Effects of Organic Nutrients of Different Raw Materials on Soil Properties, Yield and Quality of Tobacco Leaves

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0164

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the improvement effect of different organic fertilizers on continuous cropping tobacco soil, field comparative experiments were carried out at two experimental sites in Jiaxian and Luoning at the same time, and the effects of plant-derived organic fertilizer, animal-derived organic fertilizer, microbial organic fertilizer, carbon-based organic fertilizer and sesame organic fertilizer on the agronomic traits of tobacco plants, soil physical and chemical properties, and yield and quality of flue-cured tobacco leaves were analyzed. The results showed that the application of different organic fertilizers could significantly improve the physical properties of soil in continuous cropping tobacco fields. Compared with the control, the soil bulk density showed a decreasing trend, and the water content showed an increasing trend; compared with the control treatment, tobacco leaves of T5 treatment of Luoning carbon-based organic fertilizer had significantly increased net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, intercellular CO₂ concentration and transpiration rate. The transpiration rate of T5 treatment was significantly higher than that of other treatments, and there was a significant difference among T2, T3 and T6 treatments; different organic fertilizers had different material sources and ingredients, and there were also differences in their improvement effects. Among them, the tobacco leaves treated with Jiaxian carbon-based organic fertilizer T5 had the best quality and good economic properties, the output increased by 15.02% compared with the control treatment, the output value increased by 20.87%, and the proportion of medium and upper class leaves increased by 12.97%, and the Luoning test site also had similar result. In summary, the application of carbon-based organic fertilizer could effectively improve the soil characteristics of tobacco fields in Jiaxian and Luoning, promote plant growth and significantly improve the yield and quality of tobacco leaves.

Key words: flue-cured tobacco, continuous cropping obstacle, organic fertilizer, soil fertility, organic nutrition, soil improvement

CLC Number:

S158.3

Qiu Lingjun, Li Liang, Zhang Xiang, Li Yafei, Suo Yanyan, Li Qi, Chen Xiuhua, Xu Min, He Lei. Effects of Organic Nutrients of Different Raw Materials on Soil Properties, Yield and Quality of Tobacco Leaves[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(32): 69-75.

Figures/Tables 6

References 21

[1]	张继光, 申国明, 张久权. 烟草连作障碍研究进展[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2011(3):103-107.
[2]	许自成, 肖汉乾, 赵献章. 植烟土壤养分丰缺状况评价的统计方法[J]. 土壤通报, 2004(5):32-35.
[3]	李菊梅, 徐明岗, 秦道珠, 等. 有机肥无机肥配施对稻田氨挥发和水稻产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2005,11(1):51-56. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2005.0109 URL
[4]	美丽, 红梅, 刘鹏飞, 等. 有机肥施用对农田中小型土壤动物群落的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2018,277(5):154-162.
[5]	黄成江, 张晓海, 李天福, 等. 植烟土壤理化性状的适宜性研究进展[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2007,9(1):42-46.
[6]	赵满兴, 周建斌, 陈竹君, 等. 有机肥中可溶性有机碳、氮含量及其特性[J]. 生态学报, 2005,27(1):397-403.
[7]	王立刚, 李维炯, 邱建军, 等. 生物有机肥对作物生长、土壤肥力及产量的效应研究[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2004(5):12-16.
[8]	蔡秋华, 赵正雄, 左进香, 等. 有机肥配施减量化肥对烤烟青枯病及其根际微生物的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2018,51(11):26-33.
[9]	周绪宝, 郝毅, 庞博. 不同改良剂对草莓种植土壤细菌群落的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019(18):60-66.
[10]	陈玉国, 李小杰, 王海涛, 等. 烟田有机肥配施对烤烟抗病性和品质的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2015,44(6):38-42.
[11]	陈贵, 张红梅, 沈亚强, 等. 猪粪与牛粪有机肥对水稻产量、养分利用和土壤肥力的影响[J]. 土壤, 2018(1):59-65.
[12]	吕泽先, 马宏卫, 王贺东, 等. 生物质炭和有机肥施用对芦蒿产量及土壤性质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018,34(1):32-35.
[13]	刘金光, 李孝刚, 王兴祥. 连续施用有机肥对连作花生根际微生物种群和酶活性的影响[J]. 土壤, 2018,50(2):305-311.
[14]	王瑞新, 韩富根, 杨素勤. 烟草化学品质分析方法[M]. 郑州: 河南科学技术出版社, 1990.
[15]	唐继伟, 徐久凯, 温延臣, 等. 长期单施有机肥和化肥对土壤养分和小麦产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019,25(11):1827-1834.
[16]	彭星星, 郭正, 张玉娇, 等. 长期有机肥与化肥配施对渭北旱塬苹果园水分生产力和土壤有机碳含量影响的定量模拟[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018,118(1):37-47.
[17]	徐大兵, 赵书军, 袁家富, 等. 有机肥替代氮化肥对叶菜产量品质和土壤氮淋失的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2018(B11):13-18.
[18]	兰挚谦, 郑文德, 林薇. 不同土壤改良剂对番茄生长和土壤肥力的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2019,48(5):91-98.
[19]	常栋, 马文辉, 张凯, 等. 生物炭基肥对植烟土壤微生物功能多样性的影响[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2018,24(6):62-70.
[20]	施娴, 刘艳红, 王田涛, 等. 有机肥与烟草专用肥配施对植烟土壤微生物和土壤酶活性的动态变化[J]. 土壤通报, 2017(5):108-113
[21]	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.

	处理	移栽后30天				移栽后60天
	处理	株高/cm	茎围/cm	叶片数	叶面积/cm²	株高/cm	茎围/cm	叶片数	叶面积/cm²
郏县	T1	29.2 Aa	4.1 Aa	11.7 Ab	738 Aa	95.7 Ab	9.1 Ab	18.8 Ab	1401.5 Aa
	T2	31.6 Aa	4.3 Aa	12.3 Aa	779.2 Aa	99.8 Aab	10.0 Aa	20.9 Aa	1601.4 Ab
	T3	31.9 Aa	4.3 Aa	12.7 Aa	803.5 Ab	115.3 Aa	10.2 Aa	20.7 Aa	1668.7 Ab
	T4	32.9 Aa	4.3 Aa	13.0 Aa	760.2 Aa	108.8 Aab	11.0 Aa	21.1 Aa	1653.5 Ab
	T5	34.9 Ab	4.4 Aa	13.7 Aa	805.1 Ab	119.3 Aa	11.8 Aa	21.5 Aa	1712.7 Ac
	T6	32.2 Aa	4.1 Aa	12.7 Aa	779.3 Aa	115.4 Aa	9.9 Aa	20.7 Aa	1549.1 Ab
洛宁	T1	31.6 Ba	5.6 Ba	12.6 Aa	764.8 Bc	113.7 Ba	10.8 Bc	20.1 Aa	1336.5 Bc
	T2	34.2 Ba	5.8 Bb	13.3 Aa	866.4 Bb	120.5 Bb	11.4 Bb	20.6 Aa	1488.8 Bb
	T3	36.5 Bb	5.2 Ba	13.8 Aa	834.2 Bbc	122.1 Bb	11.9 Bb	20.2 Aa	1516.3 Bb
	T4	35.8 Bb	5.5 Ba	14.2 Aab	862.2 Bb	124.2 Bb	12.5 Ba	21.8 Ab	1666.4 Aa
	T5	38.7 Bc	5.3 Ba	15.7A c	892.6 Bab	126.1 Bc	12.8 Ba	21.6 Ab	1674.8 Aa
	T6	36.2 Bb	5.1 Ba	14.4 Aab	842.7 Bb	122.6 Bb	12.2 Ba	20.5 Aa	1523.2 Ab

	处理	移栽后30天				移栽后60天
	处理	株高/cm	茎围/cm	叶片数	叶面积/cm²	株高/cm	茎围/cm	叶片数	叶面积/cm²
郏县	T1	29.2 Aa	4.1 Aa	11.7 Ab	738 Aa	95.7 Ab	9.1 Ab	18.8 Ab	1401.5 Aa
	T2	31.6 Aa	4.3 Aa	12.3 Aa	779.2 Aa	99.8 Aab	10.0 Aa	20.9 Aa	1601.4 Ab
	T3	31.9 Aa	4.3 Aa	12.7 Aa	803.5 Ab	115.3 Aa	10.2 Aa	20.7 Aa	1668.7 Ab
	T4	32.9 Aa	4.3 Aa	13.0 Aa	760.2 Aa	108.8 Aab	11.0 Aa	21.1 Aa	1653.5 Ab
	T5	34.9 Ab	4.4 Aa	13.7 Aa	805.1 Ab	119.3 Aa	11.8 Aa	21.5 Aa	1712.7 Ac
	T6	32.2 Aa	4.1 Aa	12.7 Aa	779.3 Aa	115.4 Aa	9.9 Aa	20.7 Aa	1549.1 Ab
洛宁	T1	31.6 Ba	5.6 Ba	12.6 Aa	764.8 Bc	113.7 Ba	10.8 Bc	20.1 Aa	1336.5 Bc
	T2	34.2 Ba	5.8 Bb	13.3 Aa	866.4 Bb	120.5 Bb	11.4 Bb	20.6 Aa	1488.8 Bb
	T3	36.5 Bb	5.2 Ba	13.8 Aa	834.2 Bbc	122.1 Bb	11.9 Bb	20.2 Aa	1516.3 Bb
	T4	35.8 Bb	5.5 Ba	14.2 Aab	862.2 Bb	124.2 Bb	12.5 Ba	21.8 Ab	1666.4 Aa
	T5	38.7 Bc	5.3 Ba	15.7A c	892.6 Bab	126.1 Bc	12.8 Ba	21.6 Ab	1674.8 Aa
	T6	36.2 Bb	5.1 Ba	14.4 Aab	842.7 Bb	122.6 Bb	12.2 Ba	20.5 Aa	1523.2 Ab

处理	净光合速率/[μmol CO₂/(m²·s)]	气孔导度/[mol/(m²·s)]	胞间CO₂浓度/(μmol/mol)	蒸腾速率/[mmol/(m²·s)]
T1	24.5 c	0.31 c	255.8 a	5.84 d
T2	27.1 b	0.44 b	242.3 b	6.42 c
T3	28.2 a	0.47 b	234.7 c	7.24 b
T4	29.6 a	0.55 a	231.6 c	7.85 a
T5	29.7 a	0.56 a	243.3 b	7.96 a
T6	29.1 a	0.51 a	240.6 b	7.48 b

处理	净光合速率/[μmol CO₂/(m²·s)]	气孔导度/[mol/(m²·s)]	胞间CO₂浓度/(μmol/mol)	蒸腾速率/[mmol/(m²·s)]
T1	24.5 c	0.31 c	255.8 a	5.84 d
T2	27.1 b	0.44 b	242.3 b	6.42 c
T3	28.2 a	0.47 b	234.7 c	7.24 b
T4	29.6 a	0.55 a	231.6 c	7.85 a
T5	29.7 a	0.56 a	243.3 b	7.96 a
T6	29.1 a	0.51 a	240.6 b	7.48 b

	处理	烟碱/%	总氮/%	还原糖/%	总糖/%	钾/%	氯/%	糖碱比	氮碱比	钾氯比	两糖比
郏县	T1	3.28 Aa	2.90 Aa	19.00 Ac	20.21 Ab	1.16 Ac	0.87 Aa	6.16	0.88	1.33	1.06
	T2	3.08 Ab	2.68 Aab	21.54 Ab	23.27 Ab	1.44 Ab	0.74 Aa	7.56	0.87	1.95	1.08
	T3	3.12 Ab	2.48 Ab	19.31 Ab	22.67 Ab	1.74 Aab	0.78 Aa	7.27	0.79	2.23	1.17
	T4	3.02 Ab	2.57 Aab	23.57 Aa	26.71 Aa	2.05 Aa	0.69 Aab	8.84	0.85	2.97	1.13
	T5	2.81 Ac	2.15 Ac	20.52 Ab	22.76 Ab	1.95 Aa	0.69 Aab	8.10	0.77	2.83	1.11
	T6	3.01 Ab	2.39 Ab	23.44 Aa	25.69 Aa	1.45 Ab	0.57 Ab	8.53	0.79	2.54	1.10
洛宁	T1	2.87 Aa	1.83 Ba	18.31 Ac	21.30 Bb	1.49 Bc	0.49 Bb	7.42	0.64	3.04	1.16
	T2	2.66 Ba	1.84 Ba	19.94 Bb	21.23 Bb	1.89 Bb	0.42 Ba	7.98	0.69	4.50	1.06
	T3	2.74 Ba	1.63 Bb	22.05 Ba	24.76 Ba	1.81 Ab	0.41 Ba	9.04	0.59	4.41	1.12
	T4	2.49 Bb	1.59 Bb	20.37 Ba	20.42 Bc	1.95 Aa	0.40 Ba	8.20	0.64	4.88	1.00
	T5	2.23 Bb	1.58 Bb	21.97 Ba	23.94 Aa	1.98 Aa	0.41 Ba	10.74	0.71	4.83	1.09
	T6	2.04 Bc	1.78 Ba	20.56 Ba	22.99 Bab	1.76 Bb	0.52 Bb	11.27	0.87	3.38	1.12