Maize hybrid productivity and grain quality in conditions of the Cis-Ural forest-steppe

Raphael Ismagilov; Bulat Akhiyarov; Damir Islamgulov; Dayan Ayupov; Vasiliy Salnikov; Raphael Ismagilov; Bulat Akhiyarov; Damir Islamgulov; Dayan Ayupov; Vasiliy Salnikov

doi:10.3934/agrfood.2019.3.604

AIMS Agriculture and Food

2019, Volume 4, Issue 3: 604-612. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2019.3.604

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Maize hybrid productivity and grain quality in conditions of the Cis-Ural forest-steppe

Federal state budgetary educational institution of higher education, Bashkir state agrarian university, Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, Russian Federation

Received: 07 May 2019 Accepted: 24 July 2019 Published: 01 August 2019

This study (2016–2017) was conducted to identify highly productive maize hybrids for the conditions of the Bashkortostan Republic. Maize growth, yield and grain quality was examined on different hybrids that gave 3.79–5.55 t/ha of maize. Nur and Baikal hybrids showed the best grain quality indicators on the starch content being 61.7% and 60.8%, respectively. From mid-early hybrids Newton, Mashuk 220 MV and Mashuk 250 SV are recommended for silage production.
- maize,
- hybrid,
- plant growth,
- yield,
- grain quality
Citation: Raphael Ismagilov, Bulat Akhiyarov, Damir Islamgulov, Dayan Ayupov, Vasiliy Salnikov. Maize hybrid productivity and grain quality in conditions of the Cis-Ural forest-steppe[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2019, 4(3): 604-612. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2019.3.604

Related Papers:

Abstract

This study (2016–2017) was conducted to identify highly productive maize hybrids for the conditions of the Bashkortostan Republic. Maize growth, yield and grain quality was examined on different hybrids that gave 3.79–5.55 t/ha of maize. Nur and Baikal hybrids showed the best grain quality indicators on the starch content being 61.7% and 60.8%, respectively. From mid-early hybrids Newton, Mashuk 220 MV and Mashuk 250 SV are recommended for silage production.

References

[1]	Omokanye AT, Kelleher FM, McInnes A (2013) Crop residues for mulch, feed yield and quality as influenced by low-input maize-based cropping systems and N fertilizer. Agric J 8: 222–231.
[2]	Akhiyarov BG, Ismagilov RR, Islamgulov DR, et al. (2018) Yield and quality of table beet depending on cultivation technology elements. J Eng Appl Sci 13: 8752–8759.
[3]	Ngaboyisonga C, Njoroge K, Kirubi D, et al. (2012) Quality protein maize under low N and drought environments: Endosperm modification, protein and tryptophan concentrations in grain. Agric J 7: 327–338.
[4]	Ngaboyisonga C, Njoroge K (2014) Quality protein maize under low-nitrogen and drought: Genotype by environment interaction for grain and protein qualities. Agric J 9: 68–76.
[5]	Kedir M (2018) Adoption and determinants adoption of improved maize in Ethiopia. Agric J 13: 1–8.
[6]	Sotchenko YuV, Ismagilov RR, Akhiyarov BG (2018) Maize hybrid grain productivity and quality in conditions of the Bashkortostan Republic. Vestnik of Bashkir State Agrarian University 4: 39–43. Available from: http://vestnik.bsau.ru/netcat_files/vestnic/file/2018-48.pdf (in Russian).
[7]	Nasyrov IS, Mukhametshin AM, Surakov II, et al. (2016) Maize cultivation technology for grain production in the Republic of Bashkortostan. Ministry of Agriculture in the Bashkortostan Republic, All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Maize, Bashkir State Agrarian University, Ufa. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=26703785 (in Russian).
[8]	Abba Mohammed Wakili (2012) Technical efficiency of maize farmers in Gombi Local Government of Adamawa State, Nigeria. Agric J 7: 1–4.
[9]	Islamgulov DR, Ismagilov RR, Bakirova AU, et al. (2018) Productivity and technological qualities of sugar beet at different times of harvesting depending on contamination and freezing of root crops. J Eng Appl Sci 13: 6533–6540.
[10]	Xu J, Meng J, Quackenbush LJ (2019) Use of remote sensing to predict the optimal harvest date of corn. Field Crops Res 236: 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.03.003
[11]	Xu J, Hana H, Ning T, et al. (2019) Long-term effects of tillage and straw management on soil organic carbon, crop yield, and yield stability in a wheat-maize system. Field Crops Res 233: 33–40. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2018.12.016
[12]	Akinchin AV, Fedorov AS (2015) Effect of green-manure crops on agrophysical properties of the soil and maize productivity for grain. Bull Kursk State Agric Acad 8: 143–145.
[13]	Honghong L, Yun X, Gang L, et al. (2019) Soybean and maize simulation under different degrees of soil erosion. Field Crops Res 230: 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2018.10.004
[14]	Gabitov II, Saifullin RN, Farhshatov MN, et al. (2018) Hardening of electrohydraulic injectors valve units of diesels at repair. J Eng Appl Sci 13: 6478–6486.
[15]	Hisse IR, D'Andrea KE, Otegui ME (2019) Source-sink relations and kernel weight in maize inbred lines and hybrids: Responses to contrasting nitrogen supply levels. Field Crops Res 230: 151–159. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2018.10.011
[16]	Venkatesha MS, Hazraab KK, Ghosh PK, et al. (2019) Integrated phosphorus management in maize-chickpea rotation in moderately-alkaline Inceptisol in Kanpur, India: An agronomic and economic evaluation. Field Crops Res 233: 21–32. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.01.001
[17]	Lubova TN, Islamgulov DR, Ismagilov KR, et al. (2018) Economic efficiency of sugar beet production. J Eng Appl Sci 13: 6565–6569.
[18]	Ngeno V, Mengist C, Langat BK, et al. (2012) Measuring technical efficiency among maize farmers in Kenya's bread basket. Agric J 7: 106–110.
[19]	Sotchenko VS, Bagrintsy VN (2015) Maize cultivation technologies. Bull Agric Prod Stavropolie 52: 79–84. Available from: http://bibl-stgau.ru/images/Files/number18.pdf (in Russian).
[20]	Pettigrew WT (2008) Potassium influences on yield and quality production for maize, wheat, soybean and cotton. Physiol Plant 133: 670–681. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2008.01073.x
[21]	Khamaletdinov RR, Gabitov II, Mudarisov SG, et al. (2018) Improvement in engineering design of machines for biological crop treatment with microbial products. J Eng Appl Sci 13: 6500–6504.
[22]	Rebero E, Mupenzi M (2012) Comparison of nutrient composition and in vitro digestion characteristics of four forage legumes from two agro-ecological zones of Rwanda. Agric J 7: 354–359.
[23]	Mudarisov S, Khasanov E, Rakhimov Z, et al. (2017) Specifying two-phase flow in modeling pneumatic systems performance of farm machines. J Mech Eng Res Dev 40: 706–715.
[24]	Kätterer T, Roobroeck D, Andrén O, et al. (2019) Biochar addition persistently increased soil fertility and yields in maize-soybean rotations over 10 years in sub-humid regions of Kenya. Field Crops Res 235: 18–26. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.02.015
[25]	Sotchenko VS, Gorbachev AG, Panfilov AE, et al. (2016) Grain productivity of maize hybrids as a function of locations, sowing time and seed storage length. Agroindu Complex Russ 23: 687–694. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=27192859 (in Russian).
[26]	Xu H, Vandecasteele B, Zavattaro L, et al. (2019) Maize root‐derived C in soil and the role of physical protection on its relative stability over shoot‐derived C. Eur J Soil Sci 2019, doi: 10.1111/ejss.12792.
[27]	Czembor E, Stępień Ł, Waśkiewicz A (2015) Effect of environmental factors on Fusarium species and associated mycotoxins in maize grain grown in Poland. PloS One 10: e0133644. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133644

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)