浙江农业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (1): 8-17.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.01.02
收稿日期:
2020-06-19
出版日期:
2021-01-25
发布日期:
2021-01-25
作者简介:
刘根红(1973—),男,宁夏隆德人,博士,教授,主要从事作物栽培与耕作学研究。E-mail:liu_genhong@163.com
基金资助:
LIU Genhong(), XUE Yinxin, ZHANG Qian, ZHOU Jiarui, MAI Xiaofeng
Received:
2020-06-19
Online:
2021-01-25
Published:
2021-01-25
摘要:
滴灌已逐渐成为宁夏引黄灌区玉米新型灌溉方式,以玉米天赐19号为试材,采用裂区设计,主区为耕深,设0.25~0.30 m、0.30~0.35 m、0.35~0.40 m三水平,秸秆还田量为副区,设常规栽培秸秆1/4还田量、1/3还田量、1/2还田量三水平,以明确玉米滴灌条件下适宜的耕深与秸秆还田量水平。结果表明,各处理对玉米生长指标及产量的影响有差异,以耕深0.30~0.35 m、秸秆1/3还田量水平组合条件下与其他处理间差异明显,产量间差异极显著(P<0.01)。该处理条件下,玉米生长苗期0~0.2 m土壤温度升高明显,最大差异为1.5 ℃,增加了8.6%;其吐丝灌浆期净光合速率(PSA)比最低处理高34.5%,百粒重比最低处理高6%,其花后20 d灌浆速率(GFA)比最低处理高26.9%,产量14 781.9 kg·hm-2,比最低处理高16.3%。但不同处理对株高、叶面积指数(LAI)、穗粗的影响不同,以秸秆1/2还田量、耕深0.25~0.30 m组合对苗期株高、拔节期LAI及穗粗性状影响显著。因此,玉米滴灌以耕深0.30~0.35 m、秸秆1/3还田量组合时,主要田间生长性状良好,穗部性状穗长、穗粗、百粒重均优于其他处理,产量最高,适宜于灌区推广。
中图分类号:
刘根红, 薛银鑫, 张倩, 周佳瑞, 买小凤. 滴灌条件下不同耕深及秸秆还田量对玉米生长的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(1): 8-17.
LIU Genhong, XUE Yinxin, ZHANG Qian, ZHOU Jiarui, MAI Xiaofeng. Effects of different tillage depth and amount of straw returned to the field on maize growth under drip-irrigation[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(1): 8-17.
土壤深度 Soil depth/m | 处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SP | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | ||
0~0.2 | 0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 16.8 b | 17.5 b | 24.2 a | 24.5 c | 25.0 b | 19.7 a | |
1/3 | 17.2 b | 18.0 b | 23.0 b | 25.0 b | 25.8 a | 20.0 a | |||
1/2 | 18.0 a | 18.5 a | 22.1 b | 26.2 a | 26.0 a | 20.5 a | |||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 17.0 b | 17.5 c | 24.5 a | 26.5 a | 25.5 b | 20.0 a | ||
1/3 | 17.7 a | 18.5 b | 24.2 a | 26.2 a | 26.0 a | 20.2 a | |||
1/2 | 18.2 a | 19.0 a | 24.0 a | 26.8 a | 26.9 a | 20.7 a | |||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 17.0 b | 17.5 a | 24.5 a | 26.5 a | 25.6 a | 19.8 a | ||
1/3 | 17.7 a | 18.0 a | 24.2 a | 26.2 a | 26.2 a | 20.2 a | |||
1/2 | 18.4 a | 18.3 a | 24.1 a | 26.1 a | 27.0 a | 21.0 a | |||
0.2~0.4 | 0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 16.5 a | 16.8 a | 24.0 a | 24.6 a | 26.0 a | 20.5 a | |
1/3 | 16.8 a | 17.4 a | 23.0 a | 25.0 a | 25.8 a | 20.0 a | |||
1/2 | 17.3 a | 17.5 a | 22.5 b | 24.5 a | 27.0 a | 21.0 a | |||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 16.5 b | 17.6 a | 24.0 a | 26.0 a | 26.2 a | 20.7 a | ||
1/3 | 16.8 b | 17.8 a | 23.7 b | 25.7 a | 25.8 a | 20.2 a | |||
1/2 | 17.0 a | 18.0 a | 23.0 b | 25.5 a | 26.0 a | 21.0 a | |||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 16.8 a | 18.3 a | 24.1 a | 26.1 b | 26.2 a | 20.5 b | ||
1/3 | 17.0 a | 18.7 a | 23.9 a | 26.0 b | 26.0 a | 21.7 a | |||
1/2 | 16.5 a | 19.0 a | 23.6 a | 27.0 a | 26.2 a | 21.8 a |
表1 不同耕深与秸秆还田量处理下玉米不同生育期土壤温度的变化
Table 1 Effects of different tillage depth and straw returned amount on the soil temperature in different growth stages of maize ℃
土壤深度 Soil depth/m | 处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SP | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | ||
0~0.2 | 0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 16.8 b | 17.5 b | 24.2 a | 24.5 c | 25.0 b | 19.7 a | |
1/3 | 17.2 b | 18.0 b | 23.0 b | 25.0 b | 25.8 a | 20.0 a | |||
1/2 | 18.0 a | 18.5 a | 22.1 b | 26.2 a | 26.0 a | 20.5 a | |||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 17.0 b | 17.5 c | 24.5 a | 26.5 a | 25.5 b | 20.0 a | ||
1/3 | 17.7 a | 18.5 b | 24.2 a | 26.2 a | 26.0 a | 20.2 a | |||
1/2 | 18.2 a | 19.0 a | 24.0 a | 26.8 a | 26.9 a | 20.7 a | |||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 17.0 b | 17.5 a | 24.5 a | 26.5 a | 25.6 a | 19.8 a | ||
1/3 | 17.7 a | 18.0 a | 24.2 a | 26.2 a | 26.2 a | 20.2 a | |||
1/2 | 18.4 a | 18.3 a | 24.1 a | 26.1 a | 27.0 a | 21.0 a | |||
0.2~0.4 | 0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 16.5 a | 16.8 a | 24.0 a | 24.6 a | 26.0 a | 20.5 a | |
1/3 | 16.8 a | 17.4 a | 23.0 a | 25.0 a | 25.8 a | 20.0 a | |||
1/2 | 17.3 a | 17.5 a | 22.5 b | 24.5 a | 27.0 a | 21.0 a | |||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 16.5 b | 17.6 a | 24.0 a | 26.0 a | 26.2 a | 20.7 a | ||
1/3 | 16.8 b | 17.8 a | 23.7 b | 25.7 a | 25.8 a | 20.2 a | |||
1/2 | 17.0 a | 18.0 a | 23.0 b | 25.5 a | 26.0 a | 21.0 a | |||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 16.8 a | 18.3 a | 24.1 a | 26.1 b | 26.2 a | 20.5 b | ||
1/3 | 17.0 a | 18.7 a | 23.9 a | 26.0 b | 26.0 a | 21.7 a | |||
1/2 | 16.5 a | 19.0 a | 23.6 a | 27.0 a | 26.2 a | 21.8 a |
处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 0.28 B | 0.65 B | 1.52 b | 2.52 b | 2.85 b | |
1/3 | 0.35 A | 0.79 A | 1.71 a | 2.75 a | 3.11 a | ||
1/2 | 0.42 A | 0.80 A | 1.77 a | 2.81 a | 3.20 a | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 0.31 B | 0.67 B | 1.61 b | 2.58 b | 2.86 b | |
1/3 | 0.32 B | 0.70 B | 1.74 b | 2.86 a | 3.19 a | ||
1/2 | 0.38 A | 0.80 A | 1.79 a | 2.90 a | 3.20 a | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 0.31 B | 0.71 B | 1.65 b | 2.31 b | 2.98 b | |
1/3 | 0.38 A | 0.82 A | 1.80 a | 2.91 a | 3.22 a | ||
1/2 | 0.44 A | 0.87 A | 1.83 a | 3.04 a | 3.32 a |
表2 不同耕深与秸秆还田量处理下玉米不同生育期株高的变化
Table 2 Effects of different tillage depth and straw returned amount on plant height in different growth stages of maize m
处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 0.28 B | 0.65 B | 1.52 b | 2.52 b | 2.85 b | |
1/3 | 0.35 A | 0.79 A | 1.71 a | 2.75 a | 3.11 a | ||
1/2 | 0.42 A | 0.80 A | 1.77 a | 2.81 a | 3.20 a | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 0.31 B | 0.67 B | 1.61 b | 2.58 b | 2.86 b | |
1/3 | 0.32 B | 0.70 B | 1.74 b | 2.86 a | 3.19 a | ||
1/2 | 0.38 A | 0.80 A | 1.79 a | 2.90 a | 3.20 a | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 0.31 B | 0.71 B | 1.65 b | 2.31 b | 2.98 b | |
1/3 | 0.38 A | 0.82 A | 1.80 a | 2.91 a | 3.22 a | ||
1/2 | 0.44 A | 0.87 A | 1.83 a | 3.04 a | 3.32 a |
处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 0.42 a | 1.42 c | 3.62 c | 5.10 b | 3.05 b | |
1/3 | 0.45 a | 2.20 b | 4.10 b | 5.31 b | 3.51 a | ||
1/2 | 0.49 a | 2.51 a | 4.78 a | 6.00 a | 3.70 a | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 0.45 a | 1.47 c | 3.70 c | 5.15 c | 3.16 b | |
1/3 | 0.48 a | 2.10 b | 4.20 b | 5.71 b | 3.39 b | ||
1/2 | 0.48 a | 2.60 a | 4.82 a | 6.17 a | 4.20 a | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 0.49 a | 1.57 c | 3.35 c | 5.70 a | 3.28 b | |
1/3 | 0.52 a | 2.12 b | 3.82 b | 5.92 a | 3.52 b | ||
1/2 | 0.54 a | 2.70 a | 4.21 a | 6.21 a | 4.32 a |
表3 不同耕深与秸秆还田量处理下玉米不同生育期叶面积指数的变化
Table 3 Effects of different tillage depth and straw returned amount on leaf area index in different growth stages of maize
处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 0.42 a | 1.42 c | 3.62 c | 5.10 b | 3.05 b | |
1/3 | 0.45 a | 2.20 b | 4.10 b | 5.31 b | 3.51 a | ||
1/2 | 0.49 a | 2.51 a | 4.78 a | 6.00 a | 3.70 a | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 0.45 a | 1.47 c | 3.70 c | 5.15 c | 3.16 b | |
1/3 | 0.48 a | 2.10 b | 4.20 b | 5.71 b | 3.39 b | ||
1/2 | 0.48 a | 2.60 a | 4.82 a | 6.17 a | 4.20 a | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 0.49 a | 1.57 c | 3.35 c | 5.70 a | 3.28 b | |
1/3 | 0.52 a | 2.12 b | 3.82 b | 5.92 a | 3.52 b | ||
1/2 | 0.54 a | 2.70 a | 4.21 a | 6.21 a | 4.32 a |
处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 18.4 a | 32.1 a | 23.7 b | 31.2 c | 26.2 a | |
1/3 | 19.0 a | 29.7 a | 28.1 a | 35.0 a | 28.0 a | ||
1/2 | 21.0 a | 22.5 b | 20.5 c | 32.1 b | 27.5 a | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 17.5 a | 28.7 a | 24.4 b | 36.2 c | 27.0 b | |
1/3 | 18.0 a | 28.0 a | 27.1 a | 42.1 a | 31.5 a | ||
1/2 | 19.2 a | 26.5 b | 21.4 c | 38.1 b | 29.1 b | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 16.6 a | 27.0 a | 25.2 b | 32.5 b | 26.0 b | |
1/3 | 17.2 a | 25.0 a | 27.1 a | 37.0 a | 31.2 a | ||
1/2 | 18.2 a | 22.5 a | 24.1 b | 33.1 b | 28.4 b |
表4 不同耕深与秸秆还田量处理下玉米不同生育期净光合速率的变化
Table 4 Effects of different tillage depth and straw returned amount on photosynthetic rate in different growth stages of maize μmol·m-2·s-1
处理Treatment | 生育时期Growth stages | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | SL | BT | TL | SK | MT | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 18.4 a | 32.1 a | 23.7 b | 31.2 c | 26.2 a | |
1/3 | 19.0 a | 29.7 a | 28.1 a | 35.0 a | 28.0 a | ||
1/2 | 21.0 a | 22.5 b | 20.5 c | 32.1 b | 27.5 a | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 17.5 a | 28.7 a | 24.4 b | 36.2 c | 27.0 b | |
1/3 | 18.0 a | 28.0 a | 27.1 a | 42.1 a | 31.5 a | ||
1/2 | 19.2 a | 26.5 b | 21.4 c | 38.1 b | 29.1 b | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 16.6 a | 27.0 a | 25.2 b | 32.5 b | 26.0 b | |
1/3 | 17.2 a | 25.0 a | 27.1 a | 37.0 a | 31.2 a | ||
1/2 | 18.2 a | 22.5 a | 24.1 b | 33.1 b | 28.4 b |
处理Treatment | 开花后天数Days after pollination/d | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 0.11 a | 0.55 a | 0.73 a | 0.62 b | |
1/3 | 0.17 a | 0.52 a | 0.78 a | 0.66 a | ||
1/2 | 0.13 a | 0.58 a | 0.69 b | 0.57 b | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 0.13 a | 0.52 b | 0.82 a | 0.66 b | |
1/3 | 0.15 a | 0.66 a | 0.88 a | 0.73 a | ||
1/2 | 0.12 a | 0.53 b | 0.79 b | 0.70 b | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 0.15 a | 0.51 b | 0.78 b | 0.59 b | |
1/3 | 0.17 a | 0.56 a | 0.83 a | 0.62 a | ||
1/2 | 0.14 a | 0.47 b | 0.77 b | 0.52 b |
表5 不同耕深与秸秆还田量处理下玉米不同生育期灌浆速率的变化 g·100粒-1·d-1
Table 5 Effects of different tillage depth and straw returned amount on grain filling rate in different days after pollination of maize g·100 grains-1·d-1
处理Treatment | 开花后天数Days after pollination/d | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | |
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 0.11 a | 0.55 a | 0.73 a | 0.62 b | |
1/3 | 0.17 a | 0.52 a | 0.78 a | 0.66 a | ||
1/2 | 0.13 a | 0.58 a | 0.69 b | 0.57 b | ||
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 0.13 a | 0.52 b | 0.82 a | 0.66 b | |
1/3 | 0.15 a | 0.66 a | 0.88 a | 0.73 a | ||
1/2 | 0.12 a | 0.53 b | 0.79 b | 0.70 b | ||
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 0.15 a | 0.51 b | 0.78 b | 0.59 b | |
1/3 | 0.17 a | 0.56 a | 0.83 a | 0.62 a | ||
1/2 | 0.14 a | 0.47 b | 0.77 b | 0.52 b |
处理Treatment | 穗粗 Ear diameter/ cm | 穗长 Ear length/cm | 穗行 数 Earrows | 行粒数 Line grain number | 秃尖 Bald tip/cm | 穗重 Panicle weight/g | 穗粒重 The panicle weight/g | 百粒重 Hundred grain weight/ (g·100 grain-1) | 产量 Yield/ (kg·hm-2) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | |||||||||
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 49.44 b | 15.37 b | 14.6 a | 32.95 a | 0.88 a | 240.08 a | 1721.24 a | 35.22 c | 12709.11 C |
1/3 | 49.34 b | 17.28 b | 15.07 a | 33.83 a | 0.73 a | 242.21 a | 177.54 a | 36.56 b | 14430.45 A | |
1/2 | 50.16 a | 17.47 a | 15.640 a | 34.50 a | 1.03 a | 236.30 a | 183.55 a | 35.19 c | 13926.10 B | |
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 49.21 ab | 17.28 a | 15.21 a | 34.77 a | 1.24 a | 261.50 a | 187.95 a | 36.69 ab | 14273.55 B |
1/3 | 51.54 a | 17.46 a | 15.22 a | 35.12 a | 1.03 a | 247.50 a | 190.08 a | 37.32 a | 14781.9 A | |
1/2 | 51.08 a | 16.22 ab | 15.23 a | 33.22 a | 0.76 a | 232.14 a | 160.72 a | 35.43 c | 14172.7 B | |
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 47.74 b | 15.37 b | 14.6 a | 30.95 a | 0.788 a | 249.08 a | 1621.24 a | 35.22 bc | 13309.16 BC |
1/3 | 51.51 a | 15.28 b | 14.07 a | 31.83 a | 0.73 a | 247.21 a | 167.54 a | 36.36 bc | 14530.45 A | |
1/2 | 49.16 b | 15.47 b | 14.64 a | 31.50 a | 0.83 a | 246.30 a | 153.55 a | 35.53 c | 14278.13 AB |
表6 不同耕深及不同秸秆还田量处理对玉米产量性状的影响
Table 6 Effects of different tillage depth and straw returned amount on yield properties of maize
处理Treatment | 穗粗 Ear diameter/ cm | 穗长 Ear length/cm | 穗行 数 Earrows | 行粒数 Line grain number | 秃尖 Bald tip/cm | 穗重 Panicle weight/g | 穗粒重 The panicle weight/g | 百粒重 Hundred grain weight/ (g·100 grain-1) | 产量 Yield/ (kg·hm-2) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕深 Tillage depth/m | 秸秆还田比率 Ratio of straw returned to field | |||||||||
0.25~0.30 | 1/4 | 49.44 b | 15.37 b | 14.6 a | 32.95 a | 0.88 a | 240.08 a | 1721.24 a | 35.22 c | 12709.11 C |
1/3 | 49.34 b | 17.28 b | 15.07 a | 33.83 a | 0.73 a | 242.21 a | 177.54 a | 36.56 b | 14430.45 A | |
1/2 | 50.16 a | 17.47 a | 15.640 a | 34.50 a | 1.03 a | 236.30 a | 183.55 a | 35.19 c | 13926.10 B | |
0.30~0.35 | 1/4 | 49.21 ab | 17.28 a | 15.21 a | 34.77 a | 1.24 a | 261.50 a | 187.95 a | 36.69 ab | 14273.55 B |
1/3 | 51.54 a | 17.46 a | 15.22 a | 35.12 a | 1.03 a | 247.50 a | 190.08 a | 37.32 a | 14781.9 A | |
1/2 | 51.08 a | 16.22 ab | 15.23 a | 33.22 a | 0.76 a | 232.14 a | 160.72 a | 35.43 c | 14172.7 B | |
0.35~0.40 | 1/4 | 47.74 b | 15.37 b | 14.6 a | 30.95 a | 0.788 a | 249.08 a | 1621.24 a | 35.22 bc | 13309.16 BC |
1/3 | 51.51 a | 15.28 b | 14.07 a | 31.83 a | 0.73 a | 247.21 a | 167.54 a | 36.36 bc | 14530.45 A | |
1/2 | 49.16 b | 15.47 b | 14.64 a | 31.50 a | 0.83 a | 246.30 a | 153.55 a | 35.53 c | 14278.13 AB |
[1] | 何奇瑾, 周广胜. 我国玉米种植区分布的气候适宜性[J]. 科学通报, 2012,57(4):267-275. |
HE Q J, ZHOU G S. The climatic suitability for maize cultivation in China[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2012,57(4):267-275. | |
[2] | 翁凌云. 我国玉米生产现状及发展对策分析[J]. 中国食物与营养, 2010,16(1):22-25. |
WENG L Y. Status of corn production in China and its countermeasures[J]. Food and Nutrition in China, 2010,16(1):22-25.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[3] | 李新, 许志斌, 佘奎军, 等. 宁夏玉米产业的现状和发展[J]. 种子, 2009,28(9):104-106. |
LI X, XU Z B, SHE K J, et al. Status and development of maize industry in Ningxia Province[J]. 2009,28(9):104-106.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[4] | 马孝义, 康绍忠, 王凤翔, 等. 陕西省果树地下滴灌的应用前景、存在问题与建议[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 1999,17(2):3-5. |
MA X Y, KANG S Z, WANG F X, et al. Future application, existing problem and recommendation of Fruit tree subsurface irrigation in Shaanxi Province[J]. Agricultural Reseach in the Arid Areas, 1999,17(2):3-5.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[5] | 李伏生, 陆申年. 灌溉施肥的研究和应用[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2000,6(2):233-240. |
LI F S, LU S N. Study on the fertigation and its application[J]. Plant Natrition and Fertilizen Science, 2000,6(2):233-240.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[6] | 梁海玲, 李文宝, 林明月, 等. 水肥一体化技术对鲜食甜糯玉米生长特性与产量的影响[J]. 广西农业科学, 2010,41(12):1314-1316. |
LIANG H L, LI W B, LIN M Y, et al. Effect of integrated irrigation and fertilizer management on growth characteristics and yield of fresh-consumable sweet-waxy maize[J]. Guangxi Agricultural Sciences, 2010,41(12):1314-1316.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[7] | 习金根, 汤海军, 周建斌. 不同灌溉施氮方式夏玉米生长效应[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2004,22(4):68-74. |
XI J G, TANG H J, ZHOU J B. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer fertigation on maize[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2004,22(4):68-74.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[8] | 刘永贤, 梁海玲, 农梦玲, 等. 不同施肥及滴灌方式对糯玉米生长及产量的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2012,43(7):981-985. |
LIU Y X, LIANG H L, NONG M L, et al. Effects of different drip irrigation modes on growth and yield of waxy corn under integrated management of water and fertilizer[J]. Journal of Southern Agriculture, 2012,43(7):981-985.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[9] | 黄智鸿, 申林, 孙刚, 等. 超高产玉米叶面积及地上部干物质积累与分配[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2007,35(8):2227-2228, 2230. |
HUANG Z H, SHEN L, SUN G, et al. Study on leaf area and dry matter accumulation and distribution in super high-yield maize[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2007,35(8):2227-2228, 2230.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[10] | 王士杰, 尹光华, 李忠, 等. 浅埋滴灌水肥耦合对辽西半干旱区春玉米产量的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020,31(1):139-147. |
Wang S J, Yin G H, Li Z, et al. Effects of water-fertilizer coupling on the yield of spring maize under shallow-buried drip irrigation in semi-arid region of western Liaoning Province].[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020,31(1):139-147. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[11] | MURLEY C B, SHARMA S, WARREN J G , et al. Yield response of corn and grain Sorghum to row offsets on subsurface drip laterals[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2018,208:357-362. |
[12] | 徐灿, 孙建波, 宋建辰, 等. 滴灌水肥一体化不同施氮量对玉米叶绿素含量和荧光特性的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018,46(10):54-58. |
XU C, SUN J B, SONG J C, et al. Impacts of different nitrogen application rate on chlorophyll content and fluorescence properties of corn under integration of water and fertilizer[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2018,46(10):54-58.(in Chinese) | |
[13] | SUI J, WANG J D, GONG S H , et al. Assessment of maize yield-increasing potential and optimum N level under mulched drip irrigation in the Northeast of China[J]. Field Crops Research, 2018,215:132-139. |
[14] | 陈江鲁, 杨京京, 丁变红, 等. 滴灌量对新疆高产玉米产量和蒸腾量的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2017,45(18):67-71. |
CHEN J L, YANG J J, DING B H, et al. Effect of dripirrigation on yield and transpiration of high yield maize in Xinjiang[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2017,45(18):67-71.(in Chinese) | |
[15] | 李真朴, 刘学军, 翟汝伟, 等. 宁夏半干旱区玉米滴灌灌溉制度试验研究[J]. 水资源与水工程学报, 2017,28(5):242-246. |
LI Z P, LIU X J, ZHAI R W, et al. Experimental study on irrigation schedule of maize drip irrigation in semi-arid region of Ningxia Province[J]. Journal of Water Resources and Water Engineering, 2017,28(5):242-246.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[16] | 刘志, 贺正, 苗芳芳, 等. 基于无人机的水肥一体化玉米出苗率估算方法与试验[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2019,31(6):977-985. |
LIU Z, HE Z, MIAO F F, et al. Method and experiment for estimating emergence rate of water and fertilizer integrated maize based on drone technology[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2019,31(6):977-985.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[17] |
CHAUHDARY J N, BAKHSH A, ENGEL B A , et al. Improving corn production by adopting efficient fertigation practices: Experimental and modeling approach[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2019,221:449-461.
DOI URL |
[18] |
LI Y, SONG D P, DANG P F , et al. Combined ditch buried straw return technology in a ridge-furrow plastic film mulch system: Implications for crop yield and soil organic matter dynamics[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2020,199:104596.
DOI URL |
[19] | 李忠南, 刘颖, 王影, 等. 玉米不同秸秆还田模式的保苗率及苗期叶片SPAD值研究[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2019(12):169-171, 175. |
LI Z N, LIU Y, WANG Y, et al. Study on seedling rate and SPAD value of maize leaves in seedling stage under different patterns of straw returning[J]. Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2019(12):169-171, 175.(in Chinese) | |
[20] |
ZHANG M L, GENG Y H, CAO G J , et al. Magnesium accumulation, partitioning and remobilization in spring maize (Zea mays L.) under magnesium supply with straw return in northeast China[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2020,100(6):2568-2578.
URL PMID |
[21] | 王汉朋, 景殿玺, 周如军, 等. 玉米秸秆还田量对土壤性质、秸秆腐解及玉米纹枯病的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2018,26(6):160-164. |
WANG H P, JING D X, ZHOU R J, et al. Effects of maize straw returning amounts on soil characteristics, straw decomposition and corn sheath blight[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2018,26(6):160-164.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[22] | 吴鹏年, 王艳丽, 李培富, 等. 滴灌条件下秸秆还田配施氮肥对宁夏扬黄灌区春玉米产量和土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019,30(12):4177-4185. |
WU P N, WANG Y L, LI P F, et al. Effects of straw returning combined with nitrogen fertilizer on spring maize yield and soil physicochemical properties under drip irrigation condition in Yellow River pumping irrigation area, Ningxia, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2019,30(12):4177-4185.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[23] | 柴如山, 王擎运, 叶新新, 等. 我国主要粮食作物秸秆还田替代化学氮肥潜力[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2019,38(11):2583-2593. |
CHAI R S, WANG Q Y, YE X X, et al. Nitrogen resource quantity of main grain crop straw in China and the potential of synthetic nitrogen substitution under straw returning[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2019,38(11):2583-2593.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[24] | 王桂跃, 苏婷, 韩海亮, 等. 长期施肥对水田和旱地土壤微生物群落结构、活性碳氮及酶活性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2018,30(5):817-824. |
WANG G Y, SU T, HAN H L, et al. Soil microbial community structure, labile organic carbon and nitrogen and enzyme activities in paddy field and upland affected by long-term fertilization systems[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2018,30(5):817-824.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[25] | 徐莹莹, 王俊河, 刘玉涛, 等. 秸秆还田方式对玉米田AM真菌侵染效应及球囊霉素含量的影响[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2019(3):36-39, 45. |
XU Y Y, WANG J H, LIU Y T, et al. Effects of straw return method on AM fungi infection and glomalin content in maize field[J]. Heilongjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2019(3):36-39, 45.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[26] | 姚毓香. 深松耕土壤水分入渗数值模拟及试验研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2019. |
YAO Y X. Numerical simulation and experimental study on soil infiltration of subsoiling[D]. Yangling, China: Northwest A & F University, 2019.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[27] | 翟振, 李玉义, 郭建军, 等. 耕深对土壤物理性质及小麦-玉米产量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2017,33(11):115-123. |
ZHAI Z, LI Y Y, GUO J J, et al. Effect of tillage depth on soil physical properties and yield of winter wheat-summer maize[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2017,33(11):115-123.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[28] | 陈龙. 不同秸秆还田方式对玉米根系生长发育及产量的影响[D]. 吉林:吉林农业大学, 2019. |
CHEN L. Effects of different patterns of straw returning on growth and yield of maize[D]. Jilin: Jilin Agricultural University, 2019. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[29] | 张宇飞. 耕作方式与秸秆还田对玉米产量及养分吸收的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2019. |
ZHANG Y F. Effects of tillage and straw returning on corn yield and nutrient absorption[D]. Harbin: Northeast Agricultural University, 2019.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[30] | 郭静, 周可金. 麦秸还田量和还田方式对砂姜黑土地玉米播种出苗质量及光合的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017,29(5):717-721. |
GUO J, ZHOU K J. Effects of returning amount and way of wheat straw on maize planting and seedling quality and photosynthetic parameters in lime concretion black soil field[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2017,29(5):717-721.(in Chinese with English abstract) |
[1] | 杨梅, 胡小兰, 申涛, 谭康, 刘代铃, 邱红波. 玉米第8染色体单片段代换系的构建与灰斑病抗性材料筛选[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(3): 383-389. |
[2] | 瞿展, 杨立桃. 转基因玉米TC1507质粒DNA标准物质的研制[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(3): 390-395. |
[3] | 杨乙未, 肖华, 陈浒, 肖聶佳, 郭城. 喀斯特地区不同玫瑰混农林模式的土壤螨类群落结构特征[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(1): 112-121. |
[4] | 常会庆, 徐富锦, 潘亚杰. 碳酸钙及其与壳聚糖联用对石灰性土壤铬污染的钝化效应[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(9): 1665-1671. |
[5] | 郭延景, 肖海峰. 世界玉米主产国家和地区玉米补贴政策支持水平与结构特征[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(9): 1722-1731. |
[6] | 张统帅, 闫丽娟, 李广, 陈国鹏, 罗永忠. 免耕和秸秆覆盖对旱作区土壤氮素、水分和春小麦产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(8): 1329-1341. |
[7] | 牛博, 李丽娜, 庞广昌, 鲁丁强. 植物根尖分生组织传感器的构建及其对尿素传感动力学研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(8): 1466-1474. |
[8] | 王长进, 徐运林, 程昕昕, 周毅, 余海兵. 甜玉米种子营养品质主要性状全基因组关联分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(3): 383-389. |
[9] | 赵星凯, 石海春, 余学杰, 杨殊, 赵长云, 夏伟, 柯永培. 十三份玉米新自交系的育种潜势分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(12): 2119-2127. |
[10] | 朱雷, 贾北平, 曹利, 徐静茹, 赵杰, 冯士彬, 李玉, 吴金节, 王希春. ZEA与DON单一及联合染毒致仔猪睾丸支持细胞凋亡的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(11): 1954-1962. |
[11] | 姜媛媛, 纪艺, 来勇敏, 陈笑芸, 徐俊锋, 徐晓丽, 马莲菊. 转Cry抗虫基因玉米对家蚕的安全性评价[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(11): 2042-2049. |
[12] | 钟静, 谭芬, 张洪权, 熊校勤, 黄丽霞. 玉米XYLPs基因家族表达模式及其蛋白结构分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(10): 1741-1747. |
[13] | 陶晶, 邬奇峰, 石江, 李松昊, 葛江飞, 陈俊辉, 徐秋芳, 梁辰飞, 秦华. 间作与接种丛枝菌根真菌对新垦山地玉米产量和土壤肥力的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(1): 115-123. |
[14] | 岳高红, 潘彬荣, 刘永安, 梅喜雪, 许立奎, 张宗宸, 周志辉. 利用SSR分析浙南地区甜玉米自交系的遗传多样性[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2019, 31(7): 1029-1036. |
[15] | 方芳, 何序晨, 张志豪, 张勤, 关亚静, 胡晋, 胡伟民. 玉米自交系苗期对高温胁迫的响应机制及其抗逆性[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2019, 31(7): 1045-1056. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||