作物杂志,2026, 第2期: 160–171 doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2026.02.020

• 生理生化·植物营养·栽培耕作 • 上一篇    下一篇

施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒型杂交稻源库特性的影响

潘群肖(), 龙超, 卓乐, 殷超, 肖敏, 周文新(), 易镇邪()   

  1. 湖南农业大学农学院, 410128, 湖南长沙
  • 收稿日期:2025-01-06 修回日期:2025-03-12 出版日期:2026-04-15 发布日期:2026-04-16
  • 通讯作者: 周文新,主要从事作物高产高效栽培研究,E-mail:zwxok@hunau.net;易镇邪为共同通信作者,主要从事作物高产抗逆栽培与资源高效利用研究,E-mail:yizhenxie@126.com
  • 作者简介:潘群肖,主要从事作物高产高效栽培理论与技术研究,E-mail:2823525797@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划(2023YFD2301402);湖南省农业农村厅项目(湘农办发〔2023〕38号);湖南省农业农村厅项目(湘农办发〔2024〕27号)

Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate and N-P-K Ratio on Source-Sink Characteristics of Small-Seed Hybrid Rice

Pan Qunxiao(), Long Chao, Zhuo Le, Yin Chao, Xiao Min, Zhou Wenxin(), Yi Zhenxie()   

  1. College of Agronomy, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, Hunan, China
  • Received:2025-01-06 Revised:2025-03-12 Online:2026-04-15 Published:2026-04-16

摘要:

为明确施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒型杂交稻源库特性的影响,以小粒型杂交稻卓两优0985为材料,在120(N1)、150(N2)、180(N3)和210 kg/hm2(N4)4个施氮量水平与1.0:0.5:0.8(F1)、1.0:0.5:1.0(F2)和1.0:1.0:1.0(F3)3个氮磷钾配比条件下开展大田试验。结果表明,叶面积指数(LAI)、高效叶面积指数、叶绿素相对含量(SPAD值)与干物质积累量随施氮量增大而提高,N3与N4处理差异不显著,但均显著高于N1处理;不同氮磷钾配比处理间,一般以F3处理较高,但无显著差异。总颖花数与总库容量随施氮量增加而增大,库容有效充实度表现为N1>N3>N2>N4,不同氮磷钾配比处理下库容有效充实度一般以F2最大,但差异不显著。有效穗数随施氮量增大而增加,穗粒数随施氮量增大呈先增后降趋势,结实率与千粒重均随施氮量增加而下降,但差异不显著。产量随施氮量增加呈先增后降趋势,以N3处理产量最高,互作处理间以N3F2处理产量最高,N3F1处理次之。相关分析表明,LAI、高效LAI、叶片SPAD值、干物质积累量、总颖花数、总库容量、有效穗数与产量呈极显著正相关,库容有效充实度、结实率与产量呈负相关,穗粒数与产量呈显著正相关,千粒重、粒叶比与产量相关性不显著。本试验条件下,卓两优0985以N3F1处理为最佳,其叶面积较大、穗粒数较多、库容量较大且库容有效充实度较高,粒叶比适中,源库关系较为协调的同时达到节肥增产的效果。

关键词: 小粒型杂交稻, 施氮量, 氮磷钾配比, 产量, 源库特性

Abstract:

To elucidate the effects of nitrogen application rate and N-P-K ratio on the source-sink characteristics of small-seed hybrid rice, a field experiment was conducted using the small-seed hybrid rice variety Zhuoliangyou 0985 as material. The experiment involved four nitrogen application levels [120 (N1), 150 (N2), 180 (N3), and 210 kg/ha (N4)] and three NPK ratios [1.0:0.5:0.8 (F1), 1.0:0.5:1.0 (F2), and 1.0:1.0:1.0 (F3)]. The results showed that leaf area index (LAI), high-efficiency LAI, relative content of chlorophyll (SPAD values), and dry matter accumulation increased with increasing nitrogen application rate. There were no significant differences between N3 and N4 treatments, but both were significantly higher than the N1 treatment. Among different N-P-K ratios, the F3 treatment generally resulted in higher values, though the differences were not significant. Total spikelets and total sink capacity increased with the increase of nitrogen application rate, and the available filled ratio of sink capacity followed the order of N1 > N3 > N2 > N4. Under different N-P-K ratios, the effective filling degree of sink capacity was generally the highest in F2, though the difference was not significant. Effective panicles increased with the increase of nitrogen application rate, while the number of grains per panicle initially increased and then decreased. Both seed-setting rate and 1000-grain weight decreased with the increase of nitrogen application rate, but these differences did not reach a significant level. Yield showed a trend of first increasing and then decreasing with the increase of nitrogen application, with the N3 treatment producing the highest yield. Among the interaction treatments, N3F2 achieved the highest yield, followed by N3F1. Correlation analysis indicated that LAI, high-efficiency LAI, leaf SPAD value, dry matter accumulation, total spikelets, total sink capacity, and effective panicles were extremely significantly and positively correlated with yield. The available filled ratio of sink capacity and seed-setting rate were negatively correlated with yield, while the number of grains per panicle was significantly and positively correlated with yield. No significant correlations were found between 1000-grain weight, grain-leaf ratio, and yield. Under the conditions of this experiment, N3F1 was considered the optimal treatment for Zhuoliangyou 0985. It had a relatively large leaf area, a high number of grains per panicle, a large sink capacity, and a high available filled ratio of sink capacity, with a moderate grain-leaf ratio, which coordinated source-sink relationship and achieved the dual effects of fertilizer saving and yield increase.

Key words: Small-seed hybrid rice, Nitrogen application rate, N-P-K ratio, Yield, Source-sink characteristics

表1

供试土壤基础肥力

年份
Year
全氮
Total nitrogen
(g/kg)
全磷
Total phosphorus
(g/kg)
全钾
Total potassium
(g/kg)
碱解氮
Alkali-hydrolyzed
nitrogen (mg/kg)
有效磷
Available
phosphorus (mg/kg)
速效钾
Available
potassium (mg/kg)
有机质
Organic matter
(g/kg)
pH
2023 1.64 0.89 15.72 184.78 13.67 238.19 29.86 7.19
2024 1.83 0.97 13.95 193.11 15.41 246.32 34.45 7.24

表2

施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒杂交稻LAI的影响

处理
Treatment
2023 2024
分蘖期
Tillering stage
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
分蘖期
Tillering stage
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
N1 3.37c 6.61c 5.94c 5.00c 3.57c 6.80c 6.22c 5.09c
N2 3.75b 7.52b 6.77b 5.72b 3.86b 7.49b 6.84b 5.73b
N3 4.16a 7.88ab 7.07ab 5.98ab 4.38a 7.87ab 7.19ab 5.98ab
N4 4.36a 8.26a 7.35a 6.25a 4.57a 8.00a 7.33a 6.00a
F1 3.87a 7.51a 6.74a 5.67a 4.04a 7.46a 6.85a 5.63a
F2 3.91a 7.48a 6.80a 5.71a 4.09a 7.53a 6.89a 5.72a
F3 3.95a 7.72a 6.80a 5.84a 4.16a 7.64a 6.94a 5.75a
N1F1 3.26d 6.47d 5.81c 4.84c 3.52d 6.75c 6.13c 4.92c
N1F2 3.39d 6.51d 5.96c 5.03c 3.58d 6.78c 6.17c 5.12c
N1F3 3.46d 6.86d 6.05c 5.12c 3.61d 6.86c 6.35c 5.24c
N2F1 3.75c 7.52c 6.78b 5.67b 3.81c 7.41b 6.74b 5.71b
N2F2 3.87c 7.47c 6.81b 5.71b 3.79c 7.45b 6.87b 5.69b
N2F3 3.64c 7.56bc 6.73b 5.78b 3.98c 7.62b 6.91b 5.78b
N3F1 4.14b 7.88b 7.01b 5.91b 4.32b 7.77ab 7.19ab 5.92ab
N3F2 4.12b 7.71bc 7.03b 5.94b 4.39ab 7.84ab 7.24a 5.96ab
N3F3 4.22b 8.06ab 7.16ab 6.09ab 4.43ab 8.01ab 7.13ab 6.05a
N4F1 4.33ab 8.15ab 7.37a 6.24a 4.49ab 7.91ab 7.34a 5.98ab
N4F2 4.26b 8.23a 7.41a 6.16ab 4.59a 8.03a 7.26ab 6.09a
N4F3 4.49a 8.39a 7.27ab 6.36a 4.62a 8.05a 7.38a 5.94ab
N ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
F ns ** ns ** ** ** ** **
N×F ** * * ns ns ns ** **

表3

施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒杂交稻齐穗期高效LAI的影响

处理
Treatment
2023 2024
剑叶
Flag leaf
倒二叶
Penultimate leaf
倒三叶
Antepenultimate leaf
合计
Total
剑叶
Flag leaf
倒二叶
Penultimate leaf
倒三叶
Antepenultimate leaf
合计
Total
N1 1.40 1.50 1.48 4.38c 1.42 1.51 1.45 4.38c
N2 1.51 1.69 1.65 4.85b 1.49 1.60 1.66 4.75b
N3 1.65 1.75 1.78 5.18a 1.61 1.71 1.75 5.07a
N4 1.67 1.79 1.78 5.24a 1.62 1.76 1.75 5.13a
F1 1.56 1.69 1.65 4.90a 1.54 1.63 1.63 4.80a
F2 1.55 1.68 1.68 4.91a 1.52 1.66 1.64 4.82a
F3 1.56 1.69 1.69 4.94a 1.54 1.64 1.69 4.87a
N1F1 1.39 1.50 1.43 4.32c 1.43 1.48 1.41 4.32c
N1F2 1.39 1.52 1.45 4.36c 1.41 1.49 1.46 4.36c
N1F3 1.41 1.49 1.54 4.44c 1.42 1.55 1.49 4.46c
N2F1 1.50 1.71 1.64 4.85b 1.51 1.57 1.63 4.71b
N2F2 1.51 1.62 1.68 4.81b 1.47 1.61 1.67 4.75b
N2F3 1.53 1.75 1.64 4.92b 1.49 1.62 1.68 4.79b
N3F1 1.66 1.73 1.77 5.16a 1.60 1.68 1.78 5.06a
N3F2 1.65 1.75 1.79 5.19a 1.63 1.76 1.67 5.06a
N3F3 1.63 1.76 1.80 5.19a 1.60 1.68 1.79 5.07a
N4F1 1.69 1.80 1.76 5.25a 1.63 1.77 1.72 5.12a
N4F2 1.67 1.82 1.78 5.27a 1.58 1.79 1.74 5.11a
N4F3 1.64 1.75 1.81 5.20a 1.65 1.72 1.79 5.16a
N ** **
F ns **
N×F ns ns

表4

施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒杂交稻叶片SPAD值的影响

处理
Treatment
2023 2024
分蘖期
Tillering stage
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
分蘖期
Tillering stage
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
N1 39.46c 42.57b 42.22b 38.20b 39.92b 43.14b 41.45b 38.29b
N2 41.91b 44.68ab 43.64ab 39.03b 41.34b 43.53b 42.35b 39.58b
N3 42.40ab 45.30a 44.40a 40.61ab 42.08ab 45.53ab 44.41ab 41.53ab
N4 44.33a 46.37a 45.11a 41.14a 43.50a 46.23a 45.35a 42.40a
F1 41.86a 44.46a 43.73a 39.53a 41.67a 44.41a 43.18a 40.24a
F2 42.04a 44.68a 43.96a 39.81a 41.50a 44.46a 43.51a 40.53a
F3 42.18a 45.05a 43.84a 39.90a 41.97a 44.79a 43.48a 40.58a
N1F1 39.13c 41.67b 41.63b 37.43b 39.83b 42.89b 40.85b 37.45c
N1F2 39.43c 42.83b 42.47b 38.80b 39.87b 43.03b 41.56b 38.46bc
N1F3 39.83c 43.20b 42.57b 38.37b 40.07b 43.51b 41.95b 38.95bc
N2F1 41.77bc 44.63ab 43.71ab 38.80b 41.53ab 43.37b 42.12b 39.34b
N2F2 41.93b 44.43ab 43.43ab 38.47b 40.73b 43.24b 42.39b 39.61b
N2F3 42.03b 44.97ab 43.77ab 39.83ab 41.77ab 43.98b 42.54b 39.79b
N3F1 42.37ab 45.21a 44.53ab 40.43ab 42.10a 44.81ab 44.02ab 41.23ab
N3F2 42.41ab 45.17ab 44.77a 40.78ab 41.72ab 45.34ab 44.53ab 41.62ab
N3F3 42.43ab 45.53a 43.90ab 40.63ab 42.43a 45.78ab 44.67a 41.73ab
N4F1 44.17ab 46.33a 45.03a 41.47a 43.23a 46.57a 45.74a 42.93a
N4F2 44.39a 46.27a 45.17a 41.17a 43.67a 46.23a 45.57a 42.43a
N4F3 44.43a 46.51a 45.13a 40.78ab 43.60a 45.89ab 44.74a 41.84ab
N ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
F ns * ns ns ns ns ns ns
N×F ns ** ns * ns ns * ns

表5

施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒杂交稻干物质积累量的影响

处理
Treatment
2023 2024
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
成熟期
Maturity stage
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
成熟期
Maturity stage
N1 6.46c 10.25c 13.38c 15.32c 7.24c 10.64b 12.58b 14.55c
N2 7.77b 11.17b 14.32b 16.35b 7.82b 11.35a 13.81a 15.89b
N3 8.20a 11.81a 15.25a 17.23a 8.14ab 11.58a 14.20a 16.50a
N4 8.29a 11.46ab 14.61ab 16.85ab 8.30a 11.64a 14.09a 16.27ab
F1 7.63a 11.09a 14.35a 16.40a 7.80a 11.26a 13.60a 15.75a
F2 7.67a 11.20a 14.46a 16.51a 7.83a 11.33a 13.72a 15.88a
F3 7.74a 11.23a 14.36a 16.41a 7.99a 11.34a 13.70a 15.79a
N1F1 6.37c 10.12c 13.28c 15.25c 7.12c 10.51b 12.38b 14.33c
N1F2 6.42c 10.28c 13.35c 15.30c 7.16c 10.63b 12.57b 14.58c
N1F3 6.58c 10.35c 13.51c 15.41c 7.44bc 10.79b 12.78b 14.75c
N2F1 7.71b 11.13b 14.21b 16.19bc 7.73b 11.21ab 13.67a 15.81b
N2F2 7.78b 11.18b 14.39b 16.32b 7.79b 11.34a 13.85a 15.88b
N2F3 7.82b 11.20b 14.37b 16.55ab 7.95ab 11.50a 13.92a 15.97ab
N3F1 8.18ab 11.67ab 15.26a 17.24a 8.05ab 11.57a 14.23a 16.58a
N3F2 8.19ab 11.89a 15.34a 17.36a 8.12ab 11.64a 14.29a 16.69a
N3F3 8.22ab 11.86a 15.14ab 17.09ab 8.24a 11.54a 14.08a 16.24ab
N4F1 8.25a 11.43ab 14.66ab 16.92ab 8.31a 11.73a 14.11a 16.29ab
N4F2 8.29a 11.45ab 14.75ab 17.05ab 8.25a 11.69a 14.15a 16.35ab
N4F3 8.34a 11.50ab 14.43b 16.57ab 8.34a 11.51a 14.02a 16.18ab
N ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
F ** ** ** ** ** * ** **
N×F ns ns ** ** ** ** ** **

表6

施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒杂交稻总库容量的影响

处理
Treatment
2023 2024
总颖花数
Total spikelets
(×104/hm2)
总库容量
Total sink capacity
(kg/hm2)
库容有效充实度
Available filled ratio
of sink capacity (%)
总颖花数
Total spikelets
(×104/hm2)
总库容量
Total sink capacity
(kg/hm2)
库容有效充实度
Available filled ratio
of sink capacity (%)
N1 53 282.68c 11 828.75c 78.79a 53 158.74c 11 806.56c 79.70a
N2 60 559.64b 13 426.07b 75.75ab 59 180.27b 13 132.10b 75.16b
N3 63 445.88ab 14 059.61ab 77.74a 61 982.94ab 13 741.62ab 76.05ab
N4 65 399.58a 14 479.47a 73.97b 62 086.44a 13 758.35a 74.35b
F1 59 770.46a 13 263.07a 76.91a 58 912.90a 13 072.77a 76.19a
F2 60 360.91a 13 400.12a 77.46a 59 055.88a 13 116.31a 76.70a
F3 61 716.03a 13 651.59a 75.16a 59 262.49a 13 126.64a 75.80a
N1F1 52 195.82c 11 556.15d 79.78a 52 444.16c 11 616.38c 80.23a
N1F2 52 912.89c 11 778.41d 79.04a 53 215.45c 11 840.44c 79.30a
N1F3 54 752.35c 12 160.50d 77.46ab 53 819.76c 11 969.51c 79.54a
N2F1 59 179.52b 13 120.10c 75.53b 58 667.68b 13 030.09b 74.90b
N2F2 60 316.12b 13 402.24bc 77.38ab 59 077.35b 13 132.90b 75.23b
N2F3 62 206.98b 13 760.18b 74.42b 59 799.76ab 13 233.69b 75.34b
N3F1 62 449.25ab 13 851.24ab 78.98ab 62 011.98ab 13 741.86ab 76.12ab
N3F2 63 189.11ab 13 990.07ab 78.56ab 62 310.02a 13 820.36a 76.63ab
N3F3 64 688.43ab 14 328.49ab 75.72b 61 620.99ab 13 661.37ab 75.32b
N4F1 65 566.65a 14 595.14a 73.52b 62 680.58a 13 940.16a 73.96b
N4F2 65 281.60a 14 485.99a 74.97b 61 735.37ab 13 692.91ab 75.73b
N4F3 65 334.08a 14 360.43ab 73.33b 61 848.37ab 13 637.57ab 73.47b
N ** ** ** ** ** **
F ** ** ** ns ns *
N×F * ** ** ** ** **

表7

2023年施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒型杂交稻产量及其构成因素的影响

处理
Treatment
有效穗数
Effective panicle number
(×104/hm2)
穗粒数
Grains per
panicle
结实率
Seed-setting
rate (%)
千粒重
1000-grain
weight (g)
理论产量
Theoretical
yield (t/hm2)
实际产量
Actual yield
(t/hm2)
N1 228.25c 233.44b 81.45a 22.20a 9.64c 9.32c
N2 241.62b 250.64a 78.27ab 22.17a 10.51b 10.17b
N3 251.47ab 252.30a 79.50ab 22.16a 11.17a 10.93a
N4 266.35a 245.54ab 76.18b 22.14a 11.03ab 10.71a
F1 244.56a 244.40a 79.26a 22.19a 10.51a 10.20a
F2 245.23a 246.14a 79.47a 22.20a 10.64a 10.38a
F3 250.97a 245.91a 77.83a 22.12a 10.61a 10.26a
N1F1 225.78c 231.18c 81.47a 22.14a 9.41c 9.22c
N1F2 226.87c 233.23c 82.04a 22.26a 9.66c 9.31c
N1F3 232.09c 235.91bc 80.85ab 22.21a 9.83c 9.42c
N2F1 238.31bc 248.33ab 78.62ab 22.17a 10.32bc 9.91bc
N2F2 241.39bc 249.87ab 78.49ab 22.22a 10.52b 10.37b
N2F3 245.17b 253.73a 77.70b 22.12a 10.69b 10.24b
N3F1 249.03b 250.77ab 80.96ab 22.18a 11.21a 10.94a
N3F2 248.18b 254.61a 80.47ab 22.14a 11.26a 10.99a
N3F3 257.19ab 251.52ab 77.07b 22.15a 11.04ab 10.85ab
N4F1 265.13a 247.30ab 75.98b 22.26a 11.09ab 10.73ab
N4F2 264.48a 246.83ab 76.88b 22.19a 11.14ab 10.86ab
N4F3 269.43a 242.49b 75.68b 21.98a 10.87ab 10.53ab
N ** ** ** ns ** **
F * ns ns ** ** **
N×F ns ns ns ** ** **

表8

2024年施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒型杂交稻产量及其构成因素的影响

处理
Treatment
有效穗数
Effective panicle number
(×104/hm2)
穗粒数
Grains per
panicle
结实率
Seed-setting
rate (%)
千粒重
1000-grain
weight (g)
理论产量
Theoretical
yield (t/hm2)
实际产量
Actual yield
(t/hm2)
N1 237.39b 223.93b 82.00a 22.21a 9.68c 9.41c
N2 243.43b 243.11a 78.17ab 22.19a 10.27b 9.87b
N3 258.51a 239.77a 78.65ab 22.17a 10.81a 10.45a
N4 265.69a 233.68ab 76.39b 22.16a 10.51ab 10.23ab
F1 250.48a 235.20a 78.76a 22.19a 10.29a 9.96a
F2 251.43a 234.88a 79.10a 22.21a 10.37a 10.06a
F3 251.87a 235.29a 78.54a 22.15a 10.29a 9.95a
N1F1 236.64b 221.62b 81.87a 22.15a 9.51c 9.32c
N1F2 237.41b 224.15b 81.75a 22.25a 9.68c 9.39c
N1F3 238.13b 226.01b 82.37a 22.24a 9.86bc 9.52bc
N2F1 241.56b 242.87a 77.94b 22.21a 10.16b 9.76bc
N2F2 243.96b 242.16a 77.82b 22.23a 10.22b 9.88b
N2F3 244.77b 244.31a 78.76ab 22.13a 10.42ab 9.97b
N3F1 257.45a 240.87ab 79.21ab 22.16a 10.88a 10.46a
N3F2 259.95a 239.70ab 79.11ab 22.18a 10.93a 10.59a
N3F3 258.12a 238.73ab 77.63b 22.17a 10.61ab 10.29ab
N4F1 266.25a 235.42ab 76.03b 22.24a 10.60ab 10.31ab
N4F2 264.38a 233.51ab 77.72b 22.18a 10.64ab 10.37ab
N4F3 266.45a 232.12b 75.41b 22.05a 10.28b 10.02b
N ** ** ** ns ** **
F ns ns ns * ns **
N×F ns ns ns * ** **

表9

施氮量与氮磷钾配比对小粒杂交稻叶片不同时期粒叶比的影响

处理
Treatment
2023 2024
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
孕穗期
Booting stage
齐穗期
Full heading stage
灌浆中期
Mid-filling stage
N1 0.806a 0.897a 1.067a 0.782a 0.855a 1.050a
N2 0.806a 0.894a 1.059ab 0.790a 0.865a 1.033a
N3 0.805a 0.898a 1.061ab 0.787a 0.862a 1.037a
N4 0.792a 0.890a 1.046b 0.777a 0.847a 1.034a
F1 0.798a 0.888a 1.057a 0.790a 0.861a 1.047a
F2 0.808a 0.888a 1.058a 0.785a 0.858a 1.034a
F3 0.801a 0.908a 1.059a 0.777a 0.854a 1.030a
N1F1 0.807a 0.898ab 1.078a 0.777a 0.856ab 1.066a
N1F2 0.813a 0.888ab 1.052ab 0.785a 0.862ab 1.039ab
N1F3 0.798a 0.905ab 1.069a 0.785a 0.848ab 1.027ab
N2F1 0.787a 0.873b 1.044ab 0.792a 0.870a 1.027ab
N2F2 0.807a 0.886ab 1.056ab 0.793a 0.860ab 1.038ab
N2F3 0.823a 0.924a 1.076a 0.785a 0.865a 1.035ab
N3F1 0.793a 0.891ab 1.057ab 0.798a 0.862ab 1.047ab
N3F2 0.820a 0.899ab 1.064ab 0.795a 0.861ab 1.045ab
N3F3 0.803a 0.903ab 1.062ab 0.769a 0.864ab 1.019b
N4F1 0.804a 0.890ab 1.051a 0.792a 0.854ab 1.048ab
N4F2 0.793a 0.881ab 1.060ab 0.769a 0.850ab 1.014b
N4F3 0.779a 0.899ab 1.027b 0.768a 0.838b 1.041ab
N ** ns ** ** ** **
F * ** ns ** * **
N×F ** ** ** ** * **

表10

小粒杂交稻源库性状与产量的相关性

源性状
Source trait
实际产量Actual yield 库性状
Sink trait
实际产量Actual yield
2023 2024 2023 2024
LAI 分蘖期 0.898** 0.878** 总颖花数Total spikelets 0.935** 0.938**
孕穗期 0.897** 0.898** 总库容量Total sink capacity 0.938** 0.942**
齐穗期 0.929** 0.916** 库容有效充实度Available filled ratio of sink capacity -0.401 -0.646*
灌浆中期 0.907** 0.918** 有效穗数Effective panicle number 0.827** 0.855**
剑叶 0.962** 0.879** 穗粒数Grains per panicle 0.834** 0.634*
倒二叶 0.889** 0.921** 结实率Seed-setting rate -0.565 -0.627*
倒三叶 0.962** 0.852** 千粒重1000-grain weight -0.193 -0.217
高效LAI 0.964** 0.926** 理论产量Theoretical yield 0.989** 0.988**
SPAD值
SPAD value
分蘖期 0.848** 0.765** 孕穗期粒叶比Grain to leaf ratio at booting stage -0.214 0.178
孕穗期 0.876** 0.814** 齐穗期粒叶比Grain to leaf ratio at full heading stage -0.039 -0.132
齐穗期 0.896** 0.876** 灌浆中期粒叶比Grain to leaf ratio at mid-filling stage -0.239 -0.221
灌浆中期 0.870** 0.894**
干物质积累量
Dry matter accumulation
孕穗期 0.953** 0.888**
齐穗期 0.970** 0.934**
灌浆中期 0.972** 0.932**
成熟期 0.988** 0.956**
[1] 徐春春, 纪龙, 陈中督, 等. 2022年我国水稻产业发展分析及2023年展望. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(2):1-4.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2023.02.001
[2] 乔胜锋, 邓亚萍, 瞿寒冰, 等. 不同籼稻品种对低磷响应的差异及其农艺生理性状. 中国水稻科学, 2021, 35(4):396-406.
doi: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2021.210304
[3] 李波, 宫亮, 曲航, 等. 辽河三角洲稻区施氮水平对水稻生长发育及产量的影响. 作物杂志, 2020(1):173-178.
[4] 宋志文, 赵蕾, 毕俊国, 等. 滴灌条件下施氮量对不同氮效率水稻品种物质积累及养分吸收的影响. 作物学报, 2024, 50(8):2025-2038.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.32061
[5] 凌启鸿, 张洪程, 蔡建中, 等. 水稻高产群体质量及其优化控制探讨. 中国农业科学, 1993, 26(6):1-11.
[6] 屠乃美, 官春云. 水稻幼穗分化期间减源对源库关系的影响. 湖南农业大学学报, 1999, 25(6):6-12.
[7] 朱庆森, 张祖建, 杨建昌, 等. 亚种间杂交稻产量源库特征. 中国农业科学, 1997, 30(3):52-59.
[8] Osorio S, Ruan Y L, Fernie A R. An update on source-to-sink carbon partitioning in tomato. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2014, 5:516.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00516 pmid: 25339963
[9] Doehlert D C. Sink strength: dynamic with source strength. Plant,Cell & Environment, 1993, 16(9):1027-1028.
doi: 10.1111/pce.1993.16.issue-9
[10] 俞慧友. 云南个旧杂交中稻超高产攻关亩产突破1200公斤. 中国科技网. (2022-09-15)[2025-01-06]. http://www.stdaily.com/index/kejixinwen/202209/247eb0527ec44176a19afe15f6a27da0.shtml.
[11] 郭浪, 肖敏, 崔璨, 等. 施氮量对小粒型杂交稻产量与氮素利用效率的影响. 杂交水稻, 2023, 38(5):108-114.
[12] 吕宙, 易秉怀, 陈平平, 等. 施氮量与移栽密度对小粒型杂交水稻产量形成的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(4):422-436.
doi: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2024.231116
[13] Tadahiko M. Plant Nutrition for Sustainable Food Production and Environment. Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media, 1997.
[14] 许桂玲, 王玲莉, 叶勇, 等. 不同施氮量对机插杂交籼稻群体质量及产量的影响. 耕作与栽培, 2018(4):1-3.
[15] 陈露, 张伟杨, 王志琴, 等. 施氮量对江苏不同年代中粳稻品种产量与群体质量的影响. 作物学报, 2014, 40(8):1412-1423.
[16] 宋晓华, 柳楷婧, 彭波, 等. 施氮水平对豫南地区杂交粳稻群体质量和产量的影响. 杂交水稻, 2019, 34(4):39-43.
[17] 杨建昌, 朱庆森, 曹显祖. 水稻群体冠层结构与光合特性对产量形成作用的研究. 中国农业科学, 1992, 25(4):7-14.
[18] 苏祖芳, 郭宏文, 李永丰, 等. 水稻群体叶面积动态类型的研究. 中国农业科学, 1994, 27(4):23-30.
[19] 王杰, 张武汉, 孙平勇, 等. 3个杂交稻新组合源库特性与产量形成研究. 湖南农业科学, 2014(12):4-7.
[20] 刘光明, 赵灿, 蒋岩, 等. 施氮量对水稻源库协同衰老特征的影响. 植物生理学报, 2022, 58(1):173-185.
[21] 王素兰. 水稻籽粒灌浆期间茎鞘非结构性同化物积累及其调节. 扬州: 扬州大学, 2003.
[22] Venkateswarlu B, VisperasR M. Source-sink relationships in crop plants. Agricultural and Food Sciences,Biology, 1987, 2:125.
[23] 熊洁, 耿春苗, 丁艳锋, 等. 不同库容类型杂交早籼稻品种源库结构对垩白的影响. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(19):3970-3980.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.19.006
[24] 陈年来. 作物库源关系研究进展. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2019, 54(1):1-10.
[25] 王振洋, 王冀川, 袁杰, 等. 不同施氮量与栽插密度对水稻群体生长及产量构成的影响. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(12):2969-2978.
doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.12.012
[26] 黄梅燕, 潘文兴, 农永前, 等. 不同施氮量和种植密度对水稻葛68优9938产量的影响. 农业科技通讯, 2021(11):107-110.
[27] 李前, 侯云鹏, 高军, 等. 不同供磷水平对水稻干物质累积、磷素吸收分配及产量的影响. 吉林农业科学, 2015, 40(3):37-41.
[28] 樊禄芹, 樊禄栋. 施用磷肥对水稻产量结构及经济效益的影响. 北方水稻, 2020, 50(4):20-23.
[29] 龚金龙, 张洪程, 李杰, 等. 施磷量对超级稻南粳44产量和质量的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2011, 25(4):447-451.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7216.2011.04.017
[30] 才硕, 潘晓华, 吴建富, 等. 施钾量对超高产早稻品种产量和稻米质量的影响. 江西农业学报, 2011, 23(5):1-5,9.
[31] 李建武, 辛业芸, 李文友, 等. 杂交水稻新组合卓两优1126百亩片单产17.79 t/hm2超高产栽培技术. 中国稻米, 2024, 30(4):105-107,112.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2024.04.021
[32] 刘慧敏, 周杰强, 胡远艺, 等. 水稻小粒不育系新组合卓两优1126的高产特征. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(2):160-171.
doi: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2024.230307
[33] 孙永健, 孙园园, 蒋明金, 等. 施肥水平对不同氮效率水稻氮素利用特征及产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(24):4745-4756.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.24.007
[34] 刘风, 石爱龙, 祝海竣, 等. 施氮量与肥料配比对水稻群体生长和产量的影响. 杂交水稻, 2024, 39(3):117-126.
[35] 林诚, 李清华, 王飞, 等. 不同施磷水平对冷浸田水稻磷含量、光合特性及产量的影响. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2016, 24(5):553-558.
[36] 冯跃华, 潘剑, 何腾兵, 等. 不同施氮水平对超级稻源库特性的影响. 中国农学通报, 2010, 26(15):252-256.
[37] 张宇, 赵宝平, 柳妍娣, 等. 施氮量对裸燕麦源库生理特性和茎鞘NSC积累与转运的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2024, 44(2):206-213.
[38] 唐启源, 邹应斌, 米湘成, 等. 不同施氮条件下超级杂交稻的产量形成特点与氮肥利用. 杂交水稻, 2003, 18(1):47-51.
[39] 杨玲娟, 张卫星, 张伟贵, 等. 不同施氮水平对杂交水稻保持系源库特征的影响. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(9):82-87.
[40] 王伟妮, 鲁剑巍, 何予卿, 等. 氮、磷、钾肥对水稻产量、质量及养分吸收利用的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2011, 25(6):645-653.
[41] 卜容燕, 李小坤, 鲁剑巍, 等. 中稻氮磷钾肥的施肥效果及推荐用量. 中国农学通报, 2010, 26(14):218-221.
[1] 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
[2] 罗亚伟, 农永前, 苏治友, 阳太亿, 杨翠芳, 刘丽敏, 陆衫羽, 苏树权, 周珊, 高轶静. 不同蔗区施肥量和种植密度对壮糖6号产量及经济效益的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (2): 194–201
[3] 王海燕, 毕如田, 聂萌恩, 霍晓兰, 于志勇, 刘平. 氮素有机肥替代对高粱产量和土壤性质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (2): 224–229
[4] 郝军, 张蔚, 白春华, 黄利春, 尤艳华, 卢勇鑫, 李喆, 连东阳, 武文涛, 陈杨, 张莉, 刘红波. 有机肥替代化肥对玉米产量及养分吸收利用的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (2): 98–108
[5] 刘陈, 王伟妮, 廖世鹏, 任涛, 郭晨, 许源源, 于道海, 刘俊梅, 张豪强, 孙霞, 鲁剑巍. 沿黄灌区不同种植模式下麦后复种油菜适宜施氮量研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 104–110
[6] 周文丽, 郝淼艺, 张仁和. 高密度种植下氮肥对玉米根系生长及氮代谢的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 125–132
[7] 马小明, 齐翔鲲, 谭雪, 史孟豫, 王玉凤, 付健, 杨克军. 免耕秸秆覆盖对半干旱区土壤团聚体稳定性和玉米产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 152–159
[8] 谢富欣, 江晓林, 李成焕, 张文菁, 王飞雪, 胡卫丽, 梅鸿献, 何革命, 刘焱. 芝麻叶菜采摘时期对主要经济产量性状的影响及综合效益分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 160–166
[9] 施锘, 朱宏强, 杨梦璇, 周艳宾, 代惠娟, 吕鹏辉, 刘波, 王圣丰, 穆文坡, 杜宇. 不同微生物菌肥对烤烟生长发育、产量及品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 189–196
[10] 张乐, 韩云飞, 杜二小, 李保成, 伞薪潼, 刘新雨, 王艳莉, 赵沛义, 任永峰. 有机培肥措施对马铃薯光合特性、养分含量及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 197–207
[11] 徐浩, 魏全全, 谭洪伟, 芶久兰, 冉雪松, 张萌, 宋南伶, 柳玲玲, 顾小凤, 吕锡斌. 酒糟有机无机复混肥对酒用高粱产量、品质、养分吸收及利用的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 208–216
[12] 叶晓娟, 刘强. 不同降水年型下春小麦产量对降水、施氮及秸秆覆盖的响应模拟[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 217–224
[13] 桑瑞娟, 董春阳, 张红妹, 何云, 孙浩, 刘伯帅, 朱晓艳, 马森, 李德锋. 不同生育期刈割对豫北小黑麦草产量、品质和青贮发酵质量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 225–230
[14] 王云江, 王玉莹, 刘畅, 敬雪妍, 羊辰, 孙彩霞, 王春平. 施氮量对小麦籽粒主要矿质元素含量的影响和有效性分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 240–248
[15] 杨文高, 袁文珏, 李兆光, 和桂青, 和琼姬, 王蕊, 李燕, 叶磊, 侯志江. 播期对滇西北冬播藜麦农艺性状和产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2026, (1): 257–265
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!