Effects of different carbon source inputs on the characteristics of compacted clay and the growth of cotton seedlings

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2025.03.005

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】Soil compaction and caking can lead to a significant decrease in soil quality in agricultural farmland, and a serious lack of comprehensive agricultural production capacity. Carbon source materials may have the ability to improve the structure of clayey soil. 【Methods】By using field experiments, a control group (CK), farmyard fertilizer (N group), biochar (T group), biological bacterial fertilizer (B group), commercial organic fertilizer (J group), and mineral potassium humate (H group) were designed, with three gradient treatments in each group. The aim was to explore the effects of five carbon source substances on the physicochemical properties of clayey soil and plant agronomic traits. 【Results】(1) The input of five carbon source substances had a significant impact on soil bulk density and soil porosity, with biochar having the most significant improvement effect. (2) The input of five carbon source substances had a certain improvement effect on soil aggregates of various particle sizes. Among the 1-2 mm and 1mm soil aggregates, T₂ treatment had the best improvement effect, N₃ treatment had the best improvement effect on 0.5-1 mm soil aggregates, and J₃ treatment has the best improvement effect on 0.1-0.25 mm soil aggregates; Compared to CK, it increased by 455.70%, 504.01%, 207.41%, 65.55%, and 41.70% respectively; (3) The input of five carbon source substances could significantly improve the plant height and stem diameter of cotton plants. In terms of the improvement effect on plant height and stem diameter, the pattern presented was N>T>S>J>H and S>J>T>N>H; (4) The five carbon source substances had a significant effect on improving the dry and fresh weight of plants, and the effect of farmyard fertilizer was the best in improving the agronomic properties of cotton. 【Conclusion】In the overall evaluation, different carbon source inputs are beneficial for the physicochemical properties and plant agronomic traits of clayey soil, and the recommended amount of farmyard fertilizer+50% is the best. In summary, adding carbon source substances to clay soil can promote the formation of soil aggregates and alleviate the stress of compaction on soil by regulating soil structure and biochemical organic matter.

Key words: carbon source material; clayey soil; cotton seedling stage; soil improvement

摘要：

【目的】研究不同碳源物质输入对板结黏土特性及棉花苗期生长的影响。【方法】通过采用大田试验的方法,设计对照组(CK)、农家肥(N组)、生物炭(T组)、生物菌肥(J组)、商品有机肥(J组)、矿源黄腐酸钾(H组),每组3个梯度处理,探讨5种碳源物质对黏质土壤理化性质和植株农艺性状的影响。【结果】(1)5种碳源物质输入对土壤容重和土壤孔隙度均有显著性影响,其中生物炭改良效果最显著。(2)5种碳源物质输入对各个粒径土壤团聚体均有一定的改良作用,1~2 mm土壤团聚体改良中T₂处理效果最佳,N₃处理对0.5~1 mm土壤团聚体改良效果最佳,J₃处理对0.1~0.25 mm土壤团聚体改良效果最佳;相较CK分别增加了455.70%、504.01%、207.41%、65.55%和41.70%;(3)5种碳源物质输入可以显著提高棉花植株的株高和茎粗,对株高和茎粗的改良效果为N>T>S>J>H和S>J>T>N>H。(4)5种碳源物质对植株干鲜重均有显著性提高,在对棉花农艺性质的改良中农家肥效果最佳。【结论】不同碳源物质输入对黏质土壤的理化性质和植株农艺性状有益,并以农家肥推荐量+50%的添加量最佳。黏质土壤中添加碳源物质,通过调节土壤结构和生化机质,促进土壤团粒结构的形成,减轻板结对土壤的胁迫作用。

关键词: 碳源物质, 黏质土壤, 棉花苗期, 土壤改良

ZHAO Yupeng, CHEN Bolang, WANG Zhiguo, FU Yanbo, BIAN Qingyong. Effects of different carbon source inputs on the characteristics of compacted clay and the growth of cotton seedlings[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2025, 62(3): 556-571.

赵玉鹏, 陈波浪, 王治国, 付彦博, 扁青永. 不同碳源物质输入对板结黏土特性及棉花苗期生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2025, 62(3): 556-571.

Figures/Tables 15

References 37

[1]	王立辉, 周淑凤. 土壤恶化的原因及治理[J]. 吉林农业, 2010,(23): 64.
	WANG Lihui, ZHOU Shufeng. Reasons and treatment of soil de-terioration[J]. Agriculture of Jilin, 2010,(23): 64.
[2]	陈义群, 董元华. 土壤改良剂的研究与应用进展[J]. 生态环境, 2008, 17(3): 1282-1289.
	CHEN Yiqun, DONG Yuanhua. Progress of research and utilization of soil amendments[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2008, 17(3): 1282-1289.
[3]	赵俭波. 土壤板结的成因与解决途径[J]. 现代农业科技, 2014,(13): 261, 264.
	ZHAO Jianbo. The causes and solutions of soil compaction[J]. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology, 2014,(13): 261, 264.
[4]	王建堂. 重视土壤酸化消除土壤板结[J]. 农村实用科技信息, 2010, 16(1): 14.
	WANG Jiantang. Emphasizing soil acidification and eliminating soil compaction[J]. Modern Agriculture Research, 2010, 16(1): 14.
[5]	Glap T. Effect of soil compaction and N fertilization on soil pore characteristics and physical quality of sandy loam soil under red clover/grass sward[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2014, 144: 8-19.
[6]	Figueiredo P G, Bicudo S J, Chen S B, et al. Effects of tillage options on soil physical properties and cassava-dry-matter partitioning[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017, 204: 191-198.
[7]	韩江培. 设施栽培条件下土壤酸化与盐渍化耦合发生机理研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2015.
	HAN Jiangpei. A study on the coupling mechanism of soil acidification and salinization under facility cultivation conditions[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2015.
[8]	De Neve S, Hofman G. Influence of soil compaction on carbon and nitrogen mineralization of soil organic matter and crop residues[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2000, 30(5): 544-549.
[9]	Conlin T S S, van den Driessche R. Response of soil CO₂ and O₂ concentrations to forest soil compaction at the Long-term Soil Productivity sites in central British Columbia[J]. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 2000, 80(4): 625-632.
[10]	Hamza M A, Anderson W K. Soil compaction in cropping systems A review of the nature, causes and possible solutions[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2005, 82(2): 121-145.
[11]	Hartemink A E. Soils are back on the global agenda[J]. Soil Use and Management, 2008, 24(4): 327-330.
[12]	吴增芳. 土壤结构改良剂[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1976: 24-34.
	WU Zengfang. Soil Structure Improvers[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 1976: 24-34.
[13]	员学锋, 汪有科, 吴普特, 等. PAM对土壤物理性状影响的试验研究及机理分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2005, 19(2): 37-40.
	YUN Xuefeng, WANG Youke, WU Pute, et al. Effects and mechanism of PAM on soil physical characteristics[J]. Journal of Soil Water Conservation, 2005, 19(2): 37-40.
[14]	马军勇, 吴普特, 冯浩, 等. 土壤改良剂节水增产效应的田间试验研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2009, 29(4): 72-75.
	MA Junyong, WU Pute, FENG Hao, et al. Field experimental study of the water-saving and production-increase effects of soil conditioner[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2009, 29(4): 72-75.
[15]	Deibert E J. Utter R a. earthworm (lumbricidae) survey of North dakota fieldsplaced in the u. s. conservation reserve program[J]. Soil and Water Conservation, 2003, 58(1): 39-45.
[16]	邵玉翠, 张余良, 李悦, 等. 天然矿物改良剂在微咸水灌溉土壤中应用效果的研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2005, 19(4): 100-103.
	SHAO Yucui, ZHANG Yuliang, LI Yue, et al. Study of effect on using natural minerals to improve soil in irrigating brackish water[J]. Journal of Soil Water Conservation, 2005, 19(4): 100-103.
[17]	李江涛, 钟晓兰, 赵其国. 施用畜禽粪便和化肥对土壤活性有机碳库和团聚体稳定性影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2010, 24(1): 233-238.
	LI Jiangtao, ZHONG Xiaolan, ZHAO Qiguo. Soil active organic carbon pool and aggregate stability as affected by application of livestock and poultry excrement and chemical fertilizer[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010, 24(1): 233-238.
[18]	王丽娜, 杨瑛, 杜苏. 生物炭施入对盐碱土壤影响的研究现状[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(8): 81-87. DOI
	WANG Lina, YANG Ying, DU Su. Effects of biochar application on saline-alkali soil: research status[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(8): 81-87. DOI
[19]	Dahlawis, Naeem A, Rengel salt-affected soils: Challenges and environment, 2018, 625: 320-335.Z, et al. Biochar applicationfor the remediation of opportunities[J]. Science of the total environment, 2018, 625: 320-335.
[20]	李谦维, 高俊琴, 梁金凤, 等. 生物炭添加对不同水氮条件下芦苇生长和氮素吸收的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(10): 3765-3774.
	LI Qianwei, GAO Junqin, LIANG Jinfeng, et al. Effects of biochar addition on growth and nitrogen absorption of Phragmites australis under different water and nitrogen conditions[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(10): 3765-3774.
[21]	王斌, 马兴旺, 单娜娜, 等. 新疆盐碱地土壤改良剂的选择与应用[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2014, 28(7): 111-115.
	WANG Bin, MA Xingwang, SHAN Nana, et al. The selection and application of saline alkali soil amendment in Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2014, 28(7): 111-115.
[22]	陈立新. 土壤实验实习教程[M]. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学出版社, 2005: 51-55.
	CHEN Lixin. Soil Experiment Internship Course[M]. Harbin: Northeast Forestry University, 2005: 51-55.
[23]	刘孝义. 土壤物理及土壤改良研究法[M]. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 1982: 1-2.
	LIU Xiaoyi. Research Methods for Soil Physics and Soil Improvement[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers, 1982: 1-2.
[24]	DB/ T4100 P90001.1-001.10.鲁山县水土保持试验站. 平顶山市水土保持工程标准[S].
	B/ T4100 P90001.1-001.10. Pingdingshan City Soil and Water Conservation Engineering Standards[S].
[25]	李婕, 黎青慧, 李平儒, 等. 长期有机肥施用、秸秆还田对塿土团聚体及其有机碳含量的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2012, 43(6): 1456-1460.
	LI Jie, LI Qinghui, LI Pingru, et al. Effects of long-term organic inputs on distribution of aggregate size and its organic carbon content on Lou soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2012, 43(6): 1456-1460.
[26]	杨如萍, 郭贤仕, 吕军峰, 等. 不同耕作和种植模式对土壤团聚体分布及稳定性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2010, 24(1): 252-256.
	YANG Ruping, GUO Xianshi, LYU Junfeng, et al. Affects of distribution and stability on soil aggregate in different patterns of tillage and cropping[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010, 24(1): 252-256.
[27]	孙涛, 冯晓敏, 赵财, 等. 西北绿洲区间作模式对土壤团聚体组成及其有机碳含量的影响[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2021, 38(5): 874-881.
	SUN Tao, FENG Xiaomin, ZHAO Cai, et al. Effects of intercropping regimes on soil aggregate composition and their organic carbon content in an oasis area of northwest China[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2021, 38(5): 874-881.
[28]	张旭. 生物炭土壤改良剂对白浆土理化性质及其微观结构的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2021.
	ZHANG Xu. Effects of biochar soil amendments on the physicochemical properties and microstructure of white soil[D]. Harbin:Northeast Agricultural University, 2021.
[29]	胡敏, 屈忠义, 王丽萍, 等. 不同改良剂对河套灌区盐渍化土壤性状和葵花生长特性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(5): 316-322.
	HU Min, QU Zhongyi, WANG Liping, et al. Effects of different amendments on the properties of salinized soil and sunflower growth in Hetao irrigation district[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 33(5): 316-322.
[30]	陈文涛, 郭丽琢, 剡斌, 等. 改良剂对盐碱地燕麦生长及土壤物理性状的调控效应[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2024, 59(5): 136-144.
	CHEN Wentao, GUO Lizhuo, YAN Bin, et al. Effects of amendments on oat growth and soil physical properties in saline-alkali soils[J]. Journal of Gansu Agricultural University, 2024, 59(5): 136-144.
[31]	蒲玉琳, 林超文, 谢德体, 等. 植物篱-农作坡地土壤团聚体组成和稳定性特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24(1): 122-128.
	PU Yulin, LIN Chaowen, XIE Deti, et al. Composition and stability of soil aggregates in hedgerow-crop slope land[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2013, 24(1): 122-128. PMID
[32]	王永平, 王岩, 涂德辉. 生物炭和氮肥配施对椒园土壤团聚体结构及作物产量的影响[J/OL]. 分子植物育种: 1-18[2024-03-07].
	WANG Yongping, WANG Yan, TU Dehui, et al. Effects of combined application of biochar and nitrogen fertilizer on soil aggregate structure and crop yield in pepper orchards[J]. Molecular Plant Breeding: 1-18[2024-03-07].
[33]	庞津雯, 王钰皓, 陶宏扬, 等. 生物炭不同添加量对旱作覆膜农田土壤团聚体特性及有机碳含量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(9): 1729-1743. DOI
	PANG Jinwen, WANG Yuhao, TAO Hongyang, et al. Effects of different biochar application rates on soil aggregate characteristics and organic carbon contents for film-mulching field in semiarid areas[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(9): 1729-1743. DOI
[34]	李辉信, 袁颖红, 黄欠如, 等. 不同施肥处理对红壤水稻土团聚体有机碳分布的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2006, 43(3): 422-429.
	LI Huixin, YUAN Yinghong, HUANG Qianru, et al. Effects of fertilization on soil organic carbon distribution in various aggregates of red paddy soil[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2006, 43(3): 422-429.
[35]	王改兰, 段建南, 贾宁凤, 等. 长期施肥对黄土丘陵区土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2006, 20(4): 82-85, 89.
	WANG Gailan, DUAN Jiannan, JIA Ningfeng, et al. Effects of long-term fertilizatton on soil physical and chemical property in loess hilly area[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2006, 20(4): 82-85, 89.
[36]	李润清, 王志领, 王翠玲. 有机肥对棉花出苗、生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2020,(7): 128-129, 133.
	LI Runqing, WANG Zhiling, WANG Cuiling. The effect of organic fertilizer on cotton emergence, growth and development, and yield[J]. Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2020,(7): 128-129, 133.
[37]	杨凯, 杜延全, 张西兴, 等. 有机物料与化肥配施提升土壤肥力、养分利用和玉米产量研究[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024,(4): 76-82.
	YANG Kai, DU Yanquan, ZHANG Xixing, et al. Experimental study on combined application of organic materials and chemical fertilizers to improve soil fertility, nutrient utilization and maize yield[J]. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2024,(4): 76-82.

供试土壤 Soil for test (cm)	有机质 Organic matter (g/kg)	土壤含水率 Soil moisture content (%)	土壤容重 Soil bulk density (g/cm³)	水解性氮 Hydrolyzed nitrogen (mg/kg)	有效磷 Available phosphorus (mg/kg)	速效钾 Rapidly available potassium (mg/kg)	水溶性盐分 Water-soluble salt (g/kg)
0~15	11.3	0.16	1.50	105.2	16.4	235	11.4
15~30	11.7	0.14	1.55	86.7	21.1	226	13.2

供试土壤 Soil for test (cm)	有机质 Organic matter (g/kg)	土壤含水率 Soil moisture content (%)	土壤容重 Soil bulk density (g/cm³)	水解性氮 Hydrolyzed nitrogen (mg/kg)	有效磷 Available phosphorus (mg/kg)	速效钾 Rapidly available potassium (mg/kg)	水溶性盐分 Water-soluble salt (g/kg)
0~15	11.3	0.16	1.50	105.2	16.4	235	11.4
15~30	11.7	0.14	1.55	86.7	21.1	226	13.2

项目 Items	变异来源 Source of variation		平方和 Sum of squares	自由度df Degree of freedom df	均方 Mean square	比值F Ratio F	显著性 Significance
0~15 cm容重 0-15cm Bulk density	N组	组间	0.016	2	0.008	12.633	P <0.01
		组内	0.004	6	0.001
		总数	0.020	8
	T组	组间	0.006	2	0.003	10.513	P <0.01
		组内	0.002	6	0.000
		总数	0.008	8
	J组	组间	0.006	2	0.003	20.523	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.007	8
	S组	组间	0.005	2	0.002	21.563	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.006	8
	H组	组间	0.005	2	0.003	14.119	P <0.01
		组内	0.002	6	0.000
		总数	0.007	8
15~30 cm容重 15-30 cm Bulk density	N组	组间	0.001	2	0.001	10.102	P <0.05
		组内	0.000	6	0.000
		总数	0.001	8
	T组	组间	0.001	2	0.001	5.180	P <0.05
		组内	0.000	6	0.000
		总数	0.001	8
	J组	组间	0.006	2	0.003	32.037	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.007	8
	S组	组间	0.002	2	0.001	6.947	P <0.05
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.003	8
	H组	组间	0.004	2	0.002	11.361	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.005	8

项目 Items	变异来源 Source of variation		平方和 Sum of squares	自由度df Degree of freedom df	均方 Mean square	比值F Ratio F	显著性 Significance
0~15 cm容重 0-15cm Bulk density	N组	组间	0.016	2	0.008	12.633	P <0.01
		组内	0.004	6	0.001
		总数	0.020	8
	T组	组间	0.006	2	0.003	10.513	P <0.01
		组内	0.002	6	0.000
		总数	0.008	8
	J组	组间	0.006	2	0.003	20.523	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.007	8
	S组	组间	0.005	2	0.002	21.563	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.006	8
	H组	组间	0.005	2	0.003	14.119	P <0.01
		组内	0.002	6	0.000
		总数	0.007	8
15~30 cm容重 15-30 cm Bulk density	N组	组间	0.001	2	0.001	10.102	P <0.05
		组内	0.000	6	0.000
		总数	0.001	8
	T组	组间	0.001	2	0.001	5.180	P <0.05
		组内	0.000	6	0.000
		总数	0.001	8
	J组	组间	0.006	2	0.003	32.037	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.007	8
	S组	组间	0.002	2	0.001	6.947	P <0.05
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.003	8
	H组	组间	0.004	2	0.002	11.361	P <0.01
		组内	0.001	6	0.000
		总数	0.005	8

项目 Items	变异来源 Source of variation		平方和 Sum of squares	自由度df Degree of freedom df	均方 Mean square	比值F Ratio F	显著性 Significance
0~15 cm孔隙度 0-15 cm Porosity	N组	组间	19.300	2	9.650	2.906	P =0.131
		组内	19.925	6	3.321
		总数	39.255	8
	T组	组间	7.491	2	3.745	1.372	P =0.323
		组内	16.374	6	2.729
		总数	23.864	8
	J组	组间	4.353	2	2.176	0.826	P =0.482
		组内	15.817	6	2.636
		总数	20.169	8
	S组	组间	2.286	2	1.143	0.481	P =0.640
		组内	14.262	6	2.377
		总数	16.548	8
	H组	组间	0.645	2	0.322	0.173	P =0.845
		组内	11.207	6	1.868
		总数	11.852	8
15~30 cm孔隙度 15-30 cm Porosity	N组	组间	3.538	2	1.769	0.340	P =0.725
		组内	31.218	6	5.203
		总数	34.756	8
	T组	组间	9.830	2	4.915	1.686	P =0.262
		组内	17.495	6	2.916
		总数	27.325	8
	J组	组间	28.111	2	14.056	3.713	P =0.089
		组内	22.714	6	3.786
		总数	50.825	8
	S组	组间	21.268	2	10.634	5.353	P <0.05
		组内	11.919	6	1.987
		总数	33.187	8
	H组	组间	32.959	2	16.479	7.252	P <0.05
		组内	13.634	6	2.272
		总数	46.593	8