中国水稻科学 ›› 2017, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (5): 513-523.DOI: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2017.7048 513
收稿日期:
2017-04-28
修回日期:
2017-06-10
出版日期:
2017-10-10
发布日期:
2017-09-10
通讯作者:
章秀福
基金资助:
Guang CHU, Tingting CHEN, Song CHEN, Chunmei XU, Danying WANG, Xiufu ZHANG*()
Received:
2017-04-28
Revised:
2017-06-10
Online:
2017-10-10
Published:
2017-09-10
Contact:
Xiufu ZHANG
摘要:
目的 研究不同水、氮管理模式对水稻产量以及水、氮利用效率的影响,以期为水稻高产与水、氮高效利用提供理论依据和技术参考。方法 大田试验于2015–2016年在浙江富阳进行,供试品种为三系籼型杂交稻天优华占。设置常规灌溉(CI)和干湿交替灌溉(AWD)两种灌溉模式,同时设置低氮(LN, 80 kg/hm2)、中氮(MN, 160 kg/hm2)和高氮(HN, 240 kg/hm2)3种施氮水平。结果 灌溉模式与施氮量对水稻产量以及水、氮利用效率有显著互作效应。与CI相比,AWD抑制无效分蘖,分蘖成穗率提高8.1%~10.7%;提高抽穗期至成熟期的光合势(LAD)与群体生长率(CGR);促进根系下扎,10~20 cm根层根系生物量增加了24.4%~32.3%,同时提高了结实期根系活性;促使茎鞘中非结构性碳水化合物(NSC)向籽粒中运转;且AWD在160 kg/hm2(中氮)施氮水平下可显著提高产量与水、氮利用效率,为本研究最佳的水、氮运筹模式。结论 通过适宜的水、氮运筹可充分发挥其互作效应,提高水稻产量与水、氮利用效率。
中图分类号:
褚光, 陈婷婷, 陈松, 徐春梅, 王丹英, 章秀福. 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对水稻产量以及水、氮利用效率的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2017, 31(5): 513-523.
Guang CHU, Tingting CHEN, Song CHEN, Chunmei XU, Danying WANG, Xiufu ZHANG. Effects of Interaction Between Irrigation Regimes and Nitrogen Rates on Rice Yield and Water and Nitrogen Use Efficiencies[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2017, 31(5): 513-523.
图1 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对水稻叶片水势的影响
Fig. 1. Effects of the interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on diurnal changes in leaf water potentials of rice.
图2 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对灌溉用水量(A~B)与水分利用效率(C~D)的影响
Fig. 2. Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on the amount of irrigated water (A–B) and water use efficiency(C–D).
年度与处理 Year and treatment | 产量 Grain yield/(t·hm-2) | 单位面积穗数 No.of panicles/(×104 hm-2) | 每穗粒数 Spikelets per panicle | 结实率 Seed setting rate/% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight/g |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | |||||
CI+LN | 7.34±0.22 d | 245.4±3.9 b | 143.2±2.5 d | 82.5±1.0 b | 25.4±0.3 a |
CI+MN | 8.53±0.23 b | 284.2±5.5 a | 150.8±1.8 c | 78.9±1.2 c | 25.2±0.2 ab |
CI+HN | 8.12±0.15 c | 286.4±5.3 a | 156.2±2.3 b | 72.5±1.3 d | 25.1±0.2 b |
AWD+LN | 8.06±0.20 c | 243.5±4.1 b | 146.3±2.1 d | 89.1±1.5 a | 25.5±0.2 a |
AWD+MN | 9.20±0.26 a | 279.9±5.5 a | 154.9±3.1 b | 83.5±1.0 b | 25.4±0.2 a |
AWD+HN | 9.03±0.28 a | 282.5±4.9 a | 162.4±2.6 a | 78.1±1.8 c | 25.3±0.2 ab |
2016 | |||||
CI+LN | 7.18±0.12 e | 224.4±3.8 b | 150.3±2.2 d | 84.8±1.0 bc | 25.2±0.4 a |
CI+MN | 8.83±0.20 b | 274.2±4.8 a | 155.2±2.7 c | 82.8±0.8 c | 25.1±0.2 a |
CI+HN | 8.40±0.18 c | 272.9±5.2 a | 162.3±3.7 ab | 75.4±1.5 d | 25.2±0.1 a |
AWD+LN | 7.78±0.24 d | 225.3±4.2 b | 153.8±4.2 c | 88.7±0.9 a | 25.3±0.2 a |
AWD+MN | 9.38±0.21 a | 270.8±3.5 a | 160.2±1.6 b | 85.8±1.1 b | 25.2±0.3 a |
AWD+HN | 9.27±0.29 a | 270.5±4.4 a | 164.2±2.1 a | 83.1±1.4 c | 25.2±0.2 a |
表1 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对水稻产量及其构成因素的影响
Table 1 Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on grain its and its components.
年度与处理 Year and treatment | 产量 Grain yield/(t·hm-2) | 单位面积穗数 No.of panicles/(×104 hm-2) | 每穗粒数 Spikelets per panicle | 结实率 Seed setting rate/% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight/g |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | |||||
CI+LN | 7.34±0.22 d | 245.4±3.9 b | 143.2±2.5 d | 82.5±1.0 b | 25.4±0.3 a |
CI+MN | 8.53±0.23 b | 284.2±5.5 a | 150.8±1.8 c | 78.9±1.2 c | 25.2±0.2 ab |
CI+HN | 8.12±0.15 c | 286.4±5.3 a | 156.2±2.3 b | 72.5±1.3 d | 25.1±0.2 b |
AWD+LN | 8.06±0.20 c | 243.5±4.1 b | 146.3±2.1 d | 89.1±1.5 a | 25.5±0.2 a |
AWD+MN | 9.20±0.26 a | 279.9±5.5 a | 154.9±3.1 b | 83.5±1.0 b | 25.4±0.2 a |
AWD+HN | 9.03±0.28 a | 282.5±4.9 a | 162.4±2.6 a | 78.1±1.8 c | 25.3±0.2 ab |
2016 | |||||
CI+LN | 7.18±0.12 e | 224.4±3.8 b | 150.3±2.2 d | 84.8±1.0 bc | 25.2±0.4 a |
CI+MN | 8.83±0.20 b | 274.2±4.8 a | 155.2±2.7 c | 82.8±0.8 c | 25.1±0.2 a |
CI+HN | 8.40±0.18 c | 272.9±5.2 a | 162.3±3.7 ab | 75.4±1.5 d | 25.2±0.1 a |
AWD+LN | 7.78±0.24 d | 225.3±4.2 b | 153.8±4.2 c | 88.7±0.9 a | 25.3±0.2 a |
AWD+MN | 9.38±0.21 a | 270.8±3.5 a | 160.2±1.6 b | 85.8±1.1 b | 25.2±0.3 a |
AWD+HN | 9.27±0.29 a | 270.5±4.4 a | 164.2±2.1 a | 83.1±1.4 c | 25.2±0.2 a |
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 植株吸氮量 N uptake of plants/(kg·hm-2) | 籽粒吸氮量 N uptake of grains/(kg·hm-2) | 产谷利用效率 IEN/(kg·kg-1) | 氮肥偏生产力 PFPN/(kg·kg-1) | 氮收获指数 HIN/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | |||||
CI+LN | 106.2±4.5 c | 66.7±2.2 d | 69.5±2.5 b | 91.8±3.2 b | 63.1±1.1 b |
CI+MN | 134.8±3.2 b | 82.0±1.8 b | 63.2±3.3 c | 53.3±1.8 d | 60.8±0.8 c |
CI+HN | 140.8±4.7 a | 76.1±3.0 c | 57.4±1.8 d | 33.8±1.9 f | 53.8±0.5 d |
AWD+LN | 109.3±5.1 c | 73.7±2.4 c | 73.8±2.3 a | 100.8±2.1 a | 67.5±0.9 a |
AWD+MN | 132.4±3.0 b | 86.0±1.9 a | 69.7±3.0 b | 57.5±2.5 c | 65.1±0.9 ab |
AWD+HN | 140.2±3.3 a | 86.3±1.5 a | 64.5±2.8 c | 37.6±1.5 e | 61.7±1.3 bc |
2016 | |||||
CI+LN | 108.4±4.2 c | 66.1±3.2 d | 66.7±2.4 bc | 89.8±1.8 b | 61.8±1.2 bc |
CI+MN | 136.9±3.4 b | 79.4±1.8 b | 64.5±2.1 c | 55.2±2.2 d | 58.0±1.0 c |
CI+HN | 138.7±2. 9 ab | 73.1±1.7 c | 60.5±1.4 d | 35.0±1.6 f | 52.6±0.8 d |
AWD+LN | 110.4±3.3 c | 75.0±2.3 bc | 70.9±1.7 a | 97.2±2.4 a | 68.4±0.8 a |
AWD+MN | 140.2±4.8 ab | 88.0±2.4 a | 67.2±2.1 b | 58.6±1.4 c | 63.1±0.9 b |
AWD+HN | 144.3±3.5 a | 87.4±1.9 a | 63.5±2.3 c | 38.6±1.3 e | 60.8±0.7 c |
表2 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对水稻氮肥利用效率的影响
Table 2 Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on nitrogen use efficiency of rice.
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 植株吸氮量 N uptake of plants/(kg·hm-2) | 籽粒吸氮量 N uptake of grains/(kg·hm-2) | 产谷利用效率 IEN/(kg·kg-1) | 氮肥偏生产力 PFPN/(kg·kg-1) | 氮收获指数 HIN/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | |||||
CI+LN | 106.2±4.5 c | 66.7±2.2 d | 69.5±2.5 b | 91.8±3.2 b | 63.1±1.1 b |
CI+MN | 134.8±3.2 b | 82.0±1.8 b | 63.2±3.3 c | 53.3±1.8 d | 60.8±0.8 c |
CI+HN | 140.8±4.7 a | 76.1±3.0 c | 57.4±1.8 d | 33.8±1.9 f | 53.8±0.5 d |
AWD+LN | 109.3±5.1 c | 73.7±2.4 c | 73.8±2.3 a | 100.8±2.1 a | 67.5±0.9 a |
AWD+MN | 132.4±3.0 b | 86.0±1.9 a | 69.7±3.0 b | 57.5±2.5 c | 65.1±0.9 ab |
AWD+HN | 140.2±3.3 a | 86.3±1.5 a | 64.5±2.8 c | 37.6±1.5 e | 61.7±1.3 bc |
2016 | |||||
CI+LN | 108.4±4.2 c | 66.1±3.2 d | 66.7±2.4 bc | 89.8±1.8 b | 61.8±1.2 bc |
CI+MN | 136.9±3.4 b | 79.4±1.8 b | 64.5±2.1 c | 55.2±2.2 d | 58.0±1.0 c |
CI+HN | 138.7±2. 9 ab | 73.1±1.7 c | 60.5±1.4 d | 35.0±1.6 f | 52.6±0.8 d |
AWD+LN | 110.4±3.3 c | 75.0±2.3 bc | 70.9±1.7 a | 97.2±2.4 a | 68.4±0.8 a |
AWD+MN | 140.2±4.8 ab | 88.0±2.4 a | 67.2±2.1 b | 58.6±1.4 c | 63.1±0.9 b |
AWD+HN | 144.3±3.5 a | 87.4±1.9 a | 63.5±2.3 c | 38.6±1.3 e | 60.8±0.7 c |
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 分蘖数 Number of tillers per m2 | 分蘖成穗率 Percentage of productive tillers/% | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
拔节期 Jointing stage | 抽穗期 Heading time | 成熟期 Maturity | ||
2015 | ||||
CI+LN | 289.3±4.8 e | 198.4±3.2 b | 195.3±2.7 b | 67.5±1.0 d |
CI+MN | 356.2±6.6 b | 236.4±2.8 a | 234.2±3.6 a | 65.8±1.3 d |
CI+HN | 387.8±6.6 a | 237.8±4.2 a | 235.8±3.1 a | 60.9±3.5 e |
AWD+LN | 247.3±5.1 f | 195.2±2.6 b | 192.8±2.4 b | 78.2±2.0 a |
AWD+MN | 310.4±7.7 d | 234.8±2.0 a | 230.0±3.2 a | 74.1±1.6 b |
AWD+HN | 331.8±5.2 c | 236.4±3.3 a | 231.7±2.2 a | 69.8±1.2 c |
2016 | ||||
CI+LN | 248.7±5.4 e | 176.9±2.7 b | 174.2±3.2 b | 69.8±0.9 b |
CI+MN | 348.2±6.2 b | 227.8±3.3 a | 224.1±1.8 a | 64.3±1.9 c |
CI+HN | 376.8±4.6 a | 227.3±4.1 a | 223.4±2.2 a | 59.1±1.8 d |
AWD+LN | 225.4±6.4 f | 180.4±3.5 b | 175.2±2.0 b | 77.9±1.4 a |
AWD+MN | 294.0±7.3 d | 224.8±2.8 a | 220.8±1.9 a | 75.1±2.1 a |
AWD+HN | 306.6±5.3 c | 224.3±4.1 a | 219.7±2.4 a | 71.7±1.6 b |
表3 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对水稻分蘖数与分蘖成穗率的影响
Table 3 Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on number of tillers and percentage of productive tillers of rice.
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 分蘖数 Number of tillers per m2 | 分蘖成穗率 Percentage of productive tillers/% | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
拔节期 Jointing stage | 抽穗期 Heading time | 成熟期 Maturity | ||
2015 | ||||
CI+LN | 289.3±4.8 e | 198.4±3.2 b | 195.3±2.7 b | 67.5±1.0 d |
CI+MN | 356.2±6.6 b | 236.4±2.8 a | 234.2±3.6 a | 65.8±1.3 d |
CI+HN | 387.8±6.6 a | 237.8±4.2 a | 235.8±3.1 a | 60.9±3.5 e |
AWD+LN | 247.3±5.1 f | 195.2±2.6 b | 192.8±2.4 b | 78.2±2.0 a |
AWD+MN | 310.4±7.7 d | 234.8±2.0 a | 230.0±3.2 a | 74.1±1.6 b |
AWD+HN | 331.8±5.2 c | 236.4±3.3 a | 231.7±2.2 a | 69.8±1.2 c |
2016 | ||||
CI+LN | 248.7±5.4 e | 176.9±2.7 b | 174.2±3.2 b | 69.8±0.9 b |
CI+MN | 348.2±6.2 b | 227.8±3.3 a | 224.1±1.8 a | 64.3±1.9 c |
CI+HN | 376.8±4.6 a | 227.3±4.1 a | 223.4±2.2 a | 59.1±1.8 d |
AWD+LN | 225.4±6.4 f | 180.4±3.5 b | 175.2±2.0 b | 77.9±1.4 a |
AWD+MN | 294.0±7.3 d | 224.8±2.8 a | 220.8±1.9 a | 75.1±2.1 a |
AWD+HN | 306.6±5.3 c | 224.3±4.1 a | 219.7±2.4 a | 71.7±1.6 b |
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 拔节期 Jointing | 抽穗期 Heading | 成熟期 Maturity |
---|---|---|---|
2015 | |||
CI+LN | 4.23±0.15 d | 6.12±0.13 d | 0.75±0.11 f |
CI+MN | 5.72±0.13 b | 7.44±0.27 bc | 1.69±0.08 c |
CI+HN | 6.12±0.19 a | 8.05±0.28 a | 1.31±0.09 d |
AWD+LN | 3.98±0.24 e | 6.04±0.17 d | 1.05±0.10 e |
AWD+MN | 5.14±0.15 c | 7.25±0.15 c | 1.94±0.05 b |
AWD+HN | 5.84±0.28 ab | 7.64±0.20 b | 2.16±0.06 a |
2016 | |||
CI+LN | 4.45±0.19 c | 6.31±0.21 d | 0.84±0.15 e |
CI+MN | 5.51±0.32 b | 7.61±0.12 b | 1.52±0.06 c |
CI+HN | 6.27±0.28 a | 7.94±0.22 a | 1.21±0.09 d |
AWD+LN | 4.09±0.17 d | 6.19±0.17 d | 1.04±0.11 de |
AWD+MN | 4.64±0.35 c | 7.17±0.23 c | 1.85±0.10 b |
AWD+HN | 5.69±0.26 b | 7.68±0.14 b | 2.04±0.08 a |
表4 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对水稻叶面积指数(LAI)的影响
Table 4 Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on LAI of rice.
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 拔节期 Jointing | 抽穗期 Heading | 成熟期 Maturity |
---|---|---|---|
2015 | |||
CI+LN | 4.23±0.15 d | 6.12±0.13 d | 0.75±0.11 f |
CI+MN | 5.72±0.13 b | 7.44±0.27 bc | 1.69±0.08 c |
CI+HN | 6.12±0.19 a | 8.05±0.28 a | 1.31±0.09 d |
AWD+LN | 3.98±0.24 e | 6.04±0.17 d | 1.05±0.10 e |
AWD+MN | 5.14±0.15 c | 7.25±0.15 c | 1.94±0.05 b |
AWD+HN | 5.84±0.28 ab | 7.64±0.20 b | 2.16±0.06 a |
2016 | |||
CI+LN | 4.45±0.19 c | 6.31±0.21 d | 0.84±0.15 e |
CI+MN | 5.51±0.32 b | 7.61±0.12 b | 1.52±0.06 c |
CI+HN | 6.27±0.28 a | 7.94±0.22 a | 1.21±0.09 d |
AWD+LN | 4.09±0.17 d | 6.19±0.17 d | 1.04±0.11 de |
AWD+MN | 4.64±0.35 c | 7.17±0.23 c | 1.85±0.10 b |
AWD+HN | 5.69±0.26 b | 7.68±0.14 b | 2.04±0.08 a |
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 地上部干物质量Shoot dry weight/(t·hm-2) | 抽穗期根干质量Root dry weight at heading/(g·m-2) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
拔节期 Jointing | 抽穗期 Heading | 成熟期 Maturity | 0~10 cm根层 0-10 cm soil layer | 10~20 cm根层 10-20 cm soil layer | ||||
2015 | ||||||||
CI+LN | 3.58±0.12 c | 8.27±0.38 d | 12.8±0.2 c | 66.0±2.9 b | 28.3±1.1 b | |||
CI+MN | 4.02±0.13 b | 9.54±0.22 b | 15.5±0.3 a | 76.4±2.5 a | 31.2±2.1 b | |||
CI+HN | 4.51±0.08 a | 10.10±0.31 a | 15.5±0.3 a | 75.3±3.2 a | 31.0±1.4 b | |||
AWD+LN | 3.43±0.09 c | 8.02±0.21 d | 13.2±0.3 b | 67.4±2.5 b | 36.3±0.9 ab | |||
AWD+MN | 3.97±0.15 b | 8.95±0.32 c | 15.4±0.2 a | 80.0±1.6 a | 39.3±2.0 a | |||
AWD+HN | 4.42±0.11 a | 9.46±0.25 b | 15.5±0.4 a | 79.4±2.2 a | 39.1±1.5 a | |||
2016 | ||||||||
CI+LN | 3.34±0.09 c | 8.45±0.26 d | 12.4±0.2 c | 60.7±1.2 c | 26.0±1.3 c | |||
CI+MN | 4.26±0.07 b | 9.85±0.29 b | 15.9±0.4 a | 72.1±2.7 a | 29.8±1.7 b | |||
CI+HN | 4.52±0.11 a | 10.20±0.16 a | 15.7±0.2 a | 73.8±2.9 a | 30.4±2.0 b | |||
AWD+LN | 3.28±0.14 c | 7.86±0.31 e | 13.0±0.2 b | 64.0±1.9 b | 34.4±1.6 ab | |||
AWD+MN | 4.12±0.07 b | 9.01±0.25 c | 15.7±0.3 a | 75.3±2.1 a | 37.1±0.9 a | |||
AWD+HN | 4.65±0.15 a | 9.75±0.20 b | 15.8±0.3 a | 75.1±3.2 a | 38.7±1.4 a |
表5 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对水稻地上部干物质量与抽穗期根干质量的影响
Table 5 Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on shoot dry weight and root dry weight at heading in rice.
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 地上部干物质量Shoot dry weight/(t·hm-2) | 抽穗期根干质量Root dry weight at heading/(g·m-2) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
拔节期 Jointing | 抽穗期 Heading | 成熟期 Maturity | 0~10 cm根层 0-10 cm soil layer | 10~20 cm根层 10-20 cm soil layer | ||||
2015 | ||||||||
CI+LN | 3.58±0.12 c | 8.27±0.38 d | 12.8±0.2 c | 66.0±2.9 b | 28.3±1.1 b | |||
CI+MN | 4.02±0.13 b | 9.54±0.22 b | 15.5±0.3 a | 76.4±2.5 a | 31.2±2.1 b | |||
CI+HN | 4.51±0.08 a | 10.10±0.31 a | 15.5±0.3 a | 75.3±3.2 a | 31.0±1.4 b | |||
AWD+LN | 3.43±0.09 c | 8.02±0.21 d | 13.2±0.3 b | 67.4±2.5 b | 36.3±0.9 ab | |||
AWD+MN | 3.97±0.15 b | 8.95±0.32 c | 15.4±0.2 a | 80.0±1.6 a | 39.3±2.0 a | |||
AWD+HN | 4.42±0.11 a | 9.46±0.25 b | 15.5±0.4 a | 79.4±2.2 a | 39.1±1.5 a | |||
2016 | ||||||||
CI+LN | 3.34±0.09 c | 8.45±0.26 d | 12.4±0.2 c | 60.7±1.2 c | 26.0±1.3 c | |||
CI+MN | 4.26±0.07 b | 9.85±0.29 b | 15.9±0.4 a | 72.1±2.7 a | 29.8±1.7 b | |||
CI+HN | 4.52±0.11 a | 10.20±0.16 a | 15.7±0.2 a | 73.8±2.9 a | 30.4±2.0 b | |||
AWD+LN | 3.28±0.14 c | 7.86±0.31 e | 13.0±0.2 b | 64.0±1.9 b | 34.4±1.6 ab | |||
AWD+MN | 4.12±0.07 b | 9.01±0.25 c | 15.7±0.3 a | 75.3±2.1 a | 37.1±0.9 a | |||
AWD+HN | 4.65±0.15 a | 9.75±0.20 b | 15.8±0.3 a | 75.1±3.2 a | 38.7±1.4 a |
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 剑叶净光合速率 Leaf photosynthetic rate/(µmol·m-2 s-1) | 根系氧化力 Root oxidation activity/(µg·g-1 h-1) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | W1 | D2 | W2 | D1 | W1 | D2 | W2 | ||
2015 | |||||||||
CI+LN | 17.4±0.5 b | 16.9±0.5 c | 13.9±0.6 c | 13.6±0.7 e | 408.7±22.5 b | 414.3±19.5 d | 261.7±16.6 c | 254.3±21.9 d | |
CI+MN | 21.5±0.5 a | 21.0±0.5 b | 17.1±0.5 a | 16.6±0.6 c | 595.2±26.5 a | 587.3±14.6 b | 392.4±17.5 a | 379.8±15.5 b | |
CI+HN | 21.9±0.7 a | 21.7±0.4 b | 15.1±0.5 b | 15.0±0.5 d | 611.0±27.4 a | 599.7±27.8 b | 354.3±16.9 b | 336.8±17.6 c | |
AWD+LN | 16.9±0.5 b | 21.7±0.4 b | 13.6±0.7 c | 18.3±0.8 b | 398.8±31.2 b | 547.3±18.2 c | 270.3±23.5 c | 358.7±25.5 bc | |
AWD+MN | 20.7±0.5 a | 25.2±0.6 a | 16.8±0.7 a | 21.5±0.6 a | 589.7±19.4 a | 650.3±16.5 a | 403.8±13.4 a | 454.3±24.8 a | |
AWD+HN | 21.5±0.5 a | 25.3±0.6 a | 17.9±0.5 a | 22.6±0.5 a | 600.4±16.4 a | 665.7±13.4 a | 406.7±24.8 a | 486.8±19.7 a | |
2016 | |||||||||
CI+LN | 16.6±0.6 b | 17.1±0.5 c | 14.2±0.5 c | 13.8±0.6 e | 436.2±22.2 b | 420.3±16.9 d | 270.3±16.8 c | 251.8±25.5 d | |
CI+MN | 19.9±0.8 a | 20.2±0.6 b | 17.4±0.5 a | 17.3±0.7 c | 625.5±23.1 a | 608.3±19.5 b | 393.8±25.1 a | 388.7±21.3 b | |
CI+HN | 20.7±0.6 a | 21.3±0.8 b | 16.3±0.8 b | 15.1±0.8 d | 616.3±24.8 a | 624.4±15.5 b | 342.0±21.5 b | 348.4±15.1 c | |
AWD+LN | 16.1±0.5 b | 20.6±0.4 b | 13.8±0.8 c | 18.2±0.8 b | 418.3±24.5 b | 568.7±22.4 c | 260.3±24.6 c | 390.5±22.7 b | |
AWD+MN | 19.4±0.7 a | 24.5±0.6 a | 17.3±0.6 a | 21.2±0.5 a | 607.8±11.5 a | 658.7±12.8 a | 389.0±31.8 a | 454.2±27.9 a | |
AWD+HN | 20.2±0.5 a | 23.5±0.5 a | 18.3±0.8 a | 22.7±0.7 a | 625.3±19.8 a | 670.3±20.5 a | 403.8±22.7 a | 488.5±27.2 a |
表6 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对剑叶净光合速率与根系氧化力的影响
Table 6 Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on photosynthetic rate of the flag leaf and root oxidation activity of rice during grain filling.
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 剑叶净光合速率 Leaf photosynthetic rate/(µmol·m-2 s-1) | 根系氧化力 Root oxidation activity/(µg·g-1 h-1) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | W1 | D2 | W2 | D1 | W1 | D2 | W2 | ||
2015 | |||||||||
CI+LN | 17.4±0.5 b | 16.9±0.5 c | 13.9±0.6 c | 13.6±0.7 e | 408.7±22.5 b | 414.3±19.5 d | 261.7±16.6 c | 254.3±21.9 d | |
CI+MN | 21.5±0.5 a | 21.0±0.5 b | 17.1±0.5 a | 16.6±0.6 c | 595.2±26.5 a | 587.3±14.6 b | 392.4±17.5 a | 379.8±15.5 b | |
CI+HN | 21.9±0.7 a | 21.7±0.4 b | 15.1±0.5 b | 15.0±0.5 d | 611.0±27.4 a | 599.7±27.8 b | 354.3±16.9 b | 336.8±17.6 c | |
AWD+LN | 16.9±0.5 b | 21.7±0.4 b | 13.6±0.7 c | 18.3±0.8 b | 398.8±31.2 b | 547.3±18.2 c | 270.3±23.5 c | 358.7±25.5 bc | |
AWD+MN | 20.7±0.5 a | 25.2±0.6 a | 16.8±0.7 a | 21.5±0.6 a | 589.7±19.4 a | 650.3±16.5 a | 403.8±13.4 a | 454.3±24.8 a | |
AWD+HN | 21.5±0.5 a | 25.3±0.6 a | 17.9±0.5 a | 22.6±0.5 a | 600.4±16.4 a | 665.7±13.4 a | 406.7±24.8 a | 486.8±19.7 a | |
2016 | |||||||||
CI+LN | 16.6±0.6 b | 17.1±0.5 c | 14.2±0.5 c | 13.8±0.6 e | 436.2±22.2 b | 420.3±16.9 d | 270.3±16.8 c | 251.8±25.5 d | |
CI+MN | 19.9±0.8 a | 20.2±0.6 b | 17.4±0.5 a | 17.3±0.7 c | 625.5±23.1 a | 608.3±19.5 b | 393.8±25.1 a | 388.7±21.3 b | |
CI+HN | 20.7±0.6 a | 21.3±0.8 b | 16.3±0.8 b | 15.1±0.8 d | 616.3±24.8 a | 624.4±15.5 b | 342.0±21.5 b | 348.4±15.1 c | |
AWD+LN | 16.1±0.5 b | 20.6±0.4 b | 13.8±0.8 c | 18.2±0.8 b | 418.3±24.5 b | 568.7±22.4 c | 260.3±24.6 c | 390.5±22.7 b | |
AWD+MN | 19.4±0.7 a | 24.5±0.6 a | 17.3±0.6 a | 21.2±0.5 a | 607.8±11.5 a | 658.7±12.8 a | 389.0±31.8 a | 454.2±27.9 a | |
AWD+HN | 20.2±0.5 a | 23.5±0.5 a | 18.3±0.8 a | 22.7±0.7 a | 625.3±19.8 a | 670.3±20.5 a | 403.8±22.7 a | 488.5±27.2 a |
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 抽穗期NSC NSC at heading/(g·m-2) | 成熟期NSC NSC at maturity/(g·m-2) | NSC运转率 Remobilized NSC/% | NSC对产量贡献率 NSC contributed to grain yield /% |
---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | ||||
CI+LN | 202.3±4.41 c | 90.5±2.3 d | 55.3±1.4 b | 15.1±0.8 c |
CI+MN | 252.4±3.26 b | 131±1.8 b | 47.9±1.3 d | 14.0±0.5 c |
CI+HN | 257.1±3.83 b | 171±3.6 a | 33.4±2.7 e | 10.5±0.5 d |
AWD+LN | 207.3±5.16 c | 80.7±3.2 d | 61.5±2.2 a | 16.1±0.3 b |
AWD+MN | 257.8±6.88 b | 103±2.8 c | 60.2±3.0 a | 16.9±0.3 a |
AWD+HN | 284.3±3.42 a | 139±2.5 b | 51.2±2.9 c | 15.9±0.4 b |
2016 | ||||
CI+LN | 204.3±4.25 d | 91.7±3.2 d | 55.2±1.3 b | 15.8±0.5 b |
CI+MN | 254.3±3.19 c | 137±2.8 b | 46.2±1.9 c | 13.5±0.6 c |
CI+HN | 251.7±5.28 c | 175±3.6 a | 30.3±2.0 d | 9.32±0.7 d |
AWD+LN | 211.7±6.51 d | 81.1±5.2 d | 61.8±1.3 a | 16.8±0.6 a |
AWD+MN | 262.9±4.03 b | 107±2.8 c | 59.2±2.9 a | 16.6±0.5 a |
AWD+HN | 291.7±4.92 a | 135±4.3 b | 53.6±3.0 b | 16.9±0.6 a |
表7 灌溉模式与施氮量交互作用对茎鞘中非结构性碳水化合物(NSC)运转的影响
Table 7 Effects of interaction between irrigation regimes and nitrogen rates on remobilization of non-structural carbohydrates(NSC) in culms and sheaths during grain filling.
年度与处理 Year and Treatment | 抽穗期NSC NSC at heading/(g·m-2) | 成熟期NSC NSC at maturity/(g·m-2) | NSC运转率 Remobilized NSC/% | NSC对产量贡献率 NSC contributed to grain yield /% |
---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | ||||
CI+LN | 202.3±4.41 c | 90.5±2.3 d | 55.3±1.4 b | 15.1±0.8 c |
CI+MN | 252.4±3.26 b | 131±1.8 b | 47.9±1.3 d | 14.0±0.5 c |
CI+HN | 257.1±3.83 b | 171±3.6 a | 33.4±2.7 e | 10.5±0.5 d |
AWD+LN | 207.3±5.16 c | 80.7±3.2 d | 61.5±2.2 a | 16.1±0.3 b |
AWD+MN | 257.8±6.88 b | 103±2.8 c | 60.2±3.0 a | 16.9±0.3 a |
AWD+HN | 284.3±3.42 a | 139±2.5 b | 51.2±2.9 c | 15.9±0.4 b |
2016 | ||||
CI+LN | 204.3±4.25 d | 91.7±3.2 d | 55.2±1.3 b | 15.8±0.5 b |
CI+MN | 254.3±3.19 c | 137±2.8 b | 46.2±1.9 c | 13.5±0.6 c |
CI+HN | 251.7±5.28 c | 175±3.6 a | 30.3±2.0 d | 9.32±0.7 d |
AWD+LN | 211.7±6.51 d | 81.1±5.2 d | 61.8±1.3 a | 16.8±0.6 a |
AWD+MN | 262.9±4.03 b | 107±2.8 c | 59.2±2.9 a | 16.6±0.5 a |
AWD+HN | 291.7±4.92 a | 135±4.3 b | 53.6±3.0 b | 16.9±0.6 a |
[1] | Fageria N.Plant tissue test for determination of optimum concentration and uptake of nitrogen at different growth stages in low land rice.Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal, 2003, 34(1): 259-270. |
[2] | Belder P, Bouman B, Cabangon R, Guoan L, Quilang E, Li Y, Spiertz J, Tuong T.Effect of water-saving irrigation on rice yield and water use in typical lowland conditions in Asia.Agric Water Manag, 2004, 65(3): 193-210. |
[3] | Bouman B.A conceptual framework for the improvement of cropwater productivity at different spatial scales.Agric Syst, 2007, 93(3): 43-60. |
[4] | Borrell A, Garside A, Fukai S.Improving efficiency of water use for irrigated rice in a semi-arid tropical environment.Field Crops Res, 1997, 52(3): 231-248. |
[5] | Carrijo D, Lundy M, Linquist B.Rice yields and water use under alternate wetting and drying irrigation: A meta-analysis.Field Crops Res, 2017, 203(3): 173-180. |
[6] | FAOSTAT. FAO Statistical Databases, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, Rome, 2013. .[<date-in-citation content-type="access-date">2017-09 -05</date-in-citation>]. |
[7] | Peng S, Buresh R, Huang J, Zhong X, Zou Y, Yang J, Wang G, Liu Y, Tang Q, Cui K, Zhang F, Dobermann A.Improving nitrogen fertilization in rice by site-specific N management: A review.Agron Sustain Dev, 2010, 30(3): 649-656. |
[8] | Ju X, Xing G, Chen X, Zhang S, Zhang L, Liu X, Cui Z, Yin B, Christiea P, Zhu Z, Zhang F.Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A, 2009, 106(19), 3041-3046. |
[9] | 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) | |
[10] | Cabangon R, Tuong T, Castillo E.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(4): 195-206. |
[11] | Sharma B, KarS, Cheema S. Yield, water use and nitrogen uptake for different water and N levels in winter wheat. Fert Res, 1990, 22(1):119-127. |
[12] | 杨建昌, 杜永, 刘辉. 长江下游稻麦周年超高产栽培途径与技术. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(6): 1611-1621. |
Yang J C, Du Y, Liu H.Cultivation approaches and techniques for annual super-high-yielding of rice and wheat in the lower reaches of Yangtze river. Sci Agric Sin, 2008, 41(6): 1611-1621. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[13] | Chu G, Chen T, Wang Z, Yang J, Zhang J.Morphological and physiological traits of roots and their relationships with water productivity in water-saving and drought-resistant rice.Field Crops Res, 2014, 162(8): 108-119. |
[14] | Chu G, Wang Z, Zhang H, Liu L, Yang J, Zhang J.Alternate wetting and moderate drying increases rice yield and reduces methane emission in paddy field with wheat straw residue incorporation.Food and Energy Sec, 2015, 4(3): 238-254. |
[15] | 褚光, 展明飞, 朱宽宇, 王志琴, 杨建昌. 干湿交替灌溉对水稻产量与水分利用效率的影响. 作物学报, 2016, 42(7): 1026-1036. |
Chu G, Zhan M F, Zhu K Y, Wang Z Q, Yang J C.Effects of alternate wetting and drying irrigation on yield and water use efficiency of rice.Acta Agron Sin, 2016, 42(7): 1026-1036. | |
[16] | Fu J, Huang Z, Wang Z, Yang J, Zhang J.Pre-anthesis non-structural carbohydrate reserve in the stem enhances the sink strength of inferior spikelets during grain filling of rice.Field Crops Res, 2011, 123(2): 170-182. |
[17] | Zhang Z, Chu G, Liu L, Wang Z, Yang J, Zhang J.Mid-season nitrogen application strategies for rice varieties differing in panicle size.Field Crops Res, 2013, 150: 9-18. |
[18] | Boyer J, Westgate M.Grain yields with limited water. J Exp Bot, 2004, 55(407): 2385-2349. |
[19] | Saini H, Westgate M.Reproductive development in grain crops during drought.Adv Agron, 2000, 68(2): 59-96. |
[20] | Yang J, Zhang J, Liu K, et al.Abscisic acid and ethylene interact in rice spikelets in response to water stress during meiosis.J Plant Growth Regul, 2007, 26(4): 318-328. |
[21] | Zhang H, Xue Y, Wang Z, Yang J, Zhang J.An alternate wetting and moderate soil drying regime improves root and shoot growth in rice. Crop Sci, 2009, 49(6): 2246-2260. |
[22] | Takai T, Fukuta Y, Shirawa T, Horie T.Time-related mapping of quantitative trait loci controlling grain-filling in rice. J Exp Bot, 2005, 56, 2107-2118. |
[23] | Ramasamy S, Berge H, Purushothaman S.Yield formation in rice in response to drainage and nitrogen application,Field Crops Res, 1997, 51(1): 65-82. |
[24] | Ju C, Buresh R, Wang Z, Zhang H, Liu L, Yang J, Zhang J.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. |
[25] | Yang C, Yang L, Yang X, Zhu O.Rice root growth and nutrient uptake as influenced by organic manure in continuously and alternately flooded paddy soils.Agr Water Manag, 2004, 70(1): 67-81. |
[26] | Liu L, Chen T, Wang Z, Zhang H, Yang J, Zhang J.Combination of site-specific nitrogen management and alternate wetting and drying irrigation increases grain yield and nitrogen and water use efficiency in super rice.Field Crops Res, 2013, 154: 226-235. |
[27] | Xue Y, Duan H, Liu L, Wang Z, Yang J, Zhang J.An improved crop management increases grain yield and nitrogen and water use efficiency in rice.Crop Sci, 2013, 53(1): 271-284. |
[28] | Vitousek P, Mooney H, Lubchenco J, Melillo J.Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science, 1997, 277(5325) : 494-499. |
[29] | Belder P, Spiertz J, Bouman B, Lu G, Tuong T.Nitrogen economy and water productivity of lowland rice under water-saving irrigation.Field Crops Res, 2005, 93(2): 169-185. |
[30] | 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) |
[1] | 任志奇, 薛可欣, 董铮, 李小湘, 黎用朝, 郭玉静, 刘文强, 郭梁, 盛新年, 刘之熙, 潘孝武. 水稻外卷叶突变体ocl1的鉴定及基因定位[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 337-346. |
[2] | 肖乐铨, 李雷, 戴伟民, 强胜, 宋小玲. 转cry2A*/bar基因水稻与杂草稻杂交后代的苗期生长特性[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 347-358. |
[3] | 李刚, 高清松, 李伟, 张雯霞, 王健, 程保山, 王迪, 高浩, 徐卫军, 陈红旗, 纪剑辉. 定向敲除SD1基因提高水稻的抗倒性和稻瘟病抗性[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 359-367. |
[4] | 汪胜勇, 陈宇航, 陈会丽, 黄钰杰, 张啸天, 丁双成, 王宏伟. 水稻减数分裂期高温对苯丙烷类代谢及下游分支代谢途径的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 368-378. |
[5] | 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. |
[6] | 董立强, 杨铁鑫, 李睿, 商文奇, 马亮, 李跃东, 隋国民. 株行距配置对超高产田水稻产量及根系形态生理特性的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 392-404. |
[7] | 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. |
[8] | 韩聪, 何禹畅, 吴丽娟, 郏丽丽, 王磊, 鄂志国. 水稻碱性亮氨酸拉链(bZIP)蛋白家族功能研究进展[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 436-448. |
[9] | 沈雨民, 陈明亮, 熊焕金, 熊文涛, 吴小燕, 肖叶青. 水稻内外稃异常发育突变体blg1 (beak like grain 1)的表型分析与精细定位[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 225-232. |
[10] | 段敏, 谢留杰, 高秀莹, 唐海娟, 黄善军, 潘晓飚. 利用CRISPR/Cas9技术创制广亲和水稻温敏雄性不育系[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 233-243. |
[11] | 程玲, 黄福钢, 邱一埔, 王心怡, 舒宛, 邱永福, 李发活. 籼稻材料570011抗褐飞虱基因的遗传分析及鉴定[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 244-252. |
[12] | 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. |
[13] | 刘嫒桦, 李小坤. 不同肥料施用与稻米品质关系的整合分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 276-284. |
[14] | 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. |
[15] | 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. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||