Effects of Straw Mulching and Ecological Interception on Photosynthetic Characteristics，Nutrients Accumulation and Yield of Spring Maize(Zea ways L.)

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb15040106

Abstract

Abstract: Straw mulching and ecological interception are important cultivation measures. They may reduce soil and water loss, and affect the growth and yield of maize. A long-term field plot experiment was conducted at the Experimental Base of Southern Hilly and Mountainous Cultivated Region in Liuyang City, Hunan Province, China. The design consisted of five treatments: no fertilizer (T1), chemical fertilizer (T2), chemical fertilizer plus straw mulching (T3), chemical fertilizer plus ecological interception (kernel by soybean, the same below) (T4) and chemical fertilizer plus straw mulching and ecological interception (T5). The study mainly investigated SPAD value and photosynthetic characteristics of three ear- leaves, nutrients accumulation and yield of spring maize. The results in 2014 showed that compared with T2, based on the application of chemical fertilizer, straw mulching and ecological interception increased chlorophyll content (P＜0.05 or P＜0.01), net photosynthetic rate (P＜0.01), stomatal conductance (P＜0.01) of three ear-leaves, and decreased intercellular CO2 concentration (P＜0.05 or P＜0.01) and transpiration rate (P＞0.05), and also increased nitrogen (P＜0.05 or P＜0.01), phosphorus (P＜0.01) and potassium (P＜0.01) accumulation in shoots， ear fresh weight (P＜0.01), stem and leaf fresh weight (P＜0.01), total shoot fresh weight (P＜0.01), ear kernel number (P＜0.01), 100- kernel weight (P＜0.05), grain yield (P＜0.01) of spring maize. Therefore, T5 was the most optimal in all treatments. The differences of all the indicators between T5 and T2 were significant at P＜0.01. Compared with T2, T5’ s nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium accumulation respectively increased by 28.83%, 54.67% and 17.67% , then total shoot fresh weight and grain yield increased by 24.94% and 28.13% , respectively. Except intercellular CO2 concentration (P＞0.05), transpiration rate (P＜0.05) and grain yield (P＜0.05), the differences of all other indicators between T5 and T3 were significant at P＜0.01. Meanwhile, the differences of net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, phosphorus and potassium accumulation, total shoot fresh weight, ear kernel number and 100- kernel weight were extremely significant (P＜0.01), and transpiration rate, nitrogen accumulation and ear fresh weight were significant (P＜0.05), but chlorophyll content, intercellular CO2 concentration, stem and leaf fresh weight and grain yield were not significant (P＞0.05) between T5 and T4. However, except chlorophyll content (P＜0.05), stem and leaf fresh weight (P＜0.05), total fresh weight (P＜0.05) and potassium accumulation (P＜0.01), there were no significant differences (P＞0.05) among all other indicators between T4 and T3. In summary, both straw mulching and ecological interception can improve photosynthetic characteristics and increase nutrients accumulation and yield of spring maize, and there are obvious interaction effects. Generally, effects of ecological interception are more significant than that of straw mulching.

References

[1] 农业部.历年全国农业统计提要[M]//2010年.2011,http://www.agri. gov.cn.
[2] 高飞,贾志宽,韩清芳,等.秸秆覆盖量对土壤水分利用及春玉米产量的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2012,30(1):104-112.
[3] 蔡太义,张合兵,黄会娟,等.不同量秸秆覆盖对春玉米光合生理的影响[J].农业环境科学学报,2012,31(11):2128-2135.
[4] 张宇,荣湘民,王心星,等.覆盖与生态拦截对旱地土壤地表径流和氮素流失的影响[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(2):15-19.
[5] 王云奇,陶洪斌,王璞,等.施氮模式对夏玉米产量和籽粒灌浆的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2012,20(12):1594-1598.
[6] 许东恒,石玉海,孙宁,等.氮肥运筹对玉米叶片光合速率、比叶重和 SPAD值的影响[J].玉米科学,2010,18(6):102-106,110.
[7] Subedi K D, Ma B L. Nitrogen uptake and partitioning in staygreen and leafy maize hybrids[J]. Crop Science,2005(45):740-747.
[8] 高素玲,刘松涛,杨青华,等.氮肥减量后移对玉米冠层生理性状和产量的影响[J].中国农学通报,2013,29(24):114-118.
[9] 张丽丽,王璞,杨海龙,等.氮肥对夏玉米群体构建及光合特性的影响[J].华北农学报,2013,28(增刊):332-336.
[10] 王云奇,陶洪斌,杨利华,等.氮肥管理对夏玉米冠层结构和氮肥吸收利用的影响[J].玉米科学,2013,21(3):125-130.
[11] Singh V, Singh G, Bhriguvanshi S. Effect of polyethylene mulch on soil nutrient level and root， leaf and fruiting characteristics of mango (mangifera indica)[J]. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2009, 79(6):411-417.
[12] 沈裕琥,黄相国,王海庆.秸秆覆盖的农田效应[J].干旱地区农业研究,1998,16(1):45-50.
[13] 方文松,朱自玺,刘荣花,等.秸秆覆盖农田的小气候特征和增产机理研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2009,27(6):123-128.
[14] 蔡太义,黄会娟,黄耀威,等.不同量秸秆覆盖还田对土壤活性有机碳及碳库管理指数的影响[J].自然资源学报,2012,27(6):964-974.
[15] 苏衍涛,王凯荣,刘迎新,等.稻草覆盖对红壤旱地土壤温度和水分的调控效应[J].农业环境科学学报,2008,27(2):670-676.
[16] 高雪涛,王卫,谢小立,等.红壤旱地稻草覆盖对夏玉米抗旱性的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2013,21(10):1193-1201.
[17] Ferrini F, Fini A, Frangi P, et al. Mulching of ornamental trees： Effects on growth and physiology[J]. Arboriculture and Urhan Forestry,2008,34(3):157.
[18] Yang F, Huang S, Gao R C, et al. Growth of soybean seedlings in relay strip intercropping system in relation to light quantity and red: far-red ratio[J]. Field Crops Res,2014(155):245-253.
[19] 赵建华,孙建好,陈伟,等.不同作物与玉米间套作对玉米产量和生物量累积的影响[J].作物杂志,2013(4):120-125.
[20] 王秀领,闫旭东,徐玉鹏,等.玉米-大豆间作复合体系光和特性研究[J].河北农业科学,2012,16(4):33-35,39.
[21] 王心星,荣湘民,张玉平,等.旱地不同间套作对玉米生长·养分累积及产量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2014,42(10):2897-2899.
[22] 鲍士旦.土壤农化分析(第 3版)[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[23] 张倩,张洪生,赵美爱,等.种植方式对夏玉米光合特性与产量的影响[J].玉米科学,2012,20(5):102-105.
[24] 吕越,吴普特,陈小莉,等.地上部与地下部作用对玉米/大豆间作优势的影响[J].农业机械学报,2014,45(1):129-136,142.
[25] 王小春,杨文钰,任万军,等.小麦/玉米/大豆和小麦/玉米/甘薯套作体系中玉米产量及养分吸收的差异[J].植物营养与肥料学报, 2012,18(4):803-812.
[26] 雍太文,杨文钰,任万军,等“ . 小麦/玉米/大豆”套作体系中不同作物间的相互作用及氮素的转移、吸收[J].核农学报,2009,23(2):320- 326.
[27] 卿国林,朱旺冲,潘九林.稻草覆盖量对早稻茬免耕秋玉米光合特性的影响[J].作物研究,2014,28(6):602-604,633.
[28] 张建华,马义勇,王振南,等.间作系统中玉米光合作用指标改善的研究[J].玉米科学,2006,14(4):104-106.
[29] 王帘里,孙波,隋跃宇,等.不同气候和土壤条件下玉米叶片叶绿素相对含量对土壤氮素供应和玉米产量的预测[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2009,15(2):327-335.
[30] 杨磊,吴晗,赵立华,等.玉米与大豆间作对玉米叶片气孔及光合效率的影响[J].云南农业大学学报,2012,27(1):39-43.
[31] 张向前,卞新民,黄国勤,等.秸秆覆盖和根系互作对间作玉米生理特性及产量的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2013,31(4):66-72.
[32] 张向前,黄国勤,赵其国.间作条件下秸秆覆盖对玉米叶片光合特性和产量的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2014,22(4):414-421.
[33] 王庆成,刘开昌,张秀青,等.玉米的群体光合作用[J].玉米科学, 2001,9(4):57-61.
[34] 王群,李潮海,栾丽敏,等.不同质地土壤夏玉米生育后期光合特性比较研究[J].作物学报,2005,31(5):628-633.
[35] 方瑾.不同覆盖耕作方式下玉米生长、土壤水温及无机氮变化的研究[D].雅安:四川农业大学,2013.
[36] 赵惠丽,王小利,段建军,等.免耕与覆盖对贵单 8号玉米氮磷钾养分吸收及产量的影响[J].广东农业科学,2014(1):8-12.
[37] 张智晖.玉米/大豆间作模式对土壤酶活性及土壤养分的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学,2011,39(16):9706-9707.
[38] 任媛媛,王志梁,王小林,等.黄土塬区玉米大豆不同间作方式（比例）对产量和经济收益的影响及其机制[J].生态学报,2015,35(12): 1-13.
[39] 孟凡凡,王博,刘宝泉,等.玉米-大豆带状间作下玉米品种产量和主要农艺性状比较分析[J].作物杂志,2014(3):101-105.
[40] 王晓维,杨文亭,缪建群,等.玉米-大豆间作和施氮对玉米产量及农艺性状的影响[J].生态学报,2014,34(18):5275-5282.