Response and sensitivity of photosynthesis of Stipa tianschanica in desert steppe to developing soil drought process

doi:10.11686/cyxb2020502

Abstract

Abstract:

Terrestrial ecosystem carbon budgets are sensitive to extreme climate events. To understand the carbon budget response in Stipa tianschanica desert steppe to extreme drought process， a manipulative experiment involving extreme soil extreme drought process was conducted under a rainout shelter. A range of characteristic parameters of S. tianschanica were measured and analyzed， and sensitivity to drought of the various parameters was also evaluated. It was found that water use efficiency （WUE） showed a significant exponential relationship with soil water content （SWC）. Stomatal conductance （G_s），maximum carboxylation rate （V_cmax） and triose phosphate utilization rate （TPU）showed significant liner relationships with SWC. There were also significant quadratic relationships between other carbon exchange parameters and SWC. CO₂ exchange activities of S. tianschanica at leaf scale were more sensitive to soil drought. Light-saturated net photosynthetic rate （A_sat）， transpiration rate （E）， maximum electron transfer rate （J_max）， photochemical efficiency of PSⅡ in the light （F_v'/F_m'）， actual photochemical efficiency of PSⅡ in the light （Φ_PSII） and net ecosystem CO₂ exchange （NEE） showed clear thresholds of soil moisture. G_s， WUE， V_cmax， TPU， ecosystem respiration （R_e） and gross ecosystem production （GEP） began to decrease when SWC started to decline， while E， NEE and J_max exhibited rapid rates of change under drought condition. 14.73% and 7.85% were two critical SWC at which the inhibition of leaf photosynthesis changed from stomatal limitation to non-stomatal limitation and the ecosystem shifted from sink to source， respectively. In conclusion， carbon exchange of S. tianschanica ecosystem was significantly related to SWC and carbon sink was significantly inhibited under extreme soil moisture deficit.

Key words: Stipa tianschanica, soil drought process, characteristic parameter of carbon exchange, soil water content, sensitivity

Zuo-tian YIN, Yu-hui WANG, Guang-sheng ZHOU, Quan-hui MA, Xiao-di LIU, Bing-rui JIA, Yan-ling JIANG. Response and sensitivity of photosynthesis of Stipa tianschanica in desert steppe to developing soil drought process[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2022, 31(1): 81-94.

Figures/Tables 9

References 69

1	Schimel D S. Terrestrial ecosystems and the carbon-cycle. Global Change Biology， 1995， 1： 77-91.
2	Fang J Y， Zhu J L， Shi Y. The responses of ecosystems to global warming. Chinese Science Bulletin， 2018， 63（2）： 136-140.
	方精云，朱江玲，石岳. 生态系统对全球变暖的响应. 科学通报， 2018， 63（2）： 136-140.
3	Piao S L， Sitch S， Ciais P， et al. Evaluation of terrestrial carbon cycle models for their response to climate variability and to CO₂ trends. Global Change Biology， 2013， 19： 2117-2132.
4	Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change. Climate change 2013： The physical science basis. Contribution of working group Ⅰ to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press， 2013.
5	Jackson R B， Carpenter S R， Dahm C N， et al. Water in a changing world. Ecological Applications， 2001， 11： 1027-1045.
6	Giorgi F， Mearns L O， Shields C， et al. Regional nested model simulations of present day and 2×CO₂ climate over the central plains of the US. Climatic Change， 1998， 40： 457-493.
7	Pan R C. Plant physiology. Beijing： Higher Education Press， 2012.
	潘瑞炽. 植物生理学. 北京：高等教育出版社， 2012.
8	Xu Z Z， Zhou G S. Responses of photosynthetic capacity to soil moisture gradient in perennial rhizome grass and perennial bunchgrass. BMC Plant Biology， 2011， 11： 21.
9	Reyer C P O， Leuzinger S， Rammig A， et al. A plant’s perspective of extremes： Terrestrial plant responses to changing climatic variability. Global Change Biology， 2013， 19（1）： 75-89.
10	Ciais P， Reichstein M， Viovy N， et al. Europe-wide reduction in primary productivity caused by the heat and drought in 2003. Nature， 2005， 437（22）： 529-533.
11	Song J， Wan S Q， Piao S L， et al. A meta-analysis of 1，119 manipulative experiments on terrestrial carbon-cycling responses to global change. Nature Ecology and Evolution， 2019， 3： 1309-1320.
12	Chen S P， Lin G H， Huang J H， et al. Dependence of carbon sequestration on the differential responses of ecosystem photosynthesis and respiration to rain pulses in a semiarid steppe. Global Change Biology， 2009， 15： 2450-2461.
13	Xu B， Arain M A， Black T A， et al. Seasonal variability of forest sensitivity to heat and drought stresses： A synthesis based on carbon fluxes from North American forest ecosystems. Global Change Biology， 2019， 26： 901-918.
14	Maestre F T， Eldridge D J， Soliveres S， et al. Structure and functioning of dryland ecosystems in a changing world. Annual Review of Ecology， Evolution， and Systematics， 2016， 47： 215-237.
15	Phillips O L， Aragao L E O C， Lewis S L， et al. Drought sensitivity of the Amazon Rainforest. Science， 2009， 323： 1344-1347.
16	Wang Y H， Chen J Q， Zhou G S， et al. Predominance of precipitation event controls ecosystem CO₂ exchange in an Inner Mongolian desert grassland， China. Journal of Cleaner Production， 2018， 197： 781-793.
17	Zhao M S， Running S W. Drought-induced reduction in global terrestrial net primary production from 2000 through 2009. Science， 2010， 329（5994）： 940-943.
18	Zscheischler J， Michalak A M， Schwalm C， et al. Impact of large-scale climate extremes on biospheric carbon fluxes： An intercomparison based on MsTMIP data. Global Biogeochemical Cycles， 2014， 28： 585-600.
19	Reichstein M， Bahn M， Ciais P， et al. Climate extremes and the carbon cycle. Nature， 2013， 500： 287-295.
20	Adams J M， Faure H， Fauredenard L， et al. Increases in terrestrial carbon storage from the last glacial maximum to the present. Nature， 1990， 348： 711-714.
21	Zhao T Q， Ouyang Z Y， Jia L Q， et al. Ecosystem services and their valuation of China grassland. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2004， 24（6）： 1101-1110.
	赵同谦，欧阳志云，贾良清，等. 中国草地生态系统服务功能间接价值评价. 生态学报， 2004， 24（6）： 1101-1110.
22	Kang L， Han X G， Zhang Z B， et al. Grassland ecosystems in China： Review of current knowledge and research advancement. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences， 2007， 362： 997-1008.
23	Wei Z J， Han G D， Zhao G， et al. Research of chinese desert grassland ecosystem. Beijing： Science Press， 2013.
	卫智军，韩国栋，赵钢，等. 中国荒漠草原生态系统研究. 北京：科学出版社， 2013.
24	Wu S H， Pan T， Liu Y H， et al. Comprehensive climate change risk regionalization of China. Acta Geographica Sinica， 2017， 72（1）： 3-17.
	吴绍洪，潘韬，刘燕华，等. 中国综合气候变化风险区划. 地理学报， 2017， 72（1）： 3-17.
25	Qiao X G， Guo K， Zhao L Q， et al. Distribution， community characteristics and classification of Stipa tianschanica var. klemenzii steppe in China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology， 2017， 41（2）： 231-237.
	乔鲜果，郭柯，赵利清，等. 中国石生针茅草原的分布、群落特征和分类. 植物生态学报， 2017， 41（2）： 231-237.
26	Wang H Z， Han L， Xu Y L， et al. Simulated photosynthetic responses of Populus euphratica during drought stress using light-response models. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2017， 37（7）： 2315-2324.
	王海珍，韩路，徐雅丽，等. 干旱胁迫下胡杨光合光响应过程模拟与模型比较. 生态学报， 2017， 37（7）： 2315-2324.
27	Wang L L， Li Q H， Xu J， et al. Morphology and physiology characteristic responses of different provenances of Artemisia ordosica to drought stress. Scientia Silvae Sinicae， 2015， 51（2）： 37-43.
	王林龙，李清河，徐军，等. 不同种源油蒿形态与生理特征对干旱胁迫的响应. 林业科学， 2015， 51（2）： 37-43.
28	Li L Z， Zhang D G， Xin X P， et al. Photosynthetic characteristics of Leymus chinensis under different soil moisture grades in Hulunber prairie. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2009， 29（10）： 5271-5279.
	李林芝，张德罡，辛晓平，等. 呼伦贝尔草甸草原不同土壤水分梯度下羊草的光合特性. 生态学报， 2009， 29（10）： 5271-5279.
29	Ma Q H， Liu X D， Li Y B， et al. Nitrogen deposition magnifies the sensitivity of desert steppe plant communities to large changes in precipitation. Journal of Ecology， 2020， 108： 598-610.
30	Sharkey T D， Bernacchi C J， Farquhar G D， et al. Fitting photosynthetic carbon dioxide response curves for C₃ leaves. Plant Cell and Environment， 2007， 30： 1035-1040.
31	Zhang S R. A discussion on chlorophyll fluorescence kinetics parameters and their significance. Chinese Bulletin of Botany， 1999， 16（4）： 444-448.
	张守仁. 叶绿素荧光动力学参数的意义及讨论. 植物学通报， 1999， 16（4）： 444-448.
32	You X， Gong J R. Significance and application of chlorophyll fluorescence dynamics process parameters. Journal of West China Forestry Science， 2012， 41（5）： 90-94.
	尤鑫，龚吉蕊. 叶绿素荧光动力学参数的意义及实例辨析. 西部林业科学， 2012， 41（5）： 90-94.
33	Liu Y， Lei S G， Cheng L S， et al. Effects of soil water content on stomatal conductance， transpiration， and photosynthetic rate of Caragana korshinskii under the influence of coal mining subsidence. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2018， 38（9）： 3069-3077.
	刘英，雷少刚，程林森，等. 采煤塌陷影响下土壤含水量变化对柠条气孔导度、蒸腾与光合作用速率的影响. 生态学报， 2018， 38（9）： 3069-3077.
34	Lin X L， Xu Z Z， Wang Y H， et al. Modeling the responses of leaf photosynthetic parameters of Leymus chinensis to drought and rewatering. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2008（10）： 4718-4724.
	林祥磊，许振柱，王玉辉，等. 羊草（Leymus chinensis）叶片光合参数对干旱与复水的响应机理与模拟. 生态学报， 2008（10）： 4718-4724.
35	Xu H X， Li Q， Huang Y， et al. The effect of soil environmental factors on the carbon flux over Stipa krylovii ecosystem. Scientia Geographica Sinica， 2014， 34（11）： 1385-1390.
	薛红喜，李琪，黄瑜，等. 土壤环境因子对克氏针茅草地生态系统碳通量的影响. 地理科学， 2014， 34（11）： 1385-1390.
36	Reichstein M， Tenhunen J D， Roupsard O， et al. Severe drought effects on ecosystem CO₂ and H₂O fluxes at three Mediterranean evergreen sites： Revision of current hypotheses？ Global Change Biology， 2002， 8： 999-1017.
37	Maxwell K， Johnson G N. Chlorophyll fluorescence-a practical guide. Journal of Experimental Botany， 2000， 51： 659-668.
38	Sharkey T D. Photosynthesis in intact leaves of C₃ plants-physics， physiology and rate limitations. Botanical Review， 1985， 51： 53-105.
39	Farquhar G D， Caemmerer S V， Berry J A. A biochemical-model of photosynthetic CO₂ assimilation in leaves of C₃ species. Planta， 1980， 149： 78-90.
40	Han L， Wang H Z， Xu Y L， et al. Responses of transpiration rate of Populus pruinosa to stomatal conductance and vapor pressure deficient. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment， 2016， 30（8）： 193-197.
	韩路，王海珍，徐雅丽，等. 灰胡杨蒸腾速率对气孔导度和水汽压差的响应. 干旱区资源与环境， 2016， 30（8）： 193-197.
41	Li J C， Yan B G， Pan Z X， et al. Threshold effect of soil moisture on photosynthetic efficiency of tomato leaves at the seedling stage in Dry-hot Valley， Yunnan， China. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops， 2019， 40（11）： 2278-2284.
	李建查，闫帮国，潘志贤，等. 干热河谷番茄苗期叶片光合效率的土壤水分阈值效应. 热带作物学报， 2019， 40（11）： 2278-2284.
42	Farquhar G D， Sharkey T D. Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology， 1982， 33： 317-345.
43	Schwalm C R， Anderegg W R L， Michalak A M， et al. Global patterns of drought recovery. Nature， 2017， 548： 202-205.
44	Green J K， Seneviratne S I， Berg A M， et al. Large influence of soil moisture on long-term terrestrial carbon uptake. Nature， 2019， 565： 476-479.
45	Wang Q， Yang Y， Liu Y Y， et al. Assessing the impacts of drought on grassland net primary production at the global scale. Scientific Reports， 2019， 9： 14041.
46	Schwalm C R， Williams C A， Schaefer K， et al. Assimilation exceeds respiration sensitivity to drought： A fluxnet synthesis. Global Change Biology， 2010， 16： 657-670.
47	Shi Z， Thomey M L， Mowll W， et al. Differential effects of extreme drought on production and respiration： Synthesis and modeling analysis. Biogeosciences， 2014， 11： 621-633.
48	Galmes J， Ribas-Carbo M， Medrano H， et al. Rubisco activity in Mediterranean species is regulated by the chloroplastic CO₂ concentration under water stress. Journal of Experimental Botany， 2011， 62： 653-665.
49	Zhang Y M， Zhou G S. Advances in leaf maximum carboxylation rate and its response to environmental factors. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2012， 32（18）： 5907-5917.
	张彦敏，周广胜. 植物叶片最大羧化速率及其对环境因子响应的研究进展. 生态学报， 2012， 32（18）： 5907-5917.
50	Sharkey T D. Is triose phosphate utilization important for understanding photosynthesis？ Journal of Experimental Botany， 2019， 70： 5521-5525.
51	Gu D X， Wang Q， Otieno D. Canopy transpiration and stomatal responses to prolonged drought by a dominant desert species in Central Asia. Water， 2017， 9： 404.
52	Yu M H. Canopy temperature and stomatal conductance characteristics of typical sand-fixation plants and their responses to soil moisture. Beijing： Beijing Forestry University， 2016.
	于明含. 典型固沙植物冠层温度和气孔导度特征及其对土壤水分的响应. 北京：北京林业大学， 2016.
53	Tang Z C. Response and adaptability of plant to water stress. Plant Physiology Communication， 1983（4）： 1-7.
	汤章城. 植物对水分胁迫的反应和适应性. 植物生理学通讯， 1983（4）： 1-7.
54	Davies W J， Zhang J H. Root signals and the regulation of growth and development of plants in drying soil. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology， 1991， 42： 55-76.
55	Cao S K， Feng Q， Si J H， et al. Summary on the plant water use efficiency at leaf level. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2009， 29（7）： 3882-3892.
	曹生奎，冯起，司建华，等. 植物叶片水分利用效率研究综述. 生态学报， 2009， 29（7）： 3882-3892.
56	Liu W Z. Dynamic interrelations of crop production， water consumption and water use efficiency. Journal of Natural Resources， 1998， 13（1）： 3-5.
	刘文兆. 作物生产、水分消耗与水分利用效率间的动态联系. 自然资源学报， 1998， 13（1）： 3-5.
57	Chaves M M， Maroco J P， Pereira J S. Understanding plant responses to drought-from genes to the whole plant. Functional Plant Biology， 2003， 30： 239-264.
58	Manzoni S， Vico G， Katul G， et al. Optimizing stomatal conductance for maximum carbon gain under water stress： A meta-analysis across plant functional types and climates. Functional Ecology， 2011， 25： 456-467.
59	Zou J， Ding J L， Qin Y， et al. Response of water use efficiency of Central Asia ecosystem to drought based on remote sensing data. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering， 2018， 34（9）： 145-152.
	邹杰，丁建丽，秦艳，等. 遥感分析中亚地区生态系统水分利用效率对干旱的响应. 农业工程学报， 2018， 34（9）： 145-152.
60	Liu Y T， Li J， Jin Y Q， et al. The influence of drought strength on soil respiration in a woody savanna ecosystem， Southwest China. Plant and Soil， 2018， 428： 321-333.
61	Liu L L， Wang X， Lajeunesse M J， et al. A cross-biome synthesis of soil respiration and its determinants under simulated precipitation changes. Global Change Biology， 2016， 22： 1394-1405.
62	Reichstein M， Tenhunen J D， Roupsard O， et al. Ecosystem respiration in two Mediterranean evergreen Holm Oak forests： Drought effects and decomposition dynamics. Functional Ecology， 2002， 16： 27-39.
63	McDowell N， Pockman W T， Allen C D， et al. Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought： Why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought？ New Phytologist， 2008， 178： 719-739.
64	Adams H D， Zeppel M J B， Anderegg W R L， et al. A multi-species synthesis of physiological mechanisms in drought-induced tree mortality. Nature Ecology and Evolution， 2017， 1： 1285-1291.
65	Duan H L， Wu J P， Liu W F， et al. Water relations and carbon dynamics under drought stress and the mechanisms of drought-induced tree mortality. Scientia Silvae Sinicae， 2015， 51（11）： 113-120.
	段洪浪，吴建平，刘文飞，等. 干旱胁迫下树木的碳水过程以及干旱死亡机理. 林业科学， 2015， 51（11）： 113-120.
66	Choat B， Brodribb T J， Brodersen C R， et al. Triggers of tree mortality under drought. Nature， 2018， 558： 531-539.
67	Sevanto S， McDowell N G， Dickman L T， et al. How do trees die？ A test of the hydraulic failure and carbon starvation hypotheses. Plant Cell and Environment， 2014， 37： 153-161.
68	Jin Y， Wang C K. Trade-offs between plant leaf hydraulic and economic traits. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology， 2015， 39（10）： 1021-1032.
	金鹰，王传宽. 植物叶片水力与经济性状权衡关系的研究进展. 植物生态学报， 2015， 39（10）： 1021-1032.
69	Mitchell P J， O'Grady A P， Tissue D T， et al. Drought response strategies define the relative contributions of hydraulic dysfunction and carbohydrate depletion during tree mortality. New Phytologist， 2013， 197： 862-872.

指标 Index	R²				赤池信息准则Akaike information criterion
指标 Index	线性函数 Liner	二次函数 Quadratic	指数函数 Exponential	幂函数 Power	线性函数 Liner	二次函数 Quadratic	指数函数 Exponential	幂函数 Power
净光合速率A_sat	0.72**	0.77**	0.64**	0.70**	71.71	71.25	75.28	72.78
水分利用效率WUE	0.78**	0.79**	0.80**	0.79**	22.62	23.65	21.04	21.80
最大电子传输速率J_max	0.84**	0.96**	0.71**	0.80**	96.21	83.36	102.14	98.47
最大羧化速率V_cmax	0.91**	0.91**	0.86**	0.90**	82.51	84.48	86.23	83.63
磷酸丙糖利用率TPU	0.93**	0.94**	0.87**	0.91**	32.99	33.72	38.34	34.73
蒸腾速率E	0.55**	0.77**	0.45**	0.54**	74.28	63.52	78.06	74.67
胞间二氧化碳浓度C_i	0.32*	0.52**	0.34**	0.41**	215.19	210.50	214.53	212.48
气孔导度G_s	0.85**	0.86**	0.77**	0.83**	-70.68	-70.34	-62.18	-67.80
光系统Ⅱ有效光化学量子产量F_v′/F_m′	0.75**	0.90**	0.69**	0.78**	-50.10	-64.73	-46.03	-52.35
光系统Ⅱ实际光化学效率Φ_PSII	0.62**	0.80**	0.56**	0.65**	-66.68	-76.72	-63.99	-68.12
生态系统净碳交换NEE	0.71**	0.79**	-	-	50.64	47.98	-	-
生态系统呼吸速率R_e	0.96**	0.97**	0.89**	0.94**	44.42	42.95	61.56	52.89
生态系统总初级生产力GEP	0.95**	0.97**	0.83**	0.90**	58.24	50.62	77.15	69.43

指标 Index	R²				赤池信息准则Akaike information criterion
指标 Index	线性函数 Liner	二次函数 Quadratic	指数函数 Exponential	幂函数 Power	线性函数 Liner	二次函数 Quadratic	指数函数 Exponential	幂函数 Power
净光合速率A_sat	0.72**	0.77**	0.64**	0.70**	71.71	71.25	75.28	72.78
水分利用效率WUE	0.78**	0.79**	0.80**	0.79**	22.62	23.65	21.04	21.80
最大电子传输速率J_max	0.84**	0.96**	0.71**	0.80**	96.21	83.36	102.14	98.47
最大羧化速率V_cmax	0.91**	0.91**	0.86**	0.90**	82.51	84.48	86.23	83.63
磷酸丙糖利用率TPU	0.93**	0.94**	0.87**	0.91**	32.99	33.72	38.34	34.73
蒸腾速率E	0.55**	0.77**	0.45**	0.54**	74.28	63.52	78.06	74.67
胞间二氧化碳浓度C_i	0.32*	0.52**	0.34**	0.41**	215.19	210.50	214.53	212.48
气孔导度G_s	0.85**	0.86**	0.77**	0.83**	-70.68	-70.34	-62.18	-67.80
光系统Ⅱ有效光化学量子产量F_v′/F_m′	0.75**	0.90**	0.69**	0.78**	-50.10	-64.73	-46.03	-52.35
光系统Ⅱ实际光化学效率Φ_PSII	0.62**	0.80**	0.56**	0.65**	-66.68	-76.72	-63.99	-68.12
生态系统净碳交换NEE	0.71**	0.79**	-	-	50.64	47.98	-	-
生态系统呼吸速率R_e	0.96**	0.97**	0.89**	0.94**	44.42	42.95	61.56	52.89
生态系统总初级生产力GEP	0.95**	0.97**	0.83**	0.90**	58.24	50.62	77.15	69.43

[1]	Ru ZHANG, Jian-ping LI, Wen-dong PENG, Fang WANG, Zhi-gang LI. Effects of mulching with caragana （Caragana intermedia） branches on soil moisture content and temperature and reseeded forage biomass in desertified grassland in Ningxia Province， China [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(4): 58-67.
[2]	PU Xue-ke, WU Chun-hua, ZHOU Yong-jin, MIAN You-ming, MIAO Fang-fang, HOU Xian-qing, LI Rong. Effects of dual-mulching of furrow and ridge with plastic film and straw on temporal and spatial changes of soil moisture and potato yield in dry-farming areas of southern Ningxia [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(10): 149-160.
[3]	JIANG La-mei, YANG Xiao-dong, YANG Jian-jun, HE Xue-min, LÜ Guang-hui. Effects of different management strategies on soil organic carbon and nitrogen pools in arid areas and their influencing factors [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(12): 22-33.
[4]	LI Wen, CAO Wen-Xia, LIU Hao-Dong, LI Xiao-Long, XU Chang-Lin, SHI Shang-Li, FENG Jin, ZHOU Chuan-Meng. Analysis of soil respiration under different grazing management patterns in the alpine meadow-steppe of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2015, 24(10): 22-32.
[5]	XIONG Li, XU Zheng-feng, WU Fu-zhong, YANG Wan-qin, YIN rui, LI Zhi-ping, NI Xiang-yin, XIONG Hai-tao. Effects of stepping on soil respiration of Zoysia matrella lawn during the winter dormancy period [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(2): 83-89.
[6]	LI Guang, LI Yue, HUANG Gao-bao, LUO Zhu-zhu, WANG Qi, LIU Qiang, YAN Zhen-gang, ZHAO You-yi. The effects of climate change on dryland wheat production under different tillage systems [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(5): 160-168.
[7]	LIU Qing-lin, ZHANG En-he, WANG Qi, WANG Tian-tao, LIU Chao-wei, YIN Hui, YU Hua-lin. Effect of irrigation and nitrogen supply levels on water consumption, grain yield and water use efficiency of spring wheat on no-tillage with stubble standing farmland [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(5): 169-177.
[8]	FAN Shi-jie, WANG Di, ZHANG Jun-lian, BAI Jiang-ping, SONG Ji-xuan, MA Zhi-xia. Effects of tillage strategies on the topsoil water content and the yield of potato [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(2): 271-279.
[9]	CAO Wen-xia, XU Chang-lin, ZHANG De-gang, SHI Shang-li, YAO Tuo. Ecological responses of soil bulk density and water content to different non-grazing patterns in alpine rhododendron shrubland [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(3): 28-35.
[10]	TAI Jian-hui, WANG Yan-rong, LI Xiao-xia, WEI Xue, CHEN Gu. Effects of different mulching on the establishment of Cleistogenes songorica [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(3): 287-291.
[11]	ZHANG Yi, XIE Yong-sheng. Effects of different patterns of surface mulching on soil hydrology in an apple orchard [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(2): 85-92.
[12]	XU Hai-hong, HOU Xiang-yang, NA Ri-su. Dynamics of soil respiration under different grazing systems in a Stipa breviflora desert steppe [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(2): 219-226.
[13]	YU Xiao-jun, PU Xiao-peng, HUANG Shi-jie, FANG Qiang-en, XU Ning, XU Chang-lin. Effects of ants (Tetramorium sp.) on eastern Qilian Mountains alpine grassland ecosystem [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2010, 19(2): 140-145.
[14]	LIU Guo-li, HE Shu-bin, YANG Hui-min. The responses and mechanisms of water use efficiency to different water stresses of three alfalfa varieties [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(3): 207-213.
[15]	HU-Jian, JIANG Qin-jun, HAN Lie-bao, WANG Li. Status and research advances on fungicide resistance in turfgrass pathogens [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(2): 194-204.