Abstract
Abstract Lodging can be a constraint in wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production, therefore interest exists for use of plant growth regulators (PGRs) such as Chlormequat chloride or CCC (2‐Chloroethyl‐ N, N, N ‐trimethylammonium chloride) and ethephon [(2‐Chloroethyl) phosphonic acid] for lodging control. Field experiments were conducted in New York in 1985 and 1986 on a Honeoye silt loam (fine‐loamy, mixed mesic Glossoboric Hapludalfs) to examine the influence of CCC (1.37 kg ha −1 a.i. at Zadoks Growth Stage (GS) 31) and ethephon (0.40 kg ha −1 a.i. at GS 39) on vegetative and reproductive growth of two winter wheat cultivars, Geneva and Houser. Leaf, stem, and spike phytomass were determined at 10‐d intervals from GS 25 to 95, and kernel number and weight were determined on 15 main‐culm spikes at 3 to 4‐d intervals during the grain‐filling period. The CCC application reduced culm and total phytomass by 9% at GS 45, whereas ethephon reduced spike and total phytomass by 10 and 8% at GS 55 and GS 75, respectively. Neither PGR had an effect on total or component phytomass at harvest. In 1985, a year when no lodging occurred, ethephon and CCC yielded the same compared with the yield of the check (6.12, 6.60, and 6.39 Mg ha −1 , respectively). In 1986, a year of considerable lodging, ethephon reduced lodging compared with that of CCC and the check, which was reflected in a higher kernel growth rate (1.00, 0.84, and 0.81 mg kernel −1 day −1 ), kernel weight (43.4, 39.8, and 38.9 mg), and grain yield 5.73, 4.71, and 5.30 Mg ha −1 , respectively) in the more lodging‐susceptible cultivar, Houser. The data indicate that, under the environmental conditions of this study, CCC does not benefit wheat and that ethephon should be utilized only under severe lodging conditions.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
CCC reduced culm phytomass by 9% at growth stage 45.
- Taxon
- Winter Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- CCCe0
- Outcome
- culme0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 9%e0
- Qualifier
- GS 45e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“The CCC application reduced culm and total phytomass by 9% at GS 45”
Claim · model-written summary
CCC reduced total phytomass by 9% at growth stage 45.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CCCe0
- Outcome
- total phytomasse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 9%e0
- Qualifier
- GS 45e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“The CCC application reduced culm and total phytomass by 9% at GS 45”
Claim · model-written summary
Ethephon reduced spike phytomass by 10% at growth stage 55.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- ethephone0
- Outcome
- spikee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 10e0
- Qualifier
- GS 55e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“ethephon reduced spike and total phytomass by 10 and 8% at GS 55 and GS 75, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Ethephon reduced total phytomass by 8% at growth stage 75.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- ethephone0
- Outcome
- total phytomasse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 8%e0
- Qualifier
- GS 75e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“ethephon reduced spike and total phytomass by 10 and 8% at GS 55 and GS 75, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Neither regulator changed total or component phytomass at harvest.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- PGRe0
- Outcome
- total or component phytomasse0
- Direction
- Neither PGR had an effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“Neither PGR had an effect on total or component phytomass at harvest.”
Claim · model-written summary
In the nonlodging year, CCC yield was similar to the check, at 6.60 versus 6.39 Mg ha −1.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CCCe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- the samee0
- Value
- 6.60e0
- Qualifier
- a year when no lodging occurrede0
- Comparator
- checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“In 1985, a year when no lodging occurred, ethephon and CCC yielded the same compared with the yield of the check (6.12, 6.60, and 6.39 Mg ha −1 , respectively).”
Claim · model-written summary
In the nonlodging year, ethephon yield was similar to the check, at 6.12 versus 6.39 Mg ha −1.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- ethephone0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- the samee0
- Value
- 6.12e0
- Qualifier
- a year when no lodging occurrede0
- Comparator
- checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“In 1985, a year when no lodging occurred, ethephon and CCC yielded the same compared with the yield of the check (6.12, 6.60, and 6.39 Mg ha −1 , respectively).”
Claim · model-written summary
In 1986, ethephon reduced lodging relative to CCC and the check in Houser.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- ethephone0
- Outcome
- lodginge0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- CCC and the checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“In 1986, a year of considerable lodging, ethephon reduced lodging compared with that of CCC and the check”
Claim · model-written summary
Ethephon increased Houser kernel growth rate to 1.00 versus 0.84 and 0.81 mg kernel −1 day −1 for CCC and check.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- ethephone1
- Outcome
- kernel growth ratee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1.00, 0.84, and 0.81 mg kernel −1 day −1e0
- Comparator
- CCC and the checke1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“higher kernel growth rate (1.00, 0.84, and 0.81 mg kernel −1 day −1 )”
e1“ethephon reduced lodging compared with that of CCC and the check”
Claim · model-written summary
Ethephon increased Houser kernel weight to 43.4 versus 39.8 and 38.9 mg for CCC and check.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- ethephone1
- Outcome
- kernel weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 43.4, 39.8, and 38.9 mge0
- Comparator
- CCC and the checke1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“higher kernel growth rate (1.00, 0.84, and 0.81 mg kernel −1 day −1 ), kernel weight (43.4, 39.8, and 38.9 mg)”
e1“ethephon reduced lodging compared with that of CCC and the check”
Claim · model-written summary
Ethephon increased Houser grain yield to 5.73 versus 4.71 and 5.30 Mg ha −1 for CCC and check.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- ethephone1
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5.73, 4.71, and 5.30 Mg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- CCC and the checke1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“higher kernel growth rate (1.00, 0.84, and 0.81 mg kernel −1 day −1 ), kernel weight (43.4, 39.8, and 38.9 mg), and grain yield 5.73, 4.71, and 5.30 Mg ha −1 , respectively”
e1“ethephon reduced lodging compared with that of CCC and the check”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors advise against CCC for wheat under their study conditions.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- CCC does not benefit wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“under the environmental conditions of this study, CCC does not benefit wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors advise using ethephon only under severe lodging conditions.
- Taxon
- Winter WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- ethephon should be utilized only under severe lodging conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Winter Wheat”
e0“ethephon should be utilized only under severe lodging conditions”
The same questions in other papers
(2-chloroethyl)phosphonic acid · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →(2-chloroethyl)phosphonic acid · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →chlormequat chloride · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 53 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
67 papers more in this group
See all 71 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.