大兴安岭落叶松林不同演替阶段土壤细菌群落结构与功能潜势

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.201901.010

应用生态学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (1): 95-107.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201901.010

大兴安岭落叶松林不同演替阶段土壤细菌群落结构与功能潜势

李萍^1,2,史荣久¹,赵峰¹,于景华¹,崔晓阳³,胡金贵⁴,张颖^1*

¹中国科学院沈阳应用生态研究所污染生态与环境工程重点实验室, 沈阳 110016;
²中国科学院大学, 北京 100049;
³东北林业大学, 哈尔滨 150040;
⁴内蒙古汗马自然保护区管理局, 内蒙古根河 022350

收稿日期:2018-03-31 修回日期:2018-10-23 出版日期:2019-01-20 发布日期:2019-01-20
通讯作者: yzhang@iae.ac.cn
作者简介:李萍, 女, 1991年生, 硕士研究生. 主要从事环境微生物研究. E-mail: 1095964573@qq.com
基金资助:
本文由中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(B类)(XDB15000000)和科技部基础性工作专项(2014FY110600)资助

Soil bacterial community structure and predicted functions in the larch forest during succession at the Greater Khingan Mountains of Northeast China

LI Ping^1,2, SHI Rong-jiu¹, ZHAO Feng¹, YU Jing-hua¹, CUI Xiao-yang³, HU Jin-gui⁴, ZHANG Ying^1*

¹Key Laboratory of Pollution Ecology and Environmental Engineering, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China;
²University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
³Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China;
⁴Inner Mongolia Hanma National Nature Reserve Administration, Genhe 022350, Inner Mongolia, China

Received:2018-03-31 Revised:2018-10-23 Online:2019-01-20 Published:2019-01-20
Supported by:
This work was supported by the Strategic Priority Research Programs (Category B) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB15000000) and the Basic Work of Ministry of Science and Technology of China (2014FY110600).2018-03-31 Received, 2018-10-23 Accepted.*

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用土壤细菌16S rDNA高通量测序方法研究了大兴安岭汗马自然保护区落叶松林不同演替阶段的土壤细菌群落结构和功能.结果表明: 不同演替阶段落叶松林土壤细菌优势门为变形菌门、酸杆菌门、疣微菌门、拟杆菌门、放线菌门、浮霉菌门和绿弯菌门,随着演替的进行,酸杆菌门相对丰度逐渐增加,绿弯菌门相对丰度逐渐减少,优势门相对丰度在不同演替阶段不同.细菌群落α多样性在不同演替阶段间无显著差异,但其群落结构分别在落叶松幼龄林与中龄林、幼龄林与过熟林、近熟林与成熟林之间存在显著差异.土壤氧化还原电位、土壤pH和有效磷是影响细菌群落结构的主要环境因素,其中土壤氧化还原电位对微生物群落结构影响最大.随着演替的进行,细菌参与的固氮作用、反硝化作用、氨氧化作用、木质素降解作用呈逐渐减弱的趋势,硫酸盐异化还原作用呈先降后升的趋势,碳固定作用呈先升后降的趋势,碱性磷酸酶没有明显的变化规律,影响土壤功能的主要因素有土壤有效磷和氧化还原电位等.

关键词: 落叶松, 土壤细菌多样性, 16S rDNA, 功能预测, 元素循环

Abstract: To reveal soil bacterial community structure and potential functions in larch forest during succession at Greater Khingan Mountains (Hanma National Nature Reserve), 16S rDNA was sequencing by Illumina Miseq. The results showed that the Proteobacteria, Acidobacteria, Verrucomicrobia, Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria, Planctomycetes and Chloroflexi were the most dominant phyla in soils of larch forests at various successional stages. Along forest succession, Acidobacteria increased, while Chloroflexi decreased. Relative abundance of dominant phyla was different at various successional stages. The α diversity, Chao1, Shannon index and Simpson index of soil bacterial community had no significant difference among five succession stages, while significant differences in soil bacterial community structure were observed between young and medium larch, between young and over mature larch, and between near mature and mature larch. Bacterial community structure was mainly influenced by redox potential, pH and available phosphorus. The redox potential was the most important factor influencing soil bacterial community structure. Along the succession of larch forest, N-fixation, denitrification, ammonia oxidation and lignin breakdown decreased, dissimilatory sulfate reduction had down-up trend, carbon fixation had up-down trend, and alkaline phosphatase had no apparent trend. Bacterial community potential function was mainly influenced by redox potential and available phosphorus.

Key words: 16S rDNA, function predicting, soil bacterial diversity, element cycle., larch

李萍,史荣久,赵峰,于景华,崔晓阳,胡金贵,张颖. 大兴安岭落叶松林不同演替阶段土壤细菌群落结构与功能潜势[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(1): 95-107.

LI Ping, SHI Rong-jiu, ZHAO Feng, YU Jing-hua, CUI Xiao-yang, HU Jin-gui, ZHANG Ying. Soil bacterial community structure and predicted functions in the larch forest during succession at the Greater Khingan Mountains of Northeast China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2019, 30(1): 95-107.

参考文献

[1] Mao C (毛超), Qi L-H (漆良华). Research advances on nitrogen transformation and cycling in forest soil. World Forest Research (世界林业研究), 2015, 28(2): 8-13 (in Chinese)
[2] Gou X-L (苟小林). Effects of Simulated Climate Warming on Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Transformation in the Alpine Forest of Western Sichuan. Master Thesis. Ya’an: Sichuan Agricultural University, 2014 (in Chinese)
[3] Llad S, L pez-Mondéjar R, Baldrian P. Forest soil bacteria: Diversity, involvement in ecosystem processes, and response to global change. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 2017, 81: e00063-16, doi:10.1128/mmbr.00063-16
[4] Kamimura N, Takahashi K, Mori K, et al. Bacterial catabolism of lignin-derived aromatics: New findings in a recent decade: Update on bacterial lignin catabolism. Environmental Microbiology Reports, 2017, 9: 679-705
[5] Bani A, Pioli S, Ventura M, et al. The role of microbial community in the decomposition of leaf litter and deadwood. Applied Soil Ecology, 2018, 126: 75-84
[6] He J-Z (贺纪正), Zhang L-M (张丽梅). Key processes and microbial mechanisms of soil nitrogen transformation. Microbiology China (微生物学通报), 2013, 40(1): 98-108 (in Chinese)
[7] Zhao S-H (赵少华), Yu W-T (宇万太), Zhang L (张璐), et al. Research advance in soil organic phosphorus. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 2004, 15 (11): 2189-2194 (in Chinese)
[8] Zhang B-G (张宝贵), Li G-T (李贵桐). Roles of soil organisms on the enhancement of plant availability of soil phosphorus. Acta Pedologica Sinica (土壤学报), 1998, 35 (1): 104-111 (in Chinese)
[9] Liu X-Z (刘新展), He J-Z (贺纪正), Zhang L-M (张丽梅). The sulfate reducing bacteria and surfer cycle in paddy soil. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 2009, 29(8): 4455-4463 (in Chinese)
[10] Gobat JM, Aragno M, Matthey W. The Living Soil: Fundamentals of Soil Science and Soil Biology. Plymouth, UK: Science Publishers Press, 2004
[11] Schmidt SK, Nemergut DR, Darcy JL, et al. Do bacte-rial and fungal communities assemble differently during primary succession? Molecular Ecology, 2014, 23: 254-258
[12] Yarwood SA, H gberg MN. Soil bacteria and archaea change rapidly in the first century of Fennoscandian boreal forest development. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2017, 114: 160-167
[13] Banning NC, Gleeson DB, Grigg AH, et al. Soil microbial community successional patterns during forest ecosystem restoration. Applied and Environmental Microbio-logy, 2011, 77: 6158-6164
[14] Zeng Q, An S, Liu Y. Soil bacterial community response to vegetation succession after fencing in the grassland of China. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 609: 2-10
[15] Fierer N, Jackson RB. The diversity and biogeography of soil bacterial communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2006, 103: 626-631
[16] Fierer N, Strickland MS, Liptzin D, et al. Global patterns in belowground communities. Ecology Letters, 2009, 12: 1238-1249
[17] Rousk J, B th E, Brookes PC, et al. Soil bacterial and fungal communities across a pH gradient in an arable soil. The ISME Journal, 2010, 4: 1340-1351
[18] Brockett BFT, Prescott CE, Graystonet SJ. Soil moisture is the major factor influencing microbial community structure and enzyme activities across seven biogeoclimatic zones in western Canada. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2012, 44: 9-20
[19] Landesman WJ, Nelson DM, Fitzpatrick MC. Soil pro-perties and tree species drive β-diversity of soil bacterial communities. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2014, 76: 201-209
[20] Sun H (孙海), Wang Q-X (王秋霞), Zhang C-G (张春阁), et al. Effects of different leaf litters on the physicochemical properties and soil microbial communities in Panax ginseng-growing soil. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 2018, 38(10): 1-13 (in Chinese)
[21] Baldrian P, Kolarˇík M, tursov M, et al. Active and total microbial communities in forest soil are largely different and highly stratified during decomposition. The ISME Journal, 2012, 6: 248-258
[22] Lin YT, Jangid K, Whitman WB, et al. Soil bacterial communities in native and regenerated perhumid montane forests. Applied Soil Ecology, 2011, 47: 111-118
[23] Van Elsas JD, Boersma FGH, et al. A review of mole-cular methods to study the microbiota of soil and the mycosphere. European Journal of Soil Biology, 2011, 47: 77-87
[24] Asshauer KP, Wemheuer B, Daniel R, et al. Tax4Fun: Predicting functional profiles from metagenomic 16S rRNA data. Bioinformatics, 2015, 31: 2882-2884
[25] Wemheuer F, Kaiser K, Karlovsky P, et al. Bacterial endophyte communities of three agricultural important grass species differ in their response towards management regimes. Scientific Reports, 2017, 7: 1-11
[26] Herzog S, Wemheuer F, Wemheuer B, et al. Effects of fertilization and sampling time on composition and diversity of entire and active bacterial communities in german grassland soils. PLoS One, 2015, 10(12): e0145575, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0145575
[27] Kaiser K, Wemheuer B, Korolkow V, et al. Driving forces of soil bacterial community structure, diversity, and function in temperate grasslands and forests. Scientific Reports, 2016, 6: 1-10
[28] Yang K (杨琨), Khan MA. Not disturbed old-growth forest. Forest & Humankind (森林与人类), 2015(9): 194-199 (in Chinese)
[29] Tamaki H, Wright CL, Li X, et al. Analysis of 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing options on the Roche/454 next-generation titanium sequencing platform. PLoS One, 2011, 6(9): e25263, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025263
[30] Edgar RC. UPARSE: Highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nature Methods, 2013, 10: 996-998
[31] Ferrier S, Manion G, Elith J, et al. Using generalized dissimilarity modelling to analyse and predict patterns of beta diversity in regional biodiversity assessment. Diversity and Distributions, 2007, 13: 252-264
[32] Shen JP, Cao P, Hu HW, et al. Differential response of archaeal groups to land use change in an acidic red soil. Science of the Total Environment, 2013, 461: 742-749
[33] Landesman WJ, Nelson DM, Fitzpatrick MC. Soil pro-perties and tree species drive β-diversity of soil bacterial communities. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2014, 76: 201-209
[34] Ashcroft MB, Gollan JR, Faith DP, et al. Using gene-ralised dissimilarity models and many small samples to improve the efficiency of regional and landscape scale invertebrate sampling. Ecological Informatics, 2010, 5: 124-132
[35] Myers MR, King GM. Isolation and characterization of Acidobacterium ailaaui sp. nov., a novel member of Acidobacteria subdivision 1, from a geothermally heated Hawaiian microbial mat. International Journal of Syste-matic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 2016, 66: 5328-5335
[36] Pankratov TA, Dedysh SN. Granulicella paludicola gen. nov., sp. nov., Granulicella pectinivorans sp. nov., Granulicella aggregans sp. nov. and Granulicella rosea sp. nov., acidophilic, polymer-degrading acidobacteria from Sphagnum peat bogs. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 2010, 60: 2951-2959
[37] Husson. Redox potential (Eh) and pH as drivers of soil/plant/microorganism systems: A transdisciplinary overview pointing to integrative opportunities for agro-nomy. Plant and Soil, 2013, 362: 389-417
[38] Wang X, Li H, Bezemer TM, et al. Drivers of bacterial beta diversity in two temperate forests. Ecological Research, 2016, 31: 57-64
[39] Shen C, Xiong J, Zhang H, et al. Soil pH drives the spatial distribution of bacterial communities along elevation on Changbai Mountain. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2013, 57: 204-211
[40] Erguder TH, Boon N, Wittebolle L, et al. Environmental factors shaping the ecological niches of ammonia-oxidizing archaea. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 2009, 33: 855-869
[41] Sims A, Horton J, Gajaraj S, et al. Temporal and spatial distributions of ammonia-oxidizing archaea and bacteria and their ratio as an indicator of oligotrophic conditions in natural wetlands. Water Research, 2012, 46: 4121-4129
[42] Santoro AE, Francis CA, De Sieyes NR, et al. Shifts in the relative abundance of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria and archaea across physicochemical gradients in a subterranean estuary. Environmental Microbiology, 2008, 10: 1068-1079
[43] Xie C-X (谢长校), Sun J-Z (孙建中), Li C-L (李成林), et al. Exploring the lignin degradation by bacteria. Microbiology China (微生物学通报), 2015, 42(6): 1122-1132 (in Chinese)
[44] Liu G-F (刘国凡), Deng T-X (邓廷秀). A regression model of influence of soil condition on locust nitrogen fixation. Acta Pedologica Sinica (土壤学报), 1991, 28(4): 439-446 (in Chinese)
[45] He D-H (何冬华), Shen Q-L (沈秋兰), Xu Q-F (徐秋芳), et al. Evolvement of structure and abundance of soil nitrogen-fixing bacterial community in phyllostachys edulis plantations with age of time. Acta Pedologica Sinica (土壤学报), 2015, 52(4): 934-942 (in Chinese)
[46] Reed SC, Cleveland CC, Townsend AR. Relationships among phosphorus, molybdenum and free-living nitrogen fixation in tropical rain forests: Results from observational and experimental analyses. Biogeochemistry, 2013, 114: 135-147
[47] Zheng Y-P (郑亚萍), Zheng Y-M (郑永美), Sun K-X (孙奎香). Advanced on the effect of different nut-rient elements on symbiotic nitrogen fixation potential. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin (中国农学通报), 2011, 27(5): 49-52 (in Chinese)
[48] Stark JM, Firestone MK. Mechanisms for soil moisture effects on activity of nitrifying bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1995, 61: 218-221
[49] Ingwersen J, Butterbach-Bahl K, Gasche R, et al. Barometric process separation: New method for quantifying nitrification, denitrification, and nitrous oxide sources in soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1999, 63: 117-128
[50] Schink B, Friedrich M. Phosphite oxidation by sulphate reduction. Nature, 2000, 406: 37
[51] Gao A-G (高爱国), Chen H-W (陈皓文), Sun H-Q (孙海青). Analysis on correlation between sulphate-reducing bacteria and bio-geochemical factors of sediment in the Chukchi sea and Bering sea, Arctic. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae (环境科学学报), 2003, 23(5): 619-624 (in Chinese)
[52] Yuan H, Ge T, Wu X, et al. Long-term field fertilization alters the diversity of autotrophic bacteria based on the ribulose-1,5-biphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (RubisCO) large-subunit genes in paddy soil. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2012, 95: 1061-1071
[53] Sardans J, Pe uelas J, Estiarte M. Warming and drought alter soil phosphatase activity and soil P availability in a Mediterranean shrubland. Plant and Soil, 2006, 289: 227-238

大兴安岭落叶松林不同演替阶段土壤细菌群落结构与功能潜势

Soil bacterial community structure and predicted functions in the larch forest during succession at the Greater Khingan Mountains of Northeast China

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	曹华燕, 苗铮, 郝元朔, 董利虎. 基于beta回归的长白落叶松树干含水率预测模型 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(3): 587-596.
[2]	赵怡, 李福明, 朱景康, 常晨隆, 冯泳翰, 梁文俊, 魏曦. 华北落叶松人工林林隙大小对其更新的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(8): 2039-2046.
[3]	解萍萍, 张博奕, 董一博, 吕鹏程, 杜明超, 张先亮. 华北落叶松和白杄径向生长对干旱的生态弹性差异 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(7): 1779-1786.
[4]	刘逸潇, 王传宽, 上官虹玉, 臧妙涵, 梁逸娴, 全先奎. 兴安落叶松不同径级根碳氮磷钾化学计量特征的种源差异 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(7): 1797-1805.
[5]	冯泳翰, 闫珏, 郭钰, 赵怡, 董媛, 梁文俊, 魏曦, 毕华兴. 间伐强度对华北落叶松天然更新的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(5): 1169-1177.
[6]	任倩茹, 毛晓雅, 齐晓君, 刘晋仙, 贾彤, 吴铁航, 柴宝峰. 芦芽山华北落叶松林不同深度土壤原生动物群落分布格局及驱动机制 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(5): 1395-1403.
[7]	高燕, 梁爱珍, 黄丹丹, 张延, 张旸, 王阳, 张士秀, 陈学文. 长期免耕对黑土氮磷硫循环微生物功能潜力的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(4): 913-920.
[8]	易达, 李凤日, 马爱云, 林富成, 郝元朔, 董利虎. 基于混合效应模型和分位数回归的长白落叶松枝下高模型构建 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(4): 1035-1042.
[9]	高羽, 谢龙飞, 郝元朔, 董利虎. 考虑随机效应的长白落叶松立木生物量模型构建及精度分析 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(2): 333-341.
[10]	刘艳娇, 刘庆, 贺合亮, 赵文强, 寇涌苹. 亚高山粗枝云杉人工林土壤原核微生物群落结构与功能变化 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(12): 3279-3290.
[11]	王恒, 王小雪, 贾建恒, 张子航, 郭明明. 华北落叶松径向生长对升温突变的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(10): 2629-2636.
[12]	王星, 杨腾, 毛子昆, 蔺菲, 叶吉, 房帅, 戴冠华, 胡家瑞, 郝占庆, 王绪高, 原作强. 长白山阔叶红松林优势树种叶际真菌群落结构 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(9): 2405-2412.
[13]	张悦, 谢龙飞, 董利虎. 长白落叶松含碳率分析及含碳量异速生长模型 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1166-1174.
[14]	闫嘉杰, 李凤日, 谢龙飞, 苗铮, 董利虎. 混交比例对长白落叶松和水曲柳混交林碳储量及其分配格局的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1175-1182.
[15]	汪椿凯, 黄选瑞, 李雪, 姜雨, 王小雪, 张先亮. 不同林分类型林缘华北落叶松细胞特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1191-1198.