University of Sulaimani College of Agriculture Field Crops Department

THE ROLE OF FLAG LEAF BLADE AND AWNS ON GROWTH AND YIELD OF SOME BREAD WHEAT VARIETIES UNDER DIFFERENT SEED RATES A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY OF SULAIMANI IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHYLOSOPHY

IN AGRICULTURE (Crop Science / Cereal Crops)

By

Shang Haseeb Abdulqader Noori B.Sc. - Field Crops 1999 M.Sc. - Forage Crops 2006

Supervised by: Dr. Aumeed N. M. Ameen Professor September 2010 A.D

Dr. Sherwan Ismail Towfiq Assistant Professor Razbar 2710 K.

‫بشه اهلل الرمحن الرحيه‬

‫َبّاا‬ ‫دأ‬ ‫َالَ َت ِز َرعُونَ سَ ِبعَ سِنِنيَ َ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫َرُهُُ فِاس سُانبُِِإِ َّالاا‬ ‫َا َ‬ ‫َنَا حَصَدتُّهِ ف‬ ‫ف‬

‫قَِِيِّا مِِّنَّا َت ِأكُُِونَ ﴿‪﴾٧٤‬‬

‫صدق اهلل العظيه‬ ‫سورة يوسف‪ /‬اآلية ( ‪) 74‬‬

Dedicated to: My mother and father, the candles that burn to lit my life, The Soul of my brothers Shkoo and Dasn My dear love and faithful husband Kawa, My lovely daughter Sham, The faithful brothers Rastgo My sisters Shokh and Shaee, All the people interested in science and knowledge…

Shang

Acknowledgments First of all, I am grateful to ALLAH for giving me the momentum to continue the success in this study. I would like to express my deep sincere thanks and gratitude to my supervisor, Assist. Professor Dr. Shirwan I. Tawfiq for his support and his wide knowledge and logical way of thinking which have been of great value for me, and also I would like to express my profound and cordial gratitude to the memory of professor Dr. Aumeed N. M. Amen who previously supervised me. I like to express my special thanks and deep respect to the Dean of the college of Agriculture Dr. Aram A. Muhammad. I would like to thank the Head of the Department of Crop Science, Dr. Abdulsalam Abdulrahman Rasool for his help and assistance. I would like to Thank Mr. Dana Azad Abdulkhaliq for his support and help in statistical analyses. My thanks to official staff of Qlyasan Agricultural Research Station, especially Mr. Sabah F. Abdulla for their helping and providing facilities during the implementation of the project. Special thanks to my husband Kawa for his handful help and assistance during my study. I wish to express my warm and sincere thanks to my family, especially my sister Shaee, my brother Rastgo, and his wife. Thanks and appreciations are also extended to Mr.

Hameed, Hama, Sarkhel, Awara, teeta, Shna, Balla, Trefa, and Sozear. Also thanks to anyone I forgot to mention their names that supported me during the time of the study.

SHANG

SUMMERY This investigation was conducted during the growing season of 2009-2010, at two different locations

(Qlyasan

Agriculture Research Station, College of

Agriculture- University of Sulaimani, and farm land in Dukan), using split-split plots design. Four common wheat varieties of different origins (Araz, Tamuz, Rabea'a, and Cham-4) were used and implemented in the main plots which conducted in completely randomized block design within four replicate. Four seeding rates of (120, 160, 200, and 240) kg/ ha implemented in the sub-plots as the second factor, while four removal treatments as the third factor were implemented in the sub-sub plots which were (control, flag leaf blade removal, awns removal, and flag leaf blade + awns removal). Growth characteristics such as (number of days to 50% anthesis, number of days to physiological maturity, grain filling stage period, number of tillers/ m2, and plant height) were recorded, and kernel yield with some of its components were obtained such as (number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, average spike length, number of spikelets/ spike, number of kernels/ spike, kernels weight/ spike, 1000kernels weight, and kernel yield). Data on biological yield, and harvest index were also recorded. The results of this study as the average of both locations can be summarized as follows: highly significant differences among varieties due to growth

characteristics were fluctuated. Araz variety exhibited maximum number of tillers per square meter, while Tamuz variety showed the longest period for grain filling stage, but Rabea'a variety showed maximum value for plant height, while Cham-4 spent maximum period to 50% anthesis, and physiological maturity. Regarding the effect of seeding rates on growth characteristics, it was found that number of tillers/ m2, and plant height responded highly significantly to this effect, using the seed rates 200 kg/ ha produced maximum plant height, while 240 kg/ ha exhibited maximum number of tillers per square meter.

The effect of removal treatments on growth characteristics was highly significant only on number of tillers per square meter, and the treatment of control exhibited maximum number of tillers per square meter, while minimum tillers were showed by flag leaf blade removal. The results of kernel yield and its components with biological yield, and harvest index can be summarized as the average of both locations as follows: the effect of varieties on these characteristics was highly significant, Araz variety showed maximum values for the characteristics: number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, average spike length, and harvest index. Tamuz variety exhibited maximum number of spikelets/ spike, and kernel number/ spike, while Rabea'a variety showed maximum values for the characteristics: kernels weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, and biological yield. However, Tamuz variety produced minimum values for the characteristics; spike weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, biological yield, and harvest index. The effect of seeding rates on yield characteristics and its components as the average of both locations was highly significant on number of spike / m2, spike weight/ m2, kernel yield, and biological yield only, using the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha exhibited maximum values for these characteristics, while 120

kg/ ha seeding rate showed minimum values in number of spikes / m2, kernel yield, and biological yield. Regarding the effect of removal treatments on yield characteristics, and its components as the average of both locations, the characteristics, number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, and biological yield responded highly significant to this effect, while the characteristics number of spikelets/ spike, responded significantly, and the characteristics average spike length, number of kernels/ spike, and harvest index responded non significantly, the treatment of control produced maximum values in these characteristics, while the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns showed minimum values in spike weight/ m2, kernels weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, and kernel yield

The correlation coefficient between kernel yield and other characteristics as the average of both locations was found to be positive and highly significant with spike weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, biological yield, and harvest index, but it was positive and significant with number of spikes/ m2.

List of Contents Subject

Page No.

INTRODUCTION LITRATURE REVIEW

1 4

Background Variety Plant population Flag leaf Awns Correlation coefficients among the characteristics

4 8 14 18 28 31

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Studied characteristics A. Growth characteristics B. Yield and its components C. Correlation coefficients among the characteristics

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCES APPENDICES

37 44 44 44 45

46 129 −131 132 VIII

List of Tables Table No.

Title

Page No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

The meteorological data of both locations Physical & chemical properties of soil in both locations ANOVA table for each location Combined- ANOVA table across locations Means of growth characteristics in wheat varieties The effect of seeding rates on growth characteristics The effect of removal treatments on growth characteristics

39 40 41 42 - 43 48 50 51

8

The interaction effect of varieties and seeding rates on growth characteristics

54

9

The interaction effect of varieties and removal treatments on growth characteristics

56

10

The interaction effect of seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics

58

11 A

The interaction effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics at Qlyasan location

61 - 62

11 B

The interaction effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics at Dukan location

63 - 64

11C

The interaction effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics in the average of both locations

65 – 66

12 13 14 15

The effect of locations on growth characteristics Means of kernel yield and its components in wheat varieties The effect of seeding rates on kernel yield and its components The effect of removal treatments on kernel yield and its components

16

The interaction effect of varieties and seeding rates on kernel yield and its components

17 18 19 A 19 B 19C 20 21 22 23

67 73 78 84 88 - 89

The interaction effect of varieties and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components The interaction effect of seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components The interaction effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components at Qlyasan location The interaction effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components at Dukan location The interaction effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components in the average of both locations The effect of locations on yield and its components Correlation coefficients among the characteristics at Qlyasan location Correlation coefficients among the characteristics at Dukan location Correlation coefficients among the characteristic in the average of both locations

94 – 95 99 - 100 106 - 107 108 - 109 110 – 111 113 126 127 128

List of Figures Figure No. 1

Title

Diagram of the wheat plant showing plant part.

Page No.

20

List of Appendices Appendix No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Title Mean squares of variance Analysis for growth characteristics at Qlyasan and Dukan locations Combined – ANOVA table for growth characteristics across locations Mean square of variance analysis for kernel yield and its components at Qlyasan location Mean square of variance analysis for kernel yield and its components at Dukan location Combined – ANOVA table for kernel yield and its components across locations Calculated ( t ) estimated for the correlation coefficients among the characteristics at Qlyasan location Calculated ( t ) estimated for the correlation coefficients among the characteristics at Dukan location Calculated ( t ) estimated for the correlation coefficients among the characteristics in the average of both locations

Page No. VIII IX X XI XII-XIII XIV XV XVI

INTRODUCTION It is forecasted that by 2020 the world will need to produce 760 million tons of wheat per year [1]. This is 27% more than world production in 1997, and indicates that demand for wheat will grow by 1.3% per year worldwide and by more than 1.5% per year in developing countries [2]. World wheat production is projected to reach a record of 688 million tons in 2008-2009, marking a 13% increase over the previous year on the back higher estimated produce in Australia, a UK based trade body [3]. Global production of wheat for 2009 is forecasted at 673.9 million tons, whereas global consumption at 646 million tons, according to the USDA Canada’s production forecast is increased 2.5 million tons to 26.5 million in December, which is still 2 million lower than in 2008/09 [4]. World wheat production is expected to rebound to record high levels during 2008 in view of improved weather conditions in some major wheat producing regions of the globe, according to projections made by the Canadian Wheat Board [5]. In 2008 Gulf prices for wheat were down slightly from prices in 2007, while prices for soybeans, and corn were much higher, indicating the incentives to plant wheat for the 2009-2010 crop have diminished compared to a year ago [6]. The International Grains Council and Rabobank Group, a specialist in food and agribusiness banking, forecasted that the prospect of a record world wheat harvest in 2008/09 could help to reduce wheat prices on global markets [7]. Wheat yield is the complex trait, depending on genetic and environmental factors and their interaction. Actually yield is a result of value of yield components

as well: height of plant, number of productive tillers, number of spikelets/ spike, number of kernel/ spike, kernel mass/ spike, number of spikes/ m2, thousand kernel mass and others. Environmental factors as well levels of water, fertilizer, pesticide application play important roles in wheat yield increasing [8 and 9]. Cereal growers are faced with a greater choice of new cultivars both from the public and private sectors, often with little relevant information available on their performance in the local environment [10]. There is no consistent relationship between seed rate and yield due to variation in establishment. However, there is a strong relationship between spring plant population and crop performance [11]. The 'optimum' plant population (at maximum kernel yield) varied over 30- 220 plants/ m2, depending on season and cultivar. In general, variation in the 'optimum' population was greater between seasons for a given cultivar than between cultivars within seasons [12 and13]. Any varietal differences in tillering observed at normal plant populations largely disappeared at lower densities, when there was less competition between plants. Variety therefore has no effect on optimum plant population [14]. No yield loss was apparent by lowering plant population to 125 plants/ m2. At the standard sowing rate for the district (90-110 kg/ ha) a plant population of 180250 plants/ m2 would be expected. The advantage of lower plant population is that initial moisture and nutrient reserves/ application last longer [15]. Optimal plant densities for crops depend on the crop type, the intended end use for the crop, the region and the growing conditions. Target plant densities are generally lower in areas of limited rainfall than in areas with plentiful growing season moisture [16]. In wheat the leaves particularly flag leaves have been considered to be the key organs contributing to higher yields, whereas awns have been considered subsidiary organs. Compared with extensive investigations on the assimilation contribution of leaves, the photosynthetic characteristics of awns have not been well studied [17].

Contribution to yield of cereals has traditionally been studied using yield and various yield components, thus neglecting the role of other organs such as ear awns and flag leaf. Here, it is necessary to study the effects of genotypes on the photosynthetic activity of the flag leaf blade and the ear awns of spring wheat. The parameters related to the photosynthetic activity were analyzed in relation to the kernel yield and various yield components at maturity. [18]. The effect of awns and 5 top leaf blades on kernel yield of wheat grown under different environments were determined. Yields were higher in the awned crops than in the awn clipped crops under all environments. Flag leaf made the greatest contribution to yield. The contribution of the lower blades decreased in the descending order, decrease was the greatest in the normal-sown crop [19]. The awn is important to kernel filling and yield in cereals. Some of the techniques used to study the function of the awn in kernel development include comparison of lines differing in awnless [20]. The goal of this study was to evaluate: 1- The role of flag leaf and awns of some bread wheat varieties on growth and yield. 2- The effect of different plant populations on the growth and yield of some bread wheat varieties. 3- The combination between the above factors on growth and yield. 4- The effect of locations. 5- To find the best seeding rates for each variety. 6- Participation of flag leaf, and awns in kernel yield.

LITERATURE REVIEW

LITERATURE REVIEW Historical Background: Wheat is a widely adapted crop. It is grown from temperate, irrigated to dry and high-rainfall areas and from warm, humid to dry, cold environments. Undoubtedly, this wide adaptation has been possible due to the complex nature of the plant's genome, which provides great plasticity to the crop. Wheat is a C3 plant and as such it thrives in cool environments. Much has been written about its physiology, growth and development, which at present is reasonably well understood [21]. Wheat has been cultivated domestically at least since 9,000 B.C. and probably earlier. Domesticated Einkorn wheat at Nevali Cori 40 miles northwest of Gobekli Tepe in Turkey has been dated to 9,000 B.C. [22]. Wheat first reached North America with Spanish missions in the 16th Century, but North America’s role as a major exporter of kernel dates from the colonization of the prairies in the 1870s. As kernel exports from Russia ceased in the First World War, kernel production in Kansas was doubled. Worldwide, bread wheat has proved well adapted to modern industrial baking, and has displaced many of the other wheat, barley, and rye species that were once commonly used for bread making, particularly in Europe [23]. Wheat has accompanied human since remote times (as far back as 3000 to 4000 B.C.) in their evolution and development, evolving itself (in part by nature and in part by manipulation) from its primitive form (emmer wheat) into the presently cultivated species. The more important modern wheat species are hexaploid bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and tetraploid durum wheat (T. turgidum L. var. durum), which are different from one another in genomic makeup, in kernel composition and in food end-use quality attributes. Except for the very

warm tropics, wheat adapts to all diverse climatic conditions prevailing in agricultural lands and, therefore, it is harvested in the world all year around. Its wide adaptation to diverse environmental conditions, along with its unique characteristic of possessing a viscoelastic storage protein complex called gluten, are the main factors making wheat the most important food crop in the world [24]. The domestication of diploid and tetraploid wheat is thought to have occurred in the fertile crescent of the Middle East. Domestication of the diploid and tetraploid wheat is thought to have occurred at least nine thousand years ago with the hybridization event producing hexaploid wheat occurring more than six thousand years ago [25 and 26] . Wild wheats and landraces, especially material adapted to microhabitats, are rapidly disappearing because of the introduction of agronomically superior new cultivars. Severe overgrazing by huge flocks of sheep and goats in the Near East and Central Asia can, in a very few years, wipe out late-flowering Aegilops and Triticum species in preference to earlier flowering, wild annual barley, perennial barley (Hordeum bulbosum) and wild oats, which are less affected by animal grazing. Moreover, the direct wild ancestors of cultivated wheats, namely A. speltoides, T. urartu, T. monococcum ssp. aegilopides, T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides, and T. timopheevii spp. Armeniacum, are especially susceptible to overgrazing and to increased cultivation of previously seasonal grasslands. There is a need to preserve as much of the existing genetic variation as possible for future breeders and consumers to ensure availability of genes for yield and tolerance to environmental and biological stresses [27]. The cultivation of wheat (Triticum spp.) reaches far back into history. Wheat was one of the first domesticated food crops and for 8000 years has been the basic staple food of the major civilizations of Europe, West Asia and North Africa. Today, wheat is grown on more land area than any other commercial crop and continues to be the most important food kernel

source for human. Its production leads all crops, including rice, maize, and potatoes [28]. Although the crop is most successful between the latitudes of 30° and 60° N and 27° and 40° S [29], wheat can be grown beyond these limits, from within the Arctic Circle to higher elevations near the equator. Development research by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) during the past two decades [30] has shown that wheat production in much warmer areas is technologically feasible. In altitude, the crop is grown from sea level to more than 3000 masl, and it has been reported at 4570 masl in Tibet [31]. However evidence for the exploitation of wild barley has been dated to 23,000 B.C. and some say this is also true of pre-domesticated wheat [32]. Wheat genetics is more complicated than that of most other domesticated species. Some wheat species are diploid, with two sets of chromosomes, but many are stable polyploids, with four sets of chromosomes (tetraploid) or six (hexaploid) [33]. It is clear that any increase in the yield potential of wheat will come from breeding. Progress in breeding for yield potential is more likely to occur if specific characteristics are targetted as has occurred in kernel quality improvement and disease resistance breeding. Targetting yield potential improvement requires an understanding of the physiological processes that may be genetically modified to improve yield. Some of these are already being exploited, such as flowering time to improve adaptation to particular regions and plant height, which greatly influences yield potential [21]. Genetic resources are fundamental to sustaining global wheat production now and in the future. They embody a wide range of genetic diversity that is critical to enhancing and maintaining the yield potential of wheat, for they provide new sources of resistance and tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses. Modern high-yielding wheat cultivars are an assembly of genes or gene combinations pyramided by breeders using, in most cases, well-adapted cultivars from their regions. International agriculture research has enormously expanded the

availability of widely adapted germplasm that is genetically diverse (i.e. descended from more sources). However, introgression of additional variation found in genetic resources is necessary to increase yield stability and further improve wheat [27]. In traditional agricultural systems, wheat populations often consist of landraces, informal farmer maintained populations that often maintain high levels of morphological diversity. Although landraces of wheat are no longer grown in Europe and North America, they continue to be important elsewhere. The origins of formal wheat breeding lie in the nineteenth century, when single line varieties were created through selection of seed from a single plant noted to have desired properties. Modern wheat breeding developed in the first years of the twentieth century and was closely linked to the development of Mendelian genetics. The standard method of breeding inbred wheat cultivars is by crossing two lines using hand emasculations, then selfing or inbreeding the progeny. Selections are identified (shown to have the genes responsible for the varietal differences) ten or more generations before release as a variety or cultivar [34]. The four wild species of wheat, along with the domesticated varieties einkorn, emmer and spelt have hulls [35, 36 and 37]. This more primitive morphology (in evolutionary terms) consists of toughened glumes that tightly enclose the kernels and (in domesticated wheats) a semi-brittle rachis that breaks easily on threshing. The result is that when threshed, the wheat ear breaks up into spikelets. To obtain the grain, further processing, such as milling or pounding, is needed to remove the hulls or husks. In contrast, in free threshing (or naked) forms such as durum wheat and common wheat, the glumes are fragile and the rachis tough. On threshing, the chaff breaks up, releasing the kernels. Hulled wheats are often stored as spikelets because the toughened glumes give good protection against pests of stored kernel [35]. Wheat in the form of bread provides more nutrients to the world population than any other single food source. Bread is particularly important as source of

carbohydrates, proteins and vitamins B, and E [38]. Bread consumption particularly that of breads prepared with whole kernel flours and with multigrain flours tends to increase in developed countries [39, 40 and 41]. This is mainly due to an increase in a nutritionally conscious population that wants to reduce the consumption of simple carbohydrates, fat and cholesterol while increasing the consumption of complex carbohydrates, dietary fiber and plant proteins [40]. According to various researchers [42, 43, 44 and 45], trends in bread consumption in developing countries very depending on factors such as:  degree of industry privatization and extent of government controls in wheat trading;  degree of the change from a more rural to a more urban population, which is accompanied by changes in food habits and an increase in the preference for processed, convenience foods; and  rate of adoption of food habits of developed countries and rate of the income of the individuals. The above is particularly true in China and Southeast Asia, and in Middle Eastern countries [42, 43, 44 and 45]. Bread consumption in sub-Saharan Africa is low and varies widely from country to country. In most parts of sub-Saharan Africa, the main sources of nutrients for the population (mainly rural) are maize, sorghum, and starchy roots [24].

Variety: After further investigation into factors that enable the widening of the sowing window, it should be possible to group cultivars according to response categories and make suggestions for managing seasonal risk with current cultivars [10]. Varieties are chosen on a number of characteristics including climate (rainfall, elevation, and temperature), maturity, soil type (especially acidity), kernel quality, tolerance to diseases, and climate risks (e.g. per harvest sprouting tolerance of

kernel), straw strength, head type (breaded, non- breaded), and grazing and kernel yield ability. No variety exhibits all the desirable attributes and choice depends on balancing the various risk factors. Some important factors to consider when choosing a variety include; maturity, wet weather tolerance of grain, bearded verse non- bearded, and other variety features. Many variety attributes help determine which one best suits a given environment. For example, in many upper slopes and tableland areas barley yellow dwarf virus can be devastating. Varieties with tolerance and resistance are being released to overcome this disease. There is considerable variety variability to factors such as soil acidity, kernel quality, herbicide tolerance, and relative performance [46]. The adoption of modern varieties and the increased use of irrigation and fertilizers during Green Revolution dramatically increased crop yields allover the world [47 and 48]. The wheat plant is an annual, probably derived from perennial; the ancestry of and precise distinctions between species are no longer always clear. For it's early growth wheat thrives best in cool weather. Among the more ancient, and now less frequently cultivated, species are einkorn (T. monococcum), emmer (T. dicoccum), and spelt (T. spelta). Modern wheat varieties are usually classified as winter wheats (fall-planted and unusually winter hardy for kernel crops) and spring wheats. Approximately three fourths of the wheat grown in the United States is winter wheat [49]. As wheat yields have increased, roughly half of that increase has been due to improved varieties with the remaining half due to management. With environmental conditions so unpredictable and variable, proper variety selection can make the difference between profit and loss in many years, so it deserves careful attention each year. Obviously, the primary objective is to pick varieties that will give high per-acre yields and the highest possible net income, but this is not a simple matter. Varieties do differ in kernel yield potential. During the past 20 years, yields have increased approximately one-half bushel per acre per year, due to the release of new improved varieties. Consider choosing new released varieties on

a regular basis, perhaps every 3 to 4 years, to take advantage of the higher yield potential of new varieties [50]. Triticum aestivum L. em Thell. is recorded in the National Center for Biotechnology Information Taxonomy Browser as belonging to the family poaceae (BEP clade), subfamily pooideae and tribe Triticeae. It has the recorded synonyms Triticum aestivum L., Triticum vulgare, Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum and the common names, Wheat, bread wheat and common wheat (NCBI Taxonomy Browser). The scientific and common names which will be used throughout this document are defined in the preamble. Bread wheat is an allohexaploid (6x), which regularly forms 21 pairs of chromosomes (2n=42) during meiosis. These chromosomes are subdivided into 3 closely related (homoeologous) groups of chromosomes, the A, B, and D genomes. Each of these homoeologous groups normally contains 7 pairs of chromosomes (AABBDD) [51]. It was established that each chromosomes in hexaploid wheat has a homologue in each of the other 2 genomes. This homology in hexaploid wheat also in tetraploid wheat (AABB) allows a range of chromosomal abnormalities (aneuploidy) to survive which cannot survive in diploid species such as barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) [52]. The effect of aneuploidy for each wheat chromosome was described, Including the nullisomics, monosomics, telocentrics and isochromosomes. An important aspect of wheat aneuploidy is the study of the evolutionary basis of bread wheat [53]. At present it is understood that hexaploid wheat is the product of two hybridization events. In the first hybridization event, the A genome progenitor combined with the B genome progenitor to form a primitive tetraploid wheat (2n=28, AABB). This hybrid occurred in the cytoplasm of the B genome. The second event involved hybridization between the tetraploid (AABB) form and D genome progenitor [54] to form the basic hexaploid configuration; AABBDD, again in the B genome cytoplasm [55].

Yield is based on the genetic potential and environmental conditions in which the crop is grown. Therefore, by diversify the genetic pool that is planted, a grower will hedge against crop failure. Yield data and yield stability characteristics can be attained from the winter wheat variety trail results. Select those varieties that perform well not only in your area but across experimental sites and years. This will increase the likelihood that given next years environment (which you cannot control) the variety you selected will perform well. Select a variety that has the specific insect and disease resistance characteristics that fit your regional needs. By selecting the appropriate resistant varieties, crop yield loss may be either reduced or avoided without the need of pesticides. Careful management of resistant cultivars, though crop and variety rotation is required to ensure that these characteristics are not lost. Crop height and lodging potential are also important varietal characteristics that may be affected based on cropping system. If the wheat crop is intended for kernel only, it may be important to select a variety that is short in stature and has a low potential for lodging. This may decrease yield loss due to crop spoilage and harvest loss as well as increase harvest rate. However, if the wheat crop is to be used as silage or to be harvested as both kernel and straw then selecting a taller variety may be warranted [56]. The Variety strengths appear through the selection and adaptation process when the variety grows in the field. A heritage plant has not conceived in a lab, but was selected in the field, probably by farmers, establishing a strong (people, plant, and place) relationship [57]. It was explained "Wheat producers are also required to sign a declaration at each licensed facility where they deliver, each year. By signing it, they declare that their wheat qualifies for a particular class". " To play its part, the Canadian Grain Commission The Canadian Grain Commission is the federal agency responsible for establishing and maintaining Canada's Grain quality standards is committed to notifying producer on a timely basis when wheat varieties become deregistered, in order to help them make informed seeding

choices." Therefore, the Canadian Grain Commission advises that the following wheat varieties belonging to the Canada Prairie Spring White (CPSW) class will be deregistered effective April 28, 2011: (Snowhite 475, and Snowhite 476). This means that the snowhite 475, and snowhite 476 wheat varieties will be eligible for the top grade under the CPSW class until April 28, 2011. If wheat producer deliver either wheat variety at a licensed facility after deregistration, they will only obtain a feed wheat grade for their delivery. All registered varieties of western Canadian wheat belong to a specific class. Varieties and classes are recorded in the Canadian Grain Commission’s variety designation lists. If a wheat variety does not appear on a list, it will be graded at the elevator as feed wheat or the lowest grade of amber durum. To find out if their wheat varieties are listed, wheat producer can check the variety designation lists on the Canadian Grain Commission’s. Its programs result in shipments of kernel that consistently meet contract specifications for quality, safety and quantity. The Canadian Grain Commission regulates the grain industry to protect producers’ rights and ensure the integrity of grain transactions [58]. It is concluded that seed storage protein profiles could be useful markers in the studies of genetic diversity and classification of adapted cultivars, thereby improving the efficiency of wheat breeding programs in cultivar development especially in a developing country like Pakistan [59]. Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) seed-storage proteins represent an important source of food and energy, being also involved in the determination of bread-making quality [60]. Wheat varieties are qualified to different classes, which exhibit different applications and differ in quantity and quality of proteins, mainly gluten. Gluten, comprising roughly 78 to 85% of total wheat endosperm protein, is a very large complex composed mainly of polymeric (multiple poly peptides chains) and monomeric (single chain poly peptides) proteins known as glutenins, and gliadins respectively [61]. Wheat producer choosing a dual purpose management system have greater flexibility and additional economic advantages compared with those choosing to

grow wheat as forage only or kernel only crop [62], but they need to follow system specific management practices to optimize returns. Compared to kernels, only wheat, dual purpose wheat should be planted earlier [63] and be seeded more densety [64]. Introduction of winter wheat cultivars with good forage and kernel production in such areas could provide alternative ways to meet daily requirement of livestock. Wheat hay and forage could provide valuable winter and early spring supplementation for livestock during winter as other pastures and hay are low in quality as well as quantity at that time [65]. Upon release of a new variety, a breeder will make available a small quality of seed stock that is very pure and represents the variety. This stock is referred to as parental material and forms the basis of any future maintenance and seed multiplication of the variety [66]. New improved varieties developed by NARSs – National Agricultural Research Systems should be multiplied and made available to farmers in the shortest possible time to realize the benefits of investments in agricultural research. Appropriate seed production techniques coupled with strict quality control measures ensure that varietal purity and identity is maintained, which is the cornerstone of the entire seed programme. The rate at which the variety is multiplied and accessed restricts the availability of seed and its adoption and rapid diffusion through formal or informal channels. New varieties, after they enter commercial production, may lose their genetic potential or become susceptible to pests over time, which requires their replacement. Moreover, the varieties may also be exposed to genetic, mechanical and pathological contamination during the seed multiplication process. There is a practical need to limit the number of generations that the seed is multiplied after breeder seed [67]. Recommended wheat varieties for 2010 would include Overland, Hallam, Millennium, Wahoo, PostRock, Santa Fe, Armour, and Art. These are varieties with a good yield record in university of Nebraska trails and which have a disease, maturity and hardiness package acceptable in Southeast Nebraska. Planting treated

certified seed is the best option. If wheat seed is kept over make sure it is cleaned and treated a head of planting [68].

Plant population: An economic optimum plant population can be determined from trails. Above the economic optimum seed costs increased more than the income gained from higher yield. This economic optimum can be surprisingly low. Profitability generally falls more when plant populations are below optimum than when they are above it. If plant population falls below the economic optimum yields fall significantly, especially if grass weed infestation is serious. Early drilling is not advised, certainly not at very low seed rates, if weeds are expected to be a major problem. If plant population is above the economic optimum extra seed cost is incurred and specific weight may be reduced. At higher populations lodging risk is also increased which may cause yields to fall significantly [11]. The optimum population of plants per unit area within a field depends on several factors. These include: plant variety, soil depth, stored and growing season moisture (climatic conditions), weed and disease problems and planting date. The planting rate for fall seeded cereals should be selected to achieve a plant population within the optimum range for a particular field. The goal of selecting a seeding rate is to establish the correct plant population per unit area for the yield potential of a particular field. Yield potential relates closely to precipitation but is also influenced by soil and environmental conditions. The head population must be matched to the yield potential for a field to obtain a plant population that will produce the correct number of heads per square foot for a particular date [69]. Transgenic wheat is currently being field tested with the intent of eventual commercialization. The development of wheat genotypes with novel traits has raised concerns regarding the presence of volunteer wheat populations and the role they may play in facilitating transgene movement [70]. Research and field

experience indicate that an optimal crop population plays a fundamental role in optimising crop yield and kernel quality, and ultimately profitability, particularly in dryland agricultural environments [71]. The yields of cereals increase as the spacing between rows is decreased. On average 8% increase in wheat yield for each 9 cm decrease in row spacing from 54 cm to 9 cm was observed in field experiments in Western Australia [72]. Whereas, no decrease in yield was experienced at wide row spacing up to 36 cm [73]. It was also hypothesized that an interaction between seeding rates and cultivars would occur for yield components because of previous research where the seeding rate × cultivar interaction occurred for yield. Wheat plants can adjust other yield components to compensate when a yield component is reduced because of environmental or other factors. Still, results of this study indicate that spike density cannot be maximized when hard red spring wheat (HRSW) is established at low plant populations in the Great Plains [74]. Two basic properties of the plant population which constitutes a crop affect the yield of that crop. One is the number of plants per unit area of ground, that is plant density, and the other is the pattern of spacing of the plants over the ground. Let us consider first the more important of these two factors, namely plant density, and its effect on yield [75]. The desired plant population for winter wheat is 1.2 to 1.5 million per acre (28 to 34 plants/ sq ft). This requires a seeding rate between 90 and 120 pounds per acre. The seeding rate should be based on the number of seeds per acre. When estimating the appropriate seeding rate for various drill row spacing, seeding rates are adequate if you are seeding under ideal conditions; increase these rates when seeding under poor conditions such as a cloddy seedbed or a delayed planting date. When seeding later than the suggested dates, increase the seeding rate 30 percent [76]. It was found that time from crop sowing to first flower, peak flowering, and flowering cessation varied significantly among genotypes. Increasing crop plant population density resulted in accelerated crop flowering for all genotypes, but had

little effect on flowering synchrony. Although not always significant, the time interval from sowing to 5, 50, and 95% flowering, as well as the flowering duration of the volunteer population, were also greater at low crop plant population densities [77]. When planting is done on time, the planting goal is to have 22 to 25 seeding per square foot. This requires planting 30 to 35 high-quality seeds that have at least 90 percent germination. Wheat seed size can vary by up to 50 percent in size depending on variety, production season, degree of cleaning, and seed treatments used. Consequently, planting wheat based on bushels per acre can result in substantial over- or under seeding, which is why this practice is not recommended. Planting by bushels per acre will cost the producer either in unnecessary seed or lost yield. The best approach is to calibrate the drill to plant the correct number of seeds per foot of row [78]. Wheat plant establishment declines as seed rates increase and lower establishment percentages should be used to produce high plant populations in the field. However, the expected establishment percentages may also need to take into account the time of sowing and the impact of soil type to target specific plant densities. Further research is needed to establish the reliability of using high plant densities to control weeds which has been promoted as a valuable non-herbicide integrated weed management tool [79]. The number of plants established from a given weight of seed depends on the size of the seeds and the percentage of those seeds that are viable and can grow into established plants. The common range of wheat seed size is 25 to 50 mg and crop establishment varies between 40 and 95 percent of sown seeds depending on soil type, soil moisture, sowing depth, seed quality, diseases and insects. Considering these variables a seed rate of 100 kg/ ha could result in an established plant population that may vary up to threefold even in a drill sown crop [80]. It is suggested that when a new cultivar is released its optimum plant population should be assessed in the area for which it is recommended [81].

The effects of reducing the plant density of winter wheat on canopy formation, radiation absorption and dry matter production and partitioning were investigated. Crop densities established ranged from 19 to 338 plants/ m2. Kernel yield was maintained with large reductions in plant density. At low plant densities the relative growth rate of crop increased allowing maintenance of crop dry matter production. An 18-fold reduction in plant density led only to a six-fold reduction in green area index at the beginning of stem extension and by anthesis the difference was less than two-fold. Crops grown at low plant densities increased green area per plant through increased duration of tiller production, green area per shoot and shoot survival. Main stem leaf number, phyllochron and tiller production rate were not significantly affected by plant density. Radiation use efficiency was grater at the low plant densities [82]. Kernel yield was significantly affected by plant population with a mean reduction from 9.2 to 5.5 ton/ ha as plant number was reduced from 336 to 13/ m2. In addition, there was a significant interaction between plant density and sowing date. There was, however, no interaction between variety and plant population in terms of yield, except when lodging affected high plant populations of lodging susceptible varieties. The experiments demonstrated scope for reducing plant populations below the current target of 250-300 plants/ m2; however, the degree of reduction was dependent on sowing date. Over the three years, the average economic optimum plant density was 62 plants/ m2 for late-September, 93 plants/ m2 for mid-October, and 139 plants/ m2 for mid-November sowings. Compensation for reduced population was due to increased shoot number per plant, increased kernel number per ear and to lesser extent increased kernel size. Higher economic optimum plant densities at later sowing dates were due to reduced tiller production and hence ear number per plant. The other compensatory mechanisms were unaffected by sowing date [83]. A positive relationship between spike density and yield is often found up to fairly high densities with a slight negative relationship at very high densities [84,

85, 86, 87, 88, 89 and 90]. Spike density is a function of planting rate, seeding emergence, and tillers that produce spikes, and all environmental factors discussed above influence these processes. Other factors influencing tiller appearance and survival include plant density, environmental conditions, and cultivar differences. As a result, managing final spike number must account for the complex interplay of planting rate and date, seeding emergence, environmental conditions, time of tiller appearance, and survival of tillers to produce a spike. A planting date is delayed, generally planting rates should increase to offset less tillers appearing and surviving to produce a spike [91]. Recommended wheat seeding rates vary from one to two bushels per acre depending upon condition of the seedbed, time of seeding, quality of seed and method of seeding. The higher seeding rate of two bushels per acre is generally used. Increase the rate up to two bushels per acre (1) if seed rate broadcast, (2) when seeding is delayed until Nov. 1, or (3)when seeding are made on land heavily infested with johnsongrass or wild barley, to suppress growth of these weeds [92].

Flag leaf: Figure (1) demonstrates the wheat plant parts. The flag leaf is divided at the ligule into a cylindrical sheath and the flat blade or lamina. The sheath is tubular at the base, but nearer to the blade, it is split and the margins overlap. The lamina has a fairly well-marked midrib, along which runs the major vascular bundle of the leaf. It divides the blade into two subequal parts, each of which has a number of parallel lateral ribs or veins. Each vein marks the position of a vascular bundle, and the tissue over the bundle is raised producing a ridge so that the adaxial surface of the blade is corrugated. The abaxial surface is more or less flat. The midrib extends down into the sheath for a short distance as a pronounced ridge. The leaf blade naturally assumes a twist, and just below the tip, usually about two-thirds along the leaf, there is frequently a constriction. This constriction is produced by the

constraint upon growth produced by the closely investing ligule of the subtending leaf during development. The ligule is a thin colourless flap of tissue about 1 to 2 mm in length, which encircles the leaf or the culm above it beyond where the blade diverges. Associated with the ligule are the auricles, two small earlike projections fringed with unicellular hairs [93]. There are three main features of the anatomy of the leaf. The adaxial and abaxial epidermis of the mature leaf enclose the mesophyll, which is traversed at intervals by the vascular tissue [94]. The vascular tissue and mesophyll are organized in alternate strips of tissue running parallel with each other along the long axis of the leaf. The vascular tissue lies beneath the ridges of the lamina and the associated thickening capping the vascular bundle of the midrib, and the major veins extend from the adaxial to the abaxial epidermis [93]. In wheat, the main source of assimilates for the kernels is the flag leaf [95]. The flag leaf has two components: the blade and the sheath. Most authors usually refer only to the flag leaf blade as the total flag leaf, thus neglecting the role of the flag leaf sheath. However, morphological characteristics of the flag leaf sheath are highly correlated to shoot yield, even more than characteristics of the flag blade [96]. The role of the sheath in the final shoot yield could be of particular importance in spring crops, which develop their kernel filling period under warm and dry conditions such as those of a Mediterranean climate. This is based on three considerations. First, throughout the kernel filling period the flag leaf sheath is more protected than flag leaf blade from adverse environmental conditions. This could accelerate the senescence of the blades. Second, within the canopy it appears that the photosynthetic contribution of the upper parts of the shoot (the ear, peduncle, and flag leaf blade) is relatively less important at lower latitudes,

whereas the contribution of the flag leaf sheath increase with increasing elevation

Figure1: Diagram of the wheat plant showing plant parts [97].

of the sun [98]. Third, the flag sheath could store assimilates (produced by itself and the blade) and later transport them to the developing kernel after the initiation of flag senescence. This may be most important in crops with a short kernel filling period such as spring crops under warm conditions [99]. It was suggested the high ranking of sheathes in determining final shoot yield may be due to their functioning as photosynthetic organs during the latter part of the kernel filling stage, when the flag leaf blade is senescing [96]. Even though the characteristics and the time-course of photosynthetic gas exchange in flag leaf blades during kernel filling have been studied, much less information is available about gas exchange characteristics of sheath (especially under field conditions). Furthermore, sheaths carry out processes, other than photosynthesis, which are accompanied by a significant release of CO2. The structures of blades and sheathes differ considerably. Blade structure is adapted for higher gas exchange rates, while sheath are partially rolled, holding a segment of shoot and exposing only about one-third of their area of light and gases. Upper leaves are also major contributors of nitrogen to the kernel. Higher temperatures increase the rate of nitrogen uptake .Therefore, warm temperatures during the kernel filling period increase the nitrogen content of the grain, but also accelerate the depletion of the nitrogen reserves in the vegetative parts [100], which might accelerate leaf senescence and thus reduce photosynthesis [101]. On the other hand, warm temperatures also enhance the rate of kernel growth and shorten its duration [99]. Thus, in conditions of adequate nitrogen supply, the capacity for utilization of photosynthates by kernels may become a significant limiting factor for yield of a spring crop under Mediterranean climate. It is usually observed that nonstructural carbohydrates accumulate in the flag leaf blade and sheath, and also in the stem during the period of linear kernel growth [102 and 103]. These assimilates are either stored or respired [95]. There are indications that carbohydrate accumulation may inhibit wheat leaf photosynthesis via feedback effects [104 and 105], and that

it may also induce, or at least accelerate, leaf senescence [106]. The role of sheathes storing and later transporting assimilates to the developing kernels seems to be more important for shoot yield than that of sheathes functioning as photosynthetic organs after the onset of senescence occurs. It is suggested that accumulation of carbohydrates in leaves might somehow trigger senescence in the flag leaf blade and sheath simultaneously [107]. Several flag leaf morpho-genetic parameters contributing to the moisture stress tolerance of the wheat plant were identified [108]. The flag leaf has a lower water potential, solute potential, and turgor pressure than the lower leaves, but has a high rate of photosynthesis, nitrogen assimilation and dry matter per unit area [109]. The flag leaf has also different cellular structure than the lower leaves, the cells with the thicker cell walls, as postulated for the flag leaf, are expected to show a sharper decline in their water potential in response to a given change in water content than the cells with less rigid cell walls, as in the other leaves [110]. Therefore, a flag leaf will reach lower values of water potential faster than the other leaves as the sun rises, and it would maintain this for the whole day although the water content would not decrease much [111]. Despite lower water potential, the physiological efficiency of the flag leaf seems to be the result of its structural rather than enzymatic characteristics [109]. CO2 exchange and transpiration rate of the flag leaves of four spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivers, namely Glenlea, Neepawa, Opal, and Kolibri, were compared using infra-red gas-analysis technique. The plants were grown in a controlled environment under an 18-h photoperiod, with day and night temperatures of 20 and 15° C, respectively. The time course of the CO2-exchange rate (CER) of the flag leaf differed among cultivars. CER began to decrease rapidly some 2 weeks after ear emergence in Glenlea, Neepawa and Kolibri, but only after 4 weeks in Opal. The decline in CER of Glenlea, Neepawa and Opal was continuous throughout the period of kernel development whereas in Kolibri CER

was maintained at a constant level between the 4th an 6th weeks after ear emergence. The transpiration rates of the flag leaves of the 4 cultivars did not change markedly until 6-7 weeks after ear emergence, indicating that the reduction in CER was not primarily a response to increased stomatal resistance to the diffusion of CO2 [112]. The site of photosynthesis in plants is predominantly the green leaf, and its productivity directly depends upon the chlorophyll bearing surface area, irradiance, and the potential to utilize CO2 [113 and 114]. Although leaf is the main organ contributing to carbon budget of plant throughout life cycle, other vegetative and reproductive parts also fix carbon and contribute to plant growth. In some xerophytic deciduous plants, photosynthesis takes place in chlorophyll bearing phylloclades [115 and 116]. Presence of leaves at a certain position is very important to perform optimum photosynthesis. The leaves at the tops of the canopy usually have higher values of electron transport due to optimal absorption of photosynthetically active radiations, and Rubisco activity for assimilation of CO2 and acquisition of nutrients [117 and 118]. The lower leaves are at a disadvantage due to unavailability of light as a sole source [119]. For example, second, third, and lower leaves of wheat exhibit much reduced photosynthesis compared with the flag leaf lamina, sheath, and stem internode [120]. The rate of photosynthesis declines steadily when the leaves become aged or senesced [121 and 122]. A comparison of leaves of different ages manifests a significant decrease in the 14CO2 photosynthates [120]. It was found that younger leaves could not become light-saturated at 1800  mol/cm2/sec. While older ones were about 90% light-saturated at 600  mol/cm2/sec., indicating that leaf age, and not light intensity, determines the photosynthetic rate [123]. If the sink organs regulate the metabolic activity of the source organs through the transmission of a signal and that signal is chemical in nature, then it should be present among the substances coming out of the panicle. When flag leaf respiration and photosynthesis of wheat were measured with an infrared gas analyzer after feeding

the flag leaves with the diffusate coming out of the panicle, it was observed that while respiration was unaffected, photosynthesis was sharply inhibited; the inhibition decreased with increasing age of the panicle [124]. Kernel filling in durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. var durum) is supported by transient photosynthesis and the translocation of water soluble carbohydrates accumulated prior to anthesis. The flag leaf is considered to be a primary source of assimilates for kernel filling and kernel yield due to its short distance to the spike and the fact that it stays green for longer than the rest of the leaves. Positive correlations have been found between flag leaf size and yield [125], between leaf area duration (LAD) and kernel weight, and between LAD and kernel filling duration [126]. Flag leaf removal significantly reduced final kernel weight, and maximum rate of kernel filling of Italian, and Spanish varieties, but it had no effect on kernel filling duration. Reduction in final kernel weight due to flag leaf blade removal were larger in modern than in old varieties, suggesting that the contribution of the flag leaf blade to kernel filling increased over time. The most significant changes on flag leaf attributes of Italian varieties were recorded for chlorophyll content and leaf area duration (LAD), which increased 9.1%, and 3.8% respectively. According to a stepwise regression analysis, the increase on the effect of flag leaf blade removal on final kernel weight was mostly explained by the enlargement of the flag leaf area duration in Italian varieties (R2= 0.59). Longer green flag leaf area duration has been related with the ability to maintain yield under drought [127], suggesting that Italian breeders enlarged LAD as a mechanism to increase durum wheat adaptation to Mediterranean conditions. In Spanish germplasm flag leaf length, area and weight were drastically reduced from old to modern varieties by 22%, 32% and 30%, respectively, while leaf area duration increased by 13%. Changes on the effect of flag leaf removal to final kernel weight were mostly explained by the reduction of flag leaf length, according to the stepwise regression analysis (R2= 0.61). Changes in the flag leaf contribution

to kernel filling in the Spanish germplasm may be consequence of the introduction of the Rht-B1 dwarfing gene during the 1970’s [128]. The contrasting strategies followed to improve durum wheat yield in Italy and Spain may have originated the differences between the attributes, explaining the increase on the flag leaf contribution to kernel filling [129]. Photosynthetic activity of flag leaf in monocots is always crucial that contributes from 50% to 94% [130 and 131] to kernel filling. However, towards senescence, the tendency decreases considerably, and any extra nitrogen supplied to kernel is by the degradation of proteins mainly Rubisco [132]. Like lamina, flag leaf sheath also participates in the kernel filling. It photosynthesizes when green but the CO2 uptake rate is one-third that of the leaf [133 and 134]. It stores assimilates (usually nonstructural carbohydrates) during active periods and transfers them to kernel during senescence [135 and 136]. The most important photosynthesis acceptor-leaf areas vary among cultivation measures and it is limited factor for creating exact growth models in common winter wheat [137]. Improved kernel yield is the ultimate aim for cereal breeders. Yield increase may be effectively tackled on the basis of the performance of yield components and other closely associated characteristics [138]. The leaves, being the site of photosynthetic activity, appear to have an obvious relationship to the plant’s kernel yield ability. Compared to other leaves, the flag leaf contributes the most photo synthetic assimilates in wheat; therefore, it assumes the greatest importance in terms of kernel yield [139]. The flag leaf makes a major contribution towards the kernel yield of cereals. Physiological studies of wheat have indicated the flag leaf contribution towards kernel weight accounts for 41%- 43% of dry matter in the kernel at maturity and is the major photosynthetic site during the kernel filling stage [140, 141 and 142]. Wheat kernel yield is the end product of the interaction of a large number of physiological and biochemical process in the plants and,

therefore, it is genetically complex. Since the flag leaf plays a predominant role, its size is likely to be important. Leaves, being the major site of photosynthetic activity, appear to have an obvious relationship with the plant kernel yield ability. As mentioned, flag leaf area can be an indicator of kernel yield in wheat [143]. Flag leaf is of utmost importance in cereals like wheat, because it provides the maximum amount of photosynthesis assimilates to be stored in the kernels. A greater flag leaf area will eventually help to increase photosynthetic efficiency by increasing the production of photosynthesis, which is then translocated into kernels increasing their weight. Therefore, flag leaf area has a direct relationship to kernel yield [144]. Flag leaf length was significantly and positively correlated with flag leaf width (r= 0.803) [145]. Non significant values for flag leaf measurements may be due to the effect of environment on flag leaf area, but are probably also an indication of low heritability for this plant character. Near-isogenic populations selected on the basis of flag leaf area show little difference in kernel yield, an indication that other plant parts must be more influential in determining kernel yield. Flag leaf area by itself, appears not to be a good index to plant performance [146]. Removal of flag leaf resulted approximately 13, 34, and 24% reduction in kernel per spike, kernel weight per spike, and 1000-kernel weight respectively, and 2.8% increase in kernel protein contents in both years (1999-2001). Studies indicated that significant reductions in these traits and increase in kernel protein contents resulted from removal of second upper leaf blade, and awns [147]. In wheat, major photosynthetic organs are leaves; especially the flag leaves. Mostly lower leaves are shaded by the upper ones and maximum solar absorption occurs in flag leaves. Thus, flag leaf and photosynthetic area above flag leaf was indicated the importance of these structures to increase kernel yields [148, 149, 150 and 151]. The flag leaf blade and total photosynthetic area above the flag leaf node have positive correlation with weight of kernel per plant [125 and 149].

When top leaves are removed, the lower ones supply assimilates to the grain. Effect of flag leaf removal has been reported primarily to reduce kernel yield. Removal of flag leaf and its combination with awned affected kernel yield more adversely in dwarf genotypes than taller ones [152]. It was reported that contribution to yield of flag leaf alone is 19% [153], and there was 16.1% reduction in kernel yield after flag leaf removal at the heading [154]. Up to 13.2-22.9% kernel yield reduction has been reported [155], and 34.5% kernel reduction was shown [156]. According to results obtained, flag leaf removal significantly reduced number of kernels per spike, kernel weight per spike and 1000-grain weight [149, 150, 153, 154 and 157]. It was also declared that there was a positive correlation between flag leaf area and yield [125 and 158]. At the heading, while the flag leaf, the second upper leaf blade and awns removal reduces 1000- kernels weight at proportion of 1.9-24%, it increases the proportion of kernel protein. This increase was approximately 2.8% in the flag leaf removed plants, and 1.5% in wanes removed plants and 2% in the second upper leaf blade removed [147]. It was who declared that the flag leaf removal at heading, reduced the 1000- kernel weight by 11.2% and increased the kernel protein content by 1.70% [154]. It is pointed out while the flag leaf removal was reducing kernels per spike, the weight of a 1000- kernels and the yield, it significantly increases kernel protein content and there is a positive correlation between the weight of 1000- kernels and kernel yield and a negative correlation between the kernel protein content and kernel yield [158]. The number of kernels per spike was found to be affected significantly by defoliation of all leaves, and all leaves except the flag leaf treatments in three cultivars of Shiraz, Bahar, and Yavaros. It was observed that in Shiraz, and Bahar cultivars, source restriction caused reduction in the number of kernels per spike by 18.97, and 11.07% compared to control, respectively. In all cultivars, except

Pishtaz, the main shoot kernel yield was decreased significantly by defoliation treatments. In Shiraz cultivar, defoliation of all leaves decreased main shoot kernel yield by 40.75%, compared to control, and this demonstrated that Shiraz cultivar was sensitive to source restriction [159].

Awns: It was suggested that awns play a dominant role in contributing to large kernels and a high kernel yield in awned wheat cultivars, particularly during the grain-filling stages [17]. Removing the ear of the main shoot of intact plants failed to depress CO2Exchange Rate (CER) of the subtending flag leaf until 5 weeks after ear removal. Removing the ears of all the tillers of plants in which all but 3 tillers had been removed at ear emergence did not depress CER until 4 week after ear emergence, but removal of the ear of the main shoot of plants where all the tillers had been removed at ear emergence reduced the CER of the flag leaf 2 weeks after ear removal. Removal of tillers at ear emergence had a marked effect on the time course of CER and transpiration rates of the flag leaf. Both CER and transpiration rates of a 4-tiller plant were maintained at a higher level throughout ear development as compared to those of a one- tiller plant. The transpiration rate of the flag leaf increased during the later part of the life of the leaf even for one-tiller plants with no ear, indicating that such a stomatal response may be part of the normal course of leaf aging and not a response to feedback stimulus from the ear [112]. A reduction in kernel yield was reported 3-9% when awns were removed 10 days after anthesis [155]. These reductions were 20.8% reported, and 16.8% [156 and 157]. It is pointed out that the yield and the kernel size in the awned wheat variety are higher than the awnless one and this increasing is more determinative in

the dwarf genotypes and under conditions of drought [152, 160, 161 and 162].

The physiological function of awns has long been of interest because under certain climatic conditions, awned varieties out yield awnless ones. Transpiration and photosynthesis have been considered to be possible functions of the awn in contributing to kernel yield. As early as the previous century it was found that awns are sites of intensive water transpiration, and numerous later experiments have confirmed these findings. Only a few experiments have been carried out in regard to the photosynthetic activity of the awn [163]. Inflorescence and ear are important sites of photosynthesis, because they form the canopy for maximum exposure to radiation flux. Large ear cultivars show greater rate of net photosynthesis and kernel yield than small ear type due to optimum interception of photosynthetically active radiations [164]. Different parts of the ear including rachis, lemma, palea, awn, glume, and even the panicle, photosynthesize and contribute to kernel filling [164, 165 and 166]. The awn plays a key role in ear photosynthesis. It was established that awnless wheat lines contribute only 10% to kernel filling, while the awned ones contribute up to 18%; thus a strong correlation exists between the final weight of the kernel, and length, and area of the awns [167]. This correlation is due to the fact that presence of the awn increases the photosynthetic area and at the same time economizes the total ear transpiration during water stress [168 and 169]. Manipulation of the source-sink ratio determines the dry matter partitioning, as the removal of one hampers the others’ activity. Partial defoliation results in increased photosynthesis of the remaining leaves. Sink removal, on the other hand, greatly decreases the net photosynthesis and final kernel yield of wheat [170]. The removal of fruit at anthesis in garden pea altered the photoassimilate distribution pattern of associated leaflets, revealing that fruit growth substantially controls the pattern of photosynthesis [171]. Removal of spikelets from the ear reduces the flag leaf

photosynthesis due to feedback inhibition [151] as a result of excess of photosynthates accumulation [172]. Likewise, removal of ear from monotillered plant brings about a 50% reduction in the net photosynthesis of flag leaf but this is not the case for ear removal from a multitillered plant. This suggests that the remaining tillers of the same plant are connected by phloem via roots. This is verified from the presence of radiolabeled compounds in the tillers other than that exposed to 14CO2 in the same plant [173]. In different wheat cultivars, the total contribution of non-leaf green organs, including ears and peduncle, accounts for about 40-50% of kernel mass per ear, which is higher than the total contribution of the flag leaves and penultimate leaf blades [164, 130 and 174]. In wheat, all parts of the ear, such as the awn, glum, lemma, palea, pericarp, and even peduncle, are capable of photosynthetic CO2 fixation, and a considerable portion of kernel mass derives from the photosynthesis of these organs [164, 133 and 175]. It was reported that the contribution to assimilation made by ear photosynthesis ranged from 10 to 44% depending on environmental conditions, and genotypes. However, the mechanism of ear contribution to a higher yield is still not clear and remains to be further explored [176]. The awn, i.e. the terminal part of the bearded lemma, can increase the amount of light energy captured by the plant and facilitate more CO2 flux. Awns increase the surface area of the ear from 36 to 59%, resulting in an average of 4% more radiation intercepted by awned ears [177]. Thus, awns contribute about 40-80% of the total spike carbon exchange rate, depending on the species [168]. Consequently, awned genotypes of wheat have attracted considerable attention from breeders, particularly when lodging resistance is not a problem in low-yield field. To understand the role of awns in yield production [178] have investigated the general mode of growth, morphological description, and physiological comparison of awns. Few studies, however, have focused on the sequential changes in chloroplast

ultrastructure and photosynthetic activity of the awns, and to our knowledge, no report has compared the phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPCase) activity in flag leaves to that in awns [17]. It was suggested that a larg amount of awns in the ear is a sensible selection index in wheat for improved production in hot and dry environments [179]. Ear photosynthesis is quantitatively important to kernel filling, particularly in dry areas where source (i.e., assimilate) limitations can occur. Compared to the flag leaf, ear photosynthetic exhibits higher water stress tolerance. Several factors could be involved in the ear’s "drought tolerance." First although degree of C4 metabolism in ear parts has been reported, current evidence supports only typical C3 metabolism, Second, recycling of respired CO2 (i.e., refixation) could have considerable impact on final crop yield by preventing loss of CO2. Because refixation of CO2 is independent of atmospheric conditions, water use efficiency (measured as total ear photosynthesis divided by transpiration) could be higher in the ear than in the flag leaf. Moreover, ear parts (in particular awns) show higher relative water content and better osmotic adjustment under water stress compared to the flag leaf. This capacity, in addition to persistence of photosynthetic components under drought (delayed senescence), might help the ear to continue to fix CO2 late in the kernel filling period [180]. It is probably appeared that under well-watered conditions awns had an affect on yield only when assimilate supply was limiting. Awns did not always increase yield significantly in supra-optimal temperature [181].

Correlation coefficients among the characteristics: Breeder's aims are to explain the relationships between kernel yield and agronomic and morphological characteristics by using simple correlation coefficient. Although correlation coefficient is very important to determine traits that directly affect kernel yield, but they were insufficient to determine indirect

effects of these traits on kernel yield [182]. Relationships between two metric characteristics can be positive or negative, and the cause of correlation in crop plants can be genetic or environmental [183]. Yield and their components are controlled by many genes, which contribute to the final expression of the characteristics. It is not practically possible to analyze the effect of individual genes. The alternative option left for the plant breeder is to obtain an estimate of an averaged gene effects over all the genes. The estimates of gene effects have the direct bearing on the method of hybridization and selection, which may be adopted in a variety for a specific breeding program [184]. It is often desirable in genetic studies to know whether a relationship exists between a given characteristics in a series of individuals. A correlation coefficient is an index that goes from -1.0 to +1.0, depending on degree of relationship between the variables. If there is no relation (if the variables are independent), then the correlation coefficient will be zero. If there is perfect correlation, where an increase in one variable is associated with a proportional increase in the other, the coefficient will be +1.0. If an increase in one is associated with a proportional decrease in the other, the coefficient will be -1.0 [185]. It was pointed out that there was a dynamic balance among yield traits, which prevent improvement of kernel yield through selection for just one yield trait [186]. These situations are more common in cereals because of yield traits that occur at a different growing stages and affect each other. Especially where early occurring traits influence later traits [187]. Several yield components appeared to be important in determining kernel yield in high yielding in hybrids [188]. Phenotypic associations between kernel yield and its components were high, while the morpho-physiological traits have poor positive association with kernel yield and its components [189]. Longer vegetative periods (time to heading) resulted in higher kernel yield, but longer heading-to-maturity periods had no effect on kernel yield [190].

Kernel yield in wheat is a result of a several complex morphological and physiological processes affecting each other and occurring in different growing stages of vegetation period. Some yield components significantly affect kernel yield through influencing different stages of growth from sowing to the harvest. Therefore, researchers need to know more concerning traits and how they affect kernel yield, so breeder can program for new genotypes that have high yielding capacity. There were positive and significant correlations between kernel yield and the number of heads/ m2, number of kernels/ head and kernel weight/ head. It was indicated that number of heads/ m2, kernel weight/ head, and number of kernels/ head may be used as a selection criteria in breeding programs for the development of a high yielding bread wheat varieties [191]. There was positive and significant phenotypic and genetic correlation between kernel yield and each of spike number/ m2, number of kernels/ spike, and negative and non significant correlations were found between kernel yield and plant height, and kernel weight. While negative and significant correlation between the number of spike/ m2 and kernel weight [192]. High tillering lines were high in head number and tiller mortality, low in kernel number per head and kernel weight, and susceptible to lodging [193]. When the number of tillers increased, the size of the organs on each tiller tended to decrease. In other words, a genotype with a high number of tillers tended to have smaller culm diameters, smaller leaves, and smaller heads. In addition, highly significant correlations were observed among culm diameters, average leaf area and number of kernels per head. Kernel yield was not significantly associated with either culm diameters or average leaf area, although the two traits may be strongly correlated with one or more of the three components of yield [194]. There was a positive and significant correlation between kernel yield and number of tillers/ plant. There were negative correlations between kernel weight/ Plant and number of tillers/ plant, and between kernel weight/ plant, and number of kernels/ spike [195]. Significant correlations were noticed between kernel yield and each

component of days to heading, number of tillers/ plant, plant height and kernel weight, while negative and significant correlations were observed between days to heading and the rest of traits [196]. Correlation matrices in each environment revealed that late heading isotypes consistently developed more kernels per spike and had lower kernel weights than the early heading isotypes in most environments [197]. In all genotypes, significant correlation coefficients have been determined between the kernel weight/ spike, the number of kernels/ spikelet, the number of spikelets/ spike, number of kernels/ spike and the number of kernels/ spikelet [198]. Kernel yield were found positive and significantly correlated with number of kernels/ spike and number of spikes/ m2 and negatively correlated with vegetative period, but they were indirectly affected by plant height and days to heading through their positive and significant correlation with vegetative periods. Thus, the numbers of kernels/ spike, the number of spikes/ m2, the length of vegetative period, plant height, and days to heading were the major contributors to durum kernel yield in the semi-arid region [199]. Number of spikelets/ Spike appears to be important, while kernel weight tends to be higher in hybrids, but this does not contribute significantly to increase the yield [200]. The highest correlations were obtained between kernel yield and kernel weight, number of kernels/ spike, number of spikes/ plant and number of spikelets/ spike, the correlation coefficient were 0.864, 0.446, 0.353, and 0.012, respectively [201]. There were positive and significant correlations between kernel yield and each of spike length, number of kernels/ spike, and plant height, while negative correlation was observed between kernel yield and days to heading and maturity [202]. Significant effect of spike length on kernel yield was observed, while number of spikes/ plant appears to be most important component in determining kernel yield [141]. Correlation data confirm the close association of kernel plumpness and kernel weight as measures of kernel size and the independence of these kernel size measurements from the other

agronomic characteristics studied. The genetic potential for improvement of kernel size, and kernel plumpness is demonstrated by heritability estimates of 0.886, and 0.710, respectively, for these two characteristics [203]. The average kernel weight had a negligible effect on kernel yield. The number of spikes per square meter had a considerable negative influence on kernels per spike but contributed positively to both the length of the grain-filling period and the average kernel weight. The duration of the vegetative period had a positive influence on the kernels per spike and a negative influence on the length of the grain-filling period. A lengthening of the grain-filling period induced an increase in kernels per spike but did not significantly modify the average kernel weight [204]. Positive correlations were found between plant height, productive tillering, 1000-grain weight, and plant yield in all hybrids [205]. Kernel yield positively correlated with number of spikes, and 1000 kernel weight [206]. The analysis of correlation coefficient among the quantitative traits revealed that yield per plant showed positive and significant correlation with 1000 kernel weight and harvest index. Biomass per plant showed positive and significant association with kernel yield per plant and 1000-grain weight [207]. A positive and significant correlation was found between kernel yield and straw yield (r= 0.52), whereas no such association was observed between kernel yield and harvest index [208]. Vegetative biomass showed significant positive correlations with kernel yield, height, and visual score of vegetative biomass [209]. Kernel yield was correlated positively with harvest index and correlated negatively with vegetative duration in the cooler seasons. Spikes per square meter followed by kernels per spike largely determined kernel yield. Spikes per square meter had a strong negative effect on kernels per spike. Kernel weight had little effect on kernel yield. Kernel yield was correlated most strongly with spikes per square meter followed by straw yield and vegetative shoot height. Kernel yield was correlated most strongly with vegetative shoot height. Vegetative shoot height was correlated negatively with vegetative duration

but correlated positively with straw yield, Spikes/ m2, harvest index, mature plant height, and grain-filling duration [210]. A positive and highly significant correlations were found between kernel yield/ plant, and number of spikes/ plant, number of kernels/ plant, kernel weight/ plant, biological weight, and harvest index, it suggested that selection for these traits leads to improving the kernel yield in wheat [211]. Positive associations between kernel yield and harvest index for the best hybrid combinations were observed. It was suggested that hybrids performed better because of their superior capacity to produce and to partition a biomass [212]. The high kernel yield of hybrids was associated with an increase in plant height, while the harvest index was slightly higher than that found in pure line varieties [213].

MATERIALS AND METHODS This investigation was conducted during winter seasons of 20092010 at two locations, first; Qlyasan Agriculture Research Station, College of Agriculture- University of Sulaimani, 2 km northwestern of Sulaimani city (35° 34΄ 307˝ N and 45° 21΄ 992˝ E with an altitude of 765 masl), and second; farm land of Dukan, 70 km northern of Sulaimani (35° 48΄ 651˝ N and 45° 06΄ 020˝ E with an altitude of 747 masl), using split split-plot design with four replicates [214]. To study four common wheat varieties of different origins as follows:

No. Varieties Pedigree (Sonara 64 × Lerma Rojo 64) ×Sentaelena (Saberbeg × Mexipak × Abu-Greb4) (by radiation)

Origin

1

Araz

Mexico

2

Tamuz

3

Rabea'a

(Saberbeg × Indian wheat GDU-831)

Iraq

4

Cham-4

Attila - 3.Mynaa"ul / Turaco / 3 / Turaco.kauz // Kauz / Star.Kauz /Gen

ICARDA

Iraq

Seeds for all varieties have been received from Bakrajo Research Center in Sulaimani, which implemented in the main plots, conducted with Completely Randomized Block Design (CRBD), the second factor

was seeding rates with four levels (120, 160, 200, and 240) Kg/ ha implemented in the sub-plots, and the third factor was removal treatments, implemented in the sub-sub-plots, which were control; (Flag leaf removal, Awns removal, and flag leaf blade + Awns removal). Each main plot consisted of four sub-plots with four sub-sub-plots each sub sub-plot consisted of eight rows, 2 m long, and 0.25 m apart within rows. The dates of drilling were November 11th, and 13th, 2009 for both locations Qlyasan, and farm land of Dukan, respectively. The meteorological data shown for both locations in (Table1). The representative soil samples were taken from both fields before tillage at (0-30) cm depth, these samples were air dried then sieved using 2mm sieves, then packed for analysis. Some physical and chemical properties were analyzed at the Department of Soil and Water Sciences, College of Agriculture, University of Sulaimani (Table2). The data were statistically analyzed according to the methods of analyses of variance as a general test (Table 3), and combined analysis of variance across locations was conducted as shown in (Table 4). All possible comparisons among the means were carried out using L. S. D. test (Least Significant Difference) at a significant level of 5 % after they show their significant differences [215].

Table 1 : The meteorological data of both locations: Qlyasan (2009-2010) Mo nths Oct. Nov . Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar . Apr. May Jun.

avg.

max.

Min.

22.5

28.9

16.1

38.0

Precipit ation Depth (mm) 72.9

13.2

17.5

8.8

69.0

136.4

0.7

2.4

9.9 10.3 10.3

13.4 14.3 14.4

6.3 6.3 6.1

76.0 69.0 69.0

98.3 69.0 161.9

0.5 0.7 0.8

1.3 1.7 1.6

14.8

19.5

10.0

58.0

93.2

1.5

2.5

17.5 23.0 31.0

22.6 28.7 37.0

12.4 17.6 25.2

62.0 46.0 26.0

77.1 80.8 0.0

1.0 1.1 1.5

3.5 6.0 9.3

Air temperature oC

RH %

Wind Speed m/s 0.9

ETo (mm) 4.2

Dukan (2009-2010) Mo Air nths temperature oC

RH Precipit Wind % ation

ET Soil o temper

Cloud Cover

(m m) avg. Oct. 23.8 Nov 14.5 . Dec. 10.2 Jan. 10.4 Feb. 10.3 Mar 14.8 . Apr. 17.5 May 24.3 Jun. 32.7

ma Mi x. n. 31. 0 19. 1 13. 7 14. 1 14. 2 19. 6 23. 8 31. 7 41. 0

17. 6 10. 9 7.5 7.5 6.8 10. 1 12. 5 17. 9 25. 4

33. 3 63. 4 73. 7 69. 3 71. 0 61. 7 64. 6 43. 5 20. 9

ature o C

oktas

Depth (mm)

Spe Direct ed ion m/s

28.8

2.2 110.5 4.0 27.2

4.3

66.8

3.1 128.7 2.2 18.8

5.6

139.6

2.5 111.4 1.1 13.1

5.4

54.6

3.6 106.2 1.4 12.1

5.2

83.4

2.8 107.8 1.7 11.6

5.5

108.4

3.7 95.1

2.8 14.6

4.9

43.0

2.8 120.9 3.2 18.3 8

4.8

29.4

2.9 124.0 5.6 28.0

4.4

0.2

3.3 122.0 9.3 31.6

2.7

50cm

* Total precipitation = (789.6, and 554) for Qlyasan, and Dukan, respectively. * Total ETO = (32.5, and

31.3) for Qlyasan, and Dukan, respectively.

Table 2: Physical & chemical properties of soil in both locations:

Qlyasan

Dukan

P. S. D.

Silty loam

Clay loam

Sand ( gm.Kg-1 )

116.3

303.1

Silt ( gm.Kg-1 )

648.9

409.7

Clay ( gm.Kg-1 )

243.8

287.2

EC or E.C. ( dS.m-1 )

0.41

0.37

pH

7.63

7.39

O.M. ( gm.Kg-1 )

19.18

18.17

Total N ( gm.Kg-1 ) Available Phosphorous ( mg.Kg-1 ) Soil CaCO3 ( gm.Kg-1 )

1.02

1.51

4.49

2.89

27.35

103.2

Ca++

1.62

1.32

K+

0.39

0.13

Na+

0.44

0.52

CO3-2

0.00

0.00

HCO3-2

2.88

2.25

Cl-

0.45

0.11

SO4-2

0.81

0.63

Soluble Cations & Anions mmole L-1

Soil Properties

These analyses were carried out at Soil and Water Science Department, College of Agriculture, University of Sulaimani.

Table 3: ANOVA table for each location:

S.O.V.

d.f

Replications

(r-1) = 3

SS SSR 

 Y ...l

2

 c. f

abc

Yi...

2

Variety

(a-1) = 3

E(a)

(a-1)(r-1) = 9

Seeding rates

(b-1) = 3

SS A 

 Yi..l   Yi...   Y ...l  2

SSEa

2

bc

bcr

Y . j.. 

2

 c. f

abr

2

SSB

 c. f

acr

Variety × seeding rates

(a-1)(b-1) = 9

E(b)

a(b-1)(r-1) = 36

SSEB 

(c-1) = 3

SSC 

(a-1)(c-1) = 9

SS AC 

Removal treatment Variety× Removal treatment Seeding rates×Remova l treatment

 C.F

bcr

Yij.. 

2

SS AB

Yi... 

2

cr  Yij.l 2



c

 Y ..k.

2

bcr  Yij..2 cr

Y . j..  

acr  Yi..l 2 bc

 c. f

 Yi... 

2

bcr

2

(b-1)(c-1) = 9

Variety×seedi (a-1)(b-1) ng (c-1) = 27 rates×Remova l treatment

 c. f

abr

 Yi.k.

SSBC  

SS ABC 

br

Y . jk .2 ar

r

2

 Yi...

2



bcr



 Y ..k.

2

abr

 c. f

Y . j..2 Y ..k.2    c. f acr abr

 Yijk .

 Y . jk .  ar

2

2

 Yij..

2



 Yi... 

2

bcr

cr



 Yi.k.

 Y . j.. 

2

acr

2

br

 Y ..k.  abr

2

 c. f

E(c) Total

ab(c-1)(r-1) = 144

SSEc   Yijkl

abcr-1 = 255

SST 

 Yijk . 

2

abcr

2

r

1

abcr

 Yijkl

2

 Yij.l  c

2

 Yij.. 

2

cr

 c. f

1

Linear Model: Split- Split Plots Design conducted with the Completely Randomized Block Design (CRBD)

Yijkl     l  i   il   j   ij  Eijl   k   ik    jk   ijk   ijkl i = 1, 2, 3, 4 j = 1, 2, 3, 4 k = 1, 2, 3, 4 l = 1, 2, 3, 4

( Varieties ) ( Seeding Rates ) ( Removal Treatments ) ( Blocks )

Table 4: Combined- ANOVA table across locations: S.O.V.

d.f

SS

Y ....l 

2

 c. f .

Locations

(l-1)=1

SSl

Block/Locations

L(r-1)=6

SSBlock/location=SSBlock(1)+SSBlock(2)

Variety/ Location

L(a-1)=6

SSA/L=SSA(1)+SSA(2)

abcr

 Yi.... 

2

 c. f .

Variety

(a-1)=3

SS A

Variety× Location

(a-1)(l1)=3

SSA×L=SSA/L-SSA

bcrl

Error(a)/ Location

L(a-1)(r1)=18

SSE(a)/L=SSE(a)(1)+SSE(a)(2)

Seeding rates/ Location

L(b-1)=6

SSB/L=SSB(1)+SSB(2)

Seeding rates

(b-1)=3

SS B 

Seeding rates× Location Variety× Seeding rates / Location Variety× Seeding rates Variety× Seeding rates× Location

(b-1)(l1)=3

SSB×L=SSB/L-SSB

l(a-1)(b1)=18

SSAB/L=SSAB(1)+SSAB(2)

 Y . j...

2

(a-1)(b1)=9

 c. f .

acrl

 Yij... 

2

SS AB

 c. f .  SS A  SS B

crl

(a-1)(b-1) SS =SS -SS AB×L AB/L AB (l-1)=9

Error(b)/ Location

La(b-1) (r-1)=72

SSE(b)/L=SSE(b)(1)+SS(b)

Removal treatments/ Location

L(c-1)=6

SSC/L=SSC(1)+SSC(2)

Removal treatments

(c-1)=3

SSC 

Removal treatments × Location

(c-1)(l1)=3

SSC×L=SSC/L-SSC

L(a-1)(c1)=9

SSAC/L=SSAC(1)+SSAC(2)

(a-1)(c1)=9

SS AC 

Variety×Removal treatments / Location Variety× Removal treatments Variety× Removal

 Y ..K ..

2

 c. f .

abrl

 Yi.k..

2

 c. f .  SS A  SSC

brl

(a-1)(c-1) SS AC×L=SSAC/L-SSAC treatments× Location (l-1)=9 Seeding rates× Removal treatments/ Location

L(b-1)(c1)=18

Seeding rates×

(b-1)(c1)=9

SSBC/L=SSBC(1)+SSBC(2) SS BC

 Y . jk ..  arl

2

 c. f .  SS B  SSC

Removal treatments Seeding rates× Removal treatments× Location Variety× Seeding rates× Removal treatments/ Location Variety× Seeding rates× Removal treatments

Variety× Seeding rates× Location E(c)/Location Total

(b-1)(c-1) SSBC/L=SSBC/L-SSBC (l-1)=9 L(a-1)(b1) (c-1)=54

(a-1)(b-1) (c-1)=27

SSABC/L=SSABC(1)+SSABC(2)

SS ABC 

 Yilk ..  c. f .  SS rl

A

 SSB  SSC

 SS AB  SS AC  SSBC

(a-1)(b-1) SSABC×L=SSABC/L-SSABC (c-1)(l1)=27 abl (c-1) SSE(c)/L=SSE(c)/(1)+SSE(c)(2) (r-1)=288 AbcrlSST   Yijklm 2  c. f . 1=511

Linear Model: Combined analysis of variance across locations Yijklm    Lm  lm  i  Lim   ilm   j  L jm   ij  Lijm

 Eijlm   k  L km   ik  L ikm    jk  L  jkm   ijk  Lijkm   ijklm i = 1, 2, 3, 4 j = 1, 2, 3, 4 k = 1, 2, 3, 4

( Varieties ) ( Seeding Rates ) ( Removal Treatments )

l = 1, 2, 3, 4 ( Blocks ) m = 1, 2 ( Locations ) Studied Characteristics: The Studied Characteristics include: A. Growth Characteristics: 1- Number of days to 50% anthesis: Recorded from planting date to 50% flowering. 2- Number of days to physiological maturity: Recorded from planting date to physiological maturity. 3- Grain filling stage (days): Recorded from 50% anthesis to physiological maturity. 4- No. of tillers/ m2: The mean number of tillers/ m2. 5- Plant height (cm): Measured from soil surface to the top of the plant with out awns. B. Yield and its components: 1- No. of spikes/ m2: The mean number of spikes/ m2. 2- Spike weight/ m2: The mean spike weight/ m2. 3- Average spike length (cm): The mean length of ten spikes (cm). 4- No. of spikelets/ Spike: The mean of number of spikelets for ten spikes. 5- No. of kernels/ Spike: The mean number of kernels/ ten spikes. 6- Kernels weight/ spike (g): The mean kernels weight/ ten spikes. 7- 1000- Kernel weight (g): The mean of 1000- kernel weight for three samples for each treatment.

8- Kernel yield (ton/ ha): One (m2) was harvested for each treatment then converted to kernel yield/ hectare. 9- Biological yield (ton/ ha): The means (total vegetative biomass+ total economical organ yield) by g/ m2 then converted to ton/ ha. 10- Harvest index (H.I.): Measured by separating the kernels from straw yield and weighed to calculate the H.I. according to the following equation [216]:

H .I . 

Grain yield( ton/ ha)  100 upper total biomass ( ton/ ha)

C- Correlation coefficient among the characteristics: It was estimated depending on the trait’s mean of the genotypes as follows [217]:

 X  Y 

r

t ( n  2) 

   

 XY   X     X  2

2

n

n

 Y    Y    n  

2

2



r 1 r2 / n  2

n = Number of the treatments, r = Correlation factor value or correlation coefficient. The significance of r value tested according to t test at n-2 degree of freedom.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table (5) and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the respond of some growth characters to variety effect. It was noticed that the number of days to 50% anthesis responded high significantly to variety effect. Araz variety spent minimum days to 50% anthesis in both locations and their average giving the average of 130.328, 133.563, and 131.945 days, respectively, while maximum days required to 50% anthesis exhibited by Cham-4 variety were 137.109, 140.781 and 138.945 days, for both locations and their average, respectively. Data recorded on the number of days to physiological maturity as showed in the Table (5) and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the presence of high significantly differences between varieties in this parameter for Qlyasan location and the average of both locations, while no significant differences represented between varieties in Dukan location. Minimum days to physiological maturity exhibited by Araz variety and Rabea’a variety with 188.500 and 188.375 days in the first location, while Tamuz variety with 199.625 days showed minimum days to physiological maturity in the second location. As the average of both locations Araz variety and Tamuz with 194.375 and 194.961 days exhibited minimum days to reach physiological maturity, while Cham-4 variety spent maximum days to reach physiological maturity in both locations and the average of them with 193.500, 200.438 and 196.969 days, respectively. Table (5) and Appendices, high significantly differences were noticed between varieties due the character, grain filling stage period in the first location and the average of both locations, while in the second location the differences between the varieties were significant only, this period was restricted between 55.563 and 59.047 days for both varieties, Rabea’a and Tamuz in the first location, while it was restricted between 59.656 and 66.688 for both Cham-4 variety and Araz variety in

the second location, and for the average of both locations, it was restricted between 58.023 and 62.492 days for both Cham-4 variety and Tamuz variety, respectively. Table (5) explained the character number of tillers/ m2, indicating the presence of high significantly differences represented between varieties due to this character in both locations and their average. Araz variety showed maximum number of tillers/ m2 for both locations and their average with 400.297, 598.547 and 494.922 tillers respectively, while Cham-4 variety with 296.938, 483.578 and 390.258 tillers showed minimum number for both locations and their average respectively, in the first location Araz variety exceeded the rest by 20.98, 18.53 and 34.81% respectively, while in the second location Araz variety exceeded both Rabea’a variety and Cham-4 variety by 13.12 and 21.91%, respectively, in which no significant difference between Araz variety, and Tamuz variety were noticed in this character. Regarding to the average of both locations, Araz variety exceeded the rest significantly by 10.67, 15.25 and 26.82%, respectively. High significantly differences between varieties due to plant height were exhibited in the Table (5) and Appendices, Rabea’a variety exceeded all varieties in both locations and their average recording 121.836, 115.295 and 118.566 cm respectively, in the first location Rabea’a variety predominated the rest by 21.81, 33.38 and 45.21% respectively, while in the second location outyielded the rest by 14.29, 12.31 and 20.93% respectively and for the average of both locations Rabea’a variety predominated the rest by 18.03, 22.23 and 32.30%, respectively. Minimum plant height recorded by Cham-4 variety in both locations and their average which recorded 83.906, 95.338 and 89.622 cm respectively. The presence of significant differences among varieties in vegetative growth in both locations may be due to genetic differences and to their relative performance of these varieties in their genetic expression under these locations, similar results obtained by previous workers [218, 219 and 220].

Table 5: Means of growth characteristics in wheat varieties:

Varieties

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location Araz Tamuz Rabea’a Cham-4 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

130.328 131.250 132.813 137.109

188.500 190.297 188.375 193.500

58.172 59.047 55.563 56.391

400.297 330.875 337.719 296.938

100.025 91.344 121.836 83.906

0.758

0.538

1.230

105.362

4.676

Dukan Location Araz Tamuz Rabea’a Cham-4 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

133.563 133.688 135.719 140.781

200.250 199.625 201.813 200.438

66.688 65.938 66.094 59.656

589.547 563.500 521.172 483.578

100.883 102.655 115.295 95.338

3.326

n.s

4.005

44.936

4.880

Average of both locations Araz Tamuz Rabea’a Cham-4 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

131.945 132.469 134.266 138.945

194.375 194.961 195.094 196.969

62.430 62.492 60.828 58.023

494.922 447.188 429.445 390.258

100.454 96.999 118.566 89.622

1.584

0.793

1.945

23.201

3.139

Table (6) and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the effect of seeding rates on some growth characteristics in Qlyasan location, Dukan location and their average. In Qlyasan location, the effect of seeding rates was high

significantly on number of tillers/ m2 and plant height only. Maximum numbers

of tillers was 378.750 tiller exhibited by the rate of 240 kg/ ha which exceeded both 120 and 160 kg/ ha significantly by 34.49 and 11.19%, respectively. Minimum number of tiller was 281.625 produced by the rate 120 kg/ ha. Concerning to plant height in the first location, maximum plant height was 103.903 cm shown by 200 kg/ ha, which outyielded the rest by 7.10, 5.51 and 6.33, respectively, while minimum plant height exhibited by the rate 120 kg/ ha which was 97.016 cm. As shown in the same Table all growth characteristics responded to seeding rates, In Dukan location non significantly with the exception of number of tiller/ m2. Maximum tiller number was 562.406 tillers exhibited by the rate 240 kg/ ha and outyielded both seed rates 120 and 200 kg/ ha by 10.90 and 4.24%, respectively.

Regarding the average of both locations, only the characteristics, number of tillers/ m2 and plant height responded high significantly to seeding rates, while the other characteristics did not significantly respond to this factor. Maximum number

of tillers/ m2 470.578 tillers exhibited by the rate 240 kg/ ha and outyielded all seed rates by 19.32, 5.82 and 4.07% respectively, but minimum tillers number produced by the rate 120 kg/ ha. Regarding plant height, the maximum value was 103.938 cm exhibited by 200 kg/ ha and exceeded the rest by 3.46, 2.95 and 3.65, respectively, while there were no significant differences between the rate 120, 160 and 240 kg/ ha. Minimum plant height was 100.280 cm shown by the rate 240 kg/ ha. Previous worker indicated that growth characteristics had no responses to seeding rates in Qlyasan location [221].

Table 6: The effect of seeding rates on growth characteristics: Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha)

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location 120 160 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤0.05 )

133.109 132.531 132.875 132.984

190.188 190.125 190.188 190.172

57.078 57.594 57.313 57.188

281.625 340.641 364.813 378.750

97.016 98.475 103.903 97.717

n.s

n.s

n.s

18.552

2.970

Dukan Location 120 160 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

136.000 136.000 136.063 135.688

200.594 200.531 200.563 200.438

64.594 64.594 64.438 64.750

507.125 548.719 539.547 562.406

103.914 103.439 103.973 102.844

n.s

n.s

n.s

18.145

n.s

Average of both locations 120 160 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

134.555 134.266 134.469 134.336

195.391 195.328 195.375 195.305

60.836 61.094 60.875 60.969

394.375 444.680 452.180 470.578

100.465 100.957 103.938 100.280

n.s

n.s

n.s

12.754

1.928

Table (7) and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the effect of removal treatments on some growth characteristics for both locations and their average. In Qlyasan location, all growth characteristics responded non significantly to this factor with the exception of number of tillers/ m2 and plant height which responded high

significant. Maximum

tillers number was 377.938 shown by the control and exceeded the rest by 18.50, 17.18 and 9.01% respectively, while minimum number of tillers was 318.938 exhibited by the treatment flag leaf blade removal. As shown in the same location, maximum plant height was 101.353 cm shown by the control and exceeded the rest by 2.83, 3.11 and 2.48%, respectively, while their were no significant differences between all removal treatments of flag leaf, awns and both flag leaf blade + awns. Regarding Dukan location and the average of both locations, only the character of tiller number/ m2 responded high significantly to removal treatments. Maximum tiller number exhibited by the control which was 640.703 and 509.320 tillers for the second location and the average of both locations, respectively, while minimum number exhibited by the treatment of flag leaf blade removal which was 491.703 and 405.320 tiller for both Dukan location and the average of both locations respectively. The treatment of control outyielded the rest significantly by 30.30, 25.72 and 24.22%, respectively in the second location and by 25.66, 22.41 and 18.15%, respectively as the average of both locations. Table 7: The effect of removal treatments on growth characteristics: Removal Treat.

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

132.828 132.922 132.875 132.875

190.172 190.219 190.109 190.172

57.344 57.297 57.234 57.297

377.938 318.938 322.531 346.422

101.353 98.561 98.298 98.898

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

n.s

n.s

n.s

13.479

1.676

640.703 491.703 509.625 515.766

103.081 103.328 103.613 104.148

Dukan Location Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

135.953 135.922 135.922 135.953

200.531 200.594 200.531 200.469

64.516 64.672 64.609 64.578

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

n.s

n.s

n.s

20.795

n.s

Average of both locations Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

134.391 134.422 134.398 134.414

195.352 195.406 195.320 195.320

60.930 60.984 60.922 60.938

509.320 405.320 416.078 431.094

102.217 100.945 100.955 101.523

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

n.s

n.s

n.s

12.338

n.s

Table (8) and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the combination effect between varieties, and seeding rates on some growth characteristics in both locations and their average. In Qlyasan location the combination effect was high significantly for the characteristics number of days to 50% anthesis, number of tillers/ m2, and plant height, and it was significant for grain filling stage period, while no significant combination was observed for number of days to physiological maturity. In Dukan location, only number of tillers/ m2 responded high significantly to the combination effect between varieties, and seeding rates. Concerning to the average of both locations all growth characteristics responded high significantly to this effect with the exception of number of days to physiological maturity. Maximum number of days to 50% anthesis was 137.688 and 139.219 days in the first location and the average of both locations respectively recorded by Cham-4 variety under the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha, while in the second location maximum days to 50% anthesis was 141.125 days recorded by the same variety under 200 kg/ ha. Regarding the minimum days required to 50% anthesis 129.500, 133.250 and 131.375 days recorded by Araz variety under 160 kg/ ha for both locations and their average respectively. Table (8) explained the character of grain filling stage, maximum period was 59.500 days in the first location recorded by Tamuz variety under 240 kg/ ha, whereas in the average of both locations, it was 63.125 days shown by Tamuz variety under 240 kg/ ha. Concerning to the first location, the shortest period of grain filling stage was 54.500 days which exhibited by Rabea’a variety under 120 kg/ ha. As the average of both locations the shortest period was 57.656 days recorded by Cham-4 variety under 240 kg/ ha. Table (8) confirmed that the values number of tillers/ m2 restricted between 234.813 to 446.313 tillers in the first location for Rabea’a variety under 120 kg/ ha, and Araz variety under 240 kg/ ha, respectively, while in the second location the values of tillers/ m2 restricted between 448.938 tillers recorded by Cham-4 variety under 120 kg/ ha, and 614.625 tillers recorded by the combination between Tamuz variety, and 160 kg/ ha, while for the average of both locations it was restricted between 343.594 tillers recorded by the combination between Rabea’a variety and 120 kg/ ha, and 521.250 tillers shown by the combination between Araz variety and 200 kg/ ha. Regarding plant height, as represented in the same table, maximum plant height was 132.519 and 124.194 cm in the first location and the average of both locations respectively recorded by the combination between Rabea’a variety and the seed rate of 200 kg/ ha, while in the second location it was 116.250 cm exhibited by Rabea’a variety under 160 kg/ ha. Minimum plant height in both locations and the averages of both locations were 82.488, 92.469 and 87.478 cm respectively, recorded by the combination between Cham-4 variety, and 120 kg/ ha.

Table 8: The combination effect of varieties and seeding rates on growth characteristics: Varieties

Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha)

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location Araz

Tamuz

Rabea’a

Cham - 4

120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

130.813 129.500 130.750 130.250 131.000 131.750 131.250 131.000 134.000 132.000 132.250 133.000 136.625 136.875 137.250 137.688

188.375 188.438 189.000 188.188 190.375 190.063 190.250 190.500 188.500 188.250 188.250 188.500 193.500 193.750 193.250 193.500

57.563 58.938 58.250 57.938 59.375 58.313 59.000 59.500 54.500 56.250 56.000 55.500 56.875 56.875 56.000 55.813

341.188 378.688 435.000 446.313 298.375 320.375 360.125 344.625 234.813 343.438 373.875 398.750 252.125 320.063 290.250 325.313

94.025 96.200 106.938 102.938 90.900 93.494 90.156 90.825 120.650 121.531 132.519 112.644 82.488 82.675 86.000 84.463

1.012

n.s

1.129

37.105

5.940

Dukan Location Araz

Tamuz

Rabea’a

Cham - 4

120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

133.750 133.250 134.000 133.250 134.000 134.000 133.750 133.000 136.000 135.750 135.375 135.750 140.250 141.000 141.125 140.750

200.375 200.125 200.250 200.250 199.750 199.500 199.500 199.750 201.750 202.000 202.000 201.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.250

66.625 67.125 66.000 67.000 65.750 65.500 65.750 66.750 65.750 66.250 66.625 65.750 60.250 59.500 59.375 59.500

612.625 593.688 607.500 544.375 514.563 614.625 570.875 553.938 452.375 524.500 517.813 590.000 448.938 462.063 462.000 561.313

102.969 99.625 101.606 99.331 104.344 103.788 101.488 101.000 115.875 116.250 115.869 113.188 92.469 94.094 96.931 97.856

n.s

n.s

n.s

36.289

n.s

Average of both locations Araz

Tamuz

Rabea’a

Cham - 4

120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240 120 160 200 240

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

132.281 131.375 132.375 131.750 132.500 132.875 132.500 132.000 135.000 133.875 133.813 134.375 138.438 138.938 139.188 139.219

194.375 194.281 194.625 194.219 195.063 194.781 194.875 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.000 197.000 197.125 196.875 196.875

62.094 63.031 62.125 62.469 62.563 61.906 62.375 63.125 60.125 61.250 61.313 60.625 58.563 58.188 57.688 57.656

476.906 486.188 521.250 495.344 406.469 467.500 465.500 449.281 343.594 433.969 445.844 494.375 350.531 391.063 376.125 443.313

98.497 97.913 104.272 101.134 97.622 98.641 95.822 95.913 118.263 118.891 124.194 112.916 87.478 88.384 91.466 91.159

0.744

n.s

0.802

25.507

3.855

Table (9) and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the combination effect between varieties, and removal treatments on growth characteristics for both locations and their average. This effect was found to be high significantly on number of tillers/ m2 for both locations and their average, while it was only significant in plant height for both locations and their average. Concerning to number of days to 50% anthesis, number of days to physiological maturity, and grain filling stage period, the combination effect was not affected significantly on them in both locations and their average. Maximum number of tillers/ m2 recorded by the combination of Araz variety and the treatment of control which was 466.700, 735.375 and 601.063 in both locations and their average respectively, while the minimum number in the first location and the average of both locations recorded

by Cham-4 variety

combined with flag leaf blade removal which was 276.813 and 374.031 tillers respectively, but in the second location, the minimum number of tillers/ m2 was 450.875 tiller which also recorded by the combination between Rabea’a variety with flag leaf blade removal. As shown in the Table (9), maximum plant height in the first location was 125.806 cm exhibited by the combination of Rabea’a variety and the treatment of control, while in the second location it was 115.994 cm recorded by the combination between Rabea’a variety and awns removal, but the maximum plant height as the average of both locations was 120.247 cm recorded by the combination between Rabea’a variety and the treatment of control. Regarding the minimum plant height values, it was 82.550 cm in the first location exhibited by the combination between Cham-4 variety and awns removal, while in the second location and the average of both locations it was 91.938 and 87.981 cm respectively recorded by the combination between Cham-4 variety and the treatment of control. The most important photosynthesis acceptor-leaf areas vary among cultivation measures and it is limited factor for creating exact growth models in common winter wheat [137]

Table 9: The combination effect of varieties and removal treatments on growth characteristics: Varieties

Removal Treat.

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Tamuz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Rabea’a Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Cham - 4 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 ) Araz

130.250 130.438 130.250 130.375 131.250 131.250 131.250 131.250 132.813 132.813 132.813 132.813 137.000 137.188 137.188 137.063

188.313 188.750 188.188 188.750 190.500 190.250 190.375 190.063 188.375 188.375 188.375 188.375 193.500 193.500 193.500 193.500

58.063 58.313 57.938 58.375 59.250 59.000 59.125 58.813 55.563 55.563 55.563 55.563 56.500 56.313 56.313 56.438

466.750 370.250 385.125 379.063 350.000 314.313 307.125 352.063 380.688 314.375 316.875 338.938 314.313 276.813 281.000 315.625

101.825 98.813 99.013 100.450 93.756 88.606 91.738 91.275 125.806 120.450 119.894 121.194 84.025 86.375 82.550 82.675

n.s

n.s

n.s

26.957

3.352

Dukan Location Control Flag Leaf blade Araz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Tamuz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Rabea’a Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Cham - 4 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

133.563 133.563 133.563 133.563 133.688 133.688 133.688 133.688 135.750 135.625 135.750 135.750 140.813 140.813 140.688 140.813

200.250 200.500 200.250 200.000 199.625 199.625 199.625 199.625 201.813 201.813 201.813 201.813 200.438 200.438 200.438 200.438

66.438 66.938 66.688 66.688 65.938 65.938 65.938 65.938 66.063 66.188 66.063 66.063 59.625 59.625 59.750 59.625

735.375 542.313 511.500 569.000 678.438 502.375 546.688 526.500 682.938 450.875 482.813 468.063 466.063 471.250 497.500 499.500

101.113 100.844 99.219 102.356 104.588 102.188 102.213 101.631 114.688 115.875 115.994 114.625 91.938 94.406 97.025 97.981

n.s

n.s

n.s

41.590

3.628

Average of both locations Control Flag Leaf blade Araz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Tamuz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Rabea’a Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Cham - 4 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

131.906 132.000 131.906 131.969 132.469 132.469 132.469 132.469 134.281 134.219 134.281 134.281 138.906 139.000 138.938 138.938

194.281 194.625 194.219 194.375 195.063 194.938 195.000 194.844 195.094 195.094 195.094 195.094 196.969 196.969 196.969 196.969

62.250 62.625 62.313 62.531 62.594 62.469 62.531 62.375 60.813 60.875 60.813 60.813 58.063 57.969 58.031 58.031

601.063 456.281 448.313 474.031 514.219 408.344 426.906 439.281 531.813 382.625 399.844 403.500 390.188 374.031 389.250 407.563

101.469 99.828 99.116 101.403 99.172 95.397 96.975 96.453 120.247 118.163 117.944 117.909 87.981 90.391 89.788 90.328

n.s

n.s

n.s

24.677

2.459

Table (10) and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the combination effect between seeding rates and removal treatments on some growth characteristics, confirmed the presence of high significantly respond of number of tillers/ m2 to this effect in both locations and their average, while the character of plant height responded significantly to this effect in the first location, and high significantly in the average of both locations, while in the second location no significant respond observed to the combination effect. Regarding the characteristics of number of days to 50% anthesis, number of days to physiological maturity, and grain filling stage period, they responded non significantly to the combination effect between seeding rates, and removal treatments in both locations and their average. Maximum number of tillers/ m2 was 416.500, 661.188 and 538.844 tillers for both locations and their average respectively exhibited by the combination of the seed rate 240 kg/ ha and the treatment of control, while minimum number of tillers/ m2 produced by the combination between 120 kg/ ha and the flag leaf blade removal which was 229.938, 441.375 and 335.565 tillers for both locations and their average respectively. Table (10) explained plant height, maximum plant height in the first location and the average of both locations was 105.044 and 104.928 cm respectively produced by the combination between 200 kg/ ha and flag leaf blade removal, while the combination between 120 kg/ ha and awns removal in the first location exhibited minimum plant height which was 94.206 cm, but in the average of both locations, it was 98.847 shown by the combination between 240 kg/ ha and awns removal again.

Table 10: The combination effect of seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics: Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha)

Removal Treatments

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location 120

160

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

133.063 133.250 133.000 133.125 132.438 132.563 132.563 132.563 132.875 132.875 132.875 132.875 132.938 133.000 133.063 132.938

190.250 190.250 190.000 190.250 190.313 190.188 190.000 190.000 190.188 190.188 190.188 190.188 189.938 190.250 190.250 190.250

57.188 57.000 57.000 57.125 57.875 57.625 57.438 57.438 57.313 57.313 57.313 57.313 57.000 57.250 57.188 57.313

345.563 229.938 266.813 284.188 372.313 342.938 328.438 318.875 377.375 358.625 339.250 384.000 416.500 344.250 355.625 398.625

101.425 95.688 94.206 96.744 100.506 96.888 97.988 98.519 102.563 105.044 104.881 103.125 100.919 96.625 96.119 97.206

n.s

n.s

n.s

26.957

3.352

Dukan Location 120

160

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

136.000 136.000 136.000 136.000 136.000 136.000 136.000 136.000 136.125 136.000 136.000 136.125 135.688 135.688 135.688 135.688

200.563 200.688 200.563 200.563 200.563 200.688 200.563 200.313 200.563 200.563 200.563 200.563 200.438 200.438 200.438 200.438

64.563 64.688 64.563 64.563 64.563 64.688 64.563 64.563 64.188 64.563 64.563 64.438 64.750 64.750 64.750 64.750

614.688 441.375 496.000 476.438 651.250 451.688 518.125 573.813 635.688 518.750 510.750 493.000 661.188 555.000 513.625 519.813

105.469 103.125 104.063 103.000 101.075 103.063 104.150 105.469 102.169 104.813 104.663 104.250 103.613 102.313 101.575 103.875

n.s

n.s

n.s

41.590

n.s

Average of both locations 120

160

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

134.531 134.625 134.500 134.563 134.219 134.281 134.281 134.281 134.500 134.438 134.438 134.500 134.313 134.344 134.375 134.313

195.406 195.469 195.281 195.406 195.438 195.438 195.281 195.156 195.375 195.375 195.375 195.375 195.188 195.344 195.344 195.344

60.875 60.844 60.781 60.844 61.219 61.156 61.000 61.000 60.750 60.938 60.938 60.875 60.875 61.000 60.969 61.031

480.125 335.656 381.406 380.313 511.781 397.313 423.281 446.344 506.531 438.688 425.000 438.500 538.844 449.625 434.625 459.219

103.447 99.406 99.134 99.872 100.791 99.975 101.069 101.994 102.366 104.928 104.772 103.688 102.266 99.469 98.847 100.541

n.s

n.s

n.s

24.677

2.459

Table (11A, B and C), and Appendices (1 and 2) explained the effect of the interactions among varieties, seed rates, and removal treatments on some growth characteristics in both locations and their average. It was confirmed that the characteristics of number of days to 50% anthesis, physiological maturity, and grain filling stage period were responded to this combination non significantly in both locations and their average, while the character of number of tillers/ m2 responded high significantly to this effect in both locations and their average, while the character of plant height responded high significantly to this combination effect in the first location and the average of both locations. Concerning the number of tillers/ m2 in the first location, maximum value was 482.250 tillers exhibited by the combination of Araz variety under the seed rate 240 kg/ ha and control (with out removing), but minimum number of tiller was 201.00 tiller exhibited by the combination of Rabea’a variety under 120 kg/ ha and flag leaf blade removal. Table (11B) explained the character of number of tillers/ m2, maximum number of tillers/ m2 was 796.500 tillers exhibited by the combination between Araz variety under 120 kg/ ha and the treatment of control, while minimum tillers number/ m2 was 342.250 tillers shown by the Rabea’a variety under 160 kg/ ha and flag leaf blade removal in the second location, while in the average of both locations as shows in Table (11 C), maximum number of tillers/ m2 produced by the combination between Araz variety under the seed rate of 120 kg/ ha and the treatment of control which was 627.500 tillers, but the minimum value exhibited by the combination of Rabea’a variety with the seed rate of 120 kg/ ha and the removal treatment of flag leaf blade + awns which was 312.625 tillers. Table (11 A) explained plant height, maximum plant height was 135.000 cm exhibited by the Rabea’a variety with 200 kg/ ha and the removal treatment of flag leaf blade + awns, while minimum plant height was 76.600 cm shown by the combination of Cham-4 variety under the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha with removal treatment of control in the first location, while in the second location, there were no

significant respond of plant height to this combination effect Table (11 B). As the average of both locations, the combination effect between all studied factors exhibited high significantly effect on plant height Table (11C), maximum plant height was 118.400 cm produced by Rabea’a variety interacted with the seed rate 160 kg/ ha and the treatment of flag leaf blade removal, while minimum plant height was 85.375 cm shown by the combination between Cham-4 variety interacted with 120 kg/ ha, and the awns removal treatment. Crop height and lodging potential are also important varietals characteristics that may be affected based on cropping system. If the wheat crop is intended for kernel only, it may be important to select a variety that is short in stature and has a low potential for lodging. This may decrease yield loss due to crop spoilage and harvest loss as well as increase harvest rate. However, if the wheat crop is to be used as silage or to be harvested as both kernel and straw then selecting a taller variety may be warranted [56].

Table 11 A: The combination effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics at Qlyasan location: Varieties

Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha )

Removal Treatments

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

57.750 57.500 57.250 57.750 59.250 59.250 58.000 59.250 58.250 58.250 58.250 58.250 57.000 58.250 58.250 58.250 59.750 59.250 59.250 59.250 58.750 58.250 58.750 57.500 59.000 59.000 59.000 59.000 59.500 59.500 59.500 59.500 54.500 54.500 54.500 54.500 56.250 56.250 56.250 56.250 56.000 56.000 56.000 56.000 55.500 55.500 55.500 55.500

458.500 227.500 379.000 299.750 458.250 402.500 302.250 351.750 468.000 401.250 470.250 400.500 482.250 449.750 389.000 464.250 322.000 249.250 261.000 361.250 326.500 343.500 327.500 284.000 349.500 369.250 311.250 410.500 402.000 295.250 328.750 352.500 288.250 201.000 220.250 229.750 346.250 315.000 415.000 297.500 407.000 364.500 313.500 410.500 481.250 377.000 318.750 418.000

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location 120

160 Araz 200

240

120

160 Tamuz 200

240

120

160 Rabea’a

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

130.500 131.250 130.500 131.000 129.500 129.500 129.500 129.500 130.750 130.750 130.750 130.750 130.250 130.250 130.250 130.250 131.000 131.000 131.000 131.000 131.750 131.750 131.750 131.750 131.250 131.250 131.250 131.250 131.000 131.000 131.000 131.000 134.000 134.000 134.000 134.000 132.000 132.000 132.000 132.000 132.250 132.250 132.250 132.250 133.000 133.000 133.000 133.000

188.250 188.750 187.750 188.750 188.750 188.750 187.500 188.750 189.000 189.000 189.000 189.000 187.250 188.500 188.500 188.500 190.750 190.250 190.250 190.250 190.500 190.000 190.500 189.250 190.250 190.250 190.250 190.250 190.500 190.500 190.500 190.500 188.500 188.500 188.500 188.500 188.250 188.250 188.250 188.250 188.250 188.250 188.250 188.250 188.500 188.500 188.500 188.500

94.800 91.750 92.800 96.750 100.750 96.250 91.000 96.800 105.750 106.750 109.500 105.750 106.000 100.500 102.750 102.500 97.075 86.250 89.275 91.000 92.200 88.750 98.500 94.525 86.500 90.175 94.450 89.500 99.250 89.250 84.725 90.075 123.825 120.250 117.500 121.025 124.575 120.550 123.250 117.750 133.000 132.250 129.825 135.000 121.825 108.750 109.000 111.000 T.B.C.

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha )

Removal Treatments

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location 120

160 Cham - 4

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

136.750 136.750 136.500 136.500 136.500 137.000 137.000 137.000 137.250 137.250 137.250 137.250 137.500 137.750 138.000 137.500

193.500 193.500 193.500 193.500 193.750 193.750 193.750 193.750 193.250 193.250 193.250 193.250 193.500 193.500 193.500 193.500

56.750 56.750 57.000 57.000 57.250 56.750 56.750 56.750 56.000 56.000 56.000 56.000 56.000 55.750 55.500 56.000

313.500 242.000 207.000 246.000 358.250 310.750 269.000 342.250 285.000 299.500 262.000 314.500 300.500 255.000 386.000 359.750

90.000 84.500 77.250 78.200 84.500 82.000 79.200 85.000 85.000 91.000 85.750 82.250 76.600 88.000 88.000 85.250

n.s

n.s

n.s

53.915

6.703

Table 11 B: The combination effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics at Dukan location:

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha )

Removal Treatments

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

66.500 67.000 66.500 66.500 67.000 67.500 67.000 67.000 65.250 66.250 66.250 66.250 67.000 67.000 67.000 67.000 65.750 65.750 65.750 65.750 65.500 65.500 65.500

796.500 555.000 519.750 579.250 662.250 493.250 620.000 599.250 786.250 595.500 481.250 567.000 696.500 525.500 425.000 530.500 604.500 436.000 557.500 460.250 743.000 528.500 553.000

105.750 102.000 101.375 102.750 98.500 100.750 97.500 101.750 99.750 105.000 100.250 101.425 100.450 95.625 97.750 103.500 106.000 103.250 106.375 101.750 103.050 103.000 105.850

Dukan Location 120

160 Araz 200

240

120 Tamuz 160

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn

133.750 133.750 133.750 133.750 133.250 133.250 133.250 133.250 134.000 134.000 134.000 134.000 133.250 133.250 133.250 133.250 134.000 134.000 134.000 134.000 134.000 134.000 134.000

200.250 200.750 200.250 200.250 200.250 200.750 200.250 199.250 200.250 200.250 200.250 200.250 200.250 200.250 200.250 200.250 199.750 199.750 199.750 199.750 199.500 199.500 199.500

200

240

120

160 Rabea’a

200

240

Varieties

Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

134.000 133.750 133.750 133.750 133.750 133.000 133.000 133.000 133.000 136.000 136.000 136.000 136.000 135.750 135.750 135.750 135.750 135.500 135.000 135.500 135.500 135.750 135.750 135.750 135.750

Removal Treatments

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha )

199.500 199.500 199.500 199.500 199.500 199.750 199.750 199.750 199.750 201.750 201.750 201.750 201.750 202.000 202.000 202.000 202.000 202.000 202.000 202.000 202.000 201.500 201.500 201.500 201.500

No. of days to Physiological maturity

65.500 65.750 65.750 65.750 65.750 66.750 66.750 66.750 66.750 65.750 65.750 65.750 65.750 66.250 66.250 66.250 66.250 66.500 67.000 66.500 66.500 65.750 65.750 65.750 65.750

634.000 674.500 536.000 565.250 507.750 691.750 509.000 511.000 504.000 609.750 389.000 415.250 395.500 756.500 342.250 472.750 526.500 716.500 499.500 474.000 381.250 649.000 572.750 569.250 569.000

103.250 103.800 100.750 98.625 102.775 105.500 101.750 98.000 98.750 119.000 115.750 115.000 113.750 111.500 116.250 117.750 119.500 114.000 117.500 117.725 114.250 114.250 114.000 113.500 111.000 T.B.C.

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Dukan Location 120

160 Cham - 4

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

140.250 140.250 140.250 140.250 141.000 141.000 141.000 141.000 141.250 141.250 140.750 141.250 140.750 140.750 140.750 140.750

200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.500 200.250 200.250 200.250 200.250

60.250 60.250 60.250 60.250 59.500 59.500 59.500 59.500 59.250 59.250 59.750 59.250 59.500 59.500 59.500 59.500

448.000 385.500 491.500 470.750 443.250 442.750 426.750 535.500 365.500 444.000 522.500 516.000 607.500 612.750 549.250 475.750

91.125 91.500 93.500 93.750 91.250 92.250 95.500 97.375 91.125 96.000 102.050 98.550 94.250 97.875 97.050 102.250

n.s

n.s

n.s

83.180

n.s

Table 11 C: The combination effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on growth characteristics in the average of both locations: Varieties

Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha)

Removal Treatments

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

62.125 62.250 61.875 62.125 63.125 63.375 62.500 63.125 61.750 62.250 62.250 62.250 62.000 62.625 62.625 62.625 62.750 62.500 62.500 62.500 62.125 61.875 62.125 61.500 62.375 62.375 62.375 62.375 63.125 63.125 63.125 63.125 60.125 60.125 60.125 60.125 61.250 61.250 61.250 61.250 61.250 61.500 61.250 61.250 60.625 60.625 60.625 60.625

627.500 391.250 449.375 439.500 560.250 447.875 461.125 475.500 627.125 498.375 475.750 483.750 589.375 487.625 407.000 497.375 463.250 342.625 409.250 410.750 534.750 436.000 440.250 459.000 512.000 452.625 438.250 459.125 546.875 402.125 419.875 428.250 449.000 295.000 317.750 312.625 551.375 328.625 443.875 412.000 561.750 432.000 393.750 395.875 565.125 474.875 444.000 493.500

Plant height ( cm )

Average of both locations 120

160 Araz 200

240

120

160 Tamuz 200

240

120

160 Rabea’a

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

132.125 132.500 132.125 132.375 131.375 131.375 131.375 131.375 132.375 132.375 132.375 132.375 131.750 131.750 131.750 131.750 132.500 132.500 132.500 132.500 132.875 132.875 132.875 132.875 132.500 132.500 132.500 132.500 132.000 132.000 132.000 132.000 135.000 135.000 135.000 135.000 133.875 133.875 133.875 133.875 133.875 133.625 133.875 133.875 134.375 134.375 134.375 134.375

194.250 194.750 194.000 194.500 194.500 194.750 193.875 194.000 194.625 194.625 194.625 194.625 193.750 194.375 194.375 194.375 195.250 195.000 195.000 195.000 195.000 194.750 195.000 194.375 194.875 194.875 194.875 194.875 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.125 195.000 195.000 195.000 195.000

100.275 96.875 97.088 99.750 99.625 98.500 94.250 99.275 102.750 105.875 104.875 103.588 103.225 98.063 100.250 103.000 101.538 94.750 97.825 96.375 97.625 95.875 102.175 98.888 95.150 95.463 96.538 96.138 102.375 95.500 91.363 94.413 121.413 118.000 116.250 117.388 118.038 118.400 120.500 118.625 123.500 124.875 123.775 124.625 118.038 111.375 111.250 111.000 T.B.C.

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( kg/ ha)

Removal Treatments

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Average of both locations 120

160 Cham - 4

200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

138.500 138.500 138.375 138.375 138.750 139.000 139.000 139.000 139.250 139.250 139.000 139.250 139.125 139.250 139.375 139.125

197.000 197.000 197.000 197.000 197.125 197.125 197.125 197.125 196.875 196.875 196.875 196.875 196.875 196.875 196.875 196.875

58.500 58.500 58.625 58.625 58.375 58.125 58.125 58.125 57.625 57.625 57.875 57.625 57.750 57.625 57.500 57.750

380.750 313.750 349.250 358.375 400.750 376.750 347.875 438.875 325.250 371.750 392.250 415.250 454.000 433.875 467.625 417.750

90.563 88.000 85.375 85.975 87.875 87.125 87.350 91.188 88.063 93.500 93.900 90.400 85.425 92.938 92.525 93.750

n.s

n.s

n.s

49.353

4.918

Table (12) and Appendix (2) explained the effect of both locations Qlyasan, and Dukan on some growth characteristics, indicate to the presence of high significantly effect of locations on all growth characteristics, number of days required to 50% anthesis in Dukan exceeded that of Qlyasan by 2.31%, this means that Qlyasan location was earlier than Dukan in number of days to 50% anthesis by 3.06 days. Data on number of days to physiological maturity as represented in the same Table show the same trend of previous character, it was observed that Dukan location exceeded Qlyasan by 5.45 %; this means Qlyasan location was earlier than Dukan location in this character by 10.36 days. Regarding the character of grain filling stage as shows in the Table (12), it was noticed that Dukan location spent more period for grain filling compared to Qlyasan location by 12.74%. Concerning to number of tillers/ m2 as represented in the same table, data recorded in Dukan location due to this character was higher in comparison to Qlyasan location, which predominated it by 57.98%. The same trend was observed for plant height as recorded in the same table, means Dukan location outyielded Qlyasan location by 4.30%, from these results, it was observed that there were differences in the climatic condition of these locations; it seems that the Dukan location may be more suitable due to these growth characteristics. Different respond were previously recorded in growth characteristics to the location effect, resulted from the variation between the environmental factors such as total precipitation and its

distribution along the growing season, temperature, and soil moisture availability that created such condition in which the competition among plants become lesser than other location [221]. Table 12: The effect of locations on growth characteristics:

Locations

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers 2 /m

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan

132.875

190.168

57.293

341.457

99.278

Dukan

135.938

200.531

64.594

539.449

103.543

LSD ( P ≤ 0.05 )

2.494

0.921

1.376

16.406

1.159

Table (13) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the respond of yield and its components to variety effect in both locations of Qlyasan, Dukan, and their average. Spikes number/ m2 represented in the same Table and its appendices show high significantly differences among varieties for both locations and their average. It was noticed that maximum spikes number/ m2 were 390.500, 577.125 and 483.813 spikes exhibited by Araz variety for both locations and their average respectively. Regarding Qlyasan location, Araz variety exceeded other varieties by 21.72, 19.79 and 36.21%, respectively. In Dukan location the same trend was noticed due to this character, the exceeding of Araz variety was also noticed comparing to only Rabea’a variety and Cham-4 variety by 12.54 and 21.53% respectively, but no significant differences represented between Araz variety and Tamuz in this character. Concerning to the average of both locations, Araz variety predominated the rest significantly by 9.97, 15.36 and 27.06% respectively, while minimum spike number/ m2 produced by Cham-4 variety which was 286.688, 474.875 and 380.781 for both locations and their average, respectively. Data recorded on spike weight/ m2 represented in the Table (13) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the presence of significant respond of this character to variety effect in Qlyasan location, and high significantly respond to variety effect in Dukan location and the average of both locations. Maximum spike

weight/ m2 recorded by Araz variety which was 676.676, 801.629 and 739.152 g for both locations and their average respectively, while minimum value for this character recorded by Tamuz variety which was 511.412, 579.424 and 545.418 g for both location and their average respectively, Araz variety predominated on Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety significantly by 32.32 and 18.58% respectively in Qlyasan location, while in Dukan location predominated both by 38.35 and 8.17%, respectively and by 35.52 and 12.70%, respectively as the average of both locations. Table (13) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) confirmed the presence of high significantly differences between varieties in the character of spike length in both locations and their average. Maximum value recorded by Araz variety with 10.235, 10.936 and 10.586 cm for both locations and their average respectively, while minimum spike length exhibited by Cham-4 variety with 8.955, 10.252 and 9.604 cm for both locations and their average respectively. In Qlyasan location, Araz variety exceeded the rest by 5.27, 7.76 and 14.29% respectively; while in Dukan location Araz variety predominated on Rabea’a variety and Cham-4 variety by 5.82 and 6.67% respectively, whereas in the average of both locations, Araz variety predominated on the rest by 3.42, 6.75 and 10.22 respectively. Table (13) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) confirmed the presence of high significantly differences among varieties in the character number of spikelets/ spike in Qlyasan location and the average of both locations, while these differences were significant between varieties in Dukan location. In the first location, Tamuz variety with 19.109 exhibited maximum spikelets/ spike, and predominate on the rest by 4.66, 11.18 and 2.73%, respectively, while cham-4 variety with 17.188 showed minimum values for this character. Regarding Dukan location also maximum spikelets/ spike produced by Tamuz variety with 19.094 which predominate significantly Araz variety and Rabea’a variety by 6.90 and 5.44%, respectively, while no significant differences occurred between Tamuz variety and Cham-4

variety, and minimum value was 17.859 spikelets exhibited by Araz variety. Concerning to the average of both locations, maximum spikelets number/ spike was 19.102 produced by Tamuz variety and outyielded significantly only Araz variety and Rabea’a variety by 5.78 and 8.24%, respectively, while no significant differences represented between Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety, and minimum spikelets number/ spike exhibited by Rabea’a variety which was 17.648 spikelets. Table (13) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) confirmed the presence of high significantly differences among varieties in the character kernels number/ spike, and maximum kernels number exhibited by Tamuz variety with 55.906, 55.836 and 55.871 kernels for both locations and their average respectively, whereas minimum kernel number/ spike produced by Araz variety which were 44.172, 43.289 and 43.730 kernels for both locations and their average respectively. In Qlyasan location, Tamuz variety outyielded the rest by 26.56, 22.30 and 21.80% respectively, while in Dukan location also Tamuz variety exceeded Araz variety and Rabea’a variety by 28.99 and 9.75% respectively, while no significant differences between Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety observed in this location. Regarding the average of both locations Tamuz variety exceeded the rest significantly by 27.76, 15.69 and 9.91% respectively. Data recorded on kernels weight/ spike represented in the Table (13) indicated to the presence of significant respond of kernels weight/ spike to variety effect in Qlyasan location and high significantly respond in Dukan location, and the average of both locations. Maximum kernels weight/ spike exhibited by Rabea’a variety which was 2.024, 1.769 and 1.897 g for both locations and their average respectively, while minimum value exhibited by Cham-4 variety in Qlyasan location with 1.622 g, but in Dukan location and the average of both locations it was 0.930 and 1.359 g recorded by Tamuz variety. Rabea’a variety exceeded the rest by 14.16, 13.26 and 24.78% in Qlyasan location and by 45.60, 90.22 and

40.84% in Dukan location and in the average of both locations Rabea’a variety exceeded the rest by 26.97, 39.59 and 31.83% respectively. Table (13), and appendices (3, 4, and 5) confirmed the presence of high significantly differences among varieties in the character 1000- kernels weight in both locations and their average represented in, Rabea’a variety produced maximum value in both locations and their average due to 1000- kernels weight which were 46.975, 44.925 and 45.950 g respectively, while Tamuz variety exhibited minimum weight for 1000- kernels which was 34.559, 33.256 and 33.907 g for both locations and their average respectively. Rabea’a variety predominated Araz variety, Tamuz variety, Cham-4 variety significantly by 8.78, 35.93 and 25.40% respectively in the first location, while in the second location it predominated them by 8.84, 35.09 and 24.64% respectively and in the average of both locations it predominated them by 8.81, 35.52 and 25.03 % respectively. Data on kernel yield ton/ ha exhibited high significantly respond to variety effect in both locations and their average. In Qlyasan location, Araz variety with 4.628 ton/ ha exceeded Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety by 29.74 and 16.87% respectively, and also Rabea’a variety, predominated Tamuz variety significantly by 25.96%, while their were no significant differences between Araz variety, and Rabea’a variety and also between Tamuz variety, and Cham-4 variety in this trait. Concerning to Dukan location Rabea’a variety with 4.859 ton/ ha outyielded both Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety by 116.34 and 35.35% respectively. Whereas there were no significant differences between Araz variety and Rabea’a variety, and also Araz variety with 4.587 ton/ ha exceeded both Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety by 104.23 and 27.77% respectively. Minimum kernel yield exhibited by Tamuz variety with 3.567 and 2.246 ton/ ha for both locations respectively. Regarding the average of both locations it was noticed that maximum kernel yield 4.676 ton/ ha showed by Rabea’a variety and followed by Araz variety with 4.607 ton/ ha. Rabea’a variety predominated Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety

significantly by 60.85 and 23.87 % respectively, and also Araz variety exceeded both by 58.48 and 22.04% respectively, whereas there were no significant differences between Araz variety and Rabea’a variety. Minimum kernel yield was 2.907 ton/ ha exhibited by Tamuz variety. Table (13) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5), significant differences observed between varieties in biological yield in the first location, and high significantly differences represented among varieties due to this character in the second location and the average of both locations. Maximum value produced by Rabea’a variety which were 16.912, 27.116 and 22.014 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively, and followed by Araz variety which recorded 16.501, 22.619 and 19.560 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively, while minimum biological yield produced by Tamuz variety with 13.079, 21.795 and 17.437 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively. In the first location, Rabea’a variety predominate both Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety by 29.31 and 21.46% respectively, and Araz variety predominated both Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety by 26.16 and 18.52% respectively. No significant differences represented between Araz variety, and Rabea’a variety, and also between Tamuz variety and Cham-4 variety in the first location. Regarding the second location, Rabea’a variety exceeded the rest varieties by 19.88, 24.41 and 23.88% respectively. As the average of both locations, Rabea’a variety also exceeded the rest by 12.55, 26.25 and 22.94% respectively. Table (13) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the effect of variety on the character harvest index (H.I.) indicating the presence of high significantly differences between varieties in harvest index in the second location and the average of both locations, while in the first location it was not significant, maximum harvest index value in the second location and the average of both locations exhibited by Araz variety with 0.201 and 0.240 respectively, while in the first location which was not affected significantly, maximum harvest index value

was 0.296 shown by Cham-4 variety, minimum harvest index value produced by Tamuz variety in both locations and their average which was 0.275, 0.100 and 0.188 respectively. As the average of both locations, Araz was predominated the rest by 27.66, 6.19 and 3.90% respectively. Maximum grain and biological yield obtained in particular varieties may be due to the highest value of yield components such as number of tillers/ m2, and number of spikes/ m2 [222, 223, 224 and 225]. Improved grain yield is the ultimate aim for cereal breeders. Yield increase may be effectively tackled on the basis of the performance of yield components and other closely associated characteristics [138], and some workers confirmed these results [226 and 227].

Table 13: Means of kernel yield and its components in wheat varieties:

Varieties

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

Qlyasan Location Araz Tamuz Rabea’a Cham-4 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

390.500 320.813 326.000 286.688

676.676 511.412 627.588 570.644

10.235 9.723 9.498 8.955

18.258 19.109 17.188 18.602

44.172 55.906 45.711 45.898

1.773 1.787 2.024 1.622

43.184 34.559 46.975 37.459

4.628 3.567 4.493 3.960

16.501 13.079 16.912 13.923

0.280 0.275 0.277 0.296

20.794

93.051

0.380

0.495

2.730

0.245

2.065

0.570

2.393

n.s

Dukan Location Araz Tamuz Rabea’a Cham-4 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

577.125 559.125 512.813 474.875

801.629 579.424 801.617 741.085

10.936 10.749 10.334 10.252

17.859 19.094 18.109 18.867

43.289 55.836 50.875 55.770

1.215 0.930 1.769 1.256

41.275 33.256 44.925 36.044

4.587 2.246 4.859 3.590

22.619 21.795 27.116 21.889

0.201 0.100 0.176 0.167

43.496

46.508

0.273

0.785

2.344

0.168

1.479

0.396

0.676

0.007

Average of both locations Araz Tamuz Rabea’a Cham-4 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

483.813 439.969 419.406 380.781

739.152 545.418 714.603 655.864

10.586 10.236 9.916 9.604

18.059 19.102 17.648 18.734

43.730 55.871 48.293 50.834

1.494 1.359 1.897 1.439

42.230 33.907 45.950 36.751

4.607 2.907 4.676 3.775

19.560 17.437 22.014 17.906

0.240 0.188 0.226 0.231

22.387

48.306

0.217

0.431

1.671

0.138

1.179

0.322

1.155

0.013

Table (14) explained the effect of seeding rates on the yield characteristics and grain yield components in both locations and their average. The effect of variety on the character number of spikes/ m2 indicating the presence of high significantly by seeding rates appendices (3, 4 and 5). Maximum number of spikes/ m2 produced by the seed rates 240 kg/ ha, which was 368.125, 552.813 and 460.469 spikes for both locations and their average respectively, but minimum spikes number/ m2 shown by the seeding rate of 120 kg/ ha, which was 271.188, 499.688 and 385.438 spikes for both locations and their average respectively. In the first location, the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha exceeded both 120 and 160 kg/ ha by 35.75 and 11.43%, respectively, while in the second location the seeding rate of 240 kg/ ha exceeded both 120 and 200 kg/ ha by 10.63 and 4.07% respectively, while there were no significant differences between 160 and 240 kg/ ha in this character. Concerning to the average of both locations, the seeding rates of 240 kg/ ha predominated all seeding rates significantly by 19.47, 5.78 and 4.00% respectively, while there were no significant differences between the seeding rates 160 and 200 kg/ ha in this character. Table (14) and Appendices explained the effect of seeding rates on the character spike weight/ m2 indicating the presence of not significant effect in the first location, while it was high significantly in the second location and the average of both locations. Maximum spike weight/ m2 exhibited by the seed rate of 200 and 240 kg/ ha which was 749.406 and 748.379 g respectively in the second location, and in the average of both locations it was 675.549 and 684.509 g respectively. Minimum spike weight in the second location and the average of both locations recorded by 160 kg/ ha which were 689.401 and 644.877 g respectively. Table (14) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) indicated the presence of no significant differences between seeding rates were observed for both locations and their average due to the characteristics average spike length, number of spikelet/ spike, kernels weight/ spike, and 1000- grain weight. Regarding the character, number of

kernels/ spike, it was observed from the Table (14) that the effect of seeding rates was significant only in the second location, and the value of this character restricted between 48.953 to 52.871 for the seed rates 160 and 120 kg/ ha respectively. The rates of (120, 200 and 240 kg/ ha predominated the rate 160 kg/ ha significantly by 8.004, 6.065 and 6.271% respectively. Data recorded on kernel yield represented in Table 14 confirmed the presence of high significantly effect of seeding rates in the first location and the average of both locations, while it was only significant in the second location, Appendices (3, 4 and 5). Regarding the first location, maximum kernel yield was 4.451 ton/ ha recorded by the rate 200 kg/ ha, while the seeding rates of 120 kg/ ha showed minimum kernel yield 3.821 ton/ ha. Kernel yield under 200 kg/ ha predominated both 120 and 160 kg/ ha by 16.48 and 10.42% respectively, while no significant differences represented between both rates 200 and 240 kg/ ha. Concerning to the second location and the average of both locations, maximum kernel yield recorded by the seed rate 240 kg/ ha which was 4.008 and 4.177 respectively, while minimum kernel yield was 3.564 ton/ ha in the second location recorded by 200 kg/ ha, and in the average of both locations the minimum kernel was 3.806 recorded by the seed rate 120 kg/ ha. The seed rate 240 kg/ ha predominated 200 kg/ ha by 12.46%, while there were no significant differences among 120, 160 and 240 kg/ ha in the second location. As the average of both locations, the rate of 240 kg/ ha outyielded the rate 120 kg/ ha significantly by 9.75%, whereas no significant differences represented between 160, 200 and 240 kg/ ha. Table (14) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) indicated the presence significant effect of seeding rates on biological yield in the first location, while in the second location and the average of both locations it was high significant. Maximum biological yield was 15.829 ton/ ha in the first location produced by 200 kg/ ha, while in the second location and the average of both locations it was 24.460 and 20.074 ton/ ha respectively produced by 240 kg/ ha. Minimum biological yield was 14.274, 22.259

and 18.266 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively, produced by the seed rate of 120 kg/ ha. Both seed rates 200 and 240 kg/ ha predominated 120 kg/ ha in this character by 10.89 and 9.91 % respectively, while there were no significant differences between 160, 200 and 240 kg/ ha in the first location. In the second location the seed rates 160, 200 and 240 kg/ ha exceeded 120 kg/ ha by 4.56, 5.57 and 9.89 % respectively, while the rate of 240 kg/ ha exceeded 160 and 200 kg/ ha by 5.10 and 4.40%, respectively. Regarding to the average of both locations, the seed rate 240 kg/ ha outyielded 120 and 160 kg/ ha by 9.90 and 5.94 % respectively, while no significant differences exhibited between 200 and 240 kg/ ha. Table (14) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) confirmed the presence of significant effect of seeding rates on the character harvest index in the second location only, while in the first location and the average of both locations this effect was not significant. Maximum harvest index was 0.291 in the first location showed by 200 kg/ ha, while it was 0.170 and 0.229 in the second location and the average of both locations exhibited by 160 kg/ ha, minimum harvest index was found to be 0.272 shown by 120 kg/ ha in the first location and it was 0.149 exhibited by 200 kg/ ha in the second location, and in the average of both locations it was 0.217 recorded by the seed rate 240 kg/ ha. Higher sowing rates generally increase dry matter production, especially in early grazing, generally the first 6 to 14 weeks after sowing. Higher sowing rates normally have no negative effect on kernel yield or quality. It was suggested Sowing rates from 100 to 120 kg/ ha (220 to 240 plants/ m2) for cold and higher rainfall areas, 90 kg/ ha (160 plants/ m2) for medium rainfall areas and milder environments, and 60 kg/ ha (120 plants/ m2) for lower rainfall warmer districts. These rates based on good quality seed with a high germination percentage, and an establishment of 80% of seed sown [46].

It was previously reported that no significant differences were observed in kernel yield and most of its components as seeding rates increased from 120 kg/ ha to 180 kg/ ha [228 and 229]. If plant population falls below the economic, optimum yields fall significantly, especially if grass weed infestation is serious [11].

Table 14: The effect of seeding rates on kernel yield and its components:

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha)

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

Qlyasan Location 120 160 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤0.05 )

271.188 330.375 354.313 368.125

563.636 600.353 601.693 620.638

9.588 9.470 9.683 9.673

18.492 18.117 18.391 18.156

47.336 48.617 47.367 48.367

1.747 1.816 1.808 1.835

40.359 40.664 40.880 40.274

3.821 4.031 4.451 4.346

14.274 14.624 15.829 15.688

0.272 0.288 0.291 0.276

18.413

n.s

n.s

n.s

n.s

n.s

n.s

0.319

1.232

n.s

Dukan Location 120 160 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

499.688 540.250 531.188 552.813

736.568 689.401 749.406 748.379

10.770 10.410 10.641 10.449

18.469 18.367 18.883 18.211

52.871 48.953 51.922 52.023

1.244 1.274 1.286 1.366

38.790 39.069 38.955 38.686

3.791 3.919 3.564 4.008

22.259 23.273 23.428 24.460

0.167 0.170 0.149 0.159

18.241

28.875

n.s

n.s

2.685

n.s

n.s

0.273

0.913

0.013

Average of both locations 120 160 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

385.438 435.313 442.750 460.469

650.102 644.877 675.549 684.509

10.179 9.940 10.162 10.061

18.480 18.242 18.637 18.184

50.104 48.785 49.645 50.195

1.495 1.545 1.547 1.600

39.574 39.866 39.917 39.480

3.806 3.975 4.008 4.177

18.266 18.948 19.629 20.074

0.220 0.229 0.220 0.217

12.738

30.276

n.s

n.s

n.s

n.s

n.s

0.206

0.754

n.s

Table (15) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the effect of removal treatments on kernel yield and some of its components indicating the presence of high significantly effect of removal treatments on all characteristics with the exception of average spike length which was significant only, and number of kernels/ spike which was not significant in the first location, but in the second location all studied characteristics also affected by removal treatments high significantly with the exception of number of spikelets/ spike and number of kernels/ spike which were significant only, and average spike length which was not significant. From these appendices, it was noticed that all studied characteristics in this Table were affected by removal treatments in a high significantly way with the exception of number of spikelets/ spike which was significant only, and the characteristics average spike length, number of kernels/ spike, and harvest index responded non significantly to removal treatments in the average of both locations. Data on number of spikes/ m2 as represented in Table 15 confirmed that the treatment of control (non removal) produced maximum value in both locations and their average which was 367.375, 631.750, and 499.563 respectively, while minimum number of spikes recorded by flag leaf blade removal with 308.375, 483.375 and 395.875 spikes for both locations and their average respectively. Regarding to spike weight/ m2 which recorded the same trend of number of spikes/ m2 especially for maximum values which were 715.503, 975.958 and 845.731 g for both locations and their average respectively as recorded by the control, but the minimum spike weight recorded by the treatment of both flag leaf blade + awns removal for both locations and their average which were 540.363, 632.426 and 586.395 g respectively. Data recorded on the average of spike length in the same Table which responded significantly to removal treatments in the first location only, while in the second location and the average of both locations it was not significant. Maximum spike length in the first location was 9.898 cm recorded by the treatment of control, while awns removal treatments with 9.466 cm produced minimum spike length.

Data on the number of spikelets/ spike as responded in a high significantly way to removal treatments in the first location, and significant in the second location and the average of both locations, recorded maximum value 18.867, 18.641 and 18.754 spikelets by the treatment of control in both locations and their average respectively. Minimum number of spikelets/ spike recorded by awns removal which 17.773, 18.078 and 17.926 spikelets for both locations and their average respectively. Regarding the character of kernels number/ spike responded significantly to removal treatments in the second location only. Maximum kernels number/ spike recorded by the treatment of control which was 50.008, 53.441 and 51.725 kernels for both locations and their average respectively. Minimum kernels number recorded in the first location and the average of both locations exhibited by the treatment of awns removal which was 45.992 and 48.188 kernels respectively, but in the second location, it was 49.883 kernels recorded by the treatment of both flag leaf blade + awns removal. Table (15) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the effect of removal treatments on the character kernels weight/ spike indicating the presence of high significantly response to removal treatments for both locations and their average. Maximum kernels weight/ spike recorded by the treatment of control which was 2.031, 1.375 and 1.703 g for both locations and their average respectively, whereas minimum kernels weight was 1.630, 1.167 and 1.398 g exhibited by the removal treatment of both flag leaf blade + awns for both locations and their average respectively. Data recorded in the Table(15)and the Appendices signified the presence of high significantly differences between removal treatments in the character 1000- kernels weight in both locations and their average. Maximum 1000- kernels weight recorded by the treatment of control which was 42.250, 40.691 and 41.471 g for both locations and their average respectively, whereas minimum 1000- kernels weight values were 38.702, 36.971 and 37.837 g recorded by the treatment of flag leaf blade + awns for both locations and their average

respectively. In the first location the treatment of control predominated all removal treatments by 4.27, 3.79 and 9.17% respectively, but in the second location the treatment of control outyielded the rest by 4.76, 4.35 and 10.06% respectively, while as the average of both locations, the treatment of control exceeded the rest by 4.51, 4.07 and 9.60% respectively, but no significant differences between flag leaf blade removal and awns removal were observed in this character. Table (15) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the effect of removal treatments on the character kernel yield indicating the presence of high significantly response of kernel yield to removal treatments in both locations and their average. Maximum kernel yield produced by the treatment of control which was 5.009, 4.945 and 4.977 ton/ ha, while minimum kernel yield produced by the treatment of both flag leaf blade + awns which were 3.700, 3.329 and 3.514 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively, in the first location the treatment of control exceeded the rest by 30.24, 22.38 and 35.38% respectively, and in the second location predominated the rest by 39.06, 43.25 and 48.54% respectively, but in the average of both locations treatment of control exceeded the rest by 34.48, 31.91 and 41.63% respectively, it was observed that the predominance of kernel yield in the treatment of control may be resulted in the exceeding of control treatment in the characteristics number of kernel/ spike, kernel yield/ spike, and 1000- kernels weight in comparison to other removal treatments. Table (15) and Appendices explained that the biological yield was found to be responded high significantly to removal treatments in both locations and their average. Maximum biological yield produced by control treatment which was 17.135, 28.794 and 22.964 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively, while minimum biological yield exhibited by the treatment of both flag leaf blade + awns removal which was 14.339 ton/ ha in the first location, but it was 20.722, and 17.658 ton/ ha exhibited by flag leaf blade removal treatments in the second location and the average of both locations respectively. In the first location the

treatment of control exceeded the rest by 16.29, 19.42 and 19.50% respectively, while there were no significant differences among the removal treatments flag leaf, awn, and both flag leaf blade + awns in this character. Regarding the second location, also the treatment of control exceeded the rest by 38.95, 28.39 and 34.06% respectively, while no significant differences represented between flag leaf, and both flag leaf blade + awns removal. In the average of both locations the removal of control exceeded the rest by 30.05, 24.89 and 28.23% respectively, but no significant differences was noticed between the removal treatment of flag leaf, and both flag leaf blade + awns in this character. Table (15) and Appendices show high significantly differences between removal treatments in harvest index observed in both locations, while it was not significant in the average of both locations. Maximum harvest index was 0.296 and 0.232 in the first location and the average of both locations produced by the treatment of control, while in the second location, it was 0.170 produced by the treatment of flag leaf blade removal. Minimum harvest index in the first location and the average of both locations were 0.268 and 0.211 exhibited by the treatment of both flag leaf blade + awns removal, but in the second location minimum harvest index was 0.152 shown by awns removal treatment. In the first location the treatment of control exceeded the removal treatments of flag leaf blade and both flag leaf blade + awns by 8.82 and 10.45 respectively, but there were no significant differences between control, and awns removal, while in the second location the treatment of control exceeded awns removal and both flag leaf blade + awns significantly by 10.53 and 9.09%, respectively, but no significant differences between control and flag leaf blade removal were observed. The flag leaf blade is considered to be a primary source of assimilates for grain filling and grain yield due to its short distance to the spike and the fact that it stay green for longer than the rest of the leaves. Positive correlations have been found between flag leaf blade size and yield [125], while different parts of ear including

awns photosynthesize and contribute to grain filling [164, 165 and 166] and it plays a key role in ear photosynthesis [167]. Flag leaf removal significantly reduced final kernel weight, and maximum rate of kernel filling of Italian, and Spanish varieties, but it had no effect on kernel filling duration. Reduction in final kernel weight due to flag leaf blade removal were larger in modern than in old varieties, suggesting that the contribution of the flag leaf blade to kernel filling increased over time. The most significant changes on flag leaf attributes of Italian varieties were recorded for chlorophyll content and leaf area duration (LAD), which increased 9.1%, and 3.8% respectively [127]. It was who declared that the flag leaf removal at heading, reduced the 1000kernel weight by 11.2% and increased the kernel protein content by 1.70% [154]. Improved kernel yield is the ultimate aim for cereal breeders. Yield increase may be effectively tackled on the basis of the performance of yield components and other closely associated characteristics [138]. The leaves, being the site of photosynthetic activity, appear to have an obvious relationship to the plant’s kernel yield ability. Compared to other leaves, the flag leaf contributes the most photo synthetic assimilates in wheat; therefore, it assumes the greatest importance in terms of kernel yield [139]. It was suggested that awns play a dominant role in contributing to large kernels and a high kernel yield in awned wheat cultivars, particularly during the grainfilling stages [17].

Table 15: The effect of removal treatments on kernel yield and its components: Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

Qlyasan Location Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

367.375 308.375 312.375 335.875

715.503 586.202 544.251 540.363

9.898 9.507 9.466 9.542

18.867 18.453 17.773 18.063

50.008 47.703 45.992 47.984

2.031 1.786 1.760 1.630

42.250 40.520 40.705 38.702

5.009 3.846 4.093 3.700

17.135 14.594 14.348 14.339

0.296 0.272 0.292 0.268

13.397

45.157

0.312

0.640

n.s

0.130

0.786

0.285

0.890

0.018

Dukan Location Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

631.750 483.375 500.938 507.875

975.958 656.858 658.513 632.426

10.648 10.478 10.447 10.697

18.641 18.617 18.078 18.594

53.441 52.063 50.383 49.883

1.375 1.343 1.284 1.167

40.691 38.843 38.994 36.971

4.945 3.556 3.452 3.329

28.794 20.722 22.427 21.478

0.168 0.170 0.152 0.154

20.488

33.727

n.s

0.424

2.504

0.107

0.746

0.263

0.860

0.012

Average of both locations Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

499.563 395.875 406.656 421.875

845.731 621.530 601.382 586.395

10.273 9.993 9.956 10.120

18.754 18.535 17.926 18.328

51.725 49.883 48.188 48.934

1.703 1.565 1.522 1.398

41.471 39.681 39.850 37.837

4.977 3.701 3.773 3.514

22.964 17.658 18.387 17.909

0.232 0.221 0.222 0.211

12.188

28.062

n.s

0.382

n.s

0.084

0.539

0.193

0.616

n.s

Table (16) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the combination effect between studied varieties and seeding rates on kernel yield and its components indicating that the number of spikes/ m2 responded high significantly to this effect in both locations and their average. Maximum number of spikes was 435.500 exhibited by the combination between Araz variety and the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha in the first location, but in the second location it was 612.750 kg/ ha produced by the combination between Tamuz variety and 160 kg/ ha, while in the average of both locations, the combination between Araz variety, and the seed rate 200 kg/ ha showed maximum spikes/ m2 which was 509.875. Regarding the minimum number of spikes/ m2, it was 222.750 and 333.00 spikes in the first location and the average of both locations respectively exhibited by the combination between Rabea’a variety and 120 kg/ ha, while in the second location, it was 440.000 spikes showed by the combination between Cham-4 variety and also kg/ ha. Regarding the character, spike weight/ m2; it was found that the combination effect between varieties and seeding rates was high significantly in the second location and the average of both locations, while it was not significant in the first location. Spike weight/ m2 in the second location restricted between 515.798 to 899.008 for the combination between Tamuz variety, and 240 kg/ ha and Araz variety combined with 120 kg/ ha respectively, while in the average of both locations the value of this character ranged between 498.744 and 776.841 g for the combination between Tamuz variety with 240 kg/ ha, and Rabea’a variety also 240 kg/ ha respectively. Regarding the characteristics of average spike length, number of spikelets/ spike, and kernels weight/ spike, they were responded to the combination effect between varieties and seeding rates non significantly in both locations and their average. Data recorded on number of kernel/ spike was found to be high significantly responded to this combination in the second location, and it responded significantly in the average of both locations, while in the first location no significant effect was observed. Maximum kernel number/ spike was 61.391 exhibited by the

combination between Cham-4 variety and 120 kg/ ha, while the minimum number was 41.563 produced by the combination of Araz variety and 160 kg/ ha in the second location, while in the average of both locations it was restricted between 42.609 to 57.422 exhibited by the combination of Araz variety with 200 kg/ ha, and Tamuz variety with 160 kg/ ha respectively. Table (16) and Appendices confirmed the presence of high significantly response of the character, 1000- kernels weight in both locations and the average of both locations. Maximum weight of 1000- kernels was 47.603, 45.779 and 46.691 g for both locations and the average of both locations respectively exhibited by the combination between Rabea’a variety and 120 kg/ ha, while the minimum value of 1000- kernel weight was 31.331, 30.183 and 30.757 g in both locations and their average respectively shown by the combination between Tamuz variety and 120 kg/ ha. Table (16) and Appendices explained the effect of combination between varieties and seeding rates on the character kernel yield, it was observed that the effect of this combination was high significantly in the second location and the average of both locations, while it was not significant in the first location. Maximum kernel yield in the first location was 5.146 ton/ ha produced by the combination between Rabea’a variety and 200 kg/ ha, while in the second location and the average of both locations 5.953 and 5.252 ton/ ha respectively produced by the same variety with the seed rate 240 kg/ ha. Minimum kernel yield was 3.394, 1.987 and 2.691 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively exhibited by the combination of Tamuz variety and the seed rate 240 kg/ ha. Table (16) and Appendices explained the character biological yield, indicating the presence of high significantly response of this character to the combination effect between varieties and seeding rates in second location and the average of both locations, while in the first location the combination effect was not significant. Maximum biological yield in the first location and the average of both locations

was 18.032 and 24.359 respectively produced by the combination between Rabea’a variety and the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha, but in the second location it was 29.131 ton/ ha produced by the combination between Rabea’a variety and 160 kg/ ha. Regarding the minimum value of biological yield in both locations and the average of both locations, it was 11.641, 19.799 and 15.720 ton/ ha respectively exhibited by the combination between Cham-4 variety, and 160 kg/ ha. Table (16) and Appendices explained that the combination effect between varieties and seeding rates on harvest index was significant only in the first location, and high significantly in the second location and the average of both locations. Maximum harvest index in the first location and the average of both locations was 0.328 and 0.269 exhibited by the combination between Cham-4 variety and 160 kg/ ha, while in the second location it was 0.222 shown by the combination between Araz variety and 120 kg/ ha. Minimum value for harvest index in the first location it was 0.253 exhibited by the combination between Tamuz variety and 120 kg/ ha, while in the second location was 0.089 showed by Tamuz variety and 200 kg/ ha, but in the average of both locations, it was 0.176 exhibited by the combination between Tamuz variety and 240 kg/ ha. It is clear that any increase in the yield potential of wheat will come from breeding. Progress in breeding for yield potential is more likely to occur if specific characteristics are targetted as has occurred in kernel quality improvement and disease resistance breeding [21]. Wheat plant establishment declines as seed rates increase and lower establishment percentages should be used to produce high plant populations in the field. However, the expected establishment percentages may also need to take into account the time of sowing and the impact of soil type to target specific plant densities [79].

Table 16: The combination effect of varieties and seeding rates on kernel yield and its components: No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

120 160 Araz 200 240 120 160 Tamuz 200 240 120 160 Rabea’a 200 240 120 160 Cham - 4 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

332.250 369.000 425.250 435.500 288.500 310.750 349.500 334.500 222.750 332.000 361.750 387.500 241.250 309.750 280.750 315.000 36.826

632.488 658.040 685.088 731.088 510.320 526.525 527.113 481.690 585.750 692.383 609.000 623.220 525.988 524.463 585.570 646.555 n.s

9.866 10.331 9.934 10.809 10.172 9.644 9.506 9.572 9.403 9.444 9.816 9.331 8.909 8.459 9.475 8.978 n.s

18.313 18.375 18.250 18.094 19.938 18.750 18.813 18.938 16.781 17.375 17.563 17.031 18.938 17.969 18.938 18.563 n.s

120 160 Araz 200 240 120 160 Tamuz 200 240 120 160 Rabea’a 200 240 120 160 Cham - 4 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

603.250 576.500 594.500 534.250 512.250 612.750 567.500 544.000 443.250 517.250 510.000 580.750 440.000 454.500 452.750 552.250 36.481

899.008 720.188 808.495 778.825 627.050 573.535 601.315 515.798 706.395 787.718 781.893 930.463 713.820 676.165 805.923 768.433 57.751

11.097 10.825 11.172 10.650 10.838 10.581 10.728 10.850 10.513 10.116 10.447 10.259 10.631 10.119 10.219 10.038 n.s

17.719 17.938 18.438 17.344 18.844 18.656 19.781 19.094 18.625 17.656 18.375 17.781 18.688 19.219 18.938 18.625 n.s

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha )

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 - Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

1.905 1.785 1.772 1.628 1.657 1.817 1.794 1.881 1.983 2.153 1.935 2.025 1.442 1.509 1.732 1.806 n.s

46.813 42.284 44.516 39.122 31.331 34.586 35.170 37.151 47.603 47.519 46.298 46.480 35.689 38.266 37.534 38.345 0.054

4.299 4.606 4.676 4.930 3.475 3.464 3.936 3.394 3.968 4.307 5.146 4.550 3.540 3.746 4.047 4.509 n.s

14.570 17.365 17.087 16.982 13.514 12.779 13.225 12.799 14.889 16.711 18.016 18.032 14.123 11.641 14.990 14.939 n.s

0.296 0.269 0.276 0.279 0.253 0.286 0.301 0.260 0.278 0.269 0.300 0.260 0.263 0.328 0.287 0.307 0.039

1.208 1.262 1.133 1.256 0.847 1.045 0.838 0.991 1.702 1.724 1.790 1.859 1.219 1.063 1.382 1.358 n.s

44.839 40.478 42.144 37.640 30.183 33.287 33.819 35.733 45.779 45.704 43.739 44.477 34.357 36.806 36.117 36.895 2.720

5.333 4.180 4.222 4.612 2.240 2.723 2.033 1.987 4.566 4.677 4.238 5.953 3.024 4.095 3.765 3.477 0.547

24.153 21.223 23.250 21.849 21.189 22.938 22.136 20.918 23.718 29.131 24.929 30.687 19.975 19.799 23.397 24.386 1.827

0.222 0.194 0.176 0.211 0.103 0.117 0.089 0.092 0.191 0.157 0.170 0.187 0.151 0.210 0.162 0.144 0.026 T.B.C.

Qlyasan Location 45.000 46.563 41.156 43.969 55.875 57.344 54.531 55.875 45.531 46.813 45.031 45.469 42.938 43.750 48.750 48.156 n.s

Dukan Location 42.531 41.563 44.063 45.000 55.594 57.500 55.938 54.313 51.969 50.000 51.469 50.063 61.391 46.750 56.219 58.719 5.369

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha)

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

467.750 472.750 509.875 484.875 400.375 461.750 458.500 439.250 333.000 424.625 435.875 484.125 340.625 382.125 366.750 433.625 25.476

765.748 689.114 746.791 754.956 568.685 550.030 564.214 498.744 646.073 740.050 695.446 776.841 619.904 600.314 695.746 707.494 60.552

10.481 10.578 10.553 10.730 10.505 10.113 10.117 10.211 9.958 9.780 10.131 9.795 9.770 9.289 9.847 9.508 n.s

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 - Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

1.556 1.524 1.453 1.442 1.252 1.431 1.316 1.436 1.843 1.939 1.863 1.942 1.330 1.286 1.557 1.582 n.s

45.826 41.381 43.330 38.381 30.757 33.936 34.495 36.442 46.691 46.612 45.019 45.479 35.023 37.536 36.825 37.620 1.337

4.816 4.393 4.449 4.771 2.858 3.094 2.985 2.691 4.267 4.492 4.692 5.252 3.282 3.920 3.906 3.993 0.413

19.362 19.294 20.169 19.416 17.352 17.859 17.681 16.858 19.304 22.921 21.472 24.359 17.049 15.720 19.194 19.662 1.507

0.259 0.232 0.226 0.245 0.178 0.201 0.195 0.176 0.234 0.213 0.235 0.224 0.207 0.269 0.224 0.225 0.023

Average of both locations 120 160 Araz 200 240 120 160 Tamuz 200 240 120 160 Rabea’a 200 240 120 160 Cham – 4 200 240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

18.016 18.156 18.344 17.719 19.391 18.703 19.297 19.016 17.703 17.516 17.969 17.406 18.813 18.594 18.938 18.594 n.s

43.766 44.063 42.609 44.484 55.734 57.422 55.234 55.094 48.750 48.406 48.250 47.766 52.164 45.250 52.484 53.438 4.201

Table (17) explained the combination effect between varieties and removal treatments for kernel yield and its components in both locations and their average. The Appendices (3, 4 and 5) indicating the presence of high significantly effect of combination between varieties and removal treatments on number of spikes/ m2 spike weight, 1000-kernel weight, kernel yield, and harvest index, while it was significant only for the character average spike length, and biological yield, while it was not significant for the character number of spikelets/ spike, number of kernels/ spike, and kernels weight/ spike in the first location, but in the second location it was noticed that all characteristics responded high significantly to this effect with the exception of average spike length which was found to be significant, and number of spikelets/ spike which was not significant. Regarding to the average of both locations, all studied characteristics in the same Table responded high significantly to the combination between varieties and removal treatments with the exception number of kernels/ spike, and kernel weight/ spike which were found to be significant only, and the characteristics average spike length, and number of spikelets/ spike which were responded non significantly to this effect. Maximum spikes number/ m2 was found to be 457.000, 721.750 and 589.375 spikes exhibited by the combination between Araz variety and the treatment of control for both locations and their average respectively, but minimum spike number/ m2 was 265.500 and 364.250 spikes in the first location and the average of both locations respectively, shown by the combination between Cham-4 variety and flag leaf blade removal, while in the second location it was 441.250 produced by the combination between Rabea’a variety and flag leaf blade removal. Concerning to the character spike weight/ m2, maximum spike weight in the first location and the average of both locations, it was 949.915 and 1022.465 g respectively produced by the combination between Araz variety, and the treatment of control, while in the second location, maximum spike weight was 1234.133 g produced by Rabea’a variety and the treatment of control. Minimum spike weight/ m2 was 449.123 g in

the first location exhibited by the combination between Tamuz variety and awns removal, while in the second location it was 508.895 g produced by the same variety combined with flag leaf blade removal, and in the average of both locations, it was 467.599 g exhibited by the same variety also combined with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns. From the same table, it was observed that maximum spike length was 10.809, 11.222 and 11.016 cm for both locations and their average respectively exhibited by the combination between Araz variety and the treatment of control. Minimum spike length in the first location was 8.775 cm shown by the combination between Cham-4 variety and treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns, while in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 9.934 and 9.403 respectively produced by the same variety also combined with awns removal. Table (17) and Appendices, confirmed that number of spikelets/ spike respond non significantly to the combination effect between varieties and removal treatment for both locations and their average. Regarding the character number of kernels/ spike which was responded to this combination high significantly in the second location, while significantly in the average of both location, and non significantly in the first location. Maximum kernels number/ spike in the second location and the average of both locations was 57.875 and 59.063 kernels in the second location and the average of both locations respectively exhibited by the combination between Tamuz variety and the treatment of control, but minimum number of kernels/ spike was 40.625 in the second location produced by Araz variety combined with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns, while in the average of both locations, it was 43.094 kernels produced by the combination between Araz variety and the treatment of control. Kernel weight/ spike also responded to this combination effect non significantly in the first location, but high significantly in the second location, and only significantly in the average of both locations. In the second location and the average of both locations, maximum kernel weight was

1.947 and 2.118 g respectively produced by Rabea’a variety combined with treatment of control, but minimum kernel weight/ spike in the second location was 0.906 g produced by Tamuz variety as combined with awns removal, while in the average of both locations, it was 1.192 g produced by combination between the same variety with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns. Table (17) and Appendices explained the character 1000- kernels weight, indicating the presence of high significant response to the combination between variety and removal treatments in both locations and their average. Maximum weight of 1000- kernel in the first location was 46.961 g produced by Araz variety with the control, but in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 46.122 and 46.977 g respectively shown by the combination between Rabea’a variety and flag leaf blade removal treatment. Minimum weight of 1000- kernels was 32.259, 31.047 and 31.653 g for both locations and the average of both locations respectively exhibited by Tamuz variety combined with removing both flag leaf blade + awns treatment. Table (17) and Appendices explained the character kernel yield, indicating the presence of high significantly response to the combination effect between varieties and removal treatments in both locations and their average. The highest kernel yield in the first location and the average of both locations recorded by the combination between Araz variety and the treatment of control which was 6.328, and 6.229 ton/ ha respectively, while in the second location, it was 7.107 ton/ ha recorded by Rabea’a variety under the treatment of control. Regarding the lowest kernel yield, it was 3.079 ton/ ha in the first location recorded by the combination between Tamuz variety and flag leaf blade removal, while in the second location and the average of both locations it was 1.487 and 2.349 ton/ ha respectively shown by the combination between Tamuz variety with removing both flag leaf blade + awns treatment. Regarding the biological yield, as represented in the Table (17), responded significantly to this combination effect in the first location, but high

significantly in the second location, and the average of both locations. The highest biological yield in the first location was 19.313 ton/ ha exhibited by Araz variety combined with the treatment of control, but in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 36.507 and 27.827 ton/ ha respectively produced by Rabea’a variety under the treatment of control. The lowest biological yield in the first location recorded by the combination between Tamuz variety with awns removal which was 11.731 ton/ ha, but in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 17.108 and 14.809 ton/ ha respectively produced by the combination between Tamuz variety with flag leaf blade removal treatment. Table (17) and the Appendices (3, 4 and 5) confirmed the character harvest index, confirmed the presence of high significantly response to the combination effect between varieties and removal treatments in both locations and the average of both locations. Maximum harvest index was 0.334, 0.212 and 0.273 for both locations and their average respectively recorded by the combination of Araz variety, and control treatment, while in the second location, it was 0.212 recorded by the same variety combined with treatment of flag leaf blade removal. Minimum value due to harvest index in the first location was 0.244 recorded by Rabea’a variety combined with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns, but in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 0.072 and 0.161 respectively recorded by Tamuz variety combined with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns.

Table 17: The combination effect of varieties and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components:

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

Control Flag Leaf blade Araz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Tamuz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Rabea’a Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Cham - 4 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

457.000 360.500 375.500 369.000 339.000 304.750 298.250 341.250 370.250 302.750 303.750 327.250 303.250 265.500 272.000 306.000 26.794

949.915 591.455 635.403 529.930 640.673 496.130 449.123 459.723 670.848 710.038 529.260 600.208 600.578 547.185 563.220 571.593 90.314

10.809 10.372 9.709 10.050 10.259 9.328 9.550 9.756 9.288 9.388 9.731 9.588 9.234 8.941 8.872 8.775 0.625

Control Flag Leaf blade Araz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Tamuz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Rabea’a Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Cham - 4 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

721.750 530.750 497.750 558.250 673.500 498.500 542.500 522.000 674.750 441.250 475.500 459.750 457.000 463.000 488.000 491.500 40.975

1095.015 728.970 695.060 687.470 800.855 508.895 532.473 475.475 1234.133 691.143 655.093 626.100 773.830 698.423 751.428 740.660 67.453

11.222 10.703 11.094 10.725 10.813 10.569 10.791 10.825 10.447 10.313 9.969 10.606 10.113 10.328 9.934 10.631 0.461

Varieties

Removal Treatments

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

2.048 1.690 1.741 1.611 2.091 1.775 1.820 1.462 2.262 2.024 1.968 1.843 1.722 1.655 1.510 1.602 n.s

46.961 43.790 42.734 39.250 37.434 33.001 35.543 32.259 47.696 47.832 46.395 45.977 36.907 37.458 38.149 37.320 0.030

6.328 3.898 4.564 3.722 4.395 3.079 3.585 3.210 5.140 4.501 4.271 4.061 4.174 3.907 3.955 3.807 0.569

19.313 15.249 16.530 14.911 15.278 12.510 11.731 12.798 19.147 16.183 15.266 17.052 14.801 14.433 13.863 12.595 1.780

0.334 0.258 0.273 0.256 0.292 0.251 0.307 0.250 0.270 0.299 0.294 0.244 0.290 0.281 0.292 0.321 0.036

1.346 1.391 1.163 0.959 0.966 0.927 0.906 0.922 1.974 1.581 1.905 1.616 1.214 1.474 1.164 1.171 0.214

45.577 41.459 40.994

6.130 4.296 3.623 4.297 3.338 1.689 2.470 1.487 7.107 4.286 4.148 3.893 3.203 3.952 3.567 3.638 0.525

28.774 20.390 20.005 21.306 28.434 17.108 21.359 20.281 36.507 24.474 24.853 22.632 21.459 20.916 23.489 21.693 1.720

0.212 0.212 0.179 0.201 0.118 0.099 0.112 0.072 0.194 0.176 0.165 0.171 0.150 0.194 0.153 0.170 0.024 T.B.C.

Kernels weight / spike (g)

Qlyasan Location 18.969 19.344 17.031 17.688 19.969 18.688 18.625 19.156 17.250 17.469 17.156 16.875 19.281 18.313 18.281 18.531 n.s

43.719 41.844 44.313 46.813 60.250 56.031 54.125 53.219 47.313 46.844 43.781 44.906 48.750 46.094 41.750 47.000 n.s

Dukan Location 18.156 18.219 17.719 17.344 19.500 19.031 18.938 18.906 18.250 18.125 17.500 18.563 18.656 19.094 18.156 19.563 n.s

42.469 45.156 44.906 40.625 57.875 55.188 57.781 52.500 55.813 48.688 48.938 50.063 57.609 59.219 49.906 56.344 5.008

37.071 36.016 31.744 34.215 31.047 45.666 46.122 44.067 43.843 35.507 36.044 36.700 35.924

1.491

Varieties

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

589.375 445.625 436.625 463.625 506.250 401.625 420.375 431.625 522.500 372.000 389.625 393.500 380.125 364.250 380.000 398.750 24.376

1022.465 660.213 665.231 608.700 720.764 502.513 490.798 467.599 952.490 700.590 592.176 613.154 687.204 622.804 657.324 656.126 56.124

11.016 10.538 10.402 10.388 10.536 9.948 10.170 10.291 9.867 9.850 9.850 10.097 9.673 9.634 9.403 9.703 n.s

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

46.269 42.624 41.864 38.161 36.725 32.372 34.879 31.653 46.681 46.977 45.231 44.910 36.207 36.751 37.424 36.622

6.229 4.097 4.093 4.010 3.867 2.384 3.027 2.349 6.123 4.393 4.210 3.977 3.688 3.929 3.761 3.723

0.743

0.386

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

24.044 17.820 18.267 18.109 21.856 14.809 16.545 16.539 27.827 20.328 20.060 19.842 18.130 17.674 18.676 17.144 1.232

0.273 0.235 0.226 0.228 0.205 0.175 0.209 0.161 0.232 0.238 0.229 0.208 0.220 0.238 0.223 0.246 0.021

Average of both locations Control Flag Leaf blade Araz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Tamuz Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Rabea’a Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Cham – 4 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

18.563 18.781 17.375 17.516 19.734 18.859 18.781 19.031 17.750 17.797 17.328 17.719 18.969 18.703 18.219 19.047 n.s

43.094 43.500 44.609 43.719 59.063 55.609 55.953 52.859 51.563 47.766 46.359 47.484 53.180 52.656 45.828 51.672 3.865

1.697 1.541 1.452 1.285 1.528 1.351 1.363 1.192 2.118 1.802 1.937 1.729 1.468 1.564 1.337 1.386 0.167

Table (18) explained the combination effect between seeding rates, and removal treatments due to kernel yield, and its components. Number of spikes/ m2 responded high significantly to this combination in both locations and their average Appendices (3, 4 and 5). Maximum spikes number/ m2 were 405.000, 651.500 and 528.250 for both locations and their average respectively recorded by the combination between the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha, and the treatment of control. Minimum spike number/ m2 in both locations and their average was 219.500, 437.250 and 328.375 spikes respectively recorded by the combination between 120 kg/ ha and flag leaf blade removal. From the same table, it was noticed that spike weight/ m2 responded significantly to the combination between seeding rates, and removal treatment in the first location, while high significant response to this effect in the second location and the average of both locations were noticed (appendices 3, 4 and 5). Maximum value recorded for spike weight/ m2 was 756.305, 1033.388 and 894.846 g for both locations and their average respectively recorded by the seed rate 240 kg/ ha as combined with the control treatments. Minimum weight of spikes/ m2 was 481.415 g recorded by the combination between 120 kg/ ha and awns removal, but in the second location, it was 553.083 g recorded by the combination between 160 kg/ ha, and flag leaf blade removal, while it was 564.221 g in the average of both locations recorded by 160 kg/ ha combined with awns removal. Average spike length as responded to the combination effect between seeding rates, and removal treatments was not significant in the first location, while it was significant in the second location and the average of both locations. Maximum spike length in the second location was 11.072 cm recorded by the combination between 200 kg/ ha with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns, while it was 10.488 cm in the average of both locations recorded by 120 kg/ ha as combined with treatment of control. Minimum spike length was 10.125 and 9.798

cm in the second location and the average of both locations respectively recorded by the combination between 200 kg/ ha and awns removal treatments. Data recorded on number of spikelets/ spike, number of kernels/ spike, and kernels weight/ spike as represented in the Table (18) and Appendices confirmed that they responded non significantly to the combination effect between seeding rates and removal treatments in both locations and their average. 1000- Kernels weight also responded non significantly to this combination effect in the first location, while responded significantly in the second location, and high significantly in the average of both locations. Maximum weight of 1000- kernels was 41.152 g in the second location recorded by the seed rate of 160 kg/ ha as combined with control treatment, while it was 42.035 g in the average of both locations recorded by the combination between 200 kg/ ha, and the treatment of control. Minimum value due to 1000- kernels weight was 35.810 and 36.775 g in the second location and the average of both locations respectively recorded by the combination between 200 kg/ ha with the removing treatment of both flag leaf blade + awns. The character of kernel yield responded non significantly to this combination effect in both locations and their average. Biological yield responded to this combination effect significantly in the first location and high significantly in the second location and the average of both locations. Maximum biological yield recorded by the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha combined with the treatment of control was 17.254, 30.996 and 24.125 ton/ ha for both locations and their average respectively, but minimum value due to this character was 12.446 and 16.275 ton/ ha in the first location and the average of both locations respectively recorded by the seed rate 120 kg/ ha combined with flag leaf removal, while in the second location, it was 18.730 ton/ ha recorded by the seed rate 160 kg/ ha combined also with flag leaf blade removal.

Table (18) and Appendices explained high significantly response of harvest index to this combination effect in the first location, and non significant respond in the second location, but in the average of both locations it responded significantly to this combination effect. Maximum value for harvest index in the first location, and the average of both locations was 0.325 and 0.240 respectively recorded by 160 kg/ ha combined with awns removal treatments, while the minimum harvest index value was 0.246 and 0.201 in the first location and the average of both locations respectively recorded by the combination between 120 kg/ ha, and the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns. As wheat yields have increased, roughly half of that increase has been due to improved varieties with the remaining half due to management [50]. The head population must be matched to the yield potential for a field to obtain a plant population that will produce the correct number of heads per square foot for a particular date [69]. Spike density is a function of planting rate, seeding emergence, and tillers that produce spikes, and all environmental factors discussed above influence these processes. Other factors influencing tiller appearance and survival include plant density, environmental conditions, and cultivar differences. As a result, managing final spike number must account for the complex interplay of planting rate and date, seeding emergence, environmental conditions, time of tiller appearance, and survival of tillers to produce a spike. If planting date is delayed, generally planting rates should increase to offset less tillers appearing and surviving to produce a spike [91]. A reduction in kernel yield was reported 3-9% when awns were removed 10 days after anthesis [155]. These reductions were 20.8%, and 16.8% [156 and 157] respectively.

Table 18: The combination effect of seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its component: Seeding Rates ( Kg . ha -1 )

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

Control Flag Leaf blade 120 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 160 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 200 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 240 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

335.500 219.500 257.000 272.750 362.000 333.250 318.000 308.250 367.000 349.000 327.750 373.500 405.000 331.750 346.750 389.000 26.794

749.360 515.395 481.415 508.375 684.860 624.923 514.305 577.323 671.488 635.303 592.218 507.763 756.305 569.188 589.068 567.993 90.314

9.969 9.556 9.563 9.263 9.463 9.550 9.541 9.325 10.116 9.434 9.472 9.709 10.044 9.488 9.288 9.872 n.s

18.844 18.875 17.875 18.375 18.781 18.438 17.719 17.531 19.500 18.406 17.875 17.781 18.344 18.094 17.625 18.563 n.s

Control Flag Leaf blade 120 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 160 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 200 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 240 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

606.250 437.250 485.500 469.750 643.000 441.250 510.750 566.000 626.250 510.500 503.750 484.250 651.500 544.500 503.750 511.500 40.975

939.245 706.060 654.005 646.963 901.508 553.083 614.138 688.878 1029.693 685.943 658.060 623.930 1033.388 682.345 707.850 569.935 67.453

11.006 10.641 10.697 10.734 10.294 10.144 10.613 10.591 10.841 10.528 10.125 11.072 10.453 10.600 10.353 10.391 0.461

18.969 18.719 17.969 18.219 18.188 18.750 18.219 18.313 19.375 18.906 18.125 19.125 18.031 18.094 18.000 18.719 n.s

Removal Treatments

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 - Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

2.058 1.707 1.699 1.522 1.943 1.897 1.852 1.572 2.054 1.764 1.716 1.700 2.067 1.776 1.771 1.725 n.s

41.866 39.605 40.816 39.148 42.776 41.104 39.384 39.391 42.968 41.165 41.647 37.739 41.389 40.206 40.974 38.528 n.s

4.919 3.472 3.380 3.512 4.670 3.774 4.036 3.644 5.293 4.240 4.536 3.736 5.154 3.899 4.421 3.909 n.s

16.884 12.446 13.478 14.288 17.196 14.195 12.860 14.245 17.204 16.780 15.330 14.004 17.254 14.954 15.723 14.821 1.780

0.304 0.282 0.258 0.246 0.276 0.286 0.325 0.265 0.309 0.259 0.307 0.289 0.295 0.263 0.275 0.272 0.036

1.357 1.315 1.259 1.044 1.327 1.324 1.281 1.163 1.524 1.280 1.237 1.102 1.291 1.453 1.361 1.358 n.s

40.690 38.103 39.283 37.082 41.152 39.541 37.779 37.803 41.103 38.923 39.983 35.810 39.821 38.802 38.931 37.191 1.491

4.674 3.757 3.396 3.337 4.966 3.479 3.615 3.614 4.615 3.487 3.020 3.136 5.525 3.500 3.778 3.228 n.s

26.547 20.103 21.229 21.156 27.763 18.730 23.282 23.315 29.868 21.200 21.827 20.818 30.996 22.853 23.368 20.622 1.720

0.171 0.183 0.158 0.156 0.179 0.187 0.156 0.156 0.151 0.161 0.138 0.148 0.172 0.150 0.157 0.154 n.s T.B.C.

Qlyasan Location 50.438 46.406 45.875 46.625 46.906 50.781 49.281 47.500 50.906 47.594 42.844 48.125 51.781 46.031 45.969 49.688 n.s

Dukan Location 54.672 52.844 53.875 50.094 50.000 49.094 47.906 48.813 56.531 52.313 46.906 51.938 52.563 54.000 52.844 48.688 n.s

Seeding Rates ( Kg . ha -1 )

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes . m -2

Spike weight . m -2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

470.875 328.375 371.250 371.250 502.500 387.250 414.375 437.125 496.625 429.750 415.750 428.875 528.250 438.125 425.250 450.250 24.376

844.303 610.728 567.710 577.669 793.184 589.003 564.221 633.100 850.590 660.623 625.139 565.846 894.846 625.766 648.459 568.964 56.124

10.488 10.098 10.130 9.998 9.878 9.847 10.077 9.958 10.478 9.981 9.798 10.391 10.248 10.044 9.820 10.131 0.387

No. of spikelets . spike -1

No. of kernels . spike -1

Kernels weight . spike -1 (g)

1000- Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (Ton . ha -1)

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

Harvest Index ( H.I )

1.707 1.511 1.479 1.283 1.635 1.611 1.566 1.367 1.789 1.522 1.477 1.401 1.679 1.615 1.566 1.542 n.s

41.278 38.854 40.049 38.115 41.964 40.323 38.582 38.597 42.035 40.044 40.815 36.775 40.605 39.504 39.953 37.860 0.743

4.797 3.614 3.388 3.424 4.818 3.626 3.826 3.629 4.954 3.864 3.778 3.436 5.339 3.700 4.099 3.568 n.s

21.715 16.275 17.354 17.722 22.480 16.462 18.071 18.780 23.536 18.990 18.578 17.411 24.125 18.904 19.545 17.721 1.232

0.237 0.232 0.208 0.201 0.228 0.237 0.240 0.210 0.230 0.210 0.222 0.219 0.234 0.207 0.216 0.213 0.021

Average of both locations Control Flag Leaf blade 120 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 160 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 200 Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade 240 Awn Both L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

18.906 18.797 17.922 18.297 18.484 18.594 17.969 17.922 19.438 18.656 18.000 18.453 18.188 18.094 17.813 18.641 n.s

52.555 49.625 49.875 48.359 48.453 49.938 48.594 48.156 53.719 49.953 44.875 50.031 52.172 50.016 49.406 49.188 n.s

Table (19 A, B and C) and appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the triple combination between the studied factors; varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatments on kernel yield, and its components for both locations and their average. Highly significantly combination between varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments observed for the characteristics; spikes number/ m2 in both locations and their average. Maximum value in the first location due to this character was 472.00 spikes exhibited by the combination between Araz variety under the seeding rates of 240 kg/ ha, and the treatment of control, while in the second location and the average of both locations, maximum spike number/ m2 was 783.00 and 617.500 spikes respectively produced by the combination between Araz variety under 120 kg/ ha, seeding rates, and the treatment of control, minimum spike number in the first location and the average of both locations was 189.00 and 283.500 spikes respectively exhibited by the combination between Rabea’a variety under the seeding rates of 120 kg/ ha combined with flag leaf blade removal treatments, but in the second location the lowest spikes number was 333.00 shown by the combination of Rabea’a variety under 160 kg/ ha seeding rates combined with flag leaf blade removal treatment. Table (19 A, B and C) and Appendices (3, 4 and 5) explained the character spikes weight/ m2 as affected by the combination between varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatments for both locations and their average, confirmed high significantly response due to this combination effect. Maximum spikes weight/ m2 in the first location and the average of both locations was 968.640 and 1123.015 g respectively produced by the combination between Araz variety combined with the seed rate of 120 kg/ ha under the treatment of control, while in the second location maximum/ m2 was 1413.00 g exhibited by Rabea’a variety combined with 240 kg/ ha seeding rates with treatment of control. Minimum spikes weight/ m2 in the first location was 304.870 g shown by the combination between Tamuz variety with 240 kg/ ha seeding rates, and awns removal treatment, while in the second location and the average of both

locations minimum spikes weight/ m2 was found to be 352.200 and 377.990 g respectively shown by the combination between Tamuz variety with the seeding rate of 240 kg/ ha under the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns. Table (19) and Appendices, the parameter of average spike length responded to the combination between varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatments high significantly in the second location and the average of both locations, while this effect was not significant in the first location. Maximum spike length in the second location and the average of both locations was 11.863 and 11.219 cm respectively exhibited by the combination between Araz variety under the seeding rates of 200 kg/ ha combined with the control treatments. Minimum spike length in the second location and the average of both locations was 9.300 and 8.944 cm respectively exhibited by the combination between Cham-4 variety under the seeding rate of 160 kg/ ha combined with the removal treatment of flag leaf. The effect of triple combination between varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatments on number of spikelets/ spike was not significant in the first location, while it was high significantly in the second location, and significant in the average of both locations Table (19 A, B and C ), and Appendices (3, 4 and 5). Maximum number of spikelets/ spike in the second location and the average of both locations was 21.000 and 21.125 respectively produced by the combination between Tamuz variety combined with 200 kg/ ha, and the treatment of control. Minimum number of spikelets/ spike in the second location was 16.625 exhibited by the combination between Araz variety combined with 120 kg/ ha with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns, while in the average of both locations it was 16.563 shown by the combination between Rabea’a variety under 120 kg/ ha seeding rates combined with awns removal treatments. Table (19) and Appendices explained the combination effect between varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatments on number of kernels/ spike was not significant in the first location, but it was significant in the second location and the average of both locations. Kernel number/ spike in the second location

restricted between 35.750 and 66.625 for the combination Araz variety under 120 kg/ ha with the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns and Cham-4 variety combined with 120 kg/ ha, and flag leaf blade removal treatment respectively, but in the average of both locations it was ranged between 40.438 kernels shown by Araz variety under 200 kg/ ha coupled with flag leaf blade removal treatment and 64.000 kernels exhibited by the combination between Tamuz variety with 120 kg/ ha and the treatment of control. Table (19) and Appendices explained the character kernels weight/ spike confirmed that the combination effect between varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatments was not significant in the first location and the average of both locations, but it was significant only in the second location. The value of this character restricted between 0.651 g exhibited by the combination between Tamuz variety with 200 kg/ ha under the removal treatment of flag leaf, and 2.296 g produced by the combination between Rabea’a variety under the seed rate of 240 kg/ ha and awns removal treatment in the second location. 1000- kernels weight represented in the Table (19) and Appendices indicated the presence of high significantly combination between the studied factors on this character in both locations and their average. Maximum value for 1000- kernels weight in the first location was 51.180 g shown by the combination between Araz variety with 200 kg/ ha, and the treatment of control, but in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 50.273 and 50.412 g respectively shown by the combination between Araz variety with 120 kg/ ha seeding rates under the treatment of control. Minimum weight for 1000kernel in both locations and their average was 28.798, 27.719 and 28.258 g respectively shown by the combination between Tamuz variety under the seeding rate of 120 kg/ ha coupled with flag leaf blade removal treatment. Table 19 (A, B and C) and Appendices (3, 4, and 5) explain the effect of combination between varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatment on kernel yield was found to be high significantly in both locations and their average.

Maximum kernel yield in the first location was 6.805 ton/ ha produced by the combination between Araz variety with 160 kg/ ha, and the treatment of control, while in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 9.264 and 7.397 ton/ ha respectively exhibited by the combination between Rabea’a variety under 240 kg/ ha coupled with treatment of control. Minimum kernel yield in the first location was 2.461 ton/ ha shown by Tamuz variety combined with the seeding rate of 240 kg/ ha and awns removal, but in the second location and the average of both locations, it was 1.310 and 2.089 ton/ ha respectively shown by Tamuz variety coupled with 240 kg/ ha, and the treatment of removing both flag leaf blade + awns. Regarding the character of biological yield as affected by the combination between the factors of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments represented in the Table (19) and Appendices. High significantly response of this character was noticed to this combination effect in both locations and their average. Maximum biological yield in the first location was 20.984 ton/ ha exhibited by the combination between Araz variety under the seeding rates of 240 kg/ ha coupled with the treatment of control, while in the second location and the average of both locations maximum biological yield was 40.978 and 29.914 ton/ ha respectively exhibited by the combination between Rabea’a variety under 240 kg/ ha combined with the treatment of control. Minimum biological yield was found to be 9.810 ton/ ha in the first location shown by Cham-4 variety combined with 160 kg/ ha, and flag leaf blade removal treatments, while in the second location and the average of both locations it was 16.042 and 14.152 ton/ ha respectively shown by Tamuz variety combined with 160 kg/ ha with flag leaf blade removal treatment. Table (19) and appendices show high significantly response of the character, harvest index, was observed in the first location and the average of both locations to the combination effect between varieties, seeding rates, and removal treatments, while in the second location, it was not significant. The values of harvest index in the first location restricted between 0.200 shown by

the combination between Araz variety under 160 kg/ ha with awns removal and 0.403 shown by the combination between Tamuz variety combined with 160 kg/ ha, and awns removal treatments, while in the average of both locations, it was ranged between 0.145 produced by the combination between Tamuz variety with 200 kg/ ha, and flag leaf blade removal, and 0.298 exhibited by Araz variety coupled with the seeding rates of 160 kg/ ha with the treatment of control.

Table 19 A: The combination effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components at Qlyasan location:

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha )

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

452.000 217.000 372.000 288.000 447.000 393.000 293.000 343.000 457.000 393.000 460.000 391.000 472.000 439.000 377.000 454.000 313.000 240.000 251.000 350.000 316.000 335.000 317.000 275.000 337.000 361.000 301.000 399.000 390.000 283.000 324.000 341.000

968.640 521.860 559.690 479.760 953.650 588.980 493.150 596.380 921.870 699.300 675.800 443.380 955.500 555.680 812.970 600.200 696.900 419.500 428.970 495.910 599.170 531.680 553.310 421.940 477.400 604.450 509.340 517.260 789.220 428.890 304.870 403.780

11.075 10.275 8.750 9.363 10.513 10.688 10.063 10.063 10.575 9.775 9.675 9.713 11.075 10.750 10.350 11.063 10.813 9.675 9.900 10.300 9.725 9.525 9.838 9.488 10.600 8.963 9.163 9.300 9.900 9.150 9.300 9.938

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

45.625 42.750 44.875 46.750 42.625 47.375 46.875 49.375 43.125 36.750 43.125 41.625 43.500 40.500 42.375 49.500 67.750 48.125 54.375 53.250 52.000 61.750 59.875 55.750 62.875 60.000 44.875 50.375 58.375 54.250 57.375 53.500

2.332 1.736 1.821 1.733 1.997 1.937 1.694 1.513 2.137 1.496 1.852 1.605 1.726 1.593 1.596 1.595 2.293 1.455 1.665 1.215 1.904 1.934 1.882 1.547 2.215 1.888 1.605 1.469 1.953 1.824 2.127 1.618

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

50.551 45.256 47.144 44.300 47.549 45.167 38.798 37.623 51.180 45.941 44.608 36.336 38.566 38.795 40.387 38.741 33.558 28.798 32.924 30.043 37.666 32.708 33.914 34.054 37.250 34.536 36.915 31.981 41.263 35.961 38.420 32.960

6.063 3.497 4.003 3.635 6.805 4.837 2.759 4.023 6.790 3.723 4.985 3.208 5.654 3.534 6.508 4.025 4.625 2.662 3.143 3.472 3.525 3.509 3.982 2.840 4.277 3.055 4.753 3.660 5.154 3.091 2.461 2.869

17.021 12.352 14.614 14.291 19.987 17.915 14.210 17.348 19.261 17.185 18.367 13.536 20.984 13.545 18.927 14.470 16.543 11.109 12.035 14.370 16.247 12.263 10.199 12.409 12.059 14.775 13.405 12.662 16.263 11.894 11.287 11.751

0.363 0.282 0.286 0.253 0.378 0.265 0.200 0.233 0.357 0.222 0.273 0.253 0.236 0.262 0.334 0.283 0.282 0.237 0.257 0.235 0.217 0.296 0.403 0.228 0.349 0.211 0.350 0.295 0.318 0.260 0.218 0.244

Qlyasan Location 120

160 Araz 200

240

120

160 Tamuz 200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

19.500 18.625 17.250 17.875 18.750 19.750 17.250 17.750 19.750 19.750 16.625 16.875 17.875 19.250 17.000 18.250 20.250 20.000 19.500 20.000 18.750 19.625 18.000 18.625 21.250 16.875 18.375 18.750 19.625 18.250 18.625 19.250

T.B.C.

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha )

120

160 Rabea’a 200

240

120

160 Cham - 4 200

240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

276.000 189.000 207.000 219.000 337.000 306.000 404.000 281.000 399.000 353.000 296.000 399.000 469.000 363.000 308.000 410.000 301.000 232.000 198.000 234.000 348.000 299.000 258.000 334.000 275.000 289.000 254.000 305.000 289.000 242.000 378.000 351.000

683.140 645.030 507.980 506.850 583.640 862.420 556.020 767.450 681.590 712.780 542.070 499.560 735.020 619.920 510.970 626.970 648.760 475.190 429.020 550.980 602.980 516.610 454.740 523.520 605.090 524.680 641.660 570.850 545.480 672.260 727.460 641.020

9.588 9.113 9.675 9.238 8.700 9.400 10.113 9.563 9.775 9.450 9.900 10.138 9.088 9.588 9.238 9.413 8.400 9.163 9.925 8.150 8.913 8.588 8.150 8.188 9.513 9.550 9.150 9.688 10.113 8.463 8.263 9.075

17.125 17.250 16.125 16.625 18.000 17.375 17.750 16.375 17.375 17.500 17.750 17.625 16.500 17.750 17.000 16.875 18.500 19.625 18.625 19.000 19.625 17.000 17.875 17.375 19.625 19.500 18.750 17.875 19.375 17.125 17.875 19.875

45.375 44.875 47.250 44.625 48.500 50.625 47.500 40.625 45.375 44.250 40.750 49.750 50.000 47.625 39.625 44.625 43.000 49.875 37.000 41.875 44.500 43.375 42.875 44.250 52.250 49.375 42.625 50.750 55.250 41.750 44.500 51.125

2.135 1.866 2.127 1.803 2.379 2.285 2.234 1.714 2.157 1.846 1.752 1.985 2.375 2.098 1.758 1.871 1.471 1.773 1.184 1.338 1.493 1.434 1.597 1.512 1.707 1.826 1.655 1.740 2.215 1.588 1.602 1.817

47.561 48.806 47.655 46.390 47.640 48.497 46.925 47.015 47.862 46.442 45.888 45.002 47.722 47.585 45.111 45.502 35.796 35.562 35.539 35.861 38.248 38.045 37.900 38.872 35.579 37.740 39.177 37.639 38.007 38.485 39.978 36.910

4.926 4.292 3.195 3.461 4.241 3.563 5.493 3.932 5.860 5.712 4.537 4.476 5.531 4.436 3.860 4.374 4.064 3.436 3.179 3.480 4.107 3.186 3.911 3.781 4.246 4.470 3.872 3.600 4.277 4.535 4.856 4.367

18.439 13.233 14.357 13.529 17.459 16.790 15.676 16.918 21.840 16.414 14.518 19.291 18.850 18.293 16.515 18.471 15.534 13.091 12.906 14.960 15.093 9.810 11.355 10.304 15.656 18.746 15.030 10.527 12.920 16.083 16.161 14.590

0.273 0.344 0.238 0.255 0.242 0.254 0.352 0.230 0.273 0.358 0.335 0.234 0.291 0.241 0.249 0.260 0.295 0.263 0.252 0.242 0.267 0.330 0.347 0.368 0.259 0.243 0.270 0.375 0.337 0.289 0.300 0.300

53.587

180.628

n.s

n.s

n.s

n.s

0.060

1.138

3.560

0.071

Table 19 B: The combination effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components at Dukan location:

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha)

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

50.273 43.519 45.333 40.231 45.721 43.456 36.898 35.838 49.215 41.505 42.898 34.959 37.099 37.356 38.848 37.258 32.309 27.719 31.739 28.968 36.256 31.466 32.654 32.771 35.820 33.208 35.496 30.751 39.679 34.585 36.973 31.698

6.474 5.753 3.953 5.153 5.572 3.279 3.942 3.925 6.032 4.386 2.907 3.561 6.443 3.768 3.689 4.551 3.179 1.722 2.460 1.599 3.555 2.247 3.390 1.701 3.177 1.396 2.222 1.339 3.441 1.392 1.807 1.310

31.423 22.563 20.340 22.288 25.069 16.712 21.921 21.189 29.908 23.361 19.140 20.592 28.699 18.922 18.620 21.156 26.240 17.569 20.168 20.780 29.117 16.042 23.522 23.071 29.234 17.516 22.019 19.777 29.145 17.305 19.728 17.494

0.206 0.265 0.192 0.225 0.218 0.196 0.177 0.187 0.199 0.188 0.150 0.168 0.225 0.199 0.197 0.223 0.120 0.098 0.119 0.076 0.122 0.138 0.134 0.072 0.108 0.080 0.101 0.067 0.120 0.080 0.092 0.074

Dukan Location 120

160 Araz 200

240

120

160 Tamuz 200

240

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

783.000 560.000 499.000 571.000 647.000 471.000 604.000 584.000 770.000 582.000 471.000 555.000 687.000 510.000 417.000 523.000 602.000 434.000 555.000 458.000 741.000 526.000 551.000 633.000 672.000 534.000 562.000 502.000 679.000 500.000 502.000 495.000

1277.390 848.240 691.050 779.350 958.790 551.910 650.450 719.600 1066.840 794.380 719.500 653.260 1077.040 721.350 719.240 597.670 819.770 661.220 528.370 498.840 781.420 497.980 488.830 525.910 788.380 441.360 650.570 524.950 813.850 435.020 462.120 352.200

11.200 10.713 11.788 10.688 11.513 10.838 10.200 10.750 11.863 10.400 11.725 10.700 10.313 10.863 10.663 10.763 11.363 10.400 10.975 10.613 9.625 10.438 11.175 11.088 10.913 10.438 10.238 11.325 11.350 11.000 10.775 10.275

17.500 18.750 18.000 16.625 18.750 18.500 17.500 17.000 19.000 18.250 18.625 17.875 17.375 17.375 16.750 17.875 20.125 18.250 18.625 18.375 17.125 19.750 19.375 18.375 21.000 18.625 19.625 19.875 19.750 19.500 18.125 19.000

45.375 42.750 46.250 35.750 44.000 46.750 39.500 36.000 40.375 44.125 45.875 45.875 40.125 47.000 48.000 44.875 60.250 52.250 62.375 47.500 50.875 60.625 58.750 59.750 64.125 51.125 52.625 55.875 56.250 56.750 57.375 46.875

1.348 1.446 1.118 0.920 1.435 1.471 1.147 0.995 1.137 1.267 1.250 0.878 1.464 1.382 1.136 1.042 1.103 0.688 0.915 0.680 0.865 1.210 1.191 0.913 1.073 0.651 0.738 0.891 0.821 1.159 0.779 1.204

T.B.C.

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha)

120

160 Rabea’a 200

240

120

160 Cham - 4 200

240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

601.000 378.000 406.000 388.000 749.000 333.000 468.000 519.000 708.000 491.000 468.000 373.000 641.000 563.000 560.000 559.000 439.000 377.000 482.000 462.000 435.000 435.000 420.000 528.000 355.000 435.000 514.000 507.000 599.000 605.000 536.000 469.000

946.740 668.980 650.250 559.610 1148.220 564.310 648.100 790.240 1427.580 646.580 494.970 558.440 1413.990 884.700 827.050 596.110 713.080 645.800 746.350 750.050 717.600 598.130 669.170 719.760 835.970 861.450 767.200 759.070 828.670 688.310 822.990 733.760

11.238 10.200 9.713 10.900 9.900 10.000 10.488 10.075 10.200 10.775 9.450 11.363 10.450 10.275 10.225 10.088 10.225 11.250 10.313 10.738 10.138 9.300 10.588 10.450 10.388 10.500 9.088 10.900 9.700 10.263 9.750 10.438

19.250 19.125 17.000 19.125 17.750 17.625 17.375 17.875 19.000 18.125 17.250 19.125 17.000 17.625 18.375 18.125 19.000 18.750 18.250 18.750 19.125 19.125 18.625 20.000 18.500 20.625 17.000 19.625 18.000 17.875 18.750 19.875

56.875 49.750 49.875 51.375 56.500 44.250 45.875 53.375 57.375 52.875 45.250 50.375 52.500 47.875 54.750 45.125 56.188 66.625 57.000 65.750 48.625 44.750 47.500 46.125 64.250 61.125 43.875 55.625 61.375 64.375 51.250 57.875

1.933 1.674 1.898 1.303 1.998 1.467 1.687 1.746 2.138 1.700 1.740 1.582 1.826 1.482 2.296 1.832 1.042 1.453 1.104 1.275 1.010 1.149 1.098 0.996 1.749 1.501 1.220 1.058 1.054 1.791 1.234 1.355

45.749 46.933 45.824 44.610 45.838 46.649 45.123 45.208 45.158 44.670 43.859 41.270 45.921 46.238 41.464 44.286 34.431 34.244 34.236 34.518 36.791 36.594 36.444 37.395 34.219 36.311 37.678 36.260 36.586 37.029 38.441 35.524

6.093 4.744 4.114 3.312 6.847 3.463 3.394 5.004 6.225 3.891 3.137 3.700 9.264 5.047 5.948 3.554 2.948 2.811 3.056 3.283 3.888 4.926 3.735 3.828 3.025 4.276 3.813 3.944 2.951 3.794 3.667 3.497

29.378 22.435 22.970 20.090 36.984 24.552 27.607 27.382 38.687 21.456 19.364 20.211 40.978 29.452 29.472 22.845 19.146 17.845 21.440 21.468 19.882 17.617 20.080 21.618 21.646 22.468 26.784 22.691 25.163 25.734 25.653 20.995

0.206 0.211 0.180 0.165 0.185 0.141 0.124 0.180 0.159 0.180 0.156 0.184 0.225 0.171 0.198 0.154 0.152 0.156 0.141 0.156 0.192 0.275 0.187 0.186 0.137 0.195 0.143 0.173 0.118 0.152 0.142 0.166

81.951

134.906

0.922

1.696

10.016

0.428

2.983

1.051

1.696

n.s

Table 19 C: The combination effect of varieties, seeding rates and removal treatments on kernel yield and its components in the average of both locations:

Varieties

Seeding Rates ( Kg/ ha)

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

617.500 388.500 435.500 429.500 547.000 432.000 448.500 463.500 613.500 487.500 465.500 473.000 579.500 474.500 397.000 488.500 457.500 337.000 403.000 404.000 528.500 430.500 434.000 454.000 504.500 447.500 431.500 450.500 534.500 391.500 413.000 418.000

1123.015 685.050 625.370 629.555 956.220 570.445 571.800 657.990 994.355 746.840 697.650 548.320 1016.270 638.515 766.105 598.935 758.335 540.360 478.670 497.375 690.295 514.830 521.070 473.925 632.890 522.905 579.955 521.105 801.535 431.955 383.495 377.990

11.138 10.494 10.269 10.025 11.013 10.763 10.131 10.406 11.219 10.088 10.700 10.206 10.694 10.806 10.506 10.913 11.088 10.038 10.438 10.456 9.675 9.981 10.506 10.288 10.756 9.700 9.700 10.313 10.625 10.075 10.038 10.106

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

50.412 44.387 46.238 42.266 46.635 44.312 37.848 36.730 50.198 43.723 43.753 35.647 37.832 38.076 39.617 37.999 32.933 28.258 32.332 29.505 36.961 32.087 33.284 33.413 36.535 33.872 36.205 31.366 40.471 35.273 37.696 32.329

6.268 4.625 3.978 4.394 6.189 4.058 3.351 3.974 6.411 4.054 3.946 3.384 6.048 3.651 5.098 4.288 3.902 2.192 2.802 2.535 3.540 2.878 3.686 2.270 3.727 2.225 3.487 2.499 4.298 2.241 2.134 2.089

24.222 17.458 17.477 18.289 22.528 17.313 18.066 19.269 24.584 20.273 18.753 17.064 24.841 16.234 18.774 17.813 21.391 14.339 16.102 17.575 22.682 14.152 16.860 17.740 20.647 16.145 17.712 16.219 22.704 14.599 15.507 14.623

0.284 0.273 0.239 0.239 0.298 0.230 0.188 0.210 0.278 0.205 0.211 0.211 0.230 0.230 0.266 0.253 0.201 0.168 0.188 0.156 0.170 0.217 0.268 0.150 0.228 0.145 0.226 0.181 0.219 0.170 0.155 0.159

Average of both locations 120

160 Araz 200

240

120

160 Tamuz 200

240

18.500 18.688 17.625 17.250 18.750 19.125 17.375 17.375 19.375 19.000 17.625 17.375 17.625 18.313 16.875 18.063 20.188 19.125 19.063 19.188 17.938 19.688 18.688 18.500 21.125 17.750 19.000 19.313 19.688 18.875 18.375 19.125

45.500 42.750 45.563 41.250 43.313 47.063 43.188 42.688 41.750 40.438 44.500 43.750 41.813 43.750 45.188 47.188 64.000 50.188 58.375 50.375 51.438 61.188 59.313 57.750 63.500 55.563 48.750 53.125 57.313 55.500 57.375 50.188

1.840 1.591 1.469 1.326 1.716 1.704 1.420 1.254 1.637 1.382 1.551 1.241 1.595 1.487 1.366 1.319 1.698 1.071 1.290 0.947 1.384 1.572 1.536 1.230 1.644 1.269 1.171 1.180 1.387 1.492 1.453 1.411

T.B.C.

Varieties

Seeding Rates

Removal Treatments

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight

1000 Kernels weight

Kernel yield

Biological yield

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

( Kg/ ha)

120

160 Rabea’a 200

240

120

160 Cham - 4 200

240 L.S.D ( p ≤ 0.05 )

(g) Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both Control Flag Leaf blade Awn Both

/ spike (g)

(g)

(ton/ ha)

(ton/ ha)

438.500 283.500 306.500 303.500 543.000 319.500 436.000 400.000 553.500 422.000 382.000 386.000 555.000 463.000 434.000 484.500 370.000 304.500 340.000 348.000 391.500 367.000 339.000 431.000 315.000 362.000 384.000 406.000 444.000 423.500 457.000 410.000

814.940 657.005 579.115 533.230 865.930 713.365 602.060 778.845 1054.585 679.680 518.520 529.000 1074.505 752.310 669.010 611.540 680.920 560.495 587.685 650.515 660.290 557.370 561.955 621.640 720.530 693.065 704.430 664.960 687.075 680.285 775.225 687.390

10.413 9.656 9.694 10.069 9.300 9.700 10.300 9.819 9.988 10.113 9.675 10.750 9.769 9.931 9.731 9.750 9.313 10.206 10.119 9.444 9.525 8.944 9.369 9.319 9.950 10.025 9.119 10.294 9.906 9.363 9.006 9.756

18.188 18.188 16.563 17.875 17.875 17.500 17.563 17.125 18.188 17.813 17.500 18.375 16.750 17.688 17.688 17.500 18.750 19.188 18.438 18.875 19.375 18.063 18.250 18.688 19.063 20.063 17.875 18.750 18.688 17.500 18.313 19.875

51.125 47.313 48.563 48.000 52.500 47.438 46.688 47.000 51.375 48.563 43.000 50.063 51.250 47.750 47.188 44.875 49.594 58.250 47.000 53.813 46.563 44.063 45.188 45.188 58.250 55.250 43.250 53.188 58.313 53.063 47.875 54.500

2.034 1.770 2.013 1.553 2.189 1.876 1.961 1.730 2.148 1.773 1.746 1.783 2.100 1.790 2.027 1.852 1.257 1.613 1.144 1.307 1.252 1.292 1.347 1.254 1.728 1.664 1.437 1.399 1.634 1.689 1.418 1.586

46.655 47.869 46.740 45.500 46.739 47.573 46.024 46.111 46.510 45.556 44.873 43.136 46.822 46.911 43.288 44.894 35.114 34.903 34.888 35.189 37.519 37.320 37.172 38.134 34.899 37.026 38.427 36.949 37.297 37.757 39.210 36.217

5.510 4.518 3.654 3.387 5.544 3.513 4.444 4.468 6.043 4.801 3.837 4.088 7.397 4.742 4.904 3.964 3.506 3.123 3.117 3.382 3.998 4.056 3.823 3.805 3.636 4.373 3.842 3.772 3.614 4.164 4.261 3.932

23.908 17.834 18.664 16.809 27.222 20.671 21.641 22.150 30.263 18.935 16.941 19.751 29.914 23.872 22.993 20.658 17.340 15.468 17.173 18.214 17.488 13.713 15.718 15.961 18.651 20.607 20.907 16.609 19.042 20.909 20.907 17.792

0.240 0.278 0.209 0.210 0.214 0.197 0.238 0.205 0.216 0.269 0.246 0.209 0.258 0.206 0.224 0.207 0.224 0.210 0.197 0.199 0.229 0.302 0.267 0.277 0.198 0.219 0.207 0.274 0.227 0.220 0.221 0.233

48.751

112.248

0.773

1.529

7.729

n.s

1.485

0.771

2.465

0.043

Table (20) and Appendix (5) explained the effect of locations on yield and its components. It was observed that the effect of locations was high significantly on all characteristics with the exception of number of spikelets/ spike and 1000kernel weight which were not significant. The location of Dukan predominated the Qlyasan location in the characteristics of number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, average spike length, number of spikelets/ spike, number of kernels/ spike, and biological yield by 60.42, 22.52, 10.05, 1.06, 7.35 and 54.63% respectively, while Qlyasan location outyielded Dukan location in kernel yield and some of important components such as kernel weight/ spike and harvest index by 8.95, 39.40, 4.29 and 75.116%

respectively, this indicates the

importance of kernel weight/ spike in determining kernel yield, while the outyielding some components in Dukan location such as number of spikes / m2, spike weight/ m2, average spike length, number of spikelets/ spike, and number of kernels/ spike may have a great role in outyielding biological yield in Dukan location comparing to Qlyasan location. The exceeding of kernel yield and some of its important components recorded in Qlyasan location may be resulted in the favorable environmental conditions due to this location and the values of these components affected significantly in the final grain yield. Similar results recorded by [221]. The predominating of kernel yield in Qlyasan location may be due the creating best environmental and soil conditions for planting growth, and increase in 1000- kernels weight in this location was due to the differences between locations (Table 1 and 2).

113 Table 20: The effect of locations on yield and its components:

Locations

No. of spikes /m2

Spike weight / m2 (g)

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weight / spike (g)

1000 - Kernels weight (g)

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

Harvest Index ( H.I .)

Qlyasan

331.000

596.580

9.603

18.289

47.922

1.801

40.544

4.162

15.104

0.282

Dukan

530.984

730.939

10.568

18.482

51.442

1.292

38.875

3.820

23.355

0.161

LSD ( P ≤ 0.05 )

153.915

317.910

0.332

n.s

2.541

0.086

n.s

1.980

7.800

0.019

Correlation coefficients among the characteristics: Data in Tables (21, 22 and 23) and appendices (6, 7 and 8) explained the simple correlation among studied characteristics in both locations and their average. Number of spikes/ m2: In the first location (Table 21), number of spikes/ m2 was correlated positively and high significantly with spike weight/ m2, average spike length, kernel yield, biological yield and number of tillers/ m2 in the first location, while it was correlated positively and significantly with kernels weight, 1000-kernels weight, grain filling stage and plant height, and correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis, and number of days to physiological maturity. In the second location (Table 22), number of spikes/ m2 was correlated positively and high significantly with spike weight/ m2, kernel yield, biological yield and number of tillers/ m2, while correlated positively and significantly with grain filling stage, and correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis. As the average of both location (Table 23), number of spikes/ m2 was correlated positively and high significantly with spike weight/ m2, average spike length, kernel yield, biological yield and number of tillers/ m2, while correlated positively and significantly with 1000-kernels weight and grain filling stage, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis and number of days to physiological maturity. Previously positive and high significantly correlation estimated between spike number/ m2, and spike weight [230]. Spike weight/ m2 (g): In the first location (Table 21), spike weight was correlated positively and high significantly with 1000- kernels weight/ spike, 1000-kernels weight, kernel

yield, biological yield, number of tillers/ m2, plant height and number of spikes/ m2, while it was correlated positively and significantly with average spike length and harvest index, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of days to physiological maturity. In the second location (Table 22), spike weight was correlated positively and high significantly with kernels weight, 1000-kernels weight, kernel yield, biological yield, harvest index, number of tillers/ m2 and number of spikes/ m2, and it was correlated positively and significantly with number of days to physiological maturity. As the average of both locations (Table 23), spike weight was correlated positively and high significantly with kernels weight, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, biological yield, harvest index, number of tillers/ m2, number of spikes/ m2, while it was correlated positively and significantly with plant height, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with grain filling stage. Previously positive and significant correlations were estimated between spike length, number of kernel/ spike, biological yield/ plant, kernel weight/ spike, and kernel yield/ plant [231], and also positive and significant correlation between spike length with number of grains/ spike was observed [232], while positive and significant correlation between spike length, with number of kernels/ spike, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, and biological yield/ plant were recorded [233].

Number of spikelets/ spike: In the first location (Table 21), number of spikelets/ spike correlated positively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike, number of days to physiological maturity, grain filling stage, and average spike length, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with 1000- kernels weight and plant height. In the second location (Table 22), number of spikelets/ spike was correlated positively and significantly with number of kernels/ spike, and average spike

length, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, number of days to physiological maturity and grain filling stage. As the average of both locations (Table 23), number of spikelets/ spike was correlated positively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike and grain filling stage, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of days to physiological maturity and average spike length, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with 1000- kernels weight and plant height, but it was correlated negatively and significantly with kernels weight/ spike and kernel yield. Previous workers indicated to the presence of positive and significant correlation between number of spikelets/ spike with number of kernels/ spike and spike yield [223], while it was correlated positively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike, and kernel weight/ spike [234].

Number of kernels/ spike: In the first location (Table 21), number of kernels/ spike was correlated positively and high significantly with kernel weight/ spike, grain filling stage and number of spikelets/ spike, while it was correlated negatively and high significantly with 1000- kernels weight, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with biological yield. In the second location (Table 22), number of kernels/ spike was correlated positively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis and number of spikelets/ spike, while it was correlated negatively and high significantly with 1000- kernels weight, harvest index and grain filling stage, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with kernel yield. As the average of both locations (Table 23), number of kernels/ spike was correlated positively and high significantly with number of spikelets/ spike, while it was correlated negatively and high significantly with 1000- kernels

weight, kernel yield, and harvest index, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of tillers/ m2. Previously positive and high significantly association were shown between the number of kernels/ spike with each of spike weight, spike length, and kernel weight/ spike [232], also positive and significant correlation between number of kernel/ spike, and kernel weight/ plant reported previously by [191, 199 and 233].

Kernels weight/ spike (g): In the first location (Table 21), kernels weight/ spike was correlated positively and high significantly with 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, biological yield, plant height, spike weight/ m2 and number of kernels/ spike, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of tillers/ m2, number of spikes/ m2 and average spike length, while it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to physiological maturity. In the second location (Table 22), kernels weight/ spike was correlated positively and high significantly with 1000- kernel weight, kernel yield, biological yield, harvest index, number of days to physiological maturity, plant height and spike weight/ m2. As the average of both locations (Table 23), kernels weight/ spike was correlated positively and high significantly with 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, biological yield, plant height and spike weight / m2, while it was correlated positively and significantly with harvest index, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with grain filling stage, but it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of spikelets/ spike. Previously positive and significant correlation was noticed between kernel weight/ spike, and kernel yield [191, 201 and 232].

1000- Kernels weight (g): In the first location (Table 21), 1000- Kernels weight was correlated positively and high significantly with kernel yield, biological yield, plant height, spike weight/ m2 and kernel weight/ spike, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of tillers/ m2 and number of spikes/ m2, but it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis, number of days to physiological maturity, grain filling stage, and number of spikelets/ spike. In the second location (Table 22), it was correlated positively and high significantly with kernels yield, biological yield, harvest index, number of days to physiological maturity, grain filling stage, plant height, spike weight/ m2 and kernels weight, while it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of spikelets/ spike. As the average of both locations (Table 23), it was correlated positively and significantly with kernel yield, biological yield, harvest index, plant height, spike weight/ spike and kernels weight/ spike, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of tillers/ m2 and number of spikes/ m2, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with grain filling stage, and number of spikelets/ spike, but it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of days to physiological maturity. 1000- Kernels weight correlated negatively and significantly with spike length [231], while positive and significant correlation was observed between 1000- kernels weight with kernel weight/ plant, and kernel weight/ spike [232], and also correlated positively and significantly with kernel weight/ plant, spike weight/ plant, biological weight and harvest index [233].

Kernel yield (ton/ ha): In the first location (Table 21), kernel yield was correlated positively and high significantly with harvest index, biological yield, number of tillers/ m2,

plant height, number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernel weight, while it was correlated positively and significantly with average spike length, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of days to physiological maturity. In the second location (Table 22), kernel yield was correlated positively and significantly with biological yield, harvest index, number of days to physiological maturity, number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spike/ m2, spike weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike and 1000- kernels weight, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of spikelets/ spike and number of spikelets/ spike and number of kernels/ spike. As the average of both locations (Table 23), kernel yield was correlated positively and high significantly with biological yield, harvest index, number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spike/ m2, spike weight/ m2, kernels weight/ spike and 1000- kernels weight, while it was correlated negatively and high significantly with grain filling stage and number of kernels/ spike, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of spikelets/ spike. Previous worker confirmed the presence of high significantly and positive correlation between kernel yield/ plant with biological yield/ plant, number of tiller/ plant, and spike yield/ plant, and correlated positively and significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis, plant height, and number of spikes/ plant [232], positive and significant correlation represented between kernel yield/ plant, and number of spikes/ m2, number of kernels/ spike, and kernel weight/ spike [191], and it was correlated positively and significantly with number of tillers/ plant [195], and with spike length, number of kernel/ spike, and plant height, while it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of days to heading [202], and also it was found significant correlation between kernel yield, and days to heading, number of tillers/ plant, plant height and kernel weight/ spike [196].

Biological yield (ton/ ha): In the first location (Table 21), biological yield was correlated positively and high significantly with number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, kernels weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight and kernel yield, while it was correlated positively and significantly with average spike length, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to physiological maturity, but it correlated negatively and significantly with number of kernels/ spike. In the second location (Table 22), biological yield was correlated positively and high significantly with number of days to physiological maturity, number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight and kernel yield. As the average of both locations (Table 23), biological yield was correlated positively and high significantly with number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, kernels weight/ spike and kernel yield, while it was correlated negatively and significantly with grain filling stage. Positively and high significantly correlation among biological yield/ plant with number of tillers/ plant, spike length, kernel number/ spike, kernel weight/ spike, average spike weight, spike weight/ plant, and kernel weight/ plant were recorded previously by [231 and 232], and correlated positively and significantly with harvest index [233], and correlated positively and significantly with biological weight/ plant, and kernel weight/ plant [211].

Harvest index (H.I.): In the first location (Table 21), harvest index was correlated positively and high significantly with kernel yield, and it was correlated positively and significantly with spike weight/ m2. In the second location (Table 22), harvest index was correlated positively and high significantly with number of days to physiological maturity, spike

weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike. As the average of both locations (Table 23), harvest index was correlated positively and high significantly with spike weight/ m2, 1000- kernels weight and kernel yield, while it was correlated positively and significantly with kernels weight/ spike, but it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with grain filling stage. Previous worked have shown positive and significant correlation between harvest index, and kernel yield [211], while positive and significant correlation between harvest index, and each of kernel weight/ spike, average spike weight, spike weight/ plant, and kernel weight/ plant were recorded [231].

Number of days to 50 % anthesis: In the first location (Table 21), number of days to 50 % anthesis was correlated positively and high significantly with number of days to physiological maturity, and negatively and high significantly with grain filling stage, number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, and average spike length. In the second location (Table 22), number of days to 50 % anthesis was correlated positively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike, and it was negatively and high significantly with grain filling stage, number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, and average spike length. As the average of both locations (Table 23), number of days to 50 % anthesis was correlated positively and significantly with number of days to physiological maturity, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with grain filling stage, number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, and average spike length. Positive and significant correlation between number of days to 50% anthesis, and spike length were previously recorded [233], while it was correlated positively and significantly with plant height, spike weight/ plant, and

kernel yield/ plant [232], but negatively and significantly correlated with plant height, number of tillers/ plant, and kernels weight/ spike [196].

Number of days to physiological maturity: In the first location (Table 21), number of days to physiological maturity was correlated positively and high significantly with number of spikelets/ spike and number of days to physiological maturity, while it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, average spike length, kernels weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight and biological yield, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with spike weight/ m2 and kernel yield. In the second location (Table 22), number of days to physiological maturity was correlated positively and high significantly with plant height, kernels weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield and harvest index, while it was correlated positively and significantly with spike weight/ m2, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with average spike length, number of spikelets/ spike, As the average of both locations (Table 23), number of days to physiological maturity was correlated positively and high significantly with number of days to physiological maturity, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of spikelets/ spike, but it was correlated negatively and high significantly with grain filling stage, number of tillers/ m2, plant height, number of spikes/ m2, average spike length, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with 1000- kernels weight. Previously, negative and significant correlation was observed between number of days to maturity and 1000- kernels weight [233].

Grain filling stage (days): In the first location (Table 21), grain filling stage was correlated positively and high significantly with average spike length, number of spikelets / spike,

number of kernels/ spike, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of tillers/ m2, number of spikelets/ m2, number of spikes/ m2, but it was correlated negatively and high significantly with plant height, 1000- kernels weight, and number of days to physiological maturity. In the second location (Table 22), grain filling stage was correlated positively and significantly with plant height, average spike, 1000- kernels weight, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of tillers/ m2, number of spikelets/ spike, but it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of kernels/ spike and number of days to physiological maturity, but it was correlated negatively and significantly with number of spikelets/ spike. As the average of both locations (Table 23), grain filling stage was correlated positively and high significantly with average spike length and number of spikelets/ spike, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of tillers/ m2, number of spikes/ m2, but it was correlated negatively and high significantly with plant height, kernels weight/ spike, 1000-kernels weight, kernel yield, number of days to 50% anthesis and f days to physiological maturity, and it was correlated negatively and significantly with spike weight/ m2, biological yield and harvest index. Number of tillers/ m2: In the first location (Table 21), number of tillers/ m2 was correlated positively and high significantly with number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, average spike length, kernel yield, and biological yield, while it was correlated positively and significantly with plant height, kernels weight/ spike, 1000kernels weight and grain filling stage, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis and number of days to physiological maturity. In the second location (Table 22), number of tillers/ m2 was correlated positively and high significantly with number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2,

kernel yield and biological yield, while it was correlated positively and significantly with grain filling stage, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis. As the average of both locations (Table 23), number of tillers/ m2 was correlated positively and high significantly with number of spikes/ m2, spike weight/ m2, average spike length, kernel yield and biological yield, while it was correlated positively and significantly with1000- kernels weight and grain filling stage, but it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to 50% anthesis and number of days to physiological maturity. Previous worked indicated to the presence of positive and significant correlation between number of tillers/ plant and each of spike length, number of kernels/ spike, average spike weight, kernel weight/ plant, and biological weight/ plant, it was also correlated positively and significantly with kernel weight/ spike, and average spike weight, but correlated negatively and significantly with 1000- kernels weight [231], also it was observed previously that positive and significant correlation represented between tillers number/ plant, and number of spike/ plant, kernel weight/ plant [232], while [233] indicated the presence of positive and significant correlation between tillers number/ plant, and spike length, number of kernels/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, spike weight/ plant, kernel weight/ plant, biological yield/ plant, and harvest index.

Plant height (cm): In the first location (Table 21), plant height was correlated positively and high significantly with spike weight/ m2, kernel weight/ spike, 1000- kernels weight, kernel yield and biological yield, while it was correlated positively and significantly with number of spikes/ m2 and number of tillers/ m2, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of spikelets/ spike, number of days to 50% anthesis, number of days to physiological maturity and grain filling stage.

In the second location (Table 22), plant height was correlated positively and high significantly with kernels weight/ spike, 1000-kernels weight, kernel yield, biological yield, number of days to physiological maturity and grain filling stage, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of days to physiological maturity. As the average of both locations (Table 23), plant height was correlated positively and high significantly with kernels weight/ spike, 1000-kernels weight, kernel yield and biological yield, while it was correlated positively and significantly with spike weight/ m2, and it was correlated negatively and high significantly with number of spikelets/ spike, number of days to 50% anthesis, number of days to physiological maturity and grain filling stage. Positive and significant correlation between plant height, and average spike weight was previously noticed [231], while correlated positive and significantly with 1000- kernels weight [233] with kernel weight/ plant, biological weight/ plant, and spike weight/ plant [232].

126 Table 21: Correlation coefficient among the characteristics at Qlyasan location:

TRAITS

No. of spikes . m -2

Spike weight . m -2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikes . m -2

1.000

Spike weight . m -2

0.509 **

1.000

Average spike length( cm )

0.409 **

0.275 *

No. of spikelets . spike -1

0.016 n.s

No. of kernels . spike -1

-0.010 n.s

Kernels weight . spike -1 (g)

0.276 *

0.335 **

0.256 *

1000- Kernels weight (g)

0.254 *

0.510 **

0.096 n.s

kernel yield (Ton . ha -1)

0.569 **

0.783 **

0.311 *

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

0.517 **

0.696 **

0.274 *

-0.079 n.s -0.214

n.s

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

0.152 n.s

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

-0.460 **

No. of days to Physiological maturity

-0.391 **

Grain filling stage

0.269 *

No. of tillers .m-2

0.950 **

0.513 **

Plant height ( cm )

0.268 *

0.323 **

0.293 * -0.126 n.s

-0.251 * -0.127 n.s

No. of spikelets . spike -1

No. of kernels . spike -1

Kernels weigh .spike -1 (g)

1000Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (Ton . ha -1)

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage

No. of tillers .m -2

Plant height ( cm )

1.000 0.327 **

1.000

0.182 n.s

0.399 **

0.028 n.s

-0.057 n.s -0.440 ** -0.031 n.s -0.172 n.s 0.060 n.s

1.000 0.382 **

1.000

-0.443 **

0.558 **

1.000

0.412 **

0.538 **

1.000

0.370 **

0.563 **

0.715 **

0.175 n.s

0.158 n.s

0.527 **

-0.154 n.s

-0.119 n.s

-0.211 n.s

-0.552 **

-0.249 *

-0.205 n.s

-0.264 * -0.004 n.s

-0.022 n.s

-0.175 n.s

-0.214 n.s

-0.513 **

0.335 **

0.076 n.s

-0.395 **

0.381 **

0.505 **

0.414 **

0.412 **

0.011 n.s

-0.620 **

0.191 n.s

-0.505 **

-0.015 n.s -0.213 n.s

-0.173 n.s

-0.497 **

1.000 -0.176 n.s

1.000 0.163 n.s

1.000

-0.421 **

0.170 n.s

0.825 **

1.000

-0.136 n.s

-0.214 n.s

-0.051 n.s

-0.618 **

-0.065 n.s

1.000

0.157 n.s

-0.395 **

0.264 *

0.267 *

0.260 *

0.575 **

0.521 **

0.469 **

0.705 **

0.408 **

0.559 **

-0.022 n.s

-0.461 **

-0.344 **

-0.730 **

-0.407 **

1.000 0.278 *

1.000

127

Table 22: Correlation coefficient among the characteristics at Dukan location:

TRAITS

No. of spikes . m -2

No. of spikes . m -2

1.000

Spike weight . m -2

0.591 **

Average spike length( cm )

0.127 n.s

Spike weight . m -2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets . spike -1

No. of kernels . spike -1

Kernels weigh .spike -1 (g)

1000Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (Ton . ha -1)

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage

No. of tillers .m -2

1.000 0.009 n.s

No. of spikelets . spike -1

-0.080 n.s

-0.141 n.s

No. of kernels . spike -1

-0.079 n.s

-0.033 n.s

Kernels weight . spike -1 (g)

0.006 n.s

1000- Kernels weight (g) kernel yield (Ton . ha -1)

1.000 0.331 **

1.000

0.087 n.s

0.495 **

1.000

0.420 **

-0.198 n.s

-0.170 n.s

0.091 n.s

1.000

0.203 n.s

0.490 **

0.038 n.s

-0.308 *

-0.378 **

0.623 **

1.000

0.445 **

0.829 **

-0.056 n.s

-0.281 *

-0.282 *

0.584 **

0.682 **

1.000

0.678 **

0.835 **

-0.098 n.s

-0.164 n.s

0.049 n.s

0.470 **

0.502 **

0.734 **

1.000

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

0.049 n.s

0.461 **

-0.035 n.s

-0.236 n.s

-0.445 **

0.423 **

0.558 **

0.789 **

0.192 n.s

1.000

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

-0.361 **

0.097 n.s

-0.401 **

0.194 n.s

0.345 **

0.158 n.s

-0.123 n.s

0.037 n.s

-0.032 n.s

0.136 n.s

1.000

No. of days to Physiological maturity

-0.218 n.s

0.277 *

-0.267 *

-0.245 *

-0.104 n.s

0.794 **

0.722 **

0.499 **

0.354 **

0.420 **

0.201 n.s

1.000

Grain filling stage

0.295 *

0.322 **

-0.278 *

-0.384 **

0.063 n.s

0.317 **

0.097 n.s

0.124 n.s

-0.020 n.s

-0.960 **

0.074 n.s

1.000

No. of tillers .m-2

0.940 **

0.599 **

0.134 n.s

-0.090 n.s

-0.094 n.s

0.014 n.s

0.221 n.s

0.455 **

0.677 **

0.064 n.s

-0.360 **

-0.211 n.s

0.296 *

1.000

Plant height ( cm )

0.092 n.s

0.134 n.s

-0.052 n.s

-0.194 n.s

-0.111 n.s

0.548 **

0.585 **

0.327 **

0.437 **

0.071 n.s

-0.357 **

0.676 **

0.556 **

0.086 n.s

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

Plant height ( cm )

-0.029 n.s

128

1.000

Table 23: Correlation coefficient among the characteristics in the average of locations:

TRAITS

No. of spikes . m -2

Spike weight . m -2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets . spike -1

No. of kernels . spike -1

Kernels weigh .spike -1 (g)

1000Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (Ton . ha -1)

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

Harvest Index ( H.I. )

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

No. of spikes . m -2

1.000

Spike weight . m -2

0.609 **

1.000

Average spike length( cm )

0.421 **

0.178 n.s

1.000

No. of spikelets . spike -1

0.010 n.s

-0.124 n.s

0.264 *

1.000

No. of kernels . spike -1

-0.113 n.s

-0.230 n.s

0.053 n.s

0.556 **

1.000

Kernels weight . spike -1 (g)

0.201 n.s

0.498 **

0.039 n.s

-0.256 *

0.045 n.s

1.000

1000- Kernels weight (g)

0.263 *

0.561 **

0.087 n.s

-0.454 **

-0.484 **

0.716 **

1.000

kernel yield (Ton . ha -1)

0.548 **

0.891 **

0.186 n.s

-0.262 *

-0.365 **

0.618 **

0.716 **

1.000

Biological yield (Ton .ha -1)

0.628 **

0.848 **

0.107 n.s

-0.223 n.s

-0.098 n.s

0.660 **

0.590 **

0.805 **

1.000

Harvest Index ( H.I.)

0.160 n.s

0.453 **

0.099 n.s

-0.079 n.s

-0.364 **

0.267 *

0.477 **

0.671 **

0.167 n.s

1.000

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

-0.461**

0.007 n.s

-0.637 **

0.109 n.s

0.128 n.s

-0.008 n.s

-0.139 n.s

-0.032 n.s

-0.095 n.s

0.178 n.s

1.000

No. of days to Physiological maturity

-0.482 **

-0.102 n.s

-0.602 **

0.265 *

0.230 n.s

-0.124 n.s

-0.275 *

-0.163 n.s

-0.203 n.s

0.101 n.s

0.954 **

1.000

Grain filling stage

0.302 *

-0.250 *

0.479 **

0.407 **

0.170 n.s

-0.555 **

-0.498 **

-0.365 **

-0.310 *

-0.287 *

-0.604 **

-0.392 **

1.000

No. of tillers .m-2

0.772 **

0.449 **

0.457 **

-0.051 n.s

-0.251 *

0.146 n.s

0.262 *

0.460 **

0.407 **

0.201 n.s

-0.431 **

-0.442 **

0.264 *

1.000

Plant height ( cm )

0.149 n.s

0.274 *

0.119 n.s

-0.455 **

-0.209 n.s

0.678 **

0.684 **

0.443 **

0.516 **

0.115 n.s

-0.358 **

-0.462 **

-0.414 **

0.212 n.s

Grain filling stage

No. of tillers .m -2

Plant height ( cm )

1.000

CONCLUSSIONS

According to our results, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. It was observed clearly that the performance of each variety was differed from location to other depending on the climatic condition, referring to positive response of this variety to favorable environmental factors of that location. 2. Araz variety predominated the rest in kernel yield at Qlyasan location, this may be due to outyielding of this variety in number of spikes per square meter, spike weight per square meter, and spike length comparing to the rest, while in Dukan location, the variety of Rabea'a exceeded the rest in kernel yield, this may be due to its kernel size, as indicated through outyielding this variety in kernel weight per spike, and 1000- kernel weight comparing to the rest. 3. These results confirmed the importance of flag leaf and awns in determining final kernel yield, and most of its components. 4. Participation of flag leaf, and awns in kernel yield was different from variety to another depending on flag leaf area; weight; awns intensity; length, and weight, and these parts were genetically determined. 5. Maximum kernel yield was produced by the treatment of control i.e. without flag leaf and awns removal in both locations, this may be due to the predominating all its components under these treatments, while minimum kernel yield was produced under the treatment of removing both flag leaf, and awns at both locations, this may be due to the values of most of its important components as affected directly on kernel yield, which gave minimum values under this treatment. 6. Kernel yield correlated positively and significantly with most of its important components, this due to the presence of linked genes, and epistatic effect of different genes. 7. In the view of present results it was concluded that environment plays an important role in correlation among characteristics.

RECOMMENDATIONS According to the present results, the following points of view can be recommended: 1. Carrying out more investigations for testing awned and awnless varieties with survival potentials in the prevailing climate conditions in the region, and under different environmental conditions to ensure their yield stability and to estimate their performances under different cultural practices. 2. To gain optimal plant intensity, it is better to use different space apart between rows and plants for each seeding rate. 3. For more understanding of the role of flag leaf removal, it is recommended to increase some removal treatments such as removing whole flag leaf, and some top positioned leaves.

4. Using some project in the breeding program to improve the plant parts such as flag leaf area, and awns characteristics.

5. Grain number may be increased by selecting wheat genotypes characterized by:  Reducing the size of competing organs, such as the peduncle and number of sterile tillers during spike growth.



Increasing the number of spikelets/ spike via extending the duration of the

interval between flower initiation and terminal spikelet initiation.



Increasing floret survival via avoiding carbon, water and nutrient (particularly N)

limitations.



Possibly increasing radiation use efficiency during the rapid pike growth period

via selecting genotypes for erect canopies with short leaves.

REFERENCES

REFERENCES [1] Rosegrant, M. W.; M. Paisner; S. Meijer and J. Whitcover. 2001. Global food projections to 2020: Emerging trends and alternative futures. Washington, D. C.: IFPRI.

[2] Condon, A.G.; M.P. Reynolds; J. Brennan; M. van Ginkel; R. Trethowan; G.J. Rebetzke; D.G. Bonnett; R.A. Richards and G.D. Farquhar. 2006. Stomatal aperture related traits and yield potential in bread wheat. CIMMYT, Australian Government, Australian Center for International Agriculture Research,Grains Research & Development Corporation, pp: 126-133.

[3] Terwilliger, R. 2009. Global wheat production to be a record in 2008-09: Report. PTI, Newdelhi, Mydigitalfc.com, 3 pages.

[4] Global what production forecast at 673 million tons, 2010. NCDEX institute of Commodities market and Research, Commodity online, 3 pages.

[5] Vannahme, A. and D. Klassen. 2008. Record World Wheat production forecast by CWB. High Beam research, 2 pages.

[6] Provance, P. 2009. Wheat production situation January 2009, Price ratios don't favor wheat. Government of the united state of America, 6pages.

[7] Launois, A. 2008. Record world wheat production forecast in 2008/09. food productiondaily.com, 3 pages.

[8] Jolánkai, M.; Zs. Szentpétery and Z. Hegedủs. 2006. Pesticide residue dischange dynamics in wheat grain. Cereal Research Communications Vol. 34, No. 1, pp: 505-509.

[9] Falaki, A.M.; S. Miko; I.B. Mohammed; I.U. Abubakar and J.A. Valencia. 2009. Evaluaton of some improved bread wheat varieties at Chiyako, Jigawa state, Nigeria. ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science Vol.4, No.4, 4 pages.

[10] Sharma, DL.; M. D'Antuono; M. Amjad; B.J. Shackley; C.M. ZaicouKunesch and W.K. Anderson. 2006. Differences among wheat cultivars in their optimum sowing times in Western Australian environments. Agronomy, 6 pages.

[11] Spink, J. 2002. Assessing risks to winter wheat plant population. Home Grown Cereals Authority (HGCA), No.8, 2 pages.

[12] Edwards, J. and Dr. P. Martin. 2008. Wheat Row Space, Cowra. Plant population. NSW department of primary industries, NSW DPI. VSAP Project, 2 Pages.

[13] Anderson, W.K. 2009. Some relationships between plant population, yield components and grain yield of wheat in a Mediterranean environment, Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp: 219233.

[14] Spink, J. and T. Semere. 2000. Optimum Winter Wheat Plant population. Home Grown Cereals Authority (HGCA), Topic Sheet No.36, 2 pages.

[15] Haskins, B. and T. Peach. 2006. Low plant populations maintain yield. IREC Farmers' Newsletter, Vol. 172, pp: 16-17.

[16] Hutton, G. 2007. Using 1000- Kernel Weight for Calculating Seeding Rates and Harvest Losses. Agricultural Information service, Government of Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Agdex, 100/22-1, 10 pages.

[17] Xiaojuan, Li; H. Wang; H. LI; L. Zhang, N. Teng; Q. Lin ; J. Wang; T. Kuang; Zh. LI; B. LI; A. Zhang and J. Lin. 2006. Awns play a dominant role in carbohydrate production during the grain-filling stages in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Physiologia plantarium, Vol.127, No.4, pp: 701-709.

[18] Khaliq, L.; A. Irshad and M. Ahsan, 2008. Awns and flag leaf contribution to grain yield in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), Akadėmiai Kiadơ, cereal research communications- journal Article, Vol. 36, No.1, pp: 6576.

[19] Minhas, A. S.; A.S Randhawa and K. Chand. 2006. Effect of awns and leafblades on the grain yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. Em Thell). CABI, journal of research, Punjab agricultural university, 2 pages.

[20] Paluska, M.M. 1981. Effect of flag leaf and awn removal on seed weight of arivat barley. JSTOR: Journal of the Arizona- Nevada Academy of Science, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp: 260- 266.

[21] Acevedo, E.; P. Silva and H. Silva. 2002. Wheat growth and physiology. FAO corporate document repository, agriculture and consumer protection, 28 pages.

[22]

Which

came

first,

monumental

building

projects

of

(http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/003061.html).

farming? Archaeo

News, 2008. pp: 12-14.

[23] Common wheat, Triticum aestivum, (also known as bread wheat) is a cultivated wheat species, 2009. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 3 pages. [24] Peňa, R.J. 2002. Wheat for bread and other foods. FAO corporate document repository, agriculture and consumer protection, 14 pages.

[25] Simmons, S.R. 1987. Growth, development and physiology. Chapter3. In: EG Heyne, ed. Wheat and wheat improvement, Edition 2. ASA Inc, CSSA, Inc and SSS of America Inc., Madison Wisconsin, USA, pp: 77-104.

[26] Feuillet, C.; P. Langridge and R. Waugh. 2007. Cereal breeding takes a walk on the wild side. Trends in Genetics 24, PP: 24-32.

[27] Skovmand, B.; S. Rajaram; J.M. Ribaut and A.R. Hede. 2002. Wheat genetic resources. FAO corporate document repository, agriculture and consumer protection, 14 pages.

[28] Curtis, B.C. 2002. Wheat in the world. FAO corporate document repository, agriculture and consumer protection, 15 pages.

[29] Nuttonson, M.Y. 1955. Wheat-climatic relationships and the use of phenology in ascertaining the thermal and photothermal requirements of wheat. Washington, DC, American Institute of Crop Ecology.

[30] Saunders, D.A. and G.P. Hettel, eds. 1994. Wheat in heat stressed environments: irrigated, dry areas and rice-wheat farming systems. Mexico, DF, CIMMYT.

[31] Percival, J. 1921. The wheat plant. A monograph. New York, NY, USA, E. P., Dutton and company.

[32] Piperno, D. (http://www.pnas.org/content/104/29/11871.extract); et al, 2004. "Processing of wild cereal grains in the upper Palaeolithic revealed by starch grain analysis.

[33] Hancock A.B. and F. James. 2004. Plant Evolution and the Origin of Crop Species. CABI publishing. ISBN 0 -85199-685-X. [34] Bajaj, Y.P.S. 1990. Wheat. Springer, pp: 161-63. ISBN 3-540-51809-6.

[35] Potts, D.T. 1996. Mesopotamia Civilization: The Material Foundations Cornell university press. P. 62. ISBN 0-8014-3339-8.

[36] Nevo, E; A. B. Korol; A. Beiles and T. Fahima. 2002. Evolution of Wild Emmer and Wheat improvement: Population Genetics, Genetic Resources and Genome…. Springer, p. 8. ISBN 3-540-41750-8.

[37] Vaughan, J.G. and P.A. Judd. 2003. The Oxford book of Health Foods. Oxford University Press. P. 35. ISBN 0-19-850459-4.

[38] Pomeranz, Y. 1987. Bread around the world. In Y. Pomeranz, ed. Modem cereal science and technology, pp: 258-333. New York, NY, USA, VCH Publishers.

[39] Faridi, H. and J.M. Faubion. 1995. Wheat usage in North America. In H. Faridi and J. M. Faubion, eds. Wheat end uses around the world, pp: 114. St Paul, MN, USA, American Association of Cereal Chemists.

[40] Seibel, W. 1995. Wheat usage in Western Europe. In H. Faridi and J.M. Faubion, eds. Wheat end uses around the world, pp: 93-125. St Paul, MN, USA, American Association of Cereal Chemists.

[41] McMaster, G.J. and J.T. Gould. 1995. Wheat usage in Australia and New Zealand. In H. Faridi and J.M. Faubion, eds. Wheat end uses around the world, pp: 267-285. St Paul, MN, USA, American Association of Cereal Chemists.

[42] Buckley, J. 1997a. Big wheat crops likely in 1997. Cereals Int., pp: 10, 12.

[43] Buckley, J. 1997b. Wheat-no signs of weakening. Cereals Int., pp: 7, 9, 11.

[44] Owens, G. 1997. China: handled with care. Cereals Int., pp: 14-16.

[45] Prior, D. 1997. The cradle of civilization: a snapshot of the flour milling industry. Feed Grain, pp: 15-17.

[46] Noad, B. 2005. Productive dual purpose winter wheats. NSW department of primary industries. Agnote DPI 438, Agriculture, North West New England, 8 pages.

[47] Evenson, R.E. and D. Gollin. 2003. Assesing the impact of the Green Revolution, 1960 to 2000. Science 300: 758- 762.

[48] Rosegrant, M.W. and S.A. Cline. 2003. Global food security: challenge and policies. Science 302, PP: 1917-1920.

[49] Wheat variety and their uses. 2007. High beam research, journal of business, agricultural research, Encyclopedia-wheat, 2 pages.

[50] Rollin, G.S. 1977. Varieties. Wheat breeder, Agronomy, pp: 7-9.

[51] The biology of Triticum aestivum L. em Thell. (Bread wheat). Taxonomy. 2008. Australian Government, department of health and ageing, office of the gene technology regulator, Version 2, Section1, pp: 1-2.

[52] Sears, E.R. 1966. Nullisomic-tetrasomic combinations in wheat. In: R. Riley and K.R Lewis, eds. Chromosome Manipulation and Plant Genetics. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh, pp: 29-45.

[53] Sears, E.R. 1954. The aneupliods of common wheat. Missouri Agricultural Experimental Research Station Bulletin 572.

[54] Kimber, G.K. and E.R. Sears. 1987. Evolution of the genus Triticeae and origin of cultivated wheat. Chapter 5A. In: EG Heyne, ed. Wheat and wheat improvement. Edition second. American Society of Agronomy. Inc., Crop Science Society of America, Inc., Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Pp: 154- 164.

[55] Tsunewaki, K. 1988. Cytoplasmic variation in Triticum and Aegilops. In "proceedings of the seventh International wheat genetics symposium". Miller, T.E. and Koebner R.M.D. eds, Institute of Plant Science Research, Cambridge, U.K. pp: 53- 62.

[56] Conley, Sh.; J. Gaska and C. Grau. 2010. Winter wheat variety selection and seed quality. university of Wisconsin, integrated pest and crop manager, 3 pages.

[57] Hiritage wheat varieties. 2009. Grassroot solution, green common sense solutions, local food, heritage seed culture, 6 pages.

[58] Hermanson, E. 2009, Deregistration of two Western wheat varieties in 2011. Canadian grain commission, Commission Canadienne des grain, 1 page.

[59] Shuaib, M.; A. Zep; Z. Ali; W. Ali; T. Ahmad and I. Khan. 2007. Characterization

of

wheat

varieties

by

seed

storage

protein

electrophoresis. African Journal of Biotechnology Vol.6, No.5, pp: 497500.

[60] Cooke R.J. and J.R. Law. 1998. Seed storage protein diversity in wheat varieties. Plant varieties and seeds. 11, PP: 159-167.

[61] MacRitchie F. 1994. Role of Polymeric proteins in Flour Functionality. In wheat kernel proteins: Molecular and functional aspects. Bitervo, Italy, Universita degli studi Della Tuscia. pp: 145-150.

[62] Redman, L.A.; G.W. Horn; E.G. Krenzer and D.J. Bernardo. 1995. A review of livestock grazing and wheat grain yield Boom or Bust. Agron. J., 87, PP: 137-147.

[63] Hussain, I.; F.M. Epplin and E.G. Krenzer. 2003. Planting date influence on dual-purpose winter forage yield, grain yield and test weight. Agron. J., 95, PP:1179-1188.

[64] Epplin, F. M.; I. Hossain and E.G. Krenzer. 2000. Winter wheat fall-winter forage yield and grain yield response to planting date in a dual- purpose system. Agric. Syst., 63, PP:161-173.

[65] Ullah, R.; Z. Mohammad; I.H. Khalil and A. Ullah. 2007. Heritability for heading, maturity, plant height, spike length and tillers production in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Pak. J, Pl. Sci. Vol. 13, No.1, pp: 67-73.

[66] Laverack, G.K. 1994. Management of breeders seed production. Seed Sci. Tech. 22, PP: 551-563.

[67] van Gastel, A.J.G.; Z. Bishaw and B.R. Gregg. 2002. Wheat seed production. FAO corporate document repository, agriculture and consumer protection, 19 pages.

[68] Wheat 2010, 2009. N university of Nebraska-Lincoln, UNL Extension in Gage Country, 1 page.

[69] Wysocki, D. 1987. Using cereal development to estimate optimum planting rates. PNW (Pasific NorthWest) conservation tillage handbook series, chapter 7– plant development, No. 1, Origon State University (OSU). 6 pages.

[70] Willenborg, Ch.J.; A.L. Brûlé-Babel and R.C. Van Acker. 2009. Low crop plant population densities promote pollen-mediated gene flow in spring

wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Springer link, Springer Netherlands, Journal Article, 3 pages.

[71] Amjad, M. and W. Anderson. 2003. Variety interactions with wheat row spacing and seeding rate. Agronomy, 3 pages.

[72] Anderson, W. and J. Garlinge. 2000. The wheat book: Principles and practice. Department of Agriculture Western Australia. Bulletin No.4443 (Agdex 112/ 01).

[73] Amjad, M.; A.H.S. Green; G.P. Riethmuller and R.J. Jarvis. 1997. Effects of range of seeding systems on lupin establishment and yield. Highlights of Lupin research and development in Western Australia. Edited by G. Shea, UWA, pp: 3-8.

[74] Carr, P.M.; R.D. Horsley and W.W. Poland. 2003. Tillage and seeding rate effects on wheat cultivars: II. Yield components. Crop Sci. 43, PP:210218.

[75] Forbes, J.C. and R.D. Watson. 1999. Plants in agriculture, crop production and yield, plant population and crop yield. Library of congress cataloguing in publication data available, pp: 256-300.

[76] Winter wheat: establishment. 2010. Agronomy guide 2009-2010. PNN state, small grains: part 1, section 7, 2 pages.

[77] Willenborg, Ch. J.; A. L. Brûlé-Babel; Ed. C. Luschei and R. C. Van Acker. 2009. Crop genotype and plant population density impact flowering phenology and synchrony between cropped and volunteer spring wheat. Agronomy Journal, Agron. J. 101, pp: 1311-1321.

[78] Weisz, R. and R. Heiniger. 2004. 6. Small grain seeding rates for North Carolina. Wheat, Tritical and Barley. Small grain seeding rates. 6 pages.

[79] Falconer, K.L.R. and D.L Sharma, 2006. High wheat seeding rates and plant density do not go hand in hand. Australian agronomy conference, Australian society of agronomy, 4 pages.

[80] Optimizing plant population, crop emergence and establishment. 2002. FAO corporate document repository, agriculture and consumer protection, 16 pages.

[81] Anderson, W.K. and

J. Barclay. 1991. Evidence for differences between

three wheat cultivars in yield response to plant population. Crop and pasture science, Australian journal of agricultural research, Vol. 42, No.5, pp: 701-713.

[82] Whaley, J.M; D.L. Sparkes; M.J. Foulkes; J.H. Spink; T. Semere and

R.K.

Scott. 2000. The physiological response of winter wheat to reduction in plant density. Ingentaconnect, Annals of applied biology, Vol. 137, No. 1 and 2, pp: 165-177 (13).

[83] Spink, J.H; T. Semere; D.L. Sparkes; J.M. Whaley; M.J. Foulkes; R.W. Clear and

R.K. Scott. 2000. Effect of sowing date on the optimum plant

density of winter wheat. Ingentaconnect, Annals of applied biology, Vol. 137, No.1 and 2, pp: 179-188 (10).

[84] Briggs, K.C. and date and

A. Aytenfisu. 1979. The effects of seeding rate, seeding location on grain yield, maturity, protein percentage and

protein yield of some spring wheats in Central Alberta. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 59, pp: 1139-1145.

[85] Ciha, A.J. 1983. Seeding rate and seeding date effects on spring seeded small grain cultivars. Agronomy Journal 75, pp: 795-799.

[86] Darwinkel, A. 1978. Pattern of tillering and grain production of winter wheat at a wide range of planting densities. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 26, pp: 383-398.

[87] Darwinkel, A. 1980. Ear development and formation of grain yield in winter wheat. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 28, pp: 156-163.

[88] Holliday, R. 1960. Plant population and crop yield. Field Crop Abstracts 13: 159-167 and 247-253.

[89] Laloux, R.; A. Falisse and J. Poelaert. 1980. Nutrient and fertilization of wheat.

IN:

Wheat.

Technical

monogragh.

CIBA-Geigy

Ltd.,

Switzerland. Pp: 19-24.

[90] Shanahan, J.F; D.H. Smith and

J.R. Welsh. 1984. An analysis of post-

anthesis sink-limited winter wheat grain yields under various environments. Agronomy Journal 76, pp: 611-615.

[91] Das, H.P. and

S.M.M. Darani. 2007. Agrometeorology

and wheat

production. III. Management aspects of wheat production in various climates. Planting date, seeding rates and plant density. Chapter 13 as a whole is coordinated by kees stigter with the assistance of Orivaldo Brunini or chepter 13 H. 30 pages.

[92] Paulus, P.S. 1998. Wheat production in Tennessee, seeding. The university of Tennessee or UT, Agricultural extension service. 17 pages.

[93] Kirby, E.J.M. 2002. Botany of the wheat plant. FAO corporate document repository, agriculture and consumer protection, 24 pages.

[94] Esau, K. 1953. Plant anatomy. London, Chapman and Hall.

[95] Evans, L.T; I.F. Wardlaw and

R.A. Fischer. 1980.Wheat. In LT Evans, ed,

Crop physiology: Some case histories, Ed 2.Cambridge University press, London, pp: 101-149.

[96] Ledent, J.F. and D.N. Moss. 1979 . Relation of morphological characters and shoot yield in wheat. Crop Sci.19, pp: 445-451.

[97] Hama Rashid, A. 1983. The physiology of culm elongation in wheat. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

[98] Puckridge, D.W. 1972. Phoyosynthesis of wheat under field conditions. V. The effect of solar elevation on the distribution of photosynthetic activity within the crop canopy. Aust J Agric Res 23, pp: 397-404.

[99] Wiegand, C.L. and J.A. Cuellar. 1981. Duration of grain filling and kernel weight of wheat as affected by temperature. Crop Sci. 21, pp: 95-101.

[100] Spiertz, J.H.J. 1977. The influence of temperature and light intensity on grain growth in relation to the carbohydrate and nitrogen economy of the wheat plant. Neth J Agric Sci. 25, pp: 182-197.

[101] Gregory, P.J.; B. Marshall and P.V. Biscoe. 1981. Nutrient relations of winter wheat. 3. Nitrogen uptake, photosynthesis of flag leaves and translocation of nitrogen to grain. J Agric Sci 96, pp: 539-547.

[102] Judel, G.K. and K. Mengel. 1982. Effect of shading on nonstructural carbohydrates and their turnover in culms and leaves during the grain filling period of spring wheat. Crop Sci 22, pp: 958-962.

[103] Wittenbach, V.A. 1979. Ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase and proteolytic activity in wheat leaves from anthesis through senescence. Plant physiol 64, pp: 884-887.

[104] Gifford, R.M. and L.T. Evans. 1981. Photosynthesis, carbon partitioning and yield. Annu rev plant physiol 32, pp: 485-509.

[105] Sharkey, T.D. 1985. Photosynthesis in intact leaves of C3 plants: physics, physiology and rate limitations. Bot Rev 51, pp: 53-105.

[106] Lazan, H.B.; E.W.R. Barlow and C.J. Brady. 1983. The significance of vascular connection in regulating senescence of the detached flag leaf of wheat. J Exp Bot 34, pp: 726-736.

[107] José, L. and L. Tapia. 1987. Photosynthetic gas exchange characteristics of wheat flag leaf blades and sheathes during grain filling. The case of a spring crop grown under Mediterranean climate conditions. Plant physiol. 85, pp: 667-673.

[108] Sojka, R.E.; L.H. Stolzy and R.C. Fischer. 1979. Comparison of diurnal drought response of wheat cultivars. Agron. J., 71, pp: 329-335.

[109] Aggarwal, P.K. and S.K. Sinha. 1984. Differences in water relations and physiological characteristics in leaves of wheat associated with leaf position on the plant. Plant Physiol. 74, PP : 1041-1045.

[110] Cheung, Y.N.S.; M.T. Tyree and J. Dainty. 1976. Water relation parameters in single leaves obtained in pressure bomb and some ecological interpretations. Can. J. Bot., 53, PP: 1342- 1346.

[111] Weatherley, P.E. 1970. Some aspects of water relations. Adv. Bot. Res., 3, PP: 171-206.

[112] Aslam, M. and L. A. Hunt. 1978. Photosynthesis and transpiration of the flag leaf in four spring- wheat cultivar. Springer link- journal article, springer berlin, planta Journal, Vol.141, No.1, 4 pages.

[113] Edwards, G.E. and

D.A Walker. 1983. C3 and

C4: Mechanisms and

cellular and environmental regulation of photosynthesis. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific. [114] Taiz, L. and E. Zeiger. 2002. Plant Physiology. 3rd ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.

[115] Ting, I.P. 1985. Crassulacean acid metabolism. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 36, PP: 595 – 622.

[116] Wang, N.; H. Zhang and P.S. Nobel. 1998. Carbon flow and carbohydrate metabolism during sink to source transition for developing cladodes of Opuntia ficus-indica. J. Exp. Bot. 49, PP: 1835-1843.

[117] Gonzalez-Real, M.M. and A. Baille. 2000. Changes in leaf photosynthetic parameters with leaf position and nitrogen content within a rose plant canopy (Rosa hybrida). Plant cell environ. 23, PP: 351- 363.

[118] Adam, N.R.; G.W. Wall; B.A Kimball; Jr. P.J. Pinter; R.L. LaMorte; D.J. Hunsaker; F.J. Adamsen; T. Thompson; A.D Matthias; S.W. Leavitt and

A.N. Webber. 2000. Acclimation response of spring wheat in free

air CO2 enrichment (FACE) atmosphere with variable soil nitrogen regimes. 1. leaf position and phenology determine acclimation response. Photosynth. Res. 66, PP: 65-77.

[119] Proietti, P.; A. Palliotti; F. Famiani; E. Antognozzi; F. Feranti; R. Andreutti and G. Frenguelli. 2000. Influence of leaf position, fruit and light availability on photosynthesis of two chestnut genotypes. Sci. Hort. 85, PP: 63- 73.

[120] Wang, Z.; J. Fu; M. He; Y. Yin and H. Cao. 1997. Planting density effects on assimilation and partitioning of photosynthates during filling in the late- sown wheat. Photosynthetica 33, PP: 199-204.

[121] Ryle, G.J.A.; C.E. Powell and A.J. Gordon. 1981. Pattern of

14

C-lablled

assimilate partitioning in red and white clover during vegetative growth. Ann. Bot. 47, PP: 505- 514.

[122] Nicotra, A.B.; R.L. Chazdon and

R.A. Montgomery, 2003. Sexes show

contrasting patterns of leaf and crown carbon in a dioecious rainforest shrub. Am. J. Bot. 90, PP: 347- 355.

[123] Rawson, H.M. and G.A. Constable. 1980. Carbon production of sunflower cultivars in field and controlled environments. I. photosynthesis and

transpiration of leaves, stemes and heads. Aust. J. Plant physiol. 7, PP: 555- 573.

[124] Maitra, N.; D.S. Roy and S.P.Sen. 1987. Source- Sink relationship: Control of photosynthesis in the flag leaf by the panicle in wheat. Plant and cell physiology, Vol.28, No.5, pp: 911-917.

[125] Briggs, K.G. and A., Aytenfisu. 1980. Relationship between morphological characters above the flag leaf node and grain yield in spring wheat. Crop Science, 20, PP: 350- 354.

[126] Gelang, J.; H., Pleijel; E., Sild; H., Danielsson; S., Younis and G., Selldén. 2000. Rate and duration of grain filling in relation to flag leaf senescence and grain yield in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) exposed

to

different

concentrations

of

ozone.

Physiological

plantarium110, PP: 366- 375.

[127] Foulkes, M.J.; R., Sylvester-Bradley; R.Weightman and J.W., Snape. 2007. Identifying physiological traits associated with improved drought resistance in winter wheat. Field Crop Research 103, PP: 11- 24.

[128] Royo, C. and G.A. Briceño-Félix. 2008. Spanish wheat pool. In: The word wheat book’. A. Bonjean, B. Angus and Mvan Ginkel (Eds.) Lavoisier publishing lnc. In prees.

[129] Royo, C.; F., Álvaro; V., Martos; A., Ramdami; J., Isidro; D., Villegas and L.F., Garcia, del moral. 2007. Genetic changes in durum wheat yield components and associated traits in Italian and Spanish varieties during the 20th century. Euphytica 155, pp: 259- 270.

[130] Thorne, G.N. 1963. Varietal differences in photosynthesis of ears and leaves of barley. Ann. Bot., 27, pp: 155-174.

[131] Walpole, R.P. and

D.G. Morgan. 1972. Physiology of grain filling in

barley. Nature, 240, pp: 416-417.

[132] Moutot, F.; J.C. Heut; J.F. Morot-Gaudry and J.C. Pernollet. 1986. Relationship between photosynthesis and protein synthesis in maize I. kinetics of the translocation of photoassimilates from ear leaf to seed. Plant. Physiol. 80, pp: 211-215.

[133] Evans, L.T. and M.H. Rawson. 1970. Photosynthesis and respiration by the flag leaf and component of the ear during grain development in wheat. Aust. J. Biol. Sci., 23, pp: 245-254.

[134] Petterson. T.G.; D.N. Moss and W.A. Burn. 1980. Enzymatic changes during the senescence of field grown wheat. Crop Sci., 20, pp: 15-18.

[135] Judal, G.K. and K. Mengel. 1980. Effect of shading on non-structural carbohydrates and their turnover in culm and leaves during the grain filling period of spring wheat. Crop Sci., 22, pp: 958-962.

[136] Prioul, J.L. and N. Schwebel-Dugue. 1992. Source-sink manipulations and carbohydrate metabolism in maize. Crop Sci., 32, pp: 751-756. [137] Bavec, M; K. Vuković; S.G. Mlakar; Č. Rozmam and F. Bavec. 2007. Leaf area index in winter wheat: response on seed rate and nitrogen application by different varieties central. Central European Agriculture Journal. Vol.8, N0.3, pp: 337-342.

[138] Sharma, S.N.; R.S. Sain and

R.K. Sharma. 2003a. The genetic control of

the flag leaf length in normal and late sown durum wheat. Journal of Agriculture Science 141, pp: 323-331.

[139] Lupton, F.G.H. 1973. Selection criteria determining yield in semi dwarf wheat varieties. Ann. Appl. Biol. 72, pp: 47-50.

[140] Athwal, D.S. 1968. Concept of plant type and disease resistance in rice breeding. Presidential address delivered at manual general meeting of lnd. Soc. Genet. Plant breed.

[141] Berdhal, J.D.; D.C. Rasmusson and D.N. Moss. 1972. Effect of leaf area on photosynthetic rates, light penetration and grain yield in barley. Crop Sci.20, pp: 117-180.

[142] Ibrahim, H.A. and R.A. Elenein. 1977. The relative contribution of different wheat leaves and awns to the grain yield and its protein content. Z. Ack. Pflanz. 144, pp: 1-7.

[143] Monyo, J.H. and

W.J. Whittington. 1973. Genotypic differences in flag

leaf area and their contribution to grain yield in wheat. Euphytica 22, pp: 600-606. [144] Riaz, R. and M.A. Chowdhry. 2003. Genetic analysis of some economic traits of wheat under drought condition. Asian journal of plant Science 2, pp: 790-796. [145] Dere, Ş. and M.B. Yildirim. 2006. Inheritance of grain yield per plant, flag leaf width and length in an 8×8 diallel cross population of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.).Turk J Agric For 30, pp: 339-345.

[146] Mcneal, F.H. and M.A. Berg. 2004. Flag leaf area in five spring wheat crosses and relationship to grain yield. Springerlink, springer netherland, Euphytica journal, Vol.26, No.3, pp: 739-744.

[147] Birsin, M.A. 2005. Effects of removal of some photosynthetic structures on some yield components in wheat. Tarim bilimleri dergisi, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp: 364-367.

[148] Hsu, P. and P.D. Walton. 1971. Relationships between yield and its components and structures above the flag leaf node in spring wheat. Crop Science, Vol. 11, No.1, pp: 190-193.

[149] Mohiuddin, S.H. and L.I. Croy, 1980. Flag leaf and peduncle area duration in relation to winter wheat grain yield. Agronomy Journal Vol. 72, No. 2, pp: 299-301.

[150] Sen, A. and M. Prasad. 1996. Critical period of flag-leaf duration in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences Vol. 66, No. 10, pp: 599-600. [151] Cruz-aguado, J.A.; F. Reyes; R. Rodes; I. Perez and

M. Dorado. 1999.

Effect of source-to-sink ratio on partitioning of dry matter and

14

C-

photoassimilates in wheat during grain filling. Annals of Botany 83, pp: 655-665.

[152] Chhabra, A.K and S.K. Sethi. 1989. Contribution and association of awns and flag-leaf with yield and its components in durum wheat. Cereal Research Communications, Vol. 17, No. 3 and 4, pp: 265-271.

[153] Das, N.R. and N.N. Mukherjee. 1991. Grain yield contribution by leaf and awn in dwarf wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) after rice (Oryza sativa L.). Environment and Ecology, Vol. 9, No.1, pp: 33-36.

[154] Mahmood, A.; K. Alam; A. Salam and S. Iqbal. 1991. Effect of flag leaf removal on grain yield, its components and quality of hexaploid wheat. Cereal-Research-Communications, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp: 305-310.

[155] Singh, D. and D.Singh, 1992. Effect of leaf-blade and awn on grain yield of rain fed wheat (Triticum aestivum) at different stages of spike development. Indian Journal of Agriculture Sciences, Vol. 62, No. 7, pp: 468-71.

[156] Mahmood, N. and M.A. Chowdhry. 1997. Removal of green photosynthetic structures and their effect on some yield parameters in bread wheat. Wheat information service 85, pp: 14-20.

[157] Saghir, A.R.; A.R.Khan and W.W. Worzella. 1968. Effect of plant parts on the grain yield, kernel weight and

plant hight of wheat and barley.

Agronomy Journal, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp: 95-97.

[158] Chowdhry, M.A.; N. Mahmood; T.R. Rashad and I. Khaliq. 1999. Effect of leaf area removal on grain yield and its components in spring wheat. Rachis, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp: 75-78.

[159] Bijanzadeh, E. and Y. Emam. 2010. Effect of Source-Sink Manipulation on yield components and photosynthetic characteristic of wheat cultivars (Triticum aestivum and T. durum L.). J. Applied Science, 10, pp: 564569.

[160] Atkins, I.M. and

M.J. Norris. 1955. The influence of awns on yield and

certain morphological characters of wheat. Agronomy Journal 47, pp: 218-220.

[161] Olugbemi, L. B.; R.B. Austin and J. Bingham. 1976b. Effect of awns on the photosynthesis and yield of wheat, Triticum aestivum. Ann. Appl. Biol., 84, pp: 241-250.

[162] Ledent, J.F. and

D.N. Moss. 1979. Relation of morphological characters

and shoot yield in wheat. Crop Science 19, pp: 445-450.

[163] Grundbacher, F.J. 2008. The physiological function of the cereal awn. Springer link, Springer New York, the botanical review journal, Vol.29, No.3, pp: 366-381. [164] Wang, Z.M.; A.L. Wel,

and D.M. Zheng. 2001. Photosynthetic

characteristics of non-leaf organs of winter wheat cultivars differing in ear type and their relationship with grain mass per ear. Photosynthetica, 39, pp: 239-244.

[165] Wirth, E.; G.K. Kelly; G. Fischbeck and E. Latzko. 1977. Enzyme activities and products of CO2 fixation in various photosynthetic organs of wheat and oat. Z.Pflanzen-physiol., 82, pp: 78-87.

[166] Imaizumi, N.; M. Samejima and K. Ishihara. 1997. Characteristics of photosynthetic carbon metabolism of spikelets in rice. Photosynth. Res., 52, pp: 75-82.

[167] Olugbemi, L.B.; J. Bingham and R.B. Austin. 1976b. Ear and flag leaf photosynthesis of awned and awnless Triticum species Ann. Appl. Biol., 84, pp: 231-240.

[168] Blum, A. 1985. Photosynthetic and transpiration in leaves and ear of wheat and barley varieties. J. Exp. Bot., 36, pp: 432-440.

[169] Vehrich, R.A.; B.F. Carner and B.C. Martin. 1995. Photosynthesis and water use efficiency of awned and awnletted lines of hard red winter wheat. Crop Sci., 35, pp: 172-176.

[170] Wang, Z.; J. Fu; M. He; Q. Tian and H. Cao. 1997. Effect of source sink manipulation on net photosynthetic rate and photosynthate partitioning during grain filling in winter wheat. Biol. Plant, 39, pp: 379-385. [171] Flinn, A.M. 1974. Regulation of leaflet photosynthesis by developing fruit in the pea. Physiol. Plant, 31, pp: 275-278.

[172] Mondal, M.H.; W.A. Burn and M.L. Brenner. 1978. Effect of sink removal on photosynthesis and senescence in leaves of soybean (Glycine max. L.) plants. Plant physiol., 61, pp: 394-397.

[173] Austin, R.B. and J. Edrich. 1975. Effect of ear removal on photosynthesis, carbohydrate accumulation and on the distribution of assimilated 14C in wheat. Ann. Bot., 39, pp: 141- 152.

[174] Araus, J.L.; H.R. Brown; A. Febrero; J. Bort and M.D. Serret. 1993. Ear photosynthesis, carbon isotope discrimination and the contribution of respiratory CO2 to differences in grain mass in durum wheat. Plant Cell Environ 16, pp: 383-392.

[175] Ram, H. and R. Singh. 1982, Chlorophyll content, photosynthetic rates and related enzyme activities in ear parts of two wheat cultivars differing in grain yield. Plant Physiol. Biochem 9, pp: 94-102.

[176] Kriedemann, P. 1966. The photosynthetic activity of the wheat ear. Ann Bot (Lond) 30, pp: 349-363.

[177] Motzo, R. and F. Giunta. 2002. Awnedless affects grain yield and kernel weight in near- isogenic lines of durum wheat. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 53, pp: 1285-1293.

[178] Imaizumi, N.; H. Usuda; H. Nakamoto and K. Ishihara. 1990. Changes in the rate of photosynthesis during grain filling and the enzymatic activities associated with the photosynthetic carbon metabolism in rice panicles. Plant Cell Physiol 31, pp: 835-843.

[179] Blum, A. 1985a. The effect of heat stress on wheat leaf and ear photosynthesis, oxford journal, journal of experimental botany J. Exp. Bot.,Vol. 37, No. 1, pp: 111-118. [180] Eduardo, A. T.; J. Bort; J.J. Guiamet; S. Noguės and J.L. Araus. 2007. The photosynthetic role of ear in C3 cereals: Metabolism, water use efficiency and contribution to grain yield. Plant Sciences Vol. 26, pp: 116.

[181] Olugbemi, L.B. and M.G. Bush. 2009. The influence of temperature on the contribution of awns to yield in wheat. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp: 299-310.

[182] Bhatt, G.M. 1973. Diallel analysis and cross predication in common wheat. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 24, pp: 169-178.

[183] Gebre, G.B. 2005. Genetic variability and inheritance of drought and plant density adaptive traits in maize. Ph.D. dissertation submitted to the University of the Free state (Bloemfontein, South Africa).

[184] Yadav, P.K. and V.G. Narsingham. 1999. Gene effect for yield and its components in wheat. RACHIS News letter, Vol.18, No. 2, pp: 79-81. [185] Tamarin, R.H. 2002. Principles of genetics-quantitative and evaluation genetics. Seventh Edition. Exclusive right by Mc Graw Hall companies, Inc. for manufacture and export. Pp: 532-568.

[186] Grafius, J.E. 1972. Competition for environmental resources by component characters. Crop Science. 12, pp: 364-367.

[187] Doing, S.M. and C.W. Knight. 1992. Alternative model for analysis of small yield. Crop Science 32, pp: 487-489.

[188] Liver, R.W. and E.G. Hyne. 1968. Hybeid vigor in hard red winter wheat. Proceeding of the third international wheat genetic symposium. Pp: 431-436.

[189] Aglouni, M.M. 1986. Association and inheritance of several agronomic characters in four wheat crosses. Amman (Jordan). Page 75.

[190] Dofing, S.M. 1997. Onto genetic evaluation of grain yield and time to maturity in barley. American Society of Agronomy, 89, pp: 685-690.

[191] Dokuyucu, T. and A. Akkaya. 1999. Path coefficient analysis and correlation of yield and yield components of wheat genotypes. RACHIS News letter. Vol. 18, No. 2, pp: 17-20.

[192] Al- Assel, A.M. 1998. Genetic and phenotypic correlation and path analysis character in bread wheat. Ph.D. Dissertation submitted to the College of Agriculture University of Baghdad. Iraq. [193] Benbelkacem, A.; M.S. Mekni and

D.C. Rasmusson, 1984. Breeding for

high tiller number and yield in barley. Crop Science Society of America, 24, pp: 968-972.

[194] Hamid, Z.A. and J.E. Grafius. 1978. Developmental Allometry and its implication to grain yield in barley. Crop Science Society of America, 18, pp: 83-86.

[195] Sidwell, R.J.; E.L. Smith and R.W. Mc New. 1976. Inheritance and interrelationship of grain yield and selected yield-related traits in hard red winter wheat cross. Crop Sci. 16, pp: 650-654.

[196] Hadjichristodouiou, A. 1989. Environmental correlation among grain yield and other important traits of wheat in dry land-Euphytica. Vol. 44, No. 1 and 2, pp: 143-145.

[197] Smail, V.W.; R.F. Eslick and E.A. Hockett. 1986. Isogenic heading data effects on yield component development in (Titan) barley. Crop Science Society of America, 26, pp: 1023-1029.

[198] Petrovic, J.; L. Cermin and P.B. Brezinova. 1994. The heterosis effect and phenotype correlation of the quantitative characters of the wheat. Polnohospodarstvo (Slovak republic) Vol. 40, No. 9, pp: 660-671.

[199] Ben, A.F. 1999. Genetic advances in grain yield of durum wheat under lowrainfall condition. RACHIS News letter. Vol.18, No. 1, pp: 31-33.

[200] Borghi, B.; M. Perenzin and R.J. Nash. 1988. Agronomic and quantitative characteristics of ten bread wheat hybrids produced using a chemical hybridizing agent. Euphytica. 39, pp: 185-194.

[201] Khan, N. and M.A. Bajwa. 1993. Variability and correlation between metric traits in wheat. J. Agri. Res. Vol. 31, No. 2, pp: 131-137.

[202] Singh, S.P.; A.A. Pianchi and Narsinghani. 1982. Character correlation and selection indices in F2 population of wheat. Indian J. Agr. Sci. Vol. 52, No. 7, pp: 424-429.

[203] Crook, W.J. and J.M. Poehlman. 1971. Hybrid performance among sixrowed winter barleys (Hordeum vulgare L.) varying in kernel size. Crop Science Society of America, 11, pp: 818-821. [204] Garcỉa Del Moral, L.F.; J.M. Ramos; M.B. Garcỉa Del Moral and M.P. Jiménez-Tejada. 1991. Onto genetic approach to grain production in spring barley based on path-coefficient analysis. Crop Science Society of America, 31, pp: 1179-1185.

[205] Drozd, D. 1990. Inheritance of several agronomic characters in spring wheat with a special emphasis on GxE interaction. Wroclaw, Wydawinctwo Akademii Rolinczej, 68 pages.

[206] Al-Fhady, M.Y. 2008. Estimate of phenotypic and genotypic variation, heritability and correlations on nine durum wheat cultivars (Triticum durum Desf.) under limited rainfall. Mesopotamia Journal of Agriculture. Vol. 36, No. 1, pp: 174-179.

[207] Yasuda, S. and

J. Hayashi. 1985. Ecological features of Japanese two-

rowed cultivars. Barley Genetics News letter, 15, pp: 43-46.

[208] Schittenhelm, S.; J.A. Okeno and W. Friedt. 2008. Prospects of Agronomic improvement in spring barley based on a comparison of old and new germplasm. Journal of Agronomy and crop Science, Vol. 176, No. 5, pp: 295-303.

[209] Boukerrou, L. and

D.D. Rasmusson. 1990. Breeding for heigh biomass

yield in spring barley. Crop Science Society of America, 30, pp: 31-35.

[210] Sinebo, W. 2002. Yield relationships of barleys grown in a tropical highland environment. Crop Sci. 42, pp: 428-437.

[211] Ozkan, H; T. Yagbasanlar and I. Genc. 1997. Genetic analysis of yield components. Harvest index and biological yield in bread wheat under Mediterranean climatic conditions. RACHIS News letter, Vol. 16, No. 1 and 2, pp: 49-52. [212] Sinha, S.K. and R. Khanna. 1975. Physiological, biochemical and genetic basis of heterosis. Advances in Agronomy, 27, pp:123-134,

[213] Edward, I.B.; W.G. Thomson and D.W. Pingree. 1980, Pioner hi-bred international, Department of cereal breeding Report. Annual wheat News letter. 26, pp: 36-37. [214] Al- Mohamad, F. and

M.A. AL- Yonis. 2000. Agricultural

Experimentation Design and analysis, Baghdad University. Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific research part 1 and 2, pp: 374-444 (in arabic).

[215] Al-Rawi, K.M. and A.M. Khafallah. 1980. Design and Analysis of Agricultural Experiments, College of Agriculture and forestry, Mussel University. Pp: 361-363 (in arabic).

[216] Egliq, D.B. 1998. Seed biology and yield of grain crops. Biddles limited.U.K.

[217] Singh, R.K. and B. D. Chaudhary. 1985. Biomatical methods in Quantitative Genetic analysis. Rev. ed, pp: 318, Kalyani publishers, Ludhiana, New Delhi. India.

[218] Aycicek, M. and T. Yildirim. 2006. Path coefficient analysis of yield and yield components in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes. Pak. J. Bot., 34: 417- 424.

[219] Ramazan, D.; O. Kacar; N. Coplu and

N. Azkan. 2009. Characteristics of

new breeding lines of triticale. African. J. of Agric. Res. Vol. 4, No.2, pp: 133- 138.

[220] EL- Kramany, M.F.; O.M. Ibrahim; S.F. EL- Habassha and

N.I. Ashour.

2009. Screening of 40 triticale (X Triticosecale wittmack) genotypes under sandy soil conditions. J. of Applied Sci. Res. Vol. 5, No. 1, pp: 33-39.

[221] Ahmad, M.M. 2010. Triticale as an alternative crop to wheat and barley under different Sulaimani conditions. M. Sc. Thesis. University of Sulaimani, college of agriculture.

[222] Richards, R.A. and Z. Lukacs. 2002. Seeding vigour in wheat sources of variation of genetic and agronomic improvement. Austr. J.of Agri. Res. Vol.53, pp: 41- 50.

[223] Jamali, K.D.; M.A. Arian and M.A. Javed. 2003. Breeding of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) for semi- dwarf character and high yield. Wheat information service Japan 96, pp: 11-14. [224] Lazović, D.; D. Božović; N. Deletić and B. Petrović. 1994. The study of certain morphological, biological and productive traits of recently developed winter wheat cultivars in the conditions of North Metohia. J. Sci. Agric. Res. Vol. 56, No. 198, pp: 39- 49.

[225] Andrew, Ch.; U. Baumann; B. Geoferry; B. Fincher and

N.C. Collins.

2009. Flt-2L, a locus in barley controlling flowering time, spike density and plant height. Funct Integre Genimics, 9, pp: 243- 254.

[226] Gracìa del Moral, L.F.; Y. Rharrabti; D. Villegas and C. Royo. 2003. Evaluation of grain yield and its components in durum wheat under Mediterranean conditions: an Ontogenetic Approach. Agron. J. 95, pp: 266- 274.

[227] Ugarte, C.; D.F. Calderini and G.A. Slafer. 2007. Grain weight and grain number responsiveness to pre- anthesis temperature in wheat, barley and triticaly. Field Crop Res. 100, pp: 240-248.

[228] Wajid, A; H. Abid; A.Ahmad; A.R. Goheer; M. Ibrahim and M. Mussaddique. 2004. Effect of sowing date and plant population on biomass grain yield and yield components of wheat. Int. J. Agri. Biol., Vol. 6, No. 6, pp: 1003- 1005.

[229] Muhammad, A.A. 2002. Effect of plant populations and two methods cultivation on growth and yield of four local rice (Oryza sativa L.) in Sulaimani region. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Sulaimani, college of agriculture.

[230] Salh, S. M. 2009. Performance of some bread wheat genotypes under dry farming conditions, M.Sc. Thesis. University of Sulaimani, college of agriculture.

[231] Hama Amen, T.N. 2008. Ful di allel cross in durum wheat. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Sulaimani, college of agriculture.

[232] Tofiq, S .I. 2004. Partial diallel crossing in common and durum wheat Ph.D. Dissertation submitted to University of Sulaimani, college of agriculture.

[233] Hama Ali, E.O. 2006. Estimation of heritability in half diallel crossing in some local common wheat (Triticum aestivum), M.Sc. Thesis. University of Sulaimani, college of agriculture.

[234] Jamali, K.D. and S.A. Ali. 2008. Yield and yield components with relation to plant height in semi- dwarf wheat. Pak. J. Bot. Vol. 40, No. 4, pp: 1805-1808.

Appendix 1: Mean squares of variance Analysis for growth characteristics at Qlyasan and Dukan locations: M.S S.O.V

d.f

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers / m2

Plant height ( cm )

Qlyasan Location Replicates

3

4.625

8.004

19.629

402536.358

24.229

A

3

577.302 **

365.139 **

163.358 **

118828.160 **

17251.447 **

E (a)

9

3.594

1.809

9.459

2983.712

136.737

B

3

3.948

n.s

0.056

n.s

3.160

117691.348 **

631.276 **

AB

9

6.764 **

1.153

n.s

7.171 *

11509.160 **

361.547 **

E (b)

36

1.990

2.477

2677.801

68.626

C

3

0.094

n.s

0.129

n.s

0.129

n.s

47376.827 **

126.377 **

AC

9

0.063

n.s

0.601

n.s

0.417

n.s

5168.250 **

48.048 *

BC

9

0.069

n.s

0.296

n.s

0.330

n.s

7993.355 **

55.613 *

0.071

n.s

0.319

n.s

0.355

n.s

9508.107 **

66.375 **

1488.066

23.002

126.125

619428.910

33.195

700.125 *

139602.254 **

4550.673 **

100.278

12626.698

148.934

ABC

27

E (c)

144

0.181

0.980

0.314

n.s

0.424

Dukan Location Replicates

3

261.375

A

3

729.875 **

E (a)

9

69.194

28.250 54.417

n.s

16.417

B

3

1.833

n.s

AB

9

2.486

n.s

E (b)

36

C

3

0.021

n.s

0.167

n.s

0.271

n.s

298292.046 **

13.456

AC

9

0.035

n.s

0.167

n.s

0.174

n.s

51532.681 **

56.134 *

0.097

n.s

0.118

n.s

16355.032 **

35.179

n.s

0.097

n.s

0.095

n.s

13668.537 **

18.588

n.s

2.462

BC

9

0.021

n.s

ABC

27

0.035

n.s

E (c)

144

0.031

0.292

n.s

0.458

n.s

0.361

0.087

1.042

n.s

35366.702 **

17.551

n.s

4.472

n.s

33954.851 **

68.426

n.s

2.698

0.125

2561.376

3541.918

51.070 n.s

26.955

Appendix 2: Combined – ANOVA table for growth characteristics across locations: M.S S.O.V

d.f

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers/ m 2

Plant height ( cm )

Location

1

1200.500 **

13746.893 **

6822.580 **

5017716.008 **

2328.178 **

Replicates / L

6

133.000

18.127

72.877

510982.634

28.712

A/L

6

653.589

209.778

431.742

129215.207

10901.060

A

3

1298.474 **

161.622 **

560.950 **

241192.016 **

19355.497 **

AxL

3

8.703

257.934

302.533

17238.398

2446.622

E(a)/L

18

36.394

9.113

54.868

7805.205

142.836

B/L

6

2.891

0.174

2.101

76529.025

324.414

135939.641 **

374.039 **

2.161

n.s

3

BxL

3

3.620

0.143

2.518

17118.409

274.788

AB / L

18

4.625

0.806

5.821

22732.006

214.987

AB

9

7.628 **

9.554 **

25704.226 **

254.569 **

AB x L

9

1.622

0.872

2.089

19759.786

175.404

E(b)/L

72

2.226

0.670

2.587

2619.589

59.848

C/L

6

0.057

0.148

0.200

172834.436

69.917

0.013

0.740

n.s

CxL

3

0.089

0.085

0.299

61562.523

93.426

AC / L

18

0.049

0.384

0.295

28350.466

52.091

AC

9

35530.823 **

53.209 *

AC x L

9

0.056

0.405

0.169

21170.109

50.973

BC / L

18

0.045

0.196

0.224

12174.193

45.396

8255.115 **

73.945 **

0.056

n.s

0.363

n.s

0.422

n.s

9

BC x L

9

0.035

0.134

0.202

16093.272

16.848

ABC / L

54

0.053

0.208

0.225

11588.322

42.481

ABC

27

7631.950 **

45.381 **

ABC x L

27

0.050

0.224

0.245

15544.695

39.582

E(c)/L

288

0.106

0.200

0.275

2514.992

24.978

n.s

0.192

n.s

0.247

n.s

23.204

BC

0.055

0.259

n.s

142053.174 **

n.s

3

n.s

0.050

n.s

C

0.042

0.105

n.s

1.684

n.s

B

n.s

0.205

n.s

0.204

n.s

Appendix 3: Mean squares of variance Analysis for kernel yield and its components at Qlyasan location: MS S.O.V

d.f

No. of spikes / m2

Spike weight / m2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weigh / spike (g)

1000Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.. )

Replicates

3

404984.833

3082713.449

4.172

9.310

243.732

0.009

817.166

115.308

1720.285

0.006

A

3

120162.833**

326466.380*

18.013**

42.346**

1851.633**

1.766*

1998.166**

15.382**

228.574*

E (a)

9

2703.889

54143.195

0.904

1.533

46.597

0.376

26.669

2.032

35.814

B

3

117326.167**

36361.674

n.s

0.625

n.s

2.107

n.s

28.432

n.s

0.093

n.s

4.989

5.358**

38.112*

AB

9

11440.111**

28975.131

n.s

2.464

n.s

2.799

n.s

75.631

n.s

0.294

n.s

97.415**

E (b)

36

2637.625

23037.898

1.528

4.138

C

3

47054.667**

429846.405**

2.530*

14.471**

AC

9

5350.167**

122039.481**

1.593*

4.958

n.s

78.583

n.s

0.158

BC

9

8316.833**

38138.227*

0.827

n.s

2.403

n.s

85.577

n.s

ABC

27

9760.481**

34949.238**

0.911

n.s

2.714

n.s

76.403

n.s

E (c)

144

1470.028

16702.227

0.799

3.357

86.038 173.367

n.s

72.015

n.s

1.161

n.s

21.880

n.s

0.006

n.s

0.005 0.005

n.s

0.007*

0.202

16.789

0.791

11.800

0.003

1.792**

135.051**

22.090**

118.218**

0.012**

n.s

45.036**

3.348**

14.122*

0.012**

0.098

n.s

12.060

n.s

15.646*

0.007**

0.161

n.s

13.297**

2.655**

15.402**

0.011**

5.059

0.663

6.487

0.003

0.137

n.s

0.753

Appendix 4: Mean squares of variance Analysis for kernel yield and its components at Dukan location: MS S.O.V

d.f

No. of spikes / m2

Spike weight / m2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weigh / spike (g)

1000Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.. )

Replicates

3

607911.563

1238556.304

0.539

1.155

32.373

0.309

964.150

52.369

880.727

0.010

A

3

136519.063**

705109.881**

6.897**

22.381*

2236.290**

7.805**

1748.355**

89.526**

411.087**

0.119**

E (a)

9

11830.340

13525.909

0.467

3.856

34.350

0.176

13.671

0.981

2.856

0.000

B

3

32892.896**

51248.591**

1.814

n.s

5.280

n.s

187.843*

0.174

n.s

1.851

n.s

2.369*

51.939**

0.005*

AB

9

34875.229**

89003.067**

0.335

n.s

2.189

n.s

181.053**

0.160

n.s

88.802**

5.461**

84.968**

0.007**

E (b)

36

2588.535

6486.803

C

3

295620.729**

1716751.137**

AC

9

51855.063**

205188.130**

0.990*

2.732

BC

9

16280.007**

53248.145**

1.056*

2.092

ABC

27

13673.081**

32058.141**

1.350**

3.013**

94.031*

E (c)

144

3438.007

9316.848

0.436

1.473

51.358

0.726 0.978

n.s

2.094

56.067

0.171

14.391

0.581

6.492

0.001

4.673*

169.293*

0.537**

148.021**

36.507**

872.485**

0.006**

n.s

151.446**

0.359**

51.308**

10.432**

143.080**

0.005**

n.s

80.015

11.510*

1.033

n.s

34.771**

0.001

n.s

0.160*

13.753**

1.511**

14.206**

0.002

n.s

0.094

4.554

0.565

6.058

n.s

0.144

n.s

0.001

Appendix 5: Combined – ANOVA table for kernel yield and its components across locations: M.S S.O.V

d.f

No. of spikes / m2

Spike weight / m2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weigh / spike (g)

Location

1

5119200.031**

2310696.408**

119.062**

1586.429**

33.180**

Replicates / L

6

506448.198

2160634.876

2.355

5.232

138.053

0.159

A/L

6

128340.948

515788.130

12.455

32.364

2043.961

A

3

235773.281**

953006.166**

22.777**

54.809**

AxL

3

20908.615

78570.095*

2.133

E(a)/L

18

7267.115

33834.552

B/L

6

75109.531

43805.133

B

3

132309.698**

47471.285**

BxL

3

17909.365

40138.980

0.888

1.693

163.075

0.032

AB / L

18

23157.670

58989.099

1.400

2.494

128.342

0.227

AB

9

27020.170**

72472.857**

AB x L

9

19295.170

45505.340

1.854

4.166

102.600

E(b)/L

72

2613.080

14762.350

1.127

3.116

71.052

1000Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H.I.. )

14.957**

8714.393**

1.872**

890.658

83.838

1300.506

0.008

4.786

1873.260

52.454

319.831

0.062

3284.569**

7.350**

3742.245**

88.367**

547.265**

0.070**

9.918

803.354

2.222

4.276

16.541

92.396

0.055

0.686

2.694

40.474

0.276

20.170

1.507

19.335

0.002

1.219

3.693

108.138

0.134

3.420

3.864

45.026

0.005

2.958**

80.172**

0.933

4.770

9.879

0.007

93.108

3.311

53.424

0.007

185.791**

2.901**

63.231**

0.011**

0.138

0.426

3.722

43.617

0.003

0.187

15.590

0.686

9.146

0.002

1.551

0.945

n.s

n.s

No. of spikelets / spike 4.786

5.693

0.822

n.s

n.s

n.s

53.201

n.s

154.084*

0.236

0.316

n.s

n.s

356.717

5.907

n.s

n.s

0.003

n.s

T.B.C.

C/L

6

171337.698

1073298.771

1.754

C

3

141023.266**

955159.269**

CxL

3

60628.865

236279.005

0.876

3.240

AC / L

18

28602.615

163613.805

1.291

3.845

AC

9

36060.337**

197894.386**

AC x L

9

21144.892

129333.225

1.540

BC / L

18

12298.420

45693.186

0.941

BC

9

7870.531**

41772.704**

1.198*

BC x L

9

16726.309

49613.668

0.685

1.184

64.804

0.092

0.724

ABC / L

54

11716.781

33503.690

1.131

2.864

85.217

0.160

ABC

27

7499.337**

38444.746**

1.217**

3.758*

102.294*

ABC x L

27

15934.226

28562.633

1.044

1.970

68.139

E(c)/L

288

2454.017

13009.538

0.617

2.415

61.687

1.316

1.043

n.s

n.s

9.572

1.165

141.536

29.299

495.352

1.009**

141.441**

28.391**

402.619**

43.728

0.312

0.190

1.816

185.464

0.008

115.015

0.259

48.172

6.890

78.601

0.008

151.044*

0.261*

95.713**

9.332**

92.092**

0.011**

3.519

78.985

0.257

0.630

4.448

65.109

0.006

2.247

82.796

0.121

11.785

0.893

25.208

0.004

22.204**

0.004*

0.932

28.212

0.004

13.525

2.083

14.804

0.006

26.080**

1.956**

16.331**

0.007**

0.185

0.970

2.210

13.277

0.006

0.116

4.806

0.614

6.273

0.002

7.952*

4.171

3.311

n.s

n.s

171.330 149.466

100.788

n.s

n.s

0.151

0.135

n.s

n.s

22.846**

0.854

n.s

0.009 0.005

n.s

Appendix 6: Calculate ( t ) estimated for the correlation coefficients among the characteristics at Qlyasan location: No. of spikes / m2

TRAITS

Spike weight / m2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weigh / spike (g)

1000- Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H . I. )

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers / m2

No. of spikes / m2 Spike weight / m2

4.725

Average spike length( cm )

3.589

2.286

No. of spikelets / spike

0.132

-0.637

2.772

No. of kernels / spike

-0.077

-1.748

1.479

3.480

2.214

2.848

2.119

-0.454

3.311

2.102

4.745

0.774

-3.921

-3.957

5.380

Kernel yield (ton/ ha)

5.529

10.070

2.622

-0.251

-1.677

3.619

5.105

Biological yield (ton/ ha )

4.832

7.746

2.282

-1.395

-2.191

3.183

5.457

8.180

Harvest Index ( H . I. )

1.233

2.448

0.226

0.479

-0.035

1.424

1.276

4.958

-1.427

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

-4.150

-1.013

-6.327

-0.176

-1.421

-1.750

-1.245

-0.956

-1.725

1.325

No. of days to Physiological maturity

-3.395

-2.071

-4.778

2.848

0.606

-3.442

-5.303

-2.054

-3.714

1.384

11.665

Grain filling stage (days)

2.236

-1.023

3.301

4.682

3.635

-1.402

-4.582

-1.102

-1.750

-0.410

-6.282

-0.517

No. of tillers/ m 2

44.183

4.776

3.613

0.088

-0.118

2.214

2.151

5.627

4.888

1.271

-4.155

-3.441

2.188

Plant height ( cm )

2.224

2.727

1.554

-4.675

-1.745

4.246

7.954

3.579

5.389

-0.178

-2.934

-8.533

-3.565

Kernels weight / spike (g) 1000- Kernels weight (g)

 

t (62) 0.05 = 1.999 t (62) 0.01 = 2.657

2.314

Plant height ( cm )

Appendix 7: Calculate ( t ) estimated for the correlation coefficients among the characteristics at Dukan location: No. of spikes / m2

TRAITS

Spike weight / m2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weigh / spike (g)

1000- Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H . I. )

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers / m2

No. of spikes / m2 Spike weight / m2

5.866

Average spike length( cm )

1.021

0.070

No. of spikelets / spike

-0.645

-1.140

2.810

No. of kernels / spike

-0.631

-0.265

0.339

4.557

0.045

3.704

-1.616

-1.380

0.728

1.656

4.493

0.284

-2.593

-3.264

6.374

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

3.975

5.743

-0.451

-2.345

-2.355

5.748

7.453

Biological yield (ton/ ha )

7.379

12.126

-0.787

-1.329

0.392

4.255

4.649

8.657

Harvest Index ( H . I. )

0.393

4.150

-0.280

-1.942

-3.974

3.732

5.379

10.271

1.566

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

-3.092

0.781

-3.507

1.586

2.945

1.283

-0.990

0.294

-0.253

1.098

No. of days to Physiological maturity

-1.786

2.309

-2.220

-2.018

-0.836

10.433

8.357

4.607

3.031

3.706

1.637

Grain filling stage (days)

2.466

-0.230

2.717

-2.317

-3.324

0.502

2.671

0.780

0.997

-0.160

-27.557

0.594

No. of tillers/ m 2

22.042

5.979

1.083

-0.722

-0.753

0.110

1.812

4.089

7.356

0.516

-3.087

-1.729

2.478

Plant height ( cm )

0.737

1.079

-0.417

-1.581

-0.891

5.238

5.773

2.771

3.883

0.571

-3.058

7.333

5.355

Kernels weight / spike (g) 1000- Kernels weight (g)

 

t (62) 0.05 = 1.999 t (62) 0.01 = 2.657

0.691

Plant height ( cm )

Appendix 8: Calculate ( t ) estimated for the correlation coefficients among the characteristics in the average of both locations: No. of spikes / m2

TRAITS

Spike weight / m2

Average spike length ( cm )

No. of spikelets / spike

No. of kernels / spike

Kernels weigh / spike (g)

1000- Kernels weight (g)

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

Biological yield (ton/ ha)

Harvest Index ( H . I. )

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

No. of days to Physiological maturity

Grain filling stage (days)

No. of tillers / m2

No. of spikes / m2 Spike weight / m2

6.146

Average spike length( cm )

3.715

1.445

No. of spikelets / spike

0.084

-0.997

2.192

No. of kernels / spike

-0.910

-1.893

0.425

5.352

1.645

4.597

0.309

-2.120

0.359

2.183

5.425

0.697

-4.077

-4.429

8.210

kernel yield (ton/ ha)

5.239

15.692

1.517

-2.172

-3.132

6.291

8.204

Biological yield (ton/ ha )

6.458

12.784

0.862

-1.832

-0.784

7.037

5.839

10.870

Harvest Index ( H . I. )

1.297

4.066

0.799

-0.630

-3.130

2.215

4.346

7.244

1.351

No. of days to 50 % anthesis

-4.160

0.054

-6.602

0.878

1.033

-0.063

-1.119

-0.255

-0.767

1.446

No. of days to Physiological maturity

-4.395

-0.817

-6.030

2.198

1.893

-1.001

-2.285

-1.321

-1.658

0.810

25.362

Grain filling stage (days)

2.535

-2.069

4.367

3.569

1.383

-5.339

-4.591

-3.139

-2.608

-2.395

-6.057

-3.404

No. of tillers/ m 2

9.701

4.023

4.107

-0.407

-2.072

1.177

2.171

4.147

3.569

1.645

-3.821

-3.939

2.188

Plant height ( cm )

1.207

2.275

0.956

-4.084

-1.712

7.375

7.494

3.956

4.815

0.929

-3.063

-4.168

-3.637

Kernels weight / spike (g) 1000- Kernels weight (g)

 

t (62) 0.05 = 1.999 t (62) 0.01 = 2.657

1.731

Plant height ( cm )

‫اخلالصة‬ ‫ٌفرت ِره التذسبُ خاله املىضي الصزاعٌ ‪ 2010-2009‬يف وىقعني خمتمفني (حمطُ قمًاضاُ لمبحىخ الصزاعًُ‬ ‫ألتابعُ لكمًُ ألصزاعُ‪ -‬داوعُ الطمًىاًٌُ‪،‬أزاضٌ الصزاعًُ يف دوكاُ)‪ ،‬وبأضتخداً تصىًي الكطع املٍػكُوستني‪.‬‬ ‫بإضتخداً أزبعُ أصٍاف وَ احلٍطُ الٍاعىُ و املٍصزعُ وٌِ (أزاع‪ ،‬متىش‪ ،‬زبًعُ‪ ،‬و غاً‪ )4-‬وشزعت عػىاعًاً فِ الكطع‬ ‫السئًطًُ وزتبت بتصىًي الكطاعات العػىائًُ الكاومُ وبأزبع وكسزات‪ ،‬فًىا مت أضتعىاه أزبعُ وعدالت خمتمفُ وَ‬ ‫البرا ز (‪ , 200 , 160 , 120‬و ‪ )240‬كغي ‪ِ /‬كتا ز ووضعت يف الكطع املٍػكُ كعاون ثاٌٌ‪ ،‬فًىاالعاون الجالح مت بأضتخداً‬ ‫أزبعُ وعاوالت إشالُ وٌِ (وعاومُ املكازٌُ‪ ،‬إشالُ ٌصن وزقُ العمي‪ ،‬إشالُ الطفا‪ ،‬و إشالُ ٌصن وزقُ ألعمي ‪ +‬الطفا)‬ ‫ووضعت يف ألكطع املٍػكُ وستني ألسئًطًُ‪.‬‬ ‫ودزضت صفات الٍىى وٌِ (عدد أألياً ألالشوُ وَ ألصزاعُإىل ‪ % 50‬إشِاز‪ ،‬عدد األياً الالشوُ وَ الصزاعُإىل الٍطر‬ ‫الفطًىلىدٌ‪ ،‬فرتَ إوتالء احلبُ باألياً‪،‬عدد األغطاء‪ ،2ً /‬إزتفاع الٍبات) ‪ ،‬كىا وضذمت بًاٌات عمِ حاصن احلبىب‪،‬‬ ‫ووكىٌاتُ (عددالطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬وشُ الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬وعده طىه الطٍبمُ‪ ،‬عدد الطًٍبالت‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‪ ،‬عدد احلبىب‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‪ ،‬وشُ‬ ‫احلبىب‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‪،‬و وشُ ألف حبُ) كىا ومت تطذًن البًاٌات عمِ احلاصن احلبىب البايمىدِ‪ ،‬و دلًن احلصاد‪.‬‬ ‫ميكَ تمخًص ٌتائر حاصن احلبىب‪ ،‬و وكىٌاتُ‪ ،‬واحلاصن البايمىدٌ وع دلًن احلصاد و كىعده لمىىقعني كاألتٌ‪ :‬أثست‬ ‫األصٍاف بػكن عالٌ املعٍىيُ عمِ مجًع ِرَ الصفات‪ ،‬و أظّس صٍف أزاع أعمِ قًي لصفات عدد الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬وشُ‬ ‫الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬وعده طىه الطٍبمُ‪ ،‬ودلًن احلصاد ‪،‬أوا صٍف متىش فأٌتر أعمِ عدد ضًٍبالت‪ /‬ضٍبمُ و عدد حبىب‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‬ ‫يف حني ضذن صٍف زبًعُ أعمِ لصفات وشُ احلبىب‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‪،‬وشُ ألف حبُ‪،‬حاصن احلبىب و حاصن البايمىدٌ كىا وأُ‬ ‫صٍف متىش أعطِ أقن قًىُ لصفات وشُ الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬وشُ احلبىب‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‪ ،‬وشُ ألف حبُ‪،‬حاصن احلبىب‪،‬احلاصن‬ ‫البايمىدٌ‪ ،‬و دلًن احلصاد‪ .‬و كىعده لمىىقعني فكد ثأثست وعدالت البراز بػكن عاىل املعٍىيُ يف الصفات عدد ضٍابن‪/‬‬ ‫ً‪ ،2‬وشُ الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬حاصن احلبىب و احلاصن البايمىدٌ‪ ،‬و إُ أضتخداً وعده البراز ‪ 240‬كغي‪ِ /‬كتاز أظّس أعمِ قًي‬ ‫يف ِره الصفات فًىا أضتخداً املعده ‪ 120‬كغي‪ِ /‬كتاز أٌتر أقن قًىُ لعدد الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬حاصن احلبىب‪ ،‬و احلاصن‬ ‫البايمىدٌ‪.‬‬ ‫أوا خبصىص تأثريوعاوالت األاشالُ يف حاصن احلبىب‪ ،‬ووكىٌاتُ و كىعده لمىىقعني فكد ودد بأُ صفات عدد الطٍابن‪/‬‬ ‫ً‪ ،2‬وشُ الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬وشُ احلبىب‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‪ ،‬وشُ ألف حبُ‪ ،‬حاصن احلبىب‪ ،‬و احلاصن البايمىدٌ أضتذابت بػكن عاىل‬ ‫املعٍىيُ هلرا التأثري بًٍىا أثست بػكن وعٍىٍ عمِ صفُ عدد الطًٍبالت‪ /‬ضٍبمُ يف حني مل يكَ ألدساء األشالُ تأثريات‬ ‫وعٍىيُ يف وعده طىه الطٍبمُ‪ ،‬عدد احلبىب‪ /‬ضٍبمُ‪ ،‬و دلًن احلصاد‪ ،‬وقد أظّست وعاومُ املكازٌُ أعمِ قًي لتمك‬ ‫الصفات يف حني أظّست وعاومُ إشالُ ٌصن وزقُ العمي ‪ +‬الطفا أدٌِ قًي يف صفات وشُ الطٍابن‪ ، 2ً /‬وشُ احلبىب‪/‬‬ ‫الطٍبمُ‪ ،‬وشُ ألف حبُ‪ ،‬وحاصن احلبىب‪.‬‬ ‫ٍِاك إزتباط وىدب وعالًُ املعٍىيُ بني حاصن احلبىب‪ ،‬وكن وَ وشُ الطٍابن‪ ،2ً /‬وشُ احلبىب‪ /‬الطٍبمُ‪ ،‬وشُ ألف‬ ‫حبُ‪ ،‬احلاصن البايمىدٌ‪ ،‬و دلًن احلصاد كىا وٍِاك إزتباط وىدب ووعٍىٍ بني حاصن احلبىب وع عدد الطٍابن‪2ً /‬‬ ‫وذلك كىعده لمىىقعني‪.‬‬

‫جامعة السليمانية‬ ‫كـــلية الـــــزراعـة‬ ‫قسم احملاصيل احلكلية‬

‫دور نصل ورقة العلم والسفا يف صفات النمو واحلاصل‬ ‫لبعض أ صناف حنطة اخلبز حتت معدالت البذار‬ ‫املختلفة‬ ‫أطسوحُ‬ ‫وكدوُ اىل جممظ كمًُ الصزاعُ ‪ /‬داوعُ الطمًىاًٌُ‬ ‫كذصء وَ وتطمبات ًٌن دزدُ الدكتىزافمطفُ‬ ‫وو قبن‬

‫شـــــةنط حســــيب عبدالقادز نوري‬ ‫بكالىزيىع ‪ -‬احملاصًن احلكمًُ ‪1999‬‬ ‫واجطتري ‪ -‬احملاصًن العمفًُ ‪2006‬‬ ‫بإشـــساف‬ ‫د‪ .‬أوميد نورى حممد أمني‬

‫بسوفًطىز‬

‫غىاه ‪ 1431‬ه‬

‫د‪ .‬شريوان إمساعيل توفيل‬

‫بسوفًطىز وطاعد‬

‫أيمىه ‪ً 2010‬‬

‫ثــوخــتـة‬ ‫ئُم تىيَريهُوَيُ ئُجنام دزا لُدوو وَزشّ كصتىكالَِ ( ‪ , )2010-2009‬لُ دوو شىيَين جًاواش (ويَطتطُّ قمًاضاى‬ ‫بىَ تىيَريهُوَّ كصتىكالَِ ضُزبُكىَلًَرّ كصتىكاهَ‪-‬شَانكىَّ ضمًَىانِ‪ ,‬وَ شَوّ كصتىكالَِ لُ دوكاى) بُبُكازيًَهانِ‬ ‫ديصايهِ ثازضُّ بُشكساودووجاز‪.‬وَبُبُكازيًَهانِ ضىاز ضُشو طُمنِ نُزم ئُوانًض (ئازاش‪,‬تُوىش‪ ,‬زَِبًعُ‪ ,‬وشام‪)4-‬‬ ‫ضًَهساوى بُشًَىَيُكِ يُزَوُكِ لُثازضُ ضُزَكِ يُكاندا وَزيَكخساوَ بُديصايهِ ثازضُّ يُزَوُكِ تُواو بُضىاز‬ ‫دوو بازَ بىنُوَ ‪.‬بُبُكاز يًَهانِ ضىاز زيَرَّ جًاواش لُتىَو(‪ , 200 , 160 , 120‬و ‪ )240‬كًمىَ غسام‪ /‬يًَكتاز وَخسانُ‬ ‫ثازضُّ بُشكساو وَكى فاكتُزّ دووَم‪ ,‬وَ فاكتُزّ ضًًَُم بُبُكاز يًَهانِ ضىازفاكتُزّ البسدى ئُوانًض ( تًغٌ طُالَّ‬ ‫ئاالَ‪ ,‬ثسذَ ‪ ,‬البسدنِ يُزدوو تًغٌ طُالَّ ئاال َو ثسذَ ) كُخساونُتُ ثازضُّ بُشكساوَوَ دووجاز ‪.‬‬ ‫ئُوخُضمَُتانُّ طُشُكُلًَكىلًَهُوَياى بىَكسابسيتِ بىى لُ (ئُوزِوَذانُّ كُثًَىيطنت لُضاندنُوَتا ‪ ّ %00‬طىهَ كسدى‪,‬‬ ‫ئُوزِوَذانُّ كُثًَىيطنت لُضاندنُوَتاكىثًَطُيصتهِ فُضمُجِ‪ ,‬واوَّ ثسِبىنِ تىَوبُزِوَذ‪ ,‬ذوازَّ لق‪ /‬م‪،2‬وَباالَّ‬ ‫زِووَك)‪،‬وَداتاّ تىَوازكساولُضُزبُزيُوٌ دانُويَمَُوثًَك ياتُكانِ (ذوازَّ طىهَ ‪ /‬م‪،2‬كًَصٌ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪،2‬تًَكسِاٍ دزيَرّ‬ ‫طىهَ‪ ،‬ذوازَّ طىلًَضكُ‪ /‬طىلًََك‪ ،‬ذوازٍَ تىَو‪ /‬طىلًََك‪ ،‬كًَصِ تىَو‪ /‬طىلًََك‪،‬كًَصِ يُشاز دَنك تىَو) وَبُيُواى شًَىَ‬ ‫داتاتىَوازكسالُضُزبُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ و زِيَبُزّ دزويَهُ‪.‬‬ ‫دَتىانني بُزيُوِ دانُويَمَُو ثًَك ياتُكانِ وَبُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ لُطُهَ زِيَبُزّ دزويَهُ وَكى تًَكسِاّ‬ ‫دووشىيَهُكُكىزت بكُيهُوَبُم شًَىَيُ‪ :‬ضُشو بُشًَىَيُكِ واتادازكازيطُزّ يُبىَ لُضُز يُوىو خُضمَُتُكاى‪,‬‬ ‫وَدَزكُوتىَ ضُشهِ ئازاشبُزشتسيو بُياّ يُبىَبىَخُضمَُتُكانِ ذوازَّ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪ ,2‬كًَصِ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬تًَكسِاّ دزيَرّ‬ ‫طىهَ‪ ,‬زِيَبُزّ دزويَهُ‪,‬بُالَم ضُشهِ تُممىشبُزشتسيو ذوازَّ طىلًَضكُ‪ /‬طىهَ‪ ,‬وذوازَّ تىَو بىَطىلَِ بُزيُم‬ ‫يًَهاوَ‪,‬لُكاتًَكداضُشهِ زَِبًعُ بُزشتسيو بُياّ بىَكًَصِ تىَو‪ /‬طىلًََك‪ ,‬كًَصِ يُشازدَنك تىَو‪,‬بُزيُوِ‬ ‫دانُويَمَُوبُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ تىَوازكسدوَ‪.‬وَضُشهِ تُممىش كُورتيو بُياّ داوَ بىَكًَصِ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬كًَصِ تىَو‪/‬‬ ‫يُزطىلًََك‪,‬كًَصِ يُشازدَنك تىَو‪ ,‬بُزيُوِ دانُويَمَُ‪ ,‬بُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ‪ ,‬وزِيَبُزّ دزويَهُ‪.‬‬ ‫وَكىتًَكسِاّ دووشىيَهُكُتًَكسِاّ تىَوبُشًَىَيُكِ شوَز واتادازكازيكسدوَتُضُزذوازَّ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬كًَصِ كىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬بُزيُوِ‬ ‫دانُويَمَُ‪,‬وبُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ‪,‬وَبُكازيًَهانِ زيَرَّ تىَوبُبسِّ ‪ 240‬كًمىغسام‪ /‬يًَكتازبُزشتسيو بُياّ داوَ بىَئُم‬ ‫خُضمَُتانُ‪,‬وَبُكازيًَهانِ زِيَرَّ تىَوبُبسِّ ‪ 120‬كًمىَغسام‪ /‬يًَكتازكُورتيو بُياّ بُدَضت يًَهاوَ بىَيُزيُك‬ ‫لُذوازَّ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬بُزيُوِ دانُويَمَُ‪,‬بُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ‪.‬‬ ‫ضُبازَت بُكازيطُزّ فاكتُزّ البسدى لُضُزبُزيُوِ دانُويَمَُو ثًَك ياتُكانِ وَكى تًَكسِاّ دوو شىيَهُكُ‬ ‫دوَشزاوَتُوَكُذوازَّ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬كًَصِ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬كًَصِ يُشازدَنك تىَو‪,‬بُزيُوِ دانُويَمَُ‪ ,‬بُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ‬ ‫بُشًَىَيُكِ شوَزواتادازوَالَم دانُوَياى يُبىَ بىَئُم كازكسدنُضُزَ‪,‬بُالَم كازيطُزّ بُشًَىَيُكِ واتادازبىَ‬ ‫لُضُزخُضمَُتِ ذوازَّ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪2‬لُكاتًَكدا بىَالبسدى كازيطُزٍ واتادازّ نُبىَ لُضُز تًَكسِاّ دزيَرّ طىهَ‪ ,‬ذوازَّ تىَ‪/‬‬ ‫طىلًََك‪,‬وَزِيَبُزّ دزويَهُ‪,‬وَدَزكُوتىَكُفاكتُزّ بُزاوزدكسدى بُزشتسيو بُياّ يُبىَ بىَئُم‬

‫خُضمَُتانُلُكاتًَكدادَزكُوتىَكُفاكتُزّ البسدنِ تًغٌ كُالَّ ئاالَوثسذَ كُورتيو بُياّ يُبىَ بىَخُضمَُتُكانِ‬ ‫كًَصِ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪,2‬كًَصِ تىَو‪ /‬طىلًََك‪,‬كًَصِ يُشازدَنك تىَو‪,‬بُزيُوِ دانُويَمُ‪.‬‬ ‫وَثُيىَندٍ ثىَشَتًظ وشوَزواتادازيُبىَلُنًَىاى بُزيُوِ دانُويَمَُويُزيُك لُكًَصِ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪ ,2‬كًَصِ‬ ‫تىَوبىَيُزطىلًََك‪,‬كًَصِ يُشازدَنك تىَو‪,‬بُزيُوِ بايىَلىَجِ‪,‬وَزِيَبُزّ دزويَهُ وَيُزوَيا ثُيىَندٍ ثىَشَتًظ‬ ‫شوَززواتادازيُبىَلُنًَىاى بُزيُوِ دانُويَمَُوذوازَّ طىهَ‪ /‬م‪ 2‬وَكىتًَكسِاّ دووشىيَهُكُ‪.‬‬

‫شانكىَّ ضــ مًَىانٌ‬ ‫كىَلًَرّ كصتىكاهَ‬ ‫بُشِ بُزوبىووِ كًَمَطُيِ‬

‫ِزوَلَى تيغي طة َالي ئا َال و ثسذة لةسةزطةشةكسدن و‬ ‫بةزهةمي ضةند جؤزيَك لة طةمنى نان لة ذ َيس ضاندني‬ ‫زِيَرةي جياواشي توَودا‬ ‫ناوُيُكُ ثًَصكُشُ بُ‬ ‫ئُجنىووُنٌ كؤلًَجٌ كصتىكاهَ ‪ /‬شانكؤٍ ضمًَىانٌ‬ ‫وَك بُشًَك لُ ثًَداويطتًُكانٌ بُدَضت يًَهانٌ ثمٍُ دكتىَزاّ فُلطُفُ‬ ‫لُاليُى‬

‫شـــــةنط حةســــيب عةبدولقادز نوزي‬ ‫بُكالؤزيؤس ‪ -‬بُزوبىووٌ كًَمَطُيٌ ‪1999‬‬ ‫واجطتًَس ‪ -‬بُزوبىووٌ ئالًكِ ‪2006‬‬ ‫بُضُزثُزشيت‬ ‫د‪.‬ئوميَد نوزى حممد ئة مني‬

‫‪.‬‬

‫ثسؤفًطـــــؤز‬

‫زَِشبُز ‪ 2710‬ك‬

‫د‪ .‬شريوان ئيسماعيل توَفيق‬

‫ثسؤفًطـــــؤز ٍ يازيدَ دَز‬

‫ئُيمىه ‪ 2010‬ش‬