核桃树叶基质化的酸碱前处理与发酵工艺研究

doi:10.13304/j.nykjdb.2022.0313

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探索核桃树叶基质研制方法，进行了核桃树叶酸碱前处理和堆腐发酵研究。分别采用不同水平草酸和氨水溶液对核桃树叶进行不同时长的处理，运用灰色关联度法结合处理后核桃树叶理化性质，筛选适宜的前处理条件。此后设置进行前处理（A）和不进行前处理（B）2组试验，添加不同用量鼠李糖脂进行核桃树叶发酵，通过温度、T值（发酵前后物料碳氮质量比的比值）、重金属含量和种子发芽指数等指标判断核桃树叶发酵腐熟度与基质安全性。结果表明，体积分数为0.5%的氨水溶液处理2.0 h的加权关联度为0.739，高于其他碱溶液处理，且处理后的核桃树叶pH为6.61，更适合后期发酵，是适宜的核桃树叶酸碱前处理条件。发酵过程中，堆体最高温度达62.28 ℃，维持50 ℃以上高温6 d，发酵后T值在0.36~0.58范围内，均小于0.6；不进行前处理且不添加鼠李糖脂处理基质浸提液的种子发芽率大于70%，其余处理大于80%，基质重金属含量均符合标准要求，说明各处理核桃树叶均发酵腐熟，基质安全可用。其中添加质量分数为0.3%的鼠李糖脂处理的T值最低，种子发芽指数高于85%，堆腐效果优于其他处理。综上所述，核桃树叶基质化关键工艺为：在体积分数为0.5%的氨水处理2 h条件下进行前处理，然后添加质量分数为0.3%的鼠李糖脂发酵。

关键词: 核桃树叶, 酸碱前处理, 理化性质, 基质, 发酵

Abstract:

To explore the method of walnut leaf substrate development through the study of acid-base pretreatment and pile rot fermentation of walnut leaves， different concentrations of oxalic acid and ammonia solution were used to treat walnut leaves at different times， and the gray correlation method was used to select the appropriate pretreatment conditions in combination with the physical and chemical properties of walnut leaves after treatment. Thereafter， 2 groups of tests， with pretreatment （A） and without pretreatment （B）， were set up to add different amounts of rhamnolipids for fermentation of walnut leaves， and the degree of fermentation， decay of walnut leaves and substrate safety were judged by temperature， T value， heavy metal content and seed germination index. The results showed that the weighted correlation of treatment with 0.5% ammonia solution for 2.0 h was 0.739， which was higher than other alkali solution treatments， and the pH of the treated walnut leaves was 6.61， which was more suitable for later fermentation and was a suitable acid-base pretreatment condition for walnut leaves. During the fermentation process， the highest temperature of the pile reached 62.28 ℃， and the high temperature above 50 ℃ was maintained for 6 d. After fermentation， the T value （the ratio of carbon and nitrogen ratio of materials before and after fermentation） was within the range of 0.36~0.58， all of which were less than 0.6. The germination index of substrate leaching solution of B₀ treatment was greater than 70%， while the remaining treatments were more than 80%， and the heavy metal content of the substrate all met the standard requirements， indicating that the walnut leaves of each treatment were fermented rotting， the substrate was safe and usable. The treatment with 0.3% rhamnolipid had the lowest T value， whose germination index was higher than 85%， and the effect of heap rotting was better than other treatments. To sum up， the key technology of walnut leaf substrate was to add 0.3% rhamnolipid for fermentation after pretreatment with 0.5% ammonia for 2 h.

Key words: walnut leaves, acid-base pretreatment, physicochemical properties, substrate, fermentation

中图分类号:

S789.4

王应梅, 王艳壮, 李莹杰, 李燕, 何苗, 王晓璟, 杜红斌. 核桃树叶基质化的酸碱前处理与发酵工艺研究[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(10): 210-220.

Yingmei WANG, Yanzhuang WANG, Yingjie LI, Yan LI, Miao HE, Xiaojing WANG, Hongbin DU. Research on Acid-base Pretreatment and Fermentation Process of Walnut Leaf Matrixing[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(10): 210-220.

图/表 11

参考文献 33

1	李源,马文强,朱占江,等.新疆核桃产业发展现状及对策建议[J].农学学报,2019,9(7):80-86.
	LI Y, MA W Q, ZHU Z J, et al.. Xinjiang walnut industry: the development status and countermeasures [J]. J. Agric., 2019, 9(7):80-86.
2	胡东宇,高健,黄力平,等.南疆四地州核桃产业现状与发展思路[J].北方园艺,2021(13):148-154.
	HU D Y, GAO J, HUANG L P, et al.. Current situation and development idea of walnut industry in four prefectures of Southern Xinjiang [J]. North Hortic., 2021(13):148-154.
3	柴艳芳.碱预处理对大花蕙兰基质松树皮发酵进程的影响[D].北京:北京林业大学,2014.
	CHAI Y F. Effect of alkali pretreatment on Cymbidium matrix—pink bark fermentation process [D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2014.
4	郭程程.酸化处理对玉木耳菌糠腐熟过程的影响及水稻育苗基质研制[D].长春:吉林农业大学,2018.
	GUO C C. Effect of sulfuric acid pretreatment on the chemical properties and decay process during the composting process of white fungus chaff and preparation of rice seedling substrate [D]. Changchun: Jilin Agricultural University, 2018.
5	姚文英.南疆低成本复合基质的研制及育苗效果研究[D].阿拉尔:塔里木大学,2020.
	YAO W Y. The study of the development and application effect of walnut leaf substrate [D]. Alar: Tarim University, 2020.
6	陈广银,王德汉,吴艳,等.石灰预处理对树叶堆肥过程中养分转化的影响[J].生态环境,2007(1):77-82.
	CHEN G Y, WANG D H, WU Y, et al.. Effect of lime-pretreatment on nutrient transformation of leaves compost [J]. Ecol. Environ. Sci., 2007(1):77-82.
7	曾琼,刘德春,刘勇.植物角质层蜡质的化学组成研究综述[J].生态学报,2013,33(17):5133-5140.
	ZENG Q, LIU D C, LIU Y. The overview and prospect of chemical composition of plant cuticular wax [J]. Acta Ecol. Sin., 2013, 33(17):5133-5140.
8	张璐.园林绿化废弃物堆肥化的过程控制及其产品改良与应用研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2015.
	ZHANG L. The process control of green waste composting and the improvement and application of compost product [D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2015.
9	王艳壮,姚晓杰,李莹杰,等.核桃树叶基质化的酸碱前处理方式探究[J].农业灾害研究,2022,12(6):10-12.
	WANG Y Z, YAO X J, LI Y J, et al.. Exploration of acid and alkaline pre-treatment methods for basalization of walnut leaves [J]. J. Agric. Catastrophol., 2022, 12(6):10-12
10	王应梅,申耀东,杨宗贤,等.有机发酵基质理化性质变化及对甜瓜出苗的影响[J].塔里木大学学报,2022,34(3):53-60.
	WANG Y M, SHEN Y D, YANG Z X, et al.. Effects of organic fermentation substrates on the emergence of melon seedlings and change of physicochemical properties [J]. J. Tarim Univ., 2022, 34(3):53-60.
11	环境保护部. 固体废物有机质的测定灼烧减量法: [S].北京:中国标准出版社,2015.
12	白永娟.菇渣腐熟发酵条件及其在蔬菜育苗中的应用效果研究[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2016.
	BAI Y J. The conditions of mushroom composting fermentation and seedling effects of composting substrates in vegetables [D]. Yangling: Northwest A&F University, 2016.
13	邓聚龙.灰色系统基本方法[M].武汉:华中科技大学出版社,2001:174.
	DENG J L. Basic Method of Grey System [M]. Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science & Technology Press, 2001:174.
14	杨泽敏,王维金,卢碧林.灰色关联分析在稻米品质综合评价上的应用[J].中国粮油学报,2003,18(3):4-6.
	YANG Z M, WANG W J, LU B L. Application of gray relational analysis in comprehensive evaluation of quality of rice [J]. J. Chin. Cereals Oils Assoc., 2003, 18(3):4-6.
15	农业农村部. 蔬菜育苗基质: [S].北京:中国农业出版社,2012.
16	许燕,陈如凯,张木清.嗜热侧孢霉生物学特性及其液体发酵研究[J].福建农林大学学报(自然科学版),2008,37(1):99-104.
	XU Y, CHEN R K, ZHANG M Q. Study on liquid fermentation and biological characteristics of Sporotrichum thermophile [J]. J. Fujian Agric. For. Univ., 2008, 37(1):99-104.
17	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局,中国国家标准化管理委员会. 绿化用有机基质: [S].北京:中国标准出版社,2017.
18	ZUCCONI F, MONACO A, DEBERTOLDI M. Biological evaluation of compost maturity [J]. Biocycle, 1981, 22(4):27-29.
19	冯海萍,杨志刚,杨冬艳,等.枸杞枝条基质化发酵工艺及参数优化[J].农业工程学报,2015,31(5):252-258.
	FENG H P, YANG Z G, YANG D Y, et al.. Parameter optimization of fermented substrate from wolfberry shoots [J]. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng., 2015, 31(5):252-258.
20	白永娟,徐炜南,常晓晓,等.不同碳氮比及氮源对菇渣发酵的影响[J].浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版),2016,42(6):760-768.
	BAI Y J, XU W N, CHANG X X, et al.. Effects of carbon-to-nitrogen ratios and nitrogen sources on composting of mushroom residue [J]. J. Zhejiang. Univ. (Agric. Life Sci.), 2016, 42(6):760-768.
21	姚文英,张中荣,黄亚星,等.不同发酵菌剂对树叶堆腐的效果[J].北方园艺,2019(5):26-31.
	YAO W Y, ZHANG Z R, HUANG Y X, et al.. Effects of different fermentation bacteria on leaf compost [J]. North Hortic., 2019 (5):26-31.
22	陈汉才,李桂花,廖森泰,等.农业废弃物无害化处理技术规范[J].广东农业科学,2010,37(8):222-239.
23	ZHANG S, WEI Z, ZHAO M, et al.. Influence of malonic acid and manganese dioxide on humic substance formation and inhibition of CO₂ release during composting [J/OL]. Bioresour. Technol., 2020, 318(2):124075 [2022-03-02]. .
24	ZHOU Y, SELVAM A, WONG J W C. Evaluation of humic substances during co-composting of food waste, sawdust and Chinese medicinal herbal residues [J]. Bioresour. Technol., 2014, 168(9):229-234.
25	马怀良,许修宏.接种菌剂对鸡粪堆肥的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2009(5):61-63.
	MA H L, XU X H. Effect of microbial inoculants on composting of chicken manure [J]. Soil Fert. Sci. Chin., 2009(5):61-63.
26	蒋志伟.赤泥对堆肥中木质纤维素降解和腐殖质形成及功能微生物群落演替的影响[D].南宁:广西大学,2020.
	JIANG Z W. Effects of red mud on the degradation of humus formation and succession of functional microbial communies during composting [D]. Nanning: Guangxi University, 2020.
27	张陆,曹玉博,王惟帅,等.鸡粪添加对蔬菜废弃物堆肥腐殖化过程的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2022,30(2):258-267.
	ZHANG L, CAO Y B, WANG W S, et al.. Effect of chicken manure addition on humification of vegetable waste in composting process [J]. Chin. J. Eco-Agric., 2022, 30(2):258-267.
28	张阅,王磊,陈金海.物料预处理对堆肥减量化、腐殖化和稳定化的影响及其微生物机制[J].工业微生物,2015,45(1):7-14.
	ZHANG Y, WANG L, CHEN J H. Effect of windrow pretreatment on reduction and humification during composting and its microbial mechanism [J]. Ind. Microbiol., 2015, 45(1):7-14.
29	吴阳,徐乐中,梅娟.C/N调控对园林绿化废弃物堆肥效果的影响[J].安全与环境工程,2016,23(1):64-69.
	WU Y, XU L Z, MEI J. Effect of C/N regulation on the performance of composting of green plant waste [J]. Saf. Environ. Eng., 2016, 23(1):64-69.
30	吴梦婷,梅娟,苏良湖,等.硫酸亚铁和过磷酸钙对牛粪秸秆混合堆肥氮损失和腐殖化的影响[J].生态与农村环境学报,2020,36(10):1353-1361.
	WU M T, MEI J, SU L H, et al.. Effects of ferrous sulfate and calcium superphosphate on nitrogen loss and humification during composting of cattle manure with straw [J]. J. Ecol. Rur. Environ, 2020, 36(10):1353-1361.
31	陈广银,王德汉,吴艳,等.落叶堆肥过程中有机物的动态变化[J].华南农业大学学报,2007,28(02):1-4.
	CHEN G Y, WANG D H, WU Y, et al.. Dynamic transformation of organic matter during thermophilic composting of litter [J]. J. South Chin. Agric. Univ., 2007, 28(2):1-4.
32	孙桂阳,张国言,董元杰.不同来源农业废弃物堆肥进程与产品肥效研究[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(4):349-360.
	SUN G Y, ZHANG G Y, DONG Y J. Composting process of agricultural wastes from different sources and fertilizer efficiency of theie products [J]. J. Soil Water Conser., 2021, 35(4):349-360.
33	MOREL T L, COLIN F, GERMON J C, et al.. Methods for the Evaluation of the Matutity of Municipal Refuse Compost [M]. London: El Sevier Applied Science publishers, 1985:56-72.

处理Treatment		是否进行前处理Ammonia pretreatment	鼠李糖脂添加量Rhamnolipid added/%
A	A0	是Yes	—
	A3	是Yes	0.3
	A6	是Yes	0.6
	A9	是Yes	0.9
B	B0	否No	—
	B3	否No	0.3
	B6	否No	0.6
	B9	否No	0.9

处理Treatment		是否进行前处理Ammonia pretreatment	鼠李糖脂添加量Rhamnolipid added/%
A	A0	是Yes	—
	A3	是Yes	0.3
	A6	是Yes	0.6
	A9	是Yes	0.9
B	B0	否No	—
	B3	否No	0.3
	B6	否No	0.6
	B9	否No	0.9

处理Treatment	等权关联度Equai-weighted correlation	排序Ranking	加权关联度Weighted correlation	排序Ranking	处理Treatment	等权关联度Equai-weighted correlation	排序Ranking	加权关联度Weighted correlation	排序Ranking
C₁H₁	0.626	16	0.687	8	C₄H₁	0.640	13	0.591	20
C₁H₂	0.684	5	0.711	4	C₄H₂	0.602	21	0.560	26
C₁H₃	0.641	12	0.685	9	C₄H₃	0.551	28	0.562	25
C₁H₄	0.646	9	0.695	7	C₄H₄	0.548	29	0.537	29
C₁H₅	0.707	3	0.756	2	C₄H₅	0.518	30	0.494	30
C₂H₁	0.765	1	0.766	1	C₅H₁	0.635	15	0.604	18
C₂H₂	0.746	2	0.749	3	C₅H₂	0.613	19	0.625	12
C₂H₃	0.677	6	0.705	6	C₅H₃	0.615	18	0.612	14
C₂H₄	0.624	17	0.673	10	C₅H₄	0.555	26	0.553	27
C₂H₅	0.686	4	0.711	5	C₅H₅	0.600	22	0.582	23
C₃H₁	0.586	25	0.604	17	C₆H₁	0.638	14	0.588	21
C₃H₂	0.588	24	0.580	24	C₆H₂	0.663	7	0.606	16
C₃H₃	0.607	20	0.610	15	C₆H₃	0.642	11	0.625	11
C₃H₄	0.590	23	0.582	22	C₆H₄	0.553	27	0.544	28
C₃H₅	0.644	10	0.595	19	C₆H₅	0.647	8	0.622	13

处理Treatment	等权关联度Equai-weighted correlation	排序Ranking	加权关联度Weighted correlation	排序Ranking	处理Treatment	等权关联度Equai-weighted correlation	排序Ranking	加权关联度Weighted correlation	排序Ranking
C₁H₁	0.626	16	0.687	8	C₄H₁	0.640	13	0.591	20
C₁H₂	0.684	5	0.711	4	C₄H₂	0.602	21	0.560	26
C₁H₃	0.641	12	0.685	9	C₄H₃	0.551	28	0.562	25
C₁H₄	0.646	9	0.695	7	C₄H₄	0.548	29	0.537	29
C₁H₅	0.707	3	0.756	2	C₄H₅	0.518	30	0.494	30
C₂H₁	0.765	1	0.766	1	C₅H₁	0.635	15	0.604	18
C₂H₂	0.746	2	0.749	3	C₅H₂	0.613	19	0.625	12
C₂H₃	0.677	6	0.705	6	C₅H₃	0.615	18	0.612	14
C₂H₄	0.624	17	0.673	10	C₅H₄	0.555	26	0.553	27
C₂H₅	0.686	4	0.711	5	C₅H₅	0.600	22	0.582	23
C₃H₁	0.586	25	0.604	17	C₆H₁	0.638	14	0.588	21
C₃H₂	0.588	24	0.580	24	C₆H₂	0.663	7	0.606	16
C₃H₃	0.607	20	0.610	15	C₆H₃	0.642	11	0.625	11
C₃H₄	0.590	23	0.582	22	C₆H₄	0.553	27	0.544	28
C₃H₅	0.644	10	0.595	19	C₆H₅	0.647	8	0.622	13

处理Treatment	等权关联度Equai-weighted correlation	排序Ranking	加权关联度Weighted correlation	排序Ranking	处理Treatment	等权关联度Equai-weighted correlation	排序Ranking	加权关联度Weighted correlation	排序Ranking
N₁H₁	0.617	19	0.610	19	N₄H₁	0.646	7	0.623	16
N₁H₂	0.625	17	0.654	9	N₄H₂	0.662	6	0.637	13
N₁H₃	0.625	16	0.666	6	N₄H₃	0.636	9	0.631	14
N₁H₄	0.707	2	0.739	1	N₄H₄	0.636	10	0.630	15
N₁H₅	0.632	11	0.683	5	N₄H₅	0.680	3	0.697	3
N₂H₁	0.664	5	0.659	8	N₅H₁	0.581	26	0.522	30
N₂H₂	0.597	22	0.646	10	N₅H₂	0.561	27	0.540	29
N₂H₃	0.588	23	0.577	24	N₅H₃	0.546	29	0.571	26
N₂H₄	0.532	30	0.545	28	N₅H₄	0.613	20	0.577	23
N₂H₅	0.626	15	0.644	11	N₅H₅	0.602	21	0.619	17
N₃H₁	0.629	13	0.601	21	N₆H₁	0.621	18	0.639	12
N₃H₂	0.732	1	0.698	2	N₆H₂	0.559	28	0.573	25
N₃H₃	0.630	12	0.599	22	N₆H₃	0.643	8	0.663	7
N₃H₄	0.584	25	0.617	18	N₆H₄	0.587	24	0.557	27
N₃H₅	0.627	14	0.602	20	N₆H₅	0.677	4	0.695	4