Leaf Removal Affects Maize Morphology and Grain Yield

Liu, Guangzhou; Yang, Yunshan; Liu, Wanmao; Guo, Xiaoxia; Xue, Jun; Ming, Bo; Wang, Keru; Li, Shaokun

doi:10.3390/agronomy10020269

Cited by 28 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increasing plant density is an important way to improve maize grain yield, as was verified in our previous study 7 , 29 , 30 . In the present study, the grain yields were universally more than 11.0 Mg ha −1 (Table S1 ), and the highest obtained yield was 23.9 Mg ha −1 , which was obtained at a density of 10.5 plants m −2 (data not shown, Experiment II).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

“…In the present study, it was found that the leaf angle above the ear was positively correlated with marginal superiority (Table 1 , Fig. 1 C), which indicated that compact cultivars had more reasonable light distribution and thus weak competitiveness and weak marginal superiority 12 , 23 , 28 , which might have contributed to their high grain yields 30 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Marginal superiority of maize: an indicator for density tolerance under high plant density

Liu

Yang

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marginal superiority is a common phenomenon in crops, and is caused by the competitiveness of individual plant for resources and crop adaptability to crowded growth conditions. In this study, in order to clarify the response of marginal superiority to maize morphology and plant-density tolerance, field experiments without water and nutrition stress were conducted at Qitai Farm in Xinjiang, China, in 2013–2014 and 2016–2019. The results showed that no more than three border rows of all the cultivars had marginal superiority under high density, about 90% of all the cultivars had no more than two border row that had marginal superiority and a significant negative correlation was observed between marginal superiority and population grain yield (first border row: y = − 2.193x + 213.9, p < 0.05; second border row: y = − 2.076x + 159.2, p < 0.01). Additionally, marginal superiority was found to have a significant positive relationship with plant density (first border row: y = 6.049x + 73.76, p < 0.01; second border row: y = 1.88x + 95.41, p < 0.05) and the average leaf angle above the ear (first border row: y = 2.306x + 103.1, p < 0.01). These results indicated that the smaller the leaf angle above the ear, the weaker the marginal superiority and the higher the grain yield. It suggests that the magnitude of marginal superiority in the border rows can be an indicator for plant-density tolerance under high density. What’s more, cultivars with small leaf angle above the ear can be selected to weaken the marginal superiority and improve grain yield under high plant density. Conversely, cultivars with a large leaf angle above the ear can be selected to achieve higher individual yield in intercropping systems with no more than four rows alternated with other crops.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

Marginal superiority of maize: an indicator for density tolerance under high plant density

Liu

Yang

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The length (L) and maximum leaf width (Wmax) of each live leaf was measured, and the leaf area was calculated according to the formula of leaf area = L × Wmax × 0.75 [42,43]. The total leaf area per plant at silking maturity was defined as the maximum leaf area, which was measured for five plants per plot at the silking stage; the maximum leaf area index (LAImax) was calculated as follows: LAImax = total leaf area per plant × N/S, where N is the number of plants within a unit area of ground and S is the unit area of ground [41,43]. After physiological maturity, all plants in the central four rows of each plot, representing an area of 13 m 2 , were harvested manually to measure the grain yield.…”

Section: Sampling and Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The plants were separated into the stem, leaf, sheath, tassel, bract, kernel, and cob fractions and dried at 85 • C to a constant weight. The length (L) and maximum leaf width (Wmax) of each live leaf was measured, and the leaf area was calculated according to the formula of leaf area = L × Wmax × 0.75 [42,43]. The total leaf area per plant at silking maturity was defined as the maximum leaf area, which was measured for five plants per plot at the silking stage; the maximum leaf area index (LAImax) was calculated as follows: LAImax = total leaf area per plant × N/S, where N is the number of plants within a unit area of ground and S is the unit area of ground [41,43].…”

Section: Sampling and Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Change in Maize Final Leaf Numbers and Its Effects on Biomass and Grain Yield across China

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The final leaf number is an important morphological characteristic of maize (Zea mays L.) and is therefore an important input parameter in some maize crop models. In this study, field experiments were conducted from 2013 to 2016 at 23 sites across China, which were located between latitudes of 26°30′ and 46°45′ N, focusing on five modern maize cultivars, in order to determine the amplitude of variation in mean leaf numbers between each cultivar, identify differences between the mean leaf numbers of cultivars under different climatic conditions, and clarify the effects of the differences in final leaf numbers on aboveground dry matter (DM) and grain yield. The results showed that the mean final leaf numbers increased in the order of XY335 < NH101 < ZD909 < ZD958 < DH11 among the five cultivars, with the wide distribution ranges of final leaf numbers being 17.0–23.3 (DH11), 16.7–22.3 (ZD958), 16.7–22.0 (ZD909), 16.7–22.3 (NH101), and 17.0–22.0 (XY335) across all locations. In addition, leaf numbers above and below the primary ear showed the same trends with the mean final leaf numbers for the same cultivars. Many climatic factors were found to significantly affect the final leaf numbers across four maize-growing regions in China, and the result of stepwise regression indicated that the influences of photoperiod and temperature, in particular, were greater than other climatic factors for these cultivars. Finally, there were found to be significant and positive relationships between the final leaf number and (1) the maximum leaf area index (LAImax), (2) DM at both silking and physiological maturity, and (3) grain yield for the same cultivars across all locations. The results of this study are of great importance for guiding future trans-regional maize cultivation and further model calibration.

show abstract

“…The number, stage and position of leaves removed may determine the degree of influence on maize performance. Raza et al (2019a) and Liu et al (2020) reported yield improvement in maize by removing two uppermost leaves around silking due to enhanced light distribution to the more competent leaves. However, a severe leaf removal (50%) at 25 and 35 days after silking (Shekoofa et al, 2012) and four and six top leaves at silking (Raza et al, 2019a) caused a significant yield loss in maize.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance, radiation capture and use by maize–mungbean–common bean sequential intercropping under different leaf removal and row orientation schemes

Worku

2020

Ex. Agric.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food security under smallholder farming can be improved through innovative intensification of cropping systems. Maize (Zea mays L.) – mungbean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek) – common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) sequential intercropping was studied to evaluate the patterns of radiation capture and radiation use efficiency and to determine the effects of leaf removal and row orientation on performance and intercropping efficiency. Sequential intercropping captured 1039 MJ m−2 photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) accounting for 70% of incident seasonal PAR. The corresponding sole stands for maize captured 41%, mungbean 29%, common bean 34% and mungbean–common bean 63%. Intercropped components had interception ratios of 0.98, 0.31 and 0.61 for maize, mungbean and common bean, respectively. Associated maize used intercepted light with similar efficiency, mungbean with greater efficiency and common bean with lesser efficiency compared to sole crops. Maize leaf removal and row orientation had no significant effect on performance and partial land equivalent ratio (LER) of maize. Leaf removal under East–West (EW) orientation increased grain yield by 96%, total biomass by 63%, partial LER by 92%, in common bean and total LER by 7%. Leaf removal also improved grain yield, biomass yield, partial LER, in common bean and total LER during the wetter year of 2013. Similarly, EW orientation was advantageous in 2013 raising total LER by 8%. Maize leaf removal and EW row orientation had synergistic effects on intercropping efficiency and economic benefit and both have exerted positive influence under favourable weather. Total LER values of 1.47 in 2013 and 1.29 in 2015 had revealed greater biological efficiency for intercropping during both years though it was more profitable in 2013. Thus, the cropping system can be adopted under timely onset of the rainy season using EW row orientation while leaf removal can also be practiced depending on weather conditions and convenience.

show abstract

Leaf Removal Affects Maize Morphology and Grain Yield

Cited by 28 publications

References 38 publications

Marginal superiority of maize: an indicator for density tolerance under high plant density

Marginal superiority of maize: an indicator for density tolerance under high plant density

Change in Maize Final Leaf Numbers and Its Effects on Biomass and Grain Yield across China

Performance, radiation capture and use by maize–mungbean–common bean sequential intercropping under different leaf removal and row orientation schemes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About