Evaluation of Hydrothermal Effect and Weather Resistance of Weather Resistant Plastic Film on Maize Farmland in Central Gansu Aridland

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0034

Abstract

Abstract:

Limited water and heat resources in the dry farming areas of central Gansu restrict maize growth and development. The technology of full-film double-ridge furrow sowing can solve the problem of water and heat constraints and make maize as a major local crop, but the technology also causes serious film residue pollution. To introduce the weather resistant and easily recycled plastic mulch film, a field experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of different PE mulch film (T1, T2, T3 and T4, among them, T1, T2 and T3 were weather resistant mulch film, T4 was traditional PE mulch film) and degradable mulch film T5 on soil water and heat conditions, maize photosynthetic properties and yield. The results showed that soil water content of T1, T2 and T3 were similar to that of T4 during the whole growing period of maize, but compared with T5, T2 could increase the soil water content of the 30-50 cm soil layer at the seedling stage. There was no significant difference of average soil temperature in 5 and 10 cm soil layer during the whole growth period, but the average soil temperature of T5 in 15 cm, 20 cm and 25 cm soil layers was 0.5-1.4 °C, 0.3-1.1 °C and 1.0-2.3 °C lower than that of T1, T2, T3 and T4, respectively. The leaf area index of T1, T2, T3 and T4 was significantly higher than that of T5 at jointing stage, big trumpet stage and filling stage. Compared to common plastic mulch film, T1 significantly improved the maize photosynthetic characteristics at big trumpet stage. Compared to that of T5, the grain yield of T1, T2, T3 and T4 was increased by 40.41%, 45.04%, 27.41% and 32.80%, respectively. There was no significant difference of the biological yield among the treatments, and there was no significant difference between weather resistance plastic film T1, T2 and T3 and traditional PE mulch film T4. After maize harvest, the longitudinal tensile load of weather resistant plastic film was significantly higher than that of T4, and the longitudinal tensile load, transverse tensile load and longitudinal fracture nominal strain of T1 were the largest, and its recovery was more easier than other plastic mulch film. Therefore, the application of T1 in dry agricultural areas of central Gansu can have similar hydrothermal effect with T4, and the yield of maize is also equivalent. In addition, film residue of T1 can be easily recycled after maize harvest, which reduces the pollution caused by film residue. However, due to the limited effect of temperature increase, the degradable film (T5) will reduce the yield of maize.

Key words: maize, weather resistant plastic film, hydrothermal effect, yield, weather resistance evaluation

CLC Number:

S513

ZHANG Jian, XIE Junhong, LI Lingling, KANG Yunqiang, DU Changliang, WANG Jinbin, Xie Lihua, Setorkwami FUDJOE. Evaluation of Hydrothermal Effect and Weather Resistance of Weather Resistant Plastic Film on Maize Farmland in Central Gansu Aridland[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(18): 86-94.

Figures/Tables 8

References 35

[1]	李少昆, 赵久然, 董树亭, 等. 中国玉米栽培研究进展与展望[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(11):1941-1959.
[2]	罗珠珠, 牛伊宁, 李玲玲, 等. 陇中黄土高原不同种植年限苜蓿草地土壤水分及产量响应[J]. 草业学报, 2015, 24(1):31-38.
[3]	谢军红, 王进斌, 李玲玲, 等. 培肥模式对旱作全膜双垄沟播玉米生长及土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2020, 38(1):79-85.
[4]	王进斌, 谢军红, 李玲玲, 等. 氮肥运筹对陇中旱农区玉米光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(1):60-69.
[5]	王红丽, 张绪成, 宋尚有, 等. 西北黄土高原旱地全膜双垄沟播种植对玉米季节性耗水和产量的调节机制[J]. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(5):917-926.
[6]	戴飞, 赵武云, 张锋伟, 等. 西北雨养区全膜双垄沟播技术与配套机具研究进展分析[J]. 农业机械学报, 2019, 50(5):1-16.
[7]	杨祁峰, 孙多鑫, 熊春蓉. 玉米全膜双垄沟播栽培技术[J]. 中国农学通报, 2007, 23(8):20-21.
[8]	刘晓伟, 殷涛, 李元桥, 等. 新疆地区不同农田管理模式的残膜污染现状[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(31):65-70.
[9]	严昌荣, 刘恩科, 舒帆, 等. 我国地膜覆盖和残留污染特点与防控技术[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2014, 31(2):95-102.
[10]	尉海东, 伦志磊, 郭峰. 残留农膜对土壤性状的影响[J]. 生态环境, 2008, 17(5):1853-1856.
[11]	解红娥, 李永山, 杨淑巧, 等. 农田残膜对土壤环境及作物生长发育的影响研究[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2007(S1):153-156.
[12]	何文清, 赵彩霞, 刘爽, 等. 全生物降解膜田间降解特征及其对棉花产量影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2011, 16(3):21-27.
[13]	戚瑞敏, 刘勤, 王旭峰, 等. 高强度地膜应用对棉花生产及地膜回收的影响[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2021:1-12.
[14]	谢建华, 侯书林, 刘英超. 残膜清理回收机具的研究现状及存在的问题[J]. 中国农机化, 2012, 243(5):41-44.
[15]	张佳喜, 王学农, 张丽, 等. 农田地膜拉伸性能变化对缠绕式回收的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(20):41-47.
[16]	郭喜军, 谢军红, 李玲玲, 等. 氮肥用量及有机无机肥配比对陇中旱农区玉米光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(5):806-816.
[17]	王进斌, 李玲玲, 谢军红, 等. 耕作措施和氮肥用量对陇中旱农区粮饲兼用玉米光合特性与水分利用效率的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2018, 27(6):802-811.
[18]	DONG B, LIU M, JIANG J, et al. Growth, grain yield, and water use efficiency of rain-fed spring hybrid millet (Setaria italica) in plastic-mulched and unmulched fields[J]. Agricultural water management, 2014, 143:93-101. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.06.011 URL
[19]	李尚中, 樊廷录, 赵晖, 等. 不同地膜覆盖栽培模式对玉米产量、水分利用效率和品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(10):182-191.
[20]	白雪, 周怀平, 解文艳, 等. 不同类型地膜覆盖对玉米农田水热状况及产量的影响[J]. 土壤, 2018, 50(2):414-420.
[21]	王磊, 樊廷录, 赵刚, 等. 地膜覆盖对不同株型春玉米产量和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2018, 37(1):16-20.
[22]	刘晓伟, 何宝林, 郭天文. 全膜双垄沟不同覆膜时期对玉米土壤水分和产量的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2012, 26(3):602-608,627. doi: 10.11869/hnxb.2012.03.0602
[23]	马丽, 刘天学, 韩德果, 等. 垄作对冬小麦、夏玉米产量和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2010, 24(5):1062-1067.
[24]	孙学保, 杨祁峰, 牛俊义, 等. 旱地全膜双垄沟播玉米增产效应研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2009, 130(3):32-36.
[25]	徐佳星, 封涌涛, 叶玉莲, 等. 地膜覆盖条件下黄土高原玉米产量及水分利用效应分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(12):2349-2359.
[26]	王罕博, 龚道枝, 梅旭荣, 等. 覆膜和露地旱作春玉米生长与蒸散动态比较[J]. 农业工程学报, 2012, 28(22):88-94.
[27]	BU L, LIU J, ZHU L, et al. The effects of mulching on maize growth, yield and water use in a semi-arid region[J]. Agricultural water management, 2013, 123:71-78. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2013.03.015 URL
[28]	刁生鹏, 高日平, 高宇, 等. 内蒙古黄土高原秸秆还田对玉米农田土壤水热状况及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2019, 193(6):83-89.
[29]	牟鸿燕, 黄方圆, 张超, 等. 半干旱区不同秋覆盖方式对农田土壤水温效应及玉米水分利用效率的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2018, 26(6):86-93.
[30]	刘蕊, 孙仕军, 张旺旺, 等. 氧化生物双降解地膜覆盖对玉米田间水热及产量的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2017, 36(12):25-30.
[31]	胡广荣, 王琦, 宋兴阳, 等. 沟覆盖材料对垄沟集雨种植土壤温度、作物产量和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(5):590-599.
[32]	林萌萌, 孙涛, 尹继乾, 等. 不同生物降解地膜对花生光合特性和产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(27):190-197.
[33]	孟玉, 王振华, 李文昊, 等. 降解膜覆盖对滴灌玉米土壤水温变化及其生长的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2021, 30(2):192-202.
[34]	何文清, 严昌荣, 赵彩霞, 等. 我国地膜应用污染现状及其防治途径研究[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2009, 28(3):533-538.
[35]	何为媛, 李玫, 李真熠, 等. 重庆市地膜残留系数研究[J]. 农业环境与发展, 2013, 30(3):76-78.

处理	纵向拉伸负荷/N	横向拉伸负荷/N	纵向断裂标称应变/%	横向断裂标称应变/%
T1	3.2	2.4	591.6	768.4
T2	5.9	3.2	320.8	878.5
T3	3.1	2.3	452.3	722.1
T4	3.2	2.1	699.1	776.5

处理	纵向拉伸负荷/N	横向拉伸负荷/N	纵向断裂标称应变/%	横向断裂标称应变/%
T1	3.2	2.4	591.6	768.4
T2	5.9	3.2	320.8	878.5
T3	3.1	2.3	452.3	722.1
T4	3.2	2.1	699.1	776.5

生育时期	处理	Pn/[µmol/(m²·s)]	Tr/[mmol/(m²·s)]	Gs/[mmol/(m²·s)]	干物质积累量/(g/plant)
拔节期	T1	41.8±2.4a	9.9±0.4a	223.8±13.0a	21.35±2.58a
	T2	48.9±4.2a	10.3±0.9a	247.4±24.4a	15.40±1.80bc
	T3	49.8±2.6a	10.5±0.6a	252.3±23.4a	17.15±0.93ab
	T4	45.2±1.5a	9.8±0.4a	230.8±10.7a	21.94±1.54a
	T5	48.1±2.6a	10.3±0.4a	239.8±13.8a	11.20±1.71c
大喇叭口期	T1	50.2±3.3a	8.1±1.2a	50.2±3.3a	122.56±7.78a
	T2	42.6±1.7a	6.6±0.8ab	42.6±1.7a	131.35±10.56a
	T3	32.9±2.2b	6.2±0.6ab	32.9±2.2b	118.45±9.04a
	T4	33.9±3.0b	5.6±0.6b	33.9±3.0b	115.47±7.45a
	T5	48.5±4.2a	8.0±0.4ab	48.5±4.2a	81.53±7.54b
抽雄吐丝期	T1	34.3±2.2a	6.3±0.9ab	208.6±16.3a	180.89±23.07a
	T2	30.0±2.4a	5.8±0.6ab	202.2±12.2a	170.66±10.90ab
	T3	32.8±2.1a	6.1±0.3ab	196.1±15.1a	166.70±24.93ab
	T4	29.8±1.9a	5.3±0.2b	181.2±15.8a	148.68±17.75ab
	T5	33.4±7.4a	7.0±0.4a	218.6±12.7a	117.88±11.44b
灌浆期	T1	25.4±2.5ab	4.4±0.3b	126.8±10.6b	262.71±17.15a
	T2	25.9±2.9ab	4.5±0.5b	130.5±16.7b	245.77±240.95a
	T3	21.2±1.7b	4.2±0.3b	104.4±10.0b	240.95±13.91a
	T4	32.6±2.1a	6.1±0.4a	172.3±12.3a	250.17±20.18a
	T5	27.3±2.5ab	5.3±0.4ab	127.8±10.3b	136.47±14.54b

生育时期	处理	Pn/[µmol/(m²·s)]	Tr/[mmol/(m²·s)]	Gs/[mmol/(m²·s)]	干物质积累量/(g/plant)
拔节期	T1	41.8±2.4a	9.9±0.4a	223.8±13.0a	21.35±2.58a
	T2	48.9±4.2a	10.3±0.9a	247.4±24.4a	15.40±1.80bc
	T3	49.8±2.6a	10.5±0.6a	252.3±23.4a	17.15±0.93ab
	T4	45.2±1.5a	9.8±0.4a	230.8±10.7a	21.94±1.54a
	T5	48.1±2.6a	10.3±0.4a	239.8±13.8a	11.20±1.71c
大喇叭口期	T1	50.2±3.3a	8.1±1.2a	50.2±3.3a	122.56±7.78a
	T2	42.6±1.7a	6.6±0.8ab	42.6±1.7a	131.35±10.56a
	T3	32.9±2.2b	6.2±0.6ab	32.9±2.2b	118.45±9.04a
	T4	33.9±3.0b	5.6±0.6b	33.9±3.0b	115.47±7.45a
	T5	48.5±4.2a	8.0±0.4ab	48.5±4.2a	81.53±7.54b
抽雄吐丝期	T1	34.3±2.2a	6.3±0.9ab	208.6±16.3a	180.89±23.07a
	T2	30.0±2.4a	5.8±0.6ab	202.2±12.2a	170.66±10.90ab
	T3	32.8±2.1a	6.1±0.3ab	196.1±15.1a	166.70±24.93ab
	T4	29.8±1.9a	5.3±0.2b	181.2±15.8a	148.68±17.75ab
	T5	33.4±7.4a	7.0±0.4a	218.6±12.7a	117.88±11.44b
灌浆期	T1	25.4±2.5ab	4.4±0.3b	126.8±10.6b	262.71±17.15a
	T2	25.9±2.9ab	4.5±0.5b	130.5±16.7b	245.77±240.95a
	T3	21.2±1.7b	4.2±0.3b	104.4±10.0b	240.95±13.91a
	T4	32.6±2.1a	6.1±0.4a	172.3±12.3a	250.17±20.18a
	T5	27.3±2.5ab	5.3±0.4ab	127.8±10.3b	136.47±14.54b

处理	籽粒产量/(kg/hm²)	生物产量/(kg/hm²)	穗数/（穗/m²）	穗粒数/（粒/穗）	百粒重/g
T1	8232.7a	22166.7a	8.1a	525.6a	29.9a
T2	8504.2a	20358.3a	8.2a	548.6a	30.2a
T3	7470.6a	20416.7a	6.0ab	586.9a	30.1a
T4	7786.3a	20883.3a	7.0ab	557.3a	29.9a
T5	5863.3b	19833.3a	5.3b	517.1a	26.3b