覆膜栽培与施肥对秸秆碳氮在土壤团聚体中固持特征的影响

贾瑞琴; 李小红; 王淑颖; 徐香茹; 梅秀文; 安婷婷; 汪景宽

doi:10.19336/j.cnki.trtb.2021102802

覆膜栽培与施肥对秸秆碳氮在土壤团聚体中固持特征的影响

doi: 10.19336/j.cnki.trtb.2021102802

1.
沈阳农业大学土地与环境学院，农业农村部东北耕地保育重点实验室/土肥高效利用国家工程研究中心，辽宁沈阳 110866
2.
江苏大学农业工程学院，江苏镇江 212013

基金项目: 辽宁省科学研究经费项目（LSNQN202008）、中国博士后科学基金（2021M691316）和国家自然科学基金面上项目（41771328、41977086）资助

详细信息

作者简介:
贾瑞琴（1996−），女，内蒙古锡林郭勒盟，在读研究生，主要研究方向土壤肥力与耕地保育。E-mail: jrq19960820@163.com

通讯作者:
E-mail: atting@126.com；atting@syau.edu.cn

中图分类号: S158.5
计量
- 文章访问数: 62
- HTML全文浏览量: 2
- PDF下载量: 20
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-10-28
- 录用日期: 2022-02-18
- 修回日期: 2022-01-20
- 刊出日期: 2022-06-17

Effects of Plastic Film Mulching and Fertilization on Sequestration Characteristics of Straw-derived Carbon and Nitrogen in Soil Aggregates

1.
College of Land and Environment, Shenyang Agricultural University, Key Laboratory of Northeast Arable Land Conservation, Ministry of Agriculture/National Engineering Research Center for Efficient Utilization of Soil and Fertilizer, Shenyang 110866, China
2.
College of Agricultural Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China

摘要

摘要: 目的土壤中秸秆碳氮的分解与固定受栽培方式（包括覆膜）和施肥的影响。关于不同覆膜与施肥下秸秆碳氮在团聚体中固持特征仍不很明确。方法将表层土壤（0 ~ 20 cm）与¹³C¹⁵N双标记秸秆混合后在田间进行原位培养150 d，分析土壤团聚体有机碳中秸秆来源碳（¹³C-SOC）和氮中秸秆来源氮（¹⁵N-TN）的含量。结果施肥、栽培方式及二者交互作用显著影响（P < 0.05）> 0.25 mm团聚体中有机碳含量和 < 0.053 mm团聚体中有机碳和氮含量。不覆膜栽培下，与有机肥配施氮肥（M₂N₂）处理和不施肥（CK）处理相比，单施氮肥（N₄）处理使 > 0.25 mm团聚体中¹³C-SOC含量分别增加了36.36%和20.69%。覆膜栽培下，N₄与其他处理（M₂N₂和CK）相比，各级团聚体中¹³C-SOC含量增加了22.87% ~ 53.37%。不覆膜CK与覆膜CK处理相比，0.25 ~ 0.053 mm和 < 0.053 mm团聚体中¹³C-SOC含量增加了16.00%和46.15%（P < 0.05）。不覆膜栽培下，CK和M₂N₂处理与N₄处理相比，< 0.053 mm团聚体¹⁵N-TN含量分别增加了44.85%和28.60%。同一施肥处理，不覆膜栽培下秸秆来源碳氮对 < 0.053 mm团聚体中有机碳和氮的贡献率平均分别比覆膜栽培增加了55.06%和21.35%。秸秆碳氮在团聚体中的分配比例随团聚体粒径的增加而增加，其中秸秆碳和氮分配到 > 0.25 mm团聚体比例平均分别为22.22%和42.14%。结论土壤添加秸秆后秸秆碳氮主要固定于 > 0.25 mm团聚体，且单施氮肥促进了秸秆碳在各级团聚体中固存，不覆膜有利于 < 0.053 mm团聚体中碳氮的更新。
- ¹³C¹⁵N双标记 /
- 秸秆碳氮 /
- 土壤团聚体 /
- 地膜覆盖 /
- 施肥
Abstract: Objective The decomposition and fixation of straw-derived carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) in soil were affected by cultivation measures including (plastic film mulching, PFM) and fertilization. However, the distribution and fixation characteristics of straw-derived C and N in aggregates under PFM and fertilization are still unclear. Methods The topsoil (0-20 cm) was mixed with ¹³C¹⁵N double-labeled straw and in situ incubation was carried out in the field for 150 days. The contents of straw-derived C (¹³C-SOC) and N (¹⁵N-TN) in soil aggregates were analyzed. Results Fertilizer application, cultivation measures and their interaction significantly affected organic C content in > 0.25 mm aggregates and organic C and N contents in < 0.053 mm aggregates (P < 0.05). Under the cultivation without PFM, N fertilizer treatment (N₄) had increased the ¹³C-SOC content in > 0.25 mm aggregate by 36.36% and 20.69% compared with the treatment of manure combined with N fertilizer (M₂N₂) and no fertilizer (CK). Under the cultivation with PFM, compared with other treatments (M₂N₂ and CK), the content of ¹³C-SOC in N₄ aggregates increased by 22.87%-53.37%. Compared with CK without PFM, the contents of ¹³C-SOC in 0.25 - 0.053 mm and < 0.053 mm aggregate were significantly increased (P < 0.05) by 16.00% and 46.15%. Under the cultivation without PFM, CK and M₂N₂ compared with N₄, the content of ¹⁵N-TN in 0.25-0.053 mm aggregate increased by 44.85% and 28.60%, respectively. Under the same fertilization treatment, the contribution percentage of straw-derived C and N to organic C and N of < 0.053 mm aggregates in no-PFM were 55.06% and 21.35% higher than those in PFM cultivation, respectively. The distribution percentage of straw-derived C and N in aggregate increased with the increase of aggregate sizes, and the proportions of straw-derived C and N in aggregates > 0.25 mm were 22.22% and 42.14%, respectively. Conclusion After adding straw to soil, straw-derived C and N were mainly fixed in > 0.25 mm aggregate and N fertilizer application alone promoted the C retention of straw in aggregates, the C and N regeneration in < 0.053 mm aggregate was facilitated in no-PFM cultivation.
- ¹³C¹⁵N double-labeling /
- Straw-derived carbon and nitrogen /
- Soil aggregate /
- Plastic film mulching /
- Fertilization

HTML全文

图 1 覆膜和施肥下秸秆添加后土壤团聚体中有机碳（a）和氮（b）含量

CK代表不施肥处理；N₄代表单施氮肥处理；M₂N₂代表有机肥配施氮肥处理。相同小写字母表示同一团聚体粒级同一栽培方式不同施肥处理间差异不显著(P > 0.05)；相同大写字母表示同一栽培方式同一施肥处理不同团聚体粒级间差异不显著(P > 0.05)；^*表示同一团聚体粒级同一施肥处理覆膜和不覆膜栽培方式间差异显著(P < 0.05)。以下同。

Figure 1. Contents of total organic carbon (a) and total nitrogen (b) in soil aggregates with straw addition under plastic film mulching and fertilization

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 覆膜和施肥下秸秆添加后土壤团聚体有机碳中秸秆来源碳（a）和氮中秸秆来源氮（b）含量

Figure 2. Contents of straw-derived organic carbon (a) and straw-derived nitrogen (b) of soil aggregates under plastic film mulching and fertilization with straw addition

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 栽培方式、施肥及它们的交互作用对秸秆添加后土壤团聚体中有机碳碳和氮含量影响的方差分析

Table 1. Analysis of variance for the effects of cultivation and fertilization and their interaction on contents of organic carbon and nitrogen in soil aggregates with straw addition

因子 Factor	自由度 D. f.	SOC			¹³C-SOC			TN			¹⁵N-TN
因子 Factor	自由度 D. f.	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm
施肥	2	13.641^**	11.474^**	8.820^**	15.309^**	8.266^**	6.824^*	8.474^**	11.116^**	6.338^*	5.418^*	5.191^*	0.905
栽培方式	1	15.511^**	11.929^**	22.637^**	1.905	0.660	7.427^*	3.286	3.006	15.488^**	0.168	0.033	0.635
施肥与栽培方式	2	13.662^**	3.252	12.828^**	1.613	1.069	2.002	4.901^*	1.246	5.129^*	0.533	0.317	3.655
注：施肥包括不施肥、单施氮肥和有机肥配施氮肥；栽培方式包括覆膜与不覆膜；SOC：土壤团聚体有机碳；¹³C-SOC：土壤团聚体有机碳中秸秆来源碳的含量；TN土壤团聚体氮；¹⁵N-TN：土壤团聚体氮中秸秆来源氮的含量。^表示P < 0.05；^*表示P < 0.01。以下同。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 覆膜和施肥下秸秆来源碳对团聚体有机碳和秸秆来源氮对团聚体氮的贡献率

Table 2. Contribution percentage of straw derived-carbon (C) to and to total organic C (SOC) and that of straw-derived nitrogen (N) to total N (TN) in soil aggregates under mulching and fertilization

栽培方式 Cultivation measure	施肥处理 Fertilization treatment	秸秆来源碳对团聚体有机碳贡献率 (%) Contribution percentage of straw derived-C to SOC of aggregates			秸秆来源氮对团聚体氮贡献率 (%) Contribution percentage of straw derived-N to TN of aggregates
栽培方式 Cultivation measure	施肥处理 Fertilization treatment	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm
不覆膜	CK	14.96 ± 0.63 Aa	11.82 ± 0.79 Ba	9.55 ± 0.40 Cb^*	5.24 ± 0.34 Aa	4.36 ± 0.13 Ba^*	3.55 ± 0.09 Ca^*
	N₄	13.63 ± 0.18 Aa	12.07 ± 0.56 Ba	13.27 ± 0.12 Aa^*	4.93 ± 0.03 Aa	2.60 ± 0.05 Bc	2.59 ± 0.04 Bb^*
	M₂N₂	9.29 ± 0.21 Ab	10.22 ± 0.26 Aa^*	10.97 ± 0.93 Ab^*	3.42 ± 0.16 Ab	3.14 ± 0.15 ABb	2.73 ± 0.12 Bb^*

覆膜	CK	13.13 ± 0.74 Ab	10.07 ± 0.11 Ba	8.08 ± 0.26 Ca	5.18 ± 0.15 Aa	3.90 ± 0.08 Ba	3.03 ± 0.12 Ca
	N₄	22.98 ± 0.25 Aa^*	9.39 ± 1.19 Ba	7.35 ± 0.21 Bab	5.19 ± 0.00 Aa^*	2.52 ± 0.16 Bb	2.16 ± 0.06 Cb
	M₂N₂	12.59 ± 0.33 Ab^*	7.77 ± 0.29 Ba	6.59 ± 0.22 Cb	4.13 ± 0.12 Ab^*	2.74 ± 0.06 Bb	2.15 ± 0.05 Cb

F值	施肥	165.835^**	5.084^*	7.863^**	37.555^**	93.932^**	85.856^**
	栽培方式	118.124^**	17.443^**	119.647^**	4.240	10.359^**	66.114^**
	施肥与栽培方式	94.739^**	0.258	13.227^**	2.213	1.461	0.519

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 覆膜和施肥下秸秆添加后秸秆碳氮在土壤各级团聚体中的分配比例

Table 3. Distribution percentages of straw carbon and nitrogen to soil aggregates with straw addition under plastic film mulching and fertilization

栽培方式 Cultivation measure	施肥处理 Fertilization treatment	秸秆碳分配比例 (%) Distribution percentage of straw carbon in aggregates			秸秆氮分配比例 (%) Distribution percentage of straw nitrogen in aggregates
栽培方式 Cultivation measure	施肥处理 Fertilization treatment	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm	> 0.25 mm	0.25 ~ 0.053 mm	< 0.053 mm
不覆膜	CK	20.95 ± 1.31 Aab	6.92 ± 0.17 Ba^*	4.64 ± 0.26 Ba^*	41.76 ± 1.93 Aa	16.61 ± 1.98 Ba	10.47 ± 1.07 Ca
	N₄	25.28 ± 1.75 Aa	8.05 ± 0.32 Ba	5.29 ± 0.45 Ba	44.30 ± 1.96 Aa	11.77 ± 0.36 Ba	7.22 ± 0.84 Cb
	M₂N₂	18.60 ± 0.48 Ab	7.21 ± 0.59 Ba	5.02 ± 0.47 Ca	37.96 ± 1.99 Aa	15.30 ± 2.03 Ba	9.28 ± 0.34 Cab

覆膜	CK	20.53 ± 0.62 Ab	5.96 ± 0.04 Bb	3.19 ± 0.28 Cb	45.05 ± 1.50 Aa	15.19 ± 0.53 Ba	8.80 ± 0.65 Ca
	N₄	26.06 ± 1.39 Aa	8.38 ± 0.62 Ba	5.34 ± 0.15 Ba	46.42 ± 0.50 Aa	12.13 ± 0.79 Bb	10.06 ± 0.79 Ba
	M₂N₂	21.88 ± 0.30 Ab^*	6.85 ± 0.49 Bab	3.96 ± 0.30 Cb	37.32 ± 1.54 Ab	15.79 ± 0.78 Ba	9.65 ± 0.94 Ca

F值	施肥	14.708^**	8.991^**	8.016^**	10.680^**	5.179^*	0.838
	栽培方式	1.806	0.918	8.084^*	1.256	0.029	0.592
	施肥与栽培方式	1.458	1.154	2.448	0.676	0.313	3.789

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(41)

[1]	Annabi M, Raclot D, Bahri H, et al. Spatial variability of soil aggregate stability at the scale of an agricultural region in Tunisia[J]. Catena, 2017, 153: 157 − 167. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2017.02.010
[2]	Six J, Elliott E T, Paustian K. Soil structure and soil organic matter Ⅱ. A normalized stability index and the effect of mineralogy[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2000, 64(3): 1042 − 1049. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2000.6431042x
[3]	李小涵, 郝明德, 王朝辉, 等. 农田土壤有机碳的影响因素及其研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2008, 26(3): 176 − 181.
[4]	Xie J Y, Xu M G, Cirend Q J, et al. Soil aggregation and aggregate associated organic carbon and total nitrogen under long term contrasting soil management regimes in loess soil[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2015, 14(12): 2405 − 2416. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61205-9
[5]	张国盛, 黄高宝, Chan Y. 农田土壤有机碳固定潜力研究进展[J]. 生态学报, 2005, 25(2): 351 − 357. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2005.02.026
[6]	Algayer B, Bissonnais Y L, Darboux F. Short-term dynamics of soil aggregates ability in the field[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2014, 78(4): 1168 − 1176. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2014.01.0009
[7]	荣勤雷, 李若楠, 黄绍文, 等. 不同施肥模式下设施菜田土壤团聚体养分和微生物量特征[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019, 25(7): 1084 − 1096. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.18472
[8]	李欣悦, 李冰, 莫太相, 等. 长期秸秆还田对水稻土团聚体及氮磷钾分配的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(9): 3257 − 3266.
[9]	孙宇婷, 周连仁, 孟庆峰, 等. 长期施用有机肥对草甸碱土水稳性团聚体及其碳氮分配的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2014, (1): 6 − 10.
[10]	程乙, 任昊, 刘鹏, 等. 不同栽培管理模式对农田土壤团聚体组成及其碳、氮分布的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(11): 3521 − 3528.
[11]	孙雪, 张玉铭, 张丽娟, 等. 长期添加外源有机物料对华北农田土壤团聚体有机碳组分的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2021, 29(8): 1384 − 1396.
[12]	王会, 何伟, 段福建, 等. 秸秆还田对盐渍土团聚体稳定性及碳氮含量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(4): 124 − 131. doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.04.015
[13]	苏慧清, 韩晓日, 杨劲峰, 等. 长期施肥棕壤团聚体分布及其碳氮含量变化[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(4): 924 − 932. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.16485
[14]	张少宏, 付鑫, Hsan M. 秸秆和地膜覆盖对黄土高原旱作小麦田土壤团聚体氮组分的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(1): 236 − 241.
[15]	刘小粉, 王清涛, 白双宇, 等. 绿肥根茬还田和化肥用量对土壤团聚性及碳氮分布的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021, (3): 220 − 226. doi: 10.11838/sfsc.1673-6257.20223
[16]	李景, 吴会军, 武雪萍, 等. 长期免耕和深松提高了土壤团聚体颗粒态有机碳及全氮含量[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(2): 334 − 344. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.02.009
[17]	金鑫鑫. 地膜覆盖和施肥条件下外源碳在土壤团聚体中的赋存和转化机制[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2018.
[18]	Jin X X, An T T, Aaron R, et al. Long-term plastic film mulching and fertilization treatments changed the annual distribution of residual maize straw C in soil aggregates under field conditions: characterization by¹³C tracing[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2018, 18(1): 169 − 178. doi: 10.1007/s11368-017-1754-9
[19]	Zheng L H, Pei, J B, Jin X X, et al. Impact of Plastic film mulching and fertilizers on the distribution of straw-derived nitrogen in a soil-plant system based on ¹⁵N-labeling[J]. Geoderma, 2018, 317: 15 − 22. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.12.020
[20]	王淑颖, 李小红, 程娜, 等. 地膜覆盖与施肥对秸秆碳氮在土壤中固存的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(2): 345 − 356. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.02.010
[21]	Chivenge P, Vanlauwe B, Gentile R, et al. Organic resource quality influences short-term aggregate dynamics and soil organic carbon and nitrogen accumulation[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2011, 43(3): 657 − 666. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.12.002
[22]	Conrad R, Klose M, Yuan Q, et al. Sable carbon isotope fractionation, carbon flux partitioning and priming effects in anoxic soils during methanogenic degradation of straw and soil organic matter[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2012, 49: 193 − 199. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.02.030
[23]	Blaud A, Lerch T Z, Chevallier T, et al. Dynamics of bacterial communities in relation to soil aggregate formation during the decomposition of ¹³C-labelled rice straw[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2012, 53: 1 − 9. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2011.11.005
[24]	An T T, Schaeffer S, Zhuang J, et al. Dynamics and distribution of ¹³C-labeled straw carbon by microorganisms as affected by soil fertility levels in the Black Soil region of Northeast China[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2015, 51: 605 − 613. doi: 10.1007/s00374-015-1006-3
[25]	张黛静, 王艳杰, 陈倩青, 等. 不同耕作方式与增施有机肥对麦田土壤有机碳库及小麦产量的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(11): 128 − 133.
[26]	裴久渤. 玉米秸秆碳在东北旱田土壤中的转化与固定[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2015.
[27]	杨艳华, 苏瑶, 何振超, 等. 还田秸秆碳在土壤中的转化分配及对土壤有机碳库影响的研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(2): 668 − 676.
[28]	王金洲. 秸秆还田的土壤有机碳周转特征[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2015.
[29]	Wang Y, Li M, Pei J B, et al. Dynamics of maize straw–derived nitrogen in soil aggregates as affected by fertilization[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2019, 19: 2882 − 2890. doi: 10.1007/s11368-019-02288-5
[30]	Lal R. Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and food security[J]. Science, 2004, 304(5677): 1623 − 7. doi: 10.1126/science.1097396
[31]	李世朋, 蔡祖聪, 杨浩, 等. 长期定位施肥与地膜覆盖对土壤肥力和生物学性质的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2009, 29(5): 2490 − 2498.
[32]	陈鲜妮, 吴姗薇, 寇太记, 等. 秸秆源性碳在黑土和褐土中的转运及其对氮肥的响应. 土壤学报, 2021, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/32.1119.P.20211022.1726.002.html
[33]	葛少华, 阎海涛, 陈奇, 等. 生物质炭与化肥氮配施对植烟土壤微生物功能多样性的影响[J]. 土壤, 2019, 51(4): 708 − 714.
[34]	苗淑杰, 乔云发, 王文涛, 等. 添加玉米秸秆对黄棕壤有机质的激发效应[J]. 土壤, 2019, 51(3): 622 − 626.
[35]	刘顺国, 付时丰, 汪景宽, 等. 长期地膜覆盖对棕壤水分含量和储量动态变化影响[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2006, 37(5): 725 − 730. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1700.2006.05.012
[36]	陈林, 杨新国, 翟德苹, 等. 柠条秸秆和地膜覆盖对土壤水分和玉米产量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(2): 108 − 116. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.02.016
[37]	苗淑杰, 乔云发, 张福韬. 黑土团聚体碳矿化和小麦秸秆对其的激发效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2015, 28(4): 218 − 221.
[38]	曹彬彬, 李雨诺, 朱熠辉, 等. 添加秸秆对长期不同碳氮管理土壤各粒级团聚体激发效应的影响[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 49(5): 56 − 64.
[39]	吕殿青, 张树兰, 杨学云. 外加碳、氮对土壤氮矿化、固定与激发效应的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2007, 13(2): 223 − 229. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1008-505X.2007.02.007
[40]	Tian J, Pausch J, Yu G R, et al. Aggregate size and their disruption affect ¹⁴C-labeled glucose mineralization and priming effect[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2015, 90: 1 − 10. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.01.014
[41]	Tian J, Pausch J, Yu G R, et al. Aggregate size and glucose level affect priming sources: A threesource-partitioning study[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2016, (97): 199 − 210.