Crops ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (5): 120-127.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2021.05.018

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Nitrogen Application and Intercropping on Nodule Formation and Nitrogen Uptake and Accumulation in Faba Bean

Wu Xinyu1(), Liu Zhenyang1, Li Haiye1, Zheng Yi1,2, Tang Li1, Xiao Jingxiu1()   

  1. 1College of Resources and Environmental Science, Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, China
    2Yunnan Open University, Kunming 650223, Yunnan, China
  • Received:2020-12-23 Revised:2021-01-14 Online:2021-10-15 Published:2021-10-14
  • Contact: Xiao Jingxiu E-mail:wuxinyuxixi@126.com;xiaojingxiuxjx@126.com

RichHTML

5

PDF (PC)

316

Abstract:

In order to explore the effects of wheat and faba bean intercropping on faba bean nodulation, nitrogen (N) uptake and accumulation, and faba bean yield under different N levels. Four N levels, 0 (N0, control), 45 (N1), 90 (N2), and 135kg/ha (N3) for faba bean; and 0 (N0, control), 90 (N1), 180 (N2), and 270kg/ha (N3) for wheat. The characteristics of the root nodules weight, nitrogen uptake parameters, aboveground nitrogen accumulation and yield of mono-cropped faba bean (MF) and intercropping faba bean (IF) were analyzed. The results showed that under N0, N1, N2 level, root nodules fresh weight of IF were increased by 40.9%, 27.2%, 34.1%, respectively compared to MF. Under N3 level, root nodules fresh weight of MF and IF were not significant. The maximum N accumulation (A), the maximum N uptake rate (Rmax) of IF was decreased by 8.01%-13.93% and 10.27%-12.98%, respectively compared to MF, indicating that the cumulative characteristics of nitrogen absorption were contrary to nodule weight. No difference in N accumulation between IF and MF during the faba bean vegetative growth stages (0-90days after faba bean emerged) under four N levels, but N accumulation of IF was decreased during reproductive growth stages (>90 days after faba bean emerged) compared to MF. Compared with MF, the average yield of IF faba bean was decreased 20.66%. Overall, under N1 level, root nodules fresh weight and yield reached the maximum value, which showed a downward trend with the increase of nitrogen fertilizer application. Therefore, the transportation of IF faba bean nitrogen fertilizer is closely related to the formation of intercropping advantages.

Key words: Wheat and faba bean intercropping, Root nodule fresh weight, N accumulation, N uptake rate, Yield

Table 1

Statistical analysis of root nodule fresh weight of mono- and inter-cropped faba bean under different N levels (2017-2018)"

因素
Factor		 2017 2018
分枝期
Branching		 开花期
Flowering		 结荚期
Podding		 分枝期
Branching		 开花期
Flowering		 结荚期
Podding
氮水平N level *** *** *** *** *** ***
种植模式Planting pattern *** *** *** *** *** ***
氮水平×种植模式N level×planting pattern * * *** * ** *

Fig.1

Root nodule fresh weight of mono- and inter-cropped faba beans under different N levels Different letters in the same period indicate significant differences between mono- and inter-cropped faba beans under different N levels (P<0.05)"

Table 2

Statistical analysis of key N uptake parameters for mono- and inter-cropped faba bean under different N levels (2017-2018)"

指标
Item		 2017 2018
A Tmax r Rmax A Tmax r Rmax
氮水平N level *** ** ns *** *** *** ns ***
种植模式Planting pattern *** * ns *** *** ** ns ***
氮水平×种植模式
N level×planting pattern		 ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns

Fig.2

Key nitrogen absorption parameters of mono- and inter-cropped faba bean under different N levels Different letters indicate significant difference between MF and IF faba bean under different N levels in the same year (P < 0.05)"

Fig.3

Dynamic N accumulation of mono- and inter-cropped faba bean under different N levels “△”indicates significant differences between mono- and inter-cropped faba bean at the same period under same N level (P<0.05)"

Table 3

The yeild of mono- and inter-cropped faba bean under different N levels kg/hm2"

处理Treatment 2017 2018
N0 MF 2713±169b 2451±156b
IF 2234±164cd 2046±85c
N1 MF 3401±284a 3012±247a
IF 2731±229b 2500±241b
N2 MF 2392±162bc 2207±211bc
IF 1907±116de 1676±153d
N3 MF 2221±229cd 2096±220c
IF 1759±249e 1481±179d
[1] 董艳, 汤利, 郑毅, 等. 小麦蚕豆间作条件下氮肥施用量对根际微生物区系的影响. 应用生态学报, 2008, 19(7):155-162.
[2] 寸植贤, 陈建斌, 秀洪学, 等. 间作方式和种植密度对蚕豆结瘤和作物生长的影响. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 29(4):514-520.
[3] Li L, Sun J, Zhang F. Wheat/maize or wheat/soybean strip intercropping:yield advantage and interspecific interactions on nutrients. Field Crops Research, 2001, 71(2):123-137.
doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00156-3
[4] 任家兵, 何文天, 汤利, 等. 不同氮水平下小麦蚕豆间作对小麦土壤养分特性和土地当量比的影响. 中国土壤学会.面向未来的土壤科学(中册)——中国土壤学会第十二次全国会员代表大会暨第九届海峡两岸土壤肥料学术交流研讨会论文集. 中国土壤学会, 2012:549-556.
[5] Xiao Y B, Li L, Zhang F S. Effect of root contact on interspecific competition and N transfer between wheat and faba bean using direct and indirect 15N techniques. Plant and Soil, 2004, 262(1/2):45-54.
doi: 10.1023/B:PLSO.0000037019.34719.0d
[6] 姜卉, 赵平, 汤利, 等. 云南省不同试验区小麦蚕豆间作的产量优势分析与评价. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2012, 27(5):646-652.
[7] 肖靖秀, 汤利, 郑毅, 等. 大麦/蚕豆间作条件下供氮水平对作物产量和大麦氮吸收累积的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2011, 31(3):499-503.
[8] Ji Y M, Luo R P, Zhao Z G, et al. Effects of different nitrogen application rates and methods on root nodule growth and yield of soybean. Agricultural Science and Technology, 2018, 19(2):67-72.
[9] 冯晨, 冯良山, 孙占祥, 等. 辽西半干旱区不同施氮水平下玉米/花生系统对花生结瘤特性的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019(4):127-131.
[10] 周照留, 赵平, 汤利, 等. 小麦蚕豆间作对作物根系活力、蚕豆根瘤生长的影响. 云南农业大学学报, 2007, 22(5):665-671.
[11] 毛忠顺, 董玉梅, 秀洪学, 等. 氮肥和种植密度对蚕豆结瘤和生长的影响. 作物杂志, 2012(3):89-93.
[12] 李玉英, 建好, 李春杰, 等. 施氮对蚕豆/玉米间作系统蚕豆农艺性状及结瘤特性的影响. 中国农业科学, 2009, 42(10):95-102.
[13] 赵财, 柴强, 乔寅英, 等. 禾豆间距对间作豌豆“氮阻遏”减缓效应的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(9):1169-1176.
[14] 雍太文, 董茜, 刘小明, 等. 施肥方式对玉米―大豆套作体系氮素吸收利用效率的影响. 中国油料作物学报, 2014, 36(1):84-91.
[15] 刘宇, 章莹, 杨文亭, 等. 减量施氮与大豆间作对蔗田氮平衡的影响. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(3):817-825.
[16] 柏文恋, 张梦瑶, 任家兵, 等. 小麦/蚕豆间作作物生长曲线的模拟及种间互作分析. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(12):149-158.
[17] 朱锦惠, 董艳, 肖靖秀, 等. 小麦与蚕豆间作系统氮肥调控对小麦白粉病发生及氮素累积分配的影响. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(12):3985-3993.
[18] 张晓娜, 陈平, 杜青, 等. 玉米/大豆、玉米/花生间作对作物氮素吸收及结瘤固氮的影响. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2019, 27(8):1183-1194.
[19] Zang H, Yang X, Feng X, et al. Rhizodeposition of nitrogen and carbon by mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) and its contribution to intercropped oats (Avena nuda L.). PLoS ONE, 2015, 10(3):e0121132.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121132
[20] Xiao J X, Yin X H, Ren J B, et al. Complementation drives higher growth rate and yield of wheat and saves nitrogen fertilizer in wheat and faba bean intercropping. Field Crops Research, 2018, 221:119-129.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.12.009
[21] 刘振洋, 吴鑫雨, 汤利, 等. 小麦蚕豆间作体系氮素吸收累积动态及其种间氮素竞争关系. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(7):1284-1294.
[22] 苗锐, 张福锁, 李隆. 玉米、小麦和大麦与蚕豆间作体系不同根系分隔方式对蚕豆结瘤的影响. 植物学报, 2009, 44(2):197-201.
[23] 汤东生, 朱有勇. 蚕豆/小麦间作对结瘤效应研究初探. 云南农业大学学报, 2005, 20(3):331-334.
[24] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(第3版). 北京: 农业出版社, 2000.
[25] Trinder C, Brooker R, Davidson H, et al. Dynamic trajectories of growth and nitrogen capture by competing plants. New Phytologist, 2012, 193(4):948-958.
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.04020.x pmid: 22236094
[26] Zhang W P, Liu G C, Sun J H, et al. Growth trajectories and interspecific competitive dynamics in wheat/maize and barley/maize intercropping. Plant and Soil, 2015, 397(1/2):227-238.
doi: 10.1007/s11104-015-2619-x
[27] 高运青, 李姝彤, 尚启兵, 等. 施肥对蚕豆根瘤及产量的影响. 作物杂志, 2019(2):170-173.
[28] 任胜茂, 邓榆川, 韩文斌, 等. 施氮对蚕豆根系形态及光合产物积累分配的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(4):72-77.
[29] 夏玄. 氮素水平对大豆结瘤、氮素积累及产量的影响. 哈尔滨:东北农业大学, 2014.
[30] Liu Y C, Yin X H, Xiao J X, et al. Interactive influences of intercropping by nitrogen on flavonoid exudation and nodulation in faba bean. Scientific Reports, 2019, 9(1/2):636-639.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-37213-2
[31] Hardarson G, Atkins C. Optimising biological N2 fixation by legumes in farming systems. Plant and Soil, 2003, 252(1):41-54.
doi: 10.1023/A:1024103818971
[32] 任家兵, 张梦瑶, 肖靖秀, 等. 小麦/蚕豆间作提高间作产量的优势及其氮肥响应. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2020, 28(12):1890-1900.
[33] 肖焱波, 段宗颜, 金航, 等. 小麦/蚕豆间作体系中的氮节约效应及产量优势. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2007, 13(2):267-271.
[34] Zhang F S, Li L. Using competitive and facilitative interactions in intercropping systems enhances crop productivity and nutrient-use efficiency. Plant and Soil, 2003, 248(1/2):305-312.
doi: 10.1023/A:1022352229863
[35] Hauggaard-Nielsen H, Jensen E S. Evaluating pea and barley cultivars for complementarity in intercropping at different levels of soil N availability. Field Crop Research, 2001, 72(3):185-196.
doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00176-9
[36] 宋亚娜, Marschner P, 张福锁, 等. 小麦/蚕豆,玉米/蚕豆和小麦/玉米间作对根际细菌群落结构的影响. 生态学报, 2006, 26(7):2268-2274.
[37] 李春杰. 种内/种间互作调控小麦/蚕豆间作体系作物生长与氮磷吸收的机制. 北京:中国农业大学, 2018.
[38] 赵平, 郑毅, 汤利, 等. 小麦蚕豆间作施氮对小麦氮素吸收、累积的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18(4):742-747.
[1] Zhang Pingzhen, Zhang Kehou, Chen Ying, Chen Jingping, Luo Jianke, Wang Zeyu. The Effects Analysis of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium Fertilization on Oat and Establishment of Yield Regression Model under Irrigation Condition [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 101-107.
[2] Deng Chaochao, Wang Lei, Xu Ye, Zhou Qi, Su Cuicui, Cai Xiaobin, Miao Pinggui, Zhao Haipeng, Zhang Yan, Wang Yucai, Zhang Xiangping. Effects of Nitrogen and Sowing Rate on Yield and Quality of Fresh Leaves in Barley [2011(07)814] [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 108-113.
[3] Shi Nan, Gao Zhiqiang, Hu Haiyan, Chen Chongyi, Wen Shuangya. The Effects of Ordered Machine Thickening and Reducing Fertilizer on Yield and Partial Fertilizer Productivity of Hybrid Rice [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 128-133.
[4] Liu Wei, Zhou Jianxiong, Xie Yuanyuan, Zhang Xu, Xiong Yousheng, Xu Xiangyu, Yuan Jiafu, Xiong Hanfeng. Effects of One-Time Basal Application of Nitrogen Fertilizer on Fresh Ear Yield, Quality and Nitrogen Utilization Efficiency of Summer-Sown Fresh Sweet Corn [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 134-139.
[5] Cao Lixia, Zhou Haitao, Zhang Xinjun, Shi Bihong, Zhang Lixia, Li Yunxia, Liu Junxin, Bai Jing, Zhao Shifeng. Effects of Sowing Rates on Yield of Two Buckwheat Varieties in Northern Hebei [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 140-145.
[6] Zhang Qi, Wei Zhenwu, Yan Tianfang. Correlation and Path Analysis of Oat Seed Yield with Agronomic Characters in Jiang-Huai Area [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 146-152.
[7] Liu Xin, Li Huixia, Tian Gang, Wang Yuwen, Liu Hong, Cao Jinjun, Cheng Kai, Wang Zhenhua, Liu Yongzhong, Li Wanxing. Effects of Water Control during the Whole Growth Period on the Growth Development and Quality of Millet [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 181-186.
[8] Zhang Ting, Zhang Bowen, Li Guolong, Cao Yang, Li Yue, Zhang Shaoying. Effects of Phosphorus Application Rate and Method on Photosynthetic Performance and Yield of Sugar Beet [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 187-193.
[9] Zhang Shaoping, Geng Xiaoli, Wu Huijuan, Li Deming, Liu Qian, Gao Zhanqi. Breeding and Evaluating of Variety Characteristics of Avena sativa ‘Caoyan No.1’ [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 219-224.
[10] Wang Yun, Qiao Ling, Yan Suxian, Wu Bangbang, Zheng Xingwei, Zhao Jiajia. Analysis of the Yield Components and Drought Resistance of Dryland Wheat in Different Years from Shanxi Province [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 43-49.
[11] Gao Jie, Li Xiaorong, Feng Guangcai, Li Qingfeng, Peng Qiu. Difference Analysis of Dry Matter and Nitrogen Accumulation and Translocation of Waxy Sorghum Applied in Different Eras in Guizhou Province [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 50-56.
[12] Li Jiahui, Cheng Qin, Ou Kewei, Tan Qinliang, Pang Xinhua, Zhou Quanguang, Lü Ping, Song Qiqi, Tang Yuwei, Zhu Pengjin. Comparison of Tiller Characters of Sugarcane Varieties (Lines) in Different Sugarcane Regions and Their Effects on Yield and Yield Components [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 79-86.
[13] Tang Zhiqiang, Zhang Liying, He Na, Ma Zuobing, Zhao Mingzhu, Wang Changhua, Zheng Wenjing, Yin Yong’an, Wang Hui. Effects of Mechanical Direct Dry Seeding on Rice Growth, Photosynthetic Characteristics and Yield [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 87-94.
[14] Pan Gaofeng, Wang Benfu, Chen Bo, Fang Zhenbing, Zhao Shasha, Tian Yonghong. Effects of Seeding Date on Yield, Growth Period and Utilization of Temperature and Sunshine of Different Types of Japonica Rice in North Central of Hubei Province [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(4): 105-111.
[15] Gao Jie, Feng Guangcai, Li Xiaorong, Li Qingfeng, Wang Can, Zhang Guobing, Zhou Lengbo, Peng Qiu. Effects of Nitrogen Fertilizer on Yield and Nitrogen Use Characteristics in Waxy Sorghum Cultivar "Hongyingzi" [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(4): 118-122.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!