下载: 
-
园林绿化废弃物是一种尚未得到充分开发利用的生物质资源，具有巨大的资源化潜力[1−2]。近年来，随着城市化进程加速，枯枝、落叶等园林绿化废弃物产量持续增加。中国园林绿化废弃物年产量已达0.7~1.0亿t，成为仅次于城市生活垃圾的第二大城市固体废弃物[3]。面对如此巨大的产量，其资源化利用已成为亟待解决的现实问题。堆肥作为一种能将有机物转化为植物可吸收的营养物质的资源化途径，其环境友好性和资源转化价值随之凸显，并且已逐渐成为园林绿化废弃物资源化利用的主流方式[4−6]。
然而，堆肥过程中通常伴随着大量温室气体[二氧化碳(CO2)、甲烷(CH4)和一氧化二氮(N2O)]和氨气(NH3)释放。其中，CH4和N2O的全球增温潜势分别为CO2的28和298倍，是加剧全球气候变暖的重要因素；NH3作为有毒气体，不仅威胁人体健康，沉降后导致土壤酸化，而且在大气中可进一步转化为N2O[7−9]。2020年，中国提出“双碳”战略发展目标，力争在2030年实现碳达峰，在2060年实现碳中和。统计显示，城市碳排放量占全国碳总排放量的90%以上，园林绿化废弃物作为城市固体废弃物的重要组成部分，其低碳化利用成为响应“双碳”目标的重要环节[3]。因此，探索高效的温室气体和NH3减排技术，推动园林绿化废弃物堆肥向绿色低碳转型，对实现废弃物处理行业的可持续发展具有重要现实意义。
基于此，本研究梳理了园林绿化废弃物堆肥的基础特性、堆肥过程中温室气体和NH3排放的原理及其影响因素，并总结了当前的主要减排技术和作用机制，最后结合现有问题展望研究方向，期望对园林绿化废弃物堆肥低碳化实践提供理论支持和技术指导。
-
园林绿化废弃物堆肥主要原料为修剪枝叶、草屑、花败等植物残体，具季节性和地域性差异。在北方城市，公园景观绿化和行道树多以落叶树为主，春夏两季凋落物较少，秋冬季节会产生大量的枯枝落叶；在南方城市，常绿树种占比较大，四季均会产生枯枝落叶，季节性变化较小。这些园林绿化废弃物可分为树枝、树干与草屑、落叶两大类，二者化学成分和物质组成存在一定差异[10]。具体而言，树枝、树干具有较高的木质素含量和碳含量，氮含量则较低；草屑、落叶则表现出相反的特征，氮含量较高而木质素含量较低。木质素是一种结构复杂而且难以降解的高分子有机物质，会强烈抑制堆肥中微生物降解作用[11−12]。所以，在堆肥中，树枝、树叶和草屑、落叶的相对含量不同，也会在一定程度上影响堆肥的腐熟进程。
-
园林绿化废弃物与餐厨垃圾、畜禽粪便、污水污泥等有机废弃物相比，在理化性质上表现出较大差异(表1)。园林绿化废弃物碳氮比(C/N)较高(＞60)，而且富含大量木质纤维素等难降解物质。这一特性促使其在实际堆肥中需添加富氮物料，以将初始C/N调节至适宜微生物活动的25~35范围以内，保障堆肥进程的效率和稳定[13−14]；此外，尽管园林绿化废弃物堆肥需要添加一定比例的富氮物料，但优势在于作为有机资源的潜在价值高，而且相较于餐厨垃圾等易携带高污染有害物质的废弃物，环境友好性更加突出。园林绿化废弃物作为相对清洁，而且资源丰富的有机物料，在有机废弃物资源化利用领域，尤其是在高效堆肥、土壤改良剂生产等领域，展现出广阔的应用前景。
-
CO2是园林绿化废弃物堆肥过程中排放量最大的气体，其排放速率可以直观反映堆肥系统中的微生物代谢活性，累积排放量则反映了堆肥有机物的分解程度[20]。研究认为，堆肥原料中总有机碳的23.9%~45.6%以CO2形式损失[21]，占总有机碳损失的70%~85%[22]。CO2排放主要集中在升温期和高温期，占总排放量的78.5%~86.2%[23]。堆肥过程中，木质纤维素等大分子物质在微生物及其分泌的酶的作用下分解为多糖、氨基酸等小分子物质，这些小分子物质一部分在堆肥后期通过缩合或聚合反应生成腐殖质，而另一部分小分子物质则在升温或嗜热阶段矿化为CO2[22]。
-
CH4是在严格厌氧条件下产生的温室气体，其最大排放量通常出现在堆肥的中温期[24]。研究表明，堆肥原料中以CH4形式损失的碳占总有机碳的0.1%~12.6%[21]。CH4的产生主要经历3个阶段：有机物在微生物的作用下水解为小分子物质；这些小分子物质继续转化为酸和醇；最后，虽然园林绿化废弃物较高的孔隙率可以促进堆体通风，但堆体内部也依然不可避免地产生厌氧区域，产甲烷菌就在这种厌氧区域内利用乙酸等底物产生CH4[22−23, 25]。所以，控制堆肥厌氧微区是调控CH4排放的关键措施。
-
N2O的产生与堆肥微生物的氮转化过程密切相关[26]，主要源于硝化作用和反硝化作用[23]。硝化作用是氨或铵盐在氨氧化细菌的作用下氧化为亚硝酸盐，亚硝酸根离子在亚硝酸氧化菌的作用下氧化为硝酸根，该过程中会有少量N2O生成。反硝化作用是在厌氧条件下反硝化细菌还原硝酸盐，最终产生氮气(N2)、N2O等物质的过程。一般情况下，反硝化作用是N2O的主要产生途径[23, 27]，但在供氧充足的条件下，硝化反应会成为产生N2O的主导机制[28]。堆肥中，以N2O形式损失的氮占总有机氮的0.1%~4.2%[21]。
-
堆肥中以NH3形式损失的氮是堆肥中氮素损失的主要形式。研究表明：以NH3形成损失的氮占总氮含量的9.6%~46.0%[29]，有时甚至可以占初始氮含量的90%以上[20]。NH3释放也是堆肥产生刺鼻气味的重要原因之一[30]。堆肥中含氮有机物在微生物及其分泌酶的作用下矿化为$\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $和NH3，二者在堆肥中保持动态平衡。随着微生物活性增强，氨化过程产生大量的$\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $，促使$\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $和NH3之间的平衡向NH3生成方向平移，造成NH3大量释放[31]。
-
温度是影响堆肥过程气体排放的关键环境因子之一。堆肥过程中，有机物降解会释放大量热量，促使堆体升温，而反之堆体升温会影响微生物的代谢活性，因此温度和堆肥进程紧密联系，并进一步影响温室气体和NH3的排放[12]。研究表明：环境温度升高会促进CO2和NH3的排放[24]。这是因为高温会提升微生物活性并促进有机物降解，进而促进CO2排放[27]；此外，高温还可以促进有机氮迅速矿化为$\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $，在堆肥处于碱性条件下，$\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $又易进一步转化为NH3并挥发[32]，所以NH3的排放峰值通常出现在高温期[24]。另一方面，高温会抑制大多数硝化菌和反硝化菌的活性[33]，所以N2O的最大排放量出现在适合中温微生物活跃的阶段[24, 26]。然而也有研究认为，甲烷氧化菌会在高温阶段通过氧化$\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $产生N2O[34]，所以在高温阶段依然有一定量的N2O排放[32]。
-
pH是调控堆肥微生物代谢与气体释放的重要化学参数，通过影响微生物活性对堆肥进程进行调控，进而影响温室气体和NH3的排放。堆肥过程中，产甲烷菌对堆肥pH值变化较为敏感，CH4排放随之变化：当pH为6.6~7.6时，CH4排放较为集中，而当堆肥过酸或过碱时，则CH4排放明显减少[27]。此外，pH也会通过影响硝化过程和反硝化过程的微生物活性影响N2O排放，硝化过程的最适pH为7.0~8.0，而反硝化过程的最适pH为6.0~8.0[27]。研究表明：pH与NH3排放呈正相关，特别是当pH＞7.5时，NH3/$ \mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $平衡向NH3方向移动，导致其大量释放[22, 28]。一般情况下，堆料的初始pH应控制在6.0~8.0，超出此范围时，可加入酸性或碱性物质进行调节，以实现堆肥效益最大化[14]。
-
C/N是直接关系微生物代谢平衡与堆肥气体排放特征的重要参数。堆肥过程中，碳是微生物活动的能量来源，而氮是细胞合成的物质基础[35]，而且由于碳的损失速率高于氮，导致C/N呈下降趋势，进一步影响气体排放[36−38]。微生物每同化1份氮就要消耗30份碳，所以C/N为25~35时最有利于堆肥进行[39]。当C/N偏低时，单位可降解碳对应的氮相对过剩，易造成NH3挥发量增大[40]；而NH3会对硝化微生物产生抑制作用，从而降低N2O排放[41]；此外，较低的C/N也会导致产甲烷菌的主要氮源($\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $)增多，进而促进CH4排放[27]。相反，当C/N较高时，则会降低NH3排放[32]；硝化微生物活性减弱也会导致N2O排放下降[28, 42]。另有研究表明，在园林绿化废弃物堆肥中，C/N升高会同步增加CO2排放量[43]。
-
水分是影响堆体物理结构、微生物活性及营养物质传输的核心因素[44]，直接影响氧气(O2)流通、微生物代谢和木质纤维素分解效率[39]。水分含量较低会加剧NH3和N2O等气体的排放，同时也导致微生物脱水，阻碍微生物代谢活动，降低堆肥温度[12, 22, 45]，导致CO2排放大幅下降[27]。而当含水率较高时，可以通过抑制氨化作用降低$\mathrm{NH}_4^{+} $累积和NH3排放[27]。但若堆肥含水率超过70%时，会导致物料压实，阻碍富氧空气扩散进入堆肥内部，增加厌氧环境，抑制好氧微生物活性并增强厌氧微生物活性，进而加剧N2O和CH4排放，并降低堆肥产品质量[28, 46−47]。一般认为，将含水率控制在60%~65%最有利于实现NH3和N2O减排[28]。
-
堆肥前对原料进行预处理是破坏木质纤维素结构、降低园林绿化废弃物中的难降解物质含量、促进堆肥进程[48]并调节气体排放的重要环节。预处理技术主要包括物理预处理、化学预处理和生物预处理技术。物理预处理技术只改变物料物理性质和微观结构，常见的物理预处理技术包括高温预处理、蒸汽爆破、超声波和微波等。高温预处理是在传统好氧堆肥基础上发展起来的，可以破坏堆肥原料中木质纤维素结构，增强其生物可利用性，从而加速堆肥降解、缩短堆肥周期[49]，在近年的研究中得到快速发展。HUANG等[50]研究发现，超高温预处理堆肥通过抑制蛋白水解菌和蛋白酶活性，显著降低了42%的NH3排放，同时保留了更多氮素，提高了堆肥的氮利用效率，是一种有效的减排策略。超声波和微波预处理技术均通过高频能量破坏木质纤维素结构，提升其可降解性，但目前在园林绿化废弃物堆肥减排领域尚无充足的研究，在规模化堆肥应用中的能效评估、减排效果及经济可行性仍需系统探究。生物预处理是利用真菌、细菌等微生物或动物，对堆肥进行预先降解，以破坏其复杂结构、提高后续处理效率。刘尚斌等[51]研究报道，蝇蛆预处理通过延长高温期与调控氮转化路径，实现氨减排42.7%~61.1%，并且能够显著降低CO2排放当量，但同时也提高了CO2排放量。化学预处理技术则是通过引入化学物质改变有机物的化学键和官能团，进而改变堆肥原料的化学性质。研究表明，氨预处理即可表现出N2O减排潜力[52]。需要注意的是，在进行化学预处理的同时，还应避免引入生物毒性试剂，以免造成二次污染[53]。
-
由于园林绿化废弃物高C/N和高木质纤维素含量的特性，将其与厨余垃圾、畜禽粪便、污泥复配，以达到调节堆肥原料理化性质，平衡元素配比，进而优化堆肥的目的。厨余垃圾因富含易降解有机物且与园林绿化废弃物具有协同增效作用而逐渐受到关注。XU等[32]指出，园林绿化废弃物与厨余垃圾共堆肥能通过优化C/N抑制铵态氮转化，使NH3排放减少82.1%以上，同时厌氧微区的破坏使CH4减排75.0%以上，还可以通过降低反硝化菌丰度与优化氮转化路径，使N2O排放也减少了23.8%~38.6%。此外，研究显示，当园林绿化废弃物中混合厨余垃圾≥40%时，NH3排放可降至人类嗅觉阈值(0.005‰)以下；而若采用40%~50%厨余垃圾与园林绿化废弃物混合时，调节C/N和孔隙结构不仅能实现高效氨减排，还可同步达成积温最大化，显著提升堆肥效率与能源回收潜力[30]。另有研究证实，两者共堆肥还可稳定堆肥环境，促使CO2减排22.35%[54]。
畜禽粪便氮含量高，而园林绿化废弃物有机碳含量丰富，两者按照一定比例混合可以调节堆肥C/N比，同时畜禽粪便还可以增加堆肥中的微生物数量[55]。值得注意的是，不同类型的畜禽粪便对气体排放的作用存在差异。CHEN等[56]分别将鸡粪、猪粪、羊粪与园林绿化废弃物共堆肥，发现与猪粪共堆肥N2O减排效应最大，可达19.87%，推测是由于$\mathrm{NO}_3^{-} $-N含量较低，不能满足反硝化作用需求；鸡粪共堆肥次之(13.22%)，羊粪共堆肥则表现出一定的增排效应(4.72%)；与N2O不同的是，CH4在所有粪便共堆肥中均表现出增排效应，其中猪粪共堆肥增排显著高于其他处理，原因可能在于猪粪的高氮含量提高了产甲烷菌的碳底物可利用性。
污水污泥结构致密、含水量高，园林绿化废弃物与之共堆肥可以改善堆肥通气环境[57]。研究表明，污泥和园林绿化废弃物共堆肥过程中，NH3挥发是氮损失的主要途径，而N2O排放较少[58]。然而，目前针对二者共堆肥体系中温室气体与氨气排放的系统研究仍相对缺乏，相关数据与机理解析尚不充分，亟待进一步深入探讨。
-
调整堆肥工艺可以促进园林绿化废弃物堆肥大分子难降解物质转化，同时也可以起到调节温室气体和NH3排放的作用[4]。当前堆肥工艺主要包括通气调控、覆膜、生物强化及外场辅助等方式。
提高曝气频率能改善堆体内部厌氧环境，减少温室气体排放，但也有研究表明这会相应增加NH3的排放[24]。相比于传统的底部通气，分层连续通风可以通过优化氧气供应和温度分布使NH3和N2O排放量降低30.6%和27.7%，还可以提升有机质降解率，达74.4%[59]。但当通气速率过高时可能加速生物热和水蒸气的传输，导致堆体温度下降和脱水[12]。
覆膜也是一种重要减排手段。覆膜可以减少堆肥中CH4和N2O的排放，其中对CH4减排效果更优[60]。在应用中，半透膜覆盖通过在膜下形成正压环境促进有氧分解、利用水膜吸收可溶性气体和物理阻隔等方法，使膜外CO2、CH4、N2O和NH3的累积排放量较膜内分别降低了73%、96%、80%和65%，同时产出腐熟的堆肥产品[61]。纳米膜覆盖技术可提高堆体温度，促进氮素硝化过程，同时通过膜内的水蒸气形成水膜的截留作用，最终实现NH3减排58%[62]，成为该领域的研究热点。
生物强化是应对园林绿化废弃物堆肥过程中大分子物质降解和气体排放的常用策略。其中蚯蚓堆肥是近年来广泛采用的生物强化堆肥工艺，蚯蚓可以通过自身活动翻动堆料，并通过相关微生物的作用影响物质转化过程[63−65]。研究证实，蚯蚓堆肥还可以通过改善通气、调控微生物和优化碳氮循环减少25%~36%的N2O排放和22%~26%的CH4排放量[65]，表明蚯蚓堆肥具有同步提升物质降解效率与气体减排的潜力，是生物强化策略中实用性较高的典型范例。最后，作为新型堆肥工艺的外场辅助模式近年来也逐渐发展起来，其中较为常见且具有较大研发价值的是电场堆肥和光降解堆肥。TANG等[66]将2V的直流电压施加于传统好氧堆肥，促进电子迁移至氧气，从而提高了氧气利用率，并促使总温室气体排放减少了70%，缩短了堆肥周期。光降解技术是利用不同波段的光改善园林绿化废弃物堆肥的新型技术，可以促进有机质降解[67−68]。同时WANG等[69]发现排除320~380 nm波段的光照可以增强微生物氮固定和原料中木质纤维素降解，分别使NH3和N2O排放量降低31% 和21%。总体而言，外场辅助模式为堆肥工艺创新提供了新的研究思路，在堆肥碳减排领域也应进一步探索。
-
添加剂是调控堆肥过程中温室气体与NH3排放的重要策略，根据其性质和功能可分为无机添加剂、有机添加剂、微生物添加剂及复合添加剂四大类。
无机添加剂可分为黏土矿物、无机盐类和金属类，主要通过优化堆肥物理化学性质促进减排[70]。其中黏土矿物类添加剂应用最为广泛，如膨润土可通过增加堆肥孔隙率和吸附效应使CH4和N2O排放量分别减少约16.8%和29.4%[71]。无机盐类表现出相同的减排效应，如XU等[26]发现磷渣可以为微生物代谢提供充足的氧气和附着位点，促使堆肥减排，而且10%和15%的添加量可以分别降低CO2当量的68.9%和88.6%。金属类添加剂以铁矿石为代表，可以将堆肥中的活性氧提高1.38倍，显著减少了45.12%的温室气体排放[72]。
有机添加剂可以通过减少厌氧区域或者吸附作用、调节堆肥物质平衡等途径减少释放的气体[70, 73]。例如，稻壳和蛋壳废料分别可以通过降低pH值和微孔隙吸附作用抑制园林绿化废弃物堆肥中NH3排放[74]；蚯蚓粪以较高的孔隙度和阳离子代换能力，降低堆肥氮损失，减少NH3、CH4和N2O排放量分别达61%、48%和94%[75−78]。生物炭在堆肥减排中应用最为广泛，研究也最为充分，有研究指出，添加9%的花生壳生物碳可以对CO2、CH4、N2O和NH3产生不同程度的减排作用[79]，进一步印证了有机添加剂在堆肥气体调控领域的重要价值。
微生物添加剂作为调控堆肥进程的重要手段，可以分为单一菌株和复合微生物菌剂两大类，添加量一般为堆肥物料干物质的1%~3%[49]。单一菌株作用针对性更强，如甲烷氧化菌可以增强甲烷氧化性能，促进CH4作为代谢碳源，进而抑制CH4排放[39, 80]。复合微生物菌剂可以整合不同微生物特性产生协同作用，强化减排效果，WANG等[81]研究表明，添加0.01%的复合微生物菌剂可以通过调节碳氮代谢，阻碍硝化微生物生长和相关微生物活性，使堆肥中的CH4、N2O、NH3分别减排11.39%、90.29%、20.59%。但需注意，微生物菌剂可能增强物料降解，导致堆肥内部厌氧，反而增加 CH4排放，故选择时需考虑堆肥体系氧环境评估其适用性，优先选择适配的功能菌剂[21]。
复合添加剂是将无机添加剂、有机添加剂或微生物添加剂通过不同的方式或比例复配，共同应用于堆肥的一类添加剂。这种添加剂可以综合多种添加剂的优点，实现功能互补，从而在提升减排效果的同时降低堆肥成本。比如25%啤酒糟和15%陶粒联合添加到园林绿化废弃物堆肥中，不仅可以最大程度降低NH3排放，还可以通过提高堆肥氧含量、减少反硝化过程中N2O源的形成，进而有效降低CH4、N2O的排放，并且其综合减排效果优于单一组分[82]。又如，菌剂和矿物质协同作用可以促进木质纤维素降解，显著降低温室气体和氨气排放，最终提升堆肥产品品质，缩短堆肥周期[83]。
-
针对园林绿化废弃物堆肥温室气体和NH3排放的难题，目前虽然已有较多研究开发出减排的方案，但是依然存在气体排放量高和排放量随着堆肥条件变化而产生巨大差异的现象。今后应关注以下5方面：①积极开发智能化的精准监测仪器，实现对气体排放的24 h精准监测，最大限度地降低因气体采集方法不同而导致的结果偏差。②目前园林绿化废弃物堆肥减排机制研究仍然较为薄弱，应进一步深入探索园林绿化废弃物堆肥减排的微生物学机制，揭示其减排过程的生物学基础。③目前市场上的微生物菌剂大多是针对畜禽粪便等堆肥原料的，少数园林绿化废弃物堆肥专用菌剂也只是聚焦于强化物质转化过程，未充分关注其减排能力，因此应着力开发园林绿化废弃物堆肥气体减排专用菌剂，提升减排效果[84]。④应着力开发温室气体与NH3排放的预测模型，并融合机器学习技术。通过分析多维数据，实现对减排效果的精准预测与工艺智能优化，从而推动堆肥管理向智能化、精细化方向发展。⑤尽管园林绿化废弃物堆肥减排研究逐渐受到重视，但目前仍缺乏对CO2、CH4、N2O和NH3同步减排的系统性研究。多数减排方法在抑制CH4、N2O和NH3的同时反而增加了CO2释放，应致力于开发多气体协同减排技术，实现环境效益的整体优化。
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。
“双碳”背景下园林绿化废弃物堆肥气体排放与调控研究进展
DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20250592
Advances in greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and control during green waste composting under “Dural Carbon” context
-
摘要: 园林绿化废弃物作为一种高木质纤维素、高碳氮比(C/N)的生物质资源，其堆肥化处理是促进资源化利用的有效途径。然而，堆肥过程中产生的温室气体[二氧化碳(CO2)、甲烷(CH4)和一氧化二氮(N2O)]和氨气(NH3)不仅会污染生态环境，还会造成营养元素流失，成为“双碳”目标下亟待解决的难题。本文系统综述了园林绿化废弃物堆肥的原料组成、理化特性，深入分析了堆肥过程中CO2、CH4、N2O和NH3的产生机制与排放规律，探讨了温度、pH、C/N、水分等关键因素的影响，并全面总结了原料预处理、混合原料调控、堆肥工艺优化及添加剂应用等主要减排技术的作用机制与实施效果。未来应进一步研究气体精准监测、微生物作用机制、专用菌剂、温室气体和NH3排放预测模型，并研发多气体协同减排技术，以促进园林绿化废弃物堆肥的绿色低碳转型和可持续发展。表1参84Abstract: Green waste, characterized by its high lignocellulose content and elevated C/N ratio, represents a significant biomass resource, and composting is an effective approach for its utilization. However, the greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, and N2O) and NH3 emitted during composting contribute to ecological pollution and nutrient loss, posing a challenge to China’s “Dual Carbon” goals. This review systematically examines the composition and physicochemical properties of green waste, analyzes the formation mechanisms and emission patterns of CO2, CH4, N2O, and NH3 during composting, and explores the influence of key factors such as temperature, pH, C/N ratio, and moisture content. It also summarizes mitigation strategies—including raw material pretreatment, feedstock mixing, process optimization, and additive application—detailing their mechanisms and effectiveness. Future research should focus on precise gas monitoring, elucidating microbial mechanisms, developing specialized microbial agents, constructing emission prediction models, and advancing integrated multi-gas mitigation technologies.[Ch, 1 tab. 84 ref.]
-
Key words:
- green waste /
- composting /
- greenhouse gases /
- ammonia /
- emission mechanisms /
- influencing factors /
- emission reduction technologies
-
[1] SHI Yan, GE Ying, CHANG Jie, et al. Garden waste biomass for renewable and sustainable energy production in China: potential, challenges and development[J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013, 22: 432−437. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.02.003. [2] MACFARLANE D W. Potential availability of urban wood biomass in Michigan: implications for energy production, carbon sequestration and sustainable forest management in the U. S. A.[J]. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2009, 33(4): 628−634. DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.10.004. [3] 刘学磊, 任学勇, 宋曙光, 等. 双碳背景下园林绿化废弃物资源化利用研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2024, 52(9): 1−4, 24. LIU Xuelei, REN Xueyong, SONG Shuguang, et al. Research progress on resource utilization of garden waste under the background of dual carbon[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 52(9): 1−4, 24. DOI:10.3969 /j.issn.0517-6611.2024.09.001. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2024.09.001. [4] 孙向阳, 李素艳, 任学勇, 等. 园林绿化废弃物资源化利用研究进展[J]. 林业科学, 2025, 61(7): 100−113. SUN Xiangyang, LI Suyan, REN Xueyong, et al. Research progress on resource utilization of green waste[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2025, 61(7): 100−113. DOI: 10.11707/j.1001−7488.LYKX20250340. [5] 闫芳彬, 郑景明, 宫殷婷, 等. 园林废弃物资源化处理对人工林土壤养分及微生物碳源利用的影响[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2023, 40(5): 1045−1053. YAN Fangbin, ZHENG Jingming, GONG Yinting, et al. Effects of garden waste reuse treatments on soil nutrients and microbial carbon source utilization in plantation soil[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2023, 40(5): 1045−1053. DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20220620. [6] 段晓阳, 杨晓婷, 韩露, 等. 山东省烟台市填海造陆居住区绿地土壤质量现状调查与评价[J]. 树木医学, 2025, 2(1): 87−96. DUAN Xiaoyang, YANG Xiaoting, HAN Lu, et al. Investigation and evaluation of soil quality in green space in sea reclamation residential areas of Yantai City, Shandong Province[J]. Tree Health, 2025, 2(1): 87−96. [7] 杨杰, 王鹏, 覃爱昶. “双碳”背景下堆肥温室气体减排技术研究进展[J]. 广西农学报, 2024, 39(5): 141−147. YANG Jie, WANG Peng, QIN Aichang. Research progress on greenhouse gas emission reduction technology for composting in the context of “carbon peaking and carbon neutrality”[J]. Journal of Guangxi Agriculture, 2024, 39(5): 141−147. DOI: 10.20160/j.cnki.ISSN1003-4374.2024.05.020. [8] CUI Hu, HOU Shengnan, WANG Xinyi, et al. Greenhouse gas emissions in a microbial fuel cell-assisted composting system: microbial insights into bacterial structures and genetic functions[J]. Environmental Research, 2025, 285: 122504. DOI: 10.1016/J.ENVRES.2025.122504. [9] UMAR W, VANDENBUSSCHE C, DINUCCIO E, et al. Acidification of animal slurry in housing and during storage to reduce NH3 and GHG emissions-recent advancements and future perspectives[J]. Waste Management, 2025, 203: 114856. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2025.114856. [10] 任学勇, 邢世华. 园林绿化废弃物科学处置与资源化利用[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2024. REN Xueyong, XING Shihua. Scientific Disposal and Resource Utilization of Landscape Waste[M]. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House, 2024. [11] WOOLET J, WHITMAN T. Pyrogenic organic matter effects on soil bacterial community composition[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2020, 141: 107678. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2019.107678. [12] YUN Mengying, LI Changheng, DUAN Yuandong, et al. Classification of bulking agents and their regulations on composting: a review[J]. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2025, 13(4): 117318. DOI: 10.1016/j.jece.2025.117318. [13] SZYŁAK SZYDŁOWSKI M, KOS W. Odorous emissions during the use of the intermediate fraction as an additive to the green waste composting process[J]. Sustainability, 2025, 17(3): 851. DOI: 10.3390/SU17030851. [14] 中国建筑节能协会. 园林绿化废弃物堆肥低碳处理技术: T/CABEE 061—2024[S]. 北京: 中国建材工业出版社, 2024. China Association of Building Energy Efficiency. Low-carbon Treatment Technology of Green Waste Composting: T/CABEE 061—2024[S]. Beijing: Building Materials Industry Press of China, 2024. [15] 陈昢圳, 张珂宇, 申锋. 农村多源有机固体废弃物协同好氧堆肥技术研究进展[J/OL]. 农业环境科学学报, 2025-11-05. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/12.1347.S.20251105.1135.004. CHEN Peizhen, ZHANG Keyu, SHEN Feng. Advances in aerobic co-composting of multi-source organic solid wastes in rural areas [J/OL]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2025-11-05. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/12.1347.S.20251105.1135.004. [16] 陈有先, 刘芳, 袁宗胜, 等. 厨余垃圾好氧堆肥与厌氧消化处理技术研究进展[J]. 福建农业科技, 2025, 56(7): 65−71. CHEN Youxian, LIU Fang, YUAN Zongsheng, et al. Research progress on aerobic composting and anaerobic digestion treatment technology for kitchen waste[J]. Fujian Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 56(7): 65−71. DOI: 10.13651/j.cnki.fjnykj.2025.07.011. [17] 汪鑫, 杨天学, 李杰, 等. 添加生物炭对厨余垃圾堆肥磷转化的影响研究[J]. 环境工程技术学报, 2025, 15(4): 1354−1365. WANG Xin, YANG Tianxue, LI Jie, et al. Influence of biochar amendment on phosphorus speciation during kitchen waste composting[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology, 2025, 15(4): 1354−1365. DOI: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20250177. [18] 郭亮. 猪场废弃物强制通风静态垛堆肥系统的研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2002. GUO Liang. Forced Aeration Static Pile Composting System of Swine Manure [D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2002. [19] 李晓帅, 张栋, 戴翎翎, 等. 污泥与餐厨垃圾联合厌氧消化产甲烷研究进展[J]. 环境工程, 2015, 33(9): 100−104. LI Xiaoshuai, ZHANG Dong, DAI Lingling, et al. State of the art of methane produced from sludge and food waste co-digestion[J]. Environmental Engineering, 2015, 33(9): 100−104. DOI: 10.13205/j.hjgc.201509022. [20] LI Xu, SHI Xiaoshuang, YANG Zhiman, et al. Effects of recyclable ceramsite as the porous bulking agent during the continuous thermophilic composting of dairy manure[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 217: 344−351. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.148. [21] WANG Nanyi, HE Yong, ZHAO Keqi , et al. Greenhouse gas emission characteristics and influencing factors of agricultural waste composting process: a review[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2024, 354: 120337. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120337. [22] 范景华, 张瑞玲, 张钊, 等. 餐厨垃圾好氧堆肥中的碳氮损失及缓解措施研究进展[J]. 天津理工大学学报, 2024, 40(4): 139−149. FAN Jinghua, ZHANG Ruiling, ZHANG Zhao, et al. Research progress on carbon and nitrogen loss and mitigation measures in aerobic composting of kitchen waste[J]. Journal of Tianjin University of Technology, 2024, 40(4): 139−149. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-095X.2024.04.022. [23] 李仲瀚, 杨凤霞, 杨铭, 等. 蚯蚓堆肥及其温室气体排放研究进展[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2025, 42(5): 1148−1158. LI Zhonghan, YANG Fengxia, YANG Ming, et al. Research progress in vermicomposting and its greenhouse gas emissions[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2025, 42(5): 1148−1158. DOI: 10.13254/j.jare.2024.0416. [24] HAN Zhangliang, SUN Dezhi, WANG Hui, et al. Effects of ambient temperature and aeration frequency on emissions of ammonia and greenhouse gases from a sewage sludge aerobic composting plant[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2018, 270: 457−466. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.09.048. [25] HE Xueqin, HAN Lujia, FU Bao, et al. Effect and microbial reaction mechanism of rice straw biochar on pore methane production during mainstream large-scale aerobic composting in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 215: 1223−1232. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.159. [26] XU Mingyue, YU Bao, CHEN Yue, et al. Mitigating greenhouse gas emission and enhancing fermentation by phosphorus slag addition during sewage sludge composting[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2024, 370: 122740. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.122740. [27] 巴士迪. 奶牛粪便堆肥过程温室气体和氨气排放规律及养分损失研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2020. BA Shidi. Greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions and nutrient losses from dairy manure composting [D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2020. DOI:10.27630/d.cnki.gznky.2020.000189. [28] ZHAO Shuaixiang, SCHMIDT S, QIN Wei, et al. Towards the circular nitrogen economy-a global meta-analysis of composting technologies reveals much potential for mitigating nitrogen losses[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 704: 135401. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135401. [29] LUO Wenhai, YUAN Jing, LUO Yiming, et al. Effects of mixing and covering with mature compost on gaseous emissions during composting[J]. Chemosphere, 2014, 117: 14−19. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.05.043. [30] NEUGEBAUER M, SOŁOWIEJ P. The use of green waste to overcome the difficulty in small-scale composting of organic household waste[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 156: 865−875. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.095. [31] 李松蓉, 彭璧辉, 徐少奇, 等. 堆肥过程氨气、硫化氢协同减排研究进展[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2024, 41(2): 431−441. LI Songrong, PENG Bihui, XU Shaoqi, et al. Research progress on synergistic emission reduction of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide in composting[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2024, 41(2): 431−441. DOI: 10.13254/j.jare.2023.0050. [32] XU Zhicheng, MA Yu, ZHANG Lanxia, et al. Relating bacterial dynamics and functions to gaseous emissions during composting of kitchen and garden wastes[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 767: 144210. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144210. [33] YANG Fan, LI Yun, HAN Yuhua, et al. Performance of mature compost to control gaseous emissions in kitchen waste composting[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 657: 262−269. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.030. [34] MAO Hui, ZHANG Haoyue, FU Qian, et al. Effects of four additives in pig manure composting on greenhouse gas emission reduction and bacterial community change[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2019, 292: 121896. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121896. [35] ONWOSI C O, IGBOKWE V C, ODIMBA J N, et al. Composting technology in waste stabilization: on the methods, challenges and future prospects[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 190: 140−157. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.12.051. [36] ZHANG Zhi, LIU Donghai, QIAO Yan, et al. Mitigation of carbon and nitrogen losses during pig manure composting: a meta-analysis[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 783: 147103. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147103. [37] ZHANG Wenming, YU Chenxu, WANG Xujie, et al. Increased abundance of nitrogen transforming bacteria by higher C/N ratio reduces the total losses of N and C in chicken manure and corn stover mix composting[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2020, 297: 122410. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122410. [38] TANG Ruolan, LIU Yan, MA Ruonan, et al. Effect of moisture content, aeration rate, and C/N on maturity and gaseous emissions during kitchen waste rapid composting[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2023, 326: 116662. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116662. [39] ANSARI S A, SHAKEEL A, SAWARKAR R, et al. Additive facilitated co-composting of lignocellulosic biomass waste, approach towards minimizing greenhouse gas emissions: an up to date review[J]. Environmental Research, 2023, 224: 115529. DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.115529. [40] ABALOS D, RECOUS S, BUTTERBACH-BAHL K, et al. A review and meta-analysis of mitigation measures for nitrous oxide emissions from crop residues[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 828: 154388. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154388. [41] CÁCERES R, MALIŃSKA K, MARFÀ O. Nitrification within composting: a review[J]. Waste Management, 2018, 72: 119−137. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman. 2017.10.049. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.049. [42] HUANG Yao, ZOU Jianwen, ZHENG Xunhua, et al. Nitrous oxide emissions as influenced by amendment of plant residues with different C∶N ratios[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 2004, 36(6): 973−981. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.02.009. [43] 李霞, 孔祥奕, 张雪茹, 等. 不同碳氮比对园林废弃物堆肥中氨气和温室气体排放的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2024, 52(7): 196−199. LI Xia, KONG Xiangyi, ZHANG Xueru, et al. Effects of different carbon-nitrogen ratio on the emission of ammonia and greenhouse gases during the composting of garden waste[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 52(7): 196−199. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2024.07.046. [44] LIANG C, DAS K C, MCCLENDON R W. The influence of temperature and moisture contents regimes on the aerobic microbial activity of a biosolids composting blend[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2003, 86(2): 131−137. DOI: 10.1016/S0960-8524(02)00153-0. [45] PARDO G, MORAL R, AGUILERA E, et al. Gaseous emissions from management of solid waste: a systematic review[J]. Global Change Biology, 2015, 21(3): 1313−1327. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12806. [46] VAN DER WEERDEN T J, KELLIHER F M, DE KLEIN C A M. Influence of pore size distribution and soil water content on nitrous oxide emissions[J]. Soil Research, 2012, 50(2): 125−135. DOI: 10.1071/sr11112. [47] GUO Honghong, GU Jie, WANG Xiaojuan, et al. Microbial mechanisms related to the effects of bamboo charcoal and bamboo vinegar on the degradation of organic matter and methane emissions during composting[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2021, 272: 116013. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116013. [48] BHATIA S K, JAGTAP S S, BEDEKAR A A, et al. Recent developments in pretreatment technologies on lignocellulosic biomass: Effect of key parameters, technological improvements, and challenges[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2020, 300: 122724. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122724. [49] WU Di, WEI Zimin, MOHAMED T A , et al. Lignocellulose biomass bioconversion during composting: Mechanism of action of lignocellulase, pretreatment methods and future perspectives[J]. Chemosphere, 2022, 286: 131635. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131635. [50] HUANG Ying, CHEN Yuehong, HUANG Hongying, et al. Hyperthermophilic pretreatment composting can reduce ammonia emissions by controlling proteolytic bacterial community and the physicochemical properties[J]. Bioresources and Bioprocessing, 2023, 10: 37. DOI: 10.1186/s40643-023-00659-y. [51] 刘尚斌, 郑祥洲, 王煌平, 等. 蝇蛆预处理及辅料添加对鸡粪堆肥氨挥发和温室气体排放的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2024, 43(5): 1151−1162. LIU Shangbin, ZHENG Xiangzhou, WANG Huangping, et al. Effects of excipient incorporation and fly maggot pretreatment on ammonia emissions and greenhouse gases emissions during chicken manure composting[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2024, 43(5): 1151−1162. DOI: 10.11654/jaes.2023-0547. [52] LINDBERG L, ERMOLAEV E, VINNERÅS B, et al. Process efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions in black soldier fly larvae composting of fruit and vegetable waste with and without pre-treatment[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 338: 130552. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130552. [53] ZHENG Yi, ZHAO Jia, XU Fuqing, et al. Pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for enhanced biogas production[J]. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2014, 42: 35−53. DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2014.01.001. [54] GU Junhao, LI Suyan, SUN Xiangyang, et al. Greenhouse gas emissions from co-composting of green waste and kitchen waste at different ratios[J]. Sustainability, 2025, 17(17): 8041. DOI: 10.3390/su17178041. [55] 陈乔宇, 杨丽军, 吴松成, 等. 园林绿化废弃物堆肥工艺研究进展[J]. 农业与技术, 2021, 41(15): 139−142. CHEN Qiaoyu, YANG Lijun, WU Songcheng, et al. Research progress on composting technology of garden waste[J]. Agriculture and Technology, 2021, 41(15): 139−142. DOI: 10.19754/j.nyyjs.20210815037. [56] CHEN Mengli, HUANG Yimei, LIU Huijuan, et al. Impact of different nitrogen source on the compost quality and greenhouse gas emissions during composting of garden waste[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2019, 124: 326−335. DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2019.03.006. [57] GRGAS D, ŠTEFANAC T, BAREŠIĆ M, et al. Co-composting of sewage sludge, green waste, and food waste[J]. Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, 2023, 11(1): 1−14. DOI: 10.13044/j.sdewes.d10.0415. [58] KULIKOWSKA D, BERNAT K. Composting of municipal sewage sludge and lignocellulosic waste: nitrogen transformations and humic substances molecular weight[J]. Energies, 2023, 16(1): 376. DOI: 10.3390/en16010376. [59] LIU Zelong, ZHANG Xinyuan, WANG Fenghua, et al. Stratified aeration supplied an effective way for ammonia and greenhouse gas mitigation in composting[J]. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 2025, 37: 104055. DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2025.104055. [60] CAO Jie, QU Haoli, LI Ruirong, et al. Effects of membrane covers and biochar on compost quality and greenhouse gas reduction in aerobic composting[J]. BioResources, 2024, 19(2): 3475−3488. DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.2.3475-3488. [61] SUN Xiaoxi, MA Shuangshuang, HAN Lujia, et al. The effect of a semi-permeable membrane-covered composting system on greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions in the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 204: 778−787. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.061. [62] 李永双, 孙波, 陈菊红, 等. 纳米膜覆盖对畜禽粪便好氧堆肥进程及恶臭气体排放的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2021, 42(11): 5554−5562. LI Yongshuang, SUN Bo, CHEN Juhong, et al. Effects of nano-membrane on aerobic composting process and odor emission of livestock manure[J]. Environmental Science, 2021, 42(11): 5554−5562. DOI: 10.13227/j.hjkx.202103109. [63] VELASCO-VELASCO J, PARKINSON R, KURI V. Ammonia emissions during vermicomposting of sheep manure[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2011, 102(23): 10959−10964. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.09.047. [64] WANG Jinzhi, HU Zhengyi, XU Xingkai, et al. Emissions of ammonia and greenhouse gases during combined pre-composting and vermicomposting of duck manure[J]. Waste Management, 2014, 34(8): 1546−1552. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2014.04.010. [65] NIGUSSIE A, KUYPER T W, BRUUN S, et al. Vermicomposting as a technology for reducing nitrogen losses and greenhouse gas emissions from small-scale composting[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 139: 429−439. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.058. [66] TANG Jiahuan, LI Xiang, ZHAO Wenqi, et al. Electric field induces electron flow to simultaneously enhance the maturity of aerobic composting and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2019, 279: 234−242. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.01.140. [67] LI Ruinan, ZHANG Lu. Effects of radiation with diverse spectral wavelengths on photodegradation during green waste composting[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 826: 154166. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154166. [68] SU Yuze, ZHANG Lu. Responses of microorganisms to different wavelengths of light radiation during green waste composting[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 920: 171021. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171021. [69] WANG Po, ZHANG Lu. Filtering solar wavelengths reduces nitrogen loss during green waste composting[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2025, 200: 107357. DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2025.107357. [70] 韩冰, 霍丽丽, 赵立欣, 等. 添加剂促进堆肥过程氨气和温室气体减排研究进展[J]. 高校化学工程学报, 2025, 39(2): 188−199. HAN Bing, HUO Lili, ZHAO Lixin, et al. Research progress on additive enhanced ammonia and greenhouse gas emission reduction in aerobic composting[J]. Journal of Chemical Engineering of Chinese Universities, 2025, 39(2): 188−199. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-9015.2024.00.015. [71] WU Jiaping, LI Mengling, WANG Yan, et al. Impact of bentonite on greenhouse gas emissions during pig manure composting and its subsequent application[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2023, 344: 118453. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118453. [72] DU Xian, XING Ruizhi, LIN Ying, et al. Reduced greenhouse gas emission by reactive oxygen species during composting[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2024, 404: 130910. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2024.130910. [73] NGUYEN M K, LIN C, HOANG H G, et al. Evaluate the role of biochar during the organic waste composting process: a critical review[J]. Chemosphere, 2022, 299: 134488. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134488. [74] WANG Wei, ZHANG Lu, SUN Xiangyang. Improvement of two-stage composting of green waste by addition of eggshell waste and rice husks[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2021, 320: 124388. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124388. [75] HWANG H Y, LEE S M, LEE C R, et al. Addition of earthworm castings reduces gas emissions and improves compost quality in kitchen waste composting[J]. Applied Biological Chemistry, 2022, 65: 27. DOI: 10.1186/s13765-022-00692-z. [76] LIM S L, WU T Y, LIM P N, et al. The use of vermicompost in organic farming: overview, effects on soil and economics[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2015, 95(6): 1143−1156. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.6849. [77] LIM S L, LEE L H, WU T Y. Sustainability of using composting and vermicomposting technologies for organic solid waste biotransformation: recent overview, greenhouse gases emissions and economic analysis[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 111: 262−278. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.083. [78] EDWARDS C A, ARANCON N Q, SHERMAN R L. Vermiculture Technology: Earthworms, Organic Wastes, and Environmental Management[M]. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2010. [79] 王义祥, 叶菁, 林怡, 等. 花生壳生物炭用量对猪粪堆肥温室气体和NH3排放的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2021, 26(6): 114−125. WANG Yixiang, YE Jing, LIN Yi, et al. Effects of peanut shell biochar on greenhouse gas and NH3 emissions during swine manure composting[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2021, 26(6): 114−125. DOI: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2021.06.12. [80] KUMAR M, YADAV A N, SAXENA R, et al. Novel methanotrophic and methanogenic bacterial communities from diverse ecosystems and their impact on environment[J]. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology, 2021, 33: 102005. DOI: 10.1016/j.bcab.2021.102005. [81] WANG Zhe, XU Yilin, YANG Tong, et al. Effects of biochar carried microbial agent on compost quality, greenhouse gas emission and bacterial community during sheep manure composting[J]. Biochar, 2023, 5(1): 3. DOI: 10.1007/s42773-022-00202-w. [82] BAI Yifan, ZHANG Lu, YIN Zexin, et al. Beer lees and ceramsite amendments enhance the two-stage co-composting of green waste[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2021, 335: 125288. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125288. [83] 蔡连凤. 菌剂和矿物质添加对鸡粪好氧发酵堆肥腐熟度与气体排放的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2025. CAI Lianfeng. Effects of Microbial Agents and Mineral Additions on Humic Substances and Gas Emissions from Chicken Manure Composting by Aerobic Fermentation [D]. Harbin: Northeast Agricultural University, 2025. [84] 李雅琳, 李素艳, 孙向阳, 等. 基于人工神经网络算法的2株木质素降解菌固体菌剂的制备[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2022, 39(2): 364−371. LI Yalin, LI Suyan, SUN Xiangyang, et al. Preparation of two strains of lignin-degrading bacteria solid inoculum[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A& F University, 2022, 39(2): 364−371. DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20210311. -
-
链接本文:
https://zlxb.zafu.edu.cn/article/doi/10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20250592
