The effects of different cultivation methods on accumulation and transformation of assimilation products and lodging resistance of stemsheaths of notillage (NT) rice were investigated with hybrid rice Ⅱ you 498 as material. At the same time, the relationship between transformation of assimilation products and lodging resistance of stemsheaths was also studied. The results showed that there was no significant difference between NT rice and plowingtillage (PT) rice in accumulation and transformation of assimilation products before heading, but photosynthetic productivity after heading of NT rice was much smaller than that of PT rice, resulting in significantly smaller grain yield of NT rice than that of PT rice. Under PT, triangleplanted system of rice intensification (TSRI) not only gained the highest grain yield but also maintained a small lodging index (LI) of the fifth internode from top. In NT, the interaction between wide and narrow row cultivation (WNR) and NT not only boosted dry matter accumulation after heading to increase grain yield effectively but also reduced the lodging risk at the bottom of the plant largely, which made WNR the optimal cultivation method among the four in NT. In this research, rice plants got flattened most easily at the 5th internode (N5) from top, while among a list of physical characters of stemsheaths, only internodes length of N5 and flat ratio of N4, closely related to LI, could be affected by cultivation measures, thus lessening the internode length of N5 and flat ratio of N4 was just the orientation to enhance lodging resistance. In both PT and NT, there were significant negative correlations between LI of N5 and dry matter accumulation after heading, and an increasing grain yield would not push rice plants fall down significantly, on the contrast, an increasing grain yield would help to reduce the risk of plant lodging from the bottom in PT.
YANG Zhiyuan1,2, SUN Yongjian1,2, XU Hui1, QIN Jian1,2, JIA Xianwen1, MA Jun1,2,*
. Effects of Different Cultivation Methods on Accumulation and Transformation of Assimilation Products and Lodging Resistance of Stemsheaths of Notillage Rice[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2013
, 27(5)
: 511
-519
.
DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7216.2013.05.008
\[1\]Kashiwagi T, Ishimaru K. Identification and functional analysis of a locus for improvement of lodging resistance in rice. Plant Physiol, 2004, 134: 676683.
\[2\]Sakata I, Sakai M, Imbe T. The correlation of the resistance to root lodging with growth angle, diameter and pulling strength of grown roots in rice seedlings. Jpn J Crop Sci, 2003, 72: 5661.
\[3\]李杰, 张洪程, 龚金龙, 等. 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): 22342243.
\[4\]Takaya J, Omori K, Taketani S, et al. Solubilization, purifi cation, and characterization of (H+, K+) ATPase from hog gastric microsomes. J Biochem, 1987, 102(4): 903911.
\[5\]郭玉华, 朱四光, 张龙步. 不同栽培条件对水稻茎秆生化成分的影响. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2003, 34(2): 8991.
\[6\]吴建富, 潘晓华, 王璐, 等. 双季抛栽条件下连续免耕对水稻产量和土壤肥力的影响. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(15): 31593167.
\[7\]任万军, 刘代银, 吴锦秀, 等. 免耕高留茬抛秧对稻田土壤肥力和微生物群落的影响. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(4): 817822.
\[8\]袁俊吉, 彭思利, 蒋先军, 等. 稻田垄作免耕对土壤团聚体和有机质的影响. 农业工程学报, 2010, 26(12): 153159.
\[9\]徐世宏, 李如平, 郎宁, 等. 水稻不同耕作栽培方式比较研究. 杂交水稻, 2006, 21(S1): 130133.
\[10\]孙永健, 陈宇, 孙园园, 等. 不同施氮量和栽插密度下三角形强化栽培杂交稻抗倒伏性与群体质量的关系. 中国水稻科学, 2012, 26(2): 189196.
\[11\]瀬古秀生, 佐本啓智, 鈴木嘉一郎. 水稲の倒伏に及ぼす二, 三栽培条件の影響(II). 日本作物学会紀事, 1959, 27(2): 173176.
\[12\]毛达如, 申建波. 植物营养研究方法.2版. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2005: 4849.
\[13\]吴建富, 潘晓华, 石庆华. 免耕抛栽对水稻产量及其源库特性的影响. 作物学报, 2009, 35(1): 162172.
\[14\]李华兴, 卢维盛, 刘远金, 等. 不同耕作方法对水稻生长和土壤生态的影响. 应用生态学报, 2001,12(4): 553556.
\[15\]兰全美, 张锡洲, 李廷轩. 水旱轮作条件下免耕土壤主要理化特性研究. 水土保持学报, 2009, 23(1): 145149.
\[16\]李旭毅, 孙永健, 程洪彪, 等. 两种生态条件下氮素调控对不同栽培方式水稻干物质积累和产量的影响. 作物学报, 2011,17(4): 773781.
\[17\]龙旭, 汪仁全, 孙永健, 等. 不同施氮量下三角形强化栽培水稻群体发育与产量形成特征. 中国水稻科学, 2010, 24(2): 162168.
\[18\]戴其根, 霍中洋, 张洪程, 等. 抛秧水稻生长发育与产量形成的生态生理机制：Ⅱ. 秧苗田间垂直分布格局及其生态生理效应. 作物学报, 2001, 27(5): 600611.
\[19\]吴建富， 潘晓华， 石庆华． 免耕抛秧稻的立苗特性与立苗技术研究. 作物学报, 2009, 35(5): 930939.
\[20\]Yoshida S. Physiological aspect of grain yield. Ann Rev Plant Physiol， 1972, 23: 437464.
\[21\]孙旭初. 水稻茎秆抗倒性的研究. 中国农业科学, 1987, 20(4): 3237.
\[22\]马均, 马文波, 田彦华, 等. 重穗型水稻植株抗倒伏能力的研究. 作物学报, 2004, 30(2): 143148.
\[23\]星川清親, 王善本. イネの倒伏に関する研究: 茎の形態的観察.日本作物學会紀事, 1990, 59(4): 809814.
\[24\]刘立军, 王康君, 葛立立, 等. 旱种水稻基部节间性状与倒伏的关系及其生理机制. 作物学报， 2012, 38(5): 848856.
\[25\]Kobata T, Palta J A, Turner N C. Rate of development of postanthesis water deficits and grain filling of spring wheat. Crop Sci, 1992, 32: 12381242.
\[26\]Kobata T, Takami S. Maintenance of the grain growth in rice subject to water stress during the early grain filling. Jpn J Crop Sci, 1981, 50: 536545.
\[27\]李木英, 潘晓华, 石庆华, 等. 两系杂交稻结实期茎鞘物质转运特性及其对籽粒灌浆影响的初步研究. 江西农业大学学报, 1998, 20(3): 296302.
