Next Article in Journal
A Comprehensive Benefit Evaluation of the Model of Salt-Tolerant Crops Irrigated by Mariculture Wastewater Based on a Field Plot Experiment
Previous Article in Journal
Biochar Increases Rice Yield in Soda Saline-Alkali Paddy Fields by Improving Saline-Alkali Stress and Phosphorus Use Efficiency
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 14
Issue 9
10.3390/agronomy14092160
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Combined Application of Chemical Fertilizer and Organic Amendment Improved Soil Quality in a Wheat–Sweet Potato Rotation System

by
Hui Zhang
1,2,3,
Xiang Li
1,2,
Jiayi Zhou
1,3,
Jidong Wang
1,2,3,
Lei Wang
1,
Jie Yuan
1,
Cong Xu
1,2,3,
Yue Dong
1,
Yahua Chen
3,
Yuchun Ai
1,* and
Yongchun Zhang
1,2,3,*
1
National Agricultural Experimental Station for Agricultural Environment, Institute of Agricultural Resources and Environment, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanjing 210014, China
2
School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China
3
College of Life Science, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2024, 14(9), 2160; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14092160
Submission received: 8 August 2024 / Revised: 2 September 2024 / Accepted: 12 September 2024 / Published: 22 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Innovative Cropping Systems)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The long-term excessive use of chemical fertilizers may result in soil degradation, but manure and straw application is considered to be an effective approach for alleviating this problem. The aim of this study is to examine the long-term impacts of different fertilization patterns on soil quality variables in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. Four treatments were conducted in a field trial for a duration of twelve years, including (1) no fertilizer (control, CK); (2) application of mineral fertilizers (NPK) alone; (3) NPK with crop straw return (NPKs); (4) combined use of NPK and farmyard manure (NPKm). Thirteen physical, chemical, and biological soil parameters were measured. The results showed that the NPKm and NPKs significantly improved the proportion of macroaggregates (>0.25 mm) by 24.7% and 21.9% compared to the NPK alone, respectively. The proportion of microaggregates (0.053–0.25 mm) under the NPKm was 47.4% significantly higher than the NPKs. Additionally, the NPKm resulted in a 22.2% and 19.6% increase in the SOC content than the NPK and NPKs, respectively. In terms of soil-available K, the NPKs resulted in levels that were 42.1% and 49.6% higher than the NPKm and NPK alone, respectively. Long-term fertilization significantly decreased soil pH by 0.95–1.85 units compared to the control, whereas manure application could alleviate soil acidification, as shown when the pH increased by 10.6–18.7%. The NPKm and NPKs resulted in significantly increased soil pHs by 10.6% and 18.7% compared to the NPK alone, respectively. In addition, the NPKm and NPKs increased N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase activity by 52.6% and 60.3% compared to the NPK alone. Determined by the minimum data set method, the NPKm treatment exhibited the highest soil quality index, followed by the NPKs and NPK. Our findings suggested that the combined use of chemical fertilizers with organic amendments proved beneficial for enhancing soil quality.

1. Introduction

Intensive agriculture, a farming system characterized by its heavy reliance on mineral fertilizers, has negatively affected soil quality in ways such as the acidification [1], compaction, and degradation of soils [2]. On the other hand, the growing use of chemical fertilizers inevitably interferes with the environment, causing nutrient loss and greenhouse gas emissions [3,4]. Manure, derived from crop residues or excreted by animals, has been suggested as a reliable and efficient substitution for inorganic fertilizers to restore soil fertility [5]. Prior published studies showed the positive effects of animal manure or crop residue on soil structure [6], soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration [7], and nutrients status [8]. This was ascribed to the fact that organic manure is rich in nutrients and organic carbon sources, which can be slowly released into the soil by decomposition after application. For instance, Du et al. [9] used a meta-analysis and found that manure application led to average increases in the soil organic carbon content by 17.7%, available nitrogen by 16%, available phosphorus by 66.2%, and available potassium by 19.1%. Chen et al. [10] found that a 12-year continuous application of chemical N and P fertilizers plus cotton straw or manure improved soil nutrients status, while it decreased soil bulk density, and provided additional environmental value compared to chemical N and P fertilizers alone in a cotton cropping system. Additionally, manure application could improve soil biochemical properties [11]. For example, soils amended with poultry manure and farmyard manure had obviously higher microbial biomass and enzyme activities of dehydrogenase and L-glutaminase than the amended control [12]. However, there was no observed response in the activity of acid phosphatase (ACP) following a 46-year use of cattle/green manure [13]. In contrast, Liu et al. [14] found that inorganic fertilizers plus rice straw or green manure resulted in lower peroxidase and phenol oxidase activities compared with the inorganic fertilizers alone treatment. The above results indicated significant variability in the soil biochemical properties’ response to manure application.
On the other hand, although the impacts of different fertilization patterns on physical, chemical, and biological soil properties have been reported extensively in past publications, few reports have made a comprehensive evaluation of soil fertility, focusing only on changes in individual indicators [15,16]. It is meaningful to integrate diverse soil parameters into a single comprehensive indicator. The soil quality index (SQI) served as a valuable tool for synthesizing various soil parameters, as well as enhancing understandings of soil function and processes. The SQI value, as improved by biochar and inorganic fertilization, was observed in rice [17] and maize [18] cropping systems. However, how inorganic fertilizers and organic amendments affected soil quality in wheat–sweet potato rotation systems is unclear.
Thus, a 12-year long-term field experiment with four fertilization treatments (unfertilized, application of inorganic fertilizers alone, inorganic fertilization with straw return, and combined use of synthetic fertilizers and organic manure) was set up under a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. The aims of this study were (1) to evaluate the responses of various soil quality variables including physical, chemical, and biological soil parameters to different fertilization practices; (2) to compare the changes in the soil quality index with different fertilization treatments under the wheat–sweet potato rotation system.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Site Description

The wheat–sweet potato rotation field trial was initiated in 2011. It was situated at the Fertility Survey Experimental Station of Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences (32°28′ N, 118°37′ E) in Liuhe district of Jiangsu Province, China. The soil type in this area was classified as yellow-brown soil with 25.8% sand, 55.6% silt, and 18.6% clay. The mean annual temperature (MAT) and mean annual rainfall (MAR) in this region were 15.6 °C and 1100 mm, respectively. At the beginning of the experiment, the soil at the 0–20 cm layer had 13.3 g kg−1 soil organic matter (SOM), 0.73 g kg−1 total nitrogen (TN), 7.1 mg kg−1 available phosphorus (P), and 73.3 mg kg−1 available potassium (K). Soil pH was 6.48.

2.2. Experimental Design

The field trial comprised four treatments: (1) without any fertilizer application, control (CK); (2) application of chemical fertilizers only (NPK); (3) chemical fertilizers combined with straw return (NPKs); (4) simultaneous application of inorganic fertilizers and organic materials (NPKm, with 30% organic N replacing inorganic N). Each plot measured 33.3 m2 (5 m × 6.66 m), and the fertilizer treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The total N, P2O5, and K2O application rates were 210 kg ha−1, 90 kg ha−1, and 90 kg ha−1 in the wheat growth season and 120 kg ha−1, 60 kg ha−1, and 180 kg ha−1 in the sweet potato season, respectively. All P and K fertilizers were applied in a single basal application. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied as one basal application during the sweet potato season, then one basal and one topdressing application during the wheat season. The base to topdressing ratio of N fertilizer was 7:3. Chemical fertilizers used included urea (46% N), calcium superphosphate (14% P2O5), and potassium sulfate (55% K2O). For the organic manure-amended treatments, the application rates of organic manure were 3060 kg ha−1 in the wheat season and 2040 kg ha−1 for the sweet potato season. The organic manure contained 1.46% N, 0.81% P2O5, and 1.1% K2O [19]. Wheat and sweet potato are grown under a rain-fed farming system. Wheat is sown in October of each year and harvested in May of the following year. Sweet potato is transplanted in June and harvested in October in each year.

2.3. Sampling and Analysis

At wheat harvest in May 2022, soil samples (0–20 cm depth) were gathered using an auger at six random locations within each plot. These samples were combined and sieved through a 5 mm mesh screen to eliminate visible plant debris and stones. One segment was air-dried for the analysis of pH, soil organic carbon, and nutrient contents, while the other was refrigerated at 4 °C for the analysis of ammonium, nitrate, and microbial biomass carbon.
Soil bulk density was measured by extracting undisturbed soil samples (0–20 cm) using a cutting ring of 100 cm3. The soil sample was then oven-dried at 105 °C until it reached a constant weight to calculate its dry weight [20]. Soil total organic carbon (TOC) was determined through oxidation using potassium dichromate, while soil total nitrogen was analyzed using a Kjeldahl auto-analyzer [21]. Soil alkali-hydrolyzable N was assessed employing an alkali-hydrolyzed reduction diffusing method. Soil NH4+-N and NO3−-N were extracted using 2 M KCl and determined using an auto-analyzer (Traacs–2000, Bran and Luebbe Co., Ltd., Norderstedt, Germany). Soil-available K was extracted with 1 M NH4OAc and analyzed through flame photometry (FP640, Jingke, Shanghai, China). Soil pH was measured in a soil to water suspension ratio of 1:2.5. Potassium permanganate-oxidizable C (KMnO4-C) was quantified following the method by Blair et al. [22].
The proportion of soil water-stable aggregates at each size was determined through a wet-sieving method [23]. Initially, a 100 g soil sample (<2 mm) was placed on the uppermost sieves (0.25 mm and 0.053 mm) and pre-soaked in water for 10 min. Subsequently, the stack was vertically oscillated with a 3 cm amplitude at a rate of 30 rpm for 5 min. This process yielded three aggregate size classes (>0.25 mm, 0.053–0.25 mm, <0.053 mm). The water-stable aggregates retained on the sieves were oven-dried at 60 °C and weighed.
The activities of β-glucosidase and β-N-acetylglucosaminidase were determined by porous plate fluorescence spectrophotometry [24].

2.4. Calculations

Soil quality was evaluated using the SQI determined by the minimum data set (MDS) method. The SQI value was computed according to the following equation:
SQI = ∑ i = 1 n W i × S i
where Wi represents the weight of each indicator, Si represents the score of the indicator, and n represents the number of variables.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

One-way ANOVA, conducted using STATISTICA (Version 12.0, 2012, StaSoft Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA), was used to assess the impacts of fertilization practice on soil bulk density, chemical parameters, and enzyme activities. Significant differences were determined through Tukey’s tests at a 0.05 probability level.

3. Results

3.1. Soil Bulk Density and Aggregate Size Distribution

No differences in soil bulk density were recorded among all treatments (Figure 1). However, different long-term fertilization methods significantly affected the distribution of soil water-stable aggregates. The NPKm and NPKs significantly improved the proportion of macroaggregates (>0.25 mm) by 24.7% and 21.9% compared to the NPK alone. The proportion of microaggregates (0.053–0.25 mm) under the NPKm was 47.4% significantly higher than the NPKs (Table 1). There were no differences in the proportion of microaggregates and <0.053 mm size fraction between the NPK and NPKs. The results suggested that different fertilization patterns significantly changed the distribution of soil aggregate size. The NPKm had the highest mean weight diameter (MWD) value (0.55 mm), which was 22.1% and 4.8% higher than the NPK alone and NPKs, respectively.

3.2. Soil Organic Carbon and Its Labile Fractions

Compared to the unfertilized control, long-term fertilization increased the SOC content by 19.6–48.8% (Table 2). The highest SOC content was observed in the NPKm (11.4 g kg−1), which was 22.2% and 19.6% higher than the NPK and NPKs. Additionally, the combined application of the NPK and organic manure increased the KMnO4-C content, which was 55.3% higher than the NPK alone (Table 2). In contrast, there were no significant differences in SOC and KMnO4-C contents between the NPK and NPKs. In terms of the MBC content, no differences were found among all treatments.

3.3. Soil pH and Nutrients

Long-term fertilization significantly decreased soil pH by 0.95–1.85 units compared to the unfertilized control (Figure 2). Different fertilization patterns also changed soil pH. The combined application of the NPK and organic manure or crop residue resulted in significantly higher soil pH value, increased by 10.6% and 18.7% compared to the NPK alone (Figure 2). Soil TN contents were 28.4% and 32.2% significantly higher under the NPK and NPKm compared to the unfertilized control. In addition, the NPKm was 55.5% and 35.7% higher for the AN content, and 242% and 90% higher for the NO3− content than the unfertilized and NPKs treatments, respectively (Table 3). In terms of soil-available K, the NPKs resulted in 49.6% and 42.1% higher levels than the NPK alone and NPKm, respectively (Figure 3).

3.4. Soil Enzyme Activities

The activities of soil β-glucosidase and β-N-acetyl-glucosaminidase were 50.7% and 52.6% higher in the NPKs than the NPK alone, respectively. The combined application of the NPK and organic manure (NPKm) also significantly increased β-N-acetyl-glucosaminidase activity by 60.3% compared to the NPK alone (Table 4). However, there were no significant differences in the activity of soil alkaline phosphatase among all three fertilized treatments.

3.5. Soil Quality Index

The soil quality index (SQI) with the combined application of the NPK and organic manure was the greatest (0.95) among the three fertilized treatments, followed by the NPKs (0.92) and NPK alone (0.9). The combined application of mineral fertilizers with farmyard manure or crop straw resulted in a 5.2% higher SQI value than the NPK alone (Figure 4).

4. Discussion

The combined application of mineral fertilizers and organic manure has been suggested as a substitute for chemical fertilizers to enhance soil quality [25,26]. In this study, we found that the NPKm significantly improved soil quality compared to solely using chemical fertilizers. This finding aligns with the observations of Mi et al. [27], who noted that the incorporation of cattle manure with mineral fertilizers led to markedly higher SQI values than the mineral fertilizers. Ling et al. [28] also illustrated that returning wheat straw enhanced soil quality within the 0–40 cm depth in contrast to removing the straw. However, no significant improvement in soil quality was observed between the NPKs and NPK alone (Figure 4). This was ascribed to the differences in the response of physical, chemical, and biological soil parameters to straw return.
Soil bulk density and the proportion of water-stable aggregates are two key physical indicators that reflect the soil’s capacity to facilitate the storage and movement of water, gases, and nutrients [29]. Our result showed that a significantly higher proportion of macroaggregates was recorded in the organic manure addition, suggesting that the repeated use of organic amendments increased the supply capacity of nutrients in soil. This was consistent with the findings reporting that applying organic amendments for five years enhanced the mass proportion of soil macroaggregates in a North China Plain Vertisol. However, no difference in bulk density was observed among all treatments (Figure 1). By contrast, García-Orenes et al. [30] showed that the successive application of biosolids decreased soil bulk density, likely attributable to the dilution effect of incorporating less dense organic matter into the denser mineral content. The contrasting result was possibly ascribed to the variation in soil types and the quality of organic amendments.
The application of organic amendments is known to have positive effects on the soil organic carbon pool [31,32]. However, significant differences in the total SOC content were not observed among three fertilized treatments. The initial SOC content [33,34], quality of organic materials, and duration of manure application contributed to the variation in organic carbon responses [35]. By contrast, the KMnO4-C content with organic manure input was significantly higher than in the mineral fertilizers alone, suggesting the KMnO4-C, as a labile C fraction, was sensitive to the fertilization practices. However, this difference was not observed in the NPKs and NPK alone treatments, indicating the quality of organic amendments was responsible for different results. Similarly, Mi et al. [31] also found a larger positive effect on the KMnO4-C content in the upper 0–10 cm with cattle manure application than with rice straw return.
Heavy inorganic fertilizer application can lead to a soil pH decrease due to the acidification process deriving from the nitrification of N fertilizers [36]. Our result also showed that the repeated input of mineral fertilizers decreased soil pH by 1.9 units compared to the unfertilized control. Yet, organic amendments could alleviate soil acidification caused by synthetic fertilizers, which was consistent with the findings from Jayalath et al. [37], who observed that organic amendments could stimulate soil pH increases during flooding through sulfate reduction in acid sulfate soils. Soil acidification could cause a decrease in soil C-degrading enzyme activities, which was supported by our findings [38].
Overall, the partial substitute of chemical fertilizers by organic manure not only improved soil quality, but also reduced negative impacts on the environment. However, there are still some challenges to the popularization of this measure. First, the application of organic fertilizers inevitably increased the intensity of field management and transportation costs. Secondly, there is a need to make appropriate recommendations on the amount of fertilizer to be applied to different regions and crops.

5. Conclusions

The long-term combined use of inorganic NPK fertilizers and farmyard manure or crop straw resulted in the significant improvement of soil quality compared to the mineral fertilizers alone. In terms of soil quality variables, both types of organic amendments enhanced the proportion of soil macroaggregates and β-N-acetylglucosaminidase activity. Farmyard manure also had a positive effect on soil alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen and easily oxidized organic carbon. Our result suggested that replacing parts of chemical fertilizers withorganic amendments should be recommended in wheat–sweet potato rotation systems. In future research, the joint application of different types of organic amendments could be considered so that the advantages of each can be utilized.

Author Contributions

Writing original draft, H.Z.; Writing, review, and editing, Y.A. and Y.Z.; Software, X.L. and Y.C.; Investigation, J.Z. and J.Y.; Supervision, J.W.; Resources, L.W.; Methodology, C.X. and Y.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was financially supported by the earmarked fund for CARS-10-Sweetpotato, Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20230749), the Key Research and Development Program of Jiangsu Province (BE2021378), and National Natural Science Foundation of China (41907069).

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ju, X.T.; Kou, C.L.; Christie, P.; Dou, Z.X.; Zhang, F.S. Changes in the soil environment from excessive application of fertilizers and manures to two contrasting intensive cropping systems on the North China Plain. Environ. Pollut. 2007, 145, 497–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Badalucco, L.; Rao, M.; Colombo, C.; Palumbo, G.; Laudicina, V.A.; Gianfreda, L. Reversing agriculture from intensive to sustainable improves soil quality in a semiarid South Italian soil. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2010, 46, 481–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Cai, A.D.; Xu, M.G.; Wang, B.R.; Zhang, W.J.; Liang, G.P.; Hou, E.Q.; Luo, Y.Q. Manure act as a better fertilizer for increasing crop yields than synthetic fertilizer does by improving soil fertility. Soil Till. Res. 2019, 189, 168–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wu, H.; MacDonald, G.K.; Galloway, J.N.; Zhang, L.; Gao, L.; Yang, L.; Yang, T. The influence of crop and chemical fertilizer combinations on greenhouse gas emissions: A partial life-cycle assessment of fertilizer production and use in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 168, 105303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Turmel, M.S.; Speratti, A.; Baudron, F.; Verhulst, N.; Govaerts, B. Crop residue management and soil health: A systems analysis. Agric. Syst. 2015, 134, 6–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Yue, X.L.; Zhang, J.G.; Shi, A.D.; Yao, S.H.; Zhang, B. Manure substitution of mineral fertilizers increased functional stability through changing structure and physiology of microbial communities. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2016, 77, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Yost, J.L.; Schmidt, A.M.; Koelsch, R.; Schott, L.R. Effect of swine manure on soil health properties: A systematic review. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2022, 86, 450–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mi, W.H.; Sun, Y.; Xia, S.Q.; Zhao, H.T.; Mi, W.T.; Brookes, P.C.; Liu, Y.L.; Wu, L.H. Effect of inorganic fertilizers with organic amendments on soil chemical properties and rice yield in a low-productivity paddy soil. Geoderma 2018, 320, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Du, Y.D.; Cui, B.J.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, Z.; Sun, J.; Niu, W.Q. Effects of manure fertilizer on crop yield and soil properties in China: A meta-analysis. Catena 2020, 193, 104617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chen, X.; Xi, K.; Yang, Z.; Lu, J.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, B.; Wang, K.; Shi, J. Long-Term Increases in Continuous Cotton Yield and Soil Fertility following the Application of Cotton Straw and Organic Manure. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, S.B.; Wang, J.Y.; Pu, S.Y.; Blagodatskaya, E.; Kuzyakov, Y.; Razavi, B.S. Impact of manure on soil biochemical properties: A global synthesis. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 745, 141003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Dinesh, R.; Dubey, R.P.; Shyam, P.G. Soil microbial biomass and enzyme activities as influenced by organic manure incorporation into soils of a rice-rice system. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 1998, 181, 173–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Giacometti, C.; Cavani, L.; Baldoni, G.; Ciavatta, C.; Marzadori, C.; Kandeler, E. Microplate-scale fluorometric soil enzyme assays as tools to assess soil quality in a long-term agricultural field experiment. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2014, 75, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Liu, Z.J.; Rong, Q.L.; Zhou, W.; Liang, G.Q. Effects of inorganic and organic amendment on soil chemical properties, enzyme activities, microbial community and soil quality in yellow clayey soil. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0172767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Šimanský, V.; Juriga, M.; Jonczak, J.; Uzarowicz, Ł.; Stępień, W. How relationships between soil organic matter parameters and soil structure characteristics are affected by the long-term fertilization of a sandy soil. Geoderma 2019, 342, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Agegnehu, G.; Nelson, P.N.; Bird, M.I. Crop yield, plant nutrient uptake and soil physicochemical properties under organic soil amendments and nitrogen fertilization on Nitisols. Soil Tillage Res. 2016, 160, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Chen, S.T.; Liu, G.Z.; Hong, Y.; Ma, Y.Y.; Guo, S.K.; Yan, P.; Mi, W.H. Biochar Amendment was Less Effective for Rice Yield Improvement but More Effective for Soil Quality Relative to Inorganic Fertilization in a Low Fertility Paddy Soil. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutri. 2024, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Faloye, O.T.; Ajayi, A.E.; Kamchoom, V.; Akintola, O.A.; Oguntunde, P.G. Evaluating Impacts of Biochar and Inorganic Fertilizer Applications on Soil Quality and Maize Yield Using Principal Component Analysis. Agronomy 2024, 14, 1761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wang, L.; Zhang, H.; Wang, J.; Wang, J.D.; Zhang, Y.C. Long-term fertilization with high nitrogen rates decreased diversity and stability of diazotroph communities in soils of sweet potato. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2022, 170, 104266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Tang, H.M.; Li, C.; Shi, L.H.; Wen, L.; Cheng, K.K.; Li, W.Y.; Xiao, X.P. Functional soil organic matter fraction in response to short-term tillage management under the double-cropping rice paddy field in southern of China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 48438–48449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lu, K. Analytical Methods of Soil and Agricultural Chemistry; China Agricultural Science and Technology Press: Beijing, China, 1999; pp. 107–147. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  22. Blair, G.J.; Lefroy, R.D.B.; Lisle, L. Soil carbon fractions based on their degree of oxidation, and the development of a C management index for agriculture systems. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 1995, 46, 1459–1466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wang, X.J.; Jia, Z.K.; Liang, L.Y.; Yang, B.P.; Ding, R.X.; Nie, J.F.; Wang, J.P. Maize straw effects on soil aggregation and other properties in arid land. Soil Tillage Res. 2015, 153, 131–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Shang, W.; Razavi, B.S.; Yao, S.H.; Hao, C.K.; Kuzyakov, Y.; Blagodatskaya, E.; Tian, J. Contrasting mechanisms of nutrient mobilization in rhizosphere hotspots driven by straw and biochar amendment. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2023, 187, 109212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Oladele, S.O.; Adeyemo, A.J.; Awodun, M.A. Influence of rice husk biochar and inorganic fertilizer on soil nutrients availability and rain-fed rice yield in two contrasting soils. Geoderma 2019, 336, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chivenge, P.; Vanalauwe, B.; Six, J. Does the combined application of organic and mineral nutrient sources influence maize productivity? A meta-analysis. Plant Soil 2011, 342, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mi, W.H.; Sun, T.; Ma, Y.Y.; Chen, C.; Ma, Q.X.; Wu, L.H.; Wu, Q.C.; Xu, Q. Higher yield sustainability and soil quality by manure amendment than straw returning under a single-rice cropping system. Field Crops Res. 2023, 108805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ling, J.; Zhou, J.; Wu, G.; Zhao, D.Q.; Wang, Z.T.; Wen, Y.; Zhou, S.L. Deep-injected straw incorporation enhances subsoil quality and wheat productivity. Plant Soil 2022, 499, 207–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Peng, X.H.; Horn, R.; Hallett, P. Soil structure and its functions in ecosystems: Phase matter & scale matter. Soil Tillage Res. 2015, 146, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. García-Orenes, F.; Guerrero, C.; Mataix-Solera, J.; Navarro-Pedreño, J.; Gómez, I.; Mataix-Beneyto, J. Factors controlling the aggregate stability and bulk density in two different degraded soils amended with biosolids. Soil Tillage Res. 2005, 82, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mi, W.H.; Wu, L.H.; Brookes, P.C.; Liu, Y.L.; Zhang, X.; Yang, X. Changes in soil organic carbon fractions under integrated management systems in a low-productivity paddy soil given different organic amendments and chemical fertilizers. Soil Tillage Res. 2016, 163, 64–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Tian, J.; Lou, Y.L.; Gao, Y.; Fang, H.J.; Liu, S.T.; Xu, M.G.; Blagodatskaya, E.; Kuzyakov, Y. Response of soil organic matter fractions and composition of microbial community to long-term organic and mineral fertilization. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2017, 53, 523–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Capriel, P. Trends in organic carbon and nitrogen contents in agricultural soils in Bavaria (south Germany) between 1986 and 2007: Organic carbon and nitrogen in Bavarian agricultural soils. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2013, 64, 445–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hanegraaf, M.C.; Hoffland, E.; Kuikman, P.J.; Brussaard, L. Trends in soil organic matter contents in Dutch grasslands and maize fields on sandy soils. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2009, 60, 213–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tian, K.; Zhao, Y.C.; Xu, X.H.; Hai, N.; Huang, B.; Deng, W.J. Effect of long-term fertilization and residue management on soil organic carbon changes in paddy soils of China: A meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2015, 204, 40–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cesarano, G.; Filippis, F.D.; Storia, A.L.; Scala, F.; Bonanomi, G. Organic amendment type and application frequency affect crop yields, soil fertility and microbiome composition. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2017, 120, 254–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Jayalath, N.; Fitzpatrick, R.W.; Mosley, L.; Marschner, P. Type of organic carbon amendment influences pH changes in acid sulfate soils in flooded and dry conditions. J. Soils Sediments 2016, 16, 518–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Li, Y.; Sun, J.; Tian, D.S.; Wang, J.S.; Ha, D.L.; Qu, Y.X.; Jing, G.W.; Niu, S.L. Soil acid cations induced reduction in soil respiration under nitrogen enrichment and soil acidification. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 615, 1535–1546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 14 02160 g001
Figure 1. Soil bulk density under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Figure 1. Soil bulk density under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Agronomy 14 02160 g001
Agronomy 14 02160 g002
Figure 2. Soil pH under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Figure 2. Soil pH under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Agronomy 14 02160 g002
Agronomy 14 02160 g003
Figure 3. Soil-available K under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Figure 3. Soil-available K under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Agronomy 14 02160 g003
Agronomy 14 02160 g004
Figure 4. Soil quality index value under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Figure 4. Soil quality index value under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system. NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Agronomy 14 02160 g004
Table 1. Percentage of soil aggregate and mean weight diameter (mm) under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
Table 1. Percentage of soil aggregate and mean weight diameter (mm) under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
Treatment>0.25 mm0.053–0.25 mm<0.053 mmMWD
%mm
CK33.1 ± 3 b33.3 ± 4.2 ab33.3 ± 4.2 a0.43 ± 0.03 c
NPK35 ± 3.2 b32.5 ± 4.4 ab32.5 ± 4.4 ab0.45 ± 0.04 bc
NPKs42.7 ± 1 a24.8 ± 3.2 b24.8 ± 3.2 ab0.53 ± 0.01 ab
NPKm43.7 ± 2.5 a36.6 ± 3.8 a36.6 ± 3.8 b0.55 ± 0.03 a
CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. MWD, mean weight diameter. Different lowercase letters at the same size fraction indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Table 2. Soil organic carbon and its labile fractions under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
Table 2. Soil organic carbon and its labile fractions under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
TreatmentSOCKMnO4-CMBC
g kg−1g kg−1mg kg−1
CK7.7 ± 0.2 b2.2 ± 0.2 c663 ± 112 a
NPK9.4 ± 0.9 ab3.2 ± 0.6 bc666 ± 78 a
NPKs9.6 ± 0.5 b3.9 ± 0.6 ab856 ± 140 a
NPKm11.4 ± 1.2 a5.0 ± 0.6 a672 ± 54 a
CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. SOC, soil organic carbon; KMnO4-C, potassium permanganate-oxidizable C; MBC, microbial biomass carbon. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Table 3. Soil total N and available N and its labile fractions under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
Table 3. Soil total N and available N and its labile fractions under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
TreatmentTNANNH4+NO3−
g kg−1mg kg−1
CK1.3 ± 0.1 b73.6 ± 3.3 bc2.9 ± 0.2 b3.2 ± 0.8 b
NPK1.7 ± 0.1 a105 ± 10.5 ab4.7 ± 0.6 ab6.1 ± 0.4 b
NPKs1.5 ± 0.1 ab84.4 ± 10.1 a5.3 ± 0.9 a5.8 ± 0.8 b
NPKm1.7 ± 0.1 a115 ± 11.94.9 ± 1 a11.1 ± 2 a
CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05. AN, alkali-hydrolyzable N.
Table 4. Soil enzyme activities under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
Table 4. Soil enzyme activities under different fertilization treatments in a wheat–sweet potato rotation system.
Treatmentβ-glucosidaseβ-N-acetyl-glucosaminidaseSoil Alkaline
Phosphatase
CK70.4 ± 7.1 b34.1 ± 3 ab373 ± 44 a
NPK73.1 ± 8.2 b29.3 ± 2 b477 ± 22 a
NPKs110.2 ± 18 a44.8 ± 4.3 a379 ± 54 a
NPKm80.3 ± 13 ab47.0 ± 8.7 a476 ± 66 a
CK, unfertilized control; NPK, application of mineral fertilizers alone; NPKs, NPK with crop straw return; NPKm, combined use of NPK and farmyard manure. Different lowercase letters indicate the significant difference at p < 0.05.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, H.; Li, X.; Zhou, J.; Wang, J.; Wang, L.; Yuan, J.; Xu, C.; Dong, Y.; Chen, Y.; Ai, Y.; et al. Combined Application of Chemical Fertilizer and Organic Amendment Improved Soil Quality in a Wheat–Sweet Potato Rotation System. Agronomy 2024, 14, 2160. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14092160

AMA Style

Zhang H, Li X, Zhou J, Wang J, Wang L, Yuan J, Xu C, Dong Y, Chen Y, Ai Y, et al. Combined Application of Chemical Fertilizer and Organic Amendment Improved Soil Quality in a Wheat–Sweet Potato Rotation System. Agronomy. 2024; 14(9):2160. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14092160

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Hui, Xiang Li, Jiayi Zhou, Jidong Wang, Lei Wang, Jie Yuan, Cong Xu, Yue Dong, Yahua Chen, Yuchun Ai, and et al. 2024. "Combined Application of Chemical Fertilizer and Organic Amendment Improved Soil Quality in a Wheat–Sweet Potato Rotation System" Agronomy 14, no. 9: 2160. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14092160

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop