PDF Download

[1]WU Xue,GONG Lu,RAN Qi-yang,et al.Path Analysis of Soil Physicochemical Properties and Enzymatic Activities in the Aler Reclamation Area[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2013,20(03):48-54.

Copy

Path Analysis of Soil Physicochemical Properties and Enzymatic Activities in the Aler Reclamation Area

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 20 Number of periods: 2013 03 Page number: 48-54 Column: Public date: 2013-06-28

Title:: Path Analysis of Soil Physicochemical Properties and Enzymatic Activities in the Aler Reclamation Area

Author(s):: WU Xue¹, GONG Lu^1,2, RAN Qi-yang^1,2, XIE Li-na¹, ZHU Mei-ling¹; 1. College of Resources and Environmental Science, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China;
2. Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecology, Ministry of Education, Urumqi 830046, China

Keywords:: soil ecology; soil physical and chemical properties; path analysis; soil enzyme; upper reaches of the Tarim River

CLC:: S154.2

DOI:: -

Abstract:: Soil enzyme activity can reflect the direction and strength of soil biochemical processes. The Aler reclamation area of upper reaches of Tarim River was selected as the study area.We chose sample plots of different land use type as the research sites including 8-year cotton field, 30-year cotton field, forest plantation, natural forest, grassland, abandoned land, and saline-alkali land, soil physicochemical property and the enzyme activity indices were considered, and the correlations between the soil physicochemical property and the enzyme activity of the Aler reclamation area were further discussed. The results showed that the enzymatic activities were higher in forest plantation, natural forest and 8-year cotton field while lower in saline-alkali land and abandoned land. Path analysis and determination coefficient showed that total nitrogen was the dominant factor affecting the soil enzyme activity in the region. The available P directly influences urease and invertase activities, and the available K was the main factor affecting catalase and invertase activities. Compared with simple correlation and multiple regression analysis method, path analysis could more objectively and comprehensively explain the relationships of soil enzyme activities and soil physicochemical properties.

References:: [1] 张玉兰,陈利军,张丽莉.土壤质量的酶学指标研究[J].土壤通报,2005,36(4):598-604.
[2] 漆良华,张旭东,彭镇华,等.湘西北退化侵蚀地植被恢复区土壤养分、微生物与酶活性的典范相关分析[J].林业科学,2008,44(9):1-6.
[3] 侯彦会,周学辉,焦婷,等.甘肃永昌县放牧草地土壤脲酶活性与土壤肥力的关系初探[J].草业学报,2009,18(4):111-116.
[4] 万忠梅,宋长春.三江平原不同类型湿地土壤酶活性及其与营养环境的关系[J].水土保持学报,2008,22(5):158-161.
[5] 吴海燕,金荣德,范作伟,等.东北黑土区不同耕作方式土壤养分与酶活性的时空变化[J].水土保持学报,2009,23(6):154-157.
[6] 吴楠,张元明.古尔班通古特沙漠生物土壤结皮影响下的土壤酶分布特征[J].中国沙漠,2010,30(5):1128-1135.
[7] 贡璐,张海峰,吕光辉.塔里木河上游典型绿洲不同连作年限棉田土壤质量评价[J].生态学报,2011,31(14):4136-4143.
[8] 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 & Biochemistry,2002,34(3):387-401.
[9] Aparicio V, Costa J L. Soil quality indicators under continuous cropping systems in the Argentinean Pampas[J]. Soil and Tillage Research,2007,96(1/2):155-165.
[10] Gil-Sotres F, Trasar-Cepeda C, Leirós M C, et al. Different approaches to evaluating soil quality using biochemical properties[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2005,37(5):877-887.
[11] 和文祥,朱铭莪.陕西土壤脲酶活性与土壤肥力关系分析[J].土壤学报,1997,34(4):392-398.
[12] 戴伟,白红英.土壤过氧化氢酶活度及其动力学特征与土壤性质的关系[J].北京林业大学学报,1995,17(1):37-41.
[13] 吕桂芬,吴永胜,李浩荒,等.荒漠草原不同退化阶段土壤微生物、土壤养分及酶活性的研究[J].中国沙漠,2010,30(1):104-109.
[14] 孙权,陈茹,宋乃平,等.宁南黄土丘陵区马铃薯连作土壤养分酶活性和微生物区系的演变[J].水土保持学报,2010,24(6):208-212.
[15] 刘淑娟,张伟,王克林,等.桂西北喀斯特峰丛洼地不同植被演替阶段的土壤脲酶活性[J].生态学报,2011,31(19):5789-5796.
[16] 毛志刚,谷孝鸿,刘金娥,等.盐城海滨湿地盐沼植被及农作物下土壤酶活性特征[J].生态学报,2010,30(18):5043-5049.
[17] 金裕华,汪家社,李黎光,等.武夷山不同海拔典型植被带土壤酶活性特征[J].生态学杂志,2011,30(9):1955-1961.
[18] 闫正龙,王晓国,高凡,等.塔里木河干流上游地区土壤盐渍化时空变化监测分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2010,24(10):105-110.
[19] 南京农业大学.土壤农化分析[M].北京:农业出版社,1986.
[20] 中国科学院南京土壤研究所.土壤理化分析[M].上海:上海科学技术出版社,1977.
[21] 周兆麟,李毓芝.数理统计学[M].北京:中国统计出版社,1986:56-78.
[22] 明道绪.通径分析的原理与方法[J].农业科学导报,1986,1(1):39-43.
[23] 董莉丽,郑粉莉.黄土丘陵区不同土地利用类型下土壤酶活性和养分特征[J].生态环境,2008,17(5):2050-2058.
[24] 徐万里,唐光木,盛建东,等.垦殖对新疆绿洲农田土壤有机碳组分及团聚体稳定性的影响[J].生态学报,2010,30(7):1773-1779.
[25] 左智天,田昆,向仕敏,等.澜沧江上游不同土地利用类型土壤氮含量与土壤酶活性研究[J].水土保持研究,2009,16(4):280-285.
[26] 余娜,刘济明,张超,等.不同沙生植被土壤酶活性分异特征研究[J].水土保持研究,2010,17(1):78-83.
[27] 周玮,周运超,李迸,等.喀斯特地区土壤有机碳及其碳转化酶研究[J].水土保持研究,2009,16(1):84-89.
[28] 解媛媛,谷洁,高华,等.微生物菌剂酶制剂化肥不同配比对秸秆还田后土壤酶活性的影响[J].水土保持研究,2010,17(2):233-238.
[29] 吴际友,叶道碧,王旭军.长沙市城郊森林土壤酶活性及其与土壤理化性质的相关性[J].东北林业大学学报,2010,38(3):97-99.
[30] 郑宪滨,张正杨,邢国强,等.追施钾肥对烤烟叶片和土壤钾含量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2008,36(1):34-37.
[31] 王群,夏江宝,张金池,等.黄河三角洲退化刺槐林地不同改造模式下土壤酶活性及养分特征[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(4):133-137.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01