Phonological and growth traits of spring maize genotypes for silage production in northern Pakistan
Paper Details
Phonological and growth traits of spring maize genotypes for silage production in northern Pakistan
Abstract
Selection of suitable maize hybrid for quality silage production is one of the major factor that can directly affect the quality and quantity of maize silage. The current study was conducted with the aim to determine the effect of different spring maize genotypes for fresh biomass yield, phonological and growth parameter for maize silage production in northern Pakistan. Six spring maize genotypes named; quality protein maize (QPM) 200, 300, Monsanto, Pioneer-1543, 1429 and Azam local maize cultivar was evaluated in the field of Agronomy, The Agriculture University Peshawar. The seed of each genotype was sown in 12 replicate plots under RCBD design and a total of 72 plots (8 m × 10 m) were blocked in to three replicate fields. Maize seed was sown with hands on March 28, 2017, in ridges with a row to row spacing of 75 cm @ seed rate of plant population of 66000 seeds per hectare for optimal production. The repeated measure analysis of variance using the PROC MIXED procedure of SAS (SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC) were used for statistical analysis. The results revealed that there was a large variation (P<0.05) for all the measured parameter among spring maize genotypes. The DTF ranged from 57 to 62, DTS 61 to 65. The highest plant hight was observed at Monsanto (245cm) closely followed by QPM300 (237cm) and the lowest at Azam (183cm). The genotype QPM had the maximum number of leaves per plant (17 vs 13) and cobs per plant (1.58 vs 1.07) and. The highest fresh biomass yield (55930 kg/ha) was observed at QPM300 among the spring maize genotypes. It was concluded from the study that maize genotype QPM300 had screen out the best spring maize genotype for silage production in term of biomass yield, growth parameter and phonological characteristics in local environmental condition of northern Pakistan.
Arajuo G. 2012. Yield and quality of silage of maize hybrids. In Rev. Brasil Zooteca 41, p 1539–1544.
Biro D. 2007. Nutritive value and digestibility characteristics of different maize silage hybrids. In Acta fytotechnica et zootechnica. 10(1), 17-19.
Ferraretto F, Shaver R. 2012b. Meta-analysis: Impact of corn silage harvest practices on intake, digestion, and milk production by dairy cows. Animal Sciences 28, 141-149.
Ferraretto LF, Taysom K, Taysom D, Shaver R, Hoffman PC. 2014. Relationships between dry matter content, ensiling, ammonia-nitrogen, and ruminal in vitro starch digestibility in high-moisture corn samples. Journal of Dairy Sciences 97, 3221-3227.
Hristov Oh AJN, Firkins JL, Dijkstra J, Kebreab E, Waghorn G, Makkar HPD, Adesogan AT, Yang W, Lee C, Gerber PJ,Henderson B, Tricarico JM. 2013. Special topics– Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options. Journal of Dairy Sciences 91, 5045–5069.
Johnson LM, Harrison JH, Davidson D, Robutti JL, Swift M, Mahanna WC, Shinners K. 2002. Corn silage management. I. Effects of hybrid, maturity, and mechanical processing on chemical and physical characteristic. Journal of Dairy Sciences 85(4), 833-853.
Khan NA, Yu P, Ali M, Cone J, Hendriks W. 2014. Nutritive value of maize silage in relation to dairy cow performance and milk quality. Journal of Science, Food and Agriculture.
Lopez SU, Nieto CAR, Lopez ES, Lopez NS, Rangel PP, Gil AP, Real D. 2018. Yield of forage, grain, and biomass in eight hybrids of maize with different sowing dates and environmental conditions. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias 9(1).
Loucka R, Tyrolova Y, Jancik F, Kubelkova P, Homolka P, Jambor V. 2018. Variation for In Vivo Digestibility in Two Maize Hybrid Silages. Czech Journal of Animal Sciences 63(1), 17–23.
Lynch JP, Kiely PO, Doyle EM. 2013. Yield, nutritive value, and ensilage characteristics of whole-crop maize, and of the separated cob and stover components – nitrogen, harvest date and cultivar effects. Journal of Agriculture Sciences 151, 347-367.
Masoero F, Gallo A, Zanfi C, Giuberti G, Spanghero M. 2011. Effect of nitrogen fertilization on chemical composition and rumen fermentation of different parts of plants of three corn hybrids. Animal Feed Science Technology 164, 207-216.
Millner JP, Vill RA, Hardacre AK. 2010. The yield and nutritive value of maize genotypes grown for silage, New Zealand Journal of Agriculture Research. 48(1), 101-108.
Moss BR, Reeves DW, Lin DC, Torbert HA, McElhenney WH, Mask P, Kezar W. 2001. Yield and quality of three corn hybrids as affected by broiler litter fertilization and crop maturity. Animal Feed Sciences Technology 94, 43-56.
Nizam Qasim M, Hussain M. 2010. Comparative study of agronomic parameters in synthetic maize varieties. Journal of Agriculture Research 48(1).
Opsi F, Fortina R, Borreani G, Tabacco E, Lopez S. 2012.Influence of cultivar, sowing date and maturity at harvest on yield, digestibility, rumen fermentation kinetics and estimated feeding value of maize silage. Journal of Agriculture Sciences 151, 740-753.
Thomas ED, Mandebvu P, Ballard CS, Sniffen CJ, Carter CP, Beck J. 2001. Comparison of corn silage hybrids for yield, nutrient composition, in vitro digestibility, and milk yield by dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Sciences 84, 2217-2226.
Zamir, MSI, Ahmad AH, Javeed HMR, Latif T. 2011. Growth and yield behavior of two maize hybrids (Zea mays l.) towards different plant spacing. Cercetări Agronomice în Moldova 2(146), 33-40.
Nadar Khan, Nazir Ahmad Khan, Nazir Ahmad, 2020. Phonological and growth traits of spring maize genotypes for silage production in northern Pakistan. Int. J. Biosci., 16(3), 167-172.
Copyright © 2020 by the Authors. This article is an open access article and distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) license.