4.7 Article

Variation within a bread wheat cultivar for grain yield, protein content, carbon isotope discrimination and ash content

期刊

FIELD CROPS RESEARCH
卷 86, 期 1, 页码 33-42

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-4290(03)00169-2

关键词

intra-cultivar variation; density; grain yield; protein; carbon isotope discrimination; ash content

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study was undertaken to assess the variation within a bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivar, primarily for grain yield, and the implications for wheat breeding. During the 1998-1999 growing season, cv. Nestos was established in a non-replicated (NR-0) honeycomb experiment, in the absence of competition (11 547 plants ha(-1)). Ten high yielding (H) and 10 low yielding (L) plants were selected, the seeds of which were used to form the respective H and L lines. The 20 lines, along with their original cultivar, were evaluated in two locations either in the absence of competition (11 547 plants ha(-1)) during the 1999-2000 season or under competition (5 000 000 plants ha(-1)) during the 2000-2001 season. Results showed significant differentiation between lines for grain yield, determined both in the absence of competition at the single-plant level, i.e. yield per plant (YP), and under competition at the crop yield level, i.e. yield per plot (CY). Significant differences between lines were also found for grain protein content (PC), grain carbon isotope discrimination (Delta), and grain ash content (ASH), either in the absence of competition or under competition. A positive relationship was found between YP and CY (r = 0.53, P < 0.02). Results showed that selection within a bread wheat cultivar, under very low density and on the basis of individual plant grain yield, could be an effective way to either upgrade or maintain the cultivar, whereas the use of Delta or ASH as indirect selection criteria instead of grain yield was not supported by the study. (C) 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据