Effects of different types of potassium fertilizer and application period on upper leaf quality of tobacco in Changsha

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20231170

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to explore the effects of different types of potassium fertilizer and application period on the yield and quality of upper leaves of tobacco in Changsha tobacco area and improve the industrial availability of upper leaves. In this study, Yunyan 87, the main local cultivate, was used as the experimental material. Through field test, 5 treatments were set up in random block arrangement, and 3 replicates were performed. The results showed that different types and application periods of potassium fertilizer had certain effects on the agronomic traits of tobacco plants. T1 treatment was superior to other treatments in terms of plant height, leaf number and leaf area. Different types and application periods of potassium fertilizer could promote the appearance quality of flue-cured tobacco, and there was no significant difference between T1 and T4 treatment. Different types and application periods of potassium fertilizer could improve the chemical composition and coordination of tobacco after roasting, and could improve potassium and reduce alkali to a certain extent, among which T1 treatment had the highest content of total sugar and reducing sugar, and its coordination was better than other treatments. Different types and application periods of potassium fertilizer had great influence on the sensory quality of tobacco after roasting. The total score of sensory evaluation of T1 treatment was the highest, and the aroma quality, aroma quantity, fineness and aftertaste were higher than those of the control group. The economic properties of flue-cured tobacco were improved by different types of potassium fertilizer and application period. T1 treatment significantly improved the economic properties of flue-cured tobacco and could increase the income of tobacco farmers to the greatest extent. In summary, different types and application periods of potassium fertilizer could affect the field growth of tobacco plants and the tobacco production quality after the upper leaves were roasted. The improvement of tobacco leaves by applying potassium fulvic acid in various aspects was better than that of liquid potassium fertilizer, and the effect of applying potassium fulvic acid in seedling stage (T1 treatment) was the best.

Key words: potassium fertilizer, application period, upper tobacco leaf, yield, quality

CLC Number:

S572

ZHANG Wenjun, ZHANG Qingfu, YANG Liu, SONG Jiajun, HE Jiguang, YANG Zaijun, XIONG Chengliang. Effects of different types of potassium fertilizer and application period on upper leaf quality of tobacco in Changsha[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(3): 549-554.

Figures/Tables 7

References 26

[1]	任志广, 陈征, 黄海棠, 等. 生态条件、栽培调制措施、烤烟工艺对烤烟上部叶可用性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(6): 73-78.
[2]	唐丽, 罗丽琼. 上部烟叶存在的问题及可用性分析[J]. 现代农业科技, 2016(2): 79-81.
[3]	蔡宪杰, 刘茂林, 谢德平, 等. 提高上部烟叶工业可用性技术研究[J]. 烟草科技, 2010, 43(6): 10-17.
[4]	王大海, 王明普, 张潇, 等. 不同钾肥对烤烟NC55产质量的影响[J]. 现代农业科技, 2020(8): 1-2, 4.
[5]	刘国顺, 何永秋, 杨永锋, 等. 不同钾肥配施对烤烟质体色素和碳氮代谢及品质的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2013, 34(6): 49-55.
[6]	夏乐. 缺钾对作物光合作用的影响及其机理[J]. 农业科技与装备, 2016(9): 5-6.
[7]	汪邓民, 周冀衡, 朱显灵, 等. 干旱胁迫下钾对烤烟生长及抗旱性的生理调节[J]. 中国烟草科学, 1998, 19(3): 28-31.
[8]	CHOUTEAU J, MOUNAT A, CAZAMAJOUR F, et al. Effect of potassium fertilizers on yield and on physical and chemical characteristics of dark tobaccos[J]. Armales De La Direction Des Etudes Et De Lequipement Seita, 1970, 4(1): 7-9.
[9]	SINS J L. Potassium nutrition of tobacco in agriculture[M]. ASA-CSSA-SSSA Madison Wiscousin, USA, 1985: 1023-1043.
[10]	MCCANTS C B, WOLTZ W G. Growth and mineral nutrition of tobacco[M]// Advances in Agronomy. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1967: 211-265.
[11]	闫宁, 刘新民, 杜咏梅, 等. 我国初烤烟叶钾含量现状与变化趋势分析[J]. 江西农业学报, 2018, 30(1): 86-90.
[12]	曹志洪, 胡国松, 周秀如, 等. 土壤供钾特性和烤烟的钾肥有效施用[J]. 烟草科技, 1993, 26(2): 33-37.
[13]	陈亚茹, 陈增敏, 赵正雄, 等. 施用黄腐酸钾对打顶烤烟干物质和钾素累积的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2020, 47(2): 68-74.
[14]	祖庆学, 曹本福, 廖恒, 等. 腐殖酸肥对烟叶相关油分品质的影响[J]. 中国热带农业, 2019(2): 66-71.
[15]	李高坡. 不同施肥措施对南阳烤烟钾素吸收及烟叶品质的影响[D]. 郑州: 河南农业大学, 2015.
[16]	王东, 周冀衡, 刘均, 等. 施用钾肥对烟草铅量吸收的影响[J]. 作物研究, 2009, 23(3): 177-180.
[17]	叶佳伟, 李志明, 林克惠. 不同钾肥用量对烤烟农艺性状的影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2004, 32(2): 22-24.
[18]	何承刚, 辛培尧. 不同用量硝酸钾追肥对烤烟产量质量的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2006, 24(1): 70-72.
[19]	卢剑, 王龙, 孙曙光, 等. 不同钾肥种类对烤烟品质的影响[J]. 山西农业科学, 2012, 40(12): 1277-1281.
[20]	唐永红. 烤烟产质量与施钾量及留叶数变化规律的研究[J]. 陕西农业科学, 1998, 44(3): 24-25.
[21]	赵俊杰, 张峻, 高立洪, 等. 喷施钾肥对烤烟上部成熟中叶片生理特性及化学成分的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2006, 22(7): 306-308.
[22]	王金星, 李高坡, 符云鹏, 等. 施用生物炭、黄腐酸钾对云烟87烤烟产质量的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2017, 49(6): 83-87.
[23]	赖洪敏, 罗刚, 林北森, 等. 黄腐酸钾对烤烟生长及品质的影响[J]. 腐植酸, 2017(5): 35-39.
[24]	霍昭光, 邢雪霞, 孙志浩, 等. 黄腐酸钾对烤烟生长发育及其叶片矿质元素积累的影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2018, 46(2): 70-73.
[25]	黄深, 李树晨. 生化黄腐酸钾对烤烟生长及促进营养元素钾吸收的作用研究[J]. 乡村科技, 2018(28): 88-89.
[26]	任杰, 朱峰, 程森, 等. 不同种类钾肥配施比例对烤烟产质量的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2018, 39(4): 58-63.

指标	权重	指标	权重	指标	权重
颜色	0.10	身份	0.20	叶片组织	0.05
成熟度	0.15	油分	0.10	柔韧性	0.05
叶片结构	0.20	色度	0.10	光泽度	0.05

指标	权重	指标	权重	指标	权重
颜色	0.10	身份	0.20	叶片组织	0.05
成熟度	0.15	油分	0.10	柔韧性	0.05
叶片结构	0.20	色度	0.10	光泽度	0.05

处理	株高/cm	茎围/cm	节距/cm	最大叶面积/cm²	倒三叶面积/cm²	顶叶面积/cm²
CK	105.90 b	9.90 a	5.30 a	1 425.42 b	1 087.30 a	821.32 b
T1	115.60 a	9.60 a	5.00 a	1 586.53 a	1 061.48 a	856.88 a
T2	113.10 a	10.10 a	5.30 a	1 438.04 b	916.54 c	826.12 b
T3	113.00 a	8.90 b	5.40 a	1 531.84 a	903.69 c	781.20 c
T4	111.10 a	10.00 a	5.20 a	1 378.44 c	949.77 b	758.86 d

处理	株高/cm	茎围/cm	节距/cm	最大叶面积/cm²	倒三叶面积/cm²	顶叶面积/cm²
CK	105.90 b	9.90 a	5.30 a	1 425.42 b	1 087.30 a	821.32 b
T1	115.60 a	9.60 a	5.00 a	1 586.53 a	1 061.48 a	856.88 a
T2	113.10 a	10.10 a	5.30 a	1 438.04 b	916.54 c	826.12 b
T3	113.00 a	8.90 b	5.40 a	1 531.84 a	903.69 c	781.20 c
T4	111.10 a	10.00 a	5.20 a	1 378.44 c	949.77 b	758.86 d

处理	株高/cm	茎围/cm	节距/cm	叶数/片	最大叶面积/cm²	倒三叶面积/cm²	顶叶面积/cm²
CK	107.00 b	10.60 a	5.60 a	16.70 b	1 536.19 c	1 091.85 b	864.44 b
T1	116.10 a	10.50 a	5.20 a	18.20 a	1 737.77 a	1 180.02 a	927.40 a
T2	114.50 a	10.50 a	5.80 a	17.00 b	1 524.32 c	1 008.32 c	922.69 a
T3	114.80 a	9.70 b	5.60 a	17.50 ab	1 657.05 b	996.70 c	812.08 c
T4	113.40 a	9.90 b	5.30 a	17.20 ab	1 483.36 d	1 009.51 c	810.13 c