CAJ | 학술논문

[目的]研究不同生育期渍水对棉花氮素吸收、分配和利用的影响。[方法]在田间池栽条件下，通过设置盛蕾期渍水(WL1)和花铃期渍水(WL2)处理，研究不同生育期渍水对棉花氮素吸收、分配和利用的影响。[结果]WL1对棉花根系氮素吸收能力的影响大于 WL2。WL1处理结束后20 d时，棉花根系生物量、氮素吸收量和吸收速率分别显著降低38.1%、48.6%和53.0%；WL2处理结束后20 d时，上述指标分别显著降低27.3%、46.0%和44.8%。WL1处理氮素向根和叶中分配比例明显提高，WL2处理氮素向产量器官中分配比例明显提高。 WL1和WL2处理氮素生理利用率均有所提高，增幅分别为11.4%和44.4%。产量及其构成因素分析表明，WL1处理棉花铃数、铃重和皮棉产量分别显著降低40.5%、12.4%和49.5%；而 WL2处理棉花铃数、铃重和皮棉产量分别显著降低23.1%、6.9%和29.9%，降幅均小于 WL1处理。[结论]盛蕾期渍水对棉花氮素营养和产量形成造成的负面影响大于花铃期渍水，棉花抗渍栽培工作应以防范盛蕾期渍水为重，渍水发生后加强氮素营养管理将有利于其恢复生长和降低产量损失。
[목적]연구불동생육기지수대면화담소흡수、분배화이용적영향。[방법]재전간지재조건하，통과설치성뢰기지수(WL1)화화령기지수(WL2)처리，연구불동생육기지수대면화담소흡수、분배화이용적영향。[결과]WL1대면화근계담소흡수능력적영향대우 WL2。WL1처리결속후20 d시，면화근계생물량、담소흡수량화흡수속솔분별현저강저38.1%、48.6%화53.0%；WL2처리결속후20 d시，상술지표분별현저강저27.3%、46.0%화44.8%。WL1처리담소향근화협중분배비례명현제고，WL2처리담소향산량기관중분배비례명현제고。 WL1화WL2처리담소생리이용솔균유소제고，증폭분별위11.4%화44.4%。산량급기구성인소분석표명，WL1처리면화령수、령중화피면산량분별현저강저40.5%、12.4%화49.5%；이 WL2처리면화령수、령중화피면산량분별현저강저23.1%、6.9%화29.9%，강폭균소우 WL1처리。[결론]성뢰기지수대면화담소영양화산량형성조성적부면영향대우화령기지수，면화항지재배공작응이방범성뢰기지수위중，지수발생후가강담소영양관리장유리우기회복생장화강저산량손실。
This study aimed to investigate the effects of waterlogging in different growth stages on nitrogen (N) uptake, distribution, and utilization of cotton. [Method] A pool-culture experiment in field was conducted to investigate the effects of waterlogging through comparing WL1 (waterlogging at peak squaring stage) and WL2 (waterlogging at flowering and bol-forming stage) treatments with their controls respectively. [Result] The results showed that the effect of WL1 on N uptake of cotton root was stronger than WL2. At 20 days (d) after WL1 treatment, the root biomass (RB), N uptake (NU), and N uptake rate (NUR) significantly decreased by 38.1%, 48.6%, and 53.0% respectively. At 20 d after WL2 treatment, the RB, NU, and NUR significantly decreased by 27.3%, 46.0%, and 44.8% respectively. More N was distributed to root and leaf after WL1 treatment, and to square, flower, and bol after WL2 treatment. N physiological use efficiency increased by 11.4% and 44.4%after WL1 and WL2 treatments respectively. Further analysis showed that the effects of WL1 on yield and its components of cotton were stronger than WL2. The bol number, bol weight, and lint yield per plant significantly reduced by 40.5%, 12.4%, and 49.5% after WL1 treatment, and significantly decreased by 23.1%, 6.9%, and 29.9% after WL2 treatment, respectively. [Conclusion] The negative effects of water-logging at peak squaring stage on N nutrition and yield of cotton were stronger than waterlogging at flowering and bol-forming stage, indicating that more attention should be paid to waterlogging at peak squaring stage and sound N management can improve cotton regrowth and reduce yield loss after waterlogging.