垄作条播下春小麦不同品种与施氮量对边行效应、产量与水分利用效率的影响

doi:10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2025.04.032

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 探究不同春小麦品种与施氮量在垄作条播栽培下对其边行生长及行间竞争机制的影响，以实现垄作春小麦的高产高效生产。试验采用随机区组设计，以春小麦品种陇春42号与武春10号为供试材料，设0（N0）、180（N1）、210（N2）、240 kg/hm²（N3）4个施氮水平，研究品种与施氮量对春小麦边行优势、耗水量、产量与水分利用效率的影响。结果表明，品种与施氮量显著影响边行优势，影响程度为边行>次边行>中间行，陇春42号的边行产量与小区产量均高于武春10号；施氮量能显著影响各行小麦的生长指标，在不同品种和施氮处理下，小麦株高、叶面积指数、叶绿素含量、单株根干重、单株干物质、千粒重及单株产量等指标均表现出显著的边行优势，并随施氮量的增大边行优势指数呈先增大后减小的趋势，陇春42号与武春10号单株产量在N2条件下边行优势最为显著，边行较中间行增产分别达到26.84%、30.63%；2个品种随施氮量的增大，耗水量呈增加趋势，产量、水分利用效率在N2处理下达到最大，与N0相比较，N2处理下陇春42号、武春10号的水分利用效率分别提高了23.05%、20.51%。综上所述，垄作条播栽培下，春小麦陇春42号和武春10号在施氮量210 kg/hm²（N2）下均能显著提高边行优势，但陇春42号在该处理下有较高的籽粒产量与水分利用效率。

关键词: 春小麦, 品种, 边行效应, 产量, 水分利用效率

Abstract:

To explore the effects of different spring wheat varieties and nitrogen application on the growth of border rows and the inter-row competition mechanism under ridge tillage with drill sowing, aiming to achieve high yield and efficiency in ridge-tilled spring wheat, a randomized block experiment was conducted. The spring wheat varieties Longchun 42 and Wuchun 10 were used, with four nitrogen application levels including 0 (N0), 180 (N1), 210 (N2), and 240 kg/ha (N3) to study their effects on border row advantage, water consumption, yield, and water use efficiency. The results showed that variety and nitrogen application significantly affected the border row advantage, and the order was border row > adjacent row > middle row. Longchun 42 exhibited higher border row yield and plot yield than Wuchun 10. Nitrogen application rate significantly affected the growth of wheat in different rows. Under different varieties and nitrogen application conditions, wheat plant height, leaf area index, chlorophyll content, root dry weight, dry matter per plant, 1000-grain weight, and yield per plant all showed significant border row advantages. As the nitrogen application rate increased, the border row advantage index showed a trend of first increasing and then decreasing. Longchun 42 and Wuchun 10 varieties had the most significant border row advantage in yield per plant under N2 conditions, with border row increasing yield by 26.84% and 30.63% compared to the middle row, respectively. As nitrogen application increased, water consumption tended to rise, and the maximum yield and water use efficiency were observed under the N2 treatment. Compared to the N0 treatment, the water use efficiency of Longchun 42 and Wuchun 10 increased by 23.05% and 20.51% under N2 treatment, respectively. To sum up, under ridge tillage with drill sowing, both spring wheat Longchun 42 and Wuchun 10 with the nitrogen application rate of 210 kg/ha (N2) significantly enhanced the wheat border row advantage, however, Longchun 42 exhibited higher grain yield and water use efficiency under this treatment.

Key words: Spring wheat, Variety, Border effect, Yield, Water use efficiency

雒兴刚, 万海元, 安丽蓉, 李永海, 雒兴玉, 张学凯, 梁维云, 朱建强. 垄作条播下春小麦不同品种与施氮量对边行效应、产量与水分利用效率的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025 (4): 251–258

Luo Xinggang, Wan Haiyuan, An Lirong, Li Yonghai, Luo Xingyu, Zhang Xuekai, Liang Weiyun, Zhu Jianqiang. Effects of Different Varieties and Nitrogen Application Rate on Border Effect, Yield, and Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat under Ridge Tillage with Drill Sowing[J]. Crops, 2025(4): 251–258

图/表 6

图1

图2

表1

表2

图3

表3

参考文献 29

[1]	Blanco A. Structure and trends of worldwide research on durum wheat by bibliographic mappinginternational. Journal of Plant Biology, 2024, 15(1):132-160.
[2]	Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Proactive approaches to drought preparedness—Where are we now and where do we go from here. Rome: FAO White Paper, 2019.
[3]	Zaib M, Zeeshan A, Aslam S, et al. Drought stress and plants production: a review with future prospects. International Journal of Scientific Research and Engineering Development, 2023, 6(4):1278-1293.
[4]	Yang F, Zhang J J, Liu Q E, et al. Improvement and re-evolution of tetraploid wheat for global environmental challenge and diversity consumption demand. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2022, 23(4):2206.
[5]	Leegood R C, Evans J R, Furbank R T, et al. Food security requires genetic advances to increase farm yields. Nature, 2010, 464(7290):831.
[6]	马忠明, 陈娟, 刘婷婷, 等. 水氮耦合对固定道垄作栽培春小麦根长密度和产量的影响. 作物学报, 2017, 43(11):1705-1714.
[7]	Liu G Z, Zhang G Q, Hou P, et al. Weak border effects and great uniformity increase yield of maize (Zea mays) under dense population. Crop and Pasture Science, 2020, 71(7):653-659.
[8]	岳俊芹, 邵运辉, 汪庆昌, 等. 垄作行间不同密度对小麦群体发育及产量的响应. 江苏农业科学, 2012, 40(7):79-81.
[9]	王法宏, 杨洪宾, 徐成忠, 等. 垄作栽培对小麦植株形态和产量性状的影响. 作物学报, 2007, 33(6):1038-1040.
[10]	Wang K, Zhou H Y, Wang B J, et al. Quantification of border effect on grain yield measurement of hybrid rice. Field Crops Research, 2013, 141:47-54.
[11]	Wang Y Q, Zhao Z G, Li J P, et al. Does maize hybrid intercropping increase yield due to border effects. Field Crops Research, 2017, 214:283-290.
[12]	Wang Y H, Hu W L, Zhang X L, et al. Effects of cultivation patterns on winter wheat root growth parameters and grain yield. Field Crops Research, 2014, 156:208-218.
[13]	吴玉娥, 郜庆炉, 薛香, 等. 行距对超高产小麦冠层结构及产量构成的影响. 河南农业科学, 2005, 34(9):16-20. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3268.2005.09.004
[14]	赵凯男, 丁豪, 刘阿康, 等. 氮肥减量后移改善植株光合特性提高麦―玉周年产量及经济效益. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(5):868-884. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.05.004
[15]	陈雨海, 余松烈, 于振文. 小麦间作菠菜的边际效应与基施氮肥利用率. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2004, 10(1):29-33.
[16]	丁永刚, 陈欢, 曹承富, 等. 高光效小麦群体提高氮素吸收利用和产量的机理. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2024, 30(1):27-35.
[17]	陈文娟, 胡晓棠, 李清林, 等. 翻耕深度对膜下滴灌棉花生长和冠层小气候的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2022, 40(4):77-87.
[18]	Sun Y T, Yang C, Liang H J, et al. The border effects of dry matter, photosynthetic characteristics, and yield components of wheat under hole sowing condition. Agronomy, 2023, 13(3):766.
[19]	王树林, 祁虹, 王燕, 等. 不同小麦品种在麦棉套作模式中的边行优势及产量分析. 山东农业科学, 2015, 47(4):34-36.
[20]	欧行奇, 李新华, 欧阳娟. 中秆高产冬小麦品种小区试验边行产量和内行产量研究. 种子, 2018, 37(10):106-109.
[21]	高传昌, 史尚, 王兴, 等. 小麦、玉米一体化垄作沟灌对冬小麦生长特性的影响. 节水灌溉, 2014(3):16-19.
[22]	李孟浩. 不同施氮水平下小麦/玉米套作群体生长及产量效应研究. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2022.
[23]	王秀芳. 氮肥和种植密度对带状种植小麦群体质量、产量及品质的影响. 雅安: 四川农业大学, 2012.
[24]	樊高琼, 李金刚, 王秀芳, 等. 氮肥和种植密度对带状种植小麦抗倒能力的影响及边际效应. 作物学报, 2012, 38(7):1307-1317.
[25]	田昌玉, 林治安, 狄文亚, 等. 长期定位试验氮肥效应边际成本分析与最佳氮肥推荐. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(1):33-39.
[26]	贾潇倩, 王硕, 房琴, 等. 不同品种和灌溉模式对冬小麦耗水时空变化及产量的影响. 灌溉排水学报, 2022, 41(5):8-16.
[27]	侯慧芝, 张绪成, 尹嘉德, 等. 半干旱区全膜覆土穴播对春小麦耗水特征和产量的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2019, 37(2):150-157.
[28]	史辛凯, 石玉, 赵俊晔, 等. 施氮量对超高产小麦品种烟农1212耗水特性和籽粒产量的影响. 山东农业科学, 2018, 50(5):72-75.
[29]	郭媛, 高志强, 孙敏, 等. 休闲期覆膜与施氮量对旱地小麦水氮利用效率和籽粒产量的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2014, 34(10):1398-1405.

相关文章 15

[1]	王生态, 赵宝勰, 杜世坤, 李雨阳, 俞华林, 李榕鑫. 中度盐碱地胡麻耐盐性鉴定及品种筛选[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 111–117
[2]	李秀诗, 李英桃, 付瑜华, 罗仁山, 李守岭, 尚昆, 朱加保, 於春. 不同生态条件对薏苡品种产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 157–163
[3]	王兴亚, 陈宇涵, 张孟雯, 孙琳琳, 陈利容, 郭玉秋, 龚魁杰. 不同时期施用脱落酸对玉米籽粒灌浆和脱水的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 173–180
[4]	周琦, 张靖, 王振龙, 施志国, 邓超超, 常浩, 柳洋, 周彦芳. 绿肥还田和减量施氮对甘肃河西灌区土壤质量及燕麦产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 188–196
[5]	严定伟, 杨建新, 郭杰, 梁一凡, 罗菲, 付光明, 李军正, 常剑波, 张玉林, 姬小明. 不同保水剂对植烟土壤细菌群落结构及烤烟产量和质量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 197–205
[6]	李云, 王静, 刘艳昆, 赵光辉, 郑敏娜. 叶面喷施多效唑对苦荞产量及茎秆抗倒伏性的调节作用[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 231–237
[7]	董扬, 闫锋, 赵富阳, 侯晓敏, 李清泉, 李青超, 刘悦, 兰英, 杨慧莹, 王冰雪, 徐妍. 不同除草剂喷施方案对谷子生长及土壤微生物的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 238–244
[8]	吴凤婕, 侯楠, 齐翔鲲, 杨克军, 付健, 王玉凤. 不同施氮量对半干旱区糯玉米主要营养品质及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 267–275
[9]	王志刚, 刘强, 王谨, 巩敬锦, 姚群英. 未来气象条件下旱地春小麦产量及生物量对施氮量和播期变化的响应模拟[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 276–282
[10]	李亚婷, 贾世琦, 姚立蓉, 张宏, 司二静, 杨轲, 孟亚雄, 马小乐, 李葆春, 王化俊, 郭刚刚, 汪军成. 2000-2024年全国审定（登记）皮大麦品种的选育及特征特性分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 65–74
[11]	窦阳, 陈君燚, 任淑敏, 康国章, 王黎明. 121份自选小麦新品种（系）高分子量麦谷蛋白亚基组成分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (4): 75–79
[12]	贺云霞, 马建辉, 张黛静, 刘东华, 晁晓燕, 陈慧平, 李春喜. 不同氮肥增效剂对减少豫北麦田气态氮损失及其增产效果研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (3): 108–115
[13]	王佳童, 马映辰, 冯燕飞, 路佳慧, 郭振清, 李学利, 李云, 韩玉翠, 林小虎. 减量追氮对冀东地区春小麦磷、钾肥利用及品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (3): 141–148
[14]	王祎, 任永福, 张正鹏, 丁德芳, 张靖, 刘祎鸿, 孙多鑫, 陈光荣. 不同覆盖材料对河西灌区土壤环境及玉米产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (3): 149–155
[15]	赫兵, 王晓航, 李超, 罗立强, 张强, 韩康顺, 陈殿元, 严光彬, 刘振蛟. 1987-2022年吉林省水稻审定品种数据分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2025, (3): 16–22

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

指标 Index	品种 Variety	处理 Treatment	位置Location			边行优势指数Border row advantage index (%)
指标 Index	品种 Variety	处理 Treatment	边行 Border row	次边行 Adjacent row	中间行 Middle row	边行 Border row	次边行 Adjacent row
株高 Plant height (cm)	陇春42号	N0	65.30c	61.95d	60.80d	7.40b	1.89a
株高 Plant height (cm)		N1	79.47bc	74.97c	73.30c	8.42a	2.28a
		N2	82.65b	79.40b	77.65b	6.52b	2.28a
		N3	85.40a	82.90a	82.05a	4.08c	1.04b
	武春10号	N0	61.20c	59.60c	56.85d	7.65a	4.84b
		N1	77.27b	74.10b	71.10c	8.68a	4.22b
		N2	80.77a	78.60a	74.10b	9.00a	6.07a
		N3	81.85a	79.10a	76.10a	7.56a	3.94b
LAI	陇春42号	N0	1.36c	1.21c	1.17c	16.89b	4.14c
		N1	1.78b	1.53b	1.45b	22.74b	5.17c
		N2	1.97a	1.73a	1.59a	23.90a	9.02b
		N3	2.01a	1.78a	1.69a	18.91b	5.57a
	武春10号	N0	1.30c	1.27c	1.21b	7.69b	5.29b
		N1	1.66b	1.56b	1.48a	12.54ab	5.90b
		N2	1.77a	1.70a	1.53a	15.39a	10.69a
		N3	1.70a	1.64a	1.51a	12.41ab	8.32a
SPAD	陇春42号	N0	53.80b	52.50b	51.53b	4.41b	1.88c
		N1	60.17a	58.17a	55.00a	9.40a	5.76a
		N2	60.52a	59.38a	57.10a	5.99b	3.99b
		N3	58.97a	58.77a	56.83a	3.77c	3.41b
	武春10号	N0	51.87b	51.15b	50.40b	2.91b	1.48b
		N1	56.72a	55.97a	54.20a	4.65a	3.23a
		N2	57.93a	57.20a	56.60a	2.35b	1.06b
		N3	57.05a	56.34a	55.97a	1.93b	0.66b

指标 Index	品种 Variety	处理 Treatment	位置Location			边行优势指数Border row advantage index (%)
指标 Index	品种 Variety	处理 Treatment	边行 Border row	次边行 Adjacent row	中间行 Middle row	边行 Border row	次边行 Adjacent row
单株根干重 Root dry weight per plant (g)	陇春42号	N0	0.53c	0.51b	0.51b	3.96b	1.58b
		N1	0.54bc	0.53b	0.51b	5.85a	2.73a
		N2	0.61a	0.58a	0.57a	6.13a	2.28a
		N3	0.57b	0.55b	0.54b	5.76a	1.86b
	武春10号	N0	0.50a	0.50a	0.49a	1.02b	0.41c
		N1	0.51a	0.51a	0.50a	2.20b	1.20b
		N2	0.53a	0.51a	0.49a	7.51a	3.65a
		N3	0.51a	0.48a	0.47b	8.89a	1.69b
单株干物质量 Dry matter accumulation per plant (g)	陇春42号	N0	2.36c	2.21c	2.17c	8.76c	1.34c
		N1	2.78b	2.54b	2.47b	12.55b	2.83b
		N2	3.01a	2.84a	2.61b	15.32a	8.81a
		N3	3.17a	2.96a	2.85a	11.22b	3.86b
	武春10号	N0	1.88d	1.79b	1.73b	8.84d	3.60c
		N1	2.07c	1.85b	1.77b	16.86c	4.75c
		N2	2.25b	2.11ab	1.89a	18.89a	11.72a
		N3	2.43a	2.26a	2.08a	16.61b	8.45b
千粒重 1000-grain weight (g)	陇春42号	N0	42.70b	42.38b	42.12b	1.38a	0.62a
千粒重 1000-grain weight (g)		N1	42.82b	42.40b	42.20b	1.47a	0.47a
		N2	43.33a	43.17a	43.07a	1.07a	0.46a
		N3	43.28a	43.07a	43.12a	0.72a	0.23a
	武春10号	N0	41.98b	41.85b	41.49a	1.25b	0.94b
		N1	42.33ab	42.10a	41.70a	1.37b	0.96b
		N2	42.57a	42.32a	41.75a	1.96a	1.36a
		N3	42.11ab	41.85b	41.77a	0.81c	0.19c
单株产量 Yield per plant (g)	陇春42号	N0	1.17c	1.13c	1.00c	17.03c	13.82c
单株产量 Yield per plant (g)		N1	1.43b	1.34b	1.16b	23.24b	15.15b
		N2	1.56a	1.44a	1.23a	26.84a	16.73a
		N3	1.57a	1.45a	1.24a	26.47a	16.60a
	武春10号	N0	0.94c	0.85d	0.75c	25.58c	13.25c
		N1	1.20b	1.08c	0.94b	27.73b	14.55b
		N2	1.32a	1.18b	1.01a	30.63a	16.40a
		N3	1.36a	1.23a	1.06a	28.83b	16.07a

品种 Variety	处理 Treatment	总灌水量 Irrigation water amount (m³/hm²)	降水量 Precipitation (mm)	总耗水量 Total water consumption (mm)	产量 Yield (kg/hm²)	WUE [kg/(hm²·mm)]
陇春42号 Longchun 42	N0	2400	59.3	433.96d	5348.38c	12.32c
陇春42号 Longchun 42	N1	2400	59.3	453.98c	6466.53b	14.24b
	N2	2400	59.3	486.99b	7383.79a	15.16a
	N3	2400	59.3	502.08a	7436.63a	14.81ab
武春10号 Wuchun 10	N0	2400	59.3	395.39d	4646.24c	11.75c
武春10号 Wuchun 10	N1	2400	59.3	427.38c	5537.11b	12.96b
	N2	2400	59.3	442.78b	6270.22a	14.16a
	N3	2400	59.3	457.16a	6404.86a	14.01a