Abstract
SUMMARY Triticale has a reputation for performing well on poor soils, under drought and with reduced inputs, but there has been little investigation of its performance on the better yielding soils dominated by wheat production. The present paper reports 16 field experiments comparing wheat and triticale yield responses to nitrogen (N) fertilizer on high-yielding soils in the UK in harvest years 2009–2014. Each experiment included at least two wheat and at least two triticale varieties, grown at five or six N fertilizer rates from 0 to at least 260 kg N/ha. Linear plus exponential curves were fitted to describe the yield response to N and to calculate economically optimal N rates. Normal type curves with depletion were used to describe protein responses to N. Whole crop samples from selected treatments were taken prior to harvest to measure crop biomass, harvest index, crop N content and yield components. At commercial N rates, mean triticale yield was higher than the mean wheat yield at 13 out of 16 sites; the mean yield advantage of triticale was 0·53 t/ha in the first cereal position and 1·26 t/ha in the second cereal position. Optimal N requirement varied with variety at ten of the 16 sites, but there was no consistent difference between the optimal N rates of wheat and triticale. Triticale grain had lower protein content and lower specific weight than wheat grain. Triticale typically showed higher biomass and straw yields, lower harvest index and higher total N uptake than wheat. Consequently, triticale had higher N uptake efficiency and higher N use efficiency. Based on this study, current N fertilizer recommendations for triticale in the UK are too low, as are national statistics and expectations of triticale yields. The implications of these findings for arable cropping and cereals markets in the UK and Northern Europe are discussed, and the changes which would need to occur to allow triticale to fulfil a role in achieving sustainable intensification are explored.
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
Triticale had higher mean yield than wheat at 13 of 16 sites.
- Taxon
- triticale
×Triticosecalee0 - Treatment
- commercial N ratese0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 13 out of 16 sitese0
- Comparator
- wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At commercial N rates, mean triticale yield was higher than the mean wheat yield at 13 out of 16 sites”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale had a 0·53 t/ha yield advantage in first cereal position.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- yield advantagee0
- Value
- 0·53 t/hae0
- Qualifier
- first cereal positione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the mean yield advantage of triticale was 0·53 t/ha in the first cereal position”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale had a 1·26 t/ha yield advantage in second cereal position.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- yield advantagee0
- Value
- 1·26 t/hae0
- Qualifier
- second cereal positione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the mean yield advantage of triticale was 0·53 t/ha in the first cereal position and 1·26 t/ha in the second cereal position”
Claim · model-written summary
Optimal N requirement varied by variety at ten of 16 sites.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalet0
- Material
- varietye0
- Outcome
- Optimal N requiremente0
- Value
- ten of the 16 sitese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Optimal N requirement varied with variety at ten of the 16 sites”
t0“Triticale”
Claim · model-written summary
Optimal N rates showed no consistent difference between wheat and triticale.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- optimal N ratese0
- Direction
- no consistent differencee0
- Comparator
- wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was no consistent difference between the optimal N rates of wheat and triticale”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale grain had lower protein content than wheat grain.
- Taxon
- Triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- protein contente0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triticale grain had lower protein content and lower specific weight than wheat grain”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale grain had lower specific weight than wheat grain.
- Taxon
- Triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- specific weighte0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triticale grain had lower protein content and lower specific weight than wheat grain”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale showed higher biomass and straw yields than wheat.
- Taxon
- Triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- biomass and straw yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triticale typically showed higher biomass and straw yields, lower harvest index and higher total N uptake than wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale had lower harvest index than wheat.
- Taxon
- Triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- harvest indexe0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triticale typically showed higher biomass and straw yields, lower harvest index and higher total N uptake than wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale had higher total N uptake than wheat.
- Taxon
- Triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- total N uptakee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triticale typically showed higher biomass and straw yields, lower harvest index and higher total N uptake than wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Triticale had higher N uptake efficiency and N use efficiency.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- N uptake efficiency and higher N use efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“triticale had higher N uptake efficiency and higher N use efficiency”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors judge current UK N fertilizer recommendations for triticale too low.
- Taxon
- triticale×Triticosecalee0
- Outcome
- N fertilizer recommendationse0
- Direction
- too lowe0
- Setting
- UKe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“current N fertilizer recommendations for triticale in the UK are too low”