Chief EditorArvind kumar
Print ISSN 0253-150X
Online ISSN 0976-0547
NAAS Rating 4.75
Full Research Article
Yield Response of Maize to Irrigation and Nitrogen Fertilization
First Online 14-11-2022|
Methods: The irrigation was provided as factor A at four distinct rates (irrigation at 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% available water) and nitrogenous fertilizer as factor B at three dosages (75%, 100% and 125% of recommended dose) when each factor was repeated three times. Data relevant to soil and plant parameters were analyzed for variance (ANOVA) using Statistix 10.
Result: The yield and yield contributing characters of maize responded significantly to varying degrees of irrigation and N fertilizer, with the treatment I4N2 having the highest cob per plant (1.17), cob yield (16.89 t ha-1), grain yield (9.19 t ha-1), dry matter yield (10.15 t ha-1) and the treatment I3N3 provided statistically identical results as I4N2. The treatment I4N2 also resulted in maximum content of grain N (0.87%), P (0.20%) and K (0.26%). The treatment, irrigation at 80% available water with application of 100% N on recommended dose (I4N2) appeared as the most suitable package for maize cultivation in the stated region.
Irrigation and fertilizers are two of the most important inputs for higher crop productivity. Irrigation and fertilization have contributed to the advancements of soil fertility, crop productivity and food security as it affects the farm environment by altering soil water and nutrient content (Godfray et al., 2010). As a high-yielding crop, maize requires adequate soil moisture in the root zone for proper growth and development. Maize is typically planted during the dry season. The moisture level of the soil declines gradually over the dry season. Lack of water induces water deficit condition in soil and plant system. Moisture stress causes maize plant to delay tasseling and silking, as well as limits vegetative development and production of yield (Abrecht and Carberry, 1993; Singh et al., 2007). Additional irrigation is necessary during dry season for proper crop performance. Inappropriate irrigation scheduling can lead to both water wastage and decrease in crop production which ultimately results in energy loss and low returns to the farmers. So, proper irrigation planning is required for the most effective use of available water in improving maize yield.
Nitrogen (N) is a vital nutrient and plays important role in the improvement of crop production. It is an integral component of many plant structures and processes, both internal and external (Szulc et al., 2016). Maize is a nitro-positive crop which necessitates a greater amount of nitrogen for its economic production (Adhikary et al., 2020). But nitrogenous fertilizers can be raised to a certain point before losing it via leaching, runoff, volatilization and other means that plants cannot use. Thus the non-judicial use of nitrogenous fertilizers causes environmental pollution and increases farmers cost of production. To reduce nitrogen losses while also increasing crop output and farm income, an appropriate level of nitrogen fertilizer is compulsory.
World’s demand for maize is growing day by day because of its excellent nutritive values and ability to minimize reliance on rice and wheat. The high productivity of maize can be achieved under the most favourable irrigation practices with applying the needed nutrients in right amounts and at the right times. Until recent, Very limited researches are available relating to coupling effect of irrigation and nitrogen application on maize yield. Therefore, an attempt has been made to evaluate the effect of irrigation and nitrogen on the performance of maize with the goal of establishing an irrigation schedule and nitrogen dose that will result in the highest possible maize yield.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The effect of two factors was evaluated in the study. Factor A consisted of four irrigation schedules (irrigation at 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% available water) and factor B consisted of three nitrogen doses [75%, 100% and 125% of recommended dose (RD) as per fertilizer recommendation guide (FRG). The treatments were settled down in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications.
A high yielding maize variety BARI Hybrid Maize-9 was used as test crop in the experiment. A plot size of 3 m×2 m was constructed after preparing the land. The amounts of N, P, K and S were applied in various doses as urea, triple super phosphate (TSP), muriate of potash (MoP) and Gypsum depending on the treatment requirements. One third of the N and full amount of all other nutrients were applied at final land preparation before sowing. The remaining two third of N was top-dressed at knee height and tassel emergence. Two seeds at each hill were sown at a spacing of 75×25 cm on 5 December 2018. Intercultural activities were performed as per needed. The soil was moistened by ten light irrigations up to 40 days following emergence to encourage improved germination and establishment of seedlings. After that irrigation water was applied according to the treatment plan to bring the soil moisture up to field Capacity and rooting depth of the crop.
Soil available water for plant was calculated using following formula:
Available water= Field capacity-Wilting point
Irrigation requirement was calculated as follows:
IR= Irrigation requirement (cm).
MFC= Soil moisture (%) at field capacity.
MBI= Soil moisture (%) before irrigation.
ρb= Soil bulk density (g cm-3).
D= Rooting depth (cm).
The crops were harvested when around 50-60% of the cobs turned into straw color. Four plants were randomly marked for data collection. Number of cobs per plant, cob length and cob diameter were recorded at the time of each harvest and the average value of four plants was treated as one replication. Dry matter yield was estimated after drying the plants as whole plot basis. Cob yield and grain yield per plot was converted to ton per hectare.
Water use efficiency of maize was calculated from total dry matter and grain yield by using following formula:
The data on different parameters were statistically analyzed using Statistix 10 software. The difference between the treatment means were adjudged by Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) according to Gomez and Gomez (1984).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The varying degrees of irrigation had offered significant impact on maize yield attributes like cobs per plant, cob length, cob diameter, cob yield, grain yield and dry matter yield (Table 1). Treatment I3 resulted the maximum cobs per plant (1.11) followed by I4 and I2 treatment (1.08 and 1.00 respectively). The highest cob length (21.29 cm) and cob diameter (4.72 cm) was also found with I4 treatment and the lowest (20.38 and 4.52 cm respectively) was with I1 treatment. Different levels of moisture contributed significantly to cob yield (t ha-1), grain yield (t ha-1) and dry matter yield (t ha-1) of maize. I4 treatment produced significantly increased cob yield (13.93 t ha-1), grain yield (7.86 t ha-1) and dry matter yield (8.01 t ha-1) whereas the decreased results (11.11 t ha-1, 6.48 t ha-1 and 4.60 t ha-1 respectively) were found with I1 treatment. The study signified that enhancement in irrigation levels provided positive impact on plant growth and development. Increased soil moisture level led to conducive environment for plant growth through boosting plant nutrient availability, photosynthetic activity and metabolic rates which in turn improves plant yield. Our research results are in accordance with the findings of Kidist (2013) and Akbar (2003).
Effect of nitrogen on yield and yield components of maize
The effect of different levels of nitrogen application on yield and yield components of maize was found significant except number of cobs per plant (Table 2). However, number of cobs per plant was increased with increased level of nitrogen application. The size of maize cobs was also varied significantly while N2 treatment produced largest cob length (21.15 cm) and cob diameter (4.70 cm) which was statistically identical with N3 treatment (20.95 and 4.69 cm respectively). The highest cob yield (13.22 t ha-1), grain yield (7.44 t ha-1) and dry matter yield (7.37 t ha-1) was also obtained with N2 treatment followed by N3 treatment (12.27, 7.36 and 7.30 t ha-1 respectively) simply with no statistical variation between two treatments compared to N1 treatment. The results reveal that the nitrogen requirement of maize to get optimum yield under Salna soil series can be satisfied by applying nitrogen according to 100% RD. Application of lower amount of N produced unacceptable yield of maize. The optimal rate of N promotes photosynthetic processes as well as net assimilation rate, resulting in increased yield of maize. On the other hand, higher dose of N could not give higher yield because N is particularly reactive and volatile in soils, it is vulnerable to losses through volatilization, denitrification, leaching and surface runoff. These findings were similar with other studies depicted by Hou et al. (2012) and Halvorson et al. (2006).
Interaction effect of irrigation and nitrogen on yield and yield components of maize
Significant interactive response had been exhibited by yield and different yield attributes of maize to varying degrees of irrigation and nitrogen excluding number of cobs per plant shown in Table 3. However, the interaction effect was found significant on cob length (cm) and cob diameter (cm). I4N2 treatment showed highest cob length (22.01 cm) and cob diameter (4.83 cm) which was statistically similar to treatments I3N3 and I4N3 for cob length and I4N3, I3N3, I3N2, I2N3 and I2N2 for cob diameter. The maximum cob yield (16.89 t ha-1), grain yield (9.19 t ha-1) and dry matter yield (10.15 t ha-1) was found with I4N2 treatment which was statistically identical to I3N3. On the other hand, the minimum cob yield (10.67 t ha-1), grain yield (6.07 t ha-1) and dry matter yield (3.86 t ha-1) was observed with I1N1 treatment. It can be ascertained from the study that proper water application with nitrogen dose is indispensable to ensure proper yield of maize as optimum moisture level and nitrogen supply favours the growth and development of the crop. Similar results were pointed out by Paolo and Rinaldi, (2008).
Interaction effect of irrigation and nitrogen on the primary nutrient contents of maize
Maize grains were analysed to evaluate the interaction effect of irrigation and nitrogen treatments on primary nutrient contents exposed in Fig 1. The primary nutrient contents of maize grain showed remarkable variation with the variation of applied irrigation and nitrogen. The highest grain N (0.87%) was attained from I4N2 which did not differ statistically from I3N1, I3N2, I3N3 treatment. Treatment I4N2 also resulted in the highest level of P (0.20%) which was in the same statistical category as I3N3 treatment (0.19%). Similar trends also recorded for K content of grain where K content was highest with treatment I4N2 (0.26%). As compared to other treatments, I1N1 treatment produced lowest values for N (0.29%), P (0.06%) and K (0.16%) content of maize grain. As a result of the current research, it can be revealed that nutrient mineralization, availability to the root zone and assimilation by plants are aided by adequate supply of water and nitrogenous fertilizer which eventually improve maize grain quality. These findings agree with that of Li et al. 2020 findings.
Interaction effect of irrigation and nitrogen on water use efficiency of maize
The data conveyed on the interaction effect of irrigation and nitrogen on water use efficiency of maize was presented in Fig 2. Water use efficiency of maize was estimated based on total dry matter and grain yield. The maximum water use efficiency for total dry matter (24.67 kg ha-1 mm-1) was generated from treatment I3N3 and the minimum (15.13 kg ha-1 mm-1) was from treatment I3N1. Treatment I1N2 produced highest water use efficiency (23.59 kg ha-1 mm-1) for grain yield and the lowest was recorded from I4N1 (15.13 kg ha-1 mm-1). According to the study, crops’ water use efficiency was increased under moderate irrigation and high nitrogen application. However, excessive irrigation and insufficient nitrogen application caused reduction in water use efficiency of crops due to water loss and low yield.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- Abrecht, D.G. and Carberry, P.S. (1993). The influence of water deficit prior to tassel initiation on maize growth, development and yield. Field Crop Research. 31(1- 2): 55-69.
- Adhikary, B.H., Baral, B.R., Shrestha, J. (2020). Productivity of winter maize as affected by varieties and fertilizer levels. International Journal of Applied Biology. 4(1): 85-93.
- Akbar, H. (2003). Carry over effect of crop management techniques and nitrogen on the yield of maize. Faculty of Crop Production Sciences.
- Djaman, K., O’Neill, M., Owen, C.K., Smeal, D., Koudahe, K., West, M., Irmak, S. (2018). Crop evapotranspiration, irrigation water requirement and water productivity of maize from meteorological data under semiarid climate. Water. 10(4): 405.
- FAO. (2010). Global Hunger Declining, But Still Unacceptably High. International Hunger Targets Difficult to Reach.
- Godfray, H.C.J., Beddington, J.R., Crute, I.R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J.F., Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science. 327(5967): 812-818.
- Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research (2nd Edn.). John Wiley and Sons, New York. pp. 680.
- Halvorson, A.D., Mosier, A.R., Reule, C.A., Bausch, W.C. (2006). Nitrogen and tillage effects on irrigated continuous corn yields. Journal of Agronomy. 98: 63- 71.
- Hou, P., Goa, Q., Xie, R., Li, S., Meng, Q. (2012). Grain yields in relation to N requirement: Optimizing nitrogen management for spring maize grown in China. Field Crops Research. 129: 1-6.
- Kashem, M.A. and Faroque, A.A.A. (2011). A country scenarios of food security and governance in Bangladesh. Journal of Scientific Foundation. 9(1-2): 41-50.
- Kidist, A. (2013). Growth, productivity and nitrogen use efficiency of maize as influenced by rate and time of nitrogen fertilizer application in Haramaya district, Eastern Ethiopia (Doctoral dissertation, M. Sc. Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia).
- Reddy, Y.R. and Reddy, G.H. (2003). Principles of Agronomy (3rd Edn.). Kalyani Publishers, Ludhiana, India. pp. 203-11.
- Li, G., Zhao, B., Dong, S., Zhang, J., Liu, P., Lu, W. (2020). Controlled -release urea combining with optimal irrigation improved grain yield, nitrogen uptake and growth of maize. Agricultural Water Management. 227: 105834.
- Paolo, E. and Rinaldi, M. (2008). Yield response of corn to irrigation and nitrogen fertilization in a Mediterranean environment. Field Crops Research. 105(3): 202-210.
- Singh, A.K., Roy, A.K., Kaur, D.P. (2007). Effect of irrigation and NPK on nutrient uptake pattern and qualitative parameter in winter maize-potato intercropping system. International Journal of Agricultural Science. 3(1): 199-201.
- Szulc, P., Waligora, H., Michalski, T., Rybus-Zaj¹c, M., Olejarski, P. (2016). Efficiency of nitrogen fertilization based on the fertilizer application method and type of maize cultivar (Zea mays L.). Plant, Soil and Environment. 62(3): 135-142.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.