Evaluation of Physiological Responses of Maize Hybrids to different Nitrogen levels in Kerman Province, Iran

پژوهشهای زراعی ایران

Article 10, Volume 15, Issue 2 - Serial Number 46, July 2017, Pages 463-476   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/gsc.v15i2.60121

Authors

M Madadizadeh¹; J Kambouzia^{* 1}; S Soufizadeh¹; B Panahi²

¹University of Shahid Beheshti, Tehran

²Kerman Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center

Abstract

Introduction Nitrogen is one of the most abundant elements on earth and major essential for crop growth and development that is heavily used in modern agriculture to maximize yields. Among cereals, maize (Zea mays L.) is an important food and feed crop which ranks third after wheat and rice in the world. As N fertilizer costs remain relatively high and environmental concerns over excessive N application increase, the objectives of the present study were: (i) to compare maize hybrids growth and yield responses to N rates, (ii) to determine optimum N rate for maize grain yield production, (iii) to explore the physiological functions controlling maize growth and yield and (iv) to identify more effective physiological indices in maize grain production under N stress as well as potential condition.

Materials and Methods Two field experiments were conducted in 2014 and 2015 at the Experimental Field of Kerman Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, Kerman, Iran. The experiment was laid out as a randomized complete block design with factorial arrangement of treatments and three replications. Four nitrogen rates (0, 92, 220 and 368 kg N ha-1) were applied to three maize hybrids (KSC 704, Maxima and TWC 604). Statistical analysis was done using SAS software (version 9.4).

Results and Discussion Due to a significant lack of homogeneity of variance across the two years, data from the two years were treated as independent experiments and analyzed separately. Results showed that both N rates and hybrids had significant effect on growth indices and maize grain yield. The interaction between genotype and N rate was significant for grain yield in 2015 (P < 0.01). Thus, physical slicing was used to do mean comparison. Results showed that KSC 704 and Maxima had quite similar responses to N rates and with an increase in N fertilization, their grain yield also increased. This response, however, was different in case of TWC 604 so that 92 kg N ha-1 showed maximum grain yield. The hybrids grain yield was lower notably in 2015 than 2014. As N rate reduced from 368 to 0 kg N ha-1, the mean grain yield of hybrids reduced by 41 % (5082.5 kg ha-1) in 2014 and 93 % (8824.6 kg ha-1) in 2015. The highest and lowest values of grain yield were belonged to 368 kg N ha-1 in 2014 (12359.3 kg ha-1) and Zero kg N ha-1 in 2015 (640 kg ha-1), respectively. Since there were not found sensible differences between weather data during growing seasons in 2014 and 2015, it can be concluded that sharp reduction of grain yield especially in 0kg ha-1 plots in second year was due to nitrogen depletion from the soil. Two previous cropping seasons were fallow, so in first year of experiment, the amount of initial nitrogen in the soil was notable (about 415 kgha-1 in 0–60 cm soil depth); while in second year soil depletion of initial nitrogen occurred by both maize crop and existence of high sand percentage in soil texture (about 85 %) that led to high nitrogen leaching from the soil. Among the indices, Leaf area index (LAI) and leaf area index duration (LAID) were known as key indices in maize grain yield. Net assimilation rate (NAR) of hybrid TWC 604 was higher than hybrids KSC 704 and Maxima throughout growing seasons in two years; while the hybrids KSC 704 and Maxima showed higher grain yield with compared to TWC 604. The reason for this is the higher LAI and LAID in hybrids KSC 704 and Maxima that resulted in higher CGR and consequently higher grain yield in these hybrids than TWC 604. Our results showed that lack of nitrogen fertilizer significantly limited LAI and LAID.

Conclusions In this study, maize grain yield increased with N application up to 368 kg ha-1. However an economic evaluation is essential in order to optimum N fertilizer recommendation. LAI and LAID were known as key indices in maize grain yield formation. Nitrogen stress decreased maize grain yield mainly by reduction in LAI and LAID. Significant yield benefits were observed in KSC 704 and maxima compared to TWC 604 in both N stress and potential conditions.

Keywords

grain yield; Growth indices; Nitrogen stress

References

1. Antonietta, M., Acciaresi, H., and Guiamet, J. 2015. Responses to N deficiency in stay green and non‐stay green argentinean hybrids of maize. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 202 (3): 231-242.

2. Azeem, K., Shah, S., Ahmad, N., Shah, ST., Khan, F., Arafat, Y., Naz, F., Azeem, I., and Ilyas, M. 2015. Physiological indices, biomass and economic yield of maize influenced by humic acid and nitrogen levels. Russian Agricultural Sciences 41:115-119.

3. Below, F., Cazetta, J., and Seebauer, J. 2000. Carbon/nitrogen interactions during ear and kernel development of maize. Physiology and modeling kernel set in maize. Crop Science Society of America and American Society of Agronomy15-24.

4. Boomsma, C. R., Santini, J. B., Tollenaar, M., and Vyn, T. J. 2009. Maize morphophysiological responses to intense crowding and low nitrogen availability: An analysis and review. Agronomy Journal 101:1426-1452.

5. Coque, M., and Gallais, A. 2007. Genetic variation among European maize varieties for nitrogen use efficiency under low and high nitrogen fertilization. Maydica 52: 383.

6. Ding, L., Wang, K., Jiang, G., Biswas, D., Xu, H., Li, L., and Li, Y. 2005. Effects of nitrogen deficiency on photosynthetic traits of maize hybrids released in different years. Annals of Botany 96: 925-930.

7. Echarte, L., Rothstein, S., and Tollenaar, M. 2008. The response of leaf photosynthesis and dry matter accumulation to nitrogen supply in an older and a newer maize hybrid. Crop Science 48: 656-665.

8. FAO. 2015. Agricultural production statistics. Available at: http://faostat.fao.org.

9. Gehl, R. J., Schmidt, J. P., Maddux, L. D., and Gordon, W. B. 2005. Corn yield response to nitrogen rate and timing in sandy irrigated soils. Agronomy Journal 97: 1230-1238.

10. Gomez, K. A., and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical procedures for agricultural research: John Wiley & Sons 704.

11. Habtegebrial, K., Singh, B., and Haile, M. 2007. Impact of tillage and nitrogen fertilization on yield, nitrogen use efficiency of tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter) and soil properties. Soil and Tillage Research94:55-63.

12. Hirel, B., Le Gouis, J., Ney, B., and Gallais, A. 2007. The challenge of improving nitrogen use efficiency in crop plants: towards a more central role for genetic variability and quantitative genetics within integrated approaches. Journal of Experimental Botany 58: 2369-2387.

13. Kaur, A., Bedi, S., Gill, G., and Kumar, M. 2012. Effect of nitrogen fertilizers on radiation use efficiency, Crop growth and yield in some maize (Zea mays L.) genotypes. Maydica 57: 75-82.

14. Khaliq, T., Ahmad, A., Hussain, A., and Ali, M. 2009. Maize hybrids response to nitrogen rates at multiple locations in semiarid environment. Pakistan Journal of Botany 41: 207-224.

15. Khan, A., Shah, Z., and Shah, P. 2008. Plant density and nitrogen effects on growth dynamics, light interception and yield of maize. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 54: 401-411.

16. Khan, M., and Khan, N. 2001. Response of mustard and wheat to pre-sowing seed treatment with pyridoxine and basal level of calcium. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology 6: 300-305.

17. Mccullough, D., Aguilera, A., and Tollenaar, M. 1994a. N uptake, N partitioning, and photosynthetic N-use efficiency of an old and a new maize hybrid. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 74: 479-484.

18. Mccullough, D., Mihajlovic, M., Aguilera, A., Tollenaar, M., and Girardin, P. 1994b. Influence of N supply on development and dry matter accumulation of an old and a new maize hybrid. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 74: 471-477.

19. Milliken, G. A., and Johnson, D. E. 2009. Analysis of messy data volume 1: designed experiments: CRC Press.

20. Mohammadi Aghdam, S., Yeganehpoor, F., Kahrariyan, B., and Shabani, E. 2014. Effect of different urea levels on yield and yield components of corn 704. International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research 2: 300-305.

21. Monneveux, P., Zaidi, P., and Sanchez, C. 2005. Population density and low nitrogen affects yield-associated traits in tropical maize. Crop Science 45: 535-545.

22. O'neill, P. M., Shanahan, J. F., Schepers, J. S., and Caldwell, B. 2004. Agronomic responses of corn hybrids from different eras to deficit and adequate levels of water and nitrogen. Agronomy Journal 96: 1660-1667.

23. Ogola, J., Wheeler, T., and Harris, P. 2002. Effects of nitrogen and irrigation on water use of maize crops. Field Crops Research78: 105-117.

24. Pandey, R., Maranville, J., and Chetima, M. 2000. Deficit irrigation and nitrogen effects on maize in a Sahelian environment: II. Shoot growth, nitrogen uptake and water extraction. Agricultural Water Management46:15-27.

25. Paponov, I., Sambo, P., Presterl, T., Geiger, H., and Engels, C. 2005. Grain yield and kernel weight of two maize genotypes differing in nitrogen use efficiency at various levels of nitrogen and carbohydrate availability during flowering and grain filling. Plant and Soil 272: 111-123.

26. Raja, V. 2003. Effect of N rates and plant population on yield and quality of super sweet corn. Indian Journalof Agronomy 46: 246-249.

27. Rajcan, I., and Tollenaar, M. 1999. Source: sink ratio and leaf senescence in maize:: I. Dry matter accumulation and partitioning during grain filling. Field Crops Research 60: 245-253.

28. Tafteh, A., and Sepaskhah, A. 2012. Yield and nitrogen leaching in maize field under different nitrogen rates and partial root drying irrigation. International Journal of Plant Production 6: 93-114.

29. Uhart, S.A., and Andrade, F.H. 1995a. Nitrogen defeciency in maize: I. Effects on crop growth, development, dry matter partitioning, and kernel set. Crop Science 35: 1376-1383.

30. Uhart, S. A., and Andrade, F. H. 1995b. Nitrogen deficiency in maize: II. Carbon-nitrogen interaction effects on kernel number and grain yield. Crop Science 35: 1384-1389.

31. Uribelarrea, M., Crafts-Brandner, S. J., and Below, F. E. 2009. Physiological N response of field-grown maize hybrids (Zea mays L.) with divergent yield potential and grain protein concentration. Plant and Soil316:151-160.

32. Valentinuz, O. R., and Tollenaar, M. 2006. Effect of genotype, nitrogen, plant density, and row spacing on the area-per-leaf profile in maize. Agronomy Journal 98: 94-99.

33. Valero, J.D.J., Maturano, M., Ramirez, A.A., Martin-Benito, J.T., and Álvarez, J.O. 2005. Growth and nitrogen use efficiency of irrigated maize in a semiarid region as affected by nitrogen fertilization. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 3: 134-144.

34. Wu, Y., Liu, W., Li, X., Li, M., Zhang, D., Hao, Z., Weng, J., Xu, Y., Bai, L., and Zhang, S. 2011. Low-nitrogen stress tolerance and nitrogen agronomic efficiency among maize inbreds: comparison of multiple indices and evaluation of genetic variation. Euphytica 180: 281-290.