Next Article in Journal
Auxin-Mediated Lateral Root Development in Root Galls of Cucumber under Meloidogyne incognita Stress
Previous Article in Journal
Brazil Nut Semi-Defatted Flour Oil: Impact of Extraction Using Pressurized Solvents on Lipid Profile, Bioactive Compounds Composition, and Oxidative Stability
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 13
Issue 19
10.3390/plants13192677
plants-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 thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Sulfur Application on the Quality of Fresh Waxy Maize

by
Chenyang Jiang
1,
Yuwen Liang
1,
Yuru Wang
1,
Genji You
1,
Jian Guo
1,2,
Dalei Lu
1,2 and
Guanghao Li
1,2,*
1
Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Crop Genetics and Physiology/Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Crop Cultivation and Physiology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China
2
Jiangsu Co-Innovation Center for Modern Production Technology of Grain Crops, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2024, 13(19), 2677; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13192677
Submission received: 28 July 2024 / Revised: 16 September 2024 / Accepted: 23 September 2024 / Published: 24 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Maize Physiology)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Balanced fertilizer application is crucial for achieving high-yield, high-quality, and efficient maize cultivation. Sulfur (S), considered a secondary nutrient, ranks as the fourth most essential plant nutrient after nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K). S deficiency could significantly influence maize growth and development. Field experiments were conducted in Jiangsu, Yangzhou, China, from April 1 to July 20 in 2023. Jingkenuo2000 (JKN2000) and Suyunuo5 (SYN5) were used as experiment materials, and four treatments were set: no fertilizer application (F0), S fertilizer application (F1), conventional fertilization method (F2), and conventional fertilization method with additional S application (F3). The objective was to investigate the impact of S application on grain weight and the quality of fresh waxy maize flour and starch. The results indicated that all fertilization treatments significantly increased grain weight and the starch and protein contents in grains compared to no fertilization. Among these, F3 exhibited the most significant increases. Specifically, in JKN2000, the grain weight, starch content (SC), and protein content (PC) increased by 27.7%, 4.8%, and 14.8%, respectively, while in SYN5, these parameters increased by 26.3%, 6.2%, and 7.4%, respectively, followed by F2 and F1. Compared to F0, F3 increased starch and protein contents by 4.8% and 14.8% in JKN2000, and by 6.2% and 7.4% in SYN5. Compared to F0, F2 and F3 significantly increased the iodine binding capacity (IBC) of SYN5, with F3 being more effective than F2, while they had no significant effect on the IBC of JKN2000. The peak viscosity (PV) and breakdown viscosity (BD) of waxy maize flour and starch for both varieties showed a consistent response (increasing trend) to S application, and F3 had the largest increase. Regarding the thermal properties of waxy maize flour, F3 significantly enhanced the retrogradation enthalpy (ΔHgel) of both varieties compared to F0, while achieving the lowest retrogradation percentage (%R). In starch, the highest ΔHgel and the lowest %R were observed under the F2 treatment. In summary, under the conditions of this experiment, adding S fertilizer to conventional fertilization not only increased the grain weight of waxy maize but also effectively optimized the pasting and thermal properties of waxy maize flour and starch.

1. Introduction

Waxy maize, also known as sticky maize, is valued for its rich nutritional content and palatability, and it covers over 800,000 ha in China [1]. The starch of waxy maize is composed almost entirely of amylopectin [2], resulting in high viscosity, low retrogradation, and easy digestibility. These properties made waxy maize starch widely used in both food and certain non-food industries [3]. As living standards improve, the market prospects for waxy maize are expanding both domestically and internationally. The physicochemical properties of its grains and starch are crucial in determining its edibility quality [4]. Sulfur, an essential mineral nutrient for plant growth, plays a critical role in physiological and biochemical functions for multiple crops [5]. Due to reduced atmospheric sulfur inputs, stricter environmental regulations, and changes in fertilization practices, sulfur deficiency is becoming a growing concern, and has varying impacts on different crops, including maize [4,6,7]. In recent years, unbalanced S fertilization has been observed in major maize-producing countries, including the United States, China, and Argentina, leading to yield losses and environmental issues [8,9].
Reasonable fertilization is crucial for enhancing crop yield and quality while safeguarding the ecological environment. Conversely, excessive, insufficient, or imbalanced fertilizer use can result in significant negative impacts. In recent decades, there has been a pronounced reliance on nitrogen (N) fertilizers to boost grain yields and protein content (PC), often overshadowing the potential benefits of sulfur (S) fertilizers in improving the quality of maize. Both N and S are indispensable nutrients necessary for plant growth and crop production [10,11]. Optimizing the balance of N and S enhanced crop productivity. N plays a pivotal role in crop essential physiological processes, including the formation of enzymes, hormones, and amino acids [12]. S is essential for the synthesis of proteins, chlorophyll, enzymes, and vitamins, impacting overall metabolic and photosynthetic processes [13]. Waxy maize flour, produced by grinding waxy maize grains into a fine powder, contains starch, protein, fiber, and other components, offering high nutritional value. Previous studies demonstrated that optimizing the application of NPK fertilizers made for higher pasting temperature (Ptemp), moderate gelatinization enthalpy (∆Hgel), and retrogradation percentage (%R) in waxy maize flour [14]. Moreover, the combined application of N and K fertilizers increased the PC of the grains and enhanced the ∆Hgel of waxy maize flour [15]. Proper S fertilization can address the rapid growth needs of crops under high nitrogen conditions and enhance their yield [16]. The combined application of N and S fertilizers enhanced N uptake in maize, increasing yield, PC, and starch content (SC) in the grain s [17]. Compared to normal maize starch, waxy maize starch gelatinized more readily and produced a starch paste with superior transparency, stability, extensibility, and reduced retrogradation [18]. The application of S fertilizer significantly increased grain PC and altered the disulfide bond content in flour, thereby affecting the viscosity of the flour. However, the overapplication of S interfered with the uptake of other essential nutrients, which may impede protein accumulation [19,20]. Although N fertilizers are essential for increasing crop yield [21], optimal N levels improve the starch’s pasting and thermal properties [22,23]. Conversely, excessive N application can significantly reduce the PV (peak viscosity) and BD (breakdown viscosity) of waxy maize starch and increase Ptemp [24]. And, a balanced application of NS fertilizers is more effective in enhancing both crop yield and quality. This is due to the interaction effects between N and S, as appropriate application of both fertilizers significantly enhanced the growth and development of maize [25]. Research indicated that crops exhibited greater responsiveness to S fertilizer when N supply was ample [26]. N fertilizer facilitated the accumulation of waxy maize starch, making the starch structure more stable (with higher ΔHgel), increasing starch PV, FV (final viscosity), SB (setback viscosity), and BD, and reducing starch %R [27,28]. Similarly, buckwheat exhibits a notable response to N fertilization. Research has demonstrated that optimal N application not only enhances buckwheat grain weight and PC but also improves starch quality [29,30]. On the basis of reasonable fertilization (N, P, K), additional S fertilizer effectively increased maize grain weight and grain PC, thereby improving quality [17,31,32]. Applying N and S fertilizers appropriately could enhance rapeseed yield, preserve its PC, and minimize fertilizer waste [33].
N fertilizers are commonly prioritized over sulfur in glutinous maize production due to their proven ability to boost yields and deliver significant short-term economic benefits. So, in maize production, there was a widespread phenomenon of emphasizing N while neglecting S fertilization, and the fertilization practice often lacked precision. Although the growth, yield, and quality of maize depend on N inputs, balanced fertilizer application is more beneficial for enhancing crop yield and quality [34]. It was a decisive factor in achieving S fertilizer response to apply S and N fertilizers to ensure a balanced nutrient supply. The response to S fertilizer increased with the amount of N fertilizer applied [35]. Previous research primarily focused on the effects of S fertilizer on crop yield and fertilizer use efficiency [36], but few studies have investigated the effects of S on the quality of fresh waxy maize flour and starch. Therefore, the aims of this study were (1) to investigate the effects of S application on the grain weight and quality-related indices of fresh waxy maize; (2) to study the response of fresh waxy maize flour and starch quality to S fertilizer; and (3) to develop guidelines for optimizing fertilization practices and improving the quality of fresh waxy maize in southern China.

2. Results

2.1. Grain Weight

The application of S fertilizer significantly influenced 100-grain weight and grain moisture content (Figure 1). The 100-grain weight of JKN2000 was higher than that of SYN5. Fertilization treatments resulted in significant increases in the 100-grain weight of both varieties compared to F0, while the moisture content did not exhibit statistically significant differences. The 100-grain weight of JKN2000 increased by 11.3% under F1, 24.0% under F2, and 27.4% under F3. For SYN5, the increases were 12.7% under F1, 26.3% under F2, and 27.7% under F3. The largest increase was observed with the F3 treatment.

2.2. Grain Component Content

In the single-factor analysis, variety (V) significantly influenced the starch and soluble sugar contents, while treatment (T) significantly impacted the starch, soluble sugar, and protein contents. The interaction (V × T) significantly affected the soluble sugar content but did not have a significant effect on starch and protein contents (Table 1). The SC, SSC (soluble sugar content), and PC of JKN2000 were 14.6%, 1.0%, and 1.4% higher, respectively, than those of SYN5, but the differences in protein were not statistically significant. Relative to the F0 treatment, the F2 and F3 treatments significantly increased the starch content and decreased the soluble sugar content. Both varieties showed the highest starch and protein contents and the lowest soluble sugar content under the F3 treatment.

2.3. Pasting Properties of Waxy Maize Flour and Starch

S fertilizer application significantly influenced the pasting properties of fresh waxy maize flour and starch (Figure 2). The PV, BD, and SB of waxy maize flour were greatly affected by the interaction between variety and treatment (V × T), as were the pasting property values of starch (Table 2). The PV and BD of the starch were 75.6% and 950.3% higher, respectively, compared to those of waxy maize flour. The PV, TV, BD, FV, and SB of waxy maize flour in JKN2000 were higher than those of SYN5, while the Ptemp was lower than that of SYN5. the PV, BD, FV, and SB of starch in JKN2000 were higher than those of SYN5, with a lower Ptemp, and no significant difference in TV (trough viscosity) between the two varieties. The PV and BD of both waxy maize flour and starch showed an increasing trend under fertilization treatments, as follows, F0 < F1 < F2 < F3, and the increase in the PV and BD in waxy maize flour under F3 exceeded that observed in starch. However, the BD of JKN2000 starch showed no significant difference between F1 and F2 treatments. The PV and BD of SYN5 waxy maize flour showed no significant difference between F1 and F2 treatments, and the PV and BD of starch showed no significant difference between F0 and F1 treatments.

2.4. Thermal Properties of Waxy Maize Flour and Starch

The application of S fertilizer significantly affected the thermal properties of fresh waxy maize flour and starch (Table 3). The interaction between V and T had a significant impact on both the Tp and Tc of waxy maize flour and the gelatinization temperature (To, Tp, and Tc) of starch. The ΔHgel and ΔHret values of waxy maize flour were lower than those of starch, while its gelatinization temperatures (To, Tp, and Tc) and %R were higher. The ∆Hgel and ∆Hret of JKN2000 were lower than those of SYN5, with %R showing JKN2000 < SYN5 in waxy maize flour, whereas the opposite was found in starch. Fertilization treatments significantly increased ΔHgel (reaching its maximum in F3) and decreased ΔHret and %R (reaching its minimum in F3) in waxy maize flour; similar effects were found in F2 for starch.

2.5. Maximum Absorption Wavelength and Iodine Binding Capacity of Waxy Maize Starch

The application of S fertilizer significantly affected the iodine binding capacity (IBC) and maximum absorption wavelength (MAW) of fresh waxy maize starch (Figure 3). The IBC of JKN2000 was lower than that of SYN5, but its MAW was higher, with no significant difference observed between them. Fertilizer treatments did not significantly affect the IBC of JKN2000 or the MAW of SYN5. Compared to F0, the IBC of SYN5 significantly increased in F2 and F3, with a greater increase in F3. The MAW of JKN2000 significantly decreased across F1, F2, and F3 treatments, with no significant differences observed among these treatments.

2.6. Correlation Analysis

2.6.1. Correlation Analysis of Grain Quality and Component Contents of Waxy Maize

The results of correlation analysis (Figure 4) on waxy maize flour quality showed that SC was positively correlated with PC, PV, TV, BD, FV, SB, and ΔHgel, but negatively correlated with SSC and %R. SSC was positively correlated with %R, but negatively correlated with PC and ΔHgel. PC was positively correlated with PV, TV, BD, FV, and ΔHgel, but negatively correlated with %R. PC, PV, TV, BD, and FV were positively correlated with each other pairwise. To, Tp, and Tc showed positive correlations pairwise.

2.6.2. Correlation Analysis of Starch Quality of Waxy Maize

The results of correlation analysis (Figure 5) on starch quality showed that IBC was positively correlated with PV, TV, FV, SB, and ΔHgel, but negatively correlated with %R; the MAW was positively correlated with Ptemp, To, and Tp. PV, TV, BD FV, and SB were positively correlated with each other pairwise. To, Tp, and Ptemp were positively correlated with each other pairwise.

3. Discussion

One of the key cultivation factors for increasing crop yield was fertilization [37]. Implementing scientifically based and rational fertilization practices is essential for maximizing maize yield, improving quality, and increasing overall efficiency. Zhao et al. [38] found that S fertilizer application significantly increased grain weight. This increase could be attributed to several factors. The application of S fertilizer increased glutathione levels in maize leaves, which reduced hydrogen peroxide accumulation [39]. This reduction helped maintain redox balance during photosynthesis [40], leading to an improved photosynthetic rate [41] and enhanced production of photosynthetic assimilates. The increase in photosynthetic products enhanced dry matter accumulation, which subsequently resulted in a substantial increase in maize grain weight. Similar results were observed in this experiment. The synergistic effect of N and S fertilizers significantly enhanced maize growth and development [42]. Compared to no fertilizer application, all fertilization treatments markedly increased the grain weight of fresh waxy maize (F1 increased by 0.4%, F2 increased by 37.7%, and F3 increased by 54.2%), as well as the PC and SC in the grains. Notably, the conventional fertilization method with additional S application (F3) outperformed both the S fertilizer application (F1) and the conventional fertilization method (F2) in increasing these parameters.
Maize grains are primarily composed of starch, proteins, and soluble sugars, which influence the physicochemical properties of waxy maize flour [2]. The quality of grains was profoundly impacted by environmental conditions and fertilization practices [43]. Balanced fertilization increased the SC and PC in grains [44]. Appropriate S fertilizer application enhanced the PC in maize grains [20], as confirmed by this study. S fertilizer application significantly increased the PC and SC in grains. The increase was likely due to S fertilizers promoting the cross-linking of cysteine and other amino acids, forming disulfide bonds that maintain protein stability and promote protein accumulation [45]. Protein synthesis requires the combined action of N and S [46]. Previous studies have shown that their combined application increased grain PC [47]. This study further corroborates these findings. Both N and S play essential roles in protein synthesis, with N serving as a primary building block of amino acids and S supporting the synthesis of key sulfur-containing amino acids like cysteine and methionine [48]. The synergistic application of these two elements not only optimizes the amino acid composition but also enhances protein quality. Furthermore, S facilitates N uptake and utilization in crops, improving N use efficiency and subsequently increasing PC [49], so the conventional fertilization method with additional S application (F3) led to a more substantial increase in SC and PC than the S fertilizer application (F1) and the conventional fertilization method (F2).
The pasting and thermal properties served as crucial indicators for assessing the quality of fresh waxy maize. Adding S fertilizer altered the content of disulfide bonds in wheat flour, thereby affecting its viscosity [20], and similar effects might be expected in maize. Previous studies found that changes in the composition of waxy maize grains affected the PV of waxy maize flour [50]. The results of this study indicated that compared to F0, fertilization significantly increased the SC and PV in grains of both varieties, with the highest values observed under F3. The increased SC enhanced the swelling tendency of starch granules, allowing them to fully absorb water and swell, thereby increasing the pasting viscosity [51]. In food processing, higher viscosity helps in forming a uniform food structure. This leads to improved appearance and stability of the final product, as well as reduced layering or separation during storage and transportation [52]. Correlation analysis of waxy maize flour quality showed that SC was significantly positively correlated with ΔHgel, and significantly negatively correlated with %R. This indicated that a high SC was conducive to a high ΔHgel (better thermal stability). Under the experimental conditions, fertilization treatments led to a significant increase in starch content in both maize varieties. Waxy maize starch, consisting of nearly 100% amylopectin, requires more energy to disrupt and gelatinize its highly ordered structure. This results in greater thermal stability and improved anti-retrogradation properties [53]. Consequently, sulfur application in this study enhanced the starch content of waxy maize, leading to an increase in ΔHgel. Previous research showed that waxy maize flour with high ΔHgel often formed higher pasting viscosity after gelatinization [54]. This study had similar results, indicating that a high ΔHgel was associated with stronger hydrogen bonds in starch granules, necessitating more energy to break these bonds during gelatinization and resulting in higher pasting viscosity [55]. Moreover, prior studies demonstrated that the ΔHgel value of starch was higher than that of waxy maize flour [56], a finding corroborated by this research. The higher ΔHgel of starch was typically related to its greater crystallinity and more complex molecular structure. In contrast, waxy maize flour has lower crystallinity and a looser structure, while starch, with its higher crystallinity, requires more thermal energy to overcome its crystalline structure and complete gelatinization. Consequently, the ΔHgel of starch was higher than that of waxy maize flour [57].
N fertilization changed the pasting and thermal properties of starch [27]. Previous research showed that the incorporation of S fertilizer alongside N improved the pasting viscosity (PV, TV, FV) and BD of wheat starch [58]. These findings are similar to the results of our study, which showed that compared to F1 and F2, F3 notably elevated the PV, BD, and Ptemp of waxy maize starch. Correlation analysis of starch quality showed that IBC was significantly positively correlated with pasting viscosities (PV, TV, FV) and ΔHgel, and significantly negatively correlated with %R. This suggests that a higher IBC enhances starch’s swelling and shear resistance, leading to increased pasting viscosity and improved anti-retrogradation properties [28]. Under the conditions of this experiment, SYN5 exhibited a more significant response to fertilization regarding IBC, with the highest value recorded under the F3 treatment. The increased IBC may result from fertilization, which reduced the activity of starch branching enzymes. This reduction led to decreased branching frequency in amylopectin, resulting in a higher proportion of long chains. These longer chains could form more stable complexes with iodine, thereby enhancing the IBC [59]; amylopectin with long chains has higher pasting viscosity after gelatinization, higher ΔHgel, better thermal stability, and stronger anti-retrogradation ability [60].

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Experimental Design

Field experiments were conducted in 2023 at the Yangzhou University experimental farm in Yangzhou, Jiangsu Province, China (32.40° N, 119.43° E). Jingkenuo2000 (JKN2000) and Suyunuo5 (SYN5) were used as experimental materials. In southern China, SYN5 was utilized as the benchmark variety for fresh waxy maize regional trials, whereas JKN2000 stand out as the predominant waxy maize cultivar across the nation. The test soil under examination predominantly exhibited a silt loam texture, and the PH was 6.2. The nutrient composition of the topsoil (0–20 cm) prior to sowing was as follows: average contents of organic matter 17.1 g kg−1, total N 1.0 g kg−1, alkali hydrolysable N 103.0 mg kg−1, available phosphorus 125.6 mg kg−1, available potassium 136.6 mg kg−1, and total sulfur 292.4 mg kg−1.
The field experiment employed compound fertilizer (N−P2O5−K2O = 27−9−9, provided by Jiangsu Zhongdong Fertilizer Co., Ltd., Changzhou, China) and sulfur fertilizer (sulfur content 95%, bought from Tiger-Sul, Inc., Shelton, CT, USA) as sources of N, P, K, and S fertilizers. This experiment comprised four treatments: no fertilizer application (F0), S fertilizer application (F1, 75 kg S ha−1), conventional fertilization method (F2, N/P2O5/K2O = 225/75/75 kg ha−1), and conventional fertilization method with additional S application (F3, N/P2O5/K2O/S = 225/75/75/75 kg ha−1), with 3 replicates for each treatment. At sowing, all fertilizers were uniformly applied as basal dressing, and other agronomic practices (water management, pest and disease control) followed high-yield management protocols.
Each plot, covering an area of 30 m2 (5 m × 6 m), was cultivated with a planting density of 60,000 plants ha−1, utilizing a double-row (0.8 m and 0.4 m) planting method. Maize was sown on April 1 and harvested on July 20, with a growth period of 111 days. The meteorological conditions of the field experiment are shown in Figure 6. The effective accumulated temperature, total rainfall, and total sunlight hours in the maize (Zea mays L.) growing seasons were 1401.9 °C, 698.0 mm, and 530.9 h.

4.2. Grain Weight

During the milk stage, we selected three sample points for each treatment. At each of these sample points, we employed a continuous sampling method to collect 10 representative ears. Subsequently, we determined the 100-grain weight and grain moisture content for each of these samples.

4.3. Grain Component Content

The soluble sugar and starch contents in the grains were assessed through the anthrone–sulfuric acid method [61], while the nitrogen content was measured using the Kjeldahl method. Protein content was calculated as nitrogen content × 6.25.

4.4. Preparation of Waxy Maize Flour and Starch Samples

Each treatment selected three uniformly developed maize ears, from which grains were carefully extracted from the middle and thoroughly mixed. Subsequently, 200 g of grains were randomly sampled for the preparation of starch and waxy maize flour samples. The grains (100 g) were steeped in 500 mL of 1 g L−1 NaHSO3 solution for 48 h at room temperature. Following this, starch separation was carried out following established protocols from previous studies [18]. The grains (100 g) were subjected to drying in an oven (TENGREN DZ47–63) set at 60 °C until reaching a constant weight. After drying, the grains were finely ground using a grinder (RS–FS1406) and passed through a 100-mesh sieve. The resulting grain flour was utilized for analyzing grain flour component content, gelatinization, and thermodynamic properties.

4.5. Pasting Property and Thermal Property of Waxy Maize Flour and Starch

Using waxy maize flour and starch as experimental materials, the gelatinization properties were determined following established methods [62]. Specifically, 2.8 g of maize flour was combined with 25.2 g of ultrapure water to create a 10% concentration maize slurry. Similarly, 1.96 g of starch was mixed with 26.04 g of ultrapure water to prepare a 7% concentration starch slurry. Subsequently, the gelatinization properties of the starch (total weight 28 g; 7% w/w, dry basis) and maize flour were analyzed using a Rapid Visco Analyzer (RVA, Model 3D, Newport Science, Warriewood NSW, Australia). For the determination of thermodynamic properties, 5 mg of dried sample was placed into a small crucible (25/40 µL, D = 5 mm), and an equivalent amount of ultrapure water was added to achieve a 66.7% water–starch suspension. Each suspension was sealed under pressure, and three replicates were prepared for each treatment. Following a 24-h storage period at 4 °C, thermodynamic properties were measured using a Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC, Model 200 F3 Maia, NETZSCH, Bavaria, Germany). After measurement, the samples were refrigerated at 4 °C, and retrogradation percentages were assessed after 7 days.

4.6. Maximum Absorption Wavelength and Iodine Binding Capacity of Waxy Maize Starch

The UV–Vis spectrophotometer model utilized to determine iodine binding capacity is the Lambda650 (PE, Waltham, MA, USA), featuring a scanning range from 700 to 500 nm. Iodine binding capacity was computed by assessing the ratio of absorbance values at 635 nm and 520 nm, aligning with the wavelength of maximum absorbance. This calculation leveraged the peak absorption wavelength, ensuring accurate determination [63].

4.7. Statistical Analysis

Microsoft Excel 2016 (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) and SPSS (version 26, IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) were employed for data processing, significance testing, and ANOVA, and when p < 0.05, multiple comparisons were performed using Tukey, and the marked letter method was used to indicate differences between treatments. Graphs were plotted with OriginPro (version 2022, OriginLab, Northampton, MA, USA).

5. Conclusions

The results of this study indicated that the conventional fertilization method with additional S application significantly increased the grain weight of fresh waxy maize, as well as its starch and protein content. Specifically, applying a basal dose of 225/75/75/75 kg ha−1 (N/P2O5/K2O/S) at sowing enhanced the pasting and thermal properties of waxy maize flour and starch. Therefore, we recommend the judicious addition of sulfur fertilizer in fresh waxy maize production, or incorporating sulfur into compound fertilizers, to achieve high-yield and high-quality cultivation of fresh waxy maize, which not only can increase farmers’ incomes, but also maintain the nutrient balance of the farmland, promoting the sustainable development of agriculture.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.L.; methodology, G.L. and C.J.; software, C.J. and Y.L.; validation, G.L., C.J., Y.L., Y.W. and G.Y.; formal analysis, C.J. and Y.L.; investigation, G.L., C.J. and Y.L.; resources, G.L. and J.G.; data curation, C.J., Y.L., Y.W. and G.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, G.L. and C.J.; writing—review and editing, G.L. and C.J.; supervision, G.L.; funding acquisition, G.L. and D.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Jiangsu Agriculture Science and Technology Innovation Fund (CX [23]3117), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 32101828), Jiangsu Agricultural Industry Technology System of China (JATS [2023]454), and the Blue project of Yangzhou University.

Data Availability Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. All the data and code used in this study can be requested by email to the corresponding author, Guanghao Li, at [email protected].

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the scientists from our university laboratories.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Huang, C.; Zhang, W.; Wang, H.; Gao, Y.; Ma, S.; Qin, A.; Liu, Z.; Zhao, B.; Ning, D.; Zheng, H.; et al. Effects of waterlogging at different stages on growth and ear quality of waxy maize. Agric. Manag. Water 2022, 266, 10760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Hsieh, C.F.; Liu, W.; Whaley, J.K.; Shi, Y.C. Structure and functional properties of waxy starches. Food Hydrocoll. 2019, 94, 238–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Simla, S.; Lertrat, K.; Suriharn, K. Carbohydrate characters of six vegetable waxy corn varieties as affected by harvest time and storage duration. Asian J. Plant Sci. 2010, 9, 463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Li, N.; Yang, Y.; Wang, L.; Zhou, C.; Jing, J.; Sun, X.; Tian, X. Combined effects of nitrogen and sulfur fertilization on maize growth, physiological traits, n and s uptake, and their diagnosis. Field Crops Res. 2019, 242, 107593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Singh, M.V.; Saha, J.K. A review of the sulphur research activities of the IACR-AICRP micro-and secondary nutrients project. Sulphur Agric. 1995, 19, 35–47. [Google Scholar]
  6. Blake-Kalff, M.M.A.; Hawkesford, M.J.; Zhao, F.J.; McGrath, S.P. Diagnosing sulfur deficiency in field-grown oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plant Soil 2000, 225, 95–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Carciochi, W.D.; Wyngaard, N.; Divito, G.A.; Calvo, N.I.R.; Cabrera, M.L.; Echeverría, H.E. Diagnosis of sulfur availability for corn based on soil analysis. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2016, 52, 917–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gallejones, P.; Castellón, A.; Del Prado, A.; Unamunzaga, O.; Aizpurua, A. Nitrogen and Sulphur fertilization effect on leaching losses, nutrient balance and plant quality in a wheat–rapeseed rotation under a humid mediterranean climate. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2012, 93, 337–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yang, Y.; Ni, X.; Liu, B.; Tao, L.; Yu, L.; Wang, Q.; Yang, Y.; Liu, J.; Wu, Y. Measuring field ammonia emissions and canopy ammonia fluxes in agriculture using portable ammonia detector method. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 216, 542–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pagani, A.; Echeverría, H.E. Performance of sulfur diagnostic methods for corn. Agron. J. 2011, 103, 413–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yang, Y.; Ni, X.; Zhou, Z.; Yu, L.; Liu, B.; Yang, Y.; Wu, Y. Performance of matrix-based slow-release urea in reducing nitrogen loss and improving maize yields and profits. Field Crops Res. 2017, 212, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Yue, K.; Li, L.; Xie, J.; Liu, Y.; Xie, J.; Anwar, S.; Fudjoe, S.K. Nitrogen supply affects yield and grain filling of maize by regulating starch metabolizing enzyme activities and endogenous hormone contents. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 12, 798119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sharma, R.K.; Cox, M.S.; Oglesby, C.; Dhillon, J.S. Revisiting the role of sulfur in crop production: A narrative review. J. Agric. Food Res. 2024, 15, 101013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yang, H.; Chen, G.; Wang, X.; Shi, Y.; Zhao, J.; Lu, D.; Lu, W. Effects of basic fertilizer ratio and nitrogen topdressing at jointing stage on flour thermal properties of waxy maize. Res. Crops 2014, 15, 571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhang, Q.; Li, G.; Lu, W.; Lu, D. Interactive effects of nitrogen and potassium on grain yield and quality of waxy maize. Plants 2022, 11, 2528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ahmad, R.; Dawar, K.; Iqbal, J.; Wahab, S. Effect of Sulfur on Nitrogen Use Efficiency and Yield of Maize Crop. Adv. Environ. Biol. 2016, 10, 85–91. [Google Scholar]
  17. Swify, S.; Avizienyte, D.; Mazeika, R.; Braziene, Z. Comparative study effect of urea-sulfur fertilizers on nitrogen uptake and maize productivity. Plants 2022, 11, 3020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Lu, D.; Lu, W. Effects of protein removal on the physicochemical properties of waxy maize flours. Starch-Stärke 2012, 64, 874–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Yoshino, D.; McCalla, A.G. The effects of sulfur content on the properties of wheat gluten. Can. J. Biochem. 1966, 44, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Cai, J.; Zang, F.; Xin, L.; Zhou, Q.; Wang, X.; Zhong, Y.; Huang, M.; Dai, T.; Jiang, D. Effects of cysteine and inorganic sulfur applications at different growth stages on grain protein and end-use quality in wheat. Foods 2022, 11, 3252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, H.; Li, D.; Ma, Q.; Wu, E.; Gao, L.; Yang, P.; Gao, J.; Feng, B. Nitrogen fertilizer affects starch synthesis to define non-waxy and waxy proso millet quality. Carbohydr. Polym. 2023, 302, 120423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Zhang, W.; Yang, Q.; Xia, M.; Bai, W.; Wang, P.; Gao, X.; Li, J.; Feng, B.; Gao, J. Effects of nitrogen level on the physicochemical properties of tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum (L.) Gaertn.) Starch. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 129, 799–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Zhou, T.Y.; Li, Z.K.; Li, E.P.; Wang, Y.Z.; Yuan, L.M.; Zhang, H.; Liu, L.J.; Wang, Z.Q.; Gu, J.F.; Yang, J.C. Optimization of nitrogen fertilization improves rice quality by affecting the structure and physicochemical properties of starch at high yield levels. J. Integr. Agric. 2022, 21, 1576–1592. [Google Scholar]
  24. Lu, D.L.; Jing, L.Q.; Wang, D.C.; Huang, Q.; Guo, H.F.; Zhao, J.R.; Lu, W.P. The starch pasting properties in different nitrogen topdressing treatments under spring and autumn season of waxy maize varieties. Acta. Ecol. Sin. 2010, 20, 549–555. [Google Scholar]
  25. Škarpa, P.; Antošovský, J.; Ryant, P.; Hammerschmiedt, T.; Kintl, A.; Brtnický, M. Using waste sulfur from biogas production in combination with nitrogen fertilization of maize (Zea mays L.) by foliar application. Plants 2021, 10, 2188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Carciochi, W.D.; Divito, G.A.; Fernández, L.A.; Echeverría, H.E. Sulfur affects root growth and improves nitrogen recovery and internal efficiency in wheat. J. Plant Nutr. 2017, 40, 1231–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Wang, J.; Wen, Z.; Fu, P.; Lu, W.; Lu, D. Effects of nitrogen rates on the physicochemical properties of waxy maize starch. Starch-Stärke 2019, 71, 1900146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Wang, H.; Zhang, H.; Ma, Q.; Wu, E.; Ivanistau, A.; Feng, B. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer on proso millet starch structure, pasting, and rheological properties. J. Integr. Agric. 2024, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Gao, L.; Bai, W.; Xia, M.; Wan, C.; Wang, M.; Wang, P.; Gao, X.; Gao, J. Diverse effects of nitrogen fertilizer on the structural, pasting, and thermal properties of common buckwheat starch. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 179, 542–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Gao, L.; Wan, C.; Wang, J.; Wang, P.; Gao, X.; Eeckhout, M.; Gao, J. Relationship between nitrogen fertilizer and structural, pasting and rheological properties on common buckwheat starch. Food Chem. 2022, 389, 132664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yu, Z.; Juhasz, A.; Islam, S.; Diepeveen, D.; Zhang, J.; Wang, P.; Ma, W. Impact of mid-season sulphur deficiency on wheat nitrogen metabolism and biosynthesis of grain protein. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 2499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Liu, S.; Cui, S.; Ying, F.; Nasar, J.; Wang, Y.; Gao, Q. Simultaneous improvement of protein concentration and amino acid balance in maize grains by coordination application of nitrogen and sulfur. J. Cereal Sci. 2021, 99, 103189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Poisson, E.; Trouverie, J.; Brunel-Muguet, S.; Akmouche, Y.; Pontet, C.; Pinochet, X.; Avice, J.-C. Seed yield components and seed quality of oilseed rape are impacted by sulfur fertilization and its interactions with nitrogen fertilization. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Yu, W.; Yue, Y.; Wang, F. The spatial-temporal coupling pattern of grain yield and fertilization in the North China plain. Agric. Syst. 2022, 196, 103330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Castellari, M.P.; Poffenbarger, H.J.; Van Sanford, D.A. Sulfur fertilization effects on protein concentration and yield of wheat: A meta-analysis. Field Crops Res. 2023, 302, 109061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Carciochi, W.D.; Sadras, V.O.; Pagani, A.; Ciampitti, I.A. Co-limitation and stoichiometry capture the interacting effects of nitrogen and sulfur on maize yield and nutrient use efficiency. Eur. J. Agron. 2020, 113, 12597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ranjan, R.; Yadav, R. Targeting nitrogen use efficiency for sustained production of cereal crops. J. Plant Nutr. 2019, 42, 1086–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhao, F.J.; Salmon, S.E.; Withers, P.J.A.; Monaghan, J.M.; Evans, E.J.; Shewry, P.R.; McGrath, S.P. Variation in the breadmaking quality and rheological properties of wheat in relation to sulphur nutrition under field conditions. J. Cereal Sci. 1999, 30, 19–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Liang, T.; Ding, H.; Wang, G.; Kang, J.; Pang, H.; Lv, J. Sulfur decreases cadmium translocation and enhances cadmium tolerance by promoting sulfur assimilation and glutathione metabolism in Brassica chinensis L. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2016, 124, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Zaffagnini, M.; Bedhomme, M.; Marchand, C.H.; Morisse, S.; Trost, P.; Lemaire, S.D. Redox regulation in photosynthetic organisms: Focus on glutathionylation. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2012, 16, 567–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Fatma, M.; Asgher, M.; Masood, A.; Khan, N.A. Excess sulfur supplementation improves photosynthesis and growth in mustard under salt stress through increased production of glutathione. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2014, 107, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ullah, I.; Muhammad, D.; Mussarat, M. Effect of various nitrogen sources at various sulfur levels on maize–wheat yield and n/s uptake under different climatic conditions. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2023, 42, 2073–2087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Limon-Ortega, A.; Ruiz-Torres, N.A.; Vazquez-Carrillo, G.; Baez-Perez, A. Environment and nitrogen influence on rainfed maize yield and quality. Crop Sci. 2016, 56, 1257–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Rawat, J.; Pandey, N.; Saxena, J. Role of potassium in plant photosynthesis, transport, growth and yield. In Role of Potassium in Abiotic Stress; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  45. Laps, S.; Sun, H.; Kamnesky, G.; Brik, A. Palladium-mediated direct disulfide bond formation in proteins containing s-acetamidomethyl-cysteine under aqueous conditions. Angew. Chem. 2019, 131, 5785–5789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Brosnan, J.T.; Brosnan, M.E. The sulfur-containing amino acids: An overview. J. Nutr. 2006, 136, 1636S–1640S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Bonnot, T.; Martre, P.; Hatte, V.; Dardevet, M.; Leroy, P.; Bénard, C.; Falagán, N.; Martin-Magniette, M.L.; Deborde, C.; Moing, A. Omics data reveal putative regulators of einkorn grain protein composition under sulfur deficiency. Plant Physiol. 2020, 183, 501–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zenda, T.; Liu, S.; Dong, A.; Duan, H. Revisiting sulphur—The once neglected nutrient: It’s roles in plant growth, metabolism, stress tolerance and crop production. Agriculture 2021, 11, 626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Duncan, E.G.; O’Sullivan, C.A.; Roper, M.M.; Biggs, J.S.; Peoples, M.B. Influence of co-application of nitrogen with phosphorus, potassium and sulphur on the apparent efficiency of nitrogen fertiliser use, grain yield and protein content of wheat: Review. Field Crops Res. 2018, 226, 56–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Yang, H.; Shi, Y.; Xu, R.; Lu, D.; Lu, W. Effects of shading after pollination on kernel filling and physicochemical quality traits of waxy maize. Crop J. 2016, 4, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lu, D.; Sun, X.; Yan, F.; Wang, X.; Xu, R.; Lu, W. Effects of high temperature during grain filling under control conditions on the physicochemical properties of waxy maize flour. Carbohydr. Pol. 2013, 98, 302–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ragaee, S.; Abdel-Aal, E.-S.M. Pasting properties of starch and protein in selected cereals and quality of their food products. Food Chem. 2006, 95, 9–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chakraborty, I.; Pooja, N.; Mal, S.S.; Paul, U.C.; Rahman, M.H.; Mazumder, N. An insight into the gelatinization properties influencing the modified starches used in food industry: A review. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2022, 15, 1195–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Singh, N.; Singh, J.; Kaur, L.; Sodhi, N.S.; Gill, B.S. Morphological, thermal and rheological properties of starches from different botanical sources. Food Chem. 2003, 81, 219–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wang, W.; Zhou, H.; Yang, H.; Zhao, S.; Liu, Y.; Liu, R. Effects of salts on the gelatinization and retrogradation properties of maize starch and waxy maize starch. Food Chem. 2017, 214, 319–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Iturriaga, L.; Lopez, B.; Añon, M. Thermal and physicochemical characterization of seven argentine rice flours and starches. Food Res. Int. 2004, 37, 439–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zhu, F.; Liu, P. Starch gelatinization, retrogradation, and enzyme susceptibility of retrograded starch: Effect of amylopectin internal molecular structure. Food Chem. 2020, 316, 126036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Li, W.; Shan, Y.; Xiao, X.; Zheng, J.; Luo, Q.; Ouyang, S.; Zhang, G. Effect of nitrogen and sulfur fertilization on accumulation characteristics and physicochemical properties of A- and B-wheat starch. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 2418–2425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Yang, H.; Lu, D.; Shen, X.; Cai, X.; Lu, W. Heat stress at different grain filling stages affects fresh waxy maize grain yield and quality. Cereal Chem. 2015, 92, 258–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Lu, D.; Sun, X.; Yan, F.; Wang, X.; Xu, R.; Lu, W. Effects of heat stress at different grain-filling phases on the grain yield and quality of waxy maize. Cereal Chem. 2014, 91, 189–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Hansen, J.; Møller, I. Percolation of starch and soluble carbohydrates from plant tissue for quantitative determination with anthrone. Anal. Biochem. 1975, 68, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lu, D.; Cai, X.; Lu, W. Effects of water deficit during grain filling on the physicochemical properties of waxy maize starch. Starch-Stärke 2015, 67, 692–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Lu, D.; Lu, W. Effects of heat stress during grain filling on the functional properties of flour from fresh waxy maize. Cereal Chem. 2013, 90, 65–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 13 02677 g001
Figure 1. Effects of sulfur fertilizer application on 100-grain weight and moisture content of fresh waxy maize. JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K and S ha−1. The different letters on the columns mean the difference was significant at the 0.05 probability level. The figure shows the mean values of three replicates of the same treatment.
Figure 1. Effects of sulfur fertilizer application on 100-grain weight and moisture content of fresh waxy maize. JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K and S ha−1. The different letters on the columns mean the difference was significant at the 0.05 probability level. The figure shows the mean values of three replicates of the same treatment.
Plants 13 02677 g001
Plants 13 02677 g002
Figure 2. Effects of sulfur application on pasting properties of fresh waxy maize. JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K, and S ha−1. The figure shows the mean values of three replicates with the same treatment. The gray dotted line in the legend indicates the temperature represented on the right y-axis.
Figure 2. Effects of sulfur application on pasting properties of fresh waxy maize. JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K, and S ha−1. The figure shows the mean values of three replicates with the same treatment. The gray dotted line in the legend indicates the temperature represented on the right y-axis.
Plants 13 02677 g002
Plants 13 02677 g003
Figure 3. Effects of sulfur application on iodine binding capacity and maximum absorption wavelength of fresh waxy maize. JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K, and S ha−1. The different letters on the column mean the difference was significant at the 0.05 probability level. The figure shows the mean values of three replicates with the same treatment.
Figure 3. Effects of sulfur application on iodine binding capacity and maximum absorption wavelength of fresh waxy maize. JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K, and S ha−1. The different letters on the column mean the difference was significant at the 0.05 probability level. The figure shows the mean values of three replicates with the same treatment.
Plants 13 02677 g003
Plants 13 02677 g004
Figure 4. Correlation analysis of grain quality parameters. SC: starch content; SSC: soluble sugar content; PC: protein content; PV: peak viscosity; TV: trough viscosity; BD: breakdown viscosity; FV: final viscosity; SB: setback viscosity; Ptemp: pasting temperature; ∆Hgel: gelatinization enthalpy; To: onset temperature; Tp: peak gelatinization temperature; Tc: conclusion temperature; ∆Hret: retrogradation enthalpy; %R: retrogradation percentage. * and ** represent significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels.
Figure 4. Correlation analysis of grain quality parameters. SC: starch content; SSC: soluble sugar content; PC: protein content; PV: peak viscosity; TV: trough viscosity; BD: breakdown viscosity; FV: final viscosity; SB: setback viscosity; Ptemp: pasting temperature; ∆Hgel: gelatinization enthalpy; To: onset temperature; Tp: peak gelatinization temperature; Tc: conclusion temperature; ∆Hret: retrogradation enthalpy; %R: retrogradation percentage. * and ** represent significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels.
Plants 13 02677 g004
Plants 13 02677 g005
Figure 5. Correlation analysis of starch quality parameters. IBC: iodine binding capacity; MAW: maximum absorption wavelength; PV: peak viscosity; TV: trough viscosity; BD: breakdown viscosity; FV: final viscosity; SB: setback viscosity; Ptemp: pasting temperature; ∆Hgel: gelatinization enthalpy; To: onset temperature; Tp: peak temperature; Tc: conclusion temperature; ∆Hret: retrogradation enthalpy; %R: retrogradation percentage. * and ** represent significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels.
Figure 5. Correlation analysis of starch quality parameters. IBC: iodine binding capacity; MAW: maximum absorption wavelength; PV: peak viscosity; TV: trough viscosity; BD: breakdown viscosity; FV: final viscosity; SB: setback viscosity; Ptemp: pasting temperature; ∆Hgel: gelatinization enthalpy; To: onset temperature; Tp: peak temperature; Tc: conclusion temperature; ∆Hret: retrogradation enthalpy; %R: retrogradation percentage. * and ** represent significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels.
Plants 13 02677 g005
Plants 13 02677 g006
Figure 6. Daily mean temperature, sunlight hours, and precipitation during maize growth seasons in 2023.
Figure 6. Daily mean temperature, sunlight hours, and precipitation during maize growth seasons in 2023.
Plants 13 02677 g006
Table 1. Effects of sulfur application on grain component contents of fresh waxy maize.
Table 1. Effects of sulfur application on grain component contents of fresh waxy maize.
VarietyTreatmentStarch
(mg g−1)		Soluble Sugar
(mg g−1)		Protein
(mg g−1)
JKN2000F0559.6 c87.2 a89.8 c
F1571.4 b86.5 a91.9 bc
F2584.0 a74.7 b97.2 abc
F3586.7 a71.0 c103.1 a
SYN5F0551.8 d84.2 a92.9 bc
F1562.3 c74.5 b89.2 c
F2579.7 a60.2 d94.9 abc
F3586.2 a59.7 d99.8 ab
F-value
V12.5 **158.8 **0.4
T84.9 **150.8 **5.7 **
V×T1.69.6 **0.5
JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K, and S ha−1. Values followed by different small letters within a column are significantly different at the 0.05 probability level. ** represent significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels.
Table 2. Effects of sulfur application on pasting properties of fresh waxy maize.
Table 2. Effects of sulfur application on pasting properties of fresh waxy maize.
VarietyTreatmentWaxy Maize FlourStarch
PV
(mPa·s)		TV
(mPa·s)		BD
(mPa·s)		FV
(mPa·s)		SB
(mPa·s)		Ptemp
(°C)		PV
(mPa·s)		TV
(mPa·s)		BD
(mPa·s)		FV
(mPa·s)		SB
(mPa·s)		Ptemp
(°C)
JKN2000F0905.7 d866.0 d39.7 e1137.3 d271.3 b78.3 c1556.3 d732.7 c823.7 c819.0 d86.3 bc75.1 c
F11092.0 c1000.7 c91.3 c1287.7 c287.0 b81.3 b1623.7 c712.0 d911.7 b805.0 d93.0 bc74.1 de
F21194.0 b1061.3 b132.7 b1382.3 b321.0 a78.1 c1697.3 b769.3 b928.0 b878.0 c108.7 a74.6 cd
F31556.7 a1249.3 a307.3 a1589.0 a339.7 a80.5 b1781.0 a777.7 b1003.3 a858.7c 81.0 c74.0 e
SYN5F0501.0 f494.0 f7.0 e671.7 f177.7 e81.2 b1418.3 e651.3 f767.0 d712.0 f60.7 d76.2 ab
F1582.7 e576.3 e6.3 e781.0 e204.7 d82.9 a1430.3 e673.7 e756.7 d754.7 e81.0 c75.9 b
F2621.3 e615.0 e6.3 e794.3 e179.3 e80.8 1670.3 bc824.0 a846.3 c910.3 b86.3 bc75.9 b
F3935.0 d860.3 d74.7 c1089.0 d228.7 c83.3 a1794.3 a843.3 a951.0 b939.7 a96.3 ab76.8 a
F-value
V1176.0 **1377.9 **386.8 **1143.8 **446.7 **78.4 **44.3 **0.165.4 **5.5 *12.7 **151.3 **
T225.8 **205.4 **150.5 **143.0 **23.7 **23.7 **116.0 **176.7 **54.2 **235.3 **10.0 **4.0 *
V×T9.3 **2.3 50.0 **2.9 6.5 **1.2 13.7 **54.6 **4.9 *80.1 **8.8 **7.3 **
JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K, and S ha−1; PV: peak viscosity; TV: trough viscosity; BD: breakdown viscosity; FV: final viscosity; SB: setback viscosity; Ptemp: pasting temperature. Values followed by different small letters within a column are significantly different at the 0.05 probability level. * and ** represent significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels.
Table 3. Effects of sulfur application on thermal properties of fresh waxy maize.
Table 3. Effects of sulfur application on thermal properties of fresh waxy maize.
VarietyTreatmentWaxy Maize FlourStarch
∆Hgel
(J g−1)		To
(°C)		Tp
(°C)		Tc
(°C)		∆Hret
(J g−1)		%R
(%)		∆Hgel
(J g−1)		To
(°C)		Tp
(°C)		Tc
(°C)		∆Hret
(J g−1)		%R
(%)
JKN2000F010.4 cd72.0 ab79.3 ab85.3 bc5.3 abc50.8 a19.7 cd65.0 d70.8 e83.2 abc8.1 a41.1 ab
F18.8 d75.8 a79.9 a86.1 abc3.9 e44.3 b22.0 bc63.9 e69.8 f87.9 ab8.0 a36.8 b
F210.9 bc71.7 b76.3 c85.9 abc4.9 cd45.3 ab24.3 b65.6 c71.2 d79.1 bc8.0 a33.7 bc
F312.8 a74.9 ab80.7 a87.4 a4.5 de34.7 c22.0 bc64.8 d70.5 e74.5 c7.9 a36.5 b
SYN5F011.4 abc75.1 ab80.8 a87.1 ab5.8 a50.6 a17.8 d67.4 b73.0 c80.8 abc8.7 a49.2 a
F110.8 bc72.9 ab78.0 b87.2 a5.3 abc49.0 ab22.0 bc67.0 b73.3 bc82.5 abc8.4 a38.3 b
F212.3 ab74.6 ab79.9 a86.3 abc5.6 ab45.4 ab29.8 a67.8 a73.5 b89.3 a7.9 a26.7 c
F313.0 a72.1 ab77.9 b85.2 c5.0 bcd38.0 c24.2 b65.7 c74.0 a81.8 abc8.0 a33.3 bc
F-value
V9.5 **0.1 0.1 0.6 27.6 **2.2 2.5 452.8 **3500.7 **1.7 1.5 0.1
T12.3 **0.4 5.0 0.4 10.0 **20.6 **14.4 **45.3 **63.3 **2.8 0.7 9.2 **
V×T0.9 4.0 17.8 **5.3 *1.9 0.8 3.1 20.5 **52.6 **4.1 *0.4 2.5
JKN2000: Jingkenuo2000; SYN5: Suyunuo5; F0: no fertilizer; F1: application of 75 kg S ha−1; F2: applications of 225, 75, and 75 kg N, P, and K ha−1; F3: applications of 225, 75, 75, and 75 kg N, P, K, and S ha−1; ∆Hgel: gelatinization enthalpy; To: onset temperature; Tp: peak gelatinization temperature; Tc: conclusion temperature; ∆Hret: retrogradation enthalpy; %R: retrogradation percentage. Values followed by different small letters within a column are significantly different at the 0.05 probability level. * and ** represent significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels.
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

Jiang, C.; Liang, Y.; Wang, Y.; You, G.; Guo, J.; Lu, D.; Li, G. Effects of Sulfur Application on the Quality of Fresh Waxy Maize. Plants 2024, 13, 2677. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13192677

AMA Style

Jiang C, Liang Y, Wang Y, You G, Guo J, Lu D, Li G. Effects of Sulfur Application on the Quality of Fresh Waxy Maize. Plants. 2024; 13(19):2677. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13192677

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jiang, Chenyang, Yuwen Liang, Yuru Wang, Genji You, Jian Guo, Dalei Lu, and Guanghao Li. 2024. "Effects of Sulfur Application on the Quality of Fresh Waxy Maize" Plants 13, no. 19: 2677. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13192677

APA Style

Jiang, C., Liang, Y., Wang, Y., You, G., Guo, J., Lu, D., & Li, G. (2024). Effects of Sulfur Application on the Quality of Fresh Waxy Maize. Plants, 13(19), 2677. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13192677

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