李春培(1997—),男,湖北恩施人,硕士,主要从事土壤发生演化方面的研究。E-mail:
为了分析研究酸化环境对紫色母岩风化产物交换性盐基离子及其酸缓冲容量的影响规律。本研究以侏罗纪紫色岩层中的遂宁组(J3s)、沙溪庙组(J2s)和蓬莱镇组(J3p)为研究对象,设置pH分别为2.5、3.5、4.5、5.6等4个酸性环境,以及去离子水(pH=7.0)为对照处理(CK),采用循环浸泡试验和模拟淋溶试验,研究酸性环境对紫色母岩风化产物特征的影响。结果表明,通过酸化环境处理后,3组紫色母岩风化产物交换性盐基离子及其总量均随酸化环境的pH降低而减小,且3组紫色母岩风化产物的酸缓冲容量与其交换性K+、Na+、Ca2+、Mg2+含量以及交换性盐基总量均呈极显著正相关关系(
This study aimed to analyze the influence of the acidification environment on weathering products of the typical purple parent rock. The weathering products of purple parent rocks from the Suining Group (J3s), Shaximiao Group (J2s), and Penglaizhen Group (J3p) were investigated under different acidification environments in the laboratory.
The acid solutions used for acidification of purple parent rock samples were used to cycle soaking and simulate leaching experiment tests at pHs of 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.6. In addition, deionized water (pH = 7.0) was set as a control treatment (CK).
The results showed that the exchangeable cations and content of total exchangeable cations of weathering products of these purple parent rocks decreased as the acidity of the acidifying solutions increased. The acid buffering capacity of weathering products had an extremely significant correlation with the content of the exchangeable K+, Na+, Ca2+, and Mg2+ and the content total of exchangeable cations (
The acid buffer capacity, exchangeable salt ions, and total salt of weathering products under the soaking treatment in this experiment were lower than under the leaching treatment. It can be seen that the transport of minerals or nutrients on the slopes of hilly areas is dominated by leaching, while the transport of minerals or nutrients on the plains is dominated by leaching. Therefore, acid deposition may accelerate the occurrence of soil erosion on slopes to some extent, which in turn leads to an acceleration of the plain side process.
岩石风化是地表生物地球化学循环的重要过程,岩石的风化成土过程极为缓慢[
环境酸化是当前人类面临的全球性环境问题之一[
目前,较多学者关注农业生产活动中土壤的酸性缓冲性能及发生机制的研究,但较少关注岩石风化产物的酸性缓冲性能。因此,本试验以四川盆地的典型紫色母岩为试验材料,通过室内的循环浸泡试验和模拟酸雨淋溶试验,研究酸化环境对紫色母岩风化产物盐基离子及酸性缓冲容量的影响,以期为维持紫色土肥力的可持续发展提供理论依据。
试验所用的蓬莱镇组(J3p)、沙溪庙组(J2s)和遂宁组(J3s)紫色泥岩分别采自四川安岳县工业园区(30°6′35″N,105°23′43″E)、资中县工业园区(29°44′52″N,104°51′20″E)和遂宁市河沙镇砖厂(30°35′16″N,105°41′25″E)。现场挖掘3组新出露的紫色土母岩(泥岩),而且要求同种母岩采自同一地点,尽可能使母岩样品的理化特性一致,采集的每块母岩的颜色和质地等一致。然后运至盐亭紫色土农业生态试验站(31°16′N,105°27′E),于阴凉处放至完全风干。待阴干后,将其中一部分紫色母岩进行粒径(> 60 mm,40~60 mm,20~40 mm,10~20 mm,5~10 mm)筛分,筛分完成后的母岩样品将被应用于模拟酸雨淋溶试验,即淋溶试样。而将另外一部分整块母岩切割成若干小块,并将各切割小块处理成浑圆状试样,每块重(660±3)g,为了避免同种母岩样品间的异质性,同种母岩试样从同一块母岩样品切割,尽可能使各组母岩试样的理化特性一致,切割完成后的母岩样品将被应用于循环浸泡试验,即浸泡试样。各组紫色母岩的基本性质见
紫色母岩矿物含量
Mineral content of the three purple parent rock/%
紫色母岩 Purple parent rock | 矿物含量 Mineral content/% | ||||
蒙脱石 |
伊利石 |
高岭石 |
绿泥石 |
石英 |
|
J3s | 9.1 | 30.2 | 0.0 | 8.7 | 33.2 |
J2s | 13.2 | 21.0 | 6.1 | 6.8 | 40.8 |
J3p | 5.2 | 23.1 | 0.0 | 10.7 | 38.1 |
紫色母岩 Purple parent rock | 矿物含量 Mineral content /% | ||||
钾长石 |
斜长石 |
方解石 |
白云石 |
||
J3s | 1.0 | 7.2 | 10.3 | 0.3 | |
J2s | 2.2 | 9.7 | 0.1 | 0.1 | |
J3p | 0.9 | 8.2 | 11.8 | 2.0 |
紫色母岩的主要化学元素含量
Main chemical element content of the three purple parent rock/%
紫色母岩 Purple parent rock | 化学元素 Chemical element /% | ||||||||
SiO2 | Al2O3 | Fe2O3 | TiO2 | K2O | Na2O | CaO | MgO | CaCO3 | |
注:J3s、J3p和J2s分别表示遂宁组、蓬莱镇组和沙溪庙组紫色泥岩。下同。Note:The Suining group,Penglai group,and Shaximiao group were represented by J3s,J3p,and J2s. The same as below. | |||||||||
J3s | 57.6 | 12.8 | 5.0 | 0.7 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 5.7 | 1.3 | 14.1 |
J2s | 61.5 | 16.2 | 6.6 | 0.8 | 2.6 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 2.0 | 2.2 |
J3p | 58.3 | 13.0 | 4.7 | 0.6 | 2.4 | 0.9 | 5.0 | 1.3 | 14.7 |
基于Li等[
淋溶试验采用的室内模拟土柱淋洗试验。将淋溶试样按照由大到小的粒径装入土柱内,且各粒径质量为600±3 g。由于四川盆地的年均降雨量为863 mm,因此,每次淋溶量按月平均降雨量为72 mm进行模拟降雨,且每月进行2次淋洗,共计进行24次淋洗,淋溶方法采用间歇淋溶法使其接近自然降雨。分别在淋洗12次(模拟1 a降雨量)和24次(模拟2 a降雨量)后,收集3组紫色泥岩风化产物(颗粒 < 2 mm)进行交换性盐基离子(K+、Na+、Ca2+、Mg2+)和交换性盐基总量的测定。其试验实施过程与赵吉霞等[
循环浸泡试验将事先切割完成的浸泡试样放入500 mL的烧杯中,并对浸泡试样进行称重,保持每块紫色母岩的质量为660±3 g,然后向烧杯中加入300 mL预先配置的不同酸度(pH=2.5,3.5,4.5,5.6)和对照(CK)的浸泡液,静置72 h后,分离浸泡试样和浸泡液,并收集浸泡液中崩解物,在105℃下将浸泡液中崩解物烘干至恒重且冷却至室温后,将其返还至相对应的烧杯中,至此1次循环浸泡试验完成。本试验进行24次循环浸泡为止或崩解物全部过2 mm为止,收集3组紫色母岩的风化产物,并测定3组紫色母岩风化产物中交换性盐基离子(K+、Na+、Ca2+、Mg2+)、交换性盐基总量及酸性缓冲容量。
参照Xu[
分别取5.00 g各处理后的风化产物于100 mL塑料瓶中(各处理后的风化产物取7组),滴入一定量的去离子水使样品刚好湿润为止,然后分别加入0、0.25、0.5、1.0、2.0、4.0、6.0 mL已标定的HCl(0.1 mol∙L–1)溶液,然后再加入去离子水至外加溶液的总体积均为25 mL,最后将密闭好的塑料瓶放入摇床进行震荡,所有处理均重复3次。土壤悬液在25℃条件(30~50 r∙min–1)下振荡24 h后,恒温25℃培养7 d,期间每天往复摇匀30 min,最后用pH计测定土壤悬浊液的pH,并记录悬浊液温度。以pH为纵坐标,酸加入量为横坐标,建立线性方程为:
式中,pHBC为风化产物的酸缓冲容量;b为截距;m为斜率。
经测定,各处理后的风化产物pH均大于7.0,属碱性土壤,因此根据NY/T1615-2008石灰性土壤交换性盐基及盐基总量的测定方法,以pH8.5的氯化铵-乙醇溶液作为交换液,利用原子吸收分光光度计测定风化产物中的交换性Ca2+、Mg2+含量,并用火焰光度计测定风化产物中交换性K+、Na+含量。
此外,紫色母岩矿物组成及黏土矿物采用X射线衍射仪测定;化学物质中K2O、Na2O、CaO、MgO和MnO采用原子吸收分光光度法测定;P2O5采用钼锑抗比色法测定;SiO2采用聚环氧乙烷重量法测定;Al2O3采用氟化物取代络合滴定法测定;Fe2O3采用重铬酸钾容量法测定;TiO2采用过氧化氢比色法测定。
本试验的相关试验数据的预处理均在Excel 2019中进行,数据的统计分析采用IBM SPSS Statistics 25软件,单因素方差分析采用最小显著差异法(LSD),相关性分析采用皮尔逊系数法(Pearson),绘图采用origin 2021软件。
通过对循环浸泡处理后的紫色母岩风化产物的交换性K+、Na+、Ca2+、Mg2+进行测定。结果表明,随着浸泡液酸度的增强,3组紫色母岩风化产物的交换性K+、Na+、Ca2+、Mg2+的含量均呈现下降趋势,而且不同pH酸溶液处理下的母岩风化产物中的交换性K+、Na+、Ca2+、Mg2+含量较CK处理均有不同程度的减少(
酸循环浸泡处理后紫色母岩风化产物中交换性盐基离子的含量
The contents of exchangeable salt-based ions of weathering products after treatment soaked at different pH values
在模拟淋溶12次和24次后,分别收集3组紫色母岩的风化产物(< 2 mm),并对风化产物交换性盐基离子进行测定。结果表明,随着淋溶液的酸度和降雨量的增加,3组紫色母岩风化产物中交换性盐基离子呈现减小的趋势(
模拟酸雨淋溶12次紫色母岩风化产物中交换性盐基离子的含量
The contents of exchangeable salt-based ions of weathering products after treatment simulated rain 12 times at different pH values
模拟酸雨淋溶24次紫色母岩风化产物中交换性盐基离子的含量
The contents of exchangeable salt-based ions of weathering products after treatment simulated rain 24 times at different pH values
通过测定循环浸泡试验中3组紫色母岩风化产物的交换性盐基总量。结果表明,以CK处理为对照,3组紫色母岩风化产物的交换性盐基总量均随浸泡液pH的减小而减小(
酸化环境中紫色母岩风化产物交换性盐基离子的总量
The contents of exchangeable salt-based ions of weathering products at different pH acid conditions
模拟淋溶12次和24次后,分别收集并测定3组紫色母岩风化产物交换性盐基总量。结果表明,模拟淋溶12次后,随酸性淋溶液pH的减小,3组紫色母岩风化产物交换性盐基总量呈现增加的趋势。而模拟淋溶24次后,随酸性淋溶液酸度的增加,3组紫色母岩风化产物中交换性盐基总量有明显的减少(
土壤酸缓冲能力是土壤对酸敏感性的度量指标,是土壤质量评价体系中的重要因子,通常将土壤酸缓冲容量,即单位质量的土壤降低1个pH单位所需酸的量作为评价土壤抵抗酸能力的重要指标[
不同酸浸泡处理下母岩风化产物的酸缓冲容量
The acid buffering capacity of weathering products after treatment soaked at different pH values
通过采用高斯混合模型对风化产物酸缓冲容量和酸性浸泡液的pH进行非线性拟合。遂宁组(J3s)、蓬莱镇组(J3p)和沙溪庙组(J2s)紫色母岩风化产物酸缓冲容量与酸浸泡液的pH拟合方程如
风化产物的酸缓冲容量对酸性浸泡的响应特征
The acid buffering capacity of weathering products' response to acid-soaked
土壤中的交换性盐基离子是土壤产生缓冲作用的主要原因,通过对3组紫色母岩风化产物的酸缓冲容量与交换性盐基离子的相关分析(
风化产物酸缓冲容量与风化产物盐基离子含量的相关系数
The coefficient of correlation between acid buffering capacity and contents of base exchangeable cations of weathering products
pH | K+ | Na+ | Ca2+ | Mg2+ | TEA | pHBC | |
注:表中TEA为盐基交换总量,*在 |
|||||||
pH | 1.00 | ||||||
K+ | 0.26 | 1.00 | |||||
Na+ | 0.52** | 0.79** | 1.00 | ||||
Ca2+ | 0.44** | 0.95** | 0.82** | 1.00 | |||
Mg2+ | 0.40** | 0.35* | 0.56** | 0.372* | 1.00 | ||
TEA | 0.50** | 0.90** | 0.91** | 0.94** | 0.65** | 1.00 | |
pHBC | 0.10 | 0.93** | 0.79** | 0.87** | 0.44** | 0.88** | 1.00 |
酸化环境显著影响紫色母岩的成土特征[
淋溶试验结果表明,3组紫色母岩交换性Ca2+、Mg2+随淋溶次数的增加而下降,且减小幅度远大于K+、Na+。淋溶过程中盐基离子被淋洗出土体[
随着浸泡液酸度增强,3组紫色母岩风化产物酸缓冲容量均呈现先增加后降低趋势,且酸性缓冲容量表现为遂宁组(J3s)>蓬莱镇组(J3p)>沙溪庙组(J2s),且在同一酸浸泡处理下,3组紫色母岩风化产物的酸性缓冲容量均存在显著性差异(
循环浸泡24次后,浸泡液的pH为5.60、5.46和5.16分别为遂宁组(J3s)、蓬莱镇组(J3p)和沙溪庙组(J2s)紫色母岩风化产物酸缓冲容量达到峰值(
循环浸泡24次后,遂宁组(J3s)、蓬莱镇组(J3p)和沙溪庙组(J2s)紫色母岩风化产物交换性盐基总量较淋溶24次处理分别提高13.17%~26.89%、17.49%~31.91%、0.61%~19.64%。酸性环境中H+依次与碳酸盐[
淋溶处理12次后,3组紫色母岩风化产物交换性盐基离子及盐基总量随淋溶液酸度增加而增加,但淋溶处理24次后,风化产物交换性盐基离子及盐基总量随淋溶液酸度增加而减小。本试验所采用的紫色母岩中含有较为丰富的碳酸盐(
本试验的模拟淋溶强度为中等降雨强度接近大雨强度等级,且高于实际状态下的天然降雨强度,而且杨景田等[
本研究通过室内的循环浸泡试验和模拟酸雨淋溶试验,以川中地区典型的3组紫色母岩为试验材料,研究不同酸性环境处理对紫色母岩风化产物中酸性缓冲性能、交换性盐基离子及其总量的影响。结果表明:(1)不同酸性环境条件下的母岩风化产物中交换性盐基离子及其总量随处理pH降低而减少。在相同酸度处理24次后,3组紫色母岩风化产物的交换性盐基总量较CK处理均存在不同程度的减小,而且减小幅度随浸泡液酸度的增强而增大,同时,风化产物中的交换性盐基离子含量均表现Ca2+ > Mg2+ > Na+ > K+。此外,模拟淋溶24次后3组紫色母岩风化产物中的交换性盐基总量较模拟淋溶12次均有明显的降低。(2)沙溪庙组(J2s)紫色母岩风化产物的酸缓冲容量最低,其平均值不足遂宁组(J3s)和蓬莱镇组(J3p)紫色母岩风化产物酸缓冲容量的30%,而且3组紫色母岩风化产物的酸缓冲容量与其交换性K+、Na+、Ca2+、Mg2+含量均呈极显著正相关关系(
Barton D. Notes on the disintegration of granite in Egypt[J]. The Journal of Geology, 1916, 24: 382—393.
He Y R, et al. Purple Soils in China: Part Ⅱ[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2003.
何毓蓉, 等. 中国紫色土: 下篇[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2003.
赵吉霞, 邓利梅, 陆传豪, 等. 模拟酸雨淋溶对紫色母岩风化成土特征的影响研究[J]. 西南大学学报: 自然科学版, 2021, 43(11): 151—161.
Zhao J X, Deng L M, Lu C H, et al. Effects of simulated acid rain leaching on weathering and soil forming characteristics of purple parent rock[J]. Journal of Southwest University: Natural Science Edition, 2021, 43(11): 151—161.
Tian D S, Niu S L. A global analysis of soil acidification caused by nitrogen addition[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2015, 10(2): 024019.
Shi Z J, Zhang J E, Xiao Z H, et al. Effects of acid rain on plant growth: A meta-analysis[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2021, 297: 113213.
Uchikawa J, Zeebe R E. Influence of terrestrial weathering on ocean acidification and the next glacial inception[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2008, 35(23): L23608.
Hartmann J, West A J, Renforth P, et al. Enhanced chemical weathering as a geoengineering strategy to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide, supply nutrients, and mitigate ocean acidification[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 2013, 51(2): 113—149.
周修萍, 江静蓉, 秦文娟. 中国南方几种土壤的酸雨淋溶特性[J]. 农村生态环境, 1988, 4(1): 17—22.
Zhou X P, Jiang J R, Qin W J. The leaching characteristics of acid rain on some types of soil in Southern China[J]. Rural Eco-Environment, 1988, 4(1): 17—22.
庄翔宇, 杨金玲, 张甘霖, 等. 亚热带花岗岩地区土壤矿物风化过程中盐基离子的释放特征[J]. 土壤, 2016, 48(2): 374—380.
Zhuang X Y, Yang J L, Zhang G L, et al. Release characteristics of base cations during soil mineral weathering in subtropical granite area[J]. Soils, 2016, 48(2): 374—380.
刘俐, 周友亚, 宋存义, 等. 模拟酸雨淋溶下红壤中盐基离子释放及缓冲机制研究[J]. 环境科学研究, 2008, 21(2): 49—55.
Liu L, Zhou Y Y, Song C Y, et al. Release of basic cations in red soil under simulated acid rain and buffering mechanism[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 2008, 21(2): 49—55.
刘莉, 谢德体, 李忠意, 等. 酸性紫色土的阳离子交换特征及其对酸缓冲容量的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(4): 887—897.
Liu L, Xie D T, Li Z Y, et al. Cations exchange and its effect on acid buffering capacity of acid purple soil[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2020, 57(4): 887—897.
陈忠柳, 舒英格, 周鹏鹏. 喀斯特山区不同生态恢复模式土壤盐基离子的交换及分布特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(4): 304—311, 319.
Chen Z L, Shu Y G, Zhou P P. Exchange and distribution characteristics of soil base ions under different ecological restoration pattern in the Karst mountainous area[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34(4): 304—311, 319.
聂三安, 葛体达, 肖和艾, 等. 不同栽培管理方式下土壤交换性盐基特征差异分析[J]. 土壤通报, 2011, 42(5): 1064—1069.
Nie S A, Ge T D, Xiao H A, et al. Variation analysis of soil exchangeable bases in different cultivation management[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2011, 42(5): 1064—1069.
Zhang Q Y, Wang Q F, Zhu J X, et al. Spatiotemporal variability, source apportionment, and acid-neutralizing capacity of atmospheric wet base-cation deposition in China[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2020, 262: 114335.
Tabatabai M A, Olson R A. Effect of acid rain on soils[J]. Critical Reviews in Environmental Control, 1985, 15(1): 65—110.
江军, 曹楠楠, 俞梦笑, 等. 酸性森林土壤缓冲酸沉降关键机理研究进展[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2019, 27(5): 491—499.
Jiang J, Cao N N, Yu M X, et al. A review of the key mechanisms of acidic forest soils to buffer acid deposition[J]. Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Botany, 2019, 27(5): 491—499.
李博, 赵琼, 毛兵, 等. 我国东部主要类型土壤酸缓冲能力的影响因素[J]. 生态学杂志, 2021, 40(12): 3901—3910.
Li B, Zhao Q, Mao B, et al. Factors influencing acid buffering capacity of main soil types in Eastern China[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2021, 40(12): 3901—3910.
廖柏寒, 李长生. 土壤对酸沉降缓冲机制探讨[J]. 环境科学, 1989, 10(1): 30—34, 96.
Liao B H, Li C S. Buffering mechanism of soil for acidic precipitation[J]. Environmental Science, 1989, 10(1): 30—34, 96.
毛友发, 仇荣亮, 温志良. 陆地生态系统酸沉降缓冲能力影响因素[J]. 土壤与环境, 1999, 8(2): 141—143.
Mao Y F, Qiu R L, Wen Z L. Factors influencing buffering ability of land-ecosystem[J]. Soil and Environmental Sciences, 1999, 8(2): 141—143.
赵旋彤, 王鸿斌, 赵兰坡, 等. 吉林省三种典型农耕土壤酸碱缓冲性能及影响因素[J]. 吉林农业大学学报, 2020.
Zhao X T, Wang H B, Zhao L P, et al. Acid-base buffering properties and influencing factors of three typical agricultural soils in Jilin Province[J]. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University, 2020.
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.
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.
Li Z Y, Wang P S, Liu L, et al. High negative surface charge increases the acidification risk of purple soil in China[J]. Catena, 2021, 196.
Li J L, Li R, Cui L L, et al. Spatial and temporal variation of inorganic ions in rainwater in Sichuan Province from 2011 to 2016[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2019, 254: 112941.
赵晓莉, 闫军, 陈中钰, 等. 2006—2013年四川酸雨变化特征分析[J]. 气象与环境科学, 2015, 38(2): 54—59.
Zhao X L, Yan J, Chen Z Y, et al. Variation characteristics analysis of acid rain in Sichuan from 2006 to 2013[J]. Meteorological and Environmental Sciences, 2015, 38(2): 54—59.
Wang H, Han G L. Chemical composition of rainwater and anthropogenic influences in Chengdu, Southwest China[J]. Atmospheric Research, 2011, 99(2): 190—196.
杨先红, 舒丽, 陈善莉. 南充市近十年酸雨变化特征及降水化学组成研究[J]. 四川环境, 2014, 33(1): 26—31.
Yang X H, Shu L, Chen S L. Study on changing characteristics of acid rain and chemistry composition of rain water in Nanchong in recent decade[J]. Sichuan Environment, 2014, 33(1): 26—31.
Xu J M, Tang C, Chen Z L. The role of plant residues in pH change of acid soils differing in initial pH[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2006, 38(4): 709—719.
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.
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.
张永春, 汪吉东, 沈明星, 等. 长期不同施肥对太湖地区典型土壤酸化的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2010, 47(3): 465—472.
Zhang Y C, Wang J D, Shen M X, et al. Effects of long-term fertilization on soil acidification in Taihu Lake region, China[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2010, 47(3): 465—472.
Weaver A R, Kissel D E, Chen F, et al. Mapping soil pH buffering capacity of selected fields in the coastal plain[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2004, 68(2): 662—668.
Aitken R, Moody P. The effect of valence and ionic strength on the measurement of pH buffer capacity[J]. Soil Research, 1994, 32: 975.
Tarkalson D D, Payero J O, Hergert G W, et al. Acidification of soil in a dry land winter wheat-
王力军. 模拟酸雨淋洗下土壤化学和矿物风化特性的变化[J]. 渝州大学学报: 自然科学版, 1995, 12(2): 6—10.
Wang L J. Chemical and mineralogical changes of soil under the influence of simulated acid rain[J]. Joural of Yuzhou University: Natural Sciences Edition, 1995, 12(2): 6—10.
青长乐. 酸沉降物对土壤肥力的影响研究[J]. 西南农业大学学报, 1988, 10(1): 1—11.
Qing C L. Studies on the effect of acid preciptation on soil fertility[J]. Journal of Southwest Agricultural University, 1988, 10(1): 1—11.
杨学春, 朱亚萍. 四川紫色土的酸化及其生态效应[J]. 西南农业大学学报, 1995(6): 532—537.
Yang X C, Zhu Y P. Acidification of purple soil and its ecological effects[J]. Journal of Southwest Agricultural University, 1995(6): 532—537.
仇荣亮, 于锡军. 陆地生态系统酸沉降缓冲机制与缓冲能力[J]. 中山大学学报: 自然科学版, 1998, 37(S2): 161—165.
Qiu R L, Yu X J. Study on buffering mechanisms and buffering ability of terrestrial ecosystem to acid deposition[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Sunyatseni, 1998, 37(S2): 161—165.
黄兴成. 四川盆地紫色土养分肥力现状及炭基调理剂培肥效应研究[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2016.
Huang X C. Soil fertility status and improvenment with carbon-based amendments to purple soil in the Sichuan Basin[D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2016.
Mangold D C, Tsang C F. A summary of subsurface hydrological and hydrochemical models[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 1991, 29(1): 51—79.
谭孟溪, 刘莉, 王朋顺, 等. 微地形作用下紫色母岩发育土壤的酸化特征[J]. 土壤学报, 2018, 55(6): 1441—1449.
Tan M X, Liu L, Wang P S, et al. Effect of microtopography on the acidification characteristics of soils developed from purple parent rock[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2018, 55(6): 1441—1449.
程永毅, 李忠意, 白颖艳, 等. 电渗析法研究紫色土、黄壤和砖红壤的酸化特征[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(7): 1325—1333.
Cheng Y Y, Li Z Y, Bai Y Y, et al. Acidification characteristics of purple soil, yellow soil and latosol with electrodialysis method[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(7): 1325—1333.
Zhao J X, Lu C H, Deng L M, et al. Impacts of simulated acid solution on the disintegration and cation release of purple rock (mudstone) in Southwest China[J]. Geomorphology, 2018, 316: 35—43.
Liu C S, Song G H, Shi Y X, et al. Characteristics of acid leaching of brown soil and cinnamon soil[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2002, 16(3): 5—8.
刘炜, 周运超, 张春来. 石灰土盐基离子迁移对模拟酸雨的响应[J]. 中国岩溶, 2018, 37(3): 336—342.
Liu W, Zhou Y C, Zhang C L. Response of base cations migration of lime soil to simulated acid rain[J]. Carsologica Sinica, 2018, 37(3): 336—342.
岑慧贤, 王树功, 仇荣亮, 等. 模拟酸雨对土壤盐基离子的淋溶释放影响[J]. 环境污染与防治, 2001, 23(1): 13—15, 26.
Cen H X, Wang S G, Qiu R L, et al. Effect of simulating acid rain on cation release of some soils[J]. Environmental Pollution & Control, 2001, 23(1): 13—15, 26.
樊后保, 林德喜. 模拟酸雨对福建四种山地土壤的淋溶与风化作用[J]. 山地学报, 2002, 20(5): 570—577.
Fan H B, Lin D X. Leaching and weathering effects of simulated acid rain on four types of mountain soils in Fujin, China[J]. Journal of Mountain Research, 2002, 20(5): 570—577.
廖柏寒, 戴昭华. 土壤对酸沉降的缓冲能力与土壤矿物的风化特征[J]. 环境科学学报, 1991, 11(4): 425—431.
Liao B H, Dai Z H. Soil buffering capacity to acid precipitation and weathering characteristics of soil minerals[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 1991, 11(4): 425—431.
Huang L M, Zhang G L, Yang J L. Weathering and soil formation rates based on geochemical mass balances in a small forested watershed under acid precipitation in subtropical China[J]. Catena, 2013, 105: 11—20.
邢世和, 周碧青, 张美寿, 等. 耕作土壤的非交换性K释放速率[J]. 福建农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2000, 29(2): 219—223.
Xing S H, Zhou B Q, Zhang M S, et al. Releasing rate of nonexchangeable K in some cultivated soils[J]. Journal of Fujian Agricultural University(Natural Science), 2000, 29(2): 219—223.
张博, 李佳颖, 李洪臣. 低分子量有机酸对土壤钾释放的动力学分析[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2016, 44(35): 140—142.
Zhang B, Li J Y, Li H C. Dynamics analysis of low molecular weight organic acids on soil potassium release[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 44(35): 140—142.
郭小雪, 刘可星, 王瑶, 等. 活化钾矿的钾释放动力学研究[J]. 华南农业大学学报, 2015, 36(6): 62—67.
Guo X X, Liu K X, Wang Y, et al. Kinetics of potassium release of activated insoluble potassium ores[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University, 2015, 36(6): 62—67.
刘莉, 李晓红, 周志明, 等. 模拟酸雨对三峡库区4种典型土壤酸化及盐基离子淋溶释放的影响[J]. 重庆大学学报: 自然科学版, 2007, 30(8): 63—69.
Liu L, Li X H, Zhou Z M, et al. Effects of simulated acid rain on soil acidification and base cations release of four types of typical soils from the Three Gorges reservoir region[J]. Journal of Chongqing University: Natural Science Edition, 2007, 30(8): 63—69.
杨景田, 苏欣捷, 武庆芬, 等. 铅锌冶炼弃渣有害特征及其浸出行为研究[J]. 环境科学, 1988, 9(6): 17—22, 96.
Yang J T, Su X J, Wu QF, et al. Hazardous characteristics and leaching behaviour of waste lead and zinc slags[J]. Environmental Science, 1988, 9(6): 17—22, 96.
Wang A P, Li F H, Yang S M. Effect of polyacrylamide application on runoff, erosion, and soil nutrient loss under simulated rainfall[J]. Pedosphere, 2011, 21(5): 628—638.