Rice Science
  • 首页
  • 期刊介绍
  • 编委会
  • 学术伦理
  • 投稿指南
  • 期刊订阅
  • 联系我们
  • English

Rice Science ›› 2023, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (5): 459-472.DOI: 10.1016/j.rsci.2023.03.017

• • 上一篇    下一篇

  • 收稿日期:2023-01-27 接受日期:2023-03-31 出版日期:2023-09-28 发布日期:2023-08-14

RichHTML

PDF

补充材料

1

可视化

0
  • 1. supplemental data.pdf(530KB)

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

. [J]. Rice Science, 2023, 30(5): 459-472.

使用本文

0
    /   推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: http://www.ricesci.org/CN/10.1016/j.rsci.2023.03.017

               http://www.ricesci.org/CN/Y2023/V30/I5/459

图/表 10

Table 1. Aboveground parameters for Black Gora and IR64 grown under different treatments in the first season (flooded).
Genotype Soil structure treatment Tiller number Leaf number Plant height
(cm)
Shoot fresh weight (g) Shoot dry weight (g)
Black Gora Hard plough pan 6.8 ± 0.6 25.0 ± 2.1 85.8 ± 3.1 23.00 ± 0.66 5.21 ± 0.11
Soft plough pan 7.5 ± 0.3 27.5 ± 1.2 92.2 ± 4.0 23.00 ± 0.70 5.55 ± 0.17
No plough pan 8.3 ± 0.5 30.2 ± 1.0 89.0 ± 1.7 22.70 ± 0.73 5.94 ± 0.18
IR64 Hard plough pan 6.8 ± 0.6 32.8 ± 3.6 58.0 ± 1.2 14.70 ± 1.20 4.02 ± 0.30
Soft plough pan 7.8 ± 1.3 34.5 ± 2.4 61.8 ± 2.3 17.80 ± 0.69 4.68 ± 0.24
No plough pan 9.0 ± 0.4 38.2 ± 0.6 60.2 ± 1.3 18.80 ± 0.55 4.84 ± 0.19
Analysis of variance
Genotype (G) NS 19.89*** 207.84*** 81.20*** 38.35***
Soil structure (SS) NS NS NS NS 0.29**
G × SS NS NS NS 4.15* NS

Table 1. Aboveground parameters for Black Gora and IR64 grown under different treatments in the first season (flooded).

Genotype Soil structure treatment Tiller number Leaf number Plant height
(cm)
Shoot fresh weight (g) Shoot dry weight (g)
Black Gora Hard plough pan 6.8 ± 0.6 25.0 ± 2.1 85.8 ± 3.1 23.00 ± 0.66 5.21 ± 0.11
Soft plough pan 7.5 ± 0.3 27.5 ± 1.2 92.2 ± 4.0 23.00 ± 0.70 5.55 ± 0.17
No plough pan 8.3 ± 0.5 30.2 ± 1.0 89.0 ± 1.7 22.70 ± 0.73 5.94 ± 0.18
IR64 Hard plough pan 6.8 ± 0.6 32.8 ± 3.6 58.0 ± 1.2 14.70 ± 1.20 4.02 ± 0.30
Soft plough pan 7.8 ± 1.3 34.5 ± 2.4 61.8 ± 2.3 17.80 ± 0.69 4.68 ± 0.24
No plough pan 9.0 ± 0.4 38.2 ± 0.6 60.2 ± 1.3 18.80 ± 0.55 4.84 ± 0.19
Analysis of variance
Genotype (G) NS 19.89*** 207.84*** 81.20*** 38.35***
Soil structure (SS) NS NS NS NS 0.29**
G × SS NS NS NS 4.15* NS
Table 2. Aboveground parameters for BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in the second season (upland).
Flooded season genotype Soil structure
treatment
Plant height (cm) Tiller number Leaf number Shoot fresh weight (g) Shoot dry weight (g)
Black Gora (BG) Hard plough pan 63.0 ± 0.9 11.8 ± 0.5 48.5 ± 3.4 15.93 ± 0.61 5.24 ± 0.48
Soft plough pan 64.2 ± 0.5 11.8 ± 0.5 49.0 ± 1.2 16.84 ± 0.44 6.04 ± 0.32
No plough pan 63.2 ± 0.5 12.5 ± 0.3 51.8 ± 0.9 16.49 ± 0.60 5.60 ± 0.14
IR64 Hard plough pan 62.2 ± 1.1 11.5 ± 0.3 47.5 ± 2.2 18.02 ± 0.56 5.34 ± 0.30
Soft plough pan 62.5 ± 0.6 12.0 ± 0.0 48.8 ± 0.5 17.65 ± 0.86 5.73 ± 0.40
No plough pan 64.5 ± 0.9 11.8 ± 0.5 48.2 ± 1.5 17.57 ± 0.71 6.16 ± 0.37
Without plant Hard plough pan 62.2 ± 1.1 12.0 ± 0.9 49.2 ± 3.0 18.29 ± 0.48 5.46 ± 0.28
Soft plough pan 66.3 ± 1.2 12.7 ± 0.3 51.3 ± 1.8 19.59 ± 0.62 6.65 ± 0.29
No plough pan 65.2 ± 1.1 12.8 ± 0.5 49.2 ± 1.6 18.20 ± 0.94 5.80 ± 0.38
Analysis of variance
Flooded season genotype (G) NS NS NS 8.00** NS
Soil structure (SS) NS NS NS NS NS
G × SS NS NS NS NS NS
Preceding BG vs IR64 NS NS NS 7.18* NS

Table 2. Aboveground parameters for BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in the second season (upland).

Flooded season genotype Soil structure
treatment
Plant height (cm) Tiller number Leaf number Shoot fresh weight (g) Shoot dry weight (g)
Black Gora (BG) Hard plough pan 63.0 ± 0.9 11.8 ± 0.5 48.5 ± 3.4 15.93 ± 0.61 5.24 ± 0.48
Soft plough pan 64.2 ± 0.5 11.8 ± 0.5 49.0 ± 1.2 16.84 ± 0.44 6.04 ± 0.32
No plough pan 63.2 ± 0.5 12.5 ± 0.3 51.8 ± 0.9 16.49 ± 0.60 5.60 ± 0.14
IR64 Hard plough pan 62.2 ± 1.1 11.5 ± 0.3 47.5 ± 2.2 18.02 ± 0.56 5.34 ± 0.30
Soft plough pan 62.5 ± 0.6 12.0 ± 0.0 48.8 ± 0.5 17.65 ± 0.86 5.73 ± 0.40
No plough pan 64.5 ± 0.9 11.8 ± 0.5 48.2 ± 1.5 17.57 ± 0.71 6.16 ± 0.37
Without plant Hard plough pan 62.2 ± 1.1 12.0 ± 0.9 49.2 ± 3.0 18.29 ± 0.48 5.46 ± 0.28
Soft plough pan 66.3 ± 1.2 12.7 ± 0.3 51.3 ± 1.8 19.59 ± 0.62 6.65 ± 0.29
No plough pan 65.2 ± 1.1 12.8 ± 0.5 49.2 ± 1.6 18.20 ± 0.94 5.80 ± 0.38
Analysis of variance
Flooded season genotype (G) NS NS NS 8.00** NS
Soil structure (SS) NS NS NS NS NS
G × SS NS NS NS NS NS
Preceding BG vs IR64 NS NS NS 7.18* NS
Fig. 1. Number of roots at the bottom surface of plough pan counted from X-ray computed tomography images for Black Gora and IR64 grown under different treatments in flooded season. These roots were decomposed during the decomposition period which we assumed could provide root channels or biopores for the next season of upland rice. NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4). Different lowercase letters above the bars indicate significant difference at P < 0.05.

Fig. 1. Number of roots at the bottom surface of plough pan counted from X-ray computed tomography images for Black Gora and IR64 grown under different treatments in flooded season. These roots were decomposed during the decomposition period which we assumed could provide root channels or biopores for the next season of upland rice. NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4). Different lowercase letters above the bars indicate significant difference at P < 0.05.

Fig. 2. Root length density (RLD) of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. A, Overall RLD for whole soil cores. B?D, RLD in topsoil (B), plough pan (C) and subsoil layer (D) of soil cores. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Fig. 2. Root length density (RLD) of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. A, Overall RLD for whole soil cores. B?D, RLD in topsoil (B), plough pan (C) and subsoil layer (D) of soil cores. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Table 3. Statistical analysis of root parameters for BRRI Dhan 28 grown under three different soil structure treatments in the second season (upland).
Soil layer Root parameter Flooded season treatment
(F)
Soil structure
(SS)
F × SS Preceding Black Gora
vs IR64
Total Root length density (cm/cm3) 5.29* NS NS NS
Surface area (cm2) 11.25*** NS NS NS
Diameter (mm) 47.48*** 7.11** 6.07** NS
Volume (cm3) 14.20*** NS 2.98* NS
Root tip density (cm-3) 4.82* NS NS NS
Number of branches per plant 7.16** NS NS NS
Topsoil Root length density (cm/cm3) 9.64*** NS NS 13.48**
Surface area (cm2) 7.65** NS NS 9.34**
Diameter (mm) 27.58*** NS 3.34* NS
Volume (cm3) 10.62*** NS 2.96* 6.80*
Root tip density (cm-3) 6.14** NS NS NS
Number of branches per plant 10.70*** NS NS 16.21***
Plough pan Root length density (cm/cm3) 10.67*** 27.04*** NS NS
Surface area (cm2) 12.85*** 12.63*** NS NS
Diameter (mm) 5.37* 50.10*** 3.61* NS
Volume (cm3) 13.12*** NS NS NS
Root tip density (cm-3) 36.45*** 53.09*** NS NS
Number of branches per plant 10.51*** 44.75*** NS NS
Root length density (cm/cm3) 14.09*** 45.91*** NS NS
Subsoil Root length density (cm/cm3) 12.64*** NS NS 4.53*
Surface area (cm2) 22.96*** NS NS 9.42**
Diameter (mm) 33.01*** NS NS 11.82**
Volume (cm3) 29.29*** NS NS 12.05**
Root tip density (cm-3) 9.36*** NS NS 3.41*
Number of branches per plant 19.08*** NS NS 7.12*
The flooded season treatments are no plant, Black Gora and IR64. For analysis of variance, values reported are the F-values and asterisks indicate the level of significance. NS means non-significant. ***, P  <  0.001; **, P  <  0.01; *, P  <  0.05.

Table 3. Statistical analysis of root parameters for BRRI Dhan 28 grown under three different soil structure treatments in the second season (upland).

Soil layer Root parameter Flooded season treatment
(F)
Soil structure
(SS)
F × SS Preceding Black Gora
vs IR64
Total Root length density (cm/cm3) 5.29* NS NS NS
Surface area (cm2) 11.25*** NS NS NS
Diameter (mm) 47.48*** 7.11** 6.07** NS
Volume (cm3) 14.20*** NS 2.98* NS
Root tip density (cm-3) 4.82* NS NS NS
Number of branches per plant 7.16** NS NS NS
Topsoil Root length density (cm/cm3) 9.64*** NS NS 13.48**
Surface area (cm2) 7.65** NS NS 9.34**
Diameter (mm) 27.58*** NS 3.34* NS
Volume (cm3) 10.62*** NS 2.96* 6.80*
Root tip density (cm-3) 6.14** NS NS NS
Number of branches per plant 10.70*** NS NS 16.21***
Plough pan Root length density (cm/cm3) 10.67*** 27.04*** NS NS
Surface area (cm2) 12.85*** 12.63*** NS NS
Diameter (mm) 5.37* 50.10*** 3.61* NS
Volume (cm3) 13.12*** NS NS NS
Root tip density (cm-3) 36.45*** 53.09*** NS NS
Number of branches per plant 10.51*** 44.75*** NS NS
Root length density (cm/cm3) 14.09*** 45.91*** NS NS
Subsoil Root length density (cm/cm3) 12.64*** NS NS 4.53*
Surface area (cm2) 22.96*** NS NS 9.42**
Diameter (mm) 33.01*** NS NS 11.82**
Volume (cm3) 29.29*** NS NS 12.05**
Root tip density (cm-3) 9.36*** NS NS 3.41*
Number of branches per plant 19.08*** NS NS 7.12*
The flooded season treatments are no plant, Black Gora and IR64. For analysis of variance, values reported are the F-values and asterisks indicate the level of significance. NS means non-significant. ***, P  <  0.001; **, P  <  0.01; *, P  <  0.05.
Fig. 3. Root diameter of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. A, Average root diameter for whole soil cores. B?D, Root diameter in topsoil (B), plough pan (C) and subsoil layer (D) of soil cores. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Fig. 3. Root diameter of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. A, Average root diameter for whole soil cores. B?D, Root diameter in topsoil (B), plough pan (C) and subsoil layer (D) of soil cores. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Fig. 4. Average root tip density of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. A, Overall root tip density for soil cores. B?D, Root tip density in topsoil (B), plough pan (C) and subsoil layer (D) of soil cores. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Fig. 4. Average root tip density of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. A, Overall root tip density for soil cores. B?D, Root tip density in topsoil (B), plough pan (C) and subsoil layer (D) of soil cores. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Fig. 5. Number of roots at the bottom surface of plough pan counted from camera images for BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Fig. 5. Number of roots at the bottom surface of plough pan counted from camera images for BRRI Dhan 28 grown under different treatments in upland season. Genotype means preceding season treatments. WP, Without plant; NPP, No plough pan; SPP, Soft plough pan; HPP, Hard plough pan. Error bars are standard error of the mean (n = 4).

Table 4. Root parameters of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under three different soil structures and two genotype treatments in upland season.
Soil core layer Flooded season treatment Soil structure treatment Root surface area (cm2) Root volume (cm3) Number of root branches
Total Black Gora Hard plough pan 1 796 ± 138 11.76 ± 1.20 362 949 ± 29 472
Soft plough pan 2 184 ± 147 15.20 ± 1.22 413 069 ± 42 441
No plough pan 2 098 ± 150 14.68 ± 1.57 396 717 ± 20 880
IR64 Hard plough pan 2 202 ± 80 16.48 ± 1.15 394 042 ± 8 765
Soft plough pan 1 670 ± 285 10.96 ± 2.02 333 285 ± 57 914
No plough pan 2 178 ± 306 14.60 ± 2.71 454 041 ± 47 821
Without plant Hard plough pan 1 332 ± 97 7.57 ± 0.77 280 914 ± 21 327
Soft plough pan 1 676 ± 129 10.17 ± 0.92 345 521 ± 29 443
No plough pan 1 267 ± 123 7.10 ± 0.70 275 699 ± 27 230
Topsoil Black Gora Hard plough pan 685 ± 56 5.34 ± 0.63 121 094 ± 9 261
Soft plough pan 753 ± 103 6.32 ± 1.04 119 706 ± 22 063
No plough pan 691 ± 80 5.64 ± 0.90 113 066 ± 13 885
IR64 Hard plough pan 1 125 ± 72 10.24 ± 0.95 190 561 ± 10 312
Soft plough pan 811 ± 95 6.36 ± 0.94 148 830 ± 15 912
No plough pan 919 ± 128 7.67 ± 1.41 165 587 ± 17 051
Without plant Hard plough pan 722 ± 63 4.62 ± 0.51 156 245 ± 13 412
Soft plough pan 876 ± 10 6.13 ± 0.35 181 367 ± 1 992
No plough pan 670 ± 50 4.27 ± 0.44 140 267 ± 9 827
Plough pan Black Gora Hard plough pan 145 ± 16 0.80 ± 0.09 21 370 ± 3 062
Soft plough pan 179 ± 20 1.01 ± 0.10 26 260 ± 4 501
No plough pan 240 ± 32 1.08 ± 0.13 55 474 ± 6 882
IR64 Hard plough pan 207 ± 41 1.29 ± 0.27 24 009 ± 5 420
Soft plough pan 180 ± 36 0.87 ± 0.19 31 136 ± 7 151
No plough pan 283 ± 34 1.22 ± 0.17 68 111 ± 6 864
Without plant Hard plough pan 72 ± 15 0.37 ± 0.09 9 053 ± 1 883
Soft plough pan 91 ± 24 0.39 ± 0.08 13 495 ± 4 271
No plough pan 128 ± 13 0.48 ± 0.04 31 813 ± 3 247
Subsoil Black Gora Hard plough pan 965 ± 85 5.62 ± 0.63 220 484 ± 20 627
Soft plough pan 1 252 ± 51 7.86 ± 0.43 267 102 ± 18 033
No plough pan 1 167 ± 49 7.96 ± 0.57 228 176 ± 6 050
IR64 Hard plough pan 870 ± 38 4.84 ± 0.13 179 471 ± 18 125
Soft plough pan 679 ± 166 3.72 ± 1.00 153 318 ± 37 487
No plough pan 976 ± 158 5.71 ± 1.21 220 342 ± 28 149
Without plant Hard plough pan 538 ± 74 2.57 ± 0.41 115 616 ± 17 576
Soft plough pan 709 ± 104 3.65 ± 0.59 150 659 ± 27 094
No plough pan 470 ± 102 2.35 ± 0.57 103 618 ± 23 075

Table 4. Root parameters of BRRI Dhan 28 grown under three different soil structures and two genotype treatments in upland season.

Soil core layer Flooded season treatment Soil structure treatment Root surface area (cm2) Root volume (cm3) Number of root branches
Total Black Gora Hard plough pan 1 796 ± 138 11.76 ± 1.20 362 949 ± 29 472
Soft plough pan 2 184 ± 147 15.20 ± 1.22 413 069 ± 42 441
No plough pan 2 098 ± 150 14.68 ± 1.57 396 717 ± 20 880
IR64 Hard plough pan 2 202 ± 80 16.48 ± 1.15 394 042 ± 8 765
Soft plough pan 1 670 ± 285 10.96 ± 2.02 333 285 ± 57 914
No plough pan 2 178 ± 306 14.60 ± 2.71 454 041 ± 47 821
Without plant Hard plough pan 1 332 ± 97 7.57 ± 0.77 280 914 ± 21 327
Soft plough pan 1 676 ± 129 10.17 ± 0.92 345 521 ± 29 443
No plough pan 1 267 ± 123 7.10 ± 0.70 275 699 ± 27 230
Topsoil Black Gora Hard plough pan 685 ± 56 5.34 ± 0.63 121 094 ± 9 261
Soft plough pan 753 ± 103 6.32 ± 1.04 119 706 ± 22 063
No plough pan 691 ± 80 5.64 ± 0.90 113 066 ± 13 885
IR64 Hard plough pan 1 125 ± 72 10.24 ± 0.95 190 561 ± 10 312
Soft plough pan 811 ± 95 6.36 ± 0.94 148 830 ± 15 912
No plough pan 919 ± 128 7.67 ± 1.41 165 587 ± 17 051
Without plant Hard plough pan 722 ± 63 4.62 ± 0.51 156 245 ± 13 412
Soft plough pan 876 ± 10 6.13 ± 0.35 181 367 ± 1 992
No plough pan 670 ± 50 4.27 ± 0.44 140 267 ± 9 827
Plough pan Black Gora Hard plough pan 145 ± 16 0.80 ± 0.09 21 370 ± 3 062
Soft plough pan 179 ± 20 1.01 ± 0.10 26 260 ± 4 501
No plough pan 240 ± 32 1.08 ± 0.13 55 474 ± 6 882
IR64 Hard plough pan 207 ± 41 1.29 ± 0.27 24 009 ± 5 420
Soft plough pan 180 ± 36 0.87 ± 0.19 31 136 ± 7 151
No plough pan 283 ± 34 1.22 ± 0.17 68 111 ± 6 864
Without plant Hard plough pan 72 ± 15 0.37 ± 0.09 9 053 ± 1 883
Soft plough pan 91 ± 24 0.39 ± 0.08 13 495 ± 4 271
No plough pan 128 ± 13 0.48 ± 0.04 31 813 ± 3 247
Subsoil Black Gora Hard plough pan 965 ± 85 5.62 ± 0.63 220 484 ± 20 627
Soft plough pan 1 252 ± 51 7.86 ± 0.43 267 102 ± 18 033
No plough pan 1 167 ± 49 7.96 ± 0.57 228 176 ± 6 050
IR64 Hard plough pan 870 ± 38 4.84 ± 0.13 179 471 ± 18 125
Soft plough pan 679 ± 166 3.72 ± 1.00 153 318 ± 37 487
No plough pan 976 ± 158 5.71 ± 1.21 220 342 ± 28 149
Without plant Hard plough pan 538 ± 74 2.57 ± 0.41 115 616 ± 17 576
Soft plough pan 709 ± 104 3.65 ± 0.59 150 659 ± 27 094
No plough pan 470 ± 102 2.35 ± 0.57 103 618 ± 23 075
Table 5. Penetration resistance at plough pan for different treatments at different water contents. MPa
Plough pan strength Penetration resistance
at -5 kPa
Penetration resistance
at -20 kPa
No plough pan 0.352 ± 0.041 0.855 ± 0.045
Soft plough pan 1.030 ± 0.044 1.440 ± 0.049
Hard plough pan 1.700 ± 0.020 2.800 ± 0.100

Table 5. Penetration resistance at plough pan for different treatments at different water contents. MPa

Plough pan strength Penetration resistance
at -5 kPa
Penetration resistance
at -20 kPa
No plough pan 0.352 ± 0.041 0.855 ± 0.045
Soft plough pan 1.030 ± 0.044 1.440 ± 0.049
Hard plough pan 1.700 ± 0.020 2.800 ± 0.100

参考文献 65

[1] Aggarwal G C, Sidhu A S, Sekhon N K, Sandhu K S, Sur H S. 1995. Puddling and N management effects on crop response in a rice-wheat cropping system. Soil Tillage Res, 36(3/4): 129-139.
[2] Ambassa-Kiki R, Aboubakar Y, Boulama T. 1996. Zero-tillage for rice production on Cameroonian Vertisols. Soil Tillage Res, 39(1/2): 75-84.
[3] Atkinson J A, Hawkesford M J, Whalley W R, Zhou H, Mooney S J. 2020. Soil strength influences wheat root interactions with soil macropores. Plant Cell Environ, 43(1): 235-245.
[4] Banglapedia. 2012. Rice. National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh. [2023-01-20]. https://en.banglapedia.org/index.php/Rice.
[5] Bauke S L, Landl M, Koch M, Hofmann D, Nagel K A, Siebers N, Schnepf A, Amelung W. 2017. Macropore effects on phosphorus acquisition by wheat roots: A rhizotron study. Plant Soil, 416(1): 67-82.
[6] Belder P, Bouman B M, Spiertz J J, Peng S, Castañeda A R, Visperas R M. 2005. Crop performance, nitrogen and water use in flooded and aerobic rice. Plant Soil, 273(1): 167-182.
[7] Bengough A G. 2003. Root growth and function in relation to soil structure, composition, and strength. In: de Kroon H, Visser E J W. Root Ecology. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer: 151-171.
[8] Bengough A G. 2012. Root elongation is restricted by axial but not by radial pressures: So what happens in field soil. Plant Soil, 360(1): 15-18.
[9] Bertollo A M, de Moraes M T, Franchini J C, Soltangheisi A, Balbinot A A Jr, Levien R, Debiasi H. 2021. Precrops alleviate soil physical limitations for soybean root growth in an Oxisol from southern Brazil. Soil Tillage Res, 206: 104820.
[10] Bingham I J, Glyn Bengough A, Rees R M. 2010. Soil compaction- N interactions in barley: Root growth and tissue composition. Soil Tillage Res, 106(2): 241-246.
[11] Bouman B A M, Lampayan R M, Toung T P. 2007. Water Management in Irrigated Rice: Coping with Water Scarcity. Los Baños, the Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.
[12] Chen S, Xia G M, Zhao W M, Wu F B, Zhang G P. 2007. Characterization of leaf photosynthetic properties for no-tillage rice. Rice Sci, 14(4): 283-288.
[13] Colombi T, Braun S, Keller T, Walter A. 2017. Artificial macropores attract crop roots and enhance plant productivity on compacted soils. Sci Total Environ, 574(1): 1283-1293.
[14] Colombi T, Torres L C, Walter A, Keller T. 2018. Feedbacks between soil penetration resistance, root architecture and water uptake limit water accessibility and crop growth: A vicious circle. Sci Total Environ, 626: 1026-1035.
[15] Cresswell H P, Kirkegaard J A. 1995. Subsoil amelioration by plant-roots: The process and the evidence. Soil Res, 33(2): 221.
[16] Dexter A R. 1986. Model experiments on the behaviour of roots at the interface between a tilled seed-bed and a compacted sub-soil: II. Entry of pea and wheat roots into sub-soil cracks on JSTOR. Plant Soil, 95(1): 135-147.
[17] Elkins B C, Sickle V K. 1984. Punching holes in plowpans. Solutions, 28: 38-41.
[18] Fukai S, Cooper M. 1995. Development of drought-resistant cultivars using physiomorphological traits in rice. Field Crops Res, 40(2): 67-86.
[19] Gao W, Hodgkinson L, Jin K, Watts C W, Ashton R W, Shen J, Ren T, Dodd I C, Binley A, Phillips A L, Hedden P, Hawkesford M J, Whalley W R. 2016. Deep roots and soil structure. Plant Cell Environ, 39(8): 1662-1668.
[20] Gathala M K, Ladha J K, Saharawat Y S, Kumar V, Kumar V, Sharma P K. 2011. Effect of tillage and crop establishment methods on physical properties of a medium-textured soil under a seven-year rice-wheat rotation. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 75(5): 1851-1862.
[21] Gathala M K, Timsina J, Islam M S, Rahman M M, Hossain M I, Harun-Ar-Rashid M, Ghosh A K, Krupnik T J, Tiwari T P, McDonald A. 2015. Conservation agriculture based tillage and crop establishment options can maintain farmers’ yields and increase profits in South Asia’s rice-maize systems: Evidence from Bangladesh. Field Crops Res, 172: 85-98.
[22] Gregory A S, Watts C W, Whalley W R, Kuan H L, Griffiths B S, Hallett P D, Whitmore A P. 2007. Physical resilience of soil to field compaction and the interactions with plant growth and microbial community structure. Eur J Soil Sci, 58(6): 1221-1232.
[23] Guimarães C M, Moreira J A A. 2001. Soil compaction on upland rice. Pesqui Agropecu Bras, 36(4): 703-707.
[24] Han E, Kautz T, Köpke U. 2016. Precrop root system determines root diameter of subsequent crop. Biol Fertil Soils, 52(1): 113-118.
[25] Haque M E, Bell R W, Islam M A, Rahman M A. 2016. Minimum tillage unpuddled transplanting: An alternative crop establishment strategy for rice in conservation agriculture cropping systems. Field Crops Res, 185: 31-39.
[26] Hasegawa S, Thangaraj M, O’Toole J C. 1985. Root behavior: Field and laboratory studies for rice and non-rice crops. In: Soil Physics and Rice. Manila, the Philippines: International Rice Research Institute: 383-396.
[27] Huang C P, Ding D L. 1995. The effects of paddy upland rotation on crop yield and soil physical and chemical characteristics. Acta Agric Zhejiang, 7: 448-450. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[28] Huang M, Ibrahim M, Xia B, Zou Y. 2011. Significance, progress and prospects for research in simplified cultivation technologies for rice in China. J Agric Sci, 149(4): 487-496.
[29] Islam M D D, Price A H, Hallett P D. 2021. Contrasting ability of deep and shallow rooting rice genotypes to grow through plough pans containing simulated biopores and cracks. Plant Soil, 467(1/2): 515-530.
[30] Islam M S. 2016. Genetic mapping of rooting in rice: Exploiting a high throughput phenotyping in plants. Aberdeen, UK: University of Aberdeen.
[31] Kamboj B R, Yadav D B, Yadav A, Goel N K, Gill G, Malik R K, Chauhan B S. 2013. Mechanized transplanting of rice (Oryza sativa L.) in nonpuddled and no-till conditions in the rice-wheat cropping system in Haryana, India. Am J Plant Sci, 4(12): 2409-2413.
[32] Kautz T. 2014. Research on subsoil biopores and their functions in organically managed soils: A review. Renew Agric Food Syst, 30(4): 318-327.
[33] Kautz T, Köpke U. 2010. In situ endoscopy: New insights to root growth in biopores. Plant Biosyst, 144(2): 440-442.
[34] Kolb E, Hartmann C, Genet P. 2012. Radial force development during root growth measured by photoelasticity. Plant Soil, 360(1): 19-35.
[35] Ladha J K, Dawe D, Pathak H, Padre A T, Yadav R L, Singh B, Singh Y, Singh Y, Singh P, Kundu A L, Sakal R, Ram N, Regmi A P, Gami S K, Bhandari A L, Amin R, Yadav C R, Bhattarai E M, Das S, Aggarwal H P, Gupta R K, Hobbs P R. 2003. How extensive are yield declines in long-term rice-wheat experiments in Asia. Field Crops Res, 81(2/3): 159-180.
[36] Ladha J K, Pathak H, Tirol-Padre A, Dawe D, Gupta R K. 2015. Productivity trends in intensive rice-wheat cropping systems in Asia. In: Ladha J K, Hill J E, Duxbury J M, Gupta R K, Buresh R J. Improving the Productivity and Sustainability of Rice- Wheat Systems: Issues and Impacts. Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy. Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America: 45-76.
[37] Li C K. 1992. Paddy Soils of China. Beijing, China: Science Press: 156-162. (in Chinese)
[38] Linh T B, Sleutel S, Guong V T, Khoa L V, Cornelis W M. 2015. Deeper tillage and root growth in annual rice-upland cropping systems result in improved rice yield and economic profit relative to rice monoculture. Soil Tillage Res, 154: 44-52.
[39] Lipiec J, Hatano R. 2003. Quantification of compaction effects on soil physical properties and crop growth. Geoderma, 116(1/2): 107-136.
[40] Materechera S A, Alston A M, Kirby J M, Dexter A R. 1992. Influence of root diameter on the penetration of seminal roots into a compacted subsoil. Plant Soil, 144(2): 297-303.
[41] McNally K L, Childs K L, Bohnert R, Davidson R M, Zhao K Y, Ulat V J, Zeller G, Clark R M, Hoen D R, Bureau T E, Stokowski R, Ballinger D G, Frazer K A, Cox D R, Padhukasahasram B, Bustamante C D, Weigel D, MacKill D J, Bruskiewich R M, Rätsch G, Buell C R, Leung H, Leach J E. 2009. Genomewide SNP variation reveals relationships among landraces and modern varieties of rice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 106(30): 12273-12278.
PMID
[42] Mishra V K, Saha R. 2008. Soil physical behaviour and rice (Oryza sativa) yield under different sources of organics, methods of puddling and zero tillage. Ind J Agric Sci, 78: 399-404.
[43] Munasinghe M, Price A H. 2016. Genetic and root phenotype diversity in Sri Lankan rice landraces may be related to drought resistance. Rice, 9(1): 24.
PMID
[44] Muthert L W F, Izzo L G, van Zanten M, Aronne G. 2020. Root tropisms: Investigations on earth and in space to unravel plant growth direction. Front Plant Sci, 10: 1807.
[45] Narang M K, Chandel R, Dogra B, Manes G S. 2020. Development of mat nursery raising and uprooting techniques for paddy (Oryza Sativa L.) crop and their field evaluation with mechanical transplanter for South East Asia. AMA-Agric Mech Asia Afr Lat A, 51(2): 79-90.
[46] Peng S B, Bouman B, Visperas R M, Castañeda A, Nie L X, Park H K. 2006. Comparison between aerobic and flooded rice in the tropics: Agronomic performance in an eight-season experiment. Field Crops Res, 96(2/3): 252-259.
[47] Pfeifer J, Kirchgessner N, Walter A. 2014. Artificial pores attract barley roots and can reduce artifacts of pot experiments. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci, 177(6): 903-913.
[48] Piron D, Pérès G, Hallaire V, Cluzeau D. 2012. Morphological description of soil structure patterns produced by earthworm bioturbation at the profile scale. Eur J Soil Biol, 50: 83-90.
[49] Ramalingam P, Kamoshita A, Deshmukh V, Yaginuma S, Uga Y. 2017. Association between root growth angle and root length density of a near-isogenic line of IR64 rice with DEEPER ROOTING 1 under different levels of soil compaction. Plant Prod Sci, 20(2): 162-175.
[50] Rasse D P, Smucker A J M. 1998. Root recolonization of previous root channels in corn and alfalfa rotations. Plant Soil, 204(2): 203-212.
[51] Rosolem C A, Foloni J S S, Tiritan C S. 2002. Root growth and nutrient accumulation in cover crops as affected by soil compaction. Soil Tillage Res, 65(1): 109-115.
[52] Sanchez P A. 1973. Puddling tropical rice soils: 2. Effects of water losses. Soil Sci, 115(4): 303-308.
[53] Shrestha R, Al-Shugeairy Z, Al-Ogaidi F, Munasinghe M, Radermacher M, Vandenhirtz J, Price A H. 2014. Comparing simple root phenotyping methods on a core set of rice genotypes. Plant Biol, 16(3): 632-642.
[54] Singh S P, Jain A, Anantha M S, Tripathi S, Sharma S, Kumar S, Prasad A, Sharma B, Karmakar B, Bhattarai R, Das S P, Singh S K, Shenoy V, Chandra Babu R, Robin S, Swain P, Dwivedi J L, Yadaw R B, Mandal N P, Ram T, Mishra K K, Verulkar S B, Aditya T, Prasad K, Perraju P, Mahato R K, Sharma S, Anitha Raman K, Kumar A, Henry A. 2017. Depth of soil compaction predominantly affects rice yield reduction by reproductive-stage drought at varietal screening sites in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal. Plant Soil, 417: 377-392.
PMID
[55] Steduto P, Faurès J M, Hoogeveen J, Winpenny J, Burke J J. 2012. Coping with Water Scarcity: An Action Framework for Agriculture and Food Security. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: 38.
[56] Stirzaker R J, Passioura J B, Wilms Y. 1996. Soil structure and plant growth: Impact of bulk density and biopores. Plant Soil, 185(1): 151-162.
[57] RStudio Team. 2020. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA, USA. http://www.rstudio.com/.
[58] Timsina J, Jat M L, Majumdar K. 2010. Rice-maize systems of South Asia: Current status, future prospects and research priorities for nutrient management. Plant Soil, 335(1): 65-82.
[59] Weller S, Janz B, Jörg L, Kraus D, Racela H S U, Wassmann R, Butterbach-Bahl K, Kiese R. 2016. Greenhouse gas emissions and global warming potential of traditional and diversified tropical rice rotation systems. Glob Change Biol, 22(1): 432-448.
[60] White R G, Kirkegaard J A. 2010. The distribution and abundance of wheat roots in a dense, structured subsoil: Implications for water uptake. Plant Cell Environ, 33(2): 133-148.
[61] Williams S M, Weil R R. 2004. Crop cover root channels may alleviate soil compaction effects on soybean crop. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 68(4): 1403-1409.
[62] Yuan S, Stuart A M, Laborte A G, Rattalino Edreira J I, Dobermann A, Kien L V N, Thúy L T, Paothong K, Traesang P, Tint K M, San S S, Villafuerte M Q, Quicho E D, Pame A R P, Then R, Flor R J, Thon N, Agus F, Agustiani N, Deng N Y, Li T, Grassini P. 2022. Southeast Asia must narrow down the yield gap to continue to be a major rice bowl. Nat Food, 3(3): 217-226.
PMID
[63] Zhang Z B, Yan L, Wang Y K, Ruan R J, Xiong P, Peng X H. 2022. Bio-tillage improves soil physical properties and maize growth in a compacted vertisol by cover crops. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 86(2): 324-337.
[64] Zhao K Y, Tung C W, Eizenga G C, Wright M H, Ali M L, Price A H, Norton G J, Islam M R, Reynolds A, Mezey J, McClung A M, Bustamante C D, McCouch S R. 2011. Genome-wide association mapping reveals a rich genetic architecture of complex traits in Oryza sativa. Nat Commun, 2: 467.
[65] Zhou W, Lv T F, Chen Y, Westby A P, Ren W J.2014. Soil physicochemical and biological properties of paddy-upland rotation: A review. Sci World J, 2014: 856352.

相关文章 0

No related articles found!

编辑推荐

Metrics

阅读次数
全文


摘要

  • 摘要
  • 图/表
  • 参考文献
  • 相关文章
  • 编辑推荐
  • Metrics
回顶部
浙ICP备05004719号-15   公安备案号:33010302003355
版权所有 © 《Rice Science》编辑部
地址:浙江省杭州市体育场路359号 邮编:310006 电话:0571-63371017 E-mail:crrn@fy.hz.zn.cn; cjrs278@gmail.com
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发
总访问量: 今日访问: 在线人数: