Effects of Different Organic Fertilizers on Soil Properties, Growth and Quality of ‘Red Globe’ Grape

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0344

Abstract

Abstract:

To solve the problems such as color difference and light flavor of fruits and soil hardening, acidification and salinization in facility vineyard of ‘Red Globe’ grape in southern coastal area of China, this experiment was conducted to study the effects of applying base fertilizer combined with different organic fertilizers in winter on soil physicochemical properties, nutritional status, grape plant growth and fruit quality. The contents of soil organic matter, available phosphorus and available potassium were significantly increased by applying carbon-based biological fertilizer, biological bacterial fertilizer and vegetable cake fertilizer. Soil organic matter, available phosphorus and available potassium were significantly increased by 43.77%, 35.45% and 57.9%, respectively, under the application of carbon-based biological fertilizer, which were the best. The effect of vegetable cake fertilizer on the increase of soil microelements was the best with the content of exchangeable calcium and magnesium being increased by 40.58% and 13.74%, respectively. The application of organic fertilizer could reduce soil bulk density, increase porosity, decrease salt content and increase pH, and the vegetable cake fertilizer had the best efficacy. The application of organic fertilizer could increase the leaf area and improve the lignifications degree of branches, which were increased respectively by 21.62% and 14.31% with the application of vegetable cake fertilizer. The comprehensive fruit quality was the best after applying vegetable cake fertilizer and the single fruit weight, TSS and solid acid ratio were increased by 26.46%, 2° Brix and 34.20% respectively. The economic benefits were the best with the application of rotten vegetable cake fertilizer and carbon based biological fertilizer, increased by 58794 and 39456 yuan/hm ², respectively. The application of different organic fertilizers can increase the contents of soil organic matter and nutrient elements, decrease salt content and bulk density, increase porosity and pH, thus promote the growth of branches, and the fruit quality and economic benefits, and the comprehensive effect of applying rotten vegetable cake fertilizer is the best.

Key words: grape, organic fertilizer, ‘Red Globe’ grape, soil improvement, fruit quality, benefit

CLC Number:

S663.1

Chen Qingying, Geng Fang, He Fengjie, Xu Xiaoju, Zhuo Xuanhan, Jia Huijuan, Sun Liangdu. Effects of Different Organic Fertilizers on Soil Properties, Growth and Quality of ‘Red Globe’ Grape[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(16): 82-88.

Figures/Tables 7

References 35

[1]	严大义. 红地球葡萄[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2011: 3-8.
[2]	徐小菊, 何风杰, 颜荣辉, 等. 浙江沿海涂地设施葡萄土壤营养状况及与果实品质的关系[J]. 中外葡萄与葡萄酒, 2013(3):27-31.
[3]	李文庆. 大棚栽培后土壤盐分的变化[J]. 土壤, 1995(4):203-205.
[4]	江新凤, 欧阳雪玲, 李延升, 等. 南昌县茶园施肥现状与改进措施[J]. 陕西农业科学, 2020,66(1):81-83.
[5]	陈丽楠, 刘秀春, 王炳华. 优化配方施肥对葡萄产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国果树, 2014(2):68.
[6]	丁燕. 葡萄园覆草及土壤改良施肥对葡萄产量及质量的影响[J]. 中外葡萄与葡萄酒, 2016(2):59.
[7]	林则双, 张志东, 吴林, 等. 施鸡粪对板结土壤理化性质及巨峰葡萄荧光特性的影响[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2014(2):41-44.
[8]	彭荣, 蔡德友. 共生菜籽饼肥施用量对蓝莓生长及品质影响研究[J]. 重庆工贸职业技术学院学报, 2020,58(2):20-22.
[9]	郇恒福, 周健民, 段增强, 等. 施用菜籽饼肥对次生盐渍化温室土壤有效养分、盐分及盐分组成的影响[J]. 土壤, 2008,40(4):586-590.
[10]	吴红, 刘海霞, 周明夏, 等. 养分还田对巨峰葡萄园土壤理化性的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2018,45(12):32-37.
[11]	吴红, 周明夏, 朱爱文, 等. 养分还田对巨峰葡萄生长和品质的影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2019,47(2):98-101.
[12]	雷金繁, 曹京阳, 刘艳玲, 等. 碳基复合微生物肥对“夏黑”葡萄生长的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2020(8):7-14.
[13]	马洪波, 杨苏, 李传哲, 等. 不同肥料和生物菌剂对重茬甘薯产量及土壤质量的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2019,47(24):47-49,57.
[14]	刘春燕, 周龙, 陈冬立, 等. 生物菌肥对桃土壤肥力及地上部的影响[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2020,54(4):597-603.
[15]	王鹏, 韩娟, 国淑梅, 等. 土壤微生物菌剂对大棚油桃植株特性的影响研究[J]. 东北农业科学, 2009,44(2):52-56.
[16]	李桥, 宋其岩, 杜亮亮, 等. 微生物菌肥对杨梅幼苗生长的影响[J]. 浙江林业科技, 2017,37(3):64-67.
[17]	宫英振, 李敬川, 汉瑞峰, 等. 生物菌肥在葡萄上的应用效果研究[J]. 现代农业科技, 2017(14):54.
[18]	李凯峰, 姜存良, 包昌艳, 等. 生物菌肥对猕猴桃生长和生理特性的影响[J]. 中国果树, 2020(3):72-75.
[19]	晁无疾, 陆家云. 脱落酸对葡萄上色和果实品质的影响[J]. 中外葡萄与葡萄酒, 2008(5):34-35.
[20]	潘峰, 黄素平, 李开军, 等. 配方施肥对葡萄品质及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2018(4):52-55.
[21]	胡慧蓉, 田昆. 土壤学实验指导教程[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2012.
[22]	史祥宾, 王孝弟, 冀晓昊, 等. ‘巨峰’葡萄必须矿质元素年需求规律研究[J]. 中国果树, 2018(6):29-32.
[23]	贾名波. 巨峰葡萄氮、磷、钾养分吸收与分配规律[J]. 山西果树, 2014(5):8-13.
[24]	王健鹂, 李阿红, 王会志. 有机肥对土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 吉林蔬菜, 2007(4):51-53.
[25]	魏晓兰. 生物有机肥对土壤氮、磷、钾供应及小白菜养分吸收的影响[D]. 合肥:安徽农业大学, 2016: 18-19.
[26]	张良英, 王永熙, 王小伟, 等. 桃树施用草炭和鸡粪对土壤理化性质和果实品质的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2007,16(5):159-162,166.
[27]	路克国, 朱树华, 张连忠. 有机肥对土壤理化性质和红富士苹果果实品质的影响[J]. 石河子大学学报:自然科学版, 2003,7(3):205-208.
[28]	刘国伟. 长期施用生物有机肥对土壤理化性质影响的研究[D]. 北京:中国农业大学, 2004: 15.
[29]	祝红蕾, 储大勇, 刘华. 菜籽饼粕有机肥的应用[J]. 安徽化工, 2013,39(5):13-14,24.
[30]	施平丽, 马晓丽, 王进, 等. 测土配方施肥对巨峰葡萄土壤理化性质和果实的影响[J]. 中外葡萄与葡萄酒, 2016(5):21-24,29.
[31]	刘松忠, 刘军, 武阳, 等. 梨幼树部分根域有机肥改良对生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2015,25(9):98-103.
[32]	熊荟菁, 张乃明, 赵学通, 等. 秸秆生物炭对葡萄园土壤改良效应及葡萄品质的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2018,49(4):936-941.
[33]	赵昌杰, 张强, 刘松忠, 等. 有机肥施用对葡萄园土壤特性及里扎马特葡萄产量、品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2013,41(1):101-103.
[34]	周敏, 廖淼玲, 郭亮, 等. 不同有机肥对葡萄产量、品质及土壤养分的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2014,26(11):24-28.
[35]	黄丽萍, 张倩茹, 尹蓉, 等. 矿质营养元素与果树生长发育的关系[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2017,56(4):601-602.

项目		基肥	芽前肥	座果肥	膨大肥	着色肥	采后肥
施肥量	处理I	碳基生物肥6600	复合肥150+尿素75+高磷钾微补精力15	复合肥150+尿素75+高磷钾微补精力15	复合肥150+微补根力钙15+福邦冲施肥90	复合肥150+微补根力钙15+黄腐酸钾冲施肥105	0.3%磷酸二氢钾
	处理II	生物菌肥6600
	处理III	腐熟菜饼肥4125
	处理IV	干燥腐熟猪粪16500
	处理V(CK)	复合肥330
施肥方法		结合翻耕地面撒施	滴灌施入	滴灌施入	滴灌施入	滴灌施入	叶面喷施

项目		基肥	芽前肥	座果肥	膨大肥	着色肥	采后肥
施肥量	处理I	碳基生物肥6600	复合肥150+尿素75+高磷钾微补精力15	复合肥150+尿素75+高磷钾微补精力15	复合肥150+微补根力钙15+福邦冲施肥90	复合肥150+微补根力钙15+黄腐酸钾冲施肥105	0.3%磷酸二氢钾
	处理II	生物菌肥6600
	处理III	腐熟菜饼肥4125
	处理IV	干燥腐熟猪粪16500
	处理V(CK)	复合肥330
施肥方法		结合翻耕地面撒施	滴灌施入	滴灌施入	滴灌施入	滴灌施入	叶面喷施

级别	着色状况	代表值
Ⅰ	果实全部绿色	0
Ⅱ	果面轻微着色,淡红色占1/3	1
Ⅲ	中度着色,淡红色占1/2	2
Ⅳ	基本着色,红色或紫红色占2/3	3
Ⅴ	紫红色,果面全部着色	4

级别	着色状况	代表值
Ⅰ	果实全部绿色	0
Ⅱ	果面轻微着色,淡红色占1/3	1
Ⅲ	中度着色,淡红色占1/2	2
Ⅳ	基本着色,红色或紫红色占2/3	3
Ⅴ	紫红色,果面全部着色	4

处理	有机质/ (g/kg)	全氮/ (g/kg)	有效磷/ (mg/kg)	速效钾/ (mg/kg)	交换性钙/ (cmol/kg)	交换性镁/ (cmol/kg)	有效锌/ (mg/kg)	有效硼/ (mg/kg)
Ⅰ	38.1a	2.62b	794.9a	1301.0a	44.74c	5.80c	201.60b	0.93b
Ⅱ	33.7b	2.55b	599.7c	903.0d	52.09b	8.28a	235.53a	1.05b
Ⅲ	31.9c	2.58b	572.1d	1008.0b	53.45a	8.36a	203.70b	0.88b
Ⅳ	32.4c	3.25a	649.6b	964.0c	38.39d	7.48b	188.07c	1.64a
Ⅴ(CK)	26.5d	2.69b	440.4e	722.0e	38.02d	7.35b	203.47b	1.06b