欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2009, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (7): 1364-1368.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2009.01364

• 研究简报 • 上一篇    下一篇

耕作深度对烤烟生长、养分吸收及产量、质量的影响

徐天养1,赵正雄1,*,李忠环2,陈荣平2,许龙2,王胱霖2,金霞1   

  1. 1云南农业大学烟草学院，云南昆明650201；2云南省烟草公司昆明市公司，云南昆明650051
  • 收稿日期:2008-11-03 修回日期:2009-03-18 出版日期:2009-07-12 网络出版日期:2009-05-19
  • 通讯作者: 赵正雄, E-mail: zhaozx0801@163.com; Tel: 0871-5220536
  • 基金资助:

    本研究由云南省烟草公司科技项目计划（06A12）资助。

Effect of tilling Depth on Growth,Nutrient Uptake,Yield and Quality of Flue-Cured Tobacco Plant

XU Tian-Yang1,ZHAO Zheng-Xiong1,*,LI Zhong-Huan2,CHEN Rong-Ping2,XU Long2,WANG Guang-Lin2,JIN Xia1   

  1. 1College of Tobacco Sciences,Yunnan Agricultural University,Kunming 650201,China;2Kunming Tobacco Company,Yunnan Tobacco Company,Kunming 650051,China
  • Received:2008-11-03 Revised:2009-03-18 Published:2009-07-12 Published online:2009-05-19
  • Contact: ZHAO Zheng-Xiong, E-mail: zhaozx0801@163.com; Tel: 0871-5220536

PDF

1697

被引次数

30

摘要：

通过田间试验研究了移栽前不同耕作深度(20、30和40 cm)对烟株农艺性状、根系发育及分布、干物质累积和养分吸收以及烟叶产量、产值和品质的影响。结果表明，不同耕作深度处理烟株前期生长无明显差异，但到打顶时烟株根系发育和分布则有显著差异。在0~10 cm土层内, 根系数量及根干重均随耕作深度增加而下降；而10~20 cm、20~30 cm两土层内根系数量及干重与耕作深度间的关系则与0~10 cm相反，20 cm处理与其余两处理间差异显著，耕作深度为40 cm处理明显有更多的根系。各处理烟株烟叶叶面积系数及最大叶面积、整株干物质累积和氮磷钾养分吸收均随耕作深度增加而增大, 且这种趋势随生育期发展而愈加明显。烤后烟叶产量、产值以耕作深度为40 cm处理最高, 30 cm处理次之, 20 cm处理最低, 前者与后两者间有显著差异；而评吸质量以耕作深度为30 cm处理各部位和40 cm处理上部叶相对更好。综合考虑, 建议烤烟生产中土壤耕作深度以30~40 cm为宜。

关键词: 烤烟, 甘蔗深度, 根系, 干物质积累, 养分吸收, 产量, 质量

Abstract:

Deeper tillage has been commonly thought having positive effect on plant growth, but what depth for tillage is better is not clearly in tobacco production. A field experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of tilling depth (20, 30, and 40 cm, respectively) on the growth, root distribution, dry matter accumulation, nutrient uptake, yield and quality of flue–cured tobacco plant in Shilin county, Yunnan. The results showed that tobacco plant growth was significantly affected by the tilling depth from topping to harvesting except the early stage. The number and dry weight of roots decreased with increasing tilling depth at the 0–10 cm soil layer, but increased at the 10–20 cm and 20–30 cm soil layers, and more roots were found for the treatment with tilling depth at 40 cm. Leaf area index, maximum leaf area, dry matter accumulation and uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium increased in the plant with deepening tilling depth. The highest yield and economic value of flue-cured tobacco leaves were obtained at 40 cm of tilling depth. Moreover, the 30 cm of tilling depth was also better for higher yield and higher quality of leaf. It suggested that 30 to 40 cm was the optimum tilling depth for flue-cured tobacco.

Key words: Flue-cured tobacco, Tilling depth, Root, Dry matter accumulation, Nutrient uptake, Yield, Quality

[1] Collins W K, Hawks Jr S N. Principles of Flue-cured Tobacco Production. Raleigh, North Carolina: North Carolina State University, 1993. pp 23-98

[2] Xu D(许迪), Schmid R, Mermoud A. Effects of tillage practices on temporal variations of soil surface properties. J Soil Water Conserv (水土保持学报), 2000, 14(1): 64-70 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[3] Zhang H-L(张海林), Qin Y-D(秦耀东), Zhu W-S(朱文珊). Effects of tillage on soil physical properties. Soils (土壤), 2003, (2): 140-144 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[4] Zhang J(张洁), Yao Y-Q(姚宇卿), Lü J-J(吕军杰), Wang Y-H(王育红), Jin K(金轲), Wang C-H(王聪慧), Hu B-W(胡博文), Li J-H(李俊红), Ding Z-Q(丁志强). Effects of different tillages on soil organic carbon, soil microbial biomass carbon and water use efficiency in the slopping field of arid areas.Chin J Soil Sci (土壤通报), 2007, 38(5): 882-886 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[5] Tian X-P(田秀平), Tao Y-X(陶永香), Wang L-J(王立军), Ji J-H(姬景红). The effect of different cultivation on nutrient and crop yield in Albic soils. J Heilongjiang August First Land Reclamation Univ (黑龙江八一农垦大学学报), 2002, 14(3): 9-11 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[6] Martin-Rueda I, Munoz-Guerra L M, Yunta F, Esteban E, Tenorio J L, Lucena J J. Tillage and crop rotation effects on barley yield and soil nutrients on a Calciortidic Haploxeralf. Soil Till Res, 2007, 92: 1-9

[7] Ding K-L(丁昆仑), Hann M J. Effects of soil management on soil properties and crop yield. Transact CSAE (农业工程学报), 2000, 16(3): 28-31 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[8] Han B(韩宾), Li Z-J(李增嘉), Wang Y(王芸), Ning T-Y(宁堂原), Zheng Y-H(郑延海), Shi Z-Q(史忠强). Effects of soil tillage and returning straw to soil on wheat growth status and yield. Trans CSAE (农业工程学报), 2007, 23(2): 48-53 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[9] Liu C-J(刘长江), Li Q-S(李取生), Li X-J(李秀军). Utilization of different tillage models for improvement of soda-alkaline glebe in Songnen Plain. Agric Res Arid Areas (干旱地区农业研究), 2005, 23(5): 13-16 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[10] Xu D(许迪), Schmid R, Mermoud A. Effects of tillage practices on the variation of soil moisture and the yield of summer maize. Trans CSAE(农业工程学报), 1999, 15(3): 101-106 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[11] Wang R-X(王瑞新), Han F-G(韩富根). Analysis for Chemical Assessment of Tobacco (烟草化学品质分析). Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2003. pp 66-186 (in Chinese)
[1] 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.
[2] 陈雪燕, 何华川, 李政嘉, 董新盼, 李藕琪, 刘小云, 李丹萍, 陈志伟, 刘国霞, 吕胜源, 吴印莹, 赵振东, 曹新有, 万何平. 水培盐碱复合胁迫下‘济麦60’苗期根系有机酸分泌动态变化及其转录调控机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1859-1875.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 刘昕萌, 任昊, 张继波, 张吉旺, 赵斌, 任佰朝, 刘鹏, 王洪章. 茉莉酸甲酯(MeJA)缓解高温影响玉米雌穗分化的生理机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1561-1572.
[13] 王壮壮, 武紫君, 张永新, 张芯源, 袁丽雪, 陈如雪, 刘世举, 段剑钊, 冯伟, 王同朝, 王永华. 豫东南黏壤潮土区水氮优化协同提高冬小麦产量和氮素利用效率[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1501-1521.
[14] 蔡宏玮, 于爱忠, 姜科强, 王鹏飞, 王玉珑, 霍建喆, 庞小能, 尹波, 尚永盼. 干旱灌区有机肥替代部分化肥促进甜玉米产量提升的关键机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1166-1180.
[15] 崔雪梅, 柳妍娣, 刘景辉, 米俊珍, 武俊英, 赵宝平. 不同基因型燕麦强弱势粒生理特性与产量关系研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1220-1235.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
京ICP备15008789号-2