Next Article in Journal
Improving Root Nitrogen Uptake via Organic Fertilizer Substitution Enhances Yield and Efficiency in Dryland Maize
Previous Article in Journal
Fertility Status and Soil Quality Assessment of Chernozem and Stagnosol Soils Under Organic Farming Practices
Previous Article in Special Issue
Study to Develop a Value for Cultivation and Use (VCU) Field Trial Protocol for Cannabis sativa L. Flower Varieties
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Using Flint Maize for Developing New Hybrids: A Case Study in Romania

by
Roxana Elena Călugăr
1,
Andrei Varga
1,
Carmen Daniela Vana
1,*,
Loredana Ancuța Ceclan
1,
Felicia Chețan
2,
Andras Fodor
1 and
Nicolae Tritean
1
1
Laboratory of Maize Breeding, Agricultural Research and Development Station Turda, 401100 Turda, Romania
2
Laboratory of Technology and Mechanization, Agricultural Research and Development Station Turda, 401100 Turda, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2025, 15(9), 2215; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15092215
Submission received: 30 July 2025 / Revised: 28 August 2025 / Accepted: 13 September 2025 / Published: 19 September 2025

Abstract

Maize, one of the most cultivated crops worldwide, has multiple uses, one of which is human food. Maize flour intended for human consumption is preferably produced from var. indurata. This maize variety, although it has some desirable traits, generally has a lower yield capacity. In order to obtain high-yielding hybrids that would have some traits necessary to obtain flour for human consumption, fourteen lines with dent or semi-dent grains were crossed with four inbred lines with flint grain in a cyclic system. The 56 resulting hybrids were tested in two experimental years for yield, the percentage of unlodged plants, grain dry matter at harvest, as well as other traits, such as ASI (anthesis-to-silking interval), the interval from sowing to the appearance of stigmas and to physiological maturity, and plant senescence. The maternal lines A478 and A480 were noted for transmitting higher yields. Three hybrids were identified with higher yields, good silking–flowering coincidence, stay-green, and a high unlodged plants percentage: A478 × D328, A480 × B330, and A480 × D328.

1. Introduction

Maize (Zea mays L.), a plant with high yield potential, is one of the species cultivated on the largest areas worldwide, currently surpassed only by wheat, which it surpasses in terms of total production [1]. This plant has very high phenotypic and genetic diversity, so its uses are multiple in human food, animal feed, and industry (production of biofuels, starch for fabrics, high-quality oil, and alcoholic coolants, as well as the production of raw materials in the pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries [2]). This crop is subject to a series of stress factors, so new genotypes must cope as well as possible. In the maize breeding process, breeders must consider, in addition to obtaining the highest possible yields, tolerance to biotic and abiotic stress factors. The ever-changing climate is one of the main factors to consider in maize breeding, with adverse conditions often occurring during critical periods of development [3,4]. One of the most critical periods for this crop is anthesis, and if drought occurs during maize flowering, pollination can be significantly affected, leading to very high production losses. The maximum temperature for achieving anthesis should not exceed 37 °C [3], but even at temperatures above 35 °C, physiological processes are affected, with pollen viability decreasing considerably [5]. Another aspect that must be taken into account is the apical dominance found in maize, with the silk being more sensitive to a lack of water, so that under unfavorable conditions it develops after flowering. Delayed silk emergence (high ASI) can cause losses of up to 20–50% [6,7]. ASI therefore represents an index that must be carefully monitored, both for parental genotypes and for the transmission of a reduced interval in hybrids.
Genetic narrowing of the germplasm is possible, especially due to the use of a limited number of elites or sources for the improvement of new genotypes [2], but in the case of maize, it is desirable to use the natural variability given by local populations and backcrosses, as is the use of diverse sources as initial material for the creation of new inbred lines. With the introduction of American maize hybrids to Europe after 1950 [8,9], the proportion of dentiformis genotypes increased significantly, with many local populations being contaminated over time with this type of germplasm. The use of European-origin flint maize can bring improvements to the genetic base of this plant, and due to genetic differences, crosses can result in hybrids with high heterosis.
Zea mays var. indurata (flint maize) is of particular interest to maize growers due to its characteristics. The indurata genotypes have a smaller plant size, somewhat lower yields [10], and rounded upper grains that are smooth, shiny, and hard to break (soft starch in the middle surrounded by a hard shell) [11], hence the name “hard corn”. This type of maize is specific to local populations in Europe, with most Romanian populations also being flint [12,13]. It has more beneficial properties compared to var. indentata (dent grains), with superior quality and a specific pleasant taste, being rich in fiber, protein, carbohydrates, and lipids. It is ideal for polenta, containing proteins, lipids, minerals, and vitamins A, B1, B2, B6, E, and PP [14]. Another advantage of flint maize is the lower incidence of pest attack on the cobs, due to the fact that the grain is harder [15]. European flint maize is characterized by early vigor and good cold tolerance [16], while dent maize can bring increased yield potential to hybrids [17]. In many areas of Europe, low temperatures can occur in the early part of the maize growing season, a situation often encountered in the experimental area. According to data obtained from the weather station [18] located near the fields, almost every year, temperatures below 0 are recorded in April. Also, both in April and even in May, the minimum temperature is often below 10 °C. The higher tolerance of flint maize to low temperatures (compared to var. indentata) [19], as well as the ability to recover from cold stress [20,21,22], makes it a good source for improving new genotypes. To obtain hybrids that retain the desirable characteristics of var. indurata, but also have a higher yield, crosses with genotypes with dent or semi-dent grains can be made [23].
Even though the seed offer in Romania includes flint or semi-dent hybrids [24,25,26,27], their proportion in the portfolio of companies is 5–20% of the total hybrids. In Romania, polenta and other corn-based products are quite popular, while the demand for gluten free products is increasing. According to the National Institute of Statistics [28], in Romania, the average consumption of maize and maize products is 35.1–35.8 kg/capita (grain equivalent), so there is a niche for such hybrids.
Although var. indentata is used more often in hybrid combinations, due to its productive superiority, at the Agricultural Research and Development Station (ARDS) Turda, indurata inbred lines and their crossing with dent or semi-dent lines are used. ARDS Turda is one of the main agricultural research stations in Romania, with a history of almost 70 years in maize breeding. The germplasm collection contains over 1460 inbred lines and their number varies annually, depending on the number of newly developed lines in the selection department. The collection also includes a significant number of local populations (391) from many regions of the country: 6 varieties and 72 synthetic populations. To date, 47 commercial hybrids have been registered and cultivated, of which 28 have dent grains, 14 semi-dent, 2 flint and 4 sweet corn. The latest hybrids developed are all dented, so it is also necessary to focus on flint maize as well. Given that, usually, the indurata maize from the in-house collection has a shorter vegetation period, a series of hybrid combinations were made to obtain earlier, qualitative hybrids, which also have good yield.
Thus, in order to obtain productive hybrids with flint grains, 14 high-yielding inbred lines (dent or semi-dent) were crossed in a cyclic crossing system with 4 flint lines. The 56 hybrids thus obtained were cultivated in 2 experimental years, and the yield, dry matter of grains at harvest (DM), and percentage of unlodged plants (UP) were analyzed. The period required to reach the BBCH 65 phenophase (flowering) (sowing–flowering interval), as well as the flowering-to-silking interval (ASI), was also monitored.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Biological Material

Although in the ARDS Turda germplasm collection there are about 100 flint inbred lines, 4 were chosen for this study, considering their yield capacity, a number of previously known traits (tolerance to abiotic factors, high percentage of unlodged plants at maturity, ear size) and also their genetic divergence. The lines used in crosses were classified into the germplasm group based on previous studies [29] and verified based on crosses with different heterotic groups. These lines were used in cyclic crosses (line × tester) with 14 dent or semi-dent lines, thus resulting in 56 hybrids. Several traits of the parental inbred lines are presented in Table 1.

2.2. Experimental Design and Cultivation Technology

The maize hybrids resulting from the cyclical crossing of the previously mentioned lines were tested over two years, 2021 and 2022, in the experimental field of the Maize breeding laboratory (ARDS Turda), located on the upper terrace of the Arieș River, north-western part of Turda, Cluj County, Romania (longitude 23°48′ E, latitude 46°35′ N).
According to the analyses carried out by the Pedological and Agrochemical Studies Office in Cluj-Napoca [30], the dominant soils in the experimental fields are vertical clay-iluvial chernozems (approximately 56% clay and 0.7% coarse sand), pH 6.2–6.8. The values of total nitrogen, phosphorus availability, potassium availability, carbonates and humus (at a maximum depth of 30 cm) are 0.2%, 65 ppm, 400 ppm, 0.7% and 3.5%, respectively. The reported values are averages, as they have not changed significantly over the tested years (analysis is performed every 4 years).
The hybrids were sown in both years in the first week of May, using the Monoseed DT seeder (Wintersteiger, Ried im Innkreis, Austria) [31], at a density of 70,000 plants ha−1 (19 cm between plants, 0.7 m between rows). Each hybrid was sown in four 5 m rows (only the middle rows were harvested and analyzed), in three replications, and the plots were arranged according to the randomized block design.
In the experimental field, a three-year crop rotation is used: soybean–winter wheat– maize. In autumn, ploughing was carried out, and in the spring, a pass was made with the combiner in order to level the land, simultaneously with the application of 400 kg−1 of NPK 27:13.5:0 fertilizer [32] (Azomureș, Târgu Mureș, Romania). Weed control was carried out using two herbicides: pre-emergence 1.5 L ha−1 (active substance S-metolachlor, 960 g L−1) (Tender 960 EC, by Syngenta Crop Protection AG, Basel, Switzerland) and post-emergence 1.5 L ha−1 (active substances tembotrione (44 g L−1) and isoxadiphen-ethyl (22 g L−1)) (Laudis66OD, by BayerAG, Crop Science Division, Monheim am Rhein, Germany).
Observations to determine the ASI index were made in two-day intervals, noting the date when 75% of the plants in the rows were in flower or silken. Observations of physiological maturity (BBCH 67) [33] were also made every two to three days, noting the date when 75% of the plants had dry husks, validated by visual inspection of the black layer. The stay-green genotypes have green leaves until physiological maturity, while for the non-stay-green ones, the leaves begin to dry about a month after anthesis [34]. Genotypes that had delayed leaf senescence, with green leaves at physiological maturity, were noted as stay-green (SG), those that had dry leaves up to the level of ear insertion were noted as medium stay-green (MSG), and those that had dry leaves above the ear were considered non-stay-green (NSG)
Before harvesting, fertile and sterile plants (without cobs) were counted, as well as lodged ones (plants with broken stems). The harvesting was performed mechanically with the Wintersteiger Classic combine for experimental plots (Wintersteiger, Ried im Innkreis, Austria) [35]. The yield was determined using the weight of the grains in each experimental plot, related to the number of plants counted; grain moisture was determined using the analyzer included in the combine for experimental plots (also verified with a Granomat plus analyzer, Pfeuffer GMBH, Kitzingen, Germany [36]). For the calculation of yield, the moisture was brought to the standard of 14%. The dry matter was determined by calculating the difference from the grain moisture, measured at harvest.

2.3. Meteorological Conditions

The climate of the area where the experiment was carried out is continental, with the highest temperatures being recorded in July and August, while precipitation is more abundant in June.
One of the best years for maize cultivation in the experimental area was 2021, especially due to the combination of abundant precipitation with high temperatures. This year was favorable starting from the first part of the growing season (April and May), with temperatures and precipitation specific to the area. In June and July, high temperatures were recorded, 1.9 and 3 °C, respectively, above the multiannual average (65 years). The maximum temperatures in July, during anthesis, ranged between 21.7 and 33.7 °C. Although in June, rainfall was below the average for the area (−39.8 mm), in July, it exceeded this value by 46 mm. August and September had values close to the multiannual averages, both for precipitation and for temperature (Figure 1a).
One of the most unfavorable years for maize cultivation was 2022, especially due to the climatic conditions, with water scarcity and excessive temperatures being recorded throughout the year (Figure 1b). Although during the sowing period, conditions were favorable for this crop, the extreme water deficit in June and July, associated with high temperatures, affected the crop. In June and July, the multiannual average temperature was exceeded by 3.1 and 3.3 °C, respectively, while rainfall was 42.8 and 52.8 mm lower than normal for the area. July was one of the hottest months in the area, with maximum temperatures ranging from 22.8 to 38.2 °C. August continued with extreme temperatures (+2.8 °C compared to the multiannual average) and lack of precipitation. Heavy rainfall (+38.5 mm) was recorded, especially in the last days of the month and in September (+77.5 mm), but it was already too late for maize [18].

2.4. Data Processing and Statistical Methods

ANOVA was performed on data, using Past 4 (https://past.en.lo4d.com/windows, accessed on 12 September 2025). The Fisher test for least significant differences (LSDs) was used to assess differences between genotypes at p-values of 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001. The general combining ability (GCA) was inferred from the variances of maternal and paternal effects, and the specific combining ability (SCA) was determined based on the interaction between the parental lines. The Duncan test was applied to identify differences between GCA effects of maternal and paternal lines. The hybrids were ranked based on year-wise yield and the average of the years: the average UP and DM, respectively.

3. Results

3.1. Plant Phenology

Both the inbred lines and the hybrids created at ARDS Turda are generally classified in the semi-early maturity group, this being the most optimal for the cultivation area. The hybrids studied needed 66–73 days between sowing and flowering (Figure 2). Some maternal lines have been noted that have transmitted a reduced number of days required for flowering to hybrids: E385, E359, E376 and E378, and also the paternal line C336. The shortest number of days required for flowering was observed for hybrids E378 × C336 and E385 × C336. The hybrids resulting from the crossing of testers with the maternal lines A447, A478, A480 and A483 generally needed more days to flower.
The anthesis-to-silking interval (ASI) is a crucial metric for determining the coincidence of reproductive development and is a good indicator for the crop’s tolerance or sensitivity to drought and heat [37,38]. In general, the hybrids had a good coincidence between the appearance of silk and flowering, showing good heat tolerance. The inbred line E347 was noted for the good anthesis–silking coincidence that it transmitted to hybrids. Even though a delay of 3 days was observed in the case of hybrids E359 × C336 and E376 × D298, the difference is not large enough to affect pollination (Figure 3).
Regarding the physiological maturity period (Figure 4), it took between 104 (E376 × C336) and 127 (E378 × D328) days to reach this phenophase. The genotypes noted as SG maintained all their leaves green at physiological maturity, or had 1–2 dry leaves; MG hybrids had half green–half dry leaves, while NSG genotypes had 50–100% dry leaves. A483 exhibited a longer period required to reach physiological maturity, but the plants of these hybrids had a higher number of green leaves per plant and thus stayed green for a prolonged period, a trait that indicates a longer period for the photosynthetic activity [39]. The stay-green ability is one of the traits monitored when breeding new maize genotypes. Inbred lines D328 and E347 can be used to create new hybrids or to improve new inbred lines with a shorter vegetation period, and are also used for their prolonged photosynthetic capacity. A total of 22 of the hybrids studied were SG at physiological maturity, while 31 had half of their leaves dry, being noted as MSG. Three hybrids were noted as NSG (A447 × D298, E372 × B330 and A478 × C336) at the moment of physiological maturity, with early senescence having already been observed.

3.2. Hybrid Yield, Dry Matter at Harvest and Unlodged Plants

The ANOVA analysis (Table 2) indicates a clear influence of the year factor for yield, DM and UP. All the traits studied were also significantly influenced by both hybrid and inbred lines (parental genotypes). This aspect is consistent with the premises of the study. The two years were very different in terms of favorability for the maize crop, and regarding the genotypes studied, ANOVA confirms the diversity of the biological material used.
The additive action for A478 and A480 (Table 3) indicates the higher yield that the two maternal lines transmit. These lines were also noted for their high SCA in crosses with D328, B330 and D298. A447 and A483 were also noted for their GCA. All four lines are elite inbred, used in recent years for a large number of crosses.
The inbred line C336 was obtained by crossing a local population of Romanian flint and an inbred line from the Lo3 group; although this line stood out for other traits, in the case of yield, its use had an unfavorable effect. However, the inbred line B330, which also originates from the same local population, was noted for its good SCA in crosses with A480, A478 and A483. The flint inbred lines D298 and D328 (improved by recurrent selection from hybrids) had good GCA and stood out in crosses with A478 and A480 for the highest yields.
The hybrids studied were ranked according to the yield per year, and also the average of the two experimental years (Table 4). The A478 × D328 hybrid achieved the highest yield in the favorable year 2021, and was second in the unfavorable year. This hybrid combination is considered the best in the experimental system, with the highest average yield, 10,168 kg ha−1. Second ranked in the first year, and in terms of yearly average, is A480 × B330, with an average yield of 9707 kg ha−1. In 2021, the top two ranked hybrids exceeded the yield of the two controls, Turda 332 and Turda 335, but were less productive in unfavorable conditions. In the unfavorable year 2022, the highest yield was achieved by the A480 × D328 hybrid, which ranked third in 2021 and for the yearly average. The hybrids resulting from crossing of the maternal lines A478 and A480, respectively, with three of the paternal lines (D298, B330 and D328) were ranked among the top 10 hybrids, demonstrating the superiority of the two lines.
The percentage of dry matter at harvest indicates the precocity of a genotype; thus, several sources have been identified that can be used for the precocity of the genotypes: E376, E385 and D394. In the case of the paternal lines, although the differences were statistically significant, they had low values. The hybrids that ranked higher for DM were E376 × C336, E376 × B330, E385 × C336, D394 × D328, E376 × D328 and E385 × B330. The lower DM values for hybrids with maternal lines A478 and A480, respectively, indicate the late-maturing group of the higher yielding genotypes.
As for the percentage of unlodged plants at harvest, although the values were close to the experimental average, it is nevertheless worth mentioning the maternal lines E359 and A447 transmit a lower percentage of lodged plants, as does the paternal line D298. The first two ranked hybrids had A447 as their maternal line (A447 × D298 and A447 × C336), and the hybrid resulting from the cross with D328 (the highest yielding one) was 10th. Three of the hybrids whose maternal genotype is the E359 line were ranked 7th and 9th, while several of the hybrids in the top positions in the ranking had D298 as their paternal line. One of the problems raised by the use of local populations in maize breeding is precisely the low resistance to stem breakage [40], an aspect also observed in the case of line B330, which was obtained following selection from a local population; crosses with this line had lower values of UP (Table 5).

4. Discussion

In many areas of Romania, including that where the experiment was conducted, there is a high probability that low temperatures will occur in the first period of maize vegetation. This happened in the two experimental years, when temperatures below 10 degrees were recorded even in May. In the context of an ever-changing climate, the likelihood of low temperatures will continue in the future, both in Romania and in many other areas of Europe [20,41]. European flint germplasm is often described as being more tolerant to this abiotic factor [20,21]. Several breeders have reported positive results in terms of the tolerance to low temperatures of hybrids obtained by crossing flint lines with dent lines [19].
One of the main problems that compromises the maize crop is the occurrence of high temperatures, often associated with water scarcity, in one of the most sensitive periods: anthesis [42,43]. In recent years, in Romania, this phenomenon has been encountered; in many areas of the country, the yield was significantly affected or even totally compromised [44]. In order to develop maize hybrids that continue to achieve good yields, despite unfavorable conditions, it is necessary to understand and explore maize germplasms to identify tolerant genotypes. Improving drought tolerance in maize uses both conventional techniques (backcrossing, double-haploidy) and modern genomics-assisted methods (marker-assisted selection, genome-wide association studies for gene identification, genomic selection, genome editing technologies) [45,46,47,48]. Flint maize can perform well, even at high temperatures [49], conditions encountered in the two experimental years. The tested hybrids performed quite well at high temperatures during the anthesis period, as evidenced by the ASI index values [50]. From this point of view, E347 stood out, as this line transmitted the best flowering–silking coincidence, while no differences were observed for the paternal lines. Even though, in some hybrids, the silk appeared late compared to flowering, the difference was not large enough to negatively influence pollination. With the increase in the incidence of higher temperatures during the summer, the objectives of the Maize breeding laboratory at ARDS Turda include the creation of genotypes with a lower ASI index. For both inbred lines and hybrids, the date of silk emergence and flowering is noted every year.
High temperatures and prolonged drought can cause physiological changes in maize plants, with some showing early senescence. In breeding programs, it is desired to avoid early senescence, as the quality of the grains decreases in this case. Stay-green indicates good plant health and post-anthesis drought tolerance [34] and is often linked to higher yields [43,51,52,53]. Tolerance to high temperatures and prolonged drought has been observed in some hybrids that remained green at physiological maturity. The three highest yielding hybrids, A478 × D328, A480 × B330 and A480 × D328, were noted as SG, senescence being observed only after physiological maturity.
Flint inbred lines can be used in crosses to transmit favorable traits, especially for the grains (texture, color and composition), but these genotypes also come with a series of less desirable traits, such as lower yield, small grains and lower plant growth [10]. Compensation for lower yields can be achieved by using productive lines as maternal genotypes, either with a dentate grain or a combination of it with flint. The resulting hybrids can meet both the requirements of the food industry (texture and color of flour for polenta or other products made from maize flour) and a higher yield, which will please farmers. Following the crossing of elite lines with flint testers, some hybrids were higher yielding, compared to both the other hybrids tested and some hybrids registered and cultivated in the area. The three highest yielding hybrids, A478 × D328, A480 × B330 and A480 × D328, had an average yield of 10,168 kg ha−1, 9707 kg ha−1 and 9586 kg ha−1, respectively. Productive superiority over the controls was observed only in the favorable year 2021, while in 2022, both controls had yield of about 1000 kg ha−1 higher.
In maize breeding it is very difficult to combine several characters of interest, since they are most often negatively correlated. Higher yielding hybrids with a reduced number of lodged plants have a lower DM (Figure 5). Even if the DM is lower, the values are consistent with the hybrids generally cultivated in the area, as they can reach technical maturity before frost. Sometimes hybrids with larger cobs are more prone to plant lodging, but the values obtained for UP still indicate the superiority of the studied genotypes from this point of view as well. The number of lodged plants is still quite low.
Among the 56 hybrids studied, three stood out (A478 × D328, A480 × B330 and A480 × D328) for yield, stay-green status, good coincidence at anthesis and a high percentage of unlodged plants (96.4%, 95.3% and 97.3%). Even though the DM accumulated in the grains until harvest had slightly lower values compared to the rest of the hybrids, the association of the other favorable traits led us to continue testing them and even to propose one them (A478 × D328, Figure 6) for registration testing.

5. Conclusions

The maternal lines A478 and A480 were noted for a higher GCA and yield, and can still be used as elite lines for other crosses. The highest yielding hybrids, A478 × D328, A480 × B330 and A480 × D328, exceeded the experimental average in favorable conditions, even with the registered hybrids used as controls. These hybrids were tested in the following years, and the best one, A478 × D328, is to be tested for registration. Considering that most hybrids in our country have dent grains and that the supply of flint maize hybrids is limited in Romania, the new hybrid could have the potential to be registered and cultivated.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.E.C. and A.V.; methodology, R.E.C.; software, C.D.V.; validation, C.D.V., A.V. and N.T.; investigation, A.F., N.T. and L.A.C.; resources, R.E.C. and L.A.C.; data curation, F.C. and A.F.; writing—original draft preparation, R.E.C.; writing—review and editing, R.E.C. and F.C.; visualization, C.D.V.; supervision, N.T.; project administration, R.E.C.; funding acquisition, R.E.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The APC was funded by ADER 1.3.1./18.07.2023 “Cercetări privind îmbunătățirea/ameliorarea germoplasmei de porumb pentru creșterea randamentului de utilizarea apei și nutrienților din sistemul de fertirigare”, from the 2023–2026 Sectorial Plan of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Romania.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the entire staff of the ARDS Turda Maize breeding laboratory for their work in carrying out this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
ARDSAgricultural Research and Development Station
GCAGeneral combining ability
SCASpecific combining ability
UPUnlodged plant
DMDry matter
ASIAnthesis-to-silking interval

References

  1. FAOSTAT. 2025. Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home (accessed on 30 July 2025).
  2. Patel, R.; Memon, J.; Kumar, S.; Patel, D.A.; Sakure, A.A.; Patel, M.B.; Das, A.; Karjagi, C.G.; Patel, S.; Patel, U.; et al. Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of Maize (Zea mays L.) Inbred Lines in Association with Phenotypic and Grain Qualitative Traits Using SSR Genotyping. Plants 2024, 13, 823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sánchez, B.; Rasmussen, A.; Porter, J.R. Temperatures and the Growth and Development of Maize and Rice: A Review. Glob. Change Biol. 2014, 20, 408–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Niu, S.; Du, X.; Wei, D.; Liu, S.; Tang, Q.; Bian, D.; Zhang, Y.; Cui, Y.; Gao, Z. Heat Stress After Pollination Reduces Kernel Number in Maize by Insufficient Assimilates. Front. Genet. 2021, 12, 728166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wang, J.; Vanga, S.K.; Saxena, R.; Orsat, V.; Raghavan, V. Effect of Climate Change on the Yield of Cereal Crops: A Review. Climate 2018, 6, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Nasser, L.M.; Badu-Apraku, B.; Gracen, V.E.; Mafouasson, H.N.A. Combining Ability of Early-Maturing Yellow Maize Inbreds under Combined Drought and Heat Stress and Well-Watered Environments. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cairns, J.E.; Crossa, J.; Zaidi, P.H.; Grudloyma, P.; Sanchez, C.; Araus, J.L.; Thaitad, S.; Makumbi, D.; Magorokosho, C.; Bänziger, M.; et al. Identification of Drought, Heat, and Combined Drought and Heat Tolerant Donors in Maize. Crop Sci. 2013, 53, 1335–1346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Smith, J.S.; Trevisan, W.; McCunn, A.; Huffman, W.E. Global Dependence on Corn Belt Dent Maize Germplasm: Challenges and Opportunities. Crop Sci. 2022, 62, 2039–2066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Prasanna, B.M. Diversity in Global Maize Germplasm: Characterization and Utilization. J. Biosci. 2012, 37, 843–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Tamagno, S.; Greco, I.A.; Almeida, H.; Borrás, L. Physiological Differences in Yield Related Traits between Flint and Dent Argentinean Commercial Maize Genotypes. Eur. J. Agron. 2015, 68, 50–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Singh, N.; Singh, S.; Shevkani, K. Chapter 9—Maize: Composition, Bioactive Constituents, and Unleavened Bread. In Flour and Breads and their Fortification in Health and Disease Prevention; Preedy, V.R., Watson, R.R., Patel, V.B., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2011; pp. 89–99. ISBN 978-0-12-380886-8. [Google Scholar]
  12. Murariu, M.; Murariu, D.; Has, V.; Has, I.; Leonte, C.; Placinta, D.D.; Risca, I.; Simioniuc, D. Conservarea Si Utilizarea Germoplasmei Locale de Porumb Din Romania; PIM, IASI: Iași, Romania, 2012; ISBN 978-606-13-1011-1. [Google Scholar]
  13. Murariu, D.; Plăcintă, D.D.; Simioniuc, V. Assessing Genetic Diversity in Romanian Maize Landraces, Using Molecular Markers. Rom. Agric. Res. 2019, 36, 3–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Rouf Shah, T.; Prasad, K.; Kumar, P. Maize, A Potential Source of Human Nutrition and Health: A Review. Cogent Food Agric. 2016, 2, 1166995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Suleiman, R.; Williams, D.; Nissen, A.; Bern, C.J.; Rosentrater, K.A. Is Flint Corn Naturally Resistant to Sitophilus Zeamais Infestation? J. Stored Prod. Res. 2015, 60, 19–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Tenaillon, M.I.; Charcosset, A. A European Perspective on Maize History. Comptes Rendus Biol. 2011, 334, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Unterseer, S.; Pophaly, S.D.; Peis, R.; Westermeier, P.; Mayer, M.; Seidel, M.A.; Haberer, G.; Mayer, K.F.X.; Ordas, B.; Pausch, H.; et al. A Comprehensive Study of the Genomic Differentiation between Temperate Dent and Flint Maize. Genome Biol. 2016, 17, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Turda Weather Station, Northern Transylvania Regional Meteorological Center Cluj. Available online: https://www.meteoromania.ro/ (accessed on 29 June 2025).
  19. Bhosale, S.U.; Rymen, B.; Beemster, G.T.S.; Melchinger, A.E.; Reif, J.C. Chilling Tolerance of Central European Maize Lines and Their Factorial Crosses. Ann. Bot. 2007, 100, 1315–1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Boughazi, K.; Wuyts, N.; Muller, O.; Windt, C.W.; Nagel, K.A.; Rascher, U.; Fiorani, F. Doubled Haploid Lines Derived from a European Maize Flint Landrace Contrast in Recovery from Cold Stress. Agronomy 2024, 14, 408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Peter, R.; Eschholz, T.W.; Stamp, P.; Liedgens, M. Swiss Flint Maize Landraces—A Rich Pool of Variability for Early Vigour in Cool Environments. Field Crops Res. 2009, 110, 157–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Aroca, R.; Irigoyen, J.J.; Sánchez-Díaz, M. Photosynthetic Characteristics and Protective Mechanisms against Oxidative Stress during Chilling and Subsequent Recovery in Two Maize Varieties Differing in Chilling Sensitivity. Plant Sci. 2001, 161, 719–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Maticiuc, V.; Mistreț, S.; Guzun, L. Realizări În Ameliorarea Porumbului Cu Calităţi Speciale Pentru Utilizare. Akademos 2017, 4, 52–58. [Google Scholar]
  24. KWS Semințe de Porumb—Produse-KWS SAAT SE & Co. KGaA. Available online: https://www.kws.com/ro/ro/produse/porumb/prezentare-generala-a-hibrizilor-de-porumb/ (accessed on 27 August 2025).
  25. Donau Saat ROMÂNIA. Available online: https://binealegibineculegi.ro/ (accessed on 27 August 2025).
  26. MAS Seeds România. Available online: https://www.masseeds.ro/cautator-de-produse/?page_seed=3 (accessed on 27 August 2025).
  27. Corteva Agriscience. Available online: https://www.corteva.ro/cataloage-corteva-agriscience.html (accessed on 27 August 2025).
  28. Institutul Național de Statistică. Available online: https://insse.ro/cms/ (accessed on 27 August 2025).
  29. Șuteu, D.; Băcilă, I.; Haș, V.; Haș, I.; Miclăuș, M. Romanian Maize (Zea mays) Inbred Lines as a Source of Genetic Diversity in SE Europe, and Their Potential in Future Breeding Efforts. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e85501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  30. Pedological and Soil Chemistry Office Cluj. Available online: https://ospacluj.ro/ (accessed on 2 April 2025).[Green Version]
  31. Precision Spaced Planters|WINTERSTEIGER. Available online: https://www.wintersteiger.com/seedmech/en/products/sowing-machines-tool-carriers/precision-spaced-planters (accessed on 30 July 2025).[Green Version]
  32. AZOGrow NPK 27:13,5:0. Available online: https://www.azomures.com/ingrasaminte-complexe-npk/azogrow/azogrow-npk271350 (accessed on 30 July 2025).[Green Version]
  33. Meier, U. Growth Stages of Mono- and Dicotyledonous Plants: BBCH Monograph; Open Agrar: Berlin, Germany, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bekavac, G.; Stojaković, M.; Ivanović, M.; Jocković, Đ.; Vasić, N.; Purar, B.; Boćanski, J.; Nastasić, A. Relationships of Stay Green Trait in Maize. Genetika 2002, 34, 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Plot Combines for Harvesting|WINTERSTEIGER. Available online: https://www.wintersteiger.com/seedmech/en/products/harvesters/plot-combines (accessed on 30 July 2025).
  36. Umidimetru Bod Întreg Granomat® Plus: Rapid și Precis—Produs|PFEUFFER®. Available online: https://www.pfeuffer.com/ro/produs/granomat-plus (accessed on 27 August 2025).
  37. Zhuang, L.; Wang, C.; Hao, H.; Song, W.; Guo, X. Maize Anthesis-Silking Interval Estimation via Image Detection under Field Rail-Based Phenotyping Platform. Agronomy 2024, 14, 1723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. dos Santos, T.B.; Ribas, A.F.; de Souza, S.G.H.; Budzinski, I.G.F.; Domingues, D.S. Physiological Responses to Drought, Salinity, and Heat Stress in Plants: A Review. Stresses 2022, 2, 113–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chibane, N.; Revilla, P.; Yannam, V.R.R.; Marcet, P.; Covelo, E.F.; Ordás, B. Impact of Irrigation, Nitrogen Fertilization, and Plant Density on Stay-Green and Its Effects on Agronomic Traits in Maize. Front. Plant Sci. 2024, 15, 1399072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Varga, A.; Calugar, R.E.; Vana, C.D.; Haș, V.; Ceclan, L.A.; Tritean, N.; Racz, I.; Tărău, A.-D.; Ona, A.D.; Fodor, A. Use of Genetic and Phenotypic Variability of Romanian Local Population Maize. Rom. Agric. Res. 2025, 42, 523–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Chetan, F.; Dulf, E.-H.; Rusu, T.; Chetan, C.; Simon, A. Temperature and Precipitation Forecast for Western Transylvanian Plains Using Artificial Intelligence. AgroLife Sci. J. 2024, 13, 41–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Djanaguiraman, M.; Narayanan, S.; Erdayani, E.; Prasad, P.V.V. Effects of High Temperature Stress during Anthesis and Grain Filling Periods on Photosynthesis, Lipids and Grain Yield in Wheat. BMC Plant Biol. 2020, 20, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Ding, L.; Wang, K.J.; Jiang, G.M.; Liu, M.Z.; Niu, S.L.; Gao, L.M. Post-Anthesis Changes in Photosynthetic Traits of Maize Hybrids Released in Different Years. Field Crops Res. 2005, 93, 108–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Schema de Ajutor de Stat Pentru Fermierii Afectați de Secetă Pentru Culturi Înființate în Primăvara Anului 2022—Ministerul Agriculturii si Dezvoltarii Rurale. Available online: https://madr.ro/comunicare/8171-schema-de-ajutor-de-stat-pentru-fermierii-afectati-de-seceta-pentru-culturi-infiintate-in-primavara-anului-2022.html (accessed on 28 August 2025).
  45. Maazou, A.-R.S.; Tu, J.; Qiu, J.; Liu, Z. Breeding for Drought Tolerance in Maize (Zea mays L.). Am. J. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1858–1870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gao, Z.-W.; Cui, Y.-H.; Li, X.-N.; Bai, M.-Y.; Asseri, T.A.Y.; Hashem, M.; Wang, Z.-J. Genetic Improvement of Drought Stress Tolerance in Maize, Recent Advancements and Future Research Direction. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. Cluj-Napoca 2024, 52, 13840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Asif, Z.; Jabeen, A.; Ifran, M.; Khatoon, A.; Bashir, A.; Malik, K.A. Stress-Inducible IPT Gene Expression Boosts Antioxidant Defense and Grain Production in Heat-Stressed Maize. Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 2025, 62, 359–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sattar, S.; Aslam, M.; Ahmad, R.M. Adaptability Magnitude of Double Haploid Lines in Maize for High Temperature Stress. Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 2024, 61, 233–242. [Google Scholar]
  49. Sa, K.J.; Park, H.; Fu, Z.; Jang, S.J.; Lee, J.-K. Association Study for Drought Tolerance of Flint Maize Inbred Lines Using SSR Markers. Plant Breed. Biotechnol. 2022, 10, 257–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bolaños, J.; Edmeades, G.O. The Importance of the Anthesis-Silking Interval in Breeding for Drought Tolerance in Tropical Maize. Field Crops Res. 1996, 48, 65–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Valentinuz, O.R.; Tollenaar, M. Vertical Profile of Leaf Senescence during the Grain-Filling Period in Older and Newer Maize Hybrids. Crop Sci. 2004, 44, 827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ding, L.; Wang, K.J.; Jiang, G.M.; Biswas, D.K.; Xu, H.; Li, L.F.; Li, Y.H. Effects of Nitrogen Deficiency on Photosynthetic Traits of Maize Hybrids Released in Different Years. Ann. Bot. 2005, 96, 925–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chibane, N.; Caicedo, M.; Martinez, S.; Marcet, P.; Revilla, P.; Ordás, B. Relationship between Delayed Leaf Senescence (Stay-Green) and Agronomic and Physiological Characters in Maize (Zea mays L.). Agronomy 2021, 11, 276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Meteorological conditions, Turda, (a) 2021 and (b) 2022.
Figure 1. Meteorological conditions, Turda, (a) 2021 and (b) 2022.
Agronomy 15 02215 g001
Figure 2. Sowing to flowering interval 1. E292; 2. C344; 3. D394; 4. E347; 5. E348; 6. E359; 7. E372; 8. E376; 9. E378; 10. E385; 11. A447; 12. A478; 13. A480; 14. A483.
Figure 2. Sowing to flowering interval 1. E292; 2. C344; 3. D394; 4. E347; 5. E348; 6. E359; 7. E372; 8. E376; 9. E378; 10. E385; 11. A447; 12. A478; 13. A480; 14. A483.
Agronomy 15 02215 g002
Figure 3. Anthesis to silking interval. 0 = flowering and silking coincidence, 1–3 = number of days between flowering and silking.
Figure 3. Anthesis to silking interval. 0 = flowering and silking coincidence, 1–3 = number of days between flowering and silking.
Agronomy 15 02215 g003
Figure 4. Sowing-to-physiological maturity interval.
Figure 4. Sowing-to-physiological maturity interval.
Agronomy 15 02215 g004
Figure 5. Yield, DM and UP of the studied hybrids.
Figure 5. Yield, DM and UP of the studied hybrids.
Agronomy 15 02215 g005
Figure 6. An ear of A478 × D328 (semi-dent), the highest yielding hybrid.
Figure 6. An ear of A478 × D328 (semi-dent), the highest yielding hybrid.
Agronomy 15 02215 g006
Table 1. Inbred lines used in crosses and their cob traits.
Table 1. Inbred lines used in crosses and their cob traits.
Inbred LineGermplasm GroupKernel TypeKernel ColorCob ColorEar Average LengthNo Kernel RowsNo Kernels/Row
Maternal inbred lines
E292Iodent + Mo17DentDark yellowRed1612–1424
C344IodentSemi-dentDark yellowRed1816–1824
D394IodentSemi-dentDark yellowRed1318–2027
E347IodentSemi-dentDark yellowWhite1616–1829
E348IodentSemi-dentDark yellowWhite1316–1821
E359IodentSemi-dentDark yellowRed1314–1622
E372Mo17 + C103DentDark yellowRed1518–2031
E376IodentDentDark yellowRed2018–2040
E378IodentDentDark yellowRed1814–1635
E385B73DentYellowPink1318–2022
A447Iodent + Oh43DentDark yellowRed1316–1825
A478IodentSemi-dentDark yellowPink1216–1827
A480IodentSemi-dentDark yellowWhite1218–2030
A483Iodent + B73DentDark yellowPink2016–1835
Paternal inbred lines
D298Mo17 + C103FlintDark yellowDark red1814–1628
B330W153 + D105FlintOrangeWhite1612–1417
C336W153 + Lo3FlintYellowWhite1612–1426
D328Mo17 + C103FlintDark yellowRed1314–1624
Table 2. ANOVA for yield, DM and UP—F values.
Table 2. ANOVA for yield, DM and UP—F values.
Source of VariabilityDFYieldDMUP
Year (Y)13795 **1421 **364.6 **
Hybrid (H)5517.9 **18.3 **1377 **
Maternal genotype (M)1331.1 **94.3 **1396 **
Paternal genotype (P)3135.4 **37.7 **1319 **
Y × H550.33.2 **0.1
Y × M130.41.10.2
Y × P30.42.3 **0.2
** Fisher test, significant for f = 0.01.
Table 3. GCA and SCA effects for yield.
Table 3. GCA and SCA effects for yield.
No.Maternal Inbred LineSCA EffectsMaternal Inbred Line GCA
Paternal Inbred Line
D298B330C336D328
1E292679416651243497 gh
2C34445−142−1019−296−353 bcd
3D394−457−131−8181122−71 bc
4E347288380−764−256−88 de
5E34862−3−232386−545 bc
6E359502538−1571−425−239 cde
7E372−292−658−1263−199−603 b
8E376210−284−123158−10 ef
9E378−944−527−1129−2492−1273 a
10E385465−252−1040116685 ef
11A447533854−96416427 gh
12A47813721251−12321071152 i
13A4809551646−12431525721 h
14A4834281164−870456295 fg
Paternal inbred line GCA275 b304 b−838 a258 b
The letters following the numbers represent the significance between the variants, according to Duncan’s test.
Table 4. Hybrid yield, by year, average and rank.
Table 4. Hybrid yield, by year, average and rank.
HybridYield 2021Yield 2022Average YieldRank 2021Rank 2022Average Rank
E292 × D29811,066 ± 206415 ± 3068740 121111
C344 × D29810,565 ± 3265648 ± 3468106 252928
D394 × D2989963 ± 4635244 ± 2757604 434242
E347 × D29810,708 ± 3645991 ± 1678350 222322
E348 × D29810,482 ± 815765 ± 1268123 282727
E359 × D29810,855 ± 3546271 ± 1418563 181315
E372 × D29810,128 ± 2415411 ± 1637770 403839
E376 × D29810,630 ± 2755913 ± 2808272 232424
E378 × D2989476 ± 1404759 ± 2457118*494748
E385 × D29811,019 ± 4876034 ± 1968526 132216
A447 × D29810,921 ± 2176268 ± 1928594 151414
A478 × D29811,725 ± 3187142 ± 2739434**534
A480 × D29811,375 ± 1226658 ± 939016*999
A483 × D29810,885 ± 5406094 ± 4758490 161918
E292 × B33010,836 ± 2186118 ± 3188477 201820
C344 × B33010,278 ± 3375560 ± 3037919 353334
D394 × B33010,389 ± 1435472 ± 307931 303533
E347 × B33010,800 ± 1516081 ± 4318441 212021
E348 × B33010,417 ± 4225700 ± 2588058 292829
E359 × B33010,958 ± 2896240 ± 4338599 141513
E372 × B33010,193 ± 3104614 ± 3047404 374944
E376 × B33010,136 ± 4305418 ± 1017777 393738
E378 × B3309893 ± 1835175 ± 4987534 444343
E385 × B33010,334 ± 3055284 ± 1277809 314036
A447 × B33011,274 ± 436557 ± 4888916 101010
A478 × B33011,738 ± 3806886 ± 639312**455
A480 × B33012,300 ± 3547115 ± 779707***242
A483 × B33011,584 ± 3976866 ± 2409225*767
E292 × C33611,071 ± 2676353 ± 3048712 111212
C344 × C3369400 ± 2624684 ± 5187042*504849
D394 × C3369602 ± 4224885 ± 4507243 464546
E347 × C3369656 ± 2934937 ± 3427297 454445
E348 × C3368197 ± 1243279 ± 3865738***555555
E359 × C3368683 ± 2484298 ± 1136490***545354
E372 × C3369157 ± 3904439 ± 4816798**535253
E376 × C33610,297 ± 5145580 ± 3057938 343131
E378 × C3369291 ± 1704573 ± 2336932**525051
E385 × C3369514 ± 3464528 ± 1347021*485150
A447 × C33610,324 ± 1885606 ± 2817965 323030
A478 × C33610,297 ± 2915579 ± 3617938 333232
A480 × C3369344 ± 2344293 ± 1316819**515452
A483 × C3369550 ± 994832 ± 1407191 474647
E292 × D32810,563 ± 1876045 ± 978304 262123
C344 × D32810,124 ± 815406 ± 1817765 413940
D394 × D32811,542 ± 4716825 ± 4169184*888
E347 × D32810,164 ± 2115446 ± 4197805 383637
E348 × D32810,506 ± 2405789 ± 1598148 272626
E359 × D3289995 ± 1855277 ± 297636 424141
E372 × D32810,221 ± 2695504 ± 2727862 363435
E376 × D32810,578 ± 2685861 ± 1028220 242525
E378 × D3287928 ± 563211 ± 3805569***565656
E385 × D32811,616 ± 936838 ± 2109227*676
A447 × D32810,836 ± 2286118 ± 4118477 191719
A478 × D32813,161 ± 2137176 ± 10710,168***121
A480 × D32811,945 ± 3277228 ± 3979586**313
A483 × D32810,876 ± 1856158 ± 3218517 171617
CT1 Turda 33210,716 ± 4578315 ± 376 9516
CT2 Turda 33511,060 ± 3468172 ± 2419616
p = 0.05 (*), p = 0.01 (**) and p = 0.001 (***).
Table 5. Hybrid dry matter and unlodged plants, by year, average and rank.
Table 5. Hybrid dry matter and unlodged plants, by year, average and rank.
HybridDM 2021DM 2022Average DMDM RankUP 2021UP 2022Average UPUP Rank
E292 × D29874.0 ± 0.376.1 ± 0.175.1***5597.8 ± 1.396.8 ± 0.897.3 19
C344 × D29877.0 ± 0.280.0 ± 0.478.5 2999.1 ± 0.098.2 ± 1.898.7 6
D394 × D29877.8 ± 1.180.4 ± 0.379.1 2498.4 ± 0.797.5 ± 1.697.9 16
E347 × D29878.7 ± 0.681.8 ± 0.380.2 1897.3 ± 0.096.4 ± 0.896.9 24
E348 × D29879.2 ± 0.582.0 ± 0.380.6*1599.2 ± 0.098.3 ± 1.798.8 4
E359 × D29879.9 ± 0.782.6 ± 0.181.3**799.1 ± 0.098.2 ± 1.398.7 7
E372 × D29879.4 ± 0.282.1 ± 0.380.7*1098.5 ± 0.697.7 ± 1.598.1 12
E376 × D29879.2 ± 0.381.9 ± 0.580.6*1597.1 ± 1.396.3 ± 1.396.7 25
E378 × D29877.5 ± 0.680.6 ± 0.479.0 2592.0 ± 0.791.1 ± 2.891.6 50
E385 × D29879.0 ± 0.682.5 ± 0.380.7*1296.3 ± 0.795.3 ± 0.695.8 33
A447 × D29875.6 ± 0.678.5 ± 0.377.1*4599.2 ± 0.098.5 ± 1.598.9 1
A478 × D29876.6 ± 0.579.4 ± 0.378.0 3398.4 ± 0.797.5 ± 1.397.9 15
A480 × D29874.5 ± 0.680.2 ± 0.277.4 40100.0 ± 0.097.5 ± 1.698.7 5
A483 × D29879.3 ± 0.482.3 ± 0.380.8*996.4 ± 0.795.6 ± 1.096.0 31
E292 × B33076.4 ± 0.379.4 ± 0.377.9 3687.7 ± 3.886.7 ± 2.387.2**54
C344 × B33075.8 ± 0.378.8 ± 0.477.3 4296.9 ± 1.496.0 ± 1.996.4 28
D394 × B33078.0 ± 0.681.0 ± 0.479.5 2185.5 ± 2.784.6 ± 1.885.0***55
E347 × B33078.2 ± 0.881.1 ± 0.679.6 2096.8 ± 1.394.4 ± 3.295.6 35
E348 × B33076.7 ± 0.779.7 ± 0.378.2 3295.0 ± 3.294.2 ± 0.894.6 39
E359 × B33077.8 ± 0.280.8 ± 0.679.3 2399.1 ± 0.098.2 ± 1.498.7 7
E372 × B33076.2 ± 0.179.4 ± 0.377.8 3889.5 ± 3.188.6 ± 2.289.0*53
E376 × B33081.4 ± 0.684.1 ± 0.282.8***283.8 ± 2.380.7 ± 1.082.3***56
E378 × B33075.1 ± 0.478.1 ± 0.476.6**4892.0 ± 0.691.3 ± 1.791.6 48
E385 × B33080.1 ± 0.082.7 ± 0.181.4**695.1 ± 2.692.4 ± 1.493.8 41
A447 × B33075.8 ± 0.578.4 ± 0.277.1*4493.1 ± 0.490.4 ± 1.591.8 47
A478 × B33074.9 ± 0.280.2 ± 0.677.6 3992.3 ± 0.691.3 ± 0.791.8 46
A480 × B33073.9 ± 0.475.0 ± 0.274.4***5696.6 ± 1.394.1 ± 2.095.3 36
A483 × B33075.1 ± 0.577.7 ± 0.676.4**5197.1 ± 1.894.4 ± 3.695.8 33
E292 × C33677.6 ± 0.683.0 ± 0.380.3*1796.4 ± 0.695.6 ± 1.796.0 29
C344 × C33675.3 ± 0.778.3 ± 0.176.8**4697.9 ± 1.397.0 ± 0.797.4 17
D394 × C33679.2 ± 0.982.3 ± 0.480.7*1095.5 ± 1.294.6 ± 1.595.0 38
E347 × C33679.1 ± 0.482.1 ± 0.480.6*1398.5 ± 0.697.6 ± 1.698.0 14
E348 × C33675.9 ± 0.278.8 ± 0.477.3*4196.3 ± 1.495.4 ± 1.395.8 32
E359 × C33676.8 ± 0.280.0 ± 0.378.4 30100.0 ± 0.097.2 ± 1.498.6 9
E372 × C33676.5 ± 0.380.0 ± 0.378.3 3194.7 ± 1.793.9 ± 3.194.3 40
E376 × C33682.2 ± 0.284.9 ± 0.383.6***192.2 ± 0.791.4 ± 1.391.8 45
E378 × C33678.0 ± 1.480.6 ± 0.479.3 2298.5 ± 0.797.7 ± 1.498.1 11
E385 × C33680.6 ± 0.783.4 ± 0.282.0***394.1 ± 3.493.3 ± 0.593.7 42
A447 × C33676.5 ± 0.679.1 ± 0.277.8 3799.2 ± 0.098.4 ± 0.998.8 2
A478 × C33675.9 ± 1.076.7 ± 0.776.3***5297.7 ± 1.496.8 ± 0.997.2 22
A480 × C33673.9 ± 1.077.3 ± 0.475.6***5396.4 ± 0.795.6 ± 1.896.0 30
A483 × C33677.2 ± 0.279.9 ± 0.478.5 2898.5 ± 0.697.7 ± 0.298.1 12
E292 × D32874.9 ± 0.678.4 ± 0.376.7*4790.8 ± 1.390.0 ± 1.890.4*52
C344 × D32879.1 ± 0.482.1 ± 0.180.6 1492.6 ± 3.691.7 ± 1.492.1 44
D394 × D32880.1 ± 0.583.1 ± 0.581.6**492.0 ± 0.591.2 ± 1.591.6 49
E347 × D32877.2 ± 0.380.6 ± 1.178.9 2697.7 ± 0.796.8 ± 1.397.2 21
E348 × D32876.7 ± 0.479.3 ± 0.278.0 3397.2 ± 0.795.8 ± 2.296.5 26
E359 × D32878.5 ± 0.481.2 ± 0.279.9 1997.8 ± 0.696.9 ± 2.497.4 18
E372 × D32879.8 ± 0.582.5 ± 0.381.1**894.0 ± 2.291.6 ± 1.092.8 43
E376 × D32880.0 ± 0.083.1 ± 0.281.5**592.2 ± 0.790.7 ± 2.091.5 51
E378 × D32874.2 ± 0.876.9 ± 0.575.6***5498.3 ± 1.795.8 ± 1.197.0 23
E385 × D32876.9 ± 0.180.9 ± 0.478.9 2796.8 ± 0.093.6 ± 1.395.2 37
A447 × D32876.6 ± 0.579.4 ± 0.378.0 3599.5 ± 0.796.8 ± 2.298.1 10
A478 × D32876.1 ± 0.278.5 ± 0.277.3 4296.9 ± 2.396.0 ± 2.596.4 27
A480 × D32873.6 ± 0.379.6 ± 0.376.6*4997.7 ± 0.796.8 ± 1.797.3 20
A483 × D32874.9 ± 0.178.3 ± 0.176.6*5099.2 ± 0.098.4 ± 0.998.8 3
CT1 Turda 33278.0 ± 0.881.8 ± 0.579.9 97.1 ± 1.897.0 ± 1.5
CT2 Turda 33578.9 ± 0.781.4 ± 0.780.2 100 ± 0.097.7 ± 1.2
p = 0.05 (*), p = 0.01 (**) and p = 0.001 (***).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Călugăr, R.E.; Varga, A.; Vana, C.D.; Ceclan, L.A.; Chețan, F.; Fodor, A.; Tritean, N. Using Flint Maize for Developing New Hybrids: A Case Study in Romania. Agronomy 2025, 15, 2215. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15092215

AMA Style

Călugăr RE, Varga A, Vana CD, Ceclan LA, Chețan F, Fodor A, Tritean N. Using Flint Maize for Developing New Hybrids: A Case Study in Romania. Agronomy. 2025; 15(9):2215. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15092215

Chicago/Turabian Style

Călugăr, Roxana Elena, Andrei Varga, Carmen Daniela Vana, Loredana Ancuța Ceclan, Felicia Chețan, Andras Fodor, and Nicolae Tritean. 2025. "Using Flint Maize for Developing New Hybrids: A Case Study in Romania" Agronomy 15, no. 9: 2215. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15092215

APA Style

Călugăr, R. E., Varga, A., Vana, C. D., Ceclan, L. A., Chețan, F., Fodor, A., & Tritean, N. (2025). Using Flint Maize for Developing New Hybrids: A Case Study in Romania. Agronomy, 15(9), 2215. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15092215

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop