Abstract
Abstract In field experiments conducted over 2 years, triticale was compared with barley, bread wheat and oats for its dual‐purpose (forage and grain) capability. The effect of spring forage removal on grain yield ranged from small yield increases (in the triticale and barley genotypes that otherwise lodged) to a 53% decrease, and was dependent on species, genotype, stage of development when cut, and time for recovery before grain harvest. A key factor influencing grain yield after early cutting was the number of spikes that developed. The complete types of triticale were better than the one substituted type tested for dual purpose but, as there is variability among them, selection for good mixed aptitude is possible. The production of the best triticale averaged over 2 years 3 t of forage DM ha ‐1 (with 684 kg of crude protein ha ‐1 ) and then 4–3 t of grain ha ‐1 . In this instance, neither the grain yield nor the number of spikes per plant were reduced after clipping, in spite of the fact that the shoot apices were removed. Plant height and lodging were reduced by a forage cut. In triticale, the number of days to heading was increased even more when the cut was late, but no effect was observed in barley.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Spring forage removal caused small grain yield increases in lodging triticale genotypes.
- Taxon
- triticale
×Triticosecalee0 - Treatment
- spring forage removale0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring forage removal on grain yield ranged from small yield increases (in the triticale and barley genotypes that otherwise lodged) to a 53% decrease”
Claim · model-written summary
Spring forage removal caused small grain yield increases in lodging barley genotypes.
- Taxon
- barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgaree0 - Treatment
- spring forage removale0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“spring forage removal on grain yield ranged from small yield increases (in the triticale and barley genotypes that otherwise lodged) to a 53% decrease”
Claim · model-written summary
Spring forage removal decreased grain yield by as much as 53% across the studied cereals.
- Taxon
- small grain cerealst0
- Treatment
- spring forage removale0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 53%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“small grain cereals”
e0“spring forage removal on grain yield ranged from small yield increases (in the triticale and barley genotypes that otherwise lodged) to a 53% decrease”
Claim · model-written summary
Spikes developed after early cutting were a key factor influencing cereal grain yield.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
t0“small grain cereals”
e0“A key factor influencing grain yield after early cutting was the number of spikes that developed.”
Claim · model-written summary
Complete triticale types were better for dual purpose than the substituted type.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Material
- complete types of triticalee0
- Outcome
- bettere0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- one substituted typee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The complete types of triticale were better than the one substituted type tested for dual purpose”
Claim · model-written summary
The best triticale produced 3 t forage dry matter per hectare on average.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- forage DMe0
- Value
- 3 t of forage DM ha ‐1e0
- Qualifier
- averaged over 2 yearse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The production of the best triticale averaged over 2 years 3 t of forage DM ha ‐1 (with 684 kg of crude protein ha ‐1 ) and then 4–3 t of grain ha ‐1 .”
Claim · model-written summary
The best triticale produced 684 kg crude protein per hectare.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- crude proteine0
- Value
- 684 kg of crude protein ha ‐1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The production of the best triticale averaged over 2 years 3 t of forage DM ha ‐1 (with 684 kg of crude protein ha ‐1 ) and then 4–3 t of grain ha ‐1 .”
Claim · model-written summary
The best triticale subsequently produced 4–3 t grain per hectare.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- graine0
- Value
- 4–3 t of grain ha ‐1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The production of the best triticale averaged over 2 years 3 t of forage DM ha ‐1 (with 684 kg of crude protein ha ‐1 ) and then 4–3 t of grain ha ‐1 .”
Claim · model-written summary
Clipping did not reduce triticale grain yield or spikes per plant in the best instance.
- Taxon
- Triticale×Triticosecalet0
- Treatment
- clippinge0
- Outcome
- grain yield nor the number of spikes per plante0
- Direction
- neithere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“neither the grain yield nor the number of spikes per plant were reduced after clipping”
t0“Triticale”
Claim · model-written summary
A forage cut reduced triticale plant height and lodging.
- Taxon
- Triticale×Triticosecalet0
- Treatment
- forage cute0
- Outcome
- Plant height and lodginge0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Triticale”
e0“Plant height and lodging were reduced by a forage cut.”
Claim · model-written summary
Late cutting further increased days to heading in triticale.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Treatment
- the cut was latee0
- Outcome
- number of days to headinge0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In triticale, the number of days to heading was increased even more when the cut was late”
Claim · model-written summary
Cutting had no observed effect on days to heading in barley.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Treatment
- the cut was latee0
- Outcome
- number of days to headinge0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the number of days to heading was increased even more when the cut was late, but no effect was observed in barley.”
The same questions in other papers
mechanical · yield · x Triticosecale (triticale)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- no effect
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.