Effects of Different Amounts of Biochar-based Fertilizer on Soil Properties and Yield and Quality of Celery

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0215

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the effects of different biochar-based fertilizers on soil properties and celery yield in facility settings, a plot experiment was used to compare the single application of organic fertilizer (T₁), the single application of biochar (T₂, the amount of biochar was 12 t/hm²), and the combined application of biochar and organic fertilizer (T₃ to T₅, with biochar application rates of 1.5, 3.0 and 6.0 t/hm²) on soil nutrients, celery yield and quality. The results showed that the T₄ treatment had the highest celery yield and the lowest nitrate content, which was beneficial to increasing yield and income. In terms of soil nutrients, the application of biochar increased soil organic matter and available potassium to varying degrees, but reduced soil available phosphorus content and EC value, with little effect on total nitrogen content. The increase in organic matter content compared to T₁was 1.41% to 12.54%, and the increase in available potassium content was 4.13% to 9.81%. Regarding soil microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen, the combined application of biochar and organic fertilizer in all treatments (T₃ to T₅) significantly increased soil microbial biomass nitrogen by 15.60%, 3.24% and 14.40%, respectively; only the T₄ treatment increased soil microbial biomass carbon content compared to T₁. In conclusion, the combined application of biochar and organic fertilizer can improve soil physical and chemical properties and microbial activity to varying degrees, increase celery yield and quality. In the experiment, the application of 12 t/hm² of commercial organic fertilizer and 3.0 t/hm² of biochar had the best overall effect.

Key words: biochar, soil properties, yield, quality, celery

LIU Yu, ZHANG Mengjia, WANG Rui, ZHANG Xuelian, JIN Qiang, YAN Shi, WANG Weirui. Effects of Different Amounts of Biochar-based Fertilizer on Soil Properties and Yield and Quality of Celery[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(2): 141-145.

Figures/Tables 5

References 21

[1]	闫实, 于跃跃, 梁金凤, 等. 京郊设施菜地施肥和土壤肥力现状初探[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2023(5):125-133.
[2]	郭佩瑶, 刘美玲, 曾玉华. 设施土壤连作障碍及其防控措施研究进展[J]. 西北园艺, 2023(2):1-5.
[3]	刘玉学, 刘微, 吴伟祥, 等. 土壤生物质炭环境行为与环境效应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(4):977-982.
[4]	刘世权, 纪永福, 段文倩. 生物质炭调控梭梭根际土壤水分运转及盐分分布特征研究[J]. 生态与资源,2025(8):4-6.
[5]	王亚琼, 牛文全, 李学凯, 等. 生物质炭对日光大棚土壤团聚体结构的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2019, 39(4):190-195.
[6]	杨莉, 勾颖, 文子伟, 等. 生物质炭对连作参地土壤肥力及微生物特性的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2022, 3(6):1244-1253.
[7]	邢存芳, 侯建伟, 杨莉琳. 生物质炭对花椒根际土壤真菌群落的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2023, 54(5):1098-1106.
[8]	朱培蕾, 仇建玲, 周怀文, 等. 化肥减施下不同生物质炭对大棚辣椒生长及产量品质的影响[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2024(6):101-106.
[9]	李大伟, 周加顺, 潘根兴, 等. 生物质炭基肥施用对蔬菜产量和品质以及氮素农学利用率的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2016, 39(3):433-440.
[10]	张影, 刘星, 焦瑞锋, 等. 生物质炭与有机物料配施的土壤培肥效果及对玉米生长的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25(9):1287-1297.
[11]	孙宇龙, 张永利, 苏有健, 等. 生物质炭对土壤物理结构性状和水分特征影响的研究进展[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(23) :25-32.
[12]	马晓霞, 王莲莲, 黎青慧, 等. 长期施肥对玉米生育期土壤微生物量碳氮及酶活性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2012, 32(17):5502-5511.
[13]	ROY S, SINGH J S. Consequences of habitat heterogeneity for availability of nutrients in a dry tropical forest[J]. Journal of ecology, 1994(82):503-509.
[14]	赵泽州, 王晓玲, 李鸿博, 等. 生物质炭基肥缓释性能及对土壤改良的研究进展[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(5):886-897.
[15]	YIN D W, YANG X Y, WANG H Z, et al. Effects of chemical-based fertilizer replacement with biochar-based fertilizer on albic soil nutrient content and maize yield[J]. Open life sciences, 2022(17):517-528.
[16]	方远鹏, 谢晏芬, 赵宇婷, 等. 不同生物质炭基肥施用量对土壤养分及烤烟质量的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2023, 35(10):14-20.
[17]	张文玲, 李桂花, 高卫东. 生物质炭对土壤性状和作物产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2009, 25(17):153-157.
[18]	徐阳春, 沈其荣, 冉炜. 长期免耕与施用有机肥对土壤微生物生物量碳、氮、磷的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2002, 39(1):89-96.
[19]	王晓玲. 不同施肥模式对玉米产量及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 青海农技推广,2024(3):34-36.
[20]	沈芳芳, 张哲, 袁颖红, 等. 生物质炭配施有机肥对旱地红壤酶活性及其微生物群落组成的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(18):65-74. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0502
[21]	芮绍云, 袁颖红, 周际海, 等. 改良剂对旱地红壤微生物量碳、氮及可溶性有机碳、氮的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(5):260-265.

处理	有机质/(g/kg)	全氮/(g/kg)	有效磷/(mg/kg)	速效钾/(mg/kg)	EC/(μS/cm)
T1	30.83±0.40b	1.60±0.00a	131.67±4.04a	516.33±10.50c	232.14±3.25a
T2	34.70±1.84a	1.72±0.01a	129.33±1.53ab	567.00±13.53a	216.23±20.83ab
T3	31.27±0.76b	1.70±0.01a	123.00±19.47ab	544.67±615.14b	201.22±5.14b
T4	31.80±0.90b	1.60±0.02a	111.67±12.42ab	546.33±6.11ab	170.89±9.20c
T5	32.83±1.46ab	1.56±0.01a	109.00±5.29b	537.67±110.02b	166.08±12.63c

处理	有机质/(g/kg)	全氮/(g/kg)	有效磷/(mg/kg)	速效钾/(mg/kg)	EC/(μS/cm)
T1	30.83±0.40b	1.60±0.00a	131.67±4.04a	516.33±10.50c	232.14±3.25a
T2	34.70±1.84a	1.72±0.01a	129.33±1.53ab	567.00±13.53a	216.23±20.83ab
T3	31.27±0.76b	1.70±0.01a	123.00±19.47ab	544.67±615.14b	201.22±5.14b
T4	31.80±0.90b	1.60±0.02a	111.67±12.42ab	546.33±6.11ab	170.89±9.20c
T5	32.83±1.46ab	1.56±0.01a	109.00±5.29b	537.67±110.02b	166.08±12.63c

处理	微生物量碳	微生物量氮
T1	657.51±24.86b	36.98±3.71b
T2	660.21±44.94b	33.12±0.19c
T3	646.46±35.63b	42.75±1.29a
T4	712.42±2.62a	38.18±1.83ab
T5	618.03±4.56b	42.31±3.28a

处理	微生物量碳	微生物量氮
T1	657.51±24.86b	36.98±3.71b
T2	660.21±44.94b	33.12±0.19c
T3	646.46±35.63b	42.75±1.29a
T4	712.42±2.62a	38.18±1.83ab
T5	618.03±4.56b	42.31±3.28a