Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology ›› 2025, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (10): 231-237.DOI: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2024.0163
• BIO-MANUFACTURING & RESOURCE AND ECOLOGY • Previous Articles
Lindong YANG1(), Zhongxiang WANG2, Fenshan HU1, Guoshuai KANG1, Peibing DU1, Jianmin YAO1, Ruizhen LI1(
)
Received:
2024-03-05
Accepted:
2025-05-07
Online:
2025-10-15
Published:
2025-10-15
Contact:
Ruizhen LI
杨林栋1(), 王忠祥2, 胡奋山1, 康国帅1, 杜培兵1, 姚建民1, 李瑞珍1(
)
通讯作者:
李瑞珍
作者简介:
杨林栋 E-mail:dtyld@163.com;
基金资助:
CLC Number:
Lindong YANG, Zhongxiang WANG, Fenshan HU, Guoshuai KANG, Peibing DU, Jianmin YAO, Ruizhen LI. Effect of Film Type on Potato Growth and Yield in Early Maturing Area[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(10): 231-237.
杨林栋, 王忠祥, 胡奋山, 康国帅, 杜培兵, 姚建民, 李瑞珍. 早熟区地膜类型对马铃薯生长及产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2025, 27(10): 231-237.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://nkdb.magtechjournal.com/EN/10.13304/j.nykjdb.2024.0163
处理Treatment | 参数 Parameter | 单株有效分枝数Number of effective branches per plant | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 总计Total | ||
CK | 频数Count | 83 | 60 | 41 | 20 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 217 | |
占比Percentage/% | 38.2 | 27.6 | 18.9 | 9.2 | 3.7 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 100.0 | ||
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 38.2 | 65.9 | 84.8 | 94.0 | 97.7 | 99.1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
T1 | 频数Count | 58 | 24 | 62 | 22 | 1 | 3 | 170 | ||
占比Percentage/% | 34.1 | 14.1 | 36.5 | 12.9 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 100.0 | |||
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 34.1 | 48.2 | 84.7 | 97.6 | 98.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |||
T2 | 频数Count | 85 | 55 | 16 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 177 |
占比Percentage/% | 48.0 | 31.1 | 9.0 | 5.1 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 100.0 | |
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 48.0 | 79.1 | 88.1 | 93.2 | 96.0 | 98.8 | 99.4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
T3 | 频数Count | 23 | 95 | 36 | 6 | 3 | 163 | |||
占比Percentage/% | 14.1 | 58.3 | 22.1 | 3.7 | 1.8 | 100.0 | ||||
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 14.1 | 72.4 | 94.5 | 98.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Table 1 Number of effective branches per plant under different treatments
处理Treatment | 参数 Parameter | 单株有效分枝数Number of effective branches per plant | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 总计Total | ||
CK | 频数Count | 83 | 60 | 41 | 20 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 217 | |
占比Percentage/% | 38.2 | 27.6 | 18.9 | 9.2 | 3.7 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 100.0 | ||
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 38.2 | 65.9 | 84.8 | 94.0 | 97.7 | 99.1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
T1 | 频数Count | 58 | 24 | 62 | 22 | 1 | 3 | 170 | ||
占比Percentage/% | 34.1 | 14.1 | 36.5 | 12.9 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 100.0 | |||
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 34.1 | 48.2 | 84.7 | 97.6 | 98.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |||
T2 | 频数Count | 85 | 55 | 16 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 177 |
占比Percentage/% | 48.0 | 31.1 | 9.0 | 5.1 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 100.0 | |
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 48.0 | 79.1 | 88.1 | 93.2 | 96.0 | 98.8 | 99.4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
T3 | 频数Count | 23 | 95 | 36 | 6 | 3 | 163 | |||
占比Percentage/% | 14.1 | 58.3 | 22.1 | 3.7 | 1.8 | 100.0 | ||||
累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 14.1 | 72.4 | 94.5 | 98.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Fig. 3 Number of effective branchs, tuber per plant and yield per plot under different treatmentsNote: Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between different treatments at P<0.05 level.
CK | T1 | T2 | T3 | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% |
4 | 60 | 27.6 | 27.6 | 5 | 42 | 24.7 | 24.7 | 4 | 50 | 28.2 | 28.2 | 4 | 44 | 27.0 | 27.0 |
3 | 37 | 17.1 | 44.7 | 3 | 31 | 18.2 | 42.9 | 5 | 40 | 22.6 | 50.8 | 5 | 41 | 25.2 | 52.1 |
5 | 37 | 17.1 | 61.8 | 6 | 30 | 17.6 | 60.6 | 3 | 31 | 17.5 | 68.4 | 3 | 34 | 20.9 | 73.0 |
6 | 36 | 16.6 | 78.3 | 4 | 23 | 13.5 | 74.1 | 6 | 19 | 10.7 | 79.1 | 6 | 20 | 12.3 | 85.3 |
7 | 13 | 6.0 | 84.3 | 7 | 18 | 10.6 | 84.7 | 2 | 18 | 10.2 | 89.3 | 7 | 11 | 6.7 | 92.0 |
2 | 11 | 5.1 | 89.4 | 2 | 10 | 5.9 | 90.6 | 7 | 8 | 4.5 | 93.8 | 2 | 6 | 3.7 | 95.7 |
8 | 10 | 4.6 | 94.0 | 8 | 7 | 4.1 | 94.7 | 8 | 4 | 2.3 | 96.0 | 1 | 4 | 2.5 | 98.2 |
9 | 5 | 2.3 | 96.3 | 9 | 4 | 2.4 | 97.1 | 9 | 4 | 2.3 | 98.3 | 8 | 2 | 1.2 | 99.4 |
1 | 2 | 0.9 | 97.2 | 10 | 2 | 1.2 | 98.2 | 1 | 2 | 1.1 | 99.4 | 9 | 1 | 0.6 | 100.0 |
10 | 2 | 0.9 | 98.2 | 1 | 1 | 0.6 | 98.8 | 10 | 1 | 0.6 | 100.0 | ||||
12 | 2 | 0.9 | 99.1 | 11 | 1 | 0.6 | 99.4 | ||||||||
0 | 1 | 0.5 | 99.5 | 12 | 1 | 0.6 | 100.0 | ||||||||
11 | 1 | 0.5 | 100.0 | ||||||||||||
总计Total | 217 | 100.0 | 总计Total | 170 | 100.0 | 总计Total | 177 | 100.0 | 总计Total | 163 | 100.0 |
Table 2 Number of tubers per plant under different treatments
CK | T1 | T2 | T3 | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% | 单株结薯数Number of tubers per plant | 频数Count | 占比Percentage/% | 累计占比Accumulative percentage/% |
4 | 60 | 27.6 | 27.6 | 5 | 42 | 24.7 | 24.7 | 4 | 50 | 28.2 | 28.2 | 4 | 44 | 27.0 | 27.0 |
3 | 37 | 17.1 | 44.7 | 3 | 31 | 18.2 | 42.9 | 5 | 40 | 22.6 | 50.8 | 5 | 41 | 25.2 | 52.1 |
5 | 37 | 17.1 | 61.8 | 6 | 30 | 17.6 | 60.6 | 3 | 31 | 17.5 | 68.4 | 3 | 34 | 20.9 | 73.0 |
6 | 36 | 16.6 | 78.3 | 4 | 23 | 13.5 | 74.1 | 6 | 19 | 10.7 | 79.1 | 6 | 20 | 12.3 | 85.3 |
7 | 13 | 6.0 | 84.3 | 7 | 18 | 10.6 | 84.7 | 2 | 18 | 10.2 | 89.3 | 7 | 11 | 6.7 | 92.0 |
2 | 11 | 5.1 | 89.4 | 2 | 10 | 5.9 | 90.6 | 7 | 8 | 4.5 | 93.8 | 2 | 6 | 3.7 | 95.7 |
8 | 10 | 4.6 | 94.0 | 8 | 7 | 4.1 | 94.7 | 8 | 4 | 2.3 | 96.0 | 1 | 4 | 2.5 | 98.2 |
9 | 5 | 2.3 | 96.3 | 9 | 4 | 2.4 | 97.1 | 9 | 4 | 2.3 | 98.3 | 8 | 2 | 1.2 | 99.4 |
1 | 2 | 0.9 | 97.2 | 10 | 2 | 1.2 | 98.2 | 1 | 2 | 1.1 | 99.4 | 9 | 1 | 0.6 | 100.0 |
10 | 2 | 0.9 | 98.2 | 1 | 1 | 0.6 | 98.8 | 10 | 1 | 0.6 | 100.0 | ||||
12 | 2 | 0.9 | 99.1 | 11 | 1 | 0.6 | 99.4 | ||||||||
0 | 1 | 0.5 | 99.5 | 12 | 1 | 0.6 | 100.0 | ||||||||
11 | 1 | 0.5 | 100.0 | ||||||||||||
总计Total | 217 | 100.0 | 总计Total | 170 | 100.0 | 总计Total | 177 | 100.0 | 总计Total | 163 | 100.0 |
Fig. 4 Regression analysis of effective branch number and tuber number per plant under different treatmentsNote:* and ** indicate significant at P<0.05 and P<0.01 levels, respectively.
[1] | 胡可欣,米俊珍,刘景辉,等.全生物降解渗水地膜覆盖对黄土高原旱作谷子土壤水热及产量的影响[J].中国农业大学学报, 2024, 29(3): 36-49. |
HU K X, MI J Z, LIU J H, et al.. Effects of fully biodegradable water permeable mulch on soil hydrothermal and the yield of dry-crop foxtail millet on the Loess Plateau [J]. J.China Agric.Univ., 2024, 29(3): 36-49. | |
[2] | 李瑞珍,姚建民,王忠祥,等.全生物降解渗水地膜覆盖冬播谷子产量结构关系分析[J].中国农业科技导报,2023, 25(5):185-191. |
LI R Z, YAO J M, WANG Z X, et al.. Analysis on relationship between yield structure of winter-sown millet covered fully biodegradable water permeable plastic film [J]. J.Agric. Sci. Technol., 2023, 25(5): 185-191. | |
[3] | 姚建民,马俊奎,王忠祥,等.全生物降解渗水地膜在大豆-玉米带状复合种植中的应用效果研究[J].中国农业科技导报,2023, 25(9):178-185. |
YAO J M, MA J K, WANG Z X, et al.. Application effect of full biodegradable water permeable plastic film in soybean-maize belt composite planting [J]. J. Agric. Sci. Technol., 2023, 25(9): 178-185. | |
[4] | 杨花莲,王丽春.不同播期对水肥一体化早熟黑地膜马铃薯生育期及灌水量的影响[J].农业科技与信息,2023,605(12):36-39. |
[5] | 李玲,靳拓,张杰,等.全生物降解地膜的降解特征及其对马铃薯产量的影响[J].湖南农业科学, 2022(6):10-13. |
LI L, JIN T, ZHANG J, et al.. Degradation characteristics of fully biodegradable mulch films and their effect on potato yield [J]. Hunan Agric. Sci., 2022(6): 10-13. | |
[6] | 魏静,王玉龙,贺鹏程,等.不同种类降解膜覆盖对马铃薯产量和经济效益的影响[J].现代农业, 2021(6):57-59. |
[7] | 程万莉,樊廷录,王淑英,等.全生物降解地膜对河西区马铃薯田耕层及产量的影响[J].寒旱农业科学, 2023, 2(9): 815-821. |
CHENG W L, FAN T L, WANG S Y, et al.. Effects of biodegradable film mulching on soil temperatures and potato yields in Hexi irrigation area [J]. Cold-Arid Agric. Sci., 2023, 2(9): 815-821. | |
[8] | 刘现明.覆盖生物降解地膜对马铃薯产量及土壤环境的影响[J].中国农技推广, 2023, 39(5): 72-76. |
[9] | 高远志,朱永亮.全生物降解膜在早春地膜马铃薯上的应用试验[J].农业科技与信息, 2022, 19(22): 26-29. |
[10] | 姚建民.一种降解渗水农田覆盖薄膜的加工工艺及其应用: CN110079070B[P]. 2021-05-28. |
[11] | 孙慧生.马铃薯育种学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2003:89-101. |
[12] | 刘喜才,张丽娟,张文英.马铃薯种质资源描述规范和数据标准[M].北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006: 3-90. |
[13] | 张文彤. SPSS统计分析基础教程[M].3版.北京: 高等教育出版社, 2017:107-318. |
[14] | KALIMULLIN M, ABDRAKHMANOV R, ANDREEV R, et al.. Improvement of potato cultivation technology [J/OL]. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., 2019, 346(1): 12017 [2024-02-20]. . |
[15] | 王清伟,姜洪新,刘训龙,等.不同颜色地膜对春播马铃薯生长发育的影响[J].中国马铃薯, 2021, 35(6): 538-543. |
WANG Q W, JIANG H X, LIU X L, et al.. Effects of different color mulching films on growth and development of spring potato [J]. Chin. Potato J., 2021, 35(6): 538-543. | |
[16] | 李小波,安康,何琴,等.不同颜色地膜覆盖对广东省冬种马铃薯的影响[C]//马铃薯产业与现代可持续农业(2015). 哈尔滨:黑龙江科学技术出版社, 2015: 323-328. |
[17] | 卢祚,杨成存,黄金文,等.西北旱地马铃薯田土壤水分和产量对覆盖材料及不同种植行的响应[J].甘肃农业大学学报,2023, 58(4): 77-86. |
LU Z, YANG C C, HUANG J W, et al.. Effect of mulching materials and planting rows on soil moisture and yield of dryland potato field in Northwest China [J]. J. Gansu Agric. Univ., 2023, 58(4): 77-86. | |
[18] | 刘晓峰,董海霞,徐文杰,等.不同覆盖种植方式对马铃薯耗水特性及产量的影响[J].西南农业学报,2024,37(5):1001-1009. |
LIU X F, DONG H X, XU W J, et al.. Effects of different covering planting methods on water consumption characteristics and yield of potatoes [J]. Southwest China J. Agric. Sci., 2024, 37(5):1001-1009. |
[1] | Zhenfei ZHANG, An YAN, Jing GUO, Yuhang ZHAO, Yilin YUAN, Peng LIU, Zuohao QU, Chuan YUAN. Research on Apple Yield Estimation Model Based on Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Remote Sensing [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(9): 110-119. |
[2] | Jianfeng ZHANG, Wenfeng HOU, Yongqing WU, Kaixu LI, Xiaokun LI. Effects of Nitrogen Fertilizer and Density Interactions on Occurrence of Diseases and Insect Pests and Grain Yield of Rice [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(9): 145-154. |
[3] | Caixia LYU, Yongfu LI, Huinan XIN, Na LI, Ning LAI, Qinglong GENG, Shuhuang CHEN. Effects of Slow Release Nitrogen Fertilizer on Yield of Winter Wheat and Soil Nitrate/Ammonium Nitrogen Under Drip Irrigation [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(8): 179-186. |
[4] | Xueqing LIU, Jing WANG, Yi YANG, Huiqin WU, Yanhong WANG, Luyao WANG, Jiawei LU, Kaixuan ZHANG, Yuan ZHAI, Yan CHENG. Effect of Exogenous Ethephon on Defoliation and Yield of Pigmented Pepper [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(8): 36-46. |
[5] | Qi ZHOU, Qiang LIU, Jing ZHANG, Chaochao DENG, Zhenlong WANG, Yang LIU, Fang WU, Hao CHANG, Yanfang ZHOU, Cuicui SU, Zhiguo SHI, Zhengrui GAO, Fengjie MA. Effects of Organic Fertilizer Replacing Chemical Fertilizer on Yield and Soil Biological Characteristics of Pumpkin [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(7): 190-203. |
[6] | Gang ZHENG, Peng XU, Dongquan CHEN, Songmei YANG, Minsheng WU, Ranbing YANG. Design and Experimentation of Conveying and Separating Device for Fresh-eating Sweet Potato Harvester in Sandy Soil [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(6): 104-112. |
[7] | Shichao CHEN, Ju WANG, Fuqiang GUO, Rui HAO, Jianping SHI. Effects of Different Water and Nitrogen Coupling on Physiological Indexes and Yield of Protein Mulberry [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(6): 240-249. |
[8] | Lijun DUAN, Xianhua DING, Weiqin LI, Shuangdui YAN. Investigation of Co-pyrolysis Behavior and Pyrolysis Product Analysis of Oak Bark and Corn Stalks [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(5): 164-172. |
[9] | Guiqian ZHANG, Li ZHANG, Qian WANG, Caiyun LIU. Effect of Astragalus Polysaccharides on Colony Development and Honey Production in Honeybees [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(5): 72-80. |
[10] | Zhongzhong DOU, Yiqi LIU. Simulation Analysis of Arc-jaw Type Potato Precision Seed Discharger [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(4): 110-119. |
[11] | Yan WU, Leping ZOU, Huijie SONG, Dandan HU, Kailou LIU, Wanli LIANG. Effect of Controlled-release Nitrogen Fertilizer Combined Urea on Ammonium Nitrogen of Surface Water and Early Rice Yield [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(4): 192-200. |
[12] | Darong LI, Xiaoling LI, Wuxian ZHOU, Meide ZHANG, Xiaogang JIANG, Jinwen YOU, Hua WANG. Effects of Partial Substitution of Chemical Fertilizer with Organic Fertilizer on Growth and Soil Properties of Fritillaria hupehensis [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(3): 216-226. |
[13] | Junya DUAN, Yuanyuan ZHAO, Tingting WANG, Jianyu WEI, Zheng WANG, Dexun WANG, Juan LI, Hongzhi SHI. Effects of Nitrogen Reduction Combined with Polyaspartic Acid on Nitrogen Utilization, Yield and Quality of Flue-cured Tobacco [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(3): 227-238. |
[14] | Qiang WU, Conglian WU, Xiaoyun WU, Jian WU, Xuanmei XU, Junsheng LAI, Weiyun HU, Bangchu GONG, Xibing JIANG. Effect of Different Fertilization Treatments on Yield and Fruit Quality of Castanea henryi [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(2): 228-237. |
[15] | Yixuan ZHANG, Huifeng LI, Yongmei HUANG, Yanqing LI, Jinfeng HUA, Jie YIN, Tianyuan CHEN, Dong XIAO, Yunchuan MO. Separation and Identification of Metabolites and Metabolic Pathway Analysis in Different Vegetable Sweet Potato [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(2): 62-69. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||