Journal of Agriculture ›› 2023, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (12): 1-7.doi: 10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2023-0026
LI Yanlan1(), YANG Jincheng1(), LI Hongyang2, SHEN Xianghong1, ZHANG Zhong1, LI Xiang1, ZHU Zifen3, LI Zaofu4, LI Hongyun2, LIU Jianjian1, HU Xinzhou1, SHI Lanfen5, DENG Zheng1
Received:
2023-01-30
Revised:
2023-05-16
Online:
2023-12-20
Published:
2023-12-19
Contact:
LI Yanlan, YANG Jincheng, LI Hongyang, SHEN Xianghong, ZHANG Zhong, LI Xiang, ZHU Zifen, LI Zaofu, LI Hongyun, LIU Jianjian, HU Xinzhou, SHI Lanfen, DENG Zheng. Effects of Sowing Date, Density and Nitrogen Application on Yield and Component Factors of Dry Cultivation of Hybrid Rice[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(12): 1-7.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://nxxb.caass.org.cn/EN/10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2023-0026
处理号 | 播期(A) | 基本苗(B)/(万苗/hm2) | 纯N施用量(C)/(kg/hm2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
基肥 | 分蘖肥 | 穗肥 | |||
1 | 3月30日 | 67.5 | 60 | 45 | 75 |
2 | 3月30日 | 90.0 | 60 | 90 | 75 |
3 | 3月30日 | 112.5 | 60 | 135 | 75 |
4 | 4月10日 | 67.5 | 60 | 90 | 75 |
5 | 4月10日 | 90.0 | 60 | 135 | 75 |
6 | 4月10日 | 112.5 | 60 | 45 | 75 |
7 | 4月20日 | 67.5 | 60 | 135 | 75 |
8 | 4月20日 | 90.0 | 60 | 45 | 75 |
9 | 4月20日 | 112.5 | 60 | 90 | 75 |
处理号 | 播期(A) | 基本苗(B)/(万苗/hm2) | 纯N施用量(C)/(kg/hm2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
基肥 | 分蘖肥 | 穗肥 | |||
1 | 3月30日 | 67.5 | 60 | 45 | 75 |
2 | 3月30日 | 90.0 | 60 | 90 | 75 |
3 | 3月30日 | 112.5 | 60 | 135 | 75 |
4 | 4月10日 | 67.5 | 60 | 90 | 75 |
5 | 4月10日 | 90.0 | 60 | 135 | 75 |
6 | 4月10日 | 112.5 | 60 | 45 | 75 |
7 | 4月20日 | 67.5 | 60 | 135 | 75 |
8 | 4月20日 | 90.0 | 60 | 45 | 75 |
9 | 4月20日 | 112.5 | 60 | 90 | 75 |
处理 | 试验组合 | 播种期 (月/日) | 移栽期 (月/日) | 秧龄/ d | 孕穗期 (月/日) | 始穗期 (月/日) | 齐穗期 (月/日) | 成熟期 (月/日) | 全生育期/ d | 平均全生育期/ d |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | A1B1C1 | 3/30 | 5/10 | 40 | 7/10 | 7/19 | 7/29 | 9/1 | 155 | 155 |
2 | A1B2C2 | 3/30 | 5/10 | 40 | 7/10 | 7/19 | 7/29 | 9/1 | 155 | |
3 | A1B3C3 | 3/30 | 5/10 | 40 | 7/10 | 7/19 | 7/29 | 9/1 | 155 | |
4 | A2B1C2 | 4/10 | 5/20 | 40 | 7/20 | 7/26 | 8/5 | 9/10 | 153 | 151 |
5 | A2B2C3 | 4/10 | 5/20 | 40 | 7/20 | 7/29 | 8/5 | 9/10 | 153 | |
6 | A2B3C1 | 4/10 | 5/20 | 40 | 7/20 | 7/29 | 8/5 | 9/5 | 148 | |
7 | A3B1C3 | 4/20 | 5/25 | 35 | 7/25 | 8/5 | 8/12 | 9/17 | 150 | 148 |
8 | A3B2C1 | 4/20 | 5/25 | 35 | 7/25 | 8/5 | 8/12 | 9/13 | 146 | |
9 | A3B3C2 | 4/20 | 5/25 | 35 | 7/25 | 8/5 | 8/12 | 9/17 | 150 |
处理 | 试验组合 | 播种期 (月/日) | 移栽期 (月/日) | 秧龄/ d | 孕穗期 (月/日) | 始穗期 (月/日) | 齐穗期 (月/日) | 成熟期 (月/日) | 全生育期/ d | 平均全生育期/ d |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | A1B1C1 | 3/30 | 5/10 | 40 | 7/10 | 7/19 | 7/29 | 9/1 | 155 | 155 |
2 | A1B2C2 | 3/30 | 5/10 | 40 | 7/10 | 7/19 | 7/29 | 9/1 | 155 | |
3 | A1B3C3 | 3/30 | 5/10 | 40 | 7/10 | 7/19 | 7/29 | 9/1 | 155 | |
4 | A2B1C2 | 4/10 | 5/20 | 40 | 7/20 | 7/26 | 8/5 | 9/10 | 153 | 151 |
5 | A2B2C3 | 4/10 | 5/20 | 40 | 7/20 | 7/29 | 8/5 | 9/10 | 153 | |
6 | A2B3C1 | 4/10 | 5/20 | 40 | 7/20 | 7/29 | 8/5 | 9/5 | 148 | |
7 | A3B1C3 | 4/20 | 5/25 | 35 | 7/25 | 8/5 | 8/12 | 9/17 | 150 | 148 |
8 | A3B2C1 | 4/20 | 5/25 | 35 | 7/25 | 8/5 | 8/12 | 9/13 | 146 | |
9 | A3B3C2 | 4/20 | 5/25 | 35 | 7/25 | 8/5 | 8/12 | 9/17 | 150 |
处理 | 试验组合 | 最高苗/ (万株/hm2) | 株高/ cm | 穗长/ cm | 有效穗/ (万穗/hm2) | 穗粒数/ (粒/穗) | 实粒数/ (粒/穗) | 分蘖率/ % | 成穗率/ % | 结实率/ % | 千粒重/ g | 产量/ (kg/hm2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X9 | X10 | Y | ||
1 | A1B1C1 | 449.25 | 100.27 | 23.31 | 436.5 | 129.35 | 99.64 | 5.66 | 97.16 | 77.03 | 23.30 | 9938.61 |
2 | A1B2C2 | 486 | 86.57 | 22.73 | 445.5 | 117.95 | 93.23 | 4.40 | 91.67 | 79.04 | 23.39 | 11882.48 |
3 | A1B3C3 | 522 | 99.53 | 22.79 | 501 | 121.65 | 94.72 | 3.64 | 95.98 | 77.86 | 23.81 | 11061.08 |
4 | A2B1C2 | 465 | 102.60 | 23.67 | 438 | 129.17 | 87.62 | 5.89 | 94.19 | 67.83 | 25.09 | 9838.25 |
5 | A2B2C3 | 468.75 | 101.70 | 22.76 | 460.5 | 109.93 | 80.23 | 4.21 | 98.24 | 72.98 | 23.63 | 9946.33 |
6 | A2B3C1 | 504.75 | 96.00 | 21.83 | 498 | 93.70 | 58.62 | 3.49 | 98.66 | 62.56 | 24.03 | 9361.16 |
7 | A3B1C3 | 568.5 | 97.27 | 22.57 | 507 | 106.76 | 66.69 | 7.42 | 89.18 | 62.47 | 22.47 | 8456.39 |
8 | A3B2C1 | 452.25 | 94.07 | 21.30 | 445 | 113.16 | 82.02 | 4.03 | 98.40 | 72.48 | 23.67 | 8371.47 |
9 | A3B3C2 | 524.25 | 96.33 | 21.97 | 514 | 108.97 | 75.74 | 3.66 | 98.04 | 69.51 | 24.19 | 10301.44 |
处理 | 试验组合 | 最高苗/ (万株/hm2) | 株高/ cm | 穗长/ cm | 有效穗/ (万穗/hm2) | 穗粒数/ (粒/穗) | 实粒数/ (粒/穗) | 分蘖率/ % | 成穗率/ % | 结实率/ % | 千粒重/ g | 产量/ (kg/hm2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X9 | X10 | Y | ||
1 | A1B1C1 | 449.25 | 100.27 | 23.31 | 436.5 | 129.35 | 99.64 | 5.66 | 97.16 | 77.03 | 23.30 | 9938.61 |
2 | A1B2C2 | 486 | 86.57 | 22.73 | 445.5 | 117.95 | 93.23 | 4.40 | 91.67 | 79.04 | 23.39 | 11882.48 |
3 | A1B3C3 | 522 | 99.53 | 22.79 | 501 | 121.65 | 94.72 | 3.64 | 95.98 | 77.86 | 23.81 | 11061.08 |
4 | A2B1C2 | 465 | 102.60 | 23.67 | 438 | 129.17 | 87.62 | 5.89 | 94.19 | 67.83 | 25.09 | 9838.25 |
5 | A2B2C3 | 468.75 | 101.70 | 22.76 | 460.5 | 109.93 | 80.23 | 4.21 | 98.24 | 72.98 | 23.63 | 9946.33 |
6 | A2B3C1 | 504.75 | 96.00 | 21.83 | 498 | 93.70 | 58.62 | 3.49 | 98.66 | 62.56 | 24.03 | 9361.16 |
7 | A3B1C3 | 568.5 | 97.27 | 22.57 | 507 | 106.76 | 66.69 | 7.42 | 89.18 | 62.47 | 22.47 | 8456.39 |
8 | A3B2C1 | 452.25 | 94.07 | 21.30 | 445 | 113.16 | 82.02 | 4.03 | 98.40 | 72.48 | 23.67 | 8371.47 |
9 | A3B3C2 | 524.25 | 96.33 | 21.97 | 514 | 108.97 | 75.74 | 3.66 | 98.04 | 69.51 | 24.19 | 10301.44 |
因子 | 最高苗 | 株高 | 穗长 | 有效穗 | 穗粒数 | 实粒数 | 分蘖率 | 成穗率 | 结实率 | 千粒重 | 产量 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X9 | X10 | Y | |
X1 | 1 | -0.104 | -0.1619 | 0.8853** | -0.4714* | -0.5184* | 0.2215 | -0.5039* | -0.4708* | -0.3836* | -0.0608 |
X2 | 1 | 0.4602* | 0.019 | 0.2646 | 0.0366 | 0.242 | 0.2798 | -0.2183* | 0.3144 | -0.3054* | |
X3 | 1 | -0.3833* | 0.7211** | 0.5579* | 0.5095* | -0.3851* | 0.257* | 0.166 | 0.396* | ||
X4 | 1 | -0.6265* | -0.6072* | -0.1543 | -0.0461 | -0.4707* | -0.1824 | -0.0854 | |||
X5 | 1 | 0.9101** | 0.2966 | -0.1673 | 0.6305* | 0.2222 | 0.3573* | ||||
X6 | 1 | 0.0054 | -0.0355 | 0.8939** | 0.0889 | 0.5714* | |||||
X7 | 1 | -0.7309** | -0.3184* | -0.3897* | -0.3794* | ||||||
X8 | 1 | 0.1143* | 0.4404* | -0.091 | |||||||
X9 | 1 | -0.0521 | 0.6849* | ||||||||
X10 | 1 | 0.1942 |
因子 | 最高苗 | 株高 | 穗长 | 有效穗 | 穗粒数 | 实粒数 | 分蘖率 | 成穗率 | 结实率 | 千粒重 | 产量 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X9 | X10 | Y | |
X1 | 1 | -0.104 | -0.1619 | 0.8853** | -0.4714* | -0.5184* | 0.2215 | -0.5039* | -0.4708* | -0.3836* | -0.0608 |
X2 | 1 | 0.4602* | 0.019 | 0.2646 | 0.0366 | 0.242 | 0.2798 | -0.2183* | 0.3144 | -0.3054* | |
X3 | 1 | -0.3833* | 0.7211** | 0.5579* | 0.5095* | -0.3851* | 0.257* | 0.166 | 0.396* | ||
X4 | 1 | -0.6265* | -0.6072* | -0.1543 | -0.0461 | -0.4707* | -0.1824 | -0.0854 | |||
X5 | 1 | 0.9101** | 0.2966 | -0.1673 | 0.6305* | 0.2222 | 0.3573* | ||||
X6 | 1 | 0.0054 | -0.0355 | 0.8939** | 0.0889 | 0.5714* | |||||
X7 | 1 | -0.7309** | -0.3184* | -0.3897* | -0.3794* | ||||||
X8 | 1 | 0.1143* | 0.4404* | -0.091 | |||||||
X9 | 1 | -0.0521 | 0.6849* | ||||||||
X10 | 1 | 0.1942 |
相关性状 | 直接 | →X2 | →X3 | →X4 | →X5 | →X8 | →X9 | →X10 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X2 | -0.6039 | 0.4433 | 0.0088 | -0.1302 | 0.0305 | -0.1842 | 0.1302 | ||||||
X3 | 0.9633 | -0.2779 | -0.1781 | -0.3549 | -0.042 | 0.2168 | 0.0688 | ||||||
X4 | 0.4647 | -0.0114 | -0.3692 | 0.3083 | -0.005 | -0.3971 | -0.0756 | ||||||
X5 | -0.4921 | -0.1598 | 0.6946 | -0.2911 | -0.0183 | 0.532 | 0.092 | ||||||
X8 | 0.1092 | -0.169 | -0.3709 | -0.0214 | 0.0823 | 0.0965 | 0.1824 | ||||||
X9 | 0.8437 | 0.1318 | 0.2476 | -0.2188 | -0.3103 | 0.0125 | -0.0216 | ||||||
X10 | 0.4142 | -0.1899 | 0.1599 | -0.0848 | -0.1094 | 0.0481 | -0.044 |
相关性状 | 直接 | →X2 | →X3 | →X4 | →X5 | →X8 | →X9 | →X10 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X2 | -0.6039 | 0.4433 | 0.0088 | -0.1302 | 0.0305 | -0.1842 | 0.1302 | ||||||
X3 | 0.9633 | -0.2779 | -0.1781 | -0.3549 | -0.042 | 0.2168 | 0.0688 | ||||||
X4 | 0.4647 | -0.0114 | -0.3692 | 0.3083 | -0.005 | -0.3971 | -0.0756 | ||||||
X5 | -0.4921 | -0.1598 | 0.6946 | -0.2911 | -0.0183 | 0.532 | 0.092 | ||||||
X8 | 0.1092 | -0.169 | -0.3709 | -0.0214 | 0.0823 | 0.0965 | 0.1824 | ||||||
X9 | 0.8437 | 0.1318 | 0.2476 | -0.2188 | -0.3103 | 0.0125 | -0.0216 | ||||||
X10 | 0.4142 | -0.1899 | 0.1599 | -0.0848 | -0.1094 | 0.0481 | -0.044 |
处理 | 试验组合 | 小区(21.6 m2)产量(标准水份14.5%)/kg | 折合产量/(kg/hm2) | 排名 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ⅰ | Ⅱ | Ⅲ | ∑ | 平 均 | ||||
1 | A1B1C1 | 25.90 | 19.55 | 18.92 | 64.37 | 21.46 | 9938.61 ab A | 5 |
2 | A1B2C2 | 25.45 | 24.95 | 26.56 | 76.96 | 25.65 | 11882.48 a A | 1 |
3 | A1B3C3 | 24.20 | 22.75 | 24.69 | 71.64 | 23.88 | 11061.08 ab A | 2 |
4 | A2B1C2 | 20.54 | 19.76 | 23.42 | 63.72 | 21.24 | 9838.25 ab A | 6 |
5 | A2B2C3 | 24.80 | 24.41 | 15.21 | 64.42 | 21.47 | 9946.33 ab A | 4 |
6 | A2B3C1 | 18.64 | 22.38 | 19.61 | 60.63 | 20.21 | 9361.16 ab A | 7 |
7 | A3B1C3 | 11.25 | 21.50 | 22.02 | 54.77 | 18.26 | 8456.39 b A | 8 |
8 | A3B2C1 | 19.84 | 16.53 | 17.85 | 54.22 | 18.07 | 8371.47 b A | 9 |
9 | A3B3C2 | 21.21 | 22.60 | 22.91 | 66.72 | 22.24 | 10301.44 ab A | 3 |
处理 | 试验组合 | 小区(21.6 m2)产量(标准水份14.5%)/kg | 折合产量/(kg/hm2) | 排名 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ⅰ | Ⅱ | Ⅲ | ∑ | 平 均 | ||||
1 | A1B1C1 | 25.90 | 19.55 | 18.92 | 64.37 | 21.46 | 9938.61 ab A | 5 |
2 | A1B2C2 | 25.45 | 24.95 | 26.56 | 76.96 | 25.65 | 11882.48 a A | 1 |
3 | A1B3C3 | 24.20 | 22.75 | 24.69 | 71.64 | 23.88 | 11061.08 ab A | 2 |
4 | A2B1C2 | 20.54 | 19.76 | 23.42 | 63.72 | 21.24 | 9838.25 ab A | 6 |
5 | A2B2C3 | 24.80 | 24.41 | 15.21 | 64.42 | 21.47 | 9946.33 ab A | 4 |
6 | A2B3C1 | 18.64 | 22.38 | 19.61 | 60.63 | 20.21 | 9361.16 ab A | 7 |
7 | A3B1C3 | 11.25 | 21.50 | 22.02 | 54.77 | 18.26 | 8456.39 b A | 8 |
8 | A3B2C1 | 19.84 | 16.53 | 17.85 | 54.22 | 18.07 | 8371.47 b A | 9 |
9 | A3B3C2 | 21.21 | 22.60 | 22.91 | 66.72 | 22.24 | 10301.44 ab A | 3 |
变异来源 | 平方和 | 自由度 | 均方 | F值 | F0.05 | F0.01 | 极差R |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
因素A | 79.4263 | 2 | 39.7132 | 3.8011* | 3.63 | 6.23 | 4.14 |
因素B | 16.0732 | 2 | 8.0366 | 0.7692 | 3.63 | 6.23 | 1.7922 |
因素C | 44.5729 | 2 | 22.2865 | 2.1331 | 3.63 | 6.23 | 3.1311 |
误差 | 188.0609 | 18 | 10.4478 | ||||
总和 | 328.1333 |
变异来源 | 平方和 | 自由度 | 均方 | F值 | F0.05 | F0.01 | 极差R |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
因素A | 79.4263 | 2 | 39.7132 | 3.8011* | 3.63 | 6.23 | 4.14 |
因素B | 16.0732 | 2 | 8.0366 | 0.7692 | 3.63 | 6.23 | 1.7922 |
因素C | 44.5729 | 2 | 22.2865 | 2.1331 | 3.63 | 6.23 | 3.1311 |
误差 | 188.0609 | 18 | 10.4478 | ||||
总和 | 328.1333 |
因素 | 水平 | 均值 | 5%显著水平 | 1%极显著水平 |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | 1 | 23.6633 | a | A |
A | 2 | 20.9744 | ab | A |
A | 3 | 19.5233 | b | A |
B | 3 | 22.11 | a | A |
B | 2 | 21.7333 | a | A |
B | 1 | 20.3178 | a | A |
C | 2 | 23.0444 | a | A |
C | 3 | 21.2033 | a | A |
C | 1 | 19.9133 | a | A |
因素 | 水平 | 均值 | 5%显著水平 | 1%极显著水平 |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | 1 | 23.6633 | a | A |
A | 2 | 20.9744 | ab | A |
A | 3 | 19.5233 | b | A |
B | 3 | 22.11 | a | A |
B | 2 | 21.7333 | a | A |
B | 1 | 20.3178 | a | A |
C | 2 | 23.0444 | a | A |
C | 3 | 21.2033 | a | A |
C | 1 | 19.9133 | a | A |
[1] |
云南省水利厅, 2021年云南省水资源公报[EB/OL]. http://wcb.yn.gov.cn/html/2022/shuiziyuangongbao-tongji_1230/55837.html.2022-12-30.
|
[2] |
童彦, 朱海燕, 施玉. 云南省水资源利用的时空变化特征与区域差异分析[J]. 国土与自然资源研究, 2014(5):60-61.
|
[3] |
黄梅, 崔延春, 朱玉兴, 等, 水稻多逆境响应基因OsMsr8的克隆与表达[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18(3):535-541.
|
[4] |
安晨昕. 基于As,Pb,F浓度变化对水稻品质及土壤性质的影响研究[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2016:20-23.
|
[5] |
陈猛. 黑龙江省气温变化对水稻产量的影响[J]. 农业与技术, 2016, 36(4):154-154.
|
[6] |
张让康, 刘本坤. 旱种水稻生产概况及栽培技术[J]. 湖南农业科学, 1988, 2:30-32.
|
[7] |
梁永超, 胡锋, 杨茂才, 等. 水稻覆膜旱作高产节水机理研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 1999, 32(1):26-32.
|
[8] |
卢春玲, 周洪友, 胡跃翠, 等. 杂交水稻覆膜旱作节水栽培技术在文山州的应用表现及栽培要点[J]. 中国稻米, 2021, 27(6):128-129.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2021.06.027 |
[9] |
宋伟丰, 潘亚清, 翟喜海, 等. 旱稻研究进展与栽培技术初探[J]. 中国野生植物资源, 2022, 40(12):55-58.
|
[10] |
刘成启, 孙东升, 佟斌. 浅谈旱稻覆膜栽培技术[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2008(4):148-149.
|
[11] |
范晓芳, 索常凯, 褚璇, 等. 播期及覆膜处理对旱稻养分吸收和产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(3):412-418.
doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2021.03.003 |
[12] |
赵新勇, 王友霜, 王健康, 等. 播期和品种不同对淮北地区水稻产量及品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2019, 47(9):38-41,54.
|
[13] |
李琼, 付立东. 不同穴距对水稻生育及产量的影响[J]. 北方水稻, 2011, 41(2):17-20.
|
[14] |
李世锋, 刘宝法, 刘蓉蓉, 等. 移栽密度和施氮量对宁粳3号产量及其产量构成因素的影响[J]. 中国稻米, 2010, 16(1):40-43.
|
[15] |
凌启鸿, 张洪程, 丁艳锋, 等. 水稻高产精确定量栽培[J]. 北方水稻, 2007(2):1-9.
|
[16] |
杨惠杰, 李义珍, 杨高群. 超高产水稻的分蘖特性的观察[J]. 福建农业学报, 2003, 18(4):205-208.
|
[17] |
齐春艳. 不同密度和叶龄移栽对水稻生长发育及产量的影响[D]. 长春: 吉林农业大学, 2005.
|
[18] |
付立东, 王宁, 李旭, 等. 移栽基本苗对水稻群体性状及产量的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2013, 41(1):65-67.
|
[19] |
谭长乐, 张洪熙, 夏广宏, 等. 扬稻6号不同施氮水平产量形成特性研究[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2000(2):17-19,49.
|
[20] |
彭少兵, 黄见良, 钟旭, 等. 提高中国稻田氮肥利用率的研究策略[J]. 中国农业科学, 2002, 35(9):1095-1103.
|
[21] |
黄元财, 王伯伦, 王术, 等. 施氮量对水稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2006, 37(5):688-692.
|
[22] |
杨瑞庆, 萧光玉, 汪大明, 等. 施氮量对水稻产量及产量构成因素的影响[J]. 作物研究, 1992(s1):21-26.
|
[23] |
张锦文, 邓伟, 吕永刚, 等. 氮肥用量对云南高原粳稻产量及氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(34):1-8.
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0672 |
[24] |
邹长明, 秦道珠, 陈福兴, 等. 水稻氮肥施用技术:氮肥施用的适宜时期与用量[J]. 湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2002, 26(6):467-470.
|
[1] | HU Yang, DUAN Bin, FANG Ling, HE Shijie, LI Huilong, SONG Xiaohua, YU Xinchun, CHANG Xingyuan. Different Concentrations of Paclobutrazol on Seedling Quality and Yield Composition of Japonica Rice in Southern Henan [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(9): 1-7. |
[2] | HUANG Hui. Regulating Summer Maize Root Distribution and Yield by Combined Application of Organic Manure and Chemical Fertilizer [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(9): 13-17. |
[3] | ZHOU Enqiang, YAO Mengnan, ZHOU Yao, XUE Dong, WANG Yongqiang, ZHAO Na, WEI Libin, WANG Xuejun, MIAO Yamei. Effects of Different Sowing Dates on Yield and Agronomic Characters of Vegetable Spring Soybean [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(9): 25-30. |
[4] | LI Guoqing, CONG Xinjun, ZHANG Dajian, ZHAO Na, LI Guoyu. Effects of Different Previous Crops and Planting Densities on Agronomic Characters of Garlic [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(9): 63-66. |
[5] | YANG Ning, ZHAO Shihua, CHONG Dongdong, LI Jingxin, WANG Xiuqin, DONG Lingxia, DU Zongqing, LI Rui. Effects of Different Varieties and Sowing Dates on Resistance to Yellow Mosaic Virus and Yield of Wheat [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(9): 8-12. |
[6] | LIU Yan, HUAN Haijun. Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Agrometeorological Disasters in Zibo and Its Impacts on Grain Yield [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(9): 81-87. |
[7] | SHEN Ju, ZHANG Chanjuan, XIN Pingping, LI Na. Analysis of Growth Characteristics of Quinoa at Different Sowing Dates in the Eastern Qaidam Basin [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(9): 94-100. |
[8] | CUI Zhaoyun, ZOU Junli, XU Yi, YIN Xundong, LV Guangde. Effects of Different Sowing Dates on Dry Matter Accumulation and Transport and Yield of Wheat ‘Taikemai 31' [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(8): 11-17. |
[9] | ZHAO Xiaoguang, ZHAO Xingzhong, LIU Haomeng, XIAO Jinping, ZHANG Pu, ZHANG Yalei, WANG Liping. Effects of Maize and Soybean Intercropping on Agronomic, Quality and Yield Traits of Soybean [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(8): 18-24. |
[10] | MENG Ruoxi, WANG Xiaoli, DUAN Jianjun, XU Bin, YANG Hongwei, MEI Tingting. Effects of Continuous Straw Returning on Rice Yield and Nitrogen Utilization [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(8): 37-45. |
[11] | CHEN Jun, ZHANG Haijun, LI Xiaoyu, LI Wenqian. Effect of Density and Growth Regulator Interaction on Yield and Lodging Resistance of Summer Maize ‘Zidan11’ [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(7): 12-19. |
[12] | LIU Li, CHAI Min, HAN Wei, QIE Qiyang, FENG Xiaolong, NA Dongchen, ZHOU Yuancheng, CAO Yanling, WANG Yiling. 99 Tartary BuckwheatVarieties: Evaluation of Main Agronomic Traits and Variety Screening [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(7): 25-31. |
[13] | SU Guijun, LOU Ling, LI Dan, HE Linhai, WANG Jingwen, SHEN Jianguo, ZHANG Zhouna. Effects of Bio-organic Fertilizer Base Application on the Yield of Greenhouse Pakchoi and Soil Nutrient Content [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(7): 44-47. |
[14] | WANG Ping, XIE Chengjun, SUN Zhenrong, CHEN Juan, WANG Lei, PENG Wenjing. Effects of Planting Density and Fertilization Amount on Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) in Cool Irrigation Area [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(6): 17-24. |
[15] | LI Dan, WANG Jingwen, YUAN Hangjie, SHANG Xiaolan, HUANG Yue, WEI Jiqian. Effects of Food Waste Soil Conditioners on Soil Physicochemical Properties and Rice Yield [J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(6): 39-42. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||