Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:51:53.531Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ripening in maize: interrelationships between time, water content and weight of dry material in ripening grain of a flint × dent hybrid (Inra 200)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

E. S. Bunting
E. S. Bunting
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Results are reported of ripening studies with maize (var. Inra 200) at Oxford, 1967–9. Sowings were made in late April or early in May, and crops grown at a standard density of 7–2 plants/m2. Areas were provided with cloche protection, for a 4- to 5-week period from time of sowing, to produce material for studies of the effects of flowering time on ripening patterns. From plants of known flowering date collections of 30–40 ears were taken at intervals from 30 until 100+ days after silking.

Information is presented on water content, grain dry weight and number of grains/ear at the various times of harvest. Asymptotic, polynomial and inverse-polynomial regression models have been fitted to the data to elucidate the interrelationships between time (measured from date of silking), grain water content and grain dry weight.

In plants flowering in mid-July grain continued to increase in dry weight until water content was reduced to 35 %, whereas in plants flowering early in August maximum dry weight was attained at a water content of around 40 %.Maximum dry weight of grain was approximately 10% higher in the earlier flowering plants; the corollary is that in the marginal areas of maize grain production in England maturity in such varieties as Inra 200 is often imposed by the environment with a consequent loss in potential yield.

In the early flowering plants, the time taken from silking to reach the harvestable stage of 40 % grain water content was 69 d in 1967, 79 d in 1968 and 64 d in 1969. Rate of water loss from the grain during ripening was closely related to prevailing air temperatures. In the later flowering plants, differing by an average of 11 d in time of silking, 8 days longer was required for grain to be reduced to 40% water content, giving an average difference of 19 days in permissible dates of harvest.

The results suggest that, in varieties of similar ripening pattern to Inra 200, an advance of about 7 days in flowering time is required to establish the maize grain crop beyond its present confines in south-east England.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 79 , Issue 2 , October 1972 , pp. 225 - 233
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

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

Adelana, B. O. & Milbourn, G. M. (1972). The growth of maize. II. Dry matter partition in three maize hybrids. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 78, 73–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, S. R. (1943). Maturity measurements in corn. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 35, 667–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dessureaux, L., Neal, N. P. & Brink, R. A. (1948). Maturation in corn. Agron. J. 40, 733–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, E. R. (1966). Problems relating to selection of hybrid seed: Calendarization a consideration. In Advances in Corn Production, ed. Pierre, W. H., Aldrich, S. A. and Martin, W. P.. Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Hallauer, A. R. & Russell, W. A. (1962). Estimates of maturity and its inheritance in maize. Crop Sci 2, 289–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiorns, R. W. (1965). The Fitting of Growth and Allied Curves of the Asymptotic Regression Type by Stevens's Method. Tracts for Computers No. XXVIII. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hough, M. (1970). Accumulated temperatures above 10°C in relation to maize. Met. Office Agric. Memo. no. 346.Google Scholar
Milbourn, G. M. (1971). Maize for Grain. London: Home Grown Cereals Authority.Google Scholar
Nelder, J. A. (1966). Inverse polynomials, a useful group of multifactor response functions. Biometrics 22, 128–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rather, H. C. & Marston, A. R. (1940). A study of corn maturity. Q. Bull Mich. St. Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn 22, 278–88.Google Scholar
Richards, F. J. (1969). The quantitative analysis of growth. In Plant Physiology (ed. Steward, F. C.), Vol. VA, chap. 1, pp. 3–76.Google Scholar
Shaw, B. H. & Loomis, W. E. (1950). Basis for predicting corn yields. Plant Phys. 25, 225–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spice, H. R. (1964). Polythene Tunnel Covers. British Visqueen Ltd., Stevenage.Google Scholar
Stevens, W. L. (1951). Asymptotic regression. Biometrics 7, 247–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voldeng, H. D. (1971). Factors affecting the growth of Zea mays L. D.Phil. Thesis, University of Oxford, England.Google Scholar