Crop Science
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 25 April 2006
Published in Crop Sci 46:1266-1276 (2006)
© 2006 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by D'Andrea, K. E.
Right arrow Articles by Eyhérabide, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by D'Andrea, K. E.
Right arrow Articles by Eyhérabide, G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by D'Andrea, K. E.
Right arrow Articles by Eyhérabide, G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Crop Physiology & Metabolism
Right arrow Nitrogen
Right arrow Maize

Genotypic Variability in Morphological and Physiological Traits among Maize Inbred Lines—Nitrogen Responses

K. E. D'Andreaa,*, M. E. Oteguia, A. G. Cirilob and G. Eyhérabideb

a Dpto. de Producción Vegetal, Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de Buenos Aires. Av. San Martín 4453 (C1417DSE), Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
b Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Pergamino, Buenos Aires, Pergamino


Figure 1
View larger version (28K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Solar radiation (A) and mean air temperature (B) evolution in two growing seasons (Exp. 1: 2000–2001; Exp. 2: 2001–2002). Data are presented as a function of thermal time from sowing (base temperature 8°C). The horizontal line indicates the mean flowering period of the experiments.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (17K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Relationship between leaf area per plant and the number of ligulated leaves of inbred lines cropped at two N levels (HN and LN) during two experimental years (Exp 1 and Exp 2). Different fitted curves represent significantly (P < 0.05) different responses of leaf area production: (A) between N levels (inbred LP611), (B) between N levels and experiments (inbred ZN6), with maximum plant leaf area of HN Exp 2 > HN Exp 1 = LN Exp 2 > LN Exp 1, and (C) between N levels and experiments (inbred LP521), with maximum plant leaf area of HN Exp 2 > HN Exp 1 > LN Exp 2 = LN Exp 1.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (26K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Relationship between (A) Kernel number per plant and prolificacy, (B) Harvest index and kernel number per plant, and (C) Kernel number per plant and the anthesis silking interval. Data correspond to 12 inbred lines cropped at two N levels (HN and LN) during two experimental years (Exp. 1 and Exp. 2).

 

Figure 4
View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Relationship between kernel number per plant and plant growth rate of individual tagged plants of genotypes P578 (A) and LP2 (B).

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2006 by the Crop Science Society of America.