Welcome to Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops,
Agricultural Ecology & Environmental Protection

Responses of Soil Organic Carbon Components and Microbial Communities to Organic Management

  • HAN Xingxiu 1, 2, 3 ,
  • LI Qinfen 2, 3 ,
  • WANG Jinchuang , 2, 3, *
Expand
  • 1. College of Agriculture, Guizhou University, Guiyang, Guizhou 550025, China
  • 2. Environment and Plant Protection Institute Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences / Hainan Ecological Circulating Agriculture Research Laboratory, Haikou, Hainan 571101, China
  • 3. Danzhou National Field Scientific Observation and Research Station for Tropical Agroecosystems, Danzhou, Hainan 571737, China
*WANG Jinchuang,E-mail:

Received date: 2022-03-31

  Revised date: 2022-04-05

  Online published: 2022-09-09

Abstract

Soil organic carbon and microbial community structure are important evaluation indexes for soil quality and health changes. In order to explore the effects of different management models on soil organic carbon fractions and microbial community composition in tea plantations, two tea plantations management models including organic tea plantations (OTP) and conventional tea plantations (CTP) in Baisha County, Hainan Province were selected as the research objects. 13C-NMR and phospholipid fatty acids (PLFA) were used to explore the changes of soil organic carbon components and soil microbial community composition under different management models. The effects of organic and inorganic managemen tmodels on soil organic carbon fractions (alkyl C, O-alkyl C, aromatic C and carboxyl C) and microbial community composition were clarified. Compared with inorganic management model, organic management model significantly changed the nutrient content in tea plantations soil. The content of organic matter (SOM), total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) increased by 47.86 %, 37.40 % and 100 %, respectively (P<0.05). The content of nitrate nitrogen (NO3--N) increased by 78.80 % (P<0.05), and the content of total potassium (TK) and available potassium (AK) decreased significantly (P<0.05). Organic management increased the relative content of alkyl C and O-alkyl C in tea garden soil. At the same time, the ratio of aliphatic C/aromatic C was higher than that of inorganic management tea garden. The total PLFAs content in the organic management tea plantation soil increased by 29.70 % (P<0.05), and the phospholipid fatty acid content of bacteria, G - and actinomycetes was significantly higher than that in inorganic tea garden soil (P<0.05). The RDA analysis revealed that soil TN, TK, alkyl C, O-alkyl C and carboxyl C were the main influencing factors driving for microbial community structure in tea garden (P<0.05). The correlation analysis results revealed that alkyl C of organic carbon fractions was significantly positively correlated with total PLFA, fungi, actinomycetes and mycorrhizal fungi. O-alkyl C was also positively correlated with fungi, bacteria and fungi/bacteria ratios in microorganisms. The results indicated that the organic management of tea plantation could regulate the microbial community structure, improve the degree of soil organic carbon fatty infiltration, then affecting the accumulation and turnover mechanism of soil organic carbon.

Cite this article

HAN Xingxiu , LI Qinfen , WANG Jinchuang . Responses of Soil Organic Carbon Components and Microbial Communities to Organic Management[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2022 , 43(8) : 1728 -1737 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2022.08.023

近年来,由于集约化农业的发展,导致土壤有机质含量减少,土壤肥力和生物多样性降低[1]。因此,农田生态系统中养分循环、水分调控、碳容量和微生物功能多样性等服务功能大大减弱,严重影响农业的可持续发展。有机农业通过施用有机肥,不使用人工合成的化肥、农药和生长调剂等,被认为是促进农业可持续发展的重要管理措施[2]。MARTÍNEZ等[3]2018年研究表明,有机管理可以增加土壤有机碳库(SOC)的总量。由于相异的周转速率和对环境干扰的响应不同,相异的SOC组分而不是总有机碳被认为是农业管理对土壤碳影响更加敏感的指标[4]。但有机管理对SOC组分的影响仍然不确定。另外,土壤微生物群落是SOC动态的主要调控者,可以改变养分有效性,影响土壤有机质分解速率[5]。因此,有机管理引起的微生物群落的变化对土壤碳组分的稳定也起到关键作用[6]。探究有机管理下土壤碳组分变化与微生物的相关性,对阐明有机管理对碳循环的影响机制,以及促进农业可持续发展具有重要意义。
有机碳的化学复杂性和分子结构的变化可以决定土壤微生物对碳的分解速率[7-8]。以往的研究主要采用传统的实验培养方法来确定土壤有机碳的分解速率。近年来,13C固态核磁共振谱(13C-NMR)被认为是分析土壤有机碳化学结构的适用技术[9]。例如,有机碳的化学复杂性可以从固态核磁共振谱识别的官能团的化学位移中推断出来,其分解速度在某种程度上与不同官能团的比例有关[10]。烷基C和芳香C的比例高时,有机碳稳定性高,容易被固定在土壤中。而当不稳定的O-烷基C和羧基C的比例高时,土壤有机碳不容易被固存[11]。可是,很少利用13C固态核磁共振谱分析有机管理对土壤有机碳组分的影响研究。
不同的微生物群落在分解土壤有机碳的过程中对碳组分具有一定的选择特异性[12],土壤微生物群落组成的变化可以导致土壤有机质的稳定性的变化[13]。例如,真菌在难降解有机质的分解中发挥作用[14]。另外,土壤微生物的功能也是被不同的有机碳的种类影响。这些结果说明SOC的组分在塑造土壤微生物群落中具有关键作用。可是,土壤微生物也通过影响不同的碳组分影响碳循环[15]。因此,微生物很大程度上调控不同碳组分对碳固持的相对贡献[16]。例如,真菌群落对复杂的有机碳具有更高的分解能力[17],而细菌群落更容易利用简单的有机碳[18]。目前,有机管理对土壤微生物的影响已得到广泛的研究[19-20]。可是,土壤微生物群落如何影响土壤有机碳组分仍然不清楚。
茶树[Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze]是我国的主要经济作物之一[21],种植面积广泛[22]。由于无机管理造成茶园土壤有机质下降,土壤肥力持续下降。基于此,本研究以有机茶园和无机茶园为研究对象,探讨有机管理和常规管理对土壤养分、有机碳组分和微生物群落的影响,为更好地阐明有机管理对土壤养分和有机碳周转的影响机理,以及促进茶园的可持续发展提供理论依据。

1 材料与方法

1.1 研究区域概况与实验设计

研究区位于海南省白沙县(109°38′E, 19°18′N),属于热带季风气候,年均温度22.7℃,年均降水量约为1900 mm,地势平坦,土壤类型为砖红壤。
本研究选取的两处茶园均由龙眼园转变而来,立地条件一致。管理模式分别为有机管理(organic tea plantations, OTP)和无机管理(conventional tea plantations, CTP)的茶园。无机管理与有机管理的区别主要是害虫治理和植物营养实践造成的。有机管理茶园中,不使用人工合成农药,以干羊粪为有机肥(每年平均施用6000 kg/hm2)为基础。与之相比,在无机管理茶园中,除使用杀虫剂(吡虫啉和溴氰菊酯)和除草剂(草甘膦)外,施肥以施用化学肥料为基础,每年施入N、P、K分别为450、225、225 kg/hm2。有关实验设计详见课题组WU等[19]和王敦刚等[20]的方法。

1.2 土壤样品采集

2020年11月20日采集土壤样品。每个茶园建立3个20 m×20 m的样方。除去地表杂物和表层浮土,采用五点法,在每个样方用直径为5 cm的土钻取0~20 cm土层土壤样品,混匀后作为一个样方的土壤样品。土壤样品过2 mm筛后分为2份,一份存储于-80℃用于测定土壤微生物群落,另一份自然风干用于测定土壤基础理化性质和有机碳组分。

1.3 土壤理化测定

土壤pH采用pH计测定(土壤∶蒸馏水= 1∶2.5);土壤有机碳(SOC)含量采用浓硫酸–重铬酸钾外加热法测定;土壤全氮(TN)含量采用凯氏定氮法测定;土壤总磷(TP)含量采用钼锑钪比色法测定;土壤全钾(TK)含量采用NaOH熔融-火焰光度法测定;土壤速效钾(AK)含量采用醋酸铵浸提-火焰光度法测定;硝态氮(NO3--N)和铵态氮(NH4+-N)含量采用氯化钙浸提法测定[23]

1.4 13C核磁共振波谱法(NMR)分析

土壤有机碳组分化学结构采用德国产Bruker AVANCE Ⅲ HD,400型13C固态核磁共振碳谱分析仪测定[24]。仪器频率为100.64 MHz,采用4 mm ZrO2探头,扫描次数为20 000次,样品在探头内以5000 Hz的频率旋转,接触时间为3 ms,循环延迟时间为1 s,化学位移基准值以176.03 mg/L的甘氨酸为标准。核磁共振样品预处理与波谱分析:为了提高固体核磁共振测定的精确度,土壤样品在进行核磁共振分析前需先用氢氟酸(HF)进行预处理[25],预处理方法如下:称量10 g风干土壤样品于100 mL离心管中,加50 mL HF 10%溶液,摇床上振荡1 h(25℃,100 r/min),离心10 min(3000 r/min),弃上清液,残余物继续用HF溶液处理。共重复处理8次,摇床振荡时间依次是:第1~4次1 h,第5~7次12 h,最后1次24 h。处理过后的残余物用蒸馏水清洗后以除去其中的HF溶液,方法如下:加50 mL蒸馏水,振荡10 min,离心10 min(3000 r/min),去掉上清液,整个过程重复4次。残余物在40℃的烘箱中烘干,过60目筛后上机测定。

1.5 土壤微生物群落结构分析

微生物群落结构采用WU等[19]的方法确定。称取8 g冷冻干燥的土壤样品到50 mL的特氟龙离心管中,以提取剂0.8∶1∶2的比例添加15.2 mL柠檬酸缓冲液∶氯仿∶甲醇,并在室温下250 r/min振荡2 h,然后4000 r/min离心10 min。脂肪酸甲酯(FAMEs)的含量通过气相色谱法(N6890,安捷伦)定量,并使用MIDI SHERLOCK微生物鉴定系统(版本4.5,MIDI,Inc., 美国)进行鉴定。使用十九烷酸甲酯(19∶0)作为内标。总PLFA浓度以nmol/g为单位表示,单个PLFA的种类由特定的峰面积之和并用nmol/g干土表示。PLFA被划分为以下不同的分类群,其中15∶0、16∶0、17∶0、16∶1 w7c、18∶1 w7c、a15∶0、a17∶0、cy17∶0、cy19∶0、i14∶0、i15∶0、i16∶0和i17∶0用于指示细菌,此外,i14∶0、i15∶0、a15∶0、i16∶0、a16∶0、i17∶0和 a17∶0用于指示革兰氏阳性菌,16∶1w7c、cy17∶0、18∶1w7c、cy19∶0用于指示革兰氏阴性菌18∶1w9c,18∶2w6,9c用于指示真菌;以及10Me16∶0、10Me17∶0、10Me18∶0、10Me19:0用于指示放线菌。

1.6 数据处理

利用独立样本T(T-test)检验分析不同管理模式土壤理化性质、有机碳组分的差异和土壤微生物群落的显著性差异(SPSS 17.0),所有数据均为平均值±标准误。主成分分析(PCA)用于明确不同管理模式下的茶园土壤微生物群落结构变化(CANOCO 5.02)。冗余分析(redundancy analysis, RDA)用于明确不同管理茶园中土壤理化因子与微生物群落之间的关系(CANOCO 5.02)。

2 结果与分析

2.1 有机管理对土壤理化性质的影响

与无机管理相比,有机管理提高了土壤SOM、TN、NH4+-N、NO3--N、AP、TP等养分含量以及pH,但土壤TK和AK含量降低了28.57%和11.59%(P<0.05,表1)。
表1 不同茶园管理下的土壤理化性质

Tab. 1 Soil physicochemical properties under different tea plantation management

茶园类型Tea plantation types pH 全氮
TN
/(g•kg-1)
全磷
TP
/(g•kg-1)
全钾
TK
/(g•kg-1)
铵态氮
NH4+-N /(mg•kg-1)
硝态氮
NO3--N /(mg•kg-1)
速效磷AP
/(mg•kg-1)
速效钾AK
/(mg•kg-1)
有机质SOM
/(mg•kg-1)
碳/氮
C/N
无机茶园 5.6±0.10b 1.07±0.02b 0.74±0.01b 2.7±0.12a 9.3±0.26b 9.4±0.04b 11.97±0.23b 199.3±4.78a 11.7±0.41b 10.9±0.61a
有机茶园 6.6±0.09a 1.45±0.01a 1.48±0.02a 2.1±0.08b 12.0±0.72a 16.8±0.12a 27.69±0.48a 178.6±5.81b 17.3±0.12a 12.0±0.13a

注:同列数据后不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Note: Different lowercase letters after the same column of data indicate significant difference (P<0.05).

2.2 有机管理对土壤有机碳组分的影响

13C-NMR光谱结果显示,在2种管理模式的茶园土壤中,有机碳化学结构均以O-烷基C和烷基C为主,O-烷基C所占相对比例(44.38%)最高,其次为烷基C(21.25%)和芳香C(18.07%),羧基C的平均比例(16.36%)最低(图1A)。与无机管理相比,有机管理显著改变了茶园土壤有机碳的结构组成,增加了茶园土壤中烷基C和O-烷基C的相对含量,但减少了芳香C和羧基C的相对含量,进而增加了脂肪C(烷基C+O-烷基C)与芳香C的比值(图1B)。
图1 不同管理模式下茶园土壤有机碳组分及含量

不同的小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Fig. 1 Organic carbon fractions and content in tea garden under different management models

Different lowercase letters indicate significant difference among treatments (P<0.05).

2.3 有机管理对土壤微生物群落的影响

与无机管理相比,有机管理显著增加了茶园土壤微生物总PLFAs含量(29.7%),土壤真菌PLFAs含量(41.7%),革兰氏阴性菌PLFAs含量(37.4%),土壤放线菌PLFAs含量增加(42.9%),土壤菌根真菌PLFAs含量增加了(163.6%)(P<0.05)。同时,有机茶园显著增加了茶园土壤F/B和G+/G-的比值(表2)。
表2 不同管理模式下茶园土壤微生物群落组成

Tab. 2 Tea plantation soil microbial community composition under different management model

茶园类型
Tea plantation types
总微生物量PLFAs 革兰氏阴性菌G- 革兰氏阳性菌G+ 细菌Bacteria 真菌
Fungi
放线菌
Actinomycetes
真菌/细菌F/B 革兰氏阳性菌/革兰氏阴性菌G+/G- 菌根真菌AMF
无机茶园 12.62±0.32b 3.12±0.40b 5.21±0.56a 8.74±0.62a 0.82±0.29b 2.52±0.15b 0.09±0.01b 0.59±0.05b 0.22±0.03b
有机茶园 16.37±0.60a 4.28±0.24a 5.72±0.31a 10.24±0.49a 1.1.67±0.26a 3.59±0.52a 0.16±0.01a 0.78±0.03a 0.58±0.07a

注:同列数据后不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Note: Different lowercase letters after the same column of data indicate significant difference (P<0.05).

PCA分析表明,不同管理模式下,茶园土壤微生物群落组成发生了明显分异(图2)。PCA 1和PCA 2共同解释了总变异的93.42%,其中PCA1解释了总变异的76.71%,PCA 2解释了总变异的16.71%。
图2 有机茶园土壤微生物群落结构的主成分分析

Fig. 2 Principal component analysis of soil microbial community structure in organic tea plantation

2.4 土壤微生物群落组成与土壤有机碳组分及其他土壤理化性质间的关系

相关性分析结果显示,总PLFAs与土壤pH 和NO3--N含量呈显著正相关关系。土壤微生物中的真菌、AMF和F/B的比值与pH呈显著正相关关系,与TK和AK含量呈显著负相关关系。真菌、放线菌、AMF和F/B的比值与土壤TN、TP和SOM含量呈显著正相关关系。土壤真菌和AMF与NO3--N含量呈显著正相关关系。总PLFAs、真菌、放线菌和AMF含量与有机碳组分中的烷基C相对含量呈显著正相关关系。真菌、细菌和F/B的比值与O-烷基C相对含量呈显著正相关关系。然而,芳香C相对含量与真菌、细菌、AMF和F/B的比值呈显著负相关关系。羧基C相对含量与总PLFAs、G-、真菌、放线菌等微生物呈显著负相关关系(表3)。
表3 土壤微生物群落与土壤理化、有机碳组分的相关性

Tab. 3 Correlation between soil microbial communities and physicochemical properties, organic C fractions

项目
Item
总微
生物量
PLFAs
细菌
Bacteria
真菌
Fungi
放线菌
Actinomycetes
菌根真菌
AMF
革兰氏
阴性菌
G-
革兰氏
阳性菌
G+
真菌/细菌
F/B
革兰氏阳性菌/革兰氏阴性菌G+/G-
pH 0.7800 0.740 0.965** 0.760 0.913* 0.790 0.700 0.859* -0.690
TN 0.841* 0.710 0.967** 0.922** 0.928** 0.810 0.600 0.877* -0.770
TP 0.810 0.710 0.987** 0.866* 0.930** 0.790 0.630 0.898* -0.730
TK -0.720 -0.480 -0.828* -0.847* -0.842* -0.570 -0.410 -0.800 0.520
NH4+-N -0.060 0.130 0.140 0.320 0.180 0.260 -0.070 0.100 -0.310
NO3--N 0.846* 0.740 0.907* 0.790 0.954** 0.780 0.710 0.7900 -0.680
AK -0.750 -0.620 -0.992** -0.888* -0.896* -0.720 -0.530 -0.940** 0.670
SOM 0.730 0.660 0.995** 0.841* 0.890* 0.750 0.570 0.926** -0.690
C/N 0.210 0.290 0.710 0.340 0.470 0.340 0.310 0.72 -0.230
烷基C 0.868* 0.600 0.868* 0.964** 0.829* 0.730 0.470 0.810 -0.760
O-烷基C 0.660 0.580 0.968** 0.888* 0.810 0.720 0.430 0.926** -0.700
芳香C -0.680 -0.600 -0.940** -0.900* -0.906* -0.720 -0.470 -0.881* 0.660
羧基C -0.850* -0.710 -0.976** -0.932** -0.899* -0.815* -0.580 -0.891* 0.800
脂肪族C/芳香C 0.740 0.600 0.965** 0.947** 0.872* 0.730 0.450 0.918** -0.710
烷基C/O-烷基C 0.730 0.400 0.370 0.630 0.490 0.440 0.300 0.300 -0.500
疏水C/亲水C 0.843* 0.630 0.440 0.500 0.610 0.590 0.630 0.290 -0.570

注:*表示显著相关(P<0.05),**表示极显著相关(P<0.01)。

Note: * indicates significant correlation (P<0.05), ** indicates extremely significant correlation (P<0.01)

冗余分析(RDA)显示,茶园土壤微生物群落结构在不同的管理模式下差异显著(图3)。茶园土壤中的微生物群落结构变化主要受到土壤TN、TK、烷基碳、O-烷基C和羧基C含量的影响(P<0.05),并共同解释了微生物群落结构95.24%的变化,其中RDA1解释了微生物群落结构变异的88.93%,RDA2解释了茶园土壤微生物群落结构变异的6.31%。
图3 土壤环境因子和土壤微生物的冗余分析

Fig. 3 Redundancy analysis of soil environmental factors and soil microorganisms

3 讨论

3.1 有机管理对土壤微生物群落组成的影响

农业管理方式的改变显著影响了土壤微生物群落结构。与无机管理相比,有机管理显著增加了真菌、放线菌、AMF和总PLFAs含量。原因可能是无机管理导致土壤板结,破坏了土壤的团聚体结构,导致土壤中微生物所需的碳氮源和其他土壤养分降低[26]。有机管理中施入的干羊粪含有丰富的碳和氮源,有助于微生物的增长繁殖,提高了微生物的活性。除此之外,有机肥中还引入了其他微生物,导致微生物量增加。无机管理茶园中农药和除草剂的施用会对微生物产生不利影响。这表明有机管理措施可能会减轻无机管理对土壤微生物群落产生的负面影响[27]。另外,有机管理显著增加了G+/G-的比值,这主要与土壤养分状况有关。G-细菌是寡营养菌,适应生长于营养贫瘠的土壤环境。而G+是富营养菌。它们对可利用的有机物质非常敏感[28]。与无机管理相比,有机管理施入的干羊粪增加了土壤有机物质含量。而无机管理导致茶园土壤中有机质TN、TK等养分含量下降[29-30],进而增加了G+/G-的比值。研究表明,土壤放线菌不仅具有一定的解磷作用[31],还参与有机物质的分解过程[32]
本研究发现,有机管理茶园土壤中的放线菌显著高于无机管理茶园。这可能是由于有机肥中含有大量的纤维素、木质素和单宁等有机物质含量,为放线菌群落的增长提供了养分来源。放线菌是一种纤维素降解菌,通过产生大量的纤维素酶,对纤维素和木质素等有机物质进行降解,加快矿质元素的释放,增加土壤养分含量[33]。RDA分析结果表明,土壤微生物群落结构的变化与TK、NO3--N、AK、TP、TN、C/N、pH和SOM等土壤理化因子有关。这说明土壤养分含量是驱动土壤微生物种类组成和群落结构的关键因素[34-35]

3.2 有机管理对土壤有机碳组分的影响

土壤有机质含量不仅代表土壤的碳储存量[36],也是土壤供应养分能力和肥力的重要指标[37]。与无机茶园相比,有机管理显著增加土壤有机质含量。相似地,NOVARA 等[38]研究发现,在柑橘种植园,有机管理也增加了土壤有机碳含量。这主要因为有机管理中修剪的残枝、有机肥及其他有机输入物(杂草)等进入土壤中,使土壤SOC含量增加。
无论茶园管理方式如何,茶园土壤有机碳化学官能团均以氧烷基C为主,并表现为O-烷基C>烷基C>芳香C>羧基C。O-烷基C和羧基C通常代表的是来源于纤维素、脂质和蛋白质等碳水化合物[39],是活性有机碳,容易被微生物分解[40]。而烷基C和芳香C来源于木栓质、蜡质和角质等难分解生物聚合物,是相对稳定的有机碳[41]。这表明茶园中的有机碳组分以不稳定的活性有机碳为主[42]。然而,不同的茶园管理方式对土壤碳组分的影响程度不同。与无机茶园相比,有机茶园显著增加了烷基C和O-烷基C的相对含量,而降低了芳香C和羧基C的含量。DUAN等[43]研究发现,长期施用有机肥能够增加O-烷基C的丰度,降低了芳香C的相对丰度。这主要是因为粪肥的添加使大量的易降解化合物释放到土壤中,从而增加了O-烷基C的相对丰度。其次,修剪枝条和杂草的输入,也可提高土壤O-烷基C和羧基C的相对含量,从而增加不稳定C的积累[44],促进有机碳的储存[45]。同时,化学农药的施用导致微生物细胞膜裂解[46],从而导致无机茶园中的烷基C相对含量降低。芳香C含量的降低主要与土壤中不能完全降解的木质素残留物有关。秸秆及地上枯枝落叶的输入抑制了腐生真菌的生长,使其通过脱水、脱甲基等方式对土壤中残留的木质素进行降解,导致芳香C含量降低。
各碳组分的差异与土壤微生物群落结构密切相关,表明有机碳组分之间的转化可能与土壤微生物群落结构有关。本研究发现,有机碳中的烷基C和O-烷基C与真菌、放线菌群落的微生物量显著正相关。这是因为真菌和放线菌主要分解难降解有机物中的有机碳,有机茶园中较高的真菌和放线菌群落微生物通过分解有机物质[47],促进烷基C和O-烷基C的积累[48]。可是,芳香C与真菌和放线菌微生物量显著负相关。说明放线菌和真菌可以通过利用稳定的芳基C来扩展菌丝体[49],与其他微生物竞争养分。
烷基C/O-烷基C、脂肪族C/芳香族C、疏水C/亲水C等指标经常用来评价SOC的分解程度[50]。本研究发现,与无机茶园相比,有机茶园显著增加了土壤有机碳的脂肪族C/芳香族碳的比值,而且与真菌、放线菌、丛枝菌根真菌和F/B呈显著负相关。PISANI等[51]研究发现,有机物的长期输入能够增加脂肪族化合物在土壤中的固定。肖健等[52]研究发现,随着有机肥使用年限的增加,土壤中脂肪族碳含量增加,而芳香C含量降低。其原因可能是有机茶园中有机肥的施用使茶树根系分泌物的数量成倍增加,加速了真菌、放线菌和菌根真菌等微生物对木质素和其他物质的分解,从而产生了大量的脂肪族化合物(烷基C和O-烷基C),使土壤有机质的腐殖化程度降低。说明真菌、放线菌和菌根真菌在一定程度上有助于土壤有机碳中芳香烃结构的分解转化及脂肪碳的积累。

4 结论

与常规管理相比,有机管理改变了土壤微生物群落结构,显著增加了真菌、放线菌、AMF和总PLFAs量,并显著提高了G+/G-的比值;另一方面,增加了土壤有机碳组分中烷基C和O-烷基C的比例,但不同的茶园管理方式对有机碳的稳定性没有影响。有机管理能够协同改变养分循环,调节微生物群落结构,从而影响土壤有机碳的积累和周转机制。
[1]
NAVARRO-PEDREÑO J, ALMENDRO-CANDEL M B, ZORPAS A A. The increase of soil organic matter reduces global warming, myth or reality?[J]. Science, 2021, 3(1): 18.

DOI

[2]
KOVALCHUK S. Organic production in the system of sustainable development of rural areas[J]. Eсonomy Finanсes Management Topical Issues of Science and Practical Activity, 2020(54): 117-133.

[3]
MARTÍNEZ-GARCÍA L B, KORTHALS G, BRUSSAARD L, JØRGENSEN H B, DE DEYN G B. Organic management and cover crop species steer soil microbial community structure and functionality along with soil organic matter properties[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2018, 263(1): 7-17.

DOI

[4]
魏夏新, 熊俊芬, 李涛, 文炯, 曾希柏, 余德海. 有机物料还田对双季稻田土壤有机碳及其活性组分的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(7): 2373-2380.

DOI

WEI X X, XIONG J F, LI T, WEN J, ZENG X B, YU D H. Effects of different organic amendments on soil organic carbon and its labile fractions in the paddy soil of a double rice cropping system[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020, 31(7): 2373-2380. (in Chinese)

[5]
KRAVCHENKO I, TIKHONOVA E, SEMENOV V M. Temperature sensitivity of litter and soil organic matter decomposition: perspective of soil microbial community structure and function[J]. Elsevier, 2021: 1-43.

[6]
SONG Y, ZHAI J, ZHANG J, QIAO L, XUE S. Forest management practices of Pinus tabulaeformis plantations alter soil organic carbon stability by adjusting microbial characteristics on the Loess Plateau of China[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 2020, 766(12): 144209.

DOI

[7]
YANG G R, TONG C L, ZHANG W J, WU JS. Decomposition of organic matter by soil microorganisms in terrestrial carbon cycling and its influence factors[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2005, 35(4): 605-609.

[8]
MA Q, WEN Y, PAN W, MACDONALD A, JONES D L. Soil carbon, nitrogen, and sulphur status affects the metabolism of organic S but not its uptake by microorganisms[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2020, 149: 107943.

DOI

[9]
NOVOTNY E H, TURETTA A P D, RESENDE M F, REBELLO C M. The quality of soil organic matter, accessed by 13C solid state nuclear magnetic resonance, is just as important as its content concerning pesticide sorption[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2020, 266(Pt 1): 115298.

DOI

[10]
GUAN S, AN N, ZONG N, HE Y T, SHI P L, ZHANG J J, HE N P. Climate warming impacts on soil organic carbon fractions and aggregate stability in a Tibetan alpine meadow[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2018, 116: 224-236.

DOI

[11]
丁雪丽, 韩晓增, 乔云发, 李禄军, 李娜, 宋显军. 农田土壤有机碳固存的主要影响因子及其稳定机制[J]. 土壤通报, 2012, 43(3): 8.

DING X L, HAN X Z, QIAO Y F, LI L J, LI N, SONG X J. Sequestration of organic carbon in cultivated soils: main factors and their stabilization mechanisms[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2012, 43(3): 8. (in Chinese)

[12]
NWACHUKWU B C, AYANGBENRO A S, BABALOLA O O. Elucidating the rhizosphere associated bacteria for environmental sustainability[J]. Agriculture, 2021, 11(1): 75.

DOI

[13]
JIANG R, WANG M, CHEN W, LI X, BALSEIRO- ROMERO M. Changes in the integrated functional stability of microbial community under chemical stresses and the impacting factors in field soils[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2020, 110: 105919.

DOI

[14]
罗达, 刘顺, 史作民, 冯秋红, 刘千里, 张利, 黄泉, 何建社. 川西亚高山不同林龄云杉人工林土壤微生物群落结构[J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(2): 519-527.

DOI

LUO D, LIU S, SHI Z M, FENG Q H, LIU Q L, ZHANG L, HUANG Q, HE J S. Soil microbial community structure in Picea asperata plantations with different ages in subalpine of western Sichuan,Southwest China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017, 28(2): 519-527. (in Chinese)

DOI

[15]
ZHAO F Z, REN C J, ZHANG L, HAN X H, YANG G H, WANG J. Changes in soil microbial community are linked to soil carbon fractions after afforestation[J]. European Journal of Soil Science, 2018, 69(2): 370-379.

DOI

[16]
ZHANG J, SAYER E J, ZHOU J, LI Y W, LI Y X, LI Z A, WANG F M. Long-term fertilization modifies the mineralization of soil organic matter in response to added substrate[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 2021, 798: 149341.

DOI

[17]
DONG N G, HU G L, ZHANG Y Q, QI J X, CHEN Y H, HAO Y B. Effects of green-manure and tillage management on soil microbial community composition, nutrients and tree growth in a walnut orchard[J]. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11(1), DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96472-8.

DOI

[18]
赵建琪, 吴建平, 张慧玲, 熊鑫, 赵梦頔, 褚国伟, 孟泽, 周国逸, 张德强. 增温对南亚热带季风常绿阔叶林土壤微生物群落的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2019, 28(5): 881.

ZHAO J Q, WU J P, ZHANG H L, XIONG X, ZHAO M D, CHU G W, MENG Z, ZHOU G Y, ZHANG D Q. Effects of warming on soil microbial communities of a subtropical monsoon evergreen broad-leaved forest in Southern China[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 28(5): 881-889. (in Chinese)

[19]
WU T T, LIU W J, WANG D G, ZOU Y K, LIN R, YANG Q, GBOKIE J R T, BUGHIO M A, LI Q F, WANG J C. Organic management improves soil phosphorus availability and microbial properties in a tea plantation after land conversion from longan (Dimocarpus longan)[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2020, 154: 103642.

DOI

[20]
王敦刚, 张俏燕, 曹文超, 周广帆, 王进闯. 不同土地利用方式对土壤磷有效性和溶磷细菌群落结构的影响[J]. 热带作物学报, 2021, 42(12): 3646-3654.

WANG D G, ZHANG Q Y, CAO W C, ZHOU G F, WANG J C. Effects of different land use types on soil phosphorous availability and phosphate-solubilizing bacterial community structure[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2021, 42(12): 3646-3654. (in Chinese)

[21]
陈泽军. 丁香罗勒挥发物对山东茶园绿盲蝽和天敌的种群调控评价[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2021.

CHEN Z J. Population regulation of Ocimum gratissimum L. volatile on Apolygus lucorum and natural enemies in tea plantation in Shangdong province[D]. Tai'an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2021. (in Chinese)

[22]
曹佳. 浅谈我国茶叶加工的发展现状、趋势及创新[J]. 福建茶叶, 2021, 43(11): 35-36.

CAO J. Discussion on the development status, trend and innovation of tea processing in China[J]. Tea in Fujian, 2021, 43(11): 35-36. (in Chinese)

[23]
鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.

BAO S D. Agro-chemical analyses of soils[M]. 3rd edition Beijing: Agriculture Press of China, 2000. (in Chinese)

[24]
NDUNG'U M, NGATIA L W, ONWONGA R N, MUCHERU-MUNA M W, NGETICH K F. The influence of organic and inorganic nutrient inputs on soil organic carbon functional groups content and maize yields[J]. Heliyon, 2021, 7(8): e7881.

[25]
GU J Z, WU X Z, ZHUO Y Z. The single-particle spectrum and its spacing and curvature distributions in rotating system[J]. Annual Report of China Institute of Atomic, 1996: 7-8.

[26]
MOHAMMADI K, HEIDARI G, KHALESRO S, SOHRABI Y. Soil management, microorganisms and organic matter interactions: A review[J]. African Journal of Biotechnology, 2011, 10(86): 19840-19849.

[27]
YANG J J, LI A Y, YANG Y F, LI G H, ZHANG F. Soil organic carbon stability under natural and anthropogenic-induced perturbations[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2020, 205: 103199.

DOI

[28]
HUANG Y P, WANG Q Q, ZHANG W J, ZHU P, XIAO Q, WANG C J, WU L, TIAN Y F, XU M G, GUNINA A. Stoichiometric imbalance of soil carbon and nutrients drives microbial community structure under long-term fertilization[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2021, 168: 104119.

DOI

[29]
HU Y J, XIA Y H, SUN Q, LIU K P, CHEN X B, GE T D, ZHU B L, ZHU Z K, ZHANG Z H, SU Y R. Effects of long-term fertilization on phod-harboring bacterial community in Karst soils[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018, 628: 53-63.

[30]
LI C H, LI Y, MA J, WANG Y G, WANG Z F, LIU Y. Microbial community variation and its relationship with soil carbon accumulation during long-term oasis formation[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2021, 168(9): 104126.

DOI

[31]
TIAN S Y, ZHU B J, YIN R, WANG M W, JIANG Y J, ZHANG C Z, LI D M, CHEN X Y, KARDOL P, LIU M Q. Organic fertilization promotes crop productivity through changes in soil aggregation[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2022, 165: 108533.

DOI

[32]
FANG X H, ZHANG J C, MENG M J, GUO X P, WU Y W, LIU X, ZHAO K L, DING L Z, SHAO Y F, FU W J. Forest-type shift and subsequent intensive management affected soil organic carbon and microbial community in southeastern China[J]. European Journal of Forest Research, 2017, 136(4): 689-697.

DOI

[33]
李婷, 王玥, 刘中珊, 刘奇, 徐赫男, 李冲伟. 一株降解纤维素的低温放线菌Streptomyces azureus及产酶条件优化[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(32): 25-33.

LI T, WANG Y, LIU Z S, LIU Q, XU H N, LI C W. A novel low temperature cellulose-degrading strain Streptomyces azureus and its enzymatic production condition optimization[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(32): 25-33. (in Chinese)

[34]
XIA Y, SAHIB M R, AMNA A, OPIYO S O, ZHAO Z Z, GAO Y G. Culturable endophytic fungal communities associated with plants in organic and conventional farming systems and their effects on plant growth[J]. Scientific Reports, 2019, 9(1): 1-10.

DOI

[35]
杨雅丽, 马雪松, 解宏图, 鲍雪莲, 梁超, 朱雪峰, 何红波, 张旭东. 保护性耕作对土壤微生物群落及其介导的碳循环功能的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(8): 10.

YANG Y L, MA X S, XIE H T, BAO X L, LIANG C, ZHU X F, HE H B, ZHANG X D. Effects of conservation tillage on soil microbial community and the function of soil carbon cycling[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2021, 32(8): 10. (in Chinese)

[36]
BOSSIO D A, COOK-PATTON S C, ELLIS P W, FARGIONE J, SANDERMAN J, SMITH P, WOOD S, ZOMER R J, VON UNGER M, EMMER I M, GRISCOM B W. The role of soil carbon in natural climate solutions[J]. Nature Sustainability, 2020, 3(5): 1-8.

DOI

[37]
BAHADORI M, CHEN C, LEWIS S, BOYD S, KUZYAKOV Y. Soil organic matter formation is controlled by the chemistry and bioavailability of organic carbon inputs across different land uses[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 770: 145307.

DOI

[38]
NOVARA A, PULIDO M, RODRIGO-COMINO J, DI PRIMA P, SMITH P, GRISTINA L, GIMENEZ-MORERA A, TEROL E, SALESA D, KEESSTRA S. Long-term organic farming on a citrus plantation results in soil organic carbon recovery[J]. Cuadernos de Investigación Geográfica, 2019, 45(1): 271-286.

DOI

[39]
OLK D C. Improved analytical techniques for carbohydrates, amino compounds, and phenols: tools for understanding soil processes[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2008, 72(6): 1672-1682.

DOI

[40]
GE Z, LI S, BOL R, ZHU P, PENG C, AN T T, CHENG N, LIU X, LI T Y, XU Z Q, WANG J K. Differential long-term fertilization alters residue-derived labile organic carbon fractions and microbial community during straw residue decomposition[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2021, 213: 105120.

DOI

[41]
GUO X P, MENG M J, ZHANG J C, CHEN H Y H. Vegetation change impacts on soil organic carbon chemical composition in subtropical forests[J]. Scientific Reports, 2016, 6: 29607.

DOI

[42]
李欣雨, 夏建国, 鄢广奎, 宋承远, 李琳佳. 名山河流域不同土壤类型和土地利用方式下有机碳的分布特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(3): 224-230.

LI X Y, XIA J G, YAN G K, SONG C Y, LI L J. Distribution of organic carbon under different soil types and utilization patterns in mingshan river watershed[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2017, 31(3): 224-230. (in Chinese)

[43]
DUAN Y, CHEN L, ZHANG J B, LI D M, HAN X R, ZHU B, LI Y, ZHAO B J, HUANG P. Long-term fertilisation reveals close associations between soil organic carbon composition and microbial traits at aggregate scales[J]. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2021, 306: 107169.

DOI

[44]
HUANG R L, ZHANG Z Y, XIAO X, ZHANG N, WANG X Y, YANG Z P, XU K Q, LIANG Y T. Structural changes of soil organic matter and the linkage to rhizosphere bacterial communities with biochar amendment in manure fertilized soils[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 692: 333-343.

DOI

[45]
FERREIRA C D R, NETO E C D S, PEREIRA M G, GUEDES J D N, ROSSET J S, ANJOS L H C D. Dynamics of soil aggregation and organic carbon fractions over 23 years of no-till management[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2020, 198: 104533.

DOI

[46]
HUSSAIN S, SIDDIQUE T, SALEEM M, ARSHAD M, KHALID A. Chapter 5 impact of pesticides on soil microbial diversity, enzymes, and biochemical reactions[J]. Advances in Agronomy, 2009, 102(1): 159-200.

[47]
LIKENS G E. Encyclopedia of inland waters[J]. Academic, 2009: 1-5.

[48]
BONANOMI G, CESARANO G, LOMBARDI N, MOTTI R, SCALA F, MAZZOLENI S, INCERTI G. Litter chemistry explains contrasting feeding preferences of bacteria, fungi, and higher plants[J]. Scientific reports, 2017, 7(1): 1-13.

DOI

[49]
BONANOMI G, FILIPPIS F D, CESARANO G, STORIA A L, ZOTTI M, MAZZOLENI S, INCERITI. Linking bacterial and eukaryotic microbiota to litter chemistry: combining next generation sequencing with 13C CPMAS NMR spectroscopy[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2019, 129: 110-121.

DOI

[50]
HAO X X, HAN X Z, WANG S Y, LI L J. Dynamics and composition of soil organic carbon in response to 15 years of straw return in a Mollisol[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2022, 215: 105221.

DOI

[51]
PISANI O, LIN L H, LUN O O Y, LAJTHA K, NADELHOFFER K J, SIMPSON A J, SIMPSON M J. Long-term doubling of litter inputs accelerates soil organic matter degradation and reduces soil carbon stocks[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2016, 127(1): 1-14.

DOI

[52]
肖健. 长期施肥对土壤亚微米体系中有机碳和矿物的影响机制研究[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2017.

XIAO J. Mechanism study on impact of soil organic carbon and minerals by long-term fertilization application at the submicron scale[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Agricultural University, 2017. (in Chinese)

Outlines

/