Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:58:06.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of planting density and nitrogen fertilization level on grain yield and harvest index in seven modern tropical maize hybrids (Zea mays L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 July 2015

S. TRACHSEL*
Affiliation:
The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), International Apdo. Postal 6-641, 06600 Mexico, D.F.Mexico
F. M. SAN VICENTE
Affiliation:
The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), International Apdo. Postal 6-641, 06600 Mexico, D.F.Mexico
E. A. SUAREZ
Affiliation:
The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), International Apdo. Postal 6-641, 06600 Mexico, D.F.Mexico
C. S. RODRIGUEZ
Affiliation:
The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), International Apdo. Postal 6-641, 06600 Mexico, D.F.Mexico
G. N. ATLIN
Affiliation:
The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), International Apdo. Postal 6-641, 06600 Mexico, D.F.Mexico
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]

Summary

To support tropical maize (Zea mays L.) breeding efforts, the current work aimed to assess harvest index (HI) in modern hybrids and determine the effect of different planting densities on grain yield and HI under well-fertilized (HN) and nitrogen (N) deficient conditions. Harvest index and grain yield of 34 hybrids on average reached 0·42 and 7·06 t/ha (five environments), indicating a large potential for improvement in HI relative to temperate hybrids. Ear weight (r = 0·88), HI (r = 0·78) and shoot dry weight (r = 0·68) were strongly associated with grain yield. In the second experiment, seven hybrids were evaluated at planting densities of 5, 7, 9 and 11 plants/m2 under HN (six environments) and N deficient (LN) conditions (four environments) to assess the effect of planting density on grain yield and HI. Grain yield increased by 40·4 and 21·8% under HN and LN conditions when planting density was increased relative to the lowest planting density. Harvest index increased from 0·42 at 5 plants/m2 to 0·45 at 11 plants/m2 under HN conditions and decreased from 0·44 at 5 plants/m2 to 0·42 at 9 plants/m2 under LN conditions. Harvest index was maximized at planting densities of 8·33 plants/m2 and 5·30 plants/m2 under HN and LN conditions, respectively, while grain yield was maximized at 9·93 plants/m2 and 7·89/m2. Optimal planting density maximizing both HI and grain yield were higher than planting densities currently used in tropical germplasm. It can be concluded that productivity in tropical maize could be increased both under intensive (+40·4%) and lower-input management (+21·8%) by increasing planting densities above those currently used in smallholder agriculture in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa, in environments targeted by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Banziger, M., Edmeades, G. O. & Lafitte, H. R. (1999). Selection for drought tolerance increases maize yields across a range of nitrogen levels. Crop Science 39, 10351040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banziger, M., Edmeades, G. O. & Lafitte, H. R. (2002). Physiological mechanisms contributing to the increased N stress tolerance of tropical maize selected for drought tolerance. Field Crops Research 75, 223233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banziger, M., Setimela, P. S., Hodson, D. & Vivek, B. (2006). Breeding for improved abiotic stress tolerance in maize adapted to southern Africa. Agricultural Water Management 80, 212224.Google Scholar
Bolanos, J. & Edmeades, G. O. (1993). Eight cycles of selection for drought tolerance in lowland tropical maize. 1. Responses in grain-yield, biomass and radiation utilization. Field Crops Research 31, 233252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolanos, J., Edmeades, G. O. & Martinez, L. (1993). Eight cycles of selection for drought tolerance in lowland tropical maize. 3. Responses in drought-adaptive physiological and morphological traits. Field Crops Research 31, 269286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boomsma, C. R., Santini, J. B., Tollenaar, M. & Vyn, T. J. (2009). Maize morphophysiological responses to intense crowding and low nitrogen availability: an analysis and review. Agronomy Journal 101, 14261452.Google Scholar
Borras, L., Slafer, G. A. & Otegui, M. E. (2004). Seed dry weight response to source-sink manipulations in wheat, maize and soybean: a quantitative reappraisal. Field Crops Research 86, 131146.Google Scholar
Boyer, J. S. & Westgate, M. E. (2004). Grain yields with limited water. Journal of Experimental Botany 55, 23852394.Google Scholar
Cairns, J. E., Crossa, J., Zaidi, P. H., Grudloyma, P., Sanchez, C., Araus, J. L., Thaitad, S., Makumbi, D., Magorokosho, C., Banziger, M., Menkir, A., Hearne, S. & Atlin, G. N. (2013). Identification of drought, heat, and combined drought and heat tolerant donors in maize. Crop Science 53, 13351346.Google Scholar
Ciampitti, I. A., Zhang, H., Friedemann, P. & Vyn, T. J. (2012). Potential physiological frameworks for mid-season field phenotyping of final plant nitrogen uptake, nitrogen use efficiency, and grain yield in maize. Crop Science 52, 27282742.Google Scholar
Cirilo, A. G. & Andrade, F. H. (1994). Sowing date and maize productivity. 2. Kernel number determination. Crop Science 34, 10441046.Google Scholar
Duvick, D. N. (2005). Genetic progress in yield of United States maize (Zea mays L.). Maydica 50, 193202.Google Scholar
Edmeades, G. O., Bolanos, J., Elings, A., Ribaut, J. M., Banziger, M. & Westgate, M. E. (2000). The role and regulation of the anthesis-silking interval in maize. In Physiology and Modeling Kernel Set in Maize (Eds Westgate, M. & Boote, K.), pp. 4374. CSSA Special Publication 29. Madison, WI: ASA, CSSA, SSSA.Google Scholar
Elings, A., White, J. W. & Edmeades, G. O. (1997). Options for breeding for greater maize yields in the tropics. European Journal of Agronomy 7, 119132.Google Scholar
Gilmour, A. R., Gogel, B. J., Cullis, B. R. & Thompson, R. (2009). ASReml User Guide Release 3.0. Hemel Hempstead, UK: VSN International Ltd. Available from: http://www.vsni.co.uk/resources/documentation/asreml-user-guide/ (verified 22 May 2015)Google Scholar
Grassini, P., Yang, H., Irmak, S., Thorburn, J., Burr, C. & Cassman, K. G. (2011). High-yield irrigated maize in the Western U.S. Corn Belt: II. Irrigation management and crop water productivity. Field Crops Research 120, 133141.Google Scholar
Hammer, G. L., Dong, Z., McLean, G., Doherty, A., Messina, C., Schussler, J., Zinselmeier, C., Paszkiewicz, S. & Cooper, M. (2009). Can changes in canopy and/or root system architecture explain historical maize yield trends in the US corn belt? Crop Science 49, 299312.Google Scholar
Hanway, J. J. & Ritchie, S. W. (1984). How a Corn Plant Develops. Special Report No. 48. Ames, IA, USA: Iowa State University.Google Scholar
Hay, R. K. M. & Gilbert, R. A. (2001). Variation in the harvest index of tropical maize: evaluation of recent evidence from Mexico and Malawi. Annals of Applied Biology 138, 103109.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. C., Fischer, K. S., Edmeades, G. O. & Palmer, A. F. E. (1986). Recurrent selection for reduced plant height in lowland tropical maize. Crop Science 26, 253260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ku, L. X., Zhao, W. M., Zhang, J., Wu, L. C., Wang, C. L., Wang, P. A., Zhang, W. Q. & Chen, Y. H. (2010). Quantitative trait loci mapping of leaf angle and leaf orientation value in maize (Zea mays L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 121, 951959.Google Scholar
Lafitte, H. R. & Edmeades, G. O. (1997). Temperature effects on radiation use and biomass partitioning in diverse tropical maize cultivars. Field Crops Research 49, 231247.Google Scholar
Lambert, R. J. & Johnson, R. R. (1978). Leaf angle, tassel morphology, and the performance of maize hybrids. Crop Science 18, 499502.Google Scholar
Liu, W. D. & Tollenaar, M. (2009). Physiological mechanisms underlying heterosis for shade tolerance in maize. Crop Science 49, 18171826.Google Scholar
Lorenz, A. J., Gustafson, T. J., Coors, J. G. & de Leon, N. (2010). Breeding maize for a bioeconomy: a literature survey examining harvest index and stover yield and their relationship to grain yield. Crop Science 50, 112.Google Scholar
Meghji, M. R., Dudley, J. W., Lambert, R. J. & Sprague, G. F. (1984). Inbreeding depression, inbred and hybrid grain yields, and other traits of maize genotypes representing three eras. Crop Science 24, 545549.Google Scholar
Mickelson, S. M., Stuber, C. S., Senior, L. & Kaeppler, S. M. (2002). Quantitative trait loci controlling leaf and tassel traits in a B73 – Mo17 population of maize. Crop Science 42, 19021909.Google Scholar
Monneveux, P., Zaidi, P. H. & Sanchez, C. (2005). Population density and low nitrogen affects yield-associated traits in tropical maize. Crop Science 45, 535545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osaki, M. (1995). Comparison of productivity between tropical and temperate maize. I. Leaf senescence and productivity in relation to nitrogen nutrition. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 41, 439450.Google Scholar
Otegui, M. E. & Andrade, F. H. (2000). New relationships between light interception, ear growth, and kernel set in maize. In Physiology and Modeling Kernel Set in Maize (Eds Westgate, M. & Boote, K.), pp. 89102. CSSA Special Publication 29. Madison, WI: ASA, CSSA, SSSA.Google Scholar
Otegui, M. E. & Melon, S. (1997). Kernel set and flower synchrony within the ear of maize. 1. Sowing date effects. Crop Science 37, 441447.Google Scholar
Rossini, M. A., Maddonni, G. A. & Otegui, M. E. (2011). Inter-plant competition for resources in maize crops grown under contrasting nitrogen supply and density: variability in plant and ear growth. Field Crops Research 121, 373380.Google Scholar
Russell, W. A. (1991). Genetic improvement of maize yields. Advances in Agronomy 46, 245298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sangoi, L. S. (2001). Understanding plant density effects on maize growth and development: an important issue to maximize grain yield. Ciencia Rural 31, 159168.Google Scholar
Schussler, J. R. & Westgate, M. E. (1991). Maize kernel set at low water potential: II. Sensitivity to reduced assimilates at pollination. Crop Science 31, 11961203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Severini, A. D., Borras, L., Westgate, M. E. & Cirilo, A. G. (2011). Kernel number and kernel weight determination in dent and popcorn maize. Field Crops Research 120, 360369.Google Scholar
Sinclair, T. R. (1998). Historical changes in harvest index and crop nitrogen accumulation. Crop Science 38, 638643.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M. (1989). Genetic improvement in grain yield of commercial maize hybrids grown in Ontario from 1959 to 1988. Crop Science 29, 13651371.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M. (1992). Is low plant density a stress in maize? Maydica 37, 305311.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M. & Aguilera, A. (1992). Radiation use efficiency of an old and a new maize hybrid. Agronomy Journal 84, 536541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tollenaar, M. & Lee, E. A. (2011). Strategies for enhancing grain yield in maize. Plant Breeding Reviews 34, 3782.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M., Dibo, A. A., Aguilera, A., Weise, S. F. & Swanton, C. J. (1994). Effect of crop density on weed interference in maize. Agronomy Journal 86, 591595.Google Scholar
Westgate, M. E. & Boyer, J. S. (1985). Carbohydrate reserves and reproductive development at low leaf water potentials in maize. Crop Science 25, 762769.Google Scholar
Worku, M. & Zelleke, H. (2009). Advances in improving harvest index and grain yield of maize in Ethiopia. East African Journal of Sciences 1, 112119.Google Scholar
Yamaguchi, J. (1974). Varietal traits limiting the grain yield of tropical maize IV. Plant traits and productivity of tropical varieties. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 20, 287304.Google Scholar
Zinselmeier, C., Westgate, M. E., Schussler, J. R. & Jones, R. J. (1995). Low water potential disrupts carbohydrate-metabolism in maize (Zea mays L.) ovaries. Plant Physiology 107, 385391.Google Scholar