Effects of conditioning agents on soil fertility, microbial community diversity and rice yield in red soil

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2022.06.16

Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2022, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (6): 1258-1267.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2022.06.16

• Environmental Science • Previous Articles Next Articles

Effects of conditioning agents on soil fertility, microbial community diversity and rice yield in red soil

ZHU Ming¹^,²(), LIU Chen², LIN Yicheng², GUO Bin², LI Hua², FU Qinglin²^,^*()

1. College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, China
2. Institute of Environment, Resource, Soil and Fertilizer, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou 310021, China

Received:2021-07-03 Online:2022-06-25 Published:2022-06-30
Contact: FU Qinglin

Abstract

Abstract:

The majority of low- and medium-yielding fields in Zhejiang Province are typical acidified and fertile-deficient soils. To increase rice yield via improvement of soil fertility, a field experiment was conducted with five treatments, including CK (no fertilization and no conditioning agents), N (conventional fertilization), NS (conventional fertilization +limestone powder), NSJ (conventional fertilization + limestone powder + straw return), and NSF (conventional fertilization + limestone powder + humic acid) on the low-yield red soil in Lanxi City, Zhejiang Province. The results showed that the application of limestone powder could quickly increase the soil pH, and the soil pH under NS, NSJ and NSF treatments was significantly (P<0.05) increased by 1.17-1.60 compared with CK. Compared with CK and N treatments, application of humic acid significantly (P<0.05) increased soil organic matter content, while straw return or application of humic acid significantly (P<0.05) increased soil available potassium content. The application of conditioning agents could improve the ability of soil microbial communities to utilize carbon sources, and increase the content of phospholipid fatty acids (PLFA). Among all the treatments, the highest AWCD value and FLPA contents were found under NSF treatment. The high-throughput sequencing results showed that application of conditioning agents changed the composition of the microbial community and enhanced the richness and diversity of the soil microbial community. Application of conditioning agents could significantly (P<0.05) increase crop yield, and NSF treatment showed the best performance on yield improvement, as its yield was 11.02% higher than that of CK. In general, under experimental conditions, NSF was the best combination to improve soil fertility and rice yield in red soil.

Key words: low- and medium-yielding field, limestone powder, humic acid, straw returning to field, soil fertility, rice yield

CLC Number:

S153
S154

ZHU Ming, LIU Chen, LIN Yicheng, GUO Bin, LI Hua, FU Qinglin. Effects of conditioning agents on soil fertility, microbial community diversity and rice yield in red soil[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(6): 1258-1267.

Figures/Tables 10

References 26

[1]	周镕基, 皮修平. 供给侧视角下农业“悖论”的成因及其对策[J]. 湖南师范大学社会科学学报, 2017, 46(1): 97-102.
	ZHOU R J, PI X P. Causes and solutions of agricultural “paradox” in the perspective of supply side[J]. Journal of Social Science of Hunan Normal University, 2017, 46(1): 97-102. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	2019年全国耕地质量等级情况公报[EB/OL]. (2020-05-06) [2021-07-03]. http://www.moa.gov.cn/nybgb/2020/202004/202005/t20200506_6343095.htm .
[3]	冯书珍, 陈香碧, 何寻阳, 等. 不同土地利用方式及施肥措施对红壤木质素积累特性的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2015, 34(9): 1761-1768.
	FENG S Z, CHEN X B, HE X Y, et al. Effects of land use and fertilization on lignin accumulation in red soil[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2015, 34(9): 1761-1768. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	沈仁芳, 王超, 孙波. “藏粮于地、藏粮于技”战略实施中的土壤科学与技术问题[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2018, 33(2): 135-144.
	SHEN R F, WANG C, SUN B. Soil related scientific and technological problems in implementing strategy of “storing grain in land and technology”[J]. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2018, 33(2): 135-144. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	冯兆滨, 王萍, 刘秀梅, 等. 我国红壤改良利用技术研究现状与展望[J]. 江西农业学报, 2017, 29(8): 57-61.
	FENG Z B, WANG P, LIU X M, et al. Research progress and perspective of red soil improvement and utilization technologies in China[J]. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 2017, 29(8): 57-61. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	杨永森, 段雷, 靳腾, 等. 石灰石和菱镁矿对酸化森林土壤修复作用的研究[J]. 环境科学, 2006, 27(9): 1878-1883.
	YANG Y S, DUAN L, JIN T, et al. Effect of limestone and magnesite application on remediation of acidified forest soil in Chongqing, China[J]. Environmental Science, 2006, 27(9): 1878-1883. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	JANNIN L, ARKOUN M, OURRY A, et al. Microarray analysis of humic acid effects on Brassica napus growth: involvement of N, C and S metabolisms[J]. Plant and Soil, 2012, 359(1/2): 297-319. DOI URL
[8]	吕波, 王宇函, 夏浩, 等. 不同改良剂对黄棕壤和红壤上白菜生长及土壤肥力影响的差异[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(22): 4306-4315.
	LÜ B, WANG Y H, XIA H, et al. Effects of biochar and other amendments on the cabbage growth and soil fertility in yellow-brown soil and red soil[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(22): 4306-4315. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	裴瑞杰, 袁天佑, 王俊忠, 等. 施用腐殖酸对夏玉米产量和氮效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(11): 2189-2198.
	PEI R J, YUAN T Y, WANG J Z, et al. Effects of application of humic acid on yield, nitrogen use efficiency of summer maize[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(11): 2189-2198. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	王宇函, 姜存仓, 吕波, 等. 腐植酸钾对小白菜产量、生理特性及养分利用效率的影响[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2018, 37(1): 58-63.
	WANG Y H, JIANG C C, LYU B, et al. Effects of potassium humate on yield, physiological characteristics and nutrient use efficiency of pakchoi[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University, 2018, 37(1): 58-63. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	潘剑玲, 代万安, 尚占环, 等. 秸秆还田对土壤有机质和氮素有效性影响及机制研究进展[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2013, 21(5): 526-535.
	PAN J L, DAI W N, SHANG Z H, et al. Review of research progress on the influence and mechanism of field straw residue incorporation on soil organic matter and nitrogen availability[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2013, 21(5): 526-535. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
[12]	于美婷, 李春雅, 李华泰, 等. 秸秆还田对土壤理化性质影响的研究进展[J]. 江西农业学报, 2021, 33(1): 33-39.
	YU M T, LI C Y, LI H T, et al. Research progress in effect of straw returning on soil physical and chemical properties[J]. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 2021, 33(1): 33-39. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	BLAZIER M A, PATTERSON W B, HOTARD S L. Straw harvesting, fertilization, and fertilizer type alter soil microbiological and physical properties in a loblolly pine plantation in the mid-south USA[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2008, 45(2): 145-153. DOI URL
[14]	张静, 温晓霞, 廖允成, 等. 不同玉米秸秆还田量对土壤肥力及冬小麦产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2010, 16(3): 612-619.
	ZHANG J, WEN X X, LIAO Y C, et al. Effects of different amount of maize straw returning on soil fertility and yield of winter wheat[J]. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2010, 16(3): 612-619. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	吴梦洁, 严建立, 章明奎, 等. 肥料与调理剂配施对新垦红壤性状综合改良及大豆产量的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2020, 32(9): 68-72.
	WU M J, YAN J L, ZHANG M K, et al. Effects of fertilizer and conditioner on properties of newly cultivated red soil and soybean yield[J]. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 2020, 32(9): 68-72. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 2000.
[17]	GARLAND J L, MILLS A L. Classification and characterization of heterotrophic microbial communities on the basis of patterns of community-level sole-carbon-source utilization[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1991, 57(8): 2351-2359. DOI URL
[18]	BLIGH E G, DYER W J. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification[J]. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology, 1959, 37(8): 911-917. DOI PMID
[19]	QASWAR M, DONGCHU L, JING H, et al. Interaction of liming and long-term fertilization increased crop yield and phosphorus use efficiency (PUE) through mediating exchangeable cations in acidic soil under wheat-maize cropping system[J]. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10: 19828.
[20]	张晶晶. 不同团聚体土壤秸秆降解及其微生物过程研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2020.
	ZHANG J J. Study on the straw degradation and microbial process of different aggregates soil[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2020. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	CAI Z J, WANG B R, ZHANG L, et al. Striking a balance between N sources: mitigating soil acidification and accumulation of phosphorous and heavy metals from manure[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 754: 142189.
[22]	HOWELL D M, MACKENZIE M D. Using bioavailable nutrients and microbial dynamics to assess soil type and placement depth in reclamation[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2017, 116: 87-95. DOI URL
[23]	MACDONALD E, QUIDEAU S, LANDHÄUSSER S. Rebuilding boreal forest ecosystems after industrial disturbance[M]//VITT D, BHATTI J. Restoration and reclamation of boreal ecosystems: attaining sustainable development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. DOI URL
	XIANG J L, JIN J, LIU Q, et al. Alkalinity gradients in grasslands alter soil bacterial community composition and function[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2021, 85(2): 286-298.
[24]	PENG C J, LAI S S, LUO X S, et al. Effects of long term rice straw application on the microbial communities of rapeseed rhizosphere in a paddy-upland rotation system[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2016, 557/558: 231-239. DOI URL
[25]	李涛, 何春娥, 葛晓颖, 等. 秸秆还田施氮调节碳氮比对土壤无机氮、酶活性及作物产量的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(12): 1633-1642.
	LI T, HE C E, GE X Y, et al. Responses of soil mineral N contents, enzyme activities and crop yield to different C/N ratio mediated by straw retention and N fertilization[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2016, 24(12): 1633-1642. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	ZHANG M Y, MUHAMMAD R, ZHANG L, et al. Investigating the effect of biochar and fertilizer on the composition and function of bacteria in red soil[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2019, 139: 107-116. DOI URL

处理 Treatment	pH	OM/(g∙kg^-1)	TN/(g∙kg^-1)	AN/(mg∙kg^-1)	AP/(mg∙kg^-1)	AK/(mg∙kg^-1)
CK	5.18±0.05 b	29.60±0.90 b	1.99±0.13 a	154.44±7.10 a	5.18±1.79 c	97.26±1.44 c
N	5.32±0.05 b	30.00±1.37 b	2.03±0.10 a	151.41±8.61 a	11.48±5.15 ab	98.35±3.04 c
NS	6.35±0.66 a	30.72±0.58 b	2.00±0.06 a	155.96±9.32 a	8.75±0.73 bc	104.24±5.68 bc
NSJ	6.42±0.52 a	30.37±2.75 b	2.02±0.12 a	151.41±9.46 a	13.19±5.58 a	114.33±3.42 a
NSF	6.78±0.21 a	36.74±4.90 a	2.07±0.06 a	149.22±1.62 a	13.18±2.30 a	111.73±2.58 ab

处理 Treatment	pH	OM/(g∙kg^-1)	TN/(g∙kg^-1)	AN/(mg∙kg^-1)	AP/(mg∙kg^-1)	AK/(mg∙kg^-1)
CK	5.18±0.05 b	29.60±0.90 b	1.99±0.13 a	154.44±7.10 a	5.18±1.79 c	97.26±1.44 c
N	5.32±0.05 b	30.00±1.37 b	2.03±0.10 a	151.41±8.61 a	11.48±5.15 ab	98.35±3.04 c
NS	6.35±0.66 a	30.72±0.58 b	2.00±0.06 a	155.96±9.32 a	8.75±0.73 bc	104.24±5.68 bc
NSJ	6.42±0.52 a	30.37±2.75 b	2.02±0.12 a	151.41±9.46 a	13.19±5.58 a	114.33±3.42 a
NSF	6.78±0.21 a	36.74±4.90 a	2.07±0.06 a	149.22±1.62 a	13.18±2.30 a	111.73±2.58 ab

处理 Treatment	细菌 Bacteria	真菌 Fungi	革兰氏阴性菌 Gram-negative bacteria	革兰氏阳性菌 Gram-positive bacteria	合计 Total
CK	14.49±0.28 c	1.22±0.20 a	10.44±0.46 d	7.91±0.42 d	34.06±0.06 e
N	18.21±0.54 b	1.56±0.46 a	13.99±0.91 c	9.30±0.67 c	43.07±0.21 d
NS	21.55±0.30 a	1.43±0.20 a	16.77±0.33 ab	10.51±0.18 b	50.26±0.14 c
NSJ	22.20±0.63 a	1.79±0.64 a	17.71±0.77 a	10.54±0.70 b	52.24±0.08 b
NSF	23.64±0.26 a	1.84±0.67 a	16.02±0.47 b	12.66±0.08 a	53.99±0.11 a

处理 Treatment	细菌 Bacteria	真菌 Fungi	革兰氏阴性菌 Gram-negative bacteria	革兰氏阳性菌 Gram-positive bacteria	合计 Total
CK	14.49±0.28 c	1.22±0.20 a	10.44±0.46 d	7.91±0.42 d	34.06±0.06 e
N	18.21±0.54 b	1.56±0.46 a	13.99±0.91 c	9.30±0.67 c	43.07±0.21 d
NS	21.55±0.30 a	1.43±0.20 a	16.77±0.33 ab	10.51±0.18 b	50.26±0.14 c
NSJ	22.20±0.63 a	1.79±0.64 a	17.71±0.77 a	10.54±0.70 b	52.24±0.08 b
NSF	23.64±0.26 a	1.84±0.67 a	16.02±0.47 b	12.66±0.08 a	53.99±0.11 a

处理	穗数	穗粒数	结实率	千粒重	产量
Treatment	Ear number/(10⁴ hm^-2)	Grains per spike	Filled-grain percentage/%	1 000-kernel weigh/g	Yield/(kg∙hm^-2）
CK	368.85±3.41 ab	123.52±5.29 a	81.33±3.16 a	24.43±0.52 a	8 351±150 c
N	351.50±12.51 b	124.33±2.52 a	82.48±2.86 a	25.68±1.31 a	858 571±64 c
NS	353.17±12.86 b	126.00±4.00 a	84.93±3.81 a	24.86±1.24 a	8 944±144 b
NSJ	382.19±9.02 a	128.14±3.61 a	82.97±1.95 a	24.63±0.34 a	8 998±90 ab
NSF	352.50±13.26 b	125.67±2.52 a	88.87±1.85 a	24.54±0.23 a	9 271±169 a

Effects of conditioning agents on soil fertility, microbial community diversity and rice yield in red soil

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 26

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	GUO Han, XU Minxian, XU Feifei, LUO Ming, LU Zhou, ZHANG Xu. Field-scale estimation of humic acid content based on airborne hyperspectral data [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(12): 2358-2369.
[2]	ZOU Chuan, GUO Bin, LIN Yicheng, FU Qinglin, LIU Chen, DING Nengfei, LI Ningyu, LI Hua. Effects of humic acid particles with different sizes on available cadmium in soil [J]. , 2019, 31(4): 616-623.
[3]	WANG Baojun, CHENG Wangda, CHEN Gui, SHEN Yaqiang, ZHANG Hongmei. Effect of straw returning and nitrogen reduction on soil nutrition, carbon pool and rice yield in rice field [J]. , 2019, 31(4): 624-630.
[4]	ZHAO Yue, LUO Zhijun, ZHAO Jie, JIANG Chunyan, Cao Liping. Spatial characteristics and influencing factors of soil nutrients in hilly region of South China [J]. , 2018, 30(6): 1035-1043.
[5]	WANG Guiyue, SU Ting, HAN Hailiang, TAN Heping, BAO Fei, ZHAO Fucheng. Soil microbial community structure, labile organic carbon and nitrogen and enzyme activities in paddy field and upland affected by long-term fertilization systems [J]. , 2018, 30(5): 817-824.
[6]	WANG Hongyan, SUN Yan, YU Jun, LI Simeng, YUAN Jiahui, MENG Yutian, ZHAO Wei, LI Xiaoqing. Effects of organic farming on main physical and chemical properties of saline alkali soil [J]. , 2017, 29(9): 1544-1548.
[7]	LIU Fang, HAN Dan, ZHAO Mingqin, LI Xiaoyong, GUAN Chengwei. Effects of application of microbial agents along with humic acid potassium on tobacco-planted soil and economic benefit of flue-cured tobacco [J]. , 2017, 29(7): 1064-1069.
[8]	CHEN Gui1， ZHANG Hong\\|mei1， SHEN Ya\\|qiang1， ZHAO Guo\\|hua2， CHENG Wang\\|da1，*. Influence of incorporation of green manure， wheat straw and chemical fertilizer on rice growth and fertility of purple clay\\|based paddy soil#br# [J]. , 2015, 27(10): 1797-.
[9]	LI Gang1， TIAN Wei1， YANG Zhi\\|hui2， WANG Zhen1， ZHANG Ai\\|guo1， LIU Ming\\|qing1， ZHANG Ji\\|bing1，*. Effects of compost application on potato quality and soil environment [J]. , 2014, 26(6): 1573-.
[10]	NI Zhongying;WANG Jingwen;*;SHI Yijun;LIU Yonghong;CHEN Hong. The status and evaluation of soil fertility in rapeseed production district in northeast Zhejiang [J]. , 2014, 26(2): 0-415420.
[11]	XI Hui;XUE Zhi\\|yong;*;CHEN Xi\\|jing;JIANG Li\\|na;WANG Wei\\|ping. Effect of different biogas slurry irrigation amounts on the yield and quality of Zizania caduciflora and soil fertility [J]. , 2013, 25(6): 0-1341.
[12]	XUE Pei\\|pei;WANG Bing;＊;NIU Xiang. Grey relation analysis of soil fertility of moso bamboo forests at different altitudes in Dagang Mountain [J]. , 2013, 25(6): 0-1359.
[13]	ZHENG Ning;MA Jia-wei;WANG Xyu-dong;YE Zheng-qian;LI Tian-zhu;MAO Qi;WU Xiao-hua. Effects of combinations of fungi residue and chemical fertilizer on photosynthesis characteristics of flag leaf and grain yield in rice [J]. , 2013, 25(3): 0-608.
[14]	MA Jiawei;HUANG Qiying;CHENG Lize;YE Zhengqian*;WANG Xyudong. Effect of edible fungus residue on dynamic changes of red soil nutrients and rice yield [J]. , 2013, 25(1): 0-151.
[15]	LIANG Sen-miao;WANG Qin-hong;NI Guo-fu;QIAN Li-ping;ZHAO Xian-sheng;QI Xing-jiang;*. Effects of natural grass growing on the soil fertility and fruit quality of Myrica rubra [J]. , 2012, 24(5): 0-825.