减氮控水配施生物炭与硝化抑制剂对设施土壤-番茄体系氮素损失的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2026.16.011

中国农业科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (16): 3621-3639.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2026.16.011

• 土壤肥料·节水灌溉·农业生态环境 • 上一篇下一篇

减氮控水配施生物炭与硝化抑制剂对设施土壤-番茄体系氮素损失的影响

李津津¹^,²(), 赵宇晴¹^,², 刘芮怡¹^,², 吉艳芝¹^,²^,³, 谢建治¹^,², 郭艳杰¹^,²^,³(), 张丽娟¹^,²^,³()

¹ 河北农业大学资源与环境科学学院，河北保定 071001
² 河北省农田生态环境重点实验室，河北保定 071001
³ 河北省蔬菜产业协同创新中心，河北保定 071001

收稿日期:2025-10-25 接受日期:2025-12-19 出版日期:2026-08-16 发布日期:2026-08-17
通信作者:
郭艳杰，E-mail：guoyanjie928@126.com。
张丽娟，E-mail：lj_zh2001@163.com。
联系方式: 李津津，E-mail：1248876501@qq.com。
基金资助:
河北省现代农业产业技术体系蔬菜产业创新团队项目(HBCT2018030206); 河北省重点研发计划项目(21326905D)

Effects of Reduced Nitrogen and Controlled Water Combined with Biochar and Nitrification Inhibitor on Nitrogen Losses in a Facility Soil-Tomato System

LI JinJin¹^,²(), ZHAO YuQing¹^,², LIU RuiYi¹^,², JI YanZhi¹^,²^,³, XIE JianZhi¹^,², GUO YanJie¹^,²^,³(), ZHANG LiJuan¹^,²^,³()

¹ College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071001, Hebei
² Key Laboratory for Farmland Eco-Environment of Hebei Province, Baoding 071001, Hebei
³ Collaborative Innovation Center for Vegetable Industry of Hebei, Baoding 071001, Hebei

Received:2025-10-25 Accepted:2025-12-19 Published:2026-08-16 Online:2026-08-17

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】揭示减氮控水条件下配施生物炭与硝化抑制剂双氰胺（DCD）对设施土壤-番茄体系氮素损失的调控效应，为设施蔬菜氮肥高效利用与绿色发展提供依据。【方法】以设施番茄为研究对象，设置常规滴灌（TD）与控水滴灌(CD)2种灌水方式，在此基础上设不施氮（TDN0、CDN0）、常规施氮（TDN1、CDN1）、减氮（TDN2、CDN2）及减氮配施生物炭与DCD（TDN2+BD、CDN2+BD）共8个处理。采用田间小区试验法，系统监测追肥期内土壤N₂O排放与NH₃挥发、剖面NO₃^--N累积分布及番茄氮素吸收利用、产量与品质指标，定量评估生物炭与双氰胺在减氮控水条件下的协同调控效应。【结果】施氮显著提高了土壤N₂O排放和NH₃挥发，且排放高峰主要出现在追肥后2—3 d。减氮措施可有效抑制气态氮损失，在此基础上配施生物炭与DCD进一步强化了N₂O的减排效应。在NH₃挥发方面，生物炭和DCD施用存在一定升高风险，但控水滴灌能够显著缓解这一不利效应。与常规施氮相比，减氮措施可显著降低气态氮总损失量45.7%—56.6%，土壤0—100 cm剖面硝态氮累积减少13.7%—16.2%。在此基础上配施生物炭与硝化抑制剂DCD，气态氮总损失量进一步降低至49.4%—59.0%，硝态氮累积降幅则扩大至27.4%—30.0%，并有效抑制其深层淋溶。2种灌水方式均能增强水氮协同减损效应，但控水滴灌整体优于常规滴灌。CDN2+BD处理的N₂O排放和NH₃挥发总损失量较CDN1降低30.0%，净损失率由3.3%降至2.5%；同时显著减少硝态氮深层累积，并提高20—40 cm土层NO₃^--N保持能力（增加27.1%）。此外，生物炭与DCD能将控水滴灌下的氮肥表观利用率提升至28.9%，TDN2+BD和CDN2+BD处理较对应的单一减氮处理（TDN2和CDN2）分别显著提高53.0%和30.2%（P<0.05）。控水滴灌配施生物炭与DCD处理（CDN2+BD）在获得最高产量（115.93 t·hm^-2）的同时，还显著提升了果实维生素C（Vc）含量，并促进了可溶性蛋白、可溶性糖及可溶性固形物的积累。【结论】减氮控水配施生物炭与硝化抑制剂双氰胺可显著协同抑制氮素气态损失与淋溶，改善土壤氮分布，提高氮肥利用效率和番茄品质，是设施蔬菜氮素减量增效的优选技术模式。

关键词: 减氮控水, 生物炭, 硝化抑制剂, 氮素损失调控, 设施番茄

Abstract:

【Objective】 This study aimed to clarify the regulatory effects of the reduced nitrogen combined with controlled water, biochar, and the nitrification inhibitor dicyandiamide (DCD) on nitrogen losses within a facility soil-tomato system, so as to provide a scientific basis for efficient nitrogen use and sustainable green development in facility vegetable production.【Method】 A field plot experiment was conducted using facility tomato as the research object, with two irrigation treatments including traditional drip irrigation (TD) and reduced drip irrigation (CD). Based on this, eight nitrogen treatments were designed, including no nitrogen (TDN0, and CDN0), traditional nitrogen (TDN1, and CDN1), reduced nitrogen (TDN2, and CDN2), and reduced nitrogen combined with biochar and dicyandiamide (DCD) (TDN2+BD, and CDN2+BD). During the topdressing period, soil N₂O emission and NH₃ volatilization, NO₃^--N accumulation in the 0-100 cm soil profile, and tomato nitrogen uptake, yield, and fruit quality indicators were systematically monitored to quantitatively evaluate the synergistic regulatory effects of biochar and DCD under reduced nitrogen and controlled water conditions. 【Result】 Nitrogen application significantly increased soil N₂O emissions and NH₃ volatilization, with peak fluxes occurring 2-3 days after topdressing. Nitrogen reduction effectively suppressed gaseous nitrogen losses, and the combined application of biochar and the nitrification inhibitor DCD further enhanced the mitigation effect on N₂O emissions. Although biochar and DCD posed a potential risk of increasing NH₃ volatilization, this adverse effect was substantially alleviated by reduced nitrogen and controlled water conditions. Compared with conventional nitrogen application, nitrogen reduction significantly decreased total gaseous nitrogen losses by 45.7%-56.6% and reduced NO₃^--N accumulation in the 0-100 cm soil profile by 13.7%-16.2%. When biochar and DCD were applied on the basis of nitrogen reduction, total gaseous nitrogen losses further declined by 49.4%-59.0%, while the reduction in NO₃^--N accumulation expanded to 27.4%-30.0%, with a clear suppression of deep leaching. Both irrigation methods enhanced the synergistic mitigation effects of water nitrogen regulation. However, controlled drip irrigation demonstrated superior performance compared with conventional drip irrigation. Under controlled irrigation, the CDN2+BD treatment reduced total nitrogen losses by 30.0% compared with CDN1, with decreasing the net nitrogen loss rate from 3.3% to 2.5%. This treatment also significantly inhibited deep NO₃^--N accumulation and increased NO₃^--N retention in the 20-40 cm soil layer by 27.1%. In addition, biochar and DCD increased the apparent nitrogen use efficiency under controlled irrigation to 28.9%; TDN2+BD and CDN2+BD improved nitrogen use efficiency by 53.0% and 30.2%, respectively, compared with their corresponding nitrogen-reduction treatments (TDN2 and CDN2) (P<0.05). Furthermore, the controlled irrigation with biochar and DCD (CDN2+BD) achieved the highest tomato yield (115.93 t·hm^-2), while significantly enhancing fruit vitamin C content and improving soluble protein, soluble sugar, and total soluble solid levels.【Conclusion】 Reduced nitrogen application combined with controlled water, biochar, and the nitrification inhibitor dicyandiamide (DCD) significantly decreased gaseous and leaching nitrogen losses, optimized soil nitrogen distribution, and improved nitrogen use efficiency and tomato quality, representing an optimal technical approach for nitrogen reduction and efficiency enhancement in facility vegetable production.

Key words: reduced nitrogen and controlled water, biochar, nitrification inhibitor, nitrogen losses regulation, facility tomato

李津津, 赵宇晴, 刘芮怡, 吉艳芝, 谢建治, 郭艳杰, 张丽娟. 减氮控水配施生物炭与硝化抑制剂对设施土壤-番茄体系氮素损失的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(16): 3621-3639.

LI JinJin, ZHAO YuQing, LIU RuiYi, JI YanZhi, XIE JianZhi, GUO YanJie, ZHANG LiJuan. Effects of Reduced Nitrogen and Controlled Water Combined with Biochar and Nitrification Inhibitor on Nitrogen Losses in a Facility Soil-Tomato System[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(16): 3621-3639.

图/表 16

表1

表2

图1

表3

表4

图2

表5

表6

表7

图3

表8

图4

表9

图5

表10

表11

参考文献 58

[1]	李天来. 设施蔬菜产业发展(一) 我国设施蔬菜产业发展现状及展望[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2023(9): 1-6.
	Li T L. Development status of China’s facility vegetable industry and outlook[J]. China Vegetables, 2023(9): 1-6. (in Chinese)
[2]	张怀志, 唐继伟, 袁硕, 黄绍文. 津冀设施蔬菜施肥调查分析[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2018(2): 54-60.
	Zhang H Z, Tang J W, Yuan S, Huang S W. Investigation and analysis of greenhouse vegetable fertilization in Tianjin and Hebei Province[J]. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2018(2): 54-60. (in Chinese)
[3]	石生伟, 刘衎, 郭利娜, 任天婧, 李彤, 刘云, 段碧华, 李玉娥. 天津市设施菜地施肥现状及减施潜力和对策[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(6): 1091-1105.
	Shi S W, Liu K, Guo L N, Ren T J, Li T, Liu Y, Duan B H, Li Y E. Fertilization status-quo in greenhouse vegetable production in Tianjin and the potential and countermeasures of fertilizer reduction[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2020, 26(6): 1091-1105. (in Chinese)
[4]	仲子文, 邵鹏, 井永苹, 徐建玲, 刘兆东, 曹学东, 李彦, 张英鹏. 沂南县典型设施蔬菜施肥现状调查与分析[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2023(8): 103-110.
	Zhong Z W, Shao P, Jing Y P, Xu J L, Liu Z D, Cao X D, Li Y, Zhang Y P. Investigation and analysis of fertilization status of typical protected vegetables in Yinan County[J]. China Vegetables, 2023(8): 103-110. (in Chinese)
[5]	黄梓翀, 刘善江, 孙昊, 侯立柱, 吴荣, 薛文涛. 我国蔬菜肥料利用率现状与提高对策[J]. 蔬菜, 2021(7): 43-50.
	Huang Z C, Liu S J, Sun H, Hou L Z, Wu R, Xue W T. Current situation and improvement countermeasures of fertilizer utilization rate in vegetables of China[J]. Vegetables, 2021(7): 43-50. (in Chinese)
[6]	张福锁, 王激清, 张卫峰, 崔振岭, 马文奇, 陈新平, 江荣风. 中国主要粮食作物肥料利用率现状与提高途径[J]. 土壤学报, 2008, 45(5): 915-924.
	Zhang F S, Wang J Q, Zhang W F, Cui Z L, Ma W Q, Chen X P, Jiang R F. Nutrient use efficiencies of major cereal crops in China and measures for improvement[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2008, 45(5): 915-924. (in Chinese)
[7]	Ju X T, Xing G X, Chen X P, Zhang S L, Zhang L J, Liu X J, Cui Z L, Yin B, Christie P, Zhu Z L, Zhang F S. Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems[J]. PNAS, 2009, 106(9): 3041-3046. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0813417106
[8]	王丽英, 赵小翠, 曲明山, 袁会敏, 陈清, 赵永志, 王克武. 京郊设施果类蔬菜土肥水管理现状及技术需求[J]. 华北农学报, 2012, 27(S1): 298-303. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7091.2012.z1.059
	Wang L Y, Zhao X C, Qu M S, Yuan H M, Chen Q, Zhao Y Z, Wang K W. The status and technique requirement of soil fertilization and irrigation for fruit vegetable in greenhouse[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2012, 27(S1): 298-303. (in Chinese)
[9]	郑育锁. 天津市设施蔬菜灌溉施肥情况调查[J]. 中国农技推广, 2012, 28(7): 44-46, 50.
	Zheng Y S. Investigation on irrigation and fertilization of protected vegetables in Tianjin[J]. China Agricultural Technology Extension, 2012, 28(7): 44-46, 50. (in Chinese)
[10]	张余良, 单晓政, 牛国保, 郭锐, 王坤, 张远芳, 孙德岭, 任华中, 张振贤, 高丽红. 设施蔬菜耗水时空特征及水敏感期研究[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2016, 55(3): 595-598, 611.
	Zhang Y L, Shan X Z, Niu G B, Guo R, Wang K, Zhang Y F, Sun D L, Ren H Z, Zhang Z X, Gao L H. Study on spatial and temporal characteristics of water consumption and water-sensitive stage of facility vegetables[J]. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 55(3): 595-598, 611. (in Chinese)
[11]	Lü H F, Lin S, Wang Y F, Lian X J, Zhao Y M, Li Y J, Du J Y, Wang Z X, Wang J G, Butterbach-Bahl K. Drip fertigation significantly reduces nitrogen leaching in solar greenhouse vegetable production system[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2019, 245: 694-701. doi: S0269-7491(18)34040-5 pmid: 30500748
[12]	Sun Y, Zhang J, Wang H Y, Wang L G, Li H. Identifying optimal water and nitrogen inputs for high efficiency and low environment impacts of a greenhouse summer cucumber with a model method[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2019, 212: 23-34. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.08.028
[13]	Shen J L, Li Y, Wang Y, Li Y Y, Zhu X, Jiang W Q, Li Y Y, Wu J S. Soil nitrogen cycling and environmental impacts in the subtropical hilly region of China: evidence from measurements and modeling[J]. Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering, 2022, 9(3): 407-424.
[14]	Min J, Zhang H L, Shi W M. Optimizing nitrogen input to reduce nitrate leaching loss in greenhouse vegetable production[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2012, 111: 53-59. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2012.05.003
[15]	张琳, 孙卓玲, 马理, 吉艳芝, 巨晓棠, 张丽娟. 不同水氮条件下双氰胺(DCD)对温室黄瓜土壤氮素损失的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(1): 128-137.
	Zhang L, Sun Z L, Ma L, Ji Y Z, Ju X T, Zhang L J. Effects of dicyandiamide on nitrogen loss from cucumber planting soil in intensive greenhouse under different irrigation and nitrogen conditions[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 2015, 21(1): 128-137. (in Chinese)
[16]	薄录吉, 李彦, 王艳芹, 仲子文, 井永苹. 设施番茄土壤氮素淋失控制技术措施比较[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2025, 33(2): 278-285.
	Bo L J, Li Y, Wang Y Q, Zhong Z W, Jing Y P. Comparison of various technical measures for controlling nitrogen leaching from tomato- grown soil in greenhouse facilities[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco- Agriculture, 2025, 33(2): 278-285. (in Chinese)
[17]	Norton J, Ouyang Y. Controls and adaptive management of nitrification in agricultural soils[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2019, 10: 1931. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01931 pmid: 31543867
[18]	Gao J C, Luo J F, Lindsey S, Shi Y L, Sun Z L, Wei Z B, Wang L L. Benefits and risks for the environment and crop production with application of nitrification inhibitors in China[J]. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2021, 21(1): 497-512. doi: 10.1007/s42729-020-00378-9
[19]	Wu D, Zhang Y X, Dong G, Du Z L, Wu W L, Chadwick D, Bol R. The importance of ammonia volatilization in estimating the efficacy of nitrification inhibitors to reduce N₂O emissions: A global meta-analysis[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2021, 271: 116365. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116365
[20]	宋博影, 郭艳杰, 王文赞, 吕泽楠, 赵宇晴, 柳鹭, 张丽娟. 生物炭和双氰胺对设施蔬菜土壤温室气体排放的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(10): 1935-1948. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.10.010.
	Song B Y, Guo Y J, Wang W Z, Lü Z N, Zhao Y Q, Liu L, Zhang L J. Effects of biochar combined with dicyandiamide on greenhouse gases emissions from facility vegetable soil[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(10): 1935-1948. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.10.010. (in Chinese)
[21]	Zerulla W, Barth T, Dressel J, Erhardt K, Horchler Von Locquenghien K, Pasda G, Rädle M, Wissemeier A. 3,4-Dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP) -a new nitrification inhibitor for agriculture and horticulture[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2001, 34(2): 79-84. doi: 10.1007/s003740100380
[22]	Wang J Y, Xiong Z Q, Kuzyakov Y. Biochar stability in soil: Meta- analysis of decomposition and priming effects[J]. GCB Bioenergy, 2016, 8(3): 512-523. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.2016.8.issue-3
[23]	Mandal S, Thangarajan R, Bolan N S, Sarkar B, Khan N, Ok Y S, Naidu R. Biochar-induced concomitant decrease in ammonia volatilization and increase in nitrogen use efficiency by wheat[J]. Chemosphere, 2016, 142: 120-127. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.04.086 pmid: 25959224
[24]	Ahmed R, Li Y Z, Mao L L, Xu C Y, Lin W, Ahmed S, Ahmed W. Biochar effects on mineral nitrogen leaching, moisture content, and evapotranspiration after ¹⁵N urea fertilization for vegetable crop[J]. Agronomy, 2019, 9(6): 331. doi: 10.3390/agronomy9060331
[25]	Zhang H H, He P J, Shao L M. N₂O emissions from municipal solid waste landfills with selected infertile cover soils and leachate subsurface irrigation[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2008, 156(3): 959-965. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2008.05.008
[26]	Zhang T K, Tang Y, Gao W C, Lee X Q, Li H, Hu W, Cheng J Z. Combined effects of biochar and inhibitors on greenhouse gas emissions, global warming potential, and nitrogen use efficiency in the tobacco field[J]. Sustainability, 2023, 15(7): 6100. doi: 10.3390/su15076100
[27]	邹琦. 植物生理学实验指导[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
	Zou Q. Experimental Instruction of Plant Physiology[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[28]	程晓楠, 田晓楠, 郭艳杰, 李瑞娟, 张丽娟, 吉艳芝, 李博文. 硝化抑制剂/菌剂对设施土壤-蔬菜体系中氮素去向的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2022, 28(8): 1466-1477.
	Cheng X N, Tian X N, Guo Y J, Li R J, Zhang L J, Ji Y Z, Li B W. Effects of nitrification inhibitor/microbial inoculum on nitrogen fate in soil-vegetable system of greenhouse[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2022, 28(8): 1466-1477. (in Chinese)
[29]	巨晓棠, 张福锁. 中国北方土壤硝态氮的累积及其对环境的影响[J]. 生态环境, 2003, 12(1): 24-28.
	Ju X T, Zhang F S. Nitrate accumulation and its implication to environment in North China[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2003, 12(1): 24-28. (in Chinese)
[30]	Zhou J Y, Gu B J, Schlesinger W H, Ju X T. Significant accumulation of nitrate in Chinese semi-humid croplands[J]. Scientific Reports, 2016, 6: 25088. doi: 10.1038/srep25088 pmid: 27114032
[31]	Shcherbak I, Millar N, Robertson G P. Global meta analysis of the nonlinear response of soil nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions to fertilizer nitrogen[J]. PNAS, 2014, 111(25): 9199-9204. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1322434111 pmid: 24927583
[32]	Kuang W N, Gao X P, Tenuta M, Zeng F J. A global meta-analysis of nitrous oxide emission from drip-irrigated cropping system[J]. Global Change Biology, 2021, 27(14): 3244-3256. doi: 10.1111/gcb.15636 pmid: 33931928
[33]	Lei J L, Fan Q Y, Yu J Y, Ma Y, Yin J H, Liu R. A meta-analysis to examine whether nitrification inhibitors work through selectively inhibiting ammonia-oxidizing bacteria[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2022, 13: 962146. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.962146
[34]	Yang M, Fang Y T, Sun D, Shi Y L. Efficiency of two nitrification inhibitors (dicyandiamide and 3,4-dimethypyrazole phosphate) on soil nitrogen transformations and plant productivity: A meta-analysis[J]. Scientific Reports, 2016, 6: 22075. doi: 10.1038/srep22075
[35]	Ang Y, Li W, Zhou X B, Du Y G. Effect of dicyandiamide on grassland nitrous oxide emission rates by a meta-analysis[J]. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 2024, 33(3): 2019-2025. doi: 10.15244/pjoes/173114
[36]	Tang Z M, Liu X R, Li G C, Liu X W. Mechanism of biochar on nitrification and denitrification to N₂O emissions based on isotope characteristic values[J]. Environmental Research, 2022, 212(Pt A): 113219.
[37]	Deng B L, Wang S L, Xu X T, Wang H, Hu D N, Guo X M, Shi Q H, Siemann E, Zhang L. Effects of biochar and dicyandiamide combination on nitrous oxide emissions from Camellia oleifera field soil[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2019, 26(4): 4070-4077. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-3900-3
[38]	Chen H, Yin C, Fan X P, Ye M J, Peng H Y, Li T Q, Zhao Y H, Wakelin S A, Chu G X, Liang Y C. Reduction of N₂O emission by biochar and/or 3,4-dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP) is closely linked to soil ammonia oxidizing bacteria and nosZI-N₂O reducer populations[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 694: 133658. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133658
[39]	何莉莉, 黄佳佳, 王梦洁, 刘玉学, 吕豪豪, 汪玉瑛, 杨生茂. 生物炭配施硝化抑制剂降低稻田土壤NH₃和N₂O排放的微生物机制[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2023, 29(11): 2030-2041.
	He L L, Huang J J, Wang M J, Liu Y X, Lü H H, Wang Y Y, Yang S M. Effects of biochar combined with nitrification inhibitor (DMPP) on reducing NH₃ and N₂O emission in paddy soil and its microbial mechanism[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2023, 29(11): 2030-2041. (in Chinese)
[40]	Zhang P Y, Liu J Z, Zhang H C, Wang M D, Xu J, Yu L Y, Cai H J. Deficit irrigation interacting with biochar mitigates N₂O emissions from farmland in a wheat-maize rotation system[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2024, 297: 108843. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2024.108843
[41]	Treweek G, Di H J, Cameron K C, Podolyan A. Effectiveness of the nitrification inhibitor dicyandiamide and biochar to reduce nitrous oxide emissions[J]. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 2016, 59(2): 165-173. doi: 10.1080/00288233.2016.1161651
[42]	Miao T T, Wang B, Cai A D, Ren T J, Wan Y F, Meng Y, Li Y E. Large differences in ammonia emission factors between greenhouse and open-field systems under different practices across Chinese vegetable cultivation[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 852: 158339. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158339
[43]	Sommer S G, Hutchings N J. Ammonia emission from field applied manure and its reduction: Invited paper[J]. European Journal of Agronomy, 2001, 15(1): 1-15. doi: 10.1016/S1161-0301(01)00112-5
[44]	屈田华, 李永夫, 张少博, 郦琳琳, 李永春, 刘娟. 生物质炭输入影响土壤氮素转化与氧化亚氮排放的研究进展[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2021, 38(5): 926-936.
	Qu T H, Li Y F, Zhang S B, Li L L, Li Y C, Liu J. Effects of biochar application on soil nitrogen transformation and N₂O emissions: A review[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2021, 38(5): 926-936. (in Chinese)
[45]	Liu Z Q, He T Y, Cao T, Yang T X, Meng J, Chen W F. Effects of biochar application on nitrogen leaching, ammonia volatilization and nitrogen use efficiency in two distinct soils[J]. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2017.
[46]	王翰琨, 吴永波, 刘俊萍, 薛建辉. 生物炭对土壤氮循环及其功能微生物的影响研究进展[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2022, 38(6): 689-701.
	Wang H K, Wu Y B, Liu J P, Xue J H. A review of research advances in the effects of biochar on soil nitrogen cycling and its functional microorganisms[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2022, 38(6): 689-701. (in Chinese)
[47]	Sha Z P, Li Q Q, Lü T T, Misselbrook T, Liu X J. Response of ammonia volatilization to biochar addition: A meta-analysis[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 655: 1387-1396. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.316
[48]	Zotarelli L, Dukes M D, Scholberg J M S, Muñoz-Carpena R, Icerman J. Tomato nitrogen accumulation and fertilizer use efficiency on a sandy soil, as affected by nitrogen rate and irrigation scheduling[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2009, 96(8): 1247-1258. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2009.03.019
[49]	Phogat V, Skewes M A, Mahadevan M, Cox J W. Evaluation of soil plant system response to pulsed drip irrigation of an almond tree under sustained stress conditions[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2013, 118: 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2012.11.015
[50]	Yao Y, Gao B, Zhang M, Inyang M, Zimmerman A R. Effect of biochar amendment on sorption and leaching of nitrate, ammonium, and phosphate in a sandy soil[J]. Chemosphere, 2012, 89(11): 1467-1471. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.06.002 pmid: 22763330
[51]	Clough T, Condron L, Kammann C, Müller C. A review of biochar and soil nitrogen dynamics[J]. Agronomy, 2013, 3(2): 275-293. doi: 10.3390/agronomy3020275
[52]	Li Z T, Xu P S, Han Z Q, Wu J, Bo X M, Wang J Y, Zou J W. Effect of biochar and DMPP application alone or in combination on nitrous oxide emissions differed by soil types[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2023, 59(2): 123-138. doi: 10.1007/s00374-022-01688-z
[53]	Cristóbal-Muñoz I, Prado-Hernández J V, Martínez-Ruiz A, Pascual-Ramírez F, Cristóbal-Acevedo D, Cristóbal-Muñoz D. An improved empirical model for estimating the geometry of the soil wetting front with surface drip irrigation[J]. Water, 2022, 14(11): 1827. doi: 10.3390/w14111827
[54]	Yu C X, Wang G M, Zhang H B, Chen H P, Ma Q, Yu C X, Wang G M, Zhang H B, Chen H P, Ma Q. Biochar and nitrification inhibitor (dicyandiamide) combination had a double-win effect on saline-alkali soil improvement and soybean production in the Yellow River Delta, China[J]. Agronomy, 2022, 12(12): 3154. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12123154
[55]	Guo Y J, Li B W, Di H J, Zhang L J, Gao Z L. Effects of dicyandiamide (DCD) on nitrate leaching, gaseous emissions of ammonia and nitrous oxide in a greenhouse vegetable production system in northern China[J]. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2012, 58(5): 647-658. doi: 10.1080/00380768.2012.726921
[56]	Abdelghany A E, Dou Z Y, Alashram M G, Eltohamy K M, Elrys A S, Liu X Q, Wu Y, Cheng M H, Fan J L, Zhang F C. The joint application of biochar and nitrogen enhances fruit yield, quality and water-nitrogen productivity of water-stressed greenhouse tomato under drip fertigation[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2023, 290: 108605. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108605
[57]	Hu J, Gettel G, Fan Z B, Lü H F, Zhao Y M, Yu Y L, Wang J G, Butterbach-Bahl K, Li G Y, Lin S. Drip fertigation promotes water and nitrogen use efficiency and yield stability through improved root growth for tomatoes in plastic greenhouse production[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2021, 313: 107379. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2021.107379
[58]	Ayankojo I T, Morgan K T, Kadyampakeni D M, Liu G D. Tomato growth, yield, and root development, soil nitrogen and water distribution as affected by nitrogen and irrigation rates on a Florida sandy soil[J]. HortScience, 2020, 55(11): 1744-1755. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI15177-20

土壤层次 Soil layer (cm)	全氮 Total N (g·kg^-1)	有机质 SOM (g·kg^-1)	硝态氮 NO₃^--N (mg·kg^-1)	铵态氮 NH₄⁺-N (mg·kg^-1)	有效磷 Olsen-P (mg·kg^-1)	速效钾 NH₄OAc-K (mg·kg^-1)	pH (水:土=2.5:1)	粒径组成 Particle size composition (%)			容重 Bulk density (g·cm^-3)
土壤层次 Soil layer (cm)	全氮 Total N (g·kg^-1)	有机质 SOM (g·kg^-1)	硝态氮 NO₃^--N (mg·kg^-1)	铵态氮 NH₄⁺-N (mg·kg^-1)	有效磷 Olsen-P (mg·kg^-1)	速效钾 NH₄OAc-K (mg·kg^-1)	pH (水:土=2.5:1)	砂粒 Sand	粉粒 Silt	黏粒 Clay	容重 Bulk density (g·cm^-3)
0-20	1.07	17.49	150.67	27.71	113.65	172.72	7.92	59.99	16.66	23.35	1.21
20-40	0.75	11.78	123.86	29.38	78.16	115.51	8.02	67.91	15.32	16.77	1.25
40-60	0.54	8.79	106.71	25.28	52.05	191.33	8.13	73.89	12.93	13.18	1.35
60-80	0.50	8.91	84.07	20.87	57.44	184.89	8.16	77.57	11.05	11.38	1.46
80-100	0.57	11.70	82.29	13.01	59.61	285.99	8.18	72.03	13.41	14.56	1.45

处理 Treatment	基肥（2022-10-5） Basal fertilizer (October 5, 2022)			追肥Topdressing									总计 Total (kg·hm^-2)			灌水 Irrigation							总计 Total (m³·hm^-2)
				第1次（2023-1-16） First (January 16, 2023)			第2次（2023-3-14） Second (March 14, 2023)			第3次（2023-4-15） Third (April 15, 2023)			总计 Total (kg·hm^-2)			第1次（2022-10-12） First (October 12, 2022)	第2次（2022-10-17） Second (October 17, 2023)	第3次（2023-1-16） Third (January 16, 2023)	第4次（2023-3-14） Forth (March 14, 2023)	第5次（2023-4-15） Fifth (April 15, 2023)	第6次（2023-5-5） Sixth (May 5, 2023)	第7次（2023-6-1） Seventh (June 1, 2023)
	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	第1次（2022-10-12） First (October 12, 2022)	第2次（2022-10-17） Second (October 17, 2023)	第3次（2023-1-16） Third (January 16, 2023)	第4次（2023-3-14） Forth (March 14, 2023)	第5次（2023-4-15） Fifth (April 15, 2023)	第6次（2023-5-5） Sixth (May 5, 2023)	第7次（2023-6-1） Seventh (June 1, 2023)
TDN0	0	194	205	0	30	32	0	52	70	0	52	70	0	328	377	225	360	540	810	900	990	675	4500
TDN1	207	194	205	45	30	32	100	52	70	100	52	70	452	328	377	225	360	540	810	900	990	675	4500
TDN2	145	194	205	32	30	32	70	52	70	70	52	70	317	328	377	225	360	540	810	900	990	675	4500
TDN2+BD	145	194	205	32	30	32	70	52	70	70	52	70	317	328	377	225	360	540	810	900	990	675	4500
CDN0	0	194	205	0	30	32	0	52	70	0	52	70	0	328	377	169	270	405	608	675	743	506	3375
CDN1	207	194	205	45	30	32	100	52	70	100	52	70	452	328	377	169	270	405	608	675	743	506	3375
CDN2	145	194	205	32	30	32	70	52	70	70	52	70	317	328	377	169	270	405	608	675	743	506	3375
CDN2+BD	145	194	205	32	30	32	70	52	70	70	52	70	317	328	377	169	270	405	608	675	743	506	3375

指标 Index	因素 Factor	自由度 df	标准差 MS	F检验 F test	P值 P value
N₂O排放通量 N₂O emission flux	处理 Treatment	7	28456.892	18.73	<0.001
	时间 Time	24	8923.417	35.62	<0.001
	处理×时间Treatment×Time	168	1876.539	7.49	<0.001

指标 Index	因素 Factor	自由度 df	标准差 MS	F检验 F test	P值 P value
N₂O排放通量 N₂O emission flux	灌水 Irrigation	1	519.059	13.579	0.002
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	7079.078	185.199	<0.001
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	51.432	1.346	0.295

指标 Index	因素 Factor	自由度 df	标准差 MS	F值 F value	P值 P value
NH₃挥发速率 NH₃ volatilization rate	处理 Treatment	7	45.327	22.156	<0.001
	时间 Time	41	28.641	48.773	<0.001
	处理×时间Treatment×Time	287	6.892	11.734	<0.001

减氮控水配施生物炭与硝化抑制剂对设施土壤-番茄体系氮素损失的影响

Effects of Reduced Nitrogen and Controlled Water Combined with Biochar and Nitrification Inhibitor on Nitrogen Losses in a Facility Soil-Tomato System

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 16

参考文献 58

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

指标 Index	因素 Factor	自由度 df	标准差 MS	F检验 F test	P值 P value
NH₃挥发速率 NH₃ volatilization rate	灌水 Irrigation	1	16.609	52.123	<0.001
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	281.212	882.511	<0.001
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	1.687	5.295	0.010

处理 Treatment	N₂O		NH₃		N₂O+NH₃
处理 Treatment	累积排放量 Accumulated emission amount (kg·hm^-2)	损失率 Loss rate (%)	累积排放量 Accumulated emission amount (kg·hm^-2)	损失率 Loss rate (%)	总损失量 Total losses (kg·hm^-2)	净损失率 Net loss rate (%)
TDN0	0.25±0.05 e	—	4.47±0.47 d	—	4.72+0.53 e	—
TDN1	2.18±0.14 a	0.79±0.43 a	18.44±1.55 a	5.70±0.79 a	20.62±1.59 a	6.49±0.65 a
TDN2	1.30+0.18 b	0.61±0.33 b	9.90±0.79 b	3.16±0.33 b	11.20±0.63 b	3.77±0.16 b
TDN2+BD	0.96±0.10 c	0.41±0.22 c	9.47±0.33 bc	2.91±0.35b	10.43±0.31 bc	3.32±0.46 bc
CDN0	0.22+0.05 e	—	3.91±0.35 d	—	4.13+0.30 e	—
CDN1	0.97±0.11 c	0.31±0.17 c	11.12±1.57 b	2.94±0.57 b	12.09±1.68 b	3.25±0.73 bc
CDN2	0.80+0.08 c	0.33±0.18 c	8.15±0.73 c	2.46±0.73 b	8.95+0.66 cd	2.79±0.27 bc
CDN2+BD	0.51±0.03 d	0.17±0.09 d	7.95±0.62 c	2.35±0.62 b	8.46±0.65 d	2.52±0.55 d

指标 Index	因素 Factor	自由度 df	标准差 MS	F检验 F test	P值 P value
0-20 cm土层硝态氮累积 Nitrate accumulation in 0-20 cm soil layer	灌水 Irrigation	1	4378.937	31.271	0.000
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	6572.520	46.936	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	1348.067	9.627	0.001
20-40 cm土层硝态氮累积 Nitrate accumulation in 20-40 cm soil layer	灌水 Irrigation	1	59.143	0.233	0.636
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	10214.254	40.263	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	723.765	2.853	0.072
40-60 cm土层硝态氮累积 Nitrate accumulation in 40-60 cm soil layer	灌水 Irrigation	1	583.208	5.595	0.032
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	6778.893	65.039	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	197.226	1.892	0.174
60-80 cm土层硝态氮累积 Nitrate accumulation in 60-80 cm soil layer	灌水 Irrigation	1	515.565	6.455	0.023
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	3586.607	44.908	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	326.159	4.084	0.026
80-100 cm土层硝态氮累积 Nitrate accumulation in 80-100 cm soil layer	灌水 Irrigation	1	163.375	2.795	0.115
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	4002.020	68.474	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	147.159	2.518	0.097

指标 Index	因素 Factor	自由度 df	标准差 MS	F检验 F test	P值 P value
番茄产量 Tomato yield	灌水 Irrigation	1	27.290	0.896	0.359
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	354.798	11.644	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	55.133	1.809	0.189
维生素C含量 Vc content	灌水 Irrigation	1	12.627	1.128	0.305
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	92.285	8.241	0.001
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	6.027	0.538	0.663
可溶性糖含量 Soluble sugar content	灌水 Irrigation	1	0.127	0.077	0.785
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	2.929	1.774	0.187
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	0.065	0.039	0.989
可溶性蛋白含量 Soluble protein content	灌水 Irrigation	1	28.769	0.016	0.902
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	10434.447	5.710	0.005
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	350.094	0.192	0.900
可溶性固形物含量 Soluble solid content	灌水 Irrigation	1	0.025	0.015	0.905
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	2.161	1.278	0.322
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	0.050	0.030	0.993
可滴定酸含量 Titratable acid content	灌水 Irrigation	1	1.734	1.306	0.271
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	3.149	2.371	0.099
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	0.337	0.254	0.857

指标 Index	因素 Factor	自由度 df	标准差 MS	F检验 F test	P值 P value
根氮素累积 Root N accumulation	灌水 Irrigation	1	0.235	0.162	0.693
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	12.728	8.801	0.001
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	1.311	0.907	0.461
茎氮素累积 Stem N accumulation	灌水 Irrigation	1	15.079	0.533	0.477
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	278.588	9.839	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	3.146	0.111	0.952
叶氮素累积 Leaf N accumulation	灌水 Irrigation	1	0.243	0.010	0.923
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	521.503	20.897	0.000
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	7.411	0.297	0.827
果实氮素累积 Fruit N accumulation	灌水 Irrigation	1	0.086	0.000	0.989
	氮素调控Nitrogen regulation	3	2567.785	5.393	0.007
	灌水×氮素调控 Irrigation×Nitrogen regulation	3	375.604	0.789	0.519

处理 Treatment	总吸收氮量 Total N uptake (kg·hm^-2)	氮肥表观利用率 RE (%)	氮肥农学效率 AE (kg·kg^-1)
TDN0	127.4±3.9c	—	—
TDN1	228.0±7.0a	23.1±1.6ab	33.5±7.8b
TDN2	182.1±4.4b	18.5±2.5b	37.0±8.3ab
TDN2+BD	213.2±9.5ab	28.3±2.5a	49.7±8.5ab
CDN0	121.1±6.3c	—	—
CDN1	209.7±5.8ab	19.6±3.3b	36.4±9.7ab
CDN2	191.6±8.1ab	22.2±4.6ab	43.3±7.1ab
CDN2+BD	212.9±10.1ab	28.9±3.7a	60.7±6.1a

[1]	李永娟, 张悦彤, 王艺博, 赵长江, 宋洁, 陈雪丽, 姚钦. 生物炭施用对大豆轮连作系统土壤固氮微生物nifH基因丰度及群落组成的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(6): 1272-1285.
[2]	吴佳佳, 刘蕊, 李鑫艳, 张久东, 常单娜, 曹卫东. 间作绿肥下减氮并配施生物炭降低玉米生产氮足迹[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(16): 3605-3620.
[3]	王珅, 李盼, 梁淼, 王丽萍, 张殿凯, 赵连豪, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 南运有, 殷文, 柴强. 生物炭配施缓释肥对绿洲灌区土壤水分利用的调控效应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(15): 3374-3386.
[4]	王晓丽, 樊志龙, 南运有, 陈桂平, 江龙秀, 殷文, 胡发龙, 柴强. 减氮下间作玉米干物质积累及产量稳定性对施用生物炭的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(15): 3302-3314.
[5]	周胜一, 李超, 于鑫冉, 吴凤芝, 潘凯. 菊芋秸秆生物炭对连作西瓜生长、枯萎病及土壤细菌群落的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(14): 3132-3146.
[6]	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.
[7]	王安心, 方娅婷, 顿谦, 伍永清, 廖世鹏, 李小坤, 任涛, 陆志峰, 丛日环, 鲁剑巍. 秸秆直接还田与炭化还田对稻油轮作作物产量和氮素利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(16): 3280-3292.
[8]	高尚洁, 刘杏认, 李迎春, 柳晓婉. 施用生物炭和秸秆还田对农田温室气体排放及增温潜势的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(5): 935-949.
[9]	鲁科丹, 路远, 王蕊, 党廷辉. 不同氮素管理模式对黄土旱塬春玉米产量及N₂O排放的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(18): 3642-3653.
[10]	王庆阳, 曹殿云, 王迪, 詹增意, 贺婉莹, 孙强, 陈温福, 兰宇. 长期施用生物炭对棕壤养分及腐殖质组分的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(13): 2612-2622.
[11]	庞津雯, 王钰皓, 陶宏扬, 卫婷, 高飞, 刘恩科, 贾志宽, 张鹏. 生物炭不同添加量对旱作覆膜农田土壤团聚体特性及有机碳含量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(9): 1729-1743.
[12]	刘蕾, 史建硕, 张国印, 郜静, 李玭, 任燕利, 王丽英. 长期施有机肥对设施番茄土壤稀有和丰富细菌亚群落的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(18): 3615-3628.
[13]	宋博影, 郭艳杰, 王文赞, 吕泽楠, 赵宇晴, 柳鹭, 张丽娟. 生物炭和双氰胺对设施蔬菜土壤温室气体排放的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(10): 1935-1948.
[14]	顾博文, 杨劲峰, 鲁晓玲, 吴怡慧, 李娜, 刘宁, 安宁, 韩晓日. 连续施用生物炭对花生不同生育时期叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(21): 4552-4561.
[15]	向伟,王雷,刘天奇,李诗豪,翟中兵,李成芳. 生物炭与无机氮配施对稻田温室气体排放及氮肥利用率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(22): 4634-4645.