不同施肥模式稻油轮作周年产量及土壤肥力的变化

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.16.005

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】To explore the potential of optimizing fertilization under rice-rapeseed rotation for increasing crop yield and efficiency in medium and low yield fields, this study analyzed the effects of optimized fertilization on yield, nutrient absorption, and soil fertility in rice-rapeseed rotation, as well as the effectiveness of rice-rapeseed rotation in improving soil fertility. This study aimed to identify fertilization strategies suitable for medium and low yield fields and the potential for improving quality and efficiency in rice-rapeseed rotation, so as to provide the theoretical guidance for reducing obstacles in medium and low yield fields, promoting efficient production in rice-rapeseed rotation, and achieving sustainable development of rice-rapeseed rotation.【Method】The experiment was conducted at the Agricultural Science Research Institute in Rugao City, Jiangsu Province from 2017 to 2024, with low yield fields as the research objects. Through small-scale experiments, no fertilization treatment (CK), no nitrogen treatment (PK), no phosphorus treatment (NK), farmer's habitual fertilization treatment (FFP), and optimized fertilization treatment (OPT) were set up. By analyzing the annual yield of crops in both water and drought seasons, the nutrient absorption of aboveground parts during maturity, and soil nutrient content, the yield change rules under different fertilization systems of rice-rapeseed rotation were clarified, and the main influencing factors were explored.【Result】During the seven year rotation period, compared with FFP, the yield and yield composition of rice and rapeseed treated with OPT were more stable with increasing rotation cycles. Compared with FFP, OPT treatment significantly increased the nitrogen and phosphorus partial productivity of rice and rapeseed, with rice showing 51.5%-73.3% and 81.8%-107.9% higher nitrogen and phosphorus partial productivity, respectively; rapeseed was 137.2%-152.3% and 89.8%-101.9% higher, respectively. During the four-year rotation period, the aboveground biomass of rice and rapeseed treated with OPT was higher than that treated with FFP. Comparing the two annual rotation periods at the beginning and end of the comparative experiment, it was found that the accumulation of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in the aboveground parts of rice and rapeseed treated with OPT was higher than that under FFP treatment, and OPT treatment had a better effect on improving soil organic matter, total nitrogen, and available potassium than FFP treatment. After 7 years of rice-rapeseed rotation, the soil fertility index significantly increased (63.8%-117.2%) under all treatments. Compared with FFP treatment, the average membership degree of five soil chemical indicators in the rice season treated with OPT was higher than that under FFP treatment, and its comprehensive fertility index increased by 13.4%-19.2%. In addition, the soil phosphorus activation coefficient during the three-year rotation period was monitored, and it was found that the OPT treatment had a higher soil phosphorus activation coefficient than under FFP treatment. 【Conclusion】Compared with the traditional fertilization practices of farmers, optimizing fertilization could be achieved by optimizing fertilizer management. Based on reducing nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer application by 40% and 50% in rice and 60% and 50% in rapeseed, stabilizing their yield composition, maintaining high biomass and nutrient absorption, and achieving stable annual yield in the rice-rapeseed intercropping system; the performance of optimized fertilization treatment in improving fertilizer utilization efficiency and soil fertility was better than that of farmers' habitual treatment. Therefore, optimizing fertilization under long-term fertilizer reduction could coordinate crop nutrient needs and nutrient supply, maintain stable or increased crop yields, and improve fertilizer utilization efficiency. Rice-rapeseed rotation could improve soil fertility in medium and low yield fields, achieve obstacle reduction in medium and low yield fields, and promote sustainable development of rice-rapeseed rotation.

Key words: rice-rapeseed rotation, fertilization modes, yield, nutrient absorption, fertilizer utilization rate, soil fertility

DONG YunQi, HUANG Jian, CHAI YiXiao, YANG ShiChao, WANG Min, MENG XuSheng, GUO ShiWei. Changes in Annual Yield and Soil Fertility of Rice-Rapeseed Rotation Under Different Fertilization Modes[J].Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(16): 3201-3219.

Figures/Tables 11

Table 1

Rice yield and yield composition under different fertilization system"

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	单位面积穗数 Panicle number per acre (×10⁴·hm^-2)	穗粒数 Grains per panicle	千粒重 1000-seed weight (g)	实际产量 Grain yield (t·hm^-2)
2017	CK	241.3±0.3c	114.5±2.1c	26.87±0.31a	6.68±0.18c
	PK	243.2±1.8c	115.5±2.1c	26.37±0.41a	6.90±0.22c
	NK	289.5±2.8b	126.8±0.6ab	27.09±0.23a	9.46±0.17b
	FFP	310.8±4.3a	122.5±1.1bc	26.16±0.22a	10.13±0.43a
	OPT	299.8±3.1ab	136.0±2.5a	26.78±0.77a	9.98±0.09ab
2018	CK	222.5±7.3c	111.9±1.9a	26.63±0.40a	6.10±0.29c
	PK	214.1±3.6c	110.3±4.0a	26.87±0.42a	5.94±0.32c
	NK	261.1±6.7b	112.5±2.7a	26.20±0.40a	7.33±0.25b
	FFP	318.3±8.9a	117.2±2.1a	25.43±0.25a	9.06±0.30a
	OPT	305.2±4.5a	116.7±1.4a	25.40±0.87a	8.92±0.12a
2019	CK	188.9±2.2c	102.4±2.8c	28.85±0.22a	5.33±0.16c
	PK	176.7±3.9c	121.7±4.4a	28.69±0.39a	5.90±0.23c
	NK	276.9±5.8b	111.4±1.4bc	28.39±0.49a	8.56±0.22b
	FFP	325.7±3.3a	113.5±1.3ab	27.79±0.25a	10.04±0.16a
	OPT	308.8±6.8a	110.4±1.5bc	27.89±0.99a	9.12±0.20b
2020	CK	155.7±4.0c	95.9±2.1b	27.77±0.26ab	3.97±0.09c
	PK	152.2±1.3c	96.4±5.2b	28.09±0.25a	3.94±0.06c
	NK	259.5±2.7b	116.4±0.6a	27.23±0.20abc	8.03±0.11b
	FFP	297.8±2.8a	112.5±2.8a	26.11±0.55c	8.62±0.06a
	OPT	285.1±2.6a	117.3±1.4a	26.33±0.30bc	8.69±0.10a
2021	CK	165.7±2.5c	117.8±2.7a	29.15±0.33a	5.41±0.11c
	PK	171.5±9.5c	110.6±7.7a	29.39±0.57a	5.04±0.07c
	NK	283.9±8.3b	116.8±5.1a	28.40±1.15ab	8.49±0.12b
	FFP	311.6±16.8a	109.7±4.3a	28.13±0.64ab	8.98±0.09ab
	OPT	311.5±1.0a	111.2±1.5a	27.56±0.25b	9.33±0.11a
2022	CK	186.8±9.3b	105.3±2.0a	25.02±0.54a	4.60±0.19b
	PK	185.3±1.3b	105.5±3.6a	25.36±0.50a	4.75±0.19b
	NK	310.7±2.6a	105.4±4.5a	25.31±0.27a	8.00±0.10a
	FFP	325.6±2.7a	102.7±1.7a	25.43±0.23a	7.97±0.09a
	OPT	316.8±4.1a	102.9±2.2a	25.63±0.51a	8.27±0.10a
2023	CK	176.4±4.0c	114.5±2.4c	28.10±0.48a	5.07±0.10c
	PK	190.4±3.8c	112.9±3.6c	27.29±0.31abc	5.20±0.10c
	NK	274.8±1.7b	117.8±2.0bc	27.41±0.45ab	8.29±0.14b
	FFP	309.6±6.5a	126.6±1.1ab	25.75±0.12c	9.85±0.13a
	OPT	305.6±5.2a	128.5±2.8a	26.47±0.22bc	10.04±0.14a
2024	CK	194.9±6.0b	100.4±0.8b	26.22±0.49a	4.07±0.09b
	PK	204.7±4.3b	102.7±1.6b	26.29±0.50a	4.26±0.17b
	NK	309.4±9.6a	109.1±0.5ab	25.72±0.44a	6.84±0.21a
	FFP	309.9±7.8a	114.3±1.2a	25.45±0.20a	7.06±0.19a
	OPT	311.4±3.7a	113.8±2.5a	25.04±0.31a	7.34±0.16a
年份 Year		^***	^***	^***	^***
施肥 Fertilization		^***	^***	^***	^***
年份×施肥 Year×Fertilization		^***	^***	^***	^***

Table 1

Fig. 1

Table 2

Rapeseed yield and yield composition under different fertilization system"

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	每株角数 Horns per plant	每角粒数 Particles per horn	千粒重 1000-seed weight (g)	实际产量 Grain yield (t·hm^-2)
2018	CK	217.1±12.1c	21.4±0.9c	3.33±0.11a	1.41±0.15c
	PK	223.6±14.0c	22.0±0.8bc	3.41±0.02a	1.75±0.15c
	NK	315.4±7.1b	21.9±0.4c	3.47±0.05a	2.68±0.14b
	FFP	385.7±15.6a	23.7±0.6ab	3.51±0.03a	3.20±0.16a
	OPT	386.3±12.2a	24.7±0.5a	3.38±0.13a	3.04±0.32ab
2019	CK	313.3±7.8c	20.5±0.7a	3.40±0.06a	2.50±0.18c
	PK	316.4±13.2c	20.5±0.3a	3.51±0.02a	2.58±0.16c
	NK	531.9±11.2b	20.2±0.3a	2.92±0.11b	3.40±0.12b
	FFP	619.9±10.7a	19.7±0.2a	2.88±0.09b	3.92±0.16a
	OPT	605.7±7.8a	20.0±0.2a	3.40±0.05a	3.72±0.06ab
2020	CK	241.5±7.0c	20.5±1.1a	4.95±0.10a	2.74±0.12c
	PK	243.5±15.4c	21.0±0.8a	5.19±0.05a	2.91±0.15c
	NK	351.3±8.7b	20.5±0.5a	4.98±0.07a	3.61±0.13b
	FFP	408.9±5.9a	20.9±0.9a	4.94±0.13a	4.38±0.15a
	OPT	408.1±6.7a	20.2±0.2a	4.99±0.08a	4.36±0.10a
2021	CK	273.0±9.5c	20.9±0.3a	3.56±0.06b	2.27±0.10c
	PK	293.7±6.9c	20.7±0.2a	3.52±0.06b	2.47±0.08c
	NK	374.9±6.6b	20.6±0.7a	3.84±0.07a	3.27±0.11b
	FFP	423.2±6.6a	21.1±0.5a	3.88±0.10a	3.74±0.08a
	OPT	407.4±9.3a	21.1±0.4a	3.97±0.04a	3.77±0.07a
2022	CK	270.1±8.3c	23.0±0.4a	3.53±0.02ab	2.41±0.67c
	PK	278.5±3.7c	24.2±0.6a	3.63±0.05a	2.72±0.08c
	NK	406.9±7.9b	23.8±0.8a	3.29±0.03b	3.26±0.19b
	FFP	511.5±9.6a	23.2±0.7a	3.59±0.20a	4.54±0.11a
	OPT	503.0±15.4a	23.0±0.2a	3.47±0.10ab	4.55±0.29a
2023	CK	264.8±6.7c	22.1±0.6b	3.70±0.01a	2.36±0.07c
	PK	265.5±4.6c	24.0±0.7a	3.75±0.01a	2.48±0.06c
	NK	407.4±7.3b	23.8±0.6ab	3.51±0.01a	3.71±0.07b
	FFP	505.8±13.1a	22.7±0.2ab	3.69±0.16a	4.57±0.09a
	OPT	495.3±8.6a	22.9±0.5ab	3.53±0.15a	4.47±0.13a
2024	CK	204.9±0.4c	24.6±0.2a	3.91±0.01a	2.44±0.07c
	PK	236.7±5.6c	24.2±0.7ab	3.83±0.01a	2.53±0.05c
	NK	348.8±7.8b	24.1±0.5ab	3.97±0.01a	3.76±0.08b
	FFP	498.7±3.3a	22.5±0.6b	3.72±0.12a	4.71±0.06a
	OPT	484.8±20.4a	23.1±0.2ab	3.89±0.05a	4.72±0.07a
年份 Year		^***	^***	^***	^***
施肥 Fertilization		^***	ns	^***	^***
年份×施肥 Year×Fertilization		^***	^***	^***	^***

Table 2

Fig. 2

Table 3

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Table 4

Fig. 6

Table 5

References 51

[1]	程勇翔, 王秀珍, 郭建平, 赵艳霞, 黄敬峰. 中国水稻生产的时空动态分析. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(17): 3473-3485. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.17.003.
	CHENG Y X, WANG X Z, GUO J P, ZHAO Y X, HUANG J F. The temporal-spatial dynamic analysis of China rice production. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012, 45(17): 3473-3485. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.17.003. (in Chinese)
[2]	严茂林, 葛玮玮, 张翔, 黄韵宁, 张志丹, 张洋. 我国油料产业形势分析与发展对策. 中国油脂, 2023, 48(6): 8-18.
	YAN M L, GE W W, ZHANG X, HUANG Y N, ZHANG Z D, ZHANG Y. Situation analysis and development countermeasures of China’s oilseed industry. China Oils and Fats, 2023, 48(6): 8-18. (in Chinese)
[3]	王汉中. 我国油菜产业发展的历史回顾与展望. 中国油料作物学报, 2010, 32(2): 300-302.
	WANG H Z. Review and future development of rapeseed industry in China. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2010, 32(2): 300-302. (in Chinese)
[4]	金树权, 陈若霞, 汪峰, 姚红燕, 谌江华. 不同氮肥运筹模式对稻田田面水氮浓度和水稻产量的影响. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(1): 242-248.
	JIN S Q, CHEN R X, WANG F, YAO H Y, CHEN J H. Effects of different nitrogen fertilizer application modes on the variation of nitrogen concentration in paddy field surface water and the yield of rice. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34(1): 242-248. (in Chinese)
[5]	ZHANG H Z, SHI L L, WEN D Z, YU K L. Soil potential labile but not occluded phosphorus forms increase with forest succession. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2016, 52(1): 41-51.
[6]	MENEZES-BLACKBURN D, GILES C, DARCH T, GEORGE T S, BLACKWELL M, STUTTER M, SHAND C, LUMSDON D, COOPER P, WENDLER R, BROWN L, ALMEIDA D S, WEARING C, ZHANG H, HAYGARTH P M. Opportunities for mobilizing recalcitrant phosphorus from agricultural soils: A review. Plant and Soil, 2018, 427(1): 5-16.
[7]	车品高, 陈国徽, 曹国军, 高冰可, 陈艳芳, 熊文, 应治宏, 周庆友. 稻油轮作下秸秆还田对土壤养分和作物产量的影响. 作物学报, 2024, 50(12): 3118-3128. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.32045
	CHE P G, CHEN G H, CAO G J, GAO B K, CHEN Y F, XIONG W, YING Z H, ZHOU Q Y. Effects of straw return on soil nutrients and crop yield in rice-rapeseed rotation. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(12): 3118-3128. (in Chinese)
[8]	YANG R, GENG S Y, WANG X Y. Differences of wheat yield and economic benefits between soybean-wheat and rice-wheat cropping under different nitrogen fertilization patterns in Jianghan Plain, China. The Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020, 31(2): 441-448.
[9]	HIJBEEK R, VAN ITTERSUM M K, TEN BERGE H F M, GORT G, SPIEGEL H, WHITMORE A P. Do organic inputs matter-a meta-analysis of additional yield effects for arable crops in Europe. Plant and Soil, 2017, 411(1): 293-303.
[10]	ZHANG X X, ZHANG R J, GAO J S, WANG X C, FAN F L, MA X T, YIN H Q, ZHANG C W, FENG K, DENG Y. Thirty-one years of rice-rice-green manure rotations shape the rhizosphere microbial community and enrich beneficial bacteria. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2017, 104: 208-217.
[11]	LUDWIG B, GEISSELER D, MICHEL K, JOERGENSEN R G, SCHULZ E, MERBACH I, RAUPP J, RAUBER R, HU K, NIU L, LIU X. Effects of fertilization and soil management on crop yields and carbon stabilization in soils. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2011, 31(2): 361-372.
[12]	YOUSAF M, LI X K, ZHANG Z, REN T, CONG R H, ATA-UL-KARIM S T, FAHAD S, SHAH A N, LU J W. Nitrogen fertilizer management for enhancing crop productivity and nitrogen use efficiency in a rice-oilseed rape rotation system in China. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2016, 7: 1496. pmid: 27746809
[13]	YAN J Y, REN T, WANG K K, YE T H, SONG Y, CONG R H, LI X K, LU Z F, LU J W. Optimizing phosphate fertilizer input to reduce phosphorus loss in rice-oilseed rape rotation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2023, 30(11): 31533-31545.
[14]	王寅. 直播和移栽冬油菜氮磷钾肥施用效果的差异及机理研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2014.
	WANG Y. Study on the different responses to nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium fertilizers and the mechanism between direct sown and transplanted winter oilseed rape[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2014. (in Chinese)
[15]	荣湘民, 刘强, 朱红梅. 水稻的源库关系及碳、氮代谢的研究进展. 中国水稻科学, 1998, 12(S1): 63.
	RONG X M, LIU Q, ZHU H M. Research progress on the source sink relationship and carbon and nitrogen metabolism of rice. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 1998, 12 (S1): 63. (in Chinese)
[16]	JENNER C F, UGALDE T D, ASPINALL D. The physiology of starch and protein deposition in the endosperm of wheat. Functional Plant Biology, 1991, 18(3): 211.
[17]	HE H, PENG M W, LU W D, HOU Z N, LI J H. Commercial organic fertilizer substitution increases wheat yield by improving soil quality. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 851: 158132.
[18]	SHAN L N, HE Y F, CHEN J, HUANG Q, LIAN X, WANG H C, LIU Y L. Nitrogen surface runoff losses from a Chinese cabbage field under different nitrogen treatments in the Taihu Lake Basin, China. Agricultural Water Management, 2015, 159: 255-263.
[19]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
	BAO S D. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis. 3rd ed. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[20]	MANNA M C, SWARUP A, WANJARI R H, RAVANKAR H N, MISHRA B, SAHA M N, SINGH Y V, SAHI D K, SARAP P A. Long-term effect of fertilizer and manure application on soil organic carbon storage, soil quality and yield sustainability under sub-humid and semi-arid tropical India. Field Crops Research, 2005, 93(2/3): 264-280.
[21]	YADAV R L, DWIVEDI B S, PANDEY P S. Rice-wheat cropping system: assessment of sustainability under green manuring and chemical fertilizer inputs. Field Crops Research, 2000, 65(1): 15-30.
[22]	XIE Z J, TU S X, SHAH F, XU C X, CHEN J R, HAN D, LIU G R, LI H L, MUHAMMAD I, CAO W D. Substitution of fertilizer-N by green manure improves the sustainability of yield in double-rice cropping system in South China. Field Crops Research, 2016, 188: 142-149.
[23]	WU W, DONG X O, CHEN G M, LIN Z X, CHI W C, TANG W J, YU J, WANG S S, JIANG X Z, LIU X L, et al. The elite haplotype OsGATA8-H coordinates nitrogen uptake and productive tiller formation in rice. Nature Genetics, 2024, 56(7): 1516-1526.
[24]	GUO J X, YANG S N, GAO L M, LU Z F, GUO J J, SUN Y M, KONG Y L, LING N, SHEN Q R, GUO S W. Nitrogen nutrient index and leaf function affect rice yield and nitrogen efficiency. Plant and Soil, 2019, 445(1): 7-21.
[25]	GUO J X, TIAN G L, ZHOU Y, WANG M, LING N, SHEN Q R, GUO S W. Evaluation of the grain yield and nitrogen nutrient status of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) using thermal imaging. Field Crops Research, 2016, 196: 463-472.
[26]	郭九信. 养分优化管理提高水稻产量及其生理生态机制的研究[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2015.
	GUO J X. Studies on optimized nutrient management for rice yield and its physiological and ecological mechanisms[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Agricultural University, 2015. (in Chinese)
[27]	钟旭华, 黄农荣, 郑海波, 彭少兵, Roland J Buresh. 不同时期施氮对华南双季杂交稻产量及氮素吸收和氮肥利用率的影响. 杂交水稻, 2007, 22(4): 62-66, 70.
	ZHONG X H, HUANG N R, ZHENG H B, PENG S B, BURESH R J. Effect of nitrogen application timing on grain yield, nitrogen uptake and use efficiency of hybrid rice in South China. Hybrid Rice, 2007, 22(4): 62-66, 70. (in Chinese)
[28]	仇少君, 赵士诚, 苗建国, 徐新朋, 孙刚, 易琼, 王淳, 张文学, 何萍. 氮素运筹对两个晚稻品种产量及其主要构成因素的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2012, 18(6): 1326-1335.
	QIU S J, ZHAO S C, MIAO J G, XU X P, SUN G, YI Q, WANG C, ZHANG W X, HE P. Effect of different N management practices on yield and its main formed factors in two later-season rice genotypes. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2012, 18(6): 1326-1335. (in Chinese)
[29]	申哲, 韩天富, 黄晶, 曲潇林, 马常宝, 柳开楼, 王慧颖, 刘立生, 李冬初, 李亚贞, 王秋菊, 张会民. 中国水稻相对产量差时空变异及其对氮肥的响应. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2023, 29(5): 789-801.
	SHEN Z, HAN T F, HUANG J, QU X L, MA C B, LIU K L, WANG H Y, LIU L S, LI D C, LI Y Z, WANG Q J, ZHANG H M. Spatio-temporal variation of relative yield gap of rice and its response to nitrogen fertilizer in China. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2023, 29(5): 789-801. (in Chinese)
[30]	YU X J, CHEN Q, SHI W C, GAO Z, SUN X, DONG J J, LI J, WANG H T, GAO J G, LIU Z G, ZHANG M. Interactions between phosphorus availability and microbes in a wheat-maize double cropping system: A reduced fertilization scheme. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2022, 21(3): 840-854.
[31]	TIAN W, WANG L, LI Y, ZHUANG K M, LI G, ZHANG J B, XIAO X J, XI Y G. Responses of microbial activity, abundance, and community in wheat soil after three years of heavy fertilization with manure-based compost and inorganic nitrogen. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2015, 213: 219-227.
[32]	YOU L C, ROS G H, CHEN Y L, SHAO Q, YOUNG M D, ZHANG F S, DE VRIES W. Global mean nitrogen recovery efficiency in croplands can be enhanced by optimal nutrient, crop and soil management practices. Nature Communications, 2023, 14: 5747. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-41504-2 pmid: 37717014
[33]	ZHENG M H, XU M C, ZHANG J, LIU Z F, MO J M. Soil diazotrophs sustain nitrogen fixation under high nitrogen enrichment via adjustment of community composition. mSystems, 2024, 9(10): e0054724.
[34]	莫润秀, 江立庚, 郭立, 胡均铭, 刘开强, 周佳民, 梁天锋, 曾可, 丁成泉. 氮肥运筹对水稻植株不同形态氮素含量的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2010, 24(1): 49-54. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7216.2010.01.09
	MO R X, JIANG L G, GUO L, HU J M, LIU K Q, ZHOU J M, LIANG T F, ZENG K, DING C Q. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer management on nitrogen contents in different forms in rice plants. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2010, 24(1): 49-54. (in Chinese)
[35]	XIE K L, GUO J J, WARD K, LUO G W, SHEN Q R, GUO S W. The potential for improving rice yield and nitrogen use efficiency in smallholder farmers: A case study of Jiangsu, China. Agronomy, 2020, 10(3): 419.
[36]	PENG S B, BURESH R J, HUANG J L, ZHONG X H, ZOU Y B, YANG J C, WANG G H, LIU Y Y, HU R F, TANG Q Y, CUI K H, ZHANG F S, DOBERMANN A. Improving nitrogen fertilization in rice by sitespecific N management. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2010, 30(3): 649-656.
[37]	JU X T, KOU C L, ZHANG F S, CHRISTIE P. Nitrogen balance and groundwater nitrate contamination: Comparison among three intensive cropping systems on the North China Plain. Environmental Pollution, 2006, 143(1): 117-125. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2005.11.005 pmid: 16364521
[38]	CHEN X H, YAN X J, WANG M K, CAI Y Y, WENG X F, SU D, GUO J X, WANG W Q, HOU Y, YE D L, et al. Long-term excessive phosphorus fertilization alters soil phosphorus fractions in the acidic soil of pomelo orchards. Soil and Tillage Research, 2022, 215: 105214.
[39]	PURWANTO B H, ALAM S. Impact of intensive agricultural management on carbon and nitrogen dynamics in the humid tropics. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2020, 66(1): 50-59.
[40]	SHCHERBAK I, MILLAR N, ROBERTSON G P. Global metaanalysis of the nonlinear response of soil nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions to fertilizer nitrogen. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014, 111(25): 9199-9204.
[41]	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.
[42]	陈安磊, 谢小立, 陈惟财, 王凯荣, 高超. 长期施肥对红壤稻田耕层土壤碳储量的影响. 环境科学, 2009, 30(5): 1267-1272.
	CHEN A L, XIE X L, CHEN W C, WANG K R, GAO C. Effect of long-term fertilization on soil plough layer carbon storage in a reddish paddy soil. Environmental Science, 2009, 30(5): 1267-1272. (in Chinese)
[43]	YU Q G, HU X, MA J W, YE J, SUN W C, WANG Q, LIN H. Effects of long-term organic material applications on soil carbon and nitrogen fractions in paddy fields. Soil and Tillage Research, 2020, 196: 104483.
[44]	葛晓光, 王晓雪, 付亚文, 刘秀茹. 长期定位施用氮肥对菜田土壤肥力变化的影响. 中国蔬菜, 1997(5): 1-6.
	GE X G, WANG X X, FU Y W, LIU X R. Effect of long-term fixed application of nitrogen fertilizer on soil fertility in vegetable fields. China Vegetables, 1997(5): 1-6. (in Chinese)
[45]	SHANG Q Y, GAO C M, YANG X X, WU P P, LING N, SHEN Q R, GUO S W. Ammonia volatilization in Chinese double rice-cropping systems: A 3-year field measurement in long-term fertilizer experiments. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2014, 50(5): 715-725.
[46]	ZHANG J, BAO X, WANG T. Effect of green manure utilization and reduced N fertilizer on wheat yield and soil fertility. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2011, 25: 998-1003. doi: 10.11869/hnxb.2011.05.0998
[47]	SÁNCHEZ-NAVARRO V, ZORNOZA R, FAZ Á, FERNÁNDEZ J A. Comparing legumes for use in multiple cropping to enhance soil organic carbon, soil fertility, aggregates stability and vegetables yields under semi-arid conditions. Scientia Horticulturae, 2019, 246: 835-841.
[48]	蔡常被. 水田油菜用地养地初步调查研究. 湖北农业科学, 1978, 17(8): 12-13.
	CAI C B. Preliminary investigation and study on the cultivation of rape land in paddy field. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 1978, 17(8): 12-13. (in Chinese)
[49]	BAI Z H, LI H G, YANG X Y, ZHOU B K, SHI X J, WANG B R, LI D C, SHEN J B, CHEN Q, QIN W, OENEMA O, ZHANG F S. The critical soil P levels for crop yield, soil fertility and environmental safety in different soil types. Plant and Soil, 2013, 372(1): 27-37.
[50]	黄晶, 张杨珠, 徐明岗, 高菊生. 长期施肥下红壤性水稻土有效磷的演变特征及对磷平衡的响应. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(6): 1132-1141. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.06.009.
	HUANG J, ZHANG Y Z, XU M G, GAO J S. Evolution characteristics of soil available phosphorus and its response to soil phosphorus balance in paddy soil derived from red earth under long-term fertilization. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(6): 1132-1141. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.06.009. (in Chinese)
[51]	都江雪, 柳开楼, 黄晶. 中国稻田土壤有效磷时空演变特征及其对磷平衡的响应. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(2): 476-486.
	DU J X, LIU K L, HUANG J. Temporal and spatial evolution characteristics of available phosphorus in paddy soils in China and it response to phosphorus balance. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2021, 58(2): 476-486. (in Chinese)

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	水稻Rice		油菜Rapeseed
年份 Year	处理 Treatment	氮肥偏生产力 PFP_N (kg·kg^-1)	磷肥偏生产力 PFP_P (kg·kg^-1)	氮肥偏生产力 PFP_N (kg·kg^-1)	磷肥偏生产力 PFP_P (kg·kg^-1)
2017	FFP	33.8±1.4b	84.4±3.6b	/	/
2017	OPT	55.2±0.5a	166.4±1.5a	/	/
2018	FFP	30.2±1.0b	75.5±2.5b	10.7±0.5b	26.7±1.4b
2018	OPT	49.6±0.7a	148.7±2.0a	25.3±2.6a	50.7±5.3a
2019	FFP	33.5±0.5b	83.6±1.3b	13.1±0.5b	32.7±1.3b
2019	OPT	50.7±1.1a	152.1±3.1a	31.0±0.5a	62.1±1.0a
2020	FFP	28.7±0.2b	71.8±0.5b	14.6±0.5b	36.5±1.3b
2020	OPT	48.3±0.5a	144.9±1.6a	36.3±0.8a	72.7±1.6a
2021	FFP	29.9±0.3b	74.8±0.7b	12.5±0.3b	31.1±0.7b
2021	OPT	51.8±0.6a	155.4±1.8a	31.4±0.6a	62.9±1.2a
2022	FFP	26.6±0.3b	66.4±0.8b	15.1±0.4b	37.8±0.9b
2022	OPT	45.4±1.3a	137.9±1.6a	37.9±2.4a	75.8±4.8a
2023	FFP	32.8±0.4b	82.1±1.0b	15.2±0.3b	38.1±0.8b
2023	OPT	55.8±0.8a	167.3±2.4a	37.2±1.1a	74.4±2.2a
2024	FFP	23.5±0.6b	58.8±1.6b	15.7±0.2b	39.2±0.5b
2024	OPT	40.8±0.8a	122.3±2.4a	39.4±0.6a	78.7±1.2a
年份 Year		^***	^***	^***	^***
施肥 Fertilization		^***	^***	^***	^***
年份×施肥 Year×Fertilization		^***	^***	^***	^***

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	有机质 Organic matter (g·kg^-1)	全氮 Total nitrogen (g·kg^-1)	有效磷 Available phosphorus (mg·kg^-1)	速效钾 Available potassium (mg·kg^-1)	pH
2024	CK	15.50±1.95a	1.07±0.06a	20.35±3.09a	76.33±2.31a	7.40±0.09a
2018	PK	12.29±0.46b	0.91±0.03b	26.33±3.49a	66.01±4.58b	7.23±0.23a
2024	PK	17.26±1.15a	1.13±0.06a	26.93±0.92a	90.02±7.81a	7.37±0.13a
2018	NK	12.23±0.49b	0.93±0.11b	22.25±2.88a	63.67±4.17b	7.24±0.33a
2024	NK	19.22±0.97a	1.24±0.10a	21.41±1.12a	85.01±7.94a	7.17±0.12a
2018	FFP	12.74±0.46b	0.97±0.03b	29.44±4.12a	60.67±10.21b	7.35±0.17a
2024	FFP	18.73±1.57a	1.24±0.03a	28.27±0.93a	90.33±7.09a	6.89±0.04a
2018	OPT	13.81±1.45b	0.98±0.01b	28.59±2.61a	77.67±7.57b	7.34±0.21a
2024	OPT	19.59±1.84a	1.32±0.07a	28.68±0.43a	98.33±3.51a	7.40±0.02a

年份 Year	作物 Crop	处理 Treatment	全磷 TP (g·kg^-1)	有效磷 AP (mg·kg^-1)	磷活化系数 PAC (%)
2017	水稻 Rice	CK	0.88±0.06b	22.39±3.02a	2.54±0.30a
		PK	0.96±0.02ab	26.33±3.49a	2.73±0.32a
		NK	0.81±0.06b	22.25±2.88a	2.73±0.18a
		FFP	1.06±0.08a	29.43±4.12a	2.77±0.22a
		OPT	0.97±0.02ab	28.59±2.61a	2.94±0.24a
2018	油菜Rapeseed	CK	0.58±0.02b	14.77±1.53b	2.53±0.31a
		PK	0.86±0.04a	24.19±0.87ab	2.81±0.16a
		NK	0.69±0.02b	20.37±2.19ab	2.97±0.26a
		FFP	0.99±0.05a	30.78±2.20a	3.11±0.09a
		OPT	0.91±0.06a	29.21±1.55a	3.23±0.24a
2018	水稻 Rice	CK	1.01±0.04a	22.77±2.85b	2.28±0.22a
		PK	1.02±0.07a	29.84±1.37ab	2.94±0.35a
		NK	1.01±0.08a	22.79±3.81b	2.25±0.24a
		FFP	1.07±0.09a	32.25±3.32ab	3.01±0.19a
		OPT	0.98±0.03a	33.92±1.90a	3.46±0.30a
2019	油菜Rapeseed	CK	0.92±0.05a	18.15±1.87a	1.99±0.18a
		PK	0.91±0.04a	27.016±3.37a	2.95±0.15a
		NK	0.88±0.07a	21.28±0.64a	2.42±0.25a
		FFP	1.01±0.03a	28.05±1.86a	2.79±0.25a
		OPT	0.95±0.07a	28.78±1.45a	3.04±0.38a
2019	水稻 Rice	CK	0.91±0.04a	24.41±4.50a	2.69±0.53a
		PK	0.96±0.02a	28.42±2.87a	2.95±0.34a
		NK	0.97±0.03a	24.92±4.04a	2.56±0.34a
		FFP	1.01±0.01a	32.54±6.54a	3.21±0.63a
		OPT	0.97±0.02a	33.36±8.09a	3.42±0.79a
2020	油菜Rapeseed	CK	0.86±0.02a	24.81±2.14a	3.02±1.02a
		PK	0.91±0.02a	31.23±0.58a	3.43±0.04a
		NK	0.85±0.04a	30.12±1.10a	3.57±0.39a
		FFP	0.93±0.03a	34.52±3.99a	3.71±0.55a
		OPT	0.92±0.03a	35.43±4.40a	3.85±0.48a
年份 Year			^***	^***	^***
施肥 Fertilization			^***	^***	^***
年份×施肥 Year×Fertilization			^***	^ns	^ns

Changes in Annual Yield and Soil Fertility of Rice-Rapeseed Rotation Under Different Fertilization Modes

RichHTML

PDF

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 11

References 51

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	PENG TingShen, LU JiuYan, WU MeiLin, YAN YuXin, LIU HongZhou, NAN WenBin, QIN XiaoJian, LI Ming, GONG JunYi, LIANG YongShu. QTL Analysis of Yield-Related Traits in Both Huangnuo2^# and Changbai7^# of Perennial Chinese Rice [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(7): 1361-1379.
[2]	WANG YuPing, FU Zhi, SUN JiaYing, MU XiaoMeng, LIU HuiLin, GUO JinYun, SONG WenJing, HOU LeiPing, ZHAO HaiLiang. Evaluation of the Mitigating Effect and Application Efficacy of Melatonin Applied at the Seedling Stage on Short-Term Chilling Stress in Tomato Plants [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(7): 1523-1535.
[3]	WANG JiaNuo, CHEN GuiPing, LI Pan, WANG LiPing, NAN YunYou, HE Wei, FAN ZhiLong, HU FaLong, CHAI Qiang, YIN Wen, ZHAO LiaoHao. Photo-Physiological Mechanism at Grain Filling Stage of No-Tillage with Plastic Re-Mulching to Increase Maize Yield in Oasis Irrigation Areas [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(6): 1189-1202.
[4]	ZHOU XinJie, REN Hao, CHEN YingLong, ZHANG JiWang, ZHAO Bin, REN BaiZhao, LIU Peng, WANG HongZhang. Effects of Calcium Peroxide on Root Morphology and Yield Formation of Summer Maize in Waterlogging Farmland [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(6): 1203-1216.
[5]	HE JiHang, ZHANG Qing, LÜ XiangYue, XUE JiQuan, XU ShuTu, LIU JianChao. Evaluation of Nitrogen Efficiency of Different Stay-Green Maize Hybrids [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(6): 1217-1230.
[6]	GUO FuCheng, TANG HaiJiang, HAO XinYi, MA GuoLin, YANG JiuJu, HUANG LinFeng, TIAN Lei, WANG Bin, LUO ChengKe. Effects of Different Irrigation Methods on Water-Salt Transport, Rice Yield, and Water Use Efficiency in Saline Soil in Ningxia [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(4): 750-764.
[7]	HAO Kun, CHEN HongDe, ZHANG Wei, ZHONG Yun, DANG MeiRong, ZHU ShiJiang, HUANG ZhiKun, JIN Ying. Comprehensive Evaluation of Water-Nitrogen Management Under Surge-Root Irrigation Based on Citrus Yield, Quality, and Water- Nitrogen Use Efficiency [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(4): 862-873.
[8]	YAN TingLin, DU YaDan, HU XiaoTao, WANG He, LI XiaoYan, WANG YuMing, NIU WenQuan, GU XiaoBo. The Impacts of Nitrogen Fertilizer Organic Alternatives Under Aerated Drip Irrigation on Cotton Yield and Water Use Efficiency Under Deficit Irrigation Conditions [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(3): 602-618.
[9]	YANG Rui, CHEN JingDong, HUANG Ying, XIE LingLi, ZHANG XueKun, ZHOU DengWen, LIU QingYun, XU JinSong, XU BenBo. Genetic Improvement and Configuration Analysis of High-Yield Rapeseed Lines in the Upper Reaches of the Yangtze River [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(2): 250-264.
[10]	CHEN GuiPing, WEI JinGui, GUO Yao, LI Pan, WANG FeiEr, QIU HaiLong, FENG FuXue, YIN Wen. Synergistic Effects of Wide-Narrow Row and Density Enhancement on the Photosynthetic Characteristics and Resource Utilization of Maize in Oasis Irrigation Areas [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(2): 278-291.
[11]	CAI TingYang, ZHU YuPeng, LI RuiDong, WU ZongSheng, XU YiFan, SONG WenWen, XU CaiLong, WU CunXiang. Effects of Leaf-Cutting at Seedling Stage on Photosynthetic Characteristics, Pod Distribution and Yield Formation in Soybean in the Huang-Huai-Hai Region [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(2): 292-304.
[12]	ZHANG ZhiYong, TAN ShiChao, XIONG ShuPing, MA XinMing, WEI YiHao, WANG XiaoChun. Effects of Annual Water and Nitrogen Optimization on Yield and Nitrogen Migration of Wheat-Maize Rotation System in Irrigation Area of Northern Henan [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(2): 336-353.
[13]	LÜ XuDong, SUN ShiYuan, LI YaNan, LIU YuLong, WANG YanQun, FU Xin, ZHANG JiaYing, NING Peng, PENG ZhengPing. Effects of Intelligent Mechanized Layered Fertilization on Root-Soil Nutrient Distribution and Yield in Wheat Fields [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(1): 129-146.
[14]	LU Hao, ZHANG MingLong, HAN Mei, YAN QingBiao, LI ZhengPeng, YIN Wen, FAN ZhiLong, HU FaLong, CHAI Qiang. Green Manure Returning via Sheep Digest with Nitrogen Fertilizer Reduction are Beneficial to Improve Wheat Yield and Soil Quality at Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(1): 147-160.
[15]	YE MeiJin, CHEN JiaTing, ZHOU JieGuang, YIN Li, HU XinRong, LAN YuXin, CHEN Bin, SU LongXing, LIU JiaJun, LIU TianChao, LI XiaoYu, MA Jian. Identification, Validation and Genetic Effect Analysis of Major QTL for Spike Density in Wheat [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(1): 17-28.