Analysis of Soil Management Effect of Different Measures on “Bare Land of Mountain” in the Three Rivers Source Region

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.01.026

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2023, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (1): 220-229.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.01.026

Previous Articles Next Articles

Analysis of Soil Management Effect of Different Measures on “Bare Land of Mountain” in the Three Rivers Source Region

WU Jian-li¹, SHI Jian-jun¹, WANG Xiao-li¹, ZHAO Zhi-zhong², WANG Yan-long¹, WANG Hai-bo³, HE You-long³, LI Si-yao¹

1. Academy of Animal Science and Veterinary Science/Qinghai Academy of Animal Science and Veterinary Science, Qinghai University, Xining， Qinghai Province 810016, China;
2. Qinghai University for Nationalities, Xining, Qinghai Province 810007, China;
3. Guoluo Grassland Working Station of Qinghai Province, Guoluo, Qinghai Province 8140003, China

Received:2022-05-15 Revised:2022-10-24 Online:2023-01-15 Published:2023-02-07
Contact: qdwim@126.com

不同措施下三江源区“黑土山”土壤治理效果分析

吴建丽¹, 施建军¹, 王晓丽¹, 赵之重², 王彦龙¹, 王海波³, 贺有龙³, 李思瑶¹

1. 青海大学畜牧兽医科学院/青海省畜牧兽医科学院, 青海西宁 810016;
2. 青海民族大学, 青海西宁 810007;
3. 青海省果洛州草原工作站, 青海果洛 8140003

通讯作者: 赵之重, E-mail:qdwim@126.com
作者简介:吴建丽(1995-)，女，青海湟中人，硕士研究生，主要从事退化高寒草地生态恢复研究，E-mail:2859031192@qq.com
基金资助:
青海省高端创新人才千人计划培养人才项目(k992032)；其他20-畜产品供需格局演变与畜牧业转型发展(302108)；2019年度青海三江源生态保护和建设二期工程科研和推广项目-课题5(2019-S-1)资助

Abstract

Abstract: Compared with the research on the control of " black soil beach",the research on the control of " bare land of mountain " is still in the early stage. Taking the grassland treated by six measures,micro tiller plowing+manual sowing (MT1+MS),micro-tiller plowing twice+manual sowing (MT2+MS),rotary tiller ploughing +seeder sowing (RT+SS),excavator ditching +manual sowing (ED+MS),no-till sowing (NT+ S),and manual raking+manual sowing (MR+MS),as the research object,the effects of six treatments on soil restoration were analyzed,which would provide theoretical basis for rapid soil treatment in " bare land of mountain " by studying the changes of soil physical and chemical characteristics and microbial biomass. The results showed that the contents of soil water,organic carbon,total nitrogen,total phosphorus,microbial biomass carbon,nitrogen,and phosphorus all exhibited a downward trend with the soil layer. And the soil water content in 0-20 cm soil layer and the soil nutrient content in each soil layer were the highest in the measure NT+S;The bulk density of each soil layer was the largest in ED+MS,and the difference was significant (P< 0.05). The mass percentage of soil water-stable aggregates in 0-10 cm soil layer is the highest in NT+S,and the difference was significant (P<0.05),but there was no significant difference in 10-20 cm and 20-30 cm soil layers. Therefore,combined with the changes of soil physical and chemical properties and microbial biomass,no-till sowing can be selected for the rapid soil management of " bare land of mountain " in the source region of the Three Rivers.

Key words: The source area of the Three Rivers, “Bare land of mountain”, Soil, Treatment measures

摘要： 相对于“黑土滩”的研究，“黑土山”的研究尚处于初期。本研究以6种措施“微耕机翻耕一遍+人工撒播(MT1+MS)、微耕机翻耕两遍+人工撒播(MT2+MS)、旋耕机翻耕+撒播机播种(RT+SS)、挖掘机开沟+人工条播(ED+MS)、免耕播种(NT+S)、人工耙翻+人工撒播(MR+MS)”治理后的草地为研究对象，分析土壤的理化特征和微生物量的变化，以及6种措施对土壤的治理效果，为“黑土山”土壤快速治理提供理论依据。结果表明：土壤含水量、有机碳、全氮、全磷、微生物量碳氮磷含量随土层均呈下降趋势，并且0~20 cm土层土壤含水量和各土层土壤养分含量均在措施NT+S时最高；各土层的容重在措施ED+MS最大，且差异显著(P<0.05)；0~10 cm土层，土壤水稳性团聚体质量百分数在措施NT+S最高且差异显著(P<0.05)，10~20 cm、20~30 cm土层中各措施下差异不显著。因此，结合土壤理化性质和微生物量的变化，三江源区“黑土山”土壤的快速治理可选择免耕播种的措施。

关键词: 三江源区, “黑土山”, 土壤, 治理措施

CLC Number:

S812.4

WU Jian-li, SHI Jian-jun, WANG Xiao-li, ZHAO Zhi-zhong, WANG Yan-long, WANG Hai-bo, HE You-long, LI Si-yao. Analysis of Soil Management Effect of Different Measures on “Bare Land of Mountain” in the Three Rivers Source Region[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(1): 220-229.

吴建丽, 施建军, 王晓丽, 赵之重, 王彦龙, 王海波, 贺有龙, 李思瑶. 不同措施下三江源区“黑土山”土壤治理效果分析[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(1): 220-229.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.01.026

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2023/V31/I1/220

References

[1] GAO M,XIAO Y,HU Y F. Evaluation of water production and soil erosion in the Sanjiangyuan area under different land-climate scenarios[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology,2020,11(1):13-26
[2] 张颖,章超斌,王钊齐,等. 气候变化与人为活动对三江源草地生产力影响的定量研究[J]. 草业学报,2017,26(5):1-14
[3] 胡洋洋. 青藏高原脆弱生态修复与保护研究——以高寒草地为例[J]. 农业技术与装备,2020(5):73-74
[4] 李旭谦. 青海省“黑土滩”退化草地治理模式[J]. 青海农技推广,2019(1):58-59
[5] 董全民,马玉寿,许长军,等. 三江源区黑土滩退化草地分类分级体系及分类恢复研究[J]. 草地学报,2015,23(3):441-447
[6] 张玉娟. 典型草原退化演替中植被—土壤特征变化及化感影响机制研究[D]. 北京:中国农业大学,2015:10-13
[7] 曹全恒,胡健,陈雪玲,等. 川西北沙地植被恢复对土壤碳氮磷及生态化学计量特征的影响[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(3):523-531
[8] 李生军. 研究退化草地改良对土壤理化性质和有机碳氮的影响[J]. 农家参谋,2018(16):108+171
[9] 赵磊,杨光维,刘程才. 退化草地土壤理化性质的研究简述[J]. 青海草业,2015,24(1):31-34
[10] 郭天雷,史东梅,卢阳,等. 几种保护措施对紫色丘陵区坡耕地土壤团聚体结构及有机碳的影响[J]. 水土保持学报,2017,31(2):197-203
[11] 赵恒策. 青海省江河源区草地土壤可蚀性关键因子研究[D]. 兰州:兰州大学,2019:6-8
[12] 赵冬. 黄土丘陵区植被恢复过程土壤团聚体结构演变特征及其量化表征[D].咸阳:中国科学院教育部水土保持与生态环境研究中心,2017:4-7
[13] 于双. 不同恢复措施对荒漠草原土壤结构及碳氮特征的影响[D]. 银川:宁夏大学,2019:4-6
[14] 朱建宁,彭文栋,李永华,等. 荒漠草原采用浅翻耕改良对土壤水分及牧草组成的影响研究[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医,2014(23):108-111
[15] 伊斯拉依·达吾提. 天山北坡砾沙质荒漠草地补播改良机理的研究[D]. 乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学,2008:4-8
[16] 程科,李军,毛红玲. 不同轮耕模式对黄土高原旱作麦田土壤物理性状的影响[J]. 中国农业科学,2013,46(18):3800-3808
[17] 杨永辉,武继承,丁晋利,等. 长期免耕对不同土层土壤结构与有机碳分布的影响[J]. 农业机械学报,2017,48(9):173-182
[18] 刘涛,朱迪,吕婷,等. 青海湖区芨芨草草原土壤养分对翻耕和补播措施的响应[J]. 植物研究,2021,41(2):270-280
[19] 王星,于双,许冬梅,等. 不同恢复措施对退化荒漠草原土壤碳氮及其组分特征的影响[J]. 草业学报,2022,31(1):26-35
[20] 李福. 秸秆还田条件下不同耕作方式对玉米田土壤理化性状及产量的影响[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古大学,2021:4-6
[21] 张旭龙. 长期苜蓿草地翻耕后茬作物产量和土壤质量变化研究[D]. 兰州:兰州大学,2017:4-5
[22] 杜满聪. 耕作方式对坡耕地赤红壤结构稳定性的影响[D]. 广州:广州大学,2019:04-05
[23] 赵红香. 耕作措施与秸秆还田对农田土壤质量和冬小麦根系生长与代谢的调控[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学,2021:03-05
[24] 陈武荣,叶莹莹,陆珊,等. 喀斯特地区翻耕和玉米种植对土壤团聚体、氮素及微生物量的影响[J]. 亚热带资源与环境学报,2021,16(2):25-31
[25] 唐先亮,魏甲彬,周玲红,等. 耕作方式对稻田土壤微生物量碳氮的动态影响[J]. 作物研究,2016,30(3):282-287
[26] 刘子刚,卢海博,赵海超,等. 旱作区春玉米秸秆还田方式对土壤微生物量碳氮磷及酶活性的影响[J]. 西北农业学报,2022,31(2):183-192
[27] 李洋阳,刘思宇,单春艳,等. 保护性耕作综合效益评价体系构建及实例分析[J]. 农业工程学报,2015,31(15):48-54
[28] 田效琴,田佳乔,李卓,等. 保护性耕作下西南黄壤坡地的土壤结构效应[J]. 中国农学通报,2017,33(14):62-68
[29] 王耀锋,邵玲玲,刘玉学,等. 桃园生草对土壤有机碳及活性碳库组分的影响[J]. 生态学报,2014,34(20):6002-6010
[30] 巨晓棠. 氮肥有效率的概念及意义—兼论对传统氮肥利用率的理解误区[J]. 土壤学报,2014,51(5):921-933
[31] 吴金凤,刘鞠善,李梓萌,等. 草地土壤磷循环及其对全球变化的响应[J]. 中国草地学报,2021,43(6):102-111
[32] 张超,闫瑞瑞,梁庆伟,等. 不同利用方式下草地土壤理化性质及碳、氮固持研究[J]. 草业学报,2021,30(4):90-98
[33] 周曙光,张耀生,赵新全,等. 黄河源区不同草地类型土壤水分状况及其与降水的关系[J]. 湖南农业科学,2010(21):41-44
[34] 张立俞,邸利,任艺彬,等. 陇东黄土高原中沟小流域不同植被措施土壤水分差异分析[J]. 水土保持研究,2021,28(4):159-164，170
[35] 郑洪兵,刘武仁,罗洋,等. 耕作方式对农田土壤水分变化特征及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 水土保持学报,2018,32(3):264-270
[36] 刘爽,张兴义. 保护性耕作下黑土水热动态研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2010,28(6):15-22
[37] 闫海丽,张淑香,严凯兵,等. 冷凉地区不同耕作措施对土壤环境和作物生长发育的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料,2006(4):16-19
[38] 李玲玲,秦舒浩. 陇中半干旱区集雨补灌小麦玉米复合群体产量及水分效应[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2005(6):42-45
[39] 张川,陈洪松,张伟,等. 喀斯特坡面表层土壤含水量、容重和饱和导水率的空间变异特征[J]. 应用生态学报,2014,25(6):1585-1591
[40] 张祥彩,李洪文,何进,等. 耕作方式对华北一年两熟区土壤及作物特性的影响[J]. 农业机械学报,2013,44(S1):77-82+71
[41] 程曼,朱秋莲,刘雷,等. 宁南山区植被恢复对土壤团聚体水稳定及有机碳粒径分布的影响[J]. 生态学报,2013,33(9):2835-2844
[42] 贾映兰,魏培洁,吴明辉,等. 多年冻土区“黑土滩”土壤团聚体对人工建植的响应[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(8):1934-1943
[43] 李芳,陈林,李月,等. 真菌对土壤团聚体形成的影响研究进展[J]. 河南农业大学学报,2021,55(5):800-806+905
[44] 刘威,张国英,张静,等. 2种保护性耕作措施对农田土壤团聚体稳定性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报,2015,29(3):117-122
[45] 武均,蔡立群,齐鹏,等. 不同耕作措施下旱作农田土壤团聚体中有机碳和全氮分布特征[J]. 中国生态农业学报,2015,23(3):276-284
[46] 杨勇,宋向阳,咏梅,等. 不同干扰方式对内蒙古典型草原土壤有机碳和全氮的影响[J]. 生态环境学报,2015,24(2):204-210
[47] YUCHUN YAN,XU WANG,ZHENJIE GUO,et,al. Influence of wind erosion on dry aggregate size distribution and nutrients in three steppe soils in northern China[J]. Catena,2018,170:1-2
[48] 冯彪,青格尔,高聚林,等. 不同耕作方式对土壤酶活性及微生物量和群落组成关系的影响[J]. 北方农业学报,2021,49(3):64-73
[49] 赵彤,闫浩,蒋跃利,等. 黄土丘陵区植被类型对土壤微生物量碳氮磷的影响[J]. 生态学报,2013,33(18):5615-5622
[50] 吴晓玲,张世熔,蒲玉琳,等. 川西平原土壤微生物生物量碳氮磷含量特征及其影响因素分析[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文),2019,27(10):1607-1616
[51] XUE S,LIU G B,DAI Q H,et al. Effects of different vegetation restoration models on soil microbial biomass in eroded hilly Loess Plateau,China[J]. Frontiers of Forestry in China,2007,22(1):20-27
[52] 杨佳佳,安韶山,张宏,等. 黄土丘陵区小流域侵蚀环境对土壤微生物量及酶活性的影响[J]. 生态学报,2015,35(17):5666-5674
[53] 刘淑梅,孙武,张瑜,等. 小麦季不同耕作方式对砂姜黑土玉米农田土壤微生物特性及酶活性的影响[J]. 玉米科学,2018,26(1):103-107
[54] 陈娟,马忠明,刘莉莉,等. 不同耕作方式对土壤有机碳、微生物量及酶活性的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报,2016,22(3):667-675
[55] 王杰,李刚,修伟明,等. 贝加尔针茅草原土壤微生物功能多样性对氮素和水分添加的响应[J]. 草业学报,2014,23(4):343-350
[56] 陈昊. 水分状况对内蒙古典型草原土壤微生物量及群落结构的影响[D]. 北京:中国农业大学,2018:4-13

Analysis of Soil Management Effect of Different Measures on “Bare Land of Mountain” in the Three Rivers Source Region

不同措施下三江源区“黑土山”土壤治理效果分析

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	MENG Ling-xu, JIA Cai-ling, XU Chun-xue, ZHANG Xiao-wen, Huhe. Response of Soil Bacterial Community Diversity and Co-occurrence Network to Foraging Intensity of Yaks in Alpine Meadow [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(1): 9-18.
[2]	WANG Cheng, HU Xia-song, LIU Chang-yi, LI Xi-lai, FU Jiang-tao, LU Hai-jing, ZHAO Ji-mei, XING Guang-yan, HE Wei-peng, YANG Fu-cheng, LI Guo-rong. Study on the Characteristics and Influence Factors of Root Pull-out Resistance of Six Grasses in the Source Region of the Yellow River [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(1): 157-165.
[3]	WANG Ya-fang, LI Guo-qi, SHI Yun, LIU Xing, XIE Bo-xun, XIE Sheng. Analysis of Relationship between Soil Seed Bank and Aboveground Vegetation in Low Mountain Area of Helan Mountain [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(1): 166-172.
[4]	LI Lin-zhi, MA Yuan, ZHANG Xiao-yan, HAI Long, LIN Dong, ZHANG De-gang, ZHANG Hai-tao. Distribution Characteristics of Soil Aggregates and its Organic Carbon with Different Degradation Degrees in Alpine Meadow [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(1): 210-219.
[5]	LI Ya-nan, LI Shao-yu, SHI Shi-bin, WANG Zhan-hai, ZHANG Bin, CHEN Heng, ZHAO Meng-li. Study on Soil Enzyme Stoichiometric Characteristics of Different Grazing Intensities in Desert Steppe [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(9): 2239-2248.
[6]	XU Ting-ting, DONG Zhi, GUO Jian-ying, LI Hong-li, WANG Shu-mei, CHEN Xin-chuang. Effects of Grazing on Plant Community and Soil Organic Carbon in the Typical Steppe of Inner Mongolia, China [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(9): 2273-2279.
[7]	LI Jia-xiu, ZHANG Qing-song, DU Zi-yin. Research Progress on the Effects of Livestock Reduction on Grassland Vegetation Growth and Soil Characteristics [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(9): 2280-2290.
[8]	ZHAO Fang-cao, CHEN Hong-fei, WANG Yi-hao, DONG Kuan-hu, WANG Chang-hui, CHEN Xiao-peng. Response of Rhizosphere Soil Properties to Changed Precipitation and Nitrogen Addition in a Salinized Grassland [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(9): 2430-2437.
[9]	LIU Yan-pei, XUE Shi-ming, ZHONG Shao-li, LIU Yun-song, CAI Ming, HOU Jie-qiong, ZHANG Bo-yan, KUANG Chong-yi, XU Chi, GAO Yue-e, WU Meng-xia, ZHANG Mei-yan. Comprehensive Evaluation of Mixed Grassland of Triticale and Feeding pea in High-elevation of Northwestern Yunnan [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(9): 2497-2504.
[10]	XIAO Hai-long, MA Yuan, ZHOU Hui-cheng, ZHANG Cheng-jun, YAO Yu-jiao, CHEN Jian-gang, ZHANG De-gang. Characteristics of Soil Trace Elements and Vegetation and Their Relationships in Degraded Alpine Steppe in Sanjiangyuan Region [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(8): 1925-1933.
[11]	JIA Ying-lan, WEI Pei-jie, WU Ming-hui, ZHAO Jian-zhong, GAO Ya-yue, CHEN Sheng-yun. Response of Soil Aggregate to Artificial Planting in “Black Soil Land” of Permafrost Regions [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(8): 1934-1943.
[12]	LI Ya-nan, LI Shao-yu, SUN Yu, HU Xue-feng, HE Qi-shen, ZHANG Bin, ZHAO Meng-li. Responses of Soil Enzyme Activities and Stoichiometry Characteristics of Desert Steep to Different Stocking Rates [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(8): 2019-2026.
[13]	MA Kai-kai, XU Chang-lin, LI Ying, WEI Kong-tao, BAI Mei-mei, LIU Yuan-yuan, YU Xiao-jun. Effects of Different Rest Grazing Periods on Soil Seed Bank in Cold Season Pasture of Alpine Meadow [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(8): 2100-2107.
[14]	ZHU Kai-di, SUN Hong-ren, ZHANG Ji-ping, GANG Li-hua, LYU Yu-cai, WANG Guo-jun, WEI Deng-rong. The Abundance-deficiency Index of Soil N and Recommended Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Rates for Grain and Forage Millets in China [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(8): 2207-2216.
[15]	CHAI Yu, LI Xi-lai, YU Jin-feng, YIXI Droma, SONG Xian, MA Pan-pan, DUAN Cheng-wei, XU Wen-yin. Effects of Different Applications of Organic Fertilizer in Degraded Alpine Meadow on Soil Aggregates and Organic Carbon in the Source Zone of Yellow River [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(7): 1613-1620.