Effect of Densities and Varieties on Yield and Quality of Mechanical-harvested Cotton Interplanted with Wheat

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.09.001

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】 To study the effects of different densities and varieties on yield and quality of cotton under the short-season cotton for the wheat-cotton double cropping system and provided the basis for selection and breeding of suitable densities and varieties of short-season cotton for the wheat-cotton double cropping system. 【Method】 A field experiment was conducted in 2019 with the density gradients of 45，000 plants/hm² （D₁），90，000 plants/hm² （D₂） and 135，000 plants/hm² （D₃） were set up in Anyang，Henan Province，with early maturing varieties Jinke 707 （JK707） and Lumian 2387 （LM2387） as experimental materials.【Result】 With the increase of densities，the plant height，the number of fruit branches and the ratio of branches gradually decreased，while the Leaf Area Index （LAI） and biomass where gradually increased，the LAI was the largest under D₃，with the maximum of 3.14 and 4.16，respectively. The total biomass of D₂ was increased by 40.4% and 42.0% than that of D₃ and D₁ when compared to the three density treatments of the JK707 varieties and were increased by 65.5% and 85.1% under the three density treatments of the LM2387 varieties. With the increase of densities，the seed cotton yield was first increase then decrease，with the D₂ densities the highest （JK707 and LM2387 were 4 025 kg/hm² and 4 114 kg/hm²，respectively）. Compared to the JK707，LM2387 have more advantages in the medium and high densities. The micronaire value of fiber decreases gradually with the increase of density，and the fiber strength was highest under the D₂ densities. The fiber length，strength and micronaire value of JK707 are better than LM2387.【Conclusion】 In summary，under the short-season cotton cropping pattern of the wheat-cotton double cropping system in the Yellow River Basin，the varieties JK707 and LM2387 can achieve high quality and high yield under the planting density of D₂（90，000 plant s/hm²）. Compared with the two varieties，JK707 fiber quality is superior，while LM2387 has a higher lint，more combatively plant type，more concentrated bolls，and were more suitable for mechanized harvesting.

Key words: wheat-cotton double cropping; cotton variety; density; biomass; yield composition

摘要：

【目的】 研究机采麦套短季棉种植模式下不同种植密度对棉花产量和品质的影响，为麦棉两熟种植模式下机采短季棉适宜密度的选择提供依据。【方法】 于2019年选择早熟品种锦科707（JK707）和鲁棉2387（LM2387）为材料，进行大田试验，设置3个密度梯度（4.5×10⁴株/hm²（D₁）、9×10⁴株/hm²（D₂）、13.5×10⁴株/hm²（D₃））。【结果】 随密度增加，株高、果枝台数和节枝比逐渐降低，而叶面积指数（LAI）和生物量则逐渐增大，JK707和LM2387的LAI均以D₃ 最大，分别为3.14和4.16。JK707、D₂和D₃较D₁生物量分别增加40.4%和42.0%；LM2387、D₂和D₃较D₁生物量分别增加65.5%和85.1%。随密度升高，籽棉产量先升高后降低，2个品种均以D₂种植密度产量最高（JK707和LM2387分别为4 025和4 114 kg/hm²）。与JK707相比，LM2387皮棉产量在中高密度（D₂和D₃）下更具优势。纤维马克隆值随密度增加逐渐下降，纤维强度以D₂最优。JK707的纤维长度、强度和马克隆值均优于LM2387。【结论】 在黄河流域机采麦套短季棉种植模式下，早熟棉品种锦科707和鲁棉2387在种植密度D₂（9×10⁴株/hm²）下能够实现优质高产。锦科707纤维品质优，而鲁棉2387衣分高，且株型更紧凑，成铃更集中，更适宜机械化采收。

关键词: 麦棉两熟, 棉花品种, 密度, 生物量, 产量构成

CLC Number:

S36
S562

ZHAO Xinxin, LIU Taijie, HAN Yingchun, WANG Guoping, CHEN Huanxuan, XIONG Shiwu, LEI Yaping, YANG Beifang, LI Yabing, FENG Lu. Effect of Densities and Varieties on Yield and Quality of Mechanical-harvested Cotton Interplanted with Wheat[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(9): 2081-2090.

赵欣欣, 刘太杰, 韩迎春, 王国平, 陈焕轩, 熊世武, 雷亚平, 杨北方, 李亚兵, 冯璐. 种植密度对机采麦套棉产量形成及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(9): 2081-2090.

Figures/Tables 10

References 31

[1]	中国农业科学院棉花研究所. 中国棉花栽培学[M]. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2019.
	Cotton Research Institute of CAAS. Cotton cultivation in China[M]. Edition. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers. 2019.
[2]	Dai J, Dong H. Intensive cotton farming technologies in China:Achievements,challenges and countermeasures[J]. Field Crops Research, 2014, 155(1):99-110. DOI URL
[3]	Zhang L, Werf W, Bastiaans L, Zhang S, Li B, Spiertz J H J. Light interception and utilization in relay intercrops of wheat and cotton[J]. Field Crops Research, 2008, 107(1):29-42. DOI URL
[4]	支晓宇, 毛树春, 韩迎春, 等. 密度对棉花产量及棉铃内部产量构成的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2015, 27(3):216-222.
	ZHI Xiaoyu, MAO Shuchun, HAN Yingchun, et al. Effects of Cultivars and Planting Density on Yield Components and Seed Characteristics in Cotton[J]. Cotton Science, 2015, 27(3):216-222.
[5]	李亚兵, 韩迎春, 冯璐, 等. 我国棉花轻简化栽培关键技术研究进展[J]. 棉花学报, 2017, 29(S1):80-88.
	LI Yabing, HAN Yingchun, FENG Lu, et al. Advances of Light and Simplified Cultivation Technologies in China[J]. Cotton Science, 2017, 29(S1):80-88.
[6]	Dong H Z, Li W J, Tang W, Li Z H, Zhang D M. Effects of genotypes and plant density on yield,yield components and photosynthesis in Bt transgenic cotton[J]. Journal of Agronomy and CroP Science, 2006, 192(2):132-139. DOI URL
[7]	赖奕英, 郭承君, 占东霞, 等. 不同种植密度对新疆棉花产量及纤维品质的影响[J]. 中国棉花, 2019, 46(9):16-18.
	LAI Yiying, GUO Chengjun, ZHAN Dongxia, et al. Effect of Different Planting Density on Yield and Fiber Quality of Cotton in Xinjiang[J]. China Cotton, 2019, 46(9):16-18.
[8]	敦磊, 李鹏程, 余超, 等. 早熟棉区行距与密度互作对棉花产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2020, 57(6):981-989. DOI
	DUN Lei, LI Pengcheng, YU Chao, et al. Effects of Row Spacing and Density on Cotton Yield in Early Maturity Cotton Area[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 57(6):981-989. DOI
[9]	杨长琴, 刘瑞显, 杨富强, 等. 种植密度对麦后直播棉产量与品质形成的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2013, 29(6):1221-1227.
	YANG Changqin, LIU Ruixian, YANG Fuqiang, et al. Effects of planting density on yield and fiber quality of direct-seeded cotton after barley[J]. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 29(6):1221-1227.
[10]	Bridge R R, Meredith W R, Chism J F. Influence of planting method and plantpopulation on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)[J]. Agronomy Journal, 1973, 65(1):104-109. DOI URL
[11]	Bednarz C W, Brides D C, Brown S M. Analysis of cotton yield stability across population densities.[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2000, 92(1):128-135. DOI URL
[12]	Buxton D R, Patterson L L, Briggs R E. Fruiting pattern in narrow-row cotton[J]. Crop Science, 1979, 19(1):17-22. DOI URL
[13]	吕新, 张伟, 曹连莆. 不同密度对新疆高产棉花冠层结构光合特性和产量形成的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2005, 14(1):142-148.
	LU Xin, ZHANG Wei, CAO Lianpu. Effect of Different Density on Cotton Canopy Structure,Photosynthesis and Yield Formation in High-yield Cotton of Xinjiang[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2005, 14(1):142-148.
[14]	王汉霞, 范希峰, 田晓莉, 等. 黄河流域棉区北部留叶枝棉栽培的适宜密度研究[J]. 棉花学报, 2010, 22(5):430-436.
	WANG Hanxia, FAN Xifeng, TIAN Xiaoli, et al. Response of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)with Sympodial Branches to Plant Denesity in the North of the Yellow River Areas[J]. Cotton Science, 2010, 22(5):430-436.
[15]	刘瑞显, 史伟, 徐立华, 等. 长江下游棉区抗虫杂交棉适宜密度研究[J]. 棉花学报, 2010, 22(6):634-638.
	LIU Ruixian, SHI Wei, XU Lihua, et al. Planting Density of Insect-resistant Hybrid Cotton in Lower Reaches of Yangtze River Valley[J]. Cotton Science, 2010, 22(6):634-638.
[16]	毛丽丽. 种植密度和缩节安对麦套棉花生长和产量形成的研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2015.
	MAO Lili. Crop Growth and Yield Affected by Plant Density and Mepiquat Chloride in Relay Intercropped Cotton[C], Beijing:China Agricultural University, 2015.
[17]	赵振勇, 田长彦, 马英杰. 对陆地棉产量及品质的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2003, 20(4):292-295.
	ZHAO Zhenyong, TIAN Changyan, MA Yingjie. Influence of Close Planting on the Yield and Quality of Cotton[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2003, 20(4):292-295.
[18]	罗振, 李维江, 董合忠, 等. 密度与整枝对抗虫杂交棉产量分布的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2009, 41(12):43-47.
	LUO Zhen, LI Weijiang, DONG Hezhong, et al. Effects of Density and Plant Pruning on Yield Distribution of Hybrid Bt Cotton[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2009, 41(12):43-47.
[19]	Ruth K A, Pedro A A, Wang G Y. Plant architecture influences growth and yield response of upland cotton to population density[J]. Field Crops Research, 2013, 145(1):52-59. DOI URL
[20]	唐震超, 韩俊伟, 左俊祥. 种植密度对棉花产量和品质的影响研究[J]. 新疆农垦科技, 2017, 40(10):11-13.
	TANG Zhenchao, HAN Junwei, ZUO Junxiang. Research on the influence of planting density on cotton yield and quality[J]. Xinjiang Farm Research of Science and Technology, 2017, 40(10):11-13.
[21]	Jones M A, Wells R. Dry matter allocation and fruiting patterns of cottongrown at two divergent plant populations[J]. Crop Science, 1997, 37(3):797-802. DOI URL
[22]	Khan A, Kong X, Najeeb U, Zheng J, Tan K, Akhtar K, Munsif F, Zhou R. Planting density induced changes in cotton biomass yield,fiber quality,and phosphorus distribution under beta growth model[J]. Agronomy, 2019, 9(9):500-500. DOI URL
[23]	Nichols S P, Snipe C E, Jones M A. Cotton growth,lint yield,and fiber qualityas affected by row spacing and cultivar[J]. Cotton Science, 2004, 8(1):1-12.
[24]	Coyle G G, Smith C W. Combining ability for within-boll yield components in cotton,Gossypium hirsutum L[J]. Crop Science, 1997, 37(4):1118-1122. DOI URL
[25]	Krieg D R. Yield component analyses of cotton genetic and environmental causes of variation[C]. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf, Memphis,TN. 2005:2022-2032.
[26]	Bednarz C W, Bridges D C, Brown S M. Analysis of cotton yield stability across population densities[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2000, 92(1):128-135. DOI URL
[27]	支晓宇, 韩迎春, 王国平, 等. 不同密度下棉花群体光辐射空间分布及生物量和纤维品质的变化[J]. 棉花学报, 2017, 29(4):365-373.
	ZHI Xiaoyu, HAN Yingchun, WANG Guping, et al. Changes to the PAR Spatial Distribution,Biomass,and Fiber Quality in Response to Plant Densities[J]. Cotton Science, 2017, 29(4):365-373.
[28]	周永萍, 田海燕, 崔瑞敏. 种植密度对3个棉花品种生长发育和产量品质的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2019, 9(12):5-8.
	ZHOU Yongping, TIAN Haiyan, CUN Ruimin. Planting Densities:Effects on Growth,Yield and Quality of 3 Cotton Varieties[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2019, 9(12):5-8.
[29]	Yao H, Zhang Y, Yi X. Plant density alters nitrogen partitioning among photosynthetic components,leaf photosynthetic capacity and photosynthetic nitrogen use efficiency in field-grown cotton[J]. Field Crops Research, 2015, 184(1):39-49. DOI URL
[30]	Read J J, Reddy K R, Jenkins J N. Yield and fiber quality of upland cotton as influenced by nitrogen and potassium nutrition[J]. European Journal of Agronomy, 2006, 24(3):282-290. DOI URL
[31]	Jones M A, Wells R. Fiber yield and quality of cotton grown at two divergent population densities[J]. Crop Science, 1998, 38(5):1190-1195. DOI URL

项目 Item	5月 May	6月 June	7月 July	8月 August	9月 September	10月 October
降雨量 Rainfall（mm）	5. 00	55. 40	42. 00	116. 10	51. 30	51. 50
平均温度 Average temperature（℃）	21. 95	27. 87	28. 46	25. 52	22. 02	15. 38
日照时数 Sunshine hours（h）	297. 67	256. 73	260. 16	186. 56	213. 74	139. 91

项目 Item	5月 May	6月 June	7月 July	8月 August	9月 September	10月 October
降雨量 Rainfall（mm）	5. 00	55. 40	42. 00	116. 10	51. 30	51. 50
平均温度 Average temperature（℃）	21. 95	27. 87	28. 46	25. 52	22. 02	15. 38
日照时数 Sunshine hours（h）	297. 67	256. 73	260. 16	186. 56	213. 74	139. 91

品种 Cultivar	密度 Density （10⁴株/hm²）	株高 Plant height （cm）	果枝数 No. of Fruiting （branches/plant）	节枝比 Ratio of fruiting nodes to fruiting branches	脱落率 Shedding rate （%）
锦科707 JK707	D₁	113.3	14.6	3.39	65.2^a
	D₂	114.5	13.8	2.95	68.5^a
	D₃	106.0	12.6	2.66	67.3^a
鲁棉2387 LM2387	D₁	111.6	13.9	3.22	56.0^b
	D₂	105.5	12.4	2.65	65.0^a
	D₃	105.2	11.6	2.56	67.4^a
密度内平均 Average across density
	D₁	112.5^a	14.30^a	3.31^a	60.6
	D₂	110.0^a	13.10^b	2.80^b	66.8
	D₃	105.6^b	12.10^c	2.61^c	67.3
品种内平均 Average across cultivar
锦科707 JK707		111.3	13.7^a	3.00	67.0
鲁棉2387 LM2387		107.4	12.6^b	2.81	62.8
方差分析 Analysis of variance
密度 Density（D）		**	**	**	**
品种 Cultivar（C）		ns	**	ns	**
D*C		ns	ns	ns	**

品种 Cultivar	密度 Density （10⁴株/hm²）	株高 Plant height （cm）	果枝数 No. of Fruiting （branches/plant）	节枝比 Ratio of fruiting nodes to fruiting branches	脱落率 Shedding rate （%）
锦科707 JK707	D₁	113.3	14.6	3.39	65.2^a
	D₂	114.5	13.8	2.95	68.5^a
	D₃	106.0	12.6	2.66	67.3^a
鲁棉2387 LM2387	D₁	111.6	13.9	3.22	56.0^b
	D₂	105.5	12.4	2.65	65.0^a
	D₃	105.2	11.6	2.56	67.4^a
密度内平均 Average across density
	D₁	112.5^a	14.30^a	3.31^a	60.6
	D₂	110.0^a	13.10^b	2.80^b	66.8
	D₃	105.6^b	12.10^c	2.61^c	67.3
品种内平均 Average across cultivar
锦科707 JK707		111.3	13.7^a	3.00	67.0
鲁棉2387 LM2387		107.4	12.6^b	2.81	62.8
方差分析 Analysis of variance
密度 Density（D）		**	**	**	**
品种 Cultivar（C）		ns	**	ns	**
D*C		ns	ns	ns	**

品种 Cultivars	密度 Density （10⁴株/hm²）	W_max （10³kg/hm²）	R²	T₁ （DAE）	T₂ （DAE）	T （d）	V_T kg/（hm²·d）	V_M kg/（hm²·d）
锦科707 JK707	D₁	7. 604	0. 997 7^**	65	103	38	88. 9	132. 5
	D₂	11. 600	0. 992 0^**	66	110	43	132. 2	177. 1
	D₃	11. 183	0. 982 1^**	63	89	26	123. 9	284. 7
鲁棉2387 LM2387	D₁	7. 223	0. 994 1^**	68	111	43	81. 3	111. 2
	D₂	12. 557	0. 969 6^**	71	108	37	139. 7	220. 9
	D₃	14. 045	0. 906 8^**	67	94	28	150. 4	335. 9