土壤调理剂阻控土壤酸化提高磷素养分有效性的田间对比试验

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20230836

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

土壤酸化治理是消除土壤障碍、提高耕地地力和促进农作物生长的重要内容。本研究以6种商品土壤调理剂为材料,通过田间小区试验,研究不同土壤调理剂消除土壤酸度和铝毒障碍、提高土壤中交换性盐基离子和有效磷含量、促进马铃薯作物产量和品质的效果与机理。结果表明:6种土壤调理剂施用能显著提高土壤pH值、降低交换性酸含量、有效缓解土壤酸化的危害;土壤调理剂通过降低交换性铝含量,促进Al³⁺水解为羟基态铝,有效降低铝毒;土壤调理剂增加土壤交换性K⁺和Ca²⁺含量,增加土壤磷的有效性;土壤调理剂显著提高马铃薯产量和总淀粉、粗蛋白和还原糖等含量,不同土壤调理剂提高马铃薯产量12.9%~30.4%。田间对比试验表明,土壤调理剂阻控土壤酸化、消除铝毒、提高交换性盐基离子和有效磷含量,以石灰、硅钙钾镁肥和钾长石、白云石、石灰石等为主要成分的土壤调理剂效果较好,其机理与这些调理剂具有强碱性特性和提供钙镁等矿质元素有关。而提高马铃薯总淀粉、粗蛋白和还原糖等含量,以石灰、石灰氮和富含腐殖酸的调理剂效果较好。

关键词: 土壤调理剂, 土壤酸化, 铝毒, 交换性盐基离子, 有效磷

Abstract:

Soil acidification remediation is an important issue of eliminating soil barriers, improving farmland fertility, and promoting crop growth. A field experimental was performed to compare the effects and mechanisms of six soil conditioners in eliminating soil acidity and aluminum toxicity barriers, increasing the content of exchangeable base cations and available phosphorus in soil, and promoting the yield and quality of potato. The results showed that the application of six soil conditioners significantly increased soil pH value and reduced exchangeable acid content, and then effectively alleviated the harm of soil acidification. Soil conditioners effectively reduced aluminum toxicity by reducing the content of exchangeable aluminum and promoting the hydrolysis of Al³⁺ into hydroxyl aluminum. Soil conditioners increased the content of soil exchangeable K⁺ and Ca²⁺ ions, and enhanced the availability of soil phosphorus. Soil conditioners significantly increased the yield and total starch, crude protein, and reducible sugar content of potato. Different soil conditioners could increase potato yield by 12.9% to 30.4%. Field comparative experiments showed that soil conditioners could inhibit soil acidification, eliminate aluminum toxicity, increase contents of exchangeable base cations and available phosphorus in soils. The lime, silicon calcium potassium magnesium fertilizer, and soil conditioner potassium mainly composed of potassium feldspar, dolomite, limestone, have better effects in remediating acidified soils. The remediation mechanism is related to their strong alkaline characteristics and abundance mineral elements such as calcium and magnesium of soil conditioners. The lime, lime nitrogen, and humic acid conditioners had more effective in improving the content of total starch, crude protein, and reducible sugar of potato.

Key words: soil conditioner, soil acidification, aluminum toxicity, exchangeable case cations, available phosphorus

中图分类号:

S158.5

李梦妮, 吴鲁洁, 赵觅漾, 陈翰, 卢升高. 土壤调理剂阻控土壤酸化提高磷素养分有效性的田间对比试验[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(12): 2899-2905.

LI Mengni, WU Lujie, ZHAO Miyang, CHEN Han, LU Shenggao. Field comparative experiment on improving phosphorus nutrient availability by soil conditioners through remediating soil acidification[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(12): 2899-2905.

图/表 7

表1 不同调理剂的pH值与化学组成

Table 1 The pH values and chemical composition of soil conditioners

调理剂	pH值	化学元素组成/%
调理剂	pH值	Ca	Si	C	Al	Mg
石灰(L)	12.9	52.4	1.3	7.8	0.3	0.8
硅钙钾镁肥(SCKM)	10.7	21.1	13.1	0.6	4.3	1.7
牡蛎壳粉(OS)	9.7	16.1	2.7	8.5	1.2	0.5
石灰氮(LN)	9.8	67.2	1.3	26.3	0.5	0.1
土壤调理剂Ⅰ(SC)	10.5	25.9	13.1	0.1	7.5	5.0
土壤调理剂Ⅱ(HA)	9.6	19.8	3.9	20.7	2.7	3.2

图1 不同调理剂对土壤酸化的影响柱上无相同小写字母表示处理之间差异显著(P<0.05),图2~5同。

Fig.1 Effect of soil conditioners on soil acidification

图2 不同调理剂对土壤中不同形态铝含量的影响

Fig.2 Effect of soil conditioners on the content of different aluminum forms in soil

表2 Effects of soil conditioners on the content of exchangeable base cations in soil单位:cmol·kg-1

Table 2

处理	交换性K⁺含量	交换性Na⁺含量	交换性Ca²⁺含量	交换性Mg²⁺含量	交换性盐基总含量
CK	0.57±0.07 ab	0.30±0.07 a	2.09±0.15 d	1.35±0.12 b	4.33±0.17 c
L	0.98±0.10 a	0.26±0.07 a	3.95±0.31 a	1.45±0.21 ab	6.64±0.27 a
SCKM	1.00±0.12 a	0.29±0.02 a	3.53±0.11 ab	1.88±0.19 a	6.71±0.34 a
OS	0.85±0.28 ab	0.33±0.14 a	3.02±0.84 bc	1.64±0.41 ab	5.84±1.64 ab
LN	0.64±0.24 ab	0.25±0.09 a	2.85±0.09 bc	1.33±0.30 b	5.08±0.70 bc
SC	0.89±0.34 ab	0.35±0.07 a	2.52±0.25 cd	1.91±0.06 a	5.67±0.58 abc
HA	0.49±0.16 b	0.26±0.13 a	2.75±0.21 cd	1.61±0.06 ab	5.11±0.16 bc

图3 不同调理剂对土壤中磷含量的影响

Fig.3 Effect of soil conditioners on the content of phosphorus in soil

图4 不同调理剂对土壤的不同形态磷含量的影响

Fig.4 Effects of soil conditioners on the content of different phosphorus forms in soil

图5 不同调理剂对马铃薯产量和营养物质含量的影响

Fig.5 Effects of soil conditioners on the yield and nutrient contents of potato

参考文献 13

[1]	GUO J H, LIU X J, ZHANG Y, et al. Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands[J]. Science, 2010, 327(5968): 1008-1010.
[2]	周晓阳, 徐明岗, 周世伟, 等. 长期施肥下我国南方典型农田土壤的酸化特征[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(6): 1615-1621.
[3]	徐仁扣, 李九玉, 周世伟, 等. 我国农田土壤酸化调控的科学问题与技术措施[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2018, 33(2): 160-167.
[4]	徐仁扣. 酸化红壤的修复原理与技术[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2013.
[5]	冀建华, 李絮花, 刘秀梅, 等. 硅钙钾镁肥对南方稻田土壤酸度的改良作用[J]. 土壤学报, 2019, 56(4): 895-906.
[6]	ZHAO W R, LI J Y, JIANG J, et al. The mechanisms underlying the reduction in aluminum toxicity and improvements in the yield of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) after organic and inorganic amendment of an acidic ultisol[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2020, 288: 106716.
[7]	FAGERIA N K, NASCENTE A S. Management of soil acidity of South American soils for sustainable crop production[M]// Advances in agronomy. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2014: 221-275.
[8]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[9]	SOON Y K. Fractionation of extractable aluminum in acid soils: a review and a proposed procedure[J]. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 1993, 24(13/14): 1683-1708.
[10]	陈鹰, 乐俊明, 丁映. 酸水解-DNS法测定马铃薯中淀粉含量[J]. 种子, 2009, 28(9): 109-110.
[11]	崔辉梅, 石国亮, 安君和. 马铃薯还原糖含量测定方法的比较研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2006, 34(19): 4821-4823.
[12]	DELHAIZE E, RYAN P R. Aluminum toxicity and tolerance in plants[J]. Plant Physiology, 1995, 107(2): 315-321.
[13]	ZHENG S J. Crop production on acidic soils: overcoming aluminium toxicity and phosphorus deficiency[J]. Annals of Botany, 2010, 106(1): 183-184.

[1]	温炜, 潘建清, 俞波, 解静, 马军伟, 杨艳, 王峰. 长兴县葡萄耕地主推酸化治理模式应用效果研究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(8): 1838-1842.
[2]	项舒延, 詹丽钏, 周卿伟, 金美青, 吴卫红, 傅力. 不同植茶年份土壤性质差异研究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(6): 1364-1369.
[3]	胡文君, 游春燕, 牛二利, 俞春莲, 王昆喜, 朱春权, 卢红伶, 蒋陈凯, 陈琳, 蒋起宏, 凌楸桐, 朱申龙, 郑海雷, 沈国新. 土壤酸化条件下植物响应铝毒时钙与铝交互作用的研究进展[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(12): 3048-3052.
[4]	廖丽欣, 韩昊, 李岗, 刘娟, 张淑文, 戚行江, 任海英. 生物有机肥与土壤调理剂混施对衰弱杨梅营养生长及果实品质的改良作用[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2023, 64(8): 1881-1884.
[5]	王勤俭, 王峰, 俞巧钢, 刘海天, 杨艳, 柴有忠, 张圆圆, 马军伟. 不同土壤调理剂对红黄壤黄桃园土壤及黄桃品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(8): 1743-1747.
[6]	童文彬, 江建锋, 杨海峻, 陈喜靖, 林义成, 刘琛, 张露华, 方俊, 郭彬. 南方典型酸化土壤改良与水稻安全种植同步应用技术[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(6): 1154-1156.
[7]	徐君言, 马宁, 裘高扬, 郭彬, 刘琛, 林义成, 傅庆林. 沸石与腐殖酸对滨海盐土水稻产量及土壤性质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(6): 1165-1168.
[8]	吴林土, 徐火忠, 李贵松, 唐仕琴, 王勇军. 微生物菌剂对松阳茶园土壤酸化改良及肥力提升的效果分析[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(6): 1245-1249.
[9]	宋洋, 刘冬峰, 赵泉, 郭秀珠, 李发勇, 林绍生. 不同镁肥对柚园土壤和树体营养的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(6): 1275-1278.
[10]	颜军, 汪玉磊, 俞丹宏, 陈思力, 肖鸣, 季天委. 蚓粪-贝壳粉在重金属中轻度污染菜地的安全生产应用[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(12): 2924-2928.
[11]	喻曼, 潘建清, 高敬文, 乔宇颖, 汪玉磊, 朱有为. 受镉污染耕地小麦种植中安全利用措施优化研究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(11): 2503-2507.
[12]	赵丽芳, 黄鹏武, 陈翰, 卢升高. 土壤调理剂与有机肥配施治理红壤茶园土壤酸化与培育地力的效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(11): 2692-2695.
[13]	厉宝仙, 章日亮, 刘晓霞. 稻油轮作体系施用有机肥对作物产量及土壤综合肥力的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2021, 62(6): 1085-1088.
[14]	周杨, 姚岳良, 施丽珍, 陈建霞, 章明奎. 缙云县耕地土壤酸化及其预防与治理思考[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2021, 62(4): 833-836.
[15]	夏晓燕, 邵赛男, 蒋玉根, 徐君, 戴学龙. 酸性土壤有效磷测定中的温度控制技术探讨[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2021, 62(3): 598-599.