复合肥配施生物质炭和腐殖酸对唐菖蒲农艺性状的影响

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20240088

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探究复合肥配施生物质炭和腐殖酸对唐菖蒲农艺性状的影响,以唐菖蒲为材料,采用大田栽培方式,试验共设置9个处理,对照处理(CK,不加任何生物质炭、腐殖酸以及复合肥);单施复合肥处理(F,0.075 kg·m^-2复合肥);生物质炭与腐殖酸处理(FT1,2 kg·m^-2生物质炭+0.2 kg·m^-2腐殖酸);复合肥配施生物质炭和腐殖酸处理(FT2,2 kg·m^-2生物质炭+0.2 kg·m^-2腐殖酸+0.005 kg·m^-2复合肥;FT3,2 kg·m^-2生物质炭+0.2 kg·m^-2腐殖酸+0.025 kg·m^-2复合肥;FT4,2 kg·m^-2生物质炭+0.2 kg·m^-2腐殖酸+0.045 kg·m^-2复合肥;FT5,2 kg·m^-2生物质炭+0.2 kg·m^-2腐殖酸+0.065 kg·m^-2复合肥;FT6,2 kg·m^-2生物质炭+0.2 kg·m^-2腐殖酸+0.085 kg·m^-2复合肥;FT7,2 kg·m^-2生物质炭+0.2 kg·m^-2腐殖酸+0.105 kg·m^-2复合肥)。结果表明,2种有机物料配施复合肥改善了唐菖蒲的农艺性状。通过对唐菖蒲生理特性测定发现,不同处理的生物质炭与复合肥配施整体上促进了唐菖蒲生长,与CK、F处理相比,在定植30和90 d时FT7处理的唐菖蒲株高分别增加了40.20%、1.52%和26.48%、6.79%。同时,随着复合肥施用量的增加,唐菖蒲地上部鲜重、根系鲜重均有所提高。此外,各处理均能促进唐菖蒲根系生长,其中,FT5、FT6、FT7效果较好。本试验可为今后花卉化肥减量研究提供理论指导。

关键词: 生物质炭, 腐殖酸, 唐菖蒲, 农艺性状

Abstract:

In order to explore the effects of compound fertilizer combined with biochar and humic acid on agronomic traits of Acorus calamus, using Acorus calamus as the material, a field experiment was conducted using biochar and humic acid to set up 9 treatments,control treatment (CK,no biochar, humic acid, and compound fertilizer added); single application of compound fertilizer treatment (F,0.075 kg·m^-2 compound fertilizer); biochar and humic acid treatment (FT1, 2 kg·m^-2 biochar+0.2 kg·m^-2 humic acid);treatment of compound fertilizer combined with biochar and humic acid(FT2, 2 kg·m^-2 biochar+0.2 kg·m^-2 humic acid+0.005 kg·m^-2 compound fertilizer; FT3, 2 kg·m^-2biochar+0.2 kg·m^-2 humic acid+0.025 kg·m^-2 compound fertilizer; FT4, 2 kg·m^-2 biochar+0.2 kg·m^-2 humic acid+0.045 kg·m^-2 compound fertilizer; FT5, 2 kg·m^-2biochar+0.2 kg·m^-2 humic acid+0.065 kg·m^-2 compound fertilizer; FT6, 2 kg·m^-2 biochar+0.2 kg·m^-2 humic acid+0.085 kg·m^-2 compound fertilizer; FT7, 2 kg·m^-2biochar+0.2 kg·m^-2 humic acid+0.105 kg·m^-2 compound fertilizer). The results showed that the combination of two organic materials and compound fertilizer improved the agronomic traits of Acorus calamus. By measuring the physiological characteristics of Acorus calamus, it was found that different treatments of biochar combined with compound fertilizer promoted the growth of Acorus calamus. Compared with CK and F treatment, FT7 treatment increased the plant height of Acorus calamus by 40.20%, 1.52%, 26.48%, and 6.79% after 30 and 90 days of planting, respectively. Meanwhile, with the increase of compound fertilizer application, the aboveground fresh weight and root fresh weight of Acorus calamus had both increased. In addition, all treatments can promote the root growth of Acorus calamus, among which FT5, FT6, and FT7 treatments had better effects. This experiment can provide ttheoretical guidance for future research on reducing chemical fertilizers on flowers.

Key words: biochar, humic acid, Acorus calamus, agronomic traits

中图分类号:

S682.24

张福建, 陈磊, 惠艳华, 姚文武, 徐敏, 芦艳, 盛海安, 顾婧瑜, 龚凯, 姜惠萍. 复合肥配施生物质炭和腐殖酸对唐菖蒲农艺性状的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2025, 66(5): 1195-1200.

ZHANG Fujian, CHEN Lei, HUI Yanhua, YAO Wenwu, XU Min, LU Yan, SHENG Haian, GU Jingyu, GONG Kai, JIANG Huiping. Effect of compound fertilizer combined with biochar and humic acid on the agronomic traits of Acorus calamus[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2025, 66(5): 1195-1200.

图/表 6

参考文献 28

[1]	MAHANTY T, BHATTACHARJEE S, GOSWAMI M, et al. Biofertilizers: a potential approach for sustainable agriculture development[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 2017, 24(4):3315-3335.
[2]	赵宏伟, 沙汉景. 我国稻田氮肥利用率的研究进展[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2014, 45(2):l16-122.
[3]	吴中营, 谢昶琰, 魏树伟, 等. 滴灌施肥方式下不同品种梨树减肥提质增效研究[J]. 北方园艺, 2021(22):14-21.
[4]	郑佳舜, 胡钧铭, 韦翔华, 等. 绿肥压青粉垄保护性耕作对稻田土壤温室气体排放的影响[J]. 中国农业气象, 2019, 40(1):15-24.
[5]	王秀斌, 徐新朋, 孙刚, 等. 氮肥用量对双季稻产量和氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013, 19(6):1279-1286.
[6]	ROOBROECK D, HOOD-NOWOTNY R, NAKUBULWA D, et al. Biophysical potential of crop residues for biochar carbon sequestration, and co-benefits, in Uganda[J]. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 2019, 100(4): e01611.
[7]	GAO J K, SHI Z Y, WU H M, et al. Fluorescent characteristics of dissolved organic matter released from biochar and paddy soil incorporated with biochar[J]. RSC Advances, 2020, 10(10):5785-5793.
[8]	张伟明, 修立群, 吴迪, 等. 生物质炭的结构及其理化特性研究回顾与展望[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(1):1-18.
[9]	陈亮, 常丽, 桂秀平, 等. 腐殖酸增值复混肥料及其减量在花椰菜上的应用效果[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2021, 40(S2): 107-110.
[10]	LI F Z, MEN S H, ZHANG S W, et al. Responses of low-quality soil microbial community structure and activities to application of a mixed material of humic acid, biochar, and super absorbent polymer[J]. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2020, 30(9):1310-1320.
[11]	刘萌, 樊军, 付威, 等. 添加外源有机物料和黏土矿物对菠菜生长及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2022, 41(6):21-30.
[12]	KARIMI E, SHIRMARDI M, ARDAKANI M D, et al. The effect of humic acid and biochar on growth and nutrients uptake of Calendula (Calendula officinalis L.)[J]. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Anlysis, 2020, 51(12):1658-1669.
[13]	王茜, 卢树昌. 两种调理剂配施对设施富磷土壤磷素吸收与转化的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2020(8):87-92.
[14]	WANG J Y, XIONG Z Q, KUZYAKOV Y. Biochar stability in soil:meta-analysis of decomposition and priming effects[J]. GCB Bioenergy, 2016, 8(3):512-523.
[15]	BAIAMONTE G, DE PASQUALE C, MARSALA V, et al. Structure alteration of a sandy-clay soil by biochar amendments[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2015, 15(4):816-824.
[16]	武玉, 徐刚, 吕迎春, 等. 生物质炭对土壤理化性质影响的研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 2014, 29(1):68-79.
[17]	陈祥福, 李文平, 卢运艳, 等. 腐殖酸型土壤调理剂对酸性土壤理化性质和小麦生长及产量的影响[J]. 腐殖酸, 2020(3):42-46.
[18]	陈士更, 张民, 丁方军, 等. 腐殖酸土壤调理剂对酸化果园土壤理化性状及苹果产量和品质的影响[J]. 土壤, 2019, 51(1):83-89.
[19]	强敏敏. 生物质炭与氮肥配施对黄土丘陵沟壑区沟道整治土地生产力提升机制[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2021.
[20]	LING J X, XUE Y J, YANG C, et al. Effect of farmers' awareness of climate change on their willingness to adopt low-carbon production: based on the TAM-SOR model[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022, 20(1):619.
[21]	孟文慧. 碳金融在中国农业经济发展中的潜力研究[D]. 西安: 陕西师范大学, 2012.
[22]	黄炎忠, 罗小锋, 刘迪, 等. 农户有机肥替代化肥技术采纳的影响因素:对高意愿低行为的现象解释[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(3):632-641.
[23]	李冬, 陈蕾, 夏阳, 等. 生物质炭改良剂对小白菜生长及低质土壤氮磷利用的影响[J]. 环境科学学报, 2014, 34(9):2384-2391.
[24]	KANDIL E E, ABDELSALAM N R, MANSOUR M A, et al. Potentials of organic manure and potassium forms on maize (Zea mays L.) growth and production[J]. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10(1):8752.
[25]	陈昱, 张福建, 杨有新, 等. 芥菜浸提液对豇豆连作土壤性质及幼苗生理指标的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2019, 33(5):1038-1047.
[26]	张福建, 陈昱, 吴超群, 等. 外源物质对连作辣椒生长发育的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2017(14):1-7.
[27]	BOWSHER A W, MILLER B J, DONOVAN L A. Evolutionary divergences in root system morphology,allocation,and nitrogen uptake in species from high-versus low-fertility soils[J]. Functional Plant Biology, 2015, 43(2):129-140.
[28]	张春, 赵浩淳, 郭涛, 等. 生物质炭用量对烟苗生长的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2015, 48(6):9-12, 26.

处理	平均值	标准误
CK	43.97 d	1.47
F	51.93 abc	1.32
FT1	46.70 cd	1.00
FT2	46.20 cd	2.12
FT3	47.70 bcd	2.37
FT4	50.23 abcd	2.68
FT5	55.03 a	1.83
FT6	53.20 ab	1.78
FT7	54.80 a	2.52

处理	平均值	标准误
CK	43.97 d	1.47
F	51.93 abc	1.32
FT1	46.70 cd	1.00
FT2	46.20 cd	2.12
FT3	47.70 bcd	2.37
FT4	50.23 abcd	2.68
FT5	55.03 a	1.83
FT6	53.20 ab	1.78
FT7	54.80 a	2.52

处理	根系长度/mm	根系表面积/mm²	根系体积/mm³	根尖数/个
CK	691.73±7.75 c	309.91±4.92 e	9.65±0.61 d	752.33±28.75 c
F	926.90±25.77 ab	437.62±8.99 bc	12.25±1.13 bc	917.00±28.48 a
FT1	902.80±40.18 bc	356.97±64.90 c	10.09±0.27 cd	901.33±15.98 a
FT2	953.80±12.29 abc	363.41±23.44 abc	10.59±0.42 cd	909.33±13.09 a
FT3	972.94±6.18 ab	398.36±6.77 ab	11.18±0.72 cd	914.67±22.75 a
FT4	979.37±8.34 ab	440.69±20.54 ab	13.88±0.90 ab	916.67±40.48 a
FT5	996.89±30.24 ab	442.87±17.72 a	14.05±0.56 ab	921.33±12.24 a
FT6	1 015.44±20.51 a	449.40±23.58 a	14.26±0.60 ab	975.67±12.55 a
FT7	1 009.12±11.52 a	449.84±15.92 a	14.58±0.50 a	973.00±5.86 a

处理	根系长度/mm	根系表面积/mm²	根系体积/mm³	根尖数/个
CK	691.73±7.75 c	309.91±4.92 e	9.65±0.61 d	752.33±28.75 c
F	926.90±25.77 ab	437.62±8.99 bc	12.25±1.13 bc	917.00±28.48 a
FT1	902.80±40.18 bc	356.97±64.90 c	10.09±0.27 cd	901.33±15.98 a
FT2	953.80±12.29 abc	363.41±23.44 abc	10.59±0.42 cd	909.33±13.09 a
FT3	972.94±6.18 ab	398.36±6.77 ab	11.18±0.72 cd	914.67±22.75 a
FT4	979.37±8.34 ab	440.69±20.54 ab	13.88±0.90 ab	916.67±40.48 a
FT5	996.89±30.24 ab	442.87±17.72 a	14.05±0.56 ab	921.33±12.24 a
FT6	1 015.44±20.51 a	449.40±23.58 a	14.26±0.60 ab	975.67±12.55 a
FT7	1 009.12±11.52 a	449.84±15.92 a	14.58±0.50 a	973.00±5.86 a