Effects of Biodegradable Film on Dry Matter Distribution and Yield Component of Sweet Potato

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.09.024

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】 Explored the effects of biodegradable film on dry matter distribution and yield components factors of sweet potato. 【Methods】 The field experiments were conducted to explore the effects of different plastic film mulching on dry matter weight， agronomic traits and yield formation factors of sweet potato. 【Results】 The results showed that the dry weight of stem was as follows： the ordinary film treatment>the biodegradable film treatment>the no film treatment. There was no significant difference between the ordinary film treatment and the biodegradable film treatment （P<0.05）， the film mulching treatment was significantly higher than the no film mulching treatment； The dry weight of tuber was as follows： the biodegradable film treatment>the ordinary film treatment>the no film treatment， and there were significant differences among the treatments； The weight per plant and the number of tubers per plant of the biodegradable film treatment were the highest， the ordinary film treatment was followed， and the T/R value （ratio of crown to root） of the biodegradable treatment was the lowest， compared with the ordinary film treatment and the no film mulching treatment， the biodegradable film treatment was significantly reduced 13.68% and 22.64% respectively； The dry matter rate， starch rate， commercial potato rate， fresh potato yield and dry potato yield of the biodegradable film treatment were the highest； The correlation analysis showed that there was a significant positive correlation between fresh potato yield and dry matter rate， and negatively correlated with T/R value and dry matter rate of stem. 【Conclusion】 Different plastic film mulching had different effects on dry matter distribution and yield components factors of sweet potato， The performance of biodegradable film was better than the ordinary film and the no film mulching.

Key words: biodegradable film; sweet potato; dry matter; yield components

摘要：

【目的】 研究生物降解膜对甘薯干物质分配及产量构成因素的影响。【方法】 采用田间试验，以生物降解膜、普通聚乙烯地膜、不覆膜为处理，研究不同地膜覆盖对甘薯地上部与地下部干物重、农艺性状及产量形成因素的影响。【结果】 蔓茎干物重表现为普通膜处理>生物降解膜处理>不覆膜处理，普通膜处理与生物降解膜处理间无显著差异（P<0.05），覆膜处理均显著高于不覆膜处理；薯块干物重表现为生物降解膜处理>普通膜处理>不覆膜处理，处理之间均显著性差异；生物降解膜处理单株薯重、单株结薯数均最高，普通膜处理其次，生物降解膜处理T/R值（冠根比值）最低，较普通、不覆膜处理分别显著降低13.68%、22.64%；生物降解膜处理的干物率、淀粉率、商品薯率、鲜薯产量和薯干产量均最高；鲜薯产量与薯块干物率、薯块干物重、单株结薯数呈显著正相关关系，与T/R值、蔓茎干物率呈负相关关系。【结论】 不同地膜覆盖对甘薯干物质分配及产量构成因素有不同的影响，其中生物降解膜表现优于普通膜与不覆膜。

关键词: 生物降解膜, 甘薯, 干物质, 产量构成

CLC Number:

S154
S531

WANG Wenjing, LIU Yajun, HU Qiguo, CHU Fengli. Effects of Biodegradable Film on Dry Matter Distribution and Yield Component of Sweet Potato[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(9): 2288-2294.

王文静, 刘亚军, 胡启国, 储凤丽. 生物降解膜对甘薯干物质分配及产量构成的效应分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(9): 2288-2294.

Figures/Tables 5

References 26

[1]	王钰乔, 赵鑫, 李可嘉, 等. 华北平原小麦生产的碳足迹变化动态的研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015, 25(S2):258-261.
	Wang Yuqiao, Zhao Xin, Li Kejia, et al. Study on carbon footprint dynamics of wheat production in North China Plain[J]. China population, resources and environment, 2015, 25 (S2): 258-261
[2]	李鹏飞, 冯瑶, 赵昕奕. 2002-2011年华北平原北部农田缺水时空分布特征研究[J]. 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 51(6):1111-1118.
	Li Pengfei, Feng Yao, Zhao Xinyi. Study on temporal and spatial distribution characteristics of farmland water shortage in northern North China Plain from 2002 to 2011[J]. Journal of Peking University (natural science edition), 2015, 51 (6): 1111-1118
[3]	俸玉端. 华北平原冬小麦生育期降水量、作物参考蒸散及干旱风险分析[D]. 北京: 中国气象科学研究院, 2015.
	Feng yuduan. Precipitation, crop reference evapotranspiration and drought risk analysis of Winter Wheat in North China Plain [D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, 2015
[4]	刘亚军, 胡启国, 储凤丽, 等. 不同栽培方式和种植密度对“商薯9号”产量及结薯习性的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (4):89-94.
	Liu Yajun, Hu Qiguo, Chu Fengli, et al. Effects of different cultivation methods and planting densities on Yield and tuber setting habit of "Shangshu 9"[J]. Journal of crop, 2018, (4): 89-94
[5]	杨晓琳. 华北平原不同轮作模式节水减排效果评价[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2015.
	Yang Xiaolin. Evaluation of water saving and emission reduction effect of different rotation modes in North China Plain[D]. Beijing:China Agricultural University, 2015
[6]	刘亚军, 胡启国, 储凤丽, 等. 不同栽培模式对甘薯干物质分配及产量的影响[J]. 黑龙江八一农垦大学学报, 2018, 30(6):1-7,18.
	Liu Yajun, Hu Qiguo, Chu Fengli, et al. Effects of different cultivation modes on dry matter distribution and yield of sweet potato[J]. Journal of Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, 2018, 30 (6): 1-7,18
[7]	张海燕, 解备涛, 汪宝卿, 等. 不同时期干旱胁迫对甘薯生长和抗氧化能力的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(6):1126-1139.
	Zhang Haiyan, Xie Beitao, Wang Baoqing, et al. Effects of drought stress on growth and antioxidant capacity of sweet potato[J]. Chinese Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 53 (6): 1126-1139
[8]	刘胜尧, 张立峰, 贾建明, 等. 华北旱地覆膜对春甘薯田土壤温度和水分的效应[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2015, 43(3):287-292.
	Liu Shengyao, Zhang Lifeng, Jia Jianming, et al. Effects of plastic film mulching on soil temperature and moisture of spring sweet potato field in Dryland of North China[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 43 (3): 287-292
[9]	Yanan Zhang, Meiju Liu, Michael Dannenmann, et al. Benefit of using biodegradable film on rice grain yield and N use efficiency in ground cover rice production system[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017,201.
[10]	江燕, 史春余, 王振振, 等. 地膜覆盖对耕层土壤温度水分和甘薯产量的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2014, 22(6):627-634
	Jiang Yan, Shi Chunyu, Wang Zhenzhen, et al. Effects of plastic film mulching on soil temperature, moisture and sweet potato yield[J]. Chinese Journal of ecological agriculture, 2014, 22 (6): 627-634
[11]	孙娇, 郭鑫年, 梁锦秀, 等. 不同覆膜时期对宁南山区土壤水热环境及马铃薯产量的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2017, 26(12):24-34.
	Sun Jiao, Guo Xinnian, Liang Jinxiu, et al. Effects of different plastic film mulching periods on Soil Hydrothermal Environment and potato yield in Ningnan Mountain Area[J]. Acta prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26 (12): 24-34
[12]	唐文雪, 马忠明, 魏焘. 多年采用不同捡拾方式对地膜残留系数及玉米产量的影响[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2017, 34(02):102-107.
	Tang Wenxue, Ma Zhongming, Wei Tao. Effects of different picking methods on film residue coefficient and corn yield[J]. Journal of agricultural resources and environment, 2017, 34 (02): 102-107
[13]	梁志虎. 不同可降解农用地膜对土壤环境的影响研究[J]. 中国水土保持, 2018, (7):31-33.
	Liang Zhihu. Effects of different degradable agricultural plastic films on soil environment[J]. China soil and water conservation, 2018, (7): 31-33
[14]	申丽霞, 兰印超, 李若帆. 不同降解膜覆盖对土壤水热与玉米生长的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2018, 36(1):200-206.
	Shen Lixia, LAN Yinchao, Li ruoffan. Effects of different degradable film mulching on soil moisture, heat and maize growth[J]. Agricultural research in arid areas, 2018, 36 (1): 200-206
[15]	何文清, 赵彩霞, 刘爽, 等. 全生物降解膜田间降解特征及其对棉花产量影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2011, 16(3):21-27.
	He Wenqing, Zhao Caixia, Liu Shuang, et al. Field degradation characteristics of biodegradable film and its effect on cotton yield[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2011, 16 (3): 21-27
[16]	赵爱琴. 土壤温度和水分对生物降解地膜降解过程的影响及田间应用[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2005.
	Zhao AI Qin. Effect of soil temperature and moisture on degradation process of biodegradable plastic film and its field application[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2005
[17]	邓方宁, 林涛, 何文清, 等. 生物降解地膜覆盖对棉田土壤水-热-盐及产量的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2020, 39(6):1956-1965.
	Deng fangning, Lin Tao, he Wenqing, et al. Effects of biodegradable plastic film mulching on soil water, heat, salt and yield in cotton field[J]. Journal of ecology, 2020, 39 (6): 1956-1965
[18]	崔磊, 王斌, 孙九胜, 等. 降解地膜降解后对土壤增温保墒及棉花生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2018, 55(10):1895-1901. DOI
	Cui Lei, Wang Bin sun Jiusheng, et al. Effects of degraded plastic film on soil temperature and moisture preservation and cotton growth[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 55 (10): 1895-1901
[19]	胡宏亮. 生物降解地膜的产量效应和降解特性及大田示范研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2015.
	Hu Hongliang. Study on yield effect, degradation characteristics and field demonstration of biodegradable plastic film[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2015
[20]	段兴鹏, 杨力凡, 杨晓华, 等. 不同腐熟剂对水稻秸秆菌肥的降解效应和对蔬菜生长的影响[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2009, 40(5):562-565.
	Duan Xingpeng, Yang Lifan, Yang Xiaohua, et al. Degradation effect of different decomposing agents on rice straw bacterial manure and its effect on vegetable growth[J]. Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University, 2009, 40 (5): 562-565
[21]	王鑫, 胥国斌, 任志刚, 等. 无公害可降解地膜对玉米生长及土壤环境的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2007, (1):78-81.
	Wang Xin, Xu Guobin, Ren Zhigang, et al. Effects of pollution-free degradable plastic film on maize growth and soil environment[J]. Chinese Journal of ecological agriculture, 2007,(1): 78-81
[22]	张永涛, 汤天明, 李增印, 等. 地膜覆盖的水分生理生态效应[J]. 水土保持研究, 2001, (3): 45-47.
	Zhang Yongtao, Tang Tianming, Li Zengyin, et al. Physiological and ecological effects of water under plastic film mulching[J]. Research on Soil and water conservation, 2001, (3): 45-47
[23]	Li FM, Wang J, Xu Z, et al. Productivity and soil response to plastic film mulching durations for spring wheat on entisols in the semiarid Loess Plateau of China[J]. Soil & Tillage Research, 2004, 78(1):9-20.
[24]	邱扬, 傅伯杰, 王军, 等. 土壤水分时空变异及其与环境因子的关系[J]. 生态学杂志, 2007, (1) :100-107.
	Qiu Yang, Fu Bojie, Wang Jun, et al. Spatiotemporal variation of soil moisture and its relationship with environmental factors[J]. Journal of ecology, 2007, (1): 100-107
[25]	刘宏胜, 崔红艳, 吴兵, 等. 不同覆膜栽培方式对旱作春小麦土壤温度和籽粒产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2018, 38(4):469-477.
	Liu Hongsheng, Cui Hongyan, Wu Bing, et al. Influences of Different Plastic Film Mulching on Soil Temperature and Grain Yield of Spring Wheat in Dryland[J]. Journal of wheat crops, 2018, 38 (4): 469-477
[26]	马忠明, 白玉龙, 薛亮, 等. 不同覆膜栽培方式对旱地土壤水热效应及西瓜产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(3):514-522.
	Ma Zhongming, Bai Yulong, Xue Liang, et al. Effects of Different Plastic Film Mulching Methods on Soil Water and Temperature as well as Watermelon Yield in Loess Dryland[J]. Chinese Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 48 (3): 514-522

处理 Treatment	单株薯重 Single plant weight/kg	单株结薯数 Single tuber number	单块薯重 Single tuber weight/kg	平均尺寸 Average size/cm	T/R值 T/R value
降解膜 Biodegradable film	0.99±0.05^a	4.85±0.25^a	0.22±0.03^ab	14.21±0.63^b	0.96±0.14^b
常规膜 Ordinary film	0.93±0.06^a	4.19±0.17^b	0.21±0.02^b	12.68±0.97^b	1.25±0.20^a
不覆膜 No film	0.86±0.06^a	3.55±0.27^c	0.24±0.03^a	15.95±0.53^a	1.38±0.23^a

处理 Treatment	单株薯重 Single plant weight/kg	单株结薯数 Single tuber number	单块薯重 Single tuber weight/kg	平均尺寸 Average size/cm	T/R值 T/R value
降解膜 Biodegradable film	0.99±0.05^a	4.85±0.25^a	0.22±0.03^ab	14.21±0.63^b	0.96±0.14^b
常规膜 Ordinary film	0.93±0.06^a	4.19±0.17^b	0.21±0.02^b	12.68±0.97^b	1.25±0.20^a
不覆膜 No film	0.86±0.06^a	3.55±0.27^c	0.24±0.03^a	15.95±0.53^a	1.38±0.23^a

处理 Treatment	薯块干物率 Dry matter rate of tuber （%）	淀粉率 Starch rate of tuber （%）	商品薯率 Commercial sweet potato rate （%）	鲜薯产量 Yield of fresh sweet potato（kg/hm²）	薯干产量 Yield of dry sweet potato（kg/hm²）
降解膜 Biodegradable film	30.91±1.85^a	20.53±1.61^a	79.57±5.31^a	44703.0±2126.0^a	13811.9±957.8^a
常规膜 Ordinary film	29.68±1.27^a	19.46±1.10^a	71.20±7.06^a	41803.2±2553.2^a	12427.2±1207.4^ab
不覆膜 No film	28.78±1.42^b	18.68±1.24^b	74.42±9.49^a	38638.5±2804.4^b	11098.4±550.5^b

处理 Treatment	薯块干物率 Dry matter rate of tuber （%）	淀粉率 Starch rate of tuber （%）	商品薯率 Commercial sweet potato rate （%）	鲜薯产量 Yield of fresh sweet potato（kg/hm²）	薯干产量 Yield of dry sweet potato（kg/hm²）
降解膜 Biodegradable film	30.91±1.85^a	20.53±1.61^a	79.57±5.31^a	44703.0±2126.0^a	13811.9±957.8^a
常规膜 Ordinary film	29.68±1.27^a	19.46±1.10^a	71.20±7.06^a	41803.2±2553.2^a	12427.2±1207.4^ab
不覆膜 No film	28.78±1.42^b	18.68±1.24^b	74.42±9.49^a	38638.5±2804.4^b	11098.4±550.5^b

	鲜薯产量 Fresh yield	薯块干物率 Dry matter rate of tuber	T/R值 T/R value	蔓茎干物重 Dry weight of stem	薯块干物重 Dry weight of tuber	单株结薯数 Single tuber number
鲜薯产量 Fresh yield	1
薯块干物率 Dry matter rate	0.86*	1
T/R值 T/R value	-0.32	-0.89*	1
蔓茎干物重 Dry weight of stem	-0.56	-0.7	0.73	1
薯块干物重 Dry weight of tuber	0.85*	0.98*	-0.72	-0.43	1
单株结薯数 Single tuber number	0.79*	0.83*	-0.89*	-0.72	0.56	1