Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Predicting spring barley yield from variety-specific yield potential, disease resistance and straw length, and from environment-specific disease loads and weed pressure

  • Published:
Euphytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For low-input crop production, well-characterised varieties increase the possibilities of managing diseases and weeds. This analysis aims at developing a framework for analyzing grain yield using external varietal information about disease resistance, weed competitiveness and yield potential and quantifying the impact of susceptibility grouping and straw length scores (as a measure for weed competitiveness) for predicting spring barley grain yield under variable biotic stress levels. The study comprised 52 spring barley varieties and 17 environments, i.e., combinations of location, growing system and year. Individual varieties and their interactions with environments were analysed by factorial regression of grain yield on external variety information combined with observed environmental disease loads and weed pressure. The external information was based on the official Danish VCU testing. The most parsimonious models explained about 50% of the yield variation among varieties including genotype-environment interactions. Disease resistance characteristics of varieties, weighted with disease loads of powdery mildew, leaf rust and net blotch, respectively, had a highly significant influence on grain yield. The extend to which increased susceptibility resulted in increased yield losses in environments with high disease loads of the respective diseases was predicted. The effect of externally determined straw length scores, weighted with weed pressure, was weaker although significant for weeds with creeping growth habit. Higher grain yield was thus predicted for taller plants under weed pressure. The results are discussed in relation to the model framework, impact of the considered traits and use of information from conventional variety testing in organic cropping systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Automat Contr AC-19:716–723

    Google Scholar 

  • Baril CP, Denis J-B, Wustman R, Van Eeuwijk FA (1995) Analysing genotype by environment interaction in Dutch potato variety trials using factorial regression. Euphytica 82:149–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond W, Grundy AC (2001) Non-chemical weed management in organic farming systems. Weed Res 41:383–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Box GEP, Hunter WG, Hunter JS (1978) Statistics for experimenters. Wiley, 653 pp

  • Brancourt-Hulmel M, Denis J-B, Lecomte C (2000) Determining environmental covariates which explain genotype environmental interaction in winter wheat through probe genotypes and biadditive factorial regression. Theor Appl Genet 100:285–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JKM (2002) Yield penalties of disease resistance in crops. Curr Opin Plant Biol 5:339–344

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bundessortenamt (2007) Beschreibende Sortenliste. Getreide, Mais, Ölfrüchte, Leguminosen, Hackfrüchte. Deutscher Landwirtschaftsverlag GmbH, 278 pp

  • Christensen S (1995) Weed suppression ability of spring barley varieties. Weed Res 35:241–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning (2007) Sortsforsøg 2007 (Variety trials 2007). Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning, Landscentret, Planteproduktion, 53 pp

  • Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning (2008a) SortInfo. Retrieved 11 April 2008 from http://www.sortinfo.dk

  • Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning (2008b) Results from the official variety trials in Denmark. Retrieved 11 April 2008 from http://www.planteinfo.dk/Obsparceller/index.html?item_id=408&appl=0

  • Denis J-B (1980) Analyse de regression factorielle. Biom Prax 20:1–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Digby PGN (1979) Modified joint regression analysis for incomplete variety × environment data. J Agric Sci Cambridge 93:81–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans LT, Fischer RA (1999) Yield potential: its definition, measurement, and significance. Crop Sci 39:1544–1551

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg D (1990) Components of resource competition in plant communities. In: Grace JB, Tilman D (eds) Perspectives in plant competition. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 27–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen PK, Rasmussen IA, Holst N, Andreasen C (2007) Tolerance of four spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) varieties to weed harrowing. Weed Res 47:241–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen PK, Kristensen K, Willas J (2008) A weed suppressive index for spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) varieties. Weed Res 48:225–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovmøller MS, Henriksen KE (2008) Application of pathogen surveys, disease nurseries and variety resistance characteristics in an IPM approach for the control of wheat yellow rust. Eur J Plant Pathol 121:377–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hänsel H (2001) Yield potential of barley corrected for disease infection by regression residuals. Plant Breed 120:223–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen LN, Kudsk P (2006) Twenty years’ experience with reduced agrochemical inputs: Effect on farm economics, water quality, biodiversity and environment. HGCA R & D Conference on Arable Crop Protection in the Balance Profit and the Environment, Lincolnshire (GB). http://www.hgca.com/publications/documents/cropresearch/Paper_16_Lise_Jorgensen.pdf. Cited 9/4 2008

  • Kang MS, Gauch HG (1996) Genotype-by-environment interaction. CRC Press, 416 pp

  • Khan TN (1987a) Relationship between net blotch (Drechslera teres) and losses in grain yield of barley in Western Australia. Aust J Agric Res 38:671–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan TN (1987b) Effect of spot-type net blotch (Drechslera teres (Sacc.) Shoem) infection on barley yield in short season environment of Northern Cereal Belt of Western Australia. Aust J Agric Res 40:745–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristensen K, Ericson L (2008) Importance of growth characteristics for yield of barley in different growing systems: will growth characteristics describe yield differently in different growing systems? Euphytica (this issue)

  • Kristensen K, Hill J (2002) Multi-environment variety trials: analysis and prediction. In: Variety trials in sugar beet-methodology and design, vol 4. Advances in sugar beet research. International Institute for Beet Research, Bruxelles, Belgium, pp 19–54

  • Lemerle D, Verbeek B, Coombes NE (1995) Losses in grain yield of winter crops from Lolium rigidum competition depend on crop species, cultivar and season. Weed Res 35:503–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CS, Binns MR, Lefkovitch LP (1986) Stability analysis: where do we stand? Crop Sci 26:894–900

    Google Scholar 

  • Madden L, Nutter FW (1995) Modeling crop losses at the field scale. Can J Plant Pathol 17:124–137

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch CE, Searle SR (2001) Generalized, linear, and mixed models. Wiley, New York, 325 pp

  • Newton AC, Thomas WTB (1994) Detection of tolerance of barley cultivars to infection by powdery mildew (Erysiphe graminis f. sp. hordei). Euphytica 75:179–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NIAB (2008) NIAB Spring combinable crops pocketbook. Varieties of cereals, oilseeds & pulses. National Institute of Agricultural Botany (NIAB), Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, UK, CB3 0LE, 215 pp

  • Østergård H, Kristensen K, Jensen JW (2005) Prediction of grain yield of spring barley varieties by disease and growth characteristics from VCU testing. In: Köpke U, Niggli U, Neuhoff D, Carnish P, Lockeretz W (eds) Researching sustainable systems. Proceedings of the first scientific conference of the international society of organic agriculture research (ISOFAR), Adelaide, South Australia, 21–23 September 2005, pp 154–157

  • Patterson HD, Williams ER, Hunter EA (1978) Block designs for variety trials. J Agric Sci Cambridge 90:395–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul H, van Eeuwijk FA, Heijbroek W (1993) Multiplicative models in cultivar by location interaction in testing sugar beets for resistance to beet necrotic yellow virus. Euphytica 71:63–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen JB (2007) Oversigt over landsforsøgene 2007 (Overview of national crop trials 2007). Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning, Landscentret, Planteproduktion, pp 114–125

  • Piepho HP (1998) Methods for comparing the yield stability of cropping systems—a review. J Agron Crop Sci 180:193–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinnschmidt HO, Chamarerk V, Cabulisan N, dela Peña F, Long ND, Savary S, Klein-Gebbinck HW, Teng PS (1997) Yield gap analysis of rainfed lowland systems to guide rice crop and pest management. In: Kropff MJ, Teng PS, Aggarwal PK, Bouma J, Bouman BAM, Jones JW, Van Laar HH (eds) Applications of systems approaches at the field level. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 321–338

    Google Scholar 

  • Przystalski M, Osman A, Thiemt E, Rolland B, Ericson L, Østergård H, Levy L, Wolfe M, Büchse A, Piepho HP, Krajewski P (2008) Comparing the performance of cereal varieties in organic and non-organic cropping systems in different European countries. Euphytica (this issue)

  • Purrington CB (2000) Costs of resistance. Curr Opin Plant Biol 3:305–308

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute (2000) SAS OnlineDoc Version 8. SAS Institute Inc., SAS Campus Drive, Cary, North Carolina 27513, USA

  • Satterthwaite FE (1946) An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. Biometrics Bull 2:110–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz G (1978) Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 6:461–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1990) Constraints and tradeoffs: toward a predictive theory of competition and succession. Oikos 58:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Eeuwijk FA, Elgersma A (1993) Incorporating environmental information in an analysis of genotype by environment interaction for seed yield in perennial ryegrass. Heredity 70:447–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Eeuwijk FA, Keizer LCP, Bakker JJ (1995) Linear and bilinear models for the analysis of multi-environment trials: II an application to data from the Dutch Maize Variety Trials. Euphytica 84:9–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whelan HG, Gaunt RE, Scott WR (1997) The effect of leaf rust (Puccinia hordei) on yield response in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) crops with different yield potentials. Plant Pathol 46:397–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe MS, Baresel JP, Desclaux D, Goldringer I, Hoad S, Kovacs G, Löschenberger F, Miedaner T, Østergård H, Lammerts van Bueren ET (2008) Developments in breeding cereals for organic agriculture. Euphytica (this issue)

  • Zhang XY, Loyce C, Meynard JM, Monod H (2007) Modelling the effect of cultivar resistance on yield losses of winter wheat in natural multiple disease conditions. Eur J Agron 26:384–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The data for this analysis have been collected by people at Danish Plant Directorate, Division of Variety Testing, Tystofte, under the guidance of Jakob W. Jensen. We wish to express special thank to Susanne A. Sindberg for data collection. The work has partly been funded by the DARCOF II—VI project BAR-OF. Discussions within the COST860 SUSVAR Network are acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hanne Østergård.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Østergård, H., Kristensen, K., Pinnschmidt, H.O. et al. Predicting spring barley yield from variety-specific yield potential, disease resistance and straw length, and from environment-specific disease loads and weed pressure. Euphytica 163, 391–408 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-008-9714-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-008-9714-5

Keywords

Navigation