欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (10): 3069-3083.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2026.63003

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇    下一篇

耕作方式与添加物对瘠薄型夏玉米田土壤理化性质及籽粒产量形成的影响

王悦颖(), 任昊, 王洪章, 刘鹏, 韩坤()   

  1. 山东农业大学农学院 / 黄淮海区域玉米技术创新中心, 山东泰安 271018
  • 收稿日期:2026-01-06 接受日期:2026-07-15 出版日期:2026-10-12 网络出版日期:2026-07-24
  • 通讯作者: 韩坤, E-mail: henanhankun@163.com
  • 作者简介:王悦颖, E-mail: 3289819124@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    山东省自然科学基金青年基金项目(ZR2022QC135);山东省现代农业产业技术体系建设项目(SDAIT02-08)

Effects of tillage practices and soil amendments on soil physicochemical properties and grain yield formation in low-fertility summer maize fields

Wang Yue-Ying(), Ren Hao, Wang Hong-Zhang, Liu Peng, Han Kun()   

  1. College of Agriculture, Shandong Agricultural University / Huang-Huai-Hai Regional Maize Technology Innovation Center, Tai’an 271018, Shandong, China
  • Received:2026-01-06 Accepted:2026-07-15 Published:2026-10-12 Published online:2026-07-24
  • Contact: Han Kun, E-mail: henanhankun@163.com
  • Supported by:
    Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation Youth Fund(ZR2022QC135);Shandong Provincial Modern Agricultural Industry Technology System Construction Project(SDAIT02-08)

RichHTML

2

PDF

41

摘要：

为探究土壤耕作方式及添加物对瘠薄型夏玉米田土壤理化性质与籽粒产量的影响, 于2023—2024年夏玉米季在山东省肥城市太平村瘠薄农田开展试验。以郑黄糯2号为材料, 采用裂区设计, 主区为耕作方式: 旋耕15 cm (RT)和深松30 cm+旋耕15 cm (SRT); 副区为土壤添加物, 在等氮磷钾条件下设6个处理: (1) 复合肥750 kg hm-2 (F); (2) 复合肥+保水剂60 kg hm-2 (FW); (3) 复合肥+腐殖酸1500 kg hm-2 (FH); (4) 复合肥+腐殖酸1500 kg hm-2+保水剂60 kg hm-2 (FHW); (5) 复合肥+有机肥15 t hm-2 (FO); (6) 复合肥+有机肥15 t hm-2+保水剂60 kg hm-2 (FOW)。探究其对瘠薄型夏玉米田土壤总孔隙度、三相比、水势、有机质、养分含量的调控效应及对玉米生长发育、产量形成的影响。与RT相比, SRT显著提高0~20 cm土层土壤总孔隙度、全氮和全磷含量, 增幅分别为8.57%、9.30%和14.71%; 0~20 cm和20~40 cm土层有机质含量分别显著增加11.27%和14.55%。土壤添加物显著提升了0~20 cm土层总孔隙度、水势及气相和液相值, 改善通透性与持水能力; 同时提高有机质含量, 促进养分供给, 进而增加玉米干物质积累量和产量。其中FHW处理效果最佳, 2年平均地上部干物质积累量和产量分别提高24.57%和26.44%。综上, 深松+旋耕配施复合肥+腐殖酸+保水剂(FHW)是改良瘠薄农田土壤理化性质、提升夏玉米产量的有效措施。

关键词: 瘠薄地, 耕作措施, 添加物, 土壤理化性状, 籽粒产量

Abstract:

To investigate the effects of tillage methods and soil amendments on soil physicochemical properties and grain yield formation in low-fertility summer maize fields, a field experiment was conducted during the 2023-2024 summer maize growing seasons in Taiping village, Wangzhuang town, Feicheng city, Shandong province, China. The summer maize cultivar Zhenghuangnuo 2 was used as the experimental material, and a split-plot design was adopted. The main plots consisted of two tillage methods: rotary tillage to 15 cm (RT) and subsoiling to 30 cm combined with rotary tillage to 15 cm (SRT). The subplots consisted of six amendment treatments under equal nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium inputs: compound fertilizer at 750 kg hm-2 (F); compound fertilizer plus water-retaining agent at 60 kg hm-2 (FW); compound fertilizer plus humic acid at 1500 kg hm-2 (FH); compound fertilizer plus humic acid at 1500 kg hm-2 and water-retaining agent at 60 kg hm-2 (FHW); compound fertilizer plus organic fertilizer at 15 t hm-2 (FO); and compound fertilizer plus organic fertilizer at 15 t hm-2 and water-retaining agent at 60 kg hm-2 (FOW). The regulatory effects of these treatments on soil total porosity, three-phase ratio, water potential, organic matter, and nutrient contents, as well as their effects on maize growth, development, and yield formation in low-fertility summer maize fields, were evaluated. Compared with RT, SRT significantly increased soil total porosity, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus contents in the 0-20 cm soil layer by 8.57%, 9.30%, and 14.71%, respectively, and significantly increased soil organic matter content in the 0-20 and 20-40 cm soil layers by 11.27% and 14.55%, respectively. Soil amendments significantly increased total porosity, water potential, and gas- and liquid-phase proportions in the 0-20 cm soil layer, thereby improving soil aeration and water-holding capacity. They also increased soil organic matter content, promoted nutrient supply, and ultimately enhanced maize dry matter accumulation and grain yield. Among the amendment treatments, FHW was the most effective in improving soil physicochemical properties and produced the greatest increase in grain yield. Compared with the control, FHW increased aboveground dry matter accumulation and grain yield by two-year averages of 24.57% and 26.44%, respectively. In conclusion, SRT combined with compound fertilizer, humic acid, and a water-retaining agent (FHW) can serve as an effective measure for improving soil physicochemical properties and increasing summer maize grain yield in low-fertility farmland.

Key words: infertile land, tillage methods, amendments, soil physical and chemical properties, grain yield

图1

试验区2023-2024年降雨量和气温"

表1

各添加物处理具体施肥量"

添加物
Amendment		 腐殖酸
Humic acid
(kg hm-2)		 有机肥
Organic
fertilizer
(kg hm-2)		 保水剂
Water-retaining agent
(kg hm-2)		 复合肥
Compound fertilizer
(kg hm-2)		 尿素
Urea
(kg hm-2)		 过磷酸钙
P2O5
(kg hm-2)		 氯化钾
KCl
(kg hm-2)
复合肥F 0 0 0 750.00 32.61 0 87.50
复合肥+保水剂FW 0 0 60 750.00 32.61 0 87.50
复合肥+腐殖酸FH 1500 0 0 704.25 50.02 0 86.06
复合肥+腐殖酸+保水剂FHW 1500 0 60 704.25 50.02 0 86.06
复合肥+有机肥FO 0 15,000 0 481.25 152.17 0 82.65
复合肥+有机肥+保水剂FOW 0 15,000 60 481.25 152.17 0 82.65

表2

耕作方式及添加物对瘠薄型农田吐丝期的土壤总孔隙度及三相比的影响"

年份
Year		 耕作方式
Tillage method		 添加物
Amendment		 总孔隙度
Total porosity (%)		 气相
Gas phase
(%)		 液相
Solid phase (%)		 固相
Liquid phase (%)		 土壤三相比
R
2023 SRT F 18.48 e 8.97 c 25.93 b 65.10 a 15.69 a
FW 22.99 d 10.10 abc 30.17 a 59.73 bc 14.06 bc
FH 35.44 b 10.50 ab 29.87 a 59.63 bc 13.67 bc
FHW 40.23 a 11.53 a 31.07 a 57.40 c 12.94 c
FO 20.58 de 9.70 bc 29.43 a 60.87 b 14.40 b
FOW 28.59 c 10.93 ab 30.57 a 58.50 bc 13.36 bc
RT F 17.91 c 7.70 b 23.97 c 68.33 a 17.75 a
FW 19.28 c 10.17 a 26.67 ab 63.17 b 14.29 b
FH 31.66 a 10.53 a 27.37 ab 62.10 bc 13.77 b
FHW 32.33 a 10.97 a 28.63 a 60.40 c 13.21 b
FO 19.76 c 10.27 a 26.23 bc 63.50 b 14.31 b
FOW 23.68 b 10.50 a 26.90 ab 62.60 bc 13.90 b
2024 SRT F 36.13 c 10.30 e 22.53 d 67.17 a 15.92 a
FW 40.27 ab 11.61 d 23.35 cd 65.04 b 14.17 b
FH 40.37 ab 13.79 ab 26.44 b 59.77 d 10.75 cd
FHW 40.77 ab 14.67 a 30.40 a 54.93 e 10.14 d
FO 38.40 bc 12.05 cd 24.76 c 63.19 c 13.05 b
FOW 42.10 a 12.91 bc 26.73 b 60.36 d 11.56 c
RT F 34.73 b 9.10 d 21.95 c 68.96 a 17.46 a
FW 39.77 ab 9.97 cd 23.61 c 66.42 ab 15.66 ab
FH 40.33 ab 12.85 ab 27.18 a 59.97 de 11.54 de
FHW 40.50 ab 14.04 a 28.27 a 57.69 e 10.31 e
FO 36.27 ab 11.36 bc 23.32 c 65.32 bc 14.44 bc
FOW 41.47 a 12.21 ab 25.37 b 62.42 cd 12.65 cd
方差分析 年份Year (Y) ** ** ** ** **
ANOVA 耕作方式Tillage method (T) ** ** ** ** **
添加物Amendment (A) ** ** ** ** **
Y×T ** ns ** * ns
Y×A ** ** ** ** **
T×A ns ns ns ns ns
Y×T×A ns ns ns ns ns

图2

耕作方式及添加物对瘠薄型农田吐丝期的土壤水势的影响 T: 耕作方式; A: 添加物。处理同表1和表2。不同小写字母表示同一年份、同一土层、同种耕作方式的不同处理间差异显著(P < 0.05)。**表示在0.01水平差异显著(P < 0.01); ns表示差异不显著。"

图3

耕作方式及添加物对瘠薄型农田吐丝期的土壤有机质含量的影响 T: 耕作方式; A: 添加物。处理同表1和表2。不同小写字母表示同一年份、同一土层、同种耕作方式的不同处理间差异显著(P < 0.05)。**表示在0.01水平差异显著(P < 0.01); ns表示差异不显著。"

图4

耕作方式及添加物对瘠薄型农田吐丝期的土壤养分含量的影响 T: 耕作方式; A: 添加物。处理同表1和表2。不同小写字母表示同一年份、同一土层、同种耕作方式的不同处理间差异显著(P < 0.05)。*表示在0.05水平差异显著(P < 0.05); **表示在0.01水平差异显著(P < 0.01); ns表示差异不显著。"

表3

耕作方式及添加物对瘠薄型农田完熟期夏玉米生物量、产量和产量构成因素的影响"

年份
Year		 耕作方式
Tillage method		 添加物
Amendment		 生物量
Biomass
(t hm-2)		 穗数
Ears number
(×104 hm-2)		 穗粒数
Grains per ear		 千粒重
1000-grain weight (g)		 产量
Yield
(t hm-2)
2023 SRT F 19.72 c 6.24 b 443.27 e 311.57 c 7.33 e
FW 21.39 bc 6.24 b 479.38 d 319.02 bc 8.11 d
FH 24.11 a 6.28 ab 535.60 a 331.94 b 9.49 b
FHW 24.24 a 6.34 a 540.69 a 346.74 a 10.10 a
FO 20.92 bc 6.22 b 494.16 c 314.98 c 8.23 d
FOW 23.06 ab 6.23 b 511.91 b 319.77 bc 8.67 c
RT F 18.04 c 6.22 b 435.24 d 299.46 c 6.89 e
FW 20.04 bc 6.23 b 481.66 c 303.83 c 7.75 d
FH 22.04 ab 6.24 b 504.42 ab 330.10 ab 8.83 ab
FHW 22.54 a 6.32 a 509.91 a 335.25 a 9.18 a
FO 20.12 b 6.22 b 482.56 c 310.02 bc 7.91 cd
FOW 21.36 ab 6.23 b 500.91 b 316.26 abc 8.39 bc
2024 SRT F 18.37 d 6.22 a 505.43 c 300.15 c 8.02 e
FW 20.03 cd 6.23 a 516.33 b 307.29 c 8.40 d
FH 22.56 ab 6.26 a 525.23 ab 329.36 a 9.20 ab
FHW 23.68 a 6.27 a 528.59 a 334.21 a 9.42 a
FO 21.51 bc 6.24 a 518.02 b 316.95 b 8.71 cd
FOW 21.96 b 6.23 a 523.55 ab 321.57 b 8.92 bc
RT F 17.98 c 6.20 b 508.54 b 286.09 d 7.67 d
FW 19.53 bc 6.20 ab 514.43 ab 291.72 c 7.91 c
FH 21.40 ab 6.23 ab 520.87 a 323.14 a 8.91 a
FHW 21.87 a 6.25 a 523.70 a 326.42 a 9.08 a
FO 20.37 ab 6.22 ab 517.41 ab 312.24 b 8.54 b
FOW 20.82 ab 6.24 ab 518.48 a 314.96 b 8.66 b
方差分析
ANOVA		 年份Year (Y) ** ** ** ** **
耕作方式Tillage method (T) ** * ** ** **
添加物Amendment (A) ** ** ** ** **
Y×T ns ns ** ns ns
Y×A ns ** ** ** **
T×A ns ns ** ns ns
Y×T×A ns ns ** ns ns

表4

耕作方式及添加物对玉米各项投入与产出情况的影响"

年份
Year		 耕作方式
Tillage method		 添加物
Amendment		 生产成本Production cost (yuan hm-2)
种子Seed 农药Pesticide 肥料Fertilizer 机械Machine 合计Summation
2023 SRT F 180 270 2250 2100 4800
FW 180 270 2970 2100 5520
FH 180 270 3000 2100 5550
FHW 180 270 3720 2100 6270
FO 180 270 6750 2100 9300
FOW 180 270 7470 2100 10,020
RT F 180 270 2250 1400 4100
FW 180 270 2970 1400 4820
FH 180 270 3000 1400 4850
FHW 180 270 3720 1400 5570
FO 180 270 6750 1400 8600
FOW 180 270 7470 1400 9320
2024 SRT F 180 300 2250 2100 4830
FW 180 300 2970 2100 5550
FH 180 300 3000 2100 5580
FHW 180 300 3720 2100 6300
FO 180 300 6750 2100 9330
FOW 180 300 7470 2100 10,050
RT F 180 300 2250 1400 4130
FW 180 300 2970 1400 4850
FH 180 300 3000 1400 4880
FHW 180 300 3720 1400 5600
FO 180 300 6750 1400 8630
FOW 180 300 7470 1400 9350
年份
Year		 耕作方式
Tillage method		 添加物
Amendment		 产值
Output value
(yuan hm-2)		 纯收益
Net income
(yuan hm-2)		 较F增加纯收益
Increase in net income compared to F
(yuan hm-2)
2023 SRT F 19,204.6 14,404.6 —
FW 21,248.2 15,728.2 1323.6
FH 24,863.8 19,313.8 4909.2
FHW 26,462.0 20,192.0 5787.4
FO 21,562.6 12,262.6 -2142.0
FOW 22,715.4 12,695.4 -1709.2
RT F 18,051.8 13,951.8 —
FW 20,305.0 15,485.0 1533.2
FH 23,134.6 18,284.6 4332.8
FHW 24,051.6 18,481.6 4529.8
FO 20,724.2 12,124.2 -1827.6
FOW 21,981.8 12,661.8 -1290.0
2024 SRT F 16,521.2 11,691.2 —
FW 17,304.0 11,754.0 62.8
FH 18,952.0 13,372.0 1680.8
FHW 19,405.2 13,105.2 1414.0
FO 17,942.6 8612.6 -3078.6
FOW 18,375.2 8325.2 -3366.0
RT F 15,800.2 11,670.2 —
FW 16,294.6 11,444.6 -225.6
FH 18,354.6 13,474.6 1804.4
FHW 18,704.8 13,104.8 1434.6
FO 17,592.4 8962.4 -2707.8
FOW 17,839.6 8489.6 -3180.6
[1] 朱君玉. 全国耕地资源变化及耕地保护对策研究: 基于“三调”与“二调”成果对比分析. 中国农业综合开发, 2022(12): 10-14.
Zhu J Y. Study on the changes of cultivated land resources in China and countermeasures for cultivated land protection: based on the comparative analysis of the achievements of “three tunes” and “two tunes”. Agric Compr Dev China, 2022(12): 10-14 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[2] 石全红, 王宏, 陈阜, 等. 中国中低产田时空分布特征及增产潜力分析. 中国农学通报, 2010, 26(19): 369-373.
Shi Q H, Wang H, Chen F, et al. The spatial-temporal distribution characteristics and yield potential of medium-low yielded farmland in China. Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2010, 26(19): 369-373 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.2010-1435
[3] Li Y, Guo X B, Xian Y N, et al. Granulated organic amendment enhances recalcitrant carbon accumulation through soil aggregation in a barren paddy field. J Integr Agric, 2026, 25: 1194-1208.
doi: 10.1016/j.jia.2025.05.004
[4] 王碧胜, 于维水, 武雪萍, 等. 不同耕作措施下添加秸秆对土壤有机碳及其相关因素的影响. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54: 1176-1187.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.06.009
Wang B S, Yu W S, Wu X P, et al. Effects of straw addition on soil organic carbon and related factors under different tillage practices. Sci Agric Sin, 2021, 54: 1176-1187 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.06.009
[5] 邓永晟, 张敏, 李伟, 等. 垂直深旋耕对植烟土壤理化性状和烤烟生长的影响. 中国烟草科学, 2020, 41(6): 30-36.
Deng Y S, Zhang M, Li W, et al. Effects of deep vertical rotary tillage on physicochemical properties of tobacco-planting soil and growth of flue-cured tobacco. Chin Tob Sci, 2020, 41(6): 30-36 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[6] 李富程, 花小叶, 黄强. 耕作深度对紫色土坡地旋耕机耕作侵蚀的影响. 水土保持研究, 2016, 23(4): 1-5.
Li F C, Hua X Y, Huang Q. Effects of tillage depth on tillage erosion by rotary cultivator plough on the steep land in purple soil. Res Soil Water Conserv, 2016, 23(4): 1-5 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[7] 王俊, 李强, 任禾, 等. 吉林省西部不同耕作模式下秸秆还田土壤团聚体特征. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26: 603-612.
Wang J, Li Q, Ren H, et al. Soil aggregate characteristics under different tillage and in-situ straw returning methods in western Jilin, China. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2020, 26: 603-612 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[8] 徐莹莹, 孙士明, 靳晓燕, 等. 不同耕作措施对土壤质构和玉米产量的影响. 玉米科学, 2022, 30(4): 97-106.
Xu Y Y, Sun S M, Jin X Y, et al. Effects of different tillage measures on soil texture and maize yield. J Maize Sci, 2022, 30(4): 97-106 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[9] 赵黎明, 黄安琪, 王亚新, 等. 连续旋耕下深耕对寒地优质粳稻产量形成的影响. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55: 4550-4566.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.22.018
Zhao L M, Huang A Q, Wang Y X, et al. Effect of deep tillage under continuous rotary tillage on yield formation of high-quality japonica rice in cold regions. Sci Agric Sin, 2022, 55: 4550-4566 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[10] 赵亚丽, 刘卫玲, 程思贤, 等. 深松(耕)方式对砂姜黑土耕层特性、作物产量和水分利用效率的影响. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51: 2489-2503.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.13.005
Zhao Y L, Liu W L, Cheng S X, et al. Effects of pattern of deep tillage on topsoil features, yield and water use efficiency in lime concretion black soil. Sci Agric Sin, 2018, 51: 2489-2503 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.13.005
[11] 王永华, 刘焕, 辛明华, 等. 耕作方式与灌水次数对砂姜黑土冬小麦水分利用及籽粒产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52: 801-812.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.05.003
Wang Y H, Liu H, Xin M H, et al. Effects of tillage practices and irrigation times on water use efficiency and grain yield of winter wheat in lime concretion black soil. Sci Agric Sin, 2019, 52: 801-812 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.05.003
[12] Lyu Y, Wang S B, Xu X W, et al. Optimizing subsoiling depth to enhance soil water storage and annual crop water productivity in wheat-maize cropping system. Agric Water Manag, 2026, 325: 110199.
doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2026.110199
[13] Zhao X, Liu S L, Pu C, et al. Crop yields under no-till farming in China: a meta-analysis. Eur J Agron, 2017, 84: 67-75.
doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2016.11.009
[14] Zhang Y C, Bizimana F, Han K, et al. Long-term subsoiling enhanced soil organic carbon sequestration via macropore optimization and iron-aluminum oxides enrichment. Soil Tillage Res, 2026, 260: 107132.
doi: 10.1016/j.still.2026.107132
[15] 邓远远, 朱俊峰. 粮食种植户保护性耕作技术采纳决策: 影响因素及其异质性特征. 中国农业大学学报, 2023, 28(12): 248-261.
Deng Y Y, Zhu J F. Grain farmers’ conservation tillage technology adoption behavior: Influencing factors and its heterogeneity characteristics. J China Agric Univ, 2023, 28(12): 248-261 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[16] 裴瑞杰, 袁天佑, 王俊忠, 等. 施用腐殖酸对夏玉米产量和氮效率的影响. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50: 2189-2198.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.023
Pei R J, Yuan T Y, Wang J Z, et al. Effects of application of humic acid on yield, nitrogen use efficiency of summer maize. Sci Agric Sin, 2017, 50: 2189-2198 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.023
[17] 栗海鹏, 杜武焰, 吴涵茜, 等. 不同有机肥对煤矿复垦区土壤养分及细菌群落结构的影响. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57: 3207-3219.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.16.009
Li H P, Du W Y, Wu H Q, et al. Different manures affect soil nutrients and bacterial community structure in mining reclamation area. Sci Agric Sin, 2024, 57: 3207-3219 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2024.16.009
[18] Ding T Y, Guo Z C, Yu Z Z, et al. Soil macropore structure plays divergent roles in fresh and decomposed particulate organic matter. Commun Earth Environ, 2025, 6: 648.
doi: 10.1038/s43247-025-02648-9
[19] 卢合全, 唐薇, 罗振, 等. 商品有机肥替代部分化肥对连作棉田土壤养分、棉花生长发育及产量的影响. 作物学报, 2021, 47: 2511-2521.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04279
Lu H Q, Tang W, Luo Z, et al. Effects of commercial organic fertilizer substituting chemical fertilizer partially on soil nutrients, plant development, and yield in cotton. Acta Agron Sin, 2021, 47: 2511-2521 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04279
[20] 雷菲, 王莉, 刘海林, 等. 腐殖酸缓释氮肥对糯玉米产量、氮肥利用率及土壤细菌多样性的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(17): 271-275.
Lei F, Wang L, Liu H L, et al. Impacts of humic acid slow-release nitrogen fertilizer on yield, nitrogen utilization efficiency and soil bacterial diversity of waxy corn. Jiangsu Agric Sci, 2022, 50(17): 271-275 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[21] 张鹏, 俄胜哲, 袁金华, 等. 腐殖酸肥料研究进展. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(25): 102-108.
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0758
Zhang P, E S Z, Yuan J H, et al. Research progress of humic acid fertilizer. Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2023, 39(25): 102-108 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0758
[22] 李华, 闫沛玉, 刘斌, 等. 保水剂对土壤性质及含水量的影响研究. 农业与技术, 2023, 43(18): 19-21.
Li H, Yan P Y, Liu B, et al. Study on the effect of water-retaining agent on soil properties and water content. Agric Technol, 2023, 43(18): 19-21 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[23] 蒋美佳, 刘晓林, 冯钰梅, 等. 有机肥配施保水剂对紫色土水分入渗及氮素淋溶的影响. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(5): 99-104.
Jiang M J, Liu X L, Feng Y M, et al. Effect of organic fertilizer combined with water-retaining agent on water infiltration and nitrogen leaching of purple soil. J Soil Water Conserv, 2019, 33(5): 99-104 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[24] 于淑婷, 赵亚丽, 王育红, 等. 轮耕模式对黄淮海冬小麦-夏玉米两熟区农田土壤改良效应. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50: 2150-2165.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.020
Yu S T, Zhao Y L, Wang Y H, et al. Improvement effects of rotational tillage patterns on soil in the winter wheat-summer maize double cropping area of Huang-Huai-Hai Region. Sci Agric Sin, 2017, 50: 2150-2165 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.020
[25] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(第3版). 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
Bao S D. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis, 3rd edn. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000 (in Chinese).
[26] Qian Y Q, Zhang Z B, Jiang F H, et al. Impacts of tillage treatments on soil physical properties and maize growth at two sites under different climatic conditions in black soil region of Northeast China. Soil Tillage Res, 2025, 248: 106471.
doi: 10.1016/j.still.2025.106471
[27] 李荣, 鄢慧芳, 张龙, 等. 不同耕作措施对宁南地区土壤物理性质及作物产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56: 3543-3555.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.18.005
Li R, Yan H F, Zhang L, et al. Effects of different tillage practices on soil physical properties and crop yield in the region of southern Ningxia. Sci Agric Sin, 2023, 56: 3543-3555 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.18.005
[28] 吴军虎, 朱端端, 王海洋, 等. 不同腐殖酸类对黄土坡面侵蚀和养分流失的影响. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(1): 24-29.
Wu J H, Zhu D D, Wang H Y, et al. Effect of different types humic acid class on erosion and nutrient loss on loess slope. J Soil Water Conserv, 2017, 31(1): 24-29 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[29] 邱吟霜, 王西娜, 李培富, 等. 不同种类有机肥及用量对当季旱地土壤肥力和玉米产量的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019(6): 182-189.
Qiu Y S, Wang X N, Li P F, et al. Different kinds of organic fertilizers and amounts on dryland soil fertility and corn yield in the current season. Soil Fert Sci China, 2019(6): 182-189 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[30] 方彦杰, 张绪成, 于显枫, 等. 旱地立式深旋耕方式下有机肥替代对饲用玉米耗水特性和产量的影响. 作物学报, 2020, 46: 1958-1969.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.03026
Fang Y J, Zhang X C, Yu X F, et al. Effects of substitution of organic fertilizer on water consumption and yields under vertical rotary subsoiling on arid area in forage maize. Acta Agron Sin, 2020, 46: 1958-1969 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.03026
[31] 窦春宇, 郭赛楠, 高玉婷, 等. 秸秆还田及有机肥替代化肥对塿土物理肥力及作物产量的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2025, 31: 1056-1072.
Dou C Y, Guo S N, Gao Y T, et al. Effects of straw return and organic fertilizer substitution for chemical fertilizers on physical fertility and crop yield of loess soil. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2025, 31: 1056-1072 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[32] Jakab G, Madarász B, Masoudi M, et al. Soil organic matter gain by reduced tillage intensity: storage, pools, and chemical composition. Soil Tillage Res, 2023, 226: 105584.
doi: 10.1016/j.still.2022.105584
[33] 吕凯飞, 周锋, 安曈昕, 等. 耕作深度及秸秆还田对耕层土壤理化性状的影响. 西南农业学报, 2021, 34: 1503-1509.
Lyu K F, Zhou F, An T X, et al. Effects of deep ploughing and straw returning on physical and chemical properties of cultivated soil. Southwest China J Agric Sci, 2021, 34: 1503-1509 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[34] 梁海, 陈宝成, 韩惠芳, 等. 深松35 cm可改善潮棕壤理化性质并提高小麦和玉米产量. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2019, 25: 1879-1886.
Liang H, Chen B C, Han H F, et al. Subsoiling 35 cm in depth improve soil physicochemical properties and increase grain yields of wheat and maize in aquic brown soil. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2019, 25: 1879-1886 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[35] 万连杰, 何满, 李俊杰, 等. 有机肥替代部分化肥对椪柑生长、品质及土壤特性的影响. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55: 2988-3001.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.15.010
Wan L J, He M, Li J J, et al. Effects of partial substitution of chemical fertilizer by organic fertilizer on ponkan growth and quality as well as soil properties. Sci Agric Sin, 2022, 55: 2988-3001 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.15.010
[36] Dong M H, Zhou H J, Wang J, et al. Responses of soil microbial metabolism, function and soil quality to long-term addition of organic materials with different carbon sources. Biochar, 2024, 6: 80.
doi: 10.1007/s42773-024-00367-6
[37] Sheoran P, Basak N, Kumar A, et al. Ameliorants and salt tolerant varieties improve rice-wheat production in soils undergoing sodification with alkali water irrigation in Indo-Gangetic Plains of India. Agric Water Manag, 2021, 243: 106492.
doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106492
[38] Ashraf M N, Hu C, Xu X R, et al. Long-term manure application increased soil organic carbon and nitrogen mineralization through accumulation of unprotected and physically protected carbon fractions. Pedosphere, 2023, 33: 343-354.
doi: 10.1016/j.pedsph.2022.06.047
[39] 陈均权, 马驰远, 胡鑫, 等. 有机无机肥配施调控红壤稻田土壤肥力、生态化学计量特征及产量. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58: 4952-4965.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.23.011
Chen J Q, Ma C Y, Hu X, et al. Effects of incorporation of inorganic-organic fertilizers on soil fertility, ecological stoichiometric characteristics, and yields of rice cropping system in the red soil region of China. Sci Agric Sin, 2025, 58: 4952-4965 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.23.011
[40] 李其胜, 赵贺, 汪志鹏, 等. 有机肥替代部分化肥对稻麦轮作土壤养分利用和酶活性的影响. 土壤通报, 2020, 51: 912-919.
Li Q S, Zhao H, Wang Z P, et al. Effect of partial substitution of organic fertilizer for chemical fertilizer on soil nutrient utilization and enzyme activities in rice-wheat rotation system. Chin J Soil Sci, 2020, 51: 912-919 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[41] 任科宇, 陆东明, 邹洪琴, 等. 有机替代对长江流域水稻产量和籽粒含氮量的影响. 农业资源与环境学报, 2022, 39: 716-725.
Ren K Y, Lu D M, Zou H Q, et al. Effects of substituting manure for fertilizer on yield and nitrogen content of rice grain in the Yangtze River basin. J Agric Resour Environ, 2022, 39: 716-725 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[42] 聂朝阳, 杨帆, 王志春, 等. 耕作协同物料添加对苏打盐碱化耕地土壤理化性质的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41(1): 235-243.
Nie Z Y, Yang F, Wang Z C, et al. Effects of tillage synergistic material addition on physical and chemical properties of cultivated sodic-saline soil. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2023, 41(1): 235-243 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[43] 张斯梅, 段增强, 顾克军, 等. 稻秸还田下减量化施氮对小麦产量、养分吸收及土壤理化性质的影响. 土壤, 2023, 55: 537-543.
Zhang S M, Duan Z Q, Gu K J, et al. Effects of reduced nitrogen fertilization on wheat yield, nutrient uptake and soil physicochemical properties under rice straw returning. Soils, 2023, 55: 537-543 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[44] Bogunovic I, Pereira P, Kisic I, et al. Tillage management impacts on soil compaction, erosion and crop yield in Stagnosols (Croatia). Catena, 2018, 160: 376-384.
doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2017.10.009
[45] Kuang N K, Tan D C, Li H J, et al. Effects of subsoiling before winter wheat on water consumption characteristics and yield of summer maize on the North China Plain. Agric Water Manag, 2020, 227: 105786.
doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105786
[46] Zhai L C, Wang Z B, Song S J, et al. Tillage practices affects the grain filling of inferior kernel of summer maize by regulating soil water content and photosynthetic capacity. Agric Water Manag, 2021, 245: 106600.
doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106600
[47] Sun J Y, Gao J L, Wang Z G, et al. Maize canopy photosynthetic efficiency, plant growth, and yield responses to tillage depth. Agronomy, 2019, 9: 3.
doi: 10.3390/agronomy9010003
[48] 刘战东, 张凯, 黄超, 等. 不同耕作和灌溉方式对玉米光合特性的影响. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(4): 213-220.
Liu Z D, Zhang K, Huang C, et al. Effects of different tillage and irrigation methods on photosynthetic characteristics of maize. J Soil Water Conserv, 2019, 33(4): 213-220 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[49] 朴琳, 李波, 陈喜昌, 等. 优化栽培措施对春玉米密植群体冠层结构及产量形成的调控效应. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53: 3048-3058.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.15.006
Piao L, Li B, Chen X C, et al. Regulation effects of improved cultivation measures on canopy structure and yield formation of dense spring maize population. Sci Agric Sin, 2020, 53: 3048-3058 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.15.006
[50] Xu J C, Mohamed E, Li Q, et al. Effect of humic acid addition on buffering capacity and nutrient storage capacity of soilless substrates. Front Plant Sci, 2021, 12: 644229.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.644229
[51] 蒋雨洲, 王甲, 张宏媛, 等. 化肥配施有机物料对玉米田土壤细菌和真菌群落结构的影响. 作物学报, 2025, 51: 1378-1388.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.43036
Jiang Y Z, Wang J, Zhang H Y, et al. Effects of combined application of chemical fertilizer and organic materials on the soil bacterial and fungal community structure in maize fields. Acta Agron Sin, 2025, 51: 1378-1388 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.43036
[52] Zafar M, Rizwan M S, Shahid M. Introduction of composted rock phosphate and poultry manure enhances winter wheat phosphorus use efficiency, grain yield and soil quality. J Plant Nutr, 2017, 40: 1887-1899.
doi: 10.1080/01904167.2016.1270316
[53] 杜为研, 唐杉, 汪洪. 我国有机肥资源及产业发展现状. 中国土壤与肥料, 2020(3): 210-219.
Du W Y, Tang S, Wang H. The status of organic fertilizer industry and organic fertilizer resources in China. Soil Fert Sci China, 2020(3): 210-219 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[54] Cheng W L, Bu R Y, Han S, et al. Effects of deep tillage combined with organic amendments application on carbon and nitrogen storage within aggregates and wheat yield. Front Plant Sci, 2025, 16: 1669580.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2025.1669580
[1] 李宗, 叶荣柒, 孙会军, 郭威宏, 罗子恒, 刘硕, 任永峰, 张雯, 宫香伟, 姜英. 间作绿肥对东北春玉米产量及农田土壤质量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(9): 2775-2791.
[2] 张振, 冯连杰, 石玉, 于振文, 张永丽. 节水补灌下不同穗型小麦产量形成差异研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1522-1535.
[3] 杨婷婷, 陈娟, ABDUL Rehman, 李婧, 闫素辉, 汪建来, 李文阳. 花后弱光对软质小麦干物质积累转运、籽粒产量和淀粉品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(8): 2204-2219.
[4] 闫尚龙, 王琦明, 柴强, 殷文, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 刘志鹏, 韦金贵. 绿洲灌区玉米籽粒产量及品质对密植及间作豌豆的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(6): 1665-1675.
[5] 张世博, 李宏岩, 李培富, 任瑞华, 路海东. 自然条件下气温升高3℃至4℃对地膜玉米根-冠衰老和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(6): 1599-1617.
[6] 王东, 王森, 尚丽, 冯浩伟, 张永巧, 崔佳鸣, 李爽, 章佳聪, 车欢. 补灌对黄土高原半湿润区冬小麦产量和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(5): 1312-1325.
[7] 丁潮, 杜常亮, 谢军红, 孟浩峰, 王林林, 周永杰, 李泽坤, 李玲玲. 氮肥运筹提高旱作玉米籽粒产量和品质的光合生理机制[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(11): 3080-3095.
[8] 王丽萍, 李盼, 赵连豪, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 范虹, 何蔚, 柴强, 殷文. 西北绿洲灌区玉米叶片衰老特征对不同地膜覆盖利用方式的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(1): 233-246.
[9] 张贵芹, 王洪章, 郭新送, 朱福军, 高涵, 张吉旺, 赵斌, 任佰朝, 刘鹏, 任昊. 有机物料投入对滨海盐碱地土壤理化性状和夏玉米产量形成的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(9): 2323-2334.
[10] 张振, 何建宁, 石玉, 于振文, 张永丽. 行距和种植方式对小麦光合特性和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(9): 2396-2407.
[11] 韩笑晨, 张贵芹, 王亚辉, 任昊, 王洪章, 刘国利, 林佃旭, 王子强, 张吉旺, 赵斌, 任佰朝, 刘鹏. 土壤调理剂对滨海盐碱地土壤盐分含量及夏玉米产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(7): 1776-1786.
[12] 张振, 赵俊晔, 石玉, 张永丽, 于振文. 不同播幅对小麦花后叶片光合特性和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(4): 981-990.
[13] 邹佳琪, 王仲林, 谭先明, 陈燎原, 杨文钰, 杨峰. 基于连续小波变换估测干旱胁迫下玉米籽粒产量[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(4): 1030-1042.
[14] 吴霞玉, 李盼, 韦金贵, 范虹, 何蔚, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 柴强, 殷文. 减量灌水及有机无机肥配施对西北灌区玉米光合生理、籽粒产量及品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(4): 1065-1079.
[15] 谢炜, 贺鹏, 马宏亮, 雷芳, 黄秀兰, 樊高琼, 杨洪坤. 秋闲期秸秆覆盖与施磷对冬小麦氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(2): 440-450.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
京ICP备15008789号-2