Welcome to Acta Agronomica Sinica，

Acta Agronomica Sinica ›› 2021, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (9): 1654-1665.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04167

• RESEARCH PAPERS • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of row spacings and nitrogen or mepiquat chloride application on canopy architecture, temperature and relative humity in cotton

YAN Wei1(), LI Fang-Jun1, XU Dong-Yong2, DU Ming-Wei1, TIAN Xiao-Li1,*(), LI Zhao-Hu1   

  1. 1Engineering Research Center of Plant Growth Regulators / Crop Chemical Control Research Center, Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture and Biotechnology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
    2Hebei Cottonseed Engineering Technology Research Center, Hejian 062450, Hebei, China
  • Received:2020-07-23 Accepted:2021-01-21 Online:2021-09-12 Published:2021-03-16
  • Contact: TIAN Xiao-Li E-mail:weiysdl@163.cm;tianxl@cau.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    National Key Research and Development Program of China “Physiological Basis and Agronomic Management for High-quality and High-yield of Field Cash Crops”(2018YFD1000900)

RichHTML387

18

PDF

477

Abstract:

Mechanical harvesting is an inevitable trend of cotton production in the Yellow River Valley of China. However, the current row spacings for manual harvest do not match those of spindle-type pickers. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the appropriate row spacings within the adjustable range of cotton spindle pickers (76-102 cm) and to identify supporting agronomic measures. Field study was conducted under stalk incorporation in Hejian city, Hebei province, during 2016-2018, and consisted of two independent experiments of row spacing and nitrogen (N) rate, and row spacing and mepiquat chloride (1,1-dimethyl piperidinium chloride; DPC) rate. A split-plot design with four replicates was adopted; row spacings (76, 92, and 102 cm) were assigned as main plots at equal population of 90,000 plants hm -2, and N (0, 105, 210 kg hm-2) or DPC rates (0, 140, 281, and 394 g hm-2) as subplots. In normal years of 2016 and 2017, the wider row spacings (92 and 102 cm) showed a slight increase in leaf area index (LAI) and a slight decrease in diffuse non-interceptance (DIFN) relative to narrow row spacing (76 cm); however, in the hot and dry year of 2018, the LAI of wider rows was obviously lower and the DIFN was greater than that of 76 cm rows. The application of N fertilizer showed limited influences on the canopy structure, while the DPC application had strong effects characterized by a significant reduction in LAI and an increase in DIFN. Compared with 76 cm rows, the wider rows increased the average canopy temperature and decreased the relative humidity to different extents. The effect of N fertilizer on canopy microclimate was negligible, and DPC-treated canopy showed a mildly higher temperature and a mildly lower relative humidity. The row spacings did not interact with N or DPC rates to affect the cotton canopy architecture and microclimate.

Key words: row spacing, nitrogen, mepiquat chloride, canopy architecture, temperature, relative humidity

Table 1

Application time and rate of mepiquat chloride (DPC) during 2016-2018 cotton growing seasons (g hm-2) "

处理
Treatment 		苗期
Seedling stage 		蕾期
Squaring stage 		初花期
Early blooming stage 		盛花期
Full blooming stage 		打顶后
After topping 		总剂量
Total rate
M0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M1 1.9 11.3 22.5 30.0 75.0 140.4
M2 3.8 22.5 45.0 60.0 150.0 281.3
M3 7.5 48.8 67.5 90.0 225.0 393.8

Table 2

Effect of row spacing and nitrogen rate on LAI during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

处理Treatment 2016 2017 2018
蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/23) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/1) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/15) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-
ing stage
(9/18) 		蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/18) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/3) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/14) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/20) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(6/29) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/12) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(7/29) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-
ing stage
(9/12)
行距 Row spacing (R) (cm)
76 1.3 a 2.1 a 3.7 a 5.5 a 3.6 a 0.9 b 2.2 a 4.6 a 5.6 a 2.1 a 1.4 a 2.1 a 3.3 a 2.7 a
92 1.2 a 2.1 a 3.9 a 5.9 a 3.9 a 1.2 a 2.2 a 4.7 a 6.1 a 2.2 a 1.5 a 1.9 ab 3.0 ab 2.9 a
102 1.3 a 2.0 a 3.6 a 5.3 a 3.5 a 1.2 a 2.3 a 4.6 a 5.5 a 2.1 a 1.4 a 1.6 b 2.4 b 3.3 a
氮肥 Nitrogen (N) (kg hm-2)
0 1.3 a 2.1 a 3.7 a 5.5 a 3.5 b 1.0 a 2.2 a 4.4 a 5.1 b 1.9 b 1.3 a 1.8 a 2.8 a 2.9 a
105 1.3 a 2.0 a 3.7 a 5.7 a 3.8 a 1.1 a 2.3 a 4.8 a 6.0 a 2.2 a 1.5 a 1.9 a 2.9 a 2.8 a
210 1.3 a 2.1 a 3.8 a 5.5 a 3.7 ab 1.1 a 2.3 a 4.7 a 6.2 a 2.2 a 1.5 a 2.0 a 3.0 a 3.3 a
变异来源 Source of variation
R 0.468 0.498 0.387 0.110 0.217 0.004 0.962 0.932 0.242 0.825 0.774 0.000 0.000 0.055
N 0.806 0.709 0.954 0.811 0.036 0.719 0.731 0.412 0.014 0.015 0.412 0.081 0.228 0.070
R×N 0.901 0.305 0.836 0.737 0.985 0.699 0.837 0.892 0.863 0.836 0.893 0.619 0.714 0.838

Table 3

Effect of row spacing and mepiquat chloride on LAI during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

处理
Treat-
ment 		2016 2017 2018
蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/23) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/1) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/15) 		盛铃期
Boll-
filling stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/18) 		蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/18) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/3) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/14) 		盛铃期
Boll-
filling stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/20) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(6/29) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/12) 		盛铃期
Boll-
filling stage
(7/29) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/12)
行距 Row spacing (R) (cm)
76 1.3 a 2.0 a 3.3 a 4.9 a 3.6 b 0.9 b 2.4 a 4.0 a 5.3 a 2.4 a 2.0 a 2.9 a 4.7 a 3.1 a
92 1.5 a 2.3 a 3.7 a 5.2 a 4.0 a 1.1 a 2.4 a 4.0 a 5.7 a 2.6 a 1.6 b 2.3 b 3.3 b 2.8 ab
102 1.2 a 2.0 a 3.4 a 5.2 a 4.2 a 1.1 a 2.5 a 4.0 a 5.5 a 2.7 a 1.5 b 2.1 b 3.1 b 2.5 b
甲派鎓 Mepiquat chloride (DPC) (g hm-2)
0 1.5 a 2.4 a 4.4 a 6.1 a 4.7 a 1.1 a 2.8 a 4.7 a 6.0 a 3.0 a 1.8 a 2.6 a 4.5 a 2.8 a
140 1.4 ab 2.0 b 3.2 b 4.9 b 3.8 b 1.0 a 2.4 a 4.0 b 5.5 a 2.5 b 1.7 a 2.4 a 3.8 ab 2.9 a
281 1.3 ab 2.0 b 3.1 b 4.8 b 3.6 b 0.9 a 2.2 a 3.6 b 5.2 a 2.4 b 1.6 a 2.3 a 3.3 b 2.7 a
394 1.2 b 2.0 b 3.1 b 4.6 b 3.6 b 0.9 a 2.3 a 3.6 b 5.2 a 2.4 b 1.6 a 2.3 a 3.3 b 2.9 a
变异来源 Source of variation
R 0.108 0.111 0.466 0.571 0.040 0.022 0.831 0.976 0.429 0.116 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009
DPC 0.034 0.035 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.390 0.124 0.002 0.104 0.001 0.435 0.117 0.000 0.789
R×DPC 0.928 0.761 0.794 0.518 0.496 0.885 0.968 0.843 0.225 0.993 0.492 0.939 0.654 0.857

Table 4

Effect of row spacing and nitrogen rate on MTA during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

处理Treatment 2016 2017 2018
蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/23) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/1) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/15) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-
ing stage
(9/18) 		蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/18) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/3) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/14) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/20) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(6/29) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/12) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(7/29) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-
ing stage
(9/12)
行距 Row spacing (R) (cm)
76 39.6 b 41.4 a 44.4 a 44.5 a 45.0 a 44.9 a 50.5 b 45.7 a 42.9 b 49.8 a 44.2 a 49.1 a 52.9 a 50.0 a
92 44.8 a 41.4 a 46.3 a 44.4 a 44.3 a 37.6 a 53.4 ab 45.9 a 44.2 a 48.3 a 44.4 a 49.6 a 52.2 a 50.4 a
102 40.7 ab 40.6 a 46.5 a 44.4 a 44.2 a 37.2 a 55.3 a 48.0 a 45.1 a 47.5 a 45.5 a 52.1 a 50.3 a 47.7 a
氮肥 Nitrogen (N) (kg hm-2)
0 41.5 a 41.3 a 46.4 a 44.1 a 44.7 a 40.1 a 52.4 a 48.0 a 44.9 a 51.1 a 44.2 a 50.3 a 54.7 a 48.7 a
105 40.5 a 41.2 a 47.3 a 44.7 a 44.1 a 39.9 a 52.9 a 45.8 a 43.9 a 48.0 b 45.4 a 50.8 a 50.5 a 50.3 a
210 43.1 a 40.8 a 44.7 a 44.5 a 44.6 a 39.7 a 53.8 a 45.8 a 43.5 a 46.6 b 44.4 a 49.7 a 50.1 a 49.0 a
变异来源 Source of variation
R 0.027 0.672 0.168 0.962 0.747 0.153 0.049 0.275 0.013 0.320 0.903 0.268 0.642 0.443
N 0.370 0.874 0.185 0.670 0.876 0.996 0.738 0.321 0.169 0.019 0.912 0.865 0.230 0.756
R×N 0.259 0.344 0.692 0.772 0.027 0.638 0.374 0.172 0.406 0.563 0.203 0.311 0.959 0.349

Table 5

Effect of row spacing and mepiquat chloride on MTA during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

处理
Treat-
ment 		2016 2017 2018
蕾期
Squar-
ing stage
(6/23) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/1) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/15) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-
ing stage
(9/18) 		蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/18) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/3) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/14) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/20) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(6/29) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/12) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-ing stage
(7/29) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/12)
行距 Row spacing (R) (cm)
76 41.1 a 41.4 a 45.2 b 45.9 a 43.3 a 46.2 a 51.4 a 47.2 a 41.8 b 44.4 a 49.3 a 51.5 b 47.5 b 48.4 a
92 41.8 a 41.2 a 47.6 ab 45.4 a 42.6 a 34.9 b 51.4 a 47.4 a 45.1 a 43.7 a 49.2 a 58.2 a 51.8 a 46.2 a
102 41.5 a 40.0 a 48.4 a 45.2 a 42.9 a 36.6 b 52.3 a 48.5 a 45.7 a 45.4 a 48.5 a 54.3 a 53.8 a 47.6 a
甲哌鎓 Mepiquat chloride (DPC) (g hm-2)
0 41.7 a 41.6 a 44.3 b 43.3 b 40.5 b 39.3 a 51.4 a 46.8 a 43.6 a 43.6 a 52.1 a 54.6 a 47.9 b 44.0 a
140 41.9 a 39.7 a 47.0 a 46.3 a 44.5 a 39.5 a 50.8 a 47.8 a 44.1 a 46.2 a 47.8 a 55.1 a 51.7 a 46.6 a
281 41.7 a 41.8 a 47.7 a 45.6 a 42.9 a 40.5 a 50.9 a 48.8 a 45.1 a 46.8 a 48.7 a 54.0 a 51.4 a 51.1 a
394 40.5 a 40.3 a 49.3 a 46.7 a 43.8 a 37.7 a 53.8 a 47.4 a 44.0 a 46.8 a 47.4 a 55.0 a 53.2 a 47.9 a
变异来源 Source of variation
R 0.866 0.609 0.009 0.798 0.808 0.000 0.881 0.653 0.000 0.107 0.914 0.000 0.001 0.712
DPC 0.716 0.562 0.002 0.023 0.013 0.816 0.585 0.691 0.499 0.161 0.169 0.897 0.036 0.147
R×DPC 0.094 0.708 0.717 0.193 0.268 0.120 0.829 0.916 0.126 0.902 0.937 0.445 0.761 0.870

Table 6

Effect of row spacing and nitrogen rate on DIFN during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

处理Treatment 2016 2017 2018
蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/23) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/1) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/15) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-
ing stage
(9/18) 		蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/18) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/3) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/14) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/20) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(6/29) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/12) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(7/29) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-
ing stage
(9/12)
行距 Row spacing (R) (cm)
76 35.8 a 19.8 a 6.5 a 1.7 a 6.3 a 50.0 a 18.4 a 3.4 a 1.6 a 19.7 a 31.9 a 19.7 b 9.4 b 14.1 b
92 37.9 a 19.6 a 5.5 a 1.0 a 5.9 a 40.2 b 18.6 a 3.4 a 1.2 a 19.3 a 32.6 a 22.1 a 11.8 a 15.0 a
102 34.9 a 20.3 a 7.2 a 1.8 a 6.6 a 40.0 b 19.3 a 3.9 a 1.8 a 20.4 a 34.4 a 29.3 a 16.4 a 15.7 a
氮肥 Nitrogen (N) (kg hm-2)
0 35.3 a 19.1 a 6.2 a 1.6 a 7.1 a 44.4 a 20.1 a 4.5 a 2.5 a 23.3 a 33.8 a 25.2 a 14.0 a 12.0 a
105 37.1 a 20.5 a 6.8 a 1.5 a 5.3 a 43.4 a 18.4 a 3.1 a 1.1 b 18.2 b 32.6 a 23.6 a 12.0 a 13.6 a
210 36.2 a 20.1 a 6.0 a 1.4 a 5.5 a 42.4 a 17.8 a 3.1 a 1.0 b 17.8 b 32.5 a 22.3 a 11.5 a 9.2 a
变异来源 Source of variation
R 0.417 0.417 0.299 0.059 0.075 0.004 0.894 0.842 0.424 0.826 0.669 0.000 0.000 0.048
N 0.736 0.442 0.735 0.685 0.053 0.764 0.517 0.254 0.003 0.008 0.885 0.164 0.192 0.117
R×N 0.844 0.162 0.726 0.948 0.980 0.682 0.461 0.588 0.666 0.786 0.478 0.656 0.693 0.591

Table 7

Effect of row spacing and mepiquat chloride on DIFN during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton (%)"

处理
Treatment 		2016 2017 2018
蕾期
Squar-
ing stage
(6/23) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/1) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/15) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-ing stage
(9/18) 		蕾期
Squaring stage
(6/18) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(7/3) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/14) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(8/1) 		吐絮期
Boll-
opening stage
(9/20) 		初花期
Early
blooming stage
(6/29) 		盛花期
Full
blooming stage
(7/12) 		盛铃期
Boll-fill-
ing stage
(7/29) 		吐絮期
Boll-open-ing stage
(9/12)
行距 Row spacing (R) (cm)
76 36.7 a 24.5 a 10.5 a 4.1 a 7.5 a 51.8 a 16.8 a 5.8 a 2.3 a 16.4 a 21.4 b 11.6 b 3.2 b 11.0 a
92 35.3 a 22.6 a 8.4 a 3.0 a 5.6 a 42.8 b 15.4 a 6.0 a 2.1 a 13.0 b 32.2 a 18.6 a 10.5 a 12.0 a
102 38.4 a 21.1 a 9.8 a 2.3 a 4.2 a 43.8 b 16.6 a 6.0 a 1.8 a 13.5 b 29.2 a 22.8 a 9.7 a 13.6 a
甲哌鎓 Mepiquat chloride (DPC) (g hm-2)
0 31.7 b 16.3 b 4.0 b 0.9 b 2.8 b 43.4 a 12.7 a 3.2 b 1.4 a 9.9 b 26.2 a 15.3 a 4.2 b 10.6 a
140 34.8 a 20.8 a 10.7 a 3.3 a 6.1 a 44.8 a 15.9 a 5.7 a 1.9 a 14.9 a 26.7 a 17.2 a 7.6 a 12.0 a
281 36.0 a 22.6 a 11.3 a 3.5 a 6.5 a 48.1 a 17.6 a 7.9 a 2.6 a 16.1 a 29.2 a 19.2 a 9.8 a 13.7 a
394 39.3 a 24.6 a 12.3 a 4.7 a 7.7 a 48.3 a 18.7 a 6.9 a 2.4 a 16.3 a 28.4 a 19.0 a 9.7 a 12.4 a
变异来源 Source of variation
R 0.105 0.216 0.661 0.293 0.058 0.010 0.856 0.967 0.815 0.046 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.260
DPC 0.034 0.023 0.014 0.042 0.025 0.396 0.238 0.006 0.400 0.001 0.339 0.086 0.002 0.411
R×DPC 0.915 0.813 0.802 0.639 0.563 0.850 0.829 0.916 0.126 0.902 0.301 0.868 0.820 0.993

Fig. 1

Monthly weather data during cotton growing season in Hejian city, Hebei province (2016-2018)"

Fig. 2

Effect of row spacing and nitrogen rate on canopy temperature during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

Fig. 3

Effect of row spacing and nitrogen rate on canopy relative humidity during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

Fig. 4

Effect of row spacing and mepiquat chloride on canopy temperature during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

Fig. 5

Effect of row spacing and mepiquat chloride on canopy relative humidity during 2016-2018 growing seasons in cotton"

[1] Nichols S R, Snipes C E, Jones M A. Evaluation of row spacing and mepiquat chloride in cotton. J Cotton Sci, 2003, 7:148-155.
[2] 宁新柱, 林海, 宿俊吉, 李吉莲, 刘萍, 邓福军, 段理慧, 安刚. 不同种植密度对棉花产量性状的影响. 安徽农业科学, 2011, 39:8878-8880.
Ning X Z, Lin H, Su J J, Li J L, Liu P, Deng F J, Duan L H, An G. Influence of different planting densities on the yield traits of cotton. J Anhui Agric Sci, 2011, 39:8878-8880 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[3] Conaty W C, Mahan J R, Neilsen J E, Constable G A. Vapour pressure deficit aids the interpretation of cotton canopy temperature response to water deficit. Funct Plant Biol, 2014, 41:535-546.
doi: 10.1071/FP13223
[4] Marois J, Wright D, Wiatrak P J. Effect of row width and nitrogen on cotton morphology and canopy microclimate. Crop Sci, 2004, 44:870-877.
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2004.8700
[5] Balkcom K S, Price A J, Van Santen E. Row spacing tillage system, and herbicide technology affects cotton plant growth and yield. Field Crops Res, 2010, 117:219-225.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2010.03.003
[6] Heitholt J J, Sassenrath-Cole G F. Inter-plant competition: growth responses to plant density and row spacing. In: Steward J M, Oosterhuis D, Heitholt J J, Mauney J R, eds. Physiology of Cotton. New York: Springer, Dordrecht, 2010. pp 179-186.
[7] Boquet D J, Coco A B. Yield response of cotton to row spacing, nitrogen rate and plant population density. Louisiana Agric, 1997, 40:22-23.
[8] Ahmad A S, Farrukh S M, 王龙昌, 薛兰兰, Shahid M F, Shafaqat A. 行距对棉花生长发育、产量及早熟性指数的影响的研究. 棉花学报, 2010, 22:611-616.
Ahmad A S, Farrukh S M, Wang L C, Xue L L, Shahid M F, Shafaqat A. Growth, lint yield and earliness index of cotton ( Gossypium hirsutumL.) cultivars under varying row spacing. Cotton Sci, 2010, 22:611-616 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[9] 李建峰, 王聪, 梁福斌, 陈厚川, 田景山, 康鹏, 张旺锋. 新疆机采模式下棉花株行距配置对冠层结构指标及产量的影响. 棉花学报, 2017, 29:157-165.
Li J F, Wang C, Liang F B, Chen H C, Tian J S, Kang P, Zhang W F. Row spacing and planting density affect canopy structure and yield in machine-picked cotton in Xinjiang. Cotton Sci, 2017, 29:611-616 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[10] Heitholt J J, Pettigrew W T, Meredith Jr W R. Growth, boll opening rate, and fiber properties of narrow row cotton. Agron J, 1993, 85:590-594.
doi: 10.2134/agronj1993.00021962008500030013x
[11] Brodrick R, Bange M P. Determining physiological cutout in ultra-narrow row cotton. In: Dove H, Culvenor R A, eds. Food Security from Sustainable Agriculture. New Zealand: 15th Agronomy Conference, 2010. pp 15-18.
[12] Wang X R, Hou Y R, Du M W, Xu D Y, Lu H Y, Tian X L, Li Z H. Effect of planting date and plant density on cotton traits as relating to mechanical harvesting in the Yellow River valley region of China. Field Crops Res, 2016, 198:112-121.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.09.010
[13] 徐新霞, 雷建峰, 高丽丽, 郑慧, 李淦, 王立红, 锁忠程, 李君, 张巨松. 不同机采棉行距配置对棉花生长发育及光合物质生产的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2017, 35(2):51-56.
Xu X X, Lei J F, Gao L L, Zheng H, Li G, Wang L H, Suo Z C, Li J, Zhang J S. Effects of different row spacing patterns on growth and photosynthetic production of machine-harvested cotton. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2017, 35(2):51-56 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[14] Heitholt J J. Canopy characteristics associated with deficient and excessive cotton plant population densities. Crop Sci, 1994, 34:1291-1297.
doi: 10.2135/cropsci1994.0011183X003400050028x
[15] Hesketh J D, Low A. Effect of temperature on components of yield and fibre quality of cotton varieties of diverse origin. Cotton Grow Rev, 1968, 45:243-257.
[16] 王江. 冬小麦主要发育期农田小气候与大气候相关规律的研究. 河南农业大学硕士毕业论文, 河南郑州, 2003.
Wang J. Relations on Microclimate and Climate of Winter Wheat in Its Main Development Stages. MS Thesis of Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China, 2003 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[17] Loka D A, Oosterhuis D M. Effect of high night temperatures on cotton respiration, ATP levels and carbohydrate content. Environ Exp Bot, 2010, 68:258-263.
doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.01.006
[1] QIN Lu, HAN Pei-Pei, CHANG Hai-Bin, GU Chi-Ming, HUANG Wei, LI Yin-Shui, LIAO Xiang-Sheng, XIE Li-Hua, LIAO Xing. Screening of rapeseed germplasms with low nitrogen tolerance and the evaluation of its potential application as green manure [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(6): 1488-1501.
[2] GUO Xing-Yu, LIU Peng-Zhao, WANG Rui, WANG Xiao-Li, LI Jun. Response of winter wheat yield, nitrogen use efficiency and soil nitrogen balance to rainfall types and nitrogen application rate in dryland [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(5): 1262-1272.
[3] PENG Xi-Hong, CHEN Ping, DU Qing, YANG Xue-Li, REN Jun-Bo, ZHENG Ben-Chuan, LUO Kai, XIE Chen, LEI Lu, YONG Tai-Wen, YANG Wen-Yu. Effects of reduced nitrogen application on soil aeration and root nodule growth of relay strip intercropping soybean [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(5): 1199-1209.
[4] FENG Ya, ZHU Xi, LUO Hong-Yu, LI Shi-Gui, ZHANG Ning, SI Huai-Jun. Functional analysis of StMAPK4 in response to low temperature stress in potato [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(4): 896-907.
[5] YAN Yu-Ting, SONG Qiu-Lai, YAN Chao, LIU Shuang, ZHANG Yu-Hui, TIAN Jing-Fen, DENG Yu-Xuan, MA Chun-Mei. Nitrogen accumulation and nitrogen substitution effect of maize under straw returning with continuous cropping [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(4): 962-974.
[6] LI Xin-Ge, GAO Yang, LIU Xiao-Jun, TIAN Yong-Chao, ZHU Yan, CAO Wei-Xing, CAO Qiang. Effects of sowing dates, sowing rates, and nitrogen rates on growth and spectral indices in winter wheat [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(4): 975-987.
[7] YUAN Jia-Qi, LIU Yan-Yang, XU Ke, LI Guo-Hui, CHEN Tian-Ye, ZHOU Hu-Yi, GUO Bao-Wei, HUO Zhong-Yang, DAI Qi-Gen, ZHANG Hong-Cheng. Nitrogen and density treatment to improve resource utilization and yield in late sowing japonica rice [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(3): 667-681.
[8] DING Hong, XU Yang, ZHANG Guan-Chu, QIN Fei-Fei, DAI Liang-Xiang, ZHANG Zhi-Meng. Effects of drought at different growth stages and nitrogen application on nitrogen absorption and utilization in peanut [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(3): 695-703.
[9] FENG Jian-Chao, XU Bei-Ming, JIANG Xue-Li, HU Hai-Zhou, MA Ying, WANG Chen-Yang, WANG Yong-Hua, MA Dong-Yun. Distribution of phenolic compounds and antioxidant activities in layered grinding wheat flour and the regulation effect of nitrogen fertilizer application [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(3): 704-715.
[10] LIU Yun-Jing, ZHENG Fei-Na, ZHANG Xiu, CHU Jin-Peng, YU Hai-Tao, DAI Xing-Long, HE Ming-Rong. Effects of wide range sowing on grain yield, quality, and nitrogen use of strong gluten wheat [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(3): 716-725.
[11] SONG Shi-Qin, YANG Qing-Long, WANG Dan, LYU Yan-Jie, XU Wen-Hua, WEI Wen-Wen, LIU Xiao-Dan, YAO Fan-Yun, CAO Yu-Jun, WANG Yong-Jun, WANG Li-Chun. Relationship between seed morphology, storage substance and chilling tolerance during germination of dominant maize hybrids in Northeast China [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(3): 726-738.
[12] WANG Yan, CHEN Zhi-Xiong, JIANG Da-Gang, ZHANG Can-Kui, ZHA Man-Rong. Effects of enhancing leaf nitrogen output on tiller growth and carbon metabolism in rice [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(3): 739-746.
[13] DONG Yan-Kun, HUANG Ding-Quan, GAO Zhen, CHEN Xu. Identification, expression profile of soybean PIN-Like (PILS) gene family and its function in symbiotic nitrogen fixation in root nodules [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(2): 353-366.
[14] ZHANG Te, WANG Mi-Feng, ZHAO Qiang. Effects of DPC and nitrogen fertilizer through drip irrigation on growth and yield in cotton [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(2): 396-409.
[15] ZHANG Jun, ZHOU Dong-Dong, XU Ke, LI Bi-Zhong, LIU Zhong-Hong, ZHOU Nian-Bing, FANG Shu-Liang, ZHANG Yong-Jin, TANG Jie, AN Li-Zheng. Nitrogen fertilizer reduction and precise application model on mechanical transplanting japonica rice with good taste quality under straw returning in Huaibei Area [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(2): 410-422.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Add: No. 80 Xueyuan South Rd, Beijing 100081, P. R. China E-mail: zwxb301@caas.cn
Supported by Beijing Magtech Co.Ltd