秸秆/生物质炭协同还田措施对黄河三角洲盐碱土壤的改良效果研究

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2023.01.010

生态环境学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (1): 90-98.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2023.01.010

秸秆/生物质炭协同还田措施对黄河三角洲盐碱土壤的改良效果研究

王洁(), 单燕, 马兰, 宋延静, 王向誉^*

山东省蚕业研究所，山东烟台 264000

收稿日期:2022-05-23 出版日期:2023-01-18 发布日期:2023-04-06
通讯作者: *
作者简介:王洁（1988年生），女，助理研究员，博士，主要研究方向为农业废弃物资源化利用。E-mail: m190511@126.com
基金资助:
山东省自然科学基金青年基金项目(ZR2021QD145);山东省农业科学院农业科技创新工程滨海盐碱地绿色开发技术(CXGC2022E19);国家重点研发计划项目(2021YFD1900903)

Effects of Straw and Biochar Synergistic Returning on the Improvement of Salt-affected Soil in the Yellow River Delta

WANG Jie(), SHAN Yan, MA Lan, SONG Yanjing, WANG Xiangyu^*

Shandong Institute of Sericulture, Yantai 264000, P. R. China

Received:2022-05-23 Online:2023-01-18 Published:2023-04-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

以黄河三角洲典型滨海盐碱土壤为对象，研究秸秆直接还田与炭化还田措施对其作用效果，筛选最佳配比，为实践推广奠定理论基础。设置6种不同处理，分别为T1（100%秸秆）、T2（75%秸秆+25%制炭）、T3（50%秸秆+50%制炭）、T4（25%秸秆+75%制炭）、T5（100%制炭）及CK（空白对照）。在120 d室内培养条件下，分析土壤基本理化性质、养分含量、水溶性盐基离子组成及土壤微生物多样性等指标的变化。结果表明，（1）秸秆降低土壤中可溶性氮浓度，培养过程增加其释放，T1—T5和CK较培养第1天的含量分别增加250.51%、81.21%、18.19%、32.77%、67.55%、64.20%。（2）秸秆增加磷酸盐质量浓度，培养过程增强磷酸盐的固持，T1最低，为0.99 mg·L^-1。（3）土壤中水溶性钠离子质量浓度在培养过程中持续下降，实验结束时，T3处理最低（356.80 mg·L^-1）。相反，水溶性钾离子的浓度不断上升，并随生物质炭添加量增加而增加。当秸秆直接还田与制炭比高于1:1配施时，土壤中的水溶性钙、镁离子含量基本呈现下降趋势；而当秸秆制炭量占优时，则与之相反。（4）秸秆和生物质炭均可增加土壤初始有机质含量，且秸秆强化土壤呼吸速率。（5）秸秆和生物质炭降低优势菌门变形菌门（Proteobacteria）和放线菌门（Actinobacteria）相对丰富度，土壤微生物多样性与离子组成及电导率关系密切，pH、可溶性氮、磷、钾含量对其没有显著影响。综上可知，不同秸秆和生物质炭配施影响土壤理化性质、离子组成及土壤微生物多样性，T3处理最佳，此处理下可显著降低土壤盐分和水溶性钠离子含量，缓解土壤盐胁迫，同时降低氮、磷的淋失风险，有利于土壤肥力保持。

关键词: 黄河三角洲, 秸秆, 生物质炭, 盐碱耕地改良, 养分, 微生物多样性

Abstract:

We investigated the alleviation of salt-affected soil in the coastal regions of the Yellow River Delta, China, using different combinations of maize straw and biochar. The soil samples were treated for 120 days under laboratory conditions to optimize the straw and biochar combination, which would form a theoretical foundation for field application. The experiment involved six treatment conditions (T1-T5 and CK): 100% straw, 75% straw+25% biochar, 50% straw+50% biochar, 25% straw+75% biochar, 100% biochar and CK. At the end of 120 days, parameters such as changes in soil physical and chemical properties, nutrient content, soluble ion composition and soil microbial diversity were analyzed. The results showed that (1) maize straw decreased the concentration of soluble nitrogen. The release of soluble nitrogen was enhanced during incubation, and soluble nitrogen of T1-T5 and CK in the end increased by 250.51%, 81.21%, 18.19%, 32.77%, 67.55%, 64.20%, respectively, compared with the initial. (2) Maize straw increased the phosphate content of the soil. The fixation of phosphate was enhanced during incubation, and the lowest concentration was 0.99 mg·L^-1 at T1. (3) Soluble sodium decreased through the whole incubation. T3 resulted in the maximum reduction of sodium in the soil, which was 356.80 mg·L^-1. In contrast, an increase in potassium content during incubation was observed, with the maximum potassium content observed in the treatment with increased biochar addition. When the ratio of straw to biochar was >1:1, a decrease in soluble calcium and magnesium content in the soil was observed. However, with an increase in biochar treatment, an increase in calcium and magnesium content in the soil was observed. (4) Both straw and biochar increased the initial organic matter of the soil; maize straw addition enhanced the soil respiration rate. (5) Straw and biochar decreased the relative abundance of Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria. Soil microbial diversity was closely related to ion composition and electrical conductivity. However, pH, soluble nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium had no significant effect on microbial diversity. In conclusion, the combined application of straw and biochar affected soil physical and chemical properties, ion composition and soil microbial diversity. Furthermore, T3 performed the best. The content of salt and soluble sodium in the soil reduced significantly, indicating alleviated salt stress. Our results indicate that optimal combination of maize straw and biochar effectively alleviated salt stress, reduced the risk of nitrogen and phosphorus leaching and helped maintain soil fertility.

Key words: Yellow River Delta, straw, biochar, salt-affected soil, nutrients, microbial diversity

中图分类号:

S156
X144

王洁, 单燕, 马兰, 宋延静, 王向誉. 秸秆/生物质炭协同还田措施对黄河三角洲盐碱土壤的改良效果研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(1): 90-98.

WANG Jie, SHAN Yan, MA Lan, SONG Yanjing, WANG Xiangyu. Effects of Straw and Biochar Synergistic Returning on the Improvement of Salt-affected Soil in the Yellow River Delta[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2023, 32(1): 90-98.

图/表 8

表1 土壤及生物炭的理化性质

Table 1 Basic physical and chemical properties of soil and biochar

供试材料	pH	电导率/ (dS·m^-1)	w_{(水溶性物质)}/(mg·kg^-1)
供试材料	pH	电导率/ (dS·m^-1)	N	P	Na	K	Ca	Mg
土壤	7.60	2.07	66.5	4.5	1905.3	140.9	202.2	177.1
秸秆生物质炭	7.63	10.63	16.4	2286.5	25.6	1457.5	未检出	13.4

表2 土壤培养处理

Table 2 Incubation treatment of soil

编号	处理	详细添加量
T1	100%秸秆	2 g秸秆
T2	75%秸秆+25%制炭	1.5 g秸秆+0.125 g生物质炭
T3	50%秸秆+50%制炭	1.0 g秸秆+0.5 g生物质炭
T4	25%秸秆+75%制炭	0.5 g秸秆+0.375 g生物质炭
T5	100%制炭	0.5 g 生物质炭
CK	空白对照	无添加

图1 土壤电导率及pH的变化

Figure 1 Varieties of soil EC and pH

图2 土壤中可溶性硝态氮及磷酸盐质量浓度的变化

Figure 2 Varieties of soluble nitrogen and phosphate in the soil

图3 土壤呼吸速率及培养前后土壤有机质质量分数变化

Figure 3 Varieties of soil respiration rate and organic matter before and after the incubation

图4 土壤溶液离子组成及钠吸附比值（Rsa）的变化

Figure 4 Varieties of iron composition and ratio of sodium adsorption (Rsa) in the soil

图5 不同处理下土壤微生物门水平的细菌群落组成 Other表示相对丰度<1%的所有菌门

Figure 5 Relative abundance of bacteria community phylum levels with different treatments

图6 环境因子与门水平上微生物种群相关性的Heatmap图 *0.05<P<0.1, **0.001<P<0.05

Figure 6 Heatmap of correlation between environmental factors and bacteria community on phylum levels

参考文献 31

[1]	AKHTAR S S, ANDERSEN M N, LIU F, 2015. Biochar mitigates salinity stress in potato[J]. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 201(5): 368-378. DOI URL
[2]	BOURRIE G, 2014. Swelling clays and salt-affected soils: demixing of Na/Ca clays as the rationale for discouraging the use of sodium adsorption ratio (SAR)[J]. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science, 3(4): 245-253.
[3]	COLANTONI A, EVIC N, LORD R, et al., 2016. Characterization of biochars produced from pyrolysis of pelletized agricultural residues[J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 64: 187-194. DOI URL
[4]	CORWIN D L, YEMOTO K, 2017. Salinity: Electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids[J]. Methods of Soil Analysis, 2: 1-16.
[5]	FIERER N, LAUBER C L, RAMIREZ K S, et al., 2012. Comparative metagenomic, phylogenetic and physiological analyses of soil microbial communities across nitrogen gradients[J]. The ISME Journal, 6(5): 1007-1017. DOI
[6]	GÉRARD F, 2016. Clay minerals, iron/aluminum oxides, and their contribution to phosphate sorption in soils—A myth revisited[J]. Geoderma, 262: 213-226. DOI URL
[7]	KHAN R U, KHAN M Z, KHAN A, et al., 2018. Effect of humic acid on growth and crop nutrient status of wheat on two different soils[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 41(4): 453-460. DOI URL
[8]	PETROV D, TUNEGA D, GERZABEK M H, et al., 2017. Molecular dynamics simulations of the standard leonardite humic acid: Microscopic analysis of the structure and dynamics[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 51(10): 5414-5424. DOI PMID
[9]	REN Y, YU G, SHI C, et al., 2022. Majorbio cloud: A one-stop, comprehensive bioinformatic platform for multiomics analyses[J]. iMeta, 1(2): e12.
[10]	SEILSEPOUR M, RASHIDI M, KHABBAZ B G, 2009. Prediction of soil exchangeable sodium percentage based on soil sodium adsorption ratio[J]. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 5(1): 1-4.
[11]	ZAMAN M, SHAHID S A, HENG L, 2018. Guideline for salinity assessment, mitigation and adaptation using nuclear and related techniques[M]. Cham: Springer International Publishing:5-13.
[12]	SHAYGAN M, READING L P, BAUMGARTL T, 2017. Effect of physical amendments on salt leaching characteristics for reclamation[J]. Geoderma, 292: 96-110. DOI URL
[13]	SRIVASTAVA P K, GUPTA M, SINGH N, et al., 2016. Amelioration of sodic soil for wheat cultivation using bioaugmented organic soil amendment[J]. Land Degradation and Development, 27(4): 1245-1254. DOI URL
[14]	鲍士旦, 2000. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社.
	BAO S D, 2000. Soil agrochemical analysis[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press.
[15]	韩若冰, 2015. 山东棉花生产的衰退与应对战略研究[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学:24-25.
	HAN R B, 2015. Study on the difficulties of cotton production Recession in Shandong province and the coping strategies[D]. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University:24-25.
[16]	何甜甜, 王静, 符云鹏, 等, 2021. 等碳量添加秸秆和生物炭对土壤呼吸及微生物生物量碳氮的影响[J]. 环境科学, 42(1): 450-458.
	HE T T, WANG J. FU Y P, et al., 2021. Effects of adding straw and biochar with equal carbon content on soil respiration and microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen[J]. Environmental Science, 42(1): 450-458. DOI URL
[17]	姜焕焕, 2019. 耐盐碱解磷菌与磷石膏联用改良盐碱土的效果与机制[D]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工业大学:45-46.
	JIANG H H, 2019. Saline-alkali soil remediation by the combined application of halotolerant phosphate solubilizing microorganism and rock phosphate[D]. Harbin: Harbin Institute of Technology: 45-46.
[18]	李培培, 仝昊天, 韩燕来, 等, 2019. 秸秆直接还田与炭化还田对潮土硝化微生物的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 56(6): 1471-1481.
	LI P P, TONG H T, HAN Y L, et al., 2019. Effect of straw return, directly or as biochar, on nitrifying microbes in fluvo-aquic soil[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 56(6): 1471-1481.
[19]	刘赛男, 高尚, 程效义, 等, 2019. 玉米秸秆生物炭对秸秆腐熟进程、养分含量和CO₂排放量的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 30(4): 1312-1318.
	LIU S N, GAO S, CHENG X Y, et al., 2019. Effects of corn straw biochar on process, nutrient content, and CO₂ emissions of corn straw decomposition[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 30(4): 1312-1318.
[20]	刘晓永, 2018. 中国农业生产中的养分平衡与需求研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院.
	LIU X Y, 2018. Study on nutrients balance and requirement in agricultural production in China[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences.
[21]	孟春梅, 王开勇, 樊华, 等, 2020. 棉粕对盐碱环境下土壤微生物多样性及土壤结构的影响[J]. 土壤, 52(1): 207-212.
	MENG C M, WANG K Y, FAN H, et al., 2020. An effects of cottonseed on soil microbial diversity and soil structure under saline-alkali environment[J]. Soils, 52(1): 207-212.
[22]	陶漉, 马东豪, 张丛志, 等, 2021. 石灰性土壤团聚体中钙形态特征及其与有机碳含量的关系[J]. 土壤, 53(4): 715-722.
	TAO L, MA D H, ZHANG C Z, et al., 2021. Distribution characteristics of calcium forms and their relations with organic carbon content in calcareous soil aggregates[J]. Soils, 53(4): 715-722.
[23]	田胜营, 李慧敏, 陈金林, 等, 2021. 潮土中残留小麦和玉米秸秆养分含量差异及与微生物群落组成的关系[J]. 土壤, 53(1): 55-63.
	TIAN S Y, LI H M, CHEN J L, et al., 2021. Differences of nutrient contents in residual wheat and maize straws and their relationship with microbial community composition in fluvo-aquic soil[J]. Soils, 53(1): 55-63.
[24]	欧阳竹, 王竑晟, 来剑斌, 等, 2020. 黄河三角洲农业高质量发展新模式[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 35(2): 145-153.
	OUYANG Z, WANG H S, LAI J B, et al., 2020. New approach of high-quality agricultural development in the Yellow River Delta[J]. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 35(2): 145-153.
[25]	王德领, 2017. 不同改良材料对滨海盐碱土理化性质及盆栽玉米产量的影响[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学:30-35.
	WANG D L, 2017. Effect of different modified materials on physical and chemical properties of coastal saline soil and potted maize yield[D]. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University:30-35.
[26]	王伏伟, 王晓波, 李金才, 等, 2015. 施肥及秸秆还田对砂姜黑土细菌群落的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 23(10): 1302-1311.
	WANG F W, WANG X B, LI J C, et al., 2015. Effects of fertilization and straw incorporation on bacterial communities in lime concretion black soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 23(10): 1302-1311.
[27]	王融融, 余海龙, 李诗瑶, 等, 2022. 干湿交替对土壤呼吸和土壤有机碳矿化的影响述评[J]. 水土保持研究, 29(1): 78-85.
	WANG R R, YU H L, LI S Y, et al., 2022. Review on the effects of soil alternate drying-rewetting cycle on soil respiration and soil organic carbon mineralization[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 29(1): 78-85.
[28]	伍玉鹏, 刘田, 彭其安, 等, 2014. 氮肥配施下不同C/N作物残渣还田对红壤温室气体排放的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 33(10): 2053-2062.
	WU Y P, LIU T, PENG Q A, et al., 2014. Greenhouse gas emissions in red soil as influenced by different C/N residues under nitrogen applications[J]. Journal of Agro-environment Science, 33(10): 2053-2062.
[29]	杨赛, 俞冰倩, 胡信玉, 等, 2019. 东北苏打盐碱土壤微生物群落对植被进展演替的响应[J]. 土壤通报, 50(3): 632-640.
	YANG S, YU B Q, HU X Y, et al., 2019. Response of microbial community to vegetation succession in soda saline-alkali soil in northeast China[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 50(3): 632-640.
[30]	郑海睿, 骆静梅, 刘笑彤, 等, 2019. 秸秆还田量对植物寄生线虫群落的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 38(6): 1725-1731.
	ZHENG H R, LUO J M, LIU X T, 2019. Effects of the amount of corn stover return on plant-parasitic nematode communities[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 38(6): 1725-1731.
[31]	朱晶, 张巳奇, 冉成, 等, 2021. 秸秆还田对松嫩平原西部苏打盐碱地稻田土壤养分及产量的影响[J]. 东北农业科学, 46(1): 42-46.
	ZHU J, ZHANG S Q, RAN C, et al., 2021. Effects of straw returning on soil nutrient and yield of paddy field in soda saline-alkali soil in the west of Songnen Plain[J]. Journal of Northeast Agricultural Sciences, 46(1): 42-46.

秸秆/生物质炭协同还田措施对黄河三角洲盐碱土壤的改良效果研究

Effects of Straw and Biochar Synergistic Returning on the Improvement of Salt-affected Soil in the Yellow River Delta

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	陈俊芳, 吴宪, 刘啸林, 刘娟, 杨佳绒, 刘宇. 不同土壤水分下元素化学计量对微生物多样性的塑造特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 898-909.
[2]	董智今, 张呈春, 展秀丽, 张维福. 宁夏河东沙地生物土壤结皮及其下伏土壤养分的空间分布特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 910-919.
[3]	潘昱伶, 璩向宁, 李琴, 王磊, 王筱平, 谭鹏, 崔庚, 安雨, 佟守正. 黄河宁夏段典型滩涂湿地土壤理化因子空间分布特征及其对微地形的响应[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 668-677.
[4]	代德敏, 蒋旭升, 刘杰, 王路洋, 陈诗奇, 韩庆坤. 3种有机改良剂对铅锌矿尾砂适生性改善的研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 784-793.
[5]	张贝儿, 吴建强, 王敏, 熊丽君, 谭娟, 沈城, 黄波涛, 黄沈发. 耕地生态保育工程的土壤健康度评价方法初探[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(2): 388-396.
[6]	徐敏, 许超, 余光辉, 尹力初, 张泉, 朱捍华, 朱奇宏, 张杨珠, 黄道友. 地下水位和长期秸秆还田对土壤镉有效性及稻米镉含量的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(1): 150-157.
[7]	黄伟佳, 刘春, 刘岳, 黄斌, 李定强, 袁再健. 南岭山地不同海拔土壤生态化学计量特征及影响因素[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(1): 80-89.
[8]	花莉, 成涛之, 梁智勇. 固定化混合菌对陕北黄土地区石油污染土壤的修复效果[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(8): 1610-1615.
[9]	夏恩龙, 农珺清, 魏松坡, 刘希珍, 刘广路. 毛竹向阔叶林扩展过程中土壤养分变化特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(6): 1110-1117.
[10]	王英成, 姚世庭, 金鑫, 俞文政, 芦光新, 王军邦. 三江源区高寒退化草甸土壤细菌多样性的对比研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(4): 695-703.
[11]	邓晓, 武春媛, 杨桂生, 李怡, 李勤奋. 椰壳生物炭对海南滨海土壤的改良效果[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(4): 723-731.
[12]	宋秀丽, 黄瑞龙, 柯彩杰, 黄蔚, 章武, 陶波. 不同种植方式对连作土壤细菌群落结构和多样性的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(3): 487-496.
[13]	李光炫, 石岸, 张黎明, 邢世和, 杨文浩. 不同粒径生物质炭对土壤重金属钝化及细菌群落的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(3): 583-592.
[14]	龙靖, 黄耀, 刘占锋, 简曙光, 魏丽萍, 王俊. 西沙热带珊瑚岛典型乔木叶片性状和养分再吸收特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(2): 248-256.
[15]	黄巧义, 于俊红, 黄建凤, 黄旭, 李苹, 付弘婷, 唐拴虎, 刘一锋, 徐培智. 广东省主要农作物秸秆养分资源量及替代化肥潜力[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(2): 297-306.