生物质炭配施有机肥对旱地红壤酶活性及其微生物群落组成的影响

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0502

中国农学通报 ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (18): 65-74.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0502

所属专题：生物技术；资源与环境

• 资源·环境·生态·土壤·气象 • 上一篇下一篇

生物质炭配施有机肥对旱地红壤酶活性及其微生物群落组成的影响

沈芳芳¹^,²(), 张哲¹, 袁颖红¹(), 周际海³

¹南昌工程学院/江西省退化生态系统修复与流域生态水文重点实验室，南昌 330099
²江西省水土保持科学研究院江西省土壤侵蚀与防治重点实验室，南昌 330029
³安徽师范大学/重要生物资源保护与利用研究安徽省省级重点实验室，安徽芜湖 241000

收稿日期:2020-09-24 出版日期:2021-06-25 发布日期:2021-07-13
通讯作者: 袁颖红
作者简介:沈芳芳,女,1986年出生,江西抚州人,讲师,博士,主要从事土壤生态方面研究。通信地址：330099 江西省南昌高新区天祥大道289号,E-mail： 275774853@qq.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金“生物炭有机肥堆肥对旱地红壤CH₄和NO₂通量的影响及微生物学机制”(31760167);“改良剂对旱地红壤碳汇的影响及其微生物学机制”(41461050);“秸秆及其生物质炭还田提升旱地红壤地力的差异与机理研究”(41661065);江西省教育厅科研技术研究项目“生物炭有机肥堆肥对旱地红壤CH₄排放的影响及微生物学机制”(GJJ161100);江西省水土保持科学研究院江西省土壤侵蚀与防治重点实验室2020年度开放基金项目“生物质炭-有机肥堆肥对旱地红壤CH₄和N₂O通量的影响研究”;江西省2018年研究生创新专项资金项目“生物炭有机肥堆肥对旱地红壤氮库以及N₂O排放影响”(YC2018-S420)

Effects of Biochar and Organic Manure Combined Application on Soil Enzyme Activities and Microbial Community Component in Upland Red Soil

Shen Fangfang¹^,²(), Zhang Zhe¹, Yuan Yinghong¹(), ³

¹Key Laboratory of Degraded Ecosystem Restoration and Watershed Ecological Hydrology, Nanchang Institute of Technology, Nanchang 330099
²Jiangxi Provincial Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Prevention,Jiangxi Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Nanchang 330029
³Anhui Provincial Key Laboratory for the Conservation and Utilization of Important Biological Resources, Anhui Normal University, Wuhu Anhui 241000

Received:2020-09-24 Online:2021-06-25 Published:2021-07-13
Contact: Yuan Yinghong

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

研究生物质炭配施有机肥对旱地的土壤养分的影响,可为旱地农作物的土壤改良提供理论依据。针对中亚热带第四纪红黏土发育的旱地红壤,本研究通过室内培养试验,向土壤中施用生物质炭配施有机肥,探索土壤微生物生物量碳和氮(MBC、MBN)、酶活性（脲酶、蔗糖酶、过氧化氢酶）和微生物群落组成的变化。试验共设置5种处理,分别为对照(CK,0 g/kg)、水稻生物质炭配施有机肥(RM,50 g/kg)、玉米生物质炭配施有机肥(CM,50 g/kg)、小麦生物质炭配施有机肥(WM,50 g/kg)和单施有机肥(M,40 g/kg)。为尽量消除误差,试验数据采用归一化处理,即实测值减CK值后除以各处理所添加的C、N量。结果表明：生物质炭配施有机肥(RM、CM、WM)处理均显著降低了旱地红壤MBC、MBN含量、脲酶活性和总PLFAs量,以WM处理的降幅最大,降幅分别是单施有机肥（M处理）的33.89%、69.03%、47.62%和23.30%;RM处理显著提高了蔗糖酶和过氧化氢酶活性,升幅分别是M处理的91.49%和28.94%。相比单施有机肥,生物质炭配施有机肥降低了土壤总PLFAs含量（平均为-16.89%）、真菌PLFA (-38.17%)、土壤真菌PLFA/细菌PLFA比值(F/B)(-40.63%)和土壤革兰氏阴性菌PLFA/革兰氏阳性菌PLFA比值(G^-/G⁺)(-4.3%),而提高了土壤细菌PLFA (+5.18%)、Shannon-Wiener多样性指数(+0.38%)和土壤细菌压力指数(BSI,+11%)。主成分分析表明RM处理与其他处理之间差异较大。综之,不同物料生物质炭配施有机肥引起土壤微生物量、酶活性和微生物群落组成的变化差异较大,其中影响最大的是水稻生物质炭配施有机肥处理,可为温室气体减排提供参考。

关键词: 生物质炭配施有机肥, 旱地红壤, 微生物量, 土壤酶活性, 微生物群落组成

Abstract:

To investigate the effects of biochar and organic manure combined application on soil nutrients in dry land can provide a theoretical foundation for soil improvement. Taking the upland red soil derived from Quaternary red clay in the mid-subtropical zone as the material, we added different biochar-organic manure compost into upland red soil during indoor culture experiment to explore the variation of soil microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen (MBC, MBN), enzyme activities (urease, sucrase and catalase) and microbial community component. Five treatments were set up, which were control (CK, 0 g/kg), rice straw biochar-organic manure compost (RM, 50 g/kg), corn straw biochar-organic manure compost (CM, 50 g/kg), wheat straw biochar-manure compost (WM, 50 g/kg) and manure compost (M, 40 g/kg). To eliminate errors as much as possible, test data were normalized, that was the measured value minus CK value then was divided by the amount of C and N added in each treatment. The results showed that RM, CM and WM treatment significantly reduced soil MBC, MBN, urease activity and total PLFAs, and the most significance was observed in WM treatment with the decrease rates of 33.89%, 69.03%, 47.62% and 23.30% of those of M treatment. RM treatment significantly increased soil sucrase and catalase activities, with the increase rates of 91.49% and 28.94% of those of M treatment. Compared with manure compost alone, biochar-organic manure compost reduced the total soil PLFAs (-16.89%), fungal abundance (-38.17%), fungi to bacteria ratio (F/B, -40.63%), gram-negative to gram-positive bacteria ratio (G^-/G⁺, -4.3%), while increased the relative abundance of soil bacteria (+5.18%), Shannon-Wiener index (+0.38%) of soil microorganisms and soil bacterial pressure index (BSI, +11%). Principal component analysis showed that biochar-organic manure compost had a certain effect on soil microbial community component with the most obvious effect in RM treatment. In summary, the application of different materials’ biochar-organic manure compost could cause great difference in soil microbial biomass, enzyme activities and microbial community component. Our results indicate that the effect of rice straw biochar-organic manure compost treatment is the most significant, which could provide certain references for reducing greenhouse gas emission.

Key words: biochar-organic manure combined application, upland red soil, soil microbial biomass, soil enzyme activities, microbial community component

中图分类号:

S156.2

沈芳芳, 张哲, 袁颖红, 周际海. 生物质炭配施有机肥对旱地红壤酶活性及其微生物群落组成的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(18): 65-74.

Shen Fangfang, Zhang Zhe, Yuan Yinghong, . Effects of Biochar and Organic Manure Combined Application on Soil Enzyme Activities and Microbial Community Component in Upland Red Soil[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(18): 65-74.

图/表 8

	CK	RM	CM	WM	M
pH	5.17	9.77	9.56	9.03	8.11
土壤有机碳/(g/kg)	12.99	350.57	357.29	355.05	407.69
土壤全氮/(g/kg)	1.42	18.78	17.75	20.46	10.82

表1. 供试材料的基本理化性质

图1. 培养期间不同处理土壤MBC(a)和平均含量(b)及MBN(c)含量和平均含量(d)

图2. 培养期间不同处理土壤脲酶(a)、蔗糖酶(c)、过氧化氢酶(e)及其累计活性(b、d、f)动态变化

图3. 培养期间不同处理土壤总PLFAs含量动态变化(a)及各处理的平均含量(b)

图4. 培养期间不同处理土壤各类群PLFAs相对丰度

图5. 培养期间不同处理土壤F/B (a)和G-/G+ (b)动态变化

图6. 培养期间不同处理土壤微生物Shanon-Wiener指数(a)和细菌压力指数(BSI)(b)

图7. 不同处理土壤微生物群落组成主成分分析

参考文献 45

[1]	赵其国. 我国红壤的退化问题[J]. 土壤, 1995,27(6):281-285.
[2]	黄国勤, 赵其国. 红壤生态学[J]. 生态学报, 2014,34(18):5173-5181.
[3]	乔志刚, 陈琳, 李恋卿, 等. 生物质炭基肥对水稻生长及氮素利用率的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014,30(05):175-180.
[4]	杨小东, 曾希柏, 文炯, 等. 猪粪施用量对红壤旱地理化性质及酶活性的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2020,57(3):739-749.
[5]	陈利军, 蒋瑀霁, 王浩田等. 长期施用有机物料对旱地红壤磷组分及磷素有效性的影响[J]. 土壤, 2020,52(3):451-457.
[6]	张福锁, 王激清, 张卫峰, 等. 中国主要粮食作物肥料利用率现状与提高途径[J]. 土壤学报, 2008,45(5):915-924.
[7]	Ibrahim M M, Tong C X, Hu K, et al. Biochar-fertilizer interaction modifies N-sorption,enzyme activities and microbial functional abundance regulating nitrogen retention in rhizosphere soil[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 2020,739:140065. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140065 URL
[8]	Sá ez J A, Belda R M, Bernal M P, et al. Biochar improves agro-environmental aspects of pig slurry compost as a substrate for crops with energy and remediation uses[J]. Industrial Crops and Products, 2016,94:97-106. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.08.035 URL
[9]	Agegnehu G, Nelson P N, Bird M I. The effects of biochar,compost and their mixture and nitrogen fertilizer on yield and nitrogen use efficiency of barley grown on a nitisol in the highlands of Ethiopia[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2016,569-570,869-879.
[10]	周际海, 袁东东, 袁颖红, 等. 生物质炭与有机物料混施对土壤温室气体排放和微生物活性的影响[J]. 环境科学学报, 2018,38(7):2849-2857.
[11]	Yuan Y H, Chen H H, Yuan W Q, et al. Is biochar-manure co-compost a better solution for soil health improvement and N₂O emissions mitigation[J] ?Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 2017,113:14-25.
[12]	Nguyen T T N, Xu C Y, Tahmasbian I, et al. Effects of biochar on soil available inorganic nitrogen: a review and meta-analysis[J]. Geoderma, 2017,288:79-96. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.11.004 URL
[13]	孟祥天, 蒋瑀霁, 王晓玥, 等. 生物质炭和秸秆长期还田对红壤团聚体和有机碳的影响[J]. 土壤, 2018,50(2):326-332.
[14]	David A L, Pierce F, Dedrick D D, et al. Impact of biochar amendments on the quality of a typical Midwestern agricultural soil[J]. Geoderma, 2010,158(3):443-449. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.05.013 URL
[15]	Mbagwu J S C, Piccolo A, Spallacci P. Effects of field applications of organic wastes from different sources on chemical, rheological and structural properties of some Italian surface soils[J]. Bioresource Technology, 1991,37(1):71-78. doi: 10.1016/0960-8524(91)90113-X URL
[16]	杜衍红, 蒋恩臣, 刘传平, 等. 生物质炭对华南典型红壤水分渗透及持水性的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2019,28(2):276-282.
[17]	Clough T J, Condron L M, Kammann C, et al. Effect of biochar and compost on soil properties and organic matter in aggregate size fractions under field conditions[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, 2020,295(15):106882. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2020.106882 URL
[18]	王昆艳, 官会林, 卢俊, 等. 生物质炭施用量对旱地酸性红壤理化性质的影响[J]. 土壤, 2020,52(3):503-509.
[19]	Clough T J, Condron L M, Kammann C, et al. A review of biochar and soil nitrogen dynamics[J]. Agronomy, 2013,3:275-293. doi: 10.3390/agronomy3020275 URL
[20]	陶朋闯, 陈效民, 靳泽文, 等. 生物质炭与氮肥配施对旱地红壤微生物量碳、氮和碳氮比的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2016,30(1):231-235.
[21]	赵军, 耿增超, 尚杰, 等. 生物炭及炭基硝酸铵对土壤微生物碳、氮及酶活性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2016,36(8):2355-2362.
[22]	李艳春, 李兆伟, 林伟伟, 等. 施用生物质炭和羊粪对宿根连作茶园根际土壤微生物的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018,29(4):1273-1282.
[23]	Yu L, Yu M, Lu X, et al. Combined application of biochar and nitrogen fertilizer benefits nitrogen retention in the rhizosphere of soybean by increasing microbial biomass but not altering microbial community structure[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018,640-641,1221-1230.
[24]	袁颖红, 张哲, 周际海, 等. 不同物料来源生物质炭-有机肥堆肥对旱地红壤温室气体排放的影响[J]. 南昌工程学院学报, 2019,38(6):39-44.
[25]	吴金水, 林启美, 黄巧云, 等. 土壤微生物生物量测定方法及其应用. 北京: 气象出版社, 2006, 54-78.
[26]	Bligh E G, Dyer W J. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification[J]. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry & Physiology, 1959,37(8):911-917.
[27]	Shen F F, Wu J P, Fan H B, et al. Soil N/P and C/P ratio regulate the responses of soil microbial community composition and enzyme activities in a long-term nitrogen loaded Chinese fir forest[J]. Plant and Soil, 2019,436:91-107. doi: 10.1007/s11104-018-03912-y URL
[28]	Hammesfahr U, Holger H, Bert M, et al. Impact of the antibiotic sulfadiazine and pig manure on the microbial community structure in agricultural soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2008,40:1583-1591 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.01.010 URL
[29]	芮绍云, 袁颖红, 周际海, 等. 改良剂对旱地红壤微生物量碳、氮及可溶性有机碳、氮的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017,31(5):260-265.
[30]	刘杰云, 邱虎森, 汤宏, 等. 生物质炭对双季稻水稻土微生物生物量碳、氮及可溶性有机碳氮的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2019,40(8):3799-3807.
[31]	Jindo K, Suto K, Matsumoto K, et al. Chemical and biochemical characterization of biochar-blended composts prepared from poultry manure[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2012,110:396-404. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2012.01.120 URL
[32]	Andrew R Z, Bin G, Ahn M Y. Positive and negative carbon mineralization priming effects among a variety of biochar-amended soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2011,43(6):1169-1179. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.02.005 URL
[33]	李增波, 王聪颖, 蒋新, 等. 生物质炭中多环芳烃的潜在环境风险研究进展[J]. 土壤学报, 2016,53(6):1357-1370.
[34]	Hilber I, Blum F, Leifeld J, et al. Quantitative determination of PAHs in biochar:a prerequisite to ensure its quality and safe application[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2012,60(12):3042-3050. doi: 10.1021/jf205278v URL
[35]	Schimmelpfennig S, Glaser B. One step forward toward characterization:some important material properties to distinguish biochars[J]. Journal of Environment Quality, 2012,41(4):1001-1013. doi: 10.2134/jeq2011.0146 URL
[36]	和文祥, 刘恩斌, 朱铭莪. 土壤脲酶活性与底物浓度定量关系研究[J]. 西北农业学报, 2001,10(1):62-66.
[37]	王冰, 赵闪闪, 秦治家, 等. 生物质炭对黑土吸附-解吸硝态氮性能的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2016,35(1):115-121.
[38]	Schimel W J P. Interactions between carbon and nitrogen mineralization and soil organic matter chemistry in Arctic Tundra soils[J]. Ecosystems, 2003,6(2):129-143. doi: 10.1007/s10021-002-0124-6 URL
[39]	戴叶亮, 朱清禾, 曾军, 等. 氮肥和多环芳烃对农田土壤细菌群落的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2018,27(8):1556-1562.
[40]	De Vries F T, Hoffland E, Van Eekeren N, et al. Fungal/bacterial ratios in grasslands with contrasting nitrogen management[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2006,38:2092-2103. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.01.008 URL
[41]	袁颖红, 芮绍云, 周际海, 等. 生物质炭及过氧化钙对旱地红壤酶活性和微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019,279(1):99-107.
[42]	Doan T T, Bouvier C, Bettarel Y, et al. Influence of buffalo manure, compost, vermicompost and biochar amendments on bacterial and viral communities in soil and adjacent aquatic systems[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2014,73:78-76. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2013.08.016 URL
[43]	Huang H L, Zhang S Z, Wu N Y, et al. Influence of glomus etunicatum/zea mays mycorrhiza on atrazine degradation,soil phosphatase and dehydrogenase activities, and soil microbial community structure[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2009,41(4):726-734. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.01.009 URL
[44]	李瑞月, 陈德, 李恋卿, 等. 不同作物秸秆生物炭对溶液中Pb²+、Cd²+的吸附[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2015,34(5):1001-1008.
[45]	樊诗亮, 何丽芝, 秦华, 等. 生物质炭对邻苯二甲酸二丁酯污染土壤微生物群落结构多样性的影响[J]. 环境科学学报, 2016,36(05):1800-1809.

生物质炭配施有机肥对旱地红壤酶活性及其微生物群落组成的影响

Effects of Biochar and Organic Manure Combined Application on Soil Enzyme Activities and Microbial Community Component in Upland Red Soil

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 45

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们

[1]	赵双梅, 刘宪斌, 李红梅, 董文彩, 沈健萍, 包金美, 梁芳, 鲁美. 云南哀牢山湿性常绿阔叶林土壤碳分布特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(8): 88-95.
[2]	林秀颜, 江赜伟, 陈曦, 张淑娜, 戴惠东, 杨士红. 稻田土壤微生物数量和酶活性对水碳调控的响应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(7): 75-80.
[3]	谢云, 郭芳芸, 曹兵. 大气CO₂浓度倍增对宁夏枸杞根区土壤微生物与酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(3): 90-97.
[4]	郭新送, 于晓东, 张晶, 张培苹, 赵花, 杜栋梁, 马鑫磊, 丁方军. 不同种植年限桃树根区土壤肥力变异特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(17): 65-71.
[5]	高杜娟, 刘兴录, 兰志斌, 赵杨, 陈友德, 周斌, 吕艳梅, 罗先富, 唐善军. 水稻-油菜周年耕作方式对土壤微生态的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(16): 74-81.
[6]	康勇建, 赵宝平, 孙雯, 刘瑞芳, 刘景辉. 化肥减施配合生物有机肥对土壤特性和燕麦产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(11): 59-64.
[7]	滕青, 曾梦凤, 林慧凡, 谢雨晴. 菌渣还田对生菜生长、土壤养分及酶活性的影响研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(6): 30-36.
[8]	朱书豪, 刘丽媛, 袁浩凌, 徐艳, 师荣光. 稻田冬闲期土壤酶活性及理化性质对不同施肥的响应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(36): 50-57.
[9]	贾艳艳, 诸俊, 顾大路, 杨文飞, 杜小凤, 孙爱侠, 钱新民, 文廷刚, 朱云林. 接种丛枝菌根真菌对麦秆分解和旱稻生长的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(30): 1-6.
[10]	李影,李斌,姜桂英,刘芳,李小磊,刘世亮,龙潜,董士刚. 植烟根际土壤生物活性对生物炭配施有机菌肥的响应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(36): 54-60.
[11]	杨超,白莉,梁锐婷,接伟光,孙海冰,蔡柏岩. 摩西管柄囊霉(Funneliformis mosseae)对连作大豆根系及根际土壤相关酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(30): 91-98.
[12]	贺文员,宋清晖,杨尚霖,宋福强. 生物有机肥对水稻土壤酶活性及微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(27): 106-113.
[13]	王丽超,向芳,杨刚. 放射性污染对土壤微生物量的影响及尾矿优势菌鉴定[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(25): 94-100.
[14]	潘孝晨,唐海明,肖小平,汤文光,李超,汪柯,程凯凯. 不同土壤耕作方式下稻田土壤微生物多样性研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(23): 51-57.
[15]	李庆国,张晓文. 保水剂施用方式对杨树苗根系特性和土壤酶活性及生长的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(14): 36-40.