生物质炭施用下灌溉农田土壤团聚体稳定性及分型特征

杨卫君; 惠超; 陈雨欣; 宋世龙; 杨梅; 郭颂

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.039

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

生物质炭施用下灌溉农田土壤团聚体稳定性及分型特征

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 生物质炭施用下灌溉农田土壤团聚体稳定性及分型特征
- Stability and Fractal Features of Soil Aggregate in Irrigated Farmland Under Biochar Application
- 水土保持学报 2022年36卷第6期页码：323-329
- 作者机构：
  
  新疆农业大学农学院,乌鲁木齐,830052
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  新疆维吾尔自治区自然科学基金面上项目(2021D01A87)
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.039
  中图分类号： S152.4
- 纸质出版：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
杨卫君, 惠超, 陈雨欣, 等. 生物质炭施用下灌溉农田土壤团聚体稳定性及分型特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(6):323-329.

YANG Weijun, HUI Chao, CHEN Yuxin, et al. Stability and Fractal Features of Soil Aggregate in Irrigated Farmland Under Biochar Application[J]. 2022, 36(6): 323-329.
杨卫君, 惠超, 陈雨欣, 等. 生物质炭施用下灌溉农田土壤团聚体稳定性及分型特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(6):323-329. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.039.

YANG Weijun, HUI Chao, CHEN Yuxin, et al. Stability and Fractal Features of Soil Aggregate in Irrigated Farmland Under Biochar Application[J]. 2022, 36(6): 323-329. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.039.

摘要

试验研究了不同筛分方法下生物质炭施用对土壤团聚体的影响

为生物质炭农业利用提供理论依据。设置生物质炭用量4个水平(0

30 t/hm2)

氮肥用量2个水平(0

150 kg/hm2)

通过2年田间定位试验

测定分析干筛法和湿筛法0—30 cm土层土壤团聚体分布及稳定性。结果表明:2种筛分方式下

不同处理各粒级土壤团聚体分布趋势基本一致

干筛法所得机械土壤团聚体主要以＞5

2~5 0.5~1 mm粒级为主

而湿筛法水稳性团聚体均以0.25~0.5 mm及＜0.25 mm为主;不同处理干筛法土壤团聚体平均重量直径(MWD)、几何平均直径(GMD)均高于湿筛法。湿筛法下各处理

无论施氮与否

MWD、GMD均随生物质炭量增加而增大。其中

B0N0处理MWD、GMD最小

单施生物质炭B3N0处理土壤团聚体直径最大

分别较B0N0显著提高60%(MWD)和52%(GMD);各处理土壤团聚体破坏率(PAD)随生物质炭量增加而减小

土壤团聚体稳定率(WASR)则随生物质炭量增加呈上升趋势;干筛法各处理分形维数(D)均低于湿筛法

随生物质炭量增加D值不断降低

B3生物质炭量下分形维数最低

分别为2.63(B3N0)和2.64(B3N1)

分别较对照降低3.3%和2.9%;分形维数(D)与＞0.25 mm土壤团聚体含量(R＞0.25)呈显著负相关关系。试验条件下

生物质炭添加量为30 t/hm2时土壤团聚体稳定性最佳。同时

湿筛法较干筛法能更好地模拟大田环境

真实反映土壤团聚体分布及其稳定性。

Abstract

The effects of biochar application on soil aggregates under different sieving methods were studied experimentally to provide a theoretical basis for the agricultural utilization of biochar. Four levels of biochar dosage (0

20 and 30 t/hm2) and two levels of nitrogen fertilizer dosage (0 and 150 kg/hm2) were set up in the experiment. Through two-year field positioning test

the distribution and stability of soil aggregates in 0—30 cm soil layer were measured and analyzed by dry sieving method and wet sieving method. The results showed that under the two sieving methods

the distribution trends of soil aggregates of each particle size in different treatments were basically the same. The mechanical soil aggregates obtained by the dry sieving method were mainly of ＞5 mm

2~5 mm and 0.5~1 mm

while the water-stable aggregates obtained by the wet sieving method were mainly of 0.25~0.5 mm and ＜0.25 mm. The mean weight diameter (MWD) and geometric mean diameter (GMD) of soil aggregates in the dry sieving method were higher than those in the wet sieving method. In all treatments under wet sieving method

whether nitrogen was applied or not

both MWD and GMD increased with the increasing of biochar content. Among them

the MWD and GMD of the B0N0 treatment were the smallest

and the diameter of the soil aggregates in B3N0 (single application of biochar) was the largest

which was significantly higher than that of B0N0 by 60% (MWD) and 52% (GMD)

respectively. The soil aggregate destruction rate (PAD) decreased with the increasing of biochar amount

while the soil aggregate stability rate (WASR) increased with the increasing of biochar amount. The fractal dimension (D) of each treatment in the dry sieving method was lower than that in the wet sieving method. The D value decreased continuously with the increasing of the biochar amount

and the fractal dimension of B3 biochar was the lowest

which were 2.63 (B3N0) and 2.64 (B3N1)

respectively

3.3% and 2.9% lower than that of the control. There was a significant negative correlation between the fractal dimension (D) and the content of soil aggregate larger than 0.25 mm (R＞0.25). Under the experimental conditions

the soil aggregate stability was the best when the amount of biochar was 30 t/hm2. At the same time

the wet sieving method could better simulate the field environment than the dry sieving method

and truly reflect the distribution and stability of soil aggregates.

关键词

Keywords

references

朱家琪,满秀玲,王飞.我国寒温带四种森林植被类型下土壤团聚体粒级组成及其稳定性比较研究[J].土壤通报,2020,51(3):606-613.

祁迎春,王益权,刘军,等.不同土地利用方式土壤团聚体组成及几种团聚体稳定性指标的比较[J].农业工程学报,2011,27(1):340-347.

朱秋丽,王纯,严锦华,等.施加秸秆与废弃物对茉莉园土壤团聚体及碳氮磷含量的影响[J].水土保持学报,2017,31(4):191-197.

姜敏,刘毅,刘闯,等.丹江口库区不同土地利用方式土壤团聚体稳定性及分形特征[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(6):265-270.

吴宪,张婷,王蕊,等.化肥减量配施有机肥和秸秆对华北潮土团聚体分布及稳定性的影响[J].生态环境学报,2020,29(5):933-941.

Hg A, Yla B, Sl A. Effects of the interaction between biochar and nutrients on soil organic carbon sequestration in soda saline-alkali grassland: A review[J].Global Ecology and Conservation,2021,26:e01449.

王清奎,汪思龙.土壤团聚体形成与稳定机制及影响因素[J].土壤通报,2005,36(3):415-421.

龙杰琦,姚婷,苗淑杰,等.生物炭对侵蚀黑土团聚体的影响[J].水土保持通报,2021,41(3):76-80.

史登林,王小利,段建军,等.氮肥减量配施生物炭对黄壤稻田土壤有机碳活性组分和矿化的影响[J].应用生态学报,2020,31(12):4117-4124.

乔丹丹,吴名宇,张倩,等.秸秆还田与生物炭施用对黄褐土团聚体稳定性及有机碳积累的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2018(3):92-99.

Peng X, Ye L L, Wang C H, et al. Temperature-and duration-dependent rice straw-derived biochar: Characteristics and its effects on soil properties of an Ultisol in southern China[J].Soil and Tillage Research,2011,112(2):159-166.

魏永霞,肖敬萍,王鹤,等.施加生物炭对黑土区坡耕地改土培肥效应的持续影响[J].农业机械学报,2021,52(3):305-314.

王亚琼,牛文全,李学凯,等.生物炭对日光大棚土壤团聚体结构的影响[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(4):190-195.

孙涛,孙约兵,贾宏涛,等.虾壳生物炭对Cd-As复合污染土壤修复效应及土壤可溶性有机碳含量的影响[J].农业环境科学学报,2021,40(8):1675-1685.

顾美英,刘洪亮,李志强,等.新疆连作棉田施用生物炭对土壤养分及微生物群落多样性的影响[J].中国农业科学,2014,47(20):4128-4138.

姬强.不同耕作措施和外源碳输入对土壤结构和有机碳库的影响[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2016.

郑子成,李廷轩,张锡洲,等.不同土地利用方式下土壤团聚体的组成及稳定性研究[J].水土保持学报,2009,104(5):228-231.

何玉亭,王昌全,沈杰,等.两种生物质炭对红壤团聚体结构稳定性和微生物群落的影响[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(12):2333-2342.

刘文利,吴景贵,傅民杰,等.种植年限对果园土壤团聚体分布与稳定性的影响[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(1):129-135.

Schaffer B, Attinger W, Schulin R. Compaction of restored soil by heavy agricultural machinery-soil physical and mechanical aspects[J].Soil and Tillage Research,2007,93(1):28-43.

谢钧宇,曹寒冰,孟会生,等.不同施肥措施及施肥年限下土壤团聚体的大小分布及其稳定性[J].水土保持学报,2020,168(3):274-281.

刘哲,张扬,雷娜,等.优化施肥方式对黄土高原新增耕地土壤有机质含量和团聚体特性的影响[J].水土保持通报,2021,41(5):99-106.

Schmidt M W I, Noack A G. Black carbon in soils and sediments: Analysis, distribution, implications, and current challenges[J].Global Biogeochemical Cycles,2000,14(3):777-793.

李娟,韩霁昌,陈超,等.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区土地利用方式对土壤团聚体特征的影响[J].水土保持学报,2017,31(1):248-253.

李伟,代镇,张光鑫,等.生物炭和氮肥配施提高土团聚体稳定性及作物产量[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2019,25(5):782-791.

王磊,应蓉蓉,石佳奇,等.土壤矿物对有机质的吸附与固定机制研究进展[J].土壤学报,2017,54(4):805-818.

Rengasamy P, Tavakkoli E, McDonald G K. Exchangeable cations and clay dispersion: Net dispersive charge, a new concept for dispersive soil[J].European Journal of Soil Science,2016,67(5):659-665.

Hu F, Xu C, Ma R,et al. Biochar application driven change in soil internal forces improves aggregate stability: Based on a two-year field study[J]. Geoderma,2021,403:e115276.

王博,刘扣珠,任天宝,等.减氮条件下生物炭对烤烟根系发育及土壤微生物群落的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2021(3):45-50.

Hao Z, Xiao W, Luo X, et al. Biochar-induced negative carbon mineralization priming effects in a coastal wetland soil:Roles of soil aggregation and microbial modulation[J].The Science of the Total Environment,2018,610:951-960.

Lehmann A, Rillig M C. Understanding mechanisms of soil biota involvement in soil aggregation: A way forward with saprobic fungi[J].Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2015,88:298-302.

吴林坤,林向民,林文雄.根系分泌物介导下植物-土壤-微生物互作关系研究进展与展望[J].植物生态学报,2014,38(3): 298-310.

李娜,韩晓增,尤孟阳,等.土壤团聚体与微生物相互作用研究[J].生态环境学报,2013,22(9):1625-1632.

王志强,刘英,杨文亭,等.稻田复种轮作休耕对土壤团聚体分布及稳定性的影响[J].土壤学报,2018,55(5):1143-1155.

浏览量

762

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

长期有机替代土壤团聚体及有机碳分布特征

秦岭水源地生态恢复下土壤全氮分布对侵蚀的响应

黄土高寒区典型小流域土壤团聚体稳定性及可蚀性空间变异特征

生物结皮对植被混凝土边坡土壤团聚体分布及稳定性的影响

常绿阔叶林土壤团聚体磷组分和有机碳化学分子结构对氮磷添加的响应