Effects of Different Field Configurations of Soybean and Maize Strip Intercropping on Agronomic Traits and Yield of Soybean

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0870

Abstract

Abstract:

In the banded compound planting pattern of soybean and maize, choosing the suitable field configuration is crucial to improve the soybean yield. In order to further explore the reasonable field configuration of soybean and maize, four types of configurations are set, namely 2M2S, 2M4S, 2M6S, 3M4S (M for corn and S for soybean). Using monoculture soybean (SS) and monoculture corn (SM) as controls, intercropping soybean yield, dry matter accumulation and distribution, and plant morphology were studied. The results showed that the yield of each corn was SM > 2M2S > 2M4S > 3M4S > 2M6S. The yield of intercropping corn was 3.22%-20.23% lower than that of single planting corn. The yield of intercropping soybean was 40.18%-60.5% lower than that of single cropping soybean. The yield of soybean in each configuration from high to low was SS > 2M6S > 2M4S > 3M4S > 2M2S. The yield of soybean in 2M6S configuration increased by 18.88%-51.47% compared with other intercropping configurations. In each intercropping configuration, with the increase of soybean rows, soybean SPAD, leaf area index (LAI) and stem thickness all increased, and the plant height decreased. The leaf SPAD content of 2M6S soybean increased by 0.55% to 7.63% compared with other intercropping configurations. The soybean leaf area index (LAI) of the 2M6S configuration was 9.02%-69.59% higher than that of other intercropping configurations. The soybean stem thickness of the 2M6S configuration was 4.76% to 23.94% higher than that of other intercropping configurations. Compared with monoculture soybean, the plant height increased by 17.52% to 37.50%, and the height of soybean strain in 2M2S configuration was higher than that in other intercropping configurations. The quantitative results of soybean agronomic traits and yields under different configurations of banded compound planting of soybean and maize can provide a basis for screening configurations.

Key words: soybean, corn, compound planting, field configuration, agronomic traits, soybean-maize strip intercropping, yield, dry matter accumulation and partitioning, plant morphology

HE Haochen, WEI Xinru, YANG Wujie, ZHOU Chang'an, WANG Yanling, WANG Mei, YAO Yuan, YANG Jiutao, LI Mingli, HAN Qian, LIU Xin. Effects of Different Field Configurations of Soybean and Maize Strip Intercropping on Agronomic Traits and Yield of Soybean[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(15): 15-22.

Figures/Tables 10

References 26

[1]	REN D D, YANG H, ZHOU L F, et al. The land-water-food-environment nexus in the context of China's soybean import[J]. Advances in water resources, 2021,151:103892.
[2]	李丽娥, 朱晓玲. 我国大豆进口依存度分析及对策[J]. 合作经济与科技, 2023(10):77-80.
[3]	张雅, 文启宇. 中美贸易摩擦下中国大豆产业发展现状与对策研究[J]. 农业经济, 2022(11):128-130.
[4]	杨文钰, 雍太文, 王小春, 等. 玉米-大豆带状复合种植技术体系创建与应用[J]. 中国科技成果, 2020(15):4.
[5]	范元芳, 刘沁林, 王锐, 等. 玉米-大豆带状间作对大豆生长、光合荧光特性及产量的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2017, 31(5):972-978. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2017.05.0972
[6]	罗华, 王杰, 宋勇, 等. 玉米—大豆间套作模式研究现状及其展望[J]. 作物研究, 2020, 34(5):502-506.
[7]	张晓娜, 陈平, 杜青, 等. 玉米/大豆、玉米/花生间作对作物氮素吸收及结瘤固氮的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2019(8):1183-1194.
[8]	王甜, 庞婷, 杜青, 等. 田间配置对间作大豆光合特性、干物质积累及产量的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2020(2):107-116. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20190359
[9]	舒凯, 孟永杰, 帅海威, 等. 四川玉米-大豆带状套作复合群体产量变异及其影响因素分析[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2015(6):832-837. doi: 10.7505/j.issn.1007-9084.2015.06.014
[10]	方萍, 刘卫国, 邹俊林, 等. 间作对鲜食大豆生长发育及产量形成的影响[J]. 大豆科学, 2015(4):601-605.
[11]	曹曼君, 王婧瑜, 崔悦, 等. 不同玉米大豆间作行比对大豆光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 大豆科学, 2023, 42(1):48-54.
[12]	朱星陶, 谭春燕, 陈佳琴, 等. 玉米-大豆间作行距对大豆生长及品质的影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2016, 44(6):22-25,52.
[13]	LIU X, TANZEELUR R, YANG F, et al. PAR Interception and utilization in different maize and soybean intercropping patterns[J]. Plos one, 2017, 12(1):e0169218.
[14]	LIU X, RAHMAN T, SONG C, et al. Relationships among light distribution, radiation use efficiency and land equivalent ratio in maize-soybean strip intercropping[J]. Field crops research, 2018,224:91-101.
[15]	WU Y S, YANG F, GONG W Z, et al. Shade adaptive response and yield analysis of different soybean genotypes in relay intercropping systems[J]. Journal of integrative agriculture, 2017(6):1331-1340.
[16]	王兴才, 杨文钰. 基于间套作弱光胁迫下作物源库协调与产量研究进展[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2019, 41(2):292-299. doi: 10.7505/j.issn.1007-9084.2019.02.019
[17]	程彬, 刘卫国, 王莉, 等. 种植密度对玉米-大豆带状间作下大豆光合、产量及茎秆抗倒的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021(19):4084-4096. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.19.005
[18]	齐思远, 王福林, 兰佳伟. 宽窄行种植模式对大豆生长发育和产量的影响[J]. 大豆科学, 2022, 41(5):557-563.
[19]	李淑贤, 刘卫国, 高阳, 等. 硅对人工荫蔽胁迫下大豆幼苗生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(19):3663-3672. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.19.004
[20]	CHENG B, RAZA A, WANG L, et al. Effects of multiple planting densities on lignin metabolism and lodging resistance of the strip intercropped soybean stem[J]. Agronomy, 2020, 10(8):1177.
[21]	CHEN X F, SUN N, GU Y, et al. Photosynthetic and Chlorophyll fluorescence responses in maize and soybean strip intercropping system[J]. International journal of agriculture & biology, 2020, 24(4):799-811.
[22]	崔文芳, 秦德志, 陈静, 等. 玉米大豆不同间作系统光合特性与产量边际效应[J]. 农业机械学报, 2023, 54(8):309-319.
[23]	RAZA M A, FENG L Y, WERF W, et al. Optimum strip width increases dry matter, nutrient accumulation, and seed yield of intercrops under the relay intercropping system[J]. Food and energy security, 2020, 9(2):e199.
[24]	朱元刚, 高凤菊. 不同间作模式对鲁西北地区玉米-大豆群体光合物质生产特征的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2016, 30(8):1646-1655. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2016.08.1646
[25]	刘鑫. 玉豆带状间作系统光能分布、截获与利用研究[D]. 雅安: 四川农业大学, 2016.
[26]	任媛媛, 张莉, 郁耀闯, 等. 大豆种植密度对玉米/大豆间作系统产量形成的竞争效应分析[J]. 作物学报, 2021(10):1978-1987. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04226

配置	行比（玉米:大豆）	带宽/cm	玉米行距/cm	玉米带与大豆带间距/cm	大豆行距/cm	玉米带间距/cm	玉米株距/ cm	大豆株距/cm	玉米密度/ （万株/hm²）	大豆密度/ （万株/hm²）
2M2S	2:02	200	40	60	40	160	15	7	6.6	14.4
2M4S	2:04	280	40	60	40	240	11	10	6.6	14.4
2M6S	2:06	360	40	60	40	320	8	12	6.6	14.4
3M4S	3:04	350	50	65	40	250	12(SR)；15(IR)	10	6.6	11.4
SS	-	-	-	-	50	-	-	11	-	18
SM	-	-	70	-	-	-	20	-	-6.6	-

配置	行比（玉米:大豆）	带宽/cm	玉米行距/cm	玉米带与大豆带间距/cm	大豆行距/cm	玉米带间距/cm	玉米株距/ cm	大豆株距/cm	玉米密度/ （万株/hm²）	大豆密度/ （万株/hm²）
2M2S	2:02	200	40	60	40	160	15	7	6.6	14.4
2M4S	2:04	280	40	60	40	240	11	10	6.6	14.4
2M6S	2:06	360	40	60	40	320	8	12	6.6	14.4
3M4S	3:04	350	50	65	40	250	12(SR)；15(IR)	10	6.6	11.4
SS	-	-	-	-	50	-	-	11	-	18
SM	-	-	70	-	-	-	20	-	-6.6	-

配置	R5期			R7期
配置	茎	叶	荚	茎	叶	荚
2M2S	12.54±2.49c	7.90±2.79c	4.41±1.50c	9.63±1.11c	6.82±1.34ab	10.71±0.67d
2M4S	21.08±6.52b	11.20±2.36bc	10.41±4.31b	16.45±2.68b	5.64±0.56b	26.41±0.04c
2M6S	26.30±2.39b	14.65±1.42b	11.28±2.15b	22.94±3.12b	5.45±1.65b	37.51±4.38b
3M4S	20.01±2.55b	11.24±1.51bc	11.10±3.02b	21.28±2.53b	4.74±1.25b	29.52±1.68c
SS	34.47±1.32a	22.68±3.15a	20.31±2.50a	37.87±3.20a	9.21±2.22a	48.10±2.09a

配置	R5期			R7期
配置	茎	叶	荚	茎	叶	荚
2M2S	12.54±2.49c	7.90±2.79c	4.41±1.50c	9.63±1.11c	6.82±1.34ab	10.71±0.67d
2M4S	21.08±6.52b	11.20±2.36bc	10.41±4.31b	16.45±2.68b	5.64±0.56b	26.41±0.04c
2M6S	26.30±2.39b	14.65±1.42b	11.28±2.15b	22.94±3.12b	5.45±1.65b	37.51±4.38b
3M4S	20.01±2.55b	11.24±1.51bc	11.10±3.02b	21.28±2.53b	4.74±1.25b	29.52±1.68c
SS	34.47±1.32a	22.68±3.15a	20.31±2.50a	37.87±3.20a	9.21±2.22a	48.10±2.09a

配置	主茎	主茎叶	主茎荚	分枝	分枝叶	分枝荚
2M2S	10.14±0.66c	5.59±0.22c	2.06±0.3c	2.4±5.91c	2.3±2.17b	2.35±4.54c
2M4S	12.22±0.15b	6.64±0.77b	3.95±0.36ab	8.86±2.51b	4.56±2.04b	6.46±1.86b
2M6S	13.83±0.44a	8.49±0.02a	3.46±0.68b	12.47±1.44b	6.16±1.51b	7.82±2.36b
3M4S	13.39±0.33a	7.73±0.39a	4.73±0.72a	4.61±1.55bc	3.51±2.93b	6.37±3.12b
SS	12.12±0.81b	7.89±0.77a	3.85±0.21ab	22.35±1.88a	14.79±2.46a	16.46±1.32a