重庆烟区烟叶化学成分及生态条件分析与评价
|
摘要
以重庆市主要烟区烟叶化学成分、土壤和气候等生态因素为基础数据,通过方差分析、相关分析、主成分分析及模糊数学综合评价等统计方法,对该区的烟叶化学成分含量适用性、土壤适宜性和气候适生性进行了综合评价。结果如下:
1重庆市不同地区烤烟化学成分的综合评价
根据统计分析及与优质烟区烟叶化学成分比较结果,重庆市中、上部烟叶样品总糖、还原糖含量适中;中部叶烟碱含量基本适中,较河南、云南烟区含量略高;上部叶烟碱含量偏高,与河南、云南烟区差异不明显。中、上部叶总氮含量适中,变幅较小;氯、钾含量均偏低,氯含量远低于河南、云南烟区,钾含量在整个烟区普遍较低。钾氯比高,糖碱比适宜,总氮/烟碱比值较理想。不同地区间的方差分析表明,除烟碱、钾以外,各化学指标在重庆不同地区间差异不显著。
模糊综合评价结果为:重庆上部烟叶化学成分综合得分为0.48,地区间以酉阳、南川、巫山综合评价指标值较高。重庆中部叶化学成分综合得分为0.518,地区间以彭水、南川、石柱土家族自治县综合评价指标值较高,烟叶化学成分协调性好。
2重庆市不同烟区土壤养分状况综合评价
根据优质烟土壤适宜指标分析,重庆烟区有机质含量偏高;pH适中偏高,但多在适宜范围内;全氮含量较高,速效氮含量适中;50.39%的土壤可对烟草提供充分的磷素;全钾含量丰富,近60 %的土壤速效钾含量适宜;中量元素中有效钙、有效硫含量高,镁含量属中等水平;微量元素有效硼、有效铜普遍缺乏,有60 %左右的土壤有效锰、有效锌含量偏低,大部分样品铁含量处于中等水平;氯含量不超标。方差分析表明,除全磷以外,各土壤养分指标在地区间的差异均达到0.01的极显著水平,地区间变异幅度较大。
对256个土壤样品养分指标间的相关分析表明,土壤各养分指标间相关系数达到显著水平的总数为55对,占总相关关系的40.4%。其中0.01信度水平的43个,占达到显著水平总数的78.2%。说明土壤指标间具有较强的相关关系。
重庆土壤适宜性指数为0.684,整体来看,重庆烟区大部分土壤样品的综合指标值总体处于较高(70.7%)水平,另有17.58 %和11.72 %处于中等和高水平,无样品分布在低水平。不同烟区间以彭水、巫山地区综合分值较高(>0.7)。
3重庆典型烟区气候因素综合评价
统计分析及与国外优质烟区气候资料比较结果表明,重庆黔江烟区年均温15.58℃,烟叶大田生长期平均温度为23.48℃,高于国外优质烟区的气温。大田期降雨量为552.36 mm,略低于国外优质烟区,雨量较充沛,又不过量。雨量分配前期少,中期多,后期偏少。年总日照时数平均为1097.12 h,日照百分率为26.48 %,大田期日照时数为434.63 h,低于国外烟区。总体来看,重庆烟区热量条件丰富,雨量充沛且季节分配符合烤烟需水规律,但光照略显不足。模糊综合评价结果表明,黔江烟区气候综合得分为0.817(CV=8.77%),气候适宜程度较高,且年际间变化幅度小。
Using statistics of Chongqing flued-cured tobacco chemcical components, climate and soil , the climate feasibility, soil fertility and tobacco components were by the methods of variance analysis, correlation analysis, principal compopent analysis and fuzzy synthetic evaluation the main results were as follows:
1 The chemcical components evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in different areas and in different leaf position of Chongqing
The statistical analysis and the comparision with superior tobacco-growing area of the regular chemical components indicated that the contents of total sugar and reducing sugar were in the optimum range;Chongqing flue-cured tobacco was in the optimum range and somewhat higher than Henan and Yunnan flue-cured tobacco on the contents of nicotine in cutters, the total nitrogen were in the optimum range; the contents of potassium and chlorine were both lower than the optimum range; the contents of potassium were low in all areas; the ratio of potassium to chlorine were high; the ratio of sugar to nicotine was adapt for acid-base balance; the ratio of total nitrogen to nicotine was in the optimum range. The variation between different areas was significant at 0.01 level for the content of nicotine and potassium. However, the variation was not significant at 0.05 level for the content of other chemical index.
According to the fuzzy synthesis evaluation, the chemcical components evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in upper leaves in Chongqing is 0.48, the score of Nanchuan and Wushan is higher than others. The chemcical components evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in upper leaves in Chongqing is 0.518, the score of Pengshui Nanchuan and Wushan is higher than others.
2 The soil feasibility evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in different areas of Chongqing
According to the optimum range of superior tobacco-growing area analysis, the content of organic matter is high ; The pH value was base but in the optimum range; the content of total nitrogen was rich and available nitrogen was optimum; the content of potassium was rich and available potassium was suitable in 60% of soil ; the content of available calcium and available sulphur was higher, the content of magnesium was suitable in total; the content of available boron and available copper was obviously deficient in total; the content of available mangaese and zinc was lower in 60% of soil ; almostlly all the content of Fe was in the middle level ; the content of chlorine was no more than the standard level . Except for the variation was not significant at 0.05 level for the total phosphorus all the other soil index was significant at 0.01 level of the the variation which indicated that the properties of soil had distinct divergence between different areas. The relationships amony soil nutrients in tobacco-growing bases were analyzed with correlation analysis.The results indicated that the number of correlation coefficient at 0.05 level was 55, acounting for 40.4%. The number of correlation coefficient at 0.01 level was 43, acounting for 78.2%.The results showed that there were distinct nonlinear correlation among soil nutrients.
Soil feasibility index in Chongqing is 0.684, the proportion at higher level was 70.7%, at medium level was 17.58% and at high level was 11.72%. No sample was at low level. The score of soil feasibility index of Pengshui and Wushan was higher than other areas.
3 The climate feasibility evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in model areas of Chongqing
The statistical analysis and the comparision with superior tobacco-growing area in abroad indicated that yearly average temperature is 15.58℃, average temperature during field period was 23.48℃, which were higher than that of superior tobacco-growing area abroad. Total precipitation during field period is 552.36mm, which was somewhat lower than that of superior tobacco-growing area abroad. Rainfall distribution was lower in previous and latter period but higher in middle period. Annual total sunlight hours was 1097.12h, percentage of sunshine was 26.48%,total sunlight hours during field period was 434.63h, which were lower than superior tobacco-growing area in abroad. In general, the heat quantity condition and rainfall of Chongqing were rich and the distribution was adapt for request of water .However, sunlight was inadequate. According to the fuzzy synthetic evaluation, the integrated index of Qianjiang was 0.817(CV=8.77%), the climate feasibility was well, the variance was minor.
1重庆市不同地区烤烟化学成分的综合评价
根据统计分析及与优质烟区烟叶化学成分比较结果,重庆市中、上部烟叶样品总糖、还原糖含量适中;中部叶烟碱含量基本适中,较河南、云南烟区含量略高;上部叶烟碱含量偏高,与河南、云南烟区差异不明显。中、上部叶总氮含量适中,变幅较小;氯、钾含量均偏低,氯含量远低于河南、云南烟区,钾含量在整个烟区普遍较低。钾氯比高,糖碱比适宜,总氮/烟碱比值较理想。不同地区间的方差分析表明,除烟碱、钾以外,各化学指标在重庆不同地区间差异不显著。
模糊综合评价结果为:重庆上部烟叶化学成分综合得分为0.48,地区间以酉阳、南川、巫山综合评价指标值较高。重庆中部叶化学成分综合得分为0.518,地区间以彭水、南川、石柱土家族自治县综合评价指标值较高,烟叶化学成分协调性好。
2重庆市不同烟区土壤养分状况综合评价
根据优质烟土壤适宜指标分析,重庆烟区有机质含量偏高;pH适中偏高,但多在适宜范围内;全氮含量较高,速效氮含量适中;50.39%的土壤可对烟草提供充分的磷素;全钾含量丰富,近60 %的土壤速效钾含量适宜;中量元素中有效钙、有效硫含量高,镁含量属中等水平;微量元素有效硼、有效铜普遍缺乏,有60 %左右的土壤有效锰、有效锌含量偏低,大部分样品铁含量处于中等水平;氯含量不超标。方差分析表明,除全磷以外,各土壤养分指标在地区间的差异均达到0.01的极显著水平,地区间变异幅度较大。
对256个土壤样品养分指标间的相关分析表明,土壤各养分指标间相关系数达到显著水平的总数为55对,占总相关关系的40.4%。其中0.01信度水平的43个,占达到显著水平总数的78.2%。说明土壤指标间具有较强的相关关系。
重庆土壤适宜性指数为0.684,整体来看,重庆烟区大部分土壤样品的综合指标值总体处于较高(70.7%)水平,另有17.58 %和11.72 %处于中等和高水平,无样品分布在低水平。不同烟区间以彭水、巫山地区综合分值较高(>0.7)。
3重庆典型烟区气候因素综合评价
统计分析及与国外优质烟区气候资料比较结果表明,重庆黔江烟区年均温15.58℃,烟叶大田生长期平均温度为23.48℃,高于国外优质烟区的气温。大田期降雨量为552.36 mm,略低于国外优质烟区,雨量较充沛,又不过量。雨量分配前期少,中期多,后期偏少。年总日照时数平均为1097.12 h,日照百分率为26.48 %,大田期日照时数为434.63 h,低于国外烟区。总体来看,重庆烟区热量条件丰富,雨量充沛且季节分配符合烤烟需水规律,但光照略显不足。模糊综合评价结果表明,黔江烟区气候综合得分为0.817(CV=8.77%),气候适宜程度较高,且年际间变化幅度小。
Using statistics of Chongqing flued-cured tobacco chemcical components, climate and soil , the climate feasibility, soil fertility and tobacco components were by the methods of variance analysis, correlation analysis, principal compopent analysis and fuzzy synthetic evaluation the main results were as follows:
1 The chemcical components evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in different areas and in different leaf position of Chongqing
The statistical analysis and the comparision with superior tobacco-growing area of the regular chemical components indicated that the contents of total sugar and reducing sugar were in the optimum range;Chongqing flue-cured tobacco was in the optimum range and somewhat higher than Henan and Yunnan flue-cured tobacco on the contents of nicotine in cutters, the total nitrogen were in the optimum range; the contents of potassium and chlorine were both lower than the optimum range; the contents of potassium were low in all areas; the ratio of potassium to chlorine were high; the ratio of sugar to nicotine was adapt for acid-base balance; the ratio of total nitrogen to nicotine was in the optimum range. The variation between different areas was significant at 0.01 level for the content of nicotine and potassium. However, the variation was not significant at 0.05 level for the content of other chemical index.
According to the fuzzy synthesis evaluation, the chemcical components evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in upper leaves in Chongqing is 0.48, the score of Nanchuan and Wushan is higher than others. The chemcical components evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in upper leaves in Chongqing is 0.518, the score of Pengshui Nanchuan and Wushan is higher than others.
2 The soil feasibility evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in different areas of Chongqing
According to the optimum range of superior tobacco-growing area analysis, the content of organic matter is high ; The pH value was base but in the optimum range; the content of total nitrogen was rich and available nitrogen was optimum; the content of potassium was rich and available potassium was suitable in 60% of soil ; the content of available calcium and available sulphur was higher, the content of magnesium was suitable in total; the content of available boron and available copper was obviously deficient in total; the content of available mangaese and zinc was lower in 60% of soil ; almostlly all the content of Fe was in the middle level ; the content of chlorine was no more than the standard level . Except for the variation was not significant at 0.05 level for the total phosphorus all the other soil index was significant at 0.01 level of the the variation which indicated that the properties of soil had distinct divergence between different areas. The relationships amony soil nutrients in tobacco-growing bases were analyzed with correlation analysis.The results indicated that the number of correlation coefficient at 0.05 level was 55, acounting for 40.4%. The number of correlation coefficient at 0.01 level was 43, acounting for 78.2%.The results showed that there were distinct nonlinear correlation among soil nutrients.
Soil feasibility index in Chongqing is 0.684, the proportion at higher level was 70.7%, at medium level was 17.58% and at high level was 11.72%. No sample was at low level. The score of soil feasibility index of Pengshui and Wushan was higher than other areas.
3 The climate feasibility evaluation of flue-cured tobacco in model areas of Chongqing
The statistical analysis and the comparision with superior tobacco-growing area in abroad indicated that yearly average temperature is 15.58℃, average temperature during field period was 23.48℃, which were higher than that of superior tobacco-growing area abroad. Total precipitation during field period is 552.36mm, which was somewhat lower than that of superior tobacco-growing area abroad. Rainfall distribution was lower in previous and latter period but higher in middle period. Annual total sunlight hours was 1097.12h, percentage of sunshine was 26.48%,total sunlight hours during field period was 434.63h, which were lower than superior tobacco-growing area in abroad. In general, the heat quantity condition and rainfall of Chongqing were rich and the distribution was adapt for request of water .However, sunlight was inadequate. According to the fuzzy synthetic evaluation, the integrated index of Qianjiang was 0.817(CV=8.77%), the climate feasibility was well, the variance was minor.
引文
[1]程昌新,王金平等.云南省不同地区烤烟化学成分的多变量分析[J].郑州轻工业学院学报(自然科学版),2007,22(1):32-35.
[2]王彪,李天福.气象因子与烟叶化学成分关联度分析[J].云南农业大学学报,2005,10(5):742-745.
[3]黎妍妍,许自成,王金平等.湖南烟区气候因素分析及对烟叶化学成分的影响.中国农业气象,200728(3):308-311.
[4]李洪勋,唐远驹.毕节地区烤烟化学成分的对比分析.湖北农业科学,2007,46(5): 789-790.
[5]陈杰,唐远驹.影响贵州烟叶化学成分的土壤养分因素分析.作物杂志,2008,(1):68-70.
[6] ZADEH L A.Fuzzy set[J].Inf Cont,1965,(8):338-358.
[7]杨崇瑞.模糊数学及其应用[M].北京:农业出版社,1994.
[8]江建刚.模糊综合评判技术在卷烟评吸过程中的应用[J].安庆师范学院学报(自然科学版),2002,8 (1) :38-40.
[9]高同启,张卫旗.卷烟质量多级模糊综合评判模型研究[J].合肥工业大学学报(自然科学版),1998,21 (6) :57-62.
[10]陈义强,沈笑天等.聚类分析与模糊数学在烟叶品质综合评价中的应用[J].江西农业大学学报,2007,29(4):551-556.
[11]许自成,黎妍妍,肖汉乾,王林.湘南烟区生态因素与烤烟质量的综合评价[J].植物生态学报.
[12]王瑞新.烟草化学[M].中国农业出版社.2003.
[13] Roberts D C. Natural Tobacco Flavor Recent Advances in Tobacco [J]. Beit, 1998, 12 (5) : 279-284.
[14]梁洪波,李念胜,元建,等.烤烟烟叶颜色与内在品质的关系[J].中国烟草科学, 2002, (1): 9-11.
[15]于川芳,李晓红,罗登山,等.烟叶外观质量因素与其主要化学成分之间的关系[J].烟草科技(烟草工艺), 2005, (1): 5-7.
[16]于建军,章新军,毕庆文,等.烤烟烟叶理化特性对烟气烟碱、CO、焦油量的影响[ J].中国烟草科学, 2003, (3): 5-8.
[17]贺英,徐海涛,盛志艺,等.综合方法对烤烟化学成分和烟气组分的相关分析[ J].中国烟草科学,2005, (4): 1-4.
[18]汪邓民,龚文丰,吴福如等.覆膜条件下氮磷肥对土壤理化性质酶活性及烟草生长的影响[J].烟草科技,2004,6:33-36.
[19]章新军,任晓红,毕庆文,等.鄂西南烤烟主要化学成分与评吸质量的关系[ J].烟草科技, 2006,(9): 58-60.
[20]易念游,蒋雪松,龙心林等.优质烤烟生产技术[M].四川大学出版社.1993.
[21]曹志洪,王恩沛.土壤供钾特性和烤烟的钾肥有效施用[J].烟草科技.1993,2:33-37.
[22]朱尊权.当前我国优质烤烟生产中存在的问题[J].烟草科技,1993,(2):2-7.
[23]陈江华,刘建利,龙怀玉.中国烟叶矿质营养及主要化学成分含量特征研究.中国烟草学报,2004,10(5):20-27.
[24]李联铁,袁德厚,孙泽江.含氯肥料对烤烟叶片含氯量的影响.西南农业大学学报,1994,16(4): 415-418.
[25]许自成,王林,王金平,等. 2006.湖南烤烟化学成分与土壤有机质含量的关系.生态学杂志,25(10): 1186-1190.
[26]阎克玉,李兴波,赵学亮,等.河南烤烟理化指标间的相关性研究[J].郑州轻工业学院学报(自然科学版), 2000, 15 (3): 20-24.
[27]梁洪波,李念胜,元建,等.烤烟烟叶颜色与内在品质的关系[J].中国烟草科学, 2002, (1): 9-11.
[28]毕淑峰.云南烤烟评吸质量与化学成分的关系研究[J].黄山学院学报, 2005, 7 (3): 61-63.
[29]闫克玉,李兴波,张中义,等.烤烟(40级)各等级烟叶主要理化指标分析报告[ J].烟草科技,1994, (4): 2-5.
[30]李德亮,赵瑾,丁颖,等.烟碱的测量方法[J].化学通报, 2003, (3): 174-178.
[31]韩锦峰,赫冬梅,刘华山,等.不同植物激素处理方法对烤烟内烟碱含量的影响[J].中国烟草学报, 2001, 7 (2):22-25.
[32]胡国松,李志勇,穆琳,等.烤烟烟碱积累特点研究[J].中国烟草学报, 2000, 6 (2): 6-9.
[33]闫玉秋.试论烟草中烟碱的含量及调节因素[J].烟草科技, 1996, (6): 31-34.
[34]王德宣,富德义.吉林省西部地区土壤微量元素有效性评价[J],土壤, 2002, (2): 86-90.
[35]董国政,刘德辉,姜月华,等.湖州市土壤微量元素含量与有效性评价[J].土壤通报, 2004, 35(4): 475-478.
[36]陶晓秋.四川西南烟区土壤有效态微量元素含量评价[J],土壤, 2004, 36(4): 438-441.
[37]罗建新,石丽红,龙世平.湖南主产烟区土壤养分状况与评价[J].湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版). 2005, 31(4): 376-380.
[38]李明德,肖汉乾,余崇祥,等.湖南烟区土壤中、微量元素状况及施肥效应研究[J].中国烟草科学, 2005, (1): 25-27.
[39]王伟杰,柯涌潮. T值分级法在环境评价中的应用[J].农业环境保护, 1986, 5(2): 16-18.
[40]万良碧,刘志刚.鄱阳湖区农田环境质量评价方法研究[J].农业环境保护, 1989, 8(2):25-28.
[41]王金生.灰色聚类法在土壤污染综合评价的应用[J].农业环境保护, 1991,10(2):169-172.
[42]刘崇洪.几种土壤质量评价方法的比较[J].干旱环境监测. 1996, 10(1): 26-29.
[43]马强,宇万太,赵少华,等.黑土农田土壤肥力质量综合评价[J].应用生态学报, 2004, 15(10): 1916-1920.
[44]李锡宏,林国平,黎妍妍等.恩施州烤烟种植气候适生性与土壤适宜性研究.中国烟草科学,2008,29(5):18-21.
[45]刘敬珣,刘晓晖,陈长清.湘西烟区土壤肥力状况分析与综合评价.中国农学通报,2009,25(02):46-50.
[46]窦逢科,张景略.烟草品质与土壤肥料,河南科学技术出版社[M],1989.1:60
[47]陈瑞泰.中国烟草栽培学[M],上海科学技术出版社,1987.
[48]王东胜,刘贯山,李章海.烟草栽培学[M].北京:中国科学技术大学出版社, 2002:106-109
[49]陈建军,陈建勋,吕永华.根际pH值对烟草无机营养的影响[J].植物生理学通讯, 1996, 32(5): 341-344
[50]李念胜.土壤pH值与烤烟质量[ J].中国烟草, 1999(2): 12-15.
[51]胡国松,郑伟,王震东,等.烤烟营养原理[M].北京:科学出版社, 2000: 94-118.
[52]左天觉.烟草生产的生理和生物化学[M].上海:上海远东出版社, 1993: 272-273.
[53]许自成,王林,肖汉乾.湖南烟区烤烟磷含量与土壤磷素的分布特点及关系分析.浙江大学学报,33(3):290-297,2007.
[54]王欣,许自成,肖汉乾.湖南烟区烤烟钾含量与土壤钾素的分布特点之间的关系.安全与环境学报,2007.7(5):83-87.
[55] Barber,S.Soils.Nutrient Bioavailability.New York.wiley.1984.
[56]李松岭.河南省烟叶含钾量低的原因及对策[J].河南农业科学,2000,(10):6-8.
[57]徐俊祥,徐永福,唐永良.红壤上施石灰对硼的有效性及油菜生长的影响[J].土壤,1995,27(1):38.
[58]胡定宇.石灰性土壤果树失绿症及其发生的原因[J].土壤,1985,17(l):20.
[59]谢连庆,房素芝,魏德明.济南地区石灰性土壤中的锰和锰肥肥效[J]土壤,1995,27(4):195.
[60]王敬国.植物营养的土壤化学LMI.北京:北京农业大学出版社,1997:132.
[61]周卫,林葆.土壤中钙的化学行为与生物有效性研究进展[J].土壤肥料,1996(5):19-21.
[62]谢建昌,马茂桐,朱月珍,等.红壤区土壤中镁肥肥效的研究[J].土壤学报,1965,13(4):377-386.
[63]谢建昌,陈际型,朱月珍,等.红壤区几种主要土壤的镁素供应状况及镁肥肥效的初步研究[J].土壤学报,1963,11(3):294-305.
[64]袁可能.植物营养元素的土壤化学[M].北京:科学出版社,1983,261-293.
[65]梁颁捷、朱其清等.福建烟区土壤养分丰缺及施肥对策[J].烟草科技.2002,(4):33～35
[66]姜超英,周忠仁,黄全康,等.不同生态条件下的烤烟硼营养研究[J].中国烟草科学,2004,(3):20-24.
[67]常青,殷中意,李宏,等.重庆市郊土壤中锌的调查分析[J].重庆工商大学学报(自然科学版),2004,21(3):226-228.
[68]郑绍建,等·玉米、小麦细胞P、Zn营养及交互作用的研究·植物营养与肥料学报,1999,5(2):150-155.
[69]华洛,等.土壤腐殖酸与109Cd、65Zn及其复合存在的络合物稳定性研究[J].中国农业科学,2001,34(2):187-191.
[70]吴名宇,李顺义,张杨珠.土壤锰研究进展和展望.作物研究[J],2005,19(2):137-140.
[71] Foy C D.Soil Acidity and Liming Monograph,A.S.A.1984,No.12,2nd Edition,57-97.
[72] Ottow JCG, Benckiser G. Iron toxicity of rice as multiple nutrient soil stress[J].TropAgric Res Series,1982,15:167-174.
[73]蔡妙珍,罗安成,林咸永,等.Ca2+对过量Fe2+胁迫下水稻保护酶活性及膜脂过氧化的影响[J].作物学报,2003,29(3):447-451.
[74]蔡妙珍,林咸永,罗安成,等.磷对水稻高Fe2+胁迫的缓解作用[J].中国水稻科学,2002,16(3):247-251.
[75]李宽,孙婷,刘鹏等.铜对烟草光合特性的影响[J].广东农业科学,2007(1):15-17.
[76] Sommer A I,.Copper as essential for plant growth. Plant physiology ,1931,6:339.
[77] Sims J I.,Patriek W H The distribution of micronutrients cations in soil under conditions of varying redox potential and PH.Soil Sci.Soc.Am.J., 1978,42:258一262.
[78]胡正义,沈宏,曹志洪. Cu污染土壤-水稻系统中Cu的分布特征.环境科学[J], 2000,(3): 62-65.
[79] So H B and P H Nye.J.Soil Sci.,1989,40(4):734一749.
[80]阎相奎,王复和.灌淇土施用含抓化肥对植物产量质量的影响.土壤肥料[J],1992,(6):1一5.
[81]程国华.长期施用含抓化肥对土壤酶活性的影响.沈阳农业大学学报[J],1994,25(4):360一365.
[82]陈伟,王三根,唐远驹等.不同烟区烤烟化学成分的主导气候影响因子分析.植物营养与肥料学报,2008,14(1):144-150.
[83]张聪,徐继先,杨志新等.云南农业大学学报[J],2008,23(5):654-895.
[84]李天福,王彪,样焕文等,气象因子与烟叶化学成分及香吃味间的典型相关分析.中国烟草学报,2006,12(1):32-62.
[85]韦成才,马英明,艾绥龙等.陕南烤烟质量与气候关系研究,中国烟草科学,2004,(3)38-41.
[86]戴冕.我国主产烟区若干气象因素与烟叶化学成分关系的研究.中国烟草学报,2000,(1):27-34.
[87]王玉玺,栗珂,韦成才等.陕南优质烤烟气候条件及区域划分的研究.陕西气象[J],2001(5):51-71.
[88]黄中艳,王树会,朱勇等,云南烤烟5项化学成分含量与其环境生态要素的关系.中国农业气象,2007,28(3):312-317.
[89]龙怀玉,刘建利,等.中国植烟区与国外优质烟区的比较.中国烟草学报[J], 1996,增刊,41-47.
[90]韩富根.烟草化学品质分析法[M].郑州:河南科技出版社.1990
[2]王彪,李天福.气象因子与烟叶化学成分关联度分析[J].云南农业大学学报,2005,10(5):742-745.
[3]黎妍妍,许自成,王金平等.湖南烟区气候因素分析及对烟叶化学成分的影响.中国农业气象,200728(3):308-311.
[4]李洪勋,唐远驹.毕节地区烤烟化学成分的对比分析.湖北农业科学,2007,46(5): 789-790.
[5]陈杰,唐远驹.影响贵州烟叶化学成分的土壤养分因素分析.作物杂志,2008,(1):68-70.
[6] ZADEH L A.Fuzzy set[J].Inf Cont,1965,(8):338-358.
[7]杨崇瑞.模糊数学及其应用[M].北京:农业出版社,1994.
[8]江建刚.模糊综合评判技术在卷烟评吸过程中的应用[J].安庆师范学院学报(自然科学版),2002,8 (1) :38-40.
[9]高同启,张卫旗.卷烟质量多级模糊综合评判模型研究[J].合肥工业大学学报(自然科学版),1998,21 (6) :57-62.
[10]陈义强,沈笑天等.聚类分析与模糊数学在烟叶品质综合评价中的应用[J].江西农业大学学报,2007,29(4):551-556.
[11]许自成,黎妍妍,肖汉乾,王林.湘南烟区生态因素与烤烟质量的综合评价[J].植物生态学报.
[12]王瑞新.烟草化学[M].中国农业出版社.2003.
[13] Roberts D C. Natural Tobacco Flavor Recent Advances in Tobacco [J]. Beit, 1998, 12 (5) : 279-284.
[14]梁洪波,李念胜,元建,等.烤烟烟叶颜色与内在品质的关系[J].中国烟草科学, 2002, (1): 9-11.
[15]于川芳,李晓红,罗登山,等.烟叶外观质量因素与其主要化学成分之间的关系[J].烟草科技(烟草工艺), 2005, (1): 5-7.
[16]于建军,章新军,毕庆文,等.烤烟烟叶理化特性对烟气烟碱、CO、焦油量的影响[ J].中国烟草科学, 2003, (3): 5-8.
[17]贺英,徐海涛,盛志艺,等.综合方法对烤烟化学成分和烟气组分的相关分析[ J].中国烟草科学,2005, (4): 1-4.
[18]汪邓民,龚文丰,吴福如等.覆膜条件下氮磷肥对土壤理化性质酶活性及烟草生长的影响[J].烟草科技,2004,6:33-36.
[19]章新军,任晓红,毕庆文,等.鄂西南烤烟主要化学成分与评吸质量的关系[ J].烟草科技, 2006,(9): 58-60.
[20]易念游,蒋雪松,龙心林等.优质烤烟生产技术[M].四川大学出版社.1993.
[21]曹志洪,王恩沛.土壤供钾特性和烤烟的钾肥有效施用[J].烟草科技.1993,2:33-37.
[22]朱尊权.当前我国优质烤烟生产中存在的问题[J].烟草科技,1993,(2):2-7.
[23]陈江华,刘建利,龙怀玉.中国烟叶矿质营养及主要化学成分含量特征研究.中国烟草学报,2004,10(5):20-27.
[24]李联铁,袁德厚,孙泽江.含氯肥料对烤烟叶片含氯量的影响.西南农业大学学报,1994,16(4): 415-418.
[25]许自成,王林,王金平,等. 2006.湖南烤烟化学成分与土壤有机质含量的关系.生态学杂志,25(10): 1186-1190.
[26]阎克玉,李兴波,赵学亮,等.河南烤烟理化指标间的相关性研究[J].郑州轻工业学院学报(自然科学版), 2000, 15 (3): 20-24.
[27]梁洪波,李念胜,元建,等.烤烟烟叶颜色与内在品质的关系[J].中国烟草科学, 2002, (1): 9-11.
[28]毕淑峰.云南烤烟评吸质量与化学成分的关系研究[J].黄山学院学报, 2005, 7 (3): 61-63.
[29]闫克玉,李兴波,张中义,等.烤烟(40级)各等级烟叶主要理化指标分析报告[ J].烟草科技,1994, (4): 2-5.
[30]李德亮,赵瑾,丁颖,等.烟碱的测量方法[J].化学通报, 2003, (3): 174-178.
[31]韩锦峰,赫冬梅,刘华山,等.不同植物激素处理方法对烤烟内烟碱含量的影响[J].中国烟草学报, 2001, 7 (2):22-25.
[32]胡国松,李志勇,穆琳,等.烤烟烟碱积累特点研究[J].中国烟草学报, 2000, 6 (2): 6-9.
[33]闫玉秋.试论烟草中烟碱的含量及调节因素[J].烟草科技, 1996, (6): 31-34.
[34]王德宣,富德义.吉林省西部地区土壤微量元素有效性评价[J],土壤, 2002, (2): 86-90.
[35]董国政,刘德辉,姜月华,等.湖州市土壤微量元素含量与有效性评价[J].土壤通报, 2004, 35(4): 475-478.
[36]陶晓秋.四川西南烟区土壤有效态微量元素含量评价[J],土壤, 2004, 36(4): 438-441.
[37]罗建新,石丽红,龙世平.湖南主产烟区土壤养分状况与评价[J].湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版). 2005, 31(4): 376-380.
[38]李明德,肖汉乾,余崇祥,等.湖南烟区土壤中、微量元素状况及施肥效应研究[J].中国烟草科学, 2005, (1): 25-27.
[39]王伟杰,柯涌潮. T值分级法在环境评价中的应用[J].农业环境保护, 1986, 5(2): 16-18.
[40]万良碧,刘志刚.鄱阳湖区农田环境质量评价方法研究[J].农业环境保护, 1989, 8(2):25-28.
[41]王金生.灰色聚类法在土壤污染综合评价的应用[J].农业环境保护, 1991,10(2):169-172.
[42]刘崇洪.几种土壤质量评价方法的比较[J].干旱环境监测. 1996, 10(1): 26-29.
[43]马强,宇万太,赵少华,等.黑土农田土壤肥力质量综合评价[J].应用生态学报, 2004, 15(10): 1916-1920.
[44]李锡宏,林国平,黎妍妍等.恩施州烤烟种植气候适生性与土壤适宜性研究.中国烟草科学,2008,29(5):18-21.
[45]刘敬珣,刘晓晖,陈长清.湘西烟区土壤肥力状况分析与综合评价.中国农学通报,2009,25(02):46-50.
[46]窦逢科,张景略.烟草品质与土壤肥料,河南科学技术出版社[M],1989.1:60
[47]陈瑞泰.中国烟草栽培学[M],上海科学技术出版社,1987.
[48]王东胜,刘贯山,李章海.烟草栽培学[M].北京:中国科学技术大学出版社, 2002:106-109
[49]陈建军,陈建勋,吕永华.根际pH值对烟草无机营养的影响[J].植物生理学通讯, 1996, 32(5): 341-344
[50]李念胜.土壤pH值与烤烟质量[ J].中国烟草, 1999(2): 12-15.
[51]胡国松,郑伟,王震东,等.烤烟营养原理[M].北京:科学出版社, 2000: 94-118.
[52]左天觉.烟草生产的生理和生物化学[M].上海:上海远东出版社, 1993: 272-273.
[53]许自成,王林,肖汉乾.湖南烟区烤烟磷含量与土壤磷素的分布特点及关系分析.浙江大学学报,33(3):290-297,2007.
[54]王欣,许自成,肖汉乾.湖南烟区烤烟钾含量与土壤钾素的分布特点之间的关系.安全与环境学报,2007.7(5):83-87.
[55] Barber,S.Soils.Nutrient Bioavailability.New York.wiley.1984.
[56]李松岭.河南省烟叶含钾量低的原因及对策[J].河南农业科学,2000,(10):6-8.
[57]徐俊祥,徐永福,唐永良.红壤上施石灰对硼的有效性及油菜生长的影响[J].土壤,1995,27(1):38.
[58]胡定宇.石灰性土壤果树失绿症及其发生的原因[J].土壤,1985,17(l):20.
[59]谢连庆,房素芝,魏德明.济南地区石灰性土壤中的锰和锰肥肥效[J]土壤,1995,27(4):195.
[60]王敬国.植物营养的土壤化学LMI.北京:北京农业大学出版社,1997:132.
[61]周卫,林葆.土壤中钙的化学行为与生物有效性研究进展[J].土壤肥料,1996(5):19-21.
[62]谢建昌,马茂桐,朱月珍,等.红壤区土壤中镁肥肥效的研究[J].土壤学报,1965,13(4):377-386.
[63]谢建昌,陈际型,朱月珍,等.红壤区几种主要土壤的镁素供应状况及镁肥肥效的初步研究[J].土壤学报,1963,11(3):294-305.
[64]袁可能.植物营养元素的土壤化学[M].北京:科学出版社,1983,261-293.
[65]梁颁捷、朱其清等.福建烟区土壤养分丰缺及施肥对策[J].烟草科技.2002,(4):33～35
[66]姜超英,周忠仁,黄全康,等.不同生态条件下的烤烟硼营养研究[J].中国烟草科学,2004,(3):20-24.
[67]常青,殷中意,李宏,等.重庆市郊土壤中锌的调查分析[J].重庆工商大学学报(自然科学版),2004,21(3):226-228.
[68]郑绍建,等·玉米、小麦细胞P、Zn营养及交互作用的研究·植物营养与肥料学报,1999,5(2):150-155.
[69]华洛,等.土壤腐殖酸与109Cd、65Zn及其复合存在的络合物稳定性研究[J].中国农业科学,2001,34(2):187-191.
[70]吴名宇,李顺义,张杨珠.土壤锰研究进展和展望.作物研究[J],2005,19(2):137-140.
[71] Foy C D.Soil Acidity and Liming Monograph,A.S.A.1984,No.12,2nd Edition,57-97.
[72] Ottow JCG, Benckiser G. Iron toxicity of rice as multiple nutrient soil stress[J].TropAgric Res Series,1982,15:167-174.
[73]蔡妙珍,罗安成,林咸永,等.Ca2+对过量Fe2+胁迫下水稻保护酶活性及膜脂过氧化的影响[J].作物学报,2003,29(3):447-451.
[74]蔡妙珍,林咸永,罗安成,等.磷对水稻高Fe2+胁迫的缓解作用[J].中国水稻科学,2002,16(3):247-251.
[75]李宽,孙婷,刘鹏等.铜对烟草光合特性的影响[J].广东农业科学,2007(1):15-17.
[76] Sommer A I,.Copper as essential for plant growth. Plant physiology ,1931,6:339.
[77] Sims J I.,Patriek W H The distribution of micronutrients cations in soil under conditions of varying redox potential and PH.Soil Sci.Soc.Am.J., 1978,42:258一262.
[78]胡正义,沈宏,曹志洪. Cu污染土壤-水稻系统中Cu的分布特征.环境科学[J], 2000,(3): 62-65.
[79] So H B and P H Nye.J.Soil Sci.,1989,40(4):734一749.
[80]阎相奎,王复和.灌淇土施用含抓化肥对植物产量质量的影响.土壤肥料[J],1992,(6):1一5.
[81]程国华.长期施用含抓化肥对土壤酶活性的影响.沈阳农业大学学报[J],1994,25(4):360一365.
[82]陈伟,王三根,唐远驹等.不同烟区烤烟化学成分的主导气候影响因子分析.植物营养与肥料学报,2008,14(1):144-150.
[83]张聪,徐继先,杨志新等.云南农业大学学报[J],2008,23(5):654-895.
[84]李天福,王彪,样焕文等,气象因子与烟叶化学成分及香吃味间的典型相关分析.中国烟草学报,2006,12(1):32-62.
[85]韦成才,马英明,艾绥龙等.陕南烤烟质量与气候关系研究,中国烟草科学,2004,(3)38-41.
[86]戴冕.我国主产烟区若干气象因素与烟叶化学成分关系的研究.中国烟草学报,2000,(1):27-34.
[87]王玉玺,栗珂,韦成才等.陕南优质烤烟气候条件及区域划分的研究.陕西气象[J],2001(5):51-71.
[88]黄中艳,王树会,朱勇等,云南烤烟5项化学成分含量与其环境生态要素的关系.中国农业气象,2007,28(3):312-317.
[89]龙怀玉,刘建利,等.中国植烟区与国外优质烟区的比较.中国烟草学报[J], 1996,增刊,41-47.
[90]韩富根.烟草化学品质分析法[M].郑州:河南科技出版社.1990