4.7 Article

Successive mineral nitrogen or phosphorus fertilization alone significantly altered bacterial community rather than bacterial biomass in plantation soil

Journal

APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 104, Issue 16, Pages 7213-7224

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00253-020-10761-2

Keywords

Chinese fir; Plantation; Soil nutrient; Phospholipid fatty acids; Illumina sequencing

Funding

  1. Innovation Fund Designated for Graduate Students of Jiangxi Agricultural University [NDYC2017-B001]
  2. National Natural Science Foundations of China [31760200, 31730014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bacteria play determining roles in forest soil environment and contribute to essential functions in the cycling of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P). Understanding the effects of different fertilizer applications, especially successive fertilization, on soil properties and bacterial community could reveal the impacts of fertilization on forest soil ecology and shed light on the nutrient cycling in forest system. This study aimed to evaluate the impacts of successive mineral N (NH4NO3) and P (NaH2PO4) fertilization at different rates, alone or together, on soil bacterial biomass and communities at 0-5, 5-10, and 10-20 cm. Compared with the control, N fertilization decreased soil pH, but P alone or with N fertilization had negligibly negative impacts on soil pH. Different mineral fertilizer applications, alone or together, showed no significant effects on soil organic matter contents, relative to the control treatment. Bacterial biomass remained stable to different fertilizations but decreased with sampling depths. Sole N or P fertilization, rather than combined fertilizations, significantly changed soil bacterial community structures. Our results demonstrated that mineral N or P fertilization alone significantly affected bacterial community structures rather than biomass in the plantation soils.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available