Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
to refocus and redirect American efforts at seed vigor. Following these publications, the AOSA formed its
irst Vigor Test Committee in 1961 chaired by Dr. R. P. Moore and consisting of committee members M.
Brumniitt, T. F. Cuddy, J. C. Delouche, L. Jensen, D. Isely, and G. E. Nutile. The accomplishments of that
irst committee were to bring into perspective the advantages and disadvantages of direct vs. indirect vigor
tests, as well as outlining various concepts of vigor testing. It seemed at this point that the challenge of vigor
testing was straightforward and solutions imminent. But a review of the historical progress of the AOSA
Vigor Testing Committee demonstrates the naivete of this notion. The following represents a chronology of
the more important historical achievements of this important Committee.
In 1963, Dr. R. P. Moore reported, “Progress has been slow on attempts to reach an agreement on
the precise traits to be measured and suitable methods for their evaluation.” Three years later in 1966, he
stated, “Since quite diverse points of interest are involved, the progress of the Committee could no doubt
be promoted by restriction of the assignment to measurement of vigor which commonly conveys rate and
magnitude of growth.” Clearly, the more the topic was studied the more challenging it became. By this
point, committee members were becoming divided about the meaning of vigor and how best to measure it.
For example, Dr. Moore was a staunch proponent for the use of tetrazolium chloride, while others suggested
that direct growth measurements were more suitable vigor evaluations.
In 1968, Dr. Lowell Woodstock accepted the role as chair of the Committee. Under his leadership, the
irst vigor test referee was conducted using corn. Laboratories were instructed to use any vigor test of their
choice in the evaluation of seed samples. This initial effort was designed more to identify the best vigor tests
for this important crop rather than being concerned with standardization of results. In the next ive years, the
Committee continued to evaluate seed vigor deinitions and began to deine a number of vigor tests. During
this period, greater and greater attention was being given to seed vigor, as yet an untested, unmeasured, and
needed component of seed quality. By 1974, the clamor for vigor tests was so loud that the Association of
American Seed Control Oficials (AASCO) formally resolved that AOSA develop standardized seed vigor
test procedures. This resolution prompted the AOSA Vigor Testing Committee to even greater activity. The
Committee broadened its membership from a small regulatory group to 12 members that included uni-
versity and seed trade personnel. It convened a special 1974 meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, to address
the AASCO resolutions. At that meeting, it was decided that a vigor testing handbook providing speciic
vigor test procedures was to become a major objective. However, an important early conclusion was that a
deliberate approach to vigor testing was necessary to avoid hasty use of vigor tests that were still not stan-
dardized. To accomplish this, eight vigor test procedures were identiied for a special publication edition
of the AOSA Newsletter. Rapid progress was now being made in vigor testing. Woodstock wrote in 1974,
“There has been more real movement towards consensus in seed vigor testing and more real progress by the
AOSA Vigor Testing Committee in meeting its responsibilities for developing, evaluating, codifying, and
standardizing vigor testing procedures during the past nine months than during any recent period.” Under
Dr. Woodstock's leadership, the “Seed Vigor Testing Report” was published as a special issue of the AOSA
Newsletter (Woodstock, 1976). At that time, Dr. Miller McDonald became chair of the Committee.
The “Progress Report” was a signiicant milestone in vigor testing. It provided speciic guidelines for
vigor tests that could be evaluated using a “referee” format. The Vigor Testing Committee immediately
set out to determine the standardization of these procedures and to improve them so they were repeatable
among laboratories. McDonald stated in 1977 that another important committee objective was to “...derive
a satisfactory deinition of seed vigor...” because the deinition would ultimately determine what a vigor
test would measure. By 1980, a seed vigor deinition had been approved by AOSA, AOSCA, ASTA, SCST,
and AASCO. During that same period, the Committee was convinced that it had developed viable vigor
tests and was committed to their publication in a handbook. Detailed descriptions and procedures of seven
vigor tests were written and published in 1983 as the AOSA Seed Vigor Testing Handbook. These included
(authors in parentheses) accelerated aging (Charles Baskin), cold test (Ben Clark), cool germination test
(Gurnia Moore), conductivity (Kar Ling Tao), seedling vigor classiication (George Spain), seedling growth
rate (Joe Burris), and tetrazolium (Charles Baskin). The Committee further decided that the average user
