不同施肥措施对连作芹菜土壤有机碳及酶活性的影响

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0598

中国农学通报 ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (8): 120-127.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0598

• 资源·环境·生态·土壤·气象 • 上一篇下一篇

不同施肥措施对连作芹菜土壤有机碳及酶活性的影响

金学兰¹(), 虎生园¹, 石琳¹, 马耀玉¹, 杨婷¹, 吴宏亮¹(), 康建宏¹, 冯海萍²()

¹ 宁夏大学农学院，银川 750021
² 宁夏农林科学院园艺研究所，银川 750011

收稿日期:2025-07-15 修回日期:2025-10-05 出版日期:2026-04-25 发布日期:2026-04-23
通讯作者:
吴宏亮，男，1976年出生，山西太谷人，副教授，博士，主要从事耕作制度、农业生态领域的应用基础理论和技术研究。通信地址：750021 宁夏银川市西夏区贺兰山西路489号，Tel：0951-2077800，E-mail：nxuwu@163.com；
冯海萍，女，1981年出生，宁夏吴忠人，研究员，硕士研究生，主要从事蔬菜生理及无土栽培研究。通信地址：750002 宁夏银川市金凤区黄河东路590号，Tel：0951-6886710，E-mail：fenghaiping2005@163.com。
作者简介:
金学兰，女，1997年出生，宁夏吴忠人，硕士研究生，研究方向：农作制度理论与技术。通信地址：750021 宁夏银川市西夏区贺兰山西路489号，Tel：0951-2077800，E-mail：jinxuelan0518@163.com。
基金资助:
宁夏回族自治区农业科技自主创新资金农业高质量发展和生态保护科技创新示范项目“露地芹菜、娃娃菜机械化高质栽培技术研究与示范”(NGSB-2021-8-06); 宁夏自然科学基金项目“作物根系浸提液对连作芹菜根系化感物质和根际土壤微生物群落结构的影响研究”(2024AAC03384)

Effects of Different Fertilization Practices on Organic Carbon and Enzyme Activity in Soil of Continuous Cropping Celery

JIN Xuelan¹(), HU Shengyuan¹, SHI Lin¹, MA Yaoyu¹, YANG Ting¹, WU Hongliang¹(), KANG Jianhong¹, FENG Haiping²()

¹ College of Agriculture, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021
² Institute of Horticulture, Ningxia Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Yinchuan 750011

Received:2025-07-15 Revised:2025-10-05 Published:2026-04-25 Online:2026-04-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为指导宁夏南部山区连作芹菜地的合理施用有机肥，本研究于2019—2024年在宁夏西吉长期连作芹菜田进行田间试验。试验采用随机区组设计，设置4种施肥模式：不施肥(CK)、有机肥(OF)、生物炭(BC)、生物炭+有机肥配施(BF)。通过测定土壤有机碳含量、活性有机碳组分、脲酶酶活性以及蔗糖酶活性，研究不同施肥措施对土壤有机碳含量及酶活性的影响。结果表明：与CK相比，BF、OF均能显著提高>1 mm粒级团聚体质量分数、团聚体平均重量直径(MWD)和几何平均直径(GMD)。在>1 mm和<0.25 mm粒级中，BF处理的土壤有机碳含量均高于其他处理。在0.25~1 mm和<0.25 mm粒级中，OF处理的土壤碳库管理指数(CPMI)显著高于其他处理，较CK分别提高2.39%和21.15%。BC处理在各粒级团聚体中脲酶活性均最高，较CK分别显著提高34.85%、22.83%、0.39%，OF处理次之。各粒级团聚体中土壤蔗糖酶活性表现为：OF>CK>BC>BF，OF较CK提高了10.51%、10.59%、3.19%。相关性分析结果显示，在所有团聚体粒级中，土壤脲酶活性与土壤活性有机碳呈负相关；蔗糖酶活性与脲酶活性呈正相关。在>1 mm和0.25~1 mm团聚体粒级中，有机碳与活性有机碳呈正相关，与蔗糖酶活性呈显著负相关。综上，施用有机肥能够改善土壤结构，提升团聚体稳定性，增加>1 mm和<0.25 mm粒级的土壤有机碳含量和活性有机碳组分，提升土壤碳库水平以及团聚体酶活性，从而有效改善连作芹菜地土壤质量。

关键词: 有机肥, 生物炭, 有机碳, 土壤碳库管理指数, 酶活性

Abstract:

To study the influence of fertilization measures on the variation of soil organic carbon and enzyme activity, and to provide theoretical basis for rational application of organic fertilizer to continuous cropping celery fields in the mountainous area of southern Ningxia, field trials were conducted from 2019 to 2024 in long-term continuous cropping celery fields in Xiji, Ningxia. The experiment was set up in a randomized block design with four fertilization modes: i.e., no fertilizer (CK), organic fertilizer (OF), biochar (BC), and biochar + organic fertilizer dosing (BF). By measuring soil organic carbon content, active organic carbon fractions, urease activity, and sucrase activity, this study investigated the effects of fertilization practices on changes of soil organic carbon and enzyme activity. The results showed that compared with CK, BF and OF were able to significantly increase the mass fraction of clusters with >1 mm size and the mean mass diameter (MWD) and geometric mean diameter (GMD) of the clusters. In >1mm and <0.25mm grain sizes, the soil organic carbon levels of BF treatment were higher than those of other treatments. In 0.25-1mm and <0.25mm grain sizes, the CPMI of OF treatment was significantly more than the other processing, which increased the CPMI by 2.39% and 21.15% compared with CK. BC treatment had the highest urease activity in all grain level agglomerates, with a significant improvement of 34.85%, 22.83% and 0.39% over CK, followed by OF treatment. The magnitude of soil sucrase activity in all grain level agglomerates showed that OF>CK>BC>BF, and OF increased by 10.51%, 10.59%, and 3.19% compared with CK. Correlation analysis results indicated that across all aggregate size fractions, soil urease activity exhibited a negative correlation with soil active organic carbon; sucrase activity showed a positive correlation with urease activity. And in the >1mm and 0.25-1mm agglomerates, the organic carbon was positively linked to soil activated organic carbon compositions, and significantly negatively linked to the activities of sucrase. In summary, the application of organic fertilizers can improve soil structure, enhance aggregate stability, increase the content of soil organic carbon (SOC) and active organic carbon components in particle size fractions >1 mm and <0.25 mm, elevate the level of soil carbon pools, increase the enzyme activity of the aggregates, and improve the quality of the soil carbon pool levels, and boost aggregate enzyme activity, thereby effectively improving soil quality of continuous cropping celery fields.

Key words: organic fertilizer, biochar, organic carbon, soil carbon pool management index, enzyme activity

中图分类号:

S3，S5

金学兰, 虎生园, 石琳, 马耀玉, 杨婷, 吴宏亮, 康建宏, 冯海萍. 不同施肥措施对连作芹菜土壤有机碳及酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(8): 120-127.

JIN Xuelan, HU Shengyuan, SHI Lin, MA Yaoyu, YANG Ting, WU Hongliang, KANG Jianhong, FENG Haiping. Effects of Different Fertilization Practices on Organic Carbon and Enzyme Activity in Soil of Continuous Cropping Celery[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(8): 120-127.

图/表 9

处理	各粒级团聚体质量分数
处理	>1 mm	0.25~1 mm	<0.25 mm
CK	46.45±4.10b	32.73±0.81a	20.82±2.17c
BC	42.32±1.19c	31.35±2.46b	26.34±1.03a
OF	52.29±1.14a	29.47±1.32b	18.24±2.27d
BF	51.45±1.66ab	26.73±2.91c	21.82±4.53b

表1. 不同施肥措施土壤团聚体含量的变化

图1. 不同施肥对土壤团聚体稳定性的影响

图2. 不同施肥措施下土壤有机碳及其活性组分的变化

图3. 不同施肥处理下土壤碳库管理指数的变化

图4. 不同施肥措施对土壤有机碳矿化速率的影响

图5. 不同施肥措施下土壤团聚体酶活性的变化

图6. 土壤酶活性与土壤有机碳(SOC)的相关分析

项目	PC1	PC2
特征值	2.154	1.034
方差贡献率/%	53.857	25.83
累计方差贡献率/%	53.857	79.70

表2. 土壤指标的主成分分析结果

处理	土壤质量指数SQI	排序
OF	0.641	1
CK	0.610	2
BC	0.588	3
BF	0.529	4

表3. 不同施肥措施下土壤质量的综合评价

参考文献 37

[1]	BHATTACHARYYA R, KUNDU S, SRIVASTVA A K, et al. Long term fertilization effects on soil organic carbon pools in a sandy loam soil of the Indian sub-Himalayas[J]. Plant and soil, 2011, 341(1):109-124. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0627-4 URL
[2]	HUANG N, NIU Z, ZHAN Y L, et al. Relationships between soil respiration and photosynthesis-related spectral vegetation indices in two cropland ecosystems[J]. Agricultural and forest meteorology, 2012, 160:80-89. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.03.005 URL
[3]	SHU Y, XIE S, FAN H, et al. Tea cultivation: facilitating soil organic carbon accumulation and altering soil bacterial community-Leishan County, Guizhou Province, Southwest China[J]. PeerJ, 2025,13e18683.
[4]	石艳香, 迟凤琴, 张久明, 等. 不同施肥处理黑土中添加秸秆对土壤团聚体稳定性及有机碳贡献率的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2023, 54(4):856-863.
[5]	MACK M C, SCHUUR E A, BRET-HARTE M S, et al. Ecosystem carbon storage in arctic tundra reduced by long-term nutrient fertilization[J]. Nature, 2004, 431(7007):440-443. doi: 10.1038/nature02887
[6]	CLEVELAND C C, TOWNSEND A R. Nutrient additions to a tropical rain forest drive substantial soil carbon dioxide losses to the atmosphere[J]. Proceedings of the national academyof sciences of the united states of America, 2006, 103(27):10316-10321.
[7]	孟磊, 丁维新, 蔡祖聪, 等. 长期定量施肥对土壤有机碳储量和土壤呼吸影响[J]. 地球科学进展, 2005, 20(6):687-692. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2005.06.0687
[8]	LIU L L, GREAVER T L. A global perspective on belowground carbon dynamics under nitrogen enrichment[J]. Ecology letters, 2010, 13(7):819-828. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01482.x pmid: 20482580
[9]	瑞敏. 不同施肥制度潮土有机碳矿化对温度和牛粪的响应及其机制研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2016.
[10]	王玲莉, 娄翼来, 石元亮, 等. 长期施肥对土壤活性有机碳指标的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2008, 39(4):752-755.
[11]	DAVIDSON E A, JANSSENS I A. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change[J]. Nature, 2006, 440(7081):165-173. doi: 10.1038/nature04514
[12]	MCLAUCHLAN K K, HOBBIE S E. Comparison of labile soil organic matter fractionation techniques[J]. Soil science society of America journal, 2004, 68(5):1616-1625. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2004.1616 URL
[13]	范倩玉, 刘振华, 李晋, 等. 不同轮作模式对潮土团聚体及其有机碳分布的影响[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2021, 27(1):81-88.
[14]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(第三版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[15]	LEFROY R D B, BLAIR G J, STRONG W M. Changes in soil organic matter with cropping as measured by organic carbon fractions and 13C natural isotope abundance[J]. Plant and soil, 1993, 155-156(1):399-402. doi: 10.1007/BF00025067 URL
[16]	李丹, 马晓明, 雷佳, 等. 不同沟垄覆盖模式下旱作马铃薯田土壤呼吸及有机碳矿化特征[J]. 环境科学, 2024, 45(10):6038-6049.
[17]	史登林. 生物炭与氮肥减量配施对黄壤稻田土壤有机碳矿化的影响[D]. 贵阳: 贵州大学, 2021.
[18]	GARDNER W R. Representation of soil aggregate-size distribution by a logarithmic-normal distribution[J]. Soil science society of America journal, 1956, 20(2):151-153. doi: 10.2136/sssaj1956.03615995002000020003x URL
[19]	JIANG X, XU D, RONG J, et al. Landslide and aspect effects on artificial soil organic carbon fractions and the carbon pool management index on road-cut slopes in an alpine region[J]. Catena, 2021, 199:105094. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2020.105094 URL
[20]	冷雪梅. 不同施肥处理对水稻土有机碳稳定性及微生物群落结构的影响[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2021.
[21]	张顺涛, 任涛, 周橡棋, 等. 油/麦-稻轮作和施肥对土壤养分及团聚体碳氮分布的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(1):194-205.
[22]	甘雅芬, 徐永昊, 周富忠, 等. 紫云英还田与氮肥减施对水稻土团聚体中各形态铁锰含量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2022, 28(7):1238-1248.
[23]	胡丹丹, 李浩, 宋惠洁, 等. 长期施肥条件下红壤有机碳化学结构与团聚体稳定性的关系[J]. 土壤通报, 2022, 53(1):152-159.
[24]	刘哲, 孙增慧, 吕贻忠. 长期不同施肥方式对华北地区温室和农田土壤团聚体形成特征的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25(8):1119-1128.
[25]	曹玉凤, 佟师师, 岳岐, 等. 生物炭对棕壤团聚体稳定性及磷组分分布的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2025, 33(3):520-530.
[26]	SPOHN M. Phosphorus and carbon in soil particle size fractions: A synthesis[J]. Biochemistry, 2020, 147(3):225-242.
[27]	谢钧宇, 彭博, 王仁杰, 等. 长期不同施肥对塿土大团聚体中有机碳组分特征的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019, 25(7):1073-1083.
[28]	李江舟, 代快, 张立猛, 等. 施用生物炭对云南烟区红壤团聚体组成及有机碳分布的影响[J]. 环境科学学报, 2016, 36(6):2114-2120.
[29]	MOHARANA P C, SHARMA B M, BISWAS D R, et al. Long-term effect of nutrient management on soil fertility and soil organic carbon pools under a 6-year-old pearl millet-wheatcropping system in an Inceptisol of subtropical India[J]. Field crops research, 2012, 136:32-41. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.07.002 URL
[30]	李玮, 郑子成, 李廷轩, 等. 不同植茶年限土壤团聚体及其有机碳分布特征[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(21):6326-6336.
[31]	王欣欣, 符建荣, 邹平, 等. 长期植稻年限序列水稻土团聚体有机碳分布特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24(3):719-724.
[32]	陆太伟, 蔡岸冬, 徐明岗, 等. 施用有机肥提升不同土壤团聚体有机碳含量的差异性[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2018, 37(10):2183-2193.
[33]	LUO S S, ZHU L, LIU J L, et al. Sensitivity of soil organic carbon stocks and fractions to soil surface mulching in semiarid farmland[J]. European journal of soil biology, 2015, 67:35-42. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2015.01.004 URL
[34]	YANG J L, REN L Q, ZHANG N H, et al. Can soil organic carbon sequestration and thecarbon management index be improved by changing the film mulching methods in the semiarid region?[J]. Journal of integrative agriculture, 2024, 23(5):1541-1556. doi: 10.1016/j.jia.2023.05.011 URL
[35]	郭亚军, 邱慧珍, 张玉娇, 等. 不同施肥方式对马铃薯农田土壤有机碳组分和碳库管理指数的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2021, 52(4):912-919.
[36]	吴强建, 胡梦蝶, 侯松峰, 等. 减氮配施生物炭基肥对蜜柚土壤理化性质及酶活性的影响[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2022, 56(5):732-741.
[37]	ZHANG X Y, DONG W Y, DAI X Q, et al. Responses of absolute and specific soil enzymeactivities to long term additions of organic and mineral fertilizer[J]. Science of the total environment, 2015, 536:59-67. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.043 URL

不同施肥措施对连作芹菜土壤有机碳及酶活性的影响

Effects of Different Fertilization Practices on Organic Carbon and Enzyme Activity in Soil of Continuous Cropping Celery

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 37

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]	徐芬芬, 韩金多. 外源EBR调控大豆幼苗抗旱的根系响应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(8): 53-59.
[2]	黄剑, 靖吉越, 林浩瀚. 不同种类肥料在茶树上的应用研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(7): 97-104.
[3]	周立垚, 刘娟, 刘海礁, 崔亚男, 刘兵, 罗艺龙, 于泷程, 陈亚菲, 许日升, 马腾飞. 生物炭在花生种植中的应用研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(7): 15-21.
[4]	徐培智, 李海锋, 李文光, 董云, 张捷鑫, 顾文杰, 卢钰升. 广东省肥料行业20年的科技创新与展望[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(7): 163-170.
[5]	骆国辉, 俞世康, 翟扬妮, 顾会战, 李富程, 王彬, 吴涛. 不同连作障碍类型下植烟土壤化感物质和微生物多样性特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(5): 101-108.
[6]	赵明明, 李可, 杜付荣, 张梅, 胡新燕, 陈晓光. 有机肥替代部分化学氮对马铃薯产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(5): 128-134.
[7]	商小兰, 陈翔, 刘永红, 徐星, 俞洲君, 朱为静, 李丹. 水稻秸秆炭化还田对稻田土壤有机碳稳定性的影响机制研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(4): 133-138.
[8]	谷雨, 陈鸽, 刘琼峰, 周峻宇, 谢坚, 杨曾平, 饶中秀, 梁万栋, 张丽娜, 盛浩, 吴海勇. 有机肥施用对水稻产量及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(2): 120-127.
[9]	李保军, 温国昌, 陈洁, 崔晓敬, 贾良良, 杨云马, 杨璞, 李红铁. 耕作方式、有机肥、秸秆还田对小麦赤霉病和茎基腐病的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(2): 184-190.
[10]	周佳慧, 唐浦林, 张诗野, 张爱华, 汪树理, 魏航, 任新龙, 郜玉钢, 王艳芳. 基于CNKI数据库的土壤酸化调节措施文献计量分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(2): 203-210.
[11]	陈宝珠, 黄继川, 许杨贵, 彭一平, 李珠娴, 梁健仪, 钟文亮, 晏育伟, 涂玉婷. 不同轮作模式对迟菜心种植土壤微生态的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(2): 93-102.
[12]	蒋坤莲, 冯长春, 韩利红, 孙龙, 黄康慧, 江鸿, 蔡艳. 新型生物有机肥对烤烟生长的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(1): 20-26.
[13]	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.
[14]	董林林, 严凯, 盛雪雯, 陆长婴, 施林林, 王海候, 吴正贵. 耕作方式影响下水稻生育期土壤水溶性有机碳的光谱特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(9): 99-106.
[15]	吴素霞, 赵鹏, 范海荣, 宋士涛, 陈丽娜, 靳常敏, 崔悦. 生物有机肥对谷子生长性状的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(8): 19-24.