土壤 (Soils), 2015, 47(4): 812 818 DOI: 10.13758/j.cnki.tr.2015.04.028 1 不同土水比土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆电导率的比较研究 1,2 1* 2* (1 271018 2 100035) 1.. 5 1.. 2.5 1.. 1 1.. 0.5 ( ) 1.. 5 1.. 2.5 1.. 1 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 1.. 0.5 2 Ece = 2.042 8 EC 1.. 5 + 0.089 5 Tse = 0.064 1 (TS 1.. 0.5) 0.059 TS 1.. 0.5 + 0.397 9 S156.4 [1 3] [4 5] [3] (ECe) [6] 25 [7 9] [10 11] 1.. 5 (1.. 0.5 1.. 1 1.. 2.5 1.. 5 ) 1 1.1 12.3 543 ~ 842 mm (2009BAC55B07 2011BAD11B01 2011BAD11B02)948 (2011-G30) * (fpsong@126.com; jzs721@263.net) (1987 ) E-mail: guoxinsong1028@163.com
4 813 64% 1 962 mm 3.6 52% 1.5 m 1 表 1 供试土壤部分物理性状参数统计 (n = 54) Table 1 Statistics of physical properties of tested soil (g/cm 3 ) (%) 2.58 1.45 43.96 0.05 0.16 6.45 0.01 0.04 1.52 2.45 1.19 32.71 2.60 1.40 45.14 2.66 1.74 54.64 1.2 1.2.1 ( ) 1.. 0.5 1.. 1 1.. 2.5 1.. 5 DDS-308A 0 ~ 40 cm 2 mm 10.0 g 100 ml CO 2 5 10 25 50 ml 3 min (DDSJ- 308A ) EC 1.. 0.5 EC 1.. 1 EC 1.. 2.5 EC 1.. 5 1.2.2 [12] Wang [12] EC 1.. x = x n EC 1.. 1 n 1 x = ερ w /((1 ε) ρ s ) ε ρ s ρ w [13] ECs () 3 min (DDSJ-308A ) ECs 1.2.3 [1] 20 g CO 2 ( ) 6 h (DDSJ-308A ) ECe [2] 1.2.4 2 mm 100.0 g 1 000 ml CO 2 3 min 500 ml 50 ml 100 ml 80 ~ 90 105 ~ 110 (g/kg) = / 1 000 TS 1.. 0.5 TS 1.. 1 TS 1.. 2.5 TS 1.. 5 TSe 1.3 Excel SAS 2 2.1 32.71% ~ 54.64% 45.14% 18
814 47 y = 1.072 5x 29.279 R 2 =0.981 7( 1) 1.. 5 1.. 2.5 1.. 1 1.. 0.5 ( 3 4) 图 1 饱和土壤溶液含水量与饱和泥浆含水量线性关系 (n = 18) Fig. 1 Linear relation between water contents of saturated soil paste and saturated soil solution 图 3 不同土水比土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆电导率 Fig. 3 ECs of saturated soil paste and saturated soil solutions under different soil/water ratios (ECs) (ECe) ECe ECs (R 2 =0.999 9 P 0.01) y = 1.004 5x 0.007 8( 2) 图 4 不同土水比土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆土壤全盐含量 Fig. 4 TS contents of saturated soil paste and saturated soil solutions under different soil/water ratios 图 2 饱和土壤溶液电导率与饱和泥浆电导率线性关系 (n = 18) Fig. 2 Linear relation between ECs of saturated soil paste and saturated soil solution (SP) ( ECe ECs) ( ) 2.2 2.2.1 1.. 5 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 1.. 2.5 1.. 5 1.. 0.5
4 815 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 EC1.. 5 ECe TS 1.. 0.5 TSe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 1.. 2.5 1.. 1 1.. 0.5 ( 1.. 5) ( 1.. 0.5) 2.2.2 ( 2) 表 2 不同土水比土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆电导率及土壤全盐含量的相关性 (n = 54) Table 2 EC and TS correlation between saturated soil paste and saturated soil solutions under different soil/water ratios EC 1.. 5 EC 1.. 2.5 EC 1.. 1 EC 1.. 0.5 ECe TSe TS 1:5 0.929 1** 0.917 1** 0.922 6** 0.867 5* 0.904 7** 0.814 8** TS 1:2.5 0.974 8** 0.974 2** 0.972 8** 0.907 6** 0.949 7** 0.858 5** TS 1:1 0.994 3** 0.993 2** 0.995 8** 0.900 6** 0.951 5** 0.891 4** TS 1:0.5 0.859 4** 0.873 5** 0.858 5** 0.777 2** 0.763 1** 0.858 3** TSe 0.862 2** 0.870 9** 0.897 9** 0.678 7** 0.754 9** 1.000 0 ECe 0.974 0** 0.968 4** 0.952 3** 0.971 4** 1.000 0 9** * P 0.05 ** P<0.01 ECe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 EC 1.. 5 0.974 0** ECe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 TS1:1 0.951 5** TSe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 TS 1.. 1 0.891 4** TSe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 EC 1.. 1 0.897 9** ECe TSe 0.754 9** 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 1.. 1 2.3 2.3.1 EC 1.. 5 EC 1.. 2.5 EC 1.. 1 EC 1.. 0.5 ECe ECe EC 1.. 5 EC1.. 2.5 EC 1.. 1 EC 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 ECe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 EC ( 3) ECe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 EC R 2 ECe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 EC ECe EC 1.. 5 ECe EC 1.. 5 ECe = 2.042 8 EC 1.. 5 + 0.089 5 1.. 5 EC ECe
816 47 表 3 不同土水比的土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆电导率间拟合回归函数关系模型 (ms/cm) Table 3 EC regression model of saturated soil paste and saturated soil solutions under different soil/water ratios y = a + bx R 2 y = ax 2 + bx + c R 2 ECe EC 1.. 5 y = 2.042 8x + 0.089 5 0.948 6 y = 0.056x 2 + 2.406 6x 0.039 0.950 0 ECe EC 1.. 2.5 y = 1.135x + 0.131 0.937 7 y = 0.020 7x 2 + 1.374 7x 0.015 6 0.940 1 ECe EC 1.. 1 y = 0.433 3x + 0.381 6 0.906 9 y = 0.012 5x 2 + 0.818 8x 0.144 0.947 3 ECe EC 1.. 0.5 y = 0.570 6x + 0.077 9 0.943 5 y = 0.003 4x 2 + 0.491 1x + 0.178 4 0.945 3 ECe EC 1.. 5 [4] ECe EC1.. 5 (ECe = 8.24 EC 1.. 5 0.724 ECe = 3.79 EC 1.. 5 /SP 0.501 ) [18] (ECe = 10.82 EC 1.. 5 0.59) 2.3.2 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 TS 1.. 5 TS 1.. 2.5 TS 1.. 1 TS 1.. 0.5 TSe ( 4) 表 4 不同土水比的土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆全盐间拟合回归函数关系模型 (g/kg) Table 4 TS regression model of saturated soil paste and saturated soil solutions under different soil/water ratios y = a + bx R 2 y = ax 2 + bx + c R 2 TSe TS 1:5 y = 0.096 9x + 0.172 3 0.663 9 y = 0.001 9x 2 + 0.046 8x 0.294 4 0.680 5 TSe TS 1:2.5 y = 0.105 3x + 0.222 6 0.736 7 y = 0.003 9x 2 + 0.012 2x + 0.377 7 0.776 6 TSe TS 1:1 y = 0.110 2x + 0.278 7 0.770 9 y = 0.004 2x 2 + 0.013 4x + 0.399 1 0.802 2 TSe TS 1:0.5 y = 0.361 5x + 0.190 8 0.736 1 y = 0.064 1x 2 0.059x + 0.397 9 0.813 5 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 TSe 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 TS TSe TS 1.. 1 TSe TS 1.. 0.5 TSe TSe TS R 2 TSe TSe TS 1.. 0.5 1.. 0.5 TSe = 0.064 1 (TS 1.. 0.5 ) 2 0.059 TS 1.. 0.5 + 0.397 9 3 1) ( ) 2) 1.. 5 1.. 2.5 1.. 1 1.. 0.5 ( 1.. 2.5) ( 1.. 0.5) 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 1.. 1 3) 1.. 5 ~ 1.. 0.5 1.. 5 1.. 0.5
4 817 ECe = 2.042 8 EC 1.. 5 + 0.089 5 TSe = 0.064 1 (TS 1.. 0.5 ) 2 0.059 TS 1.. 0.5 + 0.397 9 [1] Rhoades JD, Manteghi NA, Shouse PJ, Alves WJ. Estimating soil salinity from saturated soil-paste electrical conductivity[j]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1989, 53(2): 428 433 [2] Heiniger RW, McBride RG, Clay DE. Using soil electrical conductivity to improve nutrient management[j]. Agronomy Journal, 2003, 95(3): 508 519 [3] Adviento-Borbe MAA, Doran JW, Drijber RA, Dobermann A. Soil electrical conductivity and water content affect nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide emissions in intensively managed soils[j]. Journal of Environmental Quality, 2006, 35(6): 1 999 2 010 [4],,. [J]., 1996, 27(6): 285 287 [5],. [J]., 2001, 32(Z1): 85 87 [6] Zhang H, Schroder JL, Pittman, JJ, Wang JJ, Payton ME. Soil salinity using saturated paste and 1.. 1 soil to water extracts[j]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2005, 69(4): 1 146 1 151 [7] Liu GM, Yang JS, Yao RJ. Electrical conductivity in soil extracts: Chemical factors and their intensity[j]. Pedosphere, 2006, 16(1): 100 107 [8]. [J]., 2000, 5(4): 39 41 [9],. [J]., 2000, 5(5): 59 66 [10],. [J]., 2001, 17(2): 20 23 [11],,. [J]., 2004, 20(1): 51 55 [12] Wang WZH, Watanabe E, Kobayashi T. A method for measuring soil solution electrical conductivity in the field using TDR[J]. J. Japan Soc. Hydrol. & Water Resour., 2005, 18(1): 55 63 [13],,,. [J]., 2011, 48(4): 869 873 [14] Rhoades JD, Manteghi NA, Shouse PJ, Alves WJ. Soil electrical conductivity and soil salinity: New formulations and calibrations[j]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1989, 53(2): 433 439 [15] Rhoades JD, Waggoner BL, Shouse PJ, Alves WJ. Determining soil salinity from soil and soil-paste electrical conductivities: sensitivity analysis of models[j]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1989, 53(5): 1 368 1 374 [16] Yasser H, Magnus P, Ronny B. Soil solution electrical conductivity measurements using different dielectric techniques [J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2003, 67(4): 1 071 1 078 [17] Slavich PG, Petterson GH. Estimating the electrical conductivity of saturated paste extracts from 1:5 soil: Water suspensions and texture[j]. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 1993, 31(1): 73 81 [18],. 1.. 5 [J]., 2009, 28(1): 172 176 [19],,. [J]., 2010, 28(1): 111 115 [20],,,,,. [J]., 2011, 17(2): 18 21 [21] Khorsandi F, Yazdi FA. Estamation of saturated paste extracts electrical conductivity from 1:5 soil/water suspension and gypsum[j]. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 2011, 42(3): 315 321
818 47 Comparative Study on Electrical Conductivity Between Saturated Soil Paste and Saturated Soil Solutions Under Different Soil/Water Ratios GUO Xin-song 1,2, SONG Fu-peng 1*, JU Zheng-shan 2* (1 National Engineering Laboratory for Efficient Utilization of Soil and Fertilizer Resources, National Engineering & Technology Research Center for Slow and Controlled Release Fertilizers, College of Resources and Environment, Shandong Agricultural University, Taian, Shandong 271018, China; 2 Key Laboratory of Land Consolidation and Rehabilitation, MLR, Beijing 100035, China) Abstract: To overcome the uncertainty of the saturation point and the measurement instability of the electrical conductivity of saturated soil paste and to represent consistently and accurately the salinity degree of saline soil improved by subsurface drainage, this study systematically compared that the water demand between saturated soil paste and saturated soil solution, the correlation and conversion of electrical conductivity (EC) and soil total salt content (TS) between saturated soil paste and saturated soil solutions under different soil/water ratios (1.. 5, 1.. 2.5, 1.. 1 and 1.. 0.5) with chemical analysis and statistical analysis. The results showed that the water demand of saturated soil paste whose saturated point was qualitatively determined originally could be quantitatively determined by calculating soil porosity for the water demand of saturated soil solution of saline-alkali soils (chloride type soil) in the Yellow River delta. EC of saturated soil paste could be replaced completely with EC of saturated soil solution. Neither EC nor TS was the highest value in the series of different soil/water ratios, but there was significant correlation between them. EC correlation were highest between saturated soil paste and saturated soil solution under 1.. 5 soil/water ratio as well as TS correlation between saturated soil paste and saturated soil solution under 1.. 0.5 soil/water ratio, which could be respectively converted with the best-fit regression function models: ECe = 2.042 8 EC 1.. 5 + 0.089 5 and TSe = 0.064 1 (TS 1.. 0.5 ) 2 0.059 TS 1.. 0.5 + 0.397 9. Key words: Soil/water ratio; Soil solution; Saturated soil paste; Electrical conductivity; Soil total salt content