两种不同生境羊草根际土壤细菌群落多样性与环境因子的研究

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.03.008

草地学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (3): 652-660.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.03.008

两种不同生境羊草根际土壤细菌群落多样性与环境因子的研究

朱瑞芬^1,2, 刘杰淋¹, 王建丽¹, 韩微波¹, 申忠宝¹, 李达³

1. 黑龙江省农业科学院草业研究所, 黑龙江哈尔滨 150086;
2. 农业部农业微生物资源收集与保藏重点实验室, 北京 100081;
3. 白城市畜牧科学研究院, 吉林白城 137000

收稿日期:2019-10-16 修回日期:2020-01-02 出版日期:2020-06-15 发布日期:2020-05-30
作者简介:朱瑞芬(1982-),女,甘肃礼县人,博士研究生,主要从事牧草根际微生物研究,E-mail:zhuruifen1983@aliyun.com
基金资助:
黑龙江省自然科学基金优秀青年项目（YQ2019C019）；农业部农业微生物资源收集与保藏重点实验室开放基金（MRCP-2017-5）；中央财政林业科技推广示范项目共同资助

Study on Bacterial Community Diversity and Environmental Factors in Rhizosphere Soil of Leymuschinensis

ZHU Rui-fen^1,2, LIU Jie-lin¹, WANG Jian-li¹, HAN Wei-bo¹, SHEN Zhong-bao¹, LI Da³

1. Institute of Grass Industry, Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Harbin, Heilongjiang Province 150086, China;
2. Key Laboratory of Agricultural Microbial Resources Collection and Preservation, Ministry of Agriculture, Beijing 100081, China;
3. Baicheng Animal Science Research Institute, Baicheng, Jilin Province 137000

Received:2019-10-16 Revised:2020-01-02 Online:2020-06-15 Published:2020-05-30

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本试验以羊草（Leymus chinensis）为优势种的草甸草原为研究对象，旨在探讨两种不同样地（样地1为原生态未扰动处理，样地2为重度退化后人工补播扰动处理）土壤条件下土壤微生物群落结构、微生物多样性及微生物间互作效应的差异。结果表明：变形菌门（Proteobacteria）、酸杆菌（Acidobacteria）、放线菌门（Actinobacteria）这3个门是该地区羊草根际土壤细菌优势群落；速效氮、速效钾对细菌群落结构影响较大；土壤pH在一定阈值范围内与羊草根际土壤细菌多样性极显著相关（P<0.01）；土壤有机质与羊草根际土壤细菌群落相对丰度、多样性、菌间互作显著正相关；土壤交换性钠离子含量与羊草根际土壤细菌群落多样性显著负相关；人工补播后的羊草根际土壤微生物间互作与未干扰生境下相比明显减弱。

关键词: 高通量测序, 羊草, 根际细菌, 环境因子

Abstract: This study aims to explore differences in soil microbial community structure,microbial diversity,and interactions among microbes between a natural-undisturbed meadow steppe and an artificially reseed degenerated meadow steppe. The results showed that Proteobacteria,Acidobacteria and Actinobacteria were the dominant bacterial communities in the rhizosphere soil of Leymus chinensis in the region;Available nitrogen and available potassium had a big impact on the bacterial community structure. Soil pH was significantly related to bacterial diversity in the rhizosphere soil of Leymus chinensis within a certain threshold range (P<0.01);Soil organic matter was significantly positively related to the relative abundance,diversity,and interbacterial interactions of the bacterial community in the rhizosphere of Leymus chinensis. The soil exchangeable sodium ion content was significantly negatively related to the bacterial community diversity in the rhizosphere of Leymus chinensis. The inter-microbial interactions in the rhizosphere soil of Leymus chinensis after artificial reseeding were significantly weakened comparing with those in the undisturbed treatment.

Key words: High-throughput sequencing, Leymus chinensis, Rhizosphere bacteria, Environmental factors

中图分类号:

S154

朱瑞芬, 刘杰淋, 王建丽, 韩微波, 申忠宝, 李达. 两种不同生境羊草根际土壤细菌群落多样性与环境因子的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(3): 652-660.

ZHU Rui-fen, LIU Jie-lin, WANG Jian-li, HAN Wei-bo, SHEN Zhong-bao, LI Da. Study on Bacterial Community Diversity and Environmental Factors in Rhizosphere Soil of Leymuschinensis[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2020, 28(3): 652-660.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.03.008

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2020/V28/I3/652

参考文献

[1] 高伟,鲍雅静,李政海,等. 不同保护和利用方式下羊草草原群落生物量及能量功能群构成的比较[J]. 干旱区资源与环境,2010,24(6):132-136
[2] 李季春. 内蒙古羊草草原主要建群草种的光合参数[J]. 中国农学通报,2010,26(1):227-230
[3] Kaschuk G,Alberton O,Hungria M. Quantifying effects of different agricultural land uses on soil microbial biomass and activity in Brazilianbiomes:inferences to improve soil quality[J]. Plant and Soil,2011,338(1/2):467-481
[4] Ushio M,Wagai,Balser T C,Kitayama K. Variations in the soil microbial community composition of a tropical montane forest ecosystem:Does tree species matter?[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2008,40(10):2699-2702
[5] Prosser J. Molecular and functional eliversity in soil micro-organisms[J]. Plant and Soil,2002,244(1):9-17
[6] Schippers B,Bakker A W,Bakker P. Interactions of deleterious and beneficial rhizosphere microorganisms and the effect of cropping practices[J]. Annual Review of Phytopathology,2003,25(1):339-358
[7] Ryan P R,Jones D L,Delhaize E. Function and mechanism of organic anion exudation from plant roots. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology,2001,52(5):527-560
[8] 汪其同,朱婉芮,刘梦玲,等.基于高通量测序的杨树人工林根际和非根际细菌群落结构比较[J].应用与环境生物学报,2015,21(5):967-973
[9] Berg G, Grube M, Schloter M, et al. Unraveling the plant microbiome:looking back and future perspectives[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology,2014,5(6):311-320
[10] Griffiths R I, Thomson B C, James P, et al. The bacterial biogeography of British soils[J]. Environmental microbiology,2011,13(6):1642-1654
[11] Cederlund H, Wessén, Ella, et al. Soil carbon quality and nitrogen fertilization structure bacterial communities with predictable responses of major bacterial phyla[J]. Applied Soil Ecology,2014,84(4):62-68
[12] Sul W J,Stella A B,Wang Q,et al.Tropical agricultural land management influences on soil microbial communities through its effect on soil organic carbon[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2013,65(7):33-38
[13] Oliverio A M,Bradford M A,Fierer N. Identifying the microbial taxa that consistently respond to soil warming across time and space[J]. Global Change Biology,2017,23(8):2117-2129
[14] 牛世全,龙洋,李海云,等.应用Illumina MiSeq高通量测序技术分析河西走廊地区盐碱土壤微生物多样性[J].微生物学通报,2017,44(9):2067-2078
[15] Hafeez F Y,Malik K A. Manual on Biofertilizer Technology[M]. Pakistan:National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering,2000:117-129
[16] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京:中国农业出版社,1999:217-229
[17] 丁新景,敬如岩,黄雅丽,等. 黄河三角洲刺槐根际与非根际细菌结构及多样性[J]. 土壤通报,2017,54(5):1293-1302
[18] 王伏伟,王晓波,李金才,等. 施肥及秸秆还田对砂姜黑土细菌群落的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报,2015,23(10):1302-1311
[19] 柳春林,左伟英,赵增阳,等. 鼎湖山不同演替阶段森林土壤细菌多样性[J]. 微生物学报,2012,52(12):1489-1496
[20] 杨菁,周国英,田媛媛,等. 降香黄檀不同混交林土壤细菌多样性差异分析[J]. 生态学报,2015,35(24):8117-8127
[21] 杜滢鑫,谢宝明,蔡洪生,等. 大庆盐碱地九种植物根际土壤微生物群落结构和功能多样性[J]. 生态学报,2016,36(3):740-747
[22] 李岩,杨晓东,秦璐,等. 两种盐生植物根际土壤细菌多样性和群落结构[J]. 生态学报,2018,38(9):3118-3131
[23] Ziegler M, Engel M, Welzl G, et al. Development of a simple root model to study the effects of single exudates on the development of bacterial community structure[J]. Journal of Microbiological Methods,2013,94(1):30-36
[24] Junjie,Liu,Yueyu,et al. Soil carbon content drives the biogeographical distribution of fungal communities in the black soil zone of northeast China[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2015.83(4):29-39
[25] Navarrete,Acácio A,Kuramae E E,De Hollander M,et al. Acidobacterial community responses to agricultural management of soybean in Amazon forest soils[J]. FEMS Microbiology Ecology,2013,83(3):607-621
[26] Lv,Xiaofei,Yu,Junbao,Fu,Yuqin,et al. A Meta-Analysis of the Bacterial and Archaeal Diversity Observed in Wetland Soils[J]. The Scientific World Journal,2014,7(5):1-12
[27] Xiong J,Liu Y,Lin X,et al. Geographic distance and pH drive bacterial distribution in alkaline lake sediments across Tibetan Plateau[J]. Environmental Microbiology,2012,14(9):2457-2466
[28] Fierer N,Bradford M A,Jackson R B. Toward an ecological classific-ation of soil bacteria[J]. Ecology,2007,88(4):1354-1364
[29] Jones R T,Robeson M S,Lauber C L,et al. A comprehensive survey of soil acidobacterial diversity using pyrosequencing and clone library analyses[J]. The ISME Journal,2009,3(4):442-453
[30] Männistö M K,Tiirola M,Häggblom M M. Bacterial communities in Arctic fields of Finnish Lapland are stable but highly pH-dependent[J]. FEMS microbiology ecology,2007,59(2):452-465
[31] Lauber C L,Strickland M S,Bradford M A,et al. The influence of soil properties on the structure of bacterial and fungal communities across land-use types[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2008,40(9):2407-2415
[32] Shen C,Xiong J,Zhang H,et al. Soil pH drives the spatial distribution of bacterial communities along elevation on Changbai Mountain[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2013,57(4):204-211
[33] Liu J J,Sui Y Y,Yu Z H,et al. Soil carbon content drives the biogeographical distribution of fungal communities in the black soil zone of northeast China[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2015,83(4):29-39
[34] Navarrete,Acácio A,Kuramae E E,et al. Acidobacterial community responses to agricultural management of soybean in Amazon forest soils[J]. FEMS Microbiology Ecology,2013,83(3):607-621
[35] Zhang Y,Cong J,Lu H,et al. Community structure and elevational diversity patterns of soil Acidobacteria[J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences,2014,26(8):1717-1724
[36] Fierer,Noah. Embracing the unknown:disentangling the complexities of the soil microbiome[J]. Nature Reviews Microbiology,2017,22(6):117-129
[37] Oliverio A M,Bradford M AFierer N. Identifying the microbial taxa that consistently respond to soil warming across time and space[J]. Global Change Biology,2017,23(8):2117-2129
[38] Zhang Y,Liu X,Cong J,et al. The microbially-mediated soil organic carbon loss under degenerative succession in an alpine meadow[J]. Molecular Ecology,2017,26(14):3676-3686
[39] Zhou J,Xia B,Treves D S,et al. Spatial and Resource Factors Influencing High Microbial Diversity in Soil[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2002,68(1):326-334

两种不同生境羊草根际土壤细菌群落多样性与环境因子的研究

Study on Bacterial Community Diversity and Environmental Factors in Rhizosphere Soil of Leymuschinensis

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王明涛, 方江平, 包赛很那, 苗彦军, 王向涛, 赵玉红, 谢文栋, 仓木德吉. 藏北燕麦草地持续利用与撂荒对高寒草甸土壤特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1801-1808.
[2]	孙伟, 刘玉玲, 王德平, 赵敏, 杨合龙, 宋倩, 肖红, 王开丽, 曹婧, 戎郁萍. 补播羊草和黄花苜蓿对退化草甸植物群落特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1809-1817.
[3]	李文晶, 王俊锋, 高晓荻, 石玉杰, 穆春生. 干旱条件下氮磷添加对羊草干草产量及饲用品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 743-748.
[4]	候文慧, 张玉霞, 王红静, 张庆昕, 侯美玲, 丛百明, 杜晓艳. 施氮水平对羊草叶片光合特性和叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(3): 531-536.
[5]	苏贝贝, 张英, 道日娜. 4种豆科栽培牧草根际土壤细菌群落分布特征研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(2): 250-258.
[6]	张杰雪, 王占青, 全小龙, 梁军, 史惠兰, 陈梦词, 乔有明. 高寒地区人工草地土壤微生物群落对不同种植方式和年限的响应[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(2): 270-280.
[7]	韩梦丽, 白史且, 孙盛楠, 鄢家俊, 张传杰, 张昌兵, 张靖雪, 游明鸿, 李达旭, 严学兵. 基于MaxEnt模型青藏高原老芒麦适生区模拟预测[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(2): 374-382.
[8]	张天俊, 张永亮, 李威, 侯美玲, 于金鑫, 李鑫. 植物生长延缓剂对羊草非结构性碳水化合物含量及产量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(2): 407-411.
[9]	苏贝贝, 张英, 道日娜. 4种豆科植物根际土壤真菌群落特征与土壤理化因子间相关性分析[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(12): 2670-2677.
[10]	刘崇义, 靳旭妹, 王莹莹, 李腾飞, 陈新义, 曹馨悦, 龙明秀, 何树斌. 生草对关中平原有机猕猴桃园土壤养分及细菌群落的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(12): 2711-2720.
[11]	李超, 常馨, 闫卫东, 董宽虎. 刈割对晋西北赖草草地温室气体通量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(1): 17-24.
[12]	南丽丽, 郭全恩, 刘雪强. 荒漠灌区苜蓿后茬轮作不同作物对土壤细菌群落的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(1): 25-32.
[13]	米琦, 王毅, 秦小静, 孙建, 叶冲冲. 青藏高原高寒草甸不同围栏年限土壤酶化学计量特征[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(1): 33-41.
[14]	张紫薇, 高斌, 林长存, 王青, 刘佳乐, 杨娜, 苏德荣, 平晓燕. 放牧强度对典型草原6个物种生物量分配格局的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(1): 149-155.
[15]	李春艳, 王曦, 周胜花, 李希, 钟华, 董宽虎. 白羊草R2R3-MYB转录因子的挖掘及对干旱胁迫反应的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(6): 1784-1790.