Correlation Between Soil Characteristics of Tea Plantations and the Growth and Fresh Leaf Quality of Wuyi Tea (Camellia sinensis cv. Shuixian)

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2020.09.017

Abstract

Abstract:

In this study, tea trees of Wuyi Shuixian (Camellia sinensis) growing in three tea plantations, namely, Yu, Guiyan and Qishan were selected as the materials. The physico-chemical properties and enzyme activities of tea soils, and the growth and photosynthesis, and the quality indexes of tea leaves were determined. And the relationship of the indexes was analyzed. The results showed that in Qishan plantation, the total nitrogen and available nitrogen were 37% and 45% higher, and total phosphorus and available phosphorus were 62% and 38% higher than the first-grade fertility standard. While organic matter was 44% lower than the first-grade fertility standard. The organic matter of Yu was 2.35 times than that of Qishan. The trend of five soil enzymes activity was generally Qishan > Guiyan > Yu, except catalase activity, and there were significant differences (P<0.05) among the three tea plantations. The enzymatic activity of five enzymes in the soil was negatively correlated with pH value and N, P contents, and positively correlated with K and organic matter contents. The trend of growth and photosynthetic indexes was generally Qishan> Guiyan>Yu, and was positively correlated with pH value and N content and negatively correlated with organic matter content, and with activity of urease, acid phosphatase, polyphenol oxidase, and protease. The quality indexes of fresh tea leaves was generally Yu > Guiyan > Qishan. The content of theanine, free amino acid, catechin, and tea polyphenols in fresh leaves of Yu was 1.93, 1.64, 1.57 and 1.54 times than that of Qishan, respectively. The 6 quality indexes (except caffeine) were negatively correlated with pH value, NP, and catalase activity, and positively correlated with K, organic matter and 5 soil enzyme activity. Most of the quality indexes were negatively correlated with the growth and photosynthetic indexes. The results suggested that higher nitrogen increased the pH value and enhanced catalase activity of the soil, which was beneficial to the tea growth, whereas decreased other soil enzyme activities, which resulting in low recycling and utilization of nutrients and organic matter, in turn affected leaf photosynthesis, reduced the synthesis of primary and secondary metabolites, then decreased the quality of tea leaves. The management measures of "reducing nitrogen, controlling phosphorus and supplementing potassium, and increasing organic matter" should be adopted to improve the quality of Shuixian tea in Wuyishan plantation.

Key words: Wuyi Shuixian, soil physico-chemical property, soil enzyme activity, tea quality

CLC Number:

S571.1

YE Jianghua,HU Wenwen,ZHANG Qi,ZHANG Bo,WANG Peng,LUO Shengcai,WANG Haibin,JIA Xiaoli,HE Haibin. Correlation Between Soil Characteristics of Tea Plantations and the Growth and Fresh Leaf Quality of Wuyi Tea (Camellia sinensis cv. Shuixian)[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2020, 41(9): 1838-1846.

Figures/Tables 8

References 43

[1]	王丽鸳, 成浩, 周健, 等. 基于多元化学指纹图谱的武夷岩茶身份判别研究[J]. 茶叶科学, 2010,30(2):83-88.
[2]	赵峰, 段起, 林河通, 等. 武夷水仙茶产地判别多元数字化指纹图谱构建[J]. 热带作物学报, 2014,35(5):1021-1028.
[3]	Song M, Li Q, Guan X, et al. Novel HPLC method to evaluate the quality and identify the origins of Longjing green tea[J]. Analytical Letters, 2013,46(1):60-73. DOI URL
[4]	张新亭, 王梦馨, 韩宝瑜. 3个不同地域龙井茶香气组成异同的解析[J]. 茶叶科学, 2014,34(4):344-354.
[5]	朱荫, 杨停, 施江, 等. 西湖龙井茶香气成分的全二维气相色谱-飞行时间质谱分析[J]. 中国农业科学 2015,48(20):4120-4146. DOI URL
[6]	王梦琪, 邵晨阳, 朱荫, 等. 龙井茶香气成分的产区差异分析[J]. 茶叶科学, 2018,38(5):508-517.
[7]	Lv S, Wu Y, Song Y, et al. Multivariate analysis based on GC-MS fingerprint and volatile composition for the quality evaluation of Pu-Erh green tea[J]. Food Analytical Methods, 2015,8:321-333. DOI URL
[8]	陆羽. 茶经[M]. 南京: 凤凰出版社, 2007.
[9]	林心炯, 李元钦, 吴静如. 武夷岩茶品质与生态环境初步的研究[J]. 茶叶科学简报, 1986(1):25-28.
[10]	姚月明. 形成武夷岩茶品质特征的相关因子[J]. 福建茶叶, 1997(3):25-26.
[11]	叶乃兴, 郑乃辉, 杨江帆. 福建名茶与原产地保护[J]. 福建农林大学学报(自然科学版), 2004,33(4):459-462.
[12]	陈岱卉, 郭雅玲. 大红袍研究进展[J]. 福建茶叶, 2011,33(1):28-31.
[13]	陈华葵, 杨江帆. 武夷岩茶不同岩区品质形成研究进展[J]. 食品安全质量检测学报, 2016,7(1):257-262.
[14]	孙威江, 陈泉宾, 林锻炼, 等. 武夷岩茶不同产地土壤与茶树营养元素的差异[J]. 福建农林大学学报(自然科学版), 2008 (1):47-50.
[15]	林贵英. 土壤理化性状对武夷岩茶品质的影响[J]. 福建茶叶, 2005(3):23-25.
[16]	杨广容, 王秀青, 谢瑾, 等. 云南古茶园和现代茶园土壤养分与茶叶品质成分关系的研究[J]. 茶叶科学, 2015,35(6):574-582.
[17]	朱旭君, 王玉花, 张瑜, 等. 施肥结构对茶园土壤氮素营养及茶叶产量品质的影响[J]. 茶叶科学, 2015,35(3):248-254.
[18]	李贞霞, 陈倩倩, 胡宏赛, 等. 信阳茶区不同植茶年限土壤酶活性演变[J]. 生态环境学报, 2018,27(6):1076-1081.
[19]	王利民, 李卫华, 范平, 等. 长期培肥下红黄壤区茶园土壤酶活性的变化[J]. 茶叶科学, 2012,32(4):347-352.
[20]	王利民, 黄东风, 李清华, 等. 不同培肥方式对茶园土壤团聚体中有机碳和全氮分布的影响[J]. 茶叶科学, 2018,38(4):342-352.
[21]	陈泉宾. 土壤条件对武夷岩茶品质的影响与调控[D]. 福州: 福建农林大学, 2005.
[22]	叶江华. 武夷岩茶茶园土壤特性与茶树生长及茶青品质的相关性研究[D]. 福州: 福建农林大学, 2016.
[23]	叶江华, 罗盛财, 张奇, 等. 武夷山不同茶园茶树茶青品质的差异[J]. 福建农林大学学报(自然科学版), 2017,46(5):495-501.
[24]	周志, 刘扬, 张黎明, 等. 武夷茶区茶园土壤养分状况及其对茶叶品质成分的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019,52(8):1425-1434. DOI URL
[25]	关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1986.
[26]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[27]	李合生. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2000.
[28]	王理德, 王方琳, 郭春秀, 等. 土壤酶学硏究进展[J]. 土壤, 2016,48(1):12-21.
[29]	郑钰铟, 胡素萍, 陈辉, 等. 油茶饼粕生物炭和有机肥对土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2018,38(3):348-354.
[30]	索沛蘅, 杜大俊, 王玉哲, 等. 杉木连栽对土壤氮含量和氮转化酶活性的影响[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2019,39(2):113-119.
[31]	李渝, 刘彦伶, 黄兴成, 等. 贵州不同茶区土壤养分及微生物量分析评价[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2018,37(8):98-105.
[32]	马晓丽, 贾志宽, 肖恩时, 等. 旱区有机培肥对土壤肥力及酶活性的影响[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2011,39(1):144-150.
[33]	何玉玲, 王瑞君, 李林霞, 等. 岩质边坡人工土壤酶活性与土壤营养元素关系研究[J]. 中国水土保持, 2014(9):53-57.
[34]	赵维娜, 王艳霞, 陈奇伯. 高山栎天然林土壤酶活性与土壤理化性质和微生物数量的关系[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2015,43(9):72-77.
[35]	孙慧, 张建锋, 胡颖, 等. 土壤过氧化氢酶对不同林分覆盖的响应[J]. 土壤通报, 2016,47(3):605-610.
[36]	李慧杰, 徐福利, 林云, 等. 施用氮磷钾对黄土丘陵区山地红枣林土壤酶与土壤肥力的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2012,30(4):53-59.
[37]	顾谦, 陆锦时, 叶宝存. 茶叶科学[M]. 中国科学技术大学出版社, 2012.
[38]	宛晓春, 李大祥, 张正竹, 等. 茶叶生物化学研究进展[J]. 茶叶科学, 2015,35(1):1-10.
[39]	庄晚芳. 茶树栽培学[M]. 2版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1988.
[40]	Wang S P, Li T X, Zheng Z C. Effects of tea plantation age on soil aggregate-associated C- and N-cycling enzyme activities in the hilly areas of Western Sichuan, China[J]. Catena, 2018,171:145-153. DOI URL
[41]	Ma Y H, Fu S L, Zhang X P, et al. Intercropping improves soil nutrient availability, soil enzyme activity and tea quantity and quality[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2017,119:171-178. DOI URL
[42]	董迹芬, 边金霖, 朱全武, 等. 茶叶香气与产地土壤条件的关系[J]. 浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2013,3(39):309-317.
[43]	陈勤操, 戴伟东, 蔺志远, 等. 代谢组学解析遮阴对茶叶主要品质成分的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019,52(6):1066-1077. DOI URL

土壤指标 Soil index	茶园Tea plantation
土壤指标 Soil index	御茶园Yu	龟岩Guiyan	旗山Qishan
pH	4.72±0.01^c	4.76±0.01^b	4.97±0.01^a
总氮/(g·kg^-1)	1.17±0.02^b (I)	1.19±0.02^b (I)	1.37±0.03^a (I)
有效氮/(mg·kg^-1)	130.22±1.66^b(I)	132.36±1.44^b (I)	145.35±4.53^a (I)
总磷/(g·kg^-1)	0.89±0.03^b (I)	0.86±0.01^b (I)	0.97±0.02^a (I)
有效磷/(mg·kg^-1)	11.97±0.10^b (I)	13.69±0.24^a (I)	13.78±0.13^a (I)
总钾/(g·kg^-1)	13.02±0.09^a (I)	10.76±0.04^b(I)	9.63±0.11^c (II)
有效钾/(mg·kg^-1)	132.26±1.02^a (I)	135.52±3.23^a(I)	116.31±4.57^b (II)
有机质/(g·kg^-1)	19.64±1.07^a (I)	14.53±0.05^b(II)	8.35±0.09^c (III)
过氧化氢酶/(mg·g^-1)	6.44±0.11^b	6.22±0.20^b	6.73±0.08^a
蔗糖酶/(mg·g^-1)	22.32±0.56^a	16.68±0.69^b	14.43±0.28^c
脲酶/(mg·g^-1)	4.44±0.12^a	3.98±0.11^b	3.07±0.09^c
酸性磷酸酶/(mg·g^-1)	0.54±0.01^a	0.53±0.01^a	0.47±0.03^b
多酚氧化酶/(mg·g^-1)	0.76±0.03^a	0.67±0.03^b	0.48±0.01^c
蛋白酶/(mg·g^-1)	4.08±0.10^a	3.69±0.05^b	3.33±0.11^c

土壤指标 Soil index	茶园Tea plantation
土壤指标 Soil index	御茶园Yu	龟岩Guiyan	旗山Qishan
pH	4.72±0.01^c	4.76±0.01^b	4.97±0.01^a
总氮/(g·kg^-1)	1.17±0.02^b (I)	1.19±0.02^b (I)	1.37±0.03^a (I)
有效氮/(mg·kg^-1)	130.22±1.66^b(I)	132.36±1.44^b (I)	145.35±4.53^a (I)
总磷/(g·kg^-1)	0.89±0.03^b (I)	0.86±0.01^b (I)	0.97±0.02^a (I)
有效磷/(mg·kg^-1)	11.97±0.10^b (I)	13.69±0.24^a (I)	13.78±0.13^a (I)
总钾/(g·kg^-1)	13.02±0.09^a (I)	10.76±0.04^b(I)	9.63±0.11^c (II)
有效钾/(mg·kg^-1)	132.26±1.02^a (I)	135.52±3.23^a(I)	116.31±4.57^b (II)
有机质/(g·kg^-1)	19.64±1.07^a (I)	14.53±0.05^b(II)	8.35±0.09^c (III)
过氧化氢酶/(mg·g^-1)	6.44±0.11^b	6.22±0.20^b	6.73±0.08^a
蔗糖酶/(mg·g^-1)	22.32±0.56^a	16.68±0.69^b	14.43±0.28^c
脲酶/(mg·g^-1)	4.44±0.12^a	3.98±0.11^b	3.07±0.09^c
酸性磷酸酶/(mg·g^-1)	0.54±0.01^a	0.53±0.01^a	0.47±0.03^b
多酚氧化酶/(mg·g^-1)	0.76±0.03^a	0.67±0.03^b	0.48±0.01^c
蛋白酶/(mg·g^-1)	4.08±0.10^a	3.69±0.05^b	3.33±0.11^c

土壤酶 Soil enzyme	pH	总氮 Total N	总磷 Total P	总钾 Total K	有效氮 Available N	有效磷 Available P	有效钾 Available K	有机质 Organic matter
过氧化氢酶	0.95	0.97^*	1.00^**	-0.63	0.95^*	0.39	-1.00^**	-0.80
蔗糖酶	-0.82	-0.78	-0.51	1.00^**	-0.80	-0.97^*	0.60	0.96^*
脲酶	-0.98^*	-0.97^*	-0.82	0.93	-0.98^*	-0.79	0.88	0.99^**
酸性磷酸酶	-1.00^*	-1.00^**	-0.92	0.84	-1.00^**	-0.64	0.96^*	0.94
多酚氧化酶	-0.93	-0.91	-0.70	0.98^*	-0.92	-0.89	0.78	1.00^**
蛋白酶	-0.92	-0.90	-0.69	0.99^*	-0.91	-0.90	0.76	1.00^**

土壤酶 Soil enzyme	pH	总氮 Total N	总磷 Total P	总钾 Total K	有效氮 Available N	有效磷 Available P	有效钾 Available K	有机质 Organic matter
过氧化氢酶	0.95	0.97^*	1.00^**	-0.63	0.95^*	0.39	-1.00^**	-0.80
蔗糖酶	-0.82	-0.78	-0.51	1.00^**	-0.80	-0.97^*	0.60	0.96^*
脲酶	-0.98^*	-0.97^*	-0.82	0.93	-0.98^*	-0.79	0.88	0.99^**
酸性磷酸酶	-1.00^*	-1.00^**	-0.92	0.84	-1.00^**	-0.64	0.96^*	0.94
多酚氧化酶	-0.93	-0.91	-0.70	0.98^*	-0.92	-0.89	0.78	1.00^**
蛋白酶	-0.92	-0.90	-0.69	0.99^*	-0.91	-0.90	0.76	1.00^**

指标 Index	pH	总氮 Total N	总磷 Total P	总钾 Total K	有效氮 Available N	有效磷 Available P	有效钾 Available K	有机质 Organic matter	过氧化氢酶 Catalase	蔗糖酶 Sucrase	脲酶 Urease	酸性磷酸酶 Acid phosphatase	多酚氧化酶 Polyphenol oxidase	蛋白酶 Protease
着叶数	0.98^*	0.97^*	0.83	0.92	0.98^*	0.78	0.88	0.99^*	0.87	0.91	1.00^**	0.98^*	0.98^*	0.98^*
芽梢密度	1.00^**	1.00^**	0.95	0.79	1.00^**	0.59	0.97^*	0.92	0.97^*	0.76	0.96^*	1.00^**	0.90	0.90
叶面积	0.98^*	0.97^*	0.82	0.93	0.98^*	0.79	0.88^*	0.99^**	0.87	0.91	1.00^**	0.98^*	0.98^*	0.98^*
百芽重	0.97^*	0.96^*	0.79	0.94	0.97^*	0.82	0.85	1.00^**	0.84	0.93	1.00^**	0.97^*	0.99^**	0.99^**
光合速率	1.00^**	0.99^**	0.89	0.87	1.00^**	0.70	0.93	0.97^*	0.92	0.85	0.99^**	1.00^**	0.95^*	0.95^*
气孔导度	0.93	0.91	0.70	0.98^*	0.92	0.89	0.78	1.00^**	0.76	0.97*	0.98^*	0.92	1.00^**	1.00^**
胞间CO₂浓度	1.00^**	0.99^*	0.90	0.86	1.00^**	0.69	0.94	0.96^*	0.93	0.84	0.99^*	1.00^**	0.95	0.95
蒸腾速率	0.99^*	0.97^**	0.83	0.92	0.98^*	0.77	0.89	0.99^*	0.88	0.90	1.00^**	0.98^*	0.98^*	0.98^*
叶绿素含量	1.00^**	1.00^**	0.92	0.83	1.00^**	0.65	0.96^*	0.95	0.95	0.81	0.98^*	1.00^**	0.93	0.93