Figure - available from: Frontiers in Plant Science
This content is subject to copyright.
Effects of planting density on functional traits in winter wheat. Each data point represents the estimated marginal means of a genotype that were grown in low (T1) and high (T2) planting density at the booting stage. Plasticity was calculated as the percentage deviation of T2 trait values from T1. Traits shown include shoot biomass (A–C), shoot length (D–F), total tiller number (G–I), total green leaves on the main stem (J–L), and leaf mass per area [LMA, (M–O)]. Boxplots of trait distributions in T1 and T2, with solid lines showing genotype responses (A, D, G, J, M) and scatter plots of trait values in T1 vs. T2, with fitted linear regression lines, formulas, adjusted R², and p-values, with dashed lines indicating 1:1 relationship (B, E, H, K, N). Comparison between plasticity and T1 trait values, with fitted linear regression lines, formulas, adjusted R², and p-values, with dashed lines marking zero plasticity (C, F, I, L, O).

Effects of planting density on functional traits in winter wheat. Each data point represents the estimated marginal means of a genotype that were grown in low (T1) and high (T2) planting density at the booting stage. Plasticity was calculated as the percentage deviation of T2 trait values from T1. Traits shown include shoot biomass (A–C), shoot length (D–F), total tiller number (G–I), total green leaves on the main stem (J–L), and leaf mass per area [LMA, (M–O)]. Boxplots of trait distributions in T1 and T2, with solid lines showing genotype responses (A, D, G, J, M) and scatter plots of trait values in T1 vs. T2, with fitted linear regression lines, formulas, adjusted R², and p-values, with dashed lines indicating 1:1 relationship (B, E, H, K, N). Comparison between plasticity and T1 trait values, with fitted linear regression lines, formulas, adjusted R², and p-values, with dashed lines marking zero plasticity (C, F, I, L, O).

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
Breeders work to adapt winter wheat genotypes for high planting densities to pursue sustainable intensification and maximize canopy productivity. Although the effects of plant-plant competition at high planting density have been extensively reported, the quantitative relationship between competitiveness and plant performance remains unclear. In thi...

Citations

Article
Identifying target traits for breeding stable, high-yielding winter wheat cultivars is challenging due to the intricate interplays of genotype, environment and management practices. We hypothesized that yield stability could be achieved through multiple genotypic strategies and that agronomic management stimulating these strategies would enhance stability. To test this, three-years of field experiments were conducted using eight high-yielding elite cultivars and three agronomic practices:1) nitrogen levels (220 or 176 kg N/ha), 2) fertilizer application timing, and 3) two sowing dates. Detailed field phenotyping of 130 agronomic, phenological, chemical and physiological traits, resulted in 40,557 measured or derived trait values. Correlation and multivariate analyses suggested that management practices promoting grain number increased yield stability, while nitrogen level influenced the importance of application time and sowing date. Interestingly, modern elite cultivars exhibit two distinct physiological strategies coupling different source capacity and sink demand strategies to achieve genotypic yield stability: (1) coupling high tiller and grain numbers with longer canopy stay-green and higher carbon reserves and (2) coupling high grain length with low tiller number and greater remobilization of pre-anthesis carbon reserves. The integration of multiple physiological pathways could therefore facilitate the identification of trait combinations for yield stability breeding.