Effect of Side-deep Nitrogen Reduction Fertilization with Slow Release Fertilizer on Nitrogen Uptake & Utilization and Rice Yield & Quality

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-1041

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the effects of side-deep nitrogen reduction of slow mixed fertilizer on nitrogen use efficiency, yield and quality of rice, two different maturity cultivars were treated with blank (N₀) treatment and conventional fertilizer treatment (240 kg/hm², CFM) as control, four treatments of no reduction of nitrogen fertilizer (FM₁), 7% reduction of nitrogen fertilizer (FM₂), 14% reduction of nitrogen fertilizer (FM₃) and 21% reduction of nitrogen fertilizer (FM₄) were set for side-deep fertilization. The study aims to provide theoretical and technical guidance for the application of large-area mechanical inserted slow mixing fertilizer. The results showed that different fertilization treatments affected dry matter accumulation at different growth stages of rice, the dry matter accumulation of CFM treatment was significantly higher than that of other treatments in the middle and early growth stages (tillering stage to jointing stage), and FM₁ treatment was significantly higher than that of other treatments from booting stage to maturity stage. The nitrogen content of rice plants also varied according to different growth stages. The nitrogen content of rice plants at tillering to jointing stage was in the order of CFM > FM₁ > FM₂ > FM₃ > FM₄ > N₀, and that at booting to maturity stage was in the order of FM₁, FM₂ > CFM > FM₃ > FM₄ > N₀. Under deep-side fertilization, moderate-reduced nitrogen had little effect on panicle number, and the grain number per panicle was the most in FM₁ or FM₂. The seed setting rate of deep-side fertilization was higher than that of the control, the 1000 grain weight and grain yield was higher in FM₁ or FM₂, and there were differences among different varieties; compared with the control, the deep-side fertilization treatment increased the nitrogen use efficiency. The nitrogen agronomic utilization rate was FM₂>FM₁ or FM₃>CFM>FM₄, and the nitrogen physiological utilization rate of CFM was the lowest, FM₂ or FM₃ was the highest. The nitrogen absorption utilization rate was FM₂>FM₁>FM₃>CFM>FM₄, and the nitrogen partial productivity was FM₄>FM₃>FM₂>FM₁>CFM. The treatments of side-deep fertilization is beneficial to reduce chalkiness grain rate, chalkiness and alkali elimination value, increase head rice rate, amylose content, protein content, gel consistency and disintegration value, and moderate-reduced nitrogen can improve rice quality. In production, it is suggested to adopt the side-deep fertilization technology of slow mixed fertilizer with nitrogen reduction of 7%-14%, which is beneficial to achieve nitrogen reduction, cost saving and high quality and yield of rice.

Key words: rice, slow release fertilizer, side-deep fertilization, nitrogen uptake and utilization, yield, quality

LI Yajuan, DONG Minghui, JIANG Yi, GU Junrong, ZHANG Wendi, WANG Yuxuan. Effect of Side-deep Nitrogen Reduction Fertilization with Slow Release Fertilizer on Nitrogen Uptake & Utilization and Rice Yield & Quality[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(36): 14-21.

Figures/Tables 7

References 24

[1]	麻坤, 刁钢. 化肥对中国粮食产量变化贡献率的研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24:1113-1120.
[2]	苑俊丽, 梁新强, 李亮, 等. 中国水稻产量和氮素吸收量对高效氮肥响应的整合分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(17):3414-3423. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.17.009
[3]	汪军, 王德建, 张刚. 太湖地区稻麦轮作体系下秸秆还田配施氮肥对水稻产量及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2011, 19: 265-270.
[4]	ZHAO X, ZHOU Y, MIN J, et al. Nitrogen runoff dominates water nitrogen pollution from rice-wheat rotation in the Taihu Lake region of China[J]. Agric ecosyst environ, 2012, 156:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2012.04.024 URL
[5]	张洪程, 胡雅杰, 杨建昌, 等. 中国特色水稻栽培学发展与展望[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(7):1301-1321. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.07.001
[6]	顾俊荣, 董明辉, 赵步洪, 等. 不同水氮管理对水稻干物质积累和茎鞘物质运转及产量的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2016, 30(2):0347-0354.
[7]	蒋鹏, 黄敏, IBRAHIM M D, 等. “三定”栽培对双季超级稻养分吸收积累及氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2011, 37(12):2194-2207. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.02194
[8]	钟雪梅, 黄铁平, 彭建伟, 等. 机插同步一次性精量施肥对双季稻养分累积及利用率的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2019, 33:436-446. doi: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2019.8084
[9]	朱从桦, 张玉屏, 向镜, 等. 侧深施氮对机插水稻产量形成及氮素利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52:4228-4239. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.23.004
[10]	黄恒, 姜恒鑫, 刘光明, 等. 侧深施氮对水稻产量及氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(11):2232-2249. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.02086
[11]	ZHU K Y, YAN J Q, SHEN Y, et al. Deciphering the physio-morphological traitsfor high yield potential in nitrogen efficient varieties(NEVs): a japonica rice case study[J]. Journal of integrative agriculture, 2021, 21(4):947-963. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(20)63600-0 URL
[12]	PATRA A K, MISHRA K N, GARNAYAK L M, et al. Influence of long-term organic nutrient management on soil quality and crop productivity in rice (Oryza sativa)-potato (Solanum tuberosum)-okra(Abelmoschus esculentus) cropping system under irrigated condition[J]. Indian journal of agronomy, 2017, 62(3):258-274.
[13]	杨胜玲, 黄兴成, 李渝, 等. 长期有机无机肥配施对水稻生长、干物质积累及产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(9):1815-1825. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2022.09.01
[14]	KATO T, TAKEDA K. Associations among characters related to yield sink capacity in space-planted rice[J]. Crop science, 1996:36,1135-1139.
[15]	朱从桦, 李旭毅, 陈惠哲, 等. 侧深施氮对机械直播水稻产量及氮素利用的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2020, 34(9):2051-2058. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.09.2051
[16]	伍杂日曲, 郭长春, 李飞杰, 等. 减氮和机械侧深施肥对机插杂交稻产量及氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2022, 36(5):1034-1041. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2022.05.1034
[17]	蒋伟勤, 马中涛, 胡群, 等. 缓控释氮肥对水稻生长发育及氮素利用的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2020, 36(3):777-784.
[18]	丁艳锋, 赵长华, 王强盛. 穗肥施用时期对水稻氮素利用及产量的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2003, 26(4):5-8.
[19]	彭术, 王华, 张文钊, 等. 长期氮肥减量深施对双季稻产量和土壤肥力的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(6):999-1007.
[20]	PAN S G, WEN X C, WANG Z M, et al. Benefits of mechanized deep placement of nitrogen fertilizer in direct-seeded rice in Soutn China[J]. Fiele crops research, 2017, 203:139-149.
[21]	怀燕, 陈照明, 张耿苗, 等. 水稻侧深施肥技术的氮肥减施效应[J]. 浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2020, 46(2):217-224.
[22]	莫钊文, 潘圣刚, 王在满, 等. 机械同步深施肥对水稻品质和养分吸收利用的影响[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2013, 32(5):34-39.
[23]	赵红玉, 徐寿军, 杨成林, 等. 侧深施肥技术对寒地水稻生长及产量形成的影响[J]. 内蒙古民族大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 32(4):347-352.
[24]	姜恒鑫, 黄恒, 汪源, 等. 减量侧深施肥对里下河地区单季粳稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国稻米, 2022, 28(4):84-89. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2022.04.017

处理	基肥量/(kg/hm²)	返青分蘖肥/(kg/hm²)	穗肥/(kg/hm²)	施肥总量/(kg/hm²)	施肥方式	施肥次数
N₀	0	0	0	0	/	0
CFM	84	84	72	240	常规施肥	4
FM₁	192	0	48	240	基蘖测深同施	2
FM₂	178.56	0	44.64	223.2	基蘖测深同施	2
FM₃	165.12	0	41.28	206.4	基蘖测深同施	2
FM₄	151.68	0	37.92	189.6	基蘖测深同施	2

处理	基肥量/(kg/hm²)	返青分蘖肥/(kg/hm²)	穗肥/(kg/hm²)	施肥总量/(kg/hm²)	施肥方式	施肥次数
N₀	0	0	0	0	/	0
CFM	84	84	72	240	常规施肥	4
FM₁	192	0	48	240	基蘖测深同施	2
FM₂	178.56	0	44.64	223.2	基蘖测深同施	2
FM₃	165.12	0	41.28	206.4	基蘖测深同施	2
FM₄	151.68	0	37.92	189.6	基蘖测深同施	2

品种	处理	分蘖期	拔节期	孕穗期	抽穗期	成熟期
V1	N₀	1.02 e	4.12 e	7.82 d	11.06 e	17.49 d
	CFM	1.62 a	5.73 a	10.4 b	16.44 cd	25.52 b
	FM₁	1.52 b	5.59 ab	11.96 a	18.01 a	27.56 a
	FM₂	1.37 c	5.40 bc	11.74 a	17.20 b	26.02 b
	FM₃	1.34 c	5.18 cd	10.29 bc	16.71 bc	25.69 b
	FM₄	1.25 d	4.98 d	10.03 c	15.93 d	24.10 c
V2	N₀	1.06 d	5.46 d	8.43 e	11.95 f	19.08 e
	CFM	1.79 a	7.02 a	10.85 bc	16.28 d	27.06 c
	FM₁	1.59 b	6.51 b	12.58 a	18.79 a	30.04 a
	FM₂	1.56 bc	6.3 b	11.41 b	17.96 b	28.74 b
	FM₃	1.52 bc	5.94 c	10.33 cd	17.29 c	27.07 c
	FM₄	1.49 c	5.75 c	10.11 d	15.02 e	25.74 d

品种	处理	分蘖期	拔节期	孕穗期	抽穗期	成熟期
V1	N₀	1.02 e	4.12 e	7.82 d	11.06 e	17.49 d
	CFM	1.62 a	5.73 a	10.4 b	16.44 cd	25.52 b
	FM₁	1.52 b	5.59 ab	11.96 a	18.01 a	27.56 a
	FM₂	1.37 c	5.40 bc	11.74 a	17.20 b	26.02 b
	FM₃	1.34 c	5.18 cd	10.29 bc	16.71 bc	25.69 b
	FM₄	1.25 d	4.98 d	10.03 c	15.93 d	24.10 c
V2	N₀	1.06 d	5.46 d	8.43 e	11.95 f	19.08 e
	CFM	1.79 a	7.02 a	10.85 bc	16.28 d	27.06 c
	FM₁	1.59 b	6.51 b	12.58 a	18.79 a	30.04 a
	FM₂	1.56 bc	6.3 b	11.41 b	17.96 b	28.74 b
	FM₃	1.52 bc	5.94 c	10.33 cd	17.29 c	27.07 c
	FM₄	1.49 c	5.75 c	10.11 d	15.02 e	25.74 d

品种	处理	分蘖期	拔节期	孕穗期	抽穗期	成熟期
V1	N₀	25.75 d	41.67 e	56.89 e	71.95 f	76.53 e
	CFM	52.92 a	113.65 a	132.60 b	184.91 c	202.05 b
	FM₁	46.80 b	102.91 b	141.11 a	194.56 a	207.81 a
	FM₂	44.10 bc	96.67 bc	126.98 bc	189.37 b	207.98 a
	FM₃	42.02 bc	91.78 cd	122.23 cd	178.50 d	186.04 c
	FM₄	40.82 c	85.24 d	115.45 d	168.20 e	175.04 d
V2	N₀	27.96 e	44.15 f	60.03 d	76.56 f	83.60 e
	CFM	55.05 a	116.75 a	134.31 b	191.85 c	201.98 b
	FM₁	47.92 b	104.28 b	143.90 a	206.06 a	219.09 a
	FM₂	45.80 c	100.69 c	131.43 b	197.19 b	214.55 a
	FM₃	43.97 cd	96.47 d	125.51 c	176.44 d	189.99 c
	FM₄	42.31 d	89.90 e	120.12 c	154.88 e	169.81 d