Diversity of Fungi in the Rhizosphere Soil of Phragmites australis in the Sandy Land and Saline-alkali Land at the Southern Margin of the Badain Jaran Desert

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0089

Abstract

Abstract:

The fungal diversity and its relevant influencing factors of reed rhizosphere soil in sandy land and saline-alkali land at the southern margin of Badain Jaran Desert were studied. Typical sandy land and saline-alkali land were selected at the edge of desert in Linze County, Zhangye City, Gansu Province, and the soils from four quadrates were collected (reed rhizosphere soils in saline-alkali land noted as YL, bare area soil in saline-alkali land noted as YD, reed rhizosphere soils in sandy land noted as SL and bare area soil in sandy land noted as SD) as experimental materials, determination and analysis of the soil fungal diversity in various plots was carried out by using high-throughput sequencing technology. The results showed that the fungal abundance of the soils in sandy lands was significantly higher than that in saline-alkali lands. Ascomycota and Basidiomycota were the dominant phyla in common in the soils of all quadrates, among which Ascomycota was the first dominant phylum, Basidiomycota was the second, and Hair follicle was the third dominant phylum, while Olpidiomycota existed only in YL, which was the fourth dominant bacterial phylum. The species diversity of fungal community was YL>YD>SL>SD; the order of fungal community uniformity was YL>YD>SD>SL, indicating that fungal species were the most balanced in YL, and fungi dominant species had the highest proportion in all fungi in SL. The composition of fungal communities in each soil of the quadrates was highly specialized, and the dominant flora differed significantly in different quadrates; Relevant analysis also showed that the soil water content was YL>YD>SL>SD, soil available phosphorus content and electrical conductivity were YD>YL>SD>SL; canonical correlation analysis (CCA) showed that nutrient factors and soil enzyme activities were related to soil microbial abundance significantly, and soil alkaline-hydrolyzed nitrogen content and pH value had the most significant effects on fungal communities. The inter-root distribution of reed can effectively improve the physicochemical properties and microbial community structure of saline and sandy soils.

Key words: Phragmites australis, saline-alkali land, sandy land

XIONG Jianzhou, QI Yake, LI Chaozhou, JIAO Jian. Diversity of Fungi in the Rhizosphere Soil of Phragmites australis in the Sandy Land and Saline-alkali Land at the Southern Margin of the Badain Jaran Desert[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(23): 45-54.

Figures/Tables 10

References 49

[1]	姜高磊, 王乃昂, 李卓仑, 等. 巴丹吉林沙漠湖泊表层沉积物盐类矿物分布及对气候环境的指示[J/OL]. 中国地质:1-15[2023-08-04].http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.1167.P.20220524.1358.002.html
[2]	牛震敏. 高大沙山的形成机制与演化模拟[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2022.
[3]	崔徐甲, 董治宝, 逯军峰, 等. 巴丹吉林沙漠高大沙山区植被特征与地貌形态的关系[J]. 水土保持通报, 2014, 34(5):278-283.
[4]	丁国栋. 沙漠学概论[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2002:122-133.
[5]	赵文智, 白雪莲, 刘婵. 巴丹吉林沙漠南缘的植物固沙问题[J]. 中国沙漠, 2022, 42(1):5-11. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2021.00159
[6]	徐恒力, 周爱国, 肖国强, 等. 西北地区干旱化趋势及水盐失衡的生态环境效应[J]. 地球科学, 2000(5):499-504.
[7]	焦德志, 黄曌月, 周婵, 等. 扎龙湿地异质生境芦苇种群根茎动态及年龄结构[J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(4):888-895.
[8]	KAMILYA T, MAJUMDER A, YADAV M K, et al. Nutrient pollution and its remediation using constructed wetlands: Insights into removal and recovery mechanisms, modifications and sustainable aspects[J]. Journal of environmental chemical engineering, 2022:107444.
[9]	STANLEY M, PALACE V, GROSSHANS R, et al. Floating treatment wetlands for the bioremediation of oil spills: A review[J]. Journal of environmental management, 2022, 317:115416. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115416 URL
[10]	CHOUDHARY M, MUDULI M, RAY S. A comprehensive review on nitrate pollution and its remediation: conventional and recent approaches[J]. Sustainable water resources management, 2022, 8(4):1-25. doi: 10.1007/s40899-021-00589-7
[11]	KAUR S, MIDHA T, VERMA H, et al. Bioremediation: A favorable perspective to eliminate heavy metals from polluted soil[M]//Metagenomics to bioremediation. academic press, 2023:209-230.
[12]	LIU L, WU Y, YIN M, et al. Soil salinity, not plant genotype or geographical distance, shapes soil microbial community of a reed wetland at a fine scale in the Yellow River Delta[J]. Science of The total environment, 2022:159136.
[13]	DUAN Y, WANG X, WANG L, et al. Biogeographic patterns of soil microbe communities in the deserts of the Hexi Corridor, northern China[J]. Catena, 2022, 211:106026. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2022.106026 URL
[14]	张玲豫, 齐雅柯, 焦健, 等. 河西走廊沙地芦苇(Phragmites australis)根际土壤微生物群落多样性[J]. 中国沙漠, 2021, 41(6):1-9. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2021.00071
[15]	牛世全, 龙洋, 李海云, 等. 应用IlluminaMiSeq高通量测序技术分析河西走廊地区盐碱土壤微生物多样性[J]. 微生物学通报, 2017, 44(9):2067-2078.
[16]	阚雨. 甘肃巴丹吉林沙漠细菌多样性及其酶活性和抗菌活性的研究[D]. 贵阳: 贵州医科大学, 2021.
[17]	SINGH B K, DAWSON L A, MACDONALD C A, et al. Impact of biotic and abiotic interaction on soil microbial communities and functions: A field study[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2009, 41(3):239-248. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2008.10.003 URL
[18]	张薇, 魏海雷, 高洪文, 等. 土壤微生物多样性及其环境影响因子研究进展[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005(1):48-52.
[19]	DE VRIES F T, HOFFLAND E, VAN EEKEREN N, et al. Fungal/bacterial ratios in grasslands with contrasting nitrogen management[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2006, 38(8):2092-2103. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.01.008 URL
[20]	HACKL E, ZECHMEISTER-BOLTENSTERN S, BODROSSY L, et al. Comparison of diversities and compositions of bacterial populations inhabiting natural forest soils[J]. Applied and environmental microbiology, 2004, 70(9):5057-5065. pmid: 15345382
[21]	DE VRIES F T, SHADE A. Controls on soil microbial community stability under climate change[J]. Frontiers in microbiology, 2013, 4:265. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00265 pmid: 24032030
[22]	ZHENG Q, HU Y, ZHANG S, et al. Soil multifunctionality is affected by the soil environment and by microbial community composition and diversity[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2019, 136:107521. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2019.107521 URL
[23]	邵秋雨, 董醇波, 韩燕峰, 等. 植物根际微生物组的研究进展[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(1):144-152.
[24]	张学利, 杨树军, 张百习, 等. 不同林龄樟子松根际与非根际土壤的对比[J]. 福建林学院学报, 2005(1):80-84.
[25]	郭文, 高李文, 彭紫薇, 等. 不同林龄杉木根际与非根际土壤微生物群落特征[J]. 水土保持研究, 2022, 29(6):260-267.
[26]	孙雪, 龙永丽, 刘乐, 等. 河西走廊中段荒漠绿洲土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 环境科学, 2023, 44(6):3353-3363.
[27]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. (第三版)北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[28]	关松荫等编著. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 北京: 农业出版社. 1986.
[29]	LEGENDRE P, LEGENDRE L. Numerical ecology[J]. Second English edition.elsevier,amsterdam, 1998.
[30]	刘世梁, 傅伯杰, 刘国华, 等. 我国土壤质量及其评价研究的进展[J]. 土壤通报, 2006(1):137-143.
[31]	林娜, 刘勇, 李国雷, 等. 森林土壤酶研究进展[J]. 世界林业研究, 2010, 23(4):21-25.
[32]	张福锁, 曹一平. 根际动态过程与植物营养[J]. 土壤学报, 1992, 29(3):239-251.
[33]	WANG F, JIANG R, KERTESZ M A, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal hyphae mediating acidification can promote phytate mineralization in the hyphosphere of maize (Zea mays L.)[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2013, 65:69-74. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.05.010 URL
[34]	BERENDSEN R L, PIETERSE C M J, Bakker P A H M. The rhizosphere microbiome and plant health[J]. Trends in plant science, 2012, 17(8):478-486. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2012.04.001 pmid: 22564542
[35]	LI H Y, GUO Q, JING Y X, et al. Application of Streptomyces pactum Act12 enhances drought resistance in wheat[J]. Journal of plant growth regulation, 2020, 39(1):122-132. doi: 10.1007/s00344-019-09968-z
[36]	LI Y L, GUO Q, LI Y Z, et al. Streptomyces pactum Act12 controls tomato yellow leaf curl virus disease and alters rhizosphere microbial communities[J]. Biology and fertility of soils, 2019, 55(2):149-169. doi: 10.1007/s00374-019-01339-w
[37]	LIU H, BRETTELL LE, QIU Z, et al. Microbiome-mediated stress resistance in plants[J]. Trends in plant science, 2020, 25(8):733-743. doi: S1360-1385(20)30114-X pmid: 32345569
[38]	CARRIóN V J, PEREZ-JARAMILLO J, CORDOVEZ V, et al. Pathogen-induced activation of disease-suppressive functions in the endophytic root microbiome[J]. Science, 2019, 366(6465):606-612. doi: 10.1126/science.aaw9285 pmid: 31672892
[39]	张晶, 张惠文, 李新宇, 等. 土壤真菌多样性及分子生态学研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 2004(10):1958-1962.
[40]	于少鹏, 史传奇, 胡宝忠, 等. 古大湖湿地盐碱土壤微生物群落结构及多样性分析[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(11):3764-3775.
[41]	YELLE D J, RALPH J, LU F C, et al. Evidence for cleavage of lignin by a brown rot basidiomycete[J]. Environmental microbiology, 2008, 10(7):1844-1849. doi: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01605.x pmid: 18363712
[42]	BEIMFORDE C, FELDERG K, NYLINDER S, et al. Estimating the phanerozoic history of the ascomycota lineages: Combining fossil and molecular data[J]. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution, 2014, 78:386-398. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2014.04.024 pmid: 24792086
[43]	BONFANTE P, DESIRò A. Who lives in a fungus? The diversity, origins and functions of fungal endobacteria living in Mucoromycota[J]. The ISME journal, 2017, 11(8):1727-1735. doi: 10.1038/ismej.2017.21 URL
[44]	LI X, MA J, YANG Y, et al. Short-term response of soil microbial community to field conversion from dryland to paddy under the land consolidation process in North China[J]. Agriculture, 2019, 9(10):216. doi: 10.3390/agriculture9100216 URL
[45]	何小慧. 基于高通量测序的藜麦内生微生物群落结构分析[D]. 成都: 成都大学, 2021.
[46]	李望豪, 许钰滢, 谢玮轩, 等. 甘蔗根际土壤微生物群落代谢功能多样性分析[J]. 青海农林科技, 2022(3):14-17,31.
[47]	LIU J, SUI Y, YU Z, et al. High throughput sequencing analysis of biogeographical distribution of bacterial communities in the black soils of northeast China[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2014, 70:113-122. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.12.014 URL
[48]	赵帆, 赵密珍, 王钰, 等. 基于高通量测序研究草莓根际微生物群落结构和多样性[J]. 土壤, 2019, 51(1):51-60.
[49]	赵盈涵. 盐分对不同类型盐生植物根际与非根际土壤微生物群落特征的影响[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2022.

不同样地	土壤含水率/%	电导率/(μS/cm)	pH	有机质含量/(g/kg)	碱解氮含量/(mg/kg)	速效磷含量/(mg/kg)
YL	19.97±0.59a	2326.67±30.55b	7.51±0.03c	9.50±0.21b	15.40±1.40c	2.03±0.25c
YD	19.28±0.12b	2513.33±25.17a	7.32±0.01d	14.50±0.58a	9.80±0.70c	3.13±0.30b
SL	0.53±0.02c	157.07±8.66c	8.00±0.04b	1.56±0.04c	62.77±1.76b	0.24±0.03d
SD	0.43±0.01c	170.4±2.26c	8.51±0.01a	0.80±0.04d	79.57±7.01a	5.31±0.95a

不同样地	土壤含水率/%	电导率/(μS/cm)	pH	有机质含量/(g/kg)	碱解氮含量/(mg/kg)	速效磷含量/(mg/kg)
YL	19.97±0.59a	2326.67±30.55b	7.51±0.03c	9.50±0.21b	15.40±1.40c	2.03±0.25c
YD	19.28±0.12b	2513.33±25.17a	7.32±0.01d	14.50±0.58a	9.80±0.70c	3.13±0.30b
SL	0.53±0.02c	157.07±8.66c	8.00±0.04b	1.56±0.04c	62.77±1.76b	0.24±0.03d
SD	0.43±0.01c	170.4±2.26c	8.51±0.01a	0.80±0.04d	79.57±7.01a	5.31±0.95a

不同样地	脲酶活性[mg/(d·g)]	蔗糖酶活性[mg/(d·g)]	过氧化氢酶活性/[mL/(h·g)]	碱性磷酸酶活性[mg/(d·g)]
YL	2.16±0.061b	0.24±0.007b	0.08±0.002b	8.34±0.138b
YD	3.91±0.135a	1.05±0.015a	0.11±0.006a	17.00±0.385a
SL	0.09±0.025c	0.09±0.009c	0.04±0.002c	0.95±0.041c
SD	0.03±0.002c	0.12±0.005c	0.03±0.008c	0.20±0.030d

不同样地	脲酶活性[mg/(d·g)]	蔗糖酶活性[mg/(d·g)]	过氧化氢酶活性/[mL/(h·g)]	碱性磷酸酶活性[mg/(d·g)]
YL	2.16±0.061b	0.24±0.007b	0.08±0.002b	8.34±0.138b
YD	3.91±0.135a	1.05±0.015a	0.11±0.006a	17.00±0.385a
SL	0.09±0.025c	0.09±0.009c	0.04±0.002c	0.95±0.041c
SD	0.03±0.002c	0.12±0.005c	0.03±0.008c	0.20±0.030d

土壤类型	Chao1指数	Observed species指数	Shannon指数	Simpson指数	覆盖率/%
YL	228.24±93.02a	220.77±89.11a	5.34±1.33a	0.92±0.07a	99.83±0.08
YD	171.67±70.58a	165.87±65.70a	4.49±0.48a	0.86±0.07a	99.85±0.13
SL	19.00±3.61b	19.00±3.61b	2.19±0.46b	0.69±0.09a	100±0.00
SD	19.3±17.45b	19.30±17.45b	2.28±1.58b	0.64±0.25a	100±0.03