| Literature DB >> 36081789 |
Shuning Zhang1, Litao Sun2, Yujie Shi1, Yujie Song1, Yu Wang1, Kai Fan1, Rui Zong3, Yusheng Li4, Linjun Wang5, Caihong Bi6, Zhaotang Ding1,2.
Abstract
Compared with traditional organic fertilizer, fermented soybean is a better fertilizer resource in tea plantations. The application of organic fertilizer is a feasible practice to mitigate the soil degradation caused by the overuse of chemical fertilizers, which can effectively regulate soil microbial communities in tea plantations. However, the effects of fermented soybean on soil microbial communities, soil metabolites and metabolites in tea new shoots have not been systematically demonstrated, and their interactions have never been studied. Here, we investigated the responses of the soil microbial community, soil metabolites and metabolites of tea new shoots to urea fertilization (UF), naturally fermented soybean fertilization (NFS) and enzymatic fermented soybean fertilization (EFS), and analyzed the relationships between soil microbes, soil metabolites and metabolites in tea new shoots. The results showed that soil bacterial communities were dominated by Pseudomonas, Romboutsia, Candidatus_Nitrosotalea and Helicobacter, and soil fungal communities were dominated by Peziza, Fusarium, Candida and Cheilymenia at the genus level. In EFS, bacterial genera (Glutamicibacter and Streptomyces) and fungal genera (Candida and Actinomucor) presented high abundances, which were correlated with soil carbohydrate and lipid including D-Mannitol, D-Sorbitol, 9,12-Octadecadienoic acid and (Z)-13-Docosenoic acid. Enzymatic fermented soybean fertilization also affected the lipid metabolites in tea new shoots. Glycerolipids and glycerophospholipids significantly increased in EFS, which positively correlated with some soil microbial communities. Besides, the application of fermented soybean fertilizer could increase the contents of TP, AP and AK, which were also important environmental factors affecting the structure of soil microbial community in tea plantation. It was concluded that fermented soybean fertilization could improve soil nutrition, regulate associated microbial communities, and positively affect lipid metabolites in tea new shoots. This study not only explores the relationships between soil microbes and metabolites in tea plants, but also provides feasible technical guidance to cultivate high-quality tea using soybean as high-grade fertilizer.Entities:
Keywords: fermented soybean; fertilization; metabolite profiling; microbial communities; tea
Year: 2022 PMID: 36081789 PMCID: PMC9445587 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.992823
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 6.064
The physicochemical properties of soils after fermented soybean fertilization.
| pH | OM g/kg | TN g/kg | TP g/kg | TK g/kg | AN mg/kg | AP mg/kg | AK mg/kg | Ca g/kg | Mg g/kg | Na g/kg | Cu mg/kg | Zn mg/kg | |
| CK | 6.68 ± 0.11a | 93.77 ± 35.13b | 2.55 ± 0.40c | 0.64 ± 0.20b | 14.03 ± 1.03a | 70.16 ± 7.99c | 131.20 ± 34.34b | 285.53 ± 13.62b | 3.86 ± 0.37a | 2.68 ± 0.03ab | 1.64 ± 0.24a | 18.22 ± 8.07a | 83.62 ± 6.41a |
| UF | 5.19 ± 0.16c | 175.52 ± 82.59ab | 4.76 ± 1.71ab | 0.82 ± 0.18b | 11.26 ± 2.01a | 186.50 ± 8.16a | 158.77 ± 48.40b | 371.37 ± 92.03b | 3.85 ± 0.40a | 2.42 ± 0.12ab | 1.60 ± 0.06a | 10.81 ± 3.09a | 74.88 ± 4.38ab |
| NFS | 6.21 ± 0.14b | 192.29 ± 27.38ab | 5.97 ± 2.20a | 0.93 ± 0.11ab | 8.39 ± 4.98a | 146.64 ± 11.10b | 245.17 ± 33.21ab | 436.27 ± 45.00ab | 3.71 ± 0.40a | 2.29 ± 0.42c | 1.87 ± 0.76a | 12.08 ± 3.30a | 72.33 ± 3.96b |
| EFS | 6.31 ± 0.14b | 209.37 ± 47.40a | 4.91 ± 1.22ab | 1.25 ± 0.18a | 11.69 ± 0.99a | 125.46 ± 13.37b | 410.42 ± 147.52a | 695.27 ± 176.77a | 3.60 ± 0.20a | 2.84 ± 0.30a | 1.88 ± 0.89a | 14.43 ± 5.37a | 78.10 ± 4.16ab |
Values with the same letter are not significantly different (p < 0.05).
CK, control experiment; UF, urea fertilization; NFS, naturally fermented soybean fertilization; EFS, enzymatic fermented soybean fertilization.
The activities of some enzymes in soils after fermented soybean fertilization.
| S-ACP (nmol/h/g) | S-UE | S-CAT | S-CL | S-ACPT | S-SC | |
| CK | 1387.62 ± 313.27b | 783.83 ± 52.79c | 739.73 ± 52.07ab | 303.78 ± 32.17a | 16.45 ± 8.29b | 29.85 ± 1.11c |
| UF | 1073.41 ± 45.67b | 1017.27 ± 107.68bc | 744.50 ± 62.76ab | 322.42 ± 47.68a | 32.90 ± 14.15ab | 29.62 ± 2.06c |
| NFS | 2687.83 ± 92.49a | 1258.29 ± 149.95ab | 687.37 ± 81.87b | 344.58 ± 107.54a | 63.45 ± 19.70a | 56.24 ± 6.74a |
| EFS | 2718.61 ± 733.84a | 1418.29 ± 124.51a | 821.88 ± 42.32a | 488.32 ± 245.45a | 60.67 ± 8.23a | 45.77 ± 3.88b |
Values with the same letter are not significantly different (p < 0.05).
CK, control experiment; UF, urea fertilization; NFS, naturally fermented soybean fertilization; EFS, enzymatic fermented soybean fertilization.
FIGURE 1The composition of microbial communities in soil with fermented soybean fertilization. (A) The phylogenetic tree of soil bacterial communities. (B) The phylogenetic tree of soil fungal communities.
FIGURE 2The rose diagrams of relationships between soil key properties and bacterial communities in soils with fermented soybean fertilization.
FIGURE 3The differential metabolites of soil with fermented soybean fertilization. (A) The OPLS-DA analysis of soil metabolites. (B) The K-means cluster analysis of lipid molecules in tea soils. (C) The heatmap of soil differential metabolites in CK vs EFS group. (D) The heatmap of soil differential metabolites in UF vs EFS group.
FIGURE 4The ellipse heatmap of relationships between soil bacterial communities and soil metabolites. (A) The relationship of soil bacterial communities and soil metabolites in CK vs EFS group. (B) The relationship of soil bacterial communities and soil metabolites in UF vs EFS group.
FIGURE 5The ellipse heatmap of relationships between soil fungal communities and soil metabolites. (A) The relationship of soil fungal communities and soil metabolites in CK vs EFS group. (B) The relationship of soil fungal communities and soil metabolites in UF vs EFS group.
FIGURE 6The sub-classes of lipid molecules in tea new shoots. (A) The count ring of lipid classes and proportion. (B) The radar charts of lipid classes in tea new shoots. (C) The K-means cluster analysis of lipid molecules in tea new shoots.
FIGURE 7The differential lipid metabolites of tea new shoots in NFS vs EFS group. (A) The heatmap of differential metabolites in tea new shoots. (B) The violin plot of differential metabolites in tea new shoots.
FIGURE 8The ellipse heatmap of relationships between bacterial communities and metabolites in tea new shoots. (A) The relationship of bacterial communities and metabolites in CK vs EFS group. (B) The relationship of bacterial communities and metabolites in UF vs EFS group. (C) The relationship of bacterial communities and metabolites in NFS vs EFS group.
FIGURE 9The ellipse heatmap of relationships between soil fungal communities and metabolites in tea new shoots. (A) The relationship of fungal communities and metabolites in CK vs EFS group. (B) The relationship of fungal communities and metabolites in UF vs EFS group. (C) The relationship of fungal communities and metabolites in NFS vs EFS group.