中国水稻科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 257-268.DOI: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2019.8102
殷尧翥, 郭长春, 孙永健*(), 武云霞, 余华清, 孙知白, 张桥, 王海月, 杨志远, 马均
收稿日期:
2018-09-13
修回日期:
2019-02-26
出版日期:
2019-05-10
发布日期:
2019-05-10
通讯作者:
孙永健
基金资助:
Yaozhu YIN, Changchun GUO, Yongjian SUN*(), Yunxia WU, Huaqing YU, Zhibai SUN, Qiao ZHANG, Haiyue WANG, Zhiyuan YANG, Jun MA
Received:
2018-09-13
Revised:
2019-02-26
Online:
2019-05-10
Published:
2019-05-10
Contact:
Yongjian SUN
摘要:
【目的】研究秸秆还田与水氮配施的理论与技术,探讨对水稻群体质量和产量形成的影响。【方法】选用宜香优2115为试验材料,三因素裂裂区设计,主区为油菜秸秆堆腐还田和直接还田两种秸秆还田方式,裂区为淹水灌溉和控制性交替灌溉两种水分管理方式,裂裂区为4种施氮量,分析对水稻群体质量及产量的影响,并探讨秸秆还田与水氮管理模式下群体质量和产量形成的关系。【结果】秸秆还田与水氮管理对主要生育时期水稻干物质积累量、叶面积指数(LAI)及产量均存在显著或极显著的调控效应,互作效应显著;且群体质量指标与产量呈显著或极显著正相关。秸秆堆腐还田对水稻群体质量指标的调控显著高于秸秆直接还田,齐穗期高效叶面积指数提高了4.71%~6.50%,群体干物质显著增加了9.22%~13.30%;并对水稻产量及其构成因素影响显著,有效穗数及每穗粒数分别提高了5.9%~9.8%和1.5%~5.2%,从而使产量提高了9.5%~13.4%。控制性交替灌溉相对于淹灌能保证足够的穗数,提高干物质积累量,减缓拔节至齐穗期叶面积衰减,加快结实期群体生长率,利于穗粒数及产量的提高;且随着氮肥用量的增加,分蘖数、干物质积累量、有效叶面积率和高效叶面积率均呈先增后降的趋势。【结论】从三因素间的互作效应来看,秸秆堆腐还田处理下,控制性交替灌溉与施氮量150 kg/hm2,可有效提高齐穂期高效叶面积指数(4.80~5.32),具有较高的结实期干物质积累量(6.94~7.36 t/hm2),显著提高了有效穗(181.6万~220.9万/hm2)及每穗粒数(180~200粒),从而显著提高产量达到10328.1~12464.1 kg/hm2,为本研究节水减氮增效最佳的处理。
中图分类号:
殷尧翥, 郭长春, 孙永健, 武云霞, 余华清, 孙知白, 张桥, 王海月, 杨志远, 马均. 稻油轮作下油菜秸秆还田与水氮管理对杂交稻群体质量和产量的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2019, 33(3): 257-268.
Yaozhu YIN, Changchun GUO, Yongjian SUN, Yunxia WU, Huaqing YU, Zhibai SUN, Qiao ZHANG, Haiyue WANG, Zhiyuan YANG, Jun MA. Effects of Rape Straw Retention and Water and Nitrogen Management on Population Quality and Yield of Hybrid Rice Under Rice-rape Rotation[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2019, 33(3): 257-268.
年份 Year | 全氮 Total N/(g·kg-1) | 有机质 Organic matter/(g·kg-1) | 速效养分 Available nutrient/(mg·kg-1) | pH | 秸秆量 Rape straw amount/(t·hm-2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | P | K | |||||
2017 | 1.17 | 19.3 | 91.3 | 31.3 | 86.3 | 6.4 | 10.34 |
2018 | 1.81 | 24.8 | 112.5 | 22.8 | 107.1 | 5.9 | 11.18 |
表1 试验田耕层土壤(0-20 cm)理化性状及秸秆还田量
Table 1 Physicochemical properties of soil (0-20 cm) in the experiments.
年份 Year | 全氮 Total N/(g·kg-1) | 有机质 Organic matter/(g·kg-1) | 速效养分 Available nutrient/(mg·kg-1) | pH | 秸秆量 Rape straw amount/(t·hm-2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | P | K | |||||
2017 | 1.17 | 19.3 | 91.3 | 31.3 | 86.3 | 6.4 | 10.34 |
2018 | 1.81 | 24.8 | 112.5 | 22.8 | 107.1 | 5.9 | 11.18 |
处理 Treatment | 籽粒产量 Grain yield | 有效穗数 Effective panicle number | 每穗粒数 Number of grains per panicle | 结实率 Seed-setting rate | 千粒重 1000-grain weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
秸秆还田 Straw returning (A) | 153.42** | 379.85** | 49.41* | 28.89* | 35.12* |
灌水方式 Irrigation method (W) | 66.16** | 52.91** | 30.51** | 34.13** | 0.95 |
施氮量 N rate(N) | 520.95** | 227.84** | 2153.67** | 43.10** | 25.02** |
A×W | 0.34 | 3.55 | 20.21* | 1.12 | 1.77 |
A×N | 19.38** | 13.90** | 176.09** | 2.46 | 9.29** |
W×N | 6.70* | 0.57 | 17.81** | 2.47 | 3.29* |
A×W×N | 9.70* | 1.94 | 15.90** | 1.42 | 7.17** |
表2 秸秆还田与水氮管理下稻谷产量及其构成因子影响的方差分析 (F值)
Table 2 Analysis of variance for yield index of rice between straw returning and water and N management patterns (F values).
处理 Treatment | 籽粒产量 Grain yield | 有效穗数 Effective panicle number | 每穗粒数 Number of grains per panicle | 结实率 Seed-setting rate | 千粒重 1000-grain weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
秸秆还田 Straw returning (A) | 153.42** | 379.85** | 49.41* | 28.89* | 35.12* |
灌水方式 Irrigation method (W) | 66.16** | 52.91** | 30.51** | 34.13** | 0.95 |
施氮量 N rate(N) | 520.95** | 227.84** | 2153.67** | 43.10** | 25.02** |
A×W | 0.34 | 3.55 | 20.21* | 1.12 | 1.77 |
A×N | 19.38** | 13.90** | 176.09** | 2.46 | 9.29** |
W×N | 6.70* | 0.57 | 17.81** | 2.47 | 3.29* |
A×W×N | 9.70* | 1.94 | 15.90** | 1.42 | 7.17** |
处理 Treatment | 结实期干物 质积累量 Dry matter accumulation during filling stage | 结实期 群体生长率 Population growth rate during filling stage | 成熟期 单茎干物质量 Total weight per stem at maturity | 拔节期 总叶面积 Total LAI during jointing | 齐穗期 总叶面积 Total LAI at full heading | 齐穗期 高效叶面积 Efficient LAI at full heading | 拔节至齐穗 叶面积衰减率 Decreasing rate of leaf area at jointing-full heading |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
秸秆还田Straw returning (A) | 611.60** | 608.96** | 627.66** | 42.58* | 35.48* | 96.09* | 28.16* |
灌水方式Irrigation method (W) | 9.56* | 9.65* | 118.58** | 0.58 | 0.04 | 46.83** | 8.56* |
施氮量 N rate(N) | 305.48** | 305.41** | 480.07** | 255.04** | 346.73** | 868.59** | 1185.76** |
A×W | 0.67 | 0.68 | 7.03* | 8.73* | 0.78 | 0.17 | 5.30 |
A×N | 11.31** | 11.32** | 0.99 | 9.31** | 4.60* | 3.94* | 4.29* |
W×N | 7.43* | 7.39** | 1.07 | 0.43 | 0.67 | 2.47 | 7.58** |
A×W×N | 2.73 | 2.75* | 0.80 | 0.66 | 0.17 | 1.84 | 3.95* |
表3 秸秆还田与水氮管理下群体质量指标影响的方差分析 (F值)
Table 3 Analysis of variance for population quality index of rice between straw returning and water and N management patterns (F values).
处理 Treatment | 结实期干物 质积累量 Dry matter accumulation during filling stage | 结实期 群体生长率 Population growth rate during filling stage | 成熟期 单茎干物质量 Total weight per stem at maturity | 拔节期 总叶面积 Total LAI during jointing | 齐穗期 总叶面积 Total LAI at full heading | 齐穗期 高效叶面积 Efficient LAI at full heading | 拔节至齐穗 叶面积衰减率 Decreasing rate of leaf area at jointing-full heading |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
秸秆还田Straw returning (A) | 611.60** | 608.96** | 627.66** | 42.58* | 35.48* | 96.09* | 28.16* |
灌水方式Irrigation method (W) | 9.56* | 9.65* | 118.58** | 0.58 | 0.04 | 46.83** | 8.56* |
施氮量 N rate(N) | 305.48** | 305.41** | 480.07** | 255.04** | 346.73** | 868.59** | 1185.76** |
A×W | 0.67 | 0.68 | 7.03* | 8.73* | 0.78 | 0.17 | 5.30 |
A×N | 11.31** | 11.32** | 0.99 | 9.31** | 4.60* | 3.94* | 4.29* |
W×N | 7.43* | 7.39** | 1.07 | 0.43 | 0.67 | 2.47 | 7.58** |
A×W×N | 2.73 | 2.75* | 0.80 | 0.66 | 0.17 | 1.84 | 3.95* |
处理 Treatment | 有效穗数 Effective panicles (×104/hm2) | 每穗粒数 Grain number per panicle | 结实率 Seed-setting rate /% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight /g | 实际产量 Grain yield /(kg·hm-2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | W1 | N0 | 144.30 d | 149.20 d | 92.00 a | 37.37 a | 7057.2 d |
N1 | 162.53 c | 180.34 c | 91.52 a | 35.55 b | 8472.1 c | ||
N2 | 177.06 a | 195.27 a | 90.81 a | 37.71 a | 9855.9 a | ||
N3 | 166.18 b | 186.07 b | 86.78 b | 37.63 a | 9312.1 b | ||
平均 Average | 162.52 | 177.72 | 90.28 | 37.07 | 8674.3 | ||
W2 | N0 | 148.37 d | 157.38 d | 93.68 a | 36.93 bd | 7275.9 d | |
N1 | 163.91 c | 183.48 c | 92.35 a | 37.53 ab | 8603.4 c | ||
N2 | 181.60 a | 200.45 a | 93.53 a | 37.52 abc | 10328.1 a | ||
N3 | 170.71 b | 189.05 b | 88.33 b | 37.86 a | 9444.1 b | ||
平均 Average | 166.15 | 182.59 | 91.97 | 37.46 | 8912.9 | ||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 137.48 c | 154.16 d | 90.17 a | 36.29 c | 6697.5 c |
N1 | 142.38 b | 167.84 c | 89.63 a | 37.07 a | 7797.7 b | ||
N2 | 155.18 a | 207.93 a | 89.22 a | 36.54 bc | 8680.3 a | ||
N3 | 151.30 a | 179.29 b | 85.64 b | 36.61 b | 8542.4 a | ||
平均 Average | 146.58 | 177.31 | 88.67 | 36.63 | 7929.48 | ||
W2 | N0 | 140.99 c | 159.29 d | 92.24 a | 36.13 c | 6937.8 c | |
N1 | 151.77 b | 168.92 c | 88.75 c | 36.87 b | 8059.3 b | ||
N2 | 163.09 a | 199.24 a | 90.09 b | 37.25 a | 8855.3 a | ||
N3 | 155.18 b | 183.77 b | 88.29 c | 36.02 c | 8692.8 a | ||
平均 Average | 152.76 | 177.81 | 89.84 | 36.57 | 8136.3 |
表4 秸秆直接还田下水氮管理处理对产量及其构成因素的影响(2017年)
Table 4 Effects of water and N management on yield and its components in hybrid rice under direct straw returning(2017).
处理 Treatment | 有效穗数 Effective panicles (×104/hm2) | 每穗粒数 Grain number per panicle | 结实率 Seed-setting rate /% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight /g | 实际产量 Grain yield /(kg·hm-2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | W1 | N0 | 144.30 d | 149.20 d | 92.00 a | 37.37 a | 7057.2 d |
N1 | 162.53 c | 180.34 c | 91.52 a | 35.55 b | 8472.1 c | ||
N2 | 177.06 a | 195.27 a | 90.81 a | 37.71 a | 9855.9 a | ||
N3 | 166.18 b | 186.07 b | 86.78 b | 37.63 a | 9312.1 b | ||
平均 Average | 162.52 | 177.72 | 90.28 | 37.07 | 8674.3 | ||
W2 | N0 | 148.37 d | 157.38 d | 93.68 a | 36.93 bd | 7275.9 d | |
N1 | 163.91 c | 183.48 c | 92.35 a | 37.53 ab | 8603.4 c | ||
N2 | 181.60 a | 200.45 a | 93.53 a | 37.52 abc | 10328.1 a | ||
N3 | 170.71 b | 189.05 b | 88.33 b | 37.86 a | 9444.1 b | ||
平均 Average | 166.15 | 182.59 | 91.97 | 37.46 | 8912.9 | ||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 137.48 c | 154.16 d | 90.17 a | 36.29 c | 6697.5 c |
N1 | 142.38 b | 167.84 c | 89.63 a | 37.07 a | 7797.7 b | ||
N2 | 155.18 a | 207.93 a | 89.22 a | 36.54 bc | 8680.3 a | ||
N3 | 151.30 a | 179.29 b | 85.64 b | 36.61 b | 8542.4 a | ||
平均 Average | 146.58 | 177.31 | 88.67 | 36.63 | 7929.48 | ||
W2 | N0 | 140.99 c | 159.29 d | 92.24 a | 36.13 c | 6937.8 c | |
N1 | 151.77 b | 168.92 c | 88.75 c | 36.87 b | 8059.3 b | ||
N2 | 163.09 a | 199.24 a | 90.09 b | 37.25 a | 8855.3 a | ||
N3 | 155.18 b | 183.77 b | 88.29 c | 36.02 c | 8692.8 a | ||
平均 Average | 152.76 | 177.81 | 89.84 | 36.57 | 8136.3 |
处理 Treatment | 有效穗 Effective panicles (×104/hm2) | 每穗粒数 Grain number per panicle | 结实率 Seed-setting rate /% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight /g | 实际产量 Grain yield /(kg·hm-2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | W1 | N0 | 163.90 c | 153.61 d | 93.02 b | 36.36 b | 8473.9 d |
N1 | 177.78 b | 163.27 c | 94.85 a | 36.42 b | 9501.4 c | ||
N2 | 212.11 a | 178.36 a | 88.60 c | 37.08 a | 11876.3 a | ||
N3 | 206.34 a | 170.72 b | 86.32 d | 36.51 b | 10547.1 b | ||
平均 Average | 190.03 | 166.49 | 90.70 | 36.59 | 10099.7 | ||
W2 | N0 | 167.67 d | 156.82 d | 93.73 a | 36.10 b | 8819.4 d | |
N1 | 180.21 c | 165.80 c | 95.97 a | 37.12 a | 10142.2 c | ||
N2 | 220.88 a | 180.82 a | 89.78 b | 36.06 b | 12464.1 a | ||
N3 | 209.42 b | 175.65 b | 86.70 c | 36.42 b | 11026.9 b | ||
平均 Average | 194.54 | 169.77 | 91.55 | 36.42 | 10613.1 | ||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 159.76 c | 148.48 c | 92.20 b | 37.39 a | 7783.1 d |
N1 | 167.49 b | 157.32 b | 94.35 a | 36.44 ab | 8581.6 c | ||
N2 | 198.66 a | 164.80 a | 89.13 c | 36.41 ab | 10063.7 a | ||
N3 | 192.91 a | 162.24 a | 86.04 d | 36.28 b | 9534.4 b | ||
平均 Average | 179.71 | 158.21 | 90.43 | 36.63 | 8990.7 | ||
W2 | N0 | 161.19 d | 151.76 d | 93.51 a | 37.29 a | 8038.6 d | |
N1 | 171.19 c | 159.11 c | 95.28 a | 36.48 ab | 8868.4 c | ||
N2 | 204.56 a | 169.32 a | 89.24 b | 36.19 b | 10380.5 a | ||
N3 | 196.12 b | 165.08 b | 85.68 c | 36.36 ab | 9782.0 b | ||
平均 Average | 183.27 | 161.32 | 90.93 | 36.58 | 9267.4 |
表5 秸秆直接还田下水氮管理处理对杂交稻产量及其构成因素的影响(2018年)
Table 5 Effects of water and N management on yield and its components in hybrid rice under direct straw returning(2018).
处理 Treatment | 有效穗 Effective panicles (×104/hm2) | 每穗粒数 Grain number per panicle | 结实率 Seed-setting rate /% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight /g | 实际产量 Grain yield /(kg·hm-2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | W1 | N0 | 163.90 c | 153.61 d | 93.02 b | 36.36 b | 8473.9 d |
N1 | 177.78 b | 163.27 c | 94.85 a | 36.42 b | 9501.4 c | ||
N2 | 212.11 a | 178.36 a | 88.60 c | 37.08 a | 11876.3 a | ||
N3 | 206.34 a | 170.72 b | 86.32 d | 36.51 b | 10547.1 b | ||
平均 Average | 190.03 | 166.49 | 90.70 | 36.59 | 10099.7 | ||
W2 | N0 | 167.67 d | 156.82 d | 93.73 a | 36.10 b | 8819.4 d | |
N1 | 180.21 c | 165.80 c | 95.97 a | 37.12 a | 10142.2 c | ||
N2 | 220.88 a | 180.82 a | 89.78 b | 36.06 b | 12464.1 a | ||
N3 | 209.42 b | 175.65 b | 86.70 c | 36.42 b | 11026.9 b | ||
平均 Average | 194.54 | 169.77 | 91.55 | 36.42 | 10613.1 | ||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 159.76 c | 148.48 c | 92.20 b | 37.39 a | 7783.1 d |
N1 | 167.49 b | 157.32 b | 94.35 a | 36.44 ab | 8581.6 c | ||
N2 | 198.66 a | 164.80 a | 89.13 c | 36.41 ab | 10063.7 a | ||
N3 | 192.91 a | 162.24 a | 86.04 d | 36.28 b | 9534.4 b | ||
平均 Average | 179.71 | 158.21 | 90.43 | 36.63 | 8990.7 | ||
W2 | N0 | 161.19 d | 151.76 d | 93.51 a | 37.29 a | 8038.6 d | |
N1 | 171.19 c | 159.11 c | 95.28 a | 36.48 ab | 8868.4 c | ||
N2 | 204.56 a | 169.32 a | 89.24 b | 36.19 b | 10380.5 a | ||
N3 | 196.12 b | 165.08 b | 85.68 c | 36.36 ab | 9782.0 b | ||
平均 Average | 183.27 | 161.32 | 90.93 | 36.58 | 9267.4 |
图1 不同秸秆还田方式下水氮管理对水稻分蘖动态的影响(2017) A1-秸秆堆腐还田;A2-秸秆直接还田;W1-淹水灌溉;W2-干湿交替灌溉。
Fig. 1. Effects of water and N management on dynamic changes of stem and tiller in hybrid rice under different straw returning modes(2017). A1, Straw composting; A2, Direct straw returning; W1, Submerged irrigation; W2, Alternate irrigation.
处理 Treatment | 单茎叶片干质量 Dry weight of leaves per stem/g | 单茎茎鞘干质量 Dry weight of Culm and sheath per stem/g | 单茎干物质量 Dry matter weight per stem/g | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖盛期 Tillering | 拔节期 Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期 Maturity | 分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | 分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | |||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 0.12 c | 0.40 c | 1.17 d | 0.87 d | 0.14 d | 0.53 c | 3.19 b | 2.07 d | 0.26 d | 0.93 c | 5.10 d | 8.11 d | ||
N1 | 0.14 b | 0.49 b | 1.22 c | 1.06 c | 0.16 c | 0.58 b | 3.31 a | 2.26 c | 0.30 c | 1.07 b | 5.33 c | 9.14 c | ||||
N2 | 0.19 a | 0.55 a | 1.39 a | 1.23 a | 0.22 a | 0.64 a | 3.35 a | 2.41 a | 0.40 a | 1.19 a | 5.59 a | 10.15 a | ||||
N3 | 0.18 a | 0.49 b | 1.33 b | 1.11 b | 0.20 b | 0.59 b | 3.34 a | 2.35 b | 0.38 b | 1.07 b | 5.51 b | 9.82 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.16 | 0.48 | 1.28 | 1.07 | 0.18 | 0.59 | 3.3 | 2.27 | 0.34 | 1.07 | 5.38 | 9.31 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.14 c | 0.43 d | 1.13 c | 0.91 d | 0.17 c | 0.55 d | 3.15 c | 2.10 d | 0.31 c | 0.98 d | 5.02 c | 8.32 d | |||
N1 | 0.16 b | 0.45 c | 1.26 b | 1.07 c | 0.19 b | 0.57 c | 3.31 b | 2.30 c | 0.35 b | 1.02 c | 5.38 b | 9.39 c | ||||
N2 | 0.18 a | 0.57 a | 1.39 a | 1.24 a | 0.21 a | 0.67 a | 3.43 a | 2.45 a | 0.39 a | 1.24 a | 5.68 a | 10.35 a | ||||
N3 | 0.17 ab | 0.51 b | 1.38 a | 1.13 b | 0.19 b | 0.62 b | 3.40 a | 2.35 b | 0.36 b | 1.13 b | 5.63 a | 9.95 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.16 | 0.49 | 1.29 | 1.09 | 0.19 | 0.61 | 3.32 | 2.3 | 0.35 | 1.09 | 5.43 | 9.5 | ||||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 0.12 d | 0.39 d | 1.12 d | 0.81 c | 0.13 d | 0.52 c | 3.15 c | 2.02 d | 0.25 d | 0.91 d | 4.99 c | 7.83 d | ||
N1 | 0.13 c | 0.42 c | 1.18 c | 1.04 b | 0.14 c | 0.56 bc | 3.24 b | 2.20 c | 0.27 c | 0.99 c | 5.20 b | 8.85 c | ||||
N2 | 0.16 a | 0.52 a | 1.36 a | 1.17 a | 0.19 a | 0.63 a | 3.31 a | 2.35 a | 0.36 a | 1.16 a | 5.51 a | 9.78 a | ||||
N3 | 0.14 b | 0.48 b | 1.32 b | 1.04 b | 0.17 b | 0.58 ab | 3.29 a | 2.30 b | 0.31 b | 1.06 b | 5.45 a | 9.43 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.14 | 0.45 | 1.25 | 1.02 | 0.16 | 0.57 | 3.25 | 2.22 | 0.29 | 1.03 | 5.29 | 8.97 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.10 c | 0.40 d | 1.12 c | 0.84 c | 0.12 c | 0.53 c | 3.12 c | 2.05 d | 0.23 c | 0.94 d | 4.97 c | 8.01 c | |||
N1 | 0.14 b | 0.45 c | 1.26 b | 1.13 b | 0.15 b | 0.59 b | 3.29 b | 2.23 c | 0.29 b | 1.04 c | 5.33 b | 9.35 b | ||||
N2 | 0.16 a | 0.55 a | 1.37 a | 1.21 a | 0.17 a | 0.65 a | 3.36 a | 2.33 a | 0.33 a | 1.20 a | 5.59 a | 10.01 a | ||||
N3 | 0.15 a | 0.49 b | 1.34 a | 1.14 b | 0.17 a | 0.61 ab | 3.32 a | 2.29 b | 0.32 a | 1.10 b | 5.51 a | 9.80 a | ||||
平均Average | 0.14 | 0.47 | 1.27 | 1.08 | 0.15 | 0.59 | 3.27 | 2.22 | 0.3 | 1.07 | 5.35 | 9.29 |
表6 秸秆还田和水氮管理对杂交稻叶片、茎鞘和单茎干物质量的影响 (2017年)
Table 6 Effects of water and N management on leaves, culm and sheath per shoot and dry matter weight of stem under straw returning(2017).
处理 Treatment | 单茎叶片干质量 Dry weight of leaves per stem/g | 单茎茎鞘干质量 Dry weight of Culm and sheath per stem/g | 单茎干物质量 Dry matter weight per stem/g | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖盛期 Tillering | 拔节期 Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期 Maturity | 分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | 分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | |||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 0.12 c | 0.40 c | 1.17 d | 0.87 d | 0.14 d | 0.53 c | 3.19 b | 2.07 d | 0.26 d | 0.93 c | 5.10 d | 8.11 d | ||
N1 | 0.14 b | 0.49 b | 1.22 c | 1.06 c | 0.16 c | 0.58 b | 3.31 a | 2.26 c | 0.30 c | 1.07 b | 5.33 c | 9.14 c | ||||
N2 | 0.19 a | 0.55 a | 1.39 a | 1.23 a | 0.22 a | 0.64 a | 3.35 a | 2.41 a | 0.40 a | 1.19 a | 5.59 a | 10.15 a | ||||
N3 | 0.18 a | 0.49 b | 1.33 b | 1.11 b | 0.20 b | 0.59 b | 3.34 a | 2.35 b | 0.38 b | 1.07 b | 5.51 b | 9.82 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.16 | 0.48 | 1.28 | 1.07 | 0.18 | 0.59 | 3.3 | 2.27 | 0.34 | 1.07 | 5.38 | 9.31 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.14 c | 0.43 d | 1.13 c | 0.91 d | 0.17 c | 0.55 d | 3.15 c | 2.10 d | 0.31 c | 0.98 d | 5.02 c | 8.32 d | |||
N1 | 0.16 b | 0.45 c | 1.26 b | 1.07 c | 0.19 b | 0.57 c | 3.31 b | 2.30 c | 0.35 b | 1.02 c | 5.38 b | 9.39 c | ||||
N2 | 0.18 a | 0.57 a | 1.39 a | 1.24 a | 0.21 a | 0.67 a | 3.43 a | 2.45 a | 0.39 a | 1.24 a | 5.68 a | 10.35 a | ||||
N3 | 0.17 ab | 0.51 b | 1.38 a | 1.13 b | 0.19 b | 0.62 b | 3.40 a | 2.35 b | 0.36 b | 1.13 b | 5.63 a | 9.95 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.16 | 0.49 | 1.29 | 1.09 | 0.19 | 0.61 | 3.32 | 2.3 | 0.35 | 1.09 | 5.43 | 9.5 | ||||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 0.12 d | 0.39 d | 1.12 d | 0.81 c | 0.13 d | 0.52 c | 3.15 c | 2.02 d | 0.25 d | 0.91 d | 4.99 c | 7.83 d | ||
N1 | 0.13 c | 0.42 c | 1.18 c | 1.04 b | 0.14 c | 0.56 bc | 3.24 b | 2.20 c | 0.27 c | 0.99 c | 5.20 b | 8.85 c | ||||
N2 | 0.16 a | 0.52 a | 1.36 a | 1.17 a | 0.19 a | 0.63 a | 3.31 a | 2.35 a | 0.36 a | 1.16 a | 5.51 a | 9.78 a | ||||
N3 | 0.14 b | 0.48 b | 1.32 b | 1.04 b | 0.17 b | 0.58 ab | 3.29 a | 2.30 b | 0.31 b | 1.06 b | 5.45 a | 9.43 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.14 | 0.45 | 1.25 | 1.02 | 0.16 | 0.57 | 3.25 | 2.22 | 0.29 | 1.03 | 5.29 | 8.97 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.10 c | 0.40 d | 1.12 c | 0.84 c | 0.12 c | 0.53 c | 3.12 c | 2.05 d | 0.23 c | 0.94 d | 4.97 c | 8.01 c | |||
N1 | 0.14 b | 0.45 c | 1.26 b | 1.13 b | 0.15 b | 0.59 b | 3.29 b | 2.23 c | 0.29 b | 1.04 c | 5.33 b | 9.35 b | ||||
N2 | 0.16 a | 0.55 a | 1.37 a | 1.21 a | 0.17 a | 0.65 a | 3.36 a | 2.33 a | 0.33 a | 1.20 a | 5.59 a | 10.01 a | ||||
N3 | 0.15 a | 0.49 b | 1.34 a | 1.14 b | 0.17 a | 0.61 ab | 3.32 a | 2.29 b | 0.32 a | 1.10 b | 5.51 a | 9.80 a | ||||
平均Average | 0.14 | 0.47 | 1.27 | 1.08 | 0.15 | 0.59 | 3.27 | 2.22 | 0.3 | 1.07 | 5.35 | 9.29 |
处理 Treatment | 群体干物质量 Dry matter weight of population/(t·hm-2) | 不同生育阶段干物质积累量 Phase accumulation/(t·hm-2) | 群体生长率 Population growth rate/(g·m-2d-1) | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | |||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 0.62 c | 2.41 c | 7.22 d | 11.71 d | 1.79 c | 4.84 c | 4.49 d | 13.78 c | 13.84 c | 10.68 d | ||
N1 | 1.00 b | 3.50 b | 9.83 c | 14.85 c | 2.50 b | 6.33 b | 5.02 c | 19.27 b | 18.07 b | 11.95 c | ||||
N2 | 1.19 a | 3.97 a | 11.42 a | 17.98 a | 2.78 a | 7.46 a | 6.56 a | 21.36 a | 21.30 a | 15.61 a | ||||
N3 | 1.21 a | 3.93 a | 10.32 b | 16.35 b | 2.72 a | 6.40 b | 6.03 b | 20.95 a | 18.30 b | 14.35 b | ||||
平均 Average | 1.00 | 3.81 | 9.70 | 15.22 | 2.45 | 6.26 | 5.52 | 18.84 | 17.88 | 13.15 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.79 c | 2.99 c | 7.86 d | 12.34 d | 2.20 c | 4.87 d | 4.48 d | 16.93 c | 13.92 d | 10.67 d | |||
N1 | 1.04 b | 3.78 b | 10.17 c | 15.39 c | 2.74 b | 6.39 c | 5.22 c | 21.08 b | 18.26 c | 12.42 c | ||||
N2 | 1.26 a | 4.28 a | 11.85 a | 18.79 a | 3.02 a | 7.57 a | 6.94 a | 23.24 a | 21.62 a | 16.53 a | ||||
N3 | 1.31 a | 4.20 a | 11.03 b | 16.98 b | 2.89 ab | 6.86 b | 5.95 b | 22.24 ab | 19.60 b | 14.17 b | ||||
平均 Average | 1.10 | 3.81 | 10.23 | 15.87 | 2.71 | 6.42 | 5.65 | 20.87 | 18.35 | 13.45 | ||||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 0.51 c | 2.31 c | 7.54 d | 10.77 d | 1.80 c | 5.23 c | 3.23 c | 13.80 c | 14.95 c | 7.69 c | ||
N1 | 0.95 b | 3.18 b | 8.76 c | 12.59 c | 2.23 b | 5.58 c | 3.80 b | 17.12 b | 15.95 c | 9.05 b | ||||
N2 | 1.10 a | 3.71 a | 10.49 a | 15.18 a | 2.61 a | 6.78 a | 4.68 a | 20.11 a | 19.37 a | 11.16 a | ||||
N3 | 1.14 a | 3.62 a | 9.82 b | 14.27 b | 2.48 a | 6.20 b | 4.45 a | 19.11 a | 17.71 b | 10.60 a | ||||
平均 Average | 0.93 | 3.21 | 9.15 | 13.20 | 2.28 | 5.95 | 4.04 | 17.54 | 17.00 | 9.63 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.56 c | 2.65 c | 8.42 d | 11.29 d | 2.09 c | 5.77 c | 2.87 c | 16.10 c | 16.48 c | 6.84 c | |||
N1 | 0.96 b | 3.43 b | 9.80 c | 14.19 c | 2.47 b | 6.37 b | 4.38 b | 19.01 b | 18.21 b | 10.44 b | ||||
N2 | 1.13 a | 3.85 a | 11.23 a | 16.33 a | 2.72 a | 7.39 a | 5.09 a | 20.91 a | 21.10 a | 12.12 a | ||||
N3 | 1.15 a | 3.80 a | 10.51 b | 15.20 b | 2.65 ab | 6.71 b | 4.69 b | 20.39 ab | 19.17 b | 11.16 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.95 | 3.43 | 9.99 | 14.25 | 2.48 | 6.56 | 4.26 | 19.10 | 18.74 | 10.14 |
表7 秸秆直接还田下水氮管理对水稻群体干物质积累特性的影响(2017年)
Table 7 Effects of water and N management on dry matter accumulation characteristics of population under straw returning(2017).
处理 Treatment | 群体干物质量 Dry matter weight of population/(t·hm-2) | 不同生育阶段干物质积累量 Phase accumulation/(t·hm-2) | 群体生长率 Population growth rate/(g·m-2d-1) | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | |||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 0.62 c | 2.41 c | 7.22 d | 11.71 d | 1.79 c | 4.84 c | 4.49 d | 13.78 c | 13.84 c | 10.68 d | ||
N1 | 1.00 b | 3.50 b | 9.83 c | 14.85 c | 2.50 b | 6.33 b | 5.02 c | 19.27 b | 18.07 b | 11.95 c | ||||
N2 | 1.19 a | 3.97 a | 11.42 a | 17.98 a | 2.78 a | 7.46 a | 6.56 a | 21.36 a | 21.30 a | 15.61 a | ||||
N3 | 1.21 a | 3.93 a | 10.32 b | 16.35 b | 2.72 a | 6.40 b | 6.03 b | 20.95 a | 18.30 b | 14.35 b | ||||
平均 Average | 1.00 | 3.81 | 9.70 | 15.22 | 2.45 | 6.26 | 5.52 | 18.84 | 17.88 | 13.15 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.79 c | 2.99 c | 7.86 d | 12.34 d | 2.20 c | 4.87 d | 4.48 d | 16.93 c | 13.92 d | 10.67 d | |||
N1 | 1.04 b | 3.78 b | 10.17 c | 15.39 c | 2.74 b | 6.39 c | 5.22 c | 21.08 b | 18.26 c | 12.42 c | ||||
N2 | 1.26 a | 4.28 a | 11.85 a | 18.79 a | 3.02 a | 7.57 a | 6.94 a | 23.24 a | 21.62 a | 16.53 a | ||||
N3 | 1.31 a | 4.20 a | 11.03 b | 16.98 b | 2.89 ab | 6.86 b | 5.95 b | 22.24 ab | 19.60 b | 14.17 b | ||||
平均 Average | 1.10 | 3.81 | 10.23 | 15.87 | 2.71 | 6.42 | 5.65 | 20.87 | 18.35 | 13.45 | ||||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 0.51 c | 2.31 c | 7.54 d | 10.77 d | 1.80 c | 5.23 c | 3.23 c | 13.80 c | 14.95 c | 7.69 c | ||
N1 | 0.95 b | 3.18 b | 8.76 c | 12.59 c | 2.23 b | 5.58 c | 3.80 b | 17.12 b | 15.95 c | 9.05 b | ||||
N2 | 1.10 a | 3.71 a | 10.49 a | 15.18 a | 2.61 a | 6.78 a | 4.68 a | 20.11 a | 19.37 a | 11.16 a | ||||
N3 | 1.14 a | 3.62 a | 9.82 b | 14.27 b | 2.48 a | 6.20 b | 4.45 a | 19.11 a | 17.71 b | 10.60 a | ||||
平均 Average | 0.93 | 3.21 | 9.15 | 13.20 | 2.28 | 5.95 | 4.04 | 17.54 | 17.00 | 9.63 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 0.56 c | 2.65 c | 8.42 d | 11.29 d | 2.09 c | 5.77 c | 2.87 c | 16.10 c | 16.48 c | 6.84 c | |||
N1 | 0.96 b | 3.43 b | 9.80 c | 14.19 c | 2.47 b | 6.37 b | 4.38 b | 19.01 b | 18.21 b | 10.44 b | ||||
N2 | 1.13 a | 3.85 a | 11.23 a | 16.33 a | 2.72 a | 7.39 a | 5.09 a | 20.91 a | 21.10 a | 12.12 a | ||||
N3 | 1.15 a | 3.80 a | 10.51 b | 15.20 b | 2.65 ab | 6.71 b | 4.69 b | 20.39 ab | 19.17 b | 11.16 b | ||||
平均 Average | 0.95 | 3.43 | 9.99 | 14.25 | 2.48 | 6.56 | 4.26 | 19.10 | 18.74 | 10.14 |
处理 Treatment | 群体干物质量 Dry matter weight of population/(t·hm-2) | 不同生育阶段干物质积累量 Phase accumulation/(t·hm-2) | 群体生长率 Population growth rate/(g·m-2d-1) | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | |||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 1.10 b | 2.95 c | 8.10 d | 13.30 d | 1.85 c | 5.15 d | 5.20 c | 12.34 c | 14.71 d | 9.99 c | ||
N1 | 1.33 b | 3.88 b | 10.23 c | 16.24 c | 2.55 b | 6.79 c | 6.01 b | 17.01 b | 19.40 c | 11.56 b | ||||
N2 | 2.16 a | 6.03 a | 14.53 a | 21.54 a | 3.86 a | 8.50 a | 7.01 a | 25.77 a | 24.28 a | 13.48 a | ||||
N3 | 2.39 a | 5.84 a | 13.53 b | 20.26 b | 3.44 a | 7.69 b | 6.73 a | 22.96 a | 21.97 b | 12.94 a | ||||
平均 Average | 1.75 | 4.67 | 11.60 | 17.83 | 2.93 | 7.03 | 6.24 | 19.52 | 20.09 | 11.99 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 1.16 c | 3.16 c | 8.46 d | 13.95 d | 2.00 b | 5.31 d | 5.48 d | 16.59 b | 15.16 d | 10.54 d | |||
N1 | 1.68 b | 4.17 b | 10.67 c | 16.92 c | 2.49 b | 6.18 c | 6.25 c | 13.31 b | 17.66 c | 12.02 c | ||||
N2 | 2.31 a | 6.62 a | 15.49 a | 22.85 a | 4.31 a | 8.87 a | 7.36 a | 24.29 a | 25.35 a | 14.15 a | ||||
N3 | 2.58 a | 6.22 a | 14.00 b | 20.83 b | 3.64 a | 7.78 b | 6.83 b | 28.72 a | 22.23 b | 13.13 b | ||||
平均 Average | 1.93 | 5.04 | 12.16 | 18.64 | 3.11 | 7.04 | 6.48 | 20.73 | 20.10 | 12.46 | ||||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 0.91 b | 2.50 c | 7.50 d | 12.51 d | 1.60 c | 4.99 d | 5.02 b | 10.64 c | 14.26 d | 9.65 b | ||
N1 | 1.27 b | 3.77 b | 9.56 c | 14.82 c | 2.50 b | 6.46 c | 5.26 b | 16.70 b | 18.45 c | 10.11 b | ||||
N2 | 2.20 a | 6.05 a | 13.48 a | 19.43 a | 3.85 a | 7.44 a | 5.95 a | 25.66 a | 21.25 a | 11.44 a | ||||
N3 | 2.33 a | 5.67 a | 12.41 b | 18.20 b | 3.34 a | 6.75 b | 5.79 a | 22.26 a | 19.27 b | 11.13 a | ||||
平均 Average | 1.68 | 4.50 | 10.74 | 16.24 | 2.82 | 6.41 | 5.50 | 18.81 | 18.31 | 10.58 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 1.14 c | 2.81 c | 7.90 d | 12.91 d | 1.66 c | 5.09 d | 5.01 c | 14.88 b | 14.55 d | 9.64 c | |||
N1 | 1.61 b | 3.84 b | 10.35 c | 16.01 c | 2.23 b | 5.72 c | 5.66 b | 11.08 c | 16.34 c | 10.88 b | ||||
N2 | 2.23 a | 6.13 a | 14.01 a | 20.48 a | 3.90 a | 7.88 a | 6.47 a | 23.89 a | 22.52 a | 12.44 a | ||||
N3 | 2.41 a | 5.99 a | 13.15 b | 19.21 b | 3.58 a | 7.16 b | 6.06 a | 25.99 a | 20.45 b | 11.66 a | ||||
平均 Average | 1.85 | 4.69 | 11.35 | 17.15 | 2.84 | 6.46 | 5.80 | 18.96 | 18.46 | 11.16 |
表8 秸秆直接还田下水氮管理对水稻群体干物质积累特性(2018年)
Table 8 Effects of water and N management on dry matter accumulation characteristics of population under straw returning(2018).
处理 Treatment | 群体干物质量 Dry matter weight of population/(t·hm-2) | 不同生育阶段干物质积累量 Phase accumulation/(t·hm-2) | 群体生长率 Population growth rate/(g·m-2d-1) | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖盛期Tillering | 拔节期Jointing | 齐穗期 Full heading | 成熟期Maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | 分蘖盛期- 拔节期 Tillering- jointing | 拔节期- 齐穗期 Jointing- full heading | 齐穗期- 成熟期 Full heading- maturity | |||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 1.10 b | 2.95 c | 8.10 d | 13.30 d | 1.85 c | 5.15 d | 5.20 c | 12.34 c | 14.71 d | 9.99 c | ||
N1 | 1.33 b | 3.88 b | 10.23 c | 16.24 c | 2.55 b | 6.79 c | 6.01 b | 17.01 b | 19.40 c | 11.56 b | ||||
N2 | 2.16 a | 6.03 a | 14.53 a | 21.54 a | 3.86 a | 8.50 a | 7.01 a | 25.77 a | 24.28 a | 13.48 a | ||||
N3 | 2.39 a | 5.84 a | 13.53 b | 20.26 b | 3.44 a | 7.69 b | 6.73 a | 22.96 a | 21.97 b | 12.94 a | ||||
平均 Average | 1.75 | 4.67 | 11.60 | 17.83 | 2.93 | 7.03 | 6.24 | 19.52 | 20.09 | 11.99 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 1.16 c | 3.16 c | 8.46 d | 13.95 d | 2.00 b | 5.31 d | 5.48 d | 16.59 b | 15.16 d | 10.54 d | |||
N1 | 1.68 b | 4.17 b | 10.67 c | 16.92 c | 2.49 b | 6.18 c | 6.25 c | 13.31 b | 17.66 c | 12.02 c | ||||
N2 | 2.31 a | 6.62 a | 15.49 a | 22.85 a | 4.31 a | 8.87 a | 7.36 a | 24.29 a | 25.35 a | 14.15 a | ||||
N3 | 2.58 a | 6.22 a | 14.00 b | 20.83 b | 3.64 a | 7.78 b | 6.83 b | 28.72 a | 22.23 b | 13.13 b | ||||
平均 Average | 1.93 | 5.04 | 12.16 | 18.64 | 3.11 | 7.04 | 6.48 | 20.73 | 20.10 | 12.46 | ||||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 0.91 b | 2.50 c | 7.50 d | 12.51 d | 1.60 c | 4.99 d | 5.02 b | 10.64 c | 14.26 d | 9.65 b | ||
N1 | 1.27 b | 3.77 b | 9.56 c | 14.82 c | 2.50 b | 6.46 c | 5.26 b | 16.70 b | 18.45 c | 10.11 b | ||||
N2 | 2.20 a | 6.05 a | 13.48 a | 19.43 a | 3.85 a | 7.44 a | 5.95 a | 25.66 a | 21.25 a | 11.44 a | ||||
N3 | 2.33 a | 5.67 a | 12.41 b | 18.20 b | 3.34 a | 6.75 b | 5.79 a | 22.26 a | 19.27 b | 11.13 a | ||||
平均 Average | 1.68 | 4.50 | 10.74 | 16.24 | 2.82 | 6.41 | 5.50 | 18.81 | 18.31 | 10.58 | ||||
W2 | N0 | 1.14 c | 2.81 c | 7.90 d | 12.91 d | 1.66 c | 5.09 d | 5.01 c | 14.88 b | 14.55 d | 9.64 c | |||
N1 | 1.61 b | 3.84 b | 10.35 c | 16.01 c | 2.23 b | 5.72 c | 5.66 b | 11.08 c | 16.34 c | 10.88 b | ||||
N2 | 2.23 a | 6.13 a | 14.01 a | 20.48 a | 3.90 a | 7.88 a | 6.47 a | 23.89 a | 22.52 a | 12.44 a | ||||
N3 | 2.41 a | 5.99 a | 13.15 b | 19.21 b | 3.58 a | 7.16 b | 6.06 a | 25.99 a | 20.45 b | 11.66 a | ||||
平均 Average | 1.85 | 4.69 | 11.35 | 17.15 | 2.84 | 6.46 | 5.80 | 18.96 | 18.46 | 11.16 |
处理 Treatment | 分蘖盛期 Tillering | 拔节期 Jointing | 齐穂期 Full heading | 高效叶面积指数H-LAI | 叶面积衰减率 R-LAI/(LAI·d-1) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 2018 | |||||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 1.74 d | 2.49 c | 4.53 c | 3.11 c | 3.58 c | 0.0585 d |
N1 | 2.31 c | 3.06 b | 5.97 b | 4.25 b | 4.78 b | 0.0832 b | ||
N2 | 2.67 b | 3.99 a | 6.98 a | 4.61 a | 5.18 a | 0.0855 a | ||
N3 | 2.92 a | 4.01 a | 6.86 a | 4.50 a | 5.09 a | 0.0814 c | ||
平均 Average | 2.41 | 3.39 | 6.09 | 4.12 | 4.66 | 0.0772 | ||
W2 | N0 | 1.44 d | 2.40 c | 4.45 c | 3.26 c | 3.70 c | 0.0586 c | |
N1 | 2.13 c | 3.24 b | 6.15 b | 4.49 b | 5.00 b | 0.0830 b | ||
N2 | 2.52 b | 4.04 a | 7.16 a | 4.80 a | 5.35 a | 0.0891 a | ||
N3 | 2.77 a | 4.02 a | 6.97 a | 4.74 a | 5.32 a | 0.0845 b | ||
平均 Average | 2.22 | 3.43 | 6.18 | 4.32 | 4.84 | 0.0788 | ||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 1.30 d | 2.10 c | 4.08 c | 2.85 c | 3.28 c | 0.0567 c |
N1 | 2.09 c | 3.46 b | 6.22 b | 4.10 b | 4.27 b | 0.0787 b | ||
N2 | 2.33 b | 3.77 a | 6.70 a | 4.41 a | 4.93 a | 0.0839 a | ||
N3 | 2.52a | 3.83 a | 6.74 a | 4.38 a | 4.61 a | 0.0830 a | ||
平均 Average | 2.06 | 3.29 | 5.94 | 3.94 | 4.27 | 0.0756 | ||
W2 | N0 | 1.44 d | 2.12 c | 3.95 c | 2.88 c | 3.32 c | 0.0525 c | |
N1 | 2.15 c | 3.41 b | 6.25 b | 4.18 b | 4.73 b | 0.0813 b | ||
N2 | 2.52 b | 3.72 a | 6.75 a | 4.72 a | 5.27 a | 0.0867 a | ||
N3 | 2.74 a | 3.65 a | 6.55 ab | 4.68 a | 5.25 a | 0.0827 b | ||
平均 Average | 2.21 | 3.23 | 5.88 | 4.12 | 4.65 | 0.0758 |
表9 秸秆直接还田下水氮管理对杂交稻LAI的影响
Table 9 Effects of water and N management on LAI in hybrid rice under straw returning.
处理 Treatment | 分蘖盛期 Tillering | 拔节期 Jointing | 齐穂期 Full heading | 高效叶面积指数H-LAI | 叶面积衰减率 R-LAI/(LAI·d-1) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 2018 | |||||||
A1 | W1 | N0 | 1.74 d | 2.49 c | 4.53 c | 3.11 c | 3.58 c | 0.0585 d |
N1 | 2.31 c | 3.06 b | 5.97 b | 4.25 b | 4.78 b | 0.0832 b | ||
N2 | 2.67 b | 3.99 a | 6.98 a | 4.61 a | 5.18 a | 0.0855 a | ||
N3 | 2.92 a | 4.01 a | 6.86 a | 4.50 a | 5.09 a | 0.0814 c | ||
平均 Average | 2.41 | 3.39 | 6.09 | 4.12 | 4.66 | 0.0772 | ||
W2 | N0 | 1.44 d | 2.40 c | 4.45 c | 3.26 c | 3.70 c | 0.0586 c | |
N1 | 2.13 c | 3.24 b | 6.15 b | 4.49 b | 5.00 b | 0.0830 b | ||
N2 | 2.52 b | 4.04 a | 7.16 a | 4.80 a | 5.35 a | 0.0891 a | ||
N3 | 2.77 a | 4.02 a | 6.97 a | 4.74 a | 5.32 a | 0.0845 b | ||
平均 Average | 2.22 | 3.43 | 6.18 | 4.32 | 4.84 | 0.0788 | ||
A2 | W1 | N0 | 1.30 d | 2.10 c | 4.08 c | 2.85 c | 3.28 c | 0.0567 c |
N1 | 2.09 c | 3.46 b | 6.22 b | 4.10 b | 4.27 b | 0.0787 b | ||
N2 | 2.33 b | 3.77 a | 6.70 a | 4.41 a | 4.93 a | 0.0839 a | ||
N3 | 2.52a | 3.83 a | 6.74 a | 4.38 a | 4.61 a | 0.0830 a | ||
平均 Average | 2.06 | 3.29 | 5.94 | 3.94 | 4.27 | 0.0756 | ||
W2 | N0 | 1.44 d | 2.12 c | 3.95 c | 2.88 c | 3.32 c | 0.0525 c | |
N1 | 2.15 c | 3.41 b | 6.25 b | 4.18 b | 4.73 b | 0.0813 b | ||
N2 | 2.52 b | 3.72 a | 6.75 a | 4.72 a | 5.27 a | 0.0867 a | ||
N3 | 2.74 a | 3.65 a | 6.55 ab | 4.68 a | 5.25 a | 0.0827 b | ||
平均 Average | 2.21 | 3.23 | 5.88 | 4.12 | 4.65 | 0.0758 |
指标 Index | 生育期 Growth stage | 单茎干物质 Single stem dry weight | 总干物质量 Dry matter amount | 有效穗 Effective panicles | 每穗粒数 Spikelet no. per panicle | 产量 Grain yield |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LAI | JS | 0.89** | 0.82** | 0.72* | 0.90** | 0.75* |
FHS | 0.95** | 0.88** | 0.75* | 0.89** | 0.80** | |
MS | 0.94** | 0.89** | 0.77* | 0.85** | 0.80** | |
H-LAI | FHS | 0.94** | 0.86** | 0.75* | 0.74* | 0.78* |
PGR | FHS | 0.93** | 0.93** | 0.90** | 0.65* | 0.95** |
JS-FHS | 0.92** | 0.91** | 0.83** | 0.59* | 0.81** | |
FHS-MS | 0.82** | 0.93** | 0.94** | 0.49* | 0.92** |
表10 水稻LAI、群体生长率与干物质累积及产量的相关性
Table 10 orrelation coefficients of LAI and population rate with dry matter amount and grain yield.
指标 Index | 生育期 Growth stage | 单茎干物质 Single stem dry weight | 总干物质量 Dry matter amount | 有效穗 Effective panicles | 每穗粒数 Spikelet no. per panicle | 产量 Grain yield |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LAI | JS | 0.89** | 0.82** | 0.72* | 0.90** | 0.75* |
FHS | 0.95** | 0.88** | 0.75* | 0.89** | 0.80** | |
MS | 0.94** | 0.89** | 0.77* | 0.85** | 0.80** | |
H-LAI | FHS | 0.94** | 0.86** | 0.75* | 0.74* | 0.78* |
PGR | FHS | 0.93** | 0.93** | 0.90** | 0.65* | 0.95** |
JS-FHS | 0.92** | 0.91** | 0.83** | 0.59* | 0.81** | |
FHS-MS | 0.82** | 0.93** | 0.94** | 0.49* | 0.92** |
[1] | 廖伯寿, 殷艳, 马霓. 中国油料作物产业发展回顾与展望. 农学学报, 2018, 8(1): 107-112. |
Liao B S, Yin Y, Ma N.Review and future prospects of oil crops industry development in China.J Agric, 2018, 8(1): 107-112. | |
[2] | Kousterna E.The effect of covering and mulching on the temperature and moisture of soil and broccoli yield.Acta Agrophys, 2014, 21(2): 165-178. |
[3] | Su W, Lu J W, Wang W N, Li X K, Ren T, Cong R H.Influence of rice straw mulching on seed yield and nitrogen use efficiency of winter oilseed rape in intensive rice oilseed rape cropping system.Field Crop Res, 2014, 159: 53-61. |
[4] | Jawson M D, Elliott L F.Carbon and nitrogen transformations during wheat straw and root decomposition.Soil Bio Chem, 1986, 18: 15-22. |
[5] | 马宗国, 卢绪奎, 万丽, 陈祖光, 左辉. 小麦秸秆还田对水稻生长及土壤肥力的影响. 作物杂志, 2003(5): 37-38. |
Ma Z G, Lu X K, Wan L, Chen Z G, Zuo H.Effects of wheat straw returning on rice growth and soil fertility.Crops, 2003(5): 37-38. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[6] | 孙永健, 马均, 孙园园, 徐徽, 严奉君, 代邹, 蒋明金, 李玥. 水氮管理模式对杂交籼稻冈优527群体质量和产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(10): 2047-2061. |
Sun Y J, Ma J, Sun Y Y, Xu H, Yan F J, Dai Z, Jiang M J, Li Y.Effects of water and nitrogen management patterns on population quality and yield of hybrid rice Gangyou 527.Sci Agric Sin, 2014, 47(10): 2047-2061. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[7] | 严奉君, 孙永健, 马均, 徐徽, 李玥, 代邹, 杨志远, 蒋明金, 孙园园. 灌溉方式与秸秆覆盖优化施氮模式对秸秆腐熟特征及水稻氮素利用的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(11): 1435-1444. |
Yan F J, Sun Y J, Ma J, Xu H, Li Y, Dai Z, Yang Z Y, Jiang M J, Sun Y Y.Effects of irrigation method and straw mulch-nitrogen management pattern on straw decomposition characteristics and nitrogen utilization of hybrid rice. Chin J Eco-Agric, 2016, 24(11): 1435-1444. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[8] | 赵建红, 李玥, 孙永健, 李应洪, 孙加威, 代邹, 谢华英, 徐徽, 马均. 灌溉方式和氮肥运筹对免耕厢沟栽培杂交稻氮素利用及产量的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2016, 22(3): 609-617. |
[9] | Zhao J H, Li Y, Sun Y J, Li Y H, Sun J W, Dai Z, Xie H Y, Xu H, Ma J.Effects of irrigation and nitrogen management on nitrogen use efficiency and yield of hybrid rice cultivated in ditches under no-tillage.Plant Nutr Fert Sci, 2016, 22(3): 609-617. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[10] | Wang Z Q, Zhang W Y, Beebout S S, Hao Z, Liu L.Grain yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies of rice as influenced by irrigation regimes and their interaction with nitrogen rates.Field Crops Res, 2016: 193, 54-69. |
[11] | 常勇, 黄忠勤, 周兴根, 孙克新, 周涧楠, 丁震乾, 王波, 李小珊. 不同麦秸还田量对水稻生长发育、产量及品质的影响田. 江苏农业科学, 2018, 46(20): 47-51. |
Chang Y, Huang Z Q, Zhou X G, Sun K X, Zhou J N, Ding Z Q, Wang B, Li X S.Different amount of wheat straw counters-field impact on rice growth, yield and quality.Jiangsu Agric Sci, 2018, 46(20): 47-51. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[12] | 刘玲玲, 刘婷, 狄霖, 吴文祥, 盛海君, 余彬彬, 杨艳菊, 钱晓晴, 王娟娟. 秸秆全量还田对水稻生长及土壤理化性质的影响. 扬州大学学报, 2018, 39(3): 81-85. |
Liu L L, Liu T, Di L, Wu W X, Sheng H J, Yu B B, Yang Y J, Qian X Q, Wang J J.Influences of total straw returning on rice growth and soil physiochemical properties.J Yangzhou Univ, 2018, 39(3): 81-85. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[13] | Zeng X M, Han B J, Xu F S, Huang J L, Cai H M, Shi L.Effects of modified fertilization technology of on the grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency of midseason rice.Field Crop Res, 2012, 137: 203-212. |
[14] | 李旭毅, 孙永健, 程洪彪, 郑宏祯, 刘树金, 胡蓉, 马均. 两种生态条件下氮素调控对不同栽培方式水稻干物质积累和产量的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2011, 17(4): 773-781. |
Li X Y, Sun Y J, Cheng H B, Zhen H Z, Liu S J, Hu R, Ma Jet al. Effects of nitrogen application strategy and cultivation model on the performances of canopy apparent photosynthesis of Indica hybrid rice Eryou 498 during filling stage.Plant Nutr Fert Sci, 2011, 17(4): 773-781. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[15] | 张军, 张洪程, 段祥茂. 地力与施氮量对超级稻产量、品质及氮素利用率的影响. 作物学报, 2011, 37(11): 2020-2029. |
Zhang T, Zhang H C, Duan X M.Effects of soil fertility and nitrogen application rates on super rice yield quality, and nitrogen use efficiency.Acta Agron Sin, 2011, 37(11): 2020-2029. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[16] | 魏海燕, 工亚江, 孟天瑶, 徐宗进, 杨波, 郭保卫,杜斌,戴其根, 许轲, 霍中洋, 魏海燕,. 机插超级粳稻产量、品质及氮肥利用率对氮肥的响应. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25(2): 488-496. |
Wei H Y, Wang Y J, Meng T Y, Xu Z J, Yang B, Guo B W, Du B, Dai Q G, Xu K, Huo Z Y, Wei H Y,.Response of yield, quality and nitrogen use efficiency to nitrogen fertilizer from mechanical transplanting super japonica rice.Chin J Appl Ecol, 2014, 25(2): 488-496. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[17] | 于林惠, 李刚华, 徐晶晶, 凌启鸿, 丁艳锋. 基于高产示范方的机插水稻群体特征研究. 中国水稻科学, 2011, 26(4): 451-456. |
Yu L H, Li G H, Xu J J, Ling Q H, Ding Y F.Population characteristics of machine-transplanted japonica rice based on high-yield demonstration fields. Chin J Rice Sci, 2011, 26(4): 451-456. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[18] | Zhang H, Chen T T, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Yang J C, Zhang J.Performance in grain yield and physiological traits of rice in the Yangtze River basin of China during the last 60 yr. J Integr Agric, 2013, 12(1):57-66. |
[19] | 严奉君, 孙永健, 马均, 徐徽, 李玥, 杨志远, 蒋明金, 吕腾飞等. 秸秆覆盖与氮肥运筹对杂交稻根系生长及氮素利用的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(1): 23-55. |
Yan F J, Sun Y J, Ma J, Xu H, Li Y, Yang Z Y, Jiang M J, LÜ T F.Effects of straw mulch and nitrogen management on root growth and nitrogen utilization characteristics of hybrid rice.Plant Nutr Fert Sci, 2015, 21(1): 23-55. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[20] | 陈培峰, 董明辉, 顾俊荣, 惠锋, 乔中英, 杨代凤, 刘腾飞. 麦秸还田与氮肥运筹对超级稻强弱势粒粒重与品质的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2012, 26(6): 715-722. |
Chen P F, Dong M H, Gu J R, Hui F, Qiao Z Y, Yang D F, Liu T F.Effects of returning wheat residue to field and nitrogen management on grain weight and quality of superior and inferior grain in super rice.Chin J Rice Sci, 2012, 26(6): 715-722. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[21] | 朱萍, 顾艾节, 王华, 顾建芹. 稻麦秸秆连续还田配施腐熟剂对土壤性状和水稻产量的影响. 上海农业学报, 2018, 34(2): 60-64. |
Zhu P, Gu A J, Wang H, Gu J Q, Gu J Q,.Effects of continuous rice and wheat straw returning to field with decomposing agent on soil properties and rice yield.Acta Agric Shanghai, 2018, 34(2):60-64. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[22] | 怀燕, 潘建清, 陈一定, 陆若辉, 朱伟锋. 腐熟剂作用下油菜秸秆还田对土壤性状与单季稻产量的影响. 浙江农业科学, 2014(5): 636-638. |
Huan Y, Pan J Q, Chen Y D, Lu R H, Zhu W F.Rotten agent under the action of rape straw returned to soil properties and the effect of single harvesting yield.Zhejiang Agric Sci, 2014(5): 636-638. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[23] | Cabangon R J, Tuong T P, Castillo E G, Bao L X, Lu G A, Wang G H, Cui Y L, Bouman B A M, Li Y H, Chen C D, Wang J Z. Effect of irrigation method and N-fertilizer management on rice yield, water productivity and nutrient-use efficiencies in typical lowland rice conditions in China.Paddy Water Environ, 2004, 2: 195-206. |
[24] | 杨建昌, 王志琴, 朱庆森. 不同土壤水分状况下氮素营养对水稻产量的影响及其生理机制的研究. 中国农业科学, 1996, 29(4): 58-66. |
Yang J C, Wang Z Q, Zhu Q S.Effect of nitrogen nutrition on rice yield and its physiological mechanism under different status of soil moisture.Sci Agric Sin, 1996, 29(4): 58-66. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[25] | Sun Y J, Ma J, Sun Y Y, Xu H, Yang Z Y, Liu S J, Jia X W, Zheng H Z.The effects of different water and nitrogen managements on yield and nitrogen use efficiency in hybrid rice of China.Field Crops Res, 2012, 127(27): 85-98. |
[26] | 吴登, 黄世礽, 李明灌, 谢毅栋, 梁玉祥, 陈智慧. 稻草还田免耕抛秧的增产效果及节水效应. 杂交水稻, 2006(S1): 109-112. |
Wu D, Huang S R, Li M G, Xie Y D, Liang Y X, Chen Z H.Straw counters-field increase yield and some water-saving effect.Hybrid Rice, 2006(S1): 109-112. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[27] | 任万军, 刘代银, 伍菊仙, 杨文钰, 樊高琼. 免耕高留茬抛秧稻的产量及若干生理特性研究. 作物学报, 2008, 34(11): 1994-2002. |
Ren W J, Liu D Y, Wu J X, Yang W Y, Fan G Q.Effect of broadcasting rice seedlings in the field with high stand- ing-stubbles under no-tillage condition on yield and some physiological characteristics.Acta Agron Sin, 2008, 34(11): 1994-2002. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[28] | 叶文培, 谢小立, 王凯荣, 李志国. 不同时期秸秆还田对水稻生长发育及产量的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2008, 22(1): 65-70. |
Ye W P, Xie X L, Wang K R, Li Z G.Effects of rice straw maturing in different periods on growth and yield of rice.Chin J Rice Sci, 2008, 22(1): 65-70. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[29] | Jawson M D, Elliott L F.Carbon and nitrogen transformations during wheat straw and root decomposition.Soil Biol Chem, 1986, 18: 15-22. |
[30] | 张杰, 刘正柱, 将井军, 陈凤英. 小麦留高茬还田的效果. 土壤通报, 2001(4): 34-36. |
Zhang J, Liu Z Z, Jiang J J, Chen F Y.The Effect and methods of returning the high stubble of wheat stubble into field.Chin J Soil Sci, 2001(4): 34-36. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[31] | 钱洪兵, 韩春贵, 钱存进, 严桂珠. 稻麦秸秆直接还田技术研究. 土壤通报, 1998(2): 26-29. |
Qian H B, Han C G, Qian C J, Yan G Z.Rice and wheat straw counters-field technology research.Chin J Soil Sci, 1998(2): 26-29. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[32] | 张自常, 李鸿伟, 曹转勤, 王志琴, 杨建昌. 施氮量和灌溉方式的交互作用对水稻产量和品质影响. 作物学报, 2013, 39(1): 84-92. |
Zhang Z C, Li H W, Cao Z Q, Wang Z Q, Yang J C.Effect of interaction between nitrogen rate and irrigation regime on grain yield and quality of rice.Acta Agron Sin, 2013, 39(1): 84-92. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[33] | 孙永健, 孙园园, 刘树金, 杨志远, 程洪彪, 贾现文, 马均. 水分管理和氮肥运筹对水稻养分吸收、转运及分配的影响. 作物学报, 2011, 37(12): 2221-2232. |
Sun Y J, Sun Y Y, Liu S J, Yang Z Y, Cheng H B, Jia X W, Ma J.Effects of water management and nitrogen application strategies on nutrient absorption, transfer, and distribution in rice.Acta Agron Sin, 2011, 37(12): 2221-2232. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[34] | Ishii R.Leaf photosynthesis in rice in relation to grain yields//Abrol Y P, Govindjee M P. Photosynthesis -Photoreactions to Plant Productivity . Kluwer, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993: 561-569. |
[1] | 黄亚茹, 徐鹏, 王乐乐, 贺一哲, 王辉, 柯健, 何海兵, 武立权, 尤翠翠. 外源海藻糖对粳稻品系W1844籽粒灌浆特性及产量形成的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 379-391. |
[2] | 高欠清, 任孝俭, 翟中兵, 郑普兵, 吴源芬, 崔克辉. 头季穗肥和促芽肥对再生稻再生芽生长及产量形成的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 405-414. |
[3] | 王文婷, 马佳颖, 李光彦, 符卫蒙, 李沪波, 林洁, 陈婷婷, 奉保华, 陶龙兴, 符冠富, 秦叶波. 高温下不同施肥量对水稻产量品质形成的影响及其与能量代谢的关系分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 253-264. |
[4] | 杨晓龙, 王彪, 汪本福, 张枝盛, 张作林, 杨蓝天, 程建平, 李阳. 不同水分管理方式对旱直播水稻产量和稻米品质的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 285-294. |
[5] | 魏晓东, 宋雪梅, 赵凌, 赵庆勇, 陈涛, 路凯, 朱镇, 黄胜东, 王才林, 张亚东. 硅锌肥及其施用方式对南粳46产量和稻米品质的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 295-306. |
[6] | 林聃, 江敏, 苗波, 郭萌, 石春林. 水稻高温热害模型研究及其在福建省的应用[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 307-320. |
[7] | 裴峰, 王广达, 高鹏, 冯志明, 胡珂鸣, 陈宗祥, 陈红旗, 崔傲, 左示敏. 敲除OsNramp5基因创制低镉优质粳稻新材料的应用评价[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(1): 16-28. |
[8] | 张露, 梁青铎, 吴龙龙, 黄晶, 田仓, 张均华, 曹小闯, 朱春权, 孔亚丽, 金千瑜, 朱练峰. 减氮和增氧灌溉对水稻产量和氮素利用的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(1): 78-88. |
[9] | 王颖姮, 陈丽娟, 崔丽丽, 詹生威, 宋煜, 陈世安, 解振兴, 姜照伟, 吴方喜, 卓传营, 蔡秋华, 谢华安, 张建福. 施氮量对优质稻“福香占”光合特性、产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(1): 89-101. |
[10] | 任维晨, 常庆霞, 张亚军, 朱宽宇, 王志琴, 杨建昌. 不同氮利用率粳稻品种的碳氮积累与转运特征及其生理机制[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2022, 36(6): 586-600. |
[11] | 王敏羽, 戴志刚, 余德芳, 王向平, 关绍华, 邵远刚, 张家学, 李小坤. “水稻-再生稻”种植模式专用肥轻简施用对产量、肥料利用率及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2022, 36(5): 531-542. |
[12] | 曾文静, 邱岚英, 陈俊杰, 钱浩宇, 张楠, 丁艳锋, 江瑜. 秸秆还田下大气CO2浓度升高对水稻生长和CH4排放的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2022, 36(5): 543-550. |
[13] | 张宇杰, 王志强, 马鹏, 杨志远, 孙永健, 马均. 麦秆还田下水氮耦合对水稻氮素吸收利用及产量的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2022, 36(4): 388-398. |
[14] | 陈云, 刘昆, 李婷婷, 李思宇, 李国明, 张伟杨, 张耗, 顾骏飞, 刘立军, 杨建昌. 结实期干湿交替灌溉对水稻根系、产量和土壤的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2022, 36(3): 269-277. |
[15] | 张小祥, 邵士梅, 赵步洪, 张耗, 季红娟, 肖宁, 潘存红, 李育红, 吴云雨, 蔡跃, 刘建菊, 吉春明, 张秀琴, 刘广青, 周长海, 黄年生, 李爱宏. 氮肥减施模式对不同穗型迟熟中粳水稻产量及氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2022, 36(3): 278-294. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||