Effect of Different Microbial Inoculants and Particle Size on Compost of Acacia mangium Bark

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2019.01.006

Abstract

Abstract:

Three kinds of commercial microbial inoculants including enzyme bacteria (J), organic fermenting bacteria (Y), gymboree (B) were employed to ferment fine-grained (diameter <1 mm, T) and coarse-grained (diameter 1-3 mm, C) Acacia mangium bark to prepare substrates, and the physicochemical properties and the influence on the growth of white radish ‘Yangzhouyuan’ were investigated, in order to provide a scientific basis for utilization of the bark of A. mangium . The results showed that the bark supplemented with the bacterial agent could promote the growth of radish. The content of available phosphorus and available potassium in the substrate was the highest, which was 57.60 and 775.50 mg/kg, respectively, and significantly higher than that of other treatments. Whole plant fresh and dry weight of white radish ‘Yangzhouyuan’ grown on the substrate treated with enzyme bacteria was the highest, followed by gymboree and organic fermenting bacteria. The content of total phosphorus and potassium in the white radish ‘Yangzhouyuan’ was the highest, which was 3.95 and 45.20 g/kg correspondingly. The results suggest that the bark of A. mangium treated with enzyme bacteria had the best effect, and was suitable to be used as a substrate.

Key words: bark of Acacia mangium, decomposition, radish, bacterial agent, nutrient content

LIU Pengqi,XIA Yufei,LUO Jian,QU Xinjing,DAI Shengyu,YUAN Jun. Effect of Different Microbial Inoculants and Particle Size on Compost of Acacia mangium Bark[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2019, 40(1): 39-44.

Figures/Tables 8

References 25

[1]	赵平, 邹绿柳, 饶兴权 , 等. 成熟马占相思林的蒸腾耗水及年际变化[J]. 生态学报, 2011,31(20):6038-6048.
[2]	赵平, 饶兴权, 马玲 , 等. 基于树干液流测定值进行尺度扩展的马占相思林段蒸腾和冠层气孔导度[J]. 植物生态学报, 2006,30(4):655-665. DOI URL
[3]	龚木荣, 李忠正 . 值得大力推广的造纸速生材——相思木[J]. 中华纸业, 2001,22(12):42-44. DOI URL
[4]	周上云 . 用好栲胶原料——马占相思树皮[N]. 科技日报, 2003: 1-2.
[5]	张胜, 刘子雷, 陈薇 , 等. 马占相思树皮废弃物酸水解及活性炭制备研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2017,37(4):101-108. DOI URL
[6]	李天林, 沈兵, 李红霞 . 无土栽培中基质培选料的参考因素与发展趋势[J]. 石河子大学学报, 1999,3(3):250-258. DOI URL
[7]	黄国锋, 钟流举, 张振钿 , 等. 有机固体废弃物堆肥的物质变化及腐熟度评价[J]. 应用生态学报, 2003,14(5):813-818.
[8]	张沛健, 彭彦, 谢耀坚 , 等. 基于桉树皮的有机基质腐熟处理研究[J]. 热带作物学报, 2011,32(3):412-416. DOI URL
[9]	鲁如坤 . 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 2000: 44-428.
[10]	杜森, 高祥照 . 土壤分析技术规范[M]. 第2版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2014: 44-47.
[11]	周乃复, 袁军, 谭晓风 , 等. 林下种养对油茶林地上土壤磷素形态及含量的影响[J]. 经济林研究, 2016,34(2):41-44. DOI URL
[12]	Uddling J, Gelang-Alfredsson J, Piikki K , et al. Evaluating the relationship between leaf chlorophyll concentration and SPAD–502 chlorophyll meter readings[J]. Photosynjournal Research, 2007,91(1):37-46. DOI URL PMID
[13]	Oliveira A S, Coelho F C, Vieira H D , et al. Growth, nutrient conent and SPAD value of corn in monoculture and in intercropping[J]. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 2014,5(18):2726-2733.
[14]	Ling Q H, Huang W H, Jarvis P . Use of a SPAD–502 meter tomeasure leaf chlorophyll concentration in Arabidopsis thaliana[J]. Photosynjournal Research, 2011,107(2):209-214.
[15]	吴遥远, 张桥, 余新盛 . 现代堆肥影响因素及控制[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2007,13:69-71. DOI URL
[16]	董存明 . 鸡粪-椰糠配比生产有机肥及在甘薯上的肥效研究[D]. 海口: 海南大学, 2015: 16-17.
[17]	魏智龙 . 番茄穴盘育苗基质的筛选[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2001: 34-35.
[18]	曾光明, 黄国和, 袁兴中 , 等. 堆肥环境生物与控制[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2006: 270-278.
[19]	张沛健, 谢耀坚, 尚秀华 , 等. 不同粒径的桉树皮基质对桉树苗木的影响[J]. 桉树科技, 2013,30(4):26-28. DOI URL
[20]	Li Y, Ji G, Wang J , et al. Complete genome sequence of an NADC30-Like porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus characterized by recombination with other strains[J]. Genome Announcements, 2016,4(3):e00330-16. DOI URL PMID
[21]	王瑞, 陈永忠, 陈隆升 , 等. 油茶叶片SPAD 值与叶绿素含量的相关分析[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2013,33(2):76-80.
[22]	孙玉莹, 毕京翠, 赵志超 , 等. 作物叶片衰老研究进展[J]. 作物杂志, 2013(4):11-18.
[23]	王忠强, 吴良欢, 刘婷婷 , 等. 供氮水平对爬山虎(Parthenocissus tricuspidata Planch)生物量及养分分配的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2007,27(8):3435-3441.
[24]	周淑霞, 于建光, 赵莉 . 不同有机物料腐熟剂对麦秸的腐解效果[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2013,41(11):347-350. DOI URL
[25]	罗泉达 . 猪粪堆肥腐熟度指标及影响堆肥腐熟因素的研究[D]. 福州: 福建农林大学, 2005: 7-10.

处理 Treatment	铵态氮含量 Ammonium content/(mg·kg^-1)	硝态氮含量 Nitrate content/(mg·kg^-1)	有效磷含量 Available P content/(mg·kg^-1)	速效钾含量 Available K content/(mg·kg^-1)
CJ	36.72±4.05^bc	23.75±0.74^c	57.60±1.56^a	775.50±20.51^a
CY	167.23±34.37^a	1.18±0.07^d	2.37±0.20^c	637.50±31.82^cd
CB	80.79±5.7^b	18.90±7.00^c	2.17±0.06^c	569.50±41.72^de
CL	190.66±57.66^a	0.46±0.38^d	2.64±0.09^c	765.50±7.78^a
TJ	3.67±0.26^c	1.62±0.36^d	6.39±0.12^b	421.00±8.49^f
TY	4.69±0.41^c	1.14±0.13^d	3.03±0.14^c	658.50±12.02^bc
TB	1.54±0.08^c	42.16±3.42^b	2.10±0.09^c	558.67±8.02^e
TL	6.90±0.86^c	60.17±6.50^a	2.64±0.04^c	717.33±57.74^ab

处理 Treatment	铵态氮含量 Ammonium content/(mg·kg^-1)	硝态氮含量 Nitrate content/(mg·kg^-1)	有效磷含量 Available P content/(mg·kg^-1)	速效钾含量 Available K content/(mg·kg^-1)
CJ	36.72±4.05^bc	23.75±0.74^c	57.60±1.56^a	775.50±20.51^a
CY	167.23±34.37^a	1.18±0.07^d	2.37±0.20^c	637.50±31.82^cd
CB	80.79±5.7^b	18.90±7.00^c	2.17±0.06^c	569.50±41.72^de
CL	190.66±57.66^a	0.46±0.38^d	2.64±0.09^c	765.50±7.78^a
TJ	3.67±0.26^c	1.62±0.36^d	6.39±0.12^b	421.00±8.49^f
TY	4.69±0.41^c	1.14±0.13^d	3.03±0.14^c	658.50±12.02^bc
TB	1.54±0.08^c	42.16±3.42^b	2.10±0.09^c	558.67±8.02^e
TL	6.90±0.86^c	60.17±6.50^a	2.64±0.04^c	717.33±57.74^ab

处理Treatment	鲜重Fresh weight/g	干重Dry weight/g
CJ	16.04±4.56^b	1.30±0.43^b
CY	1.91±0.40^e	0.28±0.02^c
CB	5.48±0.41^de	0.79±0.65^bc
CL	1.97±0.92^e	0.30±0.11^c
TJ	47.09±4.18^a	3.86±0.44^a
TY	9.65±1.10^cd	0.95±0.08^bc
TB	13.46±4.01^bc	1.26±0.81^b
TL	6.22±0.54^de	0.82±0.05^bc

处理Treatment	鲜重Fresh weight/g	干重Dry weight/g
CJ	16.04±4.56^b	1.30±0.43^b
CY	1.91±0.40^e	0.28±0.02^c
CB	5.48±0.41^de	0.79±0.65^bc
CL	1.97±0.92^e	0.30±0.11^c
TJ	47.09±4.18^a	3.86±0.44^a
TY	9.65±1.10^cd	0.95±0.08^bc
TB	13.46±4.01^bc	1.26±0.81^b
TL	6.22±0.54^de	0.82±0.05^bc

处理 Treatment	全氮含量 Total N/(g·kg^-1)	全磷含量 Total P/(g·kg^-1)	全钾含量 Total K/(g·kg^-1)
CJ	37.94±0.63^d	3.95±0.08^a	42.63±0.11^b
CY	46.04±0.62^b	0.54±0.04^f	32.75±0.07^f
CB	50.32±0.71^a	0.86±0.02^d	37.05±0.14^e
CL	29.51±0.08^e	0.61±0.06^ef	27.70±0.14^g
TJ	29.13±0.76^e	2.98±0.06^c	45.20±0.14^a
TY	50.85±0.88^a	0.85±0.05^d	37.18±0.04^e
TB	43.81±1.18^c	0.90±0.04^d	39.85±0.28^d
TL	11.46±0.16^f	2.78±0.11^b	40.30±0.35^c