Nitrogen Nutrition: Effects on Nutritional Function Characteristics and Grain Yield of Hulless Barley

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb19010020

Abstract

Abstract:

To confirm the key nutritional function characteristics affecting the productivity of hulless barley under different nitrogen conditions, taking ‘Zangqing2000’ as the test material, we studied the effects of nitrogen levels on nutritional function characteristics and grain yield. The results showed that: compared with the nitrogen-free treatment, nitrogen application could increase the grain yield, plant height (PH), relative growth rate (RGR) and specific leaf area (SLA) significantly, but decrease the root mass per unit leaf area (RPL) and leaf dry matter content (LDMC); nitrogen application level had a positive correlation with PH, RGR and SLA, and a negative correlation with RPL and LDMC; the grain yield of hulless barley continued to increase, but the growth rate of grain yield decreased with the increase of nitrogen application, so that there was a quadratic curve relationship between grain yield and nitrogen level (y=-171.25x ²+1327.3x+10, R ²=0.958, P小于0.05); meanwhile, there was a significantly positive linear relationship between grain yield and PH (y=43.026x-2596.6, R ²=0.8994, P小于0.05), RGR (y=7178.7x-150.66, R ²=0.5361, P小于0.05), SLA (y=6.4604x+413.3, R ²=0.4153, P小于0.05), but a negative linear relationship between grain yield and LDMC (y=-29.668x+4045.7, R ²=0.4488, P小于0.05), and the grain yield had non-significant correlation with RPL (y=-2025.4x+2746.4, R ²=0.0579, P大于0.05). Those results prove that: the grain yield is promoted by PH, RGR and SLA, and inhibited by LDMC, and has non-significant correlation with RPL. So, the nutritional function characteristics (PH, RGR, SLA and LDMC) could be considered marker features affecting the productivity of hulless barley at the species level.

Key words: nitrogen nutrition, hulless barley, nutritional function characteristics, grain yield

CLC Number:

Wei Bin, Ma Zhanqin. Nitrogen Nutrition: Effects on Nutritional Function Characteristics and Grain Yield of Hulless Barley[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(12): 26-32.

Figures/Tables 5

References 21

[1]	Sun L J, Lu W, Zhang J , et al. Investigation of barley germplasm in China[J]. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 1999,46(4):361-369. doi: 10.1023/A:1008606613602 URL
[2]	Diaz S, Lavorel S, Mcintyre S , et al. plant traits responses to grazing a global synjournal[J]. Global Change Biology, 2006,12(13):1-5. doi: 10.1111/gcb.2006.12.issue-1 URL
[3]	Lavorel S, Garnier E . Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits: revisiting the Holy Grail[J]. Functional Ecology, 2002,16(5):545-556. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00664.x URL
[4]	江小雷, 李伟绮, 张卫国 . 植物功能特征与生产力的关系[J]. 兰州大学学报:自然科学版, 2009,45(4):37-41.
[5]	谭大明, 谭海运, 刘国一 , 等. 西藏不同黑青稞品种的农艺性状和营养品质分析[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2018,38(2):142-147.
[6]	孙全平, 刘国一, 唐亚伟 , 等. 种植密度、播期和施肥对西藏不同青稞品种籽粒灌浆特性影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016,32(21):67-74.
[7]	徐菲, 党斌, 杨希娟 , 等. 不同青稞品种的营养品质评价[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2016,36(9):1249-1257.
[8]	Hunt R. Plant Growth Analysis[M]. London: Academic Press, 1997.
[9]	Cornelissen J H C, Lavorel S, Garnier E , et al. A handbook of protocols for standardized and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide (review)[J]. Australian Journal of Botany, 2003,51(4):335-380. doi: 10.1071/BT02124 URL
[10]	Garnier E, Shipley B, Roumet C , et al. standardized protocol for the determination of specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content[J]. Functional Ecology, 2001,15(5):688-695. doi: 10.1046/j.0269-8463.2001.00563.x URL
[11]	赵智勇, 李秀绒, 柴永峰 , 等. 播期、播量和氮肥对强筋小麦‘运旱618’产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016,32(21):28-31.
[12]	Westoby M . A leaf height seed (LHS) plant ecology strategy scheme[J]. Plant and Soil, 1998,199(2):213-227. doi: 10.1023/A:1004327224729 URL
[13]	Westoby M, Falster D S, Moles A T , et al. Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species[J]. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 2002,33(1):125-159.
[14]	Eviner V T, Chapin F S . Functional matrix: a onceptual framework for predicting multiple plant effects on ecosystem processes[J]. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 2003,34(3):455-485. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132342 URL
[15]	Chapin F S III, Autumn K, Pugnaire F . Evolution of suites of traits inresponse to environmental stress[J]. The American Naturalist, 1993,142(Suppl):78-92.
[16]	Vile D, Shipley B, Garnier E . Ecosystem productivity can be predicted from potential relative growth rate and species abundance[J]. Ecology Letters, 2006,9(9):1061-1067. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00958.x URL pmid: 16925655
[17]	Vendramini F, diaz S, Gurvich D E , et al. Leaf traits as indicators of resource use strategy in floras with succulent species[J]. New Phytologist, 2002,154(1):147-157. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2002.00357.x URL
[18]	Pontes L D, Soussana J F, Louault F , et al. Leaf traits affect the aboveground productivity and quality of pasture grasses[J]. Functional Ecology, 2007,21(5):844-853. doi: 10.1111/fec.2007.21.issue-5 URL
[19]	Reich P B, Walters M B, Ellsworth D S . Leaf life-span in relation to leaf, plant, and stand characteristics among diverse ecosystems[J]. Ecological Monographs, 1992,62(3):365-392. doi: 10.2307/2937116 URL
[20]	Garnier E, Cortez J, Billes G , et al. Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession[J]. Ecology, 2004,85(9):2630-2637. doi: 10.1890/03-0799 URL
[21]	Cornelissen J H C, Perez H N, Diaz S . Leaf structure and defence control litter decomposition rate across species and life forms in regional floras on two continents[J]. New Phytologist, 1999,143(1):191-200. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.1999.00430.x URL

试验地点	土壤类型	pH	养分含量
试验地点	土壤类型	pH	有机质/(g/kg)	全氮/(g/kg)	全磷/(g/kg)	全钾/(g/kg)	碱解氮/(mg/kg)	速效磷/(mg/kg)	速效钾/(mg/kg)
四川省阿坝县	砂壤土	7.8	15.91	0.93	0.67	11.26	67.16	24.36	103.48

试验地点	土壤类型	pH	养分含量
试验地点	土壤类型	pH	有机质/(g/kg)	全氮/(g/kg)	全磷/(g/kg)	全钾/(g/kg)	碱解氮/(mg/kg)	速效磷/(mg/kg)	速效钾/(mg/kg)
四川省阿坝县	砂壤土	7.8	15.91	0.93	0.67	11.26	67.16	24.36	103.48

施肥水平	试验小区	处理	M/(kg/hm²)	N/(kg/hm²)	P/(kg/hm²)	K/(kg/hm²)
0	无氮区	MN₀P₂K₂	15000	0	90	120
1	70%优化氮区	MN₁P₂K₂	15000	140	90	120
2	优化氮区	MN₂P₂K₂	15000	200	90	120
3	130%优化氮区	MN₃P₂K₂	15000	260	90	120

施肥水平	试验小区	处理	M/(kg/hm²)	N/(kg/hm²)	P/(kg/hm²)	K/(kg/hm²)
0	无氮区	MN₀P₂K₂	15000	0	90	120
1	70%优化氮区	MN₁P₂K₂	15000	140	90	120
2	优化氮区	MN₂P₂K₂	15000	200	90	120
3	130%优化氮区	MN₃P₂K₂	15000	260	90	120