Plant Population Influence on Maize Yield Components in Croatia and Nebraska

Milander, Jeremy J.; Jukić, Željko; Mason, Stephen; Glausha, Tomie; Kmail, Zaher

doi:10.2135/cropsci2015.09.0565

Cited by 27 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Pearson correlations were calculated to identify interrelationships among measured parameters, and path correlation analysis (Agrama 1996;Mohammadi et al 2003) of yield and the primary and secondary yield components was completed using PROC CALIS to determine model goodness-of-fit. PP responses from this study have been reported previously in Milander et al (2016), while this article reports the hybrid maturity effects on maize yield and components.…”

Section: Cereal Research Communicationssupporting

confidence: 72%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hybrid maturity influence on maize yield and yield component response to plant population in Croatia and Nebraska

Milander

Jukić

Mason

et al. 2017

Cereal Research Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maize (Zea mays L.) yield component analysis is limited. Research was conducted in 2012 and 2013 at Zagreb, Croatia and Mead, Nebraska, United States with the objective to determine the influence of environment, hybrid maturity, and plant population (PP) on maize yield and yield components. Three maturity classes of maize hybrids were produced at five PP ranging from 65,000 to 105,000 plants ha -1 under rainfed conditions. Yield, ears m -2 , rows ear -1 , ear circumference, kernels ear -1 , kernels row -1 , ear length, and kernel weight were determined. Average yield was 10.7 t ha -1 , but was variable for hybrids across PP. The early maturity-hybrids had lesser ear circumference, more kernels ear -1 , greater ear length, and fewer rows ear -1 than mid-and late-maturity hybrids. Kernels ear -1 had the highest correlation with yield (r = 0.47; P < 0.01 for early-maturity hybrids; r = 0.55; P < 0.01 for the mid-and late-maturity hybrids). Path analysis indicated that ears m -2 , kernels ear -1 and kernel weight had similar direct effects on yield for early-maturity hybrids (R = 0.41 to 0.48) while kernels ear -1 had the largest direct effect (R = 0.58 versus 0.32 to 0.36) for the midand late-maturity hybrids. Rows ear -1 had an indirect effects on yield (R = 0.30 to 0.33) for all hybrids, while kernels row -1 had indirect effect (R = 0.46) on yield for mid-and latematurity hybrids. Yield component compensation was different for early-maturity hybrid than the mid-and late-maturity hybrids, likely due to the proportion of southern dent and northern flint germplasm present in these hybrids.

show abstract

Section: Cereal Research Communicationssupporting

confidence: 72%

“…Maize hybrid yield response to increasing PP above 60,000 ± 3000 plants ha -1 is inconsistent across locations, soil types, and hybrids (Reeves and Cox 2013;Milander et al 2016). Maize hybrid yield often follow quadratic (Novacek et al 2013(Novacek et al , 2014 or quadratic-plateau models (Hammer et al 2009).…”

Section: Cereal Research Communicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid maturity influence on maize yield and yield component response to plant population in Croatia and Nebraska

Milander

Jukić

Mason

et al. 2017

Cereal Research Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, most other yield components are defined at a later stage in plant development, that is, the ear size and grain size are determined by the V12 and R2‐R3 stage, respectively, and therefore they could be affected by environmental factors, such as intraspecific competition caused by a higher number of plants per area. Our results are in agreement with most recent studies that have shown a linear decrease in the number of ears per plant, kernel length and weight, and ear length in response to an increase in plant population in maize (Xu et al, 2017a; Milander et al, 2016; Qian et al, 2016; Testa et al, 2016; Haegele et al, 2014; Hernández et al, 2014; Van Roekel and Coulter, 2012; Kappes et al, 2011). However, we found no plant population effect for the kernel weight in the winter season.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Agronomic Responses of Maize Hybrids to Row Spacing and Plant Population in the Summer and Winter Seasons in Brazil

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brazil has two growing seasons for maize (Zea mays L.) production: summer and winter. The additional maize produced in the winter and the high-yielding opportunities in the summer season make it important to understand responses of maize hybrids to row spacing and plant population across the two annual Brazilian growing seasons. In the 2015 to 2016 summer season and the 2016 winter season, maize response to plant population, ranging from 60,000 to 90,000 plants ha -1 , was evaluated for three hybrids in 0.45-, 0.60-, 0.75-, and 0.90-m row spacing. Plant architecture traits, grain yield and yield components did not differ with row spacing, and their responses to plant population were not affected by hybrid type and/or row spacing. The DKB390PRO2 hybrid (single cross) demonstrated better grain yield performance in the summer, whereas the BG7049YH hybrid (three-way cross) had the highest yield in the winter. Plant and ear height increased linearly in response to plant population in the summer season, whereas other plant architecture traits, ear leaf chlorophyll concentration, and grain yield components decreased linearly with increasing plant populations in both seasons. There was a quadratic response in maize grain yield to plant population, and it was maximized with 78,688 plants ha -1 in the summer, and 71,206 plants ha -1 in the winter. Our results show preliminary evidence that regardless of row spacing, maize grain yield can be maximized with DKB390 hybrid (single cross) with 78,500 plants ha -1 in the summer, and BG7049YH hybrid (three-way) with 71,000 plants ha -1 in the winter season.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have shown that under high planting densities, more attention should be paid to changes in photosynthetic characteristics associated with canopy structure and that improvements in the yield of maize crops should be promoted through the development of cultivation and management coordination groups and individuals (Sarlangue et al, 2007; Niu et al, 2013). Therefore, optimum population structure is essential for high yield under high density conditions (Maddonni et al, 2001; Milander et al, 2016). Mixed cropping enhanced the complementarity between plant types and populations, improved the population canopy structure, and increased use of the space and natural resources (Daellenbach et al, 2005; Wei et al, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mixed Cropping of Different Hybrids of Maize Optimizes Canopy Structure and Promotes Higher Grain Yield

Zhang

et al. 2019

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under high‐density planting, mixed cropping planting pattern can potentially optimize maize (Zea mays L.) canopy architecture and ultimately improve grain yield. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effects of three plant patterns combined with three plant population densities (67,500, 82,500, and 97,500 plants·ha−1) on canopy architecture and grain yield. Zhengdan 958 (ZD958) and Denghai 605 (DH605) were used as experimental materials. Three different planting patterns were: mixture (M), random sowing after mixing seeds of the two hybrids in the same proportion; 1:1, one row of ZD958 and one row of DH605; and two monoculture systems, SZD958 and SDH605, as controls. A 3‐yr study demonstrated that the mixed cropping treatments (M and 1:1) at low density (LD) showed no significant difference on light transmission, leaf area index (LAI), canopy apparent photosynthesis (CAP), and canopy respiration (CR), compared with the two monocultures. However, at a medium and high density (MD and HD), mixed cropping was characterized with higher light transmission to the ear and lower layers of the canopy during grain filling than that of monoculture treatments, while no significant differences between M and 1:1 treatments. Moreover, mixed cropping treatments maintained a higher LAI, CAP, lower CR, and increased the whole and post‐silking dry matter accumulation. Grain yields were higher under mixed cropping at MD and high density (HD), while no significant differences between M and 1:1 treatments. Relative to SZD958 and SDH605, the grain yields in the M treatment were 10% and 8% higher at MD, and 7% and 5% higher at HD, respectively. Mixed cropping optimized the canopy structure, maintained higher LAI and CAP during the grain filling period, reduced respiration, and increased aboveground dry matter at maturity. These improvements also result in higher grain yield. Core Ideas Mixed cropping facilitated the formation of a high‐efficiency canopy structure. Mixed cropping delayed the rate of leaf senescence, maintained higher LAI and CAP during the grain filling period. Mixed cropping increased aboveground dry matter weight at physiological maturity, and ultimately led to higher grain yield, especially medium density.

show abstract

Plant Population Influence on Maize Yield Components in Croatia and Nebraska

Cited by 27 publications

References 28 publications

Hybrid maturity influence on maize yield and yield component response to plant population in Croatia and Nebraska

Hybrid maturity influence on maize yield and yield component response to plant population in Croatia and Nebraska

Agronomic Responses of Maize Hybrids to Row Spacing and Plant Population in the Summer and Winter Seasons in Brazil

Mixed Cropping of Different Hybrids of Maize Optimizes Canopy Structure and Promotes Higher Grain Yield

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About