Varieties-Dependent Responses of Maize to Humic Acid and Magnesium Combinations

Authors
  • Tahseen Ali Farman1* , Hussein Ali Hindi2, Firas Ahmed Alsajri3

    Author

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during fall 2025 to investigate the influence of humic acid and magnesium application on maize yield. Six maize varieties were used: Al-Furat, Drakma, 6777 DKC, Jameson, Consens, and Gloria, with seven combinations of humic acid (H) and magnesium (Mg): H0MG0, H30MG0, H0MG80, H10MG40, H20MG60, H30MG80, and H40MG100 (kg ha⁻¹), applied using a Randomized Complete Block Design with a split-plot arrangement and three replications. The results indicated a significant effect of varieties on maize yield traits and their components. Gloria variety exhibited the highest ear length (24.29 cm), while Consens variety gave the highest kernels per ear (603.86 kernels), 500-kernel weight (184.88 g), yield (12.93 tons ha⁻¹), biological yield (25.91 tons ha⁻¹), and harvest index (49.38). Treatment H40MG100 was superior, giving the highest ear length (27.15 cm), kernels per ear (614.37 kernels), 500-kernel weight (186.88 g), yield (13.17 tons ha⁻¹), biological yield (26.78 tons ha⁻¹), and harvest index (48.98). Treatment H40MG100 did not differ significantly from H30MG80 for the main studied traits. The interaction H30MG80 × Gloria showed the highest ear length (29.47 cm), while H40MG100 × Consens gave the highest kernels per ear (674.52 kernels), 500-kernel weight (227.09 g), yield (17.50 tons ha⁻¹), biological yield (28.29 tons ha⁻¹), and harvest index (61.85). The combined application of humic acid and magnesium improved maize productivity, and H30MG80 may provide a lower-input alternative to H40MG100 where the two treatments do not differ significantly. These findings support more efficient and sustainable maize production.

Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Downloads
Published
2026-09-30
Section
Articles

How to Cite

Varieties-Dependent Responses of Maize to Humic Acid and Magnesium Combinations. (2026). Euphrates Journal of Agricultural Science, 18(3). https://ejs-agri.com/index.php/EJAS/article/view/388