HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rumburg, C. B. Articles by Siemer, E. G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Rumburg, C. B. Articles by Siemer, E. G. Agricola Articles by Rumburg, C. B. Articles by Siemer, E. G.

Growth of Vernalized and Nonvernalized Creeping Foxtail¹

Herbage dry matter (HDM) accumulation Gom artificially vernalized (V) plants of ‘Garrison’ creeping foxtail(Alopecurus arundinacea Poir.) was greater than nonvernalized (NV) plants during 46 days in a growth chamber at 27/4 C (day/night). Ratio of reproductive to total shoots was 0.075 with V and 0.004 with NV. Stems and sheaths contributed about 50 and 28% of final HDM of V and NV, respectively. Shoot number was similar between V and NV at the start, but new shoots of NV developed at nearly three times the rate of V. This difference, though, was offset by a slightly increased leaf weight and nearly doubled sheath and stem weight of V over NV. Leaves/shoot were 2.0 and 1.5 on day 6 for V and NV, respectively. The V treatment retained about 0.5 leaf per shoot advantage until day 46 when the values for both were about 3.4 leaves/shoot. Mean relative growth rates (RGR) derived from quadratic functions of HDM over time for V and NV were not significantly different. However RGR of V was slightly higher than NV during the period from 6 to 13 days while RGR values from 13 to 46 days were similar for both treatments.

Key Words: Alopecurus arundinaceus Porr. • Vernalization • Relative growth rate

² Associate professors of agronomy, CSU. Senior author was previously research agronomist with ARS.

Received for publication April 2, 1975.