不同种植模式对南方丘陵旱地土壤水分利用与作物周年生产力的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.18.009

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 【目的】分析不同坡地类型条件下不同种植模式土壤水分利用与作物周年生产力的差异，探索适宜南方丘陵旱地最佳效果的种植模式。【方法】在上坡地设春玉米-饲草（SPD1）、红薯-饲草（SPD2）、红薯//春玉米-饲草（SPD3）3种模式；中坡地设春玉米-马铃薯（ZPD1）、大豆-马铃薯（ZPD2）、大豆//春玉米-马铃薯（ZPD3）3种模式；下坡地设春玉米-秋玉米-马铃薯（XPD1）、西瓜-秋玉米-马铃薯（XPD2）、西瓜//春玉米-秋玉米-马铃薯（XPD3）3种模式。连续3年测定各种植模式的土壤含水量，计算作物耗水量（WC）、水分利用效率（WUE）、作物周年生产力及间作模式的土地当量比（LER）。【结果】上坡地上，2008、2009和2010年SPD3较SPD1的土壤含水量分别增加22.8%、21.6%和24.1%，WUE分别提高9.7%、17.8%和15.6%，作物周年生产力分别增加8.3%、16.1%和14.8%，较SPD2的土壤含水量分别增加16.1%、11.0%和14.5%，WUE分别提高61.9%、60.6%和62.5%，作物周年生产力分别增加62.4%、61.6%和64.8%；中坡地上，3年中ZPD3较ZPD1的土壤含水量分别增加12.9%、13.3%和20.9%，WUE分别提高17.9%、22.5%和20.3%，作物周年生产力分别增加17.2%、21.4%和19.6%；下坡地上，3年中XPD3较XPD1的土壤含水量分别增加15.1%、17.6%和12.9%，WUE分别提高47.5%、44.6%和38.5%，作物周年生产力分别增加41.5%、43.3%和37.6%，上述差异均达显著水平（P＜0.05）。3种间作模式中，LER以XPD3模式最高，3年中较ZPD3分别增加15.70%、12.45%和13.94%，较SPD3分别增加10.32%、6.31%和5.65%，达显著差异（P＜0.05）。3种坡地类型之间，3年中的土壤含水量，XPD1分别较ZPD1增加5.5%、27.3%和17.3%，较SPD1分别增加77.3%、56.9%和50.9%，ZPD1较SPD1分别增加68.0%、23.3%和28.7%；XPD3的WUE较ZPD3分别提高105.4%、101.2%和102.3%，较SPD3分别提高238.2%、230.2%和246.2%；3年周年经济产量，XPD3较ZPD3分别增加195.9%、104.1%和101.2%，较SPD3分别增加230.6%、224.4%和236.3%，ZPD3较SPD3分别增加62.0%、62.8%和67.2%，均达显著差异（P＜0.05）。【结论】红薯//春玉米-饲草、大豆//春玉米-马铃薯、西瓜//春玉米-秋玉米-马铃薯等间套复种模式，有利于增强土壤保水性、提高作物水分利用效率及周年生产力。在不同坡地类型条件下，各种植模式的土壤水分利用及作物周年生产力表现为下坡地优于中坡地，中坡地优于上坡地。所以红壤丘陵旱地应根据不同坡地类型选择适宜的种植模式，才能达到节水避旱，实现作物周年增产目的。

关键词: 种植模式, 丘陵旱地, 水分利用效率, 周年生产力, 玉米

Abstract: 【Objective】 In order to obtain the best planting patterns, the difference of water use and crops annual productivity in southern hilly dryland were analyzed in the present paper. 【Method】 In southern hilly dryland area, nine types of experimental planting patterns including spring maize-forage grass on the hillside (SPD1), sweet potato-forage grass on the hillside (SPD2), watermelon // spring maize-forage grass on the hillside (SPD3), spring maize-potato on the slope (ZPD1), soybean-potato on the slope (ZPD2), soybean // spring maize-potato on the slope (ZPD3), spring maize-autumn maize-potato under the slope (XPD1), watermelon-autumn maize-potato under the slope (XPD2), watermelon // spring maize-autumn maize-potato under the slope (XPD3) on the hillside, on the slope and under the slope were used to study the effects of different planting patterns on soil water content, crop water consumption (WC), water use efficiency (WUE), crops annual productivity in southern hilly dryland, and land equivalent ratio (LER) between interplanting modes. 【Result】 Compared with the SPD1, soil water content were increased by 22.8%, 21.6% and 24.1% with SPD3, WUE were increased by 9.7%, 17.8% and 15.6% with SPD3, and the crops annual productivity were increased by 8.3%, 16.1% and 14.8% with SPD3, respectively. Meanwhile, compared with the SPD2, soil water content increased by 16.1%, 11.0% and 14.5% with SPD3, WUE increased by 61.9%, 60.6% and 62.5% with SPD3, and the crops annual productivity increased by 62.4%, 61.6% and 64.8% with SPD3, respectively. Compared with the ZPD1, soil water content increased by 12.9%, 13.3% and 20.9% with SPD3, WUE increased by 17.9%, 22.5% and 20.3%, and the crops annual productivity increased by 17.2%, 21.4% and 19.6% with ZPD3, respectively. Compared with the XPD1, soil water content increased by 15.1%, 17.6% and 12.9% with XPD3, WUE increased by 47.5%, 44.6% and 38.5%, and the crops annual productivity increased by 41.5%, 43.3% and 37.6% with XPD3, respectively. Compared with the XPD2, soil water content increased by 6.5%, 4.4% and 5.1% with XPD3, WUE increased by 18.6%, 21.5% and 20.0%, and the crops annual productivity increased by 20.0%, 21.5% and 21.0% with XPD3, respectively. There were no difference in water content among different planting patterns in the same year, but there was a difference in water content among different planting patterns between 2009, 2010 and 2008. In the three planting patterns, the LER of XPD3 was the highest with 1.518, 1.517 and 1.496 in 2008, 2009 and 2010. Compared with the ZPD3, the LER of XPD3 increased by 15.70%, 12.45% and 13.94%, respectively. Meanwhile, compared with the SPD3, the LER of XPD3 increased by 10.32%, 6.31% and 5.65%, respectively. In the three slope types, compared with the ZPD1, the soil water content increased by 5.5%, 27.3% and 17.3% with XPD1 in 2008, 2009 and 2010. And the soil water content increased by 68.0%, 23.3% and 28.7% with ZPD1 in 2008, 2009 and 2010. Compared with the ZPD3, the WUE increased by 105.4%, 101.2% and 102.3% with XPD3. Compared with the SPD3, the WUE increased by 238.2%, 230.2% and 246.2% with XPD3. Compared with the ZPD3, the economic output in a year increased by 195.9%, 104.1% and 101.2% with XPD3. Compared with the SPD3, the economic output in a year increased by 230.6%, 224.4% and 236.3% with XPD3. Meanwhile, Compared with the SPD3, the economic output in a year increased by 62.0%, 62.8% and 67.2% with ZPD3, respectively. 【Conclusion】As a result, the planting patterns were of benefit to enhancement of soil water retention, water use efficiency, and crops annual productivity, such as the watermelon // spring maize-forage grass, soybean // spring maize-potato, watermelon // spring maize-autumn maize-potato. Under the different slope type conditions, the WUE and crops annual productivity with different planting patterns were in the order: under the slope＞slope＞hillside. Therefore, the reasonable planting patterns should be chosen according to different slope conditions in the southern hilly dryland to achieve water-saving drought avoidance and increase efficiency.

Key words: planting patterns, hilly dryland, water use efficiency, annual productivity, maize

汤文光，肖小平，唐海明，杨光立. 不同种植模式对南方丘陵旱地土壤水分利用与作物周年生产力的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(18): 3606-3617.

TANG Wen-guang, XIAO Xiao-ping, TANG Hai-ming, YANG Guang-li. Effects of Different Planting Patterns on Water Use of Soil and Crops Annual Productivity in Southern Hilly Dryland[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014, 47(18): 3606-3617.

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.0578-1752.2014.18.009

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2014/V47/I18/3606

参考文献

[1]    黄高宝. 集约栽培条件下间套作的光能利用理论发展及其应用. 作物学报, 1999, 25(1): 16-24.
Huang G B. Development of light utilization theory for wheat/corn intercropping in condition of intensive cultivation. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 1999, 25(1): 16-24. (in Chinese)
[2]    刘广才, 杨祁峰, 李隆, 孙建好. 小麦/玉米间作优势及地上部与地下部因素的相对贡献. 植物生态学报, 2008, 32(2): 477-484.
Liu G C, Yang Q F, Li L, Sun J H. Intercropping advantage and contribution of above- and below-ground interactions in wheat-maize intercropping. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2008, 32(2): 477-484. (in Chinese)
[3]    Li L, Sun J H, Zhang F S, Li X L, Rengel Z, Yang S C. Wheat/maize or wheat/soybean strip intercropping: I. Yield advantage and interspecific interactions on nutrients. Field Crops Research, 2001, 71: 123-137.
[4]    赵秉强, 余松烈, 李凤超. 间套带状小麦高产原理与技术. 北京: 农业科学技术出版社, 2004: 34-49.
Zhao B Q, Yu S L, Li F C. Mechanism and Technology of Higher Yield Intercropped Wheat on Multiple System. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2004: 34-49. (in Chinese)
[5]    Willey R W. Intercropping-its importance and research needs: II. Agronomy and research approaches. Field Crops Abstract, 1979, 32: 73-85.
[6]    卢良恕. 中国立体农业概论. 成都: 四川科学技术出版社, 1999: 43-46.
Lu L S. China Multi-Storied Agriculture Introduction. Chengdu: Sichuan Science and Technology Press, 1999: 43-46. (in Chinese)
[7]    Bayer J M, Ochsner T E, Venterea R T, Griffis T J. Tillage and soil carbon sequestration-what do we really know? Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2007, 118: 1-5.
[8]    韩思明, 王虎全, 李岗. 渭北塬区夏闲地高效利用技术研究. 干旱地区农业研究, 2000, 18(4): 8-12.
Han S M, Wang H Q, Li G. Research on technique of efficient utilization of summer fallow land in Weibei tableland. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2000, 18(4): 8-12. (in Chinese)
[9]    汤秋香, 刘宏斌, 雷宝坤, 翟丽梅, 胡万里, 罗新华, 张继宗, 任天志. 洱海北部地区环境友好型种植模式筛选. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(12): 2375-2383.
Tang Q X, Liu H B, Lei B K, Zhai L M, Hu W L, Luo X H, Zhang J Z, Ren T Z. Screening of environment-friendly cropping mode in the northern region of Erhai Lake. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012, 45(12): 2375-2383. (in Chinese)
[10]   王龙昌, 邹聪明, 张云兰, 张赛, 张晓雨, 周航飞, 罗海秀. 西南“旱三熟”地区不同保护性耕作措施对农田土壤生态效应及生产效益的影响. 作物学报, 2013, 39(10): 1880-1890.
Wang L C, Zou C M, Zhang Y L, Zhang S, Zhang X Y , Zhou H F, Luo H X. Influences of conservation tillage practices on farmland soil ecological factors and productive benefits in dryland region with Triple Cropping System in Southwest China. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2013, 39(10): 1880-1890. (in Chinese)
[11]   李露, 杨玲, 廖允成, 温晓霞. 黄土高原半湿润区旱地一年两熟复种模式土壤水分效应. 干旱地区农业研究, 2010, 28(4): 145-151.
Li L, Yang L, Liao Y C, Weng X X. Study on soil moisture effect of double cropping in the dryland of subhumid areas of the Loess Plateau. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2010, 28(4): 145-151. (in Chinese)
[12]   郭步庆, 陶洪斌, 王璞, Heike K, Wilhelm C. 华北平原不同粮作模式下作物水分利用. 中国农业大学学报, 2013, 18(1): 53-60.
Guo B Q, Tao H B, Wang P, Heike K, Wilhelm C. Water utilization of different cropping production systems in north China plain. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2013, 18(1): 53-60. (in Chinese)
[13]   汤文光, 肖小平, 唐海明, 张帆, 曾掌权.季节性干旱区不同播期对春玉米生长及产量的影响. 现代农业科技, 2009(15): 16-18.
Tang W G, Xiao X P, Tang H M, Zhang F, Zeng Z Q. Effect of seeding time on growth and yield of spring maize in seasonal arid region. Modern Agricultural Sciences and Technology, 2009(15): 16-18. (in Chinese)
[14]   杨晓光, 陈阜. 气候变化对中国种植制度影响研究. 北京: 气象出版社, 2014: 24-25.
Yang X G, Chen F. Climate Change Impacts on Cropping System in China. Beijing: China Meteorological Press, 2014: 24-25. (in Chinese)
[15]   王红丽, 张绪成, 宋尚有, 马一凡, 于显枫. 西北黄土高原旱地全膜双垄沟播种植对玉米季节性耗水和产量的调节机制. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(5): 917-926.
Wang H L, Zhang X C, Song S Y, Ma Y F, Yu X F. Regulation of whole field surface plastic mulching and double ridge-furrow planting on seasonal soil water loss and maize yield in rain-fed area of Northwest Loess Plateau. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2013, 46(5): 917-926. (in Chinese)
[16]   柴强, 杨彩红, 黄高宝. 交替灌溉对西北绿洲区小麦间作玉米水分利用的影响. 作物学报, 2011, 37(9): 1623-1630.
Chai Q, Yang C H, Huang G B. Water use characteristics of alternately irrigated wheat/maize intercropping in oasis region of northwestern China. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2011, 37(9): 1623-1630. (in Chinese)
[17]   黄志刚, 欧阳志云, 李锋瑞, 郑华, 王效科, 王中建. 南方丘陵区不同坡地利用方式土壤水分动态. 生态学报, 2009, 29(6): 3136-3146.
Huang Z G, Ouyang Z Y, Li F R, Zheng H, Wang X K, Wang Z J. Spatial and temporal dynamics in soil water storage under different use types of sloping fields: a case study in a highland region of southern China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009, 29(6): 3136-3146. (in Chinese)
[18]   杨红薇, 张建强, 唐家良, 徐创军, 丁德蓉. 紫色土坡地不同种植模式下水土和养分流失动态特征. 中国生态农业学报, 2008, 16(3): 615-619.
Yang H W, Zhang J Q, Tang J L, Xu C J, Ding D R. Soil, water and nutrient loss under different cropping systems in purple-soil slope-lands. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2008, 16(3): 615-619. (in Chinese)
[19]   路海东, 贾志宽, 杨宝平, 李永平, 刘世新. 宁夏南部旱区坡地不同粮草带比间作种植模式比较. 生态学报, 2010, 30(21): 5941-5948.
Lu H D, Jia Z K, Yang B P, Li Y P, Liu S X. Different strip intercropping of grain-grass on sloping field in dry areas of south Ningxia. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(21): 5941-5948. (in Chinese)
[20]   朱红球, 谢振华, 李红. 衡阳紫色土丘陵坡地土地退化/恢复过程中土壤水稳性团聚体的动态变化. 中国农学通报, 2013, 29(35): 289-292.
Zhu H Q, Xie Z H, Li H. Dynamic Change of Water Stable Aggregate in Land Degradation／Restoration Process on Sloping-land with Purple Soils in Hengyang. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2013, 29(35): 289-292. (in Chinese)
[21]   高阳, 段爱旺, 邱新强, 张俊鹏, 陈金平, 王和洲. 玉米/大豆间作条件下作物生物量积累模型. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18(5): 965-968.
Gao Y, Duan A W, Qiu X Q, Zhang J P, Chen J P, Wang H Z. A biomass accumulation model for maize/soybean intercropping system. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2010, 18(5): 965-968. (in Chinese)
[22]   郑立龙, 柴强. 间作小麦、蚕豆的产量和竞争力对供水量和化感物质的响应. 中国生态农业学报, 2011, 19(4): 745-749.
Zheng Li L, Chai Q. Yield and competitive response of intercropped wheat and faba-bean to water and allelochemical dose. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2011, 19(4): 745-749. (in Chinese)
[23]   柴强, 于爱忠, 陈桂平, 黄鹏. 单作与间作的棵间蒸发量差异及其主要影响因子. 中国生态农业学报, 2011, 19(6): 1307-1312.
Chai Q, Yu A Z, Chen G P, Huang P. Soil evaporation under sole cropping and intercropping systems and the main driving factors. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2011, 19(6): 1307-1312. (in Chinese)
[24]   李志贤, 王建武, 杨文亭, 舒磊, 杜清, 刘丽玲. 广东省甜玉米/大豆间作模式的效益分析. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18(3): 627-631.
Li Z X, Wang J W, Yang W T, Shu L, Du Q, Liu L L. Benefit of sweet corn/soybean intercropping in Guangdong Province. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2010, 18(3): 627-631. (in Chinese)
[25]   黄承建, 赵思毅, 王龙昌, 王季春, 赵勇, 蔡叶茂, 滕艳, 杨国才. 马铃薯/玉米套作对马铃薯品种光合特性及产量的影响. 作物学报, 2013, 39(2): 330-342.
Huang C J, Zhao S Y, Wang L C, Wang J C, Zhao Y, Cai Y M, Teng Y, Yang G C. Effect of potato/maize intercropping on photosynthetic characteristics and yield in two potato varieties. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2013, 39(2): 330-342. (in Chinese)
[26]   邓小燕, 王小春, 杨文钰, 宋春, 文熙宸, 张群, 毛树明. 玉米/大豆和玉米/甘薯模式下玉米磷素吸收特征及种间相互作用. 作物学报, 2013, 39(10): 1891-1898.
Deng X Yan, Wang X C, Yang W Y, Song C, Wen X C, Zhang Q, Mao S M. Phosphorus uptake and utilization of maize and inter-species interactions in maize/soybean and maize/sweet potato relay intercropping systems. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2013, 39(10): 1891-1898. (in Chinese)
[27]   白伟, 孙占祥, 郑家明, 侯志研, 刘洋, 冯良山, 杨宁. 辽西地区不同种植模式对春玉米产量形成及其生长发育特性的影响. 作物学报, 2014, 40(1): 181-189.
Bai W, Sun Z X, Zheng J M, Hou Z Y, Liu Y, Feng L S, Yang N. Effect of different planting patterns on maize growth and yield in western Liaoning Province. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2014, 40(1): 181-189. (in Chinese)
[28]   张向前, 黄国勤, 卞新民, 赵其国. 红壤旱地玉米对间作大豆和花生边行效应影响的研究. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20(8): 1010-1017.
Zhang X Q, Huang G Q, Bian X M, Zhao Q G. Marginal effect of soybean and peanut intercropped with maize in upland red soils. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2012, 20(8): 1010-1017. (in Chinese)
[29]   王旭, 曾昭海, 朱波, 胡跃高. 箭筈豌豆与燕麦不同间作混播模式对产量和品质的影响. 作物学报, 2007, 33(11): 1892-1895.
Wang X, Zeng Z H, Zhu B, Hu Y G. Effect of different intercropping and mixture modes on forage yield and quality of oat and common vetch. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2007, 33(11): 1892-1895. (in Chinese)