行距和灌水量对番茄冠层光截获和光合能力、物质积累及果实品质的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.11.009

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】冠层内光合有效辐射和叶片光合生理特性存在较大异质性。探究番茄冠层不同部位叶片光截获和光合能力对行距和灌水量的响应，研究行距和灌水量对番茄冠层光合生产力的影响，并对果实综合品质进行分析，为机械化栽培番茄行距和灌水量的设置提供理论依据。【方法】以番茄为试材，宽窄行栽培，株距35 cm，小行距40 cm，设置3个大行距水平（70 cm（P1）、120 cm（P2）和170 cm（P3））和两个灌溉水平（常规灌溉（W1）和轻度亏缺灌溉（W2）），全因子试验，共6个处理，测定各叶位叶面积和光截获量，冠层均分为6个部位，测定叶片净光合速率（photosynthetic rate，Pn）、比叶质量（leaf mass per area，LMA）、叶绿素（Chlorophyll，Chl）及N、P、K含量，并分别以各部位叶面积占全株叶面积的比例或各部位叶片干重占全株叶片干重的比例为权重综合分析各处理冠层光合能力，通过Pearson相关系数分析各指标相关性，测定地上部干鲜重、单株产量及第二穗果品质，采用PCA法和基于博弈论的组合赋权-TOPSIS法对番茄综合品质进行评价并排序。【结果】行距增大对冠层叶面积、光截获和光合能力的影响主要体现在冠层中部和下部。冠层中部叶面积随行距增大表现为先增加后减少，冠层下部叶面积及冠层中部和下部光截获均表现为P1到P2显著增加，P2到P3小幅增加；冠层中部和下部Pn表现为P2较P1提高8.06%—11.32%，P3较P2提高14.25%—24.40%；LMA表现为P2较P1提高1.31%—33.24%，P3较P2提高6.09%—17.86%；Chl含量表现为P2较P1提高3.42%—6.81%，P3较P2提高3.19%—4.96%；N含量表现为P2较P1提高13.89%—34.73%，P3较P2提高2.21%—19.74%；P和K含量无明显规律。整体来看，Pn、Chl和N含量均随行距增大而增加，LMA轻度亏缺灌溉下随行距增大而增加，常规灌溉下表现为P3>P1>P2；3种行距水平下，LMA和N含量均表现为常规灌溉高于轻度亏缺灌溉，Pn表现为P1和P3下常规灌溉高于轻度亏缺灌溉，而P2下轻度亏缺灌溉更高，Chl含量表现为P1常规灌溉更高，而P2和P3轻度亏缺灌溉更高。地上部干鲜重，常规灌溉下随行距增大而增加，轻度亏缺灌溉下随行距增大而先增加后减少；常规灌溉的地上部干鲜重高于轻度亏缺灌溉。两种灌溉水平下单株产量均随行距增大而增加，P1到P2增加幅度较大（常规灌溉和轻度亏缺灌溉下，P2较P1分别增加33.75%和24.32%），P2到P3单株产量仅小幅增加（常规灌溉和轻度亏缺灌溉下，P3较P2分别增加2.87%和4.30%）；常规灌溉单株产量高于轻度亏缺灌溉。增加行距、减少灌水量可以优化果实综合品质，综合品质得分前3位为P3W2、P2W2和P3W1。【结论】叶片Pn、LMA、N含量、地上部干鲜重和单株产量为P3W1最大；冠层光截获量、Chl含量及番茄综合品质评分为P3W2最高。

关键词: 番茄, 行距, 灌水量, 光截获, 光合能力, 物质积累, 综合品质

Abstract:

【Objective】Photosynthetically active radiation and photosynthetic physiological characteristics of leaves within the canopy were heterogeneous. The response to row spacing and irrigation amount of light interception and photosynthetic capacity of leaves in different parts of tomato canopy were explored in this study. The effects of row spacing and irrigation amount on photosynthetic productivity of tomato canopy were studied in detail, and the comprehensive quality of fruit was analyzed, which provided a theoretical basis for the setting of row spacing and irrigation amount in mechanized cultivation of tomato.【Method】Tomato, the test material, was cultivated in a wide and narrow row, with plant spacing of 35 cm. Small row spacing of 40 cm, and three large row spacing levels were set: 70 cm (P1), 120 cm (P2), and 170 cm (P3). Two irrigation levels were set: conventional irrigation (W1) and light deficit irrigation (W2). The experiment was a full factorial experiment with 6 treatments. The leaf area and light interception amount of each leaf position were measured. The canopy was divided into six parts, and the net photosynthetic rate (Pn), leaf mass per area (LMA), chlorophyll (Chl) and N, P, K content were measured. The canopy photosynthetic capacity under each treatment was comprehensively analyzed by taking the proportion of leaf area of each part to that of the whole plant or the proportion of leaf dry weight of each part to that of the whole plant as weights. The correlation of each index was analyzed by the Pearson correlation coefficient. The dry and fresh weight, yield per plant and fruit quality of the second ear were measured. The comprehensive quality of tomato was evaluated and ranked by PCA method and combined weighting-TOPSIS method based on game theory.【Result】The effects of increasing row spacing on canopy leaf area, light interception and photosynthetic capacity were mainly reflected in the middle and lower parts of the canopy. The leaf area in the mid canopy increased first and then decreased with the increase of the row spacing. The leaf area in the lower canopy and the light interception in the mid and lower canopy increased significantly from P1 to P2, but slightly increased from P2 to P3; the Pn in the mid and lower canopy showed that P2 increased by 8.06%-11.32% compared with P1, and P3 increased by 14.25%-24.40% compared with P2; the LMA showed that P2 increased by 1.31%-33.24% compared with P1, and P3 increased by 6.09%-17.86% compared with P2; the Chl content of P2 was 3.42%-6.81% higher than that of P1, and P3 was 3.19%-4.96% higher than that of P2; the N content of P2 was 13.89%-34.73% higher than that of P1, and P3 was 2.21%-19.74% higher than that of P2; the content of P and K had no obvious regularity. On the whole, the content of Pn, Chl and N increased with the increase of row spacing, and the LMA increased with the increase of row spacing under light deficit irrigation and showed P3>P1>P2 under conventional irrigation; under three row spacing levels, the LMA and N content under conventional irrigation were higher than those under light deficit irrigation, the Pn under conventional irrigation was higher than that under light deficit irrigation under P1 and P3, while the Pn under light deficiency irrigation was higher under P2; the Chl content under conventional irrigation was higher under P1, while the Chl content under light deficiency irrigation was higher under P2 and P3. With the increase of row spacing, the dry and fresh weight of the aboveground parts increased under conventional irrigation, and increased first and then decreased under light deficit irrigation; the aboveground dry and fresh weight of conventional irrigation was higher than that of light deficit irrigation. The yield per plant increased with the increase of row spacing under the two irrigation levels, and the increase from P1 to P2 was larger (compared with P1, P2 under conventional irrigation and light deficit irrigation increased by 33.75% and 24.32%, respectively.), while the yield per plant increased only slightly from P2 to P3 (compared with P2, P3 increased by 2.87% and 4.30% under conventional irrigation and light deficit irrigation, respectively.); the yield per plant under conventional irrigation was higher than that under light deficit irrigation. Increasing row spacing and reducing irrigation amount could optimize the comprehensive quality of fruit, and the top three comprehensive quality scores were P3W2, P2W2 and P3W1.【Conclusion】P3W1 was the highest in leaf Pn, LMA, N content, aboveground dry and fresh weight and yield per plant, and P3W2 was the highest in canopy light interception, Chl content and comprehensive quality score.

Key words: tomato, row spacing, irrigation amount, light interception, photosynthetic capacity, matter accumulation, comprehensive quality

常佳悦, 马小龙, 吴艳莉, 李建明. 行距和灌水量对番茄冠层光截获和光合能力、物质积累及果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(11): 2141-2157.

CHANG JiaYue, MA XiaoLong, WU YanLi, LI JianMing. Effects of Row Spacing and Irrigation Amount on Canopy Light Interception and Photosynthetic Capacity, Matter Accumulation and Fruit Quality of Tomato[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(11): 2141-2157.

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.0578-1752.2023.11.009

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2023/V56/I11/2141

图/表 15

表1

图1

表2

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

表3

图7

图8

图9

表4

表5

表6

参考文献 50

[1]	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
[2]	MAROIS J J, WRIGHT D L, WIATRAK P J, VARGAS M A. Effect of row width and nitrogen on cotton morphology and canopy microclimate. Crop Science, 2004, 44(3): 870. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2004.8700
[3]	CONATY W C, MAHAN J R, NEILSEN J E, CONSTABLE G A. Vapour pressure deficit aids the interpretation of cotton canopy temperature response to water deficit. Functional Plant Biology, 2014, 41(5): 535-546. doi: 10.1071/FP13223 pmid: 32481011
[4]	颜为, 李芳军, 徐东永, 杜明伟, 田晓莉, 李召虎. 行距与氮肥或甲哌鎓化控对棉花冠层结构、温度和相对湿度的影响. 作物学报, 2021, 47(9): 1654-1665. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04167
	YAN W, LI F J, XU D Y, DU M W, TIAN X L, LI Z H. Effects of row spacings and nitrogen or mepiquat chloride application on canopy architecture, temperature and relative humidity in cotton. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2021, 47(9): 1654-1665. (in Chinese)
[5]	TANG L, XU Z J, CHEN W F. Advances and prospects of super rice breeding in China. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2017, 16(5): 984-991. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61604-0
[6]	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. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(22): 4264-4276. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.22.005. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.22.005
	XIAO J B, LIU Z, KONG F X, XIN Z X, WU H S. Effects of planting pattern and density on population structure and yield of Sorghum. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(22): 4264-4276. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.22.005. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.22.005
[7]	陈宗培, 薛佳欣, 李奔, 王贵彦. 玉米光合特性和冠层微环境对密度和行株距配置的响应. 作物杂志, 2020(1): 179-186.
	CHEN Z P, XUE J X, LI B, WANG G Y. Response of photosynthetic characteristics and canopy micro-environment to planting density and row spacing of maize (Zea mays L.). Crops, 2020(1): 179-186. (in Chinese)
[8]	JIANG H, ZOU D H, LOU W Y, CHEN W Z, YANG Y F. Growth and photosynthesis by Gracilariopsis lemaneiformis (Gracilariales, Rhodophyta) in response to different stocking densities along Nan'ao Island coastal waters. Aquaculture, 2019, 501: 279-284. doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2018.11.047
[9]	YAO H S, ZHANG Y L, YI X P, ZUO W Q, LEI Z Y, SUI L L, ZHANG W F. Characters in light-response curves of canopy photosynthetic use efficiency of light and N in responses to plant density in field-grown cotton. Field Crops Research, 2017, 203: 192-200. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.018
[10]	熊淑萍, 曹文博, 张志勇, 张捷, 高明, 樊泽华, 沈帅杰, 王小纯, 马新明. 行距和播种量对冬小麦冠层光合有效辐射垂直分布、生物量和籽粒产量的影响. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(4): 1298-1306. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202104.026
	XIONG S P, CAO W B, ZHANG Z Y, ZHANG J, GAO M, FAN Z H, SHEN S J, WANG X C, MA X M. Effects of row spacing and sowing rate on vertical distribution of photosynthetically active radiation, biomass, and grain yield in winter wheat canopy. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2021, 32(4): 1298-1306. (in Chinese)
[11]	闫春娟, 宋书宏, 王文斌, 王昌陵, 孙旭刚, 曹永强, 张立军, 李盛友, 董丽杰, 陈艳秋. 不同基因型大豆生理特性和产量对不同降雨条件的响应. 节水灌溉, 2021(5): 8-14.
	YAN C J, SONG S H, WANG W B, WANG C L, SUN X G, CAO Y Q, ZHANG L J, LI S Y, DONG L J, CHEN Y Q. Response of physiological characteristics and yield of soybean with different genotypes to different rainfall conditions. Water Saving Irrigation, 2021(5): 8-14. (in Chinese)
[12]	WANG Y Q, XI W X, WANG Z M, WANG B, XU X X, HAN M K, ZHOU S L, ZHANG Y H. Contribution of ear photosynthesis to grain yield under rainfed and irrigation conditions for winter wheat cultivars released in the past 30 years in North China Plain. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2016, 15(10): 2247-2256. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61408-9
[13]	杜兵杰, 曹红霞, 裴书瑶, 张泽宇, 李曼宁. 亏缺灌溉下温室番茄生长生理指标对生物炭的响应. 灌溉排水学报, 2021, 40(10): 43-51.
	DU B J, CAO H X, PEI S Y, ZHANG Z Y, LI M N. The effects of deficit irrigation combined with biochar amendment on growth and physiological traits of greenhouse tomato. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2021, 40(10): 43-51. (in Chinese)
[14]	DARIVA F D, PESSOA H P, COPATI M G F, DE ALMEIDA G Q, DE CASTRO FILHO M N, DE TOLEDO PICOLI E A, DA CUNHA F F, NICK C. Yield and fruit quality attributes of selected tomato introgression lines subjected to long-term deficit irrigation. Scientia Horticulturae, 2021, 289: 110426. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2021.110426
[15]	CHANG T G, ZHAO H L, WANG N, SONG Q F, XIAO Y, QU M N, ZHU X G. A three-dimensional canopy photosynthesis model in rice with a complete description of the canopy architecture, leaf physiology, and mechanical properties. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2019, 70(9): 2479-2490. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ery430
[16]	SHI Z, CHANG T G, CHEN G Y, SONG Q F, WANG Y J, ZHOU Z W, WANG M Y, QU M N, WANG B S, ZHU X G. Dissection of mechanisms for high yield in two elite rice cultivars. Field Crops Research, 2019, 241: 107563. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107563
[17]	SONG Q F, SRINIVASAN V, LONG S P, ZHU X G. Decomposition analysis on soybean productivity increase under elevated CO₂ using 3D canopy model reveals synergestic effects of CO₂ and light in photosynthesis. Annals of Botany, 2020, 126(4): 601-614. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcz163
[18]	SONG Q F, ZHANG G L, ZHU X G. Optimal crop canopy architecture to maximise canopy photosynthetic CO₂ uptake under elevated CO₂-A theoretical study using a mechanistic model of canopy photosynthesis. Functional Plant Biology, 2013, 40(2): 108. doi: 10.1071/FP12056
[19]	SARLIKIOTI V, DE VISSER P H B, MARCELIS L F M. Exploring the spatial distribution of light interception and photosynthesis of canopies by means of a functional-structural plant model. Annals of Botany, 2011, 107(5): 875-883. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcr006 pmid: 21355008
[20]	WIECHERS D, KAHLEN K, STÜTZEL H. Evaluation of a radiosity based light model for greenhouse cucumber canopies. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2011, 151(7): 906-915. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.02.016
[21]	CHEN T W, NGUYEN T M N, KAHLEN K, STÜTZEL H. Quantification of the effects of architectural traits on dry mass production and light interception of tomato canopy under different temperature regimes using a dynamic functional-structural plant model. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2014, 65(22): 6399-6410. doi: 10.1093/jxb/eru356
[22]	PRADAL C, DUFOUR-KOWALSKI S, BOUDON F, FOURNIER C, GODIN C. OpenAlea: A visual programming and component-based software platform for plant modelling. Functional Plant Biology, 2008, 35(10): 751. doi: 10.1071/FP08084 pmid: 32688829
[23]	PRADAL C, BOUDON F, NOUGUIER C, CHOPARD J, GODIN C. PlantGL: A Python-based geometric library for 3D plant modelling at different scales. Graphical Models, 2009, 71(1): 1-21. doi: 10.1016/j.gmod.2008.10.001
[24]	马乐乐, 高宁, 杨百良, 任瑞丹, 范兵华, 李建明. 全有机营养模式下番茄综合品质评价及其对有机肥水耦合的响应. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 47(6): 63-72.
	MA L L, GAO N, YANG B L, REN R D, FAN B H, LI J M. Construction of integrated quality index of tomato with total organic nutrition and its response to organic fertilizer and water coupling. Journal of Northwest A&F University (Social Science Edition), 2019, 47(6): 63-72. (in Chinese)
[25]	杨乐琦, 仇淑芳, 唐菲, 黄丹枫, 唐东芹. 基于主成分分析的观赏生菜品质综合评价. 上海交通大学学报(农业科学版), 2015, 33(3): 53-60.
	YANG L Q, QIU S F, TANG F, HUANG D F, TANG D Q. Comprehensive evaluation for ornamental lettuce based on principal component analysis. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Agricultural Science), 2015, 33(3): 53-60. (in Chinese)
[26]	ALBAYRAK E, ERENSAL Y C. Using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to improve human performance: An application of multiple criteria decision making problem. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 2004, 15(4): 491-503. doi: 10.1023/B:JIMS.0000034112.00652.4c
[27]	武兰芳, 欧阳竹. 不同播量与行距对小麦产量与辐射截获利用的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2014, 22(1): 31-36.
	WU L F, OUYANG Z. Effects of row spacing and seeding rate on radiation use efficiency and grain yield of wheat. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2014, 22(1): 31-36. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1011.2014.30568
[28]	倪纪恒, 罗卫红, 李永秀, 戴剑锋, 金亮, 徐国彬, 陈永山, 陈春宏, 卜崇兴, 徐刚. 温室番茄叶面积与干物质生产的模拟. 中国农业科学, 2005, 38(8): 1629-1635.
	NI J H, LUO W H, LI Y X, DAI J F, JIN L, XU G B, CHEN Y S, CHEN C H, BU C X, XU G. Simulation of leaf area and dry matter production in greenhouse tomato. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2005, 38(8): 1629-1635. (in Chinese)
[29]	MEDRANO H, POU A, TOMÁS M, MARTORELL S, GULIAS J, FLEXAS J, ESCALONA J M. Average daily light interception determines leaf water use efficiency among different canopy locations in grapevine. Agricultural Water Management, 2012, 114: 4-10. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.025
[30]	王虎兵, 曹红霞, 郝舒雪, 潘小燕. 温室番茄植株养分和光合对水肥耦合的响应及其与产量关系. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(10): 1761-1771. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.10.009. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.10.009
	WANG H B, CAO H X, HAO S X, PAN X Y. Responses of plant nutrient and photosynthesis in greenhouse tomato to water-fertilizer coupling and their relationship with yield. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(10): 1761-1771. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.10.009. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.10.009
[31]	MUIR C D, HANGARTER R P, MOYLE L C, DAVIS P A. Morphological and anatomical determinants of mesophyll conductance in wild relatives of tomato (Solanums ect. Lycopersicon, sect. Lycopersicoides; Solanaceae). Plant, Cell & Environment, 2014, 37(6): 1415-1426.
[32]	POORTER H, NIINEMETS Ü, POORTER L, WRIGHT I J, VILLAR R. Causes and consequences of variation in leaf mass per area (LMA): A meta-analysis. New Phytologist, 2009, 182(3): 565-588. doi: 10.1111/nph.2009.182.issue-3
[33]	VILLAR R, ROBLETO J R, DE JONG Y, POORTER H. Differences in construction costs and chemical composition between deciduous and evergreen woody species are small as compared to differences among families. Plant, Cell and Environment, 2006, 29(8): 1629-1643. doi: 10.1111/pce.2006.29.issue-8
[34]	PUGLIELLI G, CRESCENTE M F, FRATTAROLI A R, GRATANI L. Leaf mass per area (LMA) as a possible predictor of adaptive strategies in two species of Sesleria (poaceae): Analysis of morphological, anatomical and physiological leaf traits. Annales Botanici Fennici, 2015, 52(1/2): 135-143. doi: 10.5735/085.052.0201
[35]	COBLE A P, CAVALERI M A. Light acclimation optimizes leaf functional traits despite height-related constraints in a canopy shading experiment. Oecologia, 2015, 177(4): 1131-1143. doi: 10.1007/s00442-015-3219-4 pmid: 25596955
[36]	COBLE A P, CAVALERI M A. Light drives vertical gradients of leaf morphology in a sugar maple (Acer saccharum) forest. Tree Physiology, 2014, 34(2): 146-158. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tpt126 pmid: 24531298
[37]	GUENDOUZ A, SEMCHEDDINE N, MOUMENI L, HAFSI M. The effect of supplementary irrigation on leaf area, specific leaf weight, grain yield and water use efficiency in durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) cultivars. Ekin Journal of Crop Breeding and Genetics, 2016, 2(1): 82-89.
[38]	王明泉. 不同种植密度对玉米生理性状、产量和品质影响的研究进展. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(24): 6-10.
	WANG M Q. Research progress of the effects of different density on the physiological characteristics, yield and quality of maize. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2014, 30(24): 6-10. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.2014-0015
[39]	郑英达. 杨树不同功能叶片叶绿素含量变化研究. 现代农业科技, 2020(13): 102-103.
	ZHENG Y D. Study on changes of chlorophyll content of different functional poplar leaves. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology, 2020(13): 102-103. (in Chinese)
[40]	王臣, 尹娟, 赵彦波, 王顺, 张海军. 水氮调控对宁夏旱区马铃薯株高、叶绿素和产量的影响. 节水灌溉, 2020(5): 49-55, 61.
	WANG C, YIN J, ZHAO Y B, WANG S, ZHANG H J. Effects of water and nitrogen regulation on potato plant height, chlorophyll and yield in arid regions of Ningxia. Water Saving Irrigation, 2020(5): 49-55, 61. (in Chinese)
[41]	刘瑞显, 王友华, 陈兵林, 郭文琦, 周治国. 花铃期干旱胁迫下氮素水平对棉花光合作用与叶绿素荧光特性的影响. 作物学报, 2008, 34(4): 675-683.
	LIU R X, WANG Y H, CHEN B L, GUO W Q, ZHOU Z G. Effects of nitrogen levels on photosynthesis and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics under drought stress in cotton flowering and boll- forming stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2008, 34(4): 675-683. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00675
[42]	HOSSEINZADEH S R, AMIRI H, ISMAILI A. Evaluation of photosynthesis, physiological, and biochemical responses of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L. cv. Pirouz) under water deficit stress and use of vermicompost fertilizer. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2018, 17(11): 2426-2437. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61874-4
[43]	常佳悦, 马小龙, 吴故燃, 李广毅, 李建明. 基质栽培下行距和灌水量对塑料大棚番茄光能和水分利用的影响. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 51(3): 111-120, 154.
	CHANG J Y, MA X L, WU G R, LI G Y, LI J M. Effects of row spacing and irrigation amount on light energy and water utilization of tomato in plastic greenhouse under substrate cultivation. Journal of Northwest A&F University (Natural Science Edition), 2023, 51(3): 111-120, 154. (in Chinese)
[44]	CECHIN I, DE FÁTIMA FUMIS T. Effect of nitrogen supply on growth and photosynthesis of sunflower plants grown in the greenhouse. Plant Science, 2004, 166(5): 1379-1385. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2004.01.020
[45]	刘冰, 白子裕, 徐晨, 历艳璐, 王俊鹏, 陈展宇, 张治安. 大豆冠层不同部位叶片氮含量及氮素光合效率的分析. 分子植物育种, 2020, 18(12): 4060-4066.
	LIU B, BAI Z Y, XU C, LI Y L, WANG J P, CHEN Z Y, ZHANG Z A. Analysis of nitrogen content and nitrogen photosynthetic efficiency in different parts of soybean canopy leaves. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2020, 18(12): 4060-4066. (in Chinese)
[46]	李佳帅, 杨再强, 王明田, 韦婷婷, 赵和丽, 江梦圆, 孙擎, 黄琴琴. 水氮耦合对苗期葡萄叶片氮素代谢酶活性的影响. 中国农业气象, 2019, 40(6): 368-379.
	LI J S, YANG Z Q, WANG M T, WEI T T, ZHAO H L, JIANG M Y, SUN Q, HUANG Q Q. Effect of water and nitrogen coupling on nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities in grapevine seedling leaves. Chinese Journal of Agrometeorology, 2019, 40(6): 368-379. (in Chinese)
[47]	张昊, 林涛, 汤秋香, 崔建平, 郭仁松, 王亮, 郑子漂. 种植模式对机采棉冠层光能利用与产量形成的影响. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(12): 54-63.
	ZHANG H, LIN T, TANG Q X, CUI J P, GUO R S, WANG L, ZHENG Z P. Effects of planting pattern on canopy light utilization and yield formation in machine-harvested cotton field. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2021, 37(12): 54-63. (in Chinese)
[48]	AL-HARBI A R, AL-OMRAN A M, EL-ADGHAM F I. Effect of drip irrigation levels and emitters depth on okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) growth. Journal of Applied Sciences, 2008, 8(15): 2764-2769. doi: 10.3923/jas.2008.2764.2769
[49]	ISA M M, IBRAHIM J, BAH S U. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer and inter row spacing on herbage yield and some yield components (number of leaves and number of tillers per plant) of Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana Tan) in the dry sub humid zone of sokoto Nigeria. Asian Journal of Advanced Research and Reports, 2020: 10-21.
[50]	吴宣毅, 曹红霞, 王虎兵, 郝舒雪. 不同种植行距和灌水量对中国西北地区日光温室短季节栽培番茄品质的交互影响. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(5): 940-951. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.05.012. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.05.012
	WU X Y, CAO H X, WANG H B, HAO S X. Effect of planting row spacing and irrigation amount on comprehensive quality of short- season cultivation tomato in solar greenhouse in northwest China. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(5): 940-951. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.05.012. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.05.012

处理 Treatment	操作行行距 Ridge distance (cm)	灌溉水平 Irrigation level		灌水量 Irrigation amount (kg/plant)
处理 Treatment	操作行行距 Ridge distance (cm)	0—40 d	41 d—拉秧 41 d-Seedling pulling	灌水量 Irrigation amount (kg/plant)
P1W1	70	1.25 ET	1.50 ET	28.04
P1W2	70	1.00 ET	1.20 ET	22.44
P2W1	120	1.25 ET	1.50 ET	30.95
P2W2	120	1.00 ET	1.20 ET	24.76
P3W1	170	1.25 ET	1.50 ET	36.3
P3W2	170	1.00 ET	1.20 ET	29.04

		07：00	08：00	09：00	10：00	11：00	12：00	13：00	14：00	15：00	16：00	17：00
棚外PAR PAR outside the shed (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	晴天 Sunny day	35.78	244.53	583.28	883.28	1085.37	1149.53	1032.03	802.87	516.62	210.37	57.03
棚外PAR PAR outside the shed (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	多云天 Cloudy day	13.7	163.7	369.95	539.12	571.2	506.62	469.12	389.53	329.53	122.87	13.7
棚内PAR PAR inside the shed (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	晴天 Sunny day	30.41	207.85	495.79	750.79	922.56	977.1	877.23	682.44	439.13	178.81	48.48
棚内PAR PAR inside the shed (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	多云天 Cloudy day	11.64	139.14	314.46	458.25	485.52	430.63	398.75	331.1	280.1	104.44	11.64
散射光比例 The proportion of scattered light	晴天 Sunny day	1	0.69	0.47	0.42	0.36	0.42	0.55	0.71	0.89	1	1
散射光比例 The proportion of scattered light	多云天 Cloudy day	1	0.75	0.64	0.69	0.81	0.94	0.97	0.99	0.99	1	1

	Pn (µmol·m^-2·s^-1)	LMA (mg·cm^-2)	Chl含量 Chl content (mg·g^-1)	N含量 N content (mg·g^-1)	P含量 P content (mg·g^-1)	K含量 K content (mg·g^-1)
P1W1	13.26±0.15c	4.49±0.05b	1.52±0.01d	37.94±0.74c	7.56±0.10b	99.27±1.27b
P1W2	12.06±0.05d	3.59±0.13d	1.51±0.01d	35.86±0.51c	8.27±0.15a	114.74±1.46a
P2W1	13.95±0.10b	4.39±0.13bc	1.56±0.01c	45.16±0.30ab	6.87±0.19c	101.64±3.07b
P2W2	14.05±0.05b	3.81±0.04d	1.62±0.01b	44.16±1.05b	7.52±0.19b	104.23±1.55b
P3W1	15.56±0.09a	4.91±0.18a	1.60±0.01b	46.84±0.57a	8.42±0.17a	117.29±3.82a
P3W2	14.21±0.29b	4.23±0.05c	1.65±0.03a	45.25±1.14ab	7.12±0.14c	105.76±4.64b

	果形指数 Fruit shape index	果实硬度 Fruit firmness (N)	单果重 Single fruit weight (g)	果实含水量 Fruit moisture content (%)	可溶性固形物 Soluble solids (%)	有机酸 Organic acid (%)	固酸比 Solid acid ratio	可溶性蛋白 Soluble protein (mg∙g^-1)	维生素C Vitamin C (mg∙g^-1)	番茄红素 Lycopene (mg/100 g)
P1W1	0.93±0.04ab	20.55±1.15b	81.21±1.75c	89.08±0.16a	4.63±0.04e	0.75±0.03c	6.22±0.21a	7.43±0.48c	6.93±0.68e	11.61±1.86c
P1W2	0.90±0.02bc	23.35±0.75ab	76.71±0.71d	88.01±0.45ab	6.43±0.13c	1.60±0.11a	4.03±0.22d	8.65±0.47bc	12.28±1.47c	15.52±1.00b
P2W1	0.86±0.01c	17.83±1.49c	109.77±2.41a	88.50±0.10a	4.98±0.04d	0.86±0.11c	5.91±0.78ab	8.78±0.39bc	10.15±1.23d	15.56±1.27b
P2W2	0.89±0.04bc	22.95±1.72b	96.09±1.72b	86.26±2.15b	6.60±0.00c	1.26±0.11b	5.28±0.46bc	9.89±0.84b	13.99±0.51c	20.30±2.39a
P3W1	0.90±0.02bc	21.78±2.25b	113.21±2.34a	89.22±0.01a	6.80±0.14b	1.33±0.09b	5.14±0.42bc	9.58±2.06bc	17.20±0.64b	15.77±0.55b
P3W2	0.96±0.02a	25.73±1.37a	99.78±0.94b	88.64±0.21a	7.95±0.15a	1.73±0.16a	4.64±0.51cd	17.54±0.44a	21.80±0.91a	17.29±0.61ab
P	**	**	***	NS	***	***	NS	***	***	**
W	NS	***	***	*	***	***	***	***	***	**
P*W	*	NS	**	NS	***	**	*	***	NS	NS

	X1	X2	X3	X4	X5	X6	X7	X8	X9
PCA	-0.0247	0.2008	0.1215	0.2765	0.2241	-0.1686	0.2063	0.2813	0.3167
AHP	0.0168	0.0371	0.0259	0.1522	0.0418	0.2970	0.0961	0.1038	0.2294
熵权法 Entropy method	0.1025	0.111	0.1427	0.1066	0.1069	0.1011	0.1259	0.1046	0.0987
基于博弈论的组合赋权法 Combination weighting method based on game theory	0.0273	0.0462	0.0402	0.1466	0.0498	0.273	0.0998	0.1039	0.2134