黑土区农田中型土壤动物群落对免耕玉米秸秆覆盖频率的响应

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.05.004

生态环境学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (5): 699-707.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.05.004

黑土区农田中型土壤动物群落对免耕玉米秸秆覆盖频率的响应

蒋云峰^*(), 严婷, 刘俊男, 马丙增, 王海萌, 窦笑萌

吉林师范大学地理科学与旅游学院，吉林四平 136000

收稿日期:2024-01-29 出版日期:2024-05-18 发布日期:2024-06-27
通讯作者: *
作者简介:蒋云峰（1980年生），副教授，博士，主要从事土壤动物生态学方面的研究。E-mail: jiangyf427@126.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(41401283);吉林省科技发展计划项目项目(20160520080JH)

Responses of Soil Mesofauna in Agricultural Fields to the Frequency of Corn Stover Mulching in Northeastern China’s Black Soil Region

JIANG Yunfeng^*(), YAN Ting, LIU Junnan, MA Bingzeng, WANG Haimeng, DOU Xiaomeng

College of Geography Sciences and Tourism, Jilin Normal University, Siping 136000, P. R. China

Received:2024-01-29 Online:2024-05-18 Published:2024-06-27

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为保护黑土资源，以少/免耕秸秆覆盖还田为主要特征的保护性耕作在东北黑土区广泛推广。研究黑土区农田中型土壤动物群落对秸秆覆盖频率的响应利于理解保护性耕作对农田土壤生态环境的影响。在中国科学院设于吉林省梨树县保护性耕作研发基地开展研究，试验设5种处理：常规耕作（CT）、免耕无秸秆覆盖（NT-0）、免耕低频秸秆覆盖（NT-1/3）、免耕中频秸秆覆盖（NT-2/3）和免耕高频秸秆覆盖（NT-3/3）。通过调查不同覆盖频率样地中型土壤动物组成，研究其对秸秆覆盖频率的响应规律。结果显示，中型土壤动物总个体密度春季NT-2/3显著高于其他处理，秋季NT-0和NT-1/3显著高于CT；多样性和均匀度夏季CT、NT-1/3和NT-2/3显著高于NT-0，秋季秸秆覆盖处理显著高于NT-0。各中型土壤动物类群对秸秆覆盖频率响应存在明显季节变异。甲螨亚目春季NT-2/3显著高于其他处理，夏秋季NT-0显著高于其他处理；辐螨亚目春秋季NT-1/3显著高于CT、NT-0。春季球角跳科和长角跳科分别是NT-3/3、NT-2/3显著高于CT和NT-0；夏季球角跳科NT-2/3显著高于CT、NT-0和NT-1/3；秋季等节跳科、球角跳科、长角跳科和拟亚跳科分别是NT-1/3、NT-0和NT-3/3、NT-3/3、NT-0显著高于CT。覆盖频率与中型土壤动物总个体密度在春秋季而与多样性和均匀度指数在夏秋季呈显著二次曲线关系；与弹尾目密度在春季，蜱螨目密度在3个季节呈显著二次曲线关系。这说明中型土壤动物对秸秆覆盖频率的响应存在季节变异。该研究为黑土区秸秆覆盖还田有效管理提供了土壤动物学依据。

关键词: 秸秆还田, 覆盖频率, 中型土壤动物, 群落结构, 农田生态系统, 黑土区

Abstract:

Conservation tillage, comprising stover mulching and reduced/no tillage, is extensively advocated in Northeast China's black soil region to preserve its valuable soil resources. Understanding the response of soil mesofauna to stover mulching frequency is crucial for assessing the impact of conservation tillage on farmland soil ecology. This research was conducted at the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ conservation tillage research and development facility in Lishu County, Jilin Province. Five treatments were applied: conventional tillage (CT), no-tillage without stover mulching (NT-0), no-tillage with low-frequency stover mulching (NT-1/3), no-tillage with medium-frequency stover mulching (NT-2/3), and no-tillage with high-frequency stover mulching (NT-3/3). The response patterns of soil mesofauna to stover mulching frequency were explored by analyzing the composition of soil mesofauna in sample plots subjected to various mulching frequency. Results revealed that the total individual density of soil mesofauna was significantly higher in NT-2/3 compared to that in other treatments in spring and notably higher than CT in NT-0 and NT-1/3 during the fall. Moreover, diversity and evenness indices were significantly higher in CT and NT-1/3 during summer and fall, respectively, compared to those in NT-0. Seasonal differences were seen in the responses of various soil mesofauna types to no-tillage stover mulching frequency. In spring, NT-2/3 exhibited significantly higher Oribatida density, while NT-0 had the highest density in summer and autumn. In spring and summer, NT-1/3 showed substantially higher Prostigmata density compared to CT. Additionally, significant differences were observed among treatments for various mesofauna families across different seasons. The frequency of stover mulching exhibited a significant quadratic association with diversity and evenness indices in summer and autumn and with total individual mesofauna density in spring and autumn. Moreover, it was significantly associated with Acari and Collembola densities across seasons. These findings underscore the seasonal variability in soil mesofauna responses to stover mulching frequency. This study provides insights into the management of straw mulching in the black soil area for optimizing soil fauna dynamics.

Key words: soil mesofauna, no-tillage, corn stover mulching, mulching frequency, community structure, Black Soil Region

中图分类号:

蒋云峰, 严婷, 刘俊男, 马丙增, 王海萌, 窦笑萌. 黑土区农田中型土壤动物群落对免耕玉米秸秆覆盖频率的响应[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(5): 699-707.

JIANG Yunfeng, YAN Ting, LIU Junnan, MA Bingzeng, WANG Haimeng, DOU Xiaomeng. Responses of Soil Mesofauna in Agricultural Fields to the Frequency of Corn Stover Mulching in Northeastern China’s Black Soil Region[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2024, 33(5): 699-707.

图/表 9

表1 试验处理与秸秆不同覆盖频率

Table 1 Experimental treatments with different corn stover mulching frequencies

处理	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
CT	垄作	垄作	垄作	垄作	垄作	垄作	垄作	垄作	垄作
NT-0
NT-1/3	*			*			*
NT-2/3	*	*		*	*		*	*
NT-3/3	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*

图1 不同取样时期各处理样地中型土壤动物组成及其相对丰度

Figure 1 The relative abundance of different soil mesofauna groups collected from different treatments in three seasons

表2 季节和处理对中型土壤动物群落结构和主要类群密度影响的二因素方差分析

Table 2 The results of two-way ANOVA for seasons, treatments, and their interactions affected community structure and dominant groups of soil mesofauna

项目		季节			处理			季节×处理
项目		df	F	p	df	F	p	df	F	p
群落	总个体密度	2	28.390	<0.001	4	5.931	0.001	8	5.114	<0.001
	多样性指数	2	1.883	0.164	4	1.906	0.126	8	1.949	0.076
	均匀度指数	2	2.664	0.081	4	2.754	0.039	8	2.762	0.014
主要类群密度	甲螨亚目	2	23.954	<0.001	4	9.973	<0.001	8	10.851	<0.001
	辐螨亚目	2	1.026	0.367	4	2.801	0.036	8	0.694	0.695
	等节跳科	2	3.284	0.047	4	1.487	0.222	8	1.670	0.132
	球角跳科	2	30.319	<0.001	4	2.947	0.030	8	1.420	0.670
	拟亚跳科	2	6.302	0.004	4	1.063	0.385	8	1.521	0.177
	长角跳科	2	4.803	0.013	4	2.591	0.049	8	1.120	0.368
	铗尾虫	2	44.662	<0.001	4	5.092	0.002	8	5.092	<0.001
	双翅目	2	9.935	0.002	4	0.788	0.551	8	1.481	0.206

图2 不同处理样地中型土壤动物总个体密度、多样性和均匀度比较不同大写字母表示同一处理不同季节间的差异显著（p<0.05），不同小写字母表示同一季节不同处理间的差异显著（p<0.05）；平均值±标准误。下同

Figure 2 The variations of the total density, Shannon-Wiener diversity and Evenness indices of soil mesofauna in the five treatments across the three seasons

表3 基于Bray-Curtis的多元方差分析（PerMANOVA）

Table 3 Permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PerMANOVA) based on Bray-Curtis distance measurement of the community composition of mesofauna between treatments in three seasons

处理	春季		夏季		秋季
处理	t	p	t	p	t	p
CT vs. NT-0	0.433	0.945	2.654	0.031	4.077	0.024
CT vs. NT-1/3	2.319	0.089	0.535	0.810	1.849	0.059
CT vs. NT-2/3	3.859	0.028	1.545	0.082	2.131	0.027
CT vs. NT-3/3	3.071	0.029	1.379	0.109	2.633	0.031
NT-0 vs. NT-1/3	3.063	0.029	2.802	0.026	1.281	0.357
NT-0 vs. NT-2/3	4.762	0.026	1.863	0.061	2.681	0.026
NT-0 vs. NT-3/3	3.726	0.031	1.062	0.392	2.952	0.028
NT-1/3 vs. NT-2/3	4.673	0.030	1.497	0.082	0.937	0.489
NT-1/3 vs. NT-3/3	2.695	0.027	1.498	0.057	1.00	0.406
NT-2/3 vs. NT-3/3	1.349	0.204	0.869	0.446	0.196	1.000

图3 不同处理中型土壤动物群落的主成分分析（PCA）

Figure 3 Principal component analysis (PCA) of soil mesofauna communities across the treatments in three seasons

图4 处理样地间不同中型土壤动物个体密度比较

Figure 4 The variations of density of the different taxonomic groups in the five treatments across the three seasons

图5 免耕玉米秸秆覆盖频率与中型土壤动物密度、多样性和均匀度指数的关系

Figure 5 Relationships of the total density, and Shannon-Wiener and Evenness indices of soil mesofauna community with the frequency of corn stover mulching

图6 免耕玉米秸秆覆盖频率与蜱螨目和弹尾目密度的关系

Figure 6 Relationships of the density of Acari and Collembola with the frequency of corn stover mulching

参考文献 34

[1]	BEHAN-PELLETIER V M, 2003. Acari and collembola biodiversity in Canadian agricultural soils[J]. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 83: 279-288.
[2]	CHOUDHARY S, GAJANAND, CHOUDHARY M, et al., 2021. Conservation agriculture and its impact on physical, chemical and biological properties of soil: A review[J]. International Journal of Bioresource Science, 8(2): 113-122.
[3]	CULLINEY T W, 2013. Role of arthropods in maintaining soil fertility[J]. Agriculture, 3(4): 629-659.
[4]	DORN B, JOSSI W, HEIJDEN M G A, 2015. Weed suppression by cover crops: comparative on-farm experiments under integrated and organic conservation tillage[J]. Weed Research, 55(6): 586-597.
[5]	GEORGE P B L, KEITH A M, CREER S, et al., 2017. Evaluation of mesofauna communities as soil quality indicators in a national-level monitoring programme[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 115: 537-546.
[6]	LINDO Z, 2015. Warming favours small-bodied organisms through enhanced reproduction and compositional shifts in belowground systems[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 91: 271-278.
[7]	RANAIVOSON L, NAUDIN K, RIPOCHE A, et al., 2017. Agro-ecological functions of crop residues under conservation agriculture: A review[J]. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 37(4): 26.
[8]	SEASTEDT T R, 1984. The role of microarthropods in decomposition and mineralization processes[J]. Annual Review of Entomology, 29: 25-46.
[9]	SHEN Y, MALAUGHLIN N, ZHANG X P, et al., 2017. Effect of tillage and crop residue on soil temperature following planting for a Black soil in Northeast China[J]. Scientific Reports, 8: 4500.
[10]	STUBBS T L, KENNEDY A C, SCHILLINGER W F, 2004. Soil ecosystem changes during the transition to no-till cropping[J]. Journal of Crop Improvement, 11(1-2): 105-135.
[11]	WENNINGER E J, INOUYE R S, 2008. Insect community response to plant diversity and productivity in a sagebrush-steppe ecosystem[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 72(1): 24-33.
[12]	YAN S K, SINGH A N, FU S L, et al., 2012. A soil fauna index for assessing soil quality[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 47: 158-165.
[13]	ZHANG S X, LI Q, LÜ Y, et al., 2015. Conservation tillage positively influences the microflora and microfauna in the black soil of northeast China[J]. Soil & Tillage Research, 149: 46-52.
[14]	敖曼, 张旭东, 关义新, 2021. 东北黑土保护性耕作技术的研究与实践[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 6(10): 1203-1215.
	AO M, ZHANG X D, GUAN Y X, 2021. Research and practice of conservation tillage in black soil region of Northeast China[J]. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 36(10): 1203-1215.
[15]	陈建秀, 麻智春, 严海娟, 等, 2007. 跳虫在土壤生态系统中的作用[J]. 生物多样性, 15(2): 154-161. DOI
	CHEN J X, MA Z C, YAN H J, et al., 2007. Roles of springtails in soil ecosystem[J]. Biodiversity Science, 15(2): 154-161. DOI
[16]	傅声雷, 刘满强, 张卫信, 等, 2022. 土壤动物多样性的地理分布及其生态功能研究进展[J]. 生物多样性, 30(10): 22435. DOI
	FU S L, LIU M Q, ZHANG W X, et al., 2022. A review of recent advances in the study of geographical distribution and ecological functions of soil fauna diversity[J]. Biodiversity Science, 30(10): 22435. DOI
[17]	黄怡婷, 陈俊熹, 高钰淏, 等, 2024. 长期耕作对典型黑土水力性质的影响[J/OL]. 土壤学报, 61(4) [2023-10-24]. https:/link.cnki.net/urlid/32.1119.P.20231024.1018.002.
	HUANG Y T, CHEN J X, GAO Y H, et al., 2024. Effects of long-term tillage on hydraulic properties of typical black soils[J/OL]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 61(4) [2023-10-24]. https:/link.cnki.net/urlid/32.1119.P.20231024.1018.002.
[18]	李泽兴, 孙光芝, 王洋, 等, 2010. 玉米秸秆覆盖量对农田土壤动物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 26(16): 296-300.
	LI Z X, SUN G Z, WANG Y, et al., 2010. Effects of maize stubble mulch amount on soil animal community structure[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 26(16): 296-300. DOI
[19]	刘鹏飞, 红梅, 美丽, 等, 2019. 玉米秸秆还田量对黑土区农田地面节肢动物群落的影响[J]. 生态学报, 39(1) : 235-243.
	LIU P F, HONG M, MEI L, et al., 2019. Impact of quantity of returned corn straw on the cropland ground arthropod community in a black soil area[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(1): 235-243.
[20]	刘鹏飞, 红梅, 常菲, 等, 2018. 秸秆还田对黑土区西部农田中小型土壤动物群落的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 37(1): 139-146.
	LIU P F, HONG M, CHANG F, et al., 2018. Impact of straw returning on cropland soil mesofauna community in the western part of black soil area[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 37(1): 139-146.
[21]	刘宇航, 常亮, 张士秀, 等, 2023. 农田管理措施对土壤动物群落特征的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 54(4): 989-997.
	LIU Y H, CHANG L, ZHANG S X, et al., 2023. Effects of farmland management measures on the characteristics of soil animal community[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 54(4): 989-997.
[22]	连旭, 隋玉柱, 武海涛, 等, 2017. 秸秆还田对黑土农田土壤甲螨群落结构的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 36(1): 134-142.
	LIU X, SUI Y Z, WU H T, et al., 2017. Effect of on-site recycling of straw on community structure of soil Oribatida in black soil farmland[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 36(1): 134-142.
[23]	卢萍, 徐演鹏, 谭飞, 等, 2013. 黑土区农田土壤节肢动物群落与土壤理化性质的关系[J]. 中国农业科学, 46(9): 1848-1856. DOI
	LU P, XU Y P, TAN F, et al., 2013. Relationship between cropland soil arthropods community and soil properties in black soil area[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 46(9): 1848-1856. DOI
[24]	卢彩云, 罗锡文, 李洪文, 等, 2024. 我国保护性耕作的发展与政策建议[J/OL]. 中国工程科学, [2024-01-16]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.4421.G3.20240115.1120.002.
	LU C Y, LUO X W, LI H W, et al., 2024. Progress and suggestions of conservation tillage in China[J/OL]. Strategic Study of CAE, [2024-01-16]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.4421.G3.20240115.1120.002.
[25]	鲁悦, 鲍雪莲, 霍海南, 等, 2023. 免耕条件下不同量秸秆覆盖还田提高东北黑土区玉米光合性能和产量的效应[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 29(5): 840-847.
	LU Y, BAO X L, HUO H N, et al., 2023. Effects of different amounts of stover mulching on improving photosynthetic characteristics and yield of maize in Mollisol of Northeast China under long-term no-tillage[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 29(5): 840-847.
[26]	孙新, 李琪, 姚海凤, 等, 2021. 土壤动物与土壤健康[J]. 土壤学报, 58(5): 1073-1083.
	SUN X, LI Q, YAO H F, et al., 2021. Soil fauna and soil health[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 58(5): 1073-1083.
[27]	王移, 卫伟, 杨兴中, 等, 2010. 我国土壤动物与土壤环境要素相互关系研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 21(9): 2441-2448.
	WANG Y, WEI W, YANG X Z, et al., 2010. Interrelationship between soil fauna and soil environmental factors in China: Research advance[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 21(9): 2441-2448.
[28]	严珺, 吴纪华, 2018. 植物多样性对土壤动物影响的研究进展[J]. 土壤, 50(2): 231-238.
	YAN J, WU J H, 2018. Study advances in plant diversity effects on soil fauna[J]. Soils, 50(2): 231-238.
[29]	尹文英, 胡圣豪, 沈温芬, 等, 1998. 中国土壤动物检索图鉴[M]. 北京: 科学出版社: 131-390.
	YIN W Y, HU S H, SHEN W F, et al., 1998. Pictorial keys to soil animals of China[M]. Beijing: Science Press: 131-390.
[30]	赵乌英嘎, 红梅, 赵巴音那木拉, 等, 2019. 不同耕作方式下黑土区农田中小型土壤动物群落特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 39(3): 39-45.
	ZHAO W Y G, HONG M, ZHAO B Y N M L, et al., 2019. Community characteristics of soil mesofauna in farmland in black soil region under different farming practices[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 39(3): 39-45.
[31]	张向前, 杨文飞, 徐云姬, 2019. 中国主要耕作方式对旱地土壤结构及养分和微生态环境影响的研究综述[J]. 生态环境学报, 28(12): 2464-2472. DOI
	ZHANG X Q, YANG W F, XU Y J, 2019. Effects of main tillage methods on soil structure, nutrients and micro-ecological environment of upland in China: A review[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 28(12): 2464-2472.
[32]	张士秀, 贾淑霞, 常亮, 等, 2022. 保护性耕作改善东北农田黑土土壤生物多样性及其生态功能[J]. 地理科学, 42(8): 1360-1369. DOI
	ZHAO S X, JIA S X, CHANG L, et al., 2022. Conservation tillage improves soil biodiversity and its ecological function in the black soil region of Northeast China[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 42(8): 1360-1369. DOI
[33]	郑洪兵, 罗洋, 隋鹏祥, 等, 2024. 秸秆还田对东北黑土水分特征及物理性质的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 42(1): 226-236.
	ZHENG H B, LUO Y, SUI P X, et al., 2024. Effects of straw returning on soil water characteristics and physical properties of black soil in Northeast China[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 42(1): 226-236.
[34]	郑乐怡, 归鸿, 1999. 昆虫分类[M]. 南京: 南京师范大学出版社: 52-73.
	ZHEN L Y, GUI H, 1999. Nanjing: Nanjing Normal University Press: 52-73.

黑土区农田中型土壤动物群落对免耕玉米秸秆覆盖频率的响应

Responses of Soil Mesofauna in Agricultural Fields to the Frequency of Corn Stover Mulching in Northeastern China’s Black Soil Region

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 34

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李晴, 张梦悦, 于明乔, 李小璇, 常明, 陈立斌, 丁森. 东莞城市河流大型底栖动物群落结构及影响因子[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(1): 101-110.
[2]	唐志伟, 翁颖, 朱夏童, 蔡洪梅, 代雯慈, 王捧娜, 郑宝强, 李金才, 陈翔. 秸秆还田下中国农田土壤微生物生物量碳变化及其影响因素的Meta分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(9): 1552-1562.
[3]	宋思梦, 林冬梅, 周恒宇, 罗宗志, 张丽丽, 易超, 林辉, 林兴生, 刘斌, 苏德伟, 郑丹, 余世葵, 林占熺. 种植巨菌草对乌兰布和沙漠植物物种多样性与土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(9): 1595-1605.
[4]	姜懿珊, 孙迎韬, 张干, 罗春玲. 中国不同气候类型森林土壤微生物群落结构及其影响因素[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(8): 1355-1364.
[5]	刘晨, 白雪冬, 赵海超, 黄智鸿, 刘松涛, 卢海博, 刘子刚, 刘雪玲. 寒旱区春玉米秸秆还田方式对土壤DOM光谱特征的影响机制[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(8): 1419-1432.
[6]	梁川, 杨艳芳, 俞姗姗, 周利, 张经纬, 张秀娟. 围网与围塘养鱼下沉积物微生物量和群落结构特征差异[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(8): 1487-1495.
[7]	宫亮, 金丹丹, 牛世伟, 王娜, 邹晓锦, 张鑫, 隋世江, 解占军, 韩瑛祚. 辽宁省水稻田固碳减排潜力分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(7): 1226-1236.
[8]	张露, 何雨霏, 陈坦, 杨婷, 张冰, 金军. 2011—2020年汾渭平原农田生态系统碳足迹的时空格局演变[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(6): 1149-1162.
[9]	侯晖, 颜培轩, 谢沁宓, 赵宏亮, 庞丹波, 陈林, 李学斌, 胡杨, 梁咏亮, 倪细炉. 贺兰山蒙古扁桃灌丛根际土壤AM真菌群落多样性特征研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 857-865.
[10]	姜永伟, 丁振军, 袁俊斌, 张峥, 李杨, 问青春, 王业耀, 金小伟. 辽宁省主要河流底栖动物群落结构及水质评价研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 969-979.
[11]	王云, 郑西来, 曹敏, 李磊, 宋晓冉, 林晓宇, 郭凯. 滨海含水层咸-淡水过渡带反硝化性能与控制因素研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 980-988.
[12]	寇祝, 卿纯, 袁昌果, 李平. 西藏东北部热泉水中硫氧化菌的多样性及分布特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 989-1000.
[13]	胡芳, 刘聚涛, 温春云, 韩柳, 文慧. 抚河流域浮游植物群落结构特征及其水生态状况评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 744-755.
[14]	于菲, 曾海龙, 房怀阳, 付玲芳, 林澍, 董家豪. 典型感潮河网浮游藻类功能群时空变化特征及水质评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 756-765.
[15]	吴炜龙, 陈艺杰, 卫婷, 杨贵琼, 阳长洪, 甄珍, 蔺中. 蚯蚓驱动的滨海盐碱农田土壤中多环芳烃生物降解的机制研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(11): 1996-2006.