中国农业科技导报 ›› 2023, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (4): 167-177.DOI: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2021.0820
• 生物制造 资源生态 • 上一篇
孙正冉(), 张翠萍, 张晋丽, 吴昊, 刘秀艳, 王振凯, 杨玉珍, 贺道华(
)
收稿日期:
2021-09-18
接受日期:
2021-11-22
出版日期:
2023-04-01
发布日期:
2023-06-26
通讯作者:
贺道华
作者简介:
孙正冉 E-mail:973605160@qq.com;
基金资助:
Zhengran SUN(), Cuiping ZHANG, Jinli ZHANG, Hao WU, Xiuyan LIU, Zhenkai WANG, Yuzhen YANG, Daohua HE(
)
Received:
2021-09-18
Accepted:
2021-11-22
Online:
2023-04-01
Published:
2023-06-26
Contact:
Daohua HE
摘要:
为研究喷施化学打顶剂对关中地区棉花的影响,选用‘中棉619’和‘西农606’为试验材料,于2019—2020年开展棉田打顶试验。以常规人工打顶处理为对照(CK),研究缩节胺复合型(T1)、氟节胺复合型(T2)2种化学打顶剂对不同棉花品种株高、株宽、果枝台数、冠层上部果枝长度、棉铃空间分布、棉花生理活性、产量构成因素及棉花纤维品质的影响。结果表明,与人工打顶相比,喷施化学打顶剂处理棉花的株高和果枝台数显著增加;株宽和冠层上部果枝长度显著降低;棉花冠层上部铃数、单株铃数和籽棉产量显著增加;叶片过氧化物酶、超氧化物歧化酶活性显著增加,丙二醛含量显著降低。其中,缩节胺复合型化学打顶剂效果更显著。在不同棉花品种间,喷施化学打顶剂对‘中棉619’效果较大。综上所述,棉花化学打顶能塑造良好株型,改善棉铃空间分布,增强植株的抗氧化和抗早衰能力,提高棉花产量,且对棉花纤维品质无显著影响。在本试验条件下,‘中棉619’喷施缩节胺复合型化学打顶剂效果显著。
中图分类号:
孙正冉, 张翠萍, 张晋丽, 吴昊, 刘秀艳, 王振凯, 杨玉珍, 贺道华. 喷施化学打顶剂对关中棉区棉花植株生长的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(4): 167-177.
Zhengran SUN, Cuiping ZHANG, Jinli ZHANG, Hao WU, Xiuyan LIU, Zhenkai WANG, Yuzhen YANG, Daohua HE. Effects of Chemical Detopping on Cotton Plant Growth in Guanzhong Cotton Region[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(4): 167-177.
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 倒4果枝 Converse fourth fruiting branch | 倒3果枝 Converse third fruiting branch | 倒2果枝 Converse second fruiting branch | 倒1果枝 Converse first fruiting branch |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 16.82±0.16 c | 10.76±0.29 b | 7.52±0.14 c | 6.52±0.16 c |
T2 | 17.68±0.29 b | 10.78±0.26 b | 8.52±0.14 b | 7.73±0.13 b | ||
CK | 22.46±0.22 a | 21.97±0.30 a | 20.34±0.18 a | 15.72±0.14 a | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 16.30±0.36 b | 10.56±0.21 c | 8.44±0.18 c | 7.44±0.19 b | |
T2 | 17.22±0.27 b | 11.68±0.18 b | 9.32±0.12 b | 7.72±0.12 b | ||
CK | 23.08±0.31 a | 20.40±0.27 a | 19.88±0.21 a | 13.92±0.21 a | ||
2020 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 15.44±0.18 c | 12.24±0.16 b | 10.28±0.14 c | 7.60±0.19 b |
T2 | 16.72±0.19 b | 12.73±0.17 b | 11.34±0.16 b | 8.18±0.16 b | ||
CK | 24.24±0.28 a | 21.62±0.31 a | 20.20±0.21 a | 18.26±0.20 a | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 15.10±0.15 b | 11.86±0.17 c | 10.70±0.16 c | 8.18±0.16 b | |
T2 | 15.36±0.20 b | 13.10±0.19 b | 12.20±0.19 b | 8.26±0.09 b | ||
CK | 23.24±0.17 a | 22.22±0.26 a | 21.18±0.23 a | 16.20±0.19 a |
表1 不同打顶处理下棉花上部果枝的长度 (cm)
Table 1 Length of upper furiting branch in cotton responding to different detopping treatments
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 倒4果枝 Converse fourth fruiting branch | 倒3果枝 Converse third fruiting branch | 倒2果枝 Converse second fruiting branch | 倒1果枝 Converse first fruiting branch |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 16.82±0.16 c | 10.76±0.29 b | 7.52±0.14 c | 6.52±0.16 c |
T2 | 17.68±0.29 b | 10.78±0.26 b | 8.52±0.14 b | 7.73±0.13 b | ||
CK | 22.46±0.22 a | 21.97±0.30 a | 20.34±0.18 a | 15.72±0.14 a | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 16.30±0.36 b | 10.56±0.21 c | 8.44±0.18 c | 7.44±0.19 b | |
T2 | 17.22±0.27 b | 11.68±0.18 b | 9.32±0.12 b | 7.72±0.12 b | ||
CK | 23.08±0.31 a | 20.40±0.27 a | 19.88±0.21 a | 13.92±0.21 a | ||
2020 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 15.44±0.18 c | 12.24±0.16 b | 10.28±0.14 c | 7.60±0.19 b |
T2 | 16.72±0.19 b | 12.73±0.17 b | 11.34±0.16 b | 8.18±0.16 b | ||
CK | 24.24±0.28 a | 21.62±0.31 a | 20.20±0.21 a | 18.26±0.20 a | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 15.10±0.15 b | 11.86±0.17 c | 10.70±0.16 c | 8.18±0.16 b | |
T2 | 15.36±0.20 b | 13.10±0.19 b | 12.20±0.19 b | 8.26±0.09 b | ||
CK | 23.24±0.17 a | 22.22±0.26 a | 21.18±0.23 a | 16.20±0.19 a |
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 铃数Number of bolls | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
下部Lower | 中部Middle | 上部Upper | |||
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 3.6±0.45 a | 2.8±0.36 a | 4.7±0.21 a |
T2 | 3.8±0.29 a | 2.8±0.25 a | 4.6±0.37 a | ||
CK | 3.7±0.34 a | 2.6±0.27 a | 2.5±0.27 b | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 3.7±0.26 a | 3.5±0.34 a | 5.8±0.59 a | |
T2 | 3.3±0.37 a | 3.1±0.31 a | 4.3±0.42 ab | ||
CK | 3.7±0.21 a | 3.4±0.37 a | 3.0±0.39 b | ||
2020 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 3.0±0.18 a | 2.4±0.31 a | 5.6±0.71 a |
T2 | 2.7±0.16 a | 2.5±0.22 a | 4.7±0.97 ab | ||
CK | 3.1±0.21 a | 2.6±0.22 a | 2.9±0.46 b | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 2.7±0.63 a | 3.2±0.57 a | 5.3±0.37 a | |
T2 | 3.1±0.23 a | 3.3±0.40 a | 4.8±0.29 a | ||
CK | 2.8±0.20 a | 3.1±0.28 a | 3.7±0.26 a |
表2 不同打顶处理下棉铃的空间分布
Table 2 Bolls spatial distribution in plant responding to different detopping treatments
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 铃数Number of bolls | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
下部Lower | 中部Middle | 上部Upper | |||
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 3.6±0.45 a | 2.8±0.36 a | 4.7±0.21 a |
T2 | 3.8±0.29 a | 2.8±0.25 a | 4.6±0.37 a | ||
CK | 3.7±0.34 a | 2.6±0.27 a | 2.5±0.27 b | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 3.7±0.26 a | 3.5±0.34 a | 5.8±0.59 a | |
T2 | 3.3±0.37 a | 3.1±0.31 a | 4.3±0.42 ab | ||
CK | 3.7±0.21 a | 3.4±0.37 a | 3.0±0.39 b | ||
2020 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 3.0±0.18 a | 2.4±0.31 a | 5.6±0.71 a |
T2 | 2.7±0.16 a | 2.5±0.22 a | 4.7±0.97 ab | ||
CK | 3.1±0.21 a | 2.6±0.22 a | 2.9±0.46 b | ||
西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 2.7±0.63 a | 3.2±0.57 a | 5.3±0.37 a | |
T2 | 3.1±0.23 a | 3.3±0.40 a | 4.8±0.29 a | ||
CK | 2.8±0.20 a | 3.1±0.28 a | 3.7±0.26 a |
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 单铃重 Boll weight/g | 单株铃数 Bolls per plant | 收获株数Plant number / (104·hm-2) | 衣分 Lint percent/% | 籽棉产量 Seed cotton yield/(kg·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 5.54±0.32 a | 11.1±0.96 a | 6.00±0.56 a | 42.05±0.92 a | 3 689.64±327.89 a |
T2 | 5.52±0.27 a | 10.9±1.13 a | 6.20±0.43 a | 40.51±1.11 a | 3 730.42±172.68 a | ||
CK | 5.57±0.43 a | 8.8±1.06 b | 6.22±0.62 a | 40.68±0.76 a | 3 216.12±234.76 b | ||
2020 | 西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 5.67±0.26 a | 13.0±0.74 a | 4.82±0.45 a | 40.49±0.87 a | 3 552.82±345.78 a |
T2 | 5.72±0.36 a | 10.7±0.98 b | 4.91±0.33 a | 40.36±0.75 a | 3 005.29±453.65 b | ||
CK | 5.62±0.22 a | 10.1±0.95 c | 5.09±0.48 a | 41.21±0.94 a | 2 889.24±263.27 b | ||
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 5.60±0.17 a | 11.8±1.24 a | 5.32±0.57 a | 39.77±0.86 a | 3 613.55±413.26 a |
T2 | 5.84±0.25 a | 11.0±1.16 a | 5.44±0.46 a | 40.63±0.84 a | 3 479.48±223.45 b | ||
CK | 5.65±0.34 a | 9.6±0.98 b | 5.37±0.67 a | 39.83±1.06 a | 3 075.15±254.34 c | ||
2020 | 西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 5.64±0.35 a | 10.7±0.94 a | 5.43±0.48 a | 40.65±0.94 a | 3 187.52±234.16 a |
T2 | 5.72±0.27 a | 10.0±1.17 a | 5.53±0.44 a | 40.84±0.86 a | 3 176.96±337.28 a | ||
CK | 5.68±0.22 a | 9.4±0.86 b | 5.64±0.32 a | 40.39±0.95 a | 2 852.12±234.16 c |
表3 不同打顶处理下棉花产量及产量构成因子
Table 3 Yield and yield components in cotton responding to different detopping treatments
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 单铃重 Boll weight/g | 单株铃数 Bolls per plant | 收获株数Plant number / (104·hm-2) | 衣分 Lint percent/% | 籽棉产量 Seed cotton yield/(kg·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 5.54±0.32 a | 11.1±0.96 a | 6.00±0.56 a | 42.05±0.92 a | 3 689.64±327.89 a |
T2 | 5.52±0.27 a | 10.9±1.13 a | 6.20±0.43 a | 40.51±1.11 a | 3 730.42±172.68 a | ||
CK | 5.57±0.43 a | 8.8±1.06 b | 6.22±0.62 a | 40.68±0.76 a | 3 216.12±234.76 b | ||
2020 | 西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 5.67±0.26 a | 13.0±0.74 a | 4.82±0.45 a | 40.49±0.87 a | 3 552.82±345.78 a |
T2 | 5.72±0.36 a | 10.7±0.98 b | 4.91±0.33 a | 40.36±0.75 a | 3 005.29±453.65 b | ||
CK | 5.62±0.22 a | 10.1±0.95 c | 5.09±0.48 a | 41.21±0.94 a | 2 889.24±263.27 b | ||
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian 619 | T1 | 5.60±0.17 a | 11.8±1.24 a | 5.32±0.57 a | 39.77±0.86 a | 3 613.55±413.26 a |
T2 | 5.84±0.25 a | 11.0±1.16 a | 5.44±0.46 a | 40.63±0.84 a | 3 479.48±223.45 b | ||
CK | 5.65±0.34 a | 9.6±0.98 b | 5.37±0.67 a | 39.83±1.06 a | 3 075.15±254.34 c | ||
2020 | 西农606 Xinong 606 | T1 | 5.64±0.35 a | 10.7±0.94 a | 5.43±0.48 a | 40.65±0.94 a | 3 187.52±234.16 a |
T2 | 5.72±0.27 a | 10.0±1.17 a | 5.53±0.44 a | 40.84±0.86 a | 3 176.96±337.28 a | ||
CK | 5.68±0.22 a | 9.4±0.86 b | 5.64±0.32 a | 40.39±0.95 a | 2 852.12±234.16 c |
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 上半部平均长度Length/mm | 整齐度指数Uniformity/% | 断裂比强度 Strength / (cN·tex-1) | 马克隆值 Micronaire | 伸长率 Elongation /% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian619 | T1 | 30.30±0.26 a | 81.90±0.75 a | 30.17±1.35 a | 4.30±0.25 a | 6.80±0.58 a |
T2 | 30.77±0.81 a | 83.03±0.23 a | 30.43±1.47 a | 4.20±0.05 a | 6.90±0.58 a | ||
CK | 31.27±0.12 a | 82.93±0.83 a | 32.03±0.38 a | 4.10±0.31 a | 6.80±0.12 a | ||
西农606 Xinong606 | T1 | 31.60±0.35 a | 84.30±0.25 a | 29.46±0.32 a | 4.78±0.26 a | 6.80±0.06 a | |
T2 | 31.10±0.32 a | 82.86±1.03 a | 31.50±0.11 a | 4.86±0.12 a | 6.87±0.07 a | ||
CK | 31.43±0.60 a | 84.06±0.71 a | 31.07±0.41 a | 4.34±0.15 a | 6.90±0.12 a | ||
2020 | 中棉619 Zhongmian619 | T1 | 31.60±0.10 a | 83.63±0.19 a | 33.20±0.52 a | 4.76±0.23 a | 6.90±0.12 a |
T2 | 31.10±0.21 a | 83.30±0.36 a | 33.27±0.89 a | 4.67±0.15 a | 6.93±0.03 a | ||
CK | 31.70±0.25 a | 83.60±0.61 a | 33.83±0.71 a | 4.40±0.15 a | 6.87±0.03 a | ||
西农606 Xinong606 | T1 | 29.30±0.06 a | 82.87±0.46 a | 31.07±0.63 a | 4.86±0.15 a | 6.80±0.05 a | |
T2 | 29.53±0.82 a | 83.71±0.19 a | 30.40±0.25 a | 4.83±0.09 a | 6.73±0.03 a | ||
CK | 29.73±0.07 a | 83.40±0.75 a | 30.60±0.35 a | 4.80±0.15 a | 6.77±0.03 a |
表4 不同打顶处理下棉花纤维品质
Table 4 Fiber quality in cotton responding to different detopping treatments
年 Year | 品种 Cultivar | 处理 Treatment | 上半部平均长度Length/mm | 整齐度指数Uniformity/% | 断裂比强度 Strength / (cN·tex-1) | 马克隆值 Micronaire | 伸长率 Elongation /% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2019 | 中棉619 Zhongmian619 | T1 | 30.30±0.26 a | 81.90±0.75 a | 30.17±1.35 a | 4.30±0.25 a | 6.80±0.58 a |
T2 | 30.77±0.81 a | 83.03±0.23 a | 30.43±1.47 a | 4.20±0.05 a | 6.90±0.58 a | ||
CK | 31.27±0.12 a | 82.93±0.83 a | 32.03±0.38 a | 4.10±0.31 a | 6.80±0.12 a | ||
西农606 Xinong606 | T1 | 31.60±0.35 a | 84.30±0.25 a | 29.46±0.32 a | 4.78±0.26 a | 6.80±0.06 a | |
T2 | 31.10±0.32 a | 82.86±1.03 a | 31.50±0.11 a | 4.86±0.12 a | 6.87±0.07 a | ||
CK | 31.43±0.60 a | 84.06±0.71 a | 31.07±0.41 a | 4.34±0.15 a | 6.90±0.12 a | ||
2020 | 中棉619 Zhongmian619 | T1 | 31.60±0.10 a | 83.63±0.19 a | 33.20±0.52 a | 4.76±0.23 a | 6.90±0.12 a |
T2 | 31.10±0.21 a | 83.30±0.36 a | 33.27±0.89 a | 4.67±0.15 a | 6.93±0.03 a | ||
CK | 31.70±0.25 a | 83.60±0.61 a | 33.83±0.71 a | 4.40±0.15 a | 6.87±0.03 a | ||
西农606 Xinong606 | T1 | 29.30±0.06 a | 82.87±0.46 a | 31.07±0.63 a | 4.86±0.15 a | 6.80±0.05 a | |
T2 | 29.53±0.82 a | 83.71±0.19 a | 30.40±0.25 a | 4.83±0.09 a | 6.73±0.03 a | ||
CK | 29.73±0.07 a | 83.40±0.75 a | 30.60±0.35 a | 4.80±0.15 a | 6.77±0.03 a |
1 | CHEN Z K, MA H, XIA J, et al.. Optimal pre-plant irrigation and fertilization can improve 15 biomass accumulation by maintaining the root and leaf productive capacity of cotton crop [J/OL]. Sci. Rep., 2017, 7:17168 [2021-08-10]. . |
2 | 李炎子.我国种植业空间布局演变(1978-2009)[D].北京:中国农业大学,2014. |
LI Y Z. The evolution of the spatial layout of the crop industry in my country (1978-2009) [D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2014. | |
3 | 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,2013:1-1219. |
Cotton Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. China Cotton Cultivation [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Science and Technology Press, 2013:1-1219. | |
4 | 孟桂元,贺再新,孙焕良,等.作物打顶栽培研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2010,26(24):144-148. |
MENG G Y, HE Z X, SUN H L, et al.. The research progress on topping cultivation in crops [J]. Chin. Agric.Sci.Bull., 2010, 26(24):144-148. | |
5 | RENOU A, TÉRÉTA I, TOGOLA M. Manual topping decreases bollworm infestations in cotton cultivation in Mali [J]. Crop Prot., 2011, 30:1370-1375. |
6 | DAI J L, DONG H Z. Intensive cotton farming technologies in China: achievements, challenges and countermeasures [J]. Field Crops Res., 2014, 155:99-110. |
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 C R, ZHAO X Y, YU L, et al.. Effects of flubenectamine chemical topping on agronomic traits and yield of cotton in southern Xinjiang [J]. Xinjiang Agric. Sci., 2015, 52(8):1394-1398. | |
8 | 邹茜,刘爱玉,王欣悦,等.棉花打顶技术的研究现状与展望[J].作物研究,2014,28(5):570-574 . |
ZOU Q, LIU A Y, WANG X Y, et al.. Research status and prospect of cotton topping technology [J]. Crop Res., 2014, 28(5):570-574. | |
9 | 毛树春.我国棉花种植技术的现代化问题——兼论“十二五”棉花栽培相关研究[J].中国棉花,2010,37(3):2-6. |
MAO S C. The modernization of cotton planting technology in my country—also on the research of cotton cultivation in the “Twelfth Five-Year Plan” [J]. China Cotton, 2010, 37(3):2-6. | |
10 | 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(1):11-12. |
LI X Y, CHEN Y J. Experimental study on chemical topping of long-staple cotton instead of artificial topping in Xinjiang reclamation area [J]. China Cotton, 2001(1):11-12. | |
11 | 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 Q, ZHOU C J, ZHANG J S, et al.. Effects of chemical topping on agronomic and economic traits of cotton in southern Xinjiang [J]. Cotton Sci., 2011, 23(4):329-333. | |
12 | 董红强,李镇源,陈佳林,等.二甲戊灵和氟节胺复配作为打顶剂对棉花农艺性状及抗逆性的影响[J].农药,2019,58(5):377-380, 390. |
DONG H Q, LI Z Y, CHEN J L, et al.. Effects of the combination of pendimethalin and flubenzamide as a topping agent on agronomic characteristics and stress resistance of cotton [J]. Pesticides, 2019, 58(5):377-380, 390. | |
13 | 韩焕勇,王方永,陈兵,等.氮肥对棉花应用增效缩节胺封顶效果的影响[J].中国农业大学学报,2017,22(2):12-20. |
HAN H Y, WANG F Y, CHEN B, et al.. The effect of nitrogen fertilizer on the capping effect of cotton with synergistic amine [J]. J. China Agric. Univ., 2017, 22(2):12-20. | |
14 | 黎芳,王希,王香茹,等.黄河流域北部棉区棉花缩节胺化学封顶技术[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(13):2497-2510. |
LI F, WANG X, WANG X R, et al.. Chemical capping technology of cotton melanine in the cotton area of the northern Yellow river basin [J]. Chin. Agric.Sci., 2016, 49(13): 2497-2510. | |
15 | 黎芳,杜明伟,徐东永,等.黄河流域不同密度及施氮量下增效缩节胺化学封顶对棉花生长、产量和熟期的影响[J].中国农业大学学报,2018,23(3):10-22. |
LI F, DU M W, XU D Y, et al.. Effects of chemical capping of synergistic melanine on cotton growth, yield and maturity under different densities and nitrogen application rates in the Yellow river basin [J]. J. China Agric.Univ., 2018, 23(3):10-22. | |
16 | 孙正冉,吴昊,张翠萍,等.棉花化学打顶剂的配制与筛选[J].作物杂志,2021(1):112-117. |
SUN Z R, WU H, ZHANG C P, et al.. Preparation and screening of chemical topping agents for cotton [J]. Crops, 2021(1):112-117. | |
17 | 李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2000:1-278. |
LI H S. Experimental Principles and Techniques of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry [M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2000:1-278. | |
18 | 杨成勋,张旺锋,徐守振,等.喷施化学打顶剂对棉花冠层结构及群体光合生产的影响[J].中国农业科学,2016, 49(9):1672-1684. |
YANG C X, ZHANG W F, XU S Z, et al.. Effects of spraying chemical topping agents on cotton canopy structure and colony photosynthetic production [J]. China Agric. Sci., 2016, 49(9):1672-1684. | |
19 | 赵强,张巨松,周春江,等.化学打顶对棉花群容量的拓展效应[J].棉花学报,2011,23(5):401-407. |
ZHAO Q, ZHANG J S, ZHOU C J, et al.. The expansion effect of chemical topping on cotton population capacity [J]. Acta Cotton, 2011, 23(5):401-407. | |
20 | 张旺锋,王振林,余松烈,等.种植密度对新疆高产棉花群体光合作用、冠层结构及产量形成的影响[J].植物生态学报,2004, 28(2):164-171. |
ZHANG W F, WANG Z L, YU S L, et al.. Effects of planting density on photosynthesis, canopy structure and yield formation of high-yield cotton population in Xinjiang [J]. Chin. J. Plant Ecol., 2004, 28(2): 164-171. | |
21 | 刘欢,慕平,赵桂琴,等.除草剂对燕麦产量及抗氧化特性的影响[J].草业学报.2015,24(2):41-48. |
LIU H, MU P, ZHAO G Q, et al.. Effects of herbicides on the yield and antioxidant properties of oats [J]. Acta Pratac. Sin., 2015, 24(2):41-48. | |
22 | 申建芳,东保柱,曹丽霞,等.田普除草剂对燕麦的胁迫及燕麦除草剂胁迫下的修复[J].中国农学通报,2018,34(7):152-156. |
SHEN J F, DONG B Z, CAO L X, et al.. Stress of Tianpu herbicide on oats and its restoration under oat herbicide stress [J]. Chin. Agric. Sci. Bull., 2018, 34(7):152-156. | |
23 | 王鑫,郭平毅,原向阳,等.2,4-D丁酯对罂粟(Papaver somniferum L.)保护酶活性及脂质过氧化作用的影响[J].生态学报,2008, 28(3):1098-1193. |
WANG X, GUO P Y, YUAN X Y, et al.. Effects of 2,4-D butylester on protective enzyme activity and lipid peroxidation of poppy (Papaver somniferum L.) [J]. Acta Ecol. Sin., 2008, 28(3):1098-1193. | |
24 | 李璇,岳红,王升,等.影响植物抗氧化酶活性的因素及其研究热点和现状[J].中国中药杂志,2013, 38(7):973-978. |
LI X, YUE H, WANG S, et al.. Factors affecting plant antioxidant enzyme activities and their research hotspots and current status [J]. Chin. J. Chin. Materia Medica, 2013, 38(7):973-978. | |
25 | 李锦树,王洪春,王文英,等.干旱对玉米叶片细胞透性及膜脂的影响[J].植物生理学报,1983,9(3):223-230. |
LI J S, WANG H C, WANG W Y, et al.. Effects of drought on cell permeability and membrane lipids of maize leaves [J]. Acta Phytophysiol., 1983, 9(3):223-230. | |
26 | 朱其松,黄建中,周烨,等.除草剂对不同耐寒性水稻幼苗的氧化胁迫效应[J].核农学报,2009,23(1):145-149. |
ZHU Q S, HUANG J Z, ZHOU Y, et al.. Oxidative stress effects of herbicides on rice seedlings with different cold tolerance [J]. Chin. J. Nuclear Agric., 2009, 23(1):145-149. | |
27 | 宋惠洁,余凯凯,刘阳,等.烯禾啶胁迫对谷子愈伤组织生理特性的影响[J].山西农业大学学报(自然科学版),2016,36(2):107-110. |
SONG H J, YU K K, LIU Y, et al.. Effects of enoxydim stress on physiological characteristics of millet callus [J]. J. Shanxi Agric. Univ. (Nat. Sci.), 2016, 36(2):107-110. | |
28 | 董春玲,罗宏海,张亚黎,等.喷施氟节胺对棉花农艺性状的影响及化学打顶效应研究[J].新疆农业科学,2013,50(11):1985-1990. |
DONG C L, LUO H H, ZHANG Y L, et al.. The effect of spraying diflubenzamide on agronomic characteristics of cotton and the effect of chemical topping [J]. Xinjiang Agric. Sci., 2013, 50(11):1985-1990. | |
29 | 陈源,顾万荣,王汝利,等.棉花叶系质量划分及叶层配置的研究[J].棉花学报,2004,16(5):313-318. |
CHEN Y, GU W R, WANG R L, et al.. Research on cotton leaf quality division and leaf layer configuration [J]. Cotton Sci., 2004, 16(5):313-318. | |
30 | 韩焕勇,杜明伟,王方永,等.北疆棉区增效缩节胺应用剂量对棉花农艺和经济性状的影响[J].西南农业学报,2019,32(2):327-330. |
HAN H Y, DU M W, WANG F Y, et al.. Effects of application dosage of synergistic melanine on cotton agronomic and economic characteristics in northern Xinjiang cotton area [J]. Southwest Agric. J., 2019, 32(2): 327-330. |
[1] | 可艳军, 张雨萌, 郭艳杰, 张丽娟, 张子涛, 吉艳芝. 生物有机肥配合深松对农田土壤肥力和作物产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(4): 157-166. |
[2] | 杨玲, 张富仓, 孙鑫, 张少辉, 王海东, ABDELGHANY Ahmed Elsayed, 陈占飞, 方玉川. 生物炭和滴灌量对陕北榆林沙土性质和马铃薯生长的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(3): 221-233. |
[3] | 郑云珠, 孙树臣. 秸秆生物炭和秸秆对麦玉轮作系统土壤养分及作物产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(2): 152-162. |
[4] | 黄巧义, 吴永沛, 黄旭, 李苹, 付弘婷, 张木, 逄玉万, 曾招兵, 唐拴虎. 控释尿素与尿素配施对甜玉米产量和氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(2): 163-173. |
[5] | 董伟欣, 李东晓, 张月辰. 不同氮素水平对夏玉米生理参数及产量品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(1): 142-152. |
[6] | 陆国清, 马彩霞, 孙国清, 郭惠明, 程红梅. 抗除草剂棉花GV-2的分子特征和遗传稳定性分析[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(1): 42-49. |
[7] | 向开宏, 吕旭, 舒川海, 伍杂日曲, 张金悦, 朱岳梅, 杨志远, 孙永健, 马均. 有机无机肥配施对精量穴直播水稻产量及氮素利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(9): 149-165. |
[8] | 项洪涛, 李琬, 何宁, 王强, 曾玲玲, 王曼力, 杨纯杰, 冯延江. 小豆根系对水分胁迫的生理响应及S3307的缓解效应[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(9): 39-49. |
[9] | 刘艳, 鲍红帅, 尚红燕, 王国宁, 张艳, 王省芬, 马峙英, 吴金华. 棉花枯萎病菌及其培养条件筛选[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(8): 124-132. |
[10] | 陈元伟, 郑华斌, 王慰亲, 旷娜, 罗友谊, 邹丹, 唐启源. 刈割处理对再生稻头季全株生物量、青贮品质和再生季产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(8): 161-171. |
[11] | 魏全全, 高英, 芶久兰, 张萌, 饶勇, 杨斌, 凡迪, 冯文豪, 肖华贵. 播种量和播种方式对冬油菜养分吸收利用及产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(8): 182-191. |
[12] | 刘海涛, 韩鑫, 兰玉彬, 伊丽丽, 王宝聚, 崔立华. 基于YOLOv4网络的棉花顶芽精准识别方法[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(8): 99-108. |
[13] | 刘雪静, 鲍晓远, 候晓阳, 甄文超. 海河平原春季限水灌溉下冬小麦农田水分动态及产量形成特征[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(7): 167-176. |
[14] | 彭增莹, 申莹莹, 段松江, 吴一帆, 李宗润, 郭仁松, 张巨松. 化学调控对不同施氮量棉花冠层结构及产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(7): 177-186. |
[15] | 白思琦, 邹晓荣, 丁鹏, 林铭. 基于环境因子的东南太平洋智利竹筴鱼剩余产量模型建立[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(7): 197-204. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||