Short Term Effects of Compound and Phosphate Fertilizer on the Growth of Juvenile Pinus Yunnanensis Plantation

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2021.01.024

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to understand the short-term(one year after fertilization) growth effects of compound fertilizer(including slow- release fertilizer,SRF) and phosphate(P) fertilizer on a 12-year-old Pinus yunnanensis plantation,the L₉(3 ⁴) orthogonal design was employed to implement the trial.At one year after fertilization,the growth rates of diameters at breast height(DBHs),tree height(THs) and individual tree volumes(ITVs) of treatment combinations(TCs) were 4.29%~12.37%,7.96%~22.58% and 20.13%~38.39%,while numbers of control were 3.80%,10.21% and 15.76%,respectively,which was of significant difference between the TCs(P<0.01).The dominant factor affecting growth rate of the DBH was the type of fertilizer,while which of the TH and ITV was the amount of the P fertilizer.The growth rates of the THs went up with the increase of P fertilizer application,while DBH was opposite.The interaction of fertilizer types and P fertilizer amount had significant difference effects on the DBH and TH growth rates(P<0.01 or P<0.05).The demand of nutrient types and quantity for the DBH and TH growth of juvenile P.yunnanensis was different,and the fertilization of the forest primarily focuses on promoting the DBH growth.Suitable types of compound fertilizer and P fertilizer amount could significantly improve the growth of trees.Accurate fertilization could be achieved by taking every 5cm diameter of the DBH as the calculation unit of fertilization.The combination of the 0.75 and 0.50 kg/5 cm of 9-month SRF and diammonium phosphate could promote the growth of juvenile P.yunnanensis plantation and increase the stand volume in a short period of one year after fertilization based on comprehensive results of the optimal combination of theory and practice,the interaction results of compound fertilizer types and P fertilization amount,and the dominant factors affecting the timber volume of the stand.

Key words: pinus yunnanensis, orthogonal design, forest tree, growth rate, short term, interaction, forest fertilization

CLC Number:

S725.5

FU Zhigao, LI Lianfang. Short Term Effects of Compound and Phosphate Fertilizer on the Growth of Juvenile Pinus Yunnanensis Plantation[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2021, (1): 189-196.

Figures/Tables 6

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

Fig.1

References 27

[1]	中国科学院昆明植物研究所. 云南植物志:第四卷(松科)[M]. 昆明: 科学出版社, 1986: 54-55.
[2]	金振洲, 彭鉴. 云南松[M]. 昆明: 云南科技出版社, 2004.
[3]	邓喜庆, 皇宝林, 温庆忠, 等. 云南松林资源动态研究[J]. 自然资源学报, 2014,29(8):1411-1419.
[4]	中国科技情报所. 林木施肥专集[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2000: 135.
[5]	周元福. 我国施肥技术与施肥机械的研究现状及对策[J]. 工程技术:全文版, 2016(43):248-249.
[6]	Heiskanen J, Lahti M, Luoranen J. Nutrient loading has a transitory effect on the nitrogen status and growth of out planted Norway spruce seedlings[J]. Silva Fennica, 2009,43(2):249-260.
[7]	韩晓日. 新型缓/控释肥料研究现状与展望[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2006,37(1):3-8.
[8]	梁坤南, 王尚明, 杨国清, 等. 柚木种源/施肥试验初报[J]. 广东林业科技, 2002,18(2):5-9.
[9]	王金凤, 陈卓梅, 刘济祥, 等. 不同基质及缓释肥对南方红豆杉容器大苗生长的影响[J]. 浙江林业科技, 2016(2):74-78.
[10]	万芳芳, 刘勇, 李国雷, 等. 底部渗灌下缓释肥对华北落叶松容器苗生长和氮积累的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报:自然科学版, 2017,41(1):75-81.
[11]	姚光刚, 李国雷, 郑永林, 等. 缓释肥施用量对槲栎容器苗苗木质量的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报:自然科学版, 2019,43(1):69-75.
[12]	曹永庆, 任华东, 林萍, 等. 缓释肥在油茶容器育苗中的应用[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2011,39(22):13473.
[13]	何祯, 王宗星, 冯博杰, 等. 巨桉中幼林施肥效果试验[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2019,60(8):1458-1459.
[14]	万项成. 施肥对蒙古栎幼林生长及生理特性的影响[D]. 沈阳:沈阳农业大学, 2019.
[15]	陈伟, 杨斌, 史富强, 等. 配方施肥对西南桦幼林生长的影响[J]. 西部林业科学, 2015,44(5):81-84.
[16]	田应佳, 赵敏冲, 刘建忠. 磷肥对油茶低产林幼林生长的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2019,47(15):110-111.
[17]	彭超, 李莲芳, 王慷林, 等. 宜良禄丰村林场云南松天然更新分析[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2012,32(11):42-46.
[18]	李莲芳, 王慷林, 段安安, 等. 昆明宜良尖山云南松林的土壤理化特性[J]. 云南农业大学学报:自然科学, 2017,32(1):146-152.
[19]	孟宪宇. 测树学:3版[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2006, 174-175.
[20]	韩汉鹏. 试验统计引论[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2006: 93-98.
[21]	胡荣仙. 施肥对湿地松幼龄林木材性质影响效应的研究[D]. 武汉:华中农业大学, 2011.
[22]	李勇. 3种不同复合肥对杉木幼林生长量的影响[J]. 广西林业科学, 2017,46(3):280-283.
[23]	卓国庆, 吴晓明, 张辉, 等. 杉木人工幼林施肥技术[J]. 林业实用技术, 2008(S1):21-22.
[24]	陈代喜, 陈健波, 黄锦芬, 等. 尾叶桉幼林施肥效应初步研究[J]. 广西林业科学, 1995(4):169-172.
[25]	赵敏冲, 赵华, 刘建忠, 等. 磷肥对杉木低产林幼林生长的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2015(6):105-108.
[26]	梁晓静, 韦晓娟, 梁文汇, 等. 不同配比施肥对肉桂人工林生长的影响[J]. 广西林业科学, 2019,48(3):353-356.
[27]	李宝福, 俞元春, 林志鹏, 等. 桉树幼林施肥的养分间交互效应及合理施肥方案研究[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2011(4):38-44.

土层	特性
土层	含水率 /%	容重/ (g/cm³)	有机质/ (g/kg)	pH值	总氮/ (g/kg)	效氮/ (mg/kg)	总磷/ (g/kg)	效磷/ (mg/kg)	总钾/ (g/kg)	效钾/ (mg/kg)
0~20cm	8.2~10.2	1.2~1.5	28.0~44.6	4.0~4.5	1.0~1.8	80.0~125.0	0.2~0.4	0.6~3.2	5.0~23.7	67.5~130.5
20~40cm	8.9~13.6	1.5~1.7	5.9~19.6	4.1~4.9	0.3~1.1	23.0~69.0	0.2~0.4	0.0~0.5	5.2~24.8	67.0~128.5

水平	因素
水平	肥料种类 (A)	施肥量(B) (kg/5cm)	磷肥(C) (kg/5cm)
1	A₁—6个月SRF	B₁—0.25	C₁—0.50
2	A₂—9个月SRF	B₂—0.50	C₂—0.75
3	A₃—复合肥	B₃—0.75	C₃—1.00

试验号	列号
试验号	1-A	2-B	3-C	4-空	处理组合	试验方案
1	1	1	1	1	A₁B₁C₁	6个月缓释肥0.25kg/5cm,磷肥0.50kg/5cm。
2	1	2	2	2	A₁B₂C₂	6个月缓释肥0.50kg/5cm,磷肥0.75kg/5cm。
3	1	3	3	3	A₁B₃C₃	6个月缓释肥0.75kg/5cm,磷肥1.00kg/5cm。
4	2	1	2	3	A₂B₁C₂	9个月缓释肥0.25kg/5cm,磷肥0.75kg/5cm。
5	2	2	3	1	A₂B₂C₃	9个月缓释肥0.50kg/5cm,磷肥1.00kg/5cm。
6	2	3	1	2	A₂B₃C₁	9个月缓释肥0.75kg/5cm,磷肥0.50kg/5cm。
7	3	1	3	2	A₃B₁C₃	复合肥0.25kg/5cm,磷肥1.00kg/5cm。
8	3	2	1	3	A₃B₂C₁	复合肥0.50kg/5cm,磷肥0.50kg/5cm。
9	3	3	2	1	A₃B₃C₂	复合肥0.75kg/5cm,磷肥0.75kg/5cm

处理组合	施肥前			施肥后1a的增长率/%
处理组合	胸径/ cm	树高/ m	材积/ (m³/株)	胸径	CV	树高	CV	材积	CV
1	12.9	7.0	0.056	8.20±0.43^Bbc	19.18	12.17±2.26^ABb	14.40	27.20±1.97^ABb	19.18
2	11.9	6.2	0.044	5.22±0.56^Ccd	29.65	17.32±2.53^ABab	29.29	24.65±2.76^Bbc	29.65
3	13.4	7.4	0.063	6.67±0.89^Bc	43.53	10.09±2.52^Bb	36.53	22.13±3.64^Bbc	45.53
4	10.8	6.7	0.038	9.50±2.29^ABb	66.62	7.96±1.52^Bc	67.92	27.14±6.83^ABb	66.62
5	11.7	6.2	0.042	4.29±0.69^Ccd	13.67	22.58±1.21^Aa	44.02	26.60±1.37^ABb	13.67
6	10.5	6.3	0.035	12.37±0.74^Aa	19.31	13.67±2.26^ABb	16.83	38.39±2.80^Aa	19.31
7	12.1	6.5	0.047	6.43±0.74^Bc	55.37	18.69±6.89^ABab	31.40	28.41±5.94^ABb	55.37
8	11.7	7.0	0.046	10.31±1.11^ABab	32.14	9.90±1.79^Bb	29.67	30.27±3.68^ABab	32.14
9	12.3	6.7	0.050	4.79±0.42^Ccd	30.42	12.96±2.62^ABb	23.61	20.13±2.31^Bbc	30.42
ck	13.0	7.1	0.058	3.80±0.26^Cd	40.87	10.21±1.16^Bb	66.22	15.76±1.14^Cc	43.27

类目	因素	X₁	X₂	X₃	极差(R)	优水平	主次因子	优水平组合
胸径/%	A	6.70^b	7.18^ab	11.4^a	4.70	A₃	A>C>A×C>B	A₃B₁C₁
	B	8.04	6.60	7.90	1.40	B₁
	C	10.30^Aa	6.50^Bb	5.80^Bb	4.50	C₁
	A×C	6.70	8.72	7.18	2.02	—
树高/%	A	13.19	13.9	14.74	1.60	A₃	C>A×C>B>A	A₃B₂C₃
	B	12.94	16.60	12.24	4.40	B₂
	C	11.92	12.75	17.12	5.20	C₃
	A×C	13.19	13.85	14.74	4.50	—
材积/%	A	24.66^b	30.71^a	26.27^ab	6.05	A₂	C>A=A×C>B	A₂B₁C₁
	B	27.58	27.13	26.89	0.69	B₁
	C	31.96^Aa	23.97^Bb	25.71^Bb	7.99	C₁
	A×C	24.66	30.71	26.27	6.05	—