Study on the effect of soil conditioner combined with organic fertilizer on soil fertility and tea safety production in tea garden

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20230135

Abstract

Abstract:

The application of soil conditioner is an important technical measure to passivate heavy metals in soil. In this study, the effects of oyster shell soil conditioner and organic fertilizer on heavy metal content in tea garden soil and tea were studied. The results showed that the soil pH value of TY6 treatment (soil conditioner 2 250 kg·hm^-2 + organic fertilizer 7 500 kg·hm^-2) increased by 0.14 compared with CK treatment (no material was applied), and the contents of available phosphorus, available potassium, organic matter and alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen in soil increased by 61.78%, 32.11%, 57.61% and 36.48%, respectively. The lead, chromium, arsenic, mercury, available lead, available cadmium and available chromium contents in soil decreased by 52.61%, 20.48%, 22.39%, 70.00%, 59.31%, 66.67% and 50.00%, respectively. The 100-bud weight of tea increased by 25.58%, the germination density increased by 32.09%, the fresh leaf yield increased by 95.06%, the total nitrogen content of tea increased by 4.67%, the total phosphorus content increased by 6.40%, and the total potassium content increased by 3.79%. Lead, cadmium, chromium, arsenic and mercury contents in tea decreased by 70.59%, 50.00%, 26.67%, 10.71% and 17.86%, respectively. In summary, in order to improve the soil quality of tea garden, increase the yield of tea, reduce the content of heavy metals in tea, and reduce the health hazards to the body, it is recommended to use the amount of soil conditioner 2 250 kg·hm^-2 + organic fertilizer 7 500 kg·hm^-2.

Key words: tea yield, organic fertilizer, heavy metals, soil fertility

CLC Number:

S158

ZHANG Weiling, GE Furong, XU Jinggao, ZHENG Xuqian, YE Zhengqian. Study on the effect of soil conditioner combined with organic fertilizer on soil fertility and tea safety production in tea garden[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(9): 2069-2074.

Figures/Tables 7

References 21

[1]	苏有健, 王烨军, 张永利, 等. 茶园土壤酸化阻控与改良技术[J]. 中国茶叶, 2018, 40(3): 9-11, 15.
[2]	张帅, 户杉杉, 潘荣艺, 等. 茶园土壤酸化研究进展[J]. 茶叶, 2019, 45(1): 17-23.
[3]	刘嘉裕, 唐颢, 黎健龙, 等. 广东茶区茶园施肥现状及发展趋势[J]. 广东茶业, 2019(5): 2-6.
[4]	林祚棋. 不同用量土壤调理剂对包菜产量、土壤理化性状及重金属含量的影响[J]. 东南园艺, 2021, 9(3): 11-14.
[5]	许玲玲, 翁凌, 章骞, 等. 牡蛎壳土壤调理剂对春桃番茄产量与品质的改善效果[J]. 集美大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 27(1): 37-44.
[6]	索琳娜, 马杰, 刘宝存, 等. 土壤调理剂应用现状及施用风险研究[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2021, 40(6): 1141-1149.
[7]	傅平. 特贝钙土壤调理剂对茄子产量、重金属含量及土壤改良的效果[J]. 东南园艺, 2020, 8(5): 7-12.
[8]	陈勇红. 特贝钙土壤调理剂在南方红壤区蔬菜上的应用效果[J]. 东南园艺, 2019, 7(4): 1-5.
[9]	许玲玲, 章骞, 王永明, 等. 煅烧牡蛎壳粉对土壤酸化及玉菇甜瓜品质的改良效果[J]. 集美大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 25(5): 336-343.
[10]	叶昆, 吴卫红, 姚志通, 等. 煅烧牡蛎壳粉对水体中Pb²⁺和Cd²⁺的吸附研究[J]. 杭州电子科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 38(5): 72-78.
[11]	肖庆礼, 陈昆燕, 代先强, 等. 牛粪有机肥对植烟黄壤理化性质及持水能力的影响[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2020, 26(2): 57-64.
[12]	李贵松, 吴林土, 徐火忠, 等. 不同微生物菌肥及用量对茶园土壤和茶叶品质的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(5): 1208-1214.
[13]	姚明谨, 陈恩海, 彭东海. 虾肽有机肥对茶叶生长、品质和土壤肥力的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2024, 52(7): 143-148.
[14]	连娜娜, 邱瑞瑾, 黄丽蕴, 等. 浅耕和施肥对茶叶产量、品质及土壤肥力的影响[J]. 茶叶, 2024, 50(1): 6-10.
[15]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[16]	颜墩炜, 黄强, 陈海玲, 等. 牡蛎壳粉土壤调理剂对土壤理化性质及小白菜农艺性状和品质的影响[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2023, 36(7): 88-94.
[17]	郭龙, 李陈, 刘佩诗, 等. 牛粪有机肥替代化肥对茶叶产量、品质及茶园土壤肥力的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(6): 264-269.
[18]	何京, 王津军, 尹兴盛, 等. 深耕配施有机肥对云南保山植烟土壤肥力的快速提升效应[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2022, 43(1): 27-34.
[19]	刘寒双, 崔纪菡, 刘猛, 等. 有机肥替代部分化肥对谷子产量、土壤养分及酶活性的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(7): 71-81.
[20]	樊战辉, 唐小军, 郑丹, 等. 茶园土壤酸化成因及改良措施研究和展望[J]. 茶叶科学, 2020, 40(1): 15-25.
[21]	娄飞, 付天岭, 代良羽, 等. 不同土壤调理剂对黔中地区水稻Cd积累转运和产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(7): 1493-1501.

处理	土壤调理剂施用量/ (kg·hm^-2)	有机肥施用量/ (kg·hm^-2)
CK	0	0
TY1	750	3 750
TY2	750	7 500
TY3	1 500	3 750
TY4	1 500	7 500
TY5	2 250	3 750
TY6	2 250	7 500

处理	土壤调理剂施用量/ (kg·hm^-2)	有机肥施用量/ (kg·hm^-2)
CK	0	0
TY1	750	3 750
TY2	750	7 500
TY3	1 500	3 750
TY4	1 500	7 500
TY5	2 250	3 750
TY6	2 250	7 500

处理	pH值	有效磷含量/ (mg·kg^-1)	速效钾含量/ (mg·kg^-1)	有机质含量/ (g·kg^-1)	碱解氮含量/ (mg·kg^-1)
CK	4.39±0.59 b	83.81±5.4 c	118.33±16.4 b	39.47±4.6 c	171.50±1.7 c
TY1	4.40±0.24 b	106.21±7.4 b	130.66±11.0 b	52.38±7.2 b	189.45±15.3 c
TY2	4.64±0.54 a	116.66±22.9 ab	125.66±11.9 b	63.40±11.0 a	212.63±17.0 ab
TY3	4.70±0.33 a	105.35±19.0 c	120.33±14.7 b	52.60±5.6 b	204.40±27.9 b
TY4	4.60±0.16 a	108.47±25.8 b	141.00±10.5 a	68.71±7.7 a	209.39±6.1 b
TY5	4.59±0.17 b	121.19±9.8 b	160.33±12.7 a	52.50±8.8 b	202.16±28.8 b
TY6	4.53±0.16 b	135.59±19.9 a	156.33±13.2 a	62.21±10.8 a	234.07±10.0 a

处理	pH值	有效磷含量/ (mg·kg^-1)	速效钾含量/ (mg·kg^-1)	有机质含量/ (g·kg^-1)	碱解氮含量/ (mg·kg^-1)
CK	4.39±0.59 b	83.81±5.4 c	118.33±16.4 b	39.47±4.6 c	171.50±1.7 c
TY1	4.40±0.24 b	106.21±7.4 b	130.66±11.0 b	52.38±7.2 b	189.45±15.3 c
TY2	4.64±0.54 a	116.66±22.9 ab	125.66±11.9 b	63.40±11.0 a	212.63±17.0 ab
TY3	4.70±0.33 a	105.35±19.0 c	120.33±14.7 b	52.60±5.6 b	204.40±27.9 b
TY4	4.60±0.16 a	108.47±25.8 b	141.00±10.5 a	68.71±7.7 a	209.39±6.1 b
TY5	4.59±0.17 b	121.19±9.8 b	160.33±12.7 a	52.50±8.8 b	202.16±28.8 b
TY6	4.53±0.16 b	135.59±19.9 a	156.33±13.2 a	62.21±10.8 a	234.07±10.0 a

处理	铅含量	镉含量	铬含量	砷含量	汞含量
CK	84.2±30.3 a	0.11±0.05 a	24.9±2.5 a	6.7±0.4 a	0.60±0.2 a
TY1	59.1±29.9 b	0.10±0 a	18.6±1.0 a	5.4±0.3 a	0.32±0 b
TY2	57.9±30.1 b	0.09±0 a	21.3±1.3 a	5.6±0.7 a	0.23±0.1 b
TY3	51.6±10.8 b	0.07±0 a	19.8±1.8 a	5.8±1.0 a	0.16±0 c
TY4	49.5±8.2 bc	0.07±0 a	16.2±1.5 a	5.1±0.1 a	0.15±0 c
TY5	41.1±3.4 c	0.07±0 a	12.9±3.1 b	4.4±0.7 b	0.14±0 c
TY6	39.9±7.2 c	—	19.8±1.8 a	5.2±0.2 a	0.18±0 bc