| 不同家系马尾松容器苗对基质配比及控释肥的响应 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 张东北,王秀花,周生财,吴小林,楚秀丽,周志春.不同家系马尾松容器苗对基质配比及控释肥的响应[J].浙江农林大学学报,2019,36(5):1044-1050. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 张东北 王秀花 周生财 吴小林 楚秀丽 周志春 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 1.浙江省庆元县实验林场, 浙江 庆元 3238002.中国林业科学研究院 亚热带林业研究所 浙江省林木育种技术研究重点实验室, 浙江 杭州 311400 |
| |
| 基金项目： | "十三五"国家重点研发计划重点专项2017YFD0600301 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 基质配比及养分状况是容器苗培育的关键因子，不同家系容器苗对基质环境条件的响应亦不同。以马尾松Pinus massoniana不同家系苗为对象，开展基质泥炭和谷壳配比及控释肥加载量的析因试验，分析不同基质条件下马尾松家系容器苗生长及氮、磷吸收利用，探明其优质容器苗培育的基质配比和控释肥加载量。结果表明:单因素层面，基质配比对3个家系（32，35和36号）容器苗无显著影响，而控释肥加载量对各家系容器苗影响显著；双因素分析显示，不同家系容器苗对基质配比和控释肥加载量的交互作用响应不同，32号家系的双因素交互效应显著，以泥炭与谷壳体积比为5:5，控释肥加载量为3.5 kg·m-3组合处理的容器苗生长及氮、磷养分吸收利用均较好；而35和36号家系的双因素互作效应均不显著，仅对控释肥加载量表现出明显响应，分别以2.5和3.5 kg·m-3效果较优。经家系与控释肥双因素及容器苗各指标相关分析可知，苗期控释肥效应较家系明显。因此，容器苗培育不仅要注重苗高等表型指标达到出圃要求，还应严格掌控基质养分水平以确保苗木养分吸收利用；不同来源的容器苗育苗应结合其生长需求分别对待。
|
| 关 键 词： | 森林培育学 马尾松 家系 容器苗 基质 控释肥 |
| 收稿时间： | 2018-09-27 |
Response of masson pine container seedlings from different families to substrate proportion and control released fertilizer |
| |
| ZHANG Dongbei,WANG Xiuhua,ZHOU Shengcai,WU Xiaolin,CHU Xiuli,ZHOU Zhichun.Response of masson pine container seedlings from different families to substrate proportion and control released fertilizer[J].Journal of Zhejiang A&F University,2019,36(5):1044-1050. |
| |
| Authors: | ZHANG Dongbei WANG Xiuhua ZHOU Shengcai WU Xiaolin CHU Xiuli ZHOU Zhichun |
| |
| Institution: | 1.Qingyuan County Experimental Forest Farm, Qingyuan 323800, Zhejiang, China2.Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Tree Breeding, Research Institute of Subtropical Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Hangzhou 311400, Zhejiang, China |
| |
| Abstract: | To determine the suitable substrate proportion (SP) and control released fertilizer (CRF)loading level for container seedlings from different families. SP and CRF, two key factors for container seedling cultivation, were tested. This research used mass on pine container seedlings from different families as objects. A two factor test for SP and CRF loading and for different levels of each factor was carried out with factorial test. SP was given four levels and CRF was three levels, so there were twelve treatments totally. And each treatment was replicated three times. The effects of SP and CRF loading levels and their interactions on growth, N and P absorption, and seedling use were analyzed with a single factor analysis and a correlation analysis. Then, suitable SP and CRF loadings for quality container seedlings were selected. Results showed no obvious effects from SP on three seedling families; whereas, CRF loading was significant according to the single factor analysis. The interaction of SP and CRF in the two factor analysis of different seedling families varied. Family 32 displayed a noticeable response with the best treatment group being a volume ratio of peat to chaff in the substrate of 5:5 and a CRF loading of 3.5 kg·m-3 with both growth as well as N and P use being better compared to other groups. Neither family 35 or 36 showed significant differences between treatment groups, but both gave an significant response to CRF loading with family 35 having a loading of 2.5 kg·m-3 and family 36 of 3.5 kg·m-3, individually. According to the two factor analysis of family and CRF loading and the correlation analysis between growth and nutrition use indexes, the effect of CRF on seedlings was more obvious than family. Therefore, for quality seedlings, attention should be placed on 1) not only growth traits, but also on ensuring a proper substrate nutrition level for seedling requirements, and 2) different cultivation measures to be used for seedlings of different genetic background because of their different growth traits. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
| 点击此处可从《浙江农林大学学报》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《浙江农林大学学报》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
