Agricultural and Food Science in Finland, Vol. 11 (2002): 233–244 233 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 11 (2002): 233–244. Timing applications of growth regulators to alter spring cereal development at high latitudes Ari Rajala and Pirjo Peltonen-Sainio MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Plant Production Research, FIN-31600 Jokioinen, Finland, e-mail: ari.rajala@mtt.fi Plant growth regulators (PGRs) are commonly used in commercial farming to control lodging in cereals. PGRs have been shown to alter yield formation and plant stand structure, other than the straw length. To study their potential in Northern growing conditions PGRs and their application time impacts on plant stand structure and yield formation in tall and short statured cultivars of barley, oat, and wheat were studied in the field. Crop stands were sprayed with the gibberellin biosynthesis inhibitors CCC (chlormequat chloride CCC), Moddus (Trinexapac-ethyl TE), or with ethylene-re- leasing Cerone (ethephon ETH) at the recommended times or at an earlier growth stage. CCC applied at Zadoks growth scale (ZGS) 13–14 increased and ETH applied at ZGS 39–40 reduced grain yield of oat by 370 kg ha–1 and 270 kg ha–1, respectively. In wheat, CCC applied at ZGS 31–32 reduced grain yield by 480 kg ha–1. This yield reduction was associated with lower grain yield production by the main head and particularly lower single grain weight. In barley cv. Kymppi, ETH and TE treatments promoted yield formation, whereas in cv. Saana they tended to reduce yield. Early applied PGRs reduced stem height at 14 days after treatment irrespective of species or stem stature, but at maturity no constant PGR effect was noted. Excluding the stem length, PGRs did not modify plant stand structure or yield formation markedly. Key words: chlormequat, barley, oats, wheat, plant growth regulators, ethephon, growth, tillering, plant height © Agricultural and Food Science in Finland Manuscript received April 2002 Introduction Production of vegetative and head-bearing till- ers in cereals is controlled by genotype and en- vironment (e.g. Langer 1972, Batten 1985, Pel- tonen-Sainio 1999). High latitudes, long days and high sowing rates suppress initiation and growth of tillers in spring-sown cereals (Pelto- nen-Sainio and Järvinen 1995, Peltonen-Sainio 1999). There are indications that plant growth regulators (PGRs), used to control lodging, may alter tiller performance. Antigibberellins applied at early growth stages altered cereal response to photoperiod; e.g. apical development rate was slowed and tillering increased in wheat (Triti- cum aestivum L.) and oat (Avena sativa L.) grown under long day conditions (Hutley-Bull mailto:ari.rajala@mtt.fi 234 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Rajala, A. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. PGRs to alter cereal growth and Schwabe 1982, Craufurd and Cartwright 1 9 8 9 , P e l t o n e n - S a i n i o a n d R a j a l a 2 0 0 1 ) . Chlormequat chloride (CCC) increased tiller number in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and trit- icale (X Triticosecale Wittmack), when applied as a seed treatment (Naylor et al. 1989) and in winter barley when applied prior to or during tillering (Naylor et al. 1986). Enhanced tillering in barley, oat and wheat was reported to follow early application of ethephon and trinexapac- ethyl in the greenhouse (Rajala and Peltonen- Sainio 2001). Early application of CCC in a mix- ture with herbicides has been recommended in some production manuals. This is claimed to po- tentially enhance cereal root growth and tillering. Yield formation in cereals depends partly on the capacity to accumulate and store carbohy- drates in stems (and leaf blades and sheaths) and mobilise them during grain filling (Austin et al. 1977, Bidinger et al. 1977, Blum et al. 1991, Davidson and Chevalier 1992). Chlormequat chloride and ethephon treatments increased the total amount of water-soluble carbohydrates in wheat culms (Knapp et al. 1987) and dry matter accumulation in culm and upper leaf parts in barley (Ma and Smith 1992). These findings in- dicate that PGRs may have potential to enhance the build up of reserve assimilates. Long-strawed cultivars are considered to be more stress resist- ant and more yield stable over environments than short-stature cultivars (Ehdaie and Waines 1989, Mäkelä et al. 1997). This may partly be a conse- quence of the larger stem capacity and hence, better ability to store reserve assimilates that are used later for grain filling (Aggarwal and Sinha 1984, Shakiba et al. 1996, Blum et al. 1997). On the other hand, reduced demand of assimilates for stem elongation in short-stature cultivars may direct additional carbohydrates for yield forma- tion, expressed as increased number of fertile florets at anthesis and greater harvest index (HI), as noted in semi-dwarf wheat cultivars (Miralles and Slafer 1995, Gent and Kiyomoto 1998). This study was conducted in the field to mon- itor the response of tiller growth and productiv- ity to CCC and the two other most commonly used PGRs, ethephon and trinexapac-ethyl, ap- plied early and at the recommended times in barley, oat and wheat cultivars. In an additional experiment different sowing rates were used for barley cv. Saana to study a possible seeding rate X PGR (CCC) interaction. Both short and tall cultivars of each crop were included in order to gauge the effect of stem length and PGR appli- cations and their potential interaction for yield formation. Grain number, single grain weight and HI measured in this study are important param- eters for describing assimilate flow and distri- bution to harvestable plant parts. Material and methods Field experiments were conducted at Viikki Ex- perimental Farm, University of Helsinki, Finland between 1996 and 1998 (exp 1) and in 2000 (exp 2), and at Jokioinen, MTT Agrifood Re- search Finland in 2000 (exp 2). In exp 1, three sub-experiments, one for each species, were ar- ranged in completely randomised split-plot de- signs, for which the cultivars were the main plots and PGR treatments were split across them. Each species was represented by a tall and short stat- ure cultivar, plant heights (tall versus short with- in the same crop species) differed by 10 to 20 cm. Cultivars included were Kymppi and Saana for barley, Veli and Pal for oat, and Mahti and Tjalve for wheat. Gibberellin biosynthesis inhibitors chlormequat [CCC, a.i. chlormequat (2-chloroe- thyl)-trimethylammonium chloride at 750 g l–1] and trinexapac-ethyl [Moddus, a.i. ethyl-(3-ox- ido-4-cycloprpionyl-5-oxo] oxo-3-cyclohexene- carboxylate at 250 g l–1] and ethylene-releasing ethephon [Cerone, a.i. 2-chloroethyl phosphon- ic acid at 480 g l–1] application rates were simi- lar to those used in commercial farming in Fin- land, i.e., CCC 1 l ha–1 for oat and 0.5 l ha–1 for barley and wheat, trinexapac-ethyl 0.3 l ha–1 for all species, and ethephon 0.5 l ha–1 for all spe- cies. All PGRs were applied at early growth stages (Zadoks growth scale ZGS 13–14, Zadoks et al. 1974) and at the recommended time [CCC 235 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 11 (2002): 233–244. at ZGS (31–32) and trinexapac-ethyl and ethep- hon at flag leaf stage ZGS (39–40)]. PGRs were applied to the canopy using a tractor-mounted plot-sprayer at 300 l ha–1. Sowing rate was 500 viable seeds m–2 for barley and oat, and 600 via- ble seeds m–2 for wheat. In 2000, similar field trials were arranged in Helsinki and Jokioinen (exp 2). Barley cv. Saa- na was sown at 200, 300, 400, and 500 viable seeds m–2. The experiments were arranged as split-plot designs, with seeding rate was the main plot and PGR treatments split across them. Chlormequat chloride was applied at an early growth stage (ZGS 13–14) and at the recom- mended time (CCC at ZGS 31–32) at rates as described above. PGR was applied to the cano- py with a tractor-mounted plot-sprayer in Hel- sinki and with a hand-held sprayer in Jokioinen at 300 l ha–1. Due to windy conditions during the day all PGR applications were conducted during evening (1900–2400 hours). The plot size was 10 m2 (1.25 × 8 m with 12.5 cm between rows) in all experiments. All plots were ferti- lized at sowing with NH4NO3 at 80 kg N ha –1. A mixture of MCPA and diklorpropp (DIPRO) at 2 l ha–1 was used to control weeds at ZGS 12. Plant height (cm), to uppermost leaf ligule of 10 plants plot–1, was measured 14 days after early PGR application. Days from sowing to heading and to maturity were recorded. Close to maturity numbers of heads m–2 were measured (3 × 0.5 m plot–1), plant height (cm) to the top of the head was measured and if lodging (%) oc- curred it was noted. When cereal stands were yellow ripened, plant samples were collected (3 × 0.5 m plot–1) in both experiments to determine main shoot and tiller phytomass (mg plant–1), till- er number per main shoot, tiller weight (mg plant–1), head weight (mg grains plant–1), number of grains per main shoot and HI (%), and single grain weight (SGW, mg). In addition, in 1998 20 plants plot1 were collected three times at 7- day intervals (first 7 days after early PGR appli- cation) to determine main shoot and tiller weight (mg plant–1) and tiller number. In exp 2, at Jo- kioinen, 20 plants plot–1 were collected 8 times at 7-day intervals to determine main shoot, till- er and head weight (mg plant–1) and tiller number. When matured, plots were combine-harvested and grain yield (g m–2) and hectoliter-weight (kg) were measured. Statistical analyses were carried out with the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) (Littell et al. 1996). LSMEANS and differences among L S M E A N S w e r e e s t i m a t e d u s i n g P R O C MIXED, where year and cultivar were considered as a random effect in exp 1 and location and sow- ing rate as random effects in exp 2. A repeated measures method was employed to analyse re- sults from the plant samples collected repeated- ly after PGR application in 1998 and 2000. Results Yield and yield components CCC applied at ZGS 13–14 increased and ethep- hon (ETH) applied at ZGS 39–40 reduced oat yield by 7 and 5%, respectively. CCC applied at ZGS 31–32 reduced wheat yield by 8%. Other treatments did not affect grain yield of oat or wheat. Neither PGR by cultivar nor PGR by cul- tivar by year interaction occurred for grain yield in oat and wheat (Table 1). No PGR main effect was noted in barley, though barley cultivars re- sponded differently to PGR treatments. PGR treatments tended to increase grain yield in cv. Kymppi, whereas in cv. Saana, when applied at the recommended time, trinexapac-ethyl (TE) reduced yield (Table 1). Grain yield components of main shoot and tillers were unaltered by PGRs in oat. Neither PGR X cultivar nor PGR X cultivar X year in- teraction occurred in oat or wheat for main and tiller head weight or grain number in main and tiller heads (Table 2). CCC applied at ZGS 31– 32 and ETH applied at ZGS 39–40 reduced main head weight of wheat by 6 and 4%, respectively. Single grain weight was reduced in wheat by CCC treatments in 1996 and 1998 and by ETH and TE when applied at recommended times in 236 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Rajala, A. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. PGRs to alter cereal growth 1998 (Table 3). In barley, tiller head weight was decreased by ETH applied at the recommended time. In 1998, SGW was reduced by all PGR treatments except TE applied at ZGS 39 (Table 4). No PGR X cultivar interaction was recorded for main head weight and grain number or for tiller head weight of barley (Table 4). CCC ap- plied at ZGS 13–14 increased tiller head grain number by two grains in cv. Kymppi, whereas TE applied at ZGS 39–40 reduced it by two grains in cv. Saana (Table 4). In 1998, when the effect of early application of PGR on main shoot and tiller growth was monitored at 7-day intervals, CCC, ETH and TE treatments enhanced tiller number at first meas- urements by 10 to 15% in wheat. However, the only change in tiller weight (+35%) followed ETH treatment. In barley and oat, PGR treat- ments did not improve tillering or tiller growth. When tiller and head bearing tiller number were determined from the mature plant samples, no PGR effect was noted in any of the studied spe- cies. Similarly, main shoot and tiller weight in oat and barley were unchanged at maturity, whereas in wheat, CCC treatments slightly re- duced (–4 to –5%) main shoot weight (data not shown). In 2000, main shoot, and to a greater extent tiller growth and tiller number, were en- hanced at reduced sowing rates. No PGR effect was detected, nor was a PGR X seeding rate in- teraction present for tiller number or weight per main shoot (data not shown). In exp 2 (2000), sowing rate and PGR treat- ment effected grain yield of barley cv. Saana (Table 5). Average grain yields were 592, 623, 663, and 663 g m–2 at sowing rates of 200, 300, 400, and 500 seeds m–2, respectively. CCC ap- plied early or at the recommended time improved Table 1. ANOVA table (a) and LSMEANS (b) for grain yield g m–2. Difference of the LSMEANS was estimated between untreated control and PGR treatments. Level of the significance of the difference is shown next to the LSMEAN value (exp. 1). (a) ANOVA Barley Oat Wheat DF P P P Y 02 < 0.001 0.003 0.004 CV 01 < 0.001 0.002 0.04 PGR 06 0.33 < 0.001 < 0.001 Y × CV 02 0.01 < 0.001 0.45 Y × PGR 12 0.08 0.44 0.18 CV × PGR 06 0.005 0.42 0.23 Y × CV × PGR 12 0.21 0.26 0.56 (b) LSMEANS for grain yield, g m–2 Barley Oat Wheat PGR cv. Kymppi cv. Saana CONT 616 710 528 598 CCC1 635 ns 725 ns 565 * 594 ns CCC2 639 ns 706 ns 528 ns 550 *** ETH1 652 ** 697 ns 531 ns 597 ns ETH2 644 * 691 ns 501 * 579 ns TE1 644 * 696 ns 533 ns 604 ns TE2 644 * 671 ** 534 ns 585 ns Y, year; CV, cultivar; PGR, plant growth regulator treatment CONT, control CCC1, ETH1 and TE1 treatment at ZGS 13–14 CCC2 treatment at ZGS 31-32, ETH2 and TE2 treatment at ZGS 39–40 ns = non significant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 237 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 11 (2002): 233–244. Table 2. ANOVA table for grain weight and grain number in main and tiller head and single grain weight (SGW) in barley, oat and wheat (exp. 1). Head weight Grain number SGW Main head Tiller head Main head Tiller head DF P P P P P Barley Y 2 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 CV 1 < 0.001 0.04 0.02 < 0.001 < 0.001 PGR 6 0.34 0.03 0.38 0.007 0.01 Y × CV 2 0.34 0.16 0.05 0.03 0.02 Y × PGR 120 0.27 0.09 0.72 0.07 0.01 CV × PGR 6 0.54 0.19 0.25 0.05 0.62 Y × CV × PGR 120 0.44 0.79 0.39 0.67 0.91 Oat Y 1 < 0.001 0.05 < 0.001 0.29 0.91 CV 1 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 PGR 6 0.35 0.89 0.70 0.85 0.65 Y × CV 1 < 0.001 0.33 0.24 0.02 < 0.001 Y × PGR 6 0.25 0.35 0.47 0.53 0.29 CV × PGR 6 0.32 0.63 0.72 0.60 0.63 Y × CV × PGR 6 0.88 0.23 0.73 0.24 0.88 Wheat Y 2 < 0.001 0.004 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 CV 1 < 0.001 0.30 < 0.001 0.38 < 0.001 PGR 6 0.006 0.91 0.47 0.75 < 0.001 Y × CV 2 0.01 0.29 0.007 0.27 < 0.001 Y × PGR 120 0.05 0.95 0.92 0.96 < 0.001 CV × PGR 6 0.73 0.51 0.41 0.55 0.43 Y × CV × PGR 120 0.64 0.35 0.97 0.29 0.24 Y, year; CV, cultivar; PGR, plant growth regulator treatment Table 3. LSMEANS of main head weight and single grain weight (SGW) in wheat. Difference of the LSMEANS was estimated between untreated control and PGR treatments. Level of the significance of the difference is shown next to the LSMEAN value (exp 1). Head weight, mg SGW, mg main head 1996 1997 1998 CONT 1115 36.9 39.6 31.2 CCC1 1070 * 35.5 * 39.0 ns 28.7 *** CCC2 1048 ** 33.2 *** 38.7 ns 27.3 *** ETH1 1123 ns 36.2 ns 38.9 ns 30.7 ns ETH2 1070 * 36.5 ns 38.5 ns 29.3 ** TE1 1099 ns 35.8 ns 38.4 ns 30.5 ns TE2 1088 ns 37.3 ns 38.6 ns 29.4 ** CONT, control CCC1, ETH1 and TE1 treatment at ZGS 13–14 CCC2 treatment at ZGS 31-32, ETH2 and TE2 treatment at ZGS 39–40 ns = non significant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 238 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Rajala, A. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. PGRs to alter cereal growth grain yield by 100 and 150 g m–2, respectively when compared with untreated controls. There was no PGR treatment by sowing rate interac- tion for any of the measured traits. No PGR ef- fect was noted for yield components, except for single grain weight (Table 5), which was slight- ly reduced by CCC treatment (data not shown). Shoot growth and lodging Early application (ZGS 13–14) of PGRs re- duced shoot elongation in barley and oat when measured 14 days after treatment (DAT). In wheat, the height reduction occurred only in 1998. Tall and short stature cultivars respond- ed similarly to early PGR treatments and no PGR by cultivar interaction was detected for shoot growth 14 DAT for any of the studied species (Table 6). At maturity, an early PGR treatment effect was noted in TE treated barley and CCC treated wheat in two out of the three years. In 1998, wheat also responded to early ETH and TE treatments. Early application of CCC enhanced stem elongation of oat cv. Veli in 1997 (Table 7). Table 4. LSMEANS for head weight, grain number and single grain weight (SGW) in barley. Differences among the LSMEANS were estimated between untreated control and PGR treatments. Level of the significance of the difference is shown next to the LSMEAN value (exp. 1). Head weight, mg Grain number in tiller head SGW, mg in tiller head cv. Kymppi cv. Saana 1996 1997 1998 CONT 573 13.5 12.0 45.5 50.4 41.5 CCC1 565 ns 15.5 * 10.7 ns 44.9 ns 50.7 ns 39.2 ** CCC2 582 ns 14.0 ns 12.2 ns 45.9 ns 50.9 ns 38.5 *** ETH1 606 ns 14.9 ns 12.7 ns 44.7 ns 51.4 ns 38.5 *** ETH2 501 * 11.7 ns 11.0 ns 45.5 ns 51.5 ns 39.5 *** TE1 531 ns 13.9 ns 10.4 ns 45.2 ns 50.7 ns 37.6 *** TE2 534 ns 13.6 ns 10.0 * 45.9 ns 51.7 ns 40.4 ns Y, year; CV, cultivar; PGR, plant growth regulator treatment CONT, control CCC1, ETH1 and TE1 treatment at ZGS 13–14 CCC2 treatment at ZGS 31–32, ETH2 and TE2 treatment at ZGS 39–40 ns = non significant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 Table 5. ANOVA table for grain yield, head weight, grain number and single grain weight (SGW) in barley cv. Saana (exp. 2). Grain Head weight Grain number SGW yield Main head Tiller head Main head Tiller head DF P P P P P P SR 3 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.003 PGR 2 0.004 0.27 0.06 0.33 0.19 < 0.001 TRIAL 1 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 SR × PGR 6 0.59 0.58 0.92 0.47 0.90 0.84 SR × TRIAL 3 0.46 0.01 0.11 0.07 0.09 0.86 PGR × TRIAL 2 0.73 0.86 0.17 0.99 0.29 0.42 SR × PGR × TRIAL 6 0.84 0.46 0.12 0.73 0.30 0.12 SR, seeding rate; PGR, plant growth regulator treatment 239 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 11 (2002): 233–244. Discussion When grown at high latitudes PGR treatments both increased and decreased yield. Varying PGR effect has also been noted by others (Simmons et al. 1988, Moes and Stobbe 1991, Taylor et al. 1991, Ma and Smith 1992, Peltonen-Sainio and Rajala 2001). However, neither PGR by cultivar nor PGR by year interactions occurred for grain yield in oat and wheat, indicating cultivar inde- pendent yield responses to PGRs in both spe- cies. The most apparent effect was the yield re- duction (500 kg ha–1) in CCC treated wheat. This reduction was associated with the main head weight, which was reduced in parallel. Grain number per head was not affected, but single grain weight was considerably reduced by ap- plication of CCC at recommended times in two out of three years. There was no obvious reason Table 6. ANOVA table (a) and LSMEANS (b) for plant height 14 d after early PGR treatment. Difference of the LSMEANS was estimated between untreated control and PGR treatments. Level of the significance of the difference is shown next to the LSMEAN value (exp. 1). (a) ANOVA Barley Oat Wheat DF P P P Y 2 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 CV 1 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 PGR 6 < 0.001 0.04 < 0.001 Y × CV 2 < 0.001 0.02 < 0.001 Y × PGR 120 0.06 0.56 < 0.001 CV × PGR 6 0.40 0.60 0.39 Y × CV × PGR 120 0.30 0.77 0.17 (b) LSMEANS for plant height 14 DAT, cm Barley Oat Wheat 1996 1997 1998 CONT 31.6 26.0 20.3 27.7 22.6 CCC1 29.2 *** 24.9 * 19.6 ns 26.6 ns 17.9 *** ETH1 29.0 *** 25.1 * 20.7 ns 27.1 ns 19.8 *** TE1 29.4 *** 25.0 * 19.7 ns 27.3 ns 19.9 *** Y, year; CV, cultivar; PGR, plant growth regulator treatment; DAT, days after treatment CONT, control CCC1, ETH1 and TE1 treatment at ZGS 13–14 CCC2 treatment at ZGS 31-32, ETH2 and TE2 treatment at ZGS 39–40 ns = non significant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 When applied at the recommended time, PGRs reduced stem length in the species stud- ied. The exception was dwarf oat cv. Pal, pos- sessing the DW6 dwarfing gene, which respond- ed poorly to all PGR treatments. A slight increase in stem elongation was noted after treating cv. Pal with CCC. Similarly, in 1997 early-applied PGRs tended to enhance stem elongation in oat cv. Veli. CCC treatment was largely ineffective in barley. A strong year X PGR interaction oc- curred for plant height for all species (Table 7). Lodging occurred only in 1998 in oat cv. Veli and barley cv. Kymppi. ETH and TE reduced lodging in barley cv. Kymppi by 65 and 95%, respectively, when applied at the recommend- ed time, whereas in oat cv. Veli there was no treatment effect (data not shown). PGR treat- ments prolonged the period from sowing to heading and maturity by up to one day (data not shown). 240 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Rajala, A. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. PGRs to alter cereal growth for this reduction in single grain weight as the grain number, tiller number and tiller phytomass were unaltered. Hence, increased competition for growth resources was not a probable explana- tion for reduced single grain weight in the main head. In fact, stem length was shortened from 6 to 16 cm by CCC treatment and according to the literature, stem shortening should redirect more assimilates to alternative sinks, including tillers and grains (Gale and Youssefian 1985, Peltonen- Sainio and Järvinen 1995, Peltonen and Pelto- nen-Sainio 1997, Gent and Kiyomoto 1998). Table 7. ANOVA table (a) and LSMEANS (b) for plant height at maturity. Difference of the LSMEANS was estimated between untreated control and PGR treatments. Level of the significance of the difference is shown next to the LSMEAN value (exp. 1). (a) ANOVA Barley Oat Wheat DF P P P Y 2 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 CV 1 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 PGR 6 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 Y × CV 2 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.007 Y × PGR 120 0.002 < 0.001 < 0.001 CV × PGR 6 0.31 < 0.001 0.55 Y × CV × PGR 120 0.37 < 0.001 0.95 (b) plant height at maturity, cm Barley Wheat 1996 1997 1998 1996 1997 1998 CONT 82 62 90 89 81 1000 CCC1 83 ns 61 ns 91 ns 85 ** 79 ns 91 *** CCC2 80 * 63 ns 91 ns 78 *** 75 *** 84 *** ETH1 83 ns 63 ns 90 ns 90 ns 80 ns 94 *** ETH2 79 ** 55 *** 85 *** 88 ns 69 *** 91 *** TE1 79 *** 60 ** 88 ns 90 ns 82 ns 93 *** TE2 77 **** 56 **** 85 **** 86 * 75 *** 90 *** Oat 1996 1997 1998 cv. Pal cv. Veli cv. Pal cv. Veli cv. Pal cv. Veli CONT 88 127 65 94 97 135 CCC1 89 ns 128 ns 65 ns 99 ** 99 ns 134 ns CCC2 91 ns 119 *** 67 ns 89 *** 1000 * 132 * ETH1 89 ns 126 ns 68 ns 96 ns 99 ns 135 ns ETH2 87 ns 123 * 65 ns 82 *** 98 ns 134 ns TE1 87 ns 124 ns 64 ns 97 ns 99 ns 135 ns TE2 84 * 121 *** 63 ns 77 *** 1000 ns 134 ns Y, year; CV, cultivar; PGR, plant growth regulator treatment CONT, control CCC1, ETH1 and TE1 treatment at ZGS 13–14 CCC2 treatment at ZGS 31-32, ETH2 and TE2 treatment at ZGS 39–40 ns = non significant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 241 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 11 (2002): 233–244. However, such changes were not observed in this study. On the contrary, CCC induced stem short- ening was associated with less phytomass of the main shoot and lower main head weight. While no PGR induced changes in tiller growth and till- er produced yield were noted, together these re- sulted in yield loss in CCC treated wheat. Car- bon dioxide exchange rate was not measured in this study, but according to a report and our ear- lier experiment, CCC treatments had little, if any, effect on photosynthesis in wheat (Höfner and Kühn 1982, Rajala and Peltonen-Sainio 2001). CCC application induced stress is also not a like- ly explanation for reduced growth, as no chang- es in wheat ethylene production was recorded to follow CCC application (Grossmann 1992, Ra- jala et al. 2002). Response of barley cultivars to PGRs varied in this study. Yield increases were noted in PGR treated cv. Kymppi and decreases in ETH and TE treated cv. Saana. The most evident response was for cv. Saana, in which grain yield was re- duced by 400 kg ha–1 by TE applied at ZGS 39– 40. This was associated with reduced tiller head weight and number of grains in tiller heads. Bar- ley cv. Kymppi seemed to benefit from PGR treatments, though the only yield component improved was grain number in tiller heads when treated with CCC at early growth stages. In exp 2 (2000), CCC treatments slightly increased grain yield in barley cv. Saana. However, when yield components were examined, both CCC treatments tended to slightly decrease yield com- ponents, especially single grain weight. High seeding rates suppressed tiller formation in bar- ley up to 40%. CCC had no enhancing effect on tiller formation and growth at any of the seed- ing rates irrespective of time of application. Thus, CCC was ineffective in promoting tiller- ing in cv. Saana at high latitudes when low sow- ing rates were used. In most cases PGRs applied at the recom- mended time shortened stems of the cultivars studied. The shortening ranged from 3 to 22%, though the responses were not constant across years. Barley did not respond to CCC treatment and no PGRs had substantial effects on dwarf oat cv. Pal. Similarly, dwarf wheat cultivars re- sponded weakly to CCC treatments (Abbo et al. 1987, Evans et al. 1995). CCC may even enhance longitudinal stem growth in dwarf oat, as record- ed in this study and in an earlier study (Pelto- nen-Sainio and Rajala 2001). Also, there was an increase in stem length of barley after CCC treat- ment (Clark and Fedak 1977, Waddington and Cartwright 1986). When shoot length was meas- ured 14 days after early PGR treatment, cv. Pal and non-dwarf oat cv. Veli responded similarly to PGR treatments. It seems that dwarf and stand- ard oat types responded similarly to CCC treat- ment, but stem elongation was retarded for a shorter period in the dwarf type and was followed by enhanced elongation, which finally resulted in stems that were similar in length or longer than the untreated control. Also, in cv. Veli, ear- ly application of CCC enhanced stem growth in 1997. The reason for this accelerated elongation is, however, not thoroughly understood (Pelto- nen-Sainio and Rajala 2001). The response of barley to CCC seems to be similar to that ob- served in dwarf oat. Stem length of barley did not respond to CCC treatment when measured at maturity, but at 14 DAT shoot length was re- tarded equally following ETH and TE treatments. Due to varying responses in barley cultivars, CCC is not recommended for control of lodging in commercial farming. With regard to the reduction in early shoot elongation, all cultivars responded rather simi- larly to PGRs, irrespective of species, stem stat- ure or PGR involved. If the PGRs’ capability to modify cereal growth is based on change in avail- ability of photo-assimilates, then the observed reduction in main shoot elongation provides evidence for the hypotheses that all PGRs ap- plied at the early growth stage were equally ef- fective in modifying cereal growth, at least in the short term (Cooke et al. 1983, Knapp et al. 1987, Ma and Smith 1992). In support of this assumption, PGRs were noted to retard main shoot dry matter accumulation in barley, oat and wheat grown in the greenhouse (Rajala and Pel- tonen-Sainio 2001, Peltonen-Sainio et al. 2002). Contrary to this, PGRs applied prior to the till- 242 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Rajala, A. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. PGRs to alter cereal growth ering period were unable to modify tillering pat- tern as none of the PGRs involved had any ef- fect on tiller or head bearing tiller number (when measured at maturity) in the studied species, in- dicating PGRs’ ineffectiveness in promoting til- lering under field conditions in the cultivars in- volved the study. Use of moderate fertilizer application (80 kg N ha–1) under non-lodging susceptible weather conditions during the experiments reduced the pressure for lodging. However, in 1998, prevail- ing weather conditions promoted stem elonga- tion in all species. This resulted in moderate lodging in barley cv. Kymppi and oat cv. Veli. In contrast to effects on cv. Kymppi, PGR treat- ments failed to reduce stem length and degree of lodging in cv. Veli in 1998. Cultivars selected for the trials were modern and not susceptible to lodging, as the main interest lay in possibilities to modify plant stand structure and formation of yield potential rather than to test the ability to prevent lodging. As noted elsewhere, response to PGR treatments may vary from year to year and PGR treatments are often economically fea- sible only under conditions promoting lodging (Simmons et al. 1988, Ma and Smith 1992, Erviö et al. 1995). In conclusion, PGR treatments had little ef- fect on plant stand structure other than stem height. There was short-term reduction of shoot elongation following PGR application at ZGS 13–14 in all cultivars, irrespective of stem stature or PGR. CCC also reduced shoot elon- gation in dwarf oat and barley, which are often considered insensitive to CCC. Both yield in- creases and decreases were recorded in PGR treated plants, depending on cultivar and spe- cies. Barley cv. Kymppi seemed to benefit from PGR treatments. In wheat, CCC applied at ZGS 31–32 and in oat ETH applied at ZGS 39–40, reduced yield. This was associated with reduced single grain weight. Oat benefited from early application of CCC – at a relatively low cost of CCC; this treatment may be feasible for oat. However, in general, under low lodging pres- sure, PGR applications were not advantageous for yield formation of spring cereals when grown at high latitudes. Acknowledgements. The Academy of Finland and Tiura Foundation are thanked for funding this study. Markku Tykkyläinen, Susanna Muurinen, Matti Matilainen, Arto Timonen, Ari Lahti, Pirjo Mäntyvaara, Christian Eriksson and Helena Ihamäki are gratefully acknowledged for their assistance. References Abbo, S., Millet, E. & Pinthus, M.J. 1987. Genetically controlled differences in the effects of chlormequat on tetraploid wheat (Triticum turgidum). Plant Growth Regulation 5: 235–239. Aggarwal, P.K. & Sinha, S.K. 1984. Effect of water stress on grain growth and assimilate partitioning in two cultivars of wheat contrasting in their yield stability in a drought-environment. Annals of Botany 53: 329– 340. Austin, R.B., Edrich, J.A., Ford, M.A. & Blackwell, R.D. 1977. The fate of dry matter, carbohydrates and 14C lost from leaves and stems of wheat during grain fill- ing. Annals of Botany 41: 1309–1321. Batten, G.D. 1985. Oligolum wheat: tillering and ontog- eny in relation to daylength and temperature. Cereal Research Communications 13: 97–100. Bidinger, F.R., Musgrave, R.B. & Fisher, R.A. 1977. Con- tribution of stored pre-anthesis assimilate to grain yield in wheat and barley. Nature 270: 431–433. Blum, A., Golan, G., Mayer, J. & Sinmena, B. 1997. The effect of dwarfing genes of sorghum on grain filling from mobilized stem reserves under stress. Field Crops Research 52: 43–54. Blum, A., Shpiler, L., Golan, G., Mayer, J. & Sinmena, B. 1991. Mass selection of wheat for grain filling with- out transient photosynthesis. Euphytica 54: 111–116. Clark, R.V. & Fedak, G. 1977. Effects of chlormequat on plant height, disease development and chemical con- stituents of cultivars of barley, oats and wheat. Ca- nadian Journal of Plant Science 57: 31–36. Cooke, D.T., Hoad, G.V. & Child, R.D. 1983. Some ef- fects of plant growth regulators on root and shoot 243 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 11 (2002): 233–244. Agricultural and Food Science in Finland 6: 199–205. Miralles, D.J. & Slafer, G.A. 1995. Individual grain weight responses to genetic reduction in culm length in wheat as affected by source-sink manipulations. Field Crops Research 43: 55–66. Moes, J. & Stobbe, E.H. 1991. Barley treated with ethep- hon: I. Yield components and net grain yield. Agron- omy Journal 83: 86–90. Naylor, R.E.L., Brereton, P.S. & Munro, L.1989. Modifi- cation of seedling growth of triticale and barley by seed-applied chlormequat. Plant Growth Regulation 8: 117–125. Naylor, R.E.L., Saleh, M.E. & Farquharson, J.M. 1986. The response to chlormequat of winter barley grow- ing at different temperatures. Crop Research 26: 17– 31. Peltonen, J. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. 1997. Breaking uniculm growth habit of spring cereals at high latitudes by crop management. II. Tillering, grain yield and yield components. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 178: 87–95. Peltonen-Sainio, P. 1999. Growth and development of oat with special reference to source-sink interaction and productivity. In: Smith, D.L. & Hamel, C. (eds.). Crop yield, physiology and processes. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany. p. 39–66. Peltonen-Sainio, P. & Järvinen, P. 1995. Seeding rate ef- fects on tillering, grain yield, and yield components of oat at high latitude. Field Crops Research 40: 49– 56. Peltonen-Sainio, P. & Rajala, A. 2001. Chlormequat and ethephon effects on growth and yield formation of conventional, naked, and dwarf oat. Agricultural and Food Science in Finland 10: 175–184. Rajala, A. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. 2001. Plant growth reg- ulator effects on spring cereal root and shoot growth. Agronomy Journal 9: 936–943. Rajala, A., Peltonen-Sainio, P., Onnela, M. & Jackson, M.B. 2002. Effects of applying stem-shortening plant growth regulators to leaves on root elongation by seedlings of wheat, oat and barley: mediation by eth- ylene. Plant Growth Regulation 38: 51–59. Shakiba, M.R., Ehdaie, B., Madore, M.A. & Waines, J.G. 1996. Contribution of internode reserves to grain yield in a tall and a semidwarf spring wheat. Journal of Genetic Breeding 50: 91–100. Simmons, S.R., Oeike, O.E., Wiersma, J.V., Lueschen, W.E. & Warnes, D.D. 1988. Spring wheat and barley responses to ethephon. Agronomy Journal 80: 829– 834. Taylor, J.S., Foster, K.R. & Caldwell, C.D. 1991. Ethep- hon effects on barley in central Alberta. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 71: 983–995. Waddington, S.R. & Cartwright, P. 1986. Modification of yield components and stem length in spring barley by the application of growth retardants prior to main shoot stem elongation. Journal of Agricultural Sci- ence Cambridge 107: 367–375. Zadoks, J.C., Chang, T.T. & Konzak, C.F. 1974. A deci- mal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Research 14: 415–421. development and mineral nutrient-ion uptake in win- ter wheat. In: Jackson, M.B. (ed.). Growth regulators on root and shoot development. British Plant Growth Regulator Group, Monograph 10, Wantage. p. 87– 101. Craufurd, P.Q. & Cartwright, P. 1989. Effect of photoperiod and chlormequat on apical development and growth in a spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivar. Annals of Botany 63: 515–525. Davidson, D.J. & Chevalier, P.M. 1992. Storage and re- mobilisation of water-soluble carbohydrates in stems of spring wheat. Crop Science 32: 186–190. Ehdaie, B. & Waines, J.G. 1989. Adaption of landrace and improved spring wheat genotypes to stress en- vironments. Journal of Genetic Breeding 43: 151– 156. Erviö, L.-R., Jalli, H., Kontturi, M., Hakkola, H., Kangas, A. & Simojoki, P. 1995. Benefits of using plant growth regulators in fodder barley. Agricultural Science in Finland 4: 429–443. Evans, L.T., Blundell, C. & King, R.W. 1995. Develop- mental responses by tall and dwarf isogenic lines of spring wheat to applied gibberellins. Australian Jour- nal of Plant Physiology 22: 365–371. Gale, M.D. & Youssefian, S. 1985. Dwarfing genes in wheat. In: Russell, E. (ed.). Progress in plant breed- ing. Butterworths, London. Vol. 1. p. 1–35. Gent, M.P.N. & Kiyomoto, R.K. 1998. Physiological and agronomic consequences of Rht genes in wheat. Journal of Crop Production 1: 27–46. Grossmann, K. 1992. Plant growth retardants: their mode of action and benefit for physiological research. In: Karssen, C.M. et al. (eds.). Progress in plant growth regulation. Kluwer, Dordrecht. p. 788–797. Höfner, W. & Kühn, H. 1982. Effect of growth regulator combinations on ear development, assimilate trans- location and yield in cereal crops. In: McLaren, J.S. (ed.). Chemical manipulation of crop growth and development. Butterworth Scientific, London. p. 375– 390. Hutley-Bull, P.D. & Schwabe, W.W. 1982. Some effects of low-concentration gibberellic acid and retardant application during early growth on morphogenesis in wheat. In: McLaren, J.S. (ed.). Chemical manipula- tion of crop growth and development. Butterworth Scientific, London. p. 329–342. Knapp, J.S., Harms, C.L. & Volenec, J.J. 1987. Growth regulator effects on wheat culm nonstructural and structural carbohydrates and lignin. Crop Science 27: 1201–1205. Langer, R.H. 1972. How grasses grow. Edward Arnold, London. 60 p. Littell, R.C., Milliken, G.A., Stroup, W.W. & Wolfinger, R.D. 1996. SAS system for mixed models. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. 633 p. Ma, B.L. & Smith, D.L. 1992. Growth regulator effects on aboveground dry matter partitioning during grain fill of spring barley. Crop Science 32: 741–746. Mäkelä, P., Väärälä, L., Rajalahti, R., Rajala, A. & Pelto- nen-Sainio, P. 1997. Drought response of modern and old oat lines in greenhouse and long-term field trials. 244 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Rajala, A. & Peltonen-Sainio, P. PGRs to alter cereal growth SELOSTUS Aikaisen ja tavanomaisen kasvunsäädekäsittelyn vaikutus kevätviljojen kasvustoon ja satoon Ari Rajala ja Pirjo Peltonen-Sainio MTT (Maa- ja elintarviketalouden tutkimuskeskus) Kasvunsäädekäsittelyt vaikuttivat vähän muihin kasvusto-ominaisuuksiin kuin korren pituuteen. Ai- kaiset kasvunsäädekäsittelyt lyhensivät hetkellisesti kaikkien lajien oraan pituuskasvua, mutta tuleentu- neen kasvuston pituuteen niillä ei ollut vaikutusta. Kasvunsäädekäsittelyt vaikuttivat satoon vaihtelevas- ti. Toisin kuin kauralla ja vehnällä, ohralla kasvun- sääteet vaikuttivat satoon lajikkeittain. Ohralajike Kymppi hyötyi kaikista kasvunsäädekäsittelyistä, kun taas Saanan sato oli sama tai pienempi eri käsitte- lyillä. Kauralla aikainen CCC-käsittely lisäsi satoa 370 kg ha–1 ja Etefoni-käsittely tavanomaiseen aikaan laski satoa 270 kg ha–1. Vehnällä tavanomaiseen ai- kaan annettu CCC laski satoa lähes 500 kg ha–1. Sa- manaikaisesti tämän voimakkaan sadon alenemisen kanssa pääverson tähkän paino ja tuhannen jyvän pai- no pienenivät. Tulosten perusteella kasvunsääteiden käytöllä ei saavuteta muita muutoksia kasvustossa kuin korren lyheneminen, ja kasvunsääteet vaikut- tavat satoon vaihtelevasti, varsinkin kun lakoa ei esiinny. Kasvunsääteitä käytetään perinteisesti viljojen laon- torjuntaan. Monet, lähinnä ulkomaiset tutkimustulok- set antavat kuitenkin viitteitä, että kasvunsäädekäsit- telyllä voidaan vaikuttaa korren pituuskasvun lisäk- si myös muihin kasvusto-ominaisuuksiin kuten ver- soutumiseen ja jyvien lukumäärään. Tutkimme aikai- sin ja tavanomaiseen aikaan suoritettujen kasvunsää- dekäsittelyjen vaikutuksia kauran, ohran ja vehnän kasvustoihin ja sadon muodostumiseen pitkän päivän kasvuoloissa. Peltokokeet tehtiin Helsingin yliopiston Viikin koetilalla vuosina 1996–1998 ja 2000, sekä Maa- ja elintarviketalouden tutkimuskeskuksessa Jokioisilla vuonna 2000. Kustakin kevätviljalajista oli kokeissa mukana pitkä- ja lyhytkortinen lajike: kaura (Veli ja Pal), ohra (Kymppi ja Saana) ja vehnä (Mahti ja Tjal- ve). Tutkittuja kasvunsääteitä oli kolme. Näistä kah- den, CCC:n ja Modduksen, kortta lyhentävä vaiku- tus perustuu gibberelliinihapon biosynteesin rajoitta- miseen, kun taas Etefoni lisää etyleenin määrää kas- visolussa. Kasvustot käsiteltiin joko kolme–neljä-leh- tivaiheesa tai tavanomaisessa kasvuvaiheessa (CCC korren pituuskasvun alussa, Etefoni ja Moddus lip- pulehtivaiheessa). Title Introduction Results Discussion References SELOSTUS