Application of Two Soil Conditioners in Alluvial Sandy Soil of Meizhou Tobacco-growing Area

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2020.08.013

Abstract

Abstract:

The field application effect of tobacco yield, quality and physical and chemical properties of soil conditioners in the alluvial sandy soil in Meizhou tobacco area was studied. Both conditioner I and conditioner II significantly increased yield, output value, ratio of high quality tobacco and average price. The yield and output value of conditioner I was 30.42% and 57.56% higher than that of the control, and conditioner I significantly reduced the incidence of tobacco bacterial wilt and tobacco mosaic virus. Conditioner I increased soil pH by 1.42 compared with the control, and the content of available potassium, exchangeable magnesium and exchangeable calcium in conditioner I treatment was 13.21%, 63.21% and 4.9 times higher than that of the control. Both conditioners increased the number of bacteria and actinomycetes in the soil. Conditioner I significantly increased the activity of soil invertase, phosphatase, urease and dehydrogenase.

Key words: soil conditioner, flue-cured tobacco, alluvial sandy soil, physical and chemical properties, yield and quality

CLC Number:

Q949.748.5

LI Jiqin,YANG Shaohai,HUANG Zhenrui,LU Yusheng,GU Wenjie,LI Shuling. Application of Two Soil Conditioners in Alluvial Sandy Soil of Meizhou Tobacco-growing Area[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2020, 41(8): 1596-1601.

Figures/Tables 6

References 29

[1]	罗战勇, 吕永华, 李淑玲, 等. 广东省生态烟区的划分及其烟叶质量评价[J]. 广东农业科学, 2004(1):18-20.
[2]	郑武平, 王静, 柴敏, 等. 梅州烟草的土壤适种性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2011,27(3):209-214.
[3]	刘国顺. 烟草栽培学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2003: 16-34.
[4]	农恒翘, 宗钊辉, 魏秋兰, 等. 梅州烟区烤烟新品种(系)的筛选[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2017,45(3):27-30.
[5]	陈桢禄, 刘高, 冯玉龙, 等. 移栽方式对梅州产区烤烟生长发育及产质量的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2017,45(24):39-43.
[6]	陈壮壮, 郭俊杰, 陈泽鹏, 等. 不同施肥模式对烤烟氮钾肥利用效率及产量和品质的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2015,30(5):180-188.
[7]	孙蓟锋, 王旭. 土壤调理剂的研究和应用进展[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2013(1):1-7.
[8]	Pyperas P, Verstraete S, Gong P T, et al. Changes in mineral nitrogen, phosphorus availability and salt-extractable aluminium following the application of green manure residues in two weathered soils of south vietnam[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2004,37(1):163-172.
[9]	廉晓娟, 路遥, 王艳, 等. 土壤调理剂对日光温室土壤理化性质和蔬菜产量、品质的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2015(5):56-60.
[10]	张玉树, 王英男, 郑祥洲, 等. 多功能调理剂在福建植烟土壤上的应用效果[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2017,38(4):44-50, 57.
[11]	柳开楼, 熊华荣, 胡惠文, 等. 特贝钙土壤调理剂对红壤旱地花生产量和阻控土壤酸化的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2017,44(5):93-98.
[12]	国家标准化管理委员会. 烤烟: GB. 2635—92[S]. 3版北京: 中国标准出版社, 2003: 403-413.
[13]	王瑞新. 烟草化学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2003: 170-277.
[14]	王志德, 王元英, 牟建民, 等. 烟草种质资源描述规范和数据标准: Yc/T 334-2010[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006.
[15]	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, 1997: 224-226.
[16]	严永升. 土壤肥力研究方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1988: 243-279.
[17]	关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1986.
[18]	李振高, 骆永明, 滕应. 土壤与环境微生物研究法[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2008: 36-52.
[19]	蔡海林, 许丽娟, 谢扬军, 等. 烟田土壤调理剂的研究与应用现状[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2014,42(19):6212-6213, 6271.
[20]	Liu S, Li H, Han C, et al. Cd inhibition and pH improvementvia a nano-submicron mineral-based soil conditioner[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017,24(5):4942-4949. DOI URL PMID
[21]	Bai X F, Li Z F, Zhang Y Z, et al. Recovery of ammonium in urine by biochar derived from faecal sludge and its application as soil conditioner[J]. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 2018,9(9):1619-1628.
[22]	郑祥洲, 郭宝玲, 王英男, 等. 施用新型土壤调理剂改善烟草产量品质及土壤理化性质[J]. 热带作物学报, 2019,40(7):1278-1283.
[23]	周杰文, 张发明, 李海平, 等. 不同类型土壤调理剂对保山烟区酸化土壤改良效果研究[J]. 西南农业学报, 2018,31(2):360-366.
[24]	倪志强, 郜斌斌, 石伟琦, 等. 供磷型土壤调理剂在酸性土壤应用效果研究[J]. 热带作物学报, 2018,39(4):809-815.
[25]	邓小华, 杨哲宇, 李玉辉, 等. 施用改良剂对植烟土壤酶活性和养分含量的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2019,52(2):33-39.
[26]	邢世和, 熊德中, 周碧青, 等. 不同改良剂对烟区土壤肥力性状及烤烟产量和质量的影响[J]. 福建农林大学学报(自然科学版), 2004,33(3):384-389.
[27]	淡俊豪, 齐绍武, 黎娟, 等. 土壤调理剂对植烟土壤微生物碳代谢指纹的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2018,20(10):36-43.
[28]	胡亚杰, 孙建生, 石保峰, 等. 土壤调理剂对贺州烤烟质量及植烟土壤理化特性的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2014,41(21):56-60.
[29]	张玉树, 陈哲, 郑祥洲, 等. 多功能土壤调理剂在酸性植烟土壤上应用效果研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017,33(2):80-86.

处理 Treatment	产量 Yield/(kg?hm^-2)	产值 Output/(yuan?hm^-2)	上中等烟比例 Ratio of middle and hing quality tobacco/%	上等烟比例 Ratio of high quality tobacco/%	均价 Average price /(yuan?kg^-1)
CK	2501.25^c	55 594.50^c	87.51^a	46.29^b	22.23^b
调理剂Ⅰ	3262.05^a	87 604.20^a	93.96^a	61.23^a	26.85^a
调理剂Ⅱ	2702.70^b	68 204.85^b	87.52^a	60.47^a	25.23^a

处理 Treatment	产量 Yield/(kg?hm^-2)	产值 Output/(yuan?hm^-2)	上中等烟比例 Ratio of middle and hing quality tobacco/%	上等烟比例 Ratio of high quality tobacco/%	均价 Average price /(yuan?kg^-1)
CK	2501.25^c	55 594.50^c	87.51^a	46.29^b	22.23^b
调理剂Ⅰ	3262.05^a	87 604.20^a	93.96^a	61.23^a	26.85^a
调理剂Ⅱ	2702.70^b	68 204.85^b	87.52^a	60.47^a	25.23^a

处理 Treatment	部位 Position	总糖 Total sugar	还原糖 Reducing sugar	烟碱 Nicotine	总氮 Total N	氯 Cl	钾 K	蛋白质 Protein	糖碱比 Total sugar/Nicotine	氮碱比 Total N/Nicotine
CK	C3F	30.8^a	24.9^a	3.33^a	1.66^a	0.45^a	3.88^a	6.77^a	9.24^b	0.50^a
调理剂Ⅰ		34.6^a	26.5^a	2.85^a	1.49^a	0.21^b	3.25^a	6.23^a	12.14^a	0.52^a
调理剂Ⅱ		33.9^a	26.2^a	3.01^a	1.53^a	0.18^b	3.52^a	6.32^a	11.27^a	0.51^a
CK	B2F	22.1^a	16.0^a	4.90^a	2.41^a	0.41^a	2.66^a	9.81^a	4.51^a	0.49^a
调理剂Ⅰ		20.2^a	15.5^a	4.82^a	2.18^a	0.45^a	2.18^a	8.41^a	4.19^a	0.45^a
调理剂Ⅱ		19.9^a	14.7^a	4.76^a	2.42^a	0.35^a	2.29^a	9.96^a	4.18^a	0.51^a

处理 Treatment	部位 Position	总糖 Total sugar	还原糖 Reducing sugar	烟碱 Nicotine	总氮 Total N	氯 Cl	钾 K	蛋白质 Protein	糖碱比 Total sugar/Nicotine	氮碱比 Total N/Nicotine
CK	C3F	30.8^a	24.9^a	3.33^a	1.66^a	0.45^a	3.88^a	6.77^a	9.24^b	0.50^a
调理剂Ⅰ		34.6^a	26.5^a	2.85^a	1.49^a	0.21^b	3.25^a	6.23^a	12.14^a	0.52^a
调理剂Ⅱ		33.9^a	26.2^a	3.01^a	1.53^a	0.18^b	3.52^a	6.32^a	11.27^a	0.51^a
CK	B2F	22.1^a	16.0^a	4.90^a	2.41^a	0.41^a	2.66^a	9.81^a	4.51^a	0.49^a
调理剂Ⅰ		20.2^a	15.5^a	4.82^a	2.18^a	0.45^a	2.18^a	8.41^a	4.19^a	0.45^a
调理剂Ⅱ		19.9^a	14.7^a	4.76^a	2.42^a	0.35^a	2.29^a	9.96^a	4.18^a	0.51^a

处理Treatment	烟草青枯病 Tobacco bacterial wilt		烟草普通花叶病 Tobacco mosaic virus
处理Treatment	发病率Morbidity/%	发病指数Incidence index	发病率Morbidity/%	发病指数Incidence index
CK	11.67^a	4.17^a	7.50^b	2.71^b
调理剂Ⅰ	5.00^b	3.33^a	3.33^c	1.04^b
调理剂Ⅱ	8.33^a	3.96^a	19.17^a	6.25^a