Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-tbj44 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-29T22:48:12.642Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

13C discrimination in corn grain can be used to separate and quantify yield losses due to water and nitrogen stresses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

David E. Clay ,
Sharon A. Clay ,
Drew J. Lyon  and
Juerg M. Blumenthal
David E. Clay
Affiliation:
Plant Science Department, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007
Drew J. Lyon
Affiliation:
Panhandle Research and Extension Center, University of Nebraska, Scottsbluff, NE 69361
Juerg M. Blumenthal
Affiliation:
Heep Center, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is difficult to quantify the mechanism(s) responsible for competition-induced yield loss using traditional experimental techniques. A technique using yield and 13C discrimination (Δ) for wheat, a C3 plant, has been developed to separate total yield loss (TYL) into yield loss due to N (YLNS) and water (YLWS) stresses. The objective of this research was to determine whether the Δ approach could be used in corn, a C4 plant, to separate TYL into YLNS and yield loss due to a combination of water and light stresses (YLWLS). The field study had a factorial design using five corn densities and five N rates and was conducted in western Nebraska in 1999 and 2000. Relationships for YLNS and YLWLS with TYL were derived from only a portion of the yield and Δ data collected in 1999 and validated based on the remaining data collected in 1999 and 2000. In 1999, 20 to 40% of TYL was due to YLWLS, whereas in 2000, a dry year, YLWLS accounted for 60 to 80% of the TYL. Results from using the Δ-based approach were consistent with analysis of variance results. For example, calculated YLWLS values were related to measured YLWLS by the equation: calculated YLWLS = 19 + 0.91 (measured YLWLS) (r 2 = 0.95; P < 0.01). The Δ approach, based on a plant's physiological response to the environment, can be used to separate and quantify competition-induced YLNS and YLWLS in corn.

Keywords

Corn, Zea mays L.wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Modeling yield lossnitrogen stresswater stress

Information

Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 53 , Issue 1 , February 2005 , pp. 23 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Arnon, I. 1975. Physiological principles of dryland crop production. Pages 2–145 in Gupta, U. S. ed. Physiological Aspects of Dryland Farming. New York: Universal.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Semach, G., and Janzen, H. H. 2002. Fertilizer application method affects nitrogen uptake in weeds and wheat. Weed Sci 50:634–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumenthal, J. M., Lyon, D. J., and Stroup, W. W. 2003. Optimal plant population and nitrogen fertility for dryland corn in western Nebraska. Agron. J 95:878–883.Google Scholar
Carelli, M. L. C., Fahl, J. I., Trivelin, P. C. O., and Queiroz-Voltan, R. B. 1999. Carbon isotope discrimination and gas exchange in coffea species grown under different irradiance regimes. Rev. Bras. Fisiol. Veg 11:63–68.Google Scholar
Clay, D. E. 1997. Comparison of the difference and delta 15-Nitrogen approaches for evaluating liquid urea ammonium nitrate utilization by maize. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal 28:1151–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, D. E., Clay, S. A., Lui, Z., and Reese, C. 2001a. Spatial variability of C-13 isotopic discrimination in corn (Zea mays). Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal 32:1813–1828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, D. E., Engel, R. E., Long, D. S., and Liu, Z. 2001b. Using C13 discrimination to characterize N and water responses in spring wheat. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J 65:1823–1828.Google Scholar
Farahani, H. J., Peterson, G. A., Westfall, D. G., Sherrod, L. A., and Ahuja, L. R. 1998. Soil water storage in dryland cropping systems: the significance of cropping intensification. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J 62:984–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farquhar, G. D. and Lloyd, L. 1993. Carbon and oxygen isotope effects in the exchange of carbon dioxide between terrestrial plants and the atmosphere. Pages 47–70 in Ehleringer, J. R., Hall, A. E., and Farquhar, G. D. eds. Stable Isotopes and Plant Carbon-water Relations. New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hashemi-Dezfouli, A. and Herbert, S. J. 1992. Intensifying plant density response of corn with artificial shade. Agron. J 84:547–551.Google Scholar
Kitchen, N. R., Drummond, S. T., Lund, E. D., Sudduth, K. A., and Buchleifer, G. W. 2003. Soil electrical conductivity and topography related to yield for three contrasting soil-crop systems. Agron. J 95:483–495.Google Scholar
Kolberg, R. L., Kitchen, N. R., Westfall, D. G., and Peterson, G. A. 1996. Cropping intensity and nitrogen management impact dryland no-till rotations in the semi-arid western Great Plains. J. Prod. Agric 9:517–522.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Mortensen, D. A., Clay, S. A., Schmenk, R., Kells, J. J., Howatt, K., and Westra, P. 1996. Stability of corn (Zea mays)-velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference relationships. Weed Sci 44:309–313.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Mortensen, D. A., and Westra, P. et al. 1999. Stability of corn (Zea mays)-foxtail (Setaria spp.) interference relationships. Weed Sci 47:195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGee, E. A., Peterson, G. A., and Westfall, D. G. 1997. Water storage efficiency in no-till dryland cropping systems. J. Soil Water Conserv 52:131–136.Google Scholar
Norwood, C. A. 2001. Planting date, hybrid maturity, and plant population effects on soil water depletion, water use, and yield of dryland corn. Agron. J 93:1034–1042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Leary, M. H. 1993. Biochemical basis of carbon isotope fractionation. Pages 19–28 in Ehleringer, J. R., Hall, A. E., and Farquhar, G. D. eds. Stable Isotopes and Plant Carbon Water Relations. New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paz, J. O., Batchelor, W. D., Clay, D. E., Clay, S. A., and Reese, C. 2003. Characterization of Soybean Yield Variability Using Crop Growth Models and 13C Discrimination. Las Vegas, NV, July 2003. St. Joseph, MI: ASAE Meeting Paper 033044.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1998. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Release 7.00. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Schmidt, U., Thoeni, H., and Kaupenjohenn, M. 2000. Using a boundary line approach to analyze N2O flux data from agricultural soil. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst 57:119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smeltekop, H., Clay, D. E., and Clay, S. A. 2002. The impact of intercropping annual “Sava” snail medic on corn production. Agron. J 94:917–924.Google Scholar
Smika, D. E. 1970. Summer fallow for dryland winter wheat in the semiarid Great Plains. Agron. J 62:15–17.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M., Nissanka, S. P., Aguilera, A., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994. Effects of weed interference and soil nitrogen on four maize hydrids. Agron. J 86:596–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, R. A. 1972. Use of the boundary line in the analysis of biological data. J. Hortic. Sci 47:309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar