黄土丘陵区不同饲草混播模式对种间关系的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2021.06.023

草地学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (6): 1318-1326.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2021.06.023

黄土丘陵区不同饲草混播模式对种间关系的影响

李兴龙, 师尚礼, 黄宗昌, 李革革, 吴芳, 张辉辉

甘肃农业大学草业学院, 草业生态系统教育部重点实验室, 中-美草地畜牧业可持续研究中心, 甘肃兰州 730070

收稿日期:2021-03-07 修回日期:2021-04-06 出版日期:2021-06-15 发布日期:2021-07-05
通讯作者: 师尚礼,E-mail:shishl@gsau.edu.cn
作者简介:李兴龙(1992-)，男，藏族，甘肃夏河人，硕士研究生，主要从事牧草栽培研究，E-mail:lixingl@gsau.edu.cn
基金资助:
宁夏回族自治区重点研发计划（2017BY082）；国家现代农业产业技术体系（CARS-34）；农业农村部农牧交错带优质青粗饲料资源开发利用技术集成示范项目（16190051-09）资助

Effects of Different Forage Mixed Patterns on Interspecific Relationships in Loess Hilly Areas

LI Xing-long, SHI Shang-li, HUANG Zong-chang, LI Ge-ge, WU Fang, ZHANG Hui-hui

College of Grassland Science, Gansu Agricultural University, Grassland Ecosystem Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education, Sino-U. S. Research Centers for Sustainable Grassland and Livestock Management, Lanzhou, Gansu Province 730070, China

Received:2021-03-07 Revised:2021-04-06 Online:2021-06-15 Published:2021-07-05

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探究不同草种混播对饲草种间竞争的影响，筛选出适合黄土丘陵区种植推广的混播模式和混播组合，本研究于2018—2020年在宁夏回族自治区固原市原州区展开试验，设置C₃+C₃型禾豆混播模式：无芒雀麦（Bromus inermis）+紫花苜蓿（Medicago sativa）（BM），燕麦（Avena sativa）+箭筈豌豆（Vicia sativa）（AV）；C₃+C₄型禾豆混播模式：玉米（Zea mays）+拉巴豆（Dolichos lablab）（ZD），高丹草（Sorghum bicolor×S.Sudanense）+拉巴豆（SD），所有混播比例均为1∶1，以相应草种单播为对照，测定各物种生物量，土地当量比（Land equivalent ratio，LER），相对产量（Relative yield，RY），竞争力（Competition ratio，CR）和侵袭力（Aggressiveness，AG）差异特征和动态特征。结果表明：各混播处理下，LER均显著高于1（P<0.05），地上生物量均高于对应单播处理；C₃模式中BM组合中紫花苜蓿RY，CR和AG显著大于无芒雀麦，其余混播组合中均表现出禾本科RY，CR和AG大于豆科饲草，高丹草对拉巴豆的CR和AG高于玉米。本研究表明，玉米（C₄）+拉巴豆（C₃）组合资源利用效率最高，群落结构最稳定。

关键词: 黄土高原, 混播, 光合类型, 种间竞争

Abstract: This study was conducted in Yuanzhou District of Guyuan City, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region from 2018 to 2020 to explore the competition effects between mixed forage species and find out mixed sowing modes that are suitable for loess hilly areas. C₃+C₃ mixed sowing mode was set up as:Bromus inermis+Medicago sativa (BM), Avena sativa+Vicia sativa (AV);C₃+C₄ mixed sowing mode was set up as: Zea mays+Dolichos lablab (ZD),Sorghum bicolor×S.sudanense+Dolichos lablab (SD). All mixed sowing ratios were 1∶1,and the corresponding grasses were used as the control. Biomass,land equivalent ratio (LER), relative yield (RY),competition ratio (CR) and aggressiveness (AG) were measured. The results showed that the LER of each mixed sowing treatment was significantly higher than 1 (P<0.05),and the aboveground biomass was higher than that of the corresponding unicast treatment. In C₃ mode, the RY,CR and AG of Medicago sativa in BM combination were significantly higher than those of Bromus inermis,and the RY,CR and AG of Gramineae were higher than those of Leguminosae in the other mixed sowing combinations. The CR and AG of Sorghum bicolor×S.sudanense on Lablab purpureus were higher than those of Zea mays. The resource utilization efficiency of Zea mays (C₄) + Lablab purpureus (C₃) combination was the highest,and the community structure was the most stable.

Key words: Loess plateau, Mixed-sowing, Photosynthetic type, Interspecies competition

中图分类号:

李兴龙, 师尚礼, 黄宗昌, 李革革, 吴芳, 张辉辉. 黄土丘陵区不同饲草混播模式对种间关系的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1318-1326.

LI Xing-long, SHI Shang-li, HUANG Zong-chang, LI Ge-ge, WU Fang, ZHANG Hui-hui. Effects of Different Forage Mixed Patterns on Interspecific Relationships in Loess Hilly Areas[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(6): 1318-1326.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2021.06.023

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2021/V29/I6/1318

参考文献

[1] Stigter C J,Baldy C. Ecophysiology of tropical intercropping[M]. Paris:INRA,1995:29-44
[2] 姚泽英,李军,宋连昭,等. 张家口坝上地区豆-禾牧草混播效果研究[J]. 草地学报,2020,28(4):1076-1082
[3] 郑伟,朱进忠,加娜尔古丽,等. 不同混播方式对豆禾混播草地生产性能的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2011,33(5):45-52
[4] 张骞,张中华,马丽,等. 不同牧草混播对退化高寒草甸土壤养分及生物量的影响[J]. 草地学报,2019,27(6):1659-1666
[5] Gong X W,Uzizerimana F,Dang K,et al. Boosting proso millet yield by altering canopy light distribution in proso millet/mung bean intercropping systems[J]. The Crop Journal,2020,8(2):365-377
[6] 谢开云,赵云,李向林,等. 豆-禾混播草地种间关系研究进展[J]. 草业学报,2013,22(3):284-296
[7] Hu F,Zhao C,Feng F,et al. Improving N management through intercropping alleviates the inhibitory effect of mineral N on nodulation in pea[J]. Plant & Soil,2017,412(1-2):235-251
[8] Weigelt A,Weisser W W,Buchmann N,et al. Biodiversity for multifunctional grasslands:equal productivity in high-diversity low-input and low-diversity high-input systems[J]. Biogeosciences Discussions,2009,6(8):1695-1706
[9] Zhang W P,Liu G C,Sun J H,et al. Growth trajectories and interspecific competitive dynamics in wheat/maize and barley/maize intercropping[J]. Plant & Soil,2015,397:227-238
[10] Preissel S,Reckling M,Schlafke N,et al. Magnitude and farm-economic value of grain legume pre-crop benefits in Europe:A review[J]. Field Crops Research,2015,175:64-79
[11] Cossel V,Wagner,Lask,et al. Prospects of Bioenergy Cropping Systems for A More Social-Ecologically Sound Bioeconomy[J]. Agronomy,2019,9(10):605
[12] 苟文龙,李平,肖冰雪,等. 禾豆牧草混播增产增效研究进展[J]. 草学,2020(3):16-23
[13] 王平,周道玮,张宝田. 禾-豆混播草地种间竞争与共存[J]. 生态学报,2009,29(5):2560-2567
[14] Hu F L,Gan Y T,Chai Q,et al. Boosting system productivity through the improved coordination of interspecific competition in maize/pea strip intercropping[J]. Field Crops Research,2016,198:50-60
[15] 朱亚琼,于辉,郑伟,等. 燕麦+箭筈豌豆混播草地混播优势的测度与影响因素分析[J]. 草业学报,2020,29(1):74-85
[16] 李硕. 不同混播比例下鸭茅与伴生种竞争的研究[D]. 兰州:甘肃农业大学,2016:17-27
[17] Nunes L,Camargo A. The interspecific competition of tropical estuarine macrophytes is not density-dependent[J]. Aquatic Botany,2020,164:103233
[18] 郑伟,朱进忠,库尔班,等. 不同混播方式下豆禾混播草地种间竞争动态研究[J]. 草地学报,2010,18(4):568-575
[19] Yamawo A,Mukai H. Outcome of interspecific competition depends on genotype of conspecific neighbours[J]. Oecologia,2020,193(2):415-423
[20] 岳淑芳. 不同模式豆-禾混播草地牧草光合生理生态特性及种间关系的研究[D]. 银川:宁夏大学,2015:30-33
[21] 王丹,王俊杰,李凌浩,等. 旱作条件下苜蓿与冰草不同混播方式的产草量及种间竞争关系[J]. 中国草地学报,2014,36(5):27-31
[22] Edwards E J,Osborne C P,Str mberg C A,et al. The Origins of C₄ Grasslands:Integrating Evolutionary and Ecosystem Science[J]. Science,2010,328(5978):587-591
[23] Williams A C,Mccarthy B C. A new index of interspecific competition for replacement and additive designs[J]. Ecological Research,2001,16(1):29-40
[24] Dhima K V,Lithourgidis A S,Vasilakoglou I B,et al. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio[J]. Field Crops Research,2007,100(2-3):249-256
[25] Couso L L,Biganzoli F,Fernandez R J. Field competitive equivalence between grasses differing in drought tolerance in a Patagonian semiarid steppe[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,2014,102(mar.):21-26
[26] Altieri M A. The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems[J]. Agriculture,Ecosystems & Environment,1999,74(1-3):19-31
[27] 冯金朝,江天然,刘新民. C₃和C₄植物的水分利用效率[J]. 西北植物学报,1997(6):27-30
[28] Öztürk M,Rehder H,Ziegler H. Biomass production of C₃-and C₄-plant species in pure and mixed culture with different water supply[J]. Oecologia,1981,50(1):73-81
[29] Jane A,Langdale. C₄ Cycles:Past,Present,and Future Research on C₄ Photosynthesis[J]. Plant Cell,2011,23(11):3879-3892
[30] Moore,Peter D. High hopes for C₄ plants[J]. Nature,1994,367(6461):322-323
[31] 陈积山,朱瑞芬,高超,等. 苜蓿和无芒雀麦混播草地种间竞争研究[J]. 草地学报,2013,21(6):1157-1161
[32] Bai Y F,Wu J G,Xing Q,et.al. Primary production and rain use efficiency across a precipitation gradient on the Mongolia Plateau[J]. Ecology,2008,89(8):2140-2153
[33] Tilman D,Haddi A. Drought and biodiversity in Grasslands[J]. Oecologia,1992,89(2):257-264
[34] 王尚文. 灌溉对干旱草原区混播牧草种间关系和生产力的影响[D]. 兰州:甘肃农业大学,2019:18-19
[35] 张永亮,王建丽,胡自治. 杂花苜蓿与无芒雀麦混播群落种间竞争及稳定性[J]. 草地学报,2007(1):43-49
[36] 张仁平. 绿洲区苜蓿与无芒雀麦混播草地种群特征和第一性生产力的研究[D]. 石河子:石河子大学,2004:34-35
[37] 柳茜,傅平,苏茂,等. 青贮玉米与拉巴豆混播生产性能研究[J]. 草业与畜牧,2015(5):22-24
[38] 谢开云,张英俊,李向林,等. 无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿在(1:1)混播中的竞争与共存[J]. 中国农业科学,2015,48(18):3767-3778
[39] Richards A E,Forrester D I,Bauhus Jürgen,et al. The influence of mixed tree plantations on the nutrition of individual species:a review[J]. Tree Physiology,2010(9):1192-1208
[40] Adler P B,Danielle S,Beard K H,et al. Competition and coexistence in plant communities:intraspecific competition is stronger than interspecific competition[J]. Ecology Letters,2018,21(9):1319-1329

黄土丘陵区不同饲草混播模式对种间关系的影响

Effects of Different Forage Mixed Patterns on Interspecific Relationships in Loess Hilly Areas

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	汪鹏斌, 宋美娟, 童永尚, 王玉霞, 徐长林, 李珍, 鱼小军. 保护播种对高寒区刈割型混播草地产草量及品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1818-1827.
[2]	谢开云, 孟翔, 徐珍珍, 张力文, 万江春, 颜安, 李陈建. 新疆半干旱地区不同种类混播草地的牧草产量和营养价值研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1835-1842.
[3]	于铁峰, 郝凤, 张永亮, 高凯. 沙地豆禾混播草地土壤酶与土壤养分对混播比例的响应[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1217-1223.
[4]	潘越, 周冀琼, 郭川, 杨喆, 刘琳, 闫艳红, 赵艳兰, 刘珊, 孙飞达. 丛枝菌根真菌与根瘤菌对3种豆禾混播植物种间互作的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 644-654.
[5]	李满有, 马忠仁, 王斌, 杨雨琦, 沈笑天, 曹立娟, 李小云, 兰剑. 宁夏引黄灌区2个苜蓿品种不同行比混播模式研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 798-804.
[6]	王斌, 董秀, 李满有, 杨雨琦, 兰剑. 不同播量拉巴豆与青贮玉米混播对草地生产性能及牧草品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 828-834.
[7]	李思达, 刘文辉, 张永超, 秦燕, 李文. 青海扁茎早熟禾混播草地生产性能与种间关系的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(12): 2827-2837.
[8]	谢开云, 孙伶俐, 张力文, 郑万菊, 万江春, 赵云. 菌根真菌和根瘤菌接种对紫花苜蓿和无芒雀麦混播牧草生物量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(1): 182-188.
[9]	秦燕, 刘勇, 张永超, 梁国玲, 刘文辉. 不同混播比例对燕麦和箭筈豌豆混播草地植物生长特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(6): 1768-1774.
[10]	张永亮, 于铁峰, 郝凤. 豆禾混播牧草碳氮磷钾生态化学计量特征对施肥与混播比例的响应[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(5): 1386-1394.
[11]	姚泽英, 李军, 宋连昭, 刘春阳, 姚泽军, 刘贵河. 垂穗披碱草与紫花苜蓿不同时期交叉混播效果研究[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(5): 1454-1459.
[12]	姚泽英, 李军, 宋连昭, 刘春阳, 姚泽军, 刘贵河. 张家口坝上地区豆-禾牧草混播效果研究[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(4): 1076-1082.
[13]	张小芳, 张春平, 董全民, 杨晓霞, 刘文亭, 俞旸, 杨增增, 魏琳娜, 张艳芬, 褚晖, 李彩弟, 冯斌. 三江源区高寒混播草地群落结构特征的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(4): 1090-1099.
[14]	董姗, 王皓, 贾倩民, 常生华, Shahzad Ali, 刘永杰, 张程, 侯扶江. 灌溉模式与种植方式对河西地区青贮玉米生长、产量和经济效益的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(4): 1111-1120.
[15]	龙会英, 张德, 曾丽萍, 何光熊, 赵秀梅. 间作与施氮对牧草生物量、种间竞争和氮磷吸收的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(2): 571-576.