Inhibiting effects of immobilization agents on cadmium, lead and arsenic in rice production

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20230079

Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2024, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (1): 1-8.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20230079

• Crop Science • Previous Articles Next Articles

Inhibiting effects of immobilization agents on cadmium, lead and arsenic in rice production

YANG Xifan¹^,²(), GUO Bin², QIU Gaoyang², LIU Junli², TONG Wenbin³^,^*(), YANG Haijun³, ZHU Weidong³, MAO Congyan³

1. College of Environment, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310032, China
2. Institute of Environment, Resource, Soil and Fertilizer, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou 310021, China
3. Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of Qujiang Distrcit, Quzhou City, Quzhou 324022, Zhejiang, China

Received:2023-01-19 Online:2024-01-25 Published:2024-02-18

Abstract

Abstract:

In the present study, a field experiment was conducted with different application rates (0, 2 250, 4 500, 6 750 kg·hm^-2) of commercial immobilization agents to examine their inhibiting effect on soil available cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), arsenic (As) contents, soil pH value and Cd, Pb, As contents in rice grains for 2 years (2021—2022). It was shown that application of appropriate rate of immobilization agents significantly (P<0.05) increased soil pH value and decreased soil available Cd, Pb, As contents in soil. Among the 6 immobilization agents, the best effect in 2021 was noted in the treatment of application of 6 750 kg·hm^-2 long-acting passivator, as the soil pH value was significanlty increased from 5.00 to 6.98, the soil available Cd, Pb contents were significantly decreased by 82.2%, 98.6%, respectively. Besides, in 2022, application of 4 550 kg·hm^-2 long-acting passivator also significantly decreased Cd content in rice grains by 90.8%. In general, the long-acting passivator had the best effect and persistence among all the used immobilization agent, which might be related to its high content of calcium carbonate (CaCO₃).

Key words: rice, heavy metal, immobilization agents, calcium carbonate

CLC Number:

YANG Xifan, GUO Bin, QIU Gaoyang, LIU Junli, TONG Wenbin, YANG Haijun, ZHU Weidong, MAO Congyan. Inhibiting effects of immobilization agents on cadmium, lead and arsenic in rice production[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2024, 36(1): 1-8.

Figures/Tables 7

References 17

[1]	李剑睿, 徐应明, 林大松, 等. 农田重金属污染原位钝化修复研究进展[J]. 生态环境学报, 2014, 23(4): 721-728.
	LI J R, XU Y M, LIN D S, et al. In situ immobilization remediation of heavy metals in contaminated soils: a review[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2014, 23(4): 721-728. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	汪涛, 高国龙, 王庆, 等. 无机有机复合材料对重金属污染土壤的修复效应[J]. 环境科技, 2018, 31(5): 29-34.
	WANG T, GAO G L, WANG Q, et al. Inorganic-organic amendments for immobilization of heavy metal contaminants in soil[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2018, 31(5): 29-34. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	王雷, 刘常升, 安成强. 镀锌层无机物与有机物复合无铬钝化研究进展[J]. 电镀与精饰, 2011, 33(3): 22-26.
	WANG L, LIU C S, AN C Q. Progress of chromium-free passivation for zinc plating[J]. Plating & Finishing, 2011, 33(3): 22-26. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	王荐, 吴运金, 王梦杰, 等. 凹凸棒石-稻秸复合材料的制备及其对污染土壤中镉钝化效果的研究[J]. 土壤, 2022, 54(4): 802-809.
	WANG J, WU Y J, WANG M J, et al. Preparation of attapulgite-rice straw composite and its effect on passivation of Cd in contaminated soil[J]. Soils, 2022, 54(4): 802-809. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	郭彬, 刘琛, 傅庆林, 等. 有机-无机型钝化剂对水稻土镉钝化效果研究[J]. 核农学报, 2017, 31(6): 1173-1178.
	GUO B, LIU C, FU Q L, et al. Study on the effect of organic-inorganic passivant on cadmium passivation in paddy soils[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 31(6): 1173-1178. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	王凯荣, 张玉烛, 胡荣桂. 不同土壤改良剂对降低重金属污染土壤上水稻糙米铅镉含量的作用[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2007, 26(2): 476-481.
	WANG K R, ZHANG Y Z, HU R G. Effects of different types of soil amelioration materials on reducing concentrations of Pb and Cd in brown rice in heavy metal polluted paddy soils[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2007, 26(2): 476-481. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	徐隆华, 王佳盟, 韩研科, 等. 轻中度污染耕地安全利用与治理修复技术措施探讨[J]. 农业开发与装备, 2022(3): 121-123.
	XU L H, WANG J M, HAN Y K, et al. Discussion on technical measures for safe utilization, treatment and restoration of lightly and moderately polluted cultivated land[J]. Agricultural Development & Equipments, 2022(3): 121-123. (in Chinese)
[8]	张振兴, 纪雄辉, 谢运河, 等. 水稻不同生育期施用生石灰对稻米镉含量的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2016, 35(10): 1867-1872.
	ZHANG Z X, JI X H, XIE Y H, et al. Effects of quicklime application at different rice growing stage on the cadmium contents in rice grain[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2016, 35(10): 1867-1872. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	朱国武, 胡平, 符明金, 等. 氢氧化钙对土壤中有效镉的时效性[J]. 四川有色金属, 2020(3): 46-47.
	ZHU G W, HU P, FU M J, et al. Time effect of calcium hydroxide on available cadmium in soil[J]. Sichuan Nonferrous Metals, 2020(3): 46-47. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	焦常锋, 常会庆, 王启震, 等. 碳酸钙和壳聚糖联用对高pH值石灰性土壤砷污染的钝化[J]. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(11): 234-240.
	JIAO C F, CHANG H Q, WANG Q Z, et al. Passivation effects of calcium carbonate and chitosan on arsenic pollution in high pH calcareous soil[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2020, 36(11): 234-240. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	王孝堂. 土壤酸度对重金属形态分配的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 1991, 28(1): 103-107.
	WANG X T. Effect of soil acidity on distribution and chemical forms of heavy metals in soil[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 1991, 28(1): 103-107. (in Chinese)
[12]	蔡美芳, 李开明, 谢丹平, 等. 我国耕地土壤重金属污染现状与防治对策研究[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2014, 37(S2): 223-230.
	CAI M F, LI K M, XIE D P, et al. The status and protection strategy of farmland soils polluted by heavy metals[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2014, 37(S2): 223-230. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	邵学新, 吴明, 蒋科毅. 土壤重金属污染来源及其解析研究进展[J]. 广东微量元素科学, 2007, 14(4): 1-6.
	SHAO X X, WU M, JIANG K Y. Research progress in sources identification of soil heavy metal pollution[J]. Guangdong Trace Elements Science, 2007, 14(4): 1-6. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	贾然然. 土壤调理剂通用标准有望今年出台[J]. 中国农资, 2016(17): 6.
	JIA R R. The general standard of soil conditioner is expected to be introduced this year[J]. China Agri-Production News, 2016(17): 6. (in Chinese)
[15]	张传琦. 土壤中重金属砷、镉、铅、铬、汞有效态浸提剂的研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2011.
	ZHANG C Q. Heavy metals in soil arsenic, cadmium, lead, chromium, mercury extraction agents available[D]. Hefei: Anhui Agricultural University, 2011. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	韩春梅, 王林山, 巩宗强, 等. 土壤中重金属形态分析及其环境学意义[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005, 24(12): 1499-1502.
	HAN C M, WANG L S, GONG Z Q, et al. Chemical forms of soil heavy metals and their environmental significance[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2005, 24(12): 1499-1502. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	张小敏, 张秀英, 钟太洋, 等. 中国农田土壤重金属富集状况及其空间分布研究[J]. 环境科学, 2014, 35(2): 692-703.
	ZHANG X M, ZHANG X Y, ZHONG T Y, et al. Spatial distribution and accumulation of heavy metal in arable land soil of China[J]. Environmental Science, 2014, 35(2): 692-703. (in Chinese with English abstract)

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的土壤有效态As含量 Soil available As content under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	0.081±0.008 a	0.074±0.012 ab	0.065±0.009 b	0.060±0.009 b
	B	0.053±0.010 a	0.032±0.004 b	0.013±0.004 c	0.024±0.006 b
	C	0.039±0.006 a	0.037±0.001 a	0.022±0.002 b	0.010±0.003 c
	D	0.066±0.002 a	0.009±0.005 d	0.034±0.002 b	0.024±0.003 c
	E	0.082±0.003 a	0.041±0.002 c	0.024±0.004 d	0.075±0.003 b
	F	0.112±0.003 a	0.080±0.007 b	0.078±0.004 bc	0.067±0.009 c
2022	A	0.067±0.028 a	0.083±0.035 a	0.068±0.025 a	0.102±0.081 a
	B	0.038±0.083 a	0.001±0.024 b	0.089±0.034 a	0.118±0.050 a
	C	0.150±0.031 a	0.122±0.066 a	0.039±0.036 b	0.093±0.057 a
	D	0.135±0.001 a	0.055±0.025 ab	0.005±0.045 b	0.027±0.048 ab
	E	0.229±0.007 a	0.052±0.042 b	0.063±0.045 b	0.084±0.034 b
	F	0.076±0.087 a	0.030±0.061 a	0.087±0.045 a	0.053±0.033 a

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的土壤有效态As含量 Soil available As content under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	0.081±0.008 a	0.074±0.012 ab	0.065±0.009 b	0.060±0.009 b
	B	0.053±0.010 a	0.032±0.004 b	0.013±0.004 c	0.024±0.006 b
	C	0.039±0.006 a	0.037±0.001 a	0.022±0.002 b	0.010±0.003 c
	D	0.066±0.002 a	0.009±0.005 d	0.034±0.002 b	0.024±0.003 c
	E	0.082±0.003 a	0.041±0.002 c	0.024±0.004 d	0.075±0.003 b
	F	0.112±0.003 a	0.080±0.007 b	0.078±0.004 bc	0.067±0.009 c
2022	A	0.067±0.028 a	0.083±0.035 a	0.068±0.025 a	0.102±0.081 a
	B	0.038±0.083 a	0.001±0.024 b	0.089±0.034 a	0.118±0.050 a
	C	0.150±0.031 a	0.122±0.066 a	0.039±0.036 b	0.093±0.057 a
	D	0.135±0.001 a	0.055±0.025 ab	0.005±0.045 b	0.027±0.048 ab
	E	0.229±0.007 a	0.052±0.042 b	0.063±0.045 b	0.084±0.034 b
	F	0.076±0.087 a	0.030±0.061 a	0.087±0.045 a	0.053±0.033 a

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的稻米As含量 As content in rice grains under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	0.046±0.072 a	0.097±0.065 a	0.001±0.070 a	0.048±0.042 a
	B	0.120±0.041 a	0.087±0.049 a	0.029±0.012 b	0.065±0.063 ab
	C	0.167±0.072 a	0.109±0.053 a	0.125±0.062 a	0.179±0.036 a
	D	0.085±0.052 b	0.081±0.077 b	0.066±0.077 b	0.199±0.078 a
	E	0.110±0.02 a	0.105±0.076 a	0.110±0.040 a	0.011±0.038 b
	F	0.050±0.076 c	0.065±0.045 bc	0.142±0.043 ab	0.197±0.045 a
2022	A	0.531±0.043 a	ND	0.207±0.091 a	ND
	B	0.546±0.147 a	0.465±0.001 a	ND	0.129±0.129 b
	C	0.103±0.103 b	0.436±0.075 a	0.179±0.130 b	0.385±0.122 a
	D	0.248±0.120 a	0.457±0.151 a	0.403±0.143 a	0.258±0.356 a
	E	0.592±0.238 a	0.296±0.014 a	0.508±0.259 a	0.407±0.289 a
	F	0.189±0.001 a	0.524±0.249 b	ND	0.236±0.001 a

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的稻米As含量 As content in rice grains under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	0.046±0.072 a	0.097±0.065 a	0.001±0.070 a	0.048±0.042 a
	B	0.120±0.041 a	0.087±0.049 a	0.029±0.012 b	0.065±0.063 ab
	C	0.167±0.072 a	0.109±0.053 a	0.125±0.062 a	0.179±0.036 a
	D	0.085±0.052 b	0.081±0.077 b	0.066±0.077 b	0.199±0.078 a
	E	0.110±0.02 a	0.105±0.076 a	0.110±0.040 a	0.011±0.038 b
	F	0.050±0.076 c	0.065±0.045 bc	0.142±0.043 ab	0.197±0.045 a
2022	A	0.531±0.043 a	ND	0.207±0.091 a	ND
	B	0.546±0.147 a	0.465±0.001 a	ND	0.129±0.129 b
	C	0.103±0.103 b	0.436±0.075 a	0.179±0.130 b	0.385±0.122 a
	D	0.248±0.120 a	0.457±0.151 a	0.403±0.143 a	0.258±0.356 a
	E	0.592±0.238 a	0.296±0.014 a	0.508±0.259 a	0.407±0.289 a
	F	0.189±0.001 a	0.524±0.249 b	ND	0.236±0.001 a

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的土壤有效态Pb含量 Soil available Pb contents under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	0.520±0.073 a	0.430±0.054 a	0.407±0.076 a	0.301±0.060 a
	B	0.381±0.151 a	0.197±0.125 b	0.077±0.062 c	0.232±0.024 ab
	C	0.338±0.072 a	0.118±0.092 b	0.107±0.046 b	0.090±0.080 b
	D	0.312±0.093 a	0.133±0.020 b	0.156±0.055 b	0.108±0.040 b
	E	0.234±0.047 a	0.086±0.056 bc	0.034±0.041 c	0.110±0.053 b
	F	0.368±0.050 a	0.044±0.024 b	0.042±0.048 b	0.005±0.002 c
2022	A	0.323±0.003 a	0.288±0.015 a	0.302±0.009 a	0.318±0.035 a
	B	0.115±0.031 b	0.211±0.042 a	0.093±0.065 b	0.062±0.051 b
	C	0.106±0.040 a	0.120±0.006 a	0.089±0.068 a	0.112±0.014 a
	D	0.071±0.001 a	0.064±0.032 a	0.047±0.020 a	0.051±0.033 a
	E	0.092±0.065 a	0.072±0.050 a	0.090±0.101 a	0.093±0.061 a
	F	0.023±0.030 a	0.025±0.049 a	0.003±0.101 a	0.023±0.023 a

Inhibiting effects of immobilization agents on cadmium, lead and arsenic in rice production

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 17

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	PEI Huimin, WU Mingming, ZHAI Rongrong, YE Jing, JIN Yue, ZHU Yi, HOU Jianjun, ZHU Guofu, YE Shenghai. Research progress on gene function and breeding of low-cadmium rice cultivars [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(9): 2012-2020.
[2]	CHEN Xingxing, YU Wenxuan, XU Jianwei, ZHANG Peng. Characterization of heavy metal contents in different parts of Undaria pinnatifida and assessment of health hazard [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(8): 1794-1804.
[3]	TAN Shiyi, YU Guohong, XUE Xianglei, ZHAO Yinglei, XU Baoyu, ZHANG Chenghao. Design and experiment of tray handling device for industrialized rice seedling raising [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(7): 1545-1555.
[4]	ZHANG Zhi, HE Haohao, YU Miao, XU Jianfeng. Effects of chemical fertilizer reduction combined with soil conditioner on soil acidity, soil nutrients and rice yield [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(6): 1301-1308.
[5]	LIN Xiaobing, LI Jiang, CHENG Yanhong, WANG Binqiang, HE Shaolang, HUANG Shangshu, HUANG Qianru. Effects of organic materials on soil microbial biomass, mineral nitrogen content and rice yield [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(6): 1309-1318.
[6]	SU Yang, SHANG Xiaolan, QIAN Zhongming, WU Lingen, HUANG Jiaqi, ZHUANG Haifeng, ZHAO Yufei, DANG Hongyang, XU Lijun. Effects of synergistic enhancement of straw returning to the field with decomposition agent and biochar on soil quality and rice growth [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(5): 1139-1148.
[7]	ZHU Xiao, ZHU Ying, LI Hongjun, CHEN Shanfeng. Preparation and quality of oat chickpea compound rice by squeezing [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(5): 1149-1158.
[8]	LIU Qihua, SUN Zhaowen, ZHENG Chongke. Effects of nitrogen management on absorption and allocation of microelements in above-ground parts of dry direct-sowing rice [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(5): 987-997.
[9]	YING Yongfei, HAN Dongxuan, MENG Fang, YU Lin, SHEN Jialuan, WANG Kaiying. Effects of biogas slurry substituting chemical fertilizer on rice yield and quality and soil characteristics [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(4): 880-891.
[10]	SONG Xinlu, FAN Shuhong, WU Guangqi, ZHAN Mengqi, HOU Qian, LI Mingyue, XU Yan. Effects of combined copper-phenanthrene pollution on physiological characteristics and pollutant accumulation of rice roots at tillering stage [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(3): 521-529.
[11]	LEI Zhiwei, LI Xinxin, XU Heng, ZHANG Heng, ZHU Ying, ZHANG Hua. Identification of QTLs for stem borer resistance using chromosome segment substitution lines in rice [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(3): 530-537.
[12]	XIE Changyan, JIN Yumeng, ZHANG Miao, DONG Qingjun, LI Qing, JI Li, ZHONG Ping, CHEN Chuan, ZHANG Ankang. Application effect of nutrient soil made from river sludge for machine-transplanted rice seedling [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(3): 538-547.
[13]	LI Guiping, XU Xiaomei, LU Lizhi. Rice-duck farming and its environmental effects [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(3): 643-653.
[14]	WU Jiaqi, ZHU Xueming, BAO Jiandong, WANG Caoyi, ZHOU Xiaoyu, LI Lin, LIN Fucheng. Research progress on biological control of rice blast [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(3): 736-744.
[15]	WAN Shaoyuan, LIU Xianbo, CAI Shuo, SHI Hong, CHENG Jie. Effect of irrigation and planting methods on the yield and quality of double-cropping rice [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(2): 257-268.

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的稻米Pb含量 Pb contents in rice grains under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	0.012±0.022 a	0.038±0.069 a	0.169±0.207 a	0.124±0.170 a
	B	0.152±0.220 a	0.110±0.150 a	0.184±0.062 a	0.013±0.008 b
	C	0.111±0.104 a	0.204±0.146 a	0.380±0.183 a	0.004±0.007 b
	D	0.001±0.004 a	0.081±0.073 a	0.321±0.402 a	0.015±0.020 b
	E	0.084±0.033 a	0.072±0.045 a	0.030±0.040 b	0.001±0.009 c
	F	0.128±0.126 a	0.016±0.014 b	0.070±0.068 b	0.174±0.157 a
2022	A	0.268±0.268 b	ND	ND	0.804±0.001 a
	B	ND	1.489±0.001 a	1.341±0.246 a	0.825±0.042 b
	C	0.727±0.118 a	0.027±0.027 c	ND	0.384±0.384 b
	D	0.091±0.091 b	0.223±0.109 a	0.011±0.016 c	0.487±0.256 a
	E	0.619±0.406 a	ND	0.439±0.285 a	0.257±0.163 a
	F	ND	0.556±0.281 a	0.001±0.024 b	0.048±0.001 b

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的稻米Pb含量 Pb contents in rice grains under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	0.012±0.022 a	0.038±0.069 a	0.169±0.207 a	0.124±0.170 a
	B	0.152±0.220 a	0.110±0.150 a	0.184±0.062 a	0.013±0.008 b
	C	0.111±0.104 a	0.204±0.146 a	0.380±0.183 a	0.004±0.007 b
	D	0.001±0.004 a	0.081±0.073 a	0.321±0.402 a	0.015±0.020 b
	E	0.084±0.033 a	0.072±0.045 a	0.030±0.040 b	0.001±0.009 c
	F	0.128±0.126 a	0.016±0.014 b	0.070±0.068 b	0.174±0.157 a
2022	A	0.268±0.268 b	ND	ND	0.804±0.001 a
	B	ND	1.489±0.001 a	1.341±0.246 a	0.825±0.042 b
	C	0.727±0.118 a	0.027±0.027 c	ND	0.384±0.384 b
	D	0.091±0.091 b	0.223±0.109 a	0.011±0.016 c	0.487±0.256 a
	E	0.619±0.406 a	ND	0.439±0.285 a	0.257±0.163 a
	F	ND	0.556±0.281 a	0.001±0.024 b	0.048±0.001 b

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的土壤pH值 Soil pH value under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	4.94±0.07 a	5.03±0.22 a	5.67±0.94 a	5.15±0.06 a
	B	5.05±0.36 a	5.36±0.26 a	5.86±0.39 a	5.29±0.22 a
	C	5.06±0.06 b	5.36±0.35 a	5.41±0.11 a	5.65±0.25 a
	D	5.01±0.04 b	5.98±0.67 a	5.39±0.14 ab	5.64±0.14 a
	E	4.97±0.15 b	5.42±0.52 ab	6.08±0.63 a	5.56±0.17 ab
	F	5.00±0.07 c	5.89±0.53 bc	6.56±1.01 ab	6.98±0.58 a
2022	A	5.66±0.64 a	5.55±0.05 a	5.44±0.12 a	5.33±0.22 a
	B	5.69±0.21 a	5.84±0.26 a	5.47±0.17 a	5.67±0.11 a
	C	5.68±0.12 a	6.12±0.36 a	5.55±0.06 b	5.82±0.34 a
	D	5.60±0.13 a	5.76±0.04 a	5.63±0.25 a	5.70±0.09 a
	E	5.70±0.18 a	5.55±0.26 ab	5.39±0.09 b	5.89±0.22 a
	F	5.77±0.14 b	5.60±0.22 b	6.30±0.39 a	6.31±0.53 a

年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	不同钝化剂施用量水平下的土壤pH值 Soil pH value under diiferent application rates of immobilization agents
年份 Year	钝化剂 Immobilization agent	L0	L1	L2	L3
2021	A	4.94±0.07 a	5.03±0.22 a	5.67±0.94 a	5.15±0.06 a
	B	5.05±0.36 a	5.36±0.26 a	5.86±0.39 a	5.29±0.22 a
	C	5.06±0.06 b	5.36±0.35 a	5.41±0.11 a	5.65±0.25 a
	D	5.01±0.04 b	5.98±0.67 a	5.39±0.14 ab	5.64±0.14 a
	E	4.97±0.15 b	5.42±0.52 ab	6.08±0.63 a	5.56±0.17 ab
	F	5.00±0.07 c	5.89±0.53 bc	6.56±1.01 ab	6.98±0.58 a
2022	A	5.66±0.64 a	5.55±0.05 a	5.44±0.12 a	5.33±0.22 a
	B	5.69±0.21 a	5.84±0.26 a	5.47±0.17 a	5.67±0.11 a
	C	5.68±0.12 a	6.12±0.36 a	5.55±0.06 b	5.82±0.34 a
	D	5.60±0.13 a	5.76±0.04 a	5.63±0.25 a	5.70±0.09 a
	E	5.70±0.18 a	5.55±0.26 ab	5.39±0.09 b	5.89±0.22 a
	F	5.77±0.14 b	5.60±0.22 b	6.30±0.39 a	6.31±0.53 a