洪霞,胡田田,刘杰,冯璞玉,王丽,杨硕欢,张美玲.基于方法集的番茄营养品质组合评价模型构建及其对水肥供应的响应[J].干旱地区农业研究,2019,37(3):129~138
基于方法集的番茄营养品质组合评价模型构建及其对水肥供应的响应
Construction of comprehensive evaluation model for tomato nutrition quality based on method set and its response to water and fertilizer supply
  
DOI:10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2019.03.17
中文关键词:  温室番茄  营养品质  组合评价模型  方法集  肥料  灌溉
英文关键词:greenhouse tomato  nutritional quality  combination evaluation model  method set  fertilizer  irrigation
基金项目:国家自然科学基金“番茄优质高效的水钾耦合响应机制与灌水施钾模式研究”(51279169);国家十二五“863”子课题“作物优质高效的水肥耦合响应机制与模式”(2011AA100504)
作者单位
洪霞 西北农林科技大学水利与建筑工程学院 陕西 杨凌 712100西北农林科技大学旱区农业水土工程教育部重点实验室 陕西 杨凌 712100 
胡田田 西北农林科技大学水利与建筑工程学院 陕西 杨凌 712100西北农林科技大学旱区农业水土工程教育部重点实验室 陕西 杨凌 712100 
刘杰 西北农林科技大学水利与建筑工程学院 陕西 杨凌 712100西北农林科技大学旱区农业水土工程教育部重点实验室 陕西 杨凌 712100 
冯璞玉 西北农林科技大学水利与建筑工程学院 陕西 杨凌 712100西北农林科技大学旱区农业水土工程教育部重点实验室 陕西 杨凌 712100 
王丽 西北农林科技大学水利与建筑工程学院 陕西 杨凌 712100西北农林科技大学旱区农业水土工程教育部重点实验室 陕西 杨凌 712100 
杨硕欢 西北农林科技大学水利与建筑工程学院 陕西 杨凌 712100西北农林科技大学旱区农业水土工程教育部重点实验室 陕西 杨凌 712100 
张美玲 内蒙古水利水电勘测设计院设计处 内蒙古 呼和浩特 010020 
摘要点击次数: 894
全文下载次数: 508
中文摘要:
      为探索番茄营养品质综合评价方法,分析综合评价指标对水肥供应的响应,以灌水量、有机肥及氮、磷、钾肥用量为试验因素,按照五元二次通用旋转组合设计,进行番茄温室试验,监测番茄可溶性固形物、可溶性糖、可滴定酸、糖酸比、番茄红素和维生素C等6项单一品质指标。应用方法集的思想,以主成分分析法、隶属函数分析法、基于组合赋权的TOPSIS模型和灰色关联度分析法4种独立的评价方法为基础,运用基于整体差异的组合评价模型,构建番茄营养品质组合评价模型,并探索综合评价指标对水肥供应的响应。结果表明,采用4种独立评价方法得到的评价值两两之间呈现出良好的相关性,通过KENDALL-W一致性检验。组合评价模型与各独立方法的评价值的相关系数均在0.943以上,表明组合评价模型的有效性。因此,以此建立番茄综合营养品质指标对水肥用量的响应函数。各水肥因子对番茄综合营养品质的主效应表现为:有机肥用量>施磷量>施氮量≥灌水量>施钾量。当其他因素为中间水平时,番茄综合营养品质随灌水量、施氮量、施磷量和有机肥用量均呈开口向下的抛物线型变化,随施钾量呈开口向上的抛物线型变化。交互作用表现为,灌水量与施钾量、灌水量与有机肥用量之间存在一定的负交互作用,施氮量和施磷量存在一定的正交互作用。将灌水量、有机肥及氮、磷、钾肥用量依次控制为447.9~462.6 mm、23.2~24.0 t·hm-2、 532.6~581.0 kg·hm-2、418.0~454.3 kg·hm-2、712.6~776.9 kg·hm-2,是理论最优方案,可望获得较高的番茄综合营养品质值。
英文摘要:
      The objectives of this study were to investigate the response of tomato nutritional quality to irrigation and fertilization, and to explore a comprehensive method for evaluating the quality. A greenhouse experiment was designed using quadratic general composite rotatable method with five factors including irrigation, organic fertilizer, nitrogen (N) fertilizer, phosphorus (P) fertilizer, and potassium (K) fertilizer. Six quality indexes including soluble solid, soluble sugar, titratable acid, the ratio of sugar and acid, lycopene, and vitamin C were measured at the ripening stage of tomato fruit. We applied method set theory that is based on principal component analysis, membership function analysis, the TOPSIS model based on combination weighting, and grey relational grade analysis. By using whole diversity-based reasoning for objective combined evaluation, the evaluation model for tomato nutrition quality was established and its response to fertilization and irrigation was explored. The results showed that there was a strong correlation between the ranking values obtained by the 4 independent evaluation methods and they were verified by the KENDALL-W consistency test. The correlation coefficients of the ranking values between combination evaluation model and independent method were above 0.943, indicating the evaluation model was reliable. It also reflected the effectiveness of combination evaluation model. Therefore, the response function of tomato comprehensive nutritional quality index to water and fertilizer amount was established. The effects of water and fertilizer factors on the comprehensive nutrient quality of tomato ranked as organic fertilizer quantity > P quantity> N quantity ≥ irrigation quantity > K quantity. When other factors were at the intermediate levels, the comprehensive nutrition quality of tomato responded with increasing water, N, P, or organic fertilizer in an opening downwards parabola, and an opening upwards parabola with increasing K. A negative interaction of the amount of K fertilizer with irrigation and N fertilizer was observed. There was a positive interaction of the amount of P fertilizer and organic fertilizer. It indicated that nutritional quality tomato could be obtained when the amounts of irrigation, organic fertilizer, and N, P, and K fertilizers were at 447.9~462.6 mm, 23.2~24.0 t·hm-2, 532.6~581.0 kg·hm-2, 418.0~454.3 kg·hm-2, and 712.6~776.9 kg·hm-2, respectively.
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器