摘要
【目的】研究不同类型复合生态茶园经济效益及茶园土壤肥力的差异,为茶园管理与决策优化提供科学指导。【方法】试验地位于浙江省,始于2012年。供试茶园包括单一种植(CK)、茶草复合(GT)、茶菌复合(BT)和茶禽复合(PT)4种生态模式,均已持续经营10年。2019—2021年调查了茶叶产量、收入与支出明细,2021年采集0—60 cm茶园土壤测定pH、有机质、养分含量等指标,利用模糊综合评判法对土壤进行了综合肥力评价。以茶园收入作为经济指标,土壤pH、土壤有机质(SOM)、综合肥力作为生态指标,对不同类型茶园经济与生态效益进行了对比分析。【结果】1)CK模式茶园3年茶叶平均产量为189 kg/hm^(2),净收入为65000元/hm^(2)。GT、PT和BT模式的茶叶平均产量分别较CK模式提高了63.5%、79.4%和99.2%,3年平均净收入提高了66.7%、99.7%和83.7%,BT模式中的黑木耳和PT模式中的散养鸡带来的附加收入,分别占该模式总收入的40.9%和22.1%。CK、GT、PT和BT模式下茶园的产投比分别是2.57、3.23、3.69和2.51,GT和PT模式的产投比高于CK模式,而BT模式产投比与CK模式相当。2)CK模式0—20 cm土层土壤pH由10年前的4.23下降至3.69,而GT、PT和BT模式的土壤pH分别上升至6.93、4.55和5.41,GT模式缓解茶园土壤酸化的效果最佳,BT模式其次,PT模式也有一定的效果。与CK模式相比,GT、PT和BT模式茶树根区土壤0—20 cm土层SOM无显著差异,20—40和40—60 cm土层SOM显著提升,0—60 cm土层SOM含量GT、PT和BT模式分别较CK提高了39.5%、21.8%和7.54%(P<0.05),GT模式增加土壤有机质的效果明显优于PT模式,后者又明显优于BT模式;GT、PT和BT模式下0—20 cm土层土壤肥力指数较CK模式下分别提高了77.6%、68.3%和44.8%,GT和PT模式提升表层土壤肥力指数的效果优于BT模式。CK模式下40—60 cm土层土壤铵态氮和硝态氮含量显著高于0—20 cm土层,分别是表层土壤的1.58和2.57倍,而其他3个复合生态模式下40—60 cm土层土壤铵态氮和硝态氮含量多低于0—20 cm土层,降低了养分淋溶风险。【结论】与单一种茶模式相比,复合生态栽培模式在茶园经济效益和生态效益方面有明显优势,调查的3个复合模式各有优势。茶禽、茶菌复合模式较茶草模式提高茶叶产量的效果更大,还通过茶、菌收入显著提高了茶园净收入,茶禽模式的产投比最高。而茶草复合模式缓解茶园土壤酸化问题、增加茶园土壤有机质含量、提升土壤肥力、降低氮淋溶风险的生态效益大大高于茶菌和茶禽复合模式。
【Objectives】Investigating the effects of management models on soil fertility and the economic benefit of tea plantations can provide a scientific guidance for optimizing the management and green development of tea plantations in the agricultural industry.【Methods】This study was conducted in Zhejiang Province in 2012.The four tea plantation models surveyed were pure tea(CK),planting grass between tea trees(GT),cultivating mushroom under tea trees(BT),and raising meat chickens in tea garden(PT).All the four models have existed for 10 years.Tea yield,income,and expenditure from 2019 to 2021 were investigated.Soil samples at 0−20 cm,20−40 cm,and 40−60 cm depth were collected in 2021 to determine pH,soil organic matter(SOM),total and available nutrient contents.The comprehensive soil fertility was evaluated by Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method.【Results】Compared with CK,GT,PT,and BT increased the average tea yield by 63.5%,79.4%,and 99.2%and enhanced the net income by 66.7%,99.7%,and 83.7%,respectively.Black fungus and free-walking chicken in BT and PT models contributed additional income of 40.9%and 22.1%,respectively.The ratio of income to investment in CK,GT,PT,and BT models was 2.57,3.23,3.69,and 2.51,respectively.GT and PT had higher income and investment ratio while BT recorded similar value to CK.During 10 years experiment,soil pH at 0−20 cm in the CK decreased from 4.23 to 3.69,while in GT,PT,and BT increased to 6.93,4.55 and 5.41,respectively,alleviating soil acidification.Compared with CK,SOM at 0−20 cm soil depth did not change in GT,PT,and BT.However,SOM at 20−40 cm and 40−60 cm depth increased in GT,PT,and BT,respectively.Overall,SOM in GT,PT,and BT were significantly increased by 39.5%,21.8%,and 7.54%,respectively at the depth of 0−60 cm.Compared with CK,0−20 cm soil fertility index in the GT,PT,and BT increased by 77.6%,68.3%,and 44.8%,respectively,and the effect of GT and PT models was better than BT.Under CK model,NH4+-N and NO3−-N content was higher in 40−60 cm soil than 0−20 cm depth,which were 1.58 and 2.57 times of those in the surface soil.【Conclusions】All the three multiple tea plantation models showed higher merits than the pure traditional tea plantation,despite differences in their economic and ecological benefits.Tea-mushroom and tea-chicken plantation had higher tea yield and generated extra income through the sale of chicken and mushroom.The tea-chicken model had the highest production-investment ratio;grass-tea plantation showed higher efficiency in alleviating soil acidification,improved soil fertility,and reduced the risk of N leaching.
作者
何晨
田琳琳
伊晓云
杨向德
李海涛
蔡延江
倪康
石元值
HE Chen;TIAN Lin-lin;YI Xiao-yun;YANG Xiang-de;LI Hai-tao;CAI Yan-jiang;NI Kang;SHI Yuan-zhi(College of Forestry and Biotechnology,Zhejiang A&F University,Hangzhou,Zhejiang 311300,China;Tea Research Institute of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Key Laboratory of Biology,Genetics and Breeding of Special Economic Animals and Plants,Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs,Hangzhou,Zhejiang 310008,China;State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Silviculture,Zhejiang A&F University/College of Environmental and Resource Sciences,Zhejiang A&F University,Hangzhou,Zhejiang 311300,China)
出处
《植物营养与肥料学报》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2023年第4期722-731,共10页
Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers
基金
国家重点研发项目(2021YFD1601100)
财政部和农业农村部–国家现代农业产业技术体系(CARS-19)。
关键词
复合生态茶园
经济效益
生态效益
土壤肥力指数
模糊综合评判法
compound ecological tea plantations
economic benefit
ecological benefit
soil fertility index
fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method
