Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2020, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (11): 43-48.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb18120083
Special Issue: 烟草种植与生产
Previous Articles Next Articles
Chen Jianfeng1, Chen Hua1, Yin Mei1, Wang Zhiyuan1, Hong Lifang1, Su Fan1, Li Guohong2, Fu Libo1()
Received:
2018-12-19
Revised:
2019-04-02
Online:
2020-04-15
Published:
2020-04-28
Contact:
Fu Libo
E-mail:1198276883@qq.com
CLC Number:
Chen Jianfeng, Chen Hua, Yin Mei, Wang Zhiyuan, Hong Lifang, Su Fan, Li Guohong, Fu Libo. Fertilization System of Nutrient Critical Value for Optimum Yield of Tobacco in Yuxi[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(11): 43-48.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb18120083
试验点 | 海拔/m | 土壤类型 | pH | 有机质/(g/kg) | 全氮/(g/kg) | 全磷/(g/kg) | 全钾/(g/kg) | 碱解氮/(mg/kg) | 速效磷/(mg/kg) | 速效钾/(mg/kg) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
由义 | 1530 | 水稻土 | 7.15 | 48.26 | 2.82 | 1.03 | 22.81 | 198.85 | 26.65 | 223.59 |
梅营 | 1567 | 水稻土 | 7.29 | 39.97 | 2.40 | 0.74 | 15.05 | 171.37 | 47.18 | 203.41 |
新城 | 1720 | 水稻土 | 5.36 | 43.92 | 2.65 | 0.54 | 11.60 | 249.84 | 26.87 | 223.88 |
高平 | 2000 | 红壤 | 6.51 | 39.91 | 2.25 | 0.73 | 8.57 | 195.09 | 26.08 | 131.74 |
中屯 | 1684 | 红壤 | 7.44 | 20.17 | 1.82 | 0.35 | 19.37 | 150.14 | 13.91 | 233.69 |
大村 | 1893 | 红壤 | 7.02 | 27.53 | 1.63 | 4.18 | 15.06 | 126.64 | 29.3 | 142.84 |
试验点 | 海拔/m | 土壤类型 | pH | 有机质/(g/kg) | 全氮/(g/kg) | 全磷/(g/kg) | 全钾/(g/kg) | 碱解氮/(mg/kg) | 速效磷/(mg/kg) | 速效钾/(mg/kg) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
由义 | 1530 | 水稻土 | 7.15 | 48.26 | 2.82 | 1.03 | 22.81 | 198.85 | 26.65 | 223.59 |
梅营 | 1567 | 水稻土 | 7.29 | 39.97 | 2.40 | 0.74 | 15.05 | 171.37 | 47.18 | 203.41 |
新城 | 1720 | 水稻土 | 5.36 | 43.92 | 2.65 | 0.54 | 11.60 | 249.84 | 26.87 | 223.88 |
高平 | 2000 | 红壤 | 6.51 | 39.91 | 2.25 | 0.73 | 8.57 | 195.09 | 26.08 | 131.74 |
中屯 | 1684 | 红壤 | 7.44 | 20.17 | 1.82 | 0.35 | 19.37 | 150.14 | 13.91 | 233.69 |
大村 | 1893 | 红壤 | 7.02 | 27.53 | 1.63 | 4.18 | 15.06 | 126.64 | 29.3 | 142.84 |
试验点 | 产量/(kg/hm2) | 均价/(元/kg) | 净产值/(元/hm2) | 烟叶(C3F)评吸分 | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | ||||
由义 | 3361.5 | 3279.0 | 3319.5 | 3319.5 | 26.01 | 26.03 | 25.99 | 26.01 | 83995.20 | 81914.85 | 82836.45 | 82915.50 | 81.4 | ||
梅营 | 3024.0 | 3033.0 | 3055.5 | 3037.5 | 25.65 | 25.67 | 25.66 | 25.66 | 74557.95 | 74849.40 | 75396.45 | 74934.60 | 84.0 | ||
新城 | 2724.0 | 2742.0 | 2734.5 | 2733.0 | 23.9 | 23.93 | 23.92 | 23.92 | 62095.95 | 62608.35 | 62401.50 | 62368.65 | 81.3 | ||
高平 | 2286.0 | 2341.5 | 2331.0 | 2319.0 | 25.98 | 25.99 | 25.99 | 25.99 | 56382.60 | 57847.80 | 57574.95 | 57268.50 | 83.9 | ||
中屯 | 2512.5 | 2538.0 | 2485.5 | 2512.5 | 25.81 | 25.84 | 25.83 | 25.83 | 62269.65 | 63003.90 | 61622.40 | 62298.60 | 82.6 | ||
大村 | 2263.5 | 2334.0 | 2284.5 | 2293.5 | 25.68 | 25.62 | 25.65 | 25.65 | 55548.60 | 57219.00 | 56019.45 | 56262.30 | 81.8 |
试验点 | 产量/(kg/hm2) | 均价/(元/kg) | 净产值/(元/hm2) | 烟叶(C3F)评吸分 | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | ||||
由义 | 3361.5 | 3279.0 | 3319.5 | 3319.5 | 26.01 | 26.03 | 25.99 | 26.01 | 83995.20 | 81914.85 | 82836.45 | 82915.50 | 81.4 | ||
梅营 | 3024.0 | 3033.0 | 3055.5 | 3037.5 | 25.65 | 25.67 | 25.66 | 25.66 | 74557.95 | 74849.40 | 75396.45 | 74934.60 | 84.0 | ||
新城 | 2724.0 | 2742.0 | 2734.5 | 2733.0 | 23.9 | 23.93 | 23.92 | 23.92 | 62095.95 | 62608.35 | 62401.50 | 62368.65 | 81.3 | ||
高平 | 2286.0 | 2341.5 | 2331.0 | 2319.0 | 25.98 | 25.99 | 25.99 | 25.99 | 56382.60 | 57847.80 | 57574.95 | 57268.50 | 83.9 | ||
中屯 | 2512.5 | 2538.0 | 2485.5 | 2512.5 | 25.81 | 25.84 | 25.83 | 25.83 | 62269.65 | 63003.90 | 61622.40 | 62298.60 | 82.6 | ||
大村 | 2263.5 | 2334.0 | 2284.5 | 2293.5 | 25.68 | 25.62 | 25.65 | 25.65 | 55548.60 | 57219.00 | 56019.45 | 56262.30 | 81.8 |
试验点 | N0P2K2 | N2P0K2 | N2P2K0 | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | |||
由义 | 1660.5 | 1684.5 | 1659.0 | 1668.0 | 1668.0 | 1662.0 | 1632.0 | 1654.5 | 1446.0 | 1465.5 | 1491.0 | 1467.0 | ||
梅营 | 1540.5 | 1575.0 | 1596.0 | 1570.5 | 2446.5 | 2463.0 | 2503.5 | 2470.5 | 1410.0 | 1371.0 | 1366.5 | 1383.0 | ||
新城 | 1951.5 | 1831.5 | 1909.5 | 1897.5 | 1663.5 | 1659.0 | 1681.5 | 1668.0 | 1473.0 | 1452.0 | 1482.0 | 1468.5 | ||
高平 | 1812.0 | 1810.5 | 1822.5 | 1815.0 | 1612.5 | 1603.5 | 1641.0 | 1618.5 | 1408.5 | 1374.0 | 1380.0 | 1387.5 | ||
中屯 | 1381.5 | 1398.0 | 1374.0 | 1384.5 | 1101.0 | 1122.0 | 1095.0 | 1105.5 | 1516.5 | 1540.5 | 1543.5 | 1533.0 | ||
大村 | 1234.5 | 1230.0 | 1198.5 | 1221.0 | 1764.0 | 1776.0 | 1746.0 | 1762.5 | 1179.0 | 1170.0 | 1165.5 | 1171.5 |
试验点 | N0P2K2 | N2P0K2 | N2P2K0 | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | X1 | X2 | X3 | 平均 | |||
由义 | 1660.5 | 1684.5 | 1659.0 | 1668.0 | 1668.0 | 1662.0 | 1632.0 | 1654.5 | 1446.0 | 1465.5 | 1491.0 | 1467.0 | ||
梅营 | 1540.5 | 1575.0 | 1596.0 | 1570.5 | 2446.5 | 2463.0 | 2503.5 | 2470.5 | 1410.0 | 1371.0 | 1366.5 | 1383.0 | ||
新城 | 1951.5 | 1831.5 | 1909.5 | 1897.5 | 1663.5 | 1659.0 | 1681.5 | 1668.0 | 1473.0 | 1452.0 | 1482.0 | 1468.5 | ||
高平 | 1812.0 | 1810.5 | 1822.5 | 1815.0 | 1612.5 | 1603.5 | 1641.0 | 1618.5 | 1408.5 | 1374.0 | 1380.0 | 1387.5 | ||
中屯 | 1381.5 | 1398.0 | 1374.0 | 1384.5 | 1101.0 | 1122.0 | 1095.0 | 1105.5 | 1516.5 | 1540.5 | 1543.5 | 1533.0 | ||
大村 | 1234.5 | 1230.0 | 1198.5 | 1221.0 | 1764.0 | 1776.0 | 1746.0 | 1762.5 | 1179.0 | 1170.0 | 1165.5 | 1171.5 |
试验点 | 土壤有效养分测定值/(mg/kg) | 试验处理及产量/(kg/hm2) | 土壤养分校正系数 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
碱解氮 | 速效磷 | 速效钾 | N0P2K2 | N2P0K2 | N2P2K0 | 氮 | 磷 | 钾 | |||
由义 | 198.85 | 26.65 | 223.59 | 1668.0 | 1654.1 | 1467.3 | 0.11 | 0.32 | 0.14 | ||
梅营 | 171.37 | 47.18 | 203.41 | 1570.5 | 2470.8 | 1382.6 | 0.12 | 0.27 | 0.15 | ||
新城 | 249.84 | 26.87 | 223.88 | 1897.5 | 1667.8 | 1469.2 | 0.10 | 0.32 | 0.14 | ||
高平 | 195.09 | 26.08 | 131.74 | 1815.0 | 1618.8 | 1387.5 | 0.12 | 0.32 | 0.19 | ||
中屯 | 150.14 | 13.91 | 233.69 | 1384.5 | 1106.2 | 1533.6 | 0.12 | 0.41 | 0.14 | ||
大村 | 126.64 | 29.3 | 142.84 | 1221.0 | 1761.8 | 1171.7 | 0.13 | 0.31 | 0.18 |
试验点 | 土壤有效养分测定值/(mg/kg) | 试验处理及产量/(kg/hm2) | 土壤养分校正系数 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
碱解氮 | 速效磷 | 速效钾 | N0P2K2 | N2P0K2 | N2P2K0 | 氮 | 磷 | 钾 | |||
由义 | 198.85 | 26.65 | 223.59 | 1668.0 | 1654.1 | 1467.3 | 0.11 | 0.32 | 0.14 | ||
梅营 | 171.37 | 47.18 | 203.41 | 1570.5 | 2470.8 | 1382.6 | 0.12 | 0.27 | 0.15 | ||
新城 | 249.84 | 26.87 | 223.88 | 1897.5 | 1667.8 | 1469.2 | 0.10 | 0.32 | 0.14 | ||
高平 | 195.09 | 26.08 | 131.74 | 1815.0 | 1618.8 | 1387.5 | 0.12 | 0.32 | 0.19 | ||
中屯 | 150.14 | 13.91 | 233.69 | 1384.5 | 1106.2 | 1533.6 | 0.12 | 0.41 | 0.14 | ||
大村 | 126.64 | 29.3 | 142.84 | 1221.0 | 1761.8 | 1171.7 | 0.13 | 0.31 | 0.18 |
试验点 | 因素 | 偏回归模型 | 最佳经济施肥量/ (kg/hm2) | 耕作层(0~20 cm)土壤养分 含量/(kg/hm2) | 土壤养分 校正系数 | 适产养分临界值/ (kg/hm2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
由义 | N | y=-10.7987N2+2523.6N+6441 | 116.850 | 447.420 | 0.113 | 167.415 |
P2O5 | y=-25.8127P2+3044.2P+6814.5 | 58.965 | 59.970 | 0.325 | 78.450 | |
K2O | y=-0.4801K2+287.34K+3991.5 | 299.235 | 503.085 | 0.143 | 371.175 | |
梅营 | N | y=-8.4473N2+1819.1N+2293.5 | 107.670 | 385.590 | 0.119 | 153.555 |
P2O5 | y=-31.076P2+3388.3P+1729.5 | 54.510 | 106.155 | 0.259 | 82.005 | |
K2O | y=-1.1819K2+637.9K+11071.95 | 269.850 | 457.680 | 0.151 | 338.955 | |
新城 | N | y=-7.4007N2+1575.4N+2146.5 | 106.440 | 562.140 | 0.104 | 164.910 |
P2O5 | y=-28.32P2+2988.5P+1647 | 52.770 | 60.465 | 0.324 | 72.360 | |
K2O | y=-0.8591K2+459.92K+834.615 | 267.690 | 503.730 | 0.143 | 339.720 | |
高平 | N | y=-5.37N2+1107.3N+209.625 | 103.095 | 438.960 | 0.114 | 153.135 |
P2O5 | y=-23.2727P2+2435.7P+6462.9 | 52.335 | 58.680 | 0.328 | 71.580 | |
K2O | y=-0.665K2+361.7K+8150.85 | 271.920 | 296.415 | 0.190 | 328.245 | |
中屯 | N | y=-10.019N2+1828.2N+2107.5 | 91.230 | 337.815 | 0.124 | 133.125 |
P2O5 | y=-38.3307P2+3467.2P+1611 | 45.225 | 31.305 | 0.401 | 57.780 | |
K2O | y=-1.1607K2+532.69K+1202.4 | 229.470 | 525.810 | 0.139 | 302.565 | |
大村 | N | y=-6.936N2+1293.5N+3967.5 | 93.240 | 284.940 | 0.131 | 130.560 |
P2O5 | y=-28.837P2+2644P+4323.2 | 45.840 | 65.925 | 0.314 | 66.540 | |
K2O | y=-1.047K2+481.23K+983.845 | 229.830 | 321.390 | 0.183 | 288.645 |
试验点 | 因素 | 偏回归模型 | 最佳经济施肥量/ (kg/hm2) | 耕作层(0~20 cm)土壤养分 含量/(kg/hm2) | 土壤养分 校正系数 | 适产养分临界值/ (kg/hm2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
由义 | N | y=-10.7987N2+2523.6N+6441 | 116.850 | 447.420 | 0.113 | 167.415 |
P2O5 | y=-25.8127P2+3044.2P+6814.5 | 58.965 | 59.970 | 0.325 | 78.450 | |
K2O | y=-0.4801K2+287.34K+3991.5 | 299.235 | 503.085 | 0.143 | 371.175 | |
梅营 | N | y=-8.4473N2+1819.1N+2293.5 | 107.670 | 385.590 | 0.119 | 153.555 |
P2O5 | y=-31.076P2+3388.3P+1729.5 | 54.510 | 106.155 | 0.259 | 82.005 | |
K2O | y=-1.1819K2+637.9K+11071.95 | 269.850 | 457.680 | 0.151 | 338.955 | |
新城 | N | y=-7.4007N2+1575.4N+2146.5 | 106.440 | 562.140 | 0.104 | 164.910 |
P2O5 | y=-28.32P2+2988.5P+1647 | 52.770 | 60.465 | 0.324 | 72.360 | |
K2O | y=-0.8591K2+459.92K+834.615 | 267.690 | 503.730 | 0.143 | 339.720 | |
高平 | N | y=-5.37N2+1107.3N+209.625 | 103.095 | 438.960 | 0.114 | 153.135 |
P2O5 | y=-23.2727P2+2435.7P+6462.9 | 52.335 | 58.680 | 0.328 | 71.580 | |
K2O | y=-0.665K2+361.7K+8150.85 | 271.920 | 296.415 | 0.190 | 328.245 | |
中屯 | N | y=-10.019N2+1828.2N+2107.5 | 91.230 | 337.815 | 0.124 | 133.125 |
P2O5 | y=-38.3307P2+3467.2P+1611 | 45.225 | 31.305 | 0.401 | 57.780 | |
K2O | y=-1.1607K2+532.69K+1202.4 | 229.470 | 525.810 | 0.139 | 302.565 | |
大村 | N | y=-6.936N2+1293.5N+3967.5 | 93.240 | 284.940 | 0.131 | 130.560 |
P2O5 | y=-28.837P2+2644P+4323.2 | 45.840 | 65.925 | 0.314 | 66.540 | |
K2O | y=-1.047K2+481.23K+983.845 | 229.830 | 321.390 | 0.183 | 288.645 |
[1] | 中国农业科学院烟草研究所. 中国烟草栽培学[M]. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2005: 5-6. |
[2] | 胡荣海 . 云南烟草栽培学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007: 290-296. |
[3] |
刘青丽, 陈阜, 张云贵 , 等. 我国西南烟区典型植烟土壤烤烟氮素的吸收规律[J]. 作物学报, 2013,39(3):486-493.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2013.00486 URL |
[4] | 郑明, 周冀衡, 李强 , 等. 曲靖植烟土壤主要养分现状分析及施肥对策[J]. 湖北农业学报, 2010,29(4):825-828. |
[5] | Collins W K, Hawks S N . Principles of flue- cured tobacco production[M]. NC: North Carolina State University, 1994: 23-98. |
[6] | 黄瑾, 林北森, 周文亮 , 等. 广西百色市植烟土壤主要养分特征及施肥对策[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2010,31(4):33-37. |
[7] | 刘青丽, 张云贵, 焦永鸽 , 等. 西南烟区氮素供应与烤烟氮素吸收的关系[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017,23(3):757-764. |
[8] | 闫芳芳, 朱波, 陈庆瑞 , 等. 不同增钾肥配方对攀枝花烤烟烟叶产量、品质及土壤养分含量的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2013,26(5):1957-1961. |
[9] |
朱佩, 张继光, 薛琳 , 等. 不同质地土壤上烤烟氮素积累分配及利用率的研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015,21(2):362-370.
doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2015.0210 URL |
[10] | 金耀青, 张中原 . 配方施肥方法及其应用[M]. 沈阳: 辽宁科学技术出版社, 1993: 52-60. |
[11] | 史彦江, 吴正保, 谷量 , 等. 不同氮磷钾配比追肥对幼龄骏枣生长及其产量和品质的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2014(1):42-47. |
[12] | 张海伟, 翟晶, 程小强 , 等. 不同基追肥比例及施氮量对紫色土旱地烤烟产质量的影响[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2013,19(2):72-76. |
[13] | 张勇刚, 宋朝鹏, 李常军 , 等. 烟叶感官质量评价研究进展[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2010,49(9):2271-2274. |
[14] | 何欢辉, 王峰吉, 高文霞 , 等. 不同施氮量对烤烟品系F1-35产量和品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2008,36(12):5028-5030. |
[15] | 杨舟非, 张明发, 田峰 , 等. 湘西州植烟土壤有机质特征及与土壤养分的相关性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015,31(1):69-75. |
[16] | 张明发, 田峰, 巢进 , 等. 湘西州植烟土壤pH特征及与土壤有效养分的相关性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014,30(25):267-272. |
[17] |
李子双, 王薇, 张世文 , 等. 氮磷与硅钙肥配施对辣椒产量和品质的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015,21(2):458-466.
doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2015.0221 URL |
[18] | 中国烟叶生产购销公司.中国烟叶生产实用技术指南[M]. 2016: 34- 37, 52-55. |
[19] | 鲁如坤 . 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社,2000:127-129,146- 149, 302-311. |
[20] | 鲍士旦 . 土壤农化分析(第三版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社,2005:56-58,80- 84, 106-108. |
[21] |
刘卫群, 郭群召, 汪庆昌 , 等. 不同施氮水平对烤烟干物质、氮素积累分配及产质的影响[J].河南农业科学,2004(8):25-28.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3268.2004.08.007 URL |
[22] | 刘诚, 王振飞 . 烤烟适宜施氮量试验初报[J]. 江西农业学报, 2005,17(3):95-96. |
[23] | 周宽余, 严自斌 . 不同施氮量对烤烟生产的影响[J]. 山西农业科学, 1998,26(2):58-59. |
[24] | 方先兰, 肖林长, 郭伟 . 品种和施氮量对烤烟优质高产的效应初探[J].江西农业科技,2003(11):18-19. |
[25] |
Xi X Y, Li C J, Zhang F S . Nitrogen Supply after Removing the Shoot Apex Increases the Nicotine Concentration and Nitrogen Content of Tobacco[J]. Plants Annals of Botany, 2005,96:793-797.
doi: 10.1093/aob/mci229 URL pmid: 16100227 |
[26] | 魏建军, 董巨河, 盛建东 . 和田县玉米测土配方施肥土壤养分校正系数研究[J]. 新疆农业大学学报, 2011,34(6):517-520. |
[27] | 邢月华, 汪仁, 安景文 . 土壤养分测定值与其校正系数的回归关系[J].辽宁农业科学,2005(2):45-46. |
[28] | 曹连福, 段曰亮 . 水稻土有效养分与其校正系数的数学模型[J].中国土壤与肥料,2012(5):73-76. |
[29] | 普匡 . 新平县旱地植烟土壤养分状况分析及施肥水平建议[J]. 西南农业学报, 2010,23(4):1160-1165. |
[30] | 张明发, 田峰, 邓小华 , 等. 不同新型肥料对土壤肥力及烤烟生长的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017,33(29):85-89. |
[1] | HUANG Hao, XIE Jin, YUAN Wenbin, WANG Chuliang, CHEN Kunhua, ZENG Fandong, LIANG Zengfa, SU Zhao, WANG Wei. Effects of Different Organic Materials on Root Characteristics and Accumulation of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium in Flue-cured Tobacco [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(8): 51-57. |
[2] | CHEN Jianfeng, ZHAO Wenjun, FU Libo, YIN Mei, WANG Zhiyuan, WANG Wei, WANG Yingxue, YANG Yanxian, CHEN Hua. Influence of Fertilization System of Nutrient Critical Value for Optimum Yield of Tobacco on Yield and Quality of Flue-cured Tobacco in Yuxi [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(28): 1-6. |
[3] | CHEN Jin, WANG Xinyue, XIE Pengfei, ZHANG Qingfu, YANG Liu, CHEN Zhifeng, PEI Xiaodong, HUANG Jie, DENG Yongsheng, DENG Xiaohua. Tobacco Residues Returning to Field: Decomposition Characteristics and Effects on Soil Nutrients and Nicotine [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(14): 65-71. |
[4] | WANG Yan, XIAO Yang. Different Fertilization Treatments: Effects on Biomass and Quality of Barnyard Grass [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(12): 20-25. |
[5] | XING Qiming, JIN Wenjie, ZHOU Libin, LI Wenjian, LIU Ruiyuan, MA Jianzhong. Salt Tolerance of Plant Increased by Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria: Research Progress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(11): 46-52. |
[6] | Chen Jianfeng, Liu Jun, He Zhenghai, Chen Hua, Yin Mei, Wang Zhiyuan, Wang Wei, Fu Libo. Fertilization System of Nutrient Critical Value for Optimum Yield of Tea Plantation in South Yunnan [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(8): 79-83. |
[7] | Zhang Wenxue, Li Dianrong. NPK Fertilizer in High Yield Field: Effect on Rapeseed Yield Characters [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(6): 37-43. |
[8] | Liu Jingyi, Zuo Qingsong, Wang Long, You Jingjing, Zheng Jingdong, Chen Jiaxuan, Yang Guang, Leng Suohu. Differences of Accumulation and Distribution of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium in Rapeseed Under Two Soil Salt Concentration Levels [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(12): 24-30. |
[9] | Wang Xiaoying, Chen Zhanfei, Fang Yuchuan, Lv Jun, Wang Kui, Gao Qingqing, Zhang Yuan. Influence of NPK Combinations on Agronomic Characters, Yield and Nutrition Quality of Potato [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(4): 44-49. |
[10] | Huang Anxiang, Zhou Xianyong, Yang Shoulu, Ji Ning, Zhu Yayan, Xu Jie, Zhang Yanxiong. Camellia oleifera Forest Land: NPK Content and Distribution Characteristics in Soil Profile Under Different Slopes [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(34): 25-31. |
[11] | Yin Huanli, Guo Ya, Chang Feng, Wang Dandan, Li Lantao, Wang Yilun. Combined Application of N, P and K Fertilizers: Effects on Yield, Nutrient Uptake and Utilization of Winter Wheat [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(16): 7-12. |
[12] | . NPK Application Modes Affect Plants and Yield of Summer Maize and Soil Nutrients [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2019, 35(13): 23-30. |
[13] | . Effects of Slow-release Fertilizer Containing Urease Inhibitor and Nitrification Inhibitor on Nutrients Contents and Enzymes Activities in Soil [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2019, 35(11): 65-71. |
[14] | 尹天能,,,周汝梦 and . Effects of Fertilization Treatments on Leaf Structure of Tobacco‘K326’ [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(4): 49-54. |
[15] | . Utilization Rate of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium in Potato: A Preliminary Report [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(27): 39-44. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||