土地利用方式对土壤团聚体磷组分及磷库管理指数的影响

doi:10.16843/j.sswc.2023.01.010

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要冀西北坝上地区是京津冀重要水源地。该区域水土保持能力受土地利用方式影响较大。为探究不同土地利用方式下土壤团聚体结构对磷素的稳定作用，采集马铃薯地、燕麦地、青贮玉米地、露地等地、草地、林地和大棚菜地7种土地利用类型的土壤，利用干筛法进行团聚体分级，分析不同团聚体中磷形态的分布规律及磷库管理指数变化。结果表明：冀西北土壤团聚体总磷质量分数为211.72~441.94 mg/kg，主要分布在≥0.25~0.50 mm团聚体；水溶性总磷质量分数为267.68~421.83 mg/kg，主要分布在≥1.00~2.00 mm团聚体。土壤团聚体磷库管理指数为79.00~153.00，≥0.50~1.00 mm团聚体最高。马铃薯地提高≥0.25~0.50 mm团聚体水溶性磷质量分数和≥0.50~1.00 mm团聚体总磷质量分数及比例，提高<0.25 mm团聚体磷库管理指数。燕麦地促进磷向≥5.00 mm团聚体中分布及提高其磷库管理指数。青贮玉米地和林地促进土壤总磷向≥1.00~2.00 mm团聚体分布，提高≥0.50~1.00 mm团聚体磷库管理指数。草地提高≥0.50~1.00 mm团聚体磷库管理指数。菜地增加≥5.00 mm团聚体总磷质量分数及比例，大棚菜地提高<0.25 mm团聚体磷库管理指数，露地菜地提高≥0.50~1.00 mm团聚体磷库管理指数。大团聚体能增加土壤磷素的供给能力，因此冀西北坝上地区应采用增施有机肥、轮作种植归还率较高的作物、控制马铃薯种植、增加饲草种植等措施，促进磷向大团聚体分布，减少磷素流失，提高京津冀水源保护地生态效益。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	李璠
	王炯琪
	刘子刚
	赵海超
	和江鹏
	黄智鸿
	卢海博

关键词 ：土地利用方式, 土壤, 团聚体, 磷形态, 磷库管理指数

Abstract：[Background]The Bashang region in the Northwest Hebei is an important water source in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei. The soil and water conservation capacity of this region is greatly affected by land use types. This work is to explore the stability mechanism of soil aggregate structure on phosphorus under different land use types.[Methods] Soil samples from 7 land use types, i.e., potato field, oat field, silage corn field, open vegetable field, grassland, woodland and greenhouse vegetable field were collected. Then the soil aggregates were classified by dry sieving method to analyze the distribution law of phosphorus forms and the change of phosphorus pool management index (PPMI) in different soil aggregates. The result data were processes by Excel 2007 and SPSS 20.[Results] The content of total phosphorus (TP) in Northwest Hebei ranged from 211.72 to 441.94 mg/kg, mainly distributed in the aggregates of ≥ 0.25-0.50 mm, and water-soluble total phosphorus (WSTP) content ranged from 267.68-421.83 mg/kg, mainly distributed in the aggregates of ≥ 1.00-2.00 mm. The phosphorus pool management index (PPMI) of soil aggregates ranged from 79 to 153, with the highest value of 0.50 to 1.00 mm aggregates. The contents of water-soluble phosphorus of ≥ 0.25-0.50 mm, the TP content and proportion of ≥ 0.50-1.00 mm, and the PPMI of <0.25 mm increased in the potato field. The oat field promoted the distribution of phosphorus to the aggregate of ≥ 5.00 mm and increased PPMI. The distribution of soil TP to ≥ 1.00-2.00 mm aggregate were promoted, and the PPMI of the ≥ 0.50-1.00 mm soil aggregates increased in the silage corn field and forest land. The management index of aggregate phosphorus pool ≥ 0.50-1.00 mm was improved in the grassland. The TP content and proportion of aggregates ≥ 5.00 mm in the vegetable field, the PPMI of <0.25 mm in the greenhouse vegetable field, and the PPMI of ≥ 0.50-1.00 mm aggregate increased in the open vegetable field.[Conclusions] Large soil aggregates can increase the supply capacity of soil phosphorus holding capacity. Therefore, in the Bashang region of Northwest Hebei, the methods of adding organic fertilizer, rotating crops with high return rate, controlling potato planting, and increasing forage grass planting should be used to promote the distribution of phosphorus to the big aggregate and deduce the loss of phosphorus, thus improving the ecological benefits of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei water source area.

Key words： land use type soil soil aggregates phosphorus form phosphorus pool management index

收稿日期: 2021-09-26

PACS:

S157

基金资助:河北省教育厅重大项目"冀北旱作区农田土壤碳-水耦合机制研究"（ZD2019097）；河北省现代农业产业技术体系"寒旱区春玉米抗逆高产栽培岗位专家"（HBCT2018020203）

通讯作者: 赵海超(1974-),男,博士,副教授。主要研究方向:生态学。E-mail:haichaozhao19@163.com E-mail: haichaozhao19@163.com

作者简介: 李璠(1996-)女,硕士研究生。主要研究方向:农业资源与利用。E-mail:826256734@qq.com

引用本文:

李璠, 王炯琪, 刘子刚, 赵海超, 和江鹏, 黄智鸿, 卢海博. 土地利用方式对土壤团聚体磷组分及磷库管理指数的影响[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2023, 21(1): 83-91.
LI Fan, WANG Jiongqi, LIU Zigang, ZHAO Haichao, HE Jiangpeng, HUANG Zhihong, LU Haibo. Effects of land use types on the phosphorus component of soil aggregates and phosphorus pool management index. SSWC, 2023, 21(1): 83-91.

链接本文:

http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/CN/10.16843/j.sswc.2023.01.010 或 http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/CN/Y2023/V21/I1/83

[1]	吴电明, 夏立忠, 俞元春, 等. 三峡库区坡地脐橙园保护性措施对土壤团聚体结构及碳、氮、磷含量的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2011, 48(5):996. WU Dianming, XIA Lizhong, YU Yuanchun, et al. Effects of protective management of navel orange orchards on slope land on structure of and carbon,nitrogen and phosphorus contents in soil aggregates[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2011, 48(5):996.
[2]	陈曦, 刘焕焕, 江山, 等. 复垦模式对矿区土壤团聚体组成及其有机碳、氮分布的影响[J]. 山西农业科学, 2020, 48(5):768. CHEN Xi, LIU Huanhuan, JIANG Shan, et al. Effects of reclamation mode on soil aggregate composition and organic carbon and nitrogen distribution in mining area[J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(5):768.
[3]	连玉珍, 刘合满, 曹丽花, 等. 西藏林芝不同土地利用方式的土壤团聚体及其有机碳分布[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2019, 31(8):1353. LIAN Yuzhen, LIU Heman, CAO Lihua, et al. Distribution of soil aggregate and organic carbon under different land use types in Linzhi, Tibet[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2019, 31(8):1353.
[4]	张曼夏, 季猛, 李伟,等. 土地利用方式对土壤团聚体稳定性及其结合有机碳的影响[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2013, 19(4):598. ZHANG Manxia, JI Meng, LI Wei, et al. Effect of land use patterns on soil aggregate stability and aggregate-associated organic carbon[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Environmental Biology, 2013, 19(4):598.
[5]	单志杰, 于洋, 殷哲, 等. 蒙自断陷盆地不同土地利用方式土壤养分特征[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2019, 39(7):85. SHAN Zhijie, YU Yang, YIN Zhe, et al. Soil nutrient characteristics in different land use of Mengzi gabin basin[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2019, 39(7):85.
[6]	瞿晴, 徐红伟, 吴旋, 等. 黄土高原不同植被带人工刺槐林土壤团聚体稳定性及其化学计量特征[J]. 环境科学, 2019, 40(6):183. QU Qing, XU Hongwei, WU Xuan, et al. Soil aggregate stability and its stoichiometric characteristics in Robinia pseudoacacia forest within different vegetation zones on the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Environmental Science, 2019, 40(6):183.
[7]	BLAIR G J, LEFROY R D B, LISLE L. Soil carbon fractions based on their degree of oxidation, and the development of a carbon management index for agricultural systems[J]. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 1995, 46:1459.
[8]	童文彬, 邱志腾, 张明奎. 植物有效磷与水溶性磷对土壤磷素积累的响应研究[J]. 农学学报, 2020, 10(1):37. TONG Wenbin, QIU Zhiteng, ZHANG Mingkui. Response of bio-available phosphorus and water-soluble phosphorus to phosphorus accumulation in soil[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2020, 10(1):37.
[9]	曹培, 徐莹, 朱杰, 等. 不同种植模式对稻田土壤活性有机碳组分及产量的短期影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(9):2788. CAO Pei, XU Ying, ZHU Jie, et al. Short-term effects of different cropping patterns on soil labile organic carbon fractions and yields of paddy fields[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2019, 38(9):2788.
[10]	中国科学院南京土壤研究所. 土壤理化分析[M]. 上海:上海科学技术出版社, 1978:135. Nanjing Institute of Soil Siences, Chinese Academy of sciences. Soil physical and chemical analysis[M]. Shanghai:Shanghai Science and Technology Press, 1978:135.
[11]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 3版. 北京:中国农业出版社, 2000:25. BAO Shidan. Soil agrochemical analysis[M].3ed. Beijing:China Agricultural Press, 2000:25.
[12]	王圣瑞. 湖泊沉积物-水界面过程基本理论与常用测定方法[M]. 北京:科学出版社, 2014:27. WANG Shengrui. Basic theory and common determination method of lake sediment-water interface process[M]. Beijing:Science Press, 2014:27.
[13]	徐鹏, 江长胜, 郝庆菊, 等. 缙云山土地利用方式对土壤活性有机质及其碳库管理指数的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2013, 34(10):4010. XU Peng, JIANG Changsheng, HAO Qingju, et al. Effects of the different land use on soil labile organic matter and carbon management index in Jinyun mountain[J]. Environmental Science, 2013, 34(10):4010.
[14]	徐英德, 汪景宽, 王思引, 等. 玉米残体分解对不同肥力棕壤团聚体组成及有机碳分布的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2018, 26(7):1029. XU Yingde, WANG Jingkuan, WANG Siyin,et al. Effects of maize residue decomposition on aggregate composition and organic carbon distribution of different fertilities brown soils[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2018, 26(7):1029.
[15]	文倩, 赵小蓉, 张书美, 等. 半干旱地区不同土壤团聚体中微生物量磷的分布特征[J]. 中国农业科学, 2005, 38(2):327. WEN Qian, ZHAO Xiaorong, ZHANG Shumei, et al. Distribution characteristics of microbial biomass phosphorus in different soil aggregates in semi-arid area[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2005, 38(2):327.
[16]	区晓琳, 陈志彪, 姜超, 等. 植被恢复对亚热带侵蚀红壤团聚体养分分布的影响[J]. 水土保持学报,2016, 30(6):230. OU Xiaolin, CHEN Zhibiao, JIANG Chao, et al. Effect of vegetation restoration on nutrient distribution within aggregate of subtropical eroded red soils[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 30(6):230.
[17]	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):11. CAO Binbin, LI Yunuo, ZHU Yihui, et al. Priming effect of straw addition on different particle-size fractions of soil aggregates under long-term carbon and nitrogen managements[J]. Journal of Northwest A&F University(Natural Science Edition), 2021, 49(5):11.
[18]	谷思玉, 张一鹤, 陆欣春, 等. 不同土地利用方式对农田黑土剖面磷形态分布的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2019, 37(3):149. GU Siyu, ZHANG Yihe, LU Xinchun, et al. The effect of land use on the distribution of soil phosphorous forms in black soil profile[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2019, 37(3):149.
[19]	龚雪蛟, 秦琳, 刘飞, 等. 有机类肥料对土壤养分含量的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(4):1403. GONG Xuejiao, QIN Lin, LIU Fei, et al. Effects of organic manure on soil nutrient content[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020, 31(4):1403.
[20]	刘晶, 田耀武, 张巧明. 豫西黄土丘陵区不同土地利用方式土壤团聚体有机碳含量及其矿化特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2016, 30(3):255. LIU Jing, TIAN Yaowu, ZHANG Qiaoming. Characteristics of soil organic carbon content and mineralization in soil aggregates under different land use patterns on the loess hilly area of western Henan[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 30(3):255.
[21]	罗晓虹, 王子芳, 陆畅,等. 土地利用方式对土壤团聚体稳定性和有机碳含量的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2019, 40(8):281. LUO Xiaohong, WANG Zifang, LU Chang, et al. Effects of land use type on the content and stability of organic carbon in soil aggregates[J]. Environmental Science, 2019, 40(8):281.
[22]	郑兴波, 张雪, 韩士杰. 长白山阔叶红松林不同演替阶段土壤团聚体粒径组成及有机碳含量变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(5):1553. ZHENG Xingbo, ZHANG Xue, HAN Shijie. Changes of soil aggregate size composition and organic carbon content at different succession stages of broad-leaved Korean pine forest in Changbai Mountain[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2019, 30(5):1553.