生物有机肥配施下化肥减施对黑塌菜生长、产量及品质的影响

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0279

中国农学通报 ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (10): 35-43.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0279

所属专题：园艺

生物有机肥配施下化肥减施对黑塌菜生长、产量及品质的影响

翟彩娇(), 程玉静(), 仇亮, 王小秋, 葛礼姣

江苏沿江地区农业科学研究所，江苏南通 226012

收稿日期:2023-04-11 修回日期:2023-10-11 出版日期:2024-04-05 发布日期:2024-04-01
通讯作者:
程玉静，女，1984年出生，河南南阳人，副研究员，硕士，主要从事蔬菜育种与高效栽培等研究工作。通信地址：226012 江苏省南通市崇川区幸福路28号江苏沿江地区农业科学研究所，Tel：0513-89111846，E-mail：yjcheng_1699@163.com。
作者简介:
翟彩娇，女，1990年出生，河南周口人，助理研究员，硕士，主要从事特色蔬菜高效栽培与种质创制等研究工作。通信地址：226012 江苏省南通市崇川区幸福路28号江苏沿江地区农业科学研究所，Tel：0513-89111846，E-mail：szgszcj18@163.com。
基金资助:
江苏省农业科技自主创新资金项目“江苏十字花科地方特色蔬菜优异性状基因挖掘与创新利用”(CX(21)2020); 南通市科技计划乡村振兴专项“如皋地标蔬菜提质增效关键技术集成创新与示范”(MS12021068); 南通市科技创新智库项目“南通特色蔬菜产业助力乡村振兴发展路径研究”(CXZK202304)

Effects of Combined Application of Bio-organic Fertilizer with Reduced Chemical Fertilizer on Growth, Yield and Quality of Brassica campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis

ZHAI Caijiao(), CHENG Yujing(), QIU Liang, WANG Xiaoqiu, GE Lijiao

Jiangsu Yanjiang Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Nantong, Jiangsu 226012

Received:2023-04-11 Revised:2023-10-11 Published:2024-04-05 Online:2024-04-01

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探明化肥减量与生物有机肥配施对黑塌菜生长、产量及品质的影响，设置2种肥料类型(F₁，N-P₂O₅-K₂O=15-15-15；F₂，N-P₂O₅-K₂O=26-9-9)和7种施肥方式（N₁，纯复合肥525 kg/hm²；N₂，F减施10%+生物有机肥400 kg/hm²；N₃，F减施10%+生物有机肥600 kg/hm²；N₄，F减施10%+生物有机肥750 kg/hm²；N₅，F减施20%+生物有机肥400 kg/hm²；N₆，F减施20%+生物有机肥600 kg/hm²；N₇，F减施20%+生物有机肥750 kg/hm²），另设不施肥(CK)为空白对照。按肥料类型和施肥方式二因素随机区组试验，测定黑塌菜的产量构成及品质指标。结果表明：（1）肥料类型与施肥方式的交互作用对黑塌菜大多数农艺性状和单株重都有极显著影响(P<0.01)；在不同肥料类型处理下，黑塌菜的叶柄长、叶柄宽、叶片重、叶柄重和单株重均表现为F₂>F₁，且2种处理的单株重之间差异显著(P<0.05)，F₂减量与生物有机肥配施更有利于黑塌菜的生长和产量的增加；在F₁和F₂处理下，黑塌菜的单株重均与开展度、叶片重和叶柄重极显著相关，与叶柄厚不相关；与N₁相比，在化肥减施10%和20%与适量的生物有机肥配施时不会对黑塌菜的生长产生影响，且能在一定程度上促进其生长，单株重的增幅可达15.24%。（2）与N₁相比，在化肥减施10%和20%与适量的生物有机物配施时不会对黑塌菜可食部分的矿质元素含量产生影响，并有利于矿质元素的积累，但当肥料减量施用过多时，生物有机肥对土壤P、Mg、K、Ca等元素的活化能力会不同程度的降低。（3）肥料类型对黑塌菜硝态氮含量具有极显著影响，肥料类型与施肥方式的交互作用对黑塌菜的粗纤维含量具有极显著影响；化肥减量与生物有机肥的合理配施能够提高黑塌菜的可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白质和维生素C含量，降低硝酸盐含量；不同肥料处理下，黑塌菜的可溶性糖含量、维生素C含量和水溶性蛋白含量均表现为F₁>F₂，粗纤维含量、全氮含量、硝态氮含量均表现为F₂>F₁，且2种处理之间的维生素C含量和水溶性蛋白含量差异显著(P<0.05)，F₁减量与生物有机肥配施更有利于提升黑塌菜品质。化肥减量与生物有机肥的合理配施不仅能在一定程度上促进黑塌菜的生长、增加产量，而且能提升其品质。综合产量和品质因素，F₁N₆和F₂N₆可作为本试验条件下较适宜的施肥方式。

关键词: 黑塌菜, 生物有机肥, 施肥量, 产量, 品质

Abstract:

To investigate the effects of combined application of bio-organic fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilizer on growth, yield and quality of Brassica campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis, two fertilizer types F₁ (N-P₂O₅-K₂O=15-15-15), F₂ (N-P₂O₅-K₂O=26-9-9) and 7 application amounts, N₁ (pure compound fertilizer 525 kg/hm²), N₂ (F reduced by 10%+ bio-organic fertilizer 400 kg/hm²), N₃ (F reduced by 10%+ bio-organic fertilizer 600 kg/hm²), N₄ (F reduced by 10%+ bio-organic fertilizer 750 kg/hm²), N₅ (F reduced by 20%+ bio-organic fertilizer 400 kg/hm²), N₆ (F reduced by 20%+ bio-organic fertilizer 600 kg/hm²), N₇ (F reduced by 20%+ bio-organic fertilizer 750 kg/hm²) were set up in the experiment. And no fertilization (CK) was also set as the blank control. The agronomic characters, yield, mineral elements and quality characters of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis were investigated and analyzed according to the two factors of fertilizer type and fertilizer method. The results were as follows. (1) The interaction between the type of fertilizer and the application amounts had extremely significant effects on most agronomic traits and plant weight (P<0.01). Under different fertilizer treatments, the petiole length, petiole width, leaf weight, petiole weight and weight per plant were all showed as F₂>F₁. The weight per plant was significantly different between the two treatments (P<0.05). The combination of bio-organic fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilizer F₂ were more conducive to the growth and yield increase of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis. Under F₁ and F₂ treatments, the weight per plant was significantly correlated with the degree of development, leaf weight and petiole weight, but there was no correlation between plant weight and petiole thickness. Compared with N₁, chemical fertilizer reduced by 10% and 20% combined with rational bio-organic fertilizer didn’t affect the growth of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis, and could promote their growth to a certain extent. The maximum increase of weight per plant was 15.24%. (2) Compared with N₁, chemical fertilizer reduced by 10% and 20% combined with rational bio-organic fertilizer didn’t affect the content of mineral elements in the edible part of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis, and had beneficial effect on the accumulation of mineral elements. However, when the fertilizer were reduced too much, the activation ability of bio-organic fertilizer on soil elements such as P, Mg, K, Ca and other elements would be reduced by different degrees. (3) The type of fertilizer had extremely significant effect on the nitrate nitrogen content of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis, and the interaction between the type of fertilizer and the application amounts had extremely significant effect on the coarse fiber of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis (P<0.01). The combination of rational bio-organic fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilizer could increase the content of soluble sugar, soluble protein and vitamin C, and reduce the nitrate nitrogen content. Under different fertilizer treatments, the contents of soluble sugar, vitamin C and soluble protein of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis were all showed as F₁>F₂, while the content of coarse fiber, total nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen were all showed as F₂>F₁, and the contents of vitamin C and soluble protein were significantly different between the two treatments (P<0.01). The combination of bio-organic fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilizer F₁ were more conducive to improve the quality of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis. The combination of rational bio-organic fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilizer could not only promote the growth, increase the yield, but also improve the quality of B. campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis. Based on yield and quality factors, F₁N₆ and F₂N₆ could be used as suitable fertilization methods under the experimental conditions.

Key words: Brassica campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis, bio-organic fertilizer, application amount, yield, quality

翟彩娇, 程玉静, 仇亮, 王小秋, 葛礼姣. 生物有机肥配施下化肥减施对黑塌菜生长、产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(10): 35-43.

ZHAI Caijiao, CHENG Yujing, QIU Liang, WANG Xiaoqiu, GE Lijiao. Effects of Combined Application of Bio-organic Fertilizer with Reduced Chemical Fertilizer on Growth, Yield and Quality of Brassica campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(10): 35-43.

图/表 6

参考文献 22

[1]	PARKS S E, IRVING D E, MILHAM P J. A critical evaluation of on-farm rapid tests for measuring nitrate in leafy vegetables[J]. Scientia horticulture, 2012, 134(2):1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2011.10.015 URL
[2]	孔跃. 生物有机肥对番茄及小白菜生长与品质影响效应的研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2007.
[3]	胡清宏. 不同化肥减施措施对连作设施小白菜生长及土壤质量的影响[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2019.
[4]	FEI L, ZHAO M, CHEN X, et al. Effect of phosphorus accumulation in soil with the utilization ages of the vegetable greenhouses in the suburb of Shenyang[J]. Procedia environmental sciences, 2011, 8:16-20. doi: 10.1016/j.proenv.2011.10.005 URL
[5]	SHEN W, LIN X, SHI W, et al. Higher rates of nitrogen fertilization decrease soil enzyme activities, microbial functional diversity and nitrification capacity in a Chinese polytuanel greenhouse vegetable land[J]. Plant and soil, 2010, 337(1-2):137-150. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0511-2 URL
[6]	HARADA H, YOSHIMURA Y, SUNAGA Y. Variations in nitrogen uptake and nitrate-nitrogen concentration among sorghum groups[J]. Soil science and plant nutrition, 2000, 46(1):97-104. doi: 10.1080/00380768.2000.10408766 URL
[7]	魏晓兰. 生物有机肥对土壤氮、磷、钾供应及小白菜养分吸收的影响[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2016.
[8]	肖时运. 化学氮肥用量及有机无机复混肥对蔬菜产量和品质的影响[D]. 长沙: 湖南农业大学, 2006.
[9]	农业部微生物肥料和食用菌菌种质量监督检验测试中心, 中国农业科学院农业资源与农业区划研究所. NY 884—2012,生物有机肥[S]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2012:9.
[10]	薛峰, 颜廷梅, 杨林章, 等. 施用有机肥对土壤生物性状影响的研究进展[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 6:1372-1377.
[11]	孔涛, 马瑜, 刘民, 等. 生物有机肥对土壤养分和土壤微生物的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2016, 33(4):884-891.
[12]	巩子毓, 高旭, 黄炎, 等. 连续施用生物有机肥提高设施黄瓜产量和品质的研究[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2016, 39(5):777-783.
[13]	王宗抗, 阚学飞, 宋钊, 等. 新型生物有机肥对小白菜生长和土壤肥力的影响[J]. 磷肥与复肥, 2016, 31(3):49-52.
[14]	黄东风, 王果, 李卫华, 等. 不同施肥模式对小白菜生长、营养累积及菜地氮、磷流失的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2009, 17(4):619-624.
[15]	石其伟. 稻草快腐菌剂的筛选及稻草型生物有机肥在小白菜上的应用效果研究[D]. 长沙: 湖南农业大学, 2006.
[16]	于恩晶, 高丽红, 陈青云. 微生物菌剂与有机肥配施对日光温室小白菜产量和品质的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2010(7):57-59.
[17]	付文杰. 不同施肥处理对小白菜生长、产量和品质的影响[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2019.
[18]	黄俊, 吴震, 郭世荣, 等. 固体肥种类与施肥量对穴盘小白菜生长及产量品质的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2007, 15(1):45-48.
[19]	张迪, 魏自民, 李淑芹, 等. 生物有机肥对土壤中磷的吸附和解吸特性的影响[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2005, 36(5):571-575.
[20]	刘秀梅, 张夫道, 冯兆滨, 等. 风化煤腐殖酸对氮、磷、钾的吸附和解吸特性[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2005, 11(5):641-646.
[21]	李素霞, 韦司棋, 刘云霞. 3种改良剂对氮镉互作下小白菜产量和品质的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2015, 28(4):1709-1712.
[22]	孙旭, 刘臣炜, 张龙江, 等. 农业废弃物制备生物有机肥及其在小白菜栽培上的应用[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2017, 33(6):1333-1341.

肥料类型	施肥方式	开展度/ cm	最大叶长/ cm	最大叶宽/ cm	叶柄长/ cm	叶柄宽/ cm	叶柄厚/ mm	叶片重/ g	叶柄重/ g	叶片数	单株重/ g
F₁	CK	21.90c	7.97d	7.17c	3.91d	2.55c	3.84e	40.25e	28.50d	19.56a	88.17e
	N₁	27.38ab	9.74ab	8.96ab	4.76bc	3.25ab	5.08cd	71.00abc	51.58ab	20.78a	142.50ab
	N₂	26.31ab	9.51abc	8.92ab	5.12ab	3.15ab	5.34bcd	63.75c	44.92bc	20.00a	121.38c
	N₃	26.73ab	9.08bc	8.42ab	5.17ab	3.12ab	5.54bc	69.25bc	48.33ab	22.11a	134.17b
	N₄	28.18a	10.09a	9.04a	5.20ab	3.13ab	4.39de	69.83abc	55.17a	21.11a	146.75a
	N₅	25.33b	8.93c	7.92bc	4.32cd	2.93bc	5.07cd	55.42d	40.92c	20.56a	104.58d
	N₆	27.86ab	9.57abc	8.80ab	5.56a	3.38a	7.62a	71.25ab	50.67ab	22.11a	136.83ab
	N₇	28.28a	9.49abc	9.13a	4.93abc	3.15ab	6.41b	77.08a	51.50ab	20.89a	148.42a
F₂	CK	21.90d	7.97c	7.17c	3.91d	2.55c	3.84c	40.25d	28.50d	19.56a	88.17d
	N₁	24.30cd	8.42bc	7.83bc	4.76c	2.81bc	5.39ab	63.08c	45.00c	20.33a	131.83c
	N₂	27.57ab	9.25ab	9.75a	5.00bc	3.24ab	5.69a	68.92abc	47.92bc	20.56a	136.25bc
	N₃	27.68ab	9.21ab	8.92ab	5.75a	3.35a	5.93a	75.83a	56.75a	20.78a	151.92a
	N₄	26.25abc	9.13ab	8.38abc	5.54ab	3.07ab	5.79a	68.42abc	47.00c	20.89a	135.75bc
	N₅	28.63a	9.53a	9.05ab	5.97a	3.43a	5.75a	70.25abc	53.08abc	20.22a	140.25bc
	N₆	27.47ab	8.98ab	8.58abc	4.98bc	3.17ab	5.84a	71.92ab	56.00ab	22.33a	146.25ab
	N₇	25.68bc	8.95ab	8.54abc	5.05bc	3.30ab	4.69b	65.42bc	44.83c	21.33a	137.42bc

肥料类型	施肥方式	开展度/ cm	最大叶长/ cm	最大叶宽/ cm	叶柄长/ cm	叶柄宽/ cm	叶柄厚/ mm	叶片重/ g	叶柄重/ g	叶片数	单株重/ g
F₁	CK	21.90c	7.97d	7.17c	3.91d	2.55c	3.84e	40.25e	28.50d	19.56a	88.17e
	N₁	27.38ab	9.74ab	8.96ab	4.76bc	3.25ab	5.08cd	71.00abc	51.58ab	20.78a	142.50ab
	N₂	26.31ab	9.51abc	8.92ab	5.12ab	3.15ab	5.34bcd	63.75c	44.92bc	20.00a	121.38c
	N₃	26.73ab	9.08bc	8.42ab	5.17ab	3.12ab	5.54bc	69.25bc	48.33ab	22.11a	134.17b
	N₄	28.18a	10.09a	9.04a	5.20ab	3.13ab	4.39de	69.83abc	55.17a	21.11a	146.75a
	N₅	25.33b	8.93c	7.92bc	4.32cd	2.93bc	5.07cd	55.42d	40.92c	20.56a	104.58d
	N₆	27.86ab	9.57abc	8.80ab	5.56a	3.38a	7.62a	71.25ab	50.67ab	22.11a	136.83ab
	N₇	28.28a	9.49abc	9.13a	4.93abc	3.15ab	6.41b	77.08a	51.50ab	20.89a	148.42a
F₂	CK	21.90d	7.97c	7.17c	3.91d	2.55c	3.84c	40.25d	28.50d	19.56a	88.17d
	N₁	24.30cd	8.42bc	7.83bc	4.76c	2.81bc	5.39ab	63.08c	45.00c	20.33a	131.83c
	N₂	27.57ab	9.25ab	9.75a	5.00bc	3.24ab	5.69a	68.92abc	47.92bc	20.56a	136.25bc
	N₃	27.68ab	9.21ab	8.92ab	5.75a	3.35a	5.93a	75.83a	56.75a	20.78a	151.92a
	N₄	26.25abc	9.13ab	8.38abc	5.54ab	3.07ab	5.79a	68.42abc	47.00c	20.89a	135.75bc
	N₅	28.63a	9.53a	9.05ab	5.97a	3.43a	5.75a	70.25abc	53.08abc	20.22a	140.25bc
	N₆	27.47ab	8.98ab	8.58abc	4.98bc	3.17ab	5.84a	71.92ab	56.00ab	22.33a	146.25ab
	N₇	25.68bc	8.95ab	8.54abc	5.05bc	3.30ab	4.69b	65.42bc	44.83c	21.33a	137.42bc

项目	处理	开展度/ cm	最大叶长/ cm	最大叶宽/ cm	叶柄长/ cm	叶柄宽/ cm	叶柄厚/ mm	叶片重/ g	叶柄重/ g	叶片数	单株重/ g
平均	F₁	27.15a	9.49a	8.74a	5.01b	3.16a	5.64a	68.23a	49.01a	21.08a	133.52b
平均	F₂	26.79a	9.07b	8.72a	5.29a	3.19a	5.58a	69.12a	50.08a	20.92a	139.95a
F值	F	0.16	2.96	0.003	1.15	0.10	0.01	0.07	0.12	0.42	0.89
	N	0.23	0.29	0.51	0.46	0.30	0.77	0.60	0.45	4.45^*	0.79
	F×N	5.58^**	3.16^*	1.85	5.80^**	2.17	8.24^**	4.80^**	4.55^**	0.11	9.10**

项目	处理	开展度/ cm	最大叶长/ cm	最大叶宽/ cm	叶柄长/ cm	叶柄宽/ cm	叶柄厚/ mm	叶片重/ g	叶柄重/ g	叶片数	单株重/ g
平均	F₁	27.15a	9.49a	8.74a	5.01b	3.16a	5.64a	68.23a	49.01a	21.08a	133.52b
平均	F₂	26.79a	9.07b	8.72a	5.29a	3.19a	5.58a	69.12a	50.08a	20.92a	139.95a
F值	F	0.16	2.96	0.003	1.15	0.10	0.01	0.07	0.12	0.42	0.89
	N	0.23	0.29	0.51	0.46	0.30	0.77	0.60	0.45	4.45^*	0.79
	F×N	5.58^**	3.16^*	1.85	5.80^**	2.17	8.24^**	4.80^**	4.55^**	0.11	9.10**

处理	开展度	最大叶长	最大叶宽	叶柄长	叶柄宽	叶柄厚	叶片重	叶柄重	叶片数
F₁	0.60^**	0.52^*	0.58^**	0.43^*	0.49^*	0.12	0.90^**	0.75^**	0.12
F₂	0.59^**	0.35	0.14	0.35	0.56^**	0.38	0.86^**	0.69^**	0.28

生物有机肥配施下化肥减施对黑塌菜生长、产量及品质的影响

Effects of Combined Application of Bio-organic Fertilizer with Reduced Chemical Fertilizer on Growth, Yield and Quality of Brassica campestris ssp. chinensis var. rosularis

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 22

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们

肥料类型	施肥方式	粗纤维含量/ %	可溶性总糖含量/ (mg/g)	全氮含量/ (g/kg)	维生素C含量/ (mg/kg)	硝态氮含量/ (mg/kg)	水溶性蛋白含量/ (mg/g)
F₁	CK	2.74a	20.17c	38.02b	650.26c	378.18e	2.49b
	N₁	2.79a	33.71a	45.26a	703.96c	728.12a	6.44a
	N₂	2.89a	27.69b	41.80ab	872.36a	532.30d	6.06a
	N₃	2.49a	28.56ab	43.56ab	700.73c	719.56ab	6.34a
	N₄	2.36a	34.00a	45.25a	695.25c	744.54a	6.38a
	N₅	2.72a	32.52ab	43.87ab	711.71bc	648.46bc	6.09a
	N₆	2.77a	32.25ab	41.35ab	792.65ab	593.39cd	6.86a
	N₇	2.87a	29.86ab	46.29a	680.50c	787.16a	6.20a
F₂	CK	2.74a	20.17c	38.02c	650.26b	378.18c	2.49d
	N₁	3.03a	31.13ab	45.55ab	650.60b	829.39ab	5.53c
	N₂	3.29a	29.45ab	44.13ab	739.07a	792.90ab	5.60c
	N₃	3.08a	31.44ab	46.09a	717.18ab	796.71ab	5.70bc
	N₄	3.29a	30.78ab	44.09ab	713.72ab	843.83ab	6.36b
	N₅	2.76a	28.14b	43.71ab	704.51ab	811.86ab	5.49c
	N₆	1.31b	33.44a	42.33b	673.17ab	764.47b	7.15a
	N₇	2.58a	32.46a	44.02ab	692.74ab	884.23a	5.17c

项目	处理	粗纤维含量/ %	可溶性总糖含量/ (mg/g)	全氮含量/ (g/kg)	维生素C含量/ (mg/kg)	硝态氮含量/ (mg/kg)	水溶性蛋白含量/ (mg/g)	Mg/ (mg/L)	P/ (mg/L)	K/ (mg/L)	Ca/ (mg/L)
平均	F₁	2.70a	31.23a	43.91a	736.74a	679.08b	6.34a	19.86a	21.06a	156.96a	136.59b
平均	F₂	2.76a	30.98a	44.27a	698.71b	817.63a	5.86b	20.98a	18.49b	159.82a	144.41a
F值	F	0.05	0.05	0.30	2.37	32.26^**	7.28^*	4.44	18.15^**	1.5	2.23
	N	0.72	1.06	2.20	1.71	3.72	3.79	1.12	0.97	1.2	0.24
	F×N	4.04^**	1.56	0.37	2.44	1.98	1.64	0.67	1.77	2.26	2.57^*

[1]	程玉静, 王小秋, 葛礼姣, 仇亮, 翟彩娇, 宋旭东, 张振良, 王系艨. 糯玉米食味品质评价模型的建立[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 157-164.
[2]	姚金保, 杨学明, 张鹏, 范祥云, 余桂红, 何漪, 王化敦. 弱筋小麦新品种‘宁麦36’的产量及品质性状分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 20-24.
[3]	李倩, 张养利, 闫苗苗, 郝双奎, 聂耸, 孙杰, 曹三潮, 王娜. 播期播量氮肥三因子对‘渭麦9号’群体结构和籽粒品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 25-29.
[4]	侯梦媛. 基于关键气象因子的山东省棉花产量预报[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 37-41.
[5]	刘瑜, 闫实, 赵凯丽, 于跃跃, 韩宝, 张静, 郭宁. 不同磷水平设施菜田上结球生菜的适宜施磷量推荐研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 55-59.
[6]	范珊珊, 陈娟, 吴长春, 王睿, 张新刚, 陈小慧, 高飞, 吴文强. 海藻酸肥对草莓生长、产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 60-65.
[7]	丁豪, 高海涛, 毕香君, 李升东. 不同播种方式对冬小麦产量构成和旗叶光合特性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 9-19.
[8]	何国和, 陈海斌, 杜建军, 张伟丽, 郭丽华, 胡益波, 颜肇华, 张婧. 化肥减量配施有机肥对粤西地区水稻产量和养分利用的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(9): 1-8.
[9]	张世杰, 杨波, 王宾刚, 刘云, 张喜峰, 王文丽, 王泽理, 李山. 有机肥对渭北旱塬烟区烤烟产质量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(8): 38-46.
[10]	张正珍, 慕瑞瑞, 王佳, 徐灿, 陈永伟, 张战胜, 吴宏亮, 康建宏. 施钾量对玉米钾素吸收、转运及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(8): 47-56.
[11]	杨治伟, 钱爱萍, 张炜, 曹秀霞. 种植密度对胡麻抗倒性和产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(8): 1-5.
[12]	展文洁, 周犇, 朱林星, 王敏, 朱长太, 沈其荣, 郭世伟. 木霉生物有机肥对盐渍化土壤肥力及杭白菜产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(7): 108-117.
[13]	马晓玲, 周焱博, 袁杰, 张建军, 贾立亭. 阳泉市玉米生育期气象要素变化特征及相关性分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(7): 118-122.
[14]	王林闯, 刘璐, 李建明, 尹莲, 许文钊, 罗德旭, 孙玉东, 赵建锋. 灌水量和灌水频率对设施小果型西瓜产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(7): 33-38.
[15]	刘行, 田晴, 田忠平, 李成忠, 丁银花, 赵宝元, 陈越恒, 程天利, 王韬, 种梓旭. 施肥模式对‘凤丹’牡丹光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(7): 56-63.