Abstract
Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.) and other grain crops by (i) reducing canopy absorption of incident photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), (ii) reducing radiation use efficiency (RUE), and (iii) reducing harvest index (HI). The primary objective of this work was to quantify yield losses attributable to each of these components for maize exposed to drought stress in a 2‐yr field study. A second objective was to examine the relationship between RUE at the single leaf level (estimated using chlorophyll fluorescence techniques) and RUE at the whole crop level. Two levels of soil water deficit and a control treatment were established using drip tape irrigation, and dry matter harvests were taken at midseason and at physiological maturity. Mild and severe water stress treatments reduced final grain yield by 63 and 85%, respectively, in 2000, and by 13 and 26%, respectively, in 2001. Reduction of intercepted PAR (IPAR) was generally a very minor yield loss component. Yield losses attributable to reduced RUE and reduced HI were of similar magnitude. Weekly chlorophyll fluorescence measurements were used to estimate the average quantum efficiency of photosystem II at a photosynthetic photon flux density of 1200 μmol m −2 s −1 (Φ II1200 ) for each plot. Crop dry matter accumulation was not linearly related to IPAR, due to decreased RUE in the water stress treatments. However, the linear relationship was restored when daily IPAR was multiplied by the current estimate of Φ II1200 , suggesting that Φ II1200 can be used as an indicator of whole‐crop RUE.
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
Mild water stress reduced final grain yield of maize by 63% relative to the control in 2000.
- Treatment
- Mild and severe water stress treatmentse1
- Outcome
- final grain yielde1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 63e1
- Qualifier
- in 2000e1
- Comparator
- control treatmente2
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“Mild and severe water stress treatments reduced final grain yield by 63 and 85%, respectively, in 2000, and by 13 and 26%, respectively, in 2001”
e2“Two levels of soil water deficit and a control treatment were established using drip tape irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
Severe water stress reduced final grain yield of maize by 85% relative to the control in 2000.
- Treatment
- Mild and severe water stress treatmentse1
- Outcome
- final grain yielde1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 85%e1
- Qualifier
- in 2000e1
- Comparator
- control treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“Mild and severe water stress treatments reduced final grain yield by 63 and 85%, respectively, in 2000, and by 13 and 26%, respectively, in 2001”
e2“Two levels of soil water deficit and a control treatment were established using drip tape irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
Mild water stress reduced final grain yield of maize by 13% relative to the control in 2001.
- Treatment
- Mild and severe water stress treatmentse1
- Outcome
- final grain yielde1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 13e1
- Qualifier
- in 2001e1
- Comparator
- control treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“Mild and severe water stress treatments reduced final grain yield by 63 and 85%, respectively, in 2000, and by 13 and 26%, respectively, in 2001”
e2“Two levels of soil water deficit and a control treatment were established using drip tape irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
Severe water stress reduced final grain yield of maize by 26% relative to the control in 2001.
- Treatment
- Mild and severe water stress treatmentse1
- Outcome
- final grain yielde1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 26%e1
- Qualifier
- in 2001e1
- Comparator
- control treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“Mild and severe water stress treatments reduced final grain yield by 63 and 85%, respectively, in 2000, and by 13 and 26%, respectively, in 2001”
e2“Two levels of soil water deficit and a control treatment were established using drip tape irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduction of intercepted PAR was generally a very minor component of maize yield loss under drought.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e3“Reduction of intercepted PAR (IPAR) was generally a very minor yield loss component”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield losses from reduced RUE and from reduced HI were of similar magnitude in drought-stressed maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e4“Yield losses attributable to reduced RUE and reduced HI were of similar magnitude”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop dry matter accumulation of maize was not linearly related to intercepted PAR under water stress, owing to decreased RUE.
- Treatment
- water stress treatmentse5
- Outcome
- Crop dry matter accumulatione5
- Qualifier
- due to decreased RUEe5
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e5“Crop dry matter accumulation was not linearly related to IPAR, due to decreased RUE in the water stress treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Multiplying daily IPAR by the chlorophyll fluorescence estimate restored the linear relationship with dry matter, suggesting the estimate indicates whole-crop RUE.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought stress reduces yield of maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e6“the linear relationship was restored when daily IPAR was multiplied by the current estimate of”
The same questions in other papers
drought · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
299 papers in the same direction as this paper · 53 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
349 papers more in this group
See all 353 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.