亚热带森林土壤理化性质的异质性和最佳取样量

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.201807.018

应用生态学报 ›› 2018, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (7): 2139-2148.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201807.018

亚热带森林土壤理化性质的异质性和最佳取样量

张广杰^1,2,3, 巢林^1,2,3, 张伟东^1,2, 汪思龙^1,2*, 余鑫^1,2,3, 郑文辉^1,2,3

¹中国科学院沈阳应用生态研究所, 沈阳 110016;
²湖南会同森林生态系统国家野外科学观测研究站, 湖南会同 418307;
³中国科学院大学, 北京 100049

收稿日期:2017-11-29 出版日期:2018-07-18 发布日期:2018-07-18
通讯作者: *E-mail: slwang@iae.ac.cn
作者简介:张广杰, 男, 1992年生, 硕士研究生. 主要从事森林土壤研究及土壤呼吸空间异质性研究. E-mail: zhangguangjie15@mails.ucas.ac.cn
基金资助:
本文由国家重点研发计划项目(2016YFA060080203)、国家自然科学基金重点项目(41630755)和中国科学院青年创新促进会项目(2017239)资助.

Heterogeneity and optimal sampe size of soil physicochemical properties in subtropical forest.

ZHANG Guang-jie^1,2,3, CHAO Lin^1,2,3, ZHANG Wei-dong^1,2, WANG Si-long^1,2*, YU Xin^1,2,3, ZHENG Wen-hui^1,2,3

¹Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China;
²Huitong National Research Station of Forest Ecosystem, Huitong 418307, Hunan, China;
³University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

Received:2017-11-29 Online:2018-07-18 Published:2018-07-18
Contact: *E-mail: slwang@iae.ac.cn
Supported by:
This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFA060080203), the Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China (41630755), and the Youth Innovation Promotion Association Chinese Academy of Sciences (2017239).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 准确获取最佳取样量有助于提高土壤理化性质的测量精度.采用经典统计学方法,研究了亚热带常绿阔叶林和杉木人工林2个林型土壤理化性质的异质性,运用传统法和自助法研究在90%精度下评估土壤养分含量的最佳取样量.结果表明: 2个林型中土壤pH值和C/N表现为弱变异,其他养分指标均为中等程度变异;常绿阔叶林土壤全C、全N等全量土壤指标的变异系数显著大于杉木人工林,而速效指标差异不显著;2个林型中所有土壤指标的评估误差均随取样量的增加呈现出先急剧曲线下降后稳定的趋势,均值也由剧烈波动转向平稳,并且过多的取样并不能有效提高均值测定精度;常绿阔叶林土壤含水率、全C、全N、NO₃^--N、全K、全Ca、全Mg的取样量都显著大于杉木人工林,杉木林土壤NH₄⁺-N的取样量显著大于阔叶林,而其他指标二者间差异不显著;同一林型各个指标间取样量差异更加明显,NH₄⁺-N、NO₃^--N等速效指标的取样量显著大于全C、全N等全量指标.因此,建议在土壤调查或监测过程中充分考虑土壤理化性质的异质性,最佳取样量必须依据于取样的目的和土壤指标的变异信息.

Abstract: Selecting the optimal sample size accurately is important for improving the measurement precision of soil physicochemical properties. In this study, we examined the within-site heterogeneity of soil physical and chemical properties in an evergreen broad-leaved forest and a Chinese fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata) plantation in subtropical China. We applied both traditional and bootstrapping technique to determine the optimal sample size, the number of observation (n), for predicting soil nutrient content with an allowable error of 10% at a 95% confidence level for both forest types. The results showed that soil pH and C/N had low variation, while the soil nutrients had a moderate variation in both forests. The coefficients of variation (CV) of total element concentration in the evergreen broad-leaved forest, such as total carbon and total nitrogen, were significantly larger than those in the Chinese fir plantation, while the CVs of available nutrients were similar between two forests. The evaluation error of all soil properties in two forests showed a stable trend after a sharp decline with the increase of sample size. The mean values also changed from violent fluctuation to stable, and extravagant sample could not effectively improve the accuracy of mean value measurement. The sample sizes of soil water content, total carbon, total nitrogen, nitrate (NO₃^--N), total potassium, total calcium, and total magnesium in the evergreen broad-leaved forest were signifi-cantly larger than those in the Chinese fir plantation, while the sample size for ammonium (NH₄⁺-N) showed opposite pattern, and the others had no significant difference. In addition, the sample sizes of different soil physicochemical properties varied significantly in the same forest. The available elements, such as NH₄⁺-N and NO₃^--N, needed a larger sample size than total elements in both forests. Accordingly, we proposed that the heterogeneity and sample size of soil physicochemical properties should be considered before soil survey. An adequate sample size may be varied according to the purpose of sample and the site-specific variation of soil characters.

张广杰, 巢林, 张伟东, 汪思龙, 余鑫, 郑文辉. 亚热带森林土壤理化性质的异质性和最佳取样量[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(7): 2139-2148.

ZHANG Guang-jie, CHAO Lin, ZHANG Wei-dong, WANG Si-long, YU Xin, ZHENG Wen-hui. Heterogeneity and optimal sampe size of soil physicochemical properties in subtropical forest.[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2018, 29(7): 2139-2148.

参考文献 51

[1]	Imhoff S, da Silva AP, Tormena CA. Spatial heterogeneity of soil properties in areas under elephant-grass short-duration grazing system. Plant and Soil, 2000, 219: 161-168
[2]	Jr Garten CT, Kang S, Brice DJ, et al. Variability in soil properties at different spatial scales (1 m-1 km) in a deciduous forest ecosystem. Soil Biology and Bioche-mistry, 2007, 39: 2621-2627
[3]	Xia SW, Chen J, Schaefer D, et al. Effect of topography and litterfall input on fine-scale patch consistency of soil chemical properties in a tropical rainforest. Plant and Soil, 2016, 404: 385-398
[4]	Holmes KW, Kyriakidis PC, Chadwick OA, et al. Multi-scale variability in tropical soil nutrients following land-cover change. Biogeochemistry, 2005, 74: 173-203
[5]	Gallardo A. Spatial variability of soil properties in a floodplain forest in northwest Spain. Ecosystems, 2003, 6: 564-576
[6]	Kleb HR, Wilson SD. Vegetation effects on soil resource heterogeneity in prairie and forest. The American Naturalist, 1997, 150: 283-298
[7]	Day KJ, John EA, Hutchings MJ. The effects of spatially heterogeneous nutrient supply on yield, intensity of competition and root placement patterns in Briza media and Festuca ovina. Functional Ecology, 2003, 17: 454-463
[8]	John R, Dalling JW, Harms KE, et al. Soil nutrients influence spatial distributions of tropical tree species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2007, 104: 864-869
[9]	Nilsson C, Xiong SJ, Johansson ME, et al. Effects of leaf-litter accumulation on riparian plant diversity across Europe. Ecology, 1999, 80: 1770-1775
[10]	Luyssaert S, Schulze ED, Börner A, et al. Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature, 2008, 455: 213-215
[11]	Zhou GY, Liu SG, Li ZA, et al. Old-growth forests can accumulate carbon in soils. Science, 2006, 314: 1417
[12]	Davidson EA, Janssens IA. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 2006, 440: 165-173
[13]	Muukkonen P, Häkkinen M, Mäkipää R. Spatial variation in soil carbon in the organic layer of managed boreal forest soil implications for sampling design. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2009, 158: 67-76
[14]	Yan XY, Cai ZC. Number of soil profiles needed overall estimate of soil organic carbon storage using profile carbon density data. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2008, 54: 819-825
[15]	Yuan ZQ, Gazol A, Lin F, et al. Soil organic carbon in an old-growth temperate forest: Spatial pattern, determinants and bias in its quantification. Geoderma, 2013, 195-196: 48-55
[16]	Conen F, Yakutin MV, Sambuu AD. Potential for detecting changes in soil organic carbon concentrations resulting from climate change. Global Change Biology, 2003, 9: 1515-1520
[17]	Sheikh MA, Kumar M, Bussmann RW. Altitudinal varia-tion in soil organic carbon stock in coniferous subtropical and broadleaf temperate forests in Garhwal Himalaya. Carbon Balance Management, 2009, 4: 1-6
[18]	Jiang F, Wu XH, Xiang WH, et al. Spatial variations in soil organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations related to stand characteristics in subtropical areas. Plant and Soil, 2017, 413: 289-301
[19]	Sauer TJ, Cambardella CA, Meek DW. Spatial variation of soil properties relating to vegetation changes. Plant and Soil, 2006, 280: 1-5
[20]	Comita LS, Engelbrecht BMJ. Seasonal and spatial varia-tion in water availability drive habitat associations in a tropical forest. Ecology, 2009, 90: 2755-2765
[21]	Wang LX, Mou PP, Huang JH, et al. Spatial heterogeneity of soil nitrogen in a subtropical forest in China. Plant and Soil, 2007, 295: 137-150
[22]	Fantappiè M, L’Abate G, Costantini EAC. The influence of climate change on the soil organic carbon content in Italy from 1961 to 2008. Geomorphology, 2011, 135: 343-352
[23]	Bae J, Ryu Y. Land use and land cover changes explain spatial and temporal variations of the soil organic carbon stocks in a constructed urban park. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2015, 136: 57-67
[24]	Hoffmann U, Hoffmann TO, Jurasinski G, et al. Assessing the spatial variability of soil organic carbon stocks in an alpine setting (Grindelwald, Swiss Alps). Geoderma, 2014, 232-234: 270-283
[25]	Xia SW, Chen J, Schaefer D, et al. Scale-dependent soil macronutrient heterogeneity reveals effects of litterfall in a tropical rainforest. Plant and Soil, 2015, 391: 51-61
[26]	Zhou ZY, Sun JX, Luo ZK, et al. Variation in small-scale spatial heterogeneity of soil properties and vegetation with different land use in semiarid grassland ecosystem. Plant and Soil, 2008, 310: 103-112
[27]	Gruba P, Socha J, Blońska E, et al. Effect of variable soil texture, metal saturation of soil organic matter (SOM) and tree species composition on spatial distribution of SOM in forest soils in Poland. Science of the Total Environment, 2015, 521/522: 90-100
[28]	Schleuβ PM, Heitkamp F, Leuschner C, et al. Higher subsoil carbon storage in species-rich than species-poor temperate forests. Environment Research Letters, 2014, 9: 014007
[29]	Augusto L, Schrijver AD, Vesterdal L, et al. Influences of evergreen gymnosperm and deciduous angiosperm tree species on the functioning of temperate and boreal forests. Biological Reviews, 2015, 90: 444-466
[30]	Li C-H (李昌华). Preliminary study on the difference of soil nutrient balance between Chinese fir and broad-leaved woodland forest. Acta Pedologica Sinica (土壤学报), 1981, 18(3): 255-261 (in Chinese)
[31]	Fanin N, Hättenschwiler S, Barantal S, et al. Does varia-bility in litter quality determine soil microbial respiration in an Amazonian rainforest? Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2011, 43: 1014-1022
[32]	Finér L, Helmisaari HS, Lõhmus K, et al. Variation in fine root biomass of three European tree species: Beech (Fagus sylvatica L.), Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst.), and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.). Plant Biosystems, 2007, 141: 394-405
[33]	Newman GS, Hart SC. Nutrient covariance between forest foliage and fine roots. Forest Ecology and Management, 2006, 236: 136-141
[34]	Mikutta R, Mikutta C, Kalbitz K, et al. Biodegradation of forest floor organic matter bound to minerals via diffe-rent binding mechanisms. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2007, 71: 2569-2590
[35]	Chorover J, Amistadi MK. Reaction of forest floor organic matter at goethite, birnessite and smectite surfaces. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2001, 65: 95-109
[36]	Yavitt JB, Harms KE, Garcia MN, et al. Spatial heterogeneity of soil chemical properties in a lowland tropical moist forest, Panama. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 2009, 47: 674-687
[37]	Dobermann A, Goovaerts P, George T. Sources of soil variation in an acid Ultisol of the Philippines. Geoderma, 1995, 68: 173-191
[38]	Baillie IC, Ashton PS. Some soil aspects of the nutrient cycle in mixed dipterocarp forests in Sarawak// Sutton SL, Whitmore TC, Chadwick AC, eds. Tropical Rain Forest: Ecology and Management. London, UK: Blackwell Press, 1983: 347-356
[39]	Han YZ, Zhang JW, Zhang WD, et al. Sample sizes to control error estimates in determining soil bulk density in California forest soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2016, 80: 756-764
[40]	Kabacoff RI. R in Action Data Analysis and Graphics with R. 2nd Ed. Beijing: Posts & Telecom Press, 2016 (in Chinese)
[41]	Liu L (刘璐), Zeng F-P (曾馥平), Song T-Q (宋同清), et al. Spatial heterogeneity of soil nutrients in Karst area’s Mulun National Nature Reserve. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 2010, 21(7): 1667-1673 (in Chinese)
[42]	Rodríguez A, Durán J, Fernández-Palacios JM, et al. Spatial variability of soil properties under Pinus cana-riensis canopy in two contrasting soil textures. Plant and Soil, 2009, 322: 139-150
[43]	Hobbie SE, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, et al. Tree species effects on decomposition and forest floor dynamics in a common garden. Ecology, 2006, 87: 2288-2297
[44]	Cremer M, Kern NV, Prietzel J. Soil organic carbon and nitrogen stocks under pure and mixed stands of European beech, Douglas fir and Norway spruce. Forest Ecology and Management, 2016, 367: 30-40
[45]	Zhou J, Xia B, Treves DS, et al. Spatial and resource factors influencing high microbial diversity in soil. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2002, 68: 326-334
[46]	Ettema CH, Coleman DC, Vellidis G, et al. Spatiotemporal distributions of bacterivorous nematodes and soil resources in a restored riparian wetland. Ecology, 1998, 79: 2721-2734
[47]	Fu M-X (付明鑫), Tang C-B (汤纯斌), Shen J-P (沈建萍), et al. Study on soil nutrients variability and rational sample quantity in Xinjiang farmland. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences (新疆农业科学), 2004, 41(2): 79-82 (in Chinese)
[48]	Jiang Y (姜勇), Liang W-J (梁文举), Zhang Y-G (张玉革). Spatial variability of soil phosphorus in field scale. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 2005, 16(11): 2086-2091 (in Chinese)
[49]	Grunwald S, Reddy KR, Prenger JP, et al. Modeling of the spatial variability of biogeochemical soil properties in a freshwater ecosystem. Ecological Modelling, 2007, 210: 521-535
[50]	Webster R, Oliver M. Geostatistics for Environmental Scientists. New York: Wiley Press, 2001
[51]	Conen F, Zerva A, Arrouays D, et al. The carbon balance of forest soils: Detectability of changes in soil carbon stocks in temperate and boreal forests// Griffith H, Jarvis PJ, eds. The Carbon Balance of Forest Biomes. London, UK: Garland Science Press, 2004: 233-247

亚热带森林土壤理化性质的异质性和最佳取样量

Heterogeneity and optimal sampe size of soil physicochemical properties in subtropical forest.

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献 51

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价