Effects of Straw Compound Organic Ferment Materials on Tomato Soil Environment in Greenhouse

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb20190900665

Abstract

Abstract:

To increase the soil temperature and solve the soil environment deterioration of early spring greenhouse in Heilongjiang, straw+ cow manure, straw+ horse manure, straw+ sheep manure and straw only were applied to the early spring soil of ‘Qianxi’ tomato greenhouse, respectively. The effect of different straw compound organic ferment materials bio-reactors on soil temperature, soil physical and chemical characters, enzyme activity, microbial community structure were investigated. The results showed that, compared with the control, all treatments decreased the soil pH, and significantly increased the soil temperature, content of EC, alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen, available potassium, organic matter and sucrase, urease, phosphatase and catalase enzyme. Soil temperature of 20 cm deep increased significantly under straw bio-reactors treatments, especially in the straw+ sheep manure (YGH) treatment. Straw+ sheep manure (YGH) treatment improved the content of available phosphorus in soil by 2 times as compared with the control. Four soil enzymes of straw+ sheep manure (YGH) treatment were at the highest level, which was 91.9%, 220%, 18.5% and 7.3% higher than the control, respectively. The microbial diversity index of the treatments was significantly improved compared with that of the control, and followed the same rule: straw+ sheep manure (YGH)> straw+ cow manure (NGH)> straw +horse manure (MGH)> straw (JG)> control (CK). The utilization ability of the straw+ cow manure (NGH) and the straw+ sheep manure (YGH) on six carbon sources were the strongest, which were significantly higher than that of the other treatments. Based on the principal component analysis and cluster analysis, the effect of straw compound organic ferment materials bio-reactors on tomato greenhouse soil was divided into 4 grades, the order was: YGH, NGH, MGH and JG, and CK. The application of straw compound organic ferment materials bio-reactors could improve soil environment, and straw+ sheep manure (YGH) is the best compound organic ferment material.

Key words: tomato, organic ferment materials, enzyme activity, microorganisms, principal component analysis, hierarchical cluster analysis

CLC Number:

S154.1

Wang Juan, Chen Lixin, Zou Chunjiao, Sa Rina, Liu Liyong, Yang Long, Tan Wei. Effects of Straw Compound Organic Ferment Materials on Tomato Soil Environment in Greenhouse[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(25): 78-85.

Figures/Tables 11

References 39

[1]	毕洪文, 王红蕾, 钱春荣等. 黑龙江省玉米秸秆综合利用问题与对策研[J]. 玉米科学, 2017,25(5):112-115.
[2]	Chang I S, Wu J, Zhou C, et al. A time-geographical approach to biogas potential analysis of China[J]. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2014,37:318-333.
[3]	Zhang Yi, Zang Guo-qing, Tang Zheng-hao, et al. Burning straw, air pollution, and respiratory infections in China[J]. American Journal of Infection Control, 2014,42(7):815. URL pmid: 24775559
[4]	Shan Y H, Johnsonbeebout S E, Buresh R J. Crop Residue Management for Lowland Rice-Based Cropping Systems in Asia[J]. Advances in Agronomy, 2008,98(8):117-199.
[5]	Eklind Y, kirchmann H. Composting and storage of organic household waste with different litter amendments. I: carbon turn-over[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2000,74(2):115-124. doi: 10.1016/S0960-8524(00)00004-3 URL
[6]	李军见. 秸秆生物反应堆技术在西安地区的应用效果及应用方法研究[D]. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2010.
[7]	刘杰才, 崔世茂, 杨文秀, 等. 秸秆生物反应堆技术对大棚黄瓜光合性能的影响[J]. 内蒙古农业大学学报:自然科学版, 2010,31(3):85-87.
[8]	Eklind Y, Kirchmann H. Compositing and storage of organic household waste with different litter amendments[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2000,74:125-133.
[9]	卞中华, 王玉, 胡晓辉, 等. 外置式与内置式秸秆生物反应堆对番茄生长及光和性能的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2013,24(3):753-758.
[10]	杨圆圆, 韩娟, 王阳峰, 等. 秸秆生物反应堆对日光温室微生态环境及草莓光和性能的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2014,23(8):167-172.
[11]	叶林, 李建设, 张光第, 等. 不同作物秸秆生物反应堆对日光温室樱桃番茄生长、生育环境及其产量的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2015,24(7):63-68.
[12]	陈立新, 王娟, 邹春娇, 等. 内置式秸秆反应堆技术对越冬茬番茄生长及温室环境的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2017(7):48-52.
[13]	张雪艳, 王冠, 石彦龙, 等. 生物菌剂作用下的秸秆生物反应堆对越冬番茄土壤养分的影响[J]. 内蒙古农业大学学报:自然科学版, 2015,36(2):20-25.
[14]	杨文雅, 黄群, 张燕. 秸秆生物反应堆对设施土壤环境特性的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2017,45(32):111-114,117.
[15]	袁冬贞, 廖允成, 王阳峰, 等. 不同秸秆生物反应堆对日光温室黄瓜生长环境及产量的影响[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版, 2014,42(10):186-192,198.
[16]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000: 106-108.
[17]	周礼恺. 土壤酶学[M].科学出版社, 1987: 118-159.
[18]	Choi K H, Dobbs F C. Comparison of two kinds of Biolog microplates (GN and ECO) in their ability to distinguish among aquatic microbial communities[J]. J Microbiol Methods, 1999,36(3):203-213. URL pmid: 10379806
[19]	孔滨, 杨秀娟. Biolog生态板的应用原理及碳源构成[J]. 绿色科技, 2011(7):231-234.
[20]	Garland J L, Mills A L. Classification and characterization of heterotrophic microbial communities on the basis of patterns of community-level sole-carbon-source utilization[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1991,57(8):2351-2359. doi: 10.1128/AEM.57.8.2351-2359.1991 URL pmid: 16348543
[21]	Shannon C E. A mathematical theory of communication[J]. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 2001,5(1):3-55.
[22]	Simpson E H. Measurement of diversity[J]. Nature, 1949,163:688.
[23]	Pielou Steinmüller K. Mathematical ecology[J]. Biometrical Journal, 1978,20(6):627-628.
[24]	Rogers B F, Tate R L. Temporal analysis of the soil microbial community along a toposequence in Pineland soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2001,33(10):1389-1401.
[25]	邹春娇, 齐明芳, 马建, 等. Biolog-ECO解析黄瓜连作营养基质中微生物群落结构多样性特征[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016,49(5):942-951.
[26]	宋尚成, 朱凤霞, 刘润进, 等. 秸秆生物反应堆对西瓜连作土壤微生物数量和土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 微生物学通报, 2010,37(5):696-700.
[27]	呼生春, 呼李乐, 王文举, 等. 不同有机酿热物对日光温室土壤环境、葡萄产量及品质的影响[J]. 果树学报, 2016,33(9):1084-1091.
[28]	Martens D A. Plant residue biochemistry regulates soil carbon cycling and carbon sequestration[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 2000,32(3):361-369.
[29]	沙涛, 程立忠, 王国华, 等. 秸秆还田对植烟土壤中微生物结构和数量的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2000(3):40-42.
[30]	甄丽莎, 谷洁, 高华, 等. 秸秆还田与施肥对土壤酶活性和作物产量的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2012,32(9):1811-1818.
[31]	Lundquist E J, Jackson L E, Scow K M, et al. Changes in microbial biomass and community composition, and soil carbon and nitrogen pools after incorporation of rye into three California agricultural soils[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 1999,31(2):221-236.
[32]	Zhang Hong, Xu Wenxin, Li Yu-bao, et al. Changes of soil microbial communities during decomposition of straw residues under different land uses[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2017,9(5):1-12. doi: 10.1007/s40333-016-0058-z URL
[33]	Fabiola Bastian, Lamia Bouziri, Bernard Nicolardot, et al. Impact of wheat straw decomposition on successional patterns of soil microbial community structure[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 2009,41(2):262-275. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.10.024 URL
[34]	孙婧, 田永强, 高丽红, 等. 秸秆生物反应堆与菌肥对温室番茄土壤微环境的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014,30(6):153-164.
[35]	刘善江, 夏雪, 陈桂梅, 等. 土壤酶的研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2011,27(21):1-7.
[36]	赵萌, 李敏, 王淼焱, 等. 西瓜连作对土壤主要微生物类群和土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 微生物学通报, 2008,35(8):1251-1254.
[37]	Martiya Sadeghi, George A Morris, Emmanuel John M Carranza, et al. Rare earth element distribution and mineralization in Sweden: An application of principal component analysis to FOREGS soil geochemistry[J]. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 2012,133:160-175. doi: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2012.10.015 URL
[38]	Bai Youlu, Wang Lei, Lu Yanli, et al. Effects of long-term full straw return on yield and potassium response in wheat-maize rotation[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2015,14(2):2467-2476. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61216-3 URL
[39]	李丽, 王雪艳, 田彦芳, 等. 生物炭对土壤养分及设施蔬菜产量与品质的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018,24(5):1237-1244.

处理	全氮/%	全磷/%	全钾/%	有机质/(g/kg)
试验地土壤	0.17	0.06	2.78	20.7
玉米秸秆	0.617	0.108	0.990	—
羊粪	1.17	1.39	2.80	—
牛粪	0.60	0.65	1.01	—
马粪	0.66	0.89	1.42	—

处理	全氮/%	全磷/%	全钾/%	有机质/(g/kg)
试验地土壤	0.17	0.06	2.78	20.7
玉米秸秆	0.617	0.108	0.990	—
羊粪	1.17	1.39	2.80	—
牛粪	0.60	0.65	1.01	—
马粪	0.66	0.89	1.42	—

处理	pH	电导率/(μs/cm)	碱解氮/(mg/kg)	速效磷/(g/kg)	速效钾/(mg/kg)	有机质/(g/kg)
NGH	7.56bc	206.7c	230.8a	57.3b	222.5d	33.5c
MGH	7.47cd	179.7d	196.5ab	51.2c	239.0c	36.4b
YGH	7.64ab	220.3b	268.1a	128.4a	381.8a	42.1a
JG	7.38d	242.0a	228.0a	51.3c	267.0b	43.0a
CK	7.73a	158.7e	151.4b	62.1b	197.8e	26.5d

处理	pH	电导率/(μs/cm)	碱解氮/(mg/kg)	速效磷/(g/kg)	速效钾/(mg/kg)	有机质/(g/kg)
NGH	7.56bc	206.7c	230.8a	57.3b	222.5d	33.5c
MGH	7.47cd	179.7d	196.5ab	51.2c	239.0c	36.4b
YGH	7.64ab	220.3b	268.1a	128.4a	381.8a	42.1a
JG	7.38d	242.0a	228.0a	51.3c	267.0b	43.0a
CK	7.73a	158.7e	151.4b	62.1b	197.8e	26.5d

处理	蔗糖酶/[mg/(g·d)]	脲酶/[mg/(g·d)]	磷酸酶/[mg/(g·d)]	过氧化氢酶/(mL/g)
NGH	39.0b	4.1b	8.5b	8.7ab
MGH	32.4b	7.7a	9.9a	8.4bc
YGH	52.1a	7.7a	9.6a	8.8a
JG	53.5a	4.2b	9.3a	8.7ab
CK	27.2b	2.4c	8.1b	8.2c