Texas, USA 2010 - International Herbage Seed Group

yield per plantyield per plantyield per plantyield per plantFigure 1. Relationships between yield per plant (change g.pl -1 ) and (a) mature seeds per panicle(change seeds.pan -1 ), (b) weight of 1000 seeds (change g.1000 seed -1 ), (c) number of panicles perplant (change pan.pl -1 ), and (d) proportion of empty seeds, in 5 populations of Panicumcoloratum var. makarikariensis at Rafaela, Argentina in 2009 in 2009. Phe = total phenotypiccorrelation coefficient; Dir = direct effect.-a--b-120Phe = 0.89**120Phe = 0.19100Dir = 0.93100Dir = -0.15808060604040202000 200 400 600 800mature seeds per panicle00.0 0.5 1.0 1.5weight of 1000 seedsPhe = 0.35-c-120-d-120Phe = -0.58**100Dir = 0.34100Dir = -0.06808060604040202000 50 100 150 200 250panicles per plant00.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00proportion of empty seeds per panicleCorrelations were partitioned into direct and indirect effects through path coefficient analysis.Number of mature seeds per panicle had the greatest positive effect on seed yield per plant (Fig.1a) while weight of 1000 seeds and number of inflorescences per plant were negligible (Fig 1b,1c), and the proportion of empty seeds per panicle was negative but not significant. The indirecteffects were not significant (P > 0.10) for all variables analysed. The ranking of populations inthe total number of seeds produced per panicleTable 2) (the original text is fine) was differentthan the ranking of population for the number of mature seeds produced per panicle (Table 1),which means that populations showed differences in the proportion of empty (immature) seedsproduced (Table 2, Fig. 1d).155