Effects of Plant Density and Fertilization on Optimization of Maize Yield
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maize is a globally important staple crop, and optimizing its yield through agronomic practices remains a primary focus in agricultural research. This study investigates the effects of plant density and fertilization strategies on maize yield optimization, emphasizing their individual and combined influences. We examined how different plant densities, ranging from low to high, affect yield potential under varying environmental and management conditions, and identified the optimal densities for specific agronomic scenarios. Additionally, we explored the role of nutrient management-particularly nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and micronutrients-highlighting precision and site-specific fertilization strategies that enhance crop productivity. The interaction between plant density and fertilization was also analyzed, revealing their synergistic impact on yield response, plant morphology, and soil health. A regional case study conducted in the North China Plain further demonstrated the practical implications of integrated density-fertilization regimes. This study underscores the significance of genotype × environment × management interactions and points to the need for adaptive, innovative practices to achieve sustainable yield gains. Future research should aim to refine optimization models and promote evidence-based recommendations for diverse agroecological contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".