Acta Prataculturae Sinica ›› 2026, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (9): 180-197.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2025377
Hui-ting LI1,2(
), Zhong-li LI1,2, Qing-ming SHUI3, Cong-ze JIANG1,2, Kai-quan WEI1,2, Xian-long YANG1,2(
)
Received:2025-09-16
Revised:2025-11-12
Online:2026-09-20
Published:2026-07-27
Contact:
Xian-long YANG
Hui-ting LI, Zhong-li LI, Qing-ming SHUI, Cong-ze JIANG, Kai-quan WEI, Xian-long YANG. Effects of grass-legume sowing ratio and nitrogen application mode on yield and water and nitrogen use efficiency of alfalfa-Bromus inermis mixed stands on the Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(9): 180-197.
土层深度 Soil depth (cm) | 容重 Bulk density (g·cm-3) | 田间持水量 Field moisture capacity (%) | 全氮 Total nitrogen (g·kg-1) | 硝态氮 Nitrate nitrogen (mg·kg-1) | 速效钾 Available potassium (mg·kg-1) | 速效磷 Available phosphorus (mg·kg-1) | 有机质 Organic matter (g·kg-1) | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~20 | 1.6 | 14.6 | 0.5 | 8.6 | 79.3 | 19.3 | 7.4 | 7.9 |
Table 1 Basic physicochemical properties of 0-20 cm soil layer in the test plot
土层深度 Soil depth (cm) | 容重 Bulk density (g·cm-3) | 田间持水量 Field moisture capacity (%) | 全氮 Total nitrogen (g·kg-1) | 硝态氮 Nitrate nitrogen (mg·kg-1) | 速效钾 Available potassium (mg·kg-1) | 速效磷 Available phosphorus (mg·kg-1) | 有机质 Organic matter (g·kg-1) | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~20 | 1.6 | 14.6 | 0.5 | 8.6 | 79.3 | 19.3 | 7.4 | 7.9 |
混播比例 Mixed sowing ratios | 紫花苜蓿播种量 Alfalfa seeding rate (kg·hm-2) | 无芒雀麦播种量 B. inermis seeding rate (kg·hm-2) | 施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes | 处理代号 Code of treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10∶0 | 22.5 | 0.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A10S0-U0 |
| 22.5 | 0.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A10S0-U100 | |
| 22.5 | 0.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A10S0-U50+OF | |
| 22.5 | 0.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A10S0-CU50 | |
| 0∶10 | 0.0 | 30.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A0S10-U0 |
| 0.0 | 30.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A0S10-U100 | |
| 0.0 | 30.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A0S10-U50+OF | |
| 0.0 | 30.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A0S10-CU50 | |
| 3∶7 | 6.8 | 21.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A3S7-U0 |
| 6.8 | 21.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A3S7-U100 | |
| 6.8 | 21.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A3S7-U50+OF | |
| 6.8 | 21.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A3S7-CU50 | |
| 5∶5 | 11.3 | 15.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A5S5-U0 |
| 11.3 | 15.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A5S5-U100 | |
| 11.3 | 15.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A5S5-U50+OF | |
| 11.3 | 15.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A5S5-CU50 | |
| 7∶3 | 15.8 | 9.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A7S3-U0 |
| 15.8 | 9.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A7S3-U100 | |
| 15.8 | 9.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A7S3-U50+OF | |
| 15.8 | 9.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A7S3-CU50 |
Table 2 Experiment treatments
混播比例 Mixed sowing ratios | 紫花苜蓿播种量 Alfalfa seeding rate (kg·hm-2) | 无芒雀麦播种量 B. inermis seeding rate (kg·hm-2) | 施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes | 处理代号 Code of treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10∶0 | 22.5 | 0.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A10S0-U0 |
| 22.5 | 0.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A10S0-U100 | |
| 22.5 | 0.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A10S0-U50+OF | |
| 22.5 | 0.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A10S0-CU50 | |
| 0∶10 | 0.0 | 30.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A0S10-U0 |
| 0.0 | 30.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A0S10-U100 | |
| 0.0 | 30.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A0S10-U50+OF | |
| 0.0 | 30.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A0S10-CU50 | |
| 3∶7 | 6.8 | 21.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A3S7-U0 |
| 6.8 | 21.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A3S7-U100 | |
| 6.8 | 21.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A3S7-U50+OF | |
| 6.8 | 21.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A3S7-CU50 | |
| 5∶5 | 11.3 | 15.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A5S5-U0 |
| 11.3 | 15.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A5S5-U100 | |
| 11.3 | 15.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A5S5-U50+OF | |
| 11.3 | 15.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A5S5-CU50 | |
| 7∶3 | 15.8 | 9.0 | 不施氮肥No nitrogen fertilizer | A7S3-U0 |
| 15.8 | 9.0 | 普通尿素100 kg N·hm-2 Common urea of 100 kg N·ha-1 | A7S3-U100 | |
| 15.8 | 9.0 | 普通尿素50 kg N·hm-2+有机肥3.75 t·hm-2 Common urea of 50 kg N·ha-1+organic fertilizer of 3.75 t·ha-1 | A7S3-U50+OF | |
| 15.8 | 9.0 | 缓释尿素50 kg N·hm-2 Slow-release urea of 50 kg N·ha-1 | A7S3-CU50 |
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 干物质采食量Dry matter intake (DMI) | 相对饲喂价值Relative feeding value (RFV) | 相对牧草质量Relative forage quality (RFQ) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | ||
混播比例 Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A0S10 | 2.2±0.1d | 2.4±0.1b | 2.9±0.2b | 2.5±0.2c | 113.5±3.0d | 117.8±7.4b | 146.1±10.8b | 125.8±11.4c | 154.3±5.8d | 162.6±14.5b | 217.8±21.1b | 178.2±22.2c |
| A3S7 | 2.5±0.1c | 2.8±0.2a | 3.2±0.2ab | 2.8±0.2b | 136.8±7.2c | 145.0±10.1a | 181.8±14.3a | 154.5±15.7b | 199.6±14.0c | 215.7±19.8a | 287.4±27.9a | 234.2±30.7b | |
| A5S5 | 2.4±0.1c | 2.9±0.1a | 3.2±0.3ab | 2.8±0.3b | 130.0±6.1c | 148.4±9.4a | 180.1±18.1a | 152.8±17.1b | 186.4±12.0c | 222.3±18.3a | 284.2±35.2a | 231.0±33.4b | |
| A7S3 | 2.7±0.1b | 2.8±0.1a | 3.3±0.2a | 2.9±0.2b | 149.6±7.8b | 145.6±7.2a | 185.9±11.1a | 160.4±13.7b | 224.8±15.3b | 216.9±14.0a | 295.4±21.6a | 245.7±26.7b | |
| A10S0 | 3.4±0.1a | 2.9±0.1a | 3.4±0.2a | 3.2±0.2a | 192.9±7.7a | 153.3±8.2a | 192.4±13.5a | 179.5±14.7a | 309.1±15.1a | 232.0±16.0a | 308.2±26.3a | 283.1±28.8a | |
施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 2.7±0.2A | 2.8±0.2A | 3.1±0.2A | 2.9±0.3A | 144.5±15.7A | 146.2±12.1A | 170.7±16.0A | 153.8±18.1A | 214.7±30.7A | 218.0±23.5A | 265.9±31.3A | 232.9±35.3A |
| U100 | 2.7±0.3A | 2.8±0.2A | 3.3±0.3A | 2.9±0.3A | 146.7±17.4A | 140.8±10.8A | 179.7±19.8A | 155.7±18.1A | 219.0±34.0A | 207.5±21.0A | 283.3±38.7A | 236.6±35.3A | |
| U50+OF | 2.6±0.2A | 2.7±0.1A | 3.2±0.2A | 2.8±0.2A | 143.2±14.7A | 140.9±8.8A | 177.9±13.9A | 154.0±16.1A | 212.2±28.8A | 207.7±17.1A | 279.9±0.2A | 233.3±31.5A | |
| CU50 | 2.7±0.3A | 2.7±0.2A | 3.3±0.2A | 2.9±0.3A | 143.9±20.3A | 140.2±11.5A | 180.7±15.5A | 154.9±18.9A | 213.5±39.6A | 206.3±22.5A | 285.3±0.2A | 235.0±36.8A | |
| R | *** | *** | * | *** | *** | * | *** | *** | *** | * | *** | *** | |
| N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| R×N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
Table 3 Dry matter intake, relative feeding value and relative forage quality under different mixed sowing ratios and nitrogen application modes treatments
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 干物质采食量Dry matter intake (DMI) | 相对饲喂价值Relative feeding value (RFV) | 相对牧草质量Relative forage quality (RFQ) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | ||
混播比例 Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A0S10 | 2.2±0.1d | 2.4±0.1b | 2.9±0.2b | 2.5±0.2c | 113.5±3.0d | 117.8±7.4b | 146.1±10.8b | 125.8±11.4c | 154.3±5.8d | 162.6±14.5b | 217.8±21.1b | 178.2±22.2c |
| A3S7 | 2.5±0.1c | 2.8±0.2a | 3.2±0.2ab | 2.8±0.2b | 136.8±7.2c | 145.0±10.1a | 181.8±14.3a | 154.5±15.7b | 199.6±14.0c | 215.7±19.8a | 287.4±27.9a | 234.2±30.7b | |
| A5S5 | 2.4±0.1c | 2.9±0.1a | 3.2±0.3ab | 2.8±0.3b | 130.0±6.1c | 148.4±9.4a | 180.1±18.1a | 152.8±17.1b | 186.4±12.0c | 222.3±18.3a | 284.2±35.2a | 231.0±33.4b | |
| A7S3 | 2.7±0.1b | 2.8±0.1a | 3.3±0.2a | 2.9±0.2b | 149.6±7.8b | 145.6±7.2a | 185.9±11.1a | 160.4±13.7b | 224.8±15.3b | 216.9±14.0a | 295.4±21.6a | 245.7±26.7b | |
| A10S0 | 3.4±0.1a | 2.9±0.1a | 3.4±0.2a | 3.2±0.2a | 192.9±7.7a | 153.3±8.2a | 192.4±13.5a | 179.5±14.7a | 309.1±15.1a | 232.0±16.0a | 308.2±26.3a | 283.1±28.8a | |
施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 2.7±0.2A | 2.8±0.2A | 3.1±0.2A | 2.9±0.3A | 144.5±15.7A | 146.2±12.1A | 170.7±16.0A | 153.8±18.1A | 214.7±30.7A | 218.0±23.5A | 265.9±31.3A | 232.9±35.3A |
| U100 | 2.7±0.3A | 2.8±0.2A | 3.3±0.3A | 2.9±0.3A | 146.7±17.4A | 140.8±10.8A | 179.7±19.8A | 155.7±18.1A | 219.0±34.0A | 207.5±21.0A | 283.3±38.7A | 236.6±35.3A | |
| U50+OF | 2.6±0.2A | 2.7±0.1A | 3.2±0.2A | 2.8±0.2A | 143.2±14.7A | 140.9±8.8A | 177.9±13.9A | 154.0±16.1A | 212.2±28.8A | 207.7±17.1A | 279.9±0.2A | 233.3±31.5A | |
| CU50 | 2.7±0.3A | 2.7±0.2A | 3.3±0.2A | 2.9±0.3A | 143.9±20.3A | 140.2±11.5A | 180.7±15.5A | 154.9±18.9A | 213.5±39.6A | 206.3±22.5A | 285.3±0.2A | 235.0±36.8A | |
| R | *** | *** | * | *** | *** | * | *** | *** | *** | * | *** | *** | |
| N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| R×N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
Fig.4 Effects of different mixed sowing ratios and nitrogen application modes on evapotranspiration and water use efficiency of dry matter of forage grass in mixed sowing system
Fig.5 Effects of different mixed sowing ratios and nitrogen application modes on nitrogen partial factor productivity of forage grass in mixed sowing system
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 土地当量比 Land equivalent ratio (LER) | 紫花苜蓿竞争率 Alfalfa competition rate (CRA) | 无芒雀麦竞争率 B. inermis competition rate (CRS) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第三 茬The third cut | 平均 Average | ||
| 混播比例Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A3S7 | 1.2±0.1a | 1.7±0.1a | 1.3±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a | 1.4±0.2a | 2.7±0.5a | 2.2±0.5a | 2.0±0.3a | 1.1±0.3a | 0.7±0.2a | 0.6±0.1a | 0.8±0.3a |
| A5S5 | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.6±0.4a | 3.7±0.3a | 3.2±0.7a | 2.2±0.3a | 1.1±0.2a | 0.8±0.2a | 0.4±0.1a | 0.8±0.1a | |
| A7S3 | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.4±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a | 2.5±0.4a | 4.2±0.6a | 3.4±0.8a | 2.9±0.5a | 0.6±0.1a | 0.5±0.1a | 0.4±0.1a | 0.5±0.2a | |
施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 1.2±0.1A | 1.5±0.1BC | 1.2±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1B | 2.1±0.5A | 1.7±0.3B | 2.1±0.3B | 2.0±0.3B | 0.7±0.2A | 0.8±0.2A | 0.6±0.1A | 0.7±0.1A |
| U100 | 1.3±0.1A | 1.9±0.1A | 1.7±0.3A | 1.6±0.1A | 1.9±0.4A | 3.9±0.8A | 4.8±0.3A | 3.5±0.7A | 0.7±0.1A | 0.4±0.1A | 0.3±0.1A | 0.5±0.1A | |
| U50+OF | 1.1±0.1A | 1.7±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1AB | 1.4±0.1AB | 1.7±0.5A | 1.5±0.2B | 2.3±0.3B | 1.8±0.2B | 1.0±0.2A | 1.0±0.3A | 0.5±0.1A | 0.8±0.2A | |
| CU50 | 1.1±0.1A | 1.2±0.1C | 1.1±0.1B | 1.1±0.1B | 1.5±0.4A | 2.0±0.3B | 2.6±0.4AB | 2.1±0.2B | 1.3±0.4 A | 0.6±0.1A | 0.5±0.1A | 0.8±0.1A | |
| R | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| N | ns | ** | ns | * | ns | ** | ns | * | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| R×N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
Table 4 Land equivalent ratio and competition rate under different mixed sowing ratios and nitrogen application modes treatments
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 土地当量比 Land equivalent ratio (LER) | 紫花苜蓿竞争率 Alfalfa competition rate (CRA) | 无芒雀麦竞争率 B. inermis competition rate (CRS) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第三 茬The third cut | 平均 Average | ||
| 混播比例Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A3S7 | 1.2±0.1a | 1.7±0.1a | 1.3±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a | 1.4±0.2a | 2.7±0.5a | 2.2±0.5a | 2.0±0.3a | 1.1±0.3a | 0.7±0.2a | 0.6±0.1a | 0.8±0.3a |
| A5S5 | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.6±0.4a | 3.7±0.3a | 3.2±0.7a | 2.2±0.3a | 1.1±0.2a | 0.8±0.2a | 0.4±0.1a | 0.8±0.1a | |
| A7S3 | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.4±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a | 2.5±0.4a | 4.2±0.6a | 3.4±0.8a | 2.9±0.5a | 0.6±0.1a | 0.5±0.1a | 0.4±0.1a | 0.5±0.2a | |
施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 1.2±0.1A | 1.5±0.1BC | 1.2±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1B | 2.1±0.5A | 1.7±0.3B | 2.1±0.3B | 2.0±0.3B | 0.7±0.2A | 0.8±0.2A | 0.6±0.1A | 0.7±0.1A |
| U100 | 1.3±0.1A | 1.9±0.1A | 1.7±0.3A | 1.6±0.1A | 1.9±0.4A | 3.9±0.8A | 4.8±0.3A | 3.5±0.7A | 0.7±0.1A | 0.4±0.1A | 0.3±0.1A | 0.5±0.1A | |
| U50+OF | 1.1±0.1A | 1.7±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1AB | 1.4±0.1AB | 1.7±0.5A | 1.5±0.2B | 2.3±0.3B | 1.8±0.2B | 1.0±0.2A | 1.0±0.3A | 0.5±0.1A | 0.8±0.2A | |
| CU50 | 1.1±0.1A | 1.2±0.1C | 1.1±0.1B | 1.1±0.1B | 1.5±0.4A | 2.0±0.3B | 2.6±0.4AB | 2.1±0.2B | 1.3±0.4 A | 0.6±0.1A | 0.5±0.1A | 0.8±0.1A | |
| R | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| N | ns | ** | ns | * | ns | ** | ns | * | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| R×N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 紫花苜蓿相对产量 Alfalfa relative yield (RYA) | 无芒雀麦相对产量 B. inermis relative yield (RYS) | 相对产量总值 Total relative yield (RYT) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | ||
| 混播比例Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A3S7 | 2.1±0.2a | 3.6±0.5a | 2.9±0.6a | 2.9±0.3a | 0.8±0.1b | 0.9±0.1b | 0.6±0.1b | 0.8±0.1b | 1.2±0.1a | 1.7±0.1a | 1.3±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a |
| A5S5 | 1.3±0.2b | 1.8±0.2b | 1.8±0.2ab | 1.6±0.1b | 1.0±0.1ab | 1.2±0.2ab | 0.7±0.1b | 1.0±0.1b | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | |
| A7S3 | 1.2±0.1b | 1.5±0.2b | 1.5±0.3b | 1.4±0.2b | 1.3±0.2a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.2±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.4±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a | |
| 施氮模式Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 1.6±0.2AB | 1.9±0.2B | 1.8±0.3AB | 1.8±0.2B | 0.9±0.1A | 1.3±0.2AB | 0.9±0.1A | 1.1±0.1A | 1.2±0.1A | 1.5±0.1BC | 1.2±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1B |
| U100 | 1.7±0.2A | 3.3±0.7A | 3.0±0.8A | 2.7±0.5A | 1.1±0.2A | 0.9±0.1B | 0.7±0.1A | 0.9±0.1A | 1.3±0.1A | 1.9±0.1A | 1.7±0.1A | 1.6±0.1A | |
| U50+OF | 1.5±0.4AB | 2.2±0.4B | 1.9±0.2AB | 1.9±0.3B | 1.1±0.1A | 1.6±0.3A | 0.9±0.1A | 1.2±0.1A | 1.1±0.1A | 1.7±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1AB | 1.4±0.1AB | |
| CU50 | 1.3±0.2B | 1.8±0.3B | 1.6±0.2B | 1.6±0.2B | 1.1±0.2A | 1.0±0.2AB | 0.7±0.1A | 1.0±0.1A | 1.1±0.1A | 1.2±0.1C | 1.1±0.1B | 1.1±0.1B | |
| R | ** | *** | * | *** | * | * | *** | *** | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| N | ns | ** | ns | ** | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ** | ns | * | |
| R×N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
Table 5 Relative yield under different mixed sowing ratios and nitrogen application modes treatments
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 紫花苜蓿相对产量 Alfalfa relative yield (RYA) | 无芒雀麦相对产量 B. inermis relative yield (RYS) | 相对产量总值 Total relative yield (RYT) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | 第1茬 The first cut | 第2茬 The second cut | 第3茬 The third cut | 平均 Average | ||
| 混播比例Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A3S7 | 2.1±0.2a | 3.6±0.5a | 2.9±0.6a | 2.9±0.3a | 0.8±0.1b | 0.9±0.1b | 0.6±0.1b | 0.8±0.1b | 1.2±0.1a | 1.7±0.1a | 1.3±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a |
| A5S5 | 1.3±0.2b | 1.8±0.2b | 1.8±0.2ab | 1.6±0.1b | 1.0±0.1ab | 1.2±0.2ab | 0.7±0.1b | 1.0±0.1b | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | |
| A7S3 | 1.2±0.1b | 1.5±0.2b | 1.5±0.3b | 1.4±0.2b | 1.3±0.2a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.2±0.1a | 1.3±0.1a | 1.2±0.1a | 1.5±0.1a | 1.4±0.2a | 1.4±0.1a | |
| 施氮模式Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 1.6±0.2AB | 1.9±0.2B | 1.8±0.3AB | 1.8±0.2B | 0.9±0.1A | 1.3±0.2AB | 0.9±0.1A | 1.1±0.1A | 1.2±0.1A | 1.5±0.1BC | 1.2±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1B |
| U100 | 1.7±0.2A | 3.3±0.7A | 3.0±0.8A | 2.7±0.5A | 1.1±0.2A | 0.9±0.1B | 0.7±0.1A | 0.9±0.1A | 1.3±0.1A | 1.9±0.1A | 1.7±0.1A | 1.6±0.1A | |
| U50+OF | 1.5±0.4AB | 2.2±0.4B | 1.9±0.2AB | 1.9±0.3B | 1.1±0.1A | 1.6±0.3A | 0.9±0.1A | 1.2±0.1A | 1.1±0.1A | 1.7±0.1AB | 1.3±0.1AB | 1.4±0.1AB | |
| CU50 | 1.3±0.2B | 1.8±0.3B | 1.6±0.2B | 1.6±0.2B | 1.1±0.2A | 1.0±0.2AB | 0.7±0.1A | 1.0±0.1A | 1.1±0.1A | 1.2±0.1C | 1.1±0.1B | 1.1±0.1B | |
| R | ** | *** | * | *** | * | * | *** | *** | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| N | ns | ** | ns | ** | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ** | ns | * | |
| R×N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 总产出 Total output (CNY·hm-2) | 种子投入 Seed input (CNY·hm-2) | 肥料投入 Fertilizer input (CNY·hm-2) | 劳动力投入 Labor input (CNY·hm-2) | 净利润 Net profit (CNY·hm-2) | 产投比 Input-output ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
混播比例 Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A0S10 | 21199.5±759.8b | 1600.0 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 3818.1±734.6b | 1.2±0.04b |
| A3S7 | 34928.4±1970.4a | 1759.0 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 17387.9±1990.7a | 2.0±0.1a | |
| A5S5 | 32963.6±1315.3a | 1865.1 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 15317.0±1390.8a | 1.9±0.1a | |
| A7S3 | 35575.7±2467.3a | 1971.1 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 17823.2±2477.6a | 2.0±0.1a | |
| A10S0 | 31304.9±1963.7a | 2130.2 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 13393.3±1939.0a | 1.8±0.1a | |
施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 29609.2±2025.3A | 2331.4 | 5479.2 | 9722.3 | 12542.7±1997.6A | 1.7±0.1A |
| U100 | 33286.0±2257.2A | 2331.4 | 5941.1 | 9722.3 | 15757.6±2239.2A | 1.9±0.1A | |
| U50+OF | 31369.7±1950.4A | 2331.4 | 5710.1 | 9722.3 | 14072.3±1944.6A | 1.8±0.1A | |
| CU50 | 30512.8±2096.4A | 2331.4 | 7106.4 | 9722.3 | 11819.0±2074.9A | 1.6±0.1A | |
| R | *** | - | - | - | *** | *** | |
| N | ns | - | - | - | ns | ns | |
| R×N | ns | - | - | - | ns | ns | |
Table 6 Comparison of economic benefits under different mixed sowing ratios and nitrogen application modes treatments
项目 Item | 处理 Treatments | 总产出 Total output (CNY·hm-2) | 种子投入 Seed input (CNY·hm-2) | 肥料投入 Fertilizer input (CNY·hm-2) | 劳动力投入 Labor input (CNY·hm-2) | 净利润 Net profit (CNY·hm-2) | 产投比 Input-output ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
混播比例 Mixed sowing ratios (R) | A0S10 | 21199.5±759.8b | 1600.0 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 3818.1±734.6b | 1.2±0.04b |
| A3S7 | 34928.4±1970.4a | 1759.0 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 17387.9±1990.7a | 2.0±0.1a | |
| A5S5 | 32963.6±1315.3a | 1865.1 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 15317.0±1390.8a | 1.9±0.1a | |
| A7S3 | 35575.7±2467.3a | 1971.1 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 17823.2±2477.6a | 2.0±0.1a | |
| A10S0 | 31304.9±1963.7a | 2130.2 | 6059.2 | 9722.3 | 13393.3±1939.0a | 1.8±0.1a | |
施氮模式 Nitrogen application modes (N) | U0 | 29609.2±2025.3A | 2331.4 | 5479.2 | 9722.3 | 12542.7±1997.6A | 1.7±0.1A |
| U100 | 33286.0±2257.2A | 2331.4 | 5941.1 | 9722.3 | 15757.6±2239.2A | 1.9±0.1A | |
| U50+OF | 31369.7±1950.4A | 2331.4 | 5710.1 | 9722.3 | 14072.3±1944.6A | 1.8±0.1A | |
| CU50 | 30512.8±2096.4A | 2331.4 | 7106.4 | 9722.3 | 11819.0±2074.9A | 1.6±0.1A | |
| R | *** | - | - | - | *** | *** | |
| N | ns | - | - | - | ns | ns | |
| R×N | ns | - | - | - | ns | ns | |
处理 Treatments | 面积 Area | 周长 Perimeter | Vi1 | Vi2 | Y | 排序 Rank | 处理 Treatments | 面积 Area | 周长 Perimeter | Vi1 | Vi2 | Y | 排序 Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A0S10-U0 | 1.17 | 4.44 | 0.55 | 0.75 | 0.64 | 13 | A7S3-U0 | 1.38 | 5.03 | 0.64 | 0.68 | 0.66 | 11 |
| A0S10-U100 | 1.30 | 4.50 | 0.61 | 0.81 | 0.70 | 8 | A7S3-U100 | 2.14 | 6.37 | 1.00 | 0.66 | 0.81 | 1 |
| A0S10-U50+OF | 1.29 | 4.50 | 0.60 | 0.80 | 0.69 | 9 | A7S3-U50+OF | 1.43 | 5.79 | 0.67 | 0.54 | 0.60 | 14 |
| A0S10-CU50 | 1.23 | 4.39 | 0.57 | 0.80 | 0.68 | 10 | A7S3-CU50 | 1.50 | 6.31 | 0.70 | 0.47 | 0.58 | 15 |
| A3S7-U0 | 1.40 | 4.66 | 0.65 | 0.81 | 0.73 | 6 | A10S0-U0 | 1.43 | 4.60 | 0.67 | 0.85 | 0.75 | 4 |
| A3S7-U100 | 1.77 | 6.56 | 0.83 | 0.52 | 0.65 | 12 | A10S0-U100 | 1.29 | 4.45 | 0.60 | 0.81 | 0.70 | 8 |
| A3S7-U50+OF | 1.79 | 5.90 | 0.84 | 0.65 | 0.74 | 5 | A10S0-U50+OF | 1.52 | 4.75 | 0.71 | 0.85 | 0.78 | 2 |
| A3S7-CU50 | 1.51 | 4.76 | 0.71 | 0.84 | 0.77 | 3 | A10S0-CU50 | 1.43 | 4.61 | 0.67 | 0.85 | 0.75 | 4 |
| A5S5-U0 | 1.49 | 4.94 | 0.70 | 0.77 | 0.73 | 6 | |||||||
| A5S5-U100 | 1.43 | 4.69 | 0.67 | 0.82 | 0.74 | 5 | |||||||
| A5S5-U50+OF | 1.52 | 5.05 | 0.71 | 0.75 | 0.73 | 6 | |||||||
| A5S5-CU50 | 1.36 | 4.58 | 0.64 | 0.81 | 0.72 | 7 |
Table 7 Comprehensive evaluation results of different treatments
处理 Treatments | 面积 Area | 周长 Perimeter | Vi1 | Vi2 | Y | 排序 Rank | 处理 Treatments | 面积 Area | 周长 Perimeter | Vi1 | Vi2 | Y | 排序 Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A0S10-U0 | 1.17 | 4.44 | 0.55 | 0.75 | 0.64 | 13 | A7S3-U0 | 1.38 | 5.03 | 0.64 | 0.68 | 0.66 | 11 |
| A0S10-U100 | 1.30 | 4.50 | 0.61 | 0.81 | 0.70 | 8 | A7S3-U100 | 2.14 | 6.37 | 1.00 | 0.66 | 0.81 | 1 |
| A0S10-U50+OF | 1.29 | 4.50 | 0.60 | 0.80 | 0.69 | 9 | A7S3-U50+OF | 1.43 | 5.79 | 0.67 | 0.54 | 0.60 | 14 |
| A0S10-CU50 | 1.23 | 4.39 | 0.57 | 0.80 | 0.68 | 10 | A7S3-CU50 | 1.50 | 6.31 | 0.70 | 0.47 | 0.58 | 15 |
| A3S7-U0 | 1.40 | 4.66 | 0.65 | 0.81 | 0.73 | 6 | A10S0-U0 | 1.43 | 4.60 | 0.67 | 0.85 | 0.75 | 4 |
| A3S7-U100 | 1.77 | 6.56 | 0.83 | 0.52 | 0.65 | 12 | A10S0-U100 | 1.29 | 4.45 | 0.60 | 0.81 | 0.70 | 8 |
| A3S7-U50+OF | 1.79 | 5.90 | 0.84 | 0.65 | 0.74 | 5 | A10S0-U50+OF | 1.52 | 4.75 | 0.71 | 0.85 | 0.78 | 2 |
| A3S7-CU50 | 1.51 | 4.76 | 0.71 | 0.84 | 0.77 | 3 | A10S0-CU50 | 1.43 | 4.61 | 0.67 | 0.85 | 0.75 | 4 |
| A5S5-U0 | 1.49 | 4.94 | 0.70 | 0.77 | 0.73 | 6 | |||||||
| A5S5-U100 | 1.43 | 4.69 | 0.67 | 0.82 | 0.74 | 5 | |||||||
| A5S5-U50+OF | 1.52 | 5.05 | 0.71 | 0.75 | 0.73 | 6 | |||||||
| A5S5-CU50 | 1.36 | 4.58 | 0.64 | 0.81 | 0.72 | 7 |
| [1] | Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs. The 14th five-year plan for the development of forage industry in China. (2022-02-22)[2025-09-10]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2022-03/01/content_5676205.htm. |
| 农业农村部. “十四五”全国饲草产业发展规划. (2022-02-22)[2025-09-10]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2022-03/01/content_5676205.htm. | |
| [2] | Wu S W, Nan L L, Chen X S, et al. Effects of different alfalfa-grass mixed sowing methods on hay yield and soil nutrients. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2025, 33(3): 975-983. |
| 吴世文, 南丽丽, 陈孝善, 等. 不同紫花苜蓿-禾草混播方式对干草产量及土壤养分的影响. 草地学报, 2025, 33(3): 975-983. | |
| [3] | Guo C, Zhao Y L, Li X J, et al. Effect of sowing ratio on interspecific relationships between species and grassland productivity in legume-grass mixtures. Pratacultural Science, 2022, 39(11): 2307-2316. |
| 郭川, 赵艳兰, 李香君, 等. 不同豆禾混播比例对植物种间关系及草地生产力的影响. 草业科学, 2022, 39(11): 2307-2316. | |
| [4] | Fang R Y, Zeng H G, Zheng W J, et al. Study on the productivity of alfalfa and smooth bromegrass in mono-culture and mixed-culture under two drip irrigation methods. Journal of Grassland and Forage Science, 2023, 270(1): 40-44. |
| 方瑞元, 曾翰国, 郑万菊, 等. 两种滴灌方式下紫花苜蓿与无芒雀麦单播与混播草地第1茬牧草生产力研究. 草学, 2023, 270(1): 40-44. | |
| [5] | Cui Z. Effects of artificial grasslands on soil quality and soil moisture of farmland in semi-arid areas. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2019. |
| 崔增. 人工草地对半干旱区农田土壤质量改善及水分效应研究. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2019. | |
| [6] | Wei K T, Xiang H, Liu Y F, et al. Mixed cropping of Medicago ruthenica-Bromus inermis exhibits higher yield and quality advantages in the Longxi loess plateau region of Northwest China. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems,2024, 8: 1411687. |
| [7] | Liu Y P, Xue S M, Zhong S L, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of mixed grassland of triticale and feeding pea in high-elevation of northwestern Yunnan. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(9): 2497-2504. |
| 刘彦培, 薛世明, 钟绍丽, 等. 滇西北高海拔地区小黑麦与饲用豌豆混播草地综合评价. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2497-2504. | |
| [8] | Mon J, Bronson K F, Hunsaker D J, et al. Interactive effects of nitrogen fertilization and irrigation on grain yield, canopy temperature, and nitrogen use efficiency in overhead sprinkler-irrigated durum wheat. Field Crops Research, 2016, 191: 54-65. |
| [9] | Wang H D, Wu L F, Cheng M H, et al. Coupling effects of water and fertilizer on yield, water and fertilizer use efficiency of drip-fertigated cotton in northern Xinjiang, China. Field Crops Research, 2018, 219: 169-179. |
| [10] | Wang H Y, Zhang Y T, Chen A Q, et al. An optimal regional nitrogen application threshold for wheat in the north China plain considering yield and environmental effects. Field Crops Research, 2017, 207: 52-61. |
| [11] | Chen J, Arafat Y, Wu L K, et al. Shifts in soil microbial community, soil enzymes and crop yield under peanut/maize intercropping with reduced nitrogen levels. Applied Soil Ecology, 2018, 124: 327-334. |
| [12] | Liang G P. Nitrogen fertilization mitigates global food insecurity by increasing cereal yield and its stability. Global Food Security, 2022, 34: 100652. |
| [13] | Sun Y B, Zhang M, Zheng W K, et al. Effects of controlled release nitrogen fertilizer on yield and soil nutrient regime of wheat-corn rotation system. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2014, 28(4): 115-121. |
| 孙云保, 张民, 郑文魁, 等. 控释氮肥对小麦-玉米轮作产量和土壤养分状况的影响. 水土保持学报, 2014, 28(4): 115-121. | |
| [14] | Zheng W K, Zhang M, Liu Z G, et al. Combining controlled-release urea and normal urea to improve the nitrogen use efficiency and yield under wheat-maize double cropping system. Field Crops Research, 2016, 197: 52-62. |
| [15] | Li W W, Ahmad S, Liu D, et al. Subsurface banding of blended controlled-release urea can optimize rice yields while minimizing yield-scaled greenhouse gas emissions. The Crop Journal, 2023, 11: 914-921. |
| [16] | Xiao Z M, Fan X, Ma D X, et al. Determination of crude protein in feed: GB/T 6432-2018. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2018. |
| 肖志明, 樊霞, 马东霞, 等. 饲料中粗蛋白的测定: GB/T 6432-2018. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018. | |
| [17] | Van Soest P J, Robertson J B, Lewis B A, et al. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 1991, 74(10): 3583-3597. |
| [18] | Lou S N, Hou F J, Ren J Z. Evaluation of grassland agricultural productivity by food equivalent unit. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(12): 1-16. |
| 娄珊宁, 侯扶江, 任继周. 用食物当量评价草地农业的生产力. 草业学报, 2019, 28(12): 1-16. | |
| [19] | Gao W, Shou N, Jiang C Z, et al. Effect of nitrogen application rate on dry matter accumulation, allocation and water use efficiency of forage sorghum. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2022, 31(9): 26-35. |
| 高玮, 受娜, 蒋丛泽, 等. 施氮量对饲用高粱干物质积累、分配及水分利用效率的影响. 草业学报, 2022, 31(9): 26-35. | |
| [20] | Cai Q, Sun Z X, Wang W B, et al. Yield and water use of maize/soybean intercropping systems in semi-arid western Liaoning. Chinese Journal of Agrometeorology, 2022, 43(7): 551-562. |
| 蔡倩, 孙占祥, 王文斌, 等. 辽西半干旱区玉米大豆间作对作物产量及水分利用的影响. 中国农业气象, 2022, 43(7): 551-562. | |
| [21] | Dhima K V, Lithourgidis A S, Vasilakoglou I B, et al. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio. Field Crops Research, 2006, 100(2/3): 249-256. |
| [22] | Fowler N. Competition and coexistence in a North Carolina grassland: Ⅲ. mixtures of component species. The Journal of Ecology, 1982, 70(1): 77-92. |
| [23] | Wu S H, Li X, Yang Y F, et al. Reduction in chemical fertilizer rates by applying bio-organic fertilizer for optimization yield and quality of Hemerocallis citrina Baroni. Agronomy, 2024, 14(8): 1627. |
| [24] | Wang X, Zeng Z H, Zhu B, et al. Effect of different intercropping and mixture modes on forage yield and quality of oat and common vetch. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2007, 33(11): 1892-1895. |
| 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. 作物学报, 2007, 33(11): 1892-1895. | |
| [25] | Liu Q Y, Yun L, Chen Y F, et al. The dynamic analysis of forage yield and interspecific competition in alfalfa-grass mixed pasture. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2022, 31(3): 181-191. |
| 刘启宇, 云岚, 陈逸凡, 等. 苜蓿—禾草混播草地牧草产量及种间竞争关系的动态研究. 草业学报, 2022, 31(3): 181-191. | |
| [26] | Wang A X, Ma Y L, Qi G P, et al. Water and nitrogen regulation patterns for productivity improvement of Bromus inermis and alfalfa mixed grassland. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022, 36(2): 322-330. |
| 汪爱霞, 马彦麟, 齐广平, 等. 无芒雀麦与苜蓿混播草地生产力提升的水氮调控模式. 水土保持学报, 2022, 36(2): 322-330. | |
| [27] | Du S S, Qi J, Li X, et al. Effect of alfalfa and Elymus sibiricus mixture on forage yield and soil nutrients. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2024, 46(2): 74-82. |
| 独双双, 祁娟, 李霞, 等. 苜蓿与老芒麦混播对牧草产量及土壤养分的影响. 中国草地学报, 2024, 46(2): 74-82. | |
| [28] | Zhang Y L, Luo X M, Wu M H, et al. Effect of alfalfa-grass mix combinations on the forage productivity during the sowing year in the Horqin Sandy Land. Pratacultural Science, 2018, 35(4): 882-890. |
| 张永亮, 骆秀梅, 吴明浩, 等. 科尔沁沙地苜蓿-禾草混播组合对播种当年牧草生产性能的影响. 草业科学, 2018, 35(4): 882-890. | |
| [29] | Lan J Y, Zhang X Z, Zhang L P, et al. Analysis of interspecific competition in community of mixedly-sown alfalfa and awnless brome. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 2016, 28(8): 13-17. |
| 兰吉勇, 张学洲, 张丽萍, 等. 混播紫花苜蓿与无芒雀麦群落种间竞争分析. 江西农业学报, 2016, 28(8): 13-17. | |
| [30] | Cai L, Luo Z Z, Wang L L, et al. Meta-analysis on response of soil moisture, nutrients, and alfalfa yield to fertilization based on location test data. Pratacultural Science, 2021, 38(1): 160-170. |
| 才璐, 罗珠珠, 王林林, 等. 施肥对苜蓿土壤水分、养分和产量的影响:基于定位试验数据的Meta分析. 草业科学, 2021, 38(1): 160-170. | |
| [31] | Yang Y Y, Gao Z L, Wang X J. Impacts of organic and inorganic fertilizations on alfalfa yield, soil nitrate and greenhouse gas emissions. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2016, 27(3): 822-828. |
| 杨园园, 高志岭, 王雪君. 有机、无机氮肥施用对苜蓿产量、土壤硝态氮和温室气体排放的影响. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(3): 822-828. | |
| [32] | Hou L L, Wang W, Cui X J, et al. Effects of organic and inorganic combined application on yield, soil nutrients and enzyme activities of winter wheat. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(8): 1845-1852. |
| 候丽丽, 王伟, 崔新菊, 等. 有机无机肥配施对冬小麦产量和土壤养分及酶活性的影响. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1845-1852. | |
| [33] | Wei W L, Liu L, Qiu H H. Effects of different organic resources application combined with chemical fertilizer on yield and nitrogen use efficiency of main grain crops in China. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2020, 26(8): 1384-1394. |
| 魏文良, 刘路, 仇恒浩. 有机无机肥配施对我国主要粮食作物产量和氮肥利用效率的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(8): 1384-1394. | |
| [34] | Guo J J, Zhang F C, Wang H D, et al. Effects of slow-release nitrogen fertilizer and urea blending on maize growth and nitrogen uptake under different nitrogen application rates. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(20): 3930-3943. |
| 郭金金, 张富仓, 王海东, 等. 不同施氮量下缓释氮肥与尿素掺混对玉米生长与氮素吸收利用的影响. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(20): 3930-3943. | |
| [35] | Du L N, Li W J, Wang X L, et al. Effect of slow-release nitrogen fertilizer with urea on yield and nitrogen use efficiency of winter wheat. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas. (2025-10-13)[2025-11-09]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/61.1088.S.20251013.1352.002. |
| 杜璐宁, 李文净, 王小玲, 等. 缓释氮肥配施尿素对冬小麦产量和氮肥利用效率的影响. 干旱地区农业研究. (2025-10-13)[2025-11-09]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/61.1088.S.20251013.1352.002. | |
| [36] | Zheng W K, Liu Z G, Zhang M, et al. Improving crop yields, nitrogen use efficiencies, and profits by using mixtures of coated controlled-released and uncoated urea in a wheat-maize system. Field Crops Research, 2017, 205: 106-115. |
| [37] | Li S Y, Sun Y L, Zhao J W, et al. Effects of nitrogen addition on microbial quantity, enzyme activity in rhizosphere soil and alfalfa hay yield. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2022, 44(4): 113-120. |
| 李生仪, 孙延亮, 赵俊威, 等. 施氮对苜蓿根际土壤微生物数量、酶活性及干草产量的影响. 中国草地学报, 2022, 44(4): 113-120. | |
| [38] | Lu J Y, Xiong J B, Zhang H S, et al. Effects of water stress on yield, quality and trace element composition of alfalfa. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(8): 126-133. |
| 陆姣云, 熊军波, 张鹤山, 等. 水分胁迫对紫花苜蓿产量、品质和微量元素的影响. 草业学报, 2020, 29(8): 126-133. | |
| [39] | Li E H, Mu Y Y, He Y N, et al. Effects of wheat/alfalfa intercropping systems on soil moisture and water utilization efficiency. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 27(1): 54-58, 65. |
| 李恩慧, 穆阳阳, 何亚男, 等. 小麦和苜蓿套作种植对土壤水分及作物水分利用效率的影响. 水土保持研究, 2020, 27(1): 54-58, 65. | |
| [40] | Dhakal M, West C P, Villalobos C, et al. Interseeding alfalfa into native grassland for enhanced yield and water use efficiency. Agronomy Journal, 2020, 112(3): 1931-1942. |
| [41] | Zhang H L, Zhu L, Xu X. Effect of mixed sowing of graminaceous and leguminous forages under different water regimes in Ningxia central semi-arid belt. Pratacultural Science, 2017, 34(4): 777-787. |
| 张会丽, 朱林, 许兴. 宁夏中部半干旱带不同灌溉量下的禾豆混播效果. 草业科学, 2017, 34(4): 777-787. | |
| [42] | Kang Y X, Qi G P, Jia Q, et al. Appropriate water-nitrogen regulation mode to improve productivity of mixed-sowing grassland of Bromus inermis and alfalfa. Water, 2023, 15(6): 1124. |
| [43] | Li Q Q, Wang X Y, Li M H, et al. Effects of wheat/maize strip intercropping and nitrogen fertilizer on crops water consumption and water use. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2021, 30(6): 819-828. |
| 李倩倩, 王星运, 李孟浩, 等. 小麦玉米间作和氮肥对作物耗水特性及水分利用的影响. 西北农业学报, 2021, 30(6): 819-828. | |
| [44] | Zhang J, Dang J Y, Zhang D Y, et al. Response of yield, quality and water use efficiency of wheat to different combinations of organic manures and chemical fertilizers under different yearly precipitations. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2020, 26(9): 1625-1635. |
| 张晶, 党建友, 张定一, 等. 不同降水年型下小麦产量、品质及水分利用效率对有机无机肥配施的响应. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(9): 1625-1635. | |
| [45] | Zhang P L, Guo T W, Liu X W, et al. Effects of long-term organic manure application on yield and water use efficiency of spring wheat and soil organic carbon in semi-arid area. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2024(1): 105-112. |
| 张平良, 郭天文, 刘晓伟, 等. 长期施用有机肥对半干旱区春小麦产量及其水分利用效率和土壤有机碳的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024(1): 105-112. | |
| [46] | Gu X B, Cai H J, Du Y D, et al. Effects of film mulching and nitrogen fertilization on rhizosphere soil environment, root growth and nutrient uptake of winter oilseed rape in northwest China. Soil and Tillage Research, 2019, 187(4): 194-203. |
| [47] | Dugo V G, Durand J L, Gastal F. Water deficit and nitrogen nutrition of crops. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2010, 30(3): 529-544. |
| [48] | Hu W, Zhang Y H, Li P, et al. Effects of water and nitrogen supply under drip irrigation on the production performance rate and water and nitrogen use efficiency of alfalfa. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(2): 41-50. |
| 胡伟, 张亚红, 李鹏, 等. 水氮供应对地下滴灌紫花苜蓿生产性能及水氮利用效率的影响. 草业学报, 2019, 28(2): 41-50. | |
| [49] | Sun M, Yan A, Li J Y, et al. Effects of different water and nitrogen treatments on growth, quality and water and fertilizer use efficiency of alfalfa. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(6): 1512-1526. |
| 孙萌, 颜安, 李靖言, 等. 不同水氮处理对紫花苜蓿生长发育、品质及水肥利用效率的影响. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(6): 1512-1526. |
| [1] | Shi-yu PENG, Qi-shun MO, Qiong-bo LIU, Yan-lin RAN, Feng YANG, Li-li NIU, Ting-tao YANG, Zhi-hong CHEN, Sheng-jiang HE, Chao CHEN, Zhou LI. Comprehensive evaluation and screening of silage maize varieties in multiple ecological regions of Guizhou Province based on grey relational analysis and a DTOPSIS framework [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(9): 113-128. |
| [2] | Shu-chao LIU, Quan-qin SHAO, Jiang-wen FAN, Hai-bo HUANG. Spatiotemporal dynamics of edible forage and its climatic driving mechanisms in the Three-River Headwaters Region from 1981 to 2020 [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(7): 15-31. |
| [3] | Zhi-gang SU, You-jian HAN, Jian-hang ZHANG, Jun-xi WU, Ya-mei XU, Baosaihenna, Yan-jun MIAO, Zhong-hua CAO. Effects of nitrogen application and sowing rates on the seed yield and quality of Elymus nutans ‘Baqing’ [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(7): 175-187. |
| [4] | Yong-quan ZHAI, Yao MA, Li-hua SONG, Bing CAO. Effects of ryegrass intercropping density on the productivity, net benefits, and sustainability of a jujube-grass intercropping system [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(7): 68-79. |
| [5] | Jiang-ping MA, Li-juan CAO, Wen-wen ZHANG, Meng-yu ZHAO, Teng-fei WANG, Yi-yin ZHANG, Bin WANG, Jia-wang LI, Xiao-bing WANG, Jian LAN. Effects of reseeding and phosphorus application on productivity and soil in improvement of degraded alfalfa stands [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(7): 92-104. |
| [6] | Bo SUN, Jun-yi ZHANG, Chun-yan BAI, Fan FENG, Jian LAN, Jian-qiang DENG. Production benefit analysis of annual forage rotation systems in an arid area of central Ningxia [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(6): 35-48. |
| [7] | Yue-qi LI, Tao MA, Yu-ping DING, Ming SU, Tao LI, Xiao-ying MA, Feng-lan MA, Meng-hu WAN, Qing-yun LI, Dan ZHANG, Na WU, Ji-li LIU. Adaptation of maize varieties in saline and alkaline land in Ningxia based on growth-nutrient accumulation-yield synergistic regulation [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(6): 93-107. |
| [8] | Ling-fei XIANG, Feng-ju ZHANG, Yue LI, Xue-qin WANG, Jin-long LIU, Qiao-li MA. Effects of varied row spacings and sowing rates on forage and seed yield and quality of Echinochloa frumentacea in saline-alkali land [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(5): 126-138. |
| [9] | Long-hang CHAI, Rui ZHAO, Xiao-yi LIU, Jin-shun BAI. A meta-analysis of the effects of green manure on yield increase and chemical nitrogen fertilizer saving in Chinese farmlands [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(5): 162-174. |
| [10] | Wen-hui DENG, Xiao-na ZHAO, Jia-yi YONG, Si-yu GUAN, Guo-qiang HU, Teng-fei WANG, Hai-ying HU. Effects of intercropping oat with different densities on alfalfa seed yield and its constituent factors [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(4): 100-111. |
| [11] | Ju-feng FAN, Lang PAN, De-jun PENG, Ya-jun PENG, Si-fu LI, Cheng-yin NONG, Jian-hao DU, Xiang-ying LIU, Guo-lan MA. Effects of barnyardgrass on rice growth and yield traits, and determination of its economic control threshold [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(4): 124-134. |
| [12] | Yi-bo WANG, Xue-hua MING, Jian-yong ZHANG, Qi YUAN, Jian-ming DU, Bin WANG, Teng-fei WANG, Yi-yin ZHANG, Jian LAN, Le MU. Multi-trait evaluation of the production performance and seed yield of new oat germplasm materials in the arid area of Ningxia [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(4): 86-99. |
| [13] | Jia-yi ZANG, Ming-jie XU, Ji-cheng XIE, Yu-ying SHEN, Xing-fa LAI. Effects of replacing chemical fertilizers with organic fertilizer at equivalent nitrogen levels on forage yield and water use efficiency in a silage maize/forage soybean intercropping system in dryland areas [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(3): 83-95. |
| [14] | Yang-kun LI, Zhuan-lin BEN, Jun-yu ZHANG, Hui-min YANG. A meta-analysis on the effect of fertilizer type on alfalfa seed yield under various climate and soil conditions [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(2): 54-67. |
| [15] | Kong-tao WEI, Chun-ping ZHANG, Yang YU, Zheng-she ZHANG, Ze ZHOU, Xue ZHANG, Xin-xin WANG, Si-yu YUE, Quan CAO, Quan-min DONG. Yield performance, nutritional quality, and soil physicochemical responses of oat (Avena sativa) cultivars in the Qinghai Lake-Gonghe Basin region [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(1): 107-118. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||