玉米基肥期农田土壤氨挥发量与近地表氨浓度相关性研究

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.03.008

生态环境学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 399-407.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.03.008

玉米基肥期农田土壤氨挥发量与近地表氨浓度相关性研究

吕金岭¹^,²^,³^,^*(), 尤克⁴, 何斌⁵, 刘霜⁶, 梁少民⁷, 郭战玲¹^,²^,³

1.河南省农业科学院植物营养与资源环境研究所，河南郑州 450002
2.农业部原阳农业环境与耕地保育科学观测实验站，河南原阳 453500
3.河南省农业生态环境重点实验室，河南郑州 450002
4.河南省生态环境监测和安全中心，河南郑州 450046
5.西平县土壤肥料技术服务站，河南西平 463900
6.河南牧业经济学院，河南郑州 450002
7.河南省科学院地理研究所，河南郑州 450002

收稿日期:2023-07-06 出版日期:2024-03-18 发布日期:2024-05-08
通讯作者: *
作者简介:吕金岭（1983年生），男，副研究员，主要从事农田痕量气体排放研究。E-mail: lvjinling2008@163.com
基金资助:
河南省农业科学院杰出青年基金项目(2023JQ04);国家自然科学基金项目(41807098);河南省科技攻关项目(232102110016);国家重点研发计划(2017YFC0212400)

Study on the Correlation between Ammonia Volatilization and near Surface Ammonia Concentration during the Maize Basal Fertilizer Period

LÜ Jinling¹^,²^,³^,^*(), YOU Ke⁴, HE Bin⁵, LIU Shuang⁶, LIANG Shaomin⁷, GUO Zhanling¹^,²^,³

1. Institute of Plant Nutrition, Resources and Environmental Science, Henan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Zhengzhou 450002, P. R. China
2. Yuanyang Scientific Observing and Experimental Station of Agro-Environment and Arable Land Conservation Ministry of Agricultural, Yuanyang 453500, P. R. China
3. Henan Key Laboratory of Agricultural Eco-environment, Zhengzhou 450002, P. R. China
4. Henan Ecological Environment Monitoring and Security Center, Zhengzhou 450052, P. R. China
5. Xiping County Soil and Fertilizer Technical Service Station, Xiping 463900, P. R. China
6. Henan University of Animal Husbandry and Economy, Zhengzhou 450052, P. R. China
7. Institute of Geographical Sciences, Henan Academy of Sciences, Zhengzhou 450052, P. R. China

Received:2023-07-06 Online:2024-03-18 Published:2024-05-08

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

农田氨排放量与近地表氨浓度密切相关，但两者能否相互转换还缺乏系统研究。基于此，以近地表氨浓度经典方法（被动法）为主要使用方法，以传统海绵法为对照方法，在豫南砂姜黑土开展5种典型施肥处理玉米季基肥期氨排放量与近地表氨浓度的相关性研究。结果发现，不同施肥处理的氨挥发峰值均出现在施肥后的2－4 d，第5天开始显著降低，第8天之后基本与对照无明显差异；不同处理的氨累计排放量差别较大，排序为TR>OPT>SOPT>HK>CK，累计排放量分别为7.68、5.48、3.37、2.78和0.22 kg∙hm⁻²；同时发现，不同施肥处理近地表氨浓度也有相同趋势，峰值同样出现在施肥后的2－4 d，第5天开始显著降低，平均氨质量浓度排序为TR>OPT>SOPT>HK>CK，均值分别为17.5、11.6、10.7、8.21和1.70 μg∙m⁻³。线性相关性分析表明，施肥后前8 d不同施肥处理的氨挥发量与近地表氨浓度的线性相关性较强，而8 d之后两者的相关性较弱，说明近地表氨浓度和农田氨挥发量的相关性与农田氨挥发量的高低有关。除此之外，不同方法中被动法对低施氮量和缓释肥的估算优于排放因子法，而排放因子法对高施肥条件下氨挥发量的估算优于被动法。整体而言，被动方法估算氨挥发量的相对误差介于−15.9%－17.5%之间，排放因子法相对误差介于−54.3%－81.8%之间，被动方法明显具备更高的估算精度。以上结果说明，被动方法可以潜在替代传统氨监测方法估算大区域农田氨挥发量，但估算精度主要集中在高氨排放期。

关键词: 氨挥发, 被动法, 近地表氨浓度, 相关性, 排放因子法, 玉米季

Abstract:

Ammonia emissions from farmlands are closely related to the surface ammonia concentration near the ground. However, there is still a lack of systematic research on whether these can be converted to each other. This study used the near-surface ammonia concentration (passive method) as the main application method and the traditional sponge method as the control method. A correlation study was conducted on the relationship between ammonia emissions and near-surface ammonia concentration during the base fertilizer period of the maize season under five typical fertilization treatments in lime concretion black soils in Southern Henan. The results showed that the peak value of ammonia volatilization under different fertilization treatments appeared 2−4 d after fertilization and significantly decreased from the 5th day. After the 8th day, there was no significant difference compared with the control. The cumulative emissions of ammonia from the different treatments varied greatly, in the order TR>OPT>SOPT>HK>CK. The cumulative emissions were 7.68 kg∙hm⁻², 5.48 kg∙hm⁻², 3.37 kg∙hm⁻², 2.78 kg∙hm⁻², and 0.2 kg∙hm⁻², respectively. At the same time, it was found that there was a similar trend in the near surface ammonia concentration under different fertilization treatments, with a peak occurring 2-4 days after fertilization and a significant decrease starting from the 5th day. The average ammonia concentration ranked as TR>OPT>SOPT>HK>CK, with an average of 17.5 μg∙m⁻³, 11.6 μg∙m⁻³, 10.7 μg∙m⁻³, 8.21 μg∙m⁻³and 1.70 μg∙m⁻³, respectively. Linear correlation analysis showed that the linear correlation between ammonia volatilization and near-surface ammonia concentration was stronger in the first eight days after fertilization. However, the correlation between these two factors was weak after 8 days. This indicates that the correlation between the near-surface ammonia concentration and cropland ammonia volatilization is related to the level of cropland ammonia volatilization. In addition, the passive method had better estimation values for low nitrogen application and slow fertilizer control than the emission factor method, whereas the emission factor method had a better estimation of ammonia volatilization under high fertilization conditions than the passive method. However, the overall relative error of the passive method in estimating ammonia volatilization was between 15.9% and 17.5%, whereas the relative error of the emission factor method was between 54.3% and 81.8%. The passive method clearly had a higher estimation accuracy, which was particularly evident in the low-nitrogen application and slow-release treatments. Based on the above results, it is suggested that the passive method can replace traditional ammonia monitoring methods to estimate ammonia volatilization in large-scale croplands. However, the estimation accuracy mainly focuses on the high ammonia emission period after nitrogen fertilizer application.

Key words: ammonia volatilization, passive method, near-surface ammonia concentration, correlation, emission factor method, corn season

中图分类号:

S153
X16

吕金岭, 尤克, 何斌, 刘霜, 梁少民, 郭战玲. 玉米基肥期农田土壤氨挥发量与近地表氨浓度相关性研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(3): 399-407.

LÜ Jinling, YOU Ke, HE Bin, LIU Shuang, LIANG Shaomin, GUO Zhanling. Study on the Correlation between Ammonia Volatilization and near Surface Ammonia Concentration during the Maize Basal Fertilizer Period[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2024, 33(3): 399-407.

图/表 8

表1 不同施肥处理玉米季肥料施用量

Table 1 The amount of fertilizer applied of different fertilization treatments in maize season

处理	纯氮施用量/(kg∙hm⁻²)			磷P₂O₅施用量/ (kg∙hm⁻²）	钾K₂O施用量/ (kg∙hm⁻²）
处理	总量	基肥	追肥	磷P₂O₅施用量/ (kg∙hm⁻²）	钾K₂O施用量/ (kg∙hm⁻²）
CK	0	0	0	0	0
传统施肥 (TR)	279	167	112	45.0	45.0
优化施肥 (OPT)	210	126	84.0	45.0	45.0
再优化 (SOPT)	180	108	72.0	45.0	45.0
缓释肥 (HK)	180	180	不施	45.0	45.0

图1 被动试验装置及田间布置

Figure 1 Passive test device and field layout

表2 不同条件下氨排放系数

Table 2 Ammonia emission coefficients under different conditions

土壤种类	温度/℃	氨排放系数/%
土壤种类	温度/℃	尿素	碳铵	硝铵	硫铵	其他
酸性土壤	﹤10	0.51	1.71	0.36	0.66	0.21
	10‒20	2.51	2.61	0.4	0.82	0.23
	20‒30	4.5	3.52	0.45	0.97	0.26
	>30	5.5	3.98	0.47	1.05	0.27
碱性土壤	<10	12.7	6.02		1.25
	10‒20	14.7	6.93		1.4
	20‒30	16.7	7.84		1.56
	>30	17.7	8.29		1.63

图2 不同施肥处理氨挥发速率

Figure 2 Ammonia volatilization rate in different fertilization treatments

图3 不同施肥处理近地表氨浓度变化

Figure 3 Dynamics of ammonia concentration nearby the surface of different fertilizer treatments

图4 不同施肥处理氨挥发量与近地表氨浓度相关性

Figure 4 Correlation between ammonia volatilization and near-surface ammonia concentration in different fertilization treatments

图5 不同施肥处理氨挥发量与其他环境因素相关性分析

Figure 5 Correlation analysis of ammonia volatilization and other environmental factors in different fertilization treatments

表3 不同方法估算的氨累积排放量及相对误差

Table 3 Cumulative ammonia emissions and relative errors estimated by different methods

施肥处理	施氮量/ (kg∙hm⁻²)	作物产量/ (t∙hm⁻²)	氨累积排放量/ (kg∙hm⁻²)			相对误差/% ²⁾
施肥处理	施氮量/ (kg∙hm⁻²)	作物产量/ (t∙hm⁻²)	监测值¹⁾	方法1	方法2	方法1	方法2
CK	0	5.13c³⁾	0.22dc	0	0	‒	‒
TR	167	9.44b	7.68a	7.26a	7.52	2.68	−0.80
OPT	126	9.48b	5.48b	4.91b	5.67	4.91	−7.79
SOPT	108	9.37b	3.37c	2.60c	4.86	17.5	−54.3
HK	180	9.65a	2.80c	2.99c	0.47	−15.9	81.8

参考文献 26

[1]	HE Y, PAN Y, ZHANG G, et al., 2020. Tracking ammonia morning peak, sources and transport with 1 Hz measurements at a rural site in North China Plain[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 235: 117-130.
[2]	HUANG B, LIU M, REN Z F, et al., 2013. Chemical composition, diurnal variation and sources of PM_2.5 at two industrial sites of South China[J]. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 4(3): 298-305. DOI URL
[3]	KIM M S, KOO N, HYUN S, et al., 2020. Comparison of Ammonia emission estimation between passive sampler and chamber system in paddy soil after fertilizer Application[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public health, 17(17): 2-11. DOI URL
[4]	KUANG Y, XU W, LIN W, et al., 2020. Explosive morning growth phenomena of NH₃ on the North China Plain: Causes and potential impacts on aerosol formation[J]. Environmental Pollution, 257: 113-121.
[5]	LUO X S, LI Y, LIU X J, et al., 2014. An evaluation of atmospheric Nr pollution and deposition in North China after the Beijing Olympics[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 74: 209-216. DOI URL
[6]	MA S Y, 2020. High-resolution assessment of ammonia emissions in China: Inventories, driving forces and mitigation[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 229: 117-128.
[7]	SCHJOERRING J K, SOMMER S G, FERM M, 1992. A simple passive sampler for measuring ammonia emission in the field[J]. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 62: 13-24. DOI URL
[8]	SHEN J L, LIU X J, ZHNAG Y et al., 2011. Atmospheric ammonia and particulate ammonium from agricultural sources in the North China Plain[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 45(28): 5033-5041. DOI URL
[9]	WANG C, YIN S, BAI L, et al., 2018. High-resolution ammonia emission inventories with comprehensive analysis and evaluation in Henan, China, 2006-2016 [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 193: 11-23. DOI URL
[10]	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.
[11]	杜思婕, 张艺磊, 张志勇, 等, 2021. 冬小麦-夏玉米轮作体系不同新型尿素的氮素利用率及去向[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 27(1): 24-34.
	DU S J, ZHANG Y L, ZHANG Z Y, et al., 2021. Nitrogen use efficiency and fate of new urea types in a winter wheat-summer maize rotation system[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 27(1): 24-34.
[12]	郭娅, 刘娇, 尹焕丽, 等, 2020. 单株定量施肥对夏玉米产量及养分吸收利用的影响[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 37(6): 924-930.
	GUO Y, LIU J, YIN H L, et al., 2020. Effects of quantitative fertilization by a single plant on the yield, nutrient absorption, and utilization of summer maize[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 37(6): 924-930.
[13]	孔盼, 夏苏敬, 张海维, 等, 2021. 耕作方式对早稻-再生稻稻田氨挥发的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 30(8): 1627-1633. DOI
	KONG P, XIA S J, ZHANG H W, et al., 2021. Effects of tillage methods on ammonia volatilization of early season rice-ratooning rice fields[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 30(8): 1627-1633.
[14]	刘学军, 沙志鹏, 宋宇, 等, 2021. 我国大气氨的排放特征、减排技术与政策建议[J]. 环境科学研究, 34(1): 149-157.
	LIU X J, SHA Z P, SONGY, et al., 2021. China’s atmospheric ammonia emission characteristics, mitigation options and policy recommendations[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 34(1): 149-157.
[15]	吕宏菲, 马星霞, 杨改河, 等, 2020. 秸秆还田对关中地区麦玉复种体系土壤氨排放的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 28(4): 513-522.
	LÜ H F, MA X X, YANG G H, et al., 2020. Effect of straw returning on ammonia emissions from soil in a wheat-maize multiple cropping system in the Guanzhong region, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 28(4): 513-522.
[16]	吕金岭, 王小非, 李太魁, 等, 2020. 不同施肥方式下砂姜黑土冬小麦-夏玉米轮作农田氨挥发特征及排放系数[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 28(12): 1869-1879.
	LÜ J L, WANG X F, LI T K, et al., 2020. Ammonia emission characteristics and emission coefficients of wheat and maize rotation cropland under different fertilization methods in lime concretion black soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 28(12): 1869-1879.
[17]	吕金岭, 王小非, 骆晓声, 等, 2021. 减量施氮条件下沙壤质潮土小麦玉米轮作体系氨挥发特征及排放系数[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 27(2): 346-359.
	LÜ J L, WANG X F, LUO X S, et al., 2021. Ammonia volatilization characteristics and emission coefficients of wheat and maize rotation in sandy fluvo-aquic soil under reduced N fertilization[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 27(2): 346-359.
[18]	宋涛, 尹俊慧, 胡兆平, 等, 2021. 脲酶/硝化抑制剂减少农田土壤氮素损失的作用特征[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 38(4): 585-597.
	SONG T, YIN J H, HU Z P, et al., 2021. Characteristics of urease/nitrification inhibitors in reducing nitrogen losses in Cropland soils[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 38(4): 585-597.
[19]	王远, 许纪元, 潘云枫, 等, 2021. 长江下游地区水肥一体化对设施番茄氮肥利用率及氨挥发的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 59(3): 776-785.
	WANG Y, XU J Y, PAN Y F, et al., 2021. Effects of fertigation on nitrogen use efficiency and ammonia volatilization in greenhouse tomato cultivation in lower reaches of the Yangtze River[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 59(3): 776-785.
[20]	许云翔, 何莉莉, 陈金媛, 等, 2020. 生物炭对农田土壤氨挥发的影响机制研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 31(12): 4312-4320. DOI
	XU Y X, HE L L, CHEN J Y, et al., 2020. Effects of biochar on ammonia volatilization from cropland soil: A review[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 31(12): 4012-4320.
[21]	杨国英, 郭智, 刘红江, 等, 2020. 稻田氨挥发影响因素及其减排措施研究进展[J]. 生态环境学报, 29(9): 1912-1919. DOI
	YANG G Y, GUO Z, LIU H J, et al., 2020. Research progress on factors affecting ammonia volatilization and its mitigation measures in paddy fields[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 29(9): 1912-1919.
[22]	张薇, 倪邦, 许秀春, 等, 2020. 氮肥使用对北方夏玉米季氨挥发的影响[J]. 环境科学, 41(11): 5176-5184.
	ZHANG W, NI B, XU X C, et al., 2020. Impacts of nitrogen application on ammonia volatilization during maize season in northern China[J]. Environmental Science, 41(11): 5176-5184. DOI URL
[23]	张怡彬, 李俊改, 王震, 等, 2021. 有机替代下华北平原旱地农田氨挥发的年际减排特征[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 27(1): 1-11.
	ZHANG Y B, LI J G, WANG Z, et al., 2021. Substitution of chemical fertilizer with organic manure reduces ammonia volatilization in maize farmland in North China Plain[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 27(1): 1-11.
[24]	赵蒙, 曾科, 姚元林, 等, 2019. 聚脲甲醛缓释肥对太湖稻麦轮作体系氨挥发及产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 25(1): 55-63.
	ZHAO M, ZENG K, YAO Y L, et al., 2019. Effects of polyurea- formaldehyde on ammonia volatilization and yields under rice-wheat rotation in Taihu Region[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 25(1): 55-63.
[25]	中华人民共和国环境保护部, 2014. 大气氨源排放清单编制技术指南 (试行)[EB/OL]. [2014-08-20]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/gkml/hbb/bgg/201408/W020140828351293771578.pdf.
	Ministry of Ecology and Environment, People’s Republic of China, 2014. Technical Guide for Compilation of Inventories of Atmospheric Ammonia Sources (Trial)[EB/OL]. [2014-08-20]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/gkml/hbb/bgg/201408/W020140828351293771578.pdf.
[26]	周平遥, 张震, 王华, 等, 2020. 不同深施肥方式对稻田氨挥发及水稻产量的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 39(11): 2683-2691.
	ZHOU P Y, ZHANG Z, WANG H, et al., 2020. Effects of deep fertilization methods on ammonia volatilization and rice yield in paddy fields[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 39(11): 2683-2691.

玉米基肥期农田土壤氨挥发量与近地表氨浓度相关性研究

Study on the Correlation between Ammonia Volatilization and near Surface Ammonia Concentration during the Maize Basal Fertilizer Period

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 26

相关文章 13

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	刘紫薇, 葛继稳, 王月环, 杨诗雨, 姚东, 谢金林. 大九湖泥炭湿地甲烷通量变异特征及影响因素[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 706-714.
[2]	李文菁, 黄月群, 黄亮亮, 李向通, 苏琼源, 孙扬言. 北部湾海洋鱼类微塑料污染特征及其风险评估[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(11): 1913-1921.
[3]	孙建波, 畅文军, 李文彬, 张世清, 李春强, 彭明. 香蕉不同生育期根际微生物生物量及土壤酶活的变化研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(6): 1169-1174.
[4]	陈漾, 张金谱, 邱晓暖, 琚鸿, 黄俊. 2021年广州市臭氧污染特征及气象因子影响分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(10): 2028-2038.
[5]	何瑞, 蒋然, 杨芳, 张心凤, 林键銮, 朱小平, 彭松耀. 茂名近岸海域中、小型浮游动物群落特征及其与环境因子的关系[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(1): 142-150.
[6]	邢树文, 许佳敏, 黄彬, 高锦婷, 韩丽. 钨尾矿重金属污染对茶园土壤动物群落结构及多样性的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(9): 1903-1915.
[7]	袁伟皓, 王华, 夏玉宝, 曾一川, 邓燕青, 李媛媛, 张心悦. 基于GAM模型的鄱阳湖叶绿素a与水质因子相关性分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(8): 1716-1723.
[8]	赵晓亮, 郭猛, 吕美婷, 赵雪莹, 姜瑰国, 黄媛媛, 王凡, 姬亚芹. 阜新市绿化树种对大气颗粒物及重金属滞留能力研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(8): 1662-1671.
[9]	李少宁, 赵旭, 王君怡, 鲁绍伟, 赵娜, 徐晓天. 北京西山国家森林公园空气负离子与NO_x浓度动态特征分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(8): 1654-1661.
[10]	孔盼, 夏苏敬, 张海维, 朱建强. 耕作方式对早稻-再生稻稻田氨挥发的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(8): 1627-1633.
[11]	邓慧颖, 陈立新, 余永江, 王宏. 武夷山市臭氧分布特征及其与气象要素关系分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(7): 1428-1435.
[12]	马炳鑫, 靖娟利, 徐勇, 何宏昌, 刘兵. 2000—2019年滇黔桂岩溶区植被NPP时空变化及与气候变化的关系研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(12): 2285-2293.
[13]	卢乔倩, 江涛, 柳丹丽, 刘智勇. 中国不同植被覆盖类型NDVI对气温和降水的响应特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2020, 29(1): 23-34.