生物质炭降低蔬菜吸收土壤中抗生素的作用

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas15040009

农学学报 ›› 2016, Vol. 6 ›› Issue (1): 42-46.doi: 10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas15040009

所属专题：园艺

• 土壤肥料资源环境生态 • 上一篇下一篇

生物质炭降低蔬菜吸收土壤中抗生素的作用

章明奎,顾国平,徐秋桐

浙江大学环境与资源学院,绍兴市农业科学研究院,浙江大学环境与资源学院

收稿日期:2015-04-13 修回日期:2015-06-02 接受日期:2015-06-15 出版日期:2016-01-29 发布日期:2016-01-29
通讯作者: 章明奎 E-mail:mkzhang
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目“兽用抗生素在农田土壤中的活性及其在蔬菜中的积累特征与生理效应”(21177108)。

Effect of Biochar Application on the Reduction of Antibiotics Uptake by Vegetable Crop

Received:2015-04-13 Revised:2015-06-02 Accepted:2015-06-15 Online:2016-01-29 Published:2016-01-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用土培方法研究了施用不同量生物质炭(0.75%、1.5%和2.0%)对初始污染浓度各为25 mg/kg的土霉素、恩诺沙星、磺酸二甲嘧啶、泰乐菌素等4种抗生素污染土壤中有效态抗生素含量和蔬菜对土壤中抗生素吸收及蔬菜生长的影响。结果表明,施用生物质炭可减缓土壤中抗生素的降解,但明显降低了土壤中有效态抗生素含量。在培养52 d的土壤中,生物质炭用量为1.5%和2.0%的2个处理的有效态土霉素、恩诺沙星、磺酸二甲嘧啶和泰乐菌素的含量分别比对照下降25.29%与39.09%,16.39%与28.69%,16.97%与23.64%和17.76%与25.70%。施用生物质炭也可减少蔬菜对土壤抗生素的吸收,施用1.5%和2.0%生物质炭后,蔬菜中土霉素、恩诺沙星、磺酸二甲嘧啶和泰乐菌素含量分别比未施生物质炭的对照处理低23.11%与35.93%,15.89%与22.85%,7.64%与16.56%和16.79%与29.50%。与对照土壤比较,施用生物质炭可增加蔬菜的生物量。

关键词: 光碳核肥, 光碳核肥, 谷子, 光合特性, 生理生化性能, 产量性状

Abstract: A soil culture experiment was carried out to study the effects of different biochar application rates of 0.75%, 1.5% and 2.0% on the content of effective antibiotics in soil, the uptake amount of antibiotics by vegetables and the growth of vegetable. The soil was treated with 4 antibiotics (oxytetracycline, enrofloxacin, sulfamethazine, and tylosin) with the concentration of 25 mg/kg. The results showed that the application of biochar could slow down the degradation of antibiotics, but it significantly decreased the concentration of available antibiotics in soil. After 52 days incubation, the application of 1.5% and 2.0% biochar decreased the concentrations of soil available antibiotics by 25.29% and 39.09% for oxytetracycline, 16.39% and 28.69% for enrofloxacin, 16.97% and 23.64% for sulfamethazine and 17.76% and 25.70% for tylosin, respectively. The application of biochar could also reduce the uptake amount of antibiotics by vegetable plants. After the application of 1.5% and 2.0% biochar, antibiotics content in vegetable reduced by 23.11% and 35.93% for oxytetracycline, 15.89% and 22.85% for enrofloxacin, 7.64% and 16.56% for sulfamethazine and 16.79% and 29.50% for tylosin, respectively. The application of biochar could increase the biomass of vegetable plants compared to CK.

中图分类号:

X826

章明奎,顾国平,徐秋桐. 生物质炭降低蔬菜吸收土壤中抗生素的作用[J]. 农学学报, 2016, 6(1): 42-46.

参考文献

[1]Samah A k, Meyer M T, Boxall A B A. A global perspective on the use, sales, exposure pathways, occurrence, fate and effects of veterinary antibiotics in the environment[J]. Chemosphere, 2006, 65:725-759.
[2]Diaz-Cruz M S, Lopez D E, Alda M J, et al. Environmental behavior and analysis of veterinary and human drugs in soils, sediments and sludge[J]. Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2003, 22(6): 340-350.
[3]田野,刘善江.有机肥料中抗生素在农田土壤和植物间的迁移研究[J].安徽农业科学,2012,40(8):4523-4525.
[4]Halling-Sorensen B, Nielsen S N, Lansky P F, et al. Occurrence, fate, and effects of pharmaceuticals in the environment—A review[J]. Chemosphere, 1998,36:357-365.
[5]Kummer K, Henninger A. Promoting resistance by the emission of antibiotics from hospitals and households into effluent[J]. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 2003, 9(12):1203~1214.
[6]Thiele-Bruhn S. Pharmaceutical antibiotic compounds in soils—a review[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 2003, 166:145-167.
[7]Heberer T. 2000. Occurrence, fate, and removal of pharmaceutical residues in the aquatic environment: A review of recent research data[J]. Taxicological Letter, 131:5-17.
[8]Tolls J．Sorption ofvctcrinary pharmaceuticals in soils：a review[J]．Environmental Science and Technology, 2001,35：3397-3406．
[9]齐会勉,吕亮,乔显亮.抗生素在土壤中的吸附行为研究进展[J].土壤,2009,41(5):703-708.
[10]Lehmann J, Gaunt J, Rondon M A. Biochar sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems: a review[J]. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change,2006, 11: 403-427.
[11]Arezoo T T, Time J C, Robert R S, et al. Biochar adsorbed ammonia is bioavailable[J]. Plant and Soil, 2012, 350: 57-69.
[12]Yanai Y,Toyota K,Okazaki M. Effects of charcoal addition on N2O emissions from soil resulting from rewetting air-dried soil in short-term incubation experiments[J].Soil Science and Plant Nutrition,2007,53(2):181-188.
[13]方嫒,隋铭皓,盛力,等.磺胺嘧啶在颗粒活性炭和碳纳米管上的吸附特性[J].水处理技术,2012,38(1):23-26.
[14]Elif Cahskan,Sinem Gokturk．Adsorption characteristics of sulfamethoxazole and meu'onidazole on activated carbon[J]．SeparationScience and Technology,2010,45：244-255．
[15]刘虹,张国平,刘丛强.固相萃取－色谱测定水、沉积物及土壤中氯霉素和3种四环素类抗生素[J].分析化学,2007,35(3):315-319.
[16]余强,鲍艳宇,李艳梅,等.三种土壤中土霉素浸提方法的比较研究[J].中国环境科学,2011,31(6):951-957.
[17]Lehmann J, Gaunt J, Rondon M A. Biochar sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems: a review[J]. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change,2006, 11: 403-427.
[18]Warnock D D, Lehmann J, Kuyper T W, et al. Mycorrhizal responses to biochar in soil - concepts and mechanisms[J]. Plant and Soil, 2007, 300(1-2): 9-20.
[19]Busscher W J, Novak J M, Evans D E, et al. Influence of pecan biochar on physical properties of a norfolk loamy sand[J]. Soil Science, 2010, 175(1): 10-14.
[20]Arezoo T T, Time J C, Robert R S, et al. Biochar adsorbed ammonia is bioavailable[J]. Plant and Soil, 2012, 350: 57-69.
[21]张景环.不同类型土壤及黑炭对诺氟沙星的吸附[J]. 青岛科技大学学报(自然科学版),2012,33(6):568-574.
[22]孙璇,李恋卿,潘根兴,等.不同作物原料生物质炭对溶液芘的吸附特性[J].农业环境科学学报,2014,33(8):1637-1643.
[23]史明,胡林潮,黄兆琴,等.生物质炭的加入对土壤吸附菲能力以及玉米幼苗对菲吸收量的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报201 1,30(5)：912-916.
[24]余向阳,王冬兰,母昌立,等．生物质炭对敌草隆在土壤中的慢吸附及其对解吸行为的影响[J]．江苏农业学报,2011,27(5)：1011-1015．

生物质炭降低蔬菜吸收土壤中抗生素的作用

Effect of Biochar Application on the Reduction of Antibiotics Uptake by Vegetable Crop

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们

[1]	蒙彦宇, 景艳杰, 周印富. 施氮量对玉米光合特性及灌浆特性的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2022, 12(8): 10-15.
[2]	李国清, 李国瑜, 丛新军, 李妮. 谷子花生间作错期播种对谷子农艺性状及产量的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2022, 12(3): 6-10.
[3]	田岗, 李会霞, 王玉文, 刘鑫, 刘红. 优质抗除草剂谷子杂交种‘长杂谷466’的选育及配套技术[J]. 农学学报, 2022, 12(10): 1-5.
[4]	屈洋, 王可珍, 刘洋, 罗艳, 杨清华, 梁福琴. 不同种植参数对夏大豆产量及光合效能的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(8): 8-13.
[5]	高豪, 满夏夏, 孙朝霞, 韩渊怀, 李红英, 侯思宇, 郭数进. 谷子MRP蛋白家族序列特征、分子进化及表达模式分析[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(5): 74-82.
[6]	周海涛, 张艳阳, 赵孟圆, 李天亮, 曹丽霞, 张新军. S-诱抗素和黄腐酸对干旱胁迫下皮燕麦光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(2): 30-34.
[7]	时丕彪, 蒋润枝, 沈明晨, 顾闽峰, 王春云, 李亚芳, 顾小兵. 盐胁迫对南瓜幼苗生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(12): 74-79.
[8]	符昌武, 王祖富, 宋家庆, 侯翔文, 覃潇, 戴曦, 袁谋智, 姚旺. 生物炭与水分调控对烤烟光合特性的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(10): 69-74.
[9]	姚燕辉, 赵兴奎, 彭锁堂, 段永红. 中晚熟粒用高粱不同组合杂交种的筛选[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(1): 1-6.
[10]	李万斌, 戴丽君, 李永平. 不同覆膜穴播种植模式对谷子和糜子作物籽粒灌浆特征及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(1): 37-43.
[11]	冯小磊, 史高雷, 张晓磊, 赵治海, 王晓明. 河套地区种植方式与密度对'张杂谷19号'产量的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2020, 10(5): 26-30.
[12]	严美玲, 赵明, 崔明灼, 辛庆国, 孙晓辉, 王江春, 殷岩. 不同测墒补灌处理对冬小麦产量及光合特性的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2020, 10(4): 1-6.
[13]	李萍, 谢圣杰, 李明明, 贾亚涛, 冯万军, 邢国芳. 氮磷配施对玉米‘良玉188’光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2020, 10(4): 14-20.
[14]	魏萌涵, 解慧芳, 邢璐, 付楠, 王素英, 刘海萍, 宋慧, 王淑君, 刘金荣. 抗除草剂谷子新品种‘豫谷31’选育及其高产、稳定、适应性分析[J]. 农学学报, 2020, 10(3): 38-42.
[15]	聂萌恩, 柳青山, 白文斌, 郭平毅, 范昕琦, 王海燕, 杨慧勇. 喷施多效唑对谷子生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2020, 10(2): 18-23.