Effects of Different Slow (Controlled) Release Fertilizers on Reduction and Efficiency of Rice Chemical Fertilizers and Soil Environment

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2024-0131

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the efficiency of different slow (controlled) release fertilizers in rice, this experiment set up four treatments of fertilization: conventional fertilization, Maoshi controlled-release fertilizer, Sirte slow-release fertilizer, and Maoshi dual control slow-release fertilizer. The rice yield and soil chemical properties were measured in each plot, and the effects of different slow (controlled) release fertilizers on reduction and efficiency of rice fertilizer, soil fertility and determination of soil chemical properties were evaluated using combination of the analysis of soil enzyme activity and microorganism indicators. The results showed that when fertilizer nutrients quantity decreased by 13%, the theoretical yield of rice was consistent with the actual yield, with Maoshi dual control slow-release fertilizer treatment>Sirte slow-release fertilizer treatment>conventional fertilization treatment>Maoshi controlled-release fertilizer treatment; under the application of slow (controlled) release fertilizer in rice, the cost-saving and fertilizer reduction effect of Sirte slow-release fertilizer and Maoshi dual control slow-release fertilizer were the better; the total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and total potassium content of rice grains and straw treated with Sirte slow-release fertilizer and Maoshi dual control slow-release fertilizer were relatively higher. Maoshi dual control slow-release fertilizer treatment had the best effect on improving various chemical and biological characteristics of soil. Based on the above results, it can be concluded that the application of Maoshi dual control slow-release fertilizer had the best effect.

Key words: slow (controlled) release fertilizers, fertilizer reduction and efficiency, soil, rice yields

XIE Wei, YUAN Hangjie, YANG Wenye. Effects of Different Slow (Controlled) Release Fertilizers on Reduction and Efficiency of Rice Chemical Fertilizers and Soil Environment[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2025, 15(11): 23-27.

Figures/Tables 8

References 12

[1]	卢再杰, 谈梅芳, 余策金, 等. 缓控肥在水稻生产上应用探讨[J]. 农业与技术, 2017, 37(22):66.
[2]	吴红洪, 徐广辉, 高凤云, 等. 缓控释肥对水稻产量及肥料利用率的影响[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2023, 29(7):116-118.
[3]	陈和秀, 郑铭洁, 赵玲玲, 等. 缓释肥对水稻生物性状、产量及经济效益的影响[J]. 农村经济与科技, 2019, 30(11):48-49.
[4]	KHAN M A, KIM K W, WANG M, et al. Nutrient-impregnated charcoal: an environmentally friendly slow-release fertilizer[J]. Environmentalist, 2008, 28(3):231-235. doi: 10.1007/s10669-007-9133-5 URL
[5]	张玉凤, 沈玉文, 王江涛, 等. 缓控释掺混尿素对章丘大葱-小麦产量、效益及土壤氮素的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(2):231-238.
[6]	DONG D, WANG C, ZWIETEN L V, et al. An effective biochar-based slow-release fertilizer for reducing nitrogen loss in paddy fields[J]. Journal of soils and sediments, 2020, 20(8):3027-3040. doi: 10.1007/s11368-019-02401-8
[7]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M].3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[8]	农业部果品及苗木质量监督检验测试中心（郑州）、中国农业科学院郑州果树研究所. NYT2017-2011,植物中氮、磷、钾的测定[S].2011.
[9]	楼玲, 袁杭杰, 李丹, 等. 不同缓(控)释肥对水稻化肥减量增效和土壤肥力及酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(20):73-77. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0673
[10]	王惠英. 水稻控缓释配方肥肥效对比试验初报[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2018, 24(9):54-55.
[11]	李新悦, 王昌全, 李冰, 等. 控释掺混氮肥对稻麦土壤微生物及酶活性的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019(1):35-42.
[12]	蒋晓梅, 彭福田, 张江红, 等. 肥料袋控缓释对桃树土壤酶活性及植株生长的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2015(2):279-284.

试验处理	面积/hm²	基肥/(kg/hm²)	分蘖肥/(kg/hm²)	穗肥/(kg/hm²)	折纯/(kg/hm²)			总量/(kg/hm²)
试验处理	面积/hm²	基肥/(kg/hm²)	分蘖肥/(kg/hm²)	穗肥/(kg/hm²)	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	总量/(kg/hm²)
处理1（常规施肥）	0.09	450	尿素225	尿素150；氯化钾75	205.5	67.5	112.5	385.5
处理2（茂施控释肥）	0.11	450	尿素75	尿素75；氯化钾75	181.5	45.0	108.0	334.5
处理3（司尔特缓释肥）	0.12	450	尿素120	尿素120；氯化钾75	177.9	45.0	112.5	335.4
处理4（茂施俩控缓释肥）	0.13	450	尿素90	尿素75；氯化钾75	192.9	40.5	103.5	336.9

试验处理	面积/hm²	基肥/(kg/hm²)	分蘖肥/(kg/hm²)	穗肥/(kg/hm²)	折纯/(kg/hm²)			总量/(kg/hm²)
试验处理	面积/hm²	基肥/(kg/hm²)	分蘖肥/(kg/hm²)	穗肥/(kg/hm²)	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	总量/(kg/hm²)
处理1（常规施肥）	0.09	450	尿素225	尿素150；氯化钾75	205.5	67.5	112.5	385.5
处理2（茂施控释肥）	0.11	450	尿素75	尿素75；氯化钾75	181.5	45.0	108.0	334.5
处理3（司尔特缓释肥）	0.12	450	尿素120	尿素120；氯化钾75	177.9	45.0	112.5	335.4
处理4（茂施俩控缓释肥）	0.13	450	尿素90	尿素75；氯化钾75	192.9	40.5	103.5	336.9

编号	株高/cm	旗叶长/cm	有效穗/(×10⁴/hm²)	总粒数/粒	实粒数/粒	结实率/%	千粒重/g	理论产量/(kg/hm²)
处理1（常规施肥）	110.2	30.8	251.9	308.4	252.0	81.7	22.89	10644.45
处理2（茂施控释肥）	111.2	36.4	266.7	327.0	300.0	91.7	20.90	10630.5
处理3（司尔特缓释肥）	112.2	37.6	235.2	333.0	291.6	87.6	23.06	11069.55
处理4（茂施俩控缓释肥）	113.2	35.2	266.7	311.4	282.2	90.6	23.24	12745.65

编号	株高/cm	旗叶长/cm	有效穗/(×10⁴/hm²)	总粒数/粒	实粒数/粒	结实率/%	千粒重/g	理论产量/(kg/hm²)
处理1（常规施肥）	110.2	30.8	251.9	308.4	252.0	81.7	22.89	10644.45
处理2（茂施控释肥）	111.2	36.4	266.7	327.0	300.0	91.7	20.90	10630.5
处理3（司尔特缓释肥）	112.2	37.6	235.2	333.0	291.6	87.6	23.06	11069.55
处理4（茂施俩控缓释肥）	113.2	35.2	266.7	311.4	282.2	90.6	23.24	12745.65

编号	水稻产量 /(kg/hm²)	水稻产值 /(kg/hm²)	增幅 /%
处理1（常规施肥）	9865.5	31963.5	—
处理2（茂施控释肥）	9208.5	29835.0	-6.66
处理3（司尔特缓释肥）	10590.0	34311.0	7.34
处理4（茂施俩控缓释肥）	11002.5	35647.5	11.53