Soil physical and chemical properties under four typical shrubs found on the Northern and Southern Mountains of Lanzhou City， Northwest China

doi:10.11686/cyxb2020349

Abstract

Abstract:

This research was conducted on the Northern and Southern Mountains located in Lanzhou City and evaluated soil physical and chemical properties of the 0-80 cm soil layers under four common shrub species to provide a theoretical basis for shrub species selection in the future construction of artificial shrub communities. The four shrub species studied were Caragana rosea， Tamarixchinensis， Reaumuria songarica and Platycladus orientalis cv. sieboldii based on field sampling and laboratory tests. It was found that： 1） The soil bulk density and other physical properties including soil water holding capacity， soil porosity and soil infiltration were markedly better under C. rosea than under the other three shrub species. The soil pH ranged from 7.63 to 8.19. Levels of soil organic matter， total nitrogen and mineral nitrogen under C. rosea were higher than those under the other shrubs studied. Soil phosphorus and potassium showed different patterns for the different shrub species. 2） The bulk density was increased with increase in soil depth over the 0-80 cm soil layers， while the soil water holding capacity， total porosity， capillary porosity and soil penetrability decreased with increase in soil depth. Levels of soil organic matter， total nitrogen， mineral nitrogen， total phosphorus， available phosphorus and available potassium decreased with increase in soil depth in the 0-80 cm soil layers， but there were no significant differences in soil pH and total potassium with soil depth. 3） Correlation analysis of soil physical and chemical properties indicated significant positive correlations between soil organic matter and soil total nitrogen， water holding capacity， total porosity， capillary porosity， but a significant negative correlation with soil bulk density. Soil bulk density was significantly negatively correlated with soil water holding capacity， total porosity and capillary porosity. The results showed that C. rosea is more effective in improving soil physical and chemical properties， increasing soil water holding capacity and soil permeability than the other three species tested. Therefore， it is suggested that C. rosea shrubs should be the main species used in restoration planting to conserve water and soil in this area in the future.

Key words: soil physical properties, soil chemical properties, shrubs, Northern and Southern mountain in Lanzhou City

Xiao-e LIU, Shi-ping SU, Yi LI. Soil physical and chemical properties under four typical shrubs found on the Northern and Southern Mountains of Lanzhou City， Northwest China[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(6): 28-39.

Figures/Tables 9

References 39

1	Andrews S， Ditzler C A， Andrews S S. Soil quality： Why and how. Geoderma， 2003， 114（3/4）： 145-156.
2	Chang H T， Zhao J， Liu J N， et al. Changes in soil physico-chemical properties and related fractal features during conversion of cropland into agroforestry and grassland： A case study of desertified steppe in Ningxia. Acta Prataculturae Sinica， 2019， 28（7）： 14-25.
	常海涛，赵娟，刘佳楠，等. 退耕还林与还草对土壤理化性质及分形特征的影响-以宁夏荒漠草原为例. 草业学报， 2019， 28（7）： 14-25
3	Bao H S G W， Zhang W， En H， et al. Soil chemical properties of salix shrubs of different ages in Horgin Sandy Land. Forest Resources Management， 2016（6）： 130-136.
	包哈森高娃，张文，恩和，等. 科尔沁沙地不同林龄黄柳灌丛土壤化学性质差异. 森林资源管理， 2016（6）： 130-136.
4	Zhu Y X， Meng J H. On the comparion of soil physical characteristics of Cunninghamia lanceolata plantation amongst different age classes. Hebei Journal of Forestry and Orchard Research， 2015， 30（2）： 103-107.
	朱艺旋，孟京辉. 不同发育阶段杉木人工林土壤物理性质对比分析. 河北林果研究， 2015， 30（2）： 103-107.
5	Wang Q， Zhang Z Y， Xu X N. Soil properties and water conservation function of different forest types in Dabieshan District， Anhui. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation， 2003， 17（3）： 59-62.
	王勤，张宗应，徐小牛. 安徽大别山库区不同林分类型的土壤特性及其水源涵养功能. 水土保持学报， 2003， 17（3）： 59-62.
6	Zhang J， Liu G B， Xu M X， et al. Soil physical properties of vegetation secondary succession on early shrub stage in Loess Hill Gully. Research of Soil and Water Conservation， 2008， 15（4）： 105-108， 113.
	张健，刘国彬，许明祥，等. 黄土丘陵区植被次生演替灌木初期土壤物理性质特征. 水土保持研究， 2008， 15（4）： 105-108， 113.
7	Natalia V L， Elena V T， Maria A D. Associations between forest vegetation and the fertility of soil organic horizons in Northwestern Russia. Forest Ecosystems， 2019， 6（34）： 1-19.
8	Xu J F， Ma H M， Zhang J Q， et al. The flora characteristic of seed plants in the Southern and Northern Mountains of Lanzhou. Pratacultural Science， 2016， 33（3）： 408-423.
	许金凤，马红梅，张建全，等. 兰州南北两山种子植物区系. 草业科学， 2016， 33（3）： 408-423.
9	Zhao K C， Qu L B. Strategy of vegetation restoration in Lanzhou north-south mountains. Journal of Desert Research， 2006， 26（3）： 493-497.
	赵克昌，屈连宝. 兰州南北两山植被恢复策略. 中国沙漠， 2006， 26（3）： 493-497.
10	Dou X D. Hazard evaluation and control scheme of Daqinggou debris flow disasters in Anning District of Lanzhou. Resource Information and Engineering， 2020， 35（1）： 110-112.
	窦晓东. 兰州市安宁区大青沟泥石流灾害危害性评价及治理方案. 资源信息与工程， 2020， 35（1）： 110-112.
11	Yao B G. Distribution of geological hazards and their control in Lanzhou. Gansu Ecology， 2007， 16（1）： 71-75.
	姚宝贵. 兰州市市区地质灾害分布与防治建议. 甘肃地质， 2007， 16（1）： 71-75.
12	Wu Q L. The applicability analysis of massive artificial forestation in Lanzhou south-north hills. Research of Soil and Water Conservation， 2003， 10（3）： 134-136.
	吴庆龙. 兰州南北两山绿化造林工程的适宜性分析. 水土保持研究， 2003， 10（3）： 134-136.
13	Li L J， Jiang Z R， Li Z P， et al. Comprehensive evaluation on drought-resistance of three tree species and the choice of drought resistance indexes. Research of Soil and Water Conservation， 2006， 13（6）： 253-259.
	李禄军，蒋志荣，李正平，等. 3树种抗旱性的综合评价及其抗旱指标的选取. 水土保持研究， 2006， 13（6）： 253-259.
14	Jiang Z R， Liang X T， Zhu G， et al. Responses of main physiological indexes of four tree species to simulating water stress. Journal of Desert Research， 2009， 29（3）： 485-492.
	蒋志荣，梁旭婷，朱恭，等. 4树种主要生理指标对模拟水分胁迫的响应. 中国沙漠， 2009， 29（3）： 485-492.
15	Zhou Z H， Li Y， Jiao J. Quantity dynamics of Reaumuria soongorica populations from different habitats in the south-north hills in Lanzhou. Journal of Natural Resources， 2011， 26（10）： 1726-1737.
	周资行，李毅，焦健. 兰州市南北两山不同生境红砂种群数量动态研究. 自然资源学报， 2011， 26（10）： 1726-1737.
16	Zhong F， Zhao J， Sun R G， et al. Spatial distribution of soil nutrients and soil microbes in five arbore-bushe-grass lands at the south-north hills in Lanzhou， China. Acta Prataculturae Sinica， 2010， 19（3）： 94-101.
	钟芳，赵瑾，孙荣高，等. 兰州南北两山五类乔灌木林草地土壤养分与土壤微生物空间分布研究. 草业学报， 2010， 19（3）： 94-101.
17	Chen X H， Duan Z H， Song Y X， et al. Soil water dynamic in planted shrubs in Southern and Northern Mountains of Lanzhou city. Journal of Desert Research， 2006， 26（4）： 532-535.
	陈小红，段争虎，宋耀选，等. 兰州市南北两山人工灌木林地土壤水分动态. 中国沙漠， 2006， 26（4）： 532-535.
18	Liu M X， Li R， Zhang C， et al. Seasonal characteristics and influencing factors of soil microbial in Nanshan， Lanzhou. China Environmental Science， 2018， 38（7）： 2722-2730.
	刘旻霞，李瑞，张灿，等. 兰州市南山季节性土壤微生物特征及影响因素. 中国环境科学， 2018， 38（7）： 2722-2730.
19	Jing Y. A brief analysis of the characteristics and utilization of climatic resources and natural resources in Lanzhou City. Agricultural Technology and Information， 2015（16）： 40-42.
	景阳. 浅析兰州市气候资源与自然资源的特点和利用. 农业科技与信息， 2015（16）： 40-42.
20	Wu L Y， Su S P， Wang H. Preliminary investigation into plant and vegetation types in afforestation region in Southern and Northern Mountains of Lanzhou City. Journal of Desert Research， 2006， 26（4）： 564-568.
	武利玉，苏世平，王蕙. 兰州南北两山绿化区植物与植被类型初查. 中国沙漠， 2006， 26（4）： 564-568.
21	Zhang W R， Xu B T. Study method of forest soil. Beijing： China Forestry Publishing Press， 1986： 1-45.
	张万儒，许本彤. 森林土壤定位研究方法. 北京：中国林业出版社， 1986： 1-45.
22	Lu R K. Analysis methods of soil agricultural chemistry. Beijing： China Agricultural Science and Technology Press， 1999： 474-490.
	鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法. 北京：中国农业科技出版社， 1999： 474-490.
23	Xiong Y， Li Q K. Chinese soil （Second Edition）.Beijing： Science Press， 1990： 433-443.
	熊毅，李庆逵. 中国土壤（第二版）. 北京：科学出版社， 1990： 433-443.
24	Li D S， Zhang P， Zhang S L， et al. A study on water conservation capacity of forest soil in Huangqian reservoir area. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University （Natural Sciences Edition）， 2004， 28（1）： 25-27.
	李德生，张萍，张水龙，等. 黄前库区森林土壤蓄水能力研究. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）， 2004， 28（1）： 25-27.
25	Guo J F， Yang Y S， Chen G S， et al. A review on litter decomposition in forest ecosystem. Scientia Silvae Sinicae， 2006， 42（4）： 93-100.
	郭剑芬，杨玉盛，陈光水，等. 森林凋落物分解研究进展. 林业科学， 2006， 42（4）： 93-100.
26	Yu H X， Wang J Y， Wan F H， et al. Research progress on effects of plant litter on the decomposition of soil organic matter. Journal of Biosafety， 2018， 27（2）： 88-94.
	余涵霞，王家宜，万方浩，等. 植物凋落物影响土壤有机质分解的研究进展. 生物安全学报，2018， 27（2）： 88-94.
27	Cao G D， Chen J H， Xia J， et al. Analysis of soil physical properties under different vegetation types in the alluvial fan area of Manas River watershed. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2013， 33（1）： 195-204.
	曹国栋，陈接华，夏军，等. 玛纳斯河流域扇缘带不同植被类型下土壤物理性质. 生态学报， 2013， 33（1）： 195-204.
28	Fan B， Lin L， Cao G M， et al. Relationship between plant rools and physical soil properties in alpine meadows at different degradation stages. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2020， 40（7）： 2300-2309.
	樊博，林丽，曹广民，等. 不同演替状态下高寒草甸土壤物理性质与植物根系的相互关系. 生态学报， 2020， 40（7）： 2300-2309.
29	Wei Q， Ling L， Chai C S， et al. Soil physical and chemical properties in forest succession process in Xinglong Mountain of Gansu. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2012， 32（15）： 4700-4713.
	魏强，凌雷，柴春山，等. 甘肃兴隆山森林演替过程中的土壤理化性质. 生态学报， 2012， 32（15）： 4700-4713.
30	Xia L D， Cao S， Zhang H， et al. Effect of biochar on phosphorus forms and phosphatase activity in red soil under different water conditions. Journal of Agro-Environment Science， 2019， 38（5）： 1101-1111.
	夏丽丹，曹升，张虹，等. 不同水分条件下生物炭对红壤磷素形态及磷酸酶活性的影响. 农业环境科学学报， 2019， 38（5）： 1101-1111.
31	Lv G， Wu X Y. Review on influential factors of soil infiltration characteristics. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin， 2008， 24（7）： 494-499.
	吕刚，吴祥云. 土壤入渗特性影响因素研究综述. 中国农学通报， 2008， 24（7）： 494-499.
32	Zhao Y Y， Wang Y J， Wang Y Q， et al. Effects of structures of plantation forests on soil infiltration characteristics in source water protect areas in Northern Chongqing City. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2010， 30（15）： 4162-4172.
	赵洋毅，王玉杰，王云琦，等. 渝北水源区水源涵养林构建模式对土壤渗透性的影响. 生态学报， 2010， 30（15）： 4162-4172.
33	Liu X， Zhang G C， Li X L， et al. Characteristics of soil infiltration and water-holding of different forest vegetation in ecological rehabilitation of small watershed. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation， 2004， 18（6）： 1-5.
	刘霞，张光灿，李雪蕾，等. 小流域生态修复过程中不同森林植被土壤入渗与贮水特征. 水土保持学报， 2004， 18（6）： 1-5.
34	Fu Y B， Wang X C， Chen X， et al. Distribution of soil pH and its relationships with soil nutrients in Bijie tobacco-growing area. Soils， 2013， 45（1）： 46-51.
	符云鹏，王小翠，陈雪，等. 毕节烟区土壤pH值分布状况及与土壤养分的关系. 土壤， 2013， 45（1）： 46-51.
35	Paul K I， Black A S， Conyers M K. Effect of plant residue return on the development of surface soil pH gradients. Biology and Fertility of Soils， 2011， 33（1）： 75-82.
36	Wang W W， Hu Z H. Resource of symbiotic nitrogen fixation of legumes in Alashan Desert. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation， 2001， 21（5）： 30-33.
	王卫卫，胡正海. 阿拉善荒漠区豆科植物共生固氮资源初步研究. 水土保持通报， 2001， 21（5）： 30-33.
37	Rong Q Q， Liu J T， Xia J B， et al. Leaf N and P stoichiometry of Tamarix chinensis L. in Laizhou Bay wetland， Shandong Province of East China. Chinese Journal of Ecology， 2012， 31（12）： 3032-3037.
	荣戗戗，刘京涛，夏江宝，等. 莱州湾湿地柽柳叶片N、P 生态化学计量学特征. 生态学杂志， 2012， 31（12）： 3032-3037.
38	Feng H Y， Du M Y， Xin X B， et al. Seasonal variation in C， N， and P stoichiometry of Platycladus orientalis plantation in the rocky mountainous areas of North China. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2019， 39（5）： 1572-1582.
	封焕英，杜满义，辛学兵，等. 华北石质山地侧柏人工林C、N、P生态化学计量特征的季节变化. 生态学报， 2019， 39（5）： 1572-1582.
39	Liu X， Peng D L， Qiu X C. Differences in soil physicochemical properties between different forest types of Larix principis-rupprechtii. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology， 2018， 24（4）： 735-743.
	刘欣，彭道黎，邱新彩. 华北落叶松不同林型土壤理化性质差异. 应用与环境生物学报， 2018， 24（4）： 735-743.

灌丛类型 Shrub types	盖度 Coverage (%)	海拔 Altitude (m)	林龄 Age (Year)	平均树高 Mean height (m)	林分密度 Stand density (Tree·hm^-2)	土壤类型 Soil type
千头柏P.orientalis cv. sieboldii (PO)	85	1813	30	6.02	2977	灰钙土Sierozem
红砂R. songarica (RS)	/	1801	25	0.25	3500	灰钙土Sierozem
红花锦鸡儿C. rosea (CR)	95	1920	30	0.75	45000	灰钙土Sierozem
柽柳T. chinensis (TC)	55	1825	30	2.28	3600	灰钙土Sierozem

灌丛类型 Shrub types	盖度 Coverage (%)	海拔 Altitude (m)	林龄 Age (Year)	平均树高 Mean height (m)	林分密度 Stand density (Tree·hm^-2)	土壤类型 Soil type
千头柏P.orientalis cv. sieboldii (PO)	85	1813	30	6.02	2977	灰钙土Sierozem
红砂R. songarica (RS)	/	1801	25	0.25	3500	灰钙土Sierozem
红花锦鸡儿C. rosea (CR)	95	1920	30	0.75	45000	灰钙土Sierozem
柽柳T. chinensis (TC)	55	1825	30	2.28	3600	灰钙土Sierozem

灌丛类型 Shrub type	土层厚度 Soil layer (cm)	土壤容重 Bulk density (g·cm^-3)	最大持水量 Maximum water capacity (%)	毛管持水量 Capillary water capacity (%)	田间持水量 Field water capacity (%)	毛管孔隙度 Capillary porosity (%)	非毛管孔隙度 Non-capillary porosity (%)	总孔隙度 Total porosity (%)	自然水分含量 Nature moisture content (%)
CR	0~20	0.98±0.02b	57.49±2.27a	49.67±2.06a	40.98±1.77a	48.65±1.33b	12.94±0.88a	61.59±0.47a	9.30±0.18a
	20~40	1.14±0.00a	54.48±0.38ab	48.53±0.65a	39.86±2.36a	55.24±0.74a	1.15±0.75b	56.39±0.04b	8.85±0.44ab
	40~60	1.10±0.01a	51.92±0.23b	48.68±0.30a	40.20±1.31a	53.45±0.85a	4.28±1.29b	57.73±0.46b	8.06±0.24bc
	60~80	1.10±0.03a	51.91±1.55b	48.83±1.10a	41.79±1.50a	53.75±1.07a	3.84±1.90b	57.59±1.06b	6.98±0.47c
TC	0~20	1.29±0.03b	39.42±1.30a	36.99±1.24a	28.30±1.88a	47.76±0.53a	3.51±0.49ab	51.27±0.99a	7.23±0.52a
	20~40	1.39±0.02a	37.92±1.82a	33.89±0.35a	26.98±1.61a	46.93±0.33a	1.31±0.87b	48.24±0.61b	6.65±0.16ab
	40~60	1.43±0.01a	32.13±1.11b	28.97±0.29b	20.14±0.69b	41.45±0.44b	5.30±0.57a	46.75±0.23b	5.59±0.41b
	60~80	1.30±0.03b	38.33±1.40c	35.55±1.42a	24.26±0.80a	46.29±1.23a	4.64±1.28a	50.93±0.92a	5.86±0.44ab
RS	0~20	1.09±0.03b	52.95±2.21a	45.03±1.53a	37.03±1.59a	48.90±1.27a	9.16±1.88a	58.06±1.11a	6.00±0.13a
	20~40	1.16±0.01b	47.24±1.62b	44.18±1.52a	33.95±3.64ab	51.08±1.25a	4.69±0.85b	55.77±0.40a	4.91±0.46b
	40~60	1.17±0.01b	46.67±0.89b	43.62±1.10a	32.30±0.86ab	50.79±0.95a	4.72±0.72b	55.51±0.27a	3.73±0.32c
	60~80	1.29±0.03a	40.45±1.61c	38.06±1.88b	29.41±0.82b	49.04±1.33a	2.30±0.42b	51.34±0.96b	4.30±0.26bc
PO	0~20	1.24±0.03c	50.70±1.81a	37.85±1.71a	31.83±1.39a	46.67±0.90a	6.49±0.24a	53.16±1.07a	7.38±0.41a
	20~40	1.30±0.06bc	42.57±1.69b	35.67±2.45ab	26.84±1.93b	45.92±1.18ab	5.29±0.68a	51.21±1.86ab	6.27±0.56a
	40~60	1.42±0.05ab	36.74±0.57c	29.53±2.59bc	23.33±0.63bc	41.79±2.09bc	5.17±0.68a	46.96±1.67bc	6.17±0.54a
	60~80	1.48±0.04a	34.34±2.34c	27.38±1.38c	21.60±0.62c	40.34±0.90c	4.87±0.62a	45.21±1.37c	4.01±0.97b
土层 Soil layer	0~20	1.15±0.01a	50.14±0.19a	42.38±1.02a	34.54±0.31a	48.00±0.61ab	8.03±0.25a	56.03±0.39a	7.48±0.64a
	20~40	1.25±0.01b	45.55±0.41b	40.57±0.52ab	31.91±1.22b	49.79±0.46a	3.11±0.35c	52.90±0.26b	6.67±0.14b
	40~60	1.28±0.02b	41.87±0.39c	37.70±0.78b	28.99±0.20c	46.87±0.60b	4.87±0.23b	51.74±0.49b	5.89±0.31bc
	60~80	1.29±0.04b	41.26±1.56c	37.46±1.30b	29.27±0.31c	47.36±0.95b	3.91±0.40bc	51.27±0.77b	5.29±0.34c
CR	0~80	1.08±0.01c	53.95±0.77a	48.93±0.75a	40.71±0.42a	52.77±0.77a	5.55±0.88a	58.32±0.28a	8.30±0.10a
TC	0~80	1.35±0.01a	36.95±0.52d	33.85±0.20c	24.92±1.02c	45.61±0.39c	3.69±0.55a	49.30±0.17c	6.33±0.16b
RS	0~80	1.17±0.01b	46.82±0.51b	42.72±0.34b	33.17±0.96b	49.96±0.27b	5.22±0.63a	55.18±0.43b	4.74±0.23c
PO	0~80	1.36±0.03a	41.08±0.84c	32.61±1.50c	25.90±0.25c	43.68±1.03c	5.46±0.35a	49.14±1.11c	5.96±0.08b

灌丛类型 Shrub type	土层厚度 Soil layer (cm)	土壤容重 Bulk density (g·cm^-3)	最大持水量 Maximum water capacity (%)	毛管持水量 Capillary water capacity (%)	田间持水量 Field water capacity (%)	毛管孔隙度 Capillary porosity (%)	非毛管孔隙度 Non-capillary porosity (%)	总孔隙度 Total porosity (%)	自然水分含量 Nature moisture content (%)
CR	0~20	0.98±0.02b	57.49±2.27a	49.67±2.06a	40.98±1.77a	48.65±1.33b	12.94±0.88a	61.59±0.47a	9.30±0.18a
	20~40	1.14±0.00a	54.48±0.38ab	48.53±0.65a	39.86±2.36a	55.24±0.74a	1.15±0.75b	56.39±0.04b	8.85±0.44ab
	40~60	1.10±0.01a	51.92±0.23b	48.68±0.30a	40.20±1.31a	53.45±0.85a	4.28±1.29b	57.73±0.46b	8.06±0.24bc
	60~80	1.10±0.03a	51.91±1.55b	48.83±1.10a	41.79±1.50a	53.75±1.07a	3.84±1.90b	57.59±1.06b	6.98±0.47c
TC	0~20	1.29±0.03b	39.42±1.30a	36.99±1.24a	28.30±1.88a	47.76±0.53a	3.51±0.49ab	51.27±0.99a	7.23±0.52a
	20~40	1.39±0.02a	37.92±1.82a	33.89±0.35a	26.98±1.61a	46.93±0.33a	1.31±0.87b	48.24±0.61b	6.65±0.16ab
	40~60	1.43±0.01a	32.13±1.11b	28.97±0.29b	20.14±0.69b	41.45±0.44b	5.30±0.57a	46.75±0.23b	5.59±0.41b
	60~80	1.30±0.03b	38.33±1.40c	35.55±1.42a	24.26±0.80a	46.29±1.23a	4.64±1.28a	50.93±0.92a	5.86±0.44ab
RS	0~20	1.09±0.03b	52.95±2.21a	45.03±1.53a	37.03±1.59a	48.90±1.27a	9.16±1.88a	58.06±1.11a	6.00±0.13a
	20~40	1.16±0.01b	47.24±1.62b	44.18±1.52a	33.95±3.64ab	51.08±1.25a	4.69±0.85b	55.77±0.40a	4.91±0.46b
	40~60	1.17±0.01b	46.67±0.89b	43.62±1.10a	32.30±0.86ab	50.79±0.95a	4.72±0.72b	55.51±0.27a	3.73±0.32c
	60~80	1.29±0.03a	40.45±1.61c	38.06±1.88b	29.41±0.82b	49.04±1.33a	2.30±0.42b	51.34±0.96b	4.30±0.26bc
PO	0~20	1.24±0.03c	50.70±1.81a	37.85±1.71a	31.83±1.39a	46.67±0.90a	6.49±0.24a	53.16±1.07a	7.38±0.41a
	20~40	1.30±0.06bc	42.57±1.69b	35.67±2.45ab	26.84±1.93b	45.92±1.18ab	5.29±0.68a	51.21±1.86ab	6.27±0.56a
	40~60	1.42±0.05ab	36.74±0.57c	29.53±2.59bc	23.33±0.63bc	41.79±2.09bc	5.17±0.68a	46.96±1.67bc	6.17±0.54a
	60~80	1.48±0.04a	34.34±2.34c	27.38±1.38c	21.60±0.62c	40.34±0.90c	4.87±0.62a	45.21±1.37c	4.01±0.97b
土层 Soil layer	0~20	1.15±0.01a	50.14±0.19a	42.38±1.02a	34.54±0.31a	48.00±0.61ab	8.03±0.25a	56.03±0.39a	7.48±0.64a
	20~40	1.25±0.01b	45.55±0.41b	40.57±0.52ab	31.91±1.22b	49.79±0.46a	3.11±0.35c	52.90±0.26b	6.67±0.14b
	40~60	1.28±0.02b	41.87±0.39c	37.70±0.78b	28.99±0.20c	46.87±0.60b	4.87±0.23b	51.74±0.49b	5.89±0.31bc
	60~80	1.29±0.04b	41.26±1.56c	37.46±1.30b	29.27±0.31c	47.36±0.95b	3.91±0.40bc	51.27±0.77b	5.29±0.34c
CR	0~80	1.08±0.01c	53.95±0.77a	48.93±0.75a	40.71±0.42a	52.77±0.77a	5.55±0.88a	58.32±0.28a	8.30±0.10a
TC	0~80	1.35±0.01a	36.95±0.52d	33.85±0.20c	24.92±1.02c	45.61±0.39c	3.69±0.55a	49.30±0.17c	6.33±0.16b
RS	0~80	1.17±0.01b	46.82±0.51b	42.72±0.34b	33.17±0.96b	49.96±0.27b	5.22±0.63a	55.18±0.43b	4.74±0.23c
PO	0~80	1.36±0.03a	41.08±0.84c	32.61±1.50c	25.90±0.25c	43.68±1.03c	5.46±0.35a	49.14±1.11c	5.96±0.08b

灌丛类型和土层 Shrub types and soil layer		pH	有机质 Organic matter (g·kg^-1)	全氮 Total nitrogen (g·kg^-1)	无机氮 Mineral nitrogen (mg·kg^-1)	全磷 Total phosphorus (g·kg^-1)	速效磷 Available phosphorus (mg·kg^-1)	全钾 Total potassium (g·kg^-1)	速效钾 Available potassium (mg·kg^-1)
土层 Soil layer	0~20 cm	8.14±0.15a	13.10±0.77a	0.81±0.11a	27.47±3.47a	0.67±0.02a	16.28±4.00a	18.07±0.34a	86.27±0.43a
	20~40 cm	8.05±0.16a	8.64±1.03b	0.63±0.15ab	20.39±2.30ab	0.59±0.02ab	10.97±2.24ab	17.86±0.27a	76.46±0.84b
	40~60 cm	7.83±0.13a	6.21±1.04bc	0.47±0.10ab	16.49±1.52b	0.56±0.04b	5.78±0.85b	17.67±0.55a	64.41±1.90c
	60~80 cm	7.86±0.12a	4.67±0.75c	0.35±0.05b	13.41±3.25b	0.57±0.03b	3.75±0.55b	17.54±0.51a	57.10±1.09d
灌丛类型 Shrub types	CR	7.63±0.03c	10.21±0.17a	0.81±0.08a	25.82±2.45a	0.56±0.02b	10.55±0.09b	16.71±0.52b	69.57±2.25a
	TC	8.19±0.04a	8.88±0.04a	0.62±0.02b	20.82±0.14b	0.63±0.01a	10.10±0.21b	18.22±0.33a	71.18±1.51a
	RS	7.94±0.01b	7.29±0.56b	0.36±0.04d	16.23±0.18c	0.56±0.01b	12.05±0.55a	17.69±0.07ab	71.01±0.86a
	PO	8.12±0.12ab	6.24±0.62b	0.47±0.01c	14.90±0.06c	0.63±0.02a	4.08±0.10c	18.52±0.17a	72.48±1.08a