水氮互作对不同小麦品种生理参数及产量形成的影响

doi:10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2022.03.018

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为明确河北山前平原区合理的小麦水氮互作方式,以济麦22（JM-22）和藁优2018（GY-2018）为材料,设置高氮/高水（GD/GS）、中氮/高水（ZD/GS）、低氮/高水（DD/GS）、高氮/中水（GD/ZS）、中氮/中水（ZD/ZS）、低氮/中水（DD/ZS）、高氮/低水（GD/DS）、中氮/低水（ZD/DS）和低氮/低水（DD/DS）9个处理,研究水氮互作对不同小麦品种生理参数和产量形成的影响。结果表明,随着水氮量的增加,株高、旗叶面积和地上部干重增加,旗叶面积成熟期在ZD处理下最大,且GS>ZS>DS,GY-2018的植株生长和干物质积累量高于JM-22。此外,水氮越多,2个品种的叶绿素相对含量（SPAD）越大,各处理均表现出GD>ZD>DD的变化趋势,而GS、ZS和DS在3个时期无明显变化规律,2个品种相比较,JM-22的SPAD值较大,可溶性蛋白和可溶性糖含量均表现为GD>ZD>DD,而后期ZD处理最高,且GS>ZS>DS,GY-2018较JM-22更有利于碳水化合物的积累,丙二醛和活性氧含量随着施氮量的增加而降低,而超氧化物歧化酶和过氧化物酶活性却升高,但不同灌水量使酶活性在不同时期的变化不同,GY-2018的酶活性更高,有利于延缓后期叶片衰老。产量及其构成因素均表现为ZD处理下最高,且GS>ZS>DS,JM-22在ZD/GS处理下的氮肥生产效率和水分利用效率最高,产量也最高,为9927.78kg/hm²,较GY-2018提高10.07%。综上,ZD/GS（210kg/hm²,1200m³/hm²）是最理想的水氮互作方式。

关键词: 小麦, 水氮互作, 生长特性, 生理参数, 产量形成

Abstract:

To investigate a reasonable water-nitrogen interaction model at mountain front plain area in Hebei province and provide theoretical support for wheat development in that location, the influence of water-nitrogen interaction on physiological parameters and yield formation of different wheat varieties using Jimai 22 (JM-22) and Gaoyou 2018 (GY-2018) as materials were investigated and GD/GS, ZD/GS, DD/GS, GD/ZS, ZD/ZS, DD/ZS, GD/DS, ZD/DS, and DD/DS nine treatments were set. The results showed that with the increasing of water nitrogen, plant height, flag leaf area and aboveground dry weight became larger, flag leaf area was the largest under ZD treatment in maturation stage, GS>ZS>DS, moreover, plant growth and dry matter accumulation of GY-2018 were higher than that of JM-22. In addition, the more water and nitrogen, the greater SPAD value of two varieties and then each treatment showed GD>ZD>DD, while GS, ZS and DS had no distinct change in three stages, SPAD value of JM-22 was large. Soluble protein and sugar contents were showed GD>ZD>DD, but the highest in the later stage was ZD treatment, GS>ZS>DS, furthermore, GY-2018 was more conducive to carbohydrate accumulation than that of JM-22. Malonyldialdehyde and reactive oxygen contents decreased with the increasing of nitrogen application, but superoxide dismutase and peroxidase enzyme activities increased, however, the changes of enzyme activities at different stages were different with different irrigation amount, GY-2018 was higher, which was helpful to delay senescence of leaves in later stage. The yield and its components showed the highest under ZD treatment, and GS>ZS>DS, besides JM-22 nitrogen fertilizer production efficiency and water use efficiency under ZD/GS treatment was the highest, and with the highest yield of 9927.78kg/ha, which increased 10.07% compared with GY-2018. From these results, it was concluded that ZD/GS (210kg/ha, 1200m³/ha) was the most suitable mode of water and nitrogen interaction.

Key words: Wheat, Water-nitrogen interactions, Growth characteristics, Physiological parameters, Yield formation

董伟欣, 张月辰. 水氮互作对不同小麦品种生理参数及产量形成的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2022 (3): 125–133

Dong Weixin, Zhang Yuechen. Effects of Water-Nitrogen Interaction on Physiological Parameters and Yield Formation of Different Wheat Varieties[J]. Crops, 2022(3): 125–133

图/表 7

表1

水氮互作对小麦株高、旗叶面积和地上部干重的影响

指标 Index	处理 Treatment	JM-22			GY-2018
指标 Index	处理 Treatment	开花期 Flowering stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturation stage	开花期 Flowering stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturation stage
株高 Plant height (cm)	GD/GS	79.58±7.11a	81.28±5.86a	83.44±3.82a	83.00±2.31a	83.07±4.26a	83.67±3.21a
株高 Plant height (cm)	ZD/GS	79.17±2.55a	80.39±3.33ab	80.61±3.15b	81.50±3.67ab	81.67±2.71a	81.95±2.67ab
	DD/GS	79.06±5.39a	80.06±2.88ab	80.22±3.69b	79.17±2.51d	80.28±2.65a	80.78±2.79bc
	GD/ZS	78.89±3.38a	79.89±2.61ab	79.67±3.65b	82.61±3.45a	82.67±4.00a	82.78±3.59a
	ZD/ZS	78.00±3.38a	79.56±2.36ab	79.11±3.23bc	82.57±3.05a	82.64±2.38a	82.75±2.95a
	DD/ZS	78.61±3.29a	77.83±3.88b	78.28±2.87bcd	82.56±3.17a	82.22±1.83a	81.62±2.48ab
	GD/DS	78.44±2.18a	79.67±3.66ab	78.67±2.95bcd	81.28±2.63abc	81.50±3.29a	81.78±1.48a
	ZD/DS	77.89±4.11a	78.89±2.42ab	77.11±2.89cd	80.22±2.91bcd	80.74±2.91a	80.77±3.09bc
	DD/DS	77.56±2.79a	78.28±5.89ab	76.28±5.14d	79.28±2.24cd	80.67±2.99a	78.83±3.62c
旗叶面积 Flag leaf area (cm²)	GD/GS	15.98±3.25a	16.42±2.48a	17.03±3.63ab	18.35±3.18a	18.96±4.08a	19.53±2.85a
旗叶面积 Flag leaf area (cm²)	ZD/GS	15.83±3.31a	16.61±2.39a	19.81±4.05a	17.31±2.91ab	18.57±3.49a	19.92±3.66a
	DD/GS	15.21±2.66a	15.22±4.03a	16.97±3.11ab	16.81±2.91ab	18.49±2.87a	18.91±3.13ab
	GD/ZS	15.31±2.20a	16.31±3.01a	17.79±4.76ab	18.35±2.62a	18.89±4.25a	19.91±3.52a
	ZD/ZS	15.06±3.77a	16.20±3.50a	19.21±3.45a	17.79±4.64ab	17.99±4.41a	19.19±2.47ab
	DD/ZS	14.15±3.69a	15.28±4.14a	15.40±3.44b	17.41±4.45ab	17.96±2.86a	18.63±2.86ab
	GD/DS	15.73±3.67a	16.51±2.56a	17.89±3.68ab	17.35±3.29ab	17.64±3.75a	17.77±3.94b
	ZD/DS	15.23±4.12a	16.19±4.01a	18.12±3.21ab	16.81±3.79ab	17.69±4.51a	18.47±4.58ab
	DD/DS	14.84±3.55a	15.98±3.49a	15.91±4.10ab	15.93±3.38b	16.98±3.64a	17.22±2.41b
地上部干重 Dry weight of aboveground (g)	GD/GS	2.49±0.02a	4.59±1.21a	6.16±0.89a	4.31±0.67a	5.69±0.29a	7.29±1.51a
地上部干重 Dry weight of aboveground (g)	ZD/GS	2.34±0.53a	4.11±0.39a	6.05±0.17a	3.91±0.51a	5.17±0.56ab	6.92±1.03a
	DD/GS	2.29±0.25a	4.09±0.18a	5.49±0.37a	3.88±0.89a	4.46±0.67bc	6.75±1.79a
	GD/ZS	2.34±0.35a	4.08±0.27a	5.44±0.68a	3.48±0.37ab	4.24±1.21bc	6.47±0.98a
	ZD/ZS	2.11±0.39a	3.93±0.57a	5.33±0.17a	2.78±0.52bc	4.21±0.49bc	6.25±0.19a
	DD/ZS	2.09±0.26a	3.84±0.38a	5.23±0.59a	2.69±0.33bc	4.08±0.29bc	6.22±1.36a
	GD/DS	2.06±0.38a	3.48±0.89a	5.21±0.82a	2.29±0.19c	3.90±0.88c	6.11±0.51a
	ZD/DS	1.97±0.41a	3.47±0.98a	5.08±1.08a	2.14±0.14c	3.75±0.59c	5.82±0.75a
	DD/DS	1.94±0.02a	3.33±0.31a	5.01±1.07a	2.11±0.46c	3.68±0.61c	5.59±0.27a

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

表2

水氮互作及不同因素互作效应对产量及其构成因素的影响

品种 Variety	处理 Treatment	穗数 Spike number (×10⁴/hm²)	穗粒数 Grain number per spike	穗粒重 Grain weight per spike(g)	千粒重 1000- grain weight (g)	产量 Yield (kg/hm²)
JM-22	GD/GS	761.14±122.71d	34.4±4.99abc	1.77±0.26ab	50.43±2.12ab	9483.34±543.35abc
	ZD/GS	876.87±68.93bcd	36.2±7.42a	1.87±0.41a	54.80±3.61a	9927.78±618.43a
	DD/GS	803.43±20.39cd	34.7±4.02ab	1.71±0.22ab	48.43±1.78abc	9261.12±823.17abc
	GD/ZS	815.67±57.27bcd	29.7±3.09c	1.49±0.28bc	46.70±4.35bc	9261.12±504.23abc
	ZD/ZS	879.09±72.01bcd	33.8±3.26abc	1.61±0.31abc	49.97±1.33ab	9816.67±301.11ab
	DD/ZS	763.37±44.46cd	31.2±3.46bc	1.46±0.24bc	42.83±1.69bc	9038.89±613.23abcd
	GD/DS	931.39±33.88ab	31.3±3.19bc	1.46±0.19bc	45.03±6.02bc	8816.67±315.66bcd
	ZD/DS	1021.53±85.18a	31.5±6.47abc	1.54±0.27bc	48.77±2.45abc	8705.56±334.21cd
	DD/DS	886.88±75.12bc	30.7±4.11bc	1.39±0.29c	41.13±7.68c	8038.89±314.31d
GY-2018	GD/GS	1159.52±100.01ab	29.4±4.88ab	1.58±0.18ab	51.60±1.51a	8816.67±314.41a
	ZD/GS	1187.33±141.96a	33.0±6.15a	1.61±0.32a	53.00±2.61a	8927.78±408.35a
	DD/GS	921.38±53.73c	28.8±3.58ab	1.48±0.21abc	50.83±1.55a	8594.46±334.31a
	GD/ZS	1003.73±36.77abc	30.2±3.33a	1.49±0.22abc	48.53±0.83ab	8372.23±314.31ab
	ZD/ZS	1015.97±138.46abc	31.4±5.99a	1.51±0.32abc	51.37±1.96a	8483.34±303.22ab
	DD/ZS	954.76±157.43bc	27.7±4.64ab	1.45±0.21abc	46.40±5.41ab	8261.12±539.21ab
	GD/DS	949.19±117.99bc	26.8±3.46ab	1.29±0.31c	47.40±5.65ab	7261.12±519.21bc
	ZD/DS	992.59±34.26abc	28.7±6.21ab	1.33±0.24bc	49.53±1.33ab	7816.64±467.56ab
	DD/DS	925.83±132.12c	23.9±4.78b	1.04±0.40d	44.00±4.73b	6483.34±348.37c
变量来源 Variable source	品种	***	***	**	ns	***
变量来源 Variable source	水	ns	***	**	***	***
	氮	**	*	ns	***	**
	品种×水	**	ns	ns	ns	ns
	品种×氮	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
	水×氮	ns	**	**	*	**
	品种×水×氮	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns

表2

图5

参考文献 25

[1]	Yang X L, Gao W S, Shi Q H, et al. Impact of climate change on the water requirement of summer maize in the Huang-Huai-Hai farming region. Agricultural Water Management, 2013, 124(2):20-27. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2013.03.017
[2]	宋先松, 石培基, 金蓉. 中国水资源空间分布不均引发的供需矛盾分析. 干旱区研究, 2005, 22(2):162-166.
[3]	串丽敏, 何萍, 赵同科, 等. 中国小麦季氮素养分循环与平衡特征. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(1):76-86.
[4]	赵连佳, 薛丽华, 孙乾坤, 等. 不同水氮处理对滴灌冬小麦田耗水特性及水氮利用效率的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2016, 36(8):1050-1059.
[5]	丁继君, 栗丽, 王旭钰. 水肥藕合对冬小麦生长和产量的影响. 山西水土保持科技, 2014(4):12-14.
[6]	王磊, 董树亭, 刘鹏, 等. 水氮互作对冬小麦光合生理特性和产量的影响. 水土保持学报, 2018, 32(3):301-308.
[7]	吕广德, 王超, 靳雪梅, 等. 水氮互作对冬小麦干物质及氮素积累和产量的影响. 应用生态学报, 2020, 3(5):1-13.
[8]	赵芳华, 张树华, 郭程瑾, 等. 限水灌溉下春季追氮方式对小麦旗叶光合和衰老特性的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2009, 15(2):247-254.
[9]	冉文星. 滴灌小麦水氮耦合的生理调控效应研究. 阿拉尔:塔里木大学, 2016.
[10]	董博, 于显枫, 张绪成, 等. 水氮互作对春小麦植株养分含量及产量的影响. 西北农业学报, 2011, 20(6):90-95.
[11]	曹勇, 姬虎太, 裴雪霞, 等. 水氮运筹对中筋冬小麦‘临Y7287’产量和品质的影响. 中国农学通报, 2016, 32(27):42-46.
[12]	Read S M, Northcote D H. Minimization of variation in the response to different proteins of the coomassie blue G dye-binding assay for protein. Analytical Biochemistry, 1981, 116(1):53-64. pmid: 7304986
[13]	白宝璋, 靳占忠, 李存东. 植物生理学试验教程. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 1996:61-62.
[14]	韩胜芳, 邓若磊, 徐海荣, 等. 缺磷条件下不同磷效率水稻品种光合特性和细胞保护酶活性. 应用生态学报, 2007, 18(11):2462-2467.
[15]	邹琦. 植物生理学实验指导. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[16]	Cakmak I, Marschner H. Magnesium deficiency and high light intensity enhance activities of superoxide dismutase,ascorbate peroxidate and glutathione ruductase in bean leaves. Plant Physiology, 1992, 98:1222-1227. doi: 10.1104/pp.98.4.1222 pmid: 16668779
[17]	董博, 于显枫, 郭天文, 等. 水氮互作对春小麦不同生育期植株性状及产量的影响. 甘肃农业科技, 2011(1):5-9.
[18]	金修宽, 赵同科. 测墒补灌和施氮对冬小麦产量及氮素吸收分配的影响. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(2):233-239.
[19]	谷艳芳, 丁圣彦, 高志英, 等. 干旱胁迫下冬小麦光合产物分配格局及其与产量的关系. 生态学报, 2010, 30(5):1167-1173.
[20]	郭丽. 水氮耦合对冬小麦―夏玉米生理特性及产量影响的研究. 保定:河北农业大学, 2010.
[21]	于显枫. 水氮互作对小麦生理特性及产量的影响. 兰州:甘肃农业大学, 2008.
[22]	周萍, 陈志国, 庄丽, 等. 水氮互作对滴灌春小麦渗透调节物及产量的影响. 石河子大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 31(4):425-429.
[23]	王小燕, 王东, 于振文. 水氮互作对小麦旗叶光合特性、籽粒产量及氮素和水分利用率的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2009, 27(6):17-22.
[24]	Pan F F, Li H, Li P P, et al. Effects of supplemental irrigation based on testing soil moisture and nitrogen fertilization amount on the yield and nitrogen uptake of winter wheat. Agricultural Science and Technology, 2014, 15(5):817-820,823.
[25]	黄玲, 杨文平, 胡喜巧, 等. 水氮互作对冬小麦耗水特性和氮素利用的影响. 水土保持学报, 2016, 30(2):168-174.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed