播量对缩行带状滴灌燕麦抗倒伏能力和产量的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.41012

Abstract

Abstract:

This study aimed to determine the effects of seeding rate under reduced strip irrigation on the lodging resistance and yield of oat. Five seeding rates—90 kg hm^-2, 120 kg hm^-2, 150 kg hm^-2, 180 kg hm^-2, and 210 kg hm^-2 were tested on the lodging-resistant variety ‘Bayou 1’ and the easily lodging variety ‘Yanke 2’ from 2022 to 2023. We investigated the effects on physicochemical properties, lodging resistance, yield, and constituent factors of the oat stem base. The results showed that the plant height and center of gravity height of oat initially increased and then decreased with an increasing seeding rate. For ‘Bayou 1’, the highest plant height and center of gravity height were observed under the 150 kg hm^-2 treatment, increasing by 2.63%-13.36% and 1.49%-12.30% compared to other treatments, respectively. For ‘Yanke 2’, the highest values were under the 120 kg hm^-2 treatment, with increases of 2.52%-15.20% and 4.67%-21.21%, respectively. The second internode length of both oat varieties increased with seeding rate, while the course, dry weight, fullness, and bending resistance of the second internode decreased. Compared with other treatments, the 90 kg hm^-2 treatment showed increases of 1.76%-32.81% in coarse, 9.08%-125.89% in dry weight, 26.88%-292.64% in fullness, and 6.48%-129.70% in bending resistance. With higher seeding rates, the contents of cellulose, soluble sugar, C/N ratio, potassium, and silicon in the oat stem base decreased, while nitrogen content increased. Under the 90 kg hm^-2 treatment, these chemical components increased by 5.81%-74.10%, 1.62%-24.34%, 4.78%-55.41%, 1.90%-107.78%, and 2.00%-17.37%, respectively, whereas nitrogen content decreased by 2.95%-22.66%. Lodging rates and grades varied by year and variety. Lodging occurred in ‘Bayou 1’ and ‘Yanke 2’ under seeding rates of 180-210 kg hm^-2 and 150-210 kg hm^-2, respectively, with both varieties experiencing increased lodging in 2023 as seeding rates rose. The number of grains per ear and 1000-grain weight decreased with higher seeding rates, but grain yield initially increased and then decreased. The highest grain yields for ‘Bayou 1’ and ‘Yanke 2’ were achieved at 150 kg hm^-2 and 120 kg hm^-2, respectively. Correlation analysis indicated that the morphological characteristics and chemical composition of the stem base significantly affected its folding resistance, subsequently influencing lodging rate and grade. These factors can be key indices for evaluating oat lodging resistance. Considering lodging resistance and grain yield, the optimal seeding rates for ‘Bayou 1’ and ‘Yanke 2’ were 150 kg hm^-2 and 120 kg hm^-2, respectively.

Key words: stem base morphology, the content of chemical components in stem base, bending resistance, lodging rate, yield

YANG Zhi-Xue, LIU Jing-Hui, MI Jun-Zhen, SUN Jing, ZHAO Bao-Ping, REN Chang-Zhong, TIAN Lu, ZHENG Cheng-Zhong. Effect of seeding rates on lodging resistance and yield of oat under reduced strip drip irrigation[J].Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(11): 2831-2447.

Figures/Tables 17

Fig. 1

Table 1

Fig. 2

Table 2

Effects of different seeding rate on plant height and ear height of oat"

年份 Year	品种 Variety	播量 Seeding rate	株高Plant height (cm)			重心高度 Height of center of gravity (cm)
年份 Year	品种 Variety	播量 Seeding rate	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage
2022	BY1	S1	104.36±0.46 ef	104.05±0.56 d	102.74±2.87 f	53.51±3.91 de	54.85±0.72 de	53.07±1.86 cd
		S2	105.51±1.95 de	108.90±0.80 c	107.92±1.02 e	58.04±1.40 abc	58.51±0.99 b	56.62±1.25 bc
		S3	110.79±3.29 c	112.59±0.77 b	112.29±2.36 d	59.53±0.93 ab	59.90±0.70 b	59.27±1.23 b
		S4	106.62±0.29 de	107.70±0.61 c	106.96±1.24 e	56.69±0.53 bc	57.55±1.25 bc	56.87±2.25 bc
		S5	95.82±1.30 g	103.85±2.00 d	103.63±0.20 f	52.44±0.70 e	52.68±2.58 e	53.82±1.66 cd
	YK2	S1	115.08±2.44 b	115.32±2.31 b	115.23±0.89 c	53.30±0.42 de	58.50±1.74 b	56.54±0.34 bc
		S2	118.46±1.58 a	121.97±1.80 a	121.89±0.55 a	60.26±0.63 a	62.68±1.40 a	68.02±3.55 a
		S3	110.72±2.80 c	121.20±1.23 a	119.52±1.88 ab	56.09±0.46 cd	58.29±1.16 b	58.08±3.03 b
		S4	108.41±1.72 cd	120.44±2.09 a	117.23±0.21 bc	53.29±1.06 de	55.40±0.92 cd	53.56±3.11 cd
		S5	101.84±0.89 f	114.52±1.81 b	115.49±1.84 c	55.26±2.34 cde	54.84±0.31 de	52.41±1.14 d
2023	BY1	S1	105.82±3.58 d	109.93±2.36 cd	106.31±3.89 d	46.17±0.87 bc	48.85±1.32 ef	47.62±1.62 f
		S2	110.26±2.92 abc	112.05±0.69 abc	110.01±3.16 bc	47.70±1.56 bc	52.02±0.76 bcd	50.19±0.96 e
		S3	113.98±2.29 a	114.13±2.02 ab	115.94±0.76 a	49.09±0.53 ab	54.45±2.02 a	55.89±1.50 ab
		S4	107.61±0.90 cd	107.62±1.63 de	101.09±3.12 e	49.08±1.19 ab	50.25±0.81 de	51.27±1.03 de
		S5	104.58±2.47 d	104.51±3.57 e	97.94±2.42 e	45.98±1.35 c	48.04±1.12 f	46.47±0.58 f
	YK2	S1	108.43±2.08 bcd	111.13±0.82 bc	111.71±3.91 ab	47.60±1.26 bc	52.00±0.29 bcd	52.64±1.33 cd
		S2	112.78±0.52 a	115.05±0.39 a	116.33±1.50 a	50.33±1.37 a	53.94±1.62 ab	57.57±1.30 a
		S3	112.25±1.96 ab	112.42±0.60 abc	113.14±1.10 ab	49.05±0.41 ab	52.98±1.09 abc	55.50±0.39 b
		S4	105.34±2.47 d	105.85±2.47 e	108.71±1.94 bc	47.86±1.47 bc	51.18±0.54 cd	54.02±0.02 bc
		S5	104.15±1.93 d	104.30±1.24 e	105.90±1.80 d	47.72±1.14 bc	47.84±1.18 f	51.11±0.87 de
方差分析ANOVA
V			**	**	**	NS	*	**
S			**	**	**	**	**	**
V×S			**	NS	**	**	**	**

Table 2

Table 3

Effects of seeding rate on internode length and thickness of different oat stem bases"

年份Year	品种Variety	播量 Seeding rate	第二节间长 Second internode length (cm)			第二节间粗 Second internode diameter (mm)
年份Year	品种Variety	播量 Seeding rate	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage
2022	BY1	S1	8.98±0.31 e	8.45±0.65 e	9.82±0.67 g	4.36±0.11 a	4.60±0.03 a	4.81±0.07 a
		S2	9.07±0.72 e	11.34±1.22 d	10.84±0.35 fg	4.23±0.12 ab	4.47±0.12 ab	4.67±0.10 a
		S3	10.71±1.05 d	12.42±0.94 d	12.29±0.17 de	4.13±0.14 b	4.24±0.14 cd	4.38±0.11 b
		S4	14.18±0.52 ab	15.73±0.67 abc	14.69±0.45 bc	3.88±0.05 c	3.90±0.09 e	4.08±0.14 cd
		S5	15.12±0.25 a	16.45±0.79 a	15.51±0.60 ab	3.68±0.04 d	3.68±0.14 f	3.78±0.12 e
	YK2	S1	10.63±0.51 d	11.94±0.34 d	11.83±0.29 ef	4.25±0.04 ab	4.42±0.09 abc	4.39±0.18 b
		S2	12.19±0.47 c	14.50±0.82 c	13.00±0.95 de	4.20±0.04 ab	4.38±0.08 bc	4.35±0.11 b
		S3	12.44±0.32 c	14.99±0.10 bc	13.41±0.40 cd	4.10±0.01 b	4.10±0.06 d	4.21±0.18 bc
		S4	13.80±0.47 b	16.06±0.20 ab	14.90±1.12 ab	3.82±0.08 cd	3.91±0.13 e	3.90±0.06 de
		S5	15.04±1.37 a	16.86±1.06 a	16.13±1.50 a	3.73±0.18 cd	3.69±0.13 f	3.69±0.13 e
2023	BY1	S1	5.80±0.61 e	6.71±0.99 e	6.20±0.17 g	4.33±0.17 a	4.34±0.02 a	4.14±0.24 a
		S2	7.00±0.74 e	8.13±0.97 de	9.02±0.62 de	4.31±0.11 a	3.95±0.07 b	3.92±0.14 ab
		S3	8.54±0.35 cd	10.92±0.82 bc	10.30±0.69 cd	4.29±0.07 a	3.61±0.11 cd	3.77±0.15 bc
		S4	9.69±0.63 bc	12.91±0.88 a	12.12±0.98 b	3.91±0.07 c	3.39±0.25 de	3.46±0.20 d
		S5	10.15±0.24 b	13.30±0.84 a	13.21±1.13 b	3.78±0.12 cd	3.20±0.09 ef	2.99±0.12 ef
	YK2	S1	6.50±0.55 e	7.00±0.95 de	7.22±0.07 fg	4.26±0.12 a	4.04±0.02 b	4.04±0.08 ab
		S2	8.28±1.38 d	8.78±1.54 d	8.62±1.03 ef	4.15±0.07 ab	3.94±0.12 b	3.88±0.13 abc
		S3	8.61±0.46 cd	10.57±0.60 c	11.64±0.64 bc	3.99±0.13 bc	3.68±0.14 c	3.62±0.26 cd
		S4	10.74±0.60 ab	12.46±1.56 ab	12.76±1.64 b	3.79±0.12 cd	3.38±0.22 de	3.17±0.09 e
		S5	11.83±0.52 a	14.11±0.60 a	15.78±0.50 a	3.64±0.22 d	3.03±0.07 f	2.82±0.05 f
方差分析ANOVA
V			**	**	**	**	*	**
S			**	**	**	**	**	**
V×S			*	*	NS	NS	NS	NS

Table 3

Table 4

Effects of seeding rate on internode dry weight and fullness of different oat stem bases"

年份 Year	品种 Variety	播量 Seeding rate	第二节间干重 Second internode dry weight (g)			第二节间充实度 Second internode fullness (mg cm^-1)
年份 Year	品种 Variety	播量 Seeding rate	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage
2022	BY1	S1	0.37±0.20 a	0.29±0.02 a	0.27±0.02 ab	25.56±3.47 a	31.01±2.36 a	27.18±2.13 a
		S2	0.27±0.02 ab	0.24±0.03 abc	0.27±0.05 ab	20.42±0.35 bc	21.22±4.09 bc	24.65±3.73 a
		S3	0.23±0.03 b	0.22±0.01 cde	0.22±0.01 bc	16.27±2.51 cde	17.86±1.29 cd	17.99±0.46 b
		S4	0.21±0.01 b	0.18±0.01 de	0.20±0.03 c	11.87±1.15 ef	11.44±0.53 f	13.46±1.62 c
		S5	0.20±0.02 b	0.12±0.02 fg	0.13±0.03 e	10.78±1.20 f	7.27±1.07 gh	8.26±2.14 d
	YK2	S1	0.28±0.05 ab	0.28±0.04 ab	0.30±0.04 a	23.22±4.90 ab	23.11±3.32 b	25.12±2.95 a
		S2	0.26±0.02 ab	0.23±0.07 bcd	0.20±0.01 c	17.82±2.20 cd	15.75±3.75 de	15.16±0.86 bc
		S3	0.23±0.05 b	0.19±0.02 cde	0.19±0.02 cd	15.57±2.92 de	12.38±1.32 ef	13.83±1.16 c
		S4	0.22±0.01 b	0.17±0.00 ef	0.14±0.03 de	13.50±0.53 def	10.59±0.08 fg	9.51±2.53 d
		S5	0.19±0.03 b	0.10±0.02 g	0.11±0.02 e	11.01±1.49 f	6.18±0.87 h	6.63±0.94 d
2023	BY1	S1	0.15±0.06 a	0.20±0.01 a	0.19±0.01 a	24.94±2.08 a	30.86±5.80 a	31.28±0.70 a
		S2	0.13±0.01 a	0.19±0.01 ab	0.18±0.01 ab	22.85±2.59 a	22.93±1.49 bc	23.00±3.89 c
		S3	0.12±0.02 a	0.17±0.01 bc	0.17±0.00 b	15.31±1.10 bc	15.82±0.94 de	16.28±1.10 d
		S4	0.11±0.04 a	0.16±0.01 c	0.15±0.03 c	11.98±1.63 cde	12.16±0.70 ef	11.87±0.98 e
		S5	0.10±0.01 a	0.13±0.01 d	0.13±0.01 cd	10.12±1.11 de	9.86±0.45 f	9.87±1.50 e
	YK2	S1	0.12±0.02 a	0.18±0.02 ab	0.19±0.01 a	16.84±3.96 b	26.46±3.17 b	26.93±1.09 b
		S2	0.11±0.03 a	0.17±0.02 bc	0.19±0.02 ab	13.64±3.87 bcd	19.35±0.91 cd	21.62±3.66 c
		S3	0.11±0.03 a	0.16±0.01 c	0.18±0.01 ab	13.45±2.79 bcd	14.99±0.63 e	15.46±1.41 d
		S4	0.11±0.02 a	0.15±0.02 cd	0.14±0.01 c	10.49±1.66 de	11.96±1.97 ef	10.92±0.35 e
		S5	0.10±0.01 a	0.13±0.01 d	0.11±0.01 d	8.15±1.05 e	9.22±0.70 f	7.12±0.38 f
方差分析ANOVA
V			NS	*	**	*	**	**
S			*	**	**	**	**	**
V×S			NS	NS	NS	NS	**	NS

Table 4

Table 5

Fig. 3

Table 6

Fig. 4

Table 7

Effects of different seeding rate on soluble sugar content and nitrogen content of oats (%)"

年份Year	品种Variety	播量Seeding rate	可溶性糖含量Soluble sugar content			氮含量 Nitrogen content
年份Year	品种Variety	播量Seeding rate	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage
2022	BY1	S1	7.16±0.29 a	6.21±0.09 a	6.73±0.27 a	0.69±0.02 c	0.67±0.01 e	0.67±0.01 d
		S2	6.47±0.13 b	6.07±0.10 b	6.21±0.14 b	0.74±0.06 bc	0.67±0.01 e	0.68±0.02 cd
		S3	5.92±0.15 cde	6.03±0.04 bc	5.65±0.09 c	0.76±0.03 bc	0.72±0.01 d	0.69±0.02 cd
		S4	5.69±0.17 de	5.81±0.19 efg	5.60±0.05 c	0.77±0.05 bc	0.75±0.02 c	0.70±0.02 bcd
		S5	5.63±0.31 de	5.70±0.06 fg	5.47±0.05 c	0.78±0.06 bc	0.79±0.03 b	0.71±0.00 bc
	YK2	S1	5.94±0.04 cd	5.98±0.08 bcd	6.08±0.18 b	0.76±0.04 bc	0.66±0.02 e	0.67±0.01 d
		S2	5.92±0.09 cde	5.92±0.05 bcde	6.06±0.12 b	0.79±0.02 b	0.71±0.01 d	0.69±0.02 cd
		S3	6.10±0.23 c	5.88±0.04 cde	5.64±0.04 c	0.80±0.03 b	0.75±0.01 c	0.71±0.03 bc
		S4	5.79±0.07 cde	5.84±0.03 def	5.56±0.02 c	0.82±0.04 b	0.79±0.01 b	0.73±0.03 ab
		S5	5.60±0.06 e	5.66±0.05 g	5.46±0.22 c	0.93±0.12 a	0.83±0.01 a	0.76±0.02 a
2023	BY1	S1	6.41±0.04 a	6.53±0.05 a	6.30±0.06 a	0.75±0.04 h	0.80±0.00 f	0.82±0.02 bcd
		S2	6.06±0.02 b	6.22±0.08 b	6.23±0.02 a	0.91±0.06 g	0.87±0.06 e	0.85±0.06 abcd
		S3	5.79±0.06 e	5.92±0.01 c	6.00±0.03 b	0.96±0.07 fg	0.91±0.03 de	0.90±0.02 abc
		S4	5.57±0.05 f	5.67±0.05 e	5.63±0.02 d	1.00±0.03 def	0.95±0.04 cd	0.91±0.05 ab
		S5	5.27±0.07 g	5.48±0.06 f	5.41±0.03 e	1.03±0.02 cde	0.98±0.06 bc	0.92±0.04 ab
	YK2	S1	6.03±0.03 bc	5.91±0.01 c	6.04±0.14 b	0.97±0.04 efg	0.88±0.01 e	0.77±0.01 d
		S2	5.97±0.06 cd	5.81±0.02 d	5.86±0.06 c	1.05±0.03 cd	1.00±0.05 abc	0.80±0.06 cd
		S3	5.90±0.03 d	5.73±0.03 e	5.67±0.08 d	1.08±0.02 bc	1.03±0.01 ab	0.85±0.01 abcd
		S4	5.62±0.02 f	5.36±0.04 g	5.38±0.03 e	1.12±0.01 b	1.03±0.02 ab	0.90±0.14 abc
		S5	5.31±0.02 g	5.17±0.02 h	5.16±0.03 f	1.18±0.04 a	1.05±0.03 a	0.95±0.02 a
方差分析ANOVA
V			**	**	**	**	**	NS
S			**	**	**	**	**	**
V×S			**	**	**	NS	NS	NS

Table 7

Table 8

Fig. 5

Table 9

Effects of different seeding rate on potassium and silicon content in oat stem base (%)"

年份Year	品种Variety	播量Seeding rate	K含量K content			Si含量Si content
年份Year	品种Variety	播量Seeding rate	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage	抽穗期 Heading stage	灌浆期 Filling stage	成熟期 Maturity stage
2022	BY1	S1	3.97±0.21 a	3.87±0.21 a	3.03±0.32 a	3.70±0.09 a	3.90±0.02 a	3.81±0.05 a
		S2	3.83±0.49 ab	3.50±0.10 bc	2.97±0.21 ab	3.61±0.04 b	3.48±0.05 b	3.69±0.03 b
		S3	3.33±0.15 bcde	3.40±0.00 bc	2.63±0.06 bcd	3.60±0.03 b	3.42±0.02 bc	3.68±0.02 b
		S4	2.93±0.32 e	3.27±0.06 c	2.37±0.25 de	3.33±0.03 cd	3.22±0.03 e	3.57±0.05 c
		S5	2.80±0.17 e	2.33±0.12 e	2.07±0.12 ef	3.28±0.02 de	3.09±0.05 g	3.21±0.02 f
	YK2	S1	3.70±0.30 abc	3.60±0.26 ab	2.90±0.30 abc	3.38±0.03 c	3.35±0.03 cd	3.55±0.03 c
		S2	3.57±0.06 abcd	3.23±0.25 cd	2.57±0.21 cd	3.33±0.01 cd	3.32±0.07 d	3.47±0.01 d
		S3	3.17±0.32 cde	2.97±0.15 d	2.30±0.10 def	3.23±0.02 e	3.15±0.01 f	3.35±0.03 e
		S4	3.10±0.46 de	2.50±0.10 e	1.97±0.06 f	3.12±0.03 f	3.08±0.04 g	3.18±0.04 f
		S5	2.83±0.06 e	1.77±0.15 f	1.57±0.12 g	3.01±0.05 g	3.00±0.02 h	2.97±0.05 g
2023	BY1	S1	3.18±0.23 a	2.70±0.14 a	2.42±0.05 a	3.71±0.13 a	3.92±0.04 a	3.97±0.04 a
		S2	3.17±0.17 a	2.56±0.06 abc	2.07±0.19 bc	3.41±0.06 bc	3.83±0.05 b	3.84±0.12 b
		S3	2.64±0.10 bcd	2.51±0.03 bc	1.83±0.08 de	3.54±0.03 ab	3.76±0.06 b	3.76±0.05 bc
		S4	2.46±0.04 de	2.51±0.06 bcd	1.73±0.10 ef	3.29±0.03 cd	3.63±0.03 cd	3.73±0.03 cd
		S5	2.32±0.07 e	2.36±0.11 d	1.29±0.22 g	3.23±0.09 de	3.61±0.02 cd	3.66±0.02 d
	YK2	S1	3.11±0.05 a	2.63±0.04 ab	2.22±0.13 ab	3.55±0.05 ab	3.79±0.07 b	3.77±0.06 bc
		S2	2.85±0.26 b	2.41±0.11 cd	1.96±0.04 cd	3.42±0.07 bc	3.68±0.04 c	3.69±0.03 cd
		S3	2.75±0.10 bc	2.06±0.03 e	1.63±0.07 ef	3.31±0.01 cd	3.56±0.04 d	3.64±0.07 d
		S4	2.56±0.12 cde	1.93±0.07 ef	1.54±0.10 f	3.15±0.03 de	3.48±0.03 e	3.46±0.04 e
		S5	2.39±0.13 de	1.79±0.12 f	0.96±0.08 h	3.09±0.23 e	3.45±0.01 e	3.38±0.06 e
方差分析ANOVA
V			NS	**	**	**	**	**
S			**	**	**	**	**	**
V×S			NS	**	NS	NS	**	**

Table 9

Table 10

Table 11

Table 12

References 39

[1]	任长忠, 闫金婷, 董锐, 胡新中. 燕麦营养成分、功能特性及其产品的研究进展. 食品工业科技, 2022, 43: 438-446.
	Ren C Z, Yan J T, Dong R, Hu X Z. Research progress on oat nutrients, functional properties and related products. Sci Technol Food Ind, 2022, 43: 438-446 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[2]	Stewart D, McDougall G. Oat agriculture, cultivation and breeding targets: implications for human nutrition and health. British J Nutr, 2014, 112: S50-S57.
[3]	高阳, 赵力兴, 朱铁霞, 王琳, 高凯. 施氮量对科尔沁沙地燕麦生物量及物质分配规律的影响. 草地学报, 2018, 26: 1168-1172. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.05.019
	Gao Y, Zhao L X, Zhu T X, Wang L, Gao K. Effects of nitrogen application rate on Avena sativa biomass and substance distribution in Horqin sandy land. Acta Agrest Sin, 2018, 26: 1168-1172 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[4]	周罕觅, 孙旗立, 牛晓丽, 陈佳庚, 马林爽, 苏裕民, 李纪琛. 滴灌节水减氮对苹果幼树生长与光合特征的影响. 灌溉排水学报, 2023, 42: 49-57.
	Zhou H M, Sun Q L, Niu X L, Chen J G, Ma L S, Su Y M, Li J C. Effect of saving-water drip irrigation and nitrogen reduction on growth and photosynthetic characteristics of young apple tree. J Irrig Drain, 2023, 42: 49-57 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[5]	南铭, 赵桂琴, 李晶, 柴继宽, 刘彦明. 不同燕麦品种茎秆形态特征与抗倒伏性的关系. 草地学报, 2018, 26: 1382-1391. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.06.014
	Nan M, Zhao G Q, Li J, Chai J K, Liu Y M. Research of lodging-resistance and the stem morphological characteristics of different Avena stiva L. varieties. Acta Agrest Sin, 2018, 26: 1382-1391 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[6]	南铭, 王兴荣, 李晶, 刘彦明, 张成君, 柴继宽, 赵桂琴. 燕麦抗倒伏性状的基因型差异. 草业学报, 2023, 32: 106-118. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2023010
[39]	Hu W, Liang G L, Liu K Q, Liu W H, Li W. Study on lodging resistance and its influencing factors of 9 oat varieties in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Acta Agrest Sin, 2023, 31: 1788-1797 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[40]	景婷婷, 旦增塔庆, 任淑娉, 王登平, 张新全, 杨盛婷, 陈仕勇, 黄琳凯. 播期和播量对成都平原“英迪米特”燕麦饲草产量及相关性状的影响. 草业科学, 2019, 36: 2594-2600.
	Jing T T, Tenzintarchen, Ren S P, Wang D P, Zhang X Q, Yang S T, Chen S Y, Huang L K. Effects of the planting date and planting rate on the yield and related characters of ‘Intimidator’ oats on the Chengdu Plain. Pratac Sci, 2019, 36: 2594-2600 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[41]	许俊伟, 孟天瑶, 荆培培, 张洪程, 李超, 戴其根, 魏海燕, 郭保卫. 机插密度对不同类型水稻抗倒伏能力及产量的影响. 作物学报, 2015, 41: 1767-1776. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2015.01767
	Xu J W, Meng T Y, Jing P P, Zhang H C, Li C, Dai Q G, Wei H Y, Guo B W. Effect of mechanical-transplanting density on lodging resistance and yield in different types of rice. Acta Agron Sin, 2015, 41: 1767-1776 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[42]	Matsuyama H, Ookawa T. The effects of seeding rate on yield, lodging resistance and culm strength in wheat. Plant Prod Sci, 2020, 23: 322-332. doi: 10.1080/1343943X.2019.1702469
[6]	Nan M, Wang X R, Li J, Liu Y M, Zhang C J, Chai J K, Zhao G Q. Differences in traits related to lodging resistance among oat genotypes. Acta Pratac Sin, 2023, 32: 106-118 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[7]	南铭, 柴继宽, 景芳, 张丽娟, 闵庚梅, 刘亚锋, 刘彦明, 李晶, 赵桂琴. 燕麦抗倒伏性研究进展. 草地学报, 2023, 31: 2582-2589. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.09.002
	Nan M, Chai J K, Jing F, Zhang L J, Min G M, Liu Y F, Liu Y M, Li J, Zhao G Q. Research advances on lodging resistance of oat (Avena stiva L.). Acta Agrest Sin, 2023, 31: 2582-2589 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[8]	张靓, 梁小玉, 胡远彬, 季杨, 易军, 汪辉. 燕麦抗倒伏性研究进展. 麦类作物学报, 2024, 44: 74-81.
	Zhang J, Liang X Y, Hu Y B, Ji Y, Yi J, Wang H. Research progress on lodging resistance in oat. J Triticeae Crops, 2024, 44: 74-81 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[9]	Khan S, Anwar S, Kuai J, Ullah S, Fahad S, Zhou G S. Optimization of nitrogen rate and planting density for improving yield, nitrogen use efficiency, and lodging resistance in oilseed rape. Frunt Plant Sci, 2017, 8: 532.
[10]	韦金贵, 郭瑶, 柴强, 殷文, 樊志龙, 胡发龙. 水氮减量密植玉米的产量及产量构成. 作物学报, 2023, 49: 1919-1929. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.23056
	Wei J G, Guo Y, Chai Q, Yin W, Fan Z L, Hu F L. Yield and yield components of maize response to high plant density under reduced water and nitrogen supply. Acta Agron Sin, 2023, 49: 1919-1929 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[11]	覃凤, 汪小飞, 吴臻, 胡一波, 王小琴, 张家伟, 蔡铁. 集雨种植模式下种植密度与行距配置对小麦茎秆糖积累及倒伏性能的影响. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57: 65-79. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.01.006
	Qin F, Wang X F, Wu Z, Hu Y B, Wang X Q, Zhang J W, Cai T. Effects of planting density and row spacing configuration on sugar accumulation and lodging performance of wheat stem under rainfall harvesting planting mode. Sci Agric Sin, 2024, 57: 65-79 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.01.006
[12]	Wang Y Y, Jin M, Luo Y L, Chang Y L, Zhu J K, Li Y, Wang Z L. Effects of irrigation on stem lignin and breaking strength of winter wheat with different planting densities. Field Crops Res, 2022, 282: 108518.
[13]	李金才, 尹钧, 魏凤珍. 播种密度对冬小麦茎秆形态特征和抗倒指数的影响. 作物学报, 2005, 31: 662-666.
	Li J C, Yin J, Wei F Z. Effects of planting density on characters of culm and culm lodging resistant index in winter wheat. Acta Agron Sin, 2005, 31: 662-666 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[14]	景芳, 南铭, 刘彦明, 陈富, 边芳, 任生兰, 张成君. 品种和种植密度对燕麦饲草产量、品质和病害的影响. 草地学报, 2023, 31: 3174-3184. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.10.030
	Jing F, Nan M, Liu Y M, Chen F, Bian F, Ren S L, Zhang C J. Effects of variety and planting density on yield, quality and disease of forage oat. Acta Agrest Sin, 2023, 31: 3174-3184 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[15]	田露, 刘景辉, 米俊珍, 赵宝平, 李英浩, 张胜, 王凤梧, 焦伟红, 高卿, 郑成忠, 张子臻. 缩行带状种植和保水剂对滴灌燕麦籽粒和饲草品质的影响. 中国农业大学学报, 2023, 28(1): 79-88.
	Tian L, Liu J H, Mi J Z, Zhao B P, Li Y H, Zhang S, Wang F W, Jiao W H, Gao Q, Zheng C Z, Zhang Z Z. Effects of strip cropping with reducing row spacing and super absorbent polymer on the grain and forage quality of oat under drip irrigation. J China Agric Univ, 2023, 28(1): 79-88 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[16]	田露, 刘景辉, 米俊珍, 赵宝平, 李英浩, 张胜, 王凤梧, 焦伟红, 高卿. 缩行配施保水剂对滴灌燕麦群体特征和产量的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2023, 43: 332-342.
	Tian L, Liu J H, Mi J Z, Zhao B P, Li Y H, Zhang S, Wang F W, Jiao W H, Gao Q. Effect of combination of row spacing reduction and super absorbent polymercan on population characteristics and yield of oat under drip irrigation. J Triticeae Crops, 2023, 43: 332-342 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[17]	Tian L, Liu J H, Zhang S, Zhao B P, Mi J Z, Li Y H, Wang F W. Effects of strip cropping with reducing row spacing and super absorbent polymer on yield and water productivity of oat (Avena sativa L.) under drip irrigation in Inner Mongolia, China. Sci Rep, 2022, 12: 11441. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-15418-w pmid: 35794199
[18]	刘明, 范文静, 赵鹏, 靳容, 张强强, 朱晓亚, 王静, 李强. 甘薯耐低钾基因型苗期筛选及综合评价. 作物学报, 2023, 49: 926-937. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.24080
	Liu M, Fan W J, Zhao P, Jin R, Zhang Q Q, Zhu X Y, Wang J, Li Q. Genotypes screening and comprehensive evaluation of sweet- potato tolerant to low potassium stress at seeding stage. Acta Agron Sin, 2023, 49: 926-937 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[19]	邓穗生, 洪彩香. 靛酚蓝比色法测定植物全氮含量方法的改进. 热带农业科学, 2013, 33: 5-7.
	Deng S S, Hong C X. Improvement of phenol method for determining total nitrogen in plant. Chin J Trop Agric, 2013, 33: 5-7 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[20]	贾雨薇, 杨瑞林, 张洋, 房娟娟, 陈惠. 一种优化的测定水稻硅含量的方法. 植物学报, 2016, 51: 679-683. doi: 10.11983/CBB15181
	Jia Y W, Yang R L, Zhang Y, Fang J J, Chen H. An optimized method to determine silicon content in rice. Chin Bull Bot, 2016, 51: 679-683 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[21]	薛文芳, 高玉红, 胡亚朋, 崔政军, 王一帆, 剡斌, 晁长艳. 增密扩行对宽幅匀播胡麻抗倒伏能力及籽粒产量的影响. 核农学报, 2024, 38: 149-159. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.1000-8551.2024.01.0149
	Xue W F, Gao Y H, Hu Y P, Cui Z J, Wang Y F, Yan B, Chao C Y. Effect of increasing density and row spacing on lodging resistance and grain yield of oil flax under wide-width uniformed sowing status. J Nucl Agric Sci, 2024, 38: 149-159 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[22]	纪明雪, 张智勇, 齐冰洁, 何竹青, 周子健, 王永聪, 杨超, 隋白婧. 燕麦种质资源抗倒伏及生物学性状的差异评价. 麦类作物学报, 2023, 43: 453-462.
	Ji M X, Zhang Z Y, Qi B J, He Z Q, Zhou Z J, Wang Y C, Yang C, Sui B J. Evaluation of lodging resistance and difference of biological characters of oat germplasm resources. J Triticeae Crops, 2023, 43: 453-462 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[23]	Irshad A, Maksat B, Khushnuma I. Nitrogen management improves lodging resistance and production in maize (Zea mays L.) at a high plant density. J Integr Agric, 2023, 22: 417-433.
[24]	南铭, 赵桂琴, 李晶, 柴继宽, 刘彦明. 半干旱区燕麦品种茎秆理化特性及其与抗倒性的关系研究. 草地学报, 2019, 27: 1284-1290. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2019.05.022
	Nan M, Zhao G Q, Li J, Chai J K, Liu Y M. Research on relationship with physicochemical properties of lodging resistance of different oat varieties in the semi-arid area. Acta Agrest Sin, 2019, 27: 1284-1290 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[25]	梁国玲, 刘文辉, 秦燕, 魏小星, 刘凯强, 杨晶. 不同燕麦资源生物量构成和茎秆特征与倒伏间的相关性研究. 草地学报, 2019, 27: 1339-1346. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2019.05.028
	Liang G L, Liu W H, Qin Y, Wei X X, Liu K Q, Yang J. Study of correlation between biomass composition, stem traits and lodging in different oats resources. Acta Agrest Sin, 2019, 27: 1339-1346 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[26]	曾凡成, 王建元, 曾赟. 不同播量对鄂麦580产量性状及抗逆性的影响. 湖北农业科学, 2021, 60 (增刊2): 75-76.
	Zeng F C, Wang J Y, Zeng Y. Effects of different sowing rates on Emai 580 yield traits and stress resistance. Hubei Agric Sci, 2021, 60 (S2): 75-76 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[27]	张永平, 潘佳楠, 郭占斌, 吴强, 白羽. 不同种植密度对藜麦群体抗倒伏性能及产量的影响. 华北农学报, 2021, 36(4): 108-115. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20191823
	Zhang Y P, Pan J N, Guo Z B, Wu Q, Bai Y. The effect of different planting densities on lodging-resistant properties and yield of quinoa. Acta Agric Boreali-Sin, 2021, 36(4): 108-115 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20191823
[28]	郑迎霞, 陈杜, 魏鹏程, 卢平, 杨锦越, 罗上轲, 叶开梅, 宋碧. 种植密度对贵州春玉米茎秆抗倒伏性能及籽粒产量的影响. 作物学报, 2021, 47: 738-751. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.03044
	Zheng Y X, Chen D, Wei P C, Lu P, Yang J Y, Luo S K, Ye K M, Song B. Effects of planting density on lodging resistance and grain yield of spring maize stalks in Guizhou province. Acta Agron Sin, 2021, 47: 738-751 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[29]	牛海燕, 刘元元, 孔令强, 吕鹏, 刘树震, 冯波. 适当晚播结合增加播量对小麦产量和抗倒性的影响. 山东农业科学, 2021, 53(9): 19-26.
	Niu H Y, Liu Y Y, Kong L Q, Lyu P, Liu S Z, Feng B. Effects of suitable late sowing combined with increasing sowing rate on yield and lodging resistance of wheat. Shandong Agric Sci, 2021, 53(9): 19-26 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[30]	赵小红, 白羿雄, 王凯, 姚有华, 姚晓华, 吴昆仑. 种植密度对2个青稞品种抗倒伏及秸秆饲用特性的影响. 作物学报, 2020, 46: 586-595. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.91038
	Zhao X H, Bai Y X, Wang K, Yao Y H, Yao X H, Wu K L. Effects of planting density on lodging resistance and straw forage characteristics in two hulless barley varieties. Acta Agron Sin, 2020, 46: 586-595 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[31]	Kaack K, Schwarz K U, Brander P E. Variation in morphology, an atomy and chemistry of stems of Miscanthus genotypes differing in mechanical properties. Ind Crops Prod, 2003, 17:131-142.
[32]	袁圆, 汪波, 周广生, 刘芳, 黄俊生, 蒯婕. 播期和种植密度对油菜产量和茎秆抗倒性的影响. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54: 1613-1626. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.08.004
	Yuan Y, Wang B, Zhou G S, Liu F, Huang J S, Kuai J. Effects of different sowing dates and planting densities on the yield and stem lodging resistance of rapeseed. Sci Agric Sin, 2021, 54: 1613-1626 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.08.004
[33]	冯学颖, 米俊珍, 刘景辉, 赵宝平, 王英, 田露, 陈晓晶, 王欣欣. 宽幅条播和种植密度对燕麦抗倒伏性及产量的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2021, 41: 914-920.
	Feng X Y, Mi J Z, Liu J H, Zhao B P, Wang Y, Tian L, Chen X J, Wang X X. Effect of wide range drilling and planting density on lodging resistance and yield of oat. J Triticeae Crops, 2021, 41: 914-920 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[34]	康勇建, 赵宝平, 武俊英, 邹俊杰, 刘景辉. 追氮时期对饲用燕麦茎秆理化特性和抗倒性的影响. 草地学报, 2020, 28: 1775-1783. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.06.034
	Kang Y J, Zhao B P, Wu J Y, Zou J J, Liu J H. Effects of different nitrogen topdressing stage on the stalk physical and chemical characteristics and lodging resistance of forage oats. Acta Agrest Sin, 2020, 28: 1775-1783 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[35]	Lyubimova A V, Moiseeva M N, Eremin D I. Genetic resistance of cultivated oat and the influence of the mineral nutrition level on stem lodging in Western Siberia. Biol Web Conf, 2022, 51: 04005.
[36]	黄海, 常莹, 吴春胜, 胡文河, 谷岩. 群体密度对玉米茎秆可溶性碳水化合物和矿质元素含量的影响. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 42(2): 53-60.
	Huang H, Chang Y, Wu C S, Hu W H, Gu Y. Effects of population density on carbohydrate and mineral element contents in stalk of maize. J Northwest A&F (Nat Sci Edn), 2014, 42(2): 53-60 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[37]	王成雨, 代兴龙, 石玉华, 王振林, 陈晓光, 贺明荣. 氮肥水平和种植密度对冬小麦茎秆抗倒性能的影响. 作物学报, 2012, 38: 121-128. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2012.00121
	Wang C Y, Dai X L, Shi Y H, Wang Z L, Chen X G, He M R. Effects of nitrogen application rate and plant density on lodging resistance in winter wheat. Acta Agron Sin, 2012, 38: 121-128 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[38]	张晋, 郭翠花, 高志强. 不同密度对小麦花后旗叶和籽粒中可溶性糖含量的影响. 山西农业科学, 2011, 39: 1266-1268.
	Zhang J, Guo C H, Gao Z Q. Effects of different densities on the wheat soluble sugar in the flag leaf and grain. J Shanxi Agric Sci, 2011, 39: 1266-1268 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[39]	胡伟, 梁国玲, 刘凯强, 刘文辉, 李文. 青藏高原9个燕麦品种抗倒伏能力及其影响因素研究. 草地学报, 2023, 31: 1788-1797. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.06.022

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

年份 Year	pH	有机质 Organic matter (g kg^-1)	全氮 Total nitrogen (g kg^-1)	全磷 Total phosphorus (mg kg^-1)	全钾 Total potassium (g kg^-1)	碱解氮 Alkali hydrolyzed nitrogen (mg kg^-1)	速效磷 Available phosphorus (mg kg^-1)	速效钾 Available potassium (mg kg^-1)
2022	8.01	27.60	2.02	535.67	18.70	121.33	5.13	241.67
2023	7.96	28.35	2.98	528.56	16.88	134.25	6.06	237.23

年份 Year	品种 Variety	播量 Seeding rate	收获穗数 Spike (×10⁴ hm^-2)	穗粒数 Kernel number per spike	千粒重 Thousand-grain weight (g)	籽粒产量 Grain yield (kg hm^-2)
2022	BY1	S1	481.33±32.02 de	84.11±1.92 ab	23.01±0.23 a	4100.02±173.21 bcd
		S2	530.67±21.20 bcd	77.22±11.65 bc	20.57±0.15 b	4266.69±57.74 b
		S3	546.00±22.72 bc	69.33±3.67 cd	20.30±0.42 b	4500.02±100.00 a
		S4	651.67±11.93 a	60.11±10.12 de	19.33±0.57 c	4166.69±152.75 bc
		S5	679.67±31.79 a	49.34±7.64 e	18.47±0.42 d	4033.35±57.74 cde
	YK2	S1	412.67±8.08 f	94.78±7.67 a	22.43±0.37 a	3953.85±68.62 de
		S2	483.33±28.59 de	79.78±3.87 bc	20.88±0.37 b	4143.02±60.44 bc
		S3	453.67±41.96 ef	76.34±4.51 bc	20.71±0.47 b	4035.85±23.42 cde
		S4	513.67±47.82 cd	67.00±9.68 cd	19.47±0.30 c	3886.29±22.01 e
		S5	570.67±20.03 b	57.22±2.80 de	17.96±0.32 d	3703.89±123.33 f
2023	BY1	S1	434.67±27.06 c	80.22±5.09 b	23.73±0.95 a	4148.79±92.50 cd
		S2	489.33±80.65 bc	69.67±3.00 c	22.79±0.99 a	4219.89±101.61 bc
		S3	533.67±13.58 ab	64.67±6.84 c	22.16±1.87 ab	4387.92±39.51 a
		S4	542.67±3.79 ab	52.56±5.50 d	20.14±0.43 cd	4043.75±72.81 d
		S5	592.67±39.17 a	47.56±1.17 d	19.16±0.87 de	3867.82±122.71 e
	YK2	S1	484.00±12.12 bc	90.00±3.33 a	21.11±0.54 bc	4133.85±68.62 cd
2023	YK2	S2	546.67±30.62 ab	86.34±5.13 ab	20.21±1.18 cd	4363.02±60.44 ab
		S3	511.33±11.15 b	67.56±3.36 c	19.84±0.36 cd	4025.85±23.42 bc
		S4	537.00±22.61 ab	47.78±4.17 d	18.65±0.22 de	3816.29±22.01 d
		S5	592.67±16.86 a	45.00±8.74 d	17.71±0.36 e	3653.89±123.33 e
方差分析ANOVA
V			**	**	**	**
S			**	**	**	**
V×S			*	NS	NS	*

指标 Item	抗折力 Stem bending resistance	倒伏率 Lodging rate	籽粒产量 Grain yield
株高Plant height	0.22	-0.23	0.22
重心高度Height of center of gravity	-0.06	-0.51^**	0.29^*
基部第二节间长The second internode length	-0.76^**	0.32^*	-0.51^**
基部第二节间粗The second internode stem diameter	0.54^**	-0.82^**	0.43^**
基部第二节间干重The second internode dry weight	0.77^**	-0.66^**	0.40^**
基部第二节间充实度The second internode fullness	0.27^*	-0.72^**	0.40^**
纤维素含量 Cellulose content	0.50^**	-0.51^**	0.40^**
可溶性糖Soluble sugar content	0.62^**	-0.72^**	0.43^**
氮含量N content	-0.13	0.74^**	-0.14
碳氮比 C/N	0.32^*	-0.82^**	0.25
钾含量K content	0.24	-0.71^**	0.30^*
硅含量Si content	0.75^**	-0.40^**	0.56^**
抗折力Stem bending resistance	—	-0.48^**	0.57^**
倒伏率 Lodging rate	-0.48^**	—	-0.58^**

Effect of seeding rates on lodging resistance and yield of oat under reduced strip drip irrigation

RichHTML430

PDF

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 17

References 39

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

年份 Year	品种 Variety	播种量 Seeding rate	倒伏时期 Stage of lodging	倒伏面积 Lodging area (%)	倒伏分级 Lodging grade
2022	BY1	S1	—	0±0 f	0
		S2	—	0±0 f	0
		S3	—	0±0 f	0
		S4	成熟期Maturity stage	13.29±13.29 e	1
		S5	成熟期Maturity stage	23.75±23.75 d	2
	YK2	S1	—	0±0 f	0
		S2	—	0±0 f	0
		S3	灌浆期Filling stage	27.29±27.29 c	2
		S4	灌浆期Filling stage	53.36±53.36 b	3
		S5	灌浆期Filling stage	82.31±82.31 a	3
2023	BY1	S1	灌浆期Filling stage	13.33±2.89 e	1
		S2	灌浆期Filling stage	25.00±5.00 d	2
		S3	灌浆期Filling stage	33.33±2.89 d	2
		S4	灌浆期Filling stage	51.67±7.64 c	3
		S5	灌浆期Filling stage	68.33±2.89 b	3
	YK2	S1	灌浆期Filling stage	23.33±2.89 d	2
	YK2	S2	灌浆期Filling stage	30.00±10.00 d	2
2023	YK2	S3	抽穗期Heading stage	60.00±10.00 bc	3
		S4	抽穗期Heading stage	88.33±2.89 a	3
		S5	抽穗期Heading stage	95.00±0.00 a	3
方差分析ANOVA
V				**
S				**
V×S				**

[1]	Hu Chuan, Zhao Kai-Nan, Huang Xiu-Li, Wu Jin-Zhi, Ren Kai-Ming, Wang He-Zheng, Fu Guo-Zhan, Huang Ming, Li You-Jun. Effects of tillage methods and nitrogen rates on yield and quality of dryland wheat under one-off irrigation [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1830-1846.
[2]	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.
[3]	Zhang Si-Si, Zhao Xiang-Hui, Zhou Yang, Yao Yun-Feng, Zhu Rong-Yu, Dong Yuan-Jie, Hu Guo-Qing, Xu Tong, Liu Zhao-Xin. Effects of plowing and green manure returning in winter fallow period on soil physicochemical properties and yield in continuously cropped peanut [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1472-1486.
[4]	Zhang Ning-Ning, Teng Yu-Fei, Ren Na-Na, Wei Xing-Zhuo, Yan Shu-Hao, Fan Ke-Xin, Wang Yong-Hong, Chen Wen-Kang, Zhang Xing-Hua, Zhu Wan-Chao, Xu Shu-Tu, Xue Ji-Quan. Phenotypic evaluation and plasticity analysis of drought resistance in 201 maize inbred lines [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1309-1325.
[5]	Wang Yu-Cheng, Zhang Lu, Liu A-Kang, Huang Jian-Liang, Peng Shao-Bing, Yuan Shen. Strategies and prospects for large-scale crop yield improvement based on yield gap [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1279-1290.
[6]	Zhang Zhen, Feng Lian-Jie, Shi Yu, Yu Zhen-Wen, Zhang Yong-Li. Yield formation of wheat with different ear types under water-saving supplementary irrigation conditions [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1522-1535.
[7]	Yan An, Jiang Kun-Wei, Wang Rong-Yuan, Tian Lin, Zhang Lu, Wang Yun, Xu Jian-Long. Identification and cloning of SVN7 controlling small vascular bundle number in the rice flag leaf [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1364-1372.
[8]	Liu Xin-Meng, Ren Hao, Zhang Ji-Bo, Zhang Ji-Wang, Zhao Bin, Ren Bai-Zhao, Liu Peng, Wang Hong-Zhang. Physiological mechanisms of methyl jasmonate (MeJA) alleviating the effects of heat stress on ear differentiation in maize [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1561-1572.
[9]	Wang Zhuang-Zhuang, Wu Zi-Jun, Zhang Yong-Xin, Zhang Xin-Yuan, Yuan Li-Xue, Chen Ru-Xue, Liu Shi-Ju, Duan Jian-Zhao, Feng Wei, Wang Tong-Chao, Wang Yong-Hua. Optimized water-nitrogen synergy enhances winter wheat yield and nitrogen use efficiency in clay-loam fluvo-aquic soils of southeastern Henan, China [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1501-1521.
[10]	Zhang Hong-Rong, Wang Fei-Er, Li Pan, Qiu Hai-Long, Zhu Jing, Zhao Lian-Hao, Nan Yun-You, He Wei, Fan Zhi-Long, Hu Fa-Long, Chai Qiang, Yin Wen. Photosynthetic characteristics of 20% reduced irrigation combined with 25% organic substitution for chemical fertilizer in increasing silage maize yield [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1487-1500.
[11]	Zhao Jia-Xue, Zhou Long-Hao, Guo Qi-Yuan, Shang Lun-Xiao, Wang Han, Liu Zhi-Tao, Chen Xi, Zhang Xiao-Pei, Song Xian-Liang, Ahmedov Miraziz Baltaevich, Mao Li-Li. Long-term stubble return and subsoiling enhance cotton yields in coastal saline-alkali soils by improving soil conditions and photosynthetic characteristics [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1548-1560.
[12]	Guo Xing-Yu, Hu Dan, Lin Su-Qi, Wang Meng-Kai, Tan Wen-Feng, Huang Chuan-Qin. Biochar combined with chemical fertilizer increases maize yield and soil ecosystem multifunctionality in an intercropped maize-soybean [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1536-1547.
[13]	Cai Hong-Wei, Yu Ai-Zhong, Jiang Ke-Qiang, Wang Peng-Fei, Wang Yu-Long, Huo Jian-Zhe, Pang Xiao-Neng, Yin Bo, Shang Yong-Pan. Key mechanisms underlying the enhancement of sweet maize yield through partial substitution of chemical fertilizers with organic manure in arid irrigation districts [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(4): 1166-1180.
[14]	Cui Xue-Mei, Liu Yan-Di, Liu Jing-Hui, Mi Jun-Zhen, Wu Jun-Ying, Zhao Bao-Ping. Study on the relationship between physiological characteristics of superior and inferior grains with yield in different oat genotypes [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(4): 1220-1235.
[15]	Yang Rui, Chen Jing-Dong, Huang Ying, Zhang Xue-Kun, Zhou Deng-Wen, Liu Qing-Yun, Xu Jin-Song, Xie Ling-Li, Xu Ben-Bo. Study on breeding and cultivation strategies for winter rapeseed to cope with climate change in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(4): 1153-1165.