Tobacco and Green Manure Interplanting in Cold Region: Effect on Growth and Economic Characteristics of Flue-cured Tobacco

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb18110066

Abstract

Abstract:

This study aims to develop low-carbon tobacco agriculture and construct resource-conserving and environment-friendly agriculture, thus to promote the development of tobacco leaf with special characteristics and the sustainable development of the tobacco leaf industry. Based on interplanting of tobacco with green manure (Medicago sativa, Melilotus officinalis, Lolium perenne, Triticum aestivum), the effect of interplanting with different green manures combined with the reduction of nitrogen fertilizer on the growth of flue-cured tobacco in field and the economic characteristics of post-flue-cured tobacco leaves was studied by using fixed-point trial. Results showed that interplanting with green manure in tobacco-growing field could significantly regulate the growth and development of tobacco plants, and contribute to accumulation of dry matter, and improve photosynthetic characteristic and economic benefit of flue-cured tobacco. For the agronomic traits and accumulation of dry matter of tobacco plants, the growth of tobacco plants interplanted with Medicago sativa+ 30%-reduction of nitrogen fertilizer treatment (Y3) was better than that of tobacco plants treated by conventional fertilization without reduction of nitrogen fertilizer (Y5). Likewise, treatment Y3 was better than treatment Y1, Y2 and Y4 in which tobacco plants were interplanted with Lolium perenne, Melilotus officinalis, and Triticum aestivum, respectively. Compared with treatment Y5, the maximum leaf length, maximum leaf width, maximum leaf area and accumulation of dry matter of treatment Y3 increased by 11.67%, 12.95%, 26.25% and 22.05%, respectively. Compared with treatment Y5, the SPAD value and photosynthetic characteristic of the tobacco plants interplanted with different green manures were improved to a certain degree, and interplanting green manure+ 30%-reduction of nitrogen fertilizer would not affect normal maturity and yellowing time of tobacco plants. At the same time, interplanting with green manure+ 30%-reduction of nitrogen fertilizer could significantly improve the relevant indexes of economic benefit of post-flue-cured tobacco leaves. The improving effect of the percentage of superior tobacco leaves of treatment Y1 was the best, and the improving effect of the percentage of medium and superior tobacco leaves, average price, yield and output value of flue-cured tobacco of treatment Y3 was the best. Compared with treatment Y5, the percentage of superior tobacco leaves of treatment Y1 increased by 9.86 percentage points. The percentage of medium and superior tobacco leaves, average price, yield and output value of treatment Y3 increased by 7.88 percentage points, 1.9 yuan/kg, 99.15 kg/hm ² and 7584.91 yuan/hm ², respectively. In general, Medicago sativa is the best green manure for soil fertility improvement in Heilongjiang.

Key words: soil environment, green manure, flue-cured tobacco, growth and development, photosynthetic characteristics, economic characteristics

CLC Number:

S311

He Guoqiang, Wang Panpan, Gao Yuan, Lu Xiaohua, Cao Yafan, Zhao Dongxue, Wang Jingying. Tobacco and Green Manure Interplanting in Cold Region: Effect on Growth and Economic Characteristics of Flue-cured Tobacco[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(7): 37-43.

Figures/Tables 5

References 26

[1]	潘义宏, 王涛, 张晓龙 , 等. 植烟土壤化学性状对烟草质量影响的研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2012(19):10105-10108.
[2]	李子双, 廉晓娟, 王薇 , 等. 我国绿肥的研究进展[J]. 草业科学, 2013(7):1135-1140.
[3]	景春梅, 刘慧, 席琳乔 , 等. 优质牧草、绿肥草木樨的研究进展[J]. 草业科学, 2014(12):2308-2315.
[4]	姜新有, 周江明 . 不同绿肥养分积累特点及地力培肥效果研究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2012(1):45-47.
[5]	徐祥玉, 孟贵星, 袁家富 , 等. 翻压绿肥对植烟土壤活性有机质和土壤酶的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2011(S1):103-107.
[6]	颜志雷, 方宇, 陈济琛 , 等. 连年翻压紫云英对稻田土壤养分和微生物学特性的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2014(5):1151-1160.
[7]	黄平娜, 秦道珠, 龙怀玉 , 等. 绿肥还田对烟田土壤培肥和烤烟产量品质的作用[J]. 土壤通报, 2010,41(2):379-382.
[8]	周孚美, 唐红丽, 谷云松 , 等. 绿肥还田对植烟土壤·烟叶产质量的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2015(21):87-88.
[9]	胡卫东, 袁芳, 靳志丽 , 等. 绿肥对烤烟产质量影响的研究[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2009(4):70-72.
[10]	林黎 . 绿肥与无机肥配施对烟田土壤改良及红花大金元品质的影响研究[D]. 北京:中国农业科学院, 2011.
[11]	韩智强, 王勇, 李忠环 , 等. 不同土壤改良措施对烤烟农艺性状的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2010,23(6):1935-1938.
[12]	国家烟草专卖局, 郑州烟草研究院. GB 2635—1992烤烟分级[S]. 北京:国家烟草专卖局, 1992.
[13]	陈蕾, 邓小华, 李海林 . 绿肥还田与减施氮肥对烟叶SPAD值的影响[J]. 作物研究, 2015,29(4):386-389.
[14]	姜桂英, 张弘, 张玉军 , 等. 烟草农艺性状和烟叶化学成分对不同碳氮比有机物料的响应[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2017,35(4):61-66.
[15]	李正 . 绿肥对植烟土壤培肥改良效应及烤烟产质量的影响[D]. 郑州:河南农业大学, 2010.
[16]	储刘专, 黄树立, 孔伟 , 等. 绿肥翻压利用对干早年份烤烟生长发育的促进作用[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2011,30(3):337-341.
[17]	刘国顺, 李正, 敬海霞 , 等. 连年翻压绿肥对植烟土壤微生物量及酶活性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2011,20(3):225-232.
[18]	李正, 刘国顺, 敬海霞 , 等. 绿肥与化肥配施对植烟土壤微生物量及供氮能力的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2011,20(6):126-134.
[19]	邓小华, 罗伟, 周米良 , 等. 绿肥在湘西烟田中的腐解和养分释放动态[J]. 烟草科技, 2015(6):13-18.
[20]	陈治锋, 邓小华, 周米良 , 等. 秸秆和绿肥还田对烤烟光合生理指标及经济性状的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2017,31(2):410-415.
[21]	周晓, 朱旭, 阚宏伟 , 等. 配施不同比例有机肥对烤烟光合作用及产质量的影响[J]. 广西农业科学, 2009,40(5):517-520.
[22]	敬海霞, 曹安全, 张登荣 , 等. 翻压绿肥对烤烟大田生长及烤后烟产值效益的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2013,29(1):155-159.
[23]	覃勇, 杨丽丽, 邓小华 , 等. 绿肥还田量对烤烟生长发育和产质量的影响[J]. 天津农业科学, 2015,21(2):119-122.
[24]	周米良, 邓小华, 田峰 , 等. 玉米秸秆促腐还田的腐解及对烤烟生长与产质量的影响[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2016,22(2):67-74.
[25]	曹海莲, 田峰, 蔡云帆 , 等. 不同植烟土壤改良模式对烤烟产质量的影响[J]. 作物研究, 2015(6):613-616.
[26]	王冬梅 . 豆科和禾本科牧草不同生长期C、N生态化学计量学特征研究[D]. 兰州:兰州大学, 2012.

处理	着生叶数/片	茎围/cm	株高/cm	最大叶长/cm	最大叶宽/cm	最大叶面积/cm²
CK	21.43±1.51c	6.64±0.18d	66.74±6.94d	46.58±3.08c	18.78±1.63d	556.43±73.00c
Y1	22.00±1.41bc	7.16±0.5c	113.93±7.84c	51.92±2.12b	21.08±1.71bc	695.54±75.85b
Y2	23.86±1.07a	7.76±0.41a	121.13±6.03bc	55.22±2.83a	22.87±1.56ab	801.84±78.48a
Y3	23.00±1.29ab	7.67±0.48ab	131.14±10.04a	57.62±3.89a	23.55±1.36a	861.94±90.48a
Y4	21.57±0.98c	7.01±0.34cd	121.64±8.98bc	51.05±1.83b	19.72±1.45cd	639.84±67.14bc
Y5	24.29±0.95a	7.30±0.42bc	126.83±7.02ab	51.60±1.41b	20.85±1.40c	682.72±51.31b

处理	着生叶数/片	茎围/cm	株高/cm	最大叶长/cm	最大叶宽/cm	最大叶面积/cm²
CK	21.43±1.51c	6.64±0.18d	66.74±6.94d	46.58±3.08c	18.78±1.63d	556.43±73.00c
Y1	22.00±1.41bc	7.16±0.5c	113.93±7.84c	51.92±2.12b	21.08±1.71bc	695.54±75.85b
Y2	23.86±1.07a	7.76±0.41a	121.13±6.03bc	55.22±2.83a	22.87±1.56ab	801.84±78.48a
Y3	23.00±1.29ab	7.67±0.48ab	131.14±10.04a	57.62±3.89a	23.55±1.36a	861.94±90.48a
Y4	21.57±0.98c	7.01±0.34cd	121.64±8.98bc	51.05±1.83b	19.72±1.45cd	639.84±67.14bc
Y5	24.29±0.95a	7.30±0.42bc	126.83±7.02ab	51.60±1.41b	20.85±1.40c	682.72±51.31b

处理	根	茎	叶	整株
CK	15.26±1.98c	21.03±1.70d	59.30±2.80d	95.59±2.27d
Y1	20.02±1.89b	28.14±2.96bc	80.84±5.72ab	129.00±10.49bc
Y2	22.55±2.21ab	33.11±2.16ab	77.59±3.60bc	133.24±4.03b
Y3	24.54±2.08a	35.62±3.61a	89.24±8.97a	149.40±9.24a
Y4	22.27±1.29ab	25.72±2.33cd	70.50±3.14c	118.49±6.19c
Y5	22.31±1.93ab	29.07±3.45bc	71.03±3.74c	122.41±5.70bc

处理	根	茎	叶	整株
CK	15.26±1.98c	21.03±1.70d	59.30±2.80d	95.59±2.27d
Y1	20.02±1.89b	28.14±2.96bc	80.84±5.72ab	129.00±10.49bc
Y2	22.55±2.21ab	33.11±2.16ab	77.59±3.60bc	133.24±4.03b
Y3	24.54±2.08a	35.62±3.61a	89.24±8.97a	149.40±9.24a
Y4	22.27±1.29ab	25.72±2.33cd	70.50±3.14c	118.49±6.19c
Y5	22.31±1.93ab	29.07±3.45bc	71.03±3.74c	122.41±5.70bc

处理	净光合速率(Pn)/ [(μmol/(m²·s)]	蒸腾速率(Tr)/ [mmol/(m²·s)]	气孔导度(Gs)/ [mmol/(m²·s)]	胞间CO₂浓度(Ci)/ (μmol/m²)	水分利用率/ [μmol CO₂/mmolH₂O]
CK	31.39±4.33c	10.55±1.28a	485.40±160.17a	256.08±17.47a	2.99±0.33b
Y1	32.96±5.85bc	11.86±0.80a	507.61±71.14a	255.88±20.95a	2.79±0.52b
Y2	40.76±3.11a	10.64±2.14a	662.93±171.82a	274.28±39.72a	3.97±0.92a
Y3	39.37±3.77a	12.18±0.89a	588.51±124.82a	261.90±23.48a	3.26±0.52ab
Y4	38.70±4.49ab	12.29±1.07a	563.32±119.87a	251.42±21.61a	3.19±0.60ab
Y5	36.16±6.73abc	10.76±1.94a	463.00±116.01a	242.72±28.69a	3.44±0.79ab