Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:36:37.512Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some factors influencing electrolyte leakage from maize (Zea mays L.) kernels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2008

H. Bruggink ,
H. L. Kraak ,
M. H. G. E. Dijkema  and
J. Bekendam
H. Bruggink
Affiliation:
Centre for Variety Research and Seed Technology, PO Box 32, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
H. L. Kraak*
Affiliation:
Centre for Variety Research and Seed Technology, PO Box 32, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
M. H. G. E. Dijkema
Affiliation:
Centre for Variety Research and Seed Technology, PO Box 32, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
J. Bekendam
Affiliation:
Centre for Variety Research and Seed Technology, PO Box 32, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
* Correspondence
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Even though the embryo of a maize (Zea mays L.) kernel contributes relatively little to total kernel weight, it is a main source of electrolytes which leach from the kernel during imbibition. Ageing of maize kernels for 18 days at 40°C and a moisture content of about 15% results in an increase of electrolyte leakage which almost exclusively originates from the embryo. The effect of ageing is most apparent after prolonged periods of imbibition. Mechanical damage increases leakage early during imbibition, the effect of damage being considerably larger for aged than for unaged kernels. The large amount of electrolytes measured after the first hour of imbibition of undamaged kernels comes mainly from the pericarp. The electrolyte content of the pericarp is variety dependent and may interfere with quality testing by conductivity measurements.

Keywords

conductivitymaizeseed qualityvigourZea mays
Type
Research Papers
Information
Seed Science Research , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 15 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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.)

Footnotes

1

Bruinsma Seeds, PO Box 24, 2670 AA Naaldwȳk.

2

Bulb Research Centre Lisse, PO Box 85, 2160 AB Lisse.

References

Anon. (1983) Seed vigour testing handbook. Association of Official Seed Analysts.Google Scholar
Bekendam, J., Kraak, H.L. and Vos, J. (1987) Studies on field emergence and vigour of onion, sugar beet, flax and maize seed. Acta Horticulturae 215, 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruggink, H. (1989) Evaluation and improvement of vigour test methods. 1. An alternative procedure for the controlled deterioration test. Acta Horticulturae 253, 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruggink, H., Kraak, H.L. and Bekendam, J. (1991) Some factors affecting maize cold test results. Seed Science and Technology (in press).Google Scholar
Duke, S.H. and Kakefuda, G. (1981) Role of the testa in preventing cellular rupture during imbibition of legume seed. Plant Physiology 67, 449–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furman, K.C., Woodstock, L.W. and Solomos, T. (1987) Interfacing the ASAC-1000 seed analyzer with an IBM-PC microcomputer using the basic program ASACSTAT. Journal of Seed Technology 11, 79–87.Google Scholar
Joo, P.K., Orman, B.A., Moustafa, A.M. and Hafdahl, M. (1980) Can leachate electro-conductivity be a useful tool for corn seed emergence potential evaluation. Agronomy Abstracts 1980, 109.Google Scholar
Lexander, K. (1980) Seed composition in connection with germination. pp 271–291 in Hebblethwaite, P.D. (Ed.) Seed production, London, Boston, Butterworths.Google Scholar
Lodha, M.L., Ram, P.C., Gupta, H.O. and Singh, J. (1977) Pericarp thickness, imbibition rate and drying rate of opaque-2 maize (Zea mays L.) and its normal analogue. Acta Agronomica Academia Scientiarum Hungaricae 26, 342–346.Google Scholar
Loeffler, T.M., TeKrony, D.M. and Egli, D.B. (1988) The bulk conductivity test as an indicator of soybean seed quality. Journal of Seed Technology 12, 37–53.Google Scholar
Matthews, S. and Powell, A.A. (1987) Electrical conductivity test. pp 37–42 in Perry, D.A. (Ed.) Handbook of vigour test methods. Zürich, International Seed Testing Association.Google Scholar
Powell, A.A. (1986) Cell membranes and seed leachate conductivity in relation to the quality of seed for sowing. Journal of Seed Technology 10, 81–100.Google Scholar
Powell, A.A. and Matthews, S. (1979) The influence of testa condition on the imbibition and vigour of pea seeds. Journal of Experimental Botany 30, 193–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, A.A. and Matthews, S. (1980) The significance of damage during imbibition to the field emergence of pea (Pisum sativum L.) seeds. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 95, 35–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purdy, J.L. and Crane, P.L. (1967) Influence of pericarp on differential drying rate in ‘mature’ corn (Zea mays L.). Crop Science 7, 379–381.Google Scholar
Randolph, L.F. (1936) Developmental morphology of the caryopsis in maize. Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 881–916.Google Scholar
Reusche, G.A. (1987) Comparison of the AOSA recommended conductivity analysis and the alternative single seed procedure. Association of Official Seed Analysts Newsletter 61, 79–90.Google Scholar
voor Zaadonderzoek, Rijksproefstation (1987) Annual Report 1986/1987. Mededelingen van het RPvZ 39, 30. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Tao, K.L.J. (1980a) Vigor ‘referee’ test for soybean and corn. Association of Official Seed Analysts Newsletter 54(1), 40–58.Google Scholar
Tao, K.L.J. (1980b) The 1980 vigor ‘referee’ test for soybean and corn seed. Association of Official Seed Analysts Newsletter 54(3), 53–68.Google Scholar
Tao, K.L. (1980c) Effect of seed treatment on the conductivity vigor test for corn. Plant Physiology 65, S–141.Google Scholar
Van Eijk, E.J.J.M. (1991) De EC-test als kwaliteitstest voor koolzaad. Doctoraalverslag, Agric. Univ., Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar