Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Figure 5 Biomass potentials for triticale in the region of Hannover (climatic period 1991 to 2007).
Similar(59)
Biomass potential calculations for triticale and cup plant have shown both crops to be high yielding and a promising alternative to maize in the region of Hanover and other places in Lower Saxony.
The calculation of the spatial distribution of the biomass potentials for two alternative energy crops (triticale and cup plant) and maize in the region of Hannover has been broken down into two steps.
Changes of growth traits in M and S treatments in comparison to the L were greater for maize than for triticale and were accompanied by daily changes in water potential and gas exchange parameters (PN, E, gs).
In the second step, the biomass yields for triticale and cup plant have been calculated with the model, and the generated yields for maize, triticale and cup plant (after correction) have been connected to a GIS-soil map of the region to visualize the spatial distribution of the biomass potentials for the three cultures.
Therefore, a field experiment was established for triticale (x Triticosecale) cultivation on loamy soils in Northern Germany.
Hence, for triticale and for cup plant, the same factor was used as for winter wheat (0.8).
As an example, the polynomial fit curves for triticale on loam and clay are displayed (Figures 8 and 9). Figure 8 Polynomial fit for nFK -dependent yield (triticale on loam).
For triticale and cup plant, no adjustment factor (yields from field trials vs. actual yields) could be determined due to lack of statistical data.
Differences between M and S treatments in daily changes in ψ for maize were in most cases statistically insignificant, whereas for triticale, they were statistically significant.
We found that the rate of spontaneous doubled haploids was 32.1%%, which is consistent with previous reports for triticale [ 8, 9], and confirms that an additional chemically-induced chromosome doubling step is required for triticale DH programs.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com