Response of Sweet Corn (Zea mays L. var. saccharata.) to different Combinations of Nutrient Management

Response of Sweet Corn (Zea mays L. var. saccharata.) to different Combinations of Nutrient Management

Shyam Sundar Reddy^1* , Kolse R. H¹ , Ugale N. S¹ , Shelke S. R¹ , Patil M. R²

¹Department Agronomy, Post Graduate Institute, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth Rahuri, Ahemednagar, Maharashtra 413722, India

²Department of Statistics, Post Graduate Institute, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth Rahuri, Ahemednagar, Maharashtra, 413722, India

Corresponding Author Email: shyamsunderreddy2015@gmail.com

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.53709/CHE.2021.v02i04.009

Abstract

Keywords

Download this article as:

Introduction

            Sweet corn is one of the most popular forms of maize. Noyes Darling of New Haven, Connecticut, was the first breeder and seed producer to develop a hybrid. Sweet corn production did not commence on a wide scale until the turn of the twentieth century. Although the plant had been known in Europe for some time, it was only after World War II it became more economically significant.  Sweet corn, popcorn, baby corn, high oil corn, and other specialty corn have the enormous market potential in India and internationally [1-4]. These specialty corns are ideal for Para-urban agriculture because of their high market value. Sweet corn has a significant market potential among the several varieties of maize. Sweet corn, popcorn, baby corn, high oil corn, and other specialty corn have the enormous market potential in India and internationally. These specialty corns are ideal for Para-urban agriculture because of their high market value. Sweet corn has a significant market potential among the several varieties of maize.

Modern agriculture must provide crops with adequate nutrients throughout the growth cycle in the most efficient way possible, while minimizing soil and water degradation. This can be accomplished by implementing current and precise nutrient management strategies, particularly water-soluble fertilizers with a high content of primary nutrients and low salt index. Foliar application and fertigation of crops are both possible with water-soluble fertilizers [5].

Maize is a demanding crop that requires many nutrients, and the nutrient management system largely determines its production. The Nutrient use efficiency (NUE) of soil-applied nutrients is relatively low, and it is highly dependent on soil and environmental conditions. In addition to augmenting the nutritional requirements of crops, timely delivery of essential nutrients through foliar sprays in conjunction with soil-applied nutrient treatments offers various advantages, including rapid and efficient response by crops. Foliar spray of water-soluble fertilizer is a well-known form of plant nutrition supplement [6-7].

Foliar nutrition is particularly successful since leaves absorb nutrients much faster than roots. The use of a balanced fertilizer throughout the critical growth phases will considerably improve the quantity and quality of agricultural output. When fertilizers are applied foliar, the plant uses more than 90 % of the fertilizer. However, when the same amount is applied to the soil, only 10 % of the fertilizer is used [8]. Foliar application of nutrients in combination with soil application has various advantages in supplementing crop nutritional requirements, including faster and more efficient plant response, less quantity of fertilizer required, maintaining soil health, and overcoming the problems of nutrient fixation and immobilization. Considering the nutrient requirement and nutrient use efficiency of foliar application of nutrients, the present investigation was carried out [9-12].

Material and Methods

            The study was conducted during Rabi season of 2020 at the PGI Farm, Post Graduate Institute, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, and District,Ahmednagar. The soil texture of the experimental field was clay loam, medium in available nitrogen (298.18 kg ha^-1), medium in available phosphorus (27 kg ha^-1), and very high in available potassium (412 kg ha^-1). In reaction, the soil in the experimental field was mildly alkaline (pH 8.46) with 0.34 % organic carbon, soil electrical conductivity was 0.52 dSm^-1.

            The experiments was laid out in randomized complete block design and comprised of nine treatments replicated thrice and the treatments are: T₁: Control ,T₂: 125% GRDF + 1% 19:19:19 NPK, T₃ : 100% GRDF + 1% 19:19:19 NPK, T₄ : 75% GRDF + 1% 19:19:19 NPK, T₅ : 50% GRDF + 1% 19:19:19 NPK, T₆ : 125% GRDF + 2% 19:19:19 NPK, T₇ : 100% GRDF + 2% 19:19:19 NPK, T₈ : 75% GRDF + 2% 19:19:19 NPK, T₉ : 50% GRDF + 2% 19:19:19 NPK.The foliar spray of 1% and 2% 19:19:19 NPK are applied at 30 and 45 DAS. The GRDF of Sweet corn is 120:60:40 N: P₂O₅: K₂O kg ha^-1+ 10 t FYM. The climatic conditions were favourable for sweet corn growth and development, according to the meteorological data. During the investigation of Rabi sweet corn in 2020, the following meteorological data were observed, mean maximum temperature (35.0⁰C -27.7⁰C), mean minimum temperature (18.3⁰C -12.3 ⁰C), relative humidity during morning hour (92.1– 70.7%), evening hour (47.4– 19.7 %).The rainfall distribution received during crop growth was uniform. In general, the weather conditions were found favourable for normal crop growth and development. The general recommended dose of fertilizer (GRDF) was applied in each plot to treatments wise in the form of FYM, urea, single super phosphate, and murate of potash, respectively. Sowing was done on 24 November, 2020, with the sweet corn seed variety Sugar -75; the crop duration was 80-90 days.

            There were total of 27 experimental plots in three replications in the layout. Nine experimental units were separated into each replication. Each experimental unit had a gross plot size of 6.0 x 5.0 m² and the net plot size was 4.8 x4.6 m². Sowing was done by dibbling two seeds at each hill at the recommended spacing of 60 cm x 20 cm. The other practices of growing sweet corn were adequately taken for the management of experimental plots throughout the cropping season. Five plants from net plot area were randomly selected, and observations on growth were recorded at 30, 45, 60 DAS and at harvest and yield attributes at harvest.

Table. 1. Plant Height (cm) as Influenced by Different Nutrient Combinations

            The observation on plant height in centimeter was done by using a scale from in it base to the tip of the fully opened top leaf, no. of functional leaves per plant was counted from five randomly selected plants in each treatment, and the mean was computed and expressed in the number of functional leaves per plant, leaf area per plant was determined by collecting green leaves and passed through “LICOR-3100 Leaf area meter” for reading leaf area and expressed as cm² per plant, leaf area index (LAI) was worked out by dividing the leaf area per plant by land area occupied by the plant [13], leaf area index (LAI) was worked out by dividing the leaf area per plant by land area occupied by the plant [14] total dry matter accumulation was determined by measuring above-ground portion plant sample subjected into air oven at 65^{o C} for 72 hours. using weighing balance and express in gram per plant.

Table.2. Number.of.Functional.Leaves.per.Plant.as.Influenced.by.Different.Nutrient Combinations

Table:3.Dry.Matter.Accumulation.(g).per.Plant.as.Influenced.by.Different.NutriencCombinations

          Table: 4. Leaf Area Index of as Influenced by Different Nutrient Combinations

The yield attributing traits were recorded on five cobs and the mean taken for each observation. At picking, the number of cobs was counted from tagged five plants in each net plot, and an average per plant was calculated. The length of cob was measured from the base to tip by using scale and expressed in centimeter, cob girth was recorded by using vernier callipers in cob at the base, middle and top of five cobs and mean diameter of cob was expressed in centimeter, the fresh weight of the cobs was also recorded, and the average weight of the cob was calculated and expressed in grams [15]. The dry weight cob after drying by using weighing balance and expressed in grams per cob, the number of kernels per cob was counted from each of five cobs and average was expressed as the number of kernels per cob ,the number of kernel rows per cob was counted from each of five cobs and average was expressed as number of kernel rows per cob, Kernel weight per plant was determined after shelling by using weighing balance,100 kernel weight in grams were randomly selected from the kernels of five labelled plants and weight was measured with weighing balance.

Table5.Cob.Length.and.Cob.Girth.(cm).as.Influenced.by.Different.Nutrient.Combinations

Table 6. Number of Kernel Rows per Cob and Number of Kernels per Cob as Influenced by Different Nutrient Combinations

Results and Discussion

                              The sweet corn crop growth and yield attributes were statistically significantly higher with the plots imposed by 125% GRDFs followed by foliar spray of 2 % 19:19:19 NPK twice; at 30 and 45 DAS, the statistically significantly lower were observed in plots under treatment control. Significantly higher plant height of (35.64, 96.16, 139.97, and 273.59cm) was recorded in the treatment of 125 % GRDF followed by foliar spray of 2 % 19:19:19 NPK twice; at 30 and 45 DAS at 60, 45, 60 DAS and at harvest. In adversely, the significantly lower plant height of (20.09, 49.43, 79.83, and 161.24 cm) was noticed in control. With respect to the growth stage at 30, 45 60 DAS and at harvest, the treated plots with 125% GRDF + 2 % 19:19:19 NPK twice; at 30 and 45 DAS had registered the high number of functional leaves per plant  (5.86, 12.60,13.30 and 12.73)  compare to the control plot where a lower number of functional leaves per plant (3.93, 7.06,8.13 and 7.66). The same trend was observed on leaf area index (0.94, 2.51,3.48,3 and 3.01) and dry matter accumulation per plant ( 21.10,92.87,189.50 and 319.25 grams) noticed with soil application of 125% GRDF followed by foliar spray of 2 % 19:19:19 NPK twice; at 30 and 45 DAS, over control,  at 30 ,45,60 DAS and at harvest.However, the application of 125% GRDF along with a foliar spray of 1 % 19:19:19 NPK at 30 and 45 DAS was on par with the application of 125% GRDF along with foliar spray of 2 % 19:19:19 NPK at 30 and 45 DAS in terms of plant height, a number of functional leaves per plant, leaf area index, dry matter accumulation per plant at 30, 45, 60 DAS and at harvest. Significantly maximum cob length( 25.13 cm), cob girth( 19.51 cm), number of cobs per plant (1.91), number of kernel rows per cob (17.96) ,number of kernels per cob (675.74), kernel weight of cob(145.24 g) 100-kernel weight (24.07 g), fresh weight of cob(293.36 g) and dry weight of cob (57.16 g) at harvest were found in with soil application of 125% GRDF followed by foliar spray of 2 % 19:19:19 NPK twice; at 30 and 45 DAS. However, the application of 125% GRDF along with a foliar spray of 1 % 19:19:19 NPK at 30 and 45 DAS was on par with the application of 125% GRDF along with foliar spray of 2 % 19:19:19 NPK at 30 and 45 DAS. The significant difference noticed in plant height (Table 1) at 30.45,60 DAS and at harvest may be due to an increased in the supply of nutrients and the apical dominance improved in foliar spraying of nutrients via auxins. [16-20] found similar results that plant height was increased than control by increasing the fertility levels. Significantly more number of functional leaves (Table 2) may be due to an increase in the supply of nutrients due to increasing levels of chemical fertilizer and in addition through foliar application of NPK, and also more dry matter accumulation per plant (Table 3) may be due to basal and foliar spraying of primary nutrients promote the photosynthetic activity which increases the dry matter accumulation in sweet corn. The results are in agreement with [21-23]. The increase in leaf area and LAI (Table 4) could also be due to increased plant height and the number of functional leaves.

Table.7. Kernel Weight of Cob and 100 – Kernel Weight (g) as Influenced Different Nutrient Combinations

Table 8. Fresh and Dry Weight of Cob (g) as Influenced by Nutrient Combinations

Conflict of Interest: Authors declared no conflict of Interest

References

1. Abd El-Fattah, A. A., Selim, E. M. and Awad, E. M. 2012. Response of Corn Plants (Zeamays)to Soil and Foliar Applications of Mineral Fertilizers under Clay Soil Conditions. Journal of Applied Sciences Research.  8 (8): 4711-4719.
2. Abdi, M., Mohamadi, G. N. and Golchin, A., 2002. The influence of foliar nutrition of urea and potassium chloride on grain yield, grain protein content, yield components and leaf relative water content of sardari wheat under rainfed condition. Journal of Agricultural Science.  8(2):29- 38.
3. Afifi, M. H. M., Khalifa, R. K. M. and Camilia, Y. 2011. Urea foliar application as a        partial             substitution of soil-applied nitrogen fertilization for some maize cultivars   grown in newly cultivated soil. Australian Journal of Basic Applied Sciences. 5(7): 826-832.
4. Amanullah, Khair, M. K., Azam, K., Imran, K., Zahir, S. and Zahid, H. 2014. Growth and            yield response of maize (Zea mays L.) to foliar NPK-fertilizers under moisture stress condition. Soil Environment.  33(2): 116-123
5. Dalvi, S. D. 1984. Effect of various spacing’s and nitrogen levels on growth, yield and     quality of two varieties of maize (Zea mays) under Konkan conditions. Journal of Agricultural Biological science.  32(3):16-17.
6. Drocelle 2016. Effect of foliar application of water soluble fertilizers on growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) M.Sc. Thesis.University of Agricultural Science. Bangalore
7. Jayant, K. P., Sanjay, K., Dwivedi and Harishankar. 2018. Effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on Productivity and Profitability of Sweet Corn (Zea mays L. saccharata). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 6(5): 2762-2769.
8. Kumar, P., Halepyati, A. S., Pujari, B. T. And Desai, B. K. 2007. Effect of integratednutrient management on productivity, nutrient uptake and     economics of maize    (Zea mays L.) under rainfed condition. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Science. 20(3): 462-465.
9. Maravalli,S. S. and Shekh, M. A.2019.Effect of water soluble fertilizers on growth            parameter and economics of sweet corn (Zea mays L. var. saccharata).           International Journal of Chemical Studies. 7(2): 1077-1080.
10. Thakur, A. K., Thaku, D. K., Patel, R. K., Pradhan Adikant and Prafull Kumar. 2015.             Effect Of  Different Plant Geometry And Nitrogen Levels, In relation to     growth characters, yield and economics on sweet corn (Zea mays saccharata L.) at bastar plateau zone. The Bioscan.  10(3): 1223-1226.
11. Zende, N. B. 2006. Effect of integrated nutrient management on the performance of sweet             corn (Zea mays L. saccharata). Thesis submitted for Ph.D. (Agri.) Thesis to Konka Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli.
12. Akgüngör, S., Miran, B., & Abay, C. (2010). Consumer willingness to pay for organic food in urban Turkey. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 22(3–4), 299–313
13. Asghar, A., Ali, A., Syed, W. H., Asif, M., Khaliq, T., & Abid, A. A. (2010). Growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) cultivars affected by NPK application in different proportion. Pakistan Journal of Science, 62(4), 211–216
14. Ayoola, O. T., & Makinde, E. (2009). Maize growth, yield and soil nutrient changes with N-enriched organic fertilizers. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 9(1), 580–592
15. Bekele, A., Kibret, K., Bedadi, B., Balemi, T., & Yli-Halla, M. (2018). Effects of lime, vermicompost and chemical P fertilizer on yield of maize in Ebantu District, Western highlands of Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 13(10), 477–489
16. Canatoy, R. C. (2018). Effects of vermicompost on the growth and yield of sweet corn in Bukidnon, Philippines. Asian Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 1–8.
17. Pangaribuan, D. H., & Hendarto, K. (2018). The effect of organic fertilizer and urea fertilizer on growth, yield and quality of sweet corn and soil health. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 6(3), 335– 344.
18. Silva, Paulo Sérgio L., Araújo Júnior, B. B., Oliveira, V. R., Pontes, F. S., & Oliveira, O. F. (2013). Effects of nitrogen application on corn yield after harvesting the apical ear as baby corn. Horticultura Brasileira, 31(3), 419–425.
19. Zhang, Y., Li, C., Wang, Y., Hu, Y., Christie, P., Zhang, J., & Li, X. (2016). Maize yield and soil fertility with combined use of compost and inorganic fertilizers on a calcareous soil on the North China Plain. Soil and Tillage Research, 155, 85–94
20. Sofyan, E. T., Sara, D. S., & Machfud, Y. (2019). The effect of organic and inorganic fertilizer applications on N, P-uptake, K-uptake and yield of sweet corn (Zea mays saccharata Sturt). IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 393(1), 012021
21. Gardner, J., Hoffmann, M. P., Pitcher, S. A., & Harper, J. K. (2011). Integrating insecticides and Trichogramma ostriniae to control European corn borer in sweet corn: Economic analysis. Biological Control, 56(1), 9–16.
22. Kumar, R., Bohra, J. S., Singh, A. K., & Kumawat, N. (2015). Productivity, profitability and nutrient-use efficiency of baby corn (Zea mays) as influenced of varying fertility levels. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 60(2), 285–290.
23. Marlina, N., Amir, N., Aminah, R. I. S., Nasser, G. A., Purwanti, Y., & Nisfuriah, L. (2017). Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers Application on NPK Uptake and Production of Sweet Corn in Inceptisol Soil of Lowland Swamp Area. MATEC Web of Conferences, 97, 01106.