Effects of Interaction Between Irrigation Regimes and Nitrogen Rates on Rice Yield and Water and Nitrogen Use Efficiencies

doi:10.16819/j.1001-7216.2017.7048 513

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】In order to lay a scientific basis for high yield and high water and nitrogen use efficiencies in rice production, we estimated the effects of the interaction between the alternate wetting and drying (AWD) regime and different nitrogen rates on grain yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies.【Method】The field experiments were conducted with two irrigation regimes, AWD and conventional irrigation (CI) and three N rates, 80 (low amount, LN), 160 (medium amount, MN) and 240 kg/hm² (high amount, HN) in Fuyang, Zhejiang Province in 2015 and 2016. The local high-yielding rice cultivar Tianyouhuazhan (three-line indica hybrid combination) was used as experimental material. 【Result】There was an obvious interaction between irrigation regimes and N rates. When compared with CI regime, AWD could reduce redundant vegetative growth and control the number of rice tillers, improve the percentage of productive tillers by 8.1%–10.7%; increase the leaf area duration (LAD) and crop growth rate (CGR) from heading to maturity; increase root dry weight at a depth of 10-20 cm at heading by 24.4%–32.3%, and the root oxidation activity (ROA) during the re-watering period after heading; AWD could promote the remobilization of non-structural carbohydrates (NSC) in culms and sheaths for grain filling. The grain yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies were the highest in the combination of AWD and MN due to the improved population quality and grain filling, and the combination of AWD and MN was the best water-nitrogen management model in this study. 【Conclusion】The aim of high grain yield and high water and nitrogen use efficiencies could be achieved through integrating AWD with the medium amount of nitrogen application in rice production.

Key words: rice, yield, water use efficiency, nitrogen use efficiency, interaction between nitrogen rates and irrigation regimes

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。

关键词: 水稻, 产量, 水分利用率, 氮肥利用效率, 水氮互作

CLC Number:

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.

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.

Figures/Tables 11

References 30

[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)

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	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 IE_N/(kg·kg^-1)	氮肥偏生产力 PFP_N/(kg·kg^-1)	氮收获指数 HI_N/%
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	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 IE_N/(kg·kg^-1)	氮肥偏生产力 PFP_N/(kg·kg^-1)	氮收获指数 HI_N/%
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/%
年度与处理 Year and Treatment	拔节期 Jointing stage	抽穗期 Heading time	成熟期 Maturity	分蘖成穗率 Percentage of productive tillers/%
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