The variation characteristics of soil nutrient, enzyme activity and microbial count under different vegetation types of Heihe wetland

doi:10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2023.09.008

Abstract

Abstract: To provide a scientific basis for improving the restoration strategy of the Heihe wetlands, the effectiveness of planting different vegetation on the restoration of wetland ecosystems was studied. In 2016, a vegetation restoration project was carried out to plant 2-year-old Elaeagnus angustifolia, Tamarix chinensis and Populus euphratica respectively in the west of the Red Army Memorial Forest on the northern bank of the Heihe, and the rhizosphere soil of each vegetation was collected in December 2020, while the natural restoration without vegetation was used as a control to study the differences and correlations of soil nutrients, enzyme activities and microbial quantity among planting different vegetations. The results showed that vegetation restoration improved the ecological environment and alleviated the salinization of Heihe wetland; planting Elaeagnus angustifolia had the most significant effect on reducing soil salinity, and increasing the content of soil organic matter and alkali-hydrolyzale nitrogen; planting Populus euphratica had the most significant effect on increasing the content of available phosphorus and available potassium, as well as the activity of urease and alkaline phosphatase in soil; planting Tamarix chinensis had the most significant effect on increasing the total soil microbial quantity; there was a close correlation between soil nutrients content, enzyme activity and microbial quantity. In total, the vegetation restoration project reduced soil salinity in the wetland, and increased the nutrients content, enzyme activity and microbial quantity of soil, and the vegetation restoration was effective for ecosystem restoration in the Heihe wetland.

Key words: vegetation restoration, soil nutrient, soil enzyme activity, microbial quantity, Heihe wetland

CLC Number:

S156.8

PENG Yi-nan, QI Hong-shan, PEI Yan-li, XI Peng, JI Bin. The variation characteristics of soil nutrient, enzyme activity and microbial count under different vegetation types of Heihe wetland[J]. HUBEI AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2023, 62(9): 44-50.

References

[1] CHATTERJEE K, BANDYOPADHYAY A, GHOSH A, et al.Assessment of environmental factors causing wetland degradation, using Fuzzy Analytic Network Process:A case study on Keoladeo National Park, India[J]. Ecological modelling, 2015,316:1-13.
[2] BEUEL S, ALVAREZ M, AMLER E, et al.A rapid assessment of anthropogenic disturbances in East African wetlands[J]. Ecological indicators, 2016,67:684-692.
[3] HU S, NIUZ, CHEN Y, et al.Global wetlands: Potential distribution, wetland loss, and status[J]. Science of the total environment, 2017, 586: 319-327.
[4] 周远刚. 黑河中游退化湿地不同恢复方式的恢复成效研究[D].兰州:西北师范大学,2019.
[5] GERDOL R, BRANCALEONI L, LASTRUCCI L, et al.Wetland plant diversity in a coastal naturereserve in Italy: Relationships with salinization and eutrophication and implications for natureconservation[J]. Estuaries and coasts, 2018, 41: 2079-2091.
[6] 董楠楠. 张掖黑河湿地自然保护区湿地资源评价与修复对策研究[D].兰州:兰州大学,2016.
[7] SHEN G,YANG X C, JIN Y X, et al.Remote sensing and evaluation of the wetland ecological degradation process of the Zoige Plateau Wetland in China[J]. Ecological indicators,2019,104:48-58.
[8] 王園博. 黑河中游湿地不同植被类型植物、土壤特征及其与土壤有机碳的关系[D].兰州:西北师范大学,2020.
[9] 国家林业和草原局. 第二次全国湿地资源调查主要结果(2009-2013年)[EB/OL]. (2014-01-28)[2020-01-14]. http://www.forestry.gov.cn/main/65/20140128/758154.html.
[10] 张晓雅. 黑河中游湿地不同类型保护地植被特征与土壤性质关系研究[D]. 兰州:西北师范大学,2020.
[11] GB7849—1987,森林土壤水解性氮测定[S].
[12] 张韫. 土壤·水·植物理化分析教程[M].北京:中国林业出版社,2011.94-105.
[13] 鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法[M].北京:中国农业科技出版社,2000.47-52.
[14] 关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1986.56-62.
[15] 牛世全,杨建文,胡磊,等.河西走廊春季不同盐碱土壤中微生物数量、酶活性与理化因子的关系[J].微生物学通报, 2012,39(3):416-427.
[16] 中国科学院南京土壤研究所微生物室.土壤微生物研究法[M].北京:科学出版社,1985.52-63.
[17] 周礼恺. 土壤酶学[M].北京:科学出版社,1989.64-84.
[18] 包耀贤. 黄土高原坝地和梯田土壤质量特征及评价[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2008.
[19] 李亮. 乌兰布和沙漠东北部沙区农田和林地土壤微生物及酶活性研究[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2010.
[20] 李亮,包耀贤,廖超英,等.乌兰布和沙漠东北部沙区人工林土壤微生物及酶活性研究[J]. 西北植物学报,2010,30(5): 987-994.
[21] 安韶山,黄懿梅.黄土丘陵区柠条林改良土壤作用的研究[J].林业科学,2006,42(1):70-74.
[22] RUTIGLIANO F A, DASCOLI R, DE SANTO A V. Soil microbial metabolism and nutrient status in a Mediterranesn area as affected by plant cover[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2004,36(11):1719-1729.
[23] 贾晓红,李新荣,李元寿.干旱沙区植被恢复中土壤碳氮变化规律[J].植物生态学报,2007,31(1):66-74.
[24] 周国新. 会同杉木林生态系统C∶N∶P生态化学计量的季节动态特征[D].长沙:中南林业科技大学,2015.
[25] 包耀贤,徐明岗,辛智鸣,等.乌兰布和沙区绿洲农田土壤微生物及酶活性研究[J].水土保持学报,2011, 25(5):121-129.
[26] 王笛,马风云,姚秀粉,等.黄河三角洲退化湿地土壤养分、微生物与土壤酶特性及其关系分析[J].中国水土保持科学,2012,10(5):94-98.
[27] 薛立,邝立刚,陈红跃.不同林分土壤养分、微生物与酶活性的研究[J].土壤学报,2003,40(2):280-285.
[28] 侯彦会,周学辉,焦婷,等.甘肃永昌县放牧草地土壤脲酶活性与土壤肥力的关系初探[J].草业学报,2009,18(4):111-116.
[29] 叶存旺,翟巧绒,郭梓娟,等.沙棘-侧柏混交林土壤养分、微生物与酶活性的研究[J].西北林学院学报,2007,22(5):1-6.
[30] 徐恒,廖超英,李晓明,等.榆林沙区人工固沙林土壤微生物生态分布特征及酶活性研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2008,36(12):136-141.
[31] 杨宁,邹冬生,杨满元,等.衡阳紫色土丘陵坡地不同植被恢复阶段土壤酶活性特征研究[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2013,19(6):1516-1524.
[32] 严绍裕. 不同林龄湿地松林土壤酶活性与土壤养分特征[J].森林与环境学报,2020,40(1):24-29.
[33] 邱莉萍,刘俊,王益权,等.土壤酶活性与土壤肥力关系的研究[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2004,10(3):277-280.
[34] 崔晓东,侯龙鱼,马风云,等.黄河三角洲不同土地利用方式土壤养分特征和酶活性及其相关性研究[J].西北林学院学报,2007,22(4):66-69.
[35] 王海英,宫渊波,陈林武.嘉陵江上游不同植被恢复模式土壤微生物及土壤酶活性的研究[J].水土保持学报,2008,22(3):172-177.