Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-mhpxw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T06:00:48.438Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Interactions between genotype and density on the yield components of Zea mays: I. Production of dry matter by the shoot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. D. Voldeng
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Science, University of Oxford
G. E. Blackman
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Science, University of Oxford

Summary

The interacting effects of genotype and density on the yield of dry matter by mature shoots were examined at Oxford, England. There were six hybrids, either pure dent or flint × dent crosses, together with two open-pollinated flint varieties of very early maturity. Over a range of 15 densities (5·0–30·8 plants/m2) for all the genotypes the relationship between the yield of the shoot and density can be adequately described by the reciprocal equation 1/w = A + Bp, where w = weight per plant, p = number of plants per unit area and A and B are constants for any particular set of conditions. Values of both 1/B (asymptotic yields) and 1/A (weight per plant at very low densities) were dependent upon the genotype. In a regression analysis between 1/w and p, the variance of 1/w was over 40 times as great at high as at low densities and a weighted analysis was necessary. Some hybrids approached maximal yields at 5 plants/m2, whereas others required a density of 10–15 plants/m2. The possible reasons for these interactions are discussed and improvements in experimental design suggested.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alessi, J. & Power, J. F. (1965). Influence of moisture, plant population and nitrogen on dryland corn in the northern plains. Agronomy Journal 57, 611–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1967). Systematic designs for spacing experiments. Experimental Agriculture 3, 7385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunting, E. S. (1971). Plant density and yield of shoot dry material in maize in England. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 77, 175–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, C. M. (1968). The breeding of crop ideotypes. Euphytica 17, 385403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downey, L. A. (1971). Plant density-yield relations in maize. Journal of Australian Institute of Agricultural Science 37, 138–46.Google Scholar
Duncan, W. G. (1971). Leaf angles, leaf area, and canopy photosynthesis. Crop Science 11, 482–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eddowes, E. E. (1969). Physiological studies of competition in Zea mays L. II. Effect of competition among maize plants. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 72, 195202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelder, J. A. (1963). Yield-density relations and Jarvis' lucerne data. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 61, 427–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obeid, M., Machin, D. & Harper, J. L. (1967). Influence of density on plant to plant variation in fiber flax, Linum usitatissimum L. Crop Science 7, 471–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, F. S. (1959). A flexible growth function for empirical use. Journal of Experimental Botany 10, 290300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. & Torrie, J. H. 1960. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, with Special Reference to the Biological Sciences, pp. 80–1. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Voldeng, H. D. (1971). Factors affecting the growth of Zea mays L., D.Phil. Thesis, University of Oxford, England.Google Scholar
Voldeng, H. D. & Blackman, G. E. (1973). The interrelated effects of stage of development and seasonal changes in light and temperature on the components of growth in Zea mays. Annals of Botany 3, 895904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, R. W. & Heath, S. B. (1969). The quantitative relationships between plant population and crop yield. Advances in Agronomy 21, 281321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar