Crops ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (4): 184-190.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2021.04.028

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Different Intercropping Modes of Green Manure Replacing Chemical Fertilizer on Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) Traits and Yield

Tang Hongqin(), Li Zhongyi, Dong Wenbin, Wei Caihui, He Tieguang(), Meng Yancheng, Tang Hailing, Mo Yongcheng   

  1. Institute of Agricultural Resource and Environment, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanning 530007, Guangxi, China
  • Received:2021-01-25 Revised:2021-06-03 Online:2021-08-15 Published:2021-08-13
  • Contact: He Tieguang E-mail:tanghq@gxaas.net;tghe118@163.com

RichHTML

2

PDF (PC)

206

Abstract:

This study aimed to explore the effects of green manure instead of chemical fertilizer on the growth and yield of cassava and to solve the key technical problems such as synergism between continuous cropping cassava soil fertility improvement and related technologies. Field experiments with eight trial treatments were conducted from 2019 to 2020 with the cassava variety "South America No.1" as the test material and investigated the parameters including stem diameter, SPAD, root diameter, root length, stem fresh weight per plant, root fresh weight, plant height, single leaf weight, root number per plant, and plot yield of cassava. The results showed that the cassava yield was the highest under treatment 5 (cassava straw returning+12.5% chemical fertilizer reduction+12.5% nutrient elements equivalent to black bean green manure returned to the field), and the best fitting equation was obtained. In a word, green manure straw returning and intercropping improved soil fertility on the whole and affected the final yield of cassava by significantly affecting root diameter, single leaf weight, and root number per plant.

Key words: Cassava, Green manure, Intercropping, Correlation, Principal component analysis

Table 1

Fertilization level of each treatment kg/hm2"

处理
Treatment		 秸秆
Straw		 总施肥量Total fertilizer rate 施肥种类及用量Type and dosage of fertilizer
N P2O5 K2O 复合肥（15-15-15）
Compound fertilizer (15-15-15)		 尿素
Urea		 氯化钾
Potassium chloride
1 (CK) 不还田 195.00 90.00 195.00 600.00 228.26 169.35
2 还田 195.00 90.00 195.00 600.00 228.26 169.35
3 还田 170.63 78.75 170.63 525.00 199.73 148.19
4 还田 146.25 67.50 146.25 450.00 171.20 127.02
5 还田 170.63 78.75 170.63 525.00 199.73 148.19
6 还田 146.25 67.50 146.25 450.00 171.20 127.02
7 还田 170.63 78.75 170.63 525.00 199.73 148.19
8 还田 146.25 67.50 146.25 450.00 171.20 127.02

Fig.1

The field planting patterns"

Table 2

Cassava yield of plot in 2019 and 2020"

年份
Year		 平均值
Mean (kg)		 平均值标准误差Standard error
of mean		 中位数
Median
(kg)		 众数
Mode
(kg)		 标准差
Standard
deviation		 方差
Variance		 最小值
Minimum
(kg)		 最大值
Maximum
(kg)		 小区总产量
Total yield
of plots (kg)
2019 179.16 5.47 174.70 167.60 26.800 718.24 136.45 232.70 4300
2020 186.10 4.60 187.62 136.16 22.543 508.20 136.16 214.20 4466

Table 3

Multiple comparison of cassava yield among different treatments"

处理
Treatment		 处理Treatment
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2 -3.365
3 13.840** 17.205**
4 28.285** 31.650** 14.445**
5 -4.745* -1.380 -18.585** -33.030**
6 19.885** 23.250** 6.045** -8.400** 24.630**
7 37.870** 41.235** 24.030** 9.585** 42.615** 17.985**
8 62.365** 65.730** 48.525** 34.080** 67.110** 42.480** 24.495**

Fig.2

The yield distribution of each treatment"

Table 4

Correlation between treatments and agronomic traits of cassava"

项目
Item		 SPAD 块根直径
Root diameter		 茎径
Stem diameter		 块根长
Root
length		 单株茎秆鲜重
Stem fresh weight per plant		 单株块根鲜重
Root fresh
weight per plant		 株高
Plant height		 单片叶重
Single leaf weight		 单株块根数
Number of root tubers per plant
相关性Correlation 0.014 0.304* 0.085 0.168 0.122 0.161 0.030 0.463** 0.791**
显著性（双尾）
Significance (double tail)		 0.912 0.015 0.505 0.184 0.337 0.205 0.814 0.000 0.000

Table 5

Correlation analysis of cassava agronomic traits"

性状
Trait		 SPAD 块根直径
Root
diameter		 茎径
Stem diameter		 块根长
Root
length		 单株茎秆鲜重
Stem fresh
weight per plant		 单株块根鲜重
Root fresh
weight per plant		 株高
Plant height		 单片叶重
Single leaf weight		 单株块根数
Number of root tubers per plant
块根直径
Root diameter		 -0.395**
茎径Stem diameter -0.315* 0.887**
块根长Root length -0.612** 0.871** 0.885**
单株茎秆鲜重
Stem fresh weight
per plant		 -0.593** 0.903** 0.920** 0.965**
单株块根鲜重
Root fresh weight
per plant		 -0.592** 0.910** 0.909** 0.967** 0.980**
株高Plant height -0.262* 0.834** 0.905** 0.825** 0.858** 0.851**
单片叶重
Single leaf weight		 -0.317* 0.882** 0.800** 0.830** 0.824** 0.822** 0.704**
单株块根数
Number of root
tubers per plant		 0.078 0.339* 0.132 0.191 0.157 0.181 0.004 0.543**
小区产量
Yield per plot		 0.121 0.378* 0.165 0.184 0.157 0.192 0.055 0.565** 0.910**

Table 6

Explanation of total variance of cassava agronomic traits"

成分
Component		 初始特征值Initial Eigenvalue 提取载荷平方和Extract the payload of the quadratic sum
总计
Aggregate		 方差百分比
Percentage of variance (%)		 累积
Accumulate (%)		 总计
Aggregate		 方差百分比
Percentage of variance (%)		 累积
Accumulate (%)
1 6.552 72.797 72.797 6.552 72.797 72.797
2 1.255 13.949 86.746 1.255 13.949 86.746
3 0.831 9.233 95.980
4 0.102 1.137 97.116
5 0.098 1.092 98.209
6 0.081 0.905 99.114
7 0.037 0.411 99.525
8 0.026 0.291 99.816
9 0.017 0.184 100.000

Table 7

Principal component coefficient matrix of cassava agronomic traits"

农艺性状
Agronomic trait		 成分Component
F1 F2
茎径Stem diameter 0.937 -0.024
SPAD -0.526 0.487
块根直径Root diameter 0.949 0.143
块根长Root length 0.970 -0.097
单株茎秆鲜重Stem fresh weight per plant 0.983 -0.118
单株块根鲜重Root fresh weight per plant 0.982 -0.099
株高Plant height 0.879 -0.122
单片叶重Single leaf weight 0.888 0.372
单株块根数Number of root tubers per plant 0.253 0.900
[1] 欧文军, 罗秀芹, 安飞飞, 等. 气候变化与我国木薯北移的可能性分析. 中国热带农业, 2014(4):4-7,8.
[2] 谭砚文, 李丛希, 曾华盛. 中国木薯生产和贸易发展分析. 世界农业, 2018 (10):163-168.
[3] 梁海波, 黄洁, 韩全辉, 等. 海南岛木薯主产区产量差及限制因素分析. 热带作物学报, 2016,37(10):1863-1871.
[4] 王战. 木薯磷营养与连作障碍的关系研究. 南宁:广西大学, 2016.
[5] 周贵靖. 木薯根际土壤理化性状与连作障碍关系研究. 南宁:广西大学, 2017.
[6] 马艳芹. 紫云英配施氮肥对水稻产量、土壤特性及生态服务功能价值的影响. 南昌:江西农业大学, 2017.
[7] 祖韦军, 潘文杰, 张金召, 等. 耕作深度与翻压绿肥对植烟土壤微生物功能多样性及酶活性的影响. 南方农业学报, 2020,51(10):2383-2393.
[8] 史桂芳, 董浩, 朱国梁, 等. 绿肥还田条件下化肥减施对土壤性状及花生产量的影响. 山东农业科学, 2020,52(11):65-68,79.
[9] 钟梅. 不同绿肥还田腐解动态及其对土壤养分的影响. 现代农业科技, 2020(24):153-154,158.
[10] 况胜剑, 王文华. 翻压绿肥对土壤微生物性状影响的研究进展. 贵州农业科学, 2020,48(8):64-67.
[11] 宋崇熙. 几种夏季绿肥的栽培及其肥效的探讨. 陕西农业科技, 1979(1):21-25.
[12] Priscila G F, Silvio J B, Songbi C, 等. 耕作方式对土壤物理性状和木薯干物质分配的影响. 中国农机化学报, 2020,41(11):193-200.
[13] 杨冬艳, 郭文忠, 杨自强, 等. 绿肥种植及翻压对日光温室土壤环境的影响. 北方园艺, 2009(10):146-148.
[14] 王帘里, 孙波, 隋跃宇, 等. 不同气候和土壤条件下玉米叶片叶绿素相对含量对土壤氮素供应和玉米产量的预测. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2009,15(2):327-335.
[15] 王晟强, 郑子成, 李廷轩. 植茶年限对土壤团聚体氮、磷、钾含量变化的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013,19(6):1393-1402.
[16] 龚静静, 胡宏祥, 朱昌雄, 等. 秸秆还田对农田生态环境的影响综述. 江苏农业科学, 2018,46(23):36-40.
[17] 张向前, 杨文飞, 徐云姬. 中国主要耕作方式对旱地土壤结构及养分和微生态环境影响的研究综述. 生态环境学报, 2019,28(12):2464-2472.
[18] 李玉洁, 王慧, 赵建宁, 等. 耕作方式对农田土壤理化因子和生物学特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2015,26(3):939-948.
[19] 曾文丹, 严华兵, 谢向誉, 等. 木薯间作套种不同作物栽培模式及经济效益研究概况. 农学学报, 2016,6(12):11-15.
[20] 汤复跃, 陈渊, 梁江, 等. 大豆、木薯播期对间作大豆产量和主要农艺性状的影响. 大豆科学, 2012,31(3):395-398.
[21] 高蕊, 龚颖婷, 李沛然, 等. 木薯/大豆间距对间作作物农艺性状及品质的影响. 大豆科学, 2018,37(1):81-86.
[22] 闫庆祥, 魏云霞, 黄洁, 等. 木薯/大豆不同间作模式对木薯光合生理特性、产量的影响研究. 热带农业科学, 2017,37(12):10-15.
[23] 宋佳, 黄晶, 高菊生, 等. 冬种绿肥和秸秆还田对双季稻区土壤团聚体和有机质官能团的影响. 应用生态学报, 2021,32(2):564-570.
[24] 邓昌哲, 姚慧, 安飞飞, 等. 木薯块根有色体分离及其蛋白质组学的研究. 作物学报, 2017,43(9):1290-1299.
[1] Du Xiaoyu, Li Nannan, Zou Shaokui, Wang Lina, Lü Yongjun, Zhang Qian, Li Shuncheng, Yang Guangyu, Han Yulin. Comprehensive Analysis of Main Traits of Newly Bred Wheat Varieties (Lines) in Southern Huang-Huai Region [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(4): 38-45.
[2] Wang Yizhen, Su Gang, Cao Lixia, Li Ze, Ge Junzhu, Zang Fengyan, Li Zifang, Wang Jinlong, Wu Xidong. Study on Decomposition and Nutrient Release Rule of Green Manure Returned in Spring Maize Field [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(3): 120-125.
[3] Yang Ping, Chen Yuli, Gong Fajiang, Bi Haibin, Gao Minghui. Bulking Characteristics of Potato Tubers and Its Correlation with Tuber Fresh Weight [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(2): 130-134.
[4] Zhou Yuexia, Fan Yu, Ruan Jingjun, Yan Jun, Lai Dili, Peng Yan, Tang Yong, Weng Wenfeng, Cheng Jianping. Correlation Analysis of Oat Grain Nutrition and Agronomic Traits [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(2): 165-172.
[5] Jin Jiangang, Tian Zaifang. Grey Correlation Analysis of Introduced Tartary Buckwheat in the Northern Shanxi [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(2): 52-56.
[6] Zhou Qilong. Grey Relational Grade Evaluation of 19 Oat Varieties Introduced in Ali of Tibet [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 26-31.
[7] Bai Wei, Hu Yang, Yang Sumei, Zhang Baoying, Cui Jinli, Jin Tao, Bai Haihua. Analysis on Agronomic Characteristics of Confectionery Sunflower Local Resources in Northwest Hebei [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 54-59.
[8] Liu Zhenxing, Zhou Guimei, Ya Xiuxiu, Chen Jian, Meng Qingxiang, He Guoqing. Effects of Different Sowing Densities on the Morphological Traits and Yields of Three Adzuki Bean Varieties [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(6): 137-142.
[9] Gao Jie, Feng Guangcai, Li Xiaorong, Li Qingfeng, Peng Qiu. Phenotypic Diversity and Clustering Analysis of Sorghum Germplasm Resources in Different Regions of Guizhou Province [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(6): 54-60.
[10] Liu Wenting, Zhang Xinjun, Yang Cai, Bai Jing, Yang Xiaohong, Zhou Haitao. Analysis of Nutritional Quality Differences and Formation Factors of Naked Oat [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(5): 140-147.
[11] Luo Xinglu, Huang Xiaofeng, Wu Meiyan, Liu Shanqian, Zhao Bowei. Studies on Physiological Characteristics and Main Agronomic Traits of Five Cassava Varieties [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(5): 182-187.
[12] Yang Xuele, Zhang Lu, Li Zhiqing, He Luqiu. Diversity Analysis of Tartary Buckwheat Germplasms Based on Phenotypic Traits [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(5): 53-58.
[13] Sun Daowang, Wang Yanqing, Hong Bo, Lu Wenjie, Yin Guifang, Wang Lihua. Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis of Agronomic Traits of Winter Sowing Oats in Yunnan [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(5): 80-87.
[14] Zhang Xiaoyan, Wang Xiaonan, Cao Kun, Sun Yufeng. Correlation Analysis of Fiber Yield and Yield Components in Five Industrial Hemp Varieties (Lines) [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 121-126.
[15] Xie Jinlan, Lin Li, Li Changning, Luo Ting, Mo Zhanghong. Effects of Intercropping Mungbean Straw Returning on Sugarcane Growth and Nitrogen Metabolism under Nitrogen Fertilizer Reduction [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 164-169.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!