Corn‐Hybrid Performance under Conventional and No‐Tillage Systems after Thinning¹

Abstract

Corn (Zea mays L.) producers question the relative performance: of hybrids under different previous‐crop residue management systems. The objective of this study was to assess tillage system ✕ corn hybrid interactions for hybrids commonly grown in the northern United States. Field experiments were conducted at four locations in Wisconsin during 1984 and 1985, including sites with Plano and Nickin silt loam (Typic Argiudoll) and Meridian loam (Mollic Hapludalf) soils. Fifteen hybrids with a range of maturities (90–115 days based on the Minnesota Relative Maturity System) were compared under conventional (moldboard plowing and disking)(CT) and no‐till (NT) systems, in a corn‐following‐corn sequence. Stands were thinned after emergence. No‐till resulted in cooler soil temperatures (0.8–3.8°C cooler), lower emergence percentage (7–12% lower), delayed vegetative growth [4.4 (NT) vs. 7.9 (CT) g plant−1], later silking (2–5 days later), and increased grain moisture (10–20 g kg−1) compared to CT. For grain yield, differences occurred for all main effects (locations, years, tillage systems, and hybrids), and most interactions were significant. Yields under NT were 92% (cool spring, 1984) and 96% (warm spring, 1985) of CT yields. On silt‐loam soils, NT yields were 92 to 95% of CT yields, but tillage systems had similar yields on the loam soil. Superior‐yielding hybrids under CT were also good choices with NT, although delayed growth under NT limited the yield potential of later‐maturing (100–115 days) hybrids.

Maize hybrid response to tillage under irrigated and dryland conditions

“…These results are consistent with the reports by Mock and Erbach ( 1977 ) , Hallauer and Colvin ( 1985 ), Anderson ( 1986), and Newhouse and Crosbie ( 1986), but contradict results of Brakke et al ( 1983 ) and Carter and Barnett ( 1987 ) . The study by Brakke et al ( 1983) was also conducted in the Central Plains, but tested the response of a very wide range of cultivars to cropping systems, combinations of tillage practice and water management (fallow or irrigation).…”

“…However, at Lincoln-1983 (Table 2B), no-tillage had a significantly lower population (2.63 plants m-2) than the disk (3.64 plant m-2) or plow (3.13 plant m-2) treatments. Carter and Barnett ( 1987 ) also forlnd no-tillage reduced emergence more than conventional tillage (plow), with as much as 26% difference between numbers of seeds planted and the number of plants emerged in no-tillage. Kaspar et al ( 1987) reported reduced plant populations at harvest with no-tillage compared to tilled treatments in one year of a two-year study.…”

“…In contrast, Brakke et al (1983) reported a significant genotype (inbreds, lines, and hybrids) x cropping-system [combination of tillage (conventional, conservation tillage, or ecofallow) and water-management (irrigation or dryland) practices] interaction for grain-yield of maize at several sites in the Central Great Plains. Carter and Barnett ( 1987 ) also reported a tillage x hybrid interaction for yield of maize grown in the northern U.S.A. The current study was initiated to determine if selected maize hybrids respond differently to tillage practices under both dryland and irrigated conditions.…”

Wheat residue management options for no-till corn

“…On average, NT treatments required more soil GDD (65) than MP treatments (53) to attain 50% corn emergence. Carter and Barnett (1987) found that for continuous NT corn production in Wisconsin, soil temperatures were cooler, emergence percentage and stand establishment were lower, crop growth was delayed and grain moisture at harvest was increased compared with corn produced using a MP system.…”

Phosphorus and potassium placement for corn and soybean managed with two conservation tillage systems

“…Another result of residue or mulch cover in conservation tillage is an increase of soil moisture in the rooting profile (Burrows and Larsen, 1962;Barber, 1971;Blevins et aI., 1971;Bennet et aI., 1973;Griffith et aI., 1973;Mock and Erbach, 1977;Johnson and Lowery, 1985;Kladivko et aI., 1986;Lowery, 1986 andCarter and Barnett, 1987;Imholte and Carter, 1987;Cox et aI., 1990;Fortin, 1993). This is highly beneficial to production agriculture in areas where optimum rainfall does not always occur.…”