退化沙质草地恢复过程中植被生物量变化及其与土壤碳的关系

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2023.09.09

干旱区研究 ›› 2023, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (9): 1457-1464.doi: 10.13866/j.azr.2023.09.09 cstr: 32277.14.j.azr.2023.09.09

退化沙质草地恢复过程中植被生物量变化及其与土壤碳的关系

周静¹(),孙永峰²,丁杰萍¹,白浩江³,马祥⁴,王旭洋³,罗永清³()

1.甘肃省生态环境科学设计研究院，甘肃兰州 730020
2.中国市政工程西北设计研究院有限公司，甘肃兰州 730000
3.中国科学院西北生态环境资源研究院，甘肃兰州 730000
4.青海大学畜牧兽医科学院，青海西宁 810016

收稿日期:2023-03-11 修回日期:2023-05-23 出版日期:2023-09-15 发布日期:2023-09-28
作者简介:周静（1981-），女，副高级工程师，主要从事生态环境保护方面的研究. E-mail: fallzhouj@aliyun.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(42242005);国家自然科学基金项目(31500369);甘肃省自然科学基金项目(23JRRA663);中国科学院青年创新促进会项目和中国科学院科技扶贫项目(E129050203)

Changes in vegetation biomass and its relationship with soil carbon during restoration processes in degraded sandy grasslands

ZHOU Jing¹(),SUN Yongfeng²,DING Jieping¹,BAI Haojiang³,MA Xiang⁴,WANG Xuyang³,Luo Yongqing³()

1. Gansu Academy of Eco-environmental Sciences, Lanzhou 730020, Gansu, China
2. CSCEC AECOM Consultants Co., Ltd., Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China
3. Northwest Institute of Eco-environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China
4. Academy of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, Qinghai, China

Received:2023-03-11 Revised:2023-05-23 Published:2023-09-15 Online:2023-09-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

植物生物量分配特征及其向土壤中的物质输入是退化沙质草地生态系统恢复，尤其是土壤碳含量增加的关键环节。本研究以科尔沁沙地不同恢复阶段的流动沙丘、半固定沙丘、固定沙丘和封育草地为研究对象，调查分析草本植被生物量分配特征、根系性状和土壤理化性质特征，厘清生物量分配特征和根系性状与土壤碳的相互关系。结果发现：随着沙化草地逐步恢复，植被地上生物量、根系生物量、地表凋落物以及地下残体均呈显著的增加趋势（P<0.01），相对于沙化严重的流动沙丘，半固定沙丘、固定沙丘和封育草地的植物总干物质（生物量+凋落物）分别增加了11.0%、116.3%和151.2%。与生物量变化趋势相同，土壤碳含量随沙化草地的逐步恢复显著增加（P<0.05），其中0~10 cm层的增加速率高于10~20 cm层。结构方程模型（SEM）分析显示，0~10 cm层土壤碳含量受地表凋落物、地下残体和根表面积3个因素的影响，10~20 cm层土壤碳含量仅受地下残体和根表面积两个因素的影响，同时，两层土壤碳含量均与地上生物量无显著的关系。研究结果表明，在退化沙质草地恢复过程中，土壤碳含量主要受凋落物输入以及根系性状的影响，而与地上生物量无直接关系。

关键词: 退化沙质草地, 土壤碳含量, 植物生物量, 凋落物, 根系性状

Abstract:

The allocation pattern of plant biomass and its input into the soil are key processes for restoring degraded sandy grassland, especially regarding soil carbon accumulation. In this study, mobile dunes, semifixed dunes, fixed dunes, and fenced grasslands in Horqin Sandy Land at different restoration stages were investigated. By analyzing the biomass allocation of herbaceous vegetation, root traits, soil physicochemical properties, and their interrelations, it was found that the aboveground biomass, root biomass, surface litter, and underground necromass all increased significantly (P<0.05) with the extent of desertified grassland restoration. Compared to severely desertified mobile dunes, the total dry matter (biomass+litters) in semifixed dunes, fixed dunes, and fenced grasslands increased by 11.01%, 116.29%, and 151.18%, respectively. Similar to the changes in biomass, soil carbon content also increased significantly (P<0.05) with the extent of desertified grassland restoration, with a higher increase rate observed in the 0-10 cm layer than the 10-20 cm layer. Structural equation modeling indicated that the soil carbon content in the 0-10 cm layer was influenced by the surface litter mass, underground necromass, and root surface area. Conversely, soil carbon content in the 10-20 cm layer was affected only by underground necromass and root surface area. Moreover, the soil carbon content in both layers showed an insignificant relationship with aboveground biomass. In conclusion, the soil carbon content in degraded sandy grassland is primarily affected by litter input and root traits but has an insignificant relationship with aboveground biomass.

Key words: degraded sandy grassland, soil carbon content, plant biomass, litter, root traits

周静,孙永峰,丁杰萍,白浩江,马祥,王旭洋,罗永清. 退化沙质草地恢复过程中植被生物量变化及其与土壤碳的关系[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(9): 1457-1464.

ZHOU Jing,SUN Yongfeng,DING Jieping,BAI Haojiang,MA Xiang,WANG Xuyang,Luo Yongqing. Changes in vegetation biomass and its relationship with soil carbon during restoration processes in degraded sandy grasslands[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(9): 1457-1464.

图/表 7

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

表3

图4

参考文献 33

[1]	王涛, 吴薇, 薛娴, 等. 近50年来中国北方沙漠化土地的时空变化[J]. 地理学报, 2004, 59(2): 203-212. doi: 10.11821/xb200402006
	[Wang Tao, Wu Wei, Xue Xian, et al. Spatial-temporal changes of sandy desertified land during last 5 decades in Northern China[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2004, 59(2): 203-212.] doi: 10.11821/xb200402006
[2]	赵哈林, 赵学勇, 张铜会, 等. 科尔沁沙地沙漠化过程及其恢复机理[M]. 北京: 海洋出版社, 2003.
	[Zhao Halin, Zhao Xueyong, Zhang Tonghui, et al. Desertification Process and Its Restoration Mechanisms in the Horqin Sand Land[M]. Beijing: China Ocean Press, 2003.]
[3]	国家林业和草原局. 中国荒漠化和沙化状况公报[EB/OL]. [2015-12-29]. http://www.forestry.gov.cn.
	[National Forestry and Grassland Administration. Bulletin of the Desertification and Sandification State of China[EB/OL]. [2015-12-29]. http://www.forestry.gov.cn. . ]
[4]	国家林业和草原局. 我国荒漠化和沙化土地面积持续减少[EB/OL]. [2022-12-31]. .
	[National Forestry and Grassland Administration. Bulletin of the Desertification and Sandification State of China[EB/OL]. [2022-12-31]. http://www.forestry.gov.cn. ]
[5]	程磊磊, 却晓娥, 杨柳, 等. 中国荒漠生态系统: 功能提升、服务增效[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2020, 35(6): 690-698.
	[Cheng Leilei, Que Xiao’e, Yang Liu, et al. China’s desert ecosystem: Functions rising and services enhancing[J]. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2020, 35(6): 690-698.]
[6]	朱教君, 郑晓. 关于三北防护林体系建设的思考与展望——基于40年建设综合评估结果[J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(5): 1600-1610.
	[Zhu Jiaojun, Zheng Xiao. The prospects of development of the Three-North Afforestation Program (TNAP): On the basis of the results of the 40-year construction general assessment of the TNAP[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2019, 38(5): 1600-1610.]
[7]	赵学勇, 张春民, 左小安, 等. 科尔沁沙地沙漠化土地恢复面临的挑战. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(7): 1559-1564. pmid: 19899451
	[Zhao Xueyong, Zhang Chunmin, Zuo Xiao’an, et al. Challenge to the desertification reversion in Horqin Sandy Land[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2009, 20(7): 1559-1564.] pmid: 19899451
[8]	罗永清, 李玉强. 基于“山水林田湖草沙生命共同体”理念的我国北方沙地治理模式探索[J]. 赤峰学院学报(自然科学版), 2022, 38(10): 1-5.
	[Luo Yongqing, Li Yuqiang. Exploration on the management mode of northern sandy land based on the concept of “Life community of mountains, rivers, forests, fields, lakes, grass and sand”[J]. Journal of Chifeng University (Natural Science Edition), 2022, 38(10): 1-5.]
[9]	Li Y Q, Zhou X H, Brandle J, et al. Temporal progress in improving carbon and nitrogen storage by grazing exclosure practice in a degraded land area of China’s Horqin Sandy Grassland[J]. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, 2012, 159: 55-61. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2012.06.024
[10]	Luo Y Q, Zhao X Y, Li Y Q, et al. Wind disturbance on litter production affects soil carbon accumulation in degraded sandy grasslands in semi-arid sandy grassland[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2021, 171: 106373. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2021.106373
[11]	罗永清, 赵学勇, 王涛, 等. 沙地植物根系特征及其与土壤有机碳和总氮的关系[J]. 草业学报, 2017, 26(8): 200-206. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2016378
	[Luo Yongqing, Zhao Xueyong, Wang Tao, et al. Plant root traits and its relationships with soil organic carbon and soil total nitrogen in degraded sandy grassland[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(8): 200-206.] doi: 10.11686/cyxb2016378
[12]	Li Y Q, Zhao H L, Zhao X Y, et al. Effects of grazing and livestock exclusion on soil physical and chemical properties in desertified sandy grassland, Inner Mongolia, northern China[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2011, 63: 771-783. doi: 10.1007/s12665-010-0748-3
[13]	赵哈林, 周瑞莲, 赵学勇, 等. 科尔沁沙地沙漠化正、逆过程的地面判别方法[J]. 中国沙漠, 2008, 28(1): 8-15.
	[Zhao Halin, Zhou Ruilian, Zhao Xueyong, et al. Ground discriminance on positive and negative processes of land desertification in Horqin Sand Land[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2008, 28(1): 8-15.]
[14]	詹瑾, 韩丹, 杨红玲, 等. 科尔沁沙地植被恢复过程中群落组成及多样性演变特征[J]. 中国沙漠, 2022, 42(2): 194-206. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2021.00103
	[Zhan Jin, Han Dan, Yang Hongling, et al. Evolution characteristics of vegetation community composition and diversity during the restoration of Horqin Sandy Land in 2005-2019[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2022, 42(2): 194-206.] doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2021.00103
[15]	Sayer E J. Using experimental manipulation to assess the roles of leaf litter in the functioning of forest ecosystems[J]. Biological Reviews, 2006, 81: 1-31. doi: 10.1017/S1464793105006846 pmid: 16460580
[16]	Leff J W, Wieder W R, Taylor P G, et al. Experimental litterfall manipulation drives large and rapid changes in soil carbon cycling in a wet tropical forest[J]. Global Change Biology, 2012, 18: 2969-2979. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02749.x pmid: 24501071
[17]	Lajtha K, Bowden R D, Nadelhoffer K. Litter and root manipulations provide insights into soil organic matter dynamics and stability[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2014, 78: 261-269. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2013.08.0370nafsc
[18]	Huyler A, Chappelka A H, Prior S A, et al. Influence of aboveground tree biomass, home age, and yard maintenance on soil carbon levels in residential yards[J]. Urban Ecosystems, 2014, 17: 787-805. doi: 10.1007/s11252-014-0350-7
[19]	Mehta N, Neeta R, Pandya N R, et al. Impact of rainfall gradient on aboveground biomass and soil organic carbon dynamics of forest covers in Gujarat, India[J]. Ecological Research, 2014, 29: 1053-1063. doi: 10.1007/s11284-014-1192-8
[20]	丰思捷, 赵艳云, 李元恒, 等. 内蒙古典型草原表层土壤有机碳储量差异及影响因素[J]. 中国草地学报, 2019, 41(2): 116-120.
	[Feng Sijie, Zhao Yanyun, Li Yuanheng, et al. The differences and influencing factors of topsoil organic carbon storage in typical steppe of Inner Mongolia[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2019, 41(2): 116-120.]
[21]	程燕明, 马红彬, 马菁, 等. 不同放牧方式对荒漠草原土壤碳氮储量及固持的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(10): 18-27. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2021412
	[Cheng Yanming, Ma Hongbin, Ma Jing, et al. Effects of different grazing patterns on soil carbon and nitrogen storage and sequestration in desert steppee[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2022, 31(10): 18-27.] doi: 10.11686/cyxb2021412
[22]	Lavallee J M, Soong J L, Cotrufo M F. Conceptualizing soil organic matter into particulate and mineral-associated forms to address global change in the 21st century[J]. Global Change Biology, 2020, 26: 261-273. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14859 pmid: 31587451
[23]	Liang C, Schimel J P, Jastrow J D. The importance of anabolism in microbial control over soil carbon storage[J]. Nature Microbiology, 2017, 2: 17105. doi: 10.1038/nmicrobiol.2017.105 pmid: 28741607
[24]	Cotrufo M F, Ranalli M G, Haddix M L, et al. Soil carbon storage informed by particulate and mineral-associated organic matter[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2019, 12(12): 989-994. doi: 10.1038/s41561-019-0484-6
[25]	Cotrufo M F, Soong J L, Horton A J, et al. Formation of soil organic matter via biochemical and physical pathways of litter mass loss[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2015, 8(10): 776-779. doi: 10.1038/NGEO2520
[26]	刘源, 李晓晶, 段玉玺, 等. 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, et al. Effects of vegetation restoration on soil stoichiometry in the eastern Hobq Desert[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(3): 924-932.]
[27]	王新源, 赵学勇, 李玉霖, 等. 科尔沁沙地沙丘生境单元凋落物运移特征[J]. 中国沙漠, 2016, 36(1): 167-173. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2015.00009
	[Wang Xinyuan, Zhao Xueyong, Li Yulin, et al. Characteristics of litter migration in habitat units of dunes in the Horqin Sandy Land[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2016, 36, 167-173.] doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2015.00009
[28]	尹华军, 刘庆. 西南亚高山森林根系分泌物生态学研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2019.
	[Yin Huajun, Liu Qing. Ecological Studies on Root Exudation of Subalpine Forest in Southwest China[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2019.]
[29]	Crow S E, Lajtha K, Filley T R, et al. Sources of plant-derived carbon and stability of organic matter in soil: Implications for global change[J]. Global Change Biology, 2009, 15: 2003-2019. doi: 10.1111/gcb.2009.15.issue-8
[30]	Liu X F, Lin T C, Vadeboncoeur M A, et al. Root litter inputs exert greater influence over soil C than does aboveground litter in a subtropical natural forest[J]. Plant and Soil, 2019, 444: 489-499. doi: 10.1007/s11104-019-04294-5
[31]	Bolinder M A, Kätterer T, Andrén O, et al. Estimating carbon inputs to soil in forage-based crop rotations and modeling the effects on soil carbon dynamics in a Swedish long-term field experiment[J]. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 2012, 92: 821-833. doi: 10.4141/cjss2012-036
[32]	Chari N R, Taylor B N. Soil organic matter formation and loss are mediated by root exudates in a temperate forest[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2022, 15(12): 1011-1016. doi: 10.1038/s41561-022-01079-x
[33]	Keiluweit M, Bougoure, J J, Nico, P S, et al. Mineral protection of soil carbon counteracted by root exudates[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2015, 5(6): 588-595. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2580

类型	样点数量	植被盖度/%	主要物种
流动沙丘	70	5~15	黄柳（Salix gordejevii），差不嘎蒿（Artemisia halodendron），小叶锦鸡儿（Caragana microphylla），沙米（Agriophyllum squarrosum），狗尾草（Setaria viridis）
半固定沙丘	50	30~50	差不嘎蒿（Artemisia halodendron），小叶锦鸡儿（Caragana microphylla），大果虫实（Corispermum maorocarpum）、猪毛菜（Salsola collina）、五星蒿（Bassia dasyphylla）
固定沙丘	31	50~75	小叶锦鸡儿（Caragana microphylla），糙隐子草（Cleistogenes squarrosa）、白草（Pennisetum centrasiaticum），黄蒿（Artemisia scoparia）
封育草地	14	60~80	兴安胡枝子（Lespedeza daurica），白草（Pennisetum centrasiaticum），糙隐子草（Cleistogenes squarrosa），黄蒿（Artemisia scoparia），鹅绒委陵菜（Potentilla anserina），扁蓿豆（Melissitus ruthenicus），蒺藜（Tribulus terresters）、牻牛儿苗（Erodium stephanianum）

	流动沙丘（n=70）	半固定沙丘（n=50）	固定沙丘（n=31）	封育草地（n=14）
地表凋落物	21.51±2.90a	14.61±2.15b	67.08±12.75c	99.20±16.68d
地下残体	240.74±24.41a	247.27±28.66a	487.85±53.05b	494.73±57.74c
总凋落物	262.25±26.69a	261.89±29.12a	546.55±60.58b	593.92±67.84c
根系生物量	31.83±2.85a	36.77±4.09a	54.64±8.10b	94.26±16.39b
地上生物量	49.90±5.09a	83.19±5.29b	142.82±10.00c	175.84±14.35d
总生物量	81.73±5.85a	119.96±6.85a	197.46±13.89b	270.10±19.32c
总干物质	343.98±29.71a	381.84±32.69a	744.00±68.19b	864.03±74.88c

土壤深度/cm	土壤碳含量/（g·kg^-1）
土壤深度/cm	流动沙丘（n=70）	半固定沙丘（n=50）	固定沙丘（n=31）	封育草地（n=14）
0~10	1.50±0.14aA	2.00±0.22bA	2.43±0.36cA	6.59±0.43dA
10~20	1.08±0.09aB	1.26±0.11aB	2.37±0.32bB	3.33±0.38cB

退化沙质草地恢复过程中植被生物量变化及其与土壤碳的关系

Changes in vegetation biomass and its relationship with soil carbon during restoration processes in degraded sandy grasslands

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 33

相关文章 7

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	袁萍, 韩欢, 赵红梅, 李从娟. 裸露与沙埋对极端干旱区凋落物分解和养分释放的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(2): 293-300.
[2]	张建华, 张琨, 刘勇, 张红, 张凯权, 周晓阳, 徐龙超. 山西省露天煤矿复垦区典型人工林凋落物持水性能研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(12): 2043-2052.
[3]	韦昌林,李毅,单立山,解婷婷. 荒漠灌丛土壤酶活性对UV-B辐射及凋落物分解的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(4): 1181-1190.
[4]	范琳杰,李向义,李成道,林丽莎,薛伟. 极端干旱区花花柴（Karelinia caspia）和胡杨（Populus euphratica）叶凋落物分解和养分释放特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(2): 479-486.
[5]	贾晓燕，王晓江，牛建明，张文军，刘玉军. 赛罕乌拉国家级自然保护区不同植被类型水源涵养服务特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2014, 31(3): 495-501.
[6]	张栋栋, 靳正忠, 徐新文, 李生宇, 雷加强, 王永东, 王迎菊. 塔里木沙漠公路防护林凋落物的持水特性[J]. 干旱区研究, 2012, 29(6): 1046-1053.
[7]	赵红梅, 黄刚, 马健 , 李彦, 范连连, 周丽. 典型荒漠植物凋落物分解及养分动态研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2012, 29(4): 628-634.