Piché, I.A.

Schellenberg, M.P.

English

eCommons@USASK

Response of plains rough fescue seed and biomass yields under irrigation

University of Saskatchewan Research Archive

Isabelle A. Piché1 , Michael P. Schellenberg1Response of Plains Rough Fescue Seed and Biomass Yields Under IrrigationSwift Current Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 1 Airport Rd, Box 1030, Swift Current, Saskatchewan, S9H 3X2•Experiment was a split plot design with water treatment as the main plot (water added, ambient precipitation). The sub-plot was rough fescue populations.•Nine wild populations were grown out in the greenhouse at Swift Current. The seedlings were transplanted into a common nursery established at the Swift Current Research and Development Centre in 2014. Each subplot consisted of 4 plants in a row with 1m separation between plants and between rows.•2.5 cm of water was added to irrigated treatments on August 19, 2015 and again on September 3, 2015.•Measurements taken included survivals (spring and fall), plant height, crown diameter, reproductive tiller number/plant, forage yield/plant, and seed yield/plant. Reproductive tiller number, biomass and seed yield are reported here.•Statistical analyses done using ANOVA with Tukey for means separation. When α was 0.05 or less the comparison was considered statistically significant.IntroductionMaterials and Methods Acknowledgements© 2013ObjectiveConclusionsPlains rough fescue (Festuca hallii (Vasey) Piper) is an important grass species in western Canada. Seed is in high demand by beef producers as the grass provides high-quality forage both in the growing season and after senescence1.The seed is also in demand  in ecological restoration for the reclamation industry. Seed availability is limited by infrequent and inconsistent production by the plant making seed collection difficult2.Flower initiation of fescue species occurs in the autumn prior to flowering, with flower development occurring between late May and early June of the subsequent year3. Palit4 reported that irrigation increased seed head density of rough fescue, therefore under moisture-limited rangeland conditions water is a critical factor in controlling reproduction of this species. Seed yield of plains rough fescue was determined by Biligetu5 to be related to the number of reproductive tillers of individual plants and, in general, the populations with the higher seed yields also produced the greatest amounts of above ground biomass. However, Biligetu5 also notes that excessive rainfall in 2010 may have limited floral development. We wanted to explore the effects of late season water application on seed yield and biomass production of plains rough fescue as a management strategy to improve performance of seed and biomass yield.  The purpose of our study is to assess seed yield and biomass response of 9 wild populations of plains rough fescue to late season water application and ultimately be able to provide the beef and reclamation industry with a practice that will provide a more dependable seed source of this species.Figure 1. Monthly mean precipitation (mm) for 2014, 2015 and the 130 year mean.Table 1. Mean number of reproductive tillers, seed yield and biomass per plant. Letters indicate statistically significant differences at α=0.05.Results020406080100120140May Jun Jul Aug Sep OctMonthly Mean Precipitation (mm)20142015130 Yr. MeanReproductive tillers plant -1 Seed yield (g plant -1) Biomass plant -1 (g)Irrigated 7.732 0.402 51.417 Dry 5.879 0.364 45.385 Populations Tillers counted June 23, 2015Seed collectedJune  23, 2015Biomass collectedSept.. 8, 2015HAG 12.844 a 0.621 ab 78.020 aCAN 9.938 ab 0.413 ab 66.700 abVNI 8.107 ab 0.810 a 51.550 abMONET 7.000 ab 0.240 ab 39.460 abTURT 6.871 ab 0.397 ab 27.350 bPAS 5.750 ab 0.282 ab 50.110 abMACKLIN 5.323 ab 0.335 ab 49.510 abKERNEN 3.710 b 0.211 b 42.770 abRM 3.300 b 0.205 b 30.130 abC.V. 143.232 185.86 63.6932014 had precipitation well above the 130 year mean for June and August; September was wetter than average. This late summer/early fall  moisture would have been available to the plants at a time when flowers are initiated for the following year. Precipitation was within the seasonal average for May 2015 but well below normal for June when flower development and seed set would be occurring. Populations HAG, VNI and CAN all rank higher for number of reproductive tillers, seed weight and biomass whereas RM ranks as one of the lowest. As this was the first year of the imposed fall water treatment, no effect on measured parameters (other than biomass) may be noted until 2016 provided that percent soil moisture was significantly different between main treatments at floral initiation in fall of 2015. We do note significant differences between some populations for all parameters (Table 1) suggesting that these differences are due to genotype, not soil moisture. Biomass production between irrigated and dry plots, although not significant, trends towards decreased production for the irrigated treatment. This was noted in other rough fescue populations undergoing similar treatment6 where there may be populations that have a threshold of water application for optimal biomass production. Excess moisture may be detrimental to biomass production for some populations therefore further research is required to determine appropriate amounts.References1. Willms W. D. and Fraser J. (1992). Growth characteristics of rough fescue (Festuca scabrella var. campestris) after three years of repeated harvesting at scheduled frequencies and heights. Canadian Journal of Botany. 70, 212-2129.2.Toynbee K. (1987). Prolific flowering year for plains rough fescue at the Kernen Prairie. Blue Jay. 45, 142-143.3. Johnston A. and MacDonald M. (1967). Floral initiation and seed production in Festuca scabrella Torr.. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 47, 577-583.4. Pallit et al. (2012). Irrigation but not N fertilization enhances seedhead density in plains rough fescue (Festuca hallii). Grass and Forage Science. 68, 120-124.5. Biligetu et al. (2012). Seed yield variation in plains rough fescue (Festuca hallii (Vasey) Piper) populations and its relation with phenotypic characteristics and environmental factors. Grass and Forage Science. 68, 589-595.6. Schellenberg M. P. and Piché I. (2016). Impact of water supplementation on rough fescue seed and biomass yields. Poster presented at Society for Range Management annual meeting.We wish to acknowledge funding from the Saskatchewan Agricultural Development Fund and AAFC as well as the assistance of S. Bender, P. Coward, L. Fast, S. Campbell, S. Cheney,I. McConkey and T. Weston. 

https://harvest.usask.ca/bitstream/handle/10388/8795/I.%20Pich%c3%a9%20and%2c%20M.%20Schellenberg%2c%202016.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Response of plains rough fescue seed and biomass yields under irrigation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

eCommons@USASK

University of Saskatchewan Research Archive