| Literature DB >> 35017618 |
Xiucheng He1,2, Huizhen Qiu3,4, Kuizhong Xie5, Yucai Wang6, Juan Hu7, Fuqiang Li6, Jing An2.
Abstract
Isatis indigotica planting is the backbone of the medicinal industry in Hexi Oasis, Gansu. In order to solve the problems insufficient water resources and excessive application of nitrogen fertilizer in this area, this paper explored the irrigation and nitrogen levels that can meet the multiple goals of Isatis indigotica. The two-factor split-plot field experiment (2018‒2019) was conducted in Minle County, Gansu Province, China, which contains 9 treatments. There were three levels of irrigation water: W1(low), W2(medium), and W3(high). The soil moisture contents were 60-70%, 70-80%, and 80-90% of the field water-holding capacity, respectively. The nitrogen application rate was classified into three levels, N1(low), N2(medium) and N3(high), which were 150, 200 and 250 kg N/ha, respectively. The standard local irrigation water amount and nitrogen application rate corresponded to W3N3. The results showed that the yield of Isatis indigotica increased first and then decreased with the increase of irrigation amount and nitrogen application rate, the yield of W2N2 is 12.2-17.1% higher than that of W1N1, the yield of W3N3 was 12.1-17.5% lower than that of W2N2. Saving water and reducing nitrogen can improve the quality of Isatis indigotica, compared with W3N3, the indigo, indirubin, (R,S)-epigoitrin and polysaccharides of W2N2 increased by 4.5-5.9%, 2.7-3.1%, 5.2-6.0%, and 1.8-2.1%, respectively. With the increase of nitrogen application rate, the water use efficiency (WUE) first increased and then decreased, as the irrigation volume increases, WUE decreases. Compared with W3N3, the WUE of W2N2 increased by 24.3-27.2%. With the increase of water input, the nitrogen fertilizer use efficiency (NUE) first increased and then decreased, as the nitrogen application rate increases, NUE decreases. Compared with W3N3, the NUE of W2W2 increased by 31.8-34.5%. Therefore, W2N2 can improve quality and increase water and nitrogen utilization efficiency on the basis of ensuring yield.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35017618 PMCID: PMC8752745 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-04585-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Distribution of monthly rainfall at the experimental station in 2018 and 2019.
Physical and chemical properties of the experimental field soil.
| Year | Soil layer (cm) | pH | Organic matter (g/kg) | Available nitrogen (mg/kg) | Available phosphorus (mg/kg) | Available potassium (mg/kg) | Bulk density (g/cm3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 0–20 | 7.18 | 13.86 | 53.26 | 8.73 | 116.16 | 1.38 |
| 2019 | 0–20 | 7.21 | 13.25 | 55.32 | 8.68 | 110.23 | 1.41 |
Description of treatments.
| Irrigation levela | Nitrogen levelb | Treatment abbreviation |
|---|---|---|
| High, soil moisture content was 80–90% of the field water-holding capacity (W3) | High, nitrogen application rate: 250 kg/ha (N3) | W3N3(CK) |
| Medium, nitrogen application rate: 200 kg/ha (N2) | W3N2 | |
| Low, nitrogen application rate: 150 kg/ha (N1) | W3N1 | |
| Medium, soil moisture content was 70–80% of the field water-holding capacity (W2) | W2N3 | |
| W2N2 | ||
| W2N1 | ||
| Low, soil moisture content was 60–70% of the field water-holding capacity (W1) | W1N3 | |
| W1N2 | ||
| W1N1 |
aHigh irrigation level treatment, in which the soil moisture content was 80–90% of the field water-holding capacity. In the medium irrigation level treatment, the soil moisture content was 70–80% of the field water-holding capacity. In the low irrigation level treatment, the soil moisture content was 60–70% of the field water-holding capacity.
bHigh nitrogen level treatment, with a nitrogen application rate of 250 kg/ha. In the medium nitrogen level treatment, the nitrogen application rate was 200 kg/ha. In the low nitrogen level treatment, the nitrogen application rate was 150 kg/ha.
Figure 2Irrigation schedule in 2018 and 2019.
Figure 3Field experiment.
Variance analysis of traits on the yield of Isatis indigotica.
| Trait | DF | Variance | SS | MS | F-value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yield in 2018 | W | 2 | 1,178,560.67 | 589,280.33 | 56.13 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 1,153,888.67 | 576,944.33 | 54.96 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 18,925.33 | 4731.33 | 0.45 | 0.47 | |
| Yield in 2019 | W | 2 | 2,732,828.67 | 1,366,414.33 | 95.07 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 2,255,040.67 | 1,127,520.33 | 78.45 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 31,705.33 | 7926.33 | 0.55 | 0.38 |
Figure 4The effects of the different treatments on the yield of Isatis indigotica. The values shown are the mean ± SD, n = 3. Asterisks indicate a significant difference at the P ≤ 0.05 level.
Variance analysis of traits the quality of Isatis indigotica.
| Trait | DF | Variance | SS | MS | F-value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indigo in 2018 | W | 2 | 0.46 | 0.23 | 160.41 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 69.16 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.38 | 0.82 | |
| Indirubin in 2018 | W | 2 | 0.44 | 0.22 | 293.07 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.19 | 0.09 | 122.60 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 7.46 | 0.00 | |
| (R,S)-epigoitrin in 2018 | W | 2 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 3290.53 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1378.76 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 8.88 | 0.00 | |
| W | 2 | 22.95 | 11.47 | 3374.77 | 0.00 | |
| Polysaccharide in 2018 | N | 2 | 10.96 | 5.48 | 1611.95 | 0.00 |
| W * N | 4 | 0.54 | 0.13 | 39.51 | 0.00 | |
| Indigo in 2019 | W | 2 | 0.22 | 0.11 | 140.19 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.12 | 0.06 | 76.80 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.33 | 0.30 | |
| Indirubin in 2019 | W | 2 | 0.37 | 0.19 | 241.87 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 105.04 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 1.80 | 0.17 | |
| (R,S)-epigoitrin in 2019 | W | 2 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 18,507.87 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5944.38 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 93.35 | 0.00 | |
| Polysaccharide in 2019 | W | 2 | 29.96 | 14.98 | 14,191.20 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 11.94 | 5.97 | 5654.75 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.34 | 0.09 | 80.67 | 0.00 |
Figure 5The effects of the different treatments on the quality index of Isatis indigotica. The values shown are the mean ± SD, n = 3. Asterisks indicate a significant difference at the P ≤ 0.05 level.
Variance analysis of traits on the WUE of Isatis indigotica.
| Trait | DF | Variance | SS | MS | F-value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WUE in 2018 | W | 2 | 1.50 | 0.75 | 906.59 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.18 | 0.09 | 111.17 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.54 | 0.71 | |
| WUE in 2019 | W | 2 | 1.12 | 0.56 | 542.70 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.23 | 0.12 | 113.03 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.42 | 0.79 |
Figure 6The effects of the different treatments on the WUE of Isatis indigotica. The values shown are the mean ± SD, n = 3. Asterisks indicate a significant difference at the P ≤ 0.05 level.
Variance analysis of traits on the NUE of Isatis indigotica.
| Trait | DF | Variance | SS | MS | F-value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NUE in 2018 | W | 2 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 149.57 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 1103.57 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.14 | 0.12 | |
| NUE in 2019 | W | 2 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 51.55 | 0.00 |
| N | 2 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 521.18 | 0.00 | |
| W * N | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.86 | 0.05 |
Figure 7The effects of the different treatments on the NUE of Isatis indigotica. The values shown are the mean ± SD, n = 3. Asterisks indicate a significant difference at the P ≤ 0.05 level.