不同缓控释肥搭配脲铵对水稻产量、氮素利用效率和土壤养分的影响

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.01.15

浙江农业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (1): 122-130.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.01.15

不同缓控释肥搭配脲铵对水稻产量、氮素利用效率和土壤养分的影响

陈贵¹(), 鲁晨妮¹, 石艳平², 倪雄伟², 程旺大¹, 张红梅¹, 王保君¹, 张丽萍¹, 孙达³^,^*()

1.嘉兴市农业科学研究院,浙江嘉兴 314016
2.嘉兴市土肥植保与农村能源站,浙江嘉兴 314050
3.嘉兴市南湖区农渔技术推广站,浙江嘉兴 314051

收稿日期:2020-07-01 出版日期:2021-01-25 发布日期:2021-01-25
作者简介:*孙达,E-mail:108553108@qq.com
陈贵(1982—),男,山西运城人,博士,副研究员,主要从事稻田氮素循环与水稻氮素高效利用机制研究。E-mail:chenzhao2004@163.com
通讯作者: 孙达
基金资助:
嘉兴市科技计划(2018AY11020);嘉兴市科技计划(2017AZ13025)

Effect of different controlled-release fertilizers with urea ammonium on yield, nitrogen use efficiency and soil nutrients of rice

CHEN Gui¹(), LU Chenni¹, SHI Yanping², NI Xiongwei², CHENG Wangda¹, ZHANG Hongmei¹, WANG Baojun¹, ZHANG Liping¹, SUN Da³^,^*()

1. Jiaxing Academy of Agricultural Science, Jiaxing 314016, China
2. Soil, Fertilizer, Plant Protection and Rural Energy Station of Jiaxing, Jiaxing 314050, China
3. Agricultural and Fishery Technology Extension Station of Nanhu District, Jiaxing City, Jiaxing 314051, China

Received:2020-07-01 Online:2021-01-25 Published:2021-01-25
Contact: SUN Da

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了明确不同类型缓控释肥搭配脲铵在水稻减氮和节本增效方面的应用效果,特开展田间试验,以嘉兴地区常规施肥(N 225 kg·hm^-2)为对照(CK),研究了分别基于木质素类缓控释肥好乐耕(HL)、脲甲醛类缓控释肥永笑(YX)、硝化抑制剂类缓控释肥开擂喽(KL)与脲铵搭配的一基一追模式,在较CK减氮0、20%、35%和50%条件下对常规粳稻产量、氮素利用效率和土壤养分的影响。结果表明:与CK相比,一基一追模式下减氮量超过20%时水稻产量显著(P<0.05)下降,主要原因为单位面积穗数和每穗粒数下降比例大于结实率和千粒重的增加比例。随施氮量减少,一基一追模式下水稻的氮素利用效率增加,其中,KL与脲铵组合的减氮50%处理氮素利用效率最高,达20.1 kg·kg^-1,且其谷物氮素生理利用效率较CK显著(P<0.05)增加14.7%。YX与脲铵组合的减氮20%处理的氮素吸收效率比CK显著(P<0.05)增加12.4%,表观氮肥回收效率显著(P<0.05)增加22.3%。一基一追模式下,施氮量减少时,土壤碱解氮含量下降;但是,不减氮条件下,其土壤碱解氮含量较CK显著(P<0.05)增加7.44%~9.57%。当选用KL与脲胺结合时土壤pH值较CK显著(P<0.05)下降0.17~0.31个单位。综合考虑产量、氮素利用效率、表观氮肥回收效率和土壤养分,一基一追模式下较CK减氮20%较为合理,且以脲甲醛类缓控释肥搭配脲铵的效果最佳。

关键词: 缓控释肥, 脲铵, 施肥模式, 氮素利用效率, 土壤养分

Abstract:

In the present study, a field experiment was conducted to study the effect of different controlled-release fertilizers (CRFs) with urea ammonium (AU) on the yield, nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and soil nutrients. The conventional fertilization method (N 225 kg·hm^-2) was introduced as CK, and three CRFs, namely, lignin-based CRF Haolegeng (HL), urea formaldehyde-based CRF Yongxiao (YX), and nitrification inhibitor-based CRF Kaileilou (KL), were selected to form three CRF+AU modes (HL+AU, YX+AU, and KL+AU), and the N input in these modes was reduced by 0, 20%, 35% and 50% as compared with CK, respectively. It was shown that there was no significant difference in yield within the treatments of CRF+AU modes with 20% N reduction and CK. However, when N reduction rate was 35% and 50%, the yields of rice under CRF+AU modes decreased significantly (P<0.05), which could be attributed to greater ratio of decreases in panicles per unit area and grains per panicle compared to seed-setting rate and 1 000-grain weight. The NUE increased with the reduction of N input under CRF+AU modes. When N reduction rate was 50%, NUE was the highest (20.1 kg·kg^-1) under KL+AU modes, and its grain physiological N-use efficiency (PE-grain) was significantly (P<0.05) increased by 14.7% than CK. When N reduction rate was 20% under YX+AU modes, the nitrogen uptake efficiency (NupE) and apparent N recovery efficiency (ANR) were significantly (P<0.05) increased by 12.4% and 22.3%, respectively, as compared with CK. Under CRF+AU modes, with the higher N reduction rate, the contents of soil alkali hydrolyzable N showed decreasing trends. However, the content of soil alkali hydrolyzable N was significantly (P<0.05) increased by 7.44%-9.57% than CK under CRR+AU modes without N reduction. Compared with CK, the soil pH under KL+AU was significantly (P<0.05) reduced by 0.17-0.31 pH unit. Based on the results of grain yield, NUE, ANR and soil nutrients, it was more reasonable to reduce N by 20% than CK under CRF+AU modes, and YX+AU had the best effect among them.

Key words: controlled-release fertilizer, urea ammonium, fertilization mode, nitrogen use efficiency, soil nutrients

中图分类号:

陈贵, 鲁晨妮, 石艳平, 倪雄伟, 程旺大, 张红梅, 王保君, 张丽萍, 孙达. 不同缓控释肥搭配脲铵对水稻产量、氮素利用效率和土壤养分的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(1): 122-130.

CHEN Gui, LU Chenni, SHI Yanping, NI Xiongwei, CHENG Wangda, ZHANG Hongmei, WANG Baojun, ZHANG Liping, SUN Da. Effect of different controlled-release fertilizers with urea ammonium on yield, nitrogen use efficiency and soil nutrients of rice[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(1): 122-130.

图/表 4

参考文献 31

[1]	彭少兵, 黄见良, 钟旭华, 等. 提高中国稻田氮肥利用率的研究策略[J]. 中国农业科学, 2002,35(9):1095-1103.
	PENG S B, HUANG J L, ZHONG X H, et al. Research strategy in improving fertilizer-nitrogen use efficiency of irrigated rice in China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2002,35(9):1095-1103.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	朱兆良. 我国土壤供氮和化肥氮去向研究的进展[J]. 土壤, 1985,17(1):2-9.
	ZHU Z L. Review on soil nitrogen supply and fate of applied fertilizer nitrogen[J]. Soils, 1985,17(1):2-9. (in Chinese)
[3]	李庆逵, 朱兆良, 于天仁. 中国农业持续发展中的肥料问题[M]. 南昌: 江西科学技术出版社, 1998.
[4]	李荣刚. 高产农田氮素肥效与调控途径: 以江苏太湖稻麦两熟农区为例推及全省[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2000.
	LI R G. Nitrogen fertilizer efficiency and regulation in high yield farmland: taking the rice-wheat double cropping area in Taihu Lake area of Jiangsu Province as an example and extending the whole province[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2000.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	CHEN G, CHEN Y, ZHAO G H, et al. Do high nitrogen use efficiency rice cultivars reduce nitrogen losses from paddy fields?[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2015,209:26-33.
[6]	秦道珠, 黄平娜, 徐明岗, 等. 施用控释肥对粳稻生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2008,24(8):283-286.
	QIN D Z, HUANG P N, XU M G, et al. Application of controlled-release fertilizer on the growth and yield of japonica rice[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2008,24(8):283-286.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	古慧娟, 石元亮, 于阁杰, 等. 我国缓/控释肥料的应用效应研究进展[J]. 土壤通报, 2011,42(1):220-224.
	GU H J, SHI Y L, YU G J, et al. Research advances on the use efficiency of slow/controlled release fertilizer[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2011,42(1):220-224.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	李敏, 郭熙盛, 叶舒娅, 等. 硫膜和树脂膜控释尿素对水稻产量、光合特性及氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013,19(4):808-815.
	LI M, GUO X S, YE S Y, et al. Effects of sulfur-and polymer-coated controlled release urea on yield, photosynthetic characteristics and nitrogen fertilizer efficiency of rice[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 2013,19(4):808-815.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	胡铁军, 张怀杰, 应小军, 等. 脲铵氮肥对冬小麦产量和氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2019,60(11):2006-2007.
	HU T J, ZHANG H J, YING X J, et al. Effect of urea ammonium on yield and nitrogen use efficiency of winter wheat[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2019,60(11):2006-2007. (in Chinese)
[10]	黄锦法, 石艳平, 王润屹, 等. 环保型节氮肥料: 脲铵在晚稻上的施用效果研究[J]. 环境污染与防治, 2013,35(3):72-74.
	HUANG J F, SHI Y P, WANG R Y, et al. Preliminary study on the application performance of a new environmentally friendly and nitrogen-saving fertilizer: urea ammonium on late rice[J]. Environmental Pollution & Control, 2013,35(3):72-74.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	张博文, 赵淼, 敖玉琴, 等. 含氯氮肥对太湖稻麦轮作体系氨挥发及作物产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017,23(3):557-566.
	ZHANG B W, ZHAO M, AO Y Q, et al. Effects of chlorine-containing nitrogen fertilizer on ammonia volatilization and yields under rice-wheat rotation system in Taihu Lake region[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 2017,23(3):557-566.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	胡铁军, 张怀杰, 郑佩君, 等. 3种缓控释肥在双季稻上的应用效果比较[J]. 上海农业科技, 2019(6):96-97.
	HU T J, ZHANG H J, ZHENG P J, et al. Comparison of application effects of three controlled-release fertilizers on double cropping rice[J]. Shanghai Agricultural Science and Technology, 2019(6):96-97.(in Chinese)
[13]	马良, 朱玉祥, 张乐平, 等. 不同缓控释肥对水稻甬优1540产量和效益的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2018,59(4):561-563.
	MA L, ZHU Y X, ZHANG L P, et al. Effects of different controlled released nitrogen on yield and benefits of hybrid rice Yongyou 1540[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018,59(4):561-563.(in Chinese)
[14]	唐拴虎, 谢春生, 孙小文, 等. 水稻施用控释肥料生长效应研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2004,20(1):149-151.
	TANG S H, XIE C S, SUN X W, et al. Effects of controlled-release fertilizers on rice growth[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2004,20(1):149-151.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	黄旭, 唐拴虎, 徐培智, 等. 一次性施用控释肥对超级稻生长及产量的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2006,33(9):16-19.
	HUANG X, TANG S H, XU P Z, et al. Effects of one basal fertilization of controlled-release fertilizers on growth and yield in super-rice[J]. Guangdong Agricultural Sciences, 2006,33(9):16-19.(in Chinese)
[16]	邱荣富, 钱丽琴, 王春芳, 等. 水稻缓/控释肥料试验研究初报[J]. 上海农业科技, 2007(2):45-46.
	QIU R F, QIAN L Q, WANG C F, et al. Effects of controlled-release fertilizer on rice growth[J]. Shanghai Agricultural Science and Technology, 2007(2):45-46.
[17]	孙海军, 闵炬, 施卫明, 等. 硝化抑制剂施用对水稻产量与氨挥发的影响[J]. 土壤, 2015,47(6):1027-1033.
	SUN H J, MIN J, SHI W M, et al. Effects of nitrification inhibitor on rice production and ammonia volatilization in paddy rice field[J]. Soils, 2015,47(6):1027-1033.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	陈贵, 陈梅, 张红梅, 等. 籼粳杂交稻与常规粳稻产量、干物质氮素累积转运及氮素利用差异研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2018,30(12):1992-2000.
	CHEN G, CHEN M, ZHANG H M, et al. Differences of yield, accumulation and translocation properties of dry matter and N, and N use efficiency between indica-japonica hybrid rice and japonica rice[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2018,30(12):1992-2000.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	ZHANG Y L, FAN J B, WANG D S, et al. Genotypic differences in grain yield and physiological nitrogen use efficiency among rice cultivars[J]. Pedosphere, 2009,19(6):681-691.
[20]	陈贵, 张红梅, 沈亚强, 等. 嘉兴地区不同基因型水稻的氮利用效率研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2015,27(11):1965-1970.
	CHEN G, ZHANG H M, SHEN Y Q, et al. Characteristics of N utilization efficiency in different rice genotypes in Jiaxing area[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2015,27(11):1965-1970.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	侯红乾, 黄永兰, 冀建华, 等. 缓/控释肥对双季稻产量和氮素利用率的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2016,30(4):389-396.
	HOU H Q, HUANG Y L, JI J H, et al. Effects of controlled-release fertilizer application on double cropping rice yield and nitrogen use efficiency[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2016,30(4):389-396.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	符建荣, 马军伟, 姜丽娜, 等. 养分释放可调控型有机无机掺混肥的创制及应用[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2005,17(5):251-256.
	FU J R, MA J W, JIANG L N, et al. Formulating and application of controlled release organic and inorganic blending fertilizers[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2005,17(5):251-256.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	伍少福, 路兴花. 不同施肥方式对水稻生长、养分吸收和品质的影响[J]. 磷肥与复肥, 2017,32(5):43-45.
	WU S F, LU X H. Effects of different fertilization methods on growth, nutrient uptake and quality of rice[J]. Phosphate & Compound Fertilizer, 2017,32(5):43-45.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	焦晓光, 罗盛国, 闻大中. 控释尿素施用对水稻吸氮量及产量的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2003,34(6):525-528.
	JIAO X G, LUO S G, WEN D Z. Effect of controlled-release urea application on N uptake and rice yield[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2003,34(6):525-528.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[25]	杨俊刚, 张冬雷, 徐凯, 等. 控释肥与普通肥料混施对设施番茄生长和土壤硝态氮残留的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2012,45(18):3782-3791.
	YANG J G, ZHANG D L, XU K, et al. Effects of mixed application of controlled-release fertilizer and common fertilizers on greenhouse tomato growth, yield, root distribution, and soil nitrate residual[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012,45(18):3782-3791.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	张华艳, 牛灵安, 郝晋珉, 等. 秸秆还田配施缓控释肥对土壤养分和作物产量的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2018,49(1):140-149.
	ZHANG H Y, NIU L A, HAO J M, et al. Effects of straw returning combined with slow release fertilizer on soil nutrient and crop yield[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2018,49(1):140-149.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[27]	朱兆良. 农田中氮肥的损失与对策[J]. 土壤与环境, 2000,9(1):1-6.
	ZHU Z L. Loss of fertilizer N from plants-soil system and the strategies and techniques for its reduction[J]. Soil and Environmental Sciences, 2000,9(1):1-6.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[28]	刘若萱, 贺纪正, 张丽梅. 稻田土壤不同水分条件下硝化/反硝化作用及其功能微生物的变化特征[J]. 环境科学, 2014,35(11):4275-4283.
	LIU R X, HE J Z, ZHANG L M. Response of nitrification/denitrification and their associated microbes to soil moisture change in paddy soil[J]. Environmental Science, 2014,35(11):4275-4283.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[29]	李杰, 石元亮, 王玲莉, 等. 硝化抑制剂对稻田土壤N₂O排放和硝化、反硝化菌数量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019,25(12):2095-2101.
	LI J, SHI Y L, WANG L L, et al. Comparison of nitrification inhibitors on N₂O emission and abundances of nitrifier and denitrifier in paddy soil[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2019,25(12):2095-2101.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[30]	CHEN G, GUO S W, KRONZUCKER H J, et al. Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) in rice links to NH⁺₄ toxicity and futile NH⁺₄ cycling in roots[J]. Plant and Soil, 2013,369(1/2):351-363.
[31]	徐仁扣. 土壤酸化及其调控研究进展[J]. 土壤, 2015,47(2):238-244.
	XU R K. Research progresses in soil acidification and its control[J]. Soils, 2015,47(2):238-244.(in Chinese with English abstract)

处理 Treatment	产量 Grain yield/ (t·hm^-2)	单位面积穗数 Panicles per unit area/ (10⁴ hm^-2)	每穗粒数 Grains per panicle	结实率 Seed-setting rate/%	千粒重 1 000-grain weight/g
N0	5.90±0.53 e	173±3 e	130±1 a	88.2±2.8 b	32.2±0.7 a
CK	9.33±0.16 a	311±15 ab	122±2 b	88.7±2.6 b	29.6±0.9 c
HL	9.12±0.55 ab	312±36 a	119±1 bcd	92.0±0.4 ab	30.7±0.3 bc
HL20	9.04±0.28 abc	298±18 abcd	115±3 cd	91.0±0.8 ab	32.0±1.5 ab
HL35	8.70±0.19 bcd	286±25 abcd	117±4 bcd	91.0±2.8 ab	31.3±0.8 ab
HL50	8.43±0.41 d	266±18 d	120±8 bc	89.4±2.1 ab	31.7±0.9 ab
YX	9.08±0.08 ab	308±9 abc	117±1 bcd	88.8±1.5 b	31.5±0.5 ab
YX20	9.04±0.29 abc	316±24 a	116±3 bcd	91.1±1.8 ab	31.2±0.7 ab
YX35	8.39±0.16 d	288±22 abcd	116±4 bcd	91.4±1.9 ab	31.2±0.5 ab
YX50	8.37±0.44 d	264±32 d	113±3 d	89.0±4.1 b	31.7±0.4 ab
KL	9.38±0.23 a	318±32 a	120±2 bc	89.3±2.0 ab	31.4±0.8 ab
KL20	9.11±0.24 ab	298±28 abcd	118±4 bcd	91.4±0.9 ab	30.8±0.7 bc
KL35	8.75±0.39 bcd	268±24 cd	118±5 bcd	92.8±4.0 a	31.7±1.3 ab
KL50	8.51±0.39 cd	270±32 bcd	118±4 bcd	90.4±0.6 ab	31.8±0.3 ab

处理 Treatment	产量 Grain yield/ (t·hm^-2)	单位面积穗数 Panicles per unit area/ (10⁴ hm^-2)	每穗粒数 Grains per panicle	结实率 Seed-setting rate/%	千粒重 1 000-grain weight/g
N0	5.90±0.53 e	173±3 e	130±1 a	88.2±2.8 b	32.2±0.7 a
CK	9.33±0.16 a	311±15 ab	122±2 b	88.7±2.6 b	29.6±0.9 c
HL	9.12±0.55 ab	312±36 a	119±1 bcd	92.0±0.4 ab	30.7±0.3 bc
HL20	9.04±0.28 abc	298±18 abcd	115±3 cd	91.0±0.8 ab	32.0±1.5 ab
HL35	8.70±0.19 bcd	286±25 abcd	117±4 bcd	91.0±2.8 ab	31.3±0.8 ab
HL50	8.43±0.41 d	266±18 d	120±8 bc	89.4±2.1 ab	31.7±0.9 ab
YX	9.08±0.08 ab	308±9 abc	117±1 bcd	88.8±1.5 b	31.5±0.5 ab
YX20	9.04±0.29 abc	316±24 a	116±3 bcd	91.1±1.8 ab	31.2±0.7 ab
YX35	8.39±0.16 d	288±22 abcd	116±4 bcd	91.4±1.9 ab	31.2±0.5 ab
YX50	8.37±0.44 d	264±32 d	113±3 d	89.0±4.1 b	31.7±0.4 ab
KL	9.38±0.23 a	318±32 a	120±2 bc	89.3±2.0 ab	31.4±0.8 ab
KL20	9.11±0.24 ab	298±28 abcd	118±4 bcd	91.4±0.9 ab	30.8±0.7 bc
KL35	8.75±0.39 bcd	268±24 cd	118±5 bcd	92.8±4.0 a	31.7±1.3 ab
KL50	8.51±0.39 cd	270±32 bcd	118±4 bcd	90.4±0.6 ab	31.8±0.3 ab

处理Treatment	NUE/(kg·kg^-1)	NupE/(kg·kg^-1)	PE-bio/(kg·kg^-1)	PE-grain/(kg·kg^-1)	ANR/%
N0	19.0±1.7 abcd	0.28±0.03 c	133±8 a	67.8±12.8 a	—
CK	17.4±0.3 efg	0.35±0.02 b	107±10 f	50.4±3.8 cd	36.2±5.1 b
HL	17.0±1.0 fg	0.36±0.03 ab	107±8 f	47.4±2.6 d	39.4±7.3 ab
HL20	18.4±0.6 cde	0.38±0.02 ab	105±1 f	48.8±0.8 d	45.0±4.6 ab
HL35	19.0±0.4 abcd	0.36±0.01 ab	109±2 def	52.8±2.1 bcd	41.5±4.4 ab
HL50	19.9±1.0 ab	0.35±0.01 b	116±1 bcde	57.0±2.7 bc	38.8±2.9 ab
YX	16.9±0.2 g	0.35±0.00 ab	107±2 ef	47.9±0.8 d	38.0±0.7 ab
YX20	18.4±0.6 cde	0.39±0.02 a	109±6 def	47.4±1.5 d	48.2±6.2 a
YX35	18.4±0.4 def	0.36±0.04 ab	118±3 bc	51.9±7.7 bcd	40.5±13.9 ab
YX50	19.7±1.0 abc	0.35±0.02 ab	122±2 b	56.3±0.4 bc	39.6±6.2 ab
KL	17.5±0.4 efg	0.34±0.01 b	108±4 def	51.2±2.3 bcd	35.2±3.3 b
KL20	18.6±0.5 bcde	0.37±0.02 ab	112±2 cdef	50.6±2.2 bcd	42.3±6.2 ab
KL35	19.1±0. 9 abcd	0.36±0. 03 ab	114±7 bcdef	52.8±1.6 bcd	42.2±8.4 ab
KL50	20.1±0.9 a	0.35±0.02 b	117±5 bcd	57.9±1.2 b	38.3±8.4 ab

处理Treatment	NUE/(kg·kg^-1)	NupE/(kg·kg^-1)	PE-bio/(kg·kg^-1)	PE-grain/(kg·kg^-1)	ANR/%
N0	19.0±1.7 abcd	0.28±0.03 c	133±8 a	67.8±12.8 a	—
CK	17.4±0.3 efg	0.35±0.02 b	107±10 f	50.4±3.8 cd	36.2±5.1 b
HL	17.0±1.0 fg	0.36±0.03 ab	107±8 f	47.4±2.6 d	39.4±7.3 ab
HL20	18.4±0.6 cde	0.38±0.02 ab	105±1 f	48.8±0.8 d	45.0±4.6 ab
HL35	19.0±0.4 abcd	0.36±0.01 ab	109±2 def	52.8±2.1 bcd	41.5±4.4 ab
HL50	19.9±1.0 ab	0.35±0.01 b	116±1 bcde	57.0±2.7 bc	38.8±2.9 ab
YX	16.9±0.2 g	0.35±0.00 ab	107±2 ef	47.9±0.8 d	38.0±0.7 ab
YX20	18.4±0.6 cde	0.39±0.02 a	109±6 def	47.4±1.5 d	48.2±6.2 a
YX35	18.4±0.4 def	0.36±0.04 ab	118±3 bc	51.9±7.7 bcd	40.5±13.9 ab
YX50	19.7±1.0 abc	0.35±0.02 ab	122±2 b	56.3±0.4 bc	39.6±6.2 ab
KL	17.5±0.4 efg	0.34±0.01 b	108±4 def	51.2±2.3 bcd	35.2±3.3 b
KL20	18.6±0.5 bcde	0.37±0.02 ab	112±2 cdef	50.6±2.2 bcd	42.3±6.2 ab
KL35	19.1±0. 9 abcd	0.36±0. 03 ab	114±7 bcdef	52.8±1.6 bcd	42.2±8.4 ab
KL50	20.1±0.9 a	0.35±0.02 b	117±5 bcd	57.9±1.2 b	38.3±8.4 ab

处理 Treatment	全氮 Total N/ (g·kg^-1)	碱解氮 Alkali hydrolyzable N/ (mg·kg^-1)	有效磷 Available P/ (mg·kg^-1)	速效钾 Available K/ (mg·kg^-1)	有机质 Organic matter/ (g·kg^-1)	pH
N0	1.68±0.08 a	140±1 a	12.8±1.5 a	152±7 a	23.9±3.0 a	6.89±0.10 a
CK	1.67±0.17 a	130±8 bcd	13.1±2.1 a	143±6 ab	22.8±1.7 a	6.83±0.03 ab
HL	1.76±0.13 a	143±6 a	13.1±2.0 a	140±10 ab	25.1±1.1 a	6.72±0.04 bcd
HL20	1.75±0.11 a	136±7 abcd	13.3±1.4 a	151±11 a	24.8±0.5 a	6.77±0.07 abc
HL35	1.81±0.07 a	130±4 bcd	13.4±0.8 a	154±12 a	24.1±3.2 a	6.77±0.05 abc
HL50	1.79±.011 a	128±4 d	13.7±1.1 a	143±7 ab	23.7±1.7 a	6.82±0.02 ab
YX	1.82±0.10 a	143±3 a	13.1±0.7 a	143±12 ab	24.0±2.1 a	6.75±0.01 bc
YX20	1.76±0.12 a	141±5 a	14.0±1.9 a	142±12 ab	22.3±1.9 a	6.71±0.06 bcde
YX35	1.75±0.10 a	137±4 abcd	13.0±0.7 a	147±11 ab	23.3±3.1 a	6.68±0.08 cde
YX50	1.79±0.08 a	130±4 bcd	13.1±0.4 a	148±9 ab	24.1±2.8 a	6.74±0.10 bcd
KL	1.82±0.12 a	140±5 a	12.7±0.7 a	135±5 b	22.2±2.0 a	6.52±0.16 f
KL20	1.76±0.14 a	138±9 ab	12.4±0.7 a	135±10 b	23.6±2.7 a	6.66±0.07 cde
KL35	1.83±0.08 a	137±4 abc	12.6±0.5 a	141±4 ab	23.0±3.9 a	6.61±0.08 def
KL50	1.71±0.12 a	130±6 cd	12.6±1.0 a	143±8 ab	22.9±1.3 a	6.58±0.11 ef

不同缓控释肥搭配脲铵对水稻产量、氮素利用效率和土壤养分的影响

Effect of different controlled-release fertilizers with urea ammonium on yield, nitrogen use efficiency and soil nutrients of rice

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	张智, 何豪豪, 郁妙, 许剑锋. 化肥减量配施土壤改良剂对土壤酸度、土壤养分和水稻产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(6): 1301-1308.
[2]	胡铁军. 化肥减量配施微生物肥对西蓝花产量品质与土壤性质的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(7): 1657-1665.
[3]	岳宗伟, 李嘉骁, 孙向阳, 刘国梁, 李素艳, 王晨晨, 查贵超, 魏宁娴. 化肥有机肥配施对土壤性质、樱桃果实品质和产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(9): 2192-2201.
[4]	吴传美, 何季, 吴文珊, 蔡俊, 向仰州. 间作对刺梨园土壤团聚体化学计量特征和养分贡献率的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(5): 1132-1143.
[5]	鲁帅, 罗晓刚, 刘全伟, 张屹, 孟洋昊, 李洁, 张景来. 有机无机复混肥对小麦生长、土壤养分和重金属含量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(4): 922-930.
[6]	高风, 文仕知, 韦铄星, 欧汉彪, 王智慧. 桂西北石漠化区不同植被恢复类型对土壤理化性质、酶活与真菌群落多样性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(10): 2425-2435.
[7]	杨胜竹, 李响, 李朝文, 陈海念, 刘丽, 陆引罡, 曹卓洋. 贵州省烟草青枯病害区根际土壤养分及酶活性特征分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(1): 146-155.
[8]	孙文艳, 刘小刚, 张文慧, 李慧永, 吴朗, 杨启良, 熊国美. 基于根区土壤质量指数优化小粒种咖啡滴灌施肥方案[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(3): 566-573.
[9]	张健利, 王振华, 陈睿, 王东旺, 梁永辉, 刘茹华. 水肥互作对滴灌红枣产量、品质与土壤养分的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(11): 2428-2437.
[10]	范琳娟, 刘子荣, 徐雪亮, 王奋山, 彭德良, 姚英娟. 6种杀线剂对重茬山药土壤微生物数量、酶活性和养分含量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(3): 506-515.
[11]	张辉, 车旭升, 吕剑, 缑兆辉, 秦启杰, 罗建, 张国斌. 灌水量与氮素形态对西兰花生产和氮代谢的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(2): 308-315.
[12]	隋夕然, 王妍, 刘云根, 张雅洁, 吴丽芳. 典型喀斯特区云南松林土壤养分和细菌群落对海拔的响应[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(12): 2348-2357.
[13]	熊廷浩, 黄益国, 周旋, 鲁艳红, 资涛, 胡宇倩, 宋海星. 湖南省油菜主产区土壤养分含量与重金属污染风险评价[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(10): 1904-1912.
[14]	李金武, 郁继华, 吕剑, 冯致, 杨海兴, 车旭升, 秦启杰, 张洋, 金宁. 不同覆盖方式对高原夏季露地松花菜产量、品质和土壤养分的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(9): 1626-1633.
[15]	牛素贞, 安红卫, 宋勤飞, 陈正武. 贵州野生茶树立地土壤养分状况分析及综合评价[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(6): 1039-1048.