放牧强度对羊草草甸草原植物器官及群落氮磷化学计量的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.07.009

中国农业科学 ›› 2022, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (7): 1371-1384.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.07.009

• 土壤肥料·节水灌溉·农业生态环境 • 上一篇下一篇

放牧强度对羊草草甸草原植物器官及群落氮磷化学计量的影响

王淼¹(),张宇¹,李瑞强²,辛晓平¹,朱晓昱³,曹娟¹,周忠义⁴,闫瑞瑞¹()

¹中国农业科学院农业资源与农业区划研究所/呼伦贝尔草原生态系统国家野外科学观测研究站,北京 100081
²内蒙古自治区环境在线监控中心,呼和浩特 010055
³农业农村部环境保护科研监测所,天津 300191
⁴牙克石市林业和草原局事业发展中心,内蒙古牙克石 022150

收稿日期:2021-03-01 接受日期:2021-07-22 出版日期:2022-04-01 发布日期:2022-04-18
通讯作者: 闫瑞瑞
作者简介:王淼,E-mail： wangmiao2021163@163.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金面上项目(31971769);国家重点研发计划(2016YFC0500601);国家重点研发计划(2017YFE0104500);中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项(Y2019YJ13);中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项(Y2020YJ19);中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项(1610132021016);呼伦贝尔市科技计划项目(YYYFHZ201903);财政部和农业农村部：国家现代农业产业技术体系;农业科技创新联盟建设-农业基础性长期性科技工作(NAES037SQ18)

Effects of Grazing Disturbance on the Stoichiometry of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Plant Organs of Leymus chinensis Meadow Steppe

WANG Miao¹(),ZHANG Yu¹,LI RuiQiang²,XIN XiaoPing¹,ZHU XiaoYu³,CAO Juan¹,ZHOU ZhongYi⁴,YAN RuiRui¹()

¹Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences/National Field Scientific Observation and Research Station of Hulunbuir Grassland Ecosystem, Beijing 100081
²Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Environmental Online Monitoring Centre, Hohhot 010055
³Environmental Protection Research and Monitoring Institute, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Tianjin 300191
⁴Career Development Center of Yakeshi Forestry and Grassland Administration, Yakeshi 022150, Inner Mongolia

Received:2021-03-01 Accepted:2021-07-22 Online:2022-04-01 Published:2022-04-18
Contact: RuiRui YAN

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】以地上植物茎、叶以及群落为研究对象,探究不同放牧强度对植物器官以及群落碳、氮、磷含量及化学计量特征的影响,为深入解析放牧干扰下草地生态系统退化过程,促进草地放牧适应性管理提供科学依据。【方法】基于呼伦贝尔羊草草甸草原长期控制放牧试验平台,在6种不同放牧强度（不放牧G0.00、较轻度放牧G0.23、轻度放牧G0.34、中度放牧G0.46、重度放牧G0.69、极重度放牧G0.92）下采集植物群落、植物不同器官的样品,采用元素分析法测定碳、氮、磷含量,并分析其碳、氮、磷含量及计量比在不同放牧强度下的变化。【结果】随着放牧强度的增加,植物茎、叶和群落的碳含量呈现显著的线性下降,重度-极重度放牧显著低于不放牧（P<0.05）;群落氮、磷含量呈现显著的线性增加,重度-极重度放牧显著高于不放牧（P<0.05）;碳含量茎叶比以中度放牧G0.46处理最低、氮含量茎叶比以重度放牧G0.69处理最高、磷含量茎叶比以较轻度放牧G0.34处理最高。植物不同器官碳含量及氮磷比的变异系数较小,氮、磷含量的变异系数较大, 不同器官的碳含量及氮磷比变异系数变化范围分别为4.01%—5.74%和2.84%—8.54%,植物氮、磷含量变异系数范围为11.47%—14.96%和11.13%—22.88%,碳氮比和碳磷比的变异系数范围分别为10.64%—16.00%和8.88%—13.57%,其中,植物叶片氮磷比的变异系数最小,植物茎磷含量的变异系数最大。轻度放牧G0.34和极重度放牧G0.92时叶片的氮磷比介于14—16,受到氮、磷元素的共同限制,其余在不同放牧强度下均低于14,表现为受到氮的限制。放牧强度与植物茎、叶、群落的碳、碳氮比以及茎和群落的氮磷比呈现出极显著负相关,与植物茎、叶、群落的氮含量,叶和群落的磷含量以及茎的氮磷比呈现极显著正相关。土壤温度与植物茎中磷含量呈现显著正相关。土壤水分与植物叶、群落的碳含量,茎、叶、群落的碳氮比,茎和群落的碳磷比呈显著正相关;与茎、叶、群落的氮含量和叶、群落的磷含量呈现显著负相关。【结论】放牧使得植物碳、氮、磷含量,生态化学计量比及群落碳氮磷总含量发生了明显的变化,过度放牧不仅降低了植物茎、叶、群落的碳含量、碳氮比和碳磷比,还降低了群落碳氮磷总含量,增加了植物茎、叶、群落的氮、磷含量,以及植物茎、叶、群落的氮磷比,适度放牧降低了茎叶碳氮比,增加了茎叶碳磷比和氮磷比,适度放牧有利于促进草地生态功能可持续稳定发展。

关键词: 草甸草原, 放牧强度, 碳、氮、磷含量, 生态化学计量特征, 茎叶, 群落, 呼伦贝尔

Abstract:

【Objective】Taking above-ground communities, stems and leaves as research objects, the effects of different grazing intensities on the contents of carbon (C), nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) elements and stoichiometric characteristics of plant components and plant communities were investigated, which provided a scientific basis for in-depth analysis of grassland ecosystem degradation process under grazing disturbance and promotion of adaptive management of grassland grazing. 【Method】Based on the long-term controlled grazing test platform of Leymus chinensis meadow grassland in Hulunbuir, the plant communities and plant samples of different components were collected. The contents of C, N and P were determined by elemental analysis method, and then the changes of C, N and P contents and the measurement ratio under different grazing intensities were analyzed. 【Result】With the increase of grazing intensity, the C content of plant stem, leaf and community showed a significant linear decrease, and the C content of heavy to extremely heavy grazing was significantly lower than that of no grazing (P<0.05). The N and P contents of the community were linearly increased, and the heavy to extremely grazing was significantly higher than that of no grazing (P<0.05). The stem-leaf ratio of C content was the lowest in moderate grazing (G0.46), while the stem-leaf ratio of N content was the highest in heavy grazing (G0.69), and the highest in P content (G0.34). The coefficients of variation of C content and N/P ratio in different plant organs were small, but the coefficients of variation of N and P contents were large. The variation coefficients of C content and N/P ratio of different components ranged from 4.01% to 5.74% and 2.84% to 8.54%, respectively. The variation coefficients of N and P contents of plants ranged from 11.47% to 14.96% and 11.13% to 22.88%, respectively, and the variation coefficients of C/N and C/P ratios ranged from 10.64% to 16.00% and 8.88% to 13.57%, respectively; among them, the coefficient of variation of the N/P ratio of plant leaves is the smallest, and the coefficient of variation of plant stem P content is the largest. The N/P ratio of leaves was between 14 and 16 under light grazing G0.34 and extremely heavy grazing G0.92, which was restricted by both N and P elements; while the other components were all lower than 14 under different grazing intensities, which was restricted by N. There was a significant negative correlation between grazing intensity and C content and C/N ratio of stem, leaf and community, and N/P ratio of stem and community, whilst they were significantly positively related to N content of stem, leaf and community, P content of plant leaf and community, and the N/P ratio of plant stem. The soil moisture was significantly positively correlated with the C content of plant leaves and community, the C/N ratio of stem, leaf and community, and the C/P ratio of stem and community, however, which were significantly negatively correlated the N content of stem, leaf and community and the P content of leaf and community. 【Conclusion】Grazing caused significant changes in plant C, N, P content, ecological stoichiometric ratio, and total community C, N, and P content. Overgrazing not only decreased the C content, C/N ratio and C/P ratio of plant stem, leaf and community, but also reduced the total C, N, and P content of the community, increased the N and P content of plant stem, leaf and community, and N/P ratio of plant stem, leaf and community. Moderate grazing decreased the C/N ratio of stem and leaf, and increased the C/P ratio and N/P ratio of stem and leaf, which was beneficial to promote the sustainable and stable development of grassland ecological functions.

Key words: meadow steppe, grazing intensity, carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus content, ecological stoichiometry characteristics, stem and leaf, community, Hulunbuir

王淼,张宇,李瑞强,辛晓平,朱晓昱,曹娟,周忠义,闫瑞瑞. 放牧强度对羊草草甸草原植物器官及群落氮磷化学计量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(7): 1371-1384.

WANG Miao,ZHANG Yu,LI RuiQiang,XIN XiaoPing,ZHU XiaoYu,CAO Juan,ZHOU ZhongYi,YAN RuiRui. Effects of Grazing Disturbance on the Stoichiometry of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Plant Organs of Leymus chinensis Meadow Steppe[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2022, 55(7): 1371-1384.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.07.009

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2022/V55/I7/1371

图/表 9

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

图4

图5

表3

图6

参考文献 41

[1]	ELDRIDGE D J, DELGADO-BAQUERIZO M, TRAVERS S K, VAL J, OLIVER I, HAMONTS K, SINGH B K. Competition drives the response of soil microbial diversity to increased grazing by vertebrate herbivores. Ecology, 2017, 98(7):1922-1931. doi: 10.1002/ecy.1879
[2]	牛得草, 董晓玉, 傅华. 长芒草不同季节碳氮磷生态化学计量特征. 草业科学, 2011, 28(6):915-920.
	NIU D C, DONG X Y, FU H. Seasonal dynamics of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry in Stipa bungeana. Pratacultural Science, 2011, 28(6):915-920. (in Chinese)
[3]	许雪贇, 曹建军, 杨淋, 杨书荣, 龚毅帆, 李梦天. 放牧与围封对青藏高原草地土壤和植物叶片化学计量学特征的影响. 生态学杂志, 2018, 37(5):1349-1355.
	XU X Y, CAO J J, YANG L, YANG S R, GONG Y F, LI M T. Effects of grazing and enclosure on foliar and soil stoichiometry of grassland on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2018, 37(5):1349-1355. (in Chinese)
[4]	郑伟. 封育对伊犁绢蒿种群营养元素分配格局及贮量的影响. 草业科学, 2012, 29(10):1503-1511.
	ZHENG W. Effects of enclosure on storage and allocation of carbon and nutrient elements in Seriphidium transiliense population. Pratacultural Science, 2012, 29(10):1503-1511. (in Chinese)
[5]	丁小慧, 宫立, 王东波, 伍星, 刘国华. 放牧对呼伦贝尔草地植物和土壤生态化学计量学特征的影响. 生态学报, 2012, 32(15):4722-4730. doi: 10.5846/stxb201104200523
	DING X H, GONG L, WANG D B, WU X, LIU G H. Grazing effects on eco-stoichiometry of plant and soil in Hulunbeir, Inner Mogolia. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2012, 32(15):4722-4730. (in Chinese) doi: 10.5846/stxb201104200523
[6]	FRANK D A. Ungulate and topographic control of nitrogen: phosphorus stoichiometry in a temperate grassland; soils, plants and mineralization rates. Oikos, 2008, 117(4):591-601. doi: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16220.x
[7]	HAN W X, FANG J Y, GUO D L, ZHANG Y. Leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry across 753 terrestrial plant species in China. New Phytologist, 2005, 168(2):377-385. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01530.x
[8]	李香真, 陈佐忠. 不同放牧率对草原植物与土壤C、N、P含量的影响. 草地学报, 1998, 6(2):90-98.
	LI X Z, CHEN Z Z. Influences of stocking rates on C, N, P contents in plant-soil system. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 1998, 6(2):90-98. (in Chinese)
[9]	张婷, 翁月, 姚凤娇, 史印涛, 崔国文, 胡国富. 放牧强度对草甸植物小叶章及土壤化学计量比的影响. 草业学报, 2014, 23(2):20-28.
	ZHANG T, WENG Y E, YAO F J, SHI Y T, CUI G W, HU G F. Effect of grazing intensity on ecological stoichiometry of Deyeuxia angustifolia and meadow soil. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(2):20-28. (in Chinese)
[10]	李香真, 邢雪荣, 陈佐忠. 不同放牧率对旱黄梅衣生物量和化学元素组成的影响. 应用生态学报, 2001, 12(3):369-373.
	LI X Z, XING X R, CHEN Z Z. Effect of grazing rate on biomass and element composition of Xanthoparmelia camtschadalis. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2001, 12(3):369-373. (in Chinese)
[11]	BARDGETT R D, WARDLE D A. Herbivore-mediated linkages between aboveground and belowground communities. Ecology, 2003, 84(9):2258-2268. doi: 10.1890/02-0274
[12]	张宇, 侯路路, 闫瑞瑞, 辛晓平. 放牧强度对草甸草原植物群落特征及营养品质的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13):2550-2561.
	ZHANG Y, HOU L L, YAN R R, XIN X P. Effects of grazing intensity on plant community characteristics and nutrient quality of herbage in a meadow steppe. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(13):2550-2561. (in Chinese)
[13]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
	BAO S D. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis.3rd ed. Beijing: Chinese Agriculture Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[14]	李红林, 贡璐, 洪毅. 克里雅绿洲旱生芦苇根茎叶C、N、P化学计量特征的季节变化. 生态学报, 2016, 36(20):6547-6555.
	LI H L, GONG L, HONG Y. Seasonal variations in C, N, and P stoichiometry of roots, stems, and leaves of Phragmites australis in the Keriya Oasis, Xinjiang, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(20):6547-6555. (in Chinese)
[15]	贺合亮, 阳小成, 李丹丹, 尹春英, 黎云祥, 周国英, 张林, 刘庆. 青藏高原东部窄叶鲜卑花碳、氮、磷化学计量特征. 植物生态学报, 2017(1):126-135. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0031
	HE H L, YANG X C, LI D D, YIN C Y, LI Y X, ZHOU G Y, ZHANG L, LIU Q. Stoichiometric characteristics of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus of Sibiraea angustata shrub on the eastern Qinghai- Xizang Plateau. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2017(1):126-135. (in Chinese) doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0031
[16]	HE J S, FANG J Y, WANG Z H, GUO D L, FLYNN D F B, GENG Z, Stoichiometry and large-scale patterns of leaf carbon and nitrogen in the grassland biomes of China. Oecologia, 2006, 149(1):115-122. doi: 10.1007/s00442-006-0425-0
[17]	韩文轩, 吴漪, 汤璐瑛, 陈雅涵, 李利平, 贺金生, 方精云. 北京及周边地区植物叶的碳氮磷元素计量特征. 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 2009, 45(5):855-860.
	HAN W X, WU Y, TANG L Y, CHEN Y H, LI L P, HE J S, FANG J Y. Leaf carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry across plant species in Beijing and its periphery. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2009, 45(5):855-860. (in Chinese)
[18]	任书杰, 于贵瑞, 陶波, 王绍强. 中国东部南北样带654种植物叶片氮和磷的化学计量学特征研究. 环境科学, 2007, 28(12):2665-2673.
	REN S J, YU G R, TAO B, WANG S Q. Leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry across 654 terrestrial plant species in NSTEC. Environmental Science, 2007, 28(12):2665-2673. (in Chinese)
[19]	范月君, 侯向阳, 石红霄, 师尚礼. 封育与放牧对三江源区高寒草甸植物和土壤碳储量的影响. 草原与草坪, 2012, 32(5):41-46, 52.
	FAN Y J, HOU X Y, SHI H X, SHI S L. The response of carbon reserves of plants and soils to different grassland managements on alpine meadow of three headwater source regions. Grassland and Turf, 2012, 32(5):41-46, 52. (in Chinese)
[20]	鄢燕, 马星星, 鲁旭阳. 人为干扰对藏北高寒草原群落生物量及其碳氮磷含量特征的影响. 山地学报, 2014, 32(4):460-466.
	YAN Y, MA X X, LU X Y. Effect of human disturbance on plant biomass and CNP contents of the alpine steppe in northern Tibet. Mountain Research, 2014, 32(4):460-466. (in Chinese)
[21]	LI X L, LIU Z Y, REN W B, DING Y, JI L, GUO F H, HOU X Y. Linking nutrient strategies with plant size along a grazing gradient: Evidence from Leymus chinensis in a natural pasture. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2016, 15(5):1132-1144. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61171-6
[22]	孙宗玖, 李培英. 放牧对伊犁绢蒿叶片碳氮磷化学计量特征的影响. 中国草学会第九次全国会员代表大会暨学术讨论会论文集. 2016: 7.
	SUN Z J, LI P Y. Effects of grazing on carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry in leaves of Seriphidium iliense//The Ninth National Member Congress of China Grass Society and Academic Symposium Proceedings. China Grass Society, 2016: 7. (in Chinese)
[23]	翟夏杰, 黄顶, 王堃. 围封与放牧对典型草原植被和土壤的影响. 中国草地学报, 2015, 37(6):73-78.
	ZHAI X J, HUANG D, WANG K. Effects of fencing and grazing on vegetation and soil in typical grassland. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2015, 37(6):73-78. (in Chinese)
[24]	仲延凯, 孙维, 孙卫国, 包青海. 割草对典型草原植物营养元素贮量及分配的影响 Ⅳ.土壤—植物营养元素含量的比较. 干旱区资源与环境, 2000, 14(1):55-63.
	ZHONG Y K, SUN W, SUN W G, BAO Q H. Influence of mowing on storing amount and distribution of nutrient elements in typical steppe Ⅳ A comparative study on nutrient element contents of soil and plant. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2000, 14(1):55-63. (in Chinese)
[25]	BAI Y F, WU J G, CLARK C M, PAN Q M, ZHANG L X, CHEN S P, WANG Q B, HAN X G. Grazing alters ecosystem functioning and C: N:P stoichiometry of grasslands along a regional precipitation gradient. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2012, 49(6):1204-1215. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02205.x
[26]	宋智芳, 安沙舟, 孙宗玖. 放牧地伊犁绢蒿营养元素分配特点. 草业科学, 2014, 31(1):132-138.
	SONG Z F, AN S Z, SUN Z J. Characteristics of nutrition allocation of Seriphidium transiliense under grazing condition. Pratacultural Science, 2014, 31(1):132-138. (in Chinese)
[27]	CUI X Y, WANG Y F, NIU H S, WU J, WANG S P, SCHNUG E, ROGASIK J, FLECKENSTEIN J, TANG Y H. Effect of long-term grazing on soil organic carbon content in semiarid steppes in Inner Mongolia. Ecological Research, 2005, 20(5):519-527. doi: 10.1007/s11284-005-0063-8
[28]	JIA B R, ZHOU G S, WANG F Y, WANG Y H, WENG E S. Effects of grazing on soil respiration of Leymus chinensis steppe. Climatic Change, 2007, 82(1):211-223. doi: 10.1007/s10584-006-9136-0
[29]	黄小波, 刘万德, 苏建荣, 李帅锋, 郎学东. 云南普洱季风常绿阔叶林152种木本植物叶片C、N、P化学计量特征. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(3):567-575.
	HUANG X B, LIU W D, SU J R, LI S F, LANG X D. Stoichiometry of leaf C, N and P across 152 woody species of a monsoon broad-leaved evergreen forest in Pu'er, Yunnan Province. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2016, 35(3):567-575. (in Chinese)
[30]	白永飞, 黄建辉, 郑淑霞, 潘庆民, 张丽霞, 周华坤, 徐海量, 李玉霖, 马健. 草地和荒漠生态系统服务功能的形成与调控机制. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(2):93-102. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00009
	BAI Y F, HUANG J H, ZHENG S X, PAN Q M, ZHANG L X, ZHOU H K, XU H L, LI Y L, MA J. Drivers and regulating mechanisms of grassland and desert ecosystem services. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2014, 38(2):93-102. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00009
[31]	丁莉君, 卫智军, 张爽, 刘佳, 吕世杰. 放牧强度季节调控对荒漠草原土壤和植物养分的影响. 草原与草业, 2019, 31(1):53-59.
	DING L J, WEI Z J, ZHANG S, LIU J, LÜ S J. Effects of seasonal regulation of grazing intensity on soil and plant nutrients in desert steppe. Grassland and Prataculture, 2019, 31(1):53-59. (in Chinese)
[32]	李从娟, 雷加强, 徐新文, 唐清亮, 高培, 王永东. 塔克拉玛干沙漠腹地人工植被及土壤CNP的化学计量特征. 生态学报, 2013, 33(18):5760-5767. doi: 10.5846/stxb201304300872
	LI C J, LEI J Q, XU X W, TANG Q L, GAO P, WANG Y D. The stoichiometric characteristics of C, N, P for artificial plants and soil in the hinterland of Taklimakan Desert. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(18):5760-5767. (in Chinese) doi: 10.5846/stxb201304300872
[33]	MAMOLOS A P, VASILIKOS C V, VERESOGLOU D S. Vegetation in contrasting soil water sites of upland herbaceous grasslands and N: P ratios as indicators of nutrient limitation. Plant and Soil, 2005, 270(1):355-369. doi: 10.1007/s11104-004-1793-z
[34]	吴统贵, 吴明, 刘丽, 萧江华. 杭州湾滨海湿地3种草本植物叶片N、P化学计量学的季节变化. 植物生态学报, 2010, 34(1):23-28. doi: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.01.005
	WU T G, WU M, LIU L, XIAO J H. Seasonal variations of leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry of three herbaceous species in Hangzhou Bay coastal wetlands, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2010, 34(1):23-28. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.01.005
[35]	KOERSELMAN W, MEULEMAN A F M. The vegetation N: P ratio: A new tool to detect the nature of nutrient limitation. The Journal of Applied Ecology, 1996, 33(6):1441. doi: 10.2307/2404783
[36]	HE J S, WANG L A, FLYNN D F B, WANG X P, MA W H, FANG J Y. Leaf nitrogen: phosphorus stoichiometry across Chinese grassland biomes. Oecologia, 2008, 155(2):301-310. doi: 10.1007/s00442-007-0912-y
[37]	董晓玉. 放牧与围封对黄土高原典型草原植物碳、氮、磷生态计量特征及其贮量的影响[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2009.
	DONG X Y. The effect of grazing and fencing on ecological stoichiometry of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and their storages in steppe grasslands of loess plateau[D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University, 2009. (in Chinese)
[38]	董晓玉, 傅华, 李旭东, 牛得草, 郭丁, 李晓东. 放牧与围封对黄土高原典型草原植物生物量及其碳氮磷贮量的影响. 草业学报, 2010, 19(2):175-182.
	DONG X Y, FU H, LI X D, NIU D C, GUO D, LI X D. Effects on plant biomass and CNP contents of plants in grazed and fenced steppe grasslands of the Loess Plateau. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2010, 19(2):175-182. (in Chinese)
[39]	ELSER J J, STERNER R W, GOROKHOVA E, FAGAN W F, MARKOW T A, COTNER J B, HARRISON J F, HOBBIE S E, ODELL G M, WEIDER L W. Biological stoichiometry from genes to ecosystems. Ecology Letters, 2000, 3(6):540-550. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2000.00185.x
[40]	HEDIN L O. Global organization of terrestrial plant-nutrient interactions. PNAS, 2004, 101(30):10849-10850. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0404222101
[41]	侯路路, 闫瑞瑞, 张宇, 辛晓平. 放牧强度对草甸草原羊草功能性状的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13):2562-2572.
	HOU L L, YAN R R, ZHANG Y, XIN X P. Effects of grazing intensity on functional traits of Leymus chinensis in meadow steppe. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(13):2562-2572. (in Chinese)

放牧强度 Grazing intensity (Cow.Au·hm^-2 )	土壤有机碳 Soil organic carbon (g·kg^-1)	土壤全氮 Soil total nitrogen (g·kg^-1)	土壤全磷 Soil total phosphorus (g·kg^-1)	土壤水分 Soil moisture (%)	土壤温度 Soil temperature (℃)
G0.00	40.78±0.22ab	3.66±0.02ab	0.58±0.02a	32.47±0.76a	21.97±1.85a
G0.23	38.35±2.15ab	3.42±0.13b	0.55±0.05a	30.60±1.46ab	23.36±2.91a
G0.34	40.49±0.10ab	3.93±0.25a	0.56±0.02a	31.06±0.73ab	23.14±2.65a
G0.46	41.55±0.66a	3.56±0.21ab	0.59±0.03a	31.14±0.43ab	23.12±2.92a
G0.69	37.71±0.50b	3.42±0.07b	0.58±0.03a	29.04±1.01ab	23.21±3.03a
G0.92	39.06±0.35ab	3.58±0.01ab	0.59±0.06a	27.78±2.18b	23.12±3.01a

日期 Date	参数 Parameter	器官 Organ	平均数 Mean	最小值 Minimum	最大值 Maximum	变异系数 Coefficient of variation (%)
2019	C (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	369.72	331.84	407.31	5.99
		叶Leave	376.84	357.05	401.41	2.81
		群落Community	384.14	360.05	404.52	3.41
	N (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	14.66	10.24	17.94	14.50
		叶Leave	20.40	16.93	23.75	7.78
		群落Community	20.09	16.85	25.93	12.70
	P (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	1.40	1.05	1.72	13.47
		叶Leave	1.60	1.20	1.89	10.54
		群落Community	1.63	1.26	1.97	12.81
2020	C (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	389.51	342.75	457.27	7.86
		叶Leave	361.90	326.62	408.33	5.64
		群落Community	373.33	330.63	424.29	6.13
	N (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	14.51	10.85	20.70	17.60
		叶Leave	23.00	17.42	44.51	26.31
		群落Community	19.70	16.87	23.37	11.97
	P (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	1.46	1.02	3.57	37.38
		叶Leave	1.60	0.92	2.09	17.25
		群落Community	1.44	0.81	1.82	15.03
两年均值 Two years mean	C (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	379.62	345.14	425.42	5.74
		叶Leave	369.37	350.74	393.39	3.09
		群落Community	378.73	358.97	402.68	4.01
	N (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	14.59	11.59	19.32	14.11
		叶Leave	21.70	18.56	32.68	14.96
		群落Community	19.89	16.93	24.65	11.47
	P (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	1.43	1.12	2.64	22.88
		叶Leave	1.60	1.20	1.99	11.13
		群落Community	1.54	1.04	1.83	12.57

		C (g·kg^-1)	N (g·kg^-1)	P (g·kg^-1)	C﹕N	C﹕P	N﹕P
放牧强度 Grazing intensity	茎Stem	-0.656**	0.825**	0.304	-0.876**	-0.598**	0.505*
	叶Leave	-0.737**	0.706**	0.535*	-0.839**	-0.449	0.428
	群落Community	-0.753**	0.861**	0.840**	-0.900**	-0.752**	0.172
土壤温度 Soil temperature (℃)	茎Stem	0.19	0.205	0.574*	-0.146	-0.252	-0.143
	叶Leave	-0.467	-0.056	0.051	-0.112	-0.204	-0.135
	群落Community	0.007	0.184	0.187	-0.133	-0.421	-0.377
土壤水分 Soil moisture (%)	茎Stem	0.364	-0.670**	-0.402	0.671**	0.619**	-0.17
	叶Leave	0.674**	-0.558*	-0.474*	0.686**	0.414	-0.283
	群落Community	0.470*	-0.644**	-0.720**	0.611**	0.751**	0.182
土壤碳含量 Soil carbon content (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	0.289	-0.656**	-0.504*	0.631**	0.631**	-0.105
	叶Leave	0.639**	-0.556*	-0.409	0.668**	0.416	-0.269
	群落Community	0.471*	-0.583*	-0.781**	0.564*	0.706**	0.196
土壤氮含量 Soil nitrogen content (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	0.401	-0.636**	-0.291	0.658**	0.567*	-0.212
	叶Leave	0.657**	-0.522*	-0.495*	0.654**	0.384	-0.275
	群落Community	0.438	-0.650**	-0.622**	0.608**	0.738**	0.158
土壤磷含量 Soil phosphorus content (g·kg^-1)	茎Stem	-0.316	0.392	0.314	-0.348	-0.247	0.239
	叶Leave	-0.145	0.183	0.169	-0.051	0.051	0.258
	群落Community	-0.104	0.005	0.046	-0.049	0.088	0.146

放牧强度对羊草草甸草原植物器官及群落氮磷化学计量的影响

Effects of Grazing Disturbance on the Stoichiometry of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Plant Organs of Leymus chinensis Meadow Steppe

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 41

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	杨静,张贺,李双霜,李桂花,张建峰. 砂质潮土施用改良剂对土壤动物群落特征的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(16): 3185-3199.
[2]	龚小雅,石记博,方凌,方亚鹏,吴凤芝. 淹水对辣椒连作土壤化学性质与微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(12): 2472-2484.
[3]	高兴祥,张悦丽,安传信,李美,李健,房锋,张双应. 山东省冬小麦田杂草群落调查及其变化原因分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(24): 5230-5239.
[4]	张梦亭, 刘萍, 黄丹丹, 贾淑霞, 张晓珂, 张士秀, 梁文举, 陈学文, 张延, 梁爱珍. 东北黑土线虫群落对长期免耕后土壤扰动的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(22): 4840-4850.
[5]	邵美琪,赵卫松,苏振贺,董丽红,郭庆港,马平. 盐胁迫下枯草芽孢杆菌NCD-2对番茄促生作用及对土壤微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(21): 4573-4584.
[6]	赵卫松,郭庆港,苏振贺,王培培,董丽红,胡卿,鹿秀云,张晓云,李社增,马平. 马铃薯健株与黄萎病株根际土壤真菌群落结构及其对碳源利用特征[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(2): 296-309.
[7]	任海英,周慧敏,戚行江,郑锡良,俞浙萍,张淑文,王震铄. 多效唑对杨梅土壤微生物及内生群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(17): 3752-3765.
[8]	闫瑞瑞, 高娃, 沈贝贝, 张宇, 王淼, 朱晓昱, 辛晓平. 草甸草原放牧场退化定量评估指标体系建立[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(15): 3343-3354.
[9]	孔亚丽,朱春权,曹小闯,朱练峰,金千瑜,洪小智,张均华. 土壤微生物介导植物抗盐性机理的研究进展[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(10): 2073-2083.
[10]	田晴,高丹美,李慧,刘守伟,周新刚,吴凤芝. 小麦根系分泌物对西瓜连作土壤真菌群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(5): 1018-1028.
[11]	赵卫松,郭庆港,李社增,王培培,鹿秀云,苏振贺,张晓云,马平. 花铃期棉花黄萎病抗病与感病品种对土壤细菌群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(5): 942-954.
[12]	张宇, 侯路路, 闫瑞瑞, 辛晓平. 放牧强度对草甸草原植物群落特征及营养品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2550-2561.
[13]	侯路路,闫瑞瑞,张宇,辛晓平. 放牧强度对草甸草原羊草功能性状的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2562-2572.
[14]	闫瑞瑞,张宇,辛晓平,卫智军,乌仁其其格,郭美兰. 刈割干扰对羊草草甸草原植物功能群及多样性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2573-2583.
[15]	王洪义, 常继方, 王正文. 退化草地恢复过程中群落物种多样性及生产力对氮磷养分的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2604-2613.