Comparative Study of Aggregate Stability and Organic Carbon Fraction in Two Types of Paddy Soils under Tobacco-rice Rotation in Central Hunan

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.casb2023-0063

Abstract

Abstract:

To reveal the difference in the stability of soil aggregates and the effect of organic carbon in two typical paddy soils with the farming mode of tobacco-rice rotation, the distribution and stability of soil aggregates, the content of organic carbon components and their relationships in two typical paddy soils were studied, sampled from the field of tobacco-rice rotation region in central Hunan Province. The results showed that the content of >0.25 mm aggregates, mean weight diameter of aggregates (MWD) and geometric mean diameter (GMD) of red paddy soil (RPS) were higher than those of purple paddy soil (PPS), but its fractal dimension (D) was lower, indicating that soil structure and aggregate stability of RPS was better than those of PPS; meanwhile, content of total organic carbon (TOC) and particulate organic carbon (POC) in RPS was significantly higher than those in PPS, but there was no significant difference in content of easily oxidized organic carbon (EOC) between RPS and PPS; the MWD and GMD of RPS and PPS were significantly positively correlated with TOC, EOC and POC, while D showed significant negative correlation; although the content of >0.25 mm aggregates in two types of soil were significantly positively correlated with TOC, EOC and POC, but the influence of organic carbon on >0.25 mm aggregates of RPS was greater than those of PPS. Meanwhile, the influence of POC on >0.25 mm aggregates in two types of soil was greater than that of EOC. To cultivate aggregates and improve structure of RPS and PPS with the farming mode of tobacco-rice rotation, the content of soil organic carbon and its fractions should be increased.

Key words: rice-tobacco rotation, paddy soil, aggregates, organic carbon

LU Feng, HE Jiewang, XIAO Zhipeng, TANG Jianning, MA Mingyun, XIA Fan, LONG Fei, XIAO Mengyu, QIAN Chuanlin. Comparative Study of Aggregate Stability and Organic Carbon Fraction in Two Types of Paddy Soils under Tobacco-rice Rotation in Central Hunan[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2024, 14(3): 48-52.

Figures/Tables 4

References 24

[1]	ROHOSKOVB M, VALLA M. Comparison of two methods for aggregate stability measurement: A review[J]. Plant soil environment, 2004, 50(8):379-382. doi: 10.17221/4047-PSE URL
[2]	罗晓虹, 王子芳, 陆畅, 等. 土地利用方式对土壤团聚体稳定性和有机碳含量的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2019, 40(8):3816-3824.
[3]	王艳玲, 王燕, 李凌宇, 等. 成土母质与利用方式双重影响下红壤团聚体的组成特征与稳定性研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2013, 44(4):776-785.
[4]	薛彦飞, 薛文, 张树兰, 等. 长期不同施肥对塿土团聚体胶结剂的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(6):1622-1632.
[5]	窦森, 李凯, 关松. 土壤团聚体中有机质研究进展[J]. 土壤学报, 2011, 48(2):412-418.
[6]	杨长明, 欧阳竹, 董玉红. 不同施肥模式对潮土有机碳组分及团聚体稳定性的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005, 24(8):887-892.
[7]	HARTLY W, RIBY P, WATERSON J. Effects of three different biochars on aggregate stability, organic carbon mobility and micronutrient bioavailability[J]. Journal of environmental management, 2016, 181:770-778. doi: S0301-4797(16)30460-1 pmid: 27444723
[8]	李景, 吴会军, 武雪萍, 等. 长期保护性耕作提高土壤大团聚体含量及团聚体有机碳的作用[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(2):378-386.
[9]	芦伟龙, 董建新, 宋文静, 等. 土壤深耕与秸秆还田对土壤物理性状及烟叶产质量的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2019, 40(1):25-32.
[10]	刘勇军, 彭曙光, 肖艳松, 等. 湖南烟稻轮作区土壤团聚体稳定性及其与碳氮比的关系[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2020, 26(1):75-82.
[11]	SIX J, CALLEWAERT P, LENDERS S, et al. Measuring and understanding carbon storage in afforested soils by physical fractionation[J]. Soil science society of America journal, 2002, 66:1981-1987. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2002.1981 URL
[12]	ELLIOTT E T. Aggregate structure and carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus in native and cultivated soils[J]. Soil science society of America journal, 1986, 50(7):627-633. doi: 10.2136/sssaj1986.03615995005000030017x URL
[13]	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,1999.
[14]	JONES D L, WILLETT V B. Experimental evaluation of methods to quantify dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in soil[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2006, 38:991-999. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.08.012 URL
[15]	周萍, 张旭辉, 潘根兴. 长期不同施肥对太湖地区黄泥土总有机碳及颗粒态有机碳含量及深度分布的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2006, 12(6):765-771.
[16]	邱莉萍, 张兴昌, 张晋爱. 黄土高原长期培肥土壤团聚体中养分和酶的分布[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(2):364-372.
[17]	杨培岭, 罗远培, 石元春. 用粒径的重量分布表征的土壤分形特征[J]. 科学通报, 1993(20):1896-1899.
[18]	周郑雄, 冯豪, 丁继林, 等. 复合微生物肥对植烟根际土壤团聚体稳定性和酶活性的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2022, 53(11):3088-3097.
[19]	肖孟宇, 廖超林, 肖亦雄, 等. 烟稻复种连作对河潮土团聚体的影响及相关因素分析[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2022, 43(2):19-24.
[20]	PENG X, ZHU Q, ZHANG Z, et al. Combined turnover of carbon and soil aggregates using rare earth oxides and isotopically labelled carbon as tracers[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2017, 109:81-94. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2017.02.002 URL
[21]	刘振东, 李贵春, 周颖, 等. 无机肥配施粪肥对华北褐土团聚体分布及有机碳含量的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2013, 32(11):2239-2245.
[22]	李璠, 王炯琪, 刘子刚, 等. 土地利用方式对土壤团聚体磷组分及磷库管理指数的影响[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2023, 23(1):83-92.
[23]	ZOU C M, LI Y, HUANG W, et al. Rotation and manure amendment increase soil macro-aggregates and associated carbon and nitrogen stocks in flue-cured tobacco production[J]. Geoderma, 2018, 325:49-58. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.03.017 URL
[24]	LI C L, CAO Z Y, CHANG J J, et al. Elevational gradient affect functional fractions of soil organic carbon and aggregates stability in a Tibetan alpine meadow[J]. Catena, 2017, 156:139-148. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2017.04.007 URL

水稻土类型	粒径/mm	样品数	最大值/%	最小值/%	均值/%	变异系数/%
RPS	>2	15	48.22	45.31	46.82 ±1.07a	2.28
	2~0.25	15	30.54	21.72	26.63±2.46a	9.25
	0.25~0.053	15	21.19	13.47	18.75±2.35b	12.53
	<0.053	15	8.53	3.80	5.87±1.52b	25.99
	>0.25	15	76.27	67.03	73.45±2.91a	3.96
PPS	>2	12	38.82	31.90	35.90±2.32b	6.45
	2~0.25	12	21.72	14.48	17.84±2.64b	14.78
	0.25~0.053	12	33.56	29.17	31.13±1.31a	4.20
	<0.053	12	15.95	9.06	12.35±1.99a	16.09
	>0.25	12	59.18	48.81	53.74±3.71b	6.90

水稻土类型	粒径/mm	样品数	最大值/%	最小值/%	均值/%	变异系数/%
RPS	>2	15	48.22	45.31	46.82 ±1.07a	2.28
	2~0.25	15	30.54	21.72	26.63±2.46a	9.25
	0.25~0.053	15	21.19	13.47	18.75±2.35b	12.53
	<0.053	15	8.53	3.80	5.87±1.52b	25.99
	>0.25	15	76.27	67.03	73.45±2.91a	3.96
PPS	>2	12	38.82	31.90	35.90±2.32b	6.45
	2~0.25	12	21.72	14.48	17.84±2.64b	14.78
	0.25~0.053	12	33.56	29.17	31.13±1.31a	4.20
	<0.053	12	15.95	9.06	12.35±1.99a	16.09
	>0.25	12	59.18	48.81	53.74±3.71b	6.90

土壤类型	稳定性指标	样品数	最大值	最小值	均值	变异系数/%
RPS	MWD	15	1.31	1.18	1.27±0.04a	3.09
	GMD	15	0.89	0.77	0.84±0.03a	3.64
	D	15	2.43	2.01	2.23±0.12b	5.25
PPS	MWD	12	1.05	0.88	0.97±0.06b	5.91
	GMD	12	0.56	0.46	0.51±0.03b	6.72
	D	12	2.56	2.36	2.48±0.07a	2.81

土壤类型	稳定性指标	样品数	最大值	最小值	均值	变异系数/%
RPS	MWD	15	1.31	1.18	1.27±0.04a	3.09
	GMD	15	0.89	0.77	0.84±0.03a	3.64
	D	15	2.43	2.01	2.23±0.12b	5.25
PPS	MWD	12	1.05	0.88	0.97±0.06b	5.91
	GMD	12	0.56	0.46	0.51±0.03b	6.72
	D	12	2.56	2.36	2.48±0.07a	2.81

土壤类型	有机碳指标	样品数	最大值/(g/kg)	最小值/(g/kg)	均值/(g/kg)	变异系数/%
RPS	TOC	15	34.11	17.22	25.21±5.32a	15.13
	EOC	15	4.60	2.64	3.89±0.55a	14.22
	POC	15	9.36	5.71	7.16±1.14a	13.66
PPS	TOC	12	26.20	16.09	20.62±3.12b	21.11
	EOC	12	5.52	2.86	3.81±0.87a	22.74
	POC	12	6.86	4.06	5.62±0.77b	15.91