不同微生物菌剂对甜菜根腐病的防效及产量影响

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.02.021

新疆农业科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (2): 448-454.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.02.021

• 园艺特产·土壤肥料·植物保护 • 上一篇下一篇

不同微生物菌剂对甜菜根腐病的防效及产量影响

王贺亚(), 罗静静(), 王康, 王瑞楠, 王旭, 高光瑞, 房艳

新疆生产建设兵团第九师农业科学研究所(畜牧科学研究所),新疆塔城 834600

收稿日期:2023-06-22 出版日期:2024-02-20 发布日期:2024-03-19
通信作者: 罗静静(1989-),女,河南扶沟人,副研究员,硕士,研究方向为植物病虫害综合防治,(E-mail)860220521@qq.com
作者简介:王贺亚(1992-),男,河南上蔡人,助理研究员,研究方向为作物高产栽培,(E-mail)1209399827@qq.com
基金资助:
新疆生产建设兵团重点领域攻关计划“塔额垦区甜菜体质增效关键技术研究与示范”(2018AB036);新疆生产建设兵团第九师科技攻关项目“甜菜根腐病的综合防治技术研究与示范”(2020JS001);新疆生产建设兵团第九师科技攻关项目“塔额垦区甜菜水资源高效利用关键技术研发与应用”(2022JS001)

Effects of different microbial agents on the disease prevention effect and yield of beetroot rot

WANG Heya(), LUO Jingjing(), WANG Kang, WANG Ruinan, WANG Xu, GAO Guangrui, FANG Yan

Agricultural Science Institute of the Ninth Division of the XPCC(Animal Husbandry Science Research Institute), Tacheng Xinjiang 834600, China

Received:2023-06-22 Online:2024-02-20 Published:2024-03-19
Correspondence author: LUO Jingjing(1989-),female,associate research,master,the research direction is integrated control of plant diseases and in sect pests,(E-mail)860220521@qq.com
Supported by:
Public Relations Plan in Key Areas of XPCC "Research and Demonstration of Key Technologies for Physical Efficiency Enhancement of Sugar Beets in Ta'erken District"(2018AB036);Science and Technology Public Relations Project of the Nineth Division "Research and Demonstration of Comprehensive Prevention and Control Technology of Beetroot Rot"(2020JS001);Science and Technology Public Relations Project of the Nineth Division "Research and Application of Key Technologies for Efficient Utilization of Sugar Beet Water Resources in Ta 'e Reclamation Area"(2022JS001)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究微生物菌剂防治甜菜根腐病的防治效果及对产量的影响。【方法】选用木霉菌(M)、枯草芽孢杆菌(B)、木霉菌+枯草芽孢杆菌(C)、荧光假单胞杆菌(P)、淡紫紫孢菌(D)、多粘芽孢杆菌(PP)6种微生物菌剂进行甜菜根腐病田间防治试验。【结果】经6种微生物菌剂处理,甜菜根腐病的发病率和病情指数与对照(CK)相比显著减低(P<0.05),发病率较对照降低18.18%~50.00%,病情指数降低2.27~5.87,各处理防效达到19.12%~49.45%,防效依次为C>D>B>P>M>PP。施用微生物菌剂能够改善甜菜根际土壤理化性状,其中M、B、C、D处理可增加土壤有机质的含量,6种微生物菌剂可显著增加速效氮、速效磷、速效钾的含量。施用微生物菌剂能够增加甜菜地上部、地下部及总干物质的积累,甜菜根产量和含糖率均高于对照,产糖量增产幅度达7.43%~38.05%,D、C和M产糖量增加效果最为显著(P<0.05),分别增产38.05%、28.49 %和19.78%。【结论】施用菌剂能活化土壤养分,木霉菌+枯草芽孢杆菌防效较好,优于木霉菌、芽孢杆菌单施,提高根际土壤有机质和速效养分的含量,同时能够增加甜菜地上部、地下部及总干物质的积累,甜菜根产量和含糖率均高于对照,产糖量增产幅度达7.43%~38.05%。微生物菌剂能够改善作物根际土壤理化性状,增加土壤中有机质、碱解氮、速效磷、速效钾含量,促进作物营养吸收和生长,提高作物产量。

关键词: 甜菜; 根腐病; 微生物菌剂; 防治效果; 产量

Abstract:

【Objective】 explore the control effect of microbial agents on beetroot rot and its impact on yield.【Methods】 Six microbial agents were selected, namely Trichoderma(M), Bacillus subtilis(B), Trichoderma plus Bacillus subtilis(C), Pseudomonas fluorescentis(P), Purpuria purpuris(D), and Bacillus polymyxoplasmos(PP), to carry out experimental research on the field prevention and control of beetroot rot.【Results】 The results showed that the incidence and disease index of beetroot rot were significantly reduced compared with the control(CK)(P<0.05), the incidence rate was reduced by 18.18%-50.00%, the disease index was reduced by 2.27-5.87, the prevention effect of each treatment reached 19.12%-49.45%, and the prevention effect was C>D>B>P>M>PP. The application of microbial agents could improve the physicochemical properties of the rhizosphere soil of beets, among which M, B, C, D treatment couldincrease the content of soil organic matter, and 6 microbial agents could significantly increase the content of available nitrogen, available phosphorus and available potassium. The application of microbial agents could increase the accumulation of aboveground, underground and total dry matter of beet, the yield and sugar content of beetroot were higher than those of the control, the sugar production rate increases by 7.43% to 38.05%, and the sugar production of D, C and M was the most significant(P<0.05), with an increase of 38.05%, 28.49% and 19.78%.【Conclusion】 The results of soil nutrient and beet yield determination shows that the application of fungal agents can activate soil nutrients, and the control effect of Trichoderma + Bacillus subtilis is better, which is better than that of Trichoderma and Bacillus, which increases the content of organic matter and quick-acting nutrients in the rhizosphere soil, and at the same time increases the accumulation of aboveground, underground and total dry matter of beets, and the yield and sugar content of beetroot are higher than those of the control, and the sugar yield increases by 7.43%-38.05%. It can be seen that microbial agents can improve the physical and chemical properties of crop rhizosphere soil, increase the content of organic matter, alkaline nitrogen, available phosphorus and available potassium in the soil, promote crop nutrient absorption and growth, thus increasing the crop yield.

Key words: beet; root rot; microbial agents; prevention and control effects; yield

中图分类号:

S566.3

王贺亚, 罗静静, 王康, 王瑞楠, 王旭, 高光瑞, 房艳. 不同微生物菌剂对甜菜根腐病的防效及产量影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(2): 448-454.

WANG Heya, LUO Jingjing, WANG Kang, WANG Ruinan, WANG Xu, GAO Guangrui, FANG Yan. Effects of different microbial agents on the disease prevention effect and yield of beetroot rot[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(2): 448-454.

图/表 5

参考文献 21

[1]	王荣华, 王维成, 刘珣, 等. 关于新疆甜菜产业发展的调研报告[J]. 中国糖料, 2014, 36(4):86-89.
	WANG Ronghua, WANG Weicheng, LIU Xun, et al. Research report on the development of sugar beet industry in Xinjiang[J]. Sugar Crops of China, 2014, 36(4):86-89.
[2]	罗静静, 王贺亚, 王康, 等. 新疆塔额垦区优质抗病甜菜新品种适应性评价[J]. 北方农业学报, 2021, 49(1):17-22. DOI
	LUO Jingjing, WANG Heya, WANG Kang, et al. Adaptability evaluation of new varieties of high-quality disease-resistant sugar beet in Ta'e Reclamation Area in Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Northern Agriculture, 2021, 49(1):17-22. DOI
[3]	魏良民. 新疆甜菜生产情况及提高含糖措施分析[J]. 中国甜菜糖业, 2015,(2):21-24.
	WEI Liangmin. Analysis of sugar beet production and measures to improve sugar content in Xinjiang[J]. China Beet and Sugar, 2015,(2):21-24.
[4]	韩秉进, 陈渊. 黑龙江产区甜菜糖业面临的问题与对策[J]. 农业系统科学与综合研究, 2001. 17(3):227-229.
	HAN Bingjin, CHENG Yuan. Problems and countermeasures faced by sugar beet sugar industry in Heilongjiang producing area[J]. System Sciences and Comprehensive Studies in Agriculture, 2001, 17(3):227-229.
[5]	雷泉, 刘秀杰, 魏晓明. 影响黑龙江省糖业发展的因素和提高甜菜产量的有效途径[J] .中国甜菜糖业, 2007,(1):35-36,44.
	LEI Quan, LIU Xiujie, WEI Xiaoming. Factors influencing the development of sugar industry in Heilongjiang Province and effective ways to increase sugar beet production[J]. China Beet and Sugar, 2007,(1):35-36,44.
[6]	杨云. 甜菜根腐病拮抗菌的筛选、鉴定与抑病效果研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江大学, 2013.
	YANG Yun. Screening, identification and antibacterial effect of beetroot rot and antibacterial effect[D]. Harbin:Heilongjiang University, 2013.
[7]	李拥军, 张叶玲. 甜菜根腐病的发生与防治[J]. 现代化农业, 2006,(8):11.
	LI Yongjun, ZHANG Yeling. Occurrence and prevention of beetroot rot[J]. Modernizing Agriculture, 2006,(8):11.
[8]	咸洪泉, 刘杰贤. 甜菜根腐病的生物和化学控制初步研究[J]. 中国糖料, 1999, 21(1):13-16.
	XIAN Hongquan, LIU Jiexian. A preliminary study on the biological and chemical control of beetroot rot[J]. Sugar Crops of China, 1999, 21(1):13-16
[9]	Bolton M D, Panella L, Campbell L, et al. Temperature, Moisture and Fungicide Effects in Managing Rhizoctonia Root and Crown Rot in Sugar Beet[J]. Phytopathology, 2010, 100(7):689-697. DOI URL
[10]	郭晓霞, 田露, 樊福义, 等. 微生态制剂对重茬甜菜根腐病防控及产质量水平提升的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2019, 28(9):1460-1468.
	GUO Xiaoxia, TIAN Lu, FAN Fuyi, et al. Effects of microecological preparations on the prevention and control of heavy stubble beetroot rot and the improvement of production quality level[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2019, 28(9):1460-1468
[11]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
	BAO Shidan. Soil agrochemical analysis[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000.
[12]	劳家柽. 土壤农化分析手册[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社,1998.
	LAO Jiatao. Handbook of Soil Agrochemical Analysis[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 1998.
[13]	陈英花, 白如霄, 王娟, 等. 叶丛期喷施烯效唑和亚精胺对甜菜生长及产量的影响[J]. 中国糖料, 2020, 42(4):40-44.
	CHEN Yinghua, BAI Ruxiao, WANG Juan, et al. Effects of spraying enoxazole and spermidine on growth and yield of sugar beets at leaf cluster stage[J]. Sugar Crops of China, 2020, 42(4):40-44.
[14]	汤晓昀, 王维成, 刘珣. 美国Beta 公司甜菜品种引进比较试验初报[J]. 中国糖料, 2013, 35(3):52-53.
	TANG Xiaoyun, WANG Weicheng, LIU Xun. Preliminary report of comparative experiment on the introduction of sugar beet varieties by Beta Company of the United States[J]. Sugar Crops of China, 2013, 35(3):52-53.
[15]	赵思峰, 李国英, 李晖, 等. 新疆甜菜根腐病发生规律及其防治[J]. 中国糖料, 2002, 24(3):22-26.
	ZHAO Sifeng, LI Guoying, LI Hui, et al. Occurrence of beetroot rot in Xinjiang and its prevention[J]. Sugar Crops of China, 2002, 24(3):22-26.
[16]	何欣, 郝文雅, 杨兴明, 等. 生物有机肥对香蕉植株生长和香蕉枯萎病防治的研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2010, 16(4):978-985.
	HE Xin, HAO Wenya, YANG Xingming, et al. Study on banana plant growth and banana blight control by bio-organic fertilizer[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 2010, 16(4):978-985.
[17]	罗静静, 刘小龙, 李克梅, 等. 几种微生物菌剂对连作棉田枯黄萎病的防病效应[J]. 西北农业学报, 2015, 24(7):136-143.
	LUO Jingjing, LIU Xiaolong, LI Kemei, et al. Effects of several microbial agents on wilt disease in continuous crop cotton field[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2015, 24(7):136-143.
[18]	袁和奇, 徐鹏程, 肖海艳, 等. 淡紫紫孢菌防治采后番茄果实灰霉病[J]. 中国生物防治学报, 2017, 33(4):525-530. DOI
	YUAN Heqi, XU Pengcheng, XIAO Haiyan, et al. Treatment of gray mold in postharvest tomato fruit by Purple Purple Spores[J]. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 2017, 33(4):525-530. DOI
[19]	赵远征, 王东, 徐利敏, 等. 不同微生物菌剂对马铃薯黑痣病的田间防效比较[J]. 中国植保导刊, 2020, 40(9):90-92.
	ZHAO Yuanzheng, WANG Dong, XU Limin, et al. Comparison of field effects of different microbial agents on potato black nevi[J]. China Plant Protection, 2020, 40(9):90-92.
[20]	牛永艳, 朱瑞清, 毛婷, 等. 多黏类芽孢杆菌SWS-15玉米促生效果测定及其废水发酵条件优化[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(22):204-209.
	NIU Yongyan, ZHU Ruiqing, MAO Ting, et al. Determination of the pro-growth effect of Bacillus polyvis sws-15 maize and optimization of wastewater fermentation conditions[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 49(22):204-209.
[21]	黄铖程, 刘景辉, 杨彦明. 生物菌肥对盐碱地燕麦生理特性及土壤速效养分的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2018, 46(5):57-61.
	HUANG Chengcheng, LIU Jinghui, YANG Yanming. Effects of biological bacterial fertilizer on physiological characteristics and soil available nutrients of oats in saline-alkali land[J]. Journal of Northern Agriculture, 2018, 46(5):57-61.

处理 Dispose	菌剂施法及施量 Bacterial agent application and dosage
木霉菌(M) Trichoderma(M)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次400 g/667m²)
枯草芽孢杆菌(B) Bacillus subtilis(B)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次80 g/667m²)
木霉菌+枯草芽孢杆菌(C) Trichoderma+Bacillus subtilis(C)	播种前撒施(4 000 g/667m²) 后耙地
荧光假单胞杆菌(P) Pseudomonas luminesceous pseudomonas(P)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次200 g/667m²)
淡紫紫孢菌(D) Purpureae(D)	播种前撒施(2 667 g/667m²) 后耙地
多粘芽孢杆菌(PP) Bacillus polymyxosporum(PP)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次167 g/667m²)
不施菌剂对照(CK) Without bacteriosomyst control(CK)	不施菌剂

处理 Dispose	菌剂施法及施量 Bacterial agent application and dosage
木霉菌(M) Trichoderma(M)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次400 g/667m²)
枯草芽孢杆菌(B) Bacillus subtilis(B)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次80 g/667m²)
木霉菌+枯草芽孢杆菌(C) Trichoderma+Bacillus subtilis(C)	播种前撒施(4 000 g/667m²) 后耙地
荧光假单胞杆菌(P) Pseudomonas luminesceous pseudomonas(P)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次200 g/667m²)
淡紫紫孢菌(D) Purpureae(D)	播种前撒施(2 667 g/667m²) 后耙地
多粘芽孢杆菌(PP) Bacillus polymyxosporum(PP)	随头水、二水滴施2次 (每次167 g/667m²)
不施菌剂对照(CK) Without bacteriosomyst control(CK)	不施菌剂

处理 Treatment	发病率 Morbidity		病情指数 Disease index		防效 Efficacy(%)
处理 Treatment	发病率 Morbidity(%)	比CK±% Than CK±%	病情指数 Disease index	比CK± Than CK±	防效 Efficacy(%)
M	10.67±1.15^bc	-27.27	8.27±0.61^c	-3.70	30.36±5.15^c
B	9.33±0.58^cd	-36.36	6.93±0.46^d	-4.94	41.59±3.89^b
C	7.33±0.61^e	-50.00	6.00±0.69^d	-5.87	49.45±5.84^a
P	10.00±1.00^cd	-31.82	8.13±0.23^c	-3.74	31.48±1.95^c
D	8.67±1.22^de	-40.91	6.40±0.40^d	-5.47	46.08±3.37^ab
PP	12.00±0.60^b	-18.18	9.60±0.40^b	-2.27	19.12±3.37^d
CK	14.66±1.53^a	0.00	11.87±1.29^a	0.00

处理 Treatment	发病率 Morbidity		病情指数 Disease index		防效 Efficacy(%)
处理 Treatment	发病率 Morbidity(%)	比CK±% Than CK±%	病情指数 Disease index	比CK± Than CK±	防效 Efficacy(%)
M	10.67±1.15^bc	-27.27	8.27±0.61^c	-3.70	30.36±5.15^c
B	9.33±0.58^cd	-36.36	6.93±0.46^d	-4.94	41.59±3.89^b
C	7.33±0.61^e	-50.00	6.00±0.69^d	-5.87	49.45±5.84^a
P	10.00±1.00^cd	-31.82	8.13±0.23^c	-3.74	31.48±1.95^c
D	8.67±1.22^de	-40.91	6.40±0.40^d	-5.47	46.08±3.37^ab
PP	12.00±0.60^b	-18.18	9.60±0.40^b	-2.27	19.12±3.37^d
CK	14.66±1.53^a	0.00	11.87±1.29^a	0.00

处理 Dispose	有机质 Organic matter (g/kg)	碱解氮 Reduce nitrogen (mg/kg)	速效磷 Available phosphorus (mg/kg)	速效钾 Quick potash (mg/kg)
M	30.03±0.58^a	50.28±0.26^c	24.83±0.22^ab	30.53±1.24^a
B	27.5±0.61^b	59.07±1.51^b	23.33±0.35^bc	30.03±1.29^a
C	27.46±2.09^b	58.44±2.16^b	25.18±0.85^a	26.57±0.41^b
P	25.45±1.80^b	57.08±0.12^b	23.80±0.39^ab	24.71±0.14^c
D	26.99±0.61^b	64.68±2.68^a	24.60±1.43^ab	26.85±0.88^b
PP	26.27±0.53^b	50.54±0.88^c	23.85±1.06^ab	29.81±0.78^a
CK	26.35±0.17^b	45.18±0.53^d	22.13±0.29^c	22.89±1.45^d

不同微生物菌剂对甜菜根腐病的防效及产量影响

Effects of different microbial agents on the disease prevention effect and yield of beetroot rot

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 21

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

处理 Treatment	地上部 Upper part of the ground (g/株)	比CK±% Than CK±%	地下部 Underground (g/株)	比CK±% Than CK±%	总量 Total (g/株)	比CK±% Than CK±%
M	136.86±5.28^c	23.92^bc	217.94±10.73^bc	87.48^bc	354.80±15.16^c	111.40^b
B	159.72±5.35^ab	46.78^a	200.21±9.00^c	69.76^cd	359.93±12.92^c	116.53^b
C	152.23±9.28^b	39.28^ab	239.30±10.25^b	108.85^ab	391.52±13.19^b	148.12^ab
P	125.74±4.96^cd	12.80^cd	171.94±11.53^d	41.49^de	297.68±16.42^d	54.28^c
D	166.37±7.11^a	53.43^a	265.32±16.72^a	134.87^a	431.70±9.84^a	188.30^a
PP	124.15±2.79^cd	11.21^cd	143.44±12.31^e	12.98^ef	267.58±12.07^e	24.18^cd
CK	112.94±11.30^d	0.00	130.45±19.06^e	0.00	243.40±28.84^e	0.00

处理 Treatment	根产量 Root yield (kg/hm²)	比CK±% Than CK±%	含糖率 Sugar content (%)	比CK±百分点 CK±percentage point	产糖量 Sugar production (kg/hm²)	比CK±% Than CK±%
M	511.22±39.30^b	11.14	18.41±0.49^ab	1.34	94.08±6.50^bc	19.78
B	506.08±31.25^b	10.02	17.72±1.05^ab	0.65	89.51±3.20^cd	13.96
C	563.93±3.55^a	22.60	17.90±0.66^ab	0.82	100.92±4.07^ab	28.49
P	483.50±39.89^b	5.11	17.92±0.85^ab	0.85	86.83±10.80^cd	10.54
D	581.57±38.40^a	26.43	18.68±0.70^a	1.60	108.43±3.06^a	38.05
PP	464.93±14.82^b	1.07	18.14±0.82^ab	1.07	84.38±6.03^cd	7.43
CK	459.99±21.25^b	0.00	17.07±0.34^b	0.00	78.55±4.65^d	0.00

[1]	杨茂琪, 侯振安, 闵伟. 压差式和泵吸式施肥装置对棉花产量和氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(2): 271-278.
[2]	吴刚, 田阳青, 赵强, 李欣欣, 穆妮热·阿卜杜艾尼, 张家豪, 王文庆, 占东霞, 马春梅. 缩节胺复配不同促进剂对棉花棉铃时空分布和光合特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(2): 279-287.
[3]	惠瑞晗, 林丽, 曹伟, 张梦珂, 林豪, 姚帅. 基于P-M模型的棉田智能灌溉系统的设计与试验[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(2): 300-309.
[4]	高新, 汪烨霖, 朱泰武, 李剑峰, 王重, 时佳, 王春生, 张宏芝, 王立红, 樊哲儒, 张跃强. 不同施氮量对春小麦灌浆速率和产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(2): 310-317.
[5]	马辉, 罗单, 李星星, 田立文, 戴路, 欧欢, 艾麦尔江·阿布力提甫, 阿孜古丽·阿布力孜, 阿布都艾尼·阿布都维力. 化学封顶对不同果枝数棉田株型和产量的影响及其评价指标的筛选[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(2): 261-270.
[6]	罗林毅, 陈瑞杰, 阮向阳, 任晓辉, 曲奥, 苏海婷, 冶军. 微生物菌剂对滴灌棉田土壤养分和棉花产量及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(1): 26-33.
[7]	王贺亚, 罗静静, 艾海峰, 李怀胜, 孟玲, 王鹏. 种植密度与减量施肥对食葵产量及相关性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(1): 55-62.
[8]	陈茂光, 林涛, 张昊, 刘海军, 王一帆, 汤秋香. 地膜类型对棉花生长的影响及自身降解和回收特性分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2101-2108.
[9]	杨国江, 陈云, 林祥群, 何江勇, 刘盛林, 曲永清. 氮肥减施下有机肥替代对滴灌棉花产量、氮素吸收利用及土壤硝态氮的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2138-2145.
[10]	陈传信, 张永强, 聂石辉, 孔德鹏, 赛力汗·赛, 徐其江, 雷钧杰. 生物质炭施用量对滴灌冬小麦生长发育和产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2146-2151.
[11]	王立红, 张宏芝, 张跃强, 李剑峰, 王重, 高新, 时佳, 王春生, 夏建强, 樊哲儒. 不同产量水平冬小麦产量差异形成的干物质生产、转运及氮肥利用分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2152-2162.
[12]	王晓雨, 王小平, 史文宇, 刘美艳, 马健, 郭云鹏, 宋瑞欣, 王清涛. 拔节期冬小麦光合特性、干物质积累和产量对干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2163-2172.
[13]	向莉, 王仙, 董裕生, 郭小玲, 方伏荣, 陈智军, 马艳明, 苗雨. 外源丁酸对干旱胁迫下大麦产量及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2173-2181.
[14]	杨红梅, 张跃强, 史应武, 吾买尔江·库尔班, 林青, 王宁, 楚敏, 曾军. 不同类型叶面肥喷施对冬小麦籽粒产量和品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2182-2188.
[15]	吴梦露, 孙清明, 吴娇娇, 王凯, 杨旸, 杨益众, 苏宏华. 重金属镉胁迫对甜菜夜蛾体内保幼激素和蜕皮激素滴度的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2291-2297.