|Table of Contents|

Effects of Chemical Fertilizers Replacement by Biogas Slurry on Yield,Quality and Nutrient Uptake of Muskmelon

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2019年14
Page:
25-31
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Effects of Chemical Fertilizers Replacement by Biogas Slurry on Yield,Quality and Nutrient Uptake of Muskmelon
Author(s):
GAO Xu1; KONG Xiangjun1; GUO Yunong1; LI Jiacong1; SAJJAD Raza1; CHEN Zhujun1; 2
(1.College of Resources and Environment,Northwest A&F University,Yangling,Shaanxi 712100；2.Key Laboratory of Plant Nutrition and the Agri-Environment in Northwest China,Ministry of Agriculture,Yangling,Shaanxi 712100)
Keywords:
biogas slurry replacement; muskmelon; yield and quality; nutrient uptake
PACS:
-
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20184575
Abstract:
Taking thin-skinned muskmelon‘Green Gem’ as test material,the randomized block field experiment was used.Five treatments (CK (check without fertilizer),CF (conventional fertilization),FR (fertilizers reduction),BS (biogas slurry replacement),BR (biogas slurry reduction)) were set up,and the effect of biogas slurry fertilized by intensive pig farm and fermented wastewater on the yield,quality and nutrient uptake of muskmelon grown in greenhouse were studied.The results showed that，1) there was no significant difference in dry matter,nutrient contents and nutrient uptakesin roots,stems,leaves and fruits of muskmelon in different treatments.The absorption of N,P2O5 and K2O for each 1 000 kg economic output of the muskmelons was 4.16-4.68 kg,1.04-1.36 kg and 7.07-7.85 kg,respectively；and the average ratio of N,P2O5 and K2O was 1∶0.30∶1.72 under greenhouse cultivation.2) No significant difference was observed in single fruit weight and yield of muskmelon in different treatments.The soluble total sugar content,soluble solids content and sugar-acid ratio of muskmelon biogas slurry replacement (BS) and reduction(BR) treatments were significantly higher than conventional fertilization treatment.3) The biogas slurry (BS,BR) treatments and fertilizer reduction (FR) treatment had a significant effect on the costs savings and increased benefits,which was 26.77%,8.49% and 3.37% higher than that of the conventional fertilizer (CF) treatment.Meanwhile,the nutrient utilization rates of N,P and K were increased by 12.47%,9.84%,15.26%,respectively in BR treatment and by 11.10%,9.62%,41.47% in FR treatment,when compared with the conventional fertilization (CF).In summary,the biogas slurry could completely replace chemical fertilizers and realize the utilization of biogas slurry resources.

References:

[1]吴信,万丹,印遇龙.畜禽养殖废弃物资源化利用与现代生态养殖模式[J].农学学报,2018,8(1):163-166.[2]GALVEZ A,SINICCO T,CAYUELA M,et al.Short term effects of bioenergy by-products on soil C and N dynamics,nutrient availability and biochemical properties[J].Agriculture,Ecosystems &Environment,2012,160:3-14.[3]许文志,欧阳平,罗付香,等.中国畜禽粪污处理利用现状及对策探讨[J].中国农学通报,2017,33(23):106-112.[4]郑学博,樊剑波,周静,等.液化肥配施对红壤旱地土壤养分和花生产量的影响[J].土壤学报,2016,53(3):675-684.[5]JIANG X,SOMMER S G,CHRUSTENSE K V.A review of the biogas in dustry in China[J].Energy Policy,2011,39:6073-6081.[6]中华人民共和国国家发展和改革委员会,农业部.全国农村沼气发展“十三五”规划[EB/OL].(2017-01-25)[2017-10-17].http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2017-02/10/content_5167076.htm.[7]王淑霞,阮应君,周伟国,等.基于沼液余热回收的沼气工程系统净产能特性[J].农业工程学报,2018,34(10):200-209.[8]丁京涛,沈玉君,孟海波,等.沼渣沼液养分含量及稳定性分析[J].中国农业科技导报,2016,18(4):139-146.[9]韩敏,刘克锋,王顺利,等.沼液的概念、成分和再利用途径及风险[J].农学学报,2014(10):54-57.[10]曹汝坤,陈灏,赵玉柱.沼液资源化利用现状与新技术展望[J].中国沼气,2015,33(2):42-50.[11]黄继川,徐培智,彭智平,等.基于稻田土壤肥力及生物学活性的沼液适宜用量研究[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2016,22(2):362-371.[12]张昌爱,刘英,曹曼,等.沼液的定价方法及其应用效果[J].生态学报,2011,31(6):1735-1741.[13]吕淑敏,刘铁干,赵会杰.不同沼液用量对夏玉米产量的影响[J].中国沼气,2015,33(4):77-81.[14]杨乐,张凤华,庞玮,等.沼液灌溉对绿洲农田土壤养分的影响[J].石河子大学学报(自然科学版),2011,29(5):542-545.[15]黄昌勇,徐建明.土壤学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2010.[16]农业部全国土壤肥料总站.NY/T 300-1995,有机肥料速效磷的测定[S].北京:中国农业出版社,1995.[17]农业部全国土壤肥料总站.NY/T 301-1995,有机肥料速效钾的测定[S].北京:中国农业出版社,1995.[18]王梅.养猪场粪便沼液利用效果评价[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2018.[19]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2013:264-271.[20]曹建康,姜微波,赵玉梅.果蔬采后生理生化实验指导[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007:24-54.[21]EU Nitrogen Expert Panel.Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE)an indicator for the utilization ofnitrogen in agriculture and food systems[R].Wageningen University,2015.[22]张娥珍,樊学军.嫁接对薄皮甜瓜叶片生理效应及果实可溶性蛋白质、总糖含量的影响[J].西南农业学报,2009,22(5):1310-1313.[23]牛晓丽,周振江,李瑞,等.根系分区交替灌溉条件下水肥供应对番茄可溶性固形物含量的影响[J].中国农业科学,2012,45(5):893-901.[24]杨润,孙钦平,赵海燕,等.沼液在稻田的精确施用及其环境效应研究[J].农业环境科学学报,2017,36(8):1566-1572.[25]王桂良,张家宏,王守红,等.沼液替代化肥氮对冬小麦产量、品质及生长发育的影响[J].农业资源与环境学报,2018,35(5):467-475.[26]赵自超,付龙云,王昭晴,等.沼液追施对设施甜椒产量、品质及养分吸收的影响[J].中国沼气,2018,36(4):85-88.[27]汪吉东,曹云,常志州,等.沼液配施化肥对太湖地区水蜜桃品质及土壤氮素累积的影响[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2013,19(2):379-386.[28]吴兴洪,朱青,陈正刚,等.酒糟沼液对辣椒化肥减量增效的应用[J].北方园艺,2018(20):105-112.[29]林多,黄丹枫.基质栽培甜瓜矿质营养吸收规律的研究[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2003(1):112-116.[30]吴海华,陈波浪,盛建东,等.南疆全立架露地栽培甜瓜平衡施肥参数的初步研究[J].新疆农业科学,2012,49(10):1793-1798.[31]隋好林,陈晓峰,秦娜,等.沼液滴灌对番茄产量、品质和土壤理化性状的影响[J].山东农业科学,2016(2):80-84.[32]吴树彪,崔畅,张笑千,等.农田施用沼液增产提质效应及水土环境影响[J].农业机械学报,2013,44(8):118-125,179.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2019-08-12