杉木纯林林下补植模式对土壤质量和微生物群落的影响

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20250050

林业科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 62 ›› Issue (3): 61-73.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20250050

杉木纯林林下补植模式对土壤质量和微生物群落的影响

胡宇欣^1,²,江怡航¹,刘振华³,朱光玉⁴,张建国¹,张雄清^1,^2,*()

1. 中国林业科学研究院林业研究所　林木资源高效生产全国重点实验室　国家林业和草原局林木培育重点实验室　北京 100091
2. 南京林业大学南方现代林业协同创新中心　南京 210037
3. 湖南省林业科学院　长沙 410004
4. 中南林业科技大学　长沙 410004

收稿日期:2025-02-02 修回日期:2025-10-28 出版日期:2026-03-15 发布日期:2026-03-12
通讯作者: 张雄清 E-mail:xqzhang85@caf.ac.cn
基金资助:
国家“十四五”重点研发计划项目（2021YFD2201304）。

Effects of Understory Enrichment Planting Modes in Pure Chinese fir Forests on Soil Quality and Microbial Communities

Yuxin Hu^1,²,Yihang Jiang¹,Zhenhua Liu³,Guangyu Zhu⁴,Jianguo Zhang¹,Xiongqing Zhang^1,^2,*()

1. State Key Laboratory of Efficient Production of Forest Resources　Key Laboratory of Tree Breeding and Cultivation of the National Forestry and Grassland Administration　Research Institute of Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry　Beijing 100091
2. Collaborative Innovation Center of Sustainable Forestry in Southern China, Nanjing Forestry University　Nanjing 210037
3. Hunan Academy of Forestry　Changsha 410004
4. Central South University of Forestry and Technology　Changsha 410004

Received:2025-02-02 Revised:2025-10-28 Online:2026-03-15 Published:2026-03-12
Contact: Xiongqing Zhang E-mail:xqzhang85@caf.ac.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 构建杉阔复层异龄混交林，评估不同林下补植模式的土壤质量变化，筛选适宜的林下补植模式，为杉木人工林土壤健康维护和可持续经营提供科学依据。方法: 在1998年营建的杉木人工林中，2014年进行第3次间伐（平均保留密度225株·hm^–2），2015年设置杉木纯林对照（M0）、仅补植闽楠（M1）、补植闽楠和红豆杉（M2）、补植闽楠和红豆杉及木荷（M3）4种林下补植模式，杉木与补植树种的株数比例均为3∶7；在补植7年后的2022年，采集0~60 cm土层深度的土样，测定化学性质、胞外酶活性和细菌群落特征（16S rRNA）。选取最小数据集建立土壤质量指数（SQI）模型，采用方差分解量化生物因素（酶活性、微生物代谢限制和群落结构）和非生物因素（化学性质及其计量比）对土壤质量的贡献率，并通过结构方程模型解析“林下补植模式?土壤质量指数”之间的关系。结果: 与纯林M0相比，经林下补植形成的杉阔复层异龄混交林（M1、M2、M3）可显著改善土壤质量和微生物群落生态功能，0~20 cm土层的全氮、全磷、碱解氮、有效钾、土壤有机碳等关键养分含量提升29.87%~72.62%，其中M2的0~20 cm土层各指标增幅最大。林下补植通过优化土壤酶活性驱动碳氮磷循环，M1的土壤蔗糖酶活性、葡萄糖苷酶活性和M3的脲酶活性在0~20 cm土层达到峰值，而纯林的酸性磷酸酶活性、过氧化氢酶活性较高，反映出分解代谢路径的差异。M2的微生物磷限制平均值较纯林下降12.05%，并通过提升0~20 cm土层的氮水解酶相对活性和缓解40~60 cm土层的微生物碳限制优化养分利用策略。微生物群落分析显示，营建的复层异龄混交林可显著提高土壤微生物的Shannon多样性指数，改变酸杆菌门、变形菌门等功能菌群丰度。林下补植模式通过调控全磷（路径系数0.68）、氮磷比（0.71）及SOC（0.33）、pH值（0.34）、氮水解酶活性（0.17）和土壤微生物Shannon多样性（0.60）间接影响土壤质量。3种林下补植模式的土壤质量指数均优于纯林，其中M2的0~20 cm土层的土壤质量最高，纯林的40~60 cm土层的土壤质量最低。结论: 通过在杉木人工纯林林下补植乡土树种形成的杉阔复层异龄混交林，能够提升土壤养分水平、平衡化学计量限制、优化酶活性和微生物群落多样性，改善土壤质量，其中林下补植闽楠和红豆杉改造模式的土壤改良作用最为突出。

关键词: 杉木人工林, 杉阔混交林, 土壤质量, 土壤酶活性, 土壤微生物群落

Abstract:

Objective: To address ecological issues such as soil degradation caused by long-term continuous monoculture of Cunninghamia lanceolata (Chinese fir), it is necessary to establish and transform plantations into multi-layered, uneven-aged mixed forests of Chinese fir and broadleaved species to enhance the sustainability of forest ecosystems. This study evaluated changes in soil quality under different understory enrichment planting modes of native tree species, aiming to identify suitable understory enrichment planting modes and provide a scientific basis for maintaining soil health and sustainable management of Chinese fir plantations. Method: In a Chinese fir plantation established in 1998, the third thinning was conducted in 2014 (retaining an average density of 225 tree·hm^–2). In 2015, four understory enrichment planting modes were conducted: a pure plantation served as the control without thinning or planting (M0), understory replanting of Phoebe bournei only (M1), understory replanting of Phoebe bournei and Taxus wallichiana var. chinensis (M2), and understory replanting of P. bournei, T. wallichiana var. chinensis, and Schima superba (M3). The proportion of Chinese fir to understory planted species was 3∶7 in all modes. In 2022, seven years after understory replanting, soil samples were collected from 0–60 cm depth to determine chemical properties, extracellular enzyme activities, and bacterial community characteristics (16S rRNA). A minimum data set (MDS) was selected to establish a soil quality index (SQI) model. Variance partitioning analysis (VPA) was used to quantify the contributions of biotic factors (enzyme activities, microbial metabolic limitations, and community structure) and abiotic factors (chemical properties and stoichiometric ratios) to soil quality. Structural equation model (SEM) was applied to analyze the relationships among “understory replanting mode–soil quality index”. Result: Compared with the pure plantation (M0), the multi-layered uneven-aged Chinese fir and broad-leaved species mixed forests (M1, M2, M3) formed by understory replanting significantly improved soil quality and microbial ecological functions. The content of key nutrients in the 0–20 cm soil layer, including total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), available nitrogen (AN), available potassium (AK), and soil organic carbon (SOC), increased by 29.87%–72.62%, with the greatest improvements observed in M2. Understory enrichment planting drove carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus cycling by optimizing soil enzyme activities. The soil sucrase (SUC) activity and glucosidase (GLU) activity of M1, and urease (URE) activity of M3 reached their peak in the 0–20 cm layer. In contrast, the pure plantation had higher acid phosphatase (ACP) and catalase (CAT) activities, reflecting differences in catabolic pathways. The average microbial phosphorus limitation in M2 decreased by 12.05% compared with the pure plantation. Additionally, M2 optimized nutrient utilization strategies by enhancing the relative activity of nitrogen hydrolase (RAN) in the 0–20 cm layer and alleviating microbial carbon limitation in the 40–60 cm layer. Microbial community analysis revealed that the established multi-layered uneven-aged mixed forests significantly increased the Shannon diversity index of soil microorganisms and altered the abundance of functional bacterial phyla such as Acidobacteriota and Proteobacteria. Understory enrichment planting modes indirectly affected soil quality by regulating total phosphorus (path coefficient: 0.68), nitrogen-to-phosphorus ratio (0.71), SOC (0.33), pH (0.34), nitrogen hydrolase activity (0.17), and soil microbial Shannon diversity (0.60). The SQI values of the three understory enrichment planting modes were higher than that of the pure plantation, with M2 exhibiting the highest soil quality in the 0–20 cm layer and the pure plantation showing the lowest soil quality in the 40–60 cm layer. Conclusion: Transforming pure Chinese fir plantations into multi-layered uneven-aged mixed forests by understory replanting native broadleaved species can enhance soil nutrient levels, balance stoichiometric limitations, optimize enzyme activities and microbial diversity, and improve overall soil quality. Among them, understory replanting of P. bournei and T. wallichiana var. chinensis (M2) demonstrates the most significant soil improvement effects. These findings provide a theoretical basis for the sustainable management of Chinese fir plantations.

Key words: Chinese fir plantation, Chinese fir-broadleaf mixed forest, soil quality, soil enzyme activity, soil microbial community

中图分类号:

S714

胡宇欣,江怡航,刘振华,朱光玉,张建国,张雄清. 杉木纯林林下补植模式对土壤质量和微生物群落的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2026, 62(3): 61-73.

Yuxin Hu,Yihang Jiang,Zhenhua Liu,Guangyu Zhu,Jianguo Zhang,Xiongqing Zhang. Effects of Understory Enrichment Planting Modes in Pure Chinese fir Forests on Soil Quality and Microbial Communities[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2026, 62(3): 61-73.

图/表 10

表1

表2

表3

不同林下补植模式及土层的土壤化学性质与化学计量比①"

指标Index	M0			M1			M2			M3
指标Index	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm
TN/(g·kg^–1)	0.94± 0.07bA	1.00± 0.02abA	0.72± 0.04bB	1.14± 0.07aA	1.04± 0.06aA	0.91± 0.10aB	1.18± 0.09aA	0.92± 0.07bB	0.76± 0.03bC	1.22± 0.08aA	0.97± 0.04abB	0.79± 0.03bC
TP /(g·kg^–1)	0.26± 0.08bA	0.24± 0.06bA	0.22± 0.04bB	0.28± 0.03bA	0.31± 0.04abA	0.31± 0.03bA	0.44± 0.03aA	0.42± 0.01aAB	0.33± 0.05aB	0.36± 0.07abA	0.33± 0.10abA	0.32± 0.08bA
TK/(g·kg^–1)	16.89± 2.04aA	17.97± 1.37aA	17.28± 0.72aA	17.87± 2.23aA	17.45± 3.68aA	17.83± 2.52aA	16.05± 0.85aA	14.98± 1.25aA	14.52± 0.29aA	15.38± 1.66aA	15.63± 1.82aA	14.64± 2.50aA
AN/(mg·kg^–1)	91.85± 4.83cA	80.11± 13.07bA	55.18± 13.17bB	126.46± 8.19bA	109.24± 1.84aB	92.64± 7.07aC	153.08± 2.53aA	124.67± 2.15aB	95.17± 24.04aC	122.83± 6.85bA	91.94± 10.73bB	75.47± 15.07abB
AP/(mg·kg^–1)	0.97± 0.30aA	0.85± 0.04aA	0.70± 0.21aA	1.22± 0.14aA	0.86± 0.35aA	0.78± 0.27aA	1.53± 0.38aA	1.19± 0.33aAB	0.66± 0.06aB	1.02± 0.20aA	0.77± 0.29aA	0.80± 0.39aA
AK /(mg·kg^–1)	47.88± 6.23bA	38.44± 1.51aB	33.29± 2.62aB	52.62± 2.99abA	39.87± 8.30aA	38.63± 9.24aA	67.99± 5.62aA	45.90± 4.92aB	40.24± 3.52aB	59.91± 12.52abA	42.96± 9.78aAB	35.53± 10.40aB
pH	4.89± 0.09bA	4.94± 0.13bA	5.03± 0.09aA	4.96± 0.08abA	4.95± 0.04bA	5.03± 0.01aA	5.15± 0.12aA	5.14± 0.05aA	5.08± 0.12aA	5.05± 0.04abA	4.99± 0.06abA	4.99± 0.03aA
AFe/(mg·kg^–1)	20.34± 3.9aA	16.13± 5.57aA	7.66± 2.41bB	24.49± 3.70aA	20.36± 3.48aA	19.75± 4.69aA	21.82± 1.76aB	17.7± 1.63aB	16.6± 1.06abA	20.09± 4.44aA	13.53± 3.58aAB	10.28± 3.89bcB
SOC/(g·kg^–1)	9.5± 0.84bA	7.07± 1.33bB	4.36± 0.97cC	15.19± 0.93aA	11.58± 1.10aB	10.29± 1.59aB	16.4± 2.26aA	11.98± 0.09abB	9.18± 0.65bB	14.53± 2.27aA	10.27± 3.13abAB	7.55± 1.30bB
C∶N	10.05± 0.12bA	7.09± 1.45bB	6.08± 1.25bB	13.32± 0.59abA	11.15± 1.15aAB	11.33± 1.13aB	13.96± 2.52aA	13.1± 0.91aA	12.2± 0.60aA	11.85± 1.09abA	10.57± 2.74abA	9.60± 2.02aA
N∶P	3.73± 0.83aA	4.38± 0.93aA	3.36± 0.78aA	4.08± 0.67aA	3.46± 0.61abA	2.96± 0.59aA	2.68± 0.24aA	2.34± 0.16bA	2.31± 0.26aA	3.52± 0.96aA	3.15± 1.09abA	2.59± 0.60aA
C∶P	37.41± 7.93aA	31.96± 12.14aA	20.51± 6.26aA	54.16± 7.44aA	38.58± 7.91aB	33.52± 7.60aB	37.45± 8.11aA	25.28± 0.88aB	24.75± 3.83aB	42.45± 15.73aA	35.29± 21.46aA	25.52± 11.19aA

表3

表4

不同林下补植模式及土层的土壤酶活性与土壤微生物代谢①"

指标 Index	M0			M1			M2			M3
指标 Index	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm	0~20 cm	20~40 cm	40~60 cm
SUC	3.11± 1.18bA	1.25± 0.94cB	0.58± 0.33bC	3.31± 0.21aA	2.40± 0.97aB	1.61± 0.79aC	2.59± 1.08cA	1.25± 0.83cB	0.97± 0.92aB	2.17± 0.83dA	1.53± 0.81bB	1.19± 0.61abC
GLU	0.74± 0.12cA	0.37± 0.03cB	0.21± 0.05cB	1.02± 0.12aA	0.84± 0.24aB	0.78± 0.26aB	0.95± 0.09abA	0.56± 0.04bB	0.46± 0.15bC	0.88± 0.24bcA	0.64± 0.14bB	0.54± 0.08bB
CEL	0.15± 0.15bB	0.32± 0.33aA	0.26± 0.17aAB	0.33± 0.07aA	0.15± 0.07bB	0.13± 0.06bB	0.28± 0.10aA	0.13± 0.07bB	0.07± 0.03bB	0.28± 0.16aA	0.17± 0.09bB	0.11± 0.04bB
URE	0.42± 0.14aA	0.32± 0.04bA	0.13± 0.02bB	0.49± 0.04aA	0.45± 0.05aA	0.40± 0.11aA	0.47± 0.05aA	0.34± 0.06bB	0.34± 0.10aB	0.54± 0.00aA	0.45± 0.02aAB	0.36± 0.04aB
ACP	1.85± 0.24aA	1.84± 0.21aA	1.22± 0.22cA	1.56± 0.24cA	1.68± 0.22bcAB	1.67± 0.19aB	1.66± 0.16bcA	1.60± 0.26cA	1.49± 0.11bB	1.68± 0.20bA	1.73± 0.11abAB	1.60± 0.10aB
CAT	2.58± 0.41aA	1.87± 0.20bB	1.53± 0.47cB	2.18± 0.10bA	1.96± 0.15bbA	1.96± 0.33bA	2.50± 0.38aA	2.21± 0.68aB	2.11± 0.63aB	2.52± 0.45aA	2.16± 0.56aB	1.80± 0.70bC
RAC	0.68± 0.19aA	0.37± 0.34aA	–0.17± 0.61aA	0.78± 0.02bA	0.69± 0.12aA	0.54± 0.20aA	0.69± 0.17aA	0.43± 0.23aA	0.12± 0.47aA	0.68± 0.12aA	0.51± 0.23aA	0.42± 0.17aA
RAN	0.55± 0.35bA	–0.83± 0.22aA	–2.65± 0.92bB	–0.37± 0.05aA	–0.48± 0.11aA	–0.66± 0.29aA	–0.45± 0.13aA	–0.81± 0.20aA	–1.04± 0.47aA	–0.37± 0.13aA	–0.55± 0.11aA	–0.93± 0.22aB
RAP	0.36± 0.12aA	0.44± 0.14aA	0.20± 0.21aA	0.23± 0.08aA	0.31± 0.10aA	0.35± 0.10aA	0.30± 0.09aA	0.35± 0.14aA	0.36± 0.12aA	0.30± 0.06aA	0.37± 0.09aA	0.36± 0.02aA
E_C∶E_N	–1.65± 1.03aB	–0.53± 0.50aAB	0.01± 0.26aA	–2.18± 0.22aA	–1.53± 0.67acA	–1.06± 0.89aA	–1.96± 0.97aA	–0.60± 0.46aA	–0.35± 0.82aA	–2.03± 0.94aA	–1.01± 0.30aAB	–0.50± 0.35aB
E_C∶E_P	2.26± 1.55aA	1.07± 1.16aA	1.09± 1.26aA	3.77± 1.19aA	2.52± 1.3aA	1.74± 1.10aA	2.55± 1.30aA	1.48± 1.13aA	0.70± 1.85aA	2.31± 0.72aA	1.51± 0.93aA	1.18± 0.52aA
E_N∶E_P	–1.54± 0.65aA	–1.92± 0.39abA	3.75± 3.97aA	–1.77± 0.68aA	–1.60± 0.30aA	–1.92± 0.76aA	–1.55± 0.41aA	–2.41± 0.40bAB	–2.83± 0.85aB	–1.24± 0.35aA	–1.47± 0.06aA	–2.59± 0.55aB
RLC	3.83± 0.78aA	1.20± 1.26aA	2.66± 1.38aA	4.41± 0.89aA	2.96± 1.47aB	2.05± 1.39aB	3.08± 1.59aA	1.60± 1.23aB	1.30± 1.58aB	3.10± 1.07aA	1.82± 1.11aB	1.29± 0.61aB
N-P limitation	127.35± 10.34aA	118.05± 5.02aA	135.35± 13.48aA	121.52± 11.36aA	122.47± 5.23aA	119.24± 8.29aA	113.70± 6.54bA	112.89± 3.50bAB	107.55± 9.64aB	129.97± 8.98aA	124.16± 1.02aA	111.66± 4.62aB

表4

表5

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

参考文献 0

	艾　灵, 吴福忠, 樊雪波, 等. 米槠和杉木人工林土壤酶活性和酶化学计量特征对凋落物输入的短期响应. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35 (3): 631- 638. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202403.014
	Ai L, Wu F Z, Fan X B, et al. Short-term responses of soil enzyme activities and stoichiometry to litter input in Castanopsis carlesii and Cunninghamia lanceolata plantations. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2024, 35 (3): 631- 638. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202403.014
	鲍士旦. 2000. 土壤农化分析. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社.
	Bao S D. 2000. Soil and agricultural chemistry analysis. 3rd ed. Beijing: China Agriculture Press. ［in Chinese］
	陈利云, 王弋博, 李三相, 等. 甘肃省麦积山景区 3 种典型裸子植物土壤微生物群落结构分析. 微生物学通报, 2016, 43 (9): 1939- 1944. doi: 10.13344/j.microbiol.china.150797
	Chen L Y, Wang Y B, Li S X, et al. Microbial community structure of three typical gymnosperms soil in scenic area of Maijishan, Gansu Province.. Microbiology China, 2016, 43 (9): 1939- 1944. doi: 10.13344/j.microbiol.china.150797
	陈　蓉, 王韦韦, 曹丽荣, 等. 马尾松和杉木人工林细根碳氮磷化学计量特征随土层深度的变化. 生态学报, 2023, 43 (9): 3709- 3718. doi: 10.5846/stxb202203250740
	Chen R, Wang W W, Cao L R, et al. Variation of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometric characteristics of fine roots in Masson pine and Chinese fir plantations with soil depth. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2023, 43 (9): 3709- 3718. doi: 10.5846/stxb202203250740
	杜　菁, 郑亚威, 杨孜奕, 等. 近自然改造模式下闽楠根际土壤微生物群落对杉木间伐保留密度的响应. 应用与环境生物学报, 2025, 31 (3): 441- 451. doi: 10.19675/j.cnki.1006-687x.2024.02005
	Du J, Zheng Y W, Yang Z Y, et al. Response of soil rhizosphere microbes in Phoebe bournei to the Cunninghamia lanceolata thinning retention density under close-to-natural transformation.. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology, 2025, 31 (3): 441- 451. doi: 10.19675/j.cnki.1006-687x.2024.02005
	关松荫. 土壤酶活性影响因子的研究: I. 有机肥料对土壤中酶活性及氮磷转化的影响. 土壤学报, 1989, 26 (1): 72- 78.
	Guan S Y. Study on influencing factors of soil enzyme activity: I. Effects of organic fertilizer on soil enzyme activity and nitrogen and phosphorus conversion. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 1989, 26 (1): 72- 78.
	厚凌宇, 徐道礼, 徐秀贤, 等. 盐胁迫对不同种类红豆杉生长的影响及其应对方案. 林业科技通讯, 2024 (9): 83- 88. doi: 10.13456/j.cnki.lykt.2024.05.27.0002
	Hou L Y, Xu D L, Xu X X, et al. Effects of salt stress on growth of different Taxus species and coping schemes. Forest Science and Technology, 2024 (9): 83- 88. doi: 10.13456/j.cnki.lykt.2024.05.27.0002
	焦泽南. 2025,. 抚育间伐对杉木人工林林分生长与土壤肥力的影响.. 长沙: 中南林业科技大学.
	Jiao Z N. 2025,. Effects of tending thinning on stand growth and soil fertility of Chinese fir plantations.. Changsha: Central South University of Forestry and Technology. ［in Chinese］
	姜　俊, 刘宪钊, 贾宏炎, 等. 杉木人工林近自然化改造对林下植被多样性和土壤理化性质的影响. 北京林业大学学报, 2019, 41 (5): 170- 177. doi: 10.13332/j.1000-1522.20190022
	Jiang J, Liu X Z, Jia H Y et al. Effects of stand density on understory species diversity and soil physicochemical properties after close–to–nature transformation management of Chinese fir plantation. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2019, 41 (5): 170- 177. doi: 10.13332/j.1000-1522.20190022
	梅俊卿. 2025,. 间伐对杉木根际土壤微生物和代谢物的影响.. 长沙: 中南林业科技大学.
	Mei J Q. 2025,. The impact of thinning on soil microorganisms and metabolites in the rhizosphere of Chinese fir plantations. .Changsha: Central South University of Forestry and Technology.［in Chinese］
	屈彦成, 江怡航, 陈涵玥, 等. 杉木人工林林分叶面积动态变化规律. 生态学报, 2024, 44 (13): 5609- 5620. doi: 10.20103/j.stxb.202304280901
	Qu Y C, Jiang Y H, Chen H Y, et al. Dynamic change of stand leaf area for Chinese fir plantation. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2024, 44 (13): 5609- 5620. doi: 10.20103/j.stxb.202304280901
	盛炜彤. 关于我国人工林长期生产力的保持. 林业科学研究, 2018, 31 (1): 1- 14. doi: 10.13275/j.cnki.lykxyj.2018.01.001
	Sheng W T. On the maintenance of long-term productivity of plantation in China. Forest Research, 2018, 31 (1): 1- 14. doi: 10.13275/j.cnki.lykxyj.2018.01.001
	苏志才. 树种间相互关系分析与混交造林树种选择. 林业科学, 1990, 368- 373.
	Su Z C. Analysis on the correlation and selection of tree species for mixed forest. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 1990, 368- 373.
	王旦媚. 2022,. 金洞林场闽楠人工林近自然改造最适密度研究.. 长沙: 中南林业科技大学.
	Wang D M. 2022,. Study on the optimal density of close-to-nature transformation of Phoebe bournei plantations in Jindong forest farm. Changsha: Central South University of Forestry and Technology. ［in Chinese］
	魏书蒙, 陈详腾, 赵光宇, 等. 杉木人工林近自然改造对土壤化学性质及酶活性的影响. 生态学报, 2024, 44 (10): 4277- 4287. doi: 10.20103/j.stxb.202309111951
	Wei S M, Chen X T, Zhao G Y, et al. Effects of close-to-nature transformation of Chinese fir plantation on soil chemical properties and enzyme activities. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2024, 44 (10): 4277- 4287. doi: 10.20103/j.stxb.202309111951
	谢阳生, 孟京辉, 曾　冀, 等. 马尾松人工纯林近自然化改造效果分析. 林业科学研究, 2023, 36 (2): 31- 38. doi: 10.12403/j.1001-1498.20220459
	Xie Y S, Meng J H, Zeng J, et al. Analysis on the effect of close-to-nature transformation of Pinus massoniana pure forest plantation. Forest Research, 2023, 36 (2): 31- 38. doi: 10.12403/j.1001-1498.20220459
	Andrews S S, Karlen D L, Cambardella C A. The soil management assessment framework. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2004, 68, 1945- 1962. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2004.1945
	Blattert C, Mutterer S, Thrippleton T, et al. Managing European Alpine forests with close-to-nature forestry to improve climate change mitigation and multifunctionality. Ecological Indicators, 2024, 165, 112154. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112154
	Bogati K, Walczak M. The impact of drought stress on soil microbial community, enzyme activities and plants. Agronomy, 2022, 12 (1): 189. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12010189
	Brown H C A, Appiah M, Berninger F A. Old timber plantations and secondary forests attain levels of plant diversity and structure similar to primary forests in the West African humid tropics. Forest Ecology and Management, 2022, 518, 120271. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120271
	Bu W S, Gu H J, Zhang C C, et al. Mixed broadleaved tree species increases soil phosphorus availability but decreases the coniferous tree nutrient concentration in subtropical China. Forests, 2020, 11 (4): 461. doi: 10.3390/f11040461
	Caporaso J G, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nature Methods, 2010, 7 (5): 335- 336. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.f.303
	Chen S F, Zhou Y Q, Chen Y R, et al. Fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessorOpen access. Bioinformatics, 2018, 34 (17): i884- i890. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty560
	Chen X T, Zhao G Y, Li Y L, et al. Close-to-nature management shifts soil phosphorus availability and P-cycling genes in Chinese fir systems. Plant and Soil, 2024, 504 (1): 333- 346. doi: 10.1007/s11104-024-06629-3
	Dengiz O. Soil quality index for paddy fields based on standard scoring functions and weight allocation method. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 2020, 66 (3): 301- 315. doi: 10.1080/03650340.2019.1610880
	Ding K, Zhang Y T, Wang L, et al. Forest conversion from pure to mixed Cunninghamia lanceolata plantations enhances soil multifunctionality, stochastic processes, and stability of bacterial networks in subtropical southern China. Plant and Soil, 2023, 488 (1): 411- 429. doi: 10.1007/s11104-023-05983-y
	Ding K, Zhang Y T, Yrjälä K, et al. The introduction of Phoebe bournei into Cunninghamia lanceolata monoculture plantations increased microbial network complexity and shifted keystone taxa. Forest Ecology and Management, 2022, 509, 120072. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120072
	Dong W Y, Zhang X Y, Liu X Y, et al. Responses of soil microbial communities and enzyme activities to nitrogen and phosphorus additions in Chinese fir plantations of subtropical China. Biogeosciences, 2015, 12 (18): 5537- 5546. doi: 10.5194/bg-12-5537-2015
	Edgar R C. UPARSE: highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nature Methods, 2013, 10 (10): 996- 998. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2604
	Frossard E, Condron L M, Oberson A, et al. Processes governing phosphorus availability in temperate soils. Journal of Environmental Quality, 2000, 29 (1): 15- 23. doi: 10.2134/jeq2000.00472425002900010003x
	Gao Y, He N P, Yu G R, et al. Long-term effects of different land use types on C, N, and P stoichiometry and storage in subtropical ecosystems: a case study in China. Ecological Engineering, 2014, 67, 171- 181. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.03.013
	Guo J H, Feng H L, McNie P, et al. Species mixing improves soil properties and enzymatic activities in Chinese fir plantations: a meta-analysis. Catena, 2023, 220, 106723. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2022.106723
	Hu W T, Chen J R, Liu M Y, et al. Mixing with Schima superba enhanced soil fertility and simplified soil microbial community of Eucalyptus urophylla forests. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2024, 24 (3): 5972- 5987. doi: 10.1007/s42729-024-01954-z
	Lei J, Wu H B, Li X Y, et al. Response of rhizosphere bacterial communities to near-natural forest management and tree species within Chinese fir plantations. Microbiology Spectrum, 2023, 11, e02328- 22. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02328-22
	Li Q, Xu M, Liu G, et al. Cumulative effects of a 17‐year chemical fertilization on the soil quality of cropping system in the Loess Hilly Region, China. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 2013, 176 (2): 249- 259. doi: 10.1002/jpln.201100395
	Li W Y, Sun H M, Cao M M, et al. Diversity and structure of soil microbial communities in Chinese fir plantations and Cunninghamia lanceolata–Phoebe bournei mixed forests at different successional stages. Forests, 2023, 14 (10): 1977. doi: 10.3390/f14101977
	Li X, Zhang Y, Song S M, et al. Bacterial diversity patterns differ in different patch types of mixed forests in the upstream area of the Yangtze River Basin. Applied Soil Ecology, 2021, 161, 103868. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2020.103868
	Li Y Q, Ma J W, Li Y J, et al. Microbial community and enzyme activity respond differently to seasonal and edaphic factors in forest and grassland ecosystems. Applied Soil Ecology, 2024, 194, 105167. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2023.105167
	Lladó S, López-Mondéjar R, Baldrian P. Forest soil bacteria: diversity, involvement in ecosystem processes, and response to global change. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 2017, 81 (2): e00063- 16. doi: 10.1128/mmbr.00063-16
	Lu D, Zhu J, Wu D, et al. Detecting dynamics and variations of crown asymmetry induced by natural gaps in a temperate secondary forest using terrestrial laser scanning. Forest Ecology and Management, 2020, 473, 118289. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118289
	Ma S H, Chen G P, Tang W G, et al. Inconsistent responses of soil microbial community structure and enzyme activity to nitrogen and phosphorus additions in two tropical forests. Plant and Soil, 2021, 460 (1): 453- 468. doi: 10.1007/s11104-020-04805-9
	Magoč T, Salzberg S L. FLASH: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assembliesFree. Bioinformatics, 2011, 27 (21): 2957- 2963. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr507
	Ming A G, Yang Y J, Liu S R, et al. A decade of close-to-nature transformation alters species composition and increases plant community diversity in two coniferous plantations. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2020, 11, 1141. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.01141
	Moorhead D L, Sinsabaugh R L, Hill B H, et al. Vector analysis of ecoenzyme activities reveal constraints on coupled C, N and P dynamics. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2016, 93, 1- 7. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.10.019
	Pan C, Sun C C, Qu X J, et al. Microbial community interactions determine the mineralization of soil organic phosphorus in subtropical forest ecosystems. Microbiology Spectrum, 2024, 12 (3): e01355- 23. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.01355-23
	Pribyl D W. A critical review of the conventional SOC to SOM conversion factor. Geoderma, 2010, 156 (3/4): 75- 83. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.02.003
	Segata N, Izard J, Waldron L, et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biology, 2011, 12 (6): R60. doi: 10.1186/gb-2011-12-6-r60
	Shang Q Y, Ling N, Feng X M, et al. Soil fertility and its significance to crop productivity and sustainability in typical agroecosystem: a summary of long-term fertilizer experiments in China. Plant and Soil, 2014, 381 (1): 13- 23. doi: 10.1007/s11104-014-2089-6
	Shen F F, Wu J P, Fan H B, et al. Soil N/P and C/P ratio regulate the responses of soil microbial community composition and enzyme activities in a long-term nitrogen loaded Chinese fir forest. Plant and Soil, 2019, 436 (1): 91- 107. doi: 10.1007/s11104-018-03912-y
	Sinsabaugh R L, Hill B H, Follstad Shah J J. Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of microbial organic nutrient acquisition in soil and sediment. Nature, 2009, 462 (7274): 795- 798. doi: 10.1038/nature08632
	Spiecker H. Silvicultural management in maintaining biodiversity and resistance of forests in Europe: temperate zone. Journal of Environmental Management, 2003, 67 (1): 55- 65. doi: 10.1016/S0301-4797(02)00188-3
	Wang Q K, Wang S L. Soil microbial properties and nutrients in pure and mixed Chinese fir plantations. Journal of Forestry Research, 2008, 19 (2): 131- 135. doi: 10.1007/s11676-008-0022-7
	Wang Q, Garrity G M, Tiedje J M, et al. Naïve Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2007, 73 (16): 5261- 5267. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00062-07
	Wu H L, Xiang W H, Chen L, et al. Soil phosphorus bioavailability and recycling increased with stand age in Chinese fir plantations. Ecosystems, 2020, 23 (5): 973- 988. doi: 10.1007/s10021-019-00450-1
	Xiao W, Chen X, Jing X, et al. A meta-analysis of soil extracellular enzyme activities in response to global change. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018, 123, 21- 32. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.05.001
	Xu C Y, Du C, Jian J S, et al. The interplay of labile organic carbon, enzyme activities and microbial communities of two forest soils across seasons. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11, 5002. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-84217-6
	Yang Z J, Chen S D, Liu X, et al. Loss of soil organic carbon following natural forest conversion to Chinese fir plantation. Forest Ecology and Management, 2019, 449, 117476. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117476
	Yemefack M, Jetten V G, Rossiter D G. Developing a minimum data set for characterizing soil dynamics in shifting cultivation systems. Soil and Tillage Research, 2006, 86 (1): 84- 98. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2005.02.017

项目 Items	M1			M2			M3			M0
样地编号 Plot No.	M1-1	M1-2	M1-3	M2-1	M2-2	M2-3	M3-1	M3-2	M3-3	M0-1	M0-2	M0-3
树种比例 Tree species composition ratio	3∶7∶ 0∶0	3∶7∶ 0∶0	3∶7∶ 0∶0	3∶5∶ 2∶0	3∶6∶ 1∶0	3∶6∶ 1∶0	3∶4∶ 1∶2	3∶2∶ 4∶1	3∶3∶ 3∶1	10∶0∶ 0∶0	10∶0∶ 0∶0	10∶0∶ 0∶0
坡位 Slope position	中坡Mid-slope			中坡Mid-slope			中坡Mid-slope			中坡Mid-slope
坡向 Slope aspect	西南Southwest			西南Southwest			西南Southwest			西南Southwest
海拔 Elevation/m	216.11			160.68			176.61			163.94
杉木密度 Density of C. lanceolata/ (trees·hm^–2)	375			350			367			1675
杉木平均胸径 Mean DBH of C. lanceolata/cm	23.16			25.20			22.07			18.46
杉木平均高 Mean tree height of C. lanceolata/m	21.42			24.83			21.12			17.01
闽楠平均胸径 Mean DBH of P. bournei/cm	4.36			5.82			5.25
闽楠平均高 Mean tree height of P. bournei/m	5.58			6.64			6.37
红豆杉平均胸径 Mean DBH of T. wallichiana var. chinensis/cm				5.99			5.88
红豆杉平均高 Mean tree height of T. wallichiana var. chinensis/m				5.08			4.82
木荷平均胸径 Mean DBH of S. superba/cm							4.49
木荷平均高 Mean tree height of S. superba/m							5.86

指标Index	缩写 Abbreviation	测定方法 Determination methods
全氮 Total nitrogen	TN	半微量凯氏定氮法Semi-micro Kjeldahl method
全磷 Total phosphorus	TP	消煮?钒钼酸铵比色法Digestion-ammonium vanadomolybdate colorimetry
全钾 Total potassium	TK	氢氧化钠熔解?火焰分光光度法Sodium hydroxide fusion-flame spectrophotometry
碱解氮 Available nitrogen	AN	碱解蒸馏法Alkali hydrolysis-distillation method
有效磷 Available phosphorus	AP	碳酸氢钠浸提?钼锑抗比色法Sodium bicarbonate extraction-molybdenum antimony anti colorimetry
速效钾 Available potassium	AK	乙酸铵浸提?火焰分光光度法Ammonium acetate extraction-flame spectrophotometry
pH值 pH value	pH	水浸提电位法（水土比2.5∶1）Water extraction potentiometry （water-soil ratio 2.5∶1）
有机质 Organic matter	SOM	重铬酸钾氧化?外加热法Potassium dichromate oxidation-external heating method
有效铁 Available iron	AFe	DTPA浸提?原子吸收分光光度法DTPA extraction-atomic absorption spectrophotometry
土壤蔗糖酶 Soil sucrase	SUC	3,5-二硝基水杨酸比色法3,5-dinitrosalicylic acid colorimetry
葡萄糖苷酶 β-Glucosidase	GLU	消煮?钒钼酸铵比色法Digestion-ammonium vanadomolybdate colorimetry
纤维素酶 Cellulase	CEL	3,5-二硝基水杨酸比色法3,5-dinitrosalicylic acid colorimetry
酸性磷酸酶 Acid phosphatase	ACP	磷酸苯二钠比色法Disodium phenyl phosphate colorimetry
脲酶 Urease	URE	苯酚?次氯酸钠比色法Phenol-sodium hypochlorite colorimetry
过氧化氢酶 Catalase	CAT	高锰酸钾滴定法Potassium permanganate titration

林下补植模式 Understory enrichment planting models	土层深度 Soil layers/cm	Shannon	Simpson	Chao	Ace	Good’s_coverage
M0	0~20	8.47±0.11bA	0.99±0.00aA	2 732.87±129.22aA	2 977.44±146.10aA	0.98±0.00aA
	20~40	8.29±0.09bAB	0.99±0.00aA	2 582.40±56.97aA	2 799.72±90.72aA	0.98±0.00aA
	40~60	8.15±0.16bB	0.99±0.00aA	2 554.00±145.01aA	2 768.72±145.01aB	0.99±0.00aA
M1	0~20	8.58±0.13abA	0.99±0.00aA	2 598.92±149.10abA	2 681.04±149.10bA	0.99±0.00aA
	20~40	8.47±0.25bB	0.99±0.00aA	2 446.58±117.69abAB	2 518.04±118.00bAB	0.99±0.00aA
	40~60	8.27±0.20bB	0.99±0.00aA	2 243.27±202.61bB	2 308.59±212.31bB	0.99±0.00aA
M2	0~20	8.76±0.23aA	0.99±0.00aA	2 672.73±199.43abA	2 776.64±206.03bA	0.98±0.00aA
	20~40	8.61±0.12aA	0.99±0.00aA	2 552.18±118.48abA	2 645.41±124.25abA	0.98±0.00aA
	40~60	8.64±0.16aA	0.99±0.00aA	2 578.67±111.65aA	2 685.35±114.25aA	0.98±0.00aA
M3	0~20	8.49±0.14bA	0.99±0.00aA	2 607.91±198.17bA	2 712.45±198.40bA	0.98±0.00aA
	20~40	8.33±0.17bA	0.99±0.00aA	2 581.56±188.81bA	2 688.11±193.05bA	0.98±0.00aA
	40~60	8.51±0.15bA	0.99±0.00bA	2 525.03±133.22abA	2 623.19±138.30aA	0.98±0.00aA

[1]	郭江涛,彭晶晶,马鑫,刘帆,夏永秀. 北方沙地杨树人工林对常规与滴灌施肥的响应[J]. 林业科学, 2025, 61(10): 135-145.
[2]	吕梓晴, 段爱国. 不同产区杉木生物量与碳储量模型[J]. 林业科学, 2024, 60(2): 1-11.
[3]	刘相荣,孙启武,厚凌宇,庞忠义,张琰琳,丁昌俊. 松辽平原杨树人工林土壤微生物群落结构及其功能多样性的林龄差异[J]. 林业科学, 2024, 60(11): 25-36.
[4]	盖旭,张健,吕衡,黄志远,李巧玲,钟哲科,卞方圆,张小平. 雷竹林下养鸡对土壤活性有机碳及碳库管理指数的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2023, 59(12): 78-86.
[5]	杨承栋. 发展有群落结构混交林是维护、恢复和提高森林土壤功能实现人工林可持续经营的关键技术[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(8): 26-40.
[6]	陈嘉琪,赵光宇,李仰龙,董玉红,厚凌宇,焦如珍. 杉木人工林土壤磷素形态及含量的林龄变化[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(5): 10-17.
[7]	王淑真,梁晶晶,包明琢,潘菲,周垂帆. 不同林龄杉木林土壤磷形态与解磷菌变化[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(2): 58-69.
[8]	曹俐,王阳,杨蕴力,郑雨,王伟,刘桂丰,姜静. 转BpGLK裂叶桦生长变异、根际土壤酶活性及微生物群落组成[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(12): 21-31.
[9]	谢云,郭芳芸,陈丽华,曹兵. 大气CO₂浓度升高对宁夏枸杞根区土壤微生物功能多样性及碳源利用特征的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2021, 57(4): 163-172.
[10]	李益,冯秀秀,赵发珠,郭垚鑫,王俊,任成杰. 秦岭太白山不同海拔锐齿栎林土壤微生物群落的变化特征[J]. 林业科学, 2021, 57(12): 22-31.
[11]	任玉连,陆梅,曹乾斌,李聪,冯峻,王志胜. 南滚河自然保护区森林土壤酶活性对海拔升高的响应[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(4): 22-34.
[12]	胡华英, 张虹, 曹升, 殷丹阳, 周垂帆, 何宗明. 杉木人工林土壤施用生物炭对细菌群落结构及多样性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(8): 184-193.
[13]	王超群, 焦如珍, 董玉红, 厚凌宇, 赵京京, 赵世荣. 不同林龄杉木人工林土壤微生物群落代谢功能差异[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(5): 36-45.
[14]	刘辉, 吴小芹, 任嘉红, 陈丹. 荧光假单胞菌与红绒盖牛肝菌共接种对杨树根际土壤酶活性及微生物多样性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(1): 22-30.
[15]	杨安娜, 陆云峰, 张俊红, 吴家森, 徐金良, 童再康. 杉木人工林土壤养分及酸杆菌群落结构变化[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(1): 119-127.

杉木纯林林下补植模式对土壤质量和微生物群落的影响

Effects of Understory Enrichment Planting Modes in Pure Chinese fir Forests on Soil Quality and Microbial Communities

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 0

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者中心

期刊获奖

引证指标

联系方式