Crops ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 47-53.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2025.05.007

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Desulfurized Gypsum and Humic Acid Interaction on Soil and Quinoa Growth in Saline-Alkali Land

Yan Jingrong1(), Pang Chunhua1(), Zhang Yongqing1,2, Wu Yueyue1, Hou Yuchen1, Wang Jiaqi1, Qiao Man1   

  1. 1 College of Life Sciences, Shanxi Normal University, Taiyuan 030031, Shanxi, China
    2 College of Geography, Shanxi Normal University, Taiyuan 030031, Shanxi, China
  • Received:2024-06-21 Revised:2024-07-19 Online:2025-10-15 Published:2025-10-21

RichHTML

3

PDF (PC)

386

Abstract:

To explore the effects of combined application of different dosages of desulfurized gypsum and humic acid on the soil of saline-alkali land, as well as the physiological characteristics and yield of quinoa, and to provide ideas and technical support for quinoa planting in saline-alkali land, taking Longli 1 as the experimental material, a pot experiment was conducted. Four levels of desulfurized gypsum at 0 (F0), 6.25 (F1), 12.50 (F2), 18.75 g/kg (F3), and three levels of humic acid at 0 (HA0), 1 (HA1), 2 g/kg (HA2) were set up for the randomized block experiment. The results showed that under the same amount of humic acid, with the increase of the application amount of desulfurized gypsum, the soil pH decreased first and then increased, and the electrical conductivity showed an upward trend. The chlorophyll content of quinoa leaves, antioxidant enzyme activity, and grain yield increased first and then decreased, and the content of malondialdehyde, soluble sugar, and proline decreased first and then increased, with the best effect under the F2 treatment. Under the same amount of desulfurized gypsum, with the increase of the amount of humic acid, the soil pH and electrical conductivity showed a downward trend. The chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzyme activity, and grain yield increased, and the contents of malondialdehyde, soluble sugar, and proline decreased, with the best effect under the HA2 treatment. The combined application of desulfurized gypsum and humic acid could significantly reduce soil pH, promote the growth of quinoa under saline-alkali stress, and increase the yield of quinoa. The best effect was achieved under the treatment of 12.5 g/kg of desulfurized gypsum combined with 2 g/kg of humic acid.

Key words: Quinoa, Desulfurized gypsum, Humic acid, Saline-alkali stress, Antioxidant enzyme activity, Soil electrical conductivity, Yield

Table 1

Treatment combination scheme of the experiment g/kg"

处理
Treatment		 组合
Combination		 腐植酸施用量
Humic acid
application rate		 脱硫石膏施用量
Desulfurized gypsum
application rate
1 HA0-F0 0 0.00
2 HA0-F1 0 6.25
3 HA0-F2 0 12.50
4 HA0-F3 0 18.75
5 HA1-F0 1 0.00
6 HA1-F1 1 6.25
7 HA1-F2 1 12.50
8 HA1-F3 1 18.75
9 HA2-F0 2 0.00
10 HA2-F1 2 6.25
11 HA2-F2 2 12.50
12 HA2-F3 2 18.75

Fig.1

Effects of different treatments on soil pH of quinoa Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among treatments in the same group at P < 0.05 level. The same below."

Fig.2

Effects of different treatments on EC of quinoa"

Fig.3

Effects of different treatments on the chlorophyll content of quinoa"

Fig.4

Effects of different treatments on MDA content, SOD and POD activities in quinoa leaves"

Fig.5

Effects of treatments on Pro and SS content in quinoa leaves"

Table 2

Effects of desulfurized gypsum and humic acid interaction on yield and its components of quinoa in saline-alkali land"

处理
Treatment		 产量
（g/盆）
Yield (g/pot)		 千粒重
1000-grain
weight (g)		 增产率
Yield increase
rate (%)
HA0-F0 23.34±0.34g 1.73±0.04h －
HA0-F1 27.65±0.37e 2.19±0.04fg 17.18±0.07
HA0-F2 30.60±0.74d 2.59±0.03bc 29.94±0.06
HA0-F3 26.73±0.82ef 2.29±0.04fg 13.44±0.07
HA1-F0 25.26±0.35f 2.06±0.04f 8.76±0.08
HA1-F1 31.53±0.64e 2.34±0.07de 36.30±0.17
HA1-F2 38.42±0.52b 2.78±0.06b 63.32±0.18
HA1-F3 28.20±0.71d 2.41±0.02cd 18.45±0.13
HA2-F0 27.17±0.52e 2.17±0.03fg 16.39±0.08
HA2-F1 34.36±0.40c 2.47±0.05cd 46.48±0.16
HA2-F2 41.49±0.33a 2.97±0.06a 76.14±0.09
HA2-F3 33.28±0.41c 2.50±0.02cd 42.17±0.18
[1] 毛庆莲, 王胜. 国内盐碱地治理趋势探究浅析. 湖北农业科学, 2020, 59(增1):302-306.
[2] 杨劲松, 姚荣江, 王相平, 等. 防止土壤盐渍化,提高土壤生产力. 科学, 2021, 73(6):30-34.
[3] 吴鹏, 吕剑, 郁继华, 等. 褪黑素对盐碱复合胁迫下黄瓜幼苗光合特性和渗透调节物质含量的影响. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7):1901-1910.
doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202207.028
[4] 杨劲松, 姚荣江, 王相平, 等. 中国盐渍土研究:历程、现状与展望. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(1):10-27.
[5] Zhang Y, Yang J S, Huang Y H, et al. Use of freeze-thaw purified saline water to leach and reclaim gypsum-amended saline-alkali soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2019, 83(5):1333-1342.
doi: 10.2136/sssaj2019.03.0081
[6] 云雪雪, 陈雨生. 国际盐碱地开发动态及其对我国的启示. 国土与自然资源研究, 2020(1):84-87.
[7] 刘永江, 覃鹏. 藜麦营养功能成分及应用研究进展. 黑龙江农业科学, 2020(3):123-127.
[8] González J A, Gallardo M, Hilal M, et al. Physiological responses of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) to drought and waterlogging stresses: dry matter partitioning. Botanical Studies, 2009, 50(1):35-42.
[9] Sampaio S L, Fernandes N, Pereira C, et al. Nutritional value, physicochemical characterization and bioactive properties of the Brazilian quinoa BRS Piabiru. Food & Function, 2020, 11:2969-2977.
[10] 于淑会, 周向莉, 卿冀川, 等. 河北滨海盐碱土地生态安全评价. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25(5):778-786.
[11] 孙在金. 脱硫石膏与腐植酸改良滨海盐碱土的效应及机理研究. 北京: 中国矿业大学, 2013.
[12] 田荣荣, 张文超, 李烨, 等. 燃煤烟气脱硫石膏改良盐碱地技术研究与工程化应用进展. 燃烧科学与技术, 2022, 28(6):736-748.
[13] 赵永敢, 王淑娟, 李彦, 等. 脱硫石膏改良盐碱土技术发展历程与展望. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 62(4):735-745.
doi: 10.16511/j.cnki.qhdxxb.2022.25.012
[14] 李传福, 朱桃川, 明玉飞, 等. 有机肥与脱硫石膏对黄河三角洲盐碱地土壤团聚体及其有机碳组分的影响. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5):878-888.
doi: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2023.05.006
[15] Wang Y G, Wang Z F, Liang F, et al. Application of flue gas desulfurization gypsum improves multiple functions of saline- sodic soils across China. Chemosphere, 2021, 277:130345.
[16] 宁松瑞, 赵雪, 姬美玥, 等. 脱硫石膏和磁化水对盐碱胁迫荞麦光合特性的影响. 农业机械学报, 2020, 51(10):310-317.
[17] 李明珠, 张文超, 王淑娟, 等. 适宜脱硫石膏施用方式改良河套灌区盐碱土提高向日葵产量. 农业工程学报, 2022, 38(6):89-95.
[18] Zhang W, Zhao Y, Wang S, et al. Combined application of flue gas desulfurization gypsum and straw pellets to ameliorate sodicity, nutrient content, and aggregate stability of sodic soil. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2021, 21(3):1806-1816.
[19] 贺坤, 李小平, 徐晨, 等. 烟气脱硫石膏对滨海盐渍土的改良效果. 环境科学研究, 2018, 31(3):547-554.
[20] 魏兆辉, 武均, 蔡立群, 等. 不同改良措施对甘肃邓马营湖盐碱区农田土壤水溶性离子的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021(5):156-162.
[21] 赵振东, 孙廉平, 曹正男, 等. 腐植酸对水稻产量、品质及土壤特性的影响. 中国稻米, 2022, 28(1):38-42.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2022.01.008
[22] Andrade F V, Mendonça E S, Silva I R, et al. Dry-matter production and phosphorus accumulation by maize plants in response to the addition of organic acids in oxisols. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 2007, 38(19/20):2733-2745.
[23] Yang C.Mycorrhizal fungi: use in sustainable agriculture and land restoration: management of the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis in sustainable crop production. Heidelberg:Springer, 2014.
[24] 陈文涛, 郭丽琢, 剡斌, 等. 改良剂对盐碱地燕麦生长及土壤物理性状的调控效应. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2024, 59(5):136-144.
[25] 张世远, 高伟, 吕兴娜, 等. 喷施腐殖酸肥对万寿菊现蕾期农艺性状与生理指标的影响. 北方园艺, 2024(16):41-48.
[26] 张志良, 瞿伟菁, 李小芳. 植物生理学指导. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2009.
[27] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[28] 冯春晖, 刘新路, 纪文君, 等. 基于电磁感应技术的棉田土壤电导率时空异质性研究. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(4):999-1011.
[29] 倪瑞军, 张永清, 庞春花, 等. 藜麦幼苗对水氮耦合变化的可塑性响应. 作物杂志, 2015(6):91-98.
[30] 程永钢, 金辉, 郑普山, 等. 间作绿肥对盐碱地土壤改良及青贮玉米产量的影响. 农业资源与环境学报, 2024, 41(5):1100-1110.
[31] 王鼎, 李跃进, 李青春, 等. 河套地区盐碱土复合调理剂配方筛选研究. 中国土壤与肥料, 2020(4):192-201.
[32] Huang Z B, Ma Y, et al. Improvement effects of different environmental materials on coastal saline-alkali soil in yellow river delta. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2013, 27(4):186-190.
[33] 王艺臻, 丁国栋, 崔欣然, 等. 盐碱复合胁迫对油沙豆生长和光合特性的影响. 干旱区资源与环境, 2022, 36(5):146-152.
[34] 白小龙, 武晋民, 张家豪, 等. 不同改良物料及其配施组合对河套平原盐碱土壤玉米光合与根系形态特征的影响. 生态学杂志, 2024, 43(10):3023-3030.
[35] 胡慧, 马帅国, 田蕾, 等. 脱硫石膏改良盐碱土对水稻叶绿素荧光特性的影响. 核农学报, 2019, 33(12):2439-2450.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2019.12.2439
[36] 张婷婷, 刘宇乐, 陈红, 等. 不同外源物质对盐、碱及干旱胁迫下草木樨种子萌发、幼苗生长及生理的影响. 草业学报, 2024, 33(8):122-132.
doi: 10.11686/cyxb2023369
[37] 白海波, 毛桂莲, 李晓慧, 等. 脱硫废弃物对盐碱地水稻幼苗抗氧化酶活性和膜脂过氧化作用的影响. 西北农业学报, 2009, 18(3):122-126.
[38] 田蕾, 王彬, 张雪艳, 等. 脱硫石膏改良盐碱土对水稻秧苗素质、根系特征及质膜透性的影响. 广东农业科学, 2014, 41 (21):1-6.
[39] 刘春, 曹丽敏, 周东升, 等. 干旱、盐分和温度胁迫诱导的植物代谢改变. 生物技术通报, 2013(4):1-7.
[40] 高富东, 何俊, 李敏, 等. 脱硫石膏与粉煤灰配施对碱化土壤改良及苜蓿生长的影响. 灌溉排水学报, 2024, 43(4):59-65.
[41] 梁萍, 张永清, 张萌, 等. 不同盐碱胁迫条件下PAM施用深度对藜麦生长及产量的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41 (5):130-137,197.
[42] 石婧, 黄超, 刘娟, 等. 脱硫石膏不同施用量对新疆盐碱土壤改良效果及作物产量的影响. 环境工程学报, 2018, 12(6):1800-1807.
[43] 高惠敏, 王相平, 屈忠义, 等. 脱硫石膏与有机物料配施对河套灌区土壤改良及向日葵生长的影响. 灌溉排水学报, 2020, 39(8):85-92.
[1] Zhou Tingfang, Li Ran, Liu Qianqian, Zhang Ze, Wang Zhenhua, Ma Baoxin, Lu Ming, Zhang Lin, Han Yehui, Yang Bo, Li Mingshun, Zhang Degui, Weng Jianfeng, Yong Hongjun, Xu Jingyu, Han Jienan, Li Xinhai. Analysis of Salt Tolerance at Germination Stage of 118 Maize Hybrids in Northeast China [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 1-10.
[2] Teng Wen, Ye Fan, Zhou Zhou, Wang Yule, Liu Lijun. Effects of Wheat and Rapeseed Straw Returning on Yield and Quality of Rice under Salt Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 11-18.
[3] Ma Qiang, Li Yankun, Wang Gui’e, Wen Tingting, Zhang Tianyu, Tian Jichun, Wang Yanxun. Analysis of Agronomic Traits and Quality Characteristics of Colored Wheat Varieties Approved in Shandong Province and Research on Improvement Direction [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 113-119.
[4] Li Xiaomin, Gong Hongyu, Tian Bingxin, Liu Donghua, Li Chunxi, Jiang Lina, Ma Jianhui. Effects of Different Row Spacing Arrangements and Planting Density Combinations on Canopy Structure and Nitrogen Utilization in Wheat on the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 171-176.
[5] Li Jiahui, Chen Ruxue, Bai Hongbo, Wang Yonghua. Photosynthesis-Grain Filling Coordination Characteristics of Winter Wheat with Different Plant Types and Their Impact on Yield Components [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 195-203.
[6] Wang Yan, Zhang Qian, Dong Ming, Wang Shulin, Feng Guoyi, Liang Qinglong, Qi Hong. Effects of Mechanical Topping Time on Agronomic Characteristics and Yield of Cotton in Southern Hebei Cotton Region [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 204-208.
[7] Wu Huijuan, Geng Xiaoli, Li Deming, Zhou Dongchang, Fu Ping, Liu Qian, Du Xiaocun. Effects of Foliar Spraying with Different Iron Fertilizers on Seed Yield and Its Components in Oat [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 233-238.
[8] Li Xiang, Li Yijie, Wu Xiaojian, Long Shengfeng, Huang Dongmei, Gao Yijing, Wang Zeping. Application Effect of Sugarcane Waste in Cultivation of Dictyophora indusiata [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 260-265.
[9] Li Jie, Zhang Yongqiang, Lei Junjie, Lü Xiaoqing, Chen Chuanxin, Xu Qijiang, Nie Shihui, Xu Wenxiu, Chang Xuhong. Effects of Different Urea Types and Application Methods on Plant Characteristics and Yield Composition of Winter Wheat under Drip Irrigation [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 266-271.
[10] Du Hanmeng, Chen Yuqiong, Liu Ruotong, Chen Yinglong, Dai Qigen, Zhang Hongcheng, Liao Ping. Effects of Chlormequat Chloride and Gypsum Application on Rice Yield and Lodging Risk under Salt Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 29-34.
[11] Xu Mingli, Wu Baichen, Liu Chang, Gao Xinhan, Yin Jiaqi, He Xue, Liu Ying, Yin Zequn, Miao Xingfen. Effect of Melatonin Soaking on Foxtail Millet Germination under Saline-Alkali Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 42-46.
[12] Zhang Jindong, Wang Cheng, Lu Huan, Zeng Lingling, Zhang Gongliang, Sun Haoyue, Liu Yue, Yang Helin, Hou Xiaomin. Response of Mung Bean Genotypes to Exogenous Brassinosteroids under Saline-Alkali Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 54-60.
[13] Chen Ping, Luo Yuanyuan, Wang Juan, Sun Quan, Ma Lingfang, Ma Wenli, Xie Jingbo. Response and Tolerance Evaluation of Oat to Mixed Saline-Alkali Stress at Germination Stage [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 61-66.
[14] Zhao Zhou, Zhang Li, Gao Xinlei, Qiu Hongyu. Effects of Compound Saline-Alkali Stress on Growth and Metabolism of Oat [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 74-85.
[15] Jia Yanli, Zhang Hongfa, Liu Guixia, Huang Sufang, Qu Xinyue, Yue Mingqiang, Han Jiating, Xu Yupeng, Liu Qingsong. Effects of Biological Sulfur Regulator on the Yield, Quality of Alfalfa and Soil Physicochemical Properties in Saline-Alkali Land [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 86-92.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!