Investigating Yield, Yield Components, Morphological Characteristics and Proline of Different Hybrids of Sweet Corn (Zea mays var. Saccharata) in Different Irrigation Regimes

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• A Estakhr ¹
• S. A. M Modarres-Sanavy ¹
• M AghaAlikhani ¹
• A Heidarzadeh ²
• A. M Abedi ¹

¹ Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

² Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbia Modares University, Tehran, Iran

10.22067/jcesc.2025.89806.1351

Abstract

Introduction
One of the main challenges in achieving sustainable agriculture is maintaining production under environmental stress. Drought, a prominent geographical feature of our country, is an unavoidable and unchangeable phenomenon. At the same time, the consumption of energy, water, and food resources is increasing rapidly, making it essential to develop strategies to mitigate and reduce its adverse impacts. Sweet corn (Zea mays var. Saccharata), scientifically known as (Zea mays var. Saccharata), is a genetically modified plant of regular corn. This genetic modification causes the accumulation of sugars and soluble polysaccharides in the endosperm of the seed. This plant has special economic importance because all its parts, including the cob, stem, leaves, wood, and husk, are used. Unlike regular corn, this plant is consumed fresh by humans. The most critical stage in terms of water consumption in sweet corn is the flowering stage, from the appearance of silks to the end of cell division in the growing seed endosperm. Stress occurrence at this stage causes a 14% reduction in grain yield. Meanwhile, stress occurrence in later stages, such as cob elongation and seed maturation, results in a 31% and 21% reduction in grain yield, respectively. The aim of this research is to study the response of different sweet corn cultivars to various irrigation regimes through traits such as seed yield, dry weight of 100 seeds, leaf area index, yield components, and proline content.
Materials and Methods
To compare the response of four foreign hybrids and one domestic hybrid cultivar of sweet corn to different irrigation regimes during flowering, an experiment was conducted in a split-plot design based on randomized complete block design with three replications. In this experiment, the irrigation regimes included: a- stopping irrigation until soil moisture depletion reached 15% of available water and then irrigating to field capacity in the root development zone (control: optimal irrigation), b- stopping irrigation until soil moisture depletion reached 35% of available water in the root development zone (mild water deficit stress), c- stopping irrigation until soil moisture depletion reached 55% of available water and then irrigating to field capacity in the root development zone (moderate water deficit stress), d- stopping irrigation until soil moisture depletion reached 75% of available water and then irrigating to field capacity in the root development zone (severe water deficit stress), applied during the reproductive stage in the main plots and sweet corn cultivars (Merit, Honey, Genesis, Chase, and Single cross 403) in the sub-plots.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the optimal irrigation treatment had the highest grain yield with an average of 5159.6 kg ha^-1, while severe water stress had the lowest grain yield with an average of 3429.2
kg ha^-1, which was 33% less than the best treatment. Among the studied cultivars, the Genesis cultivar had the highest grain yield. The Honey cultivar showed the lowest grain yield among the studied cultivars, which was 20% less than the best cultivar. Severe water deficit stress had the lowest dry weight of 100 grains, which was 20% less than the optimal irrigation conditions. The highest biological yield were obtained under optimal irrigation conditions and the Honey cultivar. The single cross 403 had the lowest biological yield under severe water deficit stress conditions.
Conclusion
The study demonstrated that optimal irrigation significantly enhanced sweet corn yield, leaf area index, and biological yield, while severe water stress substantially reduced these parameters. Among the hybrids, Genesis outperformed others in grain yield, making it the most suitable choice under water-limited conditions. Conversely, the Honey hybrid exhibited the highest proline concentration, indicating better stress tolerance. Overall, the Genesis hybrid is recommended for cultivation in drought-prone areas due to its superior yield.

Keywords

• Biological yield
• Grain yield
• Harvast index
• Leaf area index

Main Subjects

• Environmental stresses

---

©2025 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source.

References

1. Abedi,, Modarres-Sanavy, S. A. M., & Heidarzadeh, A. (2024). Study of yield and yield components of camelina (Camelina sativa L.) under water deficit stress conditions with the application of zeolite and wood vinegar. Plant Productions, 48(1), 43-50. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22055/ppd.2024.46482.2155
2. AghaAlikhani, M., & Mohammadi, Kh. (2018). Sweet corn Agronomic & Genetic Approaches. Tarbiat Modares University Press, Tehran, Iran. 408 pp. (in Persian).
3. Ahmadi, M., & Bahrani, M. J. (2009). Effect of different nitrogen levels on yield and yield components and oil rate of sesame cultivars in Bushehr region. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 13(48), 123-131. (In Persian with English abstract).
4. Bates, L. S., Waldren, R. P., & Teare, I. D. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39(1), 205-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060
5. Catville, L., Rizza, F., Badeck, F. W., Mazzucotelli, E., & Mastrangelo, A. M. (2008). Drought tolerance improvement in crop plants: An integrated view from breeding to genomics. Field Crops Research, 105(1-2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2007.07.004
6. Dadresi, V., Aboutalebian, M. A., & Seyedi, M. (2015). Effect of on-farm seed priming on yield and yield components of two maize cultivars. Journal of Crop Production and Processing, 5(16), 153-162.
7. Daryanto, S., Wang, L., & Jacinthe, P. A. (2016). Global synthesis of drought effects on maize and wheat production. PLoS ONE, 11(5), e0156362. https://doi.org/1371/journal.pone.0156362
8. Ding, S., He, F., Tang, W., Du, H., & Wang, H. (2019). Identification of maize CC-type glutaredoxins that are associated with response to drought stress. Genes, 10(8), 610. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10080610
9. Dourandish, A., Soleymani Nejad, S., Sabouhi Sabouni, M., & Banayan Aval, M. (2019). The effects of climate change on cropping pattern (Case study: Mashhad plain). Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 50(2), 249-263. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijaedr.2019.237998.668461
10. Hante, H., & Aminiyan, M. M. (2017). The response of late-maturing corn hybrids to the application of potassium sulfate under deficit irrigation conditions. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 11(2), 283-302.
11. Kalamian, S., Modares-Sanavi, A. M., & Sepehri, A. (2005). Effect of water deficit at vegetative and reproductive growth stage in leafy and commercial hybrids of maize. Agricultural Research Water, Soil, and Plant, 5(1), 38-53.
12. Kamara, A. Y., Menkir, A., Badu-Apraku, B., & Ibikunle, O. (2003). The influence of drought stress on growth, yield and yield components of selected maize genotypes. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 141(1), 43-50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859603003423
13. Khalily, M., Moghaddam, M., Kanouni, H., & Asheri, E. (2010). Dissection of drought stress as a grain production constraint of maize in Iran. Asian Journal of Crop Science, 2(2), 60-69. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajcs.2010.60.69
14. Khavari Khorasani, S. (2020). Practical guide to sweet corn production. Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO) Press. 78 pp.
15. Koocheki, A., & Sarmadnia, G. H. (2005). Physiology of crop plants. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Press.
16. Maghsoudi, K., Emam, Y., Niazi, A., Pessarakli, M., & Arvin, M. J. (2018). P5CS expression level and proline accumulation in the sensitive and tolerant wheat cultivars under control and drought stress conditions in the presence/absence of silicon and salicylic acid. Journal of Plant Interactions, 13(1), 461-471. https://doi.org/1080/17429145.2018.1506516
17. Mahrokh, A., Nabipour, M., Roshanfekr-Dezfouli, H., & Choukan, R. (2016). The effect of foliar application of auxin and cytokinin hormones on the photosynthetic pigments and proline content of single-cross 704 corn leaves under drought stress. Plant Process and Function, 5(16), 165-179.
18. Martin, G. A., Viskochil, D., Bollag, G., McCabe, P. C., Crosier, W. J., Haubruck, H., Conroy, L., Clark, R., O'Connell, P., Cawthon, R. M., Innis, M. A., & McCormick, F. (1990). The GAP-related domain of the neurofibromatosis type 1 gene product interacts with ras p21. Cell, 63(4), 843-849. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(90)90150-D
19. Mi, N., Cai, F., Zhang, Y., Ji, R., Zhang, S., & Wang, Y. (2018). Differential responses of maize yield to drought at vegetative and reproductive stages. Plant, Soil and Environment, 64(6), 260-267. https://doi.org/10.17221/141/2018-PSE
20. Mojadam, M. (2009). Effect of water stress and management of using nitrogen on distribution of dry matter and some characteristics in maize hybrid cv. KSC 704. Environmental Stress in Crop Sciences, 1(2), 123-136.
21. Nakhjavani Moghaddam, M. M., Dehghanisanij, H., Akbari, M., & Sadreghaem, S. H. (2010). The effects of deficit irrigation on water use efficiency of new early maize variety (CN.KSC.302) using sprinkler system. Journal of Water and Soil, 24(6), 1237-1244. https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.v0i0.7509
22. Nakhjavani-Moghaddam, M. M., Najafi, E., Sadrghaen, S. H., & Farhadi, E. (2011). Effect of different levels of irrigation and plant density on grain yield and yield components and water use efficiency in maize cv. KSC 302. Seed and Plant Production Journal, 27(1), 73-90.
23. Papari Moghaddam Fard, A., & Bahrani, M. J. (2005). Effect of nitrogen fertilizer rates and plant density on some agronomic characteristics, seed yield, oil and protein percentage in two sesame cultivars. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science, 36(1), 129-135.
24. Rafiee, M., Karimi, M., Nurmohamadi, G. H., & Nadian, H. (2009). Effects of drought stress and phosphorus and zinc levels on some morphological and physiological traits of maize. Physiology of Crop Science, 1(1), 1-9.
25. Rezaei-Sukht-Abnadani, R., Charati Araei, A., Akbari Nodehi, D., & Ramazani, M. (2008). Effect of irrigation and different nitrogen levels on silage dry yield and water use efficiency in Maize cv. KSC 704 in Mazandaran province. Results of Modern Agriculture, 3(2), 122-135.
26. Rughani, M., Imam Jomeh, S. R., & Kamali, K. (2012). Possibility of designing TDR sensors and evaluating their performance in soil moisture measurement. Journal of Water and Soil Engineering of Iran, 5(17), 53-62.
27. Salehi-Eskandari, B., Abaspour, J., & Forghani, A. H. (2022). The effect of drought stress on seed germination chlorophyll, proline and antioxidant enzyme activity in two cultivars of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences, 15(1), 93-104. https://doi.org/22077/escs.2020.3712.1895
28. Schwartz, R. C., Bell, J. M., Baumhardt, R. L., Colaizzi, P. D., Hiltbrunner, B. A., Witt, T. W., & Brauer, D. K. (2022). Response of maize hybrids under limited irrigation capacities: Yield and yield components. Agronomy Journal, 114(2), 1338-1352. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21013
29. Shamohammadi, N., Zare, M., Ordokhani, K., Aref, F., & Sharafzaeh, S. (2024). Grain corn yield under the influence of water deficit stress, biological and chemical fertilizers. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 55(1), 23-36. https://doi.org/22059/ijfcs.2023.352991.654966
30. Sinaki, J. M., Heravan, E. M., Rad, A. S., Noormohammadi, G. H., & Zarei, G. H. (2007). The effects of water deficit during growth stages of canola (Brassica napus). American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science, 4(4), 417-422.
31. Tahaei, S. A. R., Nasari, M., Soleymani, A., Ghooshchi, F., & Oveysi, M. (2022). Effects of growth regulators and proline amino acid on yield and yield components of single cross 704 maize under drought stress conditions in Isfahan province. Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences, 15(3), 657-668. https://doi.org/10.22077/escs.2021.3988.1948
32. Vanclooster, M., Viaene, P., Diels, J., & Christiaens, K. (1994). WAVE: A mathematical model for simulating water and agrochemicals in the soil and vadose environment. Institute for Land and Water Management, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
33. Zhang, Y., Hansen, N., Trout, T., Nielsen, D., & Paustian, K. (2018). Modeling deficit irrigation of maize with the DayCent model. Agronomy Journal, 110(5), 1754-1764. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2017.10.0585