31 SEED TESTING INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2026 • RULES DEVELOPMENT method was assessed through the estimation of repeatability and reproducibility parameters in the context of binomial data. A linear mixed model (LMM) was fitted using a R function developed by the ISTA Statistics Committee; statistical analyses were carried out using four replicates of 50 and could reveal means out of tolerance. The meaningfulness of the cold test was also evaluated by correlation analysis between cold test, germination test and field emergence results. Results Establishment of Relationship Between Field Emergence and Cold Test Means of daily temperature were recorded in the four locations. Sowing temperature varied between 7.8 °C in Chappes (earliest date of sowing) and 10.1 °C in Haut-Mauco (sown 25 d later). The highest variability of temperature was recorded in Chappes and the monthly temperature corresponding to the final field emergence was 11.1 °C for Arras, 11.5 °C for Chappes, 12.3 °C for Saint Mathurin sur Loire and 13.6 °C for Haut-Mauco. There was a significant relationship between the cold test and field emergence (r ≥ 0.95) for the three seed lots sown early (Table 2), especially in the northernmost field (Arras with r = 1). However, there was also a positive relationship (r = 0.96) between standard germination and field emergence in the south-west (Haut-Mauco), where the six seed lots used for the comparative test were considered (Fig. 2). It is interesting to note the higher correlation of field emergence with cold test results and the different levels of field emergence for seed lots with very similar germination levels. For example, lots M1 and M3 with above 90% normal germination gave field emergences of 90% and 60% respectively in the north of France (Arras) and had a difference of 9% in the favourable field (Haut-Mauco). In this traditional maize crop area, the lowest emergence was 82% for lot M5, with M1 and M6 having field emergence close to their standard germination (Fig. 3). Nevertheless, the seed lot ranking was very similar between laboratory and field (Table 3), with M1 and M6 having the highest vigour and M5, the lowest vigour. Comparative Cold Tests Between Laboratories Normal germination counts after cold testing revealed differences between seed lots in each laboratory (Fig. 4). Results revealed seed lot M5 as low vigour and seed lots M1, M2 and M6 as high vigour lots between all participating laboratories. Overall means comparison ranked the six seed lots in three classes (Table 3). Repeatability and reproducibility estimates are presented in Table 4 for all data. Dispersion factors were close to 1 for the cold test, indicating that there is no evidence of overdispersion within laboratories (⨍𝑟 ), nor between laboratories (⨍𝑅). Figure 2. Relationships between final field emergence in four locations and mean cold test results (orange dots) or mean standard germination results (green dots) in controlled conditions; significant relationships are indicated with *p>0.05, **p>0.01 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 Lab cold test (%) 93.6 ± 1.5 91.3 ± 1.8 86.3 ± 3.5 83.6 ± 2.6 72.7 ± 2.3 91.1 ± 3.6 Haut-Mauco (%) 98.0 ± 1.9 89.0 ± 3.4 89.0 ± 3.4 88.0 ± 2.2 82.0 ± 5.6 95.0 ± 3.7 Arras (%) 90.0 ± 5.5 82.0 ± 4.6 65.0 ± 5.8 nd nd nd Chappes (%) 93.0 ± 6.7 83.0 ± 10 70.0 ± 6.8 nd nd nd St Mathurin (%) 97.0 ± 1.4 93.0 ± 2.5 88.0 ± 2.4 nd nd nd Table 2. Mean results (±SD) for final field emergence (28 d after sowing) in four locations and mean cold test results (±SD) obtained in six laboratories Figure 3. Mean normal germination after 12 d cold test and final mean field emergence (%) of the samples of Zea mays in the four experimental plots (4×100 seeds); lots M4 to M6 arrived too late to be sown in the first three places M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 7 d @ 10 °C – Sand 93.6a 91.3a 86.3b 83.6b 72.7c 91.1a Table 3. Cold germination means (%) for six seed lots of maize assessed after 7 d at 10 °C and 5 d at 25 °C in six laboratories; each mean is derived from four replicates of 50 seeds per laboratory; for each method, means with different letters are significantly different according to Tukey test (α=0.05)
View this content as a flipbook by clicking here.