| Literature DB >> 28522870 |
Jiuxin Guo1,2, Xiangyu Hu1, Limin Gao1, Kailiu Xie1, Ning Ling1, Qirong Shen1, Shuijin Hu1,3, Shiwei Guo4.
Abstract
To face the great challenges of ensuring food security and environmental sustainability, agricultural production must be improved by high yield andEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28522870 PMCID: PMC5437039 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-02338-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Physical and chemical properties of the basal soil (0–20 cm, n = 1050–1350) in south, central and north Jiangsu.
| Location | Organic matter (g kg−1) | Total N (g kg−1) | Olsen-P (mg kg−1) | NH4OAC-K (mg kg−1) | pH (H2O) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| South | 24.73 a | 1.61 a | 12.95 b | 89.51 c | 6.54 b |
| Central | 24.66 a | 1.52 b | 15.74 a | 109.15 b | 7.46 a |
| North | 21.65 b | 1.15 c | 15.18 a | 141.11 a | 7.39 a |
N rate, grain yield and N partial factor productivity (PFPN) in famer’s field in Jiangsu by the farmer survey.
| Location | N rate (kg ha−1) | Grain yield (kg kg−1) | PFPN (kg kg−1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| South (n = 157) | 310.1 b | 8537.2 a | 27.5 a |
| Central (n = 190) | 353.5 a | 8041.6 ab | 22.7 b |
| North (n = 389) | 346.5 a | 7816.6 b | 22.6 b |
Figure 1The distribution of yield (a) and N partial factor productivity (PFPN, b) on farmers’ fertilizer practices (FFP) and optimized N managements (OPT), and the distribution of FFP N applied on basal to spike N fertilizer application ratios (c) for rice production. The FFP values are from farmer surveys, and the OPT values are from the location experiment. The lengths of the bars (grey colour) are the average values plus 2% of the N rate, grain yield and PFPN. The short bars labelled HYHE, HYLE, LYHE and LYLE represent high yield and high efficiency, high yield and low efficiency, low yield and high efficiency, and low yield and low efficiency, respectively.
Average biomass, yield components and harvest index of N managements across six sites in Jiangsu in 2008–2013.
| Treatment | Above-ground biomass (t ha−1) | Panicles (×104 ha−1) | Grains per panicle | Filled grain rate (%) | 103-grain weight (g) | Grain yield (t ha−1) | Harvest index | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tillering | Flowering | Harvest | |||||||
| CK | 2.7 c | 8.5 b | 11.0 b | 194.1 b | 113.3 c | 97.8 a | 27.1 a | 5.10 c | 0.46 b |
| FFP | 4.6 a | 11.8 a | 17.0 a | 303.1 a | 138.5 b | 96.3 b | 25.7 b | 8.30 b | 0.49 ab |
| OPT | 3.6 b | 12.2 a | 17.3 a | 290.7 a | 151.8 a | 97.1 a | 26.5 a | 8.79 a | 0.51 a |
Average N rate, total N uptake (TUN), N partial factor productivity (PFPN), N agronomic efficiency (AEN) and N recovery efficiency (REN) of N managements across six sites in Jiangsu in 2008–2013.
| Treatment | N rate (kg ha−1) | TUN (kg ha−1) | PFPN (kg kg−1) | AEN (kg kg−1) | REN (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 0 | 98.2 b | — | — | — |
| FFP | 350 | 224.3 a | 23.7 b | 9.1 b | 36.0 b |
| OPT | 240 | 232.9 a | 36.6 a | 13.7 a | 56.1 a |
Root length, superficial area, average diameter, root volume and number of root tip of N managements of rice roots at the seedling stage 10 days after transplanting in Rugao sites in Jiangsu.
| Treatment | Root length (cm plant−1) | Surface area (cm2 plant−1) | Average diameter (mm) | Root volume (cm3 plant−1) | Number of root tip (plant−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 481.7 a | 50.6 a | 0.34 b | 0.43 a | 4459.7 a |
| FFP | 274.4 c | 32.5 c | 0.38 ab | 0.31 b | 1874.6 c |
| OPT | 296.1 b | 39.0 b | 0.42 a | 0.41 a | 3047.0 b |
Figure 2Distribution of NH4 +-N (a) and NO3 −-N (b) concentrations in the profiles of 0–100 cm soil depths at rice harvest in the Rugao site in 2013.
Figure 3Rice grain yield of large demonstration areas on free-N control (CK, a), farmers’ fertilizer practices (FFP, b) and optimized N managements (OPT, c) in south, central and north Jiangsu in 2010–2013.
Figure 4Response curves of rice grain yield to N rate and the nutrient contribution stage; further details are in Sui et al.[8]. The result of improving rice grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency depended on the optimized N managements (OPT, insert figure) at different rice growth stages. The insert figure shows rice N management strategies between OPT and farmers’ fertilizer practices (FFP). The percentage and the dotted and solid arrows represent the N rate ratios of reduced or increased between OPT and FFP for the different and total growth stages in and out of parentheses, respectively.