论文部分内容阅读
Abstract In order to screen the pepper varieties suitable for planting in the solar greenhouse in Lhasa， variety comparison test was conducted to the continuous cropping of pepper in solar greenhouse. The results showed that Qianlv Tianshi F1， Oriental Changlong F1 and Qujiao 1 F1 had higher yields than the control， and significantly lower root incidence rates than the control. Therefore， the 3 varieties were suitable fro planting in Lhasa.
Key words Lhasa; Solar greenhouse; Pepper.; Variety
Located at 29°39′N-91°07′E， Lhasa lies in the central part of the Tibetan Plateau， to the north of the Himalayas. With an altitude of 3 648.7 m， it is roughly corresponds to the basin of the Lhasa River， a major tributary of the Yarlung Tsangpo River. It has a plateau temperate monsoon and semiarid climate. Due to the geographical location and natural environment， the production of solanaceous vegetables in Lhasa is mainly carried out in greenhouses and sheds.
Capsicum annuum L.， the pepper， is a genus of the flowering plants in the nightshade family Solanaceae， an important solanaceous vegetable that is nutritious. The severe continuous cropping imposed by the serious restrictions of greenhouses and other facilities， coupled with the blind pursuit of chemical fertilizers， has resulted in soil salinization in the facility， serious changes in soil quality and heavy soilborne diseases， thereby leading to serious continuous cropping obstacles in pepper cultivation. Therefore， this study was to find out the pepper varieties suitable for planting in the facilities in Lhasa.
Materials and Methods
Test materials
The tested pepper varieties were Taimei F1 （Anhui Advancing Innovation Seed Co.， Ltd.）， Xixiang 8 （control CK） （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）， Zhizun Jiaowang （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）， Jipinhong 3 F1 （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）， Thailand Yanhong F1 （Sichuan Shengtian Agricultural Co.， Ltd.）， Korean Tianwei 2 （Sichuan Shengtian Agricultural Co.， Ltd.）， Qujiao 1 F1 （Longyou County Letu Liangge Promotion Center， Zhejiang Province）， Oriental Changlong F1 （Anhui Advancing Innovation Seed Co.， Ltd..）， Hongsheng （South Vegetable Hightech Breeding Development Co.， Ltd.）， Qianlv Tianshi F1 （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）.
Test design
The test was carried out in the highefficiency solar greenhouse of the Lhasa National Agricultural Science and Technology Park on March 10， 2015. The greenhouse was 60 m long and 8 m wide. There were a total of 10 treatments， in which Xixiang 8 was used as the control （CK）. All treatments were randomly arranged and repeated 3 times. Each plot was 6 m long and 1.5 m wide with an area of 9 m2， and each plant could be planted with 30 pepper plants. Calibration was made in double directions. The ridge was 0.7 m wide， 0.8 m deep， and each ridge had 2 rows with the row spacing of 0.4 m. The previous crop was pepper， and the soil type was sandy loam with common fertility. The base fertilizers were sheep manure of 3 000 kg/667 m2， Dixin compound microbial fertilizer of 100 kg/667 m2. The microbial fertilizer was produced by Shijiazhuang Golden Sun Bioorganic Fertilizer Co.， Ltd.， and it had the total nutrients of N+P2O5+K2O◎6%， organic matter◎35%， crude protein◎8%， humic acid◎8%， amino acid◎6%， calcium◎6%， living bacteria count◎20 million/gram. There were 2-3 times of topdressing during the whole growth period， and the management was performed in the conventional way.
Recording items
Each treatment had 5 plants randomly selected as the observing objects， and the test was mainly to observe t he growth period， b botanical characters， resistances and yield of each tested variety.
Results and Analysis
Comparison of botanical characters and phenological periods of tested varieties
As shown in Table 1， all tested varieties showed strong growth vigor. The plant height of Thailand Yanhong F1 was the highest of 173.2 cm， while Qujiao 1 F1 was the shortest of 103.1 cm. Taimei F1 had the thickest stem diameter of 2.07 cm， while the stem diameter of Korean Tianwei 2 was the smallest of 1.50 cm. It took 41 d from the sowing to the field planting of pepper plants， and it needed 38-71 d from the field planting to harvesting. Good earlymaturity performances were found in the varieties of Oriental Changlong F1， Qujiao 1 F1 and Taimei F1， while Thailand Yanhong F1 had the harvesting period begun the latest of all. The harvesting period of Oriental Changlong F1 was the longest， reaching 161 d， while the harvesting period of Zhizun Jiaowang was the shortest of only 92 d.
Comparison of fruit characters of tested varieties
As shown in Table 2， the fruit length of Oriental Changlong F1 was the longest of 23.6 cm， followed by that of Qianlv Tianshi F1， Taimei F1， Xixiang 8 （CK）， Qujiao 1 F1， Jipinhong 3 F1， Zhizun Jiaowang， Hongsheng， Thailand Yanhong F1， Korean Tianwei 2. The largest single fruit weight was found in Zhizun Jiaowang of 79.8 g， while the smallest was that of Thailand Yanhong F1 of 3.7 g， and all others were between the 2. The varieties with long line fruit shape included Oriental Changlong F1， Jipinhong 3 F1 and Xixiang 8 （CK）， the variety with medium line shape was Qianlv Tianshi F1， varieties with long finger shape were Qujiao 1 F1， Taimei F1 and Hongsheng. Thailand Yanhong F1 had the medium finger shape， Korean Tianwei 2 had the short finger shape and Zhizun Jiaowang was of short stripe shape. In terms of fruit color， Thailand Yanhong F1 was blackish purple， Qujiao 1 F1 was light yellow， and all other varieties were of light green to blackish green. As for the favor， Thailand Yanhong F1 was the hottest variety， while Zhizhun Jiaowang had sweet taste， and all other varieties were between moderate hot and slight hot. Comparison of yields and root disease resistances of tested varieties
As shown in Table 3， the yield of Zhizun Jiaowang and Taimei F1 was significantly higher than that of control Xixiang No. 8， which was 93.65% and 75.12% higher than that of the control， respectively. However， both varieties also had high root incidence rates and poor disease resistance. The yield of Qujiao 1 F1， Qianlv Tianshi F1 and Oriental Changlong F1 was respectively 41.46%， 34.63% and 23.41% higher than that of the control， while the rest varieties had lower yields than the control.
Because the continuous cropping method was adopted， all varieties had different degrees of root diseases， among which the incidence of Zhizun Jiaowang was the most serious， followed by Jipinhong 3 F1， Xixiang 8 （CK） and Korean Tianwei 2， and the varieties with light incidence rate were Qianlv Tianshi F1， Oriental Changlong F1， Qujiao 1 F1 and Thailand Yanhong F1.
Conclusion
The results showed that with consistent time from sowing to field planting， the 10 tested varieties had different performances. Oriental Changlong F1， Qujiao 1 F1 and Taimei F1 had better earlymaturity performances. The yield of Zhizun Jiaowang and Taimei F1 was significantly higher than that of the control Xixiang 8， but both varieties had high root incidence rates， making them not suitable for the continuous cropping. On the other hand， Qujiao 1 F1， Qianlv Tianshi F1 and Oriental Changlong F1 had higher yield that of the control， and their root incidence rates were also lower than that of the control variety. Therefore， considering the yield， quality and disease resistance， Qianlv Tianshi F1， Oriental Changlong F1 and Qujiao 1 F1 were suitable for planting in Lhasa.
References
[1]REN JJ， DU J. Analysis of meteorological conditions for vegetable production in Lhasa City[J]. Tibetan Journal of Agricultural Sciences， 1996 （3）： 36-41.
[2]MA WZ. Screening of pepper cultivars in greenhouse in Pinggu District of Beijing[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences， 25015， 43（2）： 23.
[3]JIANG XH， SHE CW， GU HY， et al. The study of morphological descriptors of the local view Capsicum annuum L. varieties in Hunan[J]. Northern Horticulture， 2007（6）： 6-8.
[4]TIAN LP， WANG ZL， TAO LQ. Causes of the barrier under succession cropping and its prevention and cure steps in plastic greenhouses[J]. Journal of Shihezi University （Natural Science）， 2000， 4（2）： 159-162.
[5]WANG JT， ZHAO XD， YANG XB， et al. Preliminary report on the demonstration experiment of spring capsicum varieties in solar greenhouse[J]. Ningxia Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Science and Technology， 2010， 51（3）： 12-13. [6]XIANG YH. Cultivars comparison trial of hot pepper[J]. Hunan Agricultural Sciences， 2006， （4）： 22-25.
[7]WANG XH. Comparative experiment of pepper varieties[J]. Seed World， 2012 （10）： 27-28.
[8]CHEN YB， WANG YQ. Comparison of greenhouse pepper varieties in Western Zhejiang Province[J]. Anhui Agricultural Science Bulletin， 2005， 11（4）： 80， 116.
[9]TIAN M， CHAI ML， QIAN MZ. Preliminary report on the cultivar comparison of Capsium annuum var. conoides[J]. Farming and Cultivation， 2011（3）： 42-43.
[10]DU ZP， NIE SM， XU HQ. Comprehensive evaluation of under greenhouse introducing pepper varieties[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin， 2014， 30（19）： 176-179.
[11]YAN XP. The comparative test of different varieties of pepper in solar greenhouse in Xining area[J]. Northern Horticulture，2014（23）：41-42.
[12]TIAN H， LIAO WQ， ZHOU AW， et al. Classification of pepper fruit morphology[J]. Agricultural Technology Service， 2014， 31（7）： 61-62.
Key words Lhasa; Solar greenhouse; Pepper.; Variety
Located at 29°39′N-91°07′E， Lhasa lies in the central part of the Tibetan Plateau， to the north of the Himalayas. With an altitude of 3 648.7 m， it is roughly corresponds to the basin of the Lhasa River， a major tributary of the Yarlung Tsangpo River. It has a plateau temperate monsoon and semiarid climate. Due to the geographical location and natural environment， the production of solanaceous vegetables in Lhasa is mainly carried out in greenhouses and sheds.
Capsicum annuum L.， the pepper， is a genus of the flowering plants in the nightshade family Solanaceae， an important solanaceous vegetable that is nutritious. The severe continuous cropping imposed by the serious restrictions of greenhouses and other facilities， coupled with the blind pursuit of chemical fertilizers， has resulted in soil salinization in the facility， serious changes in soil quality and heavy soilborne diseases， thereby leading to serious continuous cropping obstacles in pepper cultivation. Therefore， this study was to find out the pepper varieties suitable for planting in the facilities in Lhasa.
Materials and Methods
Test materials
The tested pepper varieties were Taimei F1 （Anhui Advancing Innovation Seed Co.， Ltd.）， Xixiang 8 （control CK） （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）， Zhizun Jiaowang （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）， Jipinhong 3 F1 （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）， Thailand Yanhong F1 （Sichuan Shengtian Agricultural Co.， Ltd.）， Korean Tianwei 2 （Sichuan Shengtian Agricultural Co.， Ltd.）， Qujiao 1 F1 （Longyou County Letu Liangge Promotion Center， Zhejiang Province）， Oriental Changlong F1 （Anhui Advancing Innovation Seed Co.， Ltd..）， Hongsheng （South Vegetable Hightech Breeding Development Co.， Ltd.）， Qianlv Tianshi F1 （Sichuan Shengtian Agriculture Co.， Ltd.）.
Test design
The test was carried out in the highefficiency solar greenhouse of the Lhasa National Agricultural Science and Technology Park on March 10， 2015. The greenhouse was 60 m long and 8 m wide. There were a total of 10 treatments， in which Xixiang 8 was used as the control （CK）. All treatments were randomly arranged and repeated 3 times. Each plot was 6 m long and 1.5 m wide with an area of 9 m2， and each plant could be planted with 30 pepper plants. Calibration was made in double directions. The ridge was 0.7 m wide， 0.8 m deep， and each ridge had 2 rows with the row spacing of 0.4 m. The previous crop was pepper， and the soil type was sandy loam with common fertility. The base fertilizers were sheep manure of 3 000 kg/667 m2， Dixin compound microbial fertilizer of 100 kg/667 m2. The microbial fertilizer was produced by Shijiazhuang Golden Sun Bioorganic Fertilizer Co.， Ltd.， and it had the total nutrients of N+P2O5+K2O◎6%， organic matter◎35%， crude protein◎8%， humic acid◎8%， amino acid◎6%， calcium◎6%， living bacteria count◎20 million/gram. There were 2-3 times of topdressing during the whole growth period， and the management was performed in the conventional way.
Recording items
Each treatment had 5 plants randomly selected as the observing objects， and the test was mainly to observe t he growth period， b botanical characters， resistances and yield of each tested variety.
Results and Analysis
Comparison of botanical characters and phenological periods of tested varieties
As shown in Table 1， all tested varieties showed strong growth vigor. The plant height of Thailand Yanhong F1 was the highest of 173.2 cm， while Qujiao 1 F1 was the shortest of 103.1 cm. Taimei F1 had the thickest stem diameter of 2.07 cm， while the stem diameter of Korean Tianwei 2 was the smallest of 1.50 cm. It took 41 d from the sowing to the field planting of pepper plants， and it needed 38-71 d from the field planting to harvesting. Good earlymaturity performances were found in the varieties of Oriental Changlong F1， Qujiao 1 F1 and Taimei F1， while Thailand Yanhong F1 had the harvesting period begun the latest of all. The harvesting period of Oriental Changlong F1 was the longest， reaching 161 d， while the harvesting period of Zhizun Jiaowang was the shortest of only 92 d.
Comparison of fruit characters of tested varieties
As shown in Table 2， the fruit length of Oriental Changlong F1 was the longest of 23.6 cm， followed by that of Qianlv Tianshi F1， Taimei F1， Xixiang 8 （CK）， Qujiao 1 F1， Jipinhong 3 F1， Zhizun Jiaowang， Hongsheng， Thailand Yanhong F1， Korean Tianwei 2. The largest single fruit weight was found in Zhizun Jiaowang of 79.8 g， while the smallest was that of Thailand Yanhong F1 of 3.7 g， and all others were between the 2. The varieties with long line fruit shape included Oriental Changlong F1， Jipinhong 3 F1 and Xixiang 8 （CK）， the variety with medium line shape was Qianlv Tianshi F1， varieties with long finger shape were Qujiao 1 F1， Taimei F1 and Hongsheng. Thailand Yanhong F1 had the medium finger shape， Korean Tianwei 2 had the short finger shape and Zhizun Jiaowang was of short stripe shape. In terms of fruit color， Thailand Yanhong F1 was blackish purple， Qujiao 1 F1 was light yellow， and all other varieties were of light green to blackish green. As for the favor， Thailand Yanhong F1 was the hottest variety， while Zhizhun Jiaowang had sweet taste， and all other varieties were between moderate hot and slight hot. Comparison of yields and root disease resistances of tested varieties
As shown in Table 3， the yield of Zhizun Jiaowang and Taimei F1 was significantly higher than that of control Xixiang No. 8， which was 93.65% and 75.12% higher than that of the control， respectively. However， both varieties also had high root incidence rates and poor disease resistance. The yield of Qujiao 1 F1， Qianlv Tianshi F1 and Oriental Changlong F1 was respectively 41.46%， 34.63% and 23.41% higher than that of the control， while the rest varieties had lower yields than the control.
Because the continuous cropping method was adopted， all varieties had different degrees of root diseases， among which the incidence of Zhizun Jiaowang was the most serious， followed by Jipinhong 3 F1， Xixiang 8 （CK） and Korean Tianwei 2， and the varieties with light incidence rate were Qianlv Tianshi F1， Oriental Changlong F1， Qujiao 1 F1 and Thailand Yanhong F1.
Conclusion
The results showed that with consistent time from sowing to field planting， the 10 tested varieties had different performances. Oriental Changlong F1， Qujiao 1 F1 and Taimei F1 had better earlymaturity performances. The yield of Zhizun Jiaowang and Taimei F1 was significantly higher than that of the control Xixiang 8， but both varieties had high root incidence rates， making them not suitable for the continuous cropping. On the other hand， Qujiao 1 F1， Qianlv Tianshi F1 and Oriental Changlong F1 had higher yield that of the control， and their root incidence rates were also lower than that of the control variety. Therefore， considering the yield， quality and disease resistance， Qianlv Tianshi F1， Oriental Changlong F1 and Qujiao 1 F1 were suitable for planting in Lhasa.
References
[1]REN JJ， DU J. Analysis of meteorological conditions for vegetable production in Lhasa City[J]. Tibetan Journal of Agricultural Sciences， 1996 （3）： 36-41.
[2]MA WZ. Screening of pepper cultivars in greenhouse in Pinggu District of Beijing[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences， 25015， 43（2）： 23.
[3]JIANG XH， SHE CW， GU HY， et al. The study of morphological descriptors of the local view Capsicum annuum L. varieties in Hunan[J]. Northern Horticulture， 2007（6）： 6-8.
[4]TIAN LP， WANG ZL， TAO LQ. Causes of the barrier under succession cropping and its prevention and cure steps in plastic greenhouses[J]. Journal of Shihezi University （Natural Science）， 2000， 4（2）： 159-162.
[5]WANG JT， ZHAO XD， YANG XB， et al. Preliminary report on the demonstration experiment of spring capsicum varieties in solar greenhouse[J]. Ningxia Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Science and Technology， 2010， 51（3）： 12-13. [6]XIANG YH. Cultivars comparison trial of hot pepper[J]. Hunan Agricultural Sciences， 2006， （4）： 22-25.
[7]WANG XH. Comparative experiment of pepper varieties[J]. Seed World， 2012 （10）： 27-28.
[8]CHEN YB， WANG YQ. Comparison of greenhouse pepper varieties in Western Zhejiang Province[J]. Anhui Agricultural Science Bulletin， 2005， 11（4）： 80， 116.
[9]TIAN M， CHAI ML， QIAN MZ. Preliminary report on the cultivar comparison of Capsium annuum var. conoides[J]. Farming and Cultivation， 2011（3）： 42-43.
[10]DU ZP， NIE SM， XU HQ. Comprehensive evaluation of under greenhouse introducing pepper varieties[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin， 2014， 30（19）： 176-179.
[11]YAN XP. The comparative test of different varieties of pepper in solar greenhouse in Xining area[J]. Northern Horticulture，2014（23）：41-42.
[12]TIAN H， LIAO WQ， ZHOU AW， et al. Classification of pepper fruit morphology[J]. Agricultural Technology Service， 2014， 31（7）： 61-62.