播种方式对种子萌发环境及棉花出苗、生长的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.12.006

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】黄河流域棉区现行播后覆膜技术依赖人工放苗定苗，制约全程机械化发展。探究西北内陆棉区干播湿出技术在黄河流域的适应性，通过比较不同播种方式对种子萌发环境及棉花出苗率、苗期生长的影响，揭示关键环境制约因素，为机械化种植棉花技术优化提供理论支撑。【方法】于2023—2024年以冀863为供试材料，设置露地单粒直播（T1）、单粒播后覆膜（T2）、干播湿出单粒播种（T3）、干播湿出双粒播种（T4）4个试验处理，在河北省曲周县研究不同播种方式对土壤环境、棉花出苗、棉花地上部和根系生长变化的影响。【结果】相较于露地单粒直播，单粒播后覆膜、干播湿出单粒播种的土壤5 cm处地温、土壤含水量、出苗率、株高、地上部干物质重、根系长度、表面积、体积和根系活力显著增加，土壤紧实度、出苗天数和根系直径显著降低；相较于单粒播后覆膜，2023和2024年干播湿出单粒播种的播种30 d内土壤5 cm处地温日较差分别显著降低3.67和1.58 ℃，播种10 d内土壤紧实度分别显著降低9.36%和27.06%，出苗天数在2024年显著降低0.6 d，根系长度、表面积、体积和根系活力在2023和2024年显著增加；相较于干播湿出双粒播种，2023和2024年单粒播种的出苗时间显著增加、出苗率显著降低，但地上部干物质重显著增加13.98%和55.00%。结构方程模型结果表明，不同播种方式通过改变土壤5 cm处地温、5 cm处地温日较差、土壤含水量和土壤紧实度影响棉花出苗率，而苗期干物质重则主要受到土壤含水量、株高和土壤紧实度的直接影响。【结论】在黄河流域棉区，干播湿出通过降低土壤5 cm处地温日较差和土壤紧实度来提高出苗速度和出苗率，促进苗齐、苗壮，以每穴播种1粒种子为最优。

关键词: 棉花, 播种方式, 干播湿出, 出苗率, 苗期生长

Abstract:

【Objective】The current post-planting film-covering technology in the Yellow River Basin cotton-growing areas relies on manual seedling release and thinning, which hinders the development of full-scale mechanization. This study explored the adaptability of the dry sowing and wet emergence technology (used in northwestern inland cotton regions) to the Yellow River Basin. By comparing the effects of different sowing methods on seed germination environment, cotton emergence rate, and seedling growth, this study aimed to identify key environmental constraints and provide the theoretical support for optimizing mechanized planting techniques. 【Method】From 2023 to 2024, using the cotton cultivar Ji863 as the experimental material, four treatments were implemented: single-seed seeding without mulching (T1), single-seed post-planting film covering (T2), dry sowing and wet emergence with single-seed sowing (T3), and dry sowing and wet emergence with double-seed sowing (T4). The study was conducted in Quzhou County, Hebei Province, and the effects of these treatments on soil environment, cotton emergence, and growth of above-ground and root systems were evaluated. 【Result】Compared with T1, T2 and T3 significantly increased soil temperature at 5 cm, soil moisture content, emergence rate, plant height, above-ground dry matter weight, root length, root surface area, root volume, and root vigor, while significantly reduced soil compaction, emergence time, and root diameter. Compared with T2, in 2023 and 2024, T3 reduced the daily temperature range at 5 cm soil depth by 3.67 and 1.58 ℃ within 30 days after sowing, and reduced soil compaction by 9.36% and 27.06% within 10 days after sowing, respectively, which decreased emergence days in 2024 by 0.6 days, and increased root length, surface area, volume, and root activity in both years. Compared with T4, single-grain sowing in 2023 and 2024 significantly increased emergence time and decreased emergence rate but increased aboveground dry matter weight by 13.98% and 55.00%. The structural equation model showed that different sowing methods affected cotton seedling emergence rate by altering soil temperature at 5 cm depth, daily temperature range, soil moisture content, and soil compaction, while seedling dry matter weight was mainly affected by soil moisture content, plant height, and soil compaction. 【Conclusion】In the Yellow River Basin cotton areas, the dry-sowing and wet-emergence improved emergence speed and rate by reducing the diurnal temperature fluctuation at 5 cm and soil compaction, thereby promoting uniform and robust seedlings, and sowing one seed per hole was the optimal strategy.

Key words: cotton, sowing method, dry sowing with wet emergence, emergence rate, seedling growth

董明, 祁虹, 张谦, 王燕, 王树林, 冯国艺, 梁青龙, 郭宝生. 播种方式对种子萌发环境及棉花出苗、生长的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(12): 2346-2357.

DONG Ming, QI Hong, ZHANG Qian, WANG Yan, WANG ShuLin, FENG GuoYi, LIANG QingLong, GUO BaoSheng. The Impact of Sowing Methods on the Seed Germination Environment and Cotton Emergence and Growth[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(12): 2346-2357.

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.0578-1752.2025.12.006

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2025/V58/I12/2346

图/表 8

图1

图2

图3

表1

图4

表2

图5

表3

参考文献 38

[1]	桑春晓. 棉花种植及生产机械化发展研究. 安徽农业科学, 2018, 46(5): 227-230.
	SANG C X. Study on mechanization of cotton planting and production. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 46(5): 227-230. (in Chinese)
[2]	平英华, 刘先才, 王振伟. 基于农艺农机融合的华北棉区棉花生产全程机械化技术规范研究. 安徽农学通报, 2018, 24(16): 83-86, 130.
	PING Y H, LIU X C, WANG Z W. Study on technical specifications of cotton production mechanization in North China cotton region based on agronomical integration. Anhui Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 24(16): 83-86, 130. (in Chinese)
[3]	毛树春. 我国棉花种植技术的现代化问题: 兼论“十二五” 棉花栽培相关研究. 中国棉花, 2010, 37(3): 2-6. doi: 10.11963/issn.1000-632X.20100301
	MAO S C. Modernization of cotton planting technology in China: Also on the related research of cotton cultivation in the 12th Five-Year Plan. China Cotton, 2010, 37(3): 2-6. (in Chinese)
[4]	陈传强, 蒋帆, 张晓洁, 张桂芝, 李浩. 我国棉花生产全程机械化生产发展现状、问题与对策. 中国棉花, 2017, 44(12): 1-4. doi: 10.11963/1000-632X.ccqccq.20171220
	CHEN C Q, JIANG F, ZHANG X J, ZHANG G Z, LI H. The present situation, problems and countermeasures of mechanized production of cotton in China. China Cotton, 2017, 44(12): 1-4. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11963/1000-632X.ccqccq.20171220
[5]	中国农业科学院棉花研究所. 中国棉花栽培学. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2013.
	Institute of Cotton Research of CAAS. Chinese Cotton Cultivation Science. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific and Technical Publishes, 2013. (in Chinese)
[6]	赵存鹏, 赵贵元, 郭宝生, 耿军义. 棉花机械播种方式的现状及存在问题. 河北农机, 2017(4): 18.
	ZHAO C P, ZHAO G Y, GUO B S, GENG J Y. Present situation and existing problems of cotton mechanical sowing methods. Hebei Agricultural Machinery, 2017(4): 18. (in Chinese)
[7]	DAI J L, DONG H Z. Intensive cotton farming technologies in China: Achievements, challenges and countermeasures. Field Crops Research, 2014, 155: 99-110.
[8]	毛作林, 李举文, 宋玉萍, 卜东升. 阿克苏盐碱地植棉干播湿出技术. 农村科技, 2020(6): 19-21.
	MAO Z L, LI J W, SONG Y P, BU D S. Dry sowing and wet out technology of cotton planting in Aksu saline-alkali land. Rural Science & Technology, 2020(6): 19-21. (in Chinese)
[9]	DING Y, MA J Q, ZHANG J H, BAI Y G, CUI B F, HAO X P, FU G T, ZHENG M, DING B X. Response of photosynthesis, population physiological indexes, and yield of cotton in dry areas to the new technology of “dry sowing and wet emergence”. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2024, 15: 1487832.
[10]	MA J Q, DING Y, ZHANG J H, BAI Y G, CUI B F, HAO X P, ZHENG M, DING B X, YANG S G. Impact of "dry sowing and wet emergence" water regulation on physiological growth characteristics and water productivity of cotton fields in southern Xinjiang Province. Agronomy, 2024, 14(4): 734.
[11]	郑子漂, 徐海江, 努斯热提·吾斯曼, 魏鑫, 郭仁松, 张大伟, 赖成霞, 王亮, 林涛, 张娜, 霍建平. 新疆喀什植棉区“干播湿出”技术应用现状及建议. 中国棉花, 2022, 49(12): 1-3.
	ZHENG Z P. XU H J, WUSIM N, WEI X, GUO R S, ZHANG D W, LAI C X, WANG L, LIN T, ZHANG N, HUO J P. Current application status and development suggestions of "dry sowing and wet emergence" mode in Kashgar (Kashi) cotton planting area, Xinjiang. China Cotton, 2022, 49(12): 1-3. (in Chinese)
[12]	王延琴, 杨伟华, 许红霞, 周大云, 冯新爱. 不同生态区及收获期对棉子播种品质的影响. 棉花学报, 2003(1): 42-46.
	WANG Y Q, YANG W H, XU H X, ZHOU D Y, FENG X A. Sowing quality of cottonseed effected by different ecological area and harvesting date. Cotton Science, 2003(1): 42-46. (in Chinese)
[13]	杨明达, 张素瑜, 李帅, 郑东方, 杨慎骄, 关小康, 王同朝. 不同播种灌溉方式对夏玉米出苗、干物质积累及转运和产量的影响. 河南农业科学, 2024, 53(1): 22-31.
	YANG M D, ZHANG S Y, LI S, ZHENG D F, YANG S J, GUAN X K, WANG T C. Effects of different sowing and irrigation methods on seedling emergence, dry matter accumulation, transport and yield of summer maize. Journal of Henan Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 53(1): 22-31. (in Chinese)
[14]	徐敏, 李憬霖, 叶福民, 朱鹤, 王子胜. 温湿度对棉花种子萌发的影响研究. 农学学报, 2022, 12(10): 10-14, 20. doi: 10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2021-0176
	XU M, LI J L, YE F M, ZHU H, WANG Z S. Effects of temperature and humidity on cotton seed germination. Journal of Agriculture, 2022, 12(10): 10-14, 20. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2021-0176
[15]	娄善伟, 托合提·艾买提, 司地克江·艾外力, 马腾飞, 边洋, 帕尔哈提·买买提, 张鹏忠. 苗期地温对棉花前期生育进程的影响研究. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(35): 13-16. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb17100097
	LOU S, AIMAITI T, AIWAILI S, MA T F, BIAN Y, MAIMAITI P, ZHANG P Z. Soil temperature at seedling stage: effect on early growth process of cotton. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(35): 13-16. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb17100097
[16]	张鹤云, 姚成, 吴爱琼. 不同温度对棉种发芽的影响. 中国棉花, 2001, 28(12): 14-15.
	ZHANG H Y, YAO C, WU A Q. Effects of different temperatures on cotton seed germination. China Cotton, 2001, 28(12): 14-15. (in Chinese)
[17]	唐永齐, 张友良, 王凤新, 窦允清, 李躲, 冯绍元. 地膜对花生土壤水热环境和生长的影响. 灌溉排水学报, 2024, 43(1): 17-27.
	TANG Y Q, ZHANG Y L, WANG F X, DOU Y Q, LI D, FENG S Y. Effects of different degradable film and ordinary plastic film on soil hydrothermal conditions and peanut growth. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2024, 43(1): 17-27. (in Chinese)
[18]	张治, 田富强, 钟瑞森, 胡和平. 新疆膜下滴灌棉田生育期地温变化规律. 农业工程学报, 2011, 27(1): 44-51.
	ZHANG Z, TIAN F Q, ZHONG R S, HU H P. Spatial and Temporal pattern of soil temperature in cotton field under mulched drip irrigation condition in Xinjiang. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2011, 27(1): 44-51. (in Chinese)
[19]	徐爽, 阚雨晨. 不同肥力水平的土壤紧实度与含水量的相关度分析. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(36): 94-100. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-1223
	XU S, KAN Y C. Correlation of soil compactness and water content under different fertility levels. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(36): 94-100. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-1223
[20]	李少昆, 王克如, 冯聚凯, 谢瑞芝, 高世菊. 玉米秸秆还田与不同耕作方式下影响小麦出苗的因素. 作物学报, 2006, 32(3): 463-465, 478.
	LI S K, WANG K R, FENG J K, XIE R Z, GAO S J. Factors affecting seeding emergence in winter wheat under different tillage patterns with maize stalk mulching returned to the field. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2006, 32(3): 463-465, 478. (in Chinese)
[21]	VAZ C M P, MANIERI J M, DE MARIA I C, TULLER M. Modeling and correction of soil penetration resistance for varying soil water content. Geoderma, 2011, 166(1): 92-101.
[22]	袁席天, 白云岗, 孙三民, 刘洪波, 郑明, 肖军. 干播湿出模式下不同出苗水对棉花生理性状及产量的影响. 节水灌溉, 2022(9): 46-51.
	YUAN X T, BAI Y G, SUN S M, LIU H B, ZHENG M, XIAO J. Effects of different seedling emergence water on physiological characters and yield of cotton under dry sowing and wet emergence mode. Water Saving Irrigation, 2022(9): 46-51. (in Chinese)
[23]	王延琴, 杨伟华, 许红霞, 周大云, 冯新爱, 匡猛. 水分胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响. 棉花学报, 2009, 21(1): 73-76. doi: 10.11963/cs090114
	WANG Y Q, YANG W H, XU H X, ZHOU D Y, FENG X A, KUANG M. Effect of water stress on germination of cotton seeds. Cotton Science, 2009, 21(1): 73-76. (in Chinese)
[24]	李瑞春, 李憬霖, 徐敏, 叶福民, 朱鹤, 王子胜. 温湿度对棉花种子萌发过程中生理生化反应影响的研究. 种子, 2020, 39(12): 20-24.
	LI R C, LI J L, XU M, YE F M, ZHU H, WANG Z S. Effects of temperature and humidity on physiological and biochemical indicators during cotton seed germination. Seed, 2020, 39(12): 20-24. (in Chinese)
[25]	肖让, 姚宝林. 干播湿出膜下滴灌棉花现蕾初期地温变化规律. 西北农业学报, 2013, 22(5): 49-54.
	XIAO R, YAO B L. Soil temperature variation in cotton budding pre-stage with drip irrigation under mulch with dry seeding and wet emergence method. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2013, 22(5): 49-54. (in Chinese)
[26]	董合忠. 棉花重要生物学和栽培特性及其在丰产简化栽培中的应用. 中国棉花, 2013, 40(9): 1-4. doi: 10.11963/issn.1000-632X.20130901
	DONG H Z. Major biological characteristics of cotton and their application in extensive high-yielding cultivation. China Cotton, 2013, 40(9): 1-4. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11963/issn.1000-632X.20130901
[27]	张玉芹, 杨恒山, 李从锋, 赵明, 罗方, 张瑞富. 条带耕作错位种植对灌区春玉米产量形成与冠根特征的影响. 作物学报, 2020, 46(6): 902-913. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.93053
	ZHANG Y Q, YANG H S, LI C F, ZHAO M, LUO F, ZHANG R F. Effects of strip-till with staggered planting on yield formation and shoot-root characteristics of spring maize in irrigation area of Xiliaohe plain. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2020, 46(6): 902-913. (in Chinese)
[28]	洪彦彬, 周桂元, 李少雄, 刘海燕, 陈小平, 温世杰, 梁炫强. 花生根部特征与地上部分性状的相关性分析. 热带作物学报, 2009, 30(5): 657-660.
	HONG Y B, ZHOU G Y, LI S X, LIU H Y, CHEN X P, WEN S J, LIANG X Q. Correlation analysis of root and aboveground traits in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2009, 30(5): 657-660. (in Chinese)
[29]	梁璐, 周宝元, 高卓晗, 王瑞, 王新兵, 赵明, 李从锋. 不同品种玉米根-冠生长对土壤紧实胁迫的差异性响应特征. 作物学报, 2024, 50(8): 2053-2066. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.33071
	LIANG L, ZHOU B Y, GAO Z H, WANG R, WANG X B, ZHAO M, LI C F. Root and shoot growth of different maize varieties in response to soil compaction stress. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(8): 2053-2066. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.33071
[30]	张合理, 罗宏海, 李璐, 张亚黎, 张旺锋. 膜下滴灌高产棉花根、冠生物量累积特性研究. 棉花学报, 2015, 27(5): 427-434. doi: 10.11963/issn.1002-7807.201505006
	ZHANG H L, LUO H H, LI L, ZHANG Y L, ZHANG W F. Characteristics of root and shoot biomass accumulation in high-yield cotton fields with mulch-drip irrigation. Cotton Science, 2015, 27(5): 427-434. (in Chinese)
[31]	MCKENZIE D C, GREENHALGH S E, KOPPI A J, MACLEOD D A, MCBRATNEY A B. Cotton root growth in a compacted Vertisol (Grey Vertosol). II. Correlation with image analysis parameters. Soil Research, 2001, 39(5): 1169.
[32]	PANDEY B K, HUANG G Q, BHOSALE R, HARTMAN S, STURROCK C J, JOSE L, MARTIN O C, KARADY M, VOESENEK L A C J, LJUNG K, LYNCH J P, BROWN K M, WHALLEY W R, MOONEY S J, ZHANG D B, BENNETT M J. Plant roots sense soil compaction through restricted ethylene diffusion. Science, 2021, 371(6526): 276-280. doi: 10.1126/science.abf3013 pmid: 33446554
[33]	HUANG G Q, KILIC A, KARADY M, ZHANG J, MEHRA P, SONG X Y, STURROCK C J, ZHU W W, QIN H, HARTMAN S, SCHNEIDER H M, BHOSALE R, DODD I C, SHARP R E, HUANG R F, MOONEY S J, LIANG W Q, BENNETT M J, ZHANG D B, PANDEY B K. Ethylene inhibits rice root elongation in compacted soil via ABA-and auxin-mediated mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022, 119(30): e2201072119.
[34]	BUSSCHER W J, BAUER P J. Soil strength, cotton root growth and lint yield in a southeastern USA coastal loamy sand. Soil and Tillage Research, 2003, 74(2): 151-159.
[35]	董合忠, 杨国正, 田立文, 郑曙峰. 棉花轻简化栽培. 北京: 科学出版社, 2016.
	DONG H Z, YANG G Z, TIAN L W, ZHENG S F. Light and Simplified Cultivation of Cotton. Beijing: Science Press, 2016. (in Chinese)
[36]	董合忠, 杨国正, 李亚兵, 田立文, 代建龙, 孔祥强. 棉花轻简化栽培关键技术及其生理生态学机制. 作物学报, 2017, 43(5): 631-639.
	DONG H Z, YANG G Z, LI Y B, TIAN L W, DAI J L, KONG X Q. Key technologies for light and simplified cultivation of cotton and their eco-physiological mechanisms. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2017, 43(5): 631-639. (in Chinese)
[37]	王一琪, 张文太, 田长彦, 买文选. 新疆南疆棉花“干播湿出”种植技术应用现状、面临的问题及解决策略. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(3): 62-65. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.2023-0152
	WANG Y Q, ZHANG W T, TIAN C Y, MAI W X. Application, problems and solution strategies of "dry sowing and wet emergence" planting technology of cotton in southern Xinjiang. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(3): 62-65. (in Chinese)
[38]	WANG D W, WANG Z H, LV T B, ZONG R, ZHU Y, ZHANG J Z, WANG T Y. Effects of drip tape modes on soil hydrothermal conditions and cotton yield (Gossypium hirsutum L.) under machine-harvest patterns. PeerJ, 2021, 9: e12004.

年度 Year	处理 Treatment	出苗时间 Emergence Time (d)	出苗率 Emergence Rate (%)
2023	T1	10.5±0.92a	74.17±4.92c
	T2	7.5±0.70b	88.17±2.48b
	T3	7.2±0.40b	92.00±4.00b
	T4	6.6±0.53c	98.00±2.45a
2024	T1	5.9±0.25a	81.67±6.06c
	T2	4.8±0.20b	89.17±5.85b
	T3	4.2±0.26c	91.67±4.08b
	T4	3.3±0.20d	98.33±2.58a

年度 Year	处理 Treatment	根系长度 Root length (cm)	根系表面积 Root surface area (cm²)	根系体积 Root volume (cm³)	根系平均直径 Average root diameter (mm)	根系活力 Root vigor (mg·g^-1·h^-1)
2023	T1	459.11±41.59b	78.81±9.70c	1.08±0.18b	0.55±0.03ab	190.82±24.33c
	T2	745.19±198.11b	138.03±22.33b	2.06±0.12ab	0.60±0.06a	219.33±4.97bc
	T3	1508.74±444.48a	236.27±48.55a	3.01±0.34a	0.52±0.07ab	343.70±63.091a
	T4	1460.31±356.35b	204.75±38.27bc	2.31±0.29b	0.44±0.02b	282.86±23.20ab
2024	T1	469.12±130.41b	109.43±10.15b	2.18±0.98b	0.78±0.00ab	203.78±6.26d
	T2	601.85±402.40b	139.38±60.92b	2.92±0.83b	0.80±0.10a	237.65±17.88bc
	T3	2740.48±1082.27a	425.89±63.50a	6.25±0.04a	0.55±0.03b	356.45±24.89a
	T4	1113.03±134.14b	175.55±11.24b	2.74±0.38b	0.60±0.08ab	299.89±9.89b

	性状 Trait	直接效应 Direct effect	间接效应 Indirect effect	总效应 Total effect
ER	ST	0.914	-0.046	0.868
	SW	-0.465	0.791	0.327
	STR	-0.252	0.000	-0.252
	SC	-0.512	-0.851	-1.371
ED	ST	-0.298	0.017	-0.281
	SW	0.000	-0.867	-0.867
	STR	0.092	0.000	0.092
	SC	0.824	0.284	1.108
DW	SW	1.075	-0.176	0.899
	PH	0.281	0.000	0.281
	SC	0.388	-0.059	0.329