王辉,陈亚飞,许吉利,殷俐娜,王仕稳,邓西平.不同水氮环境下玉米品种的产量稳定性和干物质积累与分配差异[J].干旱地区农业研究,2024,(5):71~84
不同水氮环境下玉米品种的产量稳定性和干物质积累与分配差异
Yield stability and dry matter accumulation and distribution differences of maize cultivars under different water and nitrogen environments
  
DOI：10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2024.05.08
中文关键词:  玉米  品种  水氮调控  AMMI模型  产量  干物质积累与分配
英文关键词:maize  cultivar  water and nitrogen regulation  AMMI model  yield  dry matter accumulation and allocation
基金项目:国家“十四五”重点研发计划(2021YFD1900705)
作者单位
王辉 西北农林科技大学资源环境学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；西北农林科技大学水土保持科学与工程学院,陕西 杨凌 712100 
陈亚飞 西北农林科技大学资源环境学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；西北农林科技大学水土保持科学与工程学院,陕西 杨凌 712100 
许吉利 西北农林科技大学资源环境学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；西北农林科技大学水土保持科学与工程学院,陕西 杨凌 712100 
殷俐娜 西北农林科技大学资源环境学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；西北农林科技大学水土保持科学与工程学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所/黄土高原土壤侵蚀与旱地农业国家重点实验室,陕西 杨凌 712100 
王仕稳 西北农林科技大学资源环境学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；西北农林科技大学水土保持科学与工程学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所/黄土高原土壤侵蚀与旱地农业国家重点实验室,陕西 杨凌 712100 
邓西平 西北农林科技大学水土保持科学与工程学院,陕西 杨凌 712100；中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所/黄土高原土壤侵蚀与旱地农业国家重点实验室,陕西 杨凌 712100 
摘要点击次数: 17
全文下载次数: 11
中文摘要:
      为深入解析不同玉米品种对水氮环境的适应机制和产量形成过程，通过8个玉米品种在6种水氮处理组合下的田间试验，采用加性主效应和乘性互作（AMMI）模型分析各玉米品种在不同水氮环境下的产量稳定性，探讨这些品种产量构成因素以及干物质积累与分配的差异。结果表明，‘军育535’、‘强盛388’、‘美豫22’和‘盛育367’为产量稳定性较高的品种，‘先耕303’、 ‘秦龙14’、‘西蒙M1711’和‘金北516’为产量稳定性较低的品种。稳定性较高品种的百粒重以及吐丝期穗和成熟期籽粒的干物质积累量和分配系数显著较高，但灌溉和施氮后，稳定性较低品种的百粒重增幅分别比稳定性较高品种提高21.64%和49.22%。补灌处理后，稳定性较低品种的吐丝期穗和成熟期籽粒干物质积累量增幅比稳定性较高品种分别提高14.92%和24.79%，分配系数增幅分别提高58.40%和34.68%；施氮处理后，稳定性较低品种的吐丝期穗和成熟期籽粒干物质积累量增幅比稳定性较高品种分别提高46.96%和27.55%，分配系数增幅分别提高57.93%和61.19%；补灌和施氮后，稳定性较低品种产量增幅分别为5.91%和97.02%，从而使其在W0N0处理下产量比稳定性较高品种低9.60%，但在W1N2处理下提高0.50%。综上，稳定性较低的品种对增施氮肥或补充灌溉的响应更为敏感，其在较优的水氮条件下可表现出更显著的增产效应。
英文摘要:
      To investigate the effects of water and nitrogen on environmental adaptation and yield formation in different maize cultivars, a field experiment was carried out using eight maize cultivars under six different water and nitrogen treatment combinations. The additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) model was used to analyze the yield stability and productivity. The differential responses in dry matter accumulation and allocation among these cultivars under varying water\|nitrogen conditions were discussed. The results indicated that, among the tested cultivars, ‘Junyu 535’, ‘Qiangsheng 388’, ‘Meiyu 22’, and ‘Shengyu 367’ were cultivars with higher yield stability, while ‘Xiangeng 303’, ‘Qinlong 14’, ‘Ximeng M1711’, and ‘Jinbei 516’ exhibited lower yield stability. Cultivars with higher stability showed significantly higher 100\|grain weight, as well as significantly higher dry matter accumulation and allocation coefficients in ears during silking stage and grains during maturity stage. However, compared to cultivars with higher stability, those with lower stability exhibited increases of 21.64% and 49.22% in 100\|grain weight under irrigation and nitrogen application, respectively. Under supplemental irrigation, dry matter accumulation in ears during the silking stage and in grains during the maturity stage was 14.92% and 24.79% higher, respectively for cultivars with lower stability. Additionally, the allocation coefficients for these cultivars increased by 58.40% and 34.68%, respectively. Similarly, under nitrogen application, the dry matter accumulation in ears during silking stage and grains during maturity stage was 46.96% and 27.55% higher for cultivars with lower stability compared to those with higher stability, respectively. The allocation coefficients for cultivars with lower stability rose by 57.93% and 61.19%, respectively. Consequently, the increases in yield were 5.91% and 97.02% higher under supplementary irrigation and nitrogen application, respectively. This resulted in the yield of cultivars with lower stability being 9.60% lower than that of cultivars with higher stability under W0N0 treatment, but 0.50% higher under W1N2 treatment. This suggests that cultivars with lower stability are more sensitive to variations in nitrogen or irrigation levels.
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器