[1]FAN Yuanyuan,LI Yi,LI Qidi.Microbe, Enzymatic Activity and Nutrient Contents of Soils in Different Stand Ages of Pinus tabuliformis[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2019,26(06):58-64.
Copy
Microbe, Enzymatic Activity and Nutrient Contents of Soils in Different Stand Ages of Pinus tabuliformis
Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume:
26
Number of periods:
2019 06
Page number:
58-64
Column:
Public date:
2019-10-17
- Title:
- Microbe, Enzymatic Activity and Nutrient Contents of Soils in Different Stand Ages of Pinus tabuliformis
- CLC:
- Q154
- DOI:
- -
- Abstract:
- We studied the soil microbe, enzyme activity and nutrients of soil in the rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere in different stand ages of Pinus tabuliformis in Minjiang River valley. The results showed that:(1) the soil pH of Pinus tabulata was slight acidity, and the organic carbon contents in the rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere showed a trend of decreasing and then increasing with the increase of ages of Pinus tabulata, and reached the lowest at the mature stage; the pH of the rhizosphere soil in different growth stages was significantly lower than that in the non-rhizosphere soil (p<0.05); (2) in the rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere, the contents of soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus and available potassium presented the consistent with the trend which showed the increase at first, and then the decrease, and reached up to the peak values in the mature forest stage with the increase of the ages of Pinus tabulaeformis, rhizosphere the contents of organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus and available potassium in the rhizosphere of young forest, middle forest and mature forest were significantly higher than those of the non-rhizosphere (p<0.05), the contents of soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus and available potassium in the rhizosphere of the aged forest were not significant difference from those of the non-rhizosphere (p>0.05); (3) soil enzyme activities (sucrase activity, the activity of alkaline phosphatase, urease activity and catalase activity) and microbial community diversity, species richness index, evenness index, dominance index, carbon source utilization index) in the rhizosphere and non-hizosphere were consistent with the trend which showed the increase at first, and then the decrease, reached up to the peak values in the mature forest stage, soil enzyme activities and microbial community diversity in rhizosphere of young forest, middle forest and mature forest were significantly higher than those of the non-rhizosphere (p<0.05), there was no significant difference in enzyme activity and microbial community diversity between rhizosphere soil and non-rhizosphere soil of the aged forest (p>0.05); (4) because of the influence of microbial community on slightly rhizospheric secretion, the microbe amounts of Pinus tabulaeformis rhizosphere were higher than those of the non-rhizosphere, the proportion of bacteria to the total microbe in the rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere was the highest, the proportion of actinomycete to the total microbe in the rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere was the least; (5) correlation analysis showed that there was a negative correlation between the functional diversity of soil microbial community and soil pH, which was significantly correlated with soil organic carbon and total nitrogen, sucrase activity, alkaline phosphatase activity, number of bacteria and total number of microorganisms; therefore, soil pH negatively contributed to soil microbial community functional diversity, and soil nutrient, soil enzyme activity and microbial quantity had the positive contribution to soil microbial community functional diversity, soil organic carbon and total nitrogen, invertase activity, alkaline phosphatase activity, number of bacteria and the total number of microorganisms are the main influence factors on the soil microbial community diversity.
- References:
-
[1] Newman M M, Hoilett N, Lorenz N, et al. Glyphosate effects on soil rhizosphere-associated bacterial communities[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2016,543:155-160.
[2] Pétriacq P, Williams A, Cotton A, et al. Metabolite profiling of non-sterile rhizosphere soil[J]. the Plant Journal, 2017,92(1):147-162.
[3] Koebernick N, Daly K R, Keyes S D, et al. High-resolution synchrotron imaging shows that root hairs influence rhizosphere soil structure formation[J]. New Phytologist, 2017,216(1):124-135.
[4] Angst G, K?gel-Knabner I, Kirfel K, et al. Spatial distribution and chemical composition of soil organic matter fractions in rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere soil under European beech(Fagus sylvatica L.)[J]. Geoderma, 2016,264:179-187.
[5] Wang X, Tang C, Severi J, et al. Rhizosphere priming effect on soil organic carbon decomposition under plant species differing in soil acidification and root exudation[J]. New Phytologist, 2016,211(3):864-873.
[6] Wang X, Tang C, Severi J, et al. Rhizosphere priming effect on soil organic carbon decomposition under plant species differing in soil acidification and root exudation[J]. New Phytologist, 2016,211(3):864-873.
[7] Dotaniya M L, Meena V D. Rhizosphere effect on nutrient availability in soil and its uptake by plants:a review[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B:Biological Sciences, 2015,85(1):1-12.
[8] Gkarmiri K, Mahmood S, Ekblad A, et al. Identifying the active microbiome associated with roots and rhizosphere soil of oilseed rape[J]. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.,2017,83(22):e01938-17.
[9] Fraser T D, Lynch D H, Gaiero J, et al. Quantification of bacterial non-specific acid (phoC) and alkaline (phoD) phosphatase genes in bulk and rhizosphere soil from organically managed soybean fields[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2017,111:48-56.
[10] Sillen W M A, Thijs S, Abbamondi G R, et al. Effects of silver nanoparticles on soil microorganisms and maize biomass are linked in the rhizosphere[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2015,91:14-22.
[11] Galaviz C, Lopez B R, de-Bashan L E, et al. Root growth improvement of mesquite seedlings and bacterial rhizosphere and soil community changes are induced by inoculation with plant growth-promoting bacteria and promote restoration of eroded desert soil[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2018,29(5):1453-1466.
[12] Yang H, Hu J, Long X, et al. Salinity altered root distribution and increased diversity of bacterial communities in the rhizosphere soil of Jerusalem artichoke[J]. Scientific Reports, 2016,6:20687.
[13] 褚洪龙,李莎,唐明.黄土高原油松根际土壤酶活性及真菌群落多样性研究:以黄龙山林场为例[J].土壤学报,2015,52(1):154-161.
[14] 邱甜甜,刘国彬,王国梁,等.黄土高原不同生长阶段油松人工林土壤微生物生物量碳的变化及其影响因素[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(3):681-687.
[15] 包士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:科学出版社,2000.
[16] Fan K, Weisenhorn P, Gilbert J A, et al. Wheat rhizosphere harbors a less complex and more stable microbial co-occurrence pattern than bulk soil[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018,125:251-260.
[17] Zhang C, Lin Y, Tian X, et al. Tobacco bacterial wilt suppression with biochar soil addition associates to improved soil physiochemical properties and increased rhizosphere bacteria abundance[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2017,112:90-96.
[18] Daly K R, Mooney S J, Bennett M J, et al. Assessing the influence of the rhizosphere on soil hydraulic properties using X-ray computed tomography and numerical modelling[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2015,66(8):2305-2314.
[19] Li H, Yang X, Weng B, et al. The phenological stage of rice growth determines anaerobic ammonium oxidation activity in rhizosphere soil[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2016,100:59-65.
[20] Cui Y, Fang L, Guo X, et al. Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry and microbial nutrient limitation in rhizosphere soil in the arid area of the northern Loess Plateau, China[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018,116:11-21.
[21] McPherson M R, Wang P, Marsh E L, et al. Isolation and Analysis of Microbial Communities in Soil, Rhizosphere, and Roots in Perennial Grass Experiments[J]. Journal of Visualized Experiments:Jove, 2018, 137(3):579-583.
[22] Qiao Q, Wang F, Zhang J, et al. The variation in the rhizosphere microbiome of cotton with soil type, genotype and developmental stage[J]. Scientific Reports, 2017,7(1):3940.
[23] Li Z, Zu C, Wang C, et al. Different responses of rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere soil microbial communities to consecutive Piper nigrum L. monoculture[J]. Scientific Reports, 2016,6:35825.
[24] Sreevidya M, Gopalakrishnan S, Kudapa H, et al. Exploring plant growth-promotion actinomycetes from vermicompost and rhizosphere soil for yield enhancement in chickpea[J]. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, 2016,47(1):85-95.
[25] Kibbey T C G, Strevett K A. The effect of nanoparticles on soil and rhizosphere bacteria and plant growth in lettuce seedlings[J]. Chemosphere, 2019, 221:703-707.
[26] Oburger E, Schmidt H. New methods to unravel rhizosphere processes[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2016,21(3):243-255.
- Similar References:
Memo
-
Last Update:
1900-01-01