Crops ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 11-18.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2025.05.002

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Wheat and Rapeseed Straw Returning on Yield and Quality of Rice under Salt Stress

Teng Wen(), Ye Fan, Zhou Zhou, Wang Yule, Liu Lijun()   

  1. Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Crop Genetics and Physiology / Jiangsu Co-Innovation Center for Modern Production Technology of Grain Crops, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, Jiangsu, China
  • Received:2025-04-17 Revised:2025-05-20 Online:2025-10-15 Published:2025-10-21

RichHTML

8

PDF (PC)

114

Abstract:

This pot experiment investigated the regulatory effects of wheat straw (WS) and rapeseed straw (RS) treatments on the yield and quality of two rice cultivars, Nanjing 9108 and Huajing 5, under salt stress (SS, 0.2% salinity). The results showed that compared with non-salt treatment (CK), SS treatment significantly increased soil electrical conductivity and reduced the K+/Na+ ratio in the leaves of two rice cultivars. Compared with the no-straw treatment (NS), both straw treatments reduced soil electrical conductivity and increased the K+/Na+ ratio in leaves of two rice cultivars under SS treatment. Compared with CK, SS treatment reduced the yield of Nanjing 9108 and Huajing 5 by 59.9% and 64.5%, respectively. Under SS condition, compared with NS treatment, WS and RS treatments increased the number of panicles and the number of grains per panicle, increased the yields of Nanjing 9108 and Huajing 5 by 60.9%, 63.5% and 63.5%, 71.6%, respectively, and significantly mitigated the yield loss caused by salt stress. Compared with CK, SS treatment significantly reduced processing quality, cooking and eating quality of rice, but was beneficial to improving the appearance quality and nutritional quality. Compared with NS treatment, WS and RS treatments improved processing quality, appearance quality, and taste quality of rice under salt stress. RS treatment was more conducive to improving the processing quality and appearance quality of rice, while WS treatment was more conducive to increasing taste value and cooking and eating quality of rice. In conclusion, wheat straw and rapeseed straw treatments can alleviate the yield loss of rice caused by salt stress and improve some quality indicators of rice. Rapeseed straw treatment is superior to wheat straw treatment.

Key words: Crop straw returning, Salt stress, Rice, Yield, Quality

Fig.1

Effects of different straw returning on soil electrical conductivity Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences at P < 0.05 level among different treatments within the same variety. The same below."

Fig.2

Effects of different straw returning on K+/Na+ values in leaves"

Table 1

Effects of different straw returning on yield and its components of rice"

品种
Cultivar		 盐处理
Salt
treatment		 秸秆处理
Straw
treatment		 穗数（/盆）
Number of
panicles (/pot)		 每穗粒数
Grains number
per panicle		 结实率
Seed-setting
rate (%)		 千粒重
1000-grain
weight (g)		 产量（g/盆）
Yield
(g/pot)
南粳9108
Nanjing 9108		 CK NS 24.3a 166.6ab 87.2a 25.7bc 90.7b
WS 23.8a 174.4a 87.1a 26.1ab 94.4a
RS 24.0a 179.5a 85.1b 26.5a 97.2a
SS NS 15.3c 122.1c 77.2c 25.4c 36.4d
WS 17.3bc 151.6b 85.0b 25.1c 55.5c
RS 19.3b 164.3ab 74.2c 25.4c 59.5c
华粳5号
Huajing 5		 CK NS 20.3a 156.4abc 90.2a 28.2bc 80.3b
WS 18.3abc 174.5ab 90.8a 29.6a 85.3a
RS 19.7ab 178.3a 88.4b 29.0ab 89.7a
SS NS 12.7d 120.2c 68.4e 27.8cd 28.5d
WS 15.3cd 139.6bc 80.8c 27.4cd 46.6c
RS 16.7bc 138.1bc 76.0d 27.9d 48.9c

Table 2

Effects of different straw returning on processing quality and appearance quality of rice %"

品种
Cultivar		 盐处理
Salt treatment		 秸秆处理
Straw treatment		 糙米率
Brown rice rate		 精米率
Polished rice rate		 整精米率
Head rice rate		 垩白粒率
Chalky grain rate		 垩白度
Chalkiness
南粳9108
Nanjing 9108		 CK NS 83.1c 72.3bc 66.7b 32.4a 21.5a
WS 85.3ab 75.4a 68.8a 27.4b 18.8b
RS 86.4a 76.9a 69.0a 26.0b 17.4b
SS NS 78.2d 66.8d 61.1d 31.2a 19.9a
WS 82.9c 71.5c 62.9cd 22.3c 16.3c
RS 84.2bc 72.2bc 63.8c 21.5c 15.3c
华粳5号
Huajing 5		 CK NS 81.4b 70.5ab 66.5b 29.5a 18.5a
WS 83.6a 70.6ab 68.4a 25.0b 16.5b
RS 84.0a 71.3a 69.5a 24.5b 15.4b
SS NS 73.0d 66.1c 56.5d 28.1a 17.5a
WS 78.3c 68.7b 60.3c 19.2c 15.1c
RS 80.1bc 70.0ab 61.6c 18.3c 14.7c

Table 3

Effects of different straw returning on taste characteristics of rice"

品种
Cultivar		 盐处理
Salt treatment		 秸秆处理
Straw treatment		 外观
Appearance		 硬度
Hardness		 黏度
Viscosity		 平衡度
Balance		 食味值
Taste value
南粳9108
Nanjing 9108		 CK NS 8.3c 5.5b 8.0b 8.2c 81.0b
WS 8.8a 5.1c 8.5a 8.8a 84.5a
RS 8.5bc 5.4b 8.0b 8.5b 81.5b
SS NS 7.9d 5.9a 7.5d 7.7d 77.0c
WS 8.6ab 5.4b 7.9b 8.5b 81.0b
RS 8.0d 5.9a 7.7c 7.8d 77.5c
华粳5号
Huajing 5		 CK NS 6.1c 6.6a 5.8c 6.0cd 66.0c
WS 7.3a 6.1d 6.9a 7.1a 73.5a
RS 6.8b 6.3c 6.5b 6.6b 70.0b
SS NS 6.0c 6.7a 5.7d 5.9d 65.5c
WS 6.2c 6.5b 5.8cd 6.1c 67.0c
RS 6.1c 6.7a 5.9c 6.0cd 66.0c

Table 4

Effects of different straw returning on protein content and amylose content of rice %"

品种
Cultivar		 盐处理
Salt
treatment		 秸秆处理
Straw
treatment		 蛋白质含量
Protein
content		 直链淀粉含量
Amylose
content
南粳9108
Nanjing 9108		 CK NS 5.9d 13.8a
WS 7.0c 12.0b
RS 7.6a 12.6b
SS NS 7.2bc 12.7b
WS 7.3b 11.3c
RS 7.4ab 10.1d
华粳5号
Huajing 5		 CK NS 6.5c 20.1a
WS 7.6b 20.0a
RS 7.8b 19.9a
SS NS 8.2a 18.8b
WS 8.1a 17.0c
RS 7.9b 16.4c

Table 5

Effects of different straw returning on RVA profile characteristic of rice flour"

品种
Cultivar		 盐处理
Salt
treatment		 秸秆处理
Straw
treatment		 峰值黏度
Peak viscosity
(cP)		 热浆黏度
Hot paste
viscosity (cP)		 崩解值
Breakdown
(cP)		 最终黏度
Final viscosity
(cP)		 消减值
Setback
(cP)		 糊化温度
Pasting temperature
(℃)
南粳9108
Nanjing 9108		 CK NS 2703a 1413a 1290a 1994a -709d 76.4c
WS 2466b 1220b 1046b 1796b -670cd 77.0ab
RS 2284c 1066c 919c 1538c -646c 77.4ab
SS NS 2414b 1207b 1107b 1718b -596b 76.6bc
WS 2116d 1019c 897c 1560c -556b 77.6a
RS 1927e 877d 750d 1425d -502a 77.8a
华粳5号
Huajing 5		 CK NS 3619a 2647a 1359a 3851a -284d 76.8a
WS 3135b 2376b 1107c 3605b -211c 76.9a
RS 2713d 2106c 972d 3402c -131b 77.0a
SS NS 2968c 2580a 1249b 3557b -219c 77.0a
WS 2686d 2038c 1088c 3330c -111b 77.2a
RS 2303e 1755d 948d 3185d 45a 77.3a
[1] Wei L X, et al. Priming of rice (Oryza sativa L.) seedlings with abscisic acid enhances seedling survival, plant growth, and grain yield in saline-alkaline paddy fields. Field Crops Research, 2017, 203:86-93.
[2] 孙明法, 严国红, 唐红生, 等. 江苏沿海滩涂盐碱地水稻种植技术要点. 大麦与谷类科学, 2012(1):6-7.
[3] 黄洁, 白志刚, 钟楚, 等. 水稻耐盐生理及分子调节机制. 核农学报, 2020, 34(6):1359-1367.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.06.1359
[4] 凌启鸿. 盐碱地种稻有关问题的讨论. 中国稻米, 2018, 24(4):1-2.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2018.04.001
[5] 李小兵, 黎华寿, 张泽民, 等. 水稻盐分胁迫研究进展. 广东农业科学, 2014, 41(12):6-11.
[6] 巨晓棠, 谷保静. 我国农田氮肥施用现状、问题及趋势. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2014, 20(4):783-795.
[7] 刘月月, 郑浣彤, 程兆伟, 等. 秸秆还田与氮肥运筹对东北粳稻产量及稻米品质的影响. 中国稻米, 2021, 27(6):20-27.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2021.06.005
[8] Li C, Xing X, et al. Straw return and organic fertilizers instead of chemical fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of rice. Earth Science Informatics, 2022, 15(3):1363-1369.
[9] Yan F Y, Sun Y J, Xu H, et al. Effects of wheat straw mulch application and nitrogen management on rice root growth, dry matter accumulation and rice quality in soils of different fertility. Paddy and Water Environment, 2018, 16(3):507-518.
[10] 陈新红, 叶玉秀, 许仁良, 等. 小麦秸秆还田量对水稻产量和品质的影响. 作物杂志, 2009(1):54-57.
[11] 吴玉红, 王吕, 崔月贞, 等. 轮作模式及秸秆还田对水稻产量、稻米品质及土壤肥力的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(11):1926-1937.
[12] 徐国伟, 谈桂露, 王志琴, 等. 秸秆还田与实地氮肥管理对直播水稻产量、品质及氮肥利用的影响. 中国农业科学, 2009, 42(8):2736-2746.
[13] 王红妮, 王学春, 赵长坤, 等. 油菜秸秆还田对水稻根系、分蘖和产量的影响. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(4):1243-1252.
doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201904.008
[14] 赵贺, 王绪奎, 刘绍贵, 等. 基于水稻产量的江苏省稻麦轮作区土壤质量评价. 土壤, 2020, 52(6):1230-1238.
[15] 赵亚丽, 薛志伟, 郭海斌, 等. 耕作方式与秸秆还田对土壤呼吸的影响及机理. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(19):155-65.
[16] 于博, 刘雅梦, 杨哲, 等. 内蒙古平原灌区土壤固碳与养分吸附特征及秸秆还田调控. 华北农学报, 2024, 39(1):120-126.
doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193899
[17] Wang J, Ye F, et al. Straw type and nitrogen-water management balance rice yield and methane emissions by regulating rhizosphere microenvironment. Field Crops Research, 2024, 317:109555.
[18] 国家质量监督检验检疫总局. 优质稻谷:GB/T 17891-2017 . 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
[19] 赵汉红, 梁小军, 刘全哲, 等. 不同轮作模式下秸秆还田与氮肥配施对水稻茎蘖动态、群体质量及产量的影响. 陕西农业科学, 2024, 70(12):93-100.
[20] 金丹丹, 隋世江, 陈玥, 等. 秸秆还田下氮肥减量对辽河平原水稻产量及氮素吸收利用的影响. 作物杂志, 2025(2):172-179.
[21] 吴玉红, 郝兴顺, 田霄鸿, 等. 秸秆还田对汉中盆地稻田土壤有机碳组分、碳储量及水稻产量的影响. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(4):325-331.
[22] Liu X, Wang Q S, et al. Effects of insect-proof net cultivation, rice-duck farming, and organic matter return on rice dry matter accumulation and nitrogen utilization. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8:47.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00047 pmid: 28174589
[23] 武立权, 徐礼森, 桂文斌, 等. 油菜秸秆还田对水稻产量及群体质量影响的研究. 杂交水稻, 2016, 31(2):32-34.
[24] 张蛟, 翟彩娇, 崔士友. 微咸水灌溉滩涂稻田盐分动态及其水稻产量表现. 江苏农业学报, 2018, 34(4):799-803.
[25] 韦还和, 葛佳琳, 张徐彬, 等. 盐胁迫下粳稻品种南粳9108分蘖特性及其与群体生产力的关系. 作物学报, 2020, 46(8):1238-1247.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.02001
[26] 王沙沙, 张茂林, 刘小涛, 等. 盐碱地秸秆还田对水稻生长及产量的影响. 农业科技通讯, 2020(8):97-100.
[27] Ren C, Gao D P, Bai T Q, et al. Straw return alleviates the negative effects of saline sodic stress on rice by improving soil chemistry and reducing the accumulation of sodium ions in rice leaves. Agriculture,Ecosystems and Environment, 2023, 342:108253.
[28] 周永学. 秸秆还田方式对微咸水滴灌棉田土壤理化性质及棉花水氮利用率的影响. 石河子:石河子大学, 2022.
[29] 颜佳倩, 顾逸彪, 薛张逸, 等. 耐盐性不同水稻品种对盐胁迫的响应差异及其机制. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6):1463-1475.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.12027
[30] 肖丹丹, 李军, 邓先亮, 等. 不同品种稻米品质形成对盐胁迫的响应. 核农学报, 2020, 34(8):1840-1847.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.08.1840
[31] 刘丽华, 秦猛, 翟玲霞, 等. 秸秆还田形态和还田量对水稻氮素积累与转运及产量品质的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41(3):218-228.
[32] 王国骄, 宋鹏, 杨振中, 等. 秸秆还田对水稻光合物质生产特征、稻米品质和土壤养分的影响. 作物杂志, 2021(4):67-72.
[33] 张聪, 慕平, 尚建明. 长期持续秸秆还田对土壤理化特性、酶活性和产量性状的影响. 水土保持研究, 2018, 25(1):92-98.
[34] Yousaf M, et al. Effects of fertilization on crop production and nutrient-supplying capacity under rice-oilseed rape rotation system. Scientific Reports, 2017, 7(1/2/3/4):1270.
[35] 马唯一, 朱济邹, 朱旺, 等. 盐害和干旱对稻米品质形成的影响及生理机制研究进展. 中国水稻科学, 2025, 39(2):156-170.
doi: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2025.240607
[36] 袁晓娟, 孙知白, 杨永刚, 等. 3种复种模式下秸秆还田对机插杂交籼稻产量形成及品质的影响. 四川农业大学学报, 2022, 40(3):319-330.
[37] 周根友, 翟彩娇, 邓先亮, 等. 盐逆境对水稻产量、光合特性及品质的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2018, 32(2):146-154.
[38] Tian J Y, Xing Z P, et al. Influence of wheat straw return on yield and grain quality in different direct-seeding rice production systems. Agronomy, 2022, 12(12):3180.
[39] Balindong J L, Ward R M, Liu L, et al. Rice grain protein composition influences instrumental measures of rice cooking and eating quality. Journal of Cereal Science, 2018, 79:35-42.
[40] 余为仆. 秸秆还田条件下盐胁迫对水稻产量与品质形成的影响. 扬州:扬州大学, 2014.
[41] 张自常, 李鸿伟, 曹转勤, 等. 施氮量和灌溉方式的交互作用对水稻产量和品质影响. 作物学报, 2013, 39(1):84-92.
[42] 马凌霄, 张素红, 孙杰. 高盐浓度筛选对水稻产量和品质的影响. 北方水稻, 2017, 47(6):13-17.
[43] 解文孝, 李建国, 刘军, 等. 不同土壤背景下秸秆全量还田对水稻产量及稻米品质的影响. 中国稻米, 2021, 27(2):73-88.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2021.02.015
[44] Mechthild T, Céline M D. Source and sink mechanisms of nitrogen transport and use. The New Phytologist, 2018, 217(1):35-53.
[45] Zheng C K, Niu S L, Yan Y, et al. Moderate salinity stress affects rice quality by influencing expression of amylose and protein- content-associated genes. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2024, 25(7):4042.
[1] Zhou Tingfang, Li Ran, Liu Qianqian, Zhang Ze, Wang Zhenhua, Ma Baoxin, Lu Ming, Zhang Lin, Han Yehui, Yang Bo, Li Mingshun, Zhang Degui, Weng Jianfeng, Yong Hongjun, Xu Jingyu, Han Jienan, Li Xinhai. Analysis of Salt Tolerance at Germination Stage of 118 Maize Hybrids in Northeast China [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 1-10.
[2] Ma Qiang, Li Yankun, Wang Gui’e, Wen Tingting, Zhang Tianyu, Tian Jichun, Wang Yanxun. Analysis of Agronomic Traits and Quality Characteristics of Colored Wheat Varieties Approved in Shandong Province and Research on Improvement Direction [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 113-119.
[3] Zhi Xianhong, Ji Zixian, Xu Zhenwang, Tan En, Liang Rishen, Ma Shuaipeng, Tang Huiwu. Expression Analysis of the CYP450 Family Gene Os78A5 in Rice [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 135-141.
[4] Peng Binfeng, Lu Chusheng, Yin Yuanhong, Zhu Feifei, Ye Qunhuan, Pan Junfeng, Liu Yanzhuo, Hu Xiangyu, Hu Rui, Li Meijuan, Wang Xinyu, Liang Kaiming, Fu Youqiang. Physiological Mechanism of Ammonium-Nitrate Mixed Nutrition Promoting Rice Growth under High-Temperature Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 165-170.
[5] Li Xiaomin, Gong Hongyu, Tian Bingxin, Liu Donghua, Li Chunxi, Jiang Lina, Ma Jianhui. Effects of Different Row Spacing Arrangements and Planting Density Combinations on Canopy Structure and Nitrogen Utilization in Wheat on the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 171-176.
[6] Li Linlin, Zhang Zhen, He Gang, Gao Renji, Liang Zengfa, Xie Jin, Huang Hao, Zeng Fandong, Jin Baofeng, Cai Yixia, Jiang Junhong, Wang Wei. Effects of Stalk-Cutting and Curing on the Quality and Metabolites of Upper Tobacco Leaves [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 184-194.
[7] Li Jiahui, Chen Ruxue, Bai Hongbo, Wang Yonghua. Photosynthesis-Grain Filling Coordination Characteristics of Winter Wheat with Different Plant Types and Their Impact on Yield Components [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 195-203.
[8] Wang Yan, Zhang Qian, Dong Ming, Wang Shulin, Feng Guoyi, Liang Qinglong, Qi Hong. Effects of Mechanical Topping Time on Agronomic Characteristics and Yield of Cotton in Southern Hebei Cotton Region [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 204-208.
[9] Wu Huijuan, Geng Xiaoli, Li Deming, Zhou Dongchang, Fu Ping, Liu Qian, Du Xiaocun. Effects of Foliar Spraying with Different Iron Fertilizers on Seed Yield and Its Components in Oat [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 233-238.
[10] Li Xiang, Li Yijie, Wu Xiaojian, Long Shengfeng, Huang Dongmei, Gao Yijing, Wang Zeping. Application Effect of Sugarcane Waste in Cultivation of Dictyophora indusiata [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 260-265.
[11] Li Jie, Zhang Yongqiang, Lei Junjie, Lü Xiaoqing, Chen Chuanxin, Xu Qijiang, Nie Shihui, Xu Wenxiu, Chang Xuhong. Effects of Different Urea Types and Application Methods on Plant Characteristics and Yield Composition of Winter Wheat under Drip Irrigation [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 266-271.
[12] Du Hanmeng, Chen Yuqiong, Liu Ruotong, Chen Yinglong, Dai Qigen, Zhang Hongcheng, Liao Ping. Effects of Chlormequat Chloride and Gypsum Application on Rice Yield and Lodging Risk under Salt Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 29-34.
[13] Yan Jingrong, Pang Chunhua, Zhang Yongqing, Wu Yueyue, Hou Yuchen, Wang Jiaqi, Qiao Man. Effects of Desulfurized Gypsum and Humic Acid Interaction on Soil and Quinoa Growth in Saline-Alkali Land [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 47-53.
[14] Jia Yanli, Zhang Hongfa, Liu Guixia, Huang Sufang, Qu Xinyue, Yue Mingqiang, Han Jiating, Xu Yupeng, Liu Qingsong. Effects of Biological Sulfur Regulator on the Yield, Quality of Alfalfa and Soil Physicochemical Properties in Saline-Alkali Land [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 86-92.
[15] Sun Xianyin, Zhang Jibo, Lü Guangde, Qi Xiaolei, Sun Yingying, Mi Yong, Mu Qiuhuan, Yin Xundong, Wang Ruixia, Qian Zhaoguo, Gao Minggang. Comparison of High and Stable Yield Characteristics of Different Genotypes of Wheat under Dryland and Supplemental Irrigation Conditions [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 104-110.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!