Acta Prataculturae Sinica ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (11): 203-211.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2020490
Hong-lin WANG1(), Yan-chun ZUO1(), Xu YAN1, Xiao-kang ZHOU1, Jing KOU1, Xi-zhi YANG3, Jun-ying GUO2, Jun PU2, Hao-ren ZHANG2, Zhou-he DU1,2()
Received:
2020-11-03
Revised:
2020-12-17
Online:
2021-10-19
Published:
2021-10-19
Contact:
Zhou-he DU
Hong-lin WANG, Yan-chun ZUO, Xu YAN, Xiao-kang ZHOU, Jing KOU, Xi-zhi YANG, Jun-ying GUO, Jun PU, Hao-ren ZHANG, Zhou-he DU. Effect of cutting height and nitrogen fertilizer rate on yield and nutritive value of whole-plant mulberry (Morus alba)[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(11): 203-211.
处理 Treatment | 刈割高度 Cutting height (cm) | 施氮量 Nitrogen rate (kg N·hm-2) |
---|---|---|
H1N1 | 70 | 138 |
H1N2 | 70 | 207 |
H1N3 | 70 | 276 |
H2N1 | 90 | 138 |
H2N2 | 90 | 207 |
H2N3 | 90 | 276 |
H3N1 | 110 | 138 |
H3N2 | 110 | 207 |
H3N3 | 110 | 276 |
Table 1 Cutting height and nitrogen fertilizer rate level
处理 Treatment | 刈割高度 Cutting height (cm) | 施氮量 Nitrogen rate (kg N·hm-2) |
---|---|---|
H1N1 | 70 | 138 |
H1N2 | 70 | 207 |
H1N3 | 70 | 276 |
H2N1 | 90 | 138 |
H2N2 | 90 | 207 |
H2N3 | 90 | 276 |
H3N1 | 110 | 138 |
H3N2 | 110 | 207 |
H3N3 | 110 | 276 |
处理 Treatment | 鲜草产量Fresh yield | 平均值 Average | |
---|---|---|---|
2016 | 2017 | ||
H1N1 | 32.24±0.96c | 48.73±0.89c | 40.49±0.93 |
H1N2 | 35.99±1.37ab | 54.57±1.27b | 45.28±1.32 |
H1N3 | 37.66±2.20ab | 57.36±1.84b | 47.51±2.02 |
H2N1 | 34.71±0.97ab | 55.83±0.73b | 45.27±0.85 |
H2N2 | 36.69±0.95ab | 56.86±2.19b | 46.78±1.57 |
H2N3 | 38.91±1.32a | 65.56±1.01a | 52.24±1.17 |
H3N1 | 29.60±0.30c | 50.98±0.88c | 40.29±0.59 |
H3N2 | 34.91±1.73ab | 56.83±1.45b | 45.87±1.59 |
H3N3 | 36.55±1.71ab | 57.08±2.41b | 46.82±2.06 |
Table 2 Annual whole plant biomass of forage mulberry under different treatments at planting stage (t·hm-2)
处理 Treatment | 鲜草产量Fresh yield | 平均值 Average | |
---|---|---|---|
2016 | 2017 | ||
H1N1 | 32.24±0.96c | 48.73±0.89c | 40.49±0.93 |
H1N2 | 35.99±1.37ab | 54.57±1.27b | 45.28±1.32 |
H1N3 | 37.66±2.20ab | 57.36±1.84b | 47.51±2.02 |
H2N1 | 34.71±0.97ab | 55.83±0.73b | 45.27±0.85 |
H2N2 | 36.69±0.95ab | 56.86±2.19b | 46.78±1.57 |
H2N3 | 38.91±1.32a | 65.56±1.01a | 52.24±1.17 |
H3N1 | 29.60±0.30c | 50.98±0.88c | 40.29±0.59 |
H3N2 | 34.91±1.73ab | 56.83±1.45b | 45.87±1.59 |
H3N3 | 36.55±1.71ab | 57.08±2.41b | 46.82±2.06 |
处理 Treatment | 鲜草产量 Fresh yield | 平均值 Mean | 干草产量 Hay yield | 平均值 Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 75.77±0.45cd | 78.05±1.41c | 15.76±0.27d | 15.75±0.28c |
H1N2 | 76.87±0.80cd | 14.80±0.21e | ||
H1N3 | 81.51±1.71b | 16.69±0.41c | ||
H2N1 | 75.09±1.73d | 81.86±0.95a | 15.51±0.23d | 16.75±0.46b |
H2N2 | 78.47±1.16bc | 15.21±0.39d | ||
H2N3 | 92.03±0.86a | 19.52±0.56a | ||
H3N1 | 74.96±0.83d | 78.11±1.84b | 17.97±0.44b | 18.12±0.25a |
H3N2 | 78.75±2.63bc | 18.00±0.32b | ||
H3N3 | 80.63±1.06b | 18.40±0.18b | ||
H | ** | ** | ||
N | ** | ** | ||
H×N | ** | NS |
Table 3 Effects of cutting height and nitrogen application rate on yield of forage mulberry in high yield period (t·hm-2)
处理 Treatment | 鲜草产量 Fresh yield | 平均值 Mean | 干草产量 Hay yield | 平均值 Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 75.77±0.45cd | 78.05±1.41c | 15.76±0.27d | 15.75±0.28c |
H1N2 | 76.87±0.80cd | 14.80±0.21e | ||
H1N3 | 81.51±1.71b | 16.69±0.41c | ||
H2N1 | 75.09±1.73d | 81.86±0.95a | 15.51±0.23d | 16.75±0.46b |
H2N2 | 78.47±1.16bc | 15.21±0.39d | ||
H2N3 | 92.03±0.86a | 19.52±0.56a | ||
H3N1 | 74.96±0.83d | 78.11±1.84b | 17.97±0.44b | 18.12±0.25a |
H3N2 | 78.75±2.63bc | 18.00±0.32b | ||
H3N3 | 80.63±1.06b | 18.40±0.18b | ||
H | ** | ** | ||
N | ** | ** | ||
H×N | ** | NS |
处理 Treatment | 总分枝数 Total number of branches | 主枝粗 Main branch diameter (cm) | 主枝叶片数 Leaf number of main branch | 单株重 Weight per plant (g·plant-1) |
---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 8.57±2.50bc | 0.63±0.08e | 11.29±1.39c | 167.14±44.79d |
H1N2 | 9.33±2.56b | 0.66±0.07de | 12.83±1.34bc | 204.83±38.08cd |
H1N3 | 9.91±1.63b | 0.72±0.09cde | 12.45±1.83bc | 256.27±67.15bcd |
H2N1 | 13.43±2.44a | 0.80±0.08abc | 14.29±2.37ab | 392.29±122.17a |
H2N2 | 9.40±2.42b | 0.79±0.11abc | 13.60±2.84abc | 378.20±127.32a |
H2N3 | 10.75±2.23b | 0.74±0.07abcd | 15.42±1.61a | 293.83±81.82abc |
H3N1 | 7.63±1.93d | 0.85±0.13a | 13.50±1.50abc | 362.50±106.3ab |
H3N2 | 8.33±3.71c | 0.83±0.08ab | 13.56±1.34abc | 307.22±85.22abc |
H3N3 | 11.56±1.34b | 0.76±0.08abcd | 12.89±2.73bc | 377.78±169.94a |
H | NS | * | * | * |
N | * | NS | NS | NS |
H×N | NS | NS | NS | NS |
Table 4 Effects of cutting height and nitrogen application rate on biological characteristics of forage mulberry in high yield period
处理 Treatment | 总分枝数 Total number of branches | 主枝粗 Main branch diameter (cm) | 主枝叶片数 Leaf number of main branch | 单株重 Weight per plant (g·plant-1) |
---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 8.57±2.50bc | 0.63±0.08e | 11.29±1.39c | 167.14±44.79d |
H1N2 | 9.33±2.56b | 0.66±0.07de | 12.83±1.34bc | 204.83±38.08cd |
H1N3 | 9.91±1.63b | 0.72±0.09cde | 12.45±1.83bc | 256.27±67.15bcd |
H2N1 | 13.43±2.44a | 0.80±0.08abc | 14.29±2.37ab | 392.29±122.17a |
H2N2 | 9.40±2.42b | 0.79±0.11abc | 13.60±2.84abc | 378.20±127.32a |
H2N3 | 10.75±2.23b | 0.74±0.07abcd | 15.42±1.61a | 293.83±81.82abc |
H3N1 | 7.63±1.93d | 0.85±0.13a | 13.50±1.50abc | 362.50±106.3ab |
H3N2 | 8.33±3.71c | 0.83±0.08ab | 13.56±1.34abc | 307.22±85.22abc |
H3N3 | 11.56±1.34b | 0.76±0.08abcd | 12.89±2.73bc | 377.78±169.94a |
H | NS | * | * | * |
N | * | NS | NS | NS |
H×N | NS | NS | NS | NS |
处理 Treatment | 粗蛋白 Crude protein | 中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber | 酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber | 粗脂肪 Ether extract | 粗灰分 Crude ash |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 15.73±0.07d | 31.67±0.48d | 19.84±0.03d | 2.84±0.04b | 6.42±0.04c |
H1N2 | 18.63±0.46a | 31.83±0.31d | 16.41±0.11e | 2.67±0.03c | 5.90±0.01f |
H1N3 | 17.47±0.11b | 32.31±0.11c | 22.73±0.26c | 2.50±0.06d | 6.72±0.01a |
H2N1 | 16.62±0.03c | 31.88±0.86cd | 19.94±0.43d | 2.37±0.02e | 6.37±0.04cd |
H2N2 | 17.46±0.01b | 33.47±0.01b | 20.05±0.16d | 2.99±0.05a | 5.98±0.03f |
H2N3 | 17.13±0.01b | 31.16±0.45d | 22.32±0.12c | 2.56±0.03d | 6.31±0.05d |
H3N1 | 15.85±0.16d | 35.45±0.14a | 24.87±0.32b | 2.50±0.02d | 5.99±0.06f |
H3N2 | 17.37±0.04b | 31.60±0.80d | 27.93±0.15a | 2.36±0.01e | 6.09±0.05e |
H3N3 | 17.27±0.12b | 36.07±0.20a | 28.13±0.40a | 2.24±0.09f | 6.61±0.02b |
H | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** |
N | * | ** | ** | ** | ** |
H×N | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** |
Table 5 Effects of cutting height and nitrogen application rate on nutritional quality of forage mulberry in high yield period (%)
处理 Treatment | 粗蛋白 Crude protein | 中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber | 酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber | 粗脂肪 Ether extract | 粗灰分 Crude ash |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 15.73±0.07d | 31.67±0.48d | 19.84±0.03d | 2.84±0.04b | 6.42±0.04c |
H1N2 | 18.63±0.46a | 31.83±0.31d | 16.41±0.11e | 2.67±0.03c | 5.90±0.01f |
H1N3 | 17.47±0.11b | 32.31±0.11c | 22.73±0.26c | 2.50±0.06d | 6.72±0.01a |
H2N1 | 16.62±0.03c | 31.88±0.86cd | 19.94±0.43d | 2.37±0.02e | 6.37±0.04cd |
H2N2 | 17.46±0.01b | 33.47±0.01b | 20.05±0.16d | 2.99±0.05a | 5.98±0.03f |
H2N3 | 17.13±0.01b | 31.16±0.45d | 22.32±0.12c | 2.56±0.03d | 6.31±0.05d |
H3N1 | 15.85±0.16d | 35.45±0.14a | 24.87±0.32b | 2.50±0.02d | 5.99±0.06f |
H3N2 | 17.37±0.04b | 31.60±0.80d | 27.93±0.15a | 2.36±0.01e | 6.09±0.05e |
H3N3 | 17.27±0.12b | 36.07±0.20a | 28.13±0.40a | 2.24±0.09f | 6.61±0.02b |
H | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** |
N | * | ** | ** | ** | ** |
H×N | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** |
处理 Treatment | 鲜草 Fresh yield | 干草 Hay yield | 总分枝 Total branch | 主茎粗 Main stem diameter | 主枝叶片数 Leaf number of main branch | 单株重 Weight per plant | 粗蛋白 Crude protein | 中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber | 酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber | 粗脂肪 Ether extract | 粗灰分 Crude ash | 平均值 Average | 排序 Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 0.5220 | 0.1891 | 0.4722 | 0.4231 | 0.5714 | 0.5867 | 0.0505 | 0.6942 | 0.9932 | 0.9804 | 0.1006 | 0.5076 | 3 |
H1N2 | 0.1351 | 0.0846 | 0.5556 | 0.4454 | 0.4583 | 0.4387 | 0.6667 | 0.2912 | 0.9885 | 0.5410 | 0.9524 | 0.5052 | 4 |
H1N3 | 0.1923 | 0.1427 | 0.3258 | 0.6483 | 0.5758 | 0.3501 | 1.0000 | 0.7058 | 0.9124 | 0.7647 | 0.0204 | 0.5126 | 2 |
H2N1 | 0.3762 | 0.1109 | 0.4592 | 0.4408 | 0.4694 | 0.2254 | 0.9529 | 0.6579 | 0.9745 | 0.0523 | 0.1950 | 0.4468 | 6 |
H2N2 | 0.7348 | 0.1804 | 0.5500 | 0.5002 | 0.4600 | 0.5399 | 0.0684 | 0.0035 | 0.6813 | 1.0000 | 0.6667 | 0.4896 | 5 |
H2N3 | 1.0000 | 0.7443 | 0.3654 | 0.6870 | 0.4833 | 0.4233 | 0.0381 | 0.9064 | 0.9773 | 0.9412 | 0.8503 | 0.6742 | 1 |
H3N1 | 0.6052 | 0.8671 | 0.3750 | 0.4688 | 0.5000 | 0.3790 | 0.1717 | 0.0316 | 0.0535 | 0.3137 | 0.9057 | 0.4247 | 7 |
H3N2 | 0.7560 | 0.8328 | 0.4167 | 0.5222 | 0.5111 | 0.3279 | 0.0188 | 0.3322 | 0.0158 | 0.0328 | 0.2738 | 0.3673 | 8 |
H3N3 | 0.1209 | 0.9379 | 0.4630 | 0.4801 | 0.5432 | 0.4855 | 0.4381 | 0.0450 | 0.0585 | 0.0000 | 0.2517 | 0.3476 | 9 |
Table 6 Subordinate function values of forage mulberry value index under in different cutting height and nitrogen application rate
处理 Treatment | 鲜草 Fresh yield | 干草 Hay yield | 总分枝 Total branch | 主茎粗 Main stem diameter | 主枝叶片数 Leaf number of main branch | 单株重 Weight per plant | 粗蛋白 Crude protein | 中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber | 酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber | 粗脂肪 Ether extract | 粗灰分 Crude ash | 平均值 Average | 排序 Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1N1 | 0.5220 | 0.1891 | 0.4722 | 0.4231 | 0.5714 | 0.5867 | 0.0505 | 0.6942 | 0.9932 | 0.9804 | 0.1006 | 0.5076 | 3 |
H1N2 | 0.1351 | 0.0846 | 0.5556 | 0.4454 | 0.4583 | 0.4387 | 0.6667 | 0.2912 | 0.9885 | 0.5410 | 0.9524 | 0.5052 | 4 |
H1N3 | 0.1923 | 0.1427 | 0.3258 | 0.6483 | 0.5758 | 0.3501 | 1.0000 | 0.7058 | 0.9124 | 0.7647 | 0.0204 | 0.5126 | 2 |
H2N1 | 0.3762 | 0.1109 | 0.4592 | 0.4408 | 0.4694 | 0.2254 | 0.9529 | 0.6579 | 0.9745 | 0.0523 | 0.1950 | 0.4468 | 6 |
H2N2 | 0.7348 | 0.1804 | 0.5500 | 0.5002 | 0.4600 | 0.5399 | 0.0684 | 0.0035 | 0.6813 | 1.0000 | 0.6667 | 0.4896 | 5 |
H2N3 | 1.0000 | 0.7443 | 0.3654 | 0.6870 | 0.4833 | 0.4233 | 0.0381 | 0.9064 | 0.9773 | 0.9412 | 0.8503 | 0.6742 | 1 |
H3N1 | 0.6052 | 0.8671 | 0.3750 | 0.4688 | 0.5000 | 0.3790 | 0.1717 | 0.0316 | 0.0535 | 0.3137 | 0.9057 | 0.4247 | 7 |
H3N2 | 0.7560 | 0.8328 | 0.4167 | 0.5222 | 0.5111 | 0.3279 | 0.0188 | 0.3322 | 0.0158 | 0.0328 | 0.2738 | 0.3673 | 8 |
H3N3 | 0.1209 | 0.9379 | 0.4630 | 0.4801 | 0.5432 | 0.4855 | 0.4381 | 0.0450 | 0.0585 | 0.0000 | 0.2517 | 0.3476 | 9 |
1 | Wang X L, Yu M D, Lu C, et al. Study on breeding and photosynthetic characteristics of new polyploidy variety for leaf and fruit-producing mulberry (Morus L). Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2011, 44(3): 562-569. |
王茜龄, 余茂德, 鲁成, 等. 果叶兼用多倍体新桑品种的选育及其光合特性研究. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(3): 562-569. | |
2 | Xiang Z H, He N J, Huang X Z. Mulberry and animal husbandry. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(2): 1-9. |
向仲怀, 何宁佳, 黄先智. 桑与畜牧业. 草业学报, 2017, 26(2): 1-9. | |
3 | Wang H L, Zuo Y C, Zhou X K, et al. High planting density herbal-cultivating influence on yield and quality of whole-plant mulberry (Morus alba L.). Pratacultural Science, 2020, 37(5): 952-962. |
王红林, 左艳春, 周晓康, 等. 高密度草本化栽培对饲料桑全株产量及品质的影响. 草业科学, 2020, 37(5): 952-962. | |
4 | Liu J X, Chen X, Cao Y W, et al. Effect on growth performance and non-specific immunity of grass carp by adding feed mulberry powder. Journal of Aquaculture, 2018, 30(4): 14-20. |
刘家星, 陈霞, 曹英伟, 等. 草鱼日粮中添加饲料桑粉对其生长性能及非特异性免疫的影响. 水产养殖, 2018, 30(4): 14-20. | |
5 | Ding P, Li X, Ding Y N, et al. Effects of fermented feed mulberry powder on growth performance,meat quality and serum biochemical indexes of Ningxiang pigs. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2018, 30(5): 1950-1957. |
丁鹏, 李霞, 丁亚南, 等. 发酵饲料桑粉对宁乡花猪生长性能、肉品质和血清生化指标的影响. 动物营养学报, 2018, 30(5): 1950-1957. | |
6 | Du Z H, Zuo Y C, Yan X, et al. Physiological activation and feed value of mulberry for livestock and poultry. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(10): 227-236. |
杜周和, 左艳春, 严旭, 等. 饲料桑生理活性物质及其饲用价值. 草业学报, 2017, 26(10): 227-236. | |
7 | Wang W X, Yang H J, Bo Y K, et al. Nutritional composition analysis and metabolic energy value assessment of mulberry leaves of different varieties. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2012, 38(3): 41-45. |
王雯熙, 杨红建, 薄玉琨, 等. 不同品种桑叶营养成分分析与代谢能值评定研究. 中国畜牧杂志, 2012, 38(3): 41-45. | |
8 | Zhou C, Lv J F, Zeng X, et al. Dynamic characterization of crude protein content in 15 varieties of mulberry leaves for feed use in different growth periods. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2018, 39(6): 32-35. |
周婵, 吕金凤, 曾秀, 等. 重庆地区15种饲料用桑树不同生长期粗蛋白含量的动态分析. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2018, 39(6): 32-35. | |
9 | Huang X Z, Zhao W G, Xiong G P. Effects of mulberry density on yield and nutrient composition in Three Gorges Reservoir. Guangxi Sericulture, 2017, 54(2): 28-33. |
黄先智, 赵卫国, 熊国普. 三峡库区饲料桑栽培密度对产量及营养成分的影响. 广西蚕业, 2017, 54(2): 28-33. | |
10 | Zhao W G, Sun M Q, Hou Q R, et al. Effects of different treatments on the yield and nutritional value of forage mulberry. Guangxi Sericulture, 2018, 55(4): 6-9. |
赵卫国, 孙梦琦, 侯启瑞, 等. 不同处理方式对饲料桑产量及营养价值的影响. 广西蚕业, 2018, 55(4): 6-9. | |
11 | Han S J, Dong J, Dong K H. Effects of different forms of nitrogen fertilizer and nitrogen application rate on yield and quality of Bothriochloais chaemum. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2018(3): 618-624. |
韩世洁, 董洁, 董宽虎. 不同形态氮肥及施氮量对白羊草产量和品质的影响. 草地学报, 2018(3): 618-624. | |
12 | Liu G, Yin H, Huang G Q, et al. Effects of N, P and K fertilizer on antioxidant activities of mulberry leaves. Pratacultural Science, 2014, 31(4): 697-704. |
刘刚, 殷浩, 黄盖群, 等. 氮磷钾肥施用量对桑树叶片抗氧化能力的影响. 草业科学, 2014, 31(4): 697-704. | |
13 | Chen R Q, Lei X W, Huang J F, et al. Trial planting effect of forage mulberry in hilly and mountainous areas of southern Jiangxi Province. Jiangxi Journal of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2019(5): 31-32. |
陈荣强, 雷小文, 黄际发, 等. 饲料桑在赣南丘陵山区试种效果. 江西畜牧兽医杂志, 2019(5): 31-32. | |
14 | Bai Y C, Guo T, Yang R F, et al. Effects of nitrogen fertilization rate and cutting height on yield, nutritional value and root-rot incidence in forage ramie. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2015, 24(12): 112-120. |
白玉超, 郭婷, 杨瑞芳, 等. 氮肥用量、刈割高度对饲用苎麻产量、营养品质及败蔸的影响. 草业学报, 2015, 24(12): 112-120. | |
15 | Wang Y S, Ding P, Li X, et al. Feed value of mulberry leaf and its application in livestock and poultry production. Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2018, 50(9): 131-136. |
王玉诗, 丁鹏, 李霞, 等. 饲料桑叶的饲用价值及其在畜禽生产中的应用进展. 畜牧与兽医, 2018, 50(9): 131-136. | |
16 | Zuo Y C, Du Z H, Zhou X K, et al. Effect of planting density on yield and components of hybrid mulberry. Pratacultural Science, 2013, 30(11): 1796-1800. |
左艳春, 杜周和, 周晓康, 等. 不同栽培密度下杂交桑产量及其组分. 草业科学, 2013, 30(11): 1796-1800. | |
17 | Zhu Y, Zhang B, Tan Z L, et al. Research progress of clipping effect on quality and biomass of grazing. Pratacultural Science, 2009, 26(2): 80-85. |
朱珏, 张彬, 谭支良, 等. 刈割对牧草生物量和品质影响的研究进展. 草业科学, 2009, 26(2): 80-85. | |
18 | Bao W Y, Zhao M L, Hong M, et al. Effects of cutting on yield and compensatory growth of artificial grassland. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2015, 37(5): 46-51. |
包乌云, 赵萌莉, 红梅, 等. 刈割对人工草地产量和补偿性生长的影响. 中国草地学报, 2015, 37(5): 46-51. | |
19 | Ren Y T. The results of the experiment on introduction of forage mulberry in sandy land in Yuyang district were remarkable. Animal Husbandry in China, 2011(21): 60-61. |
任榆田. 榆阳区引种沙地饲料桑试验成效显著. 中国畜牧业, 2011(21): 60-61. | |
20 | Yu C M, Wang Y Z, Guo Y L, et al. Reaping heights effects on yield and content of crude protein of ramie for feed. Plant Fiber and Products, 2002, 24(4): 31-33. |
喻春明, 王延周, 郭运玲, 等. 饲用苎麻收割高度对产量和粗蛋白质含量影响的研究. 中国麻业, 2002, 24(4): 31-33. | |
21 | Li L L, Li R J, Miao Z Z, et al. Effect of nitrogen application on yield and main agronomic characters of Hanfeng 79. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(12): 152-154. |
李丽丽, 李锐娟, 苗振振, 等. 施氮量对玉米杂交种邯丰79产量和主要农艺性状的影响. 安徽农业科学, 2020, 48(12): 152-154. | |
22 | Xu N, Ni H W, Zhong H X, et al. Growth and photosynthetic characteristics of forage mulberry in response to different nitrogen application levels. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2015(4): 161-166. |
许楠, 倪红伟, 钟海秀, 等. 不同供氮水平对饲料桑树幼苗生长以及光合特性的影响. 江苏农业学报, 2015(4): 161-166. | |
23 | Yin H, Zhang J H, Tong W H, et al. A study on suitable scheme of nitrogen fertilization in mulberry gardens of hilly areas of Sichuan Province. Science of Sericulture, 2012, 38(2): 343-347. |
殷浩, 张建华, 佟万红, 等. 四川丘陵地区桑园合理施氮方案的研究. 蚕业科学, 2012, 38(2): 343-347. |
[1] | Hui-long LIN, Yan-fei PU, Dan-ni WANG, Hai-li MA. Index insurances for grasslands: A review and the Chinese scheme design [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(8): 171-185. |
[2] | Jing-dong ZHAO, Yan-tao SONG, Xin-lei XU, Wuyunna. Effects of nitrogen application and mowing on yield and quality of forage in degraded grassland in northwest Liaoning Province [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(8): 36-48. |
[3] | Qiang XU, Xin-hui TIAN, Wen-hua DU. Effects of mixed sowing of rye and common vetch on forage yield and nutrient quality in alpine pastoral areas [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(8): 49-59. |
[4] | Yu-xia WANG, Jin-long CHAI, Yang-yang ZHOU, Chang-lin XU, Lin WANG, Xiao-jun YU. Effects of planting method on seed yield and its components in Medicago ruthenica in an arid area of Longzhong [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(8): 60-72. |
[5] | Xin-you WANG, Wen-xia CAO, Xiao-jun WANG, Yu-zhen LIU, Rui GAO, Shi-lin WANG, Hai-tao AN, Xiu-xia DENG, Wen-hu WANG. Herbage production and forage quality responses to cutting height and fertilization of legume-grass mixtures in the Hexi region [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(4): 99-110. |
[6] | Kai-qiang LIU, Wen-hui LIU, Zhi-feng JIA, Guo-ling LIANG, Xiang MA. Effects of drought stress on yield and dry matter accumulation and distribution of Avena sativa cv. Qingyan No.1 [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(3): 177-188. |
[7] | Wan-jun XIAO, Feng-xia GUO, Yuan CHEN, Lan-lan LIU, Yong-zhong CHEN, Xu-sheng JIAO, Bi-quan ZHANG, Gang BAI, Jian-qin JIN. Effect of organic fertilizer application on the medicinal character, yield and disease resistance of Angelica sinensis [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(3): 189-199. |
[8] | Yu-lei JIA, Zhen LIAO, Li-fang WANG, Jian-chao BU, Biao-sheng LIN, Hui LIN, De-wei SU, Guo-dong LU, Zhan-xi LIN. Effects of chemical fertilizer reduction and co-application with a JUNCAO nitrogen-fixing biofertilizer on growth and nutritional quality of Pennisetum giganteum and soil nutrient status [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(3): 215-223. |
[9] | Bai-ping SHA, Ying-zhong XIE, Xue-qin GAO, Wei CAI, Bing-zhe FU. Effects of coupling of drip irrigation water and fertilizer on yield and quality of alfalfa in the yellow river irrigation district [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(2): 102-114. |
[10] | Hong-jiao HU, Xin-ping LIU, Tong-hui ZHANG, Yu-hui HE, Ming-ming WANG, La-mei ZHANG, Shan-shan SUN, Li CHENG. Feed nutritional value and silage processing properties of Caragana microphylla [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(11): 181-190. |
[11] | Chang-rong WU, Sheng DAI, Long-fei LIANG, Wen-tao SUN, Chao PENG, Chao CHEN, Jun HAO. Effects of different additives on fermentation quality and protein degradation of Broussonetia papyrifera silage [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(10): 169-179. |
[12] | Tenzin Tarchen, Purna Bhadra Chapagain, Shankar Raj Pant, Jiebu, Dunzhu Gesang, Shao-feng CHEN. Growth characteristics and nutritive value of multiple oat varieties in mountainous Northern Nepal [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(10): 73-82. |
[13] | Le-zheng WANG, Fang-jing HUA, Peng-peng CAO, Feng-ju GAO, Wen-rong XIA. Yield and dynamic responses of yield components of adzuki bean to insolation, temperature and rainfall across five sowing dates [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(1): 116-129. |
[14] | Hui-xin JIANG, Shan-shan BAI, Bo WU, Jing-yi SONG, Guo-liang WANG. A multivariate evaluation of agronomic straits and forage quality of 22 oat varieties in the Huang-Huai-Hai area of China [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(1): 140-149. |
[15] | YU Xiao-bo, LIANG Jian-qiu, HE Ze-min, ZHOU Quan-lu, WU Hai-ying, ZHANG Ming-rong. Response of stem characteristics and yield to sowing rate in soybean [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(9): 117-124. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||