Hostname: page-component-669899f699-qzcqf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T19:31:12.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Narrow rows increase maize grain yield regardless of plant density in a Mediterranean environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 October 2024

Simona Bassu Open the ORCID record for Simona Bassu [Opens in a new window] ,
Rosella Motzo ,
Maria Chiara Bertulu  and
Francesco Giunta
Simona Bassu*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Sassari, Viale Italia 39/a, 07100 Sassari, Italy
Rosella Motzo
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Sassari, Viale Italia 39/a, 07100 Sassari, Italy
Maria Chiara Bertulu
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Sassari, Viale Italia 39/a, 07100 Sassari, Italy
Francesco Giunta
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Sassari, Viale Italia 39/a, 07100 Sassari, Italy
*
Corresponding author: Simona Bassu; Email: simonabassu@yahoo.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The spatial distribution of maize plants influences the number of kernels set per plant by modifying the radiation environment during the critical period for kernel number determination. A two-year field experiment was conducted in Sardinia to explore whether, in a Mediterranean environment, a reduction in row distance can have a positive effect on grain yield of full-season maize hybrids and, if it does, whether this effect is also affected by plant density. Treatments were a factorial combination of three plant densities (6, 8 and 10 plants/m2) and two row spacings (35 and 70 cm). Grain yield and grain number benefited from a reduction in row distance from the canonical 70 cm to 35 cm irrespective of plant density and yield level (14.7 t/ha on average in 2021, 9.9 t/ha in 2022 vs 13.7 and 8.8 t/ha with canonical row distance). Row distance did not affect either the coefficient of extinction of radiation or the intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) during the critical period for grain number determination. The higher grain number per unit area at the smaller row distance translated into a greater grain yield, which cannot solely be attributed to radiation interception and plant growth rate during the period of kernel number determination. Halving the common row distance is a valuable management option for full-season hybrids grown in Mediterranean environments without nitrogen and water limitations as it seems capable of increasing grain yield via an increase in kernel number per unit area, regardless of plant density and yield level.

Keywords

intercepted photosynthetic active radiationkernel numberplant populationrow distanceRUE
Type
Crops and Soils Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 162 , Issue 4 , August 2024 , pp. 354 - 362
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andrade, FH and Ferreiro, MA (1996) Reproductive growth of maize, sunflower and soybean at different source levels during grain filling. Field Crops Research 48, 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrade, FH, Vega, C, Uhart, S, Cirilo, A, Cantarero, M and Valentinuz, O (1999) Kernel number determination in Maize. Crop Science 39, 453–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrade, FH, Calvin, PC and Barbieri, PA (2002) Yield responses to narrow rows depend on increased radiation interception. Agronomy Journal 94, 975–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Assefa, Y, Vara Prasad, PV, Carter, P, Hinds, M, Bhalla, G, Schon, R, Jeschk, M, Paszkiewicz, S and Ciampitti, IA (2016) Yield responses to planting density for US modern corn hybrids: a synthesis-analysis. Crop Science 56, 2802–2817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernhard, BJ and Below, FE (2020) Plant population and row spacing effects on corn: plant growth, phenology, and grain yield. Agronomy Journal 112, 2456–2465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cirilo, AG and Andrade, FH (1994a) Sowing date and maize productivity: I. Crop growth and dry matter partitioning. Crop Science 34, 1039–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cirilo, AG and Andrade, FH (1994b) Sowing date and maize productivity: II. Kernel number determination. Crop Science 34, 1044–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daynard, TB and Duncan, WG (1969) The black layer and grain maturity in corn. Crop Science 9, 473–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Echarte, L, Luque, S, Andrade, FH, Sadras, VO, Cirilo, A, Otegui, ME and Vega, CRC (2000) Response of maize kernel number to plant density in Argentinean hybrids released between 1965 and 1993. Field Crops Research 68, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuksa, P, Hrevušová, Z, Szabó, O and Hakl, J (2023) Effect of row spacing and plant density on silage maize growth, dry matter distribution and yield. Agronomy 13, 1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gözübenli, H (2010) Influence of planting patterns and plant density on the performance of maize hybrids in the eastern Mediterranean conditions. International Journal of Agriculture & Biology 12, 556–560.Google Scholar
Greveniotis, V, Zotis, S, Sioki, E and Ipsilandis, C (2019) Field population density effects on field yield and morphological characteristics of maize. Agriculture 9, 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, R, Zhang, G, Xie, R, Hou, P, Bo, M, Xue, J, Wang, K and Li, S (2021) Optimizing row spacing increased radiation use efficiency and yield of maize. Agronomy Journal 113, 4806–4818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddonni, GA, Otegui, ME and Cirilo, AG (2001) Plant population density, row spacing and hybrid effects on maize canopy architecture and light attenuation. Field Crops Research 71, 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddonni, GA, Otegui, E, Andrieu, B, Chelle, M and Casal, JJ (2002) Maize leaves turn away from neighbors. Plant Physiology 130, 1181–1189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maddonni, GA, Cirilo, AG and Otegui, ME (2006) Row width and maize grain yield. Agronomy Journal 98, 1532–1543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monteith, JL (1965) Radiation and crops. Experimental Agriculture 1, 241–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgeomery, EG (1911) Correlation studies in corn. Nebraska Agricultural Experimental Station. Annual Report 24, 108–159.Google Scholar
Muchow, RC and Carberry, PS (1989) Environmental control of phenology and leaf growth in a tropically adapted maize. Field Crops Research 20, 221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otegui, ME and Andrade, FH (2000) New relationships between light interception, ear growth, and kernel set in maize. In Westgate, M, Boote, K, Knievel, D and Kiniry, J (eds), Physiology and Modeling Kernel Set in Maize. Wisconsin: CSSA Special Publication, pp. 89–102. https://doi.org/10.2135/cssaspecpub29.c6Google Scholar
Otegui, ME, Andrade, FH and Suero, EE (1995) Growth, water use, and kernel abortion of maize subjected to drought at silking. Field Crops Research 40, 87–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, ER, Tollenaar, M, Lee, EA, Lukens, L and Swanton, CJ (2010) Shade avoidance: an integral component of crop – weed competition. Weed Research 50, 281–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajcan, I and Swanton, CJ (2001) Understanding maize–weed competition: resource competition, light quality and the whole plant. Field Crops Research 71, 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sangoi, L, Gracietti, MA, Rampazzo, C and Bianchetti, P (2002) Response of Brazilian maize hybrids from different eras to changes in plant density. Field Crops Research 79, 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, H and Whitelam, GC (1997) The shade avoidance syndrome: multiple responses mediated by multiple phytochromes. Plant Cell & Environment 20, 840–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, PJ, Pearson, A, Sorensen, I and Rogers, BT (2000) Effect of row spacing and plant population on maize yield and quality. Agronomy New Zealand 30, 67–75.Google Scholar
Strieder, ML, Da Silva, PRF, Rambo, L, Sangoi, L, Da Silva, AA, Endrigo, PC and Jandrey, DB (2008) Crop management systems and maize grain yield under narrow row spacing. Scientia Agricola 65, 346–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, L, Ma, W, Noor, MA, Li, L, Hou, H and Zhao, M (2018) Density resistance evaluation of maize varieties through new “Density – Yield Mode” and quantification of varietal response to gradual planting density pressure. Scientific Reports 8, 17281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Testa, G, Reyneri, A and Blandino, M (2016) Maize grain yield enhancement through high plant density cultivation with different inter-row and intra-row spacings. European Journal of Agronomy 72, 28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tollenaar, M and Dwyer, LM (1999) Physiology of Maize. In Smith, DL and Hamel, C (eds), Crop Yield. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 169–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tollenaar, M, Dwyer, LM and Stewart, DW (1992) Ear and kernel formation in maize hybrids representing three decades of grain yield improvement in Ontario. Crop Science 32, 432–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdicombe, WD and Thelen, KD (2002) Row width and plant density effects on corn grain production in the northern corn belt. Agronomy Journal 94, 1020–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Bassu et al. supplementary material 1

Bassu et al. supplementary material
Download Bassu et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 514.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Bassu et al. supplementary material 2

Bassu et al. supplementary material
Download Bassu et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 249.6 KB