不同秸秆还田模式对土壤有机碳及其活性组分的影响

    Effects of different straw return modes on contents of soil organic carbon and fractions of soil active carbon

    • 摘要: 为了探讨不同秸秆还田模式对土壤有机碳(total organic carbon,TOC)及活性碳组分的影响,设置了秸秆不还田(CK)、秸秆直接还田(CS)、秸秆转化为食用菌基质,出蘑后菌渣还田(CMS)和秸秆过腹还田(CGS)4种还田模式。通过田间小区试验,研究了不同秸秆还田模式下,土壤有机碳及活性组分的变化规律。结果表明不同秸秆还田模式均提高了土壤有机碳含量,但不同还田模式下土壤有机碳含量差异不显著(P>0.05),和CK相比,CS、CMS和CGS处理下,土壤有机碳质量分数分别增加9.0%、23.9%和26.7%。不同秸秆还田模式也提高了土壤活性碳组分含量。在不同秸秆还田模式下,土壤溶解性有机碳(dissolved organic carbon,DOC)含量表现为CS>CMS>CGS>CK,且不同处理间差异显著(P<0.01)。和CK相比,CS、CMS和CGS处理下,土壤DOC质量分数分别增加64.6%、29.4%和8.9%。土壤微生物量碳(microbial biomass carbon,MBC)含量表现为CMS>CGS>CS>CK,且差异显著(P<0.05)。和CK相比,CS、CMS和CGS处理下,土壤MBC质量分数分别增加28.9%、84.7%和59.3%。土壤易氧化态碳(easily oxidizable carbon,EOC)含量表现为CMS>CS>CGS>CK,且差异显著(P<0.01)。和CK相比,CS、CMS和CGS处理下,土壤EOC质量分数分别增加24.1%、55.7%、和9.3%。不同秸秆还田模式显著影响土壤活性碳组分在总有机碳中占的比例,改变土壤有机碳质量。在不同秸秆还田模式下,DOC/TOC表现为CS>CMS>CK>CGS、MBC/TOC表现为CMS>CGS>CS>CK、EOC/TOC表现为CMS>CS>CK>CGS,且不同处理间均差异显著(P<0.01)。从提高土壤质量角度,推荐秸秆-菌渣还田模式,在该模式下,土壤MBC/TOC和EOC/TOC均最大,土壤碳素有效性高、易于被微生物利用,有利于作物生长。从提高土壤固碳角度,推荐秸秆过腹还田模式,在该模式下,土壤DOC/TOC最小,且土壤有机碳含量最高,有利于碳的固定和保存。该研究结果可为秸秆合理高效利用、改善农业土壤碳库质量提供参考。

       

      Abstract: Abstract: To assess the effects of different straw return modes on the content of soil organic carbon and the fraction of soil active carbon, we investigated 4 different straw return modes, non-straw return (CK), direct straw return (CS), straw return after mushroom cultivation (CMS), and straw return after livestock digestion (CGS) using field plot experiment. The results showed that different straw return modes all increased the content of soil organic carbon, but the increases in soil organic carbon content by different straw return modes did not exhibit significant difference (P>0.05). The increases in soil organic carbon content were found in the order of CGS > CMS > CS > CK. In comparison to CK mode, the contents of soil organic carbon with CS, CMS and CGS modes increased by 9.0%, 23.9% and 26.7%, respectively. In addition, different straw return modes all improved the content of soil active carbon. Under different straw return modes, the contents of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) were in the order of CS > CMS > CGS > CK, and significant differences were observed among different return modes (P<0.01). Compared to CK mode, the contents of DOC in the treatments of CS, CMS and CGS increased by 64.6%, 29.4% and 8.9%, respectively. The contents of microbial biomass carbon (MBC) followed the order of CMS > CGS > CS > CK, and their differences were significant (P<0.05). The contents of MBC in the treatments of CS, CMS and CGS increased by 28.9%, 84.7%, and 59.3%, respectively, compared to the CK treatment. Similarly, the contents of soil easily oxidizable carbon (EOC) were in the order of CMS > CS > CGS > CK, and their differences were significant (P<0.01). Compared to CK mode, the contents of EOC in the treatments of CS, CMS and CGS increased by 24.1%, 55.7%and 9.3%, respectively. Straw return modes also significantly affected the fraction of soil active carbon in the soil total organic carbon (TOC) and changed the quality of soil organic carbon. Under different straw return modes, the ratios of DOC/TOC, MBC/TOC and EOC/TOC were in the orders of CS > CMS > CK > CGS, CMS > CGS > CS > CK and CMS > CS > CK > CGS, respectively. From the perspective of improving soil quality, CMS is the recommended mode, which has the greatest ratios of MBC/TOC and EOC/TOC, as well as a higher soil carbon effectiveness that facilitates the carbon utilization by the microorganisms, thus benefiting the growth of crops. On the other hand, from the perspective of soil carbon sequestration, CGS is the recommended mode, which has the lowest fraction of DOC/TOC and the highest content of soil organic carbon, thus facilitating the carbon sequestration. The results of the study can provide the basic data for the rational and efficient utilization of straw, as well as the improvement of the quality of agricultural soil carbon pool.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回