基于熵权-TOPSIS的浅埋式滴灌紫花苜蓿灌水定额的综合评价

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.10.021

新疆农业科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (10): 2537-2546.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.10.021

• 植物保护·土壤肥料·节水灌溉·农业装备工程与机械化·草业 • 上一篇下一篇

基于熵权-TOPSIS的浅埋式滴灌紫花苜蓿灌水定额的综合评价

麦合穆提·拜合提¹(), 丁峰²(), 李彦¹, 党龙芯¹

1.新疆农业大学水利与土木工程学院,乌鲁木齐 830052
2.新疆农业科学院土壤肥料与农业节水研究所,乌鲁木齐 830091

收稿日期:2024-03-23 出版日期:2024-10-20 发布日期:2024-11-07
通信作者: 丁峰(1980-),男,山东文登人,副研究员,硕士,研究方向为节水灌溉理论与水肥一体化技术,(E-mail)nkydf@126.com
作者简介:麦合穆提·拜合提(1994-),男,新疆疏附人,硕士研究生,研究方向为节水灌溉,(E-mail)mahmut17@163.com
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项项目(KY2022029);国家重点研发计划项目子课题(2021YFD1900804-05)

Comprehensive evaluation of alfalfa water quota in shallow buried drip irrigation based on entropy weight-TOPSIS

Maihemuti Baiheti¹(), DING Feng²(), LI Yan¹, DANG Loongxin¹

1. College of Water Conservancy and Civil Engineering, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052, China
2. Research Institute of Soil, Fertilizer and Agricultural Water Conservation, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091,China

Received:2024-03-23 Published:2024-10-20 Online:2024-11-07
Correspondence author: DING Feng (1980-), male, from Wendeng, Shandong, master, associate researcher, research direction: water-saving irrigation theory and water and fertilizer integration technology,(E-mail)nkydf @126.com
Supported by:
Special Project of Basic Scientific R &D Program of Public Welfare Research Institutions of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(KY2022029);Sub-project of the National Major R & D Program(2021YFD1900804-05)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】 研究不同灌水定额对滴灌紫花苜蓿的影响并优选适宜的灌水定额。【方法】 以浅埋式滴灌紫花苜蓿为研究对象,设计5个水平的灌水定额(581、506、431、356和281 m³/hm²),以地面灌CK(469 m³/hm²)为对照,分析灌水定额对苜蓿生长、产量及水分利用的影响,并采用熵权-TOPSIS综合评价法优选适宜于该地区苜蓿浅埋式滴灌的灌水定额。【结果】 苜蓿的株高、茎粗、产量和耗水量均在适当的范围内随灌水定额的增大而增大,差异显著(P<0.05),但过高的灌水量对苜蓿株高、茎粗、产量的提高并无显著影响(P<0.05);水分利用效率(WUE)和灌溉水利用效率(IWUE)随灌水定额的增大逐渐降低,茬次之间的耗水量表现为第2茬>第3茬>第1茬(P<0.05)。灌水定额为506 m³/hm²时贴近度最高,评价结果最佳,且苜蓿产量为16 079 kg/hm²。【结论】 新疆北疆浅埋式滴灌苜蓿的最优灌水定额为506 m³/hm²。

关键词: 浅埋式滴灌; 地表滴灌; 紫花苜蓿; 灌水定额; 熵权—TOPSIS; 综合评价法

Abstract:

【Objective】 To explore the effects of different irrigation quotas on alfalfa and evaluate the appropriate irrigation quota. 【Methods】 Taking alfalfa with shallow-buried drip irrigation as the research object, five levels of irrigation quotas (581,506,431,356,281 m³/hm²) were designed, and the ground irrigation CK ( 469 m³/hm²) was used as the control. Afterwards,the effects of different irrigation quotas on the growth, yield and water use of alfalfa were studied. Meanwhile, the entropy weight-TOPSIS comprehensive evaluation method was used to optimize the irrigation quota suitable for shallow-buried drip irrigation of alfalfa in this area. 【Results】 The plant height, stem diameter, yield and water consumption of alfalfa increased with the increase of irrigation quota in an appropriate range, and the difference was significant (P<0.05). However, excessive irrigation had no significant effect on the increase of plant height, stem diameter and yield of alfalfa (P < 0.05). Water use efficiency (WUE) and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) gradually decreased with the increase of irrigation quota, and the water consumption between stubbles showed the second stubble > the third stubble > the first stubble (P < 0.05). 【Conclusion】 The irrigation quota is 506 m³/hm², so it is strongly recommended this quota.

Key words: shallow buried drip irrigation; surface drip irrigation; alfalfa; irrigation quota; entropy weight-TOPSIS; comprehensive evaluation method

中图分类号:

S542.4

麦合穆提·拜合提, 丁峰, 李彦, 党龙芯. 基于熵权-TOPSIS的浅埋式滴灌紫花苜蓿灌水定额的综合评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(10): 2537-2546.

Maihemuti Baiheti, DING Feng, LI Yan, DANG Loongxin. Comprehensive evaluation of alfalfa water quota in shallow buried drip irrigation based on entropy weight-TOPSIS[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(10): 2537-2546.

图/表 9

表1 土壤基本情况

Tab.1 Basic situation of soil

土层深度 Depth of soil layer (cm)	pH值 pH value	总盐量 Total salt content	全氮 Total nitrogen (g/kg)	全磷 Total phosphorus (g/kg)	全钾 Whole potassium (g/kg)	有机质 Organic substance (g/kg)	速效氮 Avaliable nitrogen (mg/kg)	速效磷 Avaliable phosphorus (mg/kg)	速效钾 Ouick- actiong potassium (mg/kg)
0~20	8.57	0.63	0.84	0.79	18.01	14.45	54.2	6.93	211.3
20~40	8.67	0.79	0.73	0.72	18.6	12.2	46.3	4.3	178.6
40~60	8.72	0.91	0.64	0.65	18.9	11.12	37.9	3.1	148.6

图1 种植方式和滴灌带布置

Fig.1 Planting method and drip irrigation belt layout

表2 苜蓿生育期阶段分化

Tab.2 Alfalfa growth stage differentiation

茬次 Cuttings	返青期 Regeneration period	分枝期 Branching period	现蕾期 Squaring period	初花期 Initial flowering period	总计 Total(d)
第1茬 The first	4月26日	5月5日	5月25日	6月12日	46
第2茬 The second		6月15日	7月19日	7月27日	42
第3茬 The third		7月29日	9月5日	9月14日	45

表3 试验设计

Tab.3 The design of experiment

试验处理 Treatments	灌水定额 Quota of irrigating water (m³/hm²)	灌水周期 Interval of irrigation(d)	灌水次数 Frequency of irrigation			总灌溉定额 Total irrigation quota (m³/hm²)
试验处理 Treatments	灌水定额 Quota of irrigating water (m³/hm²)	灌水周期 Interval of irrigation(d)	第一茬 First cutting	第二茬 First cutting	第三茬 First cutting	总灌溉定额 Total irrigation quota (m³/hm²)
W₁	581	8~12	3	5	4	6 975
W₂	506	8~12	3	5	4	6 075
W₃	431	8~12	3	5	4	5 173
W₄	356	8~12	3	5	4	4 276
W₅	281	8~12	3	5	4	3 373
W₆(CK)	469	8~12	3	5	4	5 625

图2 不同处理下紫花苜蓿株高和茎粗注:不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05),下同

Fig.2 Plant height and stem diameter of alfalfa under different treatments Note:Different lowercase letters indicated significant differences between treatments(P<0.05),the same as below

图3 苜蓿干草产量

Fig.3 Alfalfa hay yield

表4 不同灌水定额下苜蓿产量、耗水量、WUE与IWUE的变化

Tab.4 Changes of different irrigation quotas on alfalfa yield, water consumption, WUE and IWUE

茬次 Cuttings	指标 Indexes	W₁处理 W₁ treatments	W₂处理 W₂ treatments	W₃处理 W₃ treatments	W₄处理 W₄ treatments	W₅处理 W₅ treatments	CK处理 CK treatments
第1茬 The first	干产量(kg/hm²)	5 213.1±239.5^a	5 337.5±133.5^a	4 652.9±107^b	4 301.4±121^c	3 413.9±126.7^d	4 663.6±67^b
	耗水量(mm)	114.9±3.8^a	99.9±1.7^b	95.9±0.4^c	91.2±1.4^d	77.6±1.4^e	102.1±1^b
	WUE(kg/(hm²·mm))	45.4±3^bc	53.5±2.1^a	48.5±1.2^b	47.2±1.9^bc	44±1.2^c	45.7±0.7^bc
	IWUE/(kg/(hm²·mm))	17.9±0.8^d	21.1±0.5^b	21.6±0.5^b	24.2±0.7^a	24.3±0.9^a	19.9±0.3^c
第2茬 The second	干产量(kg/hm²)	5 504.8±77.4^a	5 629.3±164.8^a	4 726.3±91.9^b	4 215.6±40.2^c	3 419.9±45.5^d	4 756.9±115^b
	耗水量(mm)	168.7±2.9^a	156.8±2.6^b	148.8±0.8^c	130.1±5.9^d	116.5±1.8^e	142.5±1.9^c
	WUE(kg/(hm²·mm))	32.6±0.5^b	35.9±0.5^a	33.2±0.4^b	33±0.3^b	29.9±1.2^c	33.4±1.3^b
	IWUE/(kg/(hm²·mm))	23.7±0.3^d	27.8±0.8^b	27.4±0.5^b	29.6±0.3^a	30.4±0.4^a	25.4±0.6^c
第3茬 The third	干产量(kg/hm²)	4 909.4±267.7^a	5 111.9±120.7^a	4 575.5±203.4^b	4 170.7±23.6^c	2 928±144.1^d	4 579.5±99.1^b
	耗水量(mm)	139.8±2.3^a	122.4±4.7^b	109.4±2^c	103.8±0.7^d	95.5±0.4^e	122.5±1^b
	WUE(kg/(hm²·mm))	35.1±1.9^b	41.9±1^a	41.7±2.1^a	41.6±0.2^a	31.1±1.5^c	37.4±1.1^b
	IWUE/(kg/(hm²·mm))	28.2±1.5^d	33.7±0.8^bc	35.4±1.6^b	39±0.2^a	34.7±1.7^bc	32.6±0.7^c
总计 Total	干产量(kg/hm²)	15 627.3±67.4^b	16 078.7±153.6^a	13 954.8±247.8^c	12 687.7±126.9^d	9 761.8±119.4^e	13 999.9±127.6^c
	耗水量(mm)	423.4±1.7^a	379±7^b	354.1±2.7^d	325.1±7.5^e	289.6±2.5^f	367±1.8^c
	WUE(kg/(hm²·mm))	36.9±0.1^d	42.4±0.3^a	40.1±1^b	39.7±0.8^b	34.1±0.8^e	38.1±0.5^c
	IWUE(kg/(hm²·mm))	22.4±0.1^e	26.5±0.3^c	27±0.5^c	29.7±0.3^a	28.9±0.4^b	24.9±0.2^d

表5 各指标熵值、差异系数及权重

Tab.5 Comparisons of entropy value,coefficient of difference and weight of each index

处理编号 Processing number	耗水量 Water consumption	干草产量 Hay yieid	株高 Height	茎粗 Stem thick	WUE	IWUE
熵值E_j	0.855	0.879	0.865	0.869	0.863	0.863
差异系数G_j	0.145	0.121	0.135	0.131	0.137	0.137
权重W_j	0.180	0.151	0.168	0.163	0.170	0.170

表6 TOPSIS结果对比

Tab.6 Comparisons of topsis results

处理编号 Processing number	正理想解 $D_{i}^{+}$ Exactly $D_{i}^{+}$	负理想解 D_i Negative ideal solution D_i	贴近度 S_i Proximity S_i	排序 Sequence
W₁处理 W₁ treatments	0.179	0.157	0.467	5
W₂处理 W₂ treatments	0.095	0.211	0.689	1
W₃处理 W₃ treatments	0.096	0.164	0.631	2
W₄处理 W₄ treatments	0.112	0.170	0.603	3
W₅处理 W₅ treatments	0.199	0.156	0.440	6
CK处理 CK treatments	0.130	0.134	0.507	4

表6 TOPSIS结果对比

Tab.6 Comparisons of topsis results

处理编号 Processing number	正理想解 $D_{i}^{+}$ Exactly $D_{i}^{+}$	负理想解 D_i Negative ideal solution D_i	贴近度 S_i Proximity S_i	排序 Sequence
W₁处理 W₁ treatments	0.179	0.157	0.467	5
W₂处理 W₂ treatments	0.095	0.211	0.689	1
W₃处理 W₃ treatments	0.096	0.164	0.631	2
W₄处理 W₄ treatments	0.112	0.170	0.603	3
W₅处理 W₅ treatments	0.199	0.156	0.440	6
CK处理 CK treatments	0.130	0.134	0.507	4

参考文献 9

[9]	SUN Hongren, LIU Guorong, ZHANG Yingjun, et al. Water requirement, water consumption, water requirement rate, water consumption rate and water use efficiency of alfalfa[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2005, 22(12): 24-30.
[10]	夏玉慧, 汪有科, 汪治同. 地下滴灌埋设深度对紫花苜蓿生长的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2008, 16(3): 298-302. DOI
	XIA Yuhui, WANG Youke, WANG Zhitong. Effect of the burying depth of underground drip irrigation system on alfalfa growth characteristics[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2008, 16(3): 298-302. DOI
[11]	Idris A Y, El Nadi A H, Dagash Y M I, et al. Comparative study of lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) under drip and sprinkler irrigation[J]. Universal Journal of Agricultural Research, 2013, 1(2): 17-23.
[12]	Lamm F, Harmoney K, Aboukheira A A, et al. Alfalfa production with subsurface drip irrigation in the central great Plains[J]. Transactions of the Asabe, 2012, 55(4): 1203-1212.
[13]	Stambouli T, Martínez-Cob A, Faci J M, et al. Sprinkler evaporation losses in alfalfa during solid-set sprinkler irrigation in semiarid areas[J]. Irrigation Science, 2013, 31(5): 1075-1089.
[14]	马铁成. 不同灌水定额对北疆苜蓿叶面积指数和产量的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2019, 38(S2): 7-10.
	MA Tiecheng. Effects of different irrigation quotas on leaf area index and yield of alfalfa in northern Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2019, 38(S2): 7-10.
[15]	Ayars J E, Phene C J, Hutmacher R B, et al. Subsurface drip irrigation of row crops: a review of 15 years of research at the Water Management Research Laboratory[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 1999, 42(1): 1-27.
[16]	刘纯. 西北旱区紫花苜蓿耗水量对品质的影响[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2021.
	LIU Chun. Effect of Water Consumption on Alfalfa Quality in Arid Areas of Northwest China[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2021.
[17]	张前兵, 于磊, 鲁为华, 等. 优化灌溉制度提高苜蓿种植当年产量及品质[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(23): 116-122.
	ZHANG Qianbing, YU Lei, LU Weihua, et al. Optimal irrigation regime improving yield and quality of alfalfa in year of sowing[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016, 32(23): 116-122.
[18]	刘敏国, 许瑞, 杨惠敏. 紫花苜蓿的水分响应及灌溉效应[J]. 西南民族大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 45(1): 16-22.
	LIU Minguo, XU Rui, YANG Huimin. Response of alfalfa to soil moisture and effect of the irrigation[J]. Journal of Southwest Minzu University (Natural Science Edition), 2019, 45(1): 16-22.
[19]	刘名江, 吴波, 李来永, 等. 基于熵权TOPSIS模型的盐碱地紫花苜蓿施氮效果评价[J]. 家畜生态学报, 2018, 39(10): 53-58.
	LIU Mingjiang, WU Bo, LI Laiyong, et al. The comprehensive evaluation of nitrogen fertilizer effect on alfalfa in saline-alkali soil based on TOPSIS model[J]. Journal of Domestic Animal Ecology, 2018, 39(10): 53-58.
[20]	李池, 陈刚, 梁国成, 等. 基于熵权-TOPSIS的滴灌春玉米灌水定额研究[J]. 水资源与水工程学报, 2023, 34(2): 216-224.
	LI Chi, CHEN Gang, LIANG Guocheng, et al. Irrigation quota of drip-irrigated spring maize based on entropy weight-TOPSIS[J]. Journal of Water Resources and Water Engineering, 2023, 34(2): 216-224.
[21]	孟洋洋, 李茂娜, 王云玲, 等. 灌水下限对紫花苜蓿产量、品质及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2020, 39(2): 1-9.
	MENG Yangyang, LI Maona, WANG Yunling, et al. Effects of the irrigation low limits on alfalfa yield, quality and water use efficiency[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2020, 39(2): 1-9.
[22]	Hwang C, Yoon K. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications-A state-of-the-art survey[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1981.
[24]	赵经华, 胡建强, 杨磊, 等. 浅埋式滴灌苜蓿耗水规律和产量对不同灌水定额的响应[J]. 南水北调与水利科技(中英文), 2020, 18(5): 202-208.
	ZHAO Jinghua, HU Jianqiang, YANG Lei, et al. Response of water consumption law and yield of alfalfa in shallow embedded drip irrigation to different irrigation quotas[J]. South-to-North Water Transfers and Water Science & Technology, 2020, 18(5): 202-208.
[1]	佚名. 全国苜蓿产业发展规划[J]. 中国农业信息, 2017,(4): 9-13.
	Unknown author. National alfalfa industry development plan[J]. China Agricultural Information, 2017,(4): 9-13.
[2]	郭婷, 薛彪, 白娟, 等. 刍议中国牧草产业发展现状——以苜蓿、燕麦为例[J]. 草业科学, 2019, 36(5): 1466-1473.
	GUO Ting, XUE Biao, BAI Juan, et al. Discussion of the present situation of China’s forage grass industry development: an example using alfalfa and oats[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2019, 36(5): 1466-1473.
[3]	Wang Y D, Liu C, Cui P F, et al. Effects of partial root-zone drying on alfalfa growth, yield and quality under subsurface drip irrigation[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2021, 245: 106608.
[4]	柴金城, 郑庚石, 王献忠. 几种微灌技术简介[J]. 中国农村水利水电, 2000,(1): 63.
	CHAI Jincheng, ZHENG Gengshi, WANG Xianzhong. Brief introduction to several micro-irrigation techniques[J]. China Rural Nater and Hydropower, 2000,(1): 63.
[5]	李灿, 张凤荣, 朱泰峰, 等. 基于熵权TOPSIS模型的土地利用绩效评价及关联分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 2013, 29(5): 217-227.
	LI Can, ZHANG Fengrong, ZHU Taifeng, et al. Evaluation and correlation analysis of land use performance based on entropy-weight TOPSIS method[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2013, 29(5): 217-227.
[6]	张前兵, 于磊, 艾尼娃尔·艾合买提, 等. 新疆绿洲区不同灌溉方式及灌溉量下苜蓿田间土壤水分运移特征[J]. 中国草地学报, 2015, 37(2): 68-74.
	ZHANG Qianbing, YU Lei, Ainiwaer Aihemaiti, et al. Effects of different irrigation methods and quantities on soil water transfer characteristics in alfalfa field in Xinjiang oasis[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2015, 37(2): 68-74.
[7]	Godoy A C, Pérez G A, Torres E C A, et al. Water use, forage production and water relations in alfalfa with subsurface drip irrigation[J]. Agrociencia, 2003, 37(2): 107-115.
[8]	Sammis T W. Yield of alfalfa and cotton as influenced by Irrigation¹[J]. Agronomy Journal, 1981, 73(2): 323-329.
[9]	孙洪仁, 刘国荣, 张英俊, 等. 紫花苜蓿的需水量、耗水量、需水强度、耗水强度和水分利用效率研究[J]. 草业科学, 2005, 22(12): 24-30.

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	1	0	0	22

来源	本网站	其他网站

次数	13	10
比例	57%	43%

摘要

106

最新录用	在线预览	正式出版

0	0	106

来源	本网站	其他网站

次数	42	64
比例	40%	60%

基于熵权-TOPSIS的浅埋式滴灌紫花苜蓿灌水定额的综合评价

Comprehensive evaluation of alfalfa water quota in shallow buried drip irrigation based on entropy weight-TOPSIS

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 9

相关文章 15

编辑推荐 0

Metrics

[1]	马勇, 刘慧, 高红梅, 康雪, 马春晖. 不同氮素水平下紫花苜蓿与多年生黑麦草混播对其产量和营养品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(7): 1793-1804.
[2]	孙萌, 颜安, 李靖言, 卢前成, 范君, 孙哲, 袁以琳. 不同水氮处理对紫花苜蓿生长发育、品质及水肥利用效率的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(6): 1512-1526.
[3]	代元帅, 鲁为华, 申磊, 王秀媛, 张文龙, 张伟. 林草复合系统中杨树-紫花苜蓿间作对苜蓿生长发育及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(5): 1182-1189.
[4]	王晓艳, 白云岗, 柴仲平, 郑明, 丁宇, 刘洪波, 肖军, 韩政宇. 滴灌冬灌调控下干播湿出对棉田水盐分布及棉花出苗率的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(4): 823-834.
[5]	马明杰, 赵经华, 李冬民, 杨胜春, 王克贤, 李池. 不同灌溉方式对苜蓿土壤水分与灌溉水利用效率的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2306-2313.
[6]	马辉, 戴路, 李星星, 阿布都艾尼·阿布都维力, 艾麦尔江·阿布力提甫, 田立文, 欧欢. 不同化学药剂处理对长绒棉封顶效果的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(11): 2601-2608.
[7]	丁宇, 张江辉, 白云岗, 赵经华, 郑明, 刘洪波, 肖军, 韩政宇. 不同水分处理干播湿出水热盐效应对棉花出苗率的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(10): 2380-2389.
[8]	周勃, 任海龙, 张龑, 高强, 徐麟, 邹集文. 金花菜与苜蓿属主要物种基因组SSR分布特征的比较分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(9): 2217-2223.
[9]	郭江龙, 高占林, 刘振宇, 窦亚楠, 安静杰, 刘忠宽, 党志红, 李耀发. 苜蓿盲蝽对紫花苜蓿植株生长和营养品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(4): 1001-1008.
[10]	赵经华, 胡建强, 杨磊, 胡文军, 彭艳平. 不同灌水定额对膜下滴灌玉米生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(4): 653-662.
[11]	苏力合, 张凡凡, 王旭哲, 宋磊, 俞雪, 贺婷婷, 马春晖. 自然覆雪对5个不同秋眠级紫花苜蓿越冬率及抗寒性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(11): 2122-2132.
[12]	马铁成, 张慧. 氮磷肥施量对阿苇灌区苜蓿生长指标和产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2020, 57(8): 1535-1541.
[13]	赖宁, 陈署晃, 付彦博, 黄建, 耿庆龙. 基于GIS的南疆果园土壤肥力评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2019, 56(8): 1476-1486.
[14]	早热古丽·热合曼, 叶尔兰·对山别克, 万江春, 艾比布拉·伊马木. 添加香梨残次果汁渣对苜蓿青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2019, 56(6): 1136-1141.
[15]	张玲, 席琳乔, 张凡凡, 王旭哲, 马春晖. 残次枣粉添加青贮苜蓿中微生物、发酵和营养品质动态规律[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2019, 56(10): 1929-1938.