Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density

Autores
Hernández, Fernando; Amelong, Agustina; Borras, Lucas
Año de publicación
2014
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Maize (Zea mays L.) stand density selection is an important management practice because yield is maximized at a particularoptimum value. Optimum stand density (OSD) varies across environments, and many have argued that current commercialgenotypes differ in their optimum stand density for a similar environment. We tested this concept by planting 11 Argentineancommercial genotypes from four seed companies at a range of stand densities (1, 8, and 16 plants m?2) in two environments.Genotypes differed in their yield response to changes in stand density, and their OSD varied from 7.3 to 11.9 plants m?2. Yield oftested genotypes was similar at the lowest stand density but different at the highest density, indicating no differences in potentialyield per plant but significant differences in crowding tolerance. When using a crop growth and biomass partitioning frameworkfor understanding kernel set differences among genotypes in their response to stand density, hybrids differed in most measuredtraits, showing differential strategies for coping with stress tolerance. Under high stand density conditions, genotypic strategiesfor avoiding barrenness were key for hybrid tolerance to crowding stress. We conclude that stand density management needs totake into account not only the environment but also the specific genotype, especially under high density management systems.
Fil: Hernández, Fernando. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Amelong, Agustina. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Borras, Lucas. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Materia
Maize
Stand Density
Yield
Optimum Stand Density
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/30377
Acceder
id CONICETDig_57ae9b60fa76bde54955a69ea1a2b8b1
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/30377
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand DensityHernández, FernandoAmelong, AgustinaBorras, LucasMaizeStand DensityYieldOptimum Stand Densityhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/4.1https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4Maize (Zea mays L.) stand density selection is an important management practice because yield is maximized at a particularoptimum value. Optimum stand density (OSD) varies across environments, and many have argued that current commercialgenotypes differ in their optimum stand density for a similar environment. We tested this concept by planting 11 Argentineancommercial genotypes from four seed companies at a range of stand densities (1, 8, and 16 plants m?2) in two environments.Genotypes differed in their yield response to changes in stand density, and their OSD varied from 7.3 to 11.9 plants m?2. Yield oftested genotypes was similar at the lowest stand density but different at the highest density, indicating no differences in potentialyield per plant but significant differences in crowding tolerance. When using a crop growth and biomass partitioning frameworkfor understanding kernel set differences among genotypes in their response to stand density, hybrids differed in most measuredtraits, showing differential strategies for coping with stress tolerance. Under high stand density conditions, genotypic strategiesfor avoiding barrenness were key for hybrid tolerance to crowding stress. We conclude that stand density management needs totake into account not only the environment but also the specific genotype, especially under high density management systems.Fil: Hernández, Fernando. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Amelong, Agustina. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Borras, Lucas. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaAmer Soc Agronomy2014-10info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/30377Hernández, Fernando; Amelong, Agustina; Borras, Lucas; Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density; Amer Soc Agronomy; Agronomy Journal; 106; 6; 10-2014; 2316-23240002-1962CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/aj/abstracts/106/6/2316info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.2134/agronj14.0183info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-03T10:01:27Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/30377instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-03 10:01:27.628CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
title Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
spellingShingle Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
Hernández, Fernando
Maize
Stand Density
Yield
Optimum Stand Density
title_short Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
title_full Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
title_fullStr Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
title_full_unstemmed Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
title_sort Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Hernández, Fernando
Amelong, Agustina
Borras, Lucas
author Hernández, Fernando
author_facet Hernández, Fernando
Amelong, Agustina
Borras, Lucas
author_role author
author2 Amelong, Agustina
Borras, Lucas
author2_role author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Maize
Stand Density
Yield
Optimum Stand Density
topic Maize
Stand Density
Yield
Optimum Stand Density
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4.1
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Maize (Zea mays L.) stand density selection is an important management practice because yield is maximized at a particularoptimum value. Optimum stand density (OSD) varies across environments, and many have argued that current commercialgenotypes differ in their optimum stand density for a similar environment. We tested this concept by planting 11 Argentineancommercial genotypes from four seed companies at a range of stand densities (1, 8, and 16 plants m?2) in two environments.Genotypes differed in their yield response to changes in stand density, and their OSD varied from 7.3 to 11.9 plants m?2. Yield oftested genotypes was similar at the lowest stand density but different at the highest density, indicating no differences in potentialyield per plant but significant differences in crowding tolerance. When using a crop growth and biomass partitioning frameworkfor understanding kernel set differences among genotypes in their response to stand density, hybrids differed in most measuredtraits, showing differential strategies for coping with stress tolerance. Under high stand density conditions, genotypic strategiesfor avoiding barrenness were key for hybrid tolerance to crowding stress. We conclude that stand density management needs totake into account not only the environment but also the specific genotype, especially under high density management systems.
Fil: Hernández, Fernando. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Amelong, Agustina. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Borras, Lucas. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Cátedra de Cultivo Extensivos Cereales y Oleaginosas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description Maize (Zea mays L.) stand density selection is an important management practice because yield is maximized at a particularoptimum value. Optimum stand density (OSD) varies across environments, and many have argued that current commercialgenotypes differ in their optimum stand density for a similar environment. We tested this concept by planting 11 Argentineancommercial genotypes from four seed companies at a range of stand densities (1, 8, and 16 plants m?2) in two environments.Genotypes differed in their yield response to changes in stand density, and their OSD varied from 7.3 to 11.9 plants m?2. Yield oftested genotypes was similar at the lowest stand density but different at the highest density, indicating no differences in potentialyield per plant but significant differences in crowding tolerance. When using a crop growth and biomass partitioning frameworkfor understanding kernel set differences among genotypes in their response to stand density, hybrids differed in most measuredtraits, showing differential strategies for coping with stress tolerance. Under high stand density conditions, genotypic strategiesfor avoiding barrenness were key for hybrid tolerance to crowding stress. We conclude that stand density management needs totake into account not only the environment but also the specific genotype, especially under high density management systems.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-10
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/30377
Hernández, Fernando; Amelong, Agustina; Borras, Lucas; Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density; Amer Soc Agronomy; Agronomy Journal; 106; 6; 10-2014; 2316-2324
0002-1962
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/30377
identifier_str_mv Hernández, Fernando; Amelong, Agustina; Borras, Lucas; Genotypic Differences among Argentinean Maize Hybrids in Yield Response to Stand Density; Amer Soc Agronomy; Agronomy Journal; 106; 6; 10-2014; 2316-2324
0002-1962
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/aj/abstracts/106/6/2316
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.2134/agronj14.0183
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Amer Soc Agronomy
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Amer Soc Agronomy
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1842269695543083008
score 13.13397

Publicaciones similares