Abstract
The first hulless cultivar Akt was taken into regional distribution in Poland in 1997 and the next one Polar in 2002. Earlier results with the naked cultivars showed that in the field conditions the germination was reduced. Our aim was estimate the influence of the agrotechnical factors on the germination dynamics, grain yield and the yield components of the naked oat variety Akt. Field experiments were conducted in Agricultural Experimental Station Lipnik near Stargard Szczecinski, during 2001-2003 using 2 sowing dates (optimal and 2 weeks later), 2 varieties of oat (naked Akt and hulled Bajka), 4 sowing depths (1, 3, 5, 7 cm). Delay of sowing time did not have a significant influence on number of plants after germination, except in 2003. Depending on the vegetation season the field germination of naked cultivar Akt was lower than hulled cultivar Bajka. Both cultivars were more tolerant of too deeper sowing depth than too lower sowing depth. Two weeks delay of sowing time caused significant decrease in grain yield mainly due to lower grain number in panicle and slightly decrease weight of 1000 grains. Number of panicles per square meter were similar independently on sowing time. Like in Budzyñski et al. (1999) the changes of the sowing depth in comparison with recommended depth 3cm caused that the grain yield was decrease up to 10% due to lower number of panicles per square meter. The obtained differences were not similar depending on sowing time and depth in each year of researches. Naked cultivar Akt yielded up to 27% lower comparing to hulled cultivar Bajka, but the differences fluctuated from 33 to 24% depending on vegetation season. The yield difference between cultivars resulted from lower weight of 1000 grains of the naked oat. Naked oat has lower panicle number per square meter at optimal sowing time. Naked cultivar obtained higher grain number than hulled Bajka per panicle. Also Peltonen-Sainio (1994) found naked lines to produce less panicles per square meter and increased the number of grains per panicle, Contrary to Cermak & Moudry (1998). Budzyñski, W. et al. 1999. ¯ywno æ. 1(18) Suppl.: 99-103; Cermak, B. & Moudry, J. 1998. Acta Acad. Agricult. Tech. Olst. 66: 89-98; Peltonen-Sainio P. 1994. Agronomy Journal 86: 510-513.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Delay of sowing time did not significantly influence the number of oat plants after germination, except in 2003.
- Taxon
- oat
Avena sativat0 - Treatment
- Delay of sowing timee1
- Outcome
- number of plants after germinatione1
- Direction
- did not have a significant influencee1
- Qualifier
- except in 2003e1
- Comparator
- optimale0
- Setting
- Agricultural Experimental Station Lipnik near Stargard Szczecinskie0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e0“Field experiments were conducted in Agricultural Experimental Station Lipnik near Stargard Szczecinski, during 2001-2003 using 2 sowing dates (optimal and 2 weeks later), 2 varieties of oat (naked Akt and hulled Bajka), 4 sowing depths (1, 3, 5, 7 cm)”
e1“Delay of sowing time did not have a significant influence on number of plants after germination, except in 2003”
Claim · model-written summary
Naked cultivar Akt had lower field germination than hulled cultivar Bajka, depending on vegetation season.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Material
- naked cultivar Akte2
- Outcome
- field germinatione2
- Direction
- lowere2
- Qualifier
- Depending on the vegetation seasone2
- Comparator
- hulled cultivar Bajkae2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e2“Depending on the vegetation season the field germination of naked cultivar Akt was lower than hulled cultivar Bajka”
Claim · model-written summary
Two weeks delay of sowing time decreased grain yield significantly.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- Two weeks delay of sowing timee3
- Outcome
- grain yielde3
- Direction
- decreasee3
- Comparator
- optimale0
- Setting
- Agricultural Experimental Station Lipnik near Stargard Szczecinskie0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e0“Field experiments were conducted in Agricultural Experimental Station Lipnik near Stargard Szczecinski, during 2001-2003 using 2 sowing dates (optimal and 2 weeks later), 2 varieties of oat (naked Akt and hulled Bajka), 4 sowing depths (1, 3, 5, 7 cm)”
e3“Two weeks delay of sowing time caused significant decrease in grain yield mainly due to lower grain number in panicle and slightly decrease weight of 1000 grains”
Claim · model-written summary
Two weeks delay of sowing time slightly decreased the weight of 1000 grains.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- Two weeks delay of sowing timee3
- Outcome
- weight of 1000 grainse3
- Direction
- slightly decreasee3
- Comparator
- optimale0
- Setting
- Agricultural Experimental Station Lipnik near Stargard Szczecinskie0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e0“Field experiments were conducted in Agricultural Experimental Station Lipnik near Stargard Szczecinski, during 2001-2003 using 2 sowing dates (optimal and 2 weeks later), 2 varieties of oat (naked Akt and hulled Bajka), 4 sowing depths (1, 3, 5, 7 cm)”
e3“Two weeks delay of sowing time caused significant decrease in grain yield mainly due to lower grain number in panicle and slightly decrease weight of 1000 grains”
Claim · model-written summary
The grain yield loss after delayed sowing was mainly due to fewer grains per panicle.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- Two weeks delay of sowing timee3
- Outcome
- grain yielde3
- Qualifier
- mainly due to lower grain number in paniclee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e3“Two weeks delay of sowing time caused significant decrease in grain yield mainly due to lower grain number in panicle and slightly decrease weight of 1000 grains”
Claim · model-written summary
Number of panicles per square meter was similar regardless of sowing time.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- sowing timee4
- Outcome
- Number of panicles per square metere4
- Direction
- similare4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e4“Number of panicles per square meter were similar independently on sowing time”
Claim · model-written summary
Changing sowing depth from the recommended 3 cm decreased grain yield by up to 10%.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- changes of the sowing depthe5
- Outcome
- grain yielde5
- Direction
- decreasee5
- Value
- up to 10%e5
- Comparator
- recommended depth 3cme5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e5“Like in Budzyñski et al. (1999) the changes of the sowing depth in comparison with recommended depth 3cm caused that the grain yield was decrease up to 10% due to lower number of panicles per square meter”
Claim · model-written summary
The grain yield decrease with changed sowing depth was due to fewer panicles per square meter.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Outcome
- grain yielde5
- Qualifier
- due to lower number of panicles per square metere5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e5“Like in Budzyñski et al. (1999) the changes of the sowing depth in comparison with recommended depth 3cm caused that the grain yield was decrease up to 10% due to lower number of panicles per square meter”
Claim · model-written summary
The yield differences were not similar across sowing time and depth in each year.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Outcome
- obtained differencese6
- Direction
- not similare6
- Qualifier
- depending on sowing time and depth in each yeare6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e6“The obtained differences were not similar depending on sowing time and depth in each year”
Claim · model-written summary
Naked cultivar Akt yielded up to 27% less than hulled cultivar Bajka.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Material
- Naked cultivar Akte7
- Outcome
- yielde7
- Direction
- lowere7
- Value
- up to 27%e7
- Comparator
- hulled cultivar Bajkae7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e7“Naked cultivar Akt yielded up to 27% lower comparing to hulled cultivar Bajka”
Claim · model-written summary
The naked versus hulled yield differences fluctuated from 33 to 24% depending on vegetation season.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Outcome
- differencese1
- Value
- 33 to 24%e1
- Qualifier
- depending on vegetation seasone1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e1“the differences fluctuated from 33 to 24% depending on vegetation season”
Claim · model-written summary
The yield difference between naked and hulled oat resulted from lower 1000-grain weight of the naked oat.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Material
- naked oate1
- Outcome
- yield difference between cultivarse1
- Qualifier
- resulted from lower weight of 1000 grains of the naked oate1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e1“The yield difference between cultivars resulted from lower weight of 1000 grains of the naked oat”
Claim · model-written summary
Naked oat had lower panicle number per square meter at optimal sowing time.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Material
- Naked oate1
- Outcome
- panicle number per square metere1
- Direction
- lowere1
- Qualifier
- at optimal sowing timee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e1“Naked oat has lower panicle number per square meter at optimal sowing time”
Claim · model-written summary
Naked cultivar had higher grain number per panicle than hulled cultivar Bajka.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Material
- Naked cultivare1
- Outcome
- grain numbere1
- Direction
- highere1
- Qualifier
- per paniclee1
- Comparator
- hulled Bajkae1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e1“Naked cultivar obtained higher grain number than hulled Bajka per panicle”
Claim · model-written summary
Both cultivars tolerated a deeper sowing depth better than a shallower one.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Material
- Both cultivarse1
- Treatment
- too deeper sowing depthe1
- Outcome
- tolerante1
- Direction
- more tolerante1
- Comparator
- too lower sowing depthe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“naked and hulled oat”
e1“Both cultivars were more tolerant of too deeper sowing depth than too lower sowing depth”
The same questions in other papers
sowing time · growth · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →sowing time · yield · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 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.