Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nswdpe.intersearch.com.au/nswdpejspui/handle/1/15515
Title: Susceptibility of chickpea varieties to pod splitting after delayed harvest and impacts on grain yield
Other Titles: Northern NSW research results 2017
Authors: Wood, Jenny
Keir, Catherine
Harden, Steven
Verrell, Andrew
Keywords: 2013, chickpea, delayed harvest, grain yield, harvest date, pod splitting, QLD, rain, shattering, Tamworth, variety, yield loss
Issue Date: 2017
Publisher: Department of Primary Industries
Abstract: Key findings •• Chickpea pods can split open when harvest is delayed (harvest date (HD)3 and HD4), allowing easy access for water and an easier exit for seeds that can drop to the ground before or during the harvest process. •• HD3 averaged 28.6% split pods per plant (varietal range of 2.8–51.9%) while HD4 averaged 46.0% split pods per plant (varietal range of 30.0–64.9%). •• Averaging across HD3 and HD4 for the desi chickpeas, Howzat had the least split pods (10.5%) and PBA Seamer[PBR] had the most (55.6%). For the kabuli chickpeas, Genesis™ 090 had the least split pods (22.5%) and Genesis™ Kalkee[PBR] was the worst affected (55.6%). •• Loss of seed from split pods and pod abscission, seed shattering and reductions in grain weight caused from delaying harvest were shown to reduce grain yields by up to 44%. •• A delay of six days with one rain event (44.2 mm) was enough to reduce the grain yield in chickpeas (averaged across varieties) by 2%, due to lower seed density. •• Growers should aim to harvest chickpeas on time to avoid yield losses and grain quality penalties at receival.
URI: https://nswdpe.intersearch.com.au/nswdpejspui/handle/1/15515
ISSN: 2208-8199
Appears in Collections:DPI Agriculture - Southern and Northern Research Results [2011-present]

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat  
NRR2017-16-Wood-+.pdf384.85 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing