Cultivar Differences in Nitrogen Uptake,Utilization and Field Nitrogen Balance of Maize Hybrids in Response to Nitrogen Management

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20192665

Abstract

Abstract:

To increase crop yields,reduce the application of chemical fertilizers,and improve nutrient utilization efficiency,N-efficient maize cultivars were screened and popularized. An understanding of nitrogen uptake,utilization,and field balance in maize cultivars with contrasting nitrogen efficiency response to N management is essential for efficient breeding and cultivation of maize to produce fodder and bio-energy. To determine the effects of N management on these factors during maize cultivation,a two-year field experiment was conducted in 2015 and 2016 in a subtropical semi-humid climate zone. The results showed that the proportion of N in the stem plus sheath and leaves in ZH311 during VT and R6 was significantly higher than that of XY508. In addition,the N accumulation into grain post-silking(NAG)and contribution of NAG to grain(CNAG)of ZH311 were significantly higher than those of XY508,while the N redistribution rate(NRR)and contribution of NRA to grain yield(CNRA)of ZH311 were significantly lower than those of XY508. The higher proportion of N in the vegetative organs of a N-efficient cultivar,ZH311,led to a significantly higher N accumulation in each stage than that observed for the N-inefficient cultivar XY508. The N accumulation advantage of ZH311 was higher after silking than before silking. The high post-silking N accumulation of ZH311 inhibited the pre-silking N transport that determines the N transport rate and contribution rate to grain of pre-silking N accumulation,which were significantly lower than those of XY508. Meanwhile,the N uptake efficiency,N recovery efficiency,and N partial productivity of ZH311 were significantly higher than those of XY508. Compared with that of XY508,the root system of ZH311 could more effectively absorb and utilize inorganic N in the 40-80 cm soil layer,reduce N deposition,and significantly decrease apparent N losses. The differences in apparent N losses between the two cultivars were mainly elicited post-topdressing. In summary,ZH311 has not only a higher yield per unit area than XY508,but also lower N losses,consequently reducing environmental risks.

Key words: Maize, Nitrogen management, Inorganic N, Nitrogen balance

LI Qiang, KONG Fanlei, YUAN Jichao. Cultivar Differences in Nitrogen Uptake,Utilization and Field Nitrogen Balance of Maize Hybrids in Response to Nitrogen Management[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2022, 37(4): 169-181. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20192665.

/ / Recommend / Download Citations

URL: http://www.hbnxb.net/EN/10.7668/hbnxb.20192665

http://www.hbnxb.net/EN/Y2022/V37/I4/169

Figures/Tables 9

References 29

[1]	Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)[DB/OL]. FAOSTAT online Database. 2017. http://faostat3.fao.org/. URL
[2]	Tilman D, Balzer C, Hill J, Befort B L. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture[J]. PNAS, 2011, 108(50):20260-20264. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1116437108. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1116437108 pmid: 22106295
[3]	Chen G, Chen Y, Zhao G H, Cheng W D, Guo S W, Zhang H L, Shi W M. Do high nitrogen use efficiency rice cultivars reduce nitrogen losses from paddy fields?[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2015, 209:26-33. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2015.03.003. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2015.03.003 URL
[4]	Nazir M, Pandey R, Siddiqi T O, Ibrahim M M, Qureshi M I, Abraham G, Vengavasi K, Ahmad A. Nitrogen-deficiency stress induces protein expression differentially in low-N tolerant and low-N sensitive maize genotypes[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2016, 7:298. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.00298. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.00298
[5]	Ladha J K, Tirol-Padre A, Reddy C K, Cassman K G, Verma S, Powlson D S, van Kessel C, Daniel D B R, Chakraborty D, Pathak H. Global nitrogen budgets in cereals:A 50-year assessment for maize,rice,and wheat production systems[J]. Scientific Reports, 2016, 6:19355. doi: 10.1038/srep19355. doi: 10.1038/srep19355 pmid: 26778035
[6]	Yin F, Wang J Z, Sun X M, Li H Q, Fu G Z, Pei R J, Jiao N Y. Response of spatial concordance index between maize root and soil nitrate distribution to water and nitrogen treatments[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50:2166-2178. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.021. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.021
[7]	Zhang X. Biogeochemistry:A plan for efficient use of nitrogen fertilizers[J]. Nature, 2017, 543(7645):322-323. doi: 10.1038/543322a. doi: 10.1038/543322a URL
[8]	Deng F, Wang L, Ren W J, Mei X F. Enhancing nitrogen utilization and soil nitrogen balance in paddy fields by optimizing nitrogen management and using polyaspartic acid urea[J]. Field Crops Research, 2014, 169:30-38. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2014.08.015. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2014.08.015 URL
[9]	Gu L M, Liu T N, Wang J F, Liu P, Dong S T, Zhao B Q, So H B, Zhang J W, Zhao B, Li J. Lysimeter study of nitrogen losses and nitrogen use efficiency of Northern Chinese wheat[J]. Field Crops Research, 2016, 188:82-95. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.10.014. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.10.014 URL
[10]	熊淑萍, 吴克远, 王小纯, 张捷, 杜盼, 吴懿鑫, 马新明. 不同氮效率基因型小麦根系吸收特性与氮素利用差异的分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(12):2267-2279. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.12.003. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.12.003
	Xiong S P, Wu K Y, Wang X C, Zhang J, Du P, Wu Y X, Ma X M. Analysis of root absorption characteristics and nitrogen utilization of wheat genotypes with different N efficiency[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(12):2267-2279.
[11]	Srivastava R K, Panda R K, Chakraborty A, Halder D. Enhancing grain yield,biomass and nitrogen use efficiency of maize by varying sowing dates and nitrogen rate under rainfed and irrigated conditions[J]. Field Crops Research, 2018, 221:339-349. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.06.019. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.06.019 URL
[12]	Li Q, Wu Y W, Chen W, Jin R, Kong F L, Ke Y P, Shi H C, Yuan J C. Cultivar differences in root nitrogen uptake ability of maize hybrids[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8:1060. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01060. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01060 URL
[13]	屈佳伟, 高聚林, 于晓芳, 王志刚, 胡树平, 孙继颖, 苏治军, 谢岷, 青格尔. 不同氮效率玉米品种对土壤硝态氮时空分布及农田氮素平衡的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(5):737-749. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.00737. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.00737
	Qu J W, Gao J L, Yu X F, Wang Z G, Hu S P, Sun J Y, Su Z J, Xie M, Qing G E. Effects of maize varieties with different nitrogen efficiencies on temporal and spatial distribution of soil nitrate and field nitrogen balance[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2018, 44(5):737-749. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.00737 URL
[14]	Liu P, Dong S T, Li S K, Zhang J W. High nitrogen use efficiency of high-yielding maize[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(12):2232-2237. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.12.004. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.12.004
[15]	周培禄, 任红, 齐华, 赵明, 李从锋. 氮肥用量对两种不同类型玉米杂交种物质生产及氮素利用的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2017, 43(2):263-276. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00263. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00263
	Zhou P L, Ren H, Qi H, Zhao M, Li C F. Effects of nitrogen application rates on dry matter productivity and nitrogen utilization of different type maize hybrids[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2017, 43(2):263-276. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00263 URL
[16]	Mueller S M, Vyn T J. Maize plant resilience to N stress and post-silking N capacity changes over time:A review[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2016, 7:53. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.00053. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.00053 pmid: 26904038
[17]	李文娟, 何萍, 高强, 金继运, 侯云鹏, 尹彩霞, 张国辉. 不同氮效率玉米干物质形成及氮素营养特性差异研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2010, 16(1):51-57. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2010.0108. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2010.0108
	Li W J, He P, Gao Q, Jin J Y, Hou Y P, Yin C X, Zhang G H. Dry matter formation and nitrogen uptake in two maize cultivars differing in nitrogen use efficiency[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2010, 16(1):51-57.
[18]	Worku M, Bänziger M, Erley G S A, Friesen D, Diallo A O, Horst W J. Nitrogen uptake and utilization in contrasting nitrogen efficient tropical maize hybrids[J]. Crop Science, 2007, 47(2):519-528. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2005.05.0070. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2005.05.0070 URL
[19]	春亮, 陈范骏, 张福锁, 米国华. 不同氮效率玉米杂交种的根系生长、氮素吸收与产量形成[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2005, 11(5):615-619. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1008-505X.2005.05.008. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1008-505X.2005.05.008
	Chun L, Chen F J, Zhang F S, Mi G H. Root growth,nitrogen uptake and yield formation of hybrid maize with different N efficiency[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2005, 11(5):615-619.
[20]	Modhej A, Kaihani A, Lack S. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer on grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency in corn(Zea mays L.)hybrids under irrigated conditions[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,India Section B:Biological Sciences, 2014, 84(3):531-536. doi: 10.1007/s40011-013-0254-y. doi: 10.1007/s40011-013-0254-y
[21]	Liu Z, Zhu K L, Dong S T, Liu P, Zhao B, Zhang J W. Effects of integrated agronomic practices management on root growth and development of summer maize[J]. European Journal of Agronomy, 2017, 84:140-151. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2016.12.006. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2016.12.006 URL
[22]	Xu C L, Huang S B, Tian B J, Ren J H, Meng Q F, Wang P. Manipulating planting density and nitrogen fertilizer application to improve yield and reduce environmental impact in Chinese maize production[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8:1234. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01234. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01234 URL
[23]	张嫚, 周苏玫, 杨习文, 周燕, 杨蕊, 张珂珂, 贺德先, 尹钧. 减氮适墒对冬小麦土壤硝态氮分布和氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(20):3885-3897. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.20.005. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.20.005
	Zhang M, Zhou S M, Yang X W, Zhou Y, Yang R, Zhang K K, He D X, Yin J. Effects of nitrogen-reducing and suitable soil moisture on nitrate nitrogen distribution in soil,nitrogen absorption and utilization of winter wheat[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(20):3885-3897.
[24]	石玉, 于振文. 施氮量及底追比例对小麦产量、土壤硝态氮含量和氮平衡的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(11):3661-3669. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.11.019. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.11.019
	Shi Y, Yu Z W. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer rate and ratio of base and topdressing on yield of wheat,content of soil nitrate and nitrogen balance[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2006, 26(11):3661-3669.
[25]	Li P C, Zhuang Z J, Cai H G, Cheng S, Soomro A A, Liu Z G, Gu R L, Mi G H, Yuan L X, Chen F J. Use of genotype-environment interactions to elucidate the pattern of maize root plasticity to nitrogen deficiency[J]. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 2016, 58(3):242-253. doi: 10.1111/jipb.12384. doi: 10.1111/jipb.12384 URL
[26]	Zhen X A, Huang Y Q, Chen J T, Liu Z Z. The response of three maize inbred seedling with the different nitrogen use efficiency to light and nitrogen[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2009, 25:89-95.
[27]	Wang X K, Xing Y Y. Effects of mulching and nitrogen on soil nitrate-N distribution,leaching and nitrogen use efficiency of maize(Zea mays L.)[J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(8):e0161612. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161612. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161612 URL
[28]	王秀康, 邢英英, 李占斌. 覆膜和施氮肥对玉米产量和根层土壤硝态氮分布和去向的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(20):3944-3957. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.20.009. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.20.009
	Wang X K, Xing Y Y, Li Z B. Effect of mulching and nitrogen fertilizer on maize yield,distribution and fate of nitrogen in root layer[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(20):3944-3957.
[29]	李淑文, 文宏达, 周彦珍, 李雁鸣, 肖凯. 不同氮效率小麦品种氮素吸收和物质生产特性[J]. 中国农业科学, 2006, 39(10):1992-2000. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2006.10.007. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2006.10.007
	Li S W, Wen H D, Zhou Y Z, Li Y M, Xiao K. Characterization of nitrogen uptake and dry matter production in wheat varieties with different N efficiency[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2006, 39(10):1992-2000.

Year	Soil layer/ cm	Organic matter/ (g/kg)	Total N/ (g/kg)	Available nutrient /(mg/kg)			pH	Bulk density/ (g /cm³)
Year	Soil layer/ cm	Organic matter/ (g/kg)	Total N/ (g/kg)	Alkali hydrolysable N	Olsen-P	Exchangeable K	pH	Bulk density/ (g /cm³)
2015	0-20	13.83±0.12	1.87±0.05	55.65±0.12	4.75±0.05	160.33±1.03	8.11±0.03	1.30±0.02
	20-40	11.44±0.08	1.83±0.03	30.74±0.17	1.56±0.03	123.83±0.85	8.14±0.02	1.40±0.03
	40-60	9.18±0.11	1.62±0.02	15.23±0.05	0.71±0.02	104.17±0.47	8.19±0.01	1.42±0.01
	60-80	7.25±0.05	1.37±0.02	10.59±0.04	0.49±0.02	89.72±0.79	8.19±0.02	1.43±0.03
2016	0-20	12.05±0.07	1.21±0.05	61.83±0.05	4.35±0.05	146.13±0.56	7.81±0.02	1.28±0.03
	20-40	10.31±0.05	1.27±0.03	53.67±0.09	2.36±0.03	111.76±0.92	7.84±0.01	1.41±0.02
	40-60	8.45±0.04	1.16±0.02	34.83±0.05	0.84±0.01	100.43±0.34	7.91±0.01	1.42±0.02
	60-80	6.05±0.07	1.02±0.01	29.75±0.07	0.53±0.02	78.52±0.59	7.90±0.02	1.44±0.01

Year	Soil layer/ cm	Organic matter/ (g/kg)	Total N/ (g/kg)	Available nutrient /(mg/kg)			pH	Bulk density/ (g /cm³)
Year	Soil layer/ cm	Organic matter/ (g/kg)	Total N/ (g/kg)	Alkali hydrolysable N	Olsen-P	Exchangeable K	pH	Bulk density/ (g /cm³)
2015	0-20	13.83±0.12	1.87±0.05	55.65±0.12	4.75±0.05	160.33±1.03	8.11±0.03	1.30±0.02
	20-40	11.44±0.08	1.83±0.03	30.74±0.17	1.56±0.03	123.83±0.85	8.14±0.02	1.40±0.03
	40-60	9.18±0.11	1.62±0.02	15.23±0.05	0.71±0.02	104.17±0.47	8.19±0.01	1.42±0.01
	60-80	7.25±0.05	1.37±0.02	10.59±0.04	0.49±0.02	89.72±0.79	8.19±0.02	1.43±0.03
2016	0-20	12.05±0.07	1.21±0.05	61.83±0.05	4.35±0.05	146.13±0.56	7.81±0.02	1.28±0.03
	20-40	10.31±0.05	1.27±0.03	53.67±0.09	2.36±0.03	111.76±0.92	7.84±0.01	1.41±0.02
	40-60	8.45±0.04	1.16±0.02	34.83±0.05	0.84±0.01	100.43±0.34	7.91±0.01	1.42±0.02
	60-80	6.05±0.07	1.02±0.01	29.75±0.07	0.53±0.02	78.52±0.59	7.90±0.02	1.44±0.01

Cultivar	Nitrogen management	Nitrogen accumulation
		Sowing stage-V12		V12-VT		VT-R6		Nitrogen accumulation
		2015	2016	2015	2016	2015	2016	2015	2016
ZH311	B1	52.61±0.82e	53.40±1.86f	12.12±1.33c	13.86±2.56fg	53.78±4.89de	64.38±0.50cd	118.50±2.71f	131.64±1.89g
	B2	71.60±1.35a	106.48±2.08a	25.47±1.87b	19.77±4.08de	72.83±4.59a	89.85±3.67a	169.91±5.01a	216.10±4.76a
	B3	67.89±1.80b	96.60±4.34b	15.84±1.26c	24.58±5.23bcd	64.57±4.44bc	62.07±4.69cd	148.30±3.14c	183.25±3.07d
	B4	61.57±0.45c	89.23±2.40c	28.20±3.28ab	41.11±1.02a	70.67±3.32ab	75.11±4.21b	160.44±3.18b	205.45±3.21b
	B5	57.08±0.38d	81.09±2.96d	35.22±5.69a	30.05±2.91b	70.26±7.34ab	87.12±0.86a	162.57±3.30b	198.26±1.88c
	Average	65.15±0.41A	85.36±0.67A	23.37±2.13A	25.88±1.09A	66.42±3.25A	75.70±1.52A	151.94±2.01A	186.94±1.43A
XY508	B1	44.69±2.73f	38.36±2.34h	12.98±0.48c	11.24±3.49g	38.74±5.66f	61.72±2.23cd	96.40±3.26g	111.33±3.39h
	B2	65.67±0.58b	87.58±2.54c	17.33±3.51c	22.42±4.18cde	46.46±2.12ef	65.05±3.62c	129.46±2.89e	175.06±2.32e
	B3	62.58±2.42c	87.95±1.72c	12.19±3.26c	17.88±0.34ef	59.10±1.39cd	59.25±2.58d	133.86±2.46de	165.08±1.25f
	B4	60.11±3.00c	66.56±4.34e	14.81±1.80c	27.98±1.52bc	54.76±3.99d	66.52±2.23c	129.69±2.97e	161.07±1.43f
	B5	46.57±1.00f	47.85±2.42g	25.40±2.78b	40.76±3.05a	63.10±3.33bc	84.83±2.39a	135.06±0.86d	173.44±0.70e
	Average	55.92±1.10B	65.66±0.43B	16.54±1.63B	24.06±0.55A	52.43±1.37B	67.48±1.39B	124.90±1.91B	157.19±1.27B
F value	Years(Y)	722.17^**		23.24^**		126.48^**		2 183.88^**
	Cultivar(C)	447.38^**		17.31^**		105.49^**		1 555.40^**
	Nitrogen(N)	458.84^**		48.56^**		45.11^**		847.35^**
	Y×C	120.80^**		5.81^*		7.11^*		3.51ns
	Y×N	85.06^**		5.68^**		12.76^**		54.73^**
	C×N	15.78^**		5.44^**		13.04^**		42.41^**
	Y×C×N	9.60^**		5.02^**		0.79ns		4.20^**

Cultivar	Nitrogen management	Nitrogen accumulation
		Sowing stage-V12		V12-VT		VT-R6		Nitrogen accumulation
		2015	2016	2015	2016	2015	2016	2015	2016
ZH311	B1	52.61±0.82e	53.40±1.86f	12.12±1.33c	13.86±2.56fg	53.78±4.89de	64.38±0.50cd	118.50±2.71f	131.64±1.89g
	B2	71.60±1.35a	106.48±2.08a	25.47±1.87b	19.77±4.08de	72.83±4.59a	89.85±3.67a	169.91±5.01a	216.10±4.76a
	B3	67.89±1.80b	96.60±4.34b	15.84±1.26c	24.58±5.23bcd	64.57±4.44bc	62.07±4.69cd	148.30±3.14c	183.25±3.07d
	B4	61.57±0.45c	89.23±2.40c	28.20±3.28ab	41.11±1.02a	70.67±3.32ab	75.11±4.21b	160.44±3.18b	205.45±3.21b
	B5	57.08±0.38d	81.09±2.96d	35.22±5.69a	30.05±2.91b	70.26±7.34ab	87.12±0.86a	162.57±3.30b	198.26±1.88c
	Average	65.15±0.41A	85.36±0.67A	23.37±2.13A	25.88±1.09A	66.42±3.25A	75.70±1.52A	151.94±2.01A	186.94±1.43A
XY508	B1	44.69±2.73f	38.36±2.34h	12.98±0.48c	11.24±3.49g	38.74±5.66f	61.72±2.23cd	96.40±3.26g	111.33±3.39h
	B2	65.67±0.58b	87.58±2.54c	17.33±3.51c	22.42±4.18cde	46.46±2.12ef	65.05±3.62c	129.46±2.89e	175.06±2.32e
	B3	62.58±2.42c	87.95±1.72c	12.19±3.26c	17.88±0.34ef	59.10±1.39cd	59.25±2.58d	133.86±2.46de	165.08±1.25f
	B4	60.11±3.00c	66.56±4.34e	14.81±1.80c	27.98±1.52bc	54.76±3.99d	66.52±2.23c	129.69±2.97e	161.07±1.43f
	B5	46.57±1.00f	47.85±2.42g	25.40±2.78b	40.76±3.05a	63.10±3.33bc	84.83±2.39a	135.06±0.86d	173.44±0.70e
	Average	55.92±1.10B	65.66±0.43B	16.54±1.63B	24.06±0.55A	52.43±1.37B	67.48±1.39B	124.90±1.91B	157.19±1.27B
F value	Years(Y)	722.17^**		23.24^**		126.48^**		2 183.88^**
	Cultivar(C)	447.38^**		17.31^**		105.49^**		1 555.40^**
	Nitrogen(N)	458.84^**		48.56^**		45.11^**		847.35^**
	Y×C	120.80^**		5.81^*		7.11^*		3.51ns
	Y×N	85.06^**		5.68^**		12.76^**		54.73^**
	C×N	15.78^**		5.44^**		13.04^**		42.41^**
	Y×C×N	9.60^**		5.02^**		0.79ns		4.20^**

Cultivar	Nitrogen management	Ratio of stem plus sheath			Ratio of leaf lamina			Ratio of panicle
Cultivar	Nitrogen management	V12	VT	R6	V12	VT	R6	VT	R6
2015
ZH311	B1	38.11±0.76e	23.03±0.93cd	11.39±0.13f	61.89±0.76a	62.96±2.86a	12.38±0.79b	14.01±3.74c	76.23±0.75a
	B2	47.93±0.95a	31.27±1.89a	18.28±0.59a	52.07±0.95e	53.15±0.74c	13.12±0.57ab	16.91±1.38bc	68.60±1.07de
	B3	42.38±0.80d	28.42±3.33ab	16.58±0.35b	57.62±0.80b	54.21±1.74c	13.61±0.45a	17.37±3.10bc	69.81±0.15cd
	B4	44.63±1.41bcd	25.62±2.69bc	15.98±0.37bc	55.37±1.41bcd	57.98±1.38b	13.58±0.16a	16.74±2.55bc	70.44±0.35c
	B5	46.33±0.95ab	21.06±1.45d	19.34±0.75a	53.67±0.95de	64.83±1.36a	12.86±0.27ab	14.11±0.38c	67.80±0.52e
	Average	43.88±0.37A	25.88±1.41A	16.32±0.26A	56.12±0.37A	58.62±0.66A	13.11±0.21A	15.83±0.54B	70.58±0.32B
XY508	B1	44.38±1.32bcd	20.37±1.82d	13.73±1.59e	55.62±1.32bcd	63.81±3.47a	9.97±0.73d	15.81±1.91bc	76.30±1.36a
	B2	44.83±1.53bc	22.80±1.84cd	14.95±0.57cd	55.17±1.53cd	55.02±3.30bc	9.99±0.29d	22.18±1.64a	75.06±0.79a
	B3	45.17±0.70bc	27.34±1.81b	14.84±0.51d	54.83±0.70cd	53.32±1.65c	10.02±0.32d	19.34±1.70ab	75.14±0.70a
	B4	43.20±1.42cd	21.40±1.05d	15.33±0.40cd	56.80±1.42bc	55.72±1.34bc	11.32±0.58c	22.87±2.17a	73.36±0.85b
	B5	44.61±2.31bcd	20.54±3.21d	13.63±0.60e	55.39±2.31bcd	56.93±2.02bc	10.75±0.17cd	22.53±2.50a	75.62±0.77a
	Average	44.44±0.56A	22.49±1.54B	14.50±0.48B	55.56±0.56A	56.29±1.87B	10.41±0.07B	20.55±1.86A	75.10±0.52A
2016
ZH311	B1	41.61±2.16cd	25.24±1.12de	10.07±0.41e	58.39±2.16ab	59.86±0.36a	16.77±0.56a	14.91±1.45de	73.16±0.19b
	B2	47.58±1.93a	32.12±0.50a	18.80±1.42a	52.42±1.93d	55.30±0.18bcd	15.86±0.68a	12.58±0.67e	65.34±1.54f
	B3	45.70±1.03ab	29.04±1.66b	17.62±0.52b	54.30±1.14cd	55.68±2.14bc	14.18±0.53b	15.29±2.47de	68.20±0.12e
	B4	42.99±2.66bcd	29.52±0.49b	17.31±0.86b	57.01±2.66abc	57.71±0.72ab	13.35±0.75bc	12.77±0.52e	69.33±1.32e
	B5	39.54±2.19d	29.33±1.26b	17.99±0.77ab	60.46±2.19a	55.44±2.04bc	13.21±0.57bc	15.22±2.58de	68.81±0.25e
	Average	43.49±1.21A	29.05±0.38A	16.36±0.33A	56.52±1.21A	56.80±0.35A	14.67±0.24A	14.15±0.66B	68.97±0.56B
XY508	B1	45.67±2.77ab	22.65±0.77d	12.97±0.56d	54.33±2.77cd	50.71±2.54e	11.76±0.63de	26.64±2.09a	75.28±0.29a
	B2	41.27±0.81cd	29.70±0.18b	17.31±0.86b	58.73±0.81ab	54.33±0.93cd	11.15±0.38e	15.97±1.09de	71.54±0.72cd
	B3	44.27±1.54abc	26.85±0.82c	15.07±0.43c	55.73±1.54bcd	54.86±0.79cd	13.95±0.76b	18.28±0.37cd	70.98±0.53d
	B4	41.01±1.52cd	21.75±0.64e	18.25±0.26ab	58.99±1.52ab	54.07±1.08cd	12.65±0.67cd	21.18±1.18bc	69.10±0.86e
	B5	40.61±2.12cd	25.43±2.14cd	13.80±0.39d	59.39±2.12ab	52.80±2.03de	13.40±0.85bc	21.77±2.18b	72.80±1.10bc
	Average	42.57±0.84A	25.88±0.29B	15.48±0.28B	57.44±0.84A	53.35±0.74B	12.58±0.14B	20.77±0.64A	71.94±0.15A
F value	Years(Y)	5.39^*	60.63^**	7.83^**	5.39^*	25.29^**	155.13^**	1.60ns	127.86^**
	Cultivar(C)	0.13ns	60.71^**	54.27^**	0.13ns	37.10^**	254.89^**	97.74^**	315.81^**
	Nitrogen(N)	5.29^**	29.95^**	103.85^**	5.29^**	14.20^**	0.96ns	0.95ns	76.25^**
	Y×C	2.31ns	0.07ns	6.55^*	2.31ns	1.38ns	4.09ns	2.76ns	13.47^**
	Y×N	7.85^**	6.45^**	10.64^**	7.85^**	14.91^**	7.82^**	10.66^**	4.12^**
	C×N	10.94^**	2.96^*	48.66^**	10.94^**	7.41^**	15.99^**	2.90^*	27.32^**
	Y×C×N	1.59ns	3.48^*	1.78ns	1.59ns	9.89^**	14.67^**	3.57^*	6.54^**

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export