Effect of Harvest Time on Mechanical Harvest Quality of Soybean in Southwestern China

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0838

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to determine the appropriate harvesting period in southwestern China, three soybean varieties with different maturity, ‘Nanxiadou35’, ‘Nanxiadou38’ and ‘Nanxiadou45’, were used to investigate the seed morphological characteristics, water contents of different part and mechanical harvest quality through field mechanical harvest and indoor sampling. The results showed that seed thickness was decreased significantly at fully mature stage, while the ratio of length/thickness and width/thickness were all increased significantly. Seed width and thickness of ‘Nanxiadou35’ were significantly higher than those of ‘Nanxiadou38’ and ‘Nanxiadou45’, but the ratio of length/width and length/thickness showed the opposite trend. Water content of various parts was decreased significantly at full maturity, and with significant difference between the varieties. Shell and seed water content of ‘Nanxiadou35’ was significantly lower than those of ‘Nanxiadou38’ and ‘Nanxiadou45’. Stem diameter and mechanical strength of ‘Nanxiadou35’ were significantly lower than those of ‘Nanxiadou45’. At full maturity, the combining header harvest loss rate was increased significantly, but seed crushing rate, cleaning loss rate and total loss rate were the lowest, and the harvest effect was the best. Among the three varieties, the mechanical harvest quality of ‘Nanxiadou35’ was the best.

Key words: variety, water content, crushing rate, loss rate, mechanical harvest quality

YU Xiaobo, LIU Yixin, LIANG Jianqiu, AN Jiangang, WU Haiying, ZHANG Mingrong. Effect of Harvest Time on Mechanical Harvest Quality of Soybean in Southwestern China[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(30): 6-13.

Figures/Tables 8

References 30

[1]	DU J B, HAN T F, GAI J Y, et al. Maize-soybena strip intercropping: achieved a balance between high productivity and sustainability[J]. Journal of integrative agriculture, 2018, 17(4):747-754. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61789-1 URL
[2]	潘彪, 田志宏. 中国农业机械化高速发展阶段的要素替代机制研究[J]. 农业工程学报, 2018, 34(9):1-10.
[3]	金诚谦, 郭飞扬, 徐金山, 等. 大豆联合收获机作业参数优化[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(13):10-22.
[4]	梁苏宁, 沐森林, 金诚谦, 等. 黄淮海地区大豆生产机械化现状及发展趋势[J]. 农机化研究, 2015, 37(1):261-264.
[5]	胡铁欢, 孙永媛, 时荣荣, 等. 2017年度河北省大豆生产调研报告[J]. 河北农业科学, 2018, 22(4):85-88.
[6]	信桂新, 杨朝现, 邵景安, 等. 基于农地流转的山地丘陵区土地整治技术体系优化及实证[J]. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(6):246-256.
[7]	倪有亮, 金诚谦, 陈满, 等. 中国大豆机械化生产关键技术与装备研究进展[J]. 中国农机化学报, 2019, 40(12):17-25. doi: 10.13733/j.jcam.issn.2095-5553.2019.12.04
[8]	张黎骅, 蔡金雄, 李雨涵, 等. 玉豆带状复合种植全程机械化技术与装备研究进展[J]. 西华大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 39(5):91-97.
[9]	白虎志, 董文杰. 华西秋雨的气候特征及成因分析[J]. 高原气象, 2004, 23(6):884-889.
[10]	张顺谦, 马振峰, 陈文秀, 等. 西南地区秋绵雨变化趋势与周期性特征的区域差异[J]. 自然资源学报, 2014, 29(2):275-284. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2014.02.009
[11]	屈洋, 马红战, 刘洋, 等. 收获期对机收大豆损失率的影响[J]. 现代农业科技, 2019, 13:13-14.
[12]	NIU Y, XU Y, LIU X F, et al. Association mapping for seed size and shape traits in soybean cultivars[J]. Molecular breeding, 2013, 31:785-794. doi: 10.1007/s11032-012-9833-5 URL
[13]	刘基, 金诚谦, 梁苏宁, 等. 大豆机械化收获损失的研究现状[J]. 农机化研究, 2017, 39(7):1-9,15.
[14]	李清龙. 打击式玉米脱粒机脱粒过程试验研究及仿真分析[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2014.
[15]	刘鹏, 金诚谦, 刘政, 等. 大豆联合收获机田间清选作业参数优化[J]. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(10):35-45.
[16]	徐立章, 李洋, 李耀明, 等. 谷物联合收获机清选技术与装置研究进展[J]. 农业机械学报, 2019, 50(10):1-16.
[17]	唐福元, 顾碧澄, 陈飞, 等. 含水率对大豆籽粒破坏力、表观接触弹性模量影响研究[J]. 粮食科技与经济, 2016, 41(4):44-48.
[18]	郭晓霞, 郭玲玲, 王凤莲, 等. 籽粒性状对玉米产量和机收的影响研究进展[J]. 现代农业科技, 2020, 2:4-7.
[19]	柴宗文, 王克如, 郭银巧, 等. 玉米机械粒收质量现状及其与含水率的关系[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(11):2036-2043. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.009
[20]	高连兴, 焦维鹏, 杨德旭, 等. 含水率对大豆静压机械特性的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2012, 28(5):40-44.
[21]	闫以勋, 赵淑红, 杨悦乾, 等. 成熟期大豆茎秆力学特性研究[J]. 东北农业大学学报. 2012, 43(5):46-49.
[22]	何晓莉, 吴晓强, 张立峰, 等. 大豆茎秆压缩力学特性的研究[J]. 农机化研究, 2010, 32(11):164-169.
[23]	刁秀楠, 李文帅, 高春艳, 等. 大豆荚皮营养成分积累动态分析[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2018, 33(7):32-37.
[24]	韩德志, 任玉龙, 郭勇, 等. 大豆炸荚发生规律及分子遗传基础[J]. 遗传, 2015, 37(6):535-543.
[25]	NIELSEN R L. Field dry down of mature corn grainp[R]. Corny News Network: Purdue University Department of Agronomy, 2011. https://www.agry.purdue.edu/Ext/corn/news/timeless/graindrying.html
[26]	雷恩, 邵迪, 朱天彪, 等. 饲用玉米器官含水率、力学强度与籽粒机收质量的关系研究[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(9):125-135. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2019517
[27]	乔金友, 孙健, 曲烽毓, 等. 大豆收获适时性损失规律试验研究[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2017, 48(6):76-81.
[28]	明博, 王克如, 谢瑞芝, 等. 玉米子粒脱水研究与机械粒收对策[J]. 作物杂志, 2018(6):17-21.
[29]	杨欢, 张黎骅, 陈平, 等. 收获时期对西南地区套作大豆机收效果及产量的影响[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2019, 50(2):62-70.
[30]	大豆联合收割机械作业质量:NY/T738-2020.

生育时期	ND35	ND38	ND45
黄熟期	10.11	10.23	10.27
完熟期	10.15	10.29	11.5

生育时期	ND35	ND38	ND45
黄熟期	10.11	10.23	10.27
完熟期	10.15	10.29	11.5

收获时期	品种	长度/mm	宽度/mm	厚度/mm	长/宽	长/厚	宽/厚
YM	ND35	9.27±0.02a	7.69±0.12a	6.84±0.14a	1.21±0.01b	1.354±0.01d	1.124±0.01c
	ND38	9.03±0.16a	7.07±0.06b	6.20±0.09b	1.28±0.03a	1.456±0.02c	1.140±0.03c
	ND45	9.01±0.10a	6.96±0.07bc	5.86±0.11c	1.29±0.01a	1.538±0.04b	1.189±0.03b
FRS	ND35	9.29±0.12a	7.64±0.06a	6.73±0.14a	1.22±0.01b	1.380± 0.02d	1.136±0.02c
	ND38	9.01±0.07a	7.04±0.12b	6.07±0.05b	1.28±0.01a	1.484±0.03c	1.159±0.01bc
	ND45	8.98±0.264 a	6.93±0.022c	5.66±0.05d	1.30±0.02a	1.587±0.02a	1.224±0.01a
HT		0.025ns	2.569 ns	9.578^**	0.325 ns	9.663^**	6.072^*
V		5.866^*	136.969^**	156.835^**	35.601^**	106.414^**	26.715^**
HT×V		0.04ns	0.412ns	0.327ns	0.08 ns	0.472ns	0.614ns

收获时期	品种	长度/mm	宽度/mm	厚度/mm	长/宽	长/厚	宽/厚
YM	ND35	9.27±0.02a	7.69±0.12a	6.84±0.14a	1.21±0.01b	1.354±0.01d	1.124±0.01c
	ND38	9.03±0.16a	7.07±0.06b	6.20±0.09b	1.28±0.03a	1.456±0.02c	1.140±0.03c
	ND45	9.01±0.10a	6.96±0.07bc	5.86±0.11c	1.29±0.01a	1.538±0.04b	1.189±0.03b
FRS	ND35	9.29±0.12a	7.64±0.06a	6.73±0.14a	1.22±0.01b	1.380± 0.02d	1.136±0.02c
	ND38	9.01±0.07a	7.04±0.12b	6.07±0.05b	1.28±0.01a	1.484±0.03c	1.159±0.01bc
	ND45	8.98±0.264 a	6.93±0.022c	5.66±0.05d	1.30±0.02a	1.587±0.02a	1.224±0.01a
HT		0.025ns	2.569 ns	9.578^**	0.325 ns	9.663^**	6.072^*
V		5.866^*	136.969^**	156.835^**	35.601^**	106.414^**	26.715^**
HT×V		0.04ns	0.412ns	0.327ns	0.08 ns	0.472ns	0.614ns

收获时期	品种	含杂率/%	破损率/%	割台损失率/%	清选损失率/%	总损失率/%
YM	ND35	4.32±0.14b	5.38±0.72c	0.67±0.09d	3.17±0.10c	3.84±0.17de
	ND38	4.45±0.15b	7.74±0.51b	0.46±0.07e	3.94±0.09b	4.40±0.06b
	ND45	4.92±0.13a	9.38±1.08a	0.31±0.06f	4.38±0.12a	4.69±0.17a
FRS	ND35	4.26±0.12b	3.66±0.45d	1.51±0.09a	2.22±0.14e	3.73±0.20e
	ND38	4.31±0.14b	4.92±0.57c	1.31±0.08b	2.80±0.08d	4.11±0.03c
	ND45	5.10±0.19a	6.63±0.27b	0.89±0.11c	3.17±0.07c	4.06±0.08cd
HT		0.025ns	64.384^**	347.525^**	488.457^**	28.531^**
V		42.384^**	45.168^**	49.492^**	163.591^**	32.637^**
HT×V		1.873ns	0.611ns	1.110ns	0.297ns	5.320^*