
中国水稻科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (4): 469-475.DOI: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2026.250607
廖萍*(
), 刘若彤, 孟轶, 翁文安, 都晗萌, 李骏, 高辉, 张洪程
收稿日期:2025-06-16
修回日期:2025-07-10
出版日期:2026-07-10
发布日期:2026-07-15
通讯作者:
*email:p.liao@yzu.edu.cn基金资助:
LIAO Ping*(
), LIU Ruotong, MENG Yi, WENG Wenan, DU Hanmeng, LI Jun, GAO Hui, ZHANG Hongcheng
Received:2025-06-16
Revised:2025-07-10
Online:2026-07-10
Published:2026-07-15
摘要:
【目的】倒伏是水稻丰产的关键限制因素,优化施肥策略以提升茎秆强度是降低水稻倒伏的重要途径之一。本研究旨在阐明不同类型肥料对水稻产量和倒伏性状的影响。【方法】利用2个常规粳稻品种(淮稻5号和南粳9108)和2种肥料类型(常规肥料和控释掺混肥),在江苏稻麦轮作区开展大田试验。【结果】与常规肥料相比,控释掺混肥显著提高了水稻产量(+3.7%),其中,淮稻5号和南粳9108的产量分别增加了3.3%和4.1%;水稻增产主要得益于有效穗数和总颖花量的提升。在倒伏性状方面,控释掺混肥显著降低了茎秆基部第1(−5.3%)和第2(−4.2%)节间的倒伏指数,对第3节间影响不显著。水稻倒伏指数下降的原因是控释掺混肥对茎秆抗折力的促进效应大于其对弯曲力矩的促进效应。控释掺混肥显著降低了茎秆基部第1和第2节间长度,而增加了节间粗度和茎壁厚度,进而提高了茎秆强度。【结论】一次性基施控释掺混肥可协同提升水稻产量与抗倒伏能力,为稻麦轮作区水稻高质量发展提供科学依据。
廖萍, 刘若彤, 孟轶, 翁文安, 都晗萌, 李骏, 高辉, 张洪程. 一次性基施控释掺混肥对水稻产量和倒伏性状的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 469-475.
LIAO Ping, LIU Ruotong, MENG Yi, WENG Wenan, DU Hanmeng, LI Jun, GAO Hui, ZHANG Hongcheng. Effects of One-time Basal Application of Controlled-release Blended Fertilizer on Rice Yield and Lodging-related Traits[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2026, 40(4): 469-475.
| 年份 Year (Y) | 品种 Variety (V) | 肥料类型 Fertilizer type (Ft) | 有效穗数 Effective panicles per 1 m2 | 每穗粒数 Spikelets per panicle | 总颖花量 Total spikelets per 1 m2 | 结实率 Seed setting rate (%) | 千粒重 1000-grain weight (g) | 产量 Grain yield (t/hm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 318 | 113 | 36008 | 95.9 | 27.7 | 9.12 |
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 345 | 111 | 38220 | 95.2 | 27.1 | 9.49 | |
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 297 | 146 | 43379 | 93.6 | 24.1 | 9.35 | |
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 319 | 143 | 45646 | 94.0 | 23.2 | 9.86 | |
| 2023 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 291 | 135 | 39218 | 91.7 | 26.0 | 9.02 |
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 320 | 127 | 40580 | 91.5 | 25.2 | 9.26 | |
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 278 | 159 | 44164 | 90.1 | 24.2 | 9.16 | |
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 313 | 146 | 45791 | 90.6 | 23.4 | 9.41 | |
| F值 F-value | ||||||||
| 肥料类型Ft | 144.7*** | 58.2*** | 60.2*** | ns | 52.3*** | 68.0*** | ||
| 品种V | 51.3*** | 1045.3*** | 672.6*** | 47.6*** | 635.9*** | 29.9*** | ||
| 年份Y | 68.3*** | 256.1*** | 45.6*** | 302.2*** | 55.8*** | 34.6*** | ||
| 品种×年份V × Y | 8.0* | 40.4*** | 23.3*** | ns | 74.1*** | ns | ||
| 肥料类型×年份Ft × Y | ns | 21.7*** | ns | ns | ns | 5.5* | ||
表1 一次性基施控释掺混肥对水稻产量及其构成的影响
Table 1. Effects of one-time basal application of controlled-release blended fertilizer on rice yield and its components
| 年份 Year (Y) | 品种 Variety (V) | 肥料类型 Fertilizer type (Ft) | 有效穗数 Effective panicles per 1 m2 | 每穗粒数 Spikelets per panicle | 总颖花量 Total spikelets per 1 m2 | 结实率 Seed setting rate (%) | 千粒重 1000-grain weight (g) | 产量 Grain yield (t/hm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 318 | 113 | 36008 | 95.9 | 27.7 | 9.12 |
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 345 | 111 | 38220 | 95.2 | 27.1 | 9.49 | |
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 297 | 146 | 43379 | 93.6 | 24.1 | 9.35 | |
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 319 | 143 | 45646 | 94.0 | 23.2 | 9.86 | |
| 2023 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 291 | 135 | 39218 | 91.7 | 26.0 | 9.02 |
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 320 | 127 | 40580 | 91.5 | 25.2 | 9.26 | |
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 278 | 159 | 44164 | 90.1 | 24.2 | 9.16 | |
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 313 | 146 | 45791 | 90.6 | 23.4 | 9.41 | |
| F值 F-value | ||||||||
| 肥料类型Ft | 144.7*** | 58.2*** | 60.2*** | ns | 52.3*** | 68.0*** | ||
| 品种V | 51.3*** | 1045.3*** | 672.6*** | 47.6*** | 635.9*** | 29.9*** | ||
| 年份Y | 68.3*** | 256.1*** | 45.6*** | 302.2*** | 55.8*** | 34.6*** | ||
| 品种×年份V × Y | 8.0* | 40.4*** | 23.3*** | ns | 74.1*** | ns | ||
| 肥料类型×年份Ft × Y | ns | 21.7*** | ns | ns | ns | 5.5* | ||
| 年份 Year (Y) | 品种 Variety (V) | 肥料类型 Fertilizer type (Ft) | 抗折力 Breaking resistance (N) | 弯曲力矩 Bending moment (cm·g) | 倒伏指数 Lodging index (cm g·N-1) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | ||||||
| 2022 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 26.0 | 21.2 | 18.9 | 667 | 583 | 489 | 25.7 | 27.5 | 25.9 | |||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 30.0 | 24.3 | 19.8 | 728 | 635 | 516 | 24.3 | 26.1 | 26.1 | ||||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 26.4 | 22.5 | 18.9 | 808 | 695 | 559 | 30.6 | 31.0 | 29.5 | ||||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 30.7 | 25.6 | 19.9 | 864 | 747 | 589 | 28.2 | 29.1 | 29.7 | ||||
| 2023 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 25.3 | 16.5 | 12.7 | 650 | 612 | 495 | 25.7 | 37.1 | 38.9 | |||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 28.1 | 18.8 | 13.1 | 701 | 665 | 521 | 24.9 | 35.3 | 39.9 | ||||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 29.5 | 19.3 | 13.8 | 784 | 640 | 568 | 26.6 | 33.2 | 41.3 | ||||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 33.0 | 21.7 | 14.8 | 839 | 710 | 623 | 25.4 | 32.7 | 42.4 | ||||
| F 值F-values | ||||||||||||||
| 肥料类型Ft | 132.8*** | 53.2*** | 4.8* | 102.5*** | 85.4*** | 47.4*** | 35.8*** | 8.3* | ns | |||||
| 品种V | 63.9*** | 29.4*** | ns | 622.5*** | 145.2*** | 248.7*** | 113.6*** | ns | 10.3** | |||||
| 年份Y | 5.4* | 131.8*** | 248.2*** | 17.7*** | ns | 7.0* | 41.2*** | 171.6*** | 186.9*** | |||||
| 品种×年份V × Y | 39.2*** | ns | ns | ns | 37.1*** | ns | 59.1*** | 46.7*** | ns | |||||
表2 一次性基施控释掺混肥对水稻茎秆抗折力、弯曲力矩和倒伏指数的影响
Table 2. Effects of one-time basal application of controlled-release blended fertilizer on breaking resistance, bending moment, and lodging index
| 年份 Year (Y) | 品种 Variety (V) | 肥料类型 Fertilizer type (Ft) | 抗折力 Breaking resistance (N) | 弯曲力矩 Bending moment (cm·g) | 倒伏指数 Lodging index (cm g·N-1) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | ||||||
| 2022 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 26.0 | 21.2 | 18.9 | 667 | 583 | 489 | 25.7 | 27.5 | 25.9 | |||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 30.0 | 24.3 | 19.8 | 728 | 635 | 516 | 24.3 | 26.1 | 26.1 | ||||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 26.4 | 22.5 | 18.9 | 808 | 695 | 559 | 30.6 | 31.0 | 29.5 | ||||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 30.7 | 25.6 | 19.9 | 864 | 747 | 589 | 28.2 | 29.1 | 29.7 | ||||
| 2023 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 25.3 | 16.5 | 12.7 | 650 | 612 | 495 | 25.7 | 37.1 | 38.9 | |||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 28.1 | 18.8 | 13.1 | 701 | 665 | 521 | 24.9 | 35.3 | 39.9 | ||||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 29.5 | 19.3 | 13.8 | 784 | 640 | 568 | 26.6 | 33.2 | 41.3 | ||||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 33.0 | 21.7 | 14.8 | 839 | 710 | 623 | 25.4 | 32.7 | 42.4 | ||||
| F 值F-values | ||||||||||||||
| 肥料类型Ft | 132.8*** | 53.2*** | 4.8* | 102.5*** | 85.4*** | 47.4*** | 35.8*** | 8.3* | ns | |||||
| 品种V | 63.9*** | 29.4*** | ns | 622.5*** | 145.2*** | 248.7*** | 113.6*** | ns | 10.3** | |||||
| 年份Y | 5.4* | 131.8*** | 248.2*** | 17.7*** | ns | 7.0* | 41.2*** | 171.6*** | 186.9*** | |||||
| 品种×年份V × Y | 39.2*** | ns | ns | ns | 37.1*** | ns | 59.1*** | 46.7*** | ns | |||||
| 年份 Year (Y) | 品种 Variety (V) | 肥料类型 Fertilizer type (Ft) | 节间长度 Internode length (cm) | 节间粗度 Internode coarseness (mm) | 茎壁厚度 Stem wall thickness (mm) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | |||||
| 2022 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 4.95 | 7.90 | 11.5 | 4.56 | 4.16 | 3.76 | 0.84 | 0.72 | 0.62 | ||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 4.71 | 7.41 | 11.2 | 4.74 | 4.40 | 3.91 | 0.92 | 0.76 | 0.62 | |||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 5.67 | 9.15 | 14.2 | 4.79 | 4.34 | 3.91 | 0.82 | 0.71 | 0.62 | |||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 5.12 | 8.58 | 14.1 | 4.99 | 4.43 | 3.96 | 0.92 | 0.75 | 0.61 | |||
| 2023 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 5.23 | 9.95 | 13.7 | 4.59 | 4.23 | 3.88 | 0.97 | 0.73 | 0.65 | ||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 4.93 | 9.06 | 12.9 | 4.91 | 4.42 | 3.97 | 1.00 | 0.77 | 0.68 | |||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 5.72 | 10.33 | 14.5 | 5.02 | 4.31 | 4.04 | 0.90 | 0.70 | 0.60 | |||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 5.36 | 9.57 | 14.6 | 5.21 | 4.47 | 4.08 | 0.97 | 0.74 | 0.67 | |||
| F 值F-values | |||||||||||||
| 肥料类型Ft | 51.3*** | 44.6*** | ns | 100.5*** | 31.2*** | ns | 17.6*** | 27.3*** | ns | ||||
| 品种V | 100.0*** | 66.9*** | 67.1*** | 189.1*** | 7.6* | 8.0* | ns | 9.4** | ns | ||||
| 年份Y | 14.7*** | 209.7** | 21.9*** | 51.3*** | ns | 5.9* | 22.6*** | ns | 7.4* | ||||
| 品种×年份V × Y | ns | 14.2** | 9.6** | 8.3* | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ||||
表3 一次性基施控释掺混肥对水稻基部节间长度、节间粗度和茎壁厚度的影响
Table 3. Effects of one-time basal application of controlled-release blended fertilizer on internode length and coarseness and stem wall thickness
| 年份 Year (Y) | 品种 Variety (V) | 肥料类型 Fertilizer type (Ft) | 节间长度 Internode length (cm) | 节间粗度 Internode coarseness (mm) | 茎壁厚度 Stem wall thickness (mm) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | I1 | I2 | I3 | |||||
| 2022 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 4.95 | 7.90 | 11.5 | 4.56 | 4.16 | 3.76 | 0.84 | 0.72 | 0.62 | ||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 4.71 | 7.41 | 11.2 | 4.74 | 4.40 | 3.91 | 0.92 | 0.76 | 0.62 | |||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 5.67 | 9.15 | 14.2 | 4.79 | 4.34 | 3.91 | 0.82 | 0.71 | 0.62 | |||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 5.12 | 8.58 | 14.1 | 4.99 | 4.43 | 3.96 | 0.92 | 0.75 | 0.61 | |||
| 2023 | 淮稻5号 | 常规肥料CF | 5.23 | 9.95 | 13.7 | 4.59 | 4.23 | 3.88 | 0.97 | 0.73 | 0.65 | ||
| Huaidao 5 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 4.93 | 9.06 | 12.9 | 4.91 | 4.42 | 3.97 | 1.00 | 0.77 | 0.68 | |||
| 南粳9108 | 常规肥料CF | 5.72 | 10.33 | 14.5 | 5.02 | 4.31 | 4.04 | 0.90 | 0.70 | 0.60 | |||
| Nanjing 9108 | 控释掺混肥CRBF | 5.36 | 9.57 | 14.6 | 5.21 | 4.47 | 4.08 | 0.97 | 0.74 | 0.67 | |||
| F 值F-values | |||||||||||||
| 肥料类型Ft | 51.3*** | 44.6*** | ns | 100.5*** | 31.2*** | ns | 17.6*** | 27.3*** | ns | ||||
| 品种V | 100.0*** | 66.9*** | 67.1*** | 189.1*** | 7.6* | 8.0* | ns | 9.4** | ns | ||||
| 年份Y | 14.7*** | 209.7** | 21.9*** | 51.3*** | ns | 5.9* | 22.6*** | ns | 7.4* | ||||
| 品种×年份V × Y | ns | 14.2** | 9.6** | 8.3* | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ||||
图1 一次性基施控释掺混肥对水稻株高(A)和重心高度(B)的影响 肥料类型(Ft)、品种(V)和年份(Y)间的两因素及三因素互作对水稻株高的影响均不显著。肥料类型与品种两因素互作(Ft ×V),肥料类型与年份两因素互作(Ft × Y)以及肥料类型、品种与年份三因素互作(Ft ×V × Y)对水稻重心高度的影响均不显著。**和***分别表示在0.001<P≤ 0.01和P≤0.001水平上主效应及互作效应差异显著。CF+HD5表示种植淮稻5号施用常规肥料,CF+NJ9108表示种植南粳9108施用常规肥料,CRBF+HD5表示种植淮稻5号一次性基施控释掺混肥,CRBF+NJ9108表示种植南粳9108一次性基施控释掺混肥。
Fig. 1. Effects of one-time basal application of controlled-release blended fertilizer on plant height (A) and gravity center height (B) There were no significant two- or three-way interactions for plant height. No significant Ft ×V, Ft × Y, or Ft ×V × Y interactive effects on gravity center height were observed. The symbols ** and *** denote significant main effects and interactive effects at the 0.001<P≤0.01 and P≤0.001, respectively. CF+HD5 indicates Huaidao 5 combined with conventional fertilization, CF+NJ9108 indicates Nanjing 9108 combined with conventional fertilization, CRBF+HD5 indicates Huaidao 5 combined with one-time basal application of controlled-release blended fertilizer, CRBF+NJ9108 indicates Nanjing 9108 combined with one-time basal application of controlled-release blended fertilizer.
图2 水稻茎秆倒伏指标相关性分析 *,**和***分别表示在P<0.05,P<0.01和P<0.001水平上显著性相关。
Fig. 2. Correlation analysis of the relationship between lodging index and influencing factors The symbols *, **, and *** represent significant correlation at the P<0.05, P<0.01, and P<0.001, respectively.
| [1] | Liao P, Bell S M, Chen L, Huang S, Wang H Y, Miao J H, Qi Y M, Sun Y N, Liao B, Zeng Y J, Wei H Y, Gao H, Dai Q G, Zhang H C. Improving rice grain yield and reducing lodging risk simultaneously: A meta-analysis[J]. European Journal of Agronomy, 2023, 143: 126709. |
| [2] | 廖萍, 翁文安, 高辉, 张洪程. 我国直播稻栽培技术应用现状与发展建议[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(24): 4854-4870. |
| Liao P, Weng W A, Gao H, Zhang H C. Application status and development suggestion of direct-seeding rice cultivation in China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2024, 57(24): 4854-4870. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [3] | FAOSTAT. World Food and Agriculture-Statistical Yearbook. Rome, 2022. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home |
| [4] | Luo Z B, Liang X, Lam S K, Mosier A R, Hu S Y, Chen D L. Hotspots of reactive nitrogen loss in China: Production, consumption, spatiotemporal trend and reduction responsibility[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2021, 284: 117126. |
| [5] | 周晓阳, 周世伟, 徐明岗, Colinet G. 中国南方水稻土酸化演变特征及影响因素[J]. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(23): 4811-4817. |
| Zhou X Y, Zhou S W, Xu M G, Colinet G. Evolution characteristics and influence factors of acidification in paddy soil of southern China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2015, 48(23): 4811-4817. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [6] | Guo J H, Liu X J, Zhang Y, Shen J L, Han W X, Zhang W F, Christie P, Goulding K W T, Vitousek P M, Zhang F S. Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands[J]. Science, 2010, 327: 1008-1010. |
| [7] | Zhang J T, Tian H Q, Shi H, Zhang J F, Wang X K, Pan S F, Yang J. Increased greenhouse gas emissions intensity of major croplands in China: Implications for food security and climate change mitigation[J]. Global Change Biology, 2020, 26(11): 6116-6133. |
| [8] | Gu J F, Yang J C. Nitrogen (N) transformation in paddy rice field: Its effect on N uptake and relation to improved N management[J]. Crop and Environment, 2022, 1(1): 7-14. |
| [9] | Xiao Z L, Zhang Y, Wang C R, Wen Y, Wang W L, Zhu K Y, Zhang W Y, Gu J F, Liu L J, Zhang J H, Yang J C, Zhang H. Optimized controlled-release nitrogen strategy achieves high yield and nitrogen use efficiency of wheat following rice in the lower reaches of Yangtze River of China[J]. Field Crops Research, 2024, 317: 109567. |
| [10] | Liu S J, Zhang Y R, Zhao D H, Liao Y C, Zhang G X, Li Y J, Han J. Optimizing the ratio of controlled release urea relative to normal urea to improve the crop yield and N recovery efficiency: A global meta-analysis[J]. Field Crops Research, 2025, 328: 109924. |
| [11] | Cheng S, Xing Z P, Tian C, Li S P, Tian J Y, Liu Q Y, Hu Y J, Guo B W, Hu Q, Wei H Y, Gao H, Zhang H C. Effects of controlled release urea formula and conventional urea ratio on grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency of direct-seeded rice[J]. Agriculture, 2022, 12(8): 1230. |
| [12] | Cheng S, Xing Z P, Tian C, Weng W A, Hu Q, Zhang H C. Optimization of one-time fertilization scheme achieved the balance of yield, quality and economic benefits of direct-seeded rice[J]. Plants, 2023, 12(10): 2047. |
| [13] | 翁文安, 邢志鹏, 胡群, 魏海燕, 廖萍, 朱海滨, 瞿济伟, 李秀丽, 刘桂云, 高辉, 张洪程. 无人化旱直播水稻产量形成特征及其能量与经济效益研究[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(5): 1363-1377. |
| Weng W A, Xing Z P, Hu Q, Wei H Y, Liao P, Zhu H B, Qu J W, Li X L, Liu G Y, Gao H, Zhang H C. Study on yield formation characteristics, energy and economic benefits of unmanned dry direct-seeding rice[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2025, 51(5): 1363-1377. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [14] | 程爽, 车阳, 田晋钰, 周磊, 刘秋员, 邢志鹏, 胡雅杰, 郭保卫, 魏海燕, 张洪程. 水稻缓控释氮肥应用研究现状与展望[J]. 扬州大学学报: 农业与生命科学版, 2020, 41(2): 1-8. |
| Cheng S, Che Y, Tian J Y, Zhou L, Liu Q Y, Xing Z P, Hu Y J, Guo B W, Wei H Y, Zhang H C. Research advances and prospects of slow-controlled release nitrogen fertilizer in rice[J]. Journal of Yangzhou University: Agricultural and Life Science Edition, 2020, 41(2): 1-8. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [15] | Zhang Y J, Ren W C, Zhu K Y, Fu J Y, Wang W L, Wang Z Q, Gu J F, Yang J C. Substituting readily available nitrogen fertilizer with controlled-release nitrogen fertilizer improves crop yield and nitrogen uptake while mitigating environmental risks: A global meta-analysis[J]. Field Crops Research, 2024, 306: 109221. |
| [16] | Zhou T Y, Cui R L, Shu C C, Zhu K Y, Zhang W Y, Zhang H, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Gu J F, Yang J C. Combining urea and controlled release nitrogen fertilizer to enhance lodging resistance of rice (Oryza sativa L.) by altering accumulation of silicon and cell wall polymers at high yielding levels[J]. Field Crops Research, 2024, 315: 109459. |
| [17] | Zhang S G, Yang Y C, Zhai W W, Tong Z H, Shen T L, Li Y C, Zhang M, Sigua G C, Chen J Q, Ding F J. Controlled-release nitrogen fertilizer improved lodging resistance and potassium and silicon uptake of direct‐seeded rice[J]. Crop Science, 2019, 59(6): 2733-2740. |
| [18] | 易艳红, 王文霞, 曾勇军, 谭雪明, 吴自明, 陈雄飞, 潘晓华, 石庆华, 曾研华. 人工模拟机械开沟穴直播提高早籼稻茎秆抗倒伏能力及产量[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(15): 2729-2742. |
| Yi Y H, Wang W X, Zeng Y J, Tan X M, Wu Z M, Chen X F, Pan X H, Shi Q H, Zeng Y H. Artificial simulation of hill-drop drilling mechanical technology to improve yield and lodging resistance of early season indica rice[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(15): 2729-2742. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [19] | 王文霞, 周燕芝, 曾勇军, 吴自明, 谭雪明, 潘晓华, 石庆华, 曾研华. 不同机直播方式对南方优质晚籼稻产量及抗倒伏特性的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2020, 34(1): 46-56. |
| Wang W X, Zhou Y Z, Zeng Y J, Wu Z M, Tan X M, Pan X H, Shi Q H, Zeng Y H. Effects of different mechanical direct seeding patterns on yield and lodging resistance of high-quality late indica rice in south China[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2020, 34(1): 46-56. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [20] | Liao P, Liu L, Chen J, Sun Y N, Huang S, Zeng Y J, van Groenigen K J. Liming reduces nitrogen uptake from chemical fertilizer but increases that from straw in a double rice cropping system[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2024, 235: 105873. |
| [21] | Niu Y N, Chen T X, Zhao C C, Zhou M X. Lodging prevention in cereals: Morphological, biochemical, anatomical traits and their molecular mechanisms, management and breeding strategies[J]. Field Crops Research, 2022, 289: 108733. |
| [22] | 罗肖郧, 郑兴飞, 彭宣国, 余启芝, 董华林, 殷得所, 王红波, 胡建林, 薛莲, 胡鹏, 徐得泽. 水稻抗倒伏研究:现状、挑战与未来方向. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(2): 181-195. |
| Luo X Y, Zheng X F, Peng X G, Yu Q Z, Dong H L, Yin D S, Wang H B, Hu J L, Xue L, Hu P, Xu D Z. Research on rice lodging resistance: current status, challenges, and future directions. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2026, 40(2): 181-195. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [23] | Zhang W J, Wu L M, Wu X R, Ding Y F, Li G H, Li J Y, Weng F, Liu Z H, Tang S, Ding C Q, Wang S H. Lodging resistance of japonica rice (Oryza sativa L.): Morphological and anatomical traits due to top-dressing nitrogen application rates[J]. Rice, 2016, 9: 1-11. |
| [24] | 唐拴虎, 徐培智, 张发宝, 陈建生, 谢春生. 一次性全层施用控释肥对水稻根系形态发育及抗倒伏能力的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2006, 12(1): 63-69. |
| Tang S H, Xu P Z, Zhang F B, Chen J S, Xie C S. Influence of single basal application controlled release fertilizer on morphologic development of root system and lodging resistance of rice[J]. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2006, 12(1): 63-69. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [25] | 沈智达, 马世浩, 黄思远, 张洋洋, 廖世鹏, 李小坤. 种植方式和施肥对水稻根系形态、抗倒伏特性与产量的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(2): 253-263. |
| Shen Z D, Ma S H, Huang S Y, Zhang Y Y, Liao S P, Li X K. Responses of rice root growth and distribution to planting methods and fertilization[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2026, 40(2): 253-263. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [1] | 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. |
| [2] | 邵在胜, 穆海蓉, 赵轶鹏, 彭斌, 王余龙, 王云霞, 杨连新. 臭氧胁迫对不同敏感型水稻干物质积累与分配的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2018, 1(1): 181-188. |
| [3] | 雷小龙1,刘利1,刘波1 ,黄光忠2 ,马荣朝1,*,任万军1,*. 杂交籼稻F优498机械化种植的茎秆理化性状与抗倒伏性[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2014, 28(6): 612-620. |
| [4] | 董春华1,2,3 ,曾闹华3 ,高菊生2,3,*,刘强1,* ,徐明岗3 ,文石林2,3 . 长期不同施肥模式下红壤性稻田水稻产量及有机碳含量变化特征[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2014, 28(2): 193-198. |
| [5] | 赵建国2 ,蒋开锋1 ,杨莉1 ,杨乾华1 ,万先齐1 ,曹应江1 ,游书梅1 ,罗婧1 ,张涛1,* ,郑家奎1,*. 水稻产量相关性状QTL定位[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2013, 27(4): 344-352. |
| [6] | 李红娇,张喜娟,李伟娟,徐正进,徐 海. 不同穗型粳稻品种抗倒伏性的比较[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2009, 23(2): 191-191~196 . |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||