不同种植模式玉米生长发育和产量形成的研究

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0030

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究不同种植模式玉米生长发育和产量形成的差异,以玉米‘京农科728’为研究对象,设置65 cm均匀垄作(CK)、68 cm均匀行平作(M1)和136 cm大垄双行垄作(M2)3种种植模式,对出苗质量、植株形态、光合生理特性和产量及产量构成因素进行比较分析。结果表明：与对照相比,M2保苗密度显著增加,株距显著缩小且变异系数更低;M2株高、穗位高、叶面积指数和单株干物重分别降低12.61%、11.21%、1.59%和3.67%,群体繁茂程度较低但叶面积指数和单株干物重下降程度均较小;M2净光合速率、气孔导度、胞间二氧化碳浓度和蒸腾速率分别提高了25.24%、25.41%、53.60%和14.82%,功能叶片的光合能力显著增强;2017—2018年M2分别增产12.60%和17.59%,群体收获穗数的显著提高是增产的主要原因。本研究推荐,黑龙江省第一积温带玉米适宜种植模式为136 cm大垄双行（宽行90 cm+窄行46 cm）垄作模式。

关键词: 玉米, 种植模式, 生长, 发育, 产量

Abstract:

To study the differences of maize growth and yield formation under different planting patterns, the maize variety‘Jingnongke728’was used as material, and three planting patterns were set up, including 65 cm even ridge (CK), 68 cm even tillage (M1) and 136 cm double lines width ridge (M2). The seedling quality, plant morphology, photosynthetic physiological characteristics and yield factors were analyzed. The results showed that, compared with the CK, the seedling density of M2 increased obviously, the plant distance of M2 decreased significantly, and the variation coefficient was lower. The plant height, ear position, leaf area index and dry weight per plant of M2 decreased by 12.61%, 11.21%, 1.59% and 3.67%, respectively, the luxuriant degree was relatively low, but the decreasing extent of leaf area index and dry weight per plant were less. The net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, intercellular carbon dioxide and transpiration rate of M2 increased by 25.24%, 25.41%, 53.60% and 14.82%, respectively, which improved the photosynthetic performance of functional leaf. The yield of M2 also increased by 12.60% and 17.59% in 2017 and 2018, respectively, and the main reason for yield improvement was the increase of ear number of population harvest. This study recommends the suitable cultivation model for maize production in the first accumulative temperature zone of Heilongjiang Province is the 136 cm double lines width ridge (wide line 90 cm+ narrow line 46 cm).

Key words: maize, planting pattern, growth, development, yield

中图分类号:

S513.047

葛选良, 钱春荣, 于洋, 宫秀杰, 姜宇博. 不同种植模式玉米生长发育和产量形成的研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(36): 12-17.

Ge Xuanliang, Qian Chunrong, Yu Yang, Gong Xiujie, Jiang Yubo. Maize Growth and Development and Yield Formation Under Different Planting Patterns[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(36): 12-17.

图/表 5

参考文献 25

[1]	钱春荣, 于洋, 宫秀杰, 等. 黑龙江省不同年代玉米杂交种氮肥利用效率对种植密度和施氮水平的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2012,38(11):2069-2077. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2012.02069 URL
[2]	佟玉欣, 李玉影, 刘双全, 等. 黑龙江春玉米籽粒产量与氮素吸收变化特征[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2014,20(5):1094-1102.
[3]	Andrate F H, Calvino P, Cirilo A, et al. Yield responses to narrow rows depends on increased radiation interception[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2002,94(5):975-980. doi: 10.2134/agronj2002.0975 URL
[4]	Reta-sanchez D G, Fower J L. Canopy light environment and yield of narrow-row cotton as affected by canopy architecture[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2002,94(6):1317-1323. doi: 10.2134/agronj2002.1317 URL
[5]	冯爱青, 张民, 李成亮, 等. 控释氮肥对土壤酶活性与土壤养分利用的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2014,28(3):177-184.
[6]	李伟, 李絮花, 李海燕, 等. 控释尿素与普通尿素混施对夏玉米产量和氮肥效率的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2012,38(4):699-706. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2012.00699 URL
[7]	Liu T D, Song F B. Maize photosynthesis and microclimate within the canopies at grain-filling stage in response to narrow-wide row planting patterns. Photosynthetica, 2012,50(2):215-222.
[8]	Liu T D, Song F B. Light interception and radiation use efficiency response to narrow-wide row planting patterns in maize. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 2012,6(3):506-513.
[9]	Awal M A, Koshi H, Ikeda T. Radiation interception and use by maize/peanut intercrop canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2006,139(1/2):74-83.
[10]	卫丽, 熊友才, Ma B L, 等. 不同群体结构夏玉米灌浆期光合特征和产量变化[J]. 生态学报, 2011,31(9):2524-2531.
[11]	刘铁东, 宋凤斌. 不同宽窄行种植方式下玉米穗位叶的光合生理特征[J]. 华北农学报, 2014,29(1):117-121. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2014.01.022 URL
[12]	高亚男, 曹庆军, 韩海飞, 等. 不同行距对春玉米产量和光合速率的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2010,18(2):73-76.
[13]	Bullock D G, Nielsen R L, Nyquist W E. A growth analysis comparison of corn grown in conventional and equidistant plant spacing[J]. Crop Science, 1987,28(2):254-258. doi: 10.2135/cropsci1988.0011183X002800020015x URL
[14]	Sharratt B S, Mcwillimas D A. Microclimatic and rooting characteristics of narrow-row versus conventional-row corn[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2005,97(4):1129-1135. doi: 10.2134/agronj2004.0292 URL
[15]	杨利华, 张丽华, 张全国, 等. 种植样式对高密度夏玉米产量和株高整齐度的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2006,14(6):122-124.
[16]	吕丽华, 陶洪斌, 夏来坤, 等. 不同种植密度下的夏玉米冠层结构及光合特性[J]. 作物学报, 2008,34(3):447-455. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00447 URL
[17]	董树亭, 高荣岐, 胡昌浩, 等. 玉米花粒期群体光合性能与高产潜力研究[J]. 作物学报, 1997,23(3):318-325.
[18]	Zelitchi I. The close relationship between net photosynjournal and crop yield[J]. BioScience, 1982,32(10):796-802. doi: 10.2307/1308973 URL
[19]	于强, 王天铎, 刘建栋, 等. 玉米株型与冠层光合作用的数学模拟研究I. 模型与验证[J]. 作物学报, 1998,24(1):7-15.
[20]	王敬亚, 齐华, 梁熠, 等. 种植方式对春玉米光合特性、干物质积累及产量的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2009,17(5):113-115.
[21]	武志海, 张治安, 陈展宇, 等. 大垄双行种植玉米群体冠层结构及光合特性的解析[J]. 玉米科学, 2005,13(4):62-65.
[22]	梁熠, 齐华, 王敬亚, 等. 宽窄行栽培对玉米生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2009,17(4):97-100.
[23]	杨克军, 李明, 李振华. 栽培方式与群体结构对寒地玉米物质积累及产量形成的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2005,21(11):157-160.
[24]	范秀玲, 李凤海, 史振声, 等. 玉米偏垄宽窄行种植方式的增产作用和生理特性研究[J]. 玉米科学, 2010,18(1):108-111.
[25]	杨吉顺, 高辉远, 刘鹏, 等. 种植密度和行距配置对超高产夏玉米群体光合特性的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2010,36(7):1226-1233. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01226 URL

种植模式	秸秆还田方式	作业流程
65 cm均匀垄作	秸秆离田	机收,秸秆全部离田,40马力拖拉机带旋耕机旋耕起垄,镇压1遍
68 cm均匀行平作	碎混还田	机收,秸秆全量还田,还田机二次粉碎作业,210马力以上拖拉机带联合整地机进行碎混还田,将秸秆混拌于0~20 cm耕层内,液压耙30°角交叉重耙2遍以上,秸度地表覆盖度30%
136 cm大垄双行垄作	深翻还田	机收,秸秆全量还田,还田机二次粉碎作业,210马力拖拉机带液压翻转犁进行翻埋还田,翻埋深度25~30 cm,液压耙30°角交叉重耙2遍,耙深15~17 cm,起大垄,镇压1遍

种植模式	秸秆还田方式	作业流程
65 cm均匀垄作	秸秆离田	机收,秸秆全部离田,40马力拖拉机带旋耕机旋耕起垄,镇压1遍
68 cm均匀行平作	碎混还田	机收,秸秆全量还田,还田机二次粉碎作业,210马力以上拖拉机带联合整地机进行碎混还田,将秸秆混拌于0~20 cm耕层内,液压耙30°角交叉重耙2遍以上,秸度地表覆盖度30%
136 cm大垄双行垄作	深翻还田	机收,秸秆全量还田,还田机二次粉碎作业,210马力拖拉机带液压翻转犁进行翻埋还田,翻埋深度25~30 cm,液压耙30°角交叉重耙2遍,耙深15~17 cm,起大垄,镇压1遍

年份	种植模式	保苗密度/(10⁴株/hm²)	变异度/%	株距/cm	变异度/%	叶片数	变异度/%
2017	CK	6.23±0.089 b B	1.16	26.00±1.41 b A	43.41	6	16.16
	M1	6.08±0.085 b B	1.14	28.93±0.40 a A	37.12	6	7.95
	M2	7.21± 0.389 a A	4.41	21.63±1.15 c B	26.20	5	11.91
2018	CK	6.21±0.089 b B	1.17	25.23±1.37 b AB	43.30	6	9.60
	M1	6.27± 0.084 b B	1.10	28.33±1.02 a A	35.21	6	3.18
	M2	7.35±0.388 a A	4.32	21.63±1.15 c B	27.02	6	4.04

年份	种植模式	保苗密度/(10⁴株/hm²)	变异度/%	株距/cm	变异度/%	叶片数	变异度/%
2017	CK	6.23±0.089 b B	1.16	26.00±1.41 b A	43.41	6	16.16
	M1	6.08±0.085 b B	1.14	28.93±0.40 a A	37.12	6	7.95
	M2	7.21± 0.389 a A	4.41	21.63±1.15 c B	26.20	5	11.91
2018	CK	6.21±0.089 b B	1.17	25.23±1.37 b AB	43.30	6	9.60
	M1	6.27± 0.084 b B	1.10	28.33±1.02 a A	35.21	6	3.18
	M2	7.35±0.388 a A	4.32	21.63±1.15 c B	27.02	6	4.04

年份	种植模式	穗数/(10⁴穗/hm²)	穗粒数/粒	千粒重/g	产量/(kg/hm²)
2017	CK	4.95±0.52 a A	554±6.03 a A	449.7±5.95 a A	9854.7±412.2 a A
	M1	4.90±0.42 a A	562±4.37 a A	435.6±3.94 a A	9905.9±318.5 a A
	M2	5.10±0.47 a A	565±3.61 a A	435.9±3.91 a A	10537.3±718.9 a A
2018	CK	5.23±0.27 a A	518±5.51 a A	460.0±10.73 a A	9332.7±598.6 a A
	M1	5.54±0.45 a A	514±12.12 a A	466.5±5.18 a A	10610.7±916.3 a A
	M2	5.70±0.28 a A	510±13.50 a A	462.2±11.41 a A	10974.5±504.8 a A