库布齐沙漠东部植被恢复对土壤生态化学计量的影响

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2022.03.26

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为阐明植被恢复对风沙土生态化学计量特征的影响,以库布齐沙漠东段流动沙地、半固定沙地、油蒿固定沙地和沙柳固定沙地为研究对象,分析植被生物量和不同深度土层（0~60 cm）土壤C、N、P化学计量特征时空变化及其相关性。结果表明：（1）土壤C、N含量随植被恢复明显增加,而土壤P含量增幅较小,均在沙柳固定沙地达到最大值（5.86 g·kg^-1、0.41 g·kg^-1、1.74 g·kg^-1）,各阶段土壤C、N、P含量均随土层加深逐渐降低,土壤P含量在各土层间差异较小。（2）不同阶段或土层间土壤化学计量比差异显著,随植被恢复土壤C：N先减小后增大,而C：P和N：P均逐渐增大,土壤C：P和N：P均随土层加深逐渐减小,而C：N则无明显变化规律。（3）土壤C、N、P两两间呈极显著正相关,均与地上和凋落物生物量呈显著正相关,土壤C：N与C：P、N：P均无显著相关关系,而土壤C：P与N：P呈显著正相关,且土壤C：P和N：P均与地上、地下和凋落物生物量呈显著正相关。综上所述,人工建植促进植被恢复可显著影响土壤C、N、P含量及化学计量特征,进而有效改善土壤理化性状,提高荒漠生态系统C、N固存能力。

关键词: 库布齐沙漠, 植被恢复, 生物量, 土壤, 化学计量特征

Abstract:

To clarify the impact of vegetation restoration on stoichiometric characteristics, aeolian sandy soil, mobile sandy land, semi-fixed sandy land, Artemisia ordosica-fixed sandy land, and Salix psammophila-fixed sandy land in the eastern part of Kubuqi were selected as research areas. This research analyzed temporal and spatial changes and the correlations among vegetation biomass and soil carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus stoichiometry at different depths (0-60 cm). Results show the following: (1) the content of soil C and N significantly increased with vegetation restoration, whereas the content of soil P slightly increased and reached a maximum value in Salix cheilophila-fixed sandy land (5.86 g·kg^-1, 0.41 g·kg^-1, 1.74 g·kg^-1), the content of C, N, and P in soil decreased with soil layer depth, and the difference in the P content in the soil layer was small. (2) The soil stoichiometric ratio at different stages or soil layers was significantly different with vegetation restoration. Soil C:N first decreased and then increased, whereas C:P and N:P increased gradually. Soil C:P and N:P decreased gradually with deepening of the soil layer, whereas C:N had no obvious change. (3) Soil C, N, and P were significantly and positively correlated with aboveground and litter biomass and there was no significant correlation between soil C:N and C:P and N:P. However, soil C:P was positively correlated with N:P, and soil C:P and N:P were positively correlated with aboveground, underground, and litter biomass. In conclusion, artificial planting to promote vegetation restoration can significantly affect the content and stoichiometric characteristics of soil C, N, and P to effectively improve soil physical and chemical properties and enhance the carbon and nitrogen sequestration capacity of the desert ecosystem.

Key words: Hobq Desert, vegetation restoration, biomass, soil, stoichiometric characteristics

刘源,李晓晶,段玉玺,王博,王伟峰,刘宗奇,冯涛. 库布齐沙漠东部植被恢复对土壤生态化学计量的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(3): 924-932.

LIU Yuan,LI Xiaojing,DUAN Yuxi,LI Bo,WANG Weifeng,LIU Zongqi,FENG Tao. Effects of vegetation restoration on soil stoichiometry in the eastern Hobq Desert[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(3): 924-932.

图/表 7

表1

表2

图1

表3

图2

表4

表5

参考文献 39

[1]	Sistla S A, Schimel J P. Stoichiometric flexibility as a regulator of carbon and nutrient cycling in terrestrial ecosystems under change[J]. New Phytologist, 2012, 196(1): 68-78. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04234.x pmid: 22924404
[2]	Fan H B, Wu J P, Liu W F, et al. Linkages of plant and soil C:N:P stoichiometry and their relationships to forest growth in subtropical plantations[J]. Plant and Soil, 2015, 392(1-2): 127-138. doi: 10.1007/s11104-015-2444-2
[3]	Hessen D O, Elser J J. Elements of ecology and evolution[J]. Munksgaard International Publishers, 2005, 109(1): 3-5.
[4]	Bastin J F, Finegold Y, Garcia C, et al. The global tree restoration potential[J]. Science, 2019, 365(6448): 76-79. doi: 10.1126/science.aax0848
[5]	刘兴诏, 周国逸, 张德强, 等. 南亚热带森林不同演替阶段植物与土壤中N、P的化学计量特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2010, 34(1): 68-75.
	[ Liu Xingzhao, Zhou Guoyi, Zhang Deqiang, et al. N and P stoichiometry of plant and soil in lower subtropical forest successional series in southern China[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2010, 34(1): 68-75. ]
[6]	宁志英, 李玉霖, 杨红玲, 等. 沙化草地土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征及其对植被生产力和多样性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(10): 3537-3546.
	[ Ning Zhiying, Li Yulin, Yang Hongling, et al. Stoichimetry and effects of carbin, nitrogen, and phosphorus in soil of desertified grasslands on community productivity and species diversity[J]. Acta Eccologica Sinica, 2019, 39(10): 3537-3546. ]
[7]	赵海燕, 张剑, 刘冬, 等. 不同沼泽湿地土壤碳氮磷生态化学计量学特征及其影响因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(3): 618-626.
	[ Zhao Haiyan, Zhang Jian, Liu Dong, et al. Characteristics and determining factors for ecological stoichiometry of soil carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus in different marsh wetlands[J]. Arid Zone Reserch, 2020, 37(3): 618-626. ]
[8]	高德新, 张伟, 任成杰, 等. 黄土高原典型植被恢复过程土壤与叶片生态化学计量特征[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(10): 3622-3630.
	[ Gao Dexing, Zhang Wei, Ren Chengjie, et al. Ecological stoichiometry characteristics of soil and leaves during the recovery process of typical vegetation on the Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(10): 3622-3630. ]
[9]	饶丽仙, 沈艳, 聂明鹤. 宁夏典型草原不同退耕年限草地植物-土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 草业学报, 2017, 26(4): 43-52.
	[ Rao Lixian, Shen Yan, Nie Minghe, et al. Effect of grassland restoration duration on plant-soil ecological stoichiometry characteristics in a typical steppe[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(4): 43-52. ]
[10]	周日平. 中国荒漠化分区与时空演变[J]. 地球信息科学学报. 2019, 21(5): 675-687. doi: 10.12082/dqxxkx.2019.180676
	[ Zhou Riping. Zonation and spatiotemporal evolution of China’s desertification[J]. Journal of Geo-Information Science, 2019, 21(5): 675-687. ] doi: 10.12082/dqxxkx.2019.180676
[11]	淑敏, 姜涛, 王东丽, 等. 科尔沁沙地不同林龄樟子松人工林土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2018, 35(4): 789-795.
	[ Shu Min, Jiang Tao, Wang Dongli, et al. Soil ecological stoichiometry under the planted of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica forests with different stand ages in the Horqin Sandy Land[J]. Arid Zone Reserch, 2018, 35(4): 789-795. ]
[12]	陶冶, 张元明. 古尔班通古特沙漠4种草本植物叶片与土壤的化学计量特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(3): 659-665. pmid: 26211045
	[ Tao Ye, Zhang Yuanming. Leaf and soil stoichiometry of four herbs in the Gurbantunggut Desert[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2015, 26(3): 659-665. ] pmid: 26211045
[13]	刘源, 段玉玺, 王博, 等. 库布齐东段典型人工固沙林土壤水分时空变化特征[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2021, 36(1): 1-8.
	[ Liu Yuan, Duan Yuxi, Wang Bo, et al. Spatial and temporal characteristics of soil moisture in typical sand fixation plantations in the eastern Hobq[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2021, 36(1): 1-8. ]
[14]	王博, 段玉玺, 王伟峰, 等. 库布齐东缘沙漠化逆转过程中土壤呼吸及其温度敏感性变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(1): 104-112. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202001.005 pmid: 31957386
	[ Wang Bo, Duan Yuxi, Wang Weifeng, et al. Variations of soil respiration and its temperature sensitivity in the reversion process of desertification in the eastern Hobq Desert[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020, 31(1): 104-112. ] doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202001.005 pmid: 31957386
[15]	郝文芳, 陈存根, 梁宗锁, 等. 植被生物量的研究进展[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2008, 36(2): 175-182.
	[ Hao Wenfang, Chen Cungen, Liang Zongsuo, et al. Research advances in vegetation biomass[J]. Journal of Northwest A & F University(Naturnal Science Edition), 2008, 36(2): 175-182. ]
[16]	苏永中, 张铜会, 赵哈林, 等. 科尔沁沙地不同年代小叶锦鸡儿人工林植物群落特征及其土壤特性[J]. 植物生态学报, 2004, 28(1): 93-100. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2004.0014
	[ Su Yongzhong, Zhang Tonghui, Zhao Halin, et al. Characteristics of plant community and soil properties in the plantation chronosequence of Caragana Microphylla in Horqin Sandy Land[J]. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 2004, 28(1): 93-100. ] doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2004.0014
[17]	钱洲, 俞元春, 俞小鹏, 等. 毛乌素沙地飞播造林植被恢复特征及土壤性质变化[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2014, 34(4): 102-107.
	[ Qian Zhou, Yu Yuanchun, Yu Xiaopeng, et al. Changes of vegetation characteristics and soil properties in Mu Us Sandy Land by aerial seeding afforestation[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2014, 34(4): 102-107. ]
[18]	宋朝枢. 乌拉特梭梭林自然保护区科学考察集[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2000.
	[ Song Chaoshu. Scientific Servey of Wulate Haloxylon Ammodendron Forst Nature Reserve[M]. Beijing: China Forestry Press, 2000. ]
[19]	王春玲, 郭泉水, 谭德远, 等. 准噶尔盆地东南缘不同生境条件下梭梭群落结构特征研究[J]. 应用生态学报, 2005, 16(7): 1224-1229. pmid: 16252856
	[ Wang Chunling, Guo Quanshui, Tan Deyuan, et al. Haloxylon ammodendron community patterns in different habitats along southeastern edge of Zhunger Basin[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2005, 16(7): 1224-1229. ] pmid: 16252856
[20]	Li C P, Xiao C W. Above-and belowground biomass of ArtemisiaorDosica communities in three contrasting habitats of the Mu Us Desert, northern China[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 2007, 70(2): 195-207. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2006.12.017
[21]	Comstock J. Ecological communities and processes in a mojave desert ecosystem, Rock Valley, Nevada[J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 1996, 11(12): 524-525.
[22]	Havstad K M, Huenneke L F, Schlesinger W H. Structure and Function of a Chihuahuan Desert Ecosystem[M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
[23]	Houghton R A, Hall F, Goetz S J. Importance of biomass in the global carbon cycle[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 2009, 114 (3): 1-13.
[24]	Gao Y, He N P, Yu G R, et al. Long-term effects of different land use trpes on C, N, and P stoichiometry and storage in subtropical ecosystems: A case study in China[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2014, 67(1): 171-181. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.03.013
[25]	Harris W N, Moretto A S, Distel R A, et al. Fire and grazing in grasslands of the Argentine Caldenal: Effects on plant and soil carbon and nitrogen[J]. Acta Oecologica, 2007, 32(2): 207-214. doi: 10.1016/j.actao.2007.05.001
[26]	王博, 段玉玺, 王伟峰, 等. 库布齐东段不同植被恢复阶段荒漠生态系统碳氮储量及分配格局[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(7): 2470-2480.
	[ Wang Bo, Duan Yuxi, Wang Weifeng, et al. Carbon and nitrogen storage and distribution patterns of desert ecosystems at different vegetation restoration stages in the eastern Hobq Desert[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(7): 2470-2480. ]
[27]	李尝君, 曾凡江, 郭京衡, 等. 植被恢复程度与沙地土壤性质--以塔克拉玛干沙漠南缘为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2015, 32(6): 1061-1067.
	[ Li Changjun, Zeng Fanjiang, Guo Jingheng, et al. Soil properties of different sandylands under different vegetation recovering levels: A case in southern Taklimakan Desert[J]. Arid Zone Reserch, 2015, 32(6): 1061-1067. ]
[28]	刘建康. 毛乌素沙地油蒿群落退化与封育恢复特征及机制研究[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2019.
	[ Liu Jiankang.Study on Characteristics and Mechanisms of Degradation and Enclosure Restoration about Artemisia ordosica Community in Mu Us Desert[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2019. ]
[29]	董正武, 玉米提·哈力克, 李生宇, 等. 古尔班通古特沙漠西南缘柽柳沙包的土壤化学计量特征[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(20): 7389-7400.
	[ Dong Zhengwu, Umut Halik, Li Shengyu, et al. Soil stoichiometric characteristics of Tamarix cones in the southwest margin of Gurbantunggut Desert[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(20): 7389-7400. ]
[30]	Shuai O Y, Xiang W H, Gou M M, et al. Variations in soil carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and stoichiometry along forest succession in southern China[J]. Biogeosciences Discussions, 2017, 10(8): 1-27.
[31]	刘进辉, 王雪芹, 马洋. 沙漠绿洲过渡带柽柳灌丛沙堆-丘间地系统土壤养分空间异质性[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(4): 979-990.
	[ Liu Jinhui, Wang Xueqin, Ma Yang. Spatial variation of soil nutrients of Tamarix ramosissima nebkhas and interdune areas in a desert-oasis ecotone[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(4): 979-990. ]
[32]	董雪, 辛智鸣, 黄雅茹, 等. 乌兰布和沙漠典型灌木群落土壤化学计量特征[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(17): 6247-6256.
	[ Dong Xue, Xin Zhimin, Huang Yaru, et al. Soil stoichiometry in typical shrub communities in the Ulan Buh Desert[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(17): 6247-6256. ]
[33]	陶冶, 吴甘霖, 刘耀斌, 等. 古尔班通古特沙漠典型灌木群落土壤化学计量特征及其影响因素[J]. 中国沙漠, 2017, 37(2): 305-314.
	[ Tao Ye, Wu Ganlin, Liu Yaobin, et al. Soil stoichiometry and their influencing factors in typical shrub communities in the Gurbantunggut Desert, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2017, 37(2): 305-314. ]
[34]	周晓兵, 陶冶, 吴林, 等. 塔克拉玛干沙漠南缘荒漠绿洲过渡带不同土地利用影响下土壤化学计量特征[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(3): 969-980.
	[ Zhou Xiaobing, Tao Ye, Wu Ling, et al. Soil stoichiometry in different land-use categories in desert-oasis ecotones of the southern Taklimakan Desert[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(3): 969-980. ]
[35]	Tian H Q, Chen G S, Zhang C, et al. Pattern and variation of C:N:P ratios in China’s soils: A synthesis of observational data[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2010, 98(1-3): 139-151. doi: 10.1007/s10533-009-9382-0
[36]	An H, Li G Q. Effects of grazing on carbon and nitrogen in plants and soils in a semiarid desert grassland, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2015, 7(3): 341-349. doi: 10.1007/s40333-014-0049-x
[37]	赵志强. 鄂尔多斯几种沙生植物根际自身固氮菌的筛选及对杨柴接种效应研究[D]. 成都: 四川农业大学, 2008.
	[ Zhao Zhiqiang. andIsolation of Nitrogen Fixing Bacteria Study on Effects of Inoculation with Hedysarum fruticosum var. mongolicum in Erdos[D]. Chengdu: Sichuan Agricultural University, 2008. ]
[38]	Cleveland C C, Liptzin D. C:N:P stoichiometry in soil: Is there a “Redfield ratio” for the microbial biomass[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2007, 85(3): 235-252. doi: 10.1007/s10533-007-9132-0
[39]	张珂, 苏永中, 王婷, 等. 荒漠绿洲区不同种植年限人工梭梭林土壤化学计量特征[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(11):3235-3243.
	[ Zhang Ke, Su Yongzhong, Wang Ting, et al. Soil stoichiometry characteristics of Haloxylon ammodendron with different plantation age in the desert-oasis ecotone, North China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(11):3235-3243. ]

样地类型	位置	恢复措施	盖度/%	优势植物	草本		灌木
样地类型	位置	恢复措施	盖度/%	优势植物	株高/cm	密度 /（株·m^-2）	株高/cm	密度 /[株·（100m²）^-1]	冠幅/m²
Md	110°46′46.41″E, 40°04′46.18″N	无	3.3	沙蓬（Agriophyllum squarrosum）、沙竹（Psammochloa villosa）	9.4	10.0	_	_	_
Sf	110°46′42.50″E, 40°04′43.73″N	无	19.7	油蒿（Artemisia ordosica）、猪毛菜（Salsola collina）	9.2	46.0	53.2	18.0	1.2
Ar	110°47′52.56″E, 40°04′24.22″N	飞播	48.5	油蒿、猪毛菜、杨柴（Hedysarum mongolicum）、	10.5	68.0	76.8	87.0	1.5
Sa	110°46′28.34″E, 40°04′ 45.99″N	扦插+飞播	60.3	沙柳（Salix cheilophila）、油蒿、杨柴、狗尾草（Setaria viridis）	6.1	50.0	122.6	206.0	2.6

样地类型	植物种	灌木茎 /（g·m^-2）	灌木叶 /（g·m^-2）	灌木根 /（g·m^-2）	草本地上部分/（g·m^-2）	草本地下部分/（g·m^-2）	凋落物 /（g·m^-2）	地上生物量 /（g·m^-2）	地下生物量 /（g·m^-2）	总生物量 /（g·m^-2）
Md		-	-	-	2.48±1.21b	0.83±0.81c	-	2.48d	0.83d	3.31d
Sf	油蒿	1.24±0.20e	1.07±0.27d	0.92±0.30d	14.42±4.11a	4.62±2.37a	10.16±0.32c	16.73c	5.54c	32.43c
Ar	油蒿	121.97±51.84b	31.22±17.95b	34.04±10.70b	12.36±8.63a	3.10±2.43b	34.89±19.87b	203.84b	37.14b	275.87b
Ar	杨柴	29.34±6.25c	8.95±2.46c	20.47±4.68b	12.36±8.63a	3.10±2.43b	34.89±19.87b	203.84b	37.14b	275.87b
Sa	沙柳	366.23±187.38a	141.81±76.64a	236.13±116.21a	0.81±0.19b	0.32±0.11c	71.26±39.59a	581.68a	236.45a	889.39a
	油蒿	44.66±7.23c	12.68±5.05c	27.72±5.62b
	杨柴	11.44±6.16d	4.05±2.16c	10.13±3.28c

指标	因素	df	均方	F	P	偏η²	R²
C	植被恢复	3	4.186	141.409	<0.001^**	0.930	0.927
	土层深度	3	0.900	30.398	<0.001^**	0.740
	植被恢复×土层深度	9	0.308	10.421	<0.001^**	0.746
N	植被恢复	3	0.015	132.015	<0.001^**	0.925	0.939
	土层深度	3	0.008	66.526	<0.001^**	0.862
	植被恢复×土层深度	9	0.002	16.178	<0.001^**	0.820
P	植被恢复	3	0.022	87.592	<0.001^**	0.891	0.910
	土层深度	3	0.014	55.240	<0.001^**	0.838
	植被恢复×土层深度	9	0.002	6.924	<0.001^**	0.661

指标	因素	df	均方	F	P	偏η²	R²
C：N	植被恢复	3	106.406	17.318	<0.001^**	0.619	0.608
	土层深度	3	16.357	2.662	0.065^*	0.200
	植被恢复×土层深度	9	19.024	3.096	0.009^**	0.465
C：P	植被恢复	3	16.311	87.361	<0.001^**	0.891	0.87
	土层深度	3	2.497	13.377	<0.001^**	0.556
	植被恢复×土层深度	9	0.555	2.971	0.011	0.455
N：P	植被恢复	3	0.052	84.467	<0.001^**	0.888	0.901
	土层深度	3	0.026	42.394	<0.001^**	0.799
	植被恢复×土层深度	9	0.004	6.887	<0.001^**	0.660

	C	N	P	C：N	C：P	N：P	AGB	UGB	LB
C	1	0.986^**	0.995^**	0.856	0.996^**	0.969^*	0.976^*	0.998^**	0.939^*
N		1	0.998^**	0.757	0.987^*	0.996^**	0.976^*	0.983^*	0.956^*
P			1	0.801	0.995^**	0.988^*	0.978^*	0.993^**	0.951^*
C：N				1	0.853	0.704	0.794	0.862^*	0.711
C：P					1	0.971^*	0.981^*	0.995^**	0.946^*
N：P						1	0.974^*	0.967^*	0.965^*
AGB							1	0.981^*	0.990^**
UGB								1	0.946^*