Paper · 1985 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

ECOLOGICAL ADAPTATION IN Lolium perenne L.: PHYSIOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS AMONG PERSISTENCE, CARBOHYDRATE RESERVES AND WATER AVAILABILITY

SERGIO ARCIONI; DOMENICO MARIOTTI; MARIO FALCINELLI

19
claims
46
verbatim quotes
27
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Cultivars of Lolium perenne L. when removed from their area of adaptation, especially in the latitudinal sense, are usually less persistent than adapted varieties and disappear after a few years. This phenomenon is particularly remarkable for North European varieties when cultivated in Mediterranean regions which are characterized by a period of drought stress (from the 2nd week of June to 2nd week of August). Two varieties of Lolium perenne L., Vejo (adapted to Central Italy) and Lenta (North European cultivar), were sown in September 1979 and compared to evaluate the effects of water stress on persistence from June 1980 to January 1982 at Perugia, central Italy. Measurements recorded included ground cover, plant survival, dry matter yield (DMY), number of tillers per plant, and water soluble carbohydrate (WSC) content. Trials were performed, according to a split-plot design with three replicates, in dense stands (seeding rate of 2000 viable seeds/m 2 ) and in spaced plants (40 × 60 cm apart) which were either irrigated or nonirrigated. The results show that Vejo, starting from the 2nd year from sowing, had higher values than Lenta for ground cover, plant survival and number of tillers per plant. The same behavior was observed for DMY with the exception of the August 1981 sampling in which the situation was reversed because of the summer dormancy of the local variety. The pattern of WSC content also differed between the two cultivars with the adapted type characterized by higher values than the unadapted one except in winter. Irrigation during the dry season increased DMY by preventing dormancy of the local cultivar and by stimulating vegetative activity of the unadapted one, but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety. These results suggest that the low DMY produced in summer by the unadapted cultivar is obtained at the expense of carbohydrate reserves. The reduction of WSC (mg∙plant −1 ) in Lenta from May to August was 43% in dry and 47% in irrigated conditions versus 22% and 32%, respectively, in Vejo. Severe depletion of reserves seems to be the main cause of the thinning of the unadapted variety (the ground cover evaluated in October 1981 was 18% and 22% in Lenta and 82% and 93% in Vejo in nonirrigated and irrigated conditions, respectively). For these reasons the lack of persistence of the unadapted cultivars of perennial ryegrass in Mediterranean regions cannot be attributed to the extent of summer water shortage characterizing these areas.Key words: Lolium perenne L., environmental adaptation, persistence, carbohydrate reserves, stress in Mediterranean areas

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

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

From the second year, Vejo exceeded Lenta in ground cover, survival and tiller number.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe0
Outcome
ground cover, plant survival and number of tillers per plante0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
starting from the 2nd year from sowinge0
Comparator
Lentae0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The results show that Vejo, starting from the 2nd year from sowing, had higher values than Lenta for ground cover, plant survival and number of tillers per plant.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1054–1216 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vejo generally had higher dry matter yield than Lenta.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe1
Outcome
DMYe0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Qualifier
with the exception of the August 1981 samplinge0
Comparator
Lentae1

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The same behavior was observed for DMY with the exception of the August 1981 sampling in which the situation was reversed because of the summer dormancy of the local variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1217–1391 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Vejo (adapted to Central Italy) and Lenta (North European cultivar)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 450–517 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In August 1981, Lenta exceeded Vejo in dry matter yield, attributed to local-variety summer dormancy.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae1
Outcome
DMYe0
Direction
reversede0
Qualifier
August 1981 samplinge0
Comparator
Vejoe1

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The same behavior was observed for DMY with the exception of the August 1981 sampling in which the situation was reversed because of the summer dormancy of the local variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1217–1391 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Vejo (adapted to Central Italy) and Lenta (North European cultivar)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 450–517 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adapted Vejo generally had higher water soluble carbohydrate content than unadapted Lenta except in winter.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe1
Outcome
WSC contente0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
except in wintere0
Comparator
Lentae1

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The pattern of WSC content also differed between the two cultivars with the adapted type characterized by higher values than the unadapted one except in winter.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1392–1552 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Vejo (adapted to Central Italy) and Lenta (North European cultivar)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 450–517 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dry-season irrigation raised dry matter yield.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Treatment
Irrigation during the dry seasone0
Outcome
DMYe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Irrigation during the dry season increased DMY by preventing dormancy of the local cultivar and by stimulating vegetative activity of the unadapted one, but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1553–1804 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation prevented local-cultivar dormancy.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe1
Treatment
Irrigation during the dry seasone0
Outcome
dormancy of the local cultivare0
Direction
preventinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Irrigation during the dry season increased DMY by preventing dormancy of the local cultivar and by stimulating vegetative activity of the unadapted one, but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1553–1804 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Vejo (adapted to Central Italy) and Lenta (North European cultivar)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 450–517 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation stimulated vegetative activity of unadapted Lenta.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae1
Treatment
Irrigation during the dry seasone0
Outcome
vegetative activity of the unadapted onee0
Direction
stimulatinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Irrigation during the dry season increased DMY by preventing dormancy of the local cultivar and by stimulating vegetative activity of the unadapted one, but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1553–1804 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Vejo (adapted to Central Italy) and Lenta (North European cultivar)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 450–517 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation did not influence mortality of unadapted Lenta.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae2
Treatment
Irrigatione1
Outcome
mortality of the foreign cultivare0
Direction
neither influencede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1706–1804 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Irrigation during the dry season increased DMY by preventing dormancy of the local cultivar and by stimulating vegetative activity of the unadapted one, but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1553–1804 · show in text ↑
e2

“The results show that Vejo, starting from the 2nd year from sowing, had higher values than Lenta for ground cover, plant survival and number of tillers per plant.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1054–1216 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation did not influence WSC content in either cultivar.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Treatment
Irrigatione1
Outcome
WSC contente0
Direction
neither influencede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1706–1804 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Irrigation during the dry season increased DMY by preventing dormancy of the local cultivar and by stimulating vegetative activity of the unadapted one, but neither influenced the mortality of the foreign cultivar or the WSC content in either variety.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1553–1804 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lenta WSC declined 43% from May to August under dry conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae0
Treatment
drye0
Outcome
WSCe0
Direction
reductione0
Value
43%e0
Qualifier
from May to Auguste0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The reduction of WSC (mg∙plant −1 ) in Lenta from May to August was 43% in dry and 47% in irrigated conditions versus 22% and 32%, respectively, in Vejo.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1942–2095 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lenta WSC declined 47% from May to August under irrigated conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae0
Treatment
irrigatede0
Outcome
WSCe0
Direction
reductione0
Value
47%e0
Qualifier
from May to Auguste0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The reduction of WSC (mg∙plant −1 ) in Lenta from May to August was 43% in dry and 47% in irrigated conditions versus 22% and 32%, respectively, in Vejo.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1942–2095 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vejo WSC declined 22% from May to August under dry conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe0
Treatment
drye0
Outcome
WSCe0
Direction
reductione0
Value
22%e0
Qualifier
from May to Auguste0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The reduction of WSC (mg∙plant −1 ) in Lenta from May to August was 43% in dry and 47% in irrigated conditions versus 22% and 32%, respectively, in Vejo.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1942–2095 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vejo WSC declined 32% from May to August under irrigated conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe0
Treatment
irrigatede0
Outcome
WSCe0
Direction
reductione0
Value
32%e0
Qualifier
from May to Auguste0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The reduction of WSC (mg∙plant −1 ) in Lenta from May to August was 43% in dry and 47% in irrigated conditions versus 22% and 32%, respectively, in Vejo.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1942–2095 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Severe reserve depletion was suggested as the main cause of thinning in Lenta.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae1
Outcome
thinning of the unadapted varietye0
Qualifier
Severe depletion of reservese0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Severe depletion of reserves seems to be the main cause of the thinning of the unadapted variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2096–2192 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Lenta (North European cultivar)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 486–517 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lenta ground cover in October 1981 was 18% under nonirrigated conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae0
Treatment
nonirrigatede0
Outcome
ground covere0
Value
18%e0
Qualifier
October 1981e0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the ground cover evaluated in October 1981 was 18% and 22% in Lenta and 82% and 93% in Vejo in nonirrigated and irrigated conditions, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2194–2340 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lenta ground cover in October 1981 was 22% under irrigated conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Lentae0
Treatment
irrigatede0
Outcome
ground covere0
Value
22%e0
Qualifier
October 1981e0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the ground cover evaluated in October 1981 was 18% and 22% in Lenta and 82% and 93% in Vejo in nonirrigated and irrigated conditions, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2194–2340 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vejo ground cover in October 1981 was 82% under nonirrigated conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe0
Treatment
nonirrigatede0
Outcome
ground covere0
Value
82%e0
Qualifier
October 1981e0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the ground cover evaluated in October 1981 was 18% and 22% in Lenta and 82% and 93% in Vejo in nonirrigated and irrigated conditions, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2194–2340 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vejo ground cover in October 1981 was 93% under irrigated conditions.

Taxon
Lolium perenne L.Lolium perennet0
Material
Vejoe0
Treatment
irrigatede0
Outcome
ground covere0
Value
93%e0
Qualifier
October 1981e0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the ground cover evaluated in October 1981 was 18% and 22% in Lenta and 82% and 93% in Vejo in nonirrigated and irrigated conditions, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2194–2340 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lolium perenne L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–42 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors concluded that lack of persistence of unadapted ryegrass cannot be attributed to summer water shortage.

Taxon
perennial ryegrassLolium perennee0
Outcome
lack of persistencee0
Qualifier
cannot be attributed to the extent of summer water shortagee0
Setting
Mediterranean regionse0

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

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the lack of persistence of the unadapted cultivars of perennial ryegrass in Mediterranean regions cannot be attributed to the extent of summer water shortage characterizing these areas.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2361–2546 · show in text ↑

drought · growth · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Results differ

12 papers: 7 positive, 5 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

irrigation · growth · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 2 positive, 3 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

irrigation · yield · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

drought · yield · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results

10 papers: 3 positive, 7 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

irrigation · quality: sugar starch · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 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.