Skip to main content
. 2016 Sep 1;11(9):e0161424. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161424

Table 2. Effects of waterlogging on grain yield and yield components of summer maize.

Hybrid Treatment Ear number Grains per ear 1000-grain weight Yield
(ears ha-1) (g) (kg ha-1)
DH605 V3-3 65,320a 499c 331c 10,756d
V3-6 64,914c 437d 317d 8,973e
V6-3 65,278ab 518bc 346b 11,634c
V6-6 65,132b 495c 338c 10,830d
10VT-3 65,049bc 567a 364a 13,371b
10VT-6 65,437a 522b 351b 11,971c
CK 65,320a 586a 367a 14,016a
ZD958 V3-3 65,043b 519c 309de 10,418d
V3-6 63,730c 445e 295e 8,380f
V6-3 65,328a 522bc 324c 11,232c
V6-6 63,256c 476d 314d 9,490e
10VT-3 65,375a 543ab 345a 12,240b
10VT-6 65,016b 527b 333b 11,415c
CK 65,954a 563a 350a 12,978a
ANOVA
Waterlogging period (P) NS * * **
Waterlogging duration (D) * ** * **
P×D NS * * **

V3-3: waterlogging for 3 d at the third leaf stage; V3-6: waterlogging for 6 d at the third leaf stage; V6-3: waterlogging for 3 d at the sixth leaf stage; V6-6: waterlogging for 6 d at the sixth leaf stage; 10VT-3: waterlogging for 3 d at the 10th day after tasseling stage; 10VT-6: waterlogging for 6 d at the 10th day after tasseling stage; CK: no waterlogging

Values fallowed by a different small letter within a column are significantly different (P = 0.05) according to L. S. D. (t).

NS: Not significant.

* Significant at the 0.05 probability level

** Significant at the 0.01 probability level