利用方式、种植模式和施氮对多年生牧草产量及品质的影响
English
-
参考文献
[1] 袁晓波, 尚振艳, 牛得草, 傅华. 黄土高原生态退化与恢复. 草业科学, 2015, 32(3): 363-371. YUAN X B, SHANG Z Y, NIU D C, FU H. Advances in ecological degeneration and restoration of Loess Plateau. Pratacultural Science, 2015, 32(3): 363-371.
[2] SHI H, SHAO M A. Soil and water loss from the Loess Plateau in China. Journal of Arid Environments, 2000, 45(1): 9-20.
[3] 胡良军, 邵明安. 黄土高原植被恢复的水分生态环境研究. 应用生态学报, 2002(8): 1045-1048. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.2002.08.027 HU L J, SHAO M A. Review on water eco-environment in vegetation restoration in Loess Plateau. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2002(8): 1045-1048. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.2002.08.027
[4] XIA Z, GUO Q Y, ZHAN B L, PENG L. Experimental study on slope runoff, erosion and sediment under different vegetation types. Water Resources Management, 2014, 28(9): 2415-2433. doi: 10.1007/s11269-014-0603-5
[5] 山仑, 徐炳成. 黄土高原半干旱地区建设稳定人工草地的探讨. 草业学报, 2009, 18(2): 1-2. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1004-5759.2009.02.001 Shanlun, XU B C. Study on constructing stable artificial grassland in semi-arid area of Loess Plateau. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(2): 1-2. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1004-5759.2009.02.001
[6] 石云. 基于景观格局变化的黄土丘陵沟壑区生态恢复评价与分析. 银川: 宁夏大学博士学位论文, 2016. SHI Y. Evaluation and analysis of ecological restoration of Loess hilly and gully region based on landscape pattern changes. PhD Thesis. Yinchuan: Ningxia University, 2016.
[7] 王明君, 韩国栋, 崔国文, 赵萌莉. 放牧强度对草甸草原生产力和多样性的影响. 生态学杂志, 2010, 29(5): 862-868. WANG M J, HAN G D, CUI G W, ZHAO M L. Effects of grazing intensity on the biodiversity and productivity of meadow steppe. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2010, 29(5): 862-868.
[8] 侯扶江, 杨中艺. 放牧对草地的作用. 生态学报, 2006, 26(1): 244-264. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.01.031 HOU F J, YANG Z Y. Effects of grazing of livestock on grassland. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2006, 26(1): 244-264. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.01.031
[9] 杨春华, 张新全. 人工建植混播草地技术研究. 草业科学, 2003(3): 42-46. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.03.011 YANG C H, ZHANG X Q. Study on the techniques of mixed sown grassland establishment. Pratacultural Science, 2003(3): 42-46. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.03.011
[10] 谢开云, 赵云, 李向林, 何峰, 万里强, 王丹, 韩冬梅. 豆–禾混播草地种间关系研究进展. 草业学报, 2013, 22(3): 284-296. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20130337 XIE K Y, ZHAO Y, LI X L, HE F, WAN L Q, WANG D, HAN D M. Relationships between grasses and legumes in mixed grassland: A review. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(3): 284-296. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20130337
[11] 韩德梁, 何胜江, 陈超, 杨光梅, 韩烈保. 豆禾混播草地群落稳定性的比较. 生态环境, 2008, 17(5): 1974-1979. HAN D L, HE S J, CHEN C, YANG G M, HAN L B. The comparison stability of the mixed grassland with leguminous. Ecologyand Environment, 2008, 17(5): 1974-1979.
[12] BRANKO ĆUPINA, SVETLANA VUJIĆ, DORDE KRSTIĆ, BRANKO DJURIĆ, LOMBNAES P. Performance of legume–grass mixtures in the West Balkan region. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 2016, 67(1): 1-11.
[13] FOSTER A, VERA C L, MALHI S S, CLARKE F R. Forage yield of simple and complex grass–legume mixtures under two management strategies. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2014, 94(1): 41-50. doi: 10.4141/cjps2013-095
[14] 包乌云, 赵萌莉, 徐军, 高新磊, 赵巴音那木拉. 苜蓿与禾本科牧草的混播效果. 草业科学, 2013, 30(11): 1782-1789. BAO W Y, ZHAO M L, XU J, GAO X L, Zhaobayinnamula. Study on mixculture of alfalfa with grasses. Pratacultural Science, 2013, 30(11): 1782-1789.
[15] 马春晖, 韩建国, 李鸿祥, 毛培胜, 戎郁萍. 播种比例、施氮量和刈割期对混播草地牧草产量和质量的影响. 中国草地, 1999(4): 10-17. MA C H, HAN J G, LI H X, MAO P S, RONG Y P. Effect of seeding rates, nitrogen fertilizer and harvest time on the yield and quality of oat-vetch mixture. Grassland of China, 1999(4): 10-17.
[16] 刘敏, 龚吉蕊, 王忆慧, 张梓榆, 徐沙, 罗亲普. 豆禾混播建植人工草地对牧草产量和草质的影响. 干旱区研究, 2016, 33(1): 179-185. LIU M, GONG J R, WANG Y H, ZHANG Z Y, XU S, LUO Q P. Effects of legume-grass mixed sowing on forage grass yield and quality in artificial grassland. Arid Zone Research, 2016, 33(1): 179-185.
[17] 刘秀丽, 李元恒. 红豆草单宁的研究概况. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2016, 37(12): 52-57. doi: 10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2016.12.015 LIU X L, LI Y H. Research situation on tannins from sainfoin. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2016, 37(12): 52-57. doi: 10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2016.12.015
[18] 德科加. 青藏高原高寒草甸草地NPK施肥组合研究. 草原与草坪, 2010, 33(4): 22-25. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-5500.2010.04.005 DE K J. Study on NPK fertilizer application in alpine meadow on Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Grassland and Turf, 2010, 33(4): 22-25. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-5500.2010.04.005
[19] 李威, 温翠平, 漆智平, 唐树梅. 施氮水平和方式对王草生产特性和品质的影响. 草业科学, 2012, 29(8): 1262-1271. LI W, WEN C P, QI Z P, TANG S M. Effects of different N fertilization modes and rates on the production and quality of king grass. Pratacultural Science, 2012, 29(8): 1262-1271.
[20] 庞立东, 李卫军, 朱进忠. 追施氮肥对苏丹草光合特性及种子产量的影响. 草业科学, 2014, 31(12): 2286-2292. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2014-0371 PANG L D, LI W J, ZHU J Z. Effects of topdressing nitrogen fertilizer on photosynthetic characteristics and seed yields of sudangrass. Pratacultural Science, 2014, 31(12): 2286-2292. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2014-0371
[21] ZHANG Y F, NIU S L, XU W H, HAN Y. Species-specific response of photosynthesis to burning and nitrogen fertilization. Journal of integrative plant biology, 2008, 50(5): 565-574.
[22] 鲁子瑜, 邹厚远. 半干旱黄土丘陵区红豆草生长发育规律及其影响因子的研究. 草业科学, 1991(2): 10-15, 72. LU Z Y, ZOU H Y. Study on the growth and development law and its influencing factors in semi-arid Loess Hilly region. Pratacultural Science, 1991(2): 10-15, 72.
[23] 乔洁, 崔秀艳, 王君芳, 刘卓, 李洪涛, 马训骏, 罗文浩, 娄玉杰. 土壤水分、氮、磷、钾含量与牧草营养成分的关系. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2009(17): 58-60. QIAO J, CUI X Y, WANG J F, LIU Z, LI H T, MA X J, LUO W H, LOU Y J. Relationship between soil moisture, N, P, K content and forage nutrient composition. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2009(17): 58-60.
[24] 王君芳. 不同施氮量、留茬高度、刈割时期对无芒雀麦生产性能的影响. 长春: 吉林农业大学硕士学位论文, 2008. WANG J F. Effects of nitrogen application, stubble height and mowing period on performance on Bromus inermis. Master Thesis. Changchun: Jilin Agricultural University, 2008.
[25] 胡冬雪, 王建丽, 潘多锋, 张瑞博, 李道明, 唐凤兰, 申忠宝. 施氮肥对羊草栽培草地生产性能及品质的影响. 中国草地学报, 2017, 39(1): 35-41. HU D X, WANG J L, PAN D F, ZHANG R B, LI D M, TANG F L, SHEN B Z. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer on the performance and quality of Leymus chinensis cultivated grassland. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2017, 39(1): 35-41.
[26] 李小梅, 陈天峰, 彭安琪, 罗燕, 张新全, 闫艳红. 氮肥种类对多花黑麦草产量与品质的影响. 草地学报, 2017, 25(6): 1368-1375. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2017.06.030 LI X M, CHEN T F, PENG A Q, LUO Y, ZHANG X Q, YAN Y H. Effects of different nitrogen fertilizer forms on production and quality on Lolium multiflorum. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2017, 25(6): 1368-1375. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2017.06.030
[27] 纪亚君, 周青平. 高寒牧区禾本科牧草施肥研究. 中国土壤与肥料, 2009(1): 27-30. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-6257.2009.01.007 JI Y J, ZHOU Q P. Study on fertilizer application to alpine grassland in Qinghai. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2009(1): 27-30. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-6257.2009.01.007
[28] 苏富源, 郝明德, 郭慧慧, 蒙静, 肖庆红, 武东波, 刘公社. 施用氮肥对人工羊草草地产量及养分吸收的影响. 草地学报, 2015, 23(4): 893-896. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2015.04.035 SU F Y, HAO M D, GUO H H, MENG J, XIAO Q H, WU D B, LIU G S. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer on the yield and nutrition absorption of artificial Leymus chinensis grassland. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2015, 23(4): 893-896. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2015.04.035
[29] 张吉鹍. 反刍家畜粗饲料品质评定的指标及其应用比较. 中国畜牧杂志, 2006, 42(5): 47-50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-7033.2006.05.017 ZHANG J K. Quality evaluation parameters of ruminant coarse fodder and their application comparison. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2006, 42(5): 47-50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-7033.2006.05.017
[30] 周秉荣, 马宗泰, 李红梅, 贺晓龙. 刈割及放牧对牧草生长的补偿效应. 青海大学学报(自然科学版), 2006(4): 18-20. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8996.2006.04.006 ZHOU B R, MA Z T, LI H M, HE X L. Recovering effect of cradle and grazing on growth of forage. Journal of Qinghai University (Natural Science Edition), 2006(4): 18-20. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8996.2006.04.006
[31] 徐智超, 祁瑜, 梅宝玲, 卓义, 王凤歌, 武胜男, 邬嘉华, 温璐. 放牧方式对人工草地植被生物量及碳密度的影响. 北方农业学报, 2018, 46(4): 110-117. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-1197.2018.04.20 XU Z C, QI Y, MEI B L, ZHUO Y, WANG F G, WU S N, WU J H, WEN L. Effects of grazing methods on vegetation productivity and carbon density in artificial grassland. Journal of Northern Agriculture, 2018, 46(4): 110-117. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-1197.2018.04.20
[32] 张荣华, 安沙舟, 杨海宽, 李海, 李军保. 模拟放牧强度对针茅再生性能的影响. 草业科学, 2008(4): 141-144. AHGN R H, AN S Z, YANG H K, LI H, LI J B. Effect of simulate grazing intensity on regrowth capability of Stipa capillata. Pratacultural Science, 2008(4): 141-144.
[33] 柴林荣, 孙义, 王宏, 常生华, 侯扶江, 程云湘. 牦牛放牧强度对甘南高寒草甸群落特征与牧草品质的影响. 草业科学, 2018, 35(1): 18-26. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2017-0113 CHAI L R, SUN Y, WANG H, CHANG S H, HOU F J, CHENG Y X. Effect of yak grazing intensity on characteristics of plant communities and forage quality in Gannan alpine meadow. Pratacultural Science, 2018, 35(1): 18-26. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2017-0113
[34] 章异平, 江源, 刘全儒, 任斐鹏. 放牧对五台山高山、亚高山草甸牧草品质的影响. 生态学报, 2011, 31(13): 3659-3667. ZHANG Y P, JIANG Y, LIU Q R, REN F P. Impacts of grazing on herbage quality of the alpine and subalpine meadows within Wutai Mountain. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(13): 3659-3667.
[35] 董全民, 赵新全, 马玉寿. 放牧强度和放牧时间对高寒混播草地牧草营养含量的影响. 中国草地学报, 2007(4): 67-73. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2007.04.012 DONG Q M, ZHAO X Q, MA Y S. Effects of grazing intensity and time on forage nutrition contents in alpine mixed -sown grassland. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2007(4): 67-73. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2007.04.012
[36] HEITSCHMIDT R K, DOWHOWER S L, CANON P S K. Effects of stocking rate on quantity and quality of available forage in a southern mixed grass prairie. Journal of Range Management, 1989, 42(6): 468-473. doi: 10.2307/3899230
[37] 付娟娟, 益西措姆, 陈浩, 苗彦军, 呼天明, 许岳飞. 青藏高原高山嵩草草甸优势植物营养成分对放牧的响应. 草业科学, 2013, 30(4): 560-565. FU J J, Yixicuomu, CHEN H, MIAO Y J, HU T M, XU Y F. Responses of dominant plant nutrients to grazing intensity in Kobresia pygmaea meadow of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Pratacultural Science, 2013, 30(4): 560-565.
[38] 白春利, 阿拉塔, 陈海军, 单玉梅, 额尔敦花, 王明玖. 氮素和水分添加对短花针茅荒漠草原植物群落特征的影响. 中国草地学报, 2013, 35(2): 69-75. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2013.02.013 BAI C L, Alata, CHEN H J, SHAN Y M, Eerdunhua, WANG M J. Effects of addition of nitrogen and water on plant community characteristics of Stipa breviflora desert steppe. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2013, 35(2): 69-75. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2013.02.013
[39] 拉旦, 李延红, 王堃. 高寒地区施肥对多年人工草地生产性能的影响. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2006(10): 73-74. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-7034.2006.10.038 Ladan, LI Y H, WANG K. Effect of fertilization on production performance of artificial grassland in alpine region. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2006(10): 73-74. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-7034.2006.10.038
[40] 王建光. 农牧交错区苜蓿–禾草混播模式研究. 北京: 中国农业科学院博士学位论文, 2012. WANG J G. Study on mixed–sowing modes of alfalfa and grasses in the farming pasture region. PhD Thesis. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2012.
[41] 寇明科, 王安碌, 张生璨, 苗建勋, 康秀芬. 不同施肥处理对提高高寒人工混播草地产草量的试验研究. 草业科学, 2003, 20(4): 14-15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.04.005 KOU M K, WANG A L, ZHANG S C, MIAO J X, KANG X F. Study on the effects of different fertilizer treatments on mixed grassland yield in Luqu, Gannan Autonomous Region. Prataculutral Science, 2003, 20(4): 14-15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.04.005
[42] 苏生海, 温随良, 李雪屏. 红豆草氮磷肥不同配比的试验. 中国草原, 1987(5): 36-38. SU S H, WEN S L, LI X P. The experiment of different ratio of nitrogen and phosphate fertilizer of Onobrychis viciaefoia. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 1987(5): 36-38.
[43] 谢开云. 氮素添加对紫花苜蓿和无芒雀麦种间关系及氮素平衡的影响. 北京: 中国农业大学博士学位论文, 2015. XIE K Y. Effect of nitrogen addition on interspecific relationship and nitrogen balance of alfalfa and smooth bromegrass. PhD Thesis. Beijing: Chinese Agricultural University, 2015.
[44] 杨桂英, 张建强, 王印魁. 施氮水平对无芒雀麦产量和营养成分含量的影响. 山西农业大学学报, 1998(4): 345-347+402. YANG G Y, ZHANG J Q, WANG Y K. Effect of the nitrogen fertilizer amount on the yield and nutrient contents of Bromus inermis. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural University (Natural Science Edition), 1998(4): 345-347+402.
[45] 王德胜, 白铁成, 支金虎, 席琳乔. 施氮水平对新疆地区苜蓿营养生长和产量品质的影响. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2017(12): 174-175, 178. WANG D S, BAI T C, ZHI J H, XI L Q. Effects of different nitrogen levels on nutritional growth, yield and quality of alfalfa in Xinjiang region. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2017(12): 174-175, 178.
[46] 李佶恺, 孙涛, 旺扎, 李洪影, 崔国文. 西藏地区燕麦与箭筈豌豆不同混播比例对牧草产量和质量的影响. 草地学报, 2011, 19(5): 830-833. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2011.05.020 LI J K, SUN T, Wangzha, LI H Y, CUI G W. Effects on mixture sowing ratio on the yield and quality of both vetch and oat in Tibet. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2011, 19(5): 830-833. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2011.05.020
[47] 宝音陶格涛. 无芒雀麦与苜蓿混播试验. 草地学报, 2001(1): 73-76. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2001.01.013 Baoyintaogetao. The experimental study of mix-sowing of Bromus inermis and Medicago sativa. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2001(1): 73-76. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2001.01.013
[48] 胡玉昆, 赵清, 王建华, 郑炯, 陈爱莲. 高冰草与作物混播试验研究. 干旱区资源与环境, 1999(4): 65-68. HU Y K, ZHAO Q, WANG J H, ZHENG J, CHEN A L. Experimental research on planting Agropyron elongalun with crops mixedly. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 1999(4): 65-68.
[49] ADIL BAKOĞLU, ALI KOÇ. Some characteristics of the common plants of range and meadows in Erzurum in relation to life span, beginning of the flowering and forage quality. Turkish Journal of Agriculture & Forestry Sciences, 1999, 23: 951-958.
[50] 王思成, 王月玲. 宁南半干旱黄土丘陵区羊草与紫花苜蓿混播效应研究. 宁夏农林科技, 2016, 57(2): 7-9. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-204X.2016.02.003 WANG S C, WANG Y L. Study on mixed sowing of Leymus chinensis and alfalfa in semi-arid hilly region of southern Ningxia. Ningxia Journal of Agricul and Forestry Science and Technology, 2016, 57(2): 7-9. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-204X.2016.02.003
[51] 郭孝, 郭良兴, 刘党标. 无芒雀麦在单播及混播下牧草产量和品质的分析. 中国草食动物科学, 2018, 38(5): 62-65. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-3887.2018.05.016 GUO X, GUO L X, LIU D B. Analysis of forage yield and quality in single and mixed sowing of Bromus inermis. China Herbivore Science, 2018, 38(5): 62-65. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-3887.2018.05.016
[52] 玛丽亚木·司马义, 祖日古丽·尤力瓦斯. 野生牧草混播技术的研究. 草食家畜, 2008(4): 36-39. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6377.2008.04.013 Maliyamu·Simayi, Zuriguli·Youliwasi. Study on mixed sowing technology of wild forage. Grass-Feeding Livestock, 2008(4): 36-39. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6377.2008.04.013
[53] KYRIAZOPOULOS A P, ABRAHAM E M, PARISSI Z, KOUKOURA Z. Forage production and nutritive value of Dactylis glomerata and Trifolium subterraneum mixtures under different shading treatments. Grass & Forage Science, 2013, 68(1): 72-82.
-
表 1 各指标的因素显著性及因素水平平均值
Table 1 Significance of factors and the average level of factors of each indicator
处理
Treatment总鲜草产量
Total fresh
grass yield/(t·hm−2)总干草产量
Total hay yield/
(t·hm−2)粗蛋白
Crude
protein/%粗脂肪
Ether
extract/%中性洗涤纤维
Neutral detergent
fiber/%酸性洗涤纤维
Acid detergent
fiber/%相对饲用价值
Relative feeding
value放牧 Grazing 32.09 ± 9.31# 7.64 ± 1.76# 18.36 ± 3.74 1.65 ± 0.29 44.65 ± 3.19 30.50 ± 2.23 137.99 ± 12.27# 刈割 Mowing 21.74 ± 7.01 5.30 ± 1.34 18.60 ± 3.42 1.71 ± 0.31# 46.45 ± 3.28# 31.89 ± 2.48# 129.38 ± 11.89 无芒雀麦和红豆
草混播 WH32.76 ± 7.09A 7.79 ± 1.62A 20.13 ± 1.11B 1.79 ± 0.22B 44.57 ± 2.80B 30.59 ± 2.05B 137.41 ± 10.29A 红豆草单播 H 31.47 ± 7.02B 6.89 ± 1.46B 21.50 ± 1.14A 1.88 ± 0.23A 43.99 ± 2.73B 29.88 ± 1.94B 140.89 ± 10.58A 无芒雀麦单播 W 16.53 ± 4.59C 4.70 ± 1.30C 13.81 ± 1.09C 1.36 ± 0.11C 48.08 ± 2.99A 33.13 ± 2.08A 122.75 ± 9.55B N1 (0) 23.03 ± 8.04C 5.47 ± 1.60C 17.44 ± 3.57B 1.46 ± 0.17C 47.99 ± 3.05A 32.90 ± 2.34A 124.14 ± 10.33C N2 (80 kg·hm−2) 28.10 ± 10.14B 6.76 ± 1.98B 18.70 ± 3.54A 1.71 ± 0.26B 45.01 ± 2.85B 31.02 ± 2.09B 135.36 ± 11.01B N3 (160 kg·hm−2) 29.62 ± 10.02A 7.15 ± 1.91A 19.30 ± 3.49A 1.86 ± 0.32A 43.65 ± 2.60B 29.68 ± 1.77C 141.55 ± 10.61A 利用方式
Utilization mode (U)** ** ns ** ** ** ** 种植模式
Planting pattern (P)** ** ** ** ** ** ** 施氮量 Nitrogen
application amount (N)** ** ** ** ** ** ** U × P ** ns ns ns ns ns ns U × N * ** ns ns ns ns ns P × N ns ns ns ** ns ns ns U × P × N ns ns ns ns ns ns ns #代表放牧和刈割两种利用方式间差异显著(P < 0.05)。不同大写字母表示不同种植模式间或者不同施氮量间差异显著(P < 0.05)。**，P < 0.01；*， P < 0.05；ns，P > 0.05。
WH, mixed planting of B. inermis and O. viciifolia; H, monoculture of O. viciifolia; W, monoculture of B. inermis; this is applicable for the Table 2 as well. # indicate significant difference between grazing and mowing at the 0.05 level. Different capital letters indicate significant difference among different factor levels at the 0.05 level. **, P < 0.01; *, P < 0.05; ns, P > 0.05.
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 不同处理下各茬牧草的鲜草产量
Table 2 Fresh grass yield of each stubble of forage under different treatments
利用方式
Utilization
mode处理
Treatment第1茬
First cut/
(t·hm−2)第2茬
Second cut/
(t·hm−2)第3茬
Third cut/
(t·hm−2)第4茬
Fourth cut/
(t·hm−2)第5茬
Fifth cut/
(t·hm−2)第6茬
Sixth cut/
(t·hm−2)总和
Total/
(t·hm−2)放牧 Grazing WHN1 9.86 ± 0.47b 7.01 ± 0.32bc 5.10 ± 0.26b 5.15 ± 0.17b 4.35 ± 0.13c 1.85 ± 0.08e 33.32 ± 1.29B WHN2 11.97 ± 0.64a 8.18 ± 0.51a 6.02 ± 0.31a 5.95 ± 0.31a 5.38 ± 0.27ab 3.25 ± 0.18ab 40.75 ± 1.70A WHN3 12.37 ± 0.70a 8.43 ± 0.47a 5.90 ± 0.35a 6.06 ± 0.38a 5.80 ± 0.33a 3.60 ± 0.17a 42.16 ± 1.98A HN1 9.78 ± 0.48b 6.70 ± 0.27c 4.52 ± 0.21c 5.03 ± 0.30b 3.20 ± 0.15d 1.74 ± 0.07e 30.98 ± 1.43BC HN2 12.15 ± 0.73a 7.69 ± 0.42ab 5.46 ± 0.30ab 6.12 ± 0.38a 4.92 ± 0.27b 3.18 ± 0.17b 39.53 ± 2.33A HN3 12.30 ± 0.61a 7.98 ± 0.45a 5.76 ± 0.35ab 6.29 ± 0.39a 5.14 ± 0.26b 3.32 ± 0.21ab 40.79 ± 2.57A WN1 3.85 ± 0.16d 3.10 ± 0.14e 3.05 ± 0.12e 2.85 ± 0.12c 2.65 ± 0.11e 2.05 ± 0.08e 17.55 ± 1.01EF WN2 5.16 ± 0.29c 3.48 ± 0.13de 3.32 ± 0.16de 3.15 ± 0.13c 3.05 ± 0.14de 2.40 ± 0.09d 20.56 ± 1.10DE WN3 5.75 ± 0.32c 4.05 ± 0.19d 3.75 ± 0.22d 3.30 ± 0.14c 3.50 ± 0.17d 2.80 ± 0.15c 23.15 ± 1.45D 刈割 Mowing WHN1 10.02 ± 0.46b 8.03 ± 0.36cd 5.53 ± 0.25b 23.58 ± 0.71D WHN2 11.85 ± 0.79a 9.13 ± 0.46ab 6.49 ± 0.26a 27.47 ± 0.90C WHN3 12.45 ± 0.68a 9.89 ± 0.55a 6.91 ± 0.40a 29.26 ± 1.49C HN1 9.83 ± 0.38b 7.54 ± 0.35d 5.09 ± 0.17b 22.46 ± 0.68D HN2 12.09 ± 0.53a 8.73 ± 0.40bc 6.35 ± 0.30a 27.17 ± 1.25C HN3 12.39 ± 0.83a 9.08 ± 0.50ab 6.41 ± 0.31a 27.87 ± 1.77C WN1 3.54 ± 0.13d 3.50 ± 0.11f 3.25 ± 0.12d 10.29 ± 0.47H WN2 5.05 ± 0.19c 4.20 ± 0.16ef 3.85 ± 0.18c 13.10 ± 0.77GH WN3 5.74 ± 0.23c 4.65 ± 0.24e 4.11 ± 0.18c 14.50 ± 0.78FG N1， N2， N3分别表示施氮0、80、160 kg·hm−2。不同小写字母表示同一利用方式下不同处理间差异显著 (P < 0.05)，不同大写字母表示处理间差异显著(P < 0.05)；下同。
N1， N2， N3 represents 0, 80, 160 kg·hm−2 nitrogen application levels. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among treatments under the same utilization mode at the 0.05 level. Different capital letters indicate significant difference among treatments; this is applicable for the following tables as well.
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 不同处理下各茬牧草的干草产量
Table 3 Hay yield of each stubble of forage under different treatments
利用方式
Utilization
mode处理
Treatment第1茬
First cut/
(t·hm−2)第2茬
Second cut/
(t·hm−2)第3茬
Third cut/
(t·hm−2)第4茬
Fourth cut/
(t·hm−2)第5茬
Fifth cut/
(t·hm−2)第6茬
Sixth cut/
(t·hm−2)总和
Total/
(t·hm−2)放牧 Grazing WHN1 2.31 ± 0.14b 1.60 ± 0.06b 1.19 ± 0.05b 1.21 ± 0.06bc 1.03 ± 0.05b 0.43 ± 0.02e 7.74 ± 0.31C WHN2 2.85 ± 0.15a 1.87 ± 0.10a 1.43 ± 0.08a 1.40 ± 0.07a 1.30 ± 0.05a 0.78 ± 0.04bc 9.65 ± 0.36A WHN3 2.96 ± 0.22a 1.91 ± 0.10a 1.42 ± 0.08a 1.43 ± 0.07a 1.39 ± 0.07a 0.87 ± 0.05a 10.00 ± 0.47A HN1 2.22 ± 0.12b 1.42 ± 0.08c 0.95 ± 0.04cd 1.08 ± 0.06cd 0.69 ± 0.03d 0.38 ± 0.02e 6.78 ± 0.31DE HN2 2.73 ± 0.14b 1.61 ± 0.10b 1.14 ± 0.08b 1.32 ± 0.09ab 1.07 ± 0.05b 0.72 ± 0.03c 8.63 ± 0.54B HN3 2.75 ± 0.15a 1.68 ± 0.08b 1.20 ± 0.05b 1.34 ± 0.08ab 1.09 ± 0.05b 0.73 ± 0.04c 8.80 ± 0.46B WN1 1.05 ± 0.03c 0.81 ± 0.04e 0.80 ± 0.03e 0.76 ± 0.04f 0.72 ± 0.03d 0.58 ± 0.03d 4.73 ± 0.25H WN2 1.45 ± 0.07c 0.94 ± 0.04e 0.86 ± 0.03de 0.85 ± 0.03ef 0.84 ± 0.04c 0.70 ± 0.03c 5.63 ± 0.28FG WN3 1.75 ± 0.10c 1.17 ± 0.06d 1.07 ± 0.06bc 0.95 ± 0.05de 1.00 ± 0.05b 0.83 ± 0.04ab 6.78 ± 0.38DE 刈割 Mowing WHN1 2.45 ± 0.10b 1.92 ± 0.08b 1.35 ± 0.05bc 5.72 ± 0.21FG WHN2 2.86 ± 0.18a 2.21 ± 0.10a 1.59 ± 0.08a 6.68 ± 0.32DE WHN3 2.97 ± 0.16a 2.35 ± 0.12a 1.67 ± 0.10a 7.01 ± 0.32CD HN1 2.25 ± 0.07b 1.62 ± 0.05c 1.10 ± 0.04d 4.94 ± 0.22GH HN2 2.84 ± 0.12a 1.89 ± 0.09b 1.44 ± 0.07b 6.17 ± 0.34DEF HN3 2.80 ± 0.13a 1.86 ± 0.11b 1.41 ± 0.06b 6.07 ± 0.34EF WN1 1.01 ± 0.03d 0.99 ± 0.04e 0.93 ± 0.03e 2.93 ± 0.13J WN2 1.50 ± 0.07c 1.23 ± 0.07d 1.11 ± 0.03d 3.87 ± 0.22I WN3 1.71 ± 0.06c 1.38 ± 0.07d 1.22 ± 0.05cd 4.31 ± 0.21HI
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 不同处理下各茬牧草的粗蛋白含量
Table 4 Crude protein content of each stubble of forage under different treatments
利用方式
Utilization
mode处理
Treatment第1茬
First cut/%第2茬
Second cut/%第3茬
Third cut/%第4茬
Fourth cut/%第5茬
Fifth cut/%第6茬
Sixth cut/%平均
Average/%放牧
GrazingWHN1 18.91 ± 0.63b 19.65 ± 0.60b 18.95 ± 0.82c 19.09 ± 0.55b 18.64 ± 0.65b 18.04 ± 0.73b 19.09 ± 0.90C WHN2 20.19 ± 0.99ab 20.64 ± 0.73ab 20.42 ± 0.83bc 20.79 ± 0.96ab 20.34 ± 0.94ab 19.66 ± 0.93ab 20.50 ± 0.94ABC WHN3 20.79 ± 1.21ab 21.32 ± 1.12ab 21.59 ± 1.17ab 21.23 ± 1.08ab 20.84 ± 0.88ab 19.93 ± 1.06ab 21.02 ± 1.05ABC HN1 20.08 ± 0.68ab 21.15 ± 0.96ab 20.26 ± 0.89bc 20.54 ± 0.90ab 20.06 ± 0.96ab 19.48 ± 0.54ab 20.45 ± 0.79ABC HN2 21.39 ± 1.07a 22.04 ± 1.02a 21.71 ± 1.31ab 22.25 ± 1.14a 21.93 ± 1.21a 21.22 ± 1.11a 21.73 ± 1.01AB HN3 21.95 ± 1.17a 22.70 ± 1.05a 22.98 ± 1.12a 22.65 ± 1.22a 22.38 ± 1.46a 21.39 ± 1.23a 22.31 ± 1.07A WN1 13.26 ± 0.39c 12.45 ± 0.49d 12.66 ± 0.36d 12.13 ± 0.34d 11.82 ± 0.43c 11.14 ± 0.42c 12.35 ± 0.41E WN2 14.44 ± 0.69c 13.90 ± 0.55cd 14.24 ± 0.64d 13.76 ± 0.69cd 12.66 ± 0.59c 12.18 ± 0.48c 13.68 ± 0.45DE WN3 15.18 ± 0.75c 14.70 ± 0.79c 14.88 ± 0.80d 14.41 ± 0.78c 13.41 ± 0.83c 12.91 ± 0.61c 14.43 ± 0.74DE 刈割
MowingWHN1 18.78 ± 0.77b 19.99 ± 1.06a 18.92 ± 0.87b 19.30 ± 1.04BC WHN2 19.93 ± 1.01ab 20.71 ± 0.99a 20.58 ± 0.94ab 20.33 ± 0.86ABC WHN3 20.59 ± 0.97ab 21.16 ± 1.02a 20.72 ± 1.38ab 20.93 ± 1.14ABC HN1 20.15 ± 0.93ab 21.61 ± 0.95a 20.37 ± 0.80ab 20.54 ± 0.87ABC HN2 21.26 ± 1.13a 22.17 ± 1.03a 22.13 ± 0.90a 21.79 ± 1.16AB HN3 21.86 ± 1.31a 22.54 ± 1.33a 22.18 ± 1.17a 22.15 ± 1.32A WN1 13.02 ± 0.45c 13.18 ± 0.40b 12.82 ± 0.43c 13.00 ± 0.57DE WN2 14.32 ± 0.53c 14.54 ± 0.54b 14.07 ± 0.62c 14.27 ± 0.68DE WN3 15.26 ± 0.87c 15.33 ± 0.77b 14.60 ± 0.78c 15.06 ± 0.85D
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 不同处理下各茬牧草的粗脂肪含量
Table 5 Ether extract content of each stubble of forage under different treatments
利用方式
Utilization
mode处理
Treatment第1茬
First cut/%第2茬
Second cut/%第3茬
Third cut/%第4茬
Fourth cut/%第5茬
Fifth cut/%第6茬
Sixth cut/%平均
Average/%放牧 Grazing WHN1 1.59 ± 0.07d 1.56 ± 0.07cd 1.56 ± 0.06ef 1.45 ± 0.06c 1.44 ± 0.05b 1.36 ± 0.06b 1.52 ± 0.07EF WHN2 1.89 ± 0.09bc 1.88 ± 0.08b 1.84 ± 0.08bcd 1.75 ± 0.08b 1.68 ± 0.08a 1.63 ± 0.08a 1.81 ± 0.09CD WHN3 2.06 ± 0.09ab 2.02 ± 0.12ab 2.01 ± 0.10ab 1.87 ± 0.10ab 1.74 ± 0.10a 1.68 ± 0.09a 1.94 ± 0.08BC HN1 1.71 ± 0.08cd 1.63 ± 0.06c 1.58 ± 0.07ef 1.51 ± 0.05c 1.46 ± 0.06b 1.42 ± 0.05b 1.60 ± 0.05E HN2 2.03 ± 0.10ab 2.00 ± 0.11ab 1.88 ± 0.09abc 1.85 ± 0.09ab 1.70 ± 0.08a 1.73 ± 0.08a 1.91 ± 0.09BC HN3 2.23 ± 0.13a 2.15 ± 0.10a 2.07 ± 0.11a 1.99 ± 0.12a 1.75 ± 0.10a 1.78 ± 0.10a 2.06 ± 0.13AB WN1 1.01 ± 0.04f 1.25 ± 0.05e 1.45 ± 0.06f 1.18 ± 0.05d 1.39 ± 0.06b 1.06 ± 0.03c 1.22 ± 0.05G WN2 1.19 ± 0.05ef 1.33 ± 0.05e 1.65 ± 0.06def 1.25 ± 0.06d 1.58 ± 0.07ab 1.13 ± 0.04c 1.34 ± 0.06FG WN3 1.28 ± 0.06e 1.41 ± 0.07de 1.74 ± 0.07cde 1.32 ± 0.09cd 1.67 ± 0.09a 1.19 ± 0.07c 1.43 ± 0.08EFG 刈割 Mowing WHN1 1.59 ± 0.08e 1.57 ± 0.08c 1.51 ± 0.05cd 1.56 ± 0.06EF WHN2 1.89 ± 0.10cd 1.89 ± 0.10b 1.80 ± 0.09b 1.85 ± 0.08BC WHN3 2.16 ± 0.11ab 2.05 ± 0.13ab 1.96 ± 0.10ab 2.08 ± 0.12AB HN1 1.67 ± 0.14de 1.59 ± 0.07c 1.53 ± 0.06cd 1.63 ± 0.07DE HN2 1.99 ± 0.08bc 1.94 ± 0.08ab 1.85 ± 0.10ab 1.95 ± 0.11BC HN3 2.29 ± 0.11a 2.12 ± 0.10a 2.02 ± 0.11a 2.17 ± 0.09A WN1 1.02 ± 0.04g 1.41 ± 0.05c 1.35 ± 0.05d 1.26 ± 0.06G WN2 1.21 ± 0.05fg 1.56 ± 0.08c 1.50 ± 0.08cd 1.41 ± 0.06EFG WN3 1.30 ± 0.06f 1.62 ± 0.09c 1.59 ± 0.06c 1.48 ± 0.09EF
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 不同处理下各茬牧草的中性洗涤纤维含量
Table 6 Neutral detergent fibers content of each stubble of forage under different treatments
利用方式
Utilization
mode处理
Treatment第1茬
First cut/%第2茬
Second cut/%第3茬
Third cut/%第4茬
Fourth cut/%第5茬
Fifth cut/%第6茬
Sixth cut/%平均
Average/%放牧
GrazingWHN1 48.04 ± 2.59ab 46.64 ± 2.78ab 44.59 ± 2.71ab 43.64 ± 2.14ab 44.27 ± 2.61ab 45.30 ± 2.56bc 45.83 ± 2.45ABC WHN2 45.15 ± 2.13b 44.19 ± 2.24ab 42.08 ± 1.95b 41.12 ± 1.94b 41.35 ± 1.76b 42.32 ± 2.25bc 43.06 ± 2.09C WHN3 43.72 ± 2.02b 42.53 ± 1.88b 41.26 ± 1.82b 40.50 ± 1.86b 40.48 ± 1.66b 41.69 ± 2.22c 42.12 ± 2.01C HN1 47.23 ± 2.96ab 45.95 ± 2.53ab 43.63 ± 3.99ab 42.63 ± 2.36b 43.00 ± 2.15b 44.19 ± 1.96bc 45.40 ± 3.01ABC HN2 44.49 ± 1.71b 43.73 ± 2.38ab 41.53 ± 3.62b 40.32 ± 2.29b 40.44 ± 2.24b 41.35 ± 1.98c 42.33 ± 1.97C HN3 43.12 ± 1.50b 42.05 ± 1.84b 40.76 ± 2.75b 39.88 ± 1.83b 39.61 ± 1.69b 40.91 ± 1.72c 41.21 ± 2.01C WN1 51.96 ± 2.80a 49.96 ± 2.85a 49.22 ± 2.30a 48.46 ± 2.55a 50.35 ± 3.26a 50.64 ± 2.17a 50.23 ± 2.79AB WN2 48.36 ± 2.18ab 46.37 ± 2.39ab 44.71 ± 2.12ab 44.98 ± 2.29ab 45.74 ± 2.45ab 47.01 ± 2.11ab 46.64 ± 1.76ABC WN3 46.60 ± 1.76ab 44.87 ± 1.90ab 43.67 ± 1.99ab 43.52 ± 1.73ab 44.68 ± 1.96ab 45.48 ± 1.69abc 45.06 ± 1.61ABC 刈割
MowingWHN1 49.11 ± 2.98ab 47.34 ± 1.90ab 46.58 ± 3.01abc 47.61 ± 2.60ABC WHN2 45.81 ± 2.17b 45.02 ± 1.73bc 43.57 ± 2.86bc 44.81 ± 2.56ABC WHN3 44.07 ± 1.92b 42.99 ± 1.35c 42.71 ± 1.69c 43.37 ± 2.03BC HN1 48.64 ± 2.68ab 46.87 ± 1.83ab 45.82 ± 2.30abc 47.49 ± 2.80ABC HN2 45.38 ± 2.22b 44.61 ± 1.07bc 42.78 ± 2.08c 44.61 ± 2.58BC HN3 43.55 ± 1.70b 42.47 ± 1.16c 41.99 ± 1.83c 42.85 ± 2.12C WN1 52.16 ± 3.14a 50.45 ± 1.91a 51.61 ± 2.65a 51.65 ± 2.39A WN2 48.64 ± 2.01ab 47.69 ± 1.16ab 48.79 ± 2.14ab 48.19 ± 2.70ABC WN3 47.51 ± 1.71ab 46.42 ± 1.01bc 47.48 ± 1.78abc 46.93 ± 1.67ABC
下载: 导出CSV
表 7 不同处理下各茬牧草的酸性洗涤纤维含量
Table 7 Acid detergent fiber content of each stubble of forage under different treatments
利用方式
Utilization
mode处理
Treatment第1茬
First cut/%第2茬
Second cut/%第3茬
Third cut/%第4茬
Fourth cut/%第5茬
Fifth cut/%第6茬
Sixth cut/%平均
Average/%放牧
GrazingWHN1 32.36 ± 1.38ab 31.10 ± 1.89abc 30.85 ± 1.83abc 30.69 ± 1.29abc 30.45 ± 1.51ab 31.04 ± 1.96ab 31.28 ± 1.56ABCD WHN2 30.57 ± 1.43b 29.88 ± 1.44bc 28.90 ± 1.55abc 29.40 ± 1.42bc 28.64 ± 1.50b 29.96 ± 1.74b 29.71 ± 1.18BCD WHN3 29.86 ± 1.36b 28.76 ± 1.14bc 27.85 ± 1.38bc 27.66 ± 1.41c 27.99 ± 1.17b 28.76 ± 1.32b 28.69 ± 1.02CD HN1 31.69 ± 1.54b 30.21 ± 1.43bc 30.04 ± 1.78abc 30.03 ± 1.73abc 29.83 ± 1.22ab 30.25 ± 1.72b 30.61 ± 2.02BCD HN2 30.05 ± 1.39b 29.27 ± 1.68bc 28.30 ± 1.42abc 28.77 ± 1.58bc 28.15 ± 1.72b 29.01 ± 1.20b 29.15 ± 1.47CD HN3 29.06 ± 1.34b 28.11 ± 1.26c 27.05 ± 0.96c 27.07 ± 0.98c 27.25 ± 1.20b 28.12 ± 1.09b 28.00 ± 1.26D WN1 35.59 ± 1.52a 34.68 ± 2.04a 32.51 ± 1.79a 33.54 ± 1.78a 33.41 ± 2.09a 34.83 ± 1.93a 34.16 ± 1.85AB WN2 33.05 ± 1.85ab 32.83 ± 1.73ab 31.80 ± 1.36ab 32.43 ± 1.76ab 31.00 ± 1.29ab 32.52 ± 1.74ab 32.36 ± 1.67ABCD WN3 31.75 ± 1.09b 30.10 ± 1.44bc 30.16 ± 1.52abc 30.54 ± 1.34abc 29.86 ± 1.26ab 30.19 ± 0.99b 30.57 ± 1.17BCD 刈割
MowingWHN1 33.03 ± 1.96abc 33.61 ± 1.69abc 33.25 ± 1.80abc 33.28 ± 1.84ABC WHN2 30.60 ± 1.45bc 31.37 ± 1.79bc 30.59 ± 1.86bcd 30.85 ± 1.89BCD WHN3 29.10 ± 1.45c 30.98 ± 1.39bc 29.01 ± 1.57cd 29.71 ± 1.16BCD HN1 32.83 ± 1.51abc 32.14 ± 1.39abc 32.11 ± 1.91abcd 32.45 ± 1.61ABCD HN2 30.41 ± 1.43bc 30.42 ± 1.73bc 29.45 ± 1.47bcd 30.19 ± 1.54BCD HN3 29.06 ± 0.91c 29.31 ± 1.20c 27.86 ± 0.97d 28.86 ± 1.31CD WN1 35.40 ± 1.97a 36.02 ± 2.11a 35.41 ± 1.72a 35.62 ± 1.74A WN2 33.59 ± 1.91ab 34.36 ± 1.52ab 33.68 ± 1.62ab 33.86 ± 1.50AB WN3 31.54 ± 1.39abc 32.85 ± 1.42abc 32.49 ± 1.41abc 32.23 ± 1.27ABCD
下载: 导出CSV
表 8 不同处理下各茬牧草的相对饲用价值
Table 8 Relative feeding value of each stubble of forage under different treatments
利用方式
Utilization
mode处理
Treatment第1茬
First cut第2茬
Second cut第3茬
Third cut第4茬
Fourth cut第5茬
Fifth cut第6茬
Sixth cut平均
Average放牧
GrazingWHN1 123.73 ± 3.80cd 129.70 ± 5.66bc 136.46 ± 4.23b 139.15 ± 4.64bc 137.50 ± 6.47bc 133.46 ± 5.62bc 133.07 ± 5.33BCDEF WHN2 134.75 ± 5.18abc 138.95 ± 5.89ab 147.94 ± 6.46ab 150.31 ± 6.51ab 150.52 ± 7.96abc 145.41 ± 6.23abc 143.79 ± 8.10ABCD WHN3 141.23 ± 7.35ab 146.32 ± 8.03ab 153.18 ± 7.33a 155.48 ± 8.81ab 155.62 ± 8.23ab 149.23 ± 7.81ab 149.53 ± 7.02AB HN1 126.48 ± 4.86bc 132.34 ± 5.56abc 139.64 ± 5.84ab 142.93 ± 7.62ab 142.04 ± 6.57abc 137.55 ± 7.47abc 136.81 ± 6.55ABCDE HN2 136.94 ± 7.05abc 140.60 ± 7.44ab 149.75 ± 5.69ab 153.40 ± 6.47ab 154.07 ± 7.50abc 149.16 ± 7.48ab 146.70 ± 5.91ABC HN3 142.95 ± 6.00a 148.22 ± 8.19a 154.79 ± 7.27a 158.20 ± 6.25a 158.94 ± 6.69a 152.35 ± 7.02a 152.49 ± 7.38A WN1 111.69 ± 4.42d 118.03 ± 3.80c 122.91 ± 4.31c 123.15 ± 5.40c 118.82 ± 4.79d 116.26 ± 4.04d 118.75 ± 4.68FG WN2 125.07 ± 4.27cd 131.45 ± 4.82abc 139.88 ± 4.79ab 136.97 ± 7.19bc 135.42 ± 5.85c 129.50 ± 5.66cd 132.29 ± 5.14CDEF WN3 133.57 ± 6.01abc 137.78 ± 6.73ab 145.98 ± 6.20ab 143.48 ± 6.51ab 141.42 ± 8.34abc 135.74 ± 7.93abc 139.89 ± 6.75ABCDE 刈割
MowingWHN1 119.66 ± 4.84bc 125.36 ± 3.89bc 127.32 ± 5.47cde 123.99 ± 6.30EFG WHN2 132.12 ± 6.77ab 134.69 ± 6.36ab 140.41 ± 5.06abc 136.54 ± 5.21ABCDE WHN3 139.79 ± 7.29a 142.92 ± 7.05a 145.83 ± 6.71a 143.60 ± 6.19ABCD HN1 121.11 ± 5.14bc 126.75 ± 5.00bc 129.71 ± 3.69bcd 125.99 ± 4.71EFG HN2 133.68 ± 7.98ab 135.97 ± 7.68ab 143.43 ± 8.49ab 136.88 ± 5.53ABCDE HN3 141.53 ± 7.17a 144.71 ± 5.12a 148.88 ± 5.38a 144.15 ± 4.46ABCD WN1 110.81 ± 4.23c 116.88 ± 5.23c 113.38 ± 4.53e 114.01 ± 4.01G WN2 122.54 ± 4.28bc 126.81 ± 4.98bc 122.97 ± 5.27de 123.78 ± 5.26EFG WN3 129.30 ± 5.86ab 132.12 ± 5.20abc 128.15 ± 6.45cde 130.25 ± 4.68DEF
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 袁晓波, 尚振艳, 牛得草, 傅华. 黄土高原生态退化与恢复. 草业科学, 2015, 32(3): 363-371. YUAN X B, SHANG Z Y, NIU D C, FU H. Advances in ecological degeneration and restoration of Loess Plateau. Pratacultural Science, 2015, 32(3): 363-371.
[2] SHI H, SHAO M A. Soil and water loss from the Loess Plateau in China. Journal of Arid Environments, 2000, 45(1): 9-20.
[3] 胡良军, 邵明安. 黄土高原植被恢复的水分生态环境研究. 应用生态学报, 2002(8): 1045-1048. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.2002.08.027 HU L J, SHAO M A. Review on water eco-environment in vegetation restoration in Loess Plateau. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2002(8): 1045-1048. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.2002.08.027
[4] XIA Z, GUO Q Y, ZHAN B L, PENG L. Experimental study on slope runoff, erosion and sediment under different vegetation types. Water Resources Management, 2014, 28(9): 2415-2433. doi: 10.1007/s11269-014-0603-5
[5] 山仑, 徐炳成. 黄土高原半干旱地区建设稳定人工草地的探讨. 草业学报, 2009, 18(2): 1-2. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1004-5759.2009.02.001 Shanlun, XU B C. Study on constructing stable artificial grassland in semi-arid area of Loess Plateau. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(2): 1-2. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1004-5759.2009.02.001
[6] 石云. 基于景观格局变化的黄土丘陵沟壑区生态恢复评价与分析. 银川: 宁夏大学博士学位论文, 2016. SHI Y. Evaluation and analysis of ecological restoration of Loess hilly and gully region based on landscape pattern changes. PhD Thesis. Yinchuan: Ningxia University, 2016.
[7] 王明君, 韩国栋, 崔国文, 赵萌莉. 放牧强度对草甸草原生产力和多样性的影响. 生态学杂志, 2010, 29(5): 862-868. WANG M J, HAN G D, CUI G W, ZHAO M L. Effects of grazing intensity on the biodiversity and productivity of meadow steppe. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2010, 29(5): 862-868.
[8] 侯扶江, 杨中艺. 放牧对草地的作用. 生态学报, 2006, 26(1): 244-264. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.01.031 HOU F J, YANG Z Y. Effects of grazing of livestock on grassland. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2006, 26(1): 244-264. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.01.031
[9] 杨春华, 张新全. 人工建植混播草地技术研究. 草业科学, 2003(3): 42-46. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.03.011 YANG C H, ZHANG X Q. Study on the techniques of mixed sown grassland establishment. Pratacultural Science, 2003(3): 42-46. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.03.011
[10] 谢开云, 赵云, 李向林, 何峰, 万里强, 王丹, 韩冬梅. 豆–禾混播草地种间关系研究进展. 草业学报, 2013, 22(3): 284-296. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20130337 XIE K Y, ZHAO Y, LI X L, HE F, WAN L Q, WANG D, HAN D M. Relationships between grasses and legumes in mixed grassland: A review. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(3): 284-296. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20130337
[11] 韩德梁, 何胜江, 陈超, 杨光梅, 韩烈保. 豆禾混播草地群落稳定性的比较. 生态环境, 2008, 17(5): 1974-1979. HAN D L, HE S J, CHEN C, YANG G M, HAN L B. The comparison stability of the mixed grassland with leguminous. Ecologyand Environment, 2008, 17(5): 1974-1979.
[12] BRANKO ĆUPINA, SVETLANA VUJIĆ, DORDE KRSTIĆ, BRANKO DJURIĆ, LOMBNAES P. Performance of legume–grass mixtures in the West Balkan region. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 2016, 67(1): 1-11.
[13] FOSTER A, VERA C L, MALHI S S, CLARKE F R. Forage yield of simple and complex grass–legume mixtures under two management strategies. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2014, 94(1): 41-50. doi: 10.4141/cjps2013-095
[14] 包乌云, 赵萌莉, 徐军, 高新磊, 赵巴音那木拉. 苜蓿与禾本科牧草的混播效果. 草业科学, 2013, 30(11): 1782-1789. BAO W Y, ZHAO M L, XU J, GAO X L, Zhaobayinnamula. Study on mixculture of alfalfa with grasses. Pratacultural Science, 2013, 30(11): 1782-1789.
[15] 马春晖, 韩建国, 李鸿祥, 毛培胜, 戎郁萍. 播种比例、施氮量和刈割期对混播草地牧草产量和质量的影响. 中国草地, 1999(4): 10-17. MA C H, HAN J G, LI H X, MAO P S, RONG Y P. Effect of seeding rates, nitrogen fertilizer and harvest time on the yield and quality of oat-vetch mixture. Grassland of China, 1999(4): 10-17.
[16] 刘敏, 龚吉蕊, 王忆慧, 张梓榆, 徐沙, 罗亲普. 豆禾混播建植人工草地对牧草产量和草质的影响. 干旱区研究, 2016, 33(1): 179-185. LIU M, GONG J R, WANG Y H, ZHANG Z Y, XU S, LUO Q P. Effects of legume-grass mixed sowing on forage grass yield and quality in artificial grassland. Arid Zone Research, 2016, 33(1): 179-185.
[17] 刘秀丽, 李元恒. 红豆草单宁的研究概况. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2016, 37(12): 52-57. doi: 10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2016.12.015 LIU X L, LI Y H. Research situation on tannins from sainfoin. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2016, 37(12): 52-57. doi: 10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2016.12.015
[18] 德科加. 青藏高原高寒草甸草地NPK施肥组合研究. 草原与草坪, 2010, 33(4): 22-25. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-5500.2010.04.005 DE K J. Study on NPK fertilizer application in alpine meadow on Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Grassland and Turf, 2010, 33(4): 22-25. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-5500.2010.04.005
[19] 李威, 温翠平, 漆智平, 唐树梅. 施氮水平和方式对王草生产特性和品质的影响. 草业科学, 2012, 29(8): 1262-1271. LI W, WEN C P, QI Z P, TANG S M. Effects of different N fertilization modes and rates on the production and quality of king grass. Pratacultural Science, 2012, 29(8): 1262-1271.
[20] 庞立东, 李卫军, 朱进忠. 追施氮肥对苏丹草光合特性及种子产量的影响. 草业科学, 2014, 31(12): 2286-2292. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2014-0371 PANG L D, LI W J, ZHU J Z. Effects of topdressing nitrogen fertilizer on photosynthetic characteristics and seed yields of sudangrass. Pratacultural Science, 2014, 31(12): 2286-2292. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2014-0371
[21] ZHANG Y F, NIU S L, XU W H, HAN Y. Species-specific response of photosynthesis to burning and nitrogen fertilization. Journal of integrative plant biology, 2008, 50(5): 565-574.
[22] 鲁子瑜, 邹厚远. 半干旱黄土丘陵区红豆草生长发育规律及其影响因子的研究. 草业科学, 1991(2): 10-15, 72. LU Z Y, ZOU H Y. Study on the growth and development law and its influencing factors in semi-arid Loess Hilly region. Pratacultural Science, 1991(2): 10-15, 72.
[23] 乔洁, 崔秀艳, 王君芳, 刘卓, 李洪涛, 马训骏, 罗文浩, 娄玉杰. 土壤水分、氮、磷、钾含量与牧草营养成分的关系. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2009(17): 58-60. QIAO J, CUI X Y, WANG J F, LIU Z, LI H T, MA X J, LUO W H, LOU Y J. Relationship between soil moisture, N, P, K content and forage nutrient composition. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2009(17): 58-60.
[24] 王君芳. 不同施氮量、留茬高度、刈割时期对无芒雀麦生产性能的影响. 长春: 吉林农业大学硕士学位论文, 2008. WANG J F. Effects of nitrogen application, stubble height and mowing period on performance on Bromus inermis. Master Thesis. Changchun: Jilin Agricultural University, 2008.
[25] 胡冬雪, 王建丽, 潘多锋, 张瑞博, 李道明, 唐凤兰, 申忠宝. 施氮肥对羊草栽培草地生产性能及品质的影响. 中国草地学报, 2017, 39(1): 35-41. HU D X, WANG J L, PAN D F, ZHANG R B, LI D M, TANG F L, SHEN B Z. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer on the performance and quality of Leymus chinensis cultivated grassland. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2017, 39(1): 35-41.
[26] 李小梅, 陈天峰, 彭安琪, 罗燕, 张新全, 闫艳红. 氮肥种类对多花黑麦草产量与品质的影响. 草地学报, 2017, 25(6): 1368-1375. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2017.06.030 LI X M, CHEN T F, PENG A Q, LUO Y, ZHANG X Q, YAN Y H. Effects of different nitrogen fertilizer forms on production and quality on Lolium multiflorum. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2017, 25(6): 1368-1375. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2017.06.030
[27] 纪亚君, 周青平. 高寒牧区禾本科牧草施肥研究. 中国土壤与肥料, 2009(1): 27-30. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-6257.2009.01.007 JI Y J, ZHOU Q P. Study on fertilizer application to alpine grassland in Qinghai. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2009(1): 27-30. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-6257.2009.01.007
[28] 苏富源, 郝明德, 郭慧慧, 蒙静, 肖庆红, 武东波, 刘公社. 施用氮肥对人工羊草草地产量及养分吸收的影响. 草地学报, 2015, 23(4): 893-896. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2015.04.035 SU F Y, HAO M D, GUO H H, MENG J, XIAO Q H, WU D B, LIU G S. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer on the yield and nutrition absorption of artificial Leymus chinensis grassland. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2015, 23(4): 893-896. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2015.04.035
[29] 张吉鹍. 反刍家畜粗饲料品质评定的指标及其应用比较. 中国畜牧杂志, 2006, 42(5): 47-50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-7033.2006.05.017 ZHANG J K. Quality evaluation parameters of ruminant coarse fodder and their application comparison. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2006, 42(5): 47-50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-7033.2006.05.017
[30] 周秉荣, 马宗泰, 李红梅, 贺晓龙. 刈割及放牧对牧草生长的补偿效应. 青海大学学报(自然科学版), 2006(4): 18-20. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8996.2006.04.006 ZHOU B R, MA Z T, LI H M, HE X L. Recovering effect of cradle and grazing on growth of forage. Journal of Qinghai University (Natural Science Edition), 2006(4): 18-20. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8996.2006.04.006
[31] 徐智超, 祁瑜, 梅宝玲, 卓义, 王凤歌, 武胜男, 邬嘉华, 温璐. 放牧方式对人工草地植被生物量及碳密度的影响. 北方农业学报, 2018, 46(4): 110-117. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-1197.2018.04.20 XU Z C, QI Y, MEI B L, ZHUO Y, WANG F G, WU S N, WU J H, WEN L. Effects of grazing methods on vegetation productivity and carbon density in artificial grassland. Journal of Northern Agriculture, 2018, 46(4): 110-117. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-1197.2018.04.20
[32] 张荣华, 安沙舟, 杨海宽, 李海, 李军保. 模拟放牧强度对针茅再生性能的影响. 草业科学, 2008(4): 141-144. AHGN R H, AN S Z, YANG H K, LI H, LI J B. Effect of simulate grazing intensity on regrowth capability of Stipa capillata. Pratacultural Science, 2008(4): 141-144.
[33] 柴林荣, 孙义, 王宏, 常生华, 侯扶江, 程云湘. 牦牛放牧强度对甘南高寒草甸群落特征与牧草品质的影响. 草业科学, 2018, 35(1): 18-26. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2017-0113 CHAI L R, SUN Y, WANG H, CHANG S H, HOU F J, CHENG Y X. Effect of yak grazing intensity on characteristics of plant communities and forage quality in Gannan alpine meadow. Pratacultural Science, 2018, 35(1): 18-26. doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2017-0113
[34] 章异平, 江源, 刘全儒, 任斐鹏. 放牧对五台山高山、亚高山草甸牧草品质的影响. 生态学报, 2011, 31(13): 3659-3667. ZHANG Y P, JIANG Y, LIU Q R, REN F P. Impacts of grazing on herbage quality of the alpine and subalpine meadows within Wutai Mountain. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(13): 3659-3667.
[35] 董全民, 赵新全, 马玉寿. 放牧强度和放牧时间对高寒混播草地牧草营养含量的影响. 中国草地学报, 2007(4): 67-73. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2007.04.012 DONG Q M, ZHAO X Q, MA Y S. Effects of grazing intensity and time on forage nutrition contents in alpine mixed -sown grassland. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2007(4): 67-73. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2007.04.012
[36] HEITSCHMIDT R K, DOWHOWER S L, CANON P S K. Effects of stocking rate on quantity and quality of available forage in a southern mixed grass prairie. Journal of Range Management, 1989, 42(6): 468-473. doi: 10.2307/3899230
[37] 付娟娟, 益西措姆, 陈浩, 苗彦军, 呼天明, 许岳飞. 青藏高原高山嵩草草甸优势植物营养成分对放牧的响应. 草业科学, 2013, 30(4): 560-565. FU J J, Yixicuomu, CHEN H, MIAO Y J, HU T M, XU Y F. Responses of dominant plant nutrients to grazing intensity in Kobresia pygmaea meadow of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Pratacultural Science, 2013, 30(4): 560-565.
[38] 白春利, 阿拉塔, 陈海军, 单玉梅, 额尔敦花, 王明玖. 氮素和水分添加对短花针茅荒漠草原植物群落特征的影响. 中国草地学报, 2013, 35(2): 69-75. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2013.02.013 BAI C L, Alata, CHEN H J, SHAN Y M, Eerdunhua, WANG M J. Effects of addition of nitrogen and water on plant community characteristics of Stipa breviflora desert steppe. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2013, 35(2): 69-75. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5021.2013.02.013
[39] 拉旦, 李延红, 王堃. 高寒地区施肥对多年人工草地生产性能的影响. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2006(10): 73-74. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-7034.2006.10.038 Ladan, LI Y H, WANG K. Effect of fertilization on production performance of artificial grassland in alpine region. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2006(10): 73-74. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-7034.2006.10.038
[40] 王建光. 农牧交错区苜蓿–禾草混播模式研究. 北京: 中国农业科学院博士学位论文, 2012. WANG J G. Study on mixed–sowing modes of alfalfa and grasses in the farming pasture region. PhD Thesis. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2012.
[41] 寇明科, 王安碌, 张生璨, 苗建勋, 康秀芬. 不同施肥处理对提高高寒人工混播草地产草量的试验研究. 草业科学, 2003, 20(4): 14-15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.04.005 KOU M K, WANG A L, ZHANG S C, MIAO J X, KANG X F. Study on the effects of different fertilizer treatments on mixed grassland yield in Luqu, Gannan Autonomous Region. Prataculutral Science, 2003, 20(4): 14-15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0629.2003.04.005
[42] 苏生海, 温随良, 李雪屏. 红豆草氮磷肥不同配比的试验. 中国草原, 1987(5): 36-38. SU S H, WEN S L, LI X P. The experiment of different ratio of nitrogen and phosphate fertilizer of Onobrychis viciaefoia. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 1987(5): 36-38.
[43] 谢开云. 氮素添加对紫花苜蓿和无芒雀麦种间关系及氮素平衡的影响. 北京: 中国农业大学博士学位论文, 2015. XIE K Y. Effect of nitrogen addition on interspecific relationship and nitrogen balance of alfalfa and smooth bromegrass. PhD Thesis. Beijing: Chinese Agricultural University, 2015.
[44] 杨桂英, 张建强, 王印魁. 施氮水平对无芒雀麦产量和营养成分含量的影响. 山西农业大学学报, 1998(4): 345-347+402. YANG G Y, ZHANG J Q, WANG Y K. Effect of the nitrogen fertilizer amount on the yield and nutrient contents of Bromus inermis. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural University (Natural Science Edition), 1998(4): 345-347+402.
[45] 王德胜, 白铁成, 支金虎, 席琳乔. 施氮水平对新疆地区苜蓿营养生长和产量品质的影响. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2017(12): 174-175, 178. WANG D S, BAI T C, ZHI J H, XI L Q. Effects of different nitrogen levels on nutritional growth, yield and quality of alfalfa in Xinjiang region. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2017(12): 174-175, 178.
[46] 李佶恺, 孙涛, 旺扎, 李洪影, 崔国文. 西藏地区燕麦与箭筈豌豆不同混播比例对牧草产量和质量的影响. 草地学报, 2011, 19(5): 830-833. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2011.05.020 LI J K, SUN T, Wangzha, LI H Y, CUI G W. Effects on mixture sowing ratio on the yield and quality of both vetch and oat in Tibet. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2011, 19(5): 830-833. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2011.05.020
[47] 宝音陶格涛. 无芒雀麦与苜蓿混播试验. 草地学报, 2001(1): 73-76. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2001.01.013 Baoyintaogetao. The experimental study of mix-sowing of Bromus inermis and Medicago sativa. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2001(1): 73-76. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2001.01.013
[48] 胡玉昆, 赵清, 王建华, 郑炯, 陈爱莲. 高冰草与作物混播试验研究. 干旱区资源与环境, 1999(4): 65-68. HU Y K, ZHAO Q, WANG J H, ZHENG J, CHEN A L. Experimental research on planting Agropyron elongalun with crops mixedly. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 1999(4): 65-68.
[49] ADIL BAKOĞLU, ALI KOÇ. Some characteristics of the common plants of range and meadows in Erzurum in relation to life span, beginning of the flowering and forage quality. Turkish Journal of Agriculture & Forestry Sciences, 1999, 23: 951-958.
[50] 王思成, 王月玲. 宁南半干旱黄土丘陵区羊草与紫花苜蓿混播效应研究. 宁夏农林科技, 2016, 57(2): 7-9. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-204X.2016.02.003 WANG S C, WANG Y L. Study on mixed sowing of Leymus chinensis and alfalfa in semi-arid hilly region of southern Ningxia. Ningxia Journal of Agricul and Forestry Science and Technology, 2016, 57(2): 7-9. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-204X.2016.02.003
[51] 郭孝, 郭良兴, 刘党标. 无芒雀麦在单播及混播下牧草产量和品质的分析. 中国草食动物科学, 2018, 38(5): 62-65. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-3887.2018.05.016 GUO X, GUO L X, LIU D B. Analysis of forage yield and quality in single and mixed sowing of Bromus inermis. China Herbivore Science, 2018, 38(5): 62-65. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-3887.2018.05.016
[52] 玛丽亚木·司马义, 祖日古丽·尤力瓦斯. 野生牧草混播技术的研究. 草食家畜, 2008(4): 36-39. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6377.2008.04.013 Maliyamu·Simayi, Zuriguli·Youliwasi. Study on mixed sowing technology of wild forage. Grass-Feeding Livestock, 2008(4): 36-39. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6377.2008.04.013
[53] KYRIAZOPOULOS A P, ABRAHAM E M, PARISSI Z, KOUKOURA Z. Forage production and nutritive value of Dactylis glomerata and Trifolium subterraneum mixtures under different shading treatments. Grass & Forage Science, 2013, 68(1): 72-82.
计量
- PDF下载量: 47
- 文章访问数: 2284
- HTML全文浏览量: 813
