Please wait a minute...
Journal of Arid Land
Journal of Arid Land  2018, Vol. 10 Issue (2): 292-303    DOI: 10.1007/s40333-018-0098-7     CSTR: 32276.14.s40333-018-0098-7
Orginal Article     
Planting density affected biomass and grain yield of maize for seed production in an arid region of Northwest China
Xuelian JIANG1,2, Ling TONG1,*(), Shaozhong KANG1, Fusheng LI3, Donghao LI1, Yonghui QIN1, Rongchao SHI1, Jianbing LI4
1 Center for Agricultural Water Research in China, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China
2 Key Laboratory of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology in Universities of Shandong, Weifang University, Weifang 261061,China
3 College of Agriculture, Guangxi University, Nanning 530005, China
4 Environmental Science and Engineering Program, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George BC V2N 4Z9, Canada
Download: HTML     PDF(392KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Abstract  

Field experiments were conducted from 2012 to 2015 in an arid region of Northwest China to investigate the effects of planting density on plant growth, yield, and water use efficiency (WUE) of maize for seed production. Five planting densities of 6.75, 8.25, 9.75, 11.25and 12.75 plants/m2 were conducted in 2012, and a planting density of 14.25plants/m2 was added from 2013 to 2015.Through comparison with the AquaCrop yield model, a modified model was developed to estimate the biomass accumulation and yield under different planting densities using adjustment coefficient for normalized biomass water productivityand harvest index. It was found that the modified yield model had a better performance and could generate results with higher determination coefficient and lower error. The results indicated that higher planting density increased the leaf area index and biomass accumulation, but decreased the biomass accumulation per plant. The total yield increased rapidly as planting density increased to 11.25 plants/m2, but only a slight increase was observed when the density was greater than 11.25 plants/m2. The WUE also reached the maximum when planting density was 11.25 plants/m2, which was the recommended planting density of maize for seed production in Northwest China.

Key words： planting density      yield model      biomass accumulation      grain yield      water use efficiency      Northwest China     
Received: 22 May 2017      Published: 10 April 2018
Corresponding Authors:
About author:

The first and fourth authors contributed equally to this work.
Service
E-mail this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Xuelian JIANG
Ling TONG
Shaozhong KANG
Fusheng LI
Donghao LI
Yonghui QIN
Rongchao SHI
Jianbing LI
Cite this article:

Xuelian JIANG, Ling TONG, Shaozhong KANG, Fusheng LI, Donghao LI, Yonghui QIN, Rongchao SHI, Jianbing LI. Planting density affected biomass and grain yield of maize for seed production in an arid region of Northwest China. Journal of Arid Land, 2018, 10(2): 292-303.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1007/s40333-018-0098-7     OR     http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2018/V10/I2/292

[1] Akmal M, Asim M, Gilbert M.2014. Influence of seasonal variation on radiation use efficiency and crop growth of maize planted at various densities and nitrogen rates. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 51(4): 835-846.
[2] Allen R G, Pereira L S, RaesD, et al. 1998. Crop evaporation: guidelines for computing crop water requirements. In: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56. Rome:FAO, 300.
[3] Coetto E, Di Candillo M, CastelliF, et al.2013. Comparing solar radiation interception and use efficiency for the energy crops giant reed (Arundo donax L.) and sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench). Field Crops Research, 149: 159-166.
[4] Cox W J, Otis D J.1993. Grain and silage yield responses of commercial corn hybrids to plant densities. In: Agronomy Abstracts. Madison, Wisconsin:American Society of Agronomy, 132.
[5] Dai J L, Li W J, Tang W, et al.2015. Manipulation of dry matter accumulation and partitioning with plant density in relation to yield stability of cotton under intensive management. Field Crops Research, 180: 207-215.
[6] DeLougherty R L, Crookston R K.1979. Harvest index of corn affected by population density, maturity rating, and environment. Agronomy Journal, 71(4): 577-580.
[7] Duncan W G.1986. Planting patterns and soybean yields. Crop Science, 26(3): 584-588.
[8] El-Hendawy S E, El-Lattief E A A, Ahmed M S, et al.2008. Irrigation rate and plant density effects on yield and water use efficiency of drip-irrigated corn. Agricultural Water Management, 95(7): 836-844.
[9] Fulton J M.1970. Relationships among soil moisture stress, plant populations, row spacing and yield of corn. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 50(1): 31-38.
[10] Griesh M H, Yakout G M.2001. Effect of plant population density and nitrogen fertilization on yield and yield components of some white and yellow maize hybrids under drip irrigation system in sandy soil. In: HorstW J, SchenkM K, BürkertA, et al. Plant Nutrition. Dordrecht: Springer,810-811.
[11] Harper L A, Pallas J E Jr, Bruce R R, et al.1979. Greenhouse microclimate for tomatoes in the southeast USA. American Society for Horticultural Science, 104(5): 659-663.
[12] Hashemi-DezfouliA, HerbertS J.1992. Intensifying plant density response of corn with arti?cial shade. Agronomy Journal, 84(4): 547-551.
[13] Holt D F, Timmons D R.1968. In?uence of precipitation, soil water, and plant population interactions on corn grain yields. Agronomy Journal, 60(4): 379-381.
[14] Jiang X L, Kang S Z, Tong L, et al.2014. Crop coefficient and evapotranspiration of grain maize modified by planting density in an arid region of northwest China. Agricultural Water Management, 142: 135-143.
[15] JohnsonbRR, GreenDE, JordanCW.1982. What is the best soybean row width? A U.S. perspective. Crops and Soils Magazine, 43(4): 10-13.
[16] Kamel M S, El-Raouf M S, Mahmoud E A, et al.1983. Response of two maize varieties to different plant densities in relation to weed control treatments. Annals of Agricultural Sciences, 19: 79-93.
[17] Karlen D L, Camp C R.1985. Row spacing, plant population, and water management effects on corn in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Agronomy Journal, 77(3): 393-398.
[18] Lang A L, Pendleton J W, Dungan G H.1956. In?uence of population and nitrogen levels on yield and protein and oil contents of nine corn hybrids. Agronomy Journal, 48(7): 284-289.
[19] Legates D R, McCabe G J Jr.1999. Evaluating the use of “goodness-of-fit”measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resources Research, 35(1): 233-241.
[20] Lemcoff J H, Loomis R S.1986. Nitrogen influences on yield determination in maize. Crop Science, 26(5): 1017-1022.
[21] Li S E, Kang S Z, Li F S, et al.2008. Evapotranspiration and crop coefficient of spring maize with plastic mulch using eddy covariance in northwest China. Agricultural Water Management, 95(11): 1214-1222.
[22] Loomis R S, Connor D J.1992. Crop Ecology: Productivity and Management in Agricultural Systems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[23] Mohamed M MA.1999. Effect of some agronomic practices on corn production (Zea mays L.) under drip irrigation system. PhD Dissertation. Ismailia, Egypt: Faculty of Agriculture, Suez Canal University, 107.
[24] Olson R A, Sander D H.1988. Corn production. In: Sprague G F, Dudley J W. Corn and Corn Improvement (3rd ed.). Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, 639-686.
[25] Papadopoulos A P, Pararajasingham S.1997. The influence of plant spacing on light interception and use in greenhouse tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.): a review. Scientia Horticulturae, 69(1-2): 1-29.
[26] Qiu R J, Song J J, Du T S, et al.2013. Response of evapotranspiration and yield to planting density of solar greenhouse grown tomato in northwest China. Agricultural Water Management, 130: 44-51.
[27] Raes D, Steduto P, HsiaoT C, et al.2009. AquaCrop-The FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water:II. Main algorithms and software description. Agronomy Journal, 101(3): 438-477.
[28] Raes D, Steduto P, Hsiao C, et al.2011. AquaCrop Version 3.1Plus Reference Manual. Rome, Italy: FAO.
[29] Rahmati H.2009. Effect of plant density and nitrogen rates on yield and nitrogen efficiency of grain corn. World Applied Science Journal, 7(8): 958-961.
[30] Rana G, Katerji N.2000. Measurement and estimation of actual evapotranspiration in the field under Mediterranean climate: a review. European Journal of Agronomy, 13(2-3): 125-153.
[31] Sangoi L, Gracietti M A, Rampazzo C, et al.2002. Response of Brazilian maize hybrids from different eras to changes in plant density. Field Crops Research, 79(1): 39-51.
[32] Soliman F H, Goda A S, Ragheb M M, et al.1995. Response of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids to plant populations density under different environmental conditions. Hip International, 23(6):124-124.
[33] Steduto P, Hsiao T C, Raes D, et al.2009. AquaCrop-the FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water:I. Concepts and underlying principles. Agronomy Journal, 101(3): 426-437.
[34] Tetio-Kagho F, Gardner F P.1998. Responses of maize to plant population density. II. Reproductive development, yield, and yield adjustments. Agronomy Journal, 80(6): 935-940.
[35] Thimmappa V, Reddy M S, Reddy U, et al.2014. Effect of nitrogen levels and plant densities on growth parameters, yield attributes and yield of kharif maize (Zea mays L.). Crop Research, 47(1-3): 29-32.
[36] Westgate M E, Forcella F, Reicosky D C, et al.1997. Rapid canopy closure for maize production in the northern US corn belt: Radiation-use efficiency and grain yield. Field Crops Research, 49(2-3): 249-258.
[1] WANG Xiangyu, XU Min, KANG Shichang, LI Xuemei, HAN Haidong, LI Xingdong. Comprehensive applicability evaluation of four precipitation products at multiple spatiotemporal scales in Northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(9): 1232-1254.
[2] DU Lan, TIAN Shengchuan, ZHAO Nan, ZHANG Bin, MU Xiaohan, TANG Lisong, ZHENG Xinjun, LI Yan. Climate and topography regulate the spatial pattern of soil salinization and its effects on shrub community structure in Northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(7): 925-942.
[3] YANG Zhiwei, CHEN Rensheng, LIU Zhangwen, ZHAO Yanni, LIU Yiwen, WU Wentong. Spatiotemporal variability of rain-on-snow events in the arid region of Northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(4): 483-499.
[4] YANG Ao, TU Wenqin, YIN Benfeng, ZHANG Shujun, ZHANG Xinyu, ZHANG Qing, HUANG Yunjie, HAN Zhili, YANG Ziyue, ZHOU Xiaobing, ZHUANG Weiwei, ZHANG Yuanming. Predicting changes in the suitable habitats of six halophytic plant species in the arid areas of Northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(10): 1380-1408.
[5] Teame G KEBEDE, Emiru BIRHANE, Kiros-Meles AYIMUT, Yemane G EGZIABHER. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi improve biomass, photosynthesis, and water use efficiency of Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Miller under different water levels[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(8): 975-988.
[6] Reza DEIHIMFARD, Sajjad RAHIMI-MOGHADDAM, Farshid JAVANSHIR, Alireza PAZOKI. Quantifying major sources of uncertainty in projecting the impact of climate change on wheat grain yield in dryland environments[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(5): 545-561.
[7] Mohamed K EL-GHANNAM, Fatma WASSAR, Sabah MORSY, Mohamed HAFEZ, Chiter M PARIHAR, Kent O BURKEY, Ahmed M ABDALLAH. Controlled drainage in the Nile River delta of Egypt: a promising approach for decreasing drainage off-site effects and enhancing yield and water use efficiency of wheat[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(4): 460-476.
[8] HAN Mengxue, ZHANG Lin, LIU Xiaoqiang. Subsurface irrigation with ceramic emitters improves wolfberry yield and economic benefits on the Tibetan Plateau, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(11): 1376-1390.
[9] Halimeh PIRI, Amir NASERIN, Ammar A ALBALASMEH. Interactive effects of deficit irrigation and vermicompost on yield, quality, and irrigation water use efficiency of greenhouse cucumber[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2022, 14(11): 1274-1292.
[10] Ibtihal AL-MANTHRIA, Abdulrahim M AL-ISMAILIA, Hemesiri KOTAGAMAB, Mumtaz KHANC, L H Janitha JEEWANTHAD. Water, land, and energy use efficiencies and financial evaluation of air conditioner cooled greenhouses based on field experiments[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2021, 13(4): 375-387.
[11] PEI Yanwu, HUANG Laiming, SHAO Ming'an, ZHANG Yinglong. Responses of Amygdalus pedunculata Pall. in the sandy and loamy soils to water stress[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2020, 12(5): 791-805.
[12] JIA Hao, WANG Zhenhua, ZHANG Jinzhu, LI Wenhao, REN Zuoli, JIA Zhecheng, WANG Qin. Effects of biodegradable mulch on soil water and heat conditions, yield and quality of processing tomatoes by drip irrigation[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2020, 12(5): 819-836.
[13] HUA Ding, HAO Xingming, ZHANG Ying, QIN Jingxiu. Uncertainty assessment of potential evapotranspiration in arid areas, as estimated by the Penman-Monteith method[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2020, 12(1): 166-180.
[14] ZHOU Honghua, CHEN Yaning, ZHU Chenggang, YANG Yuhai, YE Zhaoxia. Water transport and water use efficiency differ among Populus euphratica Oliv. saplings exposed to saline water irrigation[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2019, 11(6): 866-879.
[15] Shanshan JIN, Youke WANG, Xing WANG, Yonghong BAI, Leigang SHI. Effect of pruning intensity on soil moisture and water use efficiency in jujube (Ziziphus jujube Mill.) plantations in the hilly Loess Plateau Region, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2019, 11(3): 446-460.