土壤化学特征对草田轮作组合的响应

doi:10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2024.06.010

摘要/Abstract

摘要： [目的] 探究土壤化学特征对不同草田轮作组合的响应。[方法] 结合研究区作物种植习惯,选取3种经济作物（玉米、向日葵、马铃薯）和3种饲草作物（苜蓿、谷草、高丹草）为研究对象,设置5个轮作组合（T1：苜蓿-向日葵-向日葵-马铃薯-玉米;T2：谷草-马铃薯-谷草-谷草-向日葵;T3：苜蓿-苜蓿-马铃薯-玉米-向日葵;T4：高丹草-马铃薯-玉米-向日葵-玉米;T5：马铃薯-谷草-向日葵-马铃薯-谷草）,在内蒙古自治区包头市达尔罕茂明安联合旗开展种植试验,在5年的种植周期内比较分析不同轮作组合下0~10、10~20、20~30 cm土层土壤主要化学特征的差异。[结果] 在0~10 cm土层,T4组合的全氮、速效钾、无机碳、全硫含量显著（P<0.05）高于其他组合;T3组合的有机碳含量最高,显著（P<0.05）高于T2、T4、T5组合;T3组合的碳磷比显著（P<0.05）高于其他组合。在10~20 cm土层,T4组合的全氮、速效钾、全硫含量显著（P<0.05）高于其他组合;T3组合的有机碳含量、碳氮比、碳磷比显著（P<0.05）高于其他组合。在20~30 cm土层,T4组合的速效钾、全硫含量显著（P<0.05）高于其他组合;T3组合的无机碳含量最高,显著（P<0.05）高于T2组合;T3组合的碳磷比最高,显著（P<0.05）高于T1、T2、T5组合。[结论] 综合不同轮作组合对土壤养分含量的提升以及作物对土壤养分的吸收利用效率,推荐该区域采用苜蓿-苜蓿-马铃薯-玉米-向日葵（T3组合）作为最优的草田轮作组合。研究结果可为优化该区域草田轮作制度、提高土壤可持续利用能力提供参考。

关键词: 草田轮作, 轮作组合, 土壤养分, 化学特征

Abstract: [Objective] To investigate the response of soil chemical characteristics to various grass-crop rotation combinations. [Methods] In accordance with the crop planting practices in the study area, six crops were selected as research subjects: three economic crops （corn, sunflower, and potato) and three forage crops （alfalfa, millet straw, and sorghum-sudan grass）. Five rotation combinations were established as follows: T1 （alfalfa - sunflower - sunflower - potato - corn）; T2 （millet straw - potato - millet straw - millet straw - sunflower）; T3 （alfalfa - alfalfa - potato - corn - sunflower）; T4 （sorghum-sudan grass - potato - corn - sunflower - corn); and T5 （potato - millet straw - sunflower - potato - millet straw）. Field experiments were conducted over a five-year period in Darhan Muminggan United Banner, Baotou City, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. The primary chemical properties of soil at depths of 0-10 cm, 10-20 cm, and 20-30 cm were compared and analyzed under different rotation regimes.[Results] In the 0 - 10 cm soil layer, the T4 combination exhibited significantly higher （P<0.05） levels of total nitrogen, available potassium, inorganic carbon, and total sulfur compared to other combinations. The organic carbon content was highest in the T3 combination and significantly higher （P<0.05） than in the T2, T4, and T5 combinations. Additionally, the carbon-to-phosphorus ratio in the T3 combination was significantly higher （P<0.05） than in other combinations. In the 10 - 20 cm soil layer, the T4 combination showed significantly higher （P<0.05） levels of total nitrogen, available potassium, and total sulfur relative to other combinations. The T3 combination had significantly higher （P<0.05） levels of organic carbon, carbon-to-nitrogen ratio, and carbon-to-phosphorus ratio compared to other combinations. In the 20 - 30 cm soil layer, the T4 combination demonstrated significantly higher （P<0.05） levels of available potassium and total sulfur compared to other combinations. The inorganic carbon content was highest in the T3 combination and significantly higher （P<0.05） than in the T2 combination. Furthermore, the carbon-to-phosphorus ratio in the T3 combination was the highest and significantly higher （P<0.05） than in the T1, T2, and T5 combinations. [Conclusion] Based on the enhanced soil nutrient content from various rotation combinations and the improved efficiency of crop absorption and utilization of these nutrients, it is recommended to adopt the alfalfa-alfalfa-potato-corn-sunflower （T3 combination） as the optimal grass-crop rotation combination for this region. These findings provide a valuable reference for optimizing the grass-crop rotation systems and enhancing the sustainable use of soil resources.

Key words: grass-crop rotation, crop rotation combination, soil nutrients, chemical characteristics

中图分类号:

秦乐, 温超, 张璞进, 刘思博, 郭月峰, 许嘉逸, 张英, 殷国梅. 土壤化学特征对草田轮作组合的响应[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2024, 45(6): 64-74.

QIN Le, WEN Chao, ZHANG Pujin, LIU Sibo, GUO Yuefeng, XU Jiayi, ZHANG Ying, YIN Guomei. Response of Soil Chemical Characteristics to Grass-crop Rotation Combinations[J]. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2024, 45(6): 64-74.

参考文献

[1] COOLEDGE E C,CHADWICK D R,SMITH L M J,et al. Agronomic and environmental benefits of reintroducing herb- and legume-rich multispecies leys into arable rotations: A review[J].Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering,2022,9(2):245-271.
[2] 白春利,赵和平,师永明,等.荒漠草原区“草田轮作”模式及牧草高效种植技术[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2019,40(8):47-49.
[3] 中工院院士、西部草工中心首席科学家任继周指出西部大开发应推行“藏粮于草”[J].广西粮食经济,2002(1):11.
[4] 张英俊. 我国饲草作物的产业发展[J].中国乳业,2019(4):3-9.
[5] 苏芮. 土壤粒径对麦田土壤全氮高光谱监测的影响[D].太谷:山西农业大学,2019.
[6] 王磊,蒙春玲,覃建勋,等.桂西北地区土壤氮磷钾有机质分布特征及养分等级评价:以凤山县为例[J]. 农业与技术,2019,39(17):6-10.
[7] 崔成. 文登市土壤有机质和氮磷钾空间分布特征及影响因素分析[D].泰安:山东农业大学,2015.
[8] 尹国丽,李亚娟,张振粉,等.不同草田轮作模式土壤养分及细菌群落组成特征[J].生态学报,2020,40(5):1542-1550.
[9] 尹国丽,蔡卓山,陶茸,等.不同草田轮作方式对土壤肥力、微生物数量及自毒物质含量的影响[J].草业学报,2019,28(3):42-50.
[10] 贾雪杰,游明鸿,李达旭,等.减量施肥对牧草/烤烟轮作系统中产量和土壤养分的影响[J].四川农业大学学报,2024,42(1):166-173.
[11] 张艳娟,沈益新.南方农区紫花苜蓿发展潜力与种植模式研究进展[J].草原与草坪,2010,30(1):84-88.
[12] 祝廷成,李志坚,张为政.“粮食、牧草和经济作物”三元结构草田轮作的初探[C]//第三届中国苜蓿发展大会论文集.北京:中国畜牧业协会,中国草学会,2010.
[13] 田福平,师尚礼,洪绂曾,等.我国草田轮作的研究历史及现状[J].草业科学,2012,29(2):320-326.
[14] 杨发峻,王维奇,吴梓炜,等.福建典型茶园土壤养分及其计量比对细菌群落结构的影响[J].水土保持学报,2023,37(6):209-218.
[15] 纪志超,王欣欣,王连会,等.荞麦-大豆轮作条件下不同配比N、P、K肥对作物产量与土壤肥力的影响[J].作物研究,2023,37(3):213-217,258.
[16] 祁项超.一种山桃的种植装置及种植方法:CN202011039498.4[P].2020-12-08.
[17] 刘沛松. 宁南苜蓿草田轮作土壤环境效应研究[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2008.
[18] 魏晓斌,王志锋,于洪柱,等.不同生长年限苜蓿对盐碱地土壤肥力的影响[J].草业科学,2013,30(10):1502-1507.
[19] 张成君,师尚礼,康文娟,等.不同轮作模式土壤酶活性特征及与化学性质的关系[J].中国草地学报,2020,42(5):92-102.
[20] 江舟,魏臻武.淮河流域不同豆科牧草生产性能及对土壤养分的影响[J].中国草地学报,2021,43(7):54-62.
[21] MAIGA A,ALHAMEID A,SINGH S,et al.Responses of soil organic carbon,aggregate stability,carbon and nitrogen fractions to 15 and 24 years of no-till diversified crop rotations[J].Soil Research,2019,57(2):149.
[22] 张立成,邵继海,林毅青,等.稻-稻-油菜轮作对土壤微生物活性和多样性的影响[J].生态环境学报,2017,26(2):204-210.
[23] ERIKSEN J.Chapter 2: Soil sulfur cycling in temperate agricultural systems[J]. Advances in Agronomy,2009,102: 55-89.
[24] 林丽,张法伟,李以康,等.高寒矮嵩草草甸退化过程土壤碳氮储量及C/N化学计量学特征[J].中国草地学报,2012,34(3):42-47.
[25] 吴建国,韩梅,苌伟,等.祁连山中部高寒草甸土壤氮矿化及其影响因素研究[J].草业学报,2007(6):39-46.
[26] 王绍强,于贵瑞.生态系统碳氮磷元素的生态化学计量学特征[J].生态学报,2008(8):3937-3947.
[27] 曾全超,李鑫,董扬红,等.陕北黄土高原土壤性质及其生态化学计量的纬度变化特征[J].自然资源学报,2015,30(5):870-879.
[28] 陈妮娜,吕慧捷,张益瑞,等.干旱程度和施氮水平对春玉米叶片碳氮含量及碳氮比的影响[J].气象与环境学报,2023,39(3):106-116.
[29] 刘畅,唐国勇,童成立,等.不同施肥措施下亚热带稻田土壤碳、氮演变特征及其耦合关系[J].应用生态学报,2008(7):1489-1493.
[30] 吴超,刘娟娟,马海艳,等.不同碳氮比对马铃薯脱毒试管苗生长及结薯的影响[C]//马铃薯产业与种业创新(2023)会议论文集.齐齐哈尔:中国作物学会马铃薯专业委员会,黑龙江省农业农村厅,齐齐哈尔市人民政府,北大荒农垦集团有限公司,2023.
[31] 殷文,郭瑶,陈桂平,等.绿洲农田土壤团聚体组成及有机碳和全氮分布对秸秆还田方式的响应[J].干旱地区农业研究,2019,37(3):139-148.
[32] 刘勇军,彭曙光,肖艳松,等.湖南烟稻轮作区土壤团聚体稳定性及其与碳氮比的关系[J].中国烟草学报,2020,26(1):75-83.
[33] 纪志超,王欣欣,王连会,等.不同轮作组合对土壤碳氮比和碳磷比的影响[J].土壤通报,2022,53(1): 123-129.
[34] 李亚飞,常栋,孙军伟,等.烤烟和白肋烟烟苗氮代谢的差异分析[J].烟草科技,2017,50(1):6-11.
[35] 范月君,侯向阳,石红霄,等.气候变暖对草地生态系统碳循环的影响[J].草业学报,2012,21(3):294-302.
[36] 秦彧,宜树华,李乃杰,等.青藏高原草地生态系统碳循环研究进展[J].草业学报,2012,21(6):275-285.
[37] 杨益,牛得草,文海燕,等.贺兰山不同海拔土壤颗粒有机碳、氮特征[J].草业学报,2012,21(3):54-60.
[38] 乔有明,王振群,段中华.青海湖北岸土地利用方式对土壤碳氮含量的影响[J].草业学报,2009,18(6):105-112.
[39] KOUNO K,WU J,BROOKES P C.Turnover of biomass C and P in soil following incorporation of glucose or ryegrass[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2002,34(5):617-622.
[40] 汪景宽,王铁宇,张旭东,等.轮作模式对土壤碳氮比和碳磷比的影响[J].中国农业科学,2010,43(8):1621-1629.
[41] 黄健,杨连新,廖西元,等.轮作模式对土壤碳氮比和碳磷比的影响及其与作物产量的关系[J].土壤,2015,47(2):333-339.
[42] 贾宇,徐炳成,李凤民,等.半干旱黄土丘陵区苜蓿人工草地土壤磷素有效性及对生产力的响应[J].生态学报,2007(1):42-47.