Abstract
Self‐ (S 1 ) and open‐pollination (O.P.) progenies of 24 self‐compatible S 0 plants of cicer milkvetch ( Astragalus cicer L.) were evaluated in the field for forage yield, height, spread, vigor score, and date of flowering. One generation of inbreeding had such a deleterious effect on plant vigor that paired S 1 and O.P. progenies could be differentiated visually. Forage yields of the S 1 progenies were approximately 50% of the forage yields of O.P. progenies. Considerable variation occurred among S 0 plants for inbreeding depression. Inbreeding delayed flowering approximately 10 days in the seedling year, but there was little difference between the S 1 and O.P. progenies for mean date of flowering in subsequent growth periods. There was no relationship between the self‐compatibility of the S 0 parents and forage yields of their S 1 and O.P. progenies. There were significant differences among S 0 parents for general combining ability. Open‐pollination progenies of several S 0 plants with average vigor performed better than similar progenies of S 0 plants with excellent vigor. Simple correlation coefficients between forage yield, height, spread, vigor score, and date of flowering were highly significant. The associations between vigor score and forage yield were the highest with coefficients of —0.93, —0.91, and —0.92 for the one harvest in 1970 and the first and second harvests in 1971, respectively.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
One generation of inbreeding reduced plant vigor enough to visually distinguish progenies.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.
Astragalus cicert0 - Treatment
- One generation of inbreedinge0
- Outcome
- plant vigore0
- Direction
- deleterious effecte0
- Comparator
- O.P. progeniese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“One generation of inbreeding had such a deleterious effect on plant vigor that paired S 1 and O.P. progenies could be differentiated visually”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Selfed progeny forage yields were approximately half of open pollinated progeny yields.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Treatment
- S 1 progeniese0
- Outcome
- Forage yieldse0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- 50%e0
- Comparator
- O.P. progeniese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Forage yields of the S 1 progenies were approximately 50% of the forage yields of O.P. progenies”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Inbreeding depression varied considerably among parent plants.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Material
- S 0 plantse0
- Outcome
- inbreeding depressione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Considerable variation occurred among S 0 plants for inbreeding depression”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Inbreeding delayed flowering by approximately 10 days in the seedling year.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Organ / stage
- seedling yeare0
- Treatment
- Inbreedinge0
- Outcome
- floweringe0
- Direction
- delayede0
- Value
- 10 dayse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inbreeding delayed flowering approximately 10 days in the seedling year”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Later growth periods showed little flowering date difference between selfed and open pollinated progeny.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Material
- S 1e0
- Outcome
- mean date of floweringe0
- Direction
- little differencee0
- Qualifier
- subsequent growth periodse0
- Comparator
- O.P. progeniese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was little difference between the S 1 and O.P. progenies for mean date of flowering in subsequent growth periods”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Parental self compatibility showed no relationship with forage yield in selfed and open pollinated progeny.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Material
- S 0 parentse0
- Outcome
- forage yieldse0
- Direction
- no relationshipe0
- Qualifier
- self‐compatibilitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was no relationship between the self‐compatibility of the S 0 parents and forage yields of their S 1 and O.P. progenies”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Parents differed significantly in general combining ability.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Material
- S 0 parentse0
- Outcome
- general combining abilitye0
- Direction
- differencese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were significant differences among S 0 parents for general combining ability”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Open pollinated progeny from several average vigor parents outperformed progeny of excellent vigor parents.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Material
- S 0 plantse0
- Outcome
- performed bettere0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- S 0 plants with excellent vigore0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Open‐pollination progenies of several S 0 plants with average vigor performed better than similar progenies of S 0 plants with excellent vigor”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Correlations among forage yield, height, spread, vigor score and flowering date were highly significant.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Material
- Astragalus cicer L.t0
- Outcome
- Simple correlation coefficients between forage yield, height, spread, vigor score, and date of floweringe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Simple correlation coefficients between forage yield, height, spread, vigor score, and date of flowering were highly significant”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Vigor score and forage yield had the strongest associations, with coefficients −0.93, −0.91 and −0.92 across three harvests.
- Taxon
- Astragalus cicer L.Astragalus cicert0
- Material
- Astragalus cicer L.t0
- Outcome
- associations between vigor score and forage yielde0
- Value
- —0.93, —0.91, and —0.92e0
- Qualifier
- one harvest in 1970 and the first and second harvests in 1971e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The associations between vigor score and forage yield were the highest with coefficients of —0.93, —0.91, and —0.92 for the one harvest in 1970 and the first and second harvests in 1971, respectively”
t0“Astragalus cicer L.”