Young Apple Orchard Intercropping Soybean: Effects on Soybean Yield and Farmland Environment

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas20200100005

Abstract

Abstract:

The aim is to provide a theoretical basis for soybean production in the young apple orchards. ‘Qindou 12’ was used as material, and three treatments were set up, including intercropping 5 rows soybean (treatment 1), intercropping 4 rows soybean (treatment 2), intercropping 3 rows (treatment 3) and no intercropping as the control (CK). The soybean yield, soil traits, weed amount, and agricultural microclimate were studied in different treatment conditions. Results showed that treatment 1, treatment 2, treatment 3 had the highest yield in 1-year, 2-year, 3-year orchard, respectively. The yield marginal effect of the same treatment decreased as apple tree-age increased. Compared with CK, intercropping soybean in apple orchard decreased soil volume weight by 8.33%, increased soil moisture content by 13.08%, improved soil organic matter, available N, and available K by 16.67%, 20.33%, and 9.35%, respectively, reduced weed amount by 58.10%, increased the relative humidity by 4.47%, and obtained 160.90% of profit rate. Intercropping soybean in young apple orchard had obvious economic benefit and ecological efficiency, and significant advantages of yield and benefit were found when intercropping 5 rows soybean in 1-year orchard, intercropping 4 rows soybean in 2-year orchard, and intercropping 3 rows soybean in 3-year orchard.

Key words: Young Apple Orchard, Soybean, Planting Pattern, Intercropping, Yield, Farmland Eenvironment

CLC Number:

S318

Qu Yang, Wang Kezhen, Kang Junke, Liang Fuqin. Young Apple Orchard Intercropping Soybean: Effects on Soybean Yield and Farmland Environment[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2021, 11(10): 28-32.

Figures/Tables 5

References 27

[28]	Bilalis D, Papastylianou P, Konstantas A, et al. Weed- suppressive effects of maize- legume intercropping in organic farming[J]. International Journal of Pest Management, 2010, 56(2):173-181. doi: 10.1080/09670870903304471 URL
[29]	Jensen E S. Grain yield, symbiotic N₂ fixation and interspecific competition for inorganic N in pea-barley intercrops[J]. Plant and soil, 1996, 182(1):25-38. doi: 10.1007/BF00010992 URL
[30]	许华森, 毕华兴, 高路博, 等. 晋西黄土区果农间作系统根系生态位特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2013, 29(24):69-73.
[31]	高路博, 毕华兴, 许华森, 等. 晋西苹果-大豆间作土壤水分的时空分布特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 2014, 34(6):327-337.
[1]	程存刚, 赵德英. 新形势下中国苹果产业的发展定位与趋势[J]. 中国果树, 2019(1):1-7.
[2]	赵政阳, 戴军, 王雷存. 陕西苹果产业现状及国际竞争力分析[J]. 西北农业学报, 2002, 11(4):108-111.
[3]	卢新智. 陕西苹果大产业大经营[J]. 西北园艺(果树), 2019(2):46-48.
[4]	姚启太. 苹果幼园套种大豆栽培技术[J]. 农业科技与信息, 2009(13):13-14.
[5]	王蕾. 林果间套小杂粮(豆)主要模式及种植技术的分析[J]. 农业开发与装备, 2019(7):192-193.
[6]	张伟梅, 叶伟其, 吕周林, 等. 山地幼龄果园套种大豆技术及实施效益[J]. 福建果树, 2010(3):33-35.
[7]	匡石滋, 田世尧, 段冬洋, 等. 火龙果与大豆间作效应分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(25):128-132.
[8]	蒋际谋, 郑少泉, 刘友接, 等. 幼龄枇杷园套种科杂1号大豆的效应[J]. 亚热带植物科学, 2000, 29(4):5-8.
[32]	赵霞霞, 张江洪, 王斌, 等. 延安山地苹果园管理措施[J]. 宁夏农林科技, 2018, 59(12):33-34.
[9]	刘惠荣, 李茹, 吴菊梅, 等. 果树幼园套种大豆高产高效栽培技术[J]. 陕西农业科学, 2014, 60(11):113-114.
[10]	刘琦, 刘延军, 梁福琴. 陕西省果树幼园套种大豆高产栽培技术[J]. 陕西农业科学, 2013, 59(4):254-255,257.
[11]	许华森, 云雷, 毕华兴, 等. 核桃-大豆间作系统细根分布及地下竞争[J]. 生态学杂志, 2012, 31(7):1-5.
[12]	匡石滋, 张金妹, 田世尧, 等. 香蕉与大豆间作效应研究[J]. 广东农业科学, 2011, 38(7):63-65.
[13]	黎健龙, 涂攀峰, 陈娜, 等. 茶树与大豆间作效应分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(7):2040-2047.
[14]	屈洋, 苏旺, 李翠, 等. 陕北半干旱区沟垄覆膜集水模式下糜子边际效应及生理特性[J]. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25(3):776-782.
[15]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000:22-18.
[16]	宋来庆, 赵玲玲, 李美玲, 等. 烟台市新植矮砧苹果园发展现状、存在问题与建议[J]. 烟台果树, 2018, 3:26-29.
[17]	廖文超, 毕华兴, 高路博, 等. 苹果-大豆间作系统光照分布及其对作物的影响[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2014, 29(1):25-29.
[18]	廖文超, 毕华兴, 高路博, 等. 晋西苹果与大豆间作系统土壤养分分布特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 2014, 34(3):252-256.
[19]	廖文超, 毕华兴, 赵云杰, 等. 晋西苹果+大豆间作土壤水分分布及其对大豆生长的影响[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2014, 12(1):24-28.
[20]	李小英, 段争虎. 黄土高原土壤水分与植被相互作用研究进展[J]. 土壤通报, 2012, 43(6):1508-1514.
[21]	王国义, 沈昌蒲. 大豆对耕层土壤物理性状的影响[J]. 东北农学院学报, 1992, 23(2):121-128.
[22]	黎健龙, 涂攀峰, 陈娜, 等. 茶树与大豆间作效应分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(7):2040-2047.
[23]	Corre-Hellou G, Fustec J, Crozat Y. Interspecific competition for soil N and its interaction with N2 fixation, leaf expansion and crop growth in pea- barley intercrops[J]. Plant and Soil, 2006(282):195-208.
[24]	李娟, 林位夫, 周立军, 等. 成龄胶园间作不同豆科作物对土壤养分的影响[J]. 热带农业科学, 2014, 34(7):5-11.
[25]	丁洪, 李生秀. 磷素营养与大豆生长和共生固氮的关系[J]. 西北农业大学学报, 1998, 26(5):67-70.
[26]	张盼盼, 周瑜, 宋慧, 等. 不同肥力水平下糜子生长状况及农田小气候特征比较[J]. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(2):473-480.
[27]	许华森, 毕华兴, 高路博, 等. 晋西黄土区苹果+大豆间作系统小气候及其对作物生产力的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2014, 12(2):9-15.

处理	1龄	2龄	3龄
3	2506.95 c	2503.95 b	2492.55 a
2	2619.75 b	2564.10 a	2406.30 b
1	2750.70 a	2424.15 c	2255.10 c

处理	1龄	2龄	3龄
3	2506.95 c	2503.95 b	2492.55 a
2	2619.75 b	2564.10 a	2406.30 b
1	2750.70 a	2424.15 c	2255.10 c

树龄/龄	处理	边行产量/(kg/hm²)	中行产量/(kg/hm²)	产量边际效应指数	边行优势/%	边际率/%	边际效应/%
1	3	3831.45a	2851.95a	1.33	34.34	100.00	34.34a
	2	3647.40b	2844.90a	1.30	28.21	66.67	18.81b
	1	3466.95c	2702.85b	1.28	28.27	50.00	14.14c
2	3	4072.95a	3042.45a	1.34	33.87	100.00	33.87a
	2	3551.40b	2919.90b	1.22	21.63	66.67	14.42b
	1	3171.30c	2714.85c	1.17	16.81	50.00	8.41c
3	3	3793.95a	2847.45a	1.33	33.24	100.00	33.24a
	2	3174.90b	2768.10b	1.15	14.70	66.67	9.80b
	1	2764.95c	2549.85c	1.08	8.44	50.00	4.22c

树龄/龄	处理	边行产量/(kg/hm²)	中行产量/(kg/hm²)	产量边际效应指数	边行优势/%	边际率/%	边际效应/%
1	3	3831.45a	2851.95a	1.33	34.34	100.00	34.34a
	2	3647.40b	2844.90a	1.30	28.21	66.67	18.81b
	1	3466.95c	2702.85b	1.28	28.27	50.00	14.14c
2	3	4072.95a	3042.45a	1.34	33.87	100.00	33.87a
	2	3551.40b	2919.90b	1.22	21.63	66.67	14.42b
	1	3171.30c	2714.85c	1.17	16.81	50.00	8.41c
3	3	3793.95a	2847.45a	1.33	33.24	100.00	33.24a
	2	3174.90b	2768.10b	1.15	14.70	66.67	9.80b
	1	2764.95c	2549.85c	1.08	8.44	50.00	4.22c

树龄/龄	处理	容重/(g/cm³)	含水量/%	总孔隙度/%	有机质/(g/kg)	速效N/(mg/kg)	速效K/(mg/kg)	速效P/(mg/kg)
1	1	0.98a	16.37a	55a	18.3a	110.3a	302a	15.37b
2	2	1.02a	16.17a	54a	18.1a	109.6a	299a	14.13c
3	3	1.08a	15.36a	52b	17.6b	106.8b	288b	13.9c
CK	0	1.12b	14.12b	50b	15.4c	90.5c	271c	21.4a