Paper · 1993 · Agronomy Journal

Radiation‐Use Efficiency among Grain Sorghum Cultivars and Plant Densities

W. D. Rosenthal; T. J. Gerik; L. J. Wade

5
claims
6
verbatim quotes
40
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Radiation‐use efficiency (RUE, g MJ− 1 ) has often been used in many crop model equations to estimate total biomass and yield based on cumulative absorbed photosynthetically active radiation. Management practice effects on radiation‐use efficiency have not been well documented for grain sorghum [ Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. A field study was conducted near Temple, TX to determine plant density and cultivar effects on RUE in grain sorghum. Early ‘Cargill 4462’ and late maturing ‘Cargill 6670’ cultivars were planted on a Houston Black clay (fine, montmorillonitic, thermic Udic Paleustert) on 16 Mar. and 1 Aug. 1989 at 5, 12, 19, and 26 plants per square meter. Incoming, reflected, and transmitted photosynthetically active radiation were measured weekly from 6 wk after emergence until full anthesis. Dry matter and leaf area index were determined from 0.5‐m 2 areas immediately after the radiation measurements. The calculated extinction coefficient, 0.51, for PAR transmittance was significantly lower than in the crop growth model, SORKAM, documentation. This new value of extinction coefficient reduces total dry matter in and increases RUE in SORKAM. The average RUE for all treatments was 3.5 g MJ− 1 as compared with 3.2 g MJ− 1 in SORKAM. The new values will be incorporated into SORKAM. No significant radiation use efficiency differences were detected among density and maturity class treatments.

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 5

Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The calculated PAR extinction coefficient was 0.51 and significantly lower than SORKAM documentation.

Taxon
PARe0
Outcome
extinction coefficiente0
Direction
lowere0
Value
0.51e0
Comparator
SORKAMe0

Verbatim

e0

“The calculated extinction coefficient, 0.51, for PAR transmittance was significantly lower than in the crop growth model, SORKAM, documentation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1075 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

The revised coefficient reduces modeled total dry matter in SORKAM.

Outcome
total dry mattere0
Direction
reducese0
Comparator
SORKAMe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“This new value of extinction coefficient reduces total dry matter in and increases RUE in SORKAM.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1076–1173 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

The revised coefficient increases modeled RUE in SORKAM.

Outcome
RUEe0
Direction
increasese0
Comparator
SORKAMe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“This new value of extinction coefficient reduces total dry matter in and increases RUE in SORKAM.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1076–1173 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Average RUE was 3.5 g MJ− 1, versus 3.2 g MJ− 1 in SORKAM.

Outcome
RUEe0
Value
3.5 g MJ− 1e0
Qualifier
3.2 g MJ− 1e0
Comparator
SORKAMe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“The average RUE for all treatments was 3.5 g MJ− 1 as compared with 3.2 g MJ− 1 in SORKAM.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1174–1264 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Radiation use efficiency did not differ significantly among density and maturity class treatments.

Taxon
SorghumSorghumt0
Treatment
density and maturity class treatmentse0
Outcome
radiation use efficiencye0
Direction
No significante0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No significant radiation use efficiency differences were detected among density and maturity class treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1314–1424 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grain Sorghum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–44 · show in text ↑

conjugated linoleic acid · growth · SorghumPositive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

stage · growth · SorghumPositive and negative results

9 papers: 6 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 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.