Growth and yield studies of Lupinus angustifolius and L. albus in Victoria

Abstract

The effect of serial planting on dry matter production, leaf area, grain yield and yield components cf Lupinus angustifoiius (cvv. Uniwhite, Uniharvest and Unicrop) and L. albus (cv. Ultra) was investigated in field plots at Rutherglen in 1973 and 1974. Delayed planting reduced dry matter production of all cultivars, and leaf area for Ultra. Differences in dry matter partitioning were observed between the late flowering Uniharvest, and the early flowering Unicrop and Ultra. In Uniharvest, delayed plantings resulted in a greater proportion of total dry matter being produced during the flowering phase, whereas the reverse was true for Unicrop and Ultra. The later flowering cultivars showed marked grain yield and yield component reduction with later sowing. Yields were reduced by 160.6 kg/ha and 222.5 kg/ha for each week's delay in sowing Uniharvest and Uniwhite, respectively. This effect was offset in the early flowering cultivars by greater development of lateral branches. In addition, when Unicrop and Ultra were planted in April, pod and flower abortion on the main stem resulted from low temperatures at flowering time. Optimum sowing time was early April for Uniwhite and Uniharvest, and early May for Unicrop and Ultra. Excellent vegetative growth under ideal moisture conditions highlighted the poor harvest indices of lupins and the scope for genetic improvement in the genus.

Differences for traits associated with early N acquisition in a grain legume and early complementarity in grain legume–triticale mixtures

“…However, in field conditions over a whole cropping season, competition for light can play a role in interactions between intercropped species and weeds. Blue lupin is known to show low ability to provide ground cover (Boundy et al 1982) and is probably not more competitive than white lupin. Intercropping cereals with lupin could also provide benefits in terms of ground cover because it is likely that cereals and lupin show contrasting above-ground architectures and light interception dynamics and, thus, complementarity in the use of light, as has been shown for other legumes (Keating and Carberry 1993; Bedoussac and Justes 2010a).…”