Effects of Nitrogen Reduction Combined with Biostimulants on Nitrogen Absorption and Glycoside Content in Stevia Rebaudiana

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0722

Abstract

Abstract:

The study was conducted to investigate the effects of reduced nitrogen fertilization combined with the biostimulants of fulvic acid and chitosan on the growth and development, glycoside content, and nitrogen uptake of Stevia rebaudiana, aiming to provide a theoretical basis for optimizing fertilization practices and enhancing quality and efficiency in Stevia production. Stevia rebaudiana was used as the test material, and four nitrogen fertilization levels were set, including conventional nitrogen application (300 kg/hm²), 20% nitrogen reduction (240 kg/hm²), 40% nitrogen reduction (180 kg/hm²) and no nitrogen application (0 kg/hm²). These were supplemented with either the fulvic acid (F) or chitosan (C), with an equal amount of water (W) serving as the control. The impacts on Stevia rebaudiana growth characteristics, leaf enzyme activities, glycoside content, and nitrogen uptake were analyzed. The results showed that nitrogen application, as well as the combination with fulvic acid and chitosan, promoted Stevia rebaudiana growth, relative chlorophyll content, and nitrogen uptake. Specifically, the treatment with 20% nitrogen reduction supplemented with fulvic acid (N_0.8F) resulted in a plant height of 97.0 cm, stem diameter of 9.19 mm, and leaf mass per plant of 18.70 g, which were approximately 12.30%, 13.05% and 9.76% higher than other treatments, respectively. Nitrogen uptake in both leaves and stems was higher than in other treatments. The average contents of rebaudioside A (RA) in the treatments supplemented with fulvic acid, chitosan, and the control were 10.93%, 10.13% and 10.80%, respectively; the average contents of stevioside (Stv) were 1.04%, 1.01% and 1.18%, respectively; and the average total glycoside contents were 13.62%, 13.38% and 13.38%, respectively. Among treatments supplemented with the same biostimulant, as nitrogen application decreased, the contents of superoxide dismutase (SOD) and peroxidase (POD) tended to decrease, with fulvic acid showing better effects than chitosan. In the chitosan-supplemented treatments, the 40% nitrogen reduction treatment (N_0.6C) increased plant height, stem diameter, and leaf mass per plant by 11.92%, 9.57%, and 8.66%, respectively, compared to other nitrogen levels, and increased SOD and POD contents by 9.12% and 7.81%, respectively. A comprehensive analysis of the effects of reduced nitrogen fertilization combined with biostimulants on Stevia rebaudiana revealed that the treatment with 20% nitrogen reduction supplemented with fulvic acid (N_0.8F) effectively promoted Stevia rebaudiana growth, enhanced leaf enzyme activity, increased the content of RA in leaves, decreased the content of Stv, and improved the ratio of RA to total glycosides, thereby enhancing Stevia rebaudiana quality. Additionally, a 20% reduction in nitrogen fertilization improved plant nitrogen uptake and nitrogen use efficiency.

Key words: Stevia rebaudiana, nitrogen reduction, biostimulant, fulvic acid, chitosan, glycoside content, nitrogen absorption

ZHAO Xi, SU Cuicui, XIE Zhongqing. Effects of Nitrogen Reduction Combined with Biostimulants on Nitrogen Absorption and Glycoside Content in Stevia Rebaudiana[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(11): 107-116.

Figures/Tables 9

References 51

[1]	PARKER K J A. The search for an ideal non-nutritive sweetener is almost a century old natives to sugar[J]. Nature, 1978(271):493-495.
[2]	舒世珍, 陈睦传. 中国甜叶菊栽培及应用技术[M]. 北京: 农业出版社,1994.
[3]	殷学云. 河西冷凉灌区甜叶菊扦插育苗及根蘖繁殖技术[J]. 中国糖料, 2011(1):51-54.
[4]	张福锁, 王激清, 张卫峰, 等. 中国主要粮食作物肥料利用率现状与提高途径[J]. 土壤学报, 2008, 45(5):915-924.
[5]	张玉铭, 胡春胜, 张佳宝, 等. 农田土壤主要温室气体(CO₂、CH₄、N₂O)的源/汇强度及其温室效应研究进展[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2011, 19(4):966-975.
[6]	李晶, 王明星, 王跃思, 等. 农田生态系统温室气体排放研究进展[J]. 大气科学, 2003, 27(4):740-749.
[7]	GUO J H, LIU X J, ZHANG Y, et al. Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands[J]. Science, 2010, 327(5968):1008-1010. doi: 10.1126/science.1182570 pmid: 20150447
[8]	陈效民, 潘根兴, 沈其荣, 等. 太湖地区农田土壤中硝态氮垂直运移的规律[J]. 中国环境科学, 2001, 21(6):481-484.
[9]	谢尚强, 王文霞, 张付云, 等. 植物生物刺激素研究进展[J]. 中国生物防治学报, 2019, 35(3):487-496. doi: 10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2019.03.017
[10]	NARDI S, MUSCOLO A. Relationship between molecular characteristics of soil humic fractions and glycolytic pathway and krebs cycle in maize seedlings[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2007(39):3138-3146.
[11]	陈玉玲, 曹敏, 李云荫, 等. 干旱条件下黄腐酸对冬小麦幼苗中内源ABA和IAA水平以及SOD和POD活性的影响(简报)[J]. 植物生理学通讯, 2000(4):311-314.
[12]	冯世鑫, 闫志刚. 黄腐酸钾型桐麸菌肥对广西甜茶的生长光合特性和品质的影响[J]. 腐植酸, 2021(2):62.
[13]	邱孟柯, 回振龙, 黄晓鹏, 等. 黄腐酸对雾培马铃薯幼苗抗旱性的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2013, 31(3):155-161.
[14]	TAVARINI S, ANGELINI L G. Stevia rebaudiana bertoni as a source of bioactive compounds:The effeect of harshest time,experimental site and crop age on Steviol glycoside content and antioxidant properties[J]. Journal science food agriculture, 2013, 93(9):2121-2129.
[15]	张桂荣, 张亚宏, 武军艳, 等. 旱作冬油菜越冬期生理特性与抗旱性的关系[J]. 甘肃农业科技, 2022, 53(3):71-77.
[16]	刘祖祺, 张石城. 植物抗性生理学[M]. 北京: 农业出版社,1994.
[17]	张志良, 瞿伟菁. 植物生理学实验指导[M]. 北京: 中国高等教育出版社, 2003.
[18]	唐桃霞, 王致和, 张秀华, 等. 不同品种(系)甜叶菊产量·光合生理和糖苷含量的相关性分析[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2019, 47(21):53-57.
[19]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2013.
[20]	刘曙光, 段佩玲, 张利霞, 等. 氮素形态对‘凤丹’表型性状、光合及产量的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 43(4):161-168. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201810010
[21]	LAWLOR D W, LEMAIRE G, GASTAL F. Nitrogen,plant growth and crop yield[M]//LEAPJ,MOROT-GAUDRY J-F.Plant Nitrogen.Berlin: Springer-Verlag,2001:343-367.
[22]	SUN M, SUN G, MA H L, et al. Effects of amino acid foliar fertilizer on the yield and quality of different vegetables[J]. Agricultural science & technology, 2018, 19(6):10-15.
[23]	毛志强, 辛雪成, 周繁, 等. 叶面喷施几丁寡糖对辣椒的生长发育和品质的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019(5):170-178.
[24]	涂海华, 周坚, 毛宇, 等. 天然海藻肥对“夏黑”葡萄植株生长及果实品质的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019(4):213-217.
[25]	沈欣, 李燕婷, 袁亮, 等. 氨基酸与锌配合喷施提高小白菜生物量、品质及锌利用效率[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(1):181-188.
[26]	赵吉莹, 吴震, 侯喜林, 等. 生物刺激素在不结球白菜氮肥减施增效中的效果评价[J]. 上海农业学报, 2021, 37(6):43-52.
[27]	王金刚, 姜艳, 田甜, 等. 减氮配施生物刺激素对棉花产量及氮肥吸收利用的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(3):209-223. doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.wjgwhj.20210331
[28]	张萌欣, 薛胜平, 王晓环, 等. 黄腐酸应用概述及研究课题展望[J]. 腐植酸, 2020(5):15-19,26.
[29]	陈俊杰, 李艳梅, 杨俊刚, 等. 叶施生物刺激剂与减量灌溉对芹菜生长、产量及灌溉水利用效率的影响[J]. 节水灌溉, 2024(10):1-7. doi: 10.12396/jsgg.2024141
[30]	BORCIONI E, MÓGOR Á F, PINTO F. Influence of the application of fulvic acid on seedling root growth and yield in lettuce[J]. Revista Ciência Agronômica, 2016,47:509-515.
[31]	韦娜. 叶面喷施黄腐酸对粮饲兼用型燕麦产量、品质及饲用价值的影响[D]. 黑龙江八一农垦大学, 2023.
[32]	聂佩显, 李明丽, 刘霞, 等. 果实膨大期外源黄腐酸处理对苹果叶片光合产物合成与分配特性的影响[J]. 中国果树, 2024(2):12-17.
[33]	高原, 郭晓青, 李福德, 等. 基施黄腐酸肥料情况下减施化肥提高设施辣椒产量和品质[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(3):594-602.
[34]	卢林纲. 黄腐酸及其在农业上的应用[J]. 现代化农业, 2001(5):9-10.
[35]	VAUGHAN D, MALCOLM R E. Influence of humic substances on biochemical processes in plants[J]. Soil organic matter and biological activity,1985:77-108.
[36]	CANELLAS L P, OLIVARES F L, OKOROKOVA-FACANHAA L, et al. Humic acids isolated from earthworm compost enhance root elongation,lateral root emergence,and plasma membrane H⁺-ATPase activity in maize roots[J]. Plant physiology, 2002, 130(4):1951-1957.
[37]	杨金铭, 崔岱宗. 黄腐酸对植物生长的促进作用及其在农业生产中的应用[J]. 智慧农业导刊, 2024(14):64-67.
[38]	张昭会, 李放, 朱琳, 等. 矿源黄腐酸钾施用方法对大豆产量的影响[J]. 腐植酸, 2020(3):53.
[39]	李泽丽, 刘之广, 张民, 等. 控释尿素配施黄腐酸对小麦产量及土壤养分供应的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24(4):959-968.
[40]	武玥. 外源5-氨基乙酰丙酸(ALA)缓解黄瓜幼苗盐胁迫的效果及机理研究[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2018.
[41]	张运红, 和爱玲, 杨占平, 等. 海藻酸钠寡糖灌根处理对小麦光合特性、干物质积累和产量的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2018, 30(11):1-5.
[42]	王玉琪, 张泽锦, 梁颖, 等. 不同肥力条件下添加黄腐酸对土壤细菌多样性、甘蓝养分吸收及产量的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024(5):96-102.
[43]	姚东伟. 黄腐酸对番茄生长、产量及光合特性的影响[D]. 太原: 山西农业大学, 2003.
[44]	胡小军, 樊成, 龚毅, 等. 喷施生化黄腐酸制剂对苹果产量、品质及果树生长的影响[J]. 腐植酸, 2007(3):37-40.
[45]	WADAS W, DZIUGIEŁ T. Quality of new potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) in response to plant biostimulants application[J]. Agriculture, 2020, 10(7): 265-277.
[46]	包亚英, 胡秀英, 郝雨杉, 等. 不同施肥处理对甜菊生长及糖苷含量和积累量的影响[J]. 植物资源与环境学报, 2016, 25(1):71-80.
[47]	MAGANGANA T P, STANDER M A, MAKUNGA N P. Effect of nitrogen and phosphate on in vitro growth and metabolite profiles of Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni[J]. Plant cell, tissue and organ culture, 2018,134:141-151.
[48]	徐新娟, 张亚姣, 娄笛. 甜叶菊施肥与生长调节剂应用研究进展[J]. 北方园艺, 2020(24):129-136.
[49]	曹艳霞, 刘海河, 张彦萍, 等. 壳聚糖对甜瓜生理代谢及果实品质的影响[J]. 河北农业大学学报, 2024, 47(4):57-64. doi: 10.13320/j.cnki.jauh.2024.0054
[50]	张皓然, 范中菡, 李红春, 等. 壳聚糖对葡萄幼苗生理生态的影响[J]. 陕西农业科学, 2022, 68(8):18-23.
[51]	徐雅欣, 杨丽, 赵倩, 等. 壳聚糖及微生物菌剂对枇杷幼苗光合及抗性生理的影响[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2022(12):33-37.

处理	氮素水平/(kg/hm²)	黄腐酸/(g/kg)	壳聚糖/(g/kg)
N₀W	0	0	0
N_0.6W	180	0	0
N_0.8W	240	0	0
N₁W	300	0	0
N₀ F	0	650	0
N_0.6F	180	650	0
N_0.8F	240	650	0
N₁F	300	650	0
N₀C	0	0	542
N_0.6C	180	0	542
N_0.8C	240	0	542
N₁C	300	0	542

处理	氮素水平/(kg/hm²)	黄腐酸/(g/kg)	壳聚糖/(g/kg)
N₀W	0	0	0
N_0.6W	180	0	0
N_0.8W	240	0	0
N₁W	300	0	0
N₀ F	0	650	0
N_0.6F	180	650	0
N_0.8F	240	650	0
N₁F	300	650	0
N₀C	0	0	542
N_0.6C	180	0	542
N_0.8C	240	0	542
N₁C	300	0	542

处理		7月14日	7月31日	8月25日	9月22日
N₀W		38.6 e	43.7 e	48.9 e	42.6 f
N_0.6 W		42.7 cde	48.6 cde	54.4 d	46.6 def
N_0.8 W		47.6 ab	52.2 bcd	58.0 cd	48.0 cde
N₁ W		46.3 bcd	54.8 ab	59.3 bc	50.2 bcd
N₀F		41.5 e	47.6 de	49.5 e	44.7 ef
N_0.6F		46.1 bcd	53.0 bc	58.0 cd	50.7 bcd
N_0.8F		52.2 a	60.1 a	65.5 a	55.8 a
N₁F		48.2 ab	56.6 ab	60.5 bc	52.5 abc
N₀C		42.0 de	46.1 e	49.7 e	43.7 ef
N_0.6C		49.7 ab	57.6 ab	62.6 ab	54.8 ab
N0.8C		47.2 bc	55.0 ab	59.0 bc	51.9 abc
N1C		48.1 ab	56.6 ab	59.5 bc	51.8 abc
F值	N	^**	^**	^**	^**
	生物刺激素	^*	^**	^**	^**
	N×生物刺激素	ns	ns	^**	^*

处理		7月14日	7月31日	8月25日	9月22日
N₀W		38.6 e	43.7 e	48.9 e	42.6 f
N_0.6 W		42.7 cde	48.6 cde	54.4 d	46.6 def
N_0.8 W		47.6 ab	52.2 bcd	58.0 cd	48.0 cde
N₁ W		46.3 bcd	54.8 ab	59.3 bc	50.2 bcd
N₀F		41.5 e	47.6 de	49.5 e	44.7 ef
N_0.6F		46.1 bcd	53.0 bc	58.0 cd	50.7 bcd
N_0.8F		52.2 a	60.1 a	65.5 a	55.8 a
N₁F		48.2 ab	56.6 ab	60.5 bc	52.5 abc
N₀C		42.0 de	46.1 e	49.7 e	43.7 ef
N_0.6C		49.7 ab	57.6 ab	62.6 ab	54.8 ab
N0.8C		47.2 bc	55.0 ab	59.0 bc	51.9 abc
N1C		48.1 ab	56.6 ab	59.5 bc	51.8 abc
F值	N	^**	^**	^**	^**
	生物刺激素	^*	^**	^**	^**
	N×生物刺激素	ns	ns	^**	^*

处理		SOD活性/(U/g)	POD活性/(U/g)	可溶性糖含量/(mg/kg)	可溶性蛋白/(mg/kg)
N₀W		247.85±11.29 e	4978.61±66.54 f	20.69±0.63 cd	23.05±0.01 e
N_0.6W		268.31±13.56 de	5218.47±39.58 e	20.33±0.48 d	23.07±0.01 e
N_0.8W		278.03±10.93 cde	5502.22±44.02 d	17.52±0.49 fg	23.08±0.02 e
N₁W		285.11±2.96 bcd	5746.97±49.31 c	16.45±0.23 g	23.16±0.01 cd
N₀F		256.54±8.27 de	5265.09±58.82 e	17.84±0.17 ef	23.14±0.02 d
N_0.6F		306.30±12.69 abc	6391.51±49.51 b	21.81±0.91 c	23.23±0.05 b
N_0.8F		329.37±0.98 a	6750.11±46.96 a	24.15±0.77 ab	23.33±0.03 a
N₁F		318.54±6.91 a	6689.84±82.93 a	24.45±0.44 a	23.22±0.07 b
N₀C		259.84±11.28 de	5213.01±112.70 e	23.01±1.53 b	23.14±0.02 d
N_0.6C		319.32±8.00 a	6339.38±63.65 b	19.03±0.49 e	23.20±0.02 bc
N_0.8C		314.16±6.72 ab	6253.43±107.13 b	16.91±0.31 fg	23.21±0.02 b
N₁C		303.92±17.24 abc	6173.91±76.77 b	16.56±2.92 fg	23.18±0.02 bcd
F值	N	^**	^**	^**	^**
	生物刺激素	^**	^**	^**	^**
	N×生物刺激素	ns	^**	^**	^**