Key Laboratory of Vegetation Restoration and Management of Degraded Ecosystems & CAS Engineering Laboratory for Vegetation Ecosystem Restoration on Islands and Coastal Zones, South China Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
Centre for Plant Ecology, Core Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
Glob Chang Biol. 2021 Oct;27(20):5329-5340. doi: 10.1111/gcb.15774. Epub 2021 Jul 10.
Afforestation is an effective method to restore degraded land. Afforestation methods vary in their effects on ecosystem multifunctionality, but their effects on soil biodiversity have been largely overlooked. Here, we mapped the biodiversity and functioning of multiple soil organism groups resulting from diverse afforestation methods in tropical coastal terraces. Sixty years after afforestation from bare land (BL), plant species richness and the abundance of plant litter (398 ± 85 g m ) and plant biomass (179 ± 3.7 t ha ) in native tree species mixtures (MF) were restored to the level of native forests (NF; 287 ± 21 g m and 243.0 ± 33 t ha , respectively), while Eucalyptus monoculture (EP) only successfully restored the litter mass (388 ± 43 g m ) to the level of NF. Soil fertility in EP and MF was increased but remained lower than in NF. For example, soil nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in MF (1.2 ± 0.2 g kg and 408 ± 49 mg kg , respectively; p < 0.05) were lower than in NF (1.8 ± 0.2 g kg and 523 ± 24 mg kg , respectively; p < 0.05). Soil biodiversity, abundance (except for nematodes), and community composition in MF were similar or greater than those in NF. In contrast, restoration with EP only enhanced the diversity of microbes and mites to the level of NF, but not for other soil biota. Together, afforestation with native species mixtures can end up restoring vegetation and most aspects of the taxonomic and functional biodiversity in soil whereas monoculture using fast-growing non-native species cannot. Native species mixtures show a greater potential to reach completely similar levels of soil biodiversity in local natural forests if they are received some more decades of afforestation. Multifunctionality of soil biotic community should be considered to accelerate such processes in future restoration practices.
造林是恢复退化土地的有效方法。造林方法对生态系统多功能性的影响各不相同,但它们对土壤生物多样性的影响在很大程度上被忽视了。在这里,我们绘制了热带沿海梯田中不同造林方法对多种土壤生物群多样性和功能的影响。从裸地(BL)造林 60 年后,乡土树种混交林(MF)的植物物种丰富度和植物凋落物(398±85g m )和植物生物量(179±3.7t ha )的丰度恢复到了原生林(NF;分别为 287±21g m 和 243.0±33t ha )的水平,而桉树纯林(EP)仅成功地将凋落物质量(388±43g m )恢复到 NF 的水平。EP 和 MF 的土壤肥力增加,但仍低于 NF。例如,MF 的土壤氮和磷浓度(分别为 1.2±0.2g kg 和 408±49mg kg ;p<0.05)低于 NF(分别为 1.8±0.2g kg 和 523±24mg kg ;p<0.05)。MF 的土壤生物多样性、丰度(线虫除外)和群落组成与 NF 相似或更高。相比之下,EP 造林仅将微生物和螨虫的多样性提高到 NF 的水平,但对其他土壤生物群没有影响。总的来说,乡土树种混交造林可以恢复植被和土壤分类和功能生物多样性的大部分方面,而利用生长迅速的非乡土树种进行单一种植则不能。如果乡土树种混交林再接受几十年的造林,它们将有更大的潜力达到与当地天然林完全相似的土壤生物多样性水平。在未来的恢复实践中,应该考虑土壤生物群落的多功能性,以加速这些过程。