生物质炭配施有机物料对贫瘠红壤酶活性和微生物碳源代谢功能的影响

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202205.017

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为进一步促进红壤固碳培肥,于2017和2018年通过田间试验研究了两种有机物料(玉米秸秆和羊粪)单施以及与生物质炭配施对贫瘠红壤养分含量、碳转化相关酶活性和微生物底物利用速率的影响。试验设置6个处理,即不施有机物料(对照)、玉米秸秆、羊粪、单施生物质炭、玉米秸秆与生物质炭配施、羊粪与生物质炭配施。结果表明:与对照相比,有机物料施用显著增加了土壤pH值、有机碳、全氮、有效磷和速效钾含量;与单施秸秆和羊粪相比,生物质炭与秸秆或羊粪配施显著增加了土壤有机碳、速效钾和碱解氮含量,但两者无交互效应。与对照相比,有机物料施用显著提高了β-葡萄糖苷酶(BG)、纤维二糖水解酶(CB)、β-木聚糖苷酶(XYL)和过氧化物酶(PERO)活性;与单施秸秆相比,生物质炭与秸秆配施处理酚氧化酶、过氧化物酶活性分别显著降低了28.6%、22.2%;与单施羊粪相比,生物质炭与羊粪配施处理α-葡萄糖苷酶(AG)、BG、XYL和PERO活性分别显著降低了46.1%、50.9%、41.6%和31.3%。与对照相比,有机物料施用显著提高了土壤基础呼吸和微生物对碳水化合物的利用速率,而生物质炭配施处理对碳水化合物、羧酸类底物的利用速率存在显著抑制作用。微生物碳源利用速率与BG和PERO活性呈显著正相关。因此,有机物料与生物质炭配施更有利于提高土壤养分含量,降低有机碳分解酶和微生物碳源代谢活性,从而促进红壤固碳培肥,有利于贫瘠红壤的地力提升。

关键词: 有机物料, 生物质炭, 酶活性, 微生物活性

Abstract: To improve carbon (C) sequestration and soil fertility of red soil, a two-year (2017 and 2018) field experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of two organic amendments (i.e., corn straw and sheep manure) applied alone or combined with biochar on soil nutrient content, enzyme activities involved in C cycling, and microbial substrate utilization rate in infertile red soil. There were six treatments, including control (non-amendment), corn straw, sheep manure and across biochar treatments (without and with biochar amendment, respectively). The organic amendments and biochar were applied in 2017 and 2018. The results showed that, compared with the control, organic amendments significantly increased soil pH, organic C, total nitrogen, available phosphorus and potassium contents. Compared with straw and manure alone, the biochar co-application with straw or manure significantly increased the contents of soil organic C, available potassium, and available nitrogen, without any significant interactive effects. Application of organic amendments significantly increased the activities of soil β-glucosidase (BG), cellobiohydrolase (CB), β-xylosidase (XYL), and peroxidase (PERO). The combined application of biochar and straw significantly reduced the activity of phenol oxidase (PHOX) by 28.6% and PERO by 22.2% in comparison with straw addition alone, respectively, while the combined application of biochar and manure significantly reduced the activities of α-glucosidase (AG) by 46.1%, BG by 50.9%, XYL by 41.6%, and PERO by 31.3% compared with manure addition alone, respectively. Compared with the control, the application of organic amendments significantly enhanced soil basal respiration and microbial utilization rates of carbohydrates, whereas biochar co-application significantly decreased microbial utilization rates of carbohydrates and carboxylic acids. Microbial C source utilization rates were significantly and positively correlated with the activities of BG and PERO. Thus, biochar co-application with organic amendments can enhance nutrient content and reduce enzymatic and microbial metabolic activities, thereby may facilitate C sequestration and fertility of infertile red soil.

Key words: organic amendment, biochar, enzyme activity, microbial activity

白美霞, 司徒高铭, 李松昊, 邬奇峰, 梁辰飞, 秦华, 陈俊辉. 生物质炭配施有机物料对贫瘠红壤酶活性和微生物碳源代谢功能的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1283-1290.

BAI Mei-xia, SITU Gao-ming, LI Song-hao, WU Qi-feng, LIANG Chen-fei, QIN Hua, CHEN Jun-hui. Effects of combined application of biochar with organic amendments on enzyme activity and microbial metabolic function of carbon sources in infertile red soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2022, 33(5): 1283-1290.

参考文献

[1] 孙波. 红壤退化阻控与生态修复. 北京: 科学出版社, 2011
[2] 金书琴, 韩冬梅. 农业生态环境治理体系: 特征、要素和路径. 环境保护, 2020, 48(8): 15-20
[3] Zhang SL, Wang Y, Shen QS. Influence of straw amendment on soil physicochemical properties and crop yield on a consecutive mollisol slope in northeastern China. Water, 2018, 10: 559
[4] 刘凤艳, 龚振平, 马先树, 等. 秸秆还田对水稻病虫害发生的影响. 黑龙江农业科学, 2010(8): 75-78
[5] 陈辉, 王巨媛, 田晓飞, 等. 含水率与C/N耦合对驴粪堆肥过程中温室气体排放的影响. 生态环境学报, 2019, 28(2): 341-347
[6] Lehmann J, Joseph S. Biochar for Environmental Mana-gement: Science, Technology and Implementation. London: Routledge, 2015
[7] 陈温福, 张伟明, 孟军. 农用生物炭研究进展与前景. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(16): 3324-3333
[8] Chintala R, Schumacher TE, Mcdonald LM, et al. Phosphorus sorption and availability from biochars and oil/biochar mixtures. Clean-Soil, Air, Water, 2014, 42: 626-634
[9] 邹春娇, 张勇勇, 张一鸣, 等. 生物炭对设施连作黄瓜根域基质酶活性和微生物的调节. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(6): 1772-1778
[10] 张影, 刘星, 任秀娟, 等. 秸秆及其生物炭对土壤碳库管理指数及有机碳矿化的影响. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(3): 153-159
[11] 林少颖, 赖清志, 刘旭阳, 等. 秸秆及配施生物炭对福州茉莉园土壤碳、氮、磷、铁含量及其生态化学计量学特征影响. 环境科学学报, 2021, 41(9): 3777-3791
[12] 王磊, 刘秋凤, 苏敏, 等. 生物质炭及与有机肥配施对桂香22号茶树生长、氮素吸收及品质的影响. 热带农业科学, 2018, 38(6): 18-24
[13] Li Y, Nie C, Liu YH, et al. Soil microbial community composition closely associates with specific enzyme activities and soil carbon chemistry in a long-term nitrogen fertilized grassland. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 654: 264-274
[14] Demisie W, Liu ZY, Zhang MK. Effect of biochar on carbon fractions and enzyme activity of red soil. Catena, 2014, 121: 214-221
[15] Deforest JL. The influence of time, storage temperature, and substrate age on potential soil enzyme activity in acidic forest soils using MUB-linked substrates and l-DOPA. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2009, 41: 1180-1186
[16] Campbell CD, Chapman SJ, Cameron CM, et al. A rapid microtiter plate method to measure carbon dioxide evolved from carbon substrate amendments so as to determine the physiological profiles of soil microbial communities by using whole soil. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2003, 69: 3593-3599
[17] 石丽红, 李超, 唐海明, 等. 长期不同施肥措施对双季稻田土壤活性有机碳组分和水解酶活性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(3): 921-930
[18] Sun DQ, Meng J, Liang H, et al. Effect of volatile organic compounds absorbed to fresh biochar on survival of Bacillus mucilaginosus and structure of soil microbial communities. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2015, 15: 271-281
[19] 鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 2000
[20] Saiya-Cork KR, Sinsabaugh RL, Zak DR. The effects of long term nitrogen deposition on extracellular enzyme activity in an Acer saccharum forest soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2002, 34: 1309-1315
[21] 陶磊, 褚贵新, 刘涛, 等. 有机肥替代部分化肥对长期连作棉田产量、土壤微生物数量及酶活性的影响. 生态学报, 2014, 34(21): 6137-6146
[22] 李军营, 邓小鹏, 杨坤, 等. 施用有机肥对植烟土壤理化性质的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2012(3): 12-16
[23] Yuan JH, Xu RK, Qian W, et al. Comparison of the ameliorating effects on an acidic ultisol between four crop straws and their biochars. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2011, 11: 741-750
[24] Chen JH, Chen D, Xu QF, et al. Organic carbon qua-lity, composition of main microbial groups, enzyme activities, and temperature sensitivity of soil respiration of an acid paddy soil treated with biochar. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2019, 55: 185-197
[25] Zhang Y, Tan QL, Hu CX, et al. Differences in responses of soil microbial properties and trifoliate orange seedling to biochar derived from three feedstocks. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2015, 15: 541-551
[26] 徐国鑫, 王子芳, 高明, 等. 秸秆与生物炭还田对土壤团聚体及固碳特征的影响. 环境科学, 2018, 39(1): 355-362
[27] 王碧胜, 于维水, 武雪萍, 等. 不同耕作措施下添加秸秆对土壤有机碳及其相关因素的影响. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(6): 1176-1187
[28] 张鑫, 周卫, 艾超, 等. 秸秆还田下氮肥运筹对夏玉米不同时期土壤酶活性及细菌群落结构的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(2): 295-306
[29] Foster EJ, Hansen N, Wallenstein M, et al. Biochar and manure amendments impact soil nutrients and microbial enzymatic activities in a semi-arid irrigated maize cropping system. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2016, 233: 404-414
[30] Elzobair KA, Stromberger ME, Ippolito JA, et al. Contrasting effects of biochar versus manure on soil micro-bial communities and enzyme activities in an Aridisol. Chemosphere, 2016, 142: 145-152
[31] Bailey VL, Fansler SJ, Smith JL, et al. Reconciling apparent variability in effects of biochar amendment on soil enzyme activities by assay optimization. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2011, 43: 296-301
[32] Burns RG, Deforest JL, Marxsen J, et al. Soil enzymes in a changing environment: Current knowledge and future directions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2013, 58: 216-234
[33] Wang XB, Song DL, Liang GQ, et al. Maize biochar addition rate influences soil enzyme activity and micro-bial community composition in a fluvo-aquic soil. Applied Soil Ecology, 2015, 96: 265-272
[34] Nannipieri P, Trasar-Cepeda C, Dick RP. Soil enzyme activity: A brief history and biochemistry as a basis for appropriate interpretations and meta-analysis. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2018, 54: 11-19
[35] Guo KY, Zhao YZ, Liu Y, et al. Pyrolysis temperature of biochar affects ecoenzymatic stoichiometry and microbial nutrient-use efficiency in a bamboo forest soil. Geoderma, 2020, 363: 114162
[36] 王兵, 姜艳, 郭浩, 等. 土壤呼吸及其三个生物学过程研究. 土壤通报, 2011, 42(2): 483-490
[37] Duan M, Wu FP, Jia ZK, et al. Wheat straw and its biochar differently affect soil properties and field-based greenhouse gas emission in a Chernozemic soil. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2020, 56: 1023-1036
[38] Zhao J, Ni T, Li J, et al. Effects of organic-inorganic compound fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilizer application on crop yields, soil biological activity and bacterial community structure in a rice-wheat cropping system. Applied Soil Ecology, 2016, 99: 1-12
[39] Lu WW, Ding WX, Zhang JH, et al. Biochar suppressed the decomposition of organic carbon in a cultivated sandy loam soil: A negative priming effect. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2014, 76: 12-21
[40] 王娟, 张丽君, 姚槐应. 添加秸秆和黑炭对水稻土碳氮转化及土壤微生物代谢图谱的影响. 中国水稻科学, 2013, 27(1): 97-104