Crops ›› 2023, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (1): 170-175.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2023.01.025

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Four Bacillus Species on Yield and Quality of Sweet Potato at Different Stages

Jia Zhengrong(), Hao Jiali, Hao Yanfang(), Bai Wenbin, Zhang Jianhua, Guo Ruifeng, Liu Yong   

  1. Sorghum Research Institute, Shanxi Agricultural University/Shanxi Key Laboratory of Sorghum Genetic and Germplasm Innovation, Jinzhong 030600, Shanxi, China
  • Received:2021-12-13 Revised:2022-01-04 Online:2023-02-15 Published:2023-02-22

RichHTML

3

PDF (PC)

196

Abstract:

In order to investigate the effects of different types of Bacillus species on yield and quality of sweet potato, a field experiment was conducted with Sushu 16 as the test material and four types of Bacillus fungicides and control (CK) treatments were set. The results showed that the application of four different Bacillus species on the basis of conventional fertilization could increase the yield and quality of sweet potato. The yield increase of sweet potato was the largest under Bacillus subtilis treatment after planting 142 days, and the yield of the four Bacillus treatments were increased by 4.6%-25.4% compared with CK treatment. The starch accumulation of sweet potato showed a trend of increasing and then decreasing throughout the growing period, and the starch accumulation reached the maximum after planting 113 days, and the four Bacillus treatments were increased by 2.9%-16.4% compared with CK treatment, the largest increase was the treat with methylotrophic Bacillus. The soluble sugar accumulation of sweet potato showed a trend of decreasing and then increasing, and reached the maximum after planting 142 days, the four bacterial species were increased by 3.2%-34.2% compared with CK treatment, the treatment of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens was the most significant. The trend of sweet potato carotene accumulation were general consistent with crude protein content, showing an increase followed by a decrease, and reached the maximum after planting 90 days, and increased by 6.1%-29.5% and 2.8%-14.5% after planting 142 days, respectively, and the treatment of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens was the most significant. It was concluded that the application of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens had the best effects on the promotion of sweet potato yield and quality by the principal component analysis.

Key words: Bacillus, Sweet potato, Yield, Quality

Table 1

Effects of four Bacillus species on yield of sweet potato in growing period kg/hm2"

处理Treatment 70d 90d 113d 142d
枯草芽孢杆菌Bacillus subtilis 93.03±8.4a 116.11±12.6a 141.59±10.3a 154.37±6.3a
胶冻样芽孢杆菌Jelly-like Bacillus 73.83±6.2c 88.04±4.9c 104.05±8.3d 128.76±5.9d
解淀粉芽孢杆菌Bacillus amyloliquefaciens 87.96±8.8b 111.12±9.3b 133.57±4.6b 146.31±9.6b
甲基营养型芽孢杆菌Methylotrophic Bacillus 73.19±9.5c 85.24±9.7d 112.93±5.1c 133.62±10.3c
CK 58.49±6.9d 69.97±8.4e 86.36±11.2e 123.09±8.2e

Fig.1

Effects of four Bacillus species on the starch accumulation of sweet potato Different lowercase letters indicate significant difference at the 0.05 level, the same below"

Fig.2

Effects of four Bacillus species on the soluble sugar accumulation of sweet potato"

Fig.3

Effects of four Bacillus species on the crude protein accumulation of sweet potato"

Fig.4

Effects of four Bacillus species on the carotenoid accumulation of sweet potato"

Table 2

Results of principal component analysis of the effects of Bacillus species on yield and quality of sweet potato"

主成分
Principle
component		 特征值
Eigenvalue		 贡献率
Contribution
proportion (%)		 累积贡献率
Cumulative contribution
proportion (%)
1 3.0069 60.138 60.138
2 1.4893 29.785 89.923
3 0.4747 9.494 99.418
4 0.0291 0.583 100.000

Table 3

Results of the comprehensive evaluation of the effects of Bacillus species on yield and quality of sweet potato"

处理Treatment F1 F2 F 排序Sort
枯草芽孢杆菌
Bacillus subtilis		 0.3716 1.7020 0.8123 2
胶冻样芽孢杆菌
Jelly-like Bacillus		 0.9808 -1.3068 0.2230 3
解淀粉芽孢杆菌
Bacillus amyloliquefaciens		 2.1554 0.1646 1.4960 1
甲基营养型芽孢杆菌
Methylotrophic Bacillus 		-1.5012 0.4652 -0.8499 4
CK -2.0065 -1.0249 -1.6814 5
[1] 王欣, 李强, 曹清河, 等. 中国甘薯产业和种业发展现状与未来展望. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(3):483-492.
[2] 邓仁菊, 尹旺, 张皓, 等. 5种地膜覆盖对甘薯产量及品质的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(4):51-54.
[3] 宁运旺, 曹炳阁, 马洪波, 等. 氮肥用量对滨海滩涂区甘薯干物质积累、氮素效率和钾钠吸收的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20(8):982-987.
[4] 贾峥嵘, 李江辉, 武宗信, 等. 生物菌肥对甘薯产量、品质及经济效益的影响. 山西农业科学, 2018, 46(9):1506-1508,1514.
[5] 尹向田, 纪绍兰, 杨阳. 3种芽孢杆菌对辣椒的促生作用. 安徽农业科学, 2017, 45(1):55-57.
[6] 包昌艳, 赵晋, 贺占雪, 等. 不同种类生物菌肥及用量对猕猴桃果实品质的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021(2):262-269.
[7] Velthof G L, Oudendag D, Witzke H P, et al. Integrated assessment of nitrogenemissions from agriculture in EU-27 using MITERRA-Europe. Journal of Environmental Quality, 2009, 38(2):402-417.
doi: 10.2134/jeq2008.0108 pmid: 19202011
[8] 唐志燕, 龚国淑, 刘萍, 等. 成都市郊区土壤芽孢杆菌的初步研究. 西南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2005(2):188-192.
[9] 陈慧君. 微生物肥料菌种应用与效果分析. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2013.
[10] 王小敏, 刘文菊, 李博文, 等. 巨大芽孢杆菌与胶冻样类芽孢杆菌对土壤镉的活化效果研究. 水土保持学报, 2013, 27(6):83-88.
[11] Egamberdiyeva D. The effect of plant growth promoting bacteria on growth and nutrient uptake of maize in two different soils. Applied Soil Ecology, 2007, 36(2/3):184-189.
doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2007.02.005
[12] 王君正, 张琪, 高子星, 等. 两种微生物菌剂对有机基质袋培秋黄瓜产量、品质及根际环境的影响. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(14):3077-3087.
[13] 娄义, 郭俏, 彭楚. 3株芽孢杆菌对番茄的促生作用及对番茄根域微生物的影响. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(1):260-268.
doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201801.040
[14] 杨璐, 周蓓蓓, 侯亚玲. 枯草芽孢杆菌菌剂对盐胁迫下冬小麦生长与土壤水氮分布的影响. 排灌机械工程学报, 2021, 39 (5):517-524.
[15] 唐忠厚, 李洪民, 马代夫. 甘薯蛋白质含量近红外反射光谱分析模型应用研究. 中国食品学报, 2008, 8(4):169-173.
[16] 许森, 王永梅, 赵亚特, 等. 甘薯薯块生长过程中可溶性糖与淀粉质量分数的变化及其相关性分析. 西南大学学报(自然科学版), 2011, 33(10):31-36.
[17] 后猛, 李强, 唐忠厚, 等. 不同生态环境对甘薯主要品质性状的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20(9):1180-1184.
[18] 李洪民, 马代夫, 郭小丁. 冷涼地区甘薯品质的分析. 作物杂志, 1999(2):33-34.
[19] 孙凯, 后猛, 王凤, 等. 不同生态环境对甘薯品质性状的影响. 东北农业科学, 2020, 45(5):21-24.
[20] 李金花, 高克祥, 万利, 等. 微生物菌剂对楸树幼苗生长及根际土细菌群落结构的影响. 生态学报, 2020, 40(21) :7588-7601.
[21] 侯乐梅, 孟瑞青, 乜兰春, 等. 不同微生物菌剂对基质酶活性和番茄产量及品质的影响. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(8):2520-2526.
doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201608.015
[22] 刘聪, 谯江兰, 仝少杰, 等. 微生物菌剂对设施甜瓜产量和品质的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(19):168-171.
[23] 周晨光, 徐圣君, 张茉莉, 等. 解淀粉芽孢杆菌微生物菌剂对茶叶产量和品质的影响. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(2):253-257.
[24] 黎肇家, 张焓涟, 朱天辉, 等. 甲基营养型芽孢杆菌对黄柏苗的促生作用. 湖南农业科学, 2019(5):63-66.
[25] 于会丽, 徐国益, 路绪强, 等. 微生物菌剂对连作西瓜土壤微环境及果实品质的影响. 果树学报, 2020, 37(7):1025-1035.
[26] 张美存, 程田, 多立安, 等. 微生物菌剂对草坪植物高羊茅生长与土壤酶活性的影响. 生态学报, 2017, 37(14):4763-4769.
[27] 汪丛啸, 何福英, 杨梅, 等. 3种芽孢杆菌菌剂对望天树苗木生长及光合特性的影响. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2021, 5(12):1-12.
[28] 娄义. 芽孢杆菌对番茄促生及防治番茄黄化曲叶病毒病机制研究. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2018.
[29] 罗希榕, 罗银, 唐相群, 等. 七种微生物菌剂对连作辣椒生长发育、产量和品质及土壤微生物特性的影响. 耕作与栽培, 2019(5):6-12.
[30] 高晶霞, 牛勇琴, 吴雪梅, 等. 微生物菌剂对拱棚连作辣椒生长、产量及品质的影响. 北方园艺, 2018(19):59-64.
[31] 王归鹏, 马乐乐, 范兵华, 等. 微生物菌剂对番茄全有机营养栽培养分转化及产量品质的影响. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 49(9):118-128.
[1] Xia Yuying, Wang Zhijun, Li Hongyu, Hu Chuanjun, Lü Yandong, Zhao Haicheng, Zheng Guiping. Effects of Seedling Raising Methods on Seedling Quality, Yield and Quality of Rice in Cold Region [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 103-108.
[2] Gao Wei, Hao Qingting, Zhang Zeyan, Wang Qian, Yan Hubin, Zhu Huijun, Zhao Xueying, Zhang Yaowen. Effects of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Application on Yield, Root Morphology and Photosynthetic Characteristics of Adzuki Bean [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 109-114.
[3] Wang Yujiao, Chang Xuhong, Wang Demei, Wang Yanjie, Yang Yushuang, Shi Shubing, Zhao Guangcai. Effects of Sowing Methods on Yield and Quality of Different Varieties of Wheat [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 122-128.
[4] Chen Dong, Zou Jing, Guo Ganggang, Dai Wendian, Song Shaoguang, Huang Ying. Effects of Different Specifications of Seedling Trays on Quality and Main Physiological Characteristics of Tobacco Seedlings [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 129-135.
[5] Zhao Jingyun, Lü Xinyun, Liu Xiaorong, Ren Haihong, Ren Xiaojun, Ma Junkui. Effects of Strip Compound Intercropping under Young Walnut Forest on Soybean Growth and Yield [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 136-142.
[6] Yu Yongtao, Zhang Nan, Xie Lihua, Li Guangyu, Liu Jianhua, Li Wu, Li Gaoke, Hu Jianguang. A Preliminary Study on Preference of Consumers in Eating Quality Evaluation of Sweet Corn Germplasms [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 14-19.
[7] Zhai Caijiao, Zhang Jiao, Cui Shiyou, Chen Pengjun, Han Jijun. Effects of Slow/Controlled Release Fertilizer Application on Growth, Yield and Quality of Rice under Salt Stress [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 143-151.
[8] Li Wenshan, Zhang Junyao, Tang Jianghua, Xu Wenxiu, Xu Qinghua. Effects of Different Doses of AFD on Growth and Yield of Cotton [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 158-162.
[9] Ma Ruiqi, Wang Demei, Tao Zhiqiang, Wang Yanjie, Yang Yushuang, Zhao Guangcai, Chang Xuhong. Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate on Yield and Quality of Weak Gluten Wheat in Northern Winter Wheat Region [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 163-169.
[10] Su Cuicui, Wu Lingling, Zhao Xi, Shi Zhiguo, Zhou Yanfang, Wei Yujie. Effects of Sowing Date on the Growth, Quality and Yield of Safflower in Gansu Yellow River Irrigation Area [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 176-183.
[11] Zhang Lixia, Guo Xiaoyan, Shi Pengfei, Nie Liangpeng, Ling Jingwei, Shen Peilin, Ding Li, Zhang Lin, Lü Yuhu, Pan Ziliang. Effects of Drought Stress on Growth, Yield and Benefits of Kenaf in Vigorous Growing Period [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 184-189.
[12] Zhang Yonggang, Ren Zhiguang, Xu Zhiqiang, Liu Jianguo, Zhang Xiaobing, Liu Huabing, Xia Chen, Cheng Changhe. Chemical Quality Evaluation of Flue-Cured Tobacco Based on Maximization of Deviation and BP Neural Network [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 190-195.
[13] Jin Haiyang, Zhang Suyu, Cui Jingyu, Li Xiangdong, Yue Junqin, Zhang Deqi, Yang Cheng, Fang Baoting, Wang Hanfang, Qin Feng. Regulatory Effects of Different Nitrogen Management Methods on Quality of Strong and Medium-Strong Gluten Wheat [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 212-218.
[14] Wang Yanxun, Tian Jichun. Wide Adaptability Performance and Genetic Analysis of National Certified Wheat Variety Shannong 20 with High and Stable Yield [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 46-51.
[15] Wang Qi, Xu Yanli, Yan Peng, Dong Haosheng, Zhang Wei, Lu Lin, Dong Zhiqiang. Effects of Polyaspartic Acid-Chitosan on Agronomic Traits, Yield and Nitrogen Use of Spring Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 58-67.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!