Effect of Different Type of Potassium Fertilizer on Yield, Quality and Nutrient Uptake of Seed Lotus

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0776

Abstract

Abstract:

To appropriately select potassium fertilizer for seed lotus (Nelumbo nucifera) production, a micro-plot experiment was conducted to study the effects of different types of potassium fertilizer on growth, yield, quality and nutrient uptake of seed lotus by using ‘Taikonglian No.36’as test material, with three treatments of no potassium (CK), potassium chloride (MOP) and potassium sulfate (SOP). The results showed that potassium fertilizer application significantly increased the yield of lotus seed cotyledon (LSC) and developed rhizome (DR) in the lotus field with 32.2 mg/kg available sulfur (S) and 10.0 mg/kg available chloride (Cl) in the soil. Compared with CK treatment, yield of LSC and DR in MOP treatment increased by 29.7% and 21.5%，respectively, and that in SOP treatment increased by 41.3% and 71.2%, respectively. Compared with MOP treatment, the yield of LSC and DR in SOP treatment increased by 9.0% and 40.9% respectively, the harvest index of LSC and DR increased by 0.6 and 5.0 percentage points, and the starch content increased by 2.6 and 7.9 percentage points, respectively, and the yield, harvest index and starch content of DR increased significantly. The Cl content in most organs of seed lotus plant decreased significantly by 34%-77%, therefore the total Cl absorption decreased by 55.2%; S content in the organs of seed lotus plant increased by 0.4%-57%, and the total S absorption increased by 23.0%. The recovery efficiency of K of SOP treatment increased by 2.4 percentage points when compared with MOP treatment. SOP was slightly better than MOP in increasing yield and improving quality of LSC, and significantly superior to MOP in increasing yield and improving quality of DR. Therefore, a fertilization strategy of ‘MOP in early stage and SOP in late stage’ was preliminary proposed for seed lotus production in Guangchang County, Jiangxi Province.

Key words: seed lotus, potassium chloride, potassium sulfate, yield, quality, nutrient uptake

LI Jun, TANG Jiping, YANG Liangbo, LIU Dongbi, ZHANG Zhiyi, ZHENG Xingwen, JIE Zhihui, ZOU Dongwang, XU Jinxing, CHENG Zizhen, NI Chengfan, ZHU Dandan. Effect of Different Type of Potassium Fertilizer on Yield, Quality and Nutrient Uptake of Seed Lotus[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(28): 40-47.

Figures/Tables 9

References 26

[1]	谢建昌, 周健民, HÄRDTER R. 钾与中国农业[M]. 南京: 河海大学出版社, 2000:26-36,185-220.
[2]	谷贺贺, 李静, 张洋洋, 等. 钾肥与我国主要作物品质关系的整合分析[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(10):1749-1757.
[3]	刘晓燕, 何萍, 金继运. 钾在植物抗病性中的作用及机理的研究进展[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2006, 12(3):445-450.
[4]	杜彩艳, 普继雄, 孙曦, 等. 钾肥种类及用量对三七养分吸收和产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(4):192-200.
[5]	刘冬碧, 陈防, 鲁剑巍, 等. 施钾水平与钾肥品种对幼年早熟温州蜜柑挂果数及产量的影响[J]. 中国南方果树, 2002, 31(3):13-15.
[6]	王亚宁, 张翔, 范艺宽, 等. 烟草氯素营养研究进展与展望[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(27):66-70. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb16080066
[7]	FARAHANI S, HERAVAN E M, RAD A H S, et al. Effect of potassium sulfate on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of canola cultivars upon late-season drought stress conditions[J]. Journal of plant nutrition, 2019, 42(13):1543-1555. doi: 10.1080/01904167.2019.1628987 URL
[8]	倪吾钟, 章永松, 林咸永. 不同钾肥对几种主要蔬菜作物产量和品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 1997, 9(3):143-148.
[9]	鲁剑巍, 陈防, 刘冬碧, 等. 柑桔施用硫酸钾和氯化钾效果研究Ⅰ对树体生长、产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2002(4):30-34.
[10]	吴庆强, 张勇, 梁东丽, 等. 不同钾肥品种对蔬菜产量和品质的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2001, 10(2):84-86,90.
[11]	冒辛平, 柯英, 朱建宁, 等. 不同钾源对设施番茄生长发育、品质及钾素吸收的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2016, 44(12):186-189.
[12]	郭熙盛, 叶舒娅, 王文军, 等. 钾肥品种与用量对黄瓜产量和品质的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2004, 10(3):292-297.
[13]	孙兴祥, 尤春, 霍鸿巍, 等. 钾肥类型对西瓜产量和品质的影响[J]. 土壤, 2016, 48(3):475-478.
[14]	哈丽哈什·依巴提, 王金鑫, 李青军, 等. 钾肥品种对加工番茄生长发育及产量品质的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021(3):96-101.
[15]	周卫. 低产水稻土改良与管理理论·方法·技术[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2015:25-26.
[16]	王思博, 陈俊红, 李冬冬, 等. 由传统农业向有机农业发展过程中的阶段性生产特征比较研究:基于广昌白莲产业发展的实证考察[J]. 生态经济, 2021, 37(9):108-116.
[17]	谢克强. 广昌白莲产业的发展及其对中国莲产业的贡献[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2010(14):109-112.
[18]	刘冬碧, 余延丰, 杨良波, 等. 江西省广昌县子莲生产和施肥中存在问题与技术对策[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2019(12):66-71.
[19]	裴佳晨, 杨良波, 刘冬碧, 等. 江西省广昌县莲田土壤中、微量元素含量及空间变异性评价[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2022(3):50-57.
[20]	鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社出版, 1999:197-200,205-226.
[21]	刘冬碧, 熊桂云, 陈防, 等. 钾素营养对莲藕生长和干物质累积的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2009(5):34-37.
[22]	HÜTSCH B W, KEIPP K, GLASER A K, et al. Potato plants (Solanum tuberosum L.) are chloride- sensitive: Is this dogma valid?[J]. Journal of the science of food and agriculture, 2018, 98(8):3161-3168. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.2018.98.issue-8 URL
[23]	QUAGGIO, ANTONIO J, JUNIOR M, et al. Sources and rates of potassium for sweet orange production[J]. Scientia agricola, 2011, 68(3):369-375. doi: 10.1590/S0103-90162011000300015 URL
[24]	章永松, 倪吾钟, 林咸永, 等. 杭州市郊菜园土壤的有效养分状况与施肥对策[A].//见:谢建昌,陈际型.菜园土壤肥力与蔬菜合理施肥[M]. 南京: 河海大学出版社, 1997:43-46.
[25]	鲁剑巍, 谭启玲, 曹卫东, 等. 测土配方与作物配方施肥技术[M]. 北京: 金盾出版社, 2006:106-107.
[26]	刘义满, 魏玉翔. 水生蔬菜答农民问(13):常见子莲品种有哪些?如何提高子莲种植效益?[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2018(13):52-54.

处理	生物学产量/(g/株)			收获指数/%
处理	总量	通芯莲	膨大茎	通芯莲	膨大茎	生殖器官	营养器官
CK	2147±343b	305±43b	395±62b	13.9±5.9a	18.4±1.6a	41.6±10.6a	58.3±10.6a
MOP	3511±745a	396±48a	480±173ab	11.9±1.5a	13.5±3.8b	36.6±3.7a	63.3±3.7a
SOP	3644±636a	431±47a	676±129a	12.5±1.2a	18.5±0.4a	34.3±1.7a	65.6±1.7a

处理	生物学产量/(g/株)			收获指数/%
处理	总量	通芯莲	膨大茎	通芯莲	膨大茎	生殖器官	营养器官
CK	2147±343b	305±43b	395±62b	13.9±5.9a	18.4±1.6a	41.6±10.6a	58.3±10.6a
MOP	3511±745a	396±48a	480±173ab	11.9±1.5a	13.5±3.8b	36.6±3.7a	63.3±3.7a
SOP	3644±636a	431±47a	676±129a	12.5±1.2a	18.5±0.4a	34.3±1.7a	65.6±1.7a

时间	单片叶面积/(m²/片)			叶柄粗/mm			叶绿素SPAD值
时间	CK	MOP	SOP	CK	MOP	SOP	CK	MOP	SOP
7月上	0.18±0.05a	0.20±0.02a	0.24±0.00a	9.6±1.1a	9.4±0.4a	9.5±0.0a	42.7±1.9a	44.8±4.1a	47.4±0.0a
7月中	0.22±0.03a	0.18±0.05a	0.21±0.04a	10.0±0.4a	8.8±1.3a	9.1±0.7a	48.6±3.2a	47.0±2.0ab	43.6±1.8b
7月下	0.18±0.06a	0.20±0.02a	0.27±0.05a	8.2±1.8a	8.4±0.7a	9.8±1.2a	49.7±4.5a	45.6±3.3a	51.5±4.9a
8月上	0.28±0.05a	0.24±0.04a	0.26±0.03a	10.1±0.6a	8.8±1.1a	9.6±1.0a	51.9±0.4a	48.1±5.9a	51.9±4.7a
8月中	0.17±0.01b	0.24±0.04a	0.25±0.02a	7.9±0.8b	9.6±0.4a	9.6±0.3a	53.3±1.3a	53.0±3.2a	51.1±5.2a
8月下	0.23±0.03a	0.24±0.06a	0.25±0.04a	9.0±1.0a	9.3±1.2a	9.6±1.0a	52.8±2.3a	50.8±4.1a	53.1±1.7a
9月上	0.21±0.04a	0.23±0.04a	0.26±0.05a	8.5±1.3a	9.7±0.9a	9.7±1.5a	48.5±0.7a	46.7±4.4a	47.1±2.6a
9月中	0.19±0.06a	0.22±0.03a	0.23±0.04a	8.7±1.4a	9.5±0.7a	9.5±0.7a	48.9±6.3a	47.7±3.7a	47.6±5.3a
9月下		0.26±0.00a	0.19±0.04a		9.4±0.1a	9.1±1.5a		43.8±4.3a	42.4±3.6a
平均	0.21±0.02a	0.23±0.03a	0.25±0.02a	9.1±0.8a	9.2±0.4a	9.6±0.1a	49.5±0.8a	48.0±2.6a	48.7±1.7a

时间	单片叶面积/(m²/片)			叶柄粗/mm			叶绿素SPAD值
时间	CK	MOP	SOP	CK	MOP	SOP	CK	MOP	SOP
7月上	0.18±0.05a	0.20±0.02a	0.24±0.00a	9.6±1.1a	9.4±0.4a	9.5±0.0a	42.7±1.9a	44.8±4.1a	47.4±0.0a
7月中	0.22±0.03a	0.18±0.05a	0.21±0.04a	10.0±0.4a	8.8±1.3a	9.1±0.7a	48.6±3.2a	47.0±2.0ab	43.6±1.8b
7月下	0.18±0.06a	0.20±0.02a	0.27±0.05a	8.2±1.8a	8.4±0.7a	9.8±1.2a	49.7±4.5a	45.6±3.3a	51.5±4.9a
8月上	0.28±0.05a	0.24±0.04a	0.26±0.03a	10.1±0.6a	8.8±1.1a	9.6±1.0a	51.9±0.4a	48.1±5.9a	51.9±4.7a
8月中	0.17±0.01b	0.24±0.04a	0.25±0.02a	7.9±0.8b	9.6±0.4a	9.6±0.3a	53.3±1.3a	53.0±3.2a	51.1±5.2a
8月下	0.23±0.03a	0.24±0.06a	0.25±0.04a	9.0±1.0a	9.3±1.2a	9.6±1.0a	52.8±2.3a	50.8±4.1a	53.1±1.7a
9月上	0.21±0.04a	0.23±0.04a	0.26±0.05a	8.5±1.3a	9.7±0.9a	9.7±1.5a	48.5±0.7a	46.7±4.4a	47.1±2.6a
9月中	0.19±0.06a	0.22±0.03a	0.23±0.04a	8.7±1.4a	9.5±0.7a	9.5±0.7a	48.9±6.3a	47.7±3.7a	47.6±5.3a
9月下		0.26±0.00a	0.19±0.04a		9.4±0.1a	9.1±1.5a		43.8±4.3a	42.4±3.6a
平均	0.21±0.02a	0.23±0.03a	0.25±0.02a	9.1±0.8a	9.2±0.4a	9.6±0.1a	49.5±0.8a	48.0±2.6a	48.7±1.7a

	单片叶面积	叶柄粗	SPAD值	心皮数	结实率	单粒重
单片叶面积	1
叶柄粗	0.860^**	1
SPAD值	0.248^**	0.177^**	1
心皮数	0.381^**	0.334^**	0.164^**	1
结实率	-0.201^**	-0.163^**	-0.148^*	-0.206^**	1
单粒重	0.127^*	0.073	0.082	-0.016	-0.269^**	1