北方半湿润滨海地区海水养殖废水灌溉菊芋研究赵耕毛

　2009年4月JournalofIrrigationandDrainage　第28卷第2期　:1672-3317(2009)02-0009-04北方半湿润滨海地区海水养殖废水灌溉菊芋研究＊赵耕毛,刘兆普,张博,王建绪(南京农业大学资源与环境科学学院,南京210095)　:2007年3～10月,在山东莱州海洋863中试基地,研究了海水养殖废水灌溉条件下,耐盐能源植物菊芋的盐胁迫响应以及对氮、磷的吸收利用机制。结果表明:海水养殖废水灌溉条件下,菊芋地上部生物量(茎、叶)随着灌溉水盐度(S)的增加明显下降,盐度为9.46g/L的养殖废水处理生物量仅为淡水处理(CK2)的62.5%;地下部生物量(根、块茎)与盐度之间的关系符合一元二次方程曲线,且当盐度为3.83g/L时,地下部生物量取得最大值(0.205kg/株)。养殖废水处理菊芋地上部氮浓度明显低于淡水处理,地下部则各灌溉水处理间氮浓度没有明显差异;磷浓度地上部各灌溉水处理间没有明显差异,但地下部养殖废水灌溉处理明显高于淡水处理,表明海水养殖废水灌溉可以促进菊芋对磷的吸收,但氮利用受到显著影响。通过氮、磷通量计算,进一步证实了这一结果。　　:海水养殖废水;灌溉;菊芋;生物量;氮磷通量:S274.1;X52　　　:A　　2006,1.24×106hm2,1.06×107t,。,、,。,。、,,,[1]。、。,。、;;。,[2]。,,,,。,-,()、、,、。1　863,28m,,550mm,2116.2mm。,,200～210,、、、,。,1。18,PVC,、30、3245cm。,,(5cm)。6,CK1()、CK2()1∶1、1∶2、1∶3、1∶4(V/V),0.11、3.85、4.79、6.34、9.46g/L。3,。20063,,0.2kg。31,1。(615)(912)9＊:2008-10-30:(30600086):(1975-),。,。1,22。20cm,。900t/hm2。表1　供试土壤基本理化性质/cmpH/(g·kg-1)(N)/(mg·kg-1)(P)/(mg·kg-1)/(kg·cm-3)/%2～0.02mm0.02～0.002mm0.002mm0～207.750.5244.215.61.2782.68.98.520～407.830.6019.75.11.5882.68.19.340～607.880.646.53.91.4882.78.09.3表2　灌溉水质基本化学性质　pHEC/(dS·m-1)(TN)/(mg·L-1)(IN)/(mg·L-1)(TP)/(mg·L-1)(RP)/(mg·L-1)Ⅰ7.9035.18.443.053.760.42Ⅱ7.7226.86.292.182.920.35　　,,、pH[3];,、pH、[4]。AWH-30kg,,、、。/(g/)//。EXCELSPSS11.0,、、,。2　2.1　,,、。,、,。,、(1)。,,(p0.05)。,,0.284kg/,1∶1(S=9.46g/L),62.5%。,(y=-0.0119X+0.3017),、。图1　灌溉水盐度对菊芋地上部和地下部生物量的影响　　,,。(y=-0.0015X2+0.0115X+0.1832)。,3.85、4.79g/L,0.213、0.207kg/,109.46g/L,,1∶4(S=0.385g/L)75.1%。:,,,。2.2　、表3　灌溉水盐度对菊芋吸收氮、磷的影响/(g·L-1)/(g·kg-1)/(g·kg-1)0.11(CK2)4.14±0.16a11.12±0.45a2.30±0.38a5.42±0.42d9.46(1∶1)3.44±0.06b10.65±0.56a2.16±0.31a9.79±0.31a6.34(1∶2)3.43±0.24b10.28±0.23a2.37±0.36a7.66±0.41b4.79(1∶3)3.61±0.10b10.22±0.73a2.44±0.41a6.74±0.60c3.85(1∶4)3.63±0.03b10.15±0.61a2.30±0.59a6.47±0.52c　　,()、(3)。(CK2),、;(p0.05)。,,()。　　(3)。、,;,,,,。2.3　、　　2、。2,,。,,,,,,。,。,,。,(1∶3、1∶4),(1∶11∶2),,。图2　海水养殖废水条件下菊芋对氮、磷的净吸收量3　　,(),,。。,,;,,。3.83g/L,,。,,;,,。11,、。,,、,(、),。(),()。,、(),。,,、,,McImtosh[8]。:[1]　BurfordMA,CostanzoSD,DennisonWC,etal.AsynthesisofdominantecologicalprocessesinintensiveshrimppondsandadjacentcoastalenvironmentsinNEAustralia[J].MarinePollutionBulletin,2003,46:1456-1469.[2]　HansB.Howgreenareaquaculture,constructedwetlandsandconventionalwastewatertreatmentsystem?[J].WatSciTech,1999,40(3):45-50.[3]　.[M].:,1999.[4]　.[M].:,2002.[5]　,,,.[J].,2005,23(5):159-163.[6]　,,,.7g/L[J].,2002,21(3):64-67.[7]　,.[J].,1999,18(1):18-22.[8]　McImtoshD,FitzsimmonsK.Characterizationofeffluentfromanland,Lowsalinityshrimpfarm:whatcontributioncouldthiswatermakeifusedforirrigation[J].AquaculturalEngineering,2004,27:147-156.StudiesonJerusalemArtichokeIrrigatedwithSalineAquacultureWastewaterintheNorthSub-humidCoastalAreasofChinaZHAOGeng-mao,LIUZhao-pu,ZHANGBo,WANGJian-xu(CollegeofResourcesandEnvironmentalSciences,NanjingAgriculturalUniversity,Nanjing210095,China)Abstract:Experimentwasconductedtostudytheeffectofsalineaquaculturewastewaterirrigationonni-trogenandphosphorusuptakebyJerusalemartichokeplantinLaizhouregion,Shandongprovince,fromMatchtoOctober,2007.Theresultsweredescribedasfollows:Above-groundbiomass(stemsandleaves)wasdecreasingwithincreasingsalinityofirrigatedwater,andtheaquaculturewastewatertreatmentwithsalinity9.46obtainedtheminimumvalueofabove-groundbiomass,whichwasonly62.5%ofthatascom-paredwithfreshwaterirrigationtreatment(CK2);however,therelationshipbetweenundergroundbio-massandsalinityofirrigatedwateraccordswithquadraticequationinoneunknown,andwhenS=3.83g/L,themaximumundergroundbiomasswasobtained.Thenitrogenconcentrationsofleavesandstemsinsalineaquaculturetreatmentsweresignificantlylowerthanthatinfreshwaterirrigationtreatment;while,therewerenosignificantdifferencesinunder-groundpartsbetweenaquacultureandfreshwaterirrigationtreatments.Thephosphorusconcentrationsofabove-groundparts.However,exertednodifferencesbe-tweensalineandfreshwaterirrigationtreatments,butweresignificantlyhigherinsalineirrigationtreat-mentsthanthatinfreshwaterirrigationtreatment.Keywords:salineaquaculturewastewater;irrigation;jerusalemartichoke;biomass;flux12