Effect of Plant Growth Regulators on Rice Lodging Resistance and Grain Production of Main-crop and Ratooning Rice

doi:10.16819/j.1001-7216.2019.8075

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】The present study aims to evaluate the effect of plant growth regulators (PGRs) on rice lodging resistance and yield performance of ratoon rice.【Method】Jiafuzhan, Tianyouhuazhan, Yongyou 2640 were sampled with foliar application of paclobutrazol (PP₃₃₃), ethephon (ETH), trinexapac-ethyl (TE) at the initial jointing stage. The culm traits, mechanical index, grain yield and yield components of main-crop and ratooning rice were investigated.【Result】Yongyou 2640 had the strongest breaking resistance, plant thrust resistance and lodging resistance; Jiafuzhan had the longest internodes, the highest plant height, the maximum lodging index and the weakest lodging resistance among the three varieties while the lodging resistance of Tianyouhuazhan was between them. Compared with foliar application of water (control), application of PP₃₃₃had no marked effect on internode length, plant height, culm wall thickness, but increased culm diameter of the 3rd internode (from the top), enhanced breaking resistance of the 4th (from the top) and the 3rd internodes, drove down lodging index of the 4th and 3rd internodes; application of ETH increased length of the 4th internode, culm diameter of the 3rd internode and plant height, but had no obvious effect on culm wall thickness, reduced lodging index of the 3rd internode; application of TE shortened length of the 4th and the 2nd (from the top) internodes and plant height, increased culm diameter of the 3rd internode and culm wall thickness of the 3rd and the 2nd internodes, strengthened breaking resistance of the 4th and the 3rd internodes, reduced lodging index. PP₃₃₃, TE decreased the grain production of main-crop but increased ratooning rice, while ETH decreased both main-crop and ratooning rice. Total grain production of Tianyouhuazhan and Yongyou 2640 was reduced by PGRs treatments, total yield of Jiafuzhan was increased by PP₃₃₃ and TE application while decreased by ETH.【Conclusion】Comprehensively, application of TE enhanced the plant lodging resistance without negative effect on total yield of ratooning rice, and thus it could be used as a practice to prevent lodging in rice production.

Key words: plant growth regulators, lodging, ratoon-season rice, culm traits, production

摘要：

【目的】为了探明植物生长调节剂对再生稻头季抗倒伏能力及两季产量的影响,【方法】以佳辐占、天优华占和甬优2640为试验材料,于拔节初期叶面喷施多效唑、乙烯利和抗倒酯,研究不同植物生长调节剂对水稻头季茎秆特性、力学指标及两季产量形成的影响。【结果】甬优2640基部节间抗折力和植株抗推力最大,抗倒伏能力强;佳辐占基部节间最长,株高最高,倒伏指数高,抗倒伏能力最差;天优华占基部倒伏指数小,抗倒伏能力介于前二者中间。与喷施清水对照相比,多效唑处理植株节间长、株高、茎壁厚与对照差异较小,增加了倒3节间(N₃)茎粗和倒4节间(N₄)和N₃的抗折力,降低了N₄和N₃的倒伏指数;乙烯利处理则显著增加了N₄长度,N₃茎粗和株高,对茎壁厚没有明显影响, 增强了N₃抗折力,降低了N₃倒伏指数;抗倒酯处理缩短了N₄、倒2节间(N₂)长,降低株高,增加N₃茎粗和N₃、N₂的茎壁厚度,增强了N₄、N₃的抗折力,降低了各节间的倒伏指数。3种植物生长调节剂处理均降低了头季产量,多效唑和抗倒酯处理增加了再生季产量,乙烯利降低了再生季产量。分析产量构成因素,植物生长调节剂处理主要影响了总穗粒数,头季总穗粒数减少,再生季总穗粒数增加。天优华占和甬优2640两季总产量均较对照降低,佳辐占总产量多效唑和抗倒酯处理较对照增加,乙烯利处理较对照降低。【结论】抗倒酯处理增强了再生稻头季茎秆的抗倒伏能力,而对两季总产量无显著影响,对再生稻头季抗倒伏栽培具有现实意义。

关键词: 植物生长调节剂, 倒伏, 再生稻, 茎秆特性, 产量

CLC Number:

Zhenxing XIE, Junian ZHANG, Qi LIN, Feng LIU, Chuzhang ZHANG, Fangmei ZHUO, Zhaowei JIANG, Chuanying ZHUO. Effect of Plant Growth Regulators on Rice Lodging Resistance and Grain Production of Main-crop and Ratooning Rice[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2019, 33(2): 158-166.

解振兴, 张居念, 林祁, 刘锋, 张初长, 卓芳梅, 姜照伟, 卓传营. 植物生长调节剂对再生稻头季抗倒伏能力和两季产量的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2019, 33(2): 158-166.

Figures/Tables 5

References 33

[1]	Zhang W J, Li G H, Yang Y M, Li Q, Zhang J, Liu J Y, Wang S H, Tang S, Ding Y F.Effects of nitrogen application rate and ratio on lodging resistance of super rice with different genotypes.J Integ Agric, 2014, 13(1): 63-72.
[2]	李杰, 张洪程, 龚金龙, 常勇, 戴其根, 霍中洋, 许轲, 魏海燕. 不同种植方式对超级稻植株抗倒伏能力的影响. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(11): 2234-2243.
	Li J, Zhang H C, Gong J L, Chang Y, Dai Q G, Huo Z Y, Xu K, Wei H Y.Effects of different planting methods on the culm lodging resistance of super rice.Sci Agric Sin, 2011, 44(11): 2234-2243. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	何贤彪, 吴晓华, 马义虎. 台州沿海台风所致水稻倒伏对产量的影响. 中国稻米, 2015, 21(2): 28-29.
	He X B,Wu X H, Ma Y H.Effect of lodging caused by typhoon on grain yield of rice in Taizhou.Chin Rice. 2015, 21(2): 28-29. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	Setter T L, Laureles E V, Mazaredo A M.Lodging reduces yield of rice by self-shading and reduction in canopy photosynthesis.Field Crops Res, 1997, 49: 95-106.
[5]	刘立军, 袁莉民, 王志琴, 徐国伟, 陈云. 旱种水稻倒伏生理原因分析与对策的初步研究. 中国水稻科学, 2002, 16(3): 225-230.
	Liu L J, Yuan L M, Wang Z Q, Xu G W, Chen Y.Preliminary studies on physiological reason and countermeasure of lodging in dry-cultivated rice.Chin J Rice Sci, 2002, 16(3): 225-230. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	Lang Y Z, Yang X D, Wang M E, Zhu Q S, Effects of lodging at different filling stages on rice yield and grain quality.Rice Sci, 2012, 19(4): 315-319.
[7]	张桂莲, 屠乃美, 张顺堂.杂交水稻腋芽再生特性.中国水稻科学, 2005, 19(4): 323-327.
	Zhang G L, Tu N M, Zhang S T. ratooning properties of axillary buds in hybrid rice.Chin J Rice Sci, 2005, 19(4): 323-327. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	陈爱珠, 林玉婷, 李小萍. 再生稻头季倒伏对再生季生育的影响. 福建稻麦科技, 2010(3): 16-18.
	Chen A Z, Lin Y T, Li X P. Effects of lodging in the first crop of ratoon rice on development of the second crop. Fujian Sci Technol Rice & Wheat, 2010(3): 16-18. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	田晓莉, 李召虎, 段留生, 王保民, 何钟佩. 作物化学控制的研究进展及前景.中国农业科技报, 2004, 6(5): 11-15.
	Tian X L, Li Z H, Duan L S, Wang B M, He Z P.Progress and prospect of crop chemical control technology.Rev Chin Agric Sci Technol, 2004, 6(5): 11-15. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	解振兴, 张居念, 姜照伟. 化学调控技术在水稻栽培中的研究进展. 福建稻麦科技, 2016(4): 68-73.
	Xie Z X, Zhang J N, Jiang Z W,Advances in chemical control practice of rice cultivation.Fujian Sci Technol Rice & Wheat, 2016, (4): 68-73. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	陶龙兴, 王熹, 黄效林, 俞美玉. 植物生长调节剂在农业中的应用及发展趋势. 浙江农业学报, 2001, 13(5): 322-326.
	Tao L X,Wang X, Huang X L, Yu M Y.Application and prospects of plant growth regulators in agriculture.Acta Agric Zhejiang, 2001, 13(5): 322-326. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	孙旭初. 水稻茎秆抗倒性的研究. 中国农业科学, 1987, 20(4): 32-37.
	Sun X C.Studies on the resistance of the culm of rice to lodging.Sci Agric Sin, 1987, 20(4): 32-37. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	孙旭春, 顾洪如, 沈益新, 王显国, 丁成龙. 抗倒酯对多花黑麦草生长与倒伏的影响. 江苏农业学报, 2012, 28(1): 140-144.
	Sun X C, Gu H R, Shen Y X, Wang X G, Ding C L.Effects of growth regulator trinexapac-ethyl application on growth and lodging of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum). Jiangsu J Agric Sci, 2012, 28(1): 140-144. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	王佳, 方俊, 易文凯, 田云, 卢向阳. 水稻体内的乙烯信号传导途径(综述). 亚热带植物科学, 2011, 40(2): 72-78.
	Wang J, Fang J, Yi W K, Tian Y, Lu X Y.A review of ethylene signal transduction pathway in rice.Subtrop Plant Sci, 2011, 40(2): 72-78. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	赵雅静, 李小萍, 廖海林, 姜照伟. 再生稻佳辐占头季高产抗倒性的调控. 福建农业学报, 2015, 30(10): 927-932.
	Zhao Y J, Li X P, Liao H L, Jiang Z W.Regulating yield and lodging-resistance of ratoon rice jiafuzhan.Fujian J Agric Sci, 2015, 30(10): 927-932. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	李先民, 郑永富, 肖步金. 清流县适宜机收再生稻品种筛选试验. 福建稻麦科技, 2016(1): 16-20.
	Li X M, Zheng Y F,Xiao B J.Screening experiments of mechanical hybrid rice in qingliu county.Fujian Sci Technol Rice & Wheat, 2016(1): 16-20. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	姜照伟, 张数标, 郑家团, 徐倩华, 张琳. 低桩再生稻品种的筛选及主要机械化生产技术. 福建稻麦科技, 2015, 33(4): 15-16.
	Jiang Z W, Zhang S B, Zheng J T, Xu Q H, Zhang L.Screening and mechanized production technology of ratoon rice combination. Fujian Sci Technol Rice & Wheat, 2015, 33(4): 15-16. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	姜照伟, 李小萍, 赵雅静, 李义珍, 陈双龙. 立丰灵对水稻抗倒性和产量性状的影响. 福建农业学报, 2011, 26(3): 355-359.
	Jiang Z W, Li X P, Zhao Y J, Li Y Z, Chen S L.Effects of lifengling on lodging resistance and yield of rice.Fujian J Agric Sci, 2011, 26(3): 355-359. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	陈桂华, 邓化冰, 张桂莲, 唐文帮, 黄璜. 水稻茎秆性状与抗倒性的关系及配合力分析. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(3): 407-41.
	Chen G H, Deng H B, Zhang G L, Tang W B, Huang H.The correlation of stem characters and lodging resistance and combining ability analysis in rice.Sci Agric Sin, 2016, 49(3): 407-417. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	Islam M S, Peng S B, Visperas R M.Lodging-related morphological traits of hybrid rice in a tropical irrigated ecosystem.Field Crops Res, 2007, 101: 240-248.
[21]	杨世民, 谢力, 郑顺林, 李静, 袁继超. 氮肥水平和栽插密度对杂交稻茎秆理化特性与抗倒伏性的影响. 作物学报, 2009, 35(1): 93-103.
	Yang S M, Xie L, Zheng S L, Li J, Yuan J C.Effects of nitrogen rate and transplanting density on physical and chemical characteristics and lodging resistance of culms in hybrid rice.Acta Agron Sin, 2009, 35(1): 93-103. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	杨惠杰, 杨仁崔, 李义珍, 姜照伟, 郑景生. 水稻茎秆性状与抗倒性的关系. 福建农业学报, 2000, 15(2): 1-7.
	Yang H J, Yang R C, Li Y Z, Jiang Z W, Zheng J S.Relationship between culm traits and lodging resistance of rice Cultivars.Fujian J Agric Sci, 2000, 15(2): 1-7. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	范永义, 杨国涛, 陈敬, 蒋芬, Muslim Q, 陈永军, 胡运高. 硅钾肥配施对水稻茎秆理化性状及抗倒伏能力的影响. 西北植物学报, 2017, 37(4): 751-757.
	Fan Y Y, Yang G T, Chen J, Jiang F, Muslim Q, Chen Y J, Hu Y G.The physical chemical characters and lodging resistance of rice stem with silicon potassium collocation application.Acta Bota Bor-Occid Sin, 2017, 37(4): 751-757. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	张明聪, 刘元英, 罗盛国, 彭显龙, 陈丽楠, 李宗云, 李佳. 养分综合管理对寒地水稻抗倒伏性能的影响. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(21): 4536-4542.
	Zhang M C, Liu Y Y, Luo S G, Peng X L, Chen L N, Li Z Y, Li J.Effects of integrated nutrient management on lodging resistance of rice in cold area.Sci Agric Sin, 2010, 43(21): 4536-4542. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[25]	龚金龙, 邢志鹏, 胡雅杰, 张洪程, 戴其根, 霍中洋, 许轲, 魏海燕, 高辉. 籼/粳超级稻茎秆抗倒支撑特征的差异研究. 中国水稻科学, 2015, 29(3): 273-281.
	Gong J L, Xing Z P, Hu Y J, Zhang H C, Dai Q G, Huo Z Y, Xu K, Wei H Y, Gao H.Difference in lodging resistance of culm between india and japonica upper rice. Chin J Rice Sci, 2015, 29(3): 273-281. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	段传人, 王伯初, 王凭青. 水稻茎秆的结构及其性能的相关性. 重庆大学学报, 2003, 26(11): 38-40.
	Duan C R, Wang B C, Wang P Q.The relationship between the structure and the property of rice stem.J Chongqing Univ, 2003, 26(11): 38-40. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[27]	吴晓然, 张巫军, 伍龙梅, 翁飞, 李刚华, 刘正辉, 唐设, 丁承强, 王绍华, 丁艳锋. 超级杂交籼稻抗倒能力比较及其对氮素的响应. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(14): 2705-2717.
	Wu X R, Zhang W J, Wu L M, Weng F, Li G H, Liu Z H, Tang S, Ding C Q, Wang S H, Ding Y F. Characteristics of lodging resistance of super-hybrid indica rice and its response to nitrogen. Sci Agric Sin, 2015, 48(14): 2705-2717. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[28]	孟天瑶, 李晓芸, 李超, 韦还和, 史天宇,马荣荣, 王晓燕, 杨筠文, 戴其根, 张洪程. 甬优系列籼粳杂交稻中熟高产品系的株型特征. 中国水稻科学, 2016, 30(2): 170-180.
	Meng T Y, Li X Y, Li C, Wei H H, Shi T Y, Ma R R, Wang X Y, Yang J W, Dai Q G, Zhang H C.Plant-type characteristics of high-yielding lines of yongyou japonica/indica hybrid rice with medium maturity.Chin J Rice Sci, 2016, 30(2): 170-180. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[29]	王熹, 姚福德, 高成伟, 陶龙兴. 多效唑对水稻的生物学效应及其应用. 中国水稻科学, 1988, 2(1): 29-35.
	Wang X, Yao F D, Gao C W, Tao L X.Biological responses of MET on rice and field applications.Chin J Rice Sci, 1988, 2(1): 29-35. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[30]	吴同斌, 庞爱军, 吴睿, 庞伯良, 杨震. 多效唑对水稻抗倒伏能力影响的研究. 湖南农业科学, 2010, (11): 64-65.
	Wu T B, Pang A J, Wu R, Pang B L, Yang Z.Studies on effects of paclobutrazol on rice lodging resistance.Hunan Agric Sci, 2010, (11): 64-65. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[31]	吴光南, 汤日圣, 张金渝. 乙烯利和光强对水稻节间生长的协和效应. 中国水稻科学, 1986, 1(1): 53-57.
	Wu G N, Tang R S, Zhang J Y.The interaction of ethrel and light intensity on the growth of rice culm.Chin J Rice Sci, 1986, 1(1): 53-57. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[32]	王晓英, 呼天明, 王佺珍, 田立民, 张晓玲, 田凯. 氮肥和Trinexapac-ethyl配合施用对草地早熟禾草坪生长的影响. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(11): 3679-3684.
	Wang X Y, Hu T M, Wang Q Z, Tian L M, Zhang X L, Tian K.Growth of kentucky bluegrass as influenced by nitrogen and trinexapac-ethyl.Sci Agric Sin, 2008, 41(11): 3679-3684. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[33]	Han S W, Park J S, Cho Y C, Lim G J, Ju Y C.Effects of Trinexapac-ethyl on lodging-related traits in transplanted rice.Korean J Crop Sci, 1999, 44(3): 186-190.

试验因素 Experiment factor	抗折力 Breaking resistance/kg			倒伏指数 Lodging index/(g·cm g^-1)			植株抗推力 Plant thrust resistance/kg
试验因素 Experiment factor	N₄	N₃	N₂	N₄	N₃	N₂	植株抗推力 Plant thrust resistance/kg
品种Variety(V)
佳辐占Jiafuzhan	0.98±0.21 b	0.73±0.18 b	0.52±0.18 b	177.22±10.55 a	190.11±5.72 a	177.04±10.65 a	1.64±0.15 b
天优华占Tianyouhuazhan	0.97±0.01 b	0.68±0.26 b	0.47±0.16 b	127.51±7.67 c	162.79±7.39 b	184.18±11.94 a	1.66±0.19 b
甬优2640 Yongyou 2640	1.33±0.29 a	1.02±0.23 a	0.81±0.13 a	145.51±8.88 b	154.99±4.78 b	127.86±8.60 b	2.20±0.16 a
植物生长调节剂PGR
多效唑 PP₃₃₃	1.15±0.31 a	0.85±0.34 b	0.57±0.23 a	147.20±6.10 b	171.80±7.43 b	173.05±6.98 a	1.89±0.09 a
乙烯利ETH	1.02±0.36 b	0.81±0.26 b	0.61±0.22 a	166.75±7.96 a	169.25±12.04 b	163.67±11.11 ab	1.81±0.10 ab
抗倒酯TE	1.24±0.27 a	0.90±0.21 a	0.66±0.20 a	125.71±9.38 b	143.11±7.41 c	142.98±5.27 b	2.01±0.17 a
对照Control	0.95±0.23 b	0.68±0.19 c	0.56±0.21 a	160.67±6.49 a	183.02±3.84 a	172.41±16.12 a	1.62±0.12 b
F值F value
品种Variety(V)	28.89^**	36.15^**	60.19^**	22.73^**	8.32^**	19.32^**	24.10^**
植物生长调节剂PGR	9.05^**	7.21^**	2.64^ns	8.90^**	7.68^**	3.03^*	4.90^**
V×PGR	3.16^**	5.25^**	1.75^ns	6.82^**	2.36^*	1.17^ns	3.81^**

试验因素 Experiment factor	抗折力 Breaking resistance/kg			倒伏指数 Lodging index/(g·cm g^-1)			植株抗推力 Plant thrust resistance/kg
试验因素 Experiment factor	N₄	N₃	N₂	N₄	N₃	N₂	植株抗推力 Plant thrust resistance/kg
品种Variety(V)
佳辐占Jiafuzhan	0.98±0.21 b	0.73±0.18 b	0.52±0.18 b	177.22±10.55 a	190.11±5.72 a	177.04±10.65 a	1.64±0.15 b
天优华占Tianyouhuazhan	0.97±0.01 b	0.68±0.26 b	0.47±0.16 b	127.51±7.67 c	162.79±7.39 b	184.18±11.94 a	1.66±0.19 b
甬优2640 Yongyou 2640	1.33±0.29 a	1.02±0.23 a	0.81±0.13 a	145.51±8.88 b	154.99±4.78 b	127.86±8.60 b	2.20±0.16 a
植物生长调节剂PGR
多效唑 PP₃₃₃	1.15±0.31 a	0.85±0.34 b	0.57±0.23 a	147.20±6.10 b	171.80±7.43 b	173.05±6.98 a	1.89±0.09 a
乙烯利ETH	1.02±0.36 b	0.81±0.26 b	0.61±0.22 a	166.75±7.96 a	169.25±12.04 b	163.67±11.11 ab	1.81±0.10 ab
抗倒酯TE	1.24±0.27 a	0.90±0.21 a	0.66±0.20 a	125.71±9.38 b	143.11±7.41 c	142.98±5.27 b	2.01±0.17 a
对照Control	0.95±0.23 b	0.68±0.19 c	0.56±0.21 a	160.67±6.49 a	183.02±3.84 a	172.41±16.12 a	1.62±0.12 b
F值F value
品种Variety(V)	28.89^**	36.15^**	60.19^**	22.73^**	8.32^**	19.32^**	24.10^**
植物生长调节剂PGR	9.05^**	7.21^**	2.64^ns	8.90^**	7.68^**	3.03^*	4.90^**
V×PGR	3.16^**	5.25^**	1.75^ns	6.82^**	2.36^*	1.17^ns	3.81^**

试验因素 Experiment factor	节间长 Internode length/cm			茎粗 Culm diameter/mm			茎壁厚 Culm wall thickness/mm			株高 Plant height/cm
试验因素 Experiment factor	N₄	N₃	N₂	N₄	N₃	N₂	N₄	N₃	N₂	株高 Plant height/cm
品种Variety(V)
佳辐占Jiafuzhan	7.63±0.89 a	14.26±0.50 a	21.54±1.11 a	5.99±0.14 b	5.69±0.26 b	5.12±0.16 b	0.78±0.05 b	0.64±0.05 a	0.47±0.07 b	109.57±4.32 a
天优华Tianyouhuazhan	3.14±0.22 c	8.91±0.50 b	18.71±0.33 b	5.37±0.34 c	5.16±0.38 c	4.83±0.32 c	0.71±0.05 c	0.56±0.06 c	0.42±0.05 c	95.83±2.83 b
甬优2640 Yongyou 2640	6.05±0.53 b	14.38±0.47 a	16.61±2.28 c	6.37±0.24 b	6.19±0.25 a	5.84±0.24 a	0.92±0.07 a	0.81±0.07 a	0.68±0.03 a	91.02±3.24 c
植物生长调节剂PGR
多效唑PP₃₃₃	5.29±0.56 b	12.62±1.26 a	19.59±0.72 a	5.91±0.14 a	5.77±0.11 a	5.24±0.77 a	0.82±0.16 a	0.66±0.02 b	0.49±0.08 b	99.45±4.77 b
乙烯利ETH	6.75±0.29 a	12.26±0.84 a	19.49±1.06 a	6.01±0.33 a	5.75±0.34 a	5.32±0.29 a	0.77±0.08 a	0.63±0.06 b	0.52±0.11 b	102.69±7.35 a
抗倒酯TE	4.50±0.02 c	11.84±0.43 a	17.83±1.48 b	5.99±0.17 a	5.86±0.16 a	5.43±0.25 a	0.83±0.07 a	0.72±0.09 a	0.57±0.10 a	94.51±1.34 c
对照Control	5.88±0.11 b	13.32±0.72 a	18.90±1.00 a	5.73±0.34 a	5.33±0.48 b	5.06±0.42 a	0.78±0.07 a	0.65±0.08 b	0.50±0.10 b	98.57±6.27 b
F值F value
品种Variety(V)	128.53^**	71.82^**	110.76^**	51.82^**	46.56^**	39.61^**	34.41^**	52.12^**	101.24^**	218.37^**
植物生长调节剂PGR	16.82^**	2.17^ns	8.93^**	2.55^ns	7.32^**	2.61^ns	1.48^ns	3.69^*	5.092^**	20.01^**
V × PGR	5.58^**	3.08^**	15.33^**	5.68^**	4.38^**	3.15^**	3.51^**	3.94^**	3.93^**	4.60^**

试验因素 Experiment factor	节间长 Internode length/cm			茎粗 Culm diameter/mm			茎壁厚 Culm wall thickness/mm			株高 Plant height/cm
试验因素 Experiment factor	N₄	N₃	N₂	N₄	N₃	N₂	N₄	N₃	N₂	株高 Plant height/cm
品种Variety(V)
佳辐占Jiafuzhan	7.63±0.89 a	14.26±0.50 a	21.54±1.11 a	5.99±0.14 b	5.69±0.26 b	5.12±0.16 b	0.78±0.05 b	0.64±0.05 a	0.47±0.07 b	109.57±4.32 a
天优华Tianyouhuazhan	3.14±0.22 c	8.91±0.50 b	18.71±0.33 b	5.37±0.34 c	5.16±0.38 c	4.83±0.32 c	0.71±0.05 c	0.56±0.06 c	0.42±0.05 c	95.83±2.83 b
甬优2640 Yongyou 2640	6.05±0.53 b	14.38±0.47 a	16.61±2.28 c	6.37±0.24 b	6.19±0.25 a	5.84±0.24 a	0.92±0.07 a	0.81±0.07 a	0.68±0.03 a	91.02±3.24 c
植物生长调节剂PGR
多效唑PP₃₃₃	5.29±0.56 b	12.62±1.26 a	19.59±0.72 a	5.91±0.14 a	5.77±0.11 a	5.24±0.77 a	0.82±0.16 a	0.66±0.02 b	0.49±0.08 b	99.45±4.77 b
乙烯利ETH	6.75±0.29 a	12.26±0.84 a	19.49±1.06 a	6.01±0.33 a	5.75±0.34 a	5.32±0.29 a	0.77±0.08 a	0.63±0.06 b	0.52±0.11 b	102.69±7.35 a
抗倒酯TE	4.50±0.02 c	11.84±0.43 a	17.83±1.48 b	5.99±0.17 a	5.86±0.16 a	5.43±0.25 a	0.83±0.07 a	0.72±0.09 a	0.57±0.10 a	94.51±1.34 c
对照Control	5.88±0.11 b	13.32±0.72 a	18.90±1.00 a	5.73±0.34 a	5.33±0.48 b	5.06±0.42 a	0.78±0.07 a	0.65±0.08 b	0.50±0.10 b	98.57±6.27 b
F值F value
品种Variety(V)	128.53^**	71.82^**	110.76^**	51.82^**	46.56^**	39.61^**	34.41^**	52.12^**	101.24^**	218.37^**
植物生长调节剂PGR	16.82^**	2.17^ns	8.93^**	2.55^ns	7.32^**	2.61^ns	1.48^ns	3.69^*	5.092^**	20.01^**
V × PGR	5.58^**	3.08^**	15.33^**	5.68^**	4.38^**	3.15^**	3.51^**	3.94^**	3.93^**	4.60^**

参数 Parameter	倒伏指数 Lodging index	抗折力 Breaking resistance	植株抗推力 Plant thrust resistance	节间长 Internode length	茎粗 Culm diameter	茎壁厚 Culm wall thickness
抗折力Breaking resistance	-0.496^**
植株抗推力Plant thrust resistance	-0.513^**	0.329
节间长Internode length	0.398^*	-0.877^**	-0.190
茎粗Culm diameter	0.051	0.704^**	0.101	-0.661^**
茎壁厚Culm wall thickness	-0.418^**	0.924^**	0.173	-0.893^**	0.816^**
株高Plant height	0.511^**	-0.337	-0.495^**	0.274	-0.089	-0.268