不同类型微生物肥料在梨树栽培上的应用

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20210225

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

以浙江省桐庐县钟山乡翠冠梨为研究对象,设置不同施肥方式,研究不同微生物肥料对梨园土壤理化性状、梨产量及果实品质的影响。结果表明,与初始土壤相比较,CK和各微生物肥料处理均能增加土壤有机质、全氮和碱解氮含量。与CK相比较,施用土壤调理剂类型的微生物肥料处理T1和T2能显著提高土壤pH,但土壤调理剂T1处理的土壤全氮及氮、磷、钾等速效养分均要低于对照,而施用微生物菌剂处理T3和T4降低了土壤pH,显著提高了土壤EC值,也提高土壤有机质、全氮和碱解氮含量。测定梨的产量和品质表明,施用土壤调理剂类型的微生物肥料处理T1和T2较大的提高了梨产量,其中T1处理产量最大,平均单株产量达到50.38 kg,而且提高了果实品质,总糖、可溶性固形物含量和糖酸比分别达到8.0%、10.0%和17.02,高于CK和其他处理,而施用微生物菌剂处理T3和T4对于梨产量无显著促进作用。研究结果表明,在当前的栽培条件下,每株施用7.5 kg土壤调理剂类型的微生物肥料并与复合肥配施更有利于提高梨树产量和品质。

关键词: 翠冠梨, 微生物肥料, 土壤养分, 果实品质

中图分类号:

S661.2

钟林炳, 王道泽, 黄越, 陆晓林, 姚燕来, 王卫平. 不同类型微生物肥料在梨树栽培上的应用[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2021, 62(2): 314-319.

图/表 7

参考文献 27

[1]	WU J J, TIAN J, ZHANG J, et al. Plant-derived nutrient solution improves thinning effect on pear flowers and fruits[J]. Brazilian Journal of Botany, 2019,42(2):283-294.
[2]	NIU Q F, WANG T, LI J Z, et al. Effects of exogenous application of GA4+7 and N-(2-chloro-4-pyridyl)-N'-phenylurea on induced parthenocarpy and fruit quality in Pyrus pyrifolia ‘Cuiguan’[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2015,76(3):251-258.
[3]	尹华刚. 两种叶面肥对翠冠梨果实品质的影响试验[J]. 现代农村科技, 2015(7):61-63.
[4]	CHEN W, TENG Y, LI Z G, et al. Mechanisms by which organic fertilizer and effective microbes mitigate peanut continuous cropping yield constraints in a red soil of South China[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2018,128:23-34.
[5]	SADAF J, SHAH G A, SHAHZAD K, et al. Improvements in wheat productivity and soil quality can accomplish by co-application of biochars and chemical fertilizers[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2017,607/608:715-724.
[6]	MI W H, SUN Y, GAO Q, et al. Changes in humus carbon fractions in paddy soil given different organic amendments and mineral fertilizers[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2019,195:104421.
[7]	WANG J C, SONG Y, MA T F, et al. Impacts of inorganic and organic fertilization treatments on bacterial and fungal communities in a paddy soil[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2017,112:42-50.
[8]	ZHAO J, WANG Y G, LIANG H, et al. The rhizosphere microbial community response to a bio-organic fertilizer: finding the mechanisms behind the suppression of watermelon Fusarium wilt disease[J]. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 2017,40(1):1-14.
[9]	闫瑞瑞, 卫智军, 乌仁其其格, 等. 微生物肥料对呼伦贝尔打孔羊草草甸草原土壤微生物及酶活性的影响研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2017,26(4):597-604.
[10]	XUE C, SHEN Z Z, HAO Y W, et al. Fumigation coupled with bio-organic fertilizer for the suppression of watermelon Fusarium wilt disease re-shapes the soil microbiome[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2019,140:49-56.
[11]	ZHAO J, LIU J, LIANG H, et al. Manipulation of the rhizosphere microbial community through application of a new bio-organic fertilizer improves watermelon quality and health[J]. PLoS One, 2018,13(2):e0192967. DOI URL PMID
[12]	WANG L, LI J, YANG F, et al. Application of bioorganic fertilizer significantly increased apple yields and shaped bacterial community structure in orchard soil[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2017,73(2):404-416. DOI URL PMID
[13]	LIU H J, XIONG W, ZHANG R F, et al. Continuous application of different organic additives can suppress tomato disease by inducing the healthy rhizospheric microbiota through alterations to the bulk soil microflora[J]. Plant and Soil, 2018,423(1/2):229-240.
[14]	邹亚丽, 呼丽萍, 魏蓉, 等. 生物有机肥施用量对大樱桃果实品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2019,47(1):149-150, 211.
[15]	吴贵平. 复合微生物肥对杨梅果实品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2020,61(8):1586-1587.
[16]	HOSSAIN MOLLA A, BARUA S, HAQUE M M, et al. Performance of Trichoderma-enriched bio-organic fertilizer in N supplementation and bottle gourd production in field condition[J]. Horticulture International Journal, 2018,2(3). DOI: 10.15406/hij.2018.02.00036.
[17]	郭树根, 沈怡斐, 姚燕来, 等. 生物强化还原处理防控辣椒连作障碍[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2018,59(9):1674-1679.
[18]	洪春来, 朱凤香, 姚燕来, 等. 不同有机无机复混专用肥对枸杞园土壤及枸杞产量、品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2018,59(11):2019-2020, 2024.
[19]	肖怡, 冯浪, 王鹏, 等. 盐源县植烟土壤速效养分空间变异特征研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017,29(8):1329-1335.
[20]	CESARANO G, DE FILIPPIS F, LA STORIA A, et al. Organic amendment type and application frequency affect crop yields, soil fertility and microbiome composition[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2017,120:254-264.
[21]	TAO R, WAKELIN S A, LIANG Y C, et al. Response of ammonia-oxidizing Archaea and bacteria in calcareous soil to mineral and organic fertilizer application and their relative contribution to nitrification[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2017,114:20-30.
[22]	GAO X, ZHANG S X, ZHAO X J, et al. Evaluation of potassium application on tomato performance and rhizosphere bacterial communities under negative pressure irrigation of greenhouse-grown[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 2020,43(3):317-326.
[23]	LI C N, LI H Y, YAO T, et al. Microbial inoculation influences bacterial community succession and physicochemical characteristics during pig manure composting with corn straw[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2019,289:121653. DOI URL PMID
[24]	LI M Y, REN L H, ZHANG J C, et al. Population characteristics and influential factors of nitrogen cycling functional genes in heavy metal contaminated soil remediated by biochar and compost[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019,651:2166-2174.
[25]	LIU L, WANG S Q, GUO X P, et al. Succession and diversity of microorganisms and their association with physicochemical properties during green waste thermophilic composting[J]. Waste Management, 2018,73:101-112. DOI URL PMID
[26]	张丽华, 崔东, 杨海军, 等. 海拔对伊犁河谷草原苦豆子种群土壤活性有机碳特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2020,28(1):200-206.
[27]	迟斌, 高文胜, 李林光, 等. 微生物肥料在果树生产中的应用与展望[J]. 农学学报, 2014,4(1):33-35.

处理	每株复合肥用量/kg	每株有机类肥料用量/kg	每株复合肥养分/kg	每株有机类肥料养分/kg	总养分投入量/ (kg·hm^-2)	总产量/ kg	单株梨树平均产量/kg	有效总果数	平均单果重/ g	单株梨果数
CK	1.0	15.0	0.45	0.15	0.04	496.25	41.35	1 332	372.52	111.01
T1	1.2	7.5	0.54	0.06	0.04	604.60	50.38	1 694	356.84	141.19
T2	1.1	15.0	0.48	0.12	0.04	568.80	47.40	1 542	368.89	128.49
T3	1.1	10.0	0.50	0.10	0.04	492.11	41.01	1 314	374.38	109.54
T4	1.0	10.0	0.45	0.15	0.04	377.56	31.46	1 031	366.23	85.91

处理	每株复合肥用量/kg	每株有机类肥料用量/kg	每株复合肥养分/kg	每株有机类肥料养分/kg	总养分投入量/ (kg·hm^-2)	总产量/ kg	单株梨树平均产量/kg	有效总果数	平均单果重/ g	单株梨果数
CK	1.0	15.0	0.45	0.15	0.04	496.25	41.35	1 332	372.52	111.01
T1	1.2	7.5	0.54	0.06	0.04	604.60	50.38	1 694	356.84	141.19
T2	1.1	15.0	0.48	0.12	0.04	568.80	47.40	1 542	368.89	128.49
T3	1.1	10.0	0.50	0.10	0.04	492.11	41.01	1 314	374.38	109.54
T4	1.0	10.0	0.45	0.15	0.04	377.56	31.46	1 031	366.23	85.91

处理	总糖/ %	可溶性固形物/%	酸度/ %	糖酸比	pH	水分/ %
CK	5.4	9.4	0.76	7.11	4.98	90.2
T1	8.0	10.0	0.47	17.02	4.97	89.2
T2	6.1	9.0	0.62	9.84	4.94	89.3
T3	8.0	9.2	0.5	16.00	4.97	89.2
T4	6.7	9.0	0.64	10.47	4.96	89.9

处理	总糖/ %	可溶性固形物/%	酸度/ %	糖酸比	pH	水分/ %
CK	5.4	9.4	0.76	7.11	4.98	90.2
T1	8.0	10.0	0.47	17.02	4.97	89.2
T2	6.1	9.0	0.62	9.84	4.94	89.3
T3	8.0	9.2	0.5	16.00	4.97	89.2
T4	6.7	9.0	0.64	10.47	4.96	89.9