不同耕作方式对土壤酶活性及微生物量和群落组成关系的影响

doi:10.12190/j.issn.2096-1197.2021.03.09

北方农业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (3): 64-73.doi: 10.12190/j.issn.2096-1197.2021.03.09

• 土壤肥料·农业生态环境 • 上一篇下一篇

不同耕作方式对土壤酶活性及微生物量和群落组成关系的影响

冯彪¹, 青格尔¹, 高聚林¹, 于晓芳¹, 胡树平², 张鑫¹, 薛红飞¹, 刘瑞枝¹, 刘爱业³

1.内蒙古农业大学农学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010019;
2.内蒙古农业大学职业技术学院,内蒙古萨拉齐 014109;
3.巴彦淖尔市乌拉特前旗农牧和科技局,内蒙古乌拉山 015400

收稿日期:2021-03-29 出版日期:2021-06-20 发布日期:2021-08-23
通讯作者: 高聚林（1964—）,男,教授,博士,博士生导师,主要从事玉米生理生态的研究工作。于晓芳（1972—）,女,教授,博士,博士生导师,主要从事玉米生理生态的研究工作。
作者简介:冯彪（1995—）,男,硕士研究生,研究方向为玉米生理生态。
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目（2017YFD0300804,2018YFD0300401）; 内蒙古自然科学基金项目（2020MS03086,2018ZD02）; 国家玉米产业技术体系项目（CARS-02-63）; 农业农村部华北黄土高原地区作物栽培科学观测实验站项目（25204120）

Effects of different tillage methods on soil enzyme activity,microbial biomass and community composition

FENG Biao¹, Qinggeer¹, GAO Julin¹, YU Xiaofang¹, HU Shuping², ZHANG Xin¹, XUE Hongfei¹, LIU Ruizhi¹, LIU Aiye³

1. College of Agriculture,Inner Mongolia Agricultural University,Hohhot 010019,China;
2. College of Vocational and Technical,Inner Mongolia Agricultural University,Salaqi 014109,China;
3. Bureau of Agriculture,Animal Husbandry and Science and Technology of Urad Front Banner of Bayannur City,Wulasha 015400,China

Received:2021-03-29 Online:2021-06-20 Published:2021-08-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 【目的】明确土默川平原灌区短期不同耕作方式下土壤酶活性、微生物数量和群落组成的差异性,为该区域耕作方式的合理使用提供理论依据。【方法】试验采用大区设计,设置免耕（NT）、深翻（DP）、深松（SS）、条深旋（SC）和农户浅旋（CK）5种耕作方式,分析土壤酶活性、微生物数量、微生物量碳、微生物量氮的差异性;采用16S rRNA扩增子测序方法,明确土壤微生物群落结构组成。【结果】 DP和SS处理对土壤微生物数量、微生物量碳、微生物量氮和土壤酶活性的提高有显著影响,且年际间差异显著（P<0.05）。不同耕作方式土壤细菌群落组成较为相似,但物种丰度存在显著差异（P<0.05）,主要以Actinobactera、Proteobacteria、Chloroflexi和Acidobacteria等菌门组成,其中DP处理土壤优势细菌门中以Actinobactera、Chloroflexi、Acidobacteria等菌门最丰富;SS处理优势细菌属主要以RB41、Bacillus、Sphingomonas、Rubrobacter等菌属最丰富。DP和SS处理显著提高土壤过氧化氢酶、蔗糖酶、蛋白酶活性和细菌数量、微生物量碳含量、微生物量氮含量,使得Chloroflexi 、Firmicutes、Planctomycetes等菌门和RB41、Nordella、Bacillus、Sphingomona等菌属增加,促进物质循环;CK处理土壤细菌群落对生物学指标的变化表现不敏感;NT处理使得Actinobactera菌门和Gaiella、MND1菌属增加; SC处理使得Gemmatimonadetes菌门和Sphingomonas菌属增加。【结论】深松和深翻处理在一定程度上均可以显著增加土壤酶活性、微生物量和微生物群落组成,进而提高土壤质量,其中,深松处理提高效果最为显著,深翻处理次之。

关键词: 耕作方式, 土壤微生物量, 土壤酶活性, 微生物群落

Abstract: 【Objective】 To clarify the differences in soil enzyme activity,microbial quantity and community composition under different short-term tillage methods in the irrigation area of Tumedchuan Plain,and provide a theoretical basis for the rational use of tillage methods in this region.【Methods】 The experimentation adopted the regional design;five tillage measures including no tillage（NT）,deep ploughing（DP）,subsoiling（SS）,strip deep rotation（SC）and farmer shallow rotation（CK）were set up;and the differences of soil enzyme activity,microbial quantity,microbial biomass carbon and microbial biomass nitrogen were analyzed;16S rRNA extender sequencing method was used to explore the microbial community composition.【Results】 DP and SS treatments had significant effects on the increase of soil microbial quantity,microbial biomass carbon,microbial biomass nitrogen and soil enzyme activity,and the difference was significant between years（P<0.05）. The composition of soil bacterial community under different tillage methods was similar,but there were significant differences in species abundance（P<0.05）,mainly reflected in Actinobactera，Proteobacteria，Chloroflex and Acidobacteria. Among them，Actinobactera，Chloroflexi and Acidobacteria were the most abundant bacteria in the soil dominant bacteria phyla under DP treatment，and RB41，Bacillus，Sphingomonas and Rubrobacter were the most abundant bacteria genus in SS treatment. DP and SS treatments significantly increased soil catalase activity，sucrase activity，protease activity，microbial quantity，microbial biomass carbon content，and microbial biomass nitrogen content，making Chloroflexi，Firmicutes and Planctomycetes and other bacteria genus such as RB41，Nordella，Bacillus，and Sphingomona increase，promoted material circulation；CK treatment of soil bacterial communities was not sensitive to changes in biological indicators；NT treatment increased Actinobactera and Gaiella，MND1；SC treatment increased Gemmatimonadetes and Sphingomonas.【Conclusion】Both subsoiling treatment and deep plowing treatments could significantly increase soil enzyme activity，microbial biomass and microbial community composition，and then improve soil quality. Among them，subsoiling treatment had the most significant effect，followed by deep plowing treatment.

Key words: Tillage methods, Soil microbial biomass, Soil enzyme activity, Microbial community

中图分类号:

S153

冯彪, 青格尔, 高聚林, 于晓芳, 胡树平, 张鑫, 薛红飞, 刘瑞枝, 刘爱业. 不同耕作方式对土壤酶活性及微生物量和群落组成关系的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2021, 49(3): 64-73.

FENG Biao, Qinggeer, GAO Julin, YU Xiaofang, HU Shuping, ZHANG Xin, XUE Hongfei, LIU Ruizhi, LIU Aiye. Effects of different tillage methods on soil enzyme activity,microbial biomass and community composition[J]. Journal of Northern Agriculture, 2021, 49(3): 64-73.

参考文献

[1] 李阜棣. 土壤微生物学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1996.
[2] 罗虹,刘鹏,宋小敏.重金属镉、铜、镍复合污染对土壤酶活性的影响[J].水土保持学报,2006,20(2):94-96.
[3] 崔红标,梁家妮,范玉超,等.磷灰石等改良剂对铜污染土壤的修复效果研究对铜形态分布、土壤酶活性和微生物数量的影响[J].土壤,2011,43(2):247-252.
[4] 王岩,沈其荣,史瑞和,等.土壤微生物量及其生态效应[J].南京农业大学学报,1996,19(4):45-51.
[5] LIEBIG M A,TANAKA D L,WIENHOLD B J.Tillage and cropping effects on soil quality indicators in the Northern Great Plains[J].Soil and Tillage Research,2004,78(2):131-141.
[6] JIANG X,WRIGHT A L,WANG X,et al.Tillage-induced changes in fungal and bacterial biomass associated with soil aggregates:A long-term field study in a subtropical rice soil in China[J].Applied Soil Ecology,2011,48(2):168-173.
[7] NYAMADZAWO G,NYAMANGARA J,NYAMUGAFATA P,et al.Soil microbial biomass and mineralization of aggregate protected carbon in fallow-maize systems under conventional and no-tillage in Central Zimbabwe[J].Soil and Tillage Research,2009,102(1):151-157.
[8] 梁金凤,齐庆振,贾小红,等.不同耕作方式对土壤性质与玉米生长的影响研究[J].生态环境学报,2010,19(4):945-950.
[9] 刘红杰,习向银,刘朝科,等.深翻耕和连作对植烟土壤养分及其生物活性的影响[J].福建农业学报,2011,26(2):298-303.
[10] 高旭梅,刘娟,张前兵,等.耕作方式对新疆绿洲长期连作棉田土壤微生物、酶活性的影响[J].石河子大学学报(自然科学版),2011,29(2):145-152.
[11] 张志政,马淼,张旭龙,等.深松对乌拉尔甘草根际土壤养分以及微生物群落功能多样性的影响[J].生态学报,2017,37(15):5137-5145.
[12] 关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M].北京:农业出版社,1986.
[13] HINOJOSA M B,GARCIA-RUI Z R,VINEGLA B,et al.Microbiological rates and enzyme activities as indicators of functionlity in soils affected by the Aznalcollar toxic spill[J].Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2004,36(10):1637-1644.
[14] JENKINSON D S,BROOKES P C,POWLSON D S.Measuring soil microbial biomass[J].Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2004,36(1):5-7.
[15] XU N,TAN G,WANG H,et al.Effect of biochar additions to soil on nitrogen leaching,microbial biomass and bacterial community structure[J].European Journal of Soil Biology,2016,74:1-8.
[16] EDGAR R C,HAAS B J,Clemente J C,et al.UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed chimera detection[J].Bioinformatics,2011,27(16):2194-2200.
[17] PIOVANELLI C,GAMBA C,BRANDI G,et al.Tillage choices affect biochemical properties in the soil profile[J].Soil & Tillage Research,2006,90(1/2):84-92.
[18] 李忠和. 吉林西部稻田土壤微生物及酶活性对碳变化响应机制研究[D].长春:吉林大学,2014.
[19] 卜洪震,王丽宏,尤金成,等.长期施肥管理对红壤稻田土壤微生物量碳和微生物多样性的影响[J].中国农业科学,2010,43(16):3340-3347.
[20] 王晓龙,胡锋,李辉信,等.红壤小流域不同土地利用方式对土壤微生物量碳氮的影响[J].农业环境科学学报,2006(1):143-147.
[21] 张洁,姚宇卿,金轲,等.保护性耕作对坡耕地土壤微生物量碳、氮的影响[J].水土保持学报,2007(4):126-129.
[22] 杨敏芳,朱利群,韩新忠,等.不同土壤耕作方式与秸秆还田对稻麦两熟制农田土壤活性有机碳组分的短期影响[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(5):1387-1393.
[23] 张向前,黄国勤,卞新民,等.间作对玉米品质、产量及土壤微生物数量和酶活性的影响[J].生态学报,2012,(22):7082-7090.
[24] 张继光,秦江涛,要文倩,等.长期施肥对红壤旱地土壤活性有机碳和酶活性的影响[J].土壤,2010,42(3):364-371.
[25] 傅敏,郝敏敏,胡恒宇.土壤有机碳和微生物群落结构对多年不同耕作方式与秸秆还田的响应[J].应用生态学报,2019(9):3183-3194.
[26] JENKINS S N,RUSHTON S P,LANYON C V,et al.Taxon-specific responses of soil bacteria to the addition of low level C inputs[J].Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2010,42(9):1624-1631.
[27] WANG X B,SONG D L,LIANG G Q,et al.Maize biochar addition rate influences soil enzyme activity and microbial community composition in a fluvo-aquic soil[J].Applied Soil Ecology,2015,96:265-272.
[28] DIAMANTIDIS G,EFFOSSE A,POTIER P,et al.Purification and characterization of the first bacterial laccase in the rhizospheric bacterium Azospirillum lipoferum[J].Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2000,32(7):919-927.
[29] BWXA,BWX,CTH,et al.Swine manure and quicklime have different impacts on chemical properties and composition of bacterial communities of an acidic soil[J].Applied Soil Ecology,2016,100:38-44.

不同耕作方式对土壤酶活性及微生物量和群落组成关系的影响

Effects of different tillage methods on soil enzyme activity,microbial biomass and community composition

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 10

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	郑美, 且天真, 路战远, 那顺勿日图, 李娟, 张向前, 程玉臣, 张德健. 耕作方式和灌水量对小麦生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2022, 50(6): 1-9.
[2]	董琦, 曹秭琦, 张向前, 任永峰, 侯智惠, 慕宗杰, 赵小庆, 路战远. 油莎豆播种期密度耦合对土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2022, 50(1): 25-32.
[3]	廉博, 李强, 魏晓军, 包妍妍, 王红霞, 王丽君. 耕作方式与种植密度对土壤物理性状及春小麦产量性状的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2021, 49(2): 17-23.
[4]	张婷婷, 王丽芳, 张德健, 路战远, 程玉臣, 李福, 刘战勇, 敦惠霞. 不同小麦秸秆还田覆盖度对旱作农田土壤微生物群落多样性的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2021, 49(1): 77-87.
[5]	张婷婷, 王丽芳, 张德健, 敦惠霞. 土壤管理措施及环境因素对农田土壤微生物的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2020, 48(6): 87-92.
[6]	厉雅华, 张向前, 路战远, 程玉臣, 张德健, 刘战勇, 李福. 北方农牧交错区不同耕作方式对油菜田土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2019, 47(4): 33-39.
[7]	朱金峰;樊祖清;陈启龙;王洁琼;陈冲;芦阿虔;李红丽;王岩. 不同连作年限对烟草根际土壤微生物区系的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2019, 47(1): 42-48.
[8]	宝宏. 蓄水保墒的几个技术问题探讨[J]. 北方农业学报, 2013, (6): 124-124.
[9]	潘润平王峰杰陈苏平. 我区施用有机肥存在的问题及优势条件[J]. 北方农业学报, 2013, (1): 77-77.
[10]	王艳辉李烁菲张春燃孙久仁. 浅谈县级农药监管工作[J]. 北方农业学报, 2011, (2): 26-26.