[1]赵 娟,王兴昌.土壤置换法研究土壤基质对微生物碳氮磷的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2017,41(02):073-80.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2017.02.011]
 ZHAO Juan,WANG Xingchang.Effects of substrates on soil microbial carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus based on soil replacement method[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2017,41(02):073-80.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2017.02.011]
点击复制

土壤置换法研究土壤基质对微生物碳氮磷的影响/HTML
分享到:

《南京林业大学学报(自然科学版)》[ISSN:1000-2006/CN:32-1161/S]

卷:
41
期数:
2017年02期
页码:
073-80
栏目:
研究论文
出版日期:
2017-03-23

文章信息/Info

Title:
Effects of substrates on soil microbial carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus based on soil replacement method
文章编号:
1000-2006(2017)02-0073-08
作者:
赵 娟王兴昌
东北林业大学生态研究中心,黑龙江 哈尔滨 150040
Author(s):
ZHAO Juan WANG Xingchang
Center for Ecological Research, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040,China
关键词:
土壤基质 演替类型 土壤微生物 化学计量
Keywords:
soil substrate succession type soil microbe stoichiometry
分类号:
S718.5
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2017.02.011
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
【目的】探索植被演替初期不同土壤基质对微生物碳氮磷含量及其化学计量比的影响。【方法】于2004年采集天然次生林(演替前样地)的A层(淋溶层)、B层(淀积层)和C层(母质层土)土,分别填入30 cm土层厚度的样地,构成A、B和C处理,分别模拟森林皆伐次生演替、无种子库次生演替和原生演替,每种处理4个重复,经过10 a自然演替,比较不同土壤基质间微生物碳氮磷含量及其化学计量比的差异。【结果】① 演替前样地不同土壤基质微生物生物量碳氮磷及其占土壤碳氮磷的比例均呈现出A处理显著高于B、C两个处理(P < 0.05, C处理微生物生物量氮占土壤氮比例除外); 土壤微生物生物量碳氮比(nCmic/nNmic)为A处理低于B、C处理,土壤微生物生物量碳磷比(nCmic/nPmic)和微生物生物量氮磷比(nNmic/nPmic)均为A处理高于B、C处理; ② 演替后样地,不同土壤基质微生物生物量碳氮磷呈现出A处理显著高于B、C两个处理(P < 0.05),其占土壤碳氮磷的比例均呈现出A处理高于B、C两个处理; nCmic/nNmic为A、B处理低于C处理,nCmic/nPmic和nNmic/nPmic均为A处理高于B、C处理; ③ 经过10 a植被演替,A、B、C 3个处理土壤微生物生物量碳氮磷浓度及其占土壤碳氮磷的比例均上升(B处理nPmic除外); 3个处理nCmic/nNmic下降、nCmic/nPmic和nNmic/nPmic上升,其中,B、C两个处理的nCmic/nNmic显著下降(P < 0.05),A、C两个处理的nNmic/nPmic显著上升(P < 0.05)。【结论】植被演替初期,不同土壤基质理化性质的差异是影响土壤微生物碳氮磷的主要因素。
Abstract:
【Objective】Examine the effects of soil substrates on microbial biomass carbon(nCmic)nitrogen(nNmic), and phosphorus(nPmic)by comparing their values in the early stage of vegetation succession. 【Method】By using the soil displacement experiment performed included three treatments. Treatment A involved replacing the original soil of experimental plots(0-30 cm depth)with the A-horizon soil of an adjacent temperate broadleaved stand, whereas Treatment B involved replacing the soil with B-horizon soil, and treatment C involved replacing the soil with C-horizon soil. The three treatments simulated the secondary succession of clear-cut forests or bare soil without a seed bank or primary succession, respectively, and four replicates were used for each treatment. This study compared the difference of the nCmic, nNmic, nPmic, and their stoichiometry in different soil substrate. 【Result】① In 2004, the nCmic, nNmic and nPmicof treatment A were significantly greater than those of treatments B or C(P < 0.05), and the nCmic/nNmic ratio of treatment A was lower than those of treatments B or C, whereas the nCmic/nPmic and nNmic/nPmic ratios of treatment A were greater than those of treatments B or C. The nCmic/nCsoil(soil carbon), nNmic/nNsoil(soil nitrogen)and nPmic/nPsoil(soil phosphorus)values of treatment A were significantly greater than those of treatments B or C(P < 0.05), except for the nNmic/nNsoil value of treatment C. ② In 2014, the nCmic, nNmic and nPmic of treatment A were significantly greater than those of treatments B or C(P < 0.05), and the nCmic/nNmic ratio of treatments A and B were lower than that of treatment C, whereas the nCmic/nPmic and nNmic/nPmic ratios of treatment A were greater than those of treatments B or C. The nCmic/nCsoil, nNmic/nNsoil, and nPmic/nPsoil values of treatment A were greater than those treatments B or C. ③ After the 10-year succession, the nCmic, nNmic and nPmic of the three treatments increased, except for the nPmic of treatment B. The nCmic/nNmic ratio of the three treatments declined, but the nCmic/nPmic and nNmic/ nPmic ratios increased. Among the three treatments, the nCmic/nNmic ratio of treatments B and C decreased significantly(P < 0.05), whereas the nNmic/nPmic ratio of treatments A and C increased significantly(P < 0.05). The nCmic/nCsoil, nNmic/nNsoil and nPmic/nPsoil values of three treatments also increased with the succession. 【Condusion】 The physical and chemical properties of the different substrates were the main determinants of the spatial patterns of nCmic, nNmic, nPmic, and their stoichiometry.

参考文献/References:

[1] WARDLE D A, BARDGETT R D, KLIRONOMOS J N, et al. Ecological linkages between aboveground and belowground biota[J]. Science, 2004, 304(5677): 1629-1633. DOI: 10.1126/science.1094875.
[2] LOU Y L, LIANG W J, XU M G, et al. Straw coverage alleviates seasonal variability of the topsoil microbial biomass and activity[J]. Catena, 2011, 86(2): 117-120. DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2011.03.006.
[3] WILLIAMS M A, RICE C W, OWENSBY C E. Carbon dynamics and microbial activity in tallgrass prairie exposed toelevated CO2 for 8 years[J]. Plant and Soil, 2000, 227(1): 127-137. DOI: 10.1023/A:1026590001307.
[4] JIANG J P, XIONG Y C, JIANG H M, et al. Soil microbial activity during secondary vegetation succession in semiarid abandoned lands of Loess Plateau[J]. Pedosphere, 2009, 19(6): 735-747. DOI: 10.1016/S1002-0160(09)60169-7.
[5] REIDY B, BOLGER T. Soil carbon stocks in a sitka spruce chronosequence following afforestation[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2013, 39(3): 371-381.
[6] CLEVELAND C C, LIPTZIN D. C:N:P stoichiometry in soil: is there a “Redfield ratio” for the microbial biomass?[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2007, 85(3), 235-252. DOI: 10.1007/s10533-007-9132-0.
[7] ZHOU Z H, WANG C K. Soil resources and climate jointly drive variations in microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen in China’s forest ecosystems[J]. Biogeosciences Discussions, 2015, 12(14): 11191-11216. DOI: 10.5194/bgd-12-11191-2015.
[8] XU X F, THORNTON P E, POST W M. A global analysis of soil microbial biomass carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in terrestrial ecosystems[J]. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2013, 22(6): 737-749. DOI: 10.1111/geb.12029.
[9] LI R, CHANG R Y. Effects of external nitrogen additions on soil organic carbon dynamics and the mechanism[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2015,39(10), 1012-1020.
[10] JIA G M, CAO J, WANG C Y, et al. Microbial biomass and nutrients in soil at the different stages of secondary forest succession in Ziwulin, northwest China[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2005, 217(1): 117-125. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.05.055.
[11] 魏斌. 鄂东南低山丘陵区不同植被演替阶段土壤微生物与土壤养分研究[D]. 北京:北京林业大学, 2009. WEI B. Microbial biomass and nutrients in soil at the different stages of secondary forest succession in southeast of Hubei province[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2009.
[12] 薛萐, 刘国彬, 戴全厚, 等. 黄土丘陵区人工灌木林恢复过程中的土壤微生物生物量演变[J]. 应用生态学报, 2008, 19(3): 517-523. DOI: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.2008.0141. XUE S, LIU G B, DAI Q H, et al. Dynamic changes of soil microbial biomass in the restoration process of shrub plantations in loess hilly area[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008, 19(3): 517-523. DOI: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.2008.0141.
[13] WANG C K, HAN Y, CHEN J Q, et al. Seasonality of soil CO2 efflux in a temperate forest: Biophysical effects of snowpack and spring freeze-thaw cycles[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2013, 177(15): 83-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.04.008.
[14] EDWARDS K A, MCCULLOCH J, KERSHAW G P, et al. Soil microbial and nutrient dynamics in a wet Arctic sedge meadow in late winter and early spring[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2006, 38(9): 2843-2851. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.04.042.
[15] BROOKES P, POWLSON D, JENKINSON D. Phosphorus in the soil microbial biomass[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 1984, 16(2): 169-175. DOI:10.1016/0038-0717(84)90108-1.
[16] LU R K. Analytical methods of soil agrochemistry[M]. China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 1999.
[17] 李灵, 张玉, 王利宝, 等. 不同林地土壤微生物生物量垂直分布及相关性分析[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2007, 27(2): 52-56,60. DOI: 10.14067/j.cnki.1673-923x.2007.02.011. LI L, ZHANG Y, WANG B L, et al. Vertical changes of the soil microbial biomass and the correlation analysis in different forests[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry and Technology, 2007, 27(2): 52-56,60.
[18] 赵彤, 闫浩, 蒋跃利, 等. 黄土丘陵区植被类型对土壤微生物量碳氮磷的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(18): 5615-5622. DOI: 10.5846 / stxb201304160723. ZHAO T, YAN H, JIANG Y L, et al. Effects of vegetation types on soil microbial biomass C, N, P on the Loess Hilly Area[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(18): 5615-5622.
[19] 立天宇, 康峰峰, 韩海荣, 等. 冀北辽河源自然保护区土壤微生物碳代谢对阔叶林叶凋落物组成的响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(3): 715-722. DOI: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.20150106.010. LI T Y, KANG F F, HAN H R, et al. Responses of soil microbial carbon metabolism to the leaf litter composition in Liaohe River Nature Reserve of northern Hebei Province, China[J].Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2015, 26(3): 715-722. DOI: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.20150106.010.
[20] TAYLOR J P, WILSON B, MILLS M S, et al. Comparison of microbial numbers and enzymatic activities in surface soils and subsoils using various techniques[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2002, 34(3): 387-401.
[21] 刘恩科, 梅旭荣, 赵秉强, 等. 长期不同施肥制度对土壤微生物生物量碳、氮、磷的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2009, 14(3): 63-68. LIU E K, MEI X R, ZHAO B Q, et al. Long-term effects of different fertilizer management on microbial biomass C, N and P in a Fluvo-aquic soil[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2009, 14(3): 63-68.
[22] 吴建国, 艾丽. 祁连山3种典型生态系统土壤微生物活性和生物量碳氮含量[J]. 植物生态学报, 2008, 32(2): 465-476. DOI: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2008.02.026. WU J G, AI L. Soil microbial activity and biomass C and N content in three typical ecosystems in Qilian Mountains, China[J]. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2008, 32(2): 465-476.
[23] DRENOVSKY R E, STEENWERTH K L, JACKSON L E, et al. Land use and climatic factors structure regional patterns in soil microbial communities[J]. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2010, 19(1): 27-39. DOI: 10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009.00486.x.
[24] TISCHER A, POTTHAST K, HAMER U. Land-use and soil depth affect resource and microbial stoichiometry in a tropical mountain rainforest region of southern Ecuador[J]. Oecologia, 2014, 175(1): 1-19. DOI: 10.1007/s00442-014-2894-x.
[25] ZECHMEISTER-BOLTENSTERN S, KEIBLINGER K M, MOOSHAMMER M, et al. The application of ecological stoichiometry to plant-microbial-soil organic matter transformations[J]. Ecological Monographs, 2015, 85(2): 133-155. DOI: 10.1890/14-0777.1.
[26] NICOLAS F, NATHALIE F, BRUNO B, et al. An experimental test of the hypothesis of non-homeostatic consumer stoichiometry in a plant litter-microbe system[J]. Ecology Letters, 2013, 16(6): 764-772. DOI: 10.1111/ele.12108.
[27] XU X F, SCHIMEL J P, THORNTON P E, et al. Substrate and environmental controls on microbial assimilation of soil organic carbon: a framework for earth system models[J]. Ecology Letters, 2014, 17(5): 547-555. DOI: 10.1111/ele.12254.

相似文献/References:

[1]赵鸿杰,陆耀东*,田学琴,等.AM菌根菌对美叶橡胶树苗木生长效应的研究[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2009,33(05):139.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2009.05.031]
 ZHAO Hong jie,LU Yao dong*,TIAN Xue qin,et al.Influencing factors on growth efficiency in process of inoculating with AM fungi to the seedling of Ficus elastica.cv.Decora Tricolor with AM fungi[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2009,33(02):139.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2009.05.031]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2016-03-14 修回日期:2016-08-13
基金项目:“十二五”国家科技支撑计划(2011BAD-37B01); 教育部长江学者和创新团队发展计划(IRT-15R09)
第一作者:赵娟(zhaojuancheer@163.com)。
引文格式:赵娟,王兴昌. 土壤置换法研究土壤基质对微生物碳氮磷的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2017,41(2):73-80.
更新日期/Last Update: 2017-03-23