Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (1): 94-99.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb20200200114
Special Issue: 园艺
Previous Articles Next Articles
Tang Jian(), Zhao Junyu, Qin Zuoyu, Wang Huili, Qin Qiyun, Zhao Zehong()
Received:
2020-02-17
Revised:
2020-04-20
Online:
2021-01-05
Published:
2020-12-25
Contact:
Zhao Zehong
E-mail:21712104@qq.com;24459a91309@qq.com
CLC Number:
Tang Jian, Zhao Junyu, Qin Zuoyu, Wang Huili, Qin Qiyun, Zhao Zehong. Soil Fertility Evolution Characteristics in Main Eucalyptus Producing Areas of Guangxi: 1993-2018[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(1): 94-99.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb20200200114
地域 | 市 | 县、区、自治州 | 样点数 | 土壤类型 |
---|---|---|---|---|
桂东区 | 贵港市 | 桂平县、港南区 | 64 | 黄壤 |
玉林市 | 博白县、福锦区、陆川县 | 103 | 红壤 | |
梧州市 | 藤县、苍梧县、岑溪县 | 78 | 红壤 | |
贺州市 | 八步区、昭平县、平桂区 | 68 | 赤红壤 | |
桂西区 | 河池市 | 凤山县、天峨县、巴马县 | 83 | 黄壤 |
百色市 | 田林县、那坡县、平果 | 77 | 黄红壤 | |
桂南区 | 北海市 | 合浦县、浦北县 | 35 | 红壤 |
南宁市 | 武鸣区、江南区、兴宁区、宾阳县 | 149 | 红壤 | |
崇左市 | 宁明县、扶绥县 | 44 | 红壤 | |
钦州市 | 钦北区、钦南区 | 51 | 赤红壤 | |
桂北区 | 桂林市 | 阳朔县、全州县、龙胜 | 85 | 黄壤 |
桂中区 | 柳州市 | 柳江区、鹿寨县、城中区 | 93 | 黄红壤 |
来宾市 | 武宣区 | 18 | 黄壤 |
地域 | 市 | 县、区、自治州 | 样点数 | 土壤类型 |
---|---|---|---|---|
桂东区 | 贵港市 | 桂平县、港南区 | 64 | 黄壤 |
玉林市 | 博白县、福锦区、陆川县 | 103 | 红壤 | |
梧州市 | 藤县、苍梧县、岑溪县 | 78 | 红壤 | |
贺州市 | 八步区、昭平县、平桂区 | 68 | 赤红壤 | |
桂西区 | 河池市 | 凤山县、天峨县、巴马县 | 83 | 黄壤 |
百色市 | 田林县、那坡县、平果 | 77 | 黄红壤 | |
桂南区 | 北海市 | 合浦县、浦北县 | 35 | 红壤 |
南宁市 | 武鸣区、江南区、兴宁区、宾阳县 | 149 | 红壤 | |
崇左市 | 宁明县、扶绥县 | 44 | 红壤 | |
钦州市 | 钦北区、钦南区 | 51 | 赤红壤 | |
桂北区 | 桂林市 | 阳朔县、全州县、龙胜 | 85 | 黄壤 |
桂中区 | 柳州市 | 柳江区、鹿寨县、城中区 | 93 | 黄红壤 |
来宾市 | 武宣区 | 18 | 黄壤 |
特征指标 | 统计分析项 | 1993年 | 1998年 | 2003年 | 2008年 | 2013年 | 2018年 | 变异系数/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
pH | 极大值 | 8.67 | 8.05 | 8.54 | 8.54 | 7.95 | 6.71 | 16.54 |
极小值 | 3.32 | 3.95 | 3.99 | 3.24 | 3.49 | 4.29 | ||
均值 | 4.83a | 4.77a | 4.83a | 4.48c | 4.57b | 4.63b | ||
标准差 | 1.21 | 0.64 | 0.79 | 1.01 | 0.65 | 0.35 | ||
有机质/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 43.22 | 38.73 | 44.09 | 38.84 | 39.52 | 39.27 | 49.56 |
极小值 | 4.68 | 7.39 | 1.95 | 3.51 | 1.27 | 5.61 | ||
均值 | 23.41b | 28.32b | 26.23b | 29.22a | 25.23b | 17.98c | ||
标准差 | 11.13 | 12.63 | 13.61 | 17.83 | 16.07 | 7.71 | ||
全氮/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 4.35 | 2.54 | 3.83 | 4.76 | 4.07 | 4.83 | 44.82 |
极小值 | 0.21 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.22 | 0.04 | 0.38 | ||
均值 | 2.11a | 1.12b | 1.27b | 1.37b | 1.57b | 1.98a | ||
标准差 | 0.46 | 0.51 | 0.56 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.33 | ||
全磷/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 2.77 | 1.84 | 2.21 | 1.49 | 2.41 | 2.12 | 64.47 |
极小值 | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.29 | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.12 | ||
均值 | 1.12b | 1.16b | 1.41a | 0.71c | 0.83c | 0.75c | ||
标准差 | 0.67 | 0.93 | 0.84 | 0.47 | 0.79 | 0.16 | ||
全钾/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 33.43 | 27.76 | 21.98 | 26.81 | 27.54 | 32.58 | 63.22 |
极小值 | 1.04 | 1.59 | 1.27 | 2.52 | 2.81 | 1.65 | ||
均值 | 7.73c | 14.85a | 11.59b | 15.52a | 15.27a | 9.27c | ||
标准差 | 4.33 | 7.71 | 5.89 | 9.85 | 11.03 | 7.87 | ||
碱解氮/(mg/kg) | 极大值 | 167.00 | 183.29 | 175.61 | 131.30 | 121.20 | 155.76 | 52.91 |
极小值 | 29.00 | 19.41 | 23.40 | 16.31 | 17.71 | 24.10 | ||
均值 | 106.29b | 113.86b | 132.61a | 78.21d | 91.86c | 78.25d | ||
标准差 | 44.43 | 58.26 | 78.72 | 50.76 | 65.18 | 22.93 | ||
有效磷/(mg/kg) | 极大值 | 7.21 | 9.33 | 8.90 | 5.11 | 7.41 | 10.81 | 28.49 |
极小值 | 0.23 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.61 | ||
均值 | 2.99c | 5.28a | 2.13d | 2.77c | 3.67b | 5.62a | ||
标准差 | 1.03 | 0.53 | 0.72 | 0.26 | 0.75 | 1.93 | ||
速效钾/(mg/kg) | 极大值 | 151.39 | 148.61 | 100.41 | 108.88 | 116.80 | 126.05 | 32.11 |
极小值 | 7.13 | 5.60 | 6.83 | 12.19 | 3.33 | 5.31 | ||
均值 | 123.29a | 46.83b | 29.74c | 40.61b | 42.61b | 56.62b | ||
标准差 | 24.43 | 13.47 | 9.78 | 18.32 | 11.59 | 22.04 |
特征指标 | 统计分析项 | 1993年 | 1998年 | 2003年 | 2008年 | 2013年 | 2018年 | 变异系数/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
pH | 极大值 | 8.67 | 8.05 | 8.54 | 8.54 | 7.95 | 6.71 | 16.54 |
极小值 | 3.32 | 3.95 | 3.99 | 3.24 | 3.49 | 4.29 | ||
均值 | 4.83a | 4.77a | 4.83a | 4.48c | 4.57b | 4.63b | ||
标准差 | 1.21 | 0.64 | 0.79 | 1.01 | 0.65 | 0.35 | ||
有机质/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 43.22 | 38.73 | 44.09 | 38.84 | 39.52 | 39.27 | 49.56 |
极小值 | 4.68 | 7.39 | 1.95 | 3.51 | 1.27 | 5.61 | ||
均值 | 23.41b | 28.32b | 26.23b | 29.22a | 25.23b | 17.98c | ||
标准差 | 11.13 | 12.63 | 13.61 | 17.83 | 16.07 | 7.71 | ||
全氮/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 4.35 | 2.54 | 3.83 | 4.76 | 4.07 | 4.83 | 44.82 |
极小值 | 0.21 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.22 | 0.04 | 0.38 | ||
均值 | 2.11a | 1.12b | 1.27b | 1.37b | 1.57b | 1.98a | ||
标准差 | 0.46 | 0.51 | 0.56 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.33 | ||
全磷/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 2.77 | 1.84 | 2.21 | 1.49 | 2.41 | 2.12 | 64.47 |
极小值 | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.29 | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.12 | ||
均值 | 1.12b | 1.16b | 1.41a | 0.71c | 0.83c | 0.75c | ||
标准差 | 0.67 | 0.93 | 0.84 | 0.47 | 0.79 | 0.16 | ||
全钾/(g/kg) | 极大值 | 33.43 | 27.76 | 21.98 | 26.81 | 27.54 | 32.58 | 63.22 |
极小值 | 1.04 | 1.59 | 1.27 | 2.52 | 2.81 | 1.65 | ||
均值 | 7.73c | 14.85a | 11.59b | 15.52a | 15.27a | 9.27c | ||
标准差 | 4.33 | 7.71 | 5.89 | 9.85 | 11.03 | 7.87 | ||
碱解氮/(mg/kg) | 极大值 | 167.00 | 183.29 | 175.61 | 131.30 | 121.20 | 155.76 | 52.91 |
极小值 | 29.00 | 19.41 | 23.40 | 16.31 | 17.71 | 24.10 | ||
均值 | 106.29b | 113.86b | 132.61a | 78.21d | 91.86c | 78.25d | ||
标准差 | 44.43 | 58.26 | 78.72 | 50.76 | 65.18 | 22.93 | ||
有效磷/(mg/kg) | 极大值 | 7.21 | 9.33 | 8.90 | 5.11 | 7.41 | 10.81 | 28.49 |
极小值 | 0.23 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.61 | ||
均值 | 2.99c | 5.28a | 2.13d | 2.77c | 3.67b | 5.62a | ||
标准差 | 1.03 | 0.53 | 0.72 | 0.26 | 0.75 | 1.93 | ||
速效钾/(mg/kg) | 极大值 | 151.39 | 148.61 | 100.41 | 108.88 | 116.80 | 126.05 | 32.11 |
极小值 | 7.13 | 5.60 | 6.83 | 12.19 | 3.33 | 5.31 | ||
均值 | 123.29a | 46.83b | 29.74c | 40.61b | 42.61b | 56.62b | ||
标准差 | 24.43 | 13.47 | 9.78 | 18.32 | 11.59 | 22.04 |
[1] | 黄国勤, 赵其国. 广西桉树种植的历史、现状、生态问题及应对策略[J]. 生态学报, 2014,34(18). |
[2] | 邓富春, 覃其云, 颜权, 等. 桉树人工林土壤肥力变化及其综合评价[J]. 广西林业科学, 2013,42(2):148-152. |
[3] | 卢献健, 黄俞惠, 晏红波, 等. 基于GEE平台广西桉树快速提取研究[J]. 林业资源管理, 2019(5):52-60,75. |
[4] | 苏贻攀. 桉树连栽对土壤养分含量的影响及应对措施[J]. 福建林业科技, 2016,43(2). |
[5] | 吕小燕, 何斌, 吴永富, 等. 连栽桉树人工林土壤有机碳氮储量及其分布特征[J]. 热带作物学报, 2017(10):111-117. |
[6] | Vihervaara P, Marjokorpi A, Kumpula T, et al. Ecosystem services of fast-growing tree plantations: A case study on integrating social valuations with land-use changes in Uruguay[J]. Forest Policy and Economics, 2012,14(1):68. |
[7] | 温远光, 刘世荣, 陈放. 连栽对桉树人工林下物种多样性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2005(9):1667-1671. |
[8] | 叶绍明, 温远光, 杨梅, 等. 连栽桉树人工林植物多样性与土壤理化性质的关联分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2010,24(4):246-250,256. |
[9] | 郭琦, 王新杰, 衣晓丹. 不同林龄杉木纯林林下生物量与土壤理化性质的相关性[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2014(3):85-88. |
[10] | 唐健, 覃祚玉, 王会利, 等. 广西杉木主产区连栽杉木林地土壤肥力综合评价[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2016(1):30-35. |
[11] | Parfitt R L, Ross D J. Long-term effects of afforestation with Pinus radiata on soil carbon, nitrogen, and pH: a case study[J]. Soil Research, 2011,49. |
[12] | Wang W, Wang Y, Wang H, et al. Effects of Different Continuous Cropping and Rotation of Poplar Plantation on Soil Nitrogen Bacteria Community and Nitrogen Metabolism[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2016. |
[13] | Lin H, Jing C M, Wang J H . The Influence of Long-Term Fertilization on Soil Acidification[J]. Advanced Materials Research, 2014,955-959:3552-3555. |
[14] | 谭宏伟, 杨尚东, 吴俊, 等. 红壤区桉树人工林与不同林分土壤微生物活性及细菌多样性的比较[J]. 土壤学报, 2014,51(3):575-584. |
[15] | 廖观荣, 林书蓉, 李淑仪, 等. 雷州半岛桉树人工林地力退化的成因与防治措施[J]. 土壤与环境, 2002(3):268-273. |
[16] | 李朝婷, 周晓果, 温远光, 等. 桉树高代次连栽对林下植物、土壤肥力和酶活性的影响[J]. 广西科学, 2019,26(2):176-187. |
[17] | 史进纳, 蒋代华, 肖斌, 等. 不同连栽代次桉树林土壤有机碳演变特征[J]. 热带作物学报, 2015,36(4):748-752. |
[18] | 龚珊珊, 廖善刚. 桉树人工林与天然林土壤养分的对比研究[J]. 江苏林业科技, 2009,36(3):1-4. |
[19] | 曹继钊. 广西桉树人工林土壤肥力状况及施肥效应研究[D]. 南宁:广西大学, 2011. |
[20] | 潘会彪, 邓明军, 黄庆一, 等. 基于空间分析的桉树人工林土壤肥力评价[J]. 西部林业科学, 2018,47(3):72-77. |
[21] | 王嘉琛, 赵隽宇, 黄康庭, 等. 桂北土壤肥力质量对尾叶桉人工林连栽连栽的响应[J]. 西南林业大学学报:自然科学, 2019,39(1):112-119. |
[22] | 段春燕, 何成新, 徐广平, 等. 桂北不同林龄桉树人工林土壤养分及生物学特性[J]. 热带作物学报, 2019,40(6):1213-1222. |
[23] | 张万儒, 杨光左, 屠星南, 等. LY/T 1210-1275—1999,森林土壤分析方法[S]. 北京:中国标准出版社, 2000. |
[24] | 王建国, 杨林章, 单艳红. 模糊数学在土壤质量评价中的应用研究[J]. 土壤学报, 2001,38(2):176-183. |
[25] | 刘洁, 李茗, 吴立潮. 南方红壤区油茶林土壤肥力质量指标及评价[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2017,32(4):73-80. |
[26] | 徐建明, 张甘霖, 谢正苗, 等. 土壤质量指标与评价[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2010: 15. |
[27] |
Berthrong S T, Jobbágy E G, Jackson R B. A global meta-analysis of soil exchangeable cations, pH, carbon, and nitrogen with afforestation[J]. Ecological Applications, 2009,19(8):2228-2241.
URL pmid: 20014590 |
[28] | Barak P, Jobe B O, Krueger A R, et al. Effects of long-term soil acidification due to nitrogen fertilizer inputs in Wisconsin[J]. Plant & Soil, 1997,197(1):61-69. |
[29] | Parfitt R L, Percival H J, Dahlgren R A, et al. Soil and solution chemistry under pasture and radiata pine in New Zealand[J]. Plant & Soil, 1997,191(2):279-290. |
[30] | 刘红英. 连栽桉树人工林土壤酶活性及其与土壤养分的关系[D]. 南宁:广西大学, 2013. |
[31] | Yang Y H, Fang J Y, Guo D L, et al. Vertical patterns of soil carbon, nitrogen and carbon: nitrogen stoichiometry in Tibetan grasslands[J]. Biogeosciences Discussions, 2010,9(6):631. |
[32] | 许宇星, 王志超, 竹万宽, 等. 不同品种桉树林生活叶-凋落物-土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版, 2018(3):94-100,110. |
[33] | 许丽群. 巨尾桉生长规律[J]. 北京农业, 2013(36):142-143. |
[34] | 冯桂乾, 刘再兴. 林地不同清理方式对尾巨桉萌芽更新比较分析[J]. 绿色科技, 2014(2):117-119. |
[35] | 杨旭初, 叶会财, 李大明, 等. 基于模糊数学和主成分分析的长期施肥红壤旱地土壤肥力评价[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2018(3):79-84. |
[36] | 冉圆圆, 刘洪斌. 重庆市不同地貌甘薯土壤养分丰缺指标及施肥方案[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2017(5):44-50,72. |
[37] | 刘先, 索沛蘅, 杜大俊, 等. 连栽杉木人工林参与土壤碳氮转化过程酶活性及其与土壤理化因子相关性[J]. 生态学报, 2020(1):1-10. |
[1] | SUN Shuqing, DING Wei, SUN Rui, ZHANG Xicai, LAN Guoyu, CHEN Wei, YANG Chuan, WU Zhixiang. Soil Bacterial Community of Rubber Plantations of Different Ages of Stand: Composition and Diversity Study [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(9): 93-100. |
[2] | LI Yahua, ZHANG Xiangqian, AN Qi, WU Di, LIU Zhanyong, SUN Feng, ZHANG Dejian, GAO Min, ZHANG Guoying, XING Jun. Evaluation Methods of Cultivated Land Fertility and Their Practical Application: Research Progress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(15): 60-68. |
[3] | Chen Jianfeng, Liu Jun, He Zhenghai, Chen Hua, Yin Mei, Wang Zhiyuan, Wang Wei, Fu Libo. Fertilization System of Nutrient Critical Value for Optimum Yield of Tea Plantation in South Yunnan [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(8): 79-83. |
[4] | Yu Zhenxu, Li Yifan, Qin Guanghua, Song Yumin, Qiao Yuling, Ma Ling. Optimization of Fertilizing Scheme for Fast-growing Plantation of Black Locust Clones [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(25): 35-40. |
[5] | Lu Cuixiang, Su Yuanyu, Guo Dongqiang, Li Changrong, Sun Xi, Li Jianfan, Chen Jianbo. A Study on the Difference of Wood Tissue Proportion of Eucalyptus Clones [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(22): 42-48. |
[6] | Cheng Qiangqiang, Wang Zhe, Yi Facheng, Sun Qing, Zhang Yiping, Jiang Hu, Wang Chengxia. Evaluation and Source Analysis of Soil Potential Toxic Elements Pollution in Tea Garden in Yibin City [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(18): 75-84. |
[7] | Fang Yage, Su Youjian, Liao Wanyou, Zhang Yongli, Luo Yi, Sun Yulong, Liao Jun, Wang Yejun. Influencing Factors of N2O Emission from Tea Garden Soil and Emission Reduction Measures [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(15): 72-77. |
[8] | Lin Weipeng, Zheng Hai, Zhang Taijie, Gao Liyang, Ling Caijin, Zhou Qiaoyi, Chen Pengcheng, Lai Ronghui, Liu Shumei, Zhong Yonghui, Gu Yanxia. Investigation and Regional Difference Analysis of Spring Weed Community in Major Tea Areas of Guangdong [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(1): 138-146. |
[9] | Wang Yuchao, Li Hong, Wang Ruijun, Xi Xiaoqian. Transplanting Techniques with Plastic Film Mulching Affect Growth and Fresh Ear Yield of Fresh Corn in Alpine Region [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(5): 14-17. |
[10] | Zhang Qi, Zhang Qingxu, Pang Xiaomin, Wang Haibin, Ye Jianghua, Jia Xiaoli, He Haibin. Herbicide Ingredients in Fermentation Broth of One Strain of Fungi: Analysis [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(35): 106-112. |
[11] | Jiang Hongyan, Chen Shichun, Liu Xiang, Hu Xiang, Peng Ping, Xia Ji’an, Wang Xiaoqing. Forest Ecological Model on the Spider Community and Leafhopper Population in Tea Plantation [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(22): 111-115. |
[12] | Du Zhenyu, Ge Zhongqiang, Liang Yan, Li Zongtai, Lv Leichang, Wang Qinghua. Effects of Stand Density on Understory Vegetation of Platycladus orientalis Plantations in Central Mountainous Area of Shandong [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(22): 19-25. |
[13] | Xu Muguo, Ding Huaping, Liu Zhongmei, Chen Guiliang, Chen Yongchuan, Li Xiaoqing. Measuring Methods of Exchangeable Calcium and Magnesium in Acid and Neutral Soil of Rubber Plantation [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(18): 73-79. |
[14] | Li Xiaoyan, Meng Juan, Niu Ruirui, Zhai Honglian, Xue Pengfei. Soil Nutrient Characteristics of Fraxinus chinensis Plantation in Yellow River Delta Under Different Planting Patterns [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(12): 53-57. |
[15] | Zilin Li, Leifeng Zhao, Yachun Lu, Wenliang Zhou, Gang Luo, Xiaolin Liao, Fuzhao Nian, Dongsheng Fan. Abundance Evaluation of Nutrient Content in Tobacco Soil of Longlin [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(10): 25-32. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||