IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i2p546-d199497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Soil Microbial Community Structure and Physicochemical Properties in Amomum tsaoko -based Agroforestry Systems in the Gaoligong Mountains, Southwest China

Author

Listed:
  • Guizhou Liu

    (CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Plant Resources and Sustainable Use, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Menglun, Mengla 666303, China)

  • Man Jin

    (CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Plant Resources and Sustainable Use, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Menglun, Mengla 666303, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Chuantao Cai

    (CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Plant Resources and Sustainable Use, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Menglun, Mengla 666303, China)

  • Chaonan Ma

    (CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Plant Resources and Sustainable Use, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Menglun, Mengla 666303, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Zhongsuzhi Chen

    (CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Plant Resources and Sustainable Use, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Menglun, Mengla 666303, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Lunlun Gao

    (CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Plant Resources and Sustainable Use, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Menglun, Mengla 666303, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

Amomum tsaoko is cultivated in forests of tropical and subtropical regions of China, and the planting area is expanding gradually. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of A. tsaoko cultivation on the soil characteristics of the regions. We analyzed the effects of the A. tsaoko -forest agroforestry system (AFs) on the composition of soil microbial communities with increasing stand ages. We also compared the soil physicochemical properties, microbial biomass, and phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) composition between native forest (NF) and AFs. The results showed that the level of total carbon, nitrogen, and organic matter dramatically dropped in AFs with increasing stand ages. pH affected other soil properties and showed close correlation to total carbon ( P = 0.0057), total nitrogen ( P = 0.0146), organic matter ( P = 0.0075), hydrolyzable nitrogen ( P = 0.0085), available phosphorus ( P < 0.0001), and available potassium ( P = 0.0031). PLFAs of bacteria ( F = 4.650, P = 0.037), gram-positive bacteria ( F = 6.640, P = 0.015), anaerobe ( F = 5.672, P = 0.022), and total PLFA ( F = 4.349, P = 0.043) were significantly affected by different treatments, with the greatest value for NF treatment, and least value for AF5. However, the microbial biomass declined during the initial 5 years of cultivation, but it reached the previous level after more than 10 years of cultivation. Our research suggests that AFs is a profitable land-use practice in the Gaoligong Mountains and that AFs showed a recovering trend of the soil nutrient condition with increasing stand ages. However, the severe loss of nitrogen in the soil of AFs requires additional nitrogen during cultivation to restore it to pre-cultivation levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Guizhou Liu & Man Jin & Chuantao Cai & Chaonan Ma & Zhongsuzhi Chen & Lunlun Gao, 2019. "Soil Microbial Community Structure and Physicochemical Properties in Amomum tsaoko -based Agroforestry Systems in the Gaoligong Mountains, Southwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:546-:d:199497
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/546/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/546/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    2. Diana H. Wall & Uffe N. Nielsen & Johan Six, 2015. "Soil biodiversity and human health," Nature, Nature, vol. 528(7580), pages 69-76, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rocío Aguilar-Fernández & Mayra E. Gavito & Marielos Peña-Claros & Mirjam Pulleman & Thomas W. Kuyper, 2020. "Exploring Linkages between Supporting, Regulating, and Provisioning Ecosystem Services in Rangelands in a Tropical Agro-Forest Frontier," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Godson Chinonyerem Asuoha & Uchenna Paulinus Okafor & Philip Ogbonnia Phil-Eze & Romanus Udegbunam Ayadiuno, 2019. "The Impact of Soil Erosion on Biodiversity Conservation in Isiala Ngwa North LGA, Southeastern Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-17, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elizabeth M. Bach & Kelly S. Ramirez & Tandra D. Fraser & Diana H. Wall, 2020. "Soil Biodiversity Integrates Solutions for a Sustainable Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Laxmi D. Bhatta & Sunita Chaudhary & Anju Pandit & Himlal Baral & Partha J. Das & Nigel E. Stork, 2016. "Ecosystem Service Changes and Livelihood Impacts in the Maguri-Motapung Wetlands of Assam, India," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-14, June.
    3. McLennan, D. & Sharma, R., 2012. "The Delivering Ecological Services Index (DESI)," Working papers 119, Rimisp Latin American Center for Rural Development.
    4. Caviedes, Julián & Ibarra, José Tomás & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Álvarez-Fernández, Santiago & Junqueira, André Braga, 2024. "Indigenous and local knowledge on social-ecological changes is positively associated with livelihood resilience in a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage System," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    5. Maeda, Eduardo Eiji & Clark, Barnaby J.F. & Pellikka, Petri & Siljander, Mika, 2010. "Modelling agricultural expansion in Kenya's Eastern Arc Mountains biodiversity hotspot," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 609-620, November.
    6. Jaiswal, Sreeja & Balietti, Anca & Schäffer, Daniel, 2023. "Environmental Protection and Labor Market Composition," Working Papers 0736, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    7. Elisa Barbour & Lara Kueppers, 2012. "Conservation and management of ecological systems in a changing California," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(1), pages 135-163, March.
    8. Tyler M Harms & Kevin T Murphy & Xiaodan Lyu & Shane S Patterson & Karen E Kinkead & Stephen J Dinsmore & Paul W Frese, 2017. "Using landscape habitat associations to prioritize areas of conservation action for terrestrial birds," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, March.
    9. van der Hoff, Richard & Nascimento, Nathália & Fabrício-Neto, Ailton & Jaramillo-Giraldo, Carolina & Ambrosio, Geanderson & Arieira, Julia & Afonso Nobre, Carlos & Rajão, Raoni, 2022. "Policy-oriented ecosystem services research on tropical forests in South America: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    10. Brannstrom, Christian, 2001. "Conservation-with-Development Models in Brazil's Agro-Pastoral Landscapes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 1345-1359, August.
    11. Brendan Fisher & Stephen Polasky & Thomas Sterner, 2011. "Conservation and Human Welfare: Economic Analysis of Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 151-159, February.
    12. Pütz, S. & Groeneveld, J. & Alves, L.F. & Metzger, J.P. & Huth, A., 2011. "Fragmentation drives tropical forest fragments to early successional states: A modelling study for Brazilian Atlantic forests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(12), pages 1986-1997.
    13. Paige, Sarah B. & Malavé, Carly & Mbabazi, Edith & Mayer, Jonathan & Goldberg, Tony L., 2015. "Uncovering zoonoses awareness in an emerging disease ‘hotspot’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 78-86.
    14. Stephanie D. Maier & Jan Paul Lindner & Javier Francisco, 2019. "Conceptual Framework for Biodiversity Assessments in Global Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-34, March.
    15. Poonam Tripathi & Mukund Dev Behera & Partha Sarathi Roy, 2017. "Optimized grid representation of plant species richness in India—Utility of an existing national database in integrated ecological analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-13, March.
    16. Davis, Katrina & Pannell, David J. & Kragt, Marit & Gelcich, Stefan & Schilizzi, Steven, 2014. "Accounting for enforcement is essential to improve the spatial allocation of marine restricted-use zoning systems," Working Papers 195718, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Norman Myers, 2003. "Conservation of Biodiversity: How Are We Doing?," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 9-15, March.
    18. Shah, M., 2018. "Reforming India’s water governance to meet 21st century challenges: practical pathways to realizing the vision of the Mihir Shah Committee," IWMI Working Papers H049192, International Water Management Institute.
    19. Juliana Silveira dos Santos & Fausto Miziara & Hayla da Silva Fernandes & Renato Cezar Miranda & Rosane Garcia Collevatti, 2021. "Technification in Dairy Farms May Reconcile Habitat Conservation in a Brazilian Savanna Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, May.
    20. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & McAusland, Carol, 2004. "On trade, land-use, and biodiversity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 911-925, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:546-:d:199497. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.