Within-field variability of plant and canopy traits of sugar beet and their relation to individual root mass during harvest


Michalska-Klimczak B., Wyszyński Z., Pačuta V., Rašovský M., Brezovský O. (2020): Within-field variability of plant and canopy traits of sugar beet and their relation to individual root mass during harvest. Plant Soil Environ., 66: 437–445.


download PDF

The present study reports on research results obtained in the years 2014–2015 on two sugar beet production plantations in Central Poland. The purpose of any production is to obtain homogeneous canopy with the plants of demanded morphological and qualitative traits. The aim of the research was the assessment of the range and scale of plant variability in sugar beet canopy and impact of investigated plant and canopy traits (number of days from sowing to emergence, development stage of plants in the juvenile period, the plant living area, the location centrality index) to the final root mass at harvest time. Variability of investigated plant and canopy traits was evaluated using the variation coefficient, while the impact of these traits on the final root mass was assessed using the analysis of multiple linear regression. The obtained results show that sugar beet canopy reveals large, within-field variability in the investigated traits. The established relationship between final root mass during harvest and the canopy traits indicates that to obtain a large final root mass of individual plants during harvest, the most important is fast and even plant emergence, as well as the rapid development of plants in the juvenile period. At both production plantations, the impact of the living area of individual plants on the final mass of their roots was significant. However, no significant effect of the location centrality index on plant living area and the final root mass was found.


Boiffin J., Durr C., Fleury A., Marin-Laflèche, Maillet I. (1992): Analysis of the variability of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L) growth during the early stages. I. Influence of various conditions on crop establishment. Agronomie, 12: 515–525. https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:19920703
Çakmakçı R., Oral E. (2002): Root yield and quality of sugarbeet in relation to sowing date, plant population and harvesting date interactions. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 26: 133–139.
Durr C., Boiffin J., Fleury A., Coulomb I. (1992): Analysis of the variability of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L) growth during the early stages. II. Factors influencing seedling size in field conditions. Agronomie, 12: 527–535. https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:19920704
Durr C., Boiffin J. (1995): Sugarbeet seedling growth from germination to first leaf stage. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 124: 427–435. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002185960007338X
Durrant M.J., Jaggard K.W. (1988): Sugar-beet seed advancement to increase establishment and decrease bolting. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 110: 367–374. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600081405
Durrant M.J., Mash S.J., Jaggard K.W. (1993): Effects of seed advancement and sowing date on establishment, bolting and yield of sugarbeet. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 121: 333–341. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002185960008552X
Dzieżyc J., Nowak L., Panek K. (1987): Decade indicators of rainfall crop needs in Poland. Zeszyty Problemowe Postępów Nauk Rolniczych, 314: 11–32. (In Polish)
Freckleton R.P., Watkinson A.R., Webb D.J., Thomas T.H. (1999): Yield of sugar beet in relation to weather and nutrients. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 93: 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(98)00106-3
Gallardo-Carrera A., Léonard J., Duval Y., Dürr C. (2007): Effects of seedbed structure and water content at sowing on the development of soil surface crusting under rainfall. Soil and Tillage Research, 95: 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2007.01.001
Hoffmann C.M. (2017): Changes in root morphology with yield level of sugar beet. Sugar Industry, 142: 420–425. https://doi.org/10.36961/si18549
Hoffmann C.M., Engelhardt M., Gallmeier M., Gruber M., Märländer B. (2018): Importance of harvesting system and variety for storage losses of sugar beet. Food Science and Technology, 143: 474–484.
Hoffmann C.M. (2019): Importance of canopy closure and dry matter partitioning for yield formation of sugar beet varieties. Field Crops Research, 236: 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2019.03.013
Honsová H. (2008): Canopy establishment influences production of ecological grown fodder beet. Listy Cukrovarnické a Řeparské, 124: 271–273. (In Czech)
Jaggard K.W., Qi A.M., Milford G.F.J., Clark C.J.A., Ober E.S., Walters C., Burks E. (2011): Determining the optimal population density of sugarbeet crops in England. International Sugar Journal, 113: 114–119.
Jones P.D., Lister D.H., Jaggard K.W., Pidgeon J.D. (2003): Future climate impact on the productivity of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) in Europe. Climatic Change, 58: 93–108. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023420102432
Kenter C., Hoffmann C.M., Märländer B. (2006): Effects of weather variables on sugar beet yield development (Beta vulgaris L.). European Journal of Agronomy, 24: 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2005.05.001
Mahmood S.A., Murdoch A.J. (2017): Within-field variations in sugar beet yield and quality and their correlation with environmental variables in the East of England. European Journal of Agronomy, 89: 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2017.05.007
Malnou C.S., Jaggard K.W., Sparkes D.L. (2006): A canopy approach to nitrogen fertiliser recommendations for the sugar beet crop. European Journal of Agronomy, 25: 254–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2006.06.002
Malnou C.S., Jaggard K.W., Sparkes D.L. (2008): Nitrogen fertiliser and the efficiency of the sugar beet crop in late summer. European Journal of Agronomy, 28: 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2007.05.001
Michalska-Klimczak B., Wyszyński Z. (2010): Variability of plant traits in sugar beet canopy. Zeszyty Problemowe Postępów Nauk Rolniczych, 556: 181–191. (In Polish)
Norman J.M., Campbell G.S. (1989): Canopy structure. In: Pearcy R.W., Ehleringer J.R., Mooney H.A., Rundel P.W. (eds.): Plant Physiological Ecology. Dordrecht, Springer. ISBN 978-94-009-2221-1
Pidgeon J.D., Werker A.R., Jaggard K.W., Richter G.M., Lister D.H., Jones P.D. (2001): Climatic impact on the productivity of sugar beet in Europe, 1961–1995. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 109: 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(01)00254-4
Pocock T.O., Milford G.F.J., Armstrong M.J. (1990): Storage root quality in sugar beet in relation to nitrogen uptake. Journal of Agricultural Science, 115: 355–362. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600075791
Podlaski S., Chomontowski C. (2020): Various methods of assessing sugar beet seed vigour and its impact on the germination process, field emergence and sugar yield. Sugar Tech, 22: 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-019-00754-5
Richter G.M., Qi A.M., Semenov M.A., Jaggard K.W. (2006): Modelling the variability of UK sugar beet yields under climate change and husbandry adaptations. Soil Use and Management, 22: 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2006.00018.x
Sögüt T., Aroglu H. (2004): Plant density and sowing date effects on sugar beet yield and quality. Journal of Agronomy, 3: 215–218. https://doi.org/10.3923/ja.2004.215.218
Stibbe C., Märländer B. (2002): Field emergence dynamics significance to intraspecific competition and growth efficiency in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). European Journal of Agronomy, 17: 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00005-9
Tsialtas J.T., Maslaris N. (2010): Sugar beet root shape and its relation with yield and quality. Sugar Tech, 12: 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-010-0009-5
Wyszyński Z. (2006): Variability of the number and arrangement of plants in a sugar beet canopy under environmental and agrotechnical factors. Scientia Agriculturae Bohemica, 37: 133–139.
download PDF

© 2022 Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences | Prohlášení o přístupnosti