Impact of Different Parent Materials on Drying Shrinkage Characteristics of Paddy Soils in Red Soil Regions

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2026-0317

Abstract

Abstract:

The study aims to investigate the differences in drying shrinkage characteristics of paddy soils developed from different parent materials in the red soil region and to provide a theoretical basis for elucidating the formation mechanism of paddy soil structure and optimizing field management practices. Undisturbed soil samples from the plough layer and plow pan of six types of paddy soils developed from different parent materials in the red soil region were collected for drying shrinkage experiments. Soil crack area density was determined using image analysis, and geometric factors were calculated to characterize the drying shrinkage behavior of the soils. The results showed that in the plough layer, the crack area density followed the order: river sediment (RS, 21.41%) > Quaternary red clay (QC, 16.80%) > quartzite weathering material (Q, 10.54%) > lake sediment (LS, 7.17%) > acidic crystalline rock weathering material (ACR, 4.80%) > argillaceous rock weathering material (AR, 2.99%). The axial shrinkage strain followed the order: RS (7.69%) > Q (4.00%) > QC (3.71%) > LS (2.08%) >ACR (1.72%) > AR (1.01%). The slopes of the shrinkage characteristic curves were generally consistent between the plough layer and the plow pan, indicating that the soil had similar deformation characteristics in the vertical direction. Drying shrinkage characteristics of paddy soils in the red soil region varied significantly with parent materials. In the plough layer, paddy soil developed from RS exhibited the highest crack area density, whereas that developed from AR showed the lowest. In the plow pan, the highest crack area density was observed in paddy soil developed from RS, while the lowest was found in soil developed from ACR. Axial shrinkage strain was significantly and positively correlated with crack area density, indicating that vertical shrinkage was closely related to horizontal cracking. However, there was no significant correlation between geometric factors and soil axial shrinkage strain and surface density of shrinkage cracks.

Key words: soil physics, red soil, paddy soil, dry shrinkage characteristics, soil parent material

CLC Number:

S152.4

WANG Jingjing, WEI Leijia, LIN Jin, YUAN Jiaqi, CHEN Dan, FANG Huan, BI Lidong. Impact of Different Parent Materials on Drying Shrinkage Characteristics of Paddy Soils in Red Soil Regions[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(20): 71-79.

Figures/Tables 11

References 39

[1]	魏翠兰, 高伟达, 李录久, 等. 不同初始条件对砂姜黑土收缩特征的影响[J]. 农业机械学报, 2017, 48(10):229-236,271.
[2]	邢旭光, 马孝义. 土壤失水过程对土体收缩特性的影响[J]. 农业机械学报, 2016, 47(6):148-153.
[3]	魏玉杰, 吴新亮, 蔡崇法. 崩岗体剖面土壤收缩特性的空间变异性[J]. 农业机械学报, 2015, 46(6):153-159.
[4]	WEI Y J, WU X L, XIA J W, et al. Relationship between granitic soil particle-size distribution and shrinkage properties based on multifractal method[J]. Pedosphere, 2020, 30(6):853-862. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(20)60041-8 URL
[5]	OMIDI G H, THOMAS J C, BROWN K W. Effect of desiccation cracking on the hydraulic conductivity of a compacted clay liner[J]. Water, air, and soil pollution, 1996, 89(1-2):91-103. doi: 10.1007/BF00300424 URL
[6]	GRAY C W, ALLBROOK R. Relationships between shrinkage indices and soil properties in some New Zealand soils[J]. Geoderma, 2002, 108(3-4):287-299. doi: 10.1016/S0016-7061(02)00136-2 URL
[7]	PUPPALA A J, MANOSUTHIKIJ T, CHITTOORI B C S. Swell and shrinkage characterizations of unsaturated expansive clays from Texas[J]. Engineering geology, 2013, 164:187-194. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.07.001 URL
[8]	PENG X, HORN R. Modeling soil shrinkage curve across a wide range of soil types[J]. Soil science society of america journal, 2005, 69 (3):584-592. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2004.0146 URL
[9]	HEMMAT A, AGHILINATEGH N, REZAINEJAD Y, et al. Long-term impacts of municipal solid waste compost, sewage sludge and farmyard manure application on organic carbon, bulk density and consistency limits of a calcareous soil in central Iran[J]. Soil & tillage research, 2010, 108(1-2):43-50.
[10]	张展羽, 朱文渊, 朱磊, 等. 根系及盐分含量对农田土壤干缩裂缝发育规律的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(20):83-89.
[11]	REN J H, LI X J, ZHAO K. Quantitative analysis of relationships between crack characteristics and properties of soda-saline soils in songnen plain, China[J]. Chinese geographical science, 2015, 25(5):591-601. doi: 10.1007/s11769-015-0779-5 URL
[12]	邢旭光, 马孝义, 康端刚. 盐阳离子类型及浓度对土壤持水及干缩开裂的作用效果[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(9):115-122.
[13]	PENG X, HORN R, SMUCKER A. Pore shrinkage dependency of inorganic and organic soils on wetting and drying cycles[J]. Soil science society of america journal, 2007, 71(4):1095-1104. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2006.0156 URL
[14]	冷挺, 唐朝生, 施斌. 干湿循环条件下重塑膨胀土的裂隙发育特征及量化研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 2016, 24(5):856-862.
[15]	张展羽, 李文杰, 王策, 等. 多级干湿循环对农田土壤干缩裂缝演变特征的影响[J]. 农业机械学报, 2016, 47(12):172-177,252.
[16]	李焱, 汤红英, 邹晨阳. 多次干湿循环对红土裂隙性和力学特性影响[J]. 南昌大学学报(工科版), 2018, 40(3):253-256,261.
[17]	李雄威, 王爱军, 王勇, 等. 持续蒸发作用下膨胀土裂隙和湿热特性室内模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2014, 35(S1):141-148.
[18]	周云艳, 徐琨, 陈建平, 等. 基于CT扫描与细观力学的植物侧根固土机理分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(1):1-9.
[19]	邢旭光, 柳烨, 马孝义. 土壤添加物对土-水曲线和土体收缩的影响[J]. 水科学进展, 2016, 27(1):40-48.
[20]	诸莉燕, 毕利东, 柳开楼. 基于图像处理的土壤颜色判别方法研究[J]. 广东农业科学, 2018, 45(12):125-130.
[21]	江西省进贤县农业区划委员会. 进贤县土壤[M]. 南昌: 江西科学技术出版社, 1985.
[22]	中国科学院南京土壤研究所. 土壤理化分析[M]. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 1978.
[23]	南京农学院. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1980.
[24]	毕利东, 张斌, 潘继花. 运用Image J软件分析土壤结构特征[J]. 土壤, 2009, 41(4):654-658.
[25]	GOMBOŠ M, TALL A, KANDRA B, et al. Geometric factor as the characteristics of the three-dimensional process of volume changes of heavy soils[J]. Environments, 2018, 5(4):45. doi: 10.3390/environments5040045 URL
[26]	REZAEE L, DAVATGAR N, MOOSAVI A A, et al. Assessing the impact of soil shrinkage and pore size dynamics on rice crop yield in expansive clay soils[J]. Soil & tillage research, 2024,244.
[27]	赵诚斋, 赵渭生. 水稻土的水理性质与土壤耕作的关系[J]. 土壤学报, 1983(2):140-153.
[28]	黄传琴. 干湿交替过程中土壤胀缩特征的试验研究[D]. 杨陵: 西北农林科技大学, 2008.
[29]	刘艳丽. 长期施肥下水稻土土壤性质变化及其与生产力的关系研究[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2007.
[30]	马毅杰. 长江中下游土壤矿物组成与其土壤肥力[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 1994(1):1-8.
[31]	张中彬, 彭新华. 土壤裂隙及其优先流研究进展[J]. 土壤学报, 2015, 52(3):477-488.
[32]	宋春丽. 旱作条件下不同母质红壤磷吸附作用及其影响因素研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016, 32(2):129-134. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb15080072
[33]	袁红, 盛浩, 廖超林, 等. 湖南省几种母质类型水稻土土壤肥力特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(3):151-156.
[34]	林少雯, 陈延玲, 刘树堂, 等. 长期定位施肥对潮土土壤黏土矿物影响的研究[J]. 华北农学报, 2017, 32(4):142-147. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2017.04.023
[35]	刘智杰, 黄丽, 李峰, 等. 秸秆还田对水稻土黏土矿物组成和钾素释放的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2018, 49(6):1390-1396.
[36]	邓博, 郭澎, 卫磊嘉, 等. 外源添加物对不同土地利用方式下土壤肥力的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(8):91-100. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0569
[37]	KECHAVARZI C, DAWSON Q, LEEDS-HARRISON P B. Physical properties of low-lying agricultural peat soils in England[J]. Geoderma, 2010, 154(3-4):196-202. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.08.018 URL
[38]	赵颖文, 孔令伟, 郭爱国, 等. 典型红粘土与膨胀土的对比试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2004(15):2593-2598.
[39]	陈宇龙. 云南膨胀土的微观结构特征[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2013, 35 (S1):334-339.

土样编号	土样母质	发生层次	土层深度/cm	采样地点
QC	第四纪红色黏土	耕作层	0~17	江西省红壤研究所 (28°21′ N，116°10′ E)
QC	第四纪红色黏土	犁底层	17~28	江西省红壤研究所 (28°21′ N，116°10′ E)
RS	河积物	耕作层	0~17	南昌市进贤县温圳镇联里村 (28°20′ N，116°6′ E)
RS	河积物	犁底层	17~31	南昌市进贤县温圳镇联里村 (28°20′ N，116°6′ E)
AR	泥质岩类风化物	耕作层	0~13	南昌市进贤县白圩乡连沅村 (28°15′ N，116°14′ E)
AR	泥质岩类风化物	犁底层	13~22	南昌市进贤县白圩乡连沅村 (28°15′ N，116°14′ E)
LS	湖积物	耕作层	0~11	南昌市进贤县民和镇寺前万家 (28°24′ N，116°13′ E)
LS	湖积物	犁底层	11~20	南昌市进贤县民和镇寺前万家 (28°24′ N，116°13′ E)
ACR	酸性结晶岩类风化物	耕作层	0~14	南昌市进贤县民和镇白家合 (28°19′ N，116°22′ E)
ACR	酸性结晶岩类风化物	犁底层	14~26	南昌市进贤县民和镇白家合 (28°19′ N，116°22′ E)
Q	石英岩类风化物	耕作层	0~18	南昌市进贤县观花岭林场南 (28°25′ N，116°27′ E)
Q	石英岩类风化物	犁底层	18~27	南昌市进贤县观花岭林场南 (28°25′ N，116°27′ E)

土样编号	土样母质	发生层次	土层深度/cm	采样地点
QC	第四纪红色黏土	耕作层	0~17	江西省红壤研究所 (28°21′ N，116°10′ E)
QC	第四纪红色黏土	犁底层	17~28	江西省红壤研究所 (28°21′ N，116°10′ E)
RS	河积物	耕作层	0~17	南昌市进贤县温圳镇联里村 (28°20′ N，116°6′ E)
RS	河积物	犁底层	17~31	南昌市进贤县温圳镇联里村 (28°20′ N，116°6′ E)
AR	泥质岩类风化物	耕作层	0~13	南昌市进贤县白圩乡连沅村 (28°15′ N，116°14′ E)
AR	泥质岩类风化物	犁底层	13~22	南昌市进贤县白圩乡连沅村 (28°15′ N，116°14′ E)
LS	湖积物	耕作层	0~11	南昌市进贤县民和镇寺前万家 (28°24′ N，116°13′ E)
LS	湖积物	犁底层	11~20	南昌市进贤县民和镇寺前万家 (28°24′ N，116°13′ E)
ACR	酸性结晶岩类风化物	耕作层	0~14	南昌市进贤县民和镇白家合 (28°19′ N，116°22′ E)
ACR	酸性结晶岩类风化物	犁底层	14~26	南昌市进贤县民和镇白家合 (28°19′ N，116°22′ E)
Q	石英岩类风化物	耕作层	0~18	南昌市进贤县观花岭林场南 (28°25′ N，116°27′ E)
Q	石英岩类风化物	犁底层	18~27	南昌市进贤县观花岭林场南 (28°25′ N，116°27′ E)

土样编号	土层	土层深度/cm	土壤容重/(g/cm³)	土粒密度/(g/cm³)	黏粒量/%	粉粒量/%	有机质量/(g/kg)	>0.25 mm的土壤水稳性团聚体质量百分数/%	pH
QC	耕作层	0~17	1.16	2.49	17.16	79.67	20.10	34.23	6.46
QC	犁底层	17~28	1.60	2.60	17.90	78.95	14.00	26.57	6.41
RS	耕作层	0~17	1.28	2.57	22.27	74.74	27.74	42.47	5.96
RS	犁底层	17~31	1.41	2.65	21.83	75.60	14.06	34.00	5.93
AR	耕作层	0~13	1.31	2.49	11.66	81.96	28.77	24.17	5.32
AR	犁底层	13~22	1.56	2.69	16.92	78.79	9.70	17.40	5.49
LS	耕作层	0~11	1.40	2.48	16.51	78.84	35.75	54.90	5.28
LS	犁底层	11~20	1.51	2.65	20.43	77.72	8.54	20.77	5.62
ACR	耕作层	0~14	1.33	2.45	13.06	78.58	44.49	58.63	4.83
ACR	犁底层	14~26	1.64	2.63	16.88	79.34	9.89	35.37	4.70
Q	耕作层	0~18	1.24	2.45	18.81	77.61	37.83	64.50	4.93
Q	犁底层	18~27	1.63	2.62	20.48	76.95	10.33	36.73	5.37

土样编号	土层	土层深度/cm	土壤容重/(g/cm³)	土粒密度/(g/cm³)	黏粒量/%	粉粒量/%	有机质量/(g/kg)	>0.25 mm的土壤水稳性团聚体质量百分数/%	pH
QC	耕作层	0~17	1.16	2.49	17.16	79.67	20.10	34.23	6.46
QC	犁底层	17~28	1.60	2.60	17.90	78.95	14.00	26.57	6.41
RS	耕作层	0~17	1.28	2.57	22.27	74.74	27.74	42.47	5.96
RS	犁底层	17~31	1.41	2.65	21.83	75.60	14.06	34.00	5.93
AR	耕作层	0~13	1.31	2.49	11.66	81.96	28.77	24.17	5.32
AR	犁底层	13~22	1.56	2.69	16.92	78.79	9.70	17.40	5.49
LS	耕作层	0~11	1.40	2.48	16.51	78.84	35.75	54.90	5.28
LS	犁底层	11~20	1.51	2.65	20.43	77.72	8.54	20.77	5.62
ACR	耕作层	0~14	1.33	2.45	13.06	78.58	44.49	58.63	4.83
ACR	犁底层	14~26	1.64	2.63	16.88	79.34	9.89	35.37	4.70
Q	耕作层	0~18	1.24	2.45	18.81	77.61	37.83	64.50	4.93
Q	犁底层	18~27	1.63	2.62	20.48	76.95	10.33	36.73	5.37

土层	QC	RS	AR	LS	ACR	Q
耕作层	5.86	4.01	3.99	4.54	3.84	3.73
犁底层	4.19	4.74	3.19	4.72	5.42	4.56