黄淮地区玉米大豆复合种植模式的综合效益评估

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.23.010

中国农业科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (23): 4936-4951.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.23.010

• 黄淮地区玉米大豆复合种植丰产增效技术研发 • 上一篇下一篇

黄淮地区玉米大豆复合种植模式的综合效益评估

杨舒淇¹(), 赵影星³, 钱欣², 张学鹏³, 孟维伟³, 隋鹏¹, 李宗新²^,^*(), 陈源泉¹^,^*()

¹ 中国农业大学农学院，北京 100193
² 山东省农业科学院/小麦玉米国家工程研究中心，济南 250100
³ 山东省农业科学院作物研究所，济南 250100

收稿日期:2025-04-28 接受日期:2025-08-28 出版日期:2025-12-01 发布日期:2025-12-09
通信作者:
李宗新，E-mail：sdaucliff@sina.com。
李宗新，E-mail：sdaucliff@sina.com。
联系方式: 杨舒淇，E-mail：yshuqi@cau.edu.cn。
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划(2022YFD2300905); 国家重点研发计划(2022YFD2300901); 山东省重点研发计划(2023CXGC010703-03); 山东省玉米产业技术体系(SDAIT-02-07); 山东省自然科学基金(ZR2023QC150)

Comprehensive Evaluation of the Maize-Soybean Intercropping Pattern in the Huang-Huai Region

YANG ShuQi¹(), ZHAO YingXing³, QIAN Xin², ZHANG XuePeng³, MENG WeiWei³, SUI Peng¹, LI ZongXin²^,^*(), CHEN YuanQuan¹^,^*()

¹ College of Agronomy and Biotechnology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193
² Shandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences/National Engineering Research Center of Wheat and Maize, Jinan 250100
³ Crop Research Institute, Shandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Jinan 250100

Received:2025-04-28 Accepted:2025-08-28 Published:2025-12-01 Online:2025-12-09

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】 针对“十四五”国家重点研发计划“黄淮玉米大豆复合种植丰产增效技术研发与集成示范”布局在山东、河南、安徽、江苏4省的7个技术示范区及其周边种植户，开展产能表现、经济效益和生态效益的系统评价，以期为区域玉米大豆复合种植模式优化提供科学评价依据。【方法】 构建涵盖产量、经济与生态三大维度的综合评价指标体系，基于7个示范区及其周边种植户的试验监测和实地调研，评估各示范区与区域周边种植户玉米大豆复合种植的综合效益差异。【结果】 产量方面，项目区各示范田玉米大豆复合种植模式总体均比周边种植户平均增产10%—19%；经济效益方面，示范区的单位土地产值平均比周边种植户高出5%—21%，但由于投入成本增加了7%—15%，导致单位土地净效益仅高出2%—18%；生态影响方面，示范区的碳足迹比周边种植户高出约9%—34%、氮足迹高出5%—45%，主要原因是化肥和柴油投入增加。基于周边种植户较示范区在产量、经济、生态3个维度的差异表现，7个示范区与周边种植户的综合差异指数等级（CVI）均处于中等差异水平（对应值为3级）。其中，各区域经济趋近指数等级（ECI）表现优异（等级3—4级），尤以土地产出率差异最小（鲁西北、皖北和苏北地区达最优等级5）。这表明，尽管周边种植户产量与土地产值较低，但示范区的高投入降低了其单位产出收益效率，客观上缩小了与周边种植户的净收益差距，支撑了较高的ECI值。限制各区域综合指数提升的主要原因在于产量较低，产量趋近指数（YCI）均集中在较差的1—2级水平。【结论】 项目技术创新与应用对促进黄淮地区玉米大豆复合种植的产量和经济效益具有良好的效果，但也存在成本上升与生态压力增大的问题。如何节本增效是下一步技术创新需要加强的重点攻关方向。

关键词: 黄淮地区, 玉米大豆复合种植, 产量, 经济效益, 生态影响, 实证分析

Abstract:

【Objective】 Based on of “High-Yield and High-Efficiency Maize-Soybean Intercropping Technology R&D and Integrated Demonstration” project of National Key Research and Development Program in the 14th Five-Year Plan seven demonstration sites were established across Shandong, Henan, Anhui, and Jiangsu Provinces. Key technology research and integrated demonstrations were conducted. To comprehensively evaluate the yield performance, economic benefits, and ecological effects of the project demonstration sites, this study conducted a systematic assessment using neighboring farmers as a control, so as to provide a scientific basis for optimizing maize-soybean intercropping in the region. 【Method】 A comprehensive evaluation index system was established, covering three dimensions: yield, economy, and ecology. Through field surveys in seven demonstration sites and their neighboring farms, the differences in overall benefits of maize-soybean intercropping between the demonstration fields and local farmers were assessed. 【Result】 For yield, the intercropping in the demonstration fields was about 10% to 19% higher compared with neighboring farmers. In terms of economic benefits, the net output value per unit area in the demonstration sites was 5% to 21% higher on average. However, input costs increased by 7% to 15%, resulting in a net benefit per unit area only 2% to 18% higher. From an ecological perspective, the carbon footprint of the demonstration areas was approximately 9% to 34% higher than that of surrounding farmers, and the nitrogen footprint was 5% to 45% higher. This was mainly due to the increased use of fertilizers and diesel to ensure high yields. Based on the differences in yield, economic, and ecological dimensions between surrounding farmers and the demonstration areas, the CVI (comprehensive variation index) levels of all seven demonstration areas were at a moderate difference level (corresponding value of level 3). Among them, the ECI (economic convergence index) performed well (levels 3 to 4), especially with the smallest land output rate differences (the North Shandong, North Anhui, and North Jiangsu regions reaching the optimal level 5). This further proved that although surrounding farmers had lower yields and land output, the high inputs in the demonstration areas reduced the unit output efficiency, objectively narrowing the net profit gap with surrounding farmers and supporting the higher ECI value. The main limitation for the improvement of the comprehensive index in all regions was the relatively low yield, as the YCI (yield convergence index) of all regions concentrated at the poor level of 1 to 2. 【Conclusion】 The technological innovation and application of the project had a positive effect on promoting the yield and economic benefits of maize and soybean intercropping in the Huang-Huai region. But its sustainable promotion still faces challenges, such as rising costs and increasing ecological pressure. Finding ways to reduce costs and improve efficiency was therefore a key focus for the next stage of technological innovation.

Key words: Huang-Huai region, maize-soybean intercropping, yield, economic benefits, ecological impacts, empirical analysis

杨舒淇, 赵影星, 钱欣, 张学鹏, 孟维伟, 隋鹏, 李宗新, 陈源泉. 黄淮地区玉米大豆复合种植模式的综合效益评估[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(23): 4936-4951.

YANG ShuQi, ZHAO YingXing, QIAN Xin, ZHANG XuePeng, MENG WeiWei, SUI Peng, LI ZongXin, CHEN YuanQuan. Comprehensive Evaluation of the Maize-Soybean Intercropping Pattern in the Huang-Huai Region[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(23): 4936-4951.

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.0578-1752.2025.23.010

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2025/V58/I23/4936

图/表 13

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

表8

表9

表10

表11

图1

表12

参考文献 55

[1]	中华人民共和国国家统计局. 国家数据, 2024. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/sjjd/202401/t20240118_1946695.html.
	National Bureau of Statistics of the People's Republic of China. National Data, 2024. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/sjjd/202401/t20240118_1946695.html. (in Chinese)
[2]	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 全国大豆玉米带状复合种植技术方案, 2022. http://www.moa.gov.cn/gk/nszd_1/2022/202201/t20220126_6387740.htm.
	Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People's Republic of China. Technical Plan for Maize-Soybean Strip Intercropping in China, 2022. http://www.moa.gov.cn/gk/nszd_1/2022/202201/t20220126_6387740.htm. (in Chinese)
[3]	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 2023年前三季度农业农村经济运行情况, 2023. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/202310/content_6911099.
	Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People's Republic of China. Agricultural and Rural Economic Operation in the First Three Quarters of 2023, 2023. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/202310/content_ 6911099. (in Chinese)
[4]	LIU J, YANG W Y. Soybean maize strip intercropping: A solution for maintaining food security in China. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2024, 23(7): 2503-2506. doi: 10.1016/j.jia.2024.02.001
[5]	王添姿. 黄淮海地区玉米\|\|大豆行比配置对作物生长和光能利用的影响[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2025.
	WANG T Z. Effects of the row ratio configuration of maize and soybean intercropping on the crop growth and light energy utilization in the Huang-Huai-Hai region[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2025. (in Chinese)
[6]	ESPINOSA-TASÓN J, BERBEL J, GUTIÉRREZ-MARTÍN C. Energized water: Evolution of water-energy nexus in the Spanish irrigated agriculture, 1950-2017. Agricultural Water Management, 2020, 233: 106073. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106073
[7]	SADEGHI S H, SHARIFI MOGHADAM E, DELAVAR M, ZARGHAMI M. Application of water-energy-food nexus approach for designating optimal agricultural management pattern at a watershed scale. Agricultural Water Management, 2020, 233: 106071. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106071
[8]	WANG X Z, ZHANG Q, XU L S, TONG Y J, JIA X P, TIAN H. Water-energy-carbon nexus assessment of China’s iron and steel industry: Case study from plant level. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 253: 119910. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119910
[9]	FAN X, ZHANG W, CHEN W W, CHEN B. Land-water-energy nexus in agricultural management for greenhouse gas mitigation. Applied Energy, 2020, 265: 114796. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114796
[10]	CHAI J, SHI H T, LU Q Y, HU Y. Quantifying and predicting the Water-Energy-Food-Economy-Society-Environment Nexus based on Bayesian networks - A case study of China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 256: 120266. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120266
[11]	FAO. The state of food and agriculture 2023 - Revealing the true cost of food to transform agrifood systems, 2023. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc7724zh.
[12]	RASEDUZZAMAN M, JENSEN E S. Does intercropping enhance yield stability in arable crop production? A meta-analysis. European Journal of Agronomy, 2017, 91: 25-33. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2017.09.009
[13]	TILMAN D. Benefits of intensive agricultural intercropping. Nature Plants, 2020, 6(6): 604-605. doi: 10.1038/s41477-020-0677-4 pmid: 32483327
[14]	GAO Y, DUAN A W, QIU X Q, LIU Z G, SUN J S, ZHANG J P, WANG H Z. Distribution of roots and root length density in a maize/ soybean strip intercropping system. Agricultural Water Management, 2010, 98(1): 199-212. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2010.08.021
[15]	VAN OORT P A J, GOU F, STOMPH T J, VAN DER WERF W. Effects of strip width on yields in relay-strip intercropping: A simulation study. European Journal of Agronomy, 2020, 112: 125936. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2019.125936
[16]	VAN ASTEN P J A, WAIREGI L W I, MUKASA D, URINGI N O. Agronomic and economic benefits of coffee-banana intercropping in Uganda’s smallholder farming systems. Agricultural Systems, 2011, 104(4): 326-334. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2010.12.004
[17]	AI D. Effect of monoculture and intercropping on radiation use efficiency and yield of maize and soybean. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture. 2009.
[18]	LI C J, HOFFLAND E, KUYPER T W, YU Y, ZHANG C C, LI H G, ZHANG F S, VAN DER WERF W. Syndromes of production in intercropping impact yield gains. Nature Plants, 2020, 6(6): 653-660. doi: 10.1038/s41477-020-0680-9 pmid: 32483328
[19]	LI X F, WANG Z G, BAO X G, SUN J H, YANG S C, WANG P, WANG C B, WU J P, LIU X R, TIAN X L, et al. Long-term increased grain yield and soil fertility from intercropping. Nature Sustainability, 2021, 4(11): 943-950. doi: 10.1038/s41893-021-00767-7
[20]	WANG X L, WANG W, GUAN Y S, XIAN Y R, HUANG Z X, FENG H Y, CHEN Y. A joint use of emergy evaluation, carbon footprint and economic analysis for sustainability assessment of grain system in China during 2000-2015. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2018, 17(12): 2822-2835. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(18)61928-8
[21]	YANG X L, SUI P, ZHANG X P, DAI H C, YAN P, LI C, WANG X L, CHEN Y Q. Environmental and economic consequences analysis of cropping systems from fragmented to concentrated farmland in the North China Plain based on a joint use of life cycle assessment, emergy and economic analysis. Journal of Environmental Management, 2019, 251: 109588. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109588
[22]	袁晓婷, 汤松, 罗凯, 蒋靖怡, 杨文钰, 雍太文. 大豆玉米带状复合种植产量与效益分析: 基于全国16个示范省(市、区)的调查数据. 四川农业大学学报, 2023, 41(5): 834-841, 872.
	YUAN X T, TANG S, LUO K, JIANG J Y, YANG W Y, YONG T W. Yield and benefit analysis of soybean and maize strip compound planting: Based on survey data of 16 demonstration provinces (municipalities, autonomous regions). Journal of Sichuan Agricultural University, 2023, 41(5): 834-841, 872. (in Chinese)
[23]	ZOU J, YANG Y H, SHI S H, LI W J, ZHAO X, HUANG J, ZHANG H L, LIU K, HARRISON M T, CHEN F, YIN X G. Farm-scale practical strategies to reduce carbon footprint and emergy while increasing economic benefits in crop production in the North China plain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 359: 131996. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131996
[24]	ZHANG W, LU J S, BAI J, KHAN A, LIU S T, ZHAO L, WANG W, ZHU S G, LI X G, TIAN X H, LI S Q, XIONG Y C. Introduction of soybean into maize field reduces N₂O emission intensity via optimizing nitrogen source utilization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024, 442: 141052. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141052
[25]	SALVAGIOTTI F, CASSMAN K G, SPECHT J E, WALTERS D T, WEISS A, DOBERMANN A. Nitrogen uptake, fixation and response to fertilizer N in soybeans: A review. Field Crops Research, 2008, 108(1): 1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2008.03.001
[26]	CUI J X, SUI P, WRIGHT D L, WANG D, SUN B B, RAN M M, SHEN Y W, LI C, CHEN Y Q. Carbon emission of maize-based cropping systems in the North China Plain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 213: 300-308. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.174
[27]	N₂O emissions from managed soils, and CO₂ emissions from lime and urea application. Change. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2019.
[28]	YANG X L, LIU X H, XU W X, LI Z J, CHU Q Q, CHEN F. The missteps, improvement and application of carbon footprint methodology in farmland ecosystems with the case study of analyzing the carbon efficiency of China's intensive farming. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2013, 34: 1-11.
[29]	四川大学, 中国亿科环境科技有限公司. 中国生命周期基础数据库(Version.0.7). http://www.ike-global.com/#/products-2/chinese-lca-database-clcd.
	Sichuan University, IKE Environmental Technology co., LTD. Chinese Life Cycle Database (CLCD) (Version 0.7). http://www.ike-global.com/#/products-2/chinese-lca-database-clcd. (in Chinese)
[30]	中国城市温室气体工作组. 中国产品全生命周期温室气体排放系数库. https://lca.cityghg.com/.
	China City Greenhouse Gas Working Group (CCG). China Products Carbon Footprint Factors Database. https://lca.cityghg.com/. in Chinese)
[31]	陈舜, 逯非, 王效科. 中国氮磷钾肥制造温室气体排放系数的估算. 生态学报, 2015, 35(19): 6371-6383.
	CHEN S, LU F, WANG X K. Estimation of greenhouse gases emission factors for China's nitrogen,phosphate,and potash fertilizers. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2015, 35(19): 6371-6383. (in Chinese)
[32]	Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories. Ecoinvent Database (Version 2.2), 2010. https://support.ecoinvent.org/ecoinvent-version-2.
[33]	YU X, XU L, YUAN S, YANG G D, XIANG H S, FU Y F, HUANG J L, PENG S B. Resource use efficiencies, environmental footprints and net ecosystem economic benefit of direct-seeded double-season rice in Central China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2023, 393: 136249. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136249
[34]	CHEN Z D, XU C C, JI L, FENG J F, LI F B, ZHOU X Y, FANG F P. Effects of multi-cropping system on temporal and spatial distribution of carbon and nitrogen footprint of major crops in China. Global Ecology and Conservation, 2020, 22: e00895.
[35]	姚金哲. 中国三大油料作物的碳氮足迹: 构成、时空特征及驱动因素分析[D]. 郑州: 河南农业大学, 2024.
	YAO J Z. Carbon and nitrogen footprints of the three major oilseed crops in China: Composition, spatiotemporal characteristics, and driving factors analysis[D]. Zhengzhou: Henan Agricultural University, 2024. (in Chinese)
[36]	WANG C, SHEN Y, FANG X T, XIAO S Q, LIU G Y, WANG L G, GU B J, ZHOU F, CHEN D L, TIAN H Q, CIAIS P, ZOU J W, LIU S W. Reducing soil nitrogen losses from fertilizer use in global maize and wheat production. Nature Geoscience, 2024, 17(10): 1008-1015. doi: 10.1038/s41561-024-01542-x
[37]	李云鹏. 中国作物生产的环境足迹评价及其气候变化影响预测[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2022.
	LI Y P. Environmental footprint evaluation of crop production in China and the prediction of its impact on climate change[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Agricultural University, 2022. (in Chinese)
[38]	IKE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. eBalance (Version 3.0): Life Cycle Assessment Software and LCI Database [Computer software]. 2012.
[39]	崔吉晓. 作物种植系统生态经济可持续性评价框架构建与案例应用[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2020.
	CUI J X. Framework construction for the ecological and economic sustainability evaluation of crop planting systems and case applications[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2020. (in Chinese)
[40]	HONG Y, HEERINK N, JIN S Q, BERENTSEN P, ZHANG L Z, VAN DER WERF W. Intercropping and agroforestry in China- Current state and trends. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2017, 244: 52-61. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2017.04.019
[41]	MASVAYA E N, NYAMANGARA J, DESCHEEMAEKER K, GILLER K E. Is maize-cowpea intercropping a viable option for smallholder farms in the risky environments of semi-arid southern Africa? Field Crops Research, 2017, 209: 73-87. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.04.016
[42]	CHEN P, SONG C, LIU X M, ZHOU L, YANG H, ZHANG X N, ZHOU Y, DU Q, PANG T, FU Z D, et al. Yield advantage and nitrogen fate in an additive maize-soybean relay intercropping system. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 657: 987-999. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.376
[43]	YANG S Q, LI H, XU Y N, WANG T Z, HU Y M, ZHAO Y X, QIAN X, LI Z X, SUI P, GAO W S, CHEN Y Q. The yield performance of maize-soybean intercropping in the North China Plain: From 172 sites empirical investigation. Field Crops Research, 2024, 315: 109467. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2024.109467
[44]	马乐正, 刘宇航, 蔡雪梅, 罗珠珠, 赵小强, 牛伊宁. 种植密度对玉米大豆间作系统玉米光合及生长特性的影响. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2024, 59(6): 40-48.
	MA L Z, LIU Y H, CAI X M, LUO Z Z, ZHAO X Q, NIU Y N. Influence of maize planting density on the photosynthetic and growth characteristics of maize in the maize and soybean intercrops. Journal of Gansu Agricultural University, 2024, 59(6): 40-48. (in Chinese)
[45]	范虹, 殷文, 柴强. 间作优势的光合生理机制及其冠层微环境特征. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2022, 30(11): 1750-1761.
	FAN H, YIN W, CHAI Q. Research progress on photo-physiological mechanisms and characteristics of canopy microenvironment in the formation of intercropping advantages. Chinese Journal of Eco- Agriculture, 2022, 30(11): 1750-1761. (in Chinese)
[46]	WU Y S, HE D, WANG E L, LIU X, HUTH N I, ZHAO Z G, GONG W Z, YANG F, WANG X C, YONG T W, et al. Modelling soybean and maize growth and grain yield in strip intercropping systems with different row configurations. Field Crops Research, 2021, 265: 108122. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108122
[47]	朱冠雄, 高祺, 华方静, 田艺心, 朱金英, 李春燕, 王春雨, 曹鹏鹏, 王士岭, 高凤菊. 鲁西北地区大豆玉米间作不同行比配置对大豆生长、产量及间作系统的影响. 中国油料作物学报, 2025, 47(4): 970-979. doi: 10.19802/j.issn.1007-9084.2024056
	ZHU G X, GAO Q, HUA F J, TIAN Y X, ZHU J Y, LI C Y, WANG C Y, CAO P P, WANG S L, GAO F J. Effects of different row ratios of soybean and maize intercropping on soybean growth, yield and intercropping system in Northwest Shandong Province. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2025, 47(4): 970-979. (in Chinese)
[48]	赵鑫, 张磊, 武俊男, 梁烜赫, 李善龙, 李涛, 李雨桐, 江登宇, 闫寒, 贾立辉, 李海燕, 曹铁华. 不同玉米大豆间作模式对作物生长、产量和经济效益的影响. 玉米科学, 2024, 32(10): 48-55.
	ZHAO X, ZHANG L, WU J N, LIANG X H, LI S L, LI T, LI Y T, JIANG D Y, YAN H, JIA L H, LI H Y, CAO T H. Effects of different maize-soybean intercropping patterns on crop growth, yield, and economic benefits. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2024, 32(10): 48-55. (in Chinese)
[49]	LIANG Z Y, VAN DER WERF W, XU Z, CHENG J L, WANG C, CONG W F, ZHANG C C, ZHANG F S, GROOT J C J. Identifying exemplary sustainable cropping systems using a positive deviance approach: Wheat-maize double cropping in the North China Plain. Agricultural Systems, 2022, 201: 103471. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2022.103471
[50]	WANG W, LI M Y, ZHU S G, KHAN A, TAO X P, HUANG G F, LIU H Y, ZHANG W, TAO H Y, GONG D S, SONG C, XIONG Y C. Plant facilitation improves carbon production efficiency while reducing nitrogen input in semiarid agroecosystem. Catena, 2023, 230: 107247. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2023.107247
[51]	CHENG Y, WANG H Q, LIU P, DONG S T, ZHANG J W, ZHAO B, REN B Z. Nitrogen placement at sowing affects root growth, grain yield formation, N use efficiency in maize. Plant and Soil, 2020, 457(1): 355-373. doi: 10.1007/s11104-020-04747-2
[52]	DAI J, GUI H L, SHEN F, LIU Y Y, BAI M S, YANG J F, LIU H J, LUO P Y, HAN X R, SIDDIQUE K H M. Fertilizer (15)N balance in a soybean-maize-maize rotation system based on a 41-year long-term experiment in Northeast China. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2023, 14: 1105131. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1105131
[53]	ZOU S, YAN J, HAN X Z, ZOU W X, CHEN X, LU X C. Effects of nitrogen application on nodulation, nitrogen fixation, yield and protein content of soybean. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2022, 28(8): 1457-1465.
[54]	YANG Y, ZOU J, HUANG W H, OLESEN J E, LI W J, REES R M, HARRISON M T, FENG B, FENG Y P, CHEN F, YIN X G. Drivers of soybean-based rotations synergistically increase crop productivity and reduce GHG emissions. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2024, 372: 109094. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2024.109094
[55]	常洪庆, 陈银银, 高意帆, 李思源, 董淑雅, 陈瑞雪, 张学林, 刘天学, 李鸿萍. 大豆玉米带状复合种植示范推广与应用基础研究进展. 玉米科学, 2025, 33(1): 77-83.
	CHANG H Q, CHEN Y Y, GAO Y F, LI S Y, DONG S Y, CHEN R X, ZHANG X L, LIU T X, LI H P. Advances in basic research on the demonstration, extension and application of soybean-maize strip intercropping planting. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2025, 33(1): 77-83. (in Chinese)

省份 Province	调研主体 Survey subject	调研地点 Survey location	调研覆盖面积 Survey coverage area (hm²)	调研数量 Number of survey sites
山东 Shandong	鲁西北-项目示范区 Northwest Shandong-demonstration zone 鲁西北-周边种植户 Northwest Shandong-surrounding farmers	山东省德州市齐河县、禹城市 Dezhou city, Shandong: Qihe county, Yucheng city	1996	85
	鲁中-项目示范区 Central Shandong-project demonstration zone 鲁中-周边种植户 Central Shandong-surrounding farmers	山东省泰安市肥城县 Taian city, Shandong: Feicheng county
	鲁东-项目示范区 Eastern Shandong-project demonstration zone 鲁东-周边种植户 Eastern Shandong-surrounding farmers	山东省烟台市莱州市 Yantai city, Shandong: Laizhou city
安徽 Anhui	皖北-项目示范区 Northern Anhui-project demonstration zone 皖北-周边种植户 Northern Anhui-surrounding farmers	安徽省阜阳市太和县 Fuyang city, Anhui: Taihe county	365	25
江苏 Jiangsu	苏北-项目示范区 Northern Jiangsu-project demonstration zone 苏北-周边种植户 Northern Jiangsu-surrounding farmers	江苏省连云港市东海县 Lianyungang city, Jiangsu: Donghai county	347	23
河南 Henan	豫南-项目示范区 Southern Henan-project demonstration zone 豫南-周边种植户 Southern Henan-surrounding farmers	河南省周口市商水县 Zhoukou city, Henan: Shangshui county	878	39
河南 Henan	豫中-项目示范区 Central Henan-project demonstration zone 豫中-周边种植户 Central Henan-surrounding farmers	河南省许昌市建安区 Xuchang city, Henan: Jian’an district	878	39

项目示范区 Project demonstration zone	种植面积 Planting area (hm²)	玉米株距 Maize spacing (cm)	大豆株距 Soybean spacing(cm)	玉米大豆带间距 Strip distance (cm)	玉米行距 Maize row spacing (cm)	大豆行距 Soybean row spacing (cm)	玉米行数 Maize rows number	大豆行数 Soybean rows number	玉米品种 Maize variety	大豆品种 Soybean variety
鲁西北 Northwest Shandong	17	10	8	70	60	40	4	6	中间行：立原296；边行：MY73 Border rows: Liyuan 296; Inner rows: MY73	齐黄34 Qihuang 34
鲁中 Central Shandong	14	10	8	65	40-80-40	40	4	4	登海605 Denghai 605	徐豆18 Xudou 18
鲁东 Eastern Shandong	13	边行12，内行14 Border rows: 12, inner rows: 14	6	70	40-80-40	40	4	4	金来705 Jinlai 705	潍豆20 Weidou 20
皖北 Northern Anhui	6	10	10	80	60-80-60	40	4	6	庐玉9105 Luyu 9105	皖豆37 Wandou 37
苏北 Northern Jiangsu	13	12.5	7	70	45-80-45	30	4	4	苏玉34 Suyu 34	齐黄34 Qihuang 34
豫中 Central Henan	13	8	10	80	40-80-40	40	4	4	金子弹1号 Jinzidan 1	菏豆21 Hedou 21
豫南 Southern Henan	13	10	8	80	50-80-50	40	4	6	M712	长义豆3号 Changyidou 3

示范区周边种植户 Surround farmers	种植面积 Planting area (hm²)	玉米株距 Maize spacing (cm)	大豆株距 Soybean spacing (cm)	玉米大豆带间距 Strip distance (cm)	玉米行距 Maize row spacing (cm)	大豆行距 Soybean row spacing (cm)	玉米行数 Maize rows number	大豆行数 Soybean rows number	玉米品种 Maize variety	大豆品种 Soybean variety
鲁西北 Northwest Shandong	27,[1,153]	13,[6,25]	9,[5,16]	64,[40,90]	54,[40,70]	40,[20,70]	3,[2,8]	4,[2,8]	登海605、金来70、金海1908 Denghai 605, Jinlai 705, Jinhai 1908	齐黄34、潍豆20、菏豆22 Qihuang 34, Weidou 20, Hedou 22
鲁中 Central Shandong	18,[2,53]	15,[8,20]	10,[6,13]	63,[40,80]	55,[40,65]	43,[30,60]	4,[2,6]	4,[2,6]
鲁东 Eastern Shandong	19,[8,41]	12,[10,13]	9,[8,10]	65,[60,70]	62,[60,65]	40,[40,40]	4,[4,4]	5,[4,6]
皖北 Northern Anhui	17,[2,33]	13,[8,20]	10,[5,15]	70,[60,80]	54,[40,70]	42,[30,60]	3,[2,6]	4,[2,6]	黎民518、登海605、庐玉9105 Limin 518. Denghai 605. Luyu 9105	皖宿2156、皖豆37、齐黄34 Wansu 2156, Wandou 37, Qihuang 34
苏北 Northern Jiangsu	16,[6,48]	13,[10,20]	11,[7,20]	70,[60,80]	60,[40,80]	41,[30,60]	4,[2,4]	5,[2,6]	连单761、红旗968、苏玉42 Liandan 761, Hongqi 968, Suyu 42	徐豆18、徐豆20、齐黄34 Xudou 18, Xudou 20, Qihuang 34
豫中 Central Henan	23,[3,160]	14,[10,20]	11,[5,20]	66,[40,80]	56,[30,80]	41,[30,80]	4,[2,4]	5,[4,6]	MY73、豪玉16、登海618 MY73, Haoyu 16, Denghai 618	周豆25、长义豆3号、中黄301 Zhoudu 25, Changyidou 3, Zhonghuang 301
豫南 Southern Henan	15,[1,55]	13,[10,20]	10,[8,15]	66,[60,70]	58,[40,65]	40,[30,60]	4,[2,8]	5,[4,6]	MY73、豪玉16、登海618 MY73, Haoyu 16, Denghai 618	周豆25、长义豆3号、中黄301 Zhoudu 25, Changyidou 3, Zhonghuang 301

示范区周边种植户 Surround farmer	氮肥 Nitrogen fertilizer (kg·hm^-2)	磷肥 Phosphate fertilizer (kg·hm^-2)	钾肥 Potash fertilizer (kg·hm^-2)	除草剂 Herbicide (kg·hm^-2)	杀虫剂 Insecticide (kg·hm^-2)	杀菌剂 Fungicide (kg·hm^-2)	化控剂 Plant growth regulator (kg·hm^-2)	机械 Machinery (h·hm^-2)	人力 Labor (h·hm^-2)
鲁西北 Northwest Shandong	233,[173,284]	80,[50,101]	72,[53,89]	2,[2,4]	0.4,[0.3,0.6]	0.2,[0.1,0.6]	0.02,[0,0.2]	22,[10,31]	90,[37,135]
鲁中 Central Shandong	227,[194,330]	84,[45,129]	77,[23,129]	2,[1,3]	0.4,[0.3,0.8]	0.2,[0.2,0.5]	0.02,[0,0.1]	24,[13,34]	97,[51,152]
鲁东 Eastern Shandong	284,[245,344]	83,[80,87]	81,[75,87]	2,[2,3]	0.4,[0.3,0.7]	0.2,[0.2,0.3]	0.1,[0,0.1]	21,[11,28]	94,[74,122]
皖北 Northern Anhui	239,[188,347]	76,[48,96]	72,[48,96]	2,[1,3]	0.4,[0.3,0.8]	0.2,[0.1,0.3]	0.03,[0,0.2]	20,[10,37]	87,[37,141]
苏北 Northern Jiangsu	228,[177,261]	78,[60,95]	72,[60,91]	2,[2,3]	0.4,[0.3,0.7]	0.2,[0.2,0.5]	0.02,[0,0.2]	23,[11,35]	92,[61,118]
豫中 Central Henan	219,[177,299]	72,[45,92]	71,[53,99]	2,[1,3]	0.4,[0.3,0.6]	0.2,[0.1,0.6]	0.02,[0,0.1]	17,[8,31]	83,[29,142]
豫南 Southern Henan	228,[197,315]	78,[75,96]	71,[63,80]	2,[2,2]	0.4,[0.3,0.5]	0.2,[0.1,0.3]	0.03,[0,0.1]	18,[8,27]	83,[29,142]

项目 Category		单位 Unit	排放系数 Emission factor (kg CO₂-eq·kg^-1)	来源 Source
种子Seed	玉米 Maize	kg	1.93	CLCD v0.7^[29]
种子Seed	大豆Soybean	kg	0.37	CPCD^[30]
化肥Fertilizer	氮肥 Nitrogenous fertilizer	kg	7.76	^[31]
	磷肥 Phosphate fertilizer		2.33
	钾肥 Potash fertilizer		0.66
农药Pesticide	除草剂Herbicide	kg a.i.	16.61	Ecoinvent v2.2^[32]
	杀虫剂Insecticide		10.15
	杀菌剂Fungicide		10.50
	化控剂Plant growth regulator		12.40
电Electricity		kWh	0.82	CLCD v0.7^[29]
柴油Diesel		l	4.99	CLCD v0.7^[29]
机械Machinery		MJ	0.07	^[33]
人力Labor		h	0.04	CLCD v0.7^[29]

黄淮地区玉米大豆复合种植模式的综合效益评估

Comprehensive Evaluation of the Maize-Soybean Intercropping Pattern in the Huang-Huai Region

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 55

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

项目示范区 Project demonstration zone	氮肥 Nitrogen fertilizer (kg·hm^-2)	磷肥 Phosphate fertilizer (kg·hm^-2)	钾肥 Potash fertilizer (kg·hm^-2)	除草剂 Herbicide (kg·hm^-2)	杀虫剂 Insecticide (kg·hm^-2)	杀菌剂 Fungicide (kg·hm^-2)	化控剂 Plant growth regulator (kg·hm^-2)	机械 Machinery (h·hm^-2)	人力 Labor (h·hm^-2)
鲁西北 Northwest Shandong	315	95	95	4	0.4	0.2	0.09	29	105
鲁中 Central Shandong	305	78	86	3	0.4	0.3	0.10	25	114
鲁东 Eastern Shandong	335	90	90	3	0.4	0.3	0.09	23	97
皖北 Northern Anhui	302	78	78	2	0.4	0.2	0	21	89
苏北 Northern Jiangsu	319	85	81	3	0.4	0.2	0.12	31	127
豫中 Central Henan	335	84	84	3	0.4	0.2	0.10	21	86
豫南 Southern Henan	327	86	83	3	0.4	0.2	0.11	18	87

项目 Machinery item	单位重量 Unit weight (kg)	使用时长 Operating duration (h)	田间工作效率 Field efficiency (%)	动力来源 Power source
犁耕机Plowing tiller	208	1500	65	柴油Diesel
收获机械 Harvester	550	2000	70	柴油Diesel
植保机Crop sprayer	50	750	85	柴油Diesel
水泵Water pump	12	1500	55	电力Electric

项目 Category		单位 Unit	排放系数 Emission Factor (kg N-eq·kg^-1)	来源 Source
柴油Diesel		kg	0.08×10^-3	^[33]
柴油燃烧Diesel combustion		kg	4.58×10^-3	^[33]
化肥Fertilizer	氮肥 Nitrogenous fertilizer	kg	0.89×10^-3	CLCD v0.7^[29]
	磷肥 Phosphate fertilizer		0.54×10^-3
	钾肥 Potash fertilizer		0.03×10^-3
农药Pesticide	除草剂Herbicide	kg a.i.	3.53×10^-3	IKE eBalance v3.0^[38]
	杀虫剂Insecticide		7.05×10^-3
	杀菌剂Fungicide		4.49×10^-3
	化控剂Plant growth regulator		4.69×10^-3
电Electricity		kWh	0.12×10^-3
种子Seed	玉米 Maize	kg	0.76×10^-3	Ecoinvent v2.2^[32]
种子Seed	大豆Soybean	kg	6.50×10^-3	Ecoinvent v2.2^[32]

一级指标 Indicator	指标参数 Parameter	计算方法 Calculation method
产量趋近指数 Yield convergence index (YCI）	复合种植总产量 Total intercropping yield	单位面积复合玉米产量+单位面积复合大豆产量 Maize yield per unit area+soybean yield per unit area
经济趋近指数 Economic convergence index (ECI）	土地产值 Land output value	单位面积产量×市场价格 (Yield per unit area×market price)
	土地产出率 Land productivity ratio	单位面积产量×市场价格-成本投入 (Yield per unit area×market price)-cost input
	系统投入System cost	成本投入 Total cost input
生态友好指数 Eco-friendliness index (EFI）	单位面积氮足迹Nitrogen footprint	见1.2.2 See section 1.2.2
生态友好指数 Eco-friendliness index (EFI）	单位面积碳足迹Carbon footprint	见1.2.2 See section 1.2.2

调研地区 Survey region	复合种植总产量 Total intercropping yield	复合玉米产量 Intercropped maize yield	复合大豆产量 Intercropped soybean yield	产量趋近指数 Yield convergence index (YCI)
鲁西北-项目示范区Northwest Shandong-project demonstration zone	11145	9165	1980	0.3
鲁西北-周边种植户Northwest Shandong- surrounding farmers	9446,[8565,10355]	7880,[7253,8370]	1566,[1200,2100]	0.3
鲁中-项目示范区Central Shandong-project demonstration zone	11570	9525	2045	0.2
鲁中-周边种植户Central Shandong-surrounding farmers	9374,[8970,9810]	7801,[7350,8301]	1573,[1275,1950]	0.2
鲁东-项目示范区Eastern Shandong-project demonstration zone	11205	9180	2025	0.2
鲁东-周边种植户Eastern Shandong-surrounding farmers	9405,[8970,9810]	7940,[7650,8370]	1465,[1200,1650]	0.2
皖北-项目示范区Northern Anhui-project demonstration zone	10755	8955	1800	0.4
皖北-周边种植户Northern Anhui-surrounding farmers	9664,[8565,10230]	8093,[7545,8595]	1571,[1305,1755]	0.4
苏北-项目示范区Northern Jiangsu-project demonstration zone	10995	9195	1920	0.3
苏北-周边种植户Northern Jiangsu-surrounding farmers	9372,[8715,9750]	7899,[7470,8190]	1473,[1245,1620]	0.3
豫中-项目示范区Central Henan-project demonstration zone	11145	9180	1965	0.3
豫中-周边种植户Central Henan- surrounding farmers	9187,[8355,9660]	7677,[7125,7935]	1510,[1230,1770]	0.3
豫南-项目示范区Southern Henan-project demonstration zone	11430	9510	1920	0.4
豫南-周边种植户Southern Henan- surrounding farmers	9418,[8310,10050]	7928,[7005,8430]	1491,[1275,1620]	0.4

调研地区 Survey region	土地产值 Land output value	土地产出率 Land productivity ratio	系统投入 System cost	经济趋近指数 Economic convergence index (ECI)
鲁西北-项目示范区Northwest Shandong-project demonstration zone	29353	9925	19428	0.7
鲁西北-周边种植户Northwest Shandong-surrounding farmers	27224,[23569,30352]	9104,[4934,13016]	18114,[16915,19299]	0.7
鲁中-项目示范区Central Shandong-project demonstration zone	32551	9917	19906	0.6
鲁中-周边种植户Central Shandong- surrounding farmers	26818[24369,28831]	9025,[6012,11974]	17793,[16558,19000]	0.6
鲁东-项目示范区Eastern Shandong-project demonstration zone	29531	9396	20135	0.7
鲁东-周边种植户Eastern Shandong-surrounding farmers	25982,[24597,27289]	8425,[7019,9411]	17550,[17200,17879]	0.7
皖北-项目示范区Northern Anhui-project demonstration zone	29381	8946	20435	0.8
皖北-周边种植户Northern Anhui-surrounding farmers	28096,[23848,30259]	8675,[5376,12309]	17986,[16743,19721]	0.8
苏北-项目示范区Northern Jiangsu-project demonstration zone	29902	9660	20242	0.7
苏北-周边种植户Northern Jiangsu-surrounding farmers	27375,[24926,31166]	9418,[5926,13380]	17950,[16886,19100]	0.7
豫中-项目示范区Central Henan-project demonstration zone	30966	10260	20706	0.5
豫中-周边种植户Central Henan- surrounding farmers	26461,[23862,29367]	8368,[5448,11038]	18093,[17093,18743]	0.5
豫南-项目示范区Southern Henan-project demonstration zone	30609	11081	19535	0.6
豫南-周边种植户Southern Henan- surrounding farmers	27332,[23898,29745]	9318,[5341,12152]	18007,[16872,19192]	0.6

地区 Survey region	产量趋近指数等级 YCI level	经济趋近指数等级 ECI level				生态友好指数等级 EFI level			综合差异指数等级 CVI level
地区 Survey region	复合种植总产量 Total intercropping yield	土地产值 Land output value	土地产出率 Land productivity ratio	系统投入 Cost	ECI	单位面积氮足迹 Nitrogen footprint	单位面积碳足迹 Carbon footprint	EFI	综合差异指数等级 CVI level
鲁西北-周边种植户 Northwest Shandong-surrounding farmers	2	4	5	3	4	3	4	3	3
鲁中-周边种植户 Central Shandong-surrounding farmers	1	2	4	4	3	4	3	3	3
鲁东-周边种植户 Eastern Shandong-surrounding farmers	1	4	3	5	4	2	3	3	3
皖北-周边种植户 Northern Anhui-surrounding farmers	2	4	5	4	4	2	3	2	3
苏北-周边种植户 Northern Jiangsu-surrounding farmers	2	3	5	4	4	4	4	4	3
豫中-周边种植户 Central Henan-surrounding farmers	2	2	3	4	3	3	4	4	3
豫南-周边种植户 Southern Henan-surrounding farmers	2	3	4	3	3	4	4	4	3

[1]	蒲丽霞, 张佳芮, 叶建萍, 黄秀兰, 樊高琼, 杨洪坤. 二氢赤霉素与秸秆覆盖对旱地小麦分蘖成穗与产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(9): 1735-1748.
[2]	郭晨荔, 刘扬, 陈燕, 胡伟, 王友华, 周治国, 赵文青. 减氮条件下适当磷肥后移对滴灌棉花产量和磷肥利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(9): 1749-1766.
[3]	刘劲松, 伍龙梅, 包晓哲, 刘志霞, 张彬, 杨陶陶. 短期减施氮肥对华南地区早晚兼用型水稻产量和稻米品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(8): 1508-1520.
[4]	韦文华, 李盼, 邵冠贵, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 范虹, 何蔚, 柴强, 殷文, 赵连豪. 西北灌区青贮玉米产量及品质对减量灌水与有机无机肥配施的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(8): 1521-1534.
[5]	薛钰琦, 赵继玉, 孙旺胜, 任佰朝, 赵斌, 刘鹏, 张吉旺. 不同氮素形态对夏玉米产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(8): 1535-1549.
[6]	李绍兴, 宋稳锋, 魏泽煜, 周玉玲, 宋李霞, 任可, 马群, 王龙昌. 秸秆与紫云英覆盖对土壤肥力及甘薯产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(8): 1591-1603.
[7]	尹波, 于爱忠, 王鹏飞, 杨学慧, 王玉珑, 尚永盼, 张冬玲, 刘亚龙, 李悦, 王凤. 绿肥还田结合氮肥减施对干旱灌区麦田土壤水热特征及小麦产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(7): 1366-1380.
[8]	陈桂平, 李盼, 邵冠贵, 吴霞玉, 殷文, 赵连豪, 樊志龙, 胡发龙. 减量灌水与有机无机肥配施对青贮玉米吐丝期后叶片持绿特性的调控作用[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(7): 1381-1396.
[9]	张洪程, 邢志鹏, 张瑞宏, 单翔, 奚小波, 程爽, 翁文安, 胡群, 崔培媛, 魏海燕. 小麦整合化无人化丰产栽培的特征与技术途径[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(5): 864-876.
[10]	张涵, 张玉琪, 黎景来, 徐虹, 李维环, 李涛. LED补光对日光温室基质栽培草莓生产及叶片生理特性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(5): 975-990.
[11]	陈鸽, 谷雨, 文炯, 傅岳峰, 何兮, 李薇, 周峻宇, 刘琼峰, 吴海勇. 冬闲杂草还田对水稻光合物质生产和产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(4): 647-659.
[12]	苏明, 李翻过, 洪自强, 周甜, 柳强娟, 班文慧, 吴宏亮, 康建宏. 施氮缓解旱地马铃薯花后高温早衰的抗氧化特性研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(4): 660-675.
[13]	史帆, 李文广, 易树生, 杨娜, 陈玉萌, 郑伟, 张雪辰, 李紫燕, 翟丙年. 有机无机肥配施下旱地麦田土壤有机碳组分含量的变化特征[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(4): 719-732.
[14]	郑煜, 陈颐, 遆晋松, 史龙飞, 许校博, 李昱霖, 郭瑞. 烟草不同轮作模式碳足迹及经济效益评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(4): 733-747.
[15]	罗一诺, 李艳霏, 李文虎, 张思琦, 牟文燕, 黄宁, 孙蕊卿, 丁玉兰, 佘文婷, 宋文斌, 李小涵, 石美, 王朝辉. 我国新育成小麦品种（系）籽粒不同部位铁含量及影响因素[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(3): 416-430.