Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
RESULTS OF THE FOT]RTHEXPBRIMENTAL CYCLB WITH
STJ]TFLOWER CTJLTIVARS(re82-reffi)
Authors : see Annex 1
Dat,a processing and interpretation : LiaisonCentre of Fun'dulea, Romania (A. V. Vrân-ceânu, F. M. Stoen,escu arild G,abriela Soare)
INTRODUCTION
The subnetwork dealing witLr the experi-mentation of sunf[ower hybrids and varie-ties has ,completed four biennial icycles. Ttreresults of the first three cycles were publishedin Numb,ers 1 to 5 of this Bull,etin, and theyconstitute an useful gui,Ce for sunfl'ower gro-wers interested in the i,dentific,ation of thebest genotypes for c'ertain specifi,c envirorym,ents, or for determining the optimum biolo-gical par,am,eters of sunflower 'cropping in dif-ferent ,are,as.
In the fourth ,cycle (1982-1983), the experi-mentation was exten'ded to other countri,es,which have'become interested in growing thisoil ,crop. So, the number of participants amoun-ted to 41 reseanch iinrstitutes or stations frorn,29 ,countries.
The particip,ants which provi'ded s'cientific,rigorour: results are listed in Annex 1.
Anner 7
List of participants in F,A.O. co-operative trials(1982-r983)
I'ranceCl.-Ferrand
FranceCETIOMCl.-FerrandGermanyF. Rep.Gross-Gerau
Hungarylregszemcse
HungarySzeged
PortugalElvas
RomaniaFundulea
P. Leclercq,Station d'Améliorationdes Plantes, INRA, Do-maine de Crouelle, 63100Clermont-Ferrand
E. Choné,CETIOM, 1,74 AvenueVictor Hugo, Paris 75116
W. Schuster,Institut fûr Pflanzen-bau und P,flanzen-zûchtung, UniversitâtGiessen, 23 Ludwig-strasse. 6300 Giessen
E. Kurnik,TakarmânytermesztésiKutatô Intézet, ResearchInstitute lor ForageCrops,7095 I
A. V. Vrânceanu andF. M. Stoenescu,
Research Institute forCereals and IndustrialCrops, 8264 Fundulea,
No. 1,1983
No. 1,1983
Country andlocation Name and address
Trialsconductedand year
No. 1,1983
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,,l 982-1983
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,,1982-1983
No. 1,
l9B2-1983No. 2,
J.982-1983
No.1-1983
No. 2,r9B2-1983
NoJ1982
No. 2,1982(2)
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,t9B2-1983
EUROPE
No. 2,1982-,1983
Frank Jôzsef,Gabonatermesztési Kuta-t6 Inté4et, Cereal Re-scarch Institute, Pf:391,H-670i Szeged
G. P. Vannozzi,Istituto di AgronomiaGenerale e ColtivazioniErbacee, Via S. Micheledegli Scalzi 2, Pisa561 00
G. P. Venturi,Istituto di ProduzioneVegetale, Facoltà Agra-ria-Università di Udine,Via Chiusaforte 54;33100-Udine
Z. Kloczowski,Plant Breed,ing and Ac-climatization Institute,Sieroca 1 a, 6L-771,PoznaÉ
Maria Y. Vivas,Estaçâo Nacional deMelhoramento de Plan-tas. 7351 ElVas
BulgariaG. Toshevo
Czechoslo-vakiaVrakuna
D. lMolffhardt,Bundesanstalt f. Pflan-zenbau und Samen-prùfung, Alliierten-strasse 1, Wi,en II
Fota Stoyanova Tavet-kova,
Institute for V/heat anSunflower, GeneralToshevo 9520, Tolbuhin
A. Kovâèik,Research Institute forCrop Production, 161.06Prague 6-Ruayne 507 Jud. Càlàra
RomaniaPodu-Iloaie
Elena Andrei,Agricultural ExPerimen-tal Station, Podu-Iloaie,6623, Jud. I
Juan Dominguez-Gimenez,
National Research Centrefor Oil CroPs, INIA'Finca Alameda delObispo, Apartado 240,Côrdoba
Akhtar Beg,Pakistan Agricultural
Res,earch Council,L-13, Almarkaz 1-712,P.O. Box 1031' Isla-mabad
Filomena F. CamPos'Director, Research &DeveloPment, CentralLuzon State Universi-ty, Mufloz Nueval)cija
Soiusi Mostefa, DirecteurGéneral, Institut deDeveloPPement des Cui-tures Industrielles, Jar-din d'essais du Ham-ma, B.P. 28 El-Anas-ser
Elahmar A. Badr,Agriculture Research
Center. Field CroPsResear'ch Institute, Oi1Crops Research SectionGiza
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,1982-1983
U.S.A.I'argo
CENTRAL AND NORTH AMERICAJ. Miller,Oilseeds Investigations,
212 Waldron Hall,North Dakota StateUniversity, UniversitYStation, Fargo, NorthDakota 58102
SpainC6rdoba
'IurkeyEdirne
TurkeyIstanbul
TurkeyAnkara
YugoslâviaNovi Sad
YugoslaviaOsiiek
No. 2,l982
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,1982-1983
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,1982-1983
David B. Ferguson,Stauffer Seeds, P.O. Box
1241, Clovis, California93613E. Indelen,
Asricultural ResearchInstitute, P.O. Box 161,Ddirne
Enver Hûsemoglu,Agricultural ResearchInstitute, P.O. Box 1B'
D. Skorié,Institute of Field and
Vegetable Crops. Mak-sima Gorkog 30, 21000Novi Sad
Marija Vratarié,
M. A. Vahabian,Oil CroPs Section, Seed
and PlantImrrrovement Institute'
Mard-Abad Ave, Karaj
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,1982-1983
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,1982-1983
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,1982-1983
No. 1,t982-'1983
No. 2,1982-1983
No. I,1982-1983
No. 2,1982-i 983
No. I,1982-r983
No. 1,1983
No. 1,1982-1983
No. 2,1982
No. 2,1982
ArgentinaManfredi
ArgentinaMir'amar
ChileLa Platina
SOU,IH AMERICACruz Miguel Dreco,Estaçion ExPerimental
INTA, 5988 Manfredi(C6rdoba)
Vital Valdivia,
No. 2,i9B2
No. 2,1983
MATERIAI,S AND METHODS
'I'wo groups of ,entri'es with 'different- lengt'hsof vegJtatioh period were tested, as follows :
- trial No. 1, with 16 early anC rneCium-oarly ,cultivars (Annex 2) ;
-i ttirt No. 2, with 20 m'ediu;n-late 'culti-vars (Annex 3).
Annet 2
îRIAL No. 1
with early and medium-earl-y cultivars: single^ (SH)
a'i;' ;rrr;Ë-;il,t1l_,1ri3"",È*ffu open porrinated
PakistanIslamabad
AlgeriaMechraa,Kemis
F.A.O.entry
no.
GenetictYPe
SH
T-FI
SH
S.H
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
O,PV
CultivarsSupplyingcountrY
France
F. R. GermanY
LIunga.ry
Romania
Yugoslavia
ItaIy
No. 1,1983
77
7B
79
80
81
82
B3
B4
B5
86
B7
88
89
90
91
92
No. 1,1982- 1983
No. 2,1982- r 983
IsrâeIBeit-Dagan
Baruch Retig,Division of Field CroPs,
Agricultural ResearchOiganizaIion, VolcaniCenter, Beit-Dagan'50200
No. 2,l9B2-1983
Ana Lilia Gonzales deSchelotto,
Chacra Experimental deMiramar, Casilla Cor-reo 35, Miramar ?607(Buenos Aires)
Research Station La Pla- | 1982-1983tina, Santa Rosa 11610, I No. 2,--Paradero 33, Casilla | 1982-1983
Kamil Ilisulu,Facultv of Agriculture,Industrial Plant De-partment, Ank@ra
Asricultural Institute.'lur.to predgradje 1? ;
NEAR EAST, SOUTII AND SOUTH-EASTERN ASIA
H9P1H9I'2G 9/76
G 19/77
G 24/17
IINK-81HNK-81Koflor-1Citosol-3RO-25
RO-36
RO-70
NS_H-3NS_H-4NS-H-5Cerneanka
F.A.O.entry
no.Cultivars Genetlc
type
Anneæ 3
TRIAL No. 2with rnetlium-late cultivars : single (SH) and
three-way (TH) hybrids, and open pollinatedvarieties (OpV)
calculate'd as the product of the nectar ,contentand its sugar concerr-trâtion. The nectar con-tent was determineC by 'ulsing tiny capillaryglass tubes weighed before and rafter nectarextr'action and sug,ar concentration was esta-blished by means of a portable r,efnactometer.'Ien tubul,ar flowers in the pistillate istage,situated in differ,ent zones of the head wereanalys'ed and trhe mean melliferous index ofe.a'ch entry was estimâted on the ha,sis of tenhe,aC determinations.
Some participants did not succeed in carry-ing out properly the trials due to either lessfavourable climati'c conditions or to certainaccitdenrtal ,causes. The thybrids Seedtec-S-3l 5,Cargill-205 anrd Sunbred-24ï, ,as well as theopen pdllinated variety Pemir were not inclu-ded in network trials in 1982, because theirseed samples rea,ohod the d,estinrations verylate. The hybrid RO-36 w€rs not tested in alllocations in 1983 due to lack of seeds. Somesamples,got mixed up irr,side the package dur-ing the mailing. An irnporbant deficiency ofthe results of 'certain trials was the omissionof data ,con'cerning the seed oil content.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
As in the prrevious experimental cycles, tihetrials,carri,ed out in 1982-1983 revealed alarge diversity of the genotype response tothe environmental variation, but some culti-van's exhibited however a retratively constantb'ehaviour i'n most looations, in the two yeiars.In most cas,es, t,he year 1983 was more favou-rable for sunflower nro'duction than 1982.
TRIAL No. 1
Seed yicld ranged greratly from 3.5 q/ha atEl Kthemis, Alg,eria, to 44.6 q/ha gt Osijek,Yugoslavia (Ta'ble 1). The highest v€lues wererecor'ded in South-East of Europe (Romania,Hungary and Yugoslavia) where sc,me hybridssurpassed the level of 40 q/rha, especially in1983, and wher'e the annual trial means r.angdfrom 21.3 ,q/ha at Novi Sad, Yugoslavia, in1982 when suniflower was badly dam'aged byPhomopsis sp., to 3?.5 q/ha at Fulndulea, RÛ-mania in the same y.ear. GooC results ,al'sowere obtained in the Feder,al Republi,c of Ger-mlany, Czechoslovakia and Iran where the an-nual trial means rang'ed frorri 2?.5 q/ha to33.9 q/tha. In the other locations, the annualseed yield Èrr.eans of the whole set of cultivarswere mudh lower, varyinrg from 5.2 q/ha inAlgeria to 28.2 q/ha inl Egypt rand thus con-tributing to the diminution of the general trialm'ean to 23.8 q/ha.
Judging from thc standpoint of th,e generalseed yield meÊn, 12 ,hybri'ds were significantlydifferent from the early open poilinated varietyCerne,anka, btit the 'enûire group of these hy-brids, although rânging from 26.3 q/ha (RO-25)to 23.2 q/ha (G 19/77), was statistically similar.
Supplyingcountry
Bulgaria
FranceHungary
Romania
SpainU.S.A.
Yugoslavia
200
110
95
96
97
9B
99100
101
103
1ù4
111
t12113
tt4108
105
106
107
oPvSHTHSHSHSFISHSHS.H
SHTHSHOPVSHSHSHSHSHSHSH
PeredovikFIB-763H9P4tH-56III-155Gahib-7Citosol-2RO-4.1RO-131RO-134RO-141RO-150PemirSunbred-254Cargill-205Seedtec-31 5
Stauffer-3101NS_H-40NS_H-43NS-H.43
The genotypes under study have representedlhe latest releases of sunflower br,eeders froml3ulgaria, Fran.oe, F. R. Germany, Hungary,Romania, Spain, U.S.A., and Yugo,slavia.
The experimental design for both trials rvasthe randomized hlocks with 5 replications. Theentry ran,Comization for ea,ch location wasestablish'ed by the F.A.O. Crop and GrasslandProduction Service. The plot size was determi-ned taking into account th,at,-after dis,cardirrgthe bord,ers (1 or 2 marginal rows and 2 frontalplanls per each row), a minimum of B0 plantsper plot be harvested. T,he plant populationand other cultural practices were adapted tothe local con'ditions. Some trials were ,conhducte'd und,er irrigation, but most in dryland.
Alor,ig with seed samples, field books ândinstru,ctions were provid,ed for ea,ch trial, inorder to facilitate the uniform data ,collectionand evaluation. The interpretation of the ex-perim,ental data was perforrnl:d on the basisof the ,analysis of variance, p,articularly forseed yield and oil ,content.
Resi,stance to ,Ciseases and tolerance to 'un-tavourabl,e environmental condition,s were esti-mated only in the fieid.
In comparison with th,e former experim'entalcycles, new tr:ai'ts were studied su,ch as pollenself*f,ertility anfd the melliferous value. Thedegree of self-fertility was defined as the ratiobetween the mean number of filled seeds or1the bagged heads and the mean number offillecl seeds on the open-pollinated heads. Arc-sine transformation of data was.used orior tostatistical analysis. The melliferous index was
Fundulea Podu rloaie Iregszemcse
Yugoslavia
1eB2 | rnu, res2 | tser
17.316.017.319.317.316.018.019.319.318.016.018.0l r.J18.016.?L7.64.1
19.3
ChiIeLa Platina
cl. -I'er-rand
17.213.711.112.311.917.0t4.214.013.0t4.213.91 1.611.3t7.318.2tc o
z.o9.6
Ger-manyF. R.
Gross-Gerau
39.329.831.434.729.830.534.227.631.326.530.933.029.230.529.221 t
3.6
Table 1
Bulgaria
'Ioshevo
23.r2r.625.628.427.525.516.723.1t5.719.118.6Ir.B11'9.9
1.2.3I8.82.59.9
Vra-kuna
1982
Group-
1982
RO-25HNK-81IJ9P2Koflor-1Citosol-3H9P1RO-70NS_H-3HNK-84NS_H-5NS--H-4G L9/77G 9176G 24177CerneankaMeanL.S.D. 5%RO-36
Cultivârs
cultivars
42.039.440:437,63?.937.140.138.438.136.236.237.535.836.129.73?.5
3.037.7
38.235.634.434.333.832.042.726.232.133.232.834.331.432.228.233.4
2.8
32.523.434.626.025.932.628.423.026.029.r29.524.82t.r28.023.427.3
2.028.9
31.939.142.5B?.84L.r35.033.735.929.736.833.135.134.335.034b735.?rj
38.13&631.034.032.236.137.530.237.032.534.329.633.734.225.534.0
3.3
32.934.735.738.534.326.620.343.433.63?.838.432.932.936.431.533.9
3.032.9
34.835.435.037.439.936.534.635.536.537.535.034.236.434.33Â.,.6
35.8
30.727.723.424.4L5.223.813.422.525.127.02r.61?.319.0t7.716.02r.3
2.316.5
38.334.333.432.629.032.932.027.r34.133.829.o30.027.526.r25.631,0,:
41.531.829.637.238.034.834.132.732.536.0135.525.534.931.625.533.72.1
33.6
39.039.138.334.536.936.544.630.738,332.436.637.236.036.233.836.?
2.9
28.632.429.r30.529.126.626.22S.L27.625.226.223.323.321.4,17.625.9
2.518.6
Poz-nan
cE-TIOM
RO-25HNK-81H9P2I(oflor-1Citosol,3H9P1RO-70NS_H-3HNK-84NS-H-5NS_H-4G 19/77G 9/76
CerneankaMean
r-.s.D. 5%RO-36
RO-25HNK-81Tig P2Koflor-1Citosol-3H9 P1RO-70NS-H:3}INK-84NS-H-5NS-H.4G t9/77G 9/76G 24/77CerneankaMeanL.S.D. 5%RO-36
17.5t4.615.516,.418.915.513.615.0t4.r16.015.514.113.613.112.615.0
3.713.1
22,829.023.427.622.525.125.122.525,52r.425.023.021.023.918.423.7
3.0
11.1tt.213.511.513.2L2;l10.r-1t,10.214.812.0t2.510.811.3t2.o12.0
2.9t2.7
8.510.7
8.910.1
8.610.8
7.58.6
10.78.3
t2.310.5
9.08.79.39.52.L
26.524.223.328.426.725.025.222.725.330.4t7.724.413.831.014.823.7
3.420.0
20.6,4 r.
2t.L19.822,521.523.824.r25.023.32t.t2t.418.120.0t2.B22.0
29.228.625.024.0
25.425.026.224.624.423.722.728.028.422.425.û
3.5
29.935.026.528.228.237.628.229.O30.824.824.826.528.224.822.328.0
2.023.9
32.934.735.738.534.326.6 s20.343.433.637.838.432.9eto36.431.533.9
3.02to
9.37.3
10.88.09.78.1
10.76.78.78.18.0
11.710.88.7'l.D8.93.3
7.09.48.09.27.57.79.06.39.07.6
10,66.78.98,38.38.22.5
AlgeriaEgvptSakhâ
1982 | 1983
25.922.826.32t.g18.418.4t7.5? 1.015.418.418.026.324.1t9.712.320.2
3.316.?
Me-cfrraâ
198219831983
37.033.525.830.932.632.r32.034.830.828.525.527.433.233.233.231.1
5.127.4
32.028.l24.630.629.425.527.829.r30.620.5tot25.227.824.5
27.53.6
11.911.114.0L2.011.610.6t2.l10.4t2.411.312.3t2.410.410.810.911.6
2.6L2.r
t2.4t5.7
15.013.613.012.513.0t4.214.3t2.813.015.616.815.513.13.8
t9.2ro. r
19.81A 1
ts.417.316.414.818.21R 6
16.420.418.2tB.213.117.3
1.7
10.4lt 6
TI. T
10.414.313.311.014.611.610.6ll.J10.815.511.1l1 .?
11.2
26.325.624.824.624.424.O2t".024.023.923.623.523.222.922.42A.42,3.8
3.1
AABABCABCABCABCABCABCABCABCABCDABCD
BCDCD
t)
* Means with the
B
TÊIAL No. l/1982-1983. Seett yielit (Q/ha, 00/o moisture)
Novi sad I osijet<
rear lrsez lrsee
ttlI Hi,â 1".""'"1 *""n| - | lo,n,l;-I-'* | "' I
10.r | 25.7 13.9L7.6IJ. It4.417.614.82t.317.614.814.812.016.714.813.0t2.015.32.1
13.0
7.5 | 25.2r1.2 128.8
34.234.222.530.323.825.831.720.L28.422.830.433.230rB31.82L.328.2
3.929.4
11.8 16.7016.2 | 5.93r2.r | 6.49t4.2 | 3.4714.0 | 6.7013.9 14.1515.9 | 4.9815.9 | 6.29r4.7 | 4.6910.0 I 5.10r3.3 | 4.26t4.2 | 4.379.4 | 5.65
10.3 14.41
13.1 15.1?
l5.B | 3.54
sâme letter are not significantly different (Duncan's multiple rânge test)
Cultivârs c1. FerrandITIOM)
Table 2
Germany F'.R,
Gross-Gerâu
19831982
RO-25RO-70NS-H-4H9 P1NS-H-5HNK.81CerneankaHNK-84Citosol-3G 9/76G 24/77NS-H-3G t9/77Koflor-1II9 P2MeanL.S.D. 5%RO-36
5r.248.146.447.O44.944.246.r46.046.644.t44.947.247.044.744.946.22.2
48.0
51.550.251.651.948.950.949.551.250.351.050.250.850.048.247.r50.2
2.8
55.654.048.951.950.551.95t.750.150.545.748.951.049.247.650.150.8
3.2
60.458.658.?56.456.558.?58.1îl.tJt.+58.357.45?.057.359.858.158.0
54.252.952.r50.049.052.350.251.648.149.550.349.r49.350.549.r50.5
6.251.0
46.846.650.?46.744.845.346.2L4 r.
45.344.t43.644.444.443.543.845.4
49.0
ao. I46.441.645.r44.947.144.342.747.743.14L.543.142.244.145.844.54.3
42.838.143.940.139.336.539.335.438.136.238.637.138.638.935.738.64.9
41.0
54.952.855.350.348.350.650.050.148.648.848.r48.517.847.046.649.8
3.752.0
46.040.L39.037.73?.938.140.13B.B38.741.039.338.?40.1ar.o39.039.7
J.I
51.049.349.446.646.045.946.145.245.346.545.344.045.043.243.646.22.5
48.0
53.352.24B.r49.247.346.148.446.046.645.345.746.645.346.344.049.22.9
54.853.753.350.250.049.347.3Tt.a48.L48.049.448.248.346.347.L49.42.8
53.0
RO-25RO-70NS-H-4H9P1NS_H-5IINK-81CerneankaHNK-84Citosol-3G 9/76G 24/77NS_H-3G L9/77Koflor-1H9P2MeanL.S.D. 5%HO-36
ÂD
BCBCBCDBCDBCD
CDCDCDCDCDCD
DD
54.15L.253.651.751.650.148.349.350.150.450.151.150.248.450.350.?4.0
53.0
38.438.334.037.036.339.035.139.135.134.237.134.134.435.335.336.2
ï
53.650.847.t44.344.543.046.045.2,L. I
,a.o46.144.34'143.043.145.2D.l
51.0
10.75C.043.845.744.046.245.646.345.246.546.245.846.243.240.545.7
4.0
47.243.843.441.341.036.?4r.236.339.238.338.337.235.035.037.540.1
5.143.0
48.651.844.945.842.944.145.7
43.543.142.541.842.04t.742.144.2,À
49.0
43.643.538.339.137.137.14t.345.739.138.339.23?.337.736.036.139.22.8
51.348.5t+. I .c47.546.446.445.345.945.845.845.645.445.344.744.746.52.5
TRIAL No 1/1982-1983. Oil content in dry matter (%)
Cultivars
Romania Hungary Yugoslâvia BulgariaFundulea Podu loaie szeged fregszemcse Novi Sad Osijek Toshevo
1982 1933 1982 1983 1982 1983 1982 1983 1982 1983 1982I1982 | 1983
RO-25RO-?0NS-H-4H9 PINS-H-5HNK-81CerneankaHNK-84Citosol-3G 9/76G 24/77NS-H-3G ts/77I(oflor-1H9 P2Meanr-.s.D. 5%RO-36
53.153.353.252.950.250.850.450.251.150.348.748.749.148.049.150.6
2.652.0
55.953.047.351.047.148.649.049.04B.B47.947.947.249.646.345.849.0
3.0
52.450.15r.25t.449.345.848.847.450.147.O47.lAd 1
47.245.846.348.5
3.141.O
54.152.448.753.650.75t.751.251.949.051.151.651.65t.247.947.L50.9
3.8
50.339.048.145.O47.044.L43.243.846.243.344.245.244.343.943.6
2.241.0
52.848.746.347.146.34 8.146.648.147.246.646.146.245.646.446.047.2
3.9
55.654.354.250.651.850.348.650.050.650.349.249.249.048.750.150.84.9
53.0
55.753.947.050.646.350.149.149.346.248.447.350.249,046.246.049.0
3.6
52.239.747.547.r47.744.443.244.441.345.043.241.843.743.143.044.52.t
44.O
51.042.242.446.043.144.042.243.042.r4t.441.043.340.242.040.943.0
3.1
49.648.048.949.147.546.245.546.646.816.546.546.046.245.945.947.04.7
47.0
52.3 | 50.048.1 | 44.552.r | 40.850i1 l'-.46.550.2 | 43.150.0 | 42.847.r | 42.048.8 | 42.r46.7 | 44.245.7 | 40.o46.3 | 43.345.7 | 42.245.3 | 43.245.1 | 43.245.3 | 42.148.0 | 43.32.s | 3.1
49.0 |
EdirnellstanbullAnkara19s3 11982 lrssa 11982 lruss
* Means with the same letter are not signilieantly different (Duncan's multipte range test)
Table 3
TRIAL No. 1/1982-1983. Morpho-physiological characteristics
cultivârs
No. of days fromemergence to :
flowering maturity
4B-76
ri-its l-eun
33*4834._5035-4928-4432-4934-5032-47
31-49 42-7o403B3B373B4I40434l4l4.1
3B
42
^138
2S-46 37-6,131-46 4L-7130-45 40-7130-46 42-7232-50 45-',d132-49 47-8431-49 45-77
volumetricweight(kg/hr)
30-46
1,000 seedweight
(e)IIusks
(%) Resistânceto lodgingFundulea(1982-1983)
Table 4
H9 P1H9 P2G 9/76G 19/77G 24/77HNK-81HNK-84Koflor-1Citosol-3RO-25RO-36RO-70NS-H-3NS=H-4NS-H-5Cerneanka
45-7546-7447-7412-7739-7036-7438-7243-8049-7545-5746-754t-784B-7547-7539--72
7B-13674-13576-13376-13272-13568-13172-t3469-13176-14rB0-13475-tt776-13672-t3876-13476-13668-130
r3-244-26
5961605B60625B606159DD
63626464DI
104105105104104104101103104104
99105104105105102
t46159L44139140t49t46154140
r29150r29t37t47110
20-2622-31
19202L20192019201922222l19202019
05-17516-191
56i)l5556566665544563555452525259
232624
252523262522232325232625
goodvery goodgoodgoodgoodvery goodvery goodvery goodgoodvery goodvery goodvery goodgoodgoodgoodgood
t5-25L4-2812-2412-2613-25L4-26t2-28t5-263-274-252-274-263-26r-29
106-17599-166
106-185122-178
19-2720-272r-2920-30t9-2623-29
1B-17126-18702-1?696-180
34-5739-84
23-2718-2519-2620-262r-28t7-2722-2920-27
93-146115-19091-1?0
102-170118-18076-175
4l-7041-6934-7235-6?42-7443-81
TRIAL No. 1/1982-1983 : Resistance to diseases (naturally infected plants, %)
limits I mean
S cler otinid, s cle 1 otior um
stem âttack
1983 | 1982
head attâcliPlasmopdrd heliantki
Fundulea An- ean
4B4
11
50603I
532
Poz-nan'Szegedosij ek
151010356020405550
D
5515553045
6780B6385252
697l65
7l67?0
63
42315138434L4339484052341B4l45
2032d
3
33l
;3
3o
2626262429252632312326
34292526
232
310
1
1,343003B
463Bôl4545463B55495t
4638443030
cultivars Mean
1116242423222L2l15t226tl2lt42l28
613
I11
9l3
818I
1313t
1120
10101010II
10
À
10
1010
08
10
IB
1015I
10a
I
I
106IB
t2
16233652382929272l23192333333B39
32429825659080874l31B95383356393
À
117
t22À
3o
q
R
I
B
10
3n
22131B
À
2
I16n
12t4t4
I
I20
B
0311
03211
025
00
50
110I00000220
34
0I325000I032000
11
2I8A
70I
205J021
29
H9 PIH9 P2G 9/76G t9/77G 24/77HNK-81HNK-84Koflor-1Citosol-3RO-25RO-36RO-70NS-H-3NS-H-4NS-H-5Cerneanka
1982 I 1983
Leaf spors I iiir!::k OrobdncheÉp.
Pho-ùoosis
351020252t2518l4IDI'
:)
1023252l23
sp.
1982
Boffa-tis ci-nerea
Boro-wo
2815653045354580BO
5
-q,t407035
544
1210
:)n
112
00
1156
13
B
1011
1318III65
109B
1013
S cleî otinia s cl er otior umroot attack
6Cultivârs G.Toshevo
234
2720t72730l4
a
5
'064l)6
55
20t222201020
1
6
0I
B
55
2lt223201020106
01
226
605
4035
t4070
310
3
3015
510
5
1811Io
186B
168B
15B
11II
16
2510
5I
25I5
205D
n:)
101020
80609030404J5060BO
15
-'D?0503060
453045353550354030304035D'404525
2625
1B31273140342B
42ao
313027
1520
811I91A
322r2025281B232l3215
Iq
2311
2563j
II
6I
10o
204
13I
2826LI40381B
B
I72815
292714t219
56
lç
2015t411
36
L+B
I69
l710
3I
6I25223
3363
L211
6n
25
16
3
34462436343740t1
25343B1n
362727
111111111010111211111310l1111111
B
12t4
oI
1B
1
I10
7B
I
t2Ii)
105
31516
6
I
3i
33
H9 P1H9 P2G 9/76G t9/17G 24/77HNK-81HNK-84Koflor-1Citosol-3RO-25RO-36RO-70NS.H-3NS-H-4NS.H-5Cerneanka
10
Ilowever, in different ,countries and yeans cer-tain hybrids were better discriminated, indi-cating their environmental spe,cifi,c a'dapta-bility.
Oil content in dried seeds varied also greatlyfrom location to location and from y,ear toyear. Data from Table 2 poiqb out that thecultivars of this trial were sur:eriolfrom theoi1 content standpoint to those studied in theprevious network trials, the annual trial meansbeing rr'igtr,er trhan 500/s in 10 'aases. Three ,hy-brids (RO-25, RO-?0 and NS-H-4) were sig-nifi'cantly different from the rest of 12 culti-'nars, with a general rnean oi1 content of '51t70,480/6 and 480/6 r,espectively.
The tested hybrids $rere generally later andtaller than the opeq pollinated variety Cer-neanka, known as one of dhe ,earl.iest andshort'est cultivar (Table 3). Some ,of tkrem hadlarger seed,s, sup,erior values of volume weight,arrd a better resistance to [odging.
T,able 4 gives some information ,concerningdisease resistance under n,atu,ral infection.'Complete resistance to Plasmopara heli,anthidispl,ayed 'the hybrids HNK-81 and RO-25.Hybrids H I P 1, RO-25, NS*H-4, Citosol-3,H I P 2 anp RO-70 proved 'ito be nriore r:esls-tant to the head attack of Sclerotinta scleroti.o-rum, RO-25 an'd H I P 2 to Botryti.s ci.nereaand Pha4m,opsis sp., RO-36 and RO-70 to Ver-ti,cillium sp., G ,19/77 and HNK-81 to pucciniaheli,anthi, Koflor-l and RO-2b to Ergsiphe ,ci.-choracearurv, H I P 2,'NS-H-4, RO-2b.NS-H-5, NS-H-3, Cerneanka and Citosol-B toOrobanche sp.
In contrust with the open pollinated varietyCerneanka, most hybrids manifested a mtrdtrhiglher self*fertility deg,::ee ,(Tabte b).
Table 5
TRIAL No. l. Self-fertitity degree and melliferousvalue * (Fundulea, 1982-f9$ mea,ns)
Koflor-1NS-H-5ÏI9 P2H9 P1Citosol-3RO-25RO-70HNK-81HNK-84NS-H-4G 24/77G 9/76G t9/77CerneankaNS-H-3
53.351.950.141.139.128.226.32t.619.5lD-49.3B.B6.53.10.36.2
0.710.800.500.720.440.910.800.800.920.700.?30.540.690.580.910.08
40.439.336.734.039.432.936.733.533.730.135.034.933.229.531.129.634.5
:
33.542.251.650.8
47.040.844.542.445.847.450.046.135.443.8
3.7
0.240.340.260.370.190.430.330.360.390.320.350.270.320.210.400.50L.S.D. 50
* The determinations of nectar content and suear con-centration were performeal by I. Bâlana, Elena Giosu andG. Fota (Research fnstitute for Apiculture, Bucharest).
TRIAL No. 2
As in the 'case of Tri,al No. 1, ,s. rgreat varia-tion has ,been noticed amonrg the mediurn-latecultiva.ns of Trial No. 2, as a dunction o,f [o,ca-tions and yeârs._ Seed yield ranged from 2.0 q/kn at Elvas,P,ortugal, to 48.6 q/ha at, Osijek, Yugoslavie.(Table 6). The highest rannu,al triaL means wer.ete,corded at Szegerd, Hungary and Osijek, yugo-.slavia, in 1983 (40.8 and 40.6 q/Lra respectively)and the ,lowest at Islamabad. pakistan (b.gkg/ha). High average yields, over B0 q/ha, wèrealso obtained in Romania, Austria, Israel (1 gBB)and Argentina (Miramar). With the exception ofPakistan, very poor seed yields were recordedin Argentina (Manfredi), Italy (Pisa), Spain(Sevilla), Portugal (Elvas), U.S.A. (Fargo, N.D.).
TEIAL No.2/1982-1g83. Seed yteld (s/ha,0olo moisture)Romania
Table 6
Bulgaria
Osij ek Tosfrevo
rsa, I tsaa rsa, I rsar
Cultivârs Fundulea
1983
RO-44RO-134IH-56RO-131IH-155RO-141H9 P4RO-1s0Stauffer-3101NS-H-43Gahib-7Citosol-2PeredovikHB-763NS-H-42NS-H-40MeanL.S.D. 5%Seedtec-S-315PemirCargill-205Sunbred-254
41.540.038.837.540.13?.139.837.639.435.540.237.237.229.438.432.737.6
i
35.034.933.333.733.032.832.537.035.434.133.?31.931.431.832.227.l33.1
3.135.631.331.933.2
38.233.133.230.126.039.229.427.832.330.128.734.931.?22.830.432.631.5
i
36.337.936.540.840.645.433.736.636.638.436.937.433.834.634.736.136.4
4.O30.?31.635.833.0
43.340.33L.23?.031.?44.336.027.534.536.63r.734.231.531.425.929.O34.0
1'
37.136.936.446.940.546.043.634.837.035.243.335.239.340.043.540.040.8
4.045.843.640.141.9
34.233.929.223.027.623.026.819.027.519.120.626.526.725.0
23.925.8
:
38.038.536.537.037.538.235.137.234.336.733.935.638.140.226.430.135.9
3.637.038.634.934.0
29.622.524.020.828.L19.52t.613.623.824.8rl. I
18.2t4.313.919.920.920.2
i
30.428.332.027.533.423.030.323.936.432.523.623.423.r28.629.225.727.5
2.927.724.522.0
39.246.548.646.634.745.243.045.937.543.442.435.738.545.632.231.540.6
3.?45.039.231.340.1
33.528.427.627.L35.226.42L.618.026.316.616.522.823.314.3L7.017.922.9
ï
27.325.828.420.226.527.A28.325.421.826.O24.624.520.930.220.524.324.9
2.826.722.426.120.8
11
Table 6 (Continuation)
rorrl tottl tturl ttea
Turkey
Istanbul
Portugal
Elvas l lEivas 2
1982
Austria
F uchsenbigl----T-
1982 | 1983
Cultivars
RO-44 ..
RO-134IH.56RO-131IH-155RO-141H9 P4RO-150Stauffer-3101NS-H-43Gahib-?Citosol-2PeredovikHB-?63NS-H-42NS-H-40MeanL.S.D. 5%Seedtec-S-315PemirCargill-205Sunbred-254
20.518.9t7.719.116.918.020.320.718.115.8IO.I20.420.018.020.418.618.8i
28.825.729.828.227.228.527.r30.625.627.527.025.427.629.525.72t.427.5
4.130.6
28.227.3
t2.410.9t2.l10.8t2.6tt.7LL.210.5t2.711.5t2.4t2.810.311.1
9.6t2.211.5i
11.1t3.411.313.4L4.9r 1.213.712.815.512.313.2t2.L10.114.3t2.710.4t2.9
3.316.4r3.413.8Lt.2
17.022.323.023.523.42L.919.8L7.2
t9.42r.B17.030.31B.116.4ts.4
28.236.630.?27.826.227.331.834.723.926.927.532.423.427.927.324.529.L
2. A.
38.025.733.227.4
3?.028.432.427.029.829.43t.434.033.929.229.328.627.831.424.225.725.3
29.424.924.632.727.822.627.822.727.424.123.928.326.022.820.320.125.8
3.224.132.232.925.4
11.010.68.6
11.1'I .D
10.18.0
1 1.58.7
11.09.59.3
10.19.78.58.09.63.3
Lt.710.?
8.011.0
r0.710.?I I.Ito.211.610.510.410.710.9
9.09.3
10.4t0.2r0.210.4t2.l10.5
l'
11.210.1r4.511.5)-t8.7
13.216.6t4.2
9.3r4.2
5.916.911.32.05.0
10.4
:
t2.52t.7
16.31?.310.7
9.016.316.013.624.6
a.o17.120.0
3.08.3
r4.l
i
45.737.136.037.033.r32.834.537.032.430.533.934.333.335.216.931.632.6,:
30.?31.833.432.939.628.430.330.824.940.929.628.030.531.318.425.731.0
3.639.235.427.332.8
Table 6 (Continuati'on)
Argentina I I'.S.A.Pakis-tan
Isla-ma-bad
Egvpt
cultivarsGrou-ping *
rsaz I tett
RO-44RO-134IH-56RO-131IH-155RO-141H-9P4RO-150Stauffer-31 01NS-H-43Gahib-7Citosol-2PeredovikHB-763NS-H.42NS_H-40MeanL.S.D. 5%Seedtec-S-315PemirCargill-205Sunbred-254
4.34.76.15.35.0Àa
7.88.39.44.15.05.45.06.84.86.95.9
T
15.81t tr
17.519.321.0t1 ()
22.4Lô.2lt.t18.422.820.621.018.418.419.719.2
:
24.431.927.638.936.934.823.629.62t.L29.8
31.738.427.236.426.330.8
31.034.334.325.5
24.L25.527.728.828.127.823.627.132.426.326.525.033.727.5t4 1
25.323.r
1'*
35.229.234.5:z9.536.234.832.532.833.23r.224.929.429.730"24t.t25.731.6
2.529.828.332.929.9
14.815.118.310.416.013.813.:JIJ.J10.410.414.811.913.;l15.111.910.413.1,:
24.025.529.3
2t.B24.624626.927.422.32'.1.2
27.622.523.12r.325.325.2
4-D
:
28.529.830.929.332.326.930.727.829.132.630.929.839.035.022.625.229.8
3.332.630.733.827.1
9.98.56.8
44
9.07.04.9
4.36.0a-ô4.56.04.86.6
i
31.331.033.730.435.030.631.333.132.030.128.530.026.731.325.825.430.8
:
39.836.034.04L.534.338.536.436.340.040.931.339.732.132.436.133.336.6
5.136.936.û37.537.7
25.0
24.025.916.916.9t6.224.519.420.821.321.519.426.124.02t.522.7
1t
22.923.r2t.521.3L5.7
9.632.120.023.625.520.42r.519.920.811.317.319.9
2.220.415.710 a
20.4
10.711.1t2.28.99.99.0
11.49.5
13.912.610.5Lt.211.811.810.010.011.0
:
26.726.626.L26.025.825.825.024.624.624.524.324.3
24.022.22r.925.4
ï
AAAA
Â.ABABABABAtsABABAB
B
3
:
* Duncan's multiple range test. Means with the sage letter are not significantly different.
The general mean of Trial No. 2 v/'as quiteclose lto that of Tbial No. I (25.4 q/ha as
agiainst 23,8 q/Lra), indi'cating that rthe diffe-rence in m,aturity of the two types of sunfflower cultivars wâs not so great as to 'deter-mine significant differ,ences in seed yield.
Statistically, th,e mrajority of cultivars fellin the sam,e group âs fâr 'as th€ general seddyield m'ean is concerned. Thus, 14 entries, in-'cl,u,ding 13 rhybri'ds and the opeq ollinatdvariety Peredovik \ÀIere llIa,otically sirnilar ac-cording to Duncan's multiple ûan'ge test, a1t-
t2
hough their average seed yiel'd ranged from26.7- q/:ha (RO-44) to 24.0 q/ha (HB-763). Un'dermore limited environments, certain hybridswere however better diffenentiate'd, accordingto tùreir ;sp,eci'fi,c adaptebility.
A similar r'e'action was notised with respectto oil content (Table 7). So, tl}r,e general meanof 13 cultivar:s fell in the s,ame statlstic group,although ranging from 47.80/6 to 45.00/s andonly two hybrids werre significantly different,the hybrid RO-44 with tlhe hig'hest oil content(50.2%) and the hybrid Stauffer-3l01 withthe lowest oil content (41.6%).
IRIA,L No. 2/1982-1983. Oil content in dry matter
Cultivars
Romania
Fundulea Podu-IIoaie
1982 1982 | 1983
Yugoslavia Bulgaria
:CoshevoNDvi Sad
1982 | 1983
Osijek
1982 1982 | 1983RO-44RO-150RO-141PeredovikHB-763Citosol-2RO-134}I9 P4RO-131NS-H-40IH-56NS-H-43'Gahib-7iH-155Stauffer-3101MeanL.s.D. 5%PemirCargill-205Sunbred-254Seedtec-S-315
53.852.454.253.151.652.913.751.054.250.051.050.651.148.744.851.5
ï
5ri.055.052.352.752.r49.053.34qo53.351.14B.B49.051.547.444.051.02.2
51.751.050.0+9.7
55.349.246.448.051.140.650.350.352.449.651.847.351.551.147.550.0
4.3
57.855.054.255.553.153.053.452.952.052.652.85r.252.850.144.34' t7
4.954.754.950.050.2
52.045.345.745.243.948.2al.ô46.746.942.3A"46.044.047.6a L.l45.6
v
52.948.648.649.049.047.050.5T t.r48.548.648.344.548.246.040.147.8
4.348.248.1+D-!'46.2
56.452.753.152.351.650.652.646.152.152.049.450.150.547.543.550.7
It
55.054.L.51.352.752.252.451.049.351.052.350.148.251.346.344.350.8
3.151.252.548.r50.1
53.246.147.245.843.345.r46.847.646.046.043.547.0
38.245.3,:
:
45.4
40.040.1tl. r40.I
42.?40.340.143.14t.740.041.436.44t.l
3.24I.242.540.338.6
50.848.350.347.650.550.348.348.148.546.546.547.347.846.1atJ.:}48.0
v
52.349.048.549.250.248.546.748.8
48.648.948.149.242.348.4
:'
50.244.646.64I.544.143.642.843.347.147.241.244.744.642.632.643.73.1
47.l43.044.A39.7
a.n50.3
Edirnellstanbutlankara Udine I pisaCultivarsPortugal Austria
tr'uchsenbigl
1983RO-44RO-150RO-141Peredovii<HB-?63Citosol-3RO-134H9 P4RO-131rIS-H-40IH-56NS-H-43Gahib-7rH-155Stauffer-3101MeanL.S.D. 5%PemirCargill-205Sunbred-254Seedtec-S-315
45.0
46.144.347.043.2
+D-+40.04t.543.24l.639.343.038.243.0
1'
50.245.247.043.045.6
42.644.r
4t.l44.543.343.242.938.144.33.4
43.548.143.144.2
53.650.552.952.952.252.851.351.050.449.249.348.150.548.r43.050.44.6
48.845.045.246.446.145.245.142.544.644.244.143.9+a.c40.637.744.2
.t. o46.347.343.642.3
57.957.160.657.658.759.756.057.056.156.657.555.157.858.156.157.5
i'
58.360.659.359.557.659.158.657.0)I.t58.956.859.657.255.354.658.0
5.759.957.6D'/.D59.5
52.450.148.24'.t.249.350.148.2
48.045.342.345.347.04t 'l
40.446.9
:,
52.852.648.749.250.650.250.16
4B.150.750.150.145.946.747.347.749.0
2.249.1ao. I
50.345.8
48.845.745.044.O45.246.6
42.4
41.344.138.640.036.243.1
:^
55.155.254.255.653.054.354.253.153.550.05t.250.052.253.847.052.8
55.053.8526853.351.95t.451.551.653.150.351.049.850.250.245.951.5
:'
45.452.451.152.152.252.750.15t.250.252.550.250.152.448.244.050.3
3.6
46.748.148.147.146.846.944.347..147.646-7c+.c4î. I43.544.O47.346.3,,49.247.9+t.D47.1
Cultivars
Egvpt
Sâkha
RO-44RO-150RO-141PeredovikHB-763Citosol-2RO-134H9P4RO-131NS_H-40IH-56NS-H-43Gahib-7IH-155Stauffer-3101MeanL:S.D. 5o/sPemirCargill-205Sunbred-254Seedtec 5-315
41.234.73?.640.341.340.24t.L4t.235.235.138.138.334.634.736.838.0
:'
39.337.236.338.637.435.135.636.836.133.237.335.536.237.233.136.3
1:337.836.436.434.0
+D. I42.043.444;O45.5{t:). r44.2
41.041.642.642.5n, 1
45.142.643.4
:'
44.343.142.742.945.042.843.246.24I.742.543.044.r41.044.042.343.34.6
46.245.044.143.0
44.942.84t.742.435.143.242.340.7
42.440.242.3+l.tJd. J
34.141.0
:
42.339.140.337.333.336.234.637.340.333.135.832.6ôz- I36.333.736.3
:'
48.046.244.645.646.847.440.247.040.143.910,r44.042.345.2
44.63.7
50.049.2^ù
1
46.7
46.544.3+o. I46.4to.r44.845.245.r44.r4t.246.0
46.848.146.644.3
49.148.549.r46.049.046.548.243.946.547.145.546.3+D.D42.644.146.53.1
4L3
42.240.238.540.L40.34t.040.140.140.640.337.640.136.135.739.6
2.7
40.740.136.8
45.040.239.242.843.+41.540.040.738.448.339.243.r42.341.839.441.8
2.6
50.247.847.647.447.447.446.946.846.746.245.945.745.645.041.646.5
!2
Grou-plng*
At3BBBBBBBBt5BBB
Man-fredi1982
Mirâmar
* Duncan's multiple rânge test. Meâns with the same letter are not significanfly alifrerent.
Head I Plant lVolumetricdiametrelnelgntlweight(cm)l(cm)l(kc/hl)
Most,hybrids had a vegetation period 'simiJ'arto the open pollinated varieties Peredovik andPemir, 'but they were shorter and more resis-tant to lodging (Table B). The earliest entrieswene Stauffer-3101 and IH-1 55. Hi,gher valuesof volume seod weight and a better resistan'seto lodrging were noted for almost all hybri'ds.
Excepting Gahib-?, all the bther hybri'dsproved to possess a tqtal or a very good resis-iance to Plasmopara helianthi (Table 9). Cer-1.ain genotypes had a better response to theattack of the other important pathogens (Scle-
rotinta sclerotiorum; RO-44, RO-131, Stauf*fer-3101, Cargill-2O5, RO-l34; leaf spots: 'IH-26'NS-H-43; Pttccini'a helianthi: H 9 P 4.; Verti.ct'l-liwn sp.: RO-1 34; Orobanche sp.: Citosol-3'RO-44, Pemir). Mo"st hybri'ds extribited mu'cih
higher self-fertility degree but a lower me}li-ferous value than the open pol'linated varieti'es'Penedovik and ,Pemir (Ta'ble 10). The negativecorrelation between trhese two traits should ibe
t,aken into ,con:sideration when defining thebreeding objectives, in order to avoi'd a toostron:g divergent sele'ction.
Table ITEIAL No. 2/1982-1983. Morpho-phvsiotogical characteristics
Cultivars
No. of days fromemergence to :
flowering maturity
limits I mean
3P.^
Ëe EgÈ 9Ës
1,000 seedweight
(c)
PeredovikHB-763H9P4IIJ-56rH-155Gahib-7Citosol-2RO-44RO-131RO-134RO-141RO-150NS-H-40NS-H-43Stauffer-3101Sunbred-254Cargill-205
42-8444-9339-9135-8432-8130--8539-8439-8435-9042-8636-8941-8843-9239-8030-?840-8637-8339-8941-86
L4-2715-28L2-26t3-2916-28t2-27L4_2816-29t7*27t5-2916-2816-29t2-25t4-2711-26t5-26t3-27t+-2815-28
I118*-Jl120--1123-191tt7118-12t-1
t16--rL2t-r+-l
1-161-1
-1l-1
636263595B616463646567626763DD
62626166
L44
1061041q61031011031071051û610?10810610?10510110,6105104107
202220222l202L
2l,,2l2219191820192020
169151154155t52I:I
153150166162150t52120,158125t52141162168
3Bar4L4l43374l4l393939394l4l4l4l394238
6759566157564959677062565154464D545065
232223
252322202222232326263023t'l2524
15L414
30-5426-4428-493t-4726-4528-473t-44
273130-51
32-28-493t-4732-48
53-8447-7742-6549-8043-7043-6938-6345-7643-8447-8942-734t-7140-6440-?338-5935-6042-6539-6451--rB1
19-+B18-2820-3021-332t-3419-2919-2816-26ts-2720-2819-292G--3023-3223-a3326-39t9-2718--3620-28
good poorgoodgoodvery goodvery goodvery goodgoodvery goodvery goodgoodvery goodvery goodvery goodgoodvery good'rrery goodgoodgoodvery good
4
I 17-)l9l
I
116-1t20-rt 19-92-r
I lâ-t109-1t24-20\t25-.21
Seedtec-S-315Pemir
Table 9-A
2t-29
Table I
TRIAL No. 2/1982-1983. Aesistance to diseases (na.turatly infectetl plants' 0ô)
cultivars
PtasmoparalLelianthi
sclerota
head attâck
nid sclerotTorurn
stem attack
Fundulea adoo
F'unduleaPodu-Iloaie ?13,vozv)
I
Éi> ($o
FunduleaooFr>-o
o
J^FLN
Szeged
D
-l-l-
rgsz I rsez I
do I o>,il>1982 1982 I 1983 1982 1983 1983 1983 1982 r983 1982 1982 1989 I 1983
PeredovikHB-?63H9 P4IH-56IH-155Gahib-7Citosol-2RO-44RO-131RO-134no-141RO-150NS-H-40NS-I"I-43Stauffer-3101Sunbred-254Cargill-205Seedtec-S-315Pemir
171115132l12l1110
271164l2110010,1100100102l L
010010
-t--10-11try
203I10
23I
00000,
I1
_
164I1
0,.,
,.
000001
0
=
10 l53512113 167l4313?16
16 162l02l1413?11el7514816312
-t-:l:_t_
44B5:l
616876363B40193366646640
192634192l243110
B
I201B26132015441319
LI
33LI
15L728161513t7
15t1,2
l4t46
22
À
6II
8Io
IB
II
B528
t2I
t2
ll
342l19202519t2t2162020,1t7121223
Io
I10
6534I0350247I
563
0À
21
011D
6
6t3
1053530433
t2t71910I
131911
5B
l4L22l
6j
68l606414138lle?0138461276214545131311336013561146451615214283l2e4213082l|34-153-l38-l4e-lzs
303730201520251025t30454028
i
242746201B2l20t21B19192l2520
:
5401010401020
tl)55
102040
i14
Table 9 (Continuation)
CultivarsSzeged
rsaz I rsae
Leaf spots
I.)5
108
26T2
8101010t:)
tq5
-
Fargo
Verticilium sp. Orobanchesp.
Edirne
1983
o: doài
1982
PeredovikIIB-763H9 P4IH-56IH-155'Gahib-7Citosol-2RO-44RO-131RO-134RO-141RO-150NS-H-40NS-H.43Stauffer-3101Sunbred-254Cargill-205Seedtec-S-315Pemir
Table 70
TRIAL No. 2, Self-fertility degree and melliferousvalue * (Fundulea, averag€ f982-l98g)
CultivarsSeU-
fertilitydegree
(%)
35JO351020I
364045
25)
t2ln
i
2610t7t22l15l62020162l1À
1512
!
13IJ111311111111111À
11t2L2t2
:
15I
452010202525353325
4A
If+
6291611161818252219
2G
241B1B15201026
030
0
102525to
4027
t7102038
l32
2225I
25I
32
1'16151532
^,,r
1BLI
25
RÉSULTATS DU QUATRIÈME CYCLEEXPÉRIMENTAL AVEC DES CULTIVARS
DE TOURNESOL (1982-1983)
Résumé
Un nouveau cycle biennal d'expérimentation, con-tenant t6 cultivars et hybrides de tournesol rdemi-précoces et précoces, et 20r demi-tandifs, a été effec-tué en 32 localités, ,dont 20 localités de 13 pay.seuropéens et 12 localités de g pays hors de t,Europe.
Les conditions de milieu extrêmement di,fférentesont déterminé une large variation de la réaction desgénotypes de tournesol, tant concernant le rende-ment en semences et la teneur en huile. oue lesautres caractéristiques agronomiques.
M.algré cette importante variation, les valeurs mo-.vennes pour toutes les localités ont été, pour Ia plu-part des cas, similaires du point de vue statistique,en suggérant I'existence de certaines ressemblancesgénétiques des cultivars testés. Certains hybrides detournesol se sont, toutefois, différenciés dans le cadrede certaines zones plus restrelntes, en permettantaux cultivateurs d'identifier les génotypes adéquats,Ies mieux adaptés.
RESULTADOS DEL CUARTO CICLOEXPERIMENTAL CON CUI-TIVARES DE GIRASOL
(1982_1983)
Res{nnenIJn nuevo ciclo bienal de experimentaci6n, com-
prendiendo 16 variedades e hirbridos de girasol semi-preooc'es y 20 sernitardfos, se ùra efectuado en 82 loca-lid'ades de 13 paises europeos y 12 localfidades de!t paises fuera de Europa.
Las condici,ones de medio extremadarnente dife-rentes han determinado una gran variacfon de losgenotipos de girasol tanto en cunato a la producciônde semill,as y del contenido en aceite, como a otrascaracteristi cas agron6micas.
A pesar de esta gran variaci6n, los valores mediospara todas las localidadesr dueron en lâ miayoria idelos casos similares desde el punto de visrta esta-distico, sugeriendo la existencia de ciertes semblanzasF,enéticas de los cultivares testados" Sin embargo,algunos de los hibridos de girasol se diferenciaronmeior dentro de unas zonas mâs restrinEidas. ber-rnitiendo a los cultivadores i.dentificar loJ genotiposcorrespondientes, los mejores,adaptados.
5574464l357951545032+5535B39
LI38
713332216I
1046
204
2I3620III
25
2t
102445
t7
J6
1025
20
1
I
4219183232t232271325273334261B30312315
64tz
611
3a
I2
104I6
10I1
10E
2q
7L
I1
1125226
99
2.l
5203028
2428t71B2226ZL2215.i. Jto
2L19251R
11o
13
2lI
1LL4162211t2
l-D16201311
=
JI
10162l19
818L22527
10L713222l2713
IH-56RO-131Stauffer-3101Cargill-205Seedtec-S-315Citosol-2NS-H-42IH-155Sunbred-254RO-44NS-H-43RO-141RO-150H9P4NS_H.40PemirPeredovikHB-763Gahib-7L.D.S. 5%
66.359.857.948.245.04L.439.731.828.623.718.716.114.9t2.4It.29.78.8?.86.35.3
0.650.69r.920.851.060.380.860.701.010.451.081.111.320.480.811.190.980.670.?80.11
49.043.0'30.629.040.438.032.448.64r.463.841
'.43.837.461.938.639.444.855.652.8
0.320.300.590.250.430.140.280.340.420.2s0.440.490.490.300.310.470.440.370.420.06
tratlon \Mere perrormed iiti'flt:"'î"t, î*"itâ;";i"";î;G. tr'otâ. (Research Institute lor Apiculture, Bucharest).
CONCLUSIONS
The ,extremely different environmenta.l con-ditions 'determined, as excepted, a great varia-tion in the rrespons,e of suhflo\Mer g,enotypes,both for seed yi.eld and oil content, as well ,asfor other êgron,omic ch,aracteristics. Notwith-standing this great variation, th,e rnean vâlu,esfor all |environments were statisticallv similarin m,ost ,cases, suggesting â possiblé geneticresemblân,oe of the aultivars under testing.
Certain sunflower lrybrids were howeverb,etter differentiat,e,d within ,some limited ,areas,allcrwing growers to identify the best adaptedand suitable genotypes.
15
6U)
1983