]*>","")" />
• Article • Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHAO Chun-yan;MA Xing-wang;YANG Tao;FENG Yao-zu;ZHOU Bo;HU Shun-ju;WANG Fang;JIANG Ping-an
Received:
Revised:
Online:
Published:
赵春艳;马兴旺;杨涛;冯耀祖;周勃;胡顺军;王芳;蒋平安
摘要: 针对干旱区葡萄园春季压盐问题,通过对漫灌和滴灌两种不同的压盐方式下土壤剖面不同深度电导率测定,研究比较了两种方式的压盐效果.结果表明,大水漫灌压盐效果显著,在灌水量1 500 m3/hm2时垂直压盐深度达100~120 cm.而滴灌方式压盐时,灌水量为600 m3/hm2即可以在以滴头为中心的水平半径200 cm、深度60 cm的半椭球状土体内形成盐分淡化区,从而满足葡萄生长需要.但要注意如果是长期的滴灌洗盐必然在田间形成条带状的盐分淡化区和集盐区.
ZHAO Chun-yan;MA Xing-wang;YANG Tao;FENG Yao-zu;ZHOU Bo;HU Shun-ju;WANG Fang;JIANG Ping-an. Study on salt movement features under flood irrigation and drip irrigation in arid region[J]. .
赵春艳;马兴旺;杨涛;冯耀祖;周勃;胡顺军;王芳;蒋平安. 干旱区葡萄园漫灌和滴灌压盐效果比较[J]. .
Recommend
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.xjnykx.com/EN/
http://www.xjnykx.com/EN/Y2005/V42/I5/306