4.5 Review

Grain Nitrogen Source Changes over Time in Maize: A Review

期刊

CROP SCIENCE
卷 53, 期 2, 页码 366-377

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2012.07.0439

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Dow AgroSciences, Potash Corporation
  2. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA award) [2010-85117-20607]
  3. Purdue Bilsland Dissertation Fellowship
  4. NIFA [580996, 2010-85117-20607] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the sources of grain N uptake (Grain N) in maize (Zea mays L.) and especially the trade-off between reproductive-stage shoot N remobilization (Remobilized N) and reproductive-stage whole-plant N uptake (Reproductive N) is needed to help guide future improvements in yield and N use efficiency (NUE). Therefore, a literature review was performed to investigate the knowledge gap concerning changes over time in Grain N sources and on N partitioning to the grain and stover plant fractions at maturity. The synthesis-analysis was based on 100 reports, which were divided into two time intervals: (i) research conducted from 1940 to 1990-Old Era-and (ii) research conducted from 1991 to 2011-New Era. The most remarkable results were (i) Grain N concentration was the main parameter that has changed over time, (ii) Reproductive N contributed proportionally more to Grain N for the New Era while Reproductive N and Remobilized N contributed equally to Grain N for the Old Era, (iii) Remobilized N was primarily associated with vegetative-stage whole-plant N uptake (Vegetative N), which was constant across eras, although the proportion of the Remobilized N itself seems to be driven by the ear demand, (iv) complex plant regulation processes (source: sink) appeared to influence Reproductive N, and (v) stover N concentration gains mirrored the grain N concentration as the plant N uptake increased at maturity in both eras. This new appreciation for the changes over time may assist directed selection for yield and NUE improvements.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据