首页 > 分享 > 棉花高产和磷高效的磷肥基施追施配合技术研究

棉花高产和磷高效的磷肥基施追施配合技术研究

花匠小妙招
2024-12-23 21:38

摘要:

目的

本文比较了不同磷肥基施、追施比例对棉花生物量、产量及养分吸收的影响，以优化新疆膜下滴灌棉花的磷肥施用技术。

方法

2009—2011年连续三年进行了田间试验。试验共设3个处理：不施磷肥，磷肥全部基施，磷肥滴灌追施 (2009、2010年为磷肥50%基施和50%滴灌追施，2011年为磷肥65%基施和35%滴灌追施)，追施的磷肥分2次在棉花蕾期和初花期随水施入。各处理的氮、钾肥用量相同，氮肥全部滴灌追施，钾肥全部基施。棉花成熟期测定了棉株生物量、籽棉产量和磷肥的利用率。

结果

施用磷肥显著提高了棉花地上部生物量，与不施磷肥相比，磷肥基施显著增加了棉花的叶、茎、籽和纤维的生物量，分别增加15%、9%、9%和11%，磷肥滴灌追施显著增加了叶、茎、壳、籽和纤维的生物量，分别增加21%、23%、21%、12%和13%。施用磷肥能够显著提高棉花产量，与不施磷肥相比，磷肥全部基施籽棉平均增产8%，磷肥滴灌追施籽棉平均增产13%，而磷肥滴灌追施的产量比磷肥全部基施提高5%。施用磷肥显著增加了棉花的磷素吸收量，磷肥全部基施的磷肥平均利用率为18%，而磷肥滴灌追施的磷肥平均利用率为23%。磷肥35%滴灌追施的增产率和磷肥利用率分别为18%和24%，50%滴灌追施处理两者分别为11%和22%。

结论

与不施磷肥相比，磷肥全部基施与部分磷肥滴灌追施都能显著提高棉花生物量和产量，增加磷素吸收量，而磷肥部分滴灌追施的效果优于磷肥全部基施，磷肥65%基施和35%滴灌追施的增产效果好于50%基施和50%滴灌追施。

关键词: 棉花 / 磷高效 / 磷肥 / 基施 / 追施

Abstract:

Objectives

Different basal and topdressing ratios of phosphate fertilizer were attempted on cotton in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, in order to optimize the phosphate fertilization suitable for the widely extended fertigation under plastic mulching technology.

Methods

Three treatments were set up including no phosphorus fertilizer, all phosphorus fertilizer basal applied, and basal plus fertigation. 50% of phosphorus was applied with drip irrigation in 2009 and 2010, and 35% in 2011. Phosphorus fertigation was conducted in bud stage and early flowering stage of cotton. All nitrogen was applied with drip irrigation and all potassium fertilizer was used as basal application. The cotton biomass, yield and phosphorus contents were determined in maturity stage of cotton.

Results

The application of phosphorus fertilizer significantly increased the aboveground biomass of cotton. Compared with control, the biomass of leaf, stem, seed and fiber of cotton were significantly increased by 15%, 9%, 9% and 11% with basal treatment, and those of leaf, stem, shell, seed and fiber of cotton by 21%, 23%, 21%, 12% and 13% with fertigation treatment, respectively; the average seed cotton yield of 3 years was increased by 8% with basal treatment and 13% with fertigation, and the average yield of fertigation treatment was 5% higher than that of basal treatment. Phosphate application significantly increased phosphorus uptake of cotton. The use efficiency of phosphate fertilizer at basal treatment was 18%, and that at fertigation treatment was 23%. The yield increase and phosphate utilization rate of 35% phosphorus fertilizer was applied with drip irrigation were 18% and 24% respectively, and those were 11% and 22% in treatment with drip irrigation topdressing ratio of 50%.

Conclusions

Application of phosphorus fertilizer could significantly increase the cotton aboveground biomass and yield, and increase the phosphorus absorption of cotton. The effect of phosphorus fertigation is better than that of all phosphate fertilizer basal applied. The yield increase effect of 65% phosphate fertilizer applied as basal and 35% as drip irrigation was better than that of drip irrigation topdressing ratio of 50% phosphate fertilizer.

图 1 不同年份各处理的棉花产量

[注（Note）：P0—不施磷肥 No phosphate application; P1—磷肥100%基施 All phosphate basal applied; P2—磷肥基施加滴灌追施 Basal plus fertigation. 柱上不同小写字母表示处理间差异达到显著性水平 (P < 0.05) Different small letters above the bars in the same year mean significant among treatments (P < 0.05).]

Figure 1. Cotton yields of each treatment in different years

表 1 0—20 cm土壤基本农化性状

Table 1 The physical and chemical properties of 0–20 cm soil

年份
Year pH 有机质 (%)
OM NH4+-N
(mg/L) NO3–-N
(mg/L) 有效磷 (mg/L)
Avail. P 速效钾 (mg/L)
Avail. K 2009 8.28 0.53 37.6 18.6 7.6 171.8 2010 8.20 1.23 9.3 34.4 28.0 100.1 2011 8.39 1.04 10.4 14.5 9.7 152.5

表 2 不同年份各处理的棉花产量构成

Table 2 Cotton yield components of different treatments in different years

年份
Year 处理
Treatment 单铃重 (g)
Single boll weight 单株铃数
Bolls/plant 株数 (× 104/hm2)
Plant No. 衣分 (%)
Ginning turnout 2009 P0 5.0 c 4.7 b 18.69 a 36.1 a P1 5.3 b 4.9 a 18.62 a 35.9 a P2 5.4 a 5.0 a 18.60 a 35.9 a 2010 P0 6.8 a 4.5 c 18.59 a 37.1 a P1 6.8 a 4.7 b 18.54 a 37.1 a P2 6.9 a 4.9 a 18.17 a 37.1 a 2011 P0 4.9 c 4.9 b 16.98 a 36.1 a P1 5.2 b 5.4 a 16.35 ab 36.1 a P2 5.6 a 5.5 a 15.73 b 36.1 a 2009—2011 P0 5.6 c 4.7 c 18.09 a 36.4 a P1 5.8 b 5.0 b 17.84 ab 36.4 a P2 6.0 a 5.2 a 17.50 b 36.4 a 显著性 Significance ** *** ** ns 注（Note）：P0—不施磷肥 No phosphate application；P1—磷肥 100% 基施 100% All phosphorus basal applied; P2—磷肥基施加滴灌追施 Basal plus fertigation, 2009、2010 年磷肥 50% 基施、50% 分两次在蕾期和初花期随滴灌追施，2011 年磷肥 65% 基施、20% 和 15% 在棉花蕾期和初花期随滴管追施; 数据后不同字母表示同一年份不同处理间差异达到显著性水平 (P < 0.05); **、***表示同年处理间在 0.01、0.001 水平差异显著。Phosphate was applied by both basal and topdressing with fertigation. In 2009 and 2010, 50% phosphate for basal, 25% and 25% for top-dressed in boll and early blooming stage of cotton, and in 2011, 65% for basal, 20% and 15% for topdressing in boll and early blooming stages. Values followed by different small letters indecate significantly differenc among treatments in the same year (P < 0.05); **、***mean significantly different among treatments of the same year at 0.01 and 0.001 probability levels, respectively.

表 3 不同年份各处理的棉花生物量分配与累积 (kg/hm2)

Table 3 Cotton aboveground biomass distribution and accumulation of each treatment in different years

年份
Year 处理
Treatment 叶
Leaf 茎
Stem 壳
Shell 棉籽
Seed 纤维
Fiber 总计
Total 2009 P0 2079 b 2155 c 2046 c 3078 c 1655 b 11013 c P1 2446 a 2471 b 2436 b 3229 b 1757 a 12339 b P2 2518 a 2634 a 2617 a 3379 a 1800 a 12948 a 显著性 Significance * ** *** ** * *** 2010 P0 2152 b 2323 2951 b 4455 b 2192 b 14073 b P1 2443 a 2412 3268 a 5112 a 2528 a 15763 a P2 2472 a 2444 3406 a 5153 a 2620 a 16095 a 显著性 Significance * ns * * * * 2011 P0 2132 b 1555 b 2511 b 4290 b 1571 b 12059 b P1 2409 ab 1703 b 2203 c 4705 a 1741 a 12761 b P2 2681 a 2181 a 3017 a 4762 a 1762 a 14403 a 显著性 Significance * * * * * * 2009—2011 P0 2121 b 2011 c 2503 b 3941 b 1806 c 12382 c P1 2433 a 2195 b 2636 b 4349 a 2009 b 13621 b P2 2557 a 2420 a 3013 a 4431 a 2061 a 14149 a 显著性 Significance * ** * * * *** 注（Note）：P0—不施磷肥 No phosphate application；P1—磷肥 100% 基施 100% All phosphorus basal applied; P2—磷肥基施加滴灌追施 Basal plus fertigation, 2009、2010 年磷肥 50% 基施、50% 分两次在蕾期和初花期随滴灌追施，2011 年磷肥 65% 基施、20% 和 15% 在棉花蕾期和初花期随滴管追施; 数据后不同字母表示同一年份不同处理间差异达到显著性水平 (P < 0.05); *、**、***表示同年处理间在 0.05、0.01、0.001 水平差异显著。Phosphate was applied by both basal and topdressing with fertigation. In 2009 and 2010, 50% phosphate for basal, 25% and 25% for top-dressed in boll and early blooming stage of cotton, and in 2011, 65% for basal, 20% and 15% for topdressing in boll and early blooming stages. Values followed by different small letters indecate significantly differenc among treatments in the same year (P < 0.05); *、**、*** mean significantly different among treatments of the same year at 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001 probability levels, respectively.

表 4 2009—2011年各处理棉花不同部位磷素吸收量 (kg/hm2)

Table 4 Phosphorus uptake in different organs of cotton in each treatment from 2009 to 2011

年份
Year 处理
Treatment 叶
Leaf 茎
Stem 壳
Shell 棉籽
Seed 纤维
Fiber 总计
Total 2009 P0 2.6 c 3.1 c 2.7 c 12.3 c 1.5 b 22.2 c P1 5.5 b 5.4 b 5.3 b 17.3 b 2.2 a 35.7 b P2 6.0 a 6.0 a 5.9 a 18.4 a 2.3 a 38.5 a 显著性 Significance ** ** ** ** * *** 2010 P0 3.6 b 4.0 b 4.3 c 15.5 c 1.4 b 28.8 c P1 5.6 a 5.5 a 6.1 b 20.6 b 1.6 a 39.5 b P2 5.6 a 5.5 a 6.5 a 22.5 a 1.6 a 41.7 a 显著性 Significance * * ** *** * *** 2011 P0 1.6 c 2.0 c 2.0 c 11.0 c 1.3 b 17.8 c P1 3.7 b 4.1 b 3.6 b 16.7 b 1.6 a 29.7 b P2 4.4 a 4.6 a 4.5 a 18.1 a 1.7 a 33.2 a 显著性 Significance *** ** *** *** * *** 2009—2011 P0 2.6 c 3.0 c 3.0 c 12.9 c 1.4 b 22.9 c P1 4.9 b 5.0 b 5.0 b 18.2 b 1.8 a 35.0 b P2 5.3 a 5.4 a 5.6 a 19.6 a 1.9 a 37.8 a 显著性 Significance *** ** *** *** * *** 注（Note）：P0—不施磷肥 No phosphate application；P1—磷肥 100% 基施 100% All phosphorus basal applied; P2—磷肥基施加滴灌追施 Basal plus fertigation, 2009、2010 年磷肥 50% 基施、50% 分两次在蕾期和初花期随滴灌追施，2011 年磷肥 65% 基施、20% 和 15% 在棉花蕾期和初花期随滴管追施; 数据后不同字母表示同一年份不同处理间差异达到显著性水平 (P < 0.05); *、**、***表示同年处理间在 0.05、0.01、0.001 水平差异显著。Phosphate was applied by both basal and topdressing with fertigation. In 2009 and 2010, 50% phosphate for basal, 25% and 25% for top-dressed in boll and early blooming stage of cotton, and in 2011, 65% for basal, 20% and 15% for topdressing in boll and early blooming stages. Values followed by different small letters indecate significantly differenc among treatments in the same year (P < 0.05); *、**、*** mean significantly different among treatments of the same year at 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001 probability levels, respectively.

表 5 各处理棉花磷肥效率和土壤磷素表观平衡

Table 5 Efficiency of phosphate fertilizer of cotton and apparent phosphorous balance of soil under different treatments

年份
Year 磷肥利用率 Phosphate efficiency (%) 表观平衡 Apparent balance (kg/hm2) P1 P2 P0 P1 P2 2009 21 25 –22.2 29.8 27.0 2010 16 20 –28.8 26.1 23.8 2011 18 24 –17.8 35.8 32.3 平均 Mean 18 23 –22.9 30.6 27.7 注（Note）：P0—不施磷肥 No phosphate application；P1—磷肥 100% 基施 100% All phosphate basal applied; P2—磷肥基施加滴灌追施 sal plus fertigation，2009、2010 年磷肥 50% 基施、50% 分两次在蕾期和初花期随滴灌追施，2011 年磷肥 65% 基施、20% 和 15% 在棉花蕾期和初花期随滴管追施 Phosphate was applied by both basal and topdressing with fertigation. In 2009 and 2010, 50% phosphate for basal, 25% and 25% for top-dressed in boll and early blooming stage of cotton, and in 2011, 65% for basal, 20% and 15% for topdressing in boll and early blooming stages. [1] 王利, 高祥照, 马文奇, 等. 中国低浓度磷肥的使用现状与发展展望[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2006, 12(5): 732–737.

Wang L, Gao X Z, Ma W Q, et al. The using conditions and developing directions of Chinese phosphorous fertilizer [J]. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2006, 12(5): 732–737.

[2] 刘建玲, 张福锁, 杨奋翮. 北方耕地和蔬菜保护地土壤磷素状况研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2000, 6(2): 179–186.

Liu J L, Zhang F S, Yang F R. Fractions of phosphorus in cultivated and vegetable soils in northern China [J]. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2000, 6(2): 179–186.

[3] 刘方, 黄昌勇, 何腾兵, 等. 长期施磷对黄壤旱地磷库变化及地表径流中磷浓度的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2003, l4(2): 196–200.

Liu F, Huang C Y, He T B, et al. Dynamics of upland field P pool under a long–term application of fertilizer P in yellow soil area and their effects on P concentration in runoff [J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(2): 196–200.

[4]

Guo S L, Dang T H, Hao M D. Phosphorus changes and sorption characteristics in a calcareous soil under long–term fertilization [J]. Pedosphere, 2008, 18(2): 248–256.

[5]

Li H, Huang G, Meng Q, et al. Integrated soil and plant phosphorus management for crop and environment in China. A review [J]. Plant and Soil, 2011, 349(1–2): 157–167.

[6] 鲁如坤. 土壤磷素水平和水体环境保护[J]. 磷肥与复肥, 2003, 18(1): 4–8.

Lu R K. The phosphorus level of soil and environmental protect ion of water body [J]. Phosphate & Compound Fertilizer, 2003, 18(1): 4–8.

[7]

James E, Elena B. Phosphorus cycle: A broken biogeochemical cycle [J]. Nature, 2011, 478(7367): 29–31.

[8]

Bar–Yosef B. Advances in fertigation [J]. Advances in Agronomy, 1999, 65(8): 1–77.

[9]

Hunter A H. Laboratory and greenhouse techniques for nutrient survey to determine the soil amendments required for optimum plant growth [M]. Mimeograph Agro Service International, Florida, USA, 1980.

[10] 张少民, 白灯莎•买买提艾力, 孙良斌, 等. 不同施磷方式对盐碱地棉花苗期生长和产量的影响[J]. 中国棉花, 2013, 40(12): 21–23.

Zhang S M, Baidengsha M, Sun L B, et al. Effect of different methods of phosphorus application on cotton growth in seedling stage and its yield on saline or alkali soil [J]. China Cotton, 2013, 40(12): 21–23.

[11] 邓兰生, 涂攀峰, 龚林, 等. 滴灌下不同供磷方式对马铃薯生长的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2011, 30(1): 94–96.

Deng L S, Tu P F, Gong L, et al. Effects of P application methods on growth of potato under drip fertigation [J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2011, 30(1): 94–96.

[12]

Kafkafi U. Combined irrigation and fertilization in arid zones [J]. Israel Journal of Plant Science, 1994, 42: 301–320.

[13]

Mohammad M J, Hammouri A, Ferdows A E. Phosphorus fertigation and preplant conventional soil application of drip irrigated summer squash[J]. Journal of Agronomy, 2004, 3(3): 162-169.

[14] 尹飞虎, 康金花, 黄子蔚, 等. 棉花滴灌随水施滴灌专用肥中磷素的移动和利用率的32P研究[J]. 西北农业学报, 2005, 14(6): 199–204.

Yin F H, Kang J H, Huang Z W, et al. Distribution and use efficiency of phosphorus from trickle irrigation fertilizer specific fertigated of trickle irrigated cotton via 32P tracing technique [J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali–Occidentalis Sinica, 2005, 14(6): 199–204.

[15] 李远明, 姜妍, 祖伟, 等. 不同施肥对滴灌大豆磷素积累与分配的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2014, (6): 52–58.

Li Y M, Jiang Y, Zu W, et al. Effect of different fertigation treatments on phosphorus accumulation and distribution in soybean [J]. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2014, (6): 52–58.

[16] 周建斌, 陈竹君, 李生秀. Fertigation—水肥调控的有效措施 [J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2001, 19(4): 16–21.

Zhou J B, Chen Z J, Li S X. Fertigation―an efficient way to apply water and fertilizer [J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2001, 19(4): 16–21.

[17]

Bar-Yosef B. Fertilization under drip irrigation [J]. Fertilizer Science & Technology Series,1992, 7(1): 285–329.

[18]

Bar-Yosef B, Sagiv B, Markovitch T, et al. Phosphorus placement effects on sweet corn growth, uptake and yield[A]. Dahlia greidinger international symposium on fertigation proceeding[C]. Haifa, Israel, 1995.141–154.

[19]

Desnos T. Root branching responses to phosphate and nitrate [J]. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 2008, 11(1): 82–87.