Analysis of the influence of different chemical treatments on the sealing effect of long staple cotton

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.11.001

Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences ›› 2023, Vol. 60 ›› Issue (11): 2601-2608.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.11.001

• Crop Genetics and Breeding · Germplasm Resources·Molecular Genetics·Soil Fertilizer • Previous Articles Next Articles

Analysis of the influence of different chemical treatments on the sealing effect of long staple cotton

MA Hui¹(), DAI Lu¹, LI Xingxing¹, Abuduaini Abuduweili¹, Aimaierjiang Abulitifu¹, TIAN Liwen²(), OU Huan¹

1. Aksu Agriculture Technology and Popularization Center of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Aksu Xinjiang 843000, China
2. Research Institute of Economic Crops,Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Urumqi 830091, China

Received:2023-03-26 Online:2023-11-20 Published:2023-12-07
Correspondence author: TIAN Liwen (1965-), male.Feidong county, Anhui province, professor, Research Direction: research and development of light, simple and efficient cotton production technology, (E-mail) 1365400936@qq.com
Supported by:
The Opening Foundation of Key Laboratory of Crop Ecophysiology and Farming System in Desert Oasis Region, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Areas—Research and application of the technical system for the construction of efficient cotton populationin machine-picking cotton fields(25107020-202101);Major science and technology projects of Xinjiang—Key Technology Research on Efficient Water Use for Modern Agriculture in Arid Oasis(2022A02003)

不同化学药剂处理对长绒棉封顶效果的影响

马辉¹(), 戴路¹, 李星星¹, 阿布都艾尼·阿布都维力¹, 艾麦尔江·阿布力提甫¹, 田立文²(), 欧欢¹

1.新疆维吾尔自治区阿克苏地区农业技术推广中心,新疆阿克苏 843000
2.新疆农业科学院经济作物研究所,乌鲁木齐 830091

通讯作者: 田立文(1965-),男,安徽肥东人,研究员,研究方向为棉花轻简高效生产,(E-mail)1365400936@qq.com
作者简介:马辉(1979-),女,新疆昌吉人,正高级农艺师,研究方向为棉花育种与栽培,(E-mail) 1543043221@qq.com
基金资助:
农业农村部荒漠绿洲作物生理生态与耕作重点实验室开放课题-机采棉高效群体构建技术体系研究与应用(25107020-202101);新疆维吾尔自治区重大科技专项-干旱绿洲现代农业高效用水关键技术研究(2022A02003)

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】 To study the effect of chemical detopping on long-fiber cotton in the hope of providing theoretical support for integration matching techniques of chemical detopping. 【Methods】 The tested long staple cotton variety is Xin 78,A complete randomized experiment design was used to analyze the effects of seven detopping treatments: “Yiding”, “Yiding”, “Xianglingzhuan”, “Shiyifu”, “Miandingfeng”, “Guoguangguandingtaocan” and Manual topping on influences of cotton plant height, yield and yield components, main fiber quality. At the same time, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method base on entropy weight was applied to evaluate the 11 characters of each treatment.【Results】 The results showed that the plant height increment of pre and post the chemical detopping and artificial detopping treatments were 16.1-40.9 cm and 3.1 cm, respectively; “Yiding”treatent number of fruit branches pe cotton plant was compare with “Mianfengding”and Manual topping separately high 1.5units,1.8untits.boll number per plant of “Yiding” and “Yiding” treatments was significantly higher than those of “Shiyifu”, “Miandingfeng” and artificial detopping treatments, the boll weight of the “Shiyifu” treatment was significantly higher than that of the “Guoguangguandingtaocan” treatment by 0.23 g, lint percent of “Yiding” treatment was significantly higher than that of artificial detopping, “Yiding” and “Shiyifu” by 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3percentage points,the seed cotton yield of “Yiding” treatment was significantly higher than that of “Shiyifu”, artificial detopping and “Miandingfeng” treatment by 16.4%, 17.4% and 20.8%. The lint cotton yield of “Yiding” treatment was significantly higher than those of “Guoguangguandingtaocan”, “Xianglingzhuan”, “Shiyifu”, artificial detopping and “Miandingfeng” treatment by 15.4%, 16.0%, 20.8%, 21.2% and 22.9%, the strength and the length uniformity index had little difference, but it was significant for the micronaire value and length. The comprehensive evaluation of fuzzy method showed that the comprehensive performance of “Yiding”, “Yiding”, “Guoguangguandingtaocan” and “Xianglingzhuan” was better than artificial detopping.【Conclusion】 The plant height increment of chemical capping treatment is larger; chemical detpping has a significant effect on yield and yield components, micronaire value and length; “Yiding” treatment effect is the best, “Yiding”, “Guoguangguandingtaocan” and “Xianglingzhuan” treatment effect are second.

Key words: long-fiber cotton; entropy weight; fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method; chemical detopping; effect

摘要：

【目的】 分析不同化学药剂处理对长绒棉封顶效果的影响,为集成长绒棉化学封顶配套技术提供支撑。【方法】 采用完全随机试验设计,供试长绒棉品种为新78,分析“易顶”、“抑顶”、“向铃转”、“施益富”、“棉顶封”、“国光冠顶套餐”、人工打顶7个不同处理对棉花株高、产量及产量构成因子、主要纤维品质及成本的影响。基于熵权的模糊综合评价法,评价各处理的11个长绒棉性状。【结果】 化学封顶剂处理封顶前后长绒棉株高增长量变幅为16.1~40.9 cm,而人工打顶3.1 cm;“易顶”处理的单株果枝数较“棉顶封”和人工打顶分别高1.5台、1.8台;“易顶”、“抑顶”处理的单株铃数显著高于“施益富”、“棉顶封”和人工打顶处理,“施益富”处理铃重较“国光冠顶套餐”处理显著高0.23 g,“易顶”处理衣分比人工打顶、“抑顶”、“施益富”处理显著高1.1、1.2、1.3个百分点,“易顶”处理籽棉产量较“施益富”、人工打顶和“棉顶封”处理显著高16.4%、17.4%、20.8%,“易顶”处理皮棉产量比“国光冠顶套餐”、“向铃转”、“施益富”、人工打顶和“棉顶封”处理显著高15.4%、16.0%、20.8%、21.2%、22.9%;不同处理间断裂比强度、长度整齐度指数差距不大,但对上半部平均长度、马克隆值影响显著。“易顶”、“抑顶”、“国光冠顶套餐”和“向铃转”综合表现优于人工打顶。【结论】 化学封顶处理株高增长量较大;化学封顶对单株果枝数、产量及产量构成因子、马克隆值和上半部平均长度影响显著;“易顶”处理效果最优,“抑顶”、“国光冠顶套餐”和“向铃转”处理效果次之。

关键词: 长绒棉, 熵权, 模糊综合评价法, 化学封顶, 效果

CLC Number:

S562

MA Hui, DAI Lu, LI Xingxing, Abuduaini Abuduweili, Aimaierjiang Abulitifu, TIAN Liwen, OU Huan. Analysis of the influence of different chemical treatments on the sealing effect of long staple cotton[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(11): 2601-2608.

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.

Figures/Tables 8

References 11

[1]	叶春秀, 王刚, 李有忠, 等. 不同化学打顶剂对北疆早熟陆地棉农艺及经济性状的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2017, 30(4):762-766.
	YE Chunxiu, WANG Gang, LI Youzhong, et al. Effects of Different Chemical Topping Agents on Agronomic Characters and Yield of Early Maturing Upland Cotton(Gossypium hirsutum) in Northern Xinjiang Province[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 30(4):762-766.
[2]	王香茹, 张恒恒, 庞念厂, 等. 新疆棉区棉花化学打顶剂的筛选研究[J]. 中国棉花, 2018, 45(3):7-12,31.
	WANG Xiangru, ZHANG Hengheng, PANG Nianchang, et al. Screening for Suitable Cotton Topping Chemicals in the Xinjiang Region[J]. China Cotton, 2018, 45(3):7-12,31.
[3]	赵强, 周春江, 张巨松, 等. 化学打顶对南疆棉花农艺和经济性状的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2011, 23(4):329-333.
	ZHAO Qiang, ZHOU Chunjiang, ZHANG Jusong, et al. Effect of Chemical Detopping on the Canopy and Yield of Cotton(Gossypium hirsutum) in Southern Xinjiang[J]. Cotton Science, 2011, 23(4):329-333.
[4]	祝令晓, 刘连涛, 张永江, 等. 化学封顶对棉花株型的调控及评价指标筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(20):4152-4163. DOI
	ZHU Lingxiao, LIU Liantao、 ZHANG Yongjiang, et al. The Regulation and Evaluation Indexes Screening of Chemical Topping on Cotton’s Plant Architecture[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(20):4152-4163. DOI
[5]	娄善伟, 康正华, 赵强, 等. 化学封顶高产棉花株型研究[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2015, 52(7):1328-1333.
	LOU Shanwei, KANG Zhenghua, ZHAO Qiang, et al. Study on Plant Type of High Yield Cotton after Chemical Detopping[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 52(7):1,328-1,333.
[6]	李新裕, 陈玉娟. 新疆垦区长绒棉化学封顶取代人工打顶试验研究[J]. 中国棉花, 2001, 28(1):11-12.
	LI Xinyu, CHEN Yujuan. Experimental Study of Long-Fiber Cotton on Chemical Detopping Replacing Artificial Detoping in Xinjiang[J]. China Cotton, 2001, 28(1):11-12.
[7]	戴翠荣, 赵晓雁, 余力, 等. 氟节胺化学打顶对南疆棉花农艺性状及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2015, 52(8):1394-1398.
	DAI Cuirong, ZHAO Xiaoyan, YU Li, et al. Effect of Chemical Topping with Flumetralin on the Canopy and Yield of Cotton in Southern Xinjiang[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 52(8):1394-1398.
[8]	孙国军, 李克富, 彭延. 南疆棉区棉花利用氟节胺打顶技术试验[J]. 棉花科学, 2014, 36(2):23-25.
	SUN Guojun, LI Kefu, PENG Yan. Test of Topping Technology by Using Flumetralin in Southern Xinjiang Cotton Region[J]. Cotton Sciences, 2014, 36(2):23-25.
[9]	马辉, 张明, 戴路, 等. 基于投影寻踪法综合评价棉花不同化学打顶剂效果[J]. 中国棉花, 2021, 48(6):5-10.
	MA Hui, ZHANG Ming, DAI Lu, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of the effects of different chemical topping agents on cotton basedon the projection pursuit method[J]. China Cotton, 2021, 48(6):5-10.
[10]	康正华, 赵强, 娄善伟, 等. 不同化学打顶剂对棉花农艺及产量性状的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2015, 52(7):1200-1208.
	KANG Zhenghua, ZHAO Qiang, LOU Shanwei, et al. Effects on the Agronomic and Economic Characters of Cotton by Applying Different Topping Chemicals[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 52(7):1200-1208.
[11]	曹飞, 练文明, 吴博, 等. 南疆棉区4 种化学打顶剂应用效果的研究[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(6):72-77.
	CAO Fei, LIAN Wenming, WU Bo, et al. Research on the Application Effect of 4 Chemical Detopping in the Cotton Region of the Southern Xinjiang[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 50(6):72-77.

处理 Treatments	化学封顶剂 Detopping reagent	剂量 Dose	成分 Components	剂型 Formulation
1	“易顶”	2 250 mL/hm²	25%氟节胺	悬浮剂
2	“抑顶”	1 800 mL/hm²	40%氟节胺	悬浮剂
3	“向铃转”	975 mL/hm²	250 g/L甲哌鎓	水剂
4	“施益富”	975 mL/hm²+ 975 mL/hm²(助剂)	3%甲哌鎓+15%矮壮素+无	水剂+水剂
5	“棉顶封”	750 mL/hm²+ 750 mL/hm²(助剂)	250 g/L甲哌鎓+ 乙氧基改性聚三硅氧烷	水剂+ 离子型高渗透剂
6	“国光冠顶套餐”	150 g/hm²+600 g/hm² +15 g/hm²(助剂)	5%烯效唑+250 g/L甲哌鎓 +92%油酸甲酯	可湿性粉剂+水剂+无
7	人工打顶	0	无	无

处理 Treatments	化学封顶剂 Detopping reagent	剂量 Dose	成分 Components	剂型 Formulation
1	“易顶”	2 250 mL/hm²	25%氟节胺	悬浮剂
2	“抑顶”	1 800 mL/hm²	40%氟节胺	悬浮剂
3	“向铃转”	975 mL/hm²	250 g/L甲哌鎓	水剂
4	“施益富”	975 mL/hm²+ 975 mL/hm²(助剂)	3%甲哌鎓+15%矮壮素+无	水剂+水剂
5	“棉顶封”	750 mL/hm²+ 750 mL/hm²(助剂)	250 g/L甲哌鎓+ 乙氧基改性聚三硅氧烷	水剂+ 离子型高渗透剂
6	“国光冠顶套餐”	150 g/hm²+600 g/hm² +15 g/hm²(助剂)	5%烯效唑+250 g/L甲哌鎓 +92%油酸甲酯	可湿性粉剂+水剂+无
7	人工打顶	0	无	无

处理 Treatments	封顶前 1d株高 Plant height 1d pre- detopping (cm)	封顶后株高 Plant height post- detopping (cm)	株高增长量 Plant height increment (cm)
“易顶” “ Yiding”	132.7	148.8	16.1^b
“抑顶” “Yiding”	127.7	153.6	25.9^b
“向铃转” “Xianglingzhuan”	133.4	153.2	19.8^b
“施益富” “Shiyifu”	138.0	158.2	20.2^b
“棉顶封” “Miandingfeng”	121.6	162.5	40.9^a
“国光冠顶套餐” “Guoguang guandingtaocan”	125.9	142.9	17.1^b
人工打顶 Manual topping	137.2	140.3	3.1^c

处理 Treatments	封顶前 1d株高 Plant height 1d pre- detopping (cm)	封顶后株高 Plant height post- detopping (cm)	株高增长量 Plant height increment (cm)
“易顶” “ Yiding”	132.7	148.8	16.1^b
“抑顶” “Yiding”	127.7	153.6	25.9^b
“向铃转” “Xianglingzhuan”	133.4	153.2	19.8^b
“施益富” “Shiyifu”	138.0	158.2	20.2^b
“棉顶封” “Miandingfeng”	121.6	162.5	40.9^a
“国光冠顶套餐” “Guoguang guandingtaocan”	125.9	142.9	17.1^b
人工打顶 Manual topping	137.2	140.3	3.1^c

处理 Treatments	单株铃数 Bolls per plant (个)	铃重 Boll weight (g)	衣分 Lint percentage (%)	籽棉产量 Seed cotton yield (kg/hm²)	皮棉产量 Lint yield (kg/hm²)
“易顶”“Yiding”	9.5^a	3.09^ab	34.4^a	5 445.0^a	1 870.5^a
“抑顶” “Yiding”	9.3^a	2.98^ab	33.2^b	5 031.0^ab	1 672.5^ab
“向铃转”“Xianglingzhuan”	8.3^abc	3.04^ab	33.5^ab	4 806.0^ab	1 612.5^b
“施益富”“Shiyifu”	7.7^bc	3.15^a	33.1^b	4 678.5^b	1 548.0^b
“棉顶封”“Miandingfeng”	7.6^bc	3.10^ab	33.8^ab	4 509.0^b	1 522.5^b
“国光冠顶套餐”“Guoguang guandingtaocan”	8.7^ab	2.92^b	33.7^ab	4 816.5^ab	1 621.5^b
人工打顶 Manual topping	7.2^c	3.05^ab	33.3^b	4 636.5^b	1 543.5^b

Analysis of the influence of different chemical treatments on the sealing effect of long staple cotton

不同化学药剂处理对长绒棉封顶效果的影响

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 8

References 11

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles 0

Metrics

处理 Treatments	上半部平均长度 Length (mm)	断裂比强度 Strength (cN/tex)	马克隆值 Micronaire value	长度整齐度指数 Length uniformity index
“易顶” “Yiding”	38.05^abc	43.87^a	4.39^a	86.60^a
“抑顶” “Yiding”	38.60^ab	43.97^a	4.19^a	87.83^a
“向铃转” “Xianglingzhuan”	37.97^abc	43.97^a	4.32^a	87.27^a
“施益富” “Shiyifu”	37.68^abc	44.10^a	4.08^ab	86.20^a
“棉顶封” “Miandingfeng”	36.81^c	43.63^a	4.13^ab	86.60^a
“国光冠顶套餐” “Guoguang guandingtaocan”	37.57^bc	45.43^a	4.17^ab	85.97^a
人工打顶 Manual topping	39.14^a	43.45^a	3.76^b	87.25^a

性状 Characters	权重Weight
株高增长量 Plant height increment	0.054 5
单株果枝数Number of fruit branches per plant	0.091 6
单株铃数 Bolls per plant	0.089 4
铃重 Boll weight	0.062 8
衣分Lint percentage	0.114 5
籽棉产量 Seed cotton yield	0.104 4
皮棉产量 Lint yield	0.146 2
上半部平均长度 Length	0.064 8
断裂比强度Strength	0.120 2
马克隆值 Micronaire value	0.063 0
长度整齐度指数 Length uniformity index	0.088 7

处理 Treatments	“易顶” “Yiding”	“抑顶” “Yiding”	“向铃转” “Xiangling zhuan”	“施益富” “Shiyifu”	“棉顶封” “Mian ding feng”	“国光冠顶套餐” “Guoguang guanding taocan”	人工打顶 Manual topping
株高增长量Plant height increment	0.035 6	0.021 6	0.030 4	0.029 8	0.000 0	0.034 3	0.054 5
单株果枝数Number of fruit branches per plant	0.091 6	0.040 7	0.030 5	0.020 3	0.015 3	0.056 0	0.000 0
单株铃数Bolls per plant	0.089 4	0.081 6	0.042 8	0.019 4	0.015 5	0.058 3	0.000 0
铃重 Boll weight	0.046 4	0.016 4	0.032 7	0.062 8	0.049 1	0.000 0	0.035 5
衣分Lint percentage	0.114 5	0.008 8	0.035 2	0.000 0	0.061 7	0.052 9	0.017 6
籽棉产量Seed cotton yield	0.104 4	0.058 2	0.033 1	0.018 9	0.000 0	0.034 3	0.014 2
皮棉产量Lint yield	0.146 2	0.063 0	0.037 8	0.010 7	0.000 0	0.041 6	0.008 8
上半部平均长度Length	0.034 5	0.049 8	0.032 3	0.024 2	0.000 0	0.021 1	0.064 8
断裂比强度Strength	0.025 5	0.031 6	0.031 6	0.039 5	0.010 9	0.120 2	0.000 0
马克隆值Micronaire value	0.000 0	0.040 7	0.014 2	0.063 0	0.052 9	0.044 7	0.050 8
长度整齐度指数Length uniformity index	0.030 0	0.088 7	0.062 0	0.011 0	0.030 0	0.000 0	0.061 0
综合指数Complex index	0.718 1	0.501 0	0.382 6	0.299 6	0.235 4	0.463 4	0.307 3
排序Order	1	2	4	6	7	3	5

处理 Treatments	“易顶” “Yiding”	“抑顶” “Yiding”	“向铃转” “Xiangling zhuan”	“施益富” “Shiyifu”	“棉顶封” “Mian ding feng”	“国光冠顶套餐” “Guoguang guanding taocan”	人工打顶 Manual topping
化学封顶剂成本 Detopping cost	360	450	525	300	240	240	600
无人机作业成本 UAV operation cost	75	75	75	75	75	75	-
节省成本 Cost saving	165	75	0	225	285	285	-

[1]	ZHANG Shuai, GAO Guowen, WU Lili, ZHAO Haiyan, WANG Xiaowu, FU Kaiyun, JIA Zunzun, Tuerxun Ahemaiti, DING Xinhua, LI Kemei, GUO Wenchao. Evaluation of the synergistic application of seed coating agents, synergists, and micro fertilizers for the prevention and control of corn stem rot disease [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(S1): 19-27.
[2]	YUAN Zihan, ZHAO Wenhui, WANG Xiaowu, Tuerxun Ahemaiti, DING Xinhua, ZHANG Shuai, FU Kaiyun, JIA Zunzun, GUO Wenchao. Screening of Corn Stalk Rot control bacteria and evaluation of control effects [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(S1): 35-48.
[3]	SHEN Yuyang, HONG Gaojie, FAN Guiqiang, CHEN Li, LEI Junjie, LI Guangkuo, GAO Haifeng. The control effect of reduced pesticides application and adjuvant addition on wheat aphids in jujube-wheat intercropping pattern [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(9): 2257-2268.
[4]	CHEN Fang, LI Zihui, SUNXiaogui , ZHANG Tingjun. Different dosage of microbial agents on the yield and quality of processed tomatoes [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(9): 2285-2289.
[5]	CAO Jian, LIU Dan. Impact of E-commerce development on the value of regional public brands of agricultural products [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(8): 2071-2080.
[6]	MA Baihuan, ZHAO Qiang, XIE Jia, XU Kaiyue, REN Ruofei, SONG Xinghu. Effects of biopharmaceutical mixture on the control and growth of cotton Verticillium wilt [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(7): 1748-1756.
[7]	SHI Yingwu, NIU Xinxiang, YANG Hongmei, CHU Min, BAO Huifang, WANG Ning, ZHAN Faqiang, LIN Qing, YANG Rong, LONG Xuanqi, LOU Kai. Field control effects of four fungicides on fragrant korla pear fire blight [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(6): 1432-1440.
[8]	Tuerxun Ahemaiti, LIU Xukun, ZHAO Wenhui, ZHU Xiaofeng, Aerziguli Rouzi, Palidamu Tayier, FU Kaiyun, DING Xinhua, JIA Zunzun, Adili Shataer, GUO Wenchao. Evaluation of the effect of 10 new insecticides on the control of (Carposinasasakii Matsmura) [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(6): 1447-1453.
[9]	QIAN Tao, WU Lili, LI Lei, Anniwaer Kuerban, DING Ruifeng. Control effect of pyroxasulfone mixed with pendimethalin on broadleaf weeds in cotton filed and its safety evaluation [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(4): 861-868.
[10]	MA Yunlong, XIE Hui, ZHANG Wen, ZHU Xuehui, WANG Yanmeng, MAI Sile, ZHANG Jiaxi. Effects of temperature on color and drying characteristics of green raisins [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(2): 345-354.
[11]	Bahayiding Wupuer, Abulaike Niyazi, Huxidan Maimaiti, LYU Xiaolong, WANG Haomiao, MA Huiqin. Mutagenesis effect of ⁶⁰Co-γ radiation on the annual branches of different fig varieties [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(2): 373-381.
[12]	WANG Heya, LUO Jingjing, WANG Kang, WANG Ruinan, WANG Xu, GAO Guangrui, FANG Yan. Effects of different microbial agents on the disease prevention effect and yield of beetroot rot [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(2): 448-454.
[13]	GU Meiying, GE Chunhui, ZHU Jing, TANG Qiyong, Ainijiang Ersiman, CHU Min, TANG Guangmu, YI Yuanyang, XU Wanli, ZHANG Zhidong. Effects of growth promoting bacteria and their combinations on the growth and physiological characteristics of wheat in arid areas of Xinjiang [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(12): 2890-2901.
[14]	QI Ping, Suoyin Tuya, WEI Yang, ZHANG Shuo, Adili Shataer, Adili Aihemaiti. Evaluation of field control efficacy of 10 medications against Acalitus phloeocoptes Nalepa [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(11): 2761-2768.
[15]	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.