Yield determination of maize hybrids under limited irrigation

Zhao, Jin; Xue, Qingwu; Hao, Baozhen; Marek, Thomas H.; Jessup, Kirk E.; Xu, Wenwei; Bean, Brent W.; Colaizzi, Paul D.

doi:10.1080/15427528.2019.1606129

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this 3-yr study, we were not able to detect significant differences in grain or biomass yield among the three maize hybrids. Other field studies in the THP (Mounce et al, 2016;Zhao et al, 2019) observed similar yield responses but for differing hybrid comparisons. In contrast, Hao, Xue, Marek, Jessup, Hou, et al (2015) concluded that significant yield benefits could be obtained with a drought-tolerant P1151 compared with conventional hybrid (33D49) under water-limited conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…In this 3‐yr study, we were not able to detect significant differences in grain or biomass yield among the three maize hybrids. Other field studies in the THP (Mounce et al., 2016; Zhao et al., 2019) observed similar yield responses but for differing hybrid comparisons. In contrast, Hao, Xue, Marek, Jessup, Hou, et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…ing drought tolerance based on industry ratings have demonstrated some differences in yield components but typically with no consistent yield advantage across study years (Hao, Xue, Marek, Jessup, Becker, et al, 2015;Hao, Xue, Marek, Jessup, Hou, et al, 2015;Mounce et al, 2016;Zhao et al, 2018;Zhao et al, 2019).…”

Section: Core Ideasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All hybrids, independent of being labeled as drought tolerant or not, were found to respond similarly with respect to grain yield and yield components. Field studies in the THP comparing hybrids with varying drought tolerance based on industry ratings have demonstrated some differences in yield components but typically with no consistent yield advantage across study years (Hao, Xue, Marek, Jessup, Becker, et al., 2015; Hao, Xue, Marek, Jessup, Hou, et al., 2015; Mounce et al., 2016; Zhao et al., 2018; Zhao et al., 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Response of maize hybrids under limited irrigation capacities: Yield and yield components

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grain yield of maize (Zea mays L.) in the semiarid Texas High Plains (THP) is greatly reduced when irrigation cannot meet peak water requirements. Drought‐tolerant hybrids may mitigate yield losses resulting from water deficits. We examined the effect of irrigation capacity (8.47 and 4.23 mm d–1) and planting rates (74,000 and 95,000 seeds ha–1) during three growing seasons (2016–2018) on grain yield and yield components of three maize hybrids, two of which were considered drought tolerant. Crop water deficits at the low irrigation level usually extended temporally from seventh leaf collar to dough stage. Mean grain yields varied from 5.2 Mg ha–1 under the low irrigation level to 19.9 Mg ha–1 at the high irrigation level. Hybrid did not influence grain yield and aboveground biomass in all 3 yr. Although kernel number and kernel mass were significantly influenced by hybrid across all years, this did not result in grain yield differences because greater kernel mass compensated for reduced kernel number. Harvest index did not significantly differ between conventional and drought‐tolerant hybrids. In 2016, grain yield was significantly influenced by plant density only at the low irrigation level, with 44% greater yields at the low plant density. For the patterns and level of water stress observed during these three growing seasons, the three hybrids performed similarly. Besides using hybrids well adapted to the region, mitigation of yield reductions under limited irrigation capacities in the THP can be achieved by concentrating irrigation on less land area and optimizing planting rates.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Core Ideasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Response of maize hybrids under limited irrigation capacities: Yield and yield components

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparisons of drought with nondrought-tolerant hybrids have sometimes shown no differences in water use and grain yields (Nielsen & Schneekloth, 2018). Other researchers have observed some differences in crop water use patterns (Hao, Xue, Marek, Jessup, Becker, et al, 2015;Mounce et al, 2016;Zhao et al, 2018) but typically with no yield advantages under water deficit (Mounce et al, 2016;Zhao et al, 2018;Zhao et al, 2019). In these irrigated field studies, crop water stress was achieved during the growing season by imposing a targeted stress level at particular crop development stages or by adjusting irrigation levels based on a constant crop evapotranspiration (ET a ) as a fraction of fully irrigated crop ET (ET m ).…”

Section: Core Ideasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of maize hybrids under limited irrigation capacities: Crop water use

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maize (Zea mays L.) production in the semiarid Texas High Plains (THP) often suffers exceptional yield reductions when irrigation cannot meet seasonal and peak water requirements. Drought-tolerant hybrids may reduce yield losses resulting from water stress by altering seasonal soil water use patterns to permit greater uptake during yield-sensitive growth stages. We examined the effect of irrigation capacity (8.47 and 4.23 mm d −1 ) and planting rates (74,000 and 95,000 seeds ha −1 ) during three growing seasons (2016-2018) on water use of three maize hybrids, two of which were considered drought tolerant. Changes in stored soil water were examined for the entire profile and for segregated depth increments (0-0.4, 0.4-0.8, and 0.8-1.4 m).Seasonal crop evapotranspiration averaged 754 and 592 mm across years for the high and low irrigation capacities, respectively. Irrigation level significantly affected seasonal change in stored soil water in 1 yr (2018) with greater depletion at harvest under the low irrigation capacity. Soil water use at 0.8-1.4 m comprised <4% of seasonal water use. Hybrids did not differ with respect to growing season crop water use. Stored soil water throughout the growing season within the examined depth increments were similar among hybrids and plant densities, with significant differences occurring infrequently and being inconsistent across years. Drought-tolerant traits may have a diminished effect on transpiration in this study because of the dense soillimiting root proliferation or the high atmospheric demand at the study location.

show abstract

Response of commercial classes of wheat to contrasting irrigation regimes

Ledesma-Ramírez,

Solís-Moya,

Mariscal-Amaro

et al. 2023

CEREAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 3-year experiment was established in which four wheat classes were evaluated including soft, medium hard, hard and durum wheat with the objective to determine which class is more efficient in water use under reduced irrigation. The experiments were established during three growing seasons (2016–2018). The amount of water applied were: 26, 34 and 54 cm distributed in 2, 3 and 5 irrigations, respectively. Eighteen genotypes from each wheat class were evaluated in an alpha lattice design with three replicates. Phenological data, yield and yield components were analyzed. Yield in the two-irrigation regime ranged from 3974 to 5436, 4453 to 6909 under three and 6177 to 9107 kg ha−1 under five. Correlation analysis showed that with two irrigations there is a greater association of grain yield with thousand kernel weight (TKW), but under three and five irrigations, grain yield was associated to a greater degree with kernel number per unit area (KNO). When analyzing the grain yield, it was observed that under reduced irrigation (2 and 3 irrigations), bread wheats were superior to durum wheats regardless of the class. Under five irrigations, durum wheats showed the highest yield (8303 kg ha−1); however, they were only significantly superior (Tukey ≤ 0.05) to the hard wheats (7721 kg ha−1). In general, the tested wheats showed higher water efficiency (considered as water productivity) under reduced irrigation than under normal irrigation. The lowest losses in water productivity when going from two to five irrigations were observed in durum wheats (0.17 kg m−3) and the highest losses in the hard wheats (0.38 kg m−3).

show abstract

Yield determination of maize hybrids under limited irrigation

Cited by 10 publications

References 45 publications

Response of maize hybrids under limited irrigation capacities: Yield and yield components

Response of maize hybrids under limited irrigation capacities: Yield and yield components

Response of maize hybrids under limited irrigation capacities: Crop water use

Response of commercial classes of wheat to contrasting irrigation regimes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About