重金属汞高效钝化剂筛选及其合理施用研究

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20230035

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

由于工业活动的日益频繁、矿山的开采和冶炼、农药及化肥的滥用、垃圾的随意堆放处理等诸多因素,使农田土壤金属污染呈现日益严重的趋势。探究最适合的农田土壤重金属汞污染的原位钝化修复方法,旨在防控农田土壤重金属汞污染,以确保农田土壤生态安全。根据文献查阅以及前期研究相关研究挑选市场上较为容易采购的钝化剂5种,并依托室内土培模拟实验与大田试验来筛选出高效的重金属Hg钝化剂及其合理施用技术。土培模拟试验中的土壤钝化剂的施用促进了土壤中游离态的Hg向稳定态转化。其中以施以农用石灰和海泡石(比例为1:1)的效果最好,显著低于其他钝化剂或组合配方(P<0.05),且施用有机钝化剂可显著提高水稻生长指标。施用农用石灰和海泡石(比例1:1)和生物质炭和海泡石(比例1:1)两种比例钝化剂,对减少水稻籽粒中Hg的富集效果也有一定作用。而大田试验各钝化剂处理之间钝化效果差异不显著(P>0.05)。各钝化剂处理对水稻生长指标也未有明显影响。施用不同钝化剂水稻籽粒富集Hg的含量均未检出,说明其对粮食安全性很高。通过土培实验与田间试验显示,5种钝化剂和组合配方均显著降低土壤Hg有效性含量,其中施以农用石灰和海泡石(比例为1:1),施用量为3 000 kg·hm^-2的效果最好。

关键词: 农田土壤, 钝化剂, 汞活性, 合理施用, 污染修复

Abstract:

Due to the increasing industrial activities, mining and smelting, misuse of pesticides and chemical fertilisers, the trend of metal contamination in agricultural soils is becoming increasingly serious due to many factors, such as the random disposal of waste piles. The aim is to prevent and control heavy metal mercury contamination in agricultural soils and to ensure the ecological safety of agricultural soils. Based on a literature review and previous research, five commercially available passivators were selected, and indoor soil culture simulations and field trials were used to screen for highly effective heavy metal Hg passivators and their appropriate application techniques. The application of soil passivation remediation materials in the soil culture simulation experiment promoted the conversion of free Hg to the stable state in the soil. The best results were obtained with the application of agricultural lime and seafoam (ratio 1:1), which was significantly lower than other passivators or combination formulations (P<0.05), and the application of organic passivators significantly improved rice growth indicators. The application of two ratios of passivators, agricultural lime and seafoam (ratio 1:1) and biochar and seafoam (ratio 1:1), was also effective in reducing the enrichment of Hg in rice seeds. The difference in passivation effect between the passivator treatments in the field trial was not significant (P>0.05). There was also no significant effect of the passivator treatments on rice growth indicators. No Hg enrichment was detected in the rice grains with the different passivators, indicating a high level of grain safety. Soil cultivation experiments and field trials showed that all five passivators and combination formulations significantly reduced the effective soil Hg content, with the best results achieved by applying agricultural lime and seafoam (ratio 1:1) at a rate of 3 000 kg·hm^-2.

Key words: agricultural soils, passivation, mercury activity, rational application, contamination remediation

中图分类号:

陈振华, 张雪芳. 重金属汞高效钝化剂筛选及其合理施用研究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2025, 66(4): 1042-1047.

CHEN Zhenhua, ZHANG Xuefang. Screening of on high efficiency passivators of heavy metal mercury and its rational application[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2025, 66(4): 1042-1047.

图/表 8

表1 钝化剂试验小区物料投入情况

Table 1 Material inputs to passivator test plots

处理	材料	小区用量/kg
T1	农用石灰+海泡石	4
T2	生物质炭+海泡石	4
T3	腐殖酸复合钝化剂	6
T4	牡蛎壳为主要原料的土壤调理剂	4
CK	空白	0

图1 筛选Hg钝化剂及合理施用技术试验小区布置

Fig.1 Layout of the test plot for screening Hg passivator and rational application techniques

图2 土培实验土壤有效态Hg含量柱上无相同小写字母表示组间差异显著(P<0.05)。图3~5同。

Fig.2 Effective Hg content of soil in the soil culture experiment

图3 土培条件下钝化剂对水稻生长指标的影响

Fig.3 Effect of passivators on rice growth indicators under soil culture conditions

表2 土培条件下钝化剂对水稻籽粒富集Hg的影响

Table 2 Effect of passivators on Hg enrichment in rice seeds under soil culture conditions

处理	水稻籽粒Hg含量平均值/(mg·kg^-1)
CK	0.010
T	—
S	—
F	0.001
M	0.001
限定值	0.020

图4 大田条件下钝化剂对土壤有效态Hg含量变化的影响注:图中不同字母表示Hg有效性含量在不同处理差异显著(P<0.05) 。

Fig.4 Effect of passivators on changes in the effective Hg content of soil under field conditions

图5 大田条件下钝化剂对水稻生长指标的影响

Fig.5 Effect of passivators on rice growth indicators under field conditions

表3 大田条件下钝化剂对水稻籽粒富集Hg的影响

Table 3 Effect of passivated materials on Hg enrichment in rice seeds under field conditions

处理	水稻籽粒Hg含量平均值/(mg·kg^-1)
CK	0.004 9
T1	—
T2	—
T3	0.003 6
T4	0.003 2
限定值	0.020 0

参考文献 12

[1]	张情亚, 卢琦, 李凡, 等. 五种钝化剂施用水平对稻田镉污染土壤的修复效果研究[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2022, 61(16): 30-34.
[2]	官迪, 吴家梅, 刘昭兵, 等. 外源硫化钠对土壤-水稻体系中镉迁移积累的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2021, 40(7): 1460-1469.
[3]	LI H, LIU Y, ZHOU Y Y, et al. Effects of red mud based passivator on the transformation of Cd fraction in acidic Cd-polluted paddy soil and Cd absorption in rice[J]. The Science of the Total Environment, 2018, 640/641: 736-745.
[4]	刘静, 秦樊鑫, 罗谦, 等. 钝化剂对污染土壤汞钝化效果及辣椒吸收汞的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2022, 53(6): 1461-1470.
[5]	尹秀玲. 巯基修饰坡缕石对降低作物镉吸收的影响及机理研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2018.
[6]	JIANG Y X, HU T, PENG O, et al. Impact of heavy metal passivators on the nitrogenase activity and diazotrophic community in a cadmium-contaminated paddy field[J]. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 2022, 175: 105506.
[7]	庾明茂. 有机硅烷钝化剂对黄铁矿的钝化及自修复性能研究[D]. 广州: 华南理工大学, 2021.
[8]	ALI U. Immobilization and phytoavail ability of nickel in contaminated ultisol by organic and inorganic amendments[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2020.
[9]	WU C F, ZHANG J L, ZHANG Y, et al. Risk control effectiveness of phosphorus-containing passivators on Cd-contaminated agricultural soils to be strictly controlled[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2022, 22(9): 2365-2380.
[10]	HU H X, GAO L L, ZHANG H M, et al. Effectiveness of passivator amendments and optimized fertilization for ensuring the food safety of rice and wheat from cadmium-contaminated farmland[J]. Sustainability, 2022, 14(22): 15026.
[11]	张剑, 孔繁艺, 卢升高. 无机钝化剂对镉污染酸性水稻土的修复效果及其机制[J]. 环境科学, 2022, 43(10): 4679-4686.
[12]	黄斌. 重金属在稻田土壤中的吸附、富集、迁移特征及稳定化研究[D]. 长沙: 湖南大学, 2016.

[1]	吴林土, 徐火忠, 李贵松, 叶春福, 何金法, 王允祥, 潘瑛洁, 王月圆, 叶正钱. 不同钝化剂对茶园土壤及茶叶品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(7): 1571-1577.
[2]	马建芳, 周琼, 周颖杰, 董苾莉. 3种钝化剂对土壤污染治理重金属镉试验效果初报[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2023, 64(9): 2315-2319.
[3]	朱真令, 徐有祥, 陈德, 肖文丹, 叶雪珠. 不同钝化剂对水稻Cd吸收的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2023, 64(2): 282-285.
[4]	邹丽娜, 柳婷婷, 李文略, 骆霞虹, 朱关林, 安霞. 麻地膜覆盖对番茄根际土壤微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2023, 64(2): 371-378.
[5]	任佳佳, 石艳平, 陈轶平. 施用钝化剂对水稻田中汞的修复效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2023, 64(11): 2611-2615.
[6]	赵怡阳, 陶祥运, 张易旻, 王燕, 蒋位青. 酸模对Cd、Cu、Pb复合污染农田的修复潜力[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(8): 1878-1882.
[7]	赵怡阳, 陶祥运, 张易旻, 王燕. 农田重金属污染土壤的植物修复工程研究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(2): 391-395.
[8]	章明奎, 倪中应, 谢国雄, 王京文. 基于污染土壤基础性状的镉钝化材料选择与应用探讨[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(1): 170-173.
[9]	宁银中. 基于Meta分析的农田土壤Pb、Zn污染现状[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(1): 179-185.
[10]	宋肖琴, 陈国安, 马嘉伟, 柳丹, 叶正钱. 不同钝化剂对水稻田镉污染的修复效应[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2021, 62(3): 474-476.
[11]	张剑, 卢升高. 12种钝化剂在镉污染稻田上的应用效果对比[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2020, 61(12): 2527-2529.
[12]	倪中应, 石一珺, 谢国雄, 章明奎. 杭州市典型农田土壤镉铜铅汞的化学形态及其污染风险评价[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2017, 58(10): 1785-1788.
[13]	王小骊1，赵钰燕1，陈海英2，毛红瑞2，楼云君2. 猪场周边农田土壤重金属污染的调查[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2015, 1(9): 1470-.