Response to Selection for Seed and Forage Traits in Smooth Bromegrass<sup>1</sup>

Jessen, D. L.; Carlson, I. T.

doi:10.2135/cropsci1985.0011183x002500030016x

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The higher seed weight populations had higher germination percentages and mean seedling weight up to 39 d after planting. All effects of selection for higher seed weight on seedling vigor or forage yield had disappeared by 62 d after planting (Jessen & Carlson, 1985;Trupp & Carlson, 1971). Three cycles of divergent selection for a speedof-germination index in Altai wildrye (high = 21.5 vs. low = 5.9), resulted in significant differences in stand establishment (85 vs. 76%, respectively) (Lawrence, 1977).…”

Section: Maturitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intrapopulation selection, and subsequent evaluation of progress, provides the best documentation of the effects of selection on changes in disease resistance. Intrapopulation improvement has been documented for resistance to stem rust of orchardgrass (Miller & Carlson, 1982), purple leaf spot of orchardgrass (Zeiders et aI., 1984), brown leaf spot of smooth bromegrass (Jessen & Carlson, 1985;Jessen et aI., 1983;Berg et aI., 1986), leaf spot of smooth bromegrass (Smith & Knowles, 1967), leaf blight of tall fescue (Smith et aI., 1986), crown rust of Italian ryegrass (Hides & Wilkins, 1978;Mansat & Betin, 1979), ryegrass mosaic virus (RMV) of Italian ryegrass (Hides & Wilkins, 1978), and leaf spot of intermediate wheatgrass (Krupinsky & Berdahl, 1982). Both crown and stem rust resistance of orchardgrass increased during two cycles of selection for seed and forage traits, apparently due to improved plant vigor, because rust resistance was only a minor selection criterion (Berg et aI., 1993).…”

Section: Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Germplasm and Cultivar Development

Casler

Pedersen

Eizenga

et al. 2015

Agronomy Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cool-season forage grasses have evolved, and continue to evolve, in natural ecosystems subject to environmental factors both in the presence and absence of human influences. The literature often lacks facts describing the evolution and domestication of forage grasses. Furthermore, the literature on this subject mainly deals with evolution of species in the broad scope, i.e., on a scale of hundreds of thousands or millions or years. Thus, some of our conclusions are necessarily speculative and are highly subject to the nature of the research that has been reported. We describe the forces of selection that act upon cool-season forage grasses and attempt to place each in historical perspective and in relation to each other. Because most economically important cool-season forage grasses are perennial, our principal focus will be on perennial species. There has been very little effort to quantify economic values of selection criteria or to empirically compare different breeding procedures in cool-season forage grasses. We attempt to summarize and compare some of the more important and thoroughly reported approaches used since the advent of formal breeding strategies in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These selection criteria and breeding procedures are as varied as the individual researchers who developed them. Examples are cited to illustrate principles and phenomena of historical or practical importance. More details of the agriculturally important species are discussed in the later chapters of this book. Space limitations prevent 1 Common names for plants have been used throughout the chapter. Refer to the appendix for the scientific name.

show abstract

Section: Maturitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Germplasm and Cultivar Development

Casler

Pedersen

Eizenga

et al. 2015

Agronomy Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the correlated responses in forage yield were not a result of short-term establishment effects, but appeared to represent improvements in forage yield potential. Selection for increased seed size or speed of germination did not affect forage yield of two other perennial grasses (Lawrence, 1977;Jessen and Carlson, 1985).…”

Section: Experiments 3a and 3b: Selection Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 91%

Selection for Establishment Capacity in Reed Canarygrass

Casler

Undersander

2006

Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Establishment of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) is seriously impaired by relatively low seeding vigor and growth rate. Poor soil-seed contact, intense competition from annual weeds, and infrequent clipping during the establishment year exacerbate this problem. The objectives of this study were (i) to select reed canarygrass populations for establishment capacity in the presence of annual weeds, (ii) to evaluate progeny for progress from selection, and (iii) to determine mechanisms for improved establishment potential in selected populations. Two cycles of selection for survival under clipping and weed competition were completed, the first involving selection among spaced plants and the second involving selection within seeded plots. Selection for increased establishment capacity increased ground cover in October of the seeding year by 29% and tiller density in May of the following year by 36%, averaged over five cultivars. Seed mass consistently decreased with selection for increased establishment capacity, but emergence rate increased in all cultivars by an average of 18.1%. Three of the five cultivars (Palaton, Vantage, and Venture) responded to selection with increased shoot and/or root fresh mass, with shoot-mass responses generally larger than root-mass responses. Selected populations of Vantage and Venture also had small decreases in the time required for tiller initiation. Bellevue and Rival showed no responses of seedling traits to selection. Seedling fresh mass was the most important factor regulating genetic variability for establishment capacity, but there was some variation in the mechanism of improved establishment capacity among populations.

show abstract

“…Although floret site utilization is a common index used to explain differences in realized seed yield, it is a very onerous trait to measure in a breeding programme. For this reason, floret site utilization has been related to the ratio of clean seed mass to total spike biomass, termed fertility index (Jessen & Carlson, 1985; Raeber & Kalton, 1956; Trupp & Carlson, 1971). From a breeding perspective, fertility index is far more pragmatic to collect and could indicate higher economic floret site utilization per se or a more compact and lighter spike, such as is found in wheat.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%