祁连山区退化斑块恢复演替中高寒草甸植被和土壤特征及其驱动因素

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202606.006

应用生态学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (6): 1888-1896.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202606.006

祁连山区退化斑块恢复演替中高寒草甸植被和土壤特征及其驱动因素

韩欣颖^1,2, 张道百^1,2, 景美玲^1,2*, 王佳林³, 马玉寿⁴

¹青海民族大学生态环境与资源学院, 西宁 810007;
²青海省特色经济植物高值化利用重点实验室, 西宁 810007;
³中国科学院西北高原生物研究所, 西宁 810008;
⁴青海大学三江源区高寒草地生态教育部重点实验室, 西宁 810016

收稿日期:2026-01-20 修回日期:2026-04-28 出版日期:2026-06-18 发布日期:2026-12-18
通讯作者: *E-mail: ajml@163.com
作者简介:韩欣颖, 女, 2003年生, 硕士研究生。主要从事高寒草地退化修复研究。E-mail: 19862598622@163.com
基金资助:
青海省帅才科学家负责制项目(2024-SF-101)

Vegetation and soil characteristics and their driving factors during restoration succession of degraded patches in alpine meadows of the Qilian Mountains, China

HAN Xinying^1,2, ZHANG Daobai^1,2, JING Mei-ling^1,2*, WANG Jialin³, MA Yushou⁴

¹College of Ecology, Environment and Resources, Qinghai Minzu University, Xining 810007, China;
²Qinghai Provincial Key Laboratory of High-Value Utilization of Characteristic Economic Plants, Xining 810007, China;
³Northwest Institute of Plateau Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xining 810008, China;
⁴Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Alpine Grassland Ecology in the Three River Headwaters Region, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China

Received:2026-01-20 Revised:2026-04-28 Online:2026-06-18 Published:2026-12-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文以祁连山区裸露斑块、短期恢复植物斑块及健康高寒草甸作为恢复演替序列,分析了植被、土壤和微生物生物量特征及其驱动机制。结果表明:裸露斑块仅分布3种植物,优势种为细叶亚菊;短期恢复植物斑块有26种植物,优势种为鸡冠茶和肉果草;健康高寒草甸有40种植物,优势种为高山嵩草、垂穗披碱草。随恢复演替推进,群落植株高度(1.3～4.1 cm)及生物量(239.2～3112.9 g·m^-2)、Patrick指数(2.2～23.6)、Shannon指数(0.7～2.3)均显著上升,土壤pH与容重降低,含水量提高,而土壤有机质及氮、磷、钾全量和速效养分呈先增后减趋势。各演替阶段土壤养分均表现出表聚特征,0~10 cm土层均显著高于10～20 cm。随机森林分析表明,土壤物理性质、全量养分、速效养分及微生物生物量(MBC、MBN和MBP)对植物总生物量变异的解释率分别为31.3%、20.1%、13.9%、34.7%,对物种多样性的解释率分别为44.0%、6.1%、6.9%、43.1%。结构方程模型表明,演替阶段与植物总生物量(路径系数为0.97)、物种多样性(路径系数为0.89)具有较强正向作用。综上,祁连山退化斑块恢复演替过程中,植被群落、生产力与土壤结构协同改善;土壤因子是调控植被性状的核心要素,植被恢复与土壤环境改良呈现显著正向耦合效应。

关键词: 退化斑块, 恢复演替, 物种多样性, 土壤特征

Abstract: We analyzed the characteristics and driving mechanisms of vegetation, soil, and microbial biomass along a restoration succession sequence of bare patches, short-term restored plant patches, and healthy alpine meadows in the Qilian Mountains, aiming to inform ecological restoration strategies for degraded alpine ecosystem. The results showed that bare patches supported only three plant species, with Ajania tenuifolia as the dominant one. Short-term restored patches contained 26 species, with Sibbaldianthe bifurca and Lancea tibetica as the dominant species. Healthy alpine meadows exhibited the highest species richness (40 species), dominated by Carex parvula and Elymus nutans. As restoration succession progressed, community height (1.3-4.1 cm), total biomass (239.2-3112.9 g·m^-2), Patrick richness index (2.2-23.6), and Shannon diversity index (0.7-2.3) all increased significantly. Concurrently, soil pH and bulk density decreased, and soil water content increased. The contents of soil organic matter and total/available nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium showed a unimodal response to succession, peaking in the short-term restored stage. Across all successional stages, soil nutrients exhibited strong surface accumulation, with higher concentrations in the 0-10 cm layer than in the 10-20 cm layer. Random forest analysis revealed that the explanatory rates of soil physical properties, total nutrients, available nutrients, and microbial biomass (MBC, MBN, MBP) for the variations of total plant biomass were 31.3%, 20.1%, 13.9%, and 34.7%, respectively. Similarly, their explanatory rates for species diversity were 44.0%, 6.1%, 6.9%, and 43.1%, respectively. Results of structural equation modeling confirmed that succession stage had strong positive and direct effects on both plant biomass (path coefficient=0.97) and species diversity (path coefficient=0.89). Overall, the findings demonstrated that vegetation community structure, productivity, and soil physicochemical properties improved synergistically during the restoration of degraded alpine meadow. Soil factors were the primary drivers of vegetation recovery, highlighting a significant positive coupling between vegetation restoration and soil improvement.

Key words: bare patch, restoration succession, species diversity, soil characteristics

韩欣颖, 张道百, 景美玲, 王佳林, 马玉寿. 祁连山区退化斑块恢复演替中高寒草甸植被和土壤特征及其驱动因素[J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(6): 1888-1896.

HAN Xinying, ZHANG Daobai, JING Mei-ling, WANG Jialin, MA Yushou. Vegetation and soil characteristics and their driving factors during restoration succession of degraded patches in alpine meadows of the Qilian Mountains, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2026, 37(6): 1888-1896.

参考文献

[1] 李红琴, 张法伟, 毛绍娟, 等. 放牧强度对青海海北高寒矮嵩草草甸碳交换的影响. 中国草地学报, 2019, 41(2): 16-21
[2] Liu HY, Mi ZR, WangYH, et al. Shifting plant species composition in response to climate change stabilizes grassland primary production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018, 115: 4051-4056
[3] Dong MY, Jiang Y, Zheng DY, et al. Trends in the thermal growing season throughout the Tibetan Plateau during 1960-2009. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2012, 166: 201-206
[4] Yao TD, Pu JC, Lu AX, et al. Recent glacial retreat and its impact on hydrological processes on the Tibetan Plateau, China, and surrounding regions. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 2007, 39: 642-650
[5] 杨馥铖, 刘昌义, 胡夏嵩, 等. 黄河源区不同退化程度健康高寒草甸理化性质及复合体抗剪强度研究. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(2): 560-571
[6] 张卫国, 黄文冰, 杨振宇. 草地微斑块与草地退化关系的研究. 草业学报, 2003(3): 44-50
[7] 尚占环, 董全民, 施建军, 等. 青藏高原“黑土滩”退化草地及其生态恢复近10年研究进展: 兼论三江源生态恢复问题. 草地学报, 2018, 26(1): 1-21
[8] 宋学澳, 李世雄, 赵文, 等. 不同修复方式对退化高寒草地植被及土壤真菌群落特征的影响. 草地学报, 2025, 33(12): 3958-3968
[9] Sintim HY, Bary AI, Hayes DG, et al. In situ degradation of biodegradable plastic mulch films in compost and agricultural soils. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 727: 138668
[10] Attinello K, Fahrig L, Smith AC, et al. Substituting space for time: Bird responses to forest loss in space provide a general picture of responses over time. Ecological Applications, 2024, 34: e2919
[11] Xu HW, Qu Q, Li P, et al. Stocks and stoichiometry of soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus after vegetation restoration in the Loess Hilly Region, China. Forests, 2019, 10: 27
[12] Xiao HB, Li ZW, Dong YT, et al. Changes in microbial communities and respiration following the revegetation of eroded soil. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2017, 246: 30-37
[13] O’berien SL, Jastrow JD. Physical and chemical protection in hierarchical soil aggregates regulates soil carbon and nitrogen recovery in restored perennial grasslands. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2013, 61: 1-13
[14] Reich PB, Tjoelker MG, Machado JL, et al. Universal scaling of respiratory metabolism, size and nitrogen in plant. Nature, 2006, 439: 457-461
[15] 蒋心灵, 霍姿诺, 袁媛, 等. 基于CiteSpace的草地恢复研究进展与前沿分析. 中国草地学报, 2025, 47(4): 114-126
[16] 宋梓涵, 李希来, 李杰霞, 等. 健康高寒草甸不同扰动斑块植物功能群和根土复合体特征变化研究. 生态科学, 2022, 41(1): 31-38
[17] 李成一, 李鑫慧, 柴瑜, 等. 退化斑块恢复演替对健康高寒草甸植被和土壤特征的影响. 草地学报, 2025, 33(10): 3307-3317
[18] 牛钰杰, 杨思维, 王贵珍, 等. 放牧干扰下健康高寒草甸物种和生活型丰富度与地上及地下生物量的关系. 生态学报, 2018, 38(8): 2791-2801
[19] 李孟婵, 张春红, 路永莉. 土壤农化分析实验教学改革探索. 安徽农学通报, 2023, 29(20): 157-160
[20] 干珠扎布, 段敏杰, 郭亚奇, 等. 喷灌对藏北健康高寒草甸生产力和物种多样性的影响. 生态学报, 2015, 35(22): 7485-7493
[21] Liu S, García-Palacios P, Tedersoo L, et al. Phylotype diversity within soil fungal functional groups drives ecosystem stability. Nature Ecology & Evolution 2022, 6: 900-909
[22] 张浩林, 李娅芸, 胡洋, 等. 不同退化程度高寒草地土壤微生物残体和球囊霉素积累及其对有机碳的贡献. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(3): 911-917
[23] 刘安榕, 杨腾, 徐炜, 等. 青藏高原健康高寒草甸地下生物多样性:进展、问题与展望. 生物多样性, 2018, 26(9): 972-987
[24] 乔福生, 王长庭, 宋小艳, 等. 3种多年生禾本科牧草不同径级根系特征比较. 应用与环境生物学报, 2023, 29(5): 1100-1108
[25] 吴桂玲, 吴晓晖, 欧为友, 等. 青海湖流域盐沼湿地典型植被群落土壤盐分离子分布研究. 生态环境学报, 2025, 34(8): 1228-1239
[26] Chai Y, Li XL, Li CY, et al. Soil moisture regulates soil-microbe-enzyme stoichiometries during recovery succession in patchily degraded alpine meadows on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Ecological Engineering, 2024, 204: 107287
[27] 李强, 周道玮, 陈笑莹. 地上枯落物的累积、分解及其在陆地生态系统中的作用. 生态学报, 2014, 34(14): 3807-3819
[28] 李清鑫, 张珊, 张复茂, 等. 基于文献计量学的植物地下碳输入对土壤有机碳贡献的研究进展. 土壤通报, 2024, 55(6): 1777-1788
[29] 杨丽丽, 龚吉蕊, 刘敏, 等. 氮沉降对草地凋落物分解的影响研究进展. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(8): 894-913
[30] 张欢, 李恒鹏, 李新艳, 等. 太湖流域典型农业区氮平衡时间变化特征及驱动因素. 土壤通报, 2014, 45(5): 1119-1129
[31] 王文博, 陈长青, 仇忠启, 等. 不同沼液施灌量对水稻生长及土壤氮磷平衡的影响. 作物杂志, 2014(3): 85-91
[32] 高硕, 廖红, 徐松柏, 等. 森林演替对亚热带森林土壤微生物和土壤多功能性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(2): 417-426
[33] 孙华方, 李希来, 金立群, 等. 黄河源区斑块化退化高寒草甸土壤细菌群落多样性变化. 环境科学, 2022, 43(9): 4662-4673
[34] 张光辉. 植被恢复背景下土壤侵蚀研究需要加强的内容. 中国水土保持, 2020(9): 76-79
[35] 佘婷, 田野. 森林生态系统凋落物多样性对分解过程和土壤微生物特性影响研究进展. 生态科学, 2020, 39(1): 213-223
[36] Sokol NW, Slessarev E, Marschmann. GL, et al. Life and death in the soil microbiome: How ecological processes influence biogeochemistry. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 2022, 20: 415-430
[37] Sterner RW, Elser JJ. Ecological Stoichiometry: The Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press, 2003: 262-312
[38] 郑华平, 陈子萱, 王生荣, 等. 施肥对玛曲高寒沙化草地植物多样性和生产力的影响. 草业学报, 2007, 16(5): 34-39
[39] 杨倩, 王妮, 曾辉. 氮添加对内蒙古退化草地植物群落多样性和生物量的影响. 植物生态学报, 2018, 42(4): 430-441
[40] 韩金丹, 毕华兴, 赵丹阳, 等. 刺槐人工林林龄对土壤团聚体稳定性和土壤可蚀性的影响. 水土保持研究, 2025, 32(5): 1-10
[41] Bach EM, Baer SG, Meyer CK, et al. Soil texture affects soil microbial and structural recovery during grassland restoration. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2010, 42: 2182-2191
[42] Amador-Noguez D, Brasg IA, Feng XJ, et al. Metabolome remodeling during the acidogenic-solventogenic transition in Clostridium acetobutylicum. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2011, 77: 7984-7997
[43] 徐仁飞, 王璐, 邓磊, 等. 高寒沙区不同恢复年限青杨人工林土壤碳氮水变化特征. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(10): 2657-2666
[44] 姚欣妮, 李春杰. 土壤微生物提升退化草地地力研究进展. 草业科学, 2025, 42(4): 916-932
[45] 郭子华, 郝欢欢, 马洁, 等. 修复措施对中国退化草地土壤有机碳组分的影响. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(11): 3327-3338

祁连山区退化斑块恢复演替中高寒草甸植被和土壤特征及其驱动因素

Vegetation and soil characteristics and their driving factors during restoration succession of degraded patches in alpine meadows of the Qilian Mountains, 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]	杨雪雯, 刘志玲, 黄亮亮, 王才广, 黄墨涵, 施军, 林峰, 陈杰. 湘江西源鱼类物种多样性及其分布特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(6): 2041-2050.
[2]	益西佳措, 古桑群宗, 赤列嘉措, 拉多. 年楚河流域植物群落物种与系统发育多样性的海拔梯度 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(8): 2287-2296.
[3]	曾真, 于乐琳, 张新厚, 毛瑢. 氮磷添加对大兴安岭典型泥炭地植物群落的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(8): 2353-2360.
[4]	黄羡, 余新晓, 贾国栋, 常晓敏, 孙立博. 林分密度对小叶杨人工林林下植被和土壤性质的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(4): 1035-1042.
[5]	吴登瑜, 汤孟平. 天目山不同演替阶段乔木林物种多样性及其影响因子 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(1): 13-20.
[6]	宋珊珊, 朱江玲, 唐志尧. 短期围封对河北塞罕坝草甸草原植物功能多样性的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(1): 104-112.
[7]	刘越强, 沈泽昊, 李娜. 滇中高原半湿润常绿阔叶林斑块的鸟类多样性 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(7): 1979-1987.
[8]	李非凡, 陈淼, 刘顺, 许格希, 陈健, 邢红爽, 史作民. 青藏高原东缘亚高山森林群落的多维度生物多样性 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(6): 1447-1454.
[9]	苏丹, 孙蕊, 许榕凡, 张文浩, 吕国忠. 长白山苔原植物深色有隔内生真菌物种多样性 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(6): 1689-1694.
[10]	李千飞, 沈艳, 马红彬, 熊泽钦, 王国会, 霍新茹, 李雯. 宁夏罗山山地草原植物群落数量分类与生物多样性特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(10): 2697-2706.
[11]	陈晴, 王佳啸, 王一凡, 王杨, 王艳. 辽西北荒漠化区植物群落分异 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(1): 41-48.
[12]	王依瑞, 王彦辉, 段文标, 李平平, 于澎涛, 甄理, 李志鑫, 尚会军. 黄土高原刺槐人工林郁闭度对林下植物多样性特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(2): 305-314.
[13]	赵亮, 杨治春, 周卷华, 王国强, 尹秋龙, 赵锦, 齐光, 原作强. 秦岭北麓典型栓皮栎天然次生林群落结构与物种组成 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(12): 3214-3222.
[14]	郭香瑶, 罗颖, 尹秋龙, 杨治春, 贾仕宏, 郝占庆. 秦岭皇冠暖温带落叶阔叶林灌木层结构与物种多样性 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(8): 2017-2026.
[15]	侯星辰, 鲁绍伟, 向昌林, 李少宁, 赵娜, 徐晓天. 不同母质温带草地植物群落多样性对人为干扰的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(8): 2153-2160.