Fluorescence Spectrum Characteristics of Fulvic Acid in Black Soil Under Different Ratios of Organic-Inorganic Fertilizers Combined Application
LI Yan1, BAI Yang1, WEI Dan1,2*, WANG Wei3, LI Yu-mei3, XUE Hong4, HU Yu1, CAI Shan-shan5
1. College of Resources and Environment, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China
2. Institute of Plant Nutrition, Resources and Environment, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing 100097, China
3. Institute of Soil, Fertilizer and Environmental Resources, Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Harbin 150086, China
4. Keshan Branch of Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Qiqihar 161000, China
5. College of Land and Environment, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang 110866, China
Abstract：Fulvic acid (FA) is an important component of soil humus. As an intermediate substance in soil humification, the structural characteristics of FA play an important role in indicating the improvement of soil organic matter. The combined organic and inorganic fertilizers are an effective measure for soil fertility improvement, straw resource utilization and inorganic fertilizer reduction. In order to explore the effect of straw organic fertilizer instead of inorganic fertilizer (nitrogenous fertilizer) on soil FA in the black soil region of Heilongjiang Province, six treatments were set up, including no fertilization (CK), a single application of inorganic fertilizer (NPK), 25% of organic nitrogen fertilizer (NPKM1), 50% (NPKM2), 75% (NPKM3), and 100% (NPKM4). The contents of soil organic carbon (SOC) and FA were determined. The source of soil FA was characterized by fluorescence index (FI) and biological index (BIX), and the degree of soil humification was analyzed by humification index (HIX). Three-dimensional fluorescence spectrum parallel factor analysis method was used to analyze the fluorescence components and maximum fluorescence intensity (Fmax) of soil FA, and redundancy analysis (RDA) was used to explore the response relationships among fluorescence intensity, soil organic carbon and different treatments. The results showed that compared with NPK treatment, the contents of SOC and soil FA increased significantly in the treatments of combined application of organic and inorganic fertilizers, the greatest impact on NPKM2 treatment, SOC and soil FA content increased by 8.06% and 13.84%. Soil FA was affected by both autochthonous and terrestrial sources (FI>1.4, 0.8Fmax values of fulvic-acid-like and humic-acid-like first increased and then decreased, and the Fmax value of protein-like gradually decreased. The Fmax values of fulvic-acid-like and humic-acid-like were the highest, and the relative percentage of humic-acid-like was the highest. The results of RDA showed that NPKM2 treatment had the greatest effect on the content of SOC and soil FA. Therefore, based on the analysis of soil FA fluorescence spectrum characteristics, in order to improve the content of soil organic matter, increase straw utilization rate and reduce the application of inorganic fertilizer, the treatment of straw organic fertilizer replacing inorganic nitrogen fertilizer by 50% was the best organic-inorganic fertilizer ratio.
李 艳，白 杨，魏 丹，王 伟，李玉梅，薛 红，胡 钰，蔡姗姗. 不同比例有机无机肥配施条件下黑土富里酸荧光光谱特征[J]. 光谱学与光谱分析, 2021, 41(11): 3518-3523.
LI Yan, BAI Yang, WEI Dan, WANG Wei, LI Yu-mei, XUE Hong, HU Yu, CAI Shan-shan. Fluorescence Spectrum Characteristics of Fulvic Acid in Black Soil Under Different Ratios of Organic-Inorganic Fertilizers Combined Application. SPECTROSCOPY AND SPECTRAL ANALYSIS, 2021, 41(11): 3518-3523.
[1] Yang Q L, Zheng F X, Jia X C, et al. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2020，20（5）：2395.
[2] ZHANG Wei-li, Kolbe H, ZHANG Ren-lian(张维理, Kolbe H, 张认连). Scientia Agricultural Sinica (中国农业科学), 2020, 53(2): 317.
[3] Lehmann J, Kleber M. Nature, 2015, 528(7580): 60.
[4] Zhang P, Huang P, Xu X J, et al. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 708：134619.
[5] ZHANG Jiu-ming, LIU Yi-dan, ZHANG Yi-wen, et al(张久明, 刘亦丹, 张一雯, 等). Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis(光谱学与光谱分析), 2020, 40(7): 2194.
[6] GU Si-yu, HE Xin, NIE Yan-long, et al(谷思玉, 何 鑫, 聂艳龙, 等). Research of Environmental Sciences(环境科学研究), 2016, 29(5): 724.
[7] Rubén L S, Guillermo G C, Rigoberto E V, et al. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas, 2014, 5: 1397.
[8] MA Lian-gang, XIAO Bao-hua(马连刚, 肖保华). Bulletin of Mineralogy, Petrology and Geochemistry (矿物岩石地球化学通报), 2011, 30(4): 465.
[9] Li S Y, Li M, Wang G X, et al. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture, 2019, 6(1): 20.
[10] Gao X T, Tan W B, Zhao Y, et al. Environmental Science and Technology. 2019, 53: 3653.
[11] Gu N T, Song Q B, Yang X L, et al. Environmental Pollution，2020, 258: 113807.
[12] Li W T, Chen S Y, Xu Z X, et al. Environmental Science and Technology, 2014, 48(5): 2603.
[13] He W, Hur J. Water Research, 2015, 83: 217.
[14] ZHANG Bo, WANG Shu-hang, JIANG Xia, et al(张 博, 王书航, 姜 霞, 等). Journal of Lake Sciences(湖泊科学), 2018, 30(1): 102.
[15] QIAN Cheng, GUI Xiao-fan, PENG Yu-mei, et al(钱 承, 桂晓凡, 彭玉梅, 等). Auhui Agricultural Science Bulletin(安徽农学通报), 2020, 26(17): 123.
[16] Song F H, Wu F C, Feng W Y, et al. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2018, 74(12): 116.
[17] DOU Sen(窦 森). Soil Organic Matter(土壤有机质). 1st ed. Beijing: Science Press(北京: 科学出版社), 2010.
[18] Wei Z M, Wang X Q, Zhao X Y, et al. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation, 2016, 113: 187.
