中国农业科技导报 ›› 2022, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (6): 206-217.DOI: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2021.0304
• 生物制造 资源生态 • 上一篇
赵晨光1,2(), 牛司耘2, 陈勋3, 方丽1, 李海涛1, 王佩星4, 沈镔镔4, 石元值1()
收稿日期:
2021-04-12
接受日期:
2021-07-26
出版日期:
2022-06-15
发布日期:
2022-06-21
通讯作者:
石元值
作者简介:
赵晨光 E-mail:297071141@qq.com;
基金资助:
Chenguang ZHAO1,2(), Siyun NIU2, Xun CHEN3, Li FANG1, Haitao LI1, Peixing WANG4, Binbin SHEN4, Yuanzhi SHI1()
Received:
2021-04-12
Accepted:
2021-07-26
Online:
2022-06-15
Published:
2022-06-21
Contact:
Yuanzhi SHI
摘要:
为分析不同肥料处理对茶树生长及茶园土壤肥力的影响,以龙井43茶树为供试品种,根据施肥方式不同设置T1(不施肥处理)、T2(控释肥处理)、T3(碳基肥处理)、T4(脲甲醛处理)、T5(茶树专用肥处理)、T6(习惯施肥处理)共6个处理。分析不同施肥处理的茶叶产量、茶叶养分元素含量、茶园土壤肥力和经济效益。结果表明,施用复合肥均可提高茶叶产量及茶梢百芽重。与不施肥处理相比,施用复合肥可明显提高茶叶产量,其中以茶树专用肥处理增产效果最稳定。增加复合肥可以促进茶芽更早萌发,与不施肥相比可提早1周开采,但不同复合肥处理间差异不显著。施用复合肥可明显提高茶叶中N含量,但不同复合肥处理C含量差异不显著。施用复合肥均显著提高了茶园土壤速效养分含量,其中碳基肥复合肥在阻止肥料淋溶损失方面表现较好,其次是茶树专用肥与尿甲醛复合肥,均可提高肥料利用率,减少环境污染。施用复合肥料均可提升茶叶的产量与品质,其中以茶树专用肥效果最佳,且经济效益及养分利用效率均最高;复合肥的过量施用易导致养分淋溶损失。通过分析不同肥料对茶树生长及茶园土壤肥力的影响,旨在为茶园肥料选择提供理论依据,以期提高茶园经济效益。
中图分类号:
赵晨光, 牛司耘, 陈勋, 方丽, 李海涛, 王佩星, 沈镔镔, 石元值. 复合肥料对茶叶产量、品质及茶园土壤肥力的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(6): 206-217.
Chenguang ZHAO, Siyun NIU, Xun CHEN, Li FANG, Haitao LI, Peixing WANG, Binbin SHEN, Yuanzhi SHI. Effects of Compound Fertilizer on Tea Yield, Quality and Fertility of Tea Garden Soil[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2022, 24(6): 206-217.
土层深度 Soil depth/cm | pH | 全氮 Total N/(g·kg-1) | 有机质 Organic matter/% | v a i l a b l e p h o s p h o r u s /(mg·kg-1) 有效磷 A | v a i l a b l e p o t a s s i u m / (mg·kg-1) 速效钾 A |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0—10 | 3.66 | 2.72 | 2.35 | 29.90 | 63.05 |
10—20 | 3.70 | 1.44 | 1.10 | 21.41 | 55.70 |
20—30 | 3.68 | 0.66 | 0.70 | 3.58 | 41.10 |
30—40 | 3.72 | 0.30 | 0.40 | 2.71 | 35.00 |
40—90 | 3.82 | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.82 | 24.70 |
表1 土壤基础理化性质
Table 1 Physical and chemical properties of soil foundation
土层深度 Soil depth/cm | pH | 全氮 Total N/(g·kg-1) | 有机质 Organic matter/% | v a i l a b l e p h o s p h o r u s /(mg·kg-1) 有效磷 A | v a i l a b l e p o t a s s i u m / (mg·kg-1) 速效钾 A |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0—10 | 3.66 | 2.72 | 2.35 | 29.90 | 63.05 |
10—20 | 3.70 | 1.44 | 1.10 | 21.41 | 55.70 |
20—30 | 3.68 | 0.66 | 0.70 | 3.58 | 41.10 |
30—40 | 3.72 | 0.30 | 0.40 | 2.71 | 35.00 |
40—90 | 3.82 | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.82 | 24.70 |
编号 Code | 处理 Treatment | 生产厂家 Manufacturer | 肥料养分比例(N∶P2O5∶K20) Fertilizer nutrient ratio (N∶P2O5∶K20) | 施氮量 N application rate /(kg·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
T1 | 不施肥(CK) No fertilization(CK) | — | — | — |
T2 | 控释复合肥 Controlled-release fertilizer | 山东多益成肥料科技有限公司 Shandong Doing-well Fertilizer Technology Co. Ltd. | 30∶5∶6 | 450 |
T3 | 碳基复合肥 Carbon-based compound fertilizer | 山东戴威肥业有限公司 Shandong Daiwei Fertilizer Industry Co. Ltd. | 13.5∶13.5∶13.5 | 450 |
T4 | 脲甲醛复合肥 Urea and formaldehyde compound fertilizer | 武汉绿茵化工有限公司 Wuhan Lvyin Chemical Co. Ltd. | 30∶5∶6 | 450 |
T5 | 茶树专用肥 Specialty fertilizer of tea tree | 浙江巨隆化肥有限公司 Zhejiang Julong Fertilizer Co. Ltd. | 22.0∶8.0∶12.2 | 450 |
T6 | 习惯施肥处理 Custom fertilizer | 山东三方化工集团有限公司 Shandong Sanfang Chemical Group Co. Ltd. | 17∶17∶17 | 700 |
表2 试验用肥料养分配方
Table 2 Nutrient formula of test fertilizer
编号 Code | 处理 Treatment | 生产厂家 Manufacturer | 肥料养分比例(N∶P2O5∶K20) Fertilizer nutrient ratio (N∶P2O5∶K20) | 施氮量 N application rate /(kg·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
T1 | 不施肥(CK) No fertilization(CK) | — | — | — |
T2 | 控释复合肥 Controlled-release fertilizer | 山东多益成肥料科技有限公司 Shandong Doing-well Fertilizer Technology Co. Ltd. | 30∶5∶6 | 450 |
T3 | 碳基复合肥 Carbon-based compound fertilizer | 山东戴威肥业有限公司 Shandong Daiwei Fertilizer Industry Co. Ltd. | 13.5∶13.5∶13.5 | 450 |
T4 | 脲甲醛复合肥 Urea and formaldehyde compound fertilizer | 武汉绿茵化工有限公司 Wuhan Lvyin Chemical Co. Ltd. | 30∶5∶6 | 450 |
T5 | 茶树专用肥 Specialty fertilizer of tea tree | 浙江巨隆化肥有限公司 Zhejiang Julong Fertilizer Co. Ltd. | 22.0∶8.0∶12.2 | 450 |
T6 | 习惯施肥处理 Custom fertilizer | 山东三方化工集团有限公司 Shandong Sanfang Chemical Group Co. Ltd. | 17∶17∶17 | 700 |
图1 2019年和2020年不同施肥处理的茶叶产量注:不同小写字母表示在P<0.05水平差异显著。
Fig.1 Tea yield of different fertilization treatments in 2019 and 2020Note: Different small letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05 level.
处理 Treatment | 2019 | 2020 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
氨基酸含量 Amino acid content/% | 茶多酚含量 Polyphenols content/% | 酚氨比 Phenol ammonia ratio | 氨基酸含量 Amino acid content/% | 茶多酚含量Polyphenols content/% | 酚氨比 Phenol ammonia ratio | |
T1 | 3.55±0.63 a | 21.26±4.14 ab | 5.99 a | 3.24±0.24 c | 20.97±1.49 ab | 6.46 a |
T2 | 3.90±0.49 a | 19.16±1.98 b | 4.91 b | 4.01±0.49 b | 21.65±1.19 a | 5.41 b |
T3 | 3.81±0.59 a | 19.01±2.35 b | 4.99 b | 4.59±0.38 ab | 20.14±1.26 ab | 4.38 c |
T4 | 3.57±0.26 a | 17.63±1.81 bc | 4.94 b | 3.98±0.21 b | 21.19±2.03 ab | 5.31 b |
T5 | 3.54±0.38 a | 16.83±3.07 c | 4.75 c | 4.25±0.27 b | 19.76±0.91 b | 4.65 c |
T6 | 3.57±0.34 a | 21.88±2.44 a | 6.13 a | 5.01±0.52 a | 23.25±0.70 a | 4.64 c |
表3 2019年和2020年不同施肥处理的茶树芽梢品质
Table 3 Quality of tea bud shoot under different fertilization treatments in 2019 and 2020
处理 Treatment | 2019 | 2020 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
氨基酸含量 Amino acid content/% | 茶多酚含量 Polyphenols content/% | 酚氨比 Phenol ammonia ratio | 氨基酸含量 Amino acid content/% | 茶多酚含量Polyphenols content/% | 酚氨比 Phenol ammonia ratio | |
T1 | 3.55±0.63 a | 21.26±4.14 ab | 5.99 a | 3.24±0.24 c | 20.97±1.49 ab | 6.46 a |
T2 | 3.90±0.49 a | 19.16±1.98 b | 4.91 b | 4.01±0.49 b | 21.65±1.19 a | 5.41 b |
T3 | 3.81±0.59 a | 19.01±2.35 b | 4.99 b | 4.59±0.38 ab | 20.14±1.26 ab | 4.38 c |
T4 | 3.57±0.26 a | 17.63±1.81 bc | 4.94 b | 3.98±0.21 b | 21.19±2.03 ab | 5.31 b |
T5 | 3.54±0.38 a | 16.83±3.07 c | 4.75 c | 4.25±0.27 b | 19.76±0.91 b | 4.65 c |
T6 | 3.57±0.34 a | 21.88±2.44 a | 6.13 a | 5.01±0.52 a | 23.25±0.70 a | 4.64 c |
图3 不同施肥处理下芽梢密度及百芽重注:不同小写字母表示在P<0.05水平差异显著。
Fig.3 Bud shoot density and 100 bud weight under different fertilization treatmentsNote: Different small letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05 level.
年份Year | 处理Ttreatment | N/% | C/% | P/(g·kg-1) | K/(g·kg-1) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | 春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | 春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | 春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | ||
2019 | T1 | 4.87±0.14 b | 2.91±0.07 b | 45.45±0.34 a | 46.59±0.26 a | 4.72±0.13 a | 2.91±0.33 b | 18.36±0.49 a | 18.77±3.21 b |
T2 | 5.14±0.08 a | 2.96±0.09 ab | 45.27±0.18 a | 46.64±0.11 a | 4.68±0.09 a | 2.91±0.39 b | 17.48±0.45 a | 18.41±2.54 b | |
T3 | 5.19±0.11 a | 3.13±0.08 a | 44.88±0.21 a | 46.63±0.15 a | 4.78±0.05 a | 2.94±0.25 b | 19.95±0.45 a | 18.90±1.73 b | |
T4 | 4.95±0.07 ab | 3.07±0.09 ab | 45.30±0.25 a | 46.58±0.23 a | 4.73±0.10 a | 3.18±0.30 ab | 18.27±0.47 a | 19.65±1.28 b | |
T5 | 5.05±0.13 ab | 3.20±0.17 a | 45.28±0.26 a | 46.48±0.07 a | 4.68±0.12 a | 3.32±0.22 a | 18.34±0.39 a | 18.35±0.92 b | |
T6 | 5.25±0.10 a | 3.19±0.11 a | 44.71±0.28 a | 46.55±0.17 a | 4.68±0.07 a | 3.33±0.48 a | 19.14±0.25 a | 20.59±1.24 a | |
2020 | T1 | 4.16±0.80 a | 2.62±0.22 a | 55.61±6.61 a | 46.61±0.10 a | 5.96±0.37 b | 2.88±0.10 b | 20.34±0.98 a | 15.32±0.76 a |
T2 | 4.18±0.31 a | 2.93±0.05 a | 54.73±5.22 a | 46.87±0.27 a | 6.27±0.34 ab | 2.96±0.18 b | 20.54±0.38 a | 15.96±1.40 a | |
T3 | 4.82±0.45 a | 3.01±0.09 a | 55.57±5.15 a | 46.78±0.26 a | 6.28±0.82 ab | 2.96±0.10 b | 21.37±1.68 a | 16.40±0.80 a | |
T4 | 4.17±0.59 a | 2.95±0.18 a | 53.42±7.27 a | 46.85±0.11 a | 6.02±0.77 ab | 2.93±0.13 b | 20.29±1.52 a | 14.73±1.70 a | |
T5 | 4.18±1.38 a | 3.18±0.14 a | 54.74±5.22 a | 47.00±0.26 a | 6.27±0.34 ab | 2.82±0.30 b | 20.54±0.38 a | 15.77±1.47 a | |
T6 | 4.36±0.57 a | 3.07±0.09 a | 55.93±8.30 a | 46.84±0.61 a | 6.68±0.63 a | 3.20±0.23 a | 21.51±1.57 a | 15.90±1.20 a |
表4 不同施肥处理茶树新梢中的养分元素含量
Table 4 Nutrient elements content in tea shoot of different fertilization treatments
年份Year | 处理Ttreatment | N/% | C/% | P/(g·kg-1) | K/(g·kg-1) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | 春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | 春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | 春茶 Spring tea | 夏秋茶Summer and autumn tea | ||
2019 | T1 | 4.87±0.14 b | 2.91±0.07 b | 45.45±0.34 a | 46.59±0.26 a | 4.72±0.13 a | 2.91±0.33 b | 18.36±0.49 a | 18.77±3.21 b |
T2 | 5.14±0.08 a | 2.96±0.09 ab | 45.27±0.18 a | 46.64±0.11 a | 4.68±0.09 a | 2.91±0.39 b | 17.48±0.45 a | 18.41±2.54 b | |
T3 | 5.19±0.11 a | 3.13±0.08 a | 44.88±0.21 a | 46.63±0.15 a | 4.78±0.05 a | 2.94±0.25 b | 19.95±0.45 a | 18.90±1.73 b | |
T4 | 4.95±0.07 ab | 3.07±0.09 ab | 45.30±0.25 a | 46.58±0.23 a | 4.73±0.10 a | 3.18±0.30 ab | 18.27±0.47 a | 19.65±1.28 b | |
T5 | 5.05±0.13 ab | 3.20±0.17 a | 45.28±0.26 a | 46.48±0.07 a | 4.68±0.12 a | 3.32±0.22 a | 18.34±0.39 a | 18.35±0.92 b | |
T6 | 5.25±0.10 a | 3.19±0.11 a | 44.71±0.28 a | 46.55±0.17 a | 4.68±0.07 a | 3.33±0.48 a | 19.14±0.25 a | 20.59±1.24 a | |
2020 | T1 | 4.16±0.80 a | 2.62±0.22 a | 55.61±6.61 a | 46.61±0.10 a | 5.96±0.37 b | 2.88±0.10 b | 20.34±0.98 a | 15.32±0.76 a |
T2 | 4.18±0.31 a | 2.93±0.05 a | 54.73±5.22 a | 46.87±0.27 a | 6.27±0.34 ab | 2.96±0.18 b | 20.54±0.38 a | 15.96±1.40 a | |
T3 | 4.82±0.45 a | 3.01±0.09 a | 55.57±5.15 a | 46.78±0.26 a | 6.28±0.82 ab | 2.96±0.10 b | 21.37±1.68 a | 16.40±0.80 a | |
T4 | 4.17±0.59 a | 2.95±0.18 a | 53.42±7.27 a | 46.85±0.11 a | 6.02±0.77 ab | 2.93±0.13 b | 20.29±1.52 a | 14.73±1.70 a | |
T5 | 4.18±1.38 a | 3.18±0.14 a | 54.74±5.22 a | 47.00±0.26 a | 6.27±0.34 ab | 2.82±0.30 b | 20.54±0.38 a | 15.77±1.47 a | |
T6 | 4.36±0.57 a | 3.07±0.09 a | 55.93±8.30 a | 46.84±0.61 a | 6.68±0.63 a | 3.20±0.23 a | 21.51±1.57 a | 15.90±1.20 a |
图4 不同施肥处理下不同土层土壤铵态氮和硝态氮含量注:不同小写字母表示在P<0.05水平差异显著。
Fig.4 The content of ammonium nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen in different soil layers under different fertilization treatmentsNote: Different small letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05 level.
图5 不同施肥处理下表层土壤有效磷含量注:不同小写字母表示在P<0.05水平差异显著。
Fig.5 Soil available phosphorus content in topsoil layers under different fertilization treatmentsNote: Different small letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05 level.
图6 不同施肥处理下不同土层速效钾含量注:不同小写字母表示在P<0.05水平差异显著。
Fig.6 The content of available potassium in different soil layers under different fertilization treatmentsNote: Different small letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05 level.
处理 Treat- ment | 手采春茶 产量 Yield of hand picked spring tea/(kg·hm-2) | 机采春茶 产量 Yield of mechanical picked spring tea/ (kg·hm-2) | 机采夏秋茶 产量 Yield of mechanical picked summer and autumn tea/(kg·hm-2) | 茶园年收入 Annual income of tea plantation/ (104 yuan·hm-2) | 肥料用量 fertilizer amount/ (kg·hm-2) | 肥料单价 Fertilizer price/ (yuan·kg-1) | 肥料成本 The cost of fertilizer/(104 yuan·hm-2) | 人工费用 Labor cost/(104yuan·hm-2) | 利润 Profit/(104yuan·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T1 | 2 189.58 | 6 184.30 | 8 030.17 | 17.22 | — | — | — | 9.56 | 7.66 |
T2 | 3 200.42 | 6 785.43 | 9 951.15 | 23.91 | 1 500.00 | 4.00 | 0.60 | 14.20 | 9.11 |
T3 | 3 501.67 | 6 739.73 | 9 783.76 | 25.66 | 3 333.30 | 5.00 | 1.67 | 16.47 | 7.53 |
T4 | 3 560.83 | 7 199.47 | 9 792.20 | 26.20 | 1 500.00 | 4.00 | 0.60 | 15.64 | 9.96 |
T5 | 3 572.92 | 7 625.95 | 10 231.51 | 26.53 | 2 045.50 | 3.50 | 0.72 | 15.81 | 10.01 |
T6 | 3 456.25 | 7 409.49 | 9 445.10 | 25.59 | 2 647.10 | 0.93 | 9.27 | 15.55 | 9.76 |
表5 茶园周年经济效益
Table 5 Tea garden annual economic benefits
处理 Treat- ment | 手采春茶 产量 Yield of hand picked spring tea/(kg·hm-2) | 机采春茶 产量 Yield of mechanical picked spring tea/ (kg·hm-2) | 机采夏秋茶 产量 Yield of mechanical picked summer and autumn tea/(kg·hm-2) | 茶园年收入 Annual income of tea plantation/ (104 yuan·hm-2) | 肥料用量 fertilizer amount/ (kg·hm-2) | 肥料单价 Fertilizer price/ (yuan·kg-1) | 肥料成本 The cost of fertilizer/(104 yuan·hm-2) | 人工费用 Labor cost/(104yuan·hm-2) | 利润 Profit/(104yuan·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T1 | 2 189.58 | 6 184.30 | 8 030.17 | 17.22 | — | — | — | 9.56 | 7.66 |
T2 | 3 200.42 | 6 785.43 | 9 951.15 | 23.91 | 1 500.00 | 4.00 | 0.60 | 14.20 | 9.11 |
T3 | 3 501.67 | 6 739.73 | 9 783.76 | 25.66 | 3 333.30 | 5.00 | 1.67 | 16.47 | 7.53 |
T4 | 3 560.83 | 7 199.47 | 9 792.20 | 26.20 | 1 500.00 | 4.00 | 0.60 | 15.64 | 9.96 |
T5 | 3 572.92 | 7 625.95 | 10 231.51 | 26.53 | 2 045.50 | 3.50 | 0.72 | 15.81 | 10.01 |
T6 | 3 456.25 | 7 409.49 | 9 445.10 | 25.59 | 2 647.10 | 0.93 | 9.27 | 15.55 | 9.76 |
1 | 苏祝成.茶产业组织结构与绩效研究[D].杭州:浙江大学,2001. |
SU Z C. Studies on organizational structure and economic performance of tea industry [D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2001. | |
2 | JAROSIEWICZ A, TOMASZEWSKA OMASZEWSKA M. Controlled-release NPK fertilizer encapsulated by polymeric membranes [J]. J. Agric. Food Chem., 2003, 51(2): 413-417. |
3 | 张民,史衍玺,杨守祥,等.控释和缓释肥的研究现状与进展[J].化肥工业,2001,28(5):27-30, 63. |
ZHANG M, SHI Y X, YANG S X, et al.. Status quo of study of controlled-release and slow-release fertilizers and progress made in this respect [J]. J.Chem.Fert.Ind., 2001, 28(5): 27-30, 63. | |
4 | 曾婕,张德全,闻禄,等.长期不同施肥模式对茶叶产量与土壤肥力的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2020,48(3):161-166. |
ZENG J, ZHANG D Q, WEN Let al.. Effects of different long-term fertilization patterns on yield of tea and soil fertility [J]. Anhui Agric. Sci., 2020, 48(3): 161-166. | |
5 | 张群峰,倪康,伊晓云,等.中国茶树镁营养研究进展与展望[J].茶叶科学,2021,41(1):19-27. |
Zhang Q F, Ni K, Yi X Y, et al.. Advances of magnesium nutrition in tea plant [J]. J. Tea Sci., 2021, 41(1): 19-27. | |
6 | RUAN L, WANG L, WEI K, et al.. Comparative analysis of nitrogen spatial heterogeneity responses in low nitrogen susceptible and tolerant tea plants (Camellia sinensis) [J]. Sci. Hortic., 2019, 246: 182-189. |
7 | 李倩,王玉,侯君合,等.崂山绿茶品质及其与土壤肥力关系的研究[J].土壤通报,2010,41(5):1101-1104. |
LI Q, WANG Y, HOU J H, et al.. Quality of Laoshan green tea and its relationship with soil fertility factor [J]. J. Soil Sci., 2010, 41(5): 1101-1104. | |
8 | 田润泉,吕闰强.配方施肥对茶园土壤养分状况及茶鲜叶产量品质的影响[J].茶叶学报,2016,57(3):149-152. |
TIAN R Q, LYU R Q. Effect of formulated fertilization on nutrient in soil, quality and yield of tea shoots [J]. Acta Tea Sin., 2016, 57(3): 149-152. | |
9 | 马立锋,苏孔武,黎金兰,等.控释氮肥对茶叶产量、品质和氮素利用效率及经济效益的影响[J].茶叶科学,2015,35(4):354-362. |
MA L F, SU K W, LI J L, et al.. Effects of controlled-release nitrogen fertilizer on tea yield, quality, nitrogen use efficiency and economic benefit [J]. J. Tea Sci., 2015, 35(4): 354-362. | |
10 | 陈琳,乔志刚,李恋卿,等.施用生物质炭基肥对水稻产量及氮素利用的影响[J].生态与农村环境学报,2013,5(5):671-675. |
CHEN L, QIAO Z G, LI L Q, et al.. Effects of biocher-based fertilizers on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiency [J]. J. Ecol. Rural Environ., 2013, 5(5): 671-675. | |
11 | 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. 茶磨碎试样的制备及其干物质含量测定: [S].北京:中国标准出版社,2014. |
12 | 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. 茶游离氨基酸总量的测定: [S].北京:中国标准出版社,2014. |
13 | 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. 茶叶中茶多酚和儿茶素类含量的检测方法: [S].北京:中国标准出版社,2018. |
14 | 王继琛. 长期施肥对稻麦轮作系统土壤细菌及氮转化微生物群落影响的研究[D].南京:南京农业大学,2018. |
WANG J C. Effects of long-trem different fertilization regimes on soil bacterial and nitrogen-cycling related communities in a rice-wheat rotation system [D]. Nanjing:Nanjing Agricultural University, 2018. | |
15 | 尤雪琴,杨亚军,阮建云.田间条件下不同园龄茶树氮、磷、钾养分需求规律的研究[J].茶叶科学,2008,28(3):207-213. |
YOU X Q, YANG Y J, RUAN J Y. Requirement on nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium by tea plants with different ages under field conditions[J]. J. Tea Sci., 2008, 28(3): 207-213. | |
16 | 李德超. 蒙顶山茶叶品牌现状调查及推广对策分析[D].成都:四川农业大学,2016. |
Li D C.Mengding tea brands status investigate and extension countermeasures analysis [D].Chengdu:Sichuan Agricultural University, 2016. | |
17 | 倪康,廖万有,伊晓云 等.我国茶园施肥现状与减施潜力分析[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2019,25(3):421-432. |
NI K, LIAO W Y, YIN X Y, et al.. Fertilization status and reduction potential in tea gardens of China [J]. J. Plant Nutr. Fert., 2019, 25(3): 421-432. | |
18 | 马立锋,陈红金,单英杰,等.浙江省绿茶主产区茶园施肥现状及建议[J].茶叶科学,2013,33(1):74-84. |
MA L F, CHEN H J, SHAN Y J, et al.. Status and suggestions of tea garden fertilization on main green tea-producing counties in Zhejiang province [J]. J. Tea Sci., 2013, 33(1): 74-84. | |
19 | 舒启华.汉中市无性系良种茶园现状及品种选择建议[J].基层农技推广,2016,4(3):82-84. |
Shu Q H.Current situation and variety selection suggestions of clonal improved tea gardens in Hanzhong City [J] Prim. Agric. Tech. Ext., 2016,4(3):82-84. | |
20 | RUAN J Y, Gerendás J, Härdter R, et al. Effect of nitrogen form and root-zone pH on growth and nitrogen uptake of tea (Camellia sinensis) plants [J]. Ann. Bot., 2007, 99(2): 301-310. |
21 | 吴晓荣,张蓓蓓,余云飞,等.硝化抑制剂对典型茶园土壤尿素硝化过程的影响[J].农业环境科学学报,2017,36(10):2063-2070. |
WU X R, ZHANG B B, YU Y F, et al. Effects of nitrification inhibitors on nitrification rate of urea in four typical tea soils [J]. J. Agro. Environ. Sci., 2017, 36(10): 2063-2070. | |
22 | 刘岑薇,叶菁,李艳春 等.生物炭对茶园酸性红壤氮素养分淋溶的影响[J].中国农业科技导报,2020,22(5):181-186. |
LIU C W, YE Q, LI Y C, et al.. Effects of Biochar on soil nitrogen leaching in acid red loam of tea garden[J]. J. Agric. Sci. Tech., 2020, 22(5): 181-186. | |
23 | RICHARDSON A E, HOCKING P J, SIMPSON R J, et al.. Plant mechanisms to optimize access to soil phosphorus [J]. Crop Pasture Sci., 2009, 60: 124-143. |
24 | 韩文炎,石元值,马立峰.茶园钾素研究进展与施钾技术[J].中国茶叶,2004(1):22-24. |
HAN W Y, SHI Y Z, MA L F. Research progress of potassium in tea garden and potassium application technology [J]. China Tea, 2004(1): 22-24. | |
25 | RUAN J Y, MA L F, SHI Y Z. Potassium management in tea plantations: its uptake by field plants, status in soils, and efficacy on yields and quality of teas in China [J]. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci., 2013, 176(3): 450-459. |
26 | TAN H W, DU C L, ZHOU L Q. Effect of magnesium fertilizer on sustaining upland agricultural development in Guangxi province [J]. Better Crops Int., 2000, 14(2): 13-15. |
27 | 牛新湘,马兴旺.农田土壤养分淋溶的研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2011,27(3):451-156. |
NIU X X, MA X W. Research advances on leaching of fertilizer nutrients from agricultural soils [J]. China Agron. Bull., 2011, 27(3): 451-156. | |
28 | 段玉环,郑西来,辛佳,等.土壤中新型肥料氮素淋失特征研究[J].安徽农学通报,2016,22(8):16-20. |
DUAN Y H, ZHENG X L, XIN J, et al.. Nitrogen leaching characteristics of new emerging fertilizers in soil [J]. Anhui Agric. Sci. Bull., 2016, 22(8): 16-20. | |
29 | 武志杰,石元亮,李东坡,等.稳定性肥料发展与展望[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2017,23(6):1614-1621. |
WU Z J, SHI Y L, LI D P, et al.. The development and outlook of stabilized fertilizers [J]. J. Plant Nutr. Fertil. Sci., 2017, 23(6): 1614-1621. | |
30 | 赵蒙,曾科,姚元林,等.聚脲甲醛缓释肥对太湖稻麦轮作体系氨挥发及产量的影响[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2019,25(1)55-63. |
ZHAO M, ZENG K, YAO Y L, et al.. Effects of polyuria-formaldehyde on ammonia volatilization and yield under rice-wheat rotation system in Taihu Region [J]. J. Plant Nutr. Fertil. Sci., 2019, 25(1): 55-63. | |
31 | 宋涛,尹俊慧,胡兆平 等.脲酶/硝化抑制剂减少农田土壤氮素损失的作用特征[J].农业资源与环境学报,2021,38(4):585-597. |
SONG T, YIN J H, HU Z P, et al.. Characteristics of urease/nitrification inhibitors in reducing nitrogen losses in farmland soils[J]. J. Agric. Resour. Environ., 2021, 38(4): 585-597. | |
32 | 金晶,刁学刚,冯海强.2019年浙江茶产业现状及发展趋势预测[J].中国茶叶,2020,42(3)53-57. |
JIN J, DIAO X G, FENG H Q. The current situation and development trend forecast of Zhejiang tea industry in 2019 [J]. Chin. Tea, 2020, 42(3): 53-57. |
[1] | 董云萍, 龙宇宙, 林兴军, 莫丽珍, 朱华康, 赵青云, 孙燕. 不同施肥量对小粒咖啡产量、品质及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(3): 197-203. |
[2] | 周旋, 杨嫔玲, 彭建伟, 柴慧清, 钟雪梅, 康兴蓉, 龙俊佑, 张慧茹. 功能菌型复合肥减施对结球甘蓝产量、品质及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(2): 184-192. |
[3] | 孙万仓, 裴新梧, 马骊, 王学芳, 武军艳, 李学才, 蒲媛媛, 刘丽君, 柴鹏, 李孝泽, 贾玉娟, 王积军, 刘芳, 陈其鲜, 沈金雄. 我国北方冬季覆盖作物研究进展及发展前景[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(1): 128-136. |
[4] | 周旋, 康兴蓉, 彭建伟, 杨相东, 钟雪梅, 胡文峰, 龙俊佑. 聚氨酯包膜氮肥减施对双季早稻生长、产量及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2021, 23(7): 153-161. |
[5] | 赵婧文,张庆伟,李政,张文太*. 膜下滴灌施用生物有机肥对土壤盐分及棉花产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2019, 21(3): 102-108. |
[6] | 赵建设1,2,杨巧云1,2,谢凯权1,2,吴超1,2,蒋高明3,4,李小芳1,2,胡波5,郭立月3,4*. “稻鸭共作”模式的生态效益及其在生态农场应用的经济效益分析[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2019, 21(11): 149-156. |
[7] | 闫金垚1,鲁君明2,侯文峰1,李小坤1*. 磷肥用量对不同水稻品种产量和磷肥利用率的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2018, 20(8): 74-81. |
[8] | 李凯旭1,鲁剑巍1,鲁明星2,徐维明3,王振4,彭文勇5,李小坤1*. 不同专用配方肥对水稻产量、养分吸收及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2017, 19(1): 100-107. |
[9] | 胡贺年,窦学诚*. 基于DEA方法的种业经济效益评价研究 ——以张掖市玉米种业为例[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2015, 17(6): 150-157. |
[10] | 徐小菊. 公司制农业在现代农业中的前景——浙江省台州罗氏果业有限公司的调查和思考[J]. , 2004, 6(1): 25-28. |
[11] | 王秦俊 雷丽君. 农业科技示范园区产生的原因、现状和发展对策[J]. , 2004, 6(1): 75-77. |
[12] | 韩涛 李丽萍 王有年 张海英. 构筑采后工程体系保持果品品质提高经济效益[J]. , 2003, 5(4): 61-64. |
[13] | 王玉柱 孙浩元 等. 我国杏树发展现状分析及建议[J]. , 2003, 5(2): 24-27. |
[14] | 陈印军[1] 徐芳[2]. 北京农业结构调整方向与应注意的问题[J]. , 2002, 4(3): 57-61. |
[15] | 吴文良. 论我国生态农业的技术创新与保障体系建设[J]. , 2001, 3(5): 13-16. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||