Paper · 1998 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

Seeding date, photoperiod and nitrogen effects on specific leaf area of field-grown wheat

G. K. Hotsonyame; L. A. Hunt

18
claims
42
verbatim quotes
20
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Specific leaf area (SLA), the ratio of leaf area to leaf weight, is an important plant characteristic that affects the rate of dry matter production of crop canopies. It is affected by the conditions of growth of both isolated plants and crop communities, but the extent to which various environmental factors impact on SLA under field conditions is not clearly understood. This study was conducted to study the variability in SLA of leaves on the main culm, and in the leaf canopy as an entity, under different conditions of photoperiod, nitrogen and temperature for a number of wheat genotypes grown under field conditions. Five plantings at approximately bimonthly intervals on 12 May, 5 July and 22 September 1993; and on 9 June and 10 August 1994 were made under both natural photoperiod and an extended photoperiod of 20 h. A split plot design with two levels of nitrogen (0 kg N ha −1 and 150 kg N ha −1 ) as main plots and four genotypes of wheat comprising two spring types (Norseman and Roblin) and two winter types (Ruby and Harus) as subplots was used.SLA of individual leaves varied among leaf positions, but the pattern of variation was dependent on sowing date and genotype. For May and June sowing dates, SLA increased with leaf number up to leaf 5 and then declined with subsequent leaf numbers for the spring genotypes, but increased to leaf 5 and changed little thereafter for the winter types. For July or August sowing and for both spring and winter genotypes, the change in SLA with leaf position was less clear. The results further showed that some of this variability in SLA with leaf position could be accounted for by the mean air temperatures over which the leaves developed. As temperatures increased from 8 °C to 26 °C, SLA increased to a maximum value achieved at 18–20 °C and then declined. However, there was a large scatter of SLA values around 18–20 °C, due partly to some lower SLA values for the July and August sowing dates. This suggests the impact of other factors such as radiation and the degree of mutual shading within the canopy on SLA. Mean canopy SLA reflected the individual leaf values during the period of leaf production, and varied with sowing date and genotype, although the pattern of genotypic variability was inconsistent over sowing dates; it decreased rapidly after spike emergence presumably reflecting leaf aging. Neither nitrogen nor photoperiod had significant effects on SLA on both individual leaf and canopy bases.The results suggest that temperature is one factor affecting SLA under field conditions, but that further work to identify other factors impacting on SLA in the field will be necessary. For application of simulation models to situations in which temperatures are likely to vary, an accounting for the impact of temperature on the SLA of individual leaves would be desirable. Key words: Specific leaf area (SLA), sowing date, temperature, simulation, wheat

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 18

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SLA of individual wheat leaves varied among leaf positions, with the pattern dependent on sowing date and genotype.

Outcome
SLA of individual leavese1
Qualifier
dependent on sowing date and genotypee1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“SLA of individual leaves varied among leaf positions, but the pattern of variation was dependent on sowing date and genotype”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1064–1188 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

For May and June sowing dates, SLA increased with leaf number up to leaf 5 in spring genotypes.

Material
spring genotypese2
Treatment
May and June sowing datese2
Outcome
SLAe2
Direction
increasede2
Qualifier
with leaf number up to leaf 5e2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e2

“For May and June sowing dates, SLA increased with leaf number up to leaf 5 and then declined with subsequent leaf numbers for the spring genotypes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1190–1336 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

For May and June sowing dates, SLA declined with subsequent leaf numbers in spring genotypes.

Material
spring genotypese2
Treatment
May and June sowing datese2
Outcome
SLAe2
Direction
declinede2
Qualifier
with subsequent leaf numberse2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e2

“For May and June sowing dates, SLA increased with leaf number up to leaf 5 and then declined with subsequent leaf numbers for the spring genotypes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1190–1336 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In winter wheat types, SLA increased up to leaf 5.

Material
winter typese3
Outcome
SLAe1
Direction
increasede3
Qualifier
to leaf 5e3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“SLA of individual leaves varied among leaf positions, but the pattern of variation was dependent on sowing date and genotype”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1064–1188 · show in text ↑
e3

“but increased to leaf 5 and changed little thereafter for the winter types”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1338–1412 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In winter wheat types, SLA changed little after leaf 5.

Material
winter typese3
Outcome
SLAe1
Direction
no_changeinferrede3
Qualifier
changed little thereaftere3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“SLA of individual leaves varied among leaf positions, but the pattern of variation was dependent on sowing date and genotype”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1064–1188 · show in text ↑
e3

“but increased to leaf 5 and changed little thereafter for the winter types”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1338–1412 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

For July or August sowing, the change in SLA with leaf position was less clear.

Treatment
July or August sowinge4
Outcome
change in SLA with leaf positione4
Qualifier
less cleare4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e4

“For July or August sowing and for both spring and winter genotypes, the change in SLA with leaf position was less clear”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1414–1533 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SLA increased with temperature from 8 °C to a maximum at 18–20 °C.

Treatment
temperatures increased from 8 °C to 26 °Ce6
Outcome
SLAe6
Direction
increasede6
Value
18–20 °Ce6

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e6

“As temperatures increased from 8 °C to 26 °C, SLA increased to a maximum value achieved at 18–20 °C and then declined”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1703–1820 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SLA declined after reaching its maximum at 18–20 °C as temperature rose further.

Treatment
temperatures increased from 8 °C to 26 °Ce6
Outcome
SLAe6
Direction
declinede6
Qualifier
maximum value achieved at 18–20 °Ce6

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e6

“As temperatures increased from 8 °C to 26 °C, SLA increased to a maximum value achieved at 18–20 °C and then declined”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1703–1820 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean air temperature could partly account for variability in SLA with leaf position.

Treatment
mean air temperaturese5
Outcome
variability in SLA with leaf positione5
Qualifier
could be accounted fore5

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e5

“some of this variability in SLA with leaf position could be accounted for by the mean air temperatures over which the leaves developed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1567–1701 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SLA values were widely scattered around 18–20 °C.

Outcome
scatter of SLA values around 18–20 °Ce7
Qualifier
largee7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e7

“there was a large scatter of SLA values around 18–20 °C, due partly to some lower SLA values for the July and August sowing dates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1831–1960 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Some SLA values were lower for July and August sowing dates.

Treatment
July and August sowing datese7
Outcome
SLA valuese7
Direction
lowere7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e7

“there was a large scatter of SLA values around 18–20 °C, due partly to some lower SLA values for the July and August sowing dates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1831–1960 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Factors such as radiation and mutual shading within the canopy may affect SLA beyond temperature.

Outcome
SLAe7
Qualifier
radiation and the degree of mutual shading within the canopye7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e7

“This suggests the impact of other factors such as radiation and the degree of mutual shading within the canopy on SLA”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1962–2079 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean canopy SLA reflected the individual leaf values during leaf production.

Outcome
Mean canopy SLAe1
Qualifier
reflected the individual leaf valuese1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mean canopy SLA reflected the individual leaf values during the period of leaf production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2081–2170 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Canopy SLA varied with sowing date and genotype.

Outcome
Mean canopy SLAe1
Qualifier
varied with sowing date and genotypee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mean canopy SLA reflected the individual leaf values during the period of leaf production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2081–2170 · show in text ↑
e2

“varied with sowing date and genotype, although the pattern of genotypic variability was inconsistent over sowing dates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2176–2294 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The pattern of genotypic variability in canopy SLA was inconsistent over sowing dates.

Outcome
pattern of genotypic variabilitye1
Qualifier
inconsistent over sowing datese1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“varied with sowing date and genotype, although the pattern of genotypic variability was inconsistent over sowing dates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2176–2294 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Canopy SLA decreased rapidly after spike emergence, presumably reflecting leaf aging.

Organ / stage
after spike emergencee2
Outcome
Mean canopy SLAe1
Direction
decreasede2
Qualifier
presumably reflecting leaf aginge2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mean canopy SLA reflected the individual leaf values during the period of leaf production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2081–2170 · show in text ↑
e2

“it decreased rapidly after spike emergence presumably reflecting leaf aging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2296–2371 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen (150 kg N ha −1 against 0 kg N ha −1) had no significant effect on SLA.

Treatment
nitrogene1
Outcome
SLAe1
Direction
no_changeinferrede1
Comparator
0 kg N ha −1e2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“Neither nitrogen nor photoperiod had significant effects on SLA on both individual leaf and canopy bases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2373–2477 · show in text ↑
e2

“two levels of nitrogen (0 kg N ha −1 and 150 kg N ha −1 ) as main plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 855–926 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Extended photoperiod of 20 h had no significant effect on SLA compared with natural photoperiod.

Treatment
extended photoperiod of 20 he2
Outcome
SLAe1
Direction
no_changeinferrede1
Comparator
natural photoperiode2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“field-grown wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“Neither nitrogen nor photoperiod had significant effects on SLA on both individual leaf and canopy bases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2373–2477 · show in text ↑
e2

“both natural photoperiod and an extended photoperiod of 20 h”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 768–828 · show in text ↑

light · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

85 papers: 46 positive, 39 negative or no effect

38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 46 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

81 papers more in this group

See all 85 papers →

nitrogen · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

551 papers: 426 positive, 125 negative or no effect

124 papers in the same direction as this paper · 426 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
    Reduced N supply reduced crop growth rate, through less intercepted radiation.

    The effects of radiation and nitrogen on number of grains in wheat · 1995

    No difference from an alternativeAbout lacking this nutrient, so it counts the other way round

547 papers more in this group

See all 551 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.