不同增碳方式对黄土高原旱地玉米产量、品质及水分利用效率的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.14.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探究黄土高原旱地玉米产量、品质和水分利用效率对不同增碳方式的响应，为该地区玉米高产高效栽培提供理论依据。【方法】于2022—2023年在甘肃省定西市开展玉米田间试验，共设1个不增碳和4个相等碳量的不同增碳处理：对照组CK，不增碳处理；S1，生物炭还田处理（0.5×10⁴ kg·hm^-2）；S2，秸秆粉碎全量还田处理（1.2×10⁴ kg·hm^-2）；S3，有机粪肥还田处理（2.0×10⁴ kg·hm^-2）；S4，50%秸秆粉碎还田（0.6×10⁴ kg·hm^-2）结合50%有机肥还田（1.0×10⁴ kg·hm^-2）处理，研究增碳方式对黄土高原旱地玉米土壤水分、干物质积累与转运、产量、水分利用效率及品质的影响。【结果】增碳处理降低了0—30 cm土层土壤容重、提高了土壤孔隙度，其中S1处理较CK处理显著提高了0—300 cm土层土壤含水量。相较于CK处理，S2、S3和S4处理显著增加了玉米开花期叶面积指数，而S1处理显著降低了叶绿素含量和叶面积指数；S2、S3和S4处理玉米成熟期地上部干物质积累量和最大干物质积累速率显著提高了10.83%—21.05%和8.47%—17.13%，玉米花后干物质积累量和花后干物质对籽粒的贡献率显著增加了28.58%—54.02%和11.18%—19.43%，玉米产量显著提高了17.22%—29.66%，其中S3处理增产效果最好；S1处理的最大干物质积累速率和成熟期干物质积累量分别显著降低了5.31%和10.32%，籽粒产量显著降低了7.05%；S3处理的籽粒产量水分利用效率显著提高了23.71%，而S1、S2和S4处理的籽粒产量水分利用效率较CK差异不显著；S2处理显著降低了籽粒蛋白含量，S2、S3和S4处理均显著降低了籽粒纤维素含量，但S1处理显著提高了籽粒的纤维素含量。【结论】在0.5×10⁴ kg C·hm^-2的碳施用量下，有机粪肥施用较秸秆还田和生物炭还田对玉米产量和水分利用效率的提升效果更好。

关键词: 玉米, 增碳方式, 干物质积累, 产量, 水分利用效率

Abstract:

【Objective】This study aimed to investigate the response of maize grain yield, quality and water use efficiency (WUE) in the dryland of the Loess Plateau to different ways of carbon returning, and to provide a theoretical basis for high-yield and high-efficiency cultivation of maize in this region.【Method】A maize field experiment was carried out in Dingxi City, Gansu Province, from 2022 to 2023, with one no-carbon returning and four different carbon-increasing treatments of equal carbon amounts: CK, control treatment without carbon returning; S1, biochar returning treatment (0.5×10⁴ kg·hm^-2); S2, straw returning treatment (1.2×10⁴ kg·hm^-2); S3, organic returning treatment (2.0×10⁴ kg·hm^-2); S4: 50% straw returning (0.6×10⁴ kg·hm^-2) combined with 50% organic returning treatment (1.0×10⁴ kg·hm^-2) to study the effects of carbon returning methods on soil moisture, dry matter accumulation and translocation, yield, water use efficiency and grain quality of maize in dryland of Loess Plateau.【Result】Carbon returning treatments reduced soil bulk weight and increased soil porosity in the 0-30 cm soil layer, where S1 treatment significantly increased soil water content in the 0-300 cm soil layer compared with CK treatment. Compared with the CK treatment, S1 treatment significantly decreased the SPAD value and leaf area index (LAI) at flowering stage, whereas S2, S3 and S4 treatments significantly increased the LAI of maize. The aboveground dry matter accumulation at harvest and the maximum rate of dry matter accumulation under S2, S3 and S4 treatment were significantly increased by 10.83%-21.05% and 8.47%-17.13%, respectively, while the dry matter accumulation of maize after anthesis and the contribution of post-flowering dry matter to grain yield significantly increased by 28.58%-54.02% and 11.18%-19.43%, respectively. And then, maize yields significantly increased by 17.22%-29.66%, with S3 demonstrating the most pronounced yield improvement. Conversely, compared with CK, S1 treatment significantly reduced the maximum rate of dry matter accumulation and dry matter accumulation at harvest by 5.31% and 10.32%, respectively, and then decreased grain yield by 7.05%. The S3 treatment significantly increased water use efficiency for grain yield by 23.71% relative to CK, while S1, S2, and S4 showed no significant differences in water use efficiency when compared with CK. Furthermore, compared with CK, S2 treatment significantly reduced grain protein content, while S2, S3, and S4 significantly decreased grain cellulose content. In contrast, S1 treatment significantly increased grain cellulose content compared with CK treatment. 【Conclusion】Under carbon applications of 0.5×10⁴ kg C·hm^-2, organic manure application was more effective in improving maize yield and water use efficiency than straw return and biochar return.

Key words: maize, carbon returning methods, dry matter accumulation, yield, water use efficiency

武凌彬, 王林林, 王江文, 王子超, 司佳昂, 李世清. 不同增碳方式对黄土高原旱地玉米产量、品质及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(14): 2751-2765.

WU LingBin, WANG LinLin, WANG JiangWen, WANG ZiChao, SI JiaAng, LI ShiQing. Effects of Different Carbon Returning Methods on Grain Yield, Quality and Water Use Efficiency of Maize in Dryland of the Loess Plateau[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(14): 2751-2765.

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.0578-1752.2025.14.004

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2025/V58/I14/2751

图/表 10

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

图4

表3

表4

不同增碳方式对玉米产量性状，产量及水分利用效率的影响"

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	耗水量 ETc (mm)	生物产量 Biomass yield (kg·hm^-2)	穗粒数 Number of grain per spikes	穗粒重 Grain weight per spike (g)	百粒重 100-grain weight (g)	籽粒产量 Grain yield (kg·hm^-2)	收获指数 Harvest index (%)	生物量水分利用效率 WUEb (kg·hm^-2·mm^-1)	籽粒产量水分利用效率 WUEg (kg·hm^-2·mm^-1)
2022	CK	358±30ab	14557±417c	531.13±73.19b	102.67±8.22b	23.94±2.26ab	4414±178c	30.35±1.87c	40.79±2.84a	12.37±1.00a
	S1	300±76b	14458±97c	477.83±65.23b	91.81±5.43b	22.15±2.15b	4469±93c	30.91±0.84c	50.98±15.06a	15.64±4.50a
	S2	376±57ab	15160±880bc	540.60±46.64b	138.64±9.28a	25.84±1.96ab	5173±217ab	34.15±0.87a	40.74±4.33a	13.92±1.67a
	S3	385±46ab	16367±189a	699.25±17.01a	153.42±11.56a	26.91±1.78a	5481±215a	33.49±1.50ab	42.97±5.56a	14.43±2.41a
	S4	421±58a	15599±158ab	647.69±55.11a	143.95±8.47a	26.73±1.68a	4896±171b	31.39±1.07bc	37.55±5.46a	11.82±2.64a
2023	CK	316±31ab	12106±560c	424.42±62.06bc	97.40±9.69b	22.36±1.70a	3285±118d	27.14±0.50c	38.62±5.08b	10.47±1.20b
	S1	258.58±12b	11501±546c	359.94±81.20c	84.85±8.19b	21.28±1.23a	2688±188e	23.43±2.46b	44.57±3.67ab	10.41±0.92b
	S2	296±51ab	13638±552b	462.63±29.78bc	129.70±11.79a	23.98±2.36a	3851±191c	28.24±0.96ab	47.12±9.51ab	13.63±2.21a
	S3	327±27a	15057±261a	586.23±13.20a	143.63±8.60a	24.75±2.29a	4501±25a	29.90±0.68a	46.27±4.75ab	13.81±1.13a
	S4	268±29ab	14327±508ab	517.40±62.43ab	132.40±10.42a	24.70±1.53a	4163±170b	29.10±1.15ab	53.88±7.61a	15.60±1.61a
两年平均 Average for two years	CK	337±30ab	13331±73d	477.78±84.26bc	100.03±8.95b	23.15±1.98ab	3849±141c	28.87±0.97bc	39.71±3.68a	11.49±1.09b
	S1	279±32b	12979±307d	418.88±92.33c	88.33±6.81b	21.72±1.68b	3578±138d	27.59±1.56c	47.78±5.89a	12.99±2.07ab
	S2	336±54ab	14399±369c	501.62±55.22b	134.17±10.54a	24.91±2.16ab	4512±180b	31.33±0.49a	43.93±6.88a	13.78±1.93ab
	S3	356±19a	15712±116a	642.74±63.38a	148.52±10.08a	25.83±2.03a	4991±118a	31.77±0.98a	44.62±2.04a	14.20±1.07a
	S4	345±44ab	14963±1071b	582.54±88.69a	138.17±9.44a	25.72±1.60a	4529±134b	30.27±0.33ab	45.72±6.53a	13.64±1.86ab
增碳方式 Carbon returning method (C)		ns	**	**	**	**	**	**	ns	ns
年份Year (Y)		**	**	**	*	*	**	**	ns	ns
增碳方式×年份 Carbon returning method×Year (C×Y)		ns	*	ns	ns	*	**	*	ns	*

表4

表5

图5

参考文献 49

[1]	山仑, 张岁岐. 能否实现大量节约灌溉用水?—我国节水农业现状与展望. 自然杂志, 2006, 28(2): 71-74.
	SHAN L, ZHANG S Q. Is possible to save large irrigation water?—The situation and prospect of water-saving agriculture in China. Chinese Journal of Nature, 2006, 28(2): 71-74. (in Chinese)
[2]	康钦俊. 黄土高原区土壤养分空间变异及其耕地质量评价[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2019.
	KANG Q J. Spatial variability of soil nutrients and evaluation of cultivated land quality in the Loess Plateau[D]. Yangling: Northwest A&F University, 2019. (in Chinese)
[3]	李荣. 我国耕地质量现状及提升建议. 中国农业综合开发, 2020, (7): 7-12.
	LI R. Current situation of China's arable land quality and suggestions for improving it. Agricultural Comprehensive Development in China, 2020, (7): 7-12. (in Chinese)
[4]	孟晗宇, 文杨, 艾力库提·艾沙, 魏占波, 张彬. 秸秆还田条件下减施氮肥影响稻田土壤氧化亚氮排放的微生物机制. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35 (12): 1-12.
	MENG H Y, WEN Y, EYSA A, WEI Z B, ZHANG B. Microbial mechanism of effect of nitrogen fertilizer reduction in combination with straw addition on nitrous oxide emission from a paddy soil. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2024, 35 (12): 1-12. (in Chinese)
[5]	PENG Z K, WANG L L, XIE J H, LI L L, COULTER J A, ZHANG R Z, LUO Z Z, CAI L Q, CARBERRY P, WHITBREAD A. Conservation tillage increases yield and precipitation use efficiency of wheat on the semi-arid Loess Plateau of China. Agricultural Water Management, 2020, 231: 106024.
[6]	张鹏, 陈国亮, 武正全. 浅析天水花牛苹果果园土壤有机质现状及提升对策. 果树资源学报, 2024, 5(5): 92-95.
	ZHANG P, CHEN G L, WU Z Q. Analysis of the current status and improvement strategies of soil organic matter in Tianshui Huaniu apple orchard. Journal of Fruit Resources, 2024, 5(5): 92-95. (in Chinese)
[7]	刘志平, 马晓楠, 解文艳, 杨振兴, 周怀平, 徐明岗. 山西典型旱地玉米产量及水分利用效率对长期不同施肥模式的响应. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41(4): 61-70.
	LIU Z P, MA X N, XIE W Y, YANG Z X, ZHOU H P, XU M G. Responses of maize yield and water use efficiency to long-term fertilization patterns in dryland of Shanxi Province. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2023, 41(4): 61-70. (in Chinese)
[8]	何如, 王立, 杨彩红, 孟小伟. 绿洲灌区种植模式对土壤物理性质与有机碳的影响. 草原与草坪, 2020, 40(4): 96-102.
	HE R, WANG L, YANG C H, MENG X W. Effect of rotation on soil physical properties and soil organic matter content in oasis irrigation area. Grassland and Turf, 2020, 40(4): 96-102. (in Chinese)
[9]	徐明岗, 张旭博, 孙楠, 张文菊. 农田土壤固碳与增产协同效应研究进展. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(6): 1441-1449.
	XU M G, ZAHNG X B, SUN N, ZHANG W J. Advance in research of synergistic effects of soil carbon sequestration on crop yields improvement in croplands. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2017, 23(6): 1441-1449. (in Chinese)
[10]	WANG L L, WANG S W, CHEN W, LI H B, DENG X P. Physiological mechanisms contributing to increased water-use efficiency in winter wheat under organic fertilization. PLoS ONE, 2017, 12(6): e0180205.
[11]	MA Y Q, WOOLF D, FAN M S, QIAO L, LI R, LEHMANN J. Global crop production increase by soil organic carbon. Nature Geoscience, 2023, 16(12): 1159-1165.
[12]	姜珊, 李衍素, 王娟娟, 贺超兴, 于贤昌, 王君. 我国秸秆还田技术发展现状. 中国蔬菜, 2021, (11): 27-32.
	JIANG S, LI Y S, WANG J J, HE C X, YU X C, WANG J. Development status of straw return technology in China. China Vegetables, 2021, (11): 27-32. (in Chinese)
[13]	王亚楠. 秸秆还田模式与氮肥用量对玉米氮素利用及产量的影响[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2023.
	WANG Y N. Effect of straw return pattern and nitrogen fertilizer dosage on nitrogen utilization and yield of maize[D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2023. (in Chinese)
[14]	白伟, 张立祯, 逄焕成, 孙占祥, 牛世伟, 蔡倩, 安景文. 秸秆还田配施氮肥对东北春玉米光合性能和产量的影响. 作物学报, 2017, 43(12): 1845-1855. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.01845
	BAI W, ZHANG L Z, PANG H C, SUN Z X, NIU S W, CAI Q, AN J W. Effects of straw returning combined with nitrogen fertilizer on photosynthetic performance and yield of spring maize in Northeast China. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2017, 43(12): 1845-1855. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.01845
[15]	郑金玉, 刘武仁, 罗洋, 郑洪兵, 李瑞平, 李伟堂. 秸秆还田对玉米生长发育及产量的影响. 吉林农业科学, 2014, 39(2): 42-46.
	ZHENG J Y, LIU W R, LUO Y, ZHENG H B, LI R P, LI W T. Effects of straws returned into field on growth and development and yield of maize. Journal of Jilin Agricultural Sciences, 2014, 39(2): 42-46. (in Chinese)
[16]	赵凌霄, 姜丽娜, 马建辉, 魏继拓, 赵冬阳. 秸秆过腹还田配施氮肥对小麦-玉米周年产量及土壤理化性质的影响. 河南农业科学, 2020, 49(11): 26-36.
	ZHAO L X, JIANG L N, MA J H, WEI J T, ZHAO D Y. Effects of returning straw to field through cow’s belly and applying nitrogen on annual yield of wheat and maize and soil physical and chemical properties. Journal of Henan Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 49(11): 26-36. (in Chinese)
[17]	HU Y J, SUN B H, WU S F, FENG H, GAO M X, ZHANG B B, LIU Y Y. After-effects of straw and straw-derived biochar application on crop growth, yield, and soil properties in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)-maize (Zea mays L.) rotations: A four-year field experiment. Science of The Total Environment, 2021, 780: 146560.
[18]	CHEN S T, XIA X, DING Y J, FENG X, LIN Q M, LI T Y, BIAN R J, LI L Q, CHENG K, ZHENG J F, ZHANG X H, XIA S P, WANG Y, LIU X Y, PAN G X. Changes in aggregate-associated carbon pools and chemical composition of topsoil organic matter following crop residue amendment in forms of straw, manure and biochar in a paddy soil. Geoderma, 2024, 448: 116967.
[19]	SI J A, WANG L L, ZHANG K, LI L L, FUDJOE S K, LUO Z Z. Irrigation as an effective way to increase potato yields in northern China: A meta-analysis. Agronomy, 2024, 14(3): 448.
[20]	PAN G X, SMITH P, PAN W N. The role of soil organic matter in maintaining the productivity and yield stability of cereals in China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2009, 129(1-3): 344-348.
[21]	刘卉, 周清明, 黎娟, 向德明, 张黎明. 长期定位连续施用生物炭对植烟土壤物理性状的影响. 华北农学报, 2018, 33(3): 182-188. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2018.03.027
	LIU H, ZHOU Q M, LI J, XIANG D M, ZHANG L M. Effects of long-term located continuous application of biochar on soil physical properties of planting tobacco. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2018, 33(3): 182-188. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2018.03.027
[22]	朱真令, 陈德, 叶雪珠. 秸秆炭化还田标准化发展现状. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(7): 1709-1713.
	ZHU Z L, CHEN D, YE X Z. Current status of standardization development of biochar from straw carbonization and field application. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(7): 1709-1713. (in Chinese)
[23]	ZOU Y P, AN Z F, CHEN X L, ZHENG X, ZHANG B, ZHANG S Y, CHANG S X, JIA J L. Effects of co-applied biochar and plant growth-promoting bacteria on soil carbon mineralization and nutrient availability under two nitrogen addition rates. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2023, 266: 115579.
[24]	杨艳, 杜丹, 杨雪芳, 原向阳, 宋喜娥, 孙大生. 等碳量配施玉米秸秆和生物炭对玉米生长及氮、磷、钾吸收的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024, (8): 180-187, 266.
	YANG Y, DU D, YANG X F, YUAN X Y, SONG X E, SUN D S. The combined effects of organic amendment with equal maize-straw and biochar carbon content on the growth and nitrogen,phosphorus and potassium uptake of maize. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2024, (8): 180-187, 266. (in Chinese)
[25]	LI S L, SHANGGUAN Z P. Positive effects of apple branch biochar on wheat yield only appear at a low application rate, regardless of nitrogen and water conditions. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2018, 18(11): 3235-3243.
[26]	李帅霖. 生物炭对旱作农田土壤生态功能的影响机制研究[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学(中国科学院教育部水土保持与生态环境研究中心), 2019.
	LI S L. Effects of biochar on soil ecological function under dryland farming[D]. Beijing: Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2019. (in Chinese)
[27]	李洋洋. 生物炭对苹果产量、品质及土壤养分有效性的研究[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2018.
	LI Y Y. Effects of biochar on apple yield, quality and soil nutrient availability[D]. Taian: Shandong Agricultural University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[28]	WANG L L, PALTA J A, CHEN W, CHEN Y L, DENG X P. Nitrogen fertilization improved water-use efficiency of winter wheat through increasing water use during vegetative rather than grain filling. Agricultural Water Management, 2018, 197: 41-53.
[29]	田磊, 屈佳伟, 于晓芳, 高聚林, 胡树平, 白雨, 李文博. 秸秆还田配施氮肥对河套平原砂壤土的物理特性和春玉米氮效率的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(12): 17-26.
	TIAN L, QU J W, YU X F, GAO J L, HU S P, BAI Y, LI W B. Effects of straw returning combined with nitrogen fertilizer on physical properties of sandy loam and nitrogen efficiency of spring maize in Hetao plain. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2022(12): 17-26. (in Chinese)
[30]	齐翔鲲, 李怿聪, 谢家闯, 黄凤麟, 李影, 陈若彤, 付健, 杨克军. 耕作和秸秆还田方式对土壤物理性状和酶活性及产量的影响[C]// 第二十届中国作物学会学术年会论文摘要集. 2023: 384.
	QI X K, LI Y C, XIE J C, HUANG F L, LI Y, CHEN RUO TONG, FU J, YANG K J. Effect of tillage and straw return practices on soil physical properties and enzyme activity and yield[C]// Abstracts of the 20th Annual Conference of the Crop Society of China. 2023: 384. (in Chinese)
[31]	许兰梅, 王明友. 施用有机肥对土壤物理性状和玉米生长的影响. 安徽农学通报, 2020, 26(7): 116-118.
	XU L M, WANG M Y. Effect of organic fertiliser application on soil physical properties and maize growth. Anhui Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 26(7): 116-118. (in Chinese)
[32]	杨封科, 高世铭, 崔增团, 郭贤仕, 张绪成. 甘肃省黄绵土耕地质量特征及其调控的关键技术. 西北农业学报, 2011, 20(3): 67-74.
	YANG F K, GAO S M, CUI Z T, GUO X S, ZHANG X C. Characteristics and key regulation techniques of loessial soil tilling quality in Gansu. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 2011, 20(3): 67-74. (in Chinese)
[33]	李泽毅, 马玉洁, 付鑫, 彭正萍, 李旭. 秸秆还田方式配施氮肥对玉米秸秆腐解特征及土壤有机碳的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024(10): 1-14.
	LI Z Y, MA Y J, FU X, PENG Z P, LI X. Effects of straw returning methods combined with nitrogen fertilizer on decomposition characteristics of maize straw and soil organic carbon. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2024(10): 1-14. (in Chinese)
[34]	马凌云. 生物炭添加对黄绵土水热变化的影响[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2023.
	MA L Y. Effect of biochar addition on hydrothermal changes in loessial soil[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2023. (in Chinese)
[35]	李慧欣阁, 陈士超, 段鹏程, 蔺方春. 微藻肥对土默川平原盐渍土理化性质及玉米产量的影响. 水土保持通报, 2025, 45(2): 12-21.
	LI H X G, CHEN S C, DUAN P C, LIN F C. Effects of microalgal fertilizer on physical and chemical properties of saline soil sand maize yield in Tumochuan Plain. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2025, 45(2): 12-21. (in Chinese)
[36]	高鹏, 孙继颖, 高聚林, 刘剑, 王志刚, 胡树平, 于晓芳, 包海柱, 纪楠. 深松对春玉米田土壤贮水性能及玉米子粒水分利用效率的影响. 玉米科学, 2022, 30(4): 90-96.
	GAO P, SUN J Y, GAO J L, LIU J, WANG Z G, HU S P, YU X F, BAO H Z, JI N. Response mechanism of soil moisture storage characteristics and kernel water use efficiency to subsoiling regulation in spring maize. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2022, 30(4): 90-96. (in Chinese)
[37]	王小林. 密度和有机肥提高覆膜春玉米水分利用效率的生理基础[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学, 2016.
	WANG X L. Physiological basis of planting density and orgainc manure increased water use efficiency of film mulched spring maize[D]. Beijing: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2016. (in Chinese)
[38]	张贵芹, 王洪章, 郭新送, 朱福军, 高涵, 张吉旺, 赵斌, 任佰朝, 刘鹏, 任昊. 有机物料投入对滨海盐碱地土壤理化性状和夏玉米产量形成的影响. 作物学报, 2024, 50(9): 2323-2334. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.43002
	ZHANG G Q, WANG H Z, GUO X S, ZHU F J, GAO H, ZAHNG J W, ZHAO B, REN B C, LIU P, REN H. Effects of organic material inputs on soil physicochemical properties and summer maize yield formation in coastal saline-alkali land. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(9): 2323-2334. (in Chinese)
[39]	张影, 刘星, 焦瑞锋, 李东方, 任秀娟, 吴大付, 陈锡岭. 生物质炭与有机物料配施的土壤培肥效果及对玉米生长的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25(9): 1287-1297.
	ZHANG Y, LIU X, JIAO R F, LI D F, REN X J, WU D F, CHEN X L. Effects of combined biochar and organic matter on soil fertility and maize growth. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2017, 25(9): 1287-1297. (in Chinese)
[40]	于博, 王钰艳, 任琴, 党玉蕾, 张志鹏, 王宇. 秸秆还田对土壤结构和春玉米生长的影响. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(10): 2446-2455. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20221624
	YU B, WANG Y Y, REN Q, DANG Y L, ZHANG Z P, WANG Y. Effects of straw returning on soil structure and spring maize growth. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2023, 35(10): 2446-2455. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20221624
[41]	郭书亚, 尚赏, 张艳, 汤其宁, 卢广远. 生物炭施用五年后对土壤生物化学特性及夏玉米产量的影响. 土壤与作物, 2022, 11(3): 290-297.
	GUO S Y, SHANG S, ZHANG Y, TANG Q N, LU G Y. Effects of biochar application after five years on soil biochemical properties and summer maize yield. Soils and Crops, 2022, 11(3): 290-297. (in Chinese)
[42]	孙向春, 冯涛, 殷晓燕, 邓喜明, 吕铎, 许文霞, 张美珍, 吴晓婷. 生物炭对土壤理化性质及玉米产量的影响. 陕西农业科学, 2022, 68(9): 5-9.
	SUN X C, FENG T, YIN X Y, DENG X M, LÜ D, XU W X, ZHANG M Z, WU X T. Effect of biochar on soil physical and chemical properties and corn yield. Shaanxi Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 68(9): 5-9. (in Chinese)
[43]	王鸣腾, 曾冲, 杨东霞, 李帅, 王梓萌, 周明远, 秦丁, 王宜伦, 盛开, 李刚, 李岚涛. 不同发酵方式有机肥配施化肥对夏玉米产量、光温及养分吸收积累特性的影响. 农业资源与环境学报, 2024. https://doi.org/10.13254/j.jare.2024.0342.
	WANG M T, ZENG C, YANG D X, LI S, WANG Z M, ZHOU M Y, QIN D, WANG Y L, SHENG K, LI G, LI L T. Effects of various fermentation methods for organic fertilizer combined with chemical fertilizer on the yield, light-temperature, and nutrient absorption and accumulation characteristics of summer maize. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2024. https://doi.org/10.13254/j.jare.2024.0342. (in Chinese)
[44]	周怀平, 解文艳, 关春林, 杨振兴, 李红梅. 长期秸秆还田对旱地玉米产量、效益及水分利用的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013, 19(2): 321-330.
	ZHOU H P, XIE W Y, GUAN C L, YANG Z X, LI H M. Effects of long-term straw-returning on corn yield, economic benefit and water use in arid farming areas. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2013, 19(2): 321-330. (in Chinese)
[45]	刘熙明, 袁静超, 梁尧, 刘剑钊, 任军, 高强, 冯国忠, 蔡红光. 还田方式对玉米秸秆腐解特征及其节肥潜力的影响. 农业资源与环境学报, 2025, 42(2): 404-411.
	LIU X M, YUAN J C, LIAO Y, LIU J Z, REN J, GAO Q, FENG G Z, CAI H G. Effects of returning method on decomposition characteristics of corn straw and its fertilizer-saving potential. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2025, 42(2): 404-411. (in Chinese)
[46]	殷启杰, 姜建武, 殷汉琴, 杨宗坤, 龚冬琴, 李桂芳, 褚先尧, 刘文波, 张敏. 有机物料投入对新垦耕地土壤养分和微生物代谢的影响. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(4): 969-983. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202504.007
	YIN Q J, JIANG J W, YIN H Q, YANG Z K, GONG D Q, LI G F, CHU X Y, LIU W B, ZHANG M. Effects of organic inputs on soil nutrients and microbial metabolism in newly reclaimed farmlands. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2025, 36(4): 969-983. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202504.007
[47]	刘婷. 不同有机物料腐解特征及对酶化学计量的影响[D]. 西宁: 青海大学, 2024.
	LIU T. Decomposition characteristics of different organic materials and their effects on enzyme stoichiometry[D]. Xining: Qinghai University, 2024. (in Chinese)
[48]	王长军, 李凤霞, 吴霞. 不同有机物料对银北灌区盐碱地土壤养分含量及氮有效性的影响. 现代农业科技, 2021(23): 141-142, 153.
	WANG C J, LI F X, WU X. Effects of different organic materials on soil nutrient content and nitrogen availability in saline alkali land of Yinbei irrigation area. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology, 2021(23): 141-142, 153. (in Chinese)
[49]	仇鹏. 种植密度对玉米植株和产量性状及籽粒品质的影响[D]. 太谷: 山西农业大学, 2022.
	QIU P. Effects of different planting density on physiological indexes and grain quality of maize[D]. Taigu: Shanxi Agricultural University, 2022. (in Chinese)

处理 Treatment	土壤容重 Soil bulk (g·cm^-3)			土壤孔隙度 Soil density (%)
处理 Treatment	0—10 cm	10—20 cm	20—30 cm	0—10 cm	10—20 cm	20—30 cm
CK	1.26±0.02a	1.31±0.01a	1.37±0.03a	53.20±0.53c	51.33±0.34c	49.21±1.06c
S1	1.23±0.02ab	1.29±0.01ab	1.35±0.01ab	54.17±0.79bc	51.95±0.30bc	49.82±0.27c
S2	1.20±0.01b	1.27±0.01bc	1.28±0.02c	55.32±0.21b	52.83±0.34ab	52.48±0.63a
S3	1.21±0.03b	1.26±0.03bc	1.29±0.05bc	54.86±1.06b	53.26±1.13a	52.03±1.59ab
S4	1.14±0.03c	1.25±0.02c	1.34±0.04abc	57.59±1.13a	53.70±0.65a	50.06±1.51bc
增碳方式 Carbon returning method	**	**	*	**	**	*

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	花后干物质积累量 Dry matter accumulation at post-anthesis (kg·hm^-2)	花后干物质积累对产量的贡献率 Contribution of dry matter accumulation at post-anthesis to yield (%)	花前干物质转运量 <BOLD>P</BOLD>re-anthesis dry matter remobilization (kg·hm^-2)	花前干物质转运效率 <BOLD>P</BOLD>re-anthesis dry matter remobilization efficiency (%)
2022	CK	2834.66±176.88d	64.22±4.93a	1579.42±140.33bc	13.77±1.33b
	S1	2103.05±163.81c	47.06±2.59b	2365.84±174.48a	22.68±1.59a
	S2	3366.13±225.67b	65.07±5.54a	1807.20±121.28b	14.79±1.11b
	S3	4048.32±324.76a	73.86±4.71a	1432.42±135.64bc	11.21±0.91c
	S4	3240.61±312.98bc	66.18±6.39a	1655.69±137.46c	13.28±1.16bc
2023	CK	1969.51±153.98c	59.96±5.26b	1315.21±106.40a	12.96±0.69a
	S1	1867.43±151.75c	69.49±5.32ab	820.08±65.37d	8.83±0.75bc
	S2	2811.26±166.29b	72.99±7.07a	1040.13±72.31bc	9.56±0.76bc
	S3	3351.09±257.87a	74.45±5.58a	1150.30±77.46b	9.75±0.84b
	S4	3254.26±303.20a	78.18±4.47a	908.24±54.42cd	8.15±0.78c
两年平均 Average for two years	CK	2402.08±165.43c	62.09±5.09b	1447.32±123.37ab	13.37±1.01b
	S1	1985.24±157.78d	58.27±3.95b	1592.95±119.92a	15.76±1.17a
	S2	3088.70±159.98b	69.03±6.30a	1423.66±96.80ab	12.17±0.93bc
	S3	3699.70±291.31a	74.16±5.14a	1291.36±106.55b	10.48±0.87c
	S4	3247.43±308.09b	72.18±5.43a	1281.96±95.94b	10.72±0.97c
增碳方式 Carbon returning method (C)		**	**	**	**
年份 Year (Y)		**	**	**	**
增碳方式×年份 Carbon returning method×Year (C×Y)		*	**	**	**

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	蛋白 Protein (%)	脂肪 Fat (%)	淀粉 Starch (%)	纤维 Cellulose (%)
2022	CK	9.74±0.86ab	2.34±0.16a	56.10±5.38a	2.17±0.19a
	S1	10.11±0.99ab	2.54±0.21a	60.16±4.17a	1.60±0.14b
	S2	8.58±0.50b	2.53±0.25a	61.54±4.80a	1.25±0.09c
	S3	10.29±0.97a	2.38±0.14a	62.81±5.66a	1.25±0.09c
	S4	9.68±0.88ab	2.28±0.15a	61.17±3.54a	1.31±0.09c
2023	CK	10.18±0.43a	2.39±0.22a	60.57±0.45c	1.26±0.22c
	S1	9.81±0.07a	2.56±0.03a	56.48±0.07b	2.18±0.08a
	S2	8.64±0.49b	2.54±0.33a	63.24±2.50a	1.61±0.12b
	S3	10.36±0.32a	2.35±0.09a	61.97±0.77ab	1.26±0.08c
	S4	9.75±0.17a	2.29±0.10a	61.59±0.83ab	1.32±0.11c
两年平均 Average for two years	CK	9.96±0.66a	2.37±0.17ab	58.34±4.20a	1.72±0.53b
	S1	9.96±0.65a	2.55±0.13a	58.32±3.31a	1.89±0.34a
	S2	8.61±0.44b	2.53±0.26a	62.39±3.54a	1.43±0.22c
	S3	10.33±0.65a	2.37±0.11ab	62.39±3.60a	1.26±0.08d
	S4	9.72±0.57a	2.29±0.17a	61.38±2.31a	1.32±0.09cd
增碳方式Carbon returning method (C)		**	ns	ns	**
年份Year (Y)		ns	ns	ns	ns
增碳方式×年份 Carbon returning method×Year (C×Y)		ns	ns	ns	**