土壤环境因子对棉花根际与内生拮抗细菌存活数量的影响

doi:10.11963/1002-7807.dwfsyw.20210428

棉花学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 247-257.doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.dwfsyw.20210428

土壤环境因子对棉花根际与内生拮抗细菌存活数量的影响

党文芳^1,²(),刘萍^1,²,管力慧^1,²,杨红梅^1,³,牛新湘^4,⁶,李萍⁵,楚敏^1,³,娄恺^1,³,史应武^1,^2,^3,^6,^*()

1.新疆农业科学院微生物应用研究所,乌鲁木齐 830091
2.新疆大学生命科学与技术学院,乌鲁木齐 830052
3.新疆特殊环境微生物实验室,乌鲁木齐 830091
4.新疆农业科学院土壤肥料与农业节水研究所,乌鲁木齐 830091
5.新疆库尔勒市农业技术推广站,新疆库尔勒 841000
6.农业农村部西北绿洲农业环境重点实验室,乌鲁木齐 830091

收稿日期:2020-04-07 出版日期:2021-05-15 发布日期:2021-06-02
通讯作者: ^*史应武 E-mail:1954358900@qq.com;syw1973@126.com
作者简介:党文芳（1994―）, 1954358900@qq.com。
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区自然科学基金面上项目(2018D01A44);国家自然科学基金面上项目(41471220);新疆维吾尔自治区优秀青年科技人才培养项目(QN2005YX023);中国博士后科学基金(2016M602953XB);新疆维吾尔自治区科技计划重大专项(2020A01002-3);新疆农业科学院农业科技创新平台能力提升建设专项(nkypt005)

Effects of soil environmental factors on the survival of cotton rhizosphere and endophytic antagonistic bacteria

Dang Wenfang^1,²(),Liu Ping^1,²,Guan Lihui^1,²,Yang Hongmei^1,³,Niu Xinxiang^4,⁶,Li Ping⁵,Chu Min^1,³,Lou Kai^1,³,Shi Yingwu^1,^2,^3,^6,^*()

1. Institute of Microbiology, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091, China
2. College of Life Sciences and Technology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830052, China
3. Xinjiang Special Environmental Microbiology Laboratory, Urumqi 830091, China
4. Institute of Soil and Fertilizer and Agricultural Water Conservation, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091, China
5. Xinjiang Korla Agricultural Technology Extension Station, Korla, Xinjiang 841000, China
6. Key Laboratory of Northwest Oasis Agricultural Environment, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Urumqi 830091, China

Received:2020-04-07 Online:2021-05-15 Published:2021-06-02
Contact: ^*Shi Yingwu E-mail:1954358900@qq.com;syw1973@126.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】分析实验室条件下土壤理化性质对棉花黄萎病拮抗细菌数量及活性的影响,揭示拮抗细菌在土壤不同理化条件下的适应能力。【方法】以已筛选的4个棉花黄萎病拮抗细菌菌株为基础,采用涂布法测定培养皿土壤中不同理化因子（含水率、温度、含盐量、肥力、pH、土壤类型）下的拮抗细菌数量;通过最适土壤理化环境下的盆栽试验,对棉株根部土壤中的拮抗细菌数量进行测定并对棉花黄萎病发生情况进行统计。【结果】SHZ-24和BHZ-29菌株在土壤中活菌相对数量较高,其中SHZ-24的活菌相对数量在15%的土壤含水率下达到27.74%,BHZ-29菌株在中等肥力、灰漠土中分别达到24.81%和15.24%。在高肥、土壤含水率小于20%的土壤条件下,4种拮抗细菌对棉花黄萎病的防病效果均较好,其中BHZ-29防效最高（87.12%）,SMT-24防效最低（35.04%）。【结论】4株拮抗细菌在水分合适和施肥土壤中有很好的适应性,可维持一定数量和活性。

关键词: 棉花; 黄萎病; 拮抗细菌; 根围环境; 适应性; 土壤理化性质; 数量; 病情指数

Abstract:

[Objective] The effect of soil physical and chemical properties on the quantity and activity of cotton Verticillium wilt antagonist bacteria were analyzed under laboratory conditions, to reveal the adaptability of antagonistic bacteria under different physical and chemical conditions of soil. [Method] Four cotton Verticillium wilt antagonist bacteria isolated in the laboratory were raised to estimate their quantity under different soil physical and chemical factors (moisture, temperature, salinity, fertility, salinity, soil type) in petri dishes by coating. Through the pot experiment under the most suitable soil physical and chemical environments, the quantity of these biocontrol bacteria in the rhizosphere of cotton plants was evaluated and the incidence of cotton plants was counted. [Result] Both SHZ-24 and BHZ-29 strains have relatively high relative numbers of viable bacteria in the soil. SHZ-24 reaches 27.74% in soil with 15% water content, and BHZ-29 strain reaches 24.81% and 15.24% in medium fertilizer and gray desert soil, respectively. Under the conditions of high fertility and soil moisture content of less than 20%, four antagonistic bacteria have the best control effect on cotton Verticillium wilt. Among them, the control effect of BHZ-29 reached the maximum of 87.12%, and the control effect of SMT-24 had the minimum of 35.04%. [Conclusion] The four strains of antagonistic bacteria have good adaptability in suitable water and fertilized soil, the quantity and activity of antagonistic bacteria could be maintained well.

Key words: cotton; Verticillium wilt; antagonistic bacteria; rhizosphere; adaptability; soil physical and chemical properties; colonization number; disease index

党文芳, 刘萍, 管力慧, 杨红梅, 牛新湘, 李萍, 楚敏, 娄恺, 史应武. 土壤环境因子对棉花根际与内生拮抗细菌存活数量的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(3): 247-257.

Dang Wenfang, Liu Ping, Guan Lihui, Yang Hongmei, Niu Xinxiang, Li Ping, Chu Min, Lou Kai, Shi Yingwu. Effects of soil environmental factors on the survival of cotton rhizosphere and endophytic antagonistic bacteria[J]. Cotton Science, 2021, 33(3): 247-257.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: http://journal.cricaas.com.cn/Jweb_mhxb/CN/10.11963/1002-7807.dwfsyw.20210428

http://journal.cricaas.com.cn/Jweb_mhxb/CN/Y2021/V33/I3/247

图/表 8

表1

表2

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

参考文献 27

[1]	马平, 李社增, Huang H C,等. 利用棉花体内非致病镰刀菌防治棉花黄萎病[J]. 中国生物防治, 2001, 17(2): 71-74.
	Ma Ping, Li Shezeng, Huang H C, et al. Biological control of cotton Verticillium wilt by avirulent Fusarium spp.[J]. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 2001, 17(2): 71-74.
[2]	齐东梅, 梁启美, 惠明,等. 棉花枯萎、黄萎病拮抗芽孢杆菌的抗菌蛋白特性[J]. 微生物学通报, 2005, 32(4): 42-46.
	Qi Dongmei, Liang Qimei, Hui Ming, et al. Characteristics of antagonistic proteins from Bacillus against cotton Fusarium wilt and Verticillium wilt[J]. Chinese Journal of Microbiology, 2005, 32(4): 42-46.
[3]	刘元元, 庞学兵, 李国,等. 棉花黄萎病生防菌的筛选及挥发性抑菌物质检测[J/OL]. 西北农业学报, 2019, 28(5): 820-829 [2020-04-01]. http://dx.chinadoi.cn/10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2019.05.020.
	Liu Yuanyuan, Pang Xuebing, Li Guo, et al. Screening for bio-control bacteria against cotton Verticillium wilt and detection of volatile antimicrobial substances[J/OL]. Journal of Northwest Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 28(5): 820-829[2020-04-01]. http://dx.chinadoi.cn/10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2019.05.020.
[4]	赵君洁. 棉花黄萎病拮抗芽孢菌的筛选及其活性物质研究[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆师范大学, 2017.
	Zhao Junjie. Screening, identification and characterization of the antifungal substance of antagonistic Bacillus against Verticillium dahilae[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Normal University, 2017.
[5]	刘政. 新疆黄萎病田棉花根部内生细菌和真菌群落结构分析[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2015.
	Liu Zheng. Analysis of the community structures of endophytic bacteria and fungus in the roots of Verticillium-infected cotton in Xinjiang[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2015.
[6]	张洁. 小麦孢囊线虫病的生防微生物鉴定及球孢白僵菌08F04菌株对土壤微生物多样性的影响[D]. 郑州: 河南农业大学, 2016.
	Zhang Jie. Identification of biocontrol microorganism of cereal cyst nematode and the influence of strain 08F04 of Beauveria bassiana on soil microbial diversity[D]. Zhengzhou: Henan Agricultural University, 2016.
[7]	吕德国, 于翠, 秦嗣军,等. 本溪山樱根部解磷细菌的定殖规律及其对植株生长发育的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(2): 508-515.
	Lü Deguo, Yu Cui, Qin Sijun, et al. Colonization regulation pattern of phosphobacteria and its effect on the growth and development of Cerasus sachalinensis[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008, 41(2): 508-515.
[8]	高圣风, 刘爱勤, 桑利伟,等. 生防芽孢杆菌VD18R19在香草兰上定殖动态及其对香草兰根(茎)腐病的田间生防效果[J]. 热带农业科学, 2018, 38(7): 57-61, 66.
	Gao Shengfeng, Liu Aiqin, Sang Liwei, et al. Colonization dynamics and biocontrol effect of Bacillus subtilis VD18R19 against Fusarium wilt disease of Vanilla[J]. Tropical Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 38(7): 57-61, 66.
[9]	余超, 肖荣凤, 刘波,等. 生防菌FJAT-346-PA的内生定殖特性及对香蕉枯萎病的防治效果[J]. 植物保护学报, 2010, 37(6): 493-498.
	Yu Chao, Xiao Rongfeng, Liu Bo, et al. Endophytic colonization of biocontrol bacterium FJAT-346-PA and its efficiency against banana Fusarium wilt[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Protection, 2010, 37(6): 493-498.
[10]	张昕, 张炳欣, 喻景权,等. 生防菌ZJY-1及ZJY-116的GFP标记及其在黄瓜根围的生态适应性[J]. 应用生态学报, 2005, 16(11): 140-144.
	Zhang Xin, Zhang Bingxin, Yu Jingquan, et al. Labeling of biocontrol agents ZJY-1 and ZJY-116 gfp gene and its ecological adaptability in cucumber rhizosphere[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2005, 16(11): 140-144.
[11]	王小慧, 张国漪, 张鹏,等. 生防菌根系定殖竞争作用对西瓜枯萎病发病机理的影响[J]. 微生物学通报, 2012, 39(11): 1603-1613.
	Wang Xiaohui, Zhang Guoyi, Zhang Peng, et al. Effect of antagonistic fungal competition for colonization of roots on pathogenesis of watermelon Fusarium wilt[J]. Bulletin of Microbiology, 2012, 39(11): 1603-1613.
[12]	孙洋, 王树桐, 曹克强. 影响生防菌田间药效环境因素的研究进展[C]// 粮食安全与植保科技创新. 武汉: 中国植物保护学会, 2009: 575-579.
	Sun Yang, Wang Shutong, Cao Keqiang. Research progress on environmental factors affecting the efficacy of biocontrol bacteria in the field[C]// Food security and plant protection technology innovation. Wuhan: China Plant Protection Society, 2009: 575-579.
[13]	张炳欣, 张平, 陈晓斌. 影响引入微生物根部定殖的因素[J]. 应用生态学报, 2000, 11(6): 951-953. pmid: 11767580
	Zhang Bingxin, Zhang Ping, Chen Xiaobin. Factors affecting colonization of introduced microorganisms on plant roots[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2000, 11(6): 951-953. pmid: 11767580
[14]	李雪艳. 棉花内生与根际拮抗菌对黄萎病的防病机理研究[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆大学, 2019.
	Li Xueyan. Study on the mechanism of cotton endophytic and rhizosphere antagonism against Verticillium wilt[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang University, 2019.
[15]	张涛, 李雪艳, 杨红梅,等. 4株拮抗细菌对棉花黄萎病的防治效果及机制[J/OL]. 中国生物防治学报, 2018, 34(6): 882-889 [2020-04-01]. http://doi.org/10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2018.06.011. doi: http://doi.org/10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2018.06.011
	Zhang Tao, Li Xueyan, Yang Hongmei, et al. Biocontrol effect and mechanism of four strains of antagonistic bacteria against cotton Verticillium wilt[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 2018, 34(6): 882-889 [2020-04-01]. http://doi.org/10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2018.06.011. doi: http://doi.org/10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2018.06.011
[16]	王娜, 陶伟, 陈双林,等. 植物内生细菌在棉花体内的定殖动态及对棉花黄萎病的生物防治效果[J/OL]. 植物保护学报, 2016, 43(2): 207-214[2020-04-01]. http://doi.org/10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2016.02.005. doi: http://doi.org/10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2016.02.005
	Wang Na, Tao Wei, Chen Shuanglin, et al. Colonization dynamics of endophytic bacteria in cotton and their biological control effect on cotton Verticillium wilt[J/OL]. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica, 2016, 43(2): 207-214 [2020-04-01]. http://doi.org/10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2016.02.005. doi: http://doi.org/10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2016.02.005
[17]	Gao S, Wu H, Wang W, et al. Efficient colonization and harpins mediated enhancement in growth and biocontrol of wilt disease in tomato by Bacillus subtilis[J]. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 2013, 57(6): 526-533. doi: 10.1111/lam.12144 pmid: 23937425
[18]	高毓晗, 李世东, 郭荣君. sfp基因转化增强了Bacillus subtilis 168的定殖能力和对黄瓜茎内枯萎病菌的抑制作用[J]. 中国生物防治学报, 2016, 32(1): 76-85.
	Gao Yuhan, Li Shidong, Guo Rongjun. sfp gene transformation enhanced the colonization ability of Bacillus subtilis 168 and its inhibitory effect on Fusarium wilt in cucumber stem[J]. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 2016, 32(1): 76-85.
[19]	刘海洋, 王琦, 王伟,等. 新疆棉花黄萎病的发生现状及其病原菌的分子鉴定与ISSR分析[J/OL]. 植物保护学报, 2018, 45(6): 1194-1203 [2020-04-01]. http://dx.chinadoi.cn/10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2018.2017101.
	Liu Haiyang, Wang Qi, Wang Wei, et al. The current situation of cotton Verticillium wilt in Xinjiang and molecular identification and ISSR analysis of its pathogen[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Plant Protection, 2018, 45(6): 1194-1203 [2020-04-01]. http://dx.chinadoi.cn/10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2018.2017101.
[20]	Niemann H, Lsekann T de Beer D, et al. Novel microbial communities of the Haakon Mosby Mud Volcano and their role as a methane sink[J]. Nature, 2006, 443(7113): 854-858. doi: 10.1038/nature05227
[21]	Saini R, Dudeja S S, Giri R, et al. Isolation, characterization and evaluation of bacterial root and Nodule endophytes from chickpea cultivated in Northern India[J/OL]. Journal of Basic Microbiology, 2015, 55(1): 74-81[2020-04-01]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jobm.201300173. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jobm.201300173
[22]	程凯. 防治土传棉花黄萎病微生物有机肥研制与生物效应研究[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2010.
	Cheng Kai. Preparation and biological control effect of microbial organic fertilizer against cotton Verticillium wilt[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Agricultural College, 2010.
[23]	王羽. 无致病力青枯病病菌对番茄青枯病的控病研究[D]. 重庆: 西南农业大学, 2004.
	Wang Yu. Biological control of bacterial wilt of Tomato crops with avirulent isolates of Ralsotnia solanacearum[D]. Chongqing: Southwest Agricultural University, 2004.
[24]	Chinawoeng T, Bloemberg G, Mulders I, et al. Root colonization by phenazine-1-carboxamide-producing bacterium Pseudomonas chlororaphis PCL1391 is essential for biocontrol of Tomato foot and root rot[J]. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions, 2000, 13(12): 1340-1345. doi: 10.1094/MPMI.2000.13.12.1340
[25]	曹慧, 孙辉, 杨浩,等. 土壤酶活性及其对土壤质量的指示研究进展[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2003, 9(1): 105-109.
	Cao Hui, Sun Hui, Yang Hao, et al. A review soil enzyme activity and ITS indicators for soil quality[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology, 2003, 9(1): 105-109.
[26]	殷陶刚, 李玉泽. 土壤酶活性影响因素及测定方法的研究进展[J]. 矿产勘查, 2019, 10(6): 1523-1528.
	Yin Taogang, Li Yuze. Research progress on factors affecting soil enzyme activity and its determination methods[J]. Mineral Exploration, 2019, 10(6): 1523-1528.
[27]	万忠梅, 宋长春. 土壤酶活性对生态环境的响应研究进展[J]. 土壤通报, 2009, 40(4): 951-956.
	Wan Zhongmei, Song Changchun. Advance on response of soil enzyme activity to ecological environment[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2009, 40(4): 951-956.

土壤类型	取样地 Sampling site	养分含量Nutrient content/(g·kg^-1)							pH
土壤类型	取样地 Sampling site	有机质 Organic matter	全氮 Total nitrogen	全磷 Total phosphorus	全钾 Total potassium	碱解氮 Alkali nitrogen	速效磷 Available phosphorus	速效钾 Available potassium	pH
棕钙土	博乐Bole	22.753	1.539	0.972	25.066	0.022	0.029	0.217	7.55
灰漠土	石河子Shihezi	24.579	1.598	0.970	24.145	0.011	0.015	0.313	7.89
棕漠土	库尔勒Korla	10.833	0.727	0.838	13.910	0.004	0.047	0.151	8.03

土壤因子 Soil factor	拮抗细菌 Antagonistic bacteria	Ⅲ型平方和 Sum of square, Type III	自由度 Degrees of freedom	均方 Mean of square	F	概率 Probability (P)
土壤含水率	SHZ-24	1.34×10¹³	2	6.68×10¹²	10.865	0.002
Soil moisture content	SMT-24	8.53×10¹¹	2	4.27×10¹¹	9.035	0.004
	SHT-15	3.21×10¹²	2	1.61×10¹²	16.247	0.000
	BHZ-29	2.04×10¹³	2	1.02×10¹³	40.933	0.000
肥力	SHZ-24	1.71×10¹⁵	2	8.53×10¹⁴	3 111.006	0.000
Fertility	SMT-24	7.11×10¹³	2	3.55×10¹³	2 988.233	0.000
	SHT-15	1.42×10¹³	2	7.10×10¹²	77.034	0.000
	BHZ-29	2.31×10¹³	2	1.15×10¹³	121.524	0.000
土壤类型	SHZ-24	5.74×10¹⁵	3	1.91×10¹⁵	246.498	0.000
Soil type	SMT-24	4.90×10¹⁵	3	1.63×10¹⁵	64.030	0.000
	SHT-15	6.87×10¹⁵	3	2.29×10¹⁵	490.115	0.000
	BHZ-29	8.04×10¹⁵	3	2.68×10¹⁵	490.115	0.000
pH	SHZ-24	1.37×10¹²	2	6.86×10¹¹	3.210	0.076
	SMT-24	3.73×10¹³	2	1.87×10¹³	255.465	0.000
	SHT-15	5.31×10¹²	2	2.66×10¹²	60.323	0.000
	BHZ-29	2.53×10¹³	2	1.27×10¹³	103.773	0.000
含盐量	SHZ-24	8.32×10¹¹	2	4.16×10¹¹	0.333	0.723
Salt content	SMT-24	2.47×10¹²	2	1.23×10¹²	99.360	0.000
	SHT-15	5.45×10¹²	2	2.72×10¹²	60.734	0.000
	BHZ-29	3.11×10¹³	2	1.56×10¹³	112.275	0.000
温度	SHZ-24	2.39×10¹²	2	1.20×10¹²	1.803	0.207
Temperature	SMT-24	3.31×10¹²	2	1.65×10¹²	118.385	0.000
	SHT-15	2.11×10¹³	2	1.05×10¹³	225.264	0.000
	BHZ-29	8.30×10¹²	2	4.15×10¹²	38.326	0.000

土壤环境因子对棉花根际与内生拮抗细菌存活数量的影响

Effects of soil environmental factors on the survival of cotton rhizosphere and endophytic antagonistic bacteria

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 27

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	张岚,程琦,梁士辰,邓雨潇,潘玉欣. 棉花UGPase基因鉴定与生物信息学分析[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(4): 337-346.
[2]	马怡茹,吕新,祁亚琴,张泽,易翔,陈翔宇,鄢天荥,侯彤瑜. 基于无人机数码图像的机采棉脱叶率监测模型构建[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(4): 347-359.
[3]	苟浩琦,马常凯,张迁,范术丽,马启峰,张朝军. 棉花光敏雄性不育系psm5的培育及其育性转变规律[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(4): 360-367.
[4]	王林, 张强, 马江锋, 朱玉永, 田英, 李红, 毕显杰, 宋敏, 王海标, 雷天翔, 李召虎, 田晓莉, 杜明伟, 张立祯, 赵冰梅. 新疆棉区植保无人机喷施棉花脱叶催熟剂效果研究[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(3): 200-208.
[5]	王金刚, 姜艳, 田甜, 朱永琪, 杨振康, 周天航, 张文旭, 佟炫梦, 孙嘉祺, 王海江. 减氮配施生物刺激素对棉花产量及氮肥吸收利用的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(3): 209-223.
[6]	易翔, 张立福, 吕新, 张泽, 田敏, 印彩霞, 马怡茹, 范向龙. 基于无人机高光谱融合连续投影算法估算棉花地上部生物量[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(3): 224-234.
[7]	孙璘, 海艳, 唐晓雪, 祖丽皮亚·艾买, 焦瑞莲, 任毓忠, 李国英. 新疆棉花茎腐病的病原鉴定及其生物学特性研究[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(3): 235-246.
[8]	杨可心, 陈秀叶, 刘畅, 鹿秀云, 郭庆港, 马平. 棉花枯萎病菌新生理型菌株毒素鉴定及其活性测定[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(3): 258-268.
[9]	贾晓昀, 王士杰, 赵红霞, 朱继杰, 李妙, 王国印. 陆地棉株型及生育期相关性状QTL定位[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(2): 124-133.
[10]	安杰, 韩迎春, 张正贵, 冯璐, 雷亚平, 杨北方, 王国平, 李小飞, 王占彪, 邢芳芳, 熊世武, 辛明华, 李亚兵. 不同熟性棉花品种冠层温度分布特点[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(2): 134-143.
[11]	孟浩峰, 雷长英, 张旺锋, 张亚黎. 系统调控下棉花比叶重的变化机制[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(2): 144-154.
[12]	张友昌, 黄晓莉, 胡爱兵, 李洪菊, 冯常辉, 李蔚, 张贤红, 罗艳萍, 杨国正. 长江流域麦/油后直播棉花播种时间下限研究[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(2): 155-168.
[13]	王广恩, 郭丽, 钱玉源, 刘祎, 张曦. 不同咸水利用方式对棉花叶绿素荧光参数及土壤盐分的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(1): 13-21.
[14]	郁凯, 霍钰阳, 朱俊俊, 陈兵林, 汤秋香. 盐胁迫下施钾调节棉纤维断裂比强度的糖代谢机制[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(1): 22-32.
[15]	汪苏洁, 贵会平, 董强, 张恒恒, 王香茹, 牛静, 张西岭, 宋美珍. 有机肥替代对棉花养分积累、产量及土壤肥力的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2021, 33(1): 54-65.