Ecological Stoichiometry Characteristics of Soils in Eucalyptus Plantations with Different Ages in North Guangxi

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2018.06.019

Abstract

Abstract:

By using the space-time intergenerational method,the Eucalyptus plantations of different ages of plantation in low hilly areas at Guangxi were taken as the research object.The effects of forest age on soil organic carbon(SOC),total nitrogen(TN),total phosphorus(TP) and total potassium(TK) and their ecological stoichiometric characteristics of soils were studied.The results showed that:1)With the increase of Eucalyptus forest age,SOC showed a trend of increasing first,then decreasing and increasing again.TN had not evident regular change.It showed that the trend of decreasing first and then increasing later for TK.SOC,TN,TP and TK concent in the five different plantations decreased significantly with the increase of soil depth.2) The C:N,C:P,N:P and C:K ratios of soil increased significantly with the growth of forest age.The N:K ratios increased first and then decreased.There are no obvious regular patterns for P:K ratios of soil.The C:N ratios increased with the increase of soil depth,the N:P and N:K ratios decreased on the contrary,but C:P,C:K and P:K ratios showed no consistent pattern.3) It showed that significant positive correlation was found between SOC content and C:P ratios,N:P ratios and N/K ratios;among TN content,N:P ratios and N:K ratios;between TP content and N:K ratios and between TK content and N:P ratios.Different forest ages and soil depths all affected the distribution and utilization of soil nutrients.In general,the ecological stoichiometric ratios of soils from surface are higher than those of sub-layer soil.It will provide the scientific basis for the restoration of the forest ecosystem in Guangxi Province.

Key words: Eucalyptus plantations, forest age, soil nutrient, ecological stoichiometry characteristic, hilly area of northern Guangxi

CLC Number:

S714.5

DUAN Chunyan, XU Guangping, SHEN Yuyi, LUO Yajin, LI Yanqiong, ZHANG Denan, SUN Yingjie, HE Chengxin. Ecological Stoichiometry Characteristics of Soils in Eucalyptus Plantations with Different Ages in North Guangxi[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2018, (6): 117-124.

Figures/Tables 3

Tab.1

Concentrations of soil organic C,total N,total P and total K of the soil layers in different age forest of Eucalyptus plantation $\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $ g/kg

元素	林龄/a	土层/cm
元素	林龄/a	0~10	10~20	20~30	30~40	平均值
SOC	1	5.79±0.24Ad	4.24±0.11Ac	3.22±0.19Ab	1.10±0.02Aa	3.59±1.71A
	2	6.32±0.09Bd	5.14±0.30Ac	3.67±0.43Ab	2.06±0.05Ba	4.30±1.62B
	3	8.35±0.23Dc	7.04±0.68ADEc	5.50±0.89Bb	3.27±0.20Ca	6.04±1.98D
	4	7.61±0.32Cb	6.48±0.86ABCab	4.91±0.42Ba	3.20±0.04Ca	5.55±1.73C
	5	9.85±0.22Ed	8.40±0.31BDc	6.60±0.32Cb	3.79±0.28Da	7.16±2.28E
TN	CK(10)	13.19±0.25Fd	11.04±0.13CEc	7.60±0.30Cb	4.17±0.22Ea	9.00±3.44F
	1	1.24±0.04Ad	0.91±0.04Ac	0.56±0.05Ab	0.19±0.02Aa	0.73±0.39A
	2	1.25±0.03Ad	0.90±0.04Ac	0.57±0.05Ab	0.20±0.02Aa	0.73±0.39A
	3	1.23±0.04Ad	0.91±0.05Ac	0.55±0.07Ab	0.16±0.02Aa	0.71±0.40A
	4	1.24±0.05Ad	0.92±0.06Ac	0.56±0.06Ab	0.18±0.02Aa	0.73±0.40A
	5	1.27±0.03Ad	0.92±0.03Ac	0.58±0.05Ab	0.20±0.02Aa	0.74±0.40A
	CK(10)	1.42±0.02Bd	1.14±0.07Bc	0.73±0.03Bb	0.28±0.02Ba	0.89±0.43B
TP	1	0.36±0.01Dd	0.33±0.01Dc	0.24±0.01Db	0.16±0.01Ba	0.27±0.08D
	2	0.33±0.01Cd	0.31±0.01Dc	0.23±0.01Db	0.15±0.003Ba	0.26±0.07D
	3	0.30±0.02Bd	0.27±0.27Cc	0.22±0.01CDb	0.13±0.01Ba	0.23±0.07C
	4	0.29±0.01Bd	0.24±0.01Cc	0.20±0.02Cb	0.12±0.01Ba	0.21±0.06C
	5	0.28±0.01Bd	0.21±0.02Bc	0.16±0.02Bb	0.09±0.03ABa	0.18±0.07B
	CK(10)	0.23±0.01Ad	0.18±0.01Ac	0.13±0.001Ab	0.07±0.003Aa	0.15±0.06A
TK	1	10.07±0.17Dd	8.76±0.30Dc	5.68±0.34Cb	3.29±0.18Ba	6.95±2.66D
	2	9.12±0.24Cd	8.15±0.46Dc	5.27±0.61BCb	3.03±0.07Ba	6.39±2.44C
	3	7.66±0.18Bd	5.89±0.47Bc	4.48±0.34Bb	2.29±0.13Aa	5.08±1.99B
	4	6.44±0.26Ad	4.90±0.19Ac	3.26±0.45Ab	1.67±0.11Aa	4.07±1.81A
	5	7.93±0.20Bc	7.16±0.15Cc	4.26±0.51Bb	2.43±0.51ABa	5.45±2.25B
	CK(10)	11.95±0.20Ed	9.82±0.35Ec	7.20±0.37Db	4.52±0.30Ba	8.37±2.81E

Tab.1

Tab.2

Changes of soil C:N,C:P,N:P,C:K,N:K,P:K of the various soil layers in different age forest of Eucalyptus plantation

计量比	林龄/a		土层/cm
计量比	林龄/a		0~10	10~20	20~30	30~40
C/N	1		4.68±0.33Aa	4.66±0.27Aa	5.73±0.25Ab	5.85±0.68Ab
	2		5.08±0.16Aa	5.71±0.31Aab	6.47±0.25ABb	10.37±0.82Bc
	3		6.81±0.16Ca	7.69±0.34Ba	10.02±0.70BCb	20.16±1.05Dc
	4		6.12±0.21Ba	7.11±1.31ABa	8.86±1.61ACa	18.02±1.83Db
	5		7.77±0.02Da	9.14±0.42Ba	11.42±0.42Cb	19.08±1.52Dc
	CK(10)		9.31±0.11Ea	9.74±0.45Ba	10.39±0.73BCa	14.94±0.53Cb
C/P	1		15.94±0.24Ac	12.86±0.04Ab	13.43±1.08Abc	7.04±0.49Aa
	2		19.18±0.60Ac	16.75±0.61Ab	15.73±1.54Ab	13.43±0.64Ba
	3		27.59±1.38Ba	26.11±2.20Aa	25.17±4.82Ba	25.28±2.16BCa
	4		25.96±1.29Ba	26.70±3.85ABa	25.21±3.68Ba	26.83±2.02CDa
	5		35.63±0.87Ca	40.12±1.74BCa	42.58±4.44Ca	44.18±12.59ABDEa
	CK(10)		57.47±3.09Da	62.85±5.34Ca	58.44±2.30Da	56.95±2.46Ea
N/P	1		3.42±0.22Ac	2.77±0.16Ab	2.36±0.28Ab	1.22±0.16Aa
	2		3.78±0.03ABd	2.94±0.18ABc	2.43±0.15Ab	1.31±0.17Aa
	3		4.05±0.11BCd	3.39±0.22ACc	2.50±0.41Ab	1.26±0.16Aa
	4		4.25±0.28CDc	3.78±0.14BCDc	2.86±0.11Ab	1.52±0.28Aa
	5		4.58±0.11Db	4.40±0.31BCEb	3.73±0.43Bb	2.30±0.16ABa
	CK(10)		6.17±0.28Eb	6.50±0.87ADEab	5.64±0.25Cb	3.82±0.18Ba
C/K	1		0.58±0.01Ac	0.48±0.003Ab	0.57±0.04Ac	0.33±0.02Aa
	2		0.69±0.02Ba	0.63±0.07Aa	0.70±0.07Aa	0.68±0.02Ba
	3		1.09±0.05Ca	1.20±0.07Ba	1.24±0.26BCa	1.43±0.10Ca
	4		1.18±0.08CDa	1.33±0.23ABa	1.52±0.11CDa	1.92±0.15Db
	5		1.24±0.06Dab	1.17±0.07Ba	1.57±0.16Dbc	1.61±0.24Cc
	CK(10)		1.10±0.03Cab	1.13±0.04Bb	1.06±0.10Bab	0.93±0.10Ba
N/K	1		0.12±0.01Ac	0.10±0.01Ab	0.10±0.01Ab	0.06±0.01A
	2		0.14±0.01ABc	0.11±0.01Ab	0.11±0.01Ab	0.07±0.01ABa
	3		0.16±0.01Bb	0.16±0.01Cb	0.12±0.02Ab	0.07±0.01ABa
	4		0.19±0.01Cb	0.19±0.01Db	0.18±0.04Bb	0.11±0.02Ca
	5		0.16±0.01Bc	0.13±0.01Bb	0.14±0.02ABb	0.07±0.01BCa
	CK(10)		0.12±0.001Ab	0.12±0.01ABb	0.10±0.01Ab	0.06±0.01ABa
P/K	1		0.04±0.001Aa	0.04±0.001Aa	0.04±0.003Aa	0.05±0.01Ba
	2		0.04±0.003Aa	0.04±0.003Aa	0.04±0.003Aa	0.05±0.001BDa
	3		0.04±0.001Aa	0.05±0.003Aa	0.05±0.001Aab	0.06±0.01BEb
	4		0.05±0.003Aa	0.05±0.003Aa	0.06±0.01Aab	0.07±0.01CDEb
	5		0.03±0.003Aa	0.03±0.001Aa	0.04±0.001Aa	0.04±0.02ABCa
	CK(10)	0.02±0.001Aa		0.02±0.001Aa	0.02±0.001Aa		0.08±0.01Aa

Tab.2

Tab.3

References 32

[1]	Elser J J, Bracken M E S, Cleland E E, et al. Global analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus limitation of primary producers in fresh water,marine and terrestrial ecosystems[J]. Ecology Letters, 2007,10(12):1135-1142. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01113.x pmid: 17922835
[2]	程滨, 赵永军, 张文广, 等. 生态化学计量学研究进展[J]. 生态学报, 2010,30(6):1628-1637.
[3]	贺金生, 韩兴国. 生态化学计量学:探索从个体到生态系统的统一化理论[J]. 植物生态学报, 2010,34(1):2-6.
[4]	王绍强, 于贵瑞. 生态系统碳氮磷元素的生态化学计量学特征[J]. 生态学报, 2008,28(8):3937-3947.
[5]	曾德慧, 陈广生. 生态化学计量学:复杂生命系统奥秘的探索[J]. 植物生态学报, 2005,29(6):1007-1019.
[6]	王振兴. 国内生态化学计量学研究进展[J].绿色科技, 2011(7):195-196.
[7]	王晓光, 乌云娜, 宋彦涛, 等. 土壤与植物生态化学计量学研究进展[J]. 大连民族大学学报, 2016,18(5):437-442.
[8]	曹娟, 闫文德, 项文化, 等. 湖南会同3个林龄杉木人工林土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征[J]. 林业科学, 2015,51(7):1-8.
[9]	庞圣江, 张培, 贾宏炎, 等. 桂西北不同森林类型土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015,31(1):17-23.
[10]	许宇星, 王志超, 竹万宽, 等. 雷州半岛3种速生人工林下土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2018,35(1):35-42.
[11]	刘俊. 连栽桉树人工林碳氮磷生态化学计量学特征及其季节变化[D]. 南宁:广西大学, 2017.
[12]	雷丽群, 卢立华, 农友, 等. 不同林龄马尾松人工林土壤碳氮磷生态化学计量特征[J]. 林业科学研究, 2017,30(6):954-960.
[13]	白小芳, 徐福利, 王渭玲, 等. 华北落叶松人工林土壤碳氮磷生态化学计量特征[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2015,13(6):68-75.
[14]	杜虎, 彭晚霞, 宋同清, 等. 桂北喀斯特峰丛洼地植物群落特征及其与土壤的耦合关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2013,37(3):197-208.
[15]	陈印平, 夏江宝, 赵西梅, 等. 黄河三角洲典型人工林土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征[J]. 土壤通报, 2017,48(2):392-398.
[16]	陶玉华, 向达永, 郭耆, 等. 柳州市三种人工林土壤有机碳储量的空间分布[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2012,51(10):1990-1993.
[17]	杨会侠, 汪思龙, 范冰, 等. 马尾松人工林发育过程中的养分动态[J]. 应用生态学报, 2010,21(8):1907-1914.
[18]	赵蔓青, 韦文骅. 广西桉树种植现状及种植建议[J].福建农业, 2015(3):34-35.
[19]	黄国勤, 赵其国. 广西桉树种植的历史现状生态问题及应对策略[J]. 生态学报, 2014,34(18):5142-5152.
[20]	刘红英. 连栽桉树人工林土壤酶活性及其与土壤养分的关系[D]. 南宁:广西大学, 2013.
[21]	鲍士旦. 土壤农业化学分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000: 14-112.
[22]	秦娟, 孔海燕, 刘华. 马尾松不同林型土壤C N P K的化学计量特征[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版, 2016,44(2):68-76.
[23]	吴明, 邵学新, 周纯亮, 等. 中亚热带典型人工林土壤质量演变及其环境意义[J]. 生态学杂志, 2009,28(9):1813-1817.
[24]	马姜明, 梁士楚, 杨栋林, 等. 桂北地区桉树林及其他三种森林类型土壤有机碳含量及密度特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2013,22(8):1282-1287.
[25]	王璐, 喻阳华, 邢容容, 等. 喀斯特高原山地区主要人工林土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 南方农业学报, 2017,48(8):1388-1394.
[26]	全国土壤普查办公室. 中国土壤[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1998.
[27]	Zhao F, Jiao S, Ren C, et al. Land use change influences soil C,N,and P stoichiometry under ‘Grain-to-Green Program’in China[J].Scientific Reports, 2015(5):10195.
[28]	贾宇, 徐炳成, 李凤民, 等. 半干旱黄土丘陵区苜蓿人工草地土壤磷素有效性及对生产力的响应[J]. 生态学报, 2007,27(1):42-47.
[29]	Zhao F, Kang D, Han X, et al. Soil stoichiometry and carbon storage in long-term afforestation soil affected by understory vegetation diversity[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2015,74:415-422.
[30]	Tian H Q, Chen G S, Zhng G C, et al. Pattern and variation of C:N:P ratios in China’s soils:a synjournal of observational data[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2010,98:139-151.
[31]	覃其云, 张明慧, 唐健, 等. 马尾松人工幼林营养元素积累及其分配特征[J].林业资源管理, 2016(6):50-53.
[32]	秦仕忆, 喻阳华, 邢容容, 等. 喀斯特高原山地区水源涵养林土壤及凋落物的生态化学计量特征[J].林业资源管理, 2017(5):66-73.

	TN	TP	TK	C/N	C/P	C/K	N/P	N/K	P/K
SOC	0.804^**	0.286^*	0.723^**	0.190	0.636^**	0.235^*	0.898^**	0.514^**	-0.532^**
TN	1	0.759^**	0.881^**	-0.629^**	0.163	-0.155	0.739^**	0.642^**	-0.412^**
TP		1	0.649^**	-0.787^**	-0.475^**	-0.423^**	0.158	0.518^**	0.008
TK			1	-0.587^**	0.229	-0.413^**	0.723^**	0.242^*	-0.638^**