不同氮肥运筹模式对稻田田面水氮浓度和水稻产量的影响

金树权; 陈若霞; 汪峰; 姚红燕; 谌江华

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.01.035

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

不同氮肥运筹模式对稻田田面水氮浓度和水稻产量的影响

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 不同氮肥运筹模式对稻田田面水氮浓度和水稻产量的影响
- Effects of Different Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Modes on the Variation of Nitrogen Concentration in Paddy Field Surface Water and the Yield of Rice
- 水土保持学报 2020年34卷第1期页码：242-248
- 作者机构：
  
  宁波市农业科学研究院生态环境研究所,浙江,宁波,315040
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家重点研发计划项目（2016YFD0200800）
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.01.035
  中图分类号： S153.5
- 纸质出版：2020
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
金树权, 陈若霞, 汪峰, 等. 不同氮肥运筹模式对稻田田面水氮浓度和水稻产量的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020,34(1):242-248.

JIN Shuquan, CHEN Ruoxia, WANG Feng, et al. Effects of Different Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Modes on the Variation of Nitrogen Concentration in Paddy Field Surface Water and the Yield of Rice[J]. 2020, 34(1): 242-248.
金树权, 陈若霞, 汪峰, 等. 不同氮肥运筹模式对稻田田面水氮浓度和水稻产量的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020,34(1):242-248. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.01.035.

JIN Shuquan, CHEN Ruoxia, WANG Feng, et al. Effects of Different Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Modes on the Variation of Nitrogen Concentration in Paddy Field Surface Water and the Yield of Rice[J]. 2020, 34(1): 242-248. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.01.035.

摘要

通过构建包括不同氮肥类型、氮肥用量、施肥方式和施肥次数的6种氮肥运筹模式，分析了不同氮肥运筹模式对稻田田面水各形态氮浓度变化和水稻产量的影响。结果表明：不同时期施用缓控释肥和尿素后，总氮和铵态氮浓度均在1天达到峰值，硝态氮浓度在2~3天达到峰值，之后逐渐下降趋于稳定。铵态氮为各处理施肥后初期的主要氮形态，1天时铵态氮占总氮比例达50.6%~92.8%，而硝态氮仅占3.8%~22.6%。田面水总氮和铵态氮峰值浓度大小与氮肥类型、施用用量和施肥方式均存在相关性，等氮量施用条件下，田面水总氮和铵态氮峰值浓度大小顺序为撒施尿素处理 > 撒施缓控释肥处理 > 侧深施缓控释肥处理，在N施用量48 kg/hm2条件下，撒施尿素处理、撒施缓控释肥处理、侧深施缓控释肥处理的总氮和铵态氮平均峰值浓度分别为38.44，16.44，7.55 mg/L和34.39，13.00，3.82 mg/L。等氮施用量和相同施肥次数条件下，基肥采用侧深施缓控释肥的处理4，5，6比相应的撒施缓控释肥的处理1，2，3的产量分别提高2.8%，3.5%，2.7%。基肥采用侧深施缓控释肥和"-基-穗"2次施肥的处理6的水稻产量，在氮肥总施用量减少30%条件下，仅比基肥采用撒施缓控释肥和"-基-蘖-穗"3次施肥的处理1的水稻产量减少0.3%。侧深施缓控释肥可以有效降低施肥初期田面水铵态氮峰值浓度，从而减少氨挥发和降低径流流失风险，并在-定程度减量条件下不会对水稻产量产生影响。

Abstract

The effects of different nitrogen application modes on the variation of nitrogen concentrations in paddy field surface water and rice yield were analyzed

through constructing six nitrogen application modes with different fertilizer types

fertilizer amounts

fertilization modes and times. The results showed that after slow-controlled fertilization and urea application

the concentration of total nitrogen and ammonuim reached peak in 1 day

and the concentration of nitrate reached peak in 2~3 days

and then gradually decreased to a stable level. Ammonium nitrogen was the main form of nitrogen in the initial stage after fertilization

and the proportaion of ammonium nitrogen in total nitrogen concentration reached 50.6%~92.8% in 1 day

while nitrate nitrogen only accounted for 3.8%~22.6%. The peak concentration of total nitrogen and ammonium nitrogen in surface water was correlated with fertilizer type

fertilizer amount and fertilization mode. Under the condition of equal nitrogen fertilization

the order of peak concentration of total nitrogen and ammonium nitrogen in surface water was as follows:Spraying urea treatment > spraying slow-release fertilizer treatment > side-deep application of slow-release fertilizer treatment. Under 48 kg/hm2 N fertilization condition

the average peak concentrations of total nitrogen and ammonium nitrogen in the treatments of spraying urea

spraying slow-release fertilizer

and side-deep application of slow-release fertilizer were 38.44

16.44

7.55 mg/L

and 34.39

13.00 and 3.82 mg/L

respectively. Under the same amount of nitrogen application and times of fertilization

the yields of treatments 4

and 6 with side-deep slow-release fertilizer were 2.8%

3.5%

and 2.7% higher than those of treatments 1

2 and 3 with corresponding spraying slow-release fertilizer

respectively. Under the condition that the total amount of nitrogen fertilizer was reduced by 30%

the yield of rice of treatment 6 with side-deep application of slow-release fertilizer during base fertilizer period and two-times fertilization only decreased by 0.3% compared with that treatment 1 with spraying slow-release fertilizer during base fertilizer period and three-times fertilization. The results showed that side deep application of slow-release fertilizer could effectively reduce the peak concentration of ammonium nitrogen in surface water at the initial stage of fertilization

thus reducing the risk of ammonia volatilization and runoff loss

and would not affect rice yield under certain reduction conditions.

关键词

Keywords

references

Xiang C Y, Wang Y, Liu H W. A scientometrics review on nonpoint source pollution research[J]. Ecological Engineering,2017,99:400-408.

武淑霞,刘宏斌,刘申,等. 农业面源污染现状及防控技术[J].中国工程科学,2018,20(5):23-30.

张红举,陈方.太湖流域面源污染现状及控制途径[J].水资源保护,2010,26(3):87-90.

丁燕,杨宪龙,同延安,等.小麦-玉米轮作体系农田氮素淋失特征及氮素表观平衡[J].环境科学学报,2015,35(6):1914-1921.

Daniels M B, Sharpley A, Harmel R D, et al. The utilization of edge-of-field monitoring of agricultural runoff in addressing nonpoint source pollution[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,2018,73(1):1-8.

张智,王伟妮,李昆,等.四川省不同区域水稻氮肥施用效果研究[J].土壤学报,2015,52(1):234-241.

Fu J, Wu Y L, Wang Q H, et al. Importance of subsurface fluxes of water, nitrogen and phosphorus from rice paddy fields relative to surface runoff[J]. Agricultural Water Management,2019,213:627-635.

薛建福,濮超,张冉,等.农作措施对中国稻田氧化亚氮排放影响的研究进展[J].农业工程学报,2015,31(11):1-9.

Fu J, Wu Y L, Wang Q H, et al. Importance of subsurface fluxes of water, nitrogen and phosphorus from rice paddy fields relative to surface runoff[J]. Agricultural Water Management,2019,213(1):627-635.

斯林林,周静杰,吴良欢,等.生物炭配施缓控释肥对稻田田面水氮素动态变化及径流流失的影响[J].环境科学,2018,39(12):5383-5390.

张亦涛,王洪媛,刘申,等.氮肥农学效应与环境效应国际研究发展态势[J].生态学报,2015,36(15):4594-4608.

侯朋福,薛利祥,俞映倞,等.缓控释肥侧深施对稻田氨挥发排放的控制效果[J].环境科学,2017,38(12):5326-5332.

薛利红,俞映倞,杨林章.太湖流域稻田不同氮肥管理模式下的氮素平衡特征及环境效应评价[J].环境科学,2011,32(4):1133-1138.

王强,杨京平,陈俊,等.非完全淹水条件下稻田表面水体中三氮的动态变化特征研究[J].应用生态学报,2004,14(7):1182-1186.

俞映倞,薛利红,杨林章.太湖地区稻田不同氮肥管理模式下氨挥发特征研究[J].农业环境科学学报,2013,32(8):1682-1689.

马昕,杨艳明,刘智蕾,等.机械侧深施控释掺混肥提高寒地水稻的产量和效益[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2017,23(4):1095-1103.

鲁立明,陈少杰,蒋琪.侧深施肥技术对机插早稻产量的影响[J].中国稻米,2018,24(6):93-94.

国家环保总局.水和废水监测分析方法[M].4版.北京:中国环境科学出版社,2002.

叶玉适,梁新强,金熠,等.节水灌溉与控释肥施用对稻田田面水氮素变化及径流损失的影响[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(5):105-118.

Zhang S J, Wang L, Ma F, et al. Reducing nitrogen runoff from paddy fields with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi under different fertilizer regimes[J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2016,46:92-100.

Xu J Z, Peng S Z, Yang S H, et al. Ammonia volatilization losses from a rice paddy with different irrigation and nitrogen managements[J]. Agricultural Water Management,2012,104:184-192.

Huang N B, Sun B L, Li R R, et al. A field-scale observation method for non-point source pollution of paddy fields[J]. Agricultural Water Management,2014,146:305-313.

李忠芳,张水清,李慧,等.长期施肥下我国水稻土基础地力变化趋势[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2015,21(6):1394-1402.

Wei H Y, Chen Z F, Xing Z P, et al. Effects of slow or controlled release fertilizer types and fertilization modes on yield and quality of rice[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture,2018,17(10):2222-2234.

Pan S G, Wen X C, Wang Z M, et al. Benefits of mechanized deep placement of nitrogen fertilizer in direct-seeded rice in South China[J]. Field Crops Research,2017,203(1):139-149.

Ke J, He R C, Hou P F, et al. Combined controlled-released nitrogen fertilizers and deep placement effects of N leaching, rice yield and N recovery in machine-transplanted rice[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment,2018,265(1):402-412.

浏览量

1063

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

暂无数据