Effect of Planting Methods on Stem and Leaf Growth, Yield and Marketability of Storage Roots of Two Types of Sweetpotato

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0324

Abstract

Abstract:

The aim was to clarify the effects of planting methods on the growth and yield of sweetpotato. ‘Taizishu No.1’and ‘Taishu 15’ were used as experimental materials to study the effects of straight, oblique and flat planting methods on the growth of stem and leaf, T/R value, the root expanding velocity, yield and its constituent factors, and marketing tuber ratio of the two types of sweetpotato varieties. The results showed that the fresh yield and dry yield of the storage root of the two varieties were shown as flag planting > oblique planting > straight planting. There was no significant difference in T/R value between the two varieties under oblique planting and flat planting, but it was significantly lower than that of straight planting. Among the different planting methods, the storage root expansion rate of sweetpotato of the two varieties was shown as flat planting > oblique planting > straight planting. The marketing tuber ratio of the two sweetpotato varieties under flat and oblique planting was higher than that of straight planting, and the root number per plant and the evenness of the sweetpotato roots under flat planting were better than those under oblique planting. In conclusion, flat planting and oblique planting were better than straight planting, which could improve the yield and marketability of fresh-edible sweetpotato. Flat planting was more suitable for fresh-edible sweetpotato, and the suitable planting method for starch sweet potato can be selected according to the planting conditions.

Key words: sweetpotato, planting method, storage root yield, marketability

TIAN Changgeng, LIU Shanggang, CHEN Lulu, SUN Zhe, QIN Huawei. Effect of Planting Methods on Stem and Leaf Growth, Yield and Marketability of Storage Roots of Two Types of Sweetpotato[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(11): 9-13.

Figures/Tables 6

References 29

[1]	联合国粮食及农业组织. 世界粮农组织统计数据库[EB/OL]. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/, 2023-07-18.
[2]	赵海, 刘新鑫, 潘志国, 等. 甘薯种植农艺及机械化种植技术研究[J]. 中国农机化学报, 2021, 42(6):21-26. doi: 10.13733/j.jcam.issn.2095-5553.2021.06.04
[3]	朱玲, 沈学善, 屈会娟, 等. 紫甘薯川紫薯1号优化栽培技术研究[J]. 山西农业科学, 2020, 48(8):1250-1254.
[4]	武小平, 郭耀东, 温日宇, 等. 不同栽插方式对脱毒甘薯产量的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2014, 42(1):35-36.
[5]	莫芳静. 甘薯插蔓节段差异对甘薯产量及节位结薯的影响[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2020.
[6]	胡启国, 褚凤丽, 王文静, 等. 栽插方式和栽插密度对甘薯产量形成及结薯习性的影响[J]. 山西农业科学, 2018, 46(5):763-766.
[7]	金珠群, 许林英, 吴华新, 等. 扦插方式对迷你甘薯浙薯75产量及经济性状的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2012(6):817-818.
[8]	王一鸣, 缪鑫, 陈娟, 等. 不同扦插方式及栽培密度对紫薯‘内17-71’产量的影响[J]. 蔬菜, 2023(1):10-12.
[9]	段文学, 汪进丽, 张海燕, 等. 栽插方式和密度对鲜食型甘薯品种干物质积累分配、块根产量及品质的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2018, 33(4):167-174. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2018.04.024
[10]	唐忠厚, 魏猛, 陈晓光, 等. 不同肉色甘薯块根主要营养品质特征与综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(9):1705-1714. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.09.005
[11]	权宝全, 任杰成, 赵吉平, 等. 不同栽培方式对甘薯产量及结薯习性的影响[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2022(8):85-88.
[12]	赵秀芬, 周奕廷, 房增国, 等. 种植模式和种植密度互作对甘薯产量及养分吸收利用的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2022, 54(10):75-80.
[13]	蒲建刚, 王德贤, 赵尚文, 等. 紫甘薯新品种徐紫薯8号栽植密度与栽插方式试验研究初报[J]. 农业科技与信息, 2021, 624(19):11-13.
[14]	贾赵东, 马佩勇, 边小峰, 等. 氮钾配施和栽插密度对甘薯干物质积累及产量形成的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2012, 27(增刊):320-327.
[15]	刘桂玲, 郑建利, 柳新明, 等. 不同基因型甘薯品种产量与地上部农艺性状及主要气象因子关联度分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2009, 25(5):125-131.
[16]	董立峰, 王凤宝, 付金锋, 等. 甘薯主要数量性状对单株产量的通径分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2005, 21(3):311-315.
[17]	余金龙. 甘薯块根产量及相关性状的典型相关分析[J]. 西南农业学报, 2001, 14(2):107-110.
[18]	于振文. 作物栽培学各论[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2003.
[19]	史春余, 王振林, 余松烈, 等. 甘薯光合产物的积累分配及其影响因素[J]. 山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2001, 32(1):90-94.
[20]	孙哲, 田昌庚, 陈路路, 等. 氮钾配施对甘薯茎叶生长、产量形成及干物质分配的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021(4):186-191.
[21]	唐忠厚, 李洪民, 张爱君, 等. 甘薯叶光合特性与块根主要性状对氮素供应形态的响应[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013, 19(6):1494-1501.
[22]	林子龙, 郭其茂, 陈根辉, 等. 氮钾配施对甘薯龙薯31号生长和产量的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2019, 31(8):42-45.
[23]	张磊, 王勃, 商丽丽, 等. 不同地膜覆盖对鲜食型甘薯农艺性状和产量的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2021, 60(11):31-34.
[24]	辛国胜, 林祖军, 韩俊杰, 等. 黑色地膜对甘薯生理特性及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2010, 26(15):233-237.
[25]	孙哲, 刘桂玲, 郑建利, 等. 优化种植密度下的甘薯产量形成特性研究[J]. 山东农业科学, 2016, 48(11):61-64.
[26]	彭琼, 鄢铮. 覆盖物、种植密度及栽插方式对甘薯产量的影响[J]. 中国种业, 2021(12):86-90.
[27]	李明福, 徐宁生, 陈恩波, 等. 不同栽插方法对甘薯生长和产量的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2011(6):32-33.
[28]	钟添洪, 方明春. 不同栽插方式在甘薯栽培中的合理应用[J]. 农业与技术, 2014, 34(12):100.
[29]	ENYI B A C. Growth rates of three cassava varieties (Manihot esculenta Crantz) under varying population densities[J]. Journal of agricultural science, 1973, 81(1):15-28.

品种	栽插方式	结薯数/（个/株）	单薯重/g	鲜薯产量/(kg/hm²)	块根干率/%	薯干产量/(kg/hm²)
泰紫薯1号	ZZ	3.23 c	246.04 a	39737.45 c	20.15 a	8007.10 c
	XZ	3.87 b	226.69 a	43866.71 b	20.59 a	9032.16 b
	PZ	4.20 a	221.50 a	46517.33 a	20.40 a	9489.53 a
泰薯15	ZZ	3.06 c	211.92 a	32425.38 c	33.13 a	10742.53 c
	XZ	3.83 b	197.87 b	37894.00 b	33.49 a	12690.70 b
	PZ	4.35 a	191.83 b	41725.11 a	33.73 a	14073.88 a

品种	栽插方式	结薯数/（个/株）	单薯重/g	鲜薯产量/(kg/hm²)	块根干率/%	薯干产量/(kg/hm²)
泰紫薯1号	ZZ	3.23 c	246.04 a	39737.45 c	20.15 a	8007.10 c
	XZ	3.87 b	226.69 a	43866.71 b	20.59 a	9032.16 b
	PZ	4.20 a	221.50 a	46517.33 a	20.40 a	9489.53 a
泰薯15	ZZ	3.06 c	211.92 a	32425.38 c	33.13 a	10742.53 c
	XZ	3.83 b	197.87 b	37894.00 b	33.49 a	12690.70 b
	PZ	4.35 a	191.83 b	41725.11 a	33.73 a	14073.88 a

品种	栽插方式	60 d	80 d	100 d	120 d
泰紫薯1号	ZZ	8.69 a	4.84 a	2.58 a	1.66 a
	XZ	6.56 b	3.93 b	1.79 b	1.14 b
	PZ	6.42 b	3.81 b	1.60 c	0.98 c
泰薯15	ZZ	9.12 a	4.12 a	2.76 a	1.85 a
	XZ	7.23 b	3.30 b	2.09 b	1.35 b
	PZ	7.07 b	3.05 c	1.91 c	1.22 c

品种	栽插方式	60 d	80 d	100 d	120 d
泰紫薯1号	ZZ	8.69 a	4.84 a	2.58 a	1.66 a
	XZ	6.56 b	3.93 b	1.79 b	1.14 b
	PZ	6.42 b	3.81 b	1.60 c	0.98 c
泰薯15	ZZ	9.12 a	4.12 a	2.76 a	1.85 a
	XZ	7.23 b	3.30 b	2.09 b	1.35 b
	PZ	7.07 b	3.05 c	1.91 c	1.22 c

品种	栽插方式	60~80 d	80~100 d	100~120 d
泰紫薯1号	ZZ	3.75 b	8.94 c	7.79 c
	XZ	5.95 a	12.04 b	10.03 b
	PZ	6.74 a	14.63 a	11.30 a
泰薯15	ZZ	8.76 c	6.19 c	4.35 b
	XZ	9.93 b	8.67 b	7.21 a
	PZ	10.65 a	9.95 a	7.74 a