Effects of Short-term Fertilization on Soil Bacterial Community Composition and Diversity in Wheat Fields

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0300

Abstract

Abstract:

To clarify the mechanism of the effect of short-term fertilization on the composition and diversity of soil bacterial communities in wheat fields, a field experiment was conducted with four treatments: no fertilization (T₁), conventional fertilization (T₂), recommended fertilization (T₃) and organic substitution of 50% (T₄), by using high-throughput sequencing to study the effects on soil bacterial community composition and diversity. The results showed that compared with T₁ treatment, fertilization treatments decreased soil pH value, but T₄ treatment delayed the downward trend of pH; T₂, T₃ and T₄ increased the yield by 147.45%, 144.68% and 98.41%, respectively. The T₄ treatment increased the Shannon index and decreased the soil bacterial Chao index, but the differences were not significant. Fertilization increased the relative abundance of soil Proteobacteria, among which T₂ was the highest, while fertilization decreased the relative abundance of Cyanobacteria, among which T₄ was the highest. T₂ enriched g_Roseateles, g_Rhodanobacter and g_Singulisphaera, T₄ enriched g_Pseudoxanthomonas and o_Streptosporangiales. Cluster analyses showed that alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen, available phosphorus, available potassium and organic carbon had similar effects on bacterial flora, but pH was different. Compared with T₂, T₄ slowed down the evolution of photoautotrophic flora to chemo-energy heterotrophic flora and decreased the abundance of nitrate respiration-related flora. Therefore, short-term organic substitution (50%) has the risk of reducing yield, but it was beneficial to maintain the stability of bacterial community in wheat field. N 150 kg/hm² could be used as the recommended amount of fertilization.

Key words: fertilization, short-term fertilization, wheat fields, soil, bacterial diversity, bacterial community, functional prediction, high-throughput sequencing

LIU Donghai, DAI Zhigang, MEI Liangxian, QIAO Yan, ZHANG Zhi, XIAO Zhuoxi, LI Fei, HU Cheng. Effects of Short-term Fertilization on Soil Bacterial Community Composition and Diversity in Wheat Fields[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(2): 43-48.

Figures/Tables 6

References 33

[1]	PANKHURST C E, OPHEL-KELLER K, DOUBE B M, et al. Biodiversity of soil microbial communities in agricultural systems[J]. Biodiversity and conservation, 1996, 5(2):197-209.
[2]	WU M, QIN H, CHEN Z, et al. Effect of long-term fertilization on bacterial composition in rice paddy soil[J]. Biology and fertility of soils[J]. 2011, 47:397-405.
[3]	高日平, 段玉, 张君, 等. 长期施肥对农牧交错带旱地土壤微生物多样性及群落结构的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2023, 44(2):1063-1073.
[4]	AI C, LIANG G Q, SUN J W, et al. Different roles of rhizosphere effect and long-term fertilization in the activity and community structure of ammonia oxidizers in a calcareous fluvo-aquic soil[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2013, 57:30-42.
[5]	曹志平, 胡诚, 叶钟年, 等. 不同土壤培肥措施对华北高产农田土壤微生物生物量碳的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(5):1486-1493.
[6]	WANG Q F, JIANG X, GUAN D W, et al. Long-term fertilization changes bacterial diversity and bacterial communities in the maize rhizosphere of Chinese Mollisols[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2018, 125:88-96.
[7]	周运来, 张振华, 钱晓晴, 等. 施肥方式对土壤CO₂释放的影响及其机理研究进展[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2016, 32(2):472-480.
[8]	刘东海, 乔艳, 李双来, 等. 长期施肥对黄棕壤细菌多样性的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(5):760-767.
[9]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(3版)[J]. 北京:中国农业出版社, 2000.
[10]	秦越, 马琨, 刘萍. 马铃薯连作栽培对土壤微生物多样性的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2015, 23(2):225-232.
[11]	WANG J C, SONG Y, MA T F, et al. Impacts of inorganic and organic fertilization treatments on bacterial and fungal communities in a paddy soil[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2017, 112:42-50.
[12]	丁红利. 添加秸秆对土壤有机质和微生物群落及其演替的影响[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2016.
[13]	唐贤, 梁丰, 徐明岗, 等. 长期施用化肥对农田土壤pH影响的整合分析[J]. 吉林农业大学学报, 2020(3):316-321.
[14]	毛伟, 李文西, 赵雨涵, 等. 有机肥替代部分化肥对水稻产量及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(8):32-36. doi: 10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2020-0143
[15]	TIAN W, WANG L, LI Y, et al. Responses of microbial activity,abundance,and community in wheat soil after three years of heavy fertilization with manure-based compost and inorganic nitrogen[J]. Agriculture, ecosystems and environment, 2015, 213:219-227.
[16]	樊晓刚, 金轲, 李兆君, 等. 不同施肥和耕作制度下土壤微生物多样性研究进展[J]. 物营养与肥料学报, 2010, 16(3):744-751.
[17]	CHEN D, YUAN L, LIU Y, et al. Long-term application of manures plus chemical fertilizers sustained high rice yield and improved soil chemical and bacterial properties[J]. European journal of agronomy, 2017, 90:34-42.
[18]	周永学, 陈静, 李远, 等. 棉秆还田对咸水滴灌棉田土壤酶活性和细菌群落结构多样性的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2022, 43(4):2192-2203
[19]	王西亚, 吕继龙, 何萍, 等. 玉米秸秆分解过程中细菌群落组成演化特征[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(1):45-53.
[20]	TVEIT A T, URICH T, SVENNING M M. Metatranscriptomic analysis of arctic peat soil microbiota[J]. Applied and environmental microbiology, 2014, 80(18):5761-5772. doi: 10.1128/AEM.01030-14 pmid: 25015892
[21]	PATZELT D J, HODAČ L, FRIEDL T, et al. Biodiversity of soil cyanobacteria in the hyper-arid Atacama desert, Chile[J]. Journal of phycology, 2014, 50(4):698-710. doi: 10.1111/jpy.12196 pmid: 26988453
[22]	CHEN H J, PENG W X, DUH, et al. Effect of Different Grain for Green Approaches on Soil Bacterial Community in a Karst Region[J]. Frontiers in microbiology, 2020,11,577242.
[23]	CAO Q, LI X Z, XIE Z J, et al. Compartmentation of microbial communities in structure and function for methane oxidation coupled to nitrification-denitrification[J]. Bioresource technology, 2021,341,125761.
[24]	GUO Y X, CHEN Q J, QIN Y, et al. Succession of the microbial communities and function prediction during short-term peach sawdust-based composting[J]. Bioresource technology, 2021,332,125079.
[25]	黄耀坚, 郑忠辉, 陈晋安, 等. 厦门海区潮间带的游动放线菌及其抗菌活性[J]. 海洋通报, 1999(3):30-34.
[26]	刘东海, 张学江, 王鹏, 等. 不同施肥处理对小麦根际土壤真菌多样性及根腐病的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2020, 59(21):30-34,50.
[27]	刘佳, 陈晓芬, 刘明, 等. 长期施肥对旱地红壤细菌群落的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(2):468-478.
[28]	DING J, JIANG X, MA M, et al. Effect of 35 years inorganic fertilizer and manure amendment on structure of bacterial and archaeal communities in black soil of northeast China[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2016, 105:187-195.
[29]	MANGAN N M, FLAMHOLZ A, HOOD R D, et al. pH determines the energetic efficiency of the cyanobacterial CO₂ concentrating mechanism[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113(36):E5354-E5362.
[30]	TANG Z, ZHANG L, HE N. et al. Soil bacterial community as impacted by addition of rice straw and biochar[J]. Scientific reports, 2021, 11:22185. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-99001-9 pmid: 34773058
[31]	李慧敏, 田胜营, 李丹丹, 等. 有机物料施用对潮土活性有机碳及微生物群落组成的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(3):777-787.
[32]	练金山, 王慧颖, 徐明岗, 等. 长期施用有机肥潮土细菌的多样性及功能预测[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(12):2073-2082.
[33]	包明, 何红霞, 马小龙, 等. 化学氮肥与绿肥对麦田土壤细菌多样性和功能的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2018, 55(3):734-743.

处理	碱解氮N/(mg/kg)	有效磷P/(mg/kg)	速效钾K/(mg/kg)	有机碳SOC/(g/kg)	pH	产量/(kg/hm²)
T₁	106.58±5.49a	11.55±1.15b	70.56±11.80a	14.46±0.55b	5.99±0.45a	2402.70±397.84c
T₂	108.18±8.19a	11.83±2.20ab	67.91±28.45a	15.23±0.35ab	5.55±0.27a	5945.40±218.87a
T₃	110.52±3.52a	15.39±1.88a	73.58±14.49a	15.90±0.36a	5.66±0.04a	5878.95±112.72a
T₄	100.92±4.84a	14.62±3.44a	65.26±10.09a	15.57±1.24ab	5.78±0.29a	4767.15±263.64b

处理	碱解氮N/(mg/kg)	有效磷P/(mg/kg)	速效钾K/(mg/kg)	有机碳SOC/(g/kg)	pH	产量/(kg/hm²)
T₁	106.58±5.49a	11.55±1.15b	70.56±11.80a	14.46±0.55b	5.99±0.45a	2402.70±397.84c
T₂	108.18±8.19a	11.83±2.20ab	67.91±28.45a	15.23±0.35ab	5.55±0.27a	5945.40±218.87a
T₃	110.52±3.52a	15.39±1.88a	73.58±14.49a	15.90±0.36a	5.66±0.04a	5878.95±112.72a
T₄	100.92±4.84a	14.62±3.44a	65.26±10.09a	15.57±1.24ab	5.78±0.29a	4767.15±263.64b

处理	丰富度指数(Chao)	多样性(Shannon)	覆盖度(coverage)
T₁	30.92±1.88a	1.93±0.12a	0.9999±0.0002a
T₂	30.25±0.50a	1.82±0.13a	0.9999±0.0001a
T₃	30.33±2.54a	1.89±0.02a	0.9999±0.0001a
T₄	30.50±0.76a	1.98±0.02a	0.9999±0.0001a

处理	丰富度指数(Chao)	多样性(Shannon)	覆盖度(coverage)
T₁	30.92±1.88a	1.93±0.12a	0.9999±0.0002a
T₂	30.25±0.50a	1.82±0.13a	0.9999±0.0001a
T₃	30.33±2.54a	1.89±0.02a	0.9999±0.0001a
T₄	30.50±0.76a	1.98±0.02a	0.9999±0.0001a

细菌群落	pH	K	SOC	N	P
norank_c__Cyanobacteria	0.65	-0.20	-0.51	-0.39	-0.37
Gemmatimonadaceae	-0.33	0.25	0.67	0.21	-0.12
norank_c__Acidobacteria	-0.18	-0.04	0.71	0.31	0.29
norank_o__C0119	-0.29	-0.03	0.64	0.35	0.35