Li Hui, Man Huali, Han Jia, Jia Xixia, Wang Li, Yang Hongyu, Shi Guiying
College of Horticulture, Gansu Agricultural University, Silver Beach Road Street, Lanzhou 730070, China.
Lanzhou New District Modern Agricultural Development Research Institute Co., Lanzhou 730070, China.
Microorganisms. 2024 Oct 10;12(10):2044. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms12102044.
Biological fumigation, a potential alternative to chemical fumigation, shows a wide range of prospective applications. In this study, we carried out biological fumigation experiments to evaluate its effect on alleviating consecutive cropping problems (CRPs) when compared with chemical fumigation.
We designed five treatments, namely, CR (no treatment), LN (chemical fumigation with lime nitrogen), Ta (fumigation with marigold), Ra (fumigation with radish), and Br (fumigation with mustard), for soils for replanting eggplant and measured the crop's growth status, soil bacterial and fungal communities, and soil physicochemical properties.
The results showed that the Br and Ra treatments formed similar microbial communities, while the Ta treatment formed unique microbial communities. The genera Olpidiomycota and Rozellomycota could be used as indicator species for the transformation process of soil microbial communities after the Br and Ta treatments, respectively. When compared with the CR and LN treatments, the soil's physicochemical properties were optimized under the Br treatment, and the soil organic matter content increased by 64.26% and 79.22%, respectively. Moreover, under the Br treatment, the soil's biological properties enhanced the bacterial and fungal alpha diversity, and the saprotrophic fungi increased with the depletion of pathotrophic fungi, while some specific probiotic microorganisms (such as Olpidiomycota, Microascales, , etc.) were significantly enriched. In contrast, under the Ta treatment, soil nutrient levels decreased and the soil's biological indices deteriorated, whereas the bacterial diversity decreased and the pathogenic fungi increased.
Among these three biological fumigation methods, the Br pre-treatment was the best way to alleviate the crop's CRPs and may be a good substitute for chemical fumigation in some situations. However, the Ta treatment also had some risks, such as the loss of land quality and reduced productivity.
生物熏蒸作为化学熏蒸的一种潜在替代方法，具有广泛的应用前景。在本研究中，我们进行了生物熏蒸实验，以评估其与化学熏蒸相比对缓解连作障碍（CRPs）的效果。
我们为再植茄子的土壤设计了五种处理方法，即CR（不处理）、LN（用石灰氮进行化学熏蒸）、Ta（用万寿菊熏蒸）、Ra（用萝卜熏蒸）和Br（用芥菜熏蒸），并测量了作物的生长状况、土壤细菌和真菌群落以及土壤理化性质。
结果表明，Br和Ra处理形成了相似的微生物群落，而Ta处理形成了独特的微生物群落。Olpidiomycota属和Rozellomycota属分别可作为Br和Ta处理后土壤微生物群落转化过程的指示物种。与CR和LN处理相比，Br处理优化了土壤理化性质，土壤有机质含量分别增加了64.26%和79.22%。此外，在Br处理下，土壤生物学性质增强了细菌和真菌的α多样性，腐生真菌随着致病真菌的减少而增加，同时一些特定的益生菌微生物（如Olpidiomycota、Microascales等）显著富集。相比之下，在Ta处理下，土壤养分水平下降，土壤生物学指标恶化，细菌多样性降低，致病真菌增加。
在这三种生物熏蒸方法中，Br预处理是缓解作物连作障碍的最佳方法，在某些情况下可能是化学熏蒸的良好替代品。然而，Ta处理也存在一些风险，如土地质量下降和生产力降低。
