漓江源区常绿阔叶林和毛竹林土壤呼吸特征

王瑞强; 莫燕华; 马姜明; 秦佳双

doi:10.12356/j.2096-8884.2023-0073

漓江源区常绿阔叶林和毛竹林土壤呼吸特征

doi: 10.12356/j.2096-8884.2023-0073

王瑞强^{1, 2,},
莫燕华^{1, 2},
马姜明^{1, 2, ,},
秦佳双³

1.
广西漓江流域景观资源保育与可持续利用重点实验室（广西师范大学），桂林 541006
2.
珍稀濒危动植物生态与环境保护教育部重点实验室（广西师范大学），桂林 541006
3.
广西壮族自治区中国科学院广西植物研究所，桂林 541006

基金项目: 广西科技重大专项课题（桂科AA20161002-1）；广西重点研发计划项目（桂科AB21220057）

详细信息

作者简介:
王瑞强：E-mail：wruiqiang1217@163.com

通讯作者:
E-mail：mjming03@163.com

中图分类号: S718.54
计量
- 文章访问数: 47
- HTML全文浏览量: 17
- PDF下载量: 2
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-12-18
- 录用日期: 2024-04-03

Characteristics of Soil Respiration in Broad-leaved Evergreen Forest and Phyllostachys edulis Plantations in the Lijiang River Source Area

Ruiqiang Wang^{1, 2
,},
Yanhua Mo^{1, 2},
Jiangming Ma^{1, 2
, ,},
Jiashuang Qin³

1.
Key Laboratory of Ecology and Environmental Protection of Rare and Endangered Animals and Plants, Ministryof Education (Guangxi Normal University), Guilin 541006, China
2.
Guangxi Key Laboratory for Conservation and Sustainable Utilizationof Landscape Resources in Liiang River Basin (Guangxi Normal University), Guilin 541006, China
3.
Guangxi lnstitute of Botany, Chinese Academy ofSciences, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Guilin 541006, China

摘要

摘要: 目的研究漓江源区常绿阔叶林和毛竹林土壤呼吸特征，为该地区土壤碳排放估计和管理提供科学依据。方法利用Li-8100A土壤碳通量测量系统监测漓江源区常绿阔叶林、毛竹林以及抚育改造后的毛竹林（毛竹-多花黄精、毛竹-草珊瑚）从2022年12月到2023年11月的土壤呼吸速率。结果 1）常绿阔叶林、毛竹林和抚育改造后的毛竹林土壤呼吸速率年变化特征均整体呈先上升后下降的单峰曲线；2）常绿阔叶林土壤总呼吸年均值为4.18±2.01 μmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹，显著高于毛竹林的2.36±1.18 μmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹和抚育改造后毛竹林的2.41±1.09和2.54±1.18 μmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹，分别是毛竹林和抚育改造后的毛竹林的1.77、1.73、1.67倍；毛竹林抚育改造并套种草珊瑚和多花黄精后的土壤总呼吸均增加，且套种草珊瑚的土壤总呼吸低于套种多花黄精；3）土壤温度和土壤含水量是影响土壤呼吸速率的主要因素，共同解释了常绿阔叶林、毛竹林和抚育改造后的毛竹林土壤呼吸的63.5%～86.1%。结论漓江源区常绿阔叶林土壤呼吸显著高于毛竹林和抚育改造后的毛竹林，毛竹林抚育改造并套种草珊瑚和多花黄精后土壤呼吸均增加；土壤温度和土壤含水量是影响土壤呼吸及组分的主要因素。
- 漓江源区 /
- 土壤呼吸 /
- 常绿阔叶林 /
- 毛竹林
Abstract: Objective Study the soil respiration characteristics of broad-leaved evergreen forest and Phyllostachys edulis plantations in the source area of the Lijiang River, and provide scientific basis for the estimation and management of soil carbon emissions in the region. Method Using the Li-8100A soil carbon flux measurement system to monitor the soil respiration rate of broad-leaved evergreen forest, Phyllostachys edulis forest, and nurtured and transformed Phyllostachys edulis plantations (Phyllostachys edulis - Polygonatum cyrtonema, Phyllostachysedulis-Sarcandra glabra) in the source area of Lijiang River from December 2022 to November 2023. Result 1) The annual variation characteristics of soil respiration rate of broad-leaved evergreen forest, Phyllostachys edulis forest and nursed and transformed Phyllostachys edulis plantations showed an overall single-peak curve with an increasing and then decreasing rate. 2) The annual average of total soil respiration in broad-leaved evergreen forest was (4.18±2.01 μmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹), significantly higher than that of Phyllostachys edulis forest (2.36±1.18 μmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹) and Phyllostachys edulis plantations after tending and transformation (2.41±1.09 and 2.54±1.18 μmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹), which were 1.77, 1.73 and 1.67 times higher than that of Phyllostachys edulis forest and Phyllostachys edulis plantations after tending and transformation, respectively. After tending and transformation the Phyllostachys edulis forest and intercropping Sarcandra glabra and Polygonatum cyrtonema, the total soil respiration was increased, and the total soil respiration of intercropping Sarcandra glabra was lower than that of intercropping Polygonatum cyrtonema. 3) Soil temperature and soil moisture are the main factors influencing soil respiration rates, and together explained 63.5%～86.1% of soil respiration variation in broad-leaved evergreen forest, Phyllostachys edulis forest and tended and transformed Phyllostachys edulis plantations. Conclusion The soil respiration of the broad-leaved evergreen forest in the source area of the Lijiang River is significantly higher than that of the Phyllostachys edulis forest and the Phyllostachys edulis plantations after tending and transformation. The soil respiration of Phyllostachys edulis plantations is increased after tending and transforming and intercropping Sarcandra glabra and Polygonatum cyrtonema. Soil temperature and soil moisture are the main g factors influencing the soil respiration and its components.
- Lijiang River source area /
- soil respiration /
- broad-leaved evergreen forest /
- Phyllostachys edulis plantations

HTML全文

图 1 常绿阔叶林和毛竹林土壤总呼吸年变化特征

注：不同大写字母表示不同林分间具有显著差异；不同小写字母表示不同月份间具有显著差异。Different uppercase letters indicate significant differences between stands. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences different months.

Figure 1. Characteristics of annual changes in total soil respiration in broad-leaved evergreen forest and Phyllostachys edulis plantations

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 样地基本概况

Table 1. General information of sample plots

森林类型 Forest type	坡向 Aspect	海拔 Altitude/m	坡度 Slope/%	立竹度 Bamboo density/(株·hm⁻²)	林木密度 Tree density/(株·hm⁻²)	土壤pH值 Soil pH-value
常绿阔叶林 Broad-leaved evergreen forest	西北	312	25	—	1017	3.95
毛竹林 Phyllostachys edulis forest	西北	385	22	3350	—	4.23

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 常绿阔叶林和毛竹林土壤呼吸速率及各组分季节特征

Table 2. Seasonal characteristics of soil respiration rate and components in broad-leaved evergreen forest and Phyllostachys edulis plantations

土壤呼吸组分 Soil respiration components	森林类型 Forest Type	年均值 Annual average	春季 Spring	夏季 Summer	秋季 Autumn	冬季 Winter
土壤总呼吸 RS	BF	4.18±2.01A	3.50±1.08Abc	6.27±0.90Aa	4.84±2.39Aab	2.12±0.35Ac
	PE	2.36±1.18B	1.93±0.47Bbc	3.68±0.25Ba	2.86±1.05Aab	0.96±0.20Bc
	PS	2.41±1.09B	2.12±0.49Bbc	3.74±0.26Ba	2.55±1.16Aab	1.23±0.17Bc
	PP	2.54±1.18B	2.17±0.23Bbc	3.81±0.06Ba	3.02±1.34Aab	1.17±0.21Bc

异养呼吸 RH	BF	2.66±1.79A	1.26±0.19Ab	4.58±1.84Aa	3.28±1.7A4ab	1.51±0.34Ab
	PE	1.44±0.66B	1.25±0.46Abc	2.14±0.33Ba	1.68±0.54Aab	0.67±0.08Bc
	PS	1.51±0.76B	1.26±0.23Ab	2.54±0.17Ba	1.47±0.79Ab	0.78±0.07Bb
	PP	1.59±0.79AB	1.50±0.28Ab	2.65±0.22Ba	1.45±0.70Ab	0.75±0.13Bb

自养呼吸 RR	BF	0.66±0.54A	1.08±0.82Aa	0.62±0.48Aa	0.69±0.27Aa	0.24±0.27Aa
	PE	0.40±0.40A	0.14±0.04Bb	0.92±0.32Aa	0.42±0.11Ab	0.10±0.11Ab
	PS	0.48±0.26A	0.42±0.42ABa	0.62±0.31Aa	0.58±0.13Aa	0.31±0.13Aa
	PP	0.59±0.43A	0.24±0.15ABb	0.73±0.39Aab	1.05±0.16Aa	0.33±0.16Ab

凋落物呼吸 RL	BF	0.87±0.72A	1.17±0.79Aa	1.07±1.14Aa	0.88±0.52Aa	0.37±0.31Aa
	PE	0.52±0.30AB	0.53±0.06Aab	0.61±0.25Aab	0.76±0.40Aa	0.19±0.14Ab
	PS	0.42±0.34B	0.43±0.51Aa	0.59±0.26Aa	0.50±0.34 Aa	0.14±0.17Aa
	PP	0.37±0.25B	0.44±0.28Aa	0.43±0.20Aa	0.51±0.27Aa	0.10±0.08Aa
注：不同大写字母表示不同林分间具有显著差异；不同小写字母表示不同季节间具有显著差异。Different uppercase letters indicate significant differences between stands; Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between different seasons.

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 不同土壤呼吸速率及组分与土壤温度、土壤含水量的单因素模型和温度敏感性指数（Q₁₀）

Table 3. Single-factor models of different soil respiration rate and components with soil temperature and moisture and temperature sensitivity index (Q₁₀)

土壤呼吸组分 Soil respiration components	森林类型 Forest Type	R=ae^bT			R=aW+b			温度敏感性指数 Q₁₀
土壤呼吸组分 Soil respiration components	森林类型 Forest Type	a	b	R²	a	b	R²	温度敏感性指数 Q₁₀
土壤总呼吸-RS	BF	0.829	0.087	0.854^**	8.522	1.836	0.136^*	2.377
	PE	0.478	0.084	0.649^**	9.865	0.175	0.110^**	2.316
	PS	0.566	0.076	0.743^**	3.471	1.792	0.032^NS	2.131
	PP	0.586	0.079	0.682^**	3.327	2.104	0.021^NS	2.193

异养呼吸-RH	BF	0.489	0.087	0.571^**	-0.252	2.548	0.000^NS	2.391
	PE	0.373	0.070	0.563^**	2.444	0.926	0.024^NS	2.018
	PS	0.329	0.081	0.683^**	0.594	1.475	0.002^NS	2.240
	PP	0.311	0.086	0.713^**	6.422	0.296	0.125^**	2.353

自养呼吸-RR	BF	0.126	0.076	0.177^NS	1.439	0.295	0.036^NS	2.138
	PE	0.027	0.135	0.630^**	0.617	0.247	0.004^NS	3.852
	PS	0.196	0.043	0.143^**	-0.985	0.681	0.040^NS	1.530
	PP	0.177	0.054	0.171^NS	-1.981	1.002	0.069^NS	1.720

凋落物呼吸-RL	BF	0.147	0.076	0.098^NS	3.169	0.169	0.132^NS	2.148
	PE	0.101	0.082	0.293^NS	2.935	-0.167	0.194^NS	2.263
	PS	0.031	0.123	0.414^**	-0.789	0.574	0.008^NS	3.429
	PP	0.052	0.097	0.418^*	2.257	-0.092	0.292^NS	2.647
注：NS：P＞0.05；：P＜0.05；*：P＜0.01。下同Same below。

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 土壤呼吸速率及组分与土壤温度、含水量双因素模型

Table 4. Two-factor modelling of soil respiration rate and components with soil temperature and moisture

土壤呼吸组分 Soil respiration components	森林类型 Forest Type	R=a+bT+cW
土壤呼吸组分 Soil respiration components	森林类型 Forest Type	a	b	c	R²
土壤总呼吸-RS	BF	−1.790	0.631	0.336	0.861^**
	PE	−1.517	4.418	0.170	0.637^**
	PS	−0.371	−0.221	0.163	0.696^**
	PP	−0.398	−1.130	0.190	0.635^**

异养呼吸-RH	BF	−0.877	−3.160	0.254	0.574^**
	PE	−0.190	0.929	0.084	0.495^**
	PS	−0.210	−1.330	0.119	0.606^**
	PP	−1.152	3.406	0.119	0.744^**

自养呼吸-RR	BF	−0.010	0.919	0.026	0.099^NS
	PE	−0.303	−1.153	0.057	0.711^**
	PS	0.424	−1.196	0.018	0.202^NS
	PP	0.565	−3.840	0.048	0.370^NS

凋落物呼吸-RL	BF	−0.124	2.983	0.020	0.154^NS
	PE	−0.305	1.685	0.025	0.293^NS
	PS	0.193	−1.904	0.035	0.261^NS
	PP	−0.274	1.708	0.017	0.330^NS

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(34)

[1]	白杨, 2020. 生草栽培对山核桃林地土壤温室气体排放的影响[D]. 杭州: 浙江农林大学.
[2]	丁苏雅, 段敏, 朱瀚卿, 等, 2023. 竹生物质炭和竹凋落物对毛竹林土壤营养元素和酶活性的影响[J]. 土壤, 55(4): 795-803. doi: 10.13758/j.cnki.tr.2023.04.013
[3]	范洪旺, 滕臻, 许克福, 2018. 城市绿地土壤呼吸研究综述[J]. 生态科学, 37(5): 210-216. doi: 10.14108/j.cnki.1008-8873.2018.05.028
[4]	关伟涛, 吕世海, 刁兆岩, 等, 2023. 不同利用方式下呼伦贝尔草甸草原土壤呼吸动态特征及影响因素[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 37(7): 117-126. doi: 10.13448/j.cnki.jalre.2023.168
[5]	郭艳萍, 李洪建, 2022. 天龙山灌丛生态系统土壤呼吸对水热和植被因子的响应[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 59(4): 131-139. doi: 10.11838/sfsc.1673-6257.21262
[6]	海龙, 周梅, 张嘉開, 等, 2023. 毛乌素沙地不同林龄杨柴灌木林土壤呼吸及其影响因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 40(7): 1107-1116. doi: 10.13866/j.azr.2023.07.08
[7]	韩尚君, 韩海荣, 程小琴, 等, 2020. 改变凋落物输入对不同林龄油松林土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 39(11): 3576-3587. doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202011.037
[8]	何可宜, 沈亚文, 冯继广, 等, 2021. 植物残体输入改变对樟子松人工林土壤呼吸及其温度敏感性的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 57(2): 361-370. doi: 10.13209/j.0479-8023.2021.010
[9]	李泽霞, 陈爱华, 田晋华, 2023. 不同灌溉方式对侧柏人工林土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 节水灌溉, 48(9): 100-104+113. doi: 10.12396/jsgg.2023060
[10]	马晓翔, 张荣, 陈媛媛, 等, 2023. 三角枫-菊花复合经营对菊花生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 武汉轻工大学学报, 42(5): 54-62. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-7386.2023.05.008
[11]	毛莹儿, 周秀梅, 王楠, 等, 2023. 毛竹扩张对杉木林土壤细菌群落的影响[J]. 生物多样性, 31(6): 157-166. doi: 10.17520/biods.2022659
[12]	全权, 张震, 何念鹏, 等, 2015. 短期氮添加对东灵山三种森林土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 34(3): 797-804. doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.2015.0108
[13]	沈健, 何宗明, 董强, 等, 2023. 滨海沙地两种防护林土壤呼吸月际动态及影响因素[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 29(2): 432-439. doi: 10.19675/j.cnki.1006-687x.2022.01027
[14]	沈健, 何宗明, 董强, 等, 2023. 不同处理方式下湿地松人工林土壤呼吸及温度敏感性变化[J]. 西北林学院学报, 38(5): 10-18. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2023.05.02
[15]	孙忠林, 华明阳, 冯颖, 等, 2022. 坡向对长白山区蒙古栎林土壤根际呼吸与异养呼吸的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 41(12): 2317-2324. doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202211.024
[16]	田秋燕, 赵正勇, 杨旗, 等, 2019. 基于全球数据库的森林土壤呼吸模型研究[J]. 林业与环境科学, 35(6): 1-6. doi: CNKI:SUN:GDLY.0.2019-06-001
[17]	王锐, 向成华, 王谢, 等, 2016. 川中丘陵区3种林-药复合种植模式土壤呼吸特征[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 22(5): 793-799. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1145.2015.12028
[18]	魏书精, 罗碧珍, 孙龙, 等, 2013. 森林生态系统土壤呼吸时空异质性及影响因子研究进展[J]. 生态环境学报, 22(4): 689-704. doi: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2013.04.008
[19]	吴蒙, 马姜明, 梁士楚, 等, 2014. 桂林尧山桉树及马尾松林冬季土壤碳通量特征[J]. 广西师范大学学报(自然科学版), 32(1): 133-140. doi: 10.16088/j.issn.1001-6600.2014.01.027
[20]	徐婷, 马露露, 李泽森, 等, 2023. 黄土丘陵区自然恢复草地土壤呼吸对降雨格局改变的响应[J]. 水土保持研究, 30(5): 92-98. doi: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.05.004
[21]	夏国威, 汪東方, 朱涛, 等, 2023. 氮添加和凋落物去除对黔中喀斯特地区柳杉人工林土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 生态学报, 43(20): 8587-8597. doi: 10.20103/j.stxb.202208152345
[22]	张野, 刘新梅, 樊月, 等, 2024. 增温与凋落物去除对人工草地土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 草地学报, 32(1): 248-260. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.01.026
[23]	赵世魁, 郭晋平, 张芸香, 2022. 森林演替和气候变暖对暖温带天然次生林植物根系呼吸的交互效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 36(3): 122-129. doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.018
[24]	赵洋, 余雯静, 何易蔓, 等, 2024[2024-04-03]. 套种南方红豆杉对杉木人工林土壤肥力的影响[J/OL]. 应用与环境生物学报, 1-14.https://doi.org/10.19675/j.cnki.1006-687x.2023.05022.
[25]	钟雅琪, 钟全林, 李宝银, 等, 2020. 毛竹扩张对亚热带常绿阔叶林主要树种叶结构型性状的影响[J]. 生态学报, 40(14): 5018-5028. doi: 10.5846/stxb201904200801
[26]	竹万宽, 许宇星, 王志超, 等, 2023. 尾巨桉人工林土壤呼吸对林下植被管理措施的响应[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 40(1): 164-175. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20220138
[27]	Bhanja S N, Wang J Y, 2021. Influence of environmental factors on autotrophic, soil and ecosystem respirations in Canadian boreal forest[J]. Ecological Indicators, 125(5): 107517. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107517
[28]	Legesse T G, Qu L P, Dong G, et al, 2022. Extreme wet precipitation and mowing stimulate soil respiration in the Eurasian meadow steppe[J]. The Science of the Total Environment, 851(Pt 1): 158130.
[29]	Li X D, Fu H, Guo D, et al, 2010. Partitioning soil respiration and assessing the carbon balance in a Setaria italica (L. ) Beauv. Cropland on the Loess Plateau, Northern China[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 42(2): 337-346. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.11.013
[30]	Meisnera, B E, Rousk J, 2013. Microbial Growth responses upon rewetting soil dried for four days or one year[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 66(11): 188-192. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.07.014
[31]	Mirco R, Alessandro C, 2005. Main determinants of forest soil respiration along an elevation/temperature gradient in the Italian Alps[J]. Global Change Biology, 11(7): 1024-1041. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.00963.x
[32]	Takeda, S, Ryota M, et al, 2023. Five-year measurement data along a 1200 m elevational gradient reveals that global warming increases soil respiration[J]. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 6: 1145474. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2023.1145474
[33]	Yang C, Wang Y P, Huang Y Y, et al, 2022. Temperature dependence of ecosystem carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus residence times differs between subtropical and temperate forests in China[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 326(12): 109165. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2022.109165
[34]	Zheng Z M, Yu G R, Fu Y L, et al, 2009. Temperature sensitivity of soil respiration is affected by prevailing climatic conditions and soil organic carbon content: A trans-China based case study[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 41(7): 1531-1540. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.04.013