黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错区5种典型草地群落土壤酶活性的研究

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2017.01.005

草地学报 ›› 2017, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (1): 32-37.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2017.01.005

黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错区5种典型草地群落土壤酶活性的研究

刘建¹, 邱莉萍², 程积民^1,2, 张金娥³

1. 西北农林科技大学动物科技学院, 陕西杨凌 712100;
2. 西北农林科技大学水土保持研究所黄土高原土壤侵蚀与旱地农业国家重点实验室, 陕西杨凌 712100;
3. 宁夏固原市园林管理所, 宁夏固原 756000

收稿日期:2015-09-07 修回日期:2016-07-18 出版日期:2017-02-15 发布日期:2017-05-06
通讯作者: 程积民,E-mail:gyzcjm@ms.iswc.ac.cn
作者简介:刘建(1991-),男,广西桂林人,硕士研究生,主要从事旱区草地生态学研究,E-mail:liu_jian_1991@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目（41471244，41271315）；陕西省自然科学基金项目（2015JQ4103）资助

Soil Enzymatic Activities of Five Typical Grassland Communities in Water-wind Erosion Crisscross Region on the Loess Plateau

LIU Jian¹, QIU Li-ping², CHENG Ji-min^1,2, ZHANG Jin-e³

1. College of Animal Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi Province 712100, China;
2. State Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Dryland Farming on the Loess Plateau, Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi Province 712100, China;
3. Landscape Management, Guyuan, Ningxia 756000, China

Received:2015-09-07 Revised:2016-07-18 Online:2017-02-15 Published:2017-05-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

以长芒草（Stipa bungeana）、苜蓿-长芒草-铁杆蒿（Medicago sativa-S.bungeana-Artemisia sacrorum）、苜蓿-铁杆蒿（M.sativa-A.sacrorum）、长芒草-铁杆蒿（S.bungeana-A. sacrorum）和苜蓿-长芒草（M. sativa-S.bungeana）5种弃耕后自然演替形成的草地群落为研究对象，通过分析不同群落中土壤淀粉酶、脲酶、蔗糖酶和碱性磷酸酶活性的分布，进一步阐释黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错区弃耕农地不同植被恢复过程对土壤酶活性的影响。结果表明：除土壤淀粉酶外，土壤脲酶、蔗糖酶和碱性磷酸酶活性均受地上植物群落的显著影响，并且土壤脲酶、蔗糖酶和碱性磷酸酶活性均随土层的加深而逐渐减小。长芒草群落土壤酶活性低且土壤养分和生物量均低于其他4个群落，表明弃耕后以单一种为优势种的草地群落植被恢复效果并不理想。4种土壤酶活性与土壤养分因子存在显著相关性，表明土壤酶活性可以指示土壤质量的变化。

关键词: 水蚀风蚀交错区, 草地群落, 土壤酶活性, 土壤养分, 生物量

Abstract:

In this study, 5 different types of grassland communities (Stipa bungeana, Medicago sativa-S.bungeana-Artemisia sacrorum, M.sativa-A.sacrorum, S.bungeana-A.sacrorum and M.sativa-S.bungeana) developed as the form of natural succession after farmland abandoned in water-wind erosion crisscross region were selected as the research object to analyze the distribution of urease, invertase, alk-phosphatase and diastase, and to reveal the effect of different vegetation restoration on soil enzyme activities in water-wind erosion crisscross region on the Loess Plateau. Results showed that soil enzyme activities varied significantly in different grassland communities except for diastase. Activities of urease, invertase and alk-phosphatase all decreased with the increasing soil depth. Soil nutrients and biomass in S.bungeana grassland were the lowest among the 5 grssland communities, and the minimum values of soil enzymatic activities were all found in it, which indicated that the effect of restoration by single vegetation was not ideal. There were significant correlations between soil enzyme activities and soil nutrients, which revealed that soil enzyme activities could indicate the change of soil quality.

Key words: Water-wind erosion crisscross region, Grassland community, Soil enzyme activity, Soil nutrient, Biomass

中图分类号:

S154.2

刘建, 邱莉萍, 程积民, 张金娥. 黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错区5种典型草地群落土壤酶活性的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2017, 25(1): 32-37.

LIU Jian, QIU Li-ping, CHENG Ji-min, ZHANG Jin-e. Soil Enzymatic Activities of Five Typical Grassland Communities in Water-wind Erosion Crisscross Region on the Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2017, 25(1): 32-37.

参考文献

[1] 唐克丽. 黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错区治理的重要性与紧迫性[J]. 中国水土保持,2000(11):11-12
[2] Sparling G P. Ratio of microbial biomass carbon to soil organic carbon as a sensitive indicator of changes in soil organic matter[J]. Soil Research,1992,30(2):195-207
[3] 邱莉萍. 黄土高原植被恢复生态系统土壤质量变化及调控措施[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学,2007:116-131
[4] Burns R G. Enzyme activity in soil: location and a possible role in microbial ecology[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,1982,14(5):423-427
[5] Frankenberger W, Dick W A. Relationships between enzyme activities and microbial growth and activity indices in soil[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal,1983,47(5):945-951
[6] 王翔,李晋川,岳建英,等. 安太堡露天矿复垦地不同人工植被恢复下的土壤酶活性和肥力比较[J]. 环境科学,2013,34(9):3601-3606
[7] Caravaca F, Alguacil M M, Figueroa D, et al. Re-establishment of Retama sphaerocarpa as a target species for reclamation of soil physical and biological properties in a semi-arid Mediterranean area[J]. Forest Ecology and Management,2003,182(1):49-58
[8] Badiane N N Y, Chotte J, Pate E, et al. Use of soil enzyme activities to monitor soil quality in natural and improved fallows in semi-arid tropical regions[J]. Applied Soil Ecology,2001,18(3):229-238
[9] 周礼恺. 土壤酶学[M]. 科学出版社,1987:123-128
[10] 向泽宇,王长庭,宋文彪. 草地生态系统土壤酶活性研究进展[J]. 草业科学,2011,28(10):1801-1806
[11] Zhang Y L, Chen L J, Chen X H, et al. Response of soil enzyme activity to long-term restoration of desertified land[J]. Catena,2015(133):64-70
[12] Cenini V L, Fornara D A, Mcmullan G, et al. Linkages between extracellular enzyme activities and the carbon and nitrogen content of grassland soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2016(96):198-206
[13] Henry H A, Juarez J D, Field C B, et al. Interactive effects of elevated CO2, N deposition and climate change on extracellular enzyme activity and soil density fractionation in a California annual grassland[J]. Global Change Biology,2005,11(10):1808-1815
[14] Zhou X, Chen C, Wang Y, et al. Warming and increased precipitation have differential effects on soil extracellular enzyme activities in a temperate grassland[J]. Science of the Total Environment,2013(444):552-558
[15] Steinauer K, Tilman D, Wragg P D, et al. Plant diversity effects on soil microbial functions and enzymes are stronger than warming in a grassland experiment[J]. Ecology,2015,96(1):99-112
[16] 彭文英,张科利,杨勤科. 黄土坡面土壤性质随退耕时间的动态变化研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境,2006,20(5):153-158
[17] 潘成忠,上官周平,刘国彬. 黄土丘陵沟壑区退耕草地土壤质量演变[J]. 生态学报,2006,26(3):690-696
[18] Schlesinger W H, Reynolds J F, Cunningham G L, et al. Biological feedbacks in global deserti? cation[J]. Science,1990,247(4946):1043-1048
[19] Wardle D A. The influence of biotic interactions on soil biodiversity[J]. Ecology Letters,2006,9(7):870-886
[20] 张平仓,王斌科,唐克丽. 神木试区环境特征[J]. 中科院西北水土保持研究所集刊,1993(18):16-22
[21] 李学章,邵明安,魏孝荣,等. 黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错带水分和密度对人工草地土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 水土保持学报,2011,25(4):207-211
[22] Burns R G, Deforest J L, Marxsen J, et al. Soil enzymes in a changing environment: current knowledge and future directions[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2013,(58):216-234
[23] Von Mersi W, Schinner F. An improved and accurate method for determining the dehydrogenase activity of soils with iodonitrotetrazolium chloride[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils,1991,11(3):216-220
[24] 关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 农业出版社,1986:115-134
[25] Bandick A K, Dick R P. Field management effects on soil enzyme activities[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,1999,31(11):1471-1479
[26] Groffman P M, Mcdowell W H, Myers J C, et al. Soil microbial biomass and activity in tropical riparian forests[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2001,33(10):1339-1348
[27] Bending G D, Turner M K, Jones J E. Interactions between crop residue and soil organic matter quality and the functional diversity of soil microbial communities[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2002,34(8):1073-1082
[28] 胡亚林,汪思龙,黄宇,等. 凋落物化学组成对土壤微生物学性状及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 生态学报,2005,25(10):2662-2668
[29] 王春阳,周建斌,夏志敏,等. 黄土高原区不同植物凋落物搭配对土壤微生物量碳, 氮的影响[J]. 生态学报,2011,31(8):2139-2147
[30] D'Odorico P, He Y, Collins S, et al. Vegetation–microclimate feedbacks in woodland–grassland ecotones[J]. Global Ecology and Biogeography,2013,22(4):364-379
[31] Fliervoet L M, Werger M. Canopy structure and microclimate of two wet grassland communities[J]. New Phytologist,1984,96(1):115-130
[32] 文都日乐,李刚,张静妮. 呼伦贝尔不同草地类型土壤微生物量及土壤酶活性研究[J]. 草业学报,2010,19(5):94-102
[33] 单贵莲,陈功,宁发,等. 典型草原恢复演替过程中土壤微生物及酶活性动态变化研究[J]. 草地学报,2012,20(2):292-297
[34] 高海宁,张勇,秦嘉海,等. 祁连山黑河上游不同退化草地有机碳和酶活性分布特征[J]. 草地学报,2014,22(2):283-290
[35] 韩凤朋,郑纪勇,张兴昌. 黄土退耕坡地植物根系分布特征及其对土壤养分的影响[J]. 农业工程学报,2009,25(2):50-55
[36] 邹俊亮,邵明安,龚时慧. 不同植被和土壤类型下土壤水分剖面的分异[J]. 水土保持研究,2011,18(6):12-17
[37] 李裕元,邵明安,陈洪松,等. 水蚀风蚀交错带植被恢复对土壤物理性质的影响[J]. 生态学报,2010(16):4306-4316
[38] 白一茹,王幼奇,展秀丽. 陕北农牧交错带土地利用方式对土壤物理性质及分布特征的影响[J]. 中国农业科学,2012,46(8):1619-1627
[39] Herold N, Schoening I, Berner D, et al. Vertical gradients of potential enzyme activities in soil profiles of European beech, Norway spruce and Scots pine dominated forest sites[J]. Pedobiologia,2014,57(3):181-189
[40] 谈嫣蓉,蒲小鹏,张德罡,等. 不同退化程度高寒草地土壤酶活性的研究[J]. 草原与草坪,2006(3):20-22
[41] 王理德,姚拓,何芳兰,等. 石羊河下游退耕区次生草地自然恢复过程及土壤酶活性的变化[J]. 草业学报,2014,23(4):253-261
[42] Bowles T M, Acosta-Martínez V, Calderón F, et al. Soil enzyme activities, microbial communities, and carbon and nitrogen availability in organic agroecosystems across an intensively-managed agricultural landscape[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2014,68:252-262
[43] Wang B, Xue S, Liu G B, et al. Changes in soil nutrient and enzyme activities under different vegetations in the Loess Plateau area, Northwest China[J]. Catena,2012(92):186-195
[44] 王兵,刘国彬,薛萐,等. 黄土丘陵区撂荒对土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 草地学报,2009(3):282-287
[45] 岳中辉,王博文,庞健,等. 松嫩盐碱草地主要植物群落土壤酶活性研究[J]. 水土保持学报,2009(6):158-161
[46] Izquierdo I, Caravaca F, Alguacil M M, et al. Use of microbiological indicators for evaluating success in soil restoration after revegetation of a mining area under subtropical conditions[J]. Applied Soil Ecology,2005,30(1):3-10
[47] 王国梁,刘国彬. 黄土丘陵区纸坊沟流域植被恢复的土壤养分效应[J]. 水土保持通报,2002,22(1):1-5

黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错区5种典型草地群落土壤酶活性的研究

Soil Enzymatic Activities of Five Typical Grassland Communities in Water-wind Erosion Crisscross Region on the Loess Plateau

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]	佘延娣, 杨晓渊, 马丽, 张中华, 王党军, 黄小涛, 马真, 姚步青, 周华坤. 退化高寒草甸植物群落和土壤特征及其相互关系研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(S1): 62-71.
[2]	张中华, 马丽, 周秉荣, 宋明华, 徐文华, 邓艳芳, 王芳, 佘延娣, 张骞, 姚步青, 马真, 周华坤. 高寒草甸优势种功能多样性对增温和模拟放牧的响应[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(S1): 225-232.
[3]	王占青, 张杰雪, 杨雪莲, 黄霞, 陈斯亮, 乔有明. 高寒草甸不同斑块草地土壤微生物多样性特征研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 1916-1926.
[4]	麻莹, 张洪嘉, 库都斯·阿布都沙拉木, 耿淑娟, 薛傲然, 赵翰韦, 菅柏涵. 盐碱胁迫对盐地碱蓬生长、有机酸等溶质积累及其生理功能的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 1934-1940.
[5]	黄家兴, 吴静, 李纯斌, 秦格霞, 钱娟冰, 李怀海. 基于Sentinel-2和Landsat 8数据的天祝县草地地上生物量遥感反演[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 2023-2030.
[6]	赵朋波, 邱开阳, 谢应忠, 赵香君, 陈林, 刘王锁, 李海泉, 孟文芬, 虎学琴, 何毅, 黄业芸, 李亚园. 毛乌素沙地南缘不同固沙灌木下土壤养分的空间异质性[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 2040-2048.
[7]	吴雪梅, 杨雪岩, 林媛媛, 代亦, 曹乐乐, 董文萱, 刘增文. 刺槐和油松枯落叶腐殖质化对气候温湿变化的响应[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1738-1747.
[8]	高志香, 李希来, 张静, 金立群, 周伟. 不同施肥处理对高寒矿区渣山改良土酶活性和理化性质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1748-1756.
[9]	高宏元, 侯蒙京, 葛静, 包旭莹, 李元春, 刘洁, 冯琦胜, 梁天刚, 贺金生, 钱大文. 基于随机森林的高寒草地地上生物量高光谱估算[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1757-1768.
[10]	段丽辉, 刘晓丽, 韩冰, 位晓婷, 才仁措, 邵新庆. 乡土物种补播对青藏高原高寒草甸群落稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1793-1800.
[11]	孙宇, 张峰, 郑佳华, 赵天启, 赵萌莉, 张彬. 刈割留茬高度对大针茅草原物种多样性及地上生物量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1859-1864.
[12]	沃野, 黄佳媛, 杨宁, 卢轩, 林志玲, 赵力兴, 李天琦, 高凯. 现蕾期磷添加对菊芋块茎产量及物质分配规律的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1594-1598.
[13]	于铁峰, 郝凤, 张永亮, 高凯. 沙地豆禾混播草地土壤酶与土壤养分对混播比例的响应[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1217-1223.
[14]	郭超凡, 陈泽威, 张志高. 基于最优模型选择的牧草地上生物量遥感估算研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 946-955.
[15]	李娜娜, 杨九艳, 贾喆亭, 闫瑞玲, 陈琪. 不同放牧方式对阿拉善左旗主要草场类型群落特征和土壤养分的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 991-1003.