【作者】 赵利梅；

【导师】 吴良欢；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 植物营养学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 水稻强化栽培体系（the System of Rice Intensification，SRI）是一项新的节水栽培技术体系，近年来在国际上引起了强烈的反响，而且争论的焦点主要集中于该项技术体系的增产效应。为了评价该技术体系的产量效应及其对环境生态的影响，从2004到2006年，连续三年进行了田间试验研究。2004年试验设置了水稻强化栽培、覆膜旱作、裸地旱作、常规水作、覆膜强化栽培五个处理，其中，覆膜强化栽培包括三个移栽密度，分别为25cm×30cm、25cm×25cm、25 cm×17 cm；2005年设置了水稻强化栽培与常规水作两个处理；2006年采用裂区设计，设置了水稻强化栽培与常规水作两个主处理，0kghm^-2（NO）、80kghm^-2（N1）、160kghm^-2（N2）、240 kg hm^-2（N3）四个施氮量为副处理。各处理重复3次。以常规水作为对照，对三种节水栽培方式（水稻强化栽培、覆膜旱作、裸地旱作）水稻生长发育特性和产量性状，对水稻强化栽培方式下稻田土壤氨挥发、土壤生物学特性、节水效果与水分生产效率、养分吸收利用特性、氮肥利用率进行了研究；并且对强化栽培覆盖地膜的产量效应进行了探讨。主要结果如下：1．三种节水栽培方式以裸地旱作对水稻干旱胁迫比较严重，其分蘖数、株高、功能叶叶绿素、干物质积累量、根系干重、有效穗、结实率、千粒重显著降低，比常规水作减产44.8％。覆膜旱作促进分蘖的发生，由于成穗率较低，穗型较小，千粒重降低，产量比常规水作降低23.9％。成熟期，覆膜旱作稻株高显著降低，功能叶叶绿素、干物质积累量、根系干重与常规水作差异不大。与常规水作相比，强化栽培促进分蘖的发生，显著提高了有效穗；生育后期功能叶叶绿素、单株干物质积累量、根系干重显著提高，株高无显著差异。2004到2006年，三年数据表明强化栽培产量均有提高，较常规水作分别增产26.4％、11.5％、6.4％～48.4％，有效穗大幅度提高，千粒重、结实率无显著差异，穗粒数显著降低。2．常规水作与强化栽培产量增加幅度随着施氮量增加明显下降。强化栽培在施氮量80 kg hm^-2产量最高，但与施氮量160 kg hm^-2的产量没有显著性差异。常规水作在施氮量160 kg hm^-2产量最高。与常规水作比较，在施氮量0和80 kghm^-2下，强化栽培方式显著提高了稻谷产量，而在160和240 kg hm^-2，两种栽培方式产量差异不显著。3．与常规水作相比，强化栽培促进了水稻对养分（N、P、K）的吸收，单株养分吸收总量显著高于常规水作。成熟期，各器官中N、P、K的吸收累积量均高于常规水作，而且N、P、K在籽粒中的分配比例分别比常规水作高5.0％、2.0％、3.0％，在叶片中N、P、K的分配比例比常规水作分别低6.7％、7.3％、12.2％。强化栽培显著提高了N、P、K的产谷效率，分别比常规水作提高21.9％、19.3％、17.0％。4．无论是常规水作还是强化栽培，随着施氮量的增加，植株吸氮量增加，氮素在穗中的分配比例却下降，而且氮肥农学利用率和偏生产力降低。强化栽培稻氮肥利用率受氮肥施用量影响显著。在施氮量80 kg hm^-2水平，强化栽培氮肥农学利用率比常规水作提高47.9％；在施氮量160 kg hm^-2、240 kg hm^-2水平却显著低于常规水作，分别低44.7％、70.9％。与常规水作相比，不同氮肥水平下，强化栽培均提高了氮肥偏生产力。栽培方式与氮肥施用量的交互作用对氮肥利用率的影响显著。5．水稻强化栽培对氨挥发动态变化趋势没有影响，但促进了氨的挥发损失，氨挥发损失总量比常规水作平均提高了25.2％。在三次施肥时期，氨挥发损失量为：基肥＞分蘖肥＞孕穗肥，施用基肥是氨挥发损失的主要时期。6．与常规水作比较，3种节水栽培方式均有很好的节水效果。2004年，覆膜旱作、裸地旱作总耗水量比常规水作分别节约672.8 mm和631.0 mm，覆膜旱作显著提高了总水分利用效率和灌溉水利用率，但裸地旱作总水分利用率与常规水作差别不大。强化栽培总耗水量在2004、2005、2006年分别比常规水作节约461.5 mm、476.5 mm、830.3 mm，达33.9％、26.9％、36.9％；灌溉水利用率分别提高195.6％、90.1％、130.5％，总水分利用率分别提高91.3％、54.5％、93.5％。在一定范围内施用氮肥可以显著提高水分利用率。7．与常规水作比较，强化栽培增加了土壤细菌、真菌、放线菌数量；增加了土壤微生物量碳、微生物量氮含量；增加了生育后期土壤微生物量磷含量；提高了分蘖期土壤脲酶、碱性磷酸酶、转化酶、过氧氢酶活性；增加了土壤碱解氮含量，有效磷含量差异不显著。8．覆膜强化栽培可以促进分蘖的发生，增加有效穗数，但穗粒数、千粒重降低；单株干物质量显著高于常规水作，群体干物质量高于常规水作或持平。而且随着密度的增加，覆膜强化栽培有效穗、穗粒数、结实率降低；单株干物质量增加，群体干物质量降低。与常规水作相比，不同的移栽密度产量效应不同。在本试验的三种密度中，25 cm×30 cm、25 cm×25 cm产量比常规水作分别增加10.3％、3.7％，25 cm×17 cm比常规水作减产1.2％。综上所述，水稻强化栽培促进水稻的分蘖发生、提高有效穗、根系发达、在生育后期功能叶仍具有较高的叶绿素含量；促进了植株对养分的吸收，提高了养分在籽粒中的分布，增产作用显著；而且在低的施氮量下，增产作用较大。水稻强化栽培有利于土壤生物学特性的提高，节水效果显著，对于水稻生产的可持续发展具有重要意义，但该法采用干湿灌溉的水分管理方式促进了稻田土壤氨的挥发，因此，在水稻强化栽培中合理的氮肥管理至关重要。更多还原

【Abstract】 To evaluate the effects of the System of Rice Intensification （SRI） on grain yield andeco-environment, 3-year field experiments were conducted at the Agriculture Experimental Farmof Zhejiang University in Hangzhou, Zhejiang province, China, with one rice crop annually. In2004, the treatment was SRI, traditional flooding （TF）, non-flooded plastic film mulching （PM）,no plastic film mulching and no flooding （NM） and the system of rice intensification with plasticmulching （PMSRI）, and there were three transplanting density in PMARI treatment: 25 cm×17 cm,25 cm×25 cm, 25 cm×30 cm. In 2005, the treatments were the System of Rice Intensification（SRI） and traditional flooding （TF）. The experimental design in 2004 and 2005 was completerandomized blocks with three replications. In 2006, the experiment was a randomized split blockdesign with three replications. The main plots were two cultivation systems: traditional flooding（TF） and the System of Rice Intensification （SRI）. Subplots include four nitrogen application rates:NO （no fertilizer N）, N1 (80 kg N ha^-1), N2 (160 kg N ha^-1) and N3 (240 kg N ha^-1) as urea. Bycontrast with TF, the growth characteristics of rice and yield traits under three water-savingcultivation systems （SRI, PM, UM） were studied; the ammonia volatilization from rice field, soilbiological properties, and water-saving effect and water use efficiency, nutrient uptake andutilization and nitrogen use efficiency under SRI was also studied; and primary study on grainyield effect of the system of rice intensification with plastic mulching was conducted. The resultswere as follows:1. Compared to TF, tiller number, plant height, chlorophyll contents of functional leaves, drymatter accumulation, dry weight of roots, effective panicles, seed setting rate and 1000-grainweight was significantly decreased due to serious drought stress to rice under UM, and the grainyield was decreased by 44.8%. PM improved the rice tillering capability; however, grain yield wasdecreased by 23.9% compared to TF, which was due to lower rate of tiller and 1000-grain weightand smaller spike. At mature stage, the plant height was significantly decreased under PM,however, chlorophyll contents of functional leaves, dry matter accumulation and dry weight ofroots was not significant difference compared to TF. Compared with TF, SRI improved the ricetillering capability and significantly increased the effective panicles, dry weight of roots, drymatter of one plant and chlorophyll contents of functional leaves during the late growth stage,however, the plant height was not difference. Results showed that grain yield was increased by26.4%, 11.5% and 6.4%～48.4% in 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively, compared to TF. SRI havesmaller spike than TF, however, the seed setting rate and 1000-grain weight was not significantdifference.2. Yield-increasing was decreased with N application rate increased under both of TF and SRItreatments. The maximum grain yield under SRI was in NI level and there was not significantdifference between with N2, however, the maximum grain yield under TF was in N2 level. Compared to TF, SRI significantly increased grain yields in N0 and N1, however, there was nosignificantly in N2 and N3 level.3. SRI significantly increased nutrients （N, P, and K） uptake by rice and could promote （N, P,and K） transfer to the panicle. At mature stage, the amount of absorption and accumulation of N, Pand K in different organs （leaves, stem and sheaths and panicle） under SRI was higher than TF.Compared with TF, the ratio of panicle N, P and K to total N, P and K was increased by 5.0%,2.0% and 3.0%, and the ratio of leave N, P and K to total N, P and K was decreased by 6.7%,7.3% and 12.2%, respectively. The internal nutrient efficiency of N, P and K under SRIsignificantly increased by 21.9%, 19.3% and 17.0% compared to TF, respectively.4. As N rate increased, the amount of N uptake by rice plant increased, however, N in paniclewas up to the maximum in N2 level then decreased under both SRI and TF, and N use efficiency（ANUE, agronomic N use efficiency; PFP, partial factor productivity of applied N） under bothSRI and TF significantly decreased. Results showed that higher agronomic N use efficiency beingachieved at a relatively low N fertilizer rate (80 kg N ha^-1) with SRI and it increased by 47.9%compared to TF; however, it was lower 44.7%, 70.9% than TF at 160 and 240 kg N ha^-1,respectively. Among N treatments, partial factor productivity of applied N was increased underSRI compared to TF. Results also showed that the interaction between cultivation and nitrogenapplication rates on nitrogen use efficiency were significantly difference.5. Compared with TF, ammonia volatilization was significantly increased with SRI; however,the dynamic changes in ammonia volatilization rate under different stage were similar in bothtreatments. The greatest ammonia volatilization loss was at basal stage, next was at tillering stageand the smallest was at booting stage. The total amount of ammonia volatilization loss during therice growth stage under SRI was higher 25.2% than TF.6. Compared with TF, PM and NM resulted in 672.8 mm and 631.0 mm of total waterconsumtion in 2004, respectively, moreover, water use efficiency significantly increased by PM,but the total water use efficiency under NM was no significantly difference. SRI resulted in anirrigation water saving of 461.5 mm, 476.5 mm and 830.3 mm in 2004, 2005 and 2006,respectively, a reduction of 33.9%, 26.9% and 36.9%, compared to TF. Compared with TF, totalwater use efficiency increased by 91.3%, 54.5% and 93.5% in 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively,with SRI practices, and irrigation water use efficiency increased by 195.6%, 90.1% and 130.5% in2004, 2005 and 2006. Water use efficiency significantly increased by optimum amount of Nfertilizer application.7. Treatment SRI was significantly higher than the control in population of cultureablemicroorganisms （bacteria, fungi, actinomycetes）, microbial biomass C and N, and microbialbiomass P in the late growth stage, regardless of sampling date. Compared with TF, the activity ofurease, alkaline phosphatase, invertase and catalase in soil at the tillering stage was increased by12.6%, 30.0%, 15.1% and 13.8%, respectively. The treatment SRI was also higher than the controlin soil available N, and however, showed no significant difference in soil available P. 8. Compared with TF, the system of rice intensification with plastic mulching （PMSRI）improved the rice tillering capability and significantly increased the effective panicles, however,the grain number per spike and 1000-grain weight was decreased. Dry matter one plant underPMSRI was higher than TF and population dry matter weight was higher or equal. Results showedthat effective panicle, seed setting rate and grain number per spike decreased with the plantingdensity increasing, and dry matter one plant increased and population dry matter weight decreased.Compared with TF, grain yield under PMSRI with transplanting plant of 25 cm×25 cm and 25cm×30 cm. was increased by 10.3%, 3.7%, respectively, and decreased by 1.2% withtransplanting plant of 25 cm×17 cm.In a word, SRI improved the rice tillering capability and significantly increased the effectivepanicles compared to TF, and there were well developed root system under SRI. Results alsoshowed that SRI had higher chlorophyll contents of functional leaves during the late growth stagethan TF. Compared with TF, SRI increased the nutrients uptake by rice plant and improvednutrients transfer to the panicle and increased the grain yield. Moreover, yield-increasing wassignificantly at lower level of nitrogen. It is most important to the sustainable development of riceproduction due to significant water-saving effect with SRI and SRI was helpful to improve thebiological characteristics of soil. However, ammonia volatilization loss from rice field wasincreased by SRI and the reasonable nitrogen management was very important under SRI.更多还原