Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 326–335 | Cite as

Influence of Sowing, Nitrogen Nutrition and Weather Conditions on Stand Structure and Yield of Spring Barley

  • J. Křen
  • K. KlemEmail author
  • I. Svobodová
  • P. Míša
  • V. Lukas
Open Access
Breeding

Abstract

The processes of stand structure and yield formation of spring barley were studied under different weather conditions and crop management. The multifactorial small-plot trials focused on the combined effect of variety, sowing density and nitrogen nutrition were carried out in two years with contrast weather conditions for yield formation (2011 and 2013). Evaluation of the above-ground biomass and the segmentation of tillers into three groups was conducted in four growth stages (BBCH 25, 31, 39 and 75). The performed analyses confirmed that for effective use of inputs and high yield, it is important to create a sufficient number of strong tillers at the beginning of vegetation. In year with low proportion of strong tillers at the end of tillering (2013), the differentiation of tillers is delayed and their productivity decreases. In this year therefore, yield formation is shifted from the number of spikes to the number of grains in a spike. The comparison of barley genotypes revealed that high yield plasticity can be obtained especially in the variety Bojos, which is able to compensate effectively the changes in spike number by increased grain number in a spike. This variety is also able to create a high proportion of strong tillers even under unfavourable conditions. This knowledge could help to improve the breeding and management strategy in spring barley for the expected weather conditions in the near future, especially higher temperatures in early spring.

Keywords

spring barley yield formation tillers formation and differentiation genotype plasticity grain quality 

Supplementary material

42976_2015_4302326_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (326 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 334 KB.

References

  1. Arisnabarreta, S., Miralles, D.J. 2008. Critical period for grain number establishment of near isogenic lines of two- and six-rowed barley. Field Crops Res. 107:196–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chmielewski, F.M., Köhn, W. 1999. Impact of weather on yield components of spring cereals over 30 years. Agric. and Forest Meteorol. 96:49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clausen, S.K., Frenck, G., Linden, L.G., Mikkelsen, T.N., Lunde, C., Jørgensen, R.B. 2011. Effects of single and multifactor treatments with elevated temperature, CO2 and ozone on oilseed rape and barley. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 197:442–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Del Moral, L.F.G., Del Moral, M.B.G., Molina-Cano, J.L., Slafer, G.A. 2003. Yield stability and development in two- and six-rowed winter barleys under Mediterranean conditions. Field Crops Res. 81:109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Del Moral, M.B.G., Del Moral, L.F.G. 1995. Tiller production and survival in relation to grain yield in winter and spring barley. Field Crops Res. 44:85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Högy, P., Poll, C., Marhan, S., Kandeler, E., Fangmeier, A. 2013. Impacts of temperature increase and change in precipitation pattern on crop yield and yield quality of barley. Food Chem. 136:1470–1477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kren, J. 1991. Vyuzití poznatkv o variabilitì rostlin a stébel v porostu pšenice (The use of knowledge in variability of plants and stems in the wheat stand). Rostlinná výroba 37:297–305. (in Czech)Google Scholar
  8. Kren, J., VanKeulen, H., Grashoff, C. 1992. Grain growth in oats: Experimentation and modeling. Research Report, Centre for Agrobiological Research (CABO-DLO), Wageningen, The Netherlands, 132 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Lobell, D.B., Field, C.B. 2007. Global scale climate–crop yield relationships and the impacts of recent warming. Environ. Res. Lett. doi:  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/2/1/014002. Online at stacks.iop.org/ERL/2:014002. 7 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Muravjev, S.A. 1973. Stebleotbor v zlakovom fitocenoze (Stem Selection in Cereal Phytocenosis). Riga, Lithuania: Zinatne, 72 pp. (in Russian)Google Scholar
  11. Peltonen-Sainio, P., Jauhiainen, L., Laurila, I.P. 2009. Cereal yield trends in northern European conditions: Changes in yield potential and its realisation. Field Crops Res. 110:85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rötter, R.P., Palosuo, T., Pirttioja, N.K., Dubrovsky, M., Salo, T., Fronzek, S., Aikasalo, R., Trnka, M., Ristolainen, A., Carter, T.R. 2011. What would happen to barley production in Finland if global warming exceeded 4 °C? A model-based assessment. European J. Agron. 35:205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Semenov, M.A., Halford, N.G. 2009. Identifying target traits and molecular mechanisms for wheat breeding under a changing climate. J. Exp. Bot. 60:2791–2804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stone, P. 2001. The effects of heat stress on cereal yield and quality. In. Basra, A.S. (ed.), Crop Responses and Adaptations to Temperature Stress. New York: Food Products Press — Birmingham, UK, pp. 243–291.Google Scholar
  15. Tamm, Ü. 2003. The variation of agronomic characteristics of European malting barley varieties. Agron. Res. 1:99–103.Google Scholar
  16. Trnka, M., Dubrovský, M., Zalud, Z. 2004. Climate change impact and adaptation strategies in spring barley production in the Czech Republic. Climatic Change 64:227–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2015

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Křen
    • 1
  • K. Klem
    • 2
    Email author
  • I. Svobodová
    • 3
  • P. Míša
    • 3
  • V. Lukas
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agrosystems and Bioclimatology, Faculty of AgronomyMendel University in BrnoBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Impact ExperimentsGlobal Change Research Centre AS CR, v. v. i.BrnoCzech Republic
  3. 3.Agrotest Fyto, s.r.o.KromerízCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations