留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

单季稻氮磷吸收及径流流失对不同肥料施用的响应

方晨露 简永旗 吴家森 张艳 鲁长根 邵建均 郭飞飞 姜培坤

方晨露, 简永旗, 吴家森, 张艳, 鲁长根, 邵建均, 郭飞飞, 姜培坤. 单季稻氮磷吸收及径流流失对不同肥料施用的响应[J]. 浙江农林大学学报. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
引用本文: 方晨露, 简永旗, 吴家森, 张艳, 鲁长根, 邵建均, 郭飞飞, 姜培坤. 单季稻氮磷吸收及径流流失对不同肥料施用的响应[J]. 浙江农林大学学报. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
FANG Chenlu, JIAN Yongqi, WU Jiasen, ZHANG Yan, LU Changgen, SHAO Jianjun, GUO Feifei, JIANG Peikun. Response of nitrogen and phosphorus uptake and runoff loss in single cropping rice to different fertilization treatments[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
Citation: FANG Chenlu, JIAN Yongqi, WU Jiasen, ZHANG Yan, LU Changgen, SHAO Jianjun, GUO Feifei, JIANG Peikun. Response of nitrogen and phosphorus uptake and runoff loss in single cropping rice to different fertilization treatments[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724

本文已在中国知网网络首发,可在知网搜索、下载并阅读全文。

单季稻氮磷吸收及径流流失对不同肥料施用的响应

doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
基金项目: 浙江省重点研发计划项目(2019C03121),浙江省公益技术应用研究项目(LGF18D010003,2017C33111)
详细信息
    作者简介: 方晨露(ORCID: 0000-0001-9808-6137),从事农业资源利用研究。E-mail: 834155904@qq.com
    通信作者: 姜培坤(ORCID: 0000-0002-2311-2350),教授,从事农业资源与环境研究。E-mail: jiangpeikun@zafu.edu.cn
  • 中图分类号: S157

Response of nitrogen and phosphorus uptake and runoff loss in single cropping rice to different fertilization treatments

  • 摘要:   目的  旨在探讨施用有机肥(菜籽饼)、调理剂(贝壳砂)、炭基肥对稻田土壤氮磷流失和水稻Oryza sativa产量的影响。  方法  共设置不施肥(ck)、常规施肥(T1)、有机肥(T2)、常规施肥+调理剂(T3)、炭基肥(T4)5个处理,不同施肥处理的氮、五氧化二磷、氧化钾用量均为270、75、150 kg·hm−2。通过对比5个处理之间土壤施肥前后氮磷质量分数、水稻产量、水稻籽粒和秸秆中的氮磷质量分数,结合6−9月径流水氮磷质量浓度监测结果,研究不同施肥处理减少氮磷流失的效果。  结果  施肥显著提高了水稻籽粒、秸秆的氮磷积累量和水稻籽粒产量。与ck相比,4个施肥处理增加水稻籽粒产量51.22%~63.41%(P<0.05),但4个处理之间无显著差异。5个处理的氮和磷的流失量分别为4.91~9.56和0.70~1.35 kg·hm−2,其流失量从大到小依次为T2、T1、T3、T4、ck。4个施肥处理的氮和磷的流失率分别为0.82%~1.72%和0.65%~1.99%,从大到小依次为T2、T1、T3、T4  结论  施用调理剂和炭基肥均能有效增加水稻产量,减少氮磷的流失,但施用有机肥处理具有最大径流流失量,因此需注意施肥的时间和方式,有效减少氮磷的流失和环境污染。图5表4参32
  • 图  1  不同施肥处理的水稻籽粒产量

    Figure  1  Rice grain yields of different fertilization treatments

    图  2  不同施肥处理的水稻籽粒和秸秆的氮磷积累量

    Figure  2  Accumulation rates of nitrogen and phosphorus in grains and straws of rice with different fertilization treatments

    图  3  不同施肥处理的水稻氮磷肥料利用率

    Figure  3  Nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer utilization rates of rice with different fertilization treatments

    图  4  不同施肥处理的径流总氮质量浓度随时间的变化

    Figure  4  Changes of total nitrogen concentrations in runoff from different fertilization treatments with time

    图  5  不同施肥处理的径流总磷质量浓度随时间的变化

    Figure  5  Changes of total phosphorus concentrations in runoff from different fertilization treatments with time

    表  1  施肥处理及用量

    Table  1.   Fertilization treatments in rice season

    处理肥料氮用量/(kg·hm−2)基肥(6月16日)及用量/(kg·hm−2)追肥(6月26日)及用量/(kg·hm−2)
    ck0 00
    T1270.0复合肥750.0,钙镁磷肥125.0尿素293.5,氯化钾24.2
    T2270.0菜籽饼2700.0,钙镁磷肥62.5尿素293.5,氯化钾24.2
    T3270.0复合肥750.0,钙镁磷肥125.0,调理剂333.3尿素293.5,氯化钾24.2
    T4270.0炭基肥1 500.00
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2  不同施肥处理的土壤化学性质

    Table  2.   Soil chemical properties of different fertilization treatments

    处理pH有机质/(g·kg−1)全氮/(g·kg−1)全磷/(g·kg−1)全钾/(g·kg−1)有效磷/(mg·kg−1)速效钾/(mg·kg−1)碱解氮/(mg·kg−1)
    本底 4.98 33.30  2.07 1.14  25.60 144 138 133
    ck5.03±0.25 a30.00±0.75 a1.57±0.14 a0.83±0.02 a9.35±0.26 b57±3 a72±5 a141±3 c
    T15.19±0.22 a25.07±2.03 a1.29±0.16 a0.96±0.15 a10.37±0.77 ab107±43 a82±8 a150±4 b
    T25.14±0.07 a28.67±0.44 a1.62 ±0.21 a0.95±0.02 a11.53±1.47 ab84±3 a79±12 a148±3 bc
    T35.67±0.26 a24.23±2.85 a1.46±0.26 a0.91±0.09 a15.80±3.12 a102±35 a68±26 a205±2 a
    T45.07±0.20 a33.73±8.66 a1.45±0.10 a0.84±0.04 a10.33±1.28 ab74±18 a65±2 a197±1 a
      说明:数据为平均值±标准差;不同字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  3  水稻植株中的氮磷质量分数

    Table  3.   Contents of N and P in rice plants

    处理籽粒/(g·kg−1)秸秆/(g·kg−1)
    ck8.41±0.18 c3.74±0.07 a4.63±0.08 a2.45±0.14 b1.70±0.09 a31.03±0.65 a
    T110.93±0.36 a3.71±0.14 a4.15±0.14 bc3.99±0.44 ab1.37±0.05 a29.11±1.50 a
    T29.22±0.40 bc3.73±0.11 a4.51±0.22 ab4.28±0.34 a1.53±0.09 a28.22±0.17 a
    T39.98±0.67 ab3.63±0.08 a4.03±0.06 c5.08±0.94 a1.39±0.15 a31.64±1.47 a
    T49.69±0.18 abc3.77±0.08 a4.16±0.09 bc4.22±0.10 a1.90±0.39 a28.12±1.51 a
      说明:数据为平均值±标准差;不同字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  4  氮和磷的径流流失量和流失率

    Table  4.   Nitrogen and phosphorus runoff loss and loss rate

    处理流失量/(kg·hm−2)流失率/%
    ck4.91±0.01 c0.70±0.05 b
    T17.83±0.17 ab1.03±0.08 ab1.08±0.07 a1.03±0.37 a
    T29.56±1.22 a1.35±0.12 a1.72±0.46 a1.99±0.50 a
    T37.64±0.77 ab0.96±0.19 ab1.01±0.29 a0.79±0.71 a
    T47.13±0.49 b0.91±0.14 b0.82±0.18 a0.65±0.38 a
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] 栾江, 仇焕广, 井月, 等. 我国化肥施用量持续增长的原因分解及趋势预测[J]. 自然资源学报, 2013, 28(11): 1869 − 1878. doi:  10.11849/zrzyxb.2013.11.004

    LUAN Jiang, QIU Huanguang, JING Yue, et al. Decomposition of factors contributed to the increase of China's chemical fertilizer use and projections for future fertilizer use in China [J]. J Nat Resour, 2013, 28(11): 1869 − 1878. doi:  10.11849/zrzyxb.2013.11.004
    [2] 段永惠, 张乃明, 张玉娟. 施肥对农田氮磷污染物径流输出的影响研究[J]. 土壤, 2005, 37(1): 48 − 51. doi:  10.3321/j.issn:0253-9829.2005.01.009

    DUAN Yonghui, ZHANG Naming, ZHANG Yujuan. Effect of fertilization application on nitrogen and phosphorus loss with farmland runoff [J]. Soils, 2005, 37(1): 48 − 51. doi:  10.3321/j.issn:0253-9829.2005.01.009
    [3] 张维理, 武淑霞, 冀宏杰, 等. 中国农业面源污染形势估计及控制对策Ⅰ. 21世纪初期中国农业面源污染的形势估计[J]. 中国农业科学, 2004, 37(7): 1008 − 1017. doi:  10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2004.07.012

    ZHANG Weili, WU Shuxia, JI Hongjie, et al. Estimation of agricultural non-point source pollution in China and the alleviating strategies [J]. Sci Agric Sin, 2004, 37(7): 1008 − 1017. doi:  10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2004.07.012
    [4] CARUSO B S. Integrated assessment of phosphorus in the Lake Hayes catchment, South Island, New Zealand [J]. J Hydrol, 2000, 229(3): 168 − 189.
    [5] IQBAL A, HE Liang, ALI I, et al. Manure combined with chemical fertilizer increases rice productivity by improving soil health, post-anthesis biomass yield, and nitrogen metabolism[J]. PLoS One. 2020, 15(10): e0238934. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238934.
    [6] 王晓荣, 唐万鹏, 付甜, 等. 不同管理措施对三峡库区柑橘园土壤养分和径流氮磷流失的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(11): 95 − 102. doi:  10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0350

    WANG Xiaorong, TANG Wanpeng, FU Tian, et al. Effects of different management practices on soil nutrient and nitrogen and phosphorus losses with runoff of citrus orchard in the Three Gorges Reservoir area [J]. Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2021, 37(11): 95 − 102. doi:  10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0350
    [7] 黄东风, 王果, 李卫华, 等. 不同施肥模式对蔬菜产量、硝酸盐含量及菜地氮磷流失的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2008, 22(5): 5 − 10. doi:  10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2008.05.002

    HUANG Dongfeng, WANG Guo, LI Weihua, et al. Effects of different kinds of fertilization modes on yield, nitrate’s content of vegetable and loss of nitrogen and phosphorus in vegetable field [J]. J Soil Water Conserv, 2008, 22(5): 5 − 10. doi:  10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2008.05.002
    [8] 黄东风, 李卫华, 王利民, 等. 水肥管理措施对水稻产量、养分吸收及稻田氮磷流失的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2013, 27(2): 62 − 66.

    HUANG Dongfeng, LI Weihua, WANG Limin, et al. Effects of water and fertilizer managements on yield, nutrition uptake of rice and loss of nitrogen and phosphorus by runoff from paddy field [J]. J Soil Water Conserv, 2013, 27(2): 62 − 66.
    [9] 赵秉强. 传统化肥增效改性提升产品性能与功能[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2016, 22(1): 1 − 7. doi:  10.11674/zwyf.14470

    ZHAO Bingqiang. Modification of conventional fertilizers for enhanced property and function [J]. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2016, 22(1): 1 − 7. doi:  10.11674/zwyf.14470
    [10] 徐秋芳, 姜培坤. 有机肥对毛竹林间及根区土壤生物化学性质的影响[J]. 浙江林学院学报, 2000, 17(4): 22 − 26.

    XU Qiufang, JIANG Peikun. Effects of fertilizing on biological properties of root region soil under Phyllostachys pubescens forest [J]. J Zhejiang For Coll, 2000, 17(4): 22 − 26.
    [11] GUO Wei, ZHANG Qingzhong, LIU Jinhua, et al. Studies on changes of soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics under long-term fertilizer in the black soil based on DSSAT model [J]. Int Conf Energy Environ Sustainable Dev, 2015, 3702: 1743 − 1750.
    [12] 张琢, 王梅, 任杰, 等. 贝壳粉对污染土壤中Pb、Zn、Cd的稳定化作用[J]. 环境污染与防治, 2016, 38(1): 14 − 18.

    ZHANG Zhuo, WANG Mei, REN Jie, et al. Effect of sea shell powder on the stabilization of Pb, Zn and Cd in contaminated soil [J]. Environ Pollut Prev, 2016, 38(1): 14 − 18.
    [13] HEYMANN K, XING B, KEILUWEIT M, et al. Influence of dissolved organic carbon from natural and synthetic fertilizers on phosphate leaching from a sand-based golf green [J]. Int Turfgrass Soc Res J, 2017, 13(1): 103 − 112. doi:  10.2134/itsrj2016.05.0364
    [14] 习斌, 翟丽梅, 刘申, 等. 有机无机肥配施对玉米产量及土壤氮磷淋溶的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(2): 326 − 335. doi:  10.11674/zwyf.2015.0206

    XI Bin, ZHAI Limei, LIU Shen, et al. Effects of combination of organic and inorganic fertilization on maize yield and soil nitrogen and phosphorus leaching [J]. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2015, 21(2): 326 − 335. doi:  10.11674/zwyf.2015.0206
    [15] ZHENG Yu, HAN Xiaori, LI Yuying, et al. Effects of mixed controlled release nitrogen fertilizer with rice straw biochar on rice yield and nitrogen balance in Northeast China [J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 9452. doi:  10.1038/s41598-020-66300-6
    [16] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
    [17] QASWAR M, CHAI R, AHMED W, et al. Partial substitution of chemical fertilizers with organic amendments increased rice yield by changing phosphorus fractions and improving phosphatase activities in fluvo-aquic soil [J]. Soil Tillage Res, 2019, 20(3): 1285 − 1296.
    [18] FARHA A, AKHTAE I. Interactive effect of potassium and flyash: a soil conditioner on metal accumulation, physiological and biochemical traits of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) [J]. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 2019, 26(8): 7847 − 7862. doi:  10.1007/s11356-019-04243-w
    [19] 范星露. 新型炭基复混肥料对水稻生理的影响[D]. 长沙: 湖南农业大学, 2016.

    FAN Xinglu. Effect of Carbon-based Compound Fertilizer on Physiology of Oryza sativa L.[D]. Changsha: Hunan Agricultural University, 2016.
    [20] PURAKAYASTHA T, BERA T, DEBARATI B, et al. A review on biochar modulated soil condition improvements and nutrient dynamics concerning crop yields: pathways to climate change mitigation and global food security [J]. Chemosphere, 2019, 227: 345 − 365. doi:  10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.03.170
    [21] WEI Haiyan, CHEN Zhifeng, XING Zhipeng, et al. Effects of slow or controlled release fertilizer types and fertilization modes on yield and quality of rice [J]. J Integrative Agric, 2018, 17(10): 2222 − 2234. doi:  10.1016/S2095-3119(18)62052-0
    [22] 崔新卫, 张杨珠, 高菊生, 等. 长期不同施肥处理对红壤稻田土壤性质及晚稻产量与品质的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2019, 34(6): 190 − 197. doi:  10.7668/hbnxb.20190052

    CUI Xinwei, ZHANG Yangzhu, GAO Jusheng, et al. Effects of long-term fertilization treatments on soil properties, rice yield and quality in reddish paddy soil [J]. Acta Agric Boreal-Sin, 2019, 34(6): 190 − 197. doi:  10.7668/hbnxb.20190052
    [23] 史华, 吴冰洁, 陈爽, 等. 生物炭和保水剂用量对火鹤花叶绿素和光合特性的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(14): 139 − 142.

    SHI Hua, WU Bingjie, CHEN Shuang, et al. Effects of biochar and water retention agents on chlorophyll and photosynthetic characteristics of Flamoea sinensis [J]. Jiangsu Agric Sci, 2019, 47(14): 139 − 142.
    [24] HUSAIN A. 洱海流域典型轮作模式下不同施肥模式对淋溶及地表径流氮磷流失的影响[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2019.

    HUSAIN A. Analysis of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Losses in leached and Surface Runoff Water with Application of Different Fertilizers and Management Strategies under Typical Crop Rotation System in the Erhai Lake Basin, Yunnan, China[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2019.
    [25] 王莺, 陆荣杰, 吴家森, 等. 山核桃林闭合区内径流氮磷流失特征[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2018, 35(5): 802 − 809. doi:  10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2018.05.003

    WANG Ying, LU Rongjie, WU Jiasen, et al. Nitrogen and phosphorus loss in runoff and sediment for a closed zone of a Carya cathayensis stand [J]. J Zhejiang A&F Univ, 2018, 35(5): 802 − 809. doi:  10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2018.05.003
    [26] HONG S H, LEE E Y. Restoration of eroded coastal sand dunes using plant and soil-conditioner mixture [J]. Int Biodeterioration Biodegradation, 2016, 113: 161 − 168. doi:  10.1016/j.ibiod.2016.04.021
    [27] ZHU Haoyu, GAO Ming, LONG Yi, et al. Effects of fertilizer reduction and application of organic fertilizer on soil nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients and crop yield in a purple soil sloping field [J]. Environ Sci, 2020, 41(4): 1921 − 1929.
    [28] 董晓伟. 牡蛎壳土壤调理剂对大棚土壤理化、生物性状影响的研究[D]. 青岛: 中国海洋大学, 2004.

    DONG Xiaowei. Effect of Oyster Shell Soil Remediation on Soil Physical-Chemical and Biology Character of Plastic Greenhouse[D]. Qingdao: Ocean University of China, 2004.
    [29] 褚军, 薛建辉, 金梅娟, 等. 生物炭对农业面源污染氮、磷流失的影响研究进展[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2014, 30(4): 409 − 415. doi:  10.3969/j.issn.1673-4831.2014.04.001

    CHU Jun, XUE Jianhui, JIN Meijuan, et al. Review of researches on effects of biochar in reducing nitrogen and phosphorus losses with agricultural non-point source pollution [J]. J Ecol Rural Environ, 2014, 30(4): 409 − 415. doi:  10.3969/j.issn.1673-4831.2014.04.001
    [30] 陈闻, 吴家森, 许开平, 等. 集约经营雷竹林土壤磷素状况及流失潜能[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2011, 28(5): 687 − 693. doi:  10.3969/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.05.001

    CHEN Wen, WU Jiasen, XU Kaiping, et al. Soil phosphorus and potential loss in Phyllostachys praecox stands with intensive management [J]. J Zhejiang A&F Univ, 2011, 28(5): 687 − 693. doi:  10.3969/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.05.001
    [31] 朱成立, 郭相平, 刘敏昊, 等. 水稻沟田协同控制灌排模式的节水减污效应[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(3): 86 − 91. doi:  10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2016.03.013

    ZHU Chengli, GUO Xiangping, LIU Minhao, et al. Reduction of nitrogen, phosphorous and runoff by coordination controlled drainage with basin and ditch in paddy field [J]. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng, 2016, 32(3): 86 − 91. doi:  10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2016.03.013
    [32] YANG Shihong, PENG Shizhang, XU Junzheng, et al. Effects of water saving irrigation and controlled release nitrogen fertilizer managements on nitrogen losses from paddy fields [J]. Paddy Water Environ, 2015, 13(1): 71 − 80. doi:  10.1007/s10333-013-0408-9
  • [1] 张曾, 宋成芳, 单胜道, 郑华宝, 张成.  猪粪水热炭对土壤有机碳矿化及土壤性质的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200651
    [2] 张崑, 徐坚, 鲁长根, 邵建均, 蔡广越, 张艳, 吴家森.  不同施肥对稻-菜种植模式氮磷吸收及径流流失的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200593
    [3] 陈丽美, 李小英, 李俊龙, 梁智, 史亮涛.  竹炭与有机肥配施对土壤肥力及紫甘蓝生长的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200723
    [4] 刘宁, 彭春菊, 雷赵枫, 张君波, 李全, 宋新章.  氮沉降和生物质炭对毛竹叶片光合特性的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2019, 36(4): 704-712. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2019.04.010
    [5] 朱荣玮, 葛之葳, 阮宏华, 徐瑾, 彭思利.  外源氮输入下土壤有机碳与土壤微生物生物量碳分形特征 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2019, 36(4): 656-663. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2019.04.004
    [6] 姚兰, 张焕朝, 胡立煌, 王艮梅, 方炎明.  黄山不同海拔植被带土壤活性有机碳、氮及其与酶活性的关系 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2019, 36(6): 1069-1076. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2019.06.003
    [7] 王秋月, 杨兴, 何丽芝, 陆扣萍, 车磊, 袁国栋, 王海龙.  酸化猪炭对土壤中不同形态磷质量分数及相互转化的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2018, 35(3): 387-397. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2018.03.001
    [8] 王莺, 陆荣杰, 吴家森, 姜培坤, 童志鹏.  山核桃林闭合区内径流氮磷流失特征 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2018, 35(5): 802-809. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2018.05.003
    [9] 周紫球, 陆媛媛, 范伟青, 叶慧群, 吴礼栋.  肥料对5年生毛竹竹材物理力学性质的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2013, 30(5): 729-733. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2013.05.015
    [10] 孙芳利, 鲍滨福, 陈安良, 周月英, 于红卫, 杜春贵.  有机杀菌剂在木竹材保护中的应用及发展展望 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2012, 29(2): 272-278. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2012.02.018
    [11] 陈闻, 吴家森, 许开平, 姜培坤.  集约经营雷竹林土壤磷素状况及流失潜能 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2011, 28(5): 687-693. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.05.001
    [12] 刘晓玲, 宋照亮, 单胜道, 叶正钱.  畜禽粪肥施加对嘉兴水稻土总磷、有机磷和有效磷分布的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2011, 28(1): 33-39. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.01.006
    [13] 徐秋芳, 姜培坤, 陆贻通.  不同施肥对雷竹林土壤微生物功能多样性影响初报 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2008, 25(5): 548-552.
    [14] 肖和忠, 杨秀芹, 刘卫东, 吉志新, 王晓娟.  1125肥药双效剂对甘蓝黑根病的防治效果 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2007, 24(4): 468-472.
    [15] 房莉, 俞元春, 余健, 张平究, 朱强根.  低分子量有机酸对森林土壤磷的活化作用 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2007, 24(1): 28-32.
    [16] 姜培坤, 徐秋芳, 邬奇峰, 吴家森.  施肥对板栗林土壤养分和生物学性质的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2007, 24(4): 445-449.
    [17] 陆梅.  腐殖酸桉树有机专用肥对邓恩桉抗寒促生的效应 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2006, 23(5): 501-506.
    [18] 张履勤, 章明奎.  林地与农地转换过程中红壤有机碳、氮和磷库的演变 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2006, 23(1): 75-79.
    [19] 杨芳, 吴家森, 钱新标, 吴丽君.  不同施肥雷竹林土壤微生物量碳的动态变化 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2006, 23(1): 70-74.
    [20] 徐秋芳, 姜培坤.  有机肥对毛竹林间及根区土壤生物化学性质的影响 . 浙江农林大学学报, 2000, 17(4): 364-368.
  • 加载中
  • 链接本文:

    http://zlxb.zafu.edu.cn/article/doi/10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724

    http://zlxb.zafu.edu.cn/article/zjnldxxb/2021//1

计量
  • 文章访问数:  23
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2020-11-09
  • 修回日期:  2021-04-25

单季稻氮磷吸收及径流流失对不同肥料施用的响应

doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
    基金项目:  浙江省重点研发计划项目(2019C03121),浙江省公益技术应用研究项目(LGF18D010003,2017C33111)
    作者简介:

    方晨露(ORCID: 0000-0001-9808-6137),从事农业资源利用研究。E-mail: 834155904@qq.com

    通信作者: 姜培坤(ORCID: 0000-0002-2311-2350),教授,从事农业资源与环境研究。E-mail: jiangpeikun@zafu.edu.cn
  • 中图分类号: S157

摘要:   目的  旨在探讨施用有机肥(菜籽饼)、调理剂(贝壳砂)、炭基肥对稻田土壤氮磷流失和水稻Oryza sativa产量的影响。  方法  共设置不施肥(ck)、常规施肥(T1)、有机肥(T2)、常规施肥+调理剂(T3)、炭基肥(T4)5个处理,不同施肥处理的氮、五氧化二磷、氧化钾用量均为270、75、150 kg·hm−2。通过对比5个处理之间土壤施肥前后氮磷质量分数、水稻产量、水稻籽粒和秸秆中的氮磷质量分数,结合6−9月径流水氮磷质量浓度监测结果,研究不同施肥处理减少氮磷流失的效果。  结果  施肥显著提高了水稻籽粒、秸秆的氮磷积累量和水稻籽粒产量。与ck相比,4个施肥处理增加水稻籽粒产量51.22%~63.41%(P<0.05),但4个处理之间无显著差异。5个处理的氮和磷的流失量分别为4.91~9.56和0.70~1.35 kg·hm−2,其流失量从大到小依次为T2、T1、T3、T4、ck。4个施肥处理的氮和磷的流失率分别为0.82%~1.72%和0.65%~1.99%,从大到小依次为T2、T1、T3、T4  结论  施用调理剂和炭基肥均能有效增加水稻产量,减少氮磷的流失,但施用有机肥处理具有最大径流流失量,因此需注意施肥的时间和方式,有效减少氮磷的流失和环境污染。图5表4参32

English Abstract

方晨露, 简永旗, 吴家森, 张艳, 鲁长根, 邵建均, 郭飞飞, 姜培坤. 单季稻氮磷吸收及径流流失对不同肥料施用的响应[J]. 浙江农林大学学报. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
引用本文: 方晨露, 简永旗, 吴家森, 张艳, 鲁长根, 邵建均, 郭飞飞, 姜培坤. 单季稻氮磷吸收及径流流失对不同肥料施用的响应[J]. 浙江农林大学学报. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
FANG Chenlu, JIAN Yongqi, WU Jiasen, ZHANG Yan, LU Changgen, SHAO Jianjun, GUO Feifei, JIANG Peikun. Response of nitrogen and phosphorus uptake and runoff loss in single cropping rice to different fertilization treatments[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724
Citation: FANG Chenlu, JIAN Yongqi, WU Jiasen, ZHANG Yan, LU Changgen, SHAO Jianjun, GUO Feifei, JIANG Peikun. Response of nitrogen and phosphorus uptake and runoff loss in single cropping rice to different fertilization treatments[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20200724

返回顶部

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回