有机改良剂配施菌剂对油橄榄土壤肥力及微生物群落的影响

Effects of Organic Amendments Combined with Microbial Agents on Soil Fertility and Microbial Communities in Olive Groves

摘要

为探明多种有机改良剂与菌剂配施对油橄榄土壤肥力及微生物群落的影响，本研究通过盆栽试验，以空白为对照（CK），系统设置了单施有机改良剂、菌剂（J）、生物炭+有机肥+菌剂（BC+OF+J）、生物炭+腐殖酸+菌剂（BC+HA+J）、有机肥+腐殖酸+菌剂（OF+HA+J）、生物炭+腐殖酸+有机肥（BC+HA+OF）以及生物炭+有机肥+菌剂+腐殖酸（BC+OF+J+HA）不同组合处理。与对照（CK）相比，各配施处理下的土壤有机碳（SOC）、碱解氮（AN）、速效磷（AP）和速效钾（AK）含量均显著提高，其中，BC+OF+J处理对SOC和AN的提升效果最为显著，分别较CK提高2.69倍和1.81倍，OF+HA+J处理的AK含量最高（778.50 mg·kg^-1），BC+HA+OF处理对AP含量的提升作用最明显（662.27 mg·kg⁻¹）。除BC+HA+J处理外，其余配施处理均显著增强碱性磷酸酶（ALP）、脲酶（UE）和蔗糖酶（SC）活性，其中BC+OF+J处理对ALP活性提升最显著（14 385.1 U/g），OF+HA+J 处理的UE 活性最高（438.23 U/g），同时，OF+HA+J 处理的SC 活性最高（23.36 U/g）。主坐标分析（PCoA）与相似性分析（ANOSIM）表明，不同处理显著改变了土壤微生物群落结构，其中细菌群落结构变化较真菌更为显著。变形菌门、厚壁菌门、放线菌门、绿弯菌门和酸杆菌门为优势细菌门，子囊菌门为优势真菌类群，其中配施处理显著提高了厚壁菌门和子囊菌门的相对丰度。冗余分析和Mantel检验表明，变形菌门、厚壁菌门、子囊菌门与土壤脲酶、碱性磷酸酶、蔗糖酶活性及土壤养分有效性呈正相关。土壤细菌群落与SOC、AN、AP、AK、ALP、UE、SC 呈极显著正相关（ P<0.01），真菌群落与SOC、AN、AP、AK、ALP、UE 呈极显著正相关（ P<0.01），并与SC呈显著正相关（ P<0.05）。综上，本研究证明有机改良剂与菌剂配施可协同调控油橄榄土壤肥力、酶活性及微生物群落，为其在油橄榄及其他作物上的应用提供理论依据和数据参考。

Abstract

To investigate the effects of combined organic amendments and microbial agents on soil fertility and microbial communities in olive groves, this study conducts pot experiments using an untreated control (CK) and systematically sets up different treatment combinations: single application of organic amendments, single application of microbial agent (J), biochar + organic fertilizer + microbial agent (BC+OF+J), biochar + humic acid + microbial agent (BC+HA+J), organic fertilizer + humic acid + microbial agent (OF+HA+J), biochar + humic acid + organic fertilizer (BC+HA+OF), and biochar + organic fertilizer + microbial agent + humic acid (BC+OF+J+HA). Compared with CK, all combination treatments significantly increase the contents of soil organic carbon (SOC), available nitrogen (AN), available phosphorus (AP), and available potassium (AK). The BC+OF+J treatment is the most effective, increasing SOC and AN by 2.69 and 1.81 times, respectively, compared to CK. The OF+HA+J treatment has the highest AK content (778.50 mg·kg⁻¹), while the BC+HA+OF treatment most effectively enhances AP content (662.27 mg·kg⁻¹). Except for the BC+HA+J treatment, all other combination treatments significantly increase the activities of alkaline phosphatase (ALP), urease (UE), and sucrase (SC). Among them, the BC+OF+J treatment achieves the greatest increase in ALP activity (14 385.1 U/g), whereas the OF+HA+J treatment has the highest activities of both UE (438.23 U/g) and SC (23.36 U/g). Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) and analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) indicate that the treatments significantly alter the soil microbial community structure, with more pronounced shifts observed in bacterial than in fungal communities. The bacterial communities are dominated by the phyla Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, Actinobacteriota, Chloroflexi, and Acidobacteriota, while the fungal community is overwhelmingly dominated by Ascomycota. The combination treatments significantly increase the relative abundances of Firmicutes and Ascomycota. Redundancy analysis (RDA) and Mantel tests reveal that Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, and Ascomycota are positively correlated with soil enzyme activities (UE, ALP, SC) and nutrient availability. Soil bacterial communities show highly significant positive correlations with SOC, AN, AP, AK, ALP, UE, and SC ( P<0.01), while the fungal communities exhibit highly significant positive correlations with SOC, AN, AP, AK, ALP, and UE ( P<0.01), and also significant positive correlations with SC ( P<0.05). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that the combined application of organic amendments and microbial agents synergistically regulates soil fertility, enzyme activities, and microbial community structure in olive groves, providing a theoretical basis and data support for its application in olives and other crops.

关键词

有机改良剂 / 微生物菌剂 / 土壤肥力 / 土壤微生物群落 / 可持续农业

Key words

Organic amendments / microbial agents / soil fertility / soil microbial community / sustainable agriculture

参考文献

[1] 林 浩,吴 涛, 李勇杰. 油橄榄根际细菌群落与叶片及土壤营养状况的关联性[J]. 经济林研究, 2026, 44(01): 33-45.

[2] 秦 楷,张 波, 单体江, 等. 油橄榄内生真菌的分离鉴定及其抑菌活性研究[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2025, 53(11): 277-284.

[3] 郭翠莲,刘 坤, 贾重阳, 等. 2种微生物菌肥对油橄榄生长及根际土壤微生物多样性的影响[J]. 江西农业大学学报, 2024, 46(05): 1138-1150.

[4] 佀国涵, 赵书军,苏 刚, 等. 十堰油橄榄主要种植区土壤养分特征[J]. 林业科技通讯, 2024(12): 71-74.

[5] 魏立本, 戴前莉, 黄小辉, 等. 重庆油橄榄园土壤养分状况调查与分析[J]. 中国南方果树, 2020, 49(01): 51-55.

[6] 刘 鑫,王 天, 宋佳承, 等. 不同磷肥施用量对油橄榄根际土壤微环境及生长发育的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2021(06): 78-87.

[7] 马 婷, 谢正万, 景跃波, 等. 不同施肥处理对油橄榄生长、结果及品质的影响[J]. 经济林研究, 2022, 40(02): 276-281+288.

[8] Bai S H, Omidvar N, Gallart M, et al. Combined effects of biochar and fertilizer applications on yield: A review and meta-analysis[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 808: 152073.

[9] Ren H, Islam M S, Wang H, et al. Effect of humic acid on soil physical and chemical properties, microbial community structure, and metabolites of decline diseased bayberry[J]. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2022, 23(23): 14707.

[10] 刘卿宇. 人工腐殖酸配施微生物菌剂对玉米生长及土壤有机碳的影响研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2024.

[11] Wu J, Sha C, Wang M, et al. Effect of organic fertilizer on soil bacteria in maize fields[J]. Land, 2021, 10(03): 328.

[12] Yu Y, Zhang L, Li Y, et al. Silicon fertilizer and microbial agents changed the bacterial community in the consecutive replant soil of lilies[J]. Agronomy, 2022, 12(07): 1530.

[13] 李 禹,段 斌, 杨代云, 等. 有机肥配施微生物菌剂对土壤理化特性及烤烟产质量的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2025, 53(02): 81-87.

[14] Castellano-Hinojosa A, Meyering B, Nuzzo A, et al. Effect of plant biostimulants on root and plant health and the rhizosphere microbiome of citrus trees in huanglongbing-endemic conditions[J]. Trees, 2021, 35: 1525-1539.

[15] Hu W, Zhang Y, Rong X, et al. Biochar and organic fertilizer applications enhance soil functional microbial abundance and agroecosystem multifunctionality[J]. Biochar, 2024, 6(01): 3.

[16] Xing J, Li X, Li Z, et al. Remediation of soda-saline-alkali soil through soil amendments: Microbially mediated carbon and nitrogen cycles and remediation mechanisms[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 924: 171641.

[17] Meena M, Yadav G, Sonigra P, et al. Multifarious responses of forest soil microbial community toward climate change[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2023, 86(01): 49-74.

[18] Aasfar A, Bargaz A, Yaakoubi K, et al. Nitrogen fixing Azotobacter species as potential soil biological enhancers for crop nutrition and yield stability[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2021, 12: 628379.

[19] Basile-Doelsch I, Balesdent J, Pellerin S. Reviews and syntheses: The mechanisms underlying carbon storage in soil[J]. Biogeosciences, 2020, 17(21): 5223-5242.

[20] 黄治宏, 赵浩宾, 王龙飞, 等. 生物炭对土壤酶活性、生态功能研究进展及作用机制分析[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2025(01): 250-259.

[21] 杨久扬. AM真菌和改良剂对小果白刺生长和沙化土壤改良效应的影响[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古大学, 2019.

[22] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(第三版)[M]∥ 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.

[23] 张晓花, 宋娅丽, 王克勤, 等. 不同改良剂施用对滇中植烟土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2024, 52(06): 242-249.

[24] 李京豪, 黎建强,高 朗, 等. 林下三七种植对土壤微生物群落的影响[J]. 微生物学通报, 2024, 51(06): 1995-2012.

[25] Mago T, Salzberg S L. FLASH: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies[J]. Bioinformatics, 2011, 27(21): 2957-2963.

[26] Edgar R C. UPARSE: highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads[J]. Nature Methods, 2013, 10(10): 996-998.

[27] Stackebrandt E, Goebel B M. Taxonomic note: a place for DNA-DNA reassociation and 16S rRNA sequence analysis in the present species definition in bacteriology[J]. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 1994, 44(04): 846-849.

[28] Schloss P D, Westcott S L, Ryabin T, et al. Introducing mothur: open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2009, 75(23): 7537-7541.

[29] 柴雪茹, 王贺正, 马嵩科, 等. 秸秆还田配施氮肥对豫西旱地麦田土壤速效养分和小麦氮肥利用效率的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2025, 57(04): 98-106.

[30] 冀泳標. 生物炭配施有机肥添加协同混播牧草对陕北沙地土壤改良的影响[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2025.

[31] Zarezadeh S, Zheng Y, Jenkins S N, et al. Sustainable soil management in agriculture under drought stress: Utilising waste-derived organic soil amendments and beneficial impacts on soil bacterial processes[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2025, 206: 105870.

[32] Luo Y, Shen J, Wang X, et al. Recent advances in research on microbial community in the composting process[J]. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 2024, 14(19): 23319-23333.

[33] 李玉露. 不同肥料配施对黄土高原果园土壤理化性质及苹果产量品质的影响[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2024.

[34] 焦 扬,李 颖, 朱剑琴, 等. 生物炭调控土壤细菌群落结构影响磷有效性的作用机制[J]. 微生物学报, 2025, 65(08): 3365-3382.

[35] Jin S, Huang Y, Dong C, et al. Effects of different straw returning amounts and fertilizer conditions on bacteria of rice's different part in rare earth mining area[J]. Scientific Reports, 2023, 13(01): 412.

[36] 周 红. 凋落物输入对喀斯特土壤有机碳及岩溶作用的影响[D]. 贵阳: 贵州大学, 2024.

[37] 李玲慧, 刘怡君, 王怡萌, 等. 长白山退化泥炭沼泽恢复过程中土壤活性有机碳组分和酶活性变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(08): 2361-2369.

[38] 许馨文, 陈梦娅,张 润, 等. 草地不同性状凋落物分解对土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 草学, 2025(01): 35-42.

[39] 柯心怡, 郑海峰, 令狐莎艺, 等. 不同施肥措施臭氧浓度升高对稻田土壤酶活性及微生物群落的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2025, 45(16): 8031-8041.

[40] Zhang X, Zhang Q, Zhan L, et al. Biochar addition stabilized soil carbon sequestration by reducing temperature sensitivity of mineralization and altering the microbial community in a greenhouse vegetable field[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2022, 313: 114972.

[41] 潘晓月, 杨晓旭, 丁新宇, 等. 生物炭对核桃园土壤理化性质及酶活性的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2025(19): 61-70.

[42] 蒲子天,王 红,赵 斌, 等. 不同土壤改良物料对连作黄芩生长及土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2024, 26(07): 189-198.

[43] Song S Q, Jiang M Y, Liu H L, et al. Application of the biogas residue of anaerobic co-digestion of gentamicin mycelial residues and wheat straw as soil amendment: Focus on nutrients supply, soil enzyme activities and antibiotic resistance genes[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2023, 335: 117-125.

[44] 吴京静, 李新程, 孟令鑫, 等. 生物炭配施菌剂对大豆根际土壤养分及微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 吉林农业大学学报, 2025, 47(05): 930-940.

[45] 吉 波, 程红光, 韩世明, 等. 生物炭与丛枝菌根真菌对土壤中磷供应影响的研究进展[J]. 生态环境学报, 2025, 34(11): 1812-1826.

[46] 杨 柳, 孙富生, 王韬略, 等. 长期施肥下红壤中类芬顿反应及其对碳储存的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2019, 56(05): 1128-1139.

[47] Pang Z, Dong F, Liu Q, et al. Soil metagenomics reveals effects of continuous sugarcane cropping on the structure and functional pathway of rhizospheric microbial community[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2021, 12: 627569.

[48] Ahmad S, Zhai X, Wang M, et al. Correction: Biochar amendments improve soil functionalities, microbial community and reduce Pokkah boeng disease of sugarcane[J]. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture, 2024, 11(01): 28.

[49] 孙世君,马 博, 王逸轩, 等. 腐殖酸对盐胁迫下温室黄瓜根际土壤养分及微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2022(05): 83-90.

[50] Zhuang W, Zhao C, Zhang Y, et al. Synergistic application of biochar with organic fertilizer positively impacts the soil micro-food web in sandy loam soils[J]. European Journal of Soil Biology, 2024, 123: 103680.

[51] Wu Q, Chen Y, Dou X, et al. Microbial fertilizers improve soil quality and crop yield in coastal saline soils by regulating soil bacterial and fungal community structure[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 949: 175127.

[52] 郑兰香, 常 洁,王 芳. 施用生物炭对葡萄园土壤理化性质和细菌群落结构的影响[J]. 微生物学杂志, 2024, 44(03): 24-31.

[53] Tong H, Hu M, Li F B, et al. Biochar enhances the microbial and chemical transformation of pentachlorophenol in paddy soil[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2014, 70: 142-150.

[54] 王 立,刘 颖, 张逸东, 等. 有机肥配施赤霉素和混合芽孢杆菌对柑橘黄龙病的作用[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024(08): 221-232.

[55] 田夏琼, 关统伟, 王淑英, 等. 短期内有机肥增施对高原土壤养分和细菌群落的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2022, 35(04): 924-931.

[56] 张馨方, 梁凯粼,孙 丰, 等. 腐熟牛粪与不同有机物料配施对曲靖烟区黄壤微生物群落组成的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2025(10): 44-54.

[57] 张少卓,王 征, 刘志昌, 等. 不同煤泥添加量对紫花苜蓿根际土壤酶活性与微生物的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2024, 38(10): 144-153.

[58] Li H, Yang S, Semenov M V, et al. Temperature sensitivity of SOM decomposition is linked with a K-selected microbial community[J]. Global Change Biology, 2021, 27(12): 2763-2779.

[59] Peng L, Yi T, Song X, et al. Mobilization of recalcitrant phosphorous and enhancement of pepper P uptake and yield by a new biocontrol and bioremediation bacterium Burkholderia cepacia CQ18[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2021, 130(6): 1935-1948.

[60] 刘 洁, 李娟娟,马 香, 等. 微塑料对我国土壤微生物群落结构影响的综合分析[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2025, 53(15): 255-261.

[61] Chhetri G, Kim I, Kang M, et al. An isolated arthrobacter sp. Enhances rice (Oryza sativa L.) Plant Growth [J]. Microorganisms, 2022, 10(6): 1187.

[62] Guo Z, Wan S, Hua K, et al. Fertilization regime has a greater effect on soil microbial community structure than crop rotation and growth stage in an agroecosystem[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2020, 149: 103510.

[63] Wu C, Yan B, Wei F, et al. Long-term application of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers changes the process of community construction by affecting keystone species of crop rhizosphere microorganisms[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2023, 897: 165239.

[64] 杨 凯, 杜延全, 张西兴, 等. 不同有机物料与化肥配施对土壤真菌群落结构和生态功能的影响[J]. 土壤, 2024, 56(01): 222-228.

[65] 黎宏轩,严 君, 张秀丽, 等. 桑/豆间作和施氮量对土壤微生物群落结构及多样性的影响[J/OL]. 吉林农业大学学报, 1-12[2025- 12-18]. https:∥kns.cnki.net.

[66] 张许可, 夏红飞, 陈国立, 等. 白三叶草镰刀菌根腐病病原鉴定及其生物学特性[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(12): 175-187.

[67] 任宏芳,王 璐, 郝兴宇, 等. 缓释肥处理下麦田土壤细菌和真菌群落对气候变化的响应[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(10): 50-63.

[68] 王娟娟, 朱紫娟, 钱晓晴, 等. 减施化肥与不同有机肥配施对稻季土壤细菌群落结构的影响[J]. 土壤, 2021, 53(05): 983-99.

[69] 杨玉皎, 李义林, 包玲凤, 等. 不同施肥处理对干热河谷草莓园土壤细菌群落特征及多样性的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2025(05): 11-20.

基金资助

国家重点研发计划项目(2022YFF1302900)