种植方式和密度对高粱群体结构和产量的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.22.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】种植方式结合种植密度是提高旱作区作物光能利用率、增加作物产量的有效途径之一,在旱作农业生产中具有重要意义。通过研究不同种植密度和种植方式对高粱冠层结构的影响,为进一步挖掘辽西半干旱区高粱产量潜力提供理论依据。【方法】2016—2017年以酿造型高粱品种辽杂19号为试验材料,采用二因素裂区试验设计,主区为种植方式,设60 cm等行距种植（P1）和80 cm+40 cm宽窄行种植（P2）,裂区为种植密度,分别为75 000株/hm ²（D1）、105 000株/hm ²（D2）、135 000株/hm ²（D3）、165 000株/hm ²（D4）,3次重复。通过测定分析高粱群体植株形态指标、光合生理指标、地上部生物量,探究不同处理组合对高粱群体光合特性和产量形成的影响。【结果】2年间同一种植方式下,高粱籽粒产量由大到小依次为D3>D2>D4>D1。2年平均产量,P2D2处理较P1D2处理增产5.02%,P2D3处理较P1D3处理增产6.96%,P2D1处理较P1D1处理减产0.27%,2017年P2D4处理较P1D4处理减产2.55%,所有处理组合中以P2D3处理产量最高,2年平均产量为10 267.14 kg·hm ^-2。随种植密度的增加,株高、群体叶面积指数和叶向值呈增大趋势,茎粗、茎粗系数、单株叶面积、茎叶夹角、透光率、叶绿素相对含量（SPAD值）、净光合速率呈减小趋势。在D2和D3处理下,P2处理较P1处理在茎粗系数、群体叶面积指数、透光率、SPAD值、净光合速率等方面表现出一定的优势。2年平均茎粗系数,P2D2处理较P1D2处理增加2.80%,P2D3处理较P1D3处理增加9.29%。。2年平均群体叶面积指数和平均净光合速率,P2D2处理较P1D2处理分别增加3.17%和16.33%,P2D3处理较P1D3处理分别增加7.27%和17.57%。开花期和乳熟期,2年平均冠层底部透光率,P2D2处理较P1D2处理分别增加22.55%和15.81%,P2D3处理较P1D3处理分别增加37.45%和102.09%,冠层中部透光率P2D2处理较P1D2处理分别增加38.72%和8.16%,P2D3处理较P1D3处理分别增加56.59%和93.60%。开花期和乳熟期,2年平均SPAD值,P2D2处理较P1D2处理分别增加6.46%和5.41%,P2D3处理较P1D3处理分别增加8.75%和5.46%。在D2和D3处理下,2年间P2处理上层叶片相对挺直,叶面积较小,可以改善中下层叶片受光条件,下层叶片相对平展,叶面积较大,可以减少漏光损失,提高光能利用率。【结论】适当提高种植密度是提升高粱产量的关键。适宜种植密度下,宽窄行种植较等行距种植可有效改善冠层透光率,增加群体叶面积指数,扩大光合面积,提高叶片尤其是中下层叶片光合性能,是实现作物群体结构和植株个体功能协同增益和产量提高的重要途径。

关键词: 密度, 种植方式, 高粱, 冠层结构, 产量

Abstract:

【Objective】 The combination of planting pattern and planting density was one of the effective ways to increase the utilization rate of light energy and to increase the yield of crops in dryland farming area, which was of great significance in dryland agricultural production. The effects of different planting densities and planting modes on the structure of sorghum canopy were studied to provide a theoretical basis for further excavating the yield potential of sorghum in the semi-arid region of western Liaoning. 【Method】 The brewed sorghum variety Liaoza 19 was used as the experimental material. Two factors split plot design was used to examine the effects of different treatments on photosynthetic characteristics of the population and yield by analyzing plant shape index, photosynthetic physiological indexes, and aboveground biomass. The main area was planted with 60 cm equal row spacing (P1) and 80 cm+40 cm wide-narrow row planting (P2), and the split area was planting density with 75 000 plants/hm ²(D1), 105 000 plants/hm ²(D2), 135 000 plants/hm ²(D3) and 165 000 plants/hm ²(D4). The experiment was repeated three times. 【Result】 In the two years, grain yield of sorghum was in turn D3>D2>D4>D1 from big to small under the same planting pattern. The average 2-year yield of P2D2 was 5.02% higher than that of P1D2, and that of P2D3 was 6.96% higher than that of P1D3, and that of P2D1 was 0.27% lower than that of P1D1, respectively. The yield of P2D4 was 2.55% lower than that of P1D4 in 2017. The yield of P2D3, which was the highest in all treatments, was 10 267.14 kg·hm ^-2. In accordance with the increase of planting density, the plant height, population leaf area index and leaf orientation value showed an increasing trend, while stem diameter, stem diameter coefficient, leaf area per plant, angle between leaf and stem, light transmittance, SPAD value and net photosynthetic rate decreased. The wide-narrow row planting had the advantages in the aspects of stem diameter coefficient, group leaf area index, light transmittance, net photosynthetic rate, SPAD value compared with equidistant row planting under D2 and D3. P2D2 increased by 2.80%, 3.17%, 16.33% compared with P1D2 and P2D3 increased by 9.29%, 7.27%, 17.57% compared with P1D3 respectively in the aspects of mean stem diameter coefficient, mean population leaf area index and mean net photosynthetic rate in the two years. In the stage of flowering and milking, P2D2 increased by 22.55%, 15.81% compared with P1D2, respectively, and P2D3 increased by 37.45%, 102.09% compared with P1D3 in the aspect of mean light transmittance at the bottom, respectively, and P2D2 increased by 38.72%, 8.16% compared with P1D2, respectively, and P2D3 increased by 56.59%, 93.60% compared with P1D3 in the aspect of mean light transmittance in the middle of the canopy, respectively, in the two years. In the stage of flowering and milking, P2D2 increased by 6.46%, 5.41% compared with P1D2, respectively, and P2D3 increased by 8.75%, 5.46% compared with P1D3 on two years' average SPAD value, respectively. Under the density of D2 and D3, the upper leave of the wide-narrow row planting was relatively straight and leaf area was lesser, which could improve the light receiving condition of the middle and lower leaves, the lower blade was relatively flat and leaf area was larger, which could reduce the loss of light leakage and improve the utilization ratio of light energy compared with equidistant row planting in the two years. 【Conclusion】Appropriate increase of planting density was the key to increase sorghum yield. Under optimum planting density, wide-narrow row planting, which was an important way to realize the synergistic gain and yield enhancement of crop population structure and plant individual function, could effectively improve canopy light transmittance, increase population leaf area index, expand photosynthetic area, and improve the photosynthetic performance of the leaves, especially the middle and lower leaves.

Key words: planting density, planting pattern, sorghum, canopy structure, yield

肖继兵,刘志,孔凡信,辛宗绪,吴宏生. 种植方式和密度对高粱群体结构和产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(22): 4264-4276.

XIAO JiBing,LIU Zhi,KONG FanXin,XIN ZongXu,WU HongSheng. Effects of Planting Pattern and Density on Population Structure and Yield of Sorghum[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(22): 4264-4276.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.22.005

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2018/V51/I22/4264

图/表 8

表1

图1

表2

表3

图2

图3

图4

图5

参考文献 31

[1]	杨吉顺, 高辉远, 刘鹏, 李耕, 董树亭, 张吉旺 . 种植密度和行距配置对超高产夏玉米群体光合特性的影响. 作物学报, 2010,36(7):1226-1233. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01226
	YANG J S, GAO H Y, LIU P, LI G, DONG S T, ZHANG J W . Effects of planting density and row spacing on canopy apparent photosynthesis of high-yield summer corn. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2010,36(7):1226-1233. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01226
[2]	章家恩 . 作物群体结构的生态环境效应及其优化探讨. 生态科学, 2000,19(1):30-35. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-8873.2000.01.005
	ZHANG J E . Discussion on the eco-environmental effects of crop community structure and its optimization. Ecologic Science, 2000,19(1):30-35. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-8873.2000.01.005
[3]	齐华, 梁熠, 赵明, 王敬亚, 吴亚男, 刘明 . 栽培方式对玉米群体结构的调控效应. 华北农学报, 2010,25(3):134-139. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2010.03.029
	QI H, LIANG Y, ZHAO M, WANG J Y, WU Y N, LIU M . The effects of cultivation ways on population structure of maize. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2010,25(3):134-139. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2010.03.029
[4]	吕丽华, 陶洪斌, 夏来坤, 张雅杰, 赵明, 赵久然, 王璞 . 不同种植密度下的夏玉米冠层结构及光合特性. 作物学报, 2008,34(3):447-455. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00447
	LÜ L H, TAO H B, XIA L K, ZHANG Y J, ZHAO M, ZHAO J R, WANG P . Canopy structure and photosynthesis traits of summer maize under different planting densities. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2008,34(3):447-455. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00447
[5]	郑洪建, 董树亭, 王空军, 郭玉秋, 胡昌浩, 张吉旺 . 生态因素对玉米品种产量影响及调控的研究. 作物学报, 2001,27(6):862-868. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0496-3490.2001.06.029
	ZHENG H J, DONG S T, WANG K J, GUO Y Q, HU C H, ZHANG J W . Effects of ecological factors on maize (Zea mays L.) yield of different varieties and corresponding regulative measure. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2001,27(6):862-868. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0496-3490.2001.06.029
[6]	DONG S, HU C, YUE S . The characteristics of canopy photosynthesis of summer corn (Zea mays) and its relation with canopy structure and ecological conditions. Acta Phytoecologica Et Geobotanica Sinica, 1992,16(4):372-378.
[7]	吕丽华, 赵明, 赵久然, 陶洪斌, 王璞 . 不同施氮量下夏玉米冠层结构及光合特性的变化. 中国农业科学, 2008,41(9):2624-2632.
	LÜ L H, ZHAO M, ZHAO J R, TAO H B, WANG P . Canopy structure and photosvnthesis of summer maize under different nitrogen fertilizer application rates. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008,41(9):2624-2632. (in Chinese)
[8]	张玉芹, 杨恒山, 高聚林, 张瑞富, 王志刚, 徐寿军, 范秀艳, 杨升辉 . 超高产春玉米冠层结构及其生理特性. 中国农业科学, 2011,44(21):4367-4376. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.21.005
	ZHANG Y Q, YANG H S, GAO J L, ZHANG R F, WANG Z G, XU S J, FAN X Y, YANG S H . Study on canopy structure and physiological characteristics of super-high yield spring maize, Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2011,44(21):4367-4376. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.21.005
[9]	SHARRATT B S, MCWILLIAMS D A . Microclimatic and rooting characteristics of narrow-row versus conventional-row corn. Agronomy Journal, 2005,97(4):1129-1135. doi: 10.2134/agronj2004.0292
[10]	RETASÁNCHEZ D G, FOWLER J L . Canopy light environment and yield of narrow-row cotton as affected by canopy architecture. Agronomy Journal, 2002,94(6):1317-1323. doi: 10.2134/agronj2002.1317
[11]	李明, 李文雄 . 肥料和密度对寒地高产玉米源库性状及产量的调节作用. 中国农业科学, 2004,37(8):1130-1137. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2004.08.008
	LI M, LI W X . Regulation of fertilizer and density on sink and source traits and yield of maize. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2004,37(8):1130-1137. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2004.08.008
[12]	KONNO Y . Feedback regulation of constant leaf standing crop in Sasa tsuboiana grasslands. Ecological Research, 2001,16(3):459-469. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1703.2001.00421.x
[13]	刘伟, 吕鹏, 苏凯, 杨今胜, 张吉旺, 董树亭, 刘鹏, 孙庆泉 . 种植密度对夏玉米产量和源库特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2010,21(7):1737-1743.
	LIU W, LÜ P, SU K, YANG J S, ZHANG J W, DONG S T, LIU P, SUN Q Q . Effects of planting density on the grain yield and source-sink characteristics of summer maize. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2010,21(7):1737-1743. (in Chinese)
[14]	WESTGATE M E, FORCELLA F, REICOSKY D C, SOMSEN J . Rapid canopy closure for maize production in the northern US corn belt: Radiation-use efficiency and grain yield. Field Crops Research, 1997,49(2/3):249-258. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(96)01055-6
[15]	ANDRADE F H, CALVIÑO P, CIRILO A, BARBIERI P . Yield responses to narrow rows depend on increased radiation interception. Agronomy Journal, 2002,94(5):975-980. doi: 10.2134/agronj2002.0975
[16]	沈秀瑛, 戴俊英, 胡安畅, 顾慰连, 郑波 . 玉米群体冠层特征与光截获及产量关系的研究. 作物学报, 1993,19(3):246-252.
	SHEN X Y, DAI J Y, HU A C, GU W L, ZHENG B . Studies on relationship among character of canopy light interception and yield in maize populations (Zea mays L.). Acta Agronomica Sinica, 1993,19(3):246-252. (in Chinese)
[17]	杨利华, 张丽华, 张全国, 姚艳荣, 贾秀领, 马瑞崑 . 种植样式对高密度夏玉米产量和株高整齐度的影响. 玉米科学, 2006,14(6):122-124. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-0906.2006.06.032
	YANG L H, ZHANG L H, ZHANG Q G, YAO Y R, JIA X L, MA R K . Effect of row spacing pattern on yield and plant height uniformity in highly-densed summer maize. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2006,14(6):122-124. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-0906.2006.06.032
[18]	LIU T, SONG F, LIU S, ZHU X . Canopy structure, light interception, and photosynthetic characteristics under different narrow-wide planting patterns in maize at silking stage. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 2011,9(4):1249-1261. doi: 10.5424/sjar/20110904-050-11
[19]	黄瑞冬, 高悦, 周宇飞, 吴奇, 张姣, 尚培培, 张壮, 高铭悦, 韩熠, 许文娟 . 矮秆高粱辽杂35光合特性与产量构成因素. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(5):822-829. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.05.005
	HUANG R D, GAO Y, ZHOU Y F, WU Q, ZHANG J, SHANG P P, ZHANG Z, GAO M Y, HAN Y, XU W J . Photosynthetic characteristics and yield components of dwarf sorghum hybrid Liaoza 35. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017,50(5):822-829. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.05.005
[20]	陆樟镳, 黄瑞冬, 魏保权, 张素萍, 周宇飞, 肖木辑, 许文娟 . 高粱不同群体类型植株冠层特性与物质生产. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2011,42(4):406-410.
	LU Z B, HUANG R D, WEI B Q, ZHANG S P, ZHOU Y F, XIAO M J, XU W J . Canopy characteristics and matter production during filling stage in different populations of sorghum. Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University, 2011,42(4):406-410. (in Chinese)
[21]	杨楠, 丁玉川, 焦晓燕, 王劲松, 董二伟, 王立革, 武萍 . 种植密度对高粱群体生理指标、产量及其构成因素的影响. 农学学报, 2013,3(7):11-17. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7774.2013.07.004
	YANG N, DING Y C, JIAO X Y, WANG J S, DONG E W, WANG L G, WU P . Effects of plant density on population physiological indices, grain yield and yield component factors of sorghum. Journal of Agriculture, 2013,3(7):11-17. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7774.2013.07.004
[22]	梁熠, 齐华, 王敬亚 . 行距配置对春玉米群体冠层环境与光合特性的影响. 西北农业学报, 2014,23(8):66-72. doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2014.08.011
	LIANG Y, QI H, WANG J Y . Effects of different row spacing on ecological environment and photosynthetic characteristics of spring maize populations. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 2014,23(8):66-72. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2014.08.011
[23]	李光, 白文斌, 曹昌林, 史丽娟, 张建华, 彭之东, 范娜 . 不同种植模式对矮秆高粱‘晋杂34号’光合特性和产量的影响. 农学学报, 2015,5(10):1-5.
	LI G, BAI W B, CAO C L, SHI L J, ZHANG J H, PENG Z D, FAN N . Effects of photosynthetic characteristics and yield of ‘Jinza No.34’ with different plant patterns. Journal of Agriculture, 2015,5(10):1-5. (in Chinese)
[24]	魏珊珊, 王祥宇, 董树亭 . 株行距配置对高产夏玉米冠层结构及籽粒灌浆特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2014,25(2):441-450.
	WEI S S, WANG X Y, DONG S T . Effects of row spacing on canopy structure and grain-filling characteristics of high-yield summer maize. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014,25(2):441-450. (in Chinese)
[25]	赵甘霖, 丁国祥, 刘天朋, 倪先林, 陈国民, 胡烔凌, 汪小楷 . 宽窄行和等行距栽培条件下高粱种植密度与产量的关系研究. 农学学报, 2013,3(8):11-13.
	ZHAO G L, DING G X, LIU T P, NI X L, CHEN G M, HU J L, WANG X K . Studied on relationship on the sorghum density and yield under different width row space with narrow row space and same row space culture. Journal of Agriculture, 2013,3(8):11-13. (in Chinese)
[26]	张永科, 孙茂, 张雪君, 吴金平, 何仲阳, 马永平 . 玉米密植和营养改良之研究:Ⅱ.行距对玉米产量和营养的效应. 玉米科学, 2006,14(2):108-111. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-0906.2006.02.036
	ZHANG Y K, SUN M, ZHANG X J, WU J P, HE Z Y, MA Y P . Study on close planting and nutrient improvement of maize Ⅱ. Effect of row distance to yield and nutrition of maize. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2006,14(2):108-111. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-0906.2006.02.036
[27]	苌建峰, 张海红, 李鸿萍, 董朋飞, 李潮海 . 不同行距配置方式对夏玉米冠层结构和群体抗性的影响. 作物学报, 2016,42(1):104-112. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2016.00104
	CHANG J F, ZHANG H H, LI H P, DONG P F, LI C H . Effects of different row spaces on canopy structure and resistance of summer maize. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2016,42(1):104-112. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2016.00104
[28]	李万星, 刘永忠, 曹晋军, 靳鲲鹏, 赵文媛, 王红兰 . 肥料与密度对玉米农艺性状和产量的影响. 中国农学通报, 2011,27(15):194-198. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-874X.2013.19.003
	LI W X, LIU Y Z, CAO J J, JIN K P, ZHAO W Y, WANG H L . Effects of fertilizer and density on maize. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2011,27(15):194-198. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-874X.2013.19.003
[29]	薛吉全, 张仁和, 马国胜, 路海东, 张兴华, 李凤艳, 郝引川, 邰书静 . 种植密度、氮肥和水分胁迫对玉米产量形成的影响. 作物学报, 2010,36(6):1022-1029. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01022
	XUE J Q, ZHANG R H, MA G S, LU H D, ZHANG X H, LI F Y, HAO Y C, TAI S J . Effects of plant density, nitrogen application, and water stress on yield formation of maize. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2010,36(6):1022-1029. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01022
[30]	佟屏亚, 程延年 . 玉米密度与产量因素关系的研究. 北京农业科学, 1995,13(1):23-25.
	TONG P Y, CHENG Y N . The study of relationship between corn density and yield factors. Beijing Agricultural Sciences, 1995,13(1):23-25. (in Chinese)
[31]	董树亭, 王空军, 胡昌浩 . 玉米品种更替过程中群体光合特性的演变. 作物学报, 2000,26(2):200-204.
	DONG S T, WANG K J, HU C H . Development of canopy apparent photosynthesis among maize varieties from different eras. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2000,26(2):200-204. (in Chinese)

年份 Year	种植方式 Planting pattern	种植密度 Planting density	穗粒数 Kernels per panicle	千粒重 1000-kernel weight (g)	籽粒产量 Yield (kg·hm^-2)
2016	P1	D1	3606.67±323.60a	29.40±1.23a	7542.75±426.00b
		D2	2802.20±320.72b	27.36±1.24b	8016.40±688.65b
		D3	2751.23±457.81b	25.49±1.11c	9625.95±661.55a
	P2	D1	3053.80±477.59a	30.66±1.17a	6996.75±841.78c
		D2	2954.26±321.70a	27.73±2.09b	8558.20±424.98b
		D3	2798.21±143.08a	26.37±0.95b	10226.25±558.26a
2017	P1	D1	3877.89±314.24a	31.23±1.65a	7652.06±708.37b
		D2	3095.85±205.82b	30.77±2.04a	9530.32±402.64a
		D3	2416.57±301.10c	30.33±1.69a	9572.47±290.35a
		D4	2193.38±270.08c	27.18±0.62b	9313.73±180.34a
	P2	D1	3926.45±151.60a	30.85±1.23a	8156.76±345.64c
		D2	3146.02±310.18b	29.43±1.13a	9868.54±763.05ab
		D3	2604.21±186.15c	29.95±1.28a	10308.02±1034.85a
		D4	2128.65±206.24d	26.27±1.54b	9076.39±412.16b

年份 Year	种植方式 Planting pattern	种植密度 Planting density	株高 Plant height (cm)	茎粗 Stem diameter (cm)	茎粗系数 Stem diameter coefficient (%)	叶面积Leaf area (cm²)
年份 Year	种植方式 Planting pattern	种植密度 Planting density	株高 Plant height (cm)	茎粗 Stem diameter (cm)	茎粗系数 Stem diameter coefficient (%)	上叶 Upper leaf	中叶 Middle leaf	下叶 Lower leaf	平均 Average
2016	P1	D1	182.0±4.24b	2.60±0.17a	1.43±0.11a	428.67±9.19a	643.83±20.80a	727.42±21.13a	599.97a
		D2	196.2±2.06a	2.22±0.07b	1.13±0.04b	380.08±20.36b	626.54±10.32a	701.88±25.25b	569.50b
		D3	203.5±2.75a	2.02±0.12b	0.99±0.05b	335.88±16.70c	626.96±8.30a	685.30±12.63b	549.38c
	P2	D1	181.2±4.00b	2.72±0.22a	1.51±0.08a	360.79±29.49a	698.34±16.04a	712.75±23.38a	590.63a
		D2	195.0±4.81a	2.27±0.07b	1.17±0.05b	360.71±24.64a	684.59±11.12a	714.34±22.61a	583.21a
		D3	203.0±4.19a	2.17±0.13b	1.07±0.08b	318.38±14.67b	646.46±22.41b	690.58±17.56b	545.14b
2017	P1	D1	185.4±6.40c	2.20±0.06a	1.20±0.09a	463.71±32.56a	726.86±16.82a	711.55±27.50a	634.04a
		D2	200.5±5.40b	1.99±0.03b	1.01±0.06b	429.58±31.67b	697.48±13.94b	653.39±17.06b	593.48b
		D3	211.5±1.60a	1.76±0.03c	0.84±0.01c	377.98±26.47c	646.90±22.31c	577.32±21.64c	534.07c
		D4	209.0±5.50a	1.65±0.09c	0.79±0.02c	395.12±12.60c	656.66±25.86c	570.30±17.23c	540.69c
	P2	D1	182.7±5.70c	2.20±0.11a	1.21±0.02a	439.24±5.68a	774.24±26.61a	743.38±19.56a	652.28a
		D2	192.5±5.30b	1.98±0.14b	1.03±0.10b	421.44±19.73ab	699.26±13.07b	685.58±16.70b	602.09b
		D3	198.3±1.90ab	1.84±0.11bc	0.93±0.06bc	368.60±7.40c	689.25±15.47b	669.39±13.32b	575.74c
		D4	204.9±5.70a	1.73±0.13c	0.85±0.08c	393.08 ±14.22bc	664.59±11.92c	608.40±14.17c	555.36d

年份 Year	种植方式 Planting pattern	种植密度 Planting density	茎叶夹角Stem-leaf angle (°)				叶向值Leaf orientation value
年份 Year	种植方式 Planting pattern	种植密度 Planting density	上叶 Upper leaf	中叶 Middle leaf	下叶 Lower leaf	平均 Average	上叶 Upper leaf	中叶 Middle leaf	下叶 Lower leaf	平均 Average
2016	P1	D1	53.00±3.84a	34.22±3.75a	27.78±0.96a	38.33a	16.24±2.10a	28.88±3.05a	27.67±3.50b	24.27b
		D2	46.55±1.54a	31.44±2.50ab	26.78±4.29a	34.92ab	17.56±4.83a	30.26±4.12a	35.33±2.85a	27.72a
		D3	45.78±2.80a	27.78±4.81b	24.11±3.89a	32.56b	19.49±3.57a	32.00±2.67a	36.88±1.74a	29.46a
	P2	D1	43.45±1.58a	34.89±2.04a	33.78±4.22a	37.37a	20.56±1.35a	27.70±4.43b	30.03±4.17a	26.10a
		D2	42.78±1.92a	30.89±1.35ab	30.56±5.85a	34.74a	20.69±1.69a	34.66±3.52a	32.66±1.23a	29.34a
		D3	42.56±3.37a	27.78±4.19b	29.22±5.74a	33.18a	19.65±1.34a	33.32±2.08ab	33.25±2.76a	28.74a
2017	P1	D1	54.67±5.24a	32.67±6.33a	35.33±2.73a	40.89a	10.03±2.91a	22.23±2.97b	17.88±3.31b	16.72b
		D2	55.11±6.55a	29.55±7.20ab	33.00±3.51ab	39.22a	10.98±3.08a	24.39±0.92ab	21.82±5.08ab	19.06ab
		D3	52.11±7.90a	32.00±4.04a	29.45±2.67bc	37.85a	13.01±3.54a	23.25±3.50ab	24.10±2.30a	20.12a
		D4	43.00±7.87b	27.11±1.35b	28.56±2.01c	32.89b	14.79±1.15a	27.86±2.78a	23.98±2.18a	22.21a
	P2	D1	53.22±5.19a	29.98±2.11a	35.78±3.95a	39.66a	11.57±3.75b	16.61±1.45b	16.35±3.68b	14.84c
		D2	46.22±4.88a	28.78±3.53a	35.00±2.85a	36.67a	16.08±4.94ab	23.19±4.70a	19.77±2.29ab	19.68b
		D3	45.55±4.02a	28.33±2.00a	30.78±4.53b	34.89a	16.61±3.57ab	23.37±2.87a	20.23±2.41ab	20.07ab
		D4	45.00±3.38a	28.45±1.95a	31.33±3.21ab	34.93a	20.95±4.03a	26.89±4.99a	24.70±2.72a	24.18a