Effects of Application Amount of Biogas Slurry from Pig Manure on Agronomic Traits and Silage Quality of Rice

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0332

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to consume the biogas slurry of stock raising waste on site, reduce environmental pollution, the effect of biogas slurry application amount on rice agronomic traits and silage quality were studied. 17 biogas slurry fertilization levels of N2-N48, as well as conventional fertilizer (CF) application and blank control (CK) were designed. With the increase of biogas slurry application amount, the tillering number of rice increased significantly, and the biomass of rice increased first and then decreased, and the biomass of N8 fertilization group was the highest. The overall score of texture, color and smell of silage rice first increased and then decreased with the increase of biogas slurry application amount. When biogas slurry application amount exceeded N240% replacing nitrogen fertilizer, the pH of silage rice significantly increased (P<0.05). Compared with that of CF and CK, neutral detergent fiber in biogas slurry N2-N8 fertilization groups slightly decreased (P>0.05), but NDF in biogas slurry N14, N16, N20, N28, N32, N36, N40 and N48 groups significantly increased (P<0.05). There was no significant change in soluble sugar, acid detergent fiber, crude protein and crude fiber in different biogas slurry application groups compared with those of CF. Compared with that of CF, the crude ash content of silage rice in biogas slurry N2-N24 (except N14) groups had no significant difference (P>0.05), but when excessive biogas slurry (N280%-N480% replacing nitrogen fertilizer) were applied, the crude ash content significantly decreased (P<0.05). Replacing chemical fertilizer with biogas slurry is helpful to increase the biomass of rice and improve the quality of silage, but it should not be applied in excess.

Key words: biogas slurry from pig manure, rice, agronomic trait, silage quality

CLC Number:

S511.21

HOU Fuyin, YANG Zhiqing, JIN Chongfu, SHI Kai, AN Chen, CHEN Changkuan. Effects of Application Amount of Biogas Slurry from Pig Manure on Agronomic Traits and Silage Quality of Rice[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(20): 124-131.

Figures/Tables 9

References 34

[1]	胡启春, 汤晓玉, 宁睿婷, 等. 与生猪产业发展联动的中国沼气工程建设现状分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(8):1-6.
[2]	徐秀银. 规模化养猪场沼液的利用现状与对策[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2010(6):521-522.
[3]	SONNE C, OK Y S, DIETZ R, et al. Pig slurry needs modifications to be a sustainable fertilizer in crop production[J]. Environmental research, 2019, 178: 108718. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2019.108718 URL
[4]	WITARSA F, LUPITSKYY R, MOSS A, et al. Ammonia capture with biogas purification from anaerobically digested poultry litter[J]. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 2021, 96(2): 431-438.
[5]	KUMAR S, MALAV L C, MALAV M K, et al. Biogas slurry: source of nutrients for eco-friendly agriculture[J]. International Journal of Extensive research, 2015, 2(2):42-46.
[6]	WANG J Q, GU D Y, YU X D, et al. Application effects of biogas slurry partly substituting for chemical fertilizer on autumn tomato production in winter-solar greenhouse[J]. The journal of applied ecology, 2019, 30(1):243-250.
[7]	黄红英, 曹金留, 常志州, 等. 猪粪沼液施用对稻、麦产量和氮磷吸收的影响[J]. 土壤, 2013, 45(3):412-418.
[8]	王守红, 王桂良, 寇祥明, 等. 基施沼渣液替代化肥氮对葡萄产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(2):74-79.
[9]	张艺菲, 李浙灿, 张力川, 等. 猪粪沼液理化性质对玉米种子萌发的影响[J]. 中国沼气, 2021, 39(1):13-21.
[10]	王志国, 李辉信, 岳明灿, 等. 中国畜禽粪尿资源及其替代化肥潜力分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(26):121-128.
[11]	郑健, 李欣怡, 马静, 等. 秸秆生物炭配施沼液对土壤有机质和全氮含量的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2020, 39(5):1111-1121.
[12]	乔锋, 肖洋, 赵淑苹. 海林农场沼肥连年施用对玉米产量和土壤化学性质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(36):93-98.
[13]	吴华山, 郭德杰, 马艳, 等. 猪粪沼液施用对土壤氨挥发及玉米产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20(2):163-168.
[14]	毛晓月, 伍钧, 孟晓霞, 等. 连续3年定位施用沼液对水稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2016, 31(3):218-224.
[15]	侯福银, 杨智青, 陈应江, 等. 猪粪沼液替代尿素对籼稻生长性状、产量和饲用品质的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2019, 50(6):1197-1203.
[16]	赵金鹏, 赵杰, 李君风, 等. 不同添加剂对水稻秸秆青贮发酵品质和结构性碳水化合物组分的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2019, 42(1):152-159.
[17]	王小彬, 闫湘, 李秀英. 畜禽粪污厌氧发酵沼液农用之环境安全风险[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(01):110-139.
[18]	XU M, XIAN Y, WU J, et al. Effect of biogas slurry addition on soil properties, yields, and bacterial composition in the rice-rape rotation ecosystem over 3 years[J]. Journal of soils and sediments, 2019, 19:2534-2542. doi: 10.1007/s11368-019-02258-x URL
[19]	张璘玮, 伍钧, 杨刚, 等. 猪粪沼液连续定位施用对油菜产量及菜籽品质的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2014, 33(3):562-568.
[20]	伍钧, 王静雯, 张磷玮, 等. 沼液对玉米产量及品质的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2014, 28(5):905-911. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2014.05.0905
[21]	周阳, 黄旭, 赵海燕, 等. 麦秸秆和沼液配施对水稻苗期生长和土壤微生物的调控[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(2):479-489.
[22]	TANG Y F, WEN G L, LI P P, et al. Effects of biogas slurry application on crop production and soil properties in a rice-wheat rotation on coastal reclaimed farmland[J]. Water, air, & soil pollution, 2019, 230(3):1-13.
[23]	周炜, 王子臣, 宗焦, 等. 沼液与有机肥配施对稻田磷、钾素径流损失的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2020(6):240-245.
[24]	冉毅, 吴延萍, 徐朗, 等. 富碳沼液施用对水稻分蘖期生长的影响[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2020, 37(2):202-208.
[25]	黄翔, 洪娟, 陈钢, 等. 不同沼肥施用量对水稻生长和产量及其重金属含量的影响[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2019(4):25-29.
[26]	杨智青, 丁海荣, 陈应江, 等. 沼液施用量对大麦农艺性状及饲用品质的影响[J]. 家畜生态学报, 2019, 40(5):59-65.
[27]	唐微, 伍钧, 孙百晔, 等. 沼液不同施用量对水稻产量及稻米品质的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2010, 29(12):2268-2273.
[28]	SAMONTE S O P B, WILSON L T, MEDLEY J C, et al. Nitrogen utilization efficiency: Relationships with grain yield, grain protein and yield-related traits in rice[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2006, 98(1):168-176. doi: 10.2134/agronj2005.0180 URL
[29]	韩文元, 赵宝平, 任鹏, 等. 内蒙古农牧交错区施氮量对燕麦饲草产量和饲用品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(24):122-127.
[30]	马小勇, 陶志刚. 叶面喷施沼液对甘蓝虫害和产量的影响[J]. 中国沼气, 2019, 37(3):90-92.
[31]	叶巧丽, 姚光伟, 徐来源, 等. 不同用量沼液对茭白生长、产量及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 蔬菜, 2021(6):35-38.
[32]	奚辉, 李国雷, 陶安安, 等. 滴灌施用有机液肥对红美人柑橘园土壤环境、柑橘产量、品质和经济效益的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(4):670-677. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.04.12
[33]	袁根, 汤逸帆, 申建华, 等. 生物炭对施用沼液稻田土壤重金属生物有效性的影响[J]. 农业资源与环境学报: 2021, 38(4):1-10.
[34]	杨琴, 彭朝辉, 朱顺熙, 等. 养殖场沼液还田对作物及土壤重金属含量的影响[J]. 中国沼气, 2021, 39(1):22-25.

处理	基肥		分蘖肥	孕穗肥	总沼液施用量/L	氮肥比例/%
处理	沼液用量/L	尿素/g	沼液用量/L	沼液用量/L	总沼液施用量/L	氮肥比例/%
CF	——	312.9	——	——	——	——
CK	——	——	——	——	——	——
N2	24.4	——	21.4	15.3	61	20%
N4	48.8	——	42.7	30.5	122	40%
N6	73.2	——	64.1	45.8	183	60%
N8	97.6	——	85.4	61.0	244	80%
N10	122.0	——	106.8	76.3	305	100%
N12	146.4	——	128.1	91.5	366	120%
N14	170.8	——	149.5	106.8	427	140%
N16	195.2	——	170.8	122.0	488	160%
N18	219.6	——	192.2	137.3	549	180%
N20	244.0	——	213.5	152.5	610	200%
N24	292.8	——	256.2	183.0	732	240%
N28	341.6	——	298.9	213.5	854	280%
N32	390.4	——	341.6	244.0	976	320%
N36	439.2	——	384.3	274.5	1098	360%
N40	488.0	——	427.0	305.0	1220	400%
N44	536.8	——	469.7	335.5	1342	440%
N48	585.6	——	512.4	366.0	1464	480%

处理	基肥		分蘖肥	孕穗肥	总沼液施用量/L	氮肥比例/%
处理	沼液用量/L	尿素/g	沼液用量/L	沼液用量/L	总沼液施用量/L	氮肥比例/%
CF	——	312.9	——	——	——	——
CK	——	——	——	——	——	——
N2	24.4	——	21.4	15.3	61	20%
N4	48.8	——	42.7	30.5	122	40%
N6	73.2	——	64.1	45.8	183	60%
N8	97.6	——	85.4	61.0	244	80%
N10	122.0	——	106.8	76.3	305	100%
N12	146.4	——	128.1	91.5	366	120%
N14	170.8	——	149.5	106.8	427	140%
N16	195.2	——	170.8	122.0	488	160%
N18	219.6	——	192.2	137.3	549	180%
N20	244.0	——	213.5	152.5	610	200%
N24	292.8	——	256.2	183.0	732	240%
N28	341.6	——	298.9	213.5	854	280%
N32	390.4	——	341.6	244.0	976	320%
N36	439.2	——	384.3	274.5	1098	360%
N40	488.0	——	427.0	305.0	1220	400%
N44	536.8	——	469.7	335.5	1342	440%
N48	585.6	——	512.4	366.0	1464	480%

处理	株高/cm	分蘖数/个			干物质/%
CF	102.45 ±6.35a	12.11±2.57de			25.99±2.03cd
CK	106.87 ±5.26a	10.89 ±2.93e			29.50±1.03abc
N2	103.47 ±4.21a	12.67 ±2.29de			29.09±1.73abcd
N4	106.03 ±8.95a	13.11 ±3.33de			25.24±1.48d
N6	105.53 ±1.91a	16.56 ±4.98abcd			26.81±0.42abcd
N8	106.87 ±5.52a	14.22 ±3.31cde			27.14±0.89abcd
N10	110.90 ±5.55a	19.33 ±6.54ab			25.65±3.38cd
N12	101.60± 4.25a	15.78 ±4.99bcd			27.00±3.80abcd
N14	108.93 ±2.35a	12.89 ±3.10de			28.05±0.71abcd
N16	101.13 ±6.80a		15.22 ±2.91bcde	26.21±3.64bcd
N18	102.30 ±4.88a		17.89 ±5.64abc	27.75±1.95abcd
N20	104.27 ±6.40a		16.56 ±3.28abcd	30.20±1.24a
N24	101.47 ±1.72a		16.44 ±4.16abcd	29.09±1.41abcd
N28	104.50 ±7.85a		21.00 ±7.31a	29.23±1.42abc
N32	103.93 ±3.42a		15.78 ±3.49bcd	28.81±1.96abcd
N36	98.80 ±13.71a		18.89 ±4.04abc	28.41±2.33abcd
N40	98.57 ±9.29a		15.89 ±5.90bcd	29.94±0.71ab
N44	102.07 ±5.73a		16.56 ±3.57abcd	29.34±1.21abc
N48	87.80± 3.00b		19.00 ±2.65abc	29.11±1.49abcd

处理	株高/cm	分蘖数/个			干物质/%
CF	102.45 ±6.35a	12.11±2.57de			25.99±2.03cd
CK	106.87 ±5.26a	10.89 ±2.93e			29.50±1.03abc
N2	103.47 ±4.21a	12.67 ±2.29de			29.09±1.73abcd
N4	106.03 ±8.95a	13.11 ±3.33de			25.24±1.48d
N6	105.53 ±1.91a	16.56 ±4.98abcd			26.81±0.42abcd
N8	106.87 ±5.52a	14.22 ±3.31cde			27.14±0.89abcd
N10	110.90 ±5.55a	19.33 ±6.54ab			25.65±3.38cd
N12	101.60± 4.25a	15.78 ±4.99bcd			27.00±3.80abcd
N14	108.93 ±2.35a	12.89 ±3.10de			28.05±0.71abcd
N16	101.13 ±6.80a		15.22 ±2.91bcde	26.21±3.64bcd
N18	102.30 ±4.88a		17.89 ±5.64abc	27.75±1.95abcd
N20	104.27 ±6.40a		16.56 ±3.28abcd	30.20±1.24a
N24	101.47 ±1.72a		16.44 ±4.16abcd	29.09±1.41abcd
N28	104.50 ±7.85a		21.00 ±7.31a	29.23±1.42abc
N32	103.93 ±3.42a		15.78 ±3.49bcd	28.81±1.96abcd
N36	98.80 ±13.71a		18.89 ±4.04abc	28.41±2.33abcd
N40	98.57 ±9.29a		15.89 ±5.90bcd	29.94±0.71ab
N44	102.07 ±5.73a		16.56 ±3.57abcd	29.34±1.21abc
N48	87.80± 3.00b		19.00 ±2.65abc	29.11±1.49abcd

处理	质地	色泽	气味
CF	5.67±1.15b	10.67±1.15ab	14.67±5.77ab
CK	5.67±1.15b	10.33±1.53abc	18.33±0.58a
N2	5.67±0.58b	11.33±1.15a	18.33±0.58a
N4	6.00±0.00ab	11.33±1.15a	17.33±1.15a
N6	7.33±0.58 ab	11.33±1.15a	17.33±1.15a
N8	6.67±0.58 ab	10.33±2.89abc	17.33±1.15a
N10	7.33±0.58 ab	10.33±2.89abc	17.33±1.15a
N12	7.00±1.00 ab	7.67±4.04abc	14.00±5.29ab
N14	7.00±1.00 ab	6.00±1.73b	18.33±0.58a
N16	6.67±1.15 ab	7.67±4.04abc	14.00±5.29ab
N18	7.33±0.58 ab	6.00±1.73b	14.67±5.77 ab
N20	6.67±0.58 ab	8.67±2.89abc	15.33±4.62 ab
N24	7.67±0.58a	10.33±2.89abc	12.00±4.00 ab
N28	6.67±1.53 ab	7.00±3.00abc	11.33±5.77 ab
N32	7.33±0.58 ab	6.67±0.58bc	14.67±5.77 ab
N36	7.00±1.00 ab	6.00±1.73b	12.67±5.03 ab
N40	6.67±1.53 ab	8.00±1.73abc	17.33±1.15 a
N44	6.33±1.15 ab	6.67±0.58bc	14.67±5.77 ab
N48	7.00±0.00 ab	6.33±2.08bc	8.00±0.00b