增施微生物菌剂对烤烟生长的影响
|
摘要
由于常年连作,导致植烟土壤肥效下降,理化性质逐年失调。为探究增施有机肥与微生物菌剂对烟株生长的影响。采用田间小区试验的方法,以有机肥、微生物菌剂(有效活菌数≥30.0亿个/g)为材料,设3个处理,处理1(T1,对照)为常规施肥量;处理2(T2)为复混肥38.85 kg/667m~(2 )+追肥15 kg/667m~(2 )+有机肥50 kg/667m~2;处理3(T3)为复混肥38 kg+追肥15 kg+有机肥50 kg+微生物菌剂2 kg/667m~2。结果表明,大田生育期,T2比T1延长4 d,T3比T1延长7 d;打顶后农艺性状,3个处理间留叶数差异不显著,T3与T1在株高、茎围、节距、腰叶长、腰叶宽、腰叶面积、倒3叶长和倒3叶宽等性状差异显著;烟株根系性状,3个处理间最大根长差异不显著,T3与T1在根鲜重、根干重和主根条数等差异显著;3个处理间烟草黑胫病的发病率、病情指数,烟草青枯病的发病率、病情指数均差异显著;烘烤后烟叶经济性状,3个处理中,T3在产量、产值、均价、上等烟比例等均最高。处理3(T3)在打顶后农艺性状,根鲜重、根干重和主根数,降低烟草黑胫病和青枯病发生以及经济性状等方面均优于对照。
As a result of perennial continuous cropping, soil fertility and physicochemical properties of tobacco planting decreased year by year. The purpose of this experiment was to explore the effects of the increasing application of organic fertilizer and microbial agents on the growth of tobacco plants. The method of field plot test was adopted. Microbial agents of organic fertilizer(effective viable bacteria number≥ 3*109/g) were used as materials. Treatment 1(T1 control) is conventional fertilizer application. Treatment 2(T2) is compound fertilizer 38.85 kg/667 m~2 + additional fertilizer 15 kg/667 m~2 + organic fertilizer 50 kg/667 m~2. Treatment 3(T3)is compound fertilizer 38 kg/667 m~2+ additional fertilizer 15 kg/667 m~2 + organic fertilizer 50 kg/667 m~2+microbial agent 2 kg/667 m~2. The results showed that, among the field growth period, T2 is 4 days longer than T1, and T3 is 7 days longer than T1. Agronomic trait after topping, there was no significant difference in number of leaves left between the three treatments, T3 and T1 showed significant differences in traits such as plant height, stem circumference, internode distance, waist leaf length, waist leaf width, waist leaf area, inverted 3 leaf length and inverted 3 leaf width. Root traits of tobacco plants, there was no significant difference in the maximum root length among the three treatments. The significant differences in root fresh weight, root dry weight and number of main roots were investigated between T3 and T1. The morbidity index of tobacco black shank disease and the morbidity index of tobacco bacterial wilt were significantly different among the three treatments. Economic properties of tobacco leaves after roasting, among the three treatments, T3 had the highest yield, output value, average price and proportion of first-class tobacco. Treatment 3 was superior to the control in agronomic traits, fresh root weight, dry root weight and number of main roots, occurrence of black shank disease and bacterial wilt, and economic characters after topping.
As a result of perennial continuous cropping, soil fertility and physicochemical properties of tobacco planting decreased year by year. The purpose of this experiment was to explore the effects of the increasing application of organic fertilizer and microbial agents on the growth of tobacco plants. The method of field plot test was adopted. Microbial agents of organic fertilizer(effective viable bacteria number≥ 3*109/g) were used as materials. Treatment 1(T1 control) is conventional fertilizer application. Treatment 2(T2) is compound fertilizer 38.85 kg/667 m~2 + additional fertilizer 15 kg/667 m~2 + organic fertilizer 50 kg/667 m~2. Treatment 3(T3)is compound fertilizer 38 kg/667 m~2+ additional fertilizer 15 kg/667 m~2 + organic fertilizer 50 kg/667 m~2+microbial agent 2 kg/667 m~2. The results showed that, among the field growth period, T2 is 4 days longer than T1, and T3 is 7 days longer than T1. Agronomic trait after topping, there was no significant difference in number of leaves left between the three treatments, T3 and T1 showed significant differences in traits such as plant height, stem circumference, internode distance, waist leaf length, waist leaf width, waist leaf area, inverted 3 leaf length and inverted 3 leaf width. Root traits of tobacco plants, there was no significant difference in the maximum root length among the three treatments. The significant differences in root fresh weight, root dry weight and number of main roots were investigated between T3 and T1. The morbidity index of tobacco black shank disease and the morbidity index of tobacco bacterial wilt were significantly different among the three treatments. Economic properties of tobacco leaves after roasting, among the three treatments, T3 had the highest yield, output value, average price and proportion of first-class tobacco. Treatment 3 was superior to the control in agronomic traits, fresh root weight, dry root weight and number of main roots, occurrence of black shank disease and bacterial wilt, and economic characters after topping.
引文
[1] 刘国顺. 烟草栽培学M]北京:中国农业出版社,2003.
[2] 张继光,申国明,张久权,等. 烟草连作障碍研究进展[J].中国烟草科学,2011,32(3):95-99.
[3] 王瑞,邓建强,谭军. 连作条件下植烟土壤保育与修复[J].中国烟草科学2016,37(2):83-88.
[4] 王茂胜,姜超英,潘文杰,等. 不同连作年限的植烟土壤理化性质与微生物群落动态研究[J].安徽农业科学,2008(12):5033-5034,5052.
[5] 陈雪丽,王玉峰,李伟群,等. 黑土区连作大豆根际微生物群落结构的动态变化[J].大豆科学,2018,37(5):748-755.
[6] 盘莫谊,张杨珠,肖嫩群,等. 烟草连作对旱地土壤微生物及酶活性的影响[J].世界科技研究与发展,2008(3):295-297.
[7] 张仕祥,过伟民,李辉信,等. 烟草连作障碍研究进展[J].土壤,2015,47(5):823-829.
[8] 杨甲华,余佳玲. 烟草连作障碍因子及其解决途径研究进展[J].湖南农业科学,2016,(8):113-116.
[9] 郭亚利,刘锦华,王仕海. 植烟土壤保育及改良技术的研究进展[J].贵州农业科学,2016,44(4):79-85.
[10] 崔鸣,赵兴喜,陈和润,等. 秦巴山地烤烟种植绿肥试验示范研究[J].农业与技术,2012(11):77,120.
[11] 胡健康. 绿肥改良土壤技术在保康县烤烟生产上的应用研究[J].现代农业科技,2012(14):222-223.
[12] 王镇. 生物有机肥对植烟土壤质量和烟叶品质影响的研究[D].郑州:河南农业大学,2010.
[13] 杨丽萍,杨宇虹,赵正雄. 有机肥对植烟土壤氮素供应及土壤性状的影响[J].烟草科技,2007(7):58-61.
[14] 徐双红,王翔,李佛琳,等. 施用不同微生物肥对烤烟生长发育及品质的影响[J].云南农业大学学报(自然科学),2011,26(S2):62-69.
[15] 杨云高,王树林,刘国,等.生物有机肥对烤烟产质量及土壤改良的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2012,33(4):70-74.
[16] 朱忠彬,吴秉奇,丁延芹,等. 短短芽孢杆菌DZQ3对烟草的促生及系统抗性诱导作用[J].中国烟草科学,2012,33(3):92-96,106.
[17] 陈态. 烟草多抗生物有机肥对病虫害防治效果及烟株生长的影响[J].现代农业科技,2009(2); 131-132.
[18] 李更新,杨德廉,张英华,等. 烟田土壤改良复合微生物菌剂对烟叶产质量的影响[J].现代农业科技,2018(22):7-8,10
[19] 韩锦峰,袁秀秀,周路阔,等. 航天微生物菌剂叶面肥对烤烟大田生长及品质的影响[J].河南农业科学,2016,45(11):47-52.
[20] 陈玉国,王海涛,李小杰,等.沃益多微生物菌肥对烤烟生长发育和抗病性的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2015,36(3):63-67.
[2] 张继光,申国明,张久权,等. 烟草连作障碍研究进展[J].中国烟草科学,2011,32(3):95-99.
[3] 王瑞,邓建强,谭军. 连作条件下植烟土壤保育与修复[J].中国烟草科学2016,37(2):83-88.
[4] 王茂胜,姜超英,潘文杰,等. 不同连作年限的植烟土壤理化性质与微生物群落动态研究[J].安徽农业科学,2008(12):5033-5034,5052.
[5] 陈雪丽,王玉峰,李伟群,等. 黑土区连作大豆根际微生物群落结构的动态变化[J].大豆科学,2018,37(5):748-755.
[6] 盘莫谊,张杨珠,肖嫩群,等. 烟草连作对旱地土壤微生物及酶活性的影响[J].世界科技研究与发展,2008(3):295-297.
[7] 张仕祥,过伟民,李辉信,等. 烟草连作障碍研究进展[J].土壤,2015,47(5):823-829.
[8] 杨甲华,余佳玲. 烟草连作障碍因子及其解决途径研究进展[J].湖南农业科学,2016,(8):113-116.
[9] 郭亚利,刘锦华,王仕海. 植烟土壤保育及改良技术的研究进展[J].贵州农业科学,2016,44(4):79-85.
[10] 崔鸣,赵兴喜,陈和润,等. 秦巴山地烤烟种植绿肥试验示范研究[J].农业与技术,2012(11):77,120.
[11] 胡健康. 绿肥改良土壤技术在保康县烤烟生产上的应用研究[J].现代农业科技,2012(14):222-223.
[12] 王镇. 生物有机肥对植烟土壤质量和烟叶品质影响的研究[D].郑州:河南农业大学,2010.
[13] 杨丽萍,杨宇虹,赵正雄. 有机肥对植烟土壤氮素供应及土壤性状的影响[J].烟草科技,2007(7):58-61.
[14] 徐双红,王翔,李佛琳,等. 施用不同微生物肥对烤烟生长发育及品质的影响[J].云南农业大学学报(自然科学),2011,26(S2):62-69.
[15] 杨云高,王树林,刘国,等.生物有机肥对烤烟产质量及土壤改良的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2012,33(4):70-74.
[16] 朱忠彬,吴秉奇,丁延芹,等. 短短芽孢杆菌DZQ3对烟草的促生及系统抗性诱导作用[J].中国烟草科学,2012,33(3):92-96,106.
[17] 陈态. 烟草多抗生物有机肥对病虫害防治效果及烟株生长的影响[J].现代农业科技,2009(2); 131-132.
[18] 李更新,杨德廉,张英华,等. 烟田土壤改良复合微生物菌剂对烟叶产质量的影响[J].现代农业科技,2018(22):7-8,10
[19] 韩锦峰,袁秀秀,周路阔,等. 航天微生物菌剂叶面肥对烤烟大田生长及品质的影响[J].河南农业科学,2016,45(11):47-52.
[20] 陈玉国,王海涛,李小杰,等.沃益多微生物菌肥对烤烟生长发育和抗病性的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2015,36(3):63-67.