Crops ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (6): 156-163.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2025.06.019

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Sugarcane and Platostoma palustre Intercropping on Soil Physicochemical Properties and Crop Yield

Lan Xiu1(), Liang Zhenhua1, Yang Haixia1(), Li Hengrui1(), Ruan Lixia1, Wei Wanling1, Chen Huixian1, He Hongliang1, Huang Ruolan1, Zhao Chunhui1, Tang Danfeng2   

  1. 1 South Asian Tropical Agricultural Science Research Institute, Longzhou 532415, Guangxi, China
    2 Guangxi Botanical Garden of Medicinal Plants, Nanning 530000, Guangxi, China
  • Received:2024-07-13 Revised:2024-08-13 Online:2025-12-15 Published:2025-12-12

RichHTML

1

PDF (PC)

94

Abstract:

Three sugarcane and Platostoma palustre intercropping modes were set up under field cultivation conditions, using single cropping sugarcane and P.palustre as controls, and the effects of different intercropping modes on soil physicochemical properties and crop yield components of newly planted sugarcane land and ratoon sugarcane land were studied. The results showed that sugarcane and P.palustre intercropping decreased the effective stalk number of sugarcane and the yield of P.palustre, but significantly increased the stalk weight of sugarcane and the number and length of branches of P.palustre. Intercropping ratoon sugarcane with P.palustre increased sugarcane yield by increasing the plant height, stalk diameter and single stalk weight of sugarcane. In the intercropping system, the yield of ratoon sugarcane was 5.17%, 1.47% and 10.02% higher than that of the control, and the yield of P.palustre was 125.34%, 74.62% and 58.98% higher than that of the control, respectively. Sugarcane and P.palustre intercropping had significant effects on soil total nitrogen, total phosphorus, total potassium, available phosphorus, available potassium and soil water content, but had no significant effects on soil alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen, organic matter content, pH value and soil bulk density. Soil organic matter (r=0.74) and water (r=0.79) were significantly correlated with the yield of P.palustre, and the content of total potassium (r=0.86), available potassium (r=0.88), alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen (r=0.87) and organic matter (r=0.74) were significantly correlated with the yield of sugarcane. The soil fertility evaluation of sugarcane land was fertile or very fertile, the soil fertility of intercropping was higher than that of monocropping, and the fertility coefficient of ratoon sugarcane land was higher than that of newly planted sugarcane land. In conclusion, intercropping with P.palustre has a positive effect on sugarcane growth, increasing sugarcane yield and soil fertility.

Key words: Sugarcane, Platostoma palustre, Intercropping, Soil physicochemistry property, Yield

Table 1

Grading standards for soil nutrients"

分级标准
Classification
standard		 全氮
Total N
(g/kg)		 全磷
Total P
(g/kg)		 全钾
Total K
(g/kg)		 碱解氮
Alkali N
(mg/kg)		 速效磷
Available P
(mg/kg)		 速效钾
Available K
(mg/kg)		 有机质
Organic matter
(g/kg)		 pH
<7 >7
Xa 0.75 0.40 5 60 5 50 10 4.5 9.0
Xc 1.50 0.60 20 120 10 100 20 5.5 8.0
Xp 2.00 1.00 25 180 20 200 30 6.5 7.0

Table 2

Components of sugarcane yield and its composition factors under different intercropping modes"

性状Trait 年份Year T1 T3 T4 T5
株高Plant height (cm) 2021 335.67±12.03a 330.33±4.69a 341.00±16.03a 332.00±4.17a
2022 331.00±52.94b 383.00±12.28ab 397.66±32.88a 383.33±15.27ab
茎粗Stalk diameter (mm) 2021 26.36±2.63a 26.27±2.62a 27.24±2.72a 27.01±2.70a
2022 29.01±0.56a 30.41±2.27a 33.07±4.25a 31.53±1.80a
有效茎数
Number of productive tillers (stalk/hm2)		 2021 72 705.00±699.90a 65 205.00±1791.00b 58 755.00±1959.00c 65 970.00±1500.00b
2022 66 660.00±872.40a 63 120.00±1549.95b 54 270.00±898.35c 63 465.00±1464.90b
单茎重Weight per stalk (kg) 2021 1.58±0.20c 1.74±0.23a 1.74±0.12a 1.67±0.25b
2022 1.81±0.09c 2.01±0.07b 2.25±0.02a 2.09±0.06b
产量Yield (kg/hm2) 2021 115 092.60±351.75a 113 315.40±849.75a 101 828.40±968.40a 109 595.25±551.70a
2022 120 738.75±693.90a 126 983.55±521.70a 122 511.90±566.40a 132 836.70±729.90a

Table 3

Components of P.palustre yield and its composition factors under different intercropping modes"

产量性状Yield trait 年份Year T2 T3 T4 T5
基径Base stalk (mm) 2021 4.24±0.35b 5.18±0.88a 5.07±0.41a 3.52±0.65c
2022 5.01±0.25b 5.50±0.28b 6.12±0.88a 4.23±0.27c
分枝数Branch number 2021 21.33±3.51c 37.00±2.65a 34.33±2.08a 28.33±1.53b
2022 30.41±2.27c 40.07±2.56a 40.01±2.25a 32.13±1.80b
分枝长Branch length (cm) 2021 74.17±5.2d 82.67±2.08c 102.50±13.44a 89.10±5.89b
2022 88.00±6.26c 94.23±3.33b 120.25±7.89a 90.24±4.66b
产量Yield (kg/hm2) 2021 4755.00±78.00c 1560.00±93.45a 1987.50±91.80a 1177.50±78.75b
2022 5682.90±61.35a 3515.25±121.05b 3470.55±90.30b 1872.00±135.90c

Table 4

Changes of soil physical and chemical properties under different intercropping modes"

指标Item 年份Year T1 T3 T4 T5
全氮Total nitrogen (g/kg) 2021 1.53±0.12c 1.65±0.15b 1.71±0.29a 1.40±0.21d
2022 1.40±0.11b 1.56±0.14a 1.40±0.13b 1.41±0.11b
全磷Total phosphorus (g/kg) 2021 0.64±0.01c 1.18±0.05ab 1.28±0.02a 0.90±0.05b
2022 1.25±0.05a 0.90±0.03b 0.68±0.01d 0.79±0.02c
全钾Total potassium (g/kg) 2021 17.14±2.13c 21.67±2.54a 19.10±3.23b 19.64±1.69b
2022 22.12±1.29a 17.98±2.42b 15.93±3.21c 17.94±2.32b
碱解氮Alkali hydrolyzable nitrogen (mg/kg) 2021 43.40±4.69a 42.65±3.25a 43.40±3.24a 43.15±4.25a
2022 41.65±3.56b 41.65±3.45b 43.15±4.33b 45.15±3.14a
速效磷Available phosphorus (mg/kg) 2021 97.43±5.67d 297.25±9.36a 286.82±8.69ab 257.84±9.65c
2022 163.49±7.65c 259.83±7.89a 266.07±9.55a 215.18±9.87b
速效钾Available potassium (mg/kg) 2021 103.01±4.57d 111.23±4.19a 104.54±4.89c 108.56±4.00b
2022 99.35±5.36c 105.12±3.25a 101.24±4.58b 99.36±3.68c
有机质Soil organic matter (g/kg) 2021 21.30±1.24a 19.13±2.33a 20.93±1.25a 20.73±2.14a
2022 18.04±2.25b 16.97±1.68c 21.72±1.45a 20.55±2.24ab
pH 2021 6.45±0.35a 6.75±0.24a 6.32±0.35a 6.43±0.24a
2022 6.57±0.33a 6.14±0.56b 6.67±0.69a 6.67±0.54a
土壤容重Soil bulk weight (g/cm3) 2021 1.08±0.02a 1.12±0.08a 1.15±0.06a 1.05±0.05a
2022 1.21±0.04a 1.10±0.06b 1.16±0.09b 1.10±0.07b
土壤水分Soil moisture (%) 2021 10.45±0.95a 9.34±0.54b 10.23±0.58a 8.64±1.23c
2022 14.44±2.01a 12.34±1.24c 13.55±1.50b 10.56±1.25d

Fig.1

Correlation analysis between sugarcane and P.palustre yield factors and soil physicochemistry P-BS: Platostoma palustre base stem, BN: branch number, BL: branch length, P-YD: Platostoma palustre yield, PH: plant height, S-SD: stem diameter, ESN: effective stalk number, WPS: weight per stalk, S-YD: sugarcane yield, SBW: soil bulk weight, SM: soil moisture. “*”means significant correlation at P < 0.05 level,“**”means extremely significant correlation at P < 0.01 level, and“***”means extremely significant correlation at P < 0.001 level."

Table 5

Soil fertility evaluation results of newly planted sugarcane field"

处理
Treatment		 分肥力系数Fractional fertility coefficient P 肥力评价
Fertility
evaluation
TN
(g/kg)		 TP
(g/kg)		 TK
(g/kg)		 AN
(mg/kg)		 AP
(mg/kg)		 AK
(mg/kg)		 SOC
(g/kg)		 pH
T1 2.30 2.10 1.94 1.06 3.00 2.22 2.13 2.95 2.63 肥沃
T2 2.06 3.00 1.97 1.11 3.00 2.21 1.91 3.00 2.82 很肥沃
T3 2.42 3.00 1.80 1.06 3.00 2.15 2.09 2.82 2.79 很肥沃
T4 2.50 3.00 1.91 1.09 3.00 2.19 2.07 2.93 2.90 很肥沃

Table 6

Soil fertility evaluation results of ratoon sugarcane field"

处理
Treatment		 分肥力系数Fractional fertility coefficient P 肥力评价
Fertility
evaluation
TN
(g/kg)		 TP
(g/kg)		 TK
(g/kg)		 AN
(mg/kg)		 AP
(mg/kg)		 AK
(mg/kg)		 SOC
(g/kg)		 pH
T1 2.00 3.00 2.22 1.19 3.00 2.19 2.80 3.00 3.20 很肥沃
T2 2.32 3.00 3.00 1.29 3.00 2.25 2.70 2.64 3.52 很肥沃
T3 2.02 3.00 2.98 1.12 3.00 2.21 2.37 3.00 3.21 很肥沃
T4 2.62 3.00 3.00 1.34 3.00 2.28 2.55 3.00 3.74 很肥沃
[1] 杨建波, 彭东海, 覃刘东, 等. 低氮条件下甘蔗―大豆间作对甘蔗产量、品质及经济效益的影响. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26 (5):1426-1432.
[2] 唐秀梅, 蒙秀珍, 蒋菁, 等. 甘蔗间作花生对不同耕层土壤微生态的影响. 中国油料作物学报, 2020, 42(5):713-722.
[3] 李志贤, 杨文亭, 王建武. 甘蔗―甜玉米间作对甘蔗产量、品质及经济效益的影响. 生态学杂志, 2014, 33(1):98-104.
[4] Kamruzzaman M, Hasanuzzaman M. Factors affecting profitability of sugarcane production as monoculture and as intercrop in selected areas of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research, 2007, 32:433-444.
doi: 10.3329/bjar.v32i3.545
[5] Suman A, Lal M, Singh A K, et al. Microbial biomass turnover in Indian subtropical soils under different sugarcane intercropping systems. Agronomy Journal, 2006, 98(3):698-704.
doi: 10.2134/agronj2005.0173
[6] Bokhtiar S M, Hossain M S, Mahmud K, et al. Site specific nutrient management for sugarcane potato and sugarcane-onion intercropping systems. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 2003, 2:1205-1208.
doi: 10.3923/ajps.2003.1205.1208
[7] 沈君辉, 聂勤, 黄得润, 等. 作物混植和间作控制病虫害研究的新进展. 植物保护学报, 2007, 34(2):209-216.
[8] 罗玉. 凉粉草多糖对不同直链含量玉米淀粉凝胶特性的影响及凉粉草布丁产品的研发. 南昌:南昌大学, 2021.
[9] 肖健, 陈思宇, 孙妍, 等. 甘蔗间作不同豆科作物对甘蔗植株内生细菌多样性的影响. 热带作物学报, 2021, 42(11):3188-3198.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2021.11.018
[10] 陈燕丽, 苏天明, 苏利荣, 等. 甘蔗套种西瓜、大豆的效益. 江苏农业科学, 2017, 45(7):133-135.
[11] 朱秋珍, 刘晓燕. 甘蔗套种春西瓜的效益及其配套栽培技术. 中国糖料, 2012(4):40-42.
[12] 孟庆宝, 方锋学, 龙明华, 等. 甘蔗间种菜用大豆对甘蔗产量、品质及间种后综合经济效益的影响. 中国农学通报, 2011, 27 (24):169-173.
[13] 张旭升. 甘蔗间种菜用大豆对其产量品质及土壤理化性状的影响. 南宁:广西大学, 2014.
[14] 罗俊, 林兆里, 阙友雄, 等. 不同耕整地方式对甘蔗耕层结构特性及产量的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2018, 26(6):824-836.
[15] 何洪良, 韦海球, 江清梅, 等. 甘蔗宽窄行间作花生对甘蔗产量、品质及经济效益的影响. 中国热带农业, 2021(6):55-58.
[16] 黎萍, 黄小娟, 梁振华, 等. 木薯与凉粉草套种高产高效栽培技术研究. 农业研究与应用, 2021, 34(1):15-19.
[17] 谭秋锦, 王文林, 陈海生, 等. 石漠化澳洲坚果园土壤养分及pH值空间异质性分析. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(2):80-83.
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb19010069
[18] 汪洲涛, 苏炜华, 阙友雄, 等. 应用AMMI和HA-GGE双标图分析甘蔗品种产量稳定性和试点代表性. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(6):790-800.
[19] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[20] Zhao W J, Luo M Q, Li Z L. Evaluation of soil fertility in agravel-sand-mulched jujube (Ziziphus jujuba) orchard based on modified nemoro fertility indexing method. Agricultural Research, 2020, 9(1):85-93.
doi: 10.1007/s40003-019-00408-8
[21] 闫浩宇, 袁泽, 张川疆, 等. 南疆枣产区土壤养分空间分布特征与肥力评价. 经济林研究, 2024, 42(2):257-266.
[22] 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, 2020, 28(12):1890-1900.
[23] 谢金兰, 王维赞, 李长宁, 等. 不同间种绿豆方式对甘蔗产量和品质的影响研究. 西南农业学报, 2014, 27(2):555-558.
[24] 揭曙彦. 蔗田间种马铃薯试验初报. 云南农业科技, 2008(2):2.
[25] 吴建明, 李杨瑞, 杨丽涛, 等. 甘蔗间种大豆的试验. 作物杂志, 2011(5):103-105.
[26] 储凤丽, 李淑敏, 刘亚军, 等. 甘薯玉米间作对土壤性质与作物产量的影响. 山西农业科学, 2020, 48(9):1445-1448.
[27] 田双燕, 张应龙, 何天久, 等. 马铃薯间作玉米对马铃薯生长、产量及糖类物质的影响. 南方农业学报, 2021, 52(5):1198-1205.
[28] Wang Y, Tanaka T, Inoue H, et al. Annual nutrient balance and soil chemical properties in heavy multiple cropping system in the coastal area of southeast Lake Dianchi, Yunnan Province, China. Plant Production Science, 2015, 18(3):323-335.
doi: 10.1626/pps.18.323
[29] 车江旅, 吴建明, 宋焕忠. 甘蔗间套种大豆研究进展. 南方农业学报, 2011, 42(8):898-900.
[30] 赵强, 章洁琼, 汪灿, 等. 不同间作模式下糯高粱根际土壤特性及产量变化. 南方农业学报, 2022, 53(8):2122-2132.
[31] 刀静梅, 毛钧, 李如丹, 等. 不同生态蔗区气候土壤差异对甘蔗生产的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(12):102-113.
[32] 苏海兰, 朱雁鸣, 陈宏, 等. 不同间作方式对凉粉草品质及根际土壤特性的影响. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(14):2755-2770.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.14.005
[33] 李加群, 刀静梅, 纪新时, 等. 施用添加改良剂的酒精废液对土壤养分和甘蔗产量及品质性状的影响. 中国糖料, 2023, 45(2):54-60.
[34] 阳景阳, 黄智刚. 蔗地土壤养分与甘蔗生长的关系模型研究. 中国糖料, 2016, 38(3):18-20.
[1] Li Qingxin, Jin Xiuliang, Song Xiao, Zhang Keke, Guo Tengfei, Huang Shaomin, Yue Ke, Ding Shijie, Huang Ming, Li Youjun. Effects of Partial Replacement of Nitrogen Fertilizer with Organic Fertilizer on Growth of Winter Wheat and Soil Properties in Eastern Henan [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 121-131.
[2] Gao Wenrui, Sun Yanjun, Han Bing, Zhang Xiaoqing, Wang Xiansheng, Zheng Zisong. Effects of Exogenous Organic Selenium on Yield and Fruit Quality of Facility Cherry Tomato [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 140-147.
[3] Qin Nana, Huang Linhua, Chen Ying, Wang Shengmou, Xie Yong, Miao Kai, Li Wanming, Qi Lan. Effects of Foliar Propionyl Brassinolide Application on Photosynthesis, Agronomic Traits and Yield of Summer Soybean [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 164-171.
[4] Wang Shuqi, Li Jianbo, Liu Zhiping, Ma Yu, Qu Jiahui, Batu , Xu Shoujun. Physiological Mechanism of Yield and Protein Formation in Barley under Different Cultivation Modes [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 172-180.
[5] Yan Xiaowen, Liang Junchao, Zeng Pan, Zhou Hongying, Wang Zhiqi, Le Meiwang, Sun Jian. Effects of Late Sowing on Main Agronomic Traits and Yield of Autumn Sesame [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 189-194.
[6] Zhang Aiying, Zhao Yuan, Liu Min, Xue Hongtao, Wang Guoliang, Wang Rui, Guo Erhu. Effects of Different Harvest Time and Harvesting Methods on Yield and Quality of Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 195-202.
[7] Xia Yulan, Zhao Yuanyuan, Li Juan, Wang Dexun, Wang Tingting, Yang Chengwei, Shi Hongzhi. Effects of Different Topdressing Ratios of Potassium Fertilizer on the Growth, Yield and Quality of Honghuadajinyuan and Yunyan 300 [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 225-230.
[8] Wang Zhanhai, Li Long, Zhao Haibo. The Impact of Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers on Facility Soil Environment and Tomato Quality [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 231-239.
[9] Fan Guohua, Feng Xiaomin, Gao Xiang, Lü Huiqing, Yang Jing, Zhang Xuli, Hao Zhiping, Zhou Zhongyu, Zhang Li, Li Hong. Effects of Ridge Mulching and Organic Fertilizer Application on Yield Formation and Soil Organic Carbon Components of Small Black Bean [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 240-247.
[10] Gao Meiping, Tao Yunrong, Jiang Huiping, Hu Yifeng, Lin Zhicheng, Fang Yanrong, Ouyang Xiu, Jiang Wen. Effects of Different Nitrogen Fertilizer Treatments on Yield, Starch Accumulation Rate and Starch Synthase Activity of Water Chestnut [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 248-253.
[11] Zhang Henan, Xu Haoce, Liu Yinghui, Feng Xiaolei, Wang Feng, Yuan Jincheng, Zhao Zhihai. Analysis of High Yield, Stable Yield, and Adaptability of ʻZhangzagu 21ʼ Based on GGE Biplot [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 51-57.
[12] 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.
[13] Teng Wen, Ye Fan, Zhou Zhou, Wang Yule, Liu Lijun. Effects of Wheat and Rapeseed Straw Returning on Yield and Quality of Rice under Salt Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 11-18.
[14] 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.
[15] 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.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!