南疆盐碱地种植饲用甜高粱对土壤改良效果和生产性能的影响

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20194819

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究饲用甜高粱在盐碱地的生产性能以及土壤改良效果,在南疆种植中科甜438号饲用甜高粱,测定其产量,并且饲用甜高粱种植前和收割后在盐碱地上选取0~10 cm,10~20 cm,20~30 cm土层,测定比较分析土壤理化性质、土壤离子和土壤酶活性的影响。结果表明:饲用甜高粱种植后土壤总盐度、pH值、电导率呈下降趋势,与种植前相比,Na⁺、K⁺、HCO₃^-、Cl^-、SO₄^2-含量及全钾、全磷、有效磷和碱解氮含量下降,而Ca²⁺、Mg²⁺含量及土壤总孔隙度、有机质、全氮、速效钾含量均呈上升趋势。土壤阳离子中Mg²⁺含量最高,阴离子中SO₄^2-含量高于Cl^-。土壤酶活性中,过氧化氢酶、蔗糖酶和碱性磷酸酶活性之间无显著差异,而脲酶活性差异显著。与种植前相比,不同土层中10~20 cm土层的变化较明显。相关性分析结果可知,pH值和总盐度之间呈极显著正相关关系;容重和pH值、总盐度之间呈显著正相关关系;蔗糖酶和碱性磷酸酶之间呈显著正相关关系。上述结果表明,该地区的盐碱土壤是Na₂SO₄为主的土壤类型,并且该地区盐碱地种植饲用甜高粱不仅可以收获高产的饲草,还能降低土壤中的部分离子改善土壤理化性质。

关键词: 饲用甜高粱, 盐碱地, 土壤理化性质, 土壤离子, 土壤酶活性

Abstract:

In order to explore the production performance and soil improvement effect of sweet sorghum in saline-alkali land,Zhongketian 438 sweet sorghum was planted in Southern Xinjiang,and its yield was measured,in addition,0-10 cm,10-20 cm,20-30 cm soil layers were selected on saline-alkali land before planting and after harvesting of feed sweet sorghum varieties,and the effects of soil physical and chemical properties,soil ions and soil enzyme activities were measured and compared.The results showed that the total salinity,pH value and electrical conductivity of the soil decreased after the planting of sweet sorghum.Compared with before planting,the contents of Na⁺,K⁺,HCO₃^-,Cl^-and SO₄^2- and total potassium,total phosphorus,available phosphorus and available nitrogen decreased significantly,while the contents of Ca²⁺,Mg²⁺,total porosity,organic matter,total nitrogen and available potassium increased.The content of Mg²⁺ in soil cation was highest,and the content of SO₄^2- in anion was the higher than that of Cl^-.In soil enzyme activity,the activities of catalase,sucrase and alkaline phosphatase were not significantly different,but the urease activity was significantly different.Compared with before planting,the change of 10-20 cm soil layer in different soil layers was more obvious.The results of correlation analysis showed that there was a significant positive correlation between pH value and total salinity;there was a significant negative correlation between bulk density and pH,total salinity;and a significant positive correlation between sucrase and alkaline phosphatase.The above results showed that the saline-alkali soil in this area is a soil type dominated by Na₂SO₄,and the cultivation of feed sweet sorghum in the saline-alkali soil in this area could not only harvest high-yield forage grass,but also reduce some ions in the soil to improve soil physical and chemical properties.

Key words: Sweet sorghum, Saline-alkali land, Soil physical and chemical properties, Soil ion, Soil enzyme activity

阿曼姑·艾麦尔艾力, 乃比·阿不来提, 艾比布拉·伊马木, 阿扎提古丽·奥布力卡斯木. 南疆盐碱地种植饲用甜高粱对土壤改良效果和生产性能的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2024, 39(S1): 159-166. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20194819.

Amangu·Aimaieraili, Naibi·Abulaiti, Aibibula·Yimamu, Azhatiguli·Aobulikasimu. Effects of Planting Sweet Sorghum on Soil Improvement and Production Performance in Saline-alkali Land of Southern Xinjiang[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2024, 39(S1): 159-166. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20194819.

http://www.hbnxb.net/CN/Y2024/V39/IS1/159

图/表 5

参考文献 31

[24]	张玉林, 陆永兴, 尹本丰, 李永刚, 周晓兵, 张元明. 模拟降雨变化对古尔班通古特沙漠土壤养分及酶活性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(5):1739-1749.doi:10.5846/stxb202102170450.
	Zhang Y L, Lu Y X, Yin B F, Li Y G, Zhou X B, Zhang Y M. Effects of simulated rainfall on soil nutrient contents and enzyme activities in the Gurbantunggut Desert,China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2022, 42(5):1739-1749.
[25]	杜艺, 邢鹏飞, 贾镇宁, 王子量, 赵祥, 董宽虎. 北方农牧交错带赖草草地斑块的土壤化学计量特征对植物多样性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(3):808-814.doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.03.027.
	Du Y, Xing P F, Jia Z N, Wang Z L, Zhao X, Dong K H. Effects of soil stoichiometry on vegetation diversity characteristics in the Leymus secalinus Patch in the northern agro-pastoral ecotone[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2020, 28(3):808-814.
[26]	Zahran H H. Diversity,adaptation and activity of the bacterial flora in saline environments[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 1997, 25(3):211-223.doi:10.1007/s003740050306.
[27]	陈心想, 耿增超, 王森, 赵宏飞. 施用生物炭后塿土土壤微生物及酶活性变化特征[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2014, 33(4):751-758.doi:10.11654/jaes.2014.04.019.
	Chen X X, Geng Z C, Wang L, Zhao H F. Effects of biochar amendment on microbial biomass and enzyme activities in loess soil[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2014, 33(4):751-758.
[28]	王爱萍, 姜彧宸, 冯月, 池田, 温强, 董琦. 施氮与种植方式对北方旱作农田土壤酶活力及养分含量的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(3): 130-138. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193655.
[1]	Ayarpadikannan S, Chung E S, So H A, Kim K M, Schraufnagle K R, Lee J H. Overexpression of SaRBP1 enhances tolerance of Arabidopsis to salt stress[J]. Plant Cell,Tissue and Organ Culture, 2014, 118(2):327-338.doi:10.1007/s11240-014-0485-5.
[2]	刘强, 袁延飞, 刘一帆, 石美, 王潇, 罗先香, 李霄云, 郑浩, 李锋民. 生物炭对盐渍化土壤改良的研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 2022, 37(10):1005-1024.doi:10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2022.050.
	Liu Q, Yuan Y F, Liu Y F, Shi M, Wang X, Luo X X, Li X Y, Zheng H, Li F M. Research progress:the application of biochar in the remediation of salt-affected soils[J]. Advances in Earth Science, 2022, 37(10):1005-1024.
[3]	王小军, 曹文侠, 王世林, 李小龙, 李文, 刘玉祯, 王辛有. 河西走廊多年生豆禾混播对牧草产量和品质的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2021, 38(7):1339-1350.doi:10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2020-0098.
	Wang X J, Cao W X, Wang S L, Li X L, Li W, Liu Y Z, Wang X Y. Effects of perennial Legume-Gramineae mixtures on forage yield and quality in the Hexi Corridor Region[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2021, 38(7):1339-1350.
[4]	张芸芸, 张利, 董高权, 韩忠玲, 程勇翔, 马淼. 玛纳斯河流域绿洲内部盐渍化土壤年际动态变化[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(19):93-103. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb19040015
[28]	Wang A P, Jiang Y C, Feng Y, Chi T, Wen Q, Dong Q. Effects of nitrogen application and planting patterns on soil enzyme activity and nutrient content of dryland in Northern China[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2023, 38(3): 130-138. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193655
[29]	黄哲, 曲世华, 白岚, 尚少鹏, 李玉梅, 张连科. 不同秸秆混合生物炭对盐碱土壤养分及酶活性的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2017, 24(4):290-295.doi:10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2017.04.046.
	Huang Z, Qu S H, Bai L, Shang S P, Li Y M, Zhang L K. Effects of different straw mixing biochar on nutrient and enzyme activity of saline soil[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2017, 24(4):290-295.
[30]	李凤霞, 王学琴, 郭永忠, 许兴, 杨建国, 柯英, 肖红艳. 不同改良措施对银川平原盐碱地土壤性质及酶活性的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2012, 19(6):13-18.
	Li F X, Wang X Q, Guo Y Z, Xu X, Yang J G, Ke Y, Xiao H Y. Effect of soil properties and soil enzyme activity in different improvement measures of saline-alkali soil in Yinchuan Plain[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2012, 19(6):13-18.
[31]	陈慧, 郝慧荣, 熊君, 齐晓辉, 张重义, 林文雄. 地黄连作对根际微生物区系及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2007, 18(12):2755-2759. pmid: 18333450
	Chen H, Hao H R, Xiong J, Qi X H, Zhang C Y, Lin W X. Effects of successive cropping Rehmannia glutinosa on rhizosphere soil microbial flora and enzyme activities[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2007, 18(12):2755-2759. pmid: 18333450
[4]	Zhang Y Y, Zhang L, Dong G Q, Han Z L, Cheng Y X, Ma M. Salinized soil in oasis of manas river basin:interannual dynamic change[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(19):93-103.
[5]	Li N, Kang Y H, Li X B, Wan S Q, Xu J C. Effect of the micro-sprinkler irrigation method with treated effluent on soil physical and chemical properties in sea reclamation land[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2019, 213:222-230.doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2018.10.023.
[6]	罗巍. 甜高粱种质资源耐苏打盐碱性鉴定及机制分析[D]. 通辽: 内蒙古民族大学, 2023.doi:10.27228/d.cnki.gnmmu.2023.000432.
	Luo W. Identification and mechanism analysis of soda tolerance of sweet sorghum germplasm resources[D]. Tongliao: Inner Mongolia University for the Nationalities, 2023.
[7]	Abro S A, Ali Otho A, Bughio F A, Sahito O M, Jamali A R, Mahar A. Desodification from calcareous saline sodic soil through phytoremediation with Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin.ex Steud.and Gypsum[J]. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 2017, 19(12):1142-1149.doi:10.1080/15226514.2017.1328395.
[8]	Rabhi M, Ferchichi S, Jouini J, Hamrouni M H, Koyro H W, Ranieri A, Abdelly C, Smaoui A. Phytodesalination of a salt-affected soil with the halophyte Sesuvium portulacastrum L.to arrange in advance the requirements for the successful growth of a glycophytic crop[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2010, 101(17):6822-6828.doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2010.03.097.
[9]	王巍巍. 不同种稻年限苏打盐碱地水田土壤酶活性变化及其与养分含量关系[D]. 长春: 吉林农业大学, 2016.
	Wang W W. Study of soil enzyme changes of saline-alkali paddy field and relationships between soil enzyme changes and soil nutrients in different planting years[D]. Changchun: Jilin Agricultural University, 2016.
[10]	孙志强, 罗撄宁, 熊乙, 高润, 吴哲, 玉柱. 甜高粱作为优质饲草在我国草牧业发展中的潜力分析[J]. 中国草地学报, 2021, 43(3):104-112.doi:10.16742/j.zgcdxb.20200278.
	Sun Z Q, Luo Y N, Xiong Y, Gao R, Wu Z, Yu Z. Evaluation of sweet sorghum as a high-quality forage in pasture-livestock industry development[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2021, 43(3):104-112.
[11]	张亚萍, 唐桃霞, 王致和, 张肖凌, 张秀华. 河西地区盐碱地甜高粱农艺性状灰色关联度评价[J]. 中国糖料, 2018, 40(6):41-43,46.doi:10.13570/j.cnki.scc.2018.06.012.
	Zhang Y P, Tang T X, Wang Z H, Zhang X L, Zhang X H. Evaluation of agronomic characteristics of sweet sorghum by gray relational analysis in saline-alkali soil in Hexi Area[J]. Sugar Crops of China, 2018, 40(6):41-43,46.
[12]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M].3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
	Bao S D. Soil agrochemical analysis[M]. 3rd edition. Beijing: China Agricultural Publishing House, 2000.
[13]	国艳春, 王思霁, 曾路生, 初庆刚, 王胜. 翅碱蓬施用不同肥料对滨海盐碱地土壤理化性质、酶活性及团聚性的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2020, 52(1):76-81.doi:10.14083/j.issn.1001-4942.2020.01.014.
	Guo Y C, Wang S J, Zeng L S, Chu Q G, Wang S. Effects of different fertilizers for Suaeda salsa on soil physical and chemical properties,enzyme activities and aggregation in coastal saline-alkali lands[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 52(1):76-81.
[14]	李贵玲. 盐生植物耐盐机制概要及其在改良土壤中的作用[J]. 生物学通报, 2020, 55(9):7-10.doi:10.3969/j.issn.0006-3193.2020.09.003.
	Li G L. Research on the anti-salt mechanism and the application of the halophytes[J]. Bulletin of Biology, 2020, 55(9):7-10.
[15]	王旺年, 葛均筑, 杨海昌, 阴法庭, 黄太利, 蒯婕, 王晶, 汪波, 周广生, 傅廷栋. 大田作物在不同盐碱地的饲料价值评价[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6):1451-1462.doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.14051.
	Wang W N, Ge J Z, Yang H C, Yin F T, Huang T L, Kuai J, Wang J, Wang B, Zhou G S, Fu T D. Adaptation of feed crops to saline-alkali soil stress and effect of improving saline-alkali soil[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(6):1451-1462. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.14051
[16]	班乃荣, 陈兴会, 张永宏, 樊正军. 耐盐植物对盐碱地的改良效果试验[J]. 宁夏农林科技, 2004, 45(1):26-27.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-204X.2004.01.011.
	Ban N R, Chen X H, Zhang Y H, Fan Z J. Experimental study on the improvement effect of salt-tolerant plants on saline-alkali land[J]. Ningxia Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Science and Technology, 2004, 45(1):26-27.
[17]	刘雪强, 南丽丽, 郭全恩, 付双军, 谭杰辉, 李冰月. 黄土高原半干旱区种植不同绿肥作物对土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2020, 55(1):145-152.doi:10.13432/j.cnki.jgsau.2020.01.019.
	Liu X Q, Nan L L, Guo Q E, Fu S J, Tan J H, Li B Y. Effects of planting different green manures on soil physical and chemical properties in semi-arid region of Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Gansu Agricultural University, 2020, 55(1):145-152.
[18]	卢庆善. 甜高粱[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2008.
	Lu Q S. Sweet sorghum[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2008.
[19]	再吐尼古丽·库尔班, 吐尔逊·吐尔洪, 阿扎提·阿不都古力, 叶凯. 甜高粱对盐碱地改良效果的研究初报[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2011, 48(8):1418-1421.
	Zaituniguli·K E B, Tuerxun·T E H, Azati·A B D G L, Ye K. Improvement of salt-affected soils with sweet sorghum[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2011, 48(8):1418-1421.
[20]	马增辉, 曹源, 王启龙. 水稻种植对陕北盐碱地土壤理化性质的影响及耐盐碱水稻品种筛选[J]. 中国稻米, 2022, 28(3):80—83,87.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2022.03.015.
	Ma Z H, Cao Y, Wang Q L. Effects of planting rice on soil physical and chemical properties of saline-alkali land in northern Shaanxi and screening of saline-alkali-tolerant rice varieties[J]. China Rice, 2022, 28(3):80-83,87. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2022.03.015
[21]	赵文举, 马宏, 豆品鑫, 郁文. 不同覆盖模式下土壤返盐及水盐运移规律[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2016, 34(5):210-214.doi:10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2016.05.32.
	Zhao W J, Ma H, Dou P X, Yu W. Soil resalinization and water-salt movement under different mulching modes[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2016, 34(5):210-214.
[22]	王慧, 刘宁, 姚延梼, 解文斌, 王林. 晋北干旱区盐碱地柽柳叶总有机碳与营养元素含量的关系[J]. 生态环境学报, 2017, 26(12):2036-2044.doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2017.12.006.
	Wang H, Liu N, Yao Y T, Xie W B, Wang L. The relationship between foliar TOC of Tamarix chinensis lour.and nutrient elements' content in saline-alkali soil of North Shanxi[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2017, 26(12):2036-2044.
[23]	孟小伟, 牛赟, 海龙, 马彦军. 不同植被对盐碱地土壤微生物数量及的酶活性影响[J]. 草原与草坪, 2020, 40(3):99-104.doi:10.13817/j.cnki.cyycp.2020.03.015.
	Meng X W, Niu Y, Hai L, Ma Y J. Effects of different vegetation on soil microorganisms number and enzyme activities in alkaline saline soil[J]. Grassland and Turf, 2020, 40(3):99-104.

变量 Variable	种植前Planting before			种植后Planting after			SEM	显著性Significance
变量 Variable	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	SEM	Z	T	Z×T
容重/(g/cm³)Bulk density	1.46±0.03a	1.50±0.05a	1.55±0.05a	1.43±0.01a	1.49±0.02a	1.51±0.05a	0.05	0.356	<0.05	0.645
总孔隙度/% Total porosity	44.91±1.00a	43.40±1.73a	41.39±1.74a	45.03±0.43a	43.65±0.79a	42.89±1.94a	1.73	0.357	<0.05	0.646
pH值pH	8.18±0.04a	8.20±0.02a	8.24±0.01a	7.97±0.04a	8.07±0.05a	8.09±0.05a	0.01	<0.001	<0.05	0.101
电导率/(mS/cm) Conductivity	2.48±0.05b	2.56±0.03b	2.66±0.03a	2.19±0.08b	2.25±0.02b	2.34±0.03a	0.19	<0.001	0.001	0.409
总盐度/(g/kg) Total salinity	5.33±0.58b	7.00±1.00a	7.53±0.02a	3.33±1.00b	5.00±1.53a	5.33±0.58a	1.62	0.001	<0.05	0.977

变量 Variable	种植前Planting before			种植后Planting after			SEM	显著性Significance
变量 Variable	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	SEM	Z	T	Z×T
容重/(g/cm³)Bulk density	1.46±0.03a	1.50±0.05a	1.55±0.05a	1.43±0.01a	1.49±0.02a	1.51±0.05a	0.05	0.356	<0.05	0.645
总孔隙度/% Total porosity	44.91±1.00a	43.40±1.73a	41.39±1.74a	45.03±0.43a	43.65±0.79a	42.89±1.94a	1.73	0.357	<0.05	0.646
pH值pH	8.18±0.04a	8.20±0.02a	8.24±0.01a	7.97±0.04a	8.07±0.05a	8.09±0.05a	0.01	<0.001	<0.05	0.101
电导率/(mS/cm) Conductivity	2.48±0.05b	2.56±0.03b	2.66±0.03a	2.19±0.08b	2.25±0.02b	2.34±0.03a	0.19	<0.001	0.001	0.409
总盐度/(g/kg) Total salinity	5.33±0.58b	7.00±1.00a	7.53±0.02a	3.33±1.00b	5.00±1.53a	5.33±0.58a	1.62	0.001	<0.05	0.977

变量 Variable	种植前Planting before			种植后Planting after			SEM	显著性Significance
变量 Variable	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	SEM	Z	T	Z×T
有机质含量/(g/kg)Organic matter	3.01±0.30b	3.10±0.57b	3.66±0.41a	3.15±0.36b	3.29±0.61b	4.13±0.49a	0.57	0.251	<0.05	0.748
全氮含量/(g/kg)Total nitrogen	0.60±0.01b	0.72±0.02a	0.31±0.02c	1.11±0.03b	1.59±0.02a	0.50±0.02c	0.59	0.094	<0.05	0.177
全钾含量/(g/kg)Total potassium	1.94±0.08a	1.87±0.02a	1.88±0.03a	1.80±0.08a	1.62±0.09b	1.84±0.10a	0.12	0.001	<0.05	0.072
全磷含量/(g/kg)Total phosphorus	0.58±0.07a	0.49±0.10a	0.45±0.01a	0.40±0.03a	0.36±0.02a	0.31±0.08a	0.09	<0.001	<0.05	0.144
有效磷含量/(mg/kg)Available phosphorus	1.49±0.15b	1.91±0.05a	1.14±0.18c	0.58±0.01b	0.64±0.04a	0.51±0.11b	0.55	<0.001	<0.001	<0.05
速效钾含量/(mg/kg)Available potassium	610.83±8.19b	675.16±11.50a	582.50±5.03c	640.16±14.74b	690.17±10.02a	601.05±7.77c	21.05	0.001	<0.001	0.460
碱解氮/(mg/kg)Available nitrogen	78.35±11.80b	146.48±25.72a	139.67±5.90a	73.16±16.82b	133.13±18.51a	125.24±13.77a	19.60	<0.01	<0.01	0.960

变量 Variable	种植前Planting before			种植后Planting after			SEM	显著性Significance
变量 Variable	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	0~10 cm	10~20 cm	20~30 cm	SEM	Z	T	Z×T
有机质含量/(g/kg)Organic matter	3.01±0.30b	3.10±0.57b	3.66±0.41a	3.15±0.36b	3.29±0.61b	4.13±0.49a	0.57	0.251	<0.05	0.748
全氮含量/(g/kg)Total nitrogen	0.60±0.01b	0.72±0.02a	0.31±0.02c	1.11±0.03b	1.59±0.02a	0.50±0.02c	0.59	0.094	<0.05	0.177
全钾含量/(g/kg)Total potassium	1.94±0.08a	1.87±0.02a	1.88±0.03a	1.80±0.08a	1.62±0.09b	1.84±0.10a	0.12	0.001	<0.05	0.072
全磷含量/(g/kg)Total phosphorus	0.58±0.07a	0.49±0.10a	0.45±0.01a	0.40±0.03a	0.36±0.02a	0.31±0.08a	0.09	<0.001	<0.05	0.144
有效磷含量/(mg/kg)Available phosphorus	1.49±0.15b	1.91±0.05a	1.14±0.18c	0.58±0.01b	0.64±0.04a	0.51±0.11b	0.55	<0.001	<0.001	<0.05
速效钾含量/(mg/kg)Available potassium	610.83±8.19b	675.16±11.50a	582.50±5.03c	640.16±14.74b	690.17±10.02a	601.05±7.77c	21.05	0.001	<0.001	0.460
碱解氮/(mg/kg)Available nitrogen	78.35±11.80b	146.48±25.72a	139.67±5.90a	73.16±16.82b	133.13±18.51a	125.24±13.77a	19.60	<0.01	<0.01	0.960

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容