Crop Science Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published in Crop Sci 12:60-62 (1972)
© 1972 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dolan, D. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Dolan, D. D.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Dolan, D. D.

Temperature, Photoperiod, and Light Intensity Effects on Growth of Pisum sativum L.1

Desmond D. Dolan2

Controlled environment chambers were used to study the effect of three factors (temperature, photoperiod, and light intensity) on the growth (dry weight) of seven pea (Pisum sativum L.) introductions and three pea cultivars. The design of the experiment was a split plot with three large temperature chambers divided in the center with one photoperiod treatment on each side. Each photoperioil chamber was then divided by a horizontal partition into two light intensity chambers. The three temperatures, low, medium, and high, were 12 C, 17.5 C, and 25 C. The two photoperiods were 12 hours light and 18 hours light. The two light intensities were 21,500 and 43,000 lux.

Growth was much greater at the medium temperature than at either the high or low. The relatively unfavorable effect of low temperature was partly offset by the most favorable light regime, namely long day combined with high light intensity. Of the four light regimes, the resu lts from two were similar and from two others were very dissimilar. The best growth was with long day and high light intensity. The poorest growth was with short day and low light intensity. The two recombinations (short day plus high intensity and long day plus low intensity) were not different in growth response. The first order interactions involving temperature were all significant indicating that temperature response was modified by both day length and light intensity effects.

Key Words: Latitude • Summation of degree days

1 Regional Research Project, NE-9 Northeast Regional Plant Introduction Station, Geneva, N.Y. Cooperative between the New Crops Research Branch Plant Science Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, and the 14 State Agricultural Experiment Stations of the Northeast Region. Approved for publication by the Director of the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station as Journal Paper No. 1884.

2 Horticulturist, Plant Science Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Geneva N. Y. 14456.

Received for publication June 18, 1971.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Journal of
Environmental Quality
Copyright © 1972 by the Crop Science Society of America.