土壤调理剂和木霉LTR-2联合施用对小油菜连作障碍土壤的修复

doi:10.3976/j.issn.1002-4026.2022.06.010

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the measures for safely producing leafy vegetables and remediation effects of Brassica chinensis in continuous cropping obstacles soil, the greenhouse plot experiment was conducted in this study using soil with conditioner combined with Trichoderma LTR-2, taking soil pH, soil conductivity, disease control efficiency, and yield increase rate as evaluation indexes. According to the results of soil nutrient content, the experiment of fertilizer reduction. The results showed that the soil pH increased from 4.50 to 6.95 and soil conductivity decreased from 675.10 to 519.70 μS/cm after treatment with a 7 500 kg/hm² conditioner. Compared with before fertilization, soil pH decreased and soil conductivity increased in B (conditioner + organic fertilizerⅠ+ compound fertilizer) and C (conditioner + organic fertilizerⅠ+ LTR-2 + compound fertilizer) treatment groups after fertilization. After one stubble of planting, pH value decreased from 6.43 and 6.57 to 6.06 and 6.26, respectively, and soil conductivity decreased from 1 011.43 and 959.47 μS/cmto 955.70 and 863.43 μS/cm, respectively. Compared with the conventional treatment group A (organic fertilizerⅡ+ compound fertilizer), there were significant differences in soil pH and soil conductivity in B and C treatment groups before and after Brassica chinensis vegetated. The control effects of root rot were 65.39% and 80.77%, and the yield increase rates were 27.48% and 33.59% in treatment groups B and C, respectively. The available nutrients of A, B, and C had different excess accumulations in the soil. Compared with conventional treatment A' (organic fertilizer III + compound fertilizer), under 66.67% compound fertilizer reduction, the yield increase rate of treatment group D' (organic fertilizerⅠ+ LTR-2 + 1/3 compound fertilizer) was 9.31%.

Key words: soil conditioner, Trichoderma spp., Brassica chinensis L., continuous cropping obstacle, soil remediation

CLC Number:

S636

WANG Yi-lian, HUANG Ding-li, WEI Yan-li, LI Hong-mei, YANG Hong-tong, LI Ji-shun. Soil conditioner and Trichoderma LTR-2 combined application for remediation of continuous cropping obstacle soil in Brassica chinensis L.[J].Shandong Science, 2022, 35(6): 74-79.

Figures/Tables 3

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

References 20

[1]	徐小燕, 刘庭付. 蔬菜连作土壤改良技术[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2019(10): 71-73.
[2]	黄婷婷, 杨晓萍. 协调治理视角下化肥施用对土壤次生盐渍化程度影响研究[J]. 环境科学与管理, 2019, 44(8): 153-157.
[3]	黄绍文, 高伟, 唐继伟, 等. 我国主要菜区耕层土壤盐分总量及离子组成[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2016, 22(4): 965-977.
[4]	谢会雅, 陈舜尧, 张阳, 等. 中国南方土壤酸化原因及土壤酸性改良技术研究进展[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2021(2): 104-107. DOI:10.16498/j.cnki.hnnykx.2021.002.027. doi: 10.16498/j.cnki.hnnykx.2021.002.027
[5]	邱婷, 张屹, 肖姬玲, 等. 土壤酸化及酸性土壤改良技术研究进展[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2016(10): 114-117. DOI:10.16498/j.cnki.hnnykx.2016.010.032. doi: 10.16498/j.cnki.hnnykx.2016.010.032
[6]	张金锦, 段增强. 设施菜地土壤次生盐渍化的成因、危害及其分类与分级标准的研究进展[J]. 土壤, 2011, 43(3): 361-366. DOI:10.13758/j.cnki.tr.2011.03.003. doi: 10.13758/j.cnki.tr.2011.03.003
[7]	张金锦, 段增强, 李迅. 基于黄瓜种植的设施菜地土壤硝酸盐型次生盐渍化的分级研究[J]. 土壤学报, 2012, 49(4):673-680. DOI: 10.11766/trxb201106170218. doi: 10.11766/trxb201106170218
[8]	黄绍文, 高伟, 唐继伟, 等. 我国主要菜区耕层土壤盐分总量及离子组成[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2016, 22(4): 965-977.
[9]	王光飞, 高晓东, 马艳, 等. 生物有机类复合调理剂在设施叶菜障碍土壤上的应用效果[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2020(2):56-65.
[10]	付宇童, 孙彤, 王林, 等. 纳米铜对小油菜(Brassica chinensis L.)种子发芽和幼苗生理生化特性的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2020, 39(11): 2524-2531.
[11]	孙蓟锋, 王旭. 土壤调理剂的研究和应用进展[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2013(1): 1-7.
[12]	施木田, 陈少华. 园艺植物营养与施肥技术[M]. 厦门: 厦门大学出版社, 2002.
[13]	肖起通. 三明市辖区大白菜氮磷钾推荐施肥指标研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016, 32(30): 113-119.
[14]	林万树. 古田山区大白菜氮磷钾指标体系研究[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2015, 30(3): 477-483. DOI:10.16211/j.issn.1004-390X(n).2015.03.025. doi: 10.16211/j.issn.1004-390X(n).2015.03.025
[15]	李娟, 章明清, 姚宝全, 等. 福建省主要蔬菜氮磷钾营养特性及其施肥指标体系研究 Ⅱ.主要蔬菜氮磷钾施肥效应及其土壤养分丰缺指标[J]. 福建农业学报, 2011, 26(3): 432-439. DOI:10.19303/j.issn.1008-0384.2011.03.020. doi: 10.19303/j.issn.1008-0384.2011.03.020
[16]	高智谋, 曹君, 潘月敏, 等. 哈茨木霉TH-1对棉花枯萎病菌和黄萎病菌的拮抗机制研究[J]. 棉花学报, 2007, 19(3): 168-172.
[17]	AHMED A S, SÁNCHEZ C P, CANDELA M E. Evaluation of induction of systemic resistance in pepper plants (Capsicum annuum) to Phytophthora capsici using Trichoderma harzianum and its relation with capsidiol accumulation[J]. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 2000, 106: 817-824. doi: 10.1023/A:1008780022925
[18]	牛鑫斌, 徐秉良, 刘佳, 等. 长枝木霉T6水分散粒剂对3种植物病害的生防效果[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2018, 53(1): 90-94. DOI:10.13432/j.cnki.jgsau.2018.01.014. doi: 10.13432/j.cnki.jgsau.2018.01.014
[19]	张丽娟, 曲继松, 朱倩楠, 等. 不同剂量外源纤维素酶对设施土壤生物活性与番茄生长的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(4): 1089-1094.
[20]	杜金伟, 付崇毅, 姜伟, 等. 羊粪堆肥提取液对小油菜生长及土壤盐分含量的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2021, 49(4): 52-56. doi: 10.12190/j.issn.2096-1197.2021.04.08

	肥前		肥前		收获
	pH	电导率/ (μS·cm^-1)	pH	电导率/ (μS·cm^-1)	pH	电导率/ (μS·cm^-1)	病株率/%	防效/%	亩净菜鲜重/kg	增产率/%
A	4.50b	675.10a	4.56b	849.50b	4.98b	615.60b	86.67a	—	1 092.21b	—
B	6.95a	519.70b	6.43a	1011.43a	6.06a	955.70a	30.00b	65.39	1 392.36ab	27.48
C	6.95a	519.70b	6.57a	959.47ab	6.26a	863.43a	16.67c	80.77	1 459.06a	33.59

	w(有机质) /(g·kg^-1)	w(有效磷) /(mg·kg^-1)	w(速效钾) /(mg·kg^-1)	w(碱解氮) /(mg·kg^-1)	w(全氮) /(mg·kg^-1)	w(全磷) /%	w(全钾) /(g·kg^-1)
A种前	12.30	114.00	213.00	331.00	1 780.00	0.120	22.40
A收获	12.20	96.80	197.00	266.00	1 540.00	0.118	25.70
ΔA	0.10	17.20	16.00	65.00	240.00	0.002	-3.30
B种前	15.00	60.70	196.00	314.00	1 550.00	0.143	24.90
B收获	14.40	76.90	259.00	366.00	1 640.00	0.105	25.40
ΔB	0.60	-16.20	-63.00	-52.00	-90.00	0.038	-0.50
C种前	18.70	95.10	229.00	315.00	2 218.00	0.432	25.60
C收获	18.00	84.80	195.00	313.00	1 860.00	0.108	25.60
ΔC	0.70	10.30	34.00	2.00	358.00	0.324	0.00

		肥后种前		收获		亩净菜鲜重/kg	较空白增产率/%	较常规增产率/%
		pH	电导率/(μS·cm^-1)	pH	电导率/(μS·cm^-1)	亩净菜鲜重/kg	较空白增产率/%	较常规增产率/%
空白	CK	4.81b	1 908.85a	4.53b	1 572.50a	1 172b
常规处理	A'	4.71b	1 596.90b	4.56b	851.60c	1 515ab	29.27
试验设计	B'	6.43a	1 759.43ab	6.32a	1 104.10b	1 507ab	28.58	0.00
	C'	6.50a	1 300.47c	6.64a	809.80 c	1 521ab	29.78	0.40
	D'	6.48a	1 471.97c	6.32a	632. 70d	1 656a	41.30	9.31
	E'	6.34a	1 756.70ab	6.34a	723.30cd	1 507ab	28.58	0.00

Soil conditioner and Trichoderma LTR-2 combined application for remediation of continuous cropping obstacle soil in Brassica chinensis L.

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 3

References 20

Related Articles 0

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0