增施有机肥和生物肥对黄河三角洲新垦土壤肥力及稻谷产量的影响
|
摘要
黄河三角洲荒地资源丰富,对这些荒地的开垦、改良和培育是保障国家粮食安全的需要,也是贯彻国家"藏粮于地、藏粮于技"战略的必然要求。为了探明增施有机肥和生物肥在黄河三角洲新开垦荒地地力培育和稻谷增产中的作用,于2017年在该区设置田间小区试验,研究增施有机肥和生物肥对土壤理化性状、稻谷产量及其构成的影响。试验共设6个处理, CK:不施肥;CG:常规施肥;CGY1:常规施肥+有机肥2 250 kg/hm~2;CGY2:常规施肥+有机肥4 500 kg/hm~2;CGS1:常规施肥+生物肥2 250 kg/hm~2;CGS2:常规施肥+生物肥4 500 kg/hm~2。结果表明,增施有机肥和生物肥后土壤碱解氮含量较试验前显著提高,除CGS处理外较其它处理常规施肥显著降低,且处理CGY2降幅达34.06%。处理CGS2土壤Olsen-P含量较试验前显著提升,其余处理均有所下降;与CG相比,处理CGY2和CGS2土壤Olsen-P含量分别显著提升4.52%和25.38%。各施肥处理土壤有机质含量较试验前均显著减少,与CG处理相比,处理CGY2和CGS2显著提升了土壤有机质含量。增施有机肥和生物肥降低了土壤全盐含量,土壤速效钾显著降低。与CG相比,处理CGY1对产量及其构成因素影响较小,处理CGY2、CGS1和CGS2通过提高二次枝梗数和有效穗数,显著提高了稻谷产量,提高幅度最高达40.27%。施肥特别是增施有机肥和生物肥使稻谷籽粒长、宽及周长变短,投影面积变小,千粒重降低。增施有机肥和生物肥通过提高单位面积穗数显著提升了稻谷产量,但对新开垦荒地肥力提升效果有限,必须与秸秆还田等其他培肥途径相结合才有望达到理想效果。
There are many wastelands in the Yellow River Delta. Their reclamation, improvement and cultivation are necessary to ensure national food security, and are also an inevitable requirement for the implementation of the national strategy of "collecting grain in the ground and storing grain in technology". In order to ascertain the role of increasing organic and biological fertilizers in the new reclaimed land fertility and rice production in the Yellow River Delta, a field experiment was set up in 2017 to study their influences on soil physicochemical characteristics, rice yield and its components. Six treatments were set up including CK(no fertilization), CG(conventional fertilization), CGY1(2 250 kg/hm~2 of organic fertilizer based on conventional fertilization), CGY2(4 500 kg/hm~2 of organic fertilizer based on conventional fertilization), CGS1(2 250 kg/hm~2 of biological fertilizer based on conventional fertilization) and CGS2(4 500 kg/hm~2 of biological fertilizer based on conventional fertilization). The results showed that the amount of alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen in soil increased significantly after increasing application of organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer, and was significantly lower than that of conventional fertilization except CGS treatment. The decline of treatment CGY2 was even greater with the decreasing amplitude of 34.06%. The Olsen-P content in CGS2 was significantly higher than that before treatment, while that of the other treatments all decreased. Compared with CG, the Olsen-P contents of CGY2 and CGS2 significantly increased, by 4.52% and 25.38%, respectively. The content of soil organic matter in all fertilization treatments decreased significantly compared with that before treatments. Compared with CG, the treatments of CGY2 and CGS2 significantly increased the soil organic matter content. The increasing application of organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer reduced the total salt content in soil, and decreased the soil available potassium significantly. Compared with CG, the treatment of CGY1 had little effects on yield and its components. Treatments of CGY2, CGS1 and CGS2 significantly increased the yield of rice by increasing the number of secondary branches and effective panicles, and the increase range was up to 40.27%. Fertilization, especially the increasing application of organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer, made the length, width and perimeter of rice grains shorter and the projected area smaller, and decreased the grain weight. Increasing organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer could significantly increase rice yield by increasing the number of panicles per unit area, but had limited effect on the improvement of fertility of new reclaimed wasteland, thus, it must be combined with other fertilization methods such as straw returning to achieve the desired effect.
There are many wastelands in the Yellow River Delta. Their reclamation, improvement and cultivation are necessary to ensure national food security, and are also an inevitable requirement for the implementation of the national strategy of "collecting grain in the ground and storing grain in technology". In order to ascertain the role of increasing organic and biological fertilizers in the new reclaimed land fertility and rice production in the Yellow River Delta, a field experiment was set up in 2017 to study their influences on soil physicochemical characteristics, rice yield and its components. Six treatments were set up including CK(no fertilization), CG(conventional fertilization), CGY1(2 250 kg/hm~2 of organic fertilizer based on conventional fertilization), CGY2(4 500 kg/hm~2 of organic fertilizer based on conventional fertilization), CGS1(2 250 kg/hm~2 of biological fertilizer based on conventional fertilization) and CGS2(4 500 kg/hm~2 of biological fertilizer based on conventional fertilization). The results showed that the amount of alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen in soil increased significantly after increasing application of organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer, and was significantly lower than that of conventional fertilization except CGS treatment. The decline of treatment CGY2 was even greater with the decreasing amplitude of 34.06%. The Olsen-P content in CGS2 was significantly higher than that before treatment, while that of the other treatments all decreased. Compared with CG, the Olsen-P contents of CGY2 and CGS2 significantly increased, by 4.52% and 25.38%, respectively. The content of soil organic matter in all fertilization treatments decreased significantly compared with that before treatments. Compared with CG, the treatments of CGY2 and CGS2 significantly increased the soil organic matter content. The increasing application of organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer reduced the total salt content in soil, and decreased the soil available potassium significantly. Compared with CG, the treatment of CGY1 had little effects on yield and its components. Treatments of CGY2, CGS1 and CGS2 significantly increased the yield of rice by increasing the number of secondary branches and effective panicles, and the increase range was up to 40.27%. Fertilization, especially the increasing application of organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer, made the length, width and perimeter of rice grains shorter and the projected area smaller, and decreased the grain weight. Increasing organic fertilizer and bio-fertilizer could significantly increase rice yield by increasing the number of panicles per unit area, but had limited effect on the improvement of fertility of new reclaimed wasteland, thus, it must be combined with other fertilization methods such as straw returning to achieve the desired effect.
引文
[1] 林代炎,姚宝全,翁伯琦,等. 15N示踪法研究复混生物肥对水稻肥效及其对茬后土壤速效养分的影响[J].核农学报,2005,19(5):379-381.
[2] 王海候,陆长婴,沈明星,等.炭基有机肥对水稻产量及土壤养分的影响[J].江苏农业科学,2016,44(7):104-106.
[3] 刘春增,刘小粉,李本银,等.紫云英还田对水稻产量、土壤团聚性及其有机碳和全氮分布的影响[J].华北农学报,2012,27(6):224-228.
[4] 许仁良,王建峰,张国良,等.秸秆、有机肥及氮肥配合使用对水稻土微生物和有机质含量的影响[J].生态学报,2010,30(13):3584-3590.
[5] 陈贵,张红梅,沈亚强,等.猪粪与牛粪有机肥对水稻产量、养分利用和土壤肥力的影响[J].土壤,2018,50(1):59-65.
[6] 张婷,佟忠勇,张广才,等.添加稻草生物炭对水稻土磷含量和形态的影响[J].华北农学报,2018,33(1):211-216.
[7] 吴立鹏,张士荣,娄金华,等.有机无机配施对滨海盐渍化土壤磷含量及水稻生长、产量的影响[J].华北农学报,2018,33(1):203-210.
[8] 鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[9] 付雪蛟,付立东.翠京元生物肥对滨海盐碱地水稻产量的影响[J].现代农业科技,2017(4):6-7.
[10] 柳玲玲,芶久兰,何佳芳,等.生物有机肥对连作马铃薯及土壤生化性状的影响[J].土壤,2017,49(4):706-711.
[11] 王智慧,唐春双,赵长江,等.生物炭与肥料配施对土壤养分及玉米产量的影响[J/OL].玉米科学,2018-02-13.http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/22.1201.S.20180213.1741.026.html.
[12] 孟红旗,吕家珑,徐明岗,等.有机肥的碱度及其减缓土壤酸化的机制[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2012,18(5):1153-1160.
[13] 刘继培,刘唯一,周婕,等.施用腐植酸和生物肥对草莓品质、产量及土壤农化性状的影响[J].农业资源与环境学报,2014,31(6):513-520.
[14] 付丽军,张爱敏,王向东,等.生物有机肥改良设施蔬菜土壤的研究进展[J].中国土壤与肥料,2017(3):1-5.
[15] 冯瑞兴,施洁君,何胥,等. 水葫芦有机肥对小白菜产量品质及土壤肥力的影响[J].浙江农业科学,2017,58(6):932-936.
[16] 罗兴录,岑忠用,谢和霞,等.生物有机肥对土壤理化、生物性状和木薯生长的影响[J].西北农业学报,2008,17(1):167-173.
[17] 张余莽,周海军,张景野,等.生物有机肥的研究进展[J].吉林农业科学,2010,35(3):37-40.
[18] 姜巍,王安东,杜明,等.生物肥对寒地水稻产量影响的研究[J].现代化农业,2017(6):14-16.
[19] 赵颖,苏艺.有机生物肥及复合肥在水稻上的试验[J].安徽农学通报,2016,22(20):26-27.
[20] 王宇,付立东,隋鑫.“平安福”生物肥在水稻上应用效果研究[J].北方水稻,2010(1):54-58.
[21] 聂俊,史亮亮,邱俊荣,等.有机肥和化肥配施对抛栽水稻群体干物质生产和产量的影响[J].西南农业学报,2016,29(3):579-583.
[22] 陆秀明,黄庆,刘军,等.水稻全有机肥一次性基施对产量及稻米品质的影响[J].耕作与栽培,2004(4):15,26.
[23] 陈惠哲,朱德峰,林贤青,等.微生物肥对水稻产量及氮肥利用的影响[J].核农学报,2010,24(5):1051-1055.
[24] 张欣,施利利,张燕,等.不同施肥处理对津原45产量和品质的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(35):17411-17413.
[2] 王海候,陆长婴,沈明星,等.炭基有机肥对水稻产量及土壤养分的影响[J].江苏农业科学,2016,44(7):104-106.
[3] 刘春增,刘小粉,李本银,等.紫云英还田对水稻产量、土壤团聚性及其有机碳和全氮分布的影响[J].华北农学报,2012,27(6):224-228.
[4] 许仁良,王建峰,张国良,等.秸秆、有机肥及氮肥配合使用对水稻土微生物和有机质含量的影响[J].生态学报,2010,30(13):3584-3590.
[5] 陈贵,张红梅,沈亚强,等.猪粪与牛粪有机肥对水稻产量、养分利用和土壤肥力的影响[J].土壤,2018,50(1):59-65.
[6] 张婷,佟忠勇,张广才,等.添加稻草生物炭对水稻土磷含量和形态的影响[J].华北农学报,2018,33(1):211-216.
[7] 吴立鹏,张士荣,娄金华,等.有机无机配施对滨海盐渍化土壤磷含量及水稻生长、产量的影响[J].华北农学报,2018,33(1):203-210.
[8] 鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[9] 付雪蛟,付立东.翠京元生物肥对滨海盐碱地水稻产量的影响[J].现代农业科技,2017(4):6-7.
[10] 柳玲玲,芶久兰,何佳芳,等.生物有机肥对连作马铃薯及土壤生化性状的影响[J].土壤,2017,49(4):706-711.
[11] 王智慧,唐春双,赵长江,等.生物炭与肥料配施对土壤养分及玉米产量的影响[J/OL].玉米科学,2018-02-13.http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/22.1201.S.20180213.1741.026.html.
[12] 孟红旗,吕家珑,徐明岗,等.有机肥的碱度及其减缓土壤酸化的机制[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2012,18(5):1153-1160.
[13] 刘继培,刘唯一,周婕,等.施用腐植酸和生物肥对草莓品质、产量及土壤农化性状的影响[J].农业资源与环境学报,2014,31(6):513-520.
[14] 付丽军,张爱敏,王向东,等.生物有机肥改良设施蔬菜土壤的研究进展[J].中国土壤与肥料,2017(3):1-5.
[15] 冯瑞兴,施洁君,何胥,等. 水葫芦有机肥对小白菜产量品质及土壤肥力的影响[J].浙江农业科学,2017,58(6):932-936.
[16] 罗兴录,岑忠用,谢和霞,等.生物有机肥对土壤理化、生物性状和木薯生长的影响[J].西北农业学报,2008,17(1):167-173.
[17] 张余莽,周海军,张景野,等.生物有机肥的研究进展[J].吉林农业科学,2010,35(3):37-40.
[18] 姜巍,王安东,杜明,等.生物肥对寒地水稻产量影响的研究[J].现代化农业,2017(6):14-16.
[19] 赵颖,苏艺.有机生物肥及复合肥在水稻上的试验[J].安徽农学通报,2016,22(20):26-27.
[20] 王宇,付立东,隋鑫.“平安福”生物肥在水稻上应用效果研究[J].北方水稻,2010(1):54-58.
[21] 聂俊,史亮亮,邱俊荣,等.有机肥和化肥配施对抛栽水稻群体干物质生产和产量的影响[J].西南农业学报,2016,29(3):579-583.
[22] 陆秀明,黄庆,刘军,等.水稻全有机肥一次性基施对产量及稻米品质的影响[J].耕作与栽培,2004(4):15,26.
[23] 陈惠哲,朱德峰,林贤青,等.微生物肥对水稻产量及氮肥利用的影响[J].核农学报,2010,24(5):1051-1055.
[24] 张欣,施利利,张燕,等.不同施肥处理对津原45产量和品质的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(35):17411-17413.