生化黄腐酸对苏打盐碱土理化性质、微生物多样性及玉米生长的影响

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20195213

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探讨不同生化黄腐酸(BFA)用量对苏打盐碱土改良效果及玉米生长的影响机制,采用盆栽试验,以内蒙古自治区典型苏打盐碱土为供试土壤,玉米东单181为供试品种,设置4个BFA用量梯度(0 g/kg,CK;2 g/kg,FA2;4 g/kg,FA4;8 g/kg,FA8),研究不同BFA用量对土壤养分、微生物多样性、玉米耐盐性及生物量等指标的影响。结果表明,相较于CK处理,土壤pH值随BFA用量的增加而降低,土壤有效磷含量在施用BFA后出现显著提高,但FA2、FA4、FA8 这3种处理之间在播种后30,62,80 d差异不显著。土壤含盐量随着BFA用量增加而提高,增幅为23.30%~89.32%。土壤交换性钾含量随BFA用量增加而提高,而交换性钙含量逐步下降。土壤中<0.053 mm的粉黏粒组分在FA2、FA4、FA8处理下,分别较CK处理降低了6.49,9.92,13.97百分点,0.053~0.250 mm团聚体比例分别增加了5.90,8.99,13.75百分点,0.250~2.000 mm粒径团聚体比例分别增加了0.55,0.87,0.21百分点,>2.000 mm粒径团聚体比例分别增加了0.04,0.06,0.01百分点。土壤微生物多样性在施用BFA后较CK处理明显提高,但FA8处理低于FA4处理。玉米地上、地下部钠钾比在FA2、FA4处理下均小于CK,而FA8处理提高了玉米地上部钠钾比。FA2、FA4处理玉米在生长中后期生物量有显著增加,而FA8处理下生物量显著下降。综合来看,施用2 g/kg或4 g/kg生化黄腐酸对降低苏打盐碱土碱性,提高土壤有效磷含量,改善土壤结构,提高土壤微生物多样性和提高玉米耐盐性与生物量具有积极作用,超出此用量范围会显著提高土壤含盐量,抑制玉米生长。

关键词: 玉米, 盐碱土改良, 生化黄腐酸, 高通量测序, 钠钾比, 耐盐性

Abstract:

To investigate the effects of different dosages of biochemical fulvic acid (BFA) on the improvement of soda saline-alkali soil and the response mechanism of maize growth,a pot experiment was conducted using soda saline-alkali soil from Inner Mongolia as the test soil and maize Dongdan 181 as the test variety.Four BFA application rates were set as 0(CK),2(FA2),4(FA4),8 g/kg(FA8).Soil nutrients,microbial diversity,maize salt tolerance,biomass,and other indicators were measured.The results showed that compared to the CK,soil pH decreased with increasing BFA dosage.The soil available phosphorus content increased significantly after the application of BFA,but there was no significant difference among the three treatments of FA2,FA4 and FA8 at 30,62 and 80 days after sowing.Soil salinity increased with the increase of BFA dosage,with an increase of 23.30%—89.32%.Soil exchangeable potassium content increased with increasing BFA dosage,while exchangeable calcium content gradually decreased.The proportion of <0.053 mm silt and clay fractions in the soil decreased by 6.49,9.92 and 13.97 percentage points under FA2,FA4,and FA8 treatments,respectively,compared to the CK treatment.Meanwhile,the proportion of 0.053—0.250 mm aggregates increased by 5.90,8.99 and 13.75 percentage points,the proportion of 0.250—2.000 mm aggregates increased by 0.55,0.87 and 0.21 percentage points,while the proportion of >2.000 mm aggregates increased by 0.04,0.06 and 0.01 percentage points,respectively,under the FA2,FA4,and FA8 treatments relative to the CK.Soil microbial diversity was significantly higher than that of CK after the application of BFA,but the FA8 treatment was lower than the FA4 treatment.The Na⁺/K⁺ ratio in both shoots and roots of maize was lower under FA2 and FA4 treatments than under the CK treatment,while the FA8 treatment increased the Na⁺/K⁺ ratio in the shoots.Maize biomass significantly increased in the mid-to-late growth stages under FA2 and FA4 treatments,while biomass significantly decreased under the FA8 treatment.In summary,the application of 2 g/kg or 4 g/kg of biochemical fulvic acid can positively reduce the alkalinity of soda saline-alkali soil,increase the content of available phosphorus in the soil,improve soil structure,improve soil microbial diversity,and enhance maize salt tolerance and biomass.However,exceeding this dosage range will significantly increase soil salinity and inhibit maize growth.

Key words: Corn, Saline-alkali soil improvement, Biochemical fulvic acid, High-throughput sequencing, Na⁺/K⁺, Salt tolerance

中图分类号:

洪煜, 陈硕桐, 高放, 颜鹏, 齐学元, 宓文海. 生化黄腐酸对苏打盐碱土理化性质、微生物多样性及玉米生长的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2025, 40(3): 114-123. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20195213.

HONG Yu, CHEN Shuotong, GAO Fang, YAN Peng, QI Xueyuan, MI Wenhai. The Effects of Biochemical Fulvic Acid on the Physicochemical Properties and Microbial Diversity of Soda Saline-alkali Soil and Maize Growth[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2025, 40(3): 114-123. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20195213.

http://www.hbnxb.net/CN/Y2025/V40/I3/114

图/表 10

表1 各处理生化黄腐酸施用量

Tab.1 The application amount of biochemical fulvic acid in each treatmentg/kg

处理 Treatment	播种后时间 Time after sowing				施用总量 Total
处理 Treatment	20 d	38 d	52 d	70 d	施用总量 Total
CK	—	—	—	—	0
FA2	2	—	—	—	2
FA4	2	2	—	—	4
FA8	2	2	2	2	8

表2 不同BFA用量对土壤肥力指标的影响

Tab.2 The effect of different BFA dosages on soil fertility indicators

播种后时间/d Time after sowing	处理 Treatment	pH	有机碳含量/(g/kg) Organic carbon content	全氮含量/(g/kg) Total nitrogen content	有效磷含量/(mg/kg) Available phosphorus content
30	CK	7.83±1.40a	3.37±0.35a	0.49±0.01a	9.04±1.22b
	FA2	7.75±1.16a	3.40±0.17a	0.43±0.06a	14.01±1.38a
	FA4	7.77±1.16a	3.33±0.21a	0.50±0.12a	13.10±1.39a
	FA8	7.71±1.30a	3.40±0.26a	0.47±0.15a	13.24±1.46a
48	CK	7.82±0.09a	3.20±0.26a	0.39±0.01a	11.03±0.46c
	FA2	7.76±0.06a	3.21±0.07a	0.43±0.06a	17.55±1.42b
	FA4	7.63±0.04b	3.23±0.12a	0.53±0.12a	22.96±1.79a
	FA8	7.62±0.06b	3.21±0.25a	0.47±0.15a	22.33±1.82a
62	CK	7.87±0.07a	3.33±0.06a	0.43±0.06a	15.94±0.80b
	FA2	7.78±0.03ab	3.30±0.10a	0.47±0.12a	19.98±1.34ab
	FA4	7.71±0.06b	3.34±0.20a	0.50±0.10a	25.08±3.66a
	FA8	7.68±0.03b	3.35±0.13a	0.37±0.06a	22.54±2.95a
80	CK	7.82±0.10a	3.73±0.21a	0.47±0.06b	16.16±1.30b
	FA2	7.75±0.11ab	3.72±0.11a	0.43±0.06b	22.40±2.17a
	FA4	7.72±0.16ab	3.71±0.11a	0.47±0.06b	24.57±1.63a
	FA8	7.61±0.06b	3.74±0.19a	0.57±0.06a	22.95±1.61a

图1 不同BFA用量对土壤含盐量的影响不同小写字母表示不同处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Fig.1 The impact of different BFA dosages on soil salt content Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between treatments (P<0.05).

图2 不同BFA用量对土壤交换性盐基离子含量的影响

Fig.2 The effect of different BFA dosages on the content of exchangeable base cations in soil

图3 不同BFA用量对土壤团聚体组成的影响

Fig.3 The effect of different BFA dosages on soil aggregate composition

图4 稀疏曲线(A)和丰度等级曲线(B)

Fig.4 Sparse curve(A)and abundance grade curve(B)

表3 不同BFA用量下土壤微生物Alpha多样性分析

Tab.3 Alpha diversity of soil microorganisms under different BFA dosages

处理 Treatment	Chao1指数 Chao1 index	Observed species指数 Observed species index	Shannon指数 Shannon index	Simpson指数 Simpson index
CK	3 360.06±427.86b	3 221.47±321.95b	10.156±0.142ab	0.997±0.001a
FA2	3 498.55±141.97ab	3 394.07±165.60ab	10.085±0.025b	0.996±0.001a
FA4	4 037.62±315.50a	3 852.27±238.63a	10.336±0.037a	0.997±0.001a
FA8	3 838.88±125.41ab	3 631.40±143.86ab	10.329±0.178a	0.998±0.001a

图5 不同BFA用量对玉米地上、地下部Na⁺、K⁺含量的影响不同小写字母表示同一取样时期内各处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。图6—7同。

Fig.5 The effect of different BFA dosages on the content of Na⁺ and K⁺ in the shoots and roots of maize Different lowercase letters indicate that there are significant differences among treatments in the same sampling period(P<0.05).The same as Fig.6—7.

图6 不同BFA用量对玉米地上、地下部钠钾比的影响

Fig.6 The effect of different BFA dosages on the Na⁺/K⁺ ratio in the shoots and roots of maize

图7 不同BFA用量对玉米地上、地下部生物量的影响

Fig.7 The effect of different BFA dosages on the biomass of maize shoots and roots

参考文献 43

[1]	杨劲松, 姚荣江, 王相平, 谢文萍, 张新, 朱伟, 张璐, 孙瑞娟. 中国盐渍土研究:历程、现状与展望[J]. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(1):10-27.doi:10.11766/trxb202110270578.
	Yang J S, Yao R J, Wang X P, Xie W P, Zhang X, Zhu W, Zhang L, Sun R J. Research on salt-affected soils in China:history,status quo and prospect[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2022, 59(1):10-27.
[2]	温晓雨, 杨树青, 张万锋, 郭富强, 马卫华, 王伟. 西辽河流域苏打盐碱地养分特征及现状评价[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2023(5):164-173.doi:10.11838/sfsc.1673-6257.22256.
	Wen X Y, Yang S Q, Zhang W F, Guo F Q, Ma W H, Wang W. Nutrient characteristics and current situation evaluation of soda saline-alkali land in Xiliao river basin[J]. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2023(5):164-173.
[3]	李雪, 李可可, 朱由余, 孔政翰, 段瑛锋, 张亚婷. 煤炭黄腐酸的提取方法及应用研究进展[J]. 炭素技术, 2023, 42(6):8-12,74.doi:10.14078/j.cnki.1001-3741.2023.06.002.
	Li X, Li K K, Zhu Y Y, Kong Z H, Duan Y F, Zhang Y T. Research progress on extraction method and application of fulvic acid from coal[J]. Carbon Techniques, 2023, 42(6):8-12,74.
[4]	Li Z L, Liu Z G, Zhang M, Chen Q, Zheng L, Li Y C, Sun L L. The combined application of controlled-release urea and fulvic acid improved the soil nutrient supply and maize yield[J]. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 2021, 67(5):633-646.doi:10.1080/03650340.2020.1742326.
[5]	梁媛媛, 王泽平, 史秋哲, 姜瑛, 李培培, 韩燕来, 王祎. 不同分子量黄腐酸对冬小麦生长和养分吸收利用的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2023, 29(2):308-322.doi:10.11674/zwyf.2022307.
	Liang Y Y, Wang Z P, Shi Q Z, Jiang Y, Li P P, Han Y L, Wang Y. Effects of fulvic acid with different molecular weights on growth and nutrient utilization of winter wheat[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2023, 29(2):308-322.
[6]	高惠敏, 王相平, 屈忠义, 杨劲松, 姚荣江. 不同改良剂对河套灌区土壤盐碱指标及作物产量的影响研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2020, 51(5):1172-1179.doi:10.19336/j.cnki.trtb.2020.05.22.
	Gao H M, Wang X P, Qu Z Y, Yang J S, Yao R J. Effects of different soil amendments on salinity index and crop yield in the irrigation area of Hetao[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2020, 51(5):1172-1179.
[7]	孙运朋, 杨劲松, 姚荣江, 陈小兵. 生物炭和黄腐酸对滨海滩涂盐碱地土壤性质的提升[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2019, 21(8):115-121.doi:10.13304/j.nykjdb.2018.0357.
	Sun Y P, Yang J S, Yao R J, Chen X B. Effects of biochar and fulvic acid application on soil properties in tidal flat reclamation region[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2019, 21(8):115-121. doi: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2018.0357
[8]	孙燕, 王春宏, 王全九, 曲植, 王建, 张曦元. 生化黄腐酸对盐碱土水盐运移特征及盐基离子组成的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022, 36(4):228-235.doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.04.029.
	Sun Y, Wang C H, Wang Q J, Qu Z, Wang J, Zhang X Y. Effects of biochemical fulvic acid application on water and salt transport characteristics and basic ion composition of saline-alkaline soil[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022, 36(4):228-235.
[9]	吴军虎, 李玉晨, 邵凡凡, 王泽祥. 生化黄腐酸对土壤物理性质及水分运动特性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(4):159-164,171.doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.04.022.
	Wu J H, Li Y C, Shao F F, Wang Z X. Effects of biochemical fulvic acid on physical properties and water movement characteristics[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2021, 35(4):159-164,171.
[10]	朱启明, 王亚男, 郑重, 曾希柏, 许立阳, 张洋, 李雨欣. 不同黄腐酸结构组成及其对小麦生长的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2024, 55(1):102-112.doi:10.19336/j.cnki.trtb.2022120302.
	Zhu Q M, Wang Y N, Zheng Z, Zeng X B, Xu L Y, Zhang Y, Li Y X. Structure and composition of different fulvic acids and their effects on the growth of wheat[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2024, 55(1):102-112.
[11]	张丽丽, 史庆华, 巩彪. 中、碱性土壤条件下黄腐酸与磷肥配施对番茄生育和磷素利用率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(17):3567-3575.doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.17.013.
	Zhang L L, Shi Q H, Gong B. Application of fulvic acid and phosphorus fertilizer on tomato growth,development,and phosphorus utilization in neutral and alkaline soil[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(17):3567-3575.
[12]	陈超, 宓文海, 居静, 吴良欢, 赵海涛. 长期不同施肥模式对中低产黄泥田土壤团聚体组成及碳组分的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2022, 37(3):168-174.doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20192856.
	Chen C, Mi W H, Ju J, Wu L H, Zhao H T. Effect of long-term different fertilization pattern on soil aggregate composition and organic carbon fractions in yellow clayey paddy soil[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2022, 37(3):168-174. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20192856
[13]	加丽森·依曼哈孜, 刘军, 查安, 刘权. 水和氯化铵提取-电感耦合等离子体原子发射光谱(ICP-AES)法测定石灰性土壤中的交换性钾钠钙镁[J]. 中国无机分析化学, 2023, 13(3):269-273.doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-1035.2023.03.011.
	Yimanhazi J, Liu J, Cha A, Liu Q. Determination of exchangeable potassium,sodium,calcium and magnesium in calcareous soil by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES)with water and ammonium chloride extraction[J]. Chinese Journal of Inorganic Analytical Chemistry, 2023, 13(3):269-273.
[14]	鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2000.
	Lu R K. Soil agricultural chemistry analysis method[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2000.
[15]	张舒予. 腐植酸与土壤调理剂配伍对土壤pH及养分有效性的影响研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2018.
	Zhang S Y. Effects of compatibility of humic acid and soil conditioner on soil pH and nutrient availability[D]. Hefei: Anhui Agricultural University, 2018.
[16]	孙燕, 吴建鑫, 曲植, 韩宁, 陆江岳, 马莹莹, 胡子付. 生化黄腐酸对不同质地苏打盐碱土水盐运移特征的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2023, 39(22):74-84.doi:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.202306131.
	Sun Y, Wu J X, Qu Z, Han N, Lu J Y, Ma Y Y, Hu Z F. Effects of biochemical fulvic acid on the water-salt transport characteristics of soda saline-alkali soil with different textures[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2023, 39(22):74-84.
[17]	邵兴华, 张建忠, 洪森荣, 林国卫. 土壤中影响磷吸附因素研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2007, 35(12):3609-3611.doi:10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2007.12.085.
	Shao X H, Zhang J Z, Hong S R, Lin G W. Research progress in the factor affecting the phosphate absorption in soil[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2007, 35(12):3609-3611.
[18]	张皓禹, 黄志华, 王娟, 张君, 孟超然, 危常州. 不同酸化剂对石灰性土壤pH值、磷有效性的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019(1):145-150.doi:10.11838/sfsc.1673-6257.18178.
	Zhang H Y, Huang Z H, Wang J, Zhang J, Meng C R, Wei C Z. Effects of different acidifiers on pH and phosphorus availability in calcareous soil[J]. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2019(1):145-150.
[19]	Emami S, Ali Alikhani H, Ali Pourbabaee A, Etesami H, Motasharezadeh B, Sarmadian F. Consortium of endophyte and rhizosphere phosphate solubilizing bacteria improves phosphorous use efficiency in wheat cultivars in phosphorus deficient soils[J]. Rhizosphere, 2020, 14:100196.doi:10.1016/j.rhisph.2020.100196.
[20]	刘垒, 范道春, 薛胜平. 生物磷肥的研究进展[J]. 磷肥与复肥, 2018, 33(4):13-14,17.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1007-6220.2018.04.006.
	Liu L, Fan D C, Xue S P. Research progress of biological phosphate fertilizer[J]. Phosphate & Compound Fertilizer, 2018, 33(4):13-14,17.
[21]	宋付朋. 长期施磷石灰性土壤无机磷形态特征及其有效性研究[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2006.doi:10.7666/d.Y903584.
	Song F P. Speciation characteristics and availability of inorganic phosphorus in calcareous soil with long-term phosphorus application[D]. Tai'an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2006.
[22]	张晓蕊. 石灰性潮土中磷形态转化以及交换性钙对磷固定的影响[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2020. doi:10.27158/d.cnki.ghznu.2020.000533.
	Zhang X R. Phosphorus speciation transformation in calcareous fluvo-aquic soil and the effect of exchangeable calcium on phosphorus fixation[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2020.
[23]	Lin J W, Jiang B H, Zhan Y H. Effect of pre-treatment of bentonite with sodium and calcium ions on phosphate adsorption onto zirconium-modified bentonite[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2018, 217:183-195.doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.079. pmid: 29604412
[24]	李彬, 王志春, 梁正伟, 迟春明. 吉林省大安市苏打碱土盐化与碱化的关系[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2007, 25(2):151-155.doi:10.3321/j.issn:1000-7601.2007.02.032.
	Li B, Wang Z C, Liang Z W, Chi C M. Relationship between salinization and alkalization of sodic soil in Da'an City[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2007, 25(2):151-155.
[25]	李玉晨. 不同类型黄腐酸对土壤性质及生菜生长特征的影响研究[D]. 西安: 西安理工大学, 2021. doi:10.27398/d.cnki.gxalu.2021.000168.
	Li Y C. Effects of different types of fulvic acid on soil properties and lettuce growth characteristics[D]. Xi'an: Xi'an University of Technology, 2021.
[26]	曾路生, 高岩, 李俊良, 崔德杰, 隋方功, 史衍玺. 寿光大棚土壤团聚体中交换性盐基离子组成与土壤团聚性关系[J]. 水土保持学报, 2011, 25(5):224-228,233.doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2011.05.044.
	Zeng L S, Gao Y, Li J L, Cui D J, Sui F G, Shi Y X. Relationship between the composing of exchangeable base cation in soil aggregate and soil glomeration of greenhouse in Shouguang[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2011, 25(5):224-228,233.
[27]	Xie X F, Pu L J, Zhu M, Wu T, Xu Y, Wang X H. Effect of long-term reclamation on soil quality in agricultural reclaimed coastal saline soil,Eastern China[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2020, 20(11):3909-3920.doi:10.1007/s11368-020-02698-w.
[28]	王建伟, 孙力平, 员建, 池勇志, 袁忠伟, 路远, 贾仁勇. 腐殖酸钠对钙、镁离子吸附效果的研究[J]. 环境科学与管理, 2008, 33(12):37-40.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-1212.2008.12.012.
	Wang J W, Sun L P, Yuan J, Chi Y Z, Yuan Z W, Lu Y, Jia R Y. Study on adsorption effect of Ca²⁺ & Mg²⁺ ion with sodium humic acid[J]. Environmental Science and Management, 2008, 33(12):37-40.
[29]	尹勤瑞. 盐碱化对土壤物理及水动力学性质的影响[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2011.
	Yi Q R. Effect of salinization on physical and hydrodynamics characteristics[D]. Yangling: Northwest A&F University, 2011
[30]	张路, 吴军虎, 杨晓伟, 雷震远, 白雪. 施加黄腐酸钾对黑垆土土壤结构的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2022, 41(10):131-138.doi:10.13522/j.cnki.ggps.2021537.
	Zhang L, Wu J H, Yang X W, Lei Z Y, Bai X. Improving structure of dark loessial soil by addition of potassium fulvic acid[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2022, 41(10):131-138.
[31]	Suh H Y, Yoo K S, Suh S G. Tuber growth and quality of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) as affected by foliar or soil application of fulvic and humic acids[J].Horticulture,Environment,and Biotechnology, 2014, 55(3):183-189.doi:10.1007/s13580-014-0005-x.
[32]	王传杰, 肖婧, 蔡岸冬, 张文菊, 徐明岗. 不同气候与施肥条件下农田土壤微生物生物量特征与容量分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(6):1067-1075.doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.06.008.
	Wang C J, Xiao J, Cai A D, Zhang W J, Xu M G. Capacity and characteristics of soil microbial biomass under various climate and fertilization conditions across China croplands[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(6):1067-1075. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.06.008
[33]	雷菲, 王莉, 刘海林, 林清火, 吴宇佳, 张冬明. 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[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(17):271-275.doi:10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2022.17.044.
	Lei F, Wang L, Liu H L, Lin Q H, Wu Y J, Zhang D M. Impacts of humic acid slow-release nitrogen fertilizer on yield,nitrogen utilization efficiency and soil bacterial diversity of waxy corn[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 50(17):271-275.
[34]	陈星星, 刘新社, 王盛荣. 腐殖酸对盐胁迫下土壤理化性质、微环境及苦瓜生长的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2023, 51(17):138-144.doi:10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2023.17.019.
	Chen X X, Liu X S, Wang S R. Influences of humic acid on soil physical and chemical properties,microenvironment and balsam pear growth under salt stress[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 51(17):138-144.
[35]	李新, 焦燕, 杨铭德. 用磷脂脂肪酸(PLFA)谱图技术分析内蒙古河套灌区不同盐碱程度土壤微生物群落多样性[J]. 生态科学, 2014, 33(3):488-494.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1008-8873.2014.03.014.
	Li X, Jiao Y, Yang M D. Microbial diversity of different saline-alkaline soil analyzing by PLFA in the Hetao area of Inner Mongolia[J]. Ecological Science, 2014, 33(3):488-494.
[36]	何斌源, 赖廷和, 王欣, 范航清, 潘良浩, 廖思明. 盐沼草对桐花树人工林污损动物危害的生物防治研究[J]. 广西科学, 2013, 20(3):185-192.doi:10.13656/j.cnki.gxkx.2013.03.001.
	He B Y, Lai T H, Wang X, Fan H Q, Pan L H, Liao S M. Biological prevention method for reducing the fouling fauna damage to the young transplanted Aegiceras corniculatum mangrove trees by mix-culturing with saltmarsh[J]. Guangxi Sciences, 2013, 20(3):185-192.
[37]	Vera-Estrella R, Barkla B J, Bohnert H J, Pantoja O. Salt stress in Mesembryanthemum crystallinum L.cell suspensions activates adaptive mechanisms similar to those observed in the whole plant[J]. Planta, 1999, 207(3):426-435.doi:10.1007/s004250050501. pmid: 9951736
[38]	Beilby M J, Shepherd V A. Modeling the current-voltage characteristics of charophyte membranes.Ⅱ.The effect of salinity on membranes of Lamprothamnium papulosum[J]. The Journal of Membrane Biology, 2001, 181(2):77-89.doi:10.1007/pl00020977.
[39]	孙扬, 郭占全, 吴春胜. 地膜覆盖对玉米产量及干物质特性的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2016, 35(6):72-75.doi:10.13522/j.cnki.ggps.2016.06.014.
	Sun Y, Guo Z Q, Wu C S. Effect of plastic film mulching on yield and dry matter characteristics in semi-arid area[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2016, 35(6):72-75.
[40]	刘世昌, 任先顺, 王子浩, 焦卫平, 魏延青, 刘朋飞. 生化黄腐酸钾对玉米生长的影响[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2022(9):51-55.doi:10.11942/j.issn1002-2767.2022.09.0051.
	Liu S C, Ren X S, Wang Z H, Jiao W P, Wei Y Q, Liu P F. Effects of biochemical fulvic acid potassium on maize growth[J]. Heilongjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022(9):51-55.
[41]	陈一昊, 孔丽丽, 侯云鹏, 尹彩侠, 张磊, 赵胤凯, 刘志全. 东北典型黑土种植密度与施钾量对玉米干物质积累与产量的调控效应[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(3):148-157.doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20193586.
	Chen Y H, Kong L L, Hou Y P, Yin C X, Zhang L, Zhao Y K, Liu Z Q. Regulation effect of planting density and potassium application rate on dry matter accumulation and yield of maize in the typical black soil region of Northeast China[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2023, 38(3):148-157. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193586
[42]	张超. 风化煤、造纸黑液中黄腐酸类物质的提取和对玉米促生作用的研究[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2017.doi:10.7666/d.D01212562.
	Zhang C. Study on extraction of fulvic acid from weathered coal and black liquor of papermaking and its effect on growth of maize[D]. Tai'an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2017.
[43]	张正珍, 慕瑞瑞, 王佳, 徐灿, 陈永伟, 张战胜, 吴宏亮, 康建宏. 钾素对玉米子粒淀粉形成及产量的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2023, 31(6):49-58.doi:10.13597/j.cnki.maize.science.20230608.
	Zhang Z Z, Mu R R, Wang J, Xu C, Chen Y W, Zhang Z S, Wu H L, Kang J H. Effect of potassium on starch formation and yield of maize kernel[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2023, 31(6):49-58.

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容