Abstract
Abstract Pre‐flowering photoperiod effects on floral initiation, flowering time and yield components of various crops have been well studied, but the post‐flowering photoperiod effects on major field crops are not clearly understood. A controlled environment study was carried out using six long‐day (LD) crops, flax, sugar beet, broad bean, triticale, wheat, and rapeseed, and seven short‐day (SD) crops including Adzuki bean, potato, rice, peanut, mungbean, cotton and corn with a major objective of evaluating the post‐flowering photoperiod effects on their reproductive development and yield components. There were significant inter‐ and intra‐specific differences in their response to post‐flowering photoperiod treatments. The effects of short days on LD crops were similar to LD effects on SD crops. The post‐flowering duration was prolonged by short photoperiod in LD crops and long photoperiod in SD crops. There was, however, significant genotypic variation within a species for such effects. The post‐flowering LD treatment caused abscission of flowers and pods and the resumption of vegetative growth in Adzuki bean. The post‐flowering LD treatment also delayed the shoot senescence of one of the two potato varieties and decreased the number of tubers per plant in both varieties. The LD treatment delayed maturation of rice and mungbean, and decreased seed yield and 100‐seed weight of peanut, although the shoot senescence of peanut was not apparently affected. Rapeseed, wheat, cotton and corn genotypes in this study did not show any sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiod. In triticale (an LD crop) exposure to short photoperiod post‐flowering increased the number of spikes per plant perhaps due to a greater assimilate accumulation over a longer duration. The results from the current study as well as those from our previous experiments suggest that post‐flowering photoperiod responses do exist in diverse field crops, and that there are strong genotypic differences in sensitivity and magnitude of response to post‐flowering photoperiod. Photoperiod after flowering substantially regulates the source/sink relationship, and promotes partitioning and accumulation of assimilates to storage organs of crops when it favours the reproductive development of crops.
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 19
Claim · model-written summary
Short photoperiod prolonged post-flowering duration in long-day crops.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The post‐flowering duration was prolonged by short photoperiod in LD crops and long photoperiod in SD crops.”
Claim · model-written summary
Long photoperiod prolonged post-flowering duration in short-day crops.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The post‐flowering duration was prolonged by short photoperiod in LD crops and long photoperiod in SD crops.”
Claim · model-written summary
Response to post-flowering photoperiod varied significantly among genotypes within species.
Verbatim
e0“There was, however, significant genotypic variation within a species for such effects.”
t0“Crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Long days after flowering caused flower and pod abscission in Adzuki bean.
- Taxon
- Adzuki bean
Vigna angularise0 - Treatment
- post‐flowering LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- abscission of flowers and podse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The post‐flowering LD treatment caused abscission of flowers and pods and the resumption of vegetative growth in Adzuki bean.”
Claim · model-written summary
Long days after flowering resumed vegetative growth in Adzuki bean.
- Taxon
- Adzuki beanVigna angularise0
- Treatment
- post‐flowering LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- resumption of vegetative growthe0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The post‐flowering LD treatment caused abscission of flowers and pods and the resumption of vegetative growth in Adzuki bean.”
Claim · model-written summary
Long days after flowering delayed shoot senescence in one potato variety.
- Taxon
- potato
Solanum tuberosume0 - Treatment
- post‐flowering LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- shoot senescencee0
- Direction
- delayede0
- Qualifier
- one of the two potato varietiese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The post‐flowering LD treatment also delayed the shoot senescence of one of the two potato varieties and decreased the number of tubers per plant in both varieties.”
Claim · model-written summary
Long days after flowering decreased tuber number per plant in both potato varieties.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume0
- Treatment
- post‐flowering LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- number of tubers per plante0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- both varietiese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The post‐flowering LD treatment also delayed the shoot senescence of one of the two potato varieties and decreased the number of tubers per plant in both varieties.”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-day treatment delayed rice maturation.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativae0 - Treatment
- LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- maturatione0
- Direction
- delayede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The LD treatment delayed maturation of rice and mungbean”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-day treatment delayed mungbean maturation.
- Taxon
- mungbean
.jpg?width=60)
Vigna radiatae0 - Treatment
- LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- maturatione0
- Direction
- delayede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The LD treatment delayed maturation of rice and mungbean”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-day treatment decreased peanut seed yield.
- Taxon
- peanut
Arachis hypogaeae0 - Treatment
- LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- seed yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The LD treatment delayed maturation of rice and mungbean, and decreased seed yield and 100‐seed weight of peanut, although the shoot senescence of peanut was not apparently affected.”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-day treatment decreased peanut 100-seed weight.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- LD treatmente0
- Outcome
- 100‐seed weighte0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The LD treatment delayed maturation of rice and mungbean, and decreased seed yield and 100‐seed weight of peanut, although the shoot senescence of peanut was not apparently affected.”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-day treatment did not apparently affect peanut shoot senescence.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- LD treatmente1
- Outcome
- shoot senescencee0
- Direction
- not apparently affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“although the shoot senescence of peanut was not apparently affected”
e1“The LD treatment delayed maturation of rice and mungbean”
Claim · model-written summary
Rapeseed genotypes showed no sensitivity to post-flowering photoperiod.
Verbatim
e0“Rapeseed, wheat, cotton and corn genotypes in this study did not show any sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiod.”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat genotypes showed no sensitivity to post-flowering photoperiod.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Outcome
- sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiode0
- Direction
- did not show anye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rapeseed, wheat, cotton and corn genotypes in this study did not show any sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiod.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton genotypes showed no sensitivity to post-flowering photoperiod.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Outcome
- sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiode0
- Direction
- did not show anye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rapeseed, wheat, cotton and corn genotypes in this study did not show any sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiod.”
Claim · model-written summary
Corn genotypes showed no sensitivity to post-flowering photoperiod.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Outcome
- sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiode0
- Direction
- did not show anye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rapeseed, wheat, cotton and corn genotypes in this study did not show any sensitivity to post‐flowering photoperiod.”
Claim · model-written summary
Short photoperiod after flowering increased triticale spikes per plant.
- Taxon
- triticale
×Triticosecalee0 - Treatment
- short photoperiod post‐floweringe0
- Outcome
- number of spikes per plante0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- perhaps due to a greater assimilate accumulation over a longer duratione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In triticale (an LD crop) exposure to short photoperiod post‐flowering increased the number of spikes per plant perhaps due to a greater assimilate accumulation over a longer duration.”
Claim · model-written summary
Post-flowering photoperiod regulated source-sink relationships in crops.
Verbatim
e0“Photoperiod after flowering substantially regulates the source/sink relationship, and promotes partitioning and accumulation of assimilates to storage organs of crops when it favours the reproductive development of crops.”
Claim · model-written summary
Favorable post-flowering photoperiod promoted assimilate partitioning and accumulation in crop storage organs.
Verbatim
e0“Photoperiod after flowering substantially regulates the source/sink relationship, and promotes partitioning and accumulation of assimilates to storage organs of crops when it favours the reproductive development of crops.”
The same questions in other papers
light · yield · Vigna angularis (adzuki bean)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →light · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →light · yield · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 papers →light · quality: postharvest · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
light · yield · x Triticosecale (triticale)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.