Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate and Leaf Number Interaction on Growth and Tobacco Quality of ‘CB-1’ in Nanping Tobacco District

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0866

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the effects of nitrogen application rate and leaf number on the growth and leaf quality of ‘CB-1’ in Nanping tobacco-growing area, a cultivation experiment was carried out to detect the agronomic traits, biomass accumulation, nitrogen content, physical characteristics and chemical composition of cured tobacco leaf. The results showed that the reduction of nitrogen application rate promoted the growth and development of tobacco plants, and increased leaf length, leaf width, leaf area and dry matter accumulation. Reducing nitrogen application rate decreased leaf nitrogen content, increased leaf reducing sugar content and total sugar content of B2F grade, reduced nicotine content and total nitrogen content, and finally improved the coordination of internal chemical composition of upper leaves. The leaf length, leaf width and leaf area decreased with the increase of the leaf number. Under the nitrogen application rate of 115 kg/hm², with the increase of leaf number, the leaf length, leaf width and leaf area of C3F grade increased first and then decreased, while the total sugar content increased, and the overall score of sensory quality increased. Under the nitrogen application rate of 98 kg/hm², with the increase of leaf number, leaf nitrogen content and nitrogen accumulation increased first and then decreased, leaf weight, leaf length, leaf width, leaf area, total vegetable base, total nitrogen and potassium contents of C3F grade decreased, but reducing sugar and total sugar contents increased. Comprehensive analysis showed that under the treatment of nitrogen application of 98 kg/hm² and remaining 18 leaves, the leaf quality of ‘CB-1’ was better in Nanping area.

Key words: flue-cured tobacco, CB-1, nitrogen application rate, leaf number, tobacco leaf quality

LIANG Guiguang, CHEN Keling, WEI Jianyu, HUANG Chongjun, JIN Yabo, ZHANG Jili, JIA Haijiang, FAN Sifeng, GUO Fangjun, LI Qinglong, RUAN Jiechong, ZHOU Zhaofeng. Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate and Leaf Number Interaction on Growth and Tobacco Quality of ‘CB-1’ in Nanping Tobacco District[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(27): 29-35.

Figures/Tables 6

References 26

[1]	李春俭, 张福锁, 李文卿, 等. 我国烤烟生产中的氮素管理及其与烟叶品质的关系[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2007, 13(2):331-337.
[2]	秦艳青, 李春俭, 赵正雄, 等. 不同供氮方式和施氮量对烤烟生长和氮素吸收的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2007(3):436-442.
[3]	JU X T, CAO F C, LI C J, et al. Yield and nicotine content of flue-cured tobacco as affected by soil nitrogen mineralization[J]. Pedosphere, 2008, 18(2):227-235. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(08)60011-9 URL
[4]	张黎明, 却志群. 不同留叶方式和数目对烤烟生长及产质量的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2011, 40(9):48-51.
[5]	钱华, 史宏志, 赵晓丹, 等. 豫中烟区烟草NC297不同留叶水平的光合生理特性[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2012, 40(6):90-93.
[6]	韩玉环. 打顶时期和留叶数对烤烟上部叶生长发育及质量的影响[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2022.
[7]	陈颐, 鲁康兴, 周彬, 等. 施氮量和留叶数互作对红大鲜烟叶素质及产量的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018, 46(19):80-84.
[8]	郑昕, 史宏志, 杨兴有, 等. 施氮量与留叶数对万源晒红烟产质量和香气成分的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2018, 39(1):49-56.
[9]	刘晓迎, 左璇, 刘雅星, 等. 河南浓香型烟叶产区气候条件分析[J]. 河南农业科学, 2017, 46(3):52-58.
[10]	夏素素, 赵莉, 杨惠娟, 等. 基于香气物质含量和感官评价的豫西烤烟关键栽培技术优化[J]. 烟草科技, 2018, 51(6):1-8.
[11]	汪代斌, 周开燕, 钟维勇, 等. 施氮量、种植密度及留叶数对重庆烟区云烟116生长和产质量的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2019, 32(12):2769-2775.
[12]	贺凌霄, 张谦, 彭玉富, 等. 种植密度、施氮量和留叶数对烤烟生长特性及产质量的影响[J]. 扬州大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2020, 41(2):40-45.
[13]	刘碧荣, 祖朝龙, 马均, 等. 施氮量与留叶数调控对高海拔烟区烤烟烟叶结构、产量及品质的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2017, 50(4):25-30.
[14]	王瑞新, 韩富根. 烟草化学品质分析[M]. 郑州: 河南科学技术出版社,1990.
[15]	CHEEK J A, VANN M C, LEWIS R S, et al. Genetics influence postharvest measurements of flue-cured tobacco more than nitrogen application rate[J]. Agronomy journal, 2021, 113(2):1020-1028. doi: 10.1002/agj2.v113.2 URL
[16]	宗钊辉, 田俊岭, 王维, 等. 氮素水平对烤烟根系形态、结构及其氮素积累的影响[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2021, 27(6):34-42.
[17]	占俊文, 梁淑平, 沈雪婷, 等. 不同施氮量对烤烟生长发育、感官评吸质量及烟碱含量的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2016, 48(4):75-78.
[18]	李云霞, 罗经仁, 余金龙, 等. 施氮量和留叶数对湘烟 6号生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2019(4):15-18.
[19]	CHEN Y, REN K, HE X, et al. The response of flue-cured tobacco cultivar K326 to nitrogen fertilizer rate in China[J]. The journal of agricultural science, 2020, 158(5):371-382. doi: 10.1017/S0021859620000738 URL
[20]	王玉林, 孙延国, 高峻, 等. 施氮量与种植密度对‘中烟100’烟叶产量及化学成分的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2022, 54(7):113-121,134.
[21]	李传胜, 史宏志, 李怀奇, 等. 增密减叶减氮模式对烤烟上部叶的提质增香效果[J]. 河南农业科学, 2017, 46(4):32-37,48.
[22]	FINCH C E, VANN M C, FISHER L R, et al. Lower-leaf removal and nitrogen application programs for flue-cured tobacco production[J]. Agronomy journal, 2019, 111(4):1933-1939. doi: 10.2134/agronj2018.10.0637 URL
[23]	关罗浩, 杨欣, 李超, 等. 留叶数对腾冲烟叶产质量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(4):10-15. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0887
[24]	申宴斌, 刘彦中, 马剑雄, 等. 不同留叶数对烤烟新品种NC297生长及产质量的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2009, 30(6):57-60.
[25]	柏永超, 刘旦, 张国平, 等. 基因型和留叶数对皖南烟区烤烟产量和品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2018, 59(9):1717-1720.
[26]	周初跃, 杜丛中, 薛琳. 皖南烟区不同留叶数对K326品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2016, 44(4):56-58.

处理	最大叶长/cm	最大叶宽/cm	叶面积/cm²
N₁L₁	76.64 a	32.17 a	1564.37 a
N₁L₂	70.79 a	30.86 a	1386.12 a
N₁L₃	69.52 a	28.74 a	1267.73 a
N₂L₁	77.55 a	33.52 a	1649.5 a
N₂L₂	74.33 a	31.07 a	1465.47 a
N₂L₃	74.00 a	30.83 a	1447.72 a
N	ns	ns	ns
L	^**	ns	^*
N×L	ns	ns	ns

处理	最大叶长/cm	最大叶宽/cm	叶面积/cm²
N₁L₁	76.64 a	32.17 a	1564.37 a
N₁L₂	70.79 a	30.86 a	1386.12 a
N₁L₃	69.52 a	28.74 a	1267.73 a
N₂L₁	77.55 a	33.52 a	1649.5 a
N₂L₂	74.33 a	31.07 a	1465.47 a
N₂L₃	74.00 a	30.83 a	1447.72 a
N	ns	ns	ns
L	^**	ns	^*
N×L	ns	ns	ns

处理	根重	茎重	叶重	总干重
N₁L₁	54.05 b	86.00 b	118.28 b	258.32 b
N₁L₂	89.61 ab	99.57 a	137.07 ab	326.25 a
N₁L₃	64.27 a	85.94 b	151.20 a	301.41 ab
N₂L₁	69.31 a	99.16 a	140.84 a	309.31 a
N₂L₂	69.64 a	105.98 a	150.55 a	326.18 a
N₂L₃	66.93 a	95.57 a	146.73 a	309.23 a
N	ns	ns	ns	ns
L	ns	ns	*	ns
N×L	ns	ns	ns	ns

处理	根重	茎重	叶重	总干重
N₁L₁	54.05 b	86.00 b	118.28 b	258.32 b
N₁L₂	89.61 ab	99.57 a	137.07 ab	326.25 a
N₁L₃	64.27 a	85.94 b	151.20 a	301.41 ab
N₂L₁	69.31 a	99.16 a	140.84 a	309.31 a
N₂L₂	69.64 a	105.98 a	150.55 a	326.18 a
N₂L₃	66.93 a	95.57 a	146.73 a	309.23 a
N	ns	ns	ns	ns
L	ns	ns	*	ns
N×L	ns	ns	ns	ns

处理	氮素含量/%			氮素积累量/(g/株)
处理	根	茎	叶	根	茎	叶
N₁L₁	1.48 a	1.76 a	2.22 a	0.78 a	1.52 a	2.66 a
N₁L₂	1.11 b	1.08 b	2.07 a	1.01 a	0.99 b	2.85 a
N₁L₃	1.13 ab	0.81 b	1.63 b	0.72 a	0.70 c	2.46 a
N₂L₁	1.15 a	1.07 b	1.36 b	0.78 a	1.07 b	1.92 b
N₂L₂	1.18 a	1.77 a	1.71 a	0.82 a	1.84 a	2.60 a
N₂L₃	1.10 a	1.69 a	1.47 ab	0.74 a	1.64 ab	2.17 ab
N	ns	ns	^**	ns	ns	^**
L	ns	ns	^**	ns	ns	^*
N×L	ns	^**	^**	ns	^**	ns