秸秆还田量对川中丘陵冬小麦-夏玉米轮作体系土壤物理特性的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.07.012

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探明秸秆还田量对农田土壤物理特征的影响，为川中丘陵紫色土区建立“提升土壤质量、高效利用秸秆”的种植业副产物利用模式，同时为秸秆资源化利用提供科学依据。【方法】基于田间长期定位试验（2006—至今），采用原位监测和计算机断层微扫描技术（CT）相结合的方法，研究秸秆还田量（无秸秆还田（RMW₀）、秸秆30%还田（RMW₃₀）、秸秆50%还田（RMW₅₀）和秸秆100% 还田（RMW₁₀₀））差异对冬小麦-夏玉米轮作体系耕层土壤物理特征的影响。【结果】（1）秸秆还田可明显改善土壤透气、持水和导水性能，随秸秆还田量增加改善效果明显增加。RMW₃₀、RMW₅₀和RMW₁₀₀处理较RMW₀处理土壤容重分别显著降低15.2%、11.7%和17.9%，土壤孔隙度则分别显著增加18.4%、13.7%和21.3%。另外，RMW₁₀₀处理饱和导水率高达1.62 mm·min^-1，导水性能优于其他处理。（2）秸秆还田促进已有孔隙发育成更大孔隙，且孔隙均匀性和孔隙间连通性明显改善，RMW₁₀₀和RMW₅₀处理对土壤大孔隙组成的改善优于RMW₃₀和RMW₀处理。RMW₁₀₀处理平均孔隙直径趋大，孔隙间连通性最优。RMW₅₀处理孔隙均匀性明显提高，大小孔隙配比较其他处理更合理。（3）与无秸秆还田处理相比，秸秆还田后>2 mm团聚体数量显著增加，0.25—2 mm团聚体数量显著减少，秸秆还田有利于形成土壤水稳性大团聚体，促进中团聚体向大团聚体转变，RMW₅₀和RMW₁₀₀处理改善效果均显著优于RMW₃₀处理。（4）土壤容重、>0.25 mm团聚体和大孔隙特征是反映石灰性紫色土区耕层土壤物理特征的主要指标，第一主成分和第二主成分对土壤物理性质的解释度分别为57.8%和23.6%。RMW₅₀与RMW₁₀₀处理土壤物理特征接近，与RMW₀和RMW₃₀处理在PC1和PC2轴上出现明显离散。【结论】川中丘陵紫色土区在产量无显著差异的基础上，不同秸秆还田量对耕层土壤物理性质的影响存在差异，秸秆50%和100%还田效果无显著差异，但显著优于秸秆30%还田和不还田处理，宜因地制宜进行还田量选择。

关键词: 秸秆还田, 紫色土, 冬小麦-夏玉米轮作, 土壤团聚体, 土壤孔隙

Abstract:

【Objective】 The aim of this study was to ascertain the effects of straw returning quantity on the soil physical characteristics and to establish a recycling model for planting by-products, so as to provide a scientific basis for the utilization of straw resources in the central hilly area of Sichuan basin.【Method】 Herein, based on long-term field trials (2006-present) using a combination of in situ monitoring and computed tomography microscanning (CT), the effects of different amounts of straw returned to the field (0 straw returned (RMW₀), 30% straw returned (RMW₃₀), 50% straw returned (RMW₅₀), and 100% straw returned (RMW₁₀₀)) on the physical characteristics at the cultivated soil layer of the winter wheat-summer maize rotation system were examined.【Result】 (1) Straw returned to the field could significantly improve soil permeability, water holding capacity and hydraulic conductivity, and the improving effect increased significantly with the amount of straw returned to the field. Compared with RMW₀, soil bulk density under RMW₃₀, RMW₅₀, and RMW₁₀₀ reduced significantly by 15.2%, 11.7%, and 17.9%, respectively; whereas, soil porosity under these treatments were significantly increased by 18.4%, 13.7%, and 21.3%, respectively. In addition, the saturated hydraulic conductivity of RMW₁₀₀ treatment was as high as 1.62 mm·min^-1, and the soil hydraulic conductivity was superior to other treatments. (2) Straw returning promoted the development of existing pores into larger ones and significantly improved pore uniformity and connectivity. The RMW₁₀₀ and RMW₅₀ treatments improved the macropore composition of the soil better than that under the RMW₃₀ and RMW₀ treatments. The average pore diameter of the RMW₁₀₀ treatment tended to be larger and inter-pore connectivity was optimal. The homogeneity of the pores under the RMW₅₀ treatment was significantly improved and the pore size distribution was more appropriate than that under other treatments. (3) Compared with RMW₀ treatment, the number of >2 mm agglomerates increased significantly and the number of 0.25-2 mm agglomerates decreased significantly after straw returned to the field, which was beneficial to the formation of large soil water-stable agglomerates and promoted the transformation of medium to large agglomerates. Both RMW₅₀ and RMW₁₀₀ treatments improved significantly better than that under RMW30 treatment. (4) Principal components analysis showed soil bulk density, water-stable aggregate with diameter larger than 0.25 mm and large pore were the main indicators of the physical characteristics of cultivated soils in calcareous purple soils. The first and second principal components explained 57.8% and 23.6% of the physical properties of the soil, respectively. The physical characteristics under RMW₅₀ and RMW₁₀₀ treatments were close to each other, and showed significant divergence from the RMW₀ and RMW₃₀ treatments on the PC1 and PC2 axes. 【Conclusion】 On the basis of no significant difference of crop yield in the central hilly area of Sichuan basin, there were differences in the effects of different straw returning quantities on the physical properties of cultivated soil layer, with no significant differences between 50% and 100% straw returning effects, but significantly better than that of 30% and 0 of straw incorporation. The specific straw application rate should be selected according to the local conditions.

Key words: straw returning, purple soil, winter wheat-summer maize rotation system, soil aggregate, soil pore characteristics

马胜兰, 况福虹, 林洪羽, 崔俊芳, 唐家良, 朱波, 蒲全波. 秸秆还田量对川中丘陵冬小麦-夏玉米轮作体系土壤物理特性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(7): 1344-1358.

MA ShengLan, KUANG FuHong, LIN HongYu, CUI JunFang, TANG JiaLiang, ZHU Bo, PU QuanBo. Effects of Straw Incorporation Quantity on Soil Physical Characteristics of Winter Wheat-Summer Maize Rotation System in the Central Hilly Area of Sichuan Basin[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(7): 1344-1358.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.07.012

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2023/V56/I7/1344

图/表 11

图1

图2

表1

图3

表2

图4

表3

图5

图6

表4

图7

参考文献 50

[1]	RABOT E, WIESMEIER M, SCHLÜTER S, VOGEL H J. Soil structure as an indicator of soil functions: A review. Geoderma, 2018, 314: 122-137. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.11.009
[2]	张俊伶, 张江周, 申建波, 田静, 金可默, 张福锁. 土壤健康与农业绿色发展:机遇与对策. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(4): 783-796.
	ZHANG J L, ZHANG J Z, SHEN J B, TIAN J, JIN K M, ZHANG F S. Soil health and agriculture green development: Opportunities and challenges. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2020, 57(4): 783-796. (in Chinese)
[3]	POLLÁKOVÁ N, ŠIMANSKÝ V, KRAVKA M. The influence of soil organic matter fractions on aggregates stabilization in agricultural and forest soils of selected Slovak and Czech hilly lands. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2018, 18(8): 2790-2800. doi: 10.1007/s11368-017-1842-x
[4]	武志杰, 张海军, 许广山, 张玉华, 刘春萍. 玉米秸秆还田培肥土壤的效果. 应用生态学报, 2002, 13(5): 539-542.
	WU Z J, ZHANG H J, XU G S, ZHANG Y H, LIU C P. Effect of returning corn straw into soil on soil fertility. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2002, 13(5): 539-542. (in Chinese)
[5]	李春阳. 不同秸秆还田量对土壤性状及玉米产量的影响[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2017.
	LI C Y. Effects of different straw returning on soil properties and maize yield[D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2017. (in Chinese)
[6]	CATES A M, RUARK M D, HEDTCKE J L, POSNER J L. Long-term tillage, rotation and perennialization effects on particulate and aggregate soil organic matter. Soil and Tillage Research, 2016, 155: 371-380. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2015.09.008
[7]	孟庆英, 邹洪涛, 韩艳玉, 张春峰. 秸秆还田量对土壤团聚体有机碳和玉米产量的影响. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(23): 119-125.
	MENG Q Y, ZOU H T, HAN Y Y, ZHANG C F. Effects of straw application rates on soil aggregates, soil organic carbon content and maize yield. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(23): 119-125. (in Chinese)
[8]	江恒. 有机物输入量对黑土结构性质及其季节性变化的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 中国科学院大学(中国科学院东北地理与农业生态研究所), 2019.
	JIANG H. Effects of organic amendment rate on the soil structure properties and their seasonal variations in black soil[D]. Harbin: Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2019. (in Chinese)
[9]	张久明, 迟凤琴, 匡恩俊, 韩锦泽, 刘宝林. 秸秆不同方式还田对土壤理化性质的影响. 黑龙江农业科学, 2016(9): 30-34.
	ZHANG J M, CHI F Q, KUANG E J, HAN J Z, LIU B L. Effect of different straw returning ways on soil physical and chemical properties. Heilongjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2016(9): 30-34. (in Chinese)
[10]	王永栋, 武均, 蔡立群, 张仁陟. 秸秆还田量对陇中旱作麦田土壤团聚体稳定性和有机碳含量的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2022, 40(2): 232-239, 249.
	WANG Y D, WU J, CAI L Q, ZHANG R Z. Effects of straw returning amount on stability of soil aggregates and organic carbon content in dryland wheat field of the Loess Plateau. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2022, 40(2): 232-239, 249. (in Chinese)
[11]	韩新忠, 朱利群, 杨敏芳, 俞琦, 卞新民. 不同小麦秸秆还田量对水稻生长、土壤微生物生物量及酶活性的影响. 农业环境科学学报, 2012, 31(11): 2192-2199.
	HAN X Z, ZHU L Q, YANG M F, YU Q, BIAN X M. Effects of different amount of wheat straw returning on rice growth, soil microbial biomass and enzyme activity. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2012, 31(11): 2192-2199. (in Chinese)
[12]	GOVAERTS B, VERHULST N, CASTELLANOS-NAVARRETE A, SAYRE K D, DIXON J, DENDOOVEN L. Conservation agriculture and soil carbon sequestration: Between myth and farmer reality. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 2009, 28(3): 97-122. doi: 10.1080/07352680902776358
[13]	四川省秸秆综合利用规划(2016-2020) http://www.china nengyuan. com/news/105572.html.
	Sichuan province straw comprehensive utilization planning. (2016-2020) http://www.china nengyuan.com/news/105572.html. (in Chinese)
[14]	吴婕, 朱钟麟, 郑家国, 姜心禄. 秸秆覆盖还田对土壤理化性质及作物产量的影响. 西南农业学报, 2006, 19(2): 192-195.
	WU J, ZHU Z L, ZHENG J G, JIANG X L. Influences of straw mulching treatment on soil physical and chemical properties and crop yields. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2006, 19(2): 192-195. (in Chinese)
[15]	徐勤学. 紫色土区主要农业活动对坡面土壤侵蚀的影响[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2011.
	XU Q X. Effects of agricultural activities on hillslop soil erosion of purple soil[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2011. (in Chinese)
[16]	张先婉, 朱波, 蒋明富. 中国科学院盐亭紫色土农业生态试验站建站20周年回顾. 山地学报, 2001, 19(S1): 1-3.
	ZHANG X W, ZHU B, JIANG M F. A 20 years’ review on Yanting agro-ecological station of purple soil, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Journal of Mountain Research, 2001, 19(S1): 1-3. (in Chinese)
[17]	ZHU B, WANG T, KUANG F H, LUO Z X, TANG J L, XU T P. Measurements of nitrate leaching from a hillslope cropland in the central Sichuan Basin, China. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2009, 73(4): 1419-1426. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2008.0259
[18]	周明华. 紫色土坡耕地氮素平衡的模拟研究[D]. 北京: 中国科学院研究生院, 2010.
	ZHOU M H. Simulation study on nitrogen balance of sloping farmland in purple soil[D]. Beijing: Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2010. (in Chinese)
[19]	花可可. 紫色土坡耕地土壤固碳机制研究[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学, 2013.
	HUA K K. Study on soil carbon fixation mechanism of sloping farmland in purple soil[D]. Beijing: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2013. (in Chinese)
[20]	何毓蓉, 张保华, 周红艺, 黄成敏. 紫色土的水土保持与持续农业环境. 水土保持学报, 2002, 16(5): 11-13.
	HE Y R, ZHANG B H, ZHOU H Y, HUANG C M. Soil and water conservation and sustainable agricultural environment of purple soil. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2002, 16(5): 11-13. (in Chinese)
[21]	王红兰. 施用生物炭对紫色土坡耕地耕层土壤水力学性质的影响[D]. 成都: 中国科学院、水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所, 2016.
	WANG H L. Effect of the application of biochar on the hydrodynamic properties of the soil of the cultivated land on the purple soil slope[D]. Chengdu: Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2016. (in Chinese)
[22]	鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 2000.
	LU R K. Methods of Soil Agrochemical Analysis. Beijing: China Agriculture Scientech Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[23]	邓继峰, 丁国栋, 李景浩, 邓舸, 张若菡, 周永斌, 殷有. 基于3种不同土壤粒径分级制度的毛乌素沙地樟子松林地土壤体积分形维数差异研究. 西北林学院学报, 2017, 32(3): 35-40.
	DENG J F, DING G D, LI J H, DENG G, ZHANG R H, ZHOU Y B, YIN Y. Effects of three soil particle size classification system on calculating volume-based fractal dimension of Mongolian pine plantations in Mu Us Desert. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2017, 32(3): 35-40. (in Chinese)
[24]	胡雷, 王长庭, 阿的鲁骥, 字洪标. 高寒草甸植物根系生物量及有机碳含量与土壤机械组成的关系. 西南民族大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 41(1): 6-11.
	HU L, WANG C T, ADE LU-JI, ZI H B. Relationship between root biomass, soil organic carbon and soil mechanical composition in alpine meadow. Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities (Natural Science Edition), 2015, 41(1): 6-11. (in Chinese)
[25]	雷泽勇, 于东伟, 周凤艳, 张岩松, 李尧, 白津宁. 樟子松人工林营建对土壤颗粒组成变化的影响. 生态学报, 2020, 40(15): 5367-5376.
	LEI Z Y, YU D W, ZHOU F Y, ZHANG Y S, LI Y, BAI J N. Effects of afforestation with Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica on change of soil particle size distribution in sandy land. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(15): 5367-5376. (in Chinese)
[26]	曹晶晶. 棉秆还田对连作棉田土壤团聚体养分及有机碳组分的影响[D]. 石河子: 石河子大学, 2016.
	CAO J J. Effect of returning straw into field on the soil aggregates nutrients, organic carbon components[D]. Shihezi: Shihezi University, 2016. (in Chinese)
[27]	窦森, 李凯, 关松. 土壤团聚体中有机质研究进展. 土壤学报, 2011, 48(2): 412-418.
	DOU S, LI K, GUAN S. A review on organic matter in soil aggregates. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2011, 48(2): 412-418. (in Chinese)
[28]	薛斌, 黄丽, 鲁剑巍, 李小坤, 殷志遥, 刘智杰, 陈涛. 连续秸秆还田和免耕对土壤团聚体及有机碳的影响. 水土保持学报, 2018, 32(1): 182-189.
	XUE B, HUANG L, LU J W, LI X K, YIN Z Y, LIU Z J, CHEN T. Effects of continuous straw returning and no-tillage on soil aggregates and organic carbon. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2018, 32(1): 182-189. (in Chinese)
[29]	侯晓娜, 李慧, 朱刘兵, 韩燕来, 唐政, 李忠芳, 谭金芳, 张水清. 生物炭与秸秆添加对砂姜黑土团聚体组成和有机碳分布的影响. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(4): 705-712. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.04.08
	HOU X N, LI H, ZHU L B, HAN Y L, TANG Z, LI Z F, TAN J F, ZHANG S Q. Effects of biochar and straw additions on lime concretion black soil aggregate composition and organic carbon distribution. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2015, 48(4): 705-712. (in Chinese)
[30]	孙梅, 黄运湘, 孙楠, 徐明岗, 王伯仁, 张旭博. 农田土壤孔隙及其影响因素研究进展. 土壤通报, 2015, 46(1): 233-238.
	SUN M, HUANG Y X, SUN N, XU M G, WANG B R, ZHANG X B. Advance in soil pore and its influencing factors. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2015, 46(1): 233-238. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1111/ejs.1995.46.issue-2
[31]	赵丽丽, 李陆生, 蔡焕杰, 石小虎, 薛少平. 有机物料还田对土壤导水导气性的综合影响. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(6): 1045-1057. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.06.008
	ZHAO L L, LI L S, CAI H J, SHI X H, XUE S P. Comprehensive effects of organic materials incorporation on soil hydraulic conductivity and air permeability. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(6): 1045-1057. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.06.008
[32]	孙纪杰, 李新举, 李海燕, 黄晓娜. 不同复垦工艺土壤物理性状研究. 土壤通报, 2013, 44(6): 1332-1336.
	SUN J J, LI X J, LI H Y, HUANG X N. The research of soil physical properties with different reclamations. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2013, 44(6): 1332-1336. (in Chinese)
[33]	王秋菊, 刘峰, 焦峰, 常本超, 姜辉, 宫秀杰. 秸秆粉碎集条深埋机械还田对土壤物理性质的影响. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(17): 43-49.
	WANG Q J, LIU F, JIAO F, CHANG B C, JIANG H, GONG X J. Effects of strip-collected chopping and mechanical deep-buried return of straw on physical properties of soil. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(17): 43-49. (in Chinese)
[34]	李江涛, 钟晓兰, 张斌, 刘勤, 赵其国. 长期施用畜禽粪便对土壤孔隙结构特征的影响. 水土保持学报, 2010, 24(6): 137-140, 180.
	LI J T, ZHONG X L, ZHANG B, LIU Q, ZHAO Q G. Soil pore structure properties as affected by long-term application of poultry litter and livestock manure. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010, 24(6): 137-140, 180. (in Chinese)
[35]	陈学文, 张晓平, 梁爱珍, 贾淑霞, 时秀焕, 范如芹, 魏守才. 耕作方式对黑土硬度和容重的影响. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(2): 439-444.
	CHEN X W, ZHANG X P, LIANG A Z, JIA S X, SHI X H, FAN R Q, WEI S C. Effects of tillage mode on black soil’s penetration resistance and bulk density. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2012, 23(2): 439-444. (in Chinese)
[36]	WANG S C, ZHAO Y W, WANG J Z, ZHU P, CUI X, HAN X Z, XU M G, LU C G. The efficiency of long-term straw return to sequester organic carbon in Northeast China’s cropland. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2018, 17(2): 436-448. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61739-8
[37]	POESEN J, INGELMO-SANCHEZ F. Runoff and sediment yield from topsoils with different porosity as affected by rock fragment cover and position. CATENA, 1992, 19(5): 451-474. doi: 10.1016/0341-8162(92)90044-C
[38]	KUNCORO P H, KOGA K, SATTA N, MUTO Y. A study on the effect of compaction on transport properties of soil gas and water I: Relative gas diffusivity, air permeability, and saturated hydraulic conductivity. Soil and Tillage Research, 2014, 143: 172-179. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2014.02.006
[39]	张琪. 长期免耕措施下土壤结构定量化研究[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学(北京), 2020.
	ZHANG Q. Quantitative description of soil structure under long-term no-tillage farming[D]. Beijing: China University of Geosciences, 2020. (in Chinese)
[40]	WATSON K W, LUXMOORE R J. Estimating macroporosity in a forest watershed by use of a tension infiltrometer. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1986, 50(3): 578-582. doi: 10.2136/sssaj1986.03615995005000030007x
[41]	窦莉洋. 秸秆还田对不同类型土壤团聚体稳定性、有机碳含量及其分布的影响[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2018.
	DOU L Y. Effects of straw return to field on stability, organic carbon content and distribution of different types of soil aggregates[D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[42]	张鹏, 贾志宽, 王维, 路文涛, 高飞, 聂俊峰. 秸秆还田对宁南半干旱地区土壤团聚体特征的影响. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(8): 1513-1520. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.08.007
	ZHANG P, JIA Z K, WANG W, LU W T, GAO F, NIE J F. Effects of straw returning on characteristics of soil aggregates in semi-arid areas in southern Ningxia of China. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012, 45(8): 1513-1520. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.08.007
[43]	董珊珊, 窦森, 邵满娇, 靳亚双, 李立波, 谭岑, 林琛茗. 秸秆深还不同年限对黑土腐殖质组成和胡敏酸结构特征的影响. 土壤学报, 2017, 54(1): 150-159.
	DONG S S, DOU S, SHAO M J, JIN Y S, LI L B, TAN C, LIN C M. Effect of corn stover deep incorporation with different years on composition of soil humus and structural characteristics of humic acid in black soil. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2017, 54(1): 150-159. (in Chinese)
[44]	朱姝, 窦森, 关松, 郭聘. 秸秆深还对土壤团聚体中胡敏素结构特征的影响. 土壤学报, 2016, 53(1): 127-136.
	ZHU S, DOU S, GUAN S, GUO P. Effect of corn stover deep incorporation on composition of humin in soil aggregates. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2016, 53(1): 127-136. (in Chinese)
[45]	王秋菊, 焦峰, 刘峰, 常本超, 姜辉, 姜宇, 米刚, 周鑫. 秸秆粉碎集条深埋机械还田模式对玉米生长及产量的影响. 农业工程学报, 2018, 34(9): 153-159.
	WANG Q J, JIAO F, LIU F, CHANG B C, JIANG H, JIANG Y, MI G, ZHOU X. Effect of straw pulverization and concentrated deep-buried into field on growth and yield of maize. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2018, 34(9): 153-159. (in Chinese)
[46]	闫雷, 李思莹, 孟庆峰, 周丽婷, 董天浩, 戴建军, 张宇飞, 喇乐鹏. 秸秆还田与有机肥对黑土区土壤团聚性的影响. 东北农业大学学报, 2019, 50(12): 58-67.
	YAN L, LI S Y, MENG Q F, ZHOU L T, DONG T H, DAI J J, ZHANG Y F, LA Y P. Effect of straw returning and organic manure on soil aggregate in black soil area. Journal of Northeast Agricultural University, 2019, 50(12): 58-67. (in Chinese)
[47]	皇甫呈惠, 孙筱璐, 刘树堂, 贾志越, 赵洪翠. 长期定位秸秆还田对土壤团聚体及有机碳组分的影响. 华北农学报, 2020, 35(3): 153-159. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20190844
	HUANGFU C H, SUN X L, LIU S T, JIA Z Y, ZHAO H C. Effect of long-term straw returning to field on soil aggregates and organic carbon components. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2020, 35(3): 153-159. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20190844
[48]	邹文秀, 韩晓增, 陆欣春, 郝翔翔, 江恒, 刘元明. 不同土地利用方式对黑土剖面土壤物理性质的影响. 水土保持学报, 2015, 29(5): 187-193, 199.
	ZOU W X, HAN X Z, LU X C, HAO X X, JIANG H, LIU Y M. Effect of land use types on physical properties of black soil profiles. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 29(5): 187-193, 199. (in Chinese)
[49]	王秋菊, 高中超, 常本超, 刘峰. 有机物料深耕还田改善石灰性黑钙土物理性状. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(10): 161-166.
	WANG Q J, GAO Z C, CHANG B C, LIU F. Deep tillage with organic materials returning to field improving soil physical characters of calcic chernozem. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2015, 31(10): 161-166. (in Chinese)
[50]	杨永辉, 武继承, 毛永萍, 韩庆元, 何方. 利用计算机断层扫描技术研究土壤改良措施下土壤孔隙. 农业工程学报, 2013, 29(23): 99-108.
	YANG Y H, WU J C, MAO Y P, HAN Q Y, HE F. Using computed tomography scanning to study soil pores under different soil structure improvement measures. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2013, 29(23): 99-108. (in Chinese)

	冬小麦季Winter wheat				夏玉米季 Summer maize
	RMW₀	RMW₃₀	RMW₅₀	RMW₁₀₀	RMW₀	RMW₃₀	RMW₅₀	RMW₁₀₀
作物产量 Crop yield (kg·hm^-2)	3457±164ab	3282±143b	3721±212a	3765±205a	6115±342a	6217±330a	6254±269a	6263±337a
秸秆多年平均产量 Average straw production (kg·hm^-2)	5889±437				6247±272
秸秆还田量 The quantities of straw returning (kg·hm^-2)	0	1874±65	3123±109	6247±272	0	1767±131	2944±219	5889±437

	粒径 Size (mm)	RMW₀	RMW₃₀	RMW₅₀	RMW₁₀₀
容重Bulk density (g·cm^-3)		1.45±0.06a	1.23±0.01b	1.28±0.04b	1.19±0.02b
总孔隙度 Total porosity (%)		45.4±2.34b	53.76±0.46a	51.63±1.60a	55.09±0.69a
饱和含水量Saturated water content (w/w, %)		25.77±2.24a	24.00±0.56a	26.31±1.10a	26.05±1.00a
饱和导水率Saturated hydraulic conductivity (mm·min^-1)		0.80±0.01b	0.79±0.03b	1.11±0.26ab	1.62±0.37a
土壤颗粒组成 Soil particle composition (%)	0.05-2.0	25.43±4.78ab	22.71±1.62b	26.30±2.11ab	27.64±1.07a
	0.002-0.05	43.40±3.65ab	46.59±3.09a	41.01±3.29b	44.13±2.08ab
	<0.002	20.09±1.01ab	19.90±1.72ab	21.56±1.49a	16.19±1.05b
	洗失量 Wash loss	11.06±0.91ab	10.79±0.64b	11.13±0.46ab	12.03±0.48a
水稳性团聚体含量 Water stable agglomerates content (%)	>2	18.14±4.36b	26.09±8.53a	27.99±5.02a	27.21±0.87a
	0.25-2	50.66±6.33a	38.59±7.80b	43.47±4.6ab	36.33±2.52b
	0.053-0.25	15.38±2.44a	17.40±1.48a	14.74±0.95a	17.40±1.48a
	<0.053	15.82±3.48ab	18.02b±0.7ab	13.80±0.33b	22.07±1.84a
土壤团聚度 Soil agglomeration (%)		69.79±1.34a	72.33±0.34a	69.40 ±0.78a	65.80±1.65b

处理 Treatment	大孔隙度（>25 μm）Macro porosity (%)	大孔隙占总孔隙度的比例 Macro porosity as a proportion of total porosity (%)	不同孔径孔隙占大孔隙数量比/体积比 Ratio of pores under different sizes to the number/volume ratio of large pores				平均孔喉比 Mean pore-throat ratio	平均喉道截面积 Mean sectional area of throat (μm²)	形状因子 Shape factor-as circle	平均配位数 Mean coordination number of pore
处理 Treatment	大孔隙度（>25 μm）Macro porosity (%)		25-100 (μm)	100-500 (μm)	500-1000 (μm)	>1000 (μm)	平均孔喉比 Mean pore-throat ratio	平均喉道截面积 Mean sectional area of throat (μm²)	形状因子 Shape factor-as circle	平均配位数 Mean coordination number of pore
RMW₀	13	28.6	51.0/0	41.9/7.0	4.6/6.2	2.6/86.8	0.15	0.22	0.81	0.68
RMW₃₀	8	14.8	41.9/0	49.8/13.5	5.5/12.1	2.8/74.4	0.12	0.17	0.80	0.69
RMW₅₀	7	13.5	33.3/0	43.3/12.7	12.7/37.5	10.7/49.8	0.34	0.13	0.70	0.53
RMW₁₀₀	17	36.0	41.8/0	39.6/3.2	10.2/5.7	8.4/91.0	0.34	0.25	0.74	0.88

	因子 Factor	共同度 Communality
容重 Bulk density		0.959
孔隙度 Porosity		0.909
土壤饱和含水量 Saturated water content		0.822
土壤饱和导水率 Saturated hydraulic conductivity		0.860
孔隙数量 Porosity quantity	25-100 μm	0.930
	100-500 μm	0.736
	500-1000 μm	0.992
	>1000 μm	0.991
颗粒组成 Soil particle composition	砂粒Sand	0.853
	粉粒Silt	0.929
	黏粒Clay	0.836
水稳性团聚体 Water-stable agglomerates	大团聚体Macro aggregate	0.877
	中团聚体Medium aggregate	0.958
	黏粉粒团聚体 Clay powder aggregate	0.935
	微团聚体Micro aggregate	0.850