Effects of different proportions of chemical fertilizer reduction combined with organic fertilizer supplements on organic carbon sequestration in Tobacco-planting soil
-
摘要:
为探究不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥影响植烟土壤有机碳固存的长期效应, 基于连续9年的田间定位试验, 设置不施肥(CK)、100%化肥(CF-1, 当地常规推荐施肥)、80%化肥(CF-2)、80%化肥配施有机肥(OF-1)、60%化肥配施有机肥(OF-2)、70%化肥配施有机肥+生物有机肥(BOF)处理, 对植烟土壤有机碳储量盈亏、固碳速率、有机碳组分含量、有机碳敏感指数、土壤碳库活度和土壤碳库管理指数进行对比, 探讨不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥对植烟土壤有机碳固存的长期效应。与CF-1处理相比, 连续不施肥(CK)处理植烟土壤有机碳组分、储量和土壤碳固存速率显著下降。不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥的 OF-1、OF-2和BOF处理, 植烟土壤有机碳含量分别增加9.6%、20.9%和13.9%, 土壤活性有机碳含量分别增加43.4%、68.0%和41.7%, 土壤可溶性有机碳含量分别增加14.8%、19.1%和25.4%, 土壤微生物量碳含量分别增加22.8%、37.2%和36.4%, 土壤有机碳储量分别增加15.3%、30.2%和31.2%, 年平均固碳速率分别提高191.3%、382.6%和391.3%, 碳库管理指数分别提高100.8%、159.8%和79.6%。不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥显著提升土壤活性有机碳敏感指数。与CF-1相比, OF-1、OF-2和BOF处理的烟叶产量分别提高10.3%、33.5%和35.3%, 中上等烟叶比例分别提高14.6%、22.0%和18.0%。连续9年化肥减量配施有机肥显著提高植烟土壤有机碳组分含量和土壤有机碳固存速率, 促进烟叶产质量提升, 是烟叶绿色优质生产、农田土壤固碳增效的有效途径, 以OF-2和BOF效应更好。
Abstract:The long-term effects of different proportions of fertilizer reduction combined with organic fertilizer on organic carbon sequestration in tobacco-planted soil were explored. Based on nine consecutive years of field positioning experiments, treatments of no fertilizer (CK), 100% fertilizer (CF-1, local conventional recommended fertilizer), 80% fertilizer (CF-2), 80% fertilizer with organic fertilizer (OF-1), 60% fertilizer with organic fertilizer (OF-2), 70% fertilizer with organic fertilizer + bioorganic fertilizer (BOF) were applied to compare organic carbon storage profit and loss, carbon sequestration rate, organic carbon component content, organic carbon sensitivity index, soil carbon pool activity and soil carbon pool management index of tobacco-planting soil, and to explore the long-term effects of different proportions of fertilizer reduction combined with organic fertilizer supplements on organic carbon sequestration in tobacco-planting soil. The organic carbon composition, storage, and soil carbon sequestration rate of tobacco-planted soil under the continuous no-fertilization (CK) treatment were significantly lower than those of CF-1. Compared with CF-1, the organic carbon content of tobacco-planting soil increased by 9.6%, 20.9% and 13.9%, the labile organic carbon content of soil increased by 43.4%, 68.0% and 41.7%, soil dissolved organic carbon content increased by 14.8%, 19.1% and 25.4%, soil microbial biomass carbon content increased by 22.8%, 37.2% and 36.4% and soil organic carbon storage increased by 15.3%, 30.2% and 31.2%, respectively, in the OF-1, OF-2 and BOF treatments. Compared with CF-1, the average annual carbon sequestration rate was increased by 191.3%, 382.6% and 391.3%, the carbon pool management index was increased by 100.8%, 159.8% and 79.6%, respectively, among OF-1, OF-2 and BOF treatments. Continuous fertilizer reduction at different proportions combined with organic fertilizer significantly increased the sensitivity index of soil active organic carbon. Compared with CF-1, the yield of tobacco leaves increased by 10.3%, 33.5%, and 35.3%, and the proportion of medium- and high-grade tobacco leaves increased by 14.6%, 22.0%, and 18.0%, respectively, in the OF-1, OF-2, and BOF treatments. After nine consecutive years of fertilizer reduction and supplementation with organic fertilizer, the organic carbon content and soil organic carbon sequestration rate of tobacco-planted soil significantly increased, and the quality of tobacco production was promoted. This approach is an effective way to produce green and high-quality tobacco leaves and to increase the efficiency of soil carbon sequestration. Treatment OF-2 or BOF resulted in much better results.
-
-
![]()
图 1 长期不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥对植烟土壤有机碳储量的影响
不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。CK: 不施肥; CF-1: 100%化肥; CF-2: 80%化肥; OF-1: 80%化肥配施有机肥; OF-2: 60%化肥配施有机肥; BOF: 70%化肥配施有机肥和生物有机肥。Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different treatments (P<0.05). CK: no fertilizer; CF-1: 100% chemical fertilizer; CF-2: 80% chemical fertilizer; OF-1: combined applicaiton of 80% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; OF-2: combined applicaiton of 60% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; BOF: combined applicaiton of 70% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer and bioorganic organic fertilizer.
Figure 1. Effects of long-term combined applicaiton of reduced chemical fertilizer with different proportions and organic fertilizer on organic carbon storage in tobacco soil
![]()
图 2 连续不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥对植烟土壤固碳速率(A)和固碳效率(B)的影响
不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。CK: 不施肥; CF-1: 100%化肥; CF-2: 80%化肥; OF-1: 80%化肥配施有机肥; OF-2: 60%化肥配施有机肥; BOF: 70%化肥配施有机肥和生物有机肥。Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different treatments (P<0.05). CK: no fertilizer; CF-1: 100% chemical fertilizer; CF-2: 80% chemical fertilizer; OF-1: combined applicaiton of 80% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; OF-2: combined applicaiton of 60% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; BOF: combined applicaiton of 70% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer and bioorganic organic fertilizer.
Figure 2. Effects of long-term combined applicaiton of reduced chemical fertilizer with different proportions and organic fertilizer on carbon sequestration rate (A) and carbon sequestration efficiency (B) of tobacco soil
![]()
图 3 碳投入量和植烟土壤固碳速率(A)和固碳效率(B)的关系
Figure 3. Relationships between carbon input and soil carbon sequestration rate (A) and carbon sequestration efficiency (B)
![]()
图 4 连续不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥对植烟土壤有机碳、活性有机碳、溶解性有机碳和微生物量碳的影响
不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。CK: 不施肥; CF-1: 100%化肥; CF-2: 80%化肥; OF-1: 80%化肥配施有机肥; OF-2: 60%化肥配施有机肥; BOF: 70%化肥配施有机肥和生物有机肥。Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different treatments (P<0.05). CK: no fertilizer; CF-1: 100% chemical fertilizer; CF-2: 80% chemical fertilizer; OF-1: combined applicaiton of 80% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; OF-2: combined applicaiton of 60% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; BOF: combined applicaiton of 70% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer and bioorganic organic fertilizer.
Figure 4. Effects of long-term combined applicaiton of reduced chemical fertilizer with different proportions and organic fertilizer on organic carbon, labile organic carbon, dissolved organic carbon and microbial biomass carbon of tobacco soil
表 1 连续不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥对植烟土壤有机碳组分敏感指数的影响
Table 1 Sensitivity indexes (SI) of organic carbon, labile organic carbon, dissolved organic carbon and microbial biomass carbon of tobacco soil under long-term combined applicaiton of reduced chemical fertilizer with different proportions and organic fertilizer
处理
Treatment土壤有机碳
Soil organic carbon土壤活性有机碳
Soil labile organic carbon土壤溶解性有机碳
Soil dissolved organic carbon土壤微生物量碳
Soil microbial biomass carbonCK −0.1665±0.05d −0.3772±0.08d −0.1493±0.08c −0.4199±0.02d CF-2 −0.0441±0.03c −0.0540±0.03c 0.0559±0.03b 0.0217±0.01c OF-1 0.0955±0.05b 0.4339±0.11b 0.1484±0.08ab 0.2380±0.02b OF-2 0.1389±0.05ab 0.6800±0.14a 0.1913±0.09a 0.3643±0.14a BOF 0.2095±0.06a 0.4168±0.07b 0.2535±0.06a 0.3721±0.08a 同列不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。CK: 不施肥; CF-1: 100%化肥; CF-2: 80%化肥; OF-1: 80%化肥配施有机肥; OF-2: 60%化肥配施有机肥; BOF: 70%化肥配施有机肥和生物有机肥。Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences among different treatments at P<0.05 level. CK: no fertilizer; CF-1: 100% chemical fertilizer; CF-2: 80% chemical fertilizer; OF-1: combined applicaiton of 80% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; OF-2: combined applicaiton of 60% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; BOF: combined applicaiton of 70% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer and bioorganic organic fertilizer. 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 连续不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥对土壤碳库活度(A)、活度指数(AI)、碳库指数(CPI)、碳库管理指数(CPMI)的影响
Table 2 Carbon pool activity, carbon pool activity index, carbon pool index and carbon pool management index of tobacco soil under long-term combined applicaiton of reduced chemical fertilizer with different proportions and organic fertilizer
处理
Treatment土壤碳库活度
Soil carbon pool activity土壤碳库活度指数
Soil carbon pool activity index土壤碳库指数
Soil carbon pool index土壤碳库管理指数
Soil carbon pool management indexCK 0.52c 0.61d 0.87d 53.19d CF-1 0.86c 1.00c 1.00c 100.00c CF-2 0.88c 1.02c 1.05c 106.23c OF-1 1.50ab 1.75ab 1.15b 200.81b OF-2 1.76a 2.05a 1.27a 259.78a BOF 1.26b 1.46 b 1.22ab 179.57b 同列不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。CK: 不施肥; CF-1: 100%化肥; CF-2: 80%化肥; OF-1: 80%化肥配施有机肥; OF-2: 60%化肥配施有机肥; BOF: 70%化肥配施有机肥和生物有机肥。Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences among treatments (P<0.05). CK: no fertilizer; CF-1: 100% chemical fertilizer; CF-2: 80% chemical fertilizer; OF-1: combined applicaiton of 80% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; OF-2: combined applicaiton of 60% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; BOF: combined applicaiton of 70% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer and bioorganic organic fertilizer.
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 连续不同比例化肥减量配施有机肥对烟叶产质量的影响
Table 3 Effects of long-term combined applicaiton of reduced chemical fertilizer with different proportions and organic fertilizer on yield and quality of tobacco
处理
Treatment烟叶产量
Tobacco yield (kg·hm−2)上等烟叶比例
Prime tobacco proportion (%)中上等烟叶比例
Proportion of medium and high-quality tobacco leaves (%)CK 710.00±62.45c 7.24±0.04d 53.25±0.08c CF-1 1260.00±51.96b 32.90±0.09bc 70.29±0.05b CF-2 1263.33±88.08b 26.63±0.08c 69.69±0.06b OF-1 1390.00±22.91b 43.22±0.05ab 80.57±0.03a OF-2 1681.67±105.04a 47.51±0.04a 85.74±0.01a BOF 1705.00±92.60a 51.92±0.06a 83.22±0.07a 同列不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。CK: 不施肥; CF-1: 100%化肥; CF-2: 80%化肥; OF-1: 80%化肥配施有机肥; OF-2: 60%化肥配施有机肥; BOF: 70%化肥配施有机肥和生物有机肥。Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences among treatments (P<0.05). CK: no fertilizer; CF-1: 100% chemical fertilizer; CF-2: 80% chemical fertilizer; OF-1: combined applicaiton of 80% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; OF-2: combined applicaiton of 60% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer; BOF: combined applicaiton of 70% chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer and bioorganic organic fertilizer.
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 植烟土壤碳组分、碳库管理指数、烟叶产质量之间的相关性
Table 4 Correlation between soil carbon components, carbon pool management indexes and tobacco yield and quality
SOC SOCs LOC DOC MBC CPMI Yield Percent SOC 1.000 SOCs 0.950** 1.000 LOC 0.901** 0.914** 1.000 DOC 0.869** 0.869** 0.830** 1.000 MBC 0.920** 0.893** 0.853** 0.793** 1.000 CPMI 0.818** 0.883** 0.942** 0.785** 0.801** 1.000 Yield 0.929** 0.910** 0.867** 0.914** 0.886** 0.813** 1.000 Percent 0.846** 0.838** 0.847** 0.778** 0.866** 0.770** 0.888** 1.000 **: P<0.01; SOC: 土壤有机碳; SOCs: 土壤有机碳储量; LOC: 土壤活性有机碳; DOC: 土壤溶解性有机碳; MBC: 土壤微生物量碳; CPMI: 土壤碳库管理指数; Yield: 烟叶产量; Percent: 中上等烟叶比例。SOC: soil organic carbon; SOCs: soil organic carbon storage; LOC: soil labile organic carbon; DOC: soil dissolved organic carbon; MBC: soil microbial biomass carbon; CPMI: carbon pool management index; Yield: tobacco leaf yield; Percent: proportion of medium- and high-grade tobacco leaves.
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] ZHAO Y C, WANG M Y, HU S J, et al. Economics- and policy-driven organic carbon input enhancement dominates soil organic carbon accumulation in Chinese croplands[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018, 115(16): 4045−4050
[2] 赵永存, 徐胜祥, 王美艳, 等. 中国农田土壤固碳潜力与速率: 认识、挑战与研究建议[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2018, 33(2): 191−197 ZHAO Y C, XU S X, WANG M Y, et al. Carbon sequestration potential in Chinese cropland soils: review, challenge, and research suggestions[J]. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2018, 33(2): 191−197
[3] QASWAR M, HUANG J, AHMED W, et al. Yield sustainability, soil organic carbon sequestration and nutrients balance under long-term combined application of manure and inorganic fertilizers in acidic paddy soil[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2020, 198: 104569 doi: 10.1016/j.still.2019.104569
[4] MALTAS A, KEBLI H, OBERHOLZER H R, et al. The effects of organic and mineral fertilizers on carbon sequestration, soil properties, and crop yields from a long-term field experiment under a Swiss conventional farming system[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2018, 29(4): 926−938
[5] TIEFENBACHER A, SANDÉN T, HASLMAYR H P, et al. Optimizing carbon sequestration in croplands: a synthesis[J]. Agronomy, 2021, 11(5): 882 doi: 10.3390/agronomy11050882
[6] YASEEN M, RAVERKAR K P, CHANDRA R, et al. Impact of long-term manures and balanced fertilization on soil carbon pools in mollisols under rice-wheat cropping system[J]. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science, 2022, 70(1): 97−105 doi: 10.5958/0974-0228.2022.00008.1
[7] 李文军, 黄庆海, 李大明, 等. 长期施肥下旱地红壤不同保护态有机碳库变化特征[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2023, 40(1): 106−115 LI W J, HUANG Q H, LI D M, et al. Variation characteristics of organic carbon pools with different protection methods in upland red soil under long-term fertilization[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2023, 40(1): 106−115
[8] DAI P G, CONG P, WANG P, et al. Alleviating soil acidification and increasing the organic carbon pool by long-term organic fertilizer on tobacco planting soil[J]. Agronomy, 2021, 11(11): 2135 doi: 10.3390/agronomy11112135
[9] 胡玲, 周丽娟, 王娟, 等. 云南烟区植烟土壤养分状况综合评价[J]. 河南农业科学, 2014, 43(7): 52−59 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3268.2014.07.012 HU L, ZHOU L J, WANG J, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of soil fertility in tobacco-growing areas in Yunnan Province[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural Sciences, 2014, 43(7): 52−59 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3268.2014.07.012
[10] ZHAO H, SUN B F, LU F, et al. Roles of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium fertilizers in carbon sequestration in a Chinese agricultural ecosystem[J]. Climatic Change, 2017, 142(3): 587−596
[11] CAI A D, ZHANG W J, XU M G, et al. Soil fertility and crop yield after manure addition to acidic soils in South China[J]. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2018, 111(1): 61−72 doi: 10.1007/s10705-018-9918-6
[12] 赵力光, 唐兴莹, 汤利, 等. 化肥减量配施生物有机肥对植烟土壤微生物区系的影响及其与烤烟青枯病的关系[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2018, 33(4): 744−750 ZHAO L G, TANG X Y, TANG L, et al. Effects of bio-organic fertilizers combination with chemical fertilizer reduction on the soil microbial flora and its correlation of bacterial wilt of flue-cured tobacco[J]. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University (Natural Science), 2018, 33(4): 744−750
[13] 宋建群, 徐智, 汤利, 等. 不同有机肥对烤烟养分吸收及化肥利用率的影响[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2015, 30(3): 471−476 doi: 10.16211/j.issn.1004-390X(n).2015.03.024 SONG J Q, XU Z, TANG L, et al. Effects of different organic fertilizers on nutrient absorption and fertilizer use efficiency of flue-cured tobacco[J]. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University (Natural Science), 2015, 30(3): 471−476 doi: 10.16211/j.issn.1004-390X(n).2015.03.024
[14] 张云伟, 徐智, 汤利, 等. 不同有机肥对烤烟根际土壤微生物的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24(9): 2551−2556 doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.2013.0504 ZHANG Y W, XU Z, TANG L, et al. Effects of different organic fertilizers on the microbes in rhizospheric soil of flue-cured tobacco[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2013, 24(9): 2551−2556 doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.2013.0504
[15] 唐兴莹, 洪杨, 赵力光, 等. 连续有机无机配施对植烟土壤归一化酶活性的影响[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2019, 34(1): 152−159 TANG X Y, HONG Y, ZHAO L G, et al. Effects of combination of organic and inorganic fertilization on the normalized enzyme activity of flue-cured tobacco soil under continuing chemical fertilizers reduction[J]. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University (Natural Science), 2019, 34(1): 152−159
[16] 农传江, 汤利, 徐智, 等. 有机肥部分替代化肥对土壤有机碳库和烤烟经济性状的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2016(4): 70−75 doi: 10.11838/sfsc.20160412 NONG C J, TANG L, XU Z, et al. Effects of organic fertilizer partial substituted for chemical fertilizer on soil organic carbon pool and economic characters of flue-cured tobacco[J]. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2016(4): 70−75 doi: 10.11838/sfsc.20160412
[17] MANU V, WHITBREAD A, BLAIR N, et al. Carbon status and structural stability of soils from differing land use systems in the Kingdom of Tonga[J]. Soil Use and Management, 2014, 30(4): 517−523 doi: 10.1111/sum.12135
[18] 刘强, 梁鑫, 董佩丽, 等. 不同施肥措施对黄土丘陵区农田土壤有机碳组分和碳库管理指数的影响[J]. 土壤, 2023, 55(2): 446−452 doi: 10.13758/j.cnki.tr.2023.02.027 LIU Q, LIANG X, DONG P L, et al. Effects of different fertilization methods on farmland soil active organic carbon and carbon pool management indicators in loess hilly area[J]. Soils, 2023, 55(2): 446−452 doi: 10.13758/j.cnki.tr.2023.02.027
[19] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 第3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000 BAO S D. Analysis of Soil Agronomy[M]. 3rd Edition. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 2000
[20] ANANDAKUMAR S, BAKHOUM N, CHINNADURAI C, et al. Impact of long-term nutrient management on sequestration and dynamics of soil organic carbon in a semi-arid tropical Alfisol of India[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2022, 177: 104549 doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2022.104549
[21] 赵惠丽, 董金琎, 师江澜, 等. 秸秆还田模式对小麦-玉米轮作体系土壤有机碳固存的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(1): 213−224 ZHAO H L, DONG J J, SHI J L, et al. Effect of straw returning mode on soil organic carbon sequestration[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2021, 58(1): 213−224
[22] 孔德宁, 康国栋, 李鹏, 等. 化肥减施条件下配施有机肥对旱地紫色土有机碳活性组分的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2021, 40(4): 1073−1080 doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202104.002 KONG D N, KANG G D, LI P, et al. Effects of combined application of organic fertilizer on the active components of organic carbon in upland purple soil under reducing chemical fertilizer application[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2021, 40(4): 1073−1080 doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202104.002
[23] 姜硕琛, 张海维, 杨迪, 等. 化肥与有机肥配施对再生稻稻田土壤容重、pH和碳氮代谢的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2023, 31(7): 1053−1066 doi: 10.12357/cjea.20220886 JIANG S C, ZHANG H W, YANG D, et al. Effects of combined application of chemical and organic fertilizer on soil bulk density, pH, and carbon and nitrogen metabolism in ratooning rice fields[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2023, 31(7): 1053−1066 doi: 10.12357/cjea.20220886
[24] 徐明岗, 张旭博, 孙楠, 等. 农田土壤固碳与增产协同效应研究进展[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(6): 1441−1449 doi: 10.11674/zwyf.17340 XU M G, ZHANG X B, SUN N, et al. Advance in research of synergistic effects of soil carbon sequestration on crop yields improvement in croplands[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 2017, 23(6): 1441−1449 doi: 10.11674/zwyf.17340
[25] QIU S J, GAO H J, ZHU P, et al. Changes in soil carbon and nitrogen pools in a Mollisol after long-term fallow or application of chemical fertilizers, straw or manures[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2016, 163: 255−265 doi: 10.1016/j.still.2016.07.002
[26] WU H L, CAI A D, XING T T, et al. Fertilization enhances mineralization of soil carbon and nitrogen pools by regulating the bacterial community and biomass[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2021, 21(4): 1633−1643 doi: 10.1007/s11368-020-02865-z
[27] PANCHAL P, PREECE C, PEÑUELAS J, et al. Soil carbon sequestration by root exudates[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2022, 27(8): 749−757 doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2022.04.009
[28] SOKOL N W, KUEBBING S E, KARLSEN-AYALA E, et al. Evidence for the primacy of living root inputs, not root or shoot litter, in forming soil organic carbon[J]. New Phytologist, 2019, 221(1): 233−246 doi: 10.1111/nph.15361
[29] LUO X Z, ZHANG L L, LIN Y B, et al. Nitrogen availability mediates soil organic carbon cycling in response to phosphorus supply: A global meta-analysis[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2023, 185: 109158 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2023.109158
[30] PAYEN F T, SYKES A, AITKENHEAD M, et al. Soil organic carbon sequestration rates in vineyard agroecosystems under different soil management practices: a meta-analysis[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 290: 125736 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125736
[31] BERHANE M, XU M, LIANG Z Y, et al. Effects of long-term straw return on soil organic carbon storage and sequestration rate in North China upland crops: a meta-analysis[J]. Global Change Biology, 2020, 4: 15018
[32] MACDONALD C A, DELGADO-BAQUERIZO M, REAY D S, et al. Soil nutrients and soil carbon storage: modulators and mechanisms[M]//Soil Carbon Storage. New York: Academic Press, 2018: 167–205
[33] HU Y M, WANG L, CHEN F X, et al. Soil carbon sequestration efficiency under continuous paddy rice cultivation and excessive nitrogen fertilization in South China[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2021, 213: 105108 doi: 10.1016/j.still.2021.105108
[34] 吴世蓉, 位佳, 邱龙霞, 等. 基于大比例尺数据库的福建省耕地土壤固碳速率和潜力研究[J]. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(5): 1293−1305 WU S R, WEI J, QIU L X, et al. Study of soil organic carbon sequestration rate and potential of farmland soil in Fujian Province based on the large scale soil database[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2022, 59(5): 1293−1305
[35] 李倩, 马琨, 冶秀香, 等. 不同培肥方式对土壤有机碳与微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2018, 26(12): 1866−1875 doi: 10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.171190 LI Q, MA K, YE X X, et al. Effect of fertilization managements on soil organic carbon and microbial community structure[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2018, 26(12): 1866−1875 doi: 10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.171190
[36] CHEN Q Y, LIU Z J, ZHOU J B, et al. Long-term straw mulching with nitrogen fertilization increases nutrient and microbial determinants of soil quality in a maize-wheat rotation on China’s Loess Plateau[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 775: 145930 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145930
[37] BHATTACHARYYA S S, ROS G H, FURTAK K, et al. Soil carbon sequestration — An interplay between soil microbial community and soil organic matter dynamics[J]. The Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 815: 152928 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.152928
[38] PLAZA C, GIANNETTA B, FERNÁNDEZ J M, et al. Response of different soil organic matter pools to biochar and organic fertilizers[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2016, 225: 150−159
[39] WHALEN E D, GRANDY A S, SOKOL N W, et al. Clarifying the evidence for microbial- and plant-derived soil organic matter, and the path toward a more quantitative understanding[J]. Global Change Biology, 2022, 28(24): 7167−7185 doi: 10.1111/gcb.16413
[40] WANG Y D, HU N, XU M G, et al. 23-year manure and fertilizer application increases soil organic carbon sequestration of a rice-barley cropping system[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2015, 51(5): 583−591 doi: 10.1007/s00374-015-1007-2
[41] 蔡岸冬, 徐明岗, 张文菊, 等. 土壤有机碳储量与外源碳输入量关系的建立与验证[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(5): 934−941 doi: 10.11674/zwyf.19287 CAI A D, XU M G, ZHANG W J, et al. Establishment and verification of the relationship between soil organic carbon storage and exogenous carbon input[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2020, 26(5): 934−941 doi: 10.11674/zwyf.19287
[42] WANG X X, CUI Y X, WANG Y H, et al. Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry reveals phosphorus addition alleviates microbial nutrient limitation and promotes soil carbon sequestration in agricultural ecosystems[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2022, 22(2): 536−546 doi: 10.1007/s11368-021-03094-8
[43] WU J J, CHENG X L, LIU G H. Increased soil organic carbon response to fertilization is associated with increasing microbial carbon use efficiency: data synthesis[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2022, 171: 108731 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108731
[44] DUVAL M E, MARTINEZ J M, GALANTINI J A. Assessing soil quality indices based on soil organic carbon fractions in different long-term wheat systems under semiarid conditions[J]. Soil Use and Management, 2020, 36(1): 71−82 doi: 10.1111/sum.12532
[45] LIU B, XIA H, JIANG C C, et al. 14 year applications of chemical fertilizers and crop straw effects on soil labile organic carbon fractions, enzyme activities and microbial community in rice-wheat rotation of middle China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 841: 156608 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156608
[46] LI J H, CHENG B H, ZHANG R, et al. Nitrogen and phosphorus additions accelerate decomposition of slow carbon pool and lower total soil organic carbon pool in alpine meadows[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2021, 32(4): 1761−1772
[47] ZHENG M Y, ZHU P, ZHENG J Y, et al. Effects of soil texture and nitrogen fertilisation on soil bacterial community structure and nitrogen uptake in flue-cured tobacco[J]. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11: 22643 doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01957-1
[48] JI L D, SI H L, HE J Q, et al. The shifts of maize soil microbial community and networks are related to soil properties under different organic fertilizers[J]. Rhizosphere, 2021, 19: 100388 doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2021.100388
[49] HARMAN G E, UPHOFF N. Symbiotic root-endophytic soil microbes improve crop productivity and provide environmental benefits[J]. Scientifica, 2019, 2019: 9106395
[50] SHA S Y, ZHAO X H, LI Y X, et al. Nutrient expert system optimizes fertilizer management to improve potato productivity and tuber quality[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2022, 102(3): 1233−1244 doi: 10.1002/jsfa.11461
-
期刊类型引用(3)
1. 何咏梅，王俊文，白鹏，冯俊芳，武玥，胡琳莉，张国斌，吕剑，刘泽慈，郁继华. 沼液部分替代化肥及钾肥减量对西葫芦果实品质和土壤性质的影响. 江苏农业学报. 2025(01): 161-168 . 
百度学术
2. 龚成文，米永伟，邵武平，谢志军，漆永红. 当归化肥农药减施增效栽培技术规程. 寒旱农业科学. 2024(04): 384-387 . 百度学术
3. 彭家豪，林少颖，王维奇，曾瑜，陈梅春，杨文文，陈思聪. 秸秆与生物炭施加对茉莉园土壤真菌群落及有机碳库特征的影响. 环境科学. 2024(07): 4228-4240 . 百度学术
其他类型引用(3)
计量
- 文章访问数: 263
- HTML全文浏览量: 78
- PDF下载量: 54
- 被引次数: 6
