长期不同施肥对甘蔗产量稳定性、肥料贡献率 及养分流失的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.10.012

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的分析长期不同施肥对甘蔗产量稳定性、肥料贡献率及氮磷养分地表径流流失的影响,明确其对甘蔗产量、肥料利用及环境效应,为南方赤红壤蔗区合理施肥,维持甘蔗高产、稳产及降低环境污染,改善农田生态系统质量提供依据。方法以长期肥料径流定位监测试验为基础,选取不施肥（CK）、推荐施肥（OPT）、过量施氮（OPT+N）、过量施磷（OPT+P）4个处理,分析甘蔗蔗茎8年产量变化、肥料贡献率及氮磷地表径流流失量。结果在种植的前4年,CK处理甘蔗蔗茎产量急剧下降,之后保持在50 t·hm^-2并趋于平衡。施肥处理不同年份间波动性较大,但在相同年份内波动较小。与CK相比,施肥显著提高甘蔗蔗茎产量和稳定性,8年平均,蔗茎产量施肥处理增幅均高达70%以上。施肥处理下,蔗茎产量OPT与OPT+P处理差异不显著,但显著高于OPT+N处理。蔗茎产量稳定性三者间均差异不显著。蔗地地力贡献率在试验前4年急剧下降,肥料贡献率急剧上升。之后,两者均基本稳定在50%左右。肥料贡献率及肥料农学利用率OPT处理均显著高于或相当于OPT+N和OPT+P处理。施肥显著提高氮磷养分地表径流流失量。过量施入氮磷肥显著增加相应氮磷流失量,但对氮（磷）肥径流流失率无显著影响。结论长期过量施入氮磷化肥不仅没有增产、稳产优势,还造成养分流失。推荐施肥是南方赤红壤蔗区兼顾甘蔗高产稳产、高肥料贡献率及低养分流失的较好施肥模式。

关键词: 氮肥, 磷肥, 甘蔗产量, 稳定性, 肥料贡献率, 养分流失

Abstract:

【Objective】 This study was conducted to explore the response of the sugarcane yield stability, fertilizer contribution rate and N, P loss in runoff under long-term different fertilization, with an aim to provide scientific references for establishing the optimal fertilization pattern and promoting the sustainable production of sugarcane as well as the quality of agroecosystem improvement.【Method】 Four different fertilization treatments (non-fertilization (CK), optimum fertilization (OPT), application of 50% N increase based on OPT (OPT+N) and application of 50% P₂O₅ increase based on OPT (OPT+P)) were chosen from an 8-years fertilization filed experiment. The changes of annual sugarcane stem yield, fertilizer contribution rate and N, P loss in runoff were investigated. 【Result】 At the first 4 years of planting, sugarcane yield declined sharply, and then kept equilibrium around 50 t·hm^-2, while fertilization treatments showed a fluctuation in different years, and kept the same trend in the same year. Fertilization significantly increased the sugarcane yield and its stability. With an average of 8 years, sugarcane yield under fertilizer treatments was 70% higher than that under CK. However, there was no significant increase between OPT and OPT+N treatments in sugarcane yield, while OPT was higher than OPT+N treatment. There was no significant difference among fertilizer treatments in sugarcane yield stability. The soil contribution rate in sugarcane field declined sharply at the first 4 years of planting, while fertilizer contribution rate showed the opposite trend, and then both of them basically stabled at around 50%. Both of fertilizer contribution rate and agronomic efficiency in OPT treatment were significantly higher than or equal to OPT+N and OPT+P treatments. Fertilization significantly increased N and P runoff loss. Excessive application of N and P fertilizer significantly increased the corresponding N and P loss, but not N (P) fertilizer loss rate. 【Conclusion】 Excessive application of N and P not only had no advantage in sugarcane yield and its stability, but also resulted in waste of resources and increase of nutrient loss. OPT treatment was a better fertilization model for high and stable yield of sugarcane, high fertilizer contribution rate and low nutrient loss.

Key words: N fertilizer, P fertilizer, sugarcane yield, stability, fertilizer contribution rate, nutrient loss

区惠平, 周柳强, 黄金生, 曾艳, 朱晓晖, 谢如林, 谭宏伟, 黄碧燕. 长期不同施肥对甘蔗产量稳定性、肥料贡献率及养分流失的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(10): 1931-1939.

HuiPing OU, LiuQiang ZHOU, JinSheng HUANG, Yan ZENG, XiaoHui ZHU, RuLin XIE, HongWei TAN, BiYan HUANG. Effects of Long-Term Different Fertilization on Sugarcane Yield Stability, Fertilizer Contribution Rate and Nutrition Loss[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(10): 1931-1939.

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.0578-1752.2018.10.012

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2018/V51/I10/1931

图/表 7

表1

图1

表2

图2

表3

图3

表4

参考文献 32

[1]	冀建华, 刘光荣, 李祖章, 刘益仁, 侯红乾, 刘秀梅, 李絮花, 罗奇祥. 基于AMMI模型评价长期定位施肥对双季稻总产量稳定性的影响. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(4): 685-696. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.04.009
	JI J H, LIU G R, LI Z Z, LIU Y R, HOU H Q, LIU X M, LI X H, LUO Q X.Effects of long-term fertilization on stability of double cropping rice yield based on AMMI model. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012, 45(4): 685-696. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.04.009
[2]	陈欢, 曹承富, 孔令聪, 张存岭, 李玮, 乔玉强, 杜世州, 赵竹. 长期施肥下淮北砂姜黑土区小麦产量稳定性研究. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(13): 2580-2590. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.13.010
	CHEN H, CAO C F, KONG L C, ZHANG C L, LI W, QIAO Y Q, DU S Z, ZHAO Z.Study on wheat yield stability in Huaibei lime concretion black soil area based on long-term fertilization Experiment.Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014, 47(13): 2580-2590. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.13.010
[3]	门明新, 李新旺, 许皞. 长期施肥对华北平原潮土作物产量及稳定性的影响. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(8): 2339-2346.
	MEN M X, LI X W, XU H.Effects of long-term fertilization on crop yields and stability.Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008, 41(8): 2339-2346. (in Chinese)
[4]	朱洪勋, 沈阿林, 张翔, 孙春河. 黄潮土养分供应特征及演变规律. 土壤学报, 1997, 34(2): 138-145.
	ZHU H X, SHEN A L, ZHANG X, SUN C H.Nutrients supplying characteristics and evolution regularities of yellow fluvo-aquic soil.Acta Pedologica Sinica, 1997, 34(2): 138-145. (in Chinese)
[5]	王定勇, 石孝均, 毛知耕. 长期水旱轮作条件下紫色土养分供应能力的研究. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2004, 10(2): 120-126. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1008-505X.2004.02.002
	WANG D Y, SHI X J, MAO Z G.Study on nutrient supplying capacity of purple soil under long-term rice-wheat rotation.Plant Nutrition and Fertilization Science, 2004, 10(2): 120-126. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1008-505X.2004.02.002
[6]	贡付飞, 查燕, 武雪萍, 黄绍敏, 徐明岗, 张会民, 刘海龙, 姜志伟, 王小彬, 蔡典雄. 长期不同施肥措施下潮土冬小麦农田基础地力演变分析. 农业工程学报, 2013, 29(12): 120-129. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2013.12.016
	GONG F F, CHA Y, WU X P, HUANG S M, XU M G, ZHANG H M, LIU H L, JIANG Z W, WANG X B, CAI D X.Analysis on basic soil productivity change of winter wheat in fluvo-aquic soil under long-term fertilization.Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2013, 29(12): 120-129. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2013.12.016
[7]	JEONG C Y, WEINDORF D C, DERAMUS A, GOODEAUX L L.Surface and subsurface phosphorus losses from sugarcane fields with different management practices.Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 2011, 217(1/4): 649-661. doi: 10.1007/s11270-010-0617-4
[8]	YU K, DELAUNE R D, TAO R, BEINE R L.Nonpoint source of nutrients and herbicides associated with sugarcane production and its impact on Louisiana coastal water quality.Journal of Environmental Quality, 2008, 37(6): 2275-2283 doi: 10.2134/jeq2008.0082 pmid: 18948481
[9]	WEBSTER A J, BARTLEY R, ARMOUR J D, BRODIE J E, THORBURN P J.Reducing dissolved inorganic nitrogen in surface runoff water from sugarcane production systems.Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2012, 65(4/9): 128-135. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.02.023 pmid: 22424798
[10]	吴棉国, 林彦铨, 张华. 我国甘蔗产业标准研究现状与展望. 亚热带农业研究, 2010, 6(3): 209-212. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-0925.2010.03.014
	WU M G, LIN Y Q, ZHANG H.Research status and prospect on industrial standard of sugarcane in China.Subtropical Agriculture Research, 2010, 6(3): 209-212. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-0925.2010.03.014
[11]	谭宏伟, 刘永贤, 周柳强, 谢如林, 杨尚东, 黄金生, 黄美福. 基于滴灌条件下的甘蔗施肥减量技术研究. 热带作物学报, 2013, 34(1): 24-28.
	TAN H W, LIU Y X, ZHOU L Q, XIE R L, YANG S D, HUANG J S, HUANG M F.Reduction fertilization technologies under drip for sugarcane irrigation.Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2013, 34(1): 24-28. (in Chinese)
[12]	蒙世欢. 广西甘蔗施肥现状、问题及对策. 广西农学报, 2007, 22(5): 37-39.
	MENG S H.Status quo, problems and countermeasures of sugarcane fertilization in Guangxi. Journal of Guangxi Agriculture, 2007, 22(5): 37-39. (in Chinese)
[13]	谭宏伟, 周柳强, 谢如林, 黄美福, 黄金生. 甘蔗实现减量施肥的理论与实践.广西糖业, 2014(6): 9-11.
	TAN H W, ZHOU L Q, XIE R L, HUANG M F, HUANG J S.The theory and practice of reducing sugarcane implement fertilization.Guangxi Sugar Industry, 2014(6): 9-11. (in Chinese)
[14]	黄祥飞. 湖泊生态调查观测与分析. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2000.
	HUANG X F.Lake Ecological Survey, Observation, and Analyses. Beijing: Chinese Standard Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[15]	国家环保局. 水质总磷的测定-钼酸铵分光光度法: GB11893—89. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 1989.
	SEPA. Water quality determination of total phosphorous-ammonium molybdate spectrophotometric method:GB11893—89. Beijing: China Environmental Science Press, 1989. (in Chinese)
[16]	谢如林, 谭宏伟, 周柳强, 黄金生, 黄美福, 黄献华, 董文斌, 王磊. 甘蔗种植体系水土及氮磷养分流失研究. 西南农业学报, 2013, 26(4): 1572-1577. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4829.2013.04.056
	XIE R L, TAN H W, ZHOU L Q, HUANG J S, HUANG M F, HUANG X H, DONG W B, WANG L.Water, soil, nitrogen and phosphorus losses from surface runoff in sugarcane cropping system.Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 26(4): 1572-1577. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4829.2013.04.056
[17]	王伟妮, 鲁剑巍, 李银水, 邹娟, 苏伟, 李小坤, 李云春. 当前生产条件下不同作物施肥效果和肥料贡献率研究. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(19): 3997-4007. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2010.19.012
	WANG W N, LU J W, LI Y S, ZOU J, SU W, LI X K, LI Y C.Study on fertilization effect and fertilizer contribution rate of different crops at present production conditions.Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2010, 43(19): 3997-4007. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2010.19.012
[18]	MANNA M C, SWARUP A, WANJARI R H, RAVANKAR H N, MISHRA B, SAHA M N, SINGH Y V, SAHI D K, SARAP P A.Long-term effect of fertilizer and manure application on soil organic carbon storage, soil quality and yield sustainability under sub-humid and semi-arid tropical India.Field Crops Research, 2005, 93(2/3): 264-280.
[19]	夏圣益.土壤基础地力、施肥水平与农作物产量的关系. 上海农业科技, 1998(1): 6-8.
	XIA S Y.The relationship among soil fertility, fertilization level and crop yields.Shanghai Agricultural Science and Technology, 1998(1): 6-8. (in Chinese)
[20]	张存岭, 陈龙潭, 曹承富, 孔令聪, 纪永明. 淮北砂姜土地力贡献与培肥技术研究. 中国农学通报, 2005, 21(11): 244-246.
	ZHANG C L, CHEN L T, CAO C F, KONG L C, JI Y M.Study on the contribution of Shajiang black soil fertilizer and the appropriate technical measures of applying fertilizer.Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2005, 21(11): 244-246. (in Chinese)
[21]	张婧婷. 多因子变化对中国主要作物产量和温室气体排放的影响研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2017.
	ZHANG Q T.Influence of multifactor environmental changes on main crop yields and greenhouse gases emissions in China[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2017. (in Chinese)
[22]	徐明岗, 梁国庆, 张夫道. 中国土壤肥力演变. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2006: 203-207.
	XU M G, LIANG G Q, ZHANG F D.Soil Fertility Change in China. Beijing: China Agricultural Scientech Press, 2006: 203-207. (in Chinese)
[23]	陈燕丽, 冯利平, 丁美花, 莫伟华, 匡昭敏. 气象因子对广西新植蔗和宿根蔗茎伸长的影响. 作物学报, 2016, 42(4): 583-590. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2016.00583
	CHEN Y L, FENG L P, DING M H, MO W H, KUANG Z M.Effects of meteorological factors on stalk elongation in new-planting and ratooning sugarcane. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2016, 42(4): 583-590. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2016.00583
[24]	廖文华, 刘建玲, 黄欣欣, 高志岭, 杨羚. 潮褐土上蔬菜产量和土壤各形态磷变化对长期过量施磷的响应. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(4): 894-903. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.16333
	LIAO W H, LIU J L, HUANG X X, GAO Z L, YANG L.Responses of vegetable yield and changes of phosphorus fractions in cinnamon soil to long-term excess phosphorus application. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 2017, 23(4): 894-903. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11674/zwyf.16333
[25]	张凤华, 廖文华, 刘建玲. 连续过量施磷和有机肥的产量效应及环境风险评价. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2009, 15(6): 1280-1287. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2009.0606
	ZHANG F H, LIAO W H, LIU J L.Applications of phosphorus and organic fertilizers on yields of vegetables and their environmental impacts.Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2009, 15(6): 1280-1287. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2009.0606
[26]	VALKAMA E, VIRKAJÄRVI P, UUSITALO R, YLIVAINIO K, TURTOLA E. Meta-analysis of grass ley response to phosphorus fertilization in Finland.Grass and Forage Science, 2016, 71(1): 36-53. doi: 10.1111/gfs.12156
[27]	赵风华, 马军花, 欧阳竹. 过量施氮对冬小麦生产力的影响. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(10): 1075-1081. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.01075
	ZHAO F H, MA J H, OUYANG Z.Effects of excessive nitrogen supply on productivity of winter wheat.Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2012, 36(10): 1075-1081. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.01075
[28]	杨生茂, 李凤民, 索东让, 郭天文, 王建国, 孙炳玲, 金绍龄. 长期施肥对绿洲农田土壤生产力及土壤硝态氮积累的影响. 中国农业科学, 2005, 38(10): 2043-2052. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2005.10.015
	YANG S M, LI F M, SUO D R, GUO T W, WANG J G, SUN B L, JIN S L.Effect of long-term fertilization on soil productivity and nitrate accumulation in Gansu oasis.Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2005, 38(10): 2043-2052. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2005.10.015
[29]	刘芬, 同延安, 王小英, 赵佐平. 渭北旱塬小麦施肥效果及肥料利用效率研究. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013, 19(3):552-558. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2013.0304
	LIU F, TONG Y A, WANG X Y, ZHAO Z P.Effects of N, P and K fertilization on wheat yield and fertilizer use efficiency in Weibei rainfed highland. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizaer, 2013, 19(3): 552-558. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2013.0304
[30]	MARDAMOOTOO T, DU PREEZ C C, SHARPLEY A N. Phosphorus mobilization from sugarcane soils in the tropical environment of Mauritius under simulated rainfall.Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2015, 103(1): 29-43. doi: 10.1007/s10705-015-9718-1
[31]	UDEIGWE T K, WANG J J, VIATOR H P, GASTON L.Surface water quality as affected by sugarcane residue management techniques.Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 2010, 208(1/4): 119-128. doi: 10.1007/s11270-009-0153-2
[32]	PARK J H, MATZNER E.Detrital control on the release of dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) and dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) from the forest floor under chronic N deposition. Environmental Pollution, 2006, 143(1): 178-185. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2005.10.045 pmid: 16406164

处理 Treatment	变异系数 CV	可持续性产量指数 SYI
CK	0.23 a	0.53 b
OPT	0.11 b	0.75 a
OPT+N	0.12 b	0.74 a
OPT+P	0.12 b	0.75 a

处理 Treatment	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	平均 Average
OPT	2.72 a	3.80 a	9.14 a	5.57 a	6.27 a	5.19 a	5.73 a	7.36 a	5.72 a
OPT+N	1.71 a	2.79 b	6.99 b	4.40 b	3.97 b	3.02 c	3.70 b	5.33 c	3.99 c
OPT+P	2.23 a	3.16 ab	7.85 ab	5.29 a	5.40 a	3.98 b	5.14 a	6.39 b	4.93 b

处理 Treatment	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	平均 Average
氮肥径流流失率 N loss rate (%)
OPT	0.45 c	0.59 a	1.40 a	3.43 a	0.53 a	1.18 b	1.53 a	1.80 a	1.36 a
OPT+N	0.83 a	0.76 a	1.60 a	3.21 a	0.53 a	1.24 b	1.40 a	2.00 a	1.45 a
OPT+P	0.71 b	0.53 a	1.63 a	3.39 a	0.53 a	1.68 a	1.66 a	1.89 a	1.50 a
磷肥径流流失率P loss rate (%)
OPT	0.81 a	0.68 a	1.88 a	0.51 a	0.81 a	0.40 a	0.38 a	0.57 a	0.76 b
OPT+N	1.06 a	1.02 a	2.13 a	0.77 a	0.85 a	0.34 a	0.38 a	0.56 a	0.89 a
OPT+P	1.09 a	1.09 a	2.15 a	0.66 a	0.86 a	0.52 a	0.40 a	0.57 a	0.92 a