欢迎访问作物学报,今天是

作物学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (2): 289-296.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2019.01105

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同种类生物炭对植烟土壤微生物及根茎病害发生的影响

李成江1,李大肥2,周桂夙1,许龙2,徐天养2,赵正雄1,*()   

  1. 1云南农业大学烟草学院, 云南昆明 650201
    2 云南省烟草公司文山州公司, 云南文山663000
  • 收稿日期:2018-05-30 接受日期:2018-10-08 出版日期:2019-02-12 发布日期:2018-11-01
  • 通讯作者: 赵正雄 E-mail:zhaozx0801@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    本研究由云南省烟草公司科技计划项目资助(2016YN14)

Effects of different types of biochar on soil microorganism and rhizome diseases occurrence of flue-cured tobacco

Cheng-Jiang LI1,Da-Fei LI2,Gui-Su ZHOU1,Long XU2,Tian-Yang XU2,Zheng-Xiong ZHAO1,*()   

  1. 1 College of Tobacco Science, Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, China
    2 Wenshan Tobacco Company, Yunnan Tobacco Company, Wenshan 663000, Yunnan, China
  • Received:2018-05-30 Accepted:2018-10-08 Online:2019-02-12 Published:2018-11-01
  • Contact: Zheng-Xiong ZHAO E-mail:zhaozx0801@163.com
  • Supported by:
    This study was supported by the Science and Technology Project of Yunnan Tobacco Company(2016YN14)

摘要:

采用田间试验研究了稻壳炭、木屑炭对烤烟根区土壤微生物、根茎病害发生以及烟叶产量的影响。结果表明, 生物炭施用明显影响着烤烟根区土壤微生物数量及其对碳源的利用, 进而影响着青枯病、黑胫病的发生情况和烟叶的产量、产值, 但其效果因生物炭种类而异。木屑炭处理烤烟旺长期细菌和采烤前放线菌的数量明显比对照增加了11.7%和12.8%, 而稻壳炭处理旺长和初烤时的真菌数量显著增加。植烟土壤中青枯菌和黑胫病菌的数量及其占微生物总量的百分比也以施用生物炭处理显著低于对照, 而烤烟旺长期根区微生物对碳源的利用能力则相反; 到烟叶采烤前, 根区微生物对酚酸类和胺类的利用以生物炭处理相对最低; 上述情况以木屑炭处理较稻壳炭处理更为明显。与对照相比, 木屑炭处理青枯病的发病率和病情指数降低了24.3%和33.3%, 黑胫病的发病率和病情指数降低了23.9%和14.9%, 产量和产值增加了4.7%和21.1%; 稻壳炭处理青枯病发病率和病情指数降低了18.1%和23.9%, 黑胫病的发病率和病情指数降低了15.9%和6.0%, 产量和产值增加了2.2%和12.0%。综合而言, 施用生物炭能较好地改善土壤微生物状况及其对碳源的利用, 减少青枯病和黑胫病的发生, 增加烟叶的产量和产值; 其中以木屑炭处理效果更佳。

关键词: 生物炭, 烤烟, 土壤微生物, 青枯病, 黑胫病, 产量, 产值

Abstract:

A field experiment was carried out to study effects of rice husk biochar and wood biochar application respectively on rhizosphere microorganisms, rhizome diseases occurrence, and leaf yield of flue-cured tobacco. The application of biochar significantly affected the amount of rhizosphere microorganisms and the use of carbon sources of flue-cured tobacco. In turn, as well as the occurrences of granville wilt and tobacco black shank, also the yield and output value of tobacco leaf, which varied with the types of biochar. The treatment of wood biochar significantly increased the number of bacteria at vigorous growth stage and actinomycete at mature stage in flue-cured tobacco by 11.7% and 12.8% respectively, while the treatment of rice husk biochar significantly increased the number of fungus in both stages. Compared with the control, the application of biochar significantly reduced the number of Ralstonia solanacearm and Phytophthora parasitica var. nicotianac and the percentage to total microorganism. But rhizosphere microorganisms of flue-cured tobacco had the opposite effect on the carbon use ability in vigorous growing stage; before mature stage, phenolic acids and amines used by rhizosphere microorganisms were the lowest. The effect above, was more obvious in treatment of wood biochar than in treatment of rice husk biochar. Compared with control, the treatment of wood biochar decreased the incidence and disease index of granville wilt by 24.3% and 33.3%, and those of tobacco black shank decreased by 23.9% and 14.9%, while increased the output and output value by 4.7% and 21.1%. In rice husk biochar treatment, the incidence and disease index of granville wilt decreased by 18.1% and 23.9%, the incidence and disease index of tobacco black shank decreased by 15.9% and 6.0%, and the output and output value increased by 2.2% and 12.0%. In summary, the application of biochar can significantly impactive the situations of rhizosphere microorganisms of flue-cured tobacco and the utilization of different types of biochar, reducing the occurrence of granville wilt and black shank, and increasing the yield and output value of tobacco leaf. The effect of wood biochar is better.

Key words: biochar, flue-cured tobacco, root-zone microorganisms, granville wilt, tobacco black shank, yield, output value

表1

供试生物炭基本性质"

生物炭
Biochar
pH 有机质
Organic matter
(g kg-1)
全氮
Total N
(g kg-1)
全磷
Total P
(g kg-1)
全钾
Total K
(g kg-1)
电导率
Electric conductivity
(mS cm-1)
稻壳炭 Rice husk biochar 9.46 17.33 0.28 28.32 39.08 4.79
木屑炭 Wood biochar 6.35 51.60 0.35 16.63 11.12 6.03

表2

根区土壤微生物数量"

测定项目
Tested assay
处理
Treatment
旺长期
Vigorous growing stage
采烤前
Mature stage
细菌
Bacteria (×106 cfu g-1)
CK 5.28±0.23 b 3.17±2.15 a
RB 5.45±0.98 b 3.49±2.23 a
WB 5.90±0.49 a 3.52±2.17 a
真菌
Fungi (×104 cfu g-1)
CK 3.75±1.90 b 6.11±2.17 b
RB 5.00±2.43 a 10.38±2.19 a
WB 3.97±2.55 b 8.17±2.56 b
放线菌
Actinomycets (×105 cfu g-1)
CK 15.58±1.90 a 17.55±1.00 b
RB 15.90±1.12 a 18.03±1.28 b
WB 15.98±0.97 a 19.80±1.59 a
微生物总量
Total microorganisms amount (×106 cfu g-1)
CK 6.85±0.21 b 5.02±0.15 b
RB 7.05±0.21 ab 5.33±0.15 a
WB 7.49±0.21 a 5.62±0.15 a

图1

不同处理根区土壤微生物平均颜色变化率 CK: 不施生物炭; RB: 稻壳炭处理; WB: 木屑炭处理。"

表3

不同处理根区土壤微生物对六类碳源的利用"

测定时期
Measurement period
处理
Treatment
碳水化合物
Carbohydrate
氨基酸类
Amino acid
聚合物
Polymer
酚酸类
Phenothiazine
胺类
Propylamine
羧酸类
RCOOH
旺长期
Vigorous growing stage
CK 0.41±0.07 b 0.32±0.04 b 0.38±0.06 b 0.10±0.01 c 0.11±0.01 c 0.38±0.10 b
RB 0.43±0.06 b 0.55±0.02 b 0.40±0.04 b 0.22±0.02 b 0.33±0.03 b 0.40±0.04 ab
WB 0.69±0.02 a 0.99±0.06 a 0.89±0.17 a 0.45±0.05 a 0.53±0.04 a 0.55±0.12 a
采烤前
Mature stage
CK 0.41±0.03 b 0.57±0.13 b 0.32±0.10 b 0.26±0.10 a 0.55±0.03 b 0.70±0.04 a
RB 0.55±0.14 ab 0.77±0.05 a 0.67± 0.04 a 0.16±0.08 a 0.43±0.04 b 0.71±0.04 a
WB 0.62±0.10 a 0.84±0.02 a 0.79± 0.03 a 0.12±0.03 a 0.35±0.05 a 0.60±0.08 a

图2

不同处理根区土壤青枯菌、黑胫病菌的数量及占微生物的百分比 不同字母表示处理间差异显著性(P<0.05)。CK: 不施生物炭; RB: 稻壳炭处理; WB: 木屑炭处理。"

表4

生物质炭对烤烟主要病害的影响"

处理
Treatment
项目
Item
旺长期 Vigorous growing stage 采烤前 Mature stage
青枯病
Granvillel wilt
黑胫病
Tobacco black shank
青枯病
Granville wilt
黑胫病
Tobacco black shank
发病率
Incidence rate (%)
CK 3.37 a 1.76 a 4.67 a 2.63 a
RB 2.76 b 1.48 b 3.53 b 2.24 b
WB 2.55 c 1.34 c 3.50 b 2.20 b
病情指数
Disease index (%)
CK 2.34 a 1.34 a 4.36 a 2.34 a
RB 1.78 b 1.26 a 2.98 b 1.52 b
WB 1.56 c 1.14 c 2.73 b 1.49 b

表5

生物炭对烤烟经济性状的影响"

处理
Treatment
产量
Yield (kg hm-2)
产值
Output value (yuan hm-2)
上等烟比例
Proportion of high grade tobacco leaf (%)
CK 2092.5 b 48576.0 b 51.1 a
RB 2139.0 a 54415.5 a 53.1 a
WB 2190.5 a 58821.0 a 54.3 a
[1] 周启星 . 健康土壤学: 土壤健康质量与农产品安全. 北京: 科学出版社, 2005. pp 149-162.
Zhou Q X. Science of Health Soil: Quality of Health. Soil and Safety of Agricultural Product. Beijing: Science Press, 2005. pp 149-162(in Chinese).
[2] 胡可, 李华兴, 卢维盛, 刘远金, 王利宾 . 生物有机肥对土壤微生物活性的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2010,18:303-306.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1011.2010.00303
Hu K, Li H X, Lu W S, Liu Y J, Wang L B . Effect of microbial organic fertilizer application on soil microbial activity. Chin J Eco-Agric, 2010,18:303-306 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1011.2010.00303
[3] 刘晓燕, 金继运, 任天志, 何萍 . 中国有机肥料养分资源潜力和环境风险分析. 应用生态学报, 2010,21:2092-2098.
Liu X Y, Jin J Y, Ren T Z, He P . Potential of organic manures nutrient resources and their environmental risk in China. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2010,21:2092-2098 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[4] Ren L X, Su S M, Yang X M, Xu Y C, Huang Q W, Shen Q R . Intercropping with aerobic rice suppressed Fusarium wilt in watermelon. Soil Biol & Biochem, 2008,40:834-844.
doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2007.11.003
[5] 王璐, 赵保卫, 许仁智, 李烨炜 . 生物炭的基本特性及其应用领域的研究进展. 广东化工, 2016,43(7):93-94.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-1865.2016.07.043
Wang L, Zhao B W, Xu R Z, Li Y W . Research on the basic characteristic and application fields of biochar. Guangdong Chem Ind, 2016,43(7):93-94 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-1865.2016.07.043
[6] Thassitou P K, Arvanitoyannis I S . Bioremediation: a novel approach to food waste management. Trends in Food Sci & Technol, 2001,12(5/6):185-196.
doi: 10.1016/S0924-2244(01)00081-4
[7] 陈温福, 张伟明, 孟军 . 农用生物炭研究进展与前景. 中国农业科学, 2013,46:3324-3333.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2013.16.003
Chen W F, Zhang W M, Meng J . Advances and prospects in research of biochar utilization in agriculture. Sci Agric Sin, 2013,46:3324-3333 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2013.16.003
[8] 万惠霞, 冯小虎, 张文梅, 裴建锋, 焦永吉, 李铭, 蒋士君 . 生态炭肥防治烟草青枯病及其土壤微生态学机理分析. 江西农业学报, 2015, ( 6):92-97.
Wan H X, Feng X H, Zhang W M, Pei J F, Jiao Y J, Li M, Jiang S J . Control effect of ecobio-char on tobacco bacterial wilt and its soil microecological mechanism. Acta Agric Jiangxi, 2015, ( 6):92-97 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[9] 管恩娜 . 生物质炭对土壤理化性质、烤烟生长及烟草黑胫病的影响. 中国农业科学院硕士学位论文, 北京, 2016.
Guan N N . Effects of Biochar on Soil Physicochemical Properties Tobacco Growth and Tobacco Blackshank. MS Thesis of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China, 2016 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[10] 叶协锋, 于晓娜, 李志鹏, 周涵君, 张晓帆, 宋显峰, 付仲毅, 凌天孝, 郑好 . 两种生物炭对植烟土壤生物学特性的影响. 中国烟草学报, 2016,22(6):78-84.
doi: 10.16472/j.chinatobacco.2015.519
Ye X F, Yu X N, Li Z P, Zhou H J, Zhang X F, Song X F, Fu Z Y, Ling X T, Zheng H . Effect of two biochars on biological characteristics of tobacco growing soil. Acta Tab Sin, 2016,22(6):78-84 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.16472/j.chinatobacco.2015.519
[11] 王成己, 陈庆荣, 陈曦, 唐莉娜, 刘岑薇, 宋铁英, 黄毅斌 . 烟秆生物质炭对烟草根际土壤养分及细菌群落的影响. 中国烟草科学, 2017,38(1):42-47.
doi: 10.13496/j.issn.1007-5119.2017.01.007
Wang C J, Chen Q R, Chen X, Tang L N, Liu C W, Song T Y, Huang Y B . Effects of tobacco stalk derived biochar on root zone soil nutrients and bacterial communities in the tobacco field. China Tob Sci, 2017,38(1):42-47 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.13496/j.issn.1007-5119.2017.01.007
[12] 张继旭, 张继光, 张忠锋, 王瑞, 高林, 戴衍晨, 孟贵星, 王树键, 马强, 许晴, 申国明 . 秸秆生物炭对烤烟生长发育、土壤有机碳及酶活性的影响. 中国烟草科学, 2016,37(5):16-21.
doi: 10.13496/j.issn.1007-5119.2016.05.004
Zhang J X, Zhang J G, Zhang Z F, Wang R, Gao L, Dai Y C, Meng G X, Wang S J, Ma Q, Xu Q, Shen G M . Effects of straw biochar on tobacco growth, soil organic carbon and soil enzyme activities. China Tob Sci, 2016,37(5):16-21 (in Chinese with English abstract)
doi: 10.13496/j.issn.1007-5119.2016.05.004
[13] 王金星, 李高坡, 符云鹏, 王念磊, 程玉渊, 谭阳 . 施用生物炭、黄腐酸钾对云烟87烤烟产质量的影响. 山东农业科学, 2017,49(6):83-87.
doi: 10.14083/j.issn.1001-4942.2017.06.018
Wang J X, Li G P, Fu Y P, Wang N L, Cheng Y Y, Tan Y . Effects of applying biochar and potassium flavate on the yield and quality of Yunyan 87 flue-cured tobacco. Shandong Agric Sci, 2017,49(6):83-87 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.14083/j.issn.1001-4942.2017.06.018
[14] 刘卉, 周清明, 刘勇军, 黎娟, 张黎明, 张明发 . 生物炭对烤烟生长及烟叶质量的影响. 中国农业科技导报, 2017,19(10):73-81.
Liu H, Zhou Q M, Liu Y J, Li J, Zhang L M, Zhang M F . Effects of biochar on the growth of flue cured tobacco and quality of tobacco. J Agric Sci Tech, 2017,19(10):73-81 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[15] 李静静 . 生物炭与氮肥配施对植烟土壤特性、烤烟生长及烟叶品质的影响. 河南农业大学硕士学位论文,河南郑州, 2016.
Li J J . Effects of Combined Application of Biochar and Nitrogen Fertilizers on Soil Properties Growth and Quality of Flue-cured Tobacco. MS Thesis of Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, Henan,China, 2016 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[16] 饶霜 . 生物炭对番茄青枯病抗性、土壤微生物活性及有机酸含量的影响. 华南农业大学硕士学位论文,广州广东, 2016.
Rao X . Effect of Biochar on Bacterial Wilt Resistance of Tomato, Soil Microbial Activity and Organic Acid. MS Thesis of South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong,China, 2016 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[17] 王光飞, 马艳, 郭德杰, 王秋君 . 秸秆生物炭对辣椒疫病的防控效果及机理研究. 土壤, 2015,47:1107-1114.
Wang G F, Ma Y, Guo D J, Wang Q J . Effect and mechanism of straw biochar on disease control of Phytophthora blight of chili pepper. Soils, 2015,47:1107-1114 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[18] 马艳, 王光飞 . 生物炭防控植物土传病害研究进展. 中国土壤与肥料, 2014, ( 6):14-20.
doi: 10.11838/sfsc.20140603
Ma Y, Wang G F . Review of biochar utilization on soil-borne disease control. Soil & Fert Sci, 2014, ( 6):14-20 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.11838/sfsc.20140603
[19] Jaiswal A K, Elad Y, Graber E R, Frenkel O . Rhizoctonia solani suppression and plant growth promotion in cucumber as affected by biochar pyrolysis temperature feedstock and concentration. Soil Biol & Biochem, 2014,69:110-118.
doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.10.051
[20] Guijarro M B, Mattner S W, Wiechel T J. Suppession of damping-off of radish caused by Rhizoctonia solani AG2.1 with soil carbon amendments. In: the 6th Australasian Soilborne Diseases Symposium. Queensland, Australia, 2010. p 49.
[21] 林先贵 . 土壤微生物研究原理与方法. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2010. pp 1-13.
Lin X G. Principles and Methods of Soil Microbiology Research. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2010. pp 1-13(in Chinese).
[22] Borrero C, Ordova’s J, Trillas M I . Tomato fusarium wilt suppressive: the relationship between the organic plant growth media and their microbial communities as characterised by Biolog®. Soil Biol & Biochem, 2006,38:1631-1637.
doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.11.017
[23] Xiang Z, Zhang L, Zhang Q . Soil nutrients and microbial functional diversity of different stand types in Qinghai province. Sci Silvae Sin, 2014,50(4):22-31.
doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20140404
[24] 赵兰凤, 张新明, 程根, 张丽娟, 刘小峰, 李华兴 . 生物炭对菜园土壤微生物功能多样性的影响. 生态学报, 2017,37:4754-4762.
doi: 10.5846/stxb201604220758
Zhao L F, Zhang X M, Cheng G, Zhang L J, Liu X F, Li H X . Effects of biochar on microbial functional diversity of vegetable garden soil. Acta Ecol Sin, 2017,37:4754-4762 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.5846/stxb201604220758
[25] 万川, 蒋珍茂, 赵秀兰, 魏世强, 李玲, 马冠华, 徐畅, 陈益银 . 深翻和施用土壤改良剂对烟草青枯病发生的影响. 烟草科技, 2015,49(11):14-20.
doi: 10.16135/j.issn1002-0861.20150203
Wan C, Jiang Z M, Zhao X L, Wei S Q, Li L, Ma G H, Xu C, Cheng Y Y . Effects of deep ploughing and soil amendment application on incidence of tobacco bacterial wilt. Tobacco Sci Tech, 2015,49(11):14-20 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.16135/j.issn1002-0861.20150203
[26] 姚玲丹, 程广焕, 王丽晓, 陈环宇, 楼莉萍 . 施用生物炭对土壤微生物的影响. 环境化学, 2015,34:697-704.
doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2015.04.2014072802
Yao L D, Cheng G H, Wang L X, Chen H Y, Lou L P . Effects of biochar application to micro organisms in soil. Environ Chem, 2015,34:697-704 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2015.04.2014072802
[27] 杨宇虹, 陈冬梅, 晋艳, 王海斌, 段玉琪, 郭徐魁, 何海斌, 林文雄 . 不同肥料种类对连作烟草根区土壤微生物功能多样性的影响. 作物学报, 2011,37:105-111.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.00105
Yang Y H, Chen D M, Jin Y, Wang H B, Duan Y Q, Guo X K, He H B, Lin W X . Effects of different fertilizers on functional diversities of microbial flora in rhizospheric soil of monoculture tobacco. Acta Agron Sin, 2011,37:105-111 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.00105
[28] 张云伟, 徐智, 汤利, 李艳红, 宋建群, 徐健钦 . 不同有机肥对烤烟根际土壤微生物的影响. 应用生态学报, 2013,24:2551-2556.
Zhang Y W, Xu Z, Tang L, Li Y H, Song J Q, Xu J Q . Effects of different organic fertilizers on the microbes in rhizospheric soil of flue-cured tobacco. Chin J App Ecol, 2013,24:2551-2556 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[29] 袁英英 . 生物有机肥对番茄青枯病及土壤微生物的影响. 华南农业大学硕士学位论文, 广州广东, 2011.
Yuan Y Y . Effect of Biological Organic Fertilizer on Tomato Bacterial Wilt and Soil Microorganism. MS Thesis of South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong,China, 2011 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[30] Bastida F, Hernandez T, Albaladejo J . Phylogenetic and functional changes in the microbial community of long-term restored soils under semiarid climate. Soil Biol & Biochem, 2013,22:12-21.
doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.04.022
[31] 张淑香, 高子勤, 刘海玲 . 连作障碍与根际微生态研究: Ⅲ. 土壤酚酸物质及其生物学效应. 应用生态学报, 2000,11:741-744.
doi: 10.1088/0256-307X/17/9/008
Zhang S X, Gao Z Q, Liu H L . Continuous cropping obstacle and rhizospheric microecology: III. Soil phenolic acids and their biological effect. Chin J App Ecol, 2000,11:741-744 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.1088/0256-307X/17/9/008
[32] Irikiin Y, Nishiyama M, Otsuka S . Rhizobacterial community-level, sole carbon source utilization pattern affects the delay in the bacterial wilt of tomato grown in rhizobacterial community model system. Appl Soil Ecol, 2006,34:27-32.
doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2005.12.003
[1] 陈玉章,柴守玺,程宏波,柴雨葳,杨长刚,谭凯敏,常磊. 秸秆还田结合秋覆膜对旱地冬小麦耗水特性和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(2): 256-266.
[2] 刘月娥,吕天放,赵久然,王荣焕,徐田军,陈传永,张译天,王元东,刘秀芝. 不同玉米杂交品种吐丝持续期特性及其对播期的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(2): 310-315.
[3] 陈四龙,程增书,宋亚辉,王瑾,刘义杰,张朋娟,李玉荣. 高产高油花生品种的光合与物质生产特征[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(2): 276-288.
[4] 许阳东,朱宽宇,章星传,王志琴,杨建昌. 绿色超级稻品种的农艺与生理性状分析[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(1): 70-80.
[5] 刘妍,刘兆新,何美娟,刘婷如,杨坚群,甄晓宇,栗鑫鑫,李向东,杨东清. 冬闲期耕作方式对连作花生叶片衰老和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(1): 131-143.
[6] 周健飞,武云杰,薛刚,张安乾,田培,彭玉富,杨铁钊. 烤烟成熟期烟叶GS同工酶活性与氮素运转的关系[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(1): 111-117.
[7] 凌霄霞, 张作林, 翟景秋, 叶树春, 黄见良. 气候变化对中国水稻生产的影响研究进展[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(03): 323-334.
[8] 孙凯, 刘振, 胡恒宇, 李耕, 刘文涛, 杨柳, 宁堂原, 王彦玲. 有机培肥与轮耕方式对夏玉米田土壤碳氮和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(03): 401-410.
[9] 樊廷录,王淑英,续创业,李尚中,王甲玺,王克如,赵刚,程万莉,张建军,王磊,党翼. 黄土高原旱作玉米籽粒水分与机械粒收质量的关系[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(9): 1411-1429.
[10] 黄聪,李晓方,李定国,林忠旭. 利用陆地棉MAGIC群体定位产量、生育期和株高性状的QTL[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(9): 1320-1333.
[11] 施龙建,文章荣,张世博,王珏,陆卫平,陆大雷. 开花期干旱胁迫对鲜食糯玉米产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(8): 1205-1211.
[12] 石洪亮,严青青,张巨松,李春艳,窦海涛. 氮肥对非充分灌溉下棉花花铃期光合特性及产量的补偿作用[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(8): 1196-1204.
[13] 李超,李志坤,谷淇深,杨君,柯会锋,吴立强,王国宁,张艳,吴金华,张桂寅,阎媛媛,马峙英,王省芬. 海岛棉CSSLs分子评价及纤维品质、产量性状QTL定位[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(8): 1114-1126.
[14] 陈雪娇,张旭东,韩治中,张鹏,贾志宽,连延浩,韩清芳. 半干旱区沟垄集雨种植谷子的肥料效应及其增产贡献[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(7): 1055-1066.
[15] 胡旦旦,张吉旺,刘鹏,赵斌,董树亭. 密植条件下玉米品种混播对夏玉米光合性能及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(6): 920-930.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 倪大虎;易成新;李莉;汪秀峰;张毅;赵开军;王春连;章琦;王文相;杨剑波. 分子标记辅助培育水稻抗白叶枯病和稻瘟病三基因聚合系[J]. 作物学报, 2008, 34(01): 100 -105 .
[2] 韩建明;侯喜林;徐海明;史公军;耿建峰;邓晓辉. 不结球白菜(Brassica campestris ssp. chinensis Makino)种质资源SRAP遗传分化分析[J]. 作物学报, 2007, 33(11): 1862 -1868 .
[3] 庞朝友;杜雄明;马峙英. 棉属种间杂交基因渐渗系SSR标记及其表型性状的聚类分析[J]. 作物学报, 2006, 32(09): 1371 -1378 .
[4] 夏仲炎. 粳稻叶型的遗传与选择的研究[J]. 作物学报, 1983, 9(04): 275 -282 .
[5] 沈建辉;邵文娟;张祖建;杨建昌;曹卫星;朱庆森. 水稻机插中苗双膜育秧落谷密度对苗质和产量影响的研究[J]. 作物学报, 2004, 30(09): 906 -911 .
[6] 吴安慧 ;张岁岐;邓西平;山仑. 水分亏缺条件下玉米根系TIP1-1基因的表达[J]. 作物学报, 2006, 32(09): 1413 -1417 .
[7] 陈华锋;钱保俐;庄丽芳;陈全战;冯祎高;裴自友;亓增军;陈佩度;刘大钧. 普通小麦中国春-百萨偃麦草异染色体系的分子标记分析[J]. 作物学报, 2007, 33(08): 1232 -1239 .
[8] 王春梅;冯祎高;庄丽芳;曹亚萍;亓增军;别同德;曹爱忠;陈佩度. 普通小麦近缘物种黑麦1R、簇毛麦1V及鹅观草1Rk#1染色体特异分子标记的筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2007, 33(11): 1741 -1747 .
[9] 周录英;李向东;王丽丽;汤笑;林英杰. 钙肥不同用量对花生生理特性及产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2008, 34(05): 879 -885 .
[10] 谢云;James R Kiniry. 国外作物生长模型发展综述[J]. 作物学报, 2002, 28(02): 190 -195 .