Responses of soil microbial biomass and bacterial community structure to closed-off management (an ecological natural restoration measures): A case study of Dongting Lake wetland, middle China

20Citations
Citations of this article
58Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Soil microbial biomass (SMB) and bacterial community structure, which are critical to global ecosystem and fundamental ecological processes, are sensitive to anthropogenic activities and environmental conditions. In this study, we examined the possible effects of closed-off management (an ecological natural restoration measures, ban on anthropogenic activity, widely employed for many important wetlands) on SMB, soil bacterial community structure and functional marker genes of nitrogen cycling in Dongting Lake wetland. Soil samples were collected from management area (MA) and contrast area (CA: human activities, such as hunting, fishing and draining, are permitted) in November 2013 and April 2014. Soil properties, microbial biomass carbon (MBC), and bacterial community structure were investigated. Comparison of the values of MA and CA showed that SMB and bacterial community diversity of the MA had a significant increase after 7 years closed-off management. The mean value of Shannon–Weiner diversity index of MA and CA respectively were 2.85 and 2.07. The gene copy numbers of 16S rRNA and nosZ of MA were significant higher than those of CA. the gene copy numbers of ammonia-oxidizing archaea (AOA) and nirK of MA were significant lower than those of CA. However, there was no significant change in the gene copy numbers of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and nirS.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dai, J., Wu, H., Zhang, C., Zeng, G., Liang, J., Guo, S., … Yuan, Y. (2016). Responses of soil microbial biomass and bacterial community structure to closed-off management (an ecological natural restoration measures): A case study of Dongting Lake wetland, middle China. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 122(3), 345–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiosc.2016.03.001

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free