Cross-pollination benefits differ among oilseed rape varieties

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Cross-pollination benefits differ among oilseed rape varieties. / Hudewenz, Anika; Pufal, Gesine; Bögeholz, Anna-Lena et al.
In: The Journal of Agricultural Science, Vol. 152, No. 5, 14.10.2014, p. 770-778.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{28fb2d9aedb343b0aaa8b5b961bfc018,
title = "Cross-pollination benefits differ among oilseed rape varieties",
abstract = "SUMMARY Winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus) is an important crop for human consumption and biofuel production and its production is increasing worldwide. It is generally assumed that cross-pollination by insects increases oilseed rape yield but testing of this has been restricted to a few rapeseed varieties and produced varying results. The present study determines whether cross-pollination benefits a number of oilseed rape varieties by comparing yield in the presence and absence of insects. Four rapeseed varieties (Sherlock, Traviata, Treffer and Visby) were used with ten individuals each in four pollination treatments: (1) supplementary hand-pollination, (2) open pollination with insects able to access the flowers, (3) wind pollination and (4) autonomous self-pollination. Across all four varieties, open and supplementary hand-pollination treatments resulted in higher fruit set, numbers of seeds per pod and seed yield compared with wind and self-pollination. The cross-pollination benefits, however, differed among rapeseed varieties: Treffer and Visby had a higher dependence on open (insects) and supplementary cross-pollination than Sherlock and Traviata. Across all four varieties, seed weight compensated for reduced fruit set and was highest when plants were self-pollinated. The present results highlight the importance of considering varietal differences in crop pollination research. Information on the pollination requirements of crop varieties is required by farmers to optimize management decisions in a world of increasing agropollination deficits.",
keywords = "Biology, autogamy, biofuel, cost-benefit analysis, insect, Ecosystems Research",
author = "Anika Hudewenz and Gesine Pufal and Anna-Lena B{\"o}geholz and Alexandra-Maria Klein",
year = "2014",
month = oct,
day = "14",
doi = "10.1017/S0021859613000440",
language = "English",
volume = "152",
pages = "770--778",
journal = "The Journal of Agricultural Science",
issn = "0021-8596",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "5",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cross-pollination benefits differ among oilseed rape varieties

AU - Hudewenz, Anika

AU - Pufal, Gesine

AU - Bögeholz, Anna-Lena

AU - Klein, Alexandra-Maria

PY - 2014/10/14

Y1 - 2014/10/14

N2 - SUMMARY Winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus) is an important crop for human consumption and biofuel production and its production is increasing worldwide. It is generally assumed that cross-pollination by insects increases oilseed rape yield but testing of this has been restricted to a few rapeseed varieties and produced varying results. The present study determines whether cross-pollination benefits a number of oilseed rape varieties by comparing yield in the presence and absence of insects. Four rapeseed varieties (Sherlock, Traviata, Treffer and Visby) were used with ten individuals each in four pollination treatments: (1) supplementary hand-pollination, (2) open pollination with insects able to access the flowers, (3) wind pollination and (4) autonomous self-pollination. Across all four varieties, open and supplementary hand-pollination treatments resulted in higher fruit set, numbers of seeds per pod and seed yield compared with wind and self-pollination. The cross-pollination benefits, however, differed among rapeseed varieties: Treffer and Visby had a higher dependence on open (insects) and supplementary cross-pollination than Sherlock and Traviata. Across all four varieties, seed weight compensated for reduced fruit set and was highest when plants were self-pollinated. The present results highlight the importance of considering varietal differences in crop pollination research. Information on the pollination requirements of crop varieties is required by farmers to optimize management decisions in a world of increasing agropollination deficits.

AB - SUMMARY Winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus) is an important crop for human consumption and biofuel production and its production is increasing worldwide. It is generally assumed that cross-pollination by insects increases oilseed rape yield but testing of this has been restricted to a few rapeseed varieties and produced varying results. The present study determines whether cross-pollination benefits a number of oilseed rape varieties by comparing yield in the presence and absence of insects. Four rapeseed varieties (Sherlock, Traviata, Treffer and Visby) were used with ten individuals each in four pollination treatments: (1) supplementary hand-pollination, (2) open pollination with insects able to access the flowers, (3) wind pollination and (4) autonomous self-pollination. Across all four varieties, open and supplementary hand-pollination treatments resulted in higher fruit set, numbers of seeds per pod and seed yield compared with wind and self-pollination. The cross-pollination benefits, however, differed among rapeseed varieties: Treffer and Visby had a higher dependence on open (insects) and supplementary cross-pollination than Sherlock and Traviata. Across all four varieties, seed weight compensated for reduced fruit set and was highest when plants were self-pollinated. The present results highlight the importance of considering varietal differences in crop pollination research. Information on the pollination requirements of crop varieties is required by farmers to optimize management decisions in a world of increasing agropollination deficits.

KW - Biology

KW - autogamy

KW - biofuel

KW - cost-benefit analysis

KW - insect

KW - Ecosystems Research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84898424875&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0021859613000440

DO - 10.1017/S0021859613000440

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 152

SP - 770

EP - 778

JO - The Journal of Agricultural Science

JF - The Journal of Agricultural Science

SN - 0021-8596

IS - 5

ER -

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Ein Meer voller Plastik
  2. Je vous salue!
  3. Hermann Bahr
  4. The right to liberty and security according to article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and facing threats to public safety and national security
  5. Politische Strategie
  6. Konzepte praktischen Verstehens in der Pädagogik
  7. Mit realistischem Blick - Lukanische Perspektiven auf Geld
  8. Aushandlungsprozesse in der Hochschullehre
  9. Über den sinn von Thematisierungstabus und die unmöglichkeit einer soziologischen analyse der soziologie
  10. Organisationen, Institutionen, Professionsentwicklungen
  11. Defeminizing Sustainability
  12. Ästhetische Erfahrung als Gegenstand empirischer Forschung?
  13. Social and ethical aspects in sustainability performance measurement and assessment. A systematic literature review
  14. 1. Einleitung
  15. Digital Tudor
  16. Fachbezogene Diskurse von DaZ-Lernenden über Kunst
  17. Normative Verortungen und Vorgehen im Forschungsprozess
  18. Einleitung
  19. Johannes Brusila, Bruce Johnson and John Richardson (2016): Memory, Space, Sound
  20. Kommentierte Bibliographie
  21. Albania
  22. Lernen in der digitalisierten Welt
  23. Zwischen Beharrung und Beschleunigung
  24. Strategischer Wissenstransfer als Erfolgsfaktor bei KMU
  25. Was nie geschrieben wurde, lesen. L’antropologia linguistica di Walter Benjamin
  26. "20 years health promotion research in and on settings"
  27. Werkkommentare
  28. Vorbemerkung zur Charta der Grundrechte
  29. Spielen für den guten Zweck
  30. Asia in the edges: a narrative account of the Inter-Asia Cultural Studies Summer School in Bangalore
  31. Rezension Chris Porter, 2019, Supporter Ownership in English Football