Research on the Characteristics of River Substrates in Dongguan and Their Feasibility as Greening Planting Soil

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0175

Abstract

Abstract:

In the comprehensive remediation project of Xitailong River basin in Shatian Town of Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, in order to solve the problem of post-treatment of dredged contaminated substrate, the basic characteristics of the substrate in the upper reaches of Xitailong River, the middle and lower reaches of the river confluence and the lower reaches of the river were investigated, and the feasibility of upgrading it to green planting soil was analysed. The results showed that the pH of Xitailong River substrate ranged from pH 6.45 to 7.35, the infiltration rate ranged from 2.17×10^-4 to 8.9×10^-4 cm/s, and the soil texture was powdery loam, all of which met the CJ/T 340-2016 industry standard for urban construction. The nutrient content of the river sediment is sufficient, but the spatial heterogeneity is large, with the nutrient content of the substrate much higher in the downstream than in the upstream reaches. The area near the downstream river is affected by the surrounding factories and the heavy metal elements in the substrate are high, with serious exceedances of the elements Ni and Cu, which does not meet the minimum standards for heavy metal content in plantation soils. A thorough analysis shows that the characteristics of the upstream river substrate is more in line with the CJ/T 340-2016 standard, which can be used as green planting soil through improvement, and is of great importance for the environmental management of urban water bodies.

Key words: river substrates, physico-chemical properties, heavy metal, feasibility, ecological management

DONG Yao, YU Huwei, LIU Zhishuo, ZHAO Xiufang, RONG Yuping. Research on the Characteristics of River Substrates in Dongguan and Their Feasibility as Greening Planting Soil[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(5): 69-73.

Figures/Tables 4

References 43

[1]	郑敏慧, 白冬锐, 张涛, 等. 苏州水网地区河道底泥的重金属分布特征与污染风险[J]. 环境科学, 2023, 44(1):198-209.
[2]	沈佳怡, 高铭晶, 刘钰, 等. 典型草本植物对镉锌铜污染河道底泥的修复[J]. 上海大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 28(1):9.
[3]	THI T H N, ZHANG W, LI Z, et al. Assessment of heavy metal pollution in Red River surface sediments, Vietnam[J]. Marine pollution bulletin, 2016, 113(1-2):513-519. doi: S0025-326X(16)30663-4 pmid: 27567198
[4]	SINGH K P, MALIK A, SINHA S, et al. Estimation of source of heavy metal contamination in sediments of Gomti River (India) using principal component analysis[J]. Water air and soil pollution, 2005, 166(1-4):321-341. doi: 10.1007/s11270-005-5268-5 URL
[5]	SAVIC R, ONDRASEK G, LETIC L, et al. Nutrients accumulation in drainage channel sediments[J]. International journal of sediment research, 2017, 32(2):180-185. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsrc.2016.07.005 URL
[6]	HONG Y, WU J, GUAN F, et al. Nitrogen removal in the sediments of the Pearl River Estuary, China: Evidence from the distribution and forms of nitrogen in the sediment cores[J]. Marine pollution bulletin, 2019, 138:115-124. doi: S0025-326X(18)30824-5 pmid: 30660252
[7]	OSTROFSKY M L. Determination of total phosphorus in lake sediments[J]. Hydrobiologia, 2012, 696(1):199-203. doi: 10.1007/s10750-012-1208-8 URL
[8]	CLARK J B, LONG W, HOOD R R. Estuarine sediment dissolved organic matter dynamics in an enhanced sediment flux model[J]. Journal of geophysical research-biogeosciences, 2017, 122(10):2669-2682. doi: 10.1002/jgrg.v122.10 URL
[9]	薄录吉, 王德建, 冉景, 等. 苏南村镇河道疏浚底泥农用对水稻生长、产量及品质的影响[J]. 土壤, 2014, 46(4):644-650.
[10]	SLIMANOU H, QUESADA D E, KHERBACHE S, et al. Harbor Dredged Sediment as raw material in fired clay brick production: Characterization and properties[J]. Journal of building engineering, 2019, 28:101085 doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101085 URL
[11]	刘继状, 朱琳. 淤泥免烧砖的耐久性能研究[J]. 硅酸盐通报, 2018, 37(12):3816-3820.
[12]	徐会显, 徐江宇, 熊正伟, 等. 荆江三口疏浚泥资源化利用研究[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2020, 43(S1):128-133.
[13]	王苗苗, 罗文琦, 王琦, 等. 白洋淀清淤底泥改良制备绿化土技术研究[J]. 水运工程, 2022(S2):54-58,102.
[14]	张茅, 杨迎春, 郑琳琳, 等. 固化淤泥作为河湖堤岸绿化草种植土的应用研究[J]. 施工技术, 2020, 49(18):13-15,19.
[15]	石稳民, 黄文海, 罗金学, 等. 襄阳护城河清淤底泥资源化制备种植土工艺设计[J]. 中国给水排水, 2020, 36(6):91-96.
[16]	卢珏, 王宇峰, 金涛, 等. 基于底泥堆肥的园林绿化基质生产研究[J]. 杭州师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 18(4):411-417.
[17]	李天才, 余米, 江瑞, 等. 紫色土池塘养殖底泥理化性质变化及营养沉积过程[J]. 河南农业科学, 2022, 51(4):151-159.
[18]	李印霞, 刘碧波, 付景保, 等. 模拟酸雨对巢湖底泥营养盐和重金属释放及其影响[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2020, 29(7):1612-1618.
[19]	蔡凯, 高维常, 潘文杰, 等. 贵州烟田土壤pH、交换性钙镁和CaCO₃含量分布特征及其相互关系[J]. 土壤通报, 2022, 53(3):532-539.
[20]	肖凯琦, 董好刚, 郭军, 等. 湖南省汨罗市耕地土壤养分空间变异特征研究[J]. 华南地质, 2021, 37(4):369-376.
[21]	魏宇宸, 赵美芳, 朱昌达, 等. 基于景观及微地形特征的丘陵区土壤属性预测[J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(2):467-476. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202202.013
[22]	何志伟, 于伯华, 王涛, 等. 喀斯特高原山区刺梨种植空间格局变化与地形土壤影响因素——以贵州省盘州市为例[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2021, 21(19):7956-7964.
[23]	张芸萍, 易克, 谢春凤, 等. 云南富源红壤烟区酸碱度空间分布及其与主要养分关系研究[J]. 扬州大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2020, 41(5):113-118.
[24]	刘雪松, 张智印, 魏建朋. 赣南地区土壤pH值分布的影响因素及其强度变化[J]. 水土保持通报, 2021, 41(4):100-105.
[25]	郭治兴, 王静, 柴敏, 等. 近30年来广东省土壤pH值的时空变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(2):425-430.
[26]	左冰. 微电解技术在电镀废水处理中的应用[J]. 中国资源综合利用, 2021, 39(11):195-197.
[27]	马冉, 刘洪斌, 武伟. 三峡库区草堂河流域土壤pH空间分布预测制图[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(3):691-699.
[28]	张博文, 刘佳, 牛凤霞, 等. 河道型水库溶解甲烷浓度的空间异质性及影响因素初探[J]. 中国环境科学, 2022, 42(12):5561-5569.
[29]	郑义文. 枯水期闽江下游水体浑浊空间变化特征及其影响因素分析[J]. 亚热带水土保持, 2021, 33(2):20-26.
[30]	陈欣, 靖淑慧, 冯若昂. 黄河对滨海湿地地表水可溶性盐的影响研究[J]. 环境科学与管理, 2017, 42(2):27-30.
[31]	武周虎, 张建, 金玲仁, 等. 南四湖表层底泥有机质及氮磷时空比较分析[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2012, 35(S1):358-364.
[32]	杨丽原, 沈吉, 刘恩峰, 等. 南四湖现代沉积物中营养元素分布特征[J]. 湖泊科学, 2007(4):390-396.
[33]	SHAZILI N A M, YUNUS K, AHMAD A S, et al. Heavy metal pollution status in the M alaysianaquatic environment[J]. Aquatic ecosystem health & management, 2006, 9(2):137-145.
[34]	范玉超, 王蒙, 邰伦伦, 等. 我国底泥重金属污染现状及其固化/稳定化修复技术研究进展[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2016, 22(13):97-101.
[35]	J J MONTES-PéRez B O, T CONEJO-OROSA, V RodríGuez. Spatio-temporal variability of carbon dioxide and methane emissions from a Mediterranean reservoir[J]. Limnetica, 2022, 41(1):43-60. doi: 10.23818/limn.41.04 URL
[36]	GRANéli W, SOLANDER D. Influence of aquatic macrophytes on phosphorus cycling in lakes[J]. Hydrobiologia, 1988, 170(1):245-66. doi: 10.1007/BF00024908 URL
[37]	孙雅慧. 园林植物受环境污染的危害以及生态作用分析[J]. 资源节约保, 2022(5):28-30,4.
[38]	赖明丽, 董晓全, 谢姗宴. 污泥施用下园林植物生长适应性和重金属吸收[J]. 华南农业大学学报, 2022, 43(4):47-57.
[39]	冼丽铧, 梁登裕, 冯嘉仪, 等. 重金属污染土壤的园林植物修复技术及其应用研究进展[J]. 林业与环境科学, 2021, 37(3):124-132.
[40]	施少华. 种植土在上海迪士尼乐园园林绿化中的应用研究[J]. 上海农业技, 2021(3):74-75.
[41]	冯发堂. 城市黑臭河流底泥处理处置技术研究[D]. 西安: 西安理工大学, 2018:1-4
[42]	崔卫方, 周海云, 许龙奕, 等. 河湖淤泥土地利用研究进展[J]. 皮革制作与环保科技, 2021, 2(2):81-83.
[43]	邓琪丰, 刘卫东, 韩云婷. 河湖疏浚底泥资源化利用研究进展[J]. 中国水运, 2022(2):138-140.

检测项目	取样点			CJ/T 340—2016
检测项目	A	B	C	CJ/T 340—2016
土壤质地	粉壤土	粉壤土	粉壤土	-
pH	6.45±0.02a	6.73±0.03 b	7.35±0.02c	5.0~8.0
EC(mS/cm)	1.52±0.00a	1.46±0.10a	1.28±0.03b	0.15~0.9
可溶性盐含量(g/kg)	6.28±0.04b	7.54±0.18a	5.60±0.18b	≤1
渗透率(cm/s)	2.17×10-4b	8.9×10-4a	6.4×10-4a	≥5

检测项目	取样点			CJ/T 340—2016
检测项目	A	B	C	CJ/T 340—2016
土壤质地	粉壤土	粉壤土	粉壤土	-
pH	6.45±0.02a	6.73±0.03 b	7.35±0.02c	5.0~8.0
EC(mS/cm)	1.52±0.00a	1.46±0.10a	1.28±0.03b	0.15~0.9
可溶性盐含量(g/kg)	6.28±0.04b	7.54±0.18a	5.60±0.18b	≤1
渗透率(cm/s)	2.17×10-4b	8.9×10-4a	6.4×10-4a	≥5

检测项目	取样点			CJ/T 340—2016
检测项目	A	B	C	CJ/T 340—2016
有机质(g/kg)	23.85±0.18c	103.36±1.46a	79.13±1.38b	20~80
速效磷(mg/kg)	35.13±0.56c	158.93±4.53a	104.74±3.94b	5~60
碱解氮(mg/kg)	78.77±0.89c	485.43±2.41a	452.92±2.42b	40~200
速效钾(mg/kg)	126.62±0.87b	111.53±0.50c	140.68±0.88a	60~300

检测项目	取样点			CJ/T 340—2016
检测项目	A	B	C	CJ/T 340—2016
有机质(g/kg)	23.85±0.18c	103.36±1.46a	79.13±1.38b	20~80
速效磷(mg/kg)	35.13±0.56c	158.93±4.53a	104.74±3.94b	5~60
碱解氮(mg/kg)	78.77±0.89c	485.43±2.41a	452.92±2.42b	40~200
速效钾(mg/kg)	126.62±0.87b	111.53±0.50c	140.68±0.88a	60~300

检测项目	取样点			Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级		Ⅲ级		Ⅳ级
检测项目	A	B	C	Ⅰ级	pH<6.5	pH>6.5	pH<6.5	pH>6.5	pH<6.5	pH>6.5
Cu	129.13±1.13c	1129.86±4.51b	1236.98±3.65a	40	150	300	350	400	500	600
Zn	122.71±1.99c	685.03±6.02a	646.88±4.51b	150	250	350	450	500	600	800
Ni	80.31±3.10c	866.23±6.07a	804.95±5.21b	40	50	80	100	150	200	220
Pb	137.38±2.38c	260.5±8.48a	225.59±1.78b	85	200	300	350	450	500	530