Response of Winter Wheat to Simulated Stand Reduction

Environmental stresses can reduce winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) stands to less than optimum densities, forcing producers to assess yield potential from early season plant densities. Our objectives were to assess changes in yield and associated traits resulting from varying spring plant densiti...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Agronomy journal 2001-03, Vol.93 (2), p.364-370
Hauptverfasser: Holen, Douglas L., Bruckner, Philip L., Martin, John M., Carlson, Gregg R., Wichman, David M., Berg, James E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 370
container_issue 2
container_start_page 364
container_title Agronomy journal
container_volume 93
creator Holen, Douglas L.
Bruckner, Philip L.
Martin, John M.
Carlson, Gregg R.
Wichman, David M.
Berg, James E.
description Environmental stresses can reduce winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) stands to less than optimum densities, forcing producers to assess yield potential from early season plant densities. Our objectives were to assess changes in yield and associated traits resulting from varying spring plant densities, and to determine if these responses varied by cultivar. Three hard red winter wheat cultivars were grown at seven population densities in seven Montana environments. Plant density levels ranging from 10 to 100% of target stand were achieved for each cultivar by planting 215 seeds m−2 in the fall and replacing winter wheat seed with spring wheat seed in proportion to the desired spring survival for each treatment. Cultivars did not differ in mean spring plant density or grain yield but differed for yield components, test weight, and protein concentration. The response to increasing plant density was generally not cultivar specific, as plant density interactions with cultivar were significant only for kernels spike−1. Grain yield increased, as did spikes m−2 and kernels m−2, while kernel weight and kernels spike−1 decreased with increasing spring plant density. Response to increasing spring plant density varied with environment for all traits, but environment effects and linear and quadratic plant density terms accounted for 95% of the variation in interaction means for all traits except tillers plant−1. Maximum grain yield occurred at 140 plants m−2, and 21.5 plants m−2 produced winter wheat grain yield equal to spring wheat grain yield for the same environments.
doi_str_mv 10.2134/agronj2001.932364x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wiley_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2001_932364x</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>AGJ2AGRONJ2001932364X</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c335X-5d145a45187c776b511eba1e6dac555c245c7a0e64089371422fcf37c12d5d8e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNj01Lw0AURQdRsFb_gKsB16nz5iPTLEup1VIspEq7C9OZF01JkzKTov33pqTo1tWFyz0XDiH3wAYchHw0H76utpwxGCSCi1h-X5AeSKEiFkt1SXqMMR5BEvNrchPCth1CIqFHVIphX1cBaZ3TVVE16OnqE01Dm5oui92hNA06umxM5WiK7mCboq5uyVVuyoB35-yT96fJ2_g5mi-mL-PRPLJCqHWkHEhlpIKhtlrHGwWAGwMYO2OVUpZLZbVhGEs2TIQGyXluc6EtcKfcEEWf8O7X-joEj3m298XO-GMGLDuJZ3_i2Vm8hR46aG-CNWXuTWWL8EsmGngC7WrSrb6KEo__-M1G0xkfTdPF6-xUd-1a_ABV4G28</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Response of Winter Wheat to Simulated Stand Reduction</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Holen, Douglas L. ; Bruckner, Philip L. ; Martin, John M. ; Carlson, Gregg R. ; Wichman, David M. ; Berg, James E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Holen, Douglas L. ; Bruckner, Philip L. ; Martin, John M. ; Carlson, Gregg R. ; Wichman, David M. ; Berg, James E.</creatorcontrib><description>Environmental stresses can reduce winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) stands to less than optimum densities, forcing producers to assess yield potential from early season plant densities. Our objectives were to assess changes in yield and associated traits resulting from varying spring plant densities, and to determine if these responses varied by cultivar. Three hard red winter wheat cultivars were grown at seven population densities in seven Montana environments. Plant density levels ranging from 10 to 100% of target stand were achieved for each cultivar by planting 215 seeds m−2 in the fall and replacing winter wheat seed with spring wheat seed in proportion to the desired spring survival for each treatment. Cultivars did not differ in mean spring plant density or grain yield but differed for yield components, test weight, and protein concentration. The response to increasing plant density was generally not cultivar specific, as plant density interactions with cultivar were significant only for kernels spike−1. Grain yield increased, as did spikes m−2 and kernels m−2, while kernel weight and kernels spike−1 decreased with increasing spring plant density. Response to increasing spring plant density varied with environment for all traits, but environment effects and linear and quadratic plant density terms accounted for 95% of the variation in interaction means for all traits except tillers plant−1. Maximum grain yield occurred at 140 plants m−2, and 21.5 plants m−2 produced winter wheat grain yield equal to spring wheat grain yield for the same environments.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-1962</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1435-0645</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2134/agronj2001.932364x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AGJOAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Madison: American Society of Agronomy</publisher><subject>Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage ; Agricultural and forest meteorology ; Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Biological and medical sciences ; Climatic models of plant production ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General agronomy. Plant production ; Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production</subject><ispartof>Agronomy journal, 2001-03, Vol.93 (2), p.364-370</ispartof><rights>Published in Agron. J.93:364–370.</rights><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c335X-5d145a45187c776b511eba1e6dac555c245c7a0e64089371422fcf37c12d5d8e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c335X-5d145a45187c776b511eba1e6dac555c245c7a0e64089371422fcf37c12d5d8e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2134%2Fagronj2001.932364x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2134%2Fagronj2001.932364x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,776,780,785,786,1411,23909,23910,25118,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=971291$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Holen, Douglas L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruckner, Philip L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, John M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carlson, Gregg R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wichman, David M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berg, James E.</creatorcontrib><title>Response of Winter Wheat to Simulated Stand Reduction</title><title>Agronomy journal</title><description>Environmental stresses can reduce winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) stands to less than optimum densities, forcing producers to assess yield potential from early season plant densities. Our objectives were to assess changes in yield and associated traits resulting from varying spring plant densities, and to determine if these responses varied by cultivar. Three hard red winter wheat cultivars were grown at seven population densities in seven Montana environments. Plant density levels ranging from 10 to 100% of target stand were achieved for each cultivar by planting 215 seeds m−2 in the fall and replacing winter wheat seed with spring wheat seed in proportion to the desired spring survival for each treatment. Cultivars did not differ in mean spring plant density or grain yield but differed for yield components, test weight, and protein concentration. The response to increasing plant density was generally not cultivar specific, as plant density interactions with cultivar were significant only for kernels spike−1. Grain yield increased, as did spikes m−2 and kernels m−2, while kernel weight and kernels spike−1 decreased with increasing spring plant density. Response to increasing spring plant density varied with environment for all traits, but environment effects and linear and quadratic plant density terms accounted for 95% of the variation in interaction means for all traits except tillers plant−1. Maximum grain yield occurred at 140 plants m−2, and 21.5 plants m−2 produced winter wheat grain yield equal to spring wheat grain yield for the same environments.</description><subject>Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage</subject><subject>Agricultural and forest meteorology</subject><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Climatic models of plant production</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General agronomy. Plant production</subject><subject>Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production</subject><issn>0002-1962</issn><issn>1435-0645</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNj01Lw0AURQdRsFb_gKsB16nz5iPTLEup1VIspEq7C9OZF01JkzKTov33pqTo1tWFyz0XDiH3wAYchHw0H76utpwxGCSCi1h-X5AeSKEiFkt1SXqMMR5BEvNrchPCth1CIqFHVIphX1cBaZ3TVVE16OnqE01Dm5oui92hNA06umxM5WiK7mCboq5uyVVuyoB35-yT96fJ2_g5mi-mL-PRPLJCqHWkHEhlpIKhtlrHGwWAGwMYO2OVUpZLZbVhGEs2TIQGyXluc6EtcKfcEEWf8O7X-joEj3m298XO-GMGLDuJZ3_i2Vm8hR46aG-CNWXuTWWL8EsmGngC7WrSrb6KEo__-M1G0xkfTdPF6-xUd-1a_ABV4G28</recordid><startdate>200103</startdate><enddate>200103</enddate><creator>Holen, Douglas L.</creator><creator>Bruckner, Philip L.</creator><creator>Martin, John M.</creator><creator>Carlson, Gregg R.</creator><creator>Wichman, David M.</creator><creator>Berg, James E.</creator><general>American Society of Agronomy</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200103</creationdate><title>Response of Winter Wheat to Simulated Stand Reduction</title><author>Holen, Douglas L. ; Bruckner, Philip L. ; Martin, John M. ; Carlson, Gregg R. ; Wichman, David M. ; Berg, James E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c335X-5d145a45187c776b511eba1e6dac555c245c7a0e64089371422fcf37c12d5d8e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage</topic><topic>Agricultural and forest meteorology</topic><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Climatic models of plant production</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General agronomy. Plant production</topic><topic>Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Holen, Douglas L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruckner, Philip L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, John M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carlson, Gregg R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wichman, David M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berg, James E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Agronomy journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Holen, Douglas L.</au><au>Bruckner, Philip L.</au><au>Martin, John M.</au><au>Carlson, Gregg R.</au><au>Wichman, David M.</au><au>Berg, James E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Response of Winter Wheat to Simulated Stand Reduction</atitle><jtitle>Agronomy journal</jtitle><date>2001-03</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>93</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>364</spage><epage>370</epage><pages>364-370</pages><issn>0002-1962</issn><eissn>1435-0645</eissn><coden>AGJOAT</coden><abstract>Environmental stresses can reduce winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) stands to less than optimum densities, forcing producers to assess yield potential from early season plant densities. Our objectives were to assess changes in yield and associated traits resulting from varying spring plant densities, and to determine if these responses varied by cultivar. Three hard red winter wheat cultivars were grown at seven population densities in seven Montana environments. Plant density levels ranging from 10 to 100% of target stand were achieved for each cultivar by planting 215 seeds m−2 in the fall and replacing winter wheat seed with spring wheat seed in proportion to the desired spring survival for each treatment. Cultivars did not differ in mean spring plant density or grain yield but differed for yield components, test weight, and protein concentration. The response to increasing plant density was generally not cultivar specific, as plant density interactions with cultivar were significant only for kernels spike−1. Grain yield increased, as did spikes m−2 and kernels m−2, while kernel weight and kernels spike−1 decreased with increasing spring plant density. Response to increasing spring plant density varied with environment for all traits, but environment effects and linear and quadratic plant density terms accounted for 95% of the variation in interaction means for all traits except tillers plant−1. Maximum grain yield occurred at 140 plants m−2, and 21.5 plants m−2 produced winter wheat grain yield equal to spring wheat grain yield for the same environments.</abstract><cop>Madison</cop><pub>American Society of Agronomy</pub><doi>10.2134/agronj2001.932364x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0002-1962
ispartof Agronomy journal, 2001-03, Vol.93 (2), p.364-370
issn 0002-1962
1435-0645
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2001_932364x
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage
Agricultural and forest meteorology
Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions
Biological and medical sciences
Climatic models of plant production
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General agronomy. Plant production
Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production
title Response of Winter Wheat to Simulated Stand Reduction
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T06%3A54%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Response%20of%20Winter%20Wheat%20to%20Simulated%20Stand%20Reduction&rft.jtitle=Agronomy%20journal&rft.au=Holen,%20Douglas%20L.&rft.date=2001-03&rft.volume=93&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=364&rft.epage=370&rft.pages=364-370&rft.issn=0002-1962&rft.eissn=1435-0645&rft.coden=AGJOAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.2134/agronj2001.932364x&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_cross%3EAGJ2AGRONJ2001932364X%3C/wiley_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true