2008Simulating the effects of changing planting date towards rice production in MADA area MalaysiaRequires access

Effects of photoperiod on growth and flowering of Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat cv. Reagan Sunny

S. Ab. Kahar

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

Chrysanthemum morifolium plants cv. Reagan Sunny were exposed to different photoperiod at two stages of flowering namely flower bud initiation and flower bud development. The photoperiods tested were natural photoperiod (control), 8 h daylight with 4 h incandescent (�2PP), 8 h daylight with 2 h incandescent (�0PP), and 8 h daylight (8PP). The growth, time of different stages of flowering and flower quality were recorded. The growth was not obviously influenced by photoperiod at both stages of exposure. Flower initiation was promoted by 8 h photoperiod and delayed by incandescent light at the end of 8 h daylight. Buds formed under treatment with 4 h incandescent were not able to develop into flowers. Further bud development and the overall time of flowering were also delayed with 8 h photoperiod. Exposing plants to photoperiods during bud development delayed bud development, and also flowering if given 4 h incandescent. Despite delaying flowering, the 2 h incandescent at the end of 8 h daylight period caused synchronization of flowering within a plant. Flower quality also did not obviously improve by shortening photoperiod.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Chrysanthemum morifolium plants cv. Reagan Sunny were exposed to different photoperiod at two stages of flowering namely flower bud initiation and flower bud development. The photoperiods tested were natural photoperiod (control), 8 h daylight with 4 h incandescent (�2PP), 8 h daylight with 2 h incandescent (�0PP), and 8 h daylight (8PP). The growth, time of different stages of flowering and flower quality were recorded. The growth was not obviously influenced by photoperiod at both stages of exposure. Flower initiation was promoted by 8 h photoperiod and delayed by incandescent light at the end of 8 h daylight. Buds formed under treatment with 4 h incandescent were not able to develop into flowers. Further bud development and the overall time of flowering were also delayed with 8 h photoperiod. Exposing plants to photoperiods during bud development delayed bud development, and also flowering if given 4 h incandescent. Despite delaying flowering, the 2 h incandescent at the end of 8 h daylight period caused synchronization of flowering within a plant. Flower quality also did not obviously improve by shortening photoperiod.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Chrysanthemum morifolium plants cv. Reagan Sunny were exposed to different photoperiod at two stages of flowering namely flower bud initiation and flower bud development. The photoperiods tested were natural photoperiod (control), 8 h daylight with 4 h incandescent (�2PP), 8 h daylight with 2 h incandescent (�0PP), and 8 h daylight (8PP). The growth, time of different stages of flowering and flower quality were recorded. The growth was not obviously influenced by photoperiod at both stages of exposure. Flower initiation was promoted by 8 h photoperiod and delayed by incandescent light at the end of 8 h daylight. Buds formed under treatment with 4 h incandescent were not able to develop into flowers. Further bud development and the overall time of flowering were also delayed with 8 h photoperiod. Exposing plants to photoperiods during bud development delayed bud development, and also flowering if given 4 h incandescent. Despite delaying flowering, the 2 h incandescent at the end of 8 h daylight period caused synchronization of flowering within a plant. Flower quality also did not obviously improve by shortening photoperiod.

Key concepts: photoperiodism, Chrysanthemum morifolium, Incandescent light bulb, Biology, Bud, Horticulture, Botany, Daylight

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Effects of photoperiod on growth and flowering of Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat cv. Reagan Sunny — Research Paper | ScholarLens