Effects of nitrogen application level and intercropping sweet potato on the growth, photosynthetic characteristics and nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities of flue-cured tobacco

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20240423

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate the effects of nitrogen application levels and intercropping with sweet potato on the growth, leaf photosynthetic characteristics, and nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities of flue-cured tobacco, a pot experiment simulating field planting was conducted using flue-cured tobacco variety LY1306 and sweet potato variety Pushu 32. The experiment included two planting patterns (A1, flue-cured tobacco monoculture; A2, flue-cured tobacco and sweet potato intercropping) and four nitrogen application levels (N0, no nitrogen; N1, 0.64 g·pot^-1; N2, 0.80 g·pot^-1; N3, 0.96 g·pot^-1), resulting in a total of 8 treatments. The differences in agronomic traits, root morphological parameters, leaf photosynthetic characteristics, and nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities of flue-cured tobacco under different treatments were studied. The results showed that on 60 days after transplanting, under the same nitrogen lapplication evel, compared with monocultured flue-cured tobacco, intercropped flue-cured tobacco exhibited increases in plant height, maximum leaf area, aboveground dry weight, root dry weight, root tip number, root volume, SPAD value, and net photosynthetic rate (P_n), by 1.93%-10.24%, 5.01%-14.23%, 23.65%-45.83%, 32.43%-53.75%, 4.62%-16.74%, 5.92%-27.82%, 0.42%-6.28%, and 9.39%-32.55%, respectively. All these above measured parameters reached their maximum values at the N2 level. Although the values at the N1 level were lower than those at the N3 level, there were no significant differences between them. The activities of nitrate reductase (NR) and glutamine synthetase (GS) in the leaves of intercropped tobacco were 3.93%-19.13% and 3.03%-5.74% higher than those in monocultured flue cured tobacco, respectively, and both enzyme activities gradually increased with increasing nitrogen application rate, reaching their highest values at the N3 level. Under the conditions of this experiment, both nitrogen application level and planting pattern had significant or highly significant effects on the agronomic traits, photosynthetic parameters, and nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities of flue-cured tobacco. However, their interaction of two factors had a significant or highly significant effect only on root tip number, root volume, intercellular CO₂ concentration (C_i), and transpiration rate (T_r). Overall, under the tobacco-sweet potato intercropping system in the rainfed areas of western Henan, a nitrogen application rate of 48-60 kg·hm^-2 was sufficient to meet the normal growth and development requirements.

Key words: flue-cured tobacco, sweet potato, agronomic traits, root morphological parameters, photosynthetic characteristics, nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities

CLC Number:

S572

ZHANG Shuhao, WANG Yujie, HE Bing, DU Jingshan, GE Menglong, WANG Hui, HE Mengying, JIAO Nianyuan, GAO Jiakai, WANG Yanfang, DENG Xuxian, LIU Ling. Effects of nitrogen application level and intercropping sweet potato on the growth, photosynthetic characteristics and nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities of flue-cured tobacco[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2025, 66(9): 2117-2125.

Figures/Tables 7

References 36

[1]	陈继峰, 蔡凯旋, 孙会, 等. 河南烤烟连作状况调查与分析[J]. 河南农业科学, 2015, 44(11): 34-37.
[2]	王峰吉, 尤垂淮, 刘朝科, 等. 不同连作年限植烟土壤对烤烟生长发育及产质量的影响[J]. 福建农业学报, 2014, 29(5): 443-448.
[3]	张楠, 乔家君, 肖杰, 等. 区位熵视角下乡村产业发展时空演化研究: 以河南省专业村为例[J]. 河南大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 53(6): 645-656, 737.
[4]	贾健, 朱金峰, 杜修智, 等. 不同种植模式对烤烟根际土壤微生物、土壤养分和烟叶质量的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2016, 29(10): 2300-2306.
[5]	时安东, 李建伟, 袁玲. 轮间作系统对烤烟产量、品质和土壤养分的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2011, 17(2): 411-418.
[6]	刘领, 温烜琳, 王悦华, 等. 一种烤烟-甘薯-绿豆间套轮作种植方法: CN113973677A[P]. 2022-01-28.
[7]	王悦华, 马珂, 苏少伟, 等. 豫西旱地烟薯间作模式下不同株距对烤烟生长及产量质量的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2024, 42(1): 194-204.
[8]	颜晓元, 夏龙龙, 遆超普. 面向作物产量和环境双赢的氮肥施用策略[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2018, 33(2): 177-183.
[9]	冯厚平, 阳显斌, 陈代荣, 等. 氮肥及不同形态氮对烤烟的影响综述[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2017(3): 135-137.
[10]	武东玲, 宋正熊, 王辉, 等. 不同氮素水平对宜阳烟区豫烟6号烤烟生长发育和烟叶质量的影响[J]. 现代农业科技, 2020(5): 8, 10.
[11]	王红丽, 杨惠娟, 苏菲, 等. 氮用量对烤烟成熟期叶片碳氮代谢及萜类代谢相关基因表达的影响[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2014, 20(5): 116-120.
[12]	朱利涛, 李自林, 毛光伟, 等. 不同氮肥施用量对云85烤烟生长发育及产量与质量的影响[J]. 现代农业科技, 2022(23): 29-32, 47.
[13]	张书豪, 王玉洁, 黄培元, 等. 化肥减量配施羊粪有机肥对烤烟生长、产质量及土壤养分的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2024, 56(4): 72-80.
[14]	刘咏艳, 宋正熊, 金佳威, 等. 钼锌营养对烤烟生理特性及品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(6): 216-224.
[15]	殷英, 张玉, 余祥文, 等. 烤烟主要农艺性状与产量产值的关系研究[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2012, 33(6): 18-22.
[16]	王艳丽, 刘国顺, 丁松爽, 等. 磷用量对烤烟根系及其与地上部关系的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(5): 1440-1446.
[17]	杨中义, 张发明, 李永智, 等. 不同烤烟品种对氮素胁迫响应差异的研究[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2011, 26(2): 240-245.
[18]	李鑫, 周冀衡, 宾俊, 等. 多种外源性化学物质对烤烟幼苗生长影响及影响差异分析[J]. 核农学报, 2015, 29(12): 2425-2432.
[19]	马二登, 薛如君, 高天, 等. 滴灌施肥频率对烤烟生长、氮肥利用及烟叶产质量的影响[J]. 节水灌溉, 2024(3): 68-74, 82.
[20]	张书豪, 王玉洁, 何冰, 等. 间作甘薯对烤烟根际土壤养分、酶活性及微生物群落的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2025(2): 53-64.
[21]	WANG Y F, GUO Y Y, ZHAO C F, et al. Exogenous melatonin achieves drought tolerance by improving photosynthesis in maize seedlings leaves[J]. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology, 2021, 68(4): 718-727.
[22]	LIU J L, WANG W X, WANG L Y, et al. Exogenous melatonin improves seedling health index and drought tolerance in tomato[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2015, 77(3): 317-326.
[23]	NAZAR R, UMAR S, KHAN N A, et al. Salicylic acid supplementation improves photosynthesis and growth in mustard through changes in proline accumulation and ethylene formation under drought stress[J]. South African Journal of Botany, 2015, 98: 84-94.
[24]	周德海, 高峰, 王在军, 等. 间作桔梗对烤烟主要农艺性状及效益的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2014, 46(9): 60-62.
[25]	周文, 郭笑恒, 徐锐, 等. 烤烟间作半夏对烤烟生长及产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(7): 161-169.
[26]	杨志晓, 史跃伟, 林世峰, 等. 烤烟碳氮代谢关键酶活性动态及其与类胡萝卜素关系研究[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2014, 35(2): 59-63.
[27]	凡聪, 赵兵飞, 符云鹏, 等. 氮用量对蛟河晒红烟碳氮代谢关键酶活性及品质的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2019, 52(8): 30-36.
[28]	ROZAS H R S, ECHEVERRÍA H E, BARBIERI P A. Nitrogen balance as affected by application time and nitrogen fertilizer rate in irrigated No-tillage maize[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2004, 96(6): 1622-1631.
[29]	GUO J H, LIU X J, ZHANG Y, et al. Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands[J]. Science, 2010, 327(5968): 1008-1010.
[30]	SUN B, SHEN R P, BOUWMAN A F. Surface N balances in agricultural crop production systems in China for the period 1980-2015[J]. Pedosphere, 2008, 18(3): 304-315.
[31]	焦念元, 宁堂原, 赵春, 等. 施氮量和玉米-花生间作模式对氮磷吸收与利用的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2008, 34(4): 706-712.
[32]	王小春, 杨文钰, 邓小燕, 等. 玉米/大豆和玉米/甘薯模式下玉米干物质积累与分配差异及氮肥的调控效应[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(1): 46-57.
[33]	鲍根生, 李媛, 冯晓云, 等. 高寒区氮添加和间作种植互作对燕麦和豌豆根系构型影响的研究[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(3): 73-84.
[34]	赵凤艳, 张勇勇, 冯晨, 等. 不同施氮量下玉米花生间作不同玉米行对土地当量比和产量贡献的研究[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2023(6): 129-137.
[35]	王利立, 朱永永, 赵彦华, 等. 施氮和根间互作对密植大麦间作豌豆氮素利用的协同效应[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25(2): 200-210.
[36]	JU X T, XING G X, CHEN X P, et al. Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009, 106(9): 3041-3046.

时期	处理	株高/cm	最大叶长/cm	最大叶宽/cm	最大叶面积/cm²
移栽后30 d	A1N0	20.70±1.42 b	21.33±0.92 d	11.63±0.40 b	156.61±1.45 d
	A1N1	21.75±1.09 ab	23.25±0.70 cd	11.95±0.25 b	176.85±7.54 cd
	A1N2	21.85±1.09 ab	24.05±0.58 bc	11.98±0.19 b	182.27±4.94 cd
	A1N3	22.10±1.04 ab	25.70±0.44 ab	12.15±0.60 b	198.53±12.31 bc
	A2N0	22.93±0.24 ab	23.60±0.43 c	12.10±0.25 b	180.99±0.82 cd
	A2N1	23.73±0.42 ab	25.78±0.89 ab	12.90±0.45 ab	211.09±11.29 ab
	A2N2	24.10±0.38 ab	26.23±0.38 a	13.48±0.51 a	224.13±8.30 a
	A2N3	24.30±1.65 a	26.65±0.83 a	13.68±0.36 a	231.49±11.02 a
F值	A	8.74^**	14.65^**	15.62^**	32.19^**
	N	0.69	9.13^**	2.63	11.13^**
	A×N	0.01	0.46	0.82	0.37
移栽后60 d	A1N0	63.18±1.64 d	34.48±0.77 c	19.55±0.37 c	427.82±14.29 d
	A1N1	67.53±1.43 c	37.88±1.01 b	19.88±0.69 bc	476.30±3.71 c
	A1N2	70.65±1.12 bc	40.05±0.92 ab	20.03±0.29 bc	508.76±12.53 bc
	A1N3	71.08±0.76 bc	40.20±0.49 ab	20.40±0.58 abc	520.17±14.42 bc
	A2N0	69.65±1.43 bc	38.63±1.32 b	19.90±0.70 bc	488.70±30.05 c
	A2N1	70.33±1.30 bc	40.20±0.40 ab	21.20±0.30 ab	540.94±12.57 ab
	A2N2	77.30±0.74 a	41.78±0.99 a	21.88±0.28 a	579.89±16.45 a
	A2N3	72.45±0.62 b	40.38±0.30 ab	21.33±0.25 ab	546.25±6.23 ab
F值	A	26.65^**	12.36^**	11.24^**	25.40^**
	N	15.50^**	10.49^**	2.83	11.99^**
	A×N	2.50	1.90	0.91	0.83

时期	处理	株高/cm	最大叶长/cm	最大叶宽/cm	最大叶面积/cm²
移栽后30 d	A1N0	20.70±1.42 b	21.33±0.92 d	11.63±0.40 b	156.61±1.45 d
	A1N1	21.75±1.09 ab	23.25±0.70 cd	11.95±0.25 b	176.85±7.54 cd
	A1N2	21.85±1.09 ab	24.05±0.58 bc	11.98±0.19 b	182.27±4.94 cd
	A1N3	22.10±1.04 ab	25.70±0.44 ab	12.15±0.60 b	198.53±12.31 bc
	A2N0	22.93±0.24 ab	23.60±0.43 c	12.10±0.25 b	180.99±0.82 cd
	A2N1	23.73±0.42 ab	25.78±0.89 ab	12.90±0.45 ab	211.09±11.29 ab
	A2N2	24.10±0.38 ab	26.23±0.38 a	13.48±0.51 a	224.13±8.30 a
	A2N3	24.30±1.65 a	26.65±0.83 a	13.68±0.36 a	231.49±11.02 a
F值	A	8.74^**	14.65^**	15.62^**	32.19^**
	N	0.69	9.13^**	2.63	11.13^**
	A×N	0.01	0.46	0.82	0.37
移栽后60 d	A1N0	63.18±1.64 d	34.48±0.77 c	19.55±0.37 c	427.82±14.29 d
	A1N1	67.53±1.43 c	37.88±1.01 b	19.88±0.69 bc	476.30±3.71 c
	A1N2	70.65±1.12 bc	40.05±0.92 ab	20.03±0.29 bc	508.76±12.53 bc
	A1N3	71.08±0.76 bc	40.20±0.49 ab	20.40±0.58 abc	520.17±14.42 bc
	A2N0	69.65±1.43 bc	38.63±1.32 b	19.90±0.70 bc	488.70±30.05 c
	A2N1	70.33±1.30 bc	40.20±0.40 ab	21.20±0.30 ab	540.94±12.57 ab
	A2N2	77.30±0.74 a	41.78±0.99 a	21.88±0.28 a	579.89±16.45 a
	A2N3	72.45±0.62 b	40.38±0.30 ab	21.33±0.25 ab	546.25±6.23 ab
F值	A	26.65^**	12.36^**	11.24^**	25.40^**
	N	15.50^**	10.49^**	2.83	11.99^**
	A×N	2.50	1.90	0.91	0.83

时期	处理	P_n/(μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	G_s/(mol·m^-2·s^-1)	C_i/(μmol·mol^-1)	T_r/(mmol·m^-2·s^-1)
移栽后30 d	A1N0	9.06±0.21 e	0.149±0.002 f	337.04±4.48 a	2.28±0.05 d
	A1N1	12.59±0.40 c	0.192±0.003 d	304.36±3.13 b	2.70±0.02 c
	A1N2	13.30±0.26 bc	0.222±0.002 c	274.52±1.57 c	2.80±0.02 c
	A1N3	13.36±0.23 bc	0.234±0.005 b	255.28±2.41 d	2.82±0.05 c
	A2N0	10.92±0.41 d	0.168±0.002 e	310.19±0.75 b	2.39±0.02 d
	A2N1	13.98±0.27 ab	0.220±0.003 c	270.25±6.00 c	2.81±0.02 c
	A2N2	15.20±0.91 a	0.243±0.005 ab	264.38±5.03 cd	3.07±0.06 b
	A2N3	15.24±0.26 a	0.252±0.002 a	254.75±1.10 d	3.27±0.07 a
F值	A	33.67^**	121.50^**	50.69^**	57.83^**
	N	45.00^**	332.18^**	138.62^**	101.86^**
	A×N	0.16	1.50	9.28^**	6.95^**
移栽后60 d	A1N0	18.59±0.48 f	0.274±0.006 d	279.62±2.81 a	3.62±0.03 d
	A1N1	21.32±0.94 e	0.312±0.008 bc	254.47±4.62 b	3.91±0.03 c
	A1N2	24.06±0.46 d	0.329±0.009 ab	227.77±2.27 c	4.13±0.03 b
	A1N3	26.42±0.16 c	0.335±0.007 ab	206.86±4.29 d	4.18±0.02 b
	A2N0	23.67±0.47 d	0.300±0.009 c	246.46±5.80 b	3.96±0.03 c
	A2N1	28.26±0.20 b	0.345±0.008 a	202.94±3.56 d	4.21±0.01 b
	A2N2	30.09±0.55 a	0.353±0.009 a	175.32±2.36 e	4.41±0.01 a
	A2N3	28.90±0.19 ab	0.346±0.005 a	186.14±3.54 e	4.22±0.01 b
F值	A	216.76^**	18.04^**	212.58^**	121.13^**
	N	71.93^**	21.82^**	127.28^**	104.86^**
	A×N	7.62^**	0.72	8.02^**	14.50^**

时期	处理	P_n/(μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	G_s/(mol·m^-2·s^-1)	C_i/(μmol·mol^-1)	T_r/(mmol·m^-2·s^-1)
移栽后30 d	A1N0	9.06±0.21 e	0.149±0.002 f	337.04±4.48 a	2.28±0.05 d
	A1N1	12.59±0.40 c	0.192±0.003 d	304.36±3.13 b	2.70±0.02 c
	A1N2	13.30±0.26 bc	0.222±0.002 c	274.52±1.57 c	2.80±0.02 c
	A1N3	13.36±0.23 bc	0.234±0.005 b	255.28±2.41 d	2.82±0.05 c
	A2N0	10.92±0.41 d	0.168±0.002 e	310.19±0.75 b	2.39±0.02 d
	A2N1	13.98±0.27 ab	0.220±0.003 c	270.25±6.00 c	2.81±0.02 c
	A2N2	15.20±0.91 a	0.243±0.005 ab	264.38±5.03 cd	3.07±0.06 b
	A2N3	15.24±0.26 a	0.252±0.002 a	254.75±1.10 d	3.27±0.07 a
F值	A	33.67^**	121.50^**	50.69^**	57.83^**
	N	45.00^**	332.18^**	138.62^**	101.86^**
	A×N	0.16	1.50	9.28^**	6.95^**
移栽后60 d	A1N0	18.59±0.48 f	0.274±0.006 d	279.62±2.81 a	3.62±0.03 d
	A1N1	21.32±0.94 e	0.312±0.008 bc	254.47±4.62 b	3.91±0.03 c
	A1N2	24.06±0.46 d	0.329±0.009 ab	227.77±2.27 c	4.13±0.03 b
	A1N3	26.42±0.16 c	0.335±0.007 ab	206.86±4.29 d	4.18±0.02 b
	A2N0	23.67±0.47 d	0.300±0.009 c	246.46±5.80 b	3.96±0.03 c
	A2N1	28.26±0.20 b	0.345±0.008 a	202.94±3.56 d	4.21±0.01 b
	A2N2	30.09±0.55 a	0.353±0.009 a	175.32±2.36 e	4.41±0.01 a
	A2N3	28.90±0.19 ab	0.346±0.005 a	186.14±3.54 e	4.22±0.01 b
F值	A	216.76^**	18.04^**	212.58^**	121.13^**
	N	71.93^**	21.82^**	127.28^**	104.86^**
	A×N	7.62^**	0.72	8.02^**	14.50^**