猪粪沼液对设施基质栽培番茄的营养效应

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.19.013

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探明猪粪沼液对设施无土栽培番茄的营养效应，为沼液的基质栽培应用提供科学依据。【方法】以番茄为研究对象，采用不同肥源（沼液和化肥）及不同类型基质（草炭和炉渣）的复因子试验设计，形成沼液+草炭（DP）、化肥+草炭（MP）、沼液+炉渣（DC）和化肥+炉渣（MC）4个处理，对番茄的生长、光合、养分吸收以及基质的理化特性等指标进行测定。【结果】DP处理的生物量比MP处理提高12.6%，同时DC处理比MC处理提高70.9%，但DP和MP处理的生物量显著高于DC和MC处理（P<0.05）。DP处理叶片的气孔导度(Cond)、胞间CO₂浓度(Ci)和蒸腾速率(Tr)显著高于其他处理（P<0.05），且光合速率Pn最高，为（18.17±0.47）µmol·m^-2·s^-1，沼液处理显著提高了番茄的生物量和叶片的光合效率。DP处理的全株氮含量和全株磷含量比MP处理分别提高46.9%和19.7%，DC处理的全株氮含量和全株磷含量分别是MC处理的1.38和2.45倍。与化学肥料处理相比，猪粪沼液显著提高了基质的pH，增加了基质的有机质和有效磷含量（P<0.05）。DP处理果实的总产量最高，为（6.0±0.4）kg·m^-2，但与MP处理无显著性差异。猪粪沼液显著提高了番茄果实的可溶性糖和Vc含量（P<0.05），提高了果实的品质。主成分分析结果表明，DP处理的各项指标综合表现最好，MP和DC处理次之，MC处理最差。【结论】猪粪沼液施入草炭基质中可以提高叶片光合效率，促进植株对氮、磷的吸收，改善基质的生态环境，且在保证产量的前提下，果实品质更好。因此，在设施番茄生产中推荐组合使用。

关键词: 猪粪沼液, 无土栽培基质, 番茄, 光合作用, 养分吸收, 基质理化特性

Abstract:

【Objective】 The nutritional effects of liquid digestate on tomatoes in facility soilless cultivation were investigated, so as to provide scientific basis for the substrate cultivation application of biogas slurry. 【Method】 Here, tomato was used as subject, and the dual inputs of fertilizers (liquid digestate (D) and mineral fertilizer (M)) and soilless substrates (peat substrate (P) and cinder substrate (C)) consisted of four treatments. The parameters of tomato growth, photosynthesis and nutrients uptake were recorded during the experimental period, as well as the properties of substrates. 【Result】The tomato dry biomass under DP treatment was higher than that under MP treatment by 12.6%, and DC treatment was higher than MC treatment by 70.9%. However, the dry biomass under DP and MP treatments were significantly higher than that under DC and MC treatments (P<0.05). The Cond, Ci and Tr of tomato leaf under DP treatment was significantly higher than that under other treatments (P<0.05), and the greatest leaf photosynthetic rate was also observed under DP treatment of (18.17±0.47) µmol·m^-2·s^-1. Liquid digestate significantly increased the dry biomass and photosynthesis of tomato plants. The total N and total P content of plant under DP treatment were higher than that under MP treatment by 46.9% and 19.7%, respectively, and DC treatment were 1.38 and 2.45 times higher than MC treatment, respectively. Moreover, liquid digestate treatments significantly increased the pH value, organic matter and available phosphate content of substrates compared with chemical fertilizer treatments (P<0.05). The highest fruit yield was obtained under DP treatment of (6.0±0.4) kg·m^-2, and the yields between DP and MP treatments had no significant difference. The liquid digestate treatments could significantly increase the soluble sugar content and vitamin C content in tomato fruits (P<0.05), and improve fruit quality. Meanwhile, the results of principal component analysis showed that DP treatment had the best overall performance, followed by MP and DC treatments, while MC treatment was the worst. 【Conclusion】The application of liquid digestate into peat substrate increased the photosynthetic efficiency of leaves and the absorption of nitrogen and phosphorus of tomato plants, as well as the properties of substrate and the yield and quality of fruits. Therefore, the combination was recommended for use in facility tomato cultivation.

Key words: liquid digestate, soilless substrates, tomato, photosynthesis, nutrient uptake, substrate properties

滕云飞, 尚斌, 陶秀萍. 猪粪沼液对设施基质栽培番茄的营养效应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(19): 3869-3878.

TENG YunFei, SHANG Bin, TAO XiuPing. Nutritional Effects of Liquid Digestate on Tomatoes Grown in Facility Substrates[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(19): 3869-3878.

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.0578-1752.2023.19.013

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2023/V56/I19/3869

图/表 9

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

表4

表5

表6

图3

参考文献 31

[1]	http://www.moa.gov.cn/govpublic/XMYS/201510/t20151023_4875680.htm.
[2]	中国畜牧兽医年鉴编辑委员会. 中国畜牧兽医年鉴-2022. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2022.
	China Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Yearbook Editorial Committee. China Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Yearbook-2022. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2022. (in Chinese)
[3]	宋英今, 王冠超, 李然, 陈冠益. 沼液处理方式及资源化研究进展. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(12): 237-250.
	SONG Y J, WANG G C, LI R, CHEN G Y. Research progress of biogas slurry treatment and resource utilization. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2021, 37(12): 237-250. (in Chinese)
[4]	张明慧, 高大文. 臭氧组合絮凝工艺处理牛粪沼液的研究. 中国沼气, 2020, 38(1): 37-44.
	ZHANG M H, GAO D W. Ozonation and flocculation combination treating biogas slurry of cow dung. China Biogas, 2020, 38(1): 37-44. (in Chinese)
[5]	ABUBAKER J, RISBERG K, PELL M. Biogas residues as fertilisers: Effects on wheat growth and soil microbial activities. Applied Energy, 2012, 99: 126-134. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.04.050
[6]	SELEIMAN M F, SELIM S, JAAKKOLA S, MÄKELÄ P S A. Chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of whole-crop maize fertilized with synthetic fertilizer or digestate and harvested at two maturity stages in Boreal growing conditions. Agricultural and Food Science, 2017, 26(1): 47. doi: 10.23986/afsci.60068
[7]	BARZEE T J, EDALATI A, EL-MASHAD H, WANG D Y, SCOW K, ZHANG R H. Digestate biofertilizers support similar or higher tomato yields and quality than mineral fertilizer in a subsurface drip fertigation system. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 2019, 3: 58. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2019.00058
[8]	NKOA R. Agricultural benefits and environmental risks of soil fertilization with anaerobic digestates: A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2014, 34(2): 473-492. doi: 10.1007/s13593-013-0196-z
[9]	YU F B, LUO X P, SONG C F, ZHANG M X, SHAN S D. Concentrated biogas slurry enhanced soil fertility and tomato quality. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B-Plant Soil Science, 2010, 60(3): 262-268.
[10]	BILALIS D, KROKIDA M, ROUSSIS I, PAPASTYLIANOU P, TRAVLOS I, CHEIMONA N, DEDE A. Effects of organic and inorganic fertilization on yield and quality of processing tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Folia Horticulturae, 2018, 30(2): 321-332. doi: 10.2478/fhort-2018-0027
[11]	乔锋, 肖洋, 赵淑苹. 海林农场沼肥连年施用对玉米产量和土壤化学性质的影响. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(36): 93-98. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb18080109
	QIAO F, XIAO Y, ZHAO S P. Consecutive application of biogas manure affects maize production and soil chemical properties in Hailin farm. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(36): 93-98. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb18080109
[12]	张钧恒, 马乐乐, 李建明. 全有机营养肥水耦合对番茄品质、产量及水分利用效率的影响. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(14): 2788-2798. doi: 10.3864/j/issn.0578-1752.2018.14.015.
	ZHANG J H, MA L L, LI J M. Effects of all-organic nutrient solution and water coupling on quality, yield and water use efficiency of tomato. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(14): 2788-2798. doi: 10.3864/j/issn.0578-1752.2018.14.015. (in Chinese)
[13]	王红宁, 林琭, 汤昀, 李永平, 孙俊宝, 张生智, 吴晓璇. 沼液营养液对基质栽培草莓叶片气体交换日变化的影响. 河北农业大学学报, 2019, 42(6): 57-64.
	WANG H N, LIN L, TANG Y, LI Y P, SUN J B, ZHANG S Z, WU X X. Effects of nutrient solution based on biogas slurry on diurnal change leaf gas exchange of strawberry in soilless cultivation. Journal of Agricultural University of Hebei, 2019, 42(6): 57-64. (in Chinese)
[14]	XIE X T, MACHIKOWA T, WONPRASAID S. Fertigation based on a nutrient balance model for cassava production in two different textured soils. Plant Production Science, 2020, 23(4): 407-416. doi: 10.1080/1343943X.2020.1743189
[15]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
	BAO S D. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis. 3rd ed. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[16]	蔡庆生. 植物生理学实验. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2013.
	CAI Q S. Plant Physiology Experiment. Beijing: China Agricultural University Press, 2013. (in Chinese)
[17]	REDDY K R, MATCHA S K. Quantifying nitrogen effects on castor bean (Ricinus communis L.) development, growth, and photosynthesis. Industrial Crops and Products, 2010, 31(1): 185-191. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2009.10.004
[18]	SHIRATSUCHI H, YAMAGISHI T, ISHII R. Leaf nitrogen distribution to maximize the canopy photosynthesis in rice. Field Crops Research, 2006, 95(2/3): 291-304. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2005.04.005
[19]	NAEEM M, KHAN M M A, IDREES M, AFTAB T. Phosphorus ameliorates crop productivity, photosynthetic efficiency, nitrogen- fixation, activities of the enzymes and content of nutraceuticals of Lablab purpureus L. Scientia Horticulturae, 2010, 126(2): 205-214. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2010.07.009
[20]	XU C M, TIAN Y, SUN Y X, DONG L M. Effects of biogas slurry irrigation on growth, photosynthesis, and nutrient status of Perilla frutescens seedlings. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 2013, 44(22): 3381-3390. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2013.847447
[21]	LUO A R, ZHOU C N, CHEN J L. The associated with carbon conversion rate and source-sink enzyme activity in tomato fruit subjected to water stress and potassium application. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2021, 12: 681145. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.681145
[22]	JIN Z W, SUN R H, PING L F, ZHANG C A, YING M F, DING S H. Evaluating the key factors of soil fertility and tomato yield with fresh and aged biogas slurry addition through greenhouse experiment. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 2023, 13(6): 5073-5084. doi: 10.1007/s13399-021-01583-x
[23]	CRISTINA G, CAMELIN E, TOMMASI T, FINO D, PUGLIESE M. Anaerobic digestates from sewage sludge used as fertilizer on a poor alkaline sandy soil and on a peat substrate: Effects on tomato plants growth and on soil properties. Journal of Environmental Management, 2020, 269: 110767. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110767
[24]	PEREZ-ESPINOSA A, MORENO-CASELLES J, MORAL R, PEREZ- MURCIA M D, GOMEZ I. Effect of sewage sludge and cobalt treatments on tomato fruit yield, weight, and quality. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 1999, 22(2): 379-385. doi: 10.1080/01904169909365635
[25]	BOURIOUG M, ALAOUI-SEHMER L, LAFFRAY X, BENBRAHIM M, ALEYA L, ALAOUI-SOSSÉ B. Sewage sludge fertilization in larch seedlings: Effects on trace metal accumulation and growth performance. Ecological Engineering, 2015, 77: 216-224. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.01.031
[26]	ZHANG Y T, KIRIIWA Y, NUKAYA A. Influence of nutrient concentration and composition on the growth, uptake patterns of nutrient elements and fruit coloring disorder for tomatoes grown in extremely low-volume substrate. The Horticulture Journal, 2015, 84(1): 37-45. doi: 10.2503/hortj.MI-003
[27]	GRUDA N, CARON J, PRASAD M, MAHER M J. Growing Media. Encyclopedia of Soil Sciences, 2016.
[28]	PAN W L, MADSEN I J, BOLTON R P, GRAVES L, SISTRUNK T. Ammonia/ammonium toxicity root symptoms induced by inorganic and organic fertilizers and placement. Agronomy Journal, 2016, 108(6): 2485-2492. doi: 10.2134/agronj2016.02.0122
[29]	MA L L, ZHANG J W, REN R D, FAN B H, HOU L P, LI J M. Effects of different organic nutrient solution formulations and supplementation on tomato fruit quality and aromatic volatiles. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 2021, 67(4): 563-575. doi: 10.1080/03650340.2020.1740208
[30]	TENG Y F, SHANG B, TAO X P. Effects of digested pig slurry on photosynthesis, carbohydrate metabolism and yield of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Agronomy, 2022, 12(9): 2042. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12092042
[31]	MOYA C, OYANEDEL E, VERDUGO G, FLORES M F, URRESTARAZU M, ÁLVARO J E. Increased electrical conductivity in nutrient solution management enhances dietary and organoleptic qualities in soilless culture tomato. HortScience, 2017, 52(6): 868-872. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI12026-17

名称 Name	电导率 Electrical conductivity (ms∙cm^-1)	pH	总氮 Total nitrogen (g·kg^-1)	氨氮 NH₄⁺-N (mg·L^-1)	有机质 Organic matter (%)	有效磷 Available phosphorus (mg·kg^-1)	速效钾 Available potassium (mg·kg^-1)
沼液¹⁾Liquid digestate	6.8±0.2	8.01±0.01	1000±40	813.3±6.4	213.0±3.0	232.5±0.7	697.0±2.8
草炭基质 Peat substrate	0.4±0.1	5.75±0.08	3.1±0.1	-	8.4±0.4	263.6±1.2	821.1±0.01
炉渣基质 Cinder substrate	0.29±0.01	7.88±0.14	0.2±0.05	-	1.5±0.04	18.0±0.05	37.7±1.2

处理 Treatment	基肥 Base fertilizer (65%)	追肥¹⁾ Topdressing fertilizer (35%)
猪粪沼液+草炭基质（DP） Liquid digestate applied on peat substrate	2.06 L	0.35 L/次，10次 0.35 L/time, 10 times
化肥+草炭基质（MP） Mineral fertilizer applied on peat substrate	N: 2.06 g, P₂O₅: 1.91 g, K₂O: 6.24 g	每次N: 0.35 g; P₂O₅: 0.12 g; K₂O: 0.44 g，10次 N: 0.35 g, P₂O₅: 0.12 g, K₂O: 0.44 g per time; 10 times
猪粪沼液+炉渣基质（DC） Liquid digestate applied on cinder substrate	5.91 L	0.35 L/次，10次 0.35 L/time, 10 times
化肥+炉渣基质（MC） Mineral fertilizer applied on cinder substrate	N: 5.91 g, P₂O₅: 2.60 g, K₂O: 7.05 g	每次N: 0.35 g; P₂O₅: 0.12 g; K₂O: 0.44 g，10次 N: 0.35 g, P₂O₅: 0.12 g, K₂O: 0.44 g per time; 10 times

处理 Treatment	总N含量 Leaf total nitrogen (%)	叶绿素含量 Chlorophyll content (mg·g^-1 FW)	叶绿素a/叶绿素b Chl a/Chl b
DP	3.98±0.01c	1.10±0.03b	6.15±0.11b
MP	4.06±0.01b	1.15±0.03b	5.46±0.35c
DC	3.91±0.02d	1.28±0.13a	5.42±0.28c
MC	4.58±0.05a	1.35±0.03a	6.92±0.35a
显著性 Significant
肥料 Fertilizer	*	ns	*
基质 Substrate	*	*	ns
肥料×基质 Fertilizer×Substrate	*	ns	*

处理 Treatment	根 Root (%)	茎 Stem (%)	叶 Leaf (%)	果 Fruit (%)	全株含量 Total-plant (g)
N
DP	2.99±0.04d	5.13±1.16a	4.76±0.80b	3.98±0.11b	11.27±1.44a
MP	3.46±0.04c	3.20±0.19b	3.99±0.26b	3.06±0.09c	7.67±0.28b
DC	4.49±0.05b	5.82±1.15a	6.28±1.05a	4.57±0.12a	9.64±1.32a
MC	5.05±0.17a	4.63±0.08ab	4.34±0.38b	2.84±0.05d	4.05±0.44c
P
DP	0.36±0.03b	0.45±0.13a	0.17±0.02bc	0.25±0.03b	0.73±0.09a
MP	0.20±0.02c	0.34±0.02a	0.22±0.02b	0.26±0.07b	0.61±0.02b
DC	0.53±0.03a	0.36±0.02a	0.33±0.04a	0.46±0.10a	0.76±0.11a
MC	0.13±0.01d	0.19±0.09b	0.13±0.06c	0.25±0.01b	0.22±0.02c
K
DP	1.10±0.01d	2.17±0.01c	1.04±0.02d	2.38±0.03c	5.37±0.55b
MP	1.78±0.02b	2.67±0.02b	2.34±0.03a	2.77±0.03a	6.14±0.19a
DC	1.38±0.03c	2.75±0.02a	1.61±0.02c	2.83±0.04a	4.50±0.83b
MC	2.08±0.04a	1.72±0.01d	2.13±0.01b	2.58±0.05b	2.44±0.20c

日期 Date	处理 Treatment	电导率 Electrical conductivity (ms·cm^-1)	pH	有机质 Organic matter (%)	总氮 Total nitrogen (%)	有效磷 Available phosphorus (g·kg^-1)	速效钾 Available potassium (g·kg^-1)
定植后30 d 30 d (DAP)	DP	0.95±0.01b	7.28±0.03a	5.08±0.03a	0.59±0.12a	0.20±0.02c	0.34±0.02bc
	MP	0.84±0.01c	7.12±0.03b	4.85±0.05b	0.58±0.15a	0.62±0.01a	0.51±0.15a
	DC	1.51±0.36a	7.10±0.02b	3.21±0.06c	0.20±0.08b	0.45±0.001b	0.48±0.04b
	MC	0.91±0.12b	6.77±0.04c	1.74±0.15d	0.27±0.03b	0.09±0.001d	0.27±0.01c
定植后60 d 60 d (DAP)	DP	1.50±0.01a	7.03±0.15a	5.09±0.07a	0.50±0.11b	0.47±0.001a	0.22±0.004b
	MP	1.62±0.01a	6.67±0.23b	4.12±0.07b	0.69±0.10a	0.02±0.01d	0.48±0.01a
	DC	1.10±0.11b	6.70±0.06b	4.46±0.39ab	0.19±0.02c	0.34±0.01b	0.15±0.03c
	MC	1.20±0.01b	6.66±0.28b	3.96±0.46b	0.16±0.04c	0.05±0.001c	0.16±0.01c
定植后120 d 120 d (DAP)	DP	1.06±0.02d	6.65±0.08b	6.65±0.37a	0.50±0.05b	0.65±0.002a	0.17±0.01bc
	MP	1.98±0.05a	6.56±0.02c	5.58±0.04b	0.68±0.01a	0.21±0.01b	0.23±0.01a
	DC	1.42±0.03c	6.77±0.03a	4.92±0.18c	0.45±0.04b	0.65±0.002a	0.19±0.001b
	MC	1.53±0.02b	6.52±0.03c	3.59±0.06d	0.21±0.03c	0.04±0.01c	0.17±0.01c