Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T04:39:12.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological and physiological variation in wild oats (Avena fatua L. and A. ludoviciana Dur.) and in hybrids between wild and cultivated oats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Joan M. Thurston
Joan M. Thurston
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In samples of wild-oat panicles collected in England and Wales in 1951 only two species, Avena fatua L. and Avena ludoviciana Dur., occurred; both were very variable in grain characters but most plants bred true. Plants of all except one type of A. fatua were upright in habit with few tillers and averaged 95% dormant grains at harvest; plants of A. ludoviciana were procumbent or prostrate at the maximum tillering stage with numerous tillers and the percentage dormant grains was lower than in A. fatua.

The taxonomy of wild oats is discussed. Chromosome counts on eleven selections showed that 2n = 42.

Types intermediate between wild and cultivated oats were compared with wild oats.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , October 1957 , pp. 259 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1957

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

Aamodt, O. S., Johnson, L. P. V. & Manson, J. M. (1934). Canad. J. Res. 11, 701.Google Scholar
Bibbey, R. O. (1948). Plant Physiol. 23, 467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrows, V. (1953). Rep. Res. Comm., Nat. Weed Comm. Canad. (Western Section), p. 23.Google Scholar
Cates, H. R. (1917). Fmrs' Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric. no. 833.Google Scholar
Clark, G. H. (1914). Bull. Canad. Seed Br. no. S.8.Google Scholar
Coffman, F. A. & Stanton, T. R. (1938). J. Agric. Res. 57, 57.Google Scholar
Corns, W. G. (1953). Rep. Res. Comm., Nat. Weed Comm. Canad. (Western Section), p. 19.Google Scholar
Darlington, C. D. & Ammal, E. K. J. (1945). Chromosome Atlas of Cultivated Plants. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.Google Scholar
Durieu, (1855). Acta Soc. Linn. Bordeaux, 20, 41.Google Scholar
Garber, R. J. & Quisenberry, K. S. (1923). J. Hered. 14, 267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haussknecht, C. (1884). Mitt, geogr. Ges. Jena, 3, 231.Google Scholar
Hector, J. M. (1936). Introduction to the Botany of Field Crops. Vol. 1. Cereals. Johannesburg, S. Africa: Central News Agency Ltd.Google Scholar
Johnson, L. P. V. (1935). Canad. J. Res. 13, section C, p. 283.Google Scholar
Lindsay, D. R. (1952). Proc. Joint Meet. N. Cent. Weed Control Conf. (9th Ann.) and W. Canad. Weed Control Conf. (6th Ann.), p. 20.Google Scholar
Lindsay, D. R. (1954). Res. Rep. Nat. Weed Comm. Canad. (Western Section), p. 108.Google Scholar
Lindsay, D. R. (1956). Weeds, 4, 1.Google Scholar
Malzew, A. I. (1930). Bull. Appl. Bot. Pl.-Breed. Suppl. 38.Google Scholar
Musil, A. F. (1948). Proc. Ass. Off. Seed Anal. N. Amer. 38th Ann. Meet. p. 84.Google Scholar
Thurston, J. M. (1951). Ann. Appl. Biol. 38, 812.Google Scholar
Thurston, J. M. (1954). Ann. Appl. Biol. 41, 619.Google Scholar
Toole, E. H. & Coffman, F. A. (1940). J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 32, 631.Google Scholar
Wood, H. E. (1952). Proc. Joint Meet. N. Cent. Weed Control Conf. (9th Ann.) and W. Canad. Weed Control Conf. (6th Ann.), p. 20.Google Scholar
Zade, A. (1912). Arb. dtsch. Landw.Ges. 229, 1.Google Scholar