退耕年限对压砂地植物群落及土壤化学计量特征的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.10.013

草地学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (10): 3133-3140.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.10.013

• 研究论文 • 上一篇

退耕年限对压砂地植物群落及土壤化学计量特征的影响

崔璐瑶^1,2,3,4, 邱开阳^1,2,3,4, 王建宇¹, 邱爱珍⁵, 谢应忠^1,2,3,4

1. 宁夏大学林业与草业学院, 宁夏银川 750021;
2. 宁夏草牧业工程技术研究中心, 宁夏银川 750021;
3. 农业农村部饲草高效生产模式创新重点实验室, 宁夏银川 750021;
4. 宁夏大学西北土地退化与生态恢复省部共建国家重点实验室培育基地, 宁夏银川 750021;
5. 湖南石油化工职业技术学院石化工程学院, 湖南岳阳 414000

收稿日期:2024-01-25 修回日期:2024-04-25 发布日期:2024-11-04
通讯作者: 邱开阳,E-mail:kaiyangqiu@nxu.edu.cn;王建宇,E-mail:w305y517@nxu.edu.cn
作者简介:崔璐瑶(1997-)，女，汉族，内蒙古巴彦淖尔人，硕士研究生，主要从事草地生态与管理研究，E-mail：bxy25900@126.com
基金资助:
宁夏自然科学基金项目(2022AAC03082)资助

Effects of Years of Fallow on Plant Community and Soil Stoichiometric Characteristics in Gravel-mulched Farmland

CUI Lu-yao^1,2,3,4, QIU Kai-yang^1,2,3,4, WANG Jian-yu¹, QIU Ai-zhen⁵, XIE Ying-zhong^1,2,3,4

1. College of Forestry and Prataculture, Ningxia University, Yinchuan, Ningxia Province 750021, China;
2. Ningxia Grassland and Animal Husbandry Engineering Technology Research Center, Yinchuan, Ningxia Province 750021, China;
3. Key Laboratory for Model Innovation in Forage Production Efficiency, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, P. R. China, Ningxia University, Yinchuan, Ningxia Province 750021, China;
4. Breeding Base for State Key Laboratory of Land Degradation and Ecological Restoration in Northwest China, Yinchuan, Ningxia Province 750021, China;
5. School of Petrochemical Engineering, Hunan Petrochemical Vocational and Technical College, Yueyang, Hunan Province 414000, China

Received:2024-01-25 Revised:2024-04-25 Published:2024-11-04

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 宁夏压砂地由于长年连作，土壤质量降低，植被类型单一、稀疏，生态破坏严重，生境破碎。本研究以宁夏中部干旱带不同退耕年限压砂地为研究对象，通过分析退耕恢复过程中植物群落结构及土壤生态化学计量特征，阐明退耕年限对植物群落及土壤生态化学计量特征的影响。结果表明，植物群落特征在不同退耕年限之间差异显著(P<0.05)，Shannon-Wiener多样性指数、Pielou均匀度指数呈逐步增加趋势，Margalef丰富度指数呈逐渐减少趋势；不同退耕年限下土壤化学计量特征具有显著性差异(P<0.05)，有机碳含量在退耕20 a时最高，退耕10 a时最低，全氮、全磷含量呈波动增加的趋势；不同退耕年限、植物群落特征、土壤养分含量三者之间具有显著的相关关系(P<0.05)。因此，建议对不同退耕恢复年限的压砂地适当增施肥料，以加快促进植物群落结构重建与生物多样性恢复。

关键词: 压砂地, 植物群落特征, 土壤化学计量特征

Abstract: Due to continuous farming,the soil quality,vegetation type,and ecological environment of sandy farmland in Ningxia have been severely damaged and fragmented. To explore the effects of cropping duration on vegetation and soil characteristics,in this study we focused on sandy farmland with different cropping restoration periods in the central arid zone of Ningxia. By analyzing the plant community structure and soil ecological stoichiometry characteristics during the restoration process,we elucidated the effects of cropping duration on plant community and soil ecological stoichiometry characteristics,and clarified the interaction between plants and soil during the cropping restoration process. It was found that there were significant differences (P<0.05) in the characteristics of plant communities in different years of fallow,and the Shannon-Wiener diversity index and Pielou evenness index showed a gradual increase,while the Margalef richness index showed a gradual decrease. The stoichiometric characteristics of soils in different years of fallow showed significant differences (P<0.05),and the content of organic carbon was the highest in 20 a of returning,and the lowest at 10 a. The total nitrogen and total phosphorus content showed a fluctuating increasing trend. There was a significant correlation (P<0.05) between different fallow years,plant community characteristics and soil nutrient content. Therefore,it is recommended that appropriate additional fertilizers should be applied to sand suppression sites with different years of fallow restoration in order to accelerate the promotion of plant community structure reconstruction and biodiversity restoration.

Key words: Compressed sand land, Vegetation community characteristics, Soil chemometric characteristics

中图分类号:

S154

崔璐瑶, 邱开阳, 王建宇, 邱爱珍, 谢应忠. 退耕年限对压砂地植物群落及土壤化学计量特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2024, 32(10): 3133-3140.

CUI Lu-yao, QIU Kai-yang, WANG Jian-yu, QIU Ai-zhen, XIE Ying-zhong. Effects of Years of Fallow on Plant Community and Soil Stoichiometric Characteristics in Gravel-mulched Farmland[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2024, 32(10): 3133-3140.

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.1007-0435.2024.10.013

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2024/V32/I10/3133

参考文献

[1] 李金燕. 宁夏中部干旱带盐池县植被生态需水规律研究[J]. 干旱区地理,2018,41(5):1064-1072
[2] 余海龙,马凯博,康扬眉,等. 宁夏中部干旱带草地气候—土壤生产潜力分析[J]. 草地学报,2018,26(3):625-630
[3] 马己安,冯克鹏,李王成,等. 基于水面蒸发量的宁夏中部干旱带土壤蒸发量估算研究[J]. 灌溉排水学报,2020,39(10):35-41
[4] 朱滕滕,何学莲,勉小娟,等. 硒砂瓜根际促生菌筛选鉴定及其促生效应研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2023,41(2):221-229
[5] 白一茹,王幼奇,王菲,等. 压砂地土壤导水特性空间格局及影响因子[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2016,34(4):55-61
[6] 阮晓晗,白一茹,王幼奇,等.基于多指标分析和分形维数的不同种植年限压砂地基质流与优先流特征研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2022,40(1):86-94
[7] 王洁,李王成,董亚萍,等. 宁夏中部干旱带压砂砾石矿质元素淋溶规律[J]. 东北农业大学学报,2021,52(2):60-69
[8] 孙丕苓,曲琳,刘庆果,等. 中国北方农牧交错带生态退耕时空分异及驱动因素[J]. 资源科学,2022,44(5):943-954
[9] TUTEN M C,SÁNCHEZ MEADOR A,FULÉ P Z. Ecological restoration and fine-scale forest structure regulation in southwestern ponderosa pine forests[J]. Forest Ecology and Management,2015,348:57-67
[10] CHEN X,YU L,DU Z,et al. Distribution of ecological restoration projects associated with land use and land cover change in China and their ecological impacts[J]. Science of The Total Environment,2022,825:153938
[11] STODDARD M T,ROCCAFORTE J P,MEADOR A J S,et al. Ecological restoration guided by historical reference conditions can increase resilience to climate change of southwestern U.S. Ponderosa pine forests[J]. Forest Ecology and Management,2021,493:119256
[12] ZHOU Y,FU D,LU C,et al. Positive effects of ecological restoration policies on the vegetation dynamics in a typical ecologically vulnerable area of China[J]. Ecological Engineering,2021,159:106087
[13] 楼一恺,范忆,戴其林,等. 天目山常绿落叶阔叶林群落垂直结构与群落整体物种多样性的关系[J]. 生态学报,2021,41(21):8568-8577
[14] 丁小慧,罗淑政,刘金巍,等. 呼伦贝尔草地植物群落与土壤化学计量学特征沿经度梯度变化[J]. 生态学报,2012,32(11):3467-3476
[15] 张子琦,焦菊英,陈同德,等. 拉萨河流域洪积扇不同植被类型土壤化学计量特征[J]. 生态学报,2022,42(16):6801-6815
[16] 王建宇,王超,王菲,等. 基于田间尺度的压砂地土壤肥力评价[J].土壤通报,2015,46(1):36-41
[17] 贾振江,赵广兴,李王成,等. 宁夏中部干旱带砂土混合覆盖下土壤蒸发估算[J]. 水土保持学报,2022,36(2):219-227
[18] 刘巧玲,李王成,赵广兴,等. 覆砂和灌水量对退耕压砂地生态枣林土壤水热及枣果产量的影响[J]. 农业资源与环境学报,2022,39(5):940-947
[19] 杨壹,邱开阳,李静尧,等. 贺兰山东坡典型植物群落多样性垂直分布特征与土壤因子的关系[J]. 生态学报,2023,43(12):4995-5004
[20] 余轩,王兴,吴婷,等. 围封对荒漠草原物种多样性和功能多样性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报,2021,35(6):243-250
[21] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M].第3版. 北京:中国农业出版社,2000:25-97
[22] BAI X,ZHAO W,WANG J,et al. Precipitation drives the floristic composition and diversity of temperate grasslands in China[J]. Global Ecology and Conservation,2021,32:e1933
[23] 朱金方,赵彩云,李飞飞,等. 不同替代修复年限对飞机草种群和本土植物群落结构的影响[J]. 环境科学研究,2020,33(12):2848-2855
[24] 原野,赵中秋,白中科,等. 安太堡露天煤矿不同复垦模式下草本植物优势种生态位[J]. 生态学杂志,2016,35(12):3215-3222
[25] JIANG L,LV G,GONG Y,et al. Characteristics and driving mechanisms of species beta diversity in desert plant communities[J]. Plos One,2021,16(1):e245249
[26] 高瑞,艾宁,刘广全,等. 煤矿复垦区不同修复年限林下草本群落特征及其与土壤耦合关系[J]. 草业学报,2022,31(6):61-68
[27] 郝建华,吴海荣,强胜. 部分菊科入侵种种子(瘦果)的萌发能力和幼苗建群特性[J]. 生态环境学报,2009,18(5):1851-1856
[28] LIU E,LIU Z,SUN Z,et al. Soil inorganic carbon stocks increase non-synergistically with soil organic carbon after ecological restoration practices in drylands[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2023,348:119070
[29] HAN G,CAO G,CAO S,et al. Effects of ecological restoration on the distribution of soil particles and organic carbon in alpine regions[J]. Separations,2022,9(10):279
[30] 党珍珍,周正朝,王凯博,等. 黄土丘陵区不同恢复年限对天然草地土壤碳库动态的影响[J]. 水土保持通报,2015,35(5):49-54
[31] 肖春旺,杨帆,柳隽瑶,等. 陆地生态系统地下碳输入与输出过程研究进展[J]. 植物学报,2017,52(5):652-668
[32] 苏淑兰,石明明,陈奇,等. 不同生态修复技术下退化高寒沼泽湿地土壤及植被化学计量特征[J]. 草地学报,2024,32(4):1142-1152
[33] 彭佳佳,胡玉福,肖海华,等. 生态修复对川西北沙化草地土壤有机质和氮素的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境,2015,29(5):149-153
[34] 拓卫卫,范家伟,周雅洁,等. 毛乌素沙地樟子松林植物—土壤生态化学计量特征演变关系[J]. 水土保持研究,2023,30(6):177-186
[35] 胡玉福,彭佳佳,邓良基,等. 围栏种植红柳对川西北高寒沙地土壤颗粒组成和矿质养分的影响[J]. 土壤通报,2015,46(1):54-61
[36] WANG J,WANG Y,LI M,et al. Divergent roles of environmental and spatial factors in shaping plant β-diversity of different growth forms in drylands[J]. Global Ecology and Conservation,2021,26:e1487
[37] 宁璐,崔向新,刘艳萍,等. 两种旅游扰动模式对荒漠草原植被及土壤的影响研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境,2023,37(2):120-127
[38] 杜国明,孙晓兵,刘彦随,等. 黄土高原生态退耕的时空分异特征[J]. 地球信息科学学报,2017,19(3):355-364
[39] 潘佳颖,王建宇,王超,等. 连作对砂田土壤微生物碳源利用和微生物量碳、氮的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境,2016,30(9):160-164
[40] 郝颢晶,关潇,曹明,等. 呼伦贝尔沙化草地不同生态修复阶段植物群落特征研究[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2023,13(4):1573-1585
[41] 姚蒙蒙,郭琛文,赫凤彩,等. 晋北盐碱草地土壤化学计量特征及其与植物多样性的关系[J]. 草地学报,2021,29(12):2800-2807
[42] 胡文浩,张晓婧,陈雅杰,等. 坝上地区不同年代退耕还林生境的草本层植物多样性及影响因子[J]. 生态学报,2021,41(3):1116-1126
[43] SU Y,JIA X,ZHANG L,et al. Size-dependent associations of woody plant structural diversity with soil C∶N∶P stoichiometry in a subtropical forest[J]. Frontiers in Environmental Science,2022,10:990387(责任编辑付宸)第32卷第10期 Vol.32 No. 10草地学报 ACTAAGRESTIASINICA 2024年 10月

退耕年限对压砂地植物群落及土壤化学计量特征的影响

Effects of Years of Fallow on Plant Community and Soil Stoichiometric Characteristics in Gravel-mulched Farmland

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 6

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	董克池, 郝媛媛, 董瑞, 蔡新成, 叶国辉, 马义杰, 赵希存, 花立民. 高原鼢鼠鼠丘斑块空间分布格局及对植物群落特征影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1853-1860.
[2]	周睿, 宋梅玲, 王玉琴, 王宏生, 马戈亮, 孔海苏. 不同放牧方式下防除黄帚橐吾对高寒草地植物群落的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(7): 1819-1828.
[3]	姚喜喜, 周睿, 李长慧, 多杰索南. 坡向对青藏高原高寒草地植被分布格局和牧草品质特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(12): 2792-2799.
[4]	吴婷, 宋乃平, 陈晓莹, 李敏岚, 陈娟. 围栏封育和放牧对盐池荒漠草原植物群落特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2019, 27(3): 651-660.
[5]	孙娇, 何俊皓, 张伟, 杨改河, 郝文芳. 刺槐人工林土壤团聚体稳定性与群落特征的相关分析[J]. 草地学报, 2016, 24(6): 1374-1377.
[6]	刘金根, 薛建辉. 刈割对香根草护坡地植物群落早期特征的影响[J]. , 2009, 17(4): 520-526.