Comprehensive Evaluation of Agricultural Land Soil Fertility in Julu County of Hebei Province

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0737

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to clarify the status of agricultural soil fertility in Julu County of Hebei Province and guide the sustainable development of regional agriculture, 1628 soil samples were systematically collected in this study. The key fertility indexes such as soil organic matter (SOM), total nitrogen (TN), available phosphorus (AP), available potassium (AK), and pH value were analyzed. The membership function was used to calculate the comprehensive fertility index (SCFI) of soil, and the soil quality was comprehensively evaluated. The results showed that the soils in Julu County were generally weakly alkaline, with an average value of pH 8.24. Specifically, SOM content was relatively low (average: 9.97 g/kg), TN was relatively abundant (average: 1.36 g/kg), AP was insufficient (average: 11.62 mg/kg), AK was enriched (average: 203.83 mg/kg), available iron (Avail-Fe) was at an appropriate level (average: 7.88 mg/kg), available manganese (Avail-Mn) was abundant (average: 23.15 mg/kg), while available copper (Avail-Cu) (average: 16.50 mg/kg) and available zinc (Avail-Zn) (average: 50.72 mg/kg) exceeded the standard limits. Among these indicators, the coefficients of variation (CV) of TN, AP, SOM, Avail-Mn, and Avail-Cu were relatively high, being 0.36, 0.33, 0.35, 0.45, and 0.41, respectively. The SCFI of soils in various towns and townships of Julu County ranged from 0.58 to 0.62, and their spatial distribution presented a pattern of being higher in the west and lower in the east, and decreasing from the central area to the north and south. Soil fertility was mainly affected by SOM, AP, and TN. Appropriately increasing the application of organic materials and applying phosphate fertilizer in a certain proportion could effectively improve the comprehensive soil fertility of this region, thereby further promoting the sustainable development of local agriculture.

Key words: soil fertility, Julu County, evaluation index system, membership function

ZHANG Kailong, DENG Pengzhi, WU Moguang, ZHOU Suifeng, XIN Zhaoshuang, JIA Xinjuan, ZHANG Hao, DING Xiaodong, ZHANG Huaizhi. Comprehensive Evaluation of Agricultural Land Soil Fertility in Julu County of Hebei Province[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(5): 142-150.

Figures/Tables 13

References 35

[1]	吴克宁, 杨淇钧, 赵瑞. 耕地土壤健康及其评价探讨[J]. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(3):537-544.
[2]	MERRILL S D, LIEBIG M A, TANAKA D L, et al. Comparison of soil quality and productivity at two sites differing in profile structure and topsoil properties[J]. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 2013, 179:53-61. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2013.07.011 URL
[3]	KANJU M I, ANGEYO K H. Challenges in rapid soil quality assessment and opportunities presented by multivariate chemometric energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence and scattering spectroscopy[J]. Geoderma, 2015,241-242:32-40.
[4]	VASU D, SINGH S K, RAY S K, et al. Soil quality index (SQI) as a tool to evaluate crop productivity in semi-arid Deccan plateau,India[J]. Geoderma, 2016, 282:70-79. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.07.010 URL
[5]	雷松仁, 许迎港, 高雪松, 等. 安岳县柠檬种植区土壤养分状况分析与肥力等级评价[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2025, 42(4):956-967.
[6]	李颖慧, 姜小三, 王振华, 等. 基于土壤肥力和重金属污染风险的农用地土壤质量综合评价研究——以山东省博兴县为例[J]. 土壤通报, 2021(52):1052-1062.
[7]	金媛, 陈良超, 冉隆贵, 等. 陕南茶园土壤微量元素有效性评价研究[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2015(43):153-161.
[8]	田诗翰, 邓毅书, 包立, 等. 云南元谋冬早蔬菜主产地土壤肥力的空间变异特征与评价[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2024, 39(4):149-158.
[9]	陈乔乔, 翁少全, 程亮, 等. 道地金银花品质与土壤肥力关系的研究[J]. 土壤, 2021, 53(4):732-738.
[10]	ROJAS J M, PRAUSE J, SANZANO G A, et al. Soil quality indicators selection by mixed models and multivariate techniques in deforested areas for agricultural use in NW of Chaco, Argentina[J]. Soil and tillage research, 2016, 155:250-262. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2015.08.010 URL
[11]	ZHANG G, BAI J, XI M, et al. Soil quality assessment of coastal wetlands in the Yellow River delta of China based on the minimum data set[J]. Ecological indicators, 2016, 66:458-466. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.01.046 URL
[12]	赵其国, 孙波, 张桃林. 土壤质量与持续环境Ⅰ.土壤质量的定义及评价方法[J]. 土壤, 1997, 29(3):113-120.
[13]	王贵梅, 路聪慧, 刘子宁. 巨鹿县近60年气候变化特征分析[J]. 河南科技, 2020(2):156-158.
[14]	龚民, 钱远超, 杜连涛, 等. 叶面喷施寡糖对花生根区固氮菌群落结构及产量的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024(6):178-185.
[15]	李婧. 土壤有机质测定方法综述[J]. 分析试验室, 2008(S1):154-156.
[16]	宋佳珅, 张晓丽, 孔凡磊, 等. 生物质调理剂对川西北高寒草地沙化土壤养分和微生物群落特征的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(6):2217-2226. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202106.036
[17]	孙世友, 张国印, 刘孟朝, 等. 河北省土壤养分状况综合评价及变异分析[C/OL]// 面向未来的土壤科学(中册)—中国土壤学会第十二次全国会员代表大会暨第九届海峡两岸土壤肥料学术交流研讨会论文集. 中国四川成都,2012:563-566.
[18]	吴雨. 长江新济洲湿地土壤养分和重金属分布特征及其质量评价[D]. 南京: 南京信息工程大学, 2023.
[19]	CHEN Y, JIANG X, WANG Y, et al. Spatial characteristics of heavy metal pollution and the potential ecological risk of a typical mining area: A case study in China[J]. Process safety and environmental protection, 2018, 113:204-219. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2017.10.008 URL
[20]	KHAN A, LU G, AYAZ M, et al. Phosphorus efficiency, soil phosphorus dynamics and critical phosphorus level under long-term fertilization for single and double cropping systems[J]. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 2018, 256:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2018.01.006 URL
[21]	吕晓男, 陆允甫, 王人潮. 土壤肥力综合评价初步研究[J]. 浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 1999(4):38-42.
[22]	任平, 张如, 李英梅, 等. 板栗林下土壤养分状况评价及相关性分析[J]. 现代农业科技, 2024(3):103-106.
[23]	MELEJ M J, ACEVEDO S E, Contreras C P, et al. Changes in macroaggregate stability as a result of wetting/drying cycles of soils with different organic matter and clay contents[J]. Geoderma, 2024, 448:116965. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.116965 URL
[24]	李学垣, 徐凤琳. 湖北省丘岗、平原主要土壤的表面化学性质与粘粒的矿物、化学组成[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 1999(5):420-426.
[25]	王婕. 不同作物覆盖下农田表层土壤养分空间变异性研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2021.
[26]	雷跻初. 渭北旱塬区不同撂荒年限坡耕地土壤-微生物-胞外酶及其化学计量特征[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学, 2023.
[27]	封乾, 杨慧敏, 黄少辉, 等. 2019—2024年河北平原区耕地土壤肥力时空变化特征及培肥对策[J]. 河北农业科学, 2025, 29(1):36-42,89.
[28]	曹胜, 欧阳梦云, 周卫军, 等. 湖南省柑橘园土壤pH和主要养分特征及其相互关系[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2020(1):31-38.
[29]	FIGUEIREDO V, ENRICH‐PRAST A, RUTTING T. Soil organic matter content controls gross nitrogen dynamics and N2 O production in riparian and upland boreal soil[J]. European journal of soil science, 2016, 67(6):782-791. doi: 10.1111/ejss.2016.67.issue-6 URL
[30]	GAO P, ZHANG T, CUI X, et al. Evolution of red soil Fertility and response of rice yield under long-term fertilization[J]. Journal of soil Science and plant nutrition, 2024, 24(2):2924-2933. doi: 10.1007/s42729-024-01718-9
[31]	贾国建, 杜振宇, 马丙尧, 等. 山东省长期连作杨树人工林的土壤理化特性与综合肥力评价[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2023(4):8-15.
[32]	郭成士, 谢坤, 丁大伟, 等. 豫东潮土区近14年土壤肥力和作物产量的演变及其对施肥的响应[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2023, 29(7):1290-1299.
[33]	SHI C, LI J, WANG Y, et al. Investigation on soil fertility of newly increased cultivated land after wasteland Improvement in Loess Hilly Region-a case study in Ganquan County, Shaanxi Province[J]. IOP Conference Series: Materials science and engineering, 2018, 394:052044. doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/394/5/052044 URL
[34]	李梅, 张学雷. 基于GIS的农田土壤肥力评价及其与土体构型的关系[J]. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(1):129-136.
[35]	张福锁, 王激清, 张卫峰, 等. 中国主要粮食作物肥料利用率现状与提高途径[J]. 土壤学报, 2008(5):915-924.

指标	Ⅰ	Ⅱ	Ⅲ	Ⅳ	Ⅴ
pH	6.5~7.5	7.5~8.0；6.0~6.5	8.0~8.5；5.5~6.0	8.5~9.0；5.0~5.5	>9.0；<5.0
全氮/(g/kg)	>2.00	1.50~2.00	1.00~1.50	0.75~1.00	<0.75
有机质/(g/kg)	>40.0	30.0~40.0	20.0~30.0	10.0~20.0	<10.0
有效磷/(mg/kg)	>40.0	30.0~40.0	20.0~30.0	10.0~20.0	<10.0
速效钾/(mg/kg)	>200	150~200	100~150	50~100	<50
有效铁/(mg/kg)	>20.0	10.0~20.0	4.5~10.0	2.5~4.5	—
有效锌/(mg/kg)	>3.00	1.00~3.00	0.50~1.00	0.30~0.50	<0.30
有效锰/(mg/kg)	>30.0	15.0~30.0	5.0~15.0	1.0~5.0	—
有效铜/(mg/kg)	>1.80	1.00~1.80	0.20~1.00	0.10~0.20	—

指标	Ⅰ	Ⅱ	Ⅲ	Ⅳ	Ⅴ
pH	6.5~7.5	7.5~8.0；6.0~6.5	8.0~8.5；5.5~6.0	8.5~9.0；5.0~5.5	>9.0；<5.0
全氮/(g/kg)	>2.00	1.50~2.00	1.00~1.50	0.75~1.00	<0.75
有机质/(g/kg)	>40.0	30.0~40.0	20.0~30.0	10.0~20.0	<10.0
有效磷/(mg/kg)	>40.0	30.0~40.0	20.0~30.0	10.0~20.0	<10.0
速效钾/(mg/kg)	>200	150~200	100~150	50~100	<50
有效铁/(mg/kg)	>20.0	10.0~20.0	4.5~10.0	2.5~4.5	—
有效锌/(mg/kg)	>3.00	1.00~3.00	0.50~1.00	0.30~0.50	<0.30
有效锰/(mg/kg)	>30.0	15.0~30.0	5.0~15.0	1.0~5.0	—
有效铜/(mg/kg)	>1.80	1.00~1.80	0.20~1.00	0.10~0.20	—

指标	权重
全氮	0.13
有机质	0.11
有效磷	0.12
速效钾	0.04
有效铁	0.08
有效锌	0.06
有效锰	0.16
有效铜	0.15
pH	0.01

指标	权重
全氮	0.13
有机质	0.11
有效磷	0.12
速效钾	0.04
有效铁	0.08
有效锌	0.06
有效锰	0.16
有效铜	0.15
pH	0.01

土壤综合肥力指数	土壤肥力等级	土壤肥力评价
>0.80	1	好
0.60~0.80	2	较好
0.40~0.60	3	中等
0.20~0.40	4	较差
<0.20	5	差