Luo Mei, Liu Ying, Li Jing, Gao Tingfeng, Wu Sheng, Wu Lei, Lai Xijun, Xu Hongjun, Hu Hongxiang, Ma Youhua
College of Resources and Environment, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China.
Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China.
Plants (Basel). 2024 Feb 2;13(3):444. doi: 10.3390/plants13030444.
Recently, replacing chemical fertilizers with straw returning and new fertilizers has received considerable attention in the agricultural sector, as it is believed to increase rice yield and improve soil properties. However, less is known about rice growth and soil properties in paddy fields with the addition of different fertilizers. Thus, in this paper, we investigated the effects of different fertilizer treatments, including no fertilization (CK), optimized fertilization based on the medium yield recommended fertilizer amount (OF), 4.50 Mg ha straw returning with chemical fertilizers (SF), 0.59 Mg ha slow-release fertilizer with chemical fertilizers (SRF), and 0.60 Mg ha water-soluble fertilizer with chemical fertilizers (WSF), on rice growth, yield, and soil properties through a field experiment. The results show that compared with the OF treatment, the new SF, SRF, and WSF treatments increased plant height, main root length, tiller number, leaf area index, chlorophyll content, and aboveground dry weight. The SF, SRF, and WSF treatments improved rice grain yield by 30.65-32.51% and 0.24-1.66% compared to the CK and OF treatments, respectively. The SRF treatment increased nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) uptake by 18.78% and 28.68%, the harvest indexes of N and P by 1.75% and 0.59%, and the partial productivity of N and P by 2.64% and 2.63%, respectively, compared with the OF treatment. However, fertilization did not significantly affect the average yield, harvest indexes of N and P, and partial productivity of N and P. The contents of TN, AN, SOM, TP, AP, and AK across all the treatments decreased significantly with increasing soil depth, while soil pH increased with soil depth. The SF treatment could more effectively increase soil pH and NH-N content compared to the SRF and WSF treatments, while the SRF treatment could greatly enhance other soil nutrients and enzyme activities compared to the SF and WSF treatments. A correlation analysis showed that rice yield was significantly positively associated with tiller number, leaf area index, chlorophyll, soil NO-N, NH-N, SOM, TP, AK, and soil enzyme activity. The experimental results indicate that SRF was the best fertilization method to improve rice growth and yield and enhance soil properties, followed by the SF, WSF, and OF treatments. Hence, the results provide useful information for better fertilization management in the Chaohu Lake region of China.
近年来，用秸秆还田和新型肥料替代化肥在农业领域受到了广泛关注，因为人们认为这可以提高水稻产量并改善土壤性质。然而，对于添加不同肥料的稻田中水稻生长和土壤性质的了解较少。因此，在本文中，我们通过田间试验研究了不同施肥处理对水稻生长、产量和土壤性质的影响，这些处理包括不施肥（CK）、基于中等产量推荐施肥量的优化施肥（OF）、4.50 Mg/ha秸秆与化肥配施（SF）、0.59 Mg/ha缓释肥与化肥配施（SRF）以及0.60 Mg/ha水溶肥与化肥配施（WSF）。结果表明，与OF处理相比，新型的SF、SRF和WSF处理增加了株高、主根长度、分蘖数、叶面积指数、叶绿素含量和地上部干重。与CK和OF处理相比，SF、SRF和WSF处理分别使水稻籽粒产量提高了30.65 - 32.51%和0.24 - 1.66%。与OF处理相比，SRF处理使氮（N）和磷（P）吸收量分别增加了18.78%和28.68%，N和P的收获指数分别增加了1.75%和0.59%，N和P的偏生产力分别增加了2.64%和2.63%。然而，施肥对平均产量、N和P的收获指数以及N和P的偏生产力没有显著影响。所有处理的全氮（TN）、碱解氮（AN）、土壤有机质（SOM）、全磷（TP）、有效磷（AP）和速效钾（AK）含量均随土壤深度增加而显著降低，而土壤pH值随土壤深度增加而升高。与SRF和WSF处理相比，SF处理能更有效地提高土壤pH值和铵态氮（NH₄⁺-N）含量，而与SF和WSF处理相比，SRF处理能显著提高其他土壤养分和酶活性。相关性分析表明，水稻产量与分蘖数、叶面积指数、叶绿素、土壤硝态氮（NO₃⁻-N）、铵态氮（NH₄⁺-N）、土壤有机质（SOM）、全磷（TP）、速效钾（AK）和土壤酶活性显著正相关。试验结果表明，SRF是改善水稻生长和产量以及增强土壤性质的最佳施肥方法，其次是SF、WSF和OF处理。因此，这些结果为中国巢湖地区更好的施肥管理提供了有用信息。
