| Literature DB >> 26423726 |
Guixiang Zhou1,2,3, Jiabao Zhang1, Jingdong Mao4, Congzhi Zhang1, Lin Chen5, Xiuli Xin1, Bingzi Zhao1.
Abstract
The role of photodegradation, an abiotic process, has been largely overlooked during straw decompn>osition in mesic ecosystems. We investigated the mass loss and chemical structures ofEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26423726 PMCID: PMC4589766 DOI: 10.1038/srep14851
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Mass loss in wheat (a,c,e) and maize (b,d,f) straws after 3 (a,b), 8 (c,d) and 12 months (e,f) of decomposition.
Error bars indicate standard errors (n = 3). Lowercase letters denote significant differences between treatment groups at the 5% level according to Tukey’s test.
Effects of UV-B radiation and soil contact on the mass loss of straw after 12 months of decomposition.
| Source of variance | Wheat straw mass loss | Maize straw mass loss | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| df | F | df | F | |||
| UV-B radiation (UVBR) | 2 | 9.657 | 0.005 | 2 | 27.763 | <0.001 |
| Soil contact (SC) | 1 | 51.998 | <0.001 | 1 | 66.002 | <0.001 |
| UVBR × SC | 1 | 17.761 | 0.002 | 1 | 6.831 | 0.026 |
Df, F and P refer to the degree of freedom, F-value and significance, respectively.
Chemical properties and decomposition rates (k-value) calculated by the exponential decay model (Xt = X0e−) for wheat and maize straw after one year of decomposition.
| Straw | Treatment | C concentration (g kg−1) | N concentration (g kg−1) | C:N ratio | Decomposition rate (year−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wheat straw | Initial | 419.51 ± 2.37a | 6.71 ± 0.20a | 62.63 ± 1.56d | |
| Block | 373.59 ± 0.88b | 2.74 ± 0.05c | 136.50 ± 2.98a | 0.16 ± 0.00c | |
| Ambient | 379.38 ± 2.86b | 3.14 ± 0.01c | 120.78 ± 0.93b | 0.42 ± 0.11b | |
| UVB | 350.63 ± 1.25c | 3.04 ± 0.14c | 115.65 ± 4.59b | 0.51 ± 0.09b | |
| UVBS | 303.33 ± 3.32d | 3.82 ± 0.11b | 79.66 ± 3.02c | 0.64 ± 0.11b | |
| AmbientS | 241.27 ± 1.01e | 4.23 ± 0.08b | 57.12 ± 1.17d | 1.04 ± 0.08a | |
| Maize straw | Initial | 438.57 ± 16.87a | 6.15 ± 0.82a | 73.62 ± 8.44de | |
| Block | 401.03 ± 2.24b | 2.81 ± 0.02c | 142.91 ± 1.70a | 0.20 ± 0.05d | |
| Ambient | 348.54 ± 1.29c | 2.95 ± 0.02bc | 118.22 ± 0.93b | 0.45 ± 0.04c | |
| UVB | 328.04 ± 4.13cd | 3.25 ± 0.13bc | 101.15 ± 3.28bc | 0.51 ± 0.02c | |
| UVBS | 301.87 ± 0.77de | 3.35 ± 0.09bc | 90.10 ± 1.75cd | 0.75 ± 0.04b | |
| AmbientS | 280.71 ± 1.58e | 4.54 ± 0.15ab | 61.99 ± 2.23e | 1.02 ± 0.05a |
All values are presented as mean ± standard error (n = 3). The lowercase letters within each column denote significant differences between the treatments for wheat or maize straw at the P < 5% level according to Tukey’s test.
The assignment of functional groups at different chemical shift regions and their relative proportions in the total spectral area determined by 13C CP/TOSS.
| Group | 190–220 ppm | 165–190 ppm | 142–165 ppm | 110–142 ppm | 93–110 ppm | 60–93 ppm | 45–60 ppm | 0–45 ppm |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| assignment | ketones/aldehydes | COO/N–C=O | aromatic C–O | aromatic C–C+/H | alkyl O–C–O | O–alkyl | NCH/OCH3 | alkyl |
| Wheat straw | ||||||||
| Initial | 0.5 ± 0.4b | 3.6 ± 0.8c | 2.0 ± 0.5bc | 5.6 ± 0.3b | 13.0 ± 0.1a | 57.5 ± 1.1a | 6.0 ± 0.2c | 11.8 ± 0.4b |
| Block | 1.9 ± 0.2a | 4.1 ± 0.2bc | 3.5 ± 0.1ab | 6.3 ± 0.3b | 10.5 ± 0.1b | 53.8 ± 0.2a | 7.4 ± 0.3abc | 12.5 ± 0.5b |
| Ambient | 1.2 ± 0.3ab | 5.0 ± 0.4abc | 2.0 ± 0.3bc | 6.6 ± 0.7b | 10.0 ± 0.1bc | 45.7 ± 0.9b | 7.3 ± 0.5bc | 22.2 ± 0.6a |
| UVB | 1.0 ± 0.2ab | 4.1 ± 0.4bc | 2.0 ± 0.1c | 6.7 ± 0.2b | 10.1 ± 0.3bc | 45.4 ± 1.4b | 8.1 ± 0.1ab | 22.6 ± 1.4a |
| UVBS | 1.8 ± 0.2ab | 5.9 ± 0.1ab | 3.8 ± 0.2a | 9.3 ± 0.3a | 9.8 ± 0.2bc | 41.1 ± 0.2c | 8.1 ± 0.3ab | 20.2 ± 0.5a |
| AmbientS | 1.5 ± 0.4ab | 6.6 ± 0.2a | 4.3 ± 0.5a | 10.1 ± 0.6a | 9.4 ± 0.4c | 39.7 ± 0.2c | 9.1 ± 0.6a | 19.3 ± 1.4a |
| Maize straw | ||||||||
| Initial | 0.8 ± 0.1a | 3.8 ± 0.5d | 1.7 ± 0.2b | 5.6 ± 0.2c | 12.0 ± 0.3a | 54.9 ± 0.8a | 7.3 ± 0.2cd | 13.9 ± 0.4c |
| Block | 0.9 ± 0.0a | 4.0 ± 0.3cd | 2.7 ± 0.2a | 6.8 ± 0.5bc | 12.0 ± 0.1a | 52.9 ± 0.1a | 7.0 ± 0.5d | 13.7 ± 0.8c |
| Ambient | 0.8 ± 0.2a | 5.2 ± 0.2bcd | 2.9 ± 0.2a | 7.1 ± 0.2abc | 10.8 ± 0.1b | 48.4 ± 0.2b | 8.4 ± 0.1bcd | 16.4 ± 0.1b |
| UVB | 1.2 ± 0.4a | 5.3 ± 0.4abc | 3.1 ± 0.3a | 8.3 ± 0.2ab | 10.7 ± 0.1b | 45.7 ± 0.2c | 8.8 ± 0.5bc | 16.9 ± 0.6b |
| UVBS | 1.2 ± 0.2a | 5.6 ± 0.1ab | 3.6 ± 0.1a | 8.8 ± 0.5a | 10.4 ± 0.4b | 44.3 ± 1.0c | 9.3 ± 0.5ab | 16.8 ± 1.4b |
| AmbientS | 0.9 ± 0.3a | 6.7 ± 0.1a | 3.5 ± 0.2a | 8.2 ± 0.3ab | 9.2 ± 0.1c | 41.2 ± 0.1d | 10.7 ± 0.2a | 19.6 ± 0.2a |
The lowercase letters within each column denote significant differences between the treatments at the P < 5% level according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 2Alkyl/O-alkyl ratio and aromaticity of wheat (a,b) and maize (c,d) straws after 12 months of decomposition.
Error bars indicate standard errors (n = 3). Lowercase letters denote significant differences between treatment groups at the 5% level according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 3Principal component analysis of the compositions of the carbon functional groups.
W = wheat straw, M = maize straw.