The Impact of Green Manure Intercropping on the Yield, Quality of Citrus Pomelo and Soil Fertility

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2025-0171

Abstract

Abstract:

To screen suitable models of green manure intercropping for citrus orchard in Jian'ou City, and explore regulatory effects of different green manures of citruspomelo and soil fertility, the 7-year-old citrus orchard was selected as the experimental subject, the clean cultivation (T₁) was used as control, and the interplant Vicia sativa (T₂), Vicia dasycarpa (T₃), Astragalus sinicus (T₄), Brassica napus (T₅), Medicago sativa (T₆), and Lupinus micranthus (T₇) were served as the six experimental treatments, the impact of the different treatments on citrus fruit agronomic trait, yield, quality, and soil physicochemical property were systematically analyzed in this study. The results showed that the six interplant treatments significantly increased citrus yield by 951.0-3001.5 kg/hm², with the increasing ratio of 5.06%-15.98%, when compared with clean cultivation. Among these, interplant Vicia sativa and Astragalus sinicus achieved the best yield improvement. The interplant green manures enhanced the content of vitamin C, soluble solid matters, reducing sugars, titratable acids, and the sugar-acid ratio, reducing nitrate content by 24.71%-50.57% in the fruit. The interplant Vicia dasycarpa, Astragalus sinicus and Brassica napus obtained higher fresh grass yields under the same conditions. Compared to clean cultivation, interplant green manures increased the content of soil organic materials by 5.96%-14.04%, total nitrogen by 2.58%-12.90%, alkeline-N by 9.79%-21.39%, available phosphorus by 13.28%-21.40%, and available potassium by 16.84%-32.63%. Among these, interplant Vicia sativa obtained the best improvement of soil fertility, followed by Vicia dasycarpa and Astragalus sinicus. In conclusion, interplant green manures in citrus orchard acquire synergistic effects on yield enhancement, quality increasing, and soil fertility improvement. The interplant Vicia sativa exhibits the most comprehensive effectiveness, and could be promoted and applied as the preference pattern of green cultivation in local citrus orchards.

Key words: citrus orchards, interplanting green manure, agronomic traits, yield, quality, soil nutrient

CHEN Ruiying. The Impact of Green Manure Intercropping on the Yield, Quality of Citrus Pomelo and Soil Fertility[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2026, 16(3): 28-32.

Figures/Tables 5

References 20

[1]	赵蕊, 王怡针, 苏港, 等. 绿肥还田对农田土壤养分性质和肥料利用率的影响研究进展[J]. 天津农学院学报, 2020, 27(1):92-97. doi: 10.19640/j.cnki.jtau.2020.01.020
[2]	陈子英, 孙小凤, 韩梅, 等. 国内外绿肥研究进展[J]. 青海农林科技, 2020(3):54-58.
[3]	曹卫东, 徐昌旭. 中国主要农区绿肥作物生产与利用技术规程[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社,2010:1-3.
[4]	翟敬华, 马雪寒, 张鸿, 等. 果园套种绿肥的品种选择及对土壤养分性质和果实品质的改善作用[J]. 中南农业科技, 2024, 45(10):236-238,256.
[5]	李合生. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社,2003:77-80.
[6]	中华人民共和国广西出入境检验检疫局. GB/T8210—2011,柑桔鲜果检测方法[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2011.
[7]	牟其芸, 李文香. 梨果实中石细胞含量测定及与果实品质相关性的研究[J]. 落叶果树, 1996, 28(1):7-9.
[8]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社,2000:25-110.
[9]	汤章城. 现代植物生理学实验指南[M]. 北京: 科学出版社,2003:127-217.
[10]	顾美英, 徐万里, 茆军, 等. 连作对新疆绿洲棉田土壤微生物数量及酶活性的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2009, 27(1):1-5.
[11]	王允青, 张祥明, 刘英, 等. 施用紫云英对水稻产量和土壤养分的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2004, 32(4):699-700.
[12]	王启亮, 潘自舒, 刘冠江. 金顶谢花酥梨果草套种增效试验[J]. 河南农业科学, 2004(9):59-60. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3268.2004.09.024
[13]	翟敬华, 马雪寒, 张鸿, 等. 果园套种绿肥的品种选择及对土壤养分性质和果实品质的改善作用[J]. 中南农业科技, 2024, 45(10):236-238.
[14]	李维明, 黄庆海, 袁天佑, 等. 长期施用绿肥对红壤稻田水稻产量和土壤养分的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2011, 17(3):563-570.
[15]	何春梅, 钟少杰, 严建辉, 等. 紫云英套种对葡萄产量品质与果园土壤养分性状及微生物量的影响[J]. 福建农业学报, 2018, 33(11):1151-1157.
[16]	陈瑞英. 葡萄架下套种紫云英技术要点与效益[J]. 福建农业, 2011(10):10-11.
[17]	吴萍, 胡南河, 叶爱青, 等. 种植紫云英的效益及其对土壤肥力的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2006, 34(11):2466-2468.
[18]	徐昌旭, 谢忠坚, 许政良, 等. 等量紫云英条件下化肥用量对早稻养分吸收和干物质积累的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2010, 22(10):13-14.
[19]	杨露, 毛云飞, 张锡洲, 等. 生草改善果园土壤肥力和苹果树体营养的效果[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(2):325-337.
[20]	晃无疾. 高度重视葡萄质量和安全确保南方葡萄健壮发展[A].//葡萄产业化与标准化生产-2007年第十三届全国葡萄学术研讨会论文集[C]. 2007:56-63.

处理	横径/cm	纵径/cm	单果重/g	果肉重/g	可食率/%
T₁	6.1±0.20d	5.6±0.17b	132.5±2.72d	86.1±1.87c	54.8±1.57c
T₂	6.5±0.17bc	6.0±0.27ab	151.4±3.08a	91.2±2.07a	59.8±1.30a
T₃	6.4±0.20bc	6.1±0.53ab	147.3±2.69b	87.9±2.16bc	59.6±2.00a
T₄	6.7±0.17a	6.2±0.20a	152.7±2.26a	87.9±1.48bc	56.4±0.96bc
T₅	6.5±0.27b	6.3±0.17a	139.8±2.86c	89.8±2.04ab	57.8±1.21ab
T₆	6.8±0.17a	6.4±0.27a	145.7±3.02b	88.3±1.80abc	58.2±.76ab
T₇	6.3±0.17cd	6.2±0.53a	143.5±.46bc	89.6±1.62ab	57.6±1.45ab

处理	横径/cm	纵径/cm	单果重/g	果肉重/g	可食率/%
T₁	6.1±0.20d	5.6±0.17b	132.5±2.72d	86.1±1.87c	54.8±1.57c
T₂	6.5±0.17bc	6.0±0.27ab	151.4±3.08a	91.2±2.07a	59.8±1.30a
T₃	6.4±0.20bc	6.1±0.53ab	147.3±2.69b	87.9±2.16bc	59.6±2.00a
T₄	6.7±0.17a	6.2±0.20a	152.7±2.26a	87.9±1.48bc	56.4±0.96bc
T₅	6.5±0.27b	6.3±0.17a	139.8±2.86c	89.8±2.04ab	57.8±1.21ab
T₆	6.8±0.17a	6.4±0.27a	145.7±3.02b	88.3±1.80abc	58.2±.76ab
T₇	6.3±0.17cd	6.2±0.53a	143.5±.46bc	89.6±1.62ab	57.6±1.45ab

处理	小区产量/(kg/100 m²)	折合产量/(kg/hm²)
T₁	187.8±4.02d	18784.5
T₂	215.5±4.36ab	21561.0
T₃	212.0±3.00ab	21210.0
T₄	217.8±5.41a	21786.0
T₅	209.3±3.54b	20935.5
T₆	197.3±3.29c	19735.5
T₇	200.8±2.13c	20085.0

处理	小区产量/(kg/100 m²)	折合产量/(kg/hm²)
T₁	187.8±4.02d	18784.5
T₂	215.5±4.36ab	21561.0
T₃	212.0±3.00ab	21210.0
T₄	217.8±5.41a	21786.0
T₅	209.3±3.54b	20935.5
T₆	197.3±3.29c	19735.5
T₇	200.8±2.13c	20085.0

处理	还原型维生素C/(mg/100 g)	可溶性固形物/%	硝酸盐/(mg/kg)	还原糖/%	可滴定酸/%	糖酸比
T₁	46.6±0.96b	13.9±0.66c	263±4.26a	5.34±0.21c	0.50 ±0.02b	10.68±0.46d
T₂	42.5±0.87cd	15.0±0.72ab	189±5.29b	6.61±0.17a	0.52±0.03b	12.71±0.46b
T₃	42.4±1.20cd	13.9±0.95c	159±3.61c	5.29±0.24c	0.47±0.04b	11.26±0.29c
T₄	38.6±1.05e	14.3±0.72bc	130±2.00d	5.14±0.23c	0.50±0.02b	10.28±0.45e
T₅	44.3±0.85c	15.6±0.85a	144±3.00e	6.14±0.19b	0.59±0.03a	10.41±0.35de
T₆	49.2±1.68a	15.7±0.62a	171±2.65f	6.56±0.27a	0.47±0.03b	13.96±0.41a
T₇	40.7±1.71d	14.8±0.75b	198±3.61g	5.51±0.15c	0.50±0.02b	11.02±0.42c