ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Eect of dierent nitrogen sources on growth, yield

and quality of fodder maize (Zea mays L.)
Mohamed El-Murtada Hassan Amin
Crop Science Department, Faulty of Agriculture, Omdurman Islamic University, Sudan
Received 4 April 2010; accepted 9 June 2010
Available online 17 December 2010
KEYWORDS
Zea mays;
Plant height;
Stem diameter;
Leaf area index;
Forage yield;
Forage quality
Abstract A eld experiment was conducted for two consecutive seasons in 2004/2005 and 2005/
2006 at the demonstration farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, Omdurman Islamic University,
Sudan, to investigate the effect of different nitrogen sources on growth, yield and quality of fodder
maize (Zea mays L.). The nitrogen sources are urea, nitrophoska (NPK), ammonium sulphate
nitrate (ASN) and ammonium sulphate (AS). The design used was completely randomized block
design with four replicates.
The growth attributes measured, were plant height, stem diameter, number of leaves, leaf area,
leaf area index. Number of days to 50% tasseling, forage yield, crude protein and crude ber were
also investigated in this study.
The results revealed that nitrogen sources signicantly affected growth parameters at all sampling
occasions during the two seasons. Remarkable results noticed at nitrogen sources ASN owed by
NPK and the AS, as compared with urea.
The results showed that, the number of the days for 50%tasseling, fresh forage yield and dry forage
yield were signicantly affected by nitrogen sources during two seasons. Moreover, dry and fresh for-
age yield, increased progressively by ASN and NPK as compared with other nitrogen sources.
The present data revealed that, the crude protein and crude ber were signicantly affected by nitro-
gen sources in both seasons. The urea gave the lowest crude protein compared with the other nitrogen
sources. On the other hand, the lowest crude ber content was recorded when plant was treated with
(ASN) fertilizer, while the highest crude ber content was recorded only under the control.
2011 King Saud University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Maize (Zea mays L.) is a member of the family Poaceae. It was
originated in Mexico where its oldest known ears could be
traced back to about 7000 years ago (Mangeisdorf et al.,
1964). In world production, maize is ranked as the third major
cereal crop after wheat and rice. The crop has a wider range of
uses. These include the following: human food, industrial
E-mail address: aminfami@hotmail.com
1658-077X 2011 King Saud University. Production and hosting by
Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.
doi:10.1016/j.jssas.2010.06.003
Production and hosting by Elsevier
J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. (2011) 10, 1723
King Saud University
Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences
www.ksu.edu.sa
www.sciencedirect.com
processed food production of starch and used as forage to feed
animals. Maize with its large number of cultivars and different
maturity periods has wider range of tolerance to different envi-
ronmental conditions (Purseglove, 1972).
In Sudan, natural rangelands constitute about 45% of the
total area of the country. This area supported about 80% of
livestock (Ipperisiel et al., 1989). The major cultivated grass
forage crops include Abu Sabein (Sorghum bicolor), Sudan
grass (Sorghum sudanence), Tongna bean (Lablab purpureus),
Alfalfa America (Medicago sativa), the hybrid Pioneer (S. bico-
lor S. sudanence), and recently maize (Z. mays L.).
In Sudan, maize can be grown to produce forage in winter
seasons to solve problems of livestock feed shortage during
this period. Maize proved to be most suitable forage as it is
characterized by its high energy content and considerable pro-
tein content, compared to other cereal forage crops (Ipperisiel
et al., 1989). The reason behind planting maize for green for-
age production is to obtain succulent vegetative part in a com-
paratively short time (Toosey, 1972).
Maize plant as a whole is an important forage for many
dairy and beef animals. The crop is palatable, quick growing
with a high dry matter production and relatively high nutritive
value. Dry matter yield of maize is a function of numerous
interacting environmental and genetic factors. Temperature
and available soil water are major environmental factors, with
subsequent inuence on leaf area development and subsequent
dry matter yield (Dwyer and Stewart, 1986).
The leaf area and canopy structures are important growth
parameters for forage production. The optimum leaf area in-
dex for grain production is considerably less than that for max-
imum dry matter production. Goldsworthy et al. (1974)
demonstrated that when leaf area index was larger than ve
the additional dry matter produced accumulated mainly on
the stem and therefore, leaf production can be increased by
increasing leaf area per plant. All growth attributes that di-
rectly or indirectly affected forage yield and quality are af-
fected by cultural practices as well as agricultural inputs.
Maize is commonly fed to livestock as fodder stover or si-
lage (Christopher et al., 1966). The feeding of corn fodder is
popular in the semi-arid as well as in areas where corn often
fails to reach the stage of mature grain. The stalks of the crop
at this stage are more palatable and higher in protein than
other stages (John and Warren, 1967).
Forge yield in maize increases and quality decreases rapidly
as plant matures (Jung and Barkjer, 1973), indicating that har-
vesting at early heading stage is generally the right time to pro-
duce high forage yield with high quality. When maize is grown
for silage it is harvested 23 weeks earlier than maize harvested
for grain. Pain (1978) reported that when maize is the most
suitable crop to be grown for silage in temperate countries, for-
age maize become one of the most important feed stuff for
ruminants specially cattle (Rouanet, 1987).
Forage maize compared to other grasses has a relatively
high content of non-structural carbohydrates. In case of silage
maize, sugars within the cell and the water soluble carbohy-
drates are more important in the preservation of the silage
material (Pain, 1978). Other carbohydrate sugars are often
added to the crop for silage making.
In some performance studies, the introduced variety 8742,
recorded the highest relative growth rate, leaf area and dry
weight as compared to Mugtama 45 and Tlatizapan 8743
(Mohamed, 1997). Therefore, the selection of cultivars for
forage production may be an important management practice,
because it inuences the nutritive value (Graybill et al., 1991).
Nitrogen element is the nutrient that most frequently limits
yield and plays an important role in quality of forage crops. It
is almost decient in most soils of Africa and most of the tro-
pics (Jules, 1974).
Positive response of nitrogen fertilizers has been reported
by Koul (1997), Omer (1998), Gasim (2001) and Sawi (1993).
Sharma (1973) observed that addition of nitrogen fertilizer in-
creased plant height. Increase in plant height resulted in an in-
crease in leaf number per plant as reported by Akintoye (1996).
Gasim (2001) indicated that the increase in plant height
with nitrogen fertilizer is due to the fact that nitrogen pro-
motes plant growth, increases the number of internodes and
length of the internodes which results in progressive increase
in plant height. Chandler (1969), Turkhede and Rajendra
(1978) and Koul (1997) reported similar results.
Nitrogen fertilization increased number of leaves per plant
and leaf area (El Noeman et al., 1990; Gasim, 2001). John and
Warren (1967) noted that the addition of nitrogen increased
stem diameter. Koul (1997) recorded that nitrogen application
resulted in greater values of plant height, leaf area, number of
leaves and stem diameter of fodder maize, fresh and dry forage
yield were also increased due to addition of nitrogen. Leaf to
stem ratio was found also to be increased by nitrogen (Dun-
can, 1980). These ndings are in full agreement with that of
Gasim (2001) who reported that the increase in leaf to stem ra-
tio with nitrogen application is probably due to the increase in
number of leaves and leaf area under nitrogen treatments, pro-
ducing more and heavy leaves.
The uptake of nitrogen by maize is low during early devel-
opment and increased at tasseling. Although only relatively
small amounts of fertilizers are required during the very early
stages of plant growth, high concentration of nutrients in the
roots zone at that time are benecial in promoting early
growth (Ritchie et al., 1993). Gasim (2001) has observed that
nitrogen fertilization accelerated the time to reach 50% tassel-
ing, promoted the fresh and dry forage weight. Salem and Ali
(1979) found that nitrogen application increased the number of
ears per plant, ear height, number of days to mid-silking and
protein content, and decreased the number of barren stalks.
Grain protein content was increased by nitrogen (Warren
et al., 1975; Gangwar and Kalra, 1988). Increased protein con-
tent in maize straw was obtained with increased dose of nitro-
gen (Rai, 1965). Tripathi et al. (1979) found that application of
nitrogen gave a signicant additional increase in crude protein
contents of forage oats.
Kalifa et al. (1981) studied the effect of nitrogen on an
open-pollinated variety of corn which was given as ammonium
nitrate applied as nitrogen source. His results indicated that
ammonium nitrate fertilizer increased the number of days to
mid- tasseling, mid-silking and shelling percentage. Singh
et al. (1986) found that the biological yield, content and uptake
of nitrogen in grain and stover of maize were highest with
nitrogen as urea applied in two split dressings. Sawi (1993)
and Omara (1989) observed that nitrogen had signicant ef-
fects on chemical composition of leaves, plant height, leaves,
internodes number per plant at early stages. Shoat and root
dry weight and cob number per plant. Nitrogen also signi-
cantly affected nal seed yield and some yield components
such as number and weight of cobs/m
2
and weight of seeds
per cob, also signicantly affected straw yield. In addition
18 Mohamed El-Murtada Hassan Amin
nitrogen had signicant effect on seed protein content and seed
and leaf P content. Gasim (2001) found that the addition of
nitrogen increased forage fresh and dry yield, also increased
percentage of crude protein in leaf stem.
The main objectives of this study were to investigate the
inuence of different nitrogen sources on growth, yield and
quality of fodder maize under irrigation.
2. Materials and methods
The experiment was conducted for two consecutive seasons in
20042005 and 2006 at the demonstration farm of the Faculty
of Agriculture, Omdurman Islamic University. The soil is gen-
erally sandy clay loam, non-saline and non-sodic with pH
(7.8). Treatments involved in the experiment consisted of dif-
ferent nitrogen sources. Nitrogen dose used for each treatment
was in 43 kg N/ha. The different nitrogen sources were as fol-
lows: urea (46%N), nitrophoska (18%N + 18%P
2
O
2
+ 5%K
2
O + microelements) and ammonium sulphate nitrate
(26%N + 14%S). Ammonium sulphate (21%N + 24%S) was
used as controls.
The treatments were arranged in completely randomized
block design with four replications. The seeds were sown in
the rst week of November for two seasons (plant cv. Mog-
tama-45). The plot area was 20 m
2
, each plot included seven
ridges, and each ridge was 6 m in length and 60 cm apart.
Nitrogen fertilizers were applied once at sowing before the
rst irrigation. The crop was irrigated eight times in each sea-
son at intervals of 1014 days. Growth attributes measured
were plant height, stem diameter, number of leaves, leaf area,
and leaf area index. The plants were chosen and removed from
each plot randomly after 45, 60, 75 and 90 days form sowing.
Number of days to 50% tasseling, forage yield, crude protein
and crude ber were also investigated in this study. For the
seasons analysis of variance was performed and means were
compared using least signicant difference (LSD) (Gomez
and Gemez, 1984).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Growth parameters
The obtained results revealed that plant height was signi-
cantly affected by applied different nitrogen sources in both
seasons at all growth stages (Table 1), with highest plant height
obtained by ASN treatment.
The increase in plant height with different nitrogen sources
can be attributed to the fact that nitrogen promotes plant
growth, increases the number and length of the internodes
which results in progressive increase in plant height.
Similar results were reported by Sharma (1973), Turkhede
and Rajendra (1978), Koul (1997), Saigusa et al. (1999) and
Gasim (2001). However, the remarkable increase in plant
height attained by (ASN) treatment, in this study can be ex-
plained by the efciency of nitrogen source which composed
of two forms (ammonium and nitrate) and sulfur as essential
nutrient for the plant. This result is in agreement with the nd-
ing of Sahid et al. (1990), Omara (1989), Bindra and Kharwara
(1994), Elmar (2001) and Abdel Gader (2007).
Data in Table 2 shows that stem diameter was signicantly
increased in all treated plants at all sampling occasions during
the two seasons. The largest stem diameter was signicantly in-
creased in all treated plants at all sampling occasions during
the two seasons. The largest stem diameter was noticed at
the nitrogen source ASN owed by NPK and the AS. The in-
crease in stem diameter due to application of nitrogen can be
explained by the fact that nitrogen promotes plants growth.
On the other hand the increase in stem diameter due to the
application of ASN and AS can be ascribed to the presence
of sulfur as reported by Elmar (2001). The increase of stem
diameter as a result of NPK applications may be due to the
fact that, this nitrogen source was composed of many nutrients
(N, P and K).
As shown in Table 2 the number of leaves per plant is sig-
nicantly increased when fertilized with different nitrogen
sources in both seasons. Whereas, fertilizing with urea pro-
duced the lower number of leaves as compared with other
sources. The increase in the number of leaves per plant could
possibly be ascribed to the fact that nitrogen often increases
plant growth and plant height and this resulted in more nodes
and internodes and subsequently more production of leaves. In
this respect, Okajina et al. (1983), Sawi (1993) and Jhones et al.
(1995) found that nitrogen fertilization, signicantly increased
the number of leaves and they suggested that the increasing in
number of leaves may be as a result of increasing number of
nodes.
The effect of different nitrogen sources on leaf area at dif-
ferent growth stages during two seasons is presented in Table 3.
The revealed values indicated that leaf area was signicantly
Table 1 Effect of different nitrogen sources on plant height (cm) of maize during 2004/2005 and 2005/2006 seasons.
Plant age (days) Treatments LSD at 5%
Control NPK ASN AS Urea
Season 2004/2005
45 24.50 40.30 54.50 45.00 39.80 19.86
60 35.30 59.00 79.50 57.00 53.80 15.14
75 43.00 79.30 100.80 75.30 55.50 26.17
90 15.00 93.50 112.00 81.50 80.50 20.72
Season 2005/2006
45 36.50 46.30 51.80 42.90 38.40 4.80
60 49.40 79.90 95.90 72.50 61.10 13.10
75 50.10 90.80 106.60 73.60 68.60 12.40
90 64.70 117.80 152.90 93.50 86.50 23.40
Effect of different nitrogen sources on growth, yield and quality of fodder maize (Zea mays L.) 19
affected by applied treatments at all sampling occasions in
both seasons. However, nitrogen enhanced growth and conse-
quently inuences leaf expansion and development. These re-
sults coincided well with Watson (1952), El Noeman et al.
(1990), Filatov and Afonin (1993) and Sayed (1998). They sta-
ted that nitrogen signicantly increased leaf area through ef-
fect on elongation of leaves.
The data presented in Table 3 reveals that, applying differ-
ent source of nitrogen on leaf area index (LAI) had signicant
effect at all growth stages in both seasons. Increasing in LAI
may be due to the fact that addition of nitrogen from different
source in this investigation increased number of leaves and to-
tal leaf area per plant and their effect on enlargement of leaves
cell. This result agrees with those obtained by Rageb et al.
(1990) and Lemocof and Loomis (1994).
3.2. Reproduction attributes
The present study showed that, the number of days to 50%
tasseling is signicantly affected by different nitrogen treat-
ments during the two seasons studied (Table 4). Nitrogen
application accelerated the time to reach 50% tasseling as
compared to control. These results are fully in line with the
ndings of Richard et al. (1983) who reported that nitrogen de-
creased the interval form seeding to owering.
Table 2 Effect of different nitrogen sources on stem diameter (cm) and number of leaves of maize during 2004/2005 and 2005/2006
seasons.
Treatment Stem diameter Number of leaves
Plant age
45 60 75 90 45 60 75 90
Season 2004/2005
Control 3.3 4.8 5.0 5.5 8.3 8.8 9.5 10.7
NPK 4.8 5.5 5.8 6.8 10.6 11.7 13.7 14.1
ASN 4.8 5.8 6.3 7.0 11.5 12.9 14.2 14.9
AS 4.3 5.3 5.8 6.0 9.5 10.5 12.6 13.2
Urea 4.0 5.3 5.5 5.8 9.2 9.8 11.7 12.4
LSD at 5% 0.16 0.21 0.16 0.83 0.50 0.25 0.25 0.18
Season 2005/2006
Control 3.9 4.5 5.4 5.8 9.5 10.0 10.9 12.1
NPK 4.7 5.4 6.8 7.0 11.8 12.9 14.1 15.3
ASN 5.0 5.6 6.9 8.6 12.7 14.1 15.3 16.5
AS 4.3 5.1 6.1 6.8 11.2 11.7 12.9 14.1
Urea 4.0 4.8 5.6 6.0 10.4 10.9 11.1 12.3
LSD at 5% 0.10 0.16 0.20 0.81 0.70 1.01 0.90 1.01
Table 3 Effect of different nitrogen sources on leaf area (cm
2
) and leaf area index (LAI) of maize during 2004/2005 and 2005/2006
seasons.
Treatment Leaf area Leaf area index
Plant age
45 60 75 90 45 60 75 90
Season 2004/2005
Control 190.9 191.9 254.1 256.2 0.9 2.4 3.0 5.1
NPK 310.8 311.2 413.2 415.1 1.5 6.0 6.9 7.5
ASN 340.8 346.6 454.2 460.5 1.5 6.9 7.5 8.1
AS 272.1 280.3 369.1 372.9 1.2 5.1 6.3 6.9
Urea 250.1 260.6 358.6 359.0 1.1 4.2 5.4 6.3
LSD at 5% 8.6 8.1 8.3 17.5 0.21 0.51 0.41 0.50
Season 2005/2006
Control 166.20 167.50 190.30 200.01 0.6 1.6 3.0 3.4
NPK 206.52 210.87 215.60 218.09 1.0 4.0 4.6 5.0
ASN 223.50 225.45 233.67 136.67 0.2 4.6 5.0 5.2
AS 189.40 196.50 203.14 204.67 0.8 3.4 4.2 4.5
Urea 172.32 181.87 199.30 201.60 0.8 2.8 3.6 3.9
LSD at 5% 16.08 13.87 8.01 31.67 0.11 0.55 0.38 0.41
20 Mohamed El-Murtada Hassan Amin
The attained results showed that, different sources of nitro-
gen signicantly affected the fresh yield of the forage as com-
pared with the control during both seasons (Table 4).
Moreover, the fresh forage yield increased progressively by
ASN and NPK treatments as compared with other nitrogen
sources both in treatments and control particularly, in the sec-
ond season. The increase in fresh yield of forage under nitro-
gen application can be attributed to the positive effect of
nitrogen on all the growth parameters investigated in this
study. These ndings are in conformity with the ndings of
other investigators particularly, Ellis et al. (1956), and Singh
et al. (1992). Fresh forage weight in the second season was hea-
vier than in the rst season. This was attributed to the logging
that accrued during the rst season. The high moisture content
of the forage in the second season was due to the fact that, the
sampling was done when the eld was under irrigation. The
high forage fresh weight obtained under ASN and NPK treat-
ments was due to the efciently of those treatments. This result
is also in agreement with Elmar (2001) and Abdel Gader
(2007).
The results summarized in Table 4 revealed that, nitrogen
application signicantly inuenced dry forage weight during
the two seasons studied. Forage yield is a function of growth
parameters. As shown earlier in this study, all growth param-
eters were affected by nitrogen fertilization from different
sources. The differences in dry forage matter yield may be
due to the nutrients included in each nitrogen source, which
was higher when plants were treated by ASN and NPK. These
results were in full conformity with those reported by El Amin
(2003) and Abdel Gader (2007).
3.3. Forage quality
The crude protein of leaf and stem of forage were signicantly
affected by different nitrogen sources in both seasons (Table 5).
The urea treatment gave the lowest crude protein as compared
with the other nitrogen sources. Increasing of crude protein
content may denitely, be due to the fact that nitrogen often
plays a great role in the synthesis of protein.
Similar results regarding the increased percentage of crude
protein due to applied nitrogen were obtained by several re-
search workers (for example, Parsad, 1979; Singh et al.,
1992; Gangwar and Kalra, 1988; Koul, 1997; Khandaker
and Islam, 1988).
The effect of different nitrogen sources on leaf and stem
crude ber of fodder maize was signicant during the two stud-
ied seasons (Table 5). The nitrogen sources application re-
duced leaf and stem crude ber content. However, the lowest
crude ber content was recorded when plants were treated with
(ASN) fertilizer, while the highest crude ber content was re-
corded under the control treatment (i.e. without nitrogen).
Table 4 Effect of different nitrogen sources on number of days to 50% tasseling, fresh forage yield and dry forage yield of maize
during 2004/2005 and 2005/2006 seasons.
Treatment Days to 50% tasseling Fresh forage yield (ton/ha) Dry forage yield (ton/ha)
2004/2005 2005/2006 2004/2005 2005/2006 2004/2005 2005/2006
Control 49.8 51.0 17.70 29.80 7.40 7.20
NPK 45.3 45.3 40.70 58.00 13.40 13.30
ASN 44.0 44.2 48.60 70.40 15.70 15.50
AS 47.0 46.3 29.60 41.90 10.40 10.40
Urea 48.5 49.0 26.40 34.25 9.20 9.30
LSD at 5% 1.2 0.9 1.20 31.15 0.24 0.31
Table 5 Effect of different nitrogen sources on crude protein (%) and crude ber of maize during 2004/2005 and 2005/2006 seasons.
Treatment Crude protein Crude ber
Leaf protein (%) Stem protein (%) Leaf ber (%) Stem ber (%)
Season 2004/2005
Control 7.00 7.30 28.95 29.97
NPK 9.30 8.89 26.63 27.65
ASN 9.77 9.43 25.25 26.27
AS 8.41 8.52 27.45 28.47
Urea 7.50 7.28 28.47 29.49
LSD at 5% 0.08 0.11 0.34 0.40
Season 2005/2006
Control 6.49 6.48 28.73 29.84
NPK 8.29 8.33 26.53 27.64
ASN 8.76 8.79 25.25 26.36
AS 7.40 7.42 27.46 28.57
Urea 7.00 60.98 28.40 29.51
LSD at 5% 0.29 0.44 0.19 0.51
Effect of different nitrogen sources on growth, yield and quality of fodder maize (Zea mays L.) 21
These results are in full agreement with the results reported
by Sandhu et al. (1976), Koul (1997) and Gasim (2001).
4. Conclusion
The results revealed that nitrogen sources affected growth
parameters at all sampling occasions. Nitrogen enhanced tas-
seling and decreased the number of days to 50% tasseling.
Also, fresh and dry forage yield was signicantly affected by
nitrogen sources. Moreover, fresh and dry forage yield, was in-
creased progressively by ASN and NPK as compared with
other nitrogen sources.
Crude protein and crude ber were affected by nitrogen
sources (NPK, ASN and AS). The urea gave lowest crude pro-
tein compared with other nitrogen sources. On the other hand,
the lowest crude ber content was recorded when plants were
treated with (ASN) fertilizer, while the highest crude ber con-
tent was recorded only under the control.
References
Abdel Gader, E.O., 2007. Effect of different nitrogen sources on
growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.). Unpublished M.Sc.
Thesis, Omdurman Islamic University, Faculty of Agriculture (in
Arabic).
Akintoye, 1996. Thesis Abstract, International Institute of Tropical
Agri Research, March 12, pp. 2527.
Bindra, A.D., Kharwara, P.C., 1994. Growth and yield of sparing
sunower in relation to nitrogen levels and plant population. J.
Agric. Res. Himachal Pradesh, India 20, 7274.
Chandler, W.V., 1969. Plant morphology and stand geometry in
relation to nitrogen physiological aspects of crop yield. In: Proc.
Symp. Amer. Soc. Agron., pp. 265285.
Christopher, R. Dowswell, Paliwal, R.L., Cantrell, Ronald P., 1966.
The maize plant and its uses. In: Maize in the Third World. United
States of America, pp. 1734.
Duncan, W.G., 1980. Maize. In: Evans, L.T. (Ed.), Crop Physiology.
Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 2350.
Dwyer, L.M., Stewart, D.W., 1986. Leaf area development in eld
grow maize. Agron. J. 78, 334343.
El Amin, L.S.A., 2003. Effect of nitrogenandphosphorus of fertilization
on growth and yield of fodder maize (Zea mays L.). M.Sc. Thesis,
Omdurman Islamic Univ., Faculty of Agric. (in Arabic).
El Noeman, A.A., El-Halem, A.K.A., El-Zeiny, H.A., 1990. Response
of maize (Zea mays L.) to irrigation intervals under different levels
of nitrogen fertilization. Egyptian J. Agron. 15 (12), 147158.
Ellis, B.G., Knauss, C.J., Smith, F.W., 1956. Nutrient content of corn as
related to fertilizer application and soil fertility. Agron. J., 455459.
Elmar, S., 2001. The importance of ammonium sulphate nitrate (ASN)
as highly efcient sulphate Sudanese crops (Fertiva CmbH,
Germany). Fertilizer Workshop on May 26, 2001, Khartoum,
Sudan.
Filatov, V.I., Afonin, N.M., 1993. The yield of early maturity maize
hybrids in the northern part of the control Chernozem region with
different methods of applying zinc preparation. Izvstiya, Timi-
ryazevkoi Sal, Koknozkhozys Ivennal Akadimi 4, 2028.
Gangwar, B., Kalra, G.S., 1988. Inuence of maize legume associa-
tions and nitrogen levels on maturity, grain quality and protein
productivity. Field Crop Abstr. 41 (11), 917 (Abstr. 7538).
Gasim, S.H., 2001. Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and seed rate on
growth, yield and quality of forage maize (Zea mays L.). M.Sc.
Thesis, Faculty of Agric., Univ. of Khartoum.
Goldsworthy, P.R., Palmer, A.F.E., Sperling, D.W., 1974. Growth
and yield of lowland and tropical maize in Mexico. J. Agric. Sci.
Camb. 83, 223230.
Gomez, K.A., Gemez, A.A., 1984. Statistical Procedure for Agricul-
tural Research, second ed. John Wiley and Sons Inc., Croda.
Graybill, J.S., Cox, W.J., Oils, D.J., 1991. Yield and quality of forage
maize as inuenced by hybrid and planting date and plant density.
Agron. J. 83 (3), 559565.
Ipperisiel, D., Alli, I., Machenze, A.F., Mehuys, G.R., 1989. Nitrogen
distribution, yield, and quality of silage corn after four nitrogen
fertilization. Agron. J. 81, 783789.
Jhones, R.M., Sanderson, M.A., Read, J.E., Lovell, A.C., 1995.
Management of corn for silage production in south central USA. J.
Prod. Agric. USA 8 (2), 175180.
John, H.M., Warren, H.L., 1967. Pasture and pasturage. In: Principle
of Field Crop Production, pp. 257258.
Jules, J., 1974. Strategy of crop production. Chapter 16: An introduc-
tion to world crops. Crop Sci.
Jung, G.A., Barkjer, R.R.S., 1973. Orchard grass. In: Heath, M.E.
et al. (Eds.), Forages, third ed. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, IA,
pp. 285296.
Kalifa, M.A., Shokr, E.S., Abdella, R.M., Ismail, A.A., 1981. Effect of
time of nitrogen application on an open-pollinated variety of corn
(Zea mays L.). Ann. Agric. Sci. 15, 2330.
Khandaker, Z.H., Islam, M.M., 1988. Effect of nitrogenfertilizationand
stage of maturity on yield and quality of fodder maize (Zea mays L.).
M.Sc. Thesis, Univ. of Khartoum, Faculty of Agric., Sudan.
Koul, G.G., 1997. Effect of sowing methods, nitrogen levels and seed
rates on yield and quality of fodder maize (Zea mays L.). M.Sc.
Thesis, Univ. of Khartoum, Faculty of Agric.
Lemocof, J.H., Loomis, R.S., 1994. Nitrogen and density inuence on
silk emergence endosperm development and grain yield in maize.
Field Crops Res., Argentina 38 (2m), 3672.
Mangeisdorf, P.C., Mac Neish, R.S., Galinat, W.E., 1964. Domesti-
cation of corn science. 143, 538545.
Mohamed, A.A., 1997. Effect within-row spacing on growth and
forage yield of three maize (Zea mays L.) varieties. M.Sc. Thesis,
Univ. of Khartoum, Faculty of Agric.
Okajina, H., Taniyama, I., Kawakami, R., Fujitsu, I., 1983. The
nitrogen balance in the soils growing corn. J. Facul. Agr. Hokkaido
Univ. 61, 323343.
Omara, H.A., 1989. The effect of spacing, nitrogen and phosphorus
application on growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.). M.Sc.
Thesis, Univ. of Khartoum, Faculty of Agric.
Omer, E.A., 1998. Farm yard manure and urea fertilization on growth
and forage yield of tow maize (Zea mays L.) cultivars. Thesis,
Faculty of Agric., Univ. of Khartoum.
Pain, B.F., 1978. Nutritional requirement of forage maize. In: Bunting,
E.S., Pain, B.F., Phipps, R.H., Wilkinson, J.M., Gunn, R.E. (Eds.),
Forage Maize Production and Utilization, pp. 87116.
Parasad, B., 1979. Effect of rates and sources of nitrogen including
sulphur coated urea and sulfathiazole treated urea on yield and
quality of oat forage. Ind. J. Agron. 24, 301306.
Purseglove, J.W., 1972. Tropical crop. Monocotyledons. Longmans,
London, pp. 300333.
Rageb, M.M., Rassay, H.N., Elshazly, 1990. Vegetative growth and
dry matter accumulation. Field Crops Abstr. 43 (12), 86, 5.
Rai, K.D., 1965. Study of rain grown sorghum and maize in central
rain land of Sudan. II: Effect of fertilizer on crude protein content
and nitrogen accumulation. Indian J. Agron. 10, 139144.
Richard, T.E., Sheppened, S.C., Bates, T.E., 1983. Nitrogen fertilizers
of land continuously cropped to corn (Zea mays L.). Can. J. Soil
Sci. 63, 543556.
Ritchie, W.S., John, J. Hanway, Garreno, B., 1993. How acorn plant
develop. Special Report No. 48, Iowa State Univ. of Science and
Technology, Cooperative Extension Service.
Rouanet, G., 1987. Maize. In: Caste, R. (Ed.), Tropical Agriculturalist
CTA. Macmillan Publisher.
Sahid, M., Titiek, Y., Gothama, A.A.A., 1990. Effect of variety and
population of cotton and fertilizer rote of maize on growth and
production in intercrop Perberitaan. Penelitian, Tanaman.
22 Mohamed El-Murtada Hassan Amin
Saigusa, M., Kasagaya, Y., Watarable, Shibuya, K., 1999. Ecology of
apple of pru (Nieandra physalodes L.). Press and Velvet Leaf
(Abudtilon avicennae Garth).
Salem, S.A., Ali, A.E., 1979. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer levels and
varieties on grain yield and some plant characters of maize (Zea
mays L.). Field Crop Abstr. 33 (2), 1035 (Abstr. 9881).
Sandhu, H.S., Brar, S.S., Puri, K.P., 1976. Effect of N and P on the
yield and quality of oat fodder. J. Res. P. A. U. Ludhiana XIII (2),
151155.
Sawi, S.M.A., 1993. The effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and time of
application on growth and yield of maize of Agric. Univ. of
Khartoum.
Sayed, S.A., 1998. Impact of boron application on maize growing
under ooded and unfolded conditions. Biol. Plant Atrium Assiut
Univ. 4 (1), 101109.
Sharma, R.K., 1973. Response of maize to nitrogen fertilization.
Madras Agric. J. 60, 399440.
Singh, R.A., Nair, K.P.P., Singh, P.P., 1986. Biological yield and
nitrogen uptake in maize. Annu. Agric. Res. 7, 275281.
Singh, S.P., Gour, B.L., Hawal, Shet., 1992. Effect of cultivar spacing
and nitrogen fertilization on yield and nutrient uptake by maize.
Annu. Agric. Res. 13, 277279.
Toosey, R.D., 1972. Protable Fodder Cropping. Farming Press Ltd.,
pp. 100129.
Tripathi, S.N., Singh, A.P., Mather, R.B., Gill, A.S., 1979. Effect of
nitrogen and phosphate levels on yield and quality of oats. Indian
J. Agron. 24, 250254.
Turkhede, B.B., Rajendra, P., 1978. Effect of rates and timing of nitro-
genapplicationon hybridsorghum. IndianJ. Agron. 23 (2), 113126.
Warren, H.L., Huber, D.M., Nelson, D.W., Nann, O.W., 1975. Stalk
rots incidence and yield of corn as affected by inhibiting nitrica-
tion of fall-applied ammonium. Agron. J. 67 (5), 655660.
Watson, D.T., 1952. The physiological basis of variation in yield. Adv.
Agron. 4, 125138.
Effect of different nitrogen sources on growth, yield and quality of fodder maize (Zea mays L.) 23