Crops ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (2): 228-233.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2024.02.028

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Study on the Difference of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Uptake of Different Genotypes of Proso Millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) Varieties

Zhang Lei(), Dong Kongjun, He Jihong, Ren Ruiyu, Liu Tianpeng, Yang Tianyu()   

  1. Crop Research Institute, Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou 730070, Gansu, China
  • Received:2023-01-04 Revised:2023-02-07 Online:2024-04-15 Published:2024-04-15

RichHTML

3

PDF (PC)

80

Abstract:

This study selected ten main varieties of proso millet grown in different ecological areas and conducted field trials in 2017 and 2018 to study the differences in nitrogen and phosphorus uptake of different proso millet varieties. The results showed that the dry matter accumulation, nitrogen and phosphorus uptake and yield of different proso millet varieties were significantly different. Compared with the main variety Longmi 14, the dry matter accumulation of Neimi 6, Ningmi 14 and Chimi 1 reached 72.9%, 74.9% and 77.0%, respectively, the phosphorus absorption reached 67.1%, 75.2% and 85.2%, respectively, and the nitrogen absorption reached 71.9%, 80.1% and 79.6%, respectively. However, the dry matter accumulation, nitrogen absorption and phosphorus absorption of Jinshu 7, Neimi 8, Yumi 3, and Longmi 13 reached 136.2%-166.6%, 131.2%-176.8%, and 144.8%-201.6%, respectively, of which Longmi 13 had the highest dry matter accumulation and nutrient absorption. In terms of yield and its components, compared with other varieties, Jinshu 7 had the highest panicle weight and grain weight per panicle, Ningmi 14 and Neimi 6 had the highest panicle number, and Neimi 6, Neimi 8, and Ningmi 14 had the highest yield. The N/P of different proso millet varieties showed that high N/P before jointing and low N/P after jointing were beneficial to dry matter accumulation and yield formation of proso millet, and the N/P at different growth stages could also be used as an important index for selecting high-yield proso millet.

Key words: Loess Plateau, Proso millet, Yield, Nutrient absorption

Fig.1

Precipitation and temperature during the growth period of proso millet in 2017 and 2018"

Table 1

Dry matter accumulation of different proso millet varieties g/plant"

年份
Year		 品种
Variety		 苗期
Seedling
stage		 拔节期
Jointing
stage		 灌浆期
Filling
stage		 成熟期
Maturity
stage
2017 晋黍7号 0.05cd 4.53c 14.10a 17.65b
内糜6号 0.05cd 3.52d 6.98cd 9.02e
内糜8号 0.06b 4.74bc 8.75c 18.37b
榆黍1号 0.05cd 4.50c 11.79b 12.91c
榆糜3号 0.05cd 6.35a 8.28cd 21.83a
雁黍11号 0.05cd 3.59d 6.62d 12.09cd
陇糜14号 0.06bc 4.11cd 4.65f 13.64c
宁糜14号 0.08a 3.98cd 5.34e 10.01d
陇糜13号 0.06b 5.31b 6.12de 21.29a
赤糜1号 0.04d 3.63d 4.26f 9.55de
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 21.70 20.00 41.11 32.76
2018 晋黍7号 0.08ab 4.79b 15.75a 21.68c
内糜6号 0.05d 3.24d 8.44d 12.09e
内糜8号 0.09a 4.81b 8.49d 24.18ab
榆黍1号 0.05d 4.48bc 12.44b 16.58d
榆糜3号 0.06cd 6.64a 10.17c 22.36bc
雁黍11号 0.05d 3.58cd 8.95cd 15.19d
陇糜14号 0.05d 4.32bc 6.13f 15.17d
宁糜14号 0.07b 4.00c 7.07e 11.58e
陇糜13号 0.09a 5.27b 8.54d 26.88a
赤糜1号 0.07bc 3.94c 6.49ef 12.74e
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 23.49 21.43 31.67 30.75

Table 2

Nitrogen uptake of different proso millet varieties g/plant"

年份
Year		 品种
Variety		 苗期
Seedling
stage		 拔节期
Jointing
stage		 灌浆期
Filling
stage		 成熟期
Maturity
stage
2017 晋黍7号 1.55c 130.35bc 256.12a 317.93b
内糜6号 1.84b 131.05bc 126.97d 155.11e
内糜8号 2.16a 128.55c 161.91b 343.94ab
榆黍1号 1.23d 131.52bc 225.23a 211.08d
榆糜3号 1.80b 191.34a 149.62bc 374.86a
雁黍11号 1.70b 92.53e 132.08cd 216.83cd
陇糜14号 1.55c 94.38e 117.74d 243.79c
宁糜14号 2.12a 96.10de 115.14d 166.47e
陇糜13号 2.39a 116.04cd 147.88bc 367.04a
赤糜1号 1.33d 101.03d 144.31bc 176.75e
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 21.07 21.23 40.53 33.32
2018 晋黍7号 3.01ab 149.45b 207.27a 279.43bc
内糜6号 1.96cd 87.92d 137.91b 169.50e
内糜8号 3.36a 150.94b 141.78b 309.99b
榆黍1号 1.68d 130.48bc 227.40a 245.38cd
榆糜3号 2.35c 190.37a 156.92b 338.53b
雁黍11号 1.82cd 99.20d 116.62c 251.24c
陇糜14号 1.95cd 132.15bc 96.12d 211.62d
宁糜14号 2.51bc 133.04bc 119.55c 194.54de
陇糜13号 3.43a 137.76b 141.76b 429.54a
赤糜1号 2.74b 116.98c 92.16d 183.58e
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 25.73 21.51 30.68 30.91

Table 3

Phosphorus uptake of different proso millet varieties g/plant"

年份
Year		 品种
Variety		 苗期
Seedling
stage		 拔节期
Jointing
stage		 灌浆期
Filling
stage		 成熟期
Maturity
stage
2017 晋黍7号 0.13cd 10.05ab 25.94a 40.78b
内糜6号 0.14c 7.32e 15.92b 19.39e
内糜8号 0.16bc 12.13a 13.65b 47.40b
榆黍1号 0.13cd 10.31ab 22.51a 25.25cd
榆糜3号 0.12d 11.75a 12.67bc 47.16b
雁黍11号 0.13cd 9.04b 10.66c 27.09c
陇糜14号 0.15c 8.60b 8.66d 29.76c
宁糜14号 0.22a 9.40b 10.35cd 20.12e
陇糜13号 0.18b 10.09ab 10.90c 58.97a
赤糜1号 0.10e 7.85be 9.11d 23.59d
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 23.52 16.05 41.61 40.30
2018 晋黍7号 0.23b 16.06cd 30.71a 57.66b
内糜6号 0.12ef 11.25f 21.52bc 26.11e
内糜8号 0.28a 17.22c 23.18b 67.95ab
榆黍1号 0.11f 17.79c 29.36a 41.12c
榆糜3号 0.16d 24.90a 19.32bc 61.04c
雁黍11号 0.15de 13.17e 20.23bc 39.49c
陇糜14号 0.13e 15.72d 13.36d 37.77c
宁糜14号 0.18cd 12.04ef 18.10c 31.27d
陇糜13号 0.29a 20.03b 19.90bc 77.41a
赤糜1号 0.19c 14.14e 13.76d 34.40cd
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 33.96 25.09 27.24 36.47

Table 4

Nitrogen and phosphorus absorption ratio of different proso millet varieties g/plant"

年份
Year		 品种
Variety		 苗期
Seedling
stage		 拔节期
Jointing
stage		 灌浆期
Filling
stage		 成熟期
Maturity
stage
2017 晋黍7号 11.89bc 12.97cd 9.88b 7.80a
内糜6号 13.62a 17.91a 7.97c 8.00a
内糜8号 13.68a 10.59de 11.86ab 7.26ab
榆黍1号 9.31d 12.75cd 10.00b 8.43a
榆糜3号 14.79a 16.31ab 11.81ab 7.95a
雁黍11号 13.04ab 10.23e 12.38a 8.01a
陇糜14号 10.48cd 13.69c 10.90ab 8.19a
宁糜14号 9.63d 12.15d 9.28b 8.27a
陇糜13号 13.40ab 14.66bc 10.65ab 6.22b
赤糜1号 13.70a 12.87cd 8.16c 7.49ab
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 15.53 17.66 14.79 8.30
2018 晋黍7号 12.96bc 9.31b 6.75bc 4.85c
内糜6号 15.92a 7.82bc 6.41bc 6.49a
内糜8号 12.02c 8.77b 6.12cd 4.56c
榆黍1号 14.85ab 7.34cd 7.75ab 5.97ab
榆糜3号 14.27ab 7.65cd 8.12a 5.54abc
雁黍11号 12.04c 7.53cd 5.77d 6.36a
陇糜14号 15.13a 8.40bc 7.19ab 5.60abc
宁糜14号 14.28ab 11.05a 6.61bc 6.22a
陇糜13号 11.95c 6.88d 7.12ab 5.55abc
赤糜1号 14.44ab 8.27bc 6.70bc 5.34bc
变异系数
Coefficient of variation (%)		 10.43 14.49 10.45 11.19

Fig.2

Yield and its components of different proso millet varieties Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between varieties in the same year."

Table 5

The correlation analysis between different indexes"

指标
Index		 干物质
Dry matter		 N P N/P 穗重
Panicle weight		 穗粒重
Grain weight per panicle		 穗数
Panicle number		 产量
Yield
干物质Dry matter 1.00
N 0.92** 1.00
P 0.97** 0.87** 1.00
N/P -0.55* -0.27 -0.68** 1.00
穗重Panicle weight 0.51* 0.38 0.48* -0.40 1.00
穗粒重Grain weight per panicle 0.65** 0.52* 0.60** -0.43 0.90** 1.00
穗数Panicle number -0.53* -0.45* -0.48* 0.08 -0.68** -0.75** 1.00
产量Yield 0.27 0.08 0.36 -0.61** 0.19 0.22 0.40 1.00
[1] Zhang J P, Lu H Y, Gu W F, et al. Early mixed farming of millet and rice 7800 years ago in the Middle Yellow River region,China. PLoS ONE, 2012, 7(12):1-8.
[2] 赵志军. 中国农业起源概述. 遗产与保护研究, 2019, 4(1):1-7.
[3] 杨清华. 粳糯糜子品种品质评价与蒸煮食味品质特性研究. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2020.
[4] 岳慧芬. 糜子黄酒发酵工艺与抗氧化特性研究. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2019.
[5] 杨文静. 糜子新品系比较试验总结. 农村实用技术, 2022(8):74-75.
[6] 李倩, 封伟, 冯海智, 等. 不同糜子品种的鉴定与综合评价. 陕西农业科学, 2022, 68(5):20-27.
[7] 刘春娟. 糜子对低氮胁迫的响应及耐低氮基因挖掘研究. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2021.
[8] He M S, Yan Z B, Cui X Q, et al. Scaling the leaf nutrient resorption efficiency: Nitrogen vs phosphorus in global plants. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 729:138920.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138920
[9] 严加坤, 张宁宁, 张岁岐. 谷子对干旱胁迫的生理生态响应. 生态学报, 2021, 41(21):8612-8622.
[10] 崔雯雯, 宋全昊, 高小丽, 等. 糜子不同种植方式对土壤酶活性及养分的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(1):234-240.
[11] 张姼, 柴晓娇, 沈轶男, 等. 不同氮素水平对谷子农艺性状和氮素利用效率的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(1):66-71.
[12] 周汉章, 刘环, 刘斐, 等. 播量与水肥耦合对秋闲田饲用谷子水分利用率的影响. 农学学报, 2015, 5(12):27-38.
doi: 10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas15040014
[13] 张磊, 杨天育, 刘天鹏, 等. 半干旱条件下糜子氮磷积累、分配及利用效率的差异. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2020, 55(3):62-70,77.
[14] 张美俊, 乔治军, 杨武德, 等. 糜子氮、磷、钾肥的效应及优化研究. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013, 19(2):347-353.
[15] 罗世武, 程炳文, 杨军学, 等. 不施氮对不同糜子品种生长及产量的影响. 湖北农业科学, 2020, 59(23):51-54,57.
[16] 曹晓宁, 王君杰, 王海岗, 等. 糜子栽培研究进展. 安徽农业科学, 2015, 43(31):79-81,84.
[17] 杨亚丽, 蔡顺林. 流动分析法与凯氏定氮法测定植物全氮的比较. 玉溪师范学院学报, 2016, 32(8):51-54.
[18] 李萍, 李明明, 王浩, 等. 改良钼锑抗比色法测定不同谷子材料组织磷含量. 激光生物学报, 2020, 29(3):237-244.
[19] 张磊, 何继红, 董孔军, 等. 氮肥对粳性和糯性糜子干物质积累和产量性状及氮肥利用效率的影响. 核农学报, 2021, 35(12):2860-2868.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2021.12.2860
[20] 游文萍, 张东升, 刘昭霖, 等. 糜子不同品种的光合能力和源库关系类型对产量形成影响的研究. 激光生物学报, 2021, 30(6):533-540,564.
[21] 杨刚. 糜子溶磷、固氮内生菌的筛选及应用效应分析. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2020.
[22] 金欣欣, 王瑾, 宋亚辉, 等. 高油酸花生干物质积累及氮磷钾养分的吸收利用. 华北农学报, 2021, 36(增1):231-239.
[23] 王晓强, 许跃奇, 何晓冰, 等. 不同烤烟品种干物质积累及养分吸收特征. 贵州农业科学, 2022, 50(8):8-14.
[24] 党红凯, 李瑞奇, 李雁鸣, 等. 超高产栽培条件下冬小麦对磷的吸收、积累和分配. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2012, 18(3):531-541.
[25] 李青风, 高杰, 彭秋, 等. 不同施氮水平下糯高粱氮磷钾养分吸收规律研究. 江苏农业科学, 2017, 45(5):83-85.
[26] 陆秀娟, 潘虹, 李祥栋, 等. 氮、磷、钾肥料对紫色小麦籽粒灌浆特征及产量形成的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2016, 44(7):123-126.
[27] 赵秀兰, 李文雄. 氮磷水平和播期对春小麦籽粒灌浆期降落数值动态变化的影响. 植物生态学报, 2006(2):344-351.
doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2006.0046
[1] Wang Han, Zheng Dechao, Tian Qinqin, Wu Xiaojing, Zhou Wenxin, Yi Zhenxie. Effects of Harvest Time on Yield and Cadmium Accumulation and Distribution Characteristics of Early Rice [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 105-112.
[2] Sun Tong, Yang Yushuang, Ma Ruiqi, Zhu Yingjie, Chang Xuhong, Dong Zhiqiang, Zhao Guangcai. Effects of PASP-KT-NAA and Ethylene-Chlormequat-Potassium on the Lodging Resistance, Yield, and Quality of Wheat [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 113-121.
[3] Sun Yueying, Liu Jinghui, Mi Junzhen, Zhao Baoping, Li Yinghao, Zhu Shanshan. Study on the Growth-Promoting Effect of Lactic Acid Bacteria Compound Preparation on Oat [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 122-128.
[4] Xu Zheli, Zhu Weiqi, Wang Litao, Shi Feng, Wei Zhiying, Wang Lina, Qiu Hongwei, Zhang Xiaoying, Li Huili. Effects of Irrigation and Foliar Nitrogen Application on Yield, Quality and Photosynthetic Characteristics of Late Sowing Wheat [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 139-147.
[5] Xiao Min, Guo Lang, Cui Can, Cheng Zhouqi, Liu Yuwu, Zhuo Le, Wu Si, Yi Zhenxie. Effects of Phosphate Fertilizer Management on Yield Components and Nutrient Uptake and Utilization in Mechanical Transplanting Double-Cropping Rice [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 178-188.
[6] Xie Mengfan, Jia Haijiang, Qu Yuankai, Nong Shiying, Li Junlin, Wang Jie, Liu Liwei, Yan Huifeng. Effects of Planting Density and Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Rate on Leaf Development and Yield of Flue-Cured Tobacco in Baise Tobacco Region [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 189-197.
[7] Wang Huaiping, Yang Mingda, Zhang Suyu, Li Shuai, Guan Xiaokang, Wang Tongchao. Effects of Different Water-Saving Irrigation Modes on Growth, Yield, and Water Utilization of Summer Maize [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 206-212.
[8] Hu Haochi, Wang Fugui, Zhu Kongyan, Hu Shuping, Wang Meng, Wang Zhigang, Sun Jiying, Yu Xiaofang, Bao Haizhu, Gao Julin. Effects of Straw Returning Years and Phosphorus Application on Root Growth and Yield of Maize [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 80-88.
[9] Qin Birong, You Saiya, Chen Shurong, Zhu Lianfeng, Kong Yali, Zhu Chunquan, Tian Wenhao, Zhang Junhua, Jin Qianyu, Cao Xiaochuang, Liu Li. Effects of the Different Nitrogen Levels on Yield, Nitrogen Utilization Efficiency and the Nitrogen Balance of Double-Cropping Rice in Paddy Field [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 89-96.
[10] Luo Xiaoying, Fang Yanfei, Hu Dongping, Tang Jianghua, Xu Wenxiu, Wang Huaigang. Effects of Sowing Methods and Sowing Rates on Soil Water Use and Yield of Dryland Wheat in Arid Region [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 97-104.
[11] Ji Ping, Liu Jinlong, Liu Hao, Kuang Jiali, Ye Shihe, Long Sha, Yang Hongtao, Peng Bo, Xu Chen, Liu Xiaolong. Effects of Heat Stress on Yield Components and Quality in Different Rice Varieties during Heading Stage [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(1): 117-125.
[12] Zhou Zhenlei, Liu Jianming, Cao Dong, Liu Baolong, Wang Dongxia, Zhang Huaigang. Comparison of Grass Yield, Agronomic Traits and Forage Quality of Different Oat Varieties [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(1): 132-140.
[13] Xiong Xin, Deng Jun, Shang Liyan, Sheng Tian, Ye Jiayu, Liu Zichen, Huang Liying, Zhang Yunbo. Effects of Nitrogen and Potassium Fertilizer Interaction on Yield and Radiation Use Efficiency of Hybrid Rice [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(1): 166-173.
[14] Shao Meihong, Zhu Defeng, Cheng Siming, Cheng Chu, Xu Qunying, Hu Chaoshui. Study on Seedling Quality and Yield of Machine Transplanting Early Rice with the Seedling Raising of Overlayed-Tray Emergence [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(1): 229-232.
[15] Xie Keran, Gao Ti, Cui Kehui. Research Progress of Potassium Fertilizer Controlling Rice Yield under High Temperature [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(1): 8-15.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!