SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry / 2014 / Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 2

Effects of different irrigation methods and plant density on silage yield and yield components of PR 31Y43 hybrid corn cultivar

Muhammet KARAŞAHİN
Pages
159–168
Publication Date
2014-05-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, when water conservation is taken into consideration (I2, 7%; I3, 11%), subsoil irrigation becomes more important.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was conducted to determine the effects of different irrigation methods (drip I1, subsoil drip I2, and subsoil capillary I3) and different plant densities (102,040 plants ha-1, D1; 119,040 plants ha-1, D2; and 142,850 plants ha-1, D3) on the silage yield and yield components of PR 31Y43 hybrid corn cultivar (Zea mays L. indentata S.) in the years 2011 and 2012 under the ecological conditions of Eskipazar-Karabük.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In both research years, the plant densities were statistically significant for stem diameter, fresh ear ratio, fresh plant weight, silage, and dry matter yield.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, when water conservation is taken into consideration (I2, 7%; I3, 11%), subsoil irrigation becomes more important.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Key words: Drip irrigation · subsoil drip irrigation · subsoil capillary irrigation

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine the effects of different irrigation methods (drip I1, subsoil drip I2, and subsoil capillary I3) and different plant densities (102,040 plants ha-1, D1; 119,040 plants ha-1, D2; and 142,850 plants ha-1, D3) on the silage yield and yield components of PR 31Y43 hybrid corn cultivar (Zea mays L. indentata S.) in the years 2011 and 2012 under the ecological conditions of Eskipazar-Karabük. In both research years, the plant densities were statistically significant for stem diameter, fresh ear ratio, fresh plant weight, silage, and dry matter yield. The highest stem diameter, fresh ear ratio, and fresh plant weight values were obtained from D1 and D2 plant densities, and the highest silage and dry matter yields were obtained from D3 and D2 plant densities. Irrigation methods were statistically significant for fresh and dry plant weight in the second research year, and the highest values were obtained from drip irrigation. The I × D interactions were statistically significant for plant height in both research years, while they were statistically significant for number of leaves, stem diameter, fresh leaf ratio, fresh ear ratio, fresh plant weight, and silage yield in the second research year. The highest silage yield was obtained from I3 × D3 interaction. D3 and D2 plant densities in all 3 irrigation methods could be recommended for corn silage farmers. However, when water conservation is taken into consideration (I2, 7%; I3, 11%), subsoil irrigation becomes more important.

Özet

This study was conducted to determine the effects of different irrigation methods (drip I1, subsoil drip I2, and subsoil capillary I3) and different plant densities (102,040 plants ha-1, D1; 119,040 plants ha-1, D2; and 142,850 plants ha-1, D3) on the silage yield and yield components of PR 31Y43 hybrid corn cultivar (Zea mays L. indentata S.) in the years 2011 and 2012 under the ecological conditions of Eskipazar-Karabük. In both research years, the plant densities were statistically significant for stem diameter, fresh ear ratio, fresh plant weight, silage, and dry matter yield. The highest stem diameter, fresh ear ratio, and fresh plant weight values were obtained from D1 and D2 plant densities, and the highest silage and dry matter yields were obtained from D3 and D2 plant densities. Irrigation methods were statistically significant for fresh and dry plant weight in the second research year, and the highest values were obtained from drip irrigation. The I × D interactions were statistically significant for plant height in both research years, while they were statistically significant for number of leaves, stem diameter, fresh leaf ratio, fresh ear ratio, fresh plant weight, and silage yield in the second research year. The highest silage yield was obtained from I3 × D3 interaction. D3 and D2 plant densities in all 3 irrigation methods could be recommended for corn silage farmers. However, when water conservation is taken into consideration (I2, 7%; I3, 11%), subsoil irrigation becomes more important.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARAŞAHİN, M. (2014). Effects of different irrigation methods and plant density on silage yield and yield components of PR 31Y43 hybrid corn cultivar. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 2, 159–168. https://ajindex.com/articles/180140

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Adamsen FJ (1992). Irrigation method and water quality effects on corn yield in the mid-Atlantic coastal plain. Agron J 84: 837– 8 Aras İ (2006). Drip irrigation. J Field Crops CRI 15: 49–60 (in Turkish). Budaklı Çarpıcı E, Çelik N, Bayram G (2010). Yield and quality of forage maize as influenced by plant density and nitrogen rate. Turk J Field Crops 15: 128–132.
  2. Camp CR, Sadler EJ, Busscher WJ (1989). Subsurface and alternatemiddle micro irrigation for the southeastern coastal plain. ASAE Publ 32: 451–456.
  3. Charlesworth PB (2003). Investigation of the efficiency and long term performance of various sub-surface irrigation configurations under field conditions. PhD, School of Agriculture, Charles Sturt University, New South Wales, Australia. Cox B, Cherney J, Atkins P (1997). Corn silage hybrids and plant populations. What’s cropping up? 20: 12–13.
  4. Cox WJ, Cherney DJR (2001). Row spacing, plant density and nitrogen effects on corn silage. Agron J 93: 597–602.
  5. Cusicanqui JA, Lauer JG (1999). Plant density and hybrids influence on corn forage yield and quality. Agron J 91: 911–915.
  6. Evett SR, Howell AT, Schneider AD (2000). Energy and water balances for surface and subsurface drip irrigated corn. International Water and Irrigation 20: 18–22.
  7. Hammad HM, Ahmad A, Abbas F, Farhad W (2012). Optimizing water and nitrogen use for maize production under semiarid conditions. Turk J Agric For 36: 519–532.
  8. Harris G (2005). Sub-surface drip irrigation: advantages and limitations. The State of Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries 17650: 1–6.
  9. Hashemi AM, Herbert SJ, Putnam DH (2005). Yield response of corn to crowding stress. Agron J 97: 839–846.
  10. Hassanli AM, Ebrahimizadeh MA, Beecham S (2009). The effects of irrigation methods with effluent and irrigation scheduling on water use efficiency and corn yields in an arid region. Agr Water Manage 96: 93–99.
  11. Howell AT, Scheneider DA, Evet RS (1997). Subsurface and surface microirrigation of corn—southern high plains. ASAE Publ 40: 635–641.
  12. Humphreys L, Fawcett B, O’Neill Chris, Muirhead W (2005). Maize under sprinkler, drip and furrow irrigation. IREC Farmers’ Newsletter 170: 35–38.
  13. İptaş S, Acar A (2006). Effects of hybrid and row spacing on maize forage yield and quality. Plant Soil Environ 52: 515–522.
  14. Jeschke M, Curran B (2008). Plant population effects on corn silage yield and quality. Pioneer Agronomy Science 18: 1–4.
  15. Kheira AAA (2009). Comparison among different irrigation systems for deficit-irrigated