Abstract
Grain and sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) differ in their ability to produce either high grain yield or high sugar concentration in the stems. Some cultivars of sorghum may yield both grains and sugar. This paper investigates the trade-offs among biomass, grain and sugar production. Fourteen tropical sorghum genotypes with contrasted sweetness and PP sensitivity were evaluated in the field near Bamako (Mali) at three sowing dates under favourable rainfed conditions. Plant phenology, morphology, dry matter of different organs and stem sugar content were measured at anthesis and grain maturity. A panicle pruning treatment was implemented after anthesis. Late sowing (shorter days) led to a decrease in total leaf number, dry mass and sugar yield even in PP-insensitive genotypes because of an increased phyllochron. Dry matter production and soluble sugar accumulation were strongly correlated with leaf number. Sugar concentration varied little among sowing dates or between anthesis and maturity. This indicates that sugar accumulation happened mainly before anthesis, thus largely escaping from competition with grain filling. This was confirmed by the low impact of panicle pruning on sugar concentration. Changes in sugar concentration from anthesis to maturity were negatively correlated with harvest index but not with grain yield. Physiological trade-offs among sugar, biomass and grain production under favourable rainfall are small in late-maturing and PP-sensitive sweet sorghums cultivated under sudano-sahelian conditions. The results differ from earlier reports that focussed on early maturing, PP-insensitive germplasm. Further research is needed on the interactions of these traits with agricultural practices and drought.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Late sowing decreased total leaf number, dry mass and sugar yield even in photoperiod-insensitive genotypes.
- Treatment
- Late sowinge0
- Outcome
- total leaf number, dry mass and sugar yielde0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Qualifier
- even in PP-insensitive genotypese0
SorghumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Late sowing (shorter days) led to a decrease in total leaf number, dry mass and sugar yield even in PP-insensitive genotypes because of an increased phyllochron”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Late sowing increased phyllochron.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Late sowing (shorter days) led to a decrease in total leaf number, dry mass and sugar yield even in PP-insensitive genotypes because of an increased phyllochron”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Dry matter production and soluble sugar accumulation correlated strongly with leaf number.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dry matter production and soluble sugar accumulation were strongly correlated with leaf number”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugar concentration varied little across sowing dates or between anthesis and maturity.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugar concentration varied little among sowing dates or between anthesis and maturity”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors infer that sugar accumulated chiefly before anthesis and largely avoided competition with grain filling.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sugar accumulation happened mainly before anthesis, thus largely escaping from competition with grain filling”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Panicle pruning had little impact on sugar concentration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“low impact of panicle pruning on sugar concentration”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Change in sugar concentration from anthesis to maturity correlated negatively with harvest index.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Changes in sugar concentration from anthesis to maturity were negatively correlated with harvest index but not with grain yield”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Change in sugar concentration was not correlated with grain yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Changes in sugar concentration from anthesis to maturity were negatively correlated with harvest index but not with grain yield”
e1“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Physiological tradeoffs among sugar, biomass and grain production were small in late-maturing, photoperiod-sensitive sweet sorghums under favorable rainfall.
Verbatim
e0“Physiological trade-offs among sugar, biomass and grain production under favourable rainfall are small in late-maturing and PP-sensitive sweet sorghums cultivated under sudano-sahelian conditions”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · quality: sugar starch · SorghumPositive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
sowing time · quality: sugar starch · SorghumPositive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.