秸秆还田下耕作方式与氮肥施用量对东北玉米产量及土壤团聚体的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2026.53066

作物学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (6): 1802-1816.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2026.53066

秸秆还田下耕作方式与氮肥施用量对东北玉米产量及土壤团聚体的影响

马胜乾¹^,²(), 王志平¹^,², 陈浩天², 窦淑贤²^,³, 张燕², 邓艾兴², 张卫建², 原向阳^1,*(), 宋振伟^2,*()

¹ 山西农业大学农学院, 山西太谷 030801
² 中国农业科学院作物科学研究所 / 农业农村部作物生理生态重点实验室, 北京 100081
³ 中国农业大学农学院, 北京 100094

收稿日期:2025-08-25 接受日期:2026-03-16 出版日期:2026-06-12 网络出版日期:2026-03-20
通讯作者: * 原向阳, E-mail: yuanxiangyang200@163.com; 宋振伟, E-mail: songzhenwei@caas.cn
作者简介:马胜乾, E-mail: MaShengQianI@outlook.com
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目(2022YFD1500702);中国农业科学院科技创新工程重大科研任务项目(CAAS-ZDRW202202)

Effects of tillage methods and nitrogen application rate on maize yield and soil aggregates in northeastern China under straw returning

Ma Sheng-Qian¹^,²(), Wang Zhi-Ping¹^,², Chen Hao-Tian², Dou Shu-Xian²^,³, Zhang Yan², Deng Ai-Xing², Zhang Wei-Jian², Yuan Xiang-Yang^1,*(), Song Zhen-Wei^2,*()

¹ College of Agriculture, Shanxi Agricultural University, Taigu 030801, Shanxi, China
² Institute of Crop Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences / Key Laboratory of Crop Physiology and Ecology, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Beijing 100081, China
³ College of Agronomy and Biotechnology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100094, China

Received:2025-08-25 Accepted:2026-03-16 Published:2026-06-12 Published online:2026-03-20
Contact: * Yuan Xiang-Yang, E-mail: yuanxiangyang200@163.com;Song Zhen-Wei, E-mail: songzhenwei@caas.cn
Supported by:
National Key Research and Development Program(2022YFD1500702);Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Program of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences(CAAS-ZDRW202202)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

东北地区是我国重要的玉米主产区, 长期不合理耕作方式与氮肥大量施用导致黑土地退化, 影响玉米可持续生产。以秸秆还田和少免耕为核心的保护性耕作技术是改善土壤质量和提高作物产量的关键措施之一, 而优化氮肥施用量对提高资源利用效率至关重要。为探索秸秆还田下的合理耕作方式与适宜氮肥施用量, 促进东北地区玉米产量与土壤质量协同提升, 本研究于2022—2024年在黑龙江省哈尔滨市闫家岗农场设置田间定位试验, 采用裂区设计, 主区为耕作方式, 包括翻耕(CT)、旋耕(RT)、条带耕作(ST)和免耕(NT); 副区为氮肥施用量, 为0 (N0)、135 (N1)、180 (N2)和225 kg hm^-2 (N3)。结果表明, 3年平均玉米籽粒产量表现为ST > CT > RT > NT, 4种耕作方式间无显著差异, 其中ST处理在2023年和2024年较NT分别增产14.5%和6.6%; 施氮显著提高产量(P < 0.001), N2和N3处理无显著差异且3年产量较N0高183.1%~217.2%; 耕作方式和氮肥施用量对玉米产量无显著互作效应。0~20 cm土层3年平均土壤容重为NT > ST > RT > CT, 且4种耕作方式间差异显著, 其中NT处理较CT处理高20.2%~31.4%。耕作方式和氮肥施用量对土壤团聚体粒径、平均重量直径和几何平均直径有显著影响(P < 0.05), NT处理0~20 cm土层0.250~2.000 mm粒径的团聚体含量显著增加23.7%~56.7%, 且平均重量直径和几何平均直径均为NT > RT > ST > CT, N2和N3处理0.250~2.000 mm粒径的团聚体含量增加9.2%~29.7%, < 0.053 mm粒径的团聚体含量降低30.3%~51.5%。相关性分析表明, 在秸秆还田下耕作方式、氮肥施用量与玉米产量呈显著正相关(P < 0.01), 且ST处理在施氮200.2 kg hm^-2可达到最高产量。综上所述, 秸秆还田下采用条带耕作结合180~225 kg hm^-2氮肥施用量可兼顾玉米高产与土壤团聚体改良, 可作为东北高寒地区适宜的保护性耕作管理措施。

关键词: 秸秆还田, 保护性耕作, 氮肥施用量, 土壤团聚体, 产量

Abstract:

Northeastern China is a major maize-producing region, but decades of unsustainable tillage practices and excessive nitrogen fertilization have degraded black soils and threatened the sustainable production of maize. Conservation tillage practices based on straw return and reduced or no tillage are key approaches to improving soil quality and maintaining crop productivity, and optimizing nitrogen inputs is essential for enhancing resource-use efficiency. To determine suitable tillage practices and optimal nitrogen rates under straw incorporation, and to promote coordinated improvements in maize yield and soil quality in northeastern China, a fixed-site field experiment was conducted from 2022 to 2024 at Yanjiagang farm, Harbin, Heilongjiang province. The experiment used a split-plot design with tillage as the main-plot factor—conventional tillage (CT), rotary tillage (RT), strip tillage (ST), and no tillage (NT)—and nitrogen rate as the subplot factor: 0 (N0), 135 (N1), 180 (N2), and 225 kg hm^-2 (N3) as pure N. Across the three years, mean grain yield ranked ST > CT > RT > NT, although differences among tillage treatments were not significant. Relative to NT, ST increased yield by 14.5% in 2023 and 6.6% in 2024, with no significant differences between ST and CT or RT. Nitrogen rate significantly increased yield (P < 0.001); yield under N2 and N3 were 183.1%-217.2% higher than under N0. No significant tillage×nitrogen interaction was detected for yield. Mean soil bulk density in the 0-20 cm layer followed the order NT > ST > RT > CT, with significant differences among tillage treatments; NT was 20.2%-31.4% higher than CT. Both tillage and nitrogen rate significantly affected aggregate-size distribution, mean weight diameter (MWD), and geometric mean diameter (GMD) (P < 0.05). NT increased the proportion of 0.250-2.000 mm aggregates in the 0-20 cm layer by 23.7%-56.7%, and MWD and GMD ranked NT > RT > ST > CT. The N2 and N3 treatments increased the proportion of 0.250-2.000 mm aggregates by 9.2%-29.7% and decreased the proportion of < 0.053 mm aggregates by 30.3%-51.5%. Correlation analysis showed significant positive associations between tillage practice and nitrogen rate under straw return and maize yield (P < 0.01), and the ST treatment achieved the maximum yield at an estimated N rate of 200.2 kg hm^-2. Overall, under straw incorporation, strip tillage combined with 180-225 kg hm^-2 N can achieve high maize yield while improving soil aggregation, and is therefore recommended for the cold regions of northeastern China.

Key words: straw returning, conservation tillage, nitrogen application rate, soil aggregates, grain yield

马胜乾, 王志平, 陈浩天, 窦淑贤, 张燕, 邓艾兴, 张卫建, 原向阳, 宋振伟. 秸秆还田下耕作方式与氮肥施用量对东北玉米产量及土壤团聚体的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1802-1816.

Ma Sheng-Qian, Wang Zhi-Ping, Chen Hao-Tian, Dou Shu-Xian, Zhang Yan, Deng Ai-Xing, Zhang Wei-Jian, Yuan Xiang-Yang, Song Zhen-Wei. Effects of tillage methods and nitrogen application rate on maize yield and soil aggregates in northeastern China under straw returning[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1802-1816.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://zwxb.chinacrops.org/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1006.2026.53066

https://zwxb.chinacrops.org/CN/Y2026/V52/I6/1802

图/表 11

图1

表1

耕作方式的操作细节"

耕作方式 Tillage method	操作细节 Operation details
翻耕 Conventional tillage (CT)	当年秋季进行翻耕作业, 将秸秆翻至土壤30 cm以下, 并进行耙地打破较大的块状土壤并平整土地, 第2年播种前进行起垄作业, 采用常规播种机进行播种与施肥一体化作业 In the autumn, plowing operations were carried out to turn the straw into the soil below 30 cm, followed breaking up large clods of soil and harrowing to level the land surface. Before sowing in the following year, ridging operations were conducted, and conventional seeders were used for sowing and applying fertilizer
旋耕 Rotary tillage (RT)	当年秋季进行旋耕作业, 将秸秆旋耕至0-20 cm土壤层内, 第2年播种前进行起垄作业, 并采用常规播种机进行播种与施肥一体化作业 In the autumn, rotary tillage was performed to incorporate the straw into the 0-20 cm soil layer. Before sowing in the following year, ridging operations were carried out, and conventional seeders were used for sowing and applying fertilizer
条带耕作 Strip tillage (ST)	当年秋季采用条耕机在玉米行间进行旋耕作业, 将秸秆旋耕至0-15 cm土壤层内, 旋耕带宽20 cm左右, 其余土壤保持免耕秸秆覆盖, 第2年春季采用免耕播种机进行播种与施肥一体化作业 In the autumn, a strip-till machine was used to perform rotary tillage between the corn rows, incorporating the straw into the 0-15 cm soil layer. The tilled strip width was approximately 20 cm, while the remaining soil was maintained under no-till with straw mulch. In the spring of the following year, a no-till planter was used for sowing and applying fertilizer
免耕 No tillage (NT)	保持秸秆覆盖不进行任何耕作处理, 第2年春季采用免耕播种机进行播种与施肥一体化作业 Maintain straw mulch without any tillage, and in the spring of the following year, use a no-till planter for direct seeding and applying fertilizer

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

图2

图3

表6

图4

图5

参考文献 53

[1]	中华人民共和国国家统计局. 中国统计年鉴. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2024.
	National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China. China Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2024 (in Chinese).
[2]	Liu X B, Zhang X Y, Wang Y X, et al. Soil degradation: a problem threatening the sustainable development of agriculture in Northeast China. Plant Soil Environ, 2010, 56: 87-97. doi: 10.17221/155/2009-PSE
[3]	王冰洁, 秦诗涵, 李德成, 等. 黑龙江省嫩江市土壤容重空间分布格局及传递函数构建. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58: 1791-1803. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.09.009
	Wang B J, Qin S H, Li D C, et al. Spatial distribution pattern and transfer function construction of soil bulk density in Nenjiang city, Heilongjiang province. Sci Agric Sin, 2025, 58: 1791-1803 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.09.009
[4]	温涛, 田晓晖, 龚斌磊, 等. 加快建设农业强国的实现路径: 《加快建设农业强国规划(2024-2035年)》颁布实施笔谈. 西南大学学报(社会科学版), 2025, 51(2): 1-20.
	Wen T, Tian X H, Gong B L, et al. Measures of accelerating building of a country strong in agriculture: a panel discussion on the issuing and implementing the plan for accelerating building a country strong in agriculture (2024-2035). J Southwest Univ (Soc Sci Edn), 2025, 51(2): 1-20 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[5]	朱勇, 李建业, 张程远, 等. 长期保护性耕作对坡耕地黑土有机碳组分的影响. 农业工程学报, 2023, 39(10): 103-111.
	Zhu Y, Li J Y, Zhang C Y, et al. Effects of long-term conservation tillage on black soil organic carbon components in sloping farmland. Trans CSAE, 2023, 39(10): 103-111 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[6]	Ahmad N, Virk A L, Hafeez M B, et al. Effects of different tillage and residue management systems on soil organic carbon stock and grain yield of rice-wheat double cropping system. Ecol Indic, 2024, 158: 111452. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111452
[7]	黄颖博, 汤文光, 肖小平, 等. 稻田不同种植模式对土壤养分表观平衡和氮素生产效率的影响. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30: 1119-1126.
	Huang Y B, Tang W G, Xiao X P, et al. Effects of different cropping patterns on soil nutrient apparent balance and nitrogen production efficiency in paddy fields. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2019, 30: 1119-1126 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[8]	梁文举, 董元华, 李英滨, 等. 土壤健康的生物学表征与调控. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32: 719-728. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202102.041
	Liang W J, Dong Y H, Li Y B, et al. Biological characterization and regulation of soil health. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2021, 32: 719-728 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[9]	刘淑军, 李冬初, 黄晶, 等. 近30年来我国小麦和玉米秸秆资源时空变化特征及还田减肥潜力. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56: 3140-3155. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.16.008
	Liu S J, Li D C, Huang J, et al. Spatial-temporal variation characteristics of wheat and maize stalk resources and chemical fertilizer reduction potential of returning to farmland in recent 30 years in China. Sci Agric Sin, 2023, 56: 3140-3155 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.16.008
[10]	王雪, 佟丙辛, 李长青, 等. 免耕技术对三大粮食作物的区域产量效应及其影响因素的Meta分析. 农业工程学报, 2024, 40(16): 133-142.
	Wang X, Tong B X, Li C Q, et al. Influencing factors of no-tillage on the regional yield of wheat, maize, and rice using Meta-analysis. Trans CSAE, 2024, 40(16): 133-142 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[11]	Dou S X, Wang Z P, Tong J C, et al. Strip tillage promotes crop yield in comparison with no tillage based on a meta-analysis. Soil Tillage Res, 2024, 240: 106085. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2024.106085
[12]	曹玉军, 姚凡云, 王丹, 等. 不同栽培技术因子对雨养春玉米产量与氮素效率差异的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53: 3036-3047. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.15.005
	Cao Y J, Yao F Y, Wang D, et al. Effects of different agronomy factors on yield gap and nitrogen efficiency gap of spring maize under rain-fed conditions. Sci Agric Sin, 2020, 53: 3036-3047 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.15.005
[13]	陈绪昊, 高强, 陈新平, 等. 东北三省玉米生产资源投入和环境效应的时空特征. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55: 3170-3184. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.16.009
	Chen X H, Gao Q, Chen X P, et al. Temporal and spatial characteristics of resources input and environmental effects for maize production in the three provinces of Northeast China. Sci Agric Sin, 2022, 55: 3170-3184 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.16.009
[14]	张福锁, 王激清, 张卫峰, 等. 中国主要粮食作物肥料利用率现状与提高途径. 土壤学报, 2008, 45: 915-924.
	Zhang F S, Wang J Q, Zhang W F, et al. Nutrient use efficiencies of major cereal crops in China and measures for improvement. Acta Pedol Sin, 2008, 45: 915-924 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[15]	郑宾, 赵伟, 徐铮, 等. 不同耕作方式与氮肥类型对夏玉米光合性能的影响. 作物学报, 2017, 43: 925-934. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00925
	Zheng B, Zhao W, Xu Z, et al. Effects of tillage methods and nitrogen fertilizer types on photosynthetic performance of summer maize. Acta Agron Sin, 2017, 43: 925-934 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00925
[16]	李翔宇, 季欣杰, 王雪莲, 等. 秸秆还田配施氮肥对春玉米产量和籽粒品质的影响. 作物学报, 2025, 51: 696-712. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.43031
	Li X Y, Ji X J, Wang X L, et al. Effects of straw returning combined with nitrogen fertilizer on yield and grain quality of spring maize. Acta Agron Sin, 2025, 51: 696-712 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.43031
[17]	Xi H, Jia M Y, Kuzyakov Y, et al. Key decomposers of straw depending on tillage and fertilization. Agric Ecosyst Environ, 2023, 358: 108717. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2023.108717
[18]	吕丽华, 陶洪斌, 夏来坤, 等. 不同种植密度下的夏玉米冠层结构及光合特性. 作物学报, 2008, 34: 447-455. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00447
	Lyu L H, Tao H B, Xia L K, et al. Canopy structure and photosynthetic traits of summer maize under different planting densities. Acta Agron Sin, 2008, 34: 447-455 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00447
[19]	Abed Gatea AL-SHAMMARY A, Kouzani A Z, Kaynak A, et al. Soil bulk density estimation methods: a review. Pedosphere, 2018, 28: 581-596. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(18)60034-7
[20]	Zhou M, Liu C Z, Wang J, et al. Soil aggregates stability and storage of soil organic carbon respond to cropping systems on black soils of Northeast China. Sci Rep, 2020, 10: 265. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-57193-1 pmid: 31937821
[21]	王玉凤, 陈天宇, 付健, 等. 不同耕作方式对松嫩平原半干旱区玉米生长和产量的影响. 玉米科学, 2022, 30(2): 104-111.
	Wang Y F, Chen T Y, Fu J, et al. Effects of tillage methods on maize growth and yield in semiarid area of Songnen plain. J Maize Sci, 2022, 30(2): 104-111 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[22]	刘秋霞, 董二伟, 黄晓磊, 等. 不同生态区高粱籽粒产量和品质对氮肥施用的响应. 作物学报, 2023, 49: 2766-2776.
	Liu Q X, Dong E W, Huang X L, et al. Response of sorghum grain yield and quality to nitrogen application in different ecozones. Acta Agron Sin, 2023, 49: 2766-2776 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.34004
[23]	赵阔礼, 吴敏, 周勇. 浅谈水稻栽培及病虫害绿色防控技术要点. 种子科技, 2023, 41(10): 100-102.
	Zhao K L, Wu M, Zhou Y. Brief discussion on the key points of rice cultivation and green prevention and control techniques for diseases and pests. Seed Sci Technol, 2023, 41(10): 100-102 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[24]	屈佳伟, 田磊, 于长生, 等. 耕作方式与秸秆还田对土壤物理性状及春玉米产量的影响. 玉米科学, 2024, 32(8): 55-62.
	Qu J W, Tian L, Yu C S, et al. Effects of tillage methods and straw returning on soil physical properties and yield of spring maize. J Maize Sci, 2024, 32(8): 55-62 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[25]	Zhang Q, Wang S L, Sun Y G, et al. Conservation tillage improves soil water storage, spring maize (Zea mays L.) yield and WUE in two types of seasonal rainfall distributions. Soil Tillage Res, 2022, 215: 105237. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2021.105237
[26]	Achankeng E, Cornelis W. Conservation tillage effects on European crop yields: a meta-analysis. Field Crops Res, 2023, 298: 108967. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2023.108967
[27]	石梦迪, 于乔乔, 蒋文月, 等. 带旋和全旋耕作对稻茬小麦生长和土壤理化性质的影响. 农业工程学报, 2023, 39(8): 65-75.
	Shi M D, Yu Q Q, Jiang W Y, et al. Effects of the strip rotary and full rotary tillage on the wheat growth and soil physicochemical properties in rice stubble. Trans CSAE, 2023, 39(8): 65-75 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[28]	Chen N N, Zhao X, Dou S X, et al. The tradeoff between maintaining maize (Zea mays L.) productivity and improving soil quality under conservation tillage practice in semi-arid region of Northeast China. Agriculture, 2023, 13: 508. doi: 10.3390/agriculture13020508
[29]	Qian Y Q, Zhang Z B, Jiang F H, et al. Impacts of tillage treatments on soil physical properties and maize growth at two sites under different climatic conditions in black soil region of Northeast China. Soil Tillage Res, 2025, 248: 106471. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2025.106471
[30]	Mikha M M, Hergert G W, Qiao X, et al. Soil chemical properties after 12 years of tillage and crop rotation. Agron J, 2020, 112: 4395-4406. doi: 10.1002/agj2.v112.5
[31]	赵鹏, 陈阜. 秸秆还田配施化学氮肥对冬小麦氮效率和产量的影响. 作物学报, 2008, 34: 1014-1018. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.01014
	Zhao P, Chen F. Effects of straw mulching plus nitrogen fertilizer on nitrogen efficiency and grain yield in winter wheat. Acta Agron Sin, 2008, 34: 1014-1018 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.01014
[32]	王鹏飞, 于爱忠, 王凤, 等. 干旱地区绿肥还田条件下减氮对玉米农艺性状、产量及籽粒品质的影响. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58: 2552-2563. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.13.005
	Wang P F, Yu A Z, Wang F, et al. Effects of reducing nitrogen application on maize agronomic traits, grain yield and quality under green manure returning to field system in arid areas. Sci Agric Sin, 2025, 58: 2552-2563 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.13.005
[33]	Ji J H, Liu S Q, Hao X Y, et al. Effects of different nitrogen fertilizer rates on spring maize yield and soil nitrogen balance under straw returning conditions of cold regions. Plants, 2025, 14: 3087. doi: 10.3390/plants14193087
[34]	Xing Y Y, Mi F Y, Wang X K. Effects of different nitrogen fertilizer types and application rates on maize yield and nitrogen use efficiency in Loess Plateau of China. J Soils Sediments, 2022, 22: 1938-1958. doi: 10.1007/s11368-022-03210-2
[35]	Feng X M, Hao Y B, Latifmanesh H, et al. Effects of subsoiling tillage on soil properties, maize root distribution, and grain yield on mollisols of Northeastern China. Agron J, 2018, 110: 1607-1615. doi: 10.2134/agronj2018.01.0027
[36]	宋振伟, 郭金瑞, 任军, 等. 耕作方式对东北雨养区玉米光合与叶绿素荧光特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24: 1900-1906.
	Song Z W, Guo J R, Ren J, et al. Effects of tillage patterns on photosynthetic and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of maize in rainfed area of Northeast China. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2013, 24: 1900-1906 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[37]	付国占, 李潮海, 王俊忠, 等. 残茬覆盖与耕作方式对土壤性状及夏玉米水分利用效率的影响. 农业工程学报, 2005, 21(1): 52-56.
	Fu G Z, Li C H, Wang J Z, et al. Effects of stubble mulch and tillage managements on soil physical properties and water use efficiency of summer maize. Trans CSAE, 2005, 21(1): 52-56 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[38]	Zhao H L, Shar A G, Li S, et al. Effect of straw return mode on soil aggregation and aggregate carbon content in an annual maize-wheat double cropping system. Soil Tillage Res, 2018, 175: 178-186. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2017.09.012
[39]	张鹏, 贾志宽, 王维, 等. 秸秆还田对宁南半干旱地区土壤团聚体特征的影响. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45: 1513-1520. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.08.007
	Zhang P, Jia Z K, Wang W, et al. Effects of straw returning on characteristics of soil aggregates in semi-arid area in Southern Ningxia of China. Sci Agric Sin, 2012, 45: 1513-1520 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[40]	邬小春, 马向峰, 杨晓军, 等. 不同耕作方式对西北地区春玉米土壤物理性状及产量的影响. 玉米科学, 2020, 28(3): 127-134.
	Wu X C, Ma X F, Yang X J, et al. Effects of different tillage methods on soil physical properties and yield of spring maize in Northwest China. J Maize Sci, 2020, 28(3): 127-134 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[41]	Alvarez R, Steinbach H S. A review of the effects of tillage systems on some soil physical properties, water content, nitrate availability and crops yield in the Argentine Pampas. Soil Tillage Res, 2009, 104: 1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2009.02.005
[42]	孙智超, 张吉旺. 弱光胁迫影响玉米产量形成的生理机制及调控效应. 作物学报, 2023, 49: 12-23. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.13064
	Sun Z C, Zhang J W. Physiological mechanism and regulation effect of low light on maize yield formation. Acta Agron Sin, 2023, 49: 12-23 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.13064
[43]	Li R P, Zheng J Y, Xie R Z, et al. Potential mechanisms of maize yield reduction under short-term no-tillage combined with residue coverage in the semi-humid region of Northeast China. Soil Tillage Res, 2022, 217: 105289. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2021.105289
[44]	李婧妤, 李倩, 武雪萍, 等. 免耕对农田土壤持水特性和有机碳储量影响的区域差异. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53: 3729-3740. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.18.009
	Li J Y, Li Q, Wu X P, et al. Regional variation in the effects of no-till on soil water retention and organic carbon pool. Sci Agric Sin, 2020, 53: 3729-3740 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.18.009
[45]	闫雷, 喇乐鹏, 董天浩, 等. 耕作方式对东北黑土坡耕地土壤物理性状及根系垂直分布的影响. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(1): 125-132.
	Yan L, La L P, Dong T H, et al. Soil physical properties and vertical distribution of root systems affected by tillage methods in black soil slope farmlands in Northeast China. Trans CSAE, 2021, 37(1): 125-132 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[46]	Komissarov M A, Klik A. The impact of No-till, conservation, and conventional tillage systems on erosion and soil properties in lower Austria. Eurasian Soil Sci, 2020, 53: 503-511. doi: 10.1134/S1064229320040079
[47]	何家帅, 李新美, 魏跃鹏, 等. 长期深耕秸秆还田配施生物炭对砂姜黑土团聚体及小麦-玉米产量的影响. 农业工程学报, 2024, 40(7): 161-171.
	He J S, Li X M, Wei Y P, et al. Effects of long-term deep tillage and straw return with biochar addition to lime concretion black soil on the aggregates and wheat-maize yield. Trans CSAE, 2024, 40(7): 161-171 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[48]	李景, 吴会军, 武雪萍, 等. 长期保护性耕作提高土壤大团聚体含量及团聚体有机碳的作用. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21: 378-386.
	Li J, Wu H J, Wu X P, et al. Impact of long-term conservation tillage on soil aggregate formation and aggregate organic carbon contents. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2015, 21: 378-386 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[49]	刘亚龙, 王萍, 汪景宽. 土壤团聚体的形成和稳定机制: 研究进展与展望. 土壤学报, 2023, 60: 627-643.
	Liu Y L, Wang P, Wang J K. Formation and stability mechanism of soil aggregates: progress and prospect. Acta Pedol Sin, 2023, 60: 627-643 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[50]	胡宏宇, 张靖, 刘莹, 等. 三峡水库消落带优势植物不同配置对土壤结构稳定性的影响. 生态学报, 2025, 45: 2710-2722.
	Hu H Y, Zhang J, Liu Y, et al. Soil structure stability impacted by the different configurations of dominant plant species in the riparian zone of Three Gorges Reservoir. Acta Ecol Sin, 2025, 45: 2710-2722 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[51]	郭戎博, 李国栋, 潘梦雨, 等. 秸秆还田与施氮对耕层土壤有机碳储量、组分和团聚体的影响. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56: 4035-4048. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.20.009
	Guo R B, Li G D, Pan M Y, et al. Effects of long-term straw return and nitrogen application rate on organic carbon storage, components and aggregates in cultivated layers. Sci Agric Sin, 2023, 56: 4035-4048 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.20.009
[52]	郭孟洁, 李建业, 李健宇, 等. 实施16年保护性耕作下黑土土壤结构功能变化特征. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(22): 108-118.
	Guo M J, Li J Y, Li J Y, et al. Changes of soil structure and function after 16-year conservation tillage in black soil. Trans CSAE, 2021, 37(22): 108-118 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[53]	王亚琼, 牛文全, 李学凯, 等. 生物炭对日光大棚土壤团聚体结构的影响. 水土保持通报, 2019, 39(4): 190-195.
	Wang Y Q, Niu W Q, Li X K, et al. Effects of biochar on soil aggregate structure in solar greenhouse. Bull Soil Water Conserv, 2019, 39(4): 190-195 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

耕作方式 Tillage method	氮肥施用量 N application rate	株高 Plant height (cm)			穗位高 Ear height (cm)	茎粗 Stem diameter (cm)
耕作方式 Tillage method	氮肥施用量 N application rate	V3	V6	R1	R6	R6
CT	N0	22.4±0.7 abc	130.2±1.8 bc	278.4±1.4 c	112.6±0.9 cdef	2.4±0.1 de
	N1	22.7±0.6 abc	137.3±3.8 a	297.9±4.8 ab	120.4±0.2 ab	2.6±0.0 bc
	N2	24.6±0.2 abc	142.0±1.2 a	309.4±4.3 a	127.5±2.2 a	2.6±0.0 bc
	N3	26.0±0.6 ab	143.0±0.9 a	306.8±1.9 ab	120.1±3.4 b	2.8±0.1 a
RT	N0	21.1±0.1 bc	107.5±1.1 d	259.8±2.7 d	117.0±2.2 bcde	2.2±0.1 f
	N1	21.8±0.6 abc	137.5±4.2 a	301.3±6.1 ab	116.5±3.2 bcde	2.5±0.1 cd
	N2	21.3±0.7 bc	138.5±2.6 a	308.6±1.0 a	117.7±2.6 bcde	2.7±0.0 b
	N3	24.1±1.1 abc	141.8±1.6 a	306.4±6.2 ab	110.7±1.6 ef	2.6±0.1 bc
ST	N0	27.0±7.1 a	109.3±3.0 d	252.2±4.7 d	111.5±4.3 def	2.3±0.0 e
	N1	24.6±0.5 abc	126.2±2.4 c	295.8±4.3 b	118.2±1.9 bcd	2.5±0.0 cd
	N2	22.9±0.3 abc	128.2±4.2 c	301.0±3.3 ab	119.5±2.8 bc	2.7±0.1 b
	N3	22.9±0.4 abc	125.7±0.8 c	299.7±3.1 ab	117.7±3.8 bcde	2.7±0.0 b
NT	N0	20.2±0.2 c	111.5±2.5 d	257.7±2.7 d	109.3±2.5 f	2.2±0.0 ef
	N1	22.5±0.5 abc	136.5±1.0 ab	298.4±1.6 ab	123.2±0.7 ab	2.6±0.0 bc
	N2	22.0±0.6 abc	136.2±0.9 ab	307.8±1.1 a	119.8±1.3 bc	2.6±0.0 bc
	N3	22.4±0.1 abc	140.2±2.3 a	301.3±7.8 ab	117.5±2.0 bcde	2.7±0.0 b
ANOVA
Tillage method (T)		ns	***	ns	ns	ns
N application rate (N)		ns	***	***	***	***
T×N		ns	**	ns	*	ns

耕作方式 Tillage method	氮肥施用量 N application rate	V3	V6	R1	R3	R6
CT	N0	0.05±0.00 bc	2.12±0.07 f	5.05±0.07 bcd	4.42±0.10 e	2.68±0.03 ef
	N1	0.05±0.00 bc	2.42±0.15 e	5.61±0.06 a	5.29±0.06 bc	3.25±0.03 bcd
	N2	0.05±0.00 ab	2.70±0.01 d	5.40±0.17 ab	5.42±0.10 abc	2.74±0.08 def
	N3	0.06±0.00 a	3.08±0.02 ab	5.31±0.06 ab	5.45±0.06 ab	2.97±0.12 cdef
RT	N0	0.03±0.00 f	1.93±0.07 f	4.61±0.07 e	4.61±0.09 de	2.48±0.06 f
	N1	0.04±0.00 cde	3.18±0.07 a	5.39±0.25 ab	5.42±0.07 abc	2.69±0.14 ef
	N2	0.04±0.00 cde	2.98±0.07 abc	5.26±0.16 abc	5.60±0.11 a	3.04±0.05 cde
	N3	0.04±0.00 bcd	3.10±0.05 ab	5.56±0.12 a	5.45±0.05 ab	2.87±0.16 def
ST	N0	0.03±0.00 f	2.42±0.07 e	4.92±0.13 cde	4.60±0.01 de	2.49±0.20 f
	N1	0.04±0.00 def	2.79±0.08 cd	5.62±0.13 a	5.27±0.02 bc	3.19±0.21 bcde
	N2	0.04±0.00 cde	2.96±0.24 abcd	5.35±0.19 ab	5.30±0.07 bc	3.44±0.17 abc
	N3	0.04±0.00 cde	2.89±0.03 bcd	5.44±0.13 a	5.23±0.03 c	3.69±0.27 ab
NT	N0	0.03±0.00 f	2.38±0.07 e	4.80±0.04 de	4.64±0.09 d	2.43±0.15 f
	N1	0.03±0.00 ef	3.06±0.04 ab	5.37±0.04 ab	5.30±0.06 bc	3.60±0.22 ab
	N2	0.04±0.00 def	3.20±0.04 a	5.56±0.17 a	5.24±0.09 c	3.86±0.20 a
	N3	0.03±0.00 f	3.16±0.06 a	5.55±0.05 a	5.33±0.06 bc	3.48±0.28 abc
ANOVA
Tillage method (T)		***	**	ns	ns	ns
N application rate (N)		***	***	***	***	***
T×N		ns	**	ns	ns	**

耕作方式 Tillage method	氮肥施用量 N application rate	V3	V6	R1	R3	R6
CT	N0	17.7±1.6 e	1681.2±94.7 fg	6187.5±224.6 e	9425.3±309.4 d	14,913.4±145.6 e
	N1	21.7±1.1 cd	2149.4±214.3 cde	10,142.3±124.7 ab	15,097.4±456.9 c	24,443.4±192.9 bcd
	N2	28.2±1.0 b	2174.5±69.4 cde	9610.1±510.3 bcd	15,519.6±537.3 bc	24,579.7±651.5 bcd
	N3	32.6±1.9 a	2840.4±71.9 a	10,531.4±395.1 a	17,322.4±253.4 a	25,549.8±752.2 bc
RT	N0	13.0±0.8 f	992.1±6.6 i	5226.1±114.4 f	9513.9±459.3 d	12,006.1±271.8 f
	N1	21.3±1.0 cd	2223.0±93.1 bcde	9767.5±431.8 abc	15,663.1±441.5 bc	23,574.3±591.5 cd
	N2	20.1±1.3 de	2098.8±98.0 de	9846.6±73.9 abc	16,314.7±576.1 abc	24,087.2±703.4 cd
	N3	24.1±0.9 c	2528.3±35.3 ab	10,277.8±347.2 ab	16,254.9±541.7 abc	24,891.7±903.2 bcd
ST	N0	11.4±0.5 f	1431.9±87.3 gh	5386.6±288.1 ef	9403.2±248.1 d	14,757.7±780.0 e
	N1	17.1±0.5 e	1946.4±70.7 ef	8950.9±501.4 cd	15,096.1±434.4 c	22,692.4±660.5 d
	N2	18.4±1.6 de	2049.8±239.1 de	10,614.7±247.0 a	16,816.6±260.4 ab	28,052.2±971.0 a
	N3	17.3±1.4 e	1896.6±159.4 ef	9716.1±438.6 abcd	15,629.8±782.2 bc	26,897.5±987.1 ab
NT	N0	11.9±1.1 f	1135.2±80.1 hi	4971.0±159.4 f	9424.4±266.4 d	12,737.0±265.6 ef
	N1	16.7±1.6 e	2349.1±87.5 bcd	8818.5±231.6 d	15,550.5±134.7 bc	22,404.0±342.1 d
	N2	17.7±1.0 e	2482.4±204.6 bc	9592.5±139.6 bcd	15,637.2±715.1 bc	24,450.5±869.6 bcd
	N3	18.6±0.4 de	2380.5±52.2 bcd	10,014.5±284.4 ab	16,322.6±753.4 abc	25,414.5±196.6 bc
ANOVA
Tillage method (T)		***	*	ns	ns	*
N application rate (N)		***	***	***	***	***
T×N		**	**	*	ns	ns

耕作方式 Tillage method	氮肥施用量 N application rate	穗数 Ear number (×10⁴ hm^-2)	穗粒数 Grain number (Number per ear)	百粒重 100-kernal weight (g)	产量 Grain yield (kg hm^-2)
CT	N0	5.0±0.1 d	466.2±20.2 bc	36.2±1.4 e	6219.6±103.0 h
	N1	5.9±0.2 abc	682.1±5.2 a	42.3±0.5 cd	12,170.4±238.7 f
	N2	5.7±0.1 bc	710.8±22.1 a	43.0±0.3 bcd	13,357.4±230.7 cd
	N3	6.1±0.1 ab	700.0±4.5 a	45.1±0.5 ab	14,791.9±87.3 a
RT	N0	5.1±0.2 d	461.7±22.4 c	38.5±0.5 e	5772.7±271.3 h
	N1	6.0±0.2 abc	662.9±13.8 a	43.6±0.7 bcd	12,414.8±145.3 ef
	N2	6.0±0.0 ab	686.5±15.0 a	42.2±1.6 d	13,137.5±90.5 de
	N3	6.0±0.1 abc	693.0±6.4 a	44.6±0.1 abc	14,046.4±193.4 abc
ST	N0	5.6±0.1 c	525.0±63.5 b	38.0±0.2 e	7244.7±272.7 g
	N1	5.9±0.1 abc	686.1±9.2 a	44.7±0.7 abc	13,343.1±285.6 cd
	N2	6.2±0.1 a	676.9±7.1 a	45.1±0.5 ab	14,431.8±179.1 ab
	N3	5.9±0.1 abc	701.4±10.2 a	44.1±1.6 abcd	14,044.9±266.7 abc
NT	N0	4.9±0.1 d	455.6±29.0 c	37.7±0.6 e	5854.6±366.6 h
	N1	5.8±0.1 abc	676.1±20.2 a	42.6±0.5 cd	12,548.7±224.6 ef
	N2	5.9±0.2 abc	695.9±5.0 a	43.6±1.0 bcd	13,773.2±589.5 bcd
	N3	6.0±0.1 abc	674.8±13.0 a	46.0±0.5 a	13,904.0±242.8 bc
ANOVA
Tillage method (T)		ns	ns	*	ns
N application rate (N)		***	***	***	***
T×N		*	ns	*	ns

秸秆还田下耕作方式与氮肥施用量对东北玉米产量及土壤团聚体的影响

Effects of tillage methods and nitrogen application rate on maize yield and soil aggregates in northeastern China under straw returning

RichHTML

PDF

文章附图附表

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 11

参考文献 53

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

关于本刊

在线期刊

作者中心

相关单位

联系我们

ANOVA	土层深度 Soil depth (cm)	> 2.000 mm (%)	0.250-2.000 mm (%)	0.053-0.250 mm (%)	< 0.053 mm (%)	MWD	GMD
Tillage method (T)	0-20	*	*	ns	ns	*	*
N application rate (N)		ns	*	**	***	*	*
T×N		ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
Tillage method (T)	20-40	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
N application rate (N)		ns	ns	*	ns	ns	ns
T×N		ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns

[1]	金欣欣, 苏俏, 宋亚辉, 赵继玉, 杨永庆, 王瑾. 种植密度对半匍匐型和直立型花生物质生产及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 2219-2230.
[2]	许佳怡, 刘宇航, 徐冰洁, 许明, 王汝娟, 柴沙沙, 柳洪鹃. 栽插方式与密度互作调控甘薯光合产物生产、转运与分配的生理机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 2127-2143.
[3]	张国超, 王昀杰, 常巧玲, 侯思宇, 樊志龙, 殷文, 胡发龙, 柴强. 绿洲灌区间作绿肥和灌水量对玉米耗水特性及水分生产效率的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 2180-2192.
[4]	谭晓强, 王健, 蒯婕, 汪波, 王晶, 徐正华, 赵杰, 张鹏鹏, 张建, 周广生. 基于氮营养指数和综合长势指标的油菜协同监测[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 2109-2126.
[5]	肖红, 李炳霖, 廖博, 肖国滨, 吕伟生, 任涛, 陆志峰, 鲁剑巍. 终花期外源喷镁对油菜籽粒产量和角果生长发育的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 2084-2094.
[6]	刘峰, 董宏伟, 张越, 李冉, 孙若男, 刘佳城, 孙树杰, 张旭东, 韩清芳. 玉豆间作减氮稳产的光合机制：光合产物转化效率提升[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 2095-2108.
[7]	胡川, 赵凯男, 黄修利, 吴金芝, 任开明, 王贺正, 付国占, 黄明, 李友军. 一次灌溉下耕作方式和氮肥用量对旱地小麦产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1830-1846.
[8]	张思思, 赵向辉, 周洋, 姚云凤, 朱荣昱, 董元杰, 胡国庆, 徐通, 刘兆新. 冬闲期翻耕和绿肥还田对连作花生田土壤理化性质和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1472-1486.
[9]	张宁宁, 滕雨菲, 任娜娜, 魏兴卓, 闫书豪, 樊可心, 王永宏, 陈文康, 张兴华, 朱万超, 徐淑兔, 薛吉全. 201份玉米自交系抗旱表型评价及可塑性分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1309-1325.
[10]	张鸿蓉, 王菲儿, 李盼, 仇海龙, 朱静, 赵连豪, 南运有, 何蔚, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 柴强, 殷文. 减量20%灌水与25%有机肥替代化肥提高青贮玉米产量的光合特性[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1487-1500.
[11]	王宇诚, 张露, 刘阿康, 黄见良, 彭少兵, 袁珅. 基于产量差的作物大面积单产提升策略与展望[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1279-1290.
[12]	赵佳雪, 周龙昊, 郭岂源, 尚伦霄, 王涵, 刘志涛, 陈曦, 张晓佩, 宋宪亮, 毛丽丽. 长期秸秆还田与深松通过改善土壤环境与棉花光合特性提高滨海盐碱地棉花产量[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1548-1560.
[13]	郭星宇, 胡丹, 林苏期, 王梦凯, 谭文峰, 黄传琴. 生物炭配施化肥提高玉米‖大豆下玉米产量和土壤生态系统多功能性[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1536-1547.
[14]	张振, 冯连杰, 石玉, 于振文, 张永丽. 节水补灌下不同穗型小麦产量形成差异研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1522-1535.
[15]	闫安, 蒋昆炜, 王蓉圆, 田林, 张璐, 王韵, 徐建龙. 水稻剑叶小维管束数基因SVN7的鉴定与克隆[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1364-1372.