不同土壤水分条件下北方稻田耗水规律研究

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用田测法研究不同土壤水分条件下稻田需水规律.试验采用淹灌、湿润灌和间歇灌3种灌水处理.结果表明,在整个生育期内由田测法测得的淹灌、湿润灌和间歇灌3种处理的蒸散量分别为889.1、635.9和775.9mm,蒸散速率分别为6.9、4.9和6.0mm·d^-1.与淹灌处理相比,湿润灌和间歇灌处理分别节水28.5%和12.7%.在充分供水的情况下,由Penman法计算的潜在蒸散值分别比田测法小29.30%.淹灌、湿润灌和间歇灌3种处理的生物产量分别为16438.22、15887.94和15757.88kg·hm^-2,经济产量分别为8014.01、7828.91和7853.93kg·hm^-2.统计分析结果表明,3种处理间的产量差别不显著.淹灌、湿润灌和间歇灌3种处理的水分利用效率(WUE)分别为9.01、12.31和10.12kg·hm^-2·mm^-1,淹灌的WUE分别比湿润灌和间歇灌减少26.8%和11.0%.对比分析结果表明,湿润灌的节水效果最好.

关键词: 水稻, 蒸散, 水分平衡, 土壤水分

Abstract: Field experiment with three irrigation treatments,i.e.,continuous flooding irrigation (CSF), moisture condition irrigation (MTC), and intermittent irrigation (IT) were installed to study the water requirement of paddy fields. The results showed that in field experiment,the evapotranspiration (ET) was 889.1, 635.9 and 775.9 mm,and the evapotranspiration rate was 6.9, 4.9 and 6.0 mm穌^-1 for CSF,MTC and IT,respectively during the entire growing season. MTC and ITwere less than CSFby 28.5 and 12.7%.Under sufficient water supply, the evapotranspiration calcutated by Penman formula was less than that from field experiment by 29.3%, during stages from returning green to milk. The biomass was 16438.22,15887.94 and 15757.88 kg穐m^-2,and the grain yield was 8014.01,7828.91 and 7853.93 kg穐m^-2 for CSF,MTC and IT,respectively.No significant differences were found among three treatments.The water use efficiency (WUE) was 9.01, 12.31 and 10.12 kg穐m^-2 穖m^-1 for CSF,MTC and IT,respectively.The WUE of MTC and ITwere higher than that of CSFby 26.8 and 11.0%, showing that MTC was a comparatively water saving irrigation treatment.

Key words: Rice, Evapotranspiration, Water balance, Soil water

中图分类号:

S152.7

王笑影, 闻大中, 梁文举. 不同土壤水分条件下北方稻田耗水规律研究[J]. 应用生态学报, 2003, (6): 925-929.

WANG Xiaoying, WEN Dazhong, LIANG Wenju . Water requirement of paddy field under different soil water conditions[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, (6): 925-929.

参考文献

[1] Adachi K, Inoue H. 1988. Effects of puddling on percolation con trol of paddy field. In:Proceeding of First International Symposium on Paddy Soil Fertility. Thailand: Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai. 917～928
[2] KeX-X(柯晓新),Yang X-G(杨兴国),Zhang X-D(张旭东).1995.Mircro-meterological methods for measuring and estimating evapotranspiration in farmland.Agric Res Arid Areas(干旱地区农业研究),13(1):3l～40(in Chinese)
[3] Lu J, Hirasawa T. 2001. Study on intermittent irrigation for pad dy rice Ⅰ . Water use efficiency. Pedosphere, 11(1):49～56
[4] Lu J, Ookawa T, Hirasawa T. 2000. The effects of irrigation regimes on the water use, dry matter production and physiological responses of paddy rice. Plant Soil, 223:207～216
[5] Luo L-G(罗良国),Xu J -M(许健民),LuoQ-S(罗启仕).1996. Water balance and its effciency in rice ecosystems of northern Chi- na.Chin J ApplEcol(应用生态学报),7(4):371～376(in Chi- nese)
[6] MaX-L(马秀玲),DiaoY-y(刁瑛元),Wu Z-L(吴钟玲).1996. Agricultural Meteorology. Beijing: Chinese Agricultural Science and Technology Press. 60～65 (in Chinese)
[7] Peng SZ, Li SS, Xu GL, et al. 1994. New water consumption pattern of rice under water-saving irrigation. Irri Drain Sys, 8: 97～108
[8] Ramamoorthy K, Selvarao KV, Chinnaswami KN. 1993. Variable response of rice to different irrigation regimes. Ind J Agron, 38: 68～469
[9] Taylor SA. 1971. The Physics of Soil Science. New York: Academic Press. 32～59
[10] Tajima K. 1995. Occurrence and mechanism of drought damage. In:Matsuo T, ed. Science of the Rice Plant 2. Physiology. Tokyo: Food and Agriculture Policy Research Center. 838～849 (in Japanese)
[11] Wang Y-X(王懿贤).1983.Tables for quick computation of the Penman estimate of potential evapotranspiration.G-eogr Res(地理研究),2(1):93～107(in Chinese)
[12] Zhu X-M(朱雪梅),Luo Q-S(罗启仕),Wen D-Z(闻大中).2000.Water saving of rice fields under different soil treatments.Chin J Appl Ecol(应用生态学报),11(supp):31～34(in Chinese)
[13] Zuo D-K(左大康).1991.The development of the field evapotran spiration measurement and rule studyin China.In:Zuo D-K(左大康),Xie X-Q(谢贤群)eds.Study ofthe Field Evaporation.Bei jing:Meteorology Press.1～4(in Chinese)

[1]	吕佳佳, 初征, 李百超, 宫丽娟, 周宝才, 刘丹, 王冬妮, 姜丽霞. 东北地区水稻开花期冷涡型光-温-水复合逆境产量损失评估指标构建 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(3): 731-738.
[2]	吴绍雄, 张勇勇, 赵文智, 康文蓉, 田子晗. 基于COSMIC模型的宇宙射线中子反演荒漠-绿洲区土壤水分 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(9): 2445-2452.
[3]	蓝浩宸, 刘琰琰, 张玉芳, 康杨. 基于标准化降水蒸散指数的川西高原干旱时空变化 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(6): 1533-1540.
[4]	明姣, 杨光, 赵允格, 马昕昕, 孙会, 乔羽. 放牧对降雨条件下黄土高原退耕草地土壤水分补给的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(6): 1555-1562.
[5]	韦兆伟, 陈若谷, 殷楠, 柯浩楠, 沙雅晴, 赵峻池, 李琪, 胡正华. 基于稻瘟病的水稻抗逆性对CO₂浓度和温度升高的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(6): 1563-1571.
[6]	南益聪, 杨永刚, 王泽青, 周杨, 苏巧梅. 煤矸石对矿区土壤特性与植物生长的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(5): 1253-1262.
[7]	娄运生, 于玉洁, 刘燕, 杨蕙琳, 周东雪. 施硅对夜间增温下南方水稻生长、产量和品质的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(4): 985-992.
[8]	宁川川, 陈悦桂, 柳瑞, 李彤欣, 陈海浪, 田纪辉, 蔡昆争. 减氮配施秸秆生物炭对双季稻产量和硅、氮营养的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(4): 993-1001.
[9]	石丽红, 唐海明, 文丽, 程凯凯, 李超, 李微艳, 肖小平. 长期不同施肥模式对南方双季稻田生态系统净碳汇效应和经济收益的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(9): 2450-2456.
[10]	黄辉, 郑昌玲, 张劲松, 孟平. 1980—2019年南太行地区气候变化趋势 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(8): 2139-2145.
[11]	谷康民, 赵允格, 张子辉, 吉静怡, 郭雅丽. 模拟放牧干扰对黄土丘陵区生物结皮坡面土壤水分入渗的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7): 1827-1834.
[12]	张冠华, 易亮, 丁文峰, 王一然, 牛俊, 李建明, 孙宝洋. 三峡库区苔藓生物结皮对土壤水分入渗的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7): 1835-1842.
[13]	岳艳鹏, 成龙, 孙迎涛, 庞营军, 吴波, 石麟, 何金军, 贾晓红. 毛乌素沙地生物结皮覆盖区土壤水分收支变化特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7): 1861-1870.
[14]	胡旺, 赵杭, 周旋, 王艺哲, 张含丰, 张玉平. 施用南荻生物炭对不同类型土壤氨挥发的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7): 1919-1926.
[15]	邴龙飞, 王娇月, 尹岩, 郗凤明, 张文凤, 马铭靖, 牛乐. 地市尺度气候调节服务评估——以福州市为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7): 1966-1974.