Study on the Leguminous-Gramineous Grass Mixed Sowing in Bashang Area of Zhangjiakou

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.04.026

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2020, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (4): 1076-1082.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.04.026

Previous Articles Next Articles

Study on the Leguminous-Gramineous Grass Mixed Sowing in Bashang Area of Zhangjiakou

YAO Ze-ying¹, LI jun¹, SOGN Lian-zhao², LIU Chun-yang¹, YAO Ze-jun¹, LIU Gui-he¹

1. Hebei North University, Zhangjiakou, Hebei Province 075000, China;
2. Zhangjiakou Grassland supervision station, Zhangjiakou, Hebei Province 075000, China

Received:2020-04-21 Revised:2020-05-18 Online:2020-08-15 Published:2020-07-28

张家口坝上地区豆-禾牧草混播效果研究

姚泽英¹, 李军¹, 宋连昭², 刘春阳¹, 姚泽军¹, 刘贵河¹

1. 河北北方学院, 河北张家口 075000;
2. 张家口市草原监理站, 河北张家口 075000

通讯作者: 刘贵河
作者简介:姚泽英(1996-),女,汉族,河北省张家口市人,硕士研究生,主要从事牧草栽培技术研究,E-mail:760050481@qq.com
基金资助:
国家牧草产业技术体系项目（CARS-34）资助

Abstract

Abstract: In order to explore the planting effect of gramineous and leguminous mixed sowing grassland in Bashang area of Zhangjiakou,a same-line mixed sowing experiment using Medicago sativa、Bromus inermis and Elymus nutans were carried out on May 25,2019 at China forage and grass research system of Zhangjiakou Comprehensive Test Station. In the experiment,there were three mixture combinations of Medicago sativa+Bromus inermis (MW)、Medicago sativa+Elymus (MP)、Medicago sativa+Bromus inermis + Elymus (MWP),and 5 mixture proportions of leguminous-gramineous grass which were 3∶7,4∶6,5∶5,6∶4 and 7∶3 respectively. The biomass and forage quality of the artificial grassland in the first flowering stage of alfalfa were studied. The results showed that,MWP combination had higher yield under 4∶6 treatment and better quality under 7∶3 treatment;MP combination could improve the yield and quality of forage under 3∶7 and 5∶5 treatment;According to the comprehensive analysis of quality and yield of mixed forage,MW was an ideal combination,and the treatment of 3∶7 had the best performance. When establishing artificial grassland in Bashang area of Zhangjiakou,it is suggested to use the mixed proportion of Medicago sativa and Bromus inermis in 3∶7.

Key words: Medicago sativa, Bromus inermis, Elymus nutans, Mixed sowing, Yield, Quality

摘要： 为研究张家口坝上地区豆禾牧草混播草地的建植效果，本试验以紫花苜蓿（Medicago sativa）与无芒雀麦（Bromus inermis）、垂穗披碱草（Elymus nutans）为研究对象，于2019年5月25日在国家牧草体系张家口综合试验站开展同行混播试验。试验设紫花苜蓿+无芒雀麦（MW）、紫花苜蓿+垂穗披碱草（MP）、紫花苜蓿+无芒雀麦+垂穗披碱草（MWP）3种混播组合，豆禾比为3：7，4：6，5：5，6：4，7：3共5个混播比例，在紫花苜蓿初花期对建植当年人工草地生物量、牧草品质进行研究。结果表明：MWP组合在豆禾比4：6处理下产量较高，在豆禾比7：3处理下品质较好；MP组合在豆禾比3：7，5：5处理下能提高牧草的产量及品质；综合混播牧草品质与产量分析，MW为较理想的混播组合，以豆禾比为3：7处理表现最佳。综上所述，在张家口坝上地区建立人工草地时，建议采用紫花苜蓿与无芒雀麦3：7的混播处理。

关键词: 紫花苜蓿, 无芒雀麦, 垂穗披碱草, 同行混播, 产量, 品质

CLC Number:

S812.8

YAO Ze-ying, LI jun, SOGN Lian-zhao, LIU Chun-yang, YAO Ze-jun, LIU Gui-he. Study on the Leguminous-Gramineous Grass Mixed Sowing in Bashang Area of Zhangjiakou[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2020, 28(4): 1076-1082.

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.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.04.026

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2020/V28/I4/1076

References

[1] 郑伟,朱进忠,加娜尔古丽. 不同混播方式豆-禾混播草地生产性能的综合评价[J]. 草业学报,2012,21(6):242-251
[2] Jedel P E,Salmon D F. Forage potential of spring and winter cereal mixture in a short-season growing area[J]. Agronomy Journal,1995,87(4):731-736
[3] 全国人大常委会办公厅. 中华人民共和国草原法[M]. 北京:中国法制出版社,2013,4
[4] 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
[5] 王平,王天慧,周雯,等. 禾-豆混播草地中土壤水分与种间关系研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报,2007,18(3):653-658
[6] 王旭,曾昭海,胡跃高,等. 豆科与禾本科牧草混播效应研究进展[J]. 中国草地学报,2007,29(4):92-98
[7] 赵海新,朱占林,张永亮,等. 混播草地之研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报,2005,21(11):38-41
[8] 鲁富宽,王建光. 紫花苜蓿和无芒雀麦混播草地适宜刈割高度研究[J]. 中国草地学报,2014,36(1):49-57
[9] 张永亮,张丽娟. 苜蓿、无芒雀麦混播及单播草地产草量动态研究[J]. 中国草地学报,2006,28(5):23-28
[10] Han K J,Collins M,Vanzant E S,et al. Density and moistur effects on alfalfa round bale silage[J]. Crop Science,2004,44(3):914-919
[11] 林文珍. 草业在畜牧业发展中的作用[J]. 中国畜牧兽医文摘,2018,34(04):33
[12] 郝芳芳,陈艳梅,高吉喜,等. 河北坝上地区草地退化指示种的高光谱特征波段识别[J]. 生态农村环境学报,2016,32(6):1024-1029
[13] 玉莹,玉柱. 不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2010,32(5)：80-84
[14] 余国辉,许庆芳,玉柱,等. 甲酸、蔗糖及晾晒对无芒雀麦青贮效果的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2011,32(2):100-104
[15] 董玉琛,刘旭. 中国作物及其野生近缘植物[M]. 北京:中国农业出版社,2007:142-144
[16] Rohweder D A,Barnes R F,Jorgensen N. Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses forevaluaring quality[J]. Journal of Animalence,1983,47(3):747-759
[17] 成立新,杨瑞杰,格根图,等. 5种饲草的分级指数测定与评价[J]. 草业科学,2013,30(08):1284-1288
[18] 邹小艳,罗彩云,徐世晓,等. 不同种牧草的产量和品质[J]. 草地学报,2015,23(5):1064-1067
[19] Rayas Amor A A,Estrada Flores J G,Mould F L,et al. Nutritional value of forage species from the Central Highlands Region of Mexico at different stages of maturity[J]. Ciência Rural,2012,42(4):705-712
[20] 王旭,曾昭海,朱波,等. 箭筈豌豆与燕麦不同间作混播模式对产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报,2007,33(11):1892-1895
[21] 单贵莲,薛世明,徐柱,等. 不同调制方法紫花苜宿干燥特性及干草质量的研究[J]. 草业学报,2008,17(4):102-109
[22] 季婧,多田琦,梅错,等. 混播比例对紫花苜蓿/无芒雀麦青贮品质的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2017,39(2):19-25
[23] 宝音陶格涛. 无芒雀麦与苜蓿混播试验[J]. 草地学报,2001,9(1)：73-76
[24] 云锦凤,米富贵. 牧草育种技术[M]. 北京:北京工业出版社,2004,37-38
[25] 锡文林,张仁平. 混播比例和刈割期对混播草地产草量及种间竞争的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2009,31(4):36-39
[26] 包兴国,杨文玉,曹卫东,等. 豆科与禾本科绿肥饲草作物混播增肥及改土效果研究[J]. 中国草地学报,2012,34(1):43-46
[27] 刘大林,马晶晶,邱伟伟,等. 不同品种多花黑麦草在扬州的适应性比较[J]. 草业科学,2011,28(12):2157-2161
[28] 郭海明,于磊,林祥群. 新疆北疆绿洲区4个紫花苜蓿品种生产性能比较[J]. 草业科学,2009,26(7):72-76
[29] 刘美玲,宝音陶格涛. 老芒麦与草原2号苜蓿混播试验[J]. 中国草地,2004,26(1):22-26
[30] 吴姝菊. 紫花苜蓿与无芒雀麦、扁穗冰草混播效果研究[J]. 中国草地学报,2010,32(2):15-20
[31] 张仁平,于磊,鲁为华. 混播比例和刈割期对混播草地产量及品质影响的研究[J]. 草业科学,2009,26(5)：139-143
[32] Weigelt A,Jolleffe P. Indices of plant competition[J]. Journal of Ecology,2003,9(1):707-720
[33] Gibson D J,Connolly J,Harnett C D,et al. Designs for green-house studies of interactions between plants[J]. Journal of Ecology,1999,8(7):1-16
[34] 徐炳成,山仑,李凤民. 苜蓿与沙打旺苗期生长和水分利用对土壤水分变化的反应[J]. 应用生态学报,2005,16(12):2328-2332
[35] 张学洲,李学森,兰吉勇,等. 豆科与禾本科牧草混播组合筛选试验研究[J]. 草食家畜,2012,(2):41-45
[36] 张永亮,王建丽,胡自治. 杂花苜宿与无芒雀麦混播群落种间竞争及稳定性[J]. 草地学报,2007,15(1):43-49

Study on the Leguminous-Gramineous Grass Mixed Sowing in Bashang Area of Zhangjiakou

张家口坝上地区豆-禾牧草混播效果研究

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	LAN Xiang-yu, YE Chong-chong, WANG Yi, ZENG Tao, SUN Jian. Spatiotemporal Variation Characteristics and Its Driving Forces of Water Conservation Function on the Tibetan Plateau from 1995 to 2014 [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 80-92.
[2]	YAO Xi-xi, WANG Li-ya, YAN Zhen-ying, LI Quan-lin, WANG You-bin, MA Bing-yun, LEI Yan-min, ZHOU Rui, XIE Jiu-xiang. Characteristics of Forage Nutritional Quality and Digestibility in Different Types of Grassland in Qinghai Tibet Plateau and their Correlation [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 113-120.
[3]	YAO Xi-xi, WANG Li-ya, YAN Zhen-ying, ZHANG Wen-juan, SUN Hai-qun, ZHOU Rui. Effects of Grazing on Vegetation Characteristics and Forage Nutrientional Quality in a Temperate Desert Steppe [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 165-172.
[4]	YAN He-piao, LI Wen-long, LIANG Tian-gang, ZHOU Hua-kun, CAO Ya-peng, LIAO Yuan-cheng. Effects of Different Restoration Measures on Degraded Alpine Grasslands of the Tibetan Plateau: A meta-analysis [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 190-198.
[5]	YAO Xi-xi, XIAO Feng, QI Shou-zhong, CHEN Guo-ming, WANG Li-ya, YAN Zhen-ying, ZHANG Wen-juan, SUN Hai-qun. Responses of Plant Functional Group Traits and Nutritional Quality to Fencing in an Alpine Meadow [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 208-217.
[6]	LU Jia-ding, YANG Xu, ZHU Xiao-yan, CUI Ya-lei, WANG Cheng-zhang, LI De-feng, SHI Ying-hua. Comprehensive Evaluation of 21 Corn Silage Varieties with both Grain and Forage in Henan Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 1950-1958.
[7]	WU Hai-yan, QU Zhen, LIU Zhao-ming, LABA Dun-zhu, TONGSANG Cuo-mu, QU Ni, NIMA zhuo-ga, MA Yu-shou. Comparative study on Production Performance of Oat Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 1967-1973.
[8]	MENG Xuan-chen, MA Peng-cheng, MA Jie, DUAN Zhen, HAN Yang-yang, ZHANG Ji-yu. Study on the Effect of Mulching Furrow and Fertilization of Alfalfa in Semi-arid Areas of Loess Plateau [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 2098-2106.
[9]	MA Ran-ran, YUAN Jie, ZHANG Wen-jie, XU Neng-xiang, GU Hong-ru. Effects of Stacking Time on Feeding and Fermentation Quality of Broccoli Waste [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 2107-2114.
[10]	YAO Xi-xi, CAI Hua, LIU Hao-dong, LI Chang-hui. Analysis of Rumen Fermentation Characteristics and In Vitro Digestibility of Alpine Meadow Forage in Different Seasons [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(8): 1729-1737.
[11]	HE Zhen-fu, HE Chun-gui, WANG Fei, CHEN Ping. Analysis of Production Performance and Quality of Different Types of Forage Sorghum [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1446-1453.
[12]	ZHANG Feng, ZHAO Tian-qi, QIAO Ji-rong, ZHAO Meng-li, ZHANG Xin-yue, WU Jian-xin. Effects of Stubble Height on productivity and Sustainable Utilization in the Stipa grandis Steppe [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1491-1498.
[13]	DU Zhao-chang, WANG Hong, YAN Yan-hong, MUHAMMAD Tahir, WEI Xiao, ZENG Tai-ru, LI Hong-liang. Effects of Rice Husk and Wheat Bran Addition on Silage Quality of Fresh Corn Straw [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1549-1554.
[14]	SONG Jian-chao, YU Xiao-jun, WEI Kong-tao, WANG Peng-bin, TONG Yong-shang, LI Zhen, HE You-long, WANG Hai-bo. Effects of Nitrogen Application on Production Performance and Nutritional Quality of Elymus nutans in Alpine Region [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1555-1564.
[15]	WU Shuo, ZOU Xuan, WANG Ming-ya, ZHANG Qing. Effects of Chenpi Citrus Juice on Fermentation Quality of Stylo and Rice Straw Silage [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1565-1570.