Performance of Different Soil Conditioners on Planting of Cuimi Kumquat in Rong’an

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0145

Abstract

Abstract:

The purpose of this research is to compare and evaluate the effects of five kinds of soil conditioners used in the cultivation of crispy honey kumquats on neutrally tilled soil of Rong’an County, Liuzhou City, Guangxi Province. In this study, two kinds of new amendments, amino acid-modified biomass ash (MBA) and amino acid-modified wood chips (MSD), and three kinds of commercially available soil amendments, dolomite (DOL), biochar (BC) and potassium humate (HAP) (used as the controls) were used for planting Cuimi kumquat. Optimal soil conditioners were selected from three aspects: the contents of soil available nutrients, the photosynthetic characteristics of leaves during plant growth, and the quality indexes of harvested kumquat fruits. The results showed that among the treatments originated from 5 kinds of soil conditioners, the comprehensive effect of the ‘base fertilizer+ amino acid modified biomass ash’ (CK+MBA) treatment was the best. Under this treatment, the soil alkali hydrolyzable nitrogen, available phosphorus, organic matter and available manganese contents were significantly higher than those of other treatments, the net photosynthetic rate and stomatal conductance of plant leaves were the highest, and the soluble solids content, fruit shape index and solid-acid ratio of fruit were the highest. The second were ‘base fertilizer + dolomite’ (CK+DOL) and ‘base fertilizer + potassium humate’ (CK+HAP) treatments, each treatment had its own advantages and disadvantages, in which CK+DOL treatment had a good effect on the soil available nutrient contents, but would increase the soil available lead and available sodium contents, and CK+HAP treatment had the highest single fruit weight of kumquat fruit, the highest juice yield and vitamin C content. MBA had the best comprehensive effect among the five conditioners, followed by DOL and HAP, which could be preferentially promoted and applied in the production of Cuimi kumquat on neutral soil.

Key words: Cuimi kumquat, soil available nutrients, leaf photosynthesis, fruit quality, amino acid-modified biomass ash, dolomite, potassium humate, biochar

ZHANG Yaoxin, SUN Jiamei, LIU Yu, CHEN Yuqing, CAI Xiongsheng, ZHOU Wenbing, ZHOU Dayun. Performance of Different Soil Conditioners on Planting of Cuimi Kumquat in Rong’an[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(25): 75-84.

Figures/Tables 6

References 32

[4]	CHEN M M, ZHANG S R, LIU L, et al. Combined organic amendments and mineral fertilizer application increase rice yield by improving soil structure, P availability and root growth in saline-alkaline soil[J]. Soil & tillage research, 2021,212:105060.
[5]	MENG X F, GUO J M, ZHENG G D, et al. Combination of low-accumulation kumquat cultivars and amendments to reduce Cd and Pb accumulation in kumquat grown in contaminated soil[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2022,365:132660.
[6]	ONDRASEK G, KRANGEC F, FILIPOVI L, et al. Biomass bottom ash & dolomite similarly ameliorate an acidic low-nutrient soil, improve phytonutrition and growth, but increase Cd accumulation in radish[J]. The science of the total environment, 2021,753:141902.
[7]	ZHANG M Y, ZHANG L, RIAZ M, et al. Biochar amendment improved fruit quality and soil properties and microbial communities at different depths in citrus production[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2021,292:126062.
[8]	LU L, HAN Y, WANG J Y, et al. PBAT/PLA humic acid biodegradable film applied on solar greenhouse tomato plants increased lycopene and decreased total acid contents[J]. Science of the total environment, 2023,871:162077.
[9]	LI Y Y, LV Y, LIAN M, et al. Effects of combined glycine and urea fertilizer application on the photosynthesis, sucrose metabolism, and fruit development of peach[J]. Scientia horticulturae, 2021,289:110504.
[10]	CRUZ N C, RODRIGUES S M, CARVALHO L, et al. Ashes from fluidized bed combustion of residual forest biomass: Recycling to soil as a viable management option[J]. Environmental science and pollution research, 2017,24:14770-14781.
[11]	FLAVIO C S, CRUZ N C, LUIS A C T, et al. Use of biomass ash-based materials as soil fertilisers: Critical review of the existing regulatory framework[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2019,214:112-124.
[12]	WU H P, SUN J M, ZHOU W B, et al. Crop effect and mechanism of amino acid-modified biomass ash in remediation of cadmium-contaminated soil[J]. Environmental science and pollution research, 2023,30:101026-101034.
[13]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(3版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[14]	NOBILE C M, BRIVIN M N, BECQUER T, et al. Phosphorus sorption and availability in an andosol after a decade of organic or mineral fertilizer applications: Importance of pH and organic carbon modifications in soil as compared to phosphorus accumulation[J]. Chemosphere, 2020,239:124709.
[15]	COLLIN S, BASKAR A, GEEVARGHESE D M, et al. Bioaccumulation of lead (Pb) and its effects in plants: A review[J]. Journal of hazardous materials letters, 2022,3:100064.
[16]	MAAS E V. Salinity and citriculture[J]. Tree physiology, 1993,12:195-216.
[17]	陆景陵. 植物营养学(上册)[M]. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2003.
[18]	WANG D B, HU P, TIE N. Responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant activities in Koelreuteria paniculata young plants exposed to manganese stress[J]. South African journal of botany, 2022,147:340-348.
[19]	许大全. 光合作用学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2013.
[20]	林兵, 武胜利, 管文轲, 等. 胡杨叶片的胞间CO₂浓度及气孔和非气孔限制的探究[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2021, 60(13):87-92.
[21]	王磊, 任树梅, 毕勇刚, 等. 土壤水分及有机肥料对番茄叶片光合特性及叶绿素含量影响的试验研究[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2004, 23(2):66-68.
[22]	邓雪花, 喻阳华, 熊康宁, 等. 不同林龄花椒光合特性及对土壤养分的响应[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2022, 42(2):149-157.
[23]	白成科, 王百群, 张希彪, 等. 土壤养分对小偃22叶片光合特性影响的初步研究[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2001, 21(4):56-60.
[24]	SHAABAN M, PENG Q, LIN S, et al. Dolomite application enhances CH₄ uptake in an acidic soil[J]. Catena, 2016,140:9-14.
[25]	LI A Y, GE W Z, LIU L H, et al. Synthesis and application of amine-functionalized MgFe₂O₄-biochar for the adsorption and immobilization of Cd(II) and Pb(II)[J]. Chemical engineering journal, 2022,439:135785.
[26]	WHITTON M M, REN X P, YU S J, et al. Humate application alters microbiota-mineral interactions and assists in pasture dieback recovery[J]. Heliyon, 2023,9:e13327.
[1]	MENG X F, GUO J M, YANG J X, et al. Effects of soil amendments on soil Pb bioavailability and Pb absorption by a low-Pb accumulator kumquat grown in two types of Pb-contaminated soils[J]. Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology, 2021,107:1128-1135.
[2]	LIU M, TAN X, ZHENG M, et al. Modified biochar/humic substance/fertiliser compound soil conditioner for highly efficient improvement of soil fertility and heavy metals remediation in acidic soils[J]. Journal of environmental management, 2023,325:116614.
[3]	YAN B J, ZHANG Y P, WANG Y Z, et al. Biochar amendments combined with organic fertilizer improve maize productivity and mitigate nutrient loss by regulating the C-N-P stoichiometry of soil, microbiome, and enzymes[J]. Chemosphere, 2023,324:138293.
[27]	ZHAI J, BURKE I T, STEWART D I. Beneficial management of biomass combustion ashes[J]. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 2021,151:111555.
[28]	赵泓凯, 张潇屹, 曾慧云, 等. 土壤调理剂对土壤理化性状及不结球白菜生理特性的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2021, 36(Z1):312-319.
[29]	郭喜军, 谢军红, 李玲玲, 等. 氮肥用量及有机无机肥配比对陇中旱农区玉米光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(5):806-816.
[30]	李旭. 减氮施肥对柑橘树体氮素含量、果实品质产量和氮肥利用的影响[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2020.
[31]	EBRAHIMI R, AHMADIAN A, FERDOUSI A, et al. Effect of washing and cooking on nitrate content of potatoes (cv. Diamant) and implications for mitigating human health risk in Iran[J]. Potato research, 2020,63:449-462.
[32]	WANG H D, QU Y, WEN Z J, et al. Interactive effects of irrigation and N fertilization management on fruit yield, quality and water-N productivity of greenhouse cherry tomato[J]. Scientia horticulturae, 2024,328:112895.

处理	有效铁	有效锰	有效铜	有效锌	有效镉	有效铅	有效钠
CK	4.64±1.30b	9.57±0.56bcd	0.17±0.01a	0.77±0.01a	0.01±0.00a	1.31±0.07b	11.24±1.31c
CK+DOL	6.53±0.08ab	7.57±0.13cd	0.23±0.09a	0.96±0.35a	0.00±0.02a	3.70±0.74a	18.50±2.93a
CK+BC	7.21±0.25a	11.66±2.19ab	0.18±0.02a	0.72±0.27a	0.01±0.01a	1.20±0.06b	12.65±0.75bc
CK+HAP	5.02±0.22b	11.05±0.35abc	0.23±0.04a	0.69±0.35a	0.02±0.02a	1.29±0.13b	11.96±0.04bc
CK＋MSD	5.57±0.13ab	7.31±1.49d	0.21±0.04a	0.93±0.16a	0.00±0.00a	1.47±0.23b	13.96±2.57abc
CK+MBA	5.45±0.00ab	11.91±1.63ab	0.18±0.02a	1.02±0.03a	0.03±0.02a	1.25±0.02b	16.89±2.41ab
CK+1/2MBA	5.50±1.17ab	10.42±0.72abcd	0.25±0.01a	0.93±0.19a	0.01±0.01a	1.74±0.19b	11.11±1.15c
1/2CK+MBA	5.44±0.02ab	13.37±1.99a	0.23±0.15a	0.69±0.40a	0.01±0.02a	1.56±0.46b	9.03±3.54c

处理	有效铁	有效锰	有效铜	有效锌	有效镉	有效铅	有效钠
CK	4.64±1.30b	9.57±0.56bcd	0.17±0.01a	0.77±0.01a	0.01±0.00a	1.31±0.07b	11.24±1.31c
CK+DOL	6.53±0.08ab	7.57±0.13cd	0.23±0.09a	0.96±0.35a	0.00±0.02a	3.70±0.74a	18.50±2.93a
CK+BC	7.21±0.25a	11.66±2.19ab	0.18±0.02a	0.72±0.27a	0.01±0.01a	1.20±0.06b	12.65±0.75bc
CK+HAP	5.02±0.22b	11.05±0.35abc	0.23±0.04a	0.69±0.35a	0.02±0.02a	1.29±0.13b	11.96±0.04bc
CK＋MSD	5.57±0.13ab	7.31±1.49d	0.21±0.04a	0.93±0.16a	0.00±0.00a	1.47±0.23b	13.96±2.57abc
CK+MBA	5.45±0.00ab	11.91±1.63ab	0.18±0.02a	1.02±0.03a	0.03±0.02a	1.25±0.02b	16.89±2.41ab
CK+1/2MBA	5.50±1.17ab	10.42±0.72abcd	0.25±0.01a	0.93±0.19a	0.01±0.01a	1.74±0.19b	11.11±1.15c
1/2CK+MBA	5.44±0.02ab	13.37±1.99a	0.23±0.15a	0.69±0.40a	0.01±0.02a	1.56±0.46b	9.03±3.54c

处理	单果重/g	纵径/cm	横径/cm	果形指数	出汁率	可食率
CK	36.40±6.14a	4.26±0.33a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.05bc	0.53±0.02ab	0.66±0.01a
CK+DOL	33.31±4.38a	4.31±0.11a	3.81±0.21a	1.15±0.00ab	0.55±0.01a	0.64±0.02a
CK+BC	34.04±3.66a	4.21±0.08a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.00bc	0.50±0.03bc	0.67±0.02a
CK+HAP	36.42±4.96a	4.35±0.24a	3.87±0.17a	1.12±0.03abc	0.56±0.02a	0.65±0.03a
CK＋MSD	30.38±3.95a	4.05±0.30a	3.75±0.17a	1.08±0.03c	0.47±0.01c	0.64±0.04a
CK+MBA	32.47±1.56a	4.27±0.06a	3.72±0.10a	1.17±0.01a	0.50±0.00bc	0.64±0.03a
CK+1/2MBA	31.09±1.07a	4.09±0.17a	3.71±0.05a	1.08±0.01c	0.47±0.02c	0.66±0.02a
1/2CK+MBA	33.03±3.70a	4.21±0.18a	3.77±0.18a	1.12±0.01abc	0.46±0.02c	0.68±0.01a

处理	单果重/g	纵径/cm	横径/cm	果形指数	出汁率	可食率
CK	36.40±6.14a	4.26±0.33a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.05bc	0.53±0.02ab	0.66±0.01a
CK+DOL	33.31±4.38a	4.31±0.11a	3.81±0.21a	1.15±0.00ab	0.55±0.01a	0.64±0.02a
CK+BC	34.04±3.66a	4.21±0.08a	3.89±0.16a	1.10±0.00bc	0.50±0.03bc	0.67±0.02a
CK+HAP	36.42±4.96a	4.35±0.24a	3.87±0.17a	1.12±0.03abc	0.56±0.02a	0.65±0.03a
CK＋MSD	30.38±3.95a	4.05±0.30a	3.75±0.17a	1.08±0.03c	0.47±0.01c	0.64±0.04a
CK+MBA	32.47±1.56a	4.27±0.06a	3.72±0.10a	1.17±0.01a	0.50±0.00bc	0.64±0.03a
CK+1/2MBA	31.09±1.07a	4.09±0.17a	3.71±0.05a	1.08±0.01c	0.47±0.02c	0.66±0.02a
1/2CK+MBA	33.03±3.70a	4.21±0.18a	3.77±0.18a	1.12±0.01abc	0.46±0.02c	0.68±0.01a