Analysis of Soil Microbial Community Structure of Burgamot Yam Under Different Production Conditions

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0257

Abstract

Abstract:

Burgamot yam is the "geographical indication product of agricultural products" in Hubei Province. There are many kinds of planting patterns in fields. In order to explore the soil microbial structure diversity of burgamot yam under different production conditions, soil specimem was collected and analysis was carried out. Soil samples of yam were collected from the main producing area of burgamot yam in Wuxue City, Hubei Province, which were taken from 4 different natural production patterns (2% avermectin for 1-year continuous cropping; 2% avermectin for 2-year continuous cropping; non 2% averamectin with no continuous cropping; non 2% avermectin for 2-year continuous cropping). The 5-point sampling method was used and soil was collected from 5-10 cm, 10-20 cm and 20-30 cm deep respectively, which were repeated 3 times. Soil genomic DNA was extracted. Bacterial 16S RNA and fungal ITS were performed for high quality sequences. The results of sequence data analysis showed that total of 2539748 effective fungal ITS sequences and 1964285 effective bacterial 16s sequences were obtained and 12 fungal and 50 bacterial taxa were identified at the phylum level, and 193 fungal and 1023 bacterial species were identified at the genus level. It showed that the difference of bacterial community composition in burgamot yam’s root soil under different production patterns was more obvious than that of fungal community. The influence of continuous planting on fungal community structure may exceed the chemical application treatment did, and the influence of different soil depth on bacterial community structure may be more significant. The characteristics of soil microbial community structure of burgamot yam indicate that the structures of fungi and bacteria in the yam soil were multiple on the phyla and genus levels in different growth depths with different natural growth conditions, and the continuous planting of burgamot yam in the field is easy to increase the risk of root disease.

Key words: burgamot yam, natural production conditions, bacterial 16S RNA, fungal ITS, soil microbial community structure, diversity

YANG Xiaolin, GUO Shanshan, LV Liang, CHANG Xiangqian, ZHANG Shu, ZHANG Youhong, LIU Xinqiong. Analysis of Soil Microbial Community Structure of Burgamot Yam Under Different Production Conditions[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(32): 91-98.

Figures/Tables 4

References 25

[1]	黄梦甜, 胡安阳, 张正茂, 等. 不同产地山药功能成分的比较[J]. 湖北工程学院学报, 2018, 38(6):30-34.
[2]	姚小东, 李孝刚, 丁昌峰, 等. 连作和轮作模式下花生土壤微生物群落不同微域分布特征[J]. 土壤学报, 2019, 56(4):975-985.
[3]	胡洪涛, 胡时友, 周荣华, 等. 油菜秸秆还田对土壤真菌群落结构和功能影响的研究[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2020, 40(S1):6-10.
[4]	李光宇, 吴次芳. 土壤微生物研究在农田质量评价中的应用[J]. 土壤学报, 2018, 55(3):543-556.
[5]	山溪, 张振超, 陶美奇, 等. 韭菜连作障碍引发的病虫害防治[J]. 蔬菜, 2023, 10:41-43.
[6]	李翔, 鲁素君, 杨靖康, 等. 设施蔬菜连作障碍成因及消减研究进展[J]. 南方农业, 2023, 17(21):107-121.
[7]	罗影, 王立光, 陈军, 等. 不同种植模式对甘肃中部高寒区胡麻田土壤酶活性及土壤养分的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2017, 31(6):1185-1191 doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2017.06.1185
[8]	樊俊, 谭军, 王瑞, 等. 秸秆还田和腐熟有机肥对植烟土壤养分、酶活性及微生物多样性的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2019, 52(2):12-18,61.
[9]	孙凯宁, 杨宁, 王克安, 等. 山药连作对土壤微生物群落及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2015, 22(6):95-98.
[10]	TONG F C, XIAO Y H, WANG Q L. Soil nematode community structure on the northern slope of Changbai Mountain, Northeast China[J]. Journal of forestry research, 2010, 21(1):93-98.
[11]	LIPHADZI K B, KASSIM A K, BENSCH C N, et al. Soil microbial and nematode communities as affected by glyphosate and tillage practices in a glyphosate-resistant cropping system[J]. Weed science, 2005, 53(4):536-545.
[12]	杨小林, 李梦欢, 何中华, 等. 佛手山药线虫病害调查与病原鉴定[J]. 植物保护, 2022, 48(5):320-326.
[13]	刘方明, 孟维韧, 刘今子, 等. 不同土地利用方式下土壤线虫群落的垂直分布分析[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2012, 51(19):4266-4269.
[14]	姬兴杰, 熊淑萍, 李春明, 等. 不同肥料类型对土壤酶活性与微生物数量时空变化的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2008(1):123-127,133.
[15]	洪彩凤, 刘国坤, 张绍升, 等. 福建省柑橘半穿刺线虫雌虫食线虫真菌的鉴定[J]. 福建林学院学报, 2007, 27(3):263-266.
[16]	SHANNON C E. A mathematical theory of communication[J]. The bell system technical journal, 1948, 27:623-656.
[17]	SIMPSON E H. Measurement of diversity[J]. Nature, 1949, 163:688.
[18]	DOUGLAS G M, BEIKO R G, LANGILLE M G I. Predicting the functional potential of the microbiome from marker genes using PICRUSt[J]. Methods in molecular biology, 2018, 1849:169-177. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-8728-3_11 pmid: 30298254
[19]	KANEHISA M, FURUMICHI M, TANABE M, et al. KEGG: new perspectives on genomes, pathways, diseases and drugs[J]. Nucleic acids research, 2017, 45:353-361. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw1092 pmid: 27899662
[20]	EGIDI E, DELGADOBAQUERIZO M, PLETT J M, et al. A few Ascomycota taxa dominate soil fungal communities worldwide[J]. Nature communication, 2019, 10:2369.
[21]	BASTIAN F, BOUZIRI L, NICOLARDOT B, et al. Impact of wheat straw decomposition on successional patterns of soil microbial community structure[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2009, 41(2):262-275.
[22]	刘威, 王晶晶, 师梦楠, 等. 茶园阴坡和阳坡土壤微生物群落结构与土壤理化因子的关系[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2024, 40(2):251-259.
[23]	周旭东, 韩天华, 申云鑫, 等. 4种轮作模式下长期连作烟田土壤微生态的响应特征[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2024, 26(3):174-187.
[24]	饶德安, 刘潘洋, 邹路易, 等. 长期连作及强还原土壤灭菌处理对烤烟根际土壤真菌群落的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(4):47-56.
[25]	HAN L X, KONG X B, XU M, et al. Repeated exposure to fungicide tebuconazole alters the degradation characteristics, soil microbial community and functional profiles[J]. Environmental pollution, 2021, 287:1-10.