
浙江农业科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 67 ›› Issue (5): 1226-1234.DOI: 10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20260078
黄莉1(
), 黄翔1, 黄忆南1, 简贵富1, 韦洁镅2, 林石榴2, 韦政民1(
)
收稿日期:2026-02-02
出版日期:2026-05-11
发布日期:2026-05-12
通讯作者:
韦政民
作者简介:韦政民,E-mail:398252698@qq.com。基金资助:
HUANG Li1(
), HUANG Xiang1, HUANG Yinan1, JIAN Guifu1, WEI Jiemei2, LIN Shiliu2, WEI Zhengmin1(
)
Received:2026-02-02
Online:2026-05-11
Published:2026-05-12
Contact:
WEI Zhengmin
摘要:
为明确种植密度与化肥、有机肥配施对喀斯特地区玉米产量的综合调控效应,探索有机肥替代部分化肥的绿色高产途径,本研究于2025年在广西马山县采用五因素二次正交旋转组合设计开展田间试验,以种植密度(X?)、化肥养分施用量(N:X2、P2O5:X3、K2O:X4)及有机肥施用量(X?)为试验因素,建立产量与各因素的回归模型,通过模型分析主效应、单因素效应及双因素互作效应,结合寻优获得高产优化方案,并进行验证试验与大田示范。结果表明,构建的产量回归模型的决定系数(R2)为0.890 4,拟合度良好;各因素对产量影响的主次顺序为X2>X1>X4>X3>X5,单因素效应均呈抛物线变化,种植密度与K2O施用量、P2O5施用量与K2O施用量的互作效应显著(p<0.05)。寻优获得产量超过7 500 kg·hm-2的高产优化方案为:种植密度5.23×104~5.35×104 hm-2,配施N 242.6~258.0 kg·hm-2、P2O5 85.5~105.8 kg·hm-2、K2O 189.9~226.3 kg·hm-2,及有机肥(腐熟干猪粪)3 848.6~4 776.4 kg·hm-2,该模式可减施化肥6%~11%。验证试验与大田示范产量分别达7 621.5 kg·hm-2和7 543.6 kg·hm-2,方案可行。本研究明确了玉米密肥耦合的关键调控因子及最优配置方案,实现了高产与化肥减量的协同目标,为马山县玉米的规模化绿色高产栽培提供了可靠的技术支撑。
中图分类号:
黄莉, 黄翔, 黄忆南, 简贵富, 韦洁镅, 林石榴, 韦政民. 喀斯特地区玉米密肥耦合栽培技术的优化[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1226-1234.
HUANG Li, HUANG Xiang, HUANG Yinan, JIAN Guifu, WEI Jiemei, LIN Shiliu, WEI Zhengmin. Study on the optimization of maize cultivation technology with density⁃fertilizer coupling in Karst regions[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2026, 67(5): 1226-1234.
| 水平 | X1/hm-2 | X2/(kg·hm-2) | X3/(kg·hm-2) | X4/(kg·hm-2) | X5/(kg·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -2 | 4.35 | 135 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| -1 | 4.80 | 180 | 45 | 90 | 1 500 |
| 0 | 5.25 | 225 | 90 | 180 | 3 000 |
| 1 | 5.70 | 270 | 135 | 270 | 4 500 |
| 2 | 6.15 | 315 | 180 | 360 | 6 000 |
| Δj | 0.45 | 45 | 45 | 90 | 1 500 |
表1 试验因素水平及编码
Table 1 Experimental factor levels and codes
| 水平 | X1/hm-2 | X2/(kg·hm-2) | X3/(kg·hm-2) | X4/(kg·hm-2) | X5/(kg·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -2 | 4.35 | 135 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| -1 | 4.80 | 180 | 45 | 90 | 1 500 |
| 0 | 5.25 | 225 | 90 | 180 | 3 000 |
| 1 | 5.70 | 270 | 135 | 270 | 4 500 |
| 2 | 6.15 | 315 | 180 | 360 | 6 000 |
| Δj | 0.45 | 45 | 45 | 90 | 1 500 |
| 项目 | 施肥时期 | 尿素/% | 过磷酸钙/% | 氯化钾/% | 干猪粪/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 基肥 | 播种时 | 40 | 100 | 60 | 100 |
| 苗肥 | 5~6叶期 | 25 | — | 40 | — |
| 攻苞肥 | 大喇叭口期 | 35 | — | — | — |
表2 施肥时期及施肥比例
Table 2 Fertilization stages and ratios
| 项目 | 施肥时期 | 尿素/% | 过磷酸钙/% | 氯化钾/% | 干猪粪/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 基肥 | 播种时 | 40 | 100 | 60 | 100 |
| 苗肥 | 5~6叶期 | 25 | — | 40 | — |
| 攻苞肥 | 大喇叭口期 | 35 | — | — | — |
| 处理 | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | 产量/(kg·hm-2) | 株高/cm | 穗位高/cm | 茎粗/mm | 穗粒数 | 百粒重/g |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 973.1 | 264 | 113 | 19.95 | 435.1 | 30.9 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 7 373.6 | 271 | 116 | 20.29 | 502.2 | 29.1 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 7 288.2 | 276 | 120 | 19.87 | 478.8 | 28.9 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 7 005.9 | 279 | 120 | 19.12 | 462.0 | 29.7 |
| 5 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 6 612.0 | 262 | 112 | 20.91 | 435.2 | 28.5 |
| 6 | 1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 7 078.1 | 269 | 119 | 19.58 | 455.8 | 31.3 |
| 7 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 7 281.7 | 275 | 116 | 19.59 | 443.2 | 30.8 |
| 8 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 6 900.9 | 256 | 115 | 20.32 | 438.6 | 29.3 |
| 9 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 7 314.5 | 265 | 115 | 21.03 | 511.7 | 30.6 |
| 10 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 7 170.1 | 268 | 113 | 20.23 | 519.4 | 30.8 |
| 11 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 7 367.0 | 274 | 119 | 20.21 | 541.1 | 31.5 |
| 12 | -1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 6 756.4 | 265 | 113 | 20.56 | 509.0 | 28.5 |
| 13 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 953.4 | 273 | 120 | 21.32 | 500.6 | 31.7 |
| 14 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 6 585.7 | 261 | 110 | 20.87 | 468.1 | 30.9 |
| 15 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 6 690.7 | 264 | 119 | 21.10 | 468.8 | 31.3 |
| 16 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 6 034.1 | 254 | 108 | 20.01 | 454.8 | 29.8 |
| 17 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 329.6 | 259 | 113 | 22.41 | 529.0 | 29.4 |
| 18 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 216.0 | 264 | 118 | 19.75 | 448.6 | 28.8 |
| 19 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 250.8 | 261 | 113 | 20.30 | 446.9 | 30.8 |
| 20 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 531.2 | 273 | 118 | 20.78 | 512.6 | 30.0 |
| 21 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 6 861.5 | 264 | 117 | 21.46 | 491.3 | 28.4 |
| 22 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 340.8 | 268 | 115 | 21.15 | 498.1 | 31.2 |
| 23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 6 907.4 | 258 | 108 | 21.49 | 489.6 | 30.2 |
| 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7 091.3 | 274 | 117 | 20.90 | 466.5 | 30.9 |
| 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 7 248.9 | 268 | 121 | 21.49 | 475.0 | 31.7 |
| 26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 518.1 | 259 | 107 | 20.48 | 476.8 | 30.8 |
| 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 386.7 | 264 | 109 | 21.12 | 478.2 | 30.4 |
| 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 688.8 | 261 | 112 | 21.10 | 510.0 | 31.0 |
| 29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 767.6 | 270 | 114 | 22.44 | 493.0 | 31.5 |
| 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 504.9 | 264 | 118 | 21.13 | 483.8 | 30.9 |
| 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 459.0 | 271 | 117 | 21.88 | 481.4 | 30.3 |
| 32 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 003.9 | 265 | 116 | 22.56 | 515.1 | 32.6 |
| 33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 419.6 | 267 | 115 | 21.82 | 494.2 | 30.0 |
| 34 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 327.6 | 268 | 120 | 20.04 | 486.2 | 29.8 |
| 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 813.5 | 269 | 111 | 20.09 | 500.5 | 31.9 |
| 36 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 360.5 | 260 | 107 | 19.91 | 480.6 | 30.2 |
表3 不同处理下玉米的产量与农艺性状
Table 3 Yield and agronomic traits of maize under different treatments
| 处理 | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | 产量/(kg·hm-2) | 株高/cm | 穗位高/cm | 茎粗/mm | 穗粒数 | 百粒重/g |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 973.1 | 264 | 113 | 19.95 | 435.1 | 30.9 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 7 373.6 | 271 | 116 | 20.29 | 502.2 | 29.1 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 7 288.2 | 276 | 120 | 19.87 | 478.8 | 28.9 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 7 005.9 | 279 | 120 | 19.12 | 462.0 | 29.7 |
| 5 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 6 612.0 | 262 | 112 | 20.91 | 435.2 | 28.5 |
| 6 | 1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 7 078.1 | 269 | 119 | 19.58 | 455.8 | 31.3 |
| 7 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 7 281.7 | 275 | 116 | 19.59 | 443.2 | 30.8 |
| 8 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 6 900.9 | 256 | 115 | 20.32 | 438.6 | 29.3 |
| 9 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 7 314.5 | 265 | 115 | 21.03 | 511.7 | 30.6 |
| 10 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 7 170.1 | 268 | 113 | 20.23 | 519.4 | 30.8 |
| 11 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 7 367.0 | 274 | 119 | 20.21 | 541.1 | 31.5 |
| 12 | -1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 6 756.4 | 265 | 113 | 20.56 | 509.0 | 28.5 |
| 13 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 953.4 | 273 | 120 | 21.32 | 500.6 | 31.7 |
| 14 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 6 585.7 | 261 | 110 | 20.87 | 468.1 | 30.9 |
| 15 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 6 690.7 | 264 | 119 | 21.10 | 468.8 | 31.3 |
| 16 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 6 034.1 | 254 | 108 | 20.01 | 454.8 | 29.8 |
| 17 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 329.6 | 259 | 113 | 22.41 | 529.0 | 29.4 |
| 18 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 216.0 | 264 | 118 | 19.75 | 448.6 | 28.8 |
| 19 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 250.8 | 261 | 113 | 20.30 | 446.9 | 30.8 |
| 20 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 531.2 | 273 | 118 | 20.78 | 512.6 | 30.0 |
| 21 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 6 861.5 | 264 | 117 | 21.46 | 491.3 | 28.4 |
| 22 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 340.8 | 268 | 115 | 21.15 | 498.1 | 31.2 |
| 23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 6 907.4 | 258 | 108 | 21.49 | 489.6 | 30.2 |
| 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7 091.3 | 274 | 117 | 20.90 | 466.5 | 30.9 |
| 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 7 248.9 | 268 | 121 | 21.49 | 475.0 | 31.7 |
| 26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 518.1 | 259 | 107 | 20.48 | 476.8 | 30.8 |
| 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 386.7 | 264 | 109 | 21.12 | 478.2 | 30.4 |
| 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 688.8 | 261 | 112 | 21.10 | 510.0 | 31.0 |
| 29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 767.6 | 270 | 114 | 22.44 | 493.0 | 31.5 |
| 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 504.9 | 264 | 118 | 21.13 | 483.8 | 30.9 |
| 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 459.0 | 271 | 117 | 21.88 | 481.4 | 30.3 |
| 32 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 003.9 | 265 | 116 | 22.56 | 515.1 | 32.6 |
| 33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 419.6 | 267 | 115 | 21.82 | 494.2 | 30.0 |
| 34 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 327.6 | 268 | 120 | 20.04 | 486.2 | 29.8 |
| 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 813.5 | 269 | 111 | 20.09 | 500.5 | 31.9 |
| 36 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 360.5 | 260 | 107 | 19.91 | 480.6 | 30.2 |
| 变异来源 | 平方和 | 自由度 | 均方 | F值 | p值 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 回归 | 6 022 392.7 | 17 | 354 258.4 | 8.604 0 | <0.000 1 |
| 残差 | 741 129.2 | 18 | 41 173.8 | — | — |
| 失拟性检验 | 265 085.5 | 9 | 29 453.9 | 0.556 9 | 0.801 9 |
| 误差 | 476 043.7 | 9 | 52 893.7 | — | — |
| 总变异 | 6 763 521.9 | 35 | — | — | — |
表4 回归模型方差分析
Table 4 Analysis of variance for the regression model
| 变异来源 | 平方和 | 自由度 | 均方 | F值 | p值 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 回归 | 6 022 392.7 | 17 | 354 258.4 | 8.604 0 | <0.000 1 |
| 残差 | 741 129.2 | 18 | 41 173.8 | — | — |
| 失拟性检验 | 265 085.5 | 9 | 29 453.9 | 0.556 9 | 0.801 9 |
| 误差 | 476 043.7 | 9 | 52 893.7 | — | — |
| 总变异 | 6 763 521.9 | 35 | — | — | — |
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X4=-2 | X4=-1 | X4=0 | X4=1 | X4=2 | |
| X1=-2 | 5 339.6 | 6 064.8 | 6 525.8 | 6 722.5 | 6 654.9 |
| X1=-1 | 6 296.1 | 6 897.5 | 7 234.5 | 7 307.3 | 7 115.8 |
| X1=0 | 6 875.1 | 7 352.5 | 7 565.7 | 7 514.5 | 7 199.1 |
| X1=1 | 7 076.6 | 7 430.0 | 7 519.2 | 7 344.2 | 6 904.8 |
| X1=2 | 6 900.4 | 7 130.0 | 7 095.3 | 6 796.3 | 6 233.0 |
表5 种植密度与K2O施用量互作下的产量单位:kg·hm-2
Table 5 Yield under the interaction of planting density and K2O application rate
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X4=-2 | X4=-1 | X4=0 | X4=1 | X4=2 | |
| X1=-2 | 5 339.6 | 6 064.8 | 6 525.8 | 6 722.5 | 6 654.9 |
| X1=-1 | 6 296.1 | 6 897.5 | 7 234.5 | 7 307.3 | 7 115.8 |
| X1=0 | 6 875.1 | 7 352.5 | 7 565.7 | 7 514.5 | 7 199.1 |
| X1=1 | 7 076.6 | 7 430.0 | 7 519.2 | 7 344.2 | 6 904.8 |
| X1=2 | 6 900.4 | 7 130.0 | 7 095.3 | 6 796.3 | 6 233.0 |
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X?=-2 | X?=-1 | X?=0 | X?=1 | X?=2 | |
| X?=-2 | 5 696.0 | 6 489.0 | 6 997.7 | 7 222.2 | 7 162.3 |
| X?=-1 | 6 372.2 | 7 022.5 | 7 388.4 | 7 470.0 | 7 267.4 |
| X?=0 | 6 835.1 | 7 342.5 | 7 565.7 | 7 504.5 | 7 159.1 |
| X?=1 | 7 084.6 | 7 449.2 | 7 529.6 | 7 325.6 | 6 837.4 |
| X?=1.5 | 7 129.4 | 7 422.6 | 7 431.5 | 7 156.1 | 6 596.5 |
| X?=2 | 7 120.7 | 7 342.6 | 7 280.1 | 6 933.3 | 6 302.3 |
表6 P2O5施用量与K2O施用量互作下的产量 (kg·hm-2)
Table 6 Yield under the interaction of P2O5 and K2O application rate
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X?=-2 | X?=-1 | X?=0 | X?=1 | X?=2 | |
| X?=-2 | 5 696.0 | 6 489.0 | 6 997.7 | 7 222.2 | 7 162.3 |
| X?=-1 | 6 372.2 | 7 022.5 | 7 388.4 | 7 470.0 | 7 267.4 |
| X?=0 | 6 835.1 | 7 342.5 | 7 565.7 | 7 504.5 | 7 159.1 |
| X?=1 | 7 084.6 | 7 449.2 | 7 529.6 | 7 325.6 | 6 837.4 |
| X?=1.5 | 7 129.4 | 7 422.6 | 7 431.5 | 7 156.1 | 6 596.5 |
| X?=2 | 7 120.7 | 7 342.6 | 7 280.1 | 6 933.3 | 6 302.3 |
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X2=-2 | X2=-1 | X2=0 | X2=1 | X2=2 | |
| X1=-2 | 5 022.3 | 5 933.4 | 6 526.0 | 6 800.2 | 6 755.8 |
| X1=-1 | 5 927.9 | 6 740.5 | 7 234.6 | 7 410.3 | 7 267.4 |
| X1=0 | 6 456.0 | 7 170.1 | 7 565.7 | 7 642.8 | 7 401.5 |
| X1=1 | 6 606.5 | 7 222.0 | 7 519.1 | 7 497.8 | 7 158.0 |
| X1=2 | 6 379.4 | 6 896.5 | 7 095.1 | 6 975.2 | 6 536.9 |
表7 种植密度与N施用量互作下的产量单位:kg·hm-2
Table 7 Yield under the interaction of planting density and N application rate
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X2=-2 | X2=-1 | X2=0 | X2=1 | X2=2 | |
| X1=-2 | 5 022.3 | 5 933.4 | 6 526.0 | 6 800.2 | 6 755.8 |
| X1=-1 | 5 927.9 | 6 740.5 | 7 234.6 | 7 410.3 | 7 267.4 |
| X1=0 | 6 456.0 | 7 170.1 | 7 565.7 | 7 642.8 | 7 401.5 |
| X1=1 | 6 606.5 | 7 222.0 | 7 519.1 | 7 497.8 | 7 158.0 |
| X1=2 | 6 379.4 | 6 896.5 | 7 095.1 | 6 975.2 | 6 536.9 |
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X?=-2 | X?=-1 | X?=0 | X?=1 | X?=2 | |
| X?=-2 | 5 554.0 | 6 146.6 | 6 525.8 | 6 691.6 | 6 644.1 |
| X?=-1 | 6 464.6 | 6 956.3 | 7 234.5 | 7 299.4 | 7 150.9 |
| X?=0 | 6 997.7 | 7 388.4 | 7 565.7 | 7 529.6 | 7 280.1 |
| X?=1 | 7 153.2 | 7 442.9 | 7 519.2 | 7 382.2 | 7 031.7 |
| X?=2 | 6 931.2 | 7 119.9 | 7 095.3 | 6 857.3 | 6 405.8 |
表8 种植密度与P2O5施用量互作对产量的影响单位:kg·hm-2
Table 8 Yield under the interaction of planting density and P2O5 application rate
| 因素水平 | 产量 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X?=-2 | X?=-1 | X?=0 | X?=1 | X?=2 | |
| X?=-2 | 5 554.0 | 6 146.6 | 6 525.8 | 6 691.6 | 6 644.1 |
| X?=-1 | 6 464.6 | 6 956.3 | 7 234.5 | 7 299.4 | 7 150.9 |
| X?=0 | 6 997.7 | 7 388.4 | 7 565.7 | 7 529.6 | 7 280.1 |
| X?=1 | 7 153.2 | 7 442.9 | 7 519.2 | 7 382.2 | 7 031.7 |
| X?=2 | 6 931.2 | 7 119.9 | 7 095.3 | 6 857.3 | 6 405.8 |
| 编码水平 | X?/(104 hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| -1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 2 |
| 0 | 27 | 14 | 18 | 18 | 9 |
| 1 | 4 | 18 | 9 | 12 | 12 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 |
| 方案合计 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 32 |
| 标准误 | 0.067 9 | 0.087 7 | 0.114 8 | 0.103 1 | 0.157 8 |
| 95%置信区间 | -0.039 3~0.226 8 | 0.390 6~0.734 4 | -0.100 0~0.350 0 | 0.110 5~0.514 5 | 0.565 7~1.184 3 |
| 相应农艺措施 | 5.23~5.35 | 242.6~258.0 | 85.5~105.8 | 189.9~226.3 | 3 848.6~4 776.4 |
表9 基于产量>7 500 kg·hm-2的优化农艺方案
Table 9 Optimized agronomic practices for achieving a yield >7 500 kg·hm?2
| 编码水平 | X?/(104 hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) | X?/(kg·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| -1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 2 |
| 0 | 27 | 14 | 18 | 18 | 9 |
| 1 | 4 | 18 | 9 | 12 | 12 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 |
| 方案合计 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 32 |
| 标准误 | 0.067 9 | 0.087 7 | 0.114 8 | 0.103 1 | 0.157 8 |
| 95%置信区间 | -0.039 3~0.226 8 | 0.390 6~0.734 4 | -0.100 0~0.350 0 | 0.110 5~0.514 5 | 0.565 7~1.184 3 |
| 相应农艺措施 | 5.23~5.35 | 242.6~258.0 | 85.5~105.8 | 189.9~226.3 | 3 848.6~4 776.4 |
| 评价指标 | F值 | p值 | 显著性水平 | 受影响程度 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 株高 | 3.997 8 | 0.002 8 | 极显著 | 较强 |
| 穗位高 | 1.465 4 | 0.214 4 | 不显著 | 较弱 |
| 茎粗 | 0.975 6 | 0.518 5 | 不显著 | 最弱 |
| 穗粒数 | 7.608 4 | 0.000 1 | 极显著 | 最强 |
| 百粒重 | 2.557 8 | 0.027 7 | 显著 | 中等 |
表10 不同处理对玉米主要农艺性状及产量构成因素的影响
Table 10 Effects of different treatments on main agronomic traits and yield components of maize
| 评价指标 | F值 | p值 | 显著性水平 | 受影响程度 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 株高 | 3.997 8 | 0.002 8 | 极显著 | 较强 |
| 穗位高 | 1.465 4 | 0.214 4 | 不显著 | 较弱 |
| 茎粗 | 0.975 6 | 0.518 5 | 不显著 | 最弱 |
| 穗粒数 | 7.608 4 | 0.000 1 | 极显著 | 最强 |
| 百粒重 | 2.557 8 | 0.027 7 | 显著 | 中等 |
| 处理区 | 面积/hm2 | 验收面积/m2 | 有效果穗/(104 hm-2) | 产量/(kg·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 验证试验 | 0.03 | 300.0 | 5.221 5 | 7 621.5 |
| 大田示范 | 2.10 | 2 801.4 | 5.208 0 | 7 543.6 |
表11 高产农艺方案验证与示范测产结果
Table 11 Yield measurement results of the high-yield agronomic scheme under verification experiment and field demonstration
| 处理区 | 面积/hm2 | 验收面积/m2 | 有效果穗/(104 hm-2) | 产量/(kg·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 验证试验 | 0.03 | 300.0 | 5.221 5 | 7 621.5 |
| 大田示范 | 2.10 | 2 801.4 | 5.208 0 | 7 543.6 |
| [1] | 赵久然,王荣焕. 玉米生产技术大全[M]. 2版. 北京:中国农业出版社,2025:11-30. |
| [2] | 农业农村部. 到2025年化肥减量化行动方案[EB/OL].(2022-11-18)[2026-02-20].. |
| [3] | 孟超然,白如霄,候建伟,等. 有机肥替代部分化肥对干旱区滴灌玉米养分吸收及产量影响[J]. 土壤,2020,52(4):750-757. |
| MENG C R, BAI R X, HOU J W,et al. Effects of organic materials partially substituting chemical fertilizer on nutrient uptake and yield of maize under drip irrigation in arid region[J]. Soils,2020,52(4):750-757. | |
| [4] | 费聪. 有机肥替代化肥对旱区雨养玉米养分吸收利用及产量的影响[J]. 核农学报,2024,38(7):1355-1364. |
| FEI C. Effects of organic fertilizer replacing chemical fertilizer on nutrient absorption-utilization and yield of rain-fed maize in arid region[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences,2024,38(7):1355-1364. | |
| [5] | 闫飞燕,钟昌松,范继征,等. 肥密耦合对广西玉米主推品种产量及其构成因子的影响[J]. 南方农业学报,2012,43(8):1149-1153. |
| YAN F Y, ZHONG C S, FAN J Z,et al. Effects of planting density and fertilizer combining on yield and its component factors of main extended maize varieties in Guangxi[J]. Journal of Southern Agriculture,2012,43(8):1149-1153. | |
| [6] | 李少昆,赵久然,董树亭,等. 中国玉米栽培研究进展与展望[J]. 中国农业科学,2017,50(11):1941-1959. |
| LI S K, ZHAO J R, DONG S T,et al. Advances and prospects of maize cultivation in China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica,2017,50(11):1941-1959. | |
| [7] | 袁静超,刘剑钊,梁尧,等. 综合农学管理模式对春玉米产量和养分累积特征的影响[J]. 中国农业科学,2019,52(20):3546-3558. |
| YUAN J C, LIU J Z, LIANG Y,et al. Characteristics of grain yield and nutrient accumulation for spring maize under different agronomic management practices[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica,2019,52(20):3546-3558. | |
| [8] | 田龙兵,沈兆崟,赵孝天,等. 种植密度与施氮量互作对不同玉米品种产量和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学,2024,57(21):4221-4237. |
| TIAN L B, SHEN Z Y, ZHAO X T,et al. Interactive effects of planting density and nitrogen application rate on plant grain yield and water use efficiency of two maize cultivars[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica,2024,57(21):4221-4237. | |
| [9] | 陈均权,马驰远,胡鑫,等. 有机无机肥配施调控红壤稻田土壤肥力、生态化学计量特征及产量[J]. 中国农业科学,2025,58(23):4952-4965. |
| CHEN J Q, MA C Y, HU X,et al. Effects of incorporation of inorganic-organic fertilizers on soil fertility,ecological stoichiometric characteristics,and yields of rice cropping system in the red soil region of China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica,2025,58(23):4952-4965. | |
| [10] | 唐启义. DPS数据处理系统:实验设计、统计分析及数据挖掘[M]. 2版. 北京:科学出版社,2010. |
| [11] | 熊伟仡,徐开未,刘明鹏,等. 不同氮用量对四川春玉米光合特性、氮利用效率及产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学,2022,55(9):1735-1748. |
| XIONG W Y, XU K W, LIU M P,et al. Effects of different nitrogen application levels on photosynthetic characteristics,nitrogen use efficiency and yield of spring maize in Sichuan Province[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica,2022,55(9):1735-1748. | |
| [12] | 李龙,肖让,张永玲. 氮磷钾配施对制种玉米产量及经济效益的影响[J]. 作物杂志,2022(5):111-117. |
| LI L, XIAO R, ZHANG Y L. Effects of combined application of nitrogen,phosphorus and potassium on seed maize yield and economic benefit[J]. Crops,2022(5):111-117. | |
| [13] | HE H, PENG M W, RU S B,et al. A suitable organic fertilizer substitution ratio could improve maize yield and soil fertility with low pollution risk[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science,2022,13:988663. |
| [14] | 刘芬,同延安,王小英,等. 渭北旱塬春玉米施肥效果及肥料利用效率研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报,2014,20(1):48-55. |
| LIU F, TONG Y A, WANG X Y,et al. Effects of N,P and K fertilization on spring maize yield and fertilizer use efficiency in Weibei rainfed highland[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer,2014,20(1):48-55. | |
| [15] | 司海丽,纪立东,刘菊莲,等. 有机肥施用量对玉米产量、土壤养分及生物活性的影响[J]. 西南农业学报,2022,35(4):740-747. |
| SI H L, JI L D, LIU J L,et al. Effects of organic fertilizer application rate on maize yield,soil nutrients and biological activity[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2022,35(4):740-747. | |
| [16] | 孔丽丽,侯云鹏,尹彩侠,等. 东北春玉米滴灌施肥的适宜种植密度和施钾量研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报,2022,28(10):1755-1769. |
| KONG L L, HOU Y P, YIN C X,et al. Optimal plant density and potassium application rate for spring maize under drip-fertigation in northeast China[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers,2022,28(10):1755-1769. | |
| [17] | 孙磊康,李孝永,郭航兆,等. 施氮量和种植密度对玉米冠层光截获、籽粒灌浆和产量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报,2025,41(22):101-113. |
| SUN L K, LI X Y, GUO H Z,et al. Effects of nitrogen application rate and planting density on light interception in different maize canopy layers,grain filling,and yield[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering,2025,41(22):101-113. | |
| [18] | 高志英,张兆沛,樊蕾,等. 光照强度和氮素水平对玉米生长发育、光合生理及干物质积累的影响[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学),2020,35(2):187-195. |
| GAO Z Y, ZHANG Z P, FAN L,et al. Effects of light intensity and nitrogen level on the growth,photosynthetic physiology and dry matter accumulation of maize[J]. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University(Natural Science),2020,35(2):187-195. | |
| [19] | 李娜,田云龙,张蕾,等. 中国化肥减量增效行动与技术研究[J]. 农业资源与环境学报,2025,42(1):1-10. |
| LI N, TIAN Y L, ZHANG L,et al. Research on action and technology for reducing fertilizer usage and enhancing efficiency in China[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment,2025,42(1):1-10. | |
| [20] | 吴文琪,焦阳,惠家祯,等. 不同有机物料配施化肥对土壤肥力和玉米产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学,2025,58(23):4966-4978. |
| WU W Q, JIAO Y, XI J Z,et al. Effects of different organic materials combined with chemical fertilizer on soil fertility and maize grain yield[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica,2025,58(23):4966-4978. | |
| [21] | 任宁,汪洋,王改革,等. 不同降雨年份控释尿素与普通尿素配施对夏玉米产量、氮素利用及经济效益的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报,2020,26(4):681-691. |
| REN N, WANG Y, WANG G G,et al. Yield,nitrogen use and economic benefit of summer maize under different ratios of controlled-release and ordinary urea combination in normal and dry rainfall years[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers,2020,26(4):681-691. | |
| [22] | 张福锁,王激清,张卫峰,等. 中国主要粮食作物肥料利用率现状与提高途径[J]. 土壤学报,2008,45(5):915-924. |
| ZHANG F S, WANG J Q, ZHANG W F,et al. Nutrient use efficiencies of major cereal crops in China and measures for improvement[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica,2008,45(5):915-924. |
| [1] | 白颂华, 邵玉静, 沈坚, 倪进庄, 楼玲, 金鑫, 顾万帆. 生物有机肥用量对设施番茄产量与营养品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1092-1096. |
| [2] | 牛骧, 丁兰, 孙玉燕, 尹雨钦. 不同磷肥处理对丝瓜生长发育、产量及品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1103-1111. |
| [3] | 龚尧, 赵昱铖, 江于良, 原白玉, 钟闽, 张路, 王成, 缪云春. 西瓜品种京嘉301的综合性状评价[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1123-1128. |
| [4] | 余欣, 陈健锋, 朱长凤, 徐明飞, 姜露萍, 吴小蓉. 7个甜瓜新品种在浦江县的试种表现[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1134-1138. |
| [5] | 马瑞芳, 丁潮洪, 王琳琳, 钟洋敏. 竹炭基有机肥对白菜生长发育、产量及品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1174-1179. |
| [6] | 潘丽卿, 王胤安, 王寅. 油赏兼用油菜、芝麻、油葵复种栽培技术研究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1240-1244. |
| [7] | 陈功楷, 汪哲, 洪方磊, 王令俐, 杨宏霜, 刘永安. 温州不同甘薯品种(系)综合性状评价与筛选[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1245-1250. |
| [8] | 粟贵俊, 程静雯, 楼玲, 庞英华, 顾万帆, 沈建国, 陈浩然. 氟啶胺用量对设施土壤微生物环境、小白菜抗病性及产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1286-1289. |
| [9] | 蒋凯. 生物农药对鲜食玉米草地贪夜蛾的防治效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1290-1296. |
| [10] | 王建科, 赵俊婕, 陈永锋, 胡美华. 甘蓝覆盖全生物降解地膜试验示范展示结果初报[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(5): 1297-1300. |
| [11] | 刘迎春, 钟东东, 沈超, 王晓燕, 李勇纲, 刘尚敏, 董合干. 干旱区棉花秸秆还田对土壤理化性质及棉花产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(4): 1006-1011. |
| [12] | 蒋正航, 应珊珊, 朱跃忠, 徐洁章, 黄张婷. 稻麦轮作模式下不同秸秆还田处理对作物产量和土壤质量的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(4): 1012-1017. |
| [13] | 胡媛, 邓金花, 王杰, 施林林, 陆长婴, 王海候. 生物降解地膜在油豆角生产中的应用及其降解优化[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(4): 1018-1023. |
| [14] | 姜伟, 龚俊, 柴伟东, 郑建斌. 21个连作晚稻新品种试验比较[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(4): 821-824. |
| [15] | 鲍苗青, 吴良欢, 韩科峰. 养分管理对水稻产量及氮肥吸收利用的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2026, 67(4): 825-830. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||