A bibliographic review of climate change and fertilization as the main drivers of maize yield: implications for food security

Ocwa, Akasairi; Harsanyi, Endre; Széles, Adrienn; Holb, Imre János; Szabó, Szilárd; Rátonyi, Tamás; Mohammed, Safwan

doi:10.1186/s40066-023-00419-3

Agriculture & Food Security

Table 5 The summary of effect of fertilizers × other agronomic practices on maize yield (selected data)

From: A bibliographic review of climate change and fertilization as the main drivers of maize yield: implications for food security

Country	Soil type (experimental site)	Fertilizer × agronomic practice(s)	Yield	Yield increase (% change from the control)	Reference
Spain	Calcic Cambisol/TypicCalcixerept	Nitrogen × Irrigation levels 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea split into two dressings (4–6 and 8 leaves) + 75% irrigation 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea split into two dressings (4–6 and 8 leaves) + 100% irrigation 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea applied at 4–6 leaves + 75% irrigation 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea applied at 4–6 leaves + 100% irrigation 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea (with urease inhibitor) split into two dressings (4–6 and 8 leaves) + 75% irrigation 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea (with urease inhibitor) split into two dressings (4–6 and 8 leaves) + 100% irrigation 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea (with urease inhibitor) applied at 4–6 leaves + 75% irrigation 170 kg N ha⁻¹ of urea (with urease inhibitor applied at 4–6 leaves + 100% irrigation Control (no fertilizer) + 75% irrigation Control (no fertilizer) + 100% irrigation	9.8 t ha⁻¹ 16.7 t ha⁻¹ 9.8 t ha⁻¹ 16.1 t ha⁻¹ 9.6 t ha⁻¹ 14.2 t ha⁻¹ 12.4 t ha⁻¹ 17.2 t ha⁻¹ 6.91 t ha⁻¹ 10.8 t ha⁻¹	41.8 54.6 41.8 49.1 38.9 31.5 79.5 59.3	[80]
Italy	Calcaric gleyic cambisol	Nitrogen × tillage types 90N kg ha⁻¹ + conventional tillage 90N kg ha⁻¹ + no tillage 180 N kg ha⁻¹ + conventional tillage 180 N kg ha⁻¹ + no tillage Control + conventional tillage Control + no tillage	2.4 t ha⁻¹ 1.6 t ha⁻¹ 3.2 t ha⁻¹ 2.2 t ha⁻¹ 1.4 t ha⁻¹ 0.95 t ha⁻¹	71.4 68.4 128 131.6	[66]
Benin	Ferralitic soil	NPK × mycorrhiza Sans CMA + 100% NPK Sans CMA + 50% NPK Glomus caledonius + 50% NPK Diversispora globifera + 50% NPK Acaulospora capsicula + A. dilatata + 50% NPK Sans CMA + 0% NPK Glomus caledonius + 0% NPK Diversispora globifera + 0% NPK Acaulospora capsicula + A. dilatata + 0% NPK	4.7 t ha⁻¹ 2.9 t ha⁻¹ 4.2 t ha⁻¹ 3.3 t ha⁻¹ 3.1 t ha⁻¹ 1.6 t ha⁻¹ 2.6 t ha⁻¹ 2.5 t ha⁻¹ 2.4 t ha⁻¹	193 81.3 61.5 24.2 29.2	[69]
Italy	Mesic Udertic Haplustalf soil	N fertilization (urea) × gypsum seed dressing 100% N fertilization (230 kg N ha⁻¹) + gypsum seed dressing 70% N fertilization (160 kg N ha⁻¹) + gypsum seed dressing 0% N fertilization (control) + gypsum seed dressing 100% N fertilization (230 kg N ha⁻¹) 70% N fertilization (160 kg N ha⁻¹) 0% N fertilization (control)	4.5 t ha⁻¹ 3.6 t ha⁻¹ 2.8 t ha⁻¹ 4.1 t ha⁻¹ 3.2 t ha⁻¹ 2.6 t ha⁻¹	9.7 12.5 7.7	[68]
Kenya	Sandy clay loams in texture (chromic luvisols)	Fertilization (NPK 1:1:1) × ridge-furrow plastic-mulching 375 kg ha⁻¹ + RFT 375 kg ha⁻¹ + RFB 375 kg ha⁻¹ + FP 225 ha⁻¹ + RFT 225 ha⁻¹ + RFB 225 ha⁻¹ + FP RFT (control) RFB (control) FP (control) RFT (alternative ridges-furrows with transparent polyethylene film), RFB( alternative ridges-furrows with black polyethylene film), FP (conventional flat planting)	4.3 t ha⁻¹ 4.3 t ha⁻¹ 2.9 t ha⁻¹ 4.2 t ha⁻¹ 4.1 t ha⁻¹ 2.4 t ha⁻¹ 3.8 t ha⁻¹ 3.8 t ha⁻¹ 1.7 t ha⁻¹	13.2 13.2 41.4 10.5 7.9 41.1	[81]
China	Fluvoaquic	N fertilizer rates × drought stress (mean of two varieties) 120 N kg ha⁻¹ + drought 120 N kg ha⁻¹ + non-drought 180 N kg ha⁻¹ + drought 180 N kg ha⁻¹ + non-drought 240 N kg ha⁻¹ + drought 240 N kg ha⁻¹ + non-drought 360 N kg ha⁻¹ + drought 360 N kg ha⁻¹ + non-drought 0 N kg ha⁻¹ + drought 0 N kg ha⁻¹ + non-drought	6.7 t ha⁻¹ 8.3 t ha⁻¹ 6.4 t ha⁻¹ 9.6 t ha⁻¹ 6.2 t ha⁻¹ 8.7 t ha⁻¹ 6.1 t ha⁻¹ 8.5 t ha⁻¹ 6.0 t ha⁻¹ 6.9 t ha⁻¹	11.6 20.3 6.7 39.1 3.3 26.1 1.7 23.1	[32]
Zimbabwe	Granite-derived sands	Fertilization rate × planting date Low rate (35 kg N ha⁻¹, 14 kg P ha⁻¹, 3 t ha⁻¹ manure) + early planting High rate (90 kg N ha⁻¹, 26 kg P ha⁻¹, 7 t ha⁻¹ manure) + early planting Low rate (35 kg N ha⁻¹, 14 kg P ha⁻¹, 3 t ha⁻¹ manure) + normal planting High rate (90 kg N ha⁻¹, 26 kg P ha⁻¹, 7 t ha⁻¹ manure) + normal planting Low rate (35 kg N ha⁻¹, 14 kg P ha⁻¹, 3 t ha⁻¹ manure) + late planting High rate (90 kg N ha⁻¹, 26 kg P ha⁻¹, 7 t ha⁻¹ manure) + late planting Control/no fertilizer + early planting Control/no fertilizer + normal planting Control/no fertilizer + late planting	1.7 t ha⁻¹ 3.9 t ha⁻¹ 1.9 t ha ⁻¹ 3.3 t ha⁻¹ 0.6 t ha ⁻¹ 0.9 t ha ⁻¹ 0.6 t ha ⁻¹ 0.7 t ha ⁻¹ 0.2 t ha⁻¹	183 550 171.4 371.4 200 350	[83]
China	Sandy and clay soil	Drip fertigation methods (NPK) × soil type Drip irrigation + sandy soil Drip irrigation + clay soil Surface drip fertigation × sandy soil Surface drip fertigation × clay soil Subsurface drip fertigation + sandy soil Subsurface drip fertigation + clay soil Surface drip fertigation and plastic mulch + sandy soil Surface drip fertigation and plastic mulch + clay soil Conventional + sandy soil Conventional + clay soil	12.0 t ha⁻¹ 14.8 t ha⁻¹ 13.2 t ha⁻¹ 15.5 t ha⁻¹ 12.8 t ha⁻¹ 14.99 t ha⁻¹ 13.3 t ha⁻¹ 15.7 t ha⁻¹ 9.4 t ha⁻¹ 13.2 t ha⁻¹	27.7 12.1 40.4 17.4 36.2 13.6 41.5 18.9	[47]

Back to article page

ISSN: 2048-7010

Contact us

Submission enquiries: sathish.venkatesan@springernature.com
General enquiries: info@biomedcentral.com