蚯蚓密度与土壤物理肥力主要参数之间的定量关系分析

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0606

中国农学通报 ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (22): 81-87.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0606

• 资源·环境·生态·土壤·气象 • 上一篇下一篇

蚯蚓密度与土壤物理肥力主要参数之间的定量关系分析

马倩¹(), 刁霏霏², 杜鑫², 陈日远¹, 林启美²(), 赵小蓉², 李贵桐²

¹ 北京嘉博文生物科技有限公司/北京市有机废弃物资源化工程技术研究中心，北京 100015
² 中国农业大学土地科学与技术学院，北京 100193

收稿日期:2023-08-22 修回日期:2024-01-17 出版日期:2024-07-28 发布日期:2024-07-28
通讯作者:
林启美，男，1961年出生，湖北武穴人，教授，博士，研究方向为土壤微生物生态学及生物质炭农业与环境应用原理与技术。通信地址：100193 北京市海淀区圆明园西路2号中国农业大学土地科学与技术学院，E-mail：linqm@cau.edu.cn。
作者简介:
马倩，女，1988年出生，江苏徐州人，博士，研究方向为健康土壤培育、土壤碳氮循环、有机废物资源化利用、新型肥料研制等工作。通信地址：100015 北京市朝阳区将台路5号院5号楼5B 北京嘉博文生物科技有限公司，E-mail：maqian7766@126.com。
基金资助:
北京嘉博文生物科技有限公司项目“山东栖霞苹果园土壤蚯蚓指数”

The Quantitative Analysis for the Relationship Between Earthworm Density and Major Parameters of Soil Physical Fertility

MA Qian¹(), DIAO Feifei², DU Xin², CHEN Riyuan¹, LIN Qimei²(), ZHAO Xiaorong², LI Guitong²

¹ Engineering Research Center for Recycling Organic Waste/ Beijing Goldenway Bio-tech Co. Ltd., Beijing 100015
² College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193

Received:2023-08-22 Revised:2024-01-17 Published:2024-07-28 Online:2024-07-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

利用现有的数据，分析蚯蚓密度与土壤物理肥力主要参数之间的关系，定量评价蚯蚓对土壤物理性状的影响。通过中国知网和Web of Science，输入关键词（蚯蚓、土壤容重、土壤含水量、土壤质地、土壤孔隙度、土壤水稳定性团聚体）搜索，提取其中相关的数据，将文献提取的数据与调研获得的数据结合，进行Pearson相关性分析。研究发现，蚯蚓密度与砂粒相对含量呈极显著的负指数关系(P<0.001)，与粉粒相对含量呈显著的正指数关系(P<0.05)，而与黏粒相对含量呈极显著的幂函数关系(P<0.001)；与土壤容重呈微弱的负相关关系(P<0.20)，但与土壤孔隙度呈显著的正相关关系(P<0.05)；与水稳定性团聚体含量呈微弱的正相关关系(P<0.5)，但与水分含量呈极显著的正相关关系(P<0.001)。基于蚯蚓密度与砂粒、粉粒、黏粒相对含量，土壤容重、孔隙度，水稳定性团聚体、水分含量关系，可以将蚯蚓密度与土壤物理肥力主要参数之间的定量关系分为5个等级，以用于评价蚯蚓对土壤物理肥力指标的影响。

关键词: 蚯蚓密度, 黏粒, 粉粒, 砂粒, 容重, 孔隙度, 水稳定性团聚体, 土壤湿度

Abstract:

This study was aimed to analyze the relationship between earthworm density and the main parameters of soil physical fertility, and quantitatively evaluate the impact of earthworms on soil physical properties through field samples and data collection from literatures. Relevant data was extracted by inputting keywords such as earthworm, soil bulk density, soil water content, soil texture, soil porosity, and soil water-stable aggregates in the China Knowledge Infrastructure and Web of Science. The data extracted from the literature was combined with the data we obtained to perform Pearson correlation analysis. It was found that earthworm density was significantly, negatively and exponentially related with sand percentage (P<0.001), and significantly, positively and exponentially related with silt percentage (P<0.05) while significantly related with clay percentage in power function (P<0.001). There was a weak negative correlation with soil bulk density (P<0.20), and a significant positive correlation with soil porosity (P<0.05). There was a weak positive correlation with water stable aggregate content (P<0.5), but a very significant positive correlation with water content (P<0.001). The quantitative relationship between earthworm density and the main parameters of soil physical fertility can be divided into five classes according to the relationships between earthworm density and the relative content of sand, silt and clay, soil bulk density, porosity, water stability aggregate and water content, which may be valuable for estimating the impacts of earthworm on soil physical fertility.

Key words: earthworm density, clay, silt, sand, bulk density, porosity, water-stable aggregates, soil moisture

马倩, 刁霏霏, 杜鑫, 陈日远, 林启美, 赵小蓉, 李贵桐. 蚯蚓密度与土壤物理肥力主要参数之间的定量关系分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(22): 81-87.

MA Qian, DIAO Feifei, DU Xin, CHEN Riyuan, LIN Qimei, ZHAO Xiaorong, LI Guitong. The Quantitative Analysis for the Relationship Between Earthworm Density and Major Parameters of Soil Physical Fertility[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(22): 81-87.

图/表 6

图1. 蚯蚓密度与砂粒、粉粒、黏粒的关系 ●数据来自本研究，o数据来自文献[9⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓-16]

图2. 蚯蚓密度与土壤容重关系数据来自文献[9,11-12,17⇓⇓⇓-21]

图3. 土壤蚯蚓密度与土壤孔隙度的关系 ●数据来自本研究，o数据来自文献[11]

图4. 土壤蚯蚓密度与土壤水稳性团聚体关系数据来自文献[18]

图5. 土壤蚯蚓密度与土壤含水量的关系数据来自文献[9-10,19-20,22⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓-29]

级别	砂粒/%	粉粒/%	黏粒/%	容重/(g/cm³)	水稳性团聚体/%	孔隙度/%	含水量/%	蚯蚓密度/(条/m²)
1	[0,25)	[50,100]	[25,100]	[0,1.2)	[40,100]	[65,100]	[30,100]	[100, +∞)
2	[25, 35)	[44,50)	[20,25)	[1.2,1.35)	[30,40)	[55,65)	[20,30)	[70,100)
3	[35,50)	[37,44)	[15,20)	[1.35,1.45)	[20,30)	[48,55)	[12,20)	[40,70)
4	[50,60)	[31,37)	[11,15)	[1.45,1.59)	[10,20)	[40,48)	[5,12)	[10,40)
5	[60,100]	[0,31)	[0,11)	[1.59,+∞)	[0,10)	[0,40)	[0,5)	[0,10)

表1. 蚯蚓密度与土壤物理肥力主要参数定量化关系分级

参考文献 50

[1]	BERTRAND M, BAROT S, BLOUIN M. Earthworm services for cropping systems: A review[J]. Agronomy for sustainable development, 2015, 35(2):553-567.
[2]	KAVDIR Y, IILAY R. Earthworms and soil structure[A].// In: KARACA A. Biology of earthworms[M]. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2011:39-50.
[3]	BHADAURIA T, SAXENA K G. Role of earthworms in soil fertility maintenance through the production of biogenic structures[J]. Applied and environmental soil science, 2010(2):49-55.
[4]	BOTTINELLI N, HENRY-DES-TUREAUX T, HALLAIRE V, et al. Earthworms accelerate soil porosity turnover under watering conditions[J]. Geoderma, 2010, 156(1-2):43-47.
[5]	BLOUIN M, HODSON M E, Delgado E A, et al. A review of earthworm impact on soil function and ecosystem services[J]. European journal of soil science, 2013, 64:161-182.
[6]	李辉信, 胡锋, 沈其荣, 等. 接种蚯蚓对秸秆还田土壤碳、氮动态和作物产量的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2002, 13(12):1637-1641.
[7]	MA L, SHAO M A, FAN J, et al. Effects of earthworm (Metaphire guillelmi) density on soil macropore and soil water content in typical anthrosol soil[J]. Agriculture, ecosystems and environment, 2021, 311:107338.
[8]	董水丽. 麦秸还田后接种蚯蚓对土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 延安职业技术学院学报, 2011, 25(6):135-136.
[9]	SCHON N L, MACKAY A D, GRAY R A, et al. Influence of earthworm abundance and diversity on soil structure and the implications for soil services throughout the season[J]. Pedobiologia, 2017, 62:41-47.
[10]	GARCÍA-PÉREZ J A, ALARCÓN-GUTIÉRREZ E, PERRONI Y, et al. Earthworm communities and soil properties in shaded coffee plantations with and without application of glyphosate[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2014, 83:230-237.
[11]	KOURTEL G N, KRIBAA M, OKKI M. Interaction between soil physicochemical parameters and earthworm communities in irrigated areas with natural water and wastewaters[J]. Applied and environmental soil science, 2017(5):1-16.
[12]	MASIN C, RODRÍGUEZ A R, ZALAZAR C, et al. Approach to assess agroecosystem anthropic disturbance: statistical monitoring based on earthworm populations and edaphic properties[J]. Ecological indicators, 2020, 111(2):105984.
[13]	NWEKE I A. Effect of compost and earthworm production on soil properties, growth and dry matter yield of maize in crude oil degraded soil[J]. Journal of soil science & environmental management, 2017, 8(1):1-10.
[14]	RADAEI M and IZADI M. Response of earthworm’s biomass and soil properties in different afforested type areas in the North Iran[J]. Eurasian journal of soil science, 2016, 5(1):47.
[15]	SCHORPP Q, SCHRADER S. Earthworm functional groups respond to the perennial energy cropping system of the cup plant (Silphium perfoliatum L.)[J]. Biomass & bioenergy, 2016, 87:61-66.
[16]	WALSH C L, JOHNSON-MAYNARD J L. Earthworm distribution and density across a climatic gradient within the Inland Pacific Northwest cereal production region[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2016, 104:104-110.
[17]	D’HOSE T, COUGNON M, VLIEGHER A D, et al. The positive relationship between soil quality and crop production: A case study on the effect of farm compost application[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2014, 75:189-198.
[18]	GIANNITSOPOULOS M L, BURGESS P J, RICKSON J. Effects of conservation tillage drills on soil quality indicators in a wheat-oilseed rape rotation: Organic carbon, earthworms and water-stableaggregates[J]. Soil use and management, 2020, 36(1):139-152.
[19]	GUO L Y, WU G L, LI Y, et al. Effects of cattle manure compost combined with chemical fertilizer on topsoil organic matter, bulk density and earthworm activity in a wheat-maize rotation system in Eastern China[J]. Soil and tillage research, 2016, 156:140-147.
[20]	LÓPEZ-HERNÁNDEZ D, HERNÁNDEZ L, OJEDA A, et al. Impact of land protection in soil quality properties and in earthworm biomass in Venezuelan savannas[J]. Journal of soil science & plant nutrition, 2014, 14(4):927-941.
[21]	TONDOH J E, DIMOBE K, GUEI A M, et al. Soil health changes over a 25-year chronosequence from forest to plantations in rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis) landscapes in southern tote d’Ivoire: Do earthworms play a role?[J]. Frontiers in environmental science, 2019, 7:23.
[22]	LI J, ZHANG Z, WANG H, et al. Urban land-use impacts on composition and spatiotemporal variations in abundance and biomass of earthworm community[J]. Journal of forestry research, 2020, 31:325-331.
[23]	RIVEST M, WHALEN J K, RIVEST D. Variation of soil microbial and earthworm communities along an agricultural transect with tree windbreak[J]. Agroforestry systems, 2020, 94:1639-1649.
[24]	SANKAR A S, PATNAIK A. Impact of soil physico-chemical properties on distribution of earthworm populations across different land use patterns in southern India[J]. The journal of basic and applied zoology, 2018, 79(1):50.
[25]	SCHAIK L V, PALM J, KLAUS J, et al. Potential effects of tillage and field borders on within-field spatial distribution patterns of earthworms[J]. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 2016, 228:82-90.
[26]	WU Y P, ZHANG Y, BI Y M, et al. Biodiversity in saline and non-saline soils along the Bohai sea coast, China[J]. Pedoshpere, 2015, 25(2):307-315.
[27]	DEKEMATI I, SIMON B, VINOGRADOV S, et al. The effects of various tillage treatments on soil physical properties, earthworm abundance and crop yield in Hungary[J]. Soil and tillage research, 2019, 194:104334.
[28]	RAJKHOWA D J, BHATTACHARYYA P N, SARMA A K, et al. Diversity and distribution of earthworms in different soil habitats of assam, North-East India, an Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot[J]. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, India section B: Biological sciences, 2015, 85(2):389-396.
[29]	VARGA J, KANIANSKA R, SPISIAK J. Impact of land use and geological conditions on selected physical soil properties in relation to the earthworm abundance and biomass along an altitudinal gradient in Slovakia[J]. Soil science annual, 2018, 69(3):160-168.
[30]	VAN CAPELLE C, SCHRADER S, BRUNOTTE J. Tillage-induced changes in the functional diversity of soil biota e a review with a focus on German data[J]. European journal of soil biology, 2012, 50:165-181.
[31]	HALLAM J, BERDENI D, GRAYSON R, et al. Effect of earthworms on soil physico-hydraulic and chemical properties, herbage production, and wheat growth on arable land converted to ley[J]. Science of total environment, 2020, 713:136491.1-136491.14.
[32]	TAJBAKHSH J, MOHAMMADI GOLTAPEH E, VARMA A. Vermicompost as a biological soil amendment[A].// In: KARACA A. Biology of earthworms[M]. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2011:215-228.
[33]	BARTZ M L C, PASINI A, BROWN G G. Earthworms as soil quality indicators in Brazilian no-tillage systems[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2013, 69:39-48.
[34]	刘杰, 许石林, 周玮. 从机械、土壤、作物体系看农田机械化发展途径[J]. 华北农学报, 1987(3):119-124. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-7091.1987.03.021
[35]	唐政, 李继光, 李慧, 等. 设施菜田水肥管理模式下蚯蚓和土壤肥力状况的变化[J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(8):2210-2214.
[36]	PELOSI C, GRANDEAU G, CAPOWIEZ Y. Temporal dynamics of earthworm-related macroporosity in tilled and non-tilled cropping systems[J]. Geoderma, 2017, 289:169-177.
[37]	LIPIEC J, TURSKI M, HAJNO M, et al. Pore structure, stability and water repellency of earthworm casts and natural aggregates in loess soil[J]. Geoderma, 2015, 243-244: 124-129.
[38]	SIX J, PAUSTIAN K. Aggregate-associated soil organic matter as an ecosystem property and a measurement tool[J]. Soil biology and biochemstry, 2014, 68:A4-A9.
[39]	GIANNITSOPOULOS M L, BURGESS P J, RICKSON R J. Effects of conservation tillage drills on soil quality indicators in a wheat-oilseed rape rotation: organic carbon, earthworms and water-stable aggregates[J]. Soil use and management, 2020, 36:139-152.
[40]	PAUL B K, VANLAUWE B, HOOGMOED M, et al. Exclusion of soil macro-fauna did not affect soil quality but increased crop yields in a sub-humid tropical maize-based system[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems and environment, 2015, 208:75-85.
[41]	CHOUDHURY S G, SRIVASTAVA S, SINGH R, et al. Tillage and residue management effects on soil aggregation, organic carbon dynamics and yield attribute in rice-wheat cropping system under reclaimed sodic soil[J]. Soil and tillage research, 2014, 136:76-83.
[42]	于建光, 胡锋, 李辉信, 等. 接种蚯蚓对土壤团聚体分布、稳定性及有机碳赋存的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2010, 24(3):175-179
[43]	LI J H, ZHANG Z, WANG H, et al. Urban land-use impacts on composition and spatiotemporal variations in abundance and biomass of earthworm community[J]. Journal of forestry research, 2020, 31(1):325-331.
[44]	王红, 王邵军, 李霁航. 不同森林群落类型土壤蚯蚓数量和生物量的时空分布特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 41(3):37-42. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201605023
[45]	GILOT-VILLENAVE C, LAVELLE P, GANRY F. Effects of a tropical geophagous earthworm, Millsonia anomala, on some soil characteristics, on maize- residue decomposition and on maize production in Ivory Coast[J]. Applied soil ecology, 1996, 4(3):201-211.
[46]	熊丽军, 马莉, 刘美泽, 等. 免耕条件下蚯蚓对农田水分及土壤物理性质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(16):77-81. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0429
[47]	SMAGIN A V, PRUSAK A V. The effect of earthworm coprolites on the soil water retention curve[J]. Eurasian soil science, 2008, 41:618-622.
[48]	HALLAM J, HODSON M E. Impact of different earthworm ecotypes on water stable aggregates and soil water holding capacity[J]. Biology and fertility of soils, 2020, 56:607-617.
[49]	VAN GROENIGEN J W, LUBBERS I M, VOS H M J, et al. Earthworms increase plant production: A meta-analysis[J]. Scientific reports, 2014, 4:6365. doi: 10.1038/srep06365 pmid: 25219785
[50]	张卫信, 李健雄, 郭明昉, 等. 广东鹤山人工林蚯蚓群落结构季节变化及其与环境的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2005, 25(6):1362-1370.

蚯蚓密度与土壤物理肥力主要参数之间的定量关系分析

The Quantitative Analysis for the Relationship Between Earthworm Density and Major Parameters of Soil Physical Fertility

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 50

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们

[1]	陈友明, 郭晏汝, 马行空, 田间, 董元华. 稻蟹共作对土壤理化性质及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(18): 58-65.
[2]	雍宬, 赵晟, 张思怡, 孙恩惠, 曲萍, 陈玲, 王秋君, 刘朝政, 靳红梅, 徐跃定, 黄红英. 秸秆纤维尺寸对育秧基质块干燥及吸水速率的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(15): 143-150.
[3]	孙力扬, 徐明岗, 王晋峰, 李建华, 刘平, 孙楠. 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.
[4]	刘敏, 赵财, 范虹, 殷文, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 孙亚斌. 长期间作及免耕对土壤物理性状及作物产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(2): 28-35.
[5]	熊丽军, 马莉, 刘美泽, 李亦男. 免耕条件下蚯蚓对农田水分及土壤物理性质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(16): 77-81.
[6]	肖弘扬, 李谟志, 林启美, 李二珍, 李贵桐, 赵小蓉. 8种耐盐植物与脱硫石膏对河套灌区盐碱土水稳定性团聚体的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(34): 90-96.
[7]	聂良鹏, 郭利伟, 郑春风, 吕玉虎, 张梦, 李本银, 潘兹亮, 李杰. 种植翻压紫云英配施化肥对稻田土壤理化性状和水稻产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(27): 65-69.
[8]	刘亚柏. 醋糟不同配比覆盖对句容旱地葡萄园土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(11): 45-50.
[9]	平翠枝, 红梅, 王文东, 赵巴音那木拉, 美丽, 刘鹏飞, 赵乌英嘎. 不同耕作方式对黑土区农田土壤物理特性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(7): 83-89.
[10]	宗巧鱼, 艾宁, 杨丰茂, 强大宏, 李阳, 刘姣, 郝宝宝, 刘长海. 陕北黄土区枣林土壤物理性质变化研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(6): 48-56.
[11]	王党朝, 尚志, 佘长超. 草原露天矿区重构土壤典型物理性质与生物量的关系[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(23): 60-65.
[12]	陈香波, 申瑞雪, 吕秀立, 冯建华, 李圃锦, 张冬梅. 不同基质栽培百子莲生长效应评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(19): 73-79.
[13]	杨越, 杨依天, 武智勇, 吴才武, 韩永娇. 冀北坝上地区不同退耕还林模式对土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(15): 54-59.
[14]	王倩, 任文斌, 邱玉亮, 许琦, 谢三刚. 49份山西水地小麦品系的HMW-GS组成及品质分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(14): 11-15.
[15]	胡立峰. 中国土壤类型下免耕对土壤容重的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(12): 73-78.