检索
E-mail
RSS
高级检索 图表检索

当期目录 我要投稿 过刊浏览
高级检索 图表检索

作物杂志,2026, 第3期: 71–79 doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2026.03.010

• 第二十八届中国科协年会学术论文专栏（主要粮食作物产能品质提升与高质量发展路径） • 上一篇    下一篇

植物生长调节剂复配腐植酸对玉米茎秆强度、籽粒灌浆及产量的影响

颜培启1(), 孔令捷1, 池昇隆1, 于洋1, 孔德庸1, 孙海燕1,2()   

  1. 1 黑龙江八一农垦大学农学院， 163319， 黑龙江大庆
    2 黑龙江省现代农业栽培技术与作物种质改良重点实验室， 163319， 黑龙江大庆
  • 收稿日期:2025-05-26 修回日期:2025-06-09 出版日期:2026-06-15 发布日期:2026-06-17
  • 通讯作者: 孙海燕，主要从事植物营养与生理研究，E-mail：shysun7908@126.com
  • 作者简介:颜培启，主要从事植物营养与肥料研究，E-mail：1946142877@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    黑龙江省“双一流”学科协同创新成果建设项目“粮食作物绿色低碳”(LJGXCG2022-107)

Effects of Plant Growth Regulators Combined with Humic Acid on Stalk Strength, Grain Filling and Yield in Maize

Yan Peiqi1(), Kong Lingjie1, Chi Shenglong1, Yu Yang1, Kong Deyong1, Sun Haiyan1,2()   

  1. 1 College of Agriculture, Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, Daqing 163319, Heilongjiang, China
    2 Heilongjiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Cultivation and Germplasm Improvement, Daqing 163319, Heilongjiang, China
  • Received:2025-05-26 Revised:2025-06-09 Online:2026-06-15 Published:2026-06-17

RichHTML

3

PDF (PC)

34

摘要：

合理提高单株粒重与种植密度有助于提高玉米产量，但密度过高易引发倒伏及抑制果穗发育等问题。以玉米品种先玉335为试验材料，在高密度（82 500株/hm2）种植条件下，于拔节期喷施乙烯利（ETH，500 mg/L）+胺鲜酯（DA-6，25 mg/L）（ED）或芸苔素内酯（BR，100 mg/L）（EB），与0（1）、200（2）、400（3）、600（4）和800 mg/L（5）浓度的腐植酸（HA）复配，共11个处理（商用调节剂玉黄金为对照），研究其对茎秆强度、籽粒灌浆及产量的调控效应。结果表明，在生育期内，ED3和ED5处理显著提高了茎粗，较CK处理平均提高2.93%~3.74%；与CK处理相比，EB3和ED3处理的穿刺强度分别显著提高9.80%和14.46%，压折强度分别显著提高9.32%和14.09%；ED3和EB4处理的百粒重较CK处理分别提高3.95%和2.33%。百粒重与灌浆参数Vmax、Wmax和Va呈极显著正相关，与W2和V2呈显著正相关，ED3处理对籽粒灌浆参数的促进效果最优。ED3与EB4较CK处理分别增产4.69%和5.40%。综上所述，ED3和EB4处理可显著增强玉米茎秆强度，提升抗倒伏能力，同时优化籽粒灌浆进程，进而显著提高产量，适用于本研究的高密度种植模式。

关键词: 玉米, 植物生长调节剂, 腐植酸, 茎秆强度, 籽粒灌浆, 产量

Abstract:

Reasonably increasing the grain weight per plant and the planting density helps improve maize yield, but excessive density tends to cause problems such as lodging and inhibition of ear development. Using maize variety Xianyu 335 as the experimental material, under high-density (82 500 plants/ha) planting conditions, ethephon (ETH, 500 mg/L) + diethyl aminoethyl hexanoate (DA-6, 25 mg/L) (ED) or brassinolide (BR, 100 mg/L) (EB) were sprayed at the jointing stage in combination with humic acid (HA) at concentrations of 0 (1), 200 (2), 400 (3), 600 (4), and 800 mg/L (5). A total of 11 treatments (with commercial regulator Yuhuangjin as the control, CK) were established to study their regulatory effects on stalk strength, grain filling, and yield. The results showed that during the growth period, ED3 and ED5 treatments significantly increased stem diameter, with an average increase of 2.93%-3.74% compared with CK. Compared with CK, the puncture strength of EB3 and ED3 treatments significantly increased by 9.80% and 14.46%, while the crushing strength significantly increased by 9.32% and 14.09%, respectively. The 100-grain weight of ED3 and EB4 treatments increased by 3.95% and 2.33% compared with CK, respectively. The 100-grain weight was extremely significantly positively correlated with grain filling parameters Vmax, Wmax, and Va, and significantly positively correlated with W2 and V2. ED3 treatment showed the best promotion effect on grain filling parameters. The yields of ED3 and EB4 treatments increased by 4.69% and 5.40% compared with CK, respectively. In conclusion, ED3 and EB4 treatments significantly enhanced stalk strength, improved lodging resistance, and optimized the grain filling process, thereby significantly increasing maize yield. These treatments are recommended for the high-density planting pattern used in this study.

Key words: Maize, Plant growth regulators, Humic acid, Stalk strength, Grain filling, Yield

表1

不同处理的调节剂复配HA浓度

处理
Treatment		 调节剂
Regulator		 HA浓度
HA concentration (mg/L)
CK 玉黄金 0
ED1 ETH+DA-6 0
ED2 ETH+DA-6 200
ED3 ETH+DA-6 400
ED4 ETH+DA-6 600
ED5 ETH+DA-6 800
EB1 ETH+BR 0
EB2 ETH+BR 200
EB3 ETH+BR 400
EB4 ETH+BR 600
EB5 ETH+BR 800

图1

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米茎粗的影响 不同小写字母表示在P < 0.05水平差异显著。下同。

表2

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米茎粗影响的主体效应检验

自变量
Independent variable		 因变量
Dependent variable		 平方和
SS		 自由度
df		 均方
MS		 F P 偏η2
ηp2 (%)
HAC 茎粗Stem diameter 6.546 4.000 1.637 7.521 0.001 25.1
PGR 9.565 1.000 9.565 43.957 0.001 32.8
HAC×PGR 36.179 4.000 9.045 41.564 0.001 64.9
误差Error 19.585 90.000 0.218
总计Total 71 323.379 120.000

图2

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米茎秆强度的影响

表3

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米茎秆强度影响的主体效应检验

自变量
Independent variable		 因变量
Dependent variable		 平方和
SS		 自由度
df		 均方
MS		 F P 偏η2
ηp2 (%)
HAC 压折强度 744.916 4 186.229 50.943 0.001 69.4
PGR 125.495 1 125.495 34.329 0.001 27.6
HAC×PGR 196.968 4 49.242 13.470 0.001 37.4
HAC 穿刺强度 21 682.123 4 5420.531 119.971 0.001 84.2
PGR 241.117 1 241.117 5.337 0.023 5.6
HAC×PGR 4340.569 4 1085.142 24.017 0.001 51.6
误差Error 压折强度 329.007 90 3.656
穿刺强度 4066.398 90 45.182
总计Total 压折强度 420 660.845 120
穿刺强度 8 101 603.990 120

图3

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米百粒重的影响

表4

Richards方程及玉米籽粒灌浆参数

处理
Treatment		 Richards方程
Richards equation		 灌浆参数Grain filling parameter 决定系数
R2
A B K D
CK y=34.908/(1+44.694e-0.096t)1/0.639 34.908bcd 44.694 0.096 0.639 0.997
ED1 y=34.496/(1+1.562e-0.078t)1/0.206 34.496cd 1.562 0.078 0.206 0.992
ED2 y=34.06/(1+7.554e-0.091t)1/0.547 34.060cd 7.554 0.091 0.547 0.996
ED3 y=36.473/(1+13.665e-0.099t)1/0.663 36.473ab 13.665 0.099 0.663 0.986
ED4 y=34.199/(1+3.445e-0.085t)1/0.353 34.199cd 4.753 0.903 0.401 0.993
ED5 y=35.763/(1+3.168e-0.083t)1/0.339 35.763abc 3.168 0.083 0.339 0.992
EB1 y=35.247/(1+3.132e-0.082t)1/0.322 35.247abcd 3.132 0.082 0.322 0.994
EB2 y=33.841/(1+20.511e-0.105t)1/0.771 33.841d 20.511 0.105 0.771 0.994
EB3 y=34.133/(1+11.597e-0.089t)1/0.672 34.133cd 11.597 0.089 0.672 0.993
EB4 y=36.889/(1+1.808e-0.075t)1/0.246 36.889a 1.808 0.075 0.246 0.988
EB5 y=34.582/(1+21.987e-0.098t)1/0.596 34.582cd 21.987 0.098 0.596 0.996

图4

玉米籽粒灌浆拟合方程及灌浆速率曲线

表5

玉米百粒重与籽粒灌浆参数相关性分析

指标Index Vmax Wmax Va W2 W3 V2
百粒重100-grain weight 0.486** 0.397** 0.390** 0.321* -0.320* 0.371*

表6

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米灌浆参数的影响

处理
Treatment		 Tmax
(d)		 Vmax
(g/d)		 Wmax
(g)		 Va
(g/d)		 D0
(d)		 R0
CK 28.302ab 0.939bc 15.794ab 0.631ab 55.651bc 0.221c
ED1 25.814e 0.895d 13.895c 0.606bc 56.971b 0.411a
ED2 28.106b 0.905d 15.320b 0.61bc 55.871b 0.173de
ED3 29.531a 1.007a 16.890a 0.677a 53.852cd 0.155e
ED4 26.012de 0.947bc 14.711bc 0.640ab 53.474d 0.250c
ED5 26.677cde 0.933c 15.112bc 0.632ab 56.979b 0.250c
EB1 26.579cde 0.899d 15.572b 0.608bc 62.261a 0.380a
EB2 27.302bcd 0.948bc 16.004ab 0.636ab 53.404d 0.149e
EB3 28.570ab 0.838e 15.771ab 0.563c 60.784a 0.141e
EB4 26.157cde 0.902d 15.078bc 0.612bc 60.338a 0.330b
EB5 27.458bc 0.961b 15.558b 0.647ab 53.703cd 0.209cd

表7

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米灌浆阶段的影响

处理
Treatment		 渐增期Gradual increase period 快增期Rapid increase period 缓增期Slow increase period
t1 (d) W1 (g) V1 (g/d) t2 (d) W2 (g) V2 (g/d) t3 (d) W3 (g) V3 (g/d)
CK 15.399b 4.453bcd 0.2889b 26.305de 20.573cd 0.782cd 42.226c 8.842abc 0.209bc
ED1 12.268cd 3.888cd 0.316b 27.094cd 20.982bc 0.774d 45.864b 9.284ab 0.202bcd
ED2 14.970b 5.608a 0.375a 25.770e 20.240cd 0.786cd 37.661de 8.096de 0.215b
ED3 17.259a 4.997ab 0.2889b 24.543ef 21.321bc 0.869a 34.408f 7.513cd 0.219b
ED4 13.500c 4.580bc 0.338ab 25.022ef 19.773d 0.791cd 38.997d 9.511a 0.247a
ED5 13.272cd 4.432bcd 0.336ab 26.811cd 20.862bc 0.779d 42.881c 8.766bc 0.205bcd
EB1 11.898d 3.964cd 0.336ab 29.612a 23.304a 0.787cd 47.663a 7.157e 0.150e
EB2 15.257b 5.220ab 0.341ab 24.089f 19.644d 0.816bc 33.023f 8.656bc 0.262a
EB3 14.973b 4.890ab 0.327ab 27.695bc 21.755b 0.786cd 39.324d 7.349e 0.187cd
EB4 11.854d 3.689d 0.315b 28.605ab 21.856b 0.764d 47.558ab 8.669bc 0.183d
EB5 15.126b 4.923ab 0.326ab 24.665ef 20.671cd 0.838ab 36.591e 8.112cd 0.222b

表8

植物生长调节剂复配HA对玉米产量及其构成因素的影响

处理
Treatment		 百粒重
100-grain
weight (g)		 穗行数
Kernel rows
per ear		 行粒数
Kernels
per row		 产量
Yield
(kg/hm2)
CK 33.44bc 16.67a 36.33bc 14 581.44d
ED1 32.41de 16.00a 35.33c 14 082.40f
ED2 32.93cde 16.00a 35.67bc 14 255.38e
ED3 34.76a 16.67a 39.67a 15 368.21a
ED4 32.95cde 16.67a 38.33bc 14 829.57c
ED5 33.53bc 16.67a 37.00b 15 179.93b
EB1 33.66bc 16.67a 36.33bc 14 900.96c
EB2 32.81cde 16.00a 35.67bc 14 453.32d
EB3 32.32e 16.67a 36.00bc 14 470.56d
EB4 34.21ab 16.67a 39.33a 15 265.47ab
EB5 33.23cd 16.67a 36.33bc 14 753.51c
HAC * ns ** **
PGR ns ns * **
HAC×PGR ** ns * **
[1] Shah A N, Tanveer M, Abbas A, et al. Combating dual challenges in maize under high planting density: stem lodging and kernel abortion. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2021, 12:699085.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.699085
[2] 王亮, 丰光, 李妍妍, 等. 玉米倒伏与植株农艺性状和病虫害发生关系的研究. 作物杂志, 2016(2):83-88.
[3] 郭书磊, 陈娜娜, 齐建双, 等. 不同密度下玉米倒伏相关性状与产量的研究. 玉米科学, 2018, 26(5):71-77.
[4] Ren H, Jiang Y, Zhao M, et al. Nitrogen supply regulates vascular bundle structure and matter transport characteristics of spring maize under high plant density. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2020, 11:602739.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.602739
[5] Wu L M, Zhang W J, Ding Y F, et al. Shading contributes to the reduction of stem mechanical strength by decreasing cell wall synthesis in japonica rice (Oryza sativa L.). Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8:881.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00881
[6] Zheng M J, Chen J, Shi Y H, et al. Manipulation of lignin metabolism by plant densities and its relationship with lodging resistance in wheat. Scientific Reports, 2017, 7:41805.
doi: 10.1038/srep41805 pmid: 28150816
[7] Hussain S, Liu T, Iqbal N, et al. Effects of lignin, cellulose, hemicellulose, sucrose and monosaccharide carbohydrates on soybean physical stem strength and yield in intercropping. Photochemical & Photobiol Sciences, 2020, 19(4):462-472.
[8] Santiago R, Souto X C, Sotelo J, et al. Relationship between maize stem structural characteristics and resistance to pink stem borer (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) attack. Journal of Economic Entomology, 2003, 96(5):1563-1570.
pmid: 14650532
[9] Klenke J R, Russel W A, Guthrie W D. Distributions for European corn borer (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) resistance ratings of S1 lines from ‘BS9’ corn. Journal of Economic Entomology, 1986, 79(4):1076-1081.
doi: 10.1093/jee/79.4.1076
[10] 吴梦寅, 蔡炜, 钟笑涵, 等. 高温胁迫对水稻籽粒灌浆与稻米品质影响及其机理研究进展. 中国稻米, 2024, 30(3):10-17.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2024.03.002
[11] 李树岩, 杨光仙, 余卫东, 等. 夏玉米不同阶段及类型倒伏对籽粒灌浆及产量的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2025, 33(4):723-736.
[12] 李国芳, 杨清龙, 赵菁菁, 等. 密度对不同玉米品种产量及籽粒灌浆特性的影响. 农业科技通讯, 2024(11):82-86.
[13] 房孟颖, 卢霖, 王庆燕, 等. 乙矮合剂对不同施氮量夏玉米根系形态构建和产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(24):4808-4822.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.24.003
[14] Ouzounidou G, Ilias I, Giannakoula A, et al. Comparative study on the effects of various plant growth regulators on growth, quality and physiology of Capsicum annuum L.. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 2010, 42(2):805-814.
[15] Fahad S, Hussain S, Saud S, et al. Exogenously applied plant growth regulators affect heat-stressed rice pollens. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 2016, 202(2):139-150.
doi: 10.1111/jac.2016.202.issue-2
[16] 文廷刚, 陈昱利, 杜小凤, 等. 不同植物生长调节剂对小麦籽粒灌浆特性及粒重的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2014, 34(1):84-90.
[17] 朱占华. 植物生长调节剂对小麦茎秆抗倒伏能力及其产量和品质的影响. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2011.
[18] Xu T, Wang D, Si Y, et al. Plant growth regulators enhance maize (Zea mays L.) yield under high density by optimizing canopy structure and delaying leaf senescence. Agronomy, 2024, 14(6):1262.
doi: 10.3390/agronomy14061262
[19] Zhang J G, Li S J, Cai Q, et al. Exogenous diethyl aminoethyl hexanoate ameliorates low temperature stress by improving nitrogen metabolism in maize seedlings. PLoS One, 2020, 15(4):e0232294.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232294
[20] 聂乐兴, 姜兴印, 吴淑华, 等. 胺鲜酯对高产夏玉米产量及叶片光合羧化酶和保护酶活性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2010, 21 (10):2558-2564.
[21] 董学会, 段留生, 孟繁林, 等. 30%已·乙水剂对玉米产量和茎秆质量的影响. 玉米科学, 2006, 14(1):138-140,143.
[22] Zhang Q, Zhang L Z, Evers J, et al. Maize yield and quality in response to plant density and application of a novel plant growth regulator. Field Crops Research, 2014, 164:82-89.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2014.06.006
[23] Ji X Z, Gao Q H, Zhuang Z L, et al. WGCNA analysis of the effect of exogenous BR on leaf angle of maize mutant lpa1. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14(1):5238.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-55835-7
[24] Gao Z, Liang X G, Zhang L, et al. Spraying exogenous 6- benzyladenine and brassinolide at tasseling increases maize yield by enhancing source and sink capacity. Field Crops Research, 2017, 211:1-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.05.027
[25] 苏超宇. 乙烯利和芸苔素内酯对玉米茎秆抗倒伏性状和产量的影响. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2023.
[26] de Melo B A G, Motta F L, Santana M H A. Humic acids: structural properties and multiple functionalities for novel technological developments. Materials Science & Engineering:C, 2016, 62:967-974.
[27] Klučáková M, Pekař M. Solubility and dissociation of lignitic humic acids in water suspension. Colloids and Surfaces A:Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2005, 252(2/3):157-163.
doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2004.10.019
[28] 孙婷, 陈养平, 杨晓军, 等. 腐植酸类生长调节剂对植物发芽和生长发育的影响. 腐植酸, 2012(4):19-25.
[29] Calvo P, Nelson L, Kloepper J W. Agricultural uses of plant biostimulants. Plant and Soil, 2014, 383(1):3-41.
doi: 10.1007/s11104-014-2131-8
[30] Canellas L P, Olivares F L, Aguiar N O, et al. Humic and fulvic acids as biostimulants in horticulture. Scientia Horticulturae, 2015, 196:15-27.
[31] 朱庆森, 曹显祖, 骆亦其. 水稻籽粒灌浆的生长分析. 作物学报, 1988, 14(3):182-193.
[32] 陈瑞杰, 罗林毅, 阮向阳, 等. 腐植酸对滴灌棉田土壤养分和棉花产量及品质的影响. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9):2112-2121.
doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.09.005
[33] 申洁, 宋小静, 钟丹丹, 等. 腐植酸及D-精氨酸对干旱胁迫下谷子幼苗根系生长的影响. 生态学杂志, 2025, 44(4):1220-1225.
[34] 赵黎明, 王亚新, 蒋文鑫, 等. 植物生长调节剂对优质粳稻产量、品质与光合特性的影响. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(5):1003-1014.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20230798
[35] 苏佳雯, 李海平, 李灵芝, 等. 腐植酸液体有机肥提升番茄产量与品质的研究. 山西农业大学学报, 2024, 44(6):59-67.
[36] Khodadadi S, Chegini M A, Soltani A, et al. Influence of foliar-applied humic acid and some key growth regulators on sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) under drought stress: antioxidant defense system, photosynthetic characteristics and sugar yield. Sugar Tech, 2020, 22(5):765-772.
[37] 李跃伟, 侯金丹, 孙慕芳, 等. 四种生长调节剂对玉米茎秆性状及抗倒伏性的影响. 江苏农业学报, 2023, 39(2):377-382.
[38] 吴小丹, 高丽, 巩天耕, 等. 微生物菌肥和腐植酸复合肥对百合生长和光合特性的影响. 中国农业科技导报, 2025, 27(4):221-229.
[39] 王明杰, 张佳琪, 武敏桦, 等. 30%胺鲜酯·乙烯利水剂(玉黄金)对密植春玉米茎折强度及生理特性的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(20):101-107.
[40] 徐田军, 吕天放, 陈传永, 等. 种植密度和植物生长调节剂对玉米茎秆性状的影响及调控. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(4):629-638.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.04.005
[41] 李英浩, 王琦, 赵宝平, 等. 水分和腐植酸对燕麦籽粒产量和β-葡聚糖含量的协同提升效应. 作物学报, 2022, 48(10):2663-2670.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.11084
[42] 赵海燕, 甘淳丹, 兰汝佳, 等. 喷施新型腐殖酸型叶面肥对小麦旗叶抗氧化和产量及品质的影响. 南京农业大学学报, 2018, 41(4):685-690.
[43] Bhuvaneswari R, Karthikeyan P K, Srinivasan S, et al. Evaluation of humic acid, micronutrients mixture and plant growth regulators on growth and quality of bhendi. Centre for Advanced Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 14:139-142.
[44] Abou Tahoun A M M, Abou El-Enin M M, Mancy A, et al. Integrative soil application of humic acid and foliar plant growth stimulants improves soil properties and wheat yield and quality in nutrient-poor sandy soil of a semiarid region. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2022, 22(3):2857-2871.
[45] Cacco G, Dell'Agnola G. Plant growth regulator activity of soluble humic complex. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 1984, 64:225-228.
[46] 刘艳丽, 丁方军, 张娟, 等. 活化腐植酸-尿素施用对小麦-玉米轮作土壤氮肥利用率及其控制因素的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(10):1310-1319.
[1] 吴淼淼, 王素华, 田静, 袁星星, 陈新, 王丽侠. 2022-2024年国家食用豆产业技术体系普通豇豆新品种（系）联合鉴定分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 102–109
[2] 盛奇明, 徐永盛, 荆风雪, 苏纯洁, 解光宁, 孙晓莎. 农杆菌介导的玉米叶片遗传转化体系的建立[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 141–146
[3] 孙梦琳, 符晓, 祁显涛, 刘昌林, 谢传晓, 郭晋杰, 朱金洁. 农杆菌碱基编辑技术的建立与recA基因精准编辑型菌株应用[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 147–154
[4] 谢福平, 毛涛. 化肥减量配施生物有机肥对设施番茄产量、品质及土壤肥力的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 197–203
[5] 史婵, 韩丽, 李秋卓, 张芳魁, 曾秀丽, 李玉蓉, 张兴端. 不同氮、磷、钾配比对紫甘薯花青素积累及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 204–209
[6] 郭威, 孙冬, 闫治霖, 丁蓓, 杜跃辰, 吴慧扬, 徐强, 窦志, 高辉. 灌浆结实期半深水灌溉对水稻产量、干物质转运及籽粒灌浆的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 21–29
[7] 谢章书, 荣志凌, 覃业玲, 李侃, 周仲华, 屠小菊, 汪启明, 刘爱玉. 夏播短季栽培模式下棉花产量及纤维品质对脱叶催熟剂喷施时间的响应[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 225–232
[8] 卢燕回, 宋战锋, 李虎, 刘广林, 陈传华, 罗群昌, 吴子帅. 秧龄对烟后水稻秧苗素质、产量及稻米品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 233–241
[9] 李春花, 吴晗, 加央多拉, 杨志雪, 王艳平, 冯博, 王春龙, 李雪英, 卜瑞, 郭来春, 任长忠. 播期对苦荞生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 242–249
[10] 罗亚伟, 梁阗, 卢文, 杨翠芳, 阳太亿, 周珊, 陆衫羽, 苏树权, 伍荣冬, 刘丽敏, 高轶静. 机械平茬对宿根蔗蔗蔸及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 250–256
[11] 张清芮, 凌凤楼, 高子婷, 王玉, 苏庆旺, 韩笑. 不同叶施时期和锌肥种类对水稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 38–47
[12] 王晓婷, 王立明, 杜世坤, 杨如萍, 张晓艳, 汤春晖, 陈光荣. 种植密度对西北不同生态区大豆产量及品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 48–55
[13] 吕建晔, 丁万红, 刘强, 张鹏鹏, 唐勇, 任红松, 薛军, 明博, 李少昆. 密植精准调控技术对新疆鲜食糯玉米商品品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (3): 64–70
[14] 占亚楠, 吴超, 杜玉倍, 常明娟, 汤玉煊, 刘素玲, 芦振华. 穗肥运筹对粳稻产量、品质及氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (2): 127–133
[15] 杨治伟, 曹秀霞, 钱爱萍, 张炜, 刘倩. 不同植物生长调节剂对胡麻抗倒性及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (2): 143–148
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!