HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (10) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Calviño, P. A. Articles by Sadras, V. O. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Calviño, P. A. Articles by Sadras, V. O. Agricola Articles by Calviño, P. A. Articles by Sadras, V. O. Related Collections Water Use Maize Maize Management

CORN

Maize Yield as Affected by Water Availability, Soil Depth, and Crop Management

^a CREA Tandil, Bolívar 710, Tandil 7000, Argentina
^b Universidad de Mar del Plata-INTA Balcarce, CC 276, Balcarce 7620, Argentina
^c CSIRO, PMB 2, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia

^* Corresponding author (pcalvino{at}infovia.com.ar)

Received for publication October 16, 2001. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of rainfall, soil depth, and crop management practices on the yield of dryland maize (Zea mays L.) crops of the Argentine Pampas. We were concerned with the relevance of known physiological mechanisms in commercial crops and with developing a framework to quantify the impact of improved management practices on crop yield. Our approach included three steps. First, baseline functions were developed to quantify the relationship between yield and water availability (W) during the critical period for kernel set. Second, baseline functions were tested using an independent data set. Third, using the baseline functions as benchmarks, the effects on yield of soil depth and crop management practices were evaluated. Yield varied between 4.2 and 10 t ha^-1, and most of this variation (>84%) was accounted for by W during the period bracketing flowering. Shallow soils presented lower yield than deep soils at a given rainfall. Using yield vs. W functions to account for the effect of variation in W, we quantified the impact of crop management on productivity. Technology-related yield increases were (a) 2.3 t ha^-1 from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s, mainly explained by P fertilization, better and earlier weed control, and improved hybrids; (b) 0.9 t ha^-1 from the mid-1990s to 1996–1998, related to no-till and higher plant density; and (c) 0.8 t ha^-1 from 1996–1998 to 1999–2000, mainly explained by enhanced rates of N fertilization.

Abbreviations: ET_max, maximum evapotranspiration • PAW, plant available soil water • W, water availability • W₁, water use by the crop from 20 d before to 20 d after flowering • W_2, rainfall from 20 d before to 20 d after flowering plus available soil water at the beginning of this period • W₃, rainfall from 20 d before to 20 d after flowering • W_4, rainfall from 30 d before to 20 d after flowering • Y, difference between actual yield and calculated yield

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. C. Mason, D. Kathol, K. M. Eskridge, and T. D. Galusha Yield Increase Has Been More Rapid for Maize than for Grain Sorghum Crop Sci., July 1, 2008; 48(4): 1560 - 1568. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. R. Capristo, R. H. Rizzalli, and F. H. Andrade Ecophysiological Yield Components of Maize Hybrids with Contrasting Maturity Agron. J., June 26, 2007; 99(4): 1111 - 1118. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. L. Ma, K. D. Subedi, and T. Q. Zhang Pre-Sidedress Nitrate Test and Other Crop-Based Indicators for Fresh Market and Processing Sweet Corn Agron. J., January 1, 2007; 99(1): 174 - 183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				X. Zhang, D. Pei, S. Chen, H. Sun, and Y. Yang Performance of Double-Cropped Winter Wheat-Summer Maize under Minimum Irrigation in the North China Plain Agron. J., October 31, 2006; 98(6): 1620 - 1626. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]