Effects of Photosynthetic Bacteria and Biological Coating on Soil Enzyme Activities and Yield of Rape

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0094

Abstract

Abstract:

The study aims to explore the effects of biological coating on the growth of rape under the application of photosynthetic bacteria. The main rape cultivar ‘Chuanyou36’ in Sichuan Province was used as test material. Based on the field tests, this paper studied the effects of biological coating (endophytic bacillus for seed coating, and application of photosynthetic bacteria liquid before sowing), chemical coating (10% cyazofamid suspension for seed coating) and uncoated treatment on the incidence rate of clubroot, soil enzyme activities and yield traits of rape. The results showed that the incidence rate of clubroot of rape decreased significantly after the coating treatment, and was the lowest under biological coating treatment. The biological coating treatment could significantly improve the activities of catalase, sucrase, urease and acid phosphatase in soil. However, the chemical coating treatment had a certain inhibitory effect on the activities of catalase, urease and acid phosphatase. In addition, the effective branch height, plant height, rhizome thickness, number of primary effective branches, 1000-grain weight and yield of rape significantly increased under the biological coating treatment. Compared with chemical coating treatment and uncoated treatment, the yield of rape with biological coating was increased by 16.97% and 22.26%, respectively. The above results show that biological coating and the application of photosynthetic bacteria could not only improve the soil environment of rape and effectively reduce the harm of clubroot to rape, but also increase the rape yield and reduce the input of chemical agents.

Key words: biological coating, photosynthetic bacteria, rape, yield, clubroot, soil enzyme activity

CLC Number:

S565.4

LI Xingyue, YI Jun, FU Huijuan, LI Qiyong, LU Wenyi, LUO Congcong, ZHANG Hong. Effects of Photosynthetic Bacteria and Biological Coating on Soil Enzyme Activities and Yield of Rape[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(2): 87-91.

Figures/Tables 6

References 26

[1]	李利霞, 陈碧云, 闫贵欣, 等. 中国油菜种质资源研究利用策略与进展[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2020, 21(1):1-19.
[2]	陈云飞, 冯中朝, 杜为公. 我国冬油菜生产的技术效率地区差异及其影响因素——以四川、湖北等11省市为例[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2020, 25(9):166-175.
[3]	刘成, 冯中朝, 肖唐华, 等. 我国油菜产业发展现状、潜力及对策[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2019, 41(4):485-489.
[4]	刘成, 杨雪, 周晓时, 等. 中国化肥投入对油菜成本效率的影响[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(12):2487-2495.
[5]	曹金华, 朱家成, 王建平, 等. 地蚜灵不同施用方式对油菜蚜虫的防效及对产量和农药残留的影响[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2018, 40(4):566-571.
[6]	陈舜, 逯非, 王效科. 中国主要农作物种植农药施用温室气体排放估算[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(9):2560-2569.
[7]	宋以玲, 于建, 陈士更, 等. 化肥减量配施生物有机肥对油菜生长及土壤微生物和酶活性影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2018, 32(1):352-360.
[8]	陈坤荣, 熊远福, 任莉, 等. 15%氟啶胺包衣悬浮剂防治油菜根肿病研究[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2015, 37(2):250-252.
[9]	范丙全. 我国生物肥料研究与应用进展[J] 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(6):1602-1613.
[10]	刘迎雪, 李彩凤, 李文华, 等. 生物种衣剂对玉米氮代谢关键酶和光合速率的影响[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2010, 41(1):13-18.
[11]	REETZ J E, SCHULZ W, SEITZ W, et al. Uptake of neonicotinoid insecticides by water-foraging honey bees (hymenoptera: apidae) through guttation fluid of winter oilseed rape[J]. Journal of economic entomology, 2016, 109(5):1-10. doi: 10.1093/jee/tov238 URL
[12]	张静, 胡立勇. 农作物种子处理方法研究进展[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2012, 31(2):258-264.
[13]	张信娣, 曹慧, 徐冬青, 等. 光合细菌和有机肥对土壤主要微生物类群和土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 土壤, 2008, 40(3):443-447.
[14]	张欢, 卢海凤, 孟涛, 等. 光合细菌在种植业上的应用研究进展[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2020, 48(8):18-28.
[15]	符慧娟, 李星月, 李其勇, 等. 光合细菌与硅肥对油菜及土壤环境的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(6):1209-1214.
[16]	关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1986:274-323.
[17]	王理德, 王方琳, 郭春秀, 等. 土壤酶学硏究进展[J]. 土壤, 2016, 48(1):12-21.
[18]	石柯, 董士刚, 申凤敏, 等. 小麦播量与减氮对潮土微生物量碳氮及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(15):2646-2663.
[19]	黄云, 王靖, 彭宇龙, 等. 根肿病[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2017:151-156.
[20]	PEI W H, LI X D, YANG P W, et al. Study on pathogenicity difference of Plasmodiophora brassicae under different temperature and pH conditions[J]. Agricultural science & technology, 2015, 16(1):112-115.
[21]	杨芳, 田俊岭, 杨盼盼, 等. 高效光合细菌菌剂对番茄品质、土壤肥力及微生物特性的影响[J]. 华南农业大学学报, 2014, 35(1):49-54.
[22]	HU X, ROBERTS D P, MAUL J E, et al. Formulations of the endophytic bacterium Bacillus subtilis Tu-100 suppress Sclerotinia sclerotiorum on oilseed rape and improve plant vigor in field trials conducted at separate locations[J]. Canadian journal of microbiology, 2011, 57(7):539-546. doi: 10.1139/w11-041 URL
[23]	李琬, 刘淼, 张必弦, 等. 植物根际促生菌的研究进展及其应用现状[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(24):1-5.
[24]	刘睿, 周园园, 闫继辰, 等. 新型复合型生物种衣剂SN102田间防效研究[J]. 大豆科学, 2017, 36(3):435-440.
[25]	郑本川, 崔成, 李浩杰, 等. 长江流域甘蓝型油菜育种亲本农艺性状的遗传变异、相关及主成分分析[J]. 南方农业学报, 2019, 50(10):2196-2204.
[26]	王学芳, 郑磊, 张智, 等. 甘蓝型油菜抗倒性及其与株型结构的关系研究[J]. 江西农业学报, 2016, 28(9):9-13.

处理	pH	硝态氮/(mg/kg)	过氧化氢酶/(μmol/(d·g))	蔗糖酶/(mg/(d·g))	脲酶/(μg/(d·g))	酸性磷酸酶/(μmol/(d·g))
T1	7.01±0.04a	31.44±2.03a	6.86±0.07a	43.01±2.61a	522.11±10.41a	10.24±0.35a
T2	6.32±0.12b	26.29±0.91b	4.83±0.12c	24.02±2.45b	447.61±8.39b	7.75±0.19b
CK	6.21±0.26b	24.01±2.57b	5.27±0.24b	21.06±1.92b	462.65±7.77b	8.31±0.31b

处理	pH	硝态氮/(mg/kg)	过氧化氢酶/(μmol/(d·g))	蔗糖酶/(mg/(d·g))	脲酶/(μg/(d·g))	酸性磷酸酶/(μmol/(d·g))
T1	7.01±0.04a	31.44±2.03a	6.86±0.07a	43.01±2.61a	522.11±10.41a	10.24±0.35a
T2	6.32±0.12b	26.29±0.91b	4.83±0.12c	24.02±2.45b	447.61±8.39b	7.75±0.19b
CK	6.21±0.26b	24.01±2.57b	5.27±0.24b	21.06±1.92b	462.65±7.77b	8.31±0.31b

处理	有效分枝高度/cm	株高/cm	根茎粗/mm	有效分枝数
处理	有效分枝高度/cm	株高/cm	根茎粗/mm	一次	二次
T1	80.20±3.32a	194.00±8.39a	19.17±0.55a	6.67±0.58a	2.00±1.00a
T2	71.30±3.67b	193.87±5.21a	19.03±0.40a	6.33±0.58ab	1.67±2.08a
CK	64.27±4.31b	180.13±2.21b	16.80±1.41b	5.00±1.00b	1.33±0.58a

处理	有效分枝高度/cm	株高/cm	根茎粗/mm	有效分枝数
处理	有效分枝高度/cm	株高/cm	根茎粗/mm	一次	二次
T1	80.20±3.32a	194.00±8.39a	19.17±0.55a	6.67±0.58a	2.00±1.00a
T2	71.30±3.67b	193.87±5.21a	19.03±0.40a	6.33±0.58ab	1.67±2.08a
CK	64.27±4.31b	180.13±2.21b	16.80±1.41b	5.00±1.00b	1.33±0.58a

处理	单株有效角果数	每角粒数	千粒重/g	种子含水量/%	产量/(kg/hm²)
T1	326.33±43.50a	21.84±2.32a	3.42±0.05a	6.73±0.15b	1867.25±23.67a
T2	320.00±34.02a	21.63±2.67a	3.24±0.03b	8.27±0.06a	1596.35±34.05b
CK	315.00±19.52a	18.13±2.12a	3.01±0.13c	7.23±0.35c	1527.25±39.50c