Grouting Characteristics and Root Morphology and Filling Degree of Tartary Buckwheat Under Different Nitrogen Fertilizer Application

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2019.06.004

Abstract

Abstract:

Tartary buckwheat cv ‘Jinqiao No. 2’ (JQ2) was selected as the material to investigate the changes in the filling characteristics, root morphology, plant agronomic traits, plumpness, and yield of tartary buckwheat with different nitrogenous treatments, in order to provide a theoretical basis and technical support for high-yield cultivation of tartary buckwheat. Medium concentration nitrogen fertilizer treatment (MN treatment) had the most significant effect on grain weight of ‘Jinqiao 2’. The actual 100-grain weight and theoretical maximum 100-grain weight (A), the initial grain filling potential (R₀), and growth rate at maximum growth rate during grain filling (W_max·G) and active growth period were the highest in the MN treatment. Root length, surface area and volume were the highest in the MN treatment. Root-shoot ratio was the highest in the less concentration nitrogen fertilizer treatment (LN). The agronomic traits, plumpness and yield of ‘Jinqiao No. 2’ were basically the best in the LN and MN treatments. In summary, the treatment of medium-concentration nitrogen fertilizer is more conducive to promoting the filling process of bitter buckwheat and improving its fullness and yield.

Key words: nitrogen fertilizer, tartary buckwheat, filling characteristics, root, plumpness, yield

CLC Number:

S517

WANG Yan,LI Zhenzhou,HUANG Kaifeng. Grouting Characteristics and Root Morphology and Filling Degree of Tartary Buckwheat Under Different Nitrogen Fertilizer Application[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2019, 40(6): 1062-1067.

Figures/Tables 4

References 29

[1]	林汝法 . 中国荞麦[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2013: 7-9.
[2]	陈庆富 . 荞麦生产状况及新类型栽培荞麦育种研究的最新进展[J]. 贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2018,36(3):1-8.
[3]	Wei Y. Buck wheat production in china[C]//Matano T, Ujihara A. Current Advance in Buckwheat Research, Proceedings of the 6th Inernational Symposium on Buckwheat. Nagano: Shinshu University Press, 1995: 7-10.
[4]	汪燕, 梁成刚, 孙艳红 , 等. 不同苦荞品种的产量与品质及其对低氮的响应[J]. 贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2017,35(6):66-73.
[5]	汪灿, 胡丹, 杨浩 , 等. 苦荞主要农艺性状与产量关系的多重分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2013(6):18-22.
[6]	Hu C, Cao Z P, Chen Y F , et al. Dynamics of soil microbial biomass carbon, mineral nitrogen and nitrogen mineralization in long-term field experiment, Northern China[J]. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 2008,32(2):287-302. DOI URL
[7]	Roy A, Singh K P . Dynamics of microbial biomass and nitrogen supply during primary succession on blast furnace slag dumps in dry tropics[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2003,35:365-372. DOI URL
[8]	宋毓雪 . 普通荞麦籽粒灌浆过程生理生化特性初探[D]. 贵阳: 贵州师范大学, 2015.
[9]	李青云, 祝召杰, 陈若礼 , 等. 影响淮北地区小麦灌浆的气象要素分析[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2001,29(5):692-693.
[10]	胡文河, 谷岩, 岳杨 , 等. 不同株型玉米籽粒淀粉积累及相关酶活性的研究[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2012,40(3):104-110.
[11]	赵福成, 景立权, 闫发宝 , 等. 灌浆期高温胁迫对甜玉米籽粒糖分积累和蔗糖代谢相关酶活性的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2013,39(9):1644-1651. DOI
[12]	杨建昌, 彭少兵, 顾世梁 , 等. 水稻灌浆期籽粒中3 个与淀粉合成有关的酶活性变化[J]. 作物学报, 2001,27(2):157-164.
[13]	于晓芳, 高聚林, 叶君 , 等. 深松及氮肥深施对超高产春玉米根系生长、产量及氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2013,21(1):114-119.
[14]	林贤青, 朱德峰, 林兴军 , 等. 不同灌溉和施肥方式对杂交稻生长和根际环境的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2009,28(4):90-92.
[15]	Peng Y F, Li X X, Li C J . Temporal and spatial profiling of rootgrowth revealed novel response of maize roots under various nitrogen supplies in the field[J]. PLoS ONE, 2012,7(5):1-11.
[16]	李双双, 李晶, 陈龙涛 , 等. 施氮量对春小麦根系生长及产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2013,33(1):141-145. DOI
[17]	朱庆森, 曹显祖, 骆亦其 . 水稻籽粒灌浆的生长分析[J]. 作物学报, 1988,14(3):182-193.
[18]	顾世梁, 朱庆森, 杨建昌 , 等. 不同水稻材料籽粒灌浆特性的分析[J]. 作物学报, 2001,21(1):7-14.
[19]	王艳哲, 刘秀位, 孙宏勇 , 等. 水氮调控对冬小麦根冠比和水分利用效率的影响研究[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2013,21(3):282-289.
[20]	张宗文, 林汝法 . 荞麦种质资源描述规范和数据标准[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2007: 13-14.
[21]	杨建昌, 朱庆森, 王志琴 , 等. 亚优2号结实率与谷粒充实率的研究[J]. 江苏农学院学报, 1994(4):14-18.
[22]	孔德章, 宋毓雪, 王雨 , 等. 甜荞不同花期剪花处理对籽粒灌浆特性的影响[J]. 安徽农业大学学报, 2016,43(3):414-419.
[23]	王乐, 康建宏, 梁熠 , 等. 控释/普通尿素配施对春玉米籽粒灌浆特性及产量的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2018,32(10):2054-2061.
[24]	董桂春, 陈琛, 袁秋梅 , 等. 氮肥处理对氮素高效吸收水稻根系性状及氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2016,36(3):642-651. DOI
[25]	张瑞朋, 杨德忠, 傅连舜 , 等. 氮素对不同来源大豆品种农艺性状及产量的影响[J]. 种子, 2009,28(10):26-29.
[26]	向达兵, 赵江林, 胡丽雪 , 等. 施氮量对苦荞麦生长发育、产量及品质的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2013,40(14):57-59.
[27]	宋毓雪, 胡静洁, 孔德章 , 等. 不同氮、磷、钾水平对苦荞产量和品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业大学学报, 2014,41(3):411-415.
[28]	张江林, 侯文峰, 鲁剑巍 , 等. 不同施氮量和移栽密度对水稻产量及灌浆特性的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2017,19(2):75-85.
[29]	肖凯, 张荣铣, 钱维朴 . 氮素营养调控小麦旗叶衰老和光合功能衰退的生理机制[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 1998,4(4):371-378. DOI

处理 Treatments	花后天数 Days after flowering/d
处理 Treatments	5	10	15	20	25	30
CK	0.0828^d	0.1592^d	0.4703^d	0.7680^d	0.9735^d	1.0199^d
LN	0.0931^c	0.1785^c	0.7862^c	0.9837^c	1.1721^c	1.2328^c
MN	0.1268^a	1.0580^a	1.3954^b	1.5728^b	1.9380^a	2.6038^a
HN	0.1054^b	0.7977^b	1.4000^a	1.7460^a	1.9074^b	2.5072^b

处理 Treatments	花后天数 Days after flowering/d
处理 Treatments	5	10	15	20	25	30
CK	0.0828^d	0.1592^d	0.4703^d	0.7680^d	0.9735^d	1.0199^d
LN	0.0931^c	0.1785^c	0.7862^c	0.9837^c	1.1721^c	1.2328^c
MN	0.1268^a	1.0580^a	1.3954^b	1.5728^b	1.9380^a	2.6038^a
HN	0.1054^b	0.7977^b	1.4000^a	1.7460^a	1.9074^b	2.5072^b

处理Treatments	实际百粒重 Actual 100-grain weight/g	A	B	K	N	R²	R₀	T_max·G/d	G_max/ (g/百粒·日)	W_max·G/g	I/%	D/d
CK	1.020	1.123	1.045	0.164	0.100	0.994	1.640	14.308	0.065	0.433	38.56	25.61
LN	1.233	1.220	1.322	0.250	0.060	0.986	4.167	12.370	0.109	0.462	37.86	16.48
MN	2.604	2.733	0.007	0.098	0.002	0.916	49.000	12.784	0.099	0.959	36.82	40.86
HN	2.507	2.543	0.023	0.133	0.005	0.968	26.600	11.474	0.124	0.925	36.88	30.15

处理Treatments	实际百粒重 Actual 100-grain weight/g	A	B	K	N	R²	R₀	T_max·G/d	G_max/ (g/百粒·日)	W_max·G/g	I/%	D/d
CK	1.020	1.123	1.045	0.164	0.100	0.994	1.640	14.308	0.065	0.433	38.56	25.61
LN	1.233	1.220	1.322	0.250	0.060	0.986	4.167	12.370	0.109	0.462	37.86	16.48
MN	2.604	2.733	0.007	0.098	0.002	0.916	49.000	12.784	0.099	0.959	36.82	40.86
HN	2.507	2.543	0.023	0.133	0.005	0.968	26.600	11.474	0.124	0.925	36.88	30.15

处理 Treatments	根长 Length/cm	表面积 Surface area/cm²	体积 Bulk/cm³	平均直径 Average diameter/mm	根冠比 Root-shoot ratio
CK	41.003^c	6.089^c	0.154^c	0.529^b	0.101^b
LN	43.722^bc	8.153^b	0.248^b	0.606^a	0.103^a
MN	73.833^a	10.870^a	0.321^a	0.435^c	0.089^c
HN	45.260^b	7.812^b	0.236^b	0.531^b	0.084^d