Effects of Planting Patterns on Plant Properties and Yield of Different Early Spring Potato Varieties

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2022-0155

Abstract

Abstract:

The study aims to screen out the appropriate planting patterns of potato and provide data support for large-scale promotion of potato varieties and farmers’ income increase in Dianwei town, Jianshui, Yunnan Province. A field experiment with seven treatments of different planting patterns (the double line width ridge- drip irrigation under white film-mulching, the double line width ridge- drip irrigation, the double line width ridge- white film-mulching, the double line width ridge, the double line width ridge -straw cored, the double line width ridge-black film-mulching, conventional cultivation) was conducted during early spring potato growing period. Two potato varieties (‘Cooperation 88’ from Southwest China and ‘Qingshu No.9’ introduced from Potato Institute of Yunnan Agricultural University) were used to evaluate the effects of the planting patterns. The results showed that, varieties, planting patterns and their interaction had significantly different effects on the plant characteristics and yield of potato. The potato plant height and yield of the double line width ridge-black film-mulching were the lowest, 44.6 cm and 6.48 t/hm² of ‘Cooperation 88’, and 41.4 cm and 7.89 t/hm² of ‘Qingshu No.9’, respectively. The number of main stems of potato under conventional cultivation was the highest: 7.7 of ‘Cooperation 88’, and 6.9 of ‘Qingshu No.9’. For the same planting pattern, the plant height and stem diameter of the ‘Cooperation 88’ were higher than those of the ‘Qingshu No.9’, but there was no regularity between the two potato varieties in the number of main stems and yield characteristics. The yield of ‘Cooperation 88’ of the double line width ridge- white film-mulching was the highest, which was 20.69 t/hm², and the yield of ‘Qingshu No.9’of the double line width ridge- drip irrigation under white film-mulching was the highest, which was 23.53 t/hm². Therefore, the planting pattern of double line width ridge- white film mulching is the best planting mode of ‘Cooperation 88’potato, and the planting pattern of double line width ridge- drip irrigation under white film-mulching is the most appropriate planting mode of ‘Qingshu No.9’in Dianwei town, Jianshui, Yunnan province.

Key words: potato, planting patterns, Yunnan Province, plant properties, yield

FAN Chunmei, PENG Errui, CHEN Jinsong, YIN Yamin. Effects of Planting Patterns on Plant Properties and Yield of Different Early Spring Potato Varieties[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2023, 13(5): 15-20.

Figures/Tables 7

References 32

[1]	徐进, 朱杰华, 杨艳丽, 等. 中国马铃薯病虫害发生情况与农药使用现状[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(16):2800-2808. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.16.006
[2]	于洪剑, 白爱枝, 杨晓炜, 等. 马铃薯干燥方法的研究进展[J]. 核农学报, 2017, 31(4):743-748. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2017.04.0743
[3]	王瀚, 秦军红, 毕真真, 等. 基于SOLANUM模型的甘肃中东部马铃薯潜在产量研究[J]. 核农学报, 2019, 33(8):1647-1657. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2019.08.1647
[4]	王红丽, 张绪成, 于显枫, 等. 黑色地膜覆盖的土壤水热效应及其对马铃薯产量的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(16):5215-5226.
[5]	李荣, 王艳丽, 吴鹏年, 等. 宁南旱区沟垄覆盖改善土壤水热状况提高马铃薯产量[J]. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(10):168-175.
[6]	霍轶珍, 丁春莲, 银花, 等. 不同材料覆盖对马铃薯田土壤水热状况及产量的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2019, 33(1):90-94.
[7]	普雪可, 吴春花, 周永瑾, 等. 宁南旱区地膜秸秆沟垄双覆盖对土壤水分时空变化及马铃薯产量的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(10):149-160. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2019534
[8]	王平, 陈娟, 谢成俊, 等. 干旱地区覆盖方式对土壤养分及马铃薯产量的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021(4):118-125.
[9]	许国春, 罗文彬, 李华伟, 等. 地膜与稻秸覆盖对冬作马铃薯产量和品质的影响及其抑草效应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(4):13-18. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0333
[10]	苗芳芳, 勉有明, 普雪可, 等. 耕作覆盖对宁南旱区土壤团粒结构及马铃薯水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(11):2366-2376. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.11.010
[11]	吴春花, 普雪可, 周永瑾, 等. 宁南旱区沟垄集雨结合覆盖对土壤水热肥与马铃薯产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(11):2208-2219. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.94194
[12]	周永瑾, 普雪可, 吴春花, 等. 垄沟集雨种植下不同降解地膜沟覆盖对农田马铃薯产量和土壤水热的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2021, 35(11):2664-2673. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2021.11.2664
[13]	ZHANG Y P, WANG J D, GONG SH H, et al. Effects of film mulching on evapotranspiration, yield and water use efficiency of a maize field with drip irrigation in Northeastern China[J]. Agricultural water management, 2018, 205:90-99. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.04.029 URL
[14]	刘鸿高, 李建宾, 顾才上, 等. 间作马铃薯覆盖不同地膜对土壤温湿度和产量的影响[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2017, 32(1):44-51.
[15]	郭志利. 不同覆膜方式对旱地大豆生长发育及产量效应的影响[J]. 辽宁农业科学, 2000(1):30-32.
[16]	李云, 宋吉轩, 石乔龙. 覆膜对甘薯生长发育和产量的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2012, 43(8):1124-1128.
[17]	马尚明, 李生宝. 马铃薯地膜覆盖栽培的效果与技术[J]. 作物杂志, 1997(4):29-30.
[18]	巩永平, 王国平, 张天佑. 甘谷县高淀粉马铃薯品种庄薯3号丰产栽培技术[J]. 中国马铃薯, 2007, 21(4):250-251.
[19]	纪荣昌, 罗文彬, 李华伟, 等. 不同覆盖物对冬种马铃薯的影响[J]. 福建农业科技, 2013(12):27-29.
[20]	欧勤辉. 冬种马铃薯6种不同栽培方式比较试验[J]. 广西农学报, 2012, 27(1):16-19.
[21]	翁定河, 朱鸿, 张招娟, 等. 冬种马铃薯稻草包芯栽培的生长发育特性及其生理特征[J]. 中国马铃薯, 2009, 23(2):75-81.
[22]	罗维禄. 不同栽培方式与密度对冬种马铃薯中薯3号的影响[J]. 福建农业学报, 2011, 26(6):961-965.
[23]	买自珍, 佘萍, 买娟, 等. 半干旱区不同覆膜时期、方式与膜色对土壤水分及马铃薯水分利用效率的影响[J]. 干旱区农业研究, 2014, 32(1):1-10.
[24]	徐康乐, 米庆华, 徐坤范. 不同地膜覆盖对春季马铃薯生长及产量的影响[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2004(4):19-21.
[25]	聂唯, 王凤新, 韩江江, 等. 不同颜色覆膜对土壤温度、马铃薯生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(2):5-13. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb17100101
[26]	李京东, 张刘东, 陈晨, 等. 不同颜色覆膜对土壤温度、马铃薯生长及产量的影响[J]. 农业工程, 2021, 11(7):127-132.
[27]	RYKBOST K A, CETAS R C. Influence of slit plastic mulches and nitrogen fertilization rates on potato yield and quality[J]. American potato journal, 1977(54):531-537.
[28]	吴佳瑞, 康建宏, 吴娜, 等. 覆膜对宁南山区马铃薯光合特性和产量的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2019, 37(4):208-214.
[29]	王清伟, 姜洪新, 刘训龙, 等. 不同颜色地膜对春播马铃薯生长发育的影响[J]. 中国马铃薯, 2021, 35(6):538-543.
[30]	刘世明. 马铃薯覆膜栽培技术及增产原因分析[J]. 内蒙古农业科技, 2011(1):87-88.
[31]	刘晓伟, 何宝林, 康恩祥. 半干旱地区马铃薯覆膜方式的研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2012, 1(29):115-117.
[32]	代海林, 秦舒浩, 张俊莲, 等. 沟垄覆膜栽培对旱作马铃薯生长及产量的影响[J]. 干旱区农业研究, 2012, 30(5):56-60.

处理	P1	P2
Z1	Z1 P1	Z1 P2
Z2	Z2 P1	Z2 P2
Z3	Z3 P1	Z3 P2
Z4	Z4 P1	Z4 P2
Z5	Z5 P1	Z5 P2
Z6	Z6 P1	Z6 P2
Z7	Z7 P1	Z7 P2

处理	P1	P2
Z1	Z1 P1	Z1 P2
Z2	Z2 P1	Z2 P2
Z3	Z3 P1	Z3 P2
Z4	Z4 P1	Z4 P2
Z5	Z5 P1	Z5 P2
Z6	Z6 P1	Z6 P2
Z7	Z7 P1	Z7 P2

方差来源	第III类平方和	自由度	均方	F
P	1490.876	1	1490.876	1746.214**
Z	4211.265	6	701.877	822.086**
P×Z	928.357	6	154.726	181.226**
Error	227.105	266	0.854	-
T	6857.602	279	-	-

方差来源	第III类平方和	自由度	均方	F
P	1490.876	1	1490.876	1746.214**
Z	4211.265	6	701.877	822.086**
P×Z	928.357	6	154.726	181.226**
Error	227.105	266	0.854	-
T	6857.602	279	-	-

方差来源	第III类平方和	自由度	均方	F
P	1.431	1	1.431	209.527**
Z	0.824	6	0.137	20.101**
P×Z	0.543	6	0.090	13.238**
Error	1.817	266	0.007	-
T	4.615	279	-	-