干热河谷失稳性坡面植物碳氮磷化学计量特征对土壤性质的响应

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202210.023

应用生态学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (10): 2743-2752.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202210.023

干热河谷失稳性坡面植物碳氮磷化学计量特征对土壤性质的响应

杨柳生^1,2,3, 高若允^1,2,3, 俞陈辉^1,2,3, 韩润宇¹, 田雪^1,2,3, 孙凡¹, 林勇明^1,2,3*, 王道杰^2,4

¹福建农林大学林学院, 福州 350002;
²中国科学院山地灾害与地表过程重点实验室, 成都 610041;
³福建省高校森林生态系统过程与经营重点实验室, 福州 350002;
⁴中国科学院水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所, 成都 610041

收稿日期:2021-11-17 修回日期:2022-07-11 出版日期:2022-10-15 发布日期:2023-04-15
通讯作者: * E-mail: monkey1422@163.com
作者简介:杨柳生, 男, 1995年生, 硕士研究生。主要从事森林资源管理研究。E-mail: liushengy923@126.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(42071132,41790434)、中国科学院山地灾害与地表过程重点实验室开放基金项目(20190402)和福建农林大学杰出青年科研人才计划项目(xjq2017016)

Responses of plant C:N:P stoichiometry to soil properties on unstable slopes of dry-hot valley

YANG Liu-sheng^1,2,3, GAO Ruo-yun^1,2,3, YU Chen-hui^1,2,3, HAN Run-yu¹, TIAN Xue^1,2,3, SUN Fan¹, LIN Yong-ming^1,2,3*, WANG Dao-jie^2,4

¹College of Forestry, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China;
²Key Laboratory of Mountain Hazards and Surface Processes, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China;
³Key Laboratory for Forest Ecosystem Process and Management of Fujian Province, Fuzhou 350002, China;
⁴Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Ministry of Water Conservancy, Chengdu 610041, China

Received:2021-11-17 Revised:2022-07-11 Online:2022-10-15 Published:2023-04-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以干热河谷阴坡和阳坡典型失稳性坡面不同区段(稳定区、失稳区和堆积区)的草本植物为研究对象,分析植物地上和地下碳(C)、氮(N)、磷(P)含量及其化学计量特征对土壤性质的响应机制。结果表明:失稳性坡面植物地上C含量(320.59 g·kg^-1)、N含量(12.15 g·kg^-1)和C/P(25.37)均显著高于地下(分别为254.01 g·kg^-1、6.12 g·kg^-1、13.43),C/N则表现为地下(43.09)显著高于地上(31.90)。阳坡植物地上和地下C含量、N/P均表现为稳定区和失稳区显著高于堆积区,N含量则表现为失稳区显著高于堆积区;阴坡植物地上N、P含量及地下P含量均表现为堆积区显著高于稳定区和失稳区,地下C含量则反之。植物地上生长主要受P限制,根系生长主要受N限制并随区段向下呈逐渐增加趋势;阴坡植物生长受P的限制程度高于阳坡,N限制弱于阳坡。土壤含水量(SWC)是影响植物地上C、N、P含量变化的重要因子,影响值分别为28.8%、20.8%、19.9%,土壤有机碳(SOC)则显著影响植物地下C、N含量,影响值分别为49.5%、22.1%,植物地下N含量的变化主要受土壤pH值的影响(24.3%)。坡向、区段及土壤因子均显著影响植物养分的分配,SWC和SOC是主要影响因子,同时还受土壤pH值的影响。

关键词: 失稳性坡面, 区段, 土壤含水量, 化学计量比, 干热河谷

Abstract: In this study, we examined plant C:N:P stoichiometry of herbaceous plants in different sections (stable area, unstable area and deposition area) of the unstable slope on both shade and sunny aspects of dry-hot valley with different soil properties. The results showed that C concentration (320.59 g·kg^-1), N concentration (12.15 g·kg^-1), and N:P ratio (25.37) of shoot on the unstable slope were significantly higher than those of root, with 254.01 g·kg^-1, 6.12 g·kg^-1 and 13.43, respectively. The average value of the C:N ratio was significantly higher in root (43.09) than shoot (31.90). The C content and N:P ratio of shoot and root in stable and unstable areas were significantly higher than in deposition area, whereas the N content in unstable area was significantly higher than that in deposition area on the sunny slope. In addition, the N and P contents of shoot and the root P content in deposition area were significantly higher than in stable and unstable areas, whereas the C content of root in stable and unstable areas were significantly higher than in deposition area on the shade slope. Moreover, the shoot growth of plants was mainly limited by P, whereas root growth was mainly limited by N and the limitation gradually increased as the section goes down. Soil water content (SWC) was an important factor controlling the C, N, and P contents change of shoot with the relative influence ratios of 28.8%, 20.8%, and 19.9%, respectively. Soil organic carbon (SOC) had a significant impact on the C and P contents of root with the relative influence ratios of 49.5% and 22.1%. The change of root N content was mainly affected by soil pH (24.3%). Our results revealed that nutrient allocation of plant was significantly affected by slope aspects, sections and soil factors, which were mainly constituted by SWC, SOC, and soil pH.

Key words: unstable slope, section, soil water content, stoichiometry, dry-hot valley

杨柳生, 高若允, 俞陈辉, 韩润宇, 田雪, 孙凡, 林勇明, 王道杰. 干热河谷失稳性坡面植物碳氮磷化学计量特征对土壤性质的响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(10): 2743-2752.

YANG Liu-sheng, GAO Ruo-yun, YU Chen-hui, HAN Run-yu, TIAN Xue, SUN Fan, LIN Yong-ming, WANG Dao-jie. Responses of plant C:N:P stoichiometry to soil properties on unstable slopes of dry-hot valley[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2022, 33(10): 2743-2752.

参考文献

[1] Yang Y, Luo Y. Carbon:nitrogen stoichiometry in forest ecosystems during stand development. Global Ecology & Biogeography, 2011, 20: 354-361
[2] Güsewell S. N:P ratios in terrestrial plants: Variation and functional significance. New Phytologist, 2004, 164: 243-266
[3] 刘天源, 周天财, 孙建, 等. 青藏高原东缘沙化草甸植物氮磷的分配和耦合特征. 草业科学, 2021, 38(2): 209-220
[4] 余杭, 高若允, 杨文嘉, 等. 干热河谷优势草本植物叶片、根系及土壤碳氮磷含量及关系. 应用与环境生物学报, 2022, 28(3): 727-735
[5] Redfield AC. The biological control of chemical factors in the environment. American Scientist, 1958, 46: 205-221
[6] Koerselman W, Meuleman AFM. The vegetation N:P ratio: A new tool to detect the nature of nutrient limitation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 1996, 33: 1441-1450
[7] Sardans J, Rivas-Ubach A, Peñuelas J. The C:N:P stoichiometry of organisms and ecosystems in a changing world: A review and perspectives. Perspectives in Plant Ecology Evolution and Systematics, 2012, 14: 33-47
[8] 刘颖, 贺静雯, 余杭, 等. 干热河谷优势灌木细根、粗根与叶片养分(C、N、P)含量及化学计量比. 山地学报, 2020, 38(5): 668-678
[9] 陈培云, 范弢, 何停, 等. 滇东岩溶高原不同恢复阶段云南松林叶片-枯落物-土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征. 应用与环境生物学报, 2022, 28(4): 1-10
[10] Chen XL, Chen HYH. Plant mixture balances terrestrial ecosystem C:N:P stoichiometry. Nature Communications, 2021, 12: 4562
[11] 马剑, 刘贤德, 金铭, 等. 祁连山5种典型灌丛土壤生态化学计量特征. 西北植物学报, 2021, 41(8): 1391-1400
[12] 崔鹏, 王道杰, 韦方强. 干热河谷生态修复模式及其效应——以中国科学院东川泥石流观测研究站为例. 中国水土保持科学, 2005, 3(3): 60-64
[13] 杨惠敏, 王冬梅. 草-环境系统植物碳氮磷生态化学计量学及其对环境因子的响应研究进展. 草业学报, 2011, 20(2): 244-252
[14] He JS, Wang L, Flynn D, et al. Leaf nitrogen:phosphorus stoichiometry across Chinese grassland biomes. Oecologia, 2008, 155: 301-310
[15] Tian D, Yan ZB, Niklas KJ, et al. Global leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry and their scaling exponent. National Science Review, 2018, 5: 728-739
[16] 汪宗飞, 郑粉莉. 黄土高原子午岭地区人工油松林碳氮磷生态化学计量特征. 生态学报, 2018, 38(19): 6870-6880
[17] 汝海丽, 张海东, 焦峰, 等. 黄土丘陵区微地形梯度下草地群落植物与土壤碳、氮、磷化学计量学特征. 自然资源学报, 2016, 31(10): 1752-1763
[18] 余杭, 孙凡, 李松阳, 等. 不同区段金沙江下游山地失稳性坡面土壤有机碳含量特征. 应用与环境生物学报, 2020, 26(5): 1192-1199
[19] Pandit K, Sarkar S, Sharma M. Optimization techniques in slope stability analysis methods. Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, 2019, 50: 227-264
[20] 罗清虎, 孙凡, 吴建召, 等. 泥石流频发流域物源区坡面植被群落特征. 应用与环境生物学报, 2018, 24(4): 681-688
[21] 崔鹏. 我国泥石流防治进展. 中国水土保持科学, 2009, 7(5): 7-13
[22] 李钊. 全球陆地植物生长季节性的时空变化及其影响因素. 硕士论文. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2020
[23] 吴建召, 孙凡, 崔羽, 等. 不同气候区失稳性坡面植被生物量与土壤密度的关系——以云南省昆明市东川区蒋家沟流域为例. 北京林业大学学报, 2020, 42(3): 24-35
[24] 中国林业科学研究院林业研究所森林土壤研究室. 森林植物与森林枯枝落叶层全硅、铁、铝、钙、镁、钾、钠、磷、硫、锰、铜、锌的测定(LY/T 1270—1999). 北京: 中国标准出版社, 1999
[25] 张敏, 谢运球, 冯英梅, 等. 浸提用水对测定土壤pH值的影响. 河南农业科学, 2008, 37(6): 58-60
[26] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000
[27] De'ath G. Boosted trees for ecological modeling and prediction. Ecology, 2007, 88: 243-251
[28] Reich PB, Oleksyn J. Global patterns of plant leaf N and P in relation to temperature and latitude. Procee-dings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2004, 101: 11001-11006
[29] 余杭, 高若允, 杨柳生, 等. 震后生态恢复初期植被-土壤的耦合关系研究——以汶川县威州镇、绵竹市汉旺镇为例. 北京林业大学学报, 2021, 43(5): 53-63
[30] 张江平, 郭颖, 孙吉慧, 等. 贵州主要森林植被养分含量及其分配特征. 北京林业大学学报, 2015, 37(4): 48-55
[31] Carvajal DE, Loayza AP, Rios RS, et al. A hyper-arid environment shapes an inverse pattern of the fast-slow plant economics spectrum for above-, but not below-ground resource acquisition strategies. Journal of Ecology, 2019, 107: 1079-1092
[32] Withington JM, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, et al. Comparisons of structure and life span in roots and leaves among temperate trees. Ecological Monographs, 2006, 76: 381-397
[33] 黄建军, 王希华. 浙江天童32种常绿阔叶树叶片的营养及结构特征. 华东师范大学学报: 自然科学版, 2003(1): 92-97
[34] 李从娟, 徐新文, 孙永强, 等. 不同生境下三种荒漠植物叶片及土壤C、N、P的化学计量特征. 干旱区地理, 2014, 37(5): 996-1004
[35] Yan ZB, Tian D, Han WX, et al. An assessment on the uncertainty of the nitrogen to phosphorus ratio as a threshold for nutrient limitation in plants. Annals of Bo-tany, 2017, 120: 937-942
[36] Du E, Terrer C, Pellegrini AFA, et al. Global patterns of terrestrial nitrogen and phosphorus limitation. Nature Geoscience, 2020, 13: 221-226
[37] Gill RA, Jackson RB. Global patterns of root turnover for terrestrial ecosystems. New Phytologist, 2000, 147: 13-31
[38] Eziz A, Yan ZB, Tian D, et al. Drought effect on plant biomass allocation: A meta-analysis. Ecology and Evolution, 2017, 7: 11002-11010
[39] Hedin LO. Global organization of terrestrial plant-nutrient interactions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2004, 101: 10849-10850
[40] 张静静. 土壤酸碱度调控对内蒙古草原植被群落及养分特征的影响. 硕士论文. 咸阳: 西北农林科技大学, 2020
[41] Yu YC, Yang JY, Zeng SC, et al. Soil pH, organic matter, and nutrient content change with the continuous cropping of Cuninghamia lanceolata plantations in South China. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2017, 17: 2230-2238
[42] Tan BC, Fan JB, He YQ, et al. Possible effect of soil organic carbon on its own turnover: A negative feedback. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2014, 69: 313-319

干热河谷失稳性坡面植物碳氮磷化学计量特征对土壤性质的响应

Responses of plant C:N:P stoichiometry to soil properties on unstable slopes of dry-hot valley

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]	刘佳妮, 翟水晶, 邱思婷, 俞新慧, 王赛. 闽江下游水体硅的组成及营养盐化学计量比 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(8): 2205-2214.
[2]	朱向明, 彭伟, 冉恩华, 富美玲, 郑月姮, 张于. 典型黑土区春玉米茎流特征及其环境影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(4): 921-927.
[3]	刘顺, 许格希, 陈淼, 陈健, 冯秋红, 史作民. 坡向对川西亚高山土壤酶活性和微生物养分限制的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(11): 2993-3002.
[4]	张峻铭, 孙永玉, 周姗, 邱昕腾, 孙仕仙, 欧朝蓉. 2000—2020年金沙江干热河谷景观生态风险的时空变化 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(10): 2767-2776.
[5]	肖向前, 张海阔, 冯娅斯, 王吉鹏, 梁辰飞, 陈有超, 朱高荻, 蔡延江. 植物残体对青藏高原高寒草甸土壤、微生物和胞外酶C∶N∶P化学计量特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(1): 58-66.
[6]	魏文涛, 倪祥银, 岳楷, 郭鸿蓉, 吴若冰, 朱玲, 吴福忠. 中亚热带不同类型米槠林凋落枝溶解性有机质动态及光谱学特性 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(8): 2121-2128.
[7]	窦韦强, 肖波, 王彦峰, 江子昊, 余星兴, 李胜龙. 黄土高原封禁林地藓结皮呼吸速率对放牧踩踏干扰强度的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7): 1783-1790.
[8]	杨乐, 何莹, 李东宾, 岳春雷, 朱弘, 张飞英, 李贺鹏. 旱化对浙江山地沼泽湿地土壤与植物碳氮磷含量的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1267-1274.
[9]	石春茂, 罗娅, 杨胜天, 周秋文, 余军林, 刘洋. 干热河谷区不同坡位土壤水分对降雨的响应特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1352-1362.
[10]	杜梦鸽, 王善举, 樊军, 葛红元. 祁连山青海云杉低液流特征及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(4): 931-938.
[11]	马红娇, 马东豪, 刘志鹏, 张佳宝, 姜晓文, 陆荣生. 顺磁物质对土壤低场核磁共振信号特征及含水量测定的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(11): 3037-3045.
[12]	王国华, 宋冰, 席璐璐, 缑倩倩. 晋西北丘陵风沙区不同林龄人工柠条生长与繁殖动态特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(6): 2079-2088.
[13]	刘美君, 吕金林, 陈秋文, 杨洁, 李国庆, 杜盛. 黄土丘陵区两典型造林树种生长季树干直径微变化动态及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(5): 1673-1680.
[14]	郑兴蕊, 宋娅丽, 王克勤, 张雨鉴, 潘禹. 滇中常绿阔叶林凋落物养分释放及生态化学计量特征对模拟N沉降的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(1): 23-30.
[15]	丁兵兵, 张永娥, 余新晓, 贾国栋, 王渝淞, 郑鹏飞, 蒋涛, 夏娟娟. 土壤水分胁迫和大气CO₂浓度对光合分馏及后光合分馏的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(6): 1800-1806.