种植密度和行距对膜下滴灌红花生长发育及产量的影响

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.04.003

新疆农业科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (4): 804-813.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.04.003

• 红花规范生产技术研究专栏 • 上一篇下一篇

种植密度和行距对膜下滴灌红花生长发育及产量的影响

宋贤明¹^,²(), 侯献飞², 顾元国², 苗昊翠², 李强², 郭美丽³, 曾幼玲¹(), 贾东海²()

1.新疆大学生命科学与技术学院,乌鲁木齐 830017
2.新疆农业科学院经济作物研究所,乌鲁木齐 830091
3.海军军医大学药学系,上海 200433

收稿日期:2023-08-10 出版日期:2024-04-20 发布日期:2024-05-31
通信作者: 曾幼玲(1971- ),女,新疆人,教授,博士,硕士生/博士生导师,研究方向为植物逆境生理和分子机制及盐碱特色农作物分子育种,(E-mail)zeng_ylxju@126.com；
贾东海(1980-),男,新疆人,研究员,研究方向为油料作物育种与栽培,(E-mail)545507831@qq.com
作者简介:宋贤明(1998- ),男,河南商丘人,硕士研究生,研究方向为作物分子育种,(E-mail)838212108@qq.com
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区重点研发项目“新疆红花高产、优质品种筛选及丰产增效技术研究”(2023B02005-1)；中央引导地方科技发展专项资金项目“新疆特色经济作物种质资源创制与新品种选育”(ZYYD2022C04)

Effects of planting density and row spacing on growth and yield of Carthamus tinctorius L. under mulch drip irrigation

SONG Xianming¹^,²(), HOU Xianfei², GU Yuanguo², MIAO Haocui², LI Qiang², GUO Meili³, ZENG Youling¹(), JIA Donghia²()

1. College of Life Science and Technology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830017, China
2. Institute Economic Crops, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091, China
3. Department of Pharmacy, Naval Military Medical University, Yangpu District, Shanghai 200433, China

Received:2023-08-10 Published:2024-04-20 Online:2024-05-31
Correspondence author: ZENG Youling (1971-), female, from Xinjiang, professor, Ph.D.,doctoral supervisor, research area: plant stress physiology and molecular mechanism and molecular breeding of saline-alkali crops, (E-mail)zeng_ylxju@126.com；
JIA Donghai (1980-), male, from Xinjiang, researcher, research area: oil crops breeding and cultivation, (E-mail)545507831@qq.com
Supported by:
Key research and development Projects of Xinjing Uygur Autonomous Region“Xinjiang safflower high yield, high quality variety screening and high yield and efficiency technology research”(2023B02005-1)；Creation of germplasm resources and selection of new varieties of economic crops with special characteristics in Xinjiang(ZYYD2022C04)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究不同种植密度和行距对膜下滴灌红花生长发育和产量的影响,为构建红花高光效种植模式提供参考。【方法】2020~2021年在新疆塔城地区裕民县设置田间试验,采用两因素随机区组设计,种植密度设4个处理:1.0×10⁴株/667m²(A₁)、1.5×10⁴株/667m²(A₂)、2.0×10⁴株/667m²(A₃)和2.5×10⁴株/667m²(A₄),行距设2个处理:20 cm(B₁)和30 cm(B₂),分析不同种植密度和行距对膜下滴灌红花农艺性状、干物质积累和产量的影响。【结果】在一定种植密度范围内,红花株高、叶绿素含量、干物质积累量、产量等指标均随种植密度的增加而逐渐增加,单株果球数、每果粒数和千粒重则随着种植密度的增加而降低,而不同行距则对红花的各指标影响较小。A₃B₁和A₃B₂处理下红花的综合指标和产量均显著优于其他处理,A₃处理下花丝产量分别比A₁、A₂和A₄处理增加了15.73%、11.23%和7.97%,籽粒产量分别比A₁、A₂和A₄处理增加了18.75%、11.96%和14.50%。【结论】种植密度(2.0×10⁴株/667m²(A₃),20 cm(B₁)或30 cm(B₂),等行距)为红花高产高效的栽培模式,能协调红花生长,显著提高红花花丝和籽粒产量。

关键词: 红花; 种植密度; 行距; 干物质积累; 生长; 产量

Abstract:

【Objective】 To study the effects of different planting density and row spacing on the growth and yield of Carthamus tinctorius L.,Which can coordinate the growth of Carthamus tinctorius L. and significantly improve the yield of Carthamus tinctorius L. filament and seed.【Methods】 Field planting experiment was carried out in Yumin County, Tacheng Prefecture, Xinjiang from 2020 to 2021. Two-factor randomized block design was adopted, and four treatments were set for planting density: 1.0×10⁴ plants/667m² (A₁), 1.5×10⁴ plants/667m² (A₂), 2.0×10⁴ plants/667m² (A₃) and 2.5×10⁴ plants/667m² (A₄), two treatments were set for row spacing: 20 cm (B₁) and 30 cm (B₂). The effects of different planting densities and row spacing on the agronomic characters, dry matter accumulation and yield of Carthamus tinctorius L. were analyzed. 【Results】 The results showed that within a certain planting density range, the plant height, chlorophyll content, dry matter accumulation, yield and other indicators of Carthamus tinctorius L. gradually increased with the increase of density, while the number of fruit balls per plant, the number of seeds per fruit and the thousand-grain weight gradually decreased with the increase of density, while different row spacing had little effect on each index of Carthamus tinctorius L.. The comprehensive index and yield of Carthamus tinctorius L. under A₃B₁ and A₃B₂ treatment reached the highest level, and the filament yield under A₃ treatment increased by 15.73%, 11.23% and 7.97% respectively compared with A₁, A₂ and A₄ treatment, and the grain yield increased by 18.75%, 11.96% and 14.50%, respectively, compared with A₁, A₂ and A₄ treatments. 【Conclusion】 Reasonable planting density (2.0×10⁴ plants/667m², 20 cm(B₁) or 30 cm(B₂) equal row spacing) is the basis of high-yield and efficient cultivation mode of Carthamus tinctorius L.

Key words: Carthamus tinctorius L.; planting density; line spacing; dry matter accumulation; growth; yield

中图分类号:

S567

宋贤明, 侯献飞, 顾元国, 苗昊翠, 李强, 郭美丽, 曾幼玲, 贾东海. 种植密度和行距对膜下滴灌红花生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(4): 804-813.

SONG Xianming, HOU Xianfei, GU Yuanguo, MIAO Haocui, LI Qiang, GUO Meili, ZENG Youling, JIA Donghia. Effects of planting density and row spacing on growth and yield of Carthamus tinctorius L. under mulch drip irrigation[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(4): 804-813.

图/表 6

参考文献 24

[1]	明博, 谢瑞芝, 侯鹏, 等. 2005-2016年中国玉米种植密度变化分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(11): 1960-1972. DOI
	MING Bo, XIE Ruizhi, HOU Peng, et al. Changes of maize planting density in China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(11): 1960-1972. DOI
[2]	秦乐, 王红光, 李东晓, 等. 不同密度下超窄行距对冬小麦群体质量和产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2016, 36(5): 659-667.
	QIN Le, WANG Hongguang, LI Dongxiao, et al. Effect of super-narrow row space on population quality and grain yield of winter wheat in different planting densities[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2016, 36(5): 659-667.
[3]	王铁固, 赵新亮, 马娟, 等. 种植密度对玉米产量及主要农艺性状的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2011, 38(23): 16-18.
	WANG Tiegu, ZHAO Xinliang, MA Juan, et al. Influence on main agronomic traits and yield of maize under different density[J]. Guangdong Agricultural Sciences, 2011, 38(23): 16-18.
[4]	Kanwal A, Zubair D, Rehman R M U, et al. The impact of seeding density and nitrogen rates on forage yield and quality of Avena sativa L[J]. BioMed Research International, 2022: 8238634.
[5]	Farooq M, Hussain M, Lee D J, et al. Narrow row spacing ensures higher productivity of low tillering wheat cultivars[J]. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 2012, 14: 413-418.
[6]	豆攀, 黄科程, 王兴龙, 等. 川中丘区不同玉米品种春、夏播茎秆抗倒特性研究[J]. 华北农学报, 2017, 32(4): 162-168. DOI
	DOU Pan, HUANG Kecheng, WANG Xinglong, et al. Study on stalk lodging resistant of different maize varieties in spring and summer[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2017, 32(4): 162-168.
[7]	刘伟, 张吉旺, 吕鹏, 等. 种植密度对高产夏玉米登海661产量及干物质积累与分配的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2011, 37(7): 1301-1307.
	LIU Wei, ZHANG Jiwang, LYU Peng, et al. Effect of plant density on grain yield dry matter accumulation and partitioning in summer maize cultivar Denghai 661[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2011, 37(7): 1301-1307.
[8]	赵黎明, 李明, 郑殿峰, 等. 灌溉方式与种植密度对寒地水稻产量及光合物质生产特性的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(6): 159-169.
	ZHAO Liming, LI Ming, ZHENG Dianfeng, et al. Effects of irrigation methods and rice planting densities on yield and photosynthetic characteristics of matter production in cold area[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2015, 31(6): 159-169.
[9]	李婷. 覆膜、施氮和密度对旱地玉米产量和水氮利用效率的互作效应[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2018.
	LI Ting. Interaction Effects of Film Mulching, nitrogen Rate and Plant Density on Grain Yield, Water and Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Spring Maize under Dryland System[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2018.
[10]	郑迎霞, 陈杜, 魏鹏程, 等. 种植密度对贵州春玉米茎秆抗倒伏性能及籽粒产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(4): 738-751. DOI
	ZHENG Yingxia, CHEN Du, WEI Pengcheng, et al. Effects of planting density on lodging resistance and grain yield of spring maize stalks in Guizhou Province[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2021, 47(4): 738-751. DOI
[11]	石必显, 陶建飞, 高燕, 等. 不同种植密度对3个复播食葵品种植株形态及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2022,(5): 195-200.
	SHI Bixian, TAO Jianfei, GAO Yan, et al. Effects of different planting densities on the morphological traits and yields of three confectionery sunflower varieties[J]. Crops, 2022,(5): 195-200.
[12]	陈猛, 梁雪齐, 李玲, 等. 种植密度对匀播冬小麦干物质积累、转运及产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2021, 41(2): 238-244.
	CHEN Meng, LIANG Xueqi, LI Ling, et al. Effect of planting density on dry matter accumulation, translocation and grain yield of uniformly sown winter wheat[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2021, 41(2): 238-244.
[13]	冯学颖, 刘景辉, 赵宝平, 等. 宽幅条播和种植密度对燕麦光合特性及干物质积累量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2022, 42(12): 1527-1534.
	FENG Xueying, LIU Jinghui, ZHAO Baoping, et al. Effects of wide sowing and planting density on photosynthetic characteristics and dry matter accumulation of oat[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2022, 42(12): 1527-1534.
[14]	魏淑丽, 王志刚, 于晓芳, 等. 施氮量和密度互作对玉米产量和氮肥利用效率的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019, 25(3): 382-391.
	WEI Shuli, WANG Zhigang, YU Xiaofang, et al. Interaction of nitrogen fertilizer rate and plant density on grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency of maize[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2019, 25(3): 382-391.
[15]	刘耀权, 李玲玲, 谢军红, 等. 种植密度对全膜双垄沟播玉米子粒灌浆特征、干物质积累及产量的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2022, 30(3): 108-115.
	LIU Yaoquan, LI Lingling, XIE Junhong, et al. Effects of different planting densities on grain filling characteristics, dry matter accumulation and yield of maize in the condition of whole field surface plastic mulching and double ridge-furrow planting[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2022, 30(3): 108-115.
[16]	樊玲玲. 种植密度对大豆农艺性状及产量的影响[J]. 农业灾害研究, 2021, 11(12): 106-107.
	FAN Lingling. Effects of planting density on agronomic characters and yield of soybean[J]. Journal of Agricultural Catastrophology, 2021, 11(12): 106-107.
[17]	王彦辉, 樊永强, 韩燕丽, 等. 种植密度对豫农棉31产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国棉花, 2021, 48(12): 20-22. DOI
	WANG Yanhui, FAN Yongqiang, HAN Yanli, et al. Effects of planting density on the yield and fiber quality of Yunongmian 31[J]. China Cotton, 2021, 48(12): 20-22. DOI
[18]	华烨, 周昊楠, 许婷婷, 等. 密度对棉花株间小气候、农艺性状及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(19): 36-41. DOI
	HUA Ye, ZHOU Haonan, XU Tingting, et al. Impact of density on the microclimate, agronomic characteristics and yield of cotton plants[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(19): 36-41. DOI
[19]	张美微, 屈俊峰, 张盼盼, 等. 减施氮肥对不同密度夏玉米产量和干物质积累特性的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2021, 29(5): 145-150.
	ZHANG Meiwei, QU Junfeng, ZHANG Panpan, et al. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer reduction on yield and dry matter accumulation in different planting densities of summer maize[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2021, 29(5): 145-150.
[20]	刘瑞显, 史伟, 徐立华, 等. 种植密度对棉花干物质、氮素累积与分配的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2011, 27(2): 250-257.
	LIU Ruixian, SHI Wei, XU Lihua, et al. Effects of planting density on dry matter and nitrogen accumulation and distribution of cotton[J]. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2011, 27(2): 250-257.
[21]	侯振伟. 不同种植密度下补灌对小麦分蘖成穗和产量的调控及其生理基础[D]. 山东农业大学, 2022.
	HOU Zhenwei. Regulation and physiological basis of supplementary irrigation on wheat tillering and yield under different planting densities[D]. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2022.
[22]	李锥. 播种方式和种植密度对冬小麦群体构建及产量的影响[D]. 西北农林科技大学, 2022.
	LI Zhui. Effects of sowing pattern and planting density on population construction and yield of winter wheat[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2022.
[23]	Xu W J, Liu C W, Wang K R, et al. Adjusting maize plant density to different climatic conditions across a large longitudinal distance in China[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017, 212: 126-134.
[24]	张明明, 董宝娣, 乔匀周, 等. 播期、播量对旱作小麦‘小偃60’生长发育、产量及水分利用的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(8): 1095-1102.
	ZHANG Mingming, DONG Baodi, QIAO Yunzhou, et al. Effects of sowing date and seeding density on growth, yield and water use efficiency of ‘Xiaoyan 60' wheat under rainfed condition[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2016, 24(8): 1095-1102.

编辑推荐 0

Metrics

阅读次数

全文

HTML			PDF

最新录用	在线预览	正式出版	最新录用	在线预览	正式出版
0	0	6	0	0	39

来源	本网站	其他网站

次数	32	13
比例	71%	29%

摘要

329

最新录用	在线预览	正式出版

0	0	329

来源	本网站	其他网站

次数	73	256
比例	22%	78%

生育时期 Growth period	种植密度处理 Planting density treatment	行距处理 Row spacing treatment	株高Plant height(cm)		茎粗Stem thick(cm)		根长Root length(cm)		叶片数Leaves number(个)		分枝数Branchs number(个)
生育时期 Growth period	种植密度处理 Planting density treatment	行距处理 Row spacing treatment	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年
伸长期 Elongation stage	A₁	B₁	5.6±0.6^a	16.3±1.53^a	5±1.57^ab	6±0.8^a	8.6±0.4^a	9.4±0.72^a	9±1.46^a	10±1^a	/	/
	A₁	B₂	7.4±2.8^a	14.3±1.25^a	5.2±1.26^ab	5.4±0.13^a	8.8±1.08^a	8.7±0.89^a	10.7±1.15^a	9±1^b	/	/
	A₂	B₁	6.8±1.33^a	15.7±2.75^a	5.5±1.18^ab	5.4±0.14^a	8.6±2.96^a	8.6±0.64^a	9.3±1.53^a	9.3±0.58^ab	/	/
	A₂	B₂	6.2±1.23^a	15.7±1.53^a	6.6±0.43^a	6±0.22^a	9.6±2.23^a	9.5±1.72^a	11.7±0.58^a	9.3±0.58^ab	/	/
	A₃	B₁	6.2±1.78^a	14.1±2.33^a	4.9±0.16^ab	5.9±0.41^a	9.4±1.56^a	8.3±1.7^b	9.7±1.53^a	9.4±1.47^ab	/	/
	A₃	B₂	7.4±2.11^a	14.6±1.3^a	5.4±1.16^ab	5.6±0.45^a	8.9±2.62^a	9.1±2.15^a	10.7±1.53^a	8.7±0.58^b	/	/
	A₄	B₁	6.7±1.51^a	14.1±2.55^a	5±0.9^ab	5.5±0.67^a	9.1±2.17^a	9.1±2.72^a	10±1.46^a	10±1^a	/	/
	A₄	B₂	6.8±1.34^a	14.7±1.28^a	4.2±1.03^b	5.8±0.37^a	9.3±2.23^a	9.1±1.79^a	8.7±1.53^a	9.3±0.58^ab	/	/
分枝期 Branching stage	A₁	B₁	24±3.72^b	42.7±2.6^b	9.1±1.31^a	9.1±0.51^a	10.5±0.97^a	14.7±1.42^ab	19.7±1.58^ab	25±1^a	/	/
	A₁	B₂	25.5±3.61^b	45.1±1a^b	9.6±0.62^a	9.7±0.26^a	11.8±1.62^a	15.8±0.64^a	20.7±2.31^a	25±2^a	/	/
	A₂	B₁	24.2±2^b	46.5±3.18^ab	9.3±0.56^a	9.3±0.54^a	10.2±1.56^a	15.1±1.89^a	19.7±1.53^ab	25.7±1.53^a	/	/
	A₂	B₂	26.9±1.62^b	44.1±2.07^ab	8.6±1.69^a	9.1±0.29^a	10.9±1.64^a	15.5±1.68^a	18.7±2.08^ab	23.7±1.53^a	/	/
	A₃	B₁	33.9±2.4^a	49.6±1.8^a	9.9±1.15^a	9.2±0.44^a	11.6±1.68^a	14.8±2.16^a	20±1.73^a	24.3±3.04^a	/	/
	A₃	B₂	34±0.53^a	48.4±3.59^a	8.9±1.46^a	8.5±0.86^a	9.9±1.5^a	15.5±2.04^a	21±1^a	24.3±1.15^a	/	/
	A₄	B₁	26.9±3.29^b	43.8±2.86^b	8.8±0.67^a	8.3±0.91^a	9.6±1.17^a	13.2±1.22^b	17.7±2.06^b	21.7±2.08^b	/	/
	A₄	B₂	25.6±2.42^b	46.4±3.62^ab	8.7±0.98^a	8±1.34^b	9.9±1.46^a	14.4±1.56^ab	17.3±1.15^b	24.3±2.31^a	/	/
现蕾期 Budding stage	A₁	B₁	57.2±2.96^b	61.6±2.59^b	11.7±0.51^a	9.3±1.29^a	16.1±1.23^b	17.2±1.69^ab	99±12.59^ab	143±10.64^b	10.3±1.51^a	12.3±1.53^b
	A₁	B₂	60.4±2.74^b	62.6±2.75^b	10.4±1.7^a	10.1±0.9^a	14.8±2.93^b	18.6±2.78^a	89±6^b	206.3±14.01^a	9.7±2.04^a	16.7±0.58^a
	A₂	B₁	61.9±4.68^b	63.4±3.67^b	10.4±1.33^a	9.9±1.01^a	18.4±2.89^a	18.9±1.05^a	112.3±11.5^a	127.7±10.03^b	9.5±1.46^a	13.7±2.89^b
	A₂	B₂	66.2±4.67^ab	64.9±1.95^b	9.8±1.38^ab	9.6±0.35^a	14.1±1.23^b	16.9±1.19^b	106.3±8.9^ab	139.7±13.05^b	10.7±1.04^a	10.3±1.58^bc
	A₃	B₁	69.4±3.44^a	70.1±3.42^a	10.2±1.45^a	10±0.98^a	15±2.28^b	16.4±2.32^ab	98.3±7.93^ab	206±8.05^a	11.3±2.16^a	11.7±2.89^bc
	A₃	B₂	68.5±2.99^a	68.7±1.65^a	9.5±1.4^ab	10.4±0.81^a	14.9±2.13^b	17.5±2.5^ab	107.3±9.32^ab	137.3±11.47^b	9.3±2.79^a	12.3±2.31^b
	A₄	B₁	61±4.33^b	63.2±3.7^b	9.2±0.55^b	7.4±0.04^b	13.5±1.25^bc	15.4±2.93^b	81±10.47^b	107±10.82^c	7.3±1.15^b	9±1^c
	A₄	B₂	60±3.71^b	65.9±1.16^b	9.3±1.63^b	7.5±0.29^b	12.1±2.46^c	14.7±1.68^b	81.7±3.51^b	108±13^c	8.7±1.73^b	8±1^c
开花期 Flowering stage	A₁	B₁	60.5±5.42^c	73.6±2.25^c	13.2±1.32^a	11.3±1.6^a	19.1±1.63^a	20.6±3.9^a	131.3±11.5^c	229.3±13.42^c	12.3±2.04^a	18.3±1.15^a
	A₁	B₂	65.2±3.87^bc	75.2±3.32^bc	11.8±1.25^ab	11.6±0.59^a	18.4±3.42^a	21.2±3.58^a	120.7±9.12^c	232.7±15.94^c	10.7±1.53^b	19.7±2.04^a
	A₂	B₁	65.1±6.47^bc	74.8±1.44^bc	12±1.2^ab	10.6±1^ab	20.1±3.1^a	20.3±1.92^a	195±13.11^a	351.7±14.92^b	10.3±1.08^bc	15.3±3.86^b
	A₂	B₂	68.5±3.67^b	78.2±2.25^b	11.9±1.6^ab	10.5±1.29^ab	18.9±2.98^a	20.8±2.25^a	188.7±11^a	446.3±11.35^a	10±5.2^bc	16.3±3.03^b
	A₃	B₁	75.5±3.84^a	82.8±2.93^a	12.7±1.44^a	11.5±0.89^a	19.4±2.88^a	20.6±2.23^a	168.3±12.7^b	413.7±14.47^a	12.7±2.79^a	20.7±3.02^a
	A₃	B₂	74.5±4.5^a	84.8±3.18^a	11.9±1.27^ab	11.4±1.44^a	18.6±2.31^a	21.2±3.73^a	154.3±14.62^b	361.7±15.91^b	11.4±2.65^ab	18.7±2.69^a
	A₄	B₁	64.9±3^bc	68.9±1.4^c	9.5±1.44^c	9.8±1.18^b	15.1±3.67^b	17.7±1.91^b	94.7±8.08^d	165.2±11.95^d	8.7±1.58^c	13±2.65^c
	A₄	B₂	64.8±8.01^bc	69.2±4.13^c	10.8±1.28^bc	8.3±0.71^b	17.7±2.72^b	18.8±3.02^b	107.7±12.32^d	175.7±13.44^d	9.7±1.53^bc	12.7±1.0^c

生育时期 Growth period	种植密度处理 Planting density treatment	行距处理 Row spacing treatment	株高Plant height(cm)		茎粗Stem thick(cm)		根长Root length(cm)		叶片数Leaves number(个)		分枝数Branchs number(个)
生育时期 Growth period	种植密度处理 Planting density treatment	行距处理 Row spacing treatment	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年	2020年	2021年
伸长期 Elongation stage	A₁	B₁	5.6±0.6^a	16.3±1.53^a	5±1.57^ab	6±0.8^a	8.6±0.4^a	9.4±0.72^a	9±1.46^a	10±1^a	/	/
	A₁	B₂	7.4±2.8^a	14.3±1.25^a	5.2±1.26^ab	5.4±0.13^a	8.8±1.08^a	8.7±0.89^a	10.7±1.15^a	9±1^b	/	/
	A₂	B₁	6.8±1.33^a	15.7±2.75^a	5.5±1.18^ab	5.4±0.14^a	8.6±2.96^a	8.6±0.64^a	9.3±1.53^a	9.3±0.58^ab	/	/
	A₂	B₂	6.2±1.23^a	15.7±1.53^a	6.6±0.43^a	6±0.22^a	9.6±2.23^a	9.5±1.72^a	11.7±0.58^a	9.3±0.58^ab	/	/
	A₃	B₁	6.2±1.78^a	14.1±2.33^a	4.9±0.16^ab	5.9±0.41^a	9.4±1.56^a	8.3±1.7^b	9.7±1.53^a	9.4±1.47^ab	/	/
	A₃	B₂	7.4±2.11^a	14.6±1.3^a	5.4±1.16^ab	5.6±0.45^a	8.9±2.62^a	9.1±2.15^a	10.7±1.53^a	8.7±0.58^b	/	/
	A₄	B₁	6.7±1.51^a	14.1±2.55^a	5±0.9^ab	5.5±0.67^a	9.1±2.17^a	9.1±2.72^a	10±1.46^a	10±1^a	/	/
	A₄	B₂	6.8±1.34^a	14.7±1.28^a	4.2±1.03^b	5.8±0.37^a	9.3±2.23^a	9.1±1.79^a	8.7±1.53^a	9.3±0.58^ab	/	/
分枝期 Branching stage	A₁	B₁	24±3.72^b	42.7±2.6^b	9.1±1.31^a	9.1±0.51^a	10.5±0.97^a	14.7±1.42^ab	19.7±1.58^ab	25±1^a	/	/
	A₁	B₂	25.5±3.61^b	45.1±1a^b	9.6±0.62^a	9.7±0.26^a	11.8±1.62^a	15.8±0.64^a	20.7±2.31^a	25±2^a	/	/
	A₂	B₁	24.2±2^b	46.5±3.18^ab	9.3±0.56^a	9.3±0.54^a	10.2±1.56^a	15.1±1.89^a	19.7±1.53^ab	25.7±1.53^a	/	/
	A₂	B₂	26.9±1.62^b	44.1±2.07^ab	8.6±1.69^a	9.1±0.29^a	10.9±1.64^a	15.5±1.68^a	18.7±2.08^ab	23.7±1.53^a	/	/
	A₃	B₁	33.9±2.4^a	49.6±1.8^a	9.9±1.15^a	9.2±0.44^a	11.6±1.68^a	14.8±2.16^a	20±1.73^a	24.3±3.04^a	/	/
	A₃	B₂	34±0.53^a	48.4±3.59^a	8.9±1.46^a	8.5±0.86^a	9.9±1.5^a	15.5±2.04^a	21±1^a	24.3±1.15^a	/	/
	A₄	B₁	26.9±3.29^b	43.8±2.86^b	8.8±0.67^a	8.3±0.91^a	9.6±1.17^a	13.2±1.22^b	17.7±2.06^b	21.7±2.08^b	/	/
	A₄	B₂	25.6±2.42^b	46.4±3.62^ab	8.7±0.98^a	8±1.34^b	9.9±1.46^a	14.4±1.56^ab	17.3±1.15^b	24.3±2.31^a	/	/
现蕾期 Budding stage	A₁	B₁	57.2±2.96^b	61.6±2.59^b	11.7±0.51^a	9.3±1.29^a	16.1±1.23^b	17.2±1.69^ab	99±12.59^ab	143±10.64^b	10.3±1.51^a	12.3±1.53^b
	A₁	B₂	60.4±2.74^b	62.6±2.75^b	10.4±1.7^a	10.1±0.9^a	14.8±2.93^b	18.6±2.78^a	89±6^b	206.3±14.01^a	9.7±2.04^a	16.7±0.58^a
	A₂	B₁	61.9±4.68^b	63.4±3.67^b	10.4±1.33^a	9.9±1.01^a	18.4±2.89^a	18.9±1.05^a	112.3±11.5^a	127.7±10.03^b	9.5±1.46^a	13.7±2.89^b
	A₂	B₂	66.2±4.67^ab	64.9±1.95^b	9.8±1.38^ab	9.6±0.35^a	14.1±1.23^b	16.9±1.19^b	106.3±8.9^ab	139.7±13.05^b	10.7±1.04^a	10.3±1.58^bc
	A₃	B₁	69.4±3.44^a	70.1±3.42^a	10.2±1.45^a	10±0.98^a	15±2.28^b	16.4±2.32^ab	98.3±7.93^ab	206±8.05^a	11.3±2.16^a	11.7±2.89^bc
	A₃	B₂	68.5±2.99^a	68.7±1.65^a	9.5±1.4^ab	10.4±0.81^a	14.9±2.13^b	17.5±2.5^ab	107.3±9.32^ab	137.3±11.47^b	9.3±2.79^a	12.3±2.31^b
	A₄	B₁	61±4.33^b	63.2±3.7^b	9.2±0.55^b	7.4±0.04^b	13.5±1.25^bc	15.4±2.93^b	81±10.47^b	107±10.82^c	7.3±1.15^b	9±1^c
	A₄	B₂	60±3.71^b	65.9±1.16^b	9.3±1.63^b	7.5±0.29^b	12.1±2.46^c	14.7±1.68^b	81.7±3.51^b	108±13^c	8.7±1.73^b	8±1^c
开花期 Flowering stage	A₁	B₁	60.5±5.42^c	73.6±2.25^c	13.2±1.32^a	11.3±1.6^a	19.1±1.63^a	20.6±3.9^a	131.3±11.5^c	229.3±13.42^c	12.3±2.04^a	18.3±1.15^a
	A₁	B₂	65.2±3.87^bc	75.2±3.32^bc	11.8±1.25^ab	11.6±0.59^a	18.4±3.42^a	21.2±3.58^a	120.7±9.12^c	232.7±15.94^c	10.7±1.53^b	19.7±2.04^a
	A₂	B₁	65.1±6.47^bc	74.8±1.44^bc	12±1.2^ab	10.6±1^ab	20.1±3.1^a	20.3±1.92^a	195±13.11^a	351.7±14.92^b	10.3±1.08^bc	15.3±3.86^b
	A₂	B₂	68.5±3.67^b	78.2±2.25^b	11.9±1.6^ab	10.5±1.29^ab	18.9±2.98^a	20.8±2.25^a	188.7±11^a	446.3±11.35^a	10±5.2^bc	16.3±3.03^b
	A₃	B₁	75.5±3.84^a	82.8±2.93^a	12.7±1.44^a	11.5±0.89^a	19.4±2.88^a	20.6±2.23^a	168.3±12.7^b	413.7±14.47^a	12.7±2.79^a	20.7±3.02^a
	A₃	B₂	74.5±4.5^a	84.8±3.18^a	11.9±1.27^ab	11.4±1.44^a	18.6±2.31^a	21.2±3.73^a	154.3±14.62^b	361.7±15.91^b	11.4±2.65^ab	18.7±2.69^a
	A₄	B₁	64.9±3^bc	68.9±1.4^c	9.5±1.44^c	9.8±1.18^b	15.1±3.67^b	17.7±1.91^b	94.7±8.08^d	165.2±11.95^d	8.7±1.58^c	13±2.65^c
	A₄	B₂	64.8±8.01^bc	69.2±4.13^c	10.8±1.28^bc	8.3±0.71^b	17.7±2.72^b	18.8±3.02^b	107.7±12.32^d	175.7±13.44^d	9.7±1.53^bc	12.7±1.0^c

种植密度和行距对膜下滴灌红花生长发育及产量的影响

Effects of planting density and row spacing on growth and yield of Carthamus tinctorius L. under mulch drip irrigation

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 24

相关文章 15

编辑推荐 0

Metrics

[1]	张泽华, 叶含春, 王振华, 李文昊, 李海强, 刘健. 等氮配施脲酶抑制剂对滴灌棉花生长发育和产量及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2103-2111.
[2]	陈瑞杰, 罗林毅, 阮向阳, 冶军. 腐植酸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(9): 2112-2121.
[3]	黄铂轩, 李鹏程, 郑苍松, 孙淼, 邵晶晶, 冯卫娜, 庞朝友, 徐文修, 董合林. 不同氮素抑制剂对棉花生长发育、氮素利用与产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2122-2131.
[4]	王超, 徐文修, 李鹏程, 郑苍松, 孙淼, 冯卫娜, 邵晶晶, 董合林. 棉花苗期生长发育对土壤速效钾水平的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2132-2139.
[5]	张鸟, 王卉, 冯国郡, 再吐尼古丽·库尔班. 不同粒用高粱品种产量和农艺性状及品质的差异性分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2160-2167.
[6]	张帆, 陈晓露, 王洁, 侯献飞, 贾东海, 顾元国, 苗昊翠, 李强. 混合盐碱胁迫对花生种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2168-2182.
[7]	陈芳, 李字辉, 孙孝贵, 张庭军. 不同剂量的微生物菌剂对加工番茄产量及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2285-2289.
[8]	张承洁, 胡浩然, 段松江, 吴一帆, 张巨松. 氮肥与密度互作对海岛棉生长发育及产量和品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1821-1830.
[9]	候丽丽, 王伟, 崔新菊, 周大伟. 有机无机肥配施对冬小麦产量和土壤养分及酶活性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1845-1852.
[10]	陈芳, 李字辉, 王兵跃, 孙孝贵, 张庭军. 微生物菌剂对冬小麦生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1853-1860.
[11]	袁莹莹, 赵经华, 迪力穆拉提·司马义, 杨庭瑞. 基于apriori算法对盆栽春小麦生理指标及产量的分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1861-1871.
[12]	牛婷婷, 马明生, 张军高. 秸秆还田和覆膜对旱作雨养农田土壤理化性质及春玉米产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1896-1906.
[13]	赵敏华, 宋秉曦, 张宇鹏, 高志红, 朱勇勇, 陈晓远. 旱作条件下氮肥减施对水稻产量及氮肥偏生产力的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1907-1915.
[14]	李锁丞, 柳延涛, 董红业, 孙振博, 李紫薇, 张春媛, 王开勇, 李强, 杨明凤. 不同施钾量对滴灌花生光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1926-1936.
[15]	赖成霞, 杨延龙, 李春平, 玛依拉·玉素音, 王燕, 杨栋, 阳妮, 葛风伟, 汪鹏龙, 马君. 落叶型棉花黄萎病的生物学特征及药剂防治分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 2034-2042.