| Literature DB >> 34259991 |
Qinli Xiong1,2,3, Lingjuan Li4, Xiaojin Luo5, Xingjin He6, Lin Zhang5, Kaiwen Pan7, Chenggang Liu8, Hui Sun9.
Abstract
Uncertainty regarding how subalpine forest ecosystems respond to tree harvesting hinders their sustainable management and conservation strategies. To investigate the impact of oak (Quercus aquifolioides Rehd. et Wils.) harvesting and stand recovery processes on soil microbial communities and understory vegetation on the eastern Tibetan Plateau, we sampled and quantified the microbial community structure and understory vegetation in three age classes (1 year, 10 years, and 20 years since tree logging) of harvested stands and an un-harvested reference (control) stand of subalpine oak forest. Our result showed logging significantly altered the edaphic properties (p < 0.001) and shifted microbial community structure (p < 0.05), increasing the abundances of the Actinobacteria and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) but decreasing fungi and general, gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Post-harvest evolution increased the biomass of understory vegetation and reshaped its community. Fungi (18:1ω7c, 18:1ω9c) and gram-negative bacteria (18:2ω7c, cy19:0) abundances changed significantly (p < 0.01) after harvesting and during stand recovery, suggesting their potential use as indicators for post-harvest oak recovery. Structural equation modeling (SEqM) revealed that, via litter, residue, and edaphic properties, the recovery process indirectly promoted microbe abundance while the overstory vegetation regrowth inhibited the plant community's biomass in the understory. Microbial communities only had a minor, direct effect on understory vegetation. Litter and edaphic factors played important roles in reshaping understory plant and soil microbial communities for post-harvest evolution.Entities:
Keywords: Microbial communities; Oak forest; Post-harvesting; Structural equation model; Subalpine; Understory vegetation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34259991 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-15367-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 4.223