水氮管理对不同氮效率水稻根系性状、氮素吸收利用及产量的影响

doi:10.16819/j.1001-7216.2017.6145

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的探究水氮管理措施对不同氮效率水稻根系构型、氮素吸收利用和产量形成的影响,以及根系性状特征与氮素吸收利用和产量关系。方法试验采用三因素裂裂区设计,主区为2个不同氮效率水稻品种德香4103(氮高效型)和宜香3724(氮低效型),裂区设置“常规灌溉”和“控制性交替灌溉”2种水分管理方式,裂裂区为SPAD指导施肥、优化施肥以及农民习惯施肥3种施氮模式,运用岭回归分析方法探究根系构型与氮素吸收利用和产量的关系。结果水稻抽穗期根系性状、产量、每穗粒数、千粒重及总颖花量均存在显著的基因型差异。氮高效品种德香4103每穗粒数多,群体库容量大,产量较氮低效品种宜香3724高0.24%~11.31%;控制性交替灌溉有利于水稻千粒重的增长,常规灌溉则对水稻有效穗数、每穗粒数及群体颖花量提高更为有利;SPAD指导施肥和优化施肥处理能够提高水稻有效穗数和每穗粒数,扩大群体颖花量以保证其对农民习惯施肥的产量优势;由于水氮互作效应的存在,控制性交替灌溉下施氮处理与空白处理水稻千粒重的差距比常规灌溉的大幅降低,使得控制性交替灌溉下施用氮肥的增产效果更佳。德香4103的氮肥生理利用率较宜香3724平均高8.69%,常规灌溉下水稻氮积累量较高,控制性交替灌溉下氮肥回收率、农学利用率、生理利用率均较优;与农民习惯施肥处理相比,SPAD指导施肥与优化施肥模式更有利于水稻氮素吸收利用效率的提高。拔节期、抽穗期和成熟期水稻根系构型与产量岭回归方程的决定系数范围为0.4198~0.9028,其中,抽穗期根系性状与产量关系最为密切,氮高效和氮低效品种的决定系数均超过0.9。在拔节期,水稻细分枝根长对产量影响最大;在抽穗期,氮高效和氮低效品种存在差异,前者是粗分枝根长,后者是细分枝根表面积对产量影响最大;在成熟期,不定根长与产量关系最为密切。水稻抽穗期根系构型对氮积累量变化的解释程度较高,岭回归方程决定系数均接近0.7。就水氮管理措施而言,氮高效和氮低效水稻均应采用常规灌溉配套SPAD指导施肥或控制性交替灌溉结合优化施肥来实现产量的提高。结论水稻抽穗期根系构型与产量、氮积累量关系密切,采用合理的水氮管理措施能够实现水稻产量和氮素吸收利用效率的同步提高。

关键词: 水氮管理, 水稻, 氮效率, 根系构型, 产量

Abstract:

【Objective】 The objective of the experiment is to study the effects of water-nitrogen management on root traits, nitrogen accumulation and utilization and grain yield in rice with different N use efficiencies, and the relationship between root traits and nitrogen accumulation and utilization and yield.【Method】In this study, two different nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) rice varieties Dexiang 4103 (high NUE) and Yixiang 3724 (low NUE) were used as the trial material to determine the effects of water-nitrogen management on root traits and grain yield in rice with different NUEs, conventional irrigation and controlled alternative irrigation coupled with SPAD-diagnosis N management, optimal N management and farmer’s usual N management were established as treatment factors. During this progress, the relationship between root traits, nitrogen accumulation and utilization and grain yield were analyzed by ridge regression analysis.【Result】There were significant genotypic differences in root traits at heading stage, grain yield, spikelet number per panicle, 1000-grain weight and total spikelet number. The high NUE variety (Dexiang 4103) had more spikelet number per panicle and larger population capacity, with the yield being 0.24%–11.31% higher than that of low NUE variety (Yixiang 3724). Compared with conventional irrigation, the 1000-grain weight under controlled alternative irrigation was significantly larger, while the former was more favorable for improving panicle number, spikelet number per panicle and population spikele number. SPAD-diagnosis-based N management and optimal N management could increase the panicle number and spikelet number per panicle, which increased the population spikelet number, ensuring the grain yield advantage over farmer’s usual N management. Because of the water-nitrogen interaction effect, the gap in 1000-grain weight between N application and zero N treatments under controlled alternative irrigation narrowed considerably compared with that of conventional irrigation, leading to better effect of N application on grain yield under controlled alternative irrigation. The nitrogen use efficiency of Dexiang 4103 was 8.69% higher than that of Yixiang 3724, the nitrogen accumulation of rice under conventional irrigation was higher, as well as the nitrogen recovery efficiency, agronomic efficiency, physiological efficiency under controlled alternative irrigation. SPAD-diagnosis-based N management and optimal N management were more favorable for imroving nitrogen accumulation and utilization efficiency of rice than farmer’s usual N management.The determination coefficient of ridge regression equation between root traits and grain yield of rice at jointing stage, heading stage and maturity stage ranged from 0.4198 to 0.9028. The relationship between root traits at heading stage and grain yield was the most closely related, and the determination coefficients of high NUE and low NUE varieties all exceeded 0.9. At the jointing stage, the rice fine lateral root length had the greatest effect on grain yield. At the heading stage, there was difference between the high NUE and low NUE varieties, and the coarse lateral root length of the former and the fine lateral root surface area of the latter had the greatest effect on grain yield, respectively. In maturity stage, the relationship between adventitious root length and grain yield was the most important. Rice root morphology at heading stage had close relation with the change of nitrogen accumulation, and the determination coefficient of ridge regression equation was close to 0.7. In terms of water and nitrogen management practice, SPAD-diagnosis N management coupled with conventional irrigation or optimal N management combined with alternative irrigation should be applied to achieve grain yield improvement for both high NUE and low NUE varieties.【Conclusion】The root morphology characters of rice at heading stage was closely related to yield and nitrogen accumulation, and the yield and nitrogen accumulation and utilization efficiency of rice could be improved by reasonable water-nitrogen management.

Key words: water-nitrogen management, rice, N use efficiency, root morphology, grain yield

中图分类号:

李娜, 杨志远, 代邹, 孙永健, 徐徽, 何艳, 蒋明金, 严田蓉, 郭长春, 马均. 水氮管理对不同氮效率水稻根系性状、氮素吸收利用及产量的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2017, 31(5): 500-512.

Na LI, Zhiyuan YANG, Zou DAI, Yongjian SUN, Hui XU, Yan HE, Mingjin JIANG, Tianrong YAN, Changchun GUO, Jun MA. Effects of Water-Nitrogen Management on Root Traits, Nitrogen Accumulation and Utilization and Grain Yield in Rice with Different Nitrogen Use Efficiency[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2017, 31(5): 500-512.

图/表 8

参考文献 31

[1]	朱德峰, 程式华, 张玉屏, 林贤青, 陈惠哲. 全球水稻生产现状与制约因素分析. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(3): 474-479.
	Zhu D F, Cheng S H, Zhang Y P, Lin X Q, Chen H Z.Analysis of status and constraints of rice production in the world.Acta Agron Sin, 2010, 43(3): 474-479. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	孙永健, 孙园园, 徐徽, 李玥, 严奉君, 蒋明金, 马均. 水氮管理模式对不同氮效率水稻氮素利用特性及产量的影响. 作物学报, 2014, 40(9): 1639-1649.
	Sun Y J, Sun Y Y, Xu H, Li Y, Yan F J, Jiang M J, Ma J.Effects of water-nitrogen management patterns on nitrogen utilization characteristics and yield in rice cultivars with different nitrogen use efficiencies.Acta Agron Sin, 2014, 40(9): 1639-1649. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	王绍华, 曹卫星, 丁艳锋, 田永超,姜东. 水氮互作对水稻氮吸收与利用的影响. 中国农业科学, 2004, 37(4): 497-501.
	Wang S H, Cao W X, Ding Y F, Tian Y C,Jiang D.Interactions of water management and nitrogen fertilizer on nitrogen absorption and utilization in rice.Sci Agric Sin, 2004, 37(4): 497-501. (In Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	梁永书, 周军杰, 南文斌, 段东东, 张汉马. 水稻根系研究进展. 植物学报, 2016, 51(1): 98-106.
	Liang Y S, Zhou J J, Nan W B, Duan D D, Zhang H M.Progress in rice root system research.Chin Bull Bot, 2016, 51(1): 98-106. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	魏海燕, 张洪程, 张胜飞, 杭杰, 戴其根, 霍中洋, 许轲, 马群, 张庆, 刘艳阳. 不同氮利用效率水稻基因型的根系形态与生理指标的研究. 作物学报, 2008, 34(3): 429-436.
	Wei H Y, Zang H C, Zhang S F, Hang J, Dai Q G, Huo Z Y, Xu K, Ma Q, Zhang Q, Liu Y Y.Root morphological and physiological characteristics in rice genotypes with different N use efficiencies.Acta Agron Sin, 2008, 34(3): 429-436. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	戢林, 李廷轩, 张锡洲, 余海英. 氮高效利用基因型水稻根系形态和活力特征. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(23): 4770-4781.
	Ji L, Li T X, Zhang X Z, Yu H Y.Root morphologial and activity characteristics of rice genotype with high nitrogen utilization efficiency.Sci Agric Sin, 2012, 45(23): 4770-4781. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	史正军, 樊小林, D Klaus, B Sattemacher.根系局部供氮对水稻根系形态的影响及其机理.中国水稻科学, 2005, 19(2): 147-152.
	Shi Z J, Fan X L, Klaus D, Sattemacher B.Effect of localized nitrogen supply on root morphology in rice and its mechanism.Chin J Rice Sci, 2005, 19(2): 147-152. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	Fan J B, Zhang Y L, Turner D, Duan Y H, Wang D S, Shen Q R.Root physiological and morphological characteristics of two rice cultivars with different nitrogen-use efficiency.Pedosphere, 2010, 20(4): 446-455.
[9]	Ju C X, Buresh R J, Wang Z Q, Zhang H, Liu L J, Yang J C, Zhang J H.Root and shoot traits for rice varieties with higher grain yield and higher nitrogen use efficiency at lower nitrogen rates application.Field Crops Res, 2015, 175: 47-55.
[10]	顾东祥, 汤亮, 徐其军, 雷晓俊, 曹卫星, 朱艳. 水氮处理下不同品种水稻根系生长分布特征. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(5): 558-566.
	Gu D X, Tang L, Xu Q J, Lei X J, Cao W X, Zhu Y.Root growth and distribution in rice cultivars as affected by nitrogen and water supply.Chin J Plant Ecol, 2011, 35(5): 558-566. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	曾翔, 李阳生, 谢小立, 肖国樱, 廖江林. 不同灌溉模式对杂交水稻生育后期根系生理特性和剑叶光合特性的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2003, 17(4): 66-70.
	Zeng X, Li Y S, Xie X L, Xiao G Y, Liao J L.Effects of different irrigation patterns on physiological characteristics of root and photosynthetic traits of flag leaf after flowering stage in hybrid rice.Chin J Rice Sci, 2003(4): 66-70. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	刘永霞, 岳延滨, 刘岩, 曹宏鑫,葛道阔,魏秀芳. 不同品种和氮肥条件下水稻根系主要几何参数动态量化. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(9): 1782-1790.
	Liu Y X, Yue Y B, Liu Y, Cao H X, Ge D K, Wei X F.Quantitative research of dynamic models of the main geometric parameters of rice root system of different varieties under different nitrogen conditions.Sci Agric Sin, 2010, 43(9): 1782-1790. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	秦俭, 杨志远, 孙永健, 徐徽, 马均. 不同穗型杂交籼稻物质积累、氮素吸收利用和产量的差异比较. 中国水稻科学, 2014, 28(5): 514-522.
	Qin J, Yang Z Y, Sun Y J, Xu H, Ma J.Differential comparison of assumilation products accumulation, nitrogen uptake and utilization and grain yield of hybrid Indica rice combinations with different panicle types.Chin J Rice Sci, 2014, 28(5): 514-522. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	孙永健, 孙园园, 徐徽, 李玥, 严奉君, 蒋明, 马均. 水氮管理模式对不同氮效率水稻氮素利用特性及产量的影响. 作物学报, 2014, 40(9): 1639-1649.
	Sun Y J, Sun Y Y, Xu H, Li Y, Yan F J, Jiang M J, Ma J.Effects of water-nitrogen management patterns on nitrogen utilization characteristics and yield in rice Cultivars with different nitrogen use efficiencies.Acta Agron Sin, 2014, 40(9): 1639-1649. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	顾东祥, 汤亮, 曹卫星, 朱艳. 基于图像分析方法的水稻根系形态特征指标的定量分. 作物学报, 2010, 36(5): 810-817.
	Gu D X, Tang L, Cao W X, Zhu Y.Quantitative analysis on root morphological characteristics based on image analysis method in rice.Acta Agron Sin, 2010, 36(5): 810-817. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	孙永健, 孙园园, 李旭毅, 郭翔, 马均. 水氮互作下水稻氮代谢关键酶活性与氮素利用的关系. 作物学报, 2009, 35(11): 2055-2063.
	Sun Y J, Sun Y Y, Li X Y, Guo X, Ma J.Relationship of activities of key enzymes involved in nitrogen metabolism with nitrogen utilization in rice under water-nitrogen interaction.Acta Agron Sin, 2009, 35(11): 2055-2063. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	孙永健, 孙园园, 刘凯, 张荣萍,马均. 水氮互作对结实期水稻衰老和物质转运及产量的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2009, 15(6): 1339-1349.
	Sun Y J, Sun Y Y, Liu K, Zhang R P, Ma J.Effects of water-nitrogen interaction on rice senescence and material transport and yield during grain filling.Plant Nutr Fert Sci, 2009, 15(6): 1339-1349. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	黄丽芬, 董芙蓉, 霍中洋, 全晓艳, 魏海燕, 戴其根, 许钶, 张洪程. 氮素水平对不同氮效率基因型水稻的物质生产与分配的影响. 核农学报, 2012, 26(9): 1290-1297.
	Huang L F, Dong F R, Huo Z Y, Quan X Y, Wei H Y, Dai Q G, Xu K, Zhang H C.Effects of nitrogen levels on dry matter accumulation and distribution in rice genotype with different nitrogen use efficiencies.Acta Agric Nucl Sin, 2012, 26(9): 1290-1297. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	朴钟泽, 韩龙植, 高熙宗. 水稻不同基因型氮素利用效率差异. 中国水稻科学, 2003, 17(3): 233-238.
	Piao Z Z, Han L Z, Gao X Z.Variations of nitrogen use efficiency by rice genotype.Chin J Rice Sci, 2003, 17(3): 233-238. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	石庆华, 黄英金, 李木英, 徐益群, 谭雪明, 张佩莲. 水稻根系性状与地上部的相关及根系性状的遗传研究. 中国农业科学, 1997, 30(4): 62-68.
	Shi Q H, Huang Y J, Li M Y, Xu Y Q, Tan X M, Zhang P L.Studies on the heredity of root characteristics and correlation between the characteristics of roots and upperground parts in rice.Sci Agric Sin, 1997, 30(4): 62-68. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	朱德峰, 林贤青, 曹卫星. 水稻深层根系对生长和产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2001, 34(4): 429-432.
	Zhu D F, Lin X Q, Cao W X.Effects of deep roots on growth and yield in two rice varieties.Sci Agric Sin, 2001, 34(4): 429-432. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	刘桃菊, 唐建军, 张佩莲, 戚昌瀚. 水稻根系建成对高产形成的模拟模型与调控决策研究:Ⅰ.水稻根系形态建成参数与产量形成关系的初步研究. 江西农业大学学报, 1998, 20(3): 11-15.
	Liu T J, Tang J J, Zhang P L, Qi C H.A Study on the simulation model and the regulation of rice root growth affecting high yield formation I .A preliminary study on the relationship between the morphological character parameters of root and yield formation in rice.J Jiangxi Agric Univ, 1998, 20(3): 11-15. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	杨建昌, 徐国伟, 仇明, 张文虎, 王志琴, 朱庆森. 新株型水稻生育特性及产量形成特点的研究. 扬州大学学报:农业与生命科学版, 2002, 23(1): 45-50.
	Yang J C, Xu G W, Qiu M, Zhang W H, Wang Z Q, Zhu Q S.Growth and development characteristics and yield formation of new plant type rice.J Yangzhou Univ Agric ＆ Life Sci Edition, 2002, 23(1): 45-50. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	Yang J C, Zhang H, Zhang J H.Root morphology and physiology in relation to the yield formation of rice.J Integr Agric, 2012, 11(6): 920-926.
[25]	张传胜, 王余龙, 龙银成, 董桂春, 杨连新, 黄建晔. 影响籼稻品种产量水平的主要根系性状. 作物学报, 2005, 31(2): 137-143.
	Zhang C S, WangY L, Long Y C, Dong G C, Yang L X,Huang J Y. Main root traits affecting yield level in conventional Indica rice cultivars (Oryza sativa L.).Acta Agron Sin, 2005, 31(2): 137-143. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	杨建昌, 王朋, 刘立军, 王志琴, 朱庆森. 中籼水稻品种产量与株型演进特征研究. 作物学报, 2006, 32(7): 949-955.
	Yang J C, Wang P, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Zhu Q S.Evolution characteristics of grain yield and plant type for mid-season Indica rice cultivars.Acta Agron Sin, 2006, 32(7): 949-955. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[27]	Cassman K G, Dobermann A, Walters D T.Agroecosystems, nitrogen-use efficiency, and nitrogen management.Ambio, 2002, 31(2): 132-140.
[28]	de Dorlodot S, Forster B, Pages L, Price A H, Tuberosa R, Draye X. Root system architecture: opportunities and constraints for genetic improvement of crops.Trends Plant Sci, 2007, 12(10): 474-481.
[29]	Walch-Liu P, Ivanov I, Filleur S Y, Gan Y, Remans T, Forde B G.Nitrogen regulation of root branching.Annals of Botany, 2006, 97(5): 875-881.
[30]	Davies W J.Root growth response and functioning as an adaptation in water limiting soils//In Advances in Molecular Breeding Toward Drought and Salt Tolerant Crops. Springer Netherland, 2007: 55-72.
[31]	徐国伟, 吕强, 陆大克, 王贺正,陈明灿. 干湿交替灌溉耦合施氮对水稻根系性状及籽粒库活性的影响. 作物学报, 2016, 42(10): 1495-1505.
	Xu G W, Lv Q, Lu D K, Wang H Z,Chen M C.Effects of wetting and drying alternative irrigation coupling with nitrogen application on root characteristic and grain-sink activity.Acta Agron Sin, 2016, 42(10): 1495-1505. (in Chinese with English abstract)

施氮模式 N management mode	施氮量及施氮时期 N application rate and stages				总施氮量 Total N rate/(kg·hm^-2)
施氮模式 N management mode	基肥 Basal N/(kg·hm^-2)	蘖肥 N application for tillering /(kg·hm^-2)	促花肥 N application for spikelet boosting/(kg·hm^-2)	保花肥 N application for spikelet preserving/(kg·hm^-2)	总施氮量 Total N rate/(kg·hm^-2)
SPAD指导施肥 SPAD-diagnosis N management	0	自移栽后7 d至齐穗期,若叶绿素仪读数SPAD < 37.5,施氮15 kg/hm²,SPAD > 37.5,不施氮。其中,拔节期(倒4叶龄期),若SPAD < 37.5,施氮30 kg/hm²。每周测1 次。			120
优化施肥模式 Optimal N management	45(30%)	45(30%)	30 (20%)	30 (20%)	150
农民习惯施肥 Farmer’s usual N management	105(70%)	45(30%)	0	0	150

施氮模式 N management mode	施氮量及施氮时期 N application rate and stages				总施氮量 Total N rate/(kg·hm^-2)
施氮模式 N management mode	基肥 Basal N/(kg·hm^-2)	蘖肥 N application for tillering /(kg·hm^-2)	促花肥 N application for spikelet boosting/(kg·hm^-2)	保花肥 N application for spikelet preserving/(kg·hm^-2)	总施氮量 Total N rate/(kg·hm^-2)
SPAD指导施肥 SPAD-diagnosis N management	0	自移栽后7 d至齐穗期,若叶绿素仪读数SPAD < 37.5,施氮15 kg/hm²,SPAD > 37.5,不施氮。其中,拔节期(倒4叶龄期),若SPAD < 37.5,施氮30 kg/hm²。每周测1 次。			120
优化施肥模式 Optimal N management	45(30%)	45(30%)	30 (20%)	30 (20%)	150
农民习惯施肥 Farmer’s usual N management	105(70%)	45(30%)	0	0	150

品种 Cultivar	灌溉方式Irrigation pattern	施氮模式 N management mode	有效穗数 Productive panicle number/(×10⁴ hm^-2)	每穗粒数 Spikelet number per panicle	结实率 Seed-setting rate /%	千粒重 1000-grain weight /g	总颖花量 Total spikelet Number/(×10⁶ hm^-2)	产量 Grain yield /(kg·hm^-2)
德香4103 Dexiang 4103(C₁)	W₁	CK	212.52±1.47 c	142.58±2.31 c	90.83±2.01 a	33.43±0.60 a	303.01±5.86 c	9 135±334.75 c
		N₁	235.10±10.11 b	211.16±16.46 a	83.92±0.68 b	30.56±0.47 c	496.21±40.90 a	12 311±266.06 a
		N₂	246.63±7.95 ab	205.39±4.11 a	80.74±2.67 b	30.90±0.55 bc	506.54±19.50 a	12 077±114.48 a
		N₃	252.20±4.93 a	162.49±5.79 b	90.72±2.80 a	32.30±0.17 ab	409.94±20.60 b	11 500±401.06 b
		平均 Average	236.61	180.41	86.55	31.80	428.92	11 256
	W₂	CK	193.72±3.70 c	138.68±3.16 c	91.24±2.40 a	33.63±1.03 a	268.66±11.11 c	8 120±365.81 c
		N₁	234.15±4.52 b	190.35±6.44 a	84.61±2.51 c	32.78±1.06 a	445.57±10.86 a	11 961±283.28 a
		N₂	241.84±10.63 ab	185.38±13.41 a	85.76±0.74 bc	32.82±0.16 a	447.65±23.56 a	12 239±341.80 a
		N₃	249.09±8.14 a	155.33±6.66 b	88.06±1.40 ab	34.43±1.53 a	387.21±27.97 b	11 351±134.61 b
		平均 Average	229.70	167.44	87.42	33.41	387.27	10 918
宜香3724 Yixiang 3724(C₂)	W₁	CK	198.03±2.58 b	131.20±3.42 b	88.85±1.58 a	36.34±1.01 a	259.80±5.30 c	8 373±147.22 c
		N₁	235.18±10.44 a	183.20±14.44 a	84.48±2.22 b	33.58±0.02 b	430.48±32.50 a	11 977±418.03 a
		N₂	241.37±6.10 a	178.67±6.04 a	84.77±2.67 b	34.42±0.19 b	431.47±24.29 a	12 048±200.90 a
		N₃	246.25±10.00 a	143.43±5.56 b	89.16±0.61 a	36.36±0.69 a	352.91±8.82 b	11 132±227.75 b
		平均 Average	230.21	159.13	86.81	35.17	368.67	10 882
	W₂	CK	190.95±3.65 c	117.47±2.01 c	89.62±0.37 a	36.76±0.53 ab	224.31±6.59 c	7 295±124.53 c
		N₁	229.79±4.93 b	179.56±7.94 a	81.11±1.21 b	36.66±1.23 ab	412.36±10.38 a	11 887±305.06 a
		N₂	238.10±11.19 ab	175.79±3.66 a	80.72±3.66 b	35.33±0.85 b	418.28±11.19 a	11 621±233.07 a
		N₃	243.05±11.10 a	144.32±4.26 b	88.05±1.68 a	37.37±2.33 a	350.94±23.67 b	11 097±199.41 b
		平均 Average	225.47	154.29	84.88	36.53	351.47	10 475
C₁平均Average			233.16	173.92	86.99	32.61	408.10	11 086.88
C₂ 平均Average			227.84	156.71	85.84	35.85	360.07	10 678.71
F值F-value		品种C	3.83 ns	35.53*	5.66 ns	3399.64**	29.55*	19.65*
		灌溉方式W	16.63*	10.38*	0.55 ns	22.24**	52.69**	183.26**
		施氮模式N	100.47**	169.12**	44.51**	12.67**	207.92**	826.41**
		C×W	0.58 ns	2.16 ns	3.71 ns	0.17 ns	9.10*	1.59 ns
		C×N	0.39 ns	0.20 ns	0.30 ns	0.23 ns	0.09 ns	4.38*
		W×N	1.19 ns	0.90 ns	1.31 ns	3.02*	0.89 ns	13.01**
		C×W×N	0.61 ns	2.16 ns	4.79**	0.77 ns	0.67 ns	2.19 ns

品种 Cultivar	灌溉方式Irrigation pattern	施氮模式 N management mode	有效穗数 Productive panicle number/(×10⁴ hm^-2)	每穗粒数 Spikelet number per panicle	结实率 Seed-setting rate /%	千粒重 1000-grain weight /g	总颖花量 Total spikelet Number/(×10⁶ hm^-2)	产量 Grain yield /(kg·hm^-2)
德香4103 Dexiang 4103(C₁)	W₁	CK	212.52±1.47 c	142.58±2.31 c	90.83±2.01 a	33.43±0.60 a	303.01±5.86 c	9 135±334.75 c
		N₁	235.10±10.11 b	211.16±16.46 a	83.92±0.68 b	30.56±0.47 c	496.21±40.90 a	12 311±266.06 a
		N₂	246.63±7.95 ab	205.39±4.11 a	80.74±2.67 b	30.90±0.55 bc	506.54±19.50 a	12 077±114.48 a
		N₃	252.20±4.93 a	162.49±5.79 b	90.72±2.80 a	32.30±0.17 ab	409.94±20.60 b	11 500±401.06 b
		平均 Average	236.61	180.41	86.55	31.80	428.92	11 256
	W₂	CK	193.72±3.70 c	138.68±3.16 c	91.24±2.40 a	33.63±1.03 a	268.66±11.11 c	8 120±365.81 c
		N₁	234.15±4.52 b	190.35±6.44 a	84.61±2.51 c	32.78±1.06 a	445.57±10.86 a	11 961±283.28 a
		N₂	241.84±10.63 ab	185.38±13.41 a	85.76±0.74 bc	32.82±0.16 a	447.65±23.56 a	12 239±341.80 a
		N₃	249.09±8.14 a	155.33±6.66 b	88.06±1.40 ab	34.43±1.53 a	387.21±27.97 b	11 351±134.61 b
		平均 Average	229.70	167.44	87.42	33.41	387.27	10 918
宜香3724 Yixiang 3724(C₂)	W₁	CK	198.03±2.58 b	131.20±3.42 b	88.85±1.58 a	36.34±1.01 a	259.80±5.30 c	8 373±147.22 c
		N₁	235.18±10.44 a	183.20±14.44 a	84.48±2.22 b	33.58±0.02 b	430.48±32.50 a	11 977±418.03 a
		N₂	241.37±6.10 a	178.67±6.04 a	84.77±2.67 b	34.42±0.19 b	431.47±24.29 a	12 048±200.90 a
		N₃	246.25±10.00 a	143.43±5.56 b	89.16±0.61 a	36.36±0.69 a	352.91±8.82 b	11 132±227.75 b
		平均 Average	230.21	159.13	86.81	35.17	368.67	10 882
	W₂	CK	190.95±3.65 c	117.47±2.01 c	89.62±0.37 a	36.76±0.53 ab	224.31±6.59 c	7 295±124.53 c
		N₁	229.79±4.93 b	179.56±7.94 a	81.11±1.21 b	36.66±1.23 ab	412.36±10.38 a	11 887±305.06 a
		N₂	238.10±11.19 ab	175.79±3.66 a	80.72±3.66 b	35.33±0.85 b	418.28±11.19 a	11 621±233.07 a
		N₃	243.05±11.10 a	144.32±4.26 b	88.05±1.68 a	37.37±2.33 a	350.94±23.67 b	11 097±199.41 b
		平均 Average	225.47	154.29	84.88	36.53	351.47	10 475
C₁平均Average			233.16	173.92	86.99	32.61	408.10	11 086.88
C₂ 平均Average			227.84	156.71	85.84	35.85	360.07	10 678.71
F值F-value		品种C	3.83 ns	35.53*	5.66 ns	3399.64**	29.55*	19.65*
		灌溉方式W	16.63*	10.38*	0.55 ns	22.24**	52.69**	183.26**
		施氮模式N	100.47**	169.12**	44.51**	12.67**	207.92**	826.41**
		C×W	0.58 ns	2.16 ns	3.71 ns	0.17 ns	9.10*	1.59 ns
		C×N	0.39 ns	0.20 ns	0.30 ns	0.23 ns	0.09 ns	4.38*
		W×N	1.19 ns	0.90 ns	1.31 ns	3.02*	0.89 ns	13.01**
		C×W×N	0.61 ns	2.16 ns	4.79**	0.77 ns	0.67 ns	2.19 ns

品种 Cultivar	灌溉方式 Irrigation pattern	施氮模式 N management mode	氮积累量 N accumulation	氮肥回收率 N recovery efficiency /%	氮肥农学利用率 N agronomic efficiency /(kg·kg^-1)	氮肥生理利用率 N physiological efficiency /(kg·kg^-1)
德香4103 Dexiang 4103(C₁)	W₁	CK	128.20±6.28 c	—	—	—
		N₁	204.98±2.88 a	63.98±4.04 a	26.47±1.32 a	41.41±1.95 a
		N₂	205.41±2.56 a	51.47±4.79 b	19.61±1.98 b	38.10±1.40 b
		N₃	193.27±6.20 b	43.38±5.11 c	15.76±1.59 c	36.40±1.21 b
		平均 Average	182.97	52.95	20.61	38.64
	W₂	CK	112.16±7.42 c	—	—	—
		N₁	191.44±5.23 a	66.07±5.57 a	32.01±0.73 a	48.65±3.65 a
		N₂	198.88±4.84 a	57.82±3.38 b	27.46±2.31 b	47.49±2.83 a
		N₃	182.03±6.48 b	46.58±2.55 c	21.54±2.62 c	46.12±3.17 a
		平均 Average	171.13	56.82	27.00	47.42
宜香3724 Yixiang 3724(C₂)	W₁	CK	111.21±4.03 c	—	—	—
		N₁	205.43±8.41 a	78.52±9.97 a	30.03±4.23 a	38.21±1.03 a
		N₂	207.89±2.54 a	64.46±3.29 b	24.5±2.30 b	37.95±1.73 a
		N₃	192.74±7.79 b	54.35±6.04 c	18.39±1.57 c	33.92±1.60 b
		平均 Average	179.32	65.78	24.31	36.69
	W₂	CK	96.44±2.89 c	—	—	—
		N₁	199.87±2.84 a	86.19±4.1 a	38.26±3.56 a	44.34±2.17 a
		N₂	192.88±0.84 ab	64.29±1.82 b	28.84±2.37 b	44.81±2.58 a
		N₃	187.39±6.43 b	60.63±6.04 b	25.35±2.04 c	41.86±0.80 a
		平均 Average	169.15	70.37	30.82	43.67
		C1平均Average	177.05	54.88	23.81	43.03
		C2平均Average	174.23	68.07	27.56	40.18
F值F-value		品种C	2.71 ns	13.79 ns	4.27 ns	21.35*
		灌溉方式W	119.28**	10.78*	250.58**	46.67**
		施氮模式N	888.36**	107.66**	171.70**	12.58**
		C×W	0.69 ns	0.08 ns	0.02 ns	0.61 ns
		C×N	10.68**	3.09 ns	1.31 ns	1.48 ns
		W×N	1.17 ns	0.21 ns	0.21 ns	1.12 ns
		C×W×N	1.62 ns	2.12 ns	3.41 ns	0.12 ns