Effects of Different Bio-stimulants on Yield and Quality of Fresh-eating Maize

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb20190400063

Abstract

Abstract:

To provide technical support for high-yield and high-quality cultivation of fresh-eating maize, the effects of different bio-stimulants on the yield and quality of maize were studied. Fresh-eating maize variety ‘Qianjiangnuo 3’ was used as material. Three bio-stimulants including Ameizi, Meiji and Baokangling 1 were tested. There were totally 6 treatments: the 1000, 1500 and 2000-fold diluents of Ameizi, 3000-fold diluent of Meiji, and 300-fold diluent of Baokangling 1 were applied to maize. The clear water with equal quantity was used as control. The effects of conventional fertilization on economic characters, yield and quality of ‘Qianjiangnuo 3’ were investigated. Under the treatment of 1500-fold diluent of Ameizi, the grain number per row, fresh and net weight per spike, and yield of maize were the highest, whereas the protein, crude fiber, reducing sugar and starch content all ranked the third. The spike width and protein content of maize treated with 300-fold diluent of ‘Baokangling 1’ was the highest, whereas the fresh and net weight per spike, yield, reducing sugar content all ranked the second, but the fat content was the lowest. 1500-fold diluent of Ameizi was the most suitable for improving the yield of maize, and 300-fold diluent of Baokangling 1 was the most suitable for improving the quality of maize. It is suggested that the combination of the two bio-stimulants is the best treatment for the improvement of yield and quality of fresh-eating maize.

Key words: bio-stimulants, fresh-eating maize, economic characters, yield, quality

CLC Number:

S513

Ying Wu, Luo Letan, Ruan Songlin, Li Jinwen. Effects of Different Bio-stimulants on Yield and Quality of Fresh-eating Maize[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(17): 89-94.

Figures/Tables 4

References 27

[1]	刘秀秀, 冯小亮, 吕东波 . 生物刺激素在农业中的应用现状及发展前景[J]. 南方农业, 2017,11(14):88-89.
[2]	陈绍荣 . 我国生物刺激剂的产业现状及发展方向[J]. 磷肥与复肥, 2017,32(1):16-18.
[3]	武良, 汤洁 . 我国生物刺激素产业发展现状及趋势[J]. 中国农技推广, 2016,32(12):9-12.
[4]	许俊香, 邹国元, 孙钦平 , 等. 腐殖酸尿素对土壤氨挥发和玉米生长的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2013(4):934-939.
[5]	刘增兵, 赵秉强, 林治安 . 腐殖酸尿素氨挥发特性及影响因素研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2010,16(1):208-213.
[6]	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.
[7]	陈玉玲 . 腐殖酸对植物生理活动的影响[J]. 植物学通报, 2000,17(1):11-16.
[8]	张水勤, 袁亮, 李伟 , 等. 腐植酸尿素对玉米产量及肥料氮去向的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017,23(5):1207-1214.
[9]	杨偲 . 生物菌肥对玉米农艺性状及生理指标的影响[D]. 哈尔滨:黑龙江大学, 2018: 2-7.
[10]	王桂跃, 赵福成, 韩海亮 , 等. 浙江省鲜食玉米新品种产量、品质和抗性分析及其育种目标选择[J]. 浙江大学学报:农业与生命科学版, 2018,44(3):343-355.
[11]	朱再荣, 朱贵平, 张惠琴 , 等. 糯玉米钱江糯3号的试种表现及直播栽培技术[J]. 中国种业, 2017(8):75-76.
[12]	赵琳, 石江, 骆乐谈 , 等. 甜糯玉米钱江糯3号的选育及栽培要点[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2017,58(11):1889-1890,1893.
[13]	孙丽娟, 赵志宏, 贺娟 , 等. 我国鲜食玉米相关标准问题分析及对策[J]. 作物杂志, 2019(2):46-50.
[14]	熊思健, 陈绍荣 . 生物刺激剂在农业绿色发展中的应用及其市场前景[J]. 化肥工业, 2018,45(6):1-6.
[15]	陈绍荣, 熊思健, 孙玲丽 . 生物刺激剂的活性及其应用研究[J]. 磷肥与复肥, 2018,33(10):18-21.
[16]	阮松林, 肖文斐, 忻雅 , 等. 植物免疫诱抗剂研究进展Ⅱ-商品化植物免疫诱抗剂特性及功效研究[J]. 杭州农业与科技, 2018(3):22-25.
[17]	张青, 肖文斐, 裘劼人 , 等. 免疫诱导剂处理的黑李叶片蛋白质组学分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2018,30(5):787-796.
[18]	裴瑞杰, 袁天佑, 王俊忠 , 等. 施用腐殖酸对夏玉米产量和氮效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(11):2189-2198.
[19]	刘威, 周剑雄, 谢媛圆 , 等. 控释尿素不同条施深度下鲜食玉米产量和氮素利用效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2018,32(1):246-251,258.
[20]	黄巧义, 唐拴虎, 张发宝 , 等. 控释尿素与常规尿素配施比例对甜玉米产量和氮肥利用的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017,23(3):622-631.
[21]	张强, 常瑞雪, 胡兆平 , 等. 生物刺激素及其在功能水溶性肥料中应用前景分析[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2018,35(2):111-118.
[22]	王浩, 刘景圣, 郑明珠 , 等. 鲜食糯玉米贮藏过程中淀粉含量及相关酶活性变化的研究[J]. 中国粮油学报, 2017,32(3):6-10.
[23]	林家永 . 近红外光谱分析技术在玉米品质分析中的研究进展[J]. 中国粮油学报, 2010,25(4):108-115.
[24]	宋俏姮, 孔亮亮, 刘俊峰 , 等. 浸渍提取温度对鲜食玉米可溶性糖含量的影响[J]. 食品工业, 2018,39(7):116-119.
[25]	赵福成, 景立权, 闫发宝 , 等. 施氮量对甜玉米产量、品质和蔗糖代谢酶活性的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013,19(1):45-53.
[26]	宋雪皎 . 氮、钾肥对糯玉米(中糯1号)鲜食品质影响研究[D]. 雅安:四川农业大学, 2005: 3-8.
[27]	胡伟民, 肖文斐, 忻雅 , 等. 免疫诱抗剂保康灵1号对鲜食糯玉米产量和抗病性的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2016,57(4):604-606.

处理	生物刺激剂	使用方法	稀释倍数
1	阿美滋	喷雾	1000倍
2	阿美滋	喷雾	1500倍
3	阿美滋	喷雾	2000倍
4	美基	喷雾	3000倍
5	保康灵1号	喷雾	300倍
6(CK)	清水对照	喷雾	—

处理	生物刺激剂	使用方法	稀释倍数
1	阿美滋	喷雾	1000倍
2	阿美滋	喷雾	1500倍
3	阿美滋	喷雾	2000倍
4	美基	喷雾	3000倍
5	保康灵1号	喷雾	300倍
6(CK)	清水对照	喷雾	—

处理	株高/cm	穗行数/	行粒数/	秃尖/cm	穗粗/cm	穗长/cm	单穗鲜重/g	单穗净重/g
1	194.73±3.06c	14.93±0.23a	38.70±0.10a	1.93±0.75b	4.73±0.06a	23.23±0.38ab	388.33±7.64b	315.00±8.66ab
2	202.73±0.76a	14.80±0.69a	41.73±1.80a	2.37±0.21ab	4.77±0.06a	23.33±0.15ab	416.67±15.28a	326.00±21.17a
3	199.20±1.93b	14.53±0.23a	40.17±2.62a	2.37±0.40ab	4.60±0.10b	22.90±1.13ab	393.33±5.77ab	293.00±4.36b
4	202.70±1.15a	13.87±0.61a	41.60±0.72a	2.70±0.26ab	4.57±0.12b	23.97±0.64a	390.00±10.00b	294.00±12.17b
5	203.27±0.64a	14.60±0.72a	39.87±0.42a	2.37±0.25ab	4.80±0.10a	22.93±0.60ab	403.33±25.17ab	321.00±8.19a
6(CK)	194.73±2.04c	14.17±0.21a	39.00±1.59a	2.93±0.35a	4.73±0.06a	22.67±0.25b	385.00±5.00b	296.67±5.77b

处理	株高/cm	穗行数/	行粒数/	秃尖/cm	穗粗/cm	穗长/cm	单穗鲜重/g	单穗净重/g
1	194.73±3.06c	14.93±0.23a	38.70±0.10a	1.93±0.75b	4.73±0.06a	23.23±0.38ab	388.33±7.64b	315.00±8.66ab
2	202.73±0.76a	14.80±0.69a	41.73±1.80a	2.37±0.21ab	4.77±0.06a	23.33±0.15ab	416.67±15.28a	326.00±21.17a
3	199.20±1.93b	14.53±0.23a	40.17±2.62a	2.37±0.40ab	4.60±0.10b	22.90±1.13ab	393.33±5.77ab	293.00±4.36b
4	202.70±1.15a	13.87±0.61a	41.60±0.72a	2.70±0.26ab	4.57±0.12b	23.97±0.64a	390.00±10.00b	294.00±12.17b
5	203.27±0.64a	14.60±0.72a	39.87±0.42a	2.37±0.25ab	4.80±0.10a	22.93±0.60ab	403.33±25.17ab	321.00±8.19a
6(CK)	194.73±2.04c	14.17±0.21a	39.00±1.59a	2.93±0.35a	4.73±0.06a	22.67±0.25b	385.00±5.00b	296.67±5.77b

处理	小区产量/(kg/100.1 m²)				折每公顷产量/(kg/hm²)	比CK增幅/%
处理	Ⅰ	Ⅱ	Ⅲ	平均/	折每公顷产量/(kg/hm²)	比CK增幅/%
1	124.25	135.80	131.90	130.65±5.88aA	13058.47	18.85
2	135.70	136.40	132.08	134.73±2.32aA	13466.26	22.56
3	127.35	123.60	130.42	127.12±3.42aAB	12705.64	15.64
4	111.60	118.15	116.05	115.27±3.34bBC	11521.24	4.86
5	129.80	130.20	133.55	131.18±2.06aA	13111.44	19.33
6(CK)	111.50	112.20	106.10	109.93±3.34bC	10987.50	—