秸秆还田方式对辽东南地区玉米生长及棕壤土壤养分的影响

doi:10.12190/j.issn.2096-1197.2025.05.03

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 【目的】探明辽东南地区秸秆还田方式对玉米生长及棕壤土壤养分的影响。【方法】于2022—2023年在辽宁凤城丹东农业科学院试验地设置免耕秸秆不还田（NT）、免耕秸秆覆盖还田（NTSR）、全层翻耕秸秆还田（PTSR）、全层旋耕秸秆还田（RTSR）、条带旋耕秸秆还田（SRTSR）5个处理,分析不同处理对玉米干物质积累量、产量及其构成因素和耕层土壤理化参数的影响。【结果】 2022年玉米总干物质积累量表现为NT与SRTSR处理显著高于PTSR处理（P<0.05）,花前干物质积累量为NT处理显著高于NTSR和PTSR处理（P<0.05）,花后干物质积累量为NTSR处理显著高于PTSR处理（P<0.05）;2023年总干物质积累量表现为RTSR与SRTSR处理显著高于其他处理（P<0.05）、NT与PTSR处理显著高于NTSR处理（P<0.05）,花前干物质积累量表现为PTSR和SRTSR处理显著高于NTSR处理（P<0.05）,花后干物质积累量表现为RTSR处理显著高于NT、PTSR与NTSR处理（P<0.05）。2022年NT处理产量较SRTSR、NTSR、PTSR、RTSR处理分别高4.82%、7.54%、23.96%、24.06%,2023年RTSR处理产量较SRTSR、NT、PTSR、NTSR处理分别高2.87%、6.13%、8.46%、23.90%。土壤全氮含量2022年为PTSR>RTSR>SRTSR>NT>NTSR,PTSR处理较其他处理分别高1.82%、4.68%、17.50%、21.35%;2023年为PTSR>RTSR>SRTSR>NTSR>NT,PTSR处理较其他处理分别高5.52%、12.63%、15.98%、19.58%。2022年NT处理的土壤容重显著高于RTSR、PTSR处理（P<0.05）;2023年NT与NTSR处理的土壤容量显著高于其他处理（P<0.05）,SRTSR与RTSR处理显著高于PTSR处理（P<0.05）。2023年各处理平均土壤有机质含量较2022年高5.11%,两年均表现为RTSR和PTSR处理显著高于其他处理（P<0.05）,NTSR与SRTSR处理的土壤有机质含量显著大于NT处理（P<0.05）。年际间土壤总盐含量无显著差异（P>0.05）,2022年土壤总盐含量表现为RTSR处理显著高于NTSR、PTSR和NT处理（P<0.05）,2023年土壤总盐含量表现为RTSR与SRTSR处理显著高于其他处理（P<0.05）。【结论】秸秆还田能显著影响辽东南地区玉米干物质积累与分配,可促进棕壤耕层土壤有机质、全氮含量增加,降低土壤容重。

关键词: 秸秆还田, 辽东南地区, 玉米, 生长发育, 棕壤, 土壤养分

Abstract: 【Objective】 To elucidate the effects of straw returning methods on maize growth and brown soil nutrients in southeastern Liaoning Province.【Methods】 From 2022 to 2023,five treatments：no-tillage without straw returning（NT）,no-tillage with straw mulching and returning（NTSR）,plough tillage with straw returning（PTSR）,rotary tillage with straw returning（RTSR）and strip rotary tillage with straw returning（SRTSR） were established at the experimental site of Dandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Fengcheng,Liaoning Province. To analyse the impacts of these treatments on maize dry matter accumulation,yield and yield components,and physical and chemical parameters of the plow layer soil.【Results】 In 2022,total dry matter accumulation of maize under NT and SRTSR treatments was significantly higher than that under PTSR treatment（P<0.05）,pre-silking dry matter accumulation under NT treatment was significantly higher than that under NTSR and PTSR treatments（P<0.05）,post-silking dry matter accumulation under NTSR treatment was significantly higher than that under PTSR treatment（P<0.05）. In 2023,total dry matter accumulation under RTSR and SRTSR treatments was significantly higher than that under the other treatments（P<0.05）,and that under NT and PTSR treatments was significantly higher than that under NTSR treatment（P<0.05）,pre-silking dry matter accumulation under PTSR and SRTSR treatments was significantly higher than that under NTSR treatment（P<0.05）,post-silking dry matter accumulation under RTSR treatment was significantly higher than that under NT,PTSR,and NTSR treatments（P<0.05）. In 2022,yield under NT treatment was 4.82%,7.54%,23.96%,and 24.06% higher than that under SRTSR,NTSR,PTSR,and RTSR treatments,respectively;in 2023,yield under RTSR treatment was 2.87%,6.13%,8.46%,and 23.90% higher than that under SRTSR,NT,PTSR,and NTSR treatments,respectively. Soil total nitrogen content in 2022 was PTSR>RTSR>SRTSR>NT>NTSR,with PTSR treatment was 1.82%,4.68%,17.50%,and 21.35% higher than the other treatments,respectively;in 2023,the soil total nitrogen content was PTSR>RTSR>SRTSR>NTSR>NT,with PTSR treatment was 5.52%,12.63%,15.98%,and 19.58% higher than the other treatments,respectively. In 2022,soil bulk density under NT treatment was significantly higher than that under RTSR and PTSR treatments（P<0.05）;in 2023,soil bulk density under NT and NTSR treatments was significantly higher than that under the other treatments（P<0.05）,and SRTSR and RTSR treatments was significantly higher than PTSR treatment（P<0.05）. The average soil organic matter content across all treatments in 2023 was 5.11% higher than that in 2022,RTSR and PTSR treatments was significantly higher than the other treatments in 2022 and 2023（P<0.05）,and soil organic matter content under NTSR and SRTSR treatments was significantly higher than that under NT treatment（P<0.05）. There was no significant differences in soil total salt content between years（P>0.05）;in 2022,soil total salt content under RTSR treatment was significantly higher than that under NTSR,PTSR,and NT treatments（P<0.05）;in 2023,soil total salt content under RTSR and SRTSR treatments was significantly higher than that under the other treatments（P<0.05）.【Conclusion】 Straw returning can significantly affect maize dry matter accumulation and distribution in southeastern Liaoning Province,promote increases in organic matter and total nitrogen contents in the plow layer of brown soil,and reduce soil bulk density.

Key words: Straw returning, Southeastern Liaoning Province, Maize, Growth and development, Brown soil, Soil nutrients

中图分类号:

S513

薛兵东, 张丽丽, 莫姣娇, 赵新宇, 刘永富, 齐华. 秸秆还田方式对辽东南地区玉米生长及棕壤土壤养分的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2025, 53(5): 25-35.

XUE Bingdong, ZHANG Lili, MO Jiaojiao, ZHAO Xinyu, LIU Yongfu, QI Hua. Effects of straw returning methods on maize growth and brown soil nutrients in southeastern Liaoning Province[J]. Journal of Northern Agriculture, 2025, 53(5): 25-35.

参考文献

[1] 孙妍芳,裴久渤,张立江,等.辽宁棕壤耕地质量评价及障碍因素类型分区研究[J].中国农业资源与区划,2017,38(11):130-137.
[2] 白树彬,裴久渤,李双异,等.30年来辽宁省耕地土壤有机质与pH时空动态变化[J].土壤通报,2016,47(3):636-644.
[3] 曹敏建,于海秋,杨玉辉,等.辽宁省玉米生产存在的突出问题及其解决途径[J].玉米科学,2009,17(5):164-165.
[4] 沈月,依艳丽,张大庚,等.耕地棕壤酸碱缓冲性能及酸化速率研究[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(1):95-100.
[5] 范庆锋,盛诗涵,杨春璐,等.玉米秸秆还田形式对辽东低山丘陵区旱田土壤酸化的影响[J].农业环境科学学报,2024,43(12):2984-2990.
[6] 齐华,李从锋,赵明,等.我国北方旱作农田保护性耕作发展与展望[J].作物杂志,2020(2):16-19.
[7] 宋大利,侯胜鹏,王秀斌,等.中国秸秆养分资源数量及替代化肥潜力[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2018,24(1):1-21.
[8] 王治统,凌俊,刘子熙,等.秸秆还田方式对土壤理化性质和玉米产量的影响[J].中国生态农业学报(中英文),2024,32(4):663-674.
[9] 梅楠,刘琳,隋鹏祥,等.秸秆还田方式对土壤理化性质及玉米产量的影响[J].玉米科学,2017,25(6):87-94.
[10] 郑洪兵,罗洋,隋鹏祥,等.秸秆还田对东北黑土水分特征及物理性质的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2024,42(1):226-236.
[11] 罗珠珠,黄高宝,张仁陟,等.保护性耕作对旱作农田耕层土壤肥力及酶活性的影响[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2009,15(5):1085-1092.
[12] 慕平,张恩和,王汉宁,等.连续多年秸秆还田对玉米耕层土壤理化性状及微生物量的影响[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(5):81-85.
[13] 隋鹏祥,张心昱,温学发,等.耕作方式和秸秆还田对棕壤土壤养分和酶活性的影响[J].生态学杂志,2016,35(8):2038-2045.
[14] 梅楠. 典型棕壤玉米田合理耕层指标体系及耕作技术评价研究[D].沈阳:沈阳农业大学,2019.
[15] 高盼,申慧波,王宇先,等.东北半干旱黑土区玉米秸秆还田方式对土壤水溶性有机碳含量及其组分的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2024,42(3):127-135.
[16] 孙力扬,徐明岗,王晋峰,等.北方地区土壤速效养分及容重对秸秆还田的响应[J].中国农学通报,2023,39(5):100-108.
[17] 沙野,赵思雨,郭雯清,等.秸秆覆盖条耕模式下不同玉米品种的产量差异及其生长适应特征分析[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2023,29(11):1977-1990.
[18] 杨文钰,王兰英.作物秸秆还田的现状与展望[J].四川农业大学学报,1999,17(2):211-216.
[19] 曹莹菲,张红,刘克,等.不同处理方式的作物秸秆田间腐解特性研究[J].农业机械学报,2016,47(9):212-219.
[20] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M].3版.北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[21] 田平,姜英,孙悦,等.不同还田方式对玉米秸秆腐解及土壤养分含量的影响[J].中国生态农业学报(中英文),2019,27(1):100-108.
[22] 范继征,闫飞燕,石达金,等.不同耕作方式对玉米田土壤物理性质及产量的影响[J].玉米科学,2016,24(1):96-101.
[23] 聂浩亮,杨军芳,杨云马,等.长期秸秆深翻还田及养分管理对潮土有机碳矿化影响[J].农业工程学报,2024,40(18):70-80.
[24] 韩上,武际,李敏,等.深耕结合秸秆还田提高作物产量并改善耕层薄化土壤理化性质[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2020,26(2):276-284.
[25] 曹庆军,王利斌,王文强,等.条耕种植对薄层黑土农田土壤物理性质与玉米产量的影响[J].广东农业科学,2023,50(10):22-29.
[26] 安俊朋,李从锋,齐华,等.秸秆条带还田对东北春玉米产量、土壤水氮及根系分布的影响[J].作物学报,2018,44(5):774-782.
[27] 姜英,王峥宇,廉宏利,等.耕作和秸秆还田方式对东北春玉米吐丝期根系特征及产量的影响[J].中国农业科学,2020,53(15):3071-3082.
[28] 周明星,代子俊,樊军,等.免耕结合覆盖措施对渭北旱塬黑垆土结构与团聚体有机碳含量的影响[J].中国农业科学,2023,56(12):2329-2340.
[29] 赵宇航,殷浩凯,胡雪纯,等.长期秸秆还田对褐土农田土壤有机碳、氮组分及玉米产量的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2024,42(3):80-88.
[30] 何家帅,李新美,魏跃鹏,等.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.