植物生态学报

• •    

云杉和华西箭竹叶际与根际细菌群落对增温的响应

李昀奕1,郑矜1,严晓艳1,李霜1,罗林2,童晋1,赵春章3   

  1. 1. 成都理工大学
    2. 中国科学院成都生物研究所
    3. 成都理工大学生态环境学院
  • 收稿日期:2023-08-01 修回日期:2024-03-13 发布日期:2024-04-09
  • 通讯作者: 赵春章

Effect of warming on phyllosphere and rhizosphere bacterial communities in Picea asperata and Fargesia nitida

Yi YunLI1,Jing ZHEN1,yan xiaoyan1,Shuang LI1, 2,Jin TONG1,   

  • Received:2023-08-01 Revised:2024-03-13

摘要: 叶片和根系作为植物对环境变化敏感的重要器官, 二者对气候变暖的响应研究已有很多, 但叶际和根际细菌群落对增温的响应仍不清楚。该研究选择青藏高原东缘亚高山针叶林优势树种云杉(Picea asperata)和优势灌木华西箭竹(Fargesia nitida)为研究对象, 比较两种植物叶际和根际土壤细菌群落特征及其对模拟增温的响应。结果表明, 云杉和华西箭竹根际细菌群落Chao指数和Shannon指数都显著高于叶际, 增温降低了云杉叶际和根际细菌多样性, 但提高了华西箭竹叶际和根际细菌多样性。两种植物叶际与根际细菌群落组成和结构均存在显著差异, 其中根瘤菌目(Rhizobiales) (41%–46%)为两种植物叶际优势菌群, Vicinamibacterales为根际优势菌群。增温下云杉叶际菌群伯克氏菌目(Burkholderiales)和棒杆菌目(Corynebacteriales)的相对丰度约增加了2倍, 华西箭竹叶际酸杆菌目(Acidobacteriales)相对丰度有增加趋势, 但增温下两种植物根际细菌群落组成变化较小。两种植物根际细菌群落共现网络复杂性高于叶际, 增温会增加云杉叶际和根际细菌共现网络连接数, 但会减少华西箭竹叶际和根际细菌的连接数。根据FAPROTAX功能预测, 两种植物根际参与碳、氮循环功能的细菌类群相对丰度显著大于叶际, 叶际细菌潜在生态功能对增温更加敏感, 增温增加了两种植物叶际细菌尿素分解功能, 但显著降低了华西箭竹叶际细菌氮呼吸 、硝酸盐还原和硝酸盐呼吸 功能, 以及云杉叶际细菌潜在固氮作用。因此, 两种植物根际和叶际细菌群落结构及其潜在碳、氮循环功能存在显著差异, 叶际细菌群落对增温的响应较根际敏感, 且存在物种差异。

关键词: 叶际, 根际, 增温, 细菌群落

Abstract: Aims Leaf and root are sensitive to environmental changes. There are many studies about the responses of leaf and root to climate warming, but the effects of warming on phyllosphere and rhizospheric soil bacterial communities remains unclear. Methods The dominant species (Picea asperata and Fargesia nitida) of subalpine coniferous forest in the eastern Qingzang Plateau were selected, and the compositional and functional characteristics of the phyllosphere and rhizosphere soil bacterial community between the two plants and their responses to simulated warming were studied. Important findings The results showed that the Chao index and Shannon index of bacterial communities in rhizosphere soil were significantly higher than those in phyllosphere of both plants. The bacterial diversity in P. asperata were decreased by warming, but that in F. nitida were increased under warming conditions. There were significant differences in bacterial community composition and structure between phyllosphere and rhizosphere. Rhizobiales (41%–46%) were the dominant order of phyllosphere bacterial community, and Vicinamibacterales were the dominant bacterial order in rhizosphere soil. The relative abundance of Burkholderiales and Corynebacteriales increased by about 2 times in P. asperata phyllosphere, and Acidobacteriales in F. nitida phyllosphere were also increased under warming conditions. However, the rhizosphere bacterial community composition of the two plants were less affected by warming. The complexity of rhizosphere bacterial co-occurrence network was higher than that of phyllosphere in both plants. The number of links in co-occurrence networks of P. asperata phyllosphere and rhizosphere bacterial community were increased by warming, but this index was decreased in F. nitida phyllosphere and rhizosphere under warming conditions. According to FAPROTAX, the relative abundance of bacterial groups involved in carbon cycling and nitrogen fixation in rhizosphere were significantly higher than those in phyllosphere. The predictive functions of phyllosphere bacteria were more sensitive to warming than those of rhizosphere, and warming increased urealysis function of phyllosphere bacteria community of both plants, but significantly decreased the phyllosphere predictive functions of nitrogen respiration, nitrate reduction and nitrate respiration in F. nitida and the nitrogen fixation of P. asperata phyllosphere bacteria community. Therefore, there were significant differences in structure and function of bacterial community between rhizosphere and phyllosphere, and the phyllosphere bacterial community was more sensitive to warming than those in rhizosphere soil.

Key words: phyllosphere, rhizosphere, warming, bacterial community