Journals / Black Sea Journal of Agriculture / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 3

Determination of Yield and Some Quality Traits in Advanced Oat Lines and Cultivars

Burakhan Korucu(Agricultural Credit Cooperative Tarkim)0000-0003-0766-2915
Ali Tekin(Doğu Akdeniz Geçit Kuşağı Tarımsal Araştırma Enstitüsü)0000-0002-4280-7369
İmren Çöken Tekin(Doğu Akdeniz Geçit Kuşağı Tarımsal Araştırma Enstitüsü)0000-0003-2014-1137
İlker Aydoğdu(Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Famagusta Port Directorate)0000-0002-0786-9767
İlker Yüce(SİVAS BİLİM VE TEKNOLOJİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-9761-3561
Hüseyin Güngör(DÜZCE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ZİRAAT VE DOĞA BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-6708-6337
Tevrican Dokuyucu(KAHRAMANMARAŞ SÜTÇÜ İMAM ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ZİRAAT FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-7704-6790
Ziya Dumlupınar(KAHRAMANMARAŞ SÜTÇÜ İMAM ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ZİRAAT FAKÜLTESİ, TARIMSAL BİYOTEKNOLOJİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0003-3119-6926
Pages
376–383
Publication Date
2026-05-15
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The advanced lines TL258, TL576, and TL254 genotypes recorded average values for the traits examined.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was conducted using a randomized complete block design with three replications during the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 growing seasons to determine certain morphological, yield, and quality characteristics of 10 different oat genotypes under the ecological conditions of Kahramanmaraş.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the study, traits such as grain number per panicle (GNP), grain weight per panicle (GWP), panicle length (PL), plant height (PH), lodging (L), thousand kernel weight (TKW), grain yield (GY), test weight (TW), and grain protein ratio (GPR) were examined.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The advanced lines TL258, TL576, and TL254 genotypes recorded average values for the traits examined.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2022-2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Oat · Grain yield · Protein ratio

Abstract

This study was conducted using a randomized complete block design with three replications during the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 growing seasons to determine certain morphological, yield, and quality characteristics of 10 different oat genotypes under the ecological conditions of Kahramanmaraş. In the study, traits such as grain number per panicle (GNP), grain weight per panicle (GWP), panicle length (PL), plant height (PH), lodging (L), thousand kernel weight (TKW), grain yield (GY), test weight (TW), and grain protein ratio (GPR) were examined. According to the two-year research results, highly significant differences (P<0.01) were detected among the genotypes for PL, GNP, GWP, PH, TKW, GY and TW except GPR. The highest average PL was observed in the TL255 genotype (29.3 cm), while the Yeniçeri cultivar stood out in terms of GNP (137.7 grains). The cultivar Yeniçeri also recorded the highest value for GWP (3.98 g). In terms of GY, the Afri-54 genotype showed significantly higher performance compared to other genotypes (796.8 kg da⁻¹). The Kahraman (33.9 g), Afri-54 (35.5 g), and Arslanbey cultivars (33.4 g) genotypes stood out in terms of TKW, while the Fetih genotype yielded the highest TW at 52.0 kg hL⁻¹. Principal Component Biplot Analysis explained 57.9% of the total variation (Principal Component 1: 36.3%, Principal Component 2: 21.5%) and revealed a positive correlation between GPR and TW, GNP, and GWP. Conversely, a negative correlation was observed between GY and GPR, TW, GWP, GNP, PH, and PL. A positive correlation was also detected between GY and TKW. The cultivar Yeniçeri stood out in terms of GPR, TW, GWP, and GNP traits, while the Afri-54 variety showed superior performance in terms of GY and TKW. The advanced lines TL258, TL576, and TL254 genotypes recorded average values for the traits examined.

Özet

This study was conducted using a randomized complete block design with three replications during the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 growing seasons to determine certain morphological, yield, and quality characteristics of 10 different oat genotypes under the ecological conditions of Kahramanmaraş. In the study, traits such as grain number per panicle (GNP), grain weight per panicle (GWP), panicle length (PL), plant height (PH), lodging (L), thousand kernel weight (TKW), grain yield (GY), test weight (TW), and grain protein ratio (GPR) were examined. According to the two-year research results, highly significant differences (P<0.01) were detected among the genotypes for PL, GNP, GWP, PH, TKW, GY and TW except GPR. The highest average PL was observed in the TL255 genotype (29.3 cm), while the Yeniçeri cultivar stood out in terms of GNP (137.7 grains). The cultivar Yeniçeri also recorded the highest value for GWP (3.98 g). In terms of GY, the Afri-54 genotype showed significantly higher performance compared to other genotypes (796.8 kg da⁻¹). The Kahraman (33.9 g), Afri-54 (35.5 g), and Arslanbey cultivars (33.4 g) genotypes stood out in terms of TKW, while the Fetih genotype yielded the highest TW at 52.0 kg hL⁻¹. Principal Component Biplot Analysis explained 57.9% of the total variation (Principal Component 1: 36.3%, Principal Component 2: 21.5%) and revealed a positive correlation between GPR and TW, GNP, and GWP. Conversely, a negative correlation was observed between GY and GPR, TW, GWP, GNP, PH, and PL. A positive correlation was also detected between GY and TKW. The cultivar Yeniçeri stood out in terms of GPR, TW, GWP, and GNP traits, while the Afri-54 variety showed superior performance in terms of GY and TKW. The advanced lines TL258, TL576, and TL254 genotypes recorded average values for the traits examined.

🔖

Cite This Article

Korucu, B., Tekin, A., Tekin, İ. Ç., Aydoğdu, İ., Yüce, İ., Güngör, H., Dokuyucu, T., Dumlupınar, Z. (2026). Determination of Yield and Some Quality Traits in Advanced Oat Lines and Cultivars. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 3, 376–383. https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1902492

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (28)

  1. Buerstmayr, H., Krenn, N., Stephan, U., Grausgruber, H., & Zechner, E. (2007). Agronomic performance and quality of oat (Avena sativa L.) genotypes of worldwide origin produced under Central European growing conditions. Field Crops Research, 101(3), 343-351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.12.011
  2. Butt, M. S., Tahir-Nadeem, M., Khan, M. K. I., Shabir, R., & Butt, M. S. (2008). Oat: Unique among the cereals. European Journal of Nutrition, 47(2), 68-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-008-0698-7
  3. Dumlupınar, Z., Tekin, A., Herek, S., Tanrıkulu, A., Dokuyucu, T., & Akkaya, A. (2017). Türkiye kökenli yulaf genotiplerinin bazı tarımsal özellikler bakımından değerlendirilmesi. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(7), 763-772. https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v5i7.763-772.1181
  4. Dumlupınar, Z., Güngör, H., Dokuyucu, T., Herek, S., Tekin, A., & Akkaya, A. (2019). Agronomical screening of OGLE1040/TAM O-301 oat genetic mapping population. Sains Malaysiana, 48(5), 975-981. https://doi.org/10.17576/jsm-2019-4805-05
  5. Ercan, K., Teki̇n, A., Herek, S., Kurt, A., Kekeç, E., Olgun, M. F., Dokuyucu, T., Dumlupinar, Z., & Akkaya, A. (2016). Yerel yulaf hatlarının Kahramanmaraş koşullarındaki performansı. KSÜ Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(4), 438-444.
  6. FAO. (2025). Food and agriculture organization corporate statistical database. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC (accessed on 23.02.2026).
  7. Gül, İ., Akıncı, C., & Çölkesen, M. (1999). Diyarbakır koşullarına uygun tane ve ot amaçlı yetiştirilebilecek yulaf çeşitlerinin belirlenmesi. Hububat Sempozyumu.
  8. Güngör, H., Çakır, M. F., Kantar, B. H., Gedik, B., & Dumlupınar, Z. (2023). Evaluation of some oat cultivars for grain yield, yield components and quality traits in Düzce ecological conditions. ISPEC Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(4), 718-729. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.10207705
  9. Güngörer, G., & Akgün, İ. (2024). Farklı yulaf (Avena sativa L.) çeşit/hatlarının Isparta koşullarında tane verimi ve kalite özelliklerinin belirlenmesi. Türk Bilim ve Mühendislik Dergisi, 6(1), 8-13. https://doi.org/10.55979/tjse.1402112
  10. Hamzaoğlu, S., Şahin, M., Göçmen Akçacık, A., Aydoğan, S., Demir, B., Mecitoğlu Güçbilmez, Ç., Gür, S., & Çeri, S. (2023). Farklı lokasyonlarda yetiştirilen yulaf (Avena sativa spp.) genotiplerinde kalite özelliklerinin karşılaştırılması. Wheat Studies, 12(1), 25-31.
  11. Hoffmann, L. A. (1995). World production and use of oats. Welch, R. W. (Ed.), The oat crop (pp. 34-61). Chapman and Hall.
  12. Howarth, C. J., Martinez-Martin, P. M. J., Cowan, A. A., Griffiths, I. M., Sanderson, R., Lister, S. J., Langdon, T., Clarke, S., Fradgley, N., & Marshall, A. H. (2021). Genotype and environment affect the grain quality and yield of winter oats (Avena sativa L.). Foods, 10(10), 2356. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10102356
  13. JMP®. (2020). Version 15.1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, 1989–2020.
  14. Kahraman, T., & Alatürk, F. (2024). Farklı yulaf (Avena sativa L.) genotiplerinin tane verimi ve yem kalitesi yönünden değerlendirilmesi. Bilim-Teknoloji-Yenilik Ekosistemi Dergisi, 5(2), 81-89.
  15. Kahraman, T., Avci, R., & Kurt, C. (2017). Bazı yulaf (Avena sativa L.) genotiplerinin tane verimi, kalite ve tarımsal özelliklerinin belirlenmesi. Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi, 26, 74-79. https://doi.org/10.21566/tarbitderg.359164
  16. Kara, R., Dumlupınar, Z., Hışır, Y., Dokuyucu, T., & Akkaya, A. (2007). Kahramanmaraş koşullarında yulaf çeşitlerinin tane verimi ve verim unsurları bakımından değerlendirilmesi. Türkiye VII. Tarla Bitkileri Kongresi.
  17. Keçeci̇oğlu, Y., Kara, R., & Dokuyucu, T. (2021). Bazı yulaf genotiplerinin morfolojik ve tarımsal özellikler yönünden genetik farklılıklarının ve ilerlemelerinin belirlenmesi. Türk Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(1), 103-115. https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.816927
  18. Kılınç, F. M. (2020). Türkiye orijinli yerel yulaf genotiplerinde bazı tarımsal özelliklerin belirlenmesi ve ilişkili haritalama analizleri (Doctoral dissertation, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Institute of Natural Sciences).
  19. Martínez-Villaluenga, C., & Peñas, E. (2017). Health benefits of oat: Current evidence and molecular mechanisms. Current Opinion in Food Science, 14, 26-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2017.01.004
  20. McCabe, C. P., & Burke, J. I. (2021). Oat (Avena sativa) yield and grain fill responses to varying agronomic and weather factors. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 159(1-2), 90-105. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859621000320
  21. Mut, Z., Demirtaş, N., & Erbaş Köse, Ö. D. (2021). Farklı yulaf (Avena sativa L.) genotiplerinin destek sulamalı ve sulamasız koşullarda bazı kalite özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesi. Anadolo Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 36(20211), 234-243. https://doi.org/10.7161/omuanajas.845337
  22. Peterson, D. M., Wesenberg, D. M., Burrup, D. E., & Erickson, C. A. (2005). Relationships among agronomic traits and grain composition in oat genotypes grown in different environments. Crop Science, 45(4), 1249-1255. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.0063
  23. Rocquigny, P. J., Entz, M. H., Gentile, R. M., & Duguıd, S. D. (2004). Yield physiology of a semidwarf and tall oat cultivar. Crop Science, 44(6), 2116. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.2116
  24. Tamm, I. (2003). Genetic and environmental variation of grain yield of oat varieties. Agronomy Research, 1(1), 93-97.
  25. Tanoli, M. T., Ali, S., Khan, N., Rabbani, M. A., Khan, S. A., Khan, S. M., Naveed, K., & Arif, M. (2016). Estimation of genetic diversity among oat genotypes through agro-morphological traits. International Journal of Biosciences, 9(5), 35-44.
  26. Tanrıkulu, A. (2025). Investigation of agro-morphological characteristics in oat. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 8(5), 587-593. https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1704410
  27. Wang, T., Li, F. M., Turner, N. C., Wang, B. R., Wu, F., Anten, N. P. R., & Du, Y. L. (2020). Accelerated grain-filling rate increases seed size and grain yield of recent naked oat cultivars under well-watered and water-deficit conditions. European Journal of Agronomy, 116, 126047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2020.126047
  28. Yang, Z., Xie, C., Bao, Y., Liu, F., Wang, H., & Wang, Y. (2023). Oat: Current state and challenges in plant-based food applications. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 134, 56-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2023.02.017