Abstract
Five cultivars of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) were evaluated for effects of weathering by subjecting windrowed grain to varying periods of exposure in a 2-yr study. Moderate amounts of precipitation caused a significant reduction (5%) in test weight affecting density and packing efficiency about equally. Cultivars differed in test weight loss with Neepawa showing the largest reduction of 2.9 and 4.2 kg hL −1 in successive years. Cultivars also differed in susceptibility to bleaching, the primary cause of grade loss. The 1000-kernel weights decreased significantly (1.4%) in only 1 yr. Grain hardness decreased approximately 8% with delayed harvest at similar rates for all cultivars. The hard-grained Glenlea and RL4137 were the most resistant to test weight loss and bleaching, indicating that selection for improvement might be possible.Key words: Harvest delay, weathering, wheat, test weight, seed size, grain hardness
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
Moderate precipitation significantly reduced wheat test weight by 5%.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- Moderate amounts of precipitatione0
- Outcome
- test weighte0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 5%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Moderate amounts of precipitation caused a significant reduction (5%) in test weight”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Precipitation affected grain density and packing efficiency about equally.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- density and packing efficiencye0
- Direction
- equallye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“affecting density and packing efficiency about equally.”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat cultivars differed in test-weight loss.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- test weight losse0
- Direction
- differede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cultivars differed in test weight loss with Neepawa showing the largest reduction of 2.9 and 4.2 kg hL −1 in successive years.”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Neepawa had the largest test-weight reduction, 2.9 and 4.2 kg hL −1 in successive years.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- Neepawae0
- Outcome
- test weightt0
- Direction
- largest reductione0
- Value
- 2.9 and 4.2 kg hL −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Neepawa showing the largest reduction of 2.9 and 4.2 kg hL −1 in successive years.”
t0“TEST WEIGHT, SEED SIZE, AND GRAIN HARDNESS OF WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivars differed in bleaching susceptibility.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- susceptibility to bleachinge0
- Direction
- differede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cultivars also differed in susceptibility to bleaching, the primary cause of grade loss.”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Bleaching was the primary cause of wheat grade loss.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- grade losse0
- Qualifier
- bleachinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bleaching, the primary cause of grade loss.”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat 1000-kernel weight fell significantly by 1.4% in one year only.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- weatheringt0
- Outcome
- 1000-kernel weightse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 1.4%e0
- Qualifier
- only 1 yre0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 1000-kernel weights decreased significantly (1.4%) in only 1 yr.”
t0“EFFECT OF WEATHERING DURING DELAYED HARVEST ON TEST WEIGHT, SEED SIZE, AND GRAIN HARDNESS OF WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Delayed harvest reduced grain hardness by approximately 8% across cultivars.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- delayed harveste0
- Outcome
- Grain hardnesse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- approximately 8%e0
- Qualifier
- similar rates for all cultivarse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Grain hardness decreased approximately 8% with delayed harvest at similar rates for all cultivars.”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Glenlea and RL4137 resisted test-weight loss and bleaching most strongly.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- Glenlea and RL4137e0
- Outcome
- test weight loss and bleachinge0
- Direction
- most resistante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The hard-grained Glenlea and RL4137 were the most resistant to test weight loss and bleaching”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest selection could improve resistance to test-weight loss and bleaching.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- selection for improvemente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“indicating that selection for improvement might be possible.”
t0“WHEAT”
The same questions in other papers
rainfall · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
stage · quality: postharvest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.