基于輸出系數(shù)法的農(nóng)業(yè)面源氮磷排放特征分析

茍 婷,裴德富,2,梁榮昌,佘 磊,楊 珺,馬千里,趙學(xué)敏,趙 瑞,姚玲愛*

基于輸出系數(shù)法的農(nóng)業(yè)面源氮磷排放特征分析

茍 婷1,裴德富1,2,梁榮昌1,佘 磊1,楊 珺3,馬千里1,趙學(xué)敏1,趙 瑞1,姚玲愛1*

(1.生態(tài)環(huán)境部華南環(huán)境科學(xué)研究所(生態(tài)環(huán)境部生態(tài)環(huán)境應(yīng)急研究所),廣東 廣州 510535；2.沈陽建筑大學(xué)市政與環(huán)境工程學(xué)院,遼寧 沈陽 110168；3.太原師范學(xué)院經(jīng)濟(jì)與管理學(xué)院,山西 晉中 030619)

為研究東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)面源氮磷負(fù)荷情況,利用改進(jìn)的輸出系數(shù)模型(ECM)對2020年東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)面源氮磷排放特征進(jìn)行了探討.結(jié)果表明:(1)東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染物總氮(TN)和總磷(TP)負(fù)荷量分別是4884.23t/a和591.85t/a, TN污染負(fù)荷是TP污染負(fù)荷的8.25倍,其中高于源頭區(qū)TN平均負(fù)荷量的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為留車鎮(zhèn)?文峰鄉(xiāng)?晨光鎮(zhèn)?南橋鎮(zhèn)?吉潭鎮(zhèn)?丹溪鄉(xiāng)和澄江鎮(zhèn),高于源頭區(qū)TP平均負(fù)荷量的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為晨光鎮(zhèn)?留車鎮(zhèn)?南橋鎮(zhèn)?文峰鄉(xiāng)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)?菖蒲鄉(xiāng)和吉潭鎮(zhèn).(2)氮磷污染負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度與負(fù)荷量不同,且表現(xiàn)出一定的空間差異性.污染負(fù)荷量較高分別為留車鎮(zhèn)和晨光鎮(zhèn),但負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最高分別為南橋鎮(zhèn)和菖蒲鄉(xiāng).TN負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度較高的依次為南橋鎮(zhèn)?菖蒲鄉(xiāng)?晨光鎮(zhèn)?留車鎮(zhèn)和項(xiàng)山鄉(xiāng),均高于源頭區(qū)TN平均負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度2.88t/(km2×a);TP負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度較高的依次為菖蒲鄉(xiāng)?南橋鎮(zhèn)?晨光鎮(zhèn)?丹溪鄉(xiāng)?留車鎮(zhèn)和羅珊鄉(xiāng),均高于源頭區(qū)TP平均負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度0.36t/(km2×a).(3)不同污染源類型對氮磷排放的貢獻(xiàn)率不一致,TN污染表現(xiàn)為土地利用>農(nóng)村生活>畜禽養(yǎng)殖,TP污染表現(xiàn)為畜禽養(yǎng)殖>土地利用>農(nóng)村生活.其中氮源中土地利用污染占比為37.67%～80.29%,主要分布在長寧鎮(zhèn)?桂竹帽鎮(zhèn)?三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)?水源鄉(xiāng)?文峰鄉(xiāng)等;磷源中畜禽養(yǎng)殖污染占比44.75%～70.71%,主要分布在菖蒲鄉(xiāng)?晨光鎮(zhèn)?羅珊鄉(xiāng)?南橋鎮(zhèn)?丹溪鄉(xiāng)?龍廷鄉(xiāng)和留車鎮(zhèn).東江源頭區(qū)各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)氮磷面源污染特征不同,其治理手段和目標(biāo)也不盡相同,對于菖蒲鄉(xiāng)?晨光鎮(zhèn)?南橋鎮(zhèn)等需切實(shí)解決畜禽養(yǎng)殖規(guī)劃性不強(qiáng),部分養(yǎng)殖戶選址不合理,糞污治理設(shè)施普及率和資源化利用水平低等問題;對于留車鎮(zhèn)?澄江鎮(zhèn)?吉潭鎮(zhèn)等應(yīng)大力推進(jìn)小型農(nóng)村污水處理設(shè)施建設(shè),完善生活污水處理措施;對于文峰鄉(xiāng)?三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)?水源鄉(xiāng)等鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)需制定合理的施肥方案,避免化肥過量施用及利用率低的問題.

改進(jìn)輸出系數(shù)法；農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染負(fù)荷；畜禽養(yǎng)殖源；農(nóng)村生活源；土地利用類型

隨著人口快速增長及經(jīng)濟(jì)、工業(yè)迅猛發(fā)展,面源污染已成為水污染的重要來源,其中氮磷污染是面源污染的重要組成部分.同時(shí),氮磷也是水生態(tài)系統(tǒng)必需的生源要素,過量的氮磷污染會導(dǎo)致水體富營養(yǎng)化加劇和藻類水華頻發(fā),威脅流域水生態(tài)安全.據(jù)報(bào)道,美國的面源污染占污染總量的2/3,其中農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染貢獻(xiàn)率占68%～83%[1].荷蘭的農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染產(chǎn)生的氮、磷污染分別占水污染總負(fù)荷的60%和40%～50%[2].在我國,氮?磷污染占水污染的比例已分別達(dá)到81%和93%[3].2020年《第二次全國污染源普查公報(bào)》顯示,農(nóng)業(yè)面源對水體氮?磷的貢獻(xiàn)率分別高達(dá)46.5%和67.2%,且農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染沒有固定的排污口,具有分散性?隱蔽性?累積性和模糊性等特性[4].因此,準(zhǔn)確掌握氮磷污染空間分布特征及污染物來源成為治理面源污染的關(guān)鍵技術(shù)難題[5].

目前研究面源污染最普遍的方法是Johnes[6]等提出的輸出系數(shù)模型法(ECM),它是通過一種“黑箱”的方法來對污染物輸入輸出進(jìn)行模擬,模型主要利用區(qū)域水文氣象參數(shù),通過多元線性相關(guān)分析建立土地利用類型與污染輸出負(fù)荷之間的關(guān)系,再基于污染物輸出系數(shù),將不同類型污染源的污染負(fù)荷相加,估算流域面源污染負(fù)荷總量.但該模型僅適用于降雨均勻的平原地區(qū),具有使用范圍局限的弊端,需要對該模型進(jìn)行改進(jìn).利用引入降雨因子和流域損失系數(shù)、以及坡度對徑流流量和流速的影響的方法改進(jìn)輸出系數(shù)模型可以成功提高了污染負(fù)荷結(jié)果的精度[7-9].引入降雨?地形因子(,)估算西南喀斯特山區(qū)的北盤江流域的農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染,結(jié)果顯示北盤江流域農(nóng)業(yè)面源氮、磷污染負(fù)荷呈現(xiàn)分布不均的特質(zhì),污染負(fù)荷局部集中,坡度較高和人口密度大的區(qū)域負(fù)荷量較高[10].利用改進(jìn)的輸出系數(shù)模型對媯水河流域農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染負(fù)荷進(jìn)行估算,并且通過分區(qū)、分類、分期的三分法對結(jié)果進(jìn)行闡釋,表明改進(jìn)輸出系數(shù)模型精確度較高[11].以上研究通過對ECM的有效改進(jìn),推進(jìn)了其在農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染負(fù)荷估算方面的應(yīng)用,同時(shí)也為其他地區(qū)更好的采用ECM核算農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染負(fù)荷奠定了基礎(chǔ).

東江是廣州、深圳、香港及惠州等粵港澳大灣區(qū)的重要供水水源,保障了約4600萬人的飲水安全.東江源頭區(qū)地處江西省贛州市尋烏縣,以農(nóng)業(yè)活動為主,源頭區(qū)排水直接流入東江,不僅影響東江流域水質(zhì),而且威脅東江的供水安全.因此無論是從保障東江供水安全的重要性,還是從東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)發(fā)展的生態(tài)經(jīng)濟(jì)性角度考慮,開展東江源頭區(qū)的面源污染問題研究均顯得尤為必要.但目前關(guān)于東江源頭區(qū)面源污染仍沒有相關(guān)的研究.因此,本研究通過收集東江源頭區(qū)各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)的人口、畜禽養(yǎng)殖、土地利用和降雨量等數(shù)據(jù),采用改進(jìn)的ECM模型研究東江源頭區(qū)氮磷污染問題,有助于準(zhǔn)確掌握該地區(qū)氮磷面源污染分布特征,進(jìn)而提出有效的面源污染防治對策.本研究對合理調(diào)整東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)布局、保障東江供水安全及促進(jìn)粵港澳大灣區(qū)的經(jīng)濟(jì)繁榮與民生穩(wěn)定具有重要的科學(xué)意義和社會價(jià)值.

1 材料與方法

1.1 研究區(qū)域概況

東江源頭區(qū)位于江西省東南端尋烏縣(115°21′222～115°54′252E,24°30′402～25°12′102N),居贛、閩、粵三省交界處.境內(nèi)最大的水系是東江水系,流域面積1974km2,占全縣流域總面積的83.7%.尋烏水是尋烏縣唯一的主河,全長113.4km,流域面積1744km2,占全縣總面積的72.1%,流經(jīng)三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)、水源鄉(xiāng)、澄江鎮(zhèn)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)、文峰鄉(xiāng)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、留車鎮(zhèn)、龍廷鄉(xiāng)8個(gè)鄉(xiāng)(鎮(zhèn)).尋烏縣東北?西北與東南部地勢高,且向西南部傾斜,地形以山地丘陵為主,僅沿河兩岸呈狹小谷地,境內(nèi)以山地為主,山地占總面積的75.62%.該地屬于亞熱帶季風(fēng)氣候,溫暖濕潤,多年平均氣溫19.1℃,歷年平均降雨量1605.7mm.土壤主要是亞熱帶紅壤區(qū),土地肥力較好.土地利用類型主要有園地和耕地,園地以果園為主;耕地利用方式主要包括水田和旱地.

1.2 數(shù)據(jù)來源

本研究數(shù)據(jù)主要來自尋烏縣數(shù)字高程模型(DEM)、2013～2020年的氣象數(shù)據(jù)?2020年的土地利用和社會經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù),如表1所列.

表1 研究數(shù)據(jù)及其來源

1.3 研究方法

1.3.1 輸出系數(shù)模型 (1)改進(jìn)的ECM模型綜合考慮降雨和地形的影響對東江源頭區(qū)面源氮磷輸出進(jìn)行模擬,具體公式如下:

式中:L為第種污染物的輸出量,kg/(hm2·a);為降雨因子;為地形影響因子;E為第種污染物第個(gè)污染源的輸出系數(shù),kg/(hm2·a),kg/(人·a)或kg/(只·a);A為流域中第種土地利用類型的面積(hm2)、畜禽養(yǎng)殖數(shù)量(頭)或人口數(shù)量(人).

(2)降雨因子取值主要通過降水的年際分布差異與空間分布差異共同確定,且流域年降雨量與面源污染氮磷負(fù)荷存在一定的相關(guān)關(guān)系[12-13],可表達(dá)為:

考慮到缺少流域內(nèi)污染物入河的監(jiān)測數(shù)據(jù),參考高田田等[14]在巢湖烔煬河流域的研究成果,建立東江源頭區(qū)降雨量與污染負(fù)荷之間的關(guān)系:

L

TN

=0.0993

r

2

+9.503

r

+216.8,(

R

2

=0.86;

P

<0.05) (3)

L

TP

=0.01146

r

2

+0.3498

r

-16.69,(

R

2

=0.98;

P

<0.05) (4)

根據(jù)2013～2020年降雨數(shù)據(jù)得到東江源頭區(qū)多年平均降雨量為562.0mm,由式(2)～(4)計(jì)算分析可以得出東江流域2020年TN的降雨影響因子為4.52、TP降水影響因子為4.54.

(3)地形影響因子主要是通過影響徑流量的大小來改變面源TN和TP污染的輸出量[8],其計(jì)算公式如下:

通過計(jì)算得到東江源頭區(qū)地形影響因子為0.68～1.32.如圖1所示.整體呈現(xiàn)流域坡度四周高中間低的趨勢,這與流域四周多以山地丘陵為主地勢較高,僅沿河兩岸呈狹小谷地的現(xiàn)狀吻合.

圖1 東江源頭區(qū)DEM(a)和土地利用圖(b)

1.3.2 模型參數(shù)的確定 (1)基礎(chǔ)數(shù)據(jù)的獲取.由于東江源頭區(qū)尋烏水流域面積占全縣總面積的72.1%,考慮到數(shù)據(jù)資料的限制,本文在計(jì)算尋烏縣的氮磷面源污染負(fù)荷基礎(chǔ)上,使用面積修正法得到東江源頭區(qū)流域內(nèi)的氮磷面源污染負(fù)荷.本次研究中農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染源分為農(nóng)村生活污染源、畜禽養(yǎng)殖污染源及土地利用污染源.具體結(jié)果如表2所示.

表2 東江源頭區(qū)流域農(nóng)村人口?牲畜數(shù)量及土地利用

(2)土地利用輸出系數(shù)的確定一般可采用研究試驗(yàn)或文獻(xiàn)調(diào)研的方法確定[14-15].Beaulac等[16]和Frink[17]通過調(diào)查不同土地利用方式下氮磷輸出系數(shù)的變化范圍,取其平均值作為所研究流域的輸出系數(shù).由于缺乏研究區(qū)域的輸出系數(shù)試驗(yàn)數(shù)據(jù),因此本文中尋烏縣各種土地利用類型的輸出系數(shù),參考國內(nèi)相似自然條件下的其他地區(qū)的研究結(jié)果而取其平均值確定[10,13,18-26].不同土地利用類型的參考輸出系數(shù)和取值結(jié)果見表3.

表3 不同土地利用類型的輸出系數(shù)取值[kg/(hm2×a)]

注:“-”表示無數(shù)據(jù)

(3)畜禽養(yǎng)殖和農(nóng)村生活面源污染物輸出系數(shù)分別采用生態(tài)環(huán)境部發(fā)布的排泄系數(shù)和人口輸出系數(shù),畜禽養(yǎng)殖業(yè)的總氮和總磷輸出系數(shù)分別取為各自排泄系數(shù)的10%[2].其取值分別見表4.

表4 東江源頭區(qū)流域畜禽養(yǎng)殖和農(nóng)村生活污染輸出系數(shù)

2 結(jié)果與分析

2.1 東江源頭區(qū)氮磷負(fù)荷量

根據(jù)東江源頭區(qū)15個(gè)鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)的土地利用、畜禽養(yǎng)殖和農(nóng)村生活3大類面源數(shù)據(jù),計(jì)算得出TN和TP污染負(fù)荷量,結(jié)果見圖2所示.源頭區(qū)TN負(fù)荷量為4884.23t/a,TP負(fù)荷量為591.85t/a,TN負(fù)荷量是TP負(fù)荷量的8.25倍.TN和TP負(fù)荷量分布呈現(xiàn)較大的空間差異性,其中TN負(fù)荷量最高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)為留車鎮(zhèn)771.43t/a,貢獻(xiàn)率為11.39%,其次為文峰鄉(xiāng)TN負(fù)荷量為759.97t/a,貢獻(xiàn)率為11.22%,此外TN負(fù)荷量較高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為晨光鎮(zhèn)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)和澄江鎮(zhèn),均高于源頭區(qū)TN的平均負(fù)荷量451.62t/a;其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)TN負(fù)荷量相對較低,長寧鎮(zhèn)負(fù)荷量最低為41.80t/a,貢獻(xiàn)率為0.62%.TP負(fù)荷量最高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)為晨光鎮(zhèn)119.38t/a,貢獻(xiàn)率為14.54%;其次為留車鎮(zhèn)TP負(fù)荷量為96.56t/a,貢獻(xiàn)率為11.76%,TP負(fù)荷量較高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為南橋鎮(zhèn)、文峰鄉(xiāng)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)、菖蒲鄉(xiāng)和吉潭鎮(zhèn),均高于源頭區(qū)TP負(fù)荷量的均值54.72t/a,其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)TP負(fù)荷量相對較低,負(fù)荷量最低為長寧鎮(zhèn)4.38t/a,貢獻(xiàn)率為0.53%.

圖2 東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染輸出負(fù)荷量分布

2.2 東江源頭區(qū)氮磷負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度

根據(jù)東江源頭區(qū)TN和TP污染負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度的數(shù)據(jù)分析,農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染的TN負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度大于TP負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度,前者是后者的8.87倍.各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)TN和TP負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度存在明顯的空間差異性(圖3).TN負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)為南橋鎮(zhèn),負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度為5.03t/(km2·a),其他較高鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為菖蒲鄉(xiāng)(4.38t/(km2·a))、晨光鎮(zhèn)(3.52t/ (km2·a))、留車鎮(zhèn)(3.34t/(km2·a))和項(xiàng)山鄉(xiāng)(3.02t/ (km2·a)),均高于源頭區(qū)TN平均負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度2.88t/ (km2·a),其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)均低于源頭區(qū)平均負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度,桂竹帽鎮(zhèn)排放負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最低為1.82t/(km2·a).不同污染源類型中除菖蒲鄉(xiāng)呈現(xiàn)畜禽養(yǎng)殖負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最高外,其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)均呈現(xiàn)土地利用排放強(qiáng)度最高.

TP負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)為菖蒲鄉(xiāng),負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度為0.81t/(km2·a),其他負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度較高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為南橋鎮(zhèn)(0.63t/(km2·a))、晨光鎮(zhèn)(0.57t/(km2·a))、丹溪鄉(xiāng)(0.42t/(km2·a))、留車鎮(zhèn)(0.42t/(km2·a))和羅珊鄉(xiāng)(0.39t/(km2·a)),均高于源頭區(qū)TP平均負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度0.36t/(km2·a),其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)均低于源頭區(qū)平均負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度,負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最低的為桂竹帽鎮(zhèn),負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度為0.16t/ (km2·a).不同污染源類型呈現(xiàn)部分鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)的畜禽養(yǎng)殖強(qiáng)度較高,依次包括菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、羅珊鄉(xiāng)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)和留車鎮(zhèn),其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)則土地利用排放較高(圖4).

圖3 東江源頭區(qū)各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染物總氮?總磷負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度

圖4 東江源頭區(qū)各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)不同污染類型的總氮、總磷負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度

2.3 不同污染源類型對氮磷污染的貢獻(xiàn)率

東江源頭區(qū)不同污染源類型對TN和TP負(fù)荷量的貢獻(xiàn)情況如圖5所示.污染源類型對TN的貢獻(xiàn)率整體呈現(xiàn)土地利用>農(nóng)村生活>畜禽養(yǎng)殖,且土地利用以耕地和林地為主.各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)污染源類型TN貢獻(xiàn)率中,除菖蒲鄉(xiāng)呈現(xiàn)為畜禽養(yǎng)殖(37.18%)>土地利用(35.56%)>農(nóng)村生活(27.26%),其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)均呈現(xiàn)為土地利用貢獻(xiàn)率最大,占比在37.67%～ 80.29%,其中南橋鎮(zhèn)(36.06%)、晨光鎮(zhèn)(31.10%)、羅珊鄉(xiāng)(24.16%)和丹溪鄉(xiāng)(21.32%)的畜禽養(yǎng)殖>農(nóng)村生活,且南橋鎮(zhèn)畜禽養(yǎng)殖以牛為主,其他鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)以豬為主;其余10個(gè)鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)則表現(xiàn)為農(nóng)村生活>畜禽養(yǎng)殖,其中農(nóng)村生活污染較嚴(yán)重的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)有澄江鎮(zhèn)(38.53%)、水源鄉(xiāng)(31.30%)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)(29.74%)和留車鎮(zhèn)(28.64%).

不同污染源類型對TP貢獻(xiàn)率與TN的規(guī)律不一致,呈現(xiàn)畜禽養(yǎng)殖>土地利用>農(nóng)村生活的特點(diǎn),其中菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、羅珊鄉(xiāng)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)、龍廷鄉(xiāng)和留車鎮(zhèn)7個(gè)鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)呈現(xiàn)為畜禽養(yǎng)殖污染占主導(dǎo),占比在44.75%～70.71%,但三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)和水源鄉(xiāng)無畜禽養(yǎng)殖污染.土地利用TP貢獻(xiàn)率較大的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)有8個(gè),依次為桂竹帽鎮(zhèn)、三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)、水源鄉(xiāng)、長寧鎮(zhèn)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)、文峰鄉(xiāng)、項(xiàng)山鄉(xiāng)和澄江鎮(zhèn),占比在40.43%～ 71.75%,另外TP農(nóng)村生活污染較嚴(yán)重的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)有澄江鎮(zhèn)(38.89%)、水源鄉(xiāng)(37.70%)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)(33.18%)和三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)(29.60%).

圖5 東江源頭區(qū)不同污染源的氮磷輸出空間分布

3 討論

3.1 流域氮磷污染負(fù)荷來源解析

不同區(qū)域因其發(fā)展方式的差異,面源污染源類型的貢獻(xiàn)率會呈現(xiàn)顯著的時(shí)空異質(zhì)性.已有研究顯示,洱海流域[27]農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染中土地利用對面源污染的貢獻(xiàn)率影響最顯著,TN和TP的排放量均主要來自于種植業(yè);洞庭湖流域[1]面源污染負(fù)荷TN的排放負(fù)荷來自種植業(yè),而TP的排放負(fù)荷主要來自于畜禽養(yǎng)殖.伊通河流域[28]的面源污染不同土地利用類型污染物流失濃度呈現(xiàn)旱田>水田>草地>林地.沱江流域[29]TP污染主要是畜禽養(yǎng)殖,成為影響沱江水環(huán)境的首要污染源.此外宋曉明等[30]研究發(fā)現(xiàn)湖南省46個(gè)區(qū)縣TN污染的主要來源為農(nóng)村生活污水和畜禽養(yǎng)殖,TP污染的主要來源為農(nóng)村生活污水.

本研究東江源頭區(qū)氮磷面源污染負(fù)荷主要來源分別為土地利用和畜禽養(yǎng)殖,這與洞庭湖流域[1]、媯水河流域[11]?滇池流域[31]等的研究結(jié)果一致,農(nóng)業(yè)種植為農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染TN的主要污染源、畜禽養(yǎng)殖為農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染TP的主要污染源[32-33].究其原因東江源頭區(qū)尋烏縣作為農(nóng)業(yè)種植大縣,是我國重要的水果(尤其是柑橘和臍橙)生產(chǎn)基地,種植柑橘和臍橙是當(dāng)?shù)剞r(nóng)民脫貧致富的途徑之一.果樹種植面積的迅速增加導(dǎo)致大量山體遭到開發(fā),坡度大于15°,甚至超過25°的山體用于種植果樹,山體水土流失嚴(yán)重,導(dǎo)致土壤中的氮、磷等營養(yǎng)鹽進(jìn)入地表水體.尋烏縣農(nóng)區(qū)2020年化肥投入強(qiáng)度約為34kg[34],高于全國平均水平22kg[35],且主要以尿素為主,過高的氮素投入和低的作物吸收率導(dǎo)致農(nóng)田土壤氮的大量累積,土壤中累積的氮素會隨著降雨形成的地表徑流匯入流域中,導(dǎo)致農(nóng)業(yè)種植成為總氮污染的主要來源.另外,資料顯示[36]尋烏縣畜禽以生豬為主,2020年底全縣生豬出欄量為13.5 萬頭,占養(yǎng)殖總量的39.68%,雖已逐步引進(jìn)大規(guī)模養(yǎng)豬場,但農(nóng)村散養(yǎng)畜禽亦呈加速發(fā)展的趨勢,且養(yǎng)殖戶主要位于農(nóng)村居住區(qū)周邊或臨河而建,環(huán)保設(shè)施不完善,其中28.2%養(yǎng)殖戶未設(shè)置污水處理設(shè)施,導(dǎo)致畜禽養(yǎng)殖產(chǎn)生的糞污水經(jīng)簡單處理后直排入河.而且由于豬禽飼料中,總磷的60%～70%是以植酸的形式存在[37],而豬等單胃動物體內(nèi)缺乏有效降解植酸的消化酶類,對植酸磷的利用率極低,不被消化的植酸磷排出體外導(dǎo)致水環(huán)境污染[38],因此畜禽養(yǎng)殖是導(dǎo)致總磷污染的主要來源.

3.2 流域氮磷污染負(fù)荷空間解析

雖然東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染以土地利用和畜禽養(yǎng)殖為主,但各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)氮磷污染負(fù)荷存在明顯的空間異質(zhì)性.其中TN污染負(fù)荷高值區(qū)主要集中分布在南部的留車鎮(zhèn)、晨光鎮(zhèn)和中部的文峰鄉(xiāng),TP污染負(fù)荷最高值區(qū)分布在南部的晨光鎮(zhèn),其次主要集中在留車鎮(zhèn)、南橋鎮(zhèn)和文峰鄉(xiāng),而兩者污染的低值區(qū)均零散的分布在中部的長寧鎮(zhèn)、北部的水源鄉(xiāng)、南部的龍廷鄉(xiāng)和東部的項(xiàng)山鄉(xiāng).污染負(fù)荷高值區(qū)由于農(nóng)業(yè)活動密集導(dǎo)致污染負(fù)荷隨之增加[11],但不同鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)的污染類型的貢獻(xiàn)率有所差異.其中留車鎮(zhèn)、澄江鎮(zhèn)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)、水源鄉(xiāng)和丹溪鄉(xiāng)農(nóng)村生活污染面源污染較嚴(yán)重,主要原因是鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)的農(nóng)村人口數(shù)龐大,且對于農(nóng)村生活污水無集中處理;而菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、羅珊鄉(xiāng)和龍廷鄉(xiāng)的畜禽養(yǎng)殖數(shù)量較多,由此產(chǎn)生的污染源貢獻(xiàn)率較大,且畜禽養(yǎng)殖結(jié)構(gòu)以大牲畜牛、豬為主;文峰鄉(xiāng)、三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)、水源鄉(xiāng)、長寧鎮(zhèn)、桂竹帽鎮(zhèn)由土地利用引起的氮磷負(fù)荷最高,主要原因是農(nóng)業(yè)種植面積尤其是耕地面積較大,而土地利用類型中耕地的固氮磷能力較差,耕地化肥利用率不高[39-40],是氮磷流失最主要的土地利用類型,且耕地的氮磷輸出系數(shù)為林地的3～4倍.盡管留車鎮(zhèn)的TN污染負(fù)荷量和晨光鎮(zhèn)的TP污染負(fù)荷量分別呈現(xiàn)最大,但污染強(qiáng)度并不是最高,TN負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最高為南橋鎮(zhèn),而TP負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最高為菖蒲鄉(xiāng).因此,在污染防控上,需綜合考慮污染負(fù)荷量和負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度來進(jìn)行面源整治.

3.3 流域農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染源控制措施探討

東江源頭區(qū)各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)的污染特征不同,其治理手段和目標(biāo)有所側(cè)重,對于畜禽養(yǎng)殖大鎮(zhèn)菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、南橋鎮(zhèn)等實(shí)施以源頭防控與重點(diǎn)治理相結(jié)合,著力改善現(xiàn)有農(nóng)業(yè)生態(tài)環(huán)境,切實(shí)解決畜禽養(yǎng)殖規(guī)劃性不強(qiáng),部分養(yǎng)殖戶選址不合理,污染防治技術(shù)體系薄弱,糞污治理設(shè)施普及率和資源化利用水平低等問題.資料顯示[37]尋烏縣規(guī)模養(yǎng)殖場均采用干清糞方式處理,但養(yǎng)殖戶中僅10%采用干清糞方式,90%采用水沖糞方式處理,而水沖糞的方式存在耗水量大、污水產(chǎn)生量大、舍內(nèi)有害氣體含量高、產(chǎn)生的污水有機(jī)污染物濃度高等問題[41-42],因此改變養(yǎng)殖戶糞肥處理方式,鼓勵養(yǎng)殖戶采用干清糞、機(jī)械清糞方式,逐步淘汰水沖糞清糞方式,減少養(yǎng)殖過程中用水量和污水排放壓力的有效途徑.另外由于尋烏縣的畜禽養(yǎng)殖結(jié)構(gòu)以牛和豬為主,建設(shè)規(guī)模化畜禽養(yǎng)殖場可推廣生物發(fā)酵床養(yǎng)殖技術(shù)[43],不僅可以提高畜禽的免疫力,降低養(yǎng)殖成本,還可有效的處理畜禽糞污,同時(shí)結(jié)合源頭區(qū)域“柑桔種植優(yōu)勢區(qū)”的特點(diǎn),建設(shè)畜禽養(yǎng)殖-果業(yè)開發(fā)生態(tài)經(jīng)濟(jì)循環(huán)圈,按照“資源化?無害化?生態(tài)化”的原則,利用資源化治理工程和配套措施處理規(guī)模化畜禽養(yǎng)殖有機(jī)污染,實(shí)現(xiàn)畜禽糞便資源化無害化利用和種植與養(yǎng)殖的良性循環(huán).

對于農(nóng)村生活污染較嚴(yán)重的留車鎮(zhèn)、澄江鎮(zhèn)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)等大力推進(jìn)小型農(nóng)村污水處理設(shè)施建設(shè),完善生活污水處理措施[31,44-45],如建立沼氣池、垃圾分類站等,杜絕污染物直接進(jìn)入水體.另外對于山區(qū)邊遠(yuǎn)鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)如丹溪鄉(xiāng)、三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)、桂竹帽鎮(zhèn)等基于人口較少、社會活動水平較低、山地丘陵地形為主的特點(diǎn),可采取戶用化糞池、沼氣池等進(jìn)行分散治理,建設(shè)污水儲存罐用于冬季儲存,結(jié)合農(nóng)業(yè)化肥減量增效、水肥一體化等,引導(dǎo)林果種植?農(nóng)業(yè)合作社、家庭農(nóng)場等現(xiàn)代農(nóng)業(yè)經(jīng)營主體將治理后的污水作為有機(jī)肥水使用,實(shí)現(xiàn)無害化處理、資源化利用.

對于農(nóng)業(yè)種植污染較嚴(yán)重的文峰鄉(xiāng)、三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)、水源鄉(xiāng)等鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)需制定合理的施肥方案,避免化肥過量施用以及利用率低的問題[46-48],控制旱地總氮徑流流失應(yīng)側(cè)重于降低徑流量和土壤氮含量,而水田則應(yīng)同時(shí)減低徑流量和施氮量,加大推廣節(jié)水灌溉技術(shù)和循環(huán)灌溉方法,將土壤氮作為作物生產(chǎn)的潛在氮源予以再利用,并進(jìn)一步推廣應(yīng)用測土配方施肥技術(shù),減少土壤氮過量積累及流失.另外需在深入了解各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)施肥習(xí)慣的基礎(chǔ)上,科學(xué)計(jì)算化肥施用量,實(shí)行以產(chǎn)定肥,平衡施用有機(jī)肥?新型肥料以及無機(jī)肥[44].提倡應(yīng)用新型肥料,同時(shí)對農(nóng)藥進(jìn)行減量控制,優(yōu)先選擇生物措施或物理措施,合理輪作,減緩污染.

4 結(jié)論

4.1 研究期間,東江源頭區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染物TN和TP負(fù)荷量分別是4884.23和591.85t/a,TN負(fù)荷量是TP負(fù)荷量的8.25倍,不同鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)的污染負(fù)荷量呈現(xiàn)較大的空間異質(zhì)性.TN負(fù)荷量較高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為留車鎮(zhèn)、文峰鄉(xiāng)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)和澄江鎮(zhèn);TP負(fù)荷量較高的鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)依次為晨光鎮(zhèn)、留車鎮(zhèn)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、文峰鄉(xiāng)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)、菖蒲鄉(xiāng)和吉潭鎮(zhèn).

4.2 源頭區(qū)氮磷負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度與負(fù)荷量表現(xiàn)出一定的空間差異性.TN和TP污染負(fù)荷量較高分別為留車鎮(zhèn)和晨光鎮(zhèn),但負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度最高分別為南橋鎮(zhèn)和菖蒲鄉(xiāng).其中TN負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度高于源頭區(qū)TN平均負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度的依次為南橋鎮(zhèn)、菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、留車鎮(zhèn)和項(xiàng)山鄉(xiāng);TP負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度高于源頭區(qū)TP負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度均值的依次為菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)、留車鎮(zhèn)和羅珊鄉(xiāng).

4.3 不同農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染源類型對TN和TP污染負(fù)荷的貢獻(xiàn)率不同,其中TN負(fù)荷量主要受土地利用影響,且土地利用污染占比為37.67%～80.29%,主要分布在長寧鎮(zhèn)、桂竹帽鎮(zhèn)、三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)、水源鄉(xiāng)、文峰鄉(xiāng)等;而TP負(fù)荷量主要受畜禽養(yǎng)殖影響,畜禽養(yǎng)殖污染占比44.75%～70.71%,主要分布在菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、羅珊鄉(xiāng)、南橋鎮(zhèn)、丹溪鄉(xiāng)、龍廷鄉(xiāng)和留車鎮(zhèn).

4.4 東江源頭區(qū)各鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)氮磷面源污染特征不同,其治理手段和目標(biāo)也不盡相同.對于畜禽養(yǎng)殖大鎮(zhèn)菖蒲鄉(xiāng)、晨光鎮(zhèn)、南橋鎮(zhèn)等以源頭防控與重點(diǎn)治理相結(jié)合,切實(shí)解決畜禽養(yǎng)殖規(guī)劃性不強(qiáng),部分養(yǎng)殖戶選址不合理,污染防治技術(shù)體系薄弱,糞污治理設(shè)施普及率和資源化利用水平低等問題;對于農(nóng)村生活污染較嚴(yán)重的留車鎮(zhèn)、澄江鎮(zhèn)、吉潭鎮(zhèn)等大力推進(jìn)小型農(nóng)村污水處理設(shè)施建設(shè),完善生活污水處理措施;對于農(nóng)業(yè)種植污染較嚴(yán)重的文峰鄉(xiāng)、三標(biāo)鄉(xiāng)、水源鄉(xiāng)等鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)需制定合理的施肥方案,盡量避免化肥過量施用以及利用率低的問題.

[1] Nguyen H H, Recknagel F, Meyer W, et al. Comparison of the alternative models SOURCE and SWAT for predicting catchment streamflow, sediment and nutrient loads under the effect of land use changes [J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019,662:254-265.

[2] Engebretsen A, Vogt R D, Bechmann M. SWAT model uncertainties and cumulative probability for decreased phosphorus loading by agricultural Best Management Practices [J]. Catena, 2019,175:154- 166.

[3] Cheng X, Chen L D, Sun R H, et al. An improved export coefficient model to estimate non-point source phosphorus pollution risks under complex precipitation and terrain conditions [J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2018,25(21):20946-20955.

[4] 劉 彬,吳 卿,高輝巧.SWAT模型在香溪河流域非點(diǎn)源污染研究中的應(yīng)用現(xiàn)狀及進(jìn)展[J]. 水資源開發(fā)與管理, 2018,(11):28-31.

Liu B, Wu Q, Gao H Q. Application progress of SWAT model in non-point source pollution research in Xiangxi River Basin [J]. Water Resources Development and Management, 2018,(11):28-31.

[5] Cheng X, Chen L, Sun R, et al. Identification of regional water resource stress based on water quantity and quality: A case study in a rapid urbanization region of China [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019,209:216-223.

[6] Johnes P J. Evaluation and management of the impact of land use change on the nitrogen and phosphorus land delivered to surface waters: the export coefficient modelling approach [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 1996,183(3/4):323-349.

[7] 蔡 明,李懷恩,莊詠濤,等.改進(jìn)的輸出系數(shù)法在流域非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷估算中的應(yīng)用[J]. 水利學(xué)報(bào), 2004,7(6):40-45.

Cai M, Li H E, Zhuang Y T, et al. Application of modified export coefficient method in polluting load estimation of non-point source pollution [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2004,7(6):40-45.

[8] Ding X W, Shen Z Y, Hong Q, et al. Development and test of the export coefficient model in the upper reach of the Yangtze River [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2010,383(3):233–244.

[9] 任 瑋,代 超,郭懷成.基于改進(jìn)輸出系數(shù)模型的云南寶象河流域非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷估算[J]. 中國環(huán)境科學(xué), 2015,35(8):2400-2408.

Ren W, Dai C, Guo H C. Estimation of pollution load from non-point source in Baoxianghe watershed based, Yunnan Province on improved export coefficient model [J]. China Environmental Science, 2015,35(8): 2400-2408.

[10] 賀 赟,楊愛江,陳蔚潔,等.西南喀斯特山區(qū)典型流域農(nóng)業(yè)非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷及分布特征[J]. 水土保持研究, 2022,29(1):148-152.

He Y, Yang A J, Chen W J, et al. Research on spatial characteristic sand the load of agricultural non-point source pollution in Karst area of southwestern China [J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022,29(1):148-152.

[11] 丁 洋,趙進(jìn)勇,董 飛,等.媯水河流域農(nóng)業(yè)非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷估算與分析[J]. 水利水電技術(shù), 2020,51(1):139-146.

Ding Y, Zhao J Y, Dong F, et al. Estimation and analysis of agricultural non-point source pollution load in Guishui River Watershed [J]. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, 2020,51(1):139-146.

[12] Chen X, Liu X, Peng W, et al. Non-Point Source Nitrogen and Phosphorus Assessment and Management Plan with an Improved Method in Data-Poor Regions [J]. Water, 2017,10(1):17.

[13] Shen Z, Hong Q, Yu H, et al. Parameter uncertainty analysis of non-point source pollution from different land use types [J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2010,408(8):1971-1978.

[14] 高田田,謝 暉,萬能勝,等.巢湖典型農(nóng)村流域面源氮磷污染模擬及來源解析[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào), 2022,41(11):2428-2438.

Gao T T, Xie H, Wan N S, et al. Simulation and source analysis of nonpoint source nitrogen and phosphorus pollution export in a typical agricultural catchment draining to Chaohu Lake [J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2022,41(11):2428-2438.

[15] 薛利紅,楊林章.面源污染物輸出系數(shù)模型的研究進(jìn)展[J]. 生態(tài)學(xué)雜志, 2009,28(4):755-761.

Xue L H, Yang L Z. Research advances of export coefficient model for non-point source pollution [J]. Journal of Ecology, 2009,28(4):755- 761.

[16] Beaulac M N, Reckhow K H. Anexamination of land use nutrient export relationships [J]. Water Resource Bulletin, 1982,18(6):1013- 1024.

[17] Frink C R. Estimating nutrient exports to estuaries [J]. Journal of Environmental Quality, 1991,20(4):717-724.

[18] 郝桂珍,宋鳳芝,徐 利,等.基于輸出系數(shù)模型的清水河上游農(nóng)業(yè)非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷估算[J]. 科學(xué)技術(shù)與工程, 2020,20(33):13919- 13927.

Hao G Z, Song F Z, Xu L, et al. Estimation of pollution loads from agricultural non-point sources in the upstream of Qingshui River based on export coefficient models [J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2020,20(33):13919-13927.

[19] 段 揚(yáng),蔣洪強(qiáng),吳文俊,等.基于改進(jìn)輸出系數(shù)模型的非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷估算——以嫩江流域?yàn)槔齕J]. 環(huán)境保護(hù)科學(xué), 2020,46(4):48-55.

Duan Y, Jiang H Q, Wu W J, et al. Estimation of non-point source pollution load based on improved export coefficient model ——a case study of Nenjiang watershed [J]. Environmental Protection Science, 2020,46(4):48-55.

[20] 李政道,劉鴻雁,姜 暢,等.基于輸出系數(shù)模型的紅楓湖保護(hù)區(qū)非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷研究[J]. 水土保持通報(bào), 2020,40(2):193-198,325.

Li Z D, Liu H Y, Jiang C, et al. Non-point source pollution load of Hong Feng Lake reserve based on export coefficient model [J]. Bulletin of Soil ang Water Conservation, 2020,40(2):193-198.

[21] 胡富昶,敖天其,胡 正,等.改進(jìn)的輸出系數(shù)模型在射洪縣的非點(diǎn)源污染應(yīng)用研究[J]. 中國農(nóng)村水利水電, 2019,(6):78-82,92.

Hu F C, Ao T Q, Hu Z, et al. Applied research on the improved export coefficient model in non－point source pollution in Shehong County [J]. China Rural Water and Hydropower, 2019,(6):78-82,92.

[22] 楊 雯,敖天其,王文章,等.基于輸出系數(shù)模型的瓊江流域(安居段)農(nóng)村非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷評估[J]. 環(huán)境工程, 2018,36(10):140-144.

Yang W, Ao T Q, Wang W Z, et al. Estimation of pollution loads from rural non-point sources in Qiongjiang River basin (Anju district) based on export coefficient modeling approach [J]. Environmental Engineering, 2018,36(10):140-144.

[23] 荊延德,張華美,孫笑笑.基于輸出系數(shù)模型的南四湖流域非點(diǎn)源污染輸出風(fēng)險(xiǎn)評估[J]. 水土保持通報(bào), 2017,37(3):270-274,278.

Jing Y D, Zhang H M, Sun X X. Risk assessment of non-point source pollution in Nansihu Lake basin using output coefficient model [J]. Bulletin of Soil ang Water Conservation, 2017,37(3):270-274,278.

[24] 張 辰,陸建忠,陳曉玲.基于輸出系數(shù)模型的云南洱海流域農(nóng)業(yè)非點(diǎn)源污染研究[J]. 華中師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(自然科學(xué)版), 2017,51(1): 108-114.

Zhang C, Lu J Z, Chen X L. Study of pollution from agricultural non-point sources in Lake Erhai watershed in Yunnan province based on export coefficient mode [J]. Journal of Central China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2017,51(1):108-114.

[25] 李 娜,韓維崢,沈夢楠,等.基于輸出系數(shù)模型的水庫匯水區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染負(fù)荷估算[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)工程學(xué)報(bào), 2016,32(8):224-230.

Li N, Han W Z, Shen M N, et al. Load evaluation of non-point source pollutants from reservoir based on export coefficient modeling [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016,32(8):224-230.

[26] 邢寶秀,陳 賀.北京市農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染負(fù)荷及入河系數(shù)估算[J]. 中國水土保持, 2016,(5):34-37,77.

Xing B X, Chen H. Estimation on agricultural non-point source pollution loads and inflow coefficient of Beijing [J]. Soil And Water Conservation in China, 2016,(5):34-37,77.

[27] 項(xiàng) 頌,吳 越,呂興菊,等.洱海流域農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染空間分布特征及分類控制策略[J]. 環(huán)境科學(xué)研究, 2020,33(11):2474-2483.

Xiang S, Wu Y, Lv X J, et al. Characteristics and spatial distribution of agricultural non-point source pollution in Erhai Lake Basin and its classified control strategy [J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 2020,33(11):2474-2483.

[28] 張 正.伊通河流域非點(diǎn)源污染的模擬與預(yù)測[D]. 長春:吉林大學(xué), 2014.

Zhang Z. Simulation and prediction of non-point source pollution in Yitong river watershed [D]. Changchun: Jilin University, 2014.

[29] 姚 婧,楊麗君,肖宇婷,等.基于社會-經(jīng)濟(jì)因子修正的沱江流域農(nóng)業(yè)面源總磷污染負(fù)荷時(shí)空演變研究[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào), 2022, 41(5):1022-1035.

Yao J, Yang L J, Xiao Y T, et al. Spatial-temporal evolution of agricultural non-point sources of total phosphorus pollution loads in Tuojiang River watershed based on correction of social-economic factors [J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2022,41(5):1022- 1035.

[30] 宋曉明,柳王榮,姜 珊,等.湖南省農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染與農(nóng)村水環(huán)境質(zhì)量的響應(yīng)關(guān)系分析[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào), 2022,41(7):1509-1519.

Song X M, Liu W R, Jiang S, et al. Analysis on response relationship between agricultural non-point source pollution and rural water environmental quality in Hunan Province, China [J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2022,41(7):1509-1519.

[31] 胡 晴,郭懷成,王雨琪,等.基于改進(jìn)輸出系數(shù)模型的農(nóng)業(yè)源污染物負(fù)荷核算[J]. 北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)((自然科學(xué)版), 2021,57(4):739-748.

Hu Q, Guo H C, Wang Y Q, et al. Estimation of agricultural non-point source pollution loads based on improved export coefficient model [J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2021,57(4): 739-748.

[32] 唐肖陽,唐德善,魯佳慧,等.漢江流域農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染的源解析[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào), 2018,37(10):2242-2251.

Tang X Y, Tang D S, Lu J H, et al. Source apportionment of agricultural nonpoint source pollution in the Hanjiang River Basin [J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2018,37(10):2242-2251.

[33] Wang J, Wang D, Ni J, et al. Simulation of the dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus loads in different land uses in the Three Gorges Reservoir Region—based on the improved export coefficient model [J]. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, 2015,17(11):1976- 1989.

[34] 尋烏縣統(tǒng)計(jì)局.2020年尋烏縣統(tǒng)計(jì)年鑒[M]. 贛州:尋烏縣統(tǒng)計(jì)局, 2020年.

Statistical yearbook in 2020 of Xunwu County [M]. Ganzhou: Xunwu County Bureau of Statistics, 2020.

[35] 宋紅梅,李廷亮,劉 洋,等.我國近20年主要糧食作物產(chǎn)量?進(jìn)出口及化肥投入變化特征[J]. 水土保持學(xué)報(bào), 2023,37(1):332-339.

Song H M, Li T L, Liu Y, et al. Temporal variation of main grain crops yield, import and export and fertilizer consumption of CHINA in the past 20 years [J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2023,37(1): 332-339.

[36] 尋烏縣人民政府.《尋烏縣"十四五"農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染防治規(guī)劃》(尋府發(fā)〔2022〕21號) [Z].

People’s Government of Xun Wu County. The “14th Five-Year Plan” for the prevention and control of agricultural non-point source pollution in Xunwu County, (Xunfu〔2022〕No.21) [Z].

[37] Reddy N R, Sathe S K, Salunkhe D K. Phytates in legumes and cereals [J]. Advances in food research, 1982,28:1-92.

[38] 李雅楠,余利紅,陳新美,等.來源于Penicillium sp. C1的水產(chǎn)用中性植酸酶基因在畢赤酵母中的表達(dá)及性質(zhì)研究[J]. 生物技術(shù)通報(bào), 2020,36(2):134-141.

Li Y N, Yu L H, Chen X M, et al. Expression and characterization of Aquatic Neutral Phytase Gene from Penicillium sp. C1in Pichia pastoris [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2020,36(2):134-141.

[39] 張 晗,歐陽真程,趙小敏,等.江西省不同農(nóng)田利用方式對土壤碳、氮和碳氮比的影響[J]. 環(huán)境科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào), 2018,38(6):2486-2497.

Zhang H, Ouyang Z C, Zhao X M, et al. Effects of different land use types on soil organic carbon,nitrogen and ratio of carbon to nitrogen in the plow layer of farmland soil in Jiangxi Province [J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 2018,38(6):2486-2497.

[40] 李家科,彭 凱,郝改瑞,等.黃河流域非點(diǎn)源污染負(fù)荷定量化與控制研究進(jìn)展[J]. 水資源保護(hù), 2021,37(1):90-102.

Li J K, Peng K, Hao G R, et al. Research progress on quantification and control of non-point source pollution load in the Yellow River Basin [J]. Water Resources Protection, 2021,37(1):90-102.

[41] 劉安芳,阮蓉丹,李廳廳,等.豬舍內(nèi)糞污廢棄物和有害氣體減量化工程技術(shù)研究[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)工程學(xué)報(bào), 2019,35(15):200-210.

Liu A F, Ruan R D, Li T T, et al. Research progress of in-house reduce engineering technology for piggery manure wastes and poisonous gas [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019,35(15):200-210.

[42] 周海賓,丁京濤,孟海波,等.中國畜禽糞污資源化利用技術(shù)應(yīng)用調(diào)研與發(fā)展分析[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)工程學(xué)報(bào), 2022,38(9):237-246.

Zhou H B, Ding J T, Meng H B, et al. Survey and development analysis of resource utilization technology of livestock and poultry wastes in China [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2022,38(9):237-246.

[43] 劉愛瑜,任二軍,高玉紅,等.冬季發(fā)酵床養(yǎng)羊的應(yīng)用效果研究[J]. 家畜生態(tài)學(xué)報(bào), 2022,43(5):73-77.

Liu A Y, Ren E J, Gao Y H, et al. Analysis of fattening effect of raising sheep in fermentation bed in winter [J]. Acta Ecologiae Animalis Domastici, 2022,43(5):73-77.

[44] Liu R, Xu F, Zhang P, et al. Identifying non-point source critical source areas based on multi-factors at a basin scale with SWAT [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2016,533:379-388.

[45] Yasarer L M W, Lohani S, Bingner R L, et al. Assessment of the soil vulnerability index and comparison with AnnAGNPS in two lower Mississippi River Basin watersheds [J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020,75(1):53-61.

[46] Zuo L, Gao J. Investigating the compounding effects of environmental factors on ecosystem services relationships for Ecological Conservation Red Line areas [J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2021,32(16):4609-4623.

[47] 陶 園,徐 靜,任賀靖,等.黃河流域農(nóng)業(yè)面源污染時(shí)空變化及因素分析[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)工程學(xué)報(bào), 2021,37(4):257-264.

Tao Y, Xu J, Ren H J, et al. Spatiotemporal evolution of agricultural non-point source pollution and its influencing factors in the Yellow River Basin [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2021,37(4):257-264.

[48] 丘麗清,吳根義,李 想,等.基于等標(biāo)污染負(fù)荷強(qiáng)度的海南省農(nóng)村面源污染特征研究[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)資源與環(huán)境學(xué)報(bào), 2023,40(1):55-63.

Qiu L Q, Wu G Y, Li X, et al. Characteristics of agricultural non-point source pollution in Hainan rural area based on equal standard pollution load intensity [J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2023,40(1):55-63.

Analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus emissions from agricultural non-point sources based on improved output coefficient method.

GOU Ting1, PEI De-fu1,2, LIANG Rong-chang1, SHE Lei1, YANG Jun3, MA Qian-li1, ZHAO Xue-min1, ZHAO Rui1, YAO Ling-ai1*

(1.South China Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Ecology and Environment (Research Institute of Eco-environmental Emergency, Ministry of Ecology and Environment), Guangzhou 510535, China；2.School of Municipal and Environmental Engineering, Shenyang University of Architecture, Shenyang 110168, China；3.School of Economics and management, Taiyuan Normal University, Jinzhong 030619, China)., 2023,43(12)：6539～6550

To study the nitrogen and phosphorus loadings from agricultural surface sources in the source area of Dongjiang River, the characteristics of nitrogen and phosphorus emissions from agricultural surface sources in the source area of Dongjiang River in 2020 were explored using an improved output coefficient model (ECM). The results show that: (1) the loads of total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) of agricultural surface source pollutants in the source area of Dongjiang River were 4884.23t/a and 591.85t/a, respectively, and the TN pollution load was 8.25 times of the TP pollution load. Among the townships with higher than the average TN load were Liuche Township, Wenfeng Township, Chenguang Township, Nanqiao Township, Jitan Township, Danxi Township and Chengjiang Township, higher than the TP average load of the township were Chenguang, Liuche Township, Nanqiao Township, Wenfeng Township, Danxi Township, Calamus Township and Jitan Township. (2) Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution load intensity and load amount was different, and showed spatial variability. The higher pollution load was Liuche Township and Chenguang Township respectively, but the highest load intensity was Nanqiao Township and Calamus Township respectively. The higher TN load intensity was in the order of Nanqiao Township, Calamus Township, Chenguang Township, Liuche Township and Xiangshan Township, which all higher than the average TN load intensity of 2.88t/(km2×a) in the source area; the higher TP load intensity was in the order of Calamus Township, Nanqiao Township, Chenguang Township, Danxi Township, Liuche Township and Luoshan Township, which all higher than the source area TP average load intensity of 0.36t/(km2×a). (3) The contribution of different source types to nitrogen and phosphorus emissions was not consistent, TN pollution was manifested as land use > rural life > livestock breeding, TP pollution was manifested as livestock breeding > land use > rural life. Among the nitrogen sources, land use pollution accounted for 37.67%～80.29%, mainly distributed in Changning Township, Guizhumat Township, Sanbiao Township, Water Source Township, Wenfeng Township; phosphorus sources of livestock breeding pollution accounted for 44.75%～70.71%, mainly distributed in Calamus Township, Chenguang Township, Luoshan Township, Nanqiao Township, Danxi Township, Longting Township and Liuche Township. Based on different characteristics of nitrogen and phosphorus non-point source pollution in the source area of Dongjiang River, the treatment methods were also different. For the townships were seriously polluted by livestock breeding, which should to solve the problems of poor planning of livestock breeding, unreasonable site selection and low level of resource utilization. The townships were seriously polluted by rural living pollution which should vigorously promote the construction of small rural sewage treatment facilities and improve the living sewage treatment measures. Other townships need to develop a reasonable fertilizer application program to avoid excessive application of chemical fertilizers. This study has important practical significance for improving the continuous emission reduction of agricultural non-point source pollution and ensuring the safety of water supply in Dongjiang River.

improved output coefficient method；agricultural non-point source pollution；livestock breeding sources；rural living sources；land use types

X501

A

1000-6923(2023)12-6539-12

茍 婷,裴德富,梁榮昌,等.基于輸出系數(shù)法的農(nóng)業(yè)面源氮磷排放特征分析 [J]. 中國環(huán)境科學(xué), 2023,43(12):6539-6550.

Gou T, Pei D F, Liang R C, et al. Analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus emissions from agricultural non-point sources based on improved output coefficient method [J]. China Environmental Science, 2023,43(12):6539-6550.

2023-04-19

廣東省重點(diǎn)領(lǐng)域研發(fā)計(jì)劃項(xiàng)目(2019B110205004);國家自然科學(xué)基金資助項(xiàng)目(41977353);中央級公益性科研院所基本科研業(yè)務(wù)專項(xiàng) (PM-zx703-202204-075)

* 責(zé)任作者, 高級工程師, yaolingai@scies.org

茍 婷(1988-),女,甘肅白銀人,工程師,碩士,主要從事水污染防治研究.發(fā)表論文18篇.gouting@scies.org.