Abstract
Physiological causes for grain weight determination in maize ( Zea mays L.) are not clear. Source–sink relationships during grain filling modulate grain weight, and there are controversies regarding the degree of source limitation that may exist during grain filling. We aimed to analyze likely causes of the responsiveness of maize grain weight to defoliation and degraining treatments imposed 15 d after silking, quantifying the responsiveness of grain weight to these source–sink manipulations in a large number of field conditions (52 background conditions in which source–sink manipulations were imposed). Grain weight was largely unresponsive to increases in source availability but was diminished by defoliations in six out of seven experiments. Interestingly, grain weight reductions due to defoliation were not hierarchical (grains from different positions along the ear responded similarly) and were not worsened by imposing a simultaneous heat stress. Heat affected the grain growth capacity directly, and indirect effects (through reducing source strength due to accelerated senescence) were not evident. The penalty imposed by heat was neither increased by defoliation nor diminished by degraining, and the reduction in grain weight was similar for grains with different potential size. Our study reinforced the concept that maize yield is limited by the sink strength during grain filling, even when grain weight may respond to reductions in the grain filling source–sink ratio.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 8
Claim · model-written summary
Maize grain weight was largely unresponsive to increases in source availability.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Grain weight was largely unresponsive to increases in source availability but was diminished by defoliations in six out of seven experiments”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Defoliation diminished maize grain weight in six out of seven experiments under field conditions.
- Treatment
- defoliationse1
- Outcome
- Grain weighte1
- Direction
- diminishede1
- Qualifier
- in six out of seven experimentse1
- Setting
- field conditionse2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Grain weight was largely unresponsive to increases in source availability but was diminished by defoliations in six out of seven experiments”
e2“in a large number of field conditions (52 background conditions in which source–sink manipulations were imposed)”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Heat affected the grain growth capacity of maize directly.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Heat affected the grain growth capacity directly, and indirect effects (through reducing source strength due to accelerated senescence) were not evident”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Indirect effects of heat on maize, through reduced source strength from accelerated senescence, were not evident.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Heat affected the grain growth capacity directly, and indirect effects (through reducing source strength due to accelerated senescence) were not evident”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain weight reductions due to defoliation were not hierarchical; grains from different ear positions responded similarly.
- Organ / stage
- grainse4
- Outcome
- grain weight reductions due to defoliatione4
- Qualifier
- grains from different positions along the ear responded similarlye4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“grain weight reductions due to defoliation were not hierarchical (grains from different positions along the ear responded similarly)”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
The reduction in maize grain weight was similar for grains with different potential size.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“the reduction in grain weight was similar for grains with different potential size”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
The penalty imposed by heat on maize was neither increased by defoliation nor diminished by degraining.
- Treatment
- heate6
- Outcome
- penalty imposed by heate6
- Qualifier
- neither increased by defoliation nor diminished by degraininge6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“The penalty imposed by heat was neither increased by defoliation nor diminished by degraining”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize yield is limited by sink strength during grain filling.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“maize yield is limited by the sink strength during grain filling”
t0“Maize Grain Weight Sensitivity to Source–Sink Manipulations under a Wide Range of Field Conditions”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
87 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
170 papers more in this group
See all 174 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.