Characteristics of Amino Sugar Accumulation in Long-term Continuous Cropping Soil of Cotton in Xinjiang Oasis

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0827

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate soil amino sugar content and composition change in long-term cotton continuous cropping field, and evaluate the effects of cotton continuous cropping and straw returning on the microbial community of soil organic matter (SOM) transformation and accumulation, the long-term cotton continuous cropping field experiment was conducted combined with modern gas chromatography to determine the contents of three kinds of amino monosaccharides (glucosamine, muramic acid and galactosamine) in different soil layers of cotton field for different years of continuous cropping (9, 14, 19, 24 and 29 years). The results showed that the contents of total amino sugar, glucosamine and galactosamine in cotton field soil gradually increased with the increasing of cotton cropping years, while muramic acid content decreased first and then increased. The transformation and accumulation of glucosamine had obvious advantages, which accounted for 70.4%-71.1% of the total amino sugar. In 0-30 cm soil layer, the contents of total amino sugar and three kinds of amino monosaccharides decreased with the increasing soil depth. The GluN/MurA value in cotton continuous cropping field increased with the increase of continuous cropping years, and had a great effect on 0-20 cm soil. Long-term cotton continuous cropping and straw returning could promote the accumulation of soil total amino sugar and three kinds of amino monosaccharides. Fungi gradually play a dominant role in the transformation process of SOM, and the soil of cotton continuous cropping field changes to the environment with fungi as the dominant population.

Key words: cotton, long-term continuous cropping, amino sugar, amino monosaccharides, accumulating characteristics

CLC Number:

S562

Wang Qian, Li Ziyu, Liu Jianguo. Characteristics of Amino Sugar Accumulation in Long-term Continuous Cropping Soil of Cotton in Xinjiang Oasis[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(30): 59-64.

Figures/Tables 3

References 30

[1]	尉海东, 董彬. 鲁东南杨树人工林根际微生物数量时空动态[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(10):1-8.
[2]	苏淑芳, 于清军, 刘亚军, 等. 秸秆覆盖免耕对土壤氨基糖在团聚体粒级中分布的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2017, 48(2):365-371.
[3]	丁雪丽, 张旭东, 杨学明, 等. 免耕秸秆还田和传统耕作方式下东北黑土氨基糖态碳的积累特征[J]. 土壤学报, 2012, 49(3):535-543.
[4]	李丽东, 胡国庆, 赵钰, 等. 玉米秸秆掺入对土壤氨基糖分布动态的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2014, 45(6):1402-1409.
[5]	丁雪丽, 何红波, 张彬, 等. 无机氮素加入量对玉米秸秆分解过程中粽壤氨基糖含量的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2011, 48(3):665-671.
[6]	张彬, 白震, 解宏图, 等. 保护性耕作对黑土微生物群落的影响[J]. 中国农业生态学报, 2010, 18(1):83-88.
[7]	Stephen M O, Amy S, Keith P. No-till management impacts on crop productivity, carbon input and soil carbon sequestration[J]. Agri-culture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2012, 149:37-49.
[8]	何红波, 李晓波, 张威, 等. 葡萄糖和不同数量氮素供给对黑土氨基糖动态的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2010, 47(4):760-766.
[9]	丁雪丽, 何红波, 白震, 等. 不同供氮水平对施用玉米秸秆后黑土氨基糖转化的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(9):2207-2213.
[10]	王辛辛, 何红波, 胡国庆, 等. 底物添加对森林2个不同演替阶段土壤氨基糖动态的影响[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2016, 38(4):86-93.
[11]	张威, 何红波, 张旭东, 等. 东北黑土氨基糖的矿化动态及其对外源物质添加的响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2010, 21(10):2593-2598.
[12]	Clement P, Edward G, Jakob M, et al. Repeated application of organic waste affects soil organic matter composition: Evidence from thermal analysis, FTIR-PAS, amino sugars and lignin biomarkers[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 2017, 104:117-127. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.10.016 URL
[13]	张威, 韩永娇, 何红波, 等. 干湿交替条件下土壤氨基糖含量的动态变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(4):1037-1041.
[14]	宁赵, 陈香碧, 唐海明, 等. 不同施肥处理下水稻根际和非根际土壤中氨基糖积累特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(1):189-197.
[15]	Appuhn A, Joergensen R G. Microbial colonisation of roots as a function of plant species[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2006, 38:1040-1051. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.09.002 URL
[16]	陈旭, 韩晓增, 严君. 东北黑土氨基糖研究与展望[J]. 土壤与作物, 2018, 7(1):71-78.
[17]	Liang C, Duncan D S, Balser T C, et al. Soil microbial residue storage linked to soil legacy under biofuel cropping systems in southern Wisconsin, USA[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 2013, 57:939-942. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.09.006 URL
[18]	Joergensen R G. Amino sugars as specific indices for fun-gal and bacterial residues in soil[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2018, 54:559-568. doi: 10.1007/s00374-018-1288-3 URL
[19]	胡国庆, 刘肖, 何红波, 等. 黄河三角洲不同盐渍化土壤中氨基糖的积累特征[J]. 土壤学报, 2018, 55(2):390-398.
[20]	李俊娣, 张玉铭, 赵宝华, 等. 长期添加外源有机物料对华北平原不同粒级土壤氮素和氨基糖的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2019, 27(4):507-518.
[21]	杨静怡, 王旭, 孙立飞, 等. 氮磷添加对长白山温带森林土壤微生物群落组成和氨基糖的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(6):1948-1956.
[22]	何红波, 张威, 解宏图, 等. 测定土壤氨基糖和氨基酸手性异构体中氮同位素比值的气相色谱/质谱方法[J]. 土壤学报, 2009, 46(2):289-298.
[23]	井艳丽, 刘世荣, 殷有, 等. 赤杨对辽东落叶松人工林土壤氨基糖积累的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(8):2838-2845.
[24]	董智, 解宏图, 张立军, 等. 不同秸秆覆盖量免耕对土壤氨基糖积累的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2013, 44(5):1158-1162.
[25]	Liang C, Schimel J P, Jastrow J D. The importance of anabolism in microbial control over soil carbon storage[J]. Nature Microbiology, 2017, 2(8):17105.
[26]	崔艳荷, 张威, 何红波, 等. 外源氮素添加对森林土壤氨基糖转化的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(4):960-965.
[27]	李响, 何红波, 张威, 等. 外源无机氮素形态对土壤氨基糖动态的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(5):1153-1158.
[28]	刘建国, 张伟, 李彦斌, 等. 新疆绿洲棉花长期连作对土壤理化性质与土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2009, 42(2):725-733.
[29]	韩光明, 詹先进, 篮家样, 等. 棉花连作对土壤质量的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2013, 52(24):5962-5965.
[30]	Glaser B, Turrión M B, Alef K. Amino sugars and muramic acid-biomarkers for soil microbial community structure analysis[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2004, 36:399-407. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2003.10.013 URL

处理	pH	有机碳(SOC)/(g/kg)	全氮(TN)/(mg/kg)	碳氮比(C/N)	硝态氮(NO₃^--N)/(mg/kg)	铵态氮(NH₄⁺ -N)/(mg/kg)
a	7.31	12.69±0.75c	508.57±11.64d	25.04±1.91a	5.86±0.14e	4.98±0.10e
14a	7.24	13.56±0.7bc	598.57±11.52c	22.67±1.16a	7.50±0.12d	5.71±0.09d
19a	7.35	14.08±0.39abc	638.10±11.38b	22.06±0.25a	8.16±0.05c	6.27±0.07c
24a	7.26	15.15±0.53ab	691.90±10.73a	21.93±1.02a	9.29±0.09b	6.71±0.07b
29a	7.33	15.89±0.54a	713.17±11.03a	22.95±0.07a	9.83±0.11a	7.35±0.09a

处理	pH	有机碳(SOC)/(g/kg)	全氮(TN)/(mg/kg)	碳氮比(C/N)	硝态氮(NO₃^--N)/(mg/kg)	铵态氮(NH₄⁺ -N)/(mg/kg)
a	7.31	12.69±0.75c	508.57±11.64d	25.04±1.91a	5.86±0.14e	4.98±0.10e
14a	7.24	13.56±0.7bc	598.57±11.52c	22.67±1.16a	7.50±0.12d	5.71±0.09d
19a	7.35	14.08±0.39abc	638.10±11.38b	22.06±0.25a	8.16±0.05c	6.27±0.07c
24a	7.26	15.15±0.53ab	691.90±10.73a	21.93±1.02a	9.29±0.09b	6.71±0.07b
29a	7.33	15.89±0.54a	713.17±11.03a	22.95±0.07a	9.83±0.11a	7.35±0.09a