中国农业科学 ›› 2021, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (16): 3473-3487.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.16.010
文明1,2(),李明华1,2,蒋家乐1,马学花1,李容望1,赵文青3,崔静1,2,刘扬1,2(),马富裕1,2()
收稿日期:
2020-09-25
接受日期:
2020-11-25
出版日期:
2021-08-16
发布日期:
2021-08-24
通讯作者:
刘扬,马富裕
作者简介:
文明,E-mail: 基金资助:
WEN Ming1,2(),LI MingHua1,2,JIANG JiaLe1,MA XueHua1,LI RongWang1,ZHAO WenQing3,CUI Jing1,2,LIU Yang1,2(),MA FuYu1,2()
Received:
2020-09-25
Accepted:
2020-11-25
Online:
2021-08-16
Published:
2021-08-24
Contact:
Yang LIU,FuYu MA
摘要:
【目的】明确北疆滴灌棉花干物质积累及产量形成对氮磷钾综合运筹的响应特征,为节省氮肥成本提供依据。【方法】以鲁棉研24号为材料,在4种施氮量(506、402.5、299和195.5 kg·hm-2,分别用N1、N2、N3和N4表示)和蕾期、花铃期4种不同磷钾肥运筹方式(100%+0,25%+75%,50%+50%和75%+25%,分别用PK-M1,PK-M2,PK-M3和PK-M4表示)下进行田间试验。试验期间测定棉花叶面积指数(LAI)、干物质积累、蕾花铃数量及产量等指标。【结果】在相同磷钾运筹方式下,随着施氮量的降低,LAI的Logistic模型K’值表现为先上升后下降趋势,N3比N2处理高5.1%—16.5%,快速增长起始期(t1)和快速增长结束期(t2)均为N3处理最晚,且N3处理快速增长期持续时间最长,N3处理比N2处理多2—12 d;N3处理生长特征值GT最高,N2处理次之,N3比N2处理高5.2%—16.7%;干物质积累量在生长前期表现为N1>N2>N3>N4处理,在生长后期表现为N2>N1>N3>N4处理;蕾花铃数在全生育期表现为N2>N3>N1>N4处理;产量相对值在各施氮处理下表现为N2处理最高,N3处理次之,N2处理比N3处理高3.6%—6.5%。在相同施氮量下,LAI的Logistic模型K’值最高为PK-M3处理,最低为PK-M1处理,PK-M3处理比PK-M1处理高20.5%—27.4%;快速增长起始期t1(2019年除外)和快速增长结束期t2均为PK-M3最晚,且PK-M3处理快速增长期持续时间(T)最长;PK-M3处理生长特征值(GT)最高,PK-M2处理次之,PK-M3处理比PK-M2处理高13.0%—24.5%;干物质积累量在生长前期表现为PK-M2处理>PK-M3处理>PK-M4处理>PK-M1处理,生长后期表现为PK-M3>PK-M2>PK-M4>PK-M1处理;蕾花铃数在生长前期表现PK-M4>PK-M3>PK-M>PK-M2处理,生长后期表现为PK-M3>PK-M2>PK-M4>PK-M1处理;产量相对值表现为PK-M3处理最高,比其他磷钾处理高5.2%—18.2%。所有处理中,N3PK-M3处理下LAI Logistic模型K’值和GT值最大,T最长,在吐絮期干物质积累量、相对产量值和后期蕾花铃数仅次于N2PK-M3处理,生殖器官干物质分配比例高于其他处理。相关分析表明,LAI在2018年播种后109 d以后和2019年播种后120 d以后与生殖器官干物质、干物质总量和相对产量呈极显著正相关,全生育期生殖器官个数、总干物质积累量、生殖器官干物质与相对产量均为显著或极显著正相关。所有处理中N2PK-M3产量最高,N3PK-M3处理次之,N3PK-M3相对产量仅比N2PK-M3处理降低1.5%。【结论】N3PK-M3处理与农户常规施氮量相比,减少25%的氮肥施用量仍能获得较高产量,可能是由于推迟了棉花后期LAI到达峰值的时期,延缓了LAI下降速率,提高棉花群体干物质生产能力,并促使其向生殖器官转运,且降低蕾铃脱落,保证后期铃数,为产量的形成提供物质基础。因此,本研究认为在蕾期和花铃期各分施50%磷钾肥的条件下,氮肥的施用量可以降低至299 kg·hm-2,这比农户常规施氮降低25%,以达到减氮稳产、节本增效的目的。
文明, 李明华, 蒋家乐, 马学花, 李容望, 赵文青, 崔静, 刘扬, 马富裕. 氮磷钾运筹模式对北疆滴灌棉花生长发育和产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(16): 3473-3487.
WEN Ming, LI MingHua, JIANG JiaLe, MA XueHua, LI RongWang, ZHAO WenQing, CUI Jing, LIU Yang, MA FuYu. Effects of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium on Drip-Irrigated Cotton Growth and Yield in Northern Xinjiang[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2021, 54(16): 3473-3487.
表1
施肥与灌溉方案"
时间 Time | 次序 Order | N1 | N2 | N3 | N4 | PK-M1 | PK-M2 | PK-M3 | PK-M4 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P | K | P | K | P | K | P | K | |||||||
2018 | 6月20日 | 1 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 50.00 | 50.00 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 25.00 | 25.00 | 37.50 | 37.50 |
7月3日 | 2 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 50.00 | 50.00 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 25.00 | 25.00 | 37.50 | 37.50 | |
7月13日 | 3 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
7月20日 | 4 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
7月30日 | 5 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
8月8日 | 6 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
8月17日 | 7 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
8月24日 | 8 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 12.50 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
合计 Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | ||
2019 | 6月14日 | 1 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 33.33 | 33.33 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 16.67 | 16.67 | 25.00 | 25.00 |
6月22日 | 2 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 33.33 | 33.33 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 16.67 | 16.67 | 25.00 | 25.00 | |
6月30日 | 3 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 33.33 | 33.33 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 16.67 | 16.67 | 25.00 | 25.00 | |
7月9日 | 4 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
7月18日 | 5 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
7月25日 | 6 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
8月3日 | 7 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
8月12日 | 8 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
8月18日 | 9 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | 11.11 | - | - | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8.33 | 8.33 | 4.17 | 4.17 | |
合计 Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
表2
LAI Logistic 模型特征值"
处理 Treatment | 2018 | 2019 | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
K’ (m2·m-2) | t1 (d) | t2 (d) | Vmax (m2·m-2·d-1) | T (d) | GT | K’ (m2·m-2) | t1 (d) | t2 (d) | Vmax (m2·m-2·d-1) | T (d) | GT | ||
N1 | PK-M1 | 3.38 | 60 | 76 | 0.14 | 16 | 2.23 | 3.33 | 54 | 83 | 0.08 | 29 | 2.19 |
PK-M2 | 3.90 | 58 | 73 | 0.17 | 15 | 2.57 | 4.03 | 56 | 72 | 0.16 | 17 | 2.66 | |
PK-M3 | 4.04 | 59 | 78 | 0.15 | 18 | 2.66 | 4.07 | 51 | 84 | 0.08 | 34 | 2.68 | |
PK-M4 | 3.61 | 60 | 76 | 0.15 | 16 | 2.38 | 3.66 | 53 | 82 | 0.08 | 29 | 2.41 | |
Average | 3.73 | 59 | 76 | 0.15 | 16 | 2.46 | 3.77 | 53 | 80 | 0.10 | 27 | 2.49 | |
N2 | PK-M1 | 3.50 | 61 | 79 | 0.12 | 19 | 2.31 | 3.55 | 54 | 92 | 0.06 | 38 | 2.34 |
PK-M2 | 4.01 | 59 | 77 | 0.15 | 18 | 2.64 | 4.00 | 53 | 78 | 0.11 | 25 | 2.63 | |
PK-M3 | 4.23 | 60 | 82 | 0.13 | 22 | 2.78 | 4.25 | 50 | 91 | 0.07 | 42 | 2.80 | |
PK-M4 | 3.75 | 61 | 79 | 0.13 | 19 | 2.47 | 3.74 | 53 | 88 | 0.07 | 35 | 2.46 | |
Average | 3.87 | 60 | 79 | 0.13 | 19 | 2.55 | 3.89 | 52 | 87 | 0.08 | 35 | 2.56 | |
N3 | PK-M1 | 3.65 | 61 | 82 | 0.12 | 21 | 2.41 | 4.18 | 56 | 110 | 0.05 | 53 | 2.76 |
PK-M2 | 4.18 | 61 | 80 | 0.14 | 19 | 2.75 | 4.28 | 54 | 86 | 0.09 | 33 | 2.82 | |
PK-M3 | 4.52 | 62 | 86 | 0.12 | 24 | 2.98 | 5.31 | 58 | 111 | 0.07 | 53 | 3.50 | |
PK-M4 | 3.93 | 61 | 82 | 0.13 | 20 | 2.59 | 4.34 | 53 | 104 | 0.06 | 50 | 2.86 | |
Average | 4.07 | 62 | 83 | 0.13 | 21 | 2.68 | 4.53 | 55 | 103 | 0.07 | 47 | 2.99 | |
N4 | PK-M1 | 3.11 | 61 | 79 | 0.12 | 18 | 2.05 | 2.74 | 54 | 82 | 0.06 | 28 | 1.80 |
PK-M2 | 3.55 | 60 | 76 | 0.14 | 16 | 2.34 | 3.78 | 55 | 80 | 0.10 | 25 | 2.49 | |
PK-M3 | 3.65 | 62 | 79 | 0.14 | 17 | 2.40 | 3.95 | 54 | 91 | 0.07 | 37 | 2.60 | |
PK-M4 | 3.33 | 60 | 78 | 0.13 | 17 | 2.19 | 3.38 | 54 | 87 | 0.07 | 33 | 2.23 | |
Average | 3.41 | 61 | 78 | 0.13 | 17 | 2.25 | 3.46 | 54 | 85 | 0.08 | 31 | 2.28 |
表3
氮磷钾综合运筹模式对不同时期生殖器官变化的影响(2018)"
氮素处理 N treatment | 磷钾处理 PK treatment | 播种后58 d 58 days after sowing | 播种后78 d 78 days after sowing | 播种后99 d 99 days after sowing | 播种后109 d 109 days after sowing | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 花数Bloom (×103·hm-2) | 铃数Boll (×103·hm-2) | 蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 花数Bloom (×103·hm-2) | 铃数Boll (×103·hm-2) | 蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 花数Bloom (×103·hm-2) | 铃数Boll (×103·hm-2) | ||
N1 | PK-M1 | 807.79bcd | 1352.58bcde | 272.95efgh | 383.45cd | 117.14hi | 44.20abc | 1429.93cd | 113.82fgh | - | 1137.10bc |
PK-M2 | 592.31e | 1319.43cde | 219.90gh | 334.83fg | 218.80ef | 118.24ab | 1605.64bcd | 213.27d | 7.74a | 1285.17ab | |
PK-M3 | 858.62abc | 1406.73bcd | 356.93cdef | 398.92bcd | 281.79cd | 36.47bc | 1769.19bc | 274.05c | 7.74a | 1326.06ab | |
PK-M4 | 876.30abc | 1474.14abc | 404.45bcd | 419.92abc | 135.92ghi | 51.94abc | 1548.18bcd | 131.50efg | - | 1228.82bc | |
N2 | PK-M1 | 868.57abc | 1467.51abcd | 358.04cdef | 397.82bcd | 159.13gh | 88.40abc | 1540.44bcd | 154.71ef | 14.37a | 1194.56bc |
PK-M2 | 797.85bcd | 1418.88bcd | 296.15defgh | 348.09ef | 394.50b | 74.04abc | 1858.69ab | 383.45b | 14.37a | 1389.05ab | |
PK-M3 | 908.35ab | 1490.71abc | 423.23bc | 418.81abc | 561.37a | 51.94abc | 2091.86a | 544.79a | 14.37a | 1553.70a | |
PK-M4 | 949.24a | 1617.79a | 614.41a | 436.49a | 235.38de | 132.61a | 1636.58bcd | 228.75d | 22.10a | 1312.80ab | |
N3 | PK-M1 | 836.52abcd | 1419.99bcd | 311.62defg | 391.19bcd | 132.61ghi | 66.30abc | 1499.55bcd | 129.29efg | 7.74a | 1183.51bc |
PK-M2 | 740.38d | 1383.52bcde | 257.48fgh | 342.57efg | 236.48de | 22.10c | 1650.94bcd | 229.85d | 14.37a | 1297.33ab | |
PK-M3 | 877.41abc | 1433.25abcd | 392.29bcd | 404.45abcd | 302.78c | 96.14abc | 1859.80ab | 293.94c | - | 1417.78ab | |
PK-M4 | 900.62ab | 1519.44ab | 478.49b | 424.34ab | 159.13gh | 80.67abc | 1580.22bcd | 154.71ef | 14.37a | 1264.18b | |
N4 | PK-M1 | 761.38cd | 1274.12de | 265.21fgh | 373.51de | 64.09j | 66.30abc | 1289.59d | 62.99i | 14.37a | 972.44c |
PK-M2 | 438.70f | 1196.77e | 190.07h | 309.41g | 104.98ij | 58.57abc | 1565.86bcd | 101.66ghj | - | 1258.65bc | |
PK-M3 | 804.48bcd | 1313.90cde | 296.15defgh | 392.29bcd | 174.60fg | 88.40abc | 1720.56bc | 169.07e | 7.74a | 1305.06ab | |
PK-M4 | 832.10bcd | 1362.53bcde | 379.03bcde | 414.39abc | 83.98ij | 58.57abc | 1524.97bcd | 81.77hi | 7.74a | 1173.56bc | |
N | 18.00** | 9.80** | 13.72** | 4.52** | 137.90** | 0.68 | 3.63* | 169.52** | 1.20 | 3.43* | |
PK-M | 40.27** | 5.75** | 35.04** | 48.36** | 135.14** | 0.28 | 9.45** | 166.13** | 0.09 | 7.72** | |
N×PK-M | 2.79** | 0.11 | 0.97 | 0.19 | 12.84** | 1.78 | 0.27 | 15.78** | 0.02 | 0.27 |
表4
氮磷钾综合运筹模式对不同时期生殖器官变化的影响(2019)"
氮素处理 N treatment | 磷钾处理 PK treatment | 播种后65 d 65 days after sowing | 播种后88 d 88 days after sowing | 播种后107 d 107 days after sowing | 播种后120 d 120 days after sowing | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 花数Bloom (×103·hm-2) | 铃数Boll (×103·hm-2) | 蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 花数Bloom (×103·hm-2) | 铃数Boll (×103·hm-2) | 蕾数Square (×103·hm-2) | 花数Bloom (×103·hm-2) | 铃数Boll (×103·hm-2) | ||
N1 | PK-M1 | 1261.98defg | 3251.26bcd | 150.55fgh | 231.36ef | 150.55f | 68.63ij | 1505.52de | 22.14a | 58.67ab | 1432.46cd |
PK-M2 | 1151.28fg | 2967.87cd | 344.28ij | 106.27h | 344.28cd | 224.72efg | 1750.17abcd | - | - | 1608.47bcd | |
PK-M3 | 1436.89bcdef | 3450.52abcd | 410.70defgh | 273.43de | 410.70bc | 357.56cd | 1927.29abc | - | 14.39b | 1772.31abc | |
PK-M4 | 1596.29abc | 3722.84abc | 238.01bcd | 349.81bc | 238.01ef | 159.41fghij | 1626.18bcde | 14.39a | 58.67ab | 1550.91bcd | |
N2 | PK-M1 | 1413.64bcdef | 3497.01abcd | 231.36cde | 292.25cde | 231.36ef | 174.91efghi | 1588.55cde | 7.75a | 22.14ab | 1543.16bcd |
PK-M2 | 1273.05cdefg | 3359.75abcd | 448.34defgh | 251.29ef | 448.34b | 448.34bc | 1808.84abcd | 74.17a | 44.28ab | 1861.97ab | |
PK-M3 | 1566.41abcd | 3688.52abc | 599.99bc | 326.57bcd | 599.99a | 607.74a | 2090.02a | - | - | 2095.55a | |
PK-M4 | 1856.44a | 4057.16a | 273.43a | 432.84a | 273.43de | 273.43de | 1710.32bcde | - | 14.39 | 1639.47bcd | |
N3 | PK-M1 | 1341.68cdefg | 3321.00abcd | 195.94defgh | 254.61ef | 195.94ef | 106.27hij | 1535.41de | - | 96.31a | 1502.20bcd |
PK-M2 | 1197.77efg | 3170.45bcd | 378.59hij | 193.73fg | 378.59bc | 281.18de | 1771.20abcd | 7.75a | - | 1653.86bcd | |
PK-M3 | 1509.95bcde | 3582.25abc | 468.26cdef | 296.68cde | 468.26b | 501.47b | 1966.03ab | 7.75a | 66.42ab | 1863.08ab | |
PK-M4 | 1699.25ab | 3929.85ab | 245.75b | 371.95ab | 245.75ef | 182.66efgh | 1670.46bcde | 88.56a | 14.39b | 1583.01bcd | |
N4 | PK-M1 | 1216.59efg | 3073.03cd | 47.60hij | 101.84h | 47.60g | 53.14j | 1376.00e | 52.03a | 22.14ab | 1291.87d |
PK-M2 | 1026.19g | 2781.89d | 273.43j | 76.38h | 273.43de | 198.15efgh | 1718.06bcde | 29.89a | 52.03ab | 1568.62bcd | |
PK-M3 | 1322.87cdefg | 3271.19bcd | 378.59efgh | 111.81h | 378.59bc | 257.93def | 1838.73abcd | 66.42a | 14.39b | 1723.60bc | |
PK-M4 | 1524.34bcde | 3511.40abcd | 192.62cdefg | 137.27gh | 192.62ef | 129.52ghij | 1588.55cde | 80.81a | 14.39b | 1527.66bcd | |
N | 4.82** | 3.42* | 28.94** | 78.79** | 19.85** | 30.66** | 1.75 | 1.27 | 0.80 | 3.63** | |
PK-M | 19.19** | 7.59** | 41.76** | 42.40** | 76.07** | 69.69** | 12.90** | 0.48 | 1.18 | 9.45** | |
N×PK-M | 0.10 | 0.04 | 0.71 | 2.64** | 1.13 | 2.23** | 0.10 | 0.75 | 1.81 | 0.27 |
表5
相对产量与主要因子相关性分析"
相对产量 Relative yield | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018年播种后天数 Days after sowing in 2018 (d) | 2019 年播种后天数 Days after sowing in 2019 (d) | |||||||||
58 | 78 | 99 | 109 | 119 | 65 | 88 | 107 | 120 | 156 | |
叶面积指数 Leaf area index | 0.41 | 0.46 | 0.50* | 0.80** | 0.91** | 0.4 | 0.42 | 0.45 | 0.81** | 0.62** |
蕾数 Square number | 0.45 | 0.67** | 0.85** | 0.85** | - | 0.42 | 0.50* | 0.81** | -0.37 | - |
花数 Bloom number | - | 0.48 | 0.22 | 0.39 | - | - | 0.81** | 0.84** | -0.13 | - |
铃数 Boll number | - | 0.25 | 0.80** | 0.81** | - | - | 0.64** | 0.76** | 0.83** | - |
生殖器官个数 Reproductive organ number | 0.45 | 0.55* | 0.84** | 0.86** | - | 0.42 | 0.73** | 0.81** | 0.78** | - |
生殖器官干物质 Dry matter of reproductive organs | 0.88** | 0.85** | 0.91** | 0.97** | 0.91** | 0.87** | 0.81** | 0.86** | 0.89** | 0.82** |
叶片干物质 Leaf dry matter | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.44 | 0.3 | 0.34 | 0.64** | 0.46 | 0.50* | 0.51* | 0.49* |
茎秆干物质 Stem dry matter | 0.53* | 0.41 | 0.4 | 0.38 | 0.42 | 0.58* | 0.48* | 0.45 | 0.64** | 0.48 |
干物质总量 Aboveground dry matter | 0.55* | 0.53* | 0.65** | 0.79** | 0.78** | 0.62** | 0.59* | 0.76** | 0.82** | 0.83** |
[1] | 王克如, 李少昆, 曹连莆, 宋光杰, 陈刚, 曹栓柱. 新疆高产棉田氮、磷、钾吸收动态及模式初步研究. 中国农业科学, 2003, 36(7):775-780. |
WANG K R, LI S K, CAO L P, SONG G J, CHEN G, CAO S Z. A preliminary study on dynamics and models of N, P, K absorption in high yield cotton in Xinjiang. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2003, 36(7):775-780. (in Chinese) | |
[2] | 龚江, 李君, 谢海霞, 王海江, 侯振安, 吕新. 膜下滴灌条件水、氮、密度耦合效应对棉花产量的影响. 新疆农业科学, 2010, 47(10):1943-1946. |
GONG J, LI J, XIE H X, WANG H J, HOU Z N, LÜ X. Effects of water, nitrogen and density coupling on the yield of hybrid cotton under film drip irrigation. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2010, 47(10):1943-1946. (in Chinese) | |
[3] | 郭金强, 危常州, 侯振安, 李俊华. 施氮量对膜下滴灌棉花氮素吸收、积累及其产量的影响. 新疆农业科学, 2008, 45(4):691-694. |
GUO J Q, WEI C Z, HOU Z A, LI J H. Effect of N rates on N uptake, accumulation and yield of cotton with drip irrigation under membrane. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2008, 45(4):691-694. (in Chinese) | |
[4] | 李新伟, 吕新, 张泽, 陈剑, 石宏刚, 田敏. 棉花氮素营养诊断与追肥推荐模型. 农业机械学报, 2014, 45(12):209-214. |
LI X W, LÜ X, ZHANG Z, CHEN J, SHI H G, TIAN M. Diagnosis of nitrogen nutrition and recommended model of topdressing for cotton. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2014, 45(12):209-214. (in Chinese) | |
[5] | 赖波, 汤明尧, 柴仲平, 陈波浪, 李青军, 董巨河, 王飞, 田长彦. 新疆农田化肥施用现状调查与评价. 干旱区研究, 2014, 31(6):1024-1030. |
LAI B, TANG M Y, CHAI Z P, CHEN B L, LI Q J, DONG J H, WANG F, TIAN C Y. Investigation and evaluation of the chemical fertilizer application situation of farmland in Xinjiang. Arid Zone Research, 2014, 31(6):1024-1030. (in Chinese) | |
[6] | 李宗泰, 陈二影, 张美玲, 赵庆龙, 许晓龙, 姬红, 宋宪亮, 孙学振. 施钾方式对棉花叶片抗氧化酶活性、产量及钾肥利用效率的影响. 作物学报, 2012, 38(3):487-494. |
LI Z T, CHEN E Y, ZHANG M L, ZHAO Q L, XU X L, JI H, SONG X L, SUN X Z. Effect of potassium application methods on antioxidant enzyme activities, yield, and potassium use efficiency of cotton. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2012, 38(3):487-494. (in Chinese) | |
[7] |
CHEN B L, YANG H K, SONG W C, LIU C Y, XU J A, ZHAO W Q, ZHOU Z G. Effect of N fertilization rate on soil alkali-hydrolyzable N, subtending leaf N concentration, fiber yield, and quality of cotton. The Crop Journal, 2016, 4(4):323-330.
doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2016.03.006 |
[8] | DEEPA G S, ALADAKATTI Y R. Effect of nutrient levels and split application of nitrogen and potassium on yield, economics and fiber quality parameters of interspecific Bt cotton. Journal of Farm Sciences, 2016, 29(2):203-207. |
[9] | DEEPA G S, ALADAKATTI Y R. Effect of varied nutrient levels and time of application of nitrogen and potassium on uptake of nutrients in interspecific Bt cotton hybrid. Journal of Farm Sciences, 2017, 30(1):56-60. |
[10] |
HU W, ZHAO W Q, YANG J S, OOSTERHUIS D M, LOKA D A, ZHOU Z G. Relationship between potassium fertilization and nitrogen metabolism in the leaf subtending the cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) boll during the boll development stage. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2016, 101:113-123.
doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.01.019 |
[11] |
HU W, COOMER T D, LOKA D A, OOSTERHUIS D M, ZHOU Z G. Potassium deficiency affects the carbon-nitrogen balance in cotton leaves. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2017, 115:408-417.
doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2017.04.005 |
[12] |
ALI S, HAFEEZ A, MA X L, TUNG S A, CHATTHA M S, SHAH A N, LUO D, AHMAD S, LIU J H, YANG G Z. Equal potassium- nitrogen ratio regulated the nitrogen metabolism and yield of high-density late-planted cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) in Yangtze River valley of China. Industrial Crops and Products, 2019, 129:231-241.
doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2018.12.009 |
[13] |
ALI S, HAFEEZ A, MA X L, TUNG S A, YANG G Z. Relative potassium ratio balanced the carbon-nitrogen assimilation in cotton leaf under reducing nitrogen application. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2020, 20(2):761-774.
doi: 10.1007/s42729-019-00163-3 |
[14] |
WANG X X, LIU S L, ZHANG S M, LI H B, MAIMAITIAILI B, FENG G, RENGEL Z. Localized ammonium and phosphorus fertilization can improve cotton lint yield by decreasing rhizosphere soil pH and salinity. Field Crops Research, 2018, 217:75-81.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.12.011 |
[15] | 康雅萍, 樊岚蓉, 康艳, 安平. 氮磷钾不同配比对棉花产量的影响. 陕西农业科学, 2010, 56(6):33-34. |
KANG Y P, FAN L R, KANG Y, AN P. Effect of different ratio of N, P, K on cotton yield. Shaanxi Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2010, 56(6):33-34. (in Chinese) | |
[16] | 潘圣刚, 翟晶, 曹凑贵, 蔡明历, 王若涵, 黄胜奇, 李进山. 氮肥运筹对水稻养分吸收特性及稻米品质的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2010, 16(3):522-527. |
PAN S G, ZHAI J, CAO C G, CAI M L, WANG R H, HUANG S Q, LI J S. Effects of nitrogen management practices on nutrition uptake and grain qualities of rice. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2010, 16(3):522-527. (in Chinese) | |
[17] | 赵庆鑫, 江燕, 史春余, 司成成, 史文卿, 王新建, 柳洪鹃, 史衍玺. 氮钾互作对甘薯氮钾元素吸收、分配和利用的影响及与块根产量的关系. 植物生理学报, 2017, 53(5):889-895. |
ZHAO Q X, JIANG Y, SHI C Y, SI C C, SHI W Q, WANG X J, LIU H J, SHI Y X. Effect of nitrogen-potassium interaction on absorption and translocation of nitrogen and potassium in sweetpotato and the root yield. Plant Physiology Journal, 2017, 53(5):889-895. (in Chinese) | |
[18] | 王永华, 黄源, 辛明华, 苑沙沙, 康国章, 冯伟, 谢迎新, 朱云集, 郭天财. 周年氮磷钾配施模式对砂姜黑土麦玉轮作体系籽粒产量和养分利用效率的影响. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(6):1031-1046. |
WANG Y H, HUANG Y, XIN M H, YUAN S S, KANG G Z, FENG W, XIE Y X, ZHU Y J, GUO T C. Effects of the year-round management model of N, P and K combined application on grain yield and nutrient efficiency of wheat-maize rotation system in lime concretion black soil. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(6):1031-1046. (in Chinese) | |
[19] | 武庆慧, 汪洋, 赵亚南, 李瑞珂, 司玉坤, 黄玉芳, 叶优良, 张福锁. 氮磷钾配比对潮土区高产夏播花生产量、养分吸收和经济效益的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019(2):98-104. |
WU Q H, WANG Y, ZHAO Y N, LI R K, SI Y K, HUANG Y F, YE Y L, ZHANG F S. Effects of NPK ratio on yield, nutrient absorption and economic benefit of high-yielding summer peanut in a fluvo-aquic soil. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2019(2):98-104. (in Chinese) | |
[20] |
YANG G Z, TANG H Y, NIE Y C, ZHANG X L. Responses of cotton growth, yield, and biomass to nitrogen split application ratio. European Journal of Agronomy, 2011, 35(3):164-170.
doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2011.06.001 |
[21] |
DU X B, CHEN B L, ZHANG Y X, ZHAO W Q, SHEN T Y, ZHOU Z G, MENG Y L. Nitrogen use efficiency of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) as influenced by wheat-cotton cropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, 2016, 75:72-79.
doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2016.01.001 |
[22] |
LUO Z, LIU H, LI W P, ZHAO Q A, DAI J L, TIAN L W, DONG H Z. Effects of reduced nitrogen rate on cotton yield and nitrogen use efficiency as mediated by application mode or plant density. Field Crops Research, 2018, 218:150-157.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2018.01.003 |
[23] | 张宾, 赵明, 董志强, 李建国, 陈传永, 孙锐. 作物高产群体LAI动态模拟模型的建立与检验. 作物学报, 2007, 33(4):612-619. |
ZHANG B, ZHAO M, DONG Z Q, LI J G, CHEN C Y, SUN R. Establishment and test of LAI dynamic simulation model for high yield population. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2007, 33(4):612-619. (in Chinese) | |
[24] |
WELLS R. Soybean growth response to plant density: relationships among canopy photosynthesis, leaf area, and light interception. Crop Science, 1991, 31(3):755-761.
doi: 10.2135/cropsci1991.0011183X003100030044x |
[25] |
LOOMIS R S, WILLIAMS W A. Maximum crop productivity: an Extimate1. Crop Science, 1963, 3(1):67-72.
doi: 10.2135/cropsci1963.0011183X000300010021x |
[26] | 贾彪, 钱瑾, 马富裕. 氮素对膜下滴灌棉花叶面积指数的影响. 农业机械学报, 2015, 46(2):79-87. |
JIA B, QIAN J, MA F Y. Simulating effects of nitrogen on leaf area index of cotton under mulched drip irrigation. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2015, 46(2):79-87. (in Chinese) | |
[27] | 刘连涛, 孙红春, 张永江, 李存东. 氮素对棉花群体生理指标的影响. 中国棉花, 2013, 40(4):9-12. |
LIU L T, SUN H C, ZHANG Y J, LI C D. Effects of nitrogen to cotton population physiological indices. China Cotton, 2013, 40(4):9-12. (in Chinese) | |
[28] | 戴婷婷, 盛建东, 陈波浪. 磷肥不同用量对棉花干物质及氮磷钾吸收分配的影响. 棉花学报, 2010, 22(5):466-470. |
DAI T T, SHENG J D, CHEN B L. Effect of different phosphorus fertilizer rate on dry matter accumulation and the absorption and distribution of nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium of cotton. Cotton Science, 2010, 22(5):466-470. (in Chinese) | |
[29] | 温立玉, 宋希云, 刘树堂. 水肥耦合对夏玉米不同生育期叶面指数和生物量的影响. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(21):89-94. |
WEN L Y, SONG X Y, LIU S T. Effect of water and fertilizer coupling on foliar index and biomass at different growth stages of summer maize. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2014, 30(21):89-94. (in Chinese) | |
[30] | 李杰, 马腾飞, 郭蕾, 古力努尔·艾哈塔尔, 郭峰, 张鹏忠, 帕尔哈提·买买提, 娄善伟. 哈密地区棉花品种生长发育特征及产量构成差异研究. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(3):509-515. |
LI J, MA T F, GUO L, AIHATAER G, GUO F, ZHANG P Z, MAIMAITI P, LOU S W. Different characteristics on development and yield composition of cotton varieties in Hami prefecture. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 33(3):509-515. (in Chinese) | |
[31] | 张学昕, 刘淑英, 王平, 周丽萍. 不同氮磷钾配施对棉花干物质积累、养分吸收及产量的影响. 西北农业学报, 2012, 21(8):107-113. |
ZHANG X X, LIU S Y, WANG P, ZHOU L P. Effects of different fertilizations on cotton dry matter accumulation, nutrients uptake and yield. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 2012, 21(8):107-113. (in Chinese) | |
[32] | 张凡, 睢宁, 余超然, 刘瑞显, 杨长琴, 宋光雷, 孟亚利, 周治国. 小麦秸秆还田和施钾对棉花产量与养分吸收的效应. 作物学报, 2014, 40(12):2169-2175. |
ZHANG F, SUI N, YU C R, LIU R X, YANG C Q, SONG G L, MENG Y L, ZHOU Z G. Effects of wheat straw returning and potassium fertilizer application on yield and nutrients uptake of cotton. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2014, 40(12):2169-2175. (in Chinese) | |
[33] | 李军宏, 王远远, 李楠楠, 王军, 罗宏海. 水磷供应对棉花根系生长、分布及生物量的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2020, 48(3):95-101. |
LI J H, WANG Y Y, LI N N, WANG J, LUO H H. Effects of water and phosphorus supply on cotton root growth, distribution and biomass. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(3):95-101. (in Chinese) | |
[34] |
DONG H Z, LI W J, ENEJI A E, ZHANG D M. Nitrogen rate and plant density effects on yield and late-season leaf senescence of cotton raised on a saline field. Field Crops Research, 2012, 126:137-144.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.10.005 |
[35] |
LI Z Y, FONTANIER C, DUNN B L. Physiological response of potted sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) to precision irrigation and fertilizer. Scientia Horticulturae, 2020, 270:109417.
doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2020.109417 |
[36] | 邓忠, 翟国亮, 吕谋超, 冯俊杰, 王晓森, 宗洁, 蔡九茂. 施肥策略对新疆棉花产量、品质与水氮利用的影响. 排灌机械工程学报, 2017, 35(10):897-902. |
DENG Z, ZHAI G L, LÜ M C, FENG J J, WANG X S, ZONG J, CAI J M. Effect of fertilization modes on cotton yield, quality, and water-nitrogen utilization in Xinjiang. Journal of Drainage and Irrigation Machinery Engineering, 2017, 35(10):897-902. (in Chinese) | |
[37] | 邓忠, 翟国亮, 王晓森, 宗洁, 冯俊杰, 蔡九茂, 吕谋超. 灌溉和施氮策略对滴灌施肥棉花蕾铃脱落的影响. 灌溉排水学报, 2017, 36(8):1-6. |
DENG Z, ZHAI G L, WANG X S, ZONG J, FENG J J, CAI J M, LÜ M C. Application schedule of N-P-K in drip fertigation affects abscission of cotton bolls. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2017, 36(8):1-6. (in Chinese) | |
[38] | 张海鹏, 马健, 文俊, 周桃华. 施钾对不同转基因棉花品种光合特性及产量和品质的影响. 棉花学报, 2012, 24(6):548-553. |
ZHANG H P, MA J, WEN J, ZHOU T H. Effects of potassium application on the photosynthetic characteristics, yield, and fiber properties of different transgenic cotton varieties. Cotton Science, 2012, 24(6):548-553. (in Chinese) | |
[39] |
KHAN A, WANG L S, ALI S, TUNG S A, HAFEEZ A, YANG G Z. Optimal planting density and sowing date can improve cotton yield by maintaining reproductive organ biomass and enhancing potassium uptake. Field Crops Research, 2017, 214:164-174.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.09.016 |
[40] | 董合林, 李鹏程, 刘爱忠, 刘敬然, 李永旗, 王晓茹, 王刚. 河南植棉区施氮量对麦棉两熟产量及氮肥利用率的影响. 棉花学报, 2014, 26(1):73-80. |
DONG H L, LI P C, LIU A Z, LIU J R, LI Y Q, WANG X R, WANG G. Effect of nitrogen application rate on yield and nitrogen use efficiency of WheatCotton double cropping in the Henan cotton region. Cotton Science, 2014, 26(1):73-80. (in Chinese) | |
[41] | 李飞, 郭利双, 李景龙, 肖才升. 施氮水平对油棉连作棉花氮磷钾吸收、分配与利用的影响. 华北农学报, 2018, 33(3):196-202. |
LI F, GUO L S, LI J L, XIAO C S. Effects of nitrogen application rate on NPK uptake, distribution and utilization of direct seeding cotton after rape harvest. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2018, 33(3):196-202. (in Chinese) | |
[42] | 董合林, 王润珍, 李鹏程, 刘爱忠. 不同施氮水平及氮磷钾肥配施对棉花产量与氮肥利用率的影响. 中国棉花学会2010年年会论文汇编, 2010: 285-287. |
DONG H L, WANG R Z, LI P C, LIU A Z. Effect of N application rates and N, P and K combinations on cotton yield and N utilization. China Society of Cotton Sci-Tech Proceedings of 2010 Annual Meeting of CSCS, 2010: 285-287. (in Chinese) | |
[43] | 张旺锋, 李蒙春, 勾玲, 杜亮. 北疆高产棉花养分吸收特性的研究. 棉花学报, 1998(2):88-95. |
ZHANG W F, LI M C, GOU L, DU L. Study on the nutrient absorbtion characters of cotton with higher productivity in north Xinjiang. Acta Gossypii Sinica, 1998(2):88-95. (in Chinese) | |
[44] | 王娇, 佀传亚, 张成, 殷志峰, 徐文修, 马晓勇. 不同施钾量对陆地棉干物质积累、养分吸收和产量的影响. 新疆农业科学, 2012, 49(12):2163-2169. |
WANG J, SI C Y, ZHANG C, YIN Z F, XU W X, MA X Y. Effect of different amounts of potassium on dry matter accumulation, nutrient absorption and yield of land cotton. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2012, 49(12):2163-2169. (in Chinese) |
[1] | 张晓丽, 陶伟, 高国庆, 陈雷, 郭辉, 张华, 唐茂艳, 梁天锋. 直播栽培对双季早稻生育期、抗倒伏能力及产量效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(2): 249-263. |
[2] | 严艳鸽, 张水勤, 李燕婷, 赵秉强, 袁亮. 葡聚糖改性尿素对冬小麦产量和肥料氮去向的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(2): 287-299. |
[3] | 徐久凯, 袁亮, 温延臣, 张水勤, 李燕婷, 李海燕, 赵秉强. 畜禽有机肥氮在冬小麦季对化肥氮的相对替代当量[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(2): 300-313. |
[4] | 王彩香,袁文敏,刘娟娟,谢晓宇,马麒,巨吉生,陈炟,王宁,冯克云,宿俊吉. 西北内陆早熟陆地棉品种的综合评价及育种演化[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(1): 1-16. |
[5] | 赵政鑫,王晓云,田雅洁,王锐,彭青,蔡焕杰. 未来气候条件下秸秆还田和氮肥种类对夏玉米产量及土壤氨挥发的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(1): 104-117. |
[6] | 张玮,严玲玲,傅志强,徐莹,郭慧娟,周梦瑶,龙攀. 播期对湖南省双季稻产量和光热资源利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(1): 31-45. |
[7] | 熊伟仡,徐开未,刘明鹏,肖华,裴丽珍,彭丹丹,陈远学. 不同氮用量对四川春玉米光合特性、氮利用效率及产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(9): 1735-1748. |
[8] | 李易玲,彭西红,陈平,杜青,任俊波,杨雪丽,雷鹿,雍太文,杨文钰. 减量施氮对套作玉米大豆叶片持绿、光合特性和系统产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(9): 1749-1762. |
[9] | 王浩琳,马悦,李永华,李超,赵明琴,苑爱静,邱炜红,何刚,石美,王朝辉. 基于小麦产量与籽粒锰含量的磷肥优化管理[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(9): 1800-1810. |
[10] | 王俊娟,陆许可,王延琴,王帅,阴祖军,付小琼,王德龙,陈修贵,郭丽雪,陈超,赵兰杰,韩迎春,孙亮庆,韩明格,张悦新,范亚朋,叶武威. 陆地棉遗传标准系TM-1的特性及其耐冷性[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(8): 1503-1517. |
[11] | 桂润飞,王在满,潘圣刚,张明华,唐湘如,莫钊文. 香稻分蘖期减氮侧深施液体肥对产量和氮素利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(8): 1529-1545. |
[12] | 廖萍,孟轶,翁文安,黄山,曾勇军,张洪程. 杂交稻对产量和氮素利用率影响的荟萃分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(8): 1546-1556. |
[13] | 李前,秦裕波,尹彩侠,孔丽丽,王蒙,侯云鹏,孙博,赵胤凯,徐晨,刘志全. 滴灌施肥模式对玉米产量、养分吸收及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(8): 1604-1616. |
[14] | 张家桦,杨恒山,张玉芹,李从锋,张瑞富,邰继承,周阳晨. 不同滴灌模式对东北春播玉米籽粒淀粉积累及淀粉相关酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(7): 1332-1345. |
[15] | 秦羽青,程宏波,柴雨葳,马建涛,李瑞,李亚伟,常磊,柴守玺. 中国北方地区小麦覆盖栽培增产效应的荟萃(Meta)分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(6): 1095-1109. |
|