Evaluation of Cultivated Land Soil Fertility Based on Membership Function and Principal Component Analysis

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0063

Abstract

Abstract:

The soil fertility of cultivated land in Gaomi City of Shandong Province was investigated and the spatial distribution of soil fertility was clarified. Eight soil fertility indexes, including soil pH, organic matter, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, total potassium, alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen, available phosphorus and available potassium, were acquired by gridded sampling and analysis of surface soil. The membership value of each index was determined by the membership function model of fuzzy mathematics, and the weight of each index was determined by principal component analysis. The integrated soil fertility index was calculated using membership value and weight, and then interpolated for mapping. The results showed that the soil in the study area was mainly alkaline, accounting for 37.77% of the total samples, followed by neutral, accounting for 29.52% of the total samples. Organic matter, alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen and available potassium were mainly insufficient, total nitrogen and total potassium were mainly medium, and total phosphorus and available phosphorus were mainly rich. The membership value of organic matter and total nitrogen were significantly lower than that of other indexes, showing they were the main limiting factors of cultivated land soil fertility. Total nitrogen had the maximum weight value and contributed the most to soil fertility. Alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen had the minimum weight value and contributed the least to soil fertility. In the study area, the spatial distribution of integrated soil fertility index of cultivated land was mainly medium.

Key words: cultivated land, membership function, principal component analysis, integrated soil fertility index, fertility evaluation

JIANG Bing, WANG Songtao, SUN Zengbing, ZHANG Hairui, WANG Jian, LIU Yang. Evaluation of Cultivated Land Soil Fertility Based on Membership Function and Principal Component Analysis[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(2): 22-27.

Figures/Tables 9

References 30

[1]	郭鑫年, 周涛, 纪立东, 等. 宁夏中部干旱带土壤肥力综合评价——以同心县为例[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(15):66-73.
[2]	张君, 蔡德宝, 杨树琼, 等. 基于主成分和聚类分析的丹江口水源区农田土壤肥力质量评价——以淅川县为例[J]. 河南农业科学, 2021, 50(4):79-87.
[3]	裴小龙, 韩小龙, 钱建利, 等. 自然资源综合观测视角下的土壤肥力评价指标[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(10):1953-1964. doi: 10.18402/resci.2020.10.12
[4]	赵满兴, 曹阳阳, 焦佳斌, 等. 延安新区(北区)道路绿地土壤肥力质量评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(27):130-136.
[5]	王远鹏, 黄晶, 柳开楼, 等. 东北典型县域稻田土壤肥力评价及其空间变异[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(2):256-266.
[6]	马光跃, 卢桂宾, 陈红玉, 等. 临猗县冬枣园土壤肥力综合评价[J]. 北方园艺, 2021, 45(20):90-96.
[7]	唐健, 赵隽宇, 覃祚玉, 等. 1993—2018年广西桉树主产区土壤肥力演变特征分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(1):94-99.
[8]	黄先飞, 王莉霞, 龚宁, 等. 剑河县水田及旱地的土壤肥力特征与评价[J]. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(7):1510-1516.
[9]	吴玉红, 田霄鸿, 同延安, 等. 基于主成分分析的土壤肥力综合指数评价[J]. 生态学杂志, 2010, 29(1):173-180.
[10]	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.
[11]	章海波, 骆永明, 赵其国, 等. 香港土壤研究Ⅵ.基于改进层次分析法的土壤肥力质量综合评价[J]. 土壤学报, 2006, 43(4):577-583.
[12]	蔡祖聪. 浅谈“十四五”土壤肥力与土壤养分循环分支学科发展战略[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(5):1128-1136.
[13]	DD2005-03.生态地球化学评价样品分析技术要求(试行)[S].
[14]	汪璇, 卞建锋, 杨民烽, 等. 基于综合赋权法的四川省烤烟化学成分可用性时空差异评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(22):131-138.
[15]	管东生, 何坤志, 陈玉娟. 广州城市绿地土壤特征及其对树木生长的影响[J]. 环境科学研究, 1998, 11(4):53-56.
[16]	DZ/T 0295-2016.土地质量地球化学评价规范[S].
[17]	管孝艳, 王少丽, 高占义, 等. 盐渍化灌区土壤盐分的时空变异特征及其与地下水埋深的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2012, 32(4):198-206.
[18]	崔潇潇, 高原, 吕贻忠. 北京市大兴区土壤肥力的空间变异[J]. 农业工程学报, 2010, 26(9):327-333.
[19]	马芊红, 张光辉, 耿韧, 等. 我国东部水蚀区坡耕地土壤质量现状分析[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2017, 15(3):36-42.
[20]	胡红青, 贺纪正, 高彦征. K⁺浓度、pH和离子强度对湖北省几种土壤吸附K⁺的影响[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 1999, 18(3):27-31.
[21]	于君宝, 刘景双, 王金达, 等. 典型黑土pH值变化对营养元素有效态含量的影响研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2003, 34(5):404-408.
[22]	赵全桂, 卢树昌, 吴德敏, 等. 施肥投入对招远农田土壤酸化及养分变化的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2008, 24(1):301-306.
[23]	刘骞. 盐碱稻田熟化过程中土壤有机碳变化及其影响因素研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2020.
[24]	林帅, 闫伟, 贾学文, 等. 毛乌素沙地不同林型下土壤肥力综合评价[J]. 北方园艺, 2019, 43(15):91-98.
[25]	广建芳, 邵孝候, 赵廷超, 等. 黔西南植烟土壤pH值分布与主要养分的相关关系[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(9):280-283.
[26]	张玲玉, 赵学强, 沈仁芳. 土壤酸化及其生态效应[J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(6):1900-1908.
[27]	张倩, 韩贵琳, 柳满, 等. 贵州普定喀斯特关键带土壤磷分布特征及其控制因素[J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(2):321-328.
[28]	姜冰, 刘阳, 颜丙鹏. 青州市表层土壤元素地球化学组合特征研究[J]. 山东国土资源, 2018, 34(9):49-54.
[29]	侯云鹏, 王立春, 李前, 等. 覆膜滴灌条件下基于玉米产量和土壤磷素平衡的磷肥适用量研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(20):3573-3584.
[30]	李晓琴, 秦富仓, 郑硕, 等. 内蒙古黄土丘陵区土地利用与土壤肥力的关系[J]. 北方园艺, 2019, 43(24):102-110.

土壤肥力指标	丰富	较丰富	中等	较缺乏	缺乏
有机质/(g/kg)	>40	30~40	20~30	10~20	≤10
全氮/(g/kg)	>2	1.5~2	1~1.5	0.75~1	≤0.75
全磷/(g/kg)	>1	0.8~1	0.6~0.8	0.4~0.6	≤0.4
全钾/(g/kg)	>25	20~25	15~20	10~15	≤10
碱解氮/(mg/kg)	>150	120~150	90~120	60~90	≤60
有效磷/(mg/kg)	>40	20~40	10~20	5~10	≤5
速效钾/(mg/kg)	>200	150~200	100~150	50~100	≤50

土壤肥力指标	丰富	较丰富	中等	较缺乏	缺乏
有机质/(g/kg)	>40	30~40	20~30	10~20	≤10
全氮/(g/kg)	>2	1.5~2	1~1.5	0.75~1	≤0.75
全磷/(g/kg)	>1	0.8~1	0.6~0.8	0.4~0.6	≤0.4
全钾/(g/kg)	>25	20~25	15~20	10~15	≤10
碱解氮/(mg/kg)	>150	120~150	90~120	60~90	≤60
有效磷/(mg/kg)	>40	20~40	10~20	5~10	≤5
速效钾/(mg/kg)	>200	150~200	100~150	50~100	≤50

土壤肥力指标	转折点				隶属度函数
土壤肥力指标	L	O₁	O₂	U	隶属度函数
有机质/(g/kg)	10			40	戒上型
全氮/(g/kg)	0.75			2
全磷/(g/kg)	0.4			1
全钾/(g/kg)	10			25
碱解氮/(mg/kg)	60			150
有效磷/(mg/kg)	5			40
速效钾/(mg/kg)	50			200
pH	5.0	6.5	7.5	8.5	峰值型

土壤肥力指标	转折点				隶属度函数
土壤肥力指标	L	O₁	O₂	U	隶属度函数
有机质/(g/kg)	10			40	戒上型
全氮/(g/kg)	0.75			2
全磷/(g/kg)	0.4			1
全钾/(g/kg)	10			25
碱解氮/(mg/kg)	60			150
有效磷/(mg/kg)	5			40
速效钾/(mg/kg)	50			200
pH	5.0	6.5	7.5	8.5	峰值型

土壤肥力指标	最大值	最小值	平均值	标准差	变异系数/%
有机质/(g/kg)	56.24	2.1	16.66	6.73	40.41
全氮/(g/kg)	3.83	0.02	1.03	0.36	34.69
全磷/(g/kg)	10.41	0.26	0.93	0.65	69.69
全钾/(g/kg)	25.7	14.8	18.97	1.42	7.50
碱解氮/(mg/kg)	927.04	8.91	117.48	76.17	64.83
有效磷/(mg/kg)	1191.1	1.3	46.48	71.04	152.84
速效钾/(mg/kg)	5107.18	31.48	168.34	286.94	170.45
pH	8.8	4.26	7.08	1.07	15.07