| 保水剂对土壤持水性影响及在不同土壤中效果比较 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 闫永利,魏占民,任秀苹,奇凤.保水剂对土壤持水性影响及在不同土壤中效果比较[J].节水灌溉,2016(1):34-38. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 闫永利 魏占民 任秀苹 奇凤 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 1. 内蒙古农业大学职业技术学院,内蒙古包头,014109;2. 内蒙古农业大学水利与土木建筑工程学院,呼和浩特,010018;3. 内蒙古包头市土默特右旗水务局,内蒙古包头,014109;4. 鄂尔多斯工业与城市供水办公室,内蒙古东胜,017000 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 为分析保水剂对土壤持水性的影响以及对不同土壤持水效果进行比较,按保水剂质量占土壤质量百分比设计0.10%、0.30%、0.50%、1.00%、以及对照(土壤不加保水剂)5个处理进行室内试验。结果表明:保水剂可提高土壤的持水性,土壤保水率随保水剂用量增加而增大,3种土壤施用比例为0.10%~1.00%的保水剂,经过7h恒温蒸发后土壤平均保水率较对照提高103%~187%。但是,当保水剂达到一定用量后,保水率增幅效果不显著。综合3种土壤平均保水率,保水剂比例为0.10%时,恒温蒸发7h后与对照差异显著,当比例增大至0.30%时,虽然与对照相比存在显著差异,但与比例为0.10%时相比无显著差异,当比例逐渐增大至0.50%和1.00%时,与比例为0.30%时相比,相互间也无显著差异。保水剂对提高不同土壤持水性方面的功效存在差异,且差异的大小与水分蒸发时间及保水剂用量有关。土壤水分蒸发初期(1~2h),不同保水剂用量,3种土壤的保水率无明显差异;土壤水分蒸发后期(2h后),保水剂对提高不同土壤持水效果的差异逐渐显现,总体上在黏粒含量较低的壤沙土中的应用效果要好于黏粒含量较高的沙黏壤土和壤土。3种土壤施用比例为0.10%~1.00%,经过7h恒温蒸发后保水率较对照提高分别为:壤沙土293.08%~591.29%,沙黏壤土181.85%~249.78%,壤土29.53%~73.03%。针对本试验所测试的壤沙土、沙黏壤土和壤土3种土壤,保水剂更适宜在黏粒含量较低的壤沙土中使用,用量以保水剂占土壤质量百分比为0.10%为宜。
|
| 关 键 词： | 保水剂 保水率 土壤持水性 壤沙土 |
Influence of Water Retaining Agent on Soil Water Holding Capacity and its Effect Comparison in Different Soils |
| |
| Abstract: | In order to analyze the influence of water retaining agent on soil water holding capacity and compare the water holding effect in different soil ,according to the water retaining agent mass percentage accounted for soil mass ,totally five treatments ,inclu-ding 0 .10% ,0 .30% ,0 .50% ,1 .00% and control group(soil without water retention agent ) ,are set in the laboratory experiment . The results show that :the water retaining agent can improve the soil water holding capacity ;water holding rate of soil increases with the increase of the water retaining agent amount ;the water retaining agent in proportion 0 .10% to 1 .00% are applied in three kinds of soil ,the average water holding rate of soil is increased by 103% to 187% after seven hours constant evaporation when compared with the control group ;However ,when the water retaining agent reaches a certain amount ,the water holding rate is not significantly increased ;synthesizing the average water holding rate of three kinds of soil ,when the water retaining agent proportion is 0 .10% , the difference is significantly compared with the control group ;when the proportion is increased to 0 .30% ,although there are signif-icant differences compared with the control group ,but no significant difference with the proportion of 0 .10% ;when the proportion is increased gradually to 0 .50% and 1 .00% ,compared with the proportion of 0 .30% ,there are no significant differences between each other ;the effect of water retaining agent to improve the water holding capacity of different soils is different ,and the difference is re-lated to the evaporation time and dosage of water retaining agent ;at the early stage of moisture evaporation (one to two hours ) ,wa-ter holding rate of three kinds of soil has no significant difference under different dosages of water retaining agent ;at the late stage of moisture evaporation (after two hours ) ,the difference of water retaining agent to improve the water holding capacity of different soils appears gradually ;generally ,the effect in the loamy sand with lower clay content is better than that in the sand clay loam and loam which have higher clay content .Water retaining agents with proportion of 0 .10% to 1 .00% are applied in three kinds of soil . Compared with the control group ,the water holding rate are increased by 293 .08 % to 591 .29 % for loamy sand ,by 181 .85 % to 249 .78 % for sand clay loam ,by 29 .53 % to 73 .03 % for loam ,respectively .According to the experiment of three kinds of soil in-cluding loamy sand ,sandy clay loam and loam ,water retaining agent is more suitable to be applied in the loamy sand with lower clay content ,and the appropriate proportion of water retaining agent mass percentage accounted for soil mass is 0 .10% . |
| |
| Keywords: | water retaining agent water holding rate soil water holding capacity loamy sand |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
|
