Investigation of Agro-Morphological Characteristics in Oat

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 5, 587 - 593, 15.09.2025

Abdulkadir Tanrıkulu

https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1704410

Öz

In this study in which agricultural characters and morphological traits were observed, 8 oat varieties were investigated. It aim was to determine the relationship between all traits examined. The study was conducted in Türkiye (under Kahramanmaraş conditions) for 2 years between 2014 and 2016 with 3 replications according to the randomized block design. As a result of the observations, the following ranges were recorded panicle length (20.8-27.4 cm), plant height (113.4-143.3 cm), peduncle length (28.8-37.2 cm), flag leaf width (1.46-1.83 cm), flag leaf length (15.8-21.3 cm), grain number per panicle (59.7-118.6 seeds), grain weight per panicle (2.57-3.33 g), panicle number/m2 (328.1-489.7 pcs/m2), biomass yield (1926-3031.7 kg/ha), harvest index (13.6-25.1 %) and protein yield (59.7-86.0 kg/ha). The findings are anticipated to support breeding programs and aid in enhancing agricultural productivity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Oats , Agro-morphological characteristics , Panicle

Etik Beyan

Ethics committee approval was not required for this study because of there was no study on animals or humans.

Kaynakça

• Acreche MM, Briceno Felix G, Martin Sanchez JA, Slafer GA. 2008. Physiological bases of genetic gains in mediterranean bread wheat yield in Spain. Eur J Agron, 28(3): 162-170.
• Ahmad G, Ansar M, Kalem S, Nabi G, Hussain M. 2008. Performance of early maturing oats (Avena sativa L.) cultivars for yield and quality. J Agric Res, 46(4): 341-346.
• Akdeniz H, Yılmaz İ, Andiç N, Zorer Ş. 2004. A research on yield and feed values of some maize varieties. Yüzüncü Yıl Univ J Agric Sci, 14(1): 47-51.
• Aktaş H. 2017. Evaluation of some barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars with intensive cultivation area in Turkey under supported irrigation and rainfed conditions. J Tekirdağ Agric Fac, 14(3): 86-97.
• Anonymous. 2008. Technical instructions for agricultural values measurement trials, wheat. General Directorate of Protection and Control, Seed Registration and Certification Center Directorate, Ankara.
• Anonymous. 2015. Kahramanmaraş Eastern Mediterranean Gateway Agricultural Research Institute Directorate. Soil-Water Resources Soil Analysis Laboratory Results.
• Anonymous. 2016a. Kahramanmaraş meteorological station climate values (1960–2015). General Directorate of Meteorology Records, Ankara.
• Anonymous. 2016b. Kahramanmaraş meteorological station climate values. General Directorate of Meteorology Records, Ankara.
• Balkan A, Gençtan T. 2008. Effects of different row spacing and seed quantity on grain yield and yield components in some bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties. J Agric Sci Ankara Univ Fac Agric, 14(1): 29-37.
• Bares I, Sehnolova J, Vlasak M, Vlach M, Krystof Z, Amler P, Maly J, Berenek V. 1985. Descriptors list of Triticum genus. Praha, Czech Republic, pp: 75.
• Branson CV, Frey KJ. 1989. Recurrent selection for groat oil content in oat. Crop Sci, 29: 1382-1387.
• Browne RA, White EM, Burke JI. 2006. Responses of developmental yield formation processes in oats variety, nitrogen, seed rate and plant growth regulator, and their relationship to quality. J Agron Sci, 144(6): 533-545.
• Çalışkan M, Koç A. 2017. Characterization of local oat genotypes belonging to the western mediterranean region: 1. Morphological characteristics. J Field Crops Cent Res Inst, 28(1): 7-18.
• Ceyhan M. 2015. Evaluation of some oat varieties in terms of yield and yield elements in Adana and Kahramanmaraş locations (Master’s Thesis). Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye pp: 82.
• Corville Baltenberger DC, Frey KJ. 1987. Genotypic variability in response of oat to delayed sowing. Agron J, 79: 813-816.
• Dumlupınar Z. 2010. Characterization of local oat genotypes of Turkey origin with avenin proteins for morphological, phenological and agronomic traits (PhD Thesis). Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye pp: 180.
• Eğritaş Ö. 2014. Determination of herbage yield and quality of common vetch + grain mixtures grown in Ordu ecological conditions (Master’s Thesis). Ordu Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ordu, Türkiye pp: 56.
• Evlice AK, Kara R, Sezal M, Dokuyucu T. 2008. Effects of nitrogen application times on phenological periods, yield and yield components of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under Kahramanmaraş conditions. J Cent Res Inst Field Crops, 17(1-2): 11-20.
• FAO. 2021. The state of food security and nutrition in Europe and Central Asia. Food and Agriculture Organization, Budapest, Hungary, pp: 220.
• Forsberg RA, Reeves DL. 1992. Breeding oat cultivars for improved grain quality. In: Marshall HG, Sorrells ME (eds.). Oat Science and Technology. Am Soc Agron, Madison, WI, USA, pp: 751-775.
• GanBmann W, Vorwerck K. 1995. Oat milling, processing and storage. In: Welch RW (ed.). The Oat Crop-Production and Utilization. Chapman and Hall, London, UK, pp: 369-408.
• Gautam SK, Verma AK, Vishwakarma SR. 2006. Genetic variability and association of morpho-physiological characters in oat (Avena sativa L.). Farm Sci J, 15(1): 82-83.
• Gül İ, Akıncı C, Çölkesen M. 1999. Determination of oat varieties suitable for grain and herbage cultivation in Diyarbakır conditions. Grain Symposium, June 8–11, Konya, Türkiye, pp: 117-125.
• Güngör H, Dokuyucu T, Dumlupınar Z, Akkaya A. 2017. Determination of the relationships between grain yield and some agronomic traits in oat (Avena spp.) by correlation and path analysis. J Tekirdağ Agric Fac, 14(1): 61-68.
• Gupta NK, Gupta S, Kumar A. 2001. Effect of water stress on physiological attributes and their relationship with growth and yield of wheat cultivars at different stages. Crop Sci, 41: 1390-1395.
• Hoffmann LA. 1995. World production and use of oats. In: Welch RW (ed.). The Oat Crop Production and Utilization. Chapman and Hall, London, UK, pp: 34-61.
• Hsu P, Walton PD. 1971. Relationships between yield and its components and structures above the flag leaf node in spring wheat. Crop Sci, 11: 190-193.
• Iannucci A, Codianni P, Cattivelli L. 2011. Evaluation of genotype diversity in oat germplasm and definition of ideotypes adapted to the mediterranean environment. Int J Agron, https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/870925.
• İnan AS, Özbaş MO, Çağırgan MI. 2005. Evaluation of oat lines used in human nutrition in terms of agricultural and quality characteristics. Turkey VI Field Crops Congress, September 5–6, Antalya, Türkiye, II: 1153-1155.
• Kara R, Dumlupınar Z, Hışır Y, Dokuyucu T, Akkaya A. 2007. Evaluation of oat varieties in terms of grain yield and yield elements under Kahramanmaraş conditions. Turkey VII Field Crops Congress, June 25–27, Erzurum, Türkiye, pp: 121-125.
• Karimi MM, Siddique KHM. 1991. Crop growth and relative growth rates of old and modern wheat cultivars. Aust J Agric Res, 42(1): 13-20.
• Koç M, Genç İ. 1990. Studies on nitrogen uptake and nitrogen harvest index in three bread wheat genotypes. Turk J Agric For, 14: 280-288.
• Maral H. 2009. Response of oat varieties to nitrogen fertilization in terms of grain yield, nitrogen use and yield characteristics (Master’s Thesis). Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye pp: 50.
• Matiello RR, Sereno MJCM, Neto JFB, Carvalho FIF, Pacheco MT, Pegoraro DG, Taderka I. 1999. Characterization for plant height and flowering date in the biological species oat. Pesq Agropec Bras, 34(4): 1393-1398.
• Mut Z, Akay H, Erbaş Köse ÖD. 2018. Grain yield, quality traits and grain yield stability of local oat cultivars. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr, 18(1): 269-281.
• Mut Z, Erbaş Köse ÖD, Akay H, Sezer İ. 2021. Evaluation of some characteristics of local oat genotypes collected from the central and western Black Sea region. J Inst Sci Technol, 11(2): 1582-1594.
• Narlıoğlu A. 2016. Evaluation of some oat genotypes in terms of yield and quality criteria and silage characteristics (Master’s Thesis). Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye pp: 74.
• Nawaz N, Razzaq A, Ali Z, Sarwar G, Yousaf M. 2004. Performance of different oat (Avena sativa L.) varieties under the agro-climatic conditions of Bahawalpur-Pakistan. Int J Agric Biol, 6(4): 624-626.
• Özgen M, Adak S, Söylemezoğlu G, Ulukan H. 2000. New approaches in conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources. 5th Technical Congress of Turkish Agricultural Engineering, January 17–21, Ankara, Türkiye, pp: 259-284.
• Peltonen Sainio P, Rajala A. 2007. Duration of vegetative and generative development phases in oat cultivars released since 1921. Field Crops Res, 101: 72-79.
• Peterson DM, Wesenberg DM, Burrup DE, Erickson CA. 2005. Relationships among agronomic traits and grain composition in oat genotypes grown in different environments. Crop Sci, 45(4): 1249-1255.
• Redaelli R, Lagana P, Rizza F, Nicosia OLD, Cattivelli L. 2008. Genetic progress of oats in Italy. Euphytica, 164: 679-687.
• Robertson LD, Frey KJ. 1987. Honeycomb design for selection among homozygous oat lines. Crop Sci, 27: 1105-1108.
• Rocquigny PJ, Entz MH, Gentile RM, Duguid SD. 2004. Yield physiology of a semidwarf and tall oat cultivar. Crop Sci, 44(6): 2116.
• SAS Institute. 1999. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. 8th Version, SAS Inst Inc, Cary, NC, USA, pp: 1200.
• Semchenko M, Zobel K. 2005. The effect of breeding on allometry and phenotypic plasticity in four varieties of oat (Avena sativa L.). Field Crops Res, 93: 151-168.
• Shah WA, Bakht J, Shafi M, Khan MA. 2002. Yield and yield components of different cultivars of wheat, barley and oat under rainfed conditions. Asian J Plant Sci, 1(2): 148-150.
• Sharma RC. 1992. Duration of the vegetative and reproductive period in relation to yield performance of spring wheat. Eur J Agron, 1(3): 133-137.
• Sobayoğlu R. 2017. Evaluation of summer sown oat varieties in terms of yield and quality characteristics in Karaman conditions (Master’s Thesis). Selçuk Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya, Türkiye pp: 66.
• Sürek H, Valentine J. 1996. Relationships and heritability of some quantitative characters in cultivated oats (Avena sativa L.). J Agric Sci Ankara Univ Fac Agric, 2(3): 39-43.
• Topal A. 1997. A research on some morphological characters affecting yield in oat varieties. Selçuk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Derg, 11(15): 30-38.
• TÜİK. 2022. Agricultural products statistics, statistics with Turkey. Turkish Statistical Institute, Ankara, Türkiye, pp: 240.
• Yanming M, Zhi Yong L, Yu Ting B, Wei W, Hao W. 2006. Study on diversity of oats varieties in Xinjiang. Xinjiang Agric Sci, 43(6): 510-513.
• Yılmaz N. 1996. A research on yield and yield components of some oat varieties and lines under Van ecological conditions. Turkey 3rd Meadow Pasture and Forage Crops Congress, June 17–19, Erzurum, Türkiye, pp: 120-123.
• Zaman Q, Hussain MN, Aziz A, Hayat K. 2006. Performance of high yielding oat varieties under agro-ecological conditions of D.I. Khan. J Agric Res, 44(1): 29-35.