HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Salvador, D. W. Articles by Pearce, R. Brent. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Salvador, D. W. Articles by Pearce, R. Brent., Jr. Agricola Articles by Salvador, D. W. Articles by Pearce, R. Brent.

Husk Removal and Its Effects on Maize Grain Yield

Dep. of Agronomy, Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA 50011

^* Corresponding author.

The role of husks in maize (Zea mays L.) grain development is unclear. Field experiments were conducted in 1984 and 1985 to determine the effect of husk removal on grain yield and yield components. Treatments consisted of a control, an intact ear covered with a paper bag, and ears with the husks peeled down and left down, husks removed entirely from the ear and shank, husks removed from the ear only, and husks peeled down and immediately replaced around the ear. The treatments were imposed at 15 d after pollination and all ears on which husks were manipulated were covered with paper bags for protection. All treatments involving husk manipulation resulted in decreased grain yields; the average decrease was 14.3%. Treatments in which husks remained on the ear after peeling decreased yield less (8.6%) than did those in which husks were removed entirely (17.7%). Among the husk manipulation treatments, replacing husks immediately after peeling them did not decrease kernel weight as much as did the other treatments. Kernel number per ear was reduced equally by all husk manipulation treatments. The importance of husks in the maintenance of an adequate moisture and temperature environment for the developing ear and as storage organs for remobilizable assimilate is demonstrated by the fact that husk removal reduced grain yield much more than can be accounted for by the loss of husk photosynthesis.

Received for publication June 15, 1987.