不同耕播方式对秸秆全量还田下麦茬直播稻生长和产量的影响

doi:10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2023.03.013

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为提高旱直播水稻耕播质量，实现旱直播水稻的高产稳产，在2020和2021年探究了秸秆全量还田下双轴旱地旋耕条播（T1）、单轴旱地旋耕条播（T2）和免耕撒播方式（T3）对旱直播水稻生长和产量的影响。结果表明，在水稻各主要生育时期，土壤容重均以T1处理最低，T3处理最高，而土壤孔隙度则以T1处理最高，T3处理最低。在水稻生长方面，与T2和T3处理相比，T1处理显著改善了水稻的根系氧化力，促进了分蘖的发生，同时T1处理下地上部关键时期的叶面积指数和干物质积累量和主要时期的光合势和群体生长率均提高。在产量及其构成因素方面，与T2和T3处理相比，T1处理的有效穗数和群体颖花量显著增加，穗粒数略有增加，但千粒重和结实率无显著差异，使得2年水稻产量均呈现T1>T2>T3，且各处理间差异显著。综上所述，在秸秆全量还田条件下，采用双轴旱地旋耕条播方式有利于改善土壤性状，增加根系活力，从而促进旱直播稻的高产稳产。

关键词: 耕播方式, 秸秆还田, 旱直播, 产量, 水稻

Abstract:

In order to improve the cultivation quality of rice in dry direct-seeding and achieve its high and stable grain yield, the effects of different tillage and sowing methods, dryland biaxial rotary tillage and drilling sowing method (T1), dryland uniaxial rotary tillage and drilling sowing method (T2) and dryland no-tillage and broadcast sowing method (T3), on the growth and yield of dry direct-seeding rice under full straw returning were investigated in 2020 and 2021. The results showed that the soil bulk density was the lowest in T1 and the highest in T3 treatment, while the soil porosity was the highest in T1 and the lowest in T3 treatment. In terms of rice growth, compared with T2 and T3 treatments, T1 significantly improved the root oxidation activity and promoted the occurrence of tillering of rice. At the same time, the leaf area index and dry matter accumulation of the shoot in the main stages and the photosynthetic potential and crop growth rate in the main stages were improved under T1 treatment. In terms of grain yield and its components, compared with T2 and T3 treatments, T1 treatment significantly increased the number of panicles and spikelets, slightly increased spikelets per panicle, but there was no significant difference in 1000-grain weight and seed-setting rate, which made the grain yield of different treatments showed the rule of T1>T2>T3 in two years, and there were significant differences among all treatments. In summary, under the condition of full straw returning to the paddy field, the dryland biaxial rotary tillage and drilling sowing method was beneficial to soil properties and increase root activity, and promoted the high and stable grain yield of dry direct-seeding rice.

Key words: Tillage and sowing method, Straw returned, Dry direct-seeding, Yield, Rice

卫云飞, 李猛, 季新, 刘娟, 王付娟, 刘秋员. 不同耕播方式对秸秆全量还田下麦茬直播稻生长和产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023 (3): 94–100

Wei Yunfei, Li Meng, Ji Xin, Liu Juan, Wang Fujuan, Liu Qiuyuan. Effects of Different Tillage and Sowing Methods on the Growth and Yield of Direct-Seeding Rice under Full Returning of Straw[J]. Crops, 2023(3): 94–100

图/表 6

表1

图1

图2

表2

表3

表4

参考文献 34

[1]	Zhao H F, Fu Y S, Wang X H, et al. Timing of rice maturity in China is affected more by transplanting date than by climate change. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2016, 216:215-220. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2015.11.001
[2]	Peng S B, Tang Q Y, Zou Y B. Current status and challenges of rice production in China. Plant Production Science, 2008, 12(1):3-8. doi: 10.1626/pps.12.3
[3]	Bhushan L, Ladha J K, Gupta R K, et al. Saving of water and labor in a rice-wheat system with no-tillage and direct seeding technologies. Agronomy Journal, 2007, 99(5):1288-1296. doi: 10.2134/agronj2006.0227
[4]	罗锡文, 王在满, 曾山, 等. 水稻机械化直播技术研究进展. 华南农业大学学报, 2019, 40(5):1-13.
[5]	Tao Y, Chen Q, Peng S B, et al. Lower global warming potential and higher yield of wet direct-seeded rice in central China. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2016, 36(2):24. doi: 10.1007/s13593-016-0361-2
[6]	Wang W X, Du J, Zhou Y Z, et al. Effects of different mechanical direct seeding methods on grain yield and lodging resistance of early indica rice in South China. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2021, 20(5):1204-1215. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(20)63191-4
[7]	冯延江, 王麒, 赵宏亮, 等. 我国水稻直播技术研究现状及展望. 中国稻米, 2020, 26(1):23-27. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2020.01.005
[8]	章清杞, 蔡来龙, 黄荣华, 等. 直播稻栽培技术研究进展. 亚热带农业研究, 2020, 16(1):1-7.
[9]	轧宗杰, 卢树昌, 侯琨. 水稻旱直播栽培发展现状、问题及应用前景. 作物杂志, 2020(2):9-15.
[10]	张洪程, 邢志鹏, 翁文安, 等. 生育约束型直播水稻生育特征与稳产关键技术. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(7):1322-1337. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.07.002
[11]	王文霞, 曾研华, 曾勇军, 等. 机械穴直播早籼稻产量和品质形成的播期效应. 江西农业大学学报, 2017, 39(4):641-648.
[12]	姚义, 霍中洋, 张洪程, 等. 播期对麦茬直播粳稻产量及品质的影响. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(15):3098-3107. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.15.004
[13]	吴培, 陈天晔, 袁嘉琦, 等. 施氮量和直播密度互作对水稻产量形成特征的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2019, 33(3):269-281. doi: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2019.8112
[14]	孙永健, 郑洪帧, 徐徽, 等. 机械旱直播方式促进水稻生长发育提高产量. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(20):10-18.
[15]	戴亿政, 罗锡文, 张明华, 等. 气吹集排式水稻旱直播机关键部件设计与试验. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(10):1-8.
[16]	李绍平, 邢志鹏, 田晋钰, 等. 机械旱直播方式对水稻产量和光合物质生产特征的影响. 农业工程学报, 2022, 38(7):1-9.
[17]	赵凌天, 咸云宇, 刘光明, 等. 不同机械化耕播模式对冬小麦幼苗质量和产量的影响. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(17):31-38.
[18]	Ferraro D O, Ghersa C M. Quantifying the crop management influence on arable soil condition in the Inland Pampa (Argentina). Geoderma, 2007, 141(1):43-52. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2007.04.025
[19]	Wang Z Q, Gu D J, Beebout S S, et al. Effect of irrigation regime on grain yield, water productivity, and methane emissions in dry direct-seeded rice grown in raised beds with wheat straw incorporation. The Crop Journal, 2018, 6(5):495-508. doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2018.05.004
[20]	胡群, 夏敏, 张洪程, 等. 氮肥运筹对钵苗机插优质食味水稻产量及氮素吸收利用的影响. 作物学报, 2016, 42(11):1666-1676.
[21]	严奉君, 孙永健, 马均, 等. 灌溉方式与秸秆覆盖优化施氮模式对秸秆腐熟特征及水稻氮素利用的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(11):1435-1444.
[22]	王力扬. 超高茬麦田套稻秸秆还田耕作方式的配套技术. 耕作与栽培, 2003, 3(4):4-5.
[23]	刘磊, 宋娜娜, 齐晓丽, 等. 水稻根系特征与氮吸收利用效率关系的研究进展. 作物杂志, 2022(1):11-19.
[24]	潘剑玲, 代万安, 尚占环, 等. 秸秆还田对土壤有机质和氮素有效性影响及机制研究进展. 中国生态农业学报, 2013, 21(5):526-535.
[25]	Nie T Z, Chen P, Zhang Z X, et al. Effects of irrigation method and rice straw incorporation on CH₄ emissions of paddy fields in Northeast China. Paddy and Water Environment, 2020, 18(1):111-120. doi: 10.1007/s10333-019-00768-5
[26]	金鑫, 蔡林运, 李刚华, 等. 小麦秸秆全量还田对水稻生长及稻田氧化还原物质的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2013(5):80-85.
[27]	Chu G, Wang Z Q, Zhang H, et al. Alternate wetting and moderate drying increases rice yield and reduces methane emission in paddy field with wheat straw residue incorporation. Food and Energy Security, 2015, 4(3):238-254. doi: 10.1002/fes3.2015.4.issue-3
[28]	张佳倩, 李福, 孙峰成, 等. 秸秆还田条件下不同耕作方式对玉米田土壤物理性状的影响. 江西农业大学学报, 2022, 44(3):759-772.
[29]	Li S H, Guo L J, Cao C G, et al. Integrated assessment of carbon footprint, energy budget and net ecosystem economic efficiency from rice fields under different tillage modes in central China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 295:126398. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126398
[30]	李江, 潘艳川, 缴锡云, 等. 加气灌溉对麦秸秆还田后土壤还原性与水稻生长的影响. 农业机械学报, 2021, 52(9):250-259.
[31]	Osaki M, Shinano T, Matsumoto M, et al. A root-shoot interaction hypothesis for high productivity of field crops. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 1997, 43(S1):1079-1084. doi: 10.1080/00380768.1997.11863721
[32]	Zhang H, Xue Y G, Wang Z Q, et al. An alternate wetting and moderate soil drying regime improves root and shoot growth in rice. Crop Science, 2009, 49(6):2246-2260. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2009.02.0099
[33]	Liu C, Lu M, Cui J, et al. Effects of straw carbon input on carbon dynamics in agricultural soils: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biology, 2014, 20(5):1366-1381. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12517 pmid: 24395454
[34]	轧宗杰, 卢树昌, 侯琨. 水稻旱直播栽培发展现状、问题及应用前景. 作物杂志, 2020(2):9-15.

相关文章 15

[1]	袁帅, 陈基旺, 陈平平, 易镇邪. 湘早籼45号头季与再生季产量及镉积累分配对灌溉方式的响应[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 101–108
[2]	张国忠, 李娟, 李毓才, 金寿林, 洪汝科, 黄大军, 普世皇, 施从波, 段自林, 马迪, 陈丽娟. 氮肥减施与移栽密度对杂交粳稻滇禾优615产量和食味品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 109–115
[3]	马义虎, 何贤彪, 陈剑, 汤学军, 王旭辉, 何豪豪, 金羽清, 齐文, 蒋海凌, 周翠. 秧龄对浙东南地区优质稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 116–125
[4]	赵云, 冯国郡, 胡相伟, 吾买尔江·库尔班, 李鹏兵, 李翠梅, 阿克博塔·木合亚提. 新疆喀什地区适栽抗除草剂复播谷子品种筛选初报[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 126–133
[5]	邢丕鹏, 黄彦峰, 易思媛, 兰儒剑, 潘圣刚, 莫钊文, 田华, 段美洋, 唐湘如. 抽穗期叶面喷施鸟氨酸对香稻产量、品质以及2-乙酰基-1-吡咯啉生物合成的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 134–138
[6]	李俊志, 常旭虹, 王德梅, 王艳杰, 杨玉双, 赵广才. 施氮水平对不同强筋小麦品种产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 148–153
[7]	宋春燕, 万运帆, 李玉娥, 蔡岸冬, 胡严炎, 周慧, 朱波, 王斌. 温度和CO₂浓度升高下双季稻茎蘖动态、成穗率与产量的关系[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 159–166
[8]	徐茜, 曾新宇, 肖波, 李保证, 张兴端. 叶面肥对叶菜型甘薯茎尖产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 183–187
[9]	栾金华, 宋欣阳, 汪磊, 孙丽丽, 程艳双, 董浩, 张佳, 程效义, 徐海. 辽宁省水稻新品系苗期耐盐性差异研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 20–26
[10]	吴艳, 柳开楼, 张景云, 宋惠洁, 胡丹丹. 增施大豆豆粕及豆粕炭对酸性水稻土的改良效果及对水稻产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 200–204
[11]	郭书磊, 王瑛, 魏良明, 张新, 刘焱, 吴伟华, 卢道文, 雷晓兵, 王振华, 鲁晓民. 不同生态条件下玉米产量影响因素分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 205–214
[12]	罗四维, 石秀楠, 贾永红, 张金汕, 王凯, 李丹丹, 王润琪, 董艳雪, 石书兵. 滴灌的毛管间距和滴头间距对匀播冬小麦光合、干物质积累和产量形成的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 230–237
[13]	邵扬, 郭延平, 闵庚梅, 杨晓明. 不同功能除草剂对蚕豆生长和田间杂草的防治效果[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 254–259
[14]	张海斌, 吴晓华, 于美玲, 王小兵, 叶君, 崔思宇, 李元清, 王占贤, 张宏旭, 薛伟, 李岩, 崔国惠, 赵轩微, 刘娟. 内蒙古区域试验小麦品种（系）籽粒产量AMMI模型分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 27–34
[15]	李晶, 李鹏程, 贺永斌, 邢雅玲, 孟凡华, 周谦, 南铭. 16份俄罗斯冬小麦品种资源主要性状多元分析和综合评价[J]. 作物杂志, 2023, (3): 58–65

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	土壤容重Soil bulk density (g/cm³)				土壤孔隙度Soil porosity (%)
年份 Year	处理 Treatment	分蘖中期 MT	拔节期 JT	抽穗期 HT	成熟期 MA	分蘖中期 MT	拔节期 JT	抽穗期 HT	成熟期 MA
2020	T1	0.81c	1.08c	1.10c	1.13c	69.2a	59.3a	58.6a	57.5a
	T2	1.01b	1.29b	1.32b	1.37b	62.2b	51.1b	50.4b	48.3b
	T3	1.24a	1.63a	1.58a	1.71a	53.4c	38.7c	40.6c	35.7c
2021	T1	0.87c	1.10c	1.21c	1.22c	67.5a	58.8a	54.8a	54.1a
	T2	1.07b	1.30b	1.35b	1.41b	59.7b	50.7b	49.2b	47.0b
	T3	1.31a	1.49a	1.65a	1.61a	50.8c	43.8c	37.7c	39.4c
年份Year (Y)		NS	NS	NS	NS	NS	NS	NS	NS
处理Treatment (T)		**	**	**	**	**	**	**	**
Y×T		NS	*	NS	*	NS	*	NS	NS

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	LAI					光合势Photosynthetic potential [(m²·d)/hm²]
		分蘖中期 MT	拔节期 JT	抽穗期 HT	成熟期 MA		播种-分蘖中期 ST-MT	分蘖中期-拔节期 MT-JT	拔节-抽穗期 JT-HT	抽穗期-成熟期 HT-MA
		分蘖中期 MT	拔节期 JT	抽穗期 HT	成熟期 MA	2020	播种-分蘖中期 ST-MT	分蘖中期-拔节期 MT-JT	拔节-抽穗期 JT-HT	抽穗期-成熟期 HT-MA	T1	3.3a	4.8a	7.8a	4.3a	66.1a	60.8a	157.5a	302.6a
	T2	3.0b	4.3b	7.2b	3.9b		59.9b	55.5b	145.1b	277.4b
	T3	2.6c	3.8c	6.9b	3.6c		52.1c	48.1c	133.8c	262.5c
2021	T1	3.5a	5.1a	8.1a	4.5a		71.3a	64.2a	163.8a	315.1a
	T2	3.1b	4.2b	7.6b	4.1b		62.6b	55.2b	147.1b	291.5b
	T3	2.5c	3.7c	7.3b	3.5c		48.9c	46.1c	137.5c	269.9c
年份Year (Y)		NS	NS	NS	NS		NS	NS	NS	NS
处理Treatment (T)		**	**	*	**		**	**	**	**
Y×T		NS	NS	NS	NS		*	*	NS	NS

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	地上部干重Above-ground dry weight (t/hm²)					群体生长率Crop growth rate [g/(m²?d)]
		分蘖中期 MT	拔节期 JT	抽穗期 HT	成熟期 MA		播种-分蘖中期 ST-MT	分蘖中期-拔节期 MT-JT	拔节-抽穗期 JT-HT	抽穗期-成熟期 HT-MA
		分蘖中期 MT	拔节期 JT	抽穗期 HT	成熟期 MA	2020	播种-分蘖中期 ST-MT	分蘖中期-拔节期 MT-JT	拔节-抽穗期 JT-HT	抽穗期-成熟期 HT-MA	T1	2.9a	5.5a	13.1a	22.2a	7.2a	17.7a	30.3a	18.1a
	T2	2.5b	4.9b	12.7ab	20.3b		6.3b	16.0b	31.1a	15.1b
	T3	2.2c	4.4c	12.4b	18.7c		5.3c	15.4b	31.8a	12.6c
2021	T1	2.6a	5.3a	13.3a	21.8a		6.4a	18.3a	31.7b	18.3a
	T2	2.3b	4.7b	12.9ab	20.7b		5.8b	15.8b	32.8ab	15.6b
	T3	2.0c	4.1c	12.6b	19.2c		5.0c	14.1c	34.1a	13.2c
年份Year (Y)		NS	NS	NS	NS		**	*	NS	NS
处理Treatment (T)		**	**	*	**		**	**	NS	**
Y×T		NS	*	NS	NS		NS	NS	NS	NS

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	有效穗数 Panicles number	穗粒数 Spikelets per panicle	群体颖花量 Spikelet number	结实率 Seed-setting rate (%)	千粒重 1000-grain weight (g)	产量 Yield (t/hm²)
2020	T1	435.1a	102.2a	44 472.2a	86.0a	28.0a	10.7a
	T2	393.7b	98.2b	38 648.6b	86.7a	27.9a	9.5b
	T3	388.0b	91.0c	35 300.5c	87.2a	28.3a	8.6c
2021	T1	459.9a	95.7a	44 003.4a	87.1a	28.4a	10.9a
	T2	404.4b	93.3a	37 728.4b	87.6a	28.9a	9.6b
	T3	391.5c	84.8b	33 208.7c	87.4a	28.5a	8.3c
年份Year (Y)		NS	NS	NS	NS	NS	NS
处理Treatment (T)		**	**	**	NS	NS	**
Y×T		*	NS	NS	NS	NS	NS