Effect of Bio-organic Fertilizer on the Improvement of Nutrition and Vigor of Weak Bayberry

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0553

Abstract

Abstract:

The weak disease of bayberry is serious in the industry. To develop the key prevention and control technology to the disease, three kinds of bio-organic fertilizers and Norwegian compound fertilizer were selected for the experiment, and the diseased trees without fertilization were used as the control. The three kinds of bio-organic fertilizers with application amount of 10-20 kg per plant had 66.12%-82.64% disease control effect, better than that of compound fertilizer which had no obvious effect, and the bio-organic fertilizers increased the soil pH and organic matter content of the treated diseased trees. The contents of seven elements in soil such as available nitrogen, available calcium, magnesium, available sulfur, zinc, copper and iron, and five elements in leaves, such as calcium, sulfur, iron, manganese and boron, were significantly increased. The vegetative growth and fruit quality were improved, the single fruit weight and soluble solids were increased by 51.8%-77.0% and 1.50-3.36 percentage points, respectively, and the titratable acid content was decreased by 0.16-0.31 percentage points. In summary, the bio-organic fertilizer has a certain control effect on weak disease of bayberry tree, and could improve the content of nutrient elements in soil and leaves of diseased trees, promote vegetative growth and fruit quality.

Key words: bio-organic fertilizer, bayberry weak disease, soil physical and chemical properties, leaf nutrition, vegetative growth, tree vigor, fruit quality

CLC Number:

S859.84

Ren Haiying, Wang Jian, Zheng Xiliang, Zhang Shuwen, Zou Xiuqin, Yu Zheping, Qi Xingjiang. Effect of Bio-organic Fertilizer on the Improvement of Nutrition and Vigor of Weak Bayberry[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(16): 127-137.

Figures/Tables 11

References 29

[1]	Ren H Y, Yu H Y, Zhang S W, et al. Genome sequencing provides insights into the evolution and antioxidant activity of Chinese bayberry[J]. BMC Genomics, 2019(20):458-572.
[2]	任海英, 郑锡良, 张淑文, 等. 杨梅衰弱病病症及病树矿质营养分析[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2020,61(10):2043-2048.
[3]	Zhang F, Meng X, Feng C, et al. Hydrolytic amino acids employed as a novel organic nitrogen source for the preparation of PGPF-containing bio-organic fertilizer for plant growth promotion and characterization of substance transformation during BOF production[J]. PLoS One, 2016,11(3):e0149447. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149447 URL
[4]	林瑞, 任海英, 安笑笑, 等. 生物有机肥对杨梅凋萎病防控及其树势恢复的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2019,31(7):1096-1104.
[5]	Yuan J, Ruan Y, Wang B, et al. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria strain Bacillus amyloliquefaciens NJN-6-enriched bio-organic fertilizer suppressed Fusarium wilt and promoted the growth of banana plants[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2013,61(16):3774-3780. doi: 10.1021/jf400038z pmid: 23541032
[6]	Shen Z, Wang D, Ruan Y, et al. Deep 16S rRNA pyrosequencing reveals a bacterial community associated with Banana Fusarium wilt disease suppression induced by bio-organic fertilizer application[J]. PLoS One, 2014,9(5):e98420. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098420 URL
[7]	Zhao S, Chen X, Deng S, et al. The effects of fungicide, soil fumigant, bio-organic fertilizer and their combined application on chrysanthemum Fusarium wilt controlling, soil enzyme activities and microbial properties[J]. Molecules, 2016,21(4):526. doi: 10.3390/molecules21040526 URL
[8]	Huang N, Wang W, Yao Y, et al. The influence of different concentrations of bio-organic fertilizer on cucumber Fusarium wilt and soil microflora alterations[J]. PLoS One, 2017,12(2):e0171490. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171490 URL
[9]	王文丽, 李娟, 赵旭. 生物有机肥对连作当归根际土壤细菌群落结构和根腐病的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019,30(8):2813-2821.
[10]	宋以玲, 于建, 陈士更, 等. 化肥减量配施生物有机肥对油菜生长及土壤微生物和酶活性影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2018,32(1):352-360.
[11]	姜莉莉, 王开运, 武玉国, 等. 生物有机肥在玫瑰香葡萄上的应用效果[J]. 落叶果树, 2019,51(1):18-21.
[12]	朱岁层, 杜建平, 金平涛. 生物有机肥与减量化肥配施对猕猴桃产量和品质的影响[J]. 陕西农业科学, 2019,65(05):28-31.
[13]	张迎春, 颉建明, 李静, 等. 生物有机肥部分替代化肥对莴笋及土壤理化性质和微生物的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019,33(4):196-205.
[14]	邓小华, 黄杰, 杨丽丽, 等. 石灰、绿肥和生物有机肥协同改良酸性土壤并提高烟草生产效益[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019,25(9):1577-1587.
[15]	李进平, 周龙, 曾志伟, 等. 生物有机肥与生物刺激素协同对撂荒香蕉园土壤改良及枯萎病防治的影响[J]. 中国南方果树, 2019,48(4):57-63.
[16]	沈宗专, 孙莉, 王东升, 等. 石灰碳铵熏蒸与施用生物有机肥对连作黄瓜和西瓜枯萎病及生物量的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2017,28(10):3351-3359.
[17]	Zhao J, Liu J, Liang H, et al. Manipulation of the rhizosphere microbial community through application of a new bio-organic fertilizer improves watermelon quality and health[J]. PLoS One, 2018,13(2):e0192967. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192967 URL
[18]	高苇, 吴峰, 王勇, 等. 棉隆与生物有机肥协同防治芹菜根腐病及其对根际土壤微生物数量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018,34(2):65-68.
[19]	王学奎. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2006:202-203, 267-268.
[20]	陈培林. 土壤农业化学常规分析方法[M]. 北京: 科学出版社出版, 1983:74-76,80-82,101-102,115-116, 273-298.
[21]	曲成闯, 陈效民, 韩召强, 等. 施用生物有机肥对黄瓜不同生育期土壤肥力特征及酶活性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017,31(6):279-284.
[22]	曲成闯, 陈效民, 张志龙, 等. 生物有机肥提高设施土壤生产力减缓黄瓜连作障碍的机制[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019,25(5):814-823.
[23]	伍从成, 姜海波, 赵静文, 等. 连续5年施用生物有机肥对梨树根系形态及分布的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2017,40(3):473-480.
[24]	黄金凤. 生物有机肥对金叶女贞根际微环境和枯萎病的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018,46(10):126-130.
[25]	张宇冲, 何思蓓, 高灵会, 等. 生物有机肥对芦笋土壤酶活性及细菌群落的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2019(12):83-91.
[26]	刘苹, 张博, 齐军山, 等. 生物有机肥对小麦根腐病的防效及其机理初探[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2019,39(9):1132-1137.
[27]	曲成闯, 陈效民, 张志龙, 等. 施用生物有机肥对黄瓜连作土壤有机碳库和酶活性的持续影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019,30(9):3147-3154.
[28]	Wu L, Chen J, Wu H, et al. Insights into the regulation of rhizosphere bacterial communities by application of bio-organic fertilizer in Pseudostellaria heterophylla monoculture regime[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2016,7:1788.
[29]	秦艳梅, 张志红, 刘春卯. 钾肥与生物有机肥配施防治香蕉枯萎病效果初探[J]. 植物保护, 2017,43(3):65-69.

肥料	用量/(kg/株)	处理编号
生物有机肥Q	5	Q5
	10	Q10
	20	Q20
生物有机肥Y	5	Y5
	10	Y10
	20	Y20
生物有机肥J	5	J5
	10	J10
	20	J20
挪威复合肥	1	NCF
病树不施肥对照	0	CK

肥料	用量/(kg/株)	处理编号
生物有机肥Q	5	Q5
	10	Q10
	20	Q20
生物有机肥Y	5	Y5
	10	Y10
	20	Y20
生物有机肥J	5	J5
	10	J10
	20	J20
挪威复合肥	1	NCF
病树不施肥对照	0	CK

处理编号	发病率/%	病情指数	防效/%	病情级别/株
处理编号	发病率/%	病情指数	防效/%	0级	1级	3级	5级	7级	9级
Q5	100.0	45.19	49.59	0	2	5	6	2	0
Q10	100.0	30.37	66.12	0	5	7	3	0	0
Q20	86.7	22.96	74.38	2	7	3	3	0	0
Y5	86.7	31.85	64.46	2	3	5	5	0	0
Y10	80.0	26.67	70.25	3	4	4	4	0	0
Y20	60.0	15.56	82.64	6	5	2	2	0	0
J5	100.0	40.74	54.55	0	4	4	5	2	0
J10	80.0	25.19	71.90	3	5	3	4	0	0
J20	73.3	22.96	74.38	4	4	4	3	0	0
NCF	100.0	89.63	0.00	0	0	0	0	7	8
CK	100.0	89.63	0.00	0	0	0	0	7	8

处理编号	发病率/%	病情指数	防效/%	病情级别/株
处理编号	发病率/%	病情指数	防效/%	0级	1级	3级	5级	7级	9级
Q5	100.0	45.19	49.59	0	2	5	6	2	0
Q10	100.0	30.37	66.12	0	5	7	3	0	0
Q20	86.7	22.96	74.38	2	7	3	3	0	0
Y5	86.7	31.85	64.46	2	3	5	5	0	0
Y10	80.0	26.67	70.25	3	4	4	4	0	0
Y20	60.0	15.56	82.64	6	5	2	2	0	0
J5	100.0	40.74	54.55	0	4	4	5	2	0
J10	80.0	25.19	71.90	3	5	3	4	0	0
J20	73.3	22.96	74.38	4	4	4	3	0	0
NCF	100.0	89.63	0.00	0	0	0	0	7	8
CK	100.0	89.63	0.00	0	0	0	0	7	8

处理	pH	有机质/%	速效氮/(mg/kg)	速效磷/(mg/kg)	速效钾/(mg/kg)	有效钙/(mg/kg)	镁/(mg/kg)
Q5	4.71±0.35c	2.74±0.11f	94.03±4.35e	26.83±1.05c	193.23±8.75a	514.77±10.46d	34.47±1.58d
Q10	5.12±0.51b	3.32±0.25d	99.87±3.21d	24.17±1.13d	185.6±7.36b	808.87±20.35b	42.73±2.46b
Q20	5.41±0.42a	5.55±0.33a	156.37±6.47a	12.03±0.35h	127.57±5.63e	812.8±15.33b	48.77±2.54a
Y5	4.36±0.33d	2.91±0.12e	94.03±3.61e	17.87±0.68e	170.5±7.37c	316.63±10.69h	30.17±1.91ef
Y10	4.56±0.21c	2.95±0.20e	99.87±4.35d	17.37±0.95e	115.27±6.47f	333.57±12.81g	32.1±1.13e
Y20	4.67±0.22c	3.27±0.09d	101.83±5.32cd	9.87±0.42g	91.53±3.38g	411±16.35f	32.33±1.45e
J5	4.38±0.31d	3.05±0.08e	106.2±4.78c	22.07±1.21d	174.43±8.64c	489.93±15.75e	29.87±1.13f
J10	4.41±0.28d	3.97±0.11c	107.2±6.42c	19.63±1.30e	136.8±5.41d	771.37±20.35c	36.43±1.22c
J20	5.11±0.39b	4.41±0.09b	140.8±7.26b	14.77±0.55f	129.23±6.12e	893.53±19.67a	41.37±2.31b
NCF	4.41±0.15d	2.33±0.07f	157.83±9.32a	46.23±2.36a	193.23±8.51a	261.13±13.25j	29.2±1.45f
CK	4.26±0.56e	2.52±0.09f	90.13±3.15f	28.17±0.45b	196.83±9.36a	288.5±9.38i	29.7±1.23f
处理	有效硫/(mg/kg)	锌/(mg/kg)	铜/(mg/kg)	铁/(mg/kg)	锰/(mg/kg)	有效硼/(mg/kg)
Q5	26.78±1.05e	3.83±0.05e	0.63±0.01d	38.9±1.31e	59.45±2.46d	0.59±0.03d
Q10	26.79±1.08e	6.5±0.03b	0.74±0.01c	39±1.21e	82.76±1.15b	0.61±0.05cd
Q20	30.97±1.13c	8.52±0.04a	1.25±0.02a	49.43±2.35c	104.49±4.23a	0.8±0.03a
Y5	25.23±1.38e	3.38±0.03e	0.53±0.01e	39.7±1.26e	45.89±2.32e	0.62±0.01c
Y10	28.86±1.51d	3.44±0.01e	0.57±0.01e	47.7±2.30c	73.4±3.21c	0.65±0.02c
Y20	30.2±2.33c	4.17±0.05d	0.74±0.02c	47.33±2.01c	102.44±5.67a	0.74±0.05b
J5	27.2±1.89e	4.22±0.23d	0.58±0.02e	42.73±2.62d	63.17±2.38d	0.63±0.03c
J10	35.05±1.04b	4.27±0.07d	0.7±0.03c	57.37±2.34b	61.44±2.75d	0.66±0.03c
J20	38.84±0.99a	5.96±0.12c	0.83±0.05b	64.7±2.83a	80.79±3.64b	0.69±0.02b
NCF	28.93±0.75d	2.85±0.03f	0.5±0.02f	30±1.21f	41.19±2.45e	0.51±0.01f
CK	22.09±1.35f	2.88±0.02f	0.42±0.02h	31.33±1.32f	31.36±1.34f	0.57±0.02e