H triml'a t ~v .. SWIM 0781 7616 (:29 LIBRARY I Michigan State ‘ University ~— I *— This is to certify that the dissertation entitled /K&Lf AJ—ALL-Ifl-A M) IL/V/Pb-f J./' 2;ng j] “Ifxf'Qz/e‘v‘. ( . . I /( vim. vW-L-‘LW'I "4. 7 r‘nn. {Cir-pi» ' I*/L Z L {M ‘ 3 C (/L «I..L,.vut 1Z6 l.-.. '~£-{// ,L, {[‘I [(obf:/ (L '- ‘V Z; L". k“ i/th ~f L ~L .. i 1. r i 3 / ’ presented by F f‘ « .. ‘ "‘ /i i ' . f) ' / 7 / ./..’ IL/ . fit I J l ‘ ' \ r , t 1 ‘ _. ’I' ., VI , t . , Vi K. I \_.( I ‘J' 'I ,s . ' .l f I: 14' 'l , u t - 4 has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for V1? D degreein C :fC‘W'LC/i grwl >x «1" QM J Major profeéZor ZYIZVy Date MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE DECnéz’ I WW3 MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution extrema-1139.1 THE EFFECT OF SEED SIZE, DENSITY AND PROTEIN CONTENT ON FTELD PERFORMANCE, VIGOR AND STORABILITY OF TWO WINTER WHEAT VARIETIES By Riad Zouheir Baalbaki A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Crop and Soil Sciences 1988 ABSTRACT THE EFFECT OF SEED DENSITY, SIZE AND PROTEIN CONTENT ON FIELD PERFORMANCE, VIGOR AND STORABILITY OF TWO WINTER WHEAT VARIETIES EL’lfi‘lul 3? Riad Zouheir Baalbaki A study was conducted to investigate the effects of different seed characters of wheat (Igigigum aestivum L.) on field performance, vigor and storability. Two winter wheat varieties, Augusta, a soft white variety, and Hillsdale, a soft red variety, were divided according to density, size and protein content and planted in two locations in Michigan for two consecutive years. After planting, the same seed lots were subjected to several vigor tests including accelerated aging, speed of germination, conductivity index, ATP level, glutamic acid decarboxy- lase activity (GADA), standard germination and cold test. Seed lots from the first year experiment were stored up to 32 months under room conditions. At various stages during the storage period, the ATP, GADA and standard germination tests were performed and their results related to vigor test results and viability in storage. The field experiment results showed that differences in emergence did not reflect differences in seed characters. However, heavy and large seeds in both varieties consistently resulted in increased yields compared to light and small seeds. Tiller number per meter had the greatest effect on yield variation in both years, followed by seed number per spike and lOOO-seed weight. Location effects significantly affected yield, and Huron county yields were higher than those in East Lansing in both years. 4—4‘ Vigor tests that involved stressing the seeds, such as the accelerated aging test and the cold test were better indicators of yield potential than non-stress tests like standard germination. Stress tests were also better able to differentiate performance of the different density, size and protein classes. Biochemical methods such as the CADA and ATP tests were also good indicators of yield potential, but were not sensitive enough to detect differences among all seed classes. The viability of the different seed categories, as measured by the standard germination test, did not change significantly up to 18 months of storage, but declined rapidly thereafter. The CADA and ATP levels showed a continuous decline throughout the entire storage period. Heavy. large and high protein seeds stored better than light, small and low protein seeds, and had higher germination at the end of the experiment. While the ATP level was among the best tests in predicting storability, the accelerated aging and speed of germination tests showed very little correlation with viability during storage. T0 MARIYA, MAI AND DR. COPELAND iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to Dr. L. 0. Copeland, my major professor, for his guidance, advice and constant encouragement throughout this study. He has shown me how to be‘ a better scientist and, perhaps more importantly, how to km: a better person. Thanks are also due to my other committee members, Drs. F. Dennis, E. Foster, and R. Freed for their valuable suggestions and reviews of this manuscript. I would also like to thank Dr. E. Everson, D. Glenn, and L. Fitzpatrick for their help with the field study, and Dr. D. Penner and F. Roggenbuk for their help with the laboratory study. I would also like to thank all my friends for their constant support and their valuable comments on this work. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ................. 2 ................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................... x INTRODUCTION ........................................................ 1 CHAPTER I. THE EFFECT OF SEED DENSITY, SIZE AND PROTEIN CONTENT ON FIELD PERFORMANCE OF WHEAT ............................... 4 ABSTRACT ......................................................... A REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................. 6 MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................... ll RESULTS ......................................................... 15 DISCUSSION ...................................................... 30 REFERENCES ...................................................... 37 CHAPTER II. THE EFFECT OF SEED DENSITY, SIZE AND PROTEIN CONTENT ON VIGOR TESTING OF TWO WHEAT VARIETIES .................... 41 ABSTRACT ........................................................ 41 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................ G2 MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................... 52 RESULTS ......................................................... 56 DISCUSSION ...................................................... 65 REFERENCES ...................................................... 72 CHAPTER III. THE EFFECT OF SEED DENSITY, SIZE AND PROTEIN CONTENT ON STORABILITY OF TWO WHEAT VARIETIES ...................... 77 ABSTRACT ........................................................ 77 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................ 78 MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................... 81 RESULTS ......................................................... 82 DISCUSSION ...................................................... 92 REFERENCES ...................................................... 95 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................ 97 APPENDICES ........................................................ 100 APPENDIX A ..................................................... 100 APPENDIX B ..................................................... 105 vi LIST OF TABLES . Page Tablel. Emergence number and emergence rate index (E R.I.) of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, grown in East Lansing in 1985 and 1986 .................... 16 Table 2. Correlation coefficients between emergence number and emergence rate index for Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 and 1986 .................................................... 18 Table 3. Biological yield, straw yield, and grain yield of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ..... 18 Table 4. Biological yield, straw yield, and grain yield of two winter' wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986 ........................................................ 20 Table 5. correlation coefficients among biological yield, straw yield, grain yield per meter and harvest index of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ................................ 22 Table (3. Correlation coefficients among biological yield, straw yield, grain yield per meter and harvest index of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986 ................................ 22 Table 7. Yield components of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ................................. 23 Table 8. Yield components of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986 ................................. 25 Table EL Correlation coefficients among yield components and grain yield of Augusta and Hillsdale ................... 26 Table. l0. ‘Yield. (kg/ha) of In“) winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, grown. in two locations, East Lansing and Pigeon, Michigan .............................. 28 Table 11. Effect of various seed characters on standard germination of Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986 ..... 57 Table 12. Effects of various seed characters on accelerated aging test results cu? Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986 .................................................... 57 vii IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIll-lll---——________f Table 13. Effects of various seed characters on cold germination test results for Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986. Percent germination .......................... 59 Table 14. Effects of various seed characters on speed of germination test results for Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986 ............................................... 59 Table 15. Effect of various seed characters on conductivity index test results for Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986 .................................. 61 Table 16. Eff ct of several seed characters on ATP test results (10- M/Lit) for Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986 .................................................... 61 Table 17. Effect of various seed characters on glutamic acid decarboxylase activity test results (ppm COZ/gm of seed) for Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986 ............ 6A Table 18. Correlation coefficients between different vigor tests, field emergence and yield of Augusta, 1985 and 1986 ........................................................ 67 Table 19. Correlation coefficients between different vigor tests, field emergence and yield of Hillsdale, 1985 and 1986 ........................................................ 70 Table 20. Correlation of standard germination, ATP and GADA results of the storage experiment for Augusta and Hillsdale ................................................... 90 Table 21. Correlathmu of the accelerated aging, speed of germination, conductivity index, cold test, ATP and GADA tests with the standard germination test results after one year, two years and 32 months of storage ................ 9O Table A1. Analysis of variance for emergence (plants per meter), and emergence rate index (E.R.I.) for Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ........................................ 100 Table A2. Analysis of variance for emergence (plants per meter), and emergence rate index (E R.I.) for Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986 ........................................ 100 Table A3. Analysis of variance for biological yield, straw yield, grain yield and harvest index per meter for Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ................................ 101 Table A4. Analysis of variance for biological yield, straw yield, grain. yield and. harvest index per meter for Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986 ................................ 101 viii —7— Table A5. Analysis of variance for yield components of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ................................ 102 Table A6. Analysis of variance for yield components of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986 ................................ 102 Table A7. Analysis of variance for yield of two varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, grown. in two locations, East Lansing and Pigeon in 1985 and 1986, and emergence rate index (E.R.I.) for Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ............ 103 Table A8. Analysis of variance results for standard germination (WC), accelerated aging (AA), cold test germination (CC), and Speed of germination index (SC), 1985 ....................................................... 103 Table A9. Analysis of variance results for standard germination (WG), accelerated aging (AA), cold test germination (CC), and speed of germination index (SC), 1986 ....................................................... 104 Table A10. Analysis of variance results for conductivity index (CI), ATP, and glutamic acid decarboxylase activity (CADA), 1985 ...................................... 1014 Table All. Analysis of variance results for conductivity index (CI), ATP, and glutamic acid decarboxylase activity (GADA), 1986 ...................................... 104 Table Bl. Mean monthly temperature for two Michigan locations, East Lansing and Pigeon for the 198A-1986 period ..................................................... 105 Table 82. Mean monthly precipitation for two Michigan locations, East Lansing and Pigeon for the 1984-1986 period ..................................................... 106 ix LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure l. Emergence number per'meter (E.N.) and emergence rate index (E.R.I.) of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 ................... 31 Figure 2. Emergence number per meter (E.N.) and emergence rate index (E.R.I.) of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986 ................... 32 Figure 3. Storage effect on germination, ATP level and GADA of two seed density classes, Augusta ............................... 83 Figure 4. Storage effect on germination, ATP level and GADA of three seed size classes, Augusta ................................ 8a Figure 5. Storage effect on germination, ATP level and GADA of two seed protein levels, Augusta ................................ 85 Figure 6. Storage effect on germination, ATP level and GADA of two seed density classes, Hillsdale ............................. 86 Figure 7. Storage effect on germination, ATP level and GADA of three seed size classes, Hillsdale .............................. 87 Figure 8. Storage effect on germination, ATP level and GADA of two seed protein levels, Hillsdale .............................. 88 INTRODUCTION Usually seed quality is measured by germination and purity tests. However, under a wide variety of environmental and soil conditions, the standard germination test rarely gives an accurate indication of the- performance of a seed lot in the field. However, vigor tests can provide a better indication of field performance. Although vigor tests are now commonly inuni to determine field emergence, stand establishment, and sometimes yield potential of species such as corn, soybeans and cotton, they have not been commonly used for wheat. Nor has the relationship of vigor tests to overall field performance of wheat been studied sufficiently. Another area that needs further study ii; seed physical characters. Physical characters snufli as seed. size, seed. density and protein content have not always been successfully related to seed vigor of wheat and no consistent relationship has been established to correlate such characters with plant performance during the entire growing season. Furthermore, more work is needed to study the effects of different seed characters on the results of vigor tests and to determine the vigor test that is most sensitive to these physical differences. Another aspect that also needs further study is the relationship of seed vigor auui physical characters to seed storability. More work is also needed to try to relate certain biochemical changes during storage to viability and vigor, and to determine if such changes can be used to indicate storage potential of seeds of varying quality levels. 1 This study had three broad objectives. (1) The first was to the relationship between the seed physical characters (i.e., density, size, protein content) and field performance as measured by stand establishment, growth rate and yield. (2) The second was to study the relationship beWeen seed vigor as determined by a series of vigor tests, and field performance, and to identify the vigor test(s) that most successfully predict the performance of a seed lot in field tests. (3) The third objective was to relate seed vigor and physical characteristics of density, size and protein content to storability. The research consisted of three related experiments. The first was a field experiment in which seed of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta, a soft white variety, and Hillsdale, a soft red variety was divided into different: density, size, and. protein. categories. The different categories were then planted in the field for two consecutive years and data on emergence and yield was obtained and correlated with the different seed characters. For the second experiment, the same varieties and seed categories were used. Several vigor tests were performed and the results correlated with field emergence and yield of the first experiment. The vigor tests included the accelerated aging test, the cold germination test, the electrical conductivity index, the speed of germination test, the glutamic acid decarboxylase activity test, the ATP test, and the standard germination test. The third experiment consisted of storing the different seed categories for 32 months and periodically testing the seeds using the standard germination, ATP and glutamic acid decarboxylase activity tests. Results of the standard germination test after different storage .1 intervals were then correlated with results of vigor tests performed in experiment two. In addition, results of the ATP and GADA tests at different storage intervals were correlated. with the standard germination results and to the performance of the different seed characters during storage. CHAPTER I THE EFFECT OF SEED DENSITY, SIZE AND PROTEIN CONTENT ON FIELD PERFORMANCE OF WHEAT ABSTRACT A two year field study was conducted to examine the relationship between seed characters of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and field performance. Two winter wheat varieties, Augusta, a soft white variety, and Hillsdale, a soft red variety were divided according to size, density and protein content and planted in two locations in Michigan. Data were collected on emergence rate index, emergence number, biological yield, straw yield, grain yield, and yield components (number of tillers, seeds per spike, and lOOO—seed weight). Our results showed that field emergence was significantly affected by treatment as well as by replication effects. Small seeds resulted in reduced biological and straw yield for both varieties in both years, while light and small seeds resulted in lower grain yields than heavy and large seeds, respectively. Tillers per meter, seeds per spike and lOOO-seed weight contributed significantly to variation in grain yield under normal conditions, but under stress conditions only the number of tillers and seeds per spike contributed significantly to variation in yield. Tillers per meter had the greatest influence on yield for both years and for both 'varieties. Treatments did not significantly influence lOOO-seed 4 5 weight for either year, but had a significant influence on seeds per spike and tillers per meter. location effects significantly affected yield, and Huron county yields were higher than those in East Lansing in both 1985 and 1986. 6 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 1. Seed Size Successful stand establishment and consistent yields are essential for efficient field crop production. Seed size has long been recognized as an important factor affecting field emergence and seedling establishment and can thus indirectly affect crop yields. Variation in seed size within and among plants can be due to genetic differences, interplant competition, effects of disease, and location within the inflorescence and differences in flowering and nutrition of the developing seeds (48). Wood et a1. (48) reported that 35 percent of the variation in size of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) seed was due to between-plant differences, 13 percent to difference between ears (spikes), and 52 percent to differences in locations within the ear. Evans and Bhatt (15) and Boyd et a1. (7) reported a significant positive correlation between seed size and seedling vigor as measured by rate of dry weight gain in young wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and barley plants. Freyman (16) found that plants from large wheat seeds were more cold hardy than those from small seeds, which in turn were slightly hardier than those from seeds with half the endosperm removed. Large barley seeds produced larger seedlings, more tillers, and higher yield compared to small, medium or ungraded seeds (13, 26, 27). Furthermore, a highly significant correlation, between seed size and seedling fresh weight, shoot length and root length of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) was observed (41). Kaufmann and Guttard (26) found that the rate of seedling growth of two barley varieties was greater for large than small seeds until the 2- 7 leaf stage, but afterward no differences in growth rate were observed. Lawan et a1. (28) reported a significant increase in seedling emergence of pearl millet (fignniggtum amggigangm L.) with increased seed size. However, not all studies indicate a positive relationship between seed size and field performance. Demirlicakmak et a1. (13) found no effect of seed size on emergence of barley, while small amd medium sized seeds of three corn (Zea may; L.) varieties had significantly higher germination than large seeds under water stress conditions (36). Abdullahi and Vanderlip (1) found no relationship between seed size and yield of sorghum. B. Seed Density While seed density is independent of seed size, seed weight is a measurement that incorporates both seed size and seed density. Ries et al. (39) reported that seed weight of wheat varied according to its position in the spike and was higher in the outside florets than the middle one, and in the bottom 10 spikelets than in the terminal ones. Yamazaki and Briggle (50) concluded that seed density of soft wheat was dependent on environment rather than variety. They reported that air spaces within the kernel largely determined seed density, and that the extent of such air spaces was dependent on the rate and extent of seed filling and was influenced by periods of wetting and drying. Austenson and Walton (3) found a significant positive correlation between initial seed weight of three wheat cultivars and number of spikes per plant, seeds per plant, straw yield, grain yield and biological yield. Ries and coworkers (38, 39) reported that seedling vigor’ measured. by shoot dry weight was significantly and positively correlated. with higher initial seed weight of wheat. McDaniel (33) 8 concluded that seedlings from heavy barley seeds had a higher growth potential than those from light seeds and that higher amount of mitochondrial respiratory activity of heavy seeds was indicative of a greater amount of energy production and higher vigor. Sung and Delouche (45) observed that germination percent, radicle length and plumule length increased with increased density of rice (9111; satixa L.) seed. They also reported that the benefit of high density seeds was even more apparent under conditions of higher emergence. Lawan et a1. (28) found that percent germination, seedling height 24 days after planting, and proportion of vitreous endosperm starch were positively related to seed density in pearl millet. In studies with wheat seeds, specific gravity was positively correlated with field stands, but showed no consistent relationship with yield (11). C. Protein Content Any reserve nutrient that can influence the rate of germination and seedling development can also influence emergence and crop yield. Meizan et a1. (35) and CarciaDelMoral et a1. (17) reported that location, genotype, location by genotype interaction and crop year all had significant effects on seed protein content of wheat and barley. DeDatta et a1. (12) showed that the protein content of rice increased at lower plant densities since more N was available to each plant, and Cochran et a1. (9) reported that when the supply of N limited yield, deep placement of N increased both yield and protein content of wheat. Many studies have shown that an increase in wheat seed protein can be achieved with spring nitrogen applications in excess of that needed for maximum yields (19, 23, 24, 46). Simazine application at flowering 9 time was also effective in increasing protein content of rye (37), brown rice (47) and wheat (38). Wu and McDonald (49) found that increased N application increased protein content, gluten, soluble protein, non- protein N, and the nitrate content of wheat. They also found that the ratio of protein to non-protein N did not change with application rate. Ries and Everson (38) and Ries et a1. (39) found that seedling vigor was highly correlated with seed protein content in wheat, and Evans and Bhatt (15) reported that seedling vigor was positively related to protein content when seed size was held constant. Lowe and Ries (32) found that high protein content in either the endosperm or aleurone layer resulted in more vigorous seedlings, irrespective of the embryo protein content. Bittenbender and Ries (6) noted that high seed protein affected vigor of rice by making seeds more resistant to loss of viability during storage and by producing larger seedlings due to better endosperm nutrition. Lowe et al. (30) observed that proline and glutamic acid were the sources of protein contributing to increased seedling vigor of wheat and that protein content was positively correlated with seedling vigor and grain yield. Ching and Rynd (8) found that high protein seeds produced larger wheat seedlings than did low protein seeds after four days of germination. They attributed these differences to increased efficiency of metabolic activity and substrate transfer from the endosperm to the seedling axis. Ayers et a1. (4) indicated that some catabolic enzymatic component was more active in high than in low protein wheat seed, and that rapid use of storage reserves was associated with greater vigor during early growth, especially if rapid utilization was coupled with other favorable enzymatic changes. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIll-ll-I:::———————_____i lO Oat (Agggg sativa L.) seeds with high protein content have been reported to yield 21 to 42 percent more the controls, and wheat seed with increased protein content developed into larger seedlings (40). Similar results were obtained. by Lowe and Ries (31) where a high correlation existed between high seed protein content of wheat and shoot, root and total seedling dry matter 3 weeks after planting. Lopez and Grabe (29) reported that high protein wheat seeds performed better under stress conditions and GarciaDelMoral et a1. (17) found that the protein content of barley seed was positively correlated with grain yield” They also Showed. that: both factors ‘were correlated. with the number of spikes per plant and to a lesser extent with seeds per spike and grain weight. The primary objective of this study was to examine the relationship of seed density, seed size and protein content of two winter wheat varieties to stand establishment, total yield and grain yield. A second objective was to determine whether some kind of seed selection during the seed processing operation was possible and sufficient to improve field performance and crop yield. The final objective was to determine the association between different seed vigor indices and field performance. 11 MATERIALS AND METHODS Experiment 1. 1985 Seed source: Untreated seeds of wheat grown in Michigan were obtained from the Michigan Crop Improvement Association. Two winter wheat varieties were used, Augusta, a soft white variety and Hillsdale, a soft red variety. Seed lots from each variety were cleaned, uniformly mixed and divided into two 5-kg sublets. One provided an unselected control and the other was used to obtain different seed size and density categories. Throughout the study, seed were stored at 5° C and 35 percent relative humidity. Seed size: Seeds were divided into three size categories. For Augusta, seeds retained on a 7/64" x 3/4" screen were considered as large; those passing through a 7/64" x 3/4" screen but retained on a 6/64" x 3/4" screen were considered as medium; and seeds passing through a 6/64" x 3/4" screen were considered as small. For Hillsdale, seeds retained on a 6.5/64" x 3/4" screen were considered as large; those passing through 6.5/64" x 3/4" screen but retained on a 5.5/64" x 3/4" screen were considered as medium; and seeds passing through a 5.5/64" x 3/4" screen were considered as small. Seed density: Seeds were divided into light, medium and heavy density classes by using a Forsberg gravity table, Model 1052. Since no clear dividing line existed between the light and medium and between the medium and heavy categories, the medium category was discarded and only the light and heavy categories were used. Protein content: To obtain seeds with varying protein contents, the two varieties had been planted the previOus year in 12 plots each at the ———— 12 Crop and Soil Sciences field laboratory at East Lansing. At anthesis, half the plots from each variety were sprayed with a solution containing 28 percent N at the rate of 20 kg/ha of N. The spraying was repeated 20 days after anthesis. After harvesting, four random samples of 200 grams from each plot were ground, dried and analyzed for N content in triplicate using the micro-Kjeldahl procedure (2). The total crude protein of each sample was obtained by multiplying percent N per gram of seed by a factor of 5.7. Since the unselected seed lots of Augusta and Hillsdale had an average protein content of 11.6 and 12.1 percent, respectivily, seed lots of Augusta and Hillsdale with 12.6 and 13.1 percent protein were selected as high protein and those with 10.6 and 11.1 percent were selected as low protein, respectively. Field study: Forty eight plots were planted in a factorial (variety x treatment) experiment in a randomized complete block design with 4 blocks. The factors were varieties (Augusta and Hillsdale) and treatments (2 seed densities, 3 seed sizes, 2 protein contents, and an unselected control) so that each block contained a total of 16 treatments [2 x (3+2+2+l)] or plots. Each plot consisted of 5 rows established with a seed drill delivering approximately 1730 seeds in a 1.2 x 3.7 meter area giving a seeding rate of about 140 kg/ha. The plots were fertilized N at the rate of 90 kgs/ha split into a preplanting and a spring application. The experiment was planted in 2 locations; one at the field laboratory in East Lansing, and the other near Pigeon in Huron County, Michigan. Field data: Prior to seedling emergence, one meter from the middle row of each plot at the East Lansing location was marked off for data collection. Emergence number per meter, emergence rate index, biological IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIllllllll---—________. 13 yield per meter, straw yield per meter, grain yield per meter and number of tillers per meter were recorded in this sampling unit. Grain yield (bu/acre) and lOOO-seed weight were determined using the whole plots harvested. with a small plot Hege combine. Only yield in kg/ha was obtained from the Huron county plots. Emergence rate index (E.R.I) was calculated using the same formula developed by Maguire (34) to measure the speed of germination and was as follows: E.R.I - No. of seedlings emerged/No. of days to first count +... + No. of new seedlings emerged/No. of days of final count Counting was started 3 days after planting and terminated 21 days after planting, and the final count recorded as emergence number per meter. After collecting emergence data all plots were thinned back to an average of 65 plants per meter. For the rest of the data, only three blocks were used in each location. Biological yield was determined by weighing the above-ground portion of the plant after drying. Grain yield per meter was obtained by threshing the plants and then straw yield calculated as the difference between biological yield and grain yield. Total grain yield was calculated by converting the yield of each plot to yield in kg/ha. All seed weights and yields were reported on a 12.5 percent moisture content basis. lOOO—seed weight was obtained by counting four lOOO-seed samples from each plot, weighing them and averaging the results. The number of tillers per meter was obtained by counting the number of seed-bearing stems per meter, and seeds per spike was obtained by dividing the total number of seeds per meter by the number of tillers. The harvest index was calculated by dividing the seed weight per meter by the biological IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIllllllllI--——________, 14 yield and multiplying by 100. 2. Experiment 2. 1986 The second experiment was conducted to verify the results of the first experiment and to further our understanding of the relationships under study. This second experiment was similar to the first with two exceptions; the number of blocks was increased from three to four and the number of treatments per variety was increased from 8 to 11. The 3 extra treatments were medium protein, unselected minus light and unselected minus small. The unselected minus small category was obtained by using one screen with a hole size of 5.5/64" x 3/4" and 6/64" x 3/4“ for Hillsdale and Augusta, respectively. The seeds retained on the screen were considered as the unselected minus small treatment. The unselected minus light category was obtained by removal of the light seeds using the gravity table and combining medium and heavy seeds in one density category. Medium protein was considered to be 12 percent for both varieties. All other treatments were the same as those used in the first experiment. 3. Statistical Analysis In both experiments, all variables were subjected to analysis of variance following the procedures outlined by Steel and Torrie (42). Means were separated using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) at the 5 percent level of probability. Simple correlations and a forward selection stepwise multiple regression analysis to select the best fit model were calculated using all data points combined for both varieties. The SAS personal computer package was used for the analysis. —7—* 15 RESULTS In 1985, emergence number of the unselected control of Augusta was significantly lower than that of all other treatments (Table 1). While no significant differences existed between the different classes of density and size categories of Augusta, the low protein treatment had significantly lower emergence than the high protein treatment. No treatment effects were significant in Hillsdale. Emergence rate index (Table l) was lower for the unselected control treatment of Augusta than for the heavy, medium, large and high protein treatments. As with the emergence number results, only the protein classes significantly differed from each other while density and size classes did not. Again, differences in emergence rate were not significant in Hillsdale. Analysis of variance (Table A1) indicated that while block and treatment significantly affected the emergence number and emergence rate index, varieties did not and only the treatment by variety interaction was significant for emergence number. In 1986, blocks and treatments had a significant effect on emergence number and emergence rate index (Table A2), while varietal effects and treatment by variety interaction did not. In Augusta (Table 1) the emergence number and emergence rate index did not differ significantly between any classes of the three seed categories; neither were any treatments significantly different from the control. Hillsdale results in 1986 (Table 1) indicated that while no treatment differed significantly from the control in emergence number and emergence rate index, the small seed treatment was significantly lower than the medium, large and unselected minus small treatments. For l6 Tablel. Emergence number and emergence rate index (E.R.I.) of two winter’ wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, grown in East Lansing in 1985 and 1986. 1985 1986 Variety Treatment E No. E.R.I E No. E R I AUGUSTA Unselected 69c 7.76d 78ab 8.74abc Light 81b 9.1lbcd 98a 11.03a Heavy 93ab 10.38abc 88ab 9.99abc Unsel-light* - - 86ab 9.27abc Small 87b 9 27abcd 69b 7 61c Medium 90b 9.68abc 88ab 9.69abc Large 93ab 10.63ab 89ab 10.05abc Unsel-small** - - 77ab 8.37bc Low protein 89b 8.49cd 92a 10.50ab Medium protein - - 81ab 9.4Zab High protein 104a 11.14a 96a 11 25a Hillsdale Unselected 86 9.36 74ab 8.02ab Light 84 9.42 94a 10.54a Heavy 87 10.41 82a 9.423 Unsel-light - - 88a 10.01a Small 83 9.59 61b 5.99b Medium 91 10.25 923 10.07a Large 86 10.74 84a 9.62a Unsel-small - - 91a 10.00a Low protein 94 10.48 85a 9.4la Medium protein - - 89a 9 96a High protein 91 10.19 79ab 8.81s n.s n.s * - unselected minus light, ** - unselected minus small For each 'variety, means followed. by the same letter in each column are not significantly different at the S % probability level according to DMRT. — 17 both varieties in both years, a highly significant correlation existed between emergence number and emergence rate index (Table 2). 2. Biological, Straw and Grain Yield In the 1985 experiment (Table 3), small seeds of both varieties gave significantly lower biological yield and straw yield than all other treatments, but TM) other differences were significant. Most variation occurred in grain yield. per' meter. In .Augusta (Table 3), the light treatment yielded significantly less than the heavy treatment; the small treatment yielded significantly less the medium treatment and both in turn were significantly lower than the large treatment; and the low protein treatment yielded significantly less than the high protein treatment. The light, small and low' protein treatments all yielded significantly less than the unselected control. No treatments of Hillsdale in 1985 produced grain yields differing significantly from that of the control (Table 3). While density classes did not differ, the small seed treatment yielded significantly less than the large treatment, and the low protein treatment yielded significantly less than the high protein treatment. The harvest index in 1985 (Table 3) was similar for both varieties in that small seeds had ‘very high indices compared to most other treatments. While significant differences were observed among size and protein classes of' Augusta, no significant differences occurred in harvest index among different density classes. In Hillsdale, the small seed treatment had a significantly higher harvest index than the medium treatment, while I“) differences existed between different density and protein classes. Analysis of variance (Table A3) showed that both treatment and variety significantly affected all variables tested except Table 2. 18 Correlation coefficients between emergence number and emergence rate index for Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985 and 1986. Augusta Hillsdale 1985 1986 0.87:: 0.97:: 0.73 0.98 ** - Significant at the 19 probability level. Table 3. Biological yield, straw yield, wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985. and grain yield of two winter Variety AUGUSTA HILLSDALE For each variety, means DMRT. Treatment Unselected Light Heavy Small Medium Large Low protein High protein Unselected Light Heavy Small Medium Large Low protein High protein Yield (gms/m) ................................. 355a 344a 367a 305b 357a 375a 342a 377a 2283 222a 237a l86b 226a 235a 220a 237a l27de 139abc ll9e l36bcd 148a l3lcd 150a 129ab l23b 130ab 119b l30ab 139a l23b 140a index ....................................................................... 41. 38. 40. 38. 41. 36 35. 35 39 36 37 35. 37. 2a 3bc lab 2bc 1a .2b 7b .5b .0a .4b .2ab 8b 2ab followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different at the 5 % probability level according to lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlllllll--::r—————____i 19 for‘ biological yield. where only treatment effects were significant. In 1986 (Table 4), no treatment in either variety differed significantly from the control in biological or straw yield except the small seed treatment of Hillsdale. Also for both varieties, no significant differences in biological yield were observed between the density and protein classes, while the small seed treatment was significantly lower than all other size classes. Straw yield results revealed rm) significant differences between classes of tin; three seed categories. As in 1985, most of the variation in 1986 occurred in grain yield (Table 4). While no treatment differed significantly from the unselected control of Augusta, light seeds yielded significantly less than heavy and unselected minus light seeds, and small seeds yielded significantly lower than medium, large and Luwelected minus small seeds. No significant differences were observed between protein classes. Grain yield the light, small and medium seed treatments of Hillsdale in 1986 (Table 4) were all significantly less than that of the control. As with Augusta, significant differences in grain yield occurred between different density and size classes but not among protein levels. Only the harvest index of the light treatment was significantly different from the control of Augusta in 1986 (Table 4). However, for Hillsdale, the light, small and medium treatments were significantly different from the control. Significant differences were recorded among density classes for both varieties. While the high protein treatment of Augusta had a Significantly higher harvest index than the low protein treatment, the large seed treatment had a significantly higher harvest than the small and medium seed treatments of Hillsdale. 20 Table 4. Biological yield, straw yield, and grain yield of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986. Yield (gms/m) --------------------------------- Harvest Variety Treatment Biological Straw Grain index AUGUSTA Unselected 222ab l40ab 82abc 37.1ab Light 233a 160a 73bc 31.4c Heavy 243a 151ab 92a 37.8ab Unsel-light* 238a l49ab 89a 37.7ab Small 198b 126b 72c 36.3abc Medium 232a lSlab 81abc 35.0abc Large 234a l42ab 93a 39.6ab Unsel-small** 241a 155ab 86ab 35.8abc Low protein 233a 153ab 80abc 34.3bc Medium protein 239a lSOab 88a 39.8a High protein 233a l4lab 93a 37.2ab HILLSDALE Unselected 240a 152ab 88ab 36.8a Light 242a 177a 65d 26.4c Heavy 259a 165ab 94a 36.3a Unsel-light 254a l68ab 86abc 33 7ab Small 208b l44b 64d 30.7bc Medium 2443 l70ab 74cd 30 2bc Large 250a 158ab 92ab 36.7a Unsel-small 243a 162ab 80bc 33.1ab Low protein 251a 17lab 80bc 32.Sab Medium protein 240a 158ab 81abc 36.9a High protein 250a 158ab 92ab 33.9ab * - unselected minus light, ** - unselected minus small For each variety, means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different at the 5 % probability level according to DMRT. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIllllllll---—_______, 21 Both treatment and variety effects in 1986 significantly influenced all results (Table A4) except grain yield, which was influenced only by treatment effects. While the biological, straw and grain yield were all positively and significantly correlated with each other for both varieties in 1985 (Table 5), the harvest index was significantly but negatively correlated with straw yield of Augusta and biological and straw yield of Hillsdale. In 1986 (Table 6), the harvest index of Augusta was negatively correlated with biological and straw yield but positively correlated with grain yield. Grain yield was positively correlated with biological yield, and the straw and biological yield were positively correlated. Both straw and grain yield of Hillsdale were negatively correlated with the harvest index and positively correlated with biological yield; however grain yield and straw yield were not significantly correlated. 3. Yield Components The components of grain yield per meter, were tillers per meter, seeds per spike and 1000-seed weight. In 1985, the small seed treatment resulted in significantly less tillers than all other treatments for both varieties while no other treatment differed significantly from the control (Table 7). While the small seed treatment of Augusta was significantly lower in seeds per spike than the control (Table 7), the large and high protein treatments were significantly higher than the control. For Hillsdale, the heavy, large and high protein treatments were all significantly higher than the control in seeds per spike. In 1985, there were significant differences in both varieties between different classes of density, size and and protein content. 22 Table 5. Correlation coefficients among biological yield, straw yield, grain yield per meter and harvest index of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985. Biol. yld. Straw yld. Grain yld. Augusta Harvest index -0.30 -0 59** O 30 Grain yld. 0.82** 0.59** Straw yld. O.95** Hillsdale Harvest index -O.53** -O.67** -0.ll Grain yld. 0.90** 0.81** Straw yld. 0.98** * - Significant at the 5% level of probability. ** - Significant at the 1% level of probability. Table 6. Correlation coefficients among biological yield, straw yield, grain yield per meter and harvest index of Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986. Biol. yld. Straw yld. Grain yld. Augusta Harvest index -0.38* -0.7l** 0.53** Grain yld. 0.58** 0.23 Straw yld. 0.92** Hillsdale Harvest index 0.03 -0.55** -0.83** Grain yld. 0.58** 0.01 Straw Yld. 0.82** * - Significant at the 5% level of probability. ** - Significant at the 1% level of probability. Table 7. Yield components of two winter wheat varieties, 23 Augusta and Hillsdale, 1985. .............................................................. AUGUSTA HILLSDALE Treatment Unselected Light Heavy Small Medium Large Low protein High protein Unselected Light Heavy Small Medium Large Low protein High protein Tillers per meter 120a 118a 124a lOOb 116a 126a 118a 128a Seeds per spike 30bc 30bc 32a 29c 31ab 32a 30bc 32a lOOO-seed wt. (gms) 41.63bc 43.04ab 40.46c 42.25ab 43.34a 42.97ab 43.6la 40.61 40.34 40.49 40.32 i 40.56 40.43 40.23 40.00 n.s For each variety, means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly probability level according to DMRT. different at the 5 % IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIllllllll----—_______i 24 Only the small seed treatment of Augusta had a significantly lower lOOO-seed weight than the control in 1985 (Table 7), while no significant differences occurred for Hillsdale. The small seed treatment of Augusta also had a significantly lower lOOO-seed weight than both the medium and large treatments. In 1986 (Table 8), the small seed treatment had significantly fewer tillers than the control of both varieties, and only the heavy treatment of Hillsdale had significantly more tillers than the control. Significant differences in tillering of both varieties occurred among different density and size classes, while no significant differences were observed between different protein levels. No significant differences in seeds per spike were recorded between the control and any treatment for either variety (Table 8). For Augusta, the light treatment was significantly lower than the heavy treatment, the small and medium significantly lower than the large, and the low protein significantly lower than the high protein treatments. For Hillsdale, the small and unselected minus small treatments were significantly lower in seeds per spike than the large seed treatment, and the low protein treatment significantly lower than the high protein treatment. No significant differences in lOOO-seed weight were recorded in 1986 between any of the treatments for either variety (Table 8). Treatment in 1985 significantly influenced the number of tillers per meter and seeds per spike but not the seed weight (Table A5). However, variety significantly influenced the number of tillers and seed weight but had no effect on seeds per spike. The treatment x variety interaction was significant for seeds per spike and seed weight. In 1986 25 Table 8. Yield components of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, 1986. Tillers Seeds per lOOO-seed Variety Treatment per meter spike wt. (gms) AUGUSTA Unselected 90ab 32abc 27.87 Light 79bc 3lbc 29.A2 Heavy 99a 35a 29.77 Unsel-light* 91ab 33ab 31.72 Small 75c 3lbc 30.02 Medium 87abc 3lbc 29.97 Large 99a 34a 31.78 Unsel-sma11** 98a 3Zabc 30.72 Low protein 90ab 30c 30.22 Medium protein 90ab 32bc 31.84 High protein 97a 33ab 31.58 n.s HILLSDALE Unselected 92b 31ab 29.56 Light 89b 30b 29.99 Heavy 106a 32ab 30.51 Unsel-light 91b 31ab 30.45 Small 76c 30b 31.67 Medium 89b 32ab 30.94 Large 98ab 33a 29.21 Unsel-small 98ab 30b 31.57 Low protein 92b 30b 30.78 Medium protein 91b 31b 30.62 High protein 97ab 33a 30.59 n.s * - unselected minus light, ** - unselected minus small For each variety, means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different at the S % probability level according to DMRT. —" 26 Table 9. Correlation coefficients among yield components and grain yield of Augusta and Hillsdale. 1000- seed Wt. Augusta Tillers per meter Seeds per spike 1985 ------------------------------ Tillers/m 0.S7* Seeds/spike 0.7l** Grain yld. 0.82** 1986 Tillers/m 0.14 Seeds/spike 0.3a Grain yld. 0.41 0.53* 0.78** 0.68** 1000- seed wt. ......... Hillsdale Tillers Seeds per per meter spike 0.60* 0.82** 0.61* 0.23 0.45* 0.66** * - Significant at the 5% level of probability. ** - Significant at the 1% level of probability. —7—' 27 (Table A6), treatment affected both number of tillers per meter and seeds per spike, while variety only affected seeds per spike. The interaction between the two was not significant. While all yield components were significantly and positively correlated with each other and with grain yield for Augusta in 1985 (Table 9), in 1986 the lOOO-seed weight was not correlated with either yield components or grain yield. lOOO-seed weight of Hillsdale (Table 10) was not correlated to either yield or yield components in either year, while the number of tillers and seeds per spike were significantly and positively correlated with grain yield for both years. The resulting regression equations after forward stepwise selection were: Y1985 - 452.367 + 3.961X1** + 0.489X2** + 2.091x3* (R2 - 0.72) rm“ - 45.1.1.7 + 0.59ox2** + 2.36x3** (R2 - 0.56) where Y - grain yield per meter X1 - lOOO-seed weight X2 - number of tillers per meter X3 - seed number per spike The yield of whole plots from both East Lansing and Pigeon was compared in 1985 and 1986 (Table 10). In 1985, only the small seed treatment of Augusta in East Lansing was significantly different from the control. While both the light and small seed treatments of Hillsdale yielded significantly less than the control in the Pigeon location, no treatment differed significantly from the control at East Lansing. While only size classes of Augusta differed significantly in yield in both locations, no significant differences were recorded for Hillsdale in any seed category at East Lansing. All categories showed significant 28 Table 10. Yield (kg/ha) of two winter wheat varieties, Augusta and Hillsdale, grown in two locations, East Lansing and Pigeon, Michigan. 1985 1986 Variety Treatment E.Lansing Pigeon E.Lansing Pigeon AUGUSTA Unselected 5972abc 6127abc 353la-d 3873ab Light 5539cd 5976abc 3128cd 3408bc Heavy 6065abc 6270abc 3982ab 4358a Unsel-light* - - 3934ab 4166ab Small 519ld 5676c 3039d 3053c Medium 5669de 5901bc 338lcd 3873ab Large 618lab 6495ab 3968ab 4440a Unsel-small** - - 3695a~d 4016ab Low protein 6024abc 6113abc 3517a-d 3449bc Medium protein - - 3750abc 3955ab High protein 6325a 6591a 4146a 4214ab HILLSDALE Unselected 5628ab 6hl3ab 3750ab 39h8abc Light 5334b 5457d 29l6d 3388cd Heavy 5703ab 6878a 3920a 4317a Unsel—light - - 3620abc 4194ab Small 5444ab 5539cd 3046cd 3087d Medium 5532ab 6359ab 3156bcd a064ab Large 5949ab 6632ab 3893a 4501a Unsel-small - - 3422a-d 4084ab Low protein 5375ab 6051bc 3470a-d 3558bcd Medium protein - - 3&97a-d 407lab High protein 6004a 6721a 3893a 4603a * - unselected minus light, ** - unselected minus small For each variety, means are not significantly according to DMRT. followed by the same letter in each column different at the S % probability level —:— 29 differences among classes in Pigeon. In 1986, the small seed treatment yielded significantly less than the control for both varieties and locations, with the exception of Augusta in East Lansing. Though significant differences in yield were always observed between different density and size classes, no differences in yield among protein levels were recorded for Augusta at Pigeon or for Hillsdale at East Lansing. Location and treatment effects were significant in both 1985 and 1986, while variety effects were not (Table A7). Treatment x variety interaction and location x variety interaction were also significant in 1985. 30 DISCUSSION Results showed that the final emergence level was closely associated with the speed of emergence or emergence rate index. Correlations between the two were highly significant for both years and for both varieties. Figures 1 and 2 clearly illustrate that regardless of the specific treatments, both the total emergence and emergence rate index followed the same trend, especially in 1986. This indicates that the emergence capacity of a seed lot is dependent on the speed of emergence; thus a seed lot that exhibits quick emergence is also expected to have a high final emergence. Conversely, slow emerging lots tend to have a low final emergence, even after extended periods of time. Although our choice of treatments influenced emergence results, grouping the data by seed characters (Figures 1 and 2) demonstrates that seed size consistently influenced seedling emergence, while seed density and protein level did not. With the exception of emergence number for Hillsdale in 1985, large and medium Seeds always had better emergence than small seeds. However, the density data show that while the light seeds gave a lower or equal total emergence and emergence rate index than the heavy seeds in 1985, the trend was reversed in 1986, and the same kind of inconsistensies occurred for seeds of different protein levels. These results indicate that while seed size had a consistent effect on emergence, seed density and protein content did not. Seeding depth could also affect emergence. Many other studies (5, 10. 43) have concluded that seeding depth affected rate and final ' and rotein emergence. Since seed size varied little across denSity p level, Size effects and their interaction with planting depth probably 31 xenc. 30m cocootoEu {12 f 1 xenc. 20m mocongm H2 1 CL A n T D S S U .L m m A. H in x _. _ a m WHWZXWZW 7 b J I /hW( L m 1 m _ 1mfm I.-- -e\ve .7? \ICVIC _ Zmfim _ «v.5 . m. __ name 1 whim MKHMflWK¢V .miw 47/ N 0R n tutu I _ m"m_ Smfl q<< increase with size or protein content in both varieties, no differences were significant among the density classes. In 1986 (Table 17), the small seeds of both varieties again contained lower GADA than other treatments. Large and high protein Augusta seeds were significantly higher than the control. Small seeds of Augusta contained significantly less enzyme activity than that of nmdium or Lumelected minus small seeds, and all three were significantly lower than the large seeds. Low protein seeds did not differ from seeds with medium protein content, but were significantly lower than high protein seeds in GADA activity. No differences were recorded among the different density classes. The density and. proteirx categories of Hillsdale paralleled those of Augusta with respect to enzyme activity, but the size classes differed in that the small seeds contained significantly less GADA than all other classes. Both treatment and variety significantly influenced GADA l! in 1984 63 GADA in 1985 (Table A10), but only treatment had a significant influence in 1986 (Table All). Tat 64 Table 17. Effect of various seed characters on glutamic acid decarboxylase activity test results (ppm COz/gm of seed) for Augusta and Hillsdale in 1985 and 1986. 1985 1986 Treatment Augusta Hillsdale Augusta Hillsdale Unselected 46Gb 463ab hSOcd 462ab Light 470ab 475a 483abc 470ab Unselected-Light* - - 482abc 475ab Heavy SOlab 478a 480abc 474ab Small 387c 371c 383e 397C Medium a79ab 416bc 457bcd 46lab Unselected-Small** - - ASAbcd 457ab Large 494ab 488a S2Sa 499a Low Protein AS7b 419bc 429d a30bc Medium Protein - - ASSbcd 425bc High Protein 522a 512a SOAab 490a * - unselected minus light, ** - unselected minus small. Means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different at the 5 % probability level according to DMRT. seed c which inter; of the other imbih deter which exhat resuf cont conc yie adV 8C! le be 65 DISCUSSION The accelerated aging test detected significant differences among seed categories for both varieties in both years, and was the only test which showed a significant influence of treatments, varieties and their interaction. Aging had greatest effect on the size classes; germination of the small and medium seed classes was consistently lower than for all other treatments. Since size must have a significant effect on degree of imbibition, these results suggest that an1 important factor in determining the extent of aging is the rate and speed of imbibition which, when followed by the activation of metabolic processes, lead to exhaustion of reserves needed for germination. Tekrony zuui Egli (68) also reported that accelerated aging test results were a good indicator of soybean performance under adverse conditions. Our results show that under both normal and adverse conditions, the accelerated aging test was significantly correlated with yield (Tables 18 and 19). However the correlatitwi was higher under adverse conditions in 1986, especially for Hillsdale. The C.V. of the accelerated aging test was relatively low and therefore the results were less variable tfiuui those for other tests. Although test results have been reported to vary with seed position within individual aging chambers (51), such effects were eliminated in our study by using most of the seed in each container for the germination test. Like the accelerated aging test, the cold test is a stress test, and was able to detect differences in germination capacity related to seed size euui density. However, the cxflxi test rarely detected Significant differences due to protein content. Since the cold test conditi Signif correl (Table standa seeds, labor; not b also and E soil were be h were neg; sea One 66 conditions were similar to those in the field, response should have been significantly correlated with emergence. However, no significant correlations between total emergence and cold test results were observed (Tables 18 and 19). On the other hand, both cold germination and standard germination were always positively correlated. Thus for wheat seeds, the cold test is more related to seed germination in the laboratory than to field emergence. Consequently, the use of soil may not be an1 important factor in determining test results. Loeffler (46) also concluded that soil and non-soil cold tests gave the same results, and Burris and Navratil (12) concluded that the presence or absence of soil pathogens did not affect the cold test results. The speed of germination index and the emergence rate index results were calculated using the same procedure; therefore, the results should be highly correlated. In Augusta however, the correlation coefficients were very low. In Hillsdale they were higher (significant in 1985), but negative. These results 'would incorrectly indicate that low' quality seeds judged by their field performance are the more vigorous seeds. One explanation of our results could be that smaller and lighter seeds reach the critical moisture content for germination more quickly than large or heavy seeds during imbibition and therefore germinate faster. When differnces in imbibition time are not a factor, as with seeds of different protein levels, the speed of germination index indicated that high protein seeds were more vigorous than low protein seeds. By contrast, even if smaller and lighter seeds germinate faster in the field, they should not emerge quickly since their growth rate or dry matter accumulation is lower than that of large or heavy seeds. If quality factors other than size and density were considered, the Table 18. emer genc‘ / 1985 WC AA CG SG 01 ATP GADA EN ERI 1986 WC AA CG SC CI ATP GAD. EN ERI * - Sig: H . Si} W = st. SG - s GADA . ERI - E 67 Table 18. Correlation coefficients between different vigor tests, field emergence and yield of Augusta, 1985 and 1986. Yld WC AA CC SC CI ATP GADA EN 1985 NC .78** AA .91** .79** CC .96** .75** .94** SC .59 .59 .52 .59 CI .68 .68 .60 .60 .58 ATP .72* .72* .83** .69 -.32 -.69 GADA .83** .83** .78** .80* -.40 -.8l* .87** EN .39 .39 .51 .51 .29 -.22 .42 .48 ERI .40 .40 .63 .51 .13 -.37 .68 .59 .89** 1986 WC .89** AA .93** .71* CC .96** .92** .89** SC .45 .54 .50 .58 CI .35 .46 .20 .41 .33 ATP .75** .64* .70* .66* -.23 -.45 GADA .70* .66* .66* .66* -.38 -.66* .89** EN .30 .34 .31 .31 -.03 -.40 .40 .68* ERI .34 .33 .38 .36 -.01 -.32 .42 .66* .98** * - significant at the 5 percent probability level. ** - significant at the 1 percent probability level. WC - standard germination; AA - accelerated aging; CC — cold test; 5K3 - Speed of germination index; CI - Conductivity Index; GADA - Glutamic acid decarboxylase activity; EN - Emergence number; ERI - Emergence rate index. speed of However, factors growth incorpox Thw between conduct seeds ( density doubted results conten1 Theref asar repro corre inde Shox COm 68 speed of germination test might provide an accurate indication of vigor. However, it was not a reliable indicator of emergence when physical factors were incorporated in the treatments. Perhaps another measure of growth such an; dry matter accumulation should be substituted or incorporated in the evaluation procedure. The conductivity index test detected significant differences between size classes but not between density or protein classes. If conductivity is a true measure of vigor, these results indicate that seeds of different size vary' in 'vigor"while seeds which differ in density' or protein. content ck) not. Many researchers, however, have doubted the the ability of the ASA-610 machine to measure vigor, since results are affected by many variables, such as initial moisture content of the seeds, fluid level per cell and seed size (35, 52). Therefore our conductivity index readings should be regarded primarily as a reflection of size, rather than vigor. The conductivity index had the highest coefficient of variability (C. V.) of any test for both years, indicating high variability and low reproducibility. Moreover, the conductivity index was not significantly correlated with yield, and only with emergence number and emergence rate index for Hillsdale in 1986 (Tables 18 and 19). If the ASA-610 machine is to be used to compare vigor differences between seed lots, samples should be sized and brought to the same moisture content, and only comparisons between similar samples be made. The two tests of biochemical activity, the ATP and GADA tests, gave basically the same results. Both were capable of detecting differences in size and protein content but neither was affected by differences in seed density for either varieties or years. Both ATP and GADA increased with sf correlz Mo Likewi the e1 Accord and p1 diffel resuli corre seed appro less one (Tat Sig 0th 69 with size and protein content and therefore were highly and positively correlated in all cases (Tables 18 and 19). Most of the GADA activity occurs in the embryo (29, 37, 39, 42). Likewise, the ATP activity is associated with mitochondrial activity in the embryo, especially the first hours of germination (ll, 71). Accordingly, our results indicate that, while differences in seed size and protein content reflect differences in both embryo and endosperm, differences in seed density reflect variations in the endosperm. These results disagree with the findings of McDaniel (49), who reported high correlations between ATP content in barley and both seed density and seed vigor. The coefficient of variability (C.V.) for ATP content was approximatly twice that of GADA in both years. Therefore results are less repeatable and consistent for the ATP test than for the GADA test. This could be considered as an advantage of the GADA test. However, with one exception, neither test proved a good indicator of field emergence (Tables 18 and 19), and while results of the two tests for Augusta were significantly correlated with yield, in Hillsdale they were not. Otherwise the two tests appeared to yield similar results. There are four criteria by which the value of any vigor test must be judged. The first is its ability to accurately predict field performance either in terms of emergence or yield. The second is its reproducibility under different conditions. The third is its ability to differentiate between seed lots differing in quality or vigor. Finally, to justify its use, the test in question should be more reliable than the standard germination test. The latter had the lowest C.V., and therefore the best reproducibility of all tests we performed; results Table 19 emergence / 1985 WC AA CG 36 Cl ATE GAE EN ER] 1986 WC we.s ERI . 70 Table 19. Correlation coefficients between different vigor tests, field emergence and yield of Hillsdale, 1985 and 1986. Yld WC AA CC SC CI ATP GADA EN 1985 NC .72* AA .74* .89** CC .71* .86** .79* SG -.25 -.4O -.29 -.65 CI -.57 -.81* -.69 -.77* .56 ATP .75* .84* .71* .61 -.15 -.71* GADA .68 .85** .90** .63 -.O6 -.68 .87** EN .11 .33 .16 .54 -.15 -.3O .03 .05 ERI .48 .45 .41 .83** -.76* -.62 .23 .21 .57 1986 NC .70* AA .94** .80** CC .83** .65* .87** SC -.47 -.38 -.47 -.56 CI -.31 -.61 -.46 -.52 .40 ATP .57 .92** .74** .52 -.28 -.47 GADA .56 .92** .64* .56 -.34 ‘.67* .84** EN -.11 .28 .13 .31 -.38 -.60* .38 .41 ERI .04 .40 .28 .43 -.47 -.69* .46 .52 .98** * - significant at the 5 percent probability level. ** - significant at the 1 percent probability level. WC - standard germination; AA - accelerated aging; CG - cold test; SC - Speed. of germination index; CI - Conductivity Index; GADA - Glutamic acid decarboxylase activity; EN - Emergence number; ERI - Emergence rate index. were 5 emerge l aging test index not w best seed: vari. indi two refl con NOS 71 were significantly and positively correlated with yield but not to field emergence. Ranking the tests according tx> these criteria, the accelerated aging test was the best vigor test, followed by the cold test, the GADA test and the ATP test. The speed of germination index and conductivity index tests did not give a consistent or true reflection of seed vigor nor were they correlated with grain yield for either variety. The two best tests (accelerated aging and cold germination) both stressed the seeds prior' to germination” The accelerated test, because of lower variability was the better of the two. The difference in quality between different seed characters, as indicated by differences in field performance and vigor results implies two things. First, seed characters themselves can be used as a reflection of vigor. This is especially true for seed size which showed consistent differences between the small, medbun and large seeds for most of our tests. Second, the effect of these different seed characters should be considered and if possible eliminated when studying other factors that contribute to variation in seed quality and vigor. Ab 15 do 51 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 72 References . Abdul-Baki, A. A. 1980. Biochemical aspects of seed vigor. Hort Sci. 15: 765-771. . Abdul-Baki, A. A., and J. D. Anderson. 1973. Relationship between decarboxylation of glutamic acid and vigor in soybean seed. Cr0p Sci. 13: 227-232. . Abdul-Baki, A. A., and J. D. Anderson. 1970. Viability and leaching of sugars from germinating barley. Crop Sci. 10: 31-34. . Abdul-Baki, A. A., and J. D. Anderson. 1973. Vigor determination in soybean seed by multiple criteria. Crop Sci. 13: 630-633. . Anderson, J. D. 1977. Adenylate metabolism of embryonic axes from deteriorated soybean seeds. Plant Physiol. 59: 610-619. . Anfirund, PL rw., and A. A. Schneiter. 1984. Relationship of sunflower germination and vigor tests to field performance. Crop Sci. 24: 341-344. . Association of official seed analysts. 1978. Rules for testing seeds. J. Seed Technol. 3: 1-126. . Associatitni of' Official Seed..Analysts. 1983. Seed ‘vigor testing handbook. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. Publ. AOSA Hand. 32. . Azizul Islam, A” .1. M., J. (3. Delouche, and C. (L Baskin. 1973. comparison of methods for evaluating deterioration in rice seed. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 63: 155-160. Bishnoi, I}. R., and J. (3. Delouche. 1980. Relationship of vigour tests land. seed. lots tn) cotton. seedling, establishment. Seed Sci. Technol. 8: 341-346. Blowers, L. E., D. A. Stormonth, and C. M. Bray. 1980. Nucleic acid and. protein synthesis and loss of vigour in germinating wheat embryos. Planta. 150: 19-25. Burris, ~I. S., and R” .J. Navratil. 1979. Relationship between laboratory cold-test methods and field emergence in maize inbreds. Agron. J. 71: 985-988. Byrd, H. W., and J. C. Delouche. 1971. Deterioration of soybean seed in storage. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 61: 41-57. Cal, J. P., and R. L. Obendorf. 1972. Imbibitional chilling injury in Zea mays L. altered by initial kernel moisture and maternal parent. Crop Sci. 12: 369-373. . Cher aci< . Chi] Pla‘ Tec 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 73 Cheng, Y., P. Linko, and M. Milner. 1960. On the nature of glutamic acid decarboxylase in wheat embryos. Plant Physiol. 35: 68-71. Ching, TL PL 1973. Adenosine triphosphate content euui seed vigor. Plant Physiol. 51: 400-402. Ching, T. M. 1973. Biochemical aspects of seed vigor. Seed Sci. Technol. 1: 73-88. Ching, TH 14., and R. Danielson. 1972. Seedling vigor and adenosine triphosphate level of lettuce seeds. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. Proc. 62: 116-124. Dalianis, C. [I 1982. Rate of radicle emergence as :1 measure of seedling emergence and vigour in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Seed Sci. Technol. 10: 35-45. DasGupta, P. R., and H. M. Austenson. 1973. Analysis of interrelationships among seedling vigor, field emergence, and yield in wheat. Agron. J. 65: 417-422. DasGupta, P. R., and H. M. Austenson. 1973. Relations between estimates of seed vigor and field performance in wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 53: 43—46. Delouche, .I. C., and (L C. Baskin. 1973. Accelerated aging techniques for predicting the relative storability of seed lots. Seed Sci. Technol. 1: 427-452. Don, R., J. R. Rennie, and M. M. Tomlin. 1981. A comparison of laboratory vigour test procedures for winter wheat seed samples. Seed Sci. Technol. 9: 641-653. Duffus, C. M., J. H. Duffus, and J. C. Slaughter. 1972. Glutamate decarboxylase in barely aleurone and its relationship to -amylase development during germination. Experientia. 28: 635-633. Edje, O. T., and J. S. Burris. 1970. Physiological and biochemical changes in deteriorating soybean seeds. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 60: 158-166. Fiala, F. 1981. Cold test. Handbook of Vigour Test Methods, (ed. D. A. Perry), Int. Seed Testing Assoc. Zurich, Switzerland: 28-36. Finch-Savage, W. E. 1986. A study of the relationship between seedling characters and rate of germination within a seed lot. Ann Appl. Biol. 108: 441-444. Galleschi, L., C. Floris, and I. Cozzani. 1977. Variation of glutamate decarboxylase activity and -amino butyric acid content of wheat embryos during ripening of seeds. Experientia. 33: 1575-1576. Galleschi,L., C. Floris, P. Meletti, and I. Cozzani. 1975. On the location of glutamate decarboxylase in the caryopsis of hard wheat (it! Expei 30. Gill durii 31. Grab of s 32. Grab 18-3 33. Gral lot: 34. Ham lab lin 33. Hep ass me; am 36. he 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 74 (Triticum durum) and its activity during early germination. Experientia. 31: 28-29. Gill, N. S., and J. <3. Delouche. 1973. Deterioration of seed corn during storage. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 63: 33-50. Grabe, D. F. 1964. Glutamic acid decarboxylase activity as a measure of seedling vigor. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 54: 100-109. Grabe, D. P. 1976. Measurement of seed vigor. J. Seed Technol. 1(2): 18-32. Grabe, D. F. 1965. Prediction of relative storability of corn seed lots. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 55: 92-96. Hampton, J. G. 1981. The relationship between field emergence, laboratory germination, and vigour testing of New Zealand seed wheat lines. N. Z. J. Exp. Agric. 9: 191-197. Hepburn, H. A., A. A. Powell, and. S. Matthews. 1984. Problems associated with the routine application of electrical conductivity measurments of individual seeds in the germination testing of peas and soybeans. Seed Sci. Technol. 12: 403-413. Heydecker,W.l969. The ‘vigour' of seeds - a review. Proc. Int. Seed Test. Assoc. 34: 201-219. Inatomi, K., and. J. C. Slaughter. 1971. The role of glutamate decarboxylase and -aminobutyric acid 1J1 germinating 'barley. J. Exper. Bot. 22: 561-571. Isely, D. 1957. Vigor testing. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 47: 176- 182. James, E. 1968. Limitations of glutamic acid decarboxylase activity for estimating viability in beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Crop Sci. 8: 403-404. Johnson, R. R. and L. M. Wax. 1978. Relationship of soybean germination and vigor tests to field performance. Agron. J. 70: 273- 278. Kulik, M. M., and Yaklich, R. W. 1982. Evaluation of vigor tests in soybean seeds: relationship of accelerated aging, cold, sandbench, and speed of germination tests to field performance. Crop Sci. 22: 766-770. Lamkin, W. M., S. W. Nelson, B. S. Miller, and Y. Pomeranz. 1983. Glutamic acid decarboxylase activity as a measure of percent germination for barley. Cereal Chem. 60: 166-171. Linko, P., and L. Sogn. 1960. Relation of viability and storage deterioration to glutamic acid decarboxylase in wheat. Cereal Chem. 37: 489-499. A4. Linko relat glute 45. Link embr 46. Loef W0 Tech hi. Lope per Ana‘ 48. Lun rel 49. Mel an( 50. he? 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 75 Linko, P., and M. Milner. 1959. Enzyme activation in wheat grains in relation tx>‘water content, glutamic acid-alanine transaminase, and glutamic acid decarboxylase. Plant Physiol. 34: 392-396. Linko, P., and M. Milner. 1959. Gas exchange induced in dry wheat embryos by wetting. Cereal Chem. 36: 274-279. Loeffler, N. L., J. L. Meier, and J. S. Burris. 1985. Comparison of two cold test procedures for use in maize drying studies. Seed Sci. Technolo. 13: 653-658. Lopez, A., and D. F. Grabe. 1973. Effect of protein content on seed performance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 63: 106-116. Lunn, C., anui E. Madsen. 1981. ATP-levels of germinating seeds in relation to vigor. Physiol. Plant. 53: 164-169. McDaniel, R. C. 1969. Relationships of seed weight, seedling vigor and mitochondrial metabolism in barley. Crop Sci. 9: 823-827. McDonald, M. B. Jr. 1975. A review and evaluation of seed vigor tests. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 65:109-139. McDonald, M. B. Jr., and B. R. Phaneendranath. 1978. A modified accelerated aging seed vigor test for soybeans. J. Seed Technol. 3: 27-37. McDonald, M. B. Jr., and D. O. Wilson. 1979. An assessment of the standardization and ability of the ASA-610 to rapidly predict potential soybean germination. J. Seed Technol. 2: 1-11. McKersie, B. D., D. T. Tomes, and S. Yamamoto. 1981. Effect of seed size on germination, seedling vigor, electrolyte leakage, and establishment of bird's-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 61: 337-343. Maguire, J. D. 1962. Speed of germination-aid in selection and evaluation for seedling emergence and vigor. Crop Sci. 2: 176-177. Mahdi, M. T., A. A. Lotfi, E. Shiltawy, and F. F. Farag. 1971. Cold test of cotton seed. Int. Seed Test. Assoc. Proc. 36: 279-287. Matthews, 8., and R. ‘Whitbread. 1968. Factors influencing pre- emergence mortality in peas 1. An association between seed exudates and the incidence of pre-emergence mortality in wrinkle-seeded peas. Plant Path. 17: 11-17. Matthews, 8., and M. F. F. Carver. 1971. Further studies on rapid seed exudate tests indicative of potential field emergence. Proc. Int. Seed Test Assoc. 36: 307-312. Matthews, 3., anKiiJ. T. Bradnock. 1968. Relationship between seed exudation and field emergence in peas and french beans. Hort. .Mi te Se .Mi P1 ( \ 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 76 Research. 8:89—93. Mian, A” I.., and I“ (3. Coffey. 1971. Eighty-hour-count germination test -A new test method for measuring seed vigor in corn. Proc. Int. Seed Test. Assoc. 36: 265-271. Mien, A. I“, enui L. C. Coffey. 1971. Testing seed vigor in rice. Proc. Int. Seed Test Assoc. 36: 273-278. Perry. D. A. 1973. Interacting effects of seed vigour and environment on seedling establishment. In: Seed Ecologv. (ed., W. Heydecker). Pennsylvania State University Press. pp. 311-323. Priestley, D. A. 1986. Seed Aging. Comstock Publishing Associates. 304 pps. Roberts, E. H. 1972. Viability and vigour of seeds. In Viability of Seeds (ed. E. H. Roberts) Chapman and Hall, London. Steel, R. C. D., and J. H. Torrie. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. 2nd Ed. McCraw-Hill Book Co. 633pps. St. John” 41. B. 1970. Determinathmo of ATP in chlorella with the luciferin-luciferase enzyme system. Analytical Biochem. 37: 409-416. Styler, R” C., D. .J. Cantliffe, and (L B. Hall. 1980. The relationship of ATP concentration to germination and seedling vigor of vegetable seeds stored under various conditions. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 105: 298-303. Tao, K. J. 1979. An evaluation of alternative methods of accelerated aging seed vigor test for soybeans. J. Seed Technol. 3: 30-40. Tekrony, D. M., and D. B. Egli. 1977. Relationship between laboratory indices of soybean seed vigor and field emergence. Crop Sci. 17: 573-577. Van Onckelen, H. A., R. Verbeek, and A. A. Khan. 1974. Relationship of ribonucleic acid metabolism in embryo and aleurone to -amylase synthesis in barley. Plant Physiol. 53: 562-568. Woodstock, L. W. 1973. Physiological and biochemical tests for seed vigor. Seed Sci. Technol. 1: 127-137. Yaklich, R. W., M. M. Kulik and J. D. Anderson. 1979. Evaluation of vigor tests in soybean seeds: relationship of ATP, conductivity, and radioactive tracer multiple criteria laboratory tests to field performance. Crop Sci. 19: 806-810. CHAPTER III THE EFFECT OF SEED DENSITY, SIZE AND PROTEIN CONTENT ON STORABILITY OF TWO WHEAT VARIETIES. ABSTRACT A long term storage experiment was conducted to study the effect of different seed characters of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) on storability and to determine the changes in ATP and GADA associated with viability during storage. Seed lots of different density, size and protein content were stored for 32 monthes at room conditions and tested periodically for germination, ATP content and GADA. Standard germination results after one year, two years and 32 nmnths were also correlated with other vigor tests performed before storage. While viability of the different seed categories did not change significantly during 18 months of storage, ATP and GADA levels showed a continous decline throughout the entire storage period. While all seed lots declined in germination and biochemical vigor indices with increased time of storage, the high density, large, and especially high protein seeds performed better than the others and had higher germination at the end of the experiment. ATP level was among the best vigor tests in predicting storability. However, the accelerated aging test and the speed of germination test showed very little correlation with the percent germination and were not good indicators of storability. 77 78 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Seeds stored for long periods of time gradually deteriorate and lose viability due to degradative processes. The rate of ‘viability loss depends largely upon the storage environment. Of the four factors affecting storability, time and oxygen level have very little influence if the other two factors, relative humidity and temperature, are kept at Optimum levels (16). Roberts (15) found that the longevity of any seed was influenced not only by environmental factors, but also by species and initial seed quality, and Anderson (4) cited field and storage fungi as contributing factors to deterioration. LikhatcheV' et al. (14), studying seeds representing as number' of crops and varieties, found considerable genetic differences in the rate of deterioration. Aspinal and Paleg (5) observed that although viability of wheat seed was not adversely affected by storage for up to six years, the rate of germination was reduced after 3 to 4 years of storage. Egli et al. (10) reported that storing soybean seed at 10.5 percent moisture and variable temperatures had no effect on germination of any of 12 seed lots tested, but at 13.5 percent moisture, the germination of 8 of the seed lots luui declined significantly after’il months of storage. Bittenbender and Ries (7) showed that both high and low protein rice seeds declined in viability within one or two months when stored in sealed vials or over water at 400 C and 20 percent moisture content; however, high protein seeds remained viable longer than low protein seeds. By transplanting old wheat embryos on young endosperm and young embryos on aged endosperm, Floris (11) showed that the aging process is l I aproy metaboi sugges storag produc hours embryc primal metab soybe that cell“ note< comp prob esa agi 79 a progressive phenomenon accompanied by a gradual accumulation of toxic metabolites and affects both embryo and endosperm. Abdul-Baki (2) suggested that the earliest and most dramatic change occurring during storage is the decline in ability of seeds to utilize glucose for C02 production and for polysaccharide and protein synthesis during the early hours of imbibition. After studying the aging and deterioration of wheat embryo and aleurone tissue, Aspinal and Paleg (5) concluded that the primary factor in the aging process is probably related to decreased metabolism or loss of intracellular integrity. Chauhan (8) found that the growing points of the embryonic axis of soybean and barley were very sensitive to accelerated aging, suggesting that the meristems of the plumule and radicle are the most vital ”key cell" regions if seeds are to remain viable. Likhatchev et al. (14) noted an increase in proteolytic enzyme activity shortly before the complete death of seeds, and remarked that such a phenomenon was probably due to the loss of cell membrane integrity facilitating the escape of enzymes. A rise in activity of hydrolytic enzymes during seed aging was also observed by Abdul-Baki (2). Harrington (12) listed symptoms of seed senescence as complete lack of growth, slow or abnormal seedling growth, loss of membrane integrity, change of color, loss of enzyme activity, and production of toxic end products such as free fatty acids. Other researchers have reported that the effects of seed storage on plant growth include delayed germination, a decrease in rate of root elongation, the slowing of shoot growth in the early stages of seedling development, and alteration of growth habit (1, l3). Agrawal (3) observed that in wheat and triticale, the initial loss in germination was due mainly to increased seedling abnormality, 80 but losses after 22 months of storage were due to death of seeds. Delouche and Baskin (9) reported that germination capacity was the last measure of quality to decline as seeds deteriorated during storage. Egli et al. (10) reported that while the accelerated aging test was sensitive enough to predict the deterioration rate of 3 soybean varieties during storage, the rate of germination (4-day count), and especially the standard germination test, were less sensitive. Likhatchev et al. (14) remarked that seed vigor of soybeans declined more rapidly than germination, and Delouche and Baskin (6) reported that immature (low vigor) peanut seeds did not store as well as mature seeds. Egli et al. (10) showed that low vigor soybean lots exhibited a faster decline in viability during storage than high vigor lots. The first objective of this experiment was to study the effects of several seed characters on storability under laboratory conditions, and to determine whether differences in density, size, and protein content lead to differences in viability after an extended storage period. Another objective was to correlate several vigor tests to viability during storage and to identify the vigor test(s) that most successfully predict viability. A third objective was to study some biochemical changes during storage and relate them to viability. 81 MATERIALS AND METHODS Seeds of Augusta, a soft-white variety, and Hillsdale, a soft-red variety were divided into two density classes, three size classes and two protein levels according to the criteria described in Chapter 1. After the vigor tests discussed in Chapter 2 were completed, seeds of the same seed lots were stored in closed paper bags at room temperature and about 35 percent relative humidity. The initial moisture content of the seeds before storage was 12.3 to 12.5 percent. Storage began in November, 1984 and terminated in July, 1987. At selected times throughout the storage period, tests for germination, glutamic acid decarboxylase activity (GADA) and ATP level were performed using procedures described earlier in Chapter 2. Germination tests were conducted every six months for the first year (Nov. 84, May 85, and Nov. 85), and then every two months until the end of the experiment. GADA and ATP tests were performed every six months starting in November 1984 and ending in May 1987. The data were analyzed as a factorial experiment in a completely randomized design, with storage time, seed characters and varieties as the three factors. Simple correlation analysis between standard germination, GADA and ATP results were calculated using inean values and analyzed utilizing the MSTAT statistical analysis program. The standard germination results after 12 months (Nov. 1985), 24 months (Nov. 1986), and 32 months (July 1987) were correlated with results of the vigor tests listed in Chapter 2 and included the accelerated aging test, speed of germination index, conductivity index, cold test, ATP test and the GADA test. 82 RESULTS Seed density in Augusta did not affect germination for up to 18 months of storage (Figure 3). Thereafter, viability in light and control seeds declined more rapidly than in heavy seeds. ATP contents declined steadily with storage time for both density classes. Decline in GADA was greater during early storage than at later storage, especially for the light aux! control treatments. While ATP content of light and control treatments were similar, control GADA values were intermediate between those for light and heavy seeds at all storage intervals. Effects of seed size on standard germination parallaled the effects of seed density (Figure 4). All seeds had high germination up ix) 18 months of storage, then germination declined rapidly in) to 28 months for the control, medium. and large classes. Like density, seed. size affected ATP content and GADA with the exception of small seeds which gave much lower values than the other size classes. Low levels of ATP occured in small seeds and changed little with storage time. Protein levels, like seed size, affected germination of Augusta (Figure 5), with little decline in germination of high protein seeds after 32 months of storage. Similarly, both ATP and GADA in high and low protein seeds resembled that in large and small seeds. Low protein seed had significantly lower ATP levels than the high protein or control treatments and changed little during storage. Results for Hillsdale (Figures 6-8) were similar to those of Augusta. Standard germination did not decline significantly during 18 months of storage for any of the seed classes, but declined rapidly thereafter. Large and the high protein seeds declined relatively little PEU\ CC (iii \