Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences ›› 2024, Vol. 65 ›› Issue (5): 1025-1030.DOI: 10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20230954
Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHU Yuqiang1(), DING Jinting2, ZHANG Peng1, WANG Xin1, FANG Jieyun1, ZHOU Shengjun1,*(
)
Received:
2024-03-11
Online:
2024-05-11
Published:
2024-05-23
CLC Number:
ZHU Yuqiang, DING Jinting, ZHANG Peng, WANG Xin, FANG Jieyun, ZHOU Shengjun. Effects of different grafting combinations on growth and quality of fruit cucumber[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1025-1030.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.zjnykx.cn/EN/10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20230954
品种/组合 | 初瓜期 | 盛瓜期 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
株高/cm | 茎粗/mm | 叶数 | 株高/cm | 茎粗/mm | 叶数 | |
浙秀3号(CK1) | 81.33±3.21 bc | 8.31±0.28 bc | 12.42±0.52 c | 161.00±2.65 c | 11.06±0.39 c | 23.52±0.52 b |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 82.52±4.93 b | 9.07±0.75 ab | 13.86±0.35 b | 169.67±0.58 bc | 12.01±0.48 b | 23.89±0.43 b |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 82.41±1.15 b | 8.73±0.31 b | 12.09±0.41 c | 179.38±1.74 a | 11.58±0.42 b | 24.07±0.47 b |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 64.69±2.52 d | 8.72±0.49 b | 10.81±0.21 d | 173.00±1.28 b | 11.55±0.42 b | 24.29±0.23 ab |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 81.87±2.47 b | 8.32±0.53 bc | 13.12±0.61 bc | 167.32±2.76 bc | 11.65±0.38 b | 23.06±0.52 b |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 81.72±9.07 bc | 8.81±0.68 b | 13.15±0.67 bc | 172.00±2.17 b | 12.07±0.39 ab | 24.56±0.49 ab |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 92.67±1.53 a | 9.17±0.21 a | 14.59±0.55 ab | 178.33±1.53 b | 12.09±0.69 a | 24.74±0.72 a |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 96.61±3.06 a | 9.25±0.38 a | 15.27±0.32 a | 188.68±1.15 a | 12.12±0.55 a | 25.12±0.88 a |
碧翠18(CK3) | 68.58±3.79 d | 8.06±0.42 c | 10.67±0.54 d | 143.67±1.39 d | 10.17±0.65 d | 20.75±0.39 c |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 83.00±1.15 b | 8.28±0.55 c | 13.55±0.46 b | 164.33±2.08 c | 11.02±0.28 cd | 23.21±0.43 b |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 77.02±1.73 cd | 8.32±0.69 bc | 12.05±0.23 c | 150.65±4.72 cd | 10.85±0.66 d | 21.76±0.58 c |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 67.33±1.73 d | 8.17±0.71 c | 10.34±0.78 d | 142.00±1.15 d | 11.08±0.81 c | 20.18±0.61 c |
Table 1 Comparison of growth potential of different varieties and grafting combinations
品种/组合 | 初瓜期 | 盛瓜期 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
株高/cm | 茎粗/mm | 叶数 | 株高/cm | 茎粗/mm | 叶数 | |
浙秀3号(CK1) | 81.33±3.21 bc | 8.31±0.28 bc | 12.42±0.52 c | 161.00±2.65 c | 11.06±0.39 c | 23.52±0.52 b |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 82.52±4.93 b | 9.07±0.75 ab | 13.86±0.35 b | 169.67±0.58 bc | 12.01±0.48 b | 23.89±0.43 b |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 82.41±1.15 b | 8.73±0.31 b | 12.09±0.41 c | 179.38±1.74 a | 11.58±0.42 b | 24.07±0.47 b |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 64.69±2.52 d | 8.72±0.49 b | 10.81±0.21 d | 173.00±1.28 b | 11.55±0.42 b | 24.29±0.23 ab |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 81.87±2.47 b | 8.32±0.53 bc | 13.12±0.61 bc | 167.32±2.76 bc | 11.65±0.38 b | 23.06±0.52 b |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 81.72±9.07 bc | 8.81±0.68 b | 13.15±0.67 bc | 172.00±2.17 b | 12.07±0.39 ab | 24.56±0.49 ab |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 92.67±1.53 a | 9.17±0.21 a | 14.59±0.55 ab | 178.33±1.53 b | 12.09±0.69 a | 24.74±0.72 a |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 96.61±3.06 a | 9.25±0.38 a | 15.27±0.32 a | 188.68±1.15 a | 12.12±0.55 a | 25.12±0.88 a |
碧翠18(CK3) | 68.58±3.79 d | 8.06±0.42 c | 10.67±0.54 d | 143.67±1.39 d | 10.17±0.65 d | 20.75±0.39 c |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 83.00±1.15 b | 8.28±0.55 c | 13.55±0.46 b | 164.33±2.08 c | 11.02±0.28 cd | 23.21±0.43 b |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 77.02±1.73 cd | 8.32±0.69 bc | 12.05±0.23 c | 150.65±4.72 cd | 10.85±0.66 d | 21.76±0.58 c |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 67.33±1.73 d | 8.17±0.71 c | 10.34±0.78 d | 142.00±1.15 d | 11.08±0.81 c | 20.18±0.61 c |
品种/组合 | 白粉病 | 霜霉病 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
病株率/% | 病叶率/% | 病情指数 | 抗病性 | 病株率/% | 病叶率/% | 病情指数 | 抗病性 | |
浙秀3号 | 38.98 | 22.61 | 14.43 | 抗 | 32.66 | 22.93 | 50.25 | 中抗 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 25.69 | 10.27 | 5.06 | 高抗 | 29.17 | 21.26 | 34.31 | 抗 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 14.25 | 15.54 | 6.18 | 高抗 | 30.09 | 25.73 | 30.53 | 抗 |
白籽砧木/浙秀3号 | 18.35 | 14.77 | 6.44 | 高抗 | 44.71 | 33.26 | 58.94 | 感 |
浙秀6号 | 40.76 | 23.62 | 14.09 | 抗 | 44.30 | 35.61 | 62.34 | 感 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 34.65 | 14.89 | 9.11 | 抗 | 34.78 | 27.82 | 52.87 | 中抗 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 39.30 | 21.28 | 13.37 | 抗 | 43.21 | 33.61 | 58.77 | 感 |
白籽砧木/浙秀6号 | 44.15 | 22.90 | 14.16 | 抗 | 48.06 | 30.39 | 71.85 | 感 |
碧翠18 | 39.65 | 19.02 | 14.47 | 抗 | 35.31 | 24.38 | 52.39 | 中抗 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 23.35 | 19.83 | 4.49 | 高抗 | 34.93 | 25.47 | 44.61 | 中抗 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 27.60 | 20.53 | 6.18 | 高抗 | 34.29 | 26.26 | 48.92 | 中抗 |
白籽砧木/碧翠18 | 30.95 | 25.13 | 13.51 | 抗 | 45.58 | 27.91 | 63.17 | 感 |
Table 2 Comparison of disease resistance among different varieties and grafting combinations
品种/组合 | 白粉病 | 霜霉病 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
病株率/% | 病叶率/% | 病情指数 | 抗病性 | 病株率/% | 病叶率/% | 病情指数 | 抗病性 | |
浙秀3号 | 38.98 | 22.61 | 14.43 | 抗 | 32.66 | 22.93 | 50.25 | 中抗 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 25.69 | 10.27 | 5.06 | 高抗 | 29.17 | 21.26 | 34.31 | 抗 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 14.25 | 15.54 | 6.18 | 高抗 | 30.09 | 25.73 | 30.53 | 抗 |
白籽砧木/浙秀3号 | 18.35 | 14.77 | 6.44 | 高抗 | 44.71 | 33.26 | 58.94 | 感 |
浙秀6号 | 40.76 | 23.62 | 14.09 | 抗 | 44.30 | 35.61 | 62.34 | 感 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 34.65 | 14.89 | 9.11 | 抗 | 34.78 | 27.82 | 52.87 | 中抗 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 39.30 | 21.28 | 13.37 | 抗 | 43.21 | 33.61 | 58.77 | 感 |
白籽砧木/浙秀6号 | 44.15 | 22.90 | 14.16 | 抗 | 48.06 | 30.39 | 71.85 | 感 |
碧翠18 | 39.65 | 19.02 | 14.47 | 抗 | 35.31 | 24.38 | 52.39 | 中抗 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 23.35 | 19.83 | 4.49 | 高抗 | 34.93 | 25.47 | 44.61 | 中抗 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 27.60 | 20.53 | 6.18 | 高抗 | 34.29 | 26.26 | 48.92 | 中抗 |
白籽砧木/碧翠18 | 30.95 | 25.13 | 13.51 | 抗 | 45.58 | 27.91 | 63.17 | 感 |
品种/组合 | 单瓜鲜重/g | 瓜长/cm | 瓜径/cm | 果形指数 | 瓜皮颜色 | 瓜面蜡粉 | 瓜棱 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
浙秀3号(CK1) | 92.2 | 15.2 | 2.7 | 5.63 | 绿 | 中 | 浅 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 91.4 | 15.1 | 2.7 | 5.59 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 89.1 | 14.6 | 2.8 | 5.21 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 90.8 | 14.5 | 2.9 | 5.00 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 84.5 | 13.8 | 2.6 | 5.31 | 深绿 | 无 | 微 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 82.7 | 13.1 | 2.7 | 4.85 | 绿 | 无 | 微 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 85.4 | 13.2 | 2.8 | 4.71 | 绿 | 无 | 微 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 87.3 | 13.4 | 2.9 | 4.62 | 绿 | 无 | 微 |
碧翠18(CK3) | 84.6 | 13.2 | 2.7 | 4.89 | 绿 | 中 | 浅 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 83.7 | 12.8 | 2.9 | 4.41 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 83.2 | 12.7 | 2.9 | 4.38 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 82.3 | 12.2 | 2.9 | 4.21 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
Table 3 Comparison of different varieties and grafting combinations of commercial fruit cucumber
品种/组合 | 单瓜鲜重/g | 瓜长/cm | 瓜径/cm | 果形指数 | 瓜皮颜色 | 瓜面蜡粉 | 瓜棱 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
浙秀3号(CK1) | 92.2 | 15.2 | 2.7 | 5.63 | 绿 | 中 | 浅 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 91.4 | 15.1 | 2.7 | 5.59 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 89.1 | 14.6 | 2.8 | 5.21 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 90.8 | 14.5 | 2.9 | 5.00 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 84.5 | 13.8 | 2.6 | 5.31 | 深绿 | 无 | 微 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 82.7 | 13.1 | 2.7 | 4.85 | 绿 | 无 | 微 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 85.4 | 13.2 | 2.8 | 4.71 | 绿 | 无 | 微 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 87.3 | 13.4 | 2.9 | 4.62 | 绿 | 无 | 微 |
碧翠18(CK3) | 84.6 | 13.2 | 2.7 | 4.89 | 绿 | 中 | 浅 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 83.7 | 12.8 | 2.9 | 4.41 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 83.2 | 12.7 | 2.9 | 4.38 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 82.3 | 12.2 | 2.9 | 4.21 | 绿 | 少 | 浅 |
品种/组合 | 游离氨基酸 含量/ (μg·g-1) | 类胡萝卜素 含量/ (mg·g-1) | 可滴定酸 含量/ (mmol·kg-1) | 维生素C 含量/ (μg·g-1) | 可溶性总糖 含量/ (mg·g-1) | 可溶性蛋白 含量/ (mg·g-1) | 可溶性 固形物 含量/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
浙秀3号(CK1) | 1 770.18 | 0.000 5 | 11.2 | 67.26 | 25.26 | 0.37 | 5.2 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 1 780.37 | 0.003 7 | 12.4 | 53.69 | 17.08 | 0.56 | 4.7 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 1 592.57 | 0.004 0 | 15.1 | 72.08 | 18.19 | 0.72 | 4.2 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 1 440.52 | 0.000 6 | 11.7 | 25.17 | 13.57 | 0.61 | 4.3 |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 2 523.28 | 0.000 6 | 13.8 | 75.54 | 27.92 | 0.53 | 5.7 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 1 529.31 | 0.002 4 | 11.8 | 54.37 | 25.27 | 0.61 | 5.3 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 1 182.27 | 0.003 3 | 10.9 | 59.98 | 20.88 | 0.59 | 4.8 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 1 808.33 | 0.004 7 | 10.2 | 70.17 | 26.01 | 0.68 | 5.2 |
碧翠18(CK3) | 2 014.23 | 0.000 5 | 12.1 | 65.48 | 27.05 | 0.46 | 4.7 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 1 727.15 | 0.002 4 | 13.8 | 47.18 | 17.08 | 0.51 | 4.1 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 1 539.05 | 0.004 3 | 8.7 | 55.64 | 23.07 | 0.47 | 4.6 |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 1 389.17 | 0.002 4 | 11.2 | 35.53 | 19.98 | 0.57 | 4.9 |
Table 4 Comparison of nutrient elements in commercial cucumber of different varieties and grafting combinations
品种/组合 | 游离氨基酸 含量/ (μg·g-1) | 类胡萝卜素 含量/ (mg·g-1) | 可滴定酸 含量/ (mmol·kg-1) | 维生素C 含量/ (μg·g-1) | 可溶性总糖 含量/ (mg·g-1) | 可溶性蛋白 含量/ (mg·g-1) | 可溶性 固形物 含量/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
浙秀3号(CK1) | 1 770.18 | 0.000 5 | 11.2 | 67.26 | 25.26 | 0.37 | 5.2 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 1 780.37 | 0.003 7 | 12.4 | 53.69 | 17.08 | 0.56 | 4.7 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 1 592.57 | 0.004 0 | 15.1 | 72.08 | 18.19 | 0.72 | 4.2 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 1 440.52 | 0.000 6 | 11.7 | 25.17 | 13.57 | 0.61 | 4.3 |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 2 523.28 | 0.000 6 | 13.8 | 75.54 | 27.92 | 0.53 | 5.7 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 1 529.31 | 0.002 4 | 11.8 | 54.37 | 25.27 | 0.61 | 5.3 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 1 182.27 | 0.003 3 | 10.9 | 59.98 | 20.88 | 0.59 | 4.8 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 1 808.33 | 0.004 7 | 10.2 | 70.17 | 26.01 | 0.68 | 5.2 |
碧翠18(CK3) | 2 014.23 | 0.000 5 | 12.1 | 65.48 | 27.05 | 0.46 | 4.7 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 1 727.15 | 0.002 4 | 13.8 | 47.18 | 17.08 | 0.51 | 4.1 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 1 539.05 | 0.004 3 | 8.7 | 55.64 | 23.07 | 0.47 | 4.6 |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 1 389.17 | 0.002 4 | 11.2 | 35.53 | 19.98 | 0.57 | 4.9 |
品种/组合 | 甜度 | 苦味 | 涩味 | 脆度 | 口感 | 韧性 | 香气 | 水分 | 综合评价总分 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
浙秀3号(CK1) | 6.5 | 7.5 | 5.6 | 7.7 | 7.5 | 6.7 | 6.1 | 8.5 | 56.1 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 6.2 | 7.5 | 5.5 | 7.6 | 7.7 | 6.6 | 6.5 | 8.2 | 55.8 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 6.2 | 7.1 | 5.7 | 7.5 | 7.4 | 6.7 | 6.3 | 8.3 | 55.2 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 6.1 | 7.3 | 5.4 | 7.7 | 7.5 | 6.8 | 6.1 | 8.1 | 55.0 |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 7.2 | 8.8 | 5.5 | 8.7 | 8.8 | 7.7 | 7.0 | 8.5 | 62.2 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 7.0 | 8.5 | 5.1 | 8.4 | 8.6 | 7.3 | 6.5 | 8.3 | 59.7 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 6.9 | 8.6 | 4.9 | 8.7 | 8.5 | 7.1 | 6.3 | 8.3 | 59.3 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 7.1 | 8.3 | 5.5 | 8.1 | 8.5 | 7.2 | 5.9 | 8.2 | 58.8 |
碧翠18(CK3) | 6.1 | 8.4 | 5.9 | 7.7 | 7.2 | 6.1 | 6.3 | 7.9 | 55.6 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 6.2 | 8.5 | 5.7 | 7.7 | 7.3 | 5.9 | 6.5 | 8.1 | 55.9 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 5.8 | 8.1 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 7.7 | 6.1 | 5.9 | 8.1 | 54.5 |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 6.0 | 8.1 | 5.8 | 7.4 | 7.1 | 6.2 | 6.0 | 8.3 | 54.9 |
Table 5 Sensory evaluation of different varieties and grafting combinations
品种/组合 | 甜度 | 苦味 | 涩味 | 脆度 | 口感 | 韧性 | 香气 | 水分 | 综合评价总分 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
浙秀3号(CK1) | 6.5 | 7.5 | 5.6 | 7.7 | 7.5 | 6.7 | 6.1 | 8.5 | 56.1 |
砧星亮/浙秀3号 | 6.2 | 7.5 | 5.5 | 7.6 | 7.7 | 6.6 | 6.5 | 8.2 | 55.8 |
思壮8号/浙秀3号 | 6.2 | 7.1 | 5.7 | 7.5 | 7.4 | 6.7 | 6.3 | 8.3 | 55.2 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀3号 | 6.1 | 7.3 | 5.4 | 7.7 | 7.5 | 6.8 | 6.1 | 8.1 | 55.0 |
浙秀6号(CK2) | 7.2 | 8.8 | 5.5 | 8.7 | 8.8 | 7.7 | 7.0 | 8.5 | 62.2 |
砧星亮/浙秀6号 | 7.0 | 8.5 | 5.1 | 8.4 | 8.6 | 7.3 | 6.5 | 8.3 | 59.7 |
思壮8号/浙秀6号 | 6.9 | 8.6 | 4.9 | 8.7 | 8.5 | 7.1 | 6.3 | 8.3 | 59.3 |
白籽南瓜/浙秀6号 | 7.1 | 8.3 | 5.5 | 8.1 | 8.5 | 7.2 | 5.9 | 8.2 | 58.8 |
碧翠18(CK3) | 6.1 | 8.4 | 5.9 | 7.7 | 7.2 | 6.1 | 6.3 | 7.9 | 55.6 |
砧星亮/碧翠18 | 6.2 | 8.5 | 5.7 | 7.7 | 7.3 | 5.9 | 6.5 | 8.1 | 55.9 |
思壮8号/碧翠18 | 5.8 | 8.1 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 7.7 | 6.1 | 5.9 | 8.1 | 54.5 |
白籽南瓜/碧翠18 | 6.0 | 8.1 | 5.8 | 7.4 | 7.1 | 6.2 | 6.0 | 8.3 | 54.9 |
[1] | 魏爱民, 杜胜利, 韩毅科, 等. 黄瓜新品种‘津美11号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2020, 47(S2):2990-2991. |
[2] | 焦自高, 王崇启, 董玉梅, 等. 嫁接对黄瓜生长及品质的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2000, 32(1):26. |
[3] | 孙艳, 黄炜, 田霄鸿, 等. 黄瓜嫁接苗生长状况、光合特性及养分吸收特性的研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2002, 8(2):181-185, 209. |
[4] | 张红梅, 金海军, 刘秀云, 等. 大棚自然高温对黄瓜嫁接植株生理特性及果实品质的影响[J]. 上海农业学报, 2018, 34(4):69-73. |
[5] | 陈银根, 吕文君. 不同砧木对嫁接黄瓜品质及产量的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2017, 45(4): 28-31. |
[6] | 潘玲华, 吴永琼, 梁祖珍, 等. 黄瓜嫁接砧木筛选试验[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2015(24): 38-41. |
[7] | 王幼群. 植物嫁接系统及其在植物生命科学研究中的应用[J]. 科学通报, 2011, 56(30):2478-2485. |
[8] | 陈利平, 宋增军, 马兴庄, 等. 嫁接对日光温室黄瓜产品品质的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2004, 13(2):170-171. |
[9] | HAYASHI T, SUZUKI T, OOSAWA K. Correlation between occurrence of bloom on cucumber fruit and air temperature in a plastic film greenhouse[J]. Acta Horticulturae, 2002(588): 29-33. |
[10] | 费雨兰, 王晶, 沈佳, 等. 不同砧木嫁接对黄瓜长势及果实品质的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2013, 41(12): 147-149. |
[1] | QIAN Xin, WANG Shengyi, WANG Xiaojuan, XUE Jinling, BAO Fangjun. Effects of drip irrigation with CO2 aqueous solution on agronomic traits and yield of processing tomato [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1037-1041. |
[2] | XU Guangfei, SHEN Yanhui, LI Zhenling, LI Ping, LI Xiqiang, WU Qiaoling. Effect of different application methods of compound amino acid fertilizers on the growth and quality of Solanum melongena L. [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1046-1050. |
[3] | LU Xiuqin, YANG Shuang, LIU Wei, WEN Xiqing. Effects of nitrogen reduction combined with liquid cow dung on the growth, yield and quality of pepper [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1051-1055. |
[4] | ZHANG Linling, ZHANG Liquan, XU Linying, ZHANG Jianchun, CAI Pan, QI Zirong. Study on the selection of grafted rootstocks of Tiwei watermelon [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1064-1067. |
[5] | ZHANG Zhiming, FANG Li, GUO Huanru, FAN Gaien. Impact of rice crop rotation and various soil treatments on yield and quality of melon [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1075-1078. |
[6] | ZHANG Yue, ZHANG Wenhao, ZHAO Ruiqi, ZHANG Mingke. Effect of new humic acid fertilizer on the growth, yield, and quality of melon [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1083-1087. |
[7] | YU Bin, HE Kuangyi, HONG Meiping, ZHANG Sifa, YAN Shaobing. Effects of different grafting rootstocks on growth, yield and fruit quality of melon [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1088-1091. |
[8] | XU Jianfeng, JIN Yuqing, ZHU Xiaoting, FANG Hui, CAI Jianjun, YE Zhengqian. Effect of different organic fertilizer substitutions on soil property and quality of citrus [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1097-1101. |
[9] | LI Gensheng, LI Zenan, WANG Meixian, LU Haiqin. Effects of biochar on soil improvement and yield and quality of Chinese cabbage in greenhouses [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1139-1142. |
[10] | ZHOU Tiantian, YANG Wenjie. Effect of prohexadione-calcium on the growth and quality of cauliflower seedlings [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1153-1158. |
[11] | ZHANG Jianghao, SUN Weihua, CHEN Fei, SHEN Meng, YAO Xiangtan. Comparative experiment on the introduction of new mustard varieties [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1165-1168. |
[12] | ZHANG Xinghong, JI Jia'nan, LIU Canguang, NI Weichen. Effects of different organic nutrient solution on the growth of lettuce [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1169-1173. |
[13] | LI Guisong, WU Lintu, XU Huozhong, WANG Yunxiang, ZHOU Ling'ai, TANG Shiqin, LIU Qiming, HE Jinfa, CHI Yongqing. Effects of different microbial fertilizer and its dosage on soil and tea quality in tea garden [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1208-1214. |
[14] | YANG Sen, KONG Lingjuan, ZHANG Qi, WANG Qing, LUO Zhongming, ZHANG Xiaohong, JIN Sijiu, YUAN Gongping. Comparative study on regeneration ability and yield of rationing rice cultivation with different hybrid medium rice [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(4): 749-755. |
[15] | GUO Ying, LI Zhiying, ZHAI Rongrong, YE Jing, WANG Wenpo, YE Shenghai, WANG Jian. Analysis of agronomic traits of 9 representative varieties of late japonica rice in Zhejiang Province [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(4): 756-759. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||