三个典型植烟生态区土壤养分适宜性评价

doi:10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2023.01.017

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to offer a theoretical foundation for the creation of scientific fertilization plans for tobacco planting in this study, descriptive statistics, the correlation coefficient approach, and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method were used to examine 418 soil samples from tobacco-planted fields in Sichuan Huidong, Henan Luoyang and southern Anhui. The results showed that, the pH of tobacco-planted soils in Huidong ranged from 5.36 to 8.66, and 77.88% of the samples soil pH above 7.50. The organic matter content was generally low. The 67% of soil had the content of alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen in samples was below 90mg/kg. The content of total nitrogen was moderate, and the contents of available phosphorus and potassium were rich. The pH of tobacco-planted soils in Luoyang was alkalescence, and the contents of organic matter and alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen were deficient, more than 70% of the soil were at the level of “deficiency” or below. The contents of total nitrogen and available phosphorus were moderate, with coefficient variation of available phosphorus was 79.38%. The available potassium content was rich. In the tobacco-planted soils of southern Anhui, the pH and contents of organic matter and total nitrogen were moderate. Moreover, the content of alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen was high, and the contents of available potassium was deficient, with 82.82% of the soil samples below 150mg/kg. The content of available phosphorus was rich but heterogeneity was strong. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) in the comprehensive fertility index (IFI) of tobacco-planted soils in the three ecological regions, southern Anhui (0.69) > Huidong (0.52) > Luoyang (0.43). Among them, 75.76% of the soil IFI in southern Anhui tobacco area was above grade II, the proportion of grade II and grade III in Huidong tobacco area was 31.73% and 46.15%, respectively, while nearly 50% of the soil in Luoyang tobacco area was grade IV. The alkaline fertilizer should be reduced, and the soil pH should be adjusted by soil amelioration in the tobacco- planted areas of Huidong and Luoyang, increasing soil organic matter and available nitrogen content. Potassium fertilizer should be appropriately increased to meet the needs of tobacco growth and development in southern Anhui.

Key words: Ecological areas, Tobacco-planted soil, Soil nutrient, Comprehensive fertility index

Sun Yihe, Zhang Kai, Lu Qifei, Li Songwei, Zhang Bo, Li Jun, Ye Xiefeng, Yao Pengwei, Li Xueli. Suitability Evaluation on Nutrients of Tobacco-Planted Soils in Three Typical Ecological Regions[J].Crops, 2023, 39(1): 115-121.

Figures/Tables 7

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Fig.1

References 42

[1]	中国农业科学院烟草研究所. 中国烟草栽培学. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2005.
[2]	王彦亭, 谢剑平, 李志宏. 中国烟草种植区划. 北京: 科学出版社, 2010.
[3]	杨超. 重庆烟区主要生态因子特征及其对烤烟产质量的影响. 重庆:西南大学, 2015.
[4]	许自成, 肖汉乾, 赵献章, 等. 植烟土壤养分丰缺状况评价的统计方法. 土壤通报, 2004(5):558-561.
[5]	王育军, 周冀衡, 孙书斌, 等. 云南省罗平县烟区土壤肥力适宜性评价及养分时空变异特征. 土壤, 2015, 47(3):515-523.
[6]	郑立臣, 宇万太, 马强, 等. 农田土壤肥力综合评价研究进展. 生态学杂志, 2004(5):156-161.
[7]	吴玉红, 田霄鸿, 同延安, 等. 基于主成分分析的土壤肥力综合指数评价. 生态学杂志, 2010(1):175-182.
[8]	崔超岗, 周冀衡, 李强, 等. 陆良县植烟土壤类型与土壤肥力的灰色关联度分析. 西南农业学报, 2016, 29(5):1172-1176.
[9]	吴玉红, 田霄鸿, 南雄雄, 等. 基于因子和聚类分析的保护性耕作土壤质量评价研究. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18(2):223-228.
[10]	刘国顺. 烟草栽培学. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2003.
[11]	高净净. 洛阳烤烟风格质量定位评价及其与生态的关系. 郑州:河南农业大学, 2017.
[12]	邱立友. 皖南烟区烤烟特殊香气风格形成机理研究. 郑州:河南农业大学, 2008.
[13]	陈玉蓝, 王昌全, 刘朝科, 等. 会东烟区土壤养分状况综合评价. 西南农业学报, 2013, 26(4):1567-1571.
[14]	刘国. 施氮量、种植密度对红大品种生长发育与产质量的影响. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2011.
[15]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(3版). 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[16]	陈江华, 刘建利, 李志宏. 中国植烟土壤及烟草养分综合管理. 北京: 科学出版社, 2008.
[17]	郭东锋, 张福建, 张继光, 等. 基于云模型的皖南植烟土壤养分适宜性评价. 烟草科技, 2020, 53(9):18-24.
[18]	陈江华, 李志宏, 刘建利, 等. 全国主要烟区土壤养分丰缺状况评价. 中国烟草学报, 2004(3):18-22.
[19]	董昆乐, 马宜林, 赵世民, 等. 洛阳烟区土壤养分状况与分布特征分析. 山东农业科学, 2019, 51(11):114-117.
[20]	于寒青, 徐明岗, 吕家珑, 等. 长期施肥下红壤地区土壤熟化肥力评价. 应用生态学报, 2010, 21(7):1772-1778.
[21]	王军艳, 张凤荣, 王茹, 等. 应用指数和法对潮土农田土壤肥力变化的评价研究. 农村生态环境, 2001(3):13-16,20.
[22]	王政, 张晓龙, 敖金成, 等. 文山市不同生态区土壤养分的时空异质性及适宜性. 中国烟草科学, 2016, 37(6):37-42.
[23]	梁红. 重庆植烟土壤肥力特征及评价. 重庆:西南大学, 2014.
[24]	王林. 湖南烟区土壤肥力状况评价和土壤养分与烤烟化学成分的关系. 郑州:河南农业大学, 2007.
[25]	周冀衡, 段灿枝, 余佳斌, 等. 根际酸度对烤烟生长与养分吸收的影响. 土壤, 2000(1):44-47.
[26]	邵伏文, 姜超强, 祖朝龙, 等. 硫磺和酒糟对烤烟生长和烟叶品质以及碱性土壤pH的影响. 西北植物学报, 2012, 32(12):2479-2485.
[27]	姜超强, 沈嘉, 郭卢, 等. 硫磺对碱性植烟土壤烤烟生长及烟叶重金属含量的影响. 中国烟草科学, 2013, 34(5):47-51.
[28]	叶协锋, 杨超, 李正, 等. 绿肥对植烟土壤酶活性及土壤肥力的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013, 19(2):445-454.
[29]	李正, 敬海霞, 解昌盛, 等. 翻压绿肥对植烟土壤理化性状及烤烟常规化学成分的影响. 华北农学报, 2012, 27(增1):275-280.
[30]	万川. 植烟土壤有机质状态对有机肥的响应及其与烟草品质的关联规律研究. 重庆:西南大学, 2015.
[31]	中国科学院南京土壤研究所. 中国土壤. 北京: 科学出版社, 1978.
[32]	李志, 史宏志, 刘国顺, 等. 施氮量对皖南砂壤土烤烟碳氮代谢动态变化的影响. 土壤, 2010(1):8-13.
[33]	Davidson E A, Janssens I A. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 2006, 440(7081):165-173. doi: 10.1038/nature04514
[34]	王浩田, 姜超强, 蒋瑀霁, 等. 皖南沿江平原不同年限烟-稻轮作土壤团聚体组成与烤烟产质量的关系. 土壤, 2020, 52(5):1057-1067.
[35]	韩秋静, 赵世民, 马君红, 等. 秸秆还田对洛阳植烟区黄土质褐土碳库及烟叶经济性状的影响. 烟草科技, 2019, 52(7):18-26.
[36]	何光道. 不同有机肥用量对土壤养分、烤烟农艺性状、产量及品质的影响. 长沙:湖南农业大学, 2016.
[37]	韩锦峰, 朱大恒, 刘华山, 等. 我国烤烟含钾量低的原因及解决途径. 河南农业科学, 2010(2):32-36.
[38]	刘智强, Cao Y Y, 赵正雄. 田间烤烟叶片缺钾症状与钾积累及土壤供钾水平关系. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(1):195-205.
[39]	王小东, 许自成, 李群平, 等. 洛阳地区植烟土壤养分肥力测定与综合评价. 河南科技大学学报:自然科学版, 2008(4):82-85.
[40]	叶协锋. 河南省烟草种植生态适宜性区划研究. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2011.
[41]	马君红. 四川省烤烟品质区划与风格特色定位研究. 郑州:河南农业大学, 2014.
[42]	刘好宝. 清甜香烤烟质量特色成因及其关键栽培技术研究. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2012.

Related Articles 15

[1]	Qin Meng, Cui Shize, He Xiaodong, Zhai Lingxia, Tao Bo, Wang Zhaojun, Zhao Haicheng, Li Hongyu, Zheng Guiping, Liu Lihua. Effects of Straw Puffing Returning on Rice Yield, Quality and Soil Nutrients [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(6): 159-166.
[2]	Chang Haigang, Li Guang, Yuan Jianyu, Xie Mingjun, Qi Xiaoping. Effects of Different Fertilization Methods on Soil Nutrients and Yield of Spring Wheat in the Loess Hilly Region of Central Gansu Province [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(5): 160-166.
[3]	Guo Shuya, Shang Shang, Tang Qining, Zhang Yan, Lu Guangyuan. Effects of Different Rotation Tillage Methods and Biochar on Soil Enzyme Activity, Soil Nutrients and Yield of Wheat and Maize [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(3): 211-217.
[4]	Wang Guojiao, Song Peng, Yang Zhenzhong, Zhang Wenzhong. Effects of Straw Returning on Photosynthetic Matter Production Characteristics, Quality of Rice and Soil Nutrients [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(4): 67-72.
[5]	Meng Xiangyu, Ran Cheng, Liu Baolong, Zhao Zhexuan, Bai Jingjing, Geng Yanqiu. Effects of Straw Returning to Field and Nitrogen Application on Soil Nutrients and Rice Yield in Black Soil Areas of Northeast China [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(3): 167-172.
[6]	Zhou Zhengping, Tian Baogeng, Chen Wanhua, Wang Ziyang, Yuan Wei, Liu Shiping. Effects of Different Tillage Methods and Straw Returning on Soil Nutrients and Wheat Yield and Quality [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(3): 78-83.
[7]	Fan Yegeng, Chen Rongfa, Yan Haifeng, Zhou Huiwen, Weng Mengling, Huang Xing, Luo Ting, Zhou Zhongfeng, Qiu Lihang, Wu Jianming. Effects of Sugarcane Rotation Green Fodder Corn and Peanut on Sugarcane Growth and Soil Properties [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 104-111.
[8]	Huang Binglin,Wang Mengxue,Jin Xijun,Hu Guohua,Zhang Yuxian. Effects of Different Tillage Treatments on Soil Microorganisms, Enzyme Activities and Nutrients [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(6): 104-113.
[9]	Li Chunxi,Li Sisi,Shao Yun,Ma Shouchen,Liu Qing,Weng Zhengpeng,Li Xiaobo. Effects of Organic Materials Returning on Enzyme Activities and Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Content in Wheat Field under Nitrogen-Reducing Conditions [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(5): 129-134.
[10]	Liuya Huang,Yongbo Sun,Shuwu Liu,Yonghui Zhang,Fuzhao Nian,Yong Gu. Research Advance of the Effects of Biochar onthe Main Properties of Soil and Yield and Quality of Flue-Cured Tobacco [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(4): 15-20.
[11]	Jingang Liang,Zhengguang Zhang. Advance on Effects of Genetically ModifiedCrops on Soil Ecosystems [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(4): 1-6.
[12]	Wenchao Zhang,Yufeng Wang,Yifei Zhang,Jingyu Xu,Qiong Wu,Tianyu Chen,Pengfei Zhang,Chen Pang,Chunshuang Tang,Jian Fu,Kejun Yang. Effects of Different Tillage Methods on Changes of Soil Nutrients and Grain Yield of Maize in Semi-Arid Regions of Songnen Plain [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(4): 123-128.
[13]	Jinyun Wang,Xianguo Cheng,Jibin Guo,Li Wang. Soil Nutrients Changes and Evaluation for Peach Cultivation under Greenhouse Conditions [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(3): 96-103.
[14]	Youyu Jia,Yongfeng Ren,Yu Gao,Peiyi Zhao,Xiulan Yin,Bin Li,Meili Meng. Effects of Different Application of Soil Amendments in Yinshan Mountain Area of Inner Mongolia [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(2): 130-134.
[15]	Runlian Wang,Zhidong Zhang,Jinghui Liu,Huijun Liu,Baoping Zhao. Effects of No-Tillage with Stubble Mulch on Soil Nutrients, Soil Enzyme Activities and Oat Yield [J]. Crops, 2016, 32(3): 134-138.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

土壤养分 Soil nutrient	极缺 Extremely lack	缺 Lack	适中 Medium	丰 Rich	很丰 Very rich
pH	－	<5.5	[5.5，7.0)	[7.0，7.5)	≥7.5
碱解氮Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen (mg/kg)	<60	[60，90)	[90，120)	[120，150)	≥150
速效磷Available phosphorus (mg/kg)	－	<10	[10，20)	[20，40)	≥40
速效钾Available potassium (mg/kg)	<80	[80，150)	[150，220)	[220，350)	≥350
有机质Organic matter (g/kg)	－	<15	[15，25)	[25，35)	≥35
全氮Total nitrogen (g/kg)	<0.5	[0.5，1.0)	[1.0，2.0)	[2.0，2.5)	≥2.5

指标 Index	烟区 Tobacco area	均值±标准差 Mean±standard deviation	变异系数 Coefficient of variation (%)	变幅 Range	各等级土壤占比The proportion of each grade soil (%)
指标 Index	烟区 Tobacco area	均值±标准差 Mean±standard deviation	变异系数 Coefficient of variation (%)	变幅 Range	极缺 Extremely lack	缺 Lack	适中 Medium	丰 Rich	很丰 Very rich
pH	会东	7.69±0.67a	8.71	5.36~8.66	－	1.92	11.54	8.65	77.88
	洛阳	7.71±0.60a	7.80	4.96~8.46	－	0.47	13.95	10.23	75.35
	皖南	5.83±0.59b	10.14	4.63~7.75	－	30.30	64.65	4.04	1.01
碱解氮 Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen (mg/kg)	会东	72.20±32.79b	45.42	4.20~162.40	35.58	31.73	27.88	3.85	0.96
	洛阳	66.27±24.93b	37.61	3.90~144.97	43.26	39.07	14.88	2.79	0.00
	皖南	121.85±33.62a	27.59	39.90~266.00	1.01	14.14	35.35	33.33	16.16
速效磷 Available phosphorus (mg/kg)	会东	23.00±14.10b	61.30	2.22~67.65	－	14.42	27.88	50.00	7.69
	洛阳	18.53±14.71c	79.38	1.62~116.26	－	26.51	42.79	23.72	6.98
	皖南	30.47±21.00a	68.93	3.76~168.65	－	9.09	23.23	48.48	19.19
速效钾 Available potassium (mg/kg)	会东	231.56±81.63a	35.25	32.00~480.00	0.96	12.50	34.62	46.15	5.77
	洛阳	233.15±65.12a	35.22	84.58~593.30	0.00	6.05	38.14	52.09	3.72
	皖南	104.40±47.12b	45.00	36.50~269.00	34.34	48.48	13.13	4.04	0.00
有机质 Organic material (g/kg)	会东	17.14±6.81b	39.73	4.07~34.71	－	45.19	41.35	13.46	0.00
	洛阳	13.06±4.01c	30.73	1.57~29.57	－	73.95	25.58	0.47	0.00
	皖南	22.33±6.37a	28.54	5.54~40.39	－	12.12	59.60	25.25	3.03
全氮 Total nitrogen (g/kg)	会东	1.42±0.41a	28.73	0.61~2.54	0.00	13.46	75.96	9.62	0.96
	洛阳	1.04±0.25b	23.82	0.25~1.84	3.26	37.67	59.07	0.00	0.00
	皖南	1.46±0.42a	28.46	0.53~2.42	0.00	14.14	72.73	13.13	0.00

指标 Index	隶属函数类型 Type of membership function	下限 Lower limit (x₁)	最优下限 Optimal lower limit (x₃)	最优上限 Optimal upper limit (x₄)	上限 Upper limit (x₂)
pH	抛物线型	5.0	5.5	7.0	7.5
碱解氮Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen (mg/kg)	抛物线型	15.0	25.0	35.0	45.0
速效磷Available phosphorus (mg/kg)	S型	60.0	90.0	120.0	150.0
速效钾Available potassium (mg/kg)	S型	0.5	1.0	2.0	2.5
有机质Organic matter (g/kg)	抛物线型	10.0	－	－	40.0
全氮Total nitrogen (g/kg)	抛物线型	80.0	－	－	350.0

指标 Index	pH	碱解氮 Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen	速效磷 Available phosphorus	速效钾 Available potassium	有机质 Organic matter	全氮 Total nitrogen
pH	1.000
碱解氮Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen	-0.532	1.000
速效磷Available phosphorus	-0.253	0.250	1.000
速效钾Available potassium	0.439	-0.281	-0.061	1.000
有机质Organic matter	-0.395	0.655	0.267	-0.214	1.000
全氮Total nitrogen	-0.285	0.600	0.253	-0.116	0.893	1.000

指标 Index	pH	碱解氮 Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen	速效磷 Available phosphorus	速效钾 Available potassium	有机质 Organic matter	全氮 Total nitrogen
平均相关系数Average correlation coefficient	0.381	0.464	0.217	0.222	0.485	0.429
权重Weight	0.173	0.211	0.099	0.101	0.220	0.195

Suitability Evaluation on Nutrients of Tobacco-Planted Soils in Three Typical Ecological Regions

RichHTML

PDF (PC)