保护性耕作下秸秆还田对三江平原土壤细菌群落结构与功能的影响

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202601.014

应用生态学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (1): 115-124.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202601.014

保护性耕作下秸秆还田对三江平原土壤细菌群落结构与功能的影响

蔡丽君¹, 张敬涛¹, 于文², 宋振伟³, 郭震华⁴, 刘婧琦¹, 杨旭¹, 张娜¹, 盖志佳^1*

¹黑龙江省农业科学院佳木斯分院/黑龙江省博士后创新实践基地, 黑龙江佳木斯 154007;
²北大荒集团黑龙江八五五农场有限公司, 黑龙江密山 158327;
³中国农业科学院作物科学研究所, 北京 100081;
⁴黑龙江省农业科学院水稻研究所, 黑龙江佳木斯 154026

收稿日期:2025-05-22 修回日期:2025-11-11 发布日期:2026-07-18
通讯作者: *E-mail: gaizhijia@163.com
作者简介:蔡丽君, 女, 1988年生, 博士。主要从事作物高产栽培和保护性耕作技术研究。E-mail: cai_lijun@yeah.net
基金资助:
黑龙江省农业科技创新跨越工程农业科技基础创新优青项目(CX23YQ09)、黑龙江省博士后基金项目(LBH-Z24274)、黑龙江省自然科学基金联合引导项目(LH2024D019)、黑龙江省省属科研业务费项目(CZKYF2021-2-C007)和黑龙江省农业科技创新跨越工程重点项目(CX23GG10)

Effects of conservation tillage with straw returning on soil microbial community structure and function in the Sanjiang Plain, Northeast China

CAI Lijun¹, ZHANG Jingtao¹, YU Wen², SONG Zhenwei³, GUO Zhenhua⁴, LIU Jingqi¹, YANG Xu¹, ZHANG Na¹, GAI Zhijia^1*

¹Jiamusi Branch, Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Heilongjiang Province Postdoctoral Innovation Practice Base, Jiamusi 154007, Heilongjiang, China;
²Beidahuang Group Heilongjiang 855 Farm Co., Ltd., Mishan 158327, Heilongjiang, China;
³Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China;
⁴Rice Research Institute, Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Jiamusi 154026, Heilongjiang, China

Received:2025-05-22 Revised:2025-11-11 Published:2026-07-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 针对东北三江平原玉米连作下不合理耕作导致的土壤质量下降等问题,开展保护性耕作和秸秆还田方式定位试验(始于2019年),设翻耕秸秆还田(PT)、旋耕秸秆还田(RT)、条带耕作秸秆还田(ST)、免耕秸秆覆盖还田(NT)4个处理,以常规旋耕秸秆不还田(CK)为对照,分析定位试验5年后保护性耕作下秸秆还田对玉米产量、土壤理化性状和土壤细菌群落组成及功能的影响。结果表明: 各处理玉米产量均高于CK,表现为ST、PT>RT>NT、CK,其中RT处理产量稳定性最佳(变异系数为4.4%),NT处理产量变幅最大(变异系数为10.4%)。0～5 cm表层土壤中,各处理较CK显著提升了铵态氮、硝态氮、有效磷、速效钾、有机质含量和土壤含水量,其中NT处理增幅最大,但除PT外均导致pH值降低;在5～10 cm亚表层土壤中,ST处理有效磷含量显著高于其他处理(增幅13.1%～83.7%),PT处理速效钾含量最高,各处理均较CK显著降低了pH值。各处理0～5 cm土层细菌Shannon指数较CK提高4.9%～9.0%;NT处理促进了放线菌门富集,ST处理促进了变形菌门富集。Mantel分析、FAPROTAX功能预测和功能基因qPCR验证表明,耕作和秸秆还田方式通过影响硝态氮、有效磷等土壤理化性状调控微生物群落组成,形成独特的碳-氮耦合代谢机制,使表层和亚表层土壤固氮功能分别增加0.3%～22.6%和69.3%～108.0%,亚表层固氮功能基因nifH丰度显著增加78.7%～161.1%。在三江平原地区ST模式玉米产量和土壤生态效益的综合表现最优,NT模式在表层土壤改良方面具有优势。

关键词: 保护性耕作, 秸秆还田, 玉米产量, 土壤养分, 细菌群落, 细菌功能预测

Abstract: To address soil degradation caused by unsustainable tillage practices under continuous maize monoculture in the Northeast Sanjiang Plain, we conducted a field experiment in 2019 to evaluate the effects of four conservation tillage and straw returning treatments: plow tillage with straw returning (PT), rotary tillage with straw mixing (RT), strip tillage with straw returning (ST), no-till with straw mulching (NT), and conventional rotary tillage without straw returning (CK). After five years of treatments, we analyzed the effects of straw returning under conservation tillage on maize yield, soil physicochemical properties, and soil bacterial community composition and function. The results showed that all treatments outperformed the control (CK) in maize yield, with the order of superiority being ST, PT>RT>NT, CK. Among them, the RT treatment exhibited the highest yield stability (coefficient of variation: 4.4%), while the NT treatment showed the largest yield fluctuation (coefficient of variation: 10.4%). In the 0-5 cm surface soil, all treatments significantly increased ammonium nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, available phosphorus, available potassium, organic matter content, and soil moisture compared to CK, with the NT treatment having the stongest effect. All treatments except PT reduced soil pH. In the 5-10 cm layer, the ST treatment resulted in significantly higher available phosphorus content than other treatments (increase of 13.1%-83.7%), while the PT treatment showed the highest available potassium content. All treatments significantly reduced soil pH in this layer. Under conservation tillage, straw returning increased the Shannon index of bacteria in the 0-5 cm soil layer by 4.9%-9.0%. NT treatment promoted enrichment of Actinomycetes, whereas the ST treatment enhanced the abundance of Proteobacteria. Results of Mantel analysis, FAPROTAX functional prediction, and qPCR verification of functional genes showed that tillage and straw returning methods regulated microbial community composition by influencing soil physicochemical properties such as nitrate and available phosphorus, leading to distinct carbon-nitrogen coupling metabolic mechanisms. This resulted in an increase in nitrogen fixation function in both the surface and subsurface layers by 0.3%-22.6% and 69.3%-108.0%, respectively, with a significant increase in the abundance of nifH gene in the subsurface layer, which was involved in nitrogen fixation, by 78.7%-161.1%. In the Sanjiang Plain, the ST mode achieved the best overall performance in terms of maize yield and soil ecological benefits, while the NT mode showed advantages in surface soil improvement.

Key words: conservation tillage, straw returning, maize yield, soil nutrient, bacterial community, bacterial function prediction

蔡丽君, 张敬涛, 于文, 宋振伟, 郭震华, 刘婧琦, 杨旭, 张娜, 盖志佳. 保护性耕作下秸秆还田对三江平原土壤细菌群落结构与功能的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 115-124.

CAI Lijun, ZHANG Jingtao, YU Wen, SONG Zhenwei, GUO Zhenhua, LIU Jingqi, YANG Xu, ZHANG Na, GAI Zhijia. Effects of conservation tillage with straw returning on soil microbial community structure and function in the Sanjiang Plain, Northeast China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2026, 37(1): 115-124.

参考文献

[1] 张福锁, 李隆, 张卫峰. 中国农业绿色发展报告. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2021
[2] 韩晓增, 邹文秀. 东北黑土地保护利用研究足迹与科技研发展望. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(6): 1341-1358
[3] 张光辉, 杨扬, 刘瑛娜, 等. 东北黑土区土壤侵蚀研究进展与展望. 水土保持学报, 2022, 36(2): 1-12
[4] 张叶叶, 莫非, 韩娟, 等. 秸秆还田下土壤有机质激发效应研究进展. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(6): 1381-1392
[5] 严东权, 薛颖昊, 徐志宇, 等. 我国农作物秸秆直接还田利用现状、技术模式及发展建议. 中国农业资源与区划, 2023, 44(4): 1-14
[6] 徐明岗, 张旭博, 孙楠, 等. 农田土壤固碳与增产协同效应研究进展. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(6): 1441-1449
[7] 纪妍可, 焉莉, 朱健菲, 等. 基于Meta分析的不同玉米主产区土壤有机碳含量对秸秆还田的响应. 农业工程学报, 2025, 41(12): 95-106
[8] 于洋, 张常仁, 杨雅丽, 等. 长期免耕和秸秆覆盖量对黑土碳氮含量及碳氮循环相关酶活性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(3): 695-704
[9] Dong Y, Wang XT, Wang S, et al. Enhancing soil organic carbon prediction by unraveling the role of crop residue coverage using interpretable machine learning. Geoderma, 2025, 455: 117225
[10] Zhao X, Li RC, Liu WX, et al. Estimation of crop residue production and its contribution to carbon neutrality in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2024, 203: 107450
[11] Manuel D, Frank R, Paul G, et al. Ecological drivers of soil microbial diversity and soil biological networks in the Southern Hemisphere. Ecology, 2018, 99: 583-596
[12] Zhou JZ, Deng Y, Luo F, et al. Functional molecular ecological networks. mBio, 2010, 1: e00169-10
[13] Wang WY, Zhang HP, Vinay N, et al. Microbial functional genes within soil aggregates drive organic carbon mineralization under contrasting tillage practices. Land Degradation and Development, 2023, 34: 3618-3635
[14] Liang C, Schimel JP, Jastrow JD. The importance of anabolism in microbial control over soil carbon storage. Nature Microbiology, 2017, 2: 17105
[15] Dong F, Wang LX, Xu TJ, et al. Multi-omics analysis of soil microbiota and metabolites in dryland wheat fields under different tillage methods. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14: 24066
[16] Thompson LR, Sanders JG, McDonald D, et al. A communal catalogue reveals Earth’s multiscale microbial diversity. Nature, 2017, 551: 457-463
[17] Louca S, Parfrey LW, Doebeli M. FAPROTAX: A functional trait database for metagenomic prediction. Molecular Ecology Resources, 2016, 16: 1098-1102
[18] 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
[19] 刘世平, 陈后庆, 陈文林, 等. 不同耕作方式与秸秆还田周年生产力的综合评价. 农业工程学报, 2009, 25(4): 82-85
[20] 隋鹏祥, 罗洋, 郑洪兵, 等. 长期耕作对农田黑土团聚体和有机碳稳定性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(7): 1853-1861
[21] Banerjee S, Heijden MVDVD. Soil microbiomes and one health. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 2022, 21: 6-20
[22] 侯晓杰, 汪景宽, 李世朋. 不同施肥处理与地膜覆盖对土壤微生物群落功能多样性的影响. 生态学报, 2007, 27(2): 655-661
[23] Banerjee S, Walder F, Lucie B, et al. Agricultural intensification reduces microbial network complexity and the abundance of keystone taxa in roots. The ISME Journal, 2019, 13: 1722-1736
[24] 张君红, 王健宇, 孟泽昕, 等. 土壤微生物多样性通过共现网络复杂性表征高寒草甸生态系统多功能性. 生态学报, 2022, 42(7): 2542-2558
[25] 曾维爱, 杨昭玥, 黄洋, 等. 长期连作农田土壤细菌群落结构和共现网络拓扑性质对土壤理化性质的响应. 微生物学报, 2022, 62(6): 2403-2416
[26] Dai HC, Zhang H, Li ZX, et al. Tillage practice impacts on the carbon sequestration potential of topsoil microbial communities in an agricultural field. Agronomy, 2021, 11: 60
[27] Kan ZR, Virk AL, Wu G, et al. Priming effect intensity of soil organic carbon mineralization under no-till and residue retention. Applied Soil Ecology, 2020, 147: 103445
[28] Sauvadet M, Lashermes G, Alavoine G, et al. High carbon use efficiency and low priming effect promote soil C stabilization under reduced tillage. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018, 123: 64-73
[29] Li Y, Li Z, Chang SX, et al. Residue retention promotes soil carbon accumulation in minimum tillage systems: Implications for conservation agriculture. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 740: 140147
[30] Laurent P, Claire C, Andreas K, et al. The interplay between microbial communities and soil properties. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 2023, 22: 226-239
[31] 刘继龙, 李佳文, 周延, 等. 秸秆覆盖与耕作方式对土壤水分特性的影响. 农业机械学报, 2019, 50(7): 333-339
[32] Fei L, Binzhe L, David RV, et al. Straw return exacerbates soil acidification in major Chinese croplands. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 2023, 198: 107176
[33] Hao TX, Liu XJ, Zhu QC, et al. Quantifying drivers of soil acidification in three Chinese cropping systems. Soil and Tillage Research, 2022, 215: 105230
[34] 张阔. 机械振动强化厌氧氨氧化及其耦合工艺的脱氮性能研究. 博士论文. 沈阳: 东北大学, 2019
[35] 杨硕, 金文俊, 黄海蒙, 等. 耕层土层交换对土壤氮素关键转化过程和玉米氮素利用的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2019, 27(10): 1515-1527

保护性耕作下秸秆还田对三江平原土壤细菌群落结构与功能的影响

Effects of conservation tillage with straw returning on soil microbial community structure and function in the Sanjiang Plain, 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]	吕佳情, 尚丹, 张瑞芳, 佟丙辛, 马文奇. 冀中平原粮田土壤养分障碍等级评价及分布特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(9): 2649-2657.
[2]	殷启杰, 姜建武, 殷汉琴, 杨宗坤, 龚冬琴, 李桂芳, 褚先尧, 刘文波, 张敏. 有机物料投入对新垦耕地土壤养分和微生物代谢的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(4): 969-983.
[3]	杜安娜, 张玉革, 李慧, 姜勇, 冯雪. 土壤酸化对草甸草原植物形态性状和光合色素含量的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(2): 473-480.
[4]	高瑞敏, 严君, 韩晓增, 陈旭, 邹文秀, 陆欣春, 贺娟妮. 不同有机物料深混对白浆土土壤胞外酶活性及化学计量特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(12): 3709-3717.
[5]	毛忆莲, 葛晓改, 薛旭鹏, 徐荣, 王小明, 周本智. 干旱对毛竹林根际土微生物碳利用效率的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(11): 3265-3276.
[6]	杨显华, 钟义军, 柳开楼, 李大明, 杨添雨, 刘炜, 黄羽翔, 金慧芳. 长期不同施肥模式下旱地红壤肥力变化及综合质量评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(10): 3007-3016.
[7]	吴傲淼, 洪宗文, 游成铭, 徐琳, 徐红伟, 徐振锋, 骆紫藤, 谭波. 华西雨屏区不同林龄柳杉人工林土壤团聚体碳氮磷化学计量特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(9): 2518-2526.
[8]	田圣陶, 罗洋, 隋鹏祥, 王浩, 任英, 周思琪, 刘海峰, 郑金玉. 长期耕作对黑土有机碳储量及其组分的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(8): 2167-2175.
[9]	尧波, 邹素珍, 梁金凤, 叶家飞, 徐晨瀛, 汪晓倩, 任琼, 胡启武. 候鸟活动对鄱阳湖苔草湿地土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(7): 1988-1996.
[10]	高瑞敏, 严君, 韩晓增, 陈旭, 邹文秀, 陆欣春, 朴永杰, 蒋锐. 白浆土肥沃耕层构建效应Ⅰ.不同有机物料深混对白浆土有机质在表层土壤中再分布的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(6): 1590-1598.
[11]	刘聪, 万翠翠, 宋旭, 夏光富, 傲耐, 桑加拉, 王奎明, 王军. 复合菌剂对新疆辣椒的促生效果和根际真核生物群落结构的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(6): 1599-1607.
[12]	于洋, 张常仁, 杨雅丽, 徐欣, 吕付泽, 郑甜甜, 解宏图, 鲍雪莲. 长期免耕和秸秆覆盖量对黑土碳氮含量及碳氮循环相关酶活性的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(3): 695-704.
[13]	李佳玉, 施秀珍, 李帅军, 王振宇, 王建青, 邹秉章, 王思荣, 黄志群. 杉木人工林和天然次生林林龄对土壤酶活性的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(2): 339-346.
[14]	孟晗宇, 文杨, 艾力库提·艾沙, 魏占波, 张彬. 秸秆还田条件下减施氮肥影响稻田土壤氧化亚氮排放的微生物机制 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(12): 3419-3426.
[15]	郑冰倩, 曹瑞, 王壮, 王芝慧, 武启骞, 杨万勤. 亚高山岷江冷杉林粗木质残体对土壤碳氮磷化学计量比的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(11): 2975-2982.