双层秸秆不同层位覆盖对土壤水分蒸发影响

详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

英文篇名：Effect of Double Layer Straw Mulching on Soil Moisture Evaporation 作者：周长泉 ; 赵文举 ; 王珍珍 ; 许建堂 英文作者：ZHOU Chang-quan;ZHAO Wen-ju;WANG Zhen-zhen;XU Jian-tang;School of Technology Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology;School of Energy and Power Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology; 关键词：土壤水分 ; 双层秸秆覆盖 ; 不同层位 ; 累计蒸发量 英文关键词：soil moisture;;double straw mulching;;different layers;;cumulative evaporation capacity 中文刊名：节水灌溉 英文刊名：Water Saving Irrigation 机构：兰州理工大学技术工程学院;兰州理工大学能源与动力工程学院; 出版日期：2019-03-05 出版单位：节水灌溉 年：2019 期：03 基金：国家自然科学基金资助项目(51869010);; 甘肃省陇原青年人才项目;; 甘肃省教育厅高校科研项目(2016B-210) 语种：中文; 页：35-38 页数：4 CN：42-1420/TV ISSN：1007-4929 分类号：S152.73

摘要

为揭示不同秸秆覆盖模式抑制土壤水分蒸发的效果,通过室内模拟试验,对双层秸秆不同层位覆盖下土壤水分蒸发过程进行了研究。试验设置秸秆单层覆盖埋深80 mm (CK)、上层埋深0 mm下层埋深300 mm秸秆双层覆盖(C1)、上层埋深80 mm下层埋深220 mm秸秆双层覆盖(C2)、上层埋深80 mm下层埋深300 mm秸秆双层覆盖(C3)、上层埋深80 mm下层埋深380 mm秸秆双层覆盖(C4) 5种模式,结果表明:不同覆盖模式下,蒸发量显著不同,实验数据显示蒸发过程可分为3段,1～10、11～18、19～24 d的规律分别为CK>C4>C2>C1>C3、CK>C1>C4>C3>C2、C2>C1>CK>C4>C3。CK的累积蒸发量为3.154 2 kg,与CK相比C1、C2、C3、C4处理的抑蒸率分别为2%、3.97%、8.6%、2.3%。综合分析来看,双层秸秆覆盖较单层秸秆可有效减小土壤水分蒸发。可得不同层位秸秆埋深对土壤累计蒸发的抑制作用由大到小排列为:C3>C2>C4>C1>CK。在整个蒸发过程中,不同秸秆覆盖下土壤水分累积蒸发量与时间的关系符合Y=a x~b。
        In order to reveal the effect of different straw mulching modes on soil water evaporation, the soil water evaporation process under different layers of double-layer straw mulching was studied through laboratory simulation experiment. The experiment set 5 models of straw single-layer covering buried depth of 80 mm(CK), upper layer buried depth of 0 mm and lower layer buried depth of 300 mm(C1), upper layer buried depth of 80 mm and lower layer buried depth of 220 mm(C2), upper layer buried depth of 80 mm and lower layer buried depth of 300 mm(C3), upper layer buried depth of 80 mm and lower layer buried depth of 380 mm(C4). The results showed that: under different coverage modes, the evaporation capacity was significantly different. The experiment data showed that the evaporation process could be divided into three stages: 1～10, 11～18, and 19～24 d. The rank order from large to small is CK, C4, C2, C1, C3, C1 for 1-10 d stage, CK, C1, C4, C3, C2 for 11 d～18 d stage, and C2, C1,CK,C4,C3 for 19～24 d stage. The cumulative evaporation capacity of CK was 3.154 2 kg. Compared with CK, the inhibition rate of C1, C2, C3 and C4 was 2%, 3.97%, 8.6% and 2.3%, respectively. According to the comprehensive analysis, double-layer straw mulching can effectively reduce soil moisture evaporation compared with single-layer straw mulching. It can be obtained that the inhibitory effect of straw burial depth at different layers on soil cumulative evaporation is ranked from large to small as follows: C3, C2, C4, C1, CK. During the whole evaporation process, the relationship between soil moisture cumulative evaporation and time under different straw mulching conditions conforms to Y=a x~b.

引文

[1] 朱元骏, 邵明安. 钙结石含量对土壤水分蒸发影响的模拟试验[J]. 农业工程学报, 2010,26(2):77-81.
    [2] 张军红, 吴波. 干旱、半干旱地区土壤水分研究进展[J]. 中国水土保持, 2012,(2):40-43.
    [3] 王遵亲,祝寿泉,俞仁培,等.中国盐渍土[M]. 北京:科学出版社,1993:250-311.
    [4] Qadir M, Schubert S, Ghafoor A, et al. Amelioration strategies for sodic soils: a review[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2001,12(4):357-386.
    [5] 乔海龙, 刘小京, 李伟强,等. 秸秆深层覆盖对土壤水盐运移及小麦生长的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2006,37(5):885-889.
    [6] 孙博, 解建仓, 汪妮,等. 不同秸秆覆盖量对盐渍土蒸发、水盐变化的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2012,26(1):246-250.
    [7] 付亚亚, 李毅, 冯浩. 不同砂石覆盖量对土壤水分及冬小麦生长过程的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017,(6):139-147.
    [8] 毕远杰, 王全九, 雪静. 覆盖及水质对土壤水盐状况及油葵产量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2010,26(s1):83-89.
    [9] Cook H F, Valdes G S B, Lee H C. Mulch effects on rainfall interception, soil physical characteristics and temperature under Zea mays, L[J]. Soil & Tillage Research, 2006,91(1):227-235.
    [10] 邓力群, 陈铭达, 刘兆普,等. 地面覆盖对盐渍土水热盐运动及作物生长的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2003,34(2):93-97.
    [11] Bezborodov G A, Shadmanov D K, Mirhashimov R T, et al. Mulching and water quality effects on soil salinity and sodicity dynamics and cotton productivity in Central Asia[J]. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2010,138(1):95-102.
    [12] 虎胆·吐马尔白, 吴旭春, 迪力达. 不同位置秸秆覆盖条件下土壤水盐运动实验研究[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2006,25(1):34-37.
    [13] 乔海龙, 刘小京, 李伟强,等. 秸秆深层覆盖对水分入渗及蒸发的影响[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2006,4(2):34-38.
    [14] 史栩帆, 张展羽, 陆培榕,等. 秸秆排水体条件下微咸水灌溉土壤水盐运移模拟[J]. 中国农村水利水电, 2018,(3):72-76.
    [15] 史佳良, 王秀茹, 崔伟杰,等. 滴灌下秸秆覆盖与灌水量对华北冬小麦土壤水分的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2017,35(4):115-123.
    [16] 赵永敢, 王婧, 李玉义,等. 秸秆隔层与地覆膜盖有效抑制潜水蒸发和土壤返盐[J]. 农业工程学报, 2013,29(23):109-117.
    [17] 王曼华, 陈为峰, 宋希亮,等. 秸秆双层覆盖对盐碱地水盐运动影响初步研究[J]. 土壤学报, 2017,54(6):1 395-1 403.