Еffect of sowing rate on seed productivity of amaranth varieties and mutant lines

Keywords: sowing density, yield, morphological traits, genetic characteristics, seed productivity

Abstract

Purpose. The aim of our study was to determine the effect of different sowing rates on the seed productivity of amaranth varieties and mutant lines, taking into account varietal characteristics and structural elements of the crop. Methods. Six sowing rates (0.2; 0.4; 0.6; 0.8; 1.0; and 1.2 million viable seeds/ha) were tested for two varieties – Kharkiv 1 and Student – and four mutant lines (LMH150, LMH150RV, LMSt150CR, LMSt150CH). Winter wheat was used as the preceding crop. Sowing was carried out in the first decade of May at a depth of 1 cm with 45 cm row spacing. Harvesting was conducted at full seed maturity. Key productivity indicators – seed mass per plant, 1000-seed weight, and plant density – were determined according to DSTU standards. Results. The longest panicles were observed at a density of 1.0–1.2 million seeds/ha, while the optimal sowing rate for forming maximum panicle length was 0.6–0.8 million seeds/ha. The longest panicles were formed by the mutant lines LMH150 and LMSt150CR, and the shortest by the Student variety. Seed mass per plant decreased with increasing sowing density, reaching a maximum at 0.2–0.4 million seeds/ha (up to 34.0 g in Kharkiv 1) and a minimum at 1.2 million seeds/ha (7.7–12.5 g). The 1000-seed weight remained relatively stable (0.75–0.92 g) and was primarily determined by varietal genetic traits. Seed yield largely depended on genotype: the highest yield was observed in Kharkiv 1 (2.5–3.0 t/ha), while the mutant lines LMH150 and LMH150RV yielded 2.25 and 1.7 t/ha, respectively. Conclusions. Seed productivity of amaranth is largely determined by varietal characteristics and to a lesser extent by sowing rate. The highest values were recorded for Kharkiv 1 (2.5–3.0 t/ha, 1000-seed weight 0.86–0.92 g). The mutant line LMH150 also showed high productivity (2.25 t/ha), whereas less productive varieties yielded 1.6–2.05 t/ha.

References

1. Martirosyan D. M. Amaranth as a functional food. Functional Foods in Health and Disease. 2015. Vol. 5, № 6. P. 106–117.
2. Rastogi A., Shukla S. Amaranth: a new millennium crop of nutraceutical values. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2013. Vol. 53, № 2. P. 109–125.
3. Shukla S., Singh S.P. Genetic improvement of grain amaranth (Amaranthus spp.): A review. Plant Breeding. 2020. Vol. 139, № 2. P. 217–233.
4. Becker R. Amaranth: Ancient grain to modern functional food. Journal of Cereal Science. 2021. Vol. 100.
5. Martínez-Cruz O., Paredes-López O. Phytochemical profile and nutraceutical potential of amaranth grain. Journal of Cereal Science. 2014. Vol. 59, № 3. P. 314–319.
6. Tyrus M. Amaranth yield depending on the sowing rate. Science Horizon. 2023. Vol. 26, № 8. P. 33–41. doi: 10.48077/scihor8.2023.33
7. Pospišil, A., Brkić, I., Pospišil, M. Grain yield and protein concentration of two amaranth species. European Journal of Agronomy. 2006. Vol. 25, № 3. P. 250–253.
8. Hricová, A., Weidner, S., Michalska, A. Comparative analysis reveals changes in some seed characteristics of amaranth mutants. Agronomy. 2021. Vol. 11, № 12. doi: 10.3390/agronomy11122565
9. Амарант: селекція, генетика та перспективи вирощування: монографія / Гопцій Т. І. та ін. Харків : ХНАУ, 2018. 362 с.
10. Mekonnen G., Woldesenbet M., Teshale T. Amaranthus сaudatus Production and Nutrition Contents for Food Security and Healthy Living in Menit Shasha, Menit Goldya and Maji Districts of Bench Maji Zone, South Western Ethiopia. Nutrition & Food Science International Journal. 2018. Vol. 7, No 3. doi.org/10.19080/NFSIJ.2018.07.555712
11. Tang Y., Tsao R. Phytochemicals in quinoa and amaranth grains and their antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and potential health beneficial effects: a review. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research. 2017. Vol. 61, No 7. P. 1–16. doi: 10.1002/mnfr.201600767
Published
2025-12-14
Section
BREEDING, SEED PRODUCTION