2016年以来广东省不同土地利用类型土壤pH和有机质时空变化及其影响因素分析

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.12.003

生态环境学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (12): 1849-1861.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.12.003

2016年以来广东省不同土地利用类型土壤pH和有机质时空变化及其影响因素分析

罗小玲¹(), 刘军¹, 王琦², 刘同旭², 梁耀杰¹, 谢志宜¹^,^*(), 王中伟¹, 陈多宏¹

1.广东省生态环境监测中心，广东广州 510308
2.广东省科学院生态环境与土壤研究所，广东广州 510650

收稿日期:2024-10-20 出版日期:2024-12-18 发布日期:2024-12-31
通讯作者: *谢志宜。E-mail: 86261961@qq.com
作者简介:罗小玲（1982年生），女，高级工程师，硕士，研究方向为土壤环境监测与评价。E-mail: 78086941@qq.com
基金资助:
广东省重点领域研发计划项目(2020B1111370001);广东省生态环境保护专项资金资助

Temporal and Spatial Changes in pH and Organic Matter and Their Influencing Factors in Soils with Various Land Use Types in Guangdong Province since 2016

LUO Xiaoling¹(), LIU Jun¹, WANG Qi², LIU Tongxu², LIANG Yaojie¹, XIE Zhiyi¹^,^*(), WANG Zhongwei¹, CHEN Duohong¹

1. Ecological environment Monitoring Center of Guangdong Province, Guangzhou, 510308, P. R. China
2. Institute of Eco-environmental and Soil Sciences, Guangdong Academyof Sciences, Guangzhou, 510650, P. R. China

Received:2024-10-20 Online:2024-12-18 Published:2024-12-31

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

土壤pH和有机质含量是评价土壤理化性质和保肥能力的重要指标。利用覆盖广东全省的定点监测数据，对2016年以来土壤pH和有机质含量变化及其影响因素进行分析。结果表明，2016－2018年时期全省土壤pH均值为5.41，不同土地利用类型均值排序为旱地>水田>园地≈林地；2021－2022年时期全省均值升高至5.46，不同土地利用类型均值排序不变，但水田均值升高0.12单位，林地均值下降0.14单位，均以粤北山区和珠三角局部地区波动最明显，旱地和园地均值变化不显著。2016－2018年时期全省土壤有机质含量均值为24.07 g∙kg⁻¹，不同土地利用类型均值排序为水田≈林地>园地≈旱地；2021－2022年时期全省均值降低至23.23 g∙kg⁻¹，不同土地利用类型均值排序变为水田>林地>旱地，园地与林地间或园地与旱地间差异不显著，其中水田和林地均值分别下降0.93 g∙kg⁻¹和3.84 g∙kg⁻¹，下降地区均集中在粤北山区，旱地和园地均值变化不显著。气象条件、土地利用类型和化肥施用是影响土壤pH和有机质含量的重要因素。适宜且稳定的温度和水分状况有利于减缓土壤酸化，促进有机质的积累。水田的保持有利于提高土壤pH、保有相对较高的有机质含量水平；与水田和旱地相比，林地土壤更易酸化且不利于有机质累积。化肥施用对旱地土壤pH的影响要高于水田，磷肥和钾肥的影响可能大于氮肥。

关键词: 广东, 土壤, pH, 有机质, 时空变化, 影响因素

Abstract:

Soil pH and organic matter content are important indicators for evaluating soil physicochemical properties and fertilizer retention capacity. To date, it remains poorly understood the temporal and spatial changes in pH and organic matter in the soils of Guangdong Province since 2016. In this study, changes in soil pH, organic matter content, and their influencing factors since 2016 were analyzed using fixed-point monitoring data from the entire Guangdong province. The results showed that the average value of soil pH was 5.41 for the whole province in 2016‒2018, with the average value of different land use types being ranked as follows: dry land>paddy field>garden land≈forest land. The average value of soil pH increased to 5.46 for the whole province during 2021‒2022, with the order of average values of different land use types being unchanged. Compared with the 2016‒2018 period, the average soil pH value of paddy field increased by 0.12 units while that of forest land decreased by 0.14 units during the 2021‒2022 period, with the most obvious fluctuations being observed in the mountainous areas of Northern Guangdong and some areas of the Pearl River Delta region. However, the average soil pH values did not change significantly in the dry or garden lands. The average soil organic matter was 24.07 g∙kg⁻¹ for the whole province in 2016‒2018, with the average value of different land use types ranked as follows: paddy field≈forest land>garden land≈dry land. The average value of soil organic matter decreased to 23.23 g∙kg⁻¹ for the entire province during 2021‒2022, with the order of average values of different land use types changing to paddy fields>forest land>dry land. There were no significant differences between garden and forest lands, or between garden and dry lands. Compared with the 2016‒2018 period, the average values of paddy field and forest land decreased by 0.93 g∙kg⁻¹ and 3.84 g∙kg⁻¹, respectively during the 2021‒2022 period, with the decreases being observed mainly in the mountainous areas of Northern Guangdong. However, the average values of soil organic matter did not change significantly in the dry and garden lands. Meteorological conditions, land use type, and fertilizer application are important factors that affect soil pH and organic matter content. Suitable and stable temperature and moisture conditions are conducive to slowing down soil acidification and promoting organic matter accumulation. The maintenance of paddy fields was conducive to improving the soil pH and maintaining a relatively high organic matter content. Compared to paddy fields and dry land, forest soils are more prone to acidification and are unfavorable for the accumulation of organic matter. The effect of chemical fertilizer application on soil pH was higher in dry land than in paddy fields, and the effects of phosphate and potassium fertilizers may be greater than those of nitrogen fertilizers.

Key words: Guangdong, soil, pH, organic matter, temporal and spatial changes, influencing factors

中图分类号:

S15
X144

罗小玲, 刘军, 王琦, 刘同旭, 梁耀杰, 谢志宜, 王中伟, 陈多宏. 2016年以来广东省不同土地利用类型土壤pH和有机质时空变化及其影响因素分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(12): 1849-1861.

LUO Xiaoling, LIU Jun, WANG Qi, LIU Tongxu, LIANG Yaojie, XIE Zhiyi, WANG Zhongwei, CHEN Duohong. Temporal and Spatial Changes in pH and Organic Matter and Their Influencing Factors in Soils with Various Land Use Types in Guangdong Province since 2016[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2024, 33(12): 1849-1861.

图/表 18

图1 广东省不同土地利用类型土壤监测点位分布基于广东省自然资源厅监制的审图号为粤S（2020）027号的地图制作；底图无修改。下同

Figure 1 Distribution of soil monitoring points of different land use types in Guangdong Province

表1 广东省不同土地利用类型土壤pH变化

Table 1 Soil pH changes of different land use types in Guangdong Province

统计范围	点位个数	时期	最小值	最大值	均值	标准差	均值变化量及其显著性
全省	2110	2016－2018	2.70	8.94	5.41	0.97	0.05
全省	2110	2021－2022	3.22	8.70	5.46	0.96	0.05
耕地 (水田)	867	2016－2018	2.70	8.56	5.40a	0.78	0.12^{** 2)}
耕地 (水田)	867	2021－2022	3.68	8.50	5.52A	0.77	0.12^{** 2)}
耕地 (旱地)	942	2016－2018	3.32	8.94	5.59b	1.11	0.03
耕地 (旱地)	942	2021－2022	3.22	8.70	5.62B	1.10	0.03
林地	173	2016－2018	3.86	7.51	4.80c	0.69	−0.14^*1)
林地	173	2021－2022	3.91	7.76	4.66C	0.59	−0.14^*1)
园地	53	2016－2018	3.68	7.16	4.96c	0.70	0.00
园地	53	2021－2022	3.78	7.43	4.96C	0.77	0.00
其他	75	2016－2018	3.85	8.40	4.86c	0.80	0.04
其他	75	2021－2022	3.90	8.20	4.90C	0.78	0.04

图2 广东省不同土地利用类型土壤pH分级对比及变化情况

Figure 2 Comparison and change of soil pH classification of different land use types in Guangdong Province

图3 广东省水田土壤pH 时空变化

Figure 3 Temporal and spatial changes of soil pH in paddy land in Guangdong Province

图4 广东省旱地土壤pH时空变化

Figure 4 Temporal and spatial changes of soil pH in dry land in Guangdong Province

图5 广东省林地土壤pH时空变化

Figure 5 Temporal and spatial changes of soil pH in forest land in Guangdong Province

表2 广东省不同土地利用类型土壤有机质质量分数变化

Table 2 Changes of soil organic matter content in different land use types in Guangdong Province

统计范围	点位个数	时期	最小值/(g∙kg⁻¹)	最大值/(g∙kg⁻¹)	均值/(g∙kg⁻¹)	标准差/(g∙kg⁻¹)	均值变化量及其显著性
全省	2110	2016－2018	1.22	94.40	24.07	11.78	−0.84
全省	2110	2021－2022	1.40	66.70	23.23	10.88	−0.84
耕地 (水田)	867	2016－2018	1.22	69.90	28.36a	11.98	−0.93^*
耕地 (水田)	867	2021－2022	3.00	64.70	27.43A	10.85	−0.93^*
耕地 (旱地)	942	2016－2018	1.54	94.40	20.10b	9.64	−0.55
耕地 (旱地)	942	2021－2022	1.40	66.00	19.55B	9.04	−0.55
林地	173	2016－2018	1.40	61.20	27.03a	13.33	−3.84^**
林地	173	2021－2022	1.46	56.50	23.20C	12.47	−3.84^**
园地	53	2016－2018	2.30	57.50	20.87b	9.59	−0.27
园地	53	2021－2022	2.38	43.80	20.60BC	8.96	−0.27
其他	75	2016－2018	3.11	76.50	19.83b	12.42	2.91
其他	75	2021－2022	3.80	66.70	22.74BC	12.49	2.91

图6 广东省不同土地利用类型土壤有机质含量分级对比及变化情况

Figure 6 Comparison and change of soil organic matter content in different land use types in Guangdong Province

图7 广东省水田土壤有机质含量时空变化

Figure 7 Temporal and spatial changes of soil organic matter content in paddy land in Guangdong Province

图8 广东省旱地土壤有机质含量时空变化

Figure 8 Temporal and spatial changes of soil organic matter content in dry land in Guangdong Province

图9 广东省林地土壤有机质含量时空变化

Figure 9 Temporal and spatial changes of soil organic matter content in forest land in Guangdong Province

表3 广东省2016－2018年时期气象条件与土壤主要理化指标相关性分析

Table 3 Correlation analysis between meteorological conditions and main physical and chemical indexes of soil in Guangdong Province from 2016 to 2018

2016－2018年土壤理化指标	2016年气象条件
2016－2018年土壤理化指标	年平均气温	年平均地面温度	年日照时数	年平均相对湿度	年降雨量	年降雨日数
pH	−0.147^{** 1)}	−0.174^**	−0.221^**	−0.236^**	0.155^**	0.195^**
有机质含量	−0.153^**	−0.146^**	−0.064^**	−0.082^**	0.051^{* 2)}	0.082^**

表4 广东省2021－2022年时期气象条件与土壤主要理化指标相关性分析

Table 4 Correlation analysis between meteorological conditions and main physical and chemical indexes of soil in Guangdong Province from 2021 to 2022

2021－2022年土壤理化指标	2021年气象条件
2021－2022年土壤理化指标	年平均气温	年平均地面温度	年日照时数	年平均相对湿度	年降雨量	年降雨日数
pH	−0.155^**	−0.169^**	−0.216^**	−0.176^**	0.029	0.038
有机质含量	−0.014	0.004	0.051^*	−0.100^**	−0.024	0.016

图10 粤东、西、北及珠三角代表城市主要年份气象条件差异

Figure 10 Differences of meteorological conditions in major years of representative cities in East, West, North

图11 粤东、西、北及珠三角代表城市土壤采样期间历年气象条件

Figure 11 Meteorological conditions over the years during soil sampling of representative cities in East, West, North of Guangdong and Pearl River Delta

表5 广东全省降水pH及酸雨频率变化

Table 5 Variation of precipitation pH and frequency of acid rain in Guangdong Province

时间	降水pH			酸雨频率/ %
时间	均值	最大值	最小值	酸雨频率/ %
2016年	5.64	7.97	3.17	26.5
2021年	5.96	8.74	4.03	10.7

表6 广东省水田和旱地土壤pH与单位面积化肥用量相关性

Table 6 Correlation between soil pH and chemical fertilizer application per unit area in paddy and dry land in Guangdong Province

时期		点位所属县域化肥用使用量/(t∙hm⁻²∙a⁻¹)
时期		氮肥	磷肥	钾肥	复合肥
水田土壤pH	2016－2018年	−0.071^{* 1)}	−0.086^*	−0.097^{** 2)}	−0.040
水田土壤pH	2021－2022年	0.034	−0.007	−0.002	0.021
旱地土壤pH	2016－2018年	0.056	0.007	0.012	0.080^*
旱地土壤pH	2021－2022年	0.020	0.018	0.018	0.000

表7 广东省水田和旱地土壤pH与县区化肥总用量相关性

Table 7 Correlation between soil pH and total amount of chemical fertilizer in paddy field and dry land in Guangdong Province

时期		点位所属县区年均化肥总用量/(t∙a⁻¹)
时期		氮肥	磷肥	钾肥	复合肥
水田土壤pH	2016－2018年	−0.115**	−0.115**	−0.112**	−0.060
水田土壤pH	2021－2022年	−0.061	−0.115**	−0.080*	−0.066
旱地土壤pH	2016－2018年	−0.291**	−0.358**	−0.337**	−0.229**
旱地土壤pH	2021－2022年	−0.201**	−0.286**	−0.208**	−0.169**

参考文献 36

[1]	BARAK P, JOBE B O, KRUEGER A R, et al., 1997. Effects of long-term soil acidification due to nitrogen fertilizer inputs in Wisconsin[J]. Plant and Soil, 197: 61-69.
[2]	HU K L, WANG S Y, LI H, et al., 2014. Spatial scaling effects on variability of soil organic matter and total nitrogen in suburban Beijing[J]. Geoderma, 226-227: 54-63.
[3]	LIU D W, WANG Z M, ZHANG B, et al., 2006. Spatial distribution of soil organic carbon and analysis of related factors in croplands of the black soil region, Northeast China[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 113(1-4): 73-81.
[4]	LI Q Q, LI A W, YU X L, et al., 2020. Soil acidification of the soil profile across Chengdu Plain of China from the 1980s to 2010s[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 698: 134320.
[5]	TIAN D S, NIU S L, 2015. A global analysis of soil acidification caused by nitrogen addition[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 10(2): 24-19.
[6]	WANG Z M, ZHANG B, SONG K S, et al., 2010. Spatial variability of soil organic carbon under maize monoculture in the Songnen Plain, Northeast China[J]. Pedosphere, 20(1): 80-89.
[7]	YANG Y H, JI C J, MA W H, et al., 2012. Significant soil acidification across northern China’s grasslands during 1980s-2000s[J]. Global Change Biology, 18(7): 2292-2300.
[8]	ZHU J X, HE N P, WANG Q F, et al., 2015. The composition, spatial patterns, and influencing factors of atmospheric wet nitrogen deposition in Chinese terrestrial ecosystems[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 511: 777-785.
[9]	ZHU Q C, VRIES W D, LIU X J, et al., 2016. The contribution of atmospheric deposition and forest harvesting to forest soil acidification in China since 1980[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 146: 215-222.
[10]	丁俊男, 于少鹏, 史传奇, 等, 2021. 寒区湿地不同土地利用方式对土壤理化性质和团聚体稳定性的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 40(11): 3543-3551.
	DING J N, YU S P, SHI C Q, et al., 2021. Effects of land use types on soil physicochemical properties and aggregates stability in cold region wetland[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 40(11): 3543-3551. DOI
[11]	广东省土壤普查办公室, 1993. 广东土壤[M]. 北京: 科学出版社.
	Guangdong Soil Census Office, 1993. Soil in Guangdong[M]. Beijing: Science Press.
[12]	国家环境保护局, 1992. 大气降水pH值的测定电极法: GB 13580.4-92[S/OL]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/image20010518/1883.pdf.
	State Bureau of Environment Pro-tection, 1992. Atmospheric precipitation-Determination of pH-Electrode method: GB 13580.4-92[S/OL]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/image20010518/1883.pdf.
[13]	国家林业局, 1999. 森林土壤pH值的测定: LY/T 1239—1999[S/OL]. https://www.cnemc.cn/jcgf/trhj/201711/P020181010541051823125.pdf.
	State Forestry Bureau, 1999. Determination of pH value of forest soil: LY/T 1239—1999[S/OL]. https://www.cnemc.cn/jcgf/trhj/201711/P020181010541051823125.pdf.
[14]	国家林业局, 1999. 森林土壤有机质的测定及碳氮比的计算: LY/T 1237—1999[S/OL]. https://www.cnemc.cn/jcgf/trhj/201711/W020181008687794710910.pdf.
	State Forestry Bureau, 1999. Determination of forest soil organic matter and calculation of carbon nitrogen ratio: LY/T 1237—1999[S/OL]. https://www.cnemc.cn/jcgf/trhj/201711/W020181008687794710910.pdf.
[15]	国家环境保护总局, 2004. 酸沉降监测技术规范: HJ/T 165—2004[S/OL]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/ywgz/fgbz/bz/bzwb/jcffbz/200412/W020110127389246611965.pdf.
	The State Environmental Protection Administration, 2004. Technical specification for acid deposition monitoring: HJ/T 165—2004[S/OL]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/ywgz/fgbz/bz/bzwb/jcffbz/200412/W020110127389246611965.pdf.
[16]	杲广文, 汪景宽, 李双异, 等, 2015. 30年来东北主要黑土区耕层土壤有机碳密度与储量动态变化研究[J]. 土壤通报, 46(4): 774-780.
	GAO G W, WANG J K, LI S Y, et al., 2015. Changes of organic carbon density and storage in northeastern black soil areas in past 30 years[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 46(4): 774-780.
[17]	广东省林业局, 2020. 2020年广东省林业统计分析报告[R/OL]. https://lyj.gd.gov.cn/government/release/content/post_3350630.html.
	Guangdong Forestry Bureau, 2020. 2020 Guangdong province forestry statistical analysis report[R/OL]. https://lyj.gd.gov.cn/government/release/content/post_3350630.html.
[18]	韩天富, 柳开楼, 黄晶, 等, 2020. 近30年中国主要农田土壤pH时空演变及其驱动因素[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 26(12): 2137-2149.
	HAN T F, LIU K L, HUANG J, et al., 2020. Spatio-temporal evolution of soil pH and its driving factors in the main Chinese farmland during past 30 years[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 26(12): 2137-2149.
[19]	何孟霓, 孙继光, 徐英德, 等, 2024. 长白山-辽东黑土区耕地土壤有机质时空变异及影响因素[J/OL]. 农业环境科学学报, [2024-06-26]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/12.1347.S.20240625.1715.006.
	HE M N, SUN J G, XU Y D, et al., 2024. The spatiotemporal variation of soil organic matter and its influencing factors in the Changbai Mountain-Liaodong black soil region[J/OL]. Journal of Agro- Environment Science, [2024-06-26]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/12.1347.S.20240625.1715.006.
[20]	罗世琼, 杨雪鸥, 2013. 烤烟石灰性黄壤肥力状况及其与土壤微生物的关系[J]. 广东农业科学, 40(14): 78-80.
	LUO S Q, YANG X O, 2013. Relationship between soil fertility and microorganism in calcareous yellow soil of flue-cured tobacco[J]. Guangdong Agricultural Science, 40(14): 78-80.
[21]	李子君, 李英姿, 王海军, 2023. 鲁中南山地丘陵区土地利用方式对土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 54(2): 254-266.
	LI Z J, LI Y Z, WANG H J, 2023. Effects of land use types on soil physical and chemical properties in mountainous and hilly areas in central and southern Shandong Province[J]. Journal of Shandong Agricultural University (Natural Science Edition), 54(2): 254-266.
[22]	秦诗涵, 孙继光, 常坤, 等, 2024. 松嫩平原黑土区土壤有机质含量时空变化及其影响因素[J/OL]. 农业资源与环境学报, [2024-03-25]. https://doi.org/10.13254/j.jare.2023.0623.
	QIN S H, SUN J G, CHANG K, et al., 2024. Spatial-temporal variation of soil organic matter content and its influencing factors in the black soil area of Songnen Plain[J/OL]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, [2024-03-25]. https://doi.org/10.13254/j.jare.2023.0623.
[23]	绍学新, 黄标, 顾志权, 等, 2006. 长三角经济高速发展地区土壤pH时空变化及其影响因素[J]. 矿物岩石地球化学通报, 25(2): 114-149.
	SHAO X X, HUANG B, GU Z Q, et al., 2006. Spatial-temporal variation of pH values of soils in a rapid economic developingarea in the Yangtze River Delta Region and their causing factors[J]. Bulletin of Mineralogy, Petrology and Geochemistry, 25(2): 114-149.
[24]	邵兴华, 徐金仁, 张建忠, 等, 2011. 长期施肥对旱地红壤肥力和酶活性的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 20(2): 266-269. DOI
	SHAO X H, XU J R, ZHANG J Z, et al., 2011. Effects of long-term fertilizer on soil fertility and soil enzyme activities in upland red soils[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 20(2): 266-269.
[25]	王子龙, 孙建, 姜秋香, 等, 2019. 松嫩平原黑土区有机质空间分布特征及影响因素[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 50(10): 54-62.
	WANG Z L, SUN J, JIANG Q X, et al., 2019. Spatial distribution characteristics and influencing factors of organic matter in black soil region of the Songnen Plain[J]. Journal of Northeast Agricultural University, 50(10): 54-62.
[26]	熊顺贵, 2001. 基础土壤学[M]. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社.
	XIONG S G, 2001. Basic soil science[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press.
[27]	徐影, 于镇华, 李彦生, 等, 2024. 土壤酸化成因及其对农田土壤-微生物-作物系统影响的研究进展[J]. 土壤通报, 55(2): 562-572.
	XU Y, YU Z H, LI Y S, et al., 2024. Research progresses on soil acidification and its effects on soilmicroorganism-crop systems in agricultural soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 55(2): 562-572.
[28]	杨皓, 胡继伟, 黄先飞, 等, 2015. 喀斯特地区金刺梨种植基地土壤肥力研究[J]. 水土保持研究, 22(3): 50-55.
	YANG H, HU J W, HUANG X F, et al., 2015. Study on soil fertility of Rosa sterilis S. D. Shi planting bases located in karst areas[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 22(3): 50-55.
[29]	余倩, 段雷, 郝吉明, 2021. 中国酸沉降: 来源、影响与控制[J]. 环境科学学报, 41(3): 731-746.
	YU Q, DUAN L, HAO J M, 2021. Acid deposition in China: Sources, effects and control[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 41(3): 731-746.
[30]	张桂兰, 苞德俊, 王英, 等, 1999. 长期施用化肥对作物产量和土壤性质的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 30(2): 64-67.
	ZHANG G L, BAO D J, WANG Y, et al., 1999. Effects of long-term application of chemical ertilizers on crop yield and soil properties[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 30(2): 64-67.
[31]	中华人民共和国农业部, 2006. 土壤检测第6部分: 土壤有机质的测定:NY/T 1121.6—2006[S/OL]. https://www.nssi.org.cn/standard/detail/73a4a81eca24c0a3dfdf28b7b399c893.
	Agricultural Ministry of the People’s Republic of China, 2006. Determination of soil organic matter: NY/T 1121.6—2006[S/OL]. https://www.nssi.org.cn/standard/detail/73a4a81eca24c0a3dfdf28b7b399c893.
[32]	中华人民共和国农业部, 2007. 土壤pH的测定: NY/T 13779—2007[S/OL]. https://www.nssi.org.cn/standard/detail/e45022a959f2efe4271e559fb768e099.
	Agricultural Ministry of the People’s Republic of China, 2007. Determination of soil pH: NY/T 13779—2007[S/OL]. https://www.nssi.org.cn/standard/detail/e45022a959f2efe4271e559fb768e099.
[33]	曾招兵, 汤建东, 刘一峰, 等, 2013. 广东耕地土壤有机质的变化趋势及其驱动力分析[J]. 土壤, 45(1): 84-90.
	ZENG Z B, TANG J D, LIU Y F, et al., 2013. Changes and driving forces of farmland organic matter in Guangdong Province, China[J]. Soil, 45(1): 84-90.
[34]	曾招兵, 曾思坚, 刘一锋, 等, 2014. 1984 年以来广东水稻土pH变化趋势及影响因素[J]. 土壤, 46(4): 732-736.
	ZENG Z B, ZENG S J, LIU Y F, et al., 2014. Change tendency of paddy soil pH in Guangdong Province Since 1984 and influential factors[J]. Soil, 46(4): 732-736.
[35]	生态环境部, 2019. 土壤pH值的测定电位法: HJ962—2018[S/OL]. 北京: 中国环境出版社. https://www.mee.gov.cn/ywgz/fgbz/bz/bzwb/jcffbz/201808/W020180815584753007210.pdf.
	Ministry of Ecology and Environment, 2019. Determination of soil pH by potentiometric method: HJ962—2018[S/OL]. Beijing, China Environmental Press https://www.mee.gov.cn/ywgz/fgbz/bz/bzwb/jcffbz/201808/W020180815584753007210.pdf.
[36]	郑超, 郭治兴, 袁宇志, 等, 2019. 广东省不同区域农田土壤酸化时空变化及其影响因素[J]. 应用生态学报, 30(2): 593-601.
	ZHENG C, GUO Z X, YUAN Y Z, et al., 2019. Spatial and temporal changes of farmland soil acidification and their influencing factors in different regions of Guangdong Province, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 30(2): 593-601. DOI

2016年以来广东省不同土地利用类型土壤pH和有机质时空变化及其影响因素分析

Temporal and Spatial Changes in pH and Organic Matter and Their Influencing Factors in Soils with Various Land Use Types in Guangdong Province since 2016

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 18

参考文献 36

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	侯金龙, 马志强, 杨澄, 葛双双, 何迪, 董璠. 京津冀地区植被碳源/汇的时空变化特征及影响因素分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1329-1338.
[2]	李建付, 黄志霖, 和成忠, 姜昕, 宋琳, 刘佳鑫, 陈利顶. 滇东喀斯特断陷盆地土壤有机碳空间分布特征及其关键影响因子[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1339-1352.
[3]	李彦林, 陈杨洋, 杨霜溶, 刘菊梅. 植物根系分泌的有机酸对土壤碳氮矿化的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1362-1371.
[4]	石含之, 熊振乾, 曹怡然, 吴志超, 文典, 李富荣, 李冬琴, 王旭. 外源秸秆添加对红壤及黑土有机碳固定的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1372-1383.
[5]	朱乐洋, 张西哲, 陶江, 王秀, 韩艳英, 叶彦辉. 氮添加对色季拉山急尖长苞冷杉林土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1384-1396.
[6]	吴东阳, 吴家欢, 李伟志, 黄志杰, 杨春亚, 陈火君. 蚓粪、猪粪配施化肥对土壤质量、辣椒生长及品质的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1416-1425.
[7]	温珊, 邢思奇, 肖宇翔, 刘云, 吴旭. 基于多场耦合有限元的天福庙水库清淤过程污染物磷释放行为研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1438-1450.
[8]	丛鑫, 张怀迪, 张荣, 赵琛, 陈坤, 刘寒冰. 基于Meta分析的近10年中国农田土壤重金属污染特征与风险解析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1451-1459.
[9]	刘东宜, 屈永华, 冯耀伟, 屈冉. 基于网格搜索优化CatBoost模型的GF-5卫星影像铬离子含量反演研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1460-1470.
[10]	庞波, 海香, 张海芳, 张艳军, 王慧, 刘红梅, 杨殿林. 藜芦扩散对山地草甸草地植被特征和土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(8): 1174-1181.
[11]	王文静, 翟水晶, 王赛. 闽江下游湿地土壤硅的沿程分布特征及影响因素[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(8): 1182-1191.
[12]	范贝贝, 丁帅, 张田田, 张帅, 魏露露, 陈清. 周期性淹水-落干和施用秸秆对白云石改良棕壤磷素流失风险的模拟研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(8): 1203-1213.
[13]	张京磊, 王国良, 吴波, 贾春林, 张进红, 周圆, 马冰. 滨海盐碱地苜蓿-小黑麦轮作对土壤细菌和真菌群落多样性与网络结构的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(7): 1048-1062.
[14]	林于蓝, 陈厚朴, 于文豪, 王宝英, 张杨, 张金波, 蔡祖聪, 赵军. 强还原处理对土壤中常见抗生素及其抗性基因的影响研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(7): 1107-1116.
[15]	张维琛, 王惺琪, 王博杰. 塔布河流域生态系统服务时空格局及影响因素分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(7): 1142-1152.