呼伦贝尔不同草地类型土壤微生物量及土壤酶活性研究

草业学报 ›› 2010, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (5): 94-102.

呼伦贝尔不同草地类型土壤微生物量及土壤酶活性研究

文都日乐^1,2,李刚²,张静妮²,赖欣²,易津¹,范国艳³,杨殿林^2*

1.内蒙古农业大学农学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010018;
2.农业部环境保护科研监测所,天津 300191;

3.甘肃农业大学草业学院, 甘肃兰州 730070

收稿日期:2010-04-23 出版日期:2010-05-25 发布日期:2010-10-20
作者简介:文都日乐(1985-),女,蒙古族,内蒙古赤峰人,在读博士。E-mail:wendurle@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(30770367),中国农业科学院院长基金和中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项资金(农业部环境保护科研监测所)资助。

The study of soil microbial biomass and soil enzyme avtivity on different grassland in Hulunbeier, Inner Mongolia

WENDU Ri-le^1,2, LI Gang², ZHANG Jing-ni², LAI Xin², YI Jin¹, FAN Guo-yan³, YANG Dian-lin²

1.Agricultural College, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010018, China;

2.Agro-Environmental Protection Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Tianjin 300191,
China;
3.College of Pratacultural Science, Gansu Agricultural
University, Lanzhou 730070, China

Received:2010-04-23 Online:2010-05-25 Published:2010-10-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以呼伦贝尔5种不同草地类型(线叶菊草原、贝加尔针茅草原、羊草草原、大针茅草原、克氏针茅草原)为研究对象,分析了不同草地类型土壤理化性状、土壤微生物数量、土壤微生物量、土壤酶活性的变化特征及其相互关系。研究表明,各类菌群数量分布在5种草地中均为细菌>放线菌>真菌,但不同菌群数量及区系组成在各草地类型间均存在显著差异(P<0.05)。细菌数量在5种草地中依次为:羊草>贝加尔针茅>克氏针茅>线叶菊>大针茅,真菌数量依次为:线叶菊>克氏针茅>羊草>贝加尔针茅>大针茅,放线菌数量依次为:克氏针茅>羊草>线叶菊>贝加尔针茅>大针茅。土壤微生物量碳、氮(SMBC、SMBN)在不同草地类型间差异显著(P<0.05),线叶菊草原土壤微生物量碳、氮均显著高于其他草地类型(P<0.05),其中大针茅草原、羊草草原土壤微生物量碳、氮均较低。研究还表明,各草地类型土壤酶活性的垂直分布均表现为表层土壤(0~10cm)酶活性大于下层土壤(10~20cm)酶活性,不同草地类型间土壤酶活性亦存在显著差异(P<0.05),线叶菊草原土壤过氧化氢酶和转化酶活性均显著高于贝加尔针茅草原和大针茅草原;土壤脲酶活性以克氏针茅草原最高,且与线叶菊草原、贝加尔针茅草原和大针茅草原差异显著;而土壤磷酸酶活性则为羊草草原显著高于其他样地。相关分析结果表明,不同草地类型土壤微生物数量、土壤微生物量、土壤酶活性、土壤理化性状之间均存在相关性,从回归分析得出的2个方程可知,土壤微生物量碳随着土壤含水量、细菌数量的增加而增加,随着土壤磷酸酶活性的增加而降低;土壤微生物量氮则随着土壤过氧化氢酶活性的增加而增加,而随着土壤磷酸酶活性与土壤容重的增加而降低。

Abstract: In this study, 5 different types of grassland (Filifolium sibiricum steppe, Stipa baicalensis steppe, Leymus chinensis steppe, Stipa grandis steppe, Stipa kryrowi steppe) in Hulunbeier were selected as the research object to analyze the variation of the soil physicochemical characteristics, soil microorganism, soil microbial biomass, soil enzyme activity and the inter-relationship among them. The results showed that the number of microorganisms in different types of grassland were in the same changing trends: bacteria>actinomycetes>fungi, but the number of each microorganism and composition reduced significantly (P<0.05). The bacteria number in 5 different types of glasslands was L. chinensis steppe>S. baicalensis steppe>S. kryrowi steppe>F. sibiricum steppe>S. grandis steppe, the fungi number was S. kryrowi steppe>L. chinensis steppe>F. sibiricum steppe>S. baicalensis steppe>S. grandis steppe, the actinomycetes number was F. sibiricum steppe>S. kryrowi steppe>L. chinensis steppe>S. baicalensis steppe>S. grandis steppe. Soil microbial biomass C, N (SMBC, SMBN) reduced significantly (P<0.05) in different grasslands. The microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen in F. sibiricum steppe soil were significantly higher than others (P<0.05), soil microbial biomass C and N in S. grandis steppe and L. chinensis steppe were lower. Results also showed that soil activitiey reduced significantly (P<0.05) in different grasslands with 0-10 cm higher than 0-20 cm in the vertical distribution. Soil activitoes of catalase and invertase activities of F. sibiricum steppe were significantliy higher than S. grandis steppe, S. baicalensis steppe; Soil urease activity of S. kryrowi steppe was the highest and significantly different from S. grandis steppe, F. sibiricum steppe, soil phosphatase activity in L. chinensis steppe was the highest and significantly different from others. Correlation analysis indicated that soil microbe quantity, soil microbial biomass, soil enzyme activity and soil physicochemical characteristics in different grasslands had different degrees of correlation. The regression formula indicated that soil microbial biomass C increased with soil moisture, bacteria quantity but decreased with soil phosphatase activity; soil microbial biomass N increased with soil hydrogen peroxidase activities, but decreased with soil phosphatase activity and soil bulk.

中图分类号:

文都日乐,李刚,张静妮,赖欣,易津,范国艳,杨殿林. 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.

WENDU Ri-le, LI Gang, ZHANG Jing-ni, LAI Xin, YI Jin, FAN Guo-yan, YANG Dian-lin. The study of soil microbial biomass and soil enzyme avtivity on different grassland in Hulunbeier, Inner Mongolia[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2010, 19(5): 94-102.

参考文献

[1] 杨殿林, 蒋景纯.呼伦贝尔草地产草量和营养物质含量动态研究[J]. 中国草地, 1993, 2: 32-35.
[2] 杨殿林, 张明, 胡其图, 等. 呼伦贝尔四个主要草地类型生物量动态的研究[J]. 草业科学, 2004, 3: 12-16.
[3] 任继周. 草原文化是华夏文化的活泼元素[J]. 草业学报, 2010, 19(1): 1-5.
[4] Clark F E, Pawl E A. The microflora of grassland[J]. Advances in Agronomy, 1970, (22): 375-435.
[5] 罗明, 邱沃. 新疆平原荒漠盐渍草地土壤微生物生态分布的研究[J]. 中国草地, 1995, (5): 29-30.
[6] 俞慎, 李勇, 王俊华, 等. 土壤微生物生物量作为红壤质量生物指标的探讨[J]. 土壤学报, 1999, 36(3): 413-422.
[7] 杨成德, 龙瑞军, 陈秀蓉, 等. 东祁连山高寒草甸土壤微生物量及其与土壤物理因子相关特征[J]. 草业学报, 2007, 16(4): 62-68.
[8] Jennifer L K, Lee A B, Miranda H. Methods of studying soil microbial diversity[J]. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 2004, 58(2): 169-188.
[9] Donald R Z, Willame H, David C W. Plant diversity, soil microbial communities, and ecosystem function: Are there any links[J]. Ecology, 2003, 84(8): 2042-2050.
[10] 何振立. 土壤微生物量及其在养分循环和环境质量评价中的意义[J]. 土壤, 1997, 29(2): 837-842.
[11] 关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1986: 296-339.
[12] 万忠梅, 吴景贵. 土壤酶活性影响因子研究进展[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2005, 33(6): 87-92.
[13] 杜伟文, 欧阳中万. 土壤酶研究进展[J]. 湖南林业科技, 2005, 32(5): 76-82.
[14] Brookes P C, Landman A, Pruden G, et al. Chloroform fumigation and the release of soil nitrogen: A rapid direct extraction method to measure microbial biomass in soil[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 1985, 17: 837-842.
[15] Powl son D S. Brookes P C, Christensen B. Measurement of soil microbial biomass provides an early indication of changes in total soil organic matter due to straw in corporation[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 1987, 19: 159-164.
[16] Ni J, Zhang X S. Climate variability, ecological gradient and the Northeast China Transect(NECT)[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,2000, 46: 313-315.
[17] 许光辉, 郑洪元. 土壤微生物分析方法手册[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1986: 255-258.
[18] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000: 30-83.
[19] Vance E D, Brookes P C, Jenkinson D S. An extraction method formeasuring soil microbial biomass C[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 1987, 19(6): 703-707.
[20] Grayston S J, Prescott C E. Microbial communities in forest floors under four tree species in coastal British Columbia[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2005, 37(6): 1157-1167.
[21] Warder D A. A comparative assessment of factors which influence microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen levels in soil[J]. Biological Reviews, 1992, 67: 321-358.
[22] 王启兰, 王长庭, 杜岩功, 等. 放牧对高寒蒿草草甸土壤微生物量碳的影响及其与土壤环境的关系[J]. 草业学报, 2008, 17(2): 39-46.
[23] Bardgett R D, Cook R. Functional aspects of soil animal diversity in agriculture grasslands[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 1998, 10: 263-276.
[24] 张成霞, 南志标. 放牧对草地土壤微生物影响的研究述评[J]. 草业科学, 2010, 27(1): 65-70.
[25] 王延平, 张文婷, 来航线, 等. 黄土高原不同植被坡地土壤微生物区系特征[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(9): 4229-4243.
[26] 章家恩, 刘文高, 胡刚. 不同土地利用方式下土壤微生物数量与土壤肥力的关系[J]. 土壤与环境, 2002, 11(2): 140-143.
[27] 顾爱星, 范燕敏, 武红旗, 等. 天山北坡退化草地土壤环境与微生物数量的关系[J]. 草业学报, 2010, 19(2): 116-123.
[28] 邵玉琴, 敖晓兰, 宋国宝, 等. 皇甫川流域退化草地和恢复草地土壤微生物生物量的研究[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005, 24(5): 578-580.
[29] 王光华, 金剑, 韩晓增, 等. 不同土地管理方式对黑土土壤微生物量碳和酶活性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2007, 18(6): 1275-1280.
[30] 焦婷, 常根柱, 周学辉, 等. 高寒草甸草场不同载畜量下土壤酶与土壤肥力的关系[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(6): 98-104.
[31] 侯彦会, 周学辉, 焦婷, 等. 甘肃永昌县放牧草地土壤脲酶活性与土壤肥力的关系初探[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(4): 111-116.
[32] 王启兰, 曹广民, 王长庭. 高寒草甸不同植被土壤微生物数量及微生物生物量的特征[J]. 生态学杂志, 2007, 26(7): 1002-1008.
[33] 艾娜. 不同处理土壤微生物量对氮素的固持及其调控研究[D]. 陕西: 西北农林科技大学, 2008.
[34] 靳正忠, 雷家强, 徐新文, 等. 塔里木沙漠公路防护林土壤微生物生物量与土壤环境因子的关系[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(1): 51-57.
[35] 蔡晓布, 钱成, 张永清. 退化高寒草原土壤生物学性质的变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 2007, 18(8): 1733-1738.
[36] 王长庭, 龙瑞军, 王启兰, 等. 放牧绕定下高寒草甸植物多样性、生产力对土壤养分条件变化的响应[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(9): 4144-4153.