Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate, Planting Density and Sowing Methods on Agronomic Traits and Yield of 'Bai Yan No. 2' Oats

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0515

Abstract

Abstract:

To understand the effects of nitrogen application, planting density and sowing method on the agronomic traits and yield of 'BaiYan No. 2' oat, the L₈(4×2²) orthogonal experiment was conducted with three factors, nitrogen application rate, density, and sowing method. The application rate factor had four levels, while density and sowing method each had two levels. The results showed that the heading date of 'BaiYan No. 2' oats was advanced with the increase of N application rate and delayed with the increase of planting density. Plant height, number of nodes, panicle length and panicle weight all increased first and then decreased with the increase of nitrogen application rate. The results showed that the sowing mode was the main factor affecting the yield of 'Bai Yan No. 2' oat, followed by nitrogen application rate and planting density. The yield of combination A₂B₁C₁ was the highest, reaching 4083.54 kg/hm², followed by combination A₁B₁C₁, the yield was 3880.19 kg/hm². The yield of 'Bai Yan No. 2' oats was not significantly affected by different nitrogen application rates, planting densities and planting methods, but the yield of the combination of nitrogen application of 52.5 kg/hm² and 37.5 kg/hm², planting density of 2.85 million seedling/hm² and strip seeding was first and second, so the best combination was A₂B₁C₁ or A₁B₁C₁. This study provided scientific basis for high-yield and high-quality oat planting technology of 'Bai Yan No. 2’.

Key words: 'Bai Yan No. 2' oat, nitrogen application rate, planting density, sowing method, agronomic traits, yield

LI Huaihong, YANG Shunbo, LIU Jia, HU Xuanjiang, ZHANG Yanjun, YU Sha, RAO Min, CAI Shujiang, ZHOU Chuwei, LI Chengchun, GAO Yuxi, LIU Yun’e, SHI Renfen, SHEN Rui, YANG Hongyun, ZHANG Cuiping. Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate, Planting Density and Sowing Methods on Agronomic Traits and Yield of 'Bai Yan No. 2' Oats[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(17): 24-30.

Figures/Tables 7

References 27

[1]	赵彬, 向达兵, 吴宪志, 等. 种植密度和施肥量对燕麦白燕2号产量的影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2015, 43(7):88-90,96.
[2]	杨敏, 徐树花, 饶雄, 等. 乌蒙山冷凉山区饲用燕麦农艺性状与营养品质评价[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(4):1071-1080. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.04.016
[3]	饶雄, 高兴发, 肖石良, 等. 高寒冷凉区冬闲田燕麦高产播种技术[J]. 云南农业, 2020(12):50-51.
[4]	董祥开, 刘恩财, 衣莹, 等. 氮磷钾对燕麦产量和品质的影响研究进展[J]. 农机化研究, 2008(11):219-222.
[5]	李虎, 陈传华, 刘广林, 等. 种植密度和施氮量对桂育9号农艺性状及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2019(6):99-103.
[6]	雷占兰, 周华坤, 刘泽华, 等. 密度氮肥交互处理下高寒地区燕麦的生长特性与生殖分配[J]. 草业科学, 2014, 31(6):1110-1119.
[7]	韩建国, 毛培胜. 牧草种子生产的地域性[A]. 见:洪绂曾,任继周. 草业与西部大开发[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2001:30-36.
[8]	李世忠, 谢应忠, 徐坤. 国内外禾本科牧草种子生产的研究进展[J]. 中国种业, 2005(7):17-19.
[9]	房丽宁, 曲洪福. 施肥及生长调节剂对高羊茅种子产量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2000, 8(3):164-170. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2000.03.002
[10]	韩建国. 实用牧草种子学[M]. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 1997.
[11]	王宏庭, 赵萍萍, 郭军玲, 等. 不同施氮运筹对夏玉米产量、净收益及氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 山西农业科学, 2010, 38(10):30-33,47.
[12]	呼瑞梅, 崔凤娟, 王振国, 等. 不同施氮量、种植密度及灌水时期对高粱产量的影响[J]. 现代农业科技, 2012(4):62-63.
[13]	吴浩, 刘文辉, 贾志锋, 等. 施氮对‘青引1号’燕麦生物量积累及其分配的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(31):10-18. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb18050127
[14]	孙怀恩, 谭旭良, 张俊超, 等. 施氮量和植物生长调节剂对‘青引2号’燕麦抗倒能力及产量品质的影响[J]. 草学, 2022(3):24-30.
[15]	王茂莹, 贺明荣, 李玉, 等. 施氮量对不同小麦品种产量及氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(4):241-248.
[16]	冯学颖, 刘景辉, 赵宝平, 等. 宽幅条播和种植密度对燕麦光合特性及干物质积累量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2022, 42(12):1527-1534.
[17]	施发贵. 不同播种方式对油菜产量及经济效益的影响[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2024, 30(8):18-21.
[18]	唐启义, 冯明光. 实用统计分析及其DPS数据处理系统[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002.
[19]	杨伟凯. 氮对农作物生长和生理特性的影响[J]. 山西农经, 2015(7):71-72.
[20]	纪亚君, 周青平, 王朋, 等. 氮肥对燕麦生长速率的影响[J]. 青海畜牧兽医杂志, 2013, 43(1):4-7.
[21]	周川姣, 肖相芬, 周顺利, 等. 施氮量对两种类型燕麦物质积累和产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2009(3):58-61.
[22]	孙建平, 薛竹慧, 杨国义, 等. 施氮对晋北燕麦饲草主要农艺性状及干物质产量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(4):964-970. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.04.023
[23]	李欣欣, 石祖梁, 王久臣, 等. 施氮量和种植密度对稻茬晚播小麦干物质积累及光合特性的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2020, 35(5):140-148. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20191204
[24]	HAN Y Y, WANG X Y, ZHOU X B. Precision planting patterns effect on growth, photosynthetic characteristics and yield of winter wheat under deficit irrigation[J]. International journal of agriculture and biology, 2016, 18(4):741-746.
[25]	薛亚光, 陈婷婷, 杨成, 等. 中粳稻不同栽培模式对产量及其生理特性的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2010, 36(3):466-476. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.00466
[26]	杨建昌, 王朋, 刘立军, 等. 中籼水稻品种产量与株型演化特征研究[J]. 作物学报, 2006, 32(7):949-955.
[27]	张艳军, 刘佳, 张钟, 等. 不同品种、密度、施氮量、播种方式对糯高粱生物性状及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(2):1-7. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0036

处理号组合	代码	施氮量(A)/(kg/hm²)	代码	密度(B)/(万株/hm²)	代码	播种方式(C)
A₁B₁C₁	1	37.5	1	285	1	条播（行距30 cm）
A₁B₂C₂	1	37.5	2	345	2	撒播
A₂B₁C₁	2	52.5	1	285	1	条播（行距30 cm）
A₂B₂C₂	2	52.5	2	345	2	撒播
A₃B₁C₂	3	67.5	1	285	2	撒播
A₃B₂C₁	3	67.5	2	345	1	条播（行距30 cm）
A₄B₁C₂	4	82.5	1	285	2	撒播
A₄B₂C₁	4	82.5	2	345	1	条播（行距30 cm）

处理号组合	代码	施氮量(A)/(kg/hm²)	代码	密度(B)/(万株/hm²)	代码	播种方式(C)
A₁B₁C₁	1	37.5	1	285	1	条播（行距30 cm）
A₁B₂C₂	1	37.5	2	345	2	撒播
A₂B₁C₁	2	52.5	1	285	1	条播（行距30 cm）
A₂B₂C₂	2	52.5	2	345	2	撒播
A₃B₁C₂	3	67.5	1	285	2	撒播
A₃B₂C₁	3	67.5	2	345	1	条播（行距30 cm）
A₄B₁C₂	4	82.5	1	285	2	撒播
A₄B₂C₁	4	82.5	2	345	1	条播（行距30 cm）

施氮量(A)	种植密度(B)	播种方式(C)	抽穗时间/d
A₁	B₁	C₁	130.00±3.606
A₁	B₂	C₂	131.67±0.577
A₂	B₁	C₁	129.67±3.055
	B₂	C₂	131.67±0.577
A₃	B₁	C₂	129.00±0.000
A₃	B₂	C₁	129.00±5.292
A₄	B₁	C₂	127.00±2.000
A₄	B₂	C₁	125.33±1.528
A₁	—	—	130.83±2.483^a
A₂	—	—	130.67±2.251^b
A₃	—	—	129.00±3.347^ab
A₄	—	—	126.17±1.835b
—	B₁	—	128.92±2.503b
—	B₂	—	129.42±3.605a
—	—	C1	128.50±3.656
—	—	C2	129.83±2.250
P值			0.217

施氮量(A)	种植密度(B)	播种方式(C)	抽穗时间/d
A₁	B₁	C₁	130.00±3.606
A₁	B₂	C₂	131.67±0.577
A₂	B₁	C₁	129.67±3.055
	B₂	C₂	131.67±0.577
A₃	B₁	C₂	129.00±0.000
A₃	B₂	C₁	129.00±5.292
A₄	B₁	C₂	127.00±2.000
A₄	B₂	C₁	125.33±1.528
A₁	—	—	130.83±2.483^a
A₂	—	—	130.67±2.251^b
A₃	—	—	129.00±3.347^ab
A₄	—	—	126.17±1.835b
—	B₁	—	128.92±2.503b
—	B₂	—	129.42±3.605a
—	—	C1	128.50±3.656
—	—	C2	129.83±2.250
P值			0.217

施氮量(A)	种植密度(B)	播种方式(C)	株高/cm	节数/节	茎粗/mm	穗长/cm	小穗数/穗
A₁	B₁	C₁	152.00±13.846	6.60±1.454	5.79±1.464	24.27±3.634	29.27±2.604
A₁	B₂	C₂	136.73±10.807	6.80±0.775	5.37±1.295	22.20±1.859	27.87±5.055
A₂	B₁	C₁	132.00±9.464	6.07±0.704	5.73±1.482	23.13±3.159	30.07±5.946
A₂	B₂	C₂	129.67±13.329	6.73±1.033	5.84±1.962	26.07±4.213	27.87±6.534
A₃	B₁	C₂	142.47±10.084	7.13±1.060	6.09±0.938	25.40±5.804	31.47±3.907
A₃	B₂	C₁	150.00±8.644	7.00±0.926	5.40±0.883	25.37±4.029	28.73±4.527
A₄	B₁	C₂	131.47±13.532	6.27±0.799	6.20±2.054	21.93±2.086	31.40±4.388
A₄	B₂	C₁	146.13±5.902	6.80±0.862	5.86±1.193	22.10±1.692	29.00±3.742
A₁	—	—	130.83±11.420^c	6.40±0.932^b	5.58±1.374	23.23±3.025^bc	28.57±4.014
A₂	—	—	144.37±14.464^ab	6.70±1.149a^b	5.79±1.710	24.60±3.951^ab	28.97±6.239
A₃	—	—	146.23±9.992^a	7.07±0.980^a	5.74±0.962	25.38±4.909^a	30.10±4.381
A₄	—	—	138.80±12.683^b	6.53±0.860^b	6.03±1.659	22.02±1.868^c	30.20±4.189
—	B₁	—	139.48±14.387	6.52±1.097	5.95±1.510	23.68±4.027	30.55±4.366
—	B₂	—	140.63±12.661	6.83±0.886	5.62±1.375	23.93±3.586	28.37±4.964
—	—	—	145.03±12.444	6.62±1.059	5.70±1.259	23.72±3.399	29.27±4.294^b
—	—	—	135.08±12.759	6.73±0.954	5.88±1.620	23.90±4.188	29.65±5.256^a
P值			<0.001	—	0.645	<0.001	0.945