Abstract
This experiment was conducted to determine the effect of defoliation time on the productivity of maize, forage and in vitro digestibility of maize leaves (ML). The response of grain yield, plant height, days to 50% silking, ear height and leaf yield as well as the chemical composition of ML variety "Obasuper" to defoliation time were evaluated in a randomized complete block design with four defoliation treatments 3, 6, 9 weeks after planting (WAP) and undefoliated treatment replicated four times. Results showed that defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyond did not have any significant (P>0.05) effect on the grain and leaf yield as well as other yield components of maize. Grain and leaf yield at 9 WAP averaged 2778.35 and 975.74 DM kg/ha respectively. The DM, crude protein (CP) and fibre fractions contents of ML varied significantly (P<0.05) among the defoliation treatments with maize defoliated at 9 WAP having a CP content of 12.6%. Ether extract and ash contents were not affected (P>0.05) by defoliation time. The in vitro digestibility of ML decreased significantly (P<0.05) with increase in the time of defoliation ranging from 59.2 and 66.4%. IT was concluded that maize variety "Obasuper" can produce forage of high quality and quantity when defoliated 9 weeks after planting wihout any anyadverse effect on the grain yield of maize.
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
Defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyond did not significantly affect grain and leaf yield compared with undefoliated maize.
- Treatment
- defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyonde1
- Outcome
- grain and leaf yielde1
- Comparator
- undefoliated treatmente0
Zea maysNot reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“four defoliation treatments 3, 6, 9 weeks after planting (WAP) and undefoliated treatment replicated four times”
e1“Results showed that defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyond did not have any significant (P>0.05) effect on the grain and leaf yield as well as other yield components of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield of maize defoliated at 9 WAP averaged 2778.35 kg/ha.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Results showed that defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyond did not have any significant (P>0.05) effect on the grain and leaf yield as well as other yield components of maize”
e2“Grain and leaf yield at 9 WAP averaged 2778.35 and 975.74 DM kg/ha respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf yield of maize defoliated at 9 WAP averaged 975.74 kg/ha.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Results showed that defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyond did not have any significant (P>0.05) effect on the grain and leaf yield as well as other yield components of maize”
e2“Grain and leaf yield at 9 WAP averaged 2778.35 and 975.74 DM kg/ha respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize leaves defoliated at 9 WAP had a crude protein content of 12.6%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“The DM, crude protein (CP) and fibre fractions contents of ML varied significantly (P<0.05) among the defoliation treatments with maize defoliated at 9 WAP having a CP content of 12.6%”
Claim · model-written summary
DM, crude protein and fibre fraction contents of maize leaves varied significantly among defoliation treatments.
- Treatment
- defoliation treatmentse3
- Outcome
- DM, crude protein (CP) and fibre fractions contentse3
- Comparator
- undefoliated treatmente0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“four defoliation treatments 3, 6, 9 weeks after planting (WAP) and undefoliated treatment replicated four times”
e3“The DM, crude protein (CP) and fibre fractions contents of ML varied significantly (P<0.05) among the defoliation treatments with maize defoliated at 9 WAP having a CP content of 12.6%”
Claim · model-written summary
Ether extract and ash contents of maize leaves were not affected by defoliation time.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Results showed that defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyond did not have any significant (P>0.05) effect on the grain and leaf yield as well as other yield components of maize”
e4“Ether extract and ash contents were not affected (P>0.05) by defoliation time”
Claim · model-written summary
In vitro digestibility of maize leaves decreased significantly with increasing defoliation time, from 59.2 to 66.4%.
- Treatment
- time of defoliatione5
- Outcome
- in vitro digestibility of MLe5
- Direction
- decreasede5
- Value
- 59.2 and 66.4%e5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Results showed that defoliating maize at 9 WAP and beyond did not have any significant (P>0.05) effect on the grain and leaf yield as well as other yield components of maize”
e5“The in vitro digestibility of ML decreased significantly (P<0.05) with increase in the time of defoliation ranging from 59.2 and 66.4%”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize variety Obasuper can produce forage of high quality and quantity when defoliated 9 weeks after planting.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“IT was concluded that maize variety "Obasuper" can produce forage of high quality and quantity when defoliated 9 weeks after planting”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · quality: grain · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →pruning · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
87 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction
- positive
- 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.