Structural Characteristics of Rhizosphere Soil Microbial Communities in Wild Dendrobium denneanum with Different Growth Years

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0592

Abstract

Abstract:

The paper aims to address the current issues of growth age and rhizosphere soil community structure of wild Dendrobium denneanum. To explore the microbial community structure of rhizosphere soil of D. denneanum with different growth years, and the correlation between microbial community and effective components of medicinal materials and soil nutrients, four soil samples were set up, including the control group of untreated soil without D. denneanum (XCK), and the rhizosphere soil of D. denneanum grown for 2 years (A2), 3 years (A3), and 4 years (A4). High-throughput sequencing was used to analyze the microbial community structure, while the contents of polysaccharides, phenols, extracts of D. denneanum and soil nutrients were determined. The results showed that with the extension of D. denneanum growth years, the richness and diversity of rhizosphere soil bacteria first decreased and then increased, whereas those of fungi first increased and then decreased. At the phylum level of bacteria, Proteobacteria had the highest relative abundance, with the proportion in A3 reaching 59.3%, which was the highest among all groups; followed by Bacteroidota which was most abundant in A4 (42.6%), and Acidobacteriota which was most abundant in XCK (11.9%). For fungi, Mortierellomycota was the dominant phylum, with the highest proportion in A2 (58.1%); Ascomycota was most abundant in XCK (52.9%); and Basidiomycota had the highest relative abundance in A3 (17.3%). Correlation analysis indicated that soil organic matter, humus, total phosphorus, total nitrogen, and calcium were significantly correlated with the rhizosphere soil microbial community of D. denneanum. Meanwhile, fungal genera such as Mortierella, Trichoderma, Ilyonectria were significantly positively correlated with some effective components of D. denneanum. In conclusion, the growth years of D. denneanum had a significant impact on the species composition and diversity of its rhizosphere soil microbial community.

Key words: Dendrobium denneanum, growth years, rhizosphere microorganisms, community structure, soil nutrients, active ingredients

PENG Cuixian, WANG Can, YANG Yuling, LI Ling, LI Guilin, SUN Hongwei, TAO Yonghong. Structural Characteristics of Rhizosphere Soil Microbial Communities in Wild Dendrobium denneanum with Different Growth Years[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(7): 130-140.

Figures/Tables 10

References 44

[1]	祝蕾, 严辉, 刘培, 等. 药用植物根际微生物对其品质形成的影响及其作用机制的研究进展[J]. 中草药, 2021, 52(13):4064-4073.
[2]	马晓晶, 郭娟, 唐金富, 等. 论中药资源可持续发展的现状与未来[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2015, 40(10):1887-1892.
[3]	杨毅, 田侃, 倪新兴, 等. 中药材品质影响因素实证研究[J]. 中药材, 2016, 39(6):1251-1256.
[4]	国家药典委员会. 中华人民共和国药典:2015年版一部[M]. 北京: 中国医药科技出版社, 2015:282-283.
[5]	四川省食品药品监督管理局. 四川省中药材标准[M]. 成都: 四川科学技术出版社, 2010:414-418.
[6]	四川省食品药品监督管理局. 四川省中药饮片炮制规范[M]. 成都: 四川科学技术出版社, 2016:375-376.
[7]	薛倩倩, 尹显梅, 尹鸿翔, 等. 叠鞘石斛多糖抗氧化作用研究[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2015, 15(12):153-156.
[8]	范益军, 淳泽, 罗傲雪, 等. 迭鞘石斛中性多糖DDP1-1的体内免疫活性[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2010, 16(3):376-379.
[9]	JOSHUA G, JENNY K. Microbial group dynamics in plant rhizospheres and their implications on nutrient cycling[J]. Frontiers in microbiology, 2018, 9:1516. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01516 pmid: 30050510
[10]	MENDES R, GARBEVA P, RAAIJMAKERS J M. The rhizosphere microbiome: Significance of plant beneficial, plant pathogenic, and human pathogenic microorganisms[J]. FEMS microbiology reviews, 2013, 37(5):634-63. doi: 10.1111/1574-6976.12028 pmid: 23790204
[11]	KLAUS S, DAVIDE B. The plant microbiome at work[J]. Molecular plant-microbe interactions, 2015, 28(3):212-217. doi: 10.1094/MPMI-10-14-0334-FI pmid: 25514681
[12]	李熙英, 金海强, 贾斌. 不同生长年限人参地土壤微生物多样性研究初报[J]. 延边大学农学学报, 2011, 33(2):133-136.
[13]	ZENG M, ZHONG Y, CAI S, et al. Deciphering the bacterial composition in the rhizosphere of Baphicacanthus cusia (NeeS) Bremek[J]. Scientific reports, 2018, 8(1):15831-15831. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34177-1
[14]	母茂君, 张弟桂, 张华, 等. 太白贝母根际微生物分布与生物碱含量的相关性[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2019, 44(11):2231-2235.
[15]	唐彬彬, 董姚君, 贺密密, 等. 云南文山健康三七种植年限对根际微生物群落的影响[J]. 微生物学通报, 2020, 47(9):2857-2866.
[16]	张媛媛, 张彬. 苯酚-硫酸法与蒽酮-硫酸法测定绿茶茶多糖的比较研究[J]. 食品科学, 2016, 37(4):158-163. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201604028
[17]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000:11-23.
[18]	谭勇, 崔尹赡, 季秀玲, 等. 三七连作的根际、根内微生物变化与生态学研究进展[J]. 中草药, 2017, 48(2):391-399.
[19]	DONG L, XU J, ZHANG L, et al. Rhizospheric microbial communities are driven by Panax ginseng at different growth stages and biocontrol bacteria alleviates replanting mortality[J]. Acta pharmaceutica sinica B, 2018, 8(2):272-282. doi: 10.1016/j.apsb.2017.12.011 URL
[20]	于春雷, 高嵩, 孙文松. 连作对辽细辛土壤理化性质和根际微生物群落特征的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(14):250-258.
[21]	王光华, 刘俊杰, 于镇华, 等. 土壤酸杆菌门细菌生态学研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2016, 32(2):14-20. doi: 10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2016.02.002
[22]	丛微, 喻海茫, 于晶晶, 等. 人参种植对林地土壤细菌群落结构和代谢功能的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(1):162-171.
[23]	LYDELL C, DOWELL L, SIKAROODI M, et al. A population survey of members of the phylum Bacteroidetes isolated from salt marsh sediments along the east coast of the United States[J]. Microbial ecology, 2004, 48(2),263-273. pmid: 15107955
[24]	SHAH A, NAZARI M, ANTAR M, et al. PGPR in agriculture: A sustainable approach to increasing climate change resilience[J]. Frontiers in sustainable food systems, 2021, 5:211-232.
[25]	张嘉慧, 邢佳佳, 彭丽媛, 等. 丛枝菌根真菌提高感染青枯菌番茄根际土壤细菌群落多样性和稳定性及有益菌属相对丰度[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2023, 29(1):120-131.
[26]	黄芳芳. 农药对三七根际土壤被孢霉的影响及其田间定殖能力[D]. 昆明: 云南大学, 2017.
[27]	张英英, 魏玉杰, 吴之涛, 等. 不同种植年限对特殊药材土壤化学性质和微生物多样性的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41(1):150-159.
[28]	萨如拉, 于淼, 李媛媛, 等. 不同年限玉米秸秆还田对土壤微生物多样性的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2023(11):34-40.
[29]	USAMI T, KATAGIRI H. Pathogenicity of Plectosphaerella species on lettuce and susceptibility of lettuce cultivars[J]. Journal of general plant pathology, 2017, 83(6):366-372. doi: 10.1007/s10327-017-0736-5 URL
[30]	徐腾起. 生物有机肥对向日葵列当寄生的影响及其微生态机理研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2024.
[31]	XIE P, HUANG K R, DENG A H, et al. The diversity and abundance of bacterial and fungal communities in the rhizosphere of Cathaya argyrophylla are affected by soil physicochemical properties[J]. Frontiers in microbiology, 2023, 14:1111087. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1111087 URL
[32]	纳小凡, 郑国琦, 彭励, 等. 不同种植年限宁夏枸杞根际微生物多样性变化[J]. 土壤学报, 2016, 53(1):241-252.
[33]	范寒雪, 邹世杰, 章圣龙, 等. 嗜冷假单胞菌BYAU-6的分离及低温秸秆降解能力解析[J]. 微生物学报, 2025, 65(8):3273-3286.
[34]	RODRÍGUEZ H, FRAGA R. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion[J]. Biotechnology advances, 1999, 17(4):319-339. doi: 10.1016/S0734-9750(99)00014-2 URL
[35]	LI X, LI B, ZHENG Y, et al. Physiological and rhizospheric response characteristics to cadmium of a newly identified cadmium accumulator Coreopsis grandiflora Hogg(Asteraceae)[J]. Ecotoxicology and environmental safety, 2022, 241:113739. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2022.113739 URL
[36]	谢慧娜. 载体对腈纶废水生化处理过程中微生物群落结构影响[D]. 兰州: 兰州交通大学, 2018.
[37]	LV N, LIU Y, GUO T, et al. The influence of Bt cotton cultivation on the structure and functions of the soil bacterial community by soil metagenomics[J]. Ecotoxicology and environmental safety, 2022, 236:113452. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2022.113452 URL
[38]	巩婷, 温艳华, 陈尔东, 等. 担子菌类真菌新产物研究进展[J]. 菌物研究, 2017, 15(2):89-111.
[39]	NONG Z, MEI C M, YU X Z, et al. Research progress of rhizosphere microorganisms in Fritillaria L. medicinal plants[J]. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022, 10:1054757. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.1054757 URL
[40]	吴林坤, 林向民, 林文雄. 根系分泌物介导下植物-土壤-微生物互作关系研究进展与展望[J]. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(3):298-310. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00027
[41]	栗圣榕, 谢巧, 廖莉, 等. 叠鞘石斛适宜采收期分析[J]. 中成药, 2020, 42(1):237-242.
[42]	SUN J, YANG J, ZHAO S, et al. Root exudates influence rhizosphere fungi and thereby synergistically regulate Panax ginseng yield and quality[J]. Frontiers in microbiology, 2023, 14(1):6.
[43]	冯璐, 李振凯, 王红, 等. 不同种植年限银柴胡根际土壤微生物群落结构变化[J]. 微生物学通报, 2024, 51(10):4132-4148.
[44]	ZHAI T, WANG Y, LIU C, et al. Trichoderma asperellum ACCC30536 inoculation improves soil nutrition and leaf artemisinin production in Artemisia annua[J]. Acta physiologiae plantarum, 2019, 41(4):11. doi: 10.1007/s11738-018-2798-1

处理	多糖	石斛酚	浸出物
A2	6.6667±0.0407a	0.0055±0.0001b	14.2773±1.0984b
A3	5.2667±0.0517c	0.0064±0.0004a	15.4313±1.2547ab
A4	6.1666±0.0577b	0.0066±0.0001a	15.7643±0.3398a

处理	多糖	石斛酚	浸出物
A2	6.6667±0.0407a	0.0055±0.0001b	14.2773±1.0984b
A3	5.2667±0.0517c	0.0064±0.0004a	15.4313±1.2547ab
A4	6.1666±0.0577b	0.0066±0.0001a	15.7643±0.3398a

处理	有机质	全氮	全磷	全钾	钙	腐殖质
A2	522.78±3.25a	22.52±1.11a	3.08±0.07b	3.68±0.17c	16.36±0.66a	302.36±0.84a
A3	166.59±4.04c	6.29±0.58c	2.11±0.01c	9.70±0.21b	7.48±0.42b	99.65±2.90b
A4	494.04±1.60b	15.70±0.01b	6.04±0.03a	26.45±0.01a	16.93±0.08a	298.90±0.29a
XCK	39.59±0.94d	2.08±0.01d	1.84±0.05d	8.52±0.15b	3.77±0.20c	25.30±0.65c

处理	有机质	全氮	全磷	全钾	钙	腐殖质
A2	522.78±3.25a	22.52±1.11a	3.08±0.07b	3.68±0.17c	16.36±0.66a	302.36±0.84a
A3	166.59±4.04c	6.29±0.58c	2.11±0.01c	9.70±0.21b	7.48±0.42b	99.65±2.90b
A4	494.04±1.60b	15.70±0.01b	6.04±0.03a	26.45±0.01a	16.93±0.08a	298.90±0.29a
XCK	39.59±0.94d	2.08±0.01d	1.84±0.05d	8.52±0.15b	3.77±0.20c	25.30±0.65c

处理	细菌		真菌
处理	Chao1	Simpson	Chao1	Simpson
XCK	2089.01±16.70a	1.00±0.0001a	541.33±22.55a	0.97±0.005a
A2	1684.33±98.36b	0.97±0.0029b	394.04±30.81b	0.83±0.050b
A3	1316.02±23.07c	0.92±0.0053c	439.33±33.65c	0.93±0.009c
A4	1628.67±138.54b	0.99±0.0015b	424.01±12.77b	0.78±0.053b