
Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (7): 141-152.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0761
Previous Articles Next Articles
WANG Lihua1(
), YAN Huijun1, YANG Xiumei1, LIAO Jiawei1, DUAN Jinhui2, WANG Huichun1, CHEN Min1, YANG Wei1, WANG Qigang1(
)
Received:2025-09-07
Revised:2026-03-15
Online:2026-04-15
Published:2026-04-15
WANG Lihua, YAN Huijun, YANG Xiumei, LIAO Jiawei, DUAN Jinhui, WANG Huichun, CHEN Min, YANG Wei, WANG Qigang. Study on Rhizosphere Nutrient Content and Microbial Diversity of Cut Rose Under Different Cultivation Modes[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(7): 141-152.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0761
| 检测指标 | 检测方法 | 检测设备 |
|---|---|---|
| 酸碱度(pH) | 土壤中pH值的测定(NY/T 1377—2007) | pH计 |
| EC | 土壤电导率的测定 电极法(HJ 802—2016) | 电导率仪 |
| 铵态氮(NH4+) | 森林土壤氮的测定(LY/T 1228—2015) | UVC |
| 硝态氮(NO3-) | 森林土壤氮的测定(LY/T 1228—2015) | UVC |
| 有效磷(P) | Olsen-P法 | UVC |
| 有效钾(K) | 土壤速效钾和缓效钾含量的测定(NY/T 889—2004) | AAS |
| 有效钙(Ca) | 土壤检测第13部分:土壤交换性钙和镁的测定(NY/T 1121.13—2006) | AAS |
| 有效镁(Mg) | ||
| 有效硫(S) | 土壤检测第14部分:土壤有效硫的测定(NY/T 1121.14—2023) | UVC |
| 氯离子(Cl-) | 土壤氯离子含量的测定(NY/T 1378—2007) | 电位计 |
| 钠离子(Na+) | 森林土壤交换性钾和钠的测定(LY/T 1246—1999) | AAS |
| 碳酸氢根(HCO3-) | 双指示剂中和法 | 滴定法 |
| 有效铁(Fe) | 土壤有效态锌、锰、铁、铜含量的测定二乙三胺五乙酸(DTPA)浸提法(NY/T 890—2004) | AAS |
| 有效锰(Mn) | ||
| 有效铜(Cu) | ||
| 有效锌(Zn) | ||
| 有效硼(B) | 土壤有效硼测定方法(NY/T 149—1990) | UVC |
| 有效钼(Mo) | 土壤检测第9部分:土壤有效钼的测定(NY/T 1121.9—2023) | 极谱仪 |
| 检测指标 | 检测方法 | 检测设备 |
|---|---|---|
| 酸碱度(pH) | 土壤中pH值的测定(NY/T 1377—2007) | pH计 |
| EC | 土壤电导率的测定 电极法(HJ 802—2016) | 电导率仪 |
| 铵态氮(NH4+) | 森林土壤氮的测定(LY/T 1228—2015) | UVC |
| 硝态氮(NO3-) | 森林土壤氮的测定(LY/T 1228—2015) | UVC |
| 有效磷(P) | Olsen-P法 | UVC |
| 有效钾(K) | 土壤速效钾和缓效钾含量的测定(NY/T 889—2004) | AAS |
| 有效钙(Ca) | 土壤检测第13部分:土壤交换性钙和镁的测定(NY/T 1121.13—2006) | AAS |
| 有效镁(Mg) | ||
| 有效硫(S) | 土壤检测第14部分:土壤有效硫的测定(NY/T 1121.14—2023) | UVC |
| 氯离子(Cl-) | 土壤氯离子含量的测定(NY/T 1378—2007) | 电位计 |
| 钠离子(Na+) | 森林土壤交换性钾和钠的测定(LY/T 1246—1999) | AAS |
| 碳酸氢根(HCO3-) | 双指示剂中和法 | 滴定法 |
| 有效铁(Fe) | 土壤有效态锌、锰、铁、铜含量的测定二乙三胺五乙酸(DTPA)浸提法(NY/T 890—2004) | AAS |
| 有效锰(Mn) | ||
| 有效铜(Cu) | ||
| 有效锌(Zn) | ||
| 有效硼(B) | 土壤有效硼测定方法(NY/T 149—1990) | UVC |
| 有效钼(Mo) | 土壤检测第9部分:土壤有效钼的测定(NY/T 1121.9—2023) | 极谱仪 |
| 模式 | 处理 | 原始识别CCS数 | 有效CCS数 | 有效序列占比/% | OTU数量 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 真菌 | 细菌 | 真菌 | 细菌 | 真菌 | 细菌 | 真菌 | 细菌 | |||||
| 土壤 | T1 | 13056 | 10474 | 12225 | 9400 | 93.64 | 89.75 | 205 | 821 | |||
| T2 | 13015 | 10325 | 12164 | 9286 | 93.46 | 89.94 | 178 | 759 | ||||
| T3 | 12984 | 10918 | 12100 | 9867 | 93.19 | 90.37 | 173 | 800 | ||||
| 平均 | 13018 | 10572 | 12163 | 9518 | 93.43 | 90.02 | 185 | 793 | ||||
| 基质 | J1 | 13093 | 12530 | 12203 | 11241 | 93.2 | 89.71 | 251 | 1017 | |||
| J2 | 12975 | 13001 | 12105 | 11450 | 93.29 | 88.07 | 233 | 1024 | ||||
| J3 | 12930 | 13075 | 12122 | 11645 | 93.75 | 89.06 | 222 | 1026 | ||||
| 平均 | 12999 | 12869 | 12143 | 11445 | 93.41 | 88.95 | 235 | 1022 | ||||
| 合计 | 78053 | 70323 | 72919 | 62889 | 578 | 1597 | ||||||
| 模式 | 处理 | 原始识别CCS数 | 有效CCS数 | 有效序列占比/% | OTU数量 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 真菌 | 细菌 | 真菌 | 细菌 | 真菌 | 细菌 | 真菌 | 细菌 | |||||
| 土壤 | T1 | 13056 | 10474 | 12225 | 9400 | 93.64 | 89.75 | 205 | 821 | |||
| T2 | 13015 | 10325 | 12164 | 9286 | 93.46 | 89.94 | 178 | 759 | ||||
| T3 | 12984 | 10918 | 12100 | 9867 | 93.19 | 90.37 | 173 | 800 | ||||
| 平均 | 13018 | 10572 | 12163 | 9518 | 93.43 | 90.02 | 185 | 793 | ||||
| 基质 | J1 | 13093 | 12530 | 12203 | 11241 | 93.2 | 89.71 | 251 | 1017 | |||
| J2 | 12975 | 13001 | 12105 | 11450 | 93.29 | 88.07 | 233 | 1024 | ||||
| J3 | 12930 | 13075 | 12122 | 11645 | 93.75 | 89.06 | 222 | 1026 | ||||
| 平均 | 12999 | 12869 | 12143 | 11445 | 93.41 | 88.95 | 235 | 1022 | ||||
| 合计 | 78053 | 70323 | 72919 | 62889 | 578 | 1597 | ||||||
| 项目 | 类别 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | 平均 | 合计 | J1 | J2 | J3 | 平均 | 合计 | |||
| Reads数/条 | 真菌 | 6827 | 7973 | 8442 | 7747 | 15076 | 3046 | 2905 | 3075 | 3009 | 12311 | |
| 细菌 | 6986 | 7290 | 7711 | 7329 | 9062 | 9157 | 9687 | 9302 | ||||
| 物种数/个 | 真菌 | 74 | 55 | 65 | 65 | 400 | 55 | 48 | 47 | 50 | 439 | |
| 细菌 | 355 | 312 | 339 | 335 | 388 | 382 | 396 | 389 | ||||
| 项目 | 类别 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | 平均 | 合计 | J1 | J2 | J3 | 平均 | 合计 | |||
| Reads数/条 | 真菌 | 6827 | 7973 | 8442 | 7747 | 15076 | 3046 | 2905 | 3075 | 3009 | 12311 | |
| 细菌 | 6986 | 7290 | 7711 | 7329 | 9062 | 9157 | 9687 | 9302 | ||||
| 物种数/个 | 真菌 | 74 | 55 | 65 | 65 | 400 | 55 | 48 | 47 | 50 | 439 | |
| 细菌 | 355 | 312 | 339 | 335 | 388 | 382 | 396 | 389 | ||||
| 物种 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | 平均 | J1 | J2 | J3 | 平均 | |||
| 真菌 | Dactylonectria alcacerensis | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.12 | 0.05 | 1.19 | 1.43 | 1.46 | 1.36 | |
| Talaromyces thailandensis | 0.35 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.14 | 1.02 | 2.84 | 1.70 | 1.85 | ||
| Amorocoelophoma cassiae | 2.46 | 2.75 | 0.93 | 2.05 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||
| Cladosporium cycadicola | 0.37 | 0.51 | 0.15 | 0.34 | 2.36 | 1.57 | 1.24 | 1.72 | ||
| Chaetomium longiciliata | 0.84 | 3.16 | 2.54 | 2.18 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.01 | ||
| Fusarium circinatum | 4.19 | 2.62 | 0.84 | 2.55 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.08 | ||
| Dactylonectria anthuriicola | 0.08 | 0.00 | 0.1 | 0.06 | 2.32 | 2.32 | 5.62 | 3.42 | ||
| Penicillium olsonii | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.16 | 0.06 | 5.89 | 3.13 | 4.17 | 4.40 | ||
| Zopfiella marina | 11.67 | 19.05 | 4.57 | 11.76 | 6.80 | 9.21 | 8.64 | 8.22 | ||
| Condenascus tortuosus | 27.3 | 31.78 | 56.31 | 38.47 | 1.07 | 0.09 | 0.80 | 0.65 | ||
| 合计 | 47.33 | 59.91 | 65.75 | 57.66 | 20.69 | 20.67 | 23.78 | 21.71 | ||
| 细菌 | uncultured bacterium g. Pseudolabrys | 2.20 | 3.47 | 3.22 | 2.96 | 3.31 | 3.07 | 3.20 | 3.19 | |
| uncultured bacterium f. Gemmatimonadaceae | 5.75 | 4.99 | 5.14 | 5.29 | 0.40 | 0.58 | 0.40 | 0.46 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. Chitinophagaceae | 1.26 | 2.30 | 2.68 | 2.08 | 3.18 | 4.15 | 2.67 | 3.33 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. TRA3-20 | 1.55 | 1.52 | 1.78 | 1.62 | 3.44 | 2.53 | 3.53 | 3.17 | ||
| uncultured bacterium c. Subgroup 6 | 2.81 | 3.70 | 3.37 | 3.29 | 0.63 | 0.50 | 0.54 | 0.56 | ||
| uncultured bacterium g. Rhodanobacter | 0.09 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 2.97 | 2.69 | 5.56 | 3.74 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. Micropepsaceae | 0.09 | 0.56 | 0.34 | 0.33 | 2.90 | 3.93 | 2.86 | 3.23 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. Pedosphaeraceae | 1.10 | 1.73 | 1.01 | 1.28 | 2.16 | 3.17 | 1.41 | 2.25 | ||
| uncultured bacterium o. Acidobacteriales | 3.09 | 1.10 | 2.45 | 2.21 | 0.99 | 1.76 | 1.10 | 1.29 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. SC-I-84 | 2.15 | 2.30 | 3.77 | 2.74 | 0.45 | 0.50 | 1.08 | 0.68 | ||
| 合计 | 20.09 | 21.67 | 23.79 | 21.85 | 20.43 | 22.88 | 22.35 | 21.90 | ||
| 有益菌 | uncultured bacterium g. Burkholderia Caballeronia Paraburkholderia | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.05 | 0.12 | 0.10 | |
| burkholderiaceae bacterium | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.06 | 0.66 | 0.61 | 0.79 | 0.69 | ||
| Bacillus sp. | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.09 | ||
| 物种 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | 平均 | J1 | J2 | J3 | 平均 | |||
| 真菌 | Dactylonectria alcacerensis | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.12 | 0.05 | 1.19 | 1.43 | 1.46 | 1.36 | |
| Talaromyces thailandensis | 0.35 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.14 | 1.02 | 2.84 | 1.70 | 1.85 | ||
| Amorocoelophoma cassiae | 2.46 | 2.75 | 0.93 | 2.05 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||
| Cladosporium cycadicola | 0.37 | 0.51 | 0.15 | 0.34 | 2.36 | 1.57 | 1.24 | 1.72 | ||
| Chaetomium longiciliata | 0.84 | 3.16 | 2.54 | 2.18 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.01 | ||
| Fusarium circinatum | 4.19 | 2.62 | 0.84 | 2.55 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.08 | ||
| Dactylonectria anthuriicola | 0.08 | 0.00 | 0.1 | 0.06 | 2.32 | 2.32 | 5.62 | 3.42 | ||
| Penicillium olsonii | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.16 | 0.06 | 5.89 | 3.13 | 4.17 | 4.40 | ||
| Zopfiella marina | 11.67 | 19.05 | 4.57 | 11.76 | 6.80 | 9.21 | 8.64 | 8.22 | ||
| Condenascus tortuosus | 27.3 | 31.78 | 56.31 | 38.47 | 1.07 | 0.09 | 0.80 | 0.65 | ||
| 合计 | 47.33 | 59.91 | 65.75 | 57.66 | 20.69 | 20.67 | 23.78 | 21.71 | ||
| 细菌 | uncultured bacterium g. Pseudolabrys | 2.20 | 3.47 | 3.22 | 2.96 | 3.31 | 3.07 | 3.20 | 3.19 | |
| uncultured bacterium f. Gemmatimonadaceae | 5.75 | 4.99 | 5.14 | 5.29 | 0.40 | 0.58 | 0.40 | 0.46 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. Chitinophagaceae | 1.26 | 2.30 | 2.68 | 2.08 | 3.18 | 4.15 | 2.67 | 3.33 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. TRA3-20 | 1.55 | 1.52 | 1.78 | 1.62 | 3.44 | 2.53 | 3.53 | 3.17 | ||
| uncultured bacterium c. Subgroup 6 | 2.81 | 3.70 | 3.37 | 3.29 | 0.63 | 0.50 | 0.54 | 0.56 | ||
| uncultured bacterium g. Rhodanobacter | 0.09 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 2.97 | 2.69 | 5.56 | 3.74 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. Micropepsaceae | 0.09 | 0.56 | 0.34 | 0.33 | 2.90 | 3.93 | 2.86 | 3.23 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. Pedosphaeraceae | 1.10 | 1.73 | 1.01 | 1.28 | 2.16 | 3.17 | 1.41 | 2.25 | ||
| uncultured bacterium o. Acidobacteriales | 3.09 | 1.10 | 2.45 | 2.21 | 0.99 | 1.76 | 1.10 | 1.29 | ||
| uncultured bacterium f. SC-I-84 | 2.15 | 2.30 | 3.77 | 2.74 | 0.45 | 0.50 | 1.08 | 0.68 | ||
| 合计 | 20.09 | 21.67 | 23.79 | 21.85 | 20.43 | 22.88 | 22.35 | 21.90 | ||
| 有益菌 | uncultured bacterium g. Burkholderia Caballeronia Paraburkholderia | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.05 | 0.12 | 0.10 | |
| burkholderiaceae bacterium | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.06 | 0.66 | 0.61 | 0.79 | 0.69 | ||
| Bacillus sp. | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.09 | ||
| 处理 | 类别 | Feature | ACE | Chao1 | Simpson | Shannon | PD whole tree | 覆盖率/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 土壤模式 | 真菌 | 185 | 187.99 | 189.92 | 0.81 | 4.27 | 39.84 | 0.999 |
| 细菌 | 793 | 906.80 | 916.58 | 0.99 | 8.29 | 46.97 | 0.977 | |
| 基质模式 | 真菌 | 235 | 245.77 | 248.13 | 0.92 | 5.30 | 47.85 | 0.998 |
| 细菌 | 1022 | 1164.06 | 1159.67 | 0.99 | 8.57 | 63.64 | 0.977 |
| 处理 | 类别 | Feature | ACE | Chao1 | Simpson | Shannon | PD whole tree | 覆盖率/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 土壤模式 | 真菌 | 185 | 187.99 | 189.92 | 0.81 | 4.27 | 39.84 | 0.999 |
| 细菌 | 793 | 906.80 | 916.58 | 0.99 | 8.29 | 46.97 | 0.977 | |
| 基质模式 | 真菌 | 235 | 245.77 | 248.13 | 0.92 | 5.30 | 47.85 | 0.998 |
| 细菌 | 1022 | 1164.06 | 1159.67 | 0.99 | 8.57 | 63.64 | 0.977 |
| 序号 | 生态功能群物种类别 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | 小计 | J1 | J2 | J3 | 小计 | ||||
| 1 | Animal Endosymbiont-Animal Pathogen-Endophyte-Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 7 | ||
| 2 | Animal Parasite-Fungal Parasite | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ||
| 3 | Animal Pathogen | 30 | 17 | 0 | 47 | 15 | 33 | 18 | 66 | ||
| 4 | Animal Pathogen-Dung Saprotroph-Endophyte-Plant Saprotroph-Soil Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 0 | 107 | 72 | 179 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 5 | Animal Pathogen-Endophyte-Plant Saprotroph-Soil Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ||
| 6 | Animal Pathogen-Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 7 | Animal Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 13 | ||
| 8 | Arbuscular Mycorrhizal | 265 | 63 | 95 | 423 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 9 | Dung Saprotroph | 1334 | 2190 | 575 | 4099 | 757 | 998 | 957 | 2712 | ||
| 10 | Dung Saprotroph-Endophyte-Wood Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 10 | 19 | 43 | ||
| 11 | Dung Saprotroph-Plant Saprotroph | 5 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | ||
| 12 | Dung Saprotroph-Soil Saprotroph | 0 | 18 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 13 | Dung Saprotroph-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 14 | Dung Saprotroph-Undefined Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 27 | 63 | 1 | 91 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 15 | Endophyte | 41 | 6 | 0 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 16 | Endophyte-Lichen Parasite-Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 14 | 0 | 27 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 17 | Endophyte-Plant Pathogen-Wood Saprotroph | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 18 | Fungal Parasite | 38 | 17 | 28 | 83 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | ||
| 19 | Plant Parasite-Wood Saprotroph | 55 | 0 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 20 | Plant Pathogen | 224 | 82 | 33 | 339 | 18 | 61 | 20 | 99 | ||
| 21 | Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 22 | Plant Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 23 | Undefined Saprotroph | 464 | 192 | 297 | 953 | 298 | 502 | 277 | 1077 | ||
| 24 | Undefined Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 42 | 11 | 9 | 62 | 15 | 12 | 1 | 28 | ||
| 25 | Wood Saprotroph | 4 | 0 | 18 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 序号 | 生态功能群物种类别 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | 小计 | J1 | J2 | J3 | 小计 | ||||
| 1 | Animal Endosymbiont-Animal Pathogen-Endophyte-Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 7 | ||
| 2 | Animal Parasite-Fungal Parasite | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ||
| 3 | Animal Pathogen | 30 | 17 | 0 | 47 | 15 | 33 | 18 | 66 | ||
| 4 | Animal Pathogen-Dung Saprotroph-Endophyte-Plant Saprotroph-Soil Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 0 | 107 | 72 | 179 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 5 | Animal Pathogen-Endophyte-Plant Saprotroph-Soil Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ||
| 6 | Animal Pathogen-Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 7 | Animal Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 13 | ||
| 8 | Arbuscular Mycorrhizal | 265 | 63 | 95 | 423 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 9 | Dung Saprotroph | 1334 | 2190 | 575 | 4099 | 757 | 998 | 957 | 2712 | ||
| 10 | Dung Saprotroph-Endophyte-Wood Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 10 | 19 | 43 | ||
| 11 | Dung Saprotroph-Plant Saprotroph | 5 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | ||
| 12 | Dung Saprotroph-Soil Saprotroph | 0 | 18 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 13 | Dung Saprotroph-Undefined Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 14 | Dung Saprotroph-Undefined Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 27 | 63 | 1 | 91 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 15 | Endophyte | 41 | 6 | 0 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 16 | Endophyte-Lichen Parasite-Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 14 | 0 | 27 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 17 | Endophyte-Plant Pathogen-Wood Saprotroph | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 18 | Fungal Parasite | 38 | 17 | 28 | 83 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | ||
| 19 | Plant Parasite-Wood Saprotroph | 55 | 0 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 20 | Plant Pathogen | 224 | 82 | 33 | 339 | 18 | 61 | 20 | 99 | ||
| 21 | Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 22 | Plant Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 23 | Undefined Saprotroph | 464 | 192 | 297 | 953 | 298 | 502 | 277 | 1077 | ||
| 24 | Undefined Saprotroph-Wood Saprotroph | 42 | 11 | 9 | 62 | 15 | 12 | 1 | 28 | ||
| 25 | Wood Saprotroph | 4 | 0 | 18 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 指标 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 |
|---|---|---|
| 铵态氮(以NH4+计)/(mg/L) | 0.27 | 0.25 |
| 硝态氮(以NO3-计)/(mg/L) | 87.42 | 86.80 |
| 有效钾(以K+计)/(mg/L) | 18.77 | 23.46 |
| 有效磷(以P3+计)/(mg/L) | 31.93 | 4.96 |
| 交换性钠(以Na+计)/(mg/L) | 5.97 | 23.44 |
| 有效钙(以Ca2+计)/(mg/L) | 33.60 | 49.20 |
| 有效镁(以Mg2+计)/(mg/L) | 3.60 | 45.84 |
| 有效硫(以SO42-计)/(mg/L) | 127.68 | 32.64 |
| 有效锰(以Mn2+计)/(μg/L) | 28.57 | 46.15 |
| 有效铁(以Fe2+计)/(μg/L) | 255.23 | 404.35 |
| 有效硼(以B3+计)/(μg/L) | 223.19 | 542.41 |
| 有效钼(以Mo6+计)/(μg/L) | 64.32 | 46.08 |
| 有效锌(以Zn2+计)/(mg/L) | 353.11 | 365.53 |
| 有效铜(以Cu2+计)/(μg/L) | 371.13 | 368.59 |
| 指标 | 土壤模式 | 基质模式 |
|---|---|---|
| 铵态氮(以NH4+计)/(mg/L) | 0.27 | 0.25 |
| 硝态氮(以NO3-计)/(mg/L) | 87.42 | 86.80 |
| 有效钾(以K+计)/(mg/L) | 18.77 | 23.46 |
| 有效磷(以P3+计)/(mg/L) | 31.93 | 4.96 |
| 交换性钠(以Na+计)/(mg/L) | 5.97 | 23.44 |
| 有效钙(以Ca2+计)/(mg/L) | 33.60 | 49.20 |
| 有效镁(以Mg2+计)/(mg/L) | 3.60 | 45.84 |
| 有效硫(以SO42-计)/(mg/L) | 127.68 | 32.64 |
| 有效锰(以Mn2+计)/(μg/L) | 28.57 | 46.15 |
| 有效铁(以Fe2+计)/(μg/L) | 255.23 | 404.35 |
| 有效硼(以B3+计)/(μg/L) | 223.19 | 542.41 |
| 有效钼(以Mo6+计)/(μg/L) | 64.32 | 46.08 |
| 有效锌(以Zn2+计)/(mg/L) | 353.11 | 365.53 |
| 有效铜(以Cu2+计)/(μg/L) | 371.13 | 368.59 |
| [1] |
周慧晶, 徐子岩, 郑珂媛, 等. 月季可育花粉离体诱导研究[J]. 植物生理学报, 2022, 58(12):2333-2340.
|
| [2] |
李振坚, 王雁, 彭镇华, 等. 兰花在全球花卉贸易中的地位及发展动态[J]. 中国农学通报, 2008(5):154-159.
|
| [3] |
曹春霞, 龙同, 程贤亮, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌防治草莓白粉病田间药效试验[J]. 湖北省农业科学, 2011, 50(20):4188-4189.
|
| [4] |
辛冰牧, 刘亚, 朱德斌, 等. 应用Illumina MiSeq高通量测序技术分析活性银离子处理饮用水微生物多样性[J]. 载人航天, 2017, 23(6):824-828.
|
| [5] |
黄亚丽, 郑立伟, 黄媛媛, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌菌剂不同施用方式对甜瓜土壤微生物多样性及生长的影响[J]. 生物工程学报, 2020, 36(12):2644-2656.
|
| [6] |
龚骏, 邢贝贝, 张倩倩. 隐真菌的研究进展[J]. 中国海洋大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 43(11):27-34.
|
| [7] |
吴燕燕, 徐伟芳, 罗琴, 等. Illumina MiSeq高通量测序分析不同品种桑树内生细菌多样性[J]. 蚕学通讯. 2018, 38(3):1-10.
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
黄瑞林, 张娜, 孙波, 等. 典型农田根际土壤伯克霍尔德氏菌群落结构及其多样性[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(4):975-985.
|
| [10] |
吴生, 张森泉, 张荣, 等. 内生细菌Bacillus sp.对菠菜枯萎病的防治效果研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2008, 36(21):9149-9150.
|
| [11] |
王浩, 孙丽英. 植物激素调控丛枝菌根发育的作用机制研究进展[J]. 微生物学通报, 2022, 49(10),4448-4466.
|
| [12] |
李艳杰. 月季黑斑病病原菌分离鉴定及防治初步研究[D]. 云南: 西南林业大学, 2024.
|
| [13] |
赵阿香, 瞿素萍, 苏艳, 等. 不同栽培模式下切花月季生长状况及品质分析[J]. 西南大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 40(11):10-19.
|
| [14] |
葛志军, 傅理. 国内外温室产业发展现状与研究进展.[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2008, 36(35):15751-15753.
|
| [15] |
doi: 10.1038/s41396-020-0720-5 URL |
| [16] |
李春艳, 王钱进, 赵梦丽, 等. 伯克霍尔德氏菌属(Burkholderia sp.)YQ9菌剂对白三叶生长和改良土壤的影响[J]. 微生物学报, 2025(12):5392-5405.
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
doi: 10.3390/su16198464 URL |
| [19] |
doi: 10.3390/horticulturae10060621 URL |
| [20] |
doi: 10.1111/nph.19697 pmid: 38494698 |
| [21] |
马雪晴, 冀傲冉, 郑娇莉, 等. 植物根际促生菌促生机制及其应用研究进展[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2025, 27(2):13-23.
|
| [22] |
doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2022.127201 URL |
| [23] |
doi: 10.1111/aab.2013.163.issue-3 URL |
| [24] |
陈详腾, 魏书蒙, 焦如珍, 等. 乌汶伯克霍尔德菌P5和格氏假单胞菌RP22促杉木生长机制探究[J]. 林业科学研究, 2024, 37(5):33-45.
|
| [1] | 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. |
| [2] | LUO Junxia, GUO Zhigang, DUAN Lumei, ZHAO Qianqian, WANG Jing, LI Qing, ZHANG Qiang, AN Xiaoliang, ZHAO Jianbo, LIU Yanmin, LI Guijin, DONG Yajie. Research Progress on Allelopathy and Planting Mode of Garlic [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(6): 85-94. |
| [3] | YANG Siqi, XUE Tingting, ZHAO Xinru, GAO Lei, CAO Lingxiao, ZHAO Zhipeng, ZHANG Liang. Structure of Carbon Sequestration Bacterial Community and Screening of Carbon Sequestration Microorganisms in Rhizosphere Soil of Wine Grapes [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(5): 117-127. |
| [4] | LIU Guiying, PENG Liya, WANG Lei. Impact of Recreational Trampling on Soil Microbial Community Structure in Urban Green Spaces: A Case Study of Shenzhen Parks [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(4): 156-163. |
| [5] | LIU Haitao, DENG Quanqing, GU Yan, WANG Jihua. Research Progress on Soil-Borne Diseases of Patchouli and Its Rhizosphere Microecology Under Continuous Cropping [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(1): 184-193. |
| [6] | WANG Wenli, YIN Xiaoning, JIN Haibo, MA Lei, NIU Junqiang, MA Ming. Effects of Microbial Agents on Apple Seedlings Growth and Rhizosphere Soil Microorganism [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(1): 142-152. |
| [7] | WANG Liyu, YANG Fengshan, FU Haiyan, GE Zhijian, YUAN Mingrui, LIU Chunguang. Influence of Plants on Soil Microbial Mediated Carbon Cycling [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(5): 63-68. |
| [8] | WANG Chenlong, MIN Jie, LIANG Rui, TAN Xiongyu, WANG Shuo, Umut Hasan. Composition and Diversity of Microbial Bacterial Communities in Paddy Rice Rhizosphere Soil [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(4): 84-93. |
| [9] | ZHANG Xiaoyan, CAO Kun, LI Xuehai, ZHU Hao, BIAN Jing. Effects of Combined Application of Bio-organic Fertilizer on Yield of Industrial Hemp and Its Rhizosphere Soil Microbial Structure [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(34): 87-95. |
| [10] | ZHAO Xinxin, WEI Yundong, ZHOU Shiyi, CHEN Ruirui, LI Jun, ZHENG Hua. Rhizosphere Microecological Difference of Different Cassava Cultivars Based on Root Bag Method [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(31): 60-71. |
| [11] | ZHU Ting, DONG Kun, YANG Yong, ZHANG Lizhen, YIN Xiangao, YIN Jianqing, HUANG Jie, CHEN Yongdui, LU Jun, WU Kuo, DONG Jiahong. Effects of Continuous Cropping on Microbial Community in Rhizosphere Soil of Konjac [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(30): 105-112. |
| [12] | XIANG Weiwei, WANG Yusi, PENG Jun, WANG Jianwu, CHEN Hua. Effects of Two Rhizosphere Promoting Bacteria on Nutritional Quality of Rice [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(3): 158-164. |
| [13] | YAN Dong, ZHANG Junqiang, ZHONG Yuehua, FENG Bing, Wu Huashan, MA Hongbo. Effects of Coconut Coir Mulching on Wheat Yield, Physicochemical Properties and Bacterial Community Structure of Saline Alkali Soil [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(29): 63-68. |
| [14] | ZHANG Shoumei, SHAO Xuehua. Effects of Azadirachtin on Gut Microbiota and Metabolic Function of Bactrocera dorsalis [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(28): 122-130. |
| [15] | LIU Naijia, SA Rula, YANG Hengshan, TAI Jicheng, WU Yunlong. Effect of Application Periods of Straw Composting Agent on Soil Fertility and Soil Enzyme Activity [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(27): 79-84. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||