欢迎访问作物学报,今天是

作物学报 ›› 2006, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (08): 1261-1264.

• 研究简报 • 上一篇    

土壤水分对水稻产量与品质的影响

郑桂萍1;李金峰1;钱永德1;李红宇1;郭晓红1;王伯伦2   

  1. 1黑龙江八一农垦大学,黑龙江大庆163319; 2沈阳农业大学,辽宁沈阳110161
  • 收稿日期:2005-06-30 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2006-08-12 网络出版日期:2006-08-12

Effect of Soil Moisture on Yield and Quality of Rice

ZHENG Gui-Ping1,LI Jin-Feng1,QIAN Yong-De1,LI Hong-Yu1,GUO Xiao-Hong1,WANG Bo-Lun2   

  1. 1Heilongjiang August First Land Reclamation University, Daqing 163319, Heilongjiang;2Shenyang Agriculture University, Shenyang 110161, Liaoning, China
  • Received:2005-06-30 Revised:1900-01-01 Published:2006-08-12 Published online:2006-08-12

摘要:

采用上育397和绥粳3号水稻品种,于分蘖期、长穗期、抽穗后1~10 d、11~20 d、21~30 d及1~30 d,用负压式土壤湿度计监测,分别进行土壤水势为-30~-35 kPa、-60~-65 kPa的控水处理。结果表明,抽穗前土壤水势控制在-30~-35 kPa时,两品种的产量均显著降低,以长穗期产量最低,进一步降低土壤水势产量不再明显下降;分蘖期控水的减产幅度以上育397>绥粳3号,长穗期以上育397<绥粳3号;2个品种穗分化期控水对籽粒品质影响最大,质量质数最低,其他时期相差不大,因此,穗分化期不仅是水稻产量的水分敏感期,也是品质的水分敏感期;比较两品种相同处理的抗旱系数和质量质数,抽穗前控水处理对产量的影响大于对品质的影响,尤其是劣势粒中表现的更为突出,抽穗后多数处理对品质的影响大于对产量的影响。

关键词: 水稻, 土壤水分, 产量, 抗旱系数, 品质, 质量质数

Abstract:

A pot experiment with controlling water treatments (CWT) for the two cultivars, Shangyu 397 and Suijing 3 at -30 kPa to -35 kPa and -60 kPa to -65 kPa of soil water potential(SWP) monitored by soil negative pressure water potential tester was carried out during tillering period, panicle formation period, 1–10 days after heading, 11–20 days after heading, 21–30 days after heading, 1-30 days after heading, respectively. The results showed that the yield of two cultivars was decreased significantly before heading stages, especially at panicle formation stage by lower SWP, but no longer obvious decrease was observed when SWP continued to be decreased .The yield lower of Shangyu 397 was greater than that of Suijing 3 at tillering stage, however that was in reverse at panicle formation stage. The effect of CWT on grain quality of the two cultivars was greater at panicle formation stage than at other stages, with the lowest comprehensive index embodied quality. Water sensitive stage of yield and quality was panicle differentiation stage. Comparing drought resistance coefficient and comprehensive index of the two cultivars, the effect of CWT after heading stages on quality was greater than that on yield.

Key words: Rice, Soil moisture, Yield, Drought-resistance index, Quality, Comprehensive index embodied quality

中图分类号: 

  • S511
[1] 田甜, 陈丽娟, 何华勤. 基于Meta-QTL和RNA-seq的整合分析挖掘水稻抗稻瘟病候选基因[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1372-1388.
[2] 郑崇珂, 周冠华, 牛淑琳, 和亚男, 孙伟, 谢先芝. 水稻早衰突变体esl-H5的表型鉴定与基因定位[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1389-1400.
[3] 周文期, 强晓霞, 王森, 江静雯, 卫万荣. 水稻OsLPL2/PIR基因抗旱耐盐机制研究[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1401-1415.
[4] 郑小龙, 周菁清, 白杨, 邵雅芳, 章林平, 胡培松, 魏祥进. 粳稻不同穗部籽粒的淀粉与垩白品质差异及分子机制[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1425-1436.
[5] 王丹, 周宝元, 马玮, 葛均筑, 丁在松, 李从锋, 赵明. 长江中游双季玉米种植模式周年气候资源分配与利用特征[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1437-1450.
[6] 王旺年, 葛均筑, 杨海昌, 阴法庭, 黄太利, 蒯婕, 王晶, 汪波, 周广生, 傅廷栋. 大田作物在不同盐碱地的饲料价值评价[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1451-1462.
[7] 颜佳倩, 顾逸彪, 薛张逸, 周天阳, 葛芊芊, 张耗, 刘立军, 王志琴, 顾骏飞, 杨建昌, 周振玲, 徐大勇. 耐盐性不同水稻品种对盐胁迫的响应差异及其机制[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1463-1475.
[8] 杨欢, 周颖, 陈平, 杜青, 郑本川, 蒲甜, 温晶, 杨文钰, 雍太文. 玉米-豆科作物带状间套作对养分吸收利用及产量优势的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1476-1487.
[9] 陈静, 任佰朝, 赵斌, 刘鹏, 张吉旺. 叶面喷施甜菜碱对不同播期夏玉米产量形成及抗氧化能力的调控[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1502-1515.
[10] 李祎君, 吕厚荃. 气候变化背景下农业气象灾害对东北地区春玉米产量影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1537-1545.
[11] 杨建昌, 李超卿, 江贻. 稻米氨基酸含量和组分及其调控[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1037-1050.
[12] 石艳艳, 马志花, 吴春花, 周永瑾, 李荣. 垄作沟覆地膜对旱地马铃薯光合特性及产量形成的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1288-1297.
[13] 杨德卫, 王勋, 郑星星, 项信权, 崔海涛, 李生平, 唐定中. OsSAMS1在水稻稻瘟病抗性中的功能研究[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1119-1128.
[14] 朱峥, 王田幸子, 陈悦, 刘玉晴, 燕高伟, 徐珊, 马金姣, 窦世娟, 李莉云, 刘国振. 水稻转录因子WRKY68在Xa21介导的抗白叶枯病反应中发挥正调控作用[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1129-1140.
[15] 王小雷, 李炜星, 欧阳林娟, 徐杰, 陈小荣, 边建民, 胡丽芳, 彭小松, 贺晓鹏, 傅军如, 周大虎, 贺浩华, 孙晓棠, 朱昌兰. 基于染色体片段置换系群体检测水稻株型性状QTL[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1141-1151.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!