Effects of short-term flue-cured tobacco-maize rotation on soil enzyme activities, microbial community structure, and substance metabolism

doi:10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2025.10.005

Abstract

Abstract: Mountainous yellow-brown soil in the Wuling Mountain area was studied with four treatments: continuous flue-cured tobacco cropping(KKK), flue-cured tobacco-maize-flue-cured tobacco rotation(KYK), maize-flue-cured tobacco-maize rotation (YKY), and continuous maize cropping(YYY), to investigate the effects of short-term flue-cured tobacco-maize rotation on soil chemical properties, enzyme activities, microbial community structure, and substance metabolism. The results showed that rotation treatments had no significant effects on soil alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen, available phosphorus, available potassium, or organic matter content, but significantly altered soil enzyme activities. The KYK treatment significantly increased cellulase activity, whereas the YKY treatment significantly decreased urease and sucrase activities. Analysis of the microbial community structure indicated that rotation altered the community structure and diversity of bacteria and fungi. The KYK treatment increased the relative abundance of Acidobacteria and Actinobacteria, while the YKY treatment elevated the abundance of Bacteroidota and Proteobacteria. In fungal communities, rotation treatments increased the relative abundance of Ascomycota and Mortierellomycota. Metabolomic analysis revealed that the KYK treatment significantly increased the contents of diterpenoids and fatty acid amides. Correlation analysis demonstrated a positive relationship between sucrase activity and bacterial diversity, and carbohydrate metabolites were closely associated with the microbial community structure. Short-term flue-cured tobacco-maize rotation could alleviate continuous cropping obstacles by regulating soil enzyme activities, microbial community structure, and substance metabolism, thereby promoting the coordinated and sustainable development of tobacco and grain production in the Wuling Mountain area.

Key words: short-term, flue-cured tobacco-maize rotation, soil enzyme activities, microbial community structure, substance metabolism

CLC Number:

S158

XU Da-bing, SUN Yu-xiao, XIA Peng-liang, TAO Yong-le, ZHOU Jian-xiong, ZHAO Shu-jun, LI Yan-yan. Effects of short-term flue-cured tobacco-maize rotation on soil enzyme activities, microbial community structure, and substance metabolism[J]. HUBEI AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2025, 64(10): 27-36.

References

[1] 尚斌,李德成,徐宜民,等.武陵山烤烟产区土壤有机质与pH特征研究[J].土壤通报,2015,46(3):590-596.
[2] 滕凯,陈前锋,周志成,等.烟草连作障碍与土壤理化性质及微生物多样性特征的关联[J].微生物学通报,2020,47(9):2848-2856.
[3] 时仁勇,王昌军,闫静,等.武陵秦巴山区不同母质植烟土壤抗酸化性能研究[J].土壤学报,2023,60(2):367-377.
[4] 肖金讯. 不同烟田复种轮作模式对烤烟生长和土壤环境影响的比较研究[D].长沙:湖南农业大学,2022.
[5] 王亚麒,刘京,芶剑渝,等.长期有机无机配施下烤烟-玉米轮作优化土壤微生物活化无机磷[J].土壤学报,2022,59(3):808-818.
[6] 朱经伟,石俊雄,张恒,等.贵州山地烤烟种植制度对黄壤农田肥力的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2019(3):56-62.
[7] 陈浩,魏立本,王亚麒,等.烤烟不同种植施肥模式对土壤养分、酶活性及细菌多样性的影响[J].南方农业学报,2019,50(5):982-989.
[8] 贾健,朱金峰,杜修智,等.不同种植模式对烤烟根际土壤微生物、土壤养分和烟叶质量的影响[J].西南农业学报,2016,29(10):2300-2306.
[9] 方树民,唐莉娜,陈顺辉,等.作物轮作对土壤中烟草青枯菌数量及发病的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2011,19(2):377-382.
[10] 赵春夺,李玉娥,刘友杰,等.轮作与连作对烟草根际土壤养分、酶活性及微生物群落结构的影响[J].生物技术通报,2025, 41(4):312-322.
[11] 张立猛,方玉婷,计思贵,等.玉米根系分泌物对烟草黑胫病菌的抑制活性及其抑菌物质分析[J].中国生物防治学报,2015,31(1):115-122.
[12] 吴哲宽,孙光伟,陈振国,等.不同轮作模式对烤烟产质量的影响[J].山西农业科学,2019,47(3):370-373.
[13] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M].3版.北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[14] 张翰林,白娜玲,郑宪清,等.秸秆还田与施肥方式对稻麦轮作土壤细菌和真菌群落结构与多样性的影响[J].中国生态农业学报(中英文),2021,29(3):531-539.
[15] WEN T, XIE P H, PENTON C R, et al.Specific metabolites drive the deterministic assembly of diseased rhizosphere microbiome through weakening microbial degradation of autotoxin[J]. Microbiome, 2022, 10(1): 177.
[16] WANG Y Z, XU X M, LIU T M, et al.Analysis of bacterial and fungal communities in continuous-cropping ramie (Boehmeria nivea L. Gaud) fields in different areas in China[J]. Scientific reports, 2020, 10: 3264.
[17] 方远鹏,王娜,白羽祥,等.长期不同种植制度下植烟土壤细菌群落特征差异分析[J].中国农业大学学报,2023,28(7):20-34.
[18] 张艳. 烤烟连作、烤烟-玉米轮作对烟叶品质和土壤养分的影响[J].河南农业科学,2014,43(8):45-48,116.
[19] 季璇,陈熙卓,宋文静,等.施钾量对不同生态区烤烟生长和钾肥利用率的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2020,41(5):36-42.
[20] 王棋,徐传涛,王昌全,等.烤烟连作对土壤生态化学计量特征的影响[J].农业资源与环境学报,2020,37(5):702-708.
[21] 焦峰,吕淑敏,汪昊,等.三江平原草甸土水田土壤酶活性的演变特征[J].安徽农业科学,2019,47(23):174-176.
[22] 蒋如,宁诗琪,隋宗明,等.长期轮作施肥处理对植烟土壤有机碳组分和酶活性的影响[J].土壤,2024,56(3):510-516.
[23] 高转琴,王丹,牛灵安,等.冀南平原盐渍化改造区土壤过氧化氢酶活性变化研究[J].土壤通报,2019,50(6):1434-1441.
[24] 刘垠霖,蔡立群,赵瑞,等.吐鲁番哈密瓜土壤养分及酶活性对连作年限的响应[J].中国土壤与肥料,2021(1):273-281.
[25] 王礼科,罗夫来,王华磊,等.半夏不同连作年限土壤酶活性、微生物及化感物质的分析[J].中药材,2021,44(4):798-801.
[26] 熊湖,郑顺林,张德银,等.轮作与连作对马铃薯生长及土壤酶活性的影响[J].福建农业学报,2022,37(1):25-32.
[27] 顾美英,徐万里,茆军,等.新疆绿洲农田不同连作年限棉花根际土壤微生物群落多样性[J].生态学报,2012,32(10):3031-3040.
[28] 芶久兰,顾小凤,张萌,等.不同烤烟种植模式对贵州土壤养分、酶活性及细菌群落结构的影响[J].核农学报,2022,36(7):1475-1484.
[29] 李琼香,李志宏,张云贵,等. 土壤微生物对不同种植方式的响应[J]. 中国烟草学报,2025,31(5):115-126.
[30] 周旭东,韩天华,申云鑫,等.4种轮作模式下长期连作烟田土壤微生态的响应特征[J].中国农业科技导报,2024,26(3):174-187.
[31] 孟祥佳,刘洋,黎妍妍,等.烟草-荞麦轮作对烟草黑胫病防治及土壤微生态的调控作用[J].南方农业学报,2022,53(6):1525-1535.
[32] 杨尚东,李荣坦,吴俊,等.番茄连作与轮作土壤生物学特性及细菌群落结构的比较[J].生态环境学报,2016,25(1):76-83.
[33] 穰中文,朱三荣,田峰,等.不同种植模式烟田土壤细菌种群特征与青枯病发生的关系[J].湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2018,44(1):33-38.
[34] 刘会芳,韩宏伟,王强,等.不同蔬菜与番茄轮作对设施土壤微生物多样性、酶活性及土壤理化性质的影响[J].微生物学报,2021,61(1):167-182.
[35] 饶德安,刘潘洋,邹路易,等.长期连作及强还原土壤灭菌处理对烤烟根际土壤真菌群落的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2022(4):47-56.
[36] SONG L C, NIU X G, ZHANG N W, et al.Effect of biochar-immobilized Sphingomonas sp. PJ2 on bioremediation of PAHs and bacterial community composition in saline soil[J]. Chemosphere, 2021, 279: 130427.
[37] 李文鹏,陶冶,赵素雅,等.芽孢杆菌HT-7对棉花黄萎病菌的拮抗作用及拮抗因子初探[J].河南农业科学,2020,49(8):84-93.
[38] FIRA D, DIMKIĆ I, BERIĆ T, et al.Biological control of plant pathogens by Bacillus species[J]. Journal of biotechnology, 2018, 285: 44-55.
[39] WANG Y H,YU Z H, LI Y S, et al.Microbial association with the dynamics of particulate organic carbon in response to the amendment of elevated CO₂-derived wheat residue into a mollisol[J]. Science of the total environment, 2017, 607: 972-981.
[40] 孙延菲. 典型固沙灌木林地土壤微生物群落结构及其对碳氮过程的影响[D].北京:北京林业大学,2020.
[41] ZHANG M M, ALVES R J E, ZHANG D D, et al. Time-dependent shifts in populations and activity of bacterial and archaeal ammonia oxidizers in response to liming in acidic soils[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2017, 112: 77-89.
[42] 李文兴,郑曼曼,王超,等.亚硝化球菌属(Nitrososphaera)可能是酸性土壤硝化作用的重要驱动者[J].土壤,2021,53(1):13-20.
[43] WEN T,DING Z X,THOMASHOW L S,et al.Deciphering the mechanism of fungal pathogen-induced disease-suppressive soil[J]. New phytologist, 2023, 238(6): 2634-2650.
[44] 程亚东,白羽祥,史普酉,等.连作植烟土壤具有显著积累特征的两种酚酸的化感效应评价[J].核农学报,2020,34(10):2307-2315.
[45] 刘贤文,郭华春.马铃薯与玉米复合种植对土壤化感物质及土壤细菌群落结构的影响[J].中国生态农业学报(中英文),2020,28(6):794-802.