不同有机物料配施对城市绿地土壤质量及植物生长的影响

Effects of combined application of different organic materials on soil quality and plant growth in urban green spaces

  • 摘要: 为改善城市绿地土壤质量并促进植物生长,通过36个月野外跟踪观测试验,探究了绿废堆肥、生物炭、餐厨堆肥及有机肥的不同配施方案对土壤肥力、物理性状及植物生长的影响。试验设置5个处理:CK,对照;T1,42 t·hm−2绿废堆肥+10 t·hm−2有机肥;T2,42 t·hm−2生物炭+10 t·hm−2有机肥;T3,21 t·hm−2绿废堆肥+21 t·hm−2生物炭+10 t·hm−2有机肥;T4,42 t·hm−2绿废堆肥+10 t·hm−2餐厨堆肥。结果表明:(1)各有机物料处理均可明显提高土壤有机质、有效氮磷钾含量和阳离子交换量,改善土壤容重和孔隙度,提高土壤质量指数并促进植物的生长,其中,T1对土壤有机质、水解性氮、有效磷含量的提升效果最好;T2对土壤速效钾含量的提升效果最好;T4对土壤质量指数及植物生长指标(株高、冠幅、地上生物量、地下生物量及总生物量)的提升效果最好。(2)对比T1、T2、T3发现,T1对土壤氮、磷含量及阳离子交换量提升幅度最高,T2对土壤速效钾含量的促增效果最好;在处理的前24个月,T1对土壤有机质含量的促增效果最优(P<0.05),到了第36个月,则以T2对有机质含量的促增效果最好,T3对土壤质量指数、植物的株高、地径、冠幅以及生物量的促增效果最优(P<0.05)。(3)对比T1和T4发现,T4对土壤速效钾含量、阳离子交换量、物理结构、土壤质量指数及植物长势的作用效果明显优于T1,对水解性氮、有效磷的促增效果则相反;在处理的前24个月,T1对有机质的促增效果优于T4,到了第36个月则相反。采用不同有机物料配施可有效实现“土壤质量提升-植物生长促进”的协同效应,其中,短期改良需强化有机质提升和氮磷供给时可优先选择T1;追求长期土壤肥力维持、土壤质量提升与植物生长促进时宜采用T4。本研究结果为园林绿地土壤改良与有机废弃物资源化利用提供了精准技术支撑。

     

    Abstract: To improve the soil quality of urban green spaces and promote plant growth, a 36-month field experiment was conducted to explore the effects of different combined application schemes of different organic materials (green waste compost, biochar, food waste compost, and organic fertilizer) on soil fertility, physical properties, and plant growth. Five treatments were set up: CK (control); T1, 42 t·hm−2 green waste compost + 10 t·hm−2 organic fertilizer; T2, 42 t·hm−2 biochar + 10 t·hm−2 organic fertilizer; T3, 21 t·hm−2 green waste compost + 21 t·hm−2 biochar + 10 t·hm−2 organic fertilizer; T4, 42 t·hm−2 green waste compost + 10 t·hm−2 food waste compost. The results showed that: (1) All organic material treatments significantly increased soil organic matter, available NPK contents, and cation exchange capacity (CEC), improved soil bulk density and porosity, enhanced soil quality index, and promoted plant growth. Among them, T1 had the best effect on increasing soil organic matter, hydrolyzable nitrogen, and available phosphorus; T2 was most effective in improving soil available potassium; T4 showed the optimal performance in enhancing soil quality index and plant growth indicators (plant height, crown width, aboveground biomass, underground biomass, and total biomass). (2) Comparison of T1, T2, and T3 revealed that T1 had the highest increase amplitude in soil N, P, and CEC, while T2 was superior in promoting available potassium. During the first 24 months of treatment, T1 exhibited the best effect on increasing soil organic matter (P<0.05); by the 36th month, T2 showed the most prominent promotion on organic matter, and T3 was optimal in improving soil quality index as well as plant height, ground diameter, crown width, and biomass (P<0.05). (3) Comparison of T1 and T4 indicated that T4 was significantly superior to T1 in improving soil available potassium, CEC, physical structure, soil quality index, and plant growth performance, but the opposite was true for the promotion of hydrolyzable nitrogen and available phosphorus. In the first 24 months, T1 was better than T4 in increasing organic matter, while the trend reversed at the 36th month. The combined application of different organic materials in this study can effectively achieve the synergistic effect of "soil quality improvement - plant growth promotion". For short-term improvement in enhancing organic matter accumulation and N-P supply, T1 is preferred; for long-term maintenance of soil fertility, soil quality improvement, and plant growth promotion, T4 is recommended. The findings provide precise technical support for soil improvement of landscape green spaces and resource utilization of organic wastes.

     

/

返回文章
返回