Crops ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (5): 91-96.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2018.05.014

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Different Row Spacing and Planting Density on the Growth Characteristics and Yield of Millet

Zhang Xiangyu,Li Hai,Liang Haiyan,Zhang Zhi,Song Xiaoqiang,Zheng Minna   

  1. High Latitude Crops Institute, Shanxi Academy of Agriculture Sciences, Datong 037008, Shanxi, China
  • Received:2018-05-31 Revised:2018-08-13 Online:2018-10-15 Published:2018-10-12

RichHTML

4

PDF (PC)

139

Abstract:

To explore and develop the production potential of broomcorn millet in the arid and semi-arid region of northern Shanxi Province, different planting density and row spacing treatment combinations of broomcorn millet were plotted out to study the effects on millet yield and quality. The results showed that the yield components of the A2B3 treatment were significantly higher than the those of other treatments. At mature stage the leaf area index value of the A2B3 treatment was lower than that in the heading stage, but it was still higher than rest of the other treatments. At the mature stage, the total amount of dry matter accumulation in A3B2 and A3B3 was relatively high, 13.17g and 13.18g respectively. Comprehensive grey correlation analysis results showed that A2B3 (30cm row spacing, density of 1.05 million plants/hm 2), A3B3 (35cm row spacing, density of 1.05 million plants/hm 2), A2B2 (30cm row spacing, density of 750 000 plants/hm 2) treatment combination were suitable to be used in north region of Shanxi Province.

Key words: Millet, Row spacing, Planting density, Growth characteristics, Production, Grey relational analysis

Table 1

Different row spacing and density treatment combinations of millet"

处理Treatment 行距Row spacing (cm) 种植密度Density (×104/hm2)
A1B1 25 50
A1B2 25 75
A1B3 25 105
A1B4 25 135
A1B5 25 150
A2B1 30 50
A2B2 30 75
A2B3 30 105
A2B4 30 135
A2B5 30 150
A3B1 35 50
A3B2 35 75
A3B3 35 105
A3B4 35 135
A3B5 35 150

Table 2

Changes of agronomic traits of millet under different row spacing and density"

处理
Treatment		 株高(cm)
Plant height		 穗长(cm)
Ear length
 茎基粗(cm)
Stem base crude		 穗重(g)
Panicle weight		 穗粒重(g)
Grain weight per panicle		 千粒重(g)
1000-grain weight
A1B1 125.06i 30.12cd 0.72b 9.28e 7.71e 8.33b
A1B2 133.12h 31.52bc 0.74b 9.82cde 7.98e 8.49b
A1B3 140.05g 34.68ab 0.77ab 10.71bcd 8.58cd 9.12b
A1B4 146.23de 29.05ef 0.65cde 7.31f 5.67gh 6.14c
A1B5 151.66abc 26.15f 0.59ef 6.57f 5.04h 5.65c
A2B1 128.17i 31.45bc 0.75ab 9.69de 7.83e 8.46b
A2B2 134.75h 33.32abc 0.77ab 11.36bc 8.97c 9.33ab
A2B3 142.66ef 36.19a 0.81a 12.57a 10.89a 11.78a
A2B4 148.11cd 30.11de 0.69cd 7.28f 5.99g 6.34c
A2B5 152.39ab 28.43ef 0.62def 7.03f 5.14gh 5.54d
A3B1 130.12i 32.66bc 0.73ab 9.76f 7.67e 8.31b
A3B2 134.43h 34.98ab 0.76ab 9.98cde 8.12de 8.56b
A3B3 143.18fg 35.49a 0.79ab 11.23bcde 9.45b 9.98ab
A3B4 149.77bc 29.56de 0.66c 7.43b 6.03f 6.75c
A3B5 153.69a 28.88ef 0.58f 6.99f 5.11gh 6.01c

Fig.1

Influence of different row spacing and density on the leaf area index of milletDifferent lowercase are significantly difference at the 0.05 probability level"

Table 3

Changes of dry matter accumulation of millet under different row spacing and densities g"

处理
Treatment		 苗期Seedling stage 拔节期Jointing stage 抽穗期Heading stage 成熟期Mature stage
茎Stem 叶Leaf 穗Ear 茎Stem 叶Leaf 穗Ear 茎Stem 叶Leaf 穗Ear 茎Stem 叶Leaf 穗Ear
A1B1 0.24e 0.05e - 1.10d 0.37e - 1.79f 0.71f - 2.70fg 1.07d 4.98e
A1B2 0.39b 0.16b - 1.28cd 0.71a - 2.32cd 1.21c - 3.69b 1.63b 7.73a
A1B3 0.36c 0.11cd - 1.32c 0.62b - 2.39c 1.25c - 3.70b 1.64b 7.61b
A1B4 0.38bc 0.14c - 1.38b 0.52d - 2.29d 1.15e - 3.40e 1.48cd 6.95d
A1B5 0.39b 0.17b - 1.37b 0.62b - 2.40c 1.24c - 3.54d 1.59bc 7.17cd
A2B1 0.21f 0.07e - 1.09d 0.35e - 1.93e 0.62g - 2.92f 0.97de 5.23e
A2B2 0.38bc 0.17b - 1.37b 0.54cd - 2.77a 1.32b - 3.82a 1.69a 7.62b
A2B3 0.34cd 0.15c - 1.32bc 0.69a - 2.67b 1.38a - 3.72ab 1.75a 7.66ab
A2B4 0.40b 0.11cd - 1.34b 0.37e - 2.59bc 1.22c - 3.51c 1.48cd 7.37c
A2B5 0.46a 0.14c - 1.39a 0.49d - 2.73ab 1.33b - 3.74ab 1.71a 7.16cd
A3B1 0.18f 0.05e - 1.13d 0.28f - 1.77f 0.59g - 2.57g 0.77e 4.77f
A3B2 0.39b 0.20a - 1.36b 0.71a - 2.65b 1.29b - 3.72ab 1.69a 7.76a
A3B3 0.37bc 0.16b - 1.41a 0.57c - 2.71ab 1.31b - 3.76a 1.63bc 7.79a
A3B4 0.40b 0.12c - 1.36b 0.51d - 2.68b 1.24c - 3.24df 1.56c 7.42bc
A3B5 0.43ab 0.14c - 1.42a 0.57c - 2.71ab 1.32b - 3.58c 1.66ab 7.68ab

Table 4

Changes in grain yield and harvest index under different row spacing and densities"

处理
Treatment		 2016 2017 子粒产量平均值
Average
(kg/hm2)
子粒产量(kg/hm2)
Grain yield		 收获指数(%)
Harvest index		 子粒产量(kg/hm2)
Grain yield		 收获指数(%)
Harvest index
A1B1 3 363.22b 47.80ab 3 280.11c 50.19b 3 321.67
A1B2 3 470.97ab 46.20ab 3 774.23a 48.56bc 3 622.60
A1B3 3 571.02ab 47.92ab 3 554.12ab 50.32b 3 562.57
A1B4 1 708.54c 35.62cd 1 878.11d 37.44d 1 793.33
A1B5 1 254.47d 33.68d 1 356.21e 35.36d 1 305.34
A2B1 3 355.52b 47.18ab 3 468.7b 49.59b 3 412.11
A2B2 3 532.53ab 48.11ab 3 715.26a 50.52b 3 623.90
A2B3 3 655.67a 50.80a 3 812.96a 53.39a 1 846.90
A2B4 1 700.85c 39.23c 1 706.35d 41.19c 1 703.60
A2B5 1 123.64d 33.01d 1 356.34e 34.69e 1 239.99
A3B1 3 340.13b 46.77b 3 661.47ab 49.11b 3 500.80
A3B2 3 455.57ab 46.25b 3 726.14a 48.61bc 3 590.86
A3B3 3 547.93ab 44.32b 3 619.54ab 46.54b 3 583.74
A3B4 1 670.06c 44.01b 1 766.32d 46.25b 1 718.19
A3B5 1 108.25d 31.95e 1 308.14e 33.55f 1 208.20

Table 5

The rank and relational grade of different treatments"

处理
Treatment		 等权关联度
Ri		 排序
Order		 加权关联度
Weighted grey correlative		 排序
Order
A1B1 0.6500 9 0.6509 9
A1B2 0.7498 6 0.7634 6
A1B3 0.8170 4 0.8259 4
A1B4 0.5429 13 0.5635 13
A1B5 0.5218 15 0.5479 15
A2B1 0.6811 7 0.6823 7
A2B2 0.8328 3 0.8386 3
A2B3 0.9127 1 0.9093 1
A2B4 0.5576 11 0.5829 11
A2B5 0.5245 14 0.5513 14
A3B1 0.6678 8 0.6709 8
A3B2 0.7649 5 0.7807 5
A3B3 0.8472 2 0.8595 2
A3B4 0.5680 10 0.5938 10
A3B5 0.5476 12 0.5782 12
[1] 王显瑞, 赵敏, 张立媛 , 等. 播量和施肥对糜子产量、农艺性状及生长的影响. 内蒙古农业科技, 2012(3):30-32.
[2] 张研 . 我国小杂粮生产现状与发展策略. 河北农业大学学报(农林教育版), 2010,12(3):432-440.
[3] 傅永斌, 霍阿红, 杨德智 , 等. 播期和密度对张选1号黍子生育及产量的影响. 西北农业学报, 2011,20(3):81-85.
[4] 杨如达, 李海, 田宏先 , 等. 不同栽培模式对黍子产量的影响. 陕西农业科学, 2015,61(5):1-3.
[5] 苏旺, 张艳, 屈洋 , 等. 不同覆盖方式对黄土高原旱地土壤水分及糜子生长、光合特性和产量的影响. 应用生态学报, 2014,25(11):3215-3222.
[6] 苏旺, 屈洋, 冯佰利 , 等. 沟垄覆膜集水模式提高糜子光合作用和产量. 农业工程学报, 2017,30(13):137-140.
[7] 王纶, 王星玉, 温琪汾 , 等. 中国黍稷种质资源研究与利用. 植物遗传资源学报, 2005,6(4):474-477.
[8] 李海, 杨如达, 林凤仙 , 等. 不同行距对黍子农艺性状、经济性状及产量的影响. 作物杂志, 2017(1):68-72.
[9] 杨吉顺, 高辉远, 刘鹏 , 等. 种植密度和行距配置对超高产夏玉米群体光合特性的影响. 作物学报, 2010,36(7):1226-1233.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01226
[10] 郑敏娜, 李荫藩, 梁秀芝 , 等. 晋北地区引种苜蓿品种的灰色关联度分析与综合评价. 草地学报, 2017,22(3):631-637.
[11] 陆雪珍, 沈雪芳, 沈才标 , 等. 不同种植密度下糯玉米产量及相关性状研究. 上海农业学报, 2008,24(2):61-64 .
[12] 祁红彦, 周广胜, 许振柱 . 北方玉米冠层光合有效辐射垂直分布及影响因子分析. 气象与环境学报, 2008,24(1):22-26.
[13] 杨利华, 张丽华, 张全国 , 等. 种植样式对高密度夏玉米产量和株高整齐度的影响. 玉米科学, 2006,14(6):122-124.
[14] 山仑, 康绍忠, 吴普特 . 中国节水农业. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2004.
[15] 任月梅 . 春播早熟区谷子主要农艺性状相关和通径分析 . 内蒙古农业科技, 2004(1): 13, 22.
[16] 杨慧卿, 王军, 袁峰 , 等. 西北春谷区中晚熟组谷子主要农艺性状的相关和通径分析. 河北农业科学, 2010,14(11):105-106,111.
[17] 闫川, 丁艳锋, 王强盛 . 行株距配置对水稻茎秆形态生理与群体生态的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2007,21(5):530-536.
[1] Wang Xiaolin,Ji Xiaoling,Zhang Panpan,Zhang Xiong,Zhang Jing. Correlation Analysis between Aboveground Biomass Allocation and Grain Yield in Different Varieties of Foxtail Millet in the Dry Land of Loess Plateau [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 150-155.
[2] Guangcai Zhao,Xuhong Chang,Demei Wang,Zhiqiang Tao,Yanjie Wang,Yushuang Yang,Yingjie Zhu. General Situation and Development of Wheat Production [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 1-7.
[3] Yun Zhao,Cailong Xu,Xu Yang,Suzhen Li,Jing Zhou,Jicun Li,Tianfu Han,Cunxiang Wu. Effects of Sowing Methods on Seedling Stand and Production Profit of Summer Soybean under Wheat-Soybean System [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 114-120.
[4] Haiyan Liang, Hai Li, Fengxian Lin, Xiangyu Zhang, Zhi Zhang, Xiaoqiang Song. Field Identification of Different Broom Corn Millet Varieties Lodging Resistance and Evaluation Index Selection and Analysis [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 37-41.
[5] Menghan Wei, Huifang Xie, Lu Xing, Hui Song, Shujun Wang, Suying Wang, Haiping Liu, Nan Fu, Jinrong Liu. Comprehensive Evaluation of Yield and Agronomic Characters of Foxtail Millet Germplasms from North China [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 42-47.
[6] Yajun Liu,Qiguo Hu,Fengli Chu,Wenjing Wang,Aimei Yang. Effects of Different Cultivation Methods and Planting Densities on the Yield and Storage Root Tuberization of Sweet Potato cv. "Shangshu 9" [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 89-94.
[7] Jiao Zhang,Qi Wu,Yufei Zhou,Yitao Wang,Ruidong Zhang,Ruidong Huang. Effects of Drought and Rewatering at Seedling and Filling Stages on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Dry Matter Production of Sorghum [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 148-154.
[8] Zhihua Li,Tingting Mu,Xin Liu,Huixia Li,Gang Tian. Combining Ability Analysis of Main Agronomic Characters of Four Millet Sterile Lines [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 61-67.
[9] Zheng Wang,Zhaobo Chen,Shengquan Zhang,Liping Ren,Xinhuan Gao,Zhijie Ye,Fengting Zhang. Feasibility Analysis of BS Series Hybrid Wheat Seed Production in Weinan of Shaanxi Province [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 174-179.
[10] Maolin Yue,Weirong Xue,Ruidong Zhang,Zhongxiao Yue,RuiZhou Lü,Pengyan Guo. Effects of Different Row Spaces on Agronomic Traits and Yield of Millet [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(2): 93-96.
[11] Junshuai Lu,Yunxiang Li,Xingfu Wang,Guohua Gao,Xia Yang,Jing Liang. Effects of High-Density on Agronomic Traits and Yield of Maize Varieties in Yellow River Irrigation Areas of Gansu Province [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(2): 97-102.
[12] Shaokun Li,Keru Wang,Xiaoxia Yang,Dongsheng Han,Yuhua Wang,Ruizhi Xie,Peng Hou,Bo Ming. Technology and Benefit Analysis of High Yield Record Field in Maize [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(6): 1-6.
[13] Dongxue Sun,Aijun Zhang. Effects of Base Application of Zinc Fertilizer on Antioxidant Activity and Dry Matter Accumulation of Millet [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(6): 160-164.
[14] Haijun He,Xiaojuan Wang,Sirong Kou. Effects of Different Planting Density on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Yield of Maize in Dry Area [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(6): 91-95.
[15] Jie Gao,Qingfeng Li,Can Wang,Guobing Zhang,Qiu Peng. Effects of Differrent Nitrogen Level on Material Production and Nitrogen Use Characteristics in Glutinous Sorghum [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(6): 126-130.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] Guangcai Zhao,Xuhong Chang,Demei Wang,Zhiqiang Tao,Yanjie Wang,Yushuang Yang,Yingjie Zhu. General Situation and Development of Wheat Production[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 1 -7 .
[2] Baoquan Quan,Dongmei Bai,Yuexia Tian,Yunyun Xue. Effects of Different Leaf-Peg Ratio on Photosynthesis and Yield of Peanut[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 102 -105 .
[3] Xuefang Huang,Mingjing Huang,Huatao Liu,Cong Zhao,Juanling Wang. Effects of Annual Precipitation and Population Density on Tiller-Earing and Yield of Zhangzagu 5 under Film Mulching and Hole Sowing[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 106 -113 .
[4] Wenhui Huang, Hui Wang, Desheng Mei. Research Progress on Lodging Resistance of Crops[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 13 -19 .
[5] Yun Zhao,Cailong Xu,Xu Yang,Suzhen Li,Jing Zhou,Jicun Li,Tianfu Han,Cunxiang Wu. Effects of Sowing Methods on Seedling Stand and Production Profit of Summer Soybean under Wheat-Soybean System[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 114 -120 .
[6] Mei Lu,Min Sun,Aixia Ren,Miaomiao Lei,Lingzhu Xue,Zhiqiang Gao. Effects of Spraying Foliar Fertilizers on Dryland Wheat Growth and the Correlation with Yield Formation[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 121 -125 .
[7] Xiaofei Wang,Haijun Xu,Mengqiao Guo,Yu Xiao,Xinyu Cheng,Shuxia Liu,Xiangjun Guan,Yaokun Wu,Weihua Zhao,Guojiang Wei. Effects of Sowing Date, Density and Fertilizer Utilization Rate on the Yield of Oilseed Perilla frutescens in Cold Area[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 126 -130 .
[8] Pengjin Zhu,Xinhua Pang,Chun Liang,Qinliang Tan,Lin Yan,Quanguang Zhou,Kewei Ou. Effects of Cold Stress on Reactive Oxygen Metabolism and Antioxidant Enzyme Activities of Sugarcane Seedlings[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 131 -137 .
[9] Jie Gao,Qingfeng Li,Qiu Peng,Xiaoyan Jiao,Jinsong Wang. Effects of Different Nutrient Combinations on Plant Production and Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium Utilization Characteristics in Waxy Sorghum[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 138 -142 .
[10] Na Shang,Zhongxu Yang,Qiuzhi Li,Huihui Yin,Shihong Wang,Haitao Li,Tong Li,Han Zhang. Response of Cotton with Vegetative Branches to Plant Density in the Western of Shandong Province[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 143 -148 .