本文已在中国知网网络首发，可在知网搜索、下载并阅读全文。
模拟家畜不同采食强度下高寒草甸土壤水解酶活性的变化特征
doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20220281
Responses of soil enzyme activities to different defoliation intensities in alpine meadow
-
摘要:
目的 探究家畜采食对高寒草甸土壤酶活性的影响，为揭示人为干扰下高寒草甸的退化机制提供依据。 方法 用刈割留茬模拟家畜轻度采食(LD)和重度采食(HD)行为，以未放牧的草地为对照(ck)，测定土壤碳、氮、磷获取的酶活性以及土壤理化性质变化特征。 结果 总体上，土壤碳获取酶土壤蔗糖酶、β-葡萄糖苷酶和土壤氮获取酶脲酶的活性在不同采食强度下不存在显著差异，但呈现明显的时间变异； LD处理可显著提高纤维素二糖水解酶活性(P＜0.05)，而HD处理能降低纤维素二糖水解酶活性；LD处理也会提高氮获取酶亮氨酸氨基肽酶、N-乙酰-β-D氨基葡萄糖苷酶以及磷获取酸性磷酸酶的活性；家畜的采食行为可能通过改变土壤养分来影响土壤酶活性；高寒草甸土壤酶活性的时间变异受控于土壤温度和土壤养分的变化。 结论 轻度采食行为可能会提高土壤水解酶活性，有助于维持土壤质量。图3表4参44 Abstract:Objective This study aims to investigate the effects of livestock defoliation on soil enzyme activities of alpine meadow, so as to provide evidence for revealing the degradation mechanisms of alpine meadow under human disturbance. Method Livestock defoliation behaviors, including light-intensity defoliation (LD) and heavy-intensity defoliation (HD) were simulated by cutting plants, and the non-grazed meadow was taken as the control (ck). The activity of enzymes obtained by carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus, as well as the change characteristics of soil physical and chemical properties were measured. Result Generally, the activities of Invertase, β-1,4-glucosidase (BG), and Urease did not show any significant differences under different defoliation intensities, but there was significant time variation. The activity of cellobiohydrolase (CBH) increased in LD treatment (P＜0.05), while it decreased in HD treatment. LD treatment also enhanced the activities of leucine aminopeptidase (LAP), β-1,4-N-acetyl-glucosaminnidase (NAG) and acid phosphatase (AP). Defoliation behavior of livestock might affect soil enzyme activity by changing soil nutrients. The temporal variation of soil enzyme activity in alpine meadow was controlled by the changes of soil temperature and soil nutrients. Conclusion Mild defoliation behavior may increase soil hydrolase activities, which helps maintain soil quality. [Ch, 3 fig. 4 tab. 44 ref.] -
Key words:
- grazing /
- defoliation /
- soil hydrolase /
- alpine meadow
-
图 1 不同采样时间和采食强度下土壤微生物量碳和微生物量氮
Figure 1 Soil microbial C and N concentration under different defoliation intensity and sampling time
图 2 不同采食强度下土壤水解酶活性
Figure 2 Soil hydrolytic enzyme activities under different defoliation intensities
图 3 土壤水解酶活性与环境因子的冗余分析
Figure 3 Redundancy analysis of soil hydrolytic enzyme activity and environmental factors
表 1 不同采样时间和采食强度下的土壤理化性质
Table 1. Soil physical and chemical properties under different defoliation intensity and sampling time
月份 采食
行为土壤含
水量/%土壤温
度/℃pH 土壤有机碳/
(g·kg−1)可溶性有机碳/
(mg·kg−1)铵态氮/
(mg·kg−1)硝态氮/
(mg·kg−1)全氮/
(g·kg−1)水溶性氮/
(mg·kg−1)7 ck 17.98±0.98 Aa 23.60±2.50 Aa 5.71±0.02 Ba 63.84±3.90 Ab 67.78±6.35 Aa 36.33±3.42 Aa 10.68±0.69 Ba 7.07±0.15 Aa 17.66±1.11 Aa LD 17.18±1.41 Ba 23.13±2.65 Aa 5.56±0.05 Ba 54.57±1.34 Cc 63.63±4.11 Ba 35.67±2.90 ABa 9.59±0.56 Ba 7.02±0.26 Aa 19.54±0.82 Ba HD 19.40±1.10 Aa 23.05±2.81 Aa 5.72±0.04 Aa 71.68±0.70 Aa 75.59±1.47 Aa 39.74±4.67 ABa 8.93±1.42 Ca 7.51±0.23 Aa 15.69±1.61 Ca 8 ck 19.18±0.63 Aa 18.20±1.22 ABa 5.81±0.03 Aa 70.14±2.73 Aa 53.45±6.51 Aab 16.37±1.14 Ba 14.54±2.60 Ba 6.26±0.15 Ba 32.17±3.87 Ba LD 15.90±1.07 Ba 18.13±0.89 ABa 5.82±0.03 Aa 71.35±2.39 Ba 46.10±3.75 Cb 27.37±2.23 Ba 13.90±1.52 Ba 6.27±0.14 Ba 33.83±1.99 Aa HD 18.35±1.28 Aa 18.33±0.78 ABa 5.73±0.03 Aa 73.14±1.54 Aa 68.53±6.35 Aa 22.36±6.03 BCa 10.87±1.76 Ba 6.09±0.11 Ba 33.82±3.66 Aa 9 ck 18.20±2.24 Aa 13.25±0.69 Ba 5.42±0.03 Ca 72.57±0.45 Ab 55.81±4.70 Ab 7.25±1.66 Ca 24.54±2.90 Ab 5.30±0.12 Cab 20.93±1.20 Ba LD 22.33±0.98 Aa 13.20±0.74 Ba 5.49±0.03 Ca 77.64±1.01 Aa 79.62±1.48 Aa 10.18±2.57 Ca 25.15±1.42 Aab 5.54±0.11 Ca 21.69±1.96 Ba HD 20.00±0.82 Aa 13.33±0.80 Ba 5.47±0.05 Ba 66.98±0.53 Bc 75.78±2.99 Aa 12.93±2.49 Ca 32.93±3.06 Aa 5.22±0.05 Cb 25.51±1.65 Ba 说明：不同大写字母表示同一采食强度不同时间差异显著(P＜0.05)，不同小写字母表示同一时间不同采食强度间差异显著(P＜0.05) 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 双因素方差分析检验采食强度和采样时间对土壤理化性质的影响
Table 2. Two-way ANOVA of the effects of defoliation intensity and sampling time on soil physicochemical properties
因素 土壤含水量 土壤温度 pH 土壤有机碳 可溶性有机碳 铵态氮 硝态氮 全氮 水溶性氮 微生物量碳 微生物量氮 采食强度 0.404 0.003 0.175 1.511 7.711** 1.345 0.385 0.171 0.406 0.830 0.188 采样时间 3.131 24.117** 62.138** 19.465** 8.957** 38.195** 69.507** 101.126** 38.269** 9.595** 3.170 采食强度×采样时间 2.523 0.033 1.330 12.816** 4.009* 1.648 3.232* 2.104 0.863 1.864 0.873 说明：数值为方差分析的F值；*表示P＜0.05；**表示P＜0.01
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 双因素方差分析检验采食强度和采样时间对土壤胞外酶活性的影响
Table 3. Two-way ANOVA of the effects of defoliation intensity and sampling time on soil extracellular enzyme activities
因素 蔗糖酶 β-葡萄糖苷酶 β-木糖苷酶 纤维二糖水解酶 脲酶 亮氨酸氨基肽酶 N-乙酰-β-D氨基葡萄糖苷酶 酸性磷酸酶 采食强度 1.749 0.435 1.534 9.232** 1.108 12.470** 32.906** 0.324 采样时间 94.212** 24.420** 46.811** 59.608** 9.623** 358.530** 6.536** 11.718** 采食强度×采样时间 0.759 1.920 1.898 2.117 1.028 50.590** 8.497** 12.521** 说明：数值为方差分析的F值；**表示P＜0.01
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 土壤水解酶活性和土壤环境因子的关系
Table 4. Correlations between soil hydrolytic enzyme activities and the environmental factors
土壤性质 蔗糖酶 β-葡萄糖苷酶 β-木糖苷酶 纤维二糖水解酶 亮氨酸氨基肽酶 硝态氮 −0.74** −0.32 −0.67** −0.38 0.38 铵态氮 0.74** 0.61* 0.63** 0.55 −0.52 全氮 0.79** 0.69** 0.83** 0.76** −0.59* pH 0.45 0.22 0.51 0.22 −0.72** 水溶性氮 −0.28 −0.58* −0.37 −0.64** 0.36 微生物量碳 0.64** 0.17 0.48 0.13 −0.80** 土壤温度 0.83** 0.61* 0.67** 0.47 −0.60* 说明：*表示P＜0.05; **表示P＜0.01
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] CAO Guangmin, TANG Yanhong, MO Wenhong,et al. Grazing intensity alters soil respiration in an alpine meadow on the Tibetan plateau [J]. Soil Biology&Biochemistry, 2004, 36(2): 237 − 243. [2] LONG Ruijun, SHANG Zhanhua, GUO Xusheng,et al. The yak grazing system on the Qinghai-Tibetan plateau and its status [J]. The Rangeland Journal, 2008, 30(2): 241 − 246. doi: 10.1071/RJ08012 [3] DONG Shikui, SHANG Zhanhuan, GAO Jixi,et al. Enhancing sustainability of grassland ecosystems through ecological restoration and grazing management in an era of climate change on Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau [J]. Agriculture,Ecosystems&Environment, 2020, 287(10): 66 − 84. [4] 向泽宇, 王长庭, 宋文彪, 等. 草地生态系统土壤酶活性研究进展[J]. 草业科学, 2011, 28(10): 1801 − 1806. XIANG Zeyu, WANG Changting, SONG Wenbiao,et al. Advance on soil activities in grassland ecosystem [J]. Pratacultural Science, 2011, 28(10): 1801 − 1806. [5] BURNS R G, DEFOREST J L, MARXSEN J,et al. Soil enzymes in a changing environment: current knowledge and future directions [J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2013, 58(2): 216 − 234. [6] GAVRICHKOVA O, MOSCATELLI M C, KUZYAKOV Y,et al. Influence of defoliation on CO2 efflux from soil and microbial activity in a Mediterranean grassland [J]. Agriculture,Ecosystems&Environment, 2010, 136(1): 87 − 96. [7] 张洪芹, 臧晓琳, 蔡宙霏, 等. 放牧对冷蒿根际微生物区系及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2017, 34(4): 679 − 686. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2017.04.014 ZHANG Hongqin, ZANG Xiaolin, CAI Zhoufei,et al. Effects of grazing intensity on soil microbial flora and soil enzyme activities in the Artemisia frigida rhizosphere [J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2017, 34(4): 679 − 686. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2017.04.014 [8] 刘肖肖, 戴伟, 戴奥娜. 北京山地4种阔叶林土壤酶活性及动力学特征[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2018, 35(5): 794 − 801. LIU Xiaoxiao, DAI Wei, DAI Aona. Soil enzyme activity and their kinetics in broadleaf forests of Beijing mountainous areas [J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2018, 35(5): 794 − 801. [9] CENINI V L, FORNARA D A, MCMULLAN G,et al. Chronic nitrogen fertilization and carbon sequestration in grassland soils: evidence of a microbial enzyme link [J]. Biogeochemistry, 2015, 126(3): 301 − 313. doi: 10.1007/s10533-015-0157-5 [10] KONG Ling, CHU L M. Subtropical urban turfs: carbon and nitrogen pools and the role of enzyme activity [J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2018, 65: 18 − 28. doi: 10.1016/j.jes.2017.04.006 [11] ZHOU Xiaoqi, CHEN Chengrong, WANG Yanfen,et al. Warming and increased precipitation have differential effects on soil extracellular enzyme activities in a temperate grassland [J]. Science of The Total Environment, 2013, 444: 552 − 558. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.12.023 [12] 刘发央, 龙瑞军. 不同放牧强度对牦牛夏季放牧行为的影响[J]. 兰州大学学报(自然科学版), 2009, 45(2): 55 − 60. LIU Fayang, LONG Ruijun. Effect of different grazing intensities on grazing behavior of yak in summer [J]. Journal of Lanzhou University(Natural Sciences), 2009, 45(2): 55 − 60. [13] 和占星, 黄梅芬, 雷波, 等. 中国牦牛的生态行为研究进展[J]. 家畜生态学报, 2019, 40(4): 1 − 9. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1182.2019.04.001 HE Zhanxing, HUANG Meifen, LEI Bo,et al. Research progress on ecological behavior of Chinese yaks [J]. Acta Ecologiae Animalis Domastici, 2019, 40(4): 1 − 9. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1182.2019.04.001 [14] 孟庆辉, 陈永杏, 白加德, 等. 放牧条件下白牦牛采食的季节性微调整及其效应[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(18): 219 − 224. doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2016.18.030 MENG Qinghui, CHEN Yongxing, BAI Jiade,et al. Seasonal subtle alternation of yak foraging and its effect under pasturing condition [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016, 32(18): 219 − 224. doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2016.18.030 [15] LI Chengyi, YANG Yuanwu, LI Xilai,et al. Effects of simulated climate warming and grazing on photosynthesis and respiration of permafrost meadow plant community [J]. Russian Journal of Ecology, 2020, 51(3): 224 − 232. doi: 10.1134/S1067413620030042 [16] SKINNER R H, GOSLEE S C. Defoliation effects on pasture photosynthesis and respiration [J]. Crop Science, 2016, 56(4): 2045 − 53. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2015.12.0733 [17] 张超, 闫瑞瑞, 梁庆伟, 等. 不同利用方式下草地土壤理化性质及碳、氮固持研究[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(4): 90 − 98. ZHANG Chao, YAN Ruirui, LIANG Qingwei,et al. Study on soil physical and chemical properties and carbon and nitrogen sequestration of grassland under different utilization modes [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(4): 90 − 98. [18] GILMULLINA A, RUMPEL C, BLAGODATSKAYA E, et al. Management of grasslands by mowing versus grazing-impacts on soil organic matter quality and microbial functioning [J/OL]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2020, 156: 103701[2022-03-10]. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2020.103701. [19] WANG Ruzhen, WU Hui, SARDANS J,et al. Carbon storage and plant-soil linkages among soil aggregates as affected by nitrogen enrichment and mowing management in a meadow grassland [J]. Plant and Soil, 2020, 457(1/2): 407 − 420. [20] HEWINS D B, BROADBENT T, CARLYLE C N,et al. Extracellular enzyme activity response to defoliation and water addition in two ecosites of the mixed grass prairie [J]. Agriculture Ecosystems&Environment, 2016, 230: 79 − 86. [21] LIU Weilong, JIANG Yonglei, WANG Genxu, et al. Effects of N addition and clipping on above and belowground plant biomass, soil microbial community structure, and function in an alpine meadow on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau [J/OL]. European Journal of Soil Biology, 2021, 106: 103344[2022-03-10]. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2021.103344. [22] SHI Changguang, SILVA L C R, ZHANG Hongxuan,et al. Climate warming alters nitrogen dynamics and total non-structural carbohydrate accumulations of perennial herbs of distinctive functional groups during the plant senescence in autumn in an alpine meadow of the Tibetan Plateau, China [J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2015, 200: 21 − 29. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.09.006 [23] MIPAM T D, ZHONG Linling, LIU Jianquan, et al. Productive overcompensation of alpine meadows in response to yak grazing in the eastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [J/OL]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2019, 10: 925[2022-03-10]. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00925. [24] 李晓刚, 朱志红, 周晓松, 等. 刈割、施肥和浇水对高寒草甸物种多样性、功能多样性与初级生产力关系的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(11): 1136 − 1147. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.01136 LI Xiaogang, ZHU Zhihong, ZHOU Xiaosong,et al. Effects of clipping, fertilizing and watering on the relationship between species diversity, functional diversity and primary productivity in alpine meadow of China [J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2011, 35(11): 1136 − 1147. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.01136 [25] YAN Yingjie, QUAN Quan, MENG Cheng, et al. Varying soil respiration under long-term warming and clipping due to shifting carbon allocation toward below-ground[J/OL]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2021, 304: 108408[2022-03-10]. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2021.108408. [26] BLAIR G, LEFROY R, LISLE L. Soil carbon fractions based on their degree of oxidation, and the development of a carbon management index for agricultural systems [J]. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 1995, 46(7): 1459 − 1466. doi: 10.1071/AR9951459 [27] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2005. BAO Shidan. Soil Agrochemical Analysis [M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 2005. [28] FRANKENBERGER W T, JOHANSON J B. Factors affecting invertase activity in soils [J]. Plant and Soil, 1983, 74(3): 313 − 323. doi: 10.1007/BF02181349 [29] 张海阔, 张宝刚, 周钟昱, 等. 亚热带天然林转变为毛竹林和茶园对土壤胞外酶活性的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2022, 41(4): 826 − 833. ZHANG Haikuo, ZHANG Baogang, ZHOU Zhongyu. Effects of converting natural forests to moso bamboo and tea plantations on soil extracellular enzyme activity in subtropical China [J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2022, 41(4): 826 − 833. [30] 吴金水, 林启美, 黄巧云, 等. 土壤微生物生物量测定方法及其应用[M]. 北京: 气象出版社, 2011. WU Jinshui, LIN Qimei, HUANG Qiaoyun, et al. Soil Microbial Biomass Measurement Method and its Application[M]. Beijing: China Meteorological Press, 2011. [31] SUN Geng, ZHUBARKER X, CHEN Dongming,et al. Responses of root exudation and nutrient cycling to grazing intensities and recovery practices in an alpine meadow: an implication for pasture management [J]. Plant and Soil, 2017, 416(1/2): 515 − 525. [32] RUI Yichao, WANG Yanfen, CHEN Chengrong,et al. Warming and grazing increase mineralization of organic P in an alpine meadow ecosystem of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China [J]. Plant and Soil, 2012, 357(1/2): 73 − 87. [33] 焦婷, 常根柱, 周学辉, 等. 高寒草甸草场不同载畜量下土壤酶与土壤肥力的关系研究[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(6): 98 − 104. JIAO Ting, CHANG Genzhu, ZHOU Xuehui,et al. Study on relationship between soil enzyme and soil fertility of alpine meadow in different carrying capacities [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(6): 98 − 104. [34] XIAO Xiang, ZHANG Tao, ANGERER J P, et al. Grazing seasons and stocking rates affects the relationship between herbage traits of alpine meadow and grazing behaviors of Tibetan Sheep in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau[J/OL]. Animals, 2020, 10(3): 488[2022-03-10]. doi: 10.3390/ani10030488. [35] ROLINSKI S, MÜLLER C, HEINKE J,et al. Modeling vegetation and carbon dynamics of managed grasslands at the global scale with LPJmL 3.6 [J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2018, 11(1): 429 − 451. doi: 10.5194/gmd-11-429-2018 [36] ORGILL S E, CONDON J R, CONYERS M K,et al. Removing grazing pressure from a native pasture decreases soil organic carbon in Southern New South Wales, Australia [J]. Land Degradation&Development, 2016, 29(2): 274 − 283. [37] ZITER C, MACDOUGALL A S. Nutrients and defoliation increase soil carbon inputs in grassland [J]. Ecology, 2013, 94(1): 106 − 116. doi: 10.1890/11-2070.1 [38] LI Jianye, ZHANG Qichun, LI Yong,et al. Effects of long-term mowing on the fractions and chemical composition of soil organic matter in a semiarid grassland [J]. Biogeosciences, 2017, 14(10): 2685 − 2696. doi: 10.5194/bg-14-2685-2017 [39] JIAN Siyang, LI Jianwei, CHEN Ji,et al. Soil extracellular enzyme activities, soil carbon and nitrogen storage under nitrogen fertilization: a meta-analysis [J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2016, 101: 32 − 43. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.07.003 [40] 吴芳芳, 郑有飞, 吴荣军, 等. 太阳辐射减弱麦田根际土壤酶与有效微量元素的相关性分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2012, 21(4): 595 − 600. WU Fangfang, ZHENG Youfei, WU Rongjun,et al. Correlative research on rhizosphere soil enzyme activities and available trace elements under reduced solar irradiance [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2012, 21(4): 595 − 600. [41] SUN Jian, LIU Biying, YOU Yong,et al. Solar radiation regulates the leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry across alpine meadows of the Tibetan Plateau [J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2019, 271: 92 − 101. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.02.041 [42] D’ALÒ F, ODRIOZOLA I, BALDRIAN P, et al. Microbial activity in alpine soils under climate change[J/OL]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 783: 147012[2022-03-10]. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147012. [43] ZHANG Zhilong, NIU Kechang, LIU Xudong,et al. Linking flowering and reproductive allocation in response to nitrogen addition in an alpine meadow [J]. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2013, 7(3): 231 − 239. [44] ZHU Yuanjun, DELGADO-BAQUERIZO M, SHAN Dan,et al. Grazing impacts on ecosystem functions exceed those from mowing [J]. Plant and Soil, 2021, 464(1/2): 579 − 591. -
-
链接本文:
https://zlxb.zafu.edu.cn/article/doi/10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20220281
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 12
- 被引次数: 0
