Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences ›› 2022, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (4): 884-890.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.04.012
• Horticultural Special Local Products·Agricultural Product Processing Engineering • Previous Articles Next Articles
WANG Jie1(), CUI Xi2, Gulmila Wusman1, Rozikari Aili1, QIN Yong1()
Received:
2021-04-16
Online:
2022-04-20
Published:
2022-04-24
Correspondence author:
QIN Yong
Supported by:
王杰1(), 崔西2, 古力米拉·吾斯曼1, 如则喀日·艾力1, 秦勇1()
通讯作者:
秦勇
作者简介:
王杰(1997-),男,山东人,硕士研究生,研究方向为蔬菜栽培与生理,(E-mail) 2398506030@qq.com
基金资助:
CLC Number:
WANG Jie, CUI Xi, Gulmila Wusman, Rozikari Aili, QIN Yong. Effect of “China Construction Seed” Treatment on Pumpkin Growth, Yield and Quality[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(4): 884-890.
王杰, 崔西, 古力米拉·吾斯曼, 如则喀日·艾力, 秦勇. “CCS种动源”处理对南瓜生长、产量和品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(4): 884-890.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.xjnykx.com/EN/10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.04.012
处理 Treat ment | 茎粗 Stem diameter(cm) | 蔓长 Vine(cm) | 叶绿素相对含量(SPAD值) Relative chlorophyll content (SPAD value) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
抽蔓期 Vine period | 开花期 Anthesis | 采收期 Harvest period | 开花期 Anthesis | 采收期 Harvest period | 抽蔓期 Vine period | 开花期 Anthesis | |||
T0 | 17.90±0.12b | 22.79±0.09b | 23.68±0.22c | 227.39±1.11c | 525.00±1.26c | 68.21±1.56b | 106.96±0.26a | ||
T1 | 17.96±0.08b | 21.84±0.08c | 24.35±0.15bc | 238.00±0.10b | 549.33±2.19c | 63.68±0.75c | 106.29±0.59a | ||
T2 | 17.97±0.73b | 23.45±0.21a | 25.19±0.20a | 237.06±0.57b | 642.33±5.81a | 70.43±0.06b | 97.64±0.47b | ||
T3 | 18.08±0.12b | 23.01±0.23ab | 24.64±0.20ab | 238.67±1.17b | 588.00±13.65b | 61.52±0.25c | 106.93±0.64a | ||
T4 | 19.22±0.12a | 23.12±0.15ab | 24.62±0.29ab | 247.83±1.11a | 663.00±11.01a | 78.31±0.81a | 107.08±0.57a |
Table 1 Comparison of pumpkin growth indicators in different periods
处理 Treat ment | 茎粗 Stem diameter(cm) | 蔓长 Vine(cm) | 叶绿素相对含量(SPAD值) Relative chlorophyll content (SPAD value) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
抽蔓期 Vine period | 开花期 Anthesis | 采收期 Harvest period | 开花期 Anthesis | 采收期 Harvest period | 抽蔓期 Vine period | 开花期 Anthesis | |||
T0 | 17.90±0.12b | 22.79±0.09b | 23.68±0.22c | 227.39±1.11c | 525.00±1.26c | 68.21±1.56b | 106.96±0.26a | ||
T1 | 17.96±0.08b | 21.84±0.08c | 24.35±0.15bc | 238.00±0.10b | 549.33±2.19c | 63.68±0.75c | 106.29±0.59a | ||
T2 | 17.97±0.73b | 23.45±0.21a | 25.19±0.20a | 237.06±0.57b | 642.33±5.81a | 70.43±0.06b | 97.64±0.47b | ||
T3 | 18.08±0.12b | 23.01±0.23ab | 24.64±0.20ab | 238.67±1.17b | 588.00±13.65b | 61.52±0.25c | 106.93±0.64a | ||
T4 | 19.22±0.12a | 23.12±0.15ab | 24.62±0.29ab | 247.83±1.11a | 663.00±11.01a | 78.31±0.81a | 107.08±0.57a |
处理 Treat ment | 单株结果数 Number of results per plant (a) | 坐果节位 Fruit set position (a) | 单果重 Fruit weight (kg) | 单株产量 Yield per plant (kg) | 小区产量 35 m2 yield (kg) | 产量Yield (kg/667 m2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T0 | 1.83±0.02c | 8.22±0.11a | 1.71±0.00d | 3.64±0.09b | 145.60 | 2 774.42 |
T1 | 2.28±0.04b | 7.39±0.15bc | 1.99±0.02bc | 4.13±0.31ab | 165.20 | 3 148.24 |
T2 | 2.22±0.04b | 7.11±0.11c | 2.03±0.03b | 4.40±0.21a | 176.00 | 3 354.06 |
T3 | 2.50±0.10a | 7.33±0.10bc | 2.16±0.04a | 4.44±0.13a | 177.60 | 3 384.55 |
T4 | 2.00±0.04c | 7.61±0.06b | 1.91±0.03c | 4.20±0.10ab | 168.00 | 3 201.60 |
Table 2 Comparison of pumpkin yield in different treatments
处理 Treat ment | 单株结果数 Number of results per plant (a) | 坐果节位 Fruit set position (a) | 单果重 Fruit weight (kg) | 单株产量 Yield per plant (kg) | 小区产量 35 m2 yield (kg) | 产量Yield (kg/667 m2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T0 | 1.83±0.02c | 8.22±0.11a | 1.71±0.00d | 3.64±0.09b | 145.60 | 2 774.42 |
T1 | 2.28±0.04b | 7.39±0.15bc | 1.99±0.02bc | 4.13±0.31ab | 165.20 | 3 148.24 |
T2 | 2.22±0.04b | 7.11±0.11c | 2.03±0.03b | 4.40±0.21a | 176.00 | 3 354.06 |
T3 | 2.50±0.10a | 7.33±0.10bc | 2.16±0.04a | 4.44±0.13a | 177.60 | 3 384.55 |
T4 | 2.00±0.04c | 7.61±0.06b | 1.91±0.03c | 4.20±0.10ab | 168.00 | 3 201.60 |
处理 Treat ment | 纵径 Vertical diameter (mm) | 横径 Transverse diameter (mm) | 含水量 Water content (%) | 干物质含量 Dry matter content (%) | 可溶性糖 Soluble sugar (%) | 可溶性蛋白 Soluble protein (mg/g) | 淀粉 Starch (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T0 | 113.96±1.18d | 173.38±0.85b | 79.09 | 20.91±0.00c | 26.00±0.00c | 9.50±0.32a | 4.64±0.00d |
T1 | 118.18±0.73c | 181.25±0.79a | 80.07 | 19.93±0.00d | 27.07±0.00a | 4.71±0.29b | 8.48±0.00a |
T2 | 120.30±0.36a | 182.11±0.52a | 77.20 | 22.80±0.00b | 26.03±0.00c | 5.38±0.40b | 5.72±0.00b |
T3 | 119.54±0.46ab | 182.92±0.46a | 78.23 | 21.77±0.00c | 25.80±0.00c | 5.25±0.29b | 4.59±0.00d |
T4 | 118.66±0.17bc | 182.75±0.54a | 73.54 | 26.47±0.00a | 26.47±0.00b | 5.43±0.26b | 5.37±0.00c |
Table 3 Comparison of pumpkin quality in different treatments
处理 Treat ment | 纵径 Vertical diameter (mm) | 横径 Transverse diameter (mm) | 含水量 Water content (%) | 干物质含量 Dry matter content (%) | 可溶性糖 Soluble sugar (%) | 可溶性蛋白 Soluble protein (mg/g) | 淀粉 Starch (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T0 | 113.96±1.18d | 173.38±0.85b | 79.09 | 20.91±0.00c | 26.00±0.00c | 9.50±0.32a | 4.64±0.00d |
T1 | 118.18±0.73c | 181.25±0.79a | 80.07 | 19.93±0.00d | 27.07±0.00a | 4.71±0.29b | 8.48±0.00a |
T2 | 120.30±0.36a | 182.11±0.52a | 77.20 | 22.80±0.00b | 26.03±0.00c | 5.38±0.40b | 5.72±0.00b |
T3 | 119.54±0.46ab | 182.92±0.46a | 78.23 | 21.77±0.00c | 25.80±0.00c | 5.25±0.29b | 4.59±0.00d |
T4 | 118.66±0.17bc | 182.75±0.54a | 73.54 | 26.47±0.00a | 26.47±0.00b | 5.43±0.26b | 5.37±0.00c |
[1] | 王建云. 南瓜营养价值及早春设施栽培技术[J]. 蔬菜, 2014,(7):42-43. |
WANG Jianyun. Nutritional value of pumpkin and cultivation techniques in early spring[J]. Vegetables, 2014,(7):42-43. | |
[2] | 罗双群, 张桂红, 陈海伟, 等. 南瓜功能特性研究进展[J]. 粮食与油脂, 2012,(4):47-49. |
LUO Shuangqun, ZHANG Guihong, CHEN Haiwei, et al. Research advance in functional characteristics of pumpkin[J]. Cereals & Oils, 2012,(4):47-49. | |
[3] | 常慧萍. 南瓜多糖的降血脂作用研究[J]. 生物学杂志, 2008, 25(3) :57-59. |
CHANG Huiping. Studies of pumpkin polysaccharides on decreasing blood lipids[J]. Journal of Biology, 2008, 25(3):57-59. | |
[4] | 包晓玮, 常永志, 朱金芳, 等. 南瓜及红甜菜多糖对小鼠免疫功能的影响[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2011, 32(8): 126-129. |
BAO Xiaowei, CHANG Yongzhi, ZHU Jinfang, et al. Effects of pumpkin polycose and beetroot polycosepolycoseonimmune function of mice[J]. Food Research and Development, 2011, 32(8):126-129. | |
[5] | 孙婕, 申娟利, 吕灵娟, 等. 3种提取方法对南瓜多糖得率及抗氧化性质的影响[J]. 农产品加工, 2011, (8): 38-40. |
SUN Jie, SHEN Juanli, LÜ Lingjuan, et al. Effects of three extracting methods for the rate and antioxidant properties of pumpkin polysaccharides[J]. Farm Products Processing, 2011,(8):38-40. | |
[6] | 屈春勇. 蔬菜种子处理技术研究进展[J]. 河南农业, 2019,(5):14-15. |
QU Chunyong. Research progress of vegetable seed treatment technology[J]. Agriculture of Henan, 2019,(5):14-15. | |
[7] | 沈颖, 黄智文, 田永红, 等. 蔬菜种子处理技术研究进展[J]. 中国种业, 2016,(2):10-13. |
SHEN Ying, HUANG Zhiwen, TIAN Yonghong, et al. Research progress of vegetable seed treatment technology[J]. China Seed Industry, 2016,(2):10-13. | |
[8] | 刘山, 欧阳西荣, 聂荣邦. 物理方法在作物种子处理中的应用现状与发展趋势[J]. 作物研究, 2007,(S1):520-524. |
LIU Shan, OUYANG Xirong, NIE Rongbang. Application status and development trend of physical methods in crop seed treatment[J]. Crop Research, 2007,(S1):520-524. | |
[9] | 黄芸萍, 张华峰, 古斌权, 等. 南瓜砧木种子干热处理试验[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2019, 60(5):791-793. |
HUANG Yunping, ZHANG Huafeng, GU Binquan, et al. Research on dry-heat treatment of pumpkin rootstocks[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 60(5):791-793. | |
[10] | 李贞霞, 林紫玉, 沈军, 等. 超低温处理对南瓜种子萌发的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2009, 18(4):363-366. |
LI Zhenxia, LIN Ziyu, SHEN Jun, et al. Effect of excessively low temperature conservation on germination of pumpkin seeds[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2009, 18(4):363-366. | |
[11] | 蒋燕, 郝文利, 田野. 液氮保存对南瓜种子生理生化特性的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2009,(2):77-79. |
JIANG Yan, HAO Wenli, TIAN Ye. Influence on physiological and biochemical characteristics of pumpkin seeds after cryopreservation abstract[J]. Northern Horticulture, 2009,(2):77-79. | |
[12] | 赵根, 陈银华, 徐坚, 等. 高压静电场在巨型南瓜种子上的应用初探[J]. 江西农业学报, 2006,(4):110-111. |
ZHAO Gen, CHEN Yinhua, XU Jian, et al. Preliminary study on the application of high voltage electrostatic field on giant pumpkin seeds[J]. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 2006,(4):110-111. | |
[13] | 方向前, 赵洪祥, 曹文明, 等. 等离子体处理对无壳南瓜种子生物学性状及产量的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2009, 37(19):8955-8956. |
FANG Xiangqian, ZHAO Hongxiang, CAO Wenming, et al. Effects of plasma treatment on biological traits and yield of summer squash (Cucumissatiuus L.) seed[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2009, 37(19):8955-8956. | |
[14] | 田月娥, 车志平, 刘圣明, 等. 微波处理对8种瓜类种子萌发的影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2018, 46(7):126-130. |
TIAN Yuee, CHE Zhiping, LIU Shengming, et al. Effect of microwave treatment on seed germination of eight kinds of gourds[J]. Guizhou Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 46(7): 126-130. | |
[15] | 白亚乡, 胡玉才, 迟建卫. 物理技术在农业生产中的应用进展[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2003,(3):232-235. |
BAI Yaxiang, HU Yucai, CHI Jianwei. Application progress of phycicaltechniques in agriculture[J]. Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University, 2003,(3):232-235. | |
[16] | 李合生. 植物生理生化实验技术与原理[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2000. |
LI Hesheng. Techniques and Principles of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry Experiments[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2000. | |
[17] | 刘宜生, 王长林, 王迎杰, 等. 早熟南瓜吉祥1号的选育[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2001,(1):29-30. |
LIU Yisheng, WANG Changlin, WANG Yingjie, et al. A new winter squash F1 hybrid-‘Jixiang No.1’[J]. China Vegetables, 2001,(1):29-30. | |
[18] | 萧浪涛, 王三根. 植物生理学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2005: 98-112. |
XIAO Langtao, WANG Sangen. Plant Physiology [M]. Beijing: Agricultural Press of China, 2005: 98-112. | |
[19] | 宋廷宇, 吴春燕, 常雪, 等. 西葫芦叶片SPAD值与叶绿素含量相关性分析[J]. 吉林农业科学, 2014, 39(3):67-70. |
SONG Tingyu, WU Chunyan, CHANG Xue, et al. Analysis on correlation between leaf SPAD value and chlorophyll content of squash[J]. Journal of Northeast Agricultural Sciences, 2014, 39(3):67-70. | |
[20] | 王宣仓. 3个南瓜品种苗期形态指标比较试验[J]. 蔬菜, 2016,(9):15-18. |
WANG Xuancang. Comparison test of three pumpkin varieties' morphological indexes at seedling stage[J]. Vegetables, 2016,(9):15-18. | |
[21] | 唐军, 王东兴, 沟丽红, 等. 种子磁化处理促生增产效果试验[J]. 农业科技与装备, 2009,(1):82-83. |
TANG Jun, WANG Dongxing, GOU Lihong, et al. Effect of seed magnetization treatment on promoting growth and yield[J]. Agricultural Science & Technology and Equipment, 2009,(1):82-83. | |
[22] | 刘岩一, 董科, 王溯, 等. 花生种子磁化处理试验研究[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2014,(5):99-100. |
LIU Yanyi, DONG Ke, WANG Suo, et al. Experimental study on magnetization treatment of peanut seeds[J]. Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2014,(5):99-100. | |
[23] | 龙荣华, 沙毓沧, 浦恩达, 等. 南瓜良种良法配套栽培技术[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2018, 31(8):62-63. |
LONG Ronghua, SHA Yucang, PU Enda, et al. Cultivation techniques of pumpkin varieties[J]. China Cucurbits and Vegetables, 2018, 31(8):62-63. | |
[24] | 程利峰, 戴思慧, 陈绍祥, 等. 不同施肥方式对南瓜生长、产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2019, 32(9):22-24. |
CHENG Lifeng, DAI Sihui, CHEN Shaoxiang, et al. Effects of different fertilization methods on growth, yield and quality of pumpkin[J]. China Cucurbits and Vegetables, 2019, 32(9):22-24. | |
[25] | 孙小武. 2014年度南瓜产业技术发展报告[C]// 中国园艺学会南瓜研究分会籽用南瓜产业发展经验交流会暨学术研讨会论文集, 2015. |
SUN Xiaowu. Pumpkin Industry Technology Development Report[C] // Proceedings of the Seed Pumpkin Industry Development Experience Exchange Meeting and Academic Symposium of the Pumpkin Research Branch of the Chinese Horticultural Society, 2014. | |
[26] | 魏淇茏, 刘新平. 新疆耕地生态安全动态变化分析[J]. 农业与技术, 2020, 40(4):5-7. |
WEI Qilong, LIU Xinping. Analysis on the dynamic changes of Xinjiang farmland ecological security[J]. Agriculture and Technology, 2020, 40(4):5-7. | |
[27] | 耿德仁. 农作物种子磁化技术的推广与应用[J]. 农业技术与装备, 2011,(24):38-40. |
GENG Deren. Popularization and application of crop seed magnetization technology[J]. Agricultural Technology & Equipment, 2011,(24):38-40. | |
[28] | 俞金龙, 徐丽珊, 郁金中, 等. 南瓜果实发育和储藏过程中碳水化合物代谢的变化[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2010, 22(3):341-344. |
YU Jinlong, XU Lishan, YU Jinzhong, et al. Changes of carbohydrate metabolism within growth and storage process of pumpkin fruit[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2010, 22(3):341-344. | |
[29] | 孙玉良. 黄瓜、南瓜和瓠瓜种子发育过程中生理生化指标的研究[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2012. |
SUN Yuliang. The study on development and indicators of physiological and biochemical of cucumber, pumpkin and cucurbit abstract[D]. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2012. |
[1] | CHEN Maoguang, LIN Tao, ZHANG Hao, LIU Haijun, WANG Yifan, TANG Qiuxiang. Effects of mulch film types on cotton growth and analysis of self-degradation recycling characteristics [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2101-2108. |
[2] | YANG Guojiang, CHEN Yun, LIN Xiangqun, HE Jiangyong, LIU Shenglin, QU Yongqing. Effects of organic fertilizer replacement on the yield and nutrient absorption of cotton and nitrate nitrogen under chemical fertilizer reduction [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2138-2145. |
[3] | CHEN Chuanxin, ZHNAG Yongqiang, NIE Shihui, KONG Depeng, Sailihan Sai, XU Qijiang, LEI Junjie. Effects of biomass charcoal application rate on the growth, development, and yield of winter wheat under drip irrigation [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2146-2151. |
[4] | WANG Lihong, ZHANG Hongzhi, ZHANG Yueqiang, LI Jianfeng, WANG Zhong, GAO Xin, SHI Jia, WANG Chunsheng, XIA Jianqiang, FAN Zheru. Analysis of dry matter production, transport and nitrogen fertilizer utilization caused by yield Gap at different yield levels of winter wheat [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2152-2162. |
[5] | WANG Xiaoyu, WANG Xiaoping, SHI Wenyu, LIU Meiyan, MA Jian, GUO Yunpeng, SONG Ruixin, WANG Qingtao. Responses of photosynthetic characteristics, dry matter accumulation and yield to drought stress in winter wheat at jointing stage [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2163-2172. |
[6] | XIANG Li, WANG Xian, DONG Yusheng, GUO Xiaoling, FANG Furong, CHEN Zhijun, MA Yanming, MIAO Yu. Effects of exogenous butyric acid on yield and quality of barley under drought stress [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2173-2181. |
[7] | YANG Hongmei, ZHANG Yueqiang, SHI Yingwu, Omarjan Kurban, LIN Qing, WANG Ning, CHU Min, ZENG Jun. Effects of different types of foliar fertilizers on grain yield and 1uality of winter wheat [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2182-2188. |
[8] | LIU Yufang, ZHANG Zhigang, LI Changcheng, LI Hong, CHENG Ping, YANG Lu. Effects of different temperature and maturity on rot rate and quality of apricot during storage [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2189-2197. |
[9] | GONG Duorui, YANG Liling, HAN Jiang, YANG Zhongqiang, LIU Jia, WEN Yu, ZHU Zhanjiang, CUI Kuanbo. Effects of simulated cold chain transport on cell membrane lipid peroxidation and quality of apricot fruit during storage [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2198-2207. |
[10] | LI Ziqin, CHEN Ya, LI Wenqi, JIA Wenting, GUO Huijing, SONG Fangyuan, ZHAO Zhiyong, LIU Chengjiang. Effects of different precooling methods combined with H2O2 treatment on the quality of lvtangxin winter jujube during storage [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2208-2215. |
[11] | SONG Bingmei, JIANG Yan, CHEN Xin, ZHANG Yu, CHENG Wannan, PAN Hongsheng. Evaluation of saline/alkali tolerance of new transgenic High-Yield cotton at germination and seedling stages [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2239-2247. |
[12] | WANG Xin, LIN Tao, CUI Jianping, WU Fengquan, TANG Zhixuan, CUI Laiyuan, GUO Rensong, WANG Liang, ZHENG Zipiao. Effects of planting mode and irrigation quota on yield and fiber quality of machine-picked long-staple cotton [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(8): 1821-1829. |
[13] | DONG Yanxue, JIA Yonghong, ZHANG Jinshan, LI Dandan, WANG Kai, LUO Siwei, WANG Runqi, SHI Shubing. Effects of different ecological conditions on dry matter accumulation and yield of spring wheat varieties [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(8): 1848-1857. |
[14] | LI Huaisheng, AI Hongyu, MENG Ling, WANG Heya, ZHANG Lei, AI Haifeng. Effects of chasing rate during peak nutrient uptake of transport under n Reduction on spring wheat [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(8): 1866-1872. |
[15] | HAN Shouan, WANG Min, Maihemuti Turupu, XIE Hui, Aiermaike Caikasimu, LIU Jiale, ZHANG Wen, PAN Mingqi. Effects of different light quality treatments on leaf photosynthetic characteristics and fruit quality of Cabernet Sauvignon grapes [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(8): 1894-1903. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||