Effects of Rhizobium Inoculation on Soil Nutrients and Enzyme Activities of Continuous Crop Pea
-
摘要:
目的 探索解决豌豆重茬导致减产的问题。 方法 以陇豌6号、定豌8号为对象,采用盆栽的方式探究外源接种单一、复合根瘤菌对重茬豌豆土壤养分及酶活性的影响。 结果 ①重茬种植降低了陇豌6号、定豌8号土壤养分含量及酶活性;外源接种根瘤菌可增加土壤硝态氮、铵态氮、有效磷、速效钾含量,提高土壤蔗糖酶、脲酶、碱性磷酸酶活性。②单一菌种、复合菌种的接种效果因不同生育时期及不同指标存在差异。③隶属函数综合分析表明,陇豌6号接种单一菌种‘ACCC15657’处理的平均隶属函数值最大(0.593),对土壤缓解效应最佳。定豌8号接种复合菌种‘ACCC15657 + ACCC15735 + Da99’处理的平均隶属函数值最大(0.533),对土壤缓解效应最强。 结论 接种适宜根瘤菌可改善重茬土壤养分及酶活性,缓解豌豆连作障碍。 Abstract:Objective The problems of legumes in continuous cropping are needed to be explored. Method The effects of exogenous inoculation of single and compound Rhizobia on soil nutrients and enzyme activities of continuous pea were investigated using ‘Longwan 6’ and ‘Dingwan 8’ as objects. Result ① Continuous cropping decreased the soil nutrient contents and enzyme activities of ‘Longwan 6’ and ‘Dingwan 8’. Exogenous rhizobium inoculation could boost soil nitrate nitrogen, ammonium nitrogen, available phosphorus, and available potassium levels, as well as soil activities of sucrase, urease alkaline phosphatase. ② The inoculation effect of single strain and compound strain was different due to different growth stages and different indices. ③ The average membership function value of ‘Longwan 6’ inoculated with a single strain ‘Accc15657’ was the largest (0.593), and the mitigating impact on the soil was the best. Ding wan 8 inoculated with compound strain ‘Accc15657 + Accc15735 + Da99’ had the highest average membership function value (0.533), and had the strongest mitigation effect on soil. Conclusion Inoculating suitable rhizobia can boost soil nutrients and enzyme activities during continuous cropping, as well as reduce the pea continuous cropping issue. -
Key words:
- Rhizobium /
- Continuous cropping /
- Soil nutrients /
- Soil enzyme activity
-
表 1 不同接菌处理对重茬陇豌6号土壤养分及土壤酶活性隶属函数分析
Table 1. Membership function analysis of soil nutrients and soil enzyme activities of continuous cropping Longwan 6 under different bacterial inoculation treatments
处理
Treatment硝态氮
Nitrate
nitrogen铵态氮
Ammonium
nitrogen有效磷
Available
phosphorus速效钾
Available
potassium蔗糖酶
Sucrase脲酶
Urease碱性磷酸酶
Alkaline
phosphatase平均值
Average排序
SequencingCK 0.809 0.180 0.563 0.510 0.602 0.731 0.617 0.573 2 CK1 0.376 0.329 0.405 0.265 0.130 0.200 0.395 0.300 9 T1 0.427 0.657 0.142 0.428 0.333 0.228 0.311 0.361 7 T2 0.612 0.765 0.721 0.261 0.536 0.602 0.652 0.593 1 T3 0.631 0.782 0.496 0.121 0.504 0.462 0.734 0.533 4 T4 0.410 0.444 0.337 0.108 0.527 0.354 0.437 0.374 6 T5 0.491 0.572 0.334 0.000 0.464 0.221 0.353 0.348 8 T6 0.727 0.689 0.455 0.147 0.737 0.686 0.542 0.569 3 T7 0.668 0.430 0.410 0.350 0.686 0.532 0.470 0.507 5 表 2 不同接菌处理对重茬定豌8号土壤养分及土壤酶活性隶属函数分析
Table 2. Membership function analysis of soil nutrients and soil enzyme activities of continuous cropping Dingwan 8 under different bacterial inoculation treatments
处理
Treatment硝态氮
Nitrate
nitrogen铵态氮
Ammonium
nitrogen有效磷
Available
phosphorus速效钾
Available
potassium蔗糖酶
Sucrase脲酶
Urease碱性磷酸酶
Alkaline
phosphatase平均值
Average排序
SequencingCK 0.751 0.403 0.468 0.656 0.451 0.408 0.438 0.511 3 CK1 0.410 0.779 0.290 0.097 0.123 0.131 0.295 0.303 8 T1 0.409 0.528 0.171 0.314 0.200 0.232 0.217 0.296 9 T2 0.574 0.874 0.585 0.340 0.241 0.444 0.668 0.532 2 T3 0.667 0.461 0.537 0.013 0.379 0.368 0.505 0.418 6 T4 0.409 0.426 0.411 0.183 0.379 0.354 0.419 0.369 7 T5 0.490 0.670 0.552 0.588 0.316 0.287 0.380 0.469 4 T6 0.723 0.598 0.442 0.000 0.581 0.512 0.352 0.458 5 T7 0.782 0.721 0.603 0.231 0.479 0.454 0.457 0.533 1 -
[1] 张新慧. 当归连作障碍机制及其生物修复措施研究[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2009. [2] 杨泽宇, 杨心怡, 李云涛, 等. 经济作物连作障碍的研究进展[J]. 环境保护前沿, 2021, 11(2): 8. [3] 段 峰, 王秀云, 高志红. 园艺作物连作障碍发生原因及防治措施[J]. 江西农业学报, 2011, 23(3): 34 − 39. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8581.2011.03.012 [4] 王志秀, 贺 婧, 陈 锋. 贺兰山东麓葡萄产地不同种植年限土壤养分特征研究[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2019, (3): 15 − 21. [5] 刘垠霖. 连作年限对党参生长、土壤理化性状及酶活性的影响研究[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2021. [6] 王礼科, 罗夫来, 王华磊, 等. 半夏不同连作年限土壤酶活性、微生物及化感物质的分析[J]. 中药材, 2021, 44(4): 798 − 801. [7] 韩海蓉, 李 屹, 陈来生, 等. 设施辣椒连作对土壤理化性状、酶活性及微生物区系的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021, (3): 237 − 242. [8] 康益晨, 杨昕宇, 张俊莲, 等. 覆膜垄播及轮作蚕豆对马铃薯连作田根系分泌物及化感效应的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2020, 29(8): 1148 − 1158. doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2020.08.004 [9] 马 丽, 郭学良, 齐红志, 等. 生物炭对连作草莓光合特性及光响应的影响[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2020, 35(2): 72 − 78. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2020.02.10 [10] Sui J, Ji C, Wang X, Liu Z, et al. A plant growth‐promoting bacterium alters the microbial community of continuous cropping poplar trees’ rhizosphere[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2019, 126(4): 1209 − 1220. doi: 10.1111/jam.14194 [11] 刘锦霞, 李 娜, 李 晶, 等. 多效微生物制剂对甘肃干旱区马铃薯连作土壤生态及产量的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2019, 50(3): 675 − 682. [12] Xie X G, Zhang F M, Wang X X, et al. Phomopsis liquidambari colonization promotes continuous cropping peanut growth by improving the rhizosphere microenvironment, nutrient uptake and disease incidence[J]. Journal of the Science of Food & Agriculture, 2018, 99(4): 1898 − 1907. [13] 曾长立, 刘 丽, 田雪婷, 等. 耕作方式与接种根瘤菌对土壤肥力及豌豆产量与品质的影响[J]. 江汉大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 49(2): 66 − 75. [14] 姚新春, 师尚礼. 寒区旱区间歇性干旱对接种根瘤菌苜蓿草地土壤养分动态的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2007, (3): 457 − 462. [15] 张旭辉, 马绍英, 马 蕾, 等. 接种根瘤菌对重茬豌豆植株生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1234 − 1241. [16] 吕汉强, 于爱忠, 王玉珑, 等. 干旱绿洲灌区玉米氮素吸收利用对绿肥还田利用方式的响应[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(8): 93 − 103. [17] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2008. [18] 关松荫. 土壤酶及其研究法[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1986. [19] 于彦琳, 师桂英, 张立彭, 等. 硅肥和微生物菌剂配施对连作兰州百合(Lilium davidli var. unicolor)生长及土壤生化性质的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2021, 41(5): 157 − 165. [20] 马海燕, 徐 瑾, 郑成淑, 等. 非洲菊连作对土壤理化性状与生物性状的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(18): 3733 − 3740. [21] 刘垠霖, 蔡立群, 赵 瑞, 等. 吐鲁番哈密瓜土壤养分及酶活性对连作年限的响应[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021, (1): 273 − 281. [22] 李奉国, 马龙传, 孔 勇, 等. 连作对大蒜土壤养分、微生物结构和酶活的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2019, 21(1): 141 − 147. [23] Franche C, Lindström K, Elmerich C. Nitrogen-fixing bacteria associated with leguminous and non-leguminous plants[J]. Plant and Soil. 2009, 321(1-2): 35-59. [24] Peoples M B, Brockwell J, Herridge D F, et al. The contributions of nitrogen-fixing crop legumes to the productivity of agricultural systems[J]. Symbiosis, 2009, 48(1-3): 1 − 17. [25] 乔云发. 不同连作方式对大豆生物固氮的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2008, 36(31): 13588 − 13589. [26] 何志刚, 王秀娟, 董 环, 等. 日光温室辣椒连作不同年限土壤微生物种群变化及酶活性研究[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2013, (1): 38 − 42. [27] 李 国, 易 强, 许世武, 等. 微生物菌剂对新疆棉花连作障碍的消减研究[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2020, (1): 202 − 207. [28] 刘姣姣, 何 静, 陈 伟, 等. 花椒连作对土壤化学性质及酶活性的影响[J]. 分子植物育种, 2019, 17(22): 7545 − 7550. [29] 彭 艳, 江 燕, 刘代铃, 等. 有机质和微生物菌剂对苦荞连作农艺性状及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 分子植物育种. (2021-9-30) [2021-10-2]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/46.1068.s.20210415.1516.008.html.