退化草牧场防护林土壤腐殖质碳组分特征及酶活性
|
摘要
[目的]探讨不同防护林结构的配置、不同林龄草牧场防护林对土壤腐殖质碳组分特征和酶活性的影响及其两者的关系,寻找最佳草牧场防护林结构的配置方式。[方法]采用对比分析的方法,对草牧场防护林和无林草牧场(对照)土壤腐殖质碳组分特征和土壤酶活性进行了研究。[结果]林龄为15年距林带0 m处,网格状草牧场防护林的胡敏酸和富里酸总碳量、胡敏酸碳组分、富里酸碳组分和胡敏素的含量以及过氧化氢酶、多酚氧化酶、脲酶、蛋白酶、磷酸酶的活性等测定指标均分别比对照显著提高70.26%、120.97%、73.76%、139.84%、51.80%、85.00%、42.17%、94.65%、53.77%、49.81%;与带状、疏林状草牧场防护林相比,网格状草牧场防护林除土壤有机质、富里酸碳组分、胡敏素、蔗糖酶、蛋白酶、磷酸酶的差异不显著外,以上10个测定指标中的其余指标差异均显著。对于网格状草牧场防护林,土壤富里酸碳组分、胡敏素、多酚氧化酶、脲酶等测定指标在林龄为1~5年时随其增大而增加,5~15年缓慢降低,15年后下降速度增大;距离林带50 m处土壤有机质含量、胡敏素、多酚氧化酶活性高于距离防护林0 m和100 m,且100 m处较0 m处低,其它测定指标基本上随距离林带距离的增加而减小。距离防护林带100 m处时,部分指标与对照差异不显著,土壤改良效益基本消失。胡敏酸和富里酸总碳量与过氧化氢酶、多酚氧化酶、脲酶、磷酸酶呈极显著正相关,胡敏酸与蛋白酶呈极显著正相关;富里酸与过氧化氢酶、蔗糖酶、脲酶、磷酸酶呈极显著正相关;胡敏素与蔗糖酶呈显著负相关。[结论]林龄为5年的网格状防护林土壤富里酸碳组分、胡敏素、多酚氧化酶和脲酶活性等最佳;对防护林及其多数土壤腐殖质碳组分和酶活性升高的分析表明,网格状防护林的带间距应小于200 m。
[Objective]This study aims at discussing the effect of the pastureland shelterbelts with different structural configurations and different stand ages on the characteristics of carbon components in soil humus and enzyme activities,and the relationship between them. [Method] Comparative analysis is used to research the characteristics ofsoil humus carbon fraction and soil enzyme activity of the degenerated pastureland shelterbelt and the pastureland without forest( control) for different stand age and configuration types( grid-shaped,belt-shaped,and sparseshaped types). [Result] In the soil at a distance of 0 m from 15-year-old grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt,the soil organic matter( SOM),total contents of humic acid( HA) and fulvic acid( FA),HA carbon fraction,FA carbon fraction,humin,the activity of catalase,polyhenol oxidase,urease,protease and phosphatase,were 70. 26%,120. 97%,73. 76%,139. 84%,51. 80%,85. 00%,42. 17%,94. 65%,53. 77%,49. 81% higher compared with the control; as comparison with belt-shaped,sparse-shaped pastureland shelterbelt,non-significant difference was observed in SOM,FA carbon fraction,humin,saccharase,protease,and phosphatase,but significant difference was found in the other indicators measured. As for the grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt,the FA carbon fraction,humin,polyhenol oxidase,urease in the soil increased with the stand age in the 1st to 5th year,then slowly decreased in the age of 5 ~ 15,and sharply declined afterward. The SOM,humin,and polyhenol oxidase activity at a distance of 50 m from grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt were higher than those at a distance of 0 m and 100 m,moreover,lower at a distance of 100 m than those at a distance of 0 m. The other indicators mainly decreased over the increasing distance from grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt. There was no significant difference for partial indicators as comparison with the control,its soil melioration benefit nearly disappeared. Total carbon contents of HA and FA were significantly positively correlated with the catalase,polyhenol oxidase,urease,and phosphatase.There was a highly significant positive correlation between HA and protease. HA was highly positively correlated with the catalase,saccharase,urease,and phosphatase. There was significantly negative correlation between humin and saccharase. [Conclusion] There is a definite correlation between total carbon content of HA and FA,HA,FA,humin,respectively. The FA carbon fraction,humin,polyhenol oxidase and urease activities in the soil are the best when the stand age of the grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt is 5. The analysis on the most soil humus carbon components and soil enzyme activities improved by the shelterbelt suggests that the distance between the shelterbelts of the grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelts should be less than 200 m. Therefore,it is suggested that less than 200 m distance between shelterbelts should be used as main configuration type of pastureland shelterbelts when they are established in the future.
[Objective]This study aims at discussing the effect of the pastureland shelterbelts with different structural configurations and different stand ages on the characteristics of carbon components in soil humus and enzyme activities,and the relationship between them. [Method] Comparative analysis is used to research the characteristics ofsoil humus carbon fraction and soil enzyme activity of the degenerated pastureland shelterbelt and the pastureland without forest( control) for different stand age and configuration types( grid-shaped,belt-shaped,and sparseshaped types). [Result] In the soil at a distance of 0 m from 15-year-old grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt,the soil organic matter( SOM),total contents of humic acid( HA) and fulvic acid( FA),HA carbon fraction,FA carbon fraction,humin,the activity of catalase,polyhenol oxidase,urease,protease and phosphatase,were 70. 26%,120. 97%,73. 76%,139. 84%,51. 80%,85. 00%,42. 17%,94. 65%,53. 77%,49. 81% higher compared with the control; as comparison with belt-shaped,sparse-shaped pastureland shelterbelt,non-significant difference was observed in SOM,FA carbon fraction,humin,saccharase,protease,and phosphatase,but significant difference was found in the other indicators measured. As for the grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt,the FA carbon fraction,humin,polyhenol oxidase,urease in the soil increased with the stand age in the 1st to 5th year,then slowly decreased in the age of 5 ~ 15,and sharply declined afterward. The SOM,humin,and polyhenol oxidase activity at a distance of 50 m from grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt were higher than those at a distance of 0 m and 100 m,moreover,lower at a distance of 100 m than those at a distance of 0 m. The other indicators mainly decreased over the increasing distance from grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt. There was no significant difference for partial indicators as comparison with the control,its soil melioration benefit nearly disappeared. Total carbon contents of HA and FA were significantly positively correlated with the catalase,polyhenol oxidase,urease,and phosphatase.There was a highly significant positive correlation between HA and protease. HA was highly positively correlated with the catalase,saccharase,urease,and phosphatase. There was significantly negative correlation between humin and saccharase. [Conclusion] There is a definite correlation between total carbon content of HA and FA,HA,FA,humin,respectively. The FA carbon fraction,humin,polyhenol oxidase and urease activities in the soil are the best when the stand age of the grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelt is 5. The analysis on the most soil humus carbon components and soil enzyme activities improved by the shelterbelt suggests that the distance between the shelterbelts of the grid-shaped pastureland shelterbelts should be less than 200 m. Therefore,it is suggested that less than 200 m distance between shelterbelts should be used as main configuration type of pastureland shelterbelts when they are established in the future.
引文
[1]段文标,陈立新.草牧场防护林营造技术的研究[J].中国沙漠,2002,22(3):13-18.
[2]杨雨春,赵珊珊,包广道,等.吉林水田防护林防风效能及其影响因子分析[J].西北林学院学报,2015,30(1):132-136.
[3]陈作州,张宇清,吴斌,等.山东省农田防护林生态系统服务功能价值核算[J].生态学杂志,2012,31(1):59-65.
[4]赵新风,徐海量,阎江平,等.塔里木河下游灌区灌溉方式转变对农田及其防护林土壤水盐动态的影响[J].土壤学报,2011,48(6):1116-1124.
[5]耿相国,吴斌,张宇清,等.农田防护林树种中林46杨不同器官碳含量的研究[J].林业科学研究,2011,24(2):267-271.
[6]王翠,雷加强,李生宇,等.和田地区绿洲外围农田防护林带的防护效益[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(1):98-103,122.
[7]王葆芳,赵英铭,王志刚,等.干旱区人工绿洲不同农田防护林模式防护效应及相关性[J].林业科学研究,2008,21(5):707-712.
[8]段文标,赵雨森,陈立新.草牧场防护林综合效益研究综述[J].山地学报,2002,20(1):90-96.
[9]李永华,杨文斌,卢琦.草牧场防护林对草地地上生产力和地下生物量的影响[J].中国草地学报,2008,30(5):85-89.
[10]闫德仁,闫婷,赵春光.草原天然植被和草原造林固碳储量的对比研究[J].内蒙古林业科技,2011,37(1):5-8.
[11]庄洋,赵娜,赵吉.内蒙古草地碳汇潜力估测及其发展对策[J].草业科学,2013,30(9):1469-1474.
[12]于建权,肖映秋,陈新,等.半干旱风沙区疏林式草牧场防护林的土壤改良效应[J].东北林业大学学报,2001,29(2):55-58.
[13]王凯,王道涵,张成龙,等.辽西北防护林对林下土壤理化性状的影响[J].东北林业大学学报,2014,42(10):77-79,99.
[14]袁春良,吴德东.沙地草牧场防护林对土壤水分变化的影响[J].防护林科技,2008,84(3):3-13.
[15]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,2000:106-108.
[16]傅积平.土壤结合态腐殖质的分组测定[J].土壤通报,1983,14(2):36-37.
[17]关松荫.土壤酶及其研究方法[M].北京:农业出版社,1986.
[18]周礼恺.土壤酶学[M].北京:科学出版社,1987:239-254.
[19]张新厚,范志平,孙学凯,等.半干旱区土地利用方式变化对生态系统碳储量的影响[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(12):2424-2430.
[20]Chen L X,Duan W B,Wang J H,et al.Soil humus compositions and the influence on soil acidity in Larix olgensis plantation of NE China[J].Advanced Materials Research,2013,610:3075-3079.
[21]陈立新.落叶松人工林施肥对土壤酶和微生物的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(6):1000-1004.
[22]孙双红,陈立新,李少博,等.阔叶红松林不同演替阶段土壤酶活性与养分特征及其相关性[J].北京林业大学学报,2016,38(2):20-28.
[23]吉艳芝,冯万忠,陈立新,等.落叶松混交林根际与非根际土壤养分、微生物和酶活性特征[J].生态环境学报,2008,17(1):339-343.
[24]邱权,李吉跃,王军辉,等.西宁南山4种灌木根际和非根际土壤微生物、酶活性和养分特征[J].生态学报,2014,34(24):7411-7420.
[25]王灿,王德建,孙瑞娟,等.长期不同施肥方式下土壤酶活性与肥力因素的相关性[J].生态环境,2008,17(2):688-692.
[26]陈立新.施肥对落叶松人工林根际土壤生化活性的影响[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(3):133-136.
[27]陈立新,杨承栋.落叶松人工林土壤磷形态、磷酸酶活性演变与林木生长关系的研究[J].林业科学,2004,40(3):12-18.
[28]Steinweg J M,Dukes J S,Paul E A,et al.Microbial responses to multi-factor climate change:effects on soil enzymes[J].Frontiers in Microbiology,2013,4:146-146.
[29]张文霖.主成分分析在SPSS中的操作应用[J].市场研究,2005,12(9):31-34.
[30]张晓曦,刘增文,朱博超,等.半干旱黄土丘陵区纯林土壤腐殖质异化特征及与其他性质的关系[J].生态学报,2015,6(3):1779-1787.
[31]矫丽娜,李志洪,殷程程,等.秸秆还田深度对黑土腐殖质和酶活性的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2015,2(4):17-21.
[2]杨雨春,赵珊珊,包广道,等.吉林水田防护林防风效能及其影响因子分析[J].西北林学院学报,2015,30(1):132-136.
[3]陈作州,张宇清,吴斌,等.山东省农田防护林生态系统服务功能价值核算[J].生态学杂志,2012,31(1):59-65.
[4]赵新风,徐海量,阎江平,等.塔里木河下游灌区灌溉方式转变对农田及其防护林土壤水盐动态的影响[J].土壤学报,2011,48(6):1116-1124.
[5]耿相国,吴斌,张宇清,等.农田防护林树种中林46杨不同器官碳含量的研究[J].林业科学研究,2011,24(2):267-271.
[6]王翠,雷加强,李生宇,等.和田地区绿洲外围农田防护林带的防护效益[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(1):98-103,122.
[7]王葆芳,赵英铭,王志刚,等.干旱区人工绿洲不同农田防护林模式防护效应及相关性[J].林业科学研究,2008,21(5):707-712.
[8]段文标,赵雨森,陈立新.草牧场防护林综合效益研究综述[J].山地学报,2002,20(1):90-96.
[9]李永华,杨文斌,卢琦.草牧场防护林对草地地上生产力和地下生物量的影响[J].中国草地学报,2008,30(5):85-89.
[10]闫德仁,闫婷,赵春光.草原天然植被和草原造林固碳储量的对比研究[J].内蒙古林业科技,2011,37(1):5-8.
[11]庄洋,赵娜,赵吉.内蒙古草地碳汇潜力估测及其发展对策[J].草业科学,2013,30(9):1469-1474.
[12]于建权,肖映秋,陈新,等.半干旱风沙区疏林式草牧场防护林的土壤改良效应[J].东北林业大学学报,2001,29(2):55-58.
[13]王凯,王道涵,张成龙,等.辽西北防护林对林下土壤理化性状的影响[J].东北林业大学学报,2014,42(10):77-79,99.
[14]袁春良,吴德东.沙地草牧场防护林对土壤水分变化的影响[J].防护林科技,2008,84(3):3-13.
[15]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,2000:106-108.
[16]傅积平.土壤结合态腐殖质的分组测定[J].土壤通报,1983,14(2):36-37.
[17]关松荫.土壤酶及其研究方法[M].北京:农业出版社,1986.
[18]周礼恺.土壤酶学[M].北京:科学出版社,1987:239-254.
[19]张新厚,范志平,孙学凯,等.半干旱区土地利用方式变化对生态系统碳储量的影响[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(12):2424-2430.
[20]Chen L X,Duan W B,Wang J H,et al.Soil humus compositions and the influence on soil acidity in Larix olgensis plantation of NE China[J].Advanced Materials Research,2013,610:3075-3079.
[21]陈立新.落叶松人工林施肥对土壤酶和微生物的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(6):1000-1004.
[22]孙双红,陈立新,李少博,等.阔叶红松林不同演替阶段土壤酶活性与养分特征及其相关性[J].北京林业大学学报,2016,38(2):20-28.
[23]吉艳芝,冯万忠,陈立新,等.落叶松混交林根际与非根际土壤养分、微生物和酶活性特征[J].生态环境学报,2008,17(1):339-343.
[24]邱权,李吉跃,王军辉,等.西宁南山4种灌木根际和非根际土壤微生物、酶活性和养分特征[J].生态学报,2014,34(24):7411-7420.
[25]王灿,王德建,孙瑞娟,等.长期不同施肥方式下土壤酶活性与肥力因素的相关性[J].生态环境,2008,17(2):688-692.
[26]陈立新.施肥对落叶松人工林根际土壤生化活性的影响[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(3):133-136.
[27]陈立新,杨承栋.落叶松人工林土壤磷形态、磷酸酶活性演变与林木生长关系的研究[J].林业科学,2004,40(3):12-18.
[28]Steinweg J M,Dukes J S,Paul E A,et al.Microbial responses to multi-factor climate change:effects on soil enzymes[J].Frontiers in Microbiology,2013,4:146-146.
[29]张文霖.主成分分析在SPSS中的操作应用[J].市场研究,2005,12(9):31-34.
[30]张晓曦,刘增文,朱博超,等.半干旱黄土丘陵区纯林土壤腐殖质异化特征及与其他性质的关系[J].生态学报,2015,6(3):1779-1787.
[31]矫丽娜,李志洪,殷程程,等.秸秆还田深度对黑土腐殖质和酶活性的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2015,2(4):17-21.