调理剂与有机肥配施对酸性稻田土壤性质及水稻产量的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2026.14.010

中国农业科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (14): 3121-3131.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2026.14.010

• 土壤肥料·节水灌溉·农业生态环境 • 上一篇下一篇

调理剂与有机肥配施对酸性稻田土壤性质及水稻产量的影响

叶嘉怡¹^,²(), 邬奇峰³, 王嘉林¹^,², 周燕¹^,², 马晓敏¹^,², 梁辰飞¹^,², 秦华¹^,², 陈俊辉¹^,²()

¹ 浙江农林大学环境与资源学院/全省土壤修复与质量提升重点实验室，杭州 311300
² 浙江农林大学碳中和学院，杭州 311300
³ 杭州市临安区农林技术推广中心，杭州 311300

收稿日期:2025-09-04 接受日期:2025-10-16 出版日期:2026-07-16 发布日期:2026-07-21
通信作者:
陈俊辉，E-mail：junhui@zafu.edu.cn
联系方式: 叶嘉怡，E-mail：yejiayi0206@163.com。
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划(2023YFD1901800); 浙江省“尖兵”“领雁”研发攻关计划(2023C02005); 浙江省“三农九方”科技协作计划(2025SNJF018)

Effects of Soil Conditioners and Organic Fertilizer Application on Enzyme Activity and Rice Yield in an Acid Paddy Soil

YE JiaYi¹^,²(), WU QiFeng³, WANG JiaLin¹^,², ZHOU Yan¹^,², MA XiaoMin¹^,², LIANG ChenFei¹^,², QIN Hua¹^,², CHEN JunHui¹^,²()

¹ College of Environment and Resources, Zhejiang A＆F University/Zhejiang Key Laboratory of Soil Remediation and Quality Improvement, Hangzhou 311300
² College of Carbon Neutrality, Zhejiang A＆F University, Hangzhou 311300
³ Agroforestry Technology Extension Centre of Lin’an District, Hangzhou, Hangzhou 311300

Received:2025-09-04 Accepted:2025-10-16 Published:2026-07-16 Online:2026-07-21

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探究连续3年低剂量土壤调理剂单施及其与有机肥配施对酸性稻田土壤化学性质、酶活性和水稻产量的影响，为南方红黄壤区酸性稻田土壤肥力提升提供依据。【方法】进行田间试验，设置8个处理：不施肥对照（CK0）、常规施肥对照（CK1）、矿物源土壤调理剂（0.75 t·hm^-2）+常规施肥（M）、有机源土壤调理剂（1.2 t·hm^-2）+常规施肥（O）、矿物和有机调理剂配施+常规施肥（MO）及后三者分别与有机肥配施（4.5 t·hm^-2）（MF、OF和MOF）处理。调理剂和有机肥每年施用一次，连续施用3年后测定土壤化学、生物学性质和水稻产量。【结果】与CK0和CK1相比，其余处理均显著提高了土壤pH，降低了交换性H⁺、交换性Al³⁺和交换性酸含量。与CK1相比，MF、OF和MOF处理显著提高了土壤有机质含量，且MOF处理显著提高了有效磷、速效钾、微生物量碳氮含量和水稻产量。相比CK1，MF和OF处理显著降低了酸性磷酸酶活性，MOF处理显著降低了向量角度，表明降低了微生物磷限制。冗余分析表明，土壤交换性酸、交换性H⁺和Al³⁺与酸性磷酸酶活性正相关，而有机质、pH、碱解氮、微生物量碳、有效磷与其呈负相关，交换性酸降低和养分提高是改变酶活性的关键因子。相关性分析表明，水稻产量与有机质、碱解氮、有效磷和微生物量碳呈显著正相关，与交换性酸和向量角度呈显著负相关。结构方程模型进一步表明，土壤有机质和交换性酸含量变化可通过影响微生物量碳和磷限制影响水稻产量，其共同解释了62%产量变异。土壤有机质对水稻产量具有显著的正效应，而交换性酸和向量角度对水稻产量具有较强的负效应。【结论】连续3年施用低剂量矿物源、有机源土壤调理剂，及调理剂与有机肥配施，均能降低土壤潜性酸、提高土壤有机质和速效养分含量、降低微生物磷限制，且以调理剂与有机肥配施处理的水稻增产效果最优，可作为南方红壤降酸培肥的有效措施。

关键词: 土壤酸化, 有机肥, 土壤调理剂, 水稻产量, 土壤酶活性

Abstract:

【Objective】The effects of application of soil conditioners and their combination with organic fertilizers at a low addition rate on soil acidity, nutrients, enzyme activity and rice yield following three successive years were investigated in this study, so as to provide a theoretical basis for soil improvement in acid red soil in Southern China.【Method】A field experiment was conducted with eight treatments: a control without fertilization and soil conditioner (CK0), traditional fertilization (CK1), application of mineral soil conditioner (0.75 t·hm^-2) with traditional fertilization (M), organic soil conditioner (1.2 t·hm^-2) with traditional fertilization (O), and combined application of mineral and organic soil conditioners with traditional fertilization (MO), as well as co-application of M, O and MO with organic fertilizer (4.5 t·hm^-2) under traditional fertilization (MF, OF and MOF). The soil conditioners and organic fertilizer were applied once per year. After consecutive application for 3 years, rice yield was measured and soil chemical properties and soil enzyme activity were analyzed.【Result】Compared with CK0 and CK1, all the treatments significantly increased soil pH, respectively, and significantly reduced soil exchangeable H⁺, exchangeable Al³⁺, and exchangeable acid concentrations. Compared with CK1, MF, OF, and MOF treatments significantly increased soil organic matter content, while MOF treatment also increased available phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) content, microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen and rice yield. Compared with the CK1, the application of MF and OF significantly reduced the activity of acid phosphatase, while MOF significantly reduced the vector angle, indicating a decreased microbial phosphorus (P) limitation. Soil exchangeable H⁺, exchangeable Al³⁺, and exchangeable acid concentrations had positive correlations with the activity of acid phosphatase, while soil organic matter, pH, available N, microbial biomass carbon, available P had negative correlations with it. Redundant analysis indicated that decrease in soil potential acidity and increase in soil nutrients were the key drivers of soil enzyme activities. Correlation analysis suggested that rice yield was significantly positively correlated with soil organic matter, available N, and available P, and significantly negatively correlated with exchangeable acids and the vector angle. Structural equation modeling further indicated that variation in soil organic matter and exchangeable acid changes rice yield via microbial biomass carbon and P limitation, which explained 62% variation in rice yield. Soil organic matter had a significant positive effect on rice yield, while the exchangeable acid concentration and vector angle had negative effects on it.【Conclusion】The combined application of mineral or organic soil conditioners with organic fertilizer following three successive years reduced soil acidity, improved soil organic matter and nutrient availability and mitigated microbial P limitation. The combination of the three amendments had the best improvement on rice yield, thereby can be recognized as an effective way for reducing acidity and improving soil fertility in red soil in the south China.

Key words: soil acidification, organic fertilizer, soil conditioner, rice yield, enzyme activity

叶嘉怡, 邬奇峰, 王嘉林, 周燕, 马晓敏, 梁辰飞, 秦华, 陈俊辉. 调理剂与有机肥配施对酸性稻田土壤性质及水稻产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(14): 3121-3131.

YE JiaYi, WU QiFeng, WANG JiaLin, ZHOU Yan, MA XiaoMin, LIANG ChenFei, QIN Hua, CHEN JunHui. Effects of Soil Conditioners and Organic Fertilizer Application on Enzyme Activity and Rice Yield in an Acid Paddy Soil[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(14): 3121-3131.

图/表 7

表1

表2

表3

表4

图1

图2

图3

参考文献 34

[1]	徐仁扣, 李九玉, 周世伟, 徐明岗, 沈仁芳. 我国农田土壤酸化调控的科学问题与技术措施[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2018, 33(2): 160-167.
	Xu R K, Li J Y, Zhou S W, Xu M G, Shen R F. Scientific issues and controlling strategies of soil acidification of croplands in China[J]. Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2018, 33(2): 160-167. (in Chinese)
[2]	韩天富, 柳开楼, 黄晶, 马常宝, 郑磊, 王慧颖, 曲潇林, 任意, 于子坤, 张会民. 近30年中国主要农田土壤pH时空演变及其驱动因素[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(12): 2137-2149.
	Han T F, Liu K L, Huang J, Ma C B, Zheng L, Wang H Y, Qu X L, Ren Y, Yu Z K, Zhang H M. Spatio-temporal evolution of soil pH and its driving factors in the main Chinese farmland during past 30 years[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2020, 26(12): 2137-2149. (in Chinese)
[3]	丁文成, 宋大利, 周卫. 我国耕地质量主控因素及提升策略[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2024, 30(8): 1580-1594.
	Ding W C, Song D L, Zhou W. Dominant factors driving the farmland quality in China and strategies for improvement[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2024, 30(8): 1580-1594. (in Chinese)
[4]	冀建华, 吕真真, 刘淑珍, 侯红乾, 刘益仁, 刘秀梅, 李絮花, 蓝贤瑾. 长期施用化肥对南方稻田土壤酸化和盐基离子损失的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(13): 2599-2611. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.13.008.
	Ji J H, Lü Z Z, Liu S Z, Hou H Q, Liu Y R, Liu X M, Li X H, Lan X J. Long-term application of chemical fertilizers induces soil acidification and soil exchangeable base cation loss on paddy in Southern China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2024, 57(13): 2599-2611. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.13.008. (in Chinese)
[5]	赵学强, 潘贤章, 马海艺, 董晓英, 车景, 王超, 时玉, 柳开楼, 沈仁芳. 中国酸性土壤利用的科学问题与策略[J]. 土壤学报, 2023, 60(5): 1248-1263.
	Zhao X Q, Pan X Z, Ma H Y, Dong X Y, Che J, Wang C, Shi Y, Liu K L, Shen R F. Scientific issues and strategies of acid soil use in China[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2023, 60(5): 1248-1263. (in Chinese)
[6]	Zhang K, Wei H, Chai Q, Li L, Wang Y, Sun J. Biological soil conditioner with reduced rates of chemical fertilization improves soil functionality and enhances rice production in vegetable-rice rotation[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2024, 195: 105242. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2023.105242
[7]	冀建华, 李絮花, 刘秀梅, 侯红乾, 刘益仁, 吕真真, 蓝贤瑾, 陈剑秋. 硅钙钾镁肥对南方稻田土壤酸性和盐基离子动态变化的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(2): 583-592. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201902.024
	Ji J H, Li X H, Liu X M, Hou H Q, Liu Y R, Lü Z Z, Lan X J, Chen J Q. Effects of fertilizer of calcium silicon magnesium potassium on the dynamics of soil acidity and exchangeable base cation in paddy field of Southern China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2019, 30(2): 583-592. (in Chinese)
[8]	胡天睿, 蔡泽江, 王伯仁, 张璐, 文石林, 朱建强, 徐明岗. 有机肥替代化学氮肥提升红壤抗酸化能力[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2022, 28(11): 2052-2059.
	Hu T R, Cai Z J, Wang B R, Zhang L, Wen S L, Zhu J Q, Xu M G. Swine manure as part of the total N source improves red soil resistance to acidification[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2022, 28(11): 2052-2059. (in Chinese)
[9]	朱道奇, 张志华, 包鑫丰, 顾祝禹, 涂圣梅, 邱承帆. 有机肥配施土壤调理剂改善土壤理化性质提高水稻产量[J]. 中南农业科技, 2024, 45(4): 6-9.
	Zhu D Q, Zhang Z H, Bao X F, Gu Z Y, Tu S M, Qiu C F. Organic fertilizer combined with soil conditioner improves soil physical and chemical properties and increases rice yield[J]. South-Central Agricultural Science and Technology, 2024, 45(4): 6-9. (in Chinese)
[10]	吴文利, 康亚龙, 曾少敏, 王中华, 胡小璇, 安祥瑞, 江尚焘, 谢昶琰, 黄新忠, 董彩霞, 徐阳春. 生物有机肥配施硅钾钙改良剂对酸性红壤梨园土壤肥力及产量的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2021, 44(2): 305-314.
	Wu W L, Kang Y L, Zeng S M, Wang Z H, Hu X X, An X R, Jiang S T, Xie C Y, Huang X Z, Dong C X, Xu Y C. Effects of bio-organic fertilizer and silicon-potassium-calcium amendment on soil fertility and yield of pear orchard in acid red soil[J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, 2021, 44(2): 305-314. (in Chinese)
[11]	Xu M, Li W, Wang J, Zhu Y, Feng Y, Yang G, Zhang W, Han X. Soil ecoenzymatic stoichiometry reveals microbial phosphorus limitation after vegetation restoration on the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 815: 152918. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.152918
[12]	Sinsabaugh R L, Carreiro M M, Repert D A. Allocation of extracellular enzymatic activity in relation to litter composition, N deposition, and mass loss[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2002, 60(1): 1-24. doi: 10.1023/A:1016541114786
[13]	Sinsabaugh R L, Hill B H, Follstad S J J. Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of microbial organic nutrient acquisition in soil and sediment[J]. Nature, 2009, 462(7274): 795-798. doi: 10.1038/nature08632
[14]	Moorhead D L, Sinsabaugh R L, Hill B H, Weintraub M N. Vector analysis of ecoenzyme activities reveal constraints on coupled C, N and P dynamics[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2016, 93: 1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.10.019
[15]	Cui Y, Fang L, Deng L, Guo X, Han F, Ju W, Wang X, Chen H, Tan W, Zhang X. Patterns of soil microbial nutrient limitations and their roles in the variation of soil organic carbon across a precipitation gradient in an arid and semi-arid region[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 658: 1440-1451. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.289
[16]	王传杰, 王齐齐, 徐虎, 高洪军, 朱平, 徐明岗, 张文菊. 长期施肥下农田土壤-有机质-微生物的碳氮磷化学计量学特征[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(11): 3848-3858.
	Wang C J, Wang Q Q, Xu H, Gao H J, Zhu P, Xu M G, Zhang W J. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus stoichiometry characteristics of bulk soil, organic matter, and soil microbial biomass under long-term fertilization in cropland[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(11): 3848-3858. (in Chinese)
[17]	Li S, Zhou G, Zhou G, Nie J, Zhang J, Gao S, Cao W. Rice straw returning under winter green manuring enhances soil carbon pool via stoichiometric regulation of extracellular enzymes[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2025, 252: 106617. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2025.106617
[18]	于金珠, 吴辰晨, 姬浩楠, 李松昊, 邬奇峰, 秦华, 陈俊辉. 矿物调理剂对丘陵红壤天目小香薯产量和酶生态化学计量特征的影响[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2023, 40(3): 531-539.
	Yu J Z, Wu C C, Ji H N, Li S H, Wu Q F, Qin H, Chen J H. Effects of mineral conditioner on the yield of sweet potato and ecoenzymatic stoichiometry in a hilly red soil[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2023, 40(3): 531-539. (in Chinese)
[19]	鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2000.
	Lu R K. Methods of Soil Agrochemical Analysis[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[20]	Wu Q, Lian R, Bai M, Bao J, Liu Y, Li S, Liang C, Qin H, Chen J, Xu Q. Biochar co-application mitigated the stimulation of organic amendments on soil respiration by decreasing microbial activities in an infertile soil[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2021, 57(6): 793-807. doi: 10.1007/s00374-021-01574-0
[21]	Deng L, Peng C, Huang C, Wang K, Liu Q, Liu Y, Hai X, Shangguan Z. Drivers of soil microbial metabolic limitation changes along a vegetation restoration gradient on the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Geoderma, 2019, 353: 188-200. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.06.037
[22]	杨右君, 冯浪佳, 任科润, 王进进, 张玉龙, 李文彦, 李永涛, 胡峥. 6种土壤调理剂对酸性水稻土改良效果的综合评价[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2026, 43(1): 153-162.
	Yang Y J, Feng L J, Ren K R, Wang J J, Zhang Y L, Li W Y, Li Y T, Hu Z. Comprehensive evaluation of the effects of six soil conditioners on the amelioration of acidic paddy soils[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2026, 43(1): 153-162. (in Chinese)
[23]	龚玲婷, 石林, 蔡如梦. 矿物质调理剂对土壤养分含量及植物营养吸收的影响[J]. 土壤, 2019, 51(5): 916-922.
	Gong L T, Shi L, Cai R M. Effects of mineral conditioner on soil nutrient contents and nutrient absorption by lettuce[J]. Soils, 2019, 51(5): 916-922. (in Chinese)
[24]	Huang T, Zhou Y, Yin S, Deng D. Remediation and environmental safety of paddy soil temporarily polluted by heavy metals from acid mine drainage[J]. Environmental Pollutants and Bioavailability, 2024, 36(1): 2323689. doi: 10.1080/26395940.2024.2323689
[25]	Wang H, Xu J, Liu X, Zhang D, Li L, Li W, Sheng L. Effects of long-term application of organic fertilizer on improving organic matter content and retarding acidity in red soil from China[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2019, 195: 104382. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2019.104382
[26]	Wang L, Butterly C R, Tian W, Herath H M S K, Xi Y, Zhang J, Xiao X. Effects of fertilization practices on aluminum fractions and species in a wheat soil[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2016, 16(7): 1933-1943. doi: 10.1007/s11368-016-1380-y
[27]	郭春雷, 李娜, 彭靖, 高天一, 马凌云, 韩晓日. 秸秆直接还田及炭化还田对土壤酸度和交换性能的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24(5): 1205-1213.
	Guo C L, Li N, Peng J, Gao T Y, Ma L Y, Han X R. Direct returning of maize straw or as biochar to the field triggers change in acidity and exchangeable capacity in soil[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2018, 24(5): 1205-1213. (in Chinese)
[28]	Sinsabaugh R L. Phenol oxidase, peroxidase and organic matter dynamics of soil[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2010, 42(3): 391-404. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.10.014
[29]	赵婧, 王亚男, 曾希柏, 文炯, 温云杰, 吴翠霞, 郑重. 不同改良措施对第四纪红壤酶活性的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(4): 1160-1176.
	Zhao J, Wang Y N, Zeng X B, Wen J, Wen Y J, Wu C X, Zheng Z. Effects of different ameliorative measures on the enzyme activities of quaternary red soil[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2022, 59(4): 1160-1176. (in Chinese)
[30]	Xiao W, Chen X, Jing X, Zhu B. A meta-analysis of soil extracellular enzyme activities in response to global change[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018, 123: 21-32. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.05.001
[31]	宁玉菲, 魏亮, 魏晓梦, 祝贞科, 袁红朝, 葛体达, 吴金水. 长期施肥稻田土壤胞外酶活性对底物可利用性的响应特征[J]. 环境科学, 2020, 41(6): 2852-2860.
	Ning Y F, Wei L, Wei X M, Zhu Z K, Yuan H C, Ge T D, Wu J S. Response of extracellular enzyme activities to substrate availability in paddy soil with long-term fertilizer management[J]. Environmental Science, 2020, 41(6): 2852-2860. (in Chinese)
[32]	Burns R G, DeForest J L, Marxsen J, Sinsabaugh R L, Stromberger M E, Wallenstein M D, Weintraub M N, Zoppini A. Soil enzymes in a changing environment: Current knowledge and future directions[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2013, 58: 216-234. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.11.009
[33]	王昭仪, 脱云飞, 刘香凝, 石小兰, 丁明净, 黎建强, 向萍, 何霞红, 杨启良. 土壤养分和酶活性及三七产量、皂苷含量对水肥耦合的响应[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2023, 29(12): 2332-2344.
	Wang Z Y, Tuo Y F, Liu X N, Shi X L, Ding M J, Li J Q, Xiang P, He X H, Yang Q L. Response of soil nutrients, enzyme activities, yield and saponin content of Panax notoginseng to different water and fertilizer combinations[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2023, 29(12): 2332-2344. (in Chinese)
[34]	魏翠翠, 刘小飞, 林成芳, 李先锋, 李艳, 郑裕雄. 凋落物输入改变对亚热带两种米槠次生林土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2018, 42(6): 692-702. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2017.0247
	Wei C C, Liu X F, Lin C F, Li X F, Li Y, Zheng Y X. Response of soil enzyme activities to litter input changes in two secondary Castanopsis carlessii forests in subtropical China[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2018, 42(6): 692-702. (in Chinese) doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2017.0247

	pH	有机质 SOM (%)	全氮 N (%)	全磷 P₂O₅(%)	全钾 K₂O (%)	氧化钙 CaO (%)	氧化镁 MgO (%)	氧化硅 SiO₂(%)
矿物源调理剂Mineral conditioner	10.5	—	0.14	0.05	0.12	40.0	10.5	25.5
有机源调理剂Organic conditioner	10.0	20.0	0.36	0.32	0.10	20.0	8.0	—
有机肥Organic fertilizer	7.7	40.0	2.50	1.80	1.50	—	—	—

处理 Treatment		pH	有机质 SOM (g·kg^-1)			碱解氮 AN (mg·kg^-1)		有效磷 AP (mg·kg^-1)		速效钾 AK (mg·kg^-1)
CK0		5.37±0.08c	22.21±1.92b			92.08±16.33b		13.35±1.83d		75.67±10.50c
CK1		5.67±0.11c	23.24±1.91b			102.28±14.99ab		16.29±1.96cd		94.67±12.22bc
M		6.24±0.32b	26.11±3.85ab			108.19±18.57ab		17.20±1.32bcd		105.33±13.01ab
O		6.64±0.22ab	27.23±3.40ab			110.16±18.80ab		18.35±4.57abcd		108.67±17.01ab
MO		6.63±0.42ab	27.66±2.99ab			117.58±5.33ab		24.19±4.27ab		117.67±18.58ab
MF		6.85±0.12a	28.98±2.36a			126.32±19.93a		22.10±4.50abc		108.33±21.50ab
OF		6.71±0.22ab	29.36±3.04a			119.06±21.21ab		23.36±3.80abc		121.00±11.79ab
MOF		6.90±0.40a	30.22±3.18a			130.56±14.09a		24.79±5.96a		128.33±8.39a
处理Treatment	微生物量碳 MBC (mg·kg^-1)			微生物量氮 MBN (mg·kg^-1)	交换性酸 EA (cmol·kg^-1)		交换性H⁺ EH (cmol·kg^-1)		交换性Al³⁺ EAl (cmol·kg^-1)		水稻产量 Rice yield (t·hm^-2)
CK0	246.51±90.36d			12.65±3.79e	0.80±0.07a		0.45±0.03a		0.35±0.05a		8.50±0.46c
CK1	293.11±20.98cd			19.14±4.69de	0.40±0.06b		0.16±0.03b		0.24±0.04b		9.22±0.66bc
M	299.95±49.50cd			28.09±5.11bc	0.11±0.06c		0.07±0.04c		0.04±0.02c		10.05±0.99ab
O	362.00±103.02bcd			29.56±3.32abc	0.08±0.03c		0.04±0.01c		0.04±0.03c		10.11±0.75ab
MO	481.86±99.96ab			32.32±2.01ab	0.10±0.06c		0.06±0.04c		0.05±0.03c		10.56±0.79ab
MF	497.06±43.94ab			23.15±6.12cd	0.05±0.02c		0.03±0.02c		0.02±0.01c		10.25±0.75ab
OF	397.91±42.25bc			25.53±1.23bcd	0.09±0.03c		0.07±0.02c		0.02±0.01c		10.64±0.56ab
MOF	599.62±95.37a			36.43±3.23a	0.06±0.03c		0.03±0.03c		0.03±0.02c		11.11±0.99a

处理 Treatment	β-葡萄糖苷酶 BG (nmol·g^-1·h^-1)	纤维二糖水解酶 CB (nmol·g^-1·h^-1)	β-N-乙酰氨基葡萄糖苷酶NAG (nmol·g^-1·h^-1)	亮氨酸氨基酞酶 LAP (nmol·g^-1·h^-1)	酸性磷酸酶 PHOS (nmol·g^-1·h^-1)
CK0	98.82±8.17a	6.52±1.03a	31.23±4.70a	8.42±0.52a	156.60±6.92a
CK1	82.22±7.50bc	4.69±0.59b	33.64±12.34a	7.57±1.01ab	132.28±2.50bc
M	81.79±10.04bc	4.71±0.78b	35.03±11.65a	7.66±0.92ab	130.95±12.77bc
O	82.35±8.41bc	4.58±0.66b	35.64±9.66a	7.21±0.88ab	123.37±9.91bc
MO	97.38±6.69ab	5.07±1.00b	40.48±7.84a	7.34±0.62ab	136.97±4.90b
MF	74.21±8.78c	4.21±0.48b	39.66±7.96a	6.63±0.65b	109.00±5.99de
OF	76.80±9.89c	3.97±0.92b	41.99±11.88a	6.31±0.69b	104.57±4.76e
MOF	95.46±9.17ab	4.37±0.85b	42.97±9.55a	6.72±0.34b	119.86±9.60cd
处理 Treatment	酶碳氮比 Enzyme C/N	酶碳磷比 Enzyme C/P	酶氮磷比 Enzyme N/P	向量长度 Vector length	向量角度 Vector angle (°)
CK0	1.27±0.06a	0.92±0.02b	0.73±0.03b	0.83±0.03a	61.03±1.50c
CK1	1.22±0.10a	0.91±0.02b	0.75±0.07ab	0.79±0.05a	59.81±3.04bc
M	1.20±0.05a	0.91±0.02b	0.77±0.05ab	0.78±0.02a	59.41±2.48ab
O	1.20±0.09a	0.93±0.03ab	0.78±0.04ab	0.79±0.07a	58.31±0.52ab
MO	1.20±0.05a	0.94±0.01ab	0.78±0.04ab	0.81±0.03a	57.89±1.74ab
MF	1.14±0.06a	0.93±0.02ab	0.81±0.03ab	0.76±0.05a	56.42±1.28ab
OF	1.14±0.11a	0.94±0.02ab	0.83±0.06a	0.76±0.08a	55.11±2.60ab
MOF	1.18±0.04a	0.96±0.00a	0.81±0.03ab	0.81±0.02a	55.83±1.12a

调理剂与有机肥配施对酸性稻田土壤性质及水稻产量的影响

Effects of Soil Conditioners and Organic Fertilizer Application on Enzyme Activity and Rice Yield in an Acid Paddy Soil

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 34

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

编号 Number	处理 Treatment	矿物源调理剂 Mineral conditioner (t·hm^-2)	有机源调理剂 Organic conditioner (t·hm^-2)	有机肥 Organic fertilizer (t·hm^-2)
CK0	无调理剂、不施肥Without fertilization and soil conditioner	0	0	0
CK1	无调理剂，常规施肥Without soil conditioner, traditional fertilization	0	0	0
M	矿物源调理剂+常规施肥Mineral soil conditioner + Traditional fertilization	0.75	0	0
O	有机源调理剂+常规施肥Organic soil conditioner + Traditional fertilization	0	1.2	0
MO	矿物源调理剂+有机源调理剂+常规施肥 Mineral soil conditioner + Organic soil conditioner + Traditional fertilization	0.75	1.2	0
MF	矿物源调理剂+有机肥+常规施肥 Mineral soil conditioner + Organic fertilizer + Traditional fertilization	0.75	0	4.5
OF	有机源调理剂+有机肥+常规施肥 Organic soil conditioner + Organic fertilizer + Traditional fertilization	0	1.2	4.5
MOF	矿物源调理剂+有机源调理剂+有机肥+常规施肥 Mineral soil conditioner + Organic soil conditioner + Organic fertilizer + Traditional fertilization	0.75	1.2	4.5

[1]	侯慧芝, 尹嘉德, 马明生, 刘晓伟, 柳燕兰, 雷康宁. 耕作与增施有机肥对陇东马铃薯-玉米一年两熟制作物产量和水分利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(8): 1672-1685.
[2]	王彩玉, 刘小丽, 李文广, 杨文平, 杨珍平, 高志强. 有机肥不同替代比例对土壤多功能性的影响及微生物驱动机制[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(8): 1712-1726.
[3]	魏文龙, 王林林, 陈晓丽, 武凌彬, 李录芳, 解云婷, 王江文. 有机替代和地膜覆盖对旱地小麦根系生长、产量和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(11): 2340-2357.
[4]	吕旭东, 孙世媛, 李亚楠, 刘玉龙, 王艳群, 付鑫, 张佳英, 宁鹏, 彭正萍. 智能机械化分层施肥对麦田根-土养分分布和小麦产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(1): 129-146.
[5]	陈均权, 马驰远, 胡鑫, 李朵, 郭艳琦, 刘灿, 周凯, 郑太辉. 有机无机肥配施调控红壤稻田土壤肥力、生态化学计量特征及产量[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(23): 4952-4966.
[6]	吴文琪, 焦阳, 惠家祯, 王绪锋, 郭博森, 沈玉芳. 不同有机物料配施化肥对土壤肥力和玉米产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(23): 4966-4978.
[7]	谢海鹏, 林俊旭, 刘勇, 麦贤俊, 罗丰, 王学武, 谢文, 李少卡, 孔祥义, 吴小燕. 施用不同有机肥对贝莱斯芽孢杆菌SD13防控豇豆枯萎病的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(21): 4405-4420.
[8]	张海睿, 贾昂元, 高奇奇, 韩哲群, 南珊珊, 段碧华, 武雪萍. 生物炭配施黄腐酸对滨海盐碱地土壤理化性质、酶活性和多功能性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(20): 4178-4188.
[9]	李月琪, 麻仲花, 苏明, 刘昊, 马风兰, 马小英, 李涛, 李清云, 张丹, 刘吉利, 吴娜. 不同耕作方式下盐碱地玉米光合物质生产能力对有机肥用量的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(19): 3872-3889.
[10]	方娅婷, 赵剑, 盛倩男, 李凯旭, 王祥华, 张洋洋, 朱俊, 丛日环, 陆志峰, 李小坤, 任涛, 鲁剑巍. 长期化肥和有机物料投入对稻油轮作作物产量和养分利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(16): 3164-3177.
[11]	卜容燕, 程文龙, 武际, 唐杉, 李敏, 鲁剑巍, 纪根学, 王慧, 朱睿, 蒋发辉, 汤萌萌, 韩上. 有机肥无机肥配施结合深耕提升稻油轮作系统生产力和养分利用效率[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(16): 3178-3189.
[12]	宣泽鹏, 冯慧瑶, 陈美淇, 徐基胜, 刘梦璇, 赵炳梓, 张佳宝. 秸秆还田配施化肥对土壤生态系统多功能性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(14): 2821-2837.
[13]	杜嘉琪, 张紫薇, 王若飞, 黎星, 郭红艳, 杨硕, 冯成, 何堂庆, Giri Bhoopander, 张学林. 有机肥替代化肥与丛枝菌根真菌互作对砂姜黑土和潮土N₂O排放的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(1): 101-116.
[14]	高娅菲, 赵媛博, 徐玲, 孙嘉悦, 夏煜轩, 薛丹, 武海雯, 宁航, 吴安驰, 吴林. 冷浸田改种泥炭藓显著增加土壤有机碳含量且降低胞外酶活性[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(8): 1533-1546.
[15]	马荣辉, 杨武杰, 于蕾, 杨泽龙, 王健, 郭跃升. 山东省作物秸秆和畜禽粪尿有机肥资源现状及替代化肥潜力分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(4): 721-739.