Paper · 1971 · New Zealand Journal of Botany

Flowering responses to daylength and temperature in Dactylis glomerata L.

D. Wilson; R. G. Thomas

7
claims
15
verbatim quotes
7
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Summary Flowering responses of three clones of Dactylis glomerata L. to different daylength and temperature combinations and sequences were studied. These showed that: Induction was brought about by natural short days (10h 10m, to 12h 30m) at all temperatures tested, but was more effective at day/night temperatures of 11.0/15.5°c than at 10.5/7.5°c or 18/15.5°c. Lower temperatures, averaging about 7.5/4°c, during short days, prevented later flowering altogether in one clone. 18‐hr days did not lead to induction. Competence attained during induction at 10.5/7.5°c was lost in short days at temperatures of 18/15.5°c even though such conditions also led to competence. Cool short days (10.5/7.5°c) led to both induction and strong initiation. Panicle initiation occurred in long days at both 10.5/7.5 and 18/15.5°c, but more prolifically at the former temperature. To explain these results an hypothesis is proposed that the development from the vegetative to the reproductive state involves a gradual progression from induction to initiation rather than two distinct stages. On this basis, warm long days destroy the early stages of induction and warm short days the later stages of induction.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Natural short days induced flowering at all tested temperatures.

Taxon
Dactylis glomerata L.Dactylis glomeratat0
Treatment
natural short days (10h 10m, to 12h 30m)e0
Outcome
Inductione0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Dactylis glomerata
Dactylis glomerata · TaxonW. Bulach · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Induction was brought about by natural short days (10h 10m, to 12h 30m) at all temperatures tested”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 168–266 · show in text ↑
t0

“Dactylis glomerata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–73 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Short-day induction was more effective at 11.0/15.5°c than at 10.5/7.5°c or 18/15.5°c.

Taxon
Dactylis glomerata L.Dactylis glomeratat0
Treatment
11.0/15.5°ce0
Outcome
Inductione1
Direction
more effectivee0
Comparator
10.5/7.5°c or 18/15.5°ce0

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

Dactylis glomerata
Dactylis glomerata · TaxonW. Bulach · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“more effective at day/night temperatures of 11.0/15.5°c than at 10.5/7.5°c or 18/15.5°c”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 276–363 · show in text ↑
t0

“Dactylis glomerata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–73 · show in text ↑
e1

“Induction was brought about by natural short days (10h 10m, to 12h 30m) at all temperatures tested”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 168–266 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low temperatures during short days prevented flowering in one clone.

Taxon
Dactylis glomerata L.Dactylis glomeratat0
Material
one clonee0
Treatment
Lower temperatures, averaging about 7.5/4°c, during short dayse0
Outcome
later floweringe0
Direction
preventede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Dactylis glomerata
Dactylis glomerata · TaxonW. Bulach · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Lower temperatures, averaging about 7.5/4°c, during short days, prevented later flowering altogether in one clone”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 365–478 · show in text ↑
t0

“Dactylis glomerata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–73 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Eighteen-hour days did not induce flowering.

Taxon
Dactylis glomerata L.Dactylis glomeratat0
Treatment
18‐hr dayse0
Outcome
inductione0
Direction
did not lead toe0

Not reportedComparator

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

Dactylis glomerata
Dactylis glomerata · TaxonW. Bulach · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“18‐hr days did not lead to induction”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 480–516 · show in text ↑
t0

“Dactylis glomerata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–73 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Short days at 18/15.5°c erased competence previously acquired at 10.5/7.5°c.

Taxon
Dactylis glomerata L.Dactylis glomeratat0
Treatment
short days at temperatures of 18/15.5°ce0
Outcome
Competencee0
Direction
loste0
Comparator
10.5/7.5°ce0

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

Dactylis glomerata
Dactylis glomerata · TaxonW. Bulach · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Competence attained during induction at 10.5/7.5°c was lost in short days at temperatures of 18/15.5°c”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 518–620 · show in text ↑
t0

“Dactylis glomerata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–73 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cool short days produced induction and strong initiation.

Taxon
Dactylis glomerata L.Dactylis glomeratat0
Treatment
Cool short days (10.5/7.5°c)e0
Outcome
induction and strong initiatione0
Direction
stronge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Dactylis glomerata
Dactylis glomerata · TaxonW. Bulach · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cool short days (10.5/7.5°c) led to both induction and strong initiation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 673–745 · show in text ↑
t0

“Dactylis glomerata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–73 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Long days permitted panicle initiation at both tested temperatures, more profusely at 10.5/7.5°c.

Taxon
Dactylis glomerata L.Dactylis glomeratat0
Treatment
long days at both 10.5/7.5 and 18/15.5°ce0
Outcome
Panicle initiatione0
Direction
more prolificallye0

Not reportedComparator

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

Dactylis glomerata
Dactylis glomerata · TaxonW. Bulach · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Panicle initiation occurred in long days at both 10.5/7.5 and 18/15.5°c, but more prolifically at the former temperature”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–867 · show in text ↑
t0

“Dactylis glomerata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–73 · show in text ↑

light · phenology · Dactylis glomerata (cocksfoot)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
See all 3 papers →

light · yield · Dactylis glomerata (cocksfoot)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.