耕作方式和有机肥对土壤有机碳及作物产量的影响

杨杰 ,  赵霡 ,  由福英 ,  王培烨 ,  周静 ,  谢颖 ,  王萌瑶 ,  张鑫 ,  王贵彦

中国农业大学学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (12) : 12 -22.

PDF (1294KB)
中国农业大学学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (12) : 12 -22. DOI: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2025.12.02

耕作方式和有机肥对土壤有机碳及作物产量的影响

作者信息 +

Effects of tillage practices and organic manure on soil organic carbon and crop yield

Author information +
文章历史 +
PDF (1324K)

摘要

为探讨不同耕作方式和施用有机肥对土壤有机碳、活性碳组分和作物产量的影响,于2022—2023年开展田间试验,采用裂区设计,设深翻(D)、深翻施用有机肥(DM)、旋耕(R)和旋耕施用有机肥(RM)4个处理,以旋耕(R)为对照处理,探究了耕作方式与施有机肥对土壤有机碳(Soil organic carbon,SOC)及其活性碳组分、碳相关酶活性、土壤碳库管理指数(Carbon pool management index,CPMI)和作物产量的影响。结果表明:1)耕作方式与施有机肥对土壤有机碳库具有显著影响,深翻比旋耕显著提高了SOC及其活性碳组分含量,施有机肥比不施有机肥显著提高了SOC及其活性碳组分含量(P<0.05);深翻施用有机肥处理SOC含量显著高于其他处理,与对照相比显著提高10.18%(P<0.05)。2)耕作方式和施有机肥对土壤碳相关酶活性有显著影响,深翻比旋耕显著提高了土壤碳相关酶活性,施有机肥比不施有机肥显著提高了土壤碳相关酶活性(P<0.05);深翻施用有机肥处理过氧化氢酶(Soil catalase, S-CAT)活性(>20—40 cm土层)显著高于其他处理,较对照显著提高了15.40%(P<0.05)。3)耕作方式与施有机肥对小麦-玉米两熟周年产量及CPMI有显著影响,均是深翻施用有机肥显著高于其他处理(P<0.05);深翻施用有机肥周年产量较对照处理显著提高了9.40%,深翻施用有机肥CPMI较对照处理显著提高了28.50%(P<0.05)。4)SOC及其活性碳组分、碳相关酶活性和CPMI均与小麦-玉米两熟周年产量呈显著正相关(P<0.05),碳相关酶活性与SOC及其活性碳组分均呈极显著正相关(P<0.01),CPMI与碳相关酶活性、SOC及其活性碳组分均呈极显著正相关(P<0.01)。综上,深翻施用有机肥可激发土壤碳相关酶活性,促进土壤活性碳与有机碳增加,提高了碳库管理指数,达到增碳增产的目的。

Abstract

To investigate the effects of different tillage practices and organic fertilizer application on soil organic carbon, active carbon components, and crop yield, a field experiment was conducted from 2022 to 2023. Split-plot design was adopted. Four treatments deep tillage (D), deep tillage with organic fertilizer (DM), rotary tillage (R), and rotary tillage with organic fertilizer (RM) were set by taking rotary tillage (R) as the control. The impacts of tillage practices and organic fertilizer application on soil organic carbon (SOC), its active components, carbon-related enzyme activities, soil carbon pool management index (CPMI), and crop yield were examined. The results showed that: 1) Tillage practices and organic fertilizer application significantly influenced the soil organic carbon pool. Deep tillage significantly increased the SOC and active carbon components compared with rotary tillage, while organic fertilizer application significantly enhanced the SOC and active carbon fraction contents compared with non-application (P<0.05). The SOC content under the deep tillage with organic fertilizer treatment was significantly higher than that under other treatments, which was significantly increased by 10.18% compared with the control (P<0.05). 2) Tillage practices and organic fertilizer application significantly affected soil carbon-related enzyme activities. Deep tillage significantly increased soil carbon-related enzyme activities compared with rotary tillage, and organic fertilizer application significantly enhanced these activities compared with non-application (P<0.05). The soil catalase (S-CAT) activity in the >20-40 cm soil layer under the deep tillage with organic fertilizer treatment was significantly higher than that under other treatments, significantly increased by 15.40% compared with the control (P<0.05). 3) Tillage practices and organic fertilizer application significantly influenced the annual yield of the wheat-maize double-cropping system and CPMI (P<0.05). The deep tillage with organic fertilizer treatment exhibited significantly higher values in both parameters compared with other treatments. The annual yield under deep tillage with organic fertilizer increased by 9.40% compared with the control, while the CPMI increased by 28.50% (P<0.05). 4) SOC and its active fractions, carbon-related enzyme activities, and CPMI were significantly positively correlated with the annual yield of the wheat-maize double-cropping system (P<0.05). Carbon-related enzyme activities showed highly significant positive correlations with SOC and its active fractions (P<0.01), and CPMI was highly significantly positively correlated with carbon-related enzyme activities, SOC and its active fractions (P<0.01). In conclusion, deep tillage combined with organic fertilizer application can stimulate soil carbon-related enzyme activities, promote the accumulation of soil-active carbon and organic carbon, and enhance the carbon pool management index, thereby achieving the dual goals of increasing carbon sequestration and crop yields.

Graphical abstract

关键词

耕作方式 / 有机肥 / 土壤有机碳 / 产量 / 碳库管理指数

Key words

tillage practices / organic manure / soil organic carbon / yield / carbon pool management index

引用本文

引用格式 ▾
杨杰,赵霡,由福英,王培烨,周静,谢颖,王萌瑶,张鑫,王贵彦. 耕作方式和有机肥对土壤有机碳及作物产量的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2025, 30(12): 12-22 DOI:10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2025.12.02

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

华北麦玉两熟区是我国重要的粮食产区和农业生产基地,在国民经济中占据重要地位[1]。近年来,作物产量的持续提高是农业生产的主要目标,该区域集约化程度和作物产量较高,导致土壤有机质流失严重[2],而提高农田土壤固碳能力和维持土壤碳库平衡,是有效维持土壤健康和持续高产的重要途径[3]。
土壤有机碳在培肥土壤、提高土地生产力等方面发挥着重要作用,是评价土壤质量的关键指标[4],活性有机碳周转速率快,能有效激活土壤微生物,活化土壤养分[5]。耕作方式是影响土壤有机碳转化的田间措施之一,不同耕作深度与强度对土壤碳库矿化速率的作用各异[6]。华北平原小麦-玉米长期浅旋耕导致耕层浅薄化、肥力衰退等问题制约了沃土提质与持续高产[7]。研究表明,深翻(20~40 cm)可改善土壤物理性质,促进作物根系生长[8],提高土壤微生物总量,从而增加碳输入[9],秸秆还田配合旋耕[10]或深翻[11]显著提高了土壤有机碳及活性碳组分含量。有机肥具有增加土壤有机质含量、培肥地力、改良土壤、增强土壤保水保肥能力的特性[12],可向土壤提供有机碳来源,提高土壤微生物活性,促进有机碳与营养物质之间的转换,从而增加土壤有机碳积累量[13]。因此,施用有机肥也是增强农田土壤有机碳的重要技术途径[14]。牛粪与无机肥混施显著提高了冬小麦‑夏玉米两熟农田土壤微生物生物量碳(Microbial biomass carbon,MBC)、土壤易氧化有机碳(Easily oxidizable organic carbon,EOC)以及土壤可溶性有机碳(Dissolved organic carbon,DOC)等活性有机碳组分含量,增强了土壤固碳能力[15]。施用有机肥比无机肥显著提高了耕作层中EOC和MBC含量[16-17]。
因此,本研究以小麦‑玉米两熟粮田为研究对象,于2022—2023年开展田间不同耕作方式下施用有机肥试验,探究不同耕作方式下施用有机肥对土壤有机碳、活性碳组分、土壤碳库变化及作物产量的影响,旨在为华北麦玉两熟区土壤增碳保碳和提高粮食产量提供科学理论依据。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验地概况

试验于2022年10月—2023年10月在河北省保定市高阳县硕丰农场(115°38′ E,38°30′ N)进行,该地区属于温带大陆性季风气候,降雨集中在7—9月,月平均气温14.44 ℃,无霜期205 d,试验期间年降水量494.57 mm。试验地0—20 cm土层基础养分有机质20.29 g/kg、全氮0.92 g/kg、速效磷13.81 mg/kg、速效钾150.23 mg/kg。

1.2 试验设计

采用双因素裂区设计,不同耕作方式为主区,设深翻(D)和旋耕(R)2个处理;副区为不施用有机肥和施用有机肥2个处理(M)。试验处理分别为:深翻(D)、深翻施用有机肥(DM)、旋耕(R)和旋耕施用有机肥(RM),以R处理为对照,小区面积50 m2(长10 m,宽5 m),3次重复。

小麦于2022年10月24日播种,2023年6月13日收获,品种为‘济麦22’,基本苗600万/hm2。播种前将有机肥和基施氮肥撒施地表后进行旋耕(15 cm)或深翻(25~30 cm),耕后耙耱进行播种。行距15 cm,滴灌水肥一体化管理模式,滴灌带间距60 cm。玉米于2023年6月20日播种,10月2日收获,品种为‘秋乐368’,种植密度6.0万株/hm2。小麦和玉米总施化肥纯氮量均为210 kg/hm2,小麦基施纯氮90 kg/hm2,拔节期追施氮肥72 kg/hm2,开花期追施氮肥48 kg/hm2、磷肥(P2O5)135 kg/hm2和钾肥(K2O)105 kg/hm2;玉米基施纯氮42 kg/hm2,大喇叭口期追氮105 kg/hm2,开花期追施氮肥63 kg/hm2、玉米磷肥(P2O5)120 kg/hm2和钾肥(K2O)150 kg/hm2。有机肥(有机质含量≥45%,有效菌≥5亿/g,NPK含量4.5 g/kg)1 800 kg/hm2和磷钾肥基施。小麦和玉米收获后秸秆粉碎还田,其他田间管理根据当地高产田管理措施进行。

1.3 测定指标及方法

分别于小麦和玉米成熟期,各小区取0—40 cm土层的土壤,20 cm为一层,去除杂质后分为2份,一份土样自然风干,测定有机碳;另一份保存于4 ℃冰箱中,用于土壤微生物生物量碳及碳相关酶活性测定。

1.3.1 土壤有机碳和碳组分含量的测定

土壤有机碳(Soil organic carbon,SOC)含量采用重铬酸钾-浓硫酸外加热法测定[18];MBC含量采用氯仿熏蒸浸提法测定[19];EOC含量采用高锰酸钾氧化法测定[20];难氧化有机碳(Hardly oxidizable carbon,HOC)含量=SOC含量-EOC含量;颗粒有机碳(Particulate organic carbon,POC)含量采用六偏磷酸钠分散法测定[21]。

1.3.2 土壤碳相关酶活性的测定

过氧化氢酶(Soil catalase,S-CAT)活性采用0.1 mol/L高锰酸钾滴定法测定[22];蔗糖酶(Soil sucrase,S-SC)活性采用3, 5-二硝基水杨酸比色法测定[22]。

1.3.3 作物产量的测定

小麦成熟期按小区收获,风干后脱粒测定产量。取样面积为1 m²,按13%含水量统一折算籽粒产量,以平均值作为单位面积产量。玉米成熟后按小区收获,风干脱粒测产。取样面积为5 m²,按14%含水量统一折算,以平均值作为单位面积籽粒产量。

1.3.4 土壤碳库管理指数

参考O’rourke等[23]的方法计算碳库活度(Activity,A)、碳库指数(Carbon pool index,CPI)、碳库活度指数(Activity index,AI)和碳库管理指数(Carbon pool management index,CPMI),以EOC作为活性有机碳表征,HOC为稳态有机碳表征,对照处理(R)为参照土壤,计算公式如下:

A=EOC/HOC
CPI=SOC/SOCCK
AI=A/ACK
CPMI=CPI×AI×100/%

式中:SOC为样品总有机碳含量,g/kg;SOCCK为对照总有机碳含量,g/kg;ACK为对照土壤碳库活度。

1.4 统计分析

数据处理采用Microsoft Excel 2021软件,用SPSS 17.0软件进行多因素方差分析和相关性分析,采用Duncan法进行差异显著性检验,采用Origin 2024软件作图。

2 结果与分析

2.1 耕作方式和有机肥对土壤SOC及其组分含量的影响

2.1.1 土壤SOC含量

小麦和玉米成熟期不同处理土壤SOC含量如图1所示。0—20 cm土层,互作分析表明小麦季耕作方式、施用有机肥及其交互作用均对SOC含量具有显著(P<0.05)或极显著(P<0.01)影响,深翻处理下SOC含量显著高于旋耕(P<0.05),施用有机肥SOC含量显著高于不施用有机肥(P<0.05);玉米季,互作分析表明施用有机肥极显著影响SOC含量(P<0.01),深翻和旋耕处理下施用有机肥SOC含量较不施用有机肥分别显著增加了18.5%和8.9%(P<0.05)。>20—40 cm土层,互作分析表明玉米季施用有机肥及其交互作用均对SOC含量具有显著(P<0.05)或极显著(P<0.01)影响,深翻处理下施用有机肥较不施用有机肥SOC含量显著增加22.9%(P<0.05)。

2.1.2 土壤活性碳组分含量

如表1所示,小麦和玉米成熟期不同处理互作分析表明,0—20和>20—40 cm土层施用有机肥均对MBC、POC和EOC含量具有显著(P<0.05)或极显著(P<0.01)影响。由表2可知,不同耕作方式和有机肥处理下MBC、POC和EOC含量随土层加深而降低。0—40 cm土层,小麦和玉米在DM处理下MBC、POC和EOC含量显著高于其他处理(P<0.05),较对照组R分别提高了23.15%、15.31%和10.12%。此外,施有机肥较不施有机肥MBC、POC和EOC含量分别显著提高了28.21%、7.92%和11.31%(P<0.05)。

2.2 耕作方式和有机肥对土壤碳相关酶活性的影响

2.2.1 土壤S-CAT活性

小麦和玉米成熟期不同处理下不同土层S-CAT活性如图2所示。互作分析表明施有机肥极显著影响0—40 cm土层S-CAT活性(P<0.01)。0—20 cm土层,小麦季和玉米季S-CAT活性施有机肥均显著高于不施用有机肥(P<0.05),玉米季S-CAT活性旋耕显著高于深翻(P<0.05)。>20—40 cm土层,玉米季S-CAT活性深翻显著高于旋耕(P<0.05),小麦季和玉米季S-CAT活性施有机肥均显著高于不施用有机肥(P<0.05)。此外,小麦季和玉米季DM均显著高于其他处理(P<0.05),较对照组R分别提高13.25%和14.35%。

2.2.2 土壤S-SC活性

小麦和玉米成熟期不同处理下不同土层S-SC活性如图3所示。互作分析表明施有机肥极显著影响0—20 cm土层S-SC活性(P<0.01)。0—20 cm土层,小麦季和玉米季S-SC活性施有机肥均显著高于不施用有机肥(P<0.05),玉米季S-SC活性旋耕显著高于深翻(P<0.05);其中小麦季和玉米季RM较对照组R分别显著提高98.7%和75.8%(P<0.05)。>20—40 cm土层,小麦季S-SC活性DM显著高于其他处理(P<0.05),较对照组R提高了47.82%。

2.3 耕作方式和有机肥处理对土壤CPMI的影响

由表3可知,耕作方式和施有机肥及其交互作用对小麦季和玉米季CPI、AI和CPMI均具有显著(P<0.05)或极显著(P<0.01)影响。如表4所示,小麦季和玉米季DM均显著高于其他各处理(P<0.05),各处理CPMI由高到低依次为DM>RM>D>R。CPMI小麦季和玉米季DM相比R处理分别显著提高了25.8%和32.7%(P<0.05)。此外,施有机肥小麦季和玉米季CPI、AI和CPMI均显著高于未施有机肥(P<0.05),DM相比D处理小麦季和玉米季分别提高20.6 %和20.9%,RM相比R处理小麦季和玉米季分别提高了16.5%和24.4%。

2.4 耕作方式和有机肥处理对作物产量的影响

由表5可知,耕作方式、施用有机肥及其交互作用均显著(P<0.05)或极显著(P<0.01)影响小麦和玉米产量及周年产量。如表6所示,DM处理小麦和玉米产量及周年产量均为最高,且显著高于其他处理(P<0.05)。深翻处理显著提高了作物产量(P<0.05),D相比R处理,小麦和玉米产量及周年产量分别显著提高2.6%、3.1%和2.9%(P<0.05)。施用有机肥可显著提高作物产量(P<0.05),小麦和玉米产量及周年产量DM相比D处理分别增产6.2%、7.1%和6.7%,RM相比R处理分别增产2.3%、8.5%和5.5%。

2.5 耕作方式和有机肥处理土壤SOC及其活性碳组分、碳相关酶、CPMI与周年产量的相关性分析

由表7可知,周年产量与土壤SOC及其活性组分含量、碳相关酶活性和CPMI均呈显著正相关(P<0.05),土壤SOC含量与活性碳组分含量和碳相关酶活性均呈极显著正相关(P<0.01),CPMI与土壤SOC及其组分含量和碳相关酶活性均呈极显著正相关(P<0.01)。

3 讨 论

3.1 耕作方式和有机肥对土壤有机碳及其碳组分含量的影响

深翻能有效促进耕层有机碳和活性有机碳含量显著增加[24],且0—40 cm土层变化尤为显著[25]。本研究结果表明,深翻施用有机肥0—20 cm土层土壤有机碳及活性碳组分显著高于旋耕施用有机肥,原因可能与旋耕能促进作物残余均匀融入土层,扩大了秸秆与土壤的交互界面,比深翻更能促进微生物分解[26],但由于秸秆分解缓慢,秸秆中的碳分解与固存也较为迟缓[27],所以表层土壤中深翻处理的SOC高于旋耕处理[28]。深翻增加了>20—40 cm土层土壤有机碳及其活性有机碳含量,由于深翻能减小土壤紧实度,降低深层土壤容重和增强深层保水能力,可将根系分泌物翻入深层土壤提供有机基质,从而提高微生物活性,加速根茬残留物分解和活性有机碳组分转化。此外,深翻将0—35 cm耕层土壤进行置换,可有效提升深层土壤肥力,从而提高活性有机碳组分及有机碳含量[29]。施用有机肥可显著增加土壤有机碳及微生物生物量碳含量[30],有机和无机肥配施也会增加有机碳组分含量,从而影响土壤有机碳的转化和固定[31]。本研究中施用有机肥处理土壤有机碳及其活性碳组分显著高于未施用有机肥处理,由于施用有机肥料可为土壤微生物群落提供充裕的碳源和能源基质,促进微生物生长与繁衍,提升其生物活性水平,释放出更多活性有机碳,提高了活性碳组分DOC和MBC含量[32-33]。

3.2 耕作方式和有机肥对土壤碳相关酶活性的影响

深翻后土壤结构疏松,土壤真菌多样性上升,增强了土壤酶活性[34],促进腐殖质分解,深层微生物能够接触到更多的氧气和有机质,从而分泌更多土壤酶加速土壤养分循环[35]。本研究中,深翻施用有机肥>20—40 cm土层蔗糖酶和过氧化氢酶活性高于其他处理,由于深翻能为作物根系向深层土壤延伸及根系分泌物释放创造有利条件,进而增强土壤微生物活性,对提高土壤酶活性有积极作用[36]。施用有机肥能够改变土壤物理和化学特性及微生物群落,可能刺激土壤碳相关酶活性增强[37]。本研究结果表明,施用有机肥显著提升土壤碳相关酶活性,这与邓婵娟[38]的研究结果一致,相较于化肥,有机肥为土壤微生物提供了关键碳源,进而提高了土壤碳相关酶活性。此外,有机肥通过增加土壤碳源储备,促进根系分泌物增多,提升了微生物活性,这些均有利于土壤碳相关酶活性的提升[39]。张欢[40]进一步证明了施用有机肥能够改变土壤物理和化学特性及微生物群落,从而刺激土壤碳相关酶活性增强。然而,本研究中玉米季>20—40 cm土层,蔗糖酶活性并未达到未施有机肥的水平,这可能由于有机肥能够在土壤中存在较长时间,从而使土壤中能够耐受有机肥的微生物物种增多,而耐受能力低的敏感物种尤其是与蔗糖酶相关的特定微生物减少,导致蔗糖酶活性降低[41]。

3.3 耕作方式和有机肥对小麦和玉米产量及土壤碳库管理指数的影响

耕作制度、施肥方式、土壤状况和气候条件等均影响产量形成[42]。本研究中深翻施用有机肥小麦玉米产量均显著高于旋耕施用有机肥处理。这是因为深翻打破犁底层,有助于作物根系向深处生长,能从土壤深层获取更多养分,确保生长发育所需的养分供给,显著提高干物质累积量,进而提升作物产量[43-44]。本研究结果表明,土壤活性碳组分含量与小麦和玉米周年产量有强相关关系,作物产量与土壤易氧有机碳化和颗粒有机碳显著正相关,说明土壤有机碳含量提高,有利于作物产量的增加[45]。本研究中,施用有机肥处理小麦和玉米产量均显著高于未施用有机肥处理。这是因为施用有机肥后有机质增加,可提供大量活性碳源,有利于微生物生长和代谢,加快土壤有机物质分解,促进养分释放和作物吸收。此外,有机肥还包含多种微量元素[46],在有机质分解过程中,会生成多种中间产物,这些产物的特定活性基团能与土壤中某些微量元素进行络合或螯合反应,进而提高微量元素的有效性,从而提高作物产量[41]。土壤碳库管理指数是反映土壤碳素动态变化灵敏而有效的指标,碳库管理指数与有机碳、碳库指数和碳库活度均密切相关,可以反映土壤有机碳含量和质量,并能为农田碳固存提供量化依据[48]。本研究发现,碳库管理指数与有机碳、碳库指数和碳库活度均显著正相关,即碳库管理指数与有机碳的各处理变化趋势基本一致,且深翻施用有机肥的碳库管理指数显著高于其他处理。这可能是由于深翻和施用有机肥均可有效增加土壤有机碳各组分含量,且能促进团聚体形成,提高土壤微生物活性,进而提高碳库管理指数[49]。此外,本研究各处理的作物产量与碳库管理指数显著正相关。碳库管理指数增大有利于维持土壤碳库的稳定性及其土壤固碳能力,从而增加土地肥力,在一定程度上反映了作物固碳增产效应[50]。

4 结 论

深翻结合施用有机肥(DM)显著提高了0—40 cm土层土壤有机碳及活性碳组分(EOC、MBC、POC)含量,增强了过氧化氢酶和蔗糖酶活性,并显著提升了碳库管理指数、小麦和玉米产量及周年产量。深翻配合施用有机肥可激发土壤碳相关酶活性,显著提升碳库活性和稳定性,促进养分转化,有效激发土壤生态功能,实现土壤增碳与作物增产的协同提升,是华北平原麦玉两熟区提高土壤有机碳和作物产量的较优管理措施,为该区域农业可持续发展提供了有效技术途径。

参考文献

[1]

郑诗然, 胡琦, 和骅芸, 邢梦媛, 高浩然, 刘媛媛, 马雪晴, 潘学标. 1961—2020年华北平原冬小麦-夏玉米生长季内光能资源时空变化特征[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2022, 27(1): 26-37

[2]

Zheng S R, Hu Q, He H Y, Xing M Y, Gao H R, Liu Y Y, Ma X Q, Pan X B. Temporal and spatial variation characteristics of radiation in winter wheat-summer maize growing season in the North China Plain during 1961-2020 [J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2022, 27(1): 26-37 (in Chinese)

[3]

Tian S Z, Ning T Y, Wang Y, Liu Z, Li G, Li Z J, Lal R. Crop yield and soil carbon responses to tillage method changes in North China[J]. Soil & Tillage Research, 2016, 163: 207-213

[4]

张旭博, 孙楠, 徐明岗, 张文菊, 李建伟. 全球气候变化下中国农田土壤碳库未来变化[J]. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(23): 4648-4657

[5]

Zhang X B, Sun N, Xu M G, Zhang W J, Li J W. Soil organic carbon in agricultural soils in China under global climate change[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014, 47(23): 4648-4657 (in Chinese)

[6]

马南, 陈智文, 张清. 不同类型秸秆还田对土壤有机碳及酶活性的影响综述[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(3): 53-57

[7]

Ma N, Chen Z W, Zhang Q. Effects of different types of straw returning on soil organic carbon contenes and enzyme activity: A review[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 49(3): 53-57 (in Chinese)

[8]

Cai A D, Feng W T, Zhang W J, Xu M G. Climate, soil texture, and soil types affect the contributions of fine-fraction-stabilized carbon to total soil organic carbon in different land uses across China [J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2016, 172: 2-9

[9]

王永慧, 轩清霞, 王丽丽, 杨殿林, 赵建宁, 李刚, 修伟明, 红雨. 不同耕作方式对土壤有机碳矿化及酶活性影响研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2020, 51(4): 876-884

[10]

Wang Y H, Xuan Q X, Wang L L, Yang D L, Zhao J N, Li G, Xiu W M, Hong Y. Soil organic carbon mineralization and soil enzyme activities under different tillage methods[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2020, 51(4): 876-884 (in Chinese)

[11]

聂良鹏, 郭利伟, 牛海燕, 魏杰, 李增嘉, 宁堂原. 轮耕对小麦–玉米两熟农田耕层构造及作物产量与品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2015, 41(3): 468-478

[12]

Nie L P, Guo L W, Niu H Y, Wei J, Li Z J, Ning T Y. Effects of rotational tillage on tilth soil structure and crop yield and quality in maize-wheat cropping system[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2015, 41(3): 468-478 (in Chinese)

[13]

Luo Z K, Wang E L, Sun O J. Can no-tillage stimulate carbon sequestration in agricultural soils: A meta-analysis of paired experiments [J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2010, 139(1-2): 224-231

[14]

Kuzyakov Y, Xu X L. Competition between roots and microorganisms for nitrogen: Mechanisms and ecological relevance[J]. New Phytologist, 2013, 198(3): 656-669

[15]

张志毅, 熊桂云, 吴茂前, 范先鹏, 冯婷婷, 巴瑞先, 段申荣. 有机培肥与耕作方式对稻麦轮作土壤团聚体和有机碳组分的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报:中英文, 2020, 28(3): 405-412

[16]

Zhang Z Y, Xiong G Y, Wu M Q, Fan X P, Feng T T, Ba R X, Duan S R. Effects of organic fertilization and tillage method on soil aggregates and organic carbon fractions in a wheat-rice system[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2020, 28(3): 405-412 (in Chinese)

[17]

何家帅, 李新美, 魏跃鹏, 郭航兆,杨康娜, 孙磊康, 李孝永,贾绪存, 李玉霞, 李荣发, 王群. 长期深耕秸秆还田配施生物炭对砂姜黑土团聚体及小麦-玉米产量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2024, 40(7): 161-171

[18]

He J S, Li X M, Wei Y P, Guo H Z, Yang K N, Sun L K, Li X Y, Jia X C, Li Y X, Li R F, Wang Q. Effects of long-term deep tillage and straw return with biochar addition to lime concretion black soil on the aggregates and wheat-maize yield [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2024, 40(7): 161-171 (in Chinese)

[19]

刘红江, 陈虞雯, 孙国峰, 陈留根, 郑建初. 有机肥-无机肥不同配施比例对水稻产量和农田养分流失的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(2): 405-412

[20]

Liu H J, Chen Y W, Sun G F, Chen L G, Zheng J C. Effects of different organic-inorganic fertilizer combination ratios on rice yield and nutrient loss with surface runoff[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2017, 36(2): 405-412 (in Chinese)

[21]

蒋太明, 罗龙皂, 李渝, 张文安, 张文菊, 张会民. 长期施肥对西南黄壤有机碳平衡的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2014, 45(3): 666-671

[22]

Jiang T M, Luo L Z, Li Y, Zhang W A, Zhang W J, Zhang H M. Effects of long-term fertilization on soil organic carbon balance in a yellow soil of south western China[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2014, 45(3): 666-671 (in Chinese)

[23]

Reeves D W. The role of soil organic matter in maintaining soil quality in continuous cropping systems[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 1997, 43(1-2): 131-167

[24]

Li J, Wen Y C, Li X H, Li Y T, Yang X D, Lin Z A, Song Z Z, Cooper J M, Zhao B Q. Soil labile organic carbon fractions and soil organic carbon stocks as affected by long-term organic and mineral fertilization regimes in the North China Plain[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2018, 175:281-290

[25]

Hu J, Wu J G, Sharaf A, Sun J M, Qu X J. Effects of organic wastes on structural characterizations of fulvic acid in semiarid soil under plastic mulched drip irrigation[J]. Chemosphere, 2019, 234: 830-836

[26]

Liang Q, Chen H Q, Gong Y S, Fan M S, Yang H F, Lal R, Kuzyakov Y. Effects of 15years of manure and inorganic fertilizers on soil organic carbon fractions in a wheat-maize system in the North China Plain[J]. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2012, 92(1): 21-33

[27]

鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 第3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000

[28]

Bao S D. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis[M]. 3rd ed. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000 (in Chinese)

[29]

Wu L, Zhang W J, Wei W J, He Z L, Kuzyakov Y, Bol R, Hu R G. Soil organic matter priming and carbon balance after straw addition is regulated by long-term fertilization[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2019, 135: 383-391

[30]

Blair G J, Lefroy R, 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(7): 1459-1466

[31]

Cambardella C A, Elliott E T. Particulate soil organic-matter changes across a grassland cultivation sequence[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1992, 56(3): 777-783

[32]

关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1986

[33]

Guan S Y. Soil Enzyme and its Research Method[M]. Beijing: Agriculture Press, 1986 (in Chinese)

[34]

O’Rourke S M, Angers D A, Holden N M, McBratney A B. Soil organic carbon across scales[J]. Global Change Biology, 2015,21(10):3561-3574

[35]

Metay A, Moreira J A A, Bernoux M, Boyer T, Douzet J M, Feigl B, Feller C, Maraux F, Oliver R, Scopel E. Storage and forms of organic carbon in a no-tillage under cover crops system on clayey Oxisol in dryland rice production (Cerrados, Brazil)[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2007, 94(1): 122-132

[36]

祁剑英, 马守田, 刘冰洋, 阚正荣, 刘鹏, 王兴, 刘洋, 张海林. 保护性耕作对土壤有机碳稳定化影响的研究进展[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2020, 25(1): 1-9

[37]

Qi J Y, Ma S T, Liu B Y, Kan Z R, Liu P, Wang X, Liu Y, Zhang H L. Advances in effects of conservation tillage on soil organic carbon stabilization[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2020, 25(1): 1-9 (in Chinese)

[38]

王旭东, 庄俊杰, 刘冰洋, 李帅帅, 赵鑫, 刘洋, 张海林. 秸秆还田条件下中国农田土壤有机碳含量变化及其影响因素的Meta分析[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2020, 25(8): 12-24

[39]

Wang X D, Zhuang J J, Liu B Y, Li S S, Zhao X, Liu Y, Zhang H L. Residue returning induced changes in soil organic carbon and the influential factors in China’s croplands: A meta-analysis [J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2020, 25(8): 12-24 (in Chinese)

[40]

Bao Y Y, Feng Y Z, Stegen J C, Wu M, Chen R R, Liu W J, Zhang J W, Li Z P, Lin X G. Straw chemistry links the assembly of bacterial communities to decomposition in paddy soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2020, 148: 107866

[41]

Hu R W, Liu Y J, Chen T, Zheng Z Y, Peng G J, Zou Y D, Tang C G, Shan X H, Zhou Q M, Li J. Responses of soil aggregates,organic carbon,and crop yield to short-term intermittent deep tillage in Southern China [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 298: 126767

[42]

Zhang X, Wang M G, Zhang D D, Zhang Y L, Wang X D. Increasing soil organic carbon pools and wheat yields by optimising tillage and fertilisation on the Loess Plateau in China[J]. European Journal of Soil Science, 2022, 73(1): e13197

[43]

Sui P X, Li R P, Zheng H B, Wang H, Yuan Y, Luo Y, Zheng J Y, Liu W R. Long-term conservation tillage practices directly and indirectly affect soil micro-food web in a Chinese mollisol [J]. Agronomy, 2022, 12(10):2356

[44]

张瑞, 张贵龙, 姬艳艳, 李刚, 常泓, 杨殿林. 不同施肥措施对土壤活性有机碳的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2013, 34(1): 277-282

[45]

Zhang R, Zhang G L, Ji Y Y, Li G, Chang H, Yang D L. Effects of different fertilizer application on soil active organic carbon[J]. Environmental Science, 2013, 34(1): 277-282 (in Chinese)

[46]

罗志章, 芦美, 鲁泽让, 赵吉霞, 李永梅, 范茂攀. 玉米不同种植模式对坡耕地红壤有机碳组分及酶活性的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2025, 37(5): 53-61

[47]

Luo Z Z, Lu M, Lu Z R, Zhao J X, Li Y M, Fan M P. Effects of different maize planting patterns on organic carbon components and enzyme activities in red soil of sloping farmland[J]. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 2025, 37(5): 53-61 (in Chinese)

[48]

Li T T, Zhang Y L, Bei S K, Li X L, Reinsch S, Zhang H Y, Zhang J L. Contrasting impacts of manure and inorganic fertilizer applications for nine years on soil organic carbon and its labile fractions in bulk soil and soil aggregates[J]. CATENA, 2020, 194: 104739

[49]

张志勇, 于旭昊, 熊淑萍, 马新明, 王小纯, 刘洋, 闫广轩, 李永革. 耕作方式与氮肥减施对黄褐土麦田土壤酶活性及温室气体排放的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2020, 39(2): 418-428

[50]

Zhang Z Y, Yu X H, Xiong S P, Ma X M, Wang X C, Liu Y, Yan G X, Li Y G. Effects of tillage methods and nitrogen fertilizer reduction on soil enzyme activities and greenhouse gas emissions of wheat yellow cinnamon soil[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2020, 39(2): 418-428 (in Chinese)

[51]

Li J T, Hai Q. Evaluation of economic security and environmental protection benefits from the perspective of sustainable development and technological ecological environment[J].Sustainability, 2023, 15(7):6072

[52]

冀保毅, 赵亚丽, 穆心愿, 陈海雁, 李潮海. 深耕和秸秆还田对土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 河北农业科学, 2016, 20(1): 46-51

[53]

Ji B Y, Zhao Y L, Mu X Y, Chen H Y, Li C H. Effects of deep tillage and straw retained on the activity of soil enzymes[J]. Journal of Hebei Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 20(1): 46-51 (in Chinese)

[54]

施娴, 刘艳红, 张德刚, 何芳芳. 猪粪与化肥配施对植烟土壤酶活性和微生物生物量动态变化的影响[J]. 土壤, 2015, 47(5): 899-903

[55]

Shi X, Liu Y H, Zhang D G, He F F. Effects of pig manure and chemical fertilizer on the changes of soil enzyme activities and microbial biomass C and N of tobacco-planting soil[J]. Soils, 2015, 47(5): 899-903 (in Chinese)

[56]

邓婵娟. 长期施肥对稻田土壤氮素转化特征及酶活性的影响[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2008

[57]

Deng C J. Effect of long-term different fertilizations on nitrogen transformation and activity of enzymes in paddy soil[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2008 (in Chinese)

[58]

邓妍, 高志强, 孙敏, 赵维峰, 赵红梅, 李青. 夏闲期深翻覆盖对旱地麦田土壤水分及产量的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2014, 25(1): 132-138

[59]

Deng Y, Gao Z Q, Sun M, Zhao W F, Zhao H M, Li Q. Effects of deep plowing and mulch in fallow period on soil water and yield of wheat in dryland[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014, 25(1): 132-138 (in Chinese)

[60]

张欢. 有机无机配施对连作玉米土壤微生物特性、酶及养分的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2015

[61]

Zhang H. Effects of organic-inorganic fertilizer on microbial, enzyme and nutrients of continuous cropping maize [D]. Harbin: Northeast Agricultural University, 2015 (in Chinese)

[62]

Wu Y, Zhang H H, Li J W, Wang Z H, Jiang Y. Adsorption of soil invertase to goethite, gibbsite and their organic complexes and the effects on enzyme catalytic performance[J]. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 2023, 222: 113073

[63]

张建军, 樊廷录, 赵刚, 党翼, 王磊, 王勇, 李尚中, 程万莉. 耕作方式与长期定位施肥对雨养农田冬小麦产量的调控效应[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(7): 175-186

[64]

Zhang J J, Fan T L, Zhao G, Dang Y, Wang L, Wang Y, Li S Z, Cheng W L. Effects of tillage system and long term fertilizer application on winter wheat yields[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(7): 175-186 (in Chinese)

[65]

张黛静, 宗洁静, 马建辉, 杨雪倩, 胡晓, 许双. 小麦-玉米周年耕作方式与增施有机肥对夏玉米土壤有机碳库及温室气体排放的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2019, 28(10): 1927-1935

[66]

Zhang D J, Zong J J, Ma J H, Yang X Q, Hu X, Xu S. Effects of wheat-maize rotation system tillage method and enhanced organic fertilizer on soil organic carbon pool and greenhouse gas emission in maize soil[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2019, 28(10): 1927-1935 (in Chinese)

[67]

李娟, 葛磊, 曹婷婷, 徐艳. 有机肥施用量和耕作方式对旱地土壤水分利用效率及作物生产力的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(2): 121-127

[68]

Li J, Ge L, Cao T T, Xu Y. Effects of organic fertilization and tillage on soil water use efficiency and crop yield in dryland[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 33(2): 121-127 (in Chinese)

[69]

Ji L F, Ni K, Wu Z D, Zhang J W, Yi X Y, Yang X D, Ling N, You Z M, Guo S W, Ruan J Y. Effect of organic substitution rates on soil quality and fungal community composition in a tea plantation with long-term fertilization[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2020, 56(5): 633-646

[70]

Li H, Feng W T, He X H, Zhu P, Gao H J, Sun N, Xu M G. Chemical fertilizers could be completely replaced by manure to maintain high maize yield and soil organic carbon (SOC) when SOC reaches a threshold in the Northeast China Plain [J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2017, 16(4): 937-946

[71]

Kong X B, Lal R, Li B G, Li K J. Crop yield response to soil organic carbon stock over long-term fertilizer management in Huang-Huai-Hai Plains of China [J]. Agricultural Research, 2014, 3(3): 246-256

[72]

杨滨娟, 李新梅, 胡启良,刘宁, 黄国勤. 不同轮作休耕模式对稻田土壤有机碳及其组分的影响[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2022, 41(6): 51-58

[73]

Yang B J, Li X M, Hu Q L, Liu N, Huang G Q. Effects of rotation and fallow patterns on organic carbon and its components in soil of paddy fields[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University, 2022, 41(6): 51-58 (in Chinese)

[74]

Wang X Y, Xu X P, Qiu S J, Zhao S C, He P. Deep tillage enhanced soil organic carbon sequestration in China: A meta-analysis [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2023, 399: 136686

[75]

李文慧, 陈浩楠, 南雄雄,林妍敏, 王芳. 宁夏旱区枸杞/覆盖作物种植体系对土壤活性有机碳库的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2024, 43(5): 1324-1332

[76]

Li W H, Chen H N, Nan X X, Lin Y M, Wang F. Effects of cropping system of Lycium barbarum L. and cover crops on soil labile organic carbon pool in an arid region of Ningxia[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2024, 43(5): 1324-1332 (in Chinese)

基金资助

国家重点研发计划(2022YFD1901300)

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF (1294KB)

383

访问

0

被引

详细

导航
相关文章

AI思维导图

/

〈 〉