Effects of Transplanting Density on Yield and Physiological Characteristics of Different Types Japonica Rice under Rice-Duck Integrated Cultivation in Northern China
1st author: 2019220219@stu.syau.edu.cn
Received date: 2021-07-24
Online published: 2021-09-20
The split-zone design experiment was used to study the effects of transplanting density on the yield and physiological characteristics of Shendao 47（a variety with medium panicle number and medium panicle size） and Shendao 505 a variety with more panicles under rice-duck organic integrated cultivation. The results showed that with the increase of transplanting density, the leaf area index （LAI） and the effective panicles of both varieties significantly increased. The proportion of dry matter accumulation before full heading stage, total dry matter accumulation and yield of Shendao 47 were significantly increased with increasing density, while the number of spikelets per panicle and the seed setting rate were significantly decreased. However, with the increase of transplanting density, the number of spikelets per panicle of Shendao 505 was significantly reduced, and the seed setting rate, population dry matter accumulation and yield first increased and then decreased. Variety and transplanting density have significant interaction effects on multiple traits such as yield. The suitable transplanting densities of Shendao 47 and Shendao 505 for high yield were 30.0 cm×9.9 cm （3.3×105 hills/hm2）and 30.0 cm×16.7 cm （2×105 hills/hm2）, respectively.
Jingyi MU, Shimeng GUO, Wenju ZHAI, Shu WANG, Baoyan JIA, Yuancai HUANG, Yan WANG, Yun WANG, Chanchan ZHOU . Effects of Transplanting Density on Yield and Physiological Characteristics of Different Types Japonica Rice under Rice-Duck Integrated Cultivation in Northern China[J]. China Rice, 2021 , 27(5) : 129 -133 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2021.05.028
| [1] | 杨静,高亮,朱毅,等. 稻鸭共作研究进展[J]. 作物杂志,2020(3):1-6. |
| [2] | 李小朋. 株行距配置对不同穗型水稻冠层结构、抗倒性及产量的影响[D]. 沈阳:沈阳农业大学,2016. |
| [3] | 陈传华,刘广林,罗群昌,等. 优质稻有机栽培肥料和种植密度试验[J]. 南方农业学报,2011,42(8):926-930. |
| [4] | 王坚纲,许德美,周燕,等. 稻鸭共作有机稻生产中几个关键问题的技术探讨[J]. 中国稻米,2016,22(1):65-67. |
| [5] | 罗强鑫,冯跃华,许桂玲,等. 有机肥施用量和种植密度对有机栽培水稻生长及产量的影响[J]. 作物研究,2021,35(2):102-107. |
| [6] | 任磊,石书兵,吐尔干江. 稻鸭共作在有机稻生产中的表现[J]. 北方水稻,2014,44(2):15-17. |
| [7] | 朱梦华. 不同机插方式与密度对稻鸭共作水稻产量与品质的影响[D]. 扬州:扬州大学,2020. |
| [8] | 王丹英,章秀福,周昌南,等. 浙江省水稻产量构成差异调查与合理种植密度分析[J]. 浙江农业学报,2010,22(3):330-336. |
| [9] | 许俊伟,孟天瑶,荆培培,等. 机插密度对不同类型水稻抗倒伏能力及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报,2015,41(11):1 767-1 776. |
| [10] | 闫川,丁艳锋,王强盛,等. 行株距配置对水稻茎秆形态生理与群体生态的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学,2007,21(5):530-536. |
| [11] | 赵黎明,顾春梅,王士强,等. 不同密度对寒地水稻产量及光合物质生产的影响[J]. 黑龙江农业科学,2019(1):27-32. |
| [12] | HU Q, JIANG W Q, SHI Q, et al.Effect of wide-narrow row arrangement in mechanical pot-seedling transplanting and plant density on yield formation and grain quality of japonica rice[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2020, 19(5): 1 197-1 214. |
| [13] | 朱克明,张利民,张建国. 水稻有机栽培密度试验[J]. 农业装备技术,2003(1):26-27. |
| [14] | 朱聪聪,张洪程,郭保卫,等. 钵苗机插密度对不同类型水稻产量及光合物质生产特性的影响[J]. 作物学报,2014,40(1):122-133. |
| [15] | 周婵婵,陈海强,王术,等. 氮肥运筹和移栽密度对水稻产量和品质形成的影响[J]. 中国稻米,2019,25(5):42-46. |
| [16] | DOU Z, LI Y Y, GUO H L, et al.Effects of mechanically transplanting methods and planting densities on yield and quality of Nanjing 2728 under rice-crayfish continuous production system[J]. Agronomy, 2021, 11(3): 488. |
| [17] | DUAN M Y, LUO H W, PAN S G, et al.High transplant density cause loss yield and quality decreasement by affecting photosynthesis, dry matter accumulation and transportation in super rice[J]. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 2019, 17(3): 6 069-6 079. |
| [18] | THAKUR A K, RATH S, ROYCHOWDHURY S, et al.Comparative performance of rice with system of rice intensification (SRI) and conventional management using different plant spacings[J]. Journal of Agronomy & Crop Science, 2010, 196(2): 146-159. |
| [19] | HOU W F, KHAN R, ZHANG J L, et al.Nitrogen rate and plant density interaction enhances radiation interception, yield and nitrogen use efficiency of mechanically transplanted rice[J].Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2019, 269: 183-192. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |