不同轮作模式下氮肥施用对油菜产量形成及养分利用的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.06.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探究施氮量对不同轮作模式下油菜产量形成及养分利用的影响。【方法】以甘蓝型油菜品种‘中油杂19’为材料，在湖北黄冈进行大田裂区试验，设置两个轮作模式（稻油轮作，RO；豆油轮作，SO）为主区，4个施氮量（N0，0；N1，90 kg·hm^-2；N2，180 kg·hm^-2；N3，270 kg·hm^-2）为副区，测定产量构成、干物质积累、农艺性状、养分积累及籽粒品质等相关指标。【结果】（1）豆油轮作油菜籽粒产量显著高于稻油轮作，增加施氮量，不同轮作模式下油菜单株角果数、每角果粒数及千粒重均呈显著上升趋势，与N0相比，在N1、N2和N3处理下，稻油轮作油菜籽粒产量分别增长176.68%、436.49%和835.40%，豆油轮作油菜籽粒产量分别增长123.96%、344.46%和547.25%。豆油轮作较稻油轮作在N0、N1、N2和N3处理下大田籽粒产量分别增长62.09%、31.33%、71.79%和12.21%；（2）成熟期豆油轮作油菜根颈粗、株高、第一有效分枝高度和有效分枝数显著高于稻油轮作，且随施氮量增加不同轮作模式下各农艺性状指标显著增加；各生育期豆油轮作单株油菜根干重及地上部干重显著高于稻油轮作，但根冠比低于稻油轮作，且随施氮量增加，两种轮作模式下苗期后根冠比显著下降；（3）豆油轮作油菜根系、角果壳、茎秆、籽粒氮含量和氮积累量均高于稻油轮作，且随着施氮量增加各部位氮含量和氮积累量显著增加。豆油轮作籽粒氮素表观利用率高于稻油轮作，随施氮量的增加，稻油轮作下氮素表观利用率增加，而豆油轮作氮素表观利用率呈现先上升后下降趋势；（4）与稻油轮作模式相比，相同施氮量下豆油轮作油菜角果壳可溶性糖含量低，而游离氨基酸含量和游离氨基酸含量/可溶性糖含量比值高，随施氮量增加可溶性糖含量降低，游离氨基酸含量和游离氨基酸含量/可溶性糖含量比值增加。因此，豆油轮作油菜籽粒因脂肪酸合成底物受限，含油率低于稻油轮作模式，且随施氮量增加，籽粒含油率在各轮作模式下均显著下降。两年试验结果显示，在270 kg·hm^-2施氮量水平时，产油量在两个轮作模式下均达到最大，稻油轮作两年产油量分别为1 678.60和1 665.33 kg·hm^-2，豆油轮作两年产油量分别为1 684.03和1 687.10 kg·hm^-2，但豆油轮作在180和270 kg·hm^-2施氮量下产油量差异不显著。【结论】稻油轮作油菜氮肥施用可控制在270 kg·hm^-2左右，而豆油轮作氮肥施用可控制在180 kg·hm^-2左右，以保证较高氮肥利用效率，并获得较高产油量。

关键词: 油菜, 轮作模式, 施氮量, 产量, 氮素利用效率

Abstract:

【Objective】 The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of nitrogen application on yield formation and nutrient utilization of oilseed (Brassica napus L.) under different cropping systems. 【Method】 A field experiment was carried out in Huanggang, Hubei Province. An oilseed variety ‘Zhongyouza19’ was used as the material, setting with two cropping systems (rice-oil rotation, RO; soybean-oil rotation, SO) and four nitrogen rates (N0, 0; N1, 90 kg·hm^-2; N2, 180 kg·hm^-2; N3, 270 kg·hm^-2) in this study. The yield and its components, dry matter accumulation, agronomic traits, nitrogen content and seeds quality were measured. 【Result】 (1) The oilseed yield of SO was significantly higher than that of RO, and the pods per plant, seeds per pod and 1000-seeds weight of oilseed in different cropping systems all tended to increase significantly by increasing the amount of nitrogen. Compared with N0, the seed yield of RO increased by 176.68%, 436.49% and 835.40% under N1, N2 and N3 treatments, respectively, while that of SO increased by 123.96%, 344.46% and 547.25%, respectively. Compared with RO, the seed yield under SO increased by 62.09%, 31.33%, 71.79% and 12.21% under N0, N1, N2 and N3 treatments, respectively. (2) The root crown diameter, plant height, first effective branch height and branch number of SO oilseed were significantly higher than those of RO at maturity stage, and the increase in each agronomic trait index was significant under different cropping systems with the increase in nitrogen application; the root biomass and above-ground biomass of SO were significantly higher than those of RO at all growth stages, but the root shoot ratio was lower than that of RO. The root shoot ratio decreased significantly after seedling stage in both cropping system with increasing nitrogen application. (3) Nitrogen content and nitrogen accumulation in the root, pod shell, stalk and seeds of SO were higher than those in RO, and the increases in nitrogen content and nitrogen accumulation in each part were significant with the increase in nitrogen application; the apparent nitrogen recovery efficiency under SO was higher than that under RO, and the apparent nitrogen recovery efficiency under RO increased with the increase in nitrogen application. (4) Compared with the RO, the soluble sugar content of pod shell under SO was lower, while the amino acid content and amino acid/soluble sugar content were higher with the same nitrogen application. The soluble sugar content decreased, but the amino acid content and amino acid/soluble sugar content increased with the increase of nitrogen application. Therefore, the oil content of oilseed under SO was lower than that under RO due to the limitation of fatty acid synthesis substrate, and the oil content of seeds decreased significantly with the increase of nitrogen application in cropping system. Oil yield was the maximum in both cropping system at 270 kg·hm^-2 nitrogen application level, 1 678.60 and 1 665.33 kg·hm^-2 for RO, and 1 684.03 and 1 687.10 kg·hm^-2 for SO, respectively, but the difference in oil yield between 180 and 270 kg·hm^-2 nitrogen application for SO was not significant. 【Conclusion】 In conclusion, the nitrogen rate for RO could be controlled at about 270 kg·hm^-2, but the nitrogen rate for SO could be controlled at about 180 kg·hm^-2 to ensure higher nitrogen use efficiency and higher oil yield.

Key words: oilseed (Brassica napus L.), cropping system, nitrogen rate, yield, nitrogen use efficiency

李小勇, 黄威, 刘红菊, 李银水, 顾炽明, 代晶, 胡文诗, 杨璐, 廖星, 秦璐. 不同轮作模式下氮肥施用对油菜产量形成及养分利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(6): 1074-1085.

LI XiaoYong, HUANG Wei, LIU HongJu, LI YinShui, GU ChiMing, DAI Jing, HU WenShi, YANG Lu, LIAO Xing, QIN Lu. Effect of Nitrogen Rates on Yield Formation and Nitrogen Use Efficiency in Oilseed Under Different Cropping Systems[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(6): 1074-1085.

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.0578-1752.2023.06.005

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2023/V56/I6/1074

图/表 8

表1

表2

图1

表3

图2

图3

图4

表4

参考文献 38

[1]	FAO. Statistical Databases, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. 2020. http://www.fao.org.
[2]	PREITI G, ROMEO M, BACCHI M, MONTI M. Soil loss measure from Mediterranean arable cropping systems: Effects of rotation and linage system on C-factor. Soil & Tillage Research, 2017, 170: 85-93.
[3]	GAN Y, MALHI S S, BRANDT S, KATEPA-MUPONDWA, STEVENSON C. Nitrogen use efficiency and nitrogen uptake of canola under diverse environments. Agronomy Journal, 2008, 100(2): 285-295.
[4]	LI X C, HU F, SHI W. Plant material addition affects soil nitrous oxide production differently between aerobic and oxygen-limited conditions. Applied Soil Ecology, 2013, 64: 91-98. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2012.10.003
[5]	YU M, WANG Q X, SU Y, XI H, QIAO Y Y, GUO Z L, WANG Y L, SHEN A L. Response of soil environment and microbial community structure to different ratios of long-term straw return and nitrogen fertilizer in wheat-maize system. Sustainability, 2023, 15(3): 1-16. doi: 10.3390/su15010001
[6]	ZUO Q S, KUAI J, ZHAO L, HU Z, WU J S, ZHOU G S. The effect of sowing depth and soil compaction on the growth and yield of rapeseed in rice straw returning field-ScienceDirect. Field Crops Research, 2017, 203: 47-54. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.016
[7]	COPELAND P J, ALLMARAS R R, CROOKSTON R K, NELSON W W. Corn-soybean rotation effects on soil water depletion. Agronomy Journal, 1994, 85(2): 203-210. doi: 10.2134/agronj1993.00021962008500020008x
[8]	董志强, 朱红霞, 白昕欣, 刘璐, 刘远. 秸秆还田对小麦幼苗生长和土壤养分变化的影响. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(6): 77-81.
	DONG Z Q, ZHU H X, BAI X X, LIU L, LIU Y. Effect of straw returning on wheat seedling growth and the change of soil nutrient. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2014, 30(6): 77-81. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.2013-1188
[9]	GENG J B, SUN Y B, ZHANG M, LI C L, YANG Y C, LIU Z G, LI S L. Long-term effects of controlled release urea application on crop yields and soil fertility under rice-oilseed rape rotation system. Field Crops Research, 2015, 184: 65-73. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.09.003
[10]	张素瑜, 王和洲, 杨明达, 王静丽, 贺德先. 水分与玉米秸秆还田对小麦根系生长和水分利用效率的影响. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(13): 2484-2496. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.13.004
	ZHANG S Y, WANG H Z, YANG M D, WANG J L, HE D X. Influence of returning corn stalks to field under different soil moisture contents on root growth and water use efficiency of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(13): 2484-2496. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.13.004
[11]	林蔚刚, 吴俊江, 董德健, 钟鹏, 王金生, 周全. 不同秸秆还田模式对大豆根系分布的影响. 大豆科学, 2012, 31(4): 584-588.
	LIN W G, WU J J, DONG D J, ZHONG P, WANG J S, ZHOU Q. Impact of different residue retention system on soybean root distribution in soil profile. Soybean Science, 2012, 31(4): 584-588. (in Chinese)
[12]	LI X H, LI Q B, YANG T W, NIE Z N, CHEN G X, HU L Y. Responses of plant development, biomass and seed production of direct sown oilseed rape (Brassica napus) to nitrogen application at different stages in Yangtze River Basin. Field Crops Research, 2016, 194: 12-20. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.04.024
[13]	GU X, LI Y, DU Y, YIN M. Ridge-furrow rainwater harvesting with supplemental irrigation to improve seed yield and water use efficiency of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2017, 16(5): 1162-1172. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61447-8
[14]	GU X, LI Y, DU Y, ZHOU C, YIN M, YANG D. Effects of water and nitrogen coupling on nitrogen nutrition index and radiation use efficiency of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2016, 47(2): 122-132.
[15]	QI W, LIU H, LIU P, DONG S, ZHAO B. Morphological and physiological characteristics of corn (Zea mays L.) roots from cultivars with different yield potentials. European Journal of Agronomy, 2012, 38(2): 54-63. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2011.12.003
[16]	KUAI J, SUN Y, ZHOU M, ZHANG P, ZUO Q, WU J, ZHOU G. The effect of nitrogen application and planting density on the radiation use efficiency and the stem lignin metabolism in rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Field Crops Research, 2016, 199: 89-98. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.09.025
[17]	左青松, 刘浩, 蒯婕, 冯倩南, 冯云艳, 张含笑, 刘靖怡, 杨光, 周广生. 氮肥和密度对毯状苗移栽油菜碳氮积累、运转和利用效率的影响. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(18): 3522-3531. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.18.006
	ZUO Q S, LIU H, KUAI J, FENG Q N, FENG Y Y, ZHANG H X, LIU J Y, YANG G, ZHOU G S. Effects of nitrogen and planting density on accumulation, translocation and utilization efficiency of carbon and nitrogen in transplanting rapeseed with blanket seedling. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(18): 3522-3531. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.18.006
[18]	KENDALLA S L, HOLMESB H, WHITEA C A, CLARKEA S M, BERRY P M. Quantifying lodging-induced yield losses in oilseed rape. Field Crops Research, 2017, 211: 106-113. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.06.013
[19]	WANG C, WANG Z, CHEN T, YANG J, CHEN W, MU J, TIAN J, ZHAO X. Relationship between Yield and photosynthesis of leaf and silique of different Brassica napus L. varieties during reproduction period. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2016, 36(7): 1417-1426.
[20]	WANG C, HAI J, YANG J, CHEN W, CHEN T, LUO H, WANG H. Influence of leaf and silique photosynthesis on seeds yield and seeds oil quality of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). European Journal of Agronomy, 2016, 74: 112-118. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2015.12.008
[21]	VASILE G, HALMAJAN H V, CIUBOATA G. The Influence of application timing of nitrogen fertilisers on yield components in oilseed rape. Bulletin of University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Agriculture, 2007, 63: 321.
[22]	BRENNAN R F, MASON M G, WALTON G H. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer on the concentrations of oil and protein in Canola (Brassica napus) seed. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 2000, 23(3): 339-348. doi: 10.1080/01904160009382020
[23]	GUNDEL A, ROLLETSCHEK H, WAGNER S, MUSZYNSKA A, BORISJUK L. Micro imaging displays the sucrose landscape within and along its allocation pathways. Plant Physiology, 2018, 178(4): 1448-1460. doi: 10.1104/pp.18.00947 pmid: 30275056
[24]	宋大利, 侯胜鹏, 王秀斌, 梁国庆, 周卫. 中国秸秆养分资源数量及替代化肥潜力. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24(1): 1-21.
	SONG D L, HOU S P, WANG X B, LIANG G Q, ZHOU W. Nutrient resource quantity of crop straw and its potential of substituting. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2018, 24(1): 1-21. (in Chinese)
[25]	伍玉鹏, 刘田, 彭其安, MUHAMMAD S, 胡荣桂. 氮肥配施下不同C/N作物残渣还田对红壤温室气体排放的影响. 农业环境科学学报, 2014, 33(10): 2053-2062.
	WU Y P, LIU T, PENG Q A, MUHAMMAD S, HU R G. Greenhouse gas emissions in red soil as influenced by different C/N residues under nitrogen applications. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2014, 33(10): 2053-2062. (in Chinese)
[26]	曹莹菲, 张红, 赵聪, 刘克, 吕家珑. 秸秆腐解过程中结构的变化特征. 农业环境科学学报, 2016, 35(5): 976-984.
	CAO Y F, ZHANG H, ZHAO C, LIU K, LÜ J L. Changes of organic structures of crop residues during decomposition. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2016, 35(5): 976-984. (in Chinese)
[27]	朱利群, 张大伟, 卞新民. 连续秸秆还田与耕作方式轮换对稻麦轮作田土壤理化性状变化及水稻产量构成的影响. 土壤通报, 2011, 42(1): 81-85.
	ZHU L Q, ZHANG D W, BIAN X M. Effects of continuous returning straws to field and shifting different tillage methods on changes of physical-chemical properties of soil and yield components of rice. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2011. 42(1): 81-85. (in Chinese)
[28]	盖琼辉, 张述强, 张义凡, 郑秀堂. 不同覆膜种植方式对大豆产量及土壤理化性质的影响. 陇东学院学报, 2017, 28(3): 52-55.
	GAI Q H, ZHANG S Q, ZHANG Y F, ZHENG X T. Effects of different film mulching planting on soybean yields and physical and chemical properties of soil. Journai of Longdong University, 2017, 28(3): 52-55. (in Chinese)
[29]	ZHAO S C, HE P, QIU S J, JIA L L, LIU M C, JIN J Y, JOHNSTON A M. Long-term effects of potassium fertilization and straw return on soil potassium levels and crop yields in north-central China. Field Crops Research, 2014, 169: 116-122. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2014.09.017
[30]	MALHI S S, NYBORG M, SOLBERG E D, MCCONKEY B, DYCK M, PUURVEEN D. Long-term straw management and N fertilizer rate effects on quantity and quality of organic C and N and some chemical properties in two contrasting soils in Western Canada. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2011, 47(7): 785-800. doi: 10.1007/s00374-011-0587-8
[31]	张顺涛, 鲁剑巍, 丛日环, 任涛, 李小坤, 廖世鹏, 张跃强, 郭世伟, 周明华, 黄益国, 程辉. 油菜轮作对后茬作物产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(14): 2852-2858. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.14.009
	ZHANG S T, LU J W, CONG R H, REN T, LI X K, LIAO S P, ZHANG Y Q, GUO S W, ZHOU M H, HUANG Y G, CHENG H. Effect of rapeseed rotation on the yield of next-stubble crops. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(14): 2852-2858. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.14.009
[32]	BOUCHET A S, LAPERCHE A, BISSUEL-BELAYGUE C, SNOWDON R, NESI N, STAHL A. Nitrogen use efficiency in rapeseed. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2016, 36(2): 38. doi: 10.1007/s13593-016-0371-0
[33]	LI X, LI Q, YANG T, NIE Z, CHEN G, HU L. Responses of plant development, biomass and seed production of direct sown oilseed rape (Brassica napus) to nitrogen application at different stages in Yangtze River Basin. Field Crops Research, 2016, 194: 12-20. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.04.024
[34]	VIGEOLAS H. Lipid storage metabolism is limited by the prevailing low oxygen concentrations within developing seeds of oilseed rape. Plant Physiology, 2003, 133(4): 2048-2060. pmid: 14645733
[35]	李燕婷, 米国华, 陈范骏, 张福锁, 劳秀荣. 玉米幼苗地上部／根间氮的循环及其基因型差异. 植物生理学报, 2001, 27(3): 226-230.
	LI Y T, MI G H, CHEN F J, ZHANG F S, LAO X R. Genotypic difference of nitrogen recycling between root and dhoot of maize seedlings. Acta Phytophysiologica Sinica, 2001, 27(3): 226-230. (in Chinese)
[36]	李旭霞, 宋海星, 杨志长, 胡宇倩, 熊庭浩. 油菜角果SPS活性变化对其碳氮代谢及油分形成的影响. 南方农业学报, 2018, 49(2): 234-238.
	LI X X, SONG H X, YANG Z C, HU Y Q, XIONG T H. Effects of SPS activity variation on carbon and nitrogen metabolism, and oil formation in rape silique. Journal of Southern Agriculture, 2018, 49(2): 234-238. (in Chinese)
[37]	NI F, LIU J, ZHANG J, KHAN M N, LUO T, XU Z, HU L. Effect of soluble sugar content in silique wall on seed oil accumulation during the seed-filling stage in Brassica napus. Crop and Pasture Science, 2019, 69: 1251-1563. doi: 10.1071/CP17392
[38]	TAN H, YANG X, ZHANG F, ZHENG X, QU C, MU J, FU F, LI J, GUAN R, ZHANG H. Enhanced seed oil production in canola by conditional expression of Brassica napus leafy cotyledon1 and LEC1-like in developing seeds. Plant Physiology, 2011, 156: 1577-1588. doi: 10.1104/pp.111.175000

轮作模式 Cropping system	施氮量 Nitrogen rate	2019-2020				2020-2021
轮作模式 Cropping system	施氮量 Nitrogen rate	单株有效角果数 Effective pods per plant	每角果粒数 Seeds per pod	千粒重 1000-seed weight (g)	实际产量 Yield (kg·hm^-2)	单株有效角果数 Effective pods per plant	每角果粒数 Seeds per pod	千粒重 1000-seed weight (g)	实际产量 Yield (kg·hm^-2)
RO	N0	10.66e	19.26b	3.54d	327.14h	11.15g	19.42b	3.62c	352.88g
	N1	25.61d	22.12a	3.68bcd	937.97f	24.36e	22.12a	3.88bc	940.96e
	N2	44.21c	22.22a	3.73bcd	1781.34d	45.66c	22.52a	3.93bc	1864.80c
	N3	75.21b	22.54a	3.98bc	3188.84b	76.07b	22.64a	3.98bc	3161.93b
SO	N0	17.03e	19.22b	3.60cd	530.34g	17.05f	19.82b	3.76bc	571.86f
	N1	32.23d	22.09a	3.74bcd	1198.16e	32.25d	22.20a	3.94bc	1269.53d
	N2	72.75b	22.41a	4.08b	2993.25c	78.86b	22.61a	4.08ab	3273.60b
	N3	82.34a	22.72a	4.49a	3535.66a	85.03a	22.72a	4.39a	3590.21a
方差分析 Variance analyses	C	**	NS	*	**	**	NS	*	**
	N	**	**	**	**	**	**	**	**
	C×N	**	NS	NS	**	**	NS	NS	**

轮作模式 Cropping system	施氮量 Nitrogen rate	2019-2020				2020-2021
轮作模式 Cropping system	施氮量 Nitrogen rate	根颈粗 Root crown diameter (mm)	株高 Plant height (cm)	第一有效分枝高度 Branch height (cm)	有效分枝数 Branch number	根颈粗 Root crown diameter (mm)	株高 Plant height (cm)	第一有效分枝高度 Branch height (cm)	有效分枝数 Branch number
RO	N0	7.71c	86.92e	48.34d	1.31e	8.43d	91.86e	46.87d	1.56d
	N1	11.49b	113.07d	55.51cd	2.93d	12.46bc	120.81d	61.45c	3.63c
	N2	12.49b	143.15c	84.83b	3.31d	13.76b	140.62c	89.84a	4.23b
	N3	13.73ab	159.77ab	90.92ab	4.72ab	14.08b	150.55bc	93.36a	5.21a
SO	N0	8.39c	87.33e	49.17d	1.64e	8.72cd	90.66e	50.34d	1.65d
	N1	11.72b	148.68bc	61.13c	3.96c	12.82bc	148.22bc	77.42b	3.98bc
	N2	13.73ab	154.61abc	96.08a	4.33bc	14.51ab	159.31ab	98.52a	4.32b
	N3	16.35a	166.52a	97.23a	5.08a	16.93a	167.12a	101.11a	5.46a
方差分析 Variance analyses	C	*	**	**	**	*	**	**	NS
	N	**	**	**	**	**	**	**	**
	C×N	NS	**	NS	NS	NS	*	NS	NS

年份 Year	轮作模式 Cropping system	施氮量 Nitrogen rate	根Root		茎Stem		角果壳Pod shell		籽粒Seed
年份 Year	轮作模式 Cropping system	施氮量 Nitrogen rate	N含量 N content (%)	N积累量 N uptake (kg·hm^-2)	N含量 N content (%)	N积累量 N uptake (kg·hm^-2)	N含量 N content (%)	N积累量 N uptake (kg·hm^-2)	N含量 N content (%)	N积累量 N uptake (kg·hm^-2)
2019-2020	RO	N0	0.42c	2.23f	0.33c	4.59f	0.45d	1.29f	2.59f	8.48f
		N1	0.44bc	5.04e	0.34c	11.70e	0.47d	6.39e	2.71ef	25.45de
		N2	0.50a	7.10cd	0.37bc	14.96d	0.53bc	9.76d	2.98bcd	53.11c
		N3	0.52a	9.63b	0.39bc	21.70c	0.55b	16.64b	3.08bc	98.14b
	SO	N0	0.44bc	2.51f	0.35c	6.90f	0.50cd	3.33f	2.85de	15.11ef
		N1	0.49ab	6.51d	0.39bc	19.93c	0.55b	8.16de	2.89cde	34.65d
		N2	0.52a	7.60c	0.42ab	26.94b	0.63a	14.30c	3.16b	94.48b
		N3	0.52a	10.52a	0.48a	34.17a	0.66a	24.18a	3.50a	123.75a
2020-2021	RO	N0	0.42e	2.52e	0.31e	3.80e	0.45e	1.31f	2.67d	9.41f
		N1	0.45cde	5.11d	0.34de	11.26d	0.49de	6.77d	2.74cd	25.81e
		N2	0.48bc	5.90d	0.38bcd	16.65c	0.52cd	9.91c	2.92c	54.36c
		N3	0.51ab	7.51c	0.42ab	22.71b	0.55bc	14.49b	3.13b	99.03b
	SO	N0	0.43de	2.84e	0.37cd	6.70e	0.49cde	3.63e	2.83cd	16.17f
		N1	0.48bcd	5.88d	0.39bc	21.81b	0.54bcd	8.58cd	2.90c	36.85d
		N2	0.52ab	8.77b	0.41abc	24.29b	0.59ab	12.57b	3.19b	104.33b
		N3	0.53a	10.65a	0.44a	33.42a	0.63a	24.89a	3.49a	125.26a
方差分析 Variance analyses	C		*	**	**	**	**	**	**	**
	N		**	**	**	**	**	**	**	**
	C×N		NS	**	NS	**	NS	**	NS	**

	15 d			25 d
	可溶性糖 Soluble sugar content	氨基酸 Amino acid content	氨基酸/可溶性糖 Amino acid/soluble sugar	可溶性糖 Soluble sugar content	氨基酸 Amino acid content	氨基酸/可溶性糖 Amino acid/soluble sugar
	含油率 Oil content	0.7259**	-0.7855**	-0.7942**	0.5858**	-0.7132**	-0.8019**
大田籽粒产量 Yield	-0.4408**	0.9069**	0.8923**	-0.9397**	0.8196**	0.8303**