不同土壤改良剂用于融安脆蜜金柑种植的效应差异

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0145

中国农学通报 ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (25): 75-84.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0145

• 资源·环境·生态·土壤·气象 • 上一篇下一篇

不同土壤改良剂用于融安脆蜜金柑种植的效应差异

张耀鑫¹^,²(), 孙家妹¹^,², 刘钰², 陈雨晴¹^,², 蔡雄生³, 周文兵¹^,²(), 周大昀³()

¹ 动物育种与健康养殖前沿科学中心，武汉 430070
² 华中农业大学资源与环境学院/生态与环境工程研究室，武汉 430070
³ 广西朗林生态农业科技有限公司，广西柳州 530401

收稿日期:2025-02-21 修回日期:2025-07-16 出版日期:2025-09-05 发布日期:2025-09-16
通讯作者:
周文兵，男，1974年出生，湖北仙桃人，教授，博士，主要从事农业废弃物无害化处理与资源化利用研究。通信地址：430070 湖北省武汉市洪山区狮子山街1号华中农业大学生猪健康协同养殖创新中心，Tel：027-87287184，E-mail：zhouwb@mail.hzau.edu.cn。
周大昀，男，1972年出生，河北石家庄人，工程师，本科，主要从事广西地区脆蜜金柑高产优栽技术研究。通信地址：545026 柳州市鱼峰区双仁路10号企业创新研发中心2栋705号，E-mail：zhoudayun2899@163.com。
作者简介:
张耀鑫，男，河南南阳人，硕士研究生，研究方向：农业废弃物无害化处理与资源化利用研究。通信地址：430070 湖北省武汉市洪山区狮子山街1号华中农业大学生猪健康协同养殖创新中心，E-mail：2248760897@qq.com。
基金资助:
中央高校基本科研业务费专项“智能化养殖与废弃物资源化利用”(2662023DKPY003); 华中农业大学与广西朗林生态农业科技有限公司校企合作项目“融安脆蜜金桔高产优质规范化种植技术合作研发”(2023420113000229)

Performance of Different Soil Conditioners on Planting of Cuimi Kumquat in Rong’an

ZHANG Yaoxin¹^,²(), SUN Jiamei¹^,², LIU Yu², CHEN Yuqing¹^,², CAI Xiongsheng³, ZHOU Wenbing¹^,²(), ZHOU Dayun³()

¹ Frontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Wuhan 430070
² Lab of Ecological and Environmental Engineering/ College of Resources and Environment, Huazhong Agricultural University,Wuhan 430070
³ Guangxi Langlin Ecological Agriculture Technology Corporation, Liuzhou, Guangxi 530401

Received:2025-02-21 Revised:2025-07-16 Published:2025-09-05 Online:2025-09-16

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为比较和评估5种土壤改良剂对广西柳州融安县中性翻耕土壤上种植的融安脆蜜金柑的效果，使用2种新型改良剂[氨基酸改性生物质灰(MBA)、氨基酸改性木屑(MSD)]、3种商售土壤改良剂[白云石(DOL)、生物炭(BC)、腐殖酸钾(HAP)（用作对照）]，通过测定土壤主要有效养分含量、植株生长过程中叶片的光合特性及果实品质指标，筛选最优土壤改良剂。结果表明，5种土壤改良剂组成的各处理中，“基肥+氨基酸改性生物质灰”(CK+MBA)处理表现出最优的综合效果，土壤碱解氮、有效磷、有机质和有效锰含量最高，同时使植株叶片的净光合速率和气孔导度达到最大值。此外，该处理下果实的可溶性固形物含量、果形指数和固酸比也显著高于其他处理。“基肥+白云石”(CK+DOL)和“基肥+腐殖酸钾”(CK+HAP)处理效果次之，但各具特色；CK+DOL处理能有效增加土壤有效态养分含量，但会增加土壤有效铅、有效钠含量；CK+HAP处理可显著提高果实的单果重、出汁率和维生素C含量。综上所述，氨基酸改性生物质灰在5种改良剂中表现最佳，白云石和腐殖酸钾次之，建议在中性土壤种植脆蜜金柑时优先应用氨基酸改性生物质灰。

关键词: 脆蜜金柑, 土壤有效养分, 叶片光合, 果实品质, 氨基酸改性生物质灰, 白云石, 腐殖酸钾, 生物炭

Abstract:

The purpose of this research is to compare and evaluate the effects of five kinds of soil conditioners used in the cultivation of crispy honey kumquats on neutrally tilled soil of Rong’an County, Liuzhou City, Guangxi Province. In this study, two kinds of new amendments, amino acid-modified biomass ash (MBA) and amino acid-modified wood chips (MSD), and three kinds of commercially available soil amendments, dolomite (DOL), biochar (BC) and potassium humate (HAP) (used as the controls) were used for planting Cuimi kumquat. Optimal soil conditioners were selected from three aspects: the contents of soil available nutrients, the photosynthetic characteristics of leaves during plant growth, and the quality indexes of harvested kumquat fruits. The results showed that among the treatments originated from 5 kinds of soil conditioners, the comprehensive effect of the ‘base fertilizer+ amino acid modified biomass ash’ (CK+MBA) treatment was the best. Under this treatment, the soil alkali hydrolyzable nitrogen, available phosphorus, organic matter and available manganese contents were significantly higher than those of other treatments, the net photosynthetic rate and stomatal conductance of plant leaves were the highest, and the soluble solids content, fruit shape index and solid-acid ratio of fruit were the highest. The second were ‘base fertilizer + dolomite’ (CK+DOL) and ‘base fertilizer + potassium humate’ (CK+HAP) treatments, each treatment had its own advantages and disadvantages, in which CK+DOL treatment had a good effect on the soil available nutrient contents, but would increase the soil available lead and available sodium contents, and CK+HAP treatment had the highest single fruit weight of kumquat fruit, the highest juice yield and vitamin C content. MBA had the best comprehensive effect among the five conditioners, followed by DOL and HAP, which could be preferentially promoted and applied in the production of Cuimi kumquat on neutral soil.

Key words: Cuimi kumquat, soil available nutrients, leaf photosynthesis, fruit quality, amino acid-modified biomass ash, dolomite, potassium humate, biochar

张耀鑫, 孙家妹, 刘钰, 陈雨晴, 蔡雄生, 周文兵, 周大昀. 不同土壤改良剂用于融安脆蜜金柑种植的效应差异[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(25): 75-84.

ZHANG Yaoxin, SUN Jiamei, LIU Yu, CHEN Yuqing, CAI Xiongsheng, ZHOU Wenbing, ZHOU Dayun. Performance of Different Soil Conditioners on Planting of Cuimi Kumquat in Rong’an[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(25): 75-84.

图/表 6

参考文献 32

[4]	CHEN M M, ZHANG S R, LIU L, et al. Combined organic amendments and mineral fertilizer application increase rice yield by improving soil structure, P availability and root growth in saline-alkaline soil[J]. Soil & tillage research, 2021,212:105060.
[5]	MENG X F, GUO J M, ZHENG G D, et al. Combination of low-accumulation kumquat cultivars and amendments to reduce Cd and Pb accumulation in kumquat grown in contaminated soil[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2022,365:132660.
[6]	ONDRASEK G, KRANGEC F, FILIPOVI L, et al. Biomass bottom ash & dolomite similarly ameliorate an acidic low-nutrient soil, improve phytonutrition and growth, but increase Cd accumulation in radish[J]. The science of the total environment, 2021,753:141902.
[7]	ZHANG M Y, ZHANG L, RIAZ M, et al. Biochar amendment improved fruit quality and soil properties and microbial communities at different depths in citrus production[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2021,292:126062.
[8]	LU L, HAN Y, WANG J Y, et al. PBAT/PLA humic acid biodegradable film applied on solar greenhouse tomato plants increased lycopene and decreased total acid contents[J]. Science of the total environment, 2023,871:162077.
[9]	LI Y Y, LV Y, LIAN M, et al. Effects of combined glycine and urea fertilizer application on the photosynthesis, sucrose metabolism, and fruit development of peach[J]. Scientia horticulturae, 2021,289:110504.
[10]	CRUZ N C, RODRIGUES S M, CARVALHO L, et al. Ashes from fluidized bed combustion of residual forest biomass: Recycling to soil as a viable management option[J]. Environmental science and pollution research, 2017,24:14770-14781.
[11]	FLAVIO C S, CRUZ N C, LUIS A C T, et al. Use of biomass ash-based materials as soil fertilisers: Critical review of the existing regulatory framework[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2019,214:112-124.
[12]	WU H P, SUN J M, ZHOU W B, et al. Crop effect and mechanism of amino acid-modified biomass ash in remediation of cadmium-contaminated soil[J]. Environmental science and pollution research, 2023,30:101026-101034.
[13]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(3版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[14]	NOBILE C M, BRIVIN M N, BECQUER T, et al. Phosphorus sorption and availability in an andosol after a decade of organic or mineral fertilizer applications: Importance of pH and organic carbon modifications in soil as compared to phosphorus accumulation[J]. Chemosphere, 2020,239:124709.
[15]	COLLIN S, BASKAR A, GEEVARGHESE D M, et al. Bioaccumulation of lead (Pb) and its effects in plants: A review[J]. Journal of hazardous materials letters, 2022,3:100064.
[16]	MAAS E V. Salinity and citriculture[J]. Tree physiology, 1993,12:195-216.
[17]	陆景陵. 植物营养学(上册)[M]. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2003.
[18]	WANG D B, HU P, TIE N. Responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant activities in Koelreuteria paniculata young plants exposed to manganese stress[J]. South African journal of botany, 2022,147:340-348.
[19]	许大全. 光合作用学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2013.
[20]	林兵, 武胜利, 管文轲, 等. 胡杨叶片的胞间CO₂浓度及气孔和非气孔限制的探究[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2021, 60(13):87-92.
[21]	王磊, 任树梅, 毕勇刚, 等. 土壤水分及有机肥料对番茄叶片光合特性及叶绿素含量影响的试验研究[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2004, 23(2):66-68.
[22]	邓雪花, 喻阳华, 熊康宁, 等. 不同林龄花椒光合特性及对土壤养分的响应[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2022, 42(2):149-157.
[23]	白成科, 王百群, 张希彪, 等. 土壤养分对小偃22叶片光合特性影响的初步研究[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2001, 21(4):56-60.
[24]	SHAABAN M, PENG Q, LIN S, et al. Dolomite application enhances CH₄ uptake in an acidic soil[J]. Catena, 2016,140:9-14.
[25]	LI A Y, GE W Z, LIU L H, et al. Synthesis and application of amine-functionalized MgFe₂O₄-biochar for the adsorption and immobilization of Cd(II) and Pb(II)[J]. Chemical engineering journal, 2022,439:135785.
[26]	WHITTON M M, REN X P, YU S J, et al. Humate application alters microbiota-mineral interactions and assists in pasture dieback recovery[J]. Heliyon, 2023,9:e13327.
[1]	MENG X F, GUO J M, YANG J X, et al. Effects of soil amendments on soil Pb bioavailability and Pb absorption by a low-Pb accumulator kumquat grown in two types of Pb-contaminated soils[J]. Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology, 2021,107:1128-1135.
[2]	LIU M, TAN X, ZHENG M, et al. Modified biochar/humic substance/fertiliser compound soil conditioner for highly efficient improvement of soil fertility and heavy metals remediation in acidic soils[J]. Journal of environmental management, 2023,325:116614.
[3]	YAN B J, ZHANG Y P, WANG Y Z, et al. Biochar amendments combined with organic fertilizer improve maize productivity and mitigate nutrient loss by regulating the C-N-P stoichiometry of soil, microbiome, and enzymes[J]. Chemosphere, 2023,324:138293.
[27]	ZHAI J, BURKE I T, STEWART D I. Beneficial management of biomass combustion ashes[J]. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 2021,151:111555.
[28]	赵泓凯, 张潇屹, 曾慧云, 等. 土壤调理剂对土壤理化性状及不结球白菜生理特性的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2021, 36(Z1):312-319.
[29]	郭喜军, 谢军红, 李玲玲, 等. 氮肥用量及有机无机肥配比对陇中旱农区玉米光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(5):806-816.
[30]	李旭. 减氮施肥对柑橘树体氮素含量、果实品质产量和氮肥利用的影响[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2020.
[31]	EBRAHIMI R, AHMADIAN A, FERDOUSI A, et al. Effect of washing and cooking on nitrate content of potatoes (cv. Diamant) and implications for mitigating human health risk in Iran[J]. Potato research, 2020,63:449-462.
[32]	WANG H D, QU Y, WEN Z J, et al. Interactive effects of irrigation and N fertilization management on fruit yield, quality and water-N productivity of greenhouse cherry tomato[J]. Scientia horticulturae, 2024,328:112895.

处理	有效铁	有效锰	有效铜	有效锌	有效镉	有效铅	有效钠
CK	4.64±1.30b	9.57±0.56bcd	0.17±0.01a	0.77±0.01a	0.01±0.00a	1.31±0.07b	11.24±1.31c
CK+DOL	6.53±0.08ab	7.57±0.13cd	0.23±0.09a	0.96±0.35a	0.00±0.02a	3.70±0.74a	18.50±2.93a
CK+BC	7.21±0.25a	11.66±2.19ab	0.18±0.02a	0.72±0.27a	0.01±0.01a	1.20±0.06b	12.65±0.75bc
CK+HAP	5.02±0.22b	11.05±0.35abc	0.23±0.04a	0.69±0.35a	0.02±0.02a	1.29±0.13b	11.96±0.04bc
CK＋MSD	5.57±0.13ab	7.31±1.49d	0.21±0.04a	0.93±0.16a	0.00±0.00a	1.47±0.23b	13.96±2.57abc
CK+MBA	5.45±0.00ab	11.91±1.63ab	0.18±0.02a	1.02±0.03a	0.03±0.02a	1.25±0.02b	16.89±2.41ab
CK+1/2MBA	5.50±1.17ab	10.42±0.72abcd	0.25±0.01a	0.93±0.19a	0.01±0.01a	1.74±0.19b	11.11±1.15c
1/2CK+MBA	5.44±0.02ab	13.37±1.99a	0.23±0.15a	0.69±0.40a	0.01±0.02a	1.56±0.46b	9.03±3.54c

处理	有效铁	有效锰	有效铜	有效锌	有效镉	有效铅	有效钠
CK	4.64±1.30b	9.57±0.56bcd	0.17±0.01a	0.77±0.01a	0.01±0.00a	1.31±0.07b	11.24±1.31c
CK+DOL	6.53±0.08ab	7.57±0.13cd	0.23±0.09a	0.96±0.35a	0.00±0.02a	3.70±0.74a	18.50±2.93a
CK+BC	7.21±0.25a	11.66±2.19ab	0.18±0.02a	0.72±0.27a	0.01±0.01a	1.20±0.06b	12.65±0.75bc
CK+HAP	5.02±0.22b	11.05±0.35abc	0.23±0.04a	0.69±0.35a	0.02±0.02a	1.29±0.13b	11.96±0.04bc
CK＋MSD	5.57±0.13ab	7.31±1.49d	0.21±0.04a	0.93±0.16a	0.00±0.00a	1.47±0.23b	13.96±2.57abc
CK+MBA	5.45±0.00ab	11.91±1.63ab	0.18±0.02a	1.02±0.03a	0.03±0.02a	1.25±0.02b	16.89±2.41ab
CK+1/2MBA	5.50±1.17ab	10.42±0.72abcd	0.25±0.01a	0.93±0.19a	0.01±0.01a	1.74±0.19b	11.11±1.15c
1/2CK+MBA	5.44±0.02ab	13.37±1.99a	0.23±0.15a	0.69±0.40a	0.01±0.02a	1.56±0.46b	9.03±3.54c

处理	单果重/g	纵径/cm	横径/cm	果形指数	出汁率	可食率
CK	36.40±6.14a	4.26±0.33a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.05bc	0.53±0.02ab	0.66±0.01a
CK+DOL	33.31±4.38a	4.31±0.11a	3.81±0.21a	1.15±0.00ab	0.55±0.01a	0.64±0.02a
CK+BC	34.04±3.66a	4.21±0.08a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.00bc	0.50±0.03bc	0.67±0.02a
CK+HAP	36.42±4.96a	4.35±0.24a	3.87±0.17a	1.12±0.03abc	0.56±0.02a	0.65±0.03a
CK＋MSD	30.38±3.95a	4.05±0.30a	3.75±0.17a	1.08±0.03c	0.47±0.01c	0.64±0.04a
CK+MBA	32.47±1.56a	4.27±0.06a	3.72±0.10a	1.17±0.01a	0.50±0.00bc	0.64±0.03a
CK+1/2MBA	31.09±1.07a	4.09±0.17a	3.71±0.05a	1.08±0.01c	0.47±0.02c	0.66±0.02a
1/2CK+MBA	33.03±3.70a	4.21±0.18a	3.77±0.18a	1.12±0.01abc	0.46±0.02c	0.68±0.01a

处理	单果重/g	纵径/cm	横径/cm	果形指数	出汁率	可食率
CK	36.40±6.14a	4.26±0.33a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.05bc	0.53±0.02ab	0.66±0.01a
CK+DOL	33.31±4.38a	4.31±0.11a	3.81±0.21a	1.15±0.00ab	0.55±0.01a	0.64±0.02a
CK+BC	34.04±3.66a	4.21±0.08a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.00bc	0.50±0.03bc	0.67±0.02a
CK+HAP	36.42±4.96a	4.35±0.24a	3.87±0.17a	1.12±0.03abc	0.56±0.02a	0.65±0.03a
CK＋MSD	30.38±3.95a	4.05±0.30a	3.75±0.17a	1.08±0.03c	0.47±0.01c	0.64±0.04a
CK+MBA	32.47±1.56a	4.27±0.06a	3.72±0.10a	1.17±0.01a	0.50±0.00bc	0.64±0.03a
CK+1/2MBA	31.09±1.07a	4.09±0.17a	3.71±0.05a	1.08±0.01c	0.47±0.02c	0.66±0.02a
1/2CK+MBA	33.03±3.70a	4.21±0.18a	3.77±0.18a	1.12±0.01abc	0.46±0.02c	0.68±0.01a

不同土壤改良剂用于融安脆蜜金柑种植的效应差异

Performance of Different Soil Conditioners on Planting of Cuimi Kumquat in Rong’an

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 32

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]	宋凯, 高宇, 左雨田, 刘杨. 生物炭改良模式下农田土壤总有机碳的Meta分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(9): 125-131.
[2]	唐忠建, 张金枝, 王晓梅, 徐文杰, 付雅洁, 赵明艳, 吴如意, 樊雯娟, 张杰. 花穗修整长度对‘夏黑’葡萄果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(7): 34-39.
[3]	董建梅, 胡江, 李晶, 刘红明, 付小猛, 赖新朴, 杜玉霞. 砧木对柠檬‘云柠1号’矿质养分吸收的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(7): 47-54.
[4]	王欢欢, 王晶晶, 陈奇凌. 3种数学方法在灰枣果实品质评价中的应用[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(7): 138-144.
[5]	黄婉莉, 张冬敏, 符喜喜, 陈心怡, 张朝坤, 郑诚乐. 砧木种类对‘红香1号’番石榴生长和果实产质量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(6): 73-79.
[6]	马倩倩, 彭莞云, 黄涛, 谢正伟, 李世银. 硅肥施用方式和浓度对青脆李果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(4): 39-43.
[7]	王敏, 韩守安, 谢辉, 刘旭鹏, 麦合木提·图如普, 漆颖, 阿地里太·铁力克, 艾尔买克·才卡斯木, 潘明启, 张雯. 赤霉素穗轴涂抹处理对葡萄果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(4): 44-49.
[8]	白剑侠, 孙聃, 李俊超, 杨光胜, 左锦静, 赵扬, 张庆霞, 张少南, 郭东权. 保水剂对枸杞根部土壤特性、生长及果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(25): 40-48.
[9]	左相如, 吴雪, 卢康乐, 夏敏仪, 张家安, 张紫房, 熊巧. 农林生物炭对土壤重金属铬毒性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(23): 90-100.
[10]	马前涛, 田文涛, 温婕, 马智斌, 张云娟, 赵丽菊, 禹昊辰, 刘宛, 宋志姣. 错季番茄品种在潞江坝地区的适应性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(22): 47-56.
[11]	郑晨烨, 闫豫疆. 矿质元素含量对新疆灰枣果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(22): 65-74.
[12]	赵科刚, 蔡苗, 马畅, 王东, 谢晓梅, 王欣雅. 土壤调理剂对连作葡萄园肥力修复及果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(21): 96-106.
[13]	何德飞, 陈伟盛, 梁杰聪, 黄栩荣, 路丛顼, 刘忠珍, 黄玉芬. 烟秆生物炭钝化土壤镉的作用与效果初探[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(2): 83-90.
[14]	黄雅淇, 李祥平, 丁渝, 傅欣怡, 廖钦洪, 张文林. 响应面法优化生姜秸秆改性生物炭对氨氮吸附性能的研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(16): 82-89.
[15]	田效琴, 李卓, 刘永红. 生物炭与尿素配施对旱地紫色土土壤养分、呼吸和油菜产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(13): 13-18.