基于最小数据集的新疆沙湾市农田土壤质量评价与障碍诊断

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2023.713

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了评估新疆沙湾市农田的土壤质量状况，明确影响生产力水平的关键影响因子，推进沙湾市高标准农田建设。运用主成分分析法（PCA）及聚类分析法（CA）分别建立农田土壤质量评价指标的最小数据集，再结合障碍因子诊断模型揭示沙湾市农田土壤质量特征及其障碍因素。结果表明：（1）基于不同数据集的土壤质量评价结果差异明显，其中基于聚类分析的土壤质量指数与全数据集呈显著正相关（R²=0.591，P<0.1），Nash有效系数为-4.923，均大于基于主成分分析的最小数据集，这表明基于聚类分析的最小数据集较基于主成分分析的最小数据集更适合替代全数据集对农田土壤质量进行评价。（2）研究区土壤质量总体处于中等及以上水平，土壤质量指数为0.130~0.641；基于最小数据集的土壤质量指数将沙湾市农田划分为5级，Ⅰ级土壤主要分布在研究区北部及西北方向，Ⅴ级土壤主要分布在东南方向，整体呈现出西北高、东南低的空间分布格局。（3）土壤有机质含量低、氮素缺失、电导率高是影响研究区土壤质量的主要障碍因子。研究结果可用于有效提升当地农田土壤质量，建议在农田管理过程中，除了施用有机肥之外，还可以通过深耕、种植杂草、覆盖秸秆、地膜覆盖等措施改良土壤。

关键词: 主成分分析, 聚类分析, 最小数据集, 土壤质量评价, 障碍度

Abstract:

In order to evaluate the soil quality status of farmland in Shawan City of Xinjiang, China and to clarify the key influencing factors on productivity level, and promote the construction of high standard farmland in Shawan City, this paper build the minimum dataset of farmland soil quality with principal component analysis and cluster analysis, and combined with an obstacle factor diagnostic model, the characteristics and obstacle factors of agricultural soil quality in the Shawan area were revealed. The results led to three main conclusions. (1) There were significant differences between the results of soil quality evaluations using different datasets. The soil quality indices determined using the minimum dataset based on cluster analysis and using the total dataset significantly positively correlated (R²=0.591, P<0.1),the Nash effective coefficient was -4.923, indicating that the minimum dataset based on cluster analysis gave better results than the minimum dataset based on principal component analysis. This indicated that the minimum dataset based on cluster analysis was more suitable than the minimum dataset based on principal component analysis for replacing the total dataset when evaluating farmland soil quality. (2) The overall soil quality in the study area was found to be moderate and better, and the soil quality indices were 0.130-0.641. Farmland in Shawan City was divided into five classes using the soil quality index minimum dataset. Class I soil was mainly in the northern and northwestern parts, and class V soil was mainly in the southeastern part of the study area, indicating that the soil quality was generally high in the northwest and low in the southeast. (3) There were obvious obstacles in the research area, which low organic matter contents, insufficient nitrogen, and high electrical conductivities were the main obstacles. The research results can be used to effectively improve the soil quality of local farmland. It is recommended that in the process of farmland management, not only applying organic fertilizer, take measures such as deep tillage, planting weeds, covering straw, and plastic film to improve the soil.

Key words: principal component analysis, cluster analysis, minimum dataset, soil quality evaluation, obstacle

高海峰, 汪溪远, 吴皓颖, 雷海峰. 基于最小数据集的新疆沙湾市农田土壤质量评价与障碍诊断[J]. 干旱区地理, 2024, 47(9): 1555-1565.

GAO Haifeng, WANG Xiyuan, WU Haoying, LEI Haifeng. Quality evaluation and obstacle diagnosis of farmland soil in Shawan City of Xinjiang based on minimum dataset[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2024, 47(9): 1555-1565.

图/表 10

图1

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

图2

图3

图4

参考文献 31

[1]	乔云发, 钟鑫, 苗淑杰, 等. 基于最小数据集的东北风沙土农田耕层土壤质量评价指标[J]. 水土保持研究, 2019, 26(4): 132-138.
	[Qiao Yunfa, Zhong Xin, Miao Shujie, et al. Evaluation indicators for soil quality of cultivated layer in northeast sandy soil farmland based on minimum dataset[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 26(4): 132-138.]
[2]	陈正发, 史东梅, 金慧芳, 等. 基于土壤管理评估框架的云南坡耕地耕层土壤质量评价[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(3): 256-267.
	[Chen Zhengfa, Shi Dongmei, Jin Huifang, et al. Evaluation of soil quality in the cultivated layer of slope farmland in Yunnan Province based on a soil management assessment framework[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(3): 256-267.]
[3]	周文涛, 兰天, 潘岳, 等. 土壤质量评价中少量样本最小数据集的构建——以内蒙古杭锦旗黄河南岸灌区典型地块为例[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2022, 27(6): 225-235.
	[Zhou Wentao, Lan Tian, Pan Yue, et al. Construction of a minimal dataset with few samples in soil quality evaluation: A case study of a typical plot in the south bank irrigation district of the Yellow River in Hangjin Banner, Inner Mongolia[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2022, 27(6): 225-235.]
[4]	Choudhury B U, Mandal S. Indexing soil properties through constructing minimum datasets for soil quality assessment of surface and profile soils of intermontane valley (Barak, northeast India)[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2021, 123: 107369, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107369.
[5]	李鹏飞, 张兴昌, 郝明德, 等. 基于最小数据集的黄土高原矿区复垦土壤质量评价[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(16): 265-273.
	[Li Pengfei, Zhang Xingchang, Hao Mingde, et al. Evaluation of soil quality for reclamation in Loess Plateau mining areas based on minimal dataset[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(16): 265-273.]
[6]	李霞, 朱万泽, 舒树淼, 等. 基于主成分分析的大渡河中游干暖河谷草地土壤质量评价[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(10): 3891-3900.
	[Li Xia, Zhu Wanze, Shu Shumiao, et al. Principal component analysis based soil quality evaluation of grassland in the dry warm valley of the middle reaches of the Dadu River[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(10): 3891-3900.]
[11]	[Li Yuchen, Xiong Aoyu, Ping Yuan, et al. Evaluation of orchard soil quality under different land preparation methods in Ningdu County based on minimum dataset[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2023, 37(4): 342-350.]
[12]	Yu P J, Han D L, Liu S W, et al. Soil quality assessment under different land uses in an alpine grassland[J]. CATENA, 2018, 171: 280-287.
[13]	胡冰涛, 陈玉东. 基于聚类分析和主成分分析的长江下游稻田氮磷监测指标筛选[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2020, 36(11): 1495-1504.
	[Hu Bingtao, Chen Yudong. Screening of nitrogen and phosphorus monitoring indicators for rice fields in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River based on cluster analysis and principal component analysis[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2020, 36(11): 1495-1504.]
[14]	Zhang J H, Ding Q D, Wang Y J, et al. Soil quality assessment and constraint diagnosis of salinized farmland in the Yellow River irrigation area in northwestern China[J]. Geoderma Regional, 2023, 34: e00684, doi: 10.1016/j.geodrs.2023.e00684.
[15]	袁野, 王浩, 罗洋, 等. 基于最小数据集评价耕作方式对黑土农田土壤质量的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2023, 31(4): 148-157.
	[Yuan Ye, Wang Hao, Luo Yang, et al. Evaluating the impact of tillage methods on soil quality in black soil farmland based on the minimum dataset[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2023, 31(4): 148-157.]
[16]	贾志兴, 江磊, 陈明, 等. 基于最小数据集权重(MDS)的稀土土壤质量评价研究[J]. 环境生态学, 2023, 5(1): 1-6.
	[Jia Zhixing, Jiang Lei, Chen Ming, et al. Research on rare earth soil quality evaluation based on minimum dataset weight (MDS)[J]. Environmental Ecology, 2023, 5(1): 1-6.]
[17]	杨黎敏, 李晓燕, 任永星, 等. 基于最小数据集的长春市耕地土壤质量评价[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(20): 305-310.
	[Yang Limin, Li Xiaoyan, Ren Yongxing, et al. Evaluation of soil quality of cultivated land in Changchun City based on minimal dataset[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 47(20): 305-310.]
[18]	Raiesi F, Pejman M. Assessment of post-wildfire soil quality and its recovery in semi-arid upland rangelands in central Iran through selecting the minimum data set and quantitative soil quality index[J]. CATENA, 2021, 201: 105202, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105202.
[19]	蒋丛泽, 受娜, 高玮, 等. 青藏高原东北缘不同土地利用类型土壤质量综合评价[J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(12): 3279-3286. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202212.016
	[Jiang Congze, Shou Na, Gao Wei, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of soil quality of different land use types in the northeast margin of the Qinghai Tibet Plateau[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2022, 33(12): 3279-3286.] doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202212.016
[20]	陈方正, 任健, 刘思涵, 等. 基于最小数据集的洞庭湖流域南部耕地土壤肥力综合评价[J]. 土壤通报, 2021, 52(6): 1348-1359.
	[Chen Fangzheng, Ren Jian, Liu Sihan, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of soil fertility of cultivated land in the southern Dongting Lake Basin based on minimal dataset[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2021, 52(6): 1348-1359.]
[21]	史东梅, 江娜, 蒋光毅, 等. 紫色土坡耕地耕层质量影响因素及其敏感性分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(3): 135-143.
	[Shi Dongmei, Jiang Na, Jiang Guangyi, et al. Factors and sensitivity analysis on the quality of cultivated layer in purple soil slope farmland[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2020, 36(3): 135-143.]
[22]	Cong P, Wang J, Li Y Y, et al. Changes in soil organic carbon and microbial community under varying straw incorporation strategies[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2020, 204: 104735, doi: 10.1016/j.still.2020.104735.
[23]	刘湘君, 乔冠宇, 郭丰浩, 等. 基于最小数据集的黄淮海旱作区耕层土壤质量评价及障碍分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 2023, 39(12): 104-113.
	[Liu Xiangjun, Qiao Guanyu, Guo Fenghao, et al. Evaluation and obstacle analysis of topsoil quality in the Huanghuaihai dry farming area based on minimum dataset[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2023, 39(12): 104-113.]
[24]	宋洪炳, 郭伟玲. 基于最小数据集的江淮丘陵区土壤质量综合评价[J]. 农业与技术, 2023, 43(12): 93-98.
	[Song Hongbing, Guo Weiling. Comprehensive evaluation of soil quality in Jianghuai hilly area based on minimum dataset[J]. Agriculture and Technology, 2023, 43(12): 93-98.]
[25]	梅楠, 谷岩, 李德忠, 等. 基于最小数据集的吉林省黑土耕层土壤质量评价[J]. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(12): 91-98.
	[Mei Nan, Gu Yan, Li Dezhong, et al. Evaluation of soil quality of black soil cultivated layer in Jilin Province based on minimal dataset[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2021, 37(12): 91-98.]
[26]	Han T F, Liu K L, Huang J, et al. Temporal and spatial characteristics of paddy soil potassium in China and its response to organic amendments: A systematic analysis[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2024, 235: 105894, doi: 10.1016/j.still.2023.105894.
[27]	Guo J H, Liu X J, Zhang Y, et al. Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands[J]. Science, 2010, 327(5968): 1008-1010. doi: 10.1126/science.1182570 pmid: 20150447
[28]	周文宇, 杨小虎, 杨海昌, 等. 基于最小数据集的典型绿洲农田土壤质量评价[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2023, 42(7): 117-122.
	[Zhou Wenyu, Yang Xiaohu, Yang Haichang, et al. Evaluation of soil quality in typical oasis farmland based on minimal dataset[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2023, 42(7): 117-122.]
[29]	刘利昆, 赵广举, 穆兴民, 等. 基于最小数据集的青藏公路沿线土壤质量评价[J]. 水土保持研究, 2022, 29(2): 125-131.
	[Liu Likun, Zhao Guangju, Mu Xingmin, et al. Soil quality evaluation along the Qinghai Tibet Highway based on minimum dataset[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022, 29(2): 125-131.]
[30]	于中阳. 设施农业土壤有机碳变化及碳氮耦合关系研究[D]. 西宁: 青海大学, 2023.
	[Yu Zhongyang. Study on soil organic carbon change and carbon-nitrogen coupling relationship in facility agriculture[D]. Xining: Qinghai University, 2023.]
[7]	包玲凤, 杨明英, 尹兴盛, 等. 基于最小数据集的保山市植烟土壤质量评价与障碍诊断[J]. 西南农业学报, 2023, 36(3): 612-622.
	[Bao Lingfeng, Yang Mingying, Yin Xingsheng, et al. Evaluation of soil quality and obstacle diagnosis for tobacco planting in Baoshan City based on minimal dataset[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 36(3): 612-622.]
[8]	杨丽扬, 张永清, 田静, 等. 基于最小数据集的生草覆盖对吉县苹果园土壤肥力质量的影响评价[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2020, 36(3): 374-381.
	[Yang Liyang, Zhang Yongqing, Tian Jing, et al. Evaluation of the impact of grass coverage on soil fertility quality in apple orchards in Jixian County based on the minimum dataset[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2020, 36(3): 374-381.]
[9]	卓志清, 李勇, 勾宇轩, 等. 基于最小数据集的东北旱作区耕层质量评价与障碍诊断[J]. 农业机械学报, 2021, 52(9): 321-330.
	[Zhuo Zhiqing, Li Yong, Gou Yuxuan, et al. Evaluation of cultivated layer quality and obstacle diagnosis in northeast dry farming area based on minimal dataset[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Machinery, 2021, 52(9): 321-330.]
[10]	金慧芳, 史东梅, 陈正发, 等. 基于聚类及PCA分析的红壤坡耕地耕层土壤质量评价指标[J]. 农业工程学报, 2018, 34(7): 155-164.
	[Jin Huifang, Shi Dongmei, Chen Zhengfa, et al. Evaluation indicators of soil quality in the cultivated layer of red soil slope farmland based on clustering and PCA analysis[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2018, 34(7): 155-164.]
[11]	李雨晨, 熊翱宇, 平原, 等. 基于最小数据集的宁都县不同整地方式下果园土壤质量评价[J]. 水土保持学报, 2023, 37(4): 342-350.
[31]	曹刚, 毕淑海, 赵明新, 等. 干旱区梨园不同覆盖条件下土壤环境因子综合性评价研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(3): 890-900. doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2021.402
	[Cao Gang, Bi Shuhai, Zhao Mingxin, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of soil environmental factors under different coverage conditions in pear orchards in arid areas[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(3): 890-900.] doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2021.402

评价指标	公因子方差			权重
评价指标	全数据集	最小数据集（MDS-PCA）	最小数据集（MDS-CA）	全数据集	最小数据集（MDS-PCA）	最小数据集（MDS-CA）
pH	0.634	-	0.762	0.104	-	0.271
电导率	0.844	-	0.825	0.138	-	0.293
有机质	0.887	0.898	0.731	0.145	0.458	0.260
有效磷	0.847	0.159	0.494	0.138	0.082	0.176
速效钾	0.602	-	-	0.098	-	-
全氮	0.911	0.902	-	0.149	0.460	-
全磷	0.812	-	-	0.133	-	-
碱解氮	0.582	-	-	0.095	-	-

函数类型	评价指标	隶属函数参数
函数类型	评价指标	a	b₁	b₂	b
S型隶属函数	有机质/g·kg^-1	0.280	-	-	4.500
	有效磷/mg·kg^-1	2.700	-	-	96.200
	速效钾/mg·kg^-1	54.800	-	-	1983.000
	全氮/g·kg^-1	0.351	-	-	5.392
	全磷/g·kg^-1	0.500	-	-	1.520
	碱解氮/mg·kg^-1	19.000	-	-	342.000
抛物线型隶属函数	pH	7.740	8.000	8.500	9.050
抛物线型隶属函数	电导率µS·cm^-1	118.200	500.000	2000.000	4540.000

土壤指标	最小值	最大值	均值	标准偏差	变异系数CV/%	养分水平分级
pH	7.700	9.050	8.233	0.226	2.7	-
电导率/µS·cm^-1	118.200	4540.000	587.684	791.211	134.6	-
有机质/g·kg^-1	0.280	4.500	1.448	0.658	45.5	六
有效磷/mg·kg^-1	2.700	96.200	22.342	15.591	69.8	二
速效钾/mg·kg^-1	54.800	1983.000	355.554	235.733	66.3	一
全氮/g·kg^-1	0.351	5.392	0.975	0.601	61.6	四
全磷/g·kg^-1	0.500	1.520	0.975	0.171	17.5	二
碱解氮/mg·kg^-1	19.000	342.000	64.568	42.082	65.2	四

土壤指标	级别
土壤指标	极高	高	中上	中	低	极低
有机质/g·kg^-1	>40	30~40	20~30	10~20	6~10	<6
全氮/g·kg^-1	>2.00	1.50~2.00	1.00~1.50	0.75~1.00	0.50~0.75	<0.50
全磷/g·kg^-1	>1.0	0.8~1.0	0.6~0.8	0.4~0.6	0.2~0.4	<0.2
碱解氮/mg·kg^-1	>150	120~150	90~120	60~90	30~60	<30
有效磷/mg·kg^-1	>40	20~40	10~20	5~10	3~5	<3
速效钾/mg·kg^-1	>200	150~200	100~150	50~100	30~50	<30

土壤属性	成分载荷矩阵			Norm值
土壤属性	1	2	3	Norm值
全氮/g·kg^-1	0.791	0.460	-0.271	1.616
速效钾/mg·kg^-1	0.748	-0.177	-0.103	1.430
有机质/g·kg^-1	0.727	0.555	-0.222	1.543
碱解氮/mg·kg^-1	0.718	-0.026	-0.257	1.380
全磷/g·kg^-1	0.714	0.097	0.541	1.466
pH	-0.593	0.527	0.060	1.287
电导率/µS·cm^-1	0.394	-0.777	-0.291	1.235
有效磷/mg·kg^-1	0.552	-0.119	0.727	1.299
特征值	3.551	1.457	1.109	-
累计贡献率/%	44.390	62.602	76.459	-