Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T22:22:43.914Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on the effect of genotype, density and row width on the yield and quality of forage maize

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. H. Phipps
R. H. Phipps
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AT
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The results are presented from a factorial experiment on the effects of genotype (Julia, Inra 200 and Caldera 535), density (4·9, 11·0 and 16·7 plants/m2) and row width (70 and 35 cm) on the quantity and quality of maize produced 136 days after emergence.

The later maturing the variety, the higher was the dry matter yield, but the lower was the dry matter percentage. There was little advantage in favour of the high density when compared with the medium density, while row width did not markedly affect the production character measured. Both density and variety significantly influenced the ripe ear. The dried grain/ear for the low, medium and high densities was 111, 89 and 74 g respectively. However, at the highest density nitrogen content, dry matter digestibility and digestible organic matter in the dry matter were all slightly reduced. With the exception of magnesium, the mineral contents showed similar trends.

Type
Short Note
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 84 , Issue 3 , June 1975 , pp. 567 - 569
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

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

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
Bunting, E. S. & Blackman, G. E. (1951). Assessment of factors controlling the productivity of maize in England. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 51, 271–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunting, E. S. & Gunn, R. E. (1973). Plant Breeding Institute, Annual Report (1972), pp. 108–11.Google Scholar
Bunting, E. S. & Willey, L. A. (1959). The cultivation of maize for fodder and ensilage. Part 1. The effect of changes in plant density. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 52, 313–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E., Foot, A. S. & Rowland, S. J. (1951). American hybrid maize for silage in the South of England. I. The yield and composition with special reference to plant population and nitrogenous fertiliser. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 41, 282–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
N.I.A.B. (1974). Recommended list of forage maize varieties.Google Scholar
N.I.R.D. Annual Report 1947, pp. 47.Google Scholar
N.I.R.D. Annual Report 1948, pp. 18.Google Scholar
N.I.R.D. Annual Report 1949, pp. 21.Google Scholar