Abstract
Soil acidity and associated fertility problems is a major challenge to maize production in western Ethiopia, reducing yield and contributing to food insecurity. This is worsened by the fact that breeding programs focused on testing and developing high-yielding varieties under optimum soil conditions, resulting in limited information on the performance of maize varieties across diverse soil pH. This study aimed to evaluate and identify maize varieties tolerant to soil acidity. Nine improved varieties (BH661, BH549, BHQP548, BH547, BH546, BHQPY545, BH5212, BH5211, and Gibe2) were evaluated under two soil pH levels (4.8 and 5.9) at Bako in 2023, using a randomized complete block design with three replications. Results showed that soil acidity and varieties significantly affected maize growth and yield with acidic conditions negatively affecting all varieties. However, BH5211, BH661, and BH547 showed the least yield reductions while BHQPY545 showed the highest yield reduction, indicating variability in adaptability. BH5211, BH661, and BH547 exhibited high grain yield stability across both pH levels, indicating broad adaptability, whereas BHQPY545 showed instability and specific adaptability. Stress tolerance indices supported these findings. Principal component analyses Showed 85.2% of total variability, with PC1 (68%) mainly influenced by biomass and grains per cob, and PC2 (17.2%) majorly affected by grain rows per cob. Varieties were grouped into four clusters; Cluster IV showed superiority in most yield and yield related variables. Overall, findings demonstrate the need for future crop improvement programs to deliberately consider soil acidity tolerance as one of selection criteria in the developing of maize varieties for high yield. Further studies on acid tolerance mechanisms and multi-location field trials are required to validate and refine these results.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Acidic conditions significantly reduced growth and yield across maize varieties.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“soil acidity and varieties significantly affected maize growth and yield with acidic conditions negatively affecting all varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
BH5211, BH661 and BH547 had the least yield reductions.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BH5211, BH661, and BH547 showed the least yield reductions”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BHQPY545 had the highest yield reduction.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BHQPY545 showed the highest yield reduction”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BH5211, BH661 and BH547 had high grain yield stability across both pH levels.
- Material
- BH5211, BH661, and BH547e0
- Outcome
- grain yield stabilitye0
- Direction
- highe0
- Qualifier
- across both pH levelse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BH5211, BH661, and BH547 exhibited high grain yield stability across both pH levels”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BHQPY545 had unstable yield and specific adaptability.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BHQPY545 showed instability and specific adaptability”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Principal components explained 85.2% of variability, with biomass and grains per cob prominent in PC1.
- Outcome
- total variabilitye0
- Value
- 85.2%e0
- Qualifier
- PC1 (68%) mainly influenced by biomass and grains per cobe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Principal component analyses Showed 85.2% of total variability, with PC1 (68%) mainly influenced by biomass and grains per cob”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PC2 explained 17.2% and was mainly affected by grain rows per cob.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PC2 (17.2%) majorly affected by grain rows per cob”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Cluster IV was superior in most yield variables.
- Material
- Cluster IVe0
- Outcome
- superiority in most yield and yield related variablese0
- Direction
- superioritye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Varieties were grouped into four clusters; Cluster IV showed superiority in most yield and yield related variables”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend including soil acidity tolerance in maize selection criteria.
- Outcome
- consider soil acidity tolerance as one of selection criteriae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“future crop improvement programs to deliberately consider soil acidity tolerance as one of selection criteria in the developing of maize varieties for high yield”