滴灌条件下不同耕深及秸秆还田量对玉米生长的影响

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.01.02

浙江农业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (1): 8-17.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.01.02

滴灌条件下不同耕深及秸秆还田量对玉米生长的影响

刘根红(), 薛银鑫, 张倩, 周佳瑞, 买小凤

宁夏大学农学院,宁夏银川 750021

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:
宁夏回族自治区自然科学基金(2018AAC03001)

Effects of different tillage depth and amount of straw returned to the field on maize growth under drip-irrigation

LIU Genhong(), XUE Yinxin, ZHANG Qian, ZHOU Jiarui, MAI Xiaofeng

College of Agriculture, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, China

Received:2020-06-19 Online:2021-01-25 Published:2021-01-25

摘要/Abstract

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。

关键词: 玉米, 耕深, 秸秆还田, 耕作方式

Abstract:

Drip irrigation has gradually become a new resource-saving cultivation method in the irrigation area of Ningxia; however, the depth of tillage and the amount of straw returned to the field under drip irrigation were not clear. The experiment was conducted to study suitable tillage depth and the level of returning straw to field under drip irrigation. Tianci No. 19 was the test maize material, and the split-plot experiment design was adopted. The main plot was tillage depth with three levels of 0.25-0.30 m, 0.30-0.35 m, 0.35~0.40 m, and the amount of straw returned to field was quarter, one third and one half of the straw amount returned to field in conventional cultivation. The results showed that the effects of different treatments on the growth index and yield of maize were different, and the difference between the treatments was significant (P<0.01) at the level of 0.30~0.35 m of tillage depth and one third of the straw amount returned to field. In this treatment, the soil temperature of 0-0.2 m at seedling stage increased obviously, the maximum difference was 1.5 ℃, the increase rate was 8.6%, the photosynthetic rate (PSA) at silking-filling stage was 34.5% higher than the lowest treatment, the 100-grain weight was 6% higher than the lowest treatment, the filling rate (GFA) at 20 days after pollination was 26.9% higher than the lowest treatment, the yield was 14 781.9 kg·hm^-2, and the yield was 16.3% higher than the lowest treatment. But different treatments had different effects on plant height, leaf area index (LAI) and ear diameter. The treatment one half amount of straw returned to field and 0.25-0.30 m of tillage depth had significant effects on plant height, LAI at jointing stage and ear diameter. It was concluded that the main field growth characters were good at the level of 0.30-0.35 m tillage depth and one third of the straw amount returned to the field. The ear length, ear diameter and 100-grain weight of ear characters were all better than other treatments, and the yield was the highest, which was suitable for promotion in irrigation area.

Key words: maize, tillage depth, straw amount return to field, farming methods

中图分类号:

S513

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.

图/表 6

参考文献 30

[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)

土壤深度 Soil depth/m	处理Treatment		生育时期Growth stages
土壤深度 Soil depth/m	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

土壤深度 Soil depth/m	处理Treatment		生育时期Growth stages
土壤深度 Soil depth/m	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

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

滴灌条件下不同耕深及秸秆还田量对玉米生长的影响

Effects of different tillage depth and amount of straw returned to the field on maize growth under drip-irrigation

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 30

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

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	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)
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]	许卫猛, 徐妍, 陈国立. 基于多种分析方法的糯玉米品质综合评价[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(9): 1840-1848.
[2]	闫沛中, 陈亮, 张生银, 刘斌. 水肥耦合对景电灌区膜下滴灌玉米产量及水肥利用效率的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(9): 1849-1859.
[3]	关秀生, 刘铁山, 王娟, 张茂林, 刘春晓, 董瑞, 关海英, 刘强, 徐扬, 何春梅. 玉米NF-YA家族基因的生物信息学分析与克隆[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(8): 1605-1614.
[4]	咸若彤, 缪青梅, 彭城, 陈笑芸, 杨蕾, 徐晓丽, 魏巍, 徐俊锋, 李玥莹, 汪小福. 转基因玉米WYN17132转化体特异性实时荧光PCR检测方法的建立与应用[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(7): 1397-1406.
[5]	苏扬, 商小兰, 钱忠明, 吴林根, 黄佳琦, 庄海峰, 赵宇飞, 党洪阳, 徐立军. 腐熟剂与生物炭协同强化秸秆还田对土壤质量和水稻生长的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(5): 1139-1148.
[6]	王闻琦, 王盼盼, 张严玲, 刘青青, 洪双双, 赵高鹏, 刘泓畅, 王翠玲. 玉米生物钟基因ZmPRR1-2互作蛋白质的筛选[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(5): 977-986.
[7]	王晓阳, 李强, 赵武云, 戴飞, 严兆荣, 王久鑫. 铲式青贮玉米起茬及残膜回收联合作业机设计与试验[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(9): 2132-2145.
[8]	李清超, 杨珊, 张登峰, 刘建新, 孙开利, 吴迅. 四百八十七份玉米地方种质资源穗部性状的表型多样性[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(7): 1481-1491.
[9]	熊瑞, 欧阳宁, 欧茜, 钟康裕, 周文涛, 王泓睿, 龙攀, 徐莹, 傅志强. 秸秆还田与耕作方式对双季稻土壤团聚体及碳氮含量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(6): 1347-1356.
[10]	周丽丽, 冯海宽, 聂臣巍, 许晓斌, 刘媛, 孟麟, 薛贝贝, 明博, 梁齐云, 苏涛, 金秀良. 无人机观测时间对玉米冠层叶绿素密度估算的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(1): 18-31.
[11]	冷益丰, 罗樊, 陈从顺, 丁鑫, 蔡光泽. 基于GBS测序的全基因组SNP揭示大凉山玉米地方品种资源的亲缘关系与遗传分化[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(1): 32-47.
[12]	汪洁, 陆若辉, 朱伟锋, 陈钰佩, 单英杰. 浙江省主要粮食作物秸秆还田替代化肥的潜力[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(8): 1853-1863.
[13]	马启良, 杨小明, 胡水星, 黄子鸿, 祁亨年. 基于Mask RCNN和视觉技术的玉米种子发芽自动检测方法[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(8): 1927-1936.
[14]	雷联. 膜下滴灌调亏对制种玉米植株生长、产量和水分利用的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(7): 1542-1549.
[15]	张淑红, 张运峰, 武秋颖, 高凤菊, 李亚子, 纪景欣, 许可, 范永山. 玉米大斑病菌醇脱氢酶基因家族的鉴定和生物信息学分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(5): 1108-1115.