Simulating the impact of source-sink manipulations in wheat

Asseng, Senthold; Kassie, Belay T.; Labra, Marcelo H.; Amador, Carlos Ávila; Calderini, Daniel F.

doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2016.04.031

Cited by 67 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was presumably because the grain carbon was mainly produced after heading (Table 6), whereas grain N mainly came from the N uptake before heading (Table 7). The fact that shading treatments were imposed in our experiments before heading when crops had already taken up a substantial amount of N also contributed a part to the relative more importance of C than N. In addition, the variations in solar radiation influence leaf photosynthesis directly (Asseng et al, 2017). Evans and Poorter (2001) reported that the variation in photosynthetic carbohydrate production and allocation is the primary crop response to light environment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Andrade & Ferreiro, 1996; Asseng et al, 2017; Serrago et al, 2013). They found that the decreased global radiation directly hinders leaf photosynthesis (Cai, 2011; Echer & Rosolem, 2015), hence reduces crop canopy photosynthetic capacity (Gao et al, 2017; Mu et al, 2010), declines the assimilate accumulation (Asseng et al, 2017; Barmudoi & Bharali, 2016), and ultimately leads to a decrease in the total C source supply. Shading also resulted in reductions in grain numbers (Abbate et al, 1997; Estrada‐Campuzano et al, 2008), grain weight (Chen et al, 2019; Ishibashi et al, 2014), grain‐filling rate (Arisnabarreta & Miralles, 2008; Jenner, 1979), percentage of filled grains (Pan et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2015), and grain‐filling duration (Andrade & Fereiro, 1996; Sandana et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For a long time, shading experiments have been used to understand the balance of source and sink for carbon (C) under decreased global radiation (e.g. Andrade & Ferreiro, 1996; Asseng et al, 2017; Serrago et al, 2013). They found that the decreased global radiation directly hinders leaf photosynthesis (Cai, 2011; Echer & Rosolem, 2015), hence reduces crop canopy photosynthetic capacity (Gao et al, 2017; Mu et al, 2010), declines the assimilate accumulation (Asseng et al, 2017; Barmudoi & Bharali, 2016), and ultimately leads to a decrease in the total C source supply.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The impact of global dimming on crop yields is determined by the source–sink imbalance of carbon during grain filling

Shao

Liu

et al. 2020

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global dimming reduces incident global radiation but increases the fraction of diffuse radiation, and thus affects crop yields; however, the underlying mechanisms of such an effect have not been revealed. We hypothesized that crop source–sink imbalance of either carbon (C) or nitrogen (N) during grain filling is a key factor underlying the effect of global dimming on yields. We presented a practical framework to assess both C and N source–sink relationships, using data of biomass and N accumulation from periodical sampling conducted in field experiments for wheat and rice from 2013 to 2016. We found a fertilization effect of the increased diffuse radiation fraction under global dimming, which alleviated the negative impact of decreased global radiation on source supply and sink growth, but the source supply and sink growth were still decreased by dimming, for both C and N. In wheat, the C source supply decreased more than the C sink demand, and as a result, crops remobilized more pre‐heading C reserves, in response to dimming. However, these responses were converse in rice, which presumably stemmed from the more increment in radiation use efficiency and the more limited sink size in rice than wheat. The global dimming affected source supply and sink growth of C more significantly than that of N. Therefore, yields in both crops were dependent more on the source–sink imbalance of C than that of N during grain filling. Our revealed source–sink relationships, and their differences and similarities between wheat and rice, provide a basis for designing strategies to alleviate the impact of global dimming on crop productivity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of global dimming on crop yields is determined by the source–sink imbalance of carbon during grain filling

Shao

Liu

et al. 2020

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Overall, shading stress eventually limits sink strength, leading to yield loss. After anthesis, severe shading (exposure to ?10% of full sunlight) reduces grain yield, as it relates to biomass accumulation and grain weight (Asseng et al, 2017). After anthesis, severe shading (exposure to ?10% of full sunlight) reduces grain yield, as it relates to biomass accumulation and grain weight (Asseng et al, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, the extent of grain yield decrease under shading stress largely depends on shading intensity and timing (Li et al, 2010a;Mu et al, 2010). After anthesis, severe shading (exposure to ?10% of full sunlight) reduces grain yield, as it relates to biomass accumulation and grain weight (Asseng et al, 2017). On the other hand, before or at anthesis, shading stress mainly affects grain number per plant because of a reduction in ear number and ear dry weight (Stockman et al, 1983;Savin and Slafer, 1991;Acreche et al, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Shading Stress on Grain Number, Yield, and Photosynthesis during Early Reproductive Growth in Wheat

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change causes shading and threatens wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) yield. Understanding the effects of shading on grain number and morphological characteristics of winter wheat during the young microspore (YM) stage may secure grain yield. Field and pot experiments were performed with six widely planted winter wheat cultivars in the North China Plain (NCP), subjected to 98% blocking of natural light for different shading durations (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 d) during the YM stage. Results showed that the YM stage was highly sensitive to shading stress, which significantly reduced grain number, causing grain yield loss. Moreover, response to shading varied among cultivars. Sensitive cultivars, such as Kenong9204 and Liangxing99, showed decreases in grain yield per plant of 32.2 to 74.9% and 25.7 to 91.4% in 2016 and 23.0 to 89.2% and 21.9 to 94.3% in 2017 with increasing shading duration. Reduction in grain yield with increasing shading duration was associated with decreasing grain number, grain weight, plant height, and dry matter weight of main stems and tillers. Tolerant cultivars Jimai32 and Henong825 experienced decreases in grain yield per plant of 8.2 to 17.3% and 11.3 to 14.2% in 2016 and 9.7 to 23.7% and 6.5 to 18.5% in 2017 with increasing shading duration. Adaptation of tolerant cultivars to shading was enhanced by rapid tiller development and photosynthesis recovery, inducing productive tillers to increase grain number per tiller, thus resulting in a smaller reduction in grain yield. Therefore, selecting shade‐tolerant cultivars may help to ensure high yield in winter wheat in fog‐haze areas of the NCP.

show abstract

Winter wheat source‐sink relationships under various planting modes, complementary irrigation, and planting densities

Dai,

Liao,

Pei

et al. 2024

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Various agronomic practices can affect the processes of aboveground dry matter accumulation (source) and grain filling (sink), resulting in yield differences. Improved source‐sink relationships can facilitate the production and accumulation of assimilates to increase the productivity of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). A two‐season field experiment was undertaken on winter wheat during 2020–2021 and 2021–2022. In a split‐split‐plot design with three replicates (randomized blocks), we compared two planting modes (ridge‐furrow planting with plastic mulching [RFPM]; traditional flat planting [TF]), two complementary irrigation levels (I30+30: 30+30 mm; I0: no irrigation), and three planting densities (D1, D2, and D3: 240, 360, and 480 plants m−2). The results showed that RFPMI30+30 significantly increased maximum yield by 28.5% compared with TFI0. Although D3 increased the number of effective spikes per unit area and duration of grain filling compared to D2, it reduced the number of grains per spike, 1000‐grain weight, and average filling rate. Compared to TF and I0, RFPM and I30+30 improved the sink/source ratio by 5.3% and 6.5%, respectively. Grain yield peaked at D2 in the RFPM and at D3 in the TF. Medium planting density (D2) and complementary irrigation (I30+30) during the wintering and reviving periods under RFPM can achieve better source‐sink balance relationships and the maximum grain yield of winter wheat. Overall, we believe that in most cases, wheat yields are source‐limited and can be improved by ridge‐furrow planting with plastic mulching, complementary irrigation, and planting density regulation.

show abstract

Simulating the impact of source-sink manipulations in wheat

Cited by 67 publications

References 67 publications

The impact of global dimming on crop yields is determined by the source–sink imbalance of carbon during grain filling

The impact of global dimming on crop yields is determined by the source–sink imbalance of carbon during grain filling

Effects of Shading Stress on Grain Number, Yield, and Photosynthesis during Early Reproductive Growth in Wheat

Winter wheat source‐sink relationships under various planting modes, complementary irrigation, and planting densities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About