浙江农业学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (10): 2446-2455.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20221624
秸秆还田对土壤结构和春玉米生长的影响
于博(
), 王钰艳, 任琴, 党玉蕾, 张志鹏, 王宇
- 集宁师范学院 生命科学与技术学院,内蒙古 乌兰察布 012000
-
收稿日期:2022-11-14出版日期:2023-10-25发布日期:2023-10-31 -
作者简介:于博(1986—),男,吉林白山人,博士,讲师,主要从事土壤肥力调控与作物生理生态研究。E-mail: jnsyyubo@126.com -
基金资助:乌兰察布市基础研究项目(2021JC201);内蒙古自治区自然科学基金(2021BS03022);集宁师范学院博士创新科研基金项目(jsbsjj2305);集宁师范学院博士科研启动基金(jsbsjj1710);大学生创新创业训练计划项目(202211427002);大学生创新创业训练计划项目(S202211427023);大学生创新创业训练计划项目(CXCY2021114270024)
Effects of straw returning on soil structure and spring maize growth
YU Bo(), WANG Yuyan, REN Qin, DANG Yulei, ZHANG Zhipeng, WANG Yu
- School of Life Science and Technology, Jining Normal University, Ulanqab 012000, Inner Mongolia, China
-
Received:2022-11-14Online:2023-10-25Published:2023-10-31
摘要：
为探讨秸秆还田对旱地土壤结构和春玉米生长的影响,设置连续4 a的秸秆还田定位试验,测定土壤物理性质、结构、春玉米根系指标和产量的变化。结果显示,秸秆还田4 a后,≥0.25 mm团聚体的质量占比、团聚体平均质量直径、团聚体几何平均直径分别显著(P<0.05)增大了8.81%、12.61%、20.35%,团聚体稳定指数、团聚体不稳定系数分别显著增大了38.09%和6.85百分点,团聚体破坏率显著减小了8.49%,土壤容重显著降低了0.2 g·cm-3,总孔隙度、质量含水量和田间持水量分别显著增加了7.53、9.92、13.05百分点,耕层(0~20 cm)春玉米根干重、根表面积和根体积显著增加,产量显著提高24.58%。结果表明,长期秸秆还田改变了春玉米旱地的土壤结构状况,提高了土壤的保水性、通透性、团聚体的稳定性,改善了春玉米根系的生长环境,增产效果明显。
中图分类号:
引用本文
于博, 王钰艳, 任琴, 党玉蕾, 张志鹏, 王宇. 秸秆还田对土壤结构和春玉米生长的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(10): 2446-2455.
YU Bo, WANG Yuyan, REN Qin, DANG Yulei, ZHANG Zhipeng, WANG Yu. Effects of straw returning on soil structure and spring maize growth[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2023, 35(10): 2446-2455.
图1 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤剖面特征的变化
Fig.1 Changes of soil profile characteristics with increasing straw returning years
图1 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤剖面特征的变化
Fig.1 Changes of soil profile characteristics with increasing straw returning years
图2 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤容重的变化 柱上无相同字母的表示差异显著(P<0.05)。
Fig.2 Changes of soil bulk density with increasing straw returning years Bars marked without the same letters indicate signficant difference at P<0.05.
图2 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤容重的变化 柱上无相同字母的表示差异显著(P<0.05)。
Fig.2 Changes of soil bulk density with increasing straw returning years Bars marked without the same letters indicate signficant difference at P<0.05.
表1 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤水分和孔隙的变化
Table 1 Changes of soil moisture and porosity with increasing straw returning years
| 处理 Treatment | 总孔隙度 Total porosity/% | 孔隙比 Void ratio | 质量含水量 Mass water content/% | 田间持水量 Field capacity/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 49.70±0.30 c | 0.99±0.01 b | 13.15±0.40 e | 34.55±0.61 d |
| HT1 | 51.73±0.38 bc | 1.07±0.02 b | 14.98±0.58 d | 40.54±0.88 c |
| HT2 | 52.64±1.38 b | 1.11±0.06 b | 17.34±0.28 c | 42.88±0.58 bc |
| HT3 | 55.57±0.38 a | 1.25±0.02 a | 19.37±0.59 b | 43.58±1.10 b |
| HT4 | 57.23±0.98 a | 1.34±0.06 a | 23.07±0.10 a | 47.60±0.81 a |
表1 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤水分和孔隙的变化
Table 1 Changes of soil moisture and porosity with increasing straw returning years
| 处理 Treatment | 总孔隙度 Total porosity/% | 孔隙比 Void ratio | 质量含水量 Mass water content/% | 田间持水量 Field capacity/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 49.70±0.30 c | 0.99±0.01 b | 13.15±0.40 e | 34.55±0.61 d |
| HT1 | 51.73±0.38 bc | 1.07±0.02 b | 14.98±0.58 d | 40.54±0.88 c |
| HT2 | 52.64±1.38 b | 1.11±0.06 b | 17.34±0.28 c | 42.88±0.58 bc |
| HT3 | 55.57±0.38 a | 1.25±0.02 a | 19.37±0.59 b | 43.58±1.10 b |
| HT4 | 57.23±0.98 a | 1.34±0.06 a | 23.07±0.10 a | 47.60±0.81 a |
图3 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤团聚体的变化 同一粒径柱上无相同字母的表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。
Fig.3 Changes of soil aggregates with increasing straw returning years Bars marked without the same letters indicate significant difference within treatments under the same particle size at P<0.05.
图3 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤团聚体的变化 同一粒径柱上无相同字母的表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。
Fig.3 Changes of soil aggregates with increasing straw returning years Bars marked without the same letters indicate significant difference within treatments under the same particle size at P<0.05.
表2 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤团聚体特征数的变化
Table 2 Changes of soil aggregate parameters with increasing straw returning years
| 处理 | R0.25 | MWD | GMD | AS | PAD | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | ||||||
| CK | 0.749±0.016 c | 2.30±0.05 b | 1.13±0.04 b | 18.22±0.41 c | 81.78±0.41 a | 2.40±0.02 a |
| HT1 | 0.777±0.007 bc | 2.44±0.04 ab | 1.26±0.03 ab | 18.96±0.74 c | 81.04±0.04 a | 2.34±0.01 a |
| HT2 | 0.828±0.008 a | 2.54±0.06 a | 1.34±0.06 a | 18.44±0.21 c | 81.56±0.21 a | 2.31±0.03 a |
| HT3 | 0.796±0.013 ab | 2.45±0.11 ab | 1.26±0.10 ab | 21.52±0.13 b | 78.48±0.13 b | 2.34±0.06 a |
| HT4 | 0.815±0.016 ab | 2.59±0.09 a | 1.36±0.08 a | 25.16±0.67 a | 74.84±0.67 c | 2.30±0.04 a |
表2 不同秸秆还田年限下土壤团聚体特征数的变化
Table 2 Changes of soil aggregate parameters with increasing straw returning years
| 处理 | R0.25 | MWD | GMD | AS | PAD | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | ||||||
| CK | 0.749±0.016 c | 2.30±0.05 b | 1.13±0.04 b | 18.22±0.41 c | 81.78±0.41 a | 2.40±0.02 a |
| HT1 | 0.777±0.007 bc | 2.44±0.04 ab | 1.26±0.03 ab | 18.96±0.74 c | 81.04±0.04 a | 2.34±0.01 a |
| HT2 | 0.828±0.008 a | 2.54±0.06 a | 1.34±0.06 a | 18.44±0.21 c | 81.56±0.21 a | 2.31±0.03 a |
| HT3 | 0.796±0.013 ab | 2.45±0.11 ab | 1.26±0.10 ab | 21.52±0.13 b | 78.48±0.13 b | 2.34±0.06 a |
| HT4 | 0.815±0.016 ab | 2.59±0.09 a | 1.36±0.08 a | 25.16±0.67 a | 74.84±0.67 c | 2.30±0.04 a |
表3 不同还田年限下土壤水稳性团聚体含量和团聚体不稳定系数(SWA)的变化
Table 3 Changes of soil water-stable aggregates and sabotage of water-stable aggregates (SWA) with increasing straw returning years %
| 处理 Treatment | 不同粒径水稳性团聚体的含量 Content of water stable aggregates with different particle sizes | SWA | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≥5 mm | 2~<5 mm | 1~<2 mm | 0.5~<1 mm | 0.25~<0.5 mm | <0.25 mm | ||
| CK | 0 c | 1.05±0.02 c | 1.21±0.02 c | 4.91±0.03 b | 6.46±0.16 d | 86.36±0.11 a | 13.64±0.11 e |
| HT1 | 1.49±0.04 b | 0.76±0.01 d | 1.50±0.02 b | 4.41±0.05 c | 6.58±0.11 cd | 85.27±0.11 b | 14.73±0.11 d |
| HT2 | 1.55±0.03 b | 0.89±0.07 cd | 1.22±0.02 c | 4.70±0.13 b | 6.91±0.04 c | 84.73±0.08 c | 15.27±0.08 c |
| HT3 | 1.48±0.05 b | 1.80±0.12 b | 1.50±0.09 b | 4.83±0.06 b | 7.52±0.15 b | 82.87±0.21 d | 17.13±0.21 b |
| HT4 | 1.91±0.03 a | 2.62±0.12 a | 1.71±0.08 a | 5.84±0.08 a | 8.42±0.08 a | 79.51±0.17 e | 20.49±0.17 a |
表3 不同还田年限下土壤水稳性团聚体含量和团聚体不稳定系数(SWA)的变化
Table 3 Changes of soil water-stable aggregates and sabotage of water-stable aggregates (SWA) with increasing straw returning years %
| 处理 Treatment | 不同粒径水稳性团聚体的含量 Content of water stable aggregates with different particle sizes | SWA | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≥5 mm | 2~<5 mm | 1~<2 mm | 0.5~<1 mm | 0.25~<0.5 mm | <0.25 mm | ||
| CK | 0 c | 1.05±0.02 c | 1.21±0.02 c | 4.91±0.03 b | 6.46±0.16 d | 86.36±0.11 a | 13.64±0.11 e |
| HT1 | 1.49±0.04 b | 0.76±0.01 d | 1.50±0.02 b | 4.41±0.05 c | 6.58±0.11 cd | 85.27±0.11 b | 14.73±0.11 d |
| HT2 | 1.55±0.03 b | 0.89±0.07 cd | 1.22±0.02 c | 4.70±0.13 b | 6.91±0.04 c | 84.73±0.08 c | 15.27±0.08 c |
| HT3 | 1.48±0.05 b | 1.80±0.12 b | 1.50±0.09 b | 4.83±0.06 b | 7.52±0.15 b | 82.87±0.21 d | 17.13±0.21 b |
| HT4 | 1.91±0.03 a | 2.62±0.12 a | 1.71±0.08 a | 5.84±0.08 a | 8.42±0.08 a | 79.51±0.17 e | 20.49±0.17 a |
表4 不同秸秆还田年限下春玉米根质量的变化
Table 4 Changes of root weight of spring maize with increasing straw returning years g
| 指标 Index | 处理 Treatment | 不同土层的根质量Root weight in different soil layers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~10 cm | 10~20 cm | 20~30 cm | 30~40 cm | 40~50 cm | 50~60 cm | ||
| 鲜重 | CK | 71.37±0.65 d | 62.50±1.05 e | 24.77±0.61 a | 9.03±0.12 a | 4.22±0.17 a | 3.35±0.21 b |
| Fresh weight | HT1 | 81.39±0.59 c | 68.30±0.92 d | 24.26±0.56 a | 9.10±0.23 a | 4.40±0.26 a | 3.65±0.02 ab |
| HT2 | 98.87±2.26 b | 72.87±1.00 c | 24.43±0.12 a | 9.27±0.09 a | 4.48±0.31 a | 3.62±0.11 ab | |
| HT3 | 103.44±1.59 a | 80.04±0.09 b | 25.38±0.44 a | 9.20±0.26 a | 4.60±0.19 a | 3.80±0.05 a | |
| HT4 | 102.46±1.23 ab | 85.51±1.59 a | 25.76±0.68 a | 9.10±0.55 a | 4.47±0.09 a | 3.87±0.09 a | |
| 干重 | CK | 7.92±0.04 d | 6.20±0.08 e | 2.40±0.04 a | 0.85±0.03 a | 0.41±0.01 b | 0.31±0.01 b |
| Dry weight | HT1 | 9.46±0.08 c | 6.74±0.10 d | 2.38±0.05 a | 0.92±0.02 a | 0.42±0.03 ab | 0.32±0.03 b |
| HT2 | 10.89±0.36 b | 7.10±0.05 c | 2.40±0.01 a | 0.94±0.01 a | 0.43±0.01 a | 0.32±0.01 b | |
| HT3 | 11.72±0.15 a | 7.86±0.04 b | 2.49±0.04 a | 0.93±0.03 a | 0.44±0.02 a | 0.38±0.03 a | |
| HT4 | 11.94±0.29 a | 8.34±0.09 a | 2.53±0.07 a | 0.92±0.06 a | 0.44±0.01 a | 0.38±0.02 a | |
表4 不同秸秆还田年限下春玉米根质量的变化
Table 4 Changes of root weight of spring maize with increasing straw returning years g
| 指标 Index | 处理 Treatment | 不同土层的根质量Root weight in different soil layers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~10 cm | 10~20 cm | 20~30 cm | 30~40 cm | 40~50 cm | 50~60 cm | ||
| 鲜重 | CK | 71.37±0.65 d | 62.50±1.05 e | 24.77±0.61 a | 9.03±0.12 a | 4.22±0.17 a | 3.35±0.21 b |
| Fresh weight | HT1 | 81.39±0.59 c | 68.30±0.92 d | 24.26±0.56 a | 9.10±0.23 a | 4.40±0.26 a | 3.65±0.02 ab |
| HT2 | 98.87±2.26 b | 72.87±1.00 c | 24.43±0.12 a | 9.27±0.09 a | 4.48±0.31 a | 3.62±0.11 ab | |
| HT3 | 103.44±1.59 a | 80.04±0.09 b | 25.38±0.44 a | 9.20±0.26 a | 4.60±0.19 a | 3.80±0.05 a | |
| HT4 | 102.46±1.23 ab | 85.51±1.59 a | 25.76±0.68 a | 9.10±0.55 a | 4.47±0.09 a | 3.87±0.09 a | |
| 干重 | CK | 7.92±0.04 d | 6.20±0.08 e | 2.40±0.04 a | 0.85±0.03 a | 0.41±0.01 b | 0.31±0.01 b |
| Dry weight | HT1 | 9.46±0.08 c | 6.74±0.10 d | 2.38±0.05 a | 0.92±0.02 a | 0.42±0.03 ab | 0.32±0.03 b |
| HT2 | 10.89±0.36 b | 7.10±0.05 c | 2.40±0.01 a | 0.94±0.01 a | 0.43±0.01 a | 0.32±0.01 b | |
| HT3 | 11.72±0.15 a | 7.86±0.04 b | 2.49±0.04 a | 0.93±0.03 a | 0.44±0.02 a | 0.38±0.03 a | |
| HT4 | 11.94±0.29 a | 8.34±0.09 a | 2.53±0.07 a | 0.92±0.06 a | 0.44±0.01 a | 0.38±0.02 a | |
表5 不同秸秆还田年限下春玉米根表面积的变化
Table 5 Changes of root surface area of spring maize with increasing straw returning years cm2
| 处理 Treatment | 不同土层的根表面积Root surface area in different soil layers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~10 cm | 10~20 cm | 20~30 cm | 30~40 cm | 40~50 cm | 50~60 cm | |
| CK | 955.98±23.83 d | 619.32±10.27 c | 503.61±4.44 a | 304.61±7.37 a | 234.08±21.65 a | 155.38±6.99 a |
| HT1 | 1 073.90±15.95 c | 686.49±15.73 b | 509.74±9.42 a | 308.80±10.55 a | 234.86±27.77 a | 161.84±2.26 a |
| HT2 | 1 226.61±10.26 b | 683.72±19.15 b | 509.70±8.39 a | 304.78±21.30 a | 240.13±26.21 a | 163.59±3.57 a |
| HT3 | 1 358.49±25.96 a | 813.67±24.45 a | 511.85±3.30 a | 303.62±12.93 a | 240.93±22.43 a | 165.96±2.15 a |
| HT4 | 1 422.90±31.41 a | 843.33±13.23 a | 514.30±9.95 a | 312.73±10.57 a | 254.13±28.47 a | 164.93±2.18 a |
表5 不同秸秆还田年限下春玉米根表面积的变化
Table 5 Changes of root surface area of spring maize with increasing straw returning years cm2
| 处理 Treatment | 不同土层的根表面积Root surface area in different soil layers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~10 cm | 10~20 cm | 20~30 cm | 30~40 cm | 40~50 cm | 50~60 cm | |
| CK | 955.98±23.83 d | 619.32±10.27 c | 503.61±4.44 a | 304.61±7.37 a | 234.08±21.65 a | 155.38±6.99 a |
| HT1 | 1 073.90±15.95 c | 686.49±15.73 b | 509.74±9.42 a | 308.80±10.55 a | 234.86±27.77 a | 161.84±2.26 a |
| HT2 | 1 226.61±10.26 b | 683.72±19.15 b | 509.70±8.39 a | 304.78±21.30 a | 240.13±26.21 a | 163.59±3.57 a |
| HT3 | 1 358.49±25.96 a | 813.67±24.45 a | 511.85±3.30 a | 303.62±12.93 a | 240.93±22.43 a | 165.96±2.15 a |
| HT4 | 1 422.90±31.41 a | 843.33±13.23 a | 514.30±9.95 a | 312.73±10.57 a | 254.13±28.47 a | 164.93±2.18 a |
表6 不同还田年限下春玉米根体积的变化
Table 6 Changes of root volume of spring maize with increasing straw returning years cm3
| 处理 Treatment | 不同土层的根体积Roo volume in different soil layers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~10 cm | 10~20 cm | 20~30 cm | 30~40 cm | 40~50 cm | 50~60 cm | |
| CK | 30.72±0.32 d | 9.00±0.11 e | 6.62±0.09 a | 4.64±0.27 a | 2.74±0.08 c | 1.28±0.01 b |
| HT1 | 32.97±0.33 c | 12.08±0.29 d | 6.63±0.35 a | 4.70±0.15 a | 2.76±0.05 c | 1.29±0.01 b |
| HT2 | 37.43±0.55 b | 17.38±0.56 c | 6.80±0.12 a | 4.80±0.12 a | 2.88±0.08 bc | 1.30±0.02 ab |
| HT3 | 37.91±0.84 b | 20.68±0.34 b | 6.75±0.09 a | 4.95±0.24 a | 3.10±0.06 ab | 1.34±0.01 a |
| HT4 | 41.44±0.69 a | 23.45±0.58 a | 6.71±0.09 a | 4.94±0.14 a | 3.25±0.10 a | 1.34±0.02 a |
表6 不同还田年限下春玉米根体积的变化
Table 6 Changes of root volume of spring maize with increasing straw returning years cm3
| 处理 Treatment | 不同土层的根体积Roo volume in different soil layers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0~10 cm | 10~20 cm | 20~30 cm | 30~40 cm | 40~50 cm | 50~60 cm | |
| CK | 30.72±0.32 d | 9.00±0.11 e | 6.62±0.09 a | 4.64±0.27 a | 2.74±0.08 c | 1.28±0.01 b |
| HT1 | 32.97±0.33 c | 12.08±0.29 d | 6.63±0.35 a | 4.70±0.15 a | 2.76±0.05 c | 1.29±0.01 b |
| HT2 | 37.43±0.55 b | 17.38±0.56 c | 6.80±0.12 a | 4.80±0.12 a | 2.88±0.08 bc | 1.30±0.02 ab |
| HT3 | 37.91±0.84 b | 20.68±0.34 b | 6.75±0.09 a | 4.95±0.24 a | 3.10±0.06 ab | 1.34±0.01 a |
| HT4 | 41.44±0.69 a | 23.45±0.58 a | 6.71±0.09 a | 4.94±0.14 a | 3.25±0.10 a | 1.34±0.02 a |
表7 不同秸秆还田年限下春玉米产量和产量构成的变化
Table 7 Changes of yield and yield composition of spring maize with increasing straw returning years
| 处理 Treatment | 有效穗数 Number of effective ears/hm-2 | 穗粒数 Kernels per spike | 百粒重 100-grain weight/g | 产量 Yield/(t·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 73 545±994 b | 664.27±9.27 b | 24.09±0.84 b | 1.18±0.46 c |
| HT1 | 77 095±785 a | 709.13±4.26 a | 24.21±0.72 b | 1.32±0.29 b |
| HT2 | 76 085±304 a | 713.67±7.13 a | 24.11±0.35 b | 1.31±0.30 b |
| HT3 | 75 572±1112 ab | 714.73±7.96 a | 25.46±0.44 ab | 1.38±0.42 ab |
| HT4 | 77 703±192 a | 717.00±2.51 a | 26.33±0.39 a | 1.47±0.25 a |
表7 不同秸秆还田年限下春玉米产量和产量构成的变化
Table 7 Changes of yield and yield composition of spring maize with increasing straw returning years
| 处理 Treatment | 有效穗数 Number of effective ears/hm-2 | 穗粒数 Kernels per spike | 百粒重 100-grain weight/g | 产量 Yield/(t·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 73 545±994 b | 664.27±9.27 b | 24.09±0.84 b | 1.18±0.46 c |
| HT1 | 77 095±785 a | 709.13±4.26 a | 24.21±0.72 b | 1.32±0.29 b |
| HT2 | 76 085±304 a | 713.67±7.13 a | 24.11±0.35 b | 1.31±0.30 b |
| HT3 | 75 572±1112 ab | 714.73±7.96 a | 25.46±0.44 ab | 1.38±0.42 ab |
| HT4 | 77 703±192 a | 717.00±2.51 a | 26.33±0.39 a | 1.47±0.25 a |
| [1] | 于博, 徐松鹤, 任琴, 等. 秸秆还田研究进展及内蒙古玉米秸秆深翻还田现状[J]. 作物杂志, 2022(2): 6-15. |
| YU B, XU S H, REN Q, et al. Research progress of straw returning and present situation of maize straw returning by deep ploughing in Inner Mongolia[J]. Crops, 2022(2): 6-15. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [2] | 邹文秀, 韩晓增, 严君, 等. 耕翻和秸秆还田深度对东北黑土物理性质的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(15): 9-18. |
| ZOU W X, HAN X Z, YAN J, et al. Effects of incorporation depth of tillage and straw returning on soil physical properties of black soil in Northeast China[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2020, 36(15): 9-18. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [3] | 韩上, 武际, 李敏, 等. 深耕结合秸秆还田提高作物产量并改善耕层薄化土壤理化性质[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(2): 276-284. |
| HAN S, WU J, LI M, et al. Deep tillage with straw returning increase crop yield and improve soil physicochemical properties under topsoil thinning treatment[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2020, 26(2): 276-284. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [4] | 王秋菊, 刘峰, 焦峰, 等. 秸秆粉碎集条深埋机械还田对土壤物理性质的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(17): 43-49. |
| WANG Q J, LIU F, JIAO F, et al. Effects of strip-collected chopping and mechanical deep-buried return of straw on physical properties of soil[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(17): 43-49. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [5] | 庞党伟, 陈金, 唐玉海, 等. 玉米秸秆还田方式和氮肥处理对土壤理化性质及冬小麦产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2016, 42(11): 1689-1699. |
| PANG D W, CHEN J, TANG Y H, et al. Effect of returning methods of maize straw and nitrogen treatments on soil physicochemical property and yield of winter wheat[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2016, 42(11): 1689-1699. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [6] | 徐莹莹, 王俊河, 刘玉涛, 等. 秸秆不同还田方式对土壤物理性状、玉米产量的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2018, 26(5): 78-84. |
| XU Y Y, WANG J H, LIU Y T, et al. Effects of different returning methods of straw on soil physical property, yield of corn[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2018, 26(5): 78-84. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [7] | LIPIEC J, WALCZAK R, WITKOWSKA-WALCZAK B, et al. The effect of aggregate size on water retention and pore structure of two silt loam soils of different genesis[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2007, 97(2): 239-246. |
| [8] | SIX J, PAUSTIAN K, ELLIOTT E T, et al. Soil structure and organic matter I: distribution of aggregate-size classes and aggregate-associated carbon[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2000, 64(2): 681-689. |
| [9] | 高洪军, 彭畅, 张秀芝, 等. 不同秸秆还田模式对黑钙土团聚体特征的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(1): 75-79. |
| GAO H J, PENG C, ZHANG X Z, et al. Effects of different straw returning modes on characteristics of soil aggregates in chernozem soil[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 33(1): 75-79. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [10] | 张翰林, 郑宪清, 何七勇, 等. 不同秸秆还田年限对稻麦轮作土壤团聚体和有机碳的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2016, 30(4): 216-220. |
| ZHANG H L, ZHENG X Q, HE Q Y, et al. Effect of years of straw returning on soil aggregates and organic carbon in rice-wheat rotation systems[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 30(4): 216-220. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [11] | 冀保毅, 赵亚丽, 郭海斌, 等. 深耕和秸秆还田对不同质地土壤团聚体组成及稳定性的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2015, 44(3): 65-70. |
| JI B Y, ZHAO Y L, GUO H B, et al. Effects of deep tillage and straw returning on different texture soils aggregate composition and stability[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 44(3): 65-70. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [12] | 慕平, 张恩和, 王汉宁, 等. 不同年限全量玉米秸秆还田对玉米生长发育及土壤理化性状的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20(3): 291-296. |
| MU P, ZHANG E H, WANG H N, et al. Effects of continuous straw return to soil on maize growth and soil chemical and physical characteristics[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2012, 20(3): 291-296. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [13] | 王沣, 王美佳, 苏思慧, 等. 水分胁迫下秸秆还田对玉米产量和根系空间分布的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(11): 3643-3648. |
| WANG F, WANG M J, SU S H, et al. Effects of straw returning on maize yield and root system spatial distribution under water stress[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2018, 29(11): 3643-3648. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [14] | 劳家柽. 土壤农化分析手册[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1988. |
| [15] | 于博, 于晓芳, 高聚林, 等. 玉米秸秆全量深翻还田对高产田土壤结构的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2018, 26(4): 584-592. |
| YU B, YU X F, GAO J L, et al. Effects of deep tillage and straw return on soil structure of high-yield spring maize field[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2018, 26(4): 584-592. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [16] | 冷暖, 邓羽松, 林立文, 等. 南亚热带不同母质发育土壤团聚体特征及其稳定性[J]. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(5): 80-86. |
| LENG N, DENG Y S, LIN L W, et al. Characteristics and stability of soil aggregates developed from different parent materials in the south subtropical region[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2021, 35(5): 80-86. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [17] | 王碧胜, 于维水, 武雪萍, 等. 添加玉米秸秆对旱作土壤团聚体及其有机碳含量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(9): 1553-1563. |
| WANG B S, YU W S, WU X P, et al. Effect of straw addition on the formation of aggregates and accumulation of organic carbon in dryland soil[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(9): 1553-1563. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [18] | 皇甫呈惠, 孙筱璐, 刘树堂, 等. 长期定位秸秆还田对土壤团聚体及有机碳组分的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2020, 35(3): 153-159. |
| HUANGFU C H, SUN X L, LIU S T, et al. Effect of long-term straw returning to field on soil aggregates and organic carbon components[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2020, 35(3): 153-159. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [19] | 王秀娟, 解占军, 董环, 等. 秸秆还田对玉米产量和土壤团聚体组成及有机碳分布的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2018, 26(1): 108-115. |
| WANG X J, XIE Z J, DONG H, et al. Effects of straw returning on yield and soil aggregates composition and organic carbon distribution[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2018, 26(1): 108-115. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [20] | 孟庆英, 邹洪涛, 韩艳玉, 等. 秸秆还田量对土壤团聚体有机碳和玉米产量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(23): 119-125. |
| MENG Q Y, ZOU H T, HAN Y Y, et al. Effects of straw application rates on soil aggregates, soil organic carbon content and maize yield[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(23): 119-125. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [21] | 张姝, 袁宇含, 苑佰飞, 等. 玉米秸秆深翻还田对土壤及其团聚体内有机碳含量和化学组成的影响[J/OL]. 吉林农业大学学报. (2021-06-23) [2022-11-14]. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=3uoqIhG8C45S0-n9fL2suRadTyEVl2pW9UrhTDCdPD65smUY22K1s2PEzT4-Y0ioho5icb-RHTWrksklvukFUYaZO_qvS5VT4-&uniplatform=NZKPT. |
| ZHANG S, YUAN Y H, YUAN B F, et al. Effects of maize straw returning with deep ploughing on organic carbon content and chemical composition in bulk soil and soil aggregates[J/OL]. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University. (2021-06-23) [2022-11-14]. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=3uoqIhG8C45S0-n9fL2suRadTyEVl2pW9UrhTDCdPD65smUY22K1s2PEzT4-Y0ioho5icb-RHTWrksklvukFUYaZO_qvS5VT4-&uniplatform=NZKPT. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [22] | 安嫄嫄, 马琨, 王明国, 等. 玉米秸秆还田对土壤团聚体组成及其碳氮分布的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2020, 29(5): 766-775. |
| AN Y Y, MA K, WANG M G, et al. Effect of maize straw returning to field on soil aggregates and their carbon and nitrogen distributions[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 2020, 29(5): 766-775. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [23] | 范倩玉, 李军辉, 李晋, 等. 不同作物秸秆还田对潮土结构的改良效果[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(4): 230-236. |
| FAN Q Y, LI J H, LI J, et al. Effect of different crop straw mulching on alluvial soil structure improvement[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34(4): 230-236. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [24] | 张奇, 陈粲, 陈效民, 等. 不同秸秆还田深度对黄棕壤土壤物理性质及其剖面变化的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2020, 51(2): 308-314. |
| ZHANG Q, CHEN C, CHEN X M, et al. Effects of different depths of straw returning to field on soil physical properties and profile changes of yellow brown soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2020, 51(2): 308-314. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [25] | 隋鹏祥, 张文可, 梅楠, 等. 不同秸秆还田方式对春玉米产量、水分利用和根系生长的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2018, 32(4): 255-261. |
| SUI P X, ZHANG W K, MEI N, et al. Effects of different straw returning methods on spring maize yield, water use and root growth[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2018, 32(4): 255-261. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [26] | 王胜楠, 邹洪涛, 张玉龙, 等. 秸秆集中深还田两年后对土壤主要性状及玉米根系的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2015, 33(3): 68-71. |
| WANG S N, ZOU H T, ZHANG Y L, et al. Effects of deeply and concentratedly returned straw on soil main properties and corn root system[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2015, 33(3): 68-71. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [27] | 黄毅, 毕素艳, 邹洪涛, 等. 秸秆深层还田对玉米根系及产量的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2013, 21(5): 109-112. |
| HUANG Y, BI S Y, ZOU H T, et al. Effect of straw deep returning on corn root system and yield[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2013, 21(5): 109-112. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [28] | 姜英, 王峥宇, 廉宏利, 等. 耕作和秸秆还田方式对东北春玉米吐丝期根系特征及产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(15): 3071-3082. |
| JIANG Y, WANG Z Y, LIAN H L, et al. Effects of tillage and straw incorporation method on root trait at silking stage and grain yield of spring maize in northeast China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(15): 3071-3082. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [1] | 汪洁, 陆若辉, 朱伟锋, 陈钰佩, 单英杰. 浙江省主要粮食作物秸秆还田替代化肥的潜力[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(8): 1853-1863. |
| [2] | 杨松花, 石贵阳, 王晶琴, 陈竹. 低磷胁迫下大豆根系分泌物对土壤中难溶性磷的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(6): 1396-1406. |
| [3] | 吴传美, 何季, 吴文珊, 蔡俊, 向仰州. 间作对刺梨园土壤团聚体化学计量特征和养分贡献率的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(5): 1132-1143. |
| [4] | 黄正, 张荣萍, 马鹏, 张琪, 周宁宁, 阿什日轨, 冯婷煜, 周林. 冬水田油菜秸秆还田和氮肥运筹对杂交稻干物质积累和产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(5): 983-991. |
| [5] | 赵书慧, 张振华, 欧张丹, 田茂平, 陈玉梅, 赵紫薇. 国内农作物根系分泌物研究热点的初步探析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(3): 534-546. |
| [6] | 耿兵婕, 叶苗苗, 陈研, 王孟昌, 马尚宇, 黄正来, 张文静, 樊永惠. 外源6-BA和KH2PO4对花后受渍小麦根系抗氧化酶和无氧呼吸酶活性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(10): 2275-2285. |
| [7] | 魏茜雅, 梁腊梅, 林欣琪, 秦中维, 李映志. 褪黑素种子引发处理对干旱胁迫下朝天椒生长与生理特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(10): 2378-2388. |
| [8] | 朱雅婷, 倪远之, 张敏, 王振旗, 沈根祥, 黄娜. 不同秸秆还田量对上海地区稻田甲烷排放的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(10): 2436-2445. |
| [9] | 孟繁昊, 杨恒山, 张瑞富, 张玉芹, 李维敏, 张雨珊, 张明伟. 灌溉方式对西辽河平原玉米产量和水氮利用效率的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(9): 1826-1836. |
| [10] | 朱铭, 刘琛, 林义成, 郭彬, 李华, 傅庆林. 不同调理剂组合对浙江红壤土壤肥力、微生物群落多样性和水稻产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(6): 1258-1267. |
| [11] | 杜红, 李玉鹏, 程文, 肖荣英, 胡鹏. 丛枝菌根真菌改善镉胁迫下植物根系和土壤微环境的效应[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(5): 1039-1048. |
| [12] | 胡开博, 杨清夏, 李扬, 吴开贤, 赵平, 龙光强. 化肥减氮配施氨基酸肥料对春玉米生产的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(4): 661-670. |
| [13] | 商佳胤, 张新建, 李凯, 张鹤, 王丹. 不同覆盖材料对设施葡萄根系分布及土壤理化特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(10): 2240-2250. |
| [14] | 贾生强, 范惠珊, 陈喜靖, 喻曼, 沈阿林, 苏瑶. 长期秸秆还田下土壤反硝化细菌群落的有机碳驱动机制[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(9): 1686-1699. |
| [15] | 刘艳伟, 周潇, 杨启良, 茶品元. 不同施肥和灌溉水平对三七生长特性和发病率的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(8): 1426-1435. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||
