Analysis of Soil Structure and Microbial Community of Sugarcane National Geographical Indication Production Area in Taoshan of Ruian

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2024-0222

Abstract

Abstract:

The soil structure and microbial community characteristics of long-term sugarcane cultivation in the national geographical indication agricultural product origin of ‘Taoshan sugarcane’ in Ruian, Zhejiang Province were analyzed. This project used wet-screening method to determine the composition and stability of soil water-stable aggregates, and Miseq high-throughput sequencing was adopted to measure soil microbial community, and then the relationship between soil structure and microbial abundance and diversity was explored. Based on the content of >0.25 mm water-stable aggregate, mean weight diameter (MWD) and geometric mean diameter (GMD) of aggregate, the structural stability of sugarcane soil was divided into three levels: high (HS), medium (MS) and low (LS). The pH and organic matter content of HS soil were significantly higher than those of MS and LS soils, while there was no significant difference in available phosphorus, hydrolyzed nitrogen and available potassium among soils with different structures. The HS soil had significantly higher microbial carbon (MBC) and nitrogen (MBN) content relative to MS and LS soils. The analysis of microbial community structure showed that soil structure significantly affected the OTU quantity, alpha diversity index, and community composition of microorganisms. The HS soil with higher contents of stable aggregate and organic matter provided a suitable microbial habitat for microorganisms. Soil structure also affected the abundance of dominant microbial genera. Redundancy analysis (RDA) showed that soil structure affected the abundance of dominant microbial genera by altering soil physicochemical properties. A good soil structure could provide a more suitable habitat for microorganisms. The research results had preliminarily revealed the soil structure and microbial community characteristics of long-term sugarcane plantation soil, as well as their interrelationships. This provided a reference for studying the regulation of sugarcane soil structure, optimization of microbial diversity and function in order to enhance soil health function. This result also provided scientific basis for the management and sustainable utilization of long-term sugarcane plantation soil.

Key words: soil structure, soil aggregate stability, microbial community structure, sugarcane, national geographical indication production area

YE Tingyun, MA Liya, LU Shenggao. Analysis of Soil Structure and Microbial Community of Sugarcane National Geographical Indication Production Area in Taoshan of Ruian[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2026, 16(3): 73-79.

Figures/Tables 7

References 18

[1]	CHERUBIN M R, KARLEN D L, FRANCO A L, et al. Soil physical quality response to sugarcane expansion in Brazil[J]. Geoderma, 2016, 267:156-168. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.01.004 URL
[2]	BARBOSA L C, MAGALHAES P S G, BORDONAL R O, et al. Soil physical quality associated with tillage practices during sugarcane planting in south-central Brazil[J]. Soil and tillage research, 2019, 195:104383. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2019.104383 URL
[3]	FRANCO A L C, CHERUBIN M R, PAVINATO P S, et al. Soil carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus changes under sugarcane expansion in Brazil[J]. The science of total environment, 2015, 15:515-516.
[4]	ORTIZ P F, ROLIM M M, DE LIMA J L, et al. Physical qualities of an Ultisol under sugarcane and Atlantic forest in Brazil[J]. Geoderma regional, 2017, 11:62-70. doi: 10.1016/j.geodrs.2017.10.001 URL
[5]	RABOT E, WIESMEIER M, SCHLUTER S, et al. Soil structure as an indicator of soil functions: a review[J]. Geoderma, 2018, 314:122-137. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.11.009 URL
[6]	刘晓利, 樊剑波, 蒋瑀霁. 不同施肥制度甘蔗地土壤养分对微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(18):5242-5248.
[7]	刘洪, 韦本辉, 党柯柯, 等. 粉垄耕作对甘蔗土壤微生物群落的影响[J]. 热带作物学报, 2022, 43(3):597-605. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2022.03.019
[8]	黄太庆, 谭裕模, 江泽普, 等. 甘蔗种植对土壤团聚体及有机碳分布特征的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2019, 32(4):860-865.
[9]	BIGOTT A F, HOY J W, FULTZ L M. Soil properties, microbial communities, and sugarcane yield in paired fields with short- or long-term sugarcane cultivation histories[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2019, 142:166-176. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.04.027 URL
[10]	STIRLING G R, MOODY P W, STIRLING AM. The impact of an improved sugarcane farming system on chemical, biochemical and biological properties associated with soil health[J]. Applied soil ecology, 2010, 46:470-477. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.08.015 URL
[11]	张爱加, 周明明, 林文雄. 不同种植模式对甘蔗根际土壤生物学特性的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2013, 19(6):1525-1532.
[12]	周灵芝, 黄渝岚, 周佳, 等. 粉垄耕作和间作绿肥还田对甘蔗不同生长时期土壤微生物群落功能多样性的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2023, 36(12):2640-2650.
[13]	何瑞清, 王百群, 张燕. 耕作与施肥对甘蔗地土壤微生物量碳、氮的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2015, 22(5):118-121.
[14]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(第三版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[15]	VANCE E D, BROOKS P C, JENKINSON D S. An extraction method for measure soil microbial biomass C[J]. Soil biology & biochemistry, 1987, 19:703-707 doi: 10.1016/0038-0717(87)90052-6 URL
[16]	LEHMANN A, ZHENG W, RILLIG M C. Soil biota contributions to soil aggregation[J]. Nature ecology & evolution, 2017, 1:1828-1835.
[17]	LEHTOVIRTA-MORLEY L E, SAYAVEDRA-SOTO L A, GALLOIS N, et al. Identifying potential mechanisms enabling acidophily in the ammonia-oxidizing archaeon “Candidatus Nitrosotalea devanaterra”[J]. Applied environmental microbiology, 2016, 82:2608-2619. doi: 10.1128/AEM.04031-15 URL
[18]	KIM S J, AJN J H, WEON H Y, et al. Chujaibacter soli gen. nov., sp. nov., isolated from soil[J]. Journal of microbiology, 2015, 53:592-597. doi: 10.1007/s12275-015-5136-y URL

指标	LS	MS	HS
WSA/%	65.92±10.76 c	86.06±5.24 b	93.61EMBED Word.Document.8 EMBED Excel.Sheet.8 EMBED Excel.Sheet.8 ±5.46 a
MWD/mm	1.36±0.36 c	2.57±0.45 b	3.84±0.49 a
GMD/mm	0.68±0.29 c	1.5±0.42 b	2.85±0.75 a

指标	LS	MS	HS
WSA/%	65.92±10.76 c	86.06±5.24 b	93.61EMBED Word.Document.8 EMBED Excel.Sheet.8 EMBED Excel.Sheet.8 ±5.46 a
MWD/mm	1.36±0.36 c	2.57±0.45 b	3.84±0.49 a
GMD/mm	0.68±0.29 c	1.5±0.42 b	2.85±0.75 a

指标	LS	MS	HS
pH	4.18±0.56 b	4.60±0.61 a	4.73±0.48 a
有机质/(g/kg)	17.33±5.7 b	18.47±7.98 b	22.26±6.09 a
速效磷/(mg/kg)	4.63±1.83 a	5.38±2.83 a	5.26±2 a
碱解氮/(mg/kg)	216.36±52 a	181.27±33.92 a	278.13±45.52 a
速效钾/(mg/kg)	91.44±55.53 a	117.69±79.92 a	84.43±49.25 a
砂粒/%	40.11±15.41 a	37.17±10.17 a	30.38±13.74 b
粉粒/%	40.6±11.76 a	37.56±9.72 a	47.4±13.56 a
黏粒/%	19.29±3.65 b	25.27±10.07 a	22.22±9.02 ab
土壤含水率/%	22.72±1.32 b	26.43±4.74 a	29.15±7.9 a
田间持水量/%	31.74±5.42 a	33.69±4.01 a	32.83±4.96 a
土壤容重/(g/cm³)	1.33±0.16 a	1.29±0.06 a	1.31±0.18 a

指标	LS	MS	HS
pH	4.18±0.56 b	4.60±0.61 a	4.73±0.48 a
有机质/(g/kg)	17.33±5.7 b	18.47±7.98 b	22.26±6.09 a
速效磷/(mg/kg)	4.63±1.83 a	5.38±2.83 a	5.26±2 a
碱解氮/(mg/kg)	216.36±52 a	181.27±33.92 a	278.13±45.52 a
速效钾/(mg/kg)	91.44±55.53 a	117.69±79.92 a	84.43±49.25 a
砂粒/%	40.11±15.41 a	37.17±10.17 a	30.38±13.74 b
粉粒/%	40.6±11.76 a	37.56±9.72 a	47.4±13.56 a
黏粒/%	19.29±3.65 b	25.27±10.07 a	22.22±9.02 ab
土壤含水率/%	22.72±1.32 b	26.43±4.74 a	29.15±7.9 a
田间持水量/%	31.74±5.42 a	33.69±4.01 a	32.83±4.96 a
土壤容重/(g/cm³)	1.33±0.16 a	1.29±0.06 a	1.31±0.18 a

		LS	MS	HS
真菌	Chao1	880.48±126 a	824.20±206 ab	710.63±200 b
	Shannon	4.74±0.6 b	5.09±0.7 a	5.01±0.63 a
	Simpson	0.11±0.04 a	0.09±0.04 b	0.08±0.04 b
细菌	Chao1	5462.00±946.86 a	5135.86±126.40 b	5401.94±797.12 a
	Shannon	8.83±0.92 b	9.04±0.79 a	9.30±0.6 a
	Simpson	0.019±0.006 a	0.012±0.004 b	0.008±0.004 b