Effects of bast straw biochar application on cadmium-contaminated soil bacterial community

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20240947

Abstract

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of application of different bast straw biochar on the bacterial community structure of cadmium-contaminated farmland soil，which is of great significance for the resource utilization of bast straw and the application of bast straw biochar. A soil incubation experiment was conducted to analyze the effects of different bast（flax，jute，ramie and kenaf） straw biochars on bacterial diversity and community structure. The results showed that jute straw biochar significantly reduced the diversity of soil bacterial community，while ramie straw biochar treatment decreased soil bacterial richness to some extent. In contrast，flax and kenaf straw biochar had no significant effects on soil bacterial diversity and richness. The application of all bast straw biochar significantly changed the soil bacterial community structure，and the community structure difference between jute straw biochar and control was the greatest. At the phylum level，jute straw biochar significantly increased the relative abundance of Acidobacteriota. At the genus level，all types of bast straw biochar significantly decreased the relative abundance of Oxobacter and Sphingomonas. In conclusion，application of bast straw biochar can change the composition of soil bacterial community in cadmium-contaminated farmland soil，which may further affect the growth of crops. This study provides a scientific basis for evaluating the application potential of bast straw biochar in cadmium-contaminated farmland.

Key words: bast straw, biochar, cadmium-contaminated soil, bacterial community

CLC Number:

S154.3

ZOU Lina, LIU Tingting, LUO Xiahong, CHEN Changli, LI Shaocui, ZHU Guanlin, AN Xia. Effects of bast straw biochar application on cadmium-contaminated soil bacterial community[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2026, 67(3): 743-749.

Figures/Tables 5

References 26

[1]	REHMAN M， GANG D， LIU Q Q，et al. Ramie，a multipurpose crop：potential applications，constraints and improvement strategies［J］. Industrial Crops and Products，2019，137：300-307.
[2]	REN Y H， WEI Q W， CHEN H L，et al. Characterization of underutilized root starches from eight varieties of ramie（Boehmeria nivea）grown in China［J］. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules，2021，183：1475-1485.
[3]	杨传文，邢帆，朱建春，等. 中国秸秆资源的时空分布、利用现状与碳减排潜力［J］. 环境科学，2023，44（2）：1149-1162.
	YANG C W， XING F， ZHU J C，et al. Temporal and spatial distribution，utilization status，and carbon emission reduction potential of straw resources in China［J］. Environmental Science，2023，44（2）：1149-1162.
[4]	CHEN W F， MENG J， HAN X R，et al. Past，present，and future of biochar［J］. Biochar，2019，1（1）：75-87.
[5]	DAHLAWI S， NAEEM A， RENGEL Z，et al. Biochar application for the remediation of salt-affected soils：challenges and opportunities［J］. Science of the Total Environment，2018，625：320-335.
[6]	罗莹莹，吴钦鸿，华碧成，等. 生物炭材料对重金属的固定机制综述［J］. 广州化工，2024，52（20）：5-7.
	LUO Y Y， WU Q H， HUA B C，et al. Review on fixation mechanism of heavy metals by biochar［J］. Guangzhou Chemical Industry，2024，52（20）：5-7.
[7]	周雅心，王晓彤，王广磊，等. 炉渣与生物炭施加对稻田土壤细菌多样性及群落组成的影响［J］. 中国环境科学，2020，40（3）：1213-1223.
	ZHOU Y X， WANG X T， WANG G L，et al. Effect of the slag and biochar application on bacterial diversity and community composition of paddy field［J］. China Environmental Science，2020，40（3）：1213-1223.
[8]	JIANG B N， LU M B， ZHANG Z Y，et al. Quantifying biochar-induced greenhouse gases emission reduction effects in constructed wetlands and its heterogeneity：a multi-level meta-analysis［J］. Science of the Total Environment，2023，855：158688.
[9]	汤家庆，张绪，黄国勇，等. 水分条件对生物炭钝化水稻土铅镉复合污染的影响［J］. 环境科学，2021，42（3）：1185-1190.
	TANG J Q， ZHANG X， HUANG G Y，et al. Effect of water regimes on Pb and Cd immobilization by biochar in contaminated paddy soil［J］. Environmental Science，2021，42（3）：1185-1190.
[10]	陈再明，陈宝梁，周丹丹. 水稻秸秆生物碳的结构特征及其对有机污染物的吸附性能［J］. 环境科学学报，2013，33（1）：9-19.
	CHEN Z M， CHEN B L， ZHOU D D. Composition and sorption properties of rice-straw derived biochars［J］. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae，2013，33（1）：9-19.
[11]	REN H W， FENG Y P， PEI J W，et al. Effects of Lactobacillus plantarum additive and temperature on the ensiling quality and microbial community dynamics of cauliflower leaf silages［J］. Bioresource Technology，2020，307：123238.
[12]	韦庆翠，姜娜英，刘玉婷，等. 不同生物炭对麦田土壤酶活性、细菌群落及理化性质的影响［J］. 内蒙古农业大学学报（自然科学版），2024，45（5）：20-27.
	WEI Q C， JIANG N Y， LIU Y T，et al. Effects of different biochars on soil enzyme activities，bacterial community and physicochmical properties in wheat fields［J］. Journal of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University（Natural Science Edition），2024，45（5）：20-27.
[13]	刘慧，焦岩，李禹韬，等. 生物炭和氮肥联合施用对水稻生产中土壤细菌群落的影响［J］. 中国土壤与肥料，2024（7）：88-100.
	LIU H， JIAO Y， LI Y T，et al. Effects of combined application of biochar and nitrogen fertilizer on soil bacterial community in rice production［J］. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China，2024（7）：88-100.
[14]	常芳娟，张贵云，张丽萍，等. 生物炭对西瓜连作土壤真菌群落结构和功能类群的影响［J］. 环境科学，2024，45（6）：3553-3561.
	CHANG F J， ZHANG G Y， ZHANG L P，et al. Effects of biochar application on the structure and function of fungal community in continuous cropping watermelon soil［J］. Environmental Science，2024，45（6）：3553-3561.
[15]	敖磊，张瑞富. 生物炭对农田土壤微环境的影响及其环境效应研究进展［J］. 现代农业科技，2024（22）：96-99，110.
	AO L， ZHANG R F. Research progress on impact of biochar on soil microenvironment in farmland and its environmental effects［J］. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology，2024（22）：96-99，110.
[16]	STEINER C， TEIXEIRA W G， LEHMANN J，et al. Long term effects of manure，charcoal and mineral fertilization on crop production and fertility on a highly weathered Central Amazonian upland soil［J］. Plant and Soil，2007，291（1）：275-290.
[17]	ZAVALLONI C， ALBERTI G， BIASIOL S，et al. Microbial mineralization of biochar and wheat straw mixture in soil：a short-term study［J］. Applied Soil Ecology，2011，50：45-51.
[18]	BAO Y Y， DOLFING J， GUO Z Y，et al. Important ecophysiological roles of non-dominant Actinobacteria in plant residue decomposition，especially in less fertile soils［J］. Microbiome，2021，9（1）：84.
[19]	SUN B， WANG X Y， WANG F，et al. Assessing the relative effects of geographic location and soil type on microbial communities associated with straw decomposition［J］. Applied and Environmental Microbiology，2013，79（11）：3327-3335.
[20]	KOLTON M， MELLER HAREL Y， PASTERNAK Z，et al. Impact of biochar application to soil on the root-associated bacterial community structure of fully developed greenhouse pepper plants［J］. Applied and Environmental Microbiology，2011，77（14）：4924-4930.
[21]	DOBRZYŃSKI J， WIERZCHOWSKI P S， STĘPIEŃ W，et al. The reaction of cellulolytic and potentially cellulolytic spore-forming bacteria to various types of crop management and farmyard manure fertilization in bulk soil［J］. Agronomy，2021，11（4）：772.
[22]	MENG D L， LI J， LIU T B，et al. Effects of redox potential on soil cadmium solubility：insight into microbial community［J］. Journal of Environmental Sciences，2019，75：224-232.
[23]	XU L X， YI M， YI H L，et al. Manure and mineral fertilization change enzyme activity and bacterial community in millet rhizosphere soils［J］. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology，2017，34（1）：8.
[24]	YANG W H， LI C J， WANG S S，et al. Influence of biochar and biochar-based fertilizer on yield，quality of tea and microbial community in an acid tea orchard soil［J］. Applied Soil Ecology，2021，166：104005.
[25]	BENGELSDORF F R， POEHLEIN A， SCHIEL-BENGELSDORF B，et al. Genome sequence of the acetogenic bacterium Oxobacter pfennigii DSM 3222^T ［J］. Genome Announcements，2015，3（6）：e01408-15.
[26]	TAN X Y， LIAO H K， SHU L Z，et al. Effect of different substrates on soil microbial community structure and the mechanisms of reductive soil disinfestation［J］. Frontiers in Microbiology，2019，10：2851.

处理	序列数	Chao指数	ACE指数	Sobs指数	Shannon指数	Simpson指数	Coverage指数
对照	66 879±4 016	1 921±49 ab	1 941±42 ab	1 701±51 ab	5.833±0.112 a	0.007±0.001 c	0.993±0.001 a
黄麻	63 263±6 323	1 838±67 ab	1 826±77 b	1 587±70 bc	5.628±0.081 b	0.011±0.001 a	0.993±0.001 a
亚麻	73 778±8 153	1 984±74 a	1 994±75 a	1 706±49 a	5.791±0.054 ab	0.009±0.001 bc	0.992±0.001 a
苎麻	63 550±8 173	1 807±48 b	1 808±64 b	1 580±41 c	5.709±0.089 ab	0.010±0.002 ab	0.993±0.001 a
红麻	54 608±6 328	1 966±88 a	1 947±75 ab	1 706±45 a	5.861±0.043 a	0.008±0.001 bc	0.993±0.001 a

处理	序列数	Chao指数	ACE指数	Sobs指数	Shannon指数	Simpson指数	Coverage指数
对照	66 879±4 016	1 921±49 ab	1 941±42 ab	1 701±51 ab	5.833±0.112 a	0.007±0.001 c	0.993±0.001 a
黄麻	63 263±6 323	1 838±67 ab	1 826±77 b	1 587±70 bc	5.628±0.081 b	0.011±0.001 a	0.993±0.001 a
亚麻	73 778±8 153	1 984±74 a	1 994±75 a	1 706±49 a	5.791±0.054 ab	0.009±0.001 bc	0.992±0.001 a
苎麻	63 550±8 173	1 807±48 b	1 808±64 b	1 580±41 c	5.709±0.089 ab	0.010±0.002 ab	0.993±0.001 a
红麻	54 608±6 328	1 966±88 a	1 947±75 ab	1 706±45 a	5.861±0.043 a	0.008±0.001 bc	0.993±0.001 a