Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T00:07:56.936Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Methods of analysing yield from trials in which the produce is graded according to diameter

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Elizabeth A. Chapman
Elizabeth A. Chapman
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A study was made of the relationship between yields in particular size grades of carrots and onions and the number of plants per unit area with a view to providing adjustments to yields for differences in plant densities. It is concluded that the relationship for individual small grades cannot be fitted consistently by a single mathematical equation but that estimates of yields in small grades are best obtained by fitting a common equation to the accumulated yield at the limits of the grade and obtaining the yield by difference. Eleven previously published equations which have been shown to fit the relationship between total yield and plant density for a number of crops are compared with one newly developed for graded produce. It was found that the latter,

where y = yield/ha, ρ = number of plants/m2 and A, B and C are constants, generally leads to the best fits when a large range of densities is present, but it is argued that, for adjustment of yields for small differences in densities such as are obtained in variety trials, a simpler equation such as a second degree polynomial is equally effective.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 97 , Issue 1 , August 1981 , pp. 55 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

Balmukand, B. H. (1928). Studies in crop variation. V. The relation between yield and soil nutrients. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 18, 602–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1966). The effect of plant spacing on the yield of bulb onions (Allium cepa L.) grown from seed. Journal of Horticultural Science 41, 145–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. & Nelder, J. A. (1960). Plant population and crop yield. Nature 188, 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. & Thompson, R. (1966). The effects of plant density and the pattern of plant arrangement on the yield of parsnips. Journal of Horticultural Science 41, 371–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bliss, C. I. (1970). Statistics in Biology, vol. II. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Boyd, D. A., Yuen, L. T. K. & Needham, P. (1976). Nitrogen requirement of cereals. 1. Response curves. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 87, 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussell, W. T. (1973). Effects of plant density and time of harvest on yield of small finger carrots. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 1, 69–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussell, W. T. (1978). Studies on baby carrot production. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 6, 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowker, B. D. & Mead, R. (1969). Yield comparisons in onion variety trials. Journal of Horticultural Science 44, 155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, W. G. (1958). The Relationship between corn population and yield. Agronomy Journal 50, 82–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farazdaghi, H. & Harris, P. M. (1968). Plant competition and crop yield. Nature 217, 289–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, J. L. (1961). Approaches to the study of plant competition. Symposium of the Society of Empirical Biologists 15, 1–39.Google Scholar
Holliday, R. (1960 a). Plant population and crop yield. Nature 186, 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holliday, R. (1960 b). Plant population and crop yield. Part I. Field Crop Abstracts 13 (3), 159–167.Google Scholar
Holliday, R. (1960 c). Plant population and crop yield. Part II. Field Crop Abstracts 13 (4), 247–254.Google Scholar
Kira, T., Ogawa, H. & Sakazaki, N. (1953). Intraspecific competition among higher plants. I. Competition yield-density interrelationships in regularly dispersed populations. Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University Series D, 4 (1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Mead, R. (1970). Plant density and crop yield. Applied Statistics 19, 64–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mead, R. (1979). Competition experiments. Biometrics 35 (1), 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mead, R. & Pike, D. J. (1975). A review of response surface methodology from a biometric viewpoint. Biometrics 31, 803–851.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelder, J. A. (1966). Inverse polynomials, a useful group of multifactor response functions. Biometrics 22, 128–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, M. A. (1970). A note on the reciprocal yielddensity model. Horticultural Research 10 (1), 88–90.Google Scholar
Salter, P. J., Currah, I. E. & Fellows, J. R. (1980). Further studies on the effects of plant density, spatial arrangement and time of harvest on yield and root size in carrots. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 465–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharpe, P. R. & Dent, J. B. (1968). The determination and economic analysis of relationships between plant population and yield in main crop potatoes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 70, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shinozaki, K. & Kira, T. (1956). Intra-specific competition among higher plants. VII. Logistic theory of the C-D effect. Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University, Series D, 7, 35–72.Google Scholar
Taylor, L. R. (1961). Aggregation, variance and the mean. Nature 189, 732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warne, L. G. G. (1951). Spacing experiments on vegetables. II. The effects of the thinning distance on the yields of globe beet, long beet, carrots and parsnips grown at a standard interrow distance in Cheshire, 1948. Journal of Horticultural Science 26, 84–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, R. W. & Heath, S. B. (1969). The quantitative relationship between plant population and crop yield. Advances in Agronomy 21, 280–321.Google Scholar