李源环^1,,
邓小华^1,,,
张仲文²,
周米良³,
江智敏²,
田峰³,
张明发³,
石楠¹
1.湖南农业大学农学院 长沙 410128
2.浙江中烟工业有限责任公司 杭州 310008
3.湖南省烟草公司湘西州公司 吉首 416000
基金项目: 湖南省烟草专卖局科技项目xx15-18Aa01

详细信息

作者简介:李源环, 主要研究方向为烟草栽培生理。E-mail:404844559@qq.com

通讯作者:邓小华, 主要从事烟草科学与工程技术研究。E-mail:yzdxh@163.com

中图分类号:S153

计量

文章访问数:643
HTML全文浏览量:4
PDF下载量:455
被引次数:0

出版历程

收稿日期:2018-07-08
录用日期:2018-09-21
刊出日期:2019-01-01

Characteristics and driving factors of acid-base buffer of typical tobac-co-planting soils in western Hunan Province

LI Yuanhuan^1,,
DENG Xiaohua^1,,,
ZHANG Zhongwen²,
ZHOU Miliang³,
JIANG Zhimin²,
TIAN Feng³,
ZHANG Mingfa³,
SHI Nan¹
1. College of Agronomy, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, China
2. China Tobacco Zhejiang Industrial Co, Ltd, Hangzhou 310008, China
3. Xiangxi Autonomous Prefecture Tobacco Company of Hunan Province, Jishou 416000, China
Funds: the Science and Technology Project of Hunan Tobacco Monopoly Bureauxx15-18Aa01

More Information

Corresponding author:DENG Xiaohua, E-mail:yzdxh@163.com

摘要
HTML全文
图(8)表(3)
参考文献(27)
相关文章
施引文献
资源附件(0)
访问统计

摘要
摘要:为探明山地植烟土壤酸碱缓冲特性，采集了湘西山区烤烟典型生产区的28个土壤样本，采用酸碱滴定法和灰色关联法分析了湘西山地植烟土壤酸碱缓冲特性以及土壤缓冲容量与各影响因素之间的量化关系。结果表明：湘西山地植烟土壤酸碱缓冲量为11.35~43.29 mmol·kg^-1，平均为17.26 mmol·kg^-1，黄棕壤的酸碱缓冲量（11.35~43.29 mmol·kg^-1）显著高于黄壤（11.79~20.70 mmol·kg^-1）。有78.57%的样本对酸碱敏感，黄壤土是否对酸敏感由有机质含量决定，黄棕壤土是否对酸敏感与pH和有机质含量密切相关。对于同一土壤类型，有机质和黏粒含量与酸碱缓冲容量显著正相关；对于黄棕壤，酸碱缓冲容量还与pH和阳离子交换量呈显著正相关，与交换性酸和交换性铝呈显著负相关。主要土壤类型之间缓冲性能存在较大差异，黄壤土酸碱缓冲性能主要受土壤有机质、阳离子交换量和黏粒含量的影响；黄棕壤土酸碱缓冲性能主要受pH、阳离子交换量和有机质的影响。在生产中应采用合理施用化肥、增施有机肥、调节土壤酸性等措施提高植烟土壤酸碱缓冲性能，为优质烟叶生产创造良好的生态环境。
关键词:湘西山地/
植烟土壤/
pH缓冲容量/
土壤缓冲性能/
酸敏感性/
土壤理化性状
Abstract:To determine the characteristics of pH buffer of soils cultivated with tobacco in the mountain regions that are under long-term fertilizer application, a total of 28 soil samples were collected in areas of typical flue-cured tobacco cultivation in mountain regions in western Hunan Province. The pH buffer characteristics of collected soils were analyzed using both titration curve and gray correlation methods. Then quantitative relationships and the driving factors of soil acid-base buffer characteristics were also investigated. The results showed that the range of pH buffer of soils cultivated with tobacco in western Hunan Province was 11.35-43.29 mmol·kg^-1 and the average was 17.26 mmol·kg^-1. Acid-base buffer of yellow brown soil (11.35-43.29 mmol·kg^-1) was significantly higher than that of yellow soil (11.79-20.70 mmol·kg^-1). While the sensitivity of yellow soil to acid was determined by the content of soil organic matter, that of yellow brown soil to acid was closely related to pH and organic matter content. Also while 78.57% of the samples were sensitive to both acid and base, soil type, organic matter contents, and clay content were positively correlated with pH buffer capacity. For yellow brown soil, pH buffer capacity was also positively correlated with pH and cation exchange capacity. However, it was negatively correlated with exchangeable acid and aluminum. The performances of pH buffer of two soil types were quite different. pH buffer capacity of yellow soil was mainly affected by soil organic matter content, cation exchange capacity, and clay content. Then pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil was mainly affected by pH, cation exchange capacity, and organic matter content. For production, it was necessary to use chemical fertilizers properly, to add organic fertilizer, to adjust soil acidity and to take other measures to improve pH buffer capacity of soil cultivated with tobacco. This will create a good ecological environment for the production of high quality tobacco leaves.
Key words:Mountain region in western Hunan Province/
Tobacco cultivated soil/
pH buffer capacity/
Soil buffer performance/
Acid sensitivity/
Soil physicochemical property

HTML全文


图1不同植烟土壤类型pH与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a: pH与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b: pH与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c: pH与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。a: the relationship between pH and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between pH and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between pH and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.
Figure1.Relationship between soil pH and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片


图2不同植烟土壤类型黏粒与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a:黏粒与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b:黏粒与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c:黏粒与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。a: the relationship between clay content and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between clay content and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between clay content and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.
Figure2.Relationship between soil clay content and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片


图3不同植烟土壤类型有机质与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a:有机质与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b:有机质与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c:有机质与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。
Figure3.Relationship between soil organic matter content and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types
a: the relationship between soil organic matter content and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between soil organic matter content and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between soil organic matter content and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片


图4不同植烟土壤类型交换性酸与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a:交换性酸与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b:交换性酸与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c:交换性酸与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。
Figure4.Relationship between soil exchangeable acid and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types
a: the relationship between exchangeable acid and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between exchangeable acid and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between exchangeable acid and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片


图5不同植烟土壤类型交换性氢与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a:交换性氢与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b:交换性氢与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c:交换性氢与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。
Figure5.Relationship between soil exchangeable hydrogen and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types
a: the relationship between exchangeable hydrogen and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between exchangeable hydrogen and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between exchangeable hydrogen and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片


图6不同植烟土壤类型交换性铝与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a:交换性铝与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b:交换性铝与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c:交换性铝与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。
Figure6.Relationship between soil exchangeable aluminum and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types
a: the relationship between exchangeable aluminum and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between exchangeable aluminum and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between exchangeable aluminum and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片


图7不同植烟土壤类型阳离子交换量与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a:阳离子交换量与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b:阳离子交换量与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c:阳离子交换量与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。
Figure7.Relationship between soil cation exchange capacity and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types
a: the relationship between cation exchange capacity and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between cation exchange capacity and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between cation exchange capacity and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片


图8不同植烟土壤类型盐基饱和度与土壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系
a:盐基饱和度与两种土壤类型酸碱缓冲容量的关系; b:盐基饱和度与黄壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系; c:盐基饱和度与黄棕壤酸碱缓冲容量的关系。
Figure8.Relationship between soil base saturation and soil pH buffer capacities (pHBC) of different tobacco-planting soil types
a: the relationship between base saturation and pH buffer capacities of two soil types; b: the relationship between base saturation and pH buffer capacity of yellow soil; c: the relationship between base saturation and pH buffer capacity of yellow brown soil.


下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表1取样点信息及土壤基本理化性质
Table1.Sampling points details and main physicochemical properties of the soils

编号 Num ber	地点 Location	土壤类型 Soil type	黏粒含量 Clay content (%)	pH	有机质 Soil organic matter (g·kg-1)	交换性酸 Exchangeable acid (cmol·kg-1)	交换性氢 Exchangeable hydrogen (cmol·kg-1)	交换性铝 Exchangeable aluminum (cmol·kg-1)	阳离子交换量 Cation exchange capacity (cmol·kg-1)	盐基饱和度 Base saturation (%)
1	永顺县Yongshun County (28°86'N, 110°04'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	25.42	5.44	28.80	0.42	0.13	0.30	8.42	47.45
2	永顺县Yongshun County (28°85'N, 110°04'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	28.48	6.92	21.97	0.11	0.09	0.02	8.50	49.53
3	永顺县Yongshun County (28°85'N, 110°04'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	27.37	7.64	36.30	0.14	0.13	0.01	9.75	49.38
4	永顺县Yongshun County (28°86'N, 110°04'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	22.57	5.54	33.10	0.38	0.17	0.21	8.73	47.82
5	永顺县Yongshun County (28°86'N, 110°04'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	35.48	6.74	32.40	0.18	0.17	0.01	8.77	49.03
6	永顺县Yongshun County (28°99'N, 110°12'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	45.21	6.58	43.20	0.31	0.30	0.01	11.23	48.66
7	永顺县Yongshun County (28°81'N, 109°97'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	26.30	5.10	15.20	1.01	0.25	0.75	7.78	43.57
8	永顺县Yongshun County (28°93'N, 109°98'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	47.38	7.77	42.80	0.28	0.27	0.01	17.08	49.24
9	永顺县Yongshun County (28°77'N, 110°10'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	35.07	7.45	52.60	0.14	0.13	0.01	17.12	49.62
10	永顺县Yongshun County (28°76'N, 109°90'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	33.09	5.59	18.70	0.34	0.13	0.21	10.11	48.37
11	永顺县Yongshun County (28°76'N, 109°90'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	28.77	6.06	27.60	0.34	0.17	0.17	9.47	48.20
12	永顺县Yongshun County (28°81'N, 110°03'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	31.38	5.87	30.30	0.21	0.13	0.08	7.65	48.63
13	龙山县Longshan County (29°35'N, 109°48'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	29.90	6.99	44.10	0.22	0.21	0.01	9.74	48.92
14	龙山县Longshan County (29°51'N, 109°66'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	20.21	5.52	28.90	0.59	0.42	0.17	8.85	46.67
15	龙山县Longshan County (29°51'N, 109°67'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	28.76	5.29	38.70	2.18	0.42	1.76	7.83	36.02
16	龙山县Longshan County (29°48'N, 109°63'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	26.18	4.65	25.30	1.35	0.34	1.01	8.81	42.34
17	龙山县Longshan County (29°44'N, 109°63'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	36.27	6.53	32.80	0.25	0.21	0.04	9.65	48.65
18	龙山县Longshan County (29°46'N, 109°64'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	30.93	6.69	30.40	0.71	0.33	0.38	8.50	45.82
19	花垣县Huayuan County (28°35'N, 109°43'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	34.04	4.34	25.30	3.12	0.30	2.83	11.62	36.57
20	花垣县Huayuan County (28°50'N, 109°43'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	21.78	4.52	21.40	3.92	0.34	3.58	9.65	29.69
21	花垣县Huayuan County (28°51'N, 109°44'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	33.47	5.55	21.10	0.26	0.21	0.04	17.32	49.25
22	花垣县Huayuan County (28°50'N, 109°45'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	35.38	4.42	21.50	5.45	0.56	4.89	13.32	29.54
23	古丈县Guzhang County (28°72'N, 109°89'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	24.73	7.16	24.60	0.18	0.17	0.01	9.17	49.07
24	古丈县Guzhang County (28°67'N, 109°80'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	24.04	4.75	25.60	1.88	0.30	1.58	9.45	40.05
25	凤凰县Fenghuang County (27°92'N, 109°34'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	29.53	5.33	27.80	0.97	0.29	0.67	8.79	44.48
26	凤凰县Fenghuang County (27°87'N, 109°35'E)	黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	33.73	7.84	49.40	0.18	0.17	0.01	13.00	49.35
27	保靖县Baojing County (28°64'N, 109°63'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	36.97	5.11	32.70	0.93	0.34	0.59	8.95	44.80
28	保靖县Baojing County (28°65'N, 109°62'E)	黄壤 Yellow soil	38.90	4.88	30.30	2.22	0.21	2.01	9.13	37.84

下载: 导出CSV
表2不同植烟土壤酸碱缓冲曲线和缓冲容量及敏感性
Table2.Acid buffer curves equations and soil pH buffer capacities and sensitivities of different tobacco-planting soil types

土壤编号 Soil number	拟合方程Fitting equation (y=ax+b)			土壤缓冲溶量 Soil pH buffer capacity (mmol·kg-1)	对酸敏感性 Acid sensitivity
	a	b	R2
1	-0.082 9	5.452 2	0.925 4	12.06	敏感Sensitive
2	-0.073 5	4.871 1	0.945 8	13.61	敏感Sensitive
3	-0.033 9	7.524 4	0.909 6	29.50	稍敏感Slightly sensitive
4	-0.085 2	5.540 0	0.921 5	11.74	敏感Sensitive
5	-0.070 1	6.645 6	0.909 0	14.27	敏感Sensitive
6	-0.048 3	6.964 4	0.946 3	20.70	稍敏感Slightly sensitive
7	-0.088 1	5.344 4	0.917 9	11.35	敏感Sensitive
8	-0.023 6	7.838 9	0.931 9	42.37	不敏感Not sensitive
9	-0.023 1	7.767 8	0.873 5	43.29	不敏感Not sensitive
10	-0.085 5	5.596 7	0.915 5	11.70	敏感Sensitive
11	-0.084 4	5.762 2	0.920 0	11.85	敏感Sensitive
12	-0.086 8	5.680 0	0.902 0	11.52	敏感Sensitive
13	-0.031 1	7.523 3	0.891 7	32.15	稍敏感Slightly sensitive
14	-0.083 8	5.451 1	0.898 5	11.93	敏感Sensitive
15	-0.076 8	5.218 9	0.913 3	13.02	敏感Sensitive
16	-0.079 9	5.274 4	0.898 5	12.52	敏感Sensitive
17	-0.067 7	6.432 2	0.943 2	14.77	敏感Sensitive
18	-0.080 7	5.774 4	0.913 8	12.39	敏感Sensitive
19	-0.078 1	5.094 4	0.927 9	12.80	敏感Sensitive
20	-0.078 1	4.970 0	0.937 5	12.80	敏感Sensitive
21	-0.078 9	5.823 3	0.935 4	12.67	敏感Sensitive
22	-0.073 5	6.666 7	0.893 8	13.61	敏感Sensitive
23	-0.075 1	6.565 6	0.895 1	13.32	敏感Sensitive
24	-0.081 6	5.222 2	0.928 8	12.25	敏感Sensitive
25	-0.085 0	5.325 6	0.917 4	11.76	敏感Sensitive
26	-0.025 7	7.741 1	0.882 5	38.91	稍敏感Slightly sensitive
27	-0.084 8	5.393 3	0.932 1	11.79	敏感Sensitive
28	-0.079 4	5.334 4	0.942 3	12.59	敏感Sensitive

下载: 导出CSV
表3不同植烟土壤类型基本理化性质与酸碱缓冲容量的关联度
Table3.Correlation degrees between soil physical and chemical properties and soil buffer capacities of different tobacco-planting soil types

土壤类型 Soil type	指标 Index	黏粒 Clay	pH	有机质 Organic matter	交换性酸 Exchangeable acid	交换性氢 Exchangeable hydrogen	交换性铝 Exchangeable aluminum	阳离子交换量 Cation exchange capacity	盐基饱和度 Base saturation
黄壤 Yellow soil	关联系数 Correlation coefficient	0.741	0.719	0.762	0.664	0.666	0.668	0.744	0.696
	排序 Sequence	3	4	1	8	7	6	2	5
黄棕壤 Yellow brown soil	关联系数 Correlation coefficient	0.736	0.863	0.825	0.622	0.636	0.617	0.829	0.711
	排序 Sequence	4	1	3	7	6	8	2	5

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(27)

[1]	杨杉, 吴胜军, 周文佐, 等.三峡库区典型土壤酸碱缓冲性能及其影响因素研究[J].长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(1):163-170 doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201601020 YANG S, WU S J, ZHOU W Z, et al. Acid and alkaline buffering capacity and its influencing factors of typical soils in the three gorges reservoir area[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2016, 25(1):163-170 doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201601020
[2]	王文婧, 戴万宏.安徽主要土壤酸碱性及其酸缓冲性能研究[J].中国农学通报, 2012, 28(15):67-72 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgnxtb201215014 WANG W J, DAI W H. Study on soil pH and acidic buffering properties in Anhui Province[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2012, 28(15):67-72 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgnxtb201215014
[3]	黄平, 张佳宝, 朱安宁, 等.黄淮海平原典型潮土的酸碱缓冲性能[J].中国农业科学, 2009, 42(7):2392-2396 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgnykx200907018 HUANG P, ZHANG J B, ZHU A N, et al. Acid and alkaline buffering capacity of typical fluvor-aquic soil in Huang-Huai-Hai Plain[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2009, 42(7):2392-2396 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgnykx200907018
[4]	汪吉东, 戚冰洁, 张永春, 等.长期施肥对砂壤质石灰性潮土土壤酸碱缓冲体系的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2012, 23(4):1031-1036 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/yystxb201204024 WANG J D, QI B J, ZHANG Y C, et al. Effects of long-term fertilization on pH buffer system of sandy loam calcareous fluvor-aquic soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2012, 23(4):1031-1036 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/yystxb201204024
[5]	黄成江, 张晓海, 李天福, 等.植烟土壤理化性状的适宜性研究进展[J].中国农业科技导报, 2007, 9(1):42-46 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0864.2007.01.008 HUANG C J, ZHANG X H, LI T F, et al. Advance on adaptability of soil physical and chemical properties in tobacco[J]. Review of China Agricultural Science and Technology, 2007, 9(1):42-46 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0864.2007.01.008
[6]	邓小华, 蔡兴, 张明发, 等.喀斯特地区湘西州植烟土壤pH分布特征及其影响因素[J].水土保持学报, 2016, 30(6):308-313 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqsystbcxb201606051 DENG X H, CAI X, ZHANG M F, et al. Distribution characteristics of tobacco-growing soil pH and its influencing factors in Karst region of Xiangxi[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 30(6):308-313 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqsystbcxb201606051
[7]	井玉丹, 林清火, 郭澎涛, 等.海南胶园土壤酸碱缓冲性能研究[J].热带作物学报, 2016, 37(2):345-350 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2016.02.021 JING Y D, LIN Q H, GUO P T, et al. Soil acid buffer performance of rubber plantation in Hainan[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2016, 37(2):345-350 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2016.02.021
[8]	胡波, 王云琦, 王玉杰, 等.重庆缙云山酸雨区森林土壤酸缓冲机制及影响因素[J].水土保持学报, 2013, 27(5):77-83 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-2242.2013.05.016 HU B, WANG Y Q, WANG Y J, et al. Acidic buffering capability and its influencing factors of typical forests soil in Jinyun Mountain, Chongqing[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2013, 27(5):77-83 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-2242.2013.05.016
[9]	苏有健, 王烨军, 张永利, 等.不同植茶年限茶园土壤pH缓冲容量[J].应用生态学报, 2014, 25(10):2914-2918 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/yystxb201410021 SU Y J, WANG Y J, ZHANG Y L, et al. Soil pH buffer capacity of tea garden with different planting years[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014, 25(10):2914-2918 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/yystxb201410021
[10]	孙越, 王继红, 安羿衡, 等.不同作物根茬对土壤酸化速率和缓冲性能的影响[J].吉林农业大学学报, 2016, 38(3):302-306 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/jlnydxxb201603009 SUN Y, WANG J H, AN Y H, et al. Effect of different crop stubble on soil acidification rate and buffering performance[J]. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University, 2016, 38(3):302-306 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/jlnydxxb201603009
[11]	胡波, 王云琦, 王玉杰, 等.模拟氮沉降对土壤酸化及土壤酸缓冲能力的影响[J].环境科学研究, 2015, 28(3):418-424 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=664064545 HU B, WANG Y Q, WANG Y J, et al. Effects of simulated nitrogen deposition on soil acidification and soil buffering capacity[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 2015, 28(3):418-424 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=664064545
[12]	陈龙, 张美玲, 李建东, 等.几种类型土壤对碱的缓冲作用及其影响因素研究[J].农学学报, 2015, 5(11):40-43 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgncxkkj201511009 CHEN L, ZHANG M L, LI J D, et al. Study on buffering action of several soil types on alkali and its influencing factors[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2015, 5(11):40-43 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgncxkkj201511009
[13]	沈月, 依艳丽, 张大庚, 等.耕地棕壤酸碱缓冲性能及酸化速率研究[J].水土保持学报, 2012, 26(1):95-100 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqsystbcxb201201020 SHEN Y, YI Y L, ZHANG D G, et al. Research on pH buffer capacity and acidification rate of arable brown soil[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2012, 26(1):95-100 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqsystbcxb201201020
[14]	尚斌, 李德成, 徐宜民, 等.武陵山烤烟产区土壤有机质与pH特征研究[J].土壤通报, 2015, 46(3):590-596 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trtb201503013 SHANG B, LI D C, XU Y M, et al. The characteristics of soil organic matter and pH in Wulingshan tobacco-growing areas[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2015, 46(3):590-596 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trtb201503013
[15]	邓小华, 周米良, 田茂成, 等.湘西州植烟气候与国内外主要烟区比较及相似性分析[J].中国烟草学报, 2012, 18(3):28-33 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgycxb201203006 DENG X H, ZHOU M L, TIAN M C, et al. Comparison and similarity analysis in climate conditions between Xiangxi and main tobacco growing areas both domestic and overseas[J]. Acta Tabacaria Sinica, 2012, 18(3):28-33 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgycxb201203006
[16]	鲁如坤.土壤农业化学分析方法[M].北京:中国农业科技出版社, 2000 LU R K. Soil Agrochemical Analysis Methods[M]. Beijing:China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2000
[17]	成杰民, 胡光鲁, 潘根兴.用酸碱滴定曲线拟合参数表征土壤对酸缓冲能力的新方法[J].农业环境科学学报, 2004, 23(3):569-573 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1672-2043.2004.03.035 CHENG J M, HU G L, PAN G X. New Method for evaluating buffering capacity and equilibrium pH of paddy soil with simulation parameter[J]. Journal of Agro-Environmental Science, 2004, 23(3):569-573 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1672-2043.2004.03.035
[18]	徐仁扣.土壤酸化及其调控研究进展[J].土壤, 2015, 47(2):238-244 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10307-1012268811.htm XU R K. Research progresses in soil acidification and its control[J]. Soils, 2015, 47(2):238-244 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10307-1012268811.htm
[19]	邹娟, 鲁剑巍, 周先竹, 等.湖北省主要植烟区土壤肥力状况及分析[J].长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(3):504-510 doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201503022 ZOU J, LU J W, ZHOU X Z, et al. Evaluation of soil fertility in tobacco-growing areas in Hubei Province[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2015, 24(3):504-510 doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201503022
[20]	彭世良.湖南土壤酸化与土壤生态系统酸相对敏感性研究[D].长沙: 湖南师范大学, 2002 PENG S L. Research on relative sensitivity of soil acidification and soil ecosystem in Hunan Province[D]. Changsha: Hunan Normal University, 2002
[21]	戴万宏, 黄耀, 武丽, 等.中国地带性土壤有机质含量与酸碱度的关系[J].土壤学报, 2009, 46(5):851-860 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0564-3929.2009.05.013 DAI W H, HUANG Y, WU L, et al. Relationships between soil organic matter content (SOM) and pH in topsoil of zonal soils in China[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2009, 46(5):851-860 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0564-3929.2009.05.013
[22]	TARKALSON D D, PAYERO J O, HERGERT G W, et al. Acidification of soil in a dry land winter wheat-sorghum/corn-fallow rotation in the semiarid U.S. Great Plains[J]. Plant & Soil, 2006, 283(1/2):367-379 doi: 10.1007/s11104-006-0027-y
[23]	ULRICH B. A concept of forest ecosystem stability and of acid deposition as driving force for destabilization[M]//ULRICH B, PANKRATH J. Effects of Accumulation of Air Pollutants in Forest Ecosystems. Dordrecht: Springer, 1983: 1-29
[24]	蒋胜军, 顾刚.成都平原土壤pH缓冲容量的空间变异性特征[J].四川农业科技, 2017, (11):22-25 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1028.2017.11.009 JIANG S J, GU G. Spatial variability of soil pH buffer capacity in the Chengdu Plain[J]. Journal of Sichuan Agricultural Science and Technology, 2017, (11):22-25 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1028.2017.11.009
[25]	邓小华, 周冀衡, 李晓忠, 等.烤烟质量与焦油量的灰色关联分析[J].江西农业大学学报, 2006, 28(6):850-854 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2286.2006.06.009 DENG X H, ZHOU J H, LI X Z, et al. Grey incidence analysis on correlation between different quality evaluating index and tar content in flue-cured tobacco[J]. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, 2006, 28(6):850-854 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2286.2006.06.009
[26]	VIEIRA F C B, BAYER C, MIELNICZUK J, et al. Long-term acidification of a Brazilian Acrisol as affected by no till cropping systems and nitrogen fertiliser[J]. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 2008, 46(1):17-26 doi: 10.1071/SR07088
[27]	孟红旗, 刘景, 徐明岗, 等.长期施肥下我国典型农田耕层土壤的pH演变[J].土壤学报, 2013, 50(6):1109-1116 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trxb201306006 MENG H Q, LIU J, XU M G, et al. Evolution of pH in topsoils of typical Chinese croplands under long-term fertilization[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2013, 50(6):1109-1116 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trxb201306006