Analysis of Rhizosphere Soil Fungal Diversity Between Root Rot Diseased and Healthy Polygonatum cyrtonema Plants Under Different Cultivation Modes

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0493

Abstract

Abstract:

The changes of community structure and fungal diversity in the rhizosphere soil of healthy and root rot diseased Polygonatum cyrtonema under varied cultivation modes were studied to provide theoretical support for the rational cultivation of P. cyrtonema and the targeted improvement of soil microbial community. Based on the Illumina HiSeq sequencing platform, the Paired-end was used to systematically analyze the changes of community structure and fungal diversity in the rhizosphere soil of healthy and root rot diseased P. cyrtonema that planted in the field and understory. The results showed that Ascomycota and Basidiomycota were the dominant fungal phyla in the rhizosphere soil of healthy and diseased plants under different cultivation patterns. Compared with the field cultivation, the rhizosphere soil fungal amount and the relative abundance of Ascomycota (except 4a diseased samples) were significantly increased in understory cultivation, while the relative abundance of Basidiomycota and Fusarium genera (except 4a diseased samples) were significantly decreased. Except for the 2a healthy plants, the rhizosphere soil fungal diversity of P. cyrtonema planted in understory was significantly higher than that in field. Among them, the Ace index and Chao1 index of the 2a diseased plants, 4a healthy plants and 4a diseased plants in the understory cultivation were 9.09%, 20.95%, 24.22% and 24.36%, 12.19% and 12.27% higher than those in field, respectively. Compared with healthy plants, the rhizosphere soil fungal amount of 2a diseased plants in field and 4a diseased plants in understory were significantly reduced, but the relative abundance of Fusarium genera in the rhizosphere soil of 4a diseased plants was significantly increased. There were no significant differences in the alpha diversity index between healthy and diseased P. cyrtonema under different cultivation modes (P>0.05). In conclusion, there were large differences in the rhizosphere soil fungal community structure and fungal diversity between healthy and diseased P. cyrtonema plants under different cultivation modes, and the relative abundance of harmful fungal genera, such as Fusarium in the rhizosphere soil, was one of the important reasons for the occurrence of P. cyrtonema root rot.

Key words: Polygonatum cyrtonema, soil fungal diversity, root rot, understory cultivation, field cultivation, Illumina HiSeq sequencing

GE Xiumei, LI Fang, WAN Xiaoting, HAN Bangxing, CHEN Cunwu. Analysis of Rhizosphere Soil Fungal Diversity Between Root Rot Diseased and Healthy Polygonatum cyrtonema Plants Under Different Cultivation Modes[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(3): 59-68.

Figures/Tables 10

References 51

[1]	国家药典委员会编. 中华人民共和国药典(一部)[M]. 北京: 中国医药科技出版社, 2020:319-320.
[2]	项昭保, 陈鹏飞, 刘岩. 多花黄精活性成分研究进展[J]. 重庆工商大学学报:自然科学版, 2024, 41(1):1-11.
[3]	CAO W, YUAN F, LIU T, et al. Network pharmacology analysis, molecular docking integrated experimental verification reveal beta-sitosterol as the active anti-NSCLC ingredient of Polygonatum cyrtonema Hua by suppression of PI3K/Akt/HIF-1alpha signaling pathway[J]. Journal of ethnopharmacology, 2024, 328:117900.
[4]	LIU S, JIA Q J, PENG Y Q, et al. Advances in mechanism research on Polygonatum in prevention and treatment of diabetes[J]. Frontiers in pharmacology, 2022, 13:758501.
[5]	程亚楠, 张金华, 田胜兰, 等. 不同来源多花黄精多糖的结构特性及抗氧化活性比较[J]. 现代食品科技, 2023, 39(7):145-153.
[6]	刘涛, 嵇晶, 王令充, 等. 基于LC-MS分析及网络药理学研究探讨多花黄精改善炎性疲劳的效应机制[J]. 南京中医药大学学报, 2023, 39(9):879-887.
[7]	吴兰兰, 吴钢, 谭强来, 等. 煮制对多花黄精多糖结构及其体外免疫刺激活性的影响[J]. 中国食物与营养, 2023, 29(6):28-34.
[8]	杨庆雄, 李欣. 林下经济作物黄精的研究进展[J]. 贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2024(6):1-14.
[9]	刘跃钧, 曾岳明, 叶征莺, 等. 多花黄精栽培技术研究进展[J]. 中国现代中药, 2022, 24(4):715-720.
[10]	岳庆艳. 大田栽培技术对农业生态发展的促进作用[J]. 农业开发与装备, 2016, 10:52.
[11]	孟缘, 付心雨, 鞠吉东, 等. 根际微生物介导药用植物-土壤负反馈形成连作障碍的作用机制[J]. 科技导报, 2023, 41(16):82-88. doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2023.16.007
[12]	苏浩, 张锐澎, 吴思炫, 等. 连作障碍产生机理及防控现状[J]. 土壤, 2024, 56(2):242-254.
[13]	张静怡, 韩海斌, 尹强, 等. 紫花苜蓿连作障碍研究进展[J]. 中国草地学报, 2024, 46(6):135-143.
[14]	郭兰萍, 康传志, 周涛, 等. 中药生态农业最新进展及展望[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2021, 46(8):1851-1857.
[15]	郭兰萍, 王铁霖, 杨婉珍, 等. 生态农业——中药农业的必由之路[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2017, 42(2):231-238.
[16]	龙志望. 多花黄精的特征特性及林下种植技术[J]. 种子科技, 2024, 42(7):66-68.
[17]	熊康宁, 肖杰, 朱大运. 混农林生态系统服务研究进展[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(3):851-861.
[18]	程立君, 王磊, 吴银梅, 等. 高通量测序技术分析光叶珙桐根际土壤微生物多样性[J]. 广东农业科学, 2019, 46(1):43-49.
[19]	王勇, 何舒, 熊冰杰, 等. 不同栽培模式对人参根际土壤微生物多样性的影响研究[J]. 中草药, 2021, 52(17):5303-5310.
[20]	徐丽慧, 曾蓉, 高士刚, 等. 土壤真菌多样性对土传病害影响的研究进展[J]. 上海农业学报, 2017, 33(3):161-165.
[21]	任玉连, 陆梅, 范方喜, 等. 高原湿地沼泽化草甸土壤真菌与理化性质的关系[J]. 生态科学, 2019, 38(1):42-49.
[22]	钱韦. 《微生物学通报》与中国植物相关细菌研究40年[J]. 微生物学通报, 2014, 41(3):445-449.
[23]	AGUILAR-TRIGUEROS C A, POWELL J R, ANDERSON I C, et al. Ecological understanding of root-infecting fungi using trait-based approaches[J]. Trends in plant science, 2014, 19(7):432-438.
[24]	PANG Z, MAO X, XIA Y, et al. Multiomics reveals the effect of root rot on Polygonati Rhizome and identifies pathogens and biocontrol strain[J]. Microbiology spectrum, 2022, 10(2):e0238521.
[25]	陈晓霞, 于红豆, 李梦玮, 等. 基于文献计量分析的根腐病研究现状及趋势[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2024, 30(3):623-632.
[26]	林亚, 蔡瑜, 胡凡, 等. 大黄根腐病与土壤营养及微生物群落组成的相关性研究[J]. 西南大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 46(3):70-83.
[27]	贺璐, 马杰, 傅淋, 等. 卷丹百合根腐病植株与健康植株根际土壤真菌群落结构差异[J]. 西南农业学报, 2023, 36(11):2419-2425.
[28]	丛丽丽, 康俊梅, 张铁军, 等. 苜蓿镰刀菌根腐病病原菌的分离鉴定与致病性分析[J]. 草地学报, 2017, 25(4):857-865. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2017.04.025
[29]	曾志浩, 王思凡, 林文波, 等. 油松林下种植牡丹土壤真菌群落结构及多样性[J]. 福建林业科技, 2024, 51(2):1-7,18.
[30]	赵晶晶, 牛晓燕, 程宇琪, 等. 我国森林凋落物分解研究进展[J]. 内蒙古林业科技, 2017, 43(3):43-46.
[31]	COROI M, SKEFFINGTON M S, GILLER P, et al. Vegetation diversity and stand structure in streamside forests in the south of Ireland[J]. Forest ecology and management, 2004, 202(1):39-57.
[32]	王静娅, 王明亮, 张凤华. 干旱区典型盐生植物群落下土壤微生物群落特征[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(8):2363-2372.
[33]	叶充, 胡庭兴, 黄从德, 等. 我国人工林地力衰退与维护研究[J]. 四川林业科技, 2005, 26(4):50-55.
[34]	周煜杰, 贾夏, 赵永华, 等. 森林生态系统土壤真菌群落及其影响因素研究进展[J]. 生态环境学报, 2020, 29(8):1703-1712. doi: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2020.08.023
[35]	邓楚璇, 周英, 李上官, 等. 基于高通量测序的土壤微生物群落结构对土地利用方式的响应[J]. 四川林业科技, 2021, 42(1):16-24.
[36]	NGUYEN H D, NICKERSON N L, SEIFERT K A. Basidioascus and geminibasidium: a new lineage of heat-resistant and xerotolerant basidiomycetes[J]. Mycologia, 2013, 105(5):1231-1250. doi: 10.3852/12-351 pmid: 23709525
[37]	魏晓帅, 郭米山, 高广磊, 等. 呼伦贝尔沙地樟子松根内真菌群落结构与功能群特征[J]. 北京大学学报:自然科学版, 2020, 56(4):710-720.
[38]	DONG L, XU J, FENG G, et al. Soil bacterial and fungal community dynamics in relation to Panax notoginseng death rate in a continuous cropping system[J]. Scientific reports, 2016, 6(1):31802.
[39]	陈海生, 江景勇, 潘仙鹏, 等. 猕猴桃根腐病发生对其植株根际土壤真菌群落结构影响[J]. 四川农业大学学报, 2023, 41(4):631-639.
[40]	罗维鸿, 王培育, 李尊文, 等. 铁皮石斛茎腐病病原鉴定及拮抗菌筛选[J]. 分子植物育种, 2024(6):1-16.
[41]	LAURENT A, MERWIN I A, FAZIO G, et al. Rootstock genotype succession influences apple replant disease and root-zone microbial community composition in an orchard soil[J]. Plant and soil, 2010, 337(1):259-272.
[42]	ARANDA S, MONTES-BORREGO M, JIMENEZ-DIAZ R M, et al. Microbial communities associated with the root system of wild olives (Olea europaea) are good reservoirs of bacteria with antagonistic potential against Verticillium dahliae[J]. Plant and soil, 2011, 343(1):329-345.
[43]	胡子贤. 结香根腐病根际土壤微生物群落组成与多样性特点[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2023.
[44]	刘晓丽, 张月荣, 姜霞, 等. 潞党参根腐病根际土壤真菌群落及与土壤因子的关系[J]. 分子植物育种, 2024, 22(4):1233-1241.
[45]	李雪萍, 李建宏, 漆永红, 等. 青稞根腐病对根际土壤微生物及酶活性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(17):5640-5649.
[46]	甄文超, 曹克强, 代丽, 等. 利用药用植物源土壤添加物控制草莓再植病害的研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2005, 4:730-735.
[47]	CHEN C, CHENG Y, ZHANG F, et al. A comparative analysis of microbial communities in the rhizosphere soil and plant roots of healthy and diseased Yuanyang nanqi (Panax vietnamensis) with root rot[J]. Agriculture, 2024, 14(5):719.
[48]	WANG X, CHI Y, SONG S. Important soil microbiota's effects on plants and soils: a comprehensive 30-year systematic literature review[J]. Frontiers in microbiology, 2024, 15:1347745.
[49]	郑元仙, 杨敏, 王继明, 等. 烤烟根腐病对烟株根际土壤真菌群落结构的影响[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2021, 42(2):50-55.
[50]	高鑫媛, 赵红玲, 白茹玥, 等. 北苍术根腐病植株根际土壤真菌群落多样性分析[J]. 西南农业学报, 2022, 35(4):812-821.
[51]	TIAN L, OU J, SUN X, et al. The discovery of pivotal fungus and major determinant factor shaping soil microbial community composition associated with rot root of American ginseng[J]. Plant signaling & behavior, 2021, 16(11):1952372.

区域	名称	序列
V3-V4	338F	5'- ACTCCTACGGGAGGCAGCA-3'
V3-V4	806R	5'- GGACTACHVGGGTWTCTAAT-3'

区域	名称	序列
V3-V4	338F	5'- ACTCCTACGGGAGGCAGCA-3'
V3-V4	806R	5'- GGACTACHVGGGTWTCTAAT-3'

栽培模式	种植年限/a	处理组	Ace指数	香农指数	辛普森指数	Chao1指数
大田	2	健株	153.69±23.55abc	5.41±0.22abc	0.95±0.01a	152.92±24.53bc
	2	病株	145.32±17.41bcd	5.32±0.23abc	0.94±0.01a	137.00±14.18cd
	4	健株	124.05±14.6d	4.99±0.36c	0.94±0.03a	123.67±14.60d
	4	病株	139.58±9.69cd	5.17±0.35bc	0.95±0.02a	139.33±9.81cd
林下	2	健株	158.24±9.49abc	5.37±0.03abc	0.96±0.01a	158.00±9.64abc
	2	病株	174.80±4.21a	5.74±0.14a	0.97±0.01a	174.50±4.09ab
	4	健株	178.64±4.33a	5.53±0.23ab	0.96±0.01a	178.33±4.48a
	4	病株	170.00±0.00ab	5.42±0.20abc	0.96±0.01a	170.00±0.00ab

栽培模式	种植年限/a	处理组	Ace指数	香农指数	辛普森指数	Chao1指数
大田	2	健株	153.69±23.55abc	5.41±0.22abc	0.95±0.01a	152.92±24.53bc
	2	病株	145.32±17.41bcd	5.32±0.23abc	0.94±0.01a	137.00±14.18cd
	4	健株	124.05±14.6d	4.99±0.36c	0.94±0.03a	123.67±14.60d
	4	病株	139.58±9.69cd	5.17±0.35bc	0.95±0.02a	139.33±9.81cd
林下	2	健株	158.24±9.49abc	5.37±0.03abc	0.96±0.01a	158.00±9.64abc
	2	病株	174.80±4.21a	5.74±0.14a	0.97±0.01a	174.50±4.09ab
	4	健株	178.64±4.33a	5.53±0.23ab	0.96±0.01a	178.33±4.48a
	4	病株	170.00±0.00ab	5.42±0.20abc	0.96±0.01a	170.00±0.00ab