Differences of

CHENG Xiang; FU Denggao; HE Gaoxun; ZHANG Yajing; YU Minghui; WANG Yue; LIU Chang'e; DUAN Changqun

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.039

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

Differences of

更新时间：2025-03-12

- Differences of
- Vol. 35, Issue 6, Pages: 285-292(2021)
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 云南大学生态与环境学院,昆明,650000
  2. 云南省高原山地生态与退化环境修复重点实验室,昆明,650000
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.039
  CLC： S718.51
- Published：2021
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
CHENG Xiang, FU Denggao, HE Gaoxun, et al. Differences of[J]. 2021, 35(6): 285-292.
DOI：

CHENG Xiang, FU Denggao, HE Gaoxun, et al. Differences of[J]. 2021, 35(6): 285-292. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.039.

摘要

以同在滇中地区磷素差异较大的富磷区与贫磷区的云南松林群落及其土壤为研究对象，采用Sui修正后的Hedley磷素分级，研究了土壤磷素的有效磷特征和土壤其他养分因子，分析了2类云南松群落的结构及其差异。结果表明，富磷区土壤全磷含量显著高于贫磷区，虽然两地活性磷（H2O—Pi、NaHCO3—Pi和NaHCO3—Po）含量都低于10%，但富磷区活性磷含量显著高于贫磷区，贫磷区有机磷含量高于无机磷含量，富磷区却相反；富磷区其他土壤养分如全氮、有机碳含量也显著高于贫磷区。富磷区云南松群落林木密度、Shannon-wiener指数、Simpson指数、Pielou指数均高于贫磷区云南松群落，而平均株高、平均胸径、冠幅低于贫磷区云南松群落。讨论认为，在贫磷区云南松与富磷区云南松群落的生长发育与营养策略有关，在磷素匮乏的地区，植物群落为了维持正常生长而进行紧密磷素循环，植物和微生物主要利用的磷素来自有机磷的矿化与溶解，并最大限度地减少生物地球化学循环的磷损失；但在磷素极其充沛的地区植物和微生物群落更加倾向将磷素从土壤矿石转移到生物地球化学磷循环中，对于当地植物和微生物来说，紧密的磷素回收就显得无关紧要。两地云南松群落结构的显著差异与地表磷素含量关系密切，富磷区因土壤磷含量丰富，并且引起其他营养资源丰富，从而能够维持更多种类的植物，同时相应地降低云南松在群落的生态优势；相应地贫磷区磷素成为限制因素，并且其他营养资源也相对短缺，从而不能支持更高水平的植物多样性，云南松因具有较强竞争力而生态优势更高。

Abstract

In this study

Pinus yunnanensis communities and their soils in the two places (phosphorus-rich area and phosphorus-poor area) with large differences in phosphorus content in Central Yunnan were taken as the research objects. The Hedley phosphorus classification revised by Sui was used to study the available phosphorus characteristics of soil phosphorus and other soil nutrient factors

and the structure and differences of two types of P. yunnanensis communities were analyzed. The results showed that the total phosphorus content in the phosphorus-rich area was significantly higher than that in the phosphorus-poor area. Although the contents of active phosphorus (H2O—Pi

NaHCO3—Pi

and NaHCO3—Po) were lower than 10% in both areas

the active phosphorus content in the phosphorus-rich area was significantly higher than that in the phosphorus-poor area. In the phosphorus-poor area

the content of organic phosphorus was higher than that of inorganic phosphorus

but it was the opposite in the phosphorus-rich area. The contents of other soil nutrients such as total nitrogen and organic carbon in the phosphorus-rich area were also significantly higher than those in the phosphorus-poor area. The forest density

Shannon-wiener index

Simpson index and Pielou index of P. yunnanensis community in the phosphorus-rich area were all higher than those in the phosphorus-poor area

while the average plant height

average DBH and crown width were all lower than those in the phosphorus-poor area. The growth and development of P. yunnanensis communities in phosphorus-poor areas and phosphorus-rich areas were related to nutrition strategies. In phosphorus-deficient areas

plant communities carried out a tight phosphorus cycle to maintain normal growth. Phosphorus mainly used by plants and microorganisms came from the mineralization and dissolution of organic phosphorus

and the phosphorus loss was minimized in the biogeochemical cycle. However

in areas where phosphorus was extremely abundant

plant and microbial communities were more inclined to transfer phosphorus from soil ores to the biogeochemical phosphorus cycle. For local plants and microbes

tight phosphorus recovery was irrelevant. The significant difference in the community structure of P. yunnanensis between the two places was closely related to the phosphorus content on the ground. Phosphorus-rich areas were rich in soil phosphorus and other nutrient resources

which was able to maintain more kinds of plants and correspondingly reduce the ecological advantages of P. yunnanensis in the communities. Accordingly

phosphorus had become a limiting factor in phosphorus-poor areas

and other nutrient resources were also relatively short

which could not support a higher level of plant diversity. P. yunnanensis had a higher ecological advantage because of its strong competitiveness.

关键词

Keywords

references

田立新, 吴初平, 杨少宗, 等.浙江杭州午潮山亚热带常绿阔叶林群落结构和物种组成[J].应用生态学报, 2020, 31(6):1909-1915.

Bennett J A, Klironomos J. Mechanisms of plant-soil feedback:Interactions among biotic and abiotic drivers[J].New Phytologist, 2019, 222(1):91-96.

赵琼, 曾德慧.陆地生态系统磷素循环及其影响因素[J].植物生态学报, 2005, 29(1):153-163.

Elser J, Bennett E. Phosphorus cycle:A broken biogeochemical cycle[J].Nature, 2011, 478(7367):29-31.

Jonard M, Fürst A, Verstraeten A, et al. Tree mineral nutrition is deteriorating in Europe[J].Global Change Biology, 2015, 21(1):418-430.

Ruttenberg K C. The global phosphorus cycle[J].Treatise on Geochemistry, 2014, 10(2):499-558.

吴征镒, 朱彦丞.云南植被[M].北京:科学出版社, 1987.

段昌群, 何峰, 刘嫦娥, 等.基于生态系统健康视角下的云南高原湖泊水环境问题的诊断与解决理念[J].中国工程科学, 2010, 12(6):62-66, 72.

阎凯, 付登高, 何峰, 等.滇池流域富磷区不同土壤磷水平下植物叶片的养分化学计量特征[J].植物生态学报, 2011, 35(4):353-361.

付登高, 何锋, 郭震, 等.滇池流域富磷区退化山地马桑-蔗茅植物群落的生态修复效能评价[J].植物生态学报, 2013, 37(4):326-334.

Han W X, Fang J Y, Guo D L, et al. Leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry across 753 terrestrial plant species in China[J].New Phytologist, 2005, 168(2):377-385.

方精云, 王襄平, 沈泽昊, 等.植物群落清查的主要内容、方法和技术规范[J].生物多样性, 2009, 17(6):533-548.

Sui Y, Thompsonv M L, Shang C. Fractionation of phosphorus in a Mollisol amended with biosolids[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1999, 63(5):1174-1180.

Rose T J, Hardiputra B, Rengel Z. Wheat, canola and grain legume access to soil phosphorus fractions differs in soils with contrasting phosphorus dynamics[J].Plant and Soil, 2010, 326(1/2):159-170.

Song C, Han X Z, Tang C. Changes in phosphorus fractions, sorption and release in Udic Mollisols under different ecosystems[J].Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2007, 44(1):37-47.

张林, 吴彦, 吴宁, 等.林线附近主要植被类型下土壤非生长季磷素形态[J].生态学报, 2010, 30(13):3457-3464.

张鑫, 谷会岩, 陈祥伟.择伐干扰对小兴安岭阔叶红松林土壤磷形态及有效性的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2018, 29(2):441-448.

马克平, 黄建辉, 于顺利, 等.北京东灵山地区植物群落多样性的研究Ⅱ丰富度、均匀度和物种多样性指数[J].生态学报, 1995, 15(3):268-277.

Hedley M J, Stewart J W B, Chauhan B S. Changes in inorganic and organic soil phosphorus fractions induced by cultivation practices and by laboratory incubations[J].Journal of the Soil Science Society of America, 1982, 46(5):970-976.

Cassagne N, Remaury M, Gauquelin T, et al. Forms and profile distribution of soil phosphorus in alpine Inceptisols and Spodosols (Pyrenees, France)[J].Geoderma, 2000, 95(1/2):161-172.

Frossard E, Stewart J W B, StArnaud R J. Distribution and mobility of phosphorus in grassland and forest soils of Saskatchewan[J].Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 1989, 69(2):401-416.

张林, 吴宁, 吴彦, 等.土壤磷素形态及其分级方法研究进展[J].应用生态学报, 2009, 20(7):1775-1782.

张龙.滇中富磷区与非富磷区主要植物群落优势种对土壤磷素形态的影响研究[D].昆明:云南大学, 2014.

Shiels A B, Sanford R L. Soil nutrient differences between two krummholz-form tree species and adjacent alpine tundra[J].Geoderma, 2001, 102(3/4):205-217.

Litaor M I, Seastedt T R, Walker M D, et al. The biogeochemistry of phosphorus across an alpine topographic/snow gradient[J].Geoderma, 2005, 124(1/2):49-61.

Cross A F, Schlesinger W H. A literature review and evaluation of the Hedley fractionation:Applications to the biogeochemical cycle of soil phosphorus in natural ecosystems[J].Geoderma, 1995, 64(3/4):197-214.

Frizano J, Johnson A H, Vann D R, et al. Soil phosphorus fractionation during forest development on landslide Scars in the Luquillo Mountains, Puerto Rico1[J].Biotropica, 2002, 34(1):17-26.

辜翔, 张仕吉, 刘兆丹, 等.中亚热带植被恢复对土壤有机碳含量、碳密度的影响[J].植物生态学报, 2018, 42(5):83-96.

王娜, 朱小叶, 方晰, 等.中亚热带退化林地土壤有机碳及不同粒径土壤颗粒有机碳的变化[J].水土保持学报, 2018, 32(3):218-225, 234.

宋创业, 郭柯.浑善达克沙地中部丘间低地植物群落分布与土壤环境关系[J].植物生态学报, 2007, 31(1):40-49.

薛鸥, 魏天兴, 刘飞, 等.公路边坡植物群落多样性与土壤因子耦合关系[J].北京林业大学学报, 2016, 38(1):91-100.

江源, 章异平, 杨艳刚, 等.放牧对五台山高山、亚高山草甸植被-土壤系统耦合的影响[J].生态学报, 2010, 30(4):837-846.

Lang F, Bauhus J, Frossard E, et al. Phosphorus in forest ecosystems:New insights from an ecosystem nutrition perspective[J].Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 2016, 179(2):129-135.

Tilman D. Nitrogen-limited growth in plants from different successional stages[J].Ecology, 1986, 67(2):555-563.

Bedford B L, Walbridge M K, Lldous A. Patterns in nutrient availability and plant diversity of temperate North American wetlands[J].Ecology, 1999, 80(7):2151-2169.

Belsky A. Population and community processes in a mosaic grassland in the Serengeti, Tanzania[J].Journal of Ecology, 1986, 74(3):841-856.

李振基, 陈小麟, 郑海雷.生态学[M].3版.北京:科学出版社, 2004.

Views

812

下载量

CSCD

Alert me when the article has been cited

提交

Tools

Publicity Resources

Quantitative Decomposition of Uncertainty in Biodiversity Simulation under Climate Change

Effects of Different Cotton Straw Returning Rates on Soil Physicochemical Properties and Cotton Growth

Effects of Regulated Deficit Irrigation on Leaf Nutrients， Enzyme Activities，and Root Zone Soil Nutrients during Fruit Expansion and Coloration-Sugar Accumulation Stages of Citrus in Western Hubei Province

Spatial Response of Habitat Quality to Climate Change and Human Activities——Taking the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau as An Example

Response of Soil Stoichiometric to Soil Erosion on Slope Farmland in Black Soil Region of Northeast China

Related Author

CHENG Yingying

ZHANG Wenyao

LIU Ying

CAO Mingchang

SONG Chuangye

LI Guoqing

LI Yueyao

YANG Maoqi

Related Institution

State Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change， Institute of Botany， Chinese Academy of Sciences

Key Laboratory of Biodiversity and Biosafety， Nanjing Institute of Environmental Sciences， Ministry of Ecology and Environment

State Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Dryland Farming on the Loess Plateau， Institute of Soil and Water Conservation， Chinese Academy of Sciences and Ministry of Water Resources， Yangling

College of Natural Resources and Environment， Northwest A&F University， Yangling

Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecological Agriculture of Xinjiang Corps， College of Agriculture， Shihezi University

⁰

Differences of

DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.039

摘要

Abstract

关键词

Keywords

references