中国水稻科学 ›› 2020, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (1): 46-56.DOI: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2020.9075
王文霞, 周燕芝, 曾勇军, 吴自明, 谭雪明, 潘晓华, 石庆华, 曾研华*()
出版日期:
2020-01-10
发布日期:
2020-01-10
通讯作者:
曾研华
Wenxia WANG, Yanzhi ZHOU, Yongjun ZENG, Ziming WU, Xueming TAN, Xiaohua PAN, Qinghua SHI, Yanhua ZENG*()
Online:
2020-01-10
Published:
2020-01-10
Contact:
Yanhua ZENG
摘要:
【目的】研究不同机直播方式对南方优质晚籼稻茎秆抗倒伏能力及产量的影响,为南方优质晚籼稻高产抗倒栽培提供参考。【方法】以籼型常规稻品种黄华占和籼型杂交稻品种泰优398为材料,设置旱直播、湿直播和淹水直播3个处理,分别测定优质晚籼稻的产量及产量构成、出苗率、干物质生产、叶面积指数和茎秆形态与力学特性。【结果】与湿直播方式或淹水直播方式相比,旱直播方式可显著提高供试晚稻品种的出苗率,增幅为6.10% ~ 22.96%,且干物质生产和叶面积指数均增加。同时,旱直播方式有利于提高供试晚稻品种产量,两品种增产幅度为6.99%~27.77%,其中泰优398产量增幅高于黄华占,从产量构成因素来看,机械旱直播方式下供试晚稻品种产量的提高主要得益于有效穗数增加。此外,旱直播方式下供试水稻株高相对较矮,基部各节间较短,但茎秆粗壮,茎壁较厚,有利于提高植株茎秆抗折力和秆型指数,降低弯曲力矩与倒伏指数。相关分析表明,茎粗、壁厚和秆型指数与抗折力显著正相关,而与倒伏指数显著负相关;株高、穗长、弯曲力矩与抗折力显著负相关,与倒伏指数显著正相关。【结论】采用机械旱直播方式不仅有利于增加南方优质晚籼稻产量,还能显著增加茎秆强度,提高植株抗倒伏能力,降低直播生产的风险。
中图分类号:
王文霞, 周燕芝, 曾勇军, 吴自明, 谭雪明, 潘晓华, 石庆华, 曾研华. 不同机直播方式对南方优质晚籼稻产量及抗倒伏特性的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2020, 34(1): 46-56.
Wenxia WANG, Yanzhi ZHOU, Yongjun ZENG, Ziming WU, Xueming TAN, Xiaohua PAN, Qinghua SHI, Yanhua ZENG. Effects of Different Mechanical Direct Seeding Patterns on Yield and Lodging Resistance of High-Quality Late indica Rice in South China[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2020, 34(1): 46-56.
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 有效穗数 Effective panicles /(×104·hm-2) | 每穗粒数 Grains per panicle | 结实率 Seed setting rate/% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight/g | 产量 Yield /(t·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 310.0 a | 100.5 a | 71.7 a | 21.5 a | 6.17 a |
WDS | 290.0 a | 102.9 a | 72.8 a | 21.2 a | 5.73 ab | ||
FDS | 252.3 b | 104.4 a | 73.0 a | 20.7 a | 5.17 b | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 320.0 a | 112.2 a | 72.5 a | 22.0 a | 6.43 a | |
WDS | 300.0 a | 115.6 a | 74.5 a | 21.6 a | 5.80 b | ||
FDS | 261.7 b | 116.6 a | 75.4 a | 21.1 a | 5.37 b | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 301.5 a | 101.8 a | 73.3 a | 21.7 a | 6.58 a |
WDS | 282.4 b | 103.6 a | 74.0 a | 21.6 a | 6.15 b | ||
FDS | 225.0 c | 105.9 a | 74.9 a | 20.9 a | 5.15 c | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 316.0 a | 113.4 a | 74.1 a | 22.1 a | 6.93 a | |
WDS | 299.0 a | 113.4 a | 72.2 a | 21.7 a | 6.18 ab | ||
FDS | 247.5 b | 117.1 a | 75.5 c | 21.4 a | 5.65 b | ||
年份Year(Y) | 2.23 | 0.18 | 0.67 | 4.14 | 13.46** | ||
品种Variety(V) | 3.91 | 90.73** | 0.79 | 12.31* | 6.87* | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 30.70** | 1.65 | 1.66 | 4.15 | 58.77** | ||
Y×V | 0.33 | 0.29 | 1.00 | 0.66 | 0.42 | ||
Y×T | 0.55 | 0.27 | 0.53 | 0.05 | 1.23 | ||
V×T | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.29 | 0.70 | 1.08 | ||
Y×V×T | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.40 | 0.43 | 0.29 |
表1 不同机直播方式对南方优质晚籼稻产量及其构成因素的影响
Table 1 Effects of different mechanical direct seeded patterns on the yield and yield components of high-quality late indica rice in South China.
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 有效穗数 Effective panicles /(×104·hm-2) | 每穗粒数 Grains per panicle | 结实率 Seed setting rate/% | 千粒重 1000-grain weight/g | 产量 Yield /(t·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 310.0 a | 100.5 a | 71.7 a | 21.5 a | 6.17 a |
WDS | 290.0 a | 102.9 a | 72.8 a | 21.2 a | 5.73 ab | ||
FDS | 252.3 b | 104.4 a | 73.0 a | 20.7 a | 5.17 b | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 320.0 a | 112.2 a | 72.5 a | 22.0 a | 6.43 a | |
WDS | 300.0 a | 115.6 a | 74.5 a | 21.6 a | 5.80 b | ||
FDS | 261.7 b | 116.6 a | 75.4 a | 21.1 a | 5.37 b | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 301.5 a | 101.8 a | 73.3 a | 21.7 a | 6.58 a |
WDS | 282.4 b | 103.6 a | 74.0 a | 21.6 a | 6.15 b | ||
FDS | 225.0 c | 105.9 a | 74.9 a | 20.9 a | 5.15 c | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 316.0 a | 113.4 a | 74.1 a | 22.1 a | 6.93 a | |
WDS | 299.0 a | 113.4 a | 72.2 a | 21.7 a | 6.18 ab | ||
FDS | 247.5 b | 117.1 a | 75.5 c | 21.4 a | 5.65 b | ||
年份Year(Y) | 2.23 | 0.18 | 0.67 | 4.14 | 13.46** | ||
品种Variety(V) | 3.91 | 90.73** | 0.79 | 12.31* | 6.87* | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 30.70** | 1.65 | 1.66 | 4.15 | 58.77** | ||
Y×V | 0.33 | 0.29 | 1.00 | 0.66 | 0.42 | ||
Y×T | 0.55 | 0.27 | 0.53 | 0.05 | 1.23 | ||
V×T | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.29 | 0.70 | 1.08 | ||
Y×V×T | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.40 | 0.43 | 0.29 |
图1 不同机直播方式对南方优质晚籼稻出苗率的影响 DDS–旱直播;WDS–湿直播;FDS–淹水直播。柱上不同小写字母表示在5%水平上差异显著。下同。
Fig. 1. Effects of different mechanical direct seeding patterns on emergence rate of high-quality late indica rice in South China. DDS, Dry direct seeding; WDS, Wet direct seeding; FDS, Flooded direct seeding. Various lowercase letters above the bars mean significant difference at 0.05 probability level. The same as in figures below.
图2 不同机直播方式对南方优质晚籼稻干物质量的影响 TS–分蘖期;PI–幼穗分化期;HS–抽穗期;MS–成熟期;TDMA–干物质总量。下同。
Fig. 2. Effects of different mechanical direct seeding patterns on dry matter accumulation of high-quality late indica rice in South China. TS, Tillering stage; PI, Panicle differentiation; HS, Heading stage; MS, Maturity stage; TDMA, Total dry matter accumulation. The same as follows.
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 株高 Plant height/cm | 穗长 Panicle length/cm | 各节间长度Internode length/cm | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | |||||
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 93.7 b | 20.5 b | 6.07 a | 8.43 b | 14.13 b |
WDS | 95.4 a | 21.5 b | 6.13 a | 9.60 a | 15.50 ab | ||
FDS | 96.4 a | 23.3 a | 6.17 a | 9.64 a | 16.69 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 83.4 b | 20.9 a | 4.59 b | 7.60 b | 12.81 c | |
WDS | 85.5 a | 21.4 a | 5.98 a | 8.41 a | 15.10 b | ||
FDS | 87.4 a | 22.2 a | 6.08 a | 8.85 a | 16.59 a | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 90.1 b | 23.1 a | 6.17 b | 8.73 a | 13.63 b |
WDS | 92.0 b | 23.4 a | 6.47 ab | 9.05 a | 15.25 a | ||
FDS | 97.8 a | 24.6 a | 6.55 a | 9.42 a | 15.74 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 84.5 b | 21.8 a | 5.32 b | 7.65 b | 13.73 c | |
WDS | 86.5 a | 22.5 a | 6.40 a | 8.53 a | 14.91 b | ||
FDS | 87.2 a | 22.8 a | 6.48 a | 8.97 a | 15.65 a | ||
年份Year(Y) | 5.44* | 62.58** | 94.49** | 0.09 | 6.41* | ||
品种Variety(V) | 967.81** | 20.14** | 123.54** | 65.01** | 8.12* | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 80.67** | 27.88** | 150.52** | 43.70** | 144.52** | ||
Y×V | 22.58** | 8.49* | 8.97* | 1.59 | 3.90 | ||
Y×T | 5.053* | 1.61 | 0.07 | 1.27 | 7.18* | ||
V×T | 5.66* | 3.19 | 77.08** | 0.98 | 1.40 | ||
Y×V×T | 13.93** | 0.70 | 5.70* | 1.79 | 3.37 |
表2 不同机直播方式对主茎形态的影响
Table 2 Effects of different mechanical direct seeding patterns on main stem morphology.
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 株高 Plant height/cm | 穗长 Panicle length/cm | 各节间长度Internode length/cm | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | |||||
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 93.7 b | 20.5 b | 6.07 a | 8.43 b | 14.13 b |
WDS | 95.4 a | 21.5 b | 6.13 a | 9.60 a | 15.50 ab | ||
FDS | 96.4 a | 23.3 a | 6.17 a | 9.64 a | 16.69 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 83.4 b | 20.9 a | 4.59 b | 7.60 b | 12.81 c | |
WDS | 85.5 a | 21.4 a | 5.98 a | 8.41 a | 15.10 b | ||
FDS | 87.4 a | 22.2 a | 6.08 a | 8.85 a | 16.59 a | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 90.1 b | 23.1 a | 6.17 b | 8.73 a | 13.63 b |
WDS | 92.0 b | 23.4 a | 6.47 ab | 9.05 a | 15.25 a | ||
FDS | 97.8 a | 24.6 a | 6.55 a | 9.42 a | 15.74 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 84.5 b | 21.8 a | 5.32 b | 7.65 b | 13.73 c | |
WDS | 86.5 a | 22.5 a | 6.40 a | 8.53 a | 14.91 b | ||
FDS | 87.2 a | 22.8 a | 6.48 a | 8.97 a | 15.65 a | ||
年份Year(Y) | 5.44* | 62.58** | 94.49** | 0.09 | 6.41* | ||
品种Variety(V) | 967.81** | 20.14** | 123.54** | 65.01** | 8.12* | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 80.67** | 27.88** | 150.52** | 43.70** | 144.52** | ||
Y×V | 22.58** | 8.49* | 8.97* | 1.59 | 3.90 | ||
Y×T | 5.053* | 1.61 | 0.07 | 1.27 | 7.18* | ||
V×T | 5.66* | 3.19 | 77.08** | 0.98 | 1.40 | ||
Y×V×T | 13.93** | 0.70 | 5.70* | 1.79 | 3.37 |
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 茎粗 Diameter of stem/mm | 壁厚 Stem wall thickness/mm | 秆型指数 Culm phenotype index/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 8.28 a | 4.03 a | 2.30 a |
WDS | 8.10 a | 3.62 b | 2.21 b | ||
FDS | 7.36 b | 3.46 c | 2.01 c | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 8.44 a | 4.10 a | 2.55 a | |
WDS | 8.15 a | 3.68 a | 2.32 ab | ||
FDS | 7.75 b | 3.64 b | 2.13 b | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 8.26 a | 4.03 a | 2.49 a |
WDS | 7.85 b | 3.60 b | 2.30 b | ||
FDS | 7.37 c | 3.52 b | 2.02 c | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 8.40 a | 4.29 a | 2.52 a | |
WDS | 8.15 b | 3.67 b | 2.34 a | ||
FDS | 7.94 c | 3.61 b | 2.26 b | ||
年份Year(Y) | 0.04 | 1.00 | 10.72** | ||
品种Variety(V) | 38.67** | 15.14** | 39.80** | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 103.86** | 118.61** | 97.84** | ||
Y×V | 2.90 | 0.34 | 1.63 | ||
Y×T | 2.39 | 1.07 | 0.12 | ||
V×T | 7.16* | 1.07 | 2.15 | ||
Y×V×T | 0.78 | 1.67 | 5.90* |
表3 不同机直播方式对基部节间茎秆特征的影响
Table 3 Effects of different mechanical direct seeding patterns on basal internode stem characteristics.
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 茎粗 Diameter of stem/mm | 壁厚 Stem wall thickness/mm | 秆型指数 Culm phenotype index/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 8.28 a | 4.03 a | 2.30 a |
WDS | 8.10 a | 3.62 b | 2.21 b | ||
FDS | 7.36 b | 3.46 c | 2.01 c | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 8.44 a | 4.10 a | 2.55 a | |
WDS | 8.15 a | 3.68 a | 2.32 ab | ||
FDS | 7.75 b | 3.64 b | 2.13 b | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 8.26 a | 4.03 a | 2.49 a |
WDS | 7.85 b | 3.60 b | 2.30 b | ||
FDS | 7.37 c | 3.52 b | 2.02 c | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 8.40 a | 4.29 a | 2.52 a | |
WDS | 8.15 b | 3.67 b | 2.34 a | ||
FDS | 7.94 c | 3.61 b | 2.26 b | ||
年份Year(Y) | 0.04 | 1.00 | 10.72** | ||
品种Variety(V) | 38.67** | 15.14** | 39.80** | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 103.86** | 118.61** | 97.84** | ||
Y×V | 2.90 | 0.34 | 1.63 | ||
Y×T | 2.39 | 1.07 | 0.12 | ||
V×T | 7.16* | 1.07 | 2.15 | ||
Y×V×T | 0.78 | 1.67 | 5.90* |
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 弯曲力矩 Bending weight(WP)/(g·cm) | 抗折力 Break force(L)/g | 倒伏指数 Lodging index(LI)/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 1512.6 b | 2211.2 a | 68.7 b |
WDS | 1530.6 b | 2027.7 b | 72.8 b | ||
FDS | 1765.3 a | 1867.4 c | 83. 9 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 1214.5 b | 2295.9 a | 53.1 b | |
WDS | 1278.2 b | 2152.0 ab | 57.1 a | ||
FDS | 1515.9 a | 1948.5 b | 69.9 a | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 1422.1 b | 2119.4 a | 67.3 b |
WDS | 1477.0 b | 2052.0 ab | 72.0 b | ||
FDS | 1786.8 a | 1858.2 b | 91.7 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 1229.8 b | 2292.1 a | 53.9 b | |
WDS | 1294.2 b | 2208.2 ab | 64.1 ab | ||
FDS | 1506.1 a | 1945.5 b | 72.1 a | ||
年份Year(Y) | 2.08 | 7.22* | 4.84 | ||
品种Variety(V) | 5638.84** | 25.71** | 148.84** | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 608.26** | 7.42** | 87.74** | ||
Y×V | 6.60 | 2.02 | 0.41 | ||
Y×T | 0.82 | 0.45 | 1.75 | ||
V×T | 52.43 | 0.02 | 1.48 | ||
Y×V×T | 1.92 | 0.18 | 2.71 |
表4 不同机直播方式对茎秆力学特性的影响
Table 4 Effect of different mechanical direct seeding patterns on mechanical properties of stem.
年份 Year | 品种 Variety | 处理 Treatment | 弯曲力矩 Bending weight(WP)/(g·cm) | 抗折力 Break force(L)/g | 倒伏指数 Lodging index(LI)/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 1512.6 b | 2211.2 a | 68.7 b |
WDS | 1530.6 b | 2027.7 b | 72.8 b | ||
FDS | 1765.3 a | 1867.4 c | 83. 9 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 1214.5 b | 2295.9 a | 53.1 b | |
WDS | 1278.2 b | 2152.0 ab | 57.1 a | ||
FDS | 1515.9 a | 1948.5 b | 69.9 a | ||
2018 | 黄华占 Huanghuazhan | DDS | 1422.1 b | 2119.4 a | 67.3 b |
WDS | 1477.0 b | 2052.0 ab | 72.0 b | ||
FDS | 1786.8 a | 1858.2 b | 91.7 a | ||
泰优398 Taiyou 398 | DDS | 1229.8 b | 2292.1 a | 53.9 b | |
WDS | 1294.2 b | 2208.2 ab | 64.1 ab | ||
FDS | 1506.1 a | 1945.5 b | 72.1 a | ||
年份Year(Y) | 2.08 | 7.22* | 4.84 | ||
品种Variety(V) | 5638.84** | 25.71** | 148.84** | ||
处理Treatment(T) | 608.26** | 7.42** | 87.74** | ||
Y×V | 6.60 | 2.02 | 0.41 | ||
Y×T | 0.82 | 0.45 | 1.75 | ||
V×T | 52.43 | 0.02 | 1.48 | ||
Y×V×T | 1.92 | 0.18 | 2.71 |
指标 Index | 抗折力 Break force | 倒伏指数 Lodging index |
---|---|---|
株高Plant height | -0.798** | 0.880** |
穗长Panicle length | -0.830** | 0.725** |
茎粗Diameter of stem | 0.739** | -0.884** |
壁厚Stem wall thickness | 0.644* | -0.721** |
弯曲力矩Bending weight | -0.811** | 0.974** |
秆型指数Culm phenotype index | 0.649* | -0.871** |
表5 茎秆性状与抗折力和倒伏指数的相关系数(n=12)
Table 5 Correlation coefficients between stem properties and break force and lodging index.
指标 Index | 抗折力 Break force | 倒伏指数 Lodging index |
---|---|---|
株高Plant height | -0.798** | 0.880** |
穗长Panicle length | -0.830** | 0.725** |
茎粗Diameter of stem | 0.739** | -0.884** |
壁厚Stem wall thickness | 0.644* | -0.721** |
弯曲力矩Bending weight | -0.811** | 0.974** |
秆型指数Culm phenotype index | 0.649* | -0.871** |
[1] | Farooq M, Siddique K H M, Rehman H, Aziz T, Lee D J, Wahid A. Rice direct seeding: Experiences, challenges and opportunities[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2011, 111(2): 87-98. |
[2] | Chauhan B S, Opeña J.Effect of tillage systems and herbicides on weed emergence, weed growth, and grain yield in dry-seeded rice systems[J]. Field Crops Research, 2012, 137:56-69. |
[3] | 罗锡文, 蒋恩臣, 王在满, 唐湘如, 李就好, 陈伟通. 开沟起垄式水稻精量穴直播机的研制[J]. 农业工程学报, 2008, 24(12): 52-56. |
Luo X W, Jiang E C, Wang Z M, Tang X R, Li J H, Chen W T.Precision rice hill-drop drilling machine[J]. Transactions of the Chinese society of Agricultural Engineering, 2008, 24(12):52-56. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[4] | 徐莹莹, 刘玉涛, 王俊河, 王宇先, 高盼, 杨慧莹, 樊景胜. 水稻旱直播研究现状及发展前景[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2018 (6): 150-152. |
Xu Y Y, Liu Y T, Wang J H, Wang Y X, Gao P, Yang H Y, Fan J S.Research status and development prospect of rice direct seeding in dry land[J]. Heilongjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018(6): 150-152. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[5] | 王文霞, 曾研华, 曾勇军, 梁喜欢, 谭雪明, 石庆华, 潘晓华. 不同直播方式对南方稻田杂草发生及早籼稻产量的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2018, 32(3): 555-560. |
Wang W X, Zeng Y H, Zeng Y J, Liang X H, Tan X M, Shi Q H, Pan X H.Effects of different direct seeding methods on weed occurrence in paddy field and grain yield of early season indica rice in South of China[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 32(3): 555-560. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[6] | 杨仕华, 程本义, 沈伟峰, 廖西元. 我国长江流域籼稻品种选育进展及改良策略[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2004, 18(2): 89-93. |
Yang S H, Cheng B Y, Shen W F, Liao X Y.Prog ress and Strategy of the improvement of indica rice varieties in the Yangtse Valley of China[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2004, 18(2): 89-93. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[7] | 赖穗春, 河野元信, 王志东, 三上隆司, 黄道强, 李宏, 卢德城, 周德贵, 周少川. 米饭食味计评价华南籼稻食味品质[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2011, 25(04): 435-438. |
Lai S C, Kawano M, Wang Z D, Mikami T, Huang D Q, Li H, Lu D C, Zhou D G, Zhou S C.Cooking and eating quality of indica rice varieties from South China by using rice taste analyzer[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2011, 25(04): 435-438. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[8] | 雷小龙, 刘利, 刘波, 黄光忠, 马荣朝, 任万军. 杂交籼稻F优498机械化种植的茎秆理化性状与抗倒伏性[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2014, 28(6): 612-620. |
Lei X L, Liu L, Liu B, Huang G Z, Ma R C, Ren W J.Physical and chemical characteristics and lodging resistance of culm of indica hybrid rice F you 498 under mechanical planting[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2014, 28(6): 612-620. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[9] | 赵新勇, 邵在胜, 吴艳珍, 赵轶鹏, 王余龙, 王云霞, 杨连新. 花后人为模拟倒伏对超级稻生长、产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2018, 26(7): 48-57. |
Zhao X Y, Shao Z S, Wu Y Z, Zhao Y P, Wang Y L, Wang Y X, Yang L X.Influence of artificial lodging at grain-filling stage on plant growth, yield and quality of super rice[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecological Agriculture, 2018, 26(7): 48-57. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[10] | 赖上坤, 陈春, 赖尚科, 王磊, 陈卫军. 水稻主要农艺性状和抗倒性的基因型差异及其相互关系[J]. 核农学报, 2018, 32(7) : 14-24. |
Lai S K, Chen C, Lai S K, Wang L, Chen W J .Genotypic Differences and Correlations between rice main agronomic traits and lodging-resistance[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 32(7): 14-24. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[11] | 丁明亮, 苏振喜, 邹茜, 朱振华, 袁平荣, 陈于敏, 刘慰华, 陆树刚, 戴陆园. 高原粳稻抗倒性与农艺性状及亲本抗倒性的关系[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2012, 26(03): 325-330. |
Ding M L, Su Z X, Zou Q, Zhu Z H, Yuan P R, Chen Y M, Liu W H, Lu S G, Dai L Y.Relationship Between lodging resistance and either agronomic traits or parents' lodging resistance in plateau japonica rice[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2012, 26(3): 325-330. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[12] | 孙加威, 李娜, 王春雨, 赵建红, 张绍文, 蒋明金, 孙永健, 马均. 栽插方式和施钾量对杂交籼稻抗倒伏能力的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2017, 31(12): 2408-2417. |
Sun J W, Li N, Wang C Y, Zhao J H, Zhang S W, Jiang M J, Sun Y J, Ma J.Effects of transplanting methods and potassium rates on lodging resistance of hybrid rice[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 31(12): 2408-2417. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[13] | 申广勒, 石英尧, 黄艳玲, 石扬娟, 王维刚, 张从合, 陈多璞. 水稻抗倒伏特性及其与茎秆性状的相关性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2007, 23(12): 58-62. |
Shen G L, Shi Y Y, Huang Y L, Shi Y J, Wang W G, Zhang C H, Chen D P.Study on rice lodging resistance character and correlation between the culm traits and lodging resistance traits[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2007, 23(12): 58-62. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[14] | 杨志远, 孙永健, 徐徽, 秦俭, 贾现文, 马均. 不同栽培方式对免耕水稻茎鞘物质积累转运与抗倒伏能力的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2013, 27(5): 511-519. |
Yang Z Y, Sun Y J, Xu H, Qin J, Jia X W, Ma J.Effects of different cultivation methods on accumulation and transformation of assimilation products and lodging resistance of stem-sheaths of no-tillage rice[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2013, 27(5): 511-519. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[15] | 雷小龙, 刘利, 刘波, 黄光忠, 郭翔, 马荣朝, 任万军. 机械化种植对杂交籼稻F优498产量构成与株型特征的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2014, 40(4): 719-730. |
Lei X L, Liu L, Liu B, Huang G Z, Guo X, Ma R C, Ren W J.Effects of mechanized planting methods on yield components and plant type characteristics of indica hybrid rice Fyou 498[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2014, 40(4): 719-730. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[16] | Ishimaru K, Togawa E, Ookawa T, Kashiwagi T, Madoka Y, Hirotsu N.New target for rice lodging resistance and its effect in a typhoon[J]. Planta, 2008, 227(3): 601-609. |
[17] | 胡雅杰, 曹伟伟, 钱海军, 邢志鹏, 张洪程, 戴其根, 霍中洋, 许轲, 魏海燕, 郭保卫, 高辉, 沙安勤, 周有炎, 刘国林. 钵苗机插密度对不同穗型水稻品种产量、株型和抗倒伏能力的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2015, 41(05): 743-757. |
Hu Y J, Cao W W, Qian H J, Xing Z P, Zhang H C, Dai Q G, Huo Z Y, Xu K, Wei H Y, Guo B W, Gao H, Sha A Q, Zhou Y Y, Liu G L.Effect of planting density of mechanically transplanted pot seedlings on yield, plant type and lodging resistance in rice with different panicle types[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2015, 41(05): 743-757. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[18] | 张俊, 李刚华, 宋云攀, 张巫军, 杨从党, 王绍华, 丁艳锋. 超级稻Y两优2号在两生态区的抗倒性分析[J]. 作物学报, 2013, 39(4): 682-692. |
Zhang J, Li G, Song Y P, Zhang W J, Yang C D, Wang S H, Ding Y F.Lodging resistance of super-hybrid rice Y Liangyou 2 in two ecological regions[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2013, 39(4): 682-692. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[19] | Ookawa T.Varietal difference of physical characteristics of the culm related to lodging resistance in paddy rice[J]. Japanese Journal of Crop Science, 2008, 61(3): 419-425. |
[20] | Islam M S, Peng S, Visperas R M, Ereful N, UddinBhuiya M S, Julfiquar A W. Lodging-related morphological traits of hybrid rice in a tropical irrigated ecosystem[J]. Field Crops Research, 2007, 101(2): 240-248. |
[21] | Wang D, Chen S, Wang Z, Ji C, Xu C, Zhang X, Chauhan B S.Optimizing hill seeding density for high-yielding hybrid rice in a single rice cropping system in South China[J]. PloS ONE, 2014, 9(10), e109417. |
[22] | 郭长春, 孙知白, 孙永健, 殷尧翥, 武云霞, 唐源, 杨志远, 向开宏, 马均. 优质丰产杂交籼稻品种机直播产量构成及其群体质量研究[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2018, 32(5): 462-474. |
Guo C C, Sun Z B, Sun Y J, Yin Y Z,Wu Y X, Tang Y, Yang Z Y, Xiang K H, Ma J.Study on yield formation and population quality of indica hybrid rice with good quality and high yield under mechanical direct seeding[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2018, 32(05): 462-474. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[23] | 张耗, 余超, 陈可伟, 孔祥胜, 刘海浪, 陈俊义, 顾骏飞, 刘立军, 王志琴, 杨建昌. 直播方式对水稻生理性状和产量的影响及其成本分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(13): 58-64. |
Zhang H, Yu C, Chen K W, Kong X S, Liu H L, Chen J Y, Gu J F, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Yang J C.Effect of direct-seeding methods on physiological characteristics and grain yield of rice and its cost analysis[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2017, 33(13): 58-64. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[24] | 许炜, 孙志贵, 田贺培, 张运波, 卢碧林. 播种和施肥方式对直播稻分蘖特性和产量的影响[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2018, 37(3):1-9. |
Xu W, Sun Z G, Tian H P, Zhang Y B, Lu B L.Effects of sowing and fertilization on tiller characteristics and yield of direct-seeded rice[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University, 2018, 37(3):1-9. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[25] | 殷春渊, 王书玉, 刘贺梅, 孙建权, 胡秀明, 王和乐, 田芳慧, 王玲燕. 播量和施氮量对直播稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(20): 1-6. |
Yin C Y, Wang S Y, Liu H M, Sun J Q, Hu X M, Wang H L, Tian F H, Wang L.Sowing amounts and nitrogen application levels affect yield and quality of direct sowing rice[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(20): 1-6. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[26] | 易艳红, 王文霞, 曾勇军, 谭雪明, 吴自明, 陈雄飞, 潘晓华, 石庆华, 曾研华. 人工模拟机械开沟穴直播提高早籼稻茎秆抗倒伏能力及产量[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(15): 2729-2742. |
Yi Y H, Wang W X, Zeng Y J, Tan X M, Wu Z M, Chen Xi F, Pan X H, Shi Q H, Zeng Y H.Artificial simulation of hill-drop drilling mechanical technology to improve yield and lodging resistance of early season indica rice[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(15): 2729-2742. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[27] | 信彩云, 周学标, 刘奇华, 赵庆雷, 王瑜, 马加清. 不同直播方式对水稻出苗状况的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2017, 49(3): 69-72. |
Xin C Y, Zhou X B, Liu Q H, Zhao Q L, Wang Y, Ma J Q.Effects of direct seeding models on seedling emergence of rice[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 49(3): 69-72. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[28] | 孙凯, 李冬秀, 杨靖, 董骥驰, 严贤诚, 罗立新, 刘永柱,肖武名, 王慧, 陈志强, 郭涛. 水稻耐淹成苗率相关性状全基因组的关联分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(3): 385-398. |
Sun K, Li D X, Yang J, Dong J C, Yan X C, Luo L X, Liu Y Z, Xiao W M, Wang H, Chen Z Q, Guo T.Genome-wide association analysis for rice submergence seedling rate[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(03): 385-398. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[29] | 孙永健, 郑洪帧, 徐徽, 杨志远, 贾现文, 程洪彪, 马均. 机械旱直播方式促进水稻生长发育提高产量[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(20): 10-18. |
Sun Y J, Zheng H Z, Xu H, Yang Z Y, Jia X W, Cheng H B, Ma J.Mechanical dry direct-sowing modes improving growth, development and yield of rice[J]. Transactions of the Chinese society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014, 30(20): 10-18. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[30] | 王建飞. 辽宁水稻机械旱直播高产栽培模式研究[D]. 沈阳:沈阳农业大学, 2016. |
Wang J F.Research on the high yield cultivation model of mechanical dry direct seeding rice in Liaoning[D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2016. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[31] | Setter T L, Laureles E V, Mazaredo A M.Lodging reduces yield of rice by self-shading and reductions in canopy photosynthesis[J]. Field Crops Research, 1997, 49(2-3):95-106. |
[32] | 韦叶娜, 杨国涛, 范永义, 范存留, 赵祥, 敬银钦, 罗红梅, 胡运高, 彭友林. 不同肥料处理对‘Ⅱ优725’茎秆物理性状的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016, 32(9): 15-19. |
Wei Y N, Yang G T, Fan Y Y, Fan C L, Zhao X, Jing Y Q, Luo H M, Hu Y G, Peng Y L.Stalk physical properties of hybrid riceⅡYou 725 under different fertilizer treatments[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2016, 32(9): 15-19. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[33] | 王振昌, 郭相平, 杨静晗, 陈盛, 黄双双, 王甫, 邱让建, 刘春伟, 操信春, 朱建彬, 高雅娴. 旱涝交替胁迫对水稻干物质生产分配及倒伏性状的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(24): 114-123. |
Wang Z C, Guo X P, Yang J H, Chen S, Huang S S, Wang F, Qiu R J, Liu C W, Cao X C, Zhu J B, Gao Y X.Effect of alternate flooding and drought stress on biomass production, distribution and lodging characteristic of rice[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016, 32(24): 114-123. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[34] | 刘畅, 李来庚. 水稻抗倒伏性状的分子机理研究进展[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2016, 30(2): 216-222. |
Liu C, Li L G.Advances in molecular understanding of rice lodging resistance[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2016, 30(2): 216-222. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[35] | 许俊伟, 孟天瑶, 荆培培, 张洪程, 李超, 戴其根, 魏海燕, 郭保卫. 机插密度对不同类型水稻抗倒伏能力及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2015, 41(11): 1767-1776. |
Xu J W, Meng T Y, Jing P P, Zhang H C, LI Chao, Dai Q G, Wei H Y, Guo B W.Effect of mechanical- transplanting density on lodging resistance and yield in different types of rice[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2015, 41(11): 1767-1776. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[36] | 许轲, 唐磊, 郭保卫, 张洪程, 霍中洋, 戴其根, 魏海燕. 不同水直播方式水稻植株抗倒特性研究[J]. 华北农学报, 2014, 29(6): 226-232. |
Xu Ke, Tang L, Guo B W, Zhang H C, Huo Z Y, Dai Q G, Wei H Y.Lodging resistance of rice under the different pattern of water direct-seeding cultivation method.Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2014, 29(6): 226-232. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[37] | 吕伟生, 曾勇军, 石庆华, 潘晓华, 黄山, 商庆银, 谭雪明, 李木英, 胡水秀, 曾研华. 近30年江西双季稻安全生产期及温光资源变化[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2016, 30(03): 323-334. |
Lu W S, Zeng Y J, Shi Q H, Pan X H, Huang S, Shang Q Y, Tan X M, Li M Y, Hu S X, Zeng Y H.Changes in safe production dates and heat-light resources of double cropping rice in Jiangxi Province in recent 30 years.Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2016, 30(03): 323-334. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[38] | 邱东峰, 张再君, 杨金松. 水稻两优0328旱直播栽培技术初探[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2017, 56(20): 3817-3818. |
Qiu D F, Zhang Z J, Yang J S.Preliminary study on cultivation techniques of direct seeding rice Liangyou 0328.Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 56(20): 3817-3818. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[1] | 蒋鹏, 张林, 周兴兵, 郭晓艺, 朱永川, 刘茂, 郭长春, 熊洪, 徐富贤. 冬水田轻简化栽培杂交稻蓄留再生稻产量形成特点[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(5): 544-554. |
[2] | 熊家欢, 张义凯, 向镜, 陈惠哲, 徐一成, 王亚梁, 王志刚, 姚坚, 张玉屏. 覆膜稻田施用炭基肥对水稻产量及氮素利用的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(5): 567-576. |
[3] | 郭展, 张运波. 水稻对干旱胁迫的生理生化响应及分子调控研究进展[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(4): 335-349. |
[4] | 韦还和, 马唯一, 左博源, 汪璐璐, 朱旺, 耿孝宇, 张翔, 孟天瑶, 陈英龙, 高平磊, 许轲, 霍中洋, 戴其根. 盐、干旱及其复合胁迫对水稻产量和品质形成影响的研究进展[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(4): 350-363. |
[5] | 吕宙, 易秉怀, 陈平平, 周文新, 唐文帮, 易镇邪. 施氮量与移栽密度对小粒型杂交水稻产量形成的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(4): 422-436. |
[6] | 赵艺婷, 谢可冉, 高逖, 崔克辉. 水稻分蘖期干旱锻炼对幼穗分化期高温下穗发育和产量形成的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(3): 277-289. |
[7] | 周甜, 吴少华, 康建宏, 吴宏亮, 杨生龙, 王星强, 李昱, 黄玉峰. 不同种植模式对水稻籽粒淀粉含量及淀粉关键酶活性的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(3): 303-315. |
[8] | 杨永刚, 袁晓娟, 曹云, 陈雪芳, 尹慧来, 王志强, 文艳芳, 杨志远, 孙园园, 贾现文, 马均, 孙永健. 品种和播种量互作对机械旱直播水稻与杂草养分竞争的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(2): 185-197. |
[9] | 彭显龙, 董强, 张辰, 李鹏飞, 李博琳, 刘智蕾, 于彩莲. 不同土壤条件下秸秆还田量对土壤还原性物质及水稻生长的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(2): 198-210. |
[10] | 朱旺, 张翔, 耿孝宇, 张哲, 陈英龙, 韦还和, 戴其根, 许轲, 朱广龙, 周桂生, 孟天瑶. 盐-旱复合胁迫下水稻根系的形态和生理特征及其与产量形成的关系[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(6): 617-627. |
[11] | 邹宇傲, 吴启侠, 周乾顺, 朱建强, 晏军. 孕穗期杂交中稻对淹涝胁迫的响应[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(6): 642-656. |
[12] | 袁沛, 周旋, 杨威, 尹凌洁, 靳拓, 彭建伟, 荣湘民, 田昌. 化肥减氮配施对洞庭湖区双季稻产量和田面水氮磷流失风险的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(5): 518-528. |
[13] | 肖大康, 胡仁, 韩天富, 张卫峰, 侯俊, 任科宇. 氮肥用量和运筹对我国水稻产量及其构成因子影响的整合分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(5): 529-542. |
[14] | 黄亚茹, 徐鹏, 王乐乐, 贺一哲, 王辉, 柯健, 何海兵, 武立权, 尤翠翠. 外源海藻糖对粳稻品系W1844籽粒灌浆特性及产量形成的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 379-391. |
[15] | 高欠清, 任孝俭, 翟中兵, 郑普兵, 吴源芬, 崔克辉. 头季穗肥和促芽肥对再生稻再生芽生长及产量形成的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 405-414. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||