关键词：油菜;种植密度;产量;裂角;倒伏 Abstract Two canola varieties (Zhongshuang 11 and Huayouza 9) with four planting densities (15 × 104, 30 × 104, 45 × 104, and 60 × 104 plants ha-1) were used to evaluate their effects on yield, lodging and pod shattering resistance index (PSRI). With the increase of plant density, effective pods per hectare increased, resulting in increasing yield. The highest yield was observed at density of 45 × 104 plants ha-1 for both of the two varieties. With the increase of plant density, the root crown diameter decreased which led lodging index to be increased. Under the densities of 15 × 104 and 30 × 104 plants ha-1, the part of stem below canopy had the highest lodging index, while under the densities of 30 × 104 and 45 × 104 plants ha-1, the central of stem and the upper part of middle stem had the highest lodging index, indicating that the lodging region was lower than under low plant density. The PSRI of branches was smaller than that of main stems, with a tendency of increasing firstly and then decreasing with decreasing branch height. The PSRI of main stem of the two varieties had different responses to increasing density, that was decreasing in Zhongshuang 11 while increasing firstly and then decreasing in Huayouza 9, with a highest PSRI under 300 000 plants ha-1. The water declining rate of pod wall from early pod development to pod maturity had highly significant and negative correlation with pod shattering resistance, indicating that this index is most important for density effects on pod shattering.
2.1.1 产量及其构成 由表1可知, 随油菜种植密度增加, 单株有效角果数和每角果粒数均呈降低趋势, 在D1密度下, 各处理达最大值, 两品种2年变化趋势一致。中双11千粒重随种植密度增加, 先增加后降低, D2密度时最大, 华油杂9号千粒重均随种植密度增加而逐渐增加, D4密度时值最大; 随着种植密度的增加, 产量先增加后降低。方差分析表明, 除千粒重在不同年份间变化不显著外, 年份、品种和密度对其他产量及构成因素的影响均达极显著水平, 且部分指标受其互作影响达极显著水平。 Table 1 表1 表1密度对油菜产量及产量构成的影响 Table 1Effect of density on yield and yield components of rapeseed
年份 Year
品种 Variety
密度 Density
单株有效角果数Effective pod number per plant
每角果粒数 Number of seeds per pod
千粒重 1000-seed weight (g)
实收产量 Yield (kg hm-2)
2014-2015
中双11 Zhongshuang 11
D1
164.5 a
22.7 a
4.30 a
2381.3 c
D2
126.4 b
22.3 b
4.34 a
2969.3 b
D3
88.4 c
20.4 c
4.27 ab
3158.5 a
D4
63.4 d
20.0 d
4.18 b
3029.1 b
华油杂9号 Huayouza 9
D1
193.5 a
25.8 a
3.01 b
2521.3 d
D2
132.8 b
24.4 b
3.10 ab
2910.7 c
D3
108.5 c
23.4 c
3.12 ab
3514.4 a
D4
86.0 d
23.5 c
3.16 a
3076.0 b
2015-2016
中双11 Zhongshuang 11
D1
170.5 a
23.1 a
4.48 b
2626.3 c
D2
108.1 b
22.7 b
4.52 a
2938.9 b
D3
95.0 c
21.6 c
4.34 c
3255.9 a
D4
66.4 d
21.2 d
4.26 d
3042.6 b
华油杂9号 Huayouza 9
D1
216.5 a
27.4 a
2.95 c
2691.8 d
D2
123.0 b
26.1 b
2.99 bc
3094.4 b
D3
107.0 c
25.1 c
3.04 ab
3358.3 a
D4
79.8 d
24.6 d
3.11 a
2916.9 c
方差分析 Variance analyses
年份(Y)
**
**
NS
**
品种(V)
**
**
**
**
密度(D)
**
**
**
**
Y×V
**
NS
**
**
Y×D
**
NS
NS
**
V×D
NS
NS
NS
**
Y×V×D
NS
NS
NS
**
D1, D2, D3, and D4 indicate the planting densities of 15×104, 30×104, 45×104, and 60×104 plant ha-1 respectively; Values within a column followed by different letters are significantly different at P﹤0.05; ** significant difference at the 0.01 probability levels; NS: not significant; Y: year; V: variety; D: density; Y×V, Y×D, V×D, Y×V×D mean the interaction between factors.D1、D2、D3和D4分别表示种植密度为15×104、30×104、45×104和60×104株 hm-2; 表中同一列不同字母表示差异达0.05显著水平; **表示在0.01水平的显著差异, NS表示差异不显著; Y: 年份; V: 品种; D: 种植密度; Y×V、Y×D、V×D、Y×V×D分别表示因素间的互作。 新窗口打开 2.1.2 成熟期农艺性状 如表2所示, 随着种植密度的增加, 根颈粗、株高、分枝数呈减小趋势, 且均在D1密度下达到最大值; 分枝高度则随密度增加而升高, 品种间、年际间变化趋势一致。方差分析表明, 密度对结角起点影响不显著, 其他指标受年份、品种和密度的影响显著, 且部分指标受其互作效应的影响达显著或极显著水平。 Table 2 表2 表2密度对油菜成熟期农艺性状的影响 Table 2Effect of density on agronomic traits at maturity of rapeseed
年份 Year
品种 Variety
密度 Density
根颈粗 Root crown diameter (mm)
株高 Plant height (cm)
分枝高 Branch height (cm)
分枝数 Branch number
结角起点 Pod starting point (cm)
2014-2015
中双11 Zhongshuang 11
D1
20.81 a
168.17 a
62.00 c
6.0 a
96.73 a
D2
16.79 b
162.50 ab
76.43 b
4.3 ab
96.73 a
D3
14.97 c
156.99 bc
82.57 ab
4.2 bc
97.47 a
D4
12.35 d
151.53 c
90.33 a
2.5 c
96.60 a
华油杂9号Huayouza 9
D1
16.08 a
164.84 a
58.51 c
6.3 a
85.61 a
D2
14.34 b
155.83 ab
68.87 b
4.1 b
83.97 a
D3
13.35 b
152.32 b
76.62 ab
3.3 c
82.81 a
D4
11.22 c
147.19 b
81.75 a
2.9 c
82.41 a
2015-2016
中双11 Zhongshuang 11
D1
21.28 a
170.00 a
63.77 c
6.3 a
99.50 a
D2
16.05 b
167.23 ab
78.03 b
4.3 b
104.33 a
D3
13.97 bc
164.50 ab
86.43 ab
3.7 b
104.80 a
D4
12.90 c
162.33 b
97.43 a
1.7 c
105.00 a
华油杂9号Huayouza 9
D1
19.69 a
173.67 a
54.60 c
7.7 a
94.57 a
D2
14.66 b
170.53 ab
81.90 b
5.3 b
98.50 a
D3
13.22 c
165.50 bc
82.67 b
5.3 b
99.67 a
D4
11.94 d
158.17 c
90.00 a
4.3 c
97.83 a
方差分析 Variance analyses
年份(Y)
**
**
**
**
**
品种(V)
**
**
**
*
**
密度(D)
**
**
**
**
NS
Y×V
**
NS
NS
**
*
Y×D
**
NS
*
*
**
V×D
NS
NS
NS
**
NS
Y×V×D
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
D1, D2, D3, and D4 indicate the planting densities of 15×104, 30×104, 45×104, and 60×104 plant ha-1 respectively; Values within a column followed by different letters are significantly different at P﹤0.05; * and **, significant difference at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels, respectively; NS: not significant; Y: year; V: variety; D: density; Y×V, Y×D, V×D, Y×V×D mean the interaction between factors.D1、D2、D3和D4分别表示种植密度为15×104、30×104、45×104和60×104株 hm-2; 表中同一列不同字母表示差异达 0.05显著水平; *, **表示在0.05和0.01水平的显著差异, NS表示差异不显著; Y: 年份; V: 品种; D: 种植密度; Y×V、Y×D、V×D、Y×V×D分别表示因素间的互作。 新窗口打开
2.2 茎秆倒伏
2.2.1 倒伏部位 由图1可知, 随种植密度的增加, 茎秆倒伏部位先增高后降低, 在D2密度下倒伏部位最高, 两品种规律相同, 且两年结果相同。在较低密度下, 下部茎秆粗壮, 植株上部生长过于旺盛, 倒伏发生部位较高; 密度过大时, 茎秆较细, 倒伏发生部位降低。 显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT 图1不同密度下油菜倒伏发生部位 D1、D2、D3和D4分别表示种植密度为15×104、30×104、45×104和60×104株hm-2。 -->Fig. 1Lodging sites at different planting densities of rapeseed D1, D2, D3, and D4 indicate the planting densities of 15×104, 30×104, 45×104, and 60×104 plant ha-1, respectively. -->
2.2.2 茎秆不同部位倒伏指数 由表3可知, 中双11倒伏指数随密度增加而增加, 2年变化趋势一致; 华油杂9号倒伏指数在2014—2015年度随种植密度增加而增加, 在2015—2016年度则随种植密度增加呈先增加后降低趋势, 在D3处理下倒伏指数最大, 2个品种整体表现为各段平均倒伏指数在D3、D4密度下高于D1、D2密度。通过分析分枝以下四段倒伏指数可知, 低密度(D1、D2)种植条件下, 从第1段到第4段倒伏指数逐渐增大, 第4段倒伏指数最大, 为易倒伏部位, 在较高密度(D3、D4)种植条件下, 各段倒伏指数呈单峰曲线变化趋势, 表现为第2、第3段倒伏指数较大。 Table 3 表3 表3密度对油菜茎秆不同部位倒伏指数的影响 Table 3Effect of density on lodging index at different parts of rapeseed stems
年份 Year
品种 Variety
密度 Density
No.1
No.2
No.3
No.4
均值 Average
2014-2015
中双11 Zhongshuang 11
D1
0.809 b
0.846 b
0.914 c
1.025 a
0.899
D2
0.876 b
1.040 b
1.078 bc
1.160 a
1.039
D3
0.922 b
0.973 b
1.186 b
1.089 a
1.043
D4
1.278 a
1.597 a
1.536 a
1.273 a
1.421
华油杂9号 Huayouza 9
D1
0.701 b
0.742 c
0.786 b
0.909 b
0.785
D2
0.809 b
0.991 b
1.073 ab
0.872 b
0.936
D3
1.224 a
1.656 a
1.335 a
1.051 a
1.317
D4
1.476 a
1.484 a
1.321 a
1.101 a
1.346
2015-2016
中双11 Zhongshuang 11
D1
0.862 b
0.954 c
1.050 c
1.113 b
0.995
D2
1.618 a
1.805 b
1.922 b
2.126 a
1.868
D3
1.665 a
1.943 b
2.281 a
1.908 a
1.949
D4
1.829 a
2.372 a
2.248 a
2.178 a
2.157
华油杂9号 Huayouza 9
D1
1.001 a
1.129 b
1.208 b
1.288 a
1.157
D2
1.066 a
1.089 b
1.215 b
1.321 a
1.173
D3
1.371 a
1.528 a
1.727 a
1.522 a
1.537
D4
1.086 a
1.349 ab
1.228 b
1.148 a
1.203
方差分析 Variance analyses
年份(Y)
**
**
**
**
品种(V)
**
**
**
**
密度(D)
**
**
**
**
Y×V
**
**
**
**
Y×D
**
NS
**
**
V×D
*
**
**
**
Y×V×D
**
**
**
**
D1, D2, D3, and D4 indicate the planting densities of 15×104, 30×104, 45×104, and 60×104 plant ha-1, respectively; No.1, No.2, No.3, and No.4 indicate the first, second, third and fourth part from bottom to the top when averaged the main stem; Values within a column followed by different letters are significantly different at P﹤0.05; * and **, significant difference at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels, respectively; NS: not significant; Y: year; V: variety; D: density; Y×V , Y×D, V×D, Y×V×D mean the interaction between factors.D1、D2、D3和D4分别表示种植密度为15×104、30×104、45×104和60×104株hm-2; No.1、No.2、No.3和No.4分别表示除去缩颈段后, 将主茎平均分为四段, 从地面往上1、2、3、4段; 表中同一列不同字母表示差异达 0.05显著水平; *, **表示在0.05和0.01水平的显著差异, NS表示差异不显著; Y: 年份; V: 品种; D: 种植密度; Y×V, Y×D, V×D, Y×V×D分别表示因素间的互作。 新窗口打开
2.3 角果抗裂角指数及相关指标
2.3.1 抗裂角指数 由图2可知, 主茎角果抗裂性强于分枝角果, 在4个种植密度下, 抗裂角指数表现为中双11>华油杂9号, 两年变化趋势相同。不同密度处理可显著影响角果抗裂角指数, 且对主茎及分枝角果的影响不同。中双11主茎角果抗裂角指数随种植密度的增大呈降低趋势, 而华油杂9号呈先增加后降低趋势, 在D2处理下, 抗裂角指数达最大值。2个品种不同密度相同分枝, 抗裂角指数均随种植密度增加呈降低趋势。相同种植密度, 不同分枝, 抗裂角指数整体上随分枝高度的降低呈先增加后降低趋势。 显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT 图2密度对油菜角果抗裂角指数的影响 D1、D2、D3和D4分别表示种植密度为15×104、30×104、45×104和60×104株hm-2; 横坐标轴中间的“0”表示主茎, “1~7”表示从上部向下部的第1到第7分枝。 -->Fig. 2Effect of plant density on pod shattering resistance of rapeseed D1, D2, D3, and D4 indicate the planting densities of 15×104, 30×104, 45×104, and 60×104 plant ha-1 respectively; “0” in the middle of abscissa axis means main stem, and “1-7” mean the first branch to the eleventh branch from top to bottom, respectively. -->
2.3.2 角果壳重和含水量 中双11角果壳干重高于华油杂9号(图3-A)。花后21~35 d, 随时间增加, 角果壳干重逐渐增大, 之后略有降低。花后42~56 d, 两品种角果壳干物质随着密度的增加整体上呈降低趋势。角果壳含水量随花后天数的增加下降, 以花后28~49 d最为明显(图3-B), 不同密度处理下, 角果壳含水量差异不明显, 两品种变化趋势一致。 显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT 图3密度对油菜角果壳干物质(A)和含水量(B)的影响 D1、D2、D3和D4分别表示种植密度为15×104、30×104、45×104和60×104株hm-2。 -->Fig. 3Effect of density on pod wall dry weight (A) and water content (B) of rapeseed D1, D2, D3, and D4 indicate the planting densities of 15×104, 30×104, 45×104, and 60×104 plant ha-1, respectively. -->
2.3.4 角果壳干重、含水量与抗裂角指数的相关性 由表4可知, 角果果壳重、花后56 d的角果壳含水量与抗裂角指数呈极显著正相关, 花后20 d与成熟期角果壳含水量下降速率与抗裂角指数呈极显著负相关, 且相关系数最大。 Table 4 表4 表4抗裂角指数与角果壳干重、含水量相关性分析 Table 4Correlation coefficients of PSRI with pod wall weight and water content
品种 Variety
果壳重 Pod wall dry weight
角果壳含水量 Pod wall water content
花后天数 Days after flowering
Δ含水量 Δ water content
21 d
28 d
35 d
42 d
49 d
56 d
中双11 Zhongshuang 11
0.751**
-0.065
-0.45
-0.38
0.382
0.653
0.971**
-0.968**
华油杂9号 Huayouza 9
0.581**
0.110
-0.73
-0.71
0.895*
0.660
0.900**
-0.968**
*Significant at P<0.05, **significant at P<0.01; Δ water content: the descent rate in water content from 21 days post flower to maturity; 56 d: the water content of pod wall after 30 days air drying at maturity.*,**分别表示0.05和0.01的显著水平; Δ含水量表示花后20 d至成熟期含水量下降速率, 56 d表示风干后30 d角果壳含水量。 新窗口打开
Shen JX, Fu TD.Rapeseed production, improvement and edible oil supply in China .J Agric Sci Tech, 2011, 13(1): 1-8 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
MaZ, Li YM, Xu LZ.Experimental research of elastic mechanics of rape stalks .J Agric Mech Res, 2016, 38(5): 187-191 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Zhou GS, Zuo QS, Liao QX, Wu JS, Fu TD.Mechanical production status, existing problems and strategy discussion of rapeseed in China .Hubei Agric Sci, 2013, 52: 2153-2157 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 2]
Sun YY.Effect of Different Cultivation Measures on Rapeseed Yield and Lodging Resistance . MS Thesis of Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, China, 2016 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 3]
WangT, Ji SY, WuH.Effect of structural differentiation of fruit dehiscence zone on pod dehiscence in oilseed rape .Acta Agron Sin, 2012, 38: 563-569 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Wen YC, Fu TD, Tu JX, Ma CZ, Shen JX, Zhang SF.Screening and analysis of resistance to silique shattering in Rape (Brassica napus L.) . Acta Agron Sin, 2008, 34: 163-166 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 2]
[7]
Pinthus MJ.Lodging in Wheat, Barley, and Oats: the phenomenon, its causes, and preventive measures .Adv Agron, 1974, 25: 209-263 [本文引用: 3]
[8]
Morgan CL, Bruce DM, ChildR, Ladbrooke ZL, Arthur AE.Genetic variation for pod shatter resistance among lines of oilseed rape developed from syntheticB. napus . Field Crops Res, 1998, 58: 153-165 [本文引用: 2]
[9]
Kadkol GP, Macmillan RH, Burrow RP, Halloran GM.Evaluation of Brassica genotypes for resistance to shatter: I. Development of a laboratory test .Euphytica, 1984, 33: 63-73 [本文引用: 1]
[10]
Price JS, Hobson RN, Neale MA, Bruce DM.Seed losses in commercial harvesting of oilseed rape .J Agric Eng Res, 1996, 65: 183-191 [本文引用: 1]
[11]
TysJ.Evaluation of the mechanical properties of winter rape siliques in respect to their susceptibility to cracking . J Pub Admin & Policy Res, 1985, 115: e512-517 [本文引用: 2]
Liu TX, Guan CY, Lei DY.The research progress on evaluation methods of lodging resistance in crops .Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2007, 23(5): 203-206 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Tian BM, Yang GS, Cao GQ, Shu HY.The performent of lodging and root cause analysis for lodging resistance in crops .Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2006, 22(4): 163-167 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Zhou XB, Xiao SS, Wang YY, Feng XX, Wang DP, Tang HY, Fan YG, Gong DP.Research progress of rapeseed lodging .Hubei Agric Sci, 2011, 50: 4105-4108 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
GuH, Qi CK.Genetic analysis of lodging resistance with mixed model of major gene plus polygene inBrassica napus L . Acta Agron Sin, 2008, 34: 376-381 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
[16]
Morgan CL, Ladbrooke ZL, Bruce DM, ChildR, Arthur AE.Breeding oilseed rape for pod shattering resistance . J Agric Sci, 2000, 135: 347-359 [本文引用: 1]
Liu DF, Liu HL.Genetic variabilities of some quantitative characters inBrassica napus L . Acta Genet Sin, 1987, 14: 31-36 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Chen XG, Shi YH, Wang CY, Yin YP, Ning TY, Shi CY, LiY, Wang ZL.Effects of nitrogen and PP333 application on the lignin synthesis of stem in relation to lodging resistance of wheat. Sci Agric Sin, 2011, 44: 3529-3536 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
MaN, Zhang CL, LiJ, Li GM.Regulation of planting density on source-sink relationship and yield at seed-set stage of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) . Chin J Oil Crop Sci, 2009, 31: 180-184 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Liao GP, Guan CY.Effect of seeding date on yield characteristics of different rapeseed (Brassica napus) genotypes . Chin J Appl Ecol, 2001, 12: 853-858 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
[21]
DiepenbrockW.Yield analysis of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.): a review . Field Crops Res, 2000, 67: 35-49 [本文引用: 1]
[22]
JieK, SunY, ZuoQ, HuangH, LiaoQ, WuC, LuJ, WuJ, ZhouG.The yield of mechanically harvested rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) can be increased by optimum plant density and row spacing . Sci Rep, 2015, 5: 18835 [本文引用: 1]
[23]
Zuber MS, Grogan CO.A new technique for measuring stalk strength in corn1 .Crop Sci, 1961, 1: 378-380 [本文引用: 1]
Chen HL, Chen SH, Shen XS, Jiang LC, Liu DH.Effects of different density to the agronomic traits and yield of transplanting rapeseed in the hilly area of Sichuan Basin .Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2012, 28(30): 142-145 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
JieK, SunY, ZhouM, ZhangP, ZuoQ, WuJ, ZhouG.The effect of nitrogen application and planting density on the radiation use efficiency and the stem lignin metabolism in rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) . Field Crops Res, 2016, 199: 89-98 [本文引用: 2]
MengQ, Dong JG, Huang WN, Duan HF, ZhangB, Xie FN, Dong ZS.Effects of planting density and sowing date on the shatter resistance ofBrassica napus Pods . Acta Agric Boreali- occident Sin, 2013, 22(11): 37-41 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 2]
SongX, Liu FL, Zheng PY, Zhang XK, Lu GY, Fu GP, ChengY.Correlation analysis between agronomic traits and yield of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) for high density planting . Sci Agric Sin, 2010, 43: 1800-1806 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Pu HM, Fu SZ, Qi CK, Zhang JF, Wu YM, Gao JQ, Chen XJ.Influence of planting density on several characters of hybrid rape .Jiangsu Agric Sci, 2001, (3): 28-30 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
WangR, LiJ, Hu LY.Effects of different row spacing and planting density on yield of rapeseed .Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2011, 27(16): 273-277 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
ZengY, Lei YL, LiJ, Hu LY.Effects of application amounts of nitrogen, phosphate and potassium and planting density on yield and quality of rapeseed .Plant Nutr Fert Sci, 2012, 18: 146-153 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Zheng BC, Zhang JF, Li HJ, Pu XB, CuiC, ChaiL, JiangJ, Niu YZ, Jiang LC.Correlation between duration of growth periods and yield components of Brassica napus L . Chin J Oil Crop Sci, 2013, 35: 240-245 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Dong XF, Tian BM, Yao YF, ZhangY, Zhang JT, Sun YY, Liu YX, ShenL, Su YH.Effects of the density on the characteristics of the mechanization harvest inBrassica napus L . Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2012, 28(3): 71-74 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 2]
GouL, Huang JJ, ZhangB, LiT, SunR, ZhaoM.Effects of population density on stalk lodging resistant mechanism and agronomic characteristics of maize . Acta Agron Sin,2007, 33: 1688-1695 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Liu TT, Sun YY, CaoS, YangY, Wu LR, Zuo QS, Wu JS, Zhou GS.Research advances on traits of resistance to pod shattering in rapeseed .Crops, 2014, (3): 5-9 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
Liu TT, KuaiJ, Sun YY, YangY, Wu LR, Wu JS, Zhou GS.Effects of N, P, and K fertilizers on silique shatter resistance and related traits of rapeseed .Acta Agron Sin, 2015, 41: 1416-1425 (in Chinese with English abstract) [本文引用: 1]
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT
