Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:08:17.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The influence of temperature on flowering in species of Lolium and in Poa pratensis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

L. T. Evans
Affiliation:
Earhart Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena

Extract

The influence of various night- and day-temperature regimes on inflorescence initiation and earing in vernalized and unvernalized Lolium temulentum, L. multiflorum, short-rotation ryegrass, and two varieties of L. perenne, and also in the Athabasca strain of Poa pratensis, is described.

Vernalization response curves for the ryegrasses, when grown under controlled conditions, are presented, and are consonant with the operation of a first-order reaction as the rate-limiting step in the vernalization ofLolium perenne. Velocity coefficients for the rate of vernalization in various conditions are deduced, and are shown to be higher in seedlings than in seeds, and higher in short days at 10° C. than at 4° C. The Q 10 for the velocity of vernalization over this range is about 2·7.

Low-temperature vernalization in L. perenne can occur when low night temperatures are combined with moderately high day temperatures, and it can take place during abundant vegetative growth. In short days and in continuous light mean temperatures up to 10° C, at least, are fully effective, but in 16 hr. photoperiods even 7° C. was not a fully effective vernalizing temperature. The requirement of perennial ryegrass plants for cold treatment may be replaced by short-day induction if light intensities are low and if the plants are continually divided.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1960

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Cooper, J. P. (1951). J. Ecol. 39, 228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J. P. (1952). J. Ecol. 40, 352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J. P. (1956 a). J. Agric. Sci. 47, 262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J. P. (1956 b). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 11, 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J. P. (1957). J. Agric. Sci. 49, 361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dang, K. D. & Chodat, F. (1958). Experientia, 14, 68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, F. P. & Loomis, W. E. (1953). Plant Physiol. 28, 201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiesey, W. M. (1953). Amer. J. Bot. 40, 205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margadant, W. D. (1951). Versl. Inst. Landb. Onderz Wageningen, p. 39.Google Scholar
Newell, L. C. (1951). Agron. J. 43, 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purvis, O. N. (1948). Ann. Bot., Lond., N.S., 12, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purvis, O. N. & Gregory, F. G. (1937). Ann. Bot., Lond., N.S., 1, 569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purvis, O. N. & Gregory, F. G. (1952). Ann. Bot., Lond., N.S., 16, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprague, V. G. (1948). J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 40, 144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tincker, M. A. H. (1925). Ann. Bot., Lond., 39, 721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Went, F. W. (1957). Chron. bot. 17, 1.Google Scholar
Wittenrood, H. G. (1952). Versl. Inst. Landb. Onderz. Wageningen, p. 161.Google Scholar
Wycherley, P. R. (1952). Meded. Landb. Hoogesch. Wageningen, 54, 1.Google Scholar