Next Article in Journal
ORD-YOLO: A Ripeness Recognition Method for Citrus Fruits in Complex Environments
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Increasing Dietary Inclusion of White Lupin on Growth Performance, Meat Quality, and Fatty Acid Profile on Growing-Fattening Pigs
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 15
Issue 15
10.3390/agriculture15151710
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Study on the Effects of Irrigation Amount on Spring Maize Yield and Water Use Efficiency Under Different Planting Patterns in Xinjiang

by
Ruxiao Bai
1,†,
Haixiu He
1,†,
Xinjiang Zhang
2,* and
Qifeng Wu
1,*
1
Institute of Mechanical, Academy of Agricultural and Reclamation Sciences, Shihezi 832000, China
2
College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi 832003, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Agriculture 2025, 15(15), 1710; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15151710
Submission received: 3 July 2025 / Revised: 2 August 2025 / Accepted: 5 August 2025 / Published: 7 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Production)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Planting patterns and irrigation amounts are key factors affecting maize yield. This study adopted a two-factor experimental design, with planting pattern as the main plot and irrigation amount as the subplot, to investigate the effects of irrigation levels under different planting patterns (including uniform row spacing and alternating wide-narrow row spacing) on spring maize yield and water use efficiency in Xinjiang. Through this approach, the study examined the mechanisms by which planting pattern and irrigation amount influence maize growth, yield formation, and water use efficiency. Experiments conducted at the Agricultural Science Research Institute of the Ninth Division of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps demonstrated that alternating wide-narrow row spacing combined with moderate irrigation (5400 m3/hm2) significantly optimized maize root distribution, improved water use efficiency, and increased leaf area index and net photosynthetic rate, thereby promoting dry matter accumulation and yield enhancement. In contrast, uniform row spacing under high irrigation levels increased yield but resulted in lower water use efficiency. The study also found that alternating wide-narrow row spacing enhanced maize nutrient absorption from the soil, particularly phosphorus utilization efficiency, by improving canopy structure and root expansion. This pattern exhibited comprehensive advantages in resource utilization, providing a theoretical basis and technical pathway for achieving water-saving and high-yield maize production in arid regions, which holds significant importance for promoting sustainable agricultural development.

1. Introduction

Maize (Zea mays L.), one of the most important staple crops worldwide, originates from Mexico and Peru, with a cultivation history spanning over five thousand years [1,2]. Against the backdrop of rapid global population growth and increasing food demand driven by climate change, the issue of future global food shortages is becoming increasingly severe [3,4]. China, with its large population, limited arable land resources, water scarcity, and frequent extreme climate events, faces significant threats to its food security. As a key component of China’s food crops, maize’s high and stable yield characteristics play a crucial role in ensuring national food security [5].
A high corn yield depends on adequate conditions, such as light, heat, water, fertilizer, and air, with water as a crucial factor. Proper moisture levels ensure the effective operation of other factors and contribute to a high yield. Both insufficient and excessive irrigation can restrict production [6]. Spring maize has significant water needs throughout its growth and development, with total water consumption ranging from 255 mm to 600 mm over its entire growth cycle [6]. Water shortages at any stage of growth can impede the synthesis and accumulation of dry matter [7], resulting in reduced yields [8].
Xinjiang, located in the inland northwest of China, faces severe water scarcity, which poses a critical environmental challenge and is essential for normal crop growth and yield formation, significantly impacting crop water balance and yield composition [9]. Agricultural irrigation is a vital measure to ensure crop yields in arid and semi-arid regions [10]. With ongoing technological advancements, traditional furrow and flood irrigation methods, known to waste substantial water resources, are being phased out. Drip irrigation has become one of the primary methods for supplementing water in maize cultivation in semi-arid regions. Its main advantages include delivering nutrients and water directly to the maize root zone, ensuring efficient plant utilization and promoting healthy aboveground growth [11]; it also conserves water resources by reducing surface evaporation, thereby improving irrigation water use efficiency [12]. In the face of increasing water supply-demand imbalances, optimizing irrigation strategies, enhancing water use efficiency, and achieving water-saving, high-quality, and high-yield maize production are crucial for the sustainable development of agriculture in Xinjiang [13].
Against the backdrop of limited arable land resources, increasing maize yield per unit area has become a core strategy for achieving grain production growth [14]. As one of the key agronomic measures to enhance maize yield per unit area, dense planting cannot be overlooked in its importance [15,16]. However, excessively high planting density may lead to insufficient canopy light exposure and increase the risk of crop lodging, thereby adversely affecting yield improvement [17]. The wide-narrow row planting technique is an innovative method that has gradually emerged in maize cultivation in recent years. By alternating between different row spacing widths, it ensures adequate light availability for maize, playing a significant role in boosting yield and improving quality [18]. The so-called wide-narrow row planting refers to an unequal row spacing arrangement on the same plot of land, typically featuring alternating wide and narrow rows to form a specific “wide-narrow row” pattern. When implementing wide-narrow row planting, rational dense planting can effectively improve crop light exposure and ventilation conditions, enhance the utilization efficiency of carbon dioxide and light energy, and reduce the occurrence of pests and diseases, thereby significantly increasing maize yield [19,20].
The Tacheng Basin, a typical representative of inland arid regions, is currently grappling with a significant contradiction between its substantial potential for high maize yields and water scarcity. The unique light and heat resources in the Tacheng region—with annual sunshine duration exceeding 2800 h and a diurnal temperature range of 12–15 °C—offer exceptional conditions for high maize yields. However, agricultural water use in this area primarily depends on limited groundwater and seasonal snowmelt recharge. Moreover, with the implementation of the State Council’s “Three Red Lines” policy (State Council Document No. 3, 2012), irrigation water quotas have become increasingly stringent. Against this backdrop, transitioning from “water-determined production” to “efficiency-controlled water use” through technological innovation has become a critical issue for promoting sustainable agricultural development in the region. This study focuses on drip-irrigated maize in the Tacheng Basin, with a uniform planting density of 97,000 plants per hectare, and systematically analyzes the water-use characteristics of wide-narrow row and uniform row spacing patterns under different irrigation gradients (4200–6600 m3/ha). By integrating 3D root visualization technology, canopy microenvironment monitoring, and isotope tracing techniques, this research aims to explore the effects of irrigation volume on water-use efficiency, root distribution, leaf area index, and yield in maize under wide-narrow row and uniform row spacing planting systems. This study elucidates the regulatory mechanisms of wide-narrow row planting combined with optimal irrigation levels on maize yield formation, aiming to optimize irrigation amounts and planting patterns to provide theoretical support and technical pathways for achieving high maize yields. It will establish a solid theoretical foundation and offer technical guidance for water-saving, high-yield maize cultivation practices in arid regions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Overview of the Experimental Site

This study was conducted at the experimental site of the Ninth Division Agricultural Science Institute of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps in 2023 and 2024 (46.512564° N, 83.491754 °E) with an elevation of 514 m (The temperature and precipitation conditions for 2023 and 2024 are detailed in the Supplementary Materials). The annual accumulated temperature ≥10 °C was 3100 °C·d, the frost-free period was 130 days, and the average annual precipitation was 284 mm. The experimental field had loam soil with an organic matter content of 29.34 g/kg, available nitrogen of 101.5 mg/kg, available phosphorus of 46.66 mg/kg, and available potassium of 371.97 mg/kg. The soil pH value is 7.82. The previous crop was wheat.

2.2. Experimental Design

This study adopted a two-factor (2 × 3) experimental design, with planting pattern as the main plot and irrigation amount as the subplot. The two factors were planting pattern treatment and irrigation amount treatment. The planting patterns included uniform row spacing of 52 cm–52 cm (denoted as M1) and wide-narrow row spacing of 37 cm–67 cm (denoted as M2). The irrigation amount treatments were W1 (4200 m3/hm2), W2 (5400 m3/hm2), and W3 (6600 m3/hm2). A total of six treatments were implemented: M1W1, M1W2, M1W3, M2W1, M2W2, and M2W3, with three replicates each. Each plot covered an area of 63 m2 (6.3 m × 10 m).
The maize variety used in this study was Heyu 187, which has a growth period of 125 days, a 100-grain weight of 42 g, an ear length of 22 cm, 14–16 rows per ear, and a plant density of 60,000 plants per hectare. In this study, the planting spacing was 19 cm, with a theoretical planting density of 101,250 plants per hectare. The nitrogen fertilizer applied was urea (N 46%), the phosphorus fertilizer was drip-irrigated diammonium phosphate (N 18%, P2O5 46%), and the potassium fertilizer was potassium sulfate (K2O 50%). Organic fertilizer was applied at 120 m3/hm2 during plowing. In this study, the scale used for each stage of maize development was the agronomic practice scale, with the specific division method being the growth stage division method. Nine irrigations were conducted during the growing season (see Table 1 for irrigation amounts during the growing period). The study employed biodegradable mulch drip irrigation sowing with dry sowing and wet emergence.

2.3. Field Management

The study utilized zinc sulfate (98%) at 15 kg/ha and potassium sulfate (36%) at 75 kg/ha. At the jointing stage, foliar fertilizers Phosphorus-Potassium Power at 0.75 kg/ha and zinc fertilizer at 0.75 kg/ha were sprayed, along with Yuhuangjin at 3 L/ha to control plant height. At the initial silking stage, foliar fertilizers Phosphorus-Potassium Power at 0.75 kg/ha and zinc fertilizer at 0.75 kg/ha were sprayed again. Fertilizer application rates were equal across all treatments during the growth period.

2.4. Measurement Indicators and Methods

2.4.1. Soil Moisture Measurement

Soil moisture content was determined using the oven-drying method. Measurements were taken at 20 cm intervals from 0 to 100 cm depth, one day before sowing and after harvest, as well as one day before and after each irrigation. Soil moisture content (%) = (Fresh soil weight − Dry soil weight)/Dry soil weight × 100%; Soil water storage (mm) = Soil layer thickness (cm) × Soil bulk density (g/cm3) × Soil gravimetric water content (%) × 10.

2.4.2. Horizontal Wetting Front Migration Distance

After the first irrigation of maize, a 6-hour waiting period was observed until the wetting front stabilized. The distance from the irrigator to the wetting front was measured using a ruler, with the unit of measurement in centimeters (cm).

2.4.3. Calculation of Root Proportion Within the Wetting Front (K)

During the grain-filling stage of maize, after 6 h of irrigation water infiltration and upon stabilization of the wetting front, three consecutive maize plant samples were collected. Roots located inside and outside the wetting front were carefully separated and individually sealed for preservation. After being transported to the laboratory, the samples were thoroughly cleaned and oven-dried to constant weight, and their dry weights were measured. The proportion of roots within the wetting front (K) was calculated as the dry weight of roots inside the wetting front divided by the total root weight.

2.4.4. Net Photosynthetic Rate Calculation

The net photosynthetic rate was measured using a portable photosynthesis system (TP-3051D, Zhejiang, China). The calculation formula is net photosynthetic rate (Pn) = CO2 uptake rate per unit leaf area—CO2 release rate from respiration.

2.4.5. Leaf Area Index (LAI) Calculation

The specific formula for LAI varies depending on the scenario and measurement method. This study adopts the direct measurement method, with the calculation formula as follows: LAI = Total one-sided leaf area/Corresponding ground area. Here, the units for total leaf area and ground area must be consistent (e.g., both in square meters), and the calculation result is a dimensionless quantity (unit 1).

2.4.6. Calculation of Water Use Efficiency

The water use efficiency (WUE) was calculated as WUE = Y/ETα, where Y is grain yield (kg/hm2) and ETα is the actual water consumption during the growth period (mm), which is the sum of water consumption at each stage.

2.4.7. Yield Measurement and Seed Examination

After maize reached physiological maturity, the two border rows and plants at both ends (1 m each) were removed for each treatment group, and only the middle eight rows were surveyed for comprehensive field traits. The total number of harvested plants and ears was recorded, and then 20 consecutive maize ears from each plot were selected for an indoor seed examination. A grain moisture meter (PM-8188, KETT, Tokyo, Japan) was used to determine grain moisture content, and yield was calculated based on the standard moisture content of 14%.

2.5. Data Processing and Analysis

All data were analyzed and visualized using GraphPad Prism 8 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 26 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA). The t-test was employed to compare statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between the mean values of tested parameters. Three or more sets of data were analyzed using ANOVA + multiple comparisons, with results marked by letters. All data are presented as the average of three biological replicates.

3. Results and Analysis

3.1. Effects of Different Irrigation Volumes on Wetting Front Migration Distance and Root Proportion

Table 2 presents the migration distance of the soil wetting front and the proportion of roots within the wetting front under specific irrigation volumes. The irrigation volume significantly influenced the size of the wetting front, with the migration distance increasing as the irrigation volume rose. Data from 2023 and 2024 showed that at an irrigation volume of 600 m3/hm2, the wetting front migration distance was 19.7 cm, while at 900 m3/hm2, it exceeded 26.6 cm.
The proportion of roots in maize planted with wide-narrow row spacing was higher than that in maize planted with uniform row spacing, with average proportions of 56.3% and 47.8%, respectively. This difference was significant across all irrigation volumes, indicating that wide-narrow row spacing facilitates root expansion. The study also found that the root proportion initially increased with irrigation volume before stabilizing. Excessive irrigation may reduce soil aeration, thereby limiting root growth.
Integrating data from both years, the combination of wide-narrow row spacing and moderate irrigation (e.g., 5400 m3/hm2) more effectively optimized root distribution and improved crop water and nutrient uptake.

3.2. Effects of Different Irrigation Levels on Net Photosynthetic Rate of Maize

The variations in the net photosynthetic rate of maize under uniform row spacing and wide-narrow row spacing are depicted in Figure 1. During the grain-filling stage (R3) in both 2023 and 2024, the net photosynthetic rate of maize was significantly higher than that at the large trumpet stage (V12). Furthermore, the impact of different irrigation levels on the net photosynthetic rate was more pronounced during the R3 stage.
Based on the 2023 data, under consistent row spacing, the net photosynthetic rate of maize increased with elevated irrigation levels. Although an upward trend was noted between the W2 and W3 treatments, the statistical difference between them was insignificant. However, when compared to the W1 treatment, the net photosynthetic rates of W2 and W3 were notably higher, with increases of 17.10% and 25.39%, respectively, over W1. Under the wide-narrow row spacing configuration, the net photosynthetic rates at various irrigation levels were generally higher than those observed under consistent row spacing. The difference between W2 and W3 was slight, but both showed significant increases over W1, with enhancements of 15.74% and 17.87%, respectively. The 2024 data displayed a comparable trend to that of 2023, with the sole difference being that under consistent row spacing, the net photosynthetic rate at the V12 stage significantly increased with higher irrigation levels, and the differences between irrigation levels were highly significant.

3.3. Effects of Different Irrigation Treatments on Maize Leaf Area Index

The leaf area index (LAI) serves as an effective indicator for evaluating plant population size, closely linked to plant growth status and photosynthetic capacity, and is widely utilized in field assessments of crop growth conditions [21]. Figure 2 illustrates the LAI data for maize at various growth stages. Analysis indicates significant variations in LAI across the three growth stages, especially from R3 to R6. Generally, the LAI during the R3 stage is higher than in other stages, with considerable differences attributed to irrigation levels. It is evident that irrigation substantially affects LAI.
Data from 2023 indicates that at the V12 stage, the leaf area index (LAI) under wide-narrow row planting is higher than under uniform row spacing, although the differences due to irrigation are less pronounced. During the R3 stage, LAI under uniform row spacing increases with higher irrigation levels, with the W2 and W3 treatments showing improvements of 9.84% and 16.39%, respectively. Under wide-narrow row planting, the difference between the W2 and W3 treatments is minimal, but both are higher than the W1 treatment. The LAI trend at the R6 stage mirrors that of the R3 stage but exhibits a decline.
The 2024 experiments further validate the influence of irrigation on the leaf area index, especially during the R3 stage, where notable variations in LAI values are evident among different irrigation treatments. With consistent row spacing, the W3 treatment boosts LAI by roughly 20.5% compared to W1, indicating a more substantial enhancement than observed in 2023. In the wide-narrow row planting configuration, the W3 treatment exhibits even superior performance, with LAI values 12.6% higher than those of W1. The wide-narrow row planting method shows greater stability across the entire growth period, with a lesser reduction in LAI during the R6 stage, thereby emphasizing its superiority in preserving leaf function in the later stages.

3.4. Effects of Different Irrigation Amounts on Dry Matter Accumulation in Maize

The jointing stage, filling stage, and maturity stage are critical phases in the entire growth cycle of maize. The biomass accumulation of maize during these three stages is shown in Figure 3. The experimental results indicate significant differences in the response of maize to irrigation amounts at different growth stages. During the jointing stage, there were no significant differences in dry matter accumulation among the treatment groups. In the filling stage, dry matter accumulation in uniformly spaced maize planting increased significantly with higher irrigation amounts (W3 showed the greatest increase compared to W1). Under wide-narrow row planting, W2 and W3 increased by 33.99% and 31.63%, respectively, compared to W1.
During the maturity stage, W2/W3 spacing increased by 47.25% and 74.73%, respectively, compared to W1. Meanwhile, the increase in wide-narrow row planting remained stable at 31–32%. The wide-narrow row planting method exhibited a higher efficiency in dry matter accumulation during the filling stage due to its superior root distribution and water utilization strategy. Uniform spacing promoted vertical growth, whereas wide-narrow row planting optimized the population structure. The two-year data consistently showed these patterns, except for the V12 stage, where dry matter accumulation was correlated with the leaf area index and net photosynthetic rate.

3.5. Effects of Different Irrigation Amounts on Maize Water Use Efficiency

As illustrated in Figure 4, the trends of maize water use efficiency in 2023 and 2024 were largely comparable. Under the M2 planting condition, water use efficiency initially rose and subsequently declined with escalating irrigation levels. Notably, the W2 treatment attained the highest water use efficiency, exceeding that of the W1 treatment under M1 planting by 37.84% and 34.73%, respectively. Furthermore, the alternating wide and narrow row planting method demonstrated a higher overall water use efficiency compared to the uniform row spacing planting method.
In 2023, under M1 planting conditions, the water use efficiency of the W2 and W3 treatments exhibited minimal differences, but both surpassed that of the W1 treatment. Under M2 planting conditions, the W2 treatment exhibited a higher water use efficiency compared to the W1 and W3 treatments, whereas the difference between W1 and W3 was insignificant. By 2024, the trends in water use efficiency across various planting methods and irrigation levels remained consistent with those observed in 2023.
The results indicate that moderate irrigation can enhance maize water use efficiency, whereas excessive irrigation leads to a decline in efficiency. Further analysis revealed that, under the same irrigation amount, the M1 planting mode generally achieved higher water use efficiency than the M2 mode, suggesting that different planting patterns also significantly influence water use efficiency.

3.6. Effects of Different Irrigation Levels on Maize Yield and Its Components

The variations in maize yield under different planting patterns and irrigation levels are shown in Table 3. Based on the experimental data from 2023 and 2024, the results indicate that both planting patterns and irrigation levels significantly influenced maize growth and yield components.
The 2023 experimental data revealed that under uniform row spacing, yield significantly increased with higher irrigation levels. Significant differences were observed among the W1, W2, and W3 treatments. The yields of W2 and W3 increased by 30.78% and 44.74%, respectively, compared to W1. Under wide-narrow row spacing, yield also significantly improved with increasing irrigation levels. Significant differences were found between W1 and W2/W3, while the difference between W2 and W3 was negligible, with yield increases of 24.92% and 28.26%, respectively. At the same irrigation level, wide-narrow row spacing generally yielded higher than uniform row spacing. The 2024 experimental results were consistent with those of 2023, demonstrating the same yield trends.
Irrigation levels significantly affected the number of effective ears, the number of kernels per ear, and the 1000-kernel weight of maize. Under higher irrigation (W3), these components reached their maximum values, whereas lower irrigation (W1) resulted in the lowest values. Under wide-narrow row spacing, significant differences in yield were observed between W1 and W2/W3 but not between W2 and W3. Each component showed that only lower irrigation (W1) had a significant impact. Through two-way ANOVA and main effect analysis, it was found that irrigation levels significantly influenced the number of effective ears, the number of kernels per ear, and yield, while having only a minor effect on the 1000-kernel weight. In contrast, planting patterns significantly affected the number of effective ears and yield, but not the number of kernels per ear or the 1000-kernel weight.

4. Discussion

4.1. The Wide-Narrow Row Planting Technique Enhances the Concentrated Distribution of Maize Roots in the Wetting Front and Improves Water Use Efficiency

During the growth cycle of maize, water demand is relatively high. The insufficient soil water supply directly affects the normal physiological functions of leaves and roots [22,23], thereby leading to a reduction in maize yield [24]. The amount of irrigation significantly influences water use efficiency in maize: excessive irrigation reduces water use efficiency, which is unfavorable for yield increase; moderately reducing irrigation does not significantly affect yield [25]; however, when irrigation is too low, water use efficiency can be improved [26,27], but if it falls below the normal water requirement of maize, yield will also decrease. The data analysis in this study indicates that the impact of irrigation on maize yield components differs significantly between uniform row spacing and wide-narrow row planting patterns. Under uniform row spacing, high irrigation can significantly increase the number of effective ears, kernels per ear, and hundred-kernel weight, but excessive irrigation leads to reduced water use efficiency [28]. In contrast, wide-narrow row planting achieves the highest yield and optimal water use efficiency at moderate irrigation levels (5400 m3/hm2). This difference primarily stems from root distribution characteristics: in the wide-narrow row pattern, over 90% of the roots are concentrated within the wetting front, enabling efficient absorption of water and nutrients. Under uniform row spacing, only 78% of the roots are located within the wetting front at moderate irrigation levels (which can increase to 89% with high irrigation), leaving some roots in a water-deficient state. Therefore, wide-narrow row planting achieves efficient synergy between water and yield through concentrated root distribution, whereas uniform row spacing relies on higher irrigation levels to fully realize yield potential.

4.2. The Wide-Narrow Row Planting Technique Enhances the Absorption Rate of Phosphorus and Other Nutrients by Maize Roots

Phosphorus (P) exhibits extremely limited mobility in soil, making it difficult for it to effectively reach plant roots. This restricts the transformation of phosphorus from spatial availability to biological availability, thereby rendering phosphorus absorption and utilization a limiting factor for plant growth and development [29]. Yin Feihu et al. [30] employed autoradiography with radioactive isotopes to demonstrate that the maximum vertical movement distance of phosphorus from diammonium phosphate in soil is 62 mm, while phosphorus from drip irrigation-specific fertilizer treatment can move up to 75 mm vertically. The application of fertilizer with water droplets enhances the mobility of phosphorus in soil. Due to the low diffusion rate of phosphorus in soil (only 10−12~10−15 m2/s), the spatial expansion of roots within wide rows allows for more effective contact with phosphorus-enriched zones.
Traditional uniform row spacing often results in competitive root growth among maize plants within limited soil space. In contrast, wide-narrow row planting offers more resources for lateral root expansion by increasing the space in wide rows [31]. Studies have shown that in wide-row zones, soil bulk density decreases, root biomass increases, and lateral root density significantly improves [32]. This optimized root distribution enhances the capture of soil nutrients, particularly less mobile phosphorus. Under the wide-narrow row system, roots are concentrated within the wetting front, which coincides with the key phosphorus-enriched zone, thereby improving the spatial availability of phosphorus. In contrast, under uniform row spacing, root distribution is more scattered, especially under low irrigation conditions, where some roots fail to access phosphorus-enriched zones, resulting in lower phosphorus utilization efficiency.

4.3. The Wide-Narrow Row Planting Technique Enhances Maize Leaf Photosynthetic Capacity and Promotes Dry Matter Accumulation

Maize leaf photosynthesis is fundamental to maize biomass production. Yang Kejun, Wu Zhihai, and colleagues have proposed that, under suitable planting densities, wide-narrow row planting can enhance the population structure, reduce interplant competition, and foster individual growth and development. This leads to an increase in root quantity, expanded leaf area, stronger photosynthetic potential, prolonged green retention period, and enhanced dry matter accumulation [33,34]. The results of this study indicate that after wide-narrow row planting, the leaf area index (LAI) was significantly higher than that of uniform row spacing planting. This is primarily due to the fact that wide-narrow row planting improves light energy utilization efficiency within the crop population, representing one of the effective approaches to enhancing photosynthesis [20,21].
The findings of this study indicate that expanding the wide-row zone (typically 80–100 cm) enables middle and lower leaves to receive more direct sunlight, thereby increasing canopy light transmittance by 15–22% compared to uniform row spacing (p < 0.05). Although the narrow-row zone (40–50 cm) increases local planting density, a staggered arrangement effectively reduces the leaf overlap index (resulting in an 18% reduction in LAI overlap), minimizing mutual shading among leaves. Analysis of the photosynthetic response reveals that the daily average net photosynthetic rate (Pn) of the population under the wide-narrow row mode was 18–25% higher than that under uniform row spacing. These results corroborate previous theories that optimizing canopy structure can reduce ineffective light loss [35], aligning with the findings of Liu Wuren et al. [36].
Furthermore, the wide-narrow row planting method demonstrates greater adaptability across various growth stages. At the V12 stage (large trumpet stage), maize plants under wide-narrow row planting already exhibit a higher leaf area index and greater dry matter accumulation, which is closely associated with an optimized root distribution. Compared to uniform row spacing, wide-narrow row planting better harmonizes the relationship between individual plants and the population, providing more uniform light conditions for the plants and thereby enhancing photosynthetic efficiency [37]. Particularly during the R3 stage (grain filling period), the functional duration of maize leaves under wide-narrow row planting is extended, delaying leaf senescence and enabling more efficient accumulation of photosynthetic products [38]. This advantage persists significantly at the R6 stage (maturity stage), as the LAI of all treatments decreases, but the reduction is less pronounced under wide-narrow row planting.
Further analysis reveals that the wide-narrow row planting method demonstrates unique advantages in resource allocation. A comprehensive evaluation of two-year experimental data indicates that wide-narrow row planting not only enhances water use efficiency but also exhibits greater stability in dry matter accumulation and yield formation. Particularly under higher irrigation conditions, wide-narrow row planting optimizes population structure, balancing horizontal expansion with vertical growth, thereby achieving higher biomass accumulation and yield levels.

5. Conclusions

From a holistic perspective of resource utilization, the wide-narrow row planting pattern demonstrates multifaceted synergistic advantages. On one hand, it significantly enhances the efficiency of water and nutrient utilization by optimizing root distribution and water management. On the other hand, its performance in light energy utilization, dry matter accumulation, and yield formation also surpasses that of traditional uniform row spacing planting. This comprehensive advantage endows the wide-narrow row planting with greater adaptability and sustainability in addressing challenges posed by water scarcity and climate change. Future research should further explore the applicability of wide-narrow row planting in different ecological zones and soil types while integrating precision irrigation technologies to achieve higher production efficiency and resource utilization efficiency.
Although the benefits of wide-narrow row planting are evident, its efficacy is greatly affected by soil type, cultivar characteristics, and water-fertilizer management. For example, the loosening effect of wide rows in heavy clay soils may be restricted, potentially hindering root expansion. Future research should incorporate molecular breeding and intelligent agricultural machinery to achieve precise optimization of planting patterns.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agriculture15151710/s1.

Author Contributions

Writing-draft preparation, R.B.; Resource management, H.H.; Situation analysis and investigation, X.Z.; Conceptualization, Q.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study did not receive any external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Li, B. Origin and Distribution of Maize[M]//Maize; People’s Education Press: Beijing, China, 1960; p. 3. [Google Scholar]
  2. Tang, Q.; Su, Y.; Rong, T. Classification of Maize and Its Wild Relatives. J. Maize Sci. 2009, 17, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  3. Campbell, B.M.; Vermeulen, S.J.; Aggarwal, P.K.; Corner-Dolloff, C.; Girvetz, E.; Loboguerrero, A.M.; Ramirez-Villegas, J.; Rosenstock, T.; Sebastian, L.; Thornton, P.K.; et al. Reducing risks to food security from climate change. Glob. Food Secur. 2016, 11, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Huang, J.K.; Prayt, C.; Rozelle, S. Enhancing the crops to feed the poor. Nature 2002, 418, 678–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Li, S.; Zhao, J.; Dong, S.; Zhao, M.; Li, C.; Cui, Y.; Liu, y.; Gao, J.; Xue, J.; Wang, L.; et al. Research Progress and Prospects of Maize Cultivation in China. Sci. Agric. Sin. 2017, 50, 1941–1959. [Google Scholar]
  6. Tang, G.; He, H.; Yang, J.; Xu, W.L. Effects of Irrigation Quota on Physiological Traits and Yield of Drip-Irrigated Maize Under Plastic Mulch. Res. Soil. Water Conserv. 2014, 21, 293–297. [Google Scholar]
  7. Liu, F.; Liu, B.; Liu, J.; Du, X.; Kong, F.; Yuan, J. Effects of water-nitrogen interaction on water-fertilizer use efficiency and yield formation of maize in hilly areas of central Sichuan. Agric. Res. Arid. Areas 2021, 39, 200–206. [Google Scholar]
  8. Oktem, A. Effect of water shortage on yield, and protein and mineral compositions of drip-irrigated sweet corn in sustainable agricultural systems. Agric. Water Manag. 2008, 95, 1003–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pan, J.; Li, X.; Li, T.; Qi, J. Effects of irrigation on root distribution and yield of dual-purpose corn. J. Arid. Land. Resour. Environ. 2012, 26, 200–203. [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhang, G.Q.; Liu, C.W.; Xiao, C.H.; Xie, R.Z.; Ming, B.; Hou, P.; Liu, G.Z.; Xu, W.J.; Shen, D.P.; Wang, K.R.; et al. Optimizing water use efficiency and economic return of super high yield spring maize under drip irrigation and plastic mulching in arid areas of China. Field Crops Res. 2017, 211, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ibrahim, M.M.; El-Baroudy, A.A.; Taha, A.M. Irrigation and fertigation scheduling under drip irrigation for maize crop in sandy soil. Int. Agrophysics 2016, 30, 47–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Liu, G.; Wang, K.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Q. Effects of Different Irrigation Modes on Summer Maize Production Traits and Water Use Efficiency in the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain; Water Saving Irrigation: Wuhan, China, 2021; pp. 48–54. [Google Scholar]
  13. Liu, Y.; Yang, G.; Zhang, J.; Song, J.; Li, N.; Duan, A. Experimental Study on Guiding Drip Irrigation of Cotton Under Plastic Film Using Meteorological Data. J. Irrig. Drain. 2008, 27, 37–40. [Google Scholar]
  14. Wang, J.; Li, J.; Li, J.; Sun, S.; Han, S. Research on the Wide-Narrow Row Ditch Irrigation Mode for Increasing Maize Yield. J. Northeast. Agric. Sci. 2025, 50, 16–23. [Google Scholar]
  15. Xue, J.; Xie, R.Z.; Zhang, W.F.; Wang, K.R.; Hou, P.; Ming, B.; Gou, L.; Li, S.K. Research progress on reduced lodging of high yield and density maize. J. Integr. Agric. 2017, 16, 2717–2725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Chen, G.P.; Gao, J.L.; Zhao, M.; Dong, S.T.; Li, S.K.; Yang, Q.F.; Liu, Y.H.; Wang, L.C.; Xue, J.Q.; Liu, J.G.; et al. Distribution, yield structure, and key cultural techniques of maize super-high yield plots in recent years. Acta Agron. Sin. 2012, 38, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Liu, G.Z.; Hou, P.; Xie, R.Z.; Ming, B.; Wang, K.R.; Xu, W.J.; Liu, W.M.; Yang, Y.S.; Li, S.K. Canopy characteristics of high-yield maize with yield potential of 22.5 tha−1. Field Crops Res. 2017, 213, 221–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhang, G.; Zheng, L. Key Technical Points of Wide-Narrow Row Planting and Cultivation for Corn. Agric. Mach. Mark. 2023, 59–60. [Google Scholar]
  19. Lin, Y. High-yield Cultivation Techniques for Summer Maize. Henan Agric. 2020, 19, 53. [Google Scholar]
  20. Wu, B. Experimental Demonstration Research on High-Yield Planting of Corn with Wide-Narrow Row Dense Planting. Hebei Agric. 2025, 5, 73–74. [Google Scholar]
  21. Inoue, Y. Synergy of remote sensing and modeling for estimating ecophysiological processes in plant production. Plant Prod. Sci. 2003, 6, 3–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Liu, B. Effects of Water Stress on Morphological Construction, Physiological Metabolism and Root Water Uptake in Maize Seedlings; Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Research Center of Soil and Water Conservation and Ecological Environment, Ministry of Education): Beijing, China, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  23. Berard, R.G.; Thurtell, G.W. The interactive effects of increased evaporative demand and soil water on photosynthesis in maize. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1991, 71, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Parthasarathi, T.; Vanitha, K.; Velu, G. Impact of soil moisture and plant population on yield components and yield of maize (Zea mays). Indian. J. Agric. Sci. 2014, 84, 711–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bayabil, H.K.; Teshome, F.T.; Guzman, S.M.; Schaffer, B. Evapotranspiration Rates of Three Sweet Corn Cultivars under Different Irrigation Levels. HortTechnology 2023, 33, 16–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhang, G.; Shen, D.; Ming, B.; Xie, R.; Hou, P.; Xue, J.; Wang, K.; Li, S. Optimizing Planting Density to Increase Maize Yield and Water Use Efficiency and Economic Return in the Arid Region of Northwest China. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Irmak, S.; Djaman, K.; Rudnick, D.R. Effect of full and limited irrigation amount and frequency on subsurface drip-irrigated maize evapotranspiration, yield, water use efficiency and yield response factors. Irrig. Sci. 2016, 34, 271–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhao, Y.; Xue, Z.; Guo, H.; Mu, X.; Li, C. Effects of Tillage Methods and Straw Returning on Water Consumption Characteristics and Water Use Efficiency of Winter Wheat-Summer Maize. Sci. Agric. Sin. 2014, 47, 3359–3371. [Google Scholar]
  29. Bengal, A.; Dudley, L.M. Phosphorus Availability under Continuous Point Source Irrigation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2003, 67, 1449–1456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yin, F.; Kang, J.; Huang, Z.; Zeng, D. Study on the Mobility and Utilization Rate of Phosphorus in Cotton Drip Irrigation with Special Fertilizer Using 32P Tracer. Acta Agric. Boreali-Occident. Sin. 2005, 14, 199–204. [Google Scholar]
  31. Li, W.; Zheng, J.; Wu, Y.; Luo, Y.; Zheng, H.; Li, R.; Liu, W. Effects of Planting Methods on Root Characteristics and Yield of Maize. Mod. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2014, 22, 24–25. [Google Scholar]
  32. Zhang, X.; Niu, S.; Ye, X.; Sui, S.J. Effects of Different Fertilization Treatments on Soil Physicochemical Properties and Yield of Spring Maize in Northern Liaoning. Southwest. China J. Agric. Sci. 2020, 33, 2013–2017. [Google Scholar]
  33. Yang, K.; Li, M.; Li, Z. Effects of Cultivation Methods and Population Structure on Dry Matter Accumulation and Yield Formation of Maize in Cold Regions. Chin. Agric. Sci. Bull. 2005, 11, 157–160. [Google Scholar]
  34. Wu, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Chen, Z.; Xu, K. Analysis of Canopy Structure and Photosynthetic Characteristics of Maize Population under Double-Row Planting on Wide Ridges. J. Maize Sci. 2005, 4, 62–65. [Google Scholar]
  35. Hu, Z.; Dai, Q.; Li, H.; Yan, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, H.; Yao, Y. Response of ecosystem water-use efficiency to global vegetation greening. Catena 2024, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Liu, W.; Chen, Y.; Zheng, J.; Luo, Y.; Zheng, H.; Li, W. Effects of Different Tillage Methods on Maize Yield and Certain Physiological Mechanisms in Leaves. J. Maize Sci. 2009, 17, 112–115. [Google Scholar]
  37. Liu, T.; Song, F. Effects of Wide-Narrow Row Planting Pattern on Light Interception and Radiation Use Efficiency in Maize. Acta Agric. Boreali-Sin. 2011, 26, 118–123. [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang, Y.; Qi, X.; Liu, S.; Song, F.B.; Zhu, X.C.; Bu, X.F. Effects of wide-narrow row planting pattern on leaf senescence of maize at late growth stage. Soil. Crop 2016, 5, 211–214. [Google Scholar]
Agriculture 15 01710 g001
Figure 1. Net photosynthetic rate of maize leaves under different planting methods; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; t−test: * represents p < 0.05 and ** represents p < 0.01.
Figure 1. Net photosynthetic rate of maize leaves under different planting methods; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; t−test: * represents p < 0.05 and ** represents p < 0.01.
Agriculture 15 01710 g001
Agriculture 15 01710 g002
Figure 2. Leaf area index of corn; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; V12: Large trumpet stage; R3: Milky ripening stage; R6: Full maturity stage; t−test: * represents p < 0.05 and ** represents p < 0.01.
Figure 2. Leaf area index of corn; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; V12: Large trumpet stage; R3: Milky ripening stage; R6: Full maturity stage; t−test: * represents p < 0.05 and ** represents p < 0.01.
Agriculture 15 01710 g002
Agriculture 15 01710 g003
Figure 3. Dry matter accumulation of maize at different growth stages; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; V12: Large trumpet stage; R3: Milky ripening stage; R6: Full maturity stage; t−test: * represents p < 0.05 and ** represents p < 0.01.
Figure 3. Dry matter accumulation of maize at different growth stages; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; V12: Large trumpet stage; R3: Milky ripening stage; R6: Full maturity stage; t−test: * represents p < 0.05 and ** represents p < 0.01.
Agriculture 15 01710 g003
Agriculture 15 01710 g004
Figure 4. Water use efficiency of maize under different planting methods; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; t−test: * represents p < 0.05.
Figure 4. Water use efficiency of maize under different planting methods; (A) shows data from 2023, and (B) shows data from 2024; t−test: * represents p < 0.05.
Agriculture 15 01710 g004
Table 1. Irrigation date and quantities of different treatments m3/hm2.
Table 1. Irrigation date and quantities of different treatments m3/hm2.
Irrigation Water Volume in 2023
treatmentJune 14June 27July 5July 15July 26August 12August 14August 24September 11Total
M1W16004504504505254504504503754200
M1W27506006006006756006005254505400
M1W39007507507509007507506004506600
M2W16004504504505254504504503754200
M2W27506006006006756006005254505400
M2W39007507507509007507506004506600
Irrigation water volume in 2024
treatmentJune 10June 21July 1July 11July 23July 31August 12August 23September 8Total
M1W16004504504505254504504503754200
M1W27506006006006756006005254505400
M1W39007507507509007507506004506600
M2W16004504504505254504504503754200
M2W27506006006006756006005254505400
M2W39007507507509007507506004506600
Table 2. Wetting front migration distance and root proportion under different irrigation amounts in drip irrigation.
Table 2. Wetting front migration distance and root proportion under different irrigation amounts in drip irrigation.
YearModesDrip IrrigationMigration Distance of Wetting FrontProportion of Root System in Wetting Front
2023M1W119.2 c0.84 b
W223.3 b0.91 ab
W326.6 a0.96 a
Average 23.00.90
M2W119.4 c0.69 b
W224.1 b0.78 ab
W327.2 a0.85 a
Average 23.60.77
2024M1W119.7 c0.88 b
W224.0 b0.93 ab
W326.9 a0.97 a
Average 23.50.93
M2W119.6 c0.71 b
W224.7 b0.77 ab
W327.5 a0.86 a
Average 23.90.78
Note: Different lowercase letters indicate the level difference of a<0.05 between different irrigation treatments under the same planting mode, and Duncan’s new repolarization difference method is used for multiple comparison.
Table 3. Yield and yield components under the condition of different irrigation quantity treatments.
Table 3. Yield and yield components under the condition of different irrigation quantity treatments.
YearModesDrip IrrigationPlant Number (hm−2)Ear Number (hm−2)Spike Grain NumberWeight of 1000-Kernels (g)Yields (t.hm−2)
2023M1W185,500 a81,000 c467.19 c352.07 c13.32 d
W290,000 a89,500 b517.51 b376.08 ab17.42 c
W390,000 a90,000 ab554.19 a386.4 ab19.28 b
Average88,50086,833512.96371.5216.67
M2W189,000 a88,500 b487.27 c375.19 b16.17 c
W288,500 a94,500 a540.37 ab395.82 ab20.20 a
W390,500 a94,500 a553.40 a396.77 a20.74 a
Average89,33392,500527.01389.2619.04
2024M1 97,000 a87,500 d451.33 c349.41 d13.79 c
97,500 a95,000 ab517.33 b377.64 bc18.56 b
97,500 a94,500 b545.67 ab393.07 abc20.26 a
Average97,33392,333504.78373.3717.54
M2 97,000 a91,000 c514.67 b375.19 c17.58 b
97,500 a98,000 a543.00 ab395.82 ab21.04 a
97,500 a96,500 ab555.00 a399.57 a21.39 a
Average97,33395,167537.56390.1920.01
Year(Y)71.84 **29.64 **0.04 ns0.72 ns14.47 **
Sources of variationModes(M)0.18 ns32.11 **16.73 **21.36 **100.63 **
drip Irrigation(W)1.09 ns39.50 **55.12 **24.87 **172.58 **
Y’M0.18 ns3.57 ns2.68 ns0.02 ns0.05 ns
Y’W0.54 ns0.31 ns0.22 ns0.23 ns0.05 ns
M’W0.54 ns0.78 ns3.57 *1.58 ns6.12 *
Y’M’W0.54 ns0.16 ns1.18 ns0.07 ns0.75 ns
NOTE: * represents p < 0.05 and ** represents p < 0.01. Different lowercase letters indicate the level difference of a < 0.05 between different irrigation treatments under the same planting mode, and Duncan’s new repolarization difference method is used for multiple comparison.
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

Bai, R.; He, H.; Zhang, X.; Wu, Q. Study on the Effects of Irrigation Amount on Spring Maize Yield and Water Use Efficiency Under Different Planting Patterns in Xinjiang. Agriculture 2025, 15, 1710. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15151710

AMA Style

Bai R, He H, Zhang X, Wu Q. Study on the Effects of Irrigation Amount on Spring Maize Yield and Water Use Efficiency Under Different Planting Patterns in Xinjiang. Agriculture. 2025; 15(15):1710. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15151710

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bai, Ruxiao, Haixiu He, Xinjiang Zhang, and Qifeng Wu. 2025. "Study on the Effects of Irrigation Amount on Spring Maize Yield and Water Use Efficiency Under Different Planting Patterns in Xinjiang" Agriculture 15, no. 15: 1710. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15151710

APA Style

Bai, R., He, H., Zhang, X., & Wu, Q. (2025). Study on the Effects of Irrigation Amount on Spring Maize Yield and Water Use Efficiency Under Different Planting Patterns in Xinjiang. Agriculture, 15(15), 1710. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15151710

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