My Account: Log In | Join | Renew
Search
Author
Title
Vol.
Issue
Year
1st Page

Abstract

 

This article in AJ

  1. Vol. 72 No. 3, p. 459-464
     
    Received: June 11, 1979
    Published: May, 1980


 View
 Download
 Alerts
 Permissions
 Share

doi:10.2134/agronj1980.00021962007200030013x

Development of a Model for Use in Maize Replant Decisions1

  1. R. R. Johnson and
  2. D. L. Mulvaney2

Abstract

Abstract

Reduced stands after planting may force maize (Zea mays L.) producers to consider the feasibility of replanting. The objective of this research was to develop guidelines for replanting decisions based on planting date, hybrid maturity class, population density, and plant distribution. Maize was planted at central and northern Illinois locations in 3 successive years. In each experiment adapted and early season hybrids were planted at three dates ranging from late April through early June. Plots were thinned to final densities of 30,890; 41,180; 51,480; and 61,780 plants/ha. The three lower densities were distributed uniformly within the TOW, with small gaps ranging from 0.42 to 0.85 m long, and with large gaps 1.5 in long.

Adapted hybrids tended to yield more than early season hybrids when planted before 20 May, but the overall effects of hybrid maturity class were minor. Regression analysis indicated that the optimum planting date was near 6 May, and planting either 2 weeks before or after 6 May reduced yields by less than 5%. However, a rapid decrease in yield due to planting date occurred when planting was delayed past 20 May. Averaged across environments, the interaction of planting date with density and plant distribution was not significant. Before mid May the major factors to consider in replant situations are density and plant distribution within the row. After mid May, calendar date increases in importance. A model for uniformly spaced plants is presented that predicts yield on the basis of planting date and population density. Compared to uniform spacing within the row, small gaps reduced yield by an average of 1.9% while large gaps reduced yield by 5.4%

  Please view the pdf by using the Full Text (PDF) link under 'View' to the left.

Copyright © .