? Light interception and radiation use efficiency response to tridimensional uniform sowing in winter wheat
Quick Search in JIA      Advanced Search  
    2018, Vol. 17 Issue (03): 566-578     DOI: 10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61715-5
Crop Science Current Issue | Next Issue | Archive | Adv Search  |   
Light interception and radiation use efficiency response to tridimensional uniform sowing in winter wheat
TAO Zhi-qiang*, WANG De-mei*, MA Shao-kang, YANG Yu-shuang, ZHAO Guang-cai, CHANG Xu-hong  
Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Key Laboratory of Crop Physiology and Ecology, Ministry of Agriculture, Beijing 100081, P.R.China
 Download: PDF in ScienceDirect (0 KB)   HTML (1 KB)   Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      Supporting Info
Abstract Improving radiation use efficiency (RUE) of the canopy is necessary to increase wheat (Triticum aestivum) production.  Tridimensional uniform sowing (U) technology has previously been used to construct a uniformly distributed population structure that increases RUE.  In this study, we used tridimensional uniform sowing to create a wheat canopy within which light was spread evenly to increase RUE.  This study was done during 2014–2016 in the Shunyi District, Beijing, China.  The soil type was sandy loam.  Wheat was grown in two sowing patterns: (1) tridimensional uniform sowing (U); (2) conventional drilling (D).  Four planting densities were used: 1.8, 2.7, 3.6, and 4.5 million plants ha–1.  Several indices were measured to compare the wheat canopies: photosynthetic active radiation intercepted by the canopy (IPAR), leaf area index (LAI), leaf mass per unit area (LMA), canopy extinction coefficient (K), and RUE.  In two sowing patterns, the K values decreased with increasing planting density, but the K values of U were lower than that of D.  LMA and IPAR were higher for U than for D, whereas LAI was nearly the same for both sowing patterns.  IPAR and LAI increased with increasing density under the same sowing pattern.  However, the difference in IPAR and LAI between the 3.6 and 4.5 million plants ha–1 treatments was not significant for both sowing patterns.  Therefore, LAI within the same planting density was not affected by sowing pattern.  RUE was the largest for the U mode with a planting density of 3.6 million plants ha–1 treatment.  For the D sowing pattern, the lowest planting density (1.8 million plants ha–1) resulted in the highest yield.  Light radiation interception was minimal for the D mode with a planting density of 1.8 million plants ha–1 treatment, but the highest RUE and highest yield were observed under this condition.  For the U sowing pattern, IPAR increased with increasing planting density, but yield and RUE were the highest with a planting density of 3.6 million plants ha–1.  These results indicated that the optimal planting density for improving the canopy light environment differed between the sowing patterns.  The effect of sowing pattern×planting density interaction on grain yield, yield components, RUE, IPAR, and LMA was significant (P<0.05).  Correlation analysis indicated that there is a positive significant correlation between grain yield and RUE (r=0.880, P<0.01), LMA (r=0.613, P<0.05), and spike number (r=0.624, P<0.05).  These results demonstrated that the tridimensional uniform sowing technique, particularly at a planting density of 3.6 million plants ha–1, can effectively increase light interception and utilization and unit leaf area.  This leads to the production of more photosynthetic products that in turn lead to significantly increased spike number (P<0.05), kernel number, grain weight, and an overall increase in yield.
E-mail this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
Key words�� tridimensional uniform sowing     extinction coefficient     leaf area index     leaf mass per unit area     wheat     
Received: 2017-02-20; Published: 2017-06-16

This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFD0300407) and the earmarked fund for China Agriculture Research System (CARS-03).

Corresponding Authors: Correspondence ZHAO Guang-cai, Tel/Fax: +86-10-82108576, E-mail: zhaoguangcai@caas.cn; CHANG Xu-hong, Tel/Fax: +86-10-82108576, E-mail: changxuhong@caas.cn   
About author: TAO Zhi-qiang, Tel: +86-10-82107635, E-mail: taozhiqiang@caas.cn; WANG De-mei, Tel: +86-10-82108576, E-mail: wangdemei@caas.cn; * These authors contributed equally to this study.
Cite this article:   
TAO Zhi-qiang, WANG De-mei, MA Shao-kang, YANG Yu-shuang, ZHAO Guang-cai, CHANG Xu-hong. Light interception and radiation use efficiency response to tridimensional uniform sowing in winter wheat[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2018, 17(03): 566-578.
http://www.chinaagrisci.com/Jwk_zgnykxen/EN/ 10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61715-5      or     http://www.chinaagrisci.com/Jwk_zgnykxen/EN/Y2018/V17/I03/566
[1] Chaudhary J L, Patel S R, Verma P K, Manikandan N, Khavse R. 2016. Thermal and radiation effect studies of different wheat varieties in Chhattisgarh plains zone under rice-wheat cropping system. Mausam, 67, 677-682.
[2] Chen Y H, Yu S L, Yu Z W. 2003. Relationship between amount or distribution of PAR interception and grain output of wheat communities. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 29, 730-734. (in Chinese)
[3] Du X, Li Q Z, Dong T F, Jia K. 2015. Winter wheat biomass estimation using high temporal and spatial resolution satellite data combined with a light use efficiency model. Geocarto International, 30, 258-269.
[4] Ezui K S, Franke A C, Leffelaar P A, Mando A, van Heerwaarden J, Sanabria J, Sogbedji J, Giller K E. 2017. Water and radiation use efficiencies explain the effect of potassium on the productivity of cassava. European Journal of Agronomy, 83, 28-39.
[5] Francescangeli N, Sangiacomo M A, Marti H. 2006. Effects of plant density in broccoli on yield and radiation use efficiency. Scientia Horticulturae, 110, 135-143.
[6] Haro R J, Baldessari J, Otegui M E. 2017. Genetic improvement of peanut in Argentina between 1948 and 2004: Light interception, biomass production and radiation use efficiency. Field Crops Research, 204, 222-228.
[7] IUSS Working Group WRB. 2014. World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014. International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps. World Soil Resources Report No. 106. FAO, Rome. p. 181.
[8] Kiniry J R, Bean B, Xie Y, Chen P Y. 2004. Maize yield potential: Critical processes and simulation modeling in a high-yielding environment. Agricultural Systems, 82, 45-56.
[9] Liu T, Song F B, Liu S H, Zhu X C. 2011. Canopy structure, light interception, and photosynthetic characteristics under different narrow-wide planting patterns in maize at silking stage. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 9, 1249-1261.
[10] Liu W D, Su J R. 2016. Effects of light acclimation on shoot morphology, structure, and biomass allocation of two Taxus species in southwestern China. Scientific Reports, 6, 35384.
[11] Maddonni G A, Otegui M E, Cirilo A G. 2001. Plant population density, row spacing and hybrid effects on maize canopy architecture and light attenuation. Field Crops Research, 71, 183-193.
[12] Niinemets U. 2007. Photosynthesis and resource distribution through plant canopies. Plant Cell & Environment, 30, 1052-1071.
[13] Pommel B, Sohbi Y, Andrieu B. 2001. Use of virtual 3d maize canopies to assess the effect of plot heterogeneity on radiation interception. Agricultural & Forest Meteorology, 110, 55-67.
[14] Rosati A, Badeck F W, Dejong T M. 2001. Estimating canopy light interception and absorption using leaf mass per unit leaf area in solanum melongena. Annals of Botany, 88, 101-109.
[15] Ruiz R A, Bertero H D. 2008. Light interception and radiation use efficiency in temperate quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) cultivars. European Journal of Agronomy, 29, 144-152.
[16] Sharratt B S, McWilliams D A. 2005. Microclimatic and rooting characteristics of narrow-row versus conventional-row corn. Agronomy Journal, 97, 1129-1135.
[17] Shi Z Y, Gao X F, Xie Y. 2005. Comparison of three methods for measurement of transmitted photo-syntheticaly active radiation. Resources Science, 27, 104−107. (in Chinese)
[18] Soleymani A. 2016. Light extinction of wheat as affected by N fertilisation and plant parameters. Crop & Pasture Science, 67, 1075-1086.
[19] Stoskopf N C. 1981. Understanding Crop Production. vol. 1-12. Reston, Virginia.
[20] Wang Y C, Li C X, Dai X L, Zhou X Y, Zhang Y, Li H Y, He M R. 2015. Effects of cultivation patterns on the radiation use and grain yield of winter wheat. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 26, 2707-2713. (in Chinese)
[21] Wells R, Meredith W R, Williford J R. 1986. Canopy photosynthesis and its relationship to plant productivity in near-isogenic cotton lines differing in leaf morphology. Plant Physiology, 82, 635-640.
[22] Wu L F, Ou Y Z. 2014. Effects of row spacing and seeding rate on radiation use efficiency and grain yield of wheat. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 22, 31-36. (in Chinese)
[23] Yang C B, Yu Z W, Z Y L, Shi Y. 2017. Effect of soil depth with supplemental irrigation on canopy photosynthetically active radiation interception and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in Jimai 22. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 43, 253-262. (in Chinese)
[24] Yang Z Y, Li N, Ma J, Sun Y J, Xu H. 2014. High-yielding traits of heavy panicle varieties under triangle planting geometry: A new plant spatial configuration for hybrid rice in China. Field Crops Research, 168, 135-147.
[25] Zhang Z, Zhou X B, Chen Y H. 2016. Effects of irrigation and precision planting patterns on photosynthetic product of wheat. Agronomy Journal, 108, 2322-2328.
[26] Zhao G C. 2016. The technology of tridimensional uniform sowing in wheat, green, cost saving, high yield and high efficiency. Farmers Science and Technology Training, 42-44. (in Chinese)
[27] Zhu G L, Peng S B, Huang J L, Cui K H, Nie L X, Wang F. 2016. Genetic improvements in rice yield and concomitant increases in radiation- and nitrogen-use efficiency in middle reaches of Yangtze River. Scientific Reports, 6, 21049.
No Similar of article
Copyright © 2015 ChinaAgriSci.com, All Rights Reserved
Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS) No. 12 South Street, Zhongguancun, Beijing 100081, P. R. China
http://www.ChinaAgriSci.com   JIA E-mail: jia_journal@caas.cn