Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:02:44.944Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leaf tissue remaining after cutting and regrowth in perennial ryegrass

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Alison Davies
Alison Davies
Affiliation:
Welsh Plant Breeding Station, Aberystwyth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

When one or two leaves were removed out of the three or sometimes four present on each tiller of five genotypes of perennial ryegrass grown in nutrient solution, it was found that the relative growth rate (RGR) was not much less than that of untreated plants. The removal of lower leaves had no effect on RGR. Removal of all leaf blades depressed RGR. It is suggested that the results obtained indicate that the plant has the capacity to compensate for loss of leaf tissue by increased activity in the remaining leaves. Leaf appearance rate and tiller production were found to be the attributes most sensitive to the defoliation treatments imposed, and the degree to which leaf appearance rates were affected by defoliation was found to be a good indicator of the regrowth capacity of the different genotypes. Evidence was obtained linking high regrowth potential with high relative increases in the proportion of plant material allocated to new shoot growth.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 82 , Issue 1 , February 1974 , pp. 165 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anslow, R. C. (1968). The production of dry matter by swards of perennial ryegrass, differing in average age of foliage. Journal of the British Grassland Society 23, 195–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begg, J. E. & Wright, M. J. (1962). Growth and development of leaves from intercalary meristems in Phalaris arundinacea L. Nature, London 194, 1097–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begg, J. E. & Wright, M. J. (1964). Relative effectiveness of top and basal leaves for the growth of vegetative shoots of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L). Crop Science 4, 607–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binnie, R. C. & Harrington, F. J. (1972). The effect of cutting height and cutting frequency on the productivity of an Italian ryegrass sward. Journal of the British Grassland Society 27, 177–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brougham, R. W. (1956). Effect of intensity of defoliation on regrowth of pasture. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 9, 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. H., Cooper, R. B. & Blaser, R. E. (1966). Effects of leaf age on efficiency. Crop Science 6, 206–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clapp, J. G., Chamblee, D. S. & Gross, H. D. (1965). Interrelationships between defoliation systems, morphological characteristics and growth of ‘coastal’ Bermudagrass. Crop Science 5, 468–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, J. L. & Milthorpe, F. L. (1966). Leaf growth in Dactylis glomerata following defoliation. Annals of Botany New Series 30, 173–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A. (1965). Carbohydrate levels and regrowth in perennial ryegrass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 65, 213–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A. (1966). The regrowth of swards of S.24 perennial ryegrass subjected to different pretreatments. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 67, 139–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jewiss, O. R., Robson, M. J., Woledge, J., Powell, C. E., Deriaz, R. E. & Williams, R. D. (1969). Effect of defoliation on single plants. Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Annual Report 1968, pp. 53–55.Google Scholar
Kiesselbach, T. A. (1948). Endosperm type as a physiologic factor in corn yields. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy 40, 215–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinendorst, A. & Brouwer, R. (1969). Growth responses of two clones of perennial ryegrass to excision of roots or shoots. Instituut voor Biologisch en Scheikundig Onderzoek van Landbouwgewassen, Wageningen, Jaarboek 1969, pp. 19–26.Google Scholar
May, J. M. (1952). Extended and corrected tables of the upper percentage points of the ‘Studentized’ range. Biometrika 39, 192–3.Google Scholar
O'Neill, R. & Wetherill, G. B. (1971). The present state of multiple comparison methods. Royal Statistical Society Journal B33, 218–50.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. J. A. (1964). A comparison of leaf and tiller growth in seven perennial ryegrasses as influenced by nitrogen and temperature. Journal of the British Grassland Society 19, 281–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simons, R. G., Davies, A. & Troughton, A. (1972). The effect of the height of defoliation on two clones of perennial ryegrass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 79, 509–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweet, G. B. & Wareing, P. F. (1966). Role of plant growth in regulating photosynthesis. Nature, London 210, 77–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troughton, A. (1957). The Underground Organs of Herbage Grasses, p. 99, Bulletin 44, Commonwealth Bureau of Pastures and Field Crops, Hurley, Berks.Google Scholar
Waller, R. A. & Duncan, D. B. (1969). A Bayes rule for the symmetric multiple comparisons problem. American Statistical Association Journal 64, 1484–501.Google Scholar
Wareing, P. F., Khalifa, M. M. & Treharne, K. J. (1968). Rate-limiting processes in photosynthesis at saturating light intensities. Nature, London 220, 453–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed