不同利用方式对天山北坡中段山地草甸草地植物生物量分布的影响

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.04.023

新疆农业科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 60 ›› Issue (4): 974-981.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.04.023

• 草业·植物保护·畜牧兽医·农业经济 • 上一篇下一篇

不同利用方式对天山北坡中段山地草甸草地植物生物量分布的影响

夏停停¹(), 苏比努尔·吾麦尔江¹, 于昭文¹, 李宏¹, 吕文钧¹, 吐尔逊娜依·热依木²()

1.新疆农业大学草业学院,乌鲁木齐 830052
2.新疆农业大学生命科学学院,乌鲁木齐 830052

收稿日期:2022-08-07 出版日期:2023-04-20 发布日期:2023-05-06
通信作者: 吐尔逊娜依·热依木(1968-),女,新疆阿克陶人,副教授,博士,硕士生导师,研究方向为草地生态,(E-mail)tursunnay@sina.com
作者简介:夏停停(1994-),女,内蒙古通辽人,硕士研究生,研究方向为草地生态,(E-mail)1119776088@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(31960338)

Effects of different utilization methods on the biomass distribution of mountain meadows in the middle of northern slope of Tianshan Mountain

XIA Tingting¹(), Subinuer Wumaierjiang¹, YU Zhaowen¹, LI Hong¹, LYU Wenjun¹, Tuerxunnayi Reyimu²()

1. College of Pratacultural and Environmental Sciences,Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052, China
2. College of Life Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052, China

Received:2022-08-07 Online:2023-04-20 Published:2023-05-06
Correspondence author: Tuerxunnayi Reyimu(1968-), female, Kirgiz, native place: Aketao, Xinjiang. Associate professor, PhD, Mainly engaged in grassland ecology teaching and scientific research work, (E-mail)tursunnay@sina.com
Supported by:
National Natural Science Foundation(31960338)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究游牧放牧与定居放牧不同利用方式下山地草甸草地植物群落地上生物量与地下生物量的变化规律,为提高山地草甸草地生产力及确定合理的放牧方式提供依据。【方法】采用野外实地调查取样的方法,以天山北坡山地草甸草地为对象,分别在游牧放牧区和定居放牧区设置轻度放牧(Light grazing,LG)和重度放牧(Heavy grazing,HG)2种放牧强度,围栏打草场(未放牧区)为对照(Check test),分析2种放牧方式下植物群落地上生物量与地下生物量的分布。【结果】(1)在LG和HG下,不同利用方式下植物群落地上总生物量有显著差异(P<0.05)。游牧放牧和定居放牧在不同放牧强度下植物群落地上总生物量大小均为CK>LG>HG;除杂类草外,多年生禾草、多年生豆科草、多年生莎草地上生物量随放牧强度增加呈逐渐减少趋势。游牧放牧区与定居放牧区多年生莎草和杂类草地上生物量在LG下有显著差异(P<0.05),多年生豆科草地上生物量在HG下具有显著差异(P<0.05)。(2)在CK和LG下,不同放牧方式下土层0~10、10~20、20~30 cm的植物群落地下生物量有显著差异(P<0.05),且定居放牧区植物群落地下生物量比游牧放牧区分别高出36.79%、31.55%、27.38%。游牧放牧区植物群落地下生物量范围在743.99~1 229.83 g/m²;定居放牧区植物群落地下生物量分布范围在864.33~1 550.95 g/m²。(3)在LG和HG下,不同利用方式下植物根冠比有显著差异(P<0.05),定居放牧区植物群落根冠比游牧放牧区分别高出19.38%、9.91%。在不同放牧强度下,游牧放牧区和定居放牧区植物群落根冠比由大到小依次为HG>CK>LG。【结论】山地草甸草地的不同利用方式改变了植物群落地上、地下生物量的分布,定居放牧方式下植物群落地上、地下总生物量显著高于游牧放牧方式(P<0.05)。

关键词: 放牧强度; 山地草甸草地; 生物量

Abstract:

【Objective】To study the changes law of above-ground biomass and underground biomass of mountain meadow grassland in different utilization modes of nomadic grazing and settlement grazing in the hope of providing the basis for improving the productivity of mountain meadow grassland and determining the reasonable grazing methods.【Methods】Using the method of field survey and sampling, taking the mountain meadow grassland on the northern slope of Tianshan Mountain as the research object, two types of grazing intensities, light grazing and heavy grazing were set in the nomadic grazing and residential grazing areas respectively, and the no grazing area (fenced grazing field) was used as the control (Check test) to analyze the distribution of above-ground biomass and underground biomass of plant communities under two grazing methods.【Results】(1) Under LG and HG, there was a significant difference in the total biomass of plant communities under different utilization methods (P<0.05). Under Nomadic grazing and residential grazing of different grazing intensities, the total biomass of the plant community on the landing was CK>LG>HG; in addition to forbs, the aboveground biomass of functional groups of perennial grasses, perennial legumes and perennial sedges showed a gradual decrease with the increase of grazing intensity. The aboveground biomass of functional groups of perennial sedges and forbs in nomadic and settled grazing areas was significantly different under LG (P<0.05), the aboveground biomass of perennial legumes had significant differences under HG (P<0.05). (2) Under CK and LG, there were significant differences in the biomass of plant communities in the soil layer of 0~10, 10-20, and 20-30 cm under different grazing modes (P<0.05). In addition, the below-ground biomass of the flora in the settled grazing area was 36.79%, 31.55%, and 27.38% higher than that of the nomadic grazing area, respectively. The below-ground biomass of nomadic grazing area plants ranged between 743.99-1,229.83 g/m²; the distribution range of below-ground biomass of the flora in the settled grazing area was between 864.33-1,550.95 g/m². (3) Under LG and HG, there was a significant difference in plant root-to-shoot ratio under different utilization modes (P<0.05); the roots and shoots of plant communities in settled grazing areas were 19.38% and 9.91% higher than those in nomadic grazing areas, respectively. Under different grazing intensities, the root-to-shoot ratio of plant communities in nomadic grazing and settled grazing areas was HG>CK>LG in descending order.【Conclusion】The different utilization methods of mountain meadow grass change the distribution of the above-ground and underground biomass of the flora, the total biomass of the above-ground and underground plant communities under the settled grazing method is significantly higher than that of the nomadic grazing method (P<0.05).

Key words: grazing intensity; mountain meadow grassland; biomass

中图分类号:

S181
S812

夏停停, 苏比努尔·吾麦尔江, 于昭文, 李宏, 吕文钧, 吐尔逊娜依·热依木. 不同利用方式对天山北坡中段山地草甸草地植物生物量分布的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(4): 974-981.

XIA Tingting, Subinuer Wumaierjiang, YU Zhaowen, LI Hong, LYU Wenjun, Tuerxunnayi Reyimu. Effects of different utilization methods on the biomass distribution of mountain meadows in the middle of northern slope of Tianshan Mountain[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(4): 974-981.

图/表 6

参考文献 34

[1]	冯缨, 许鹏, 安沙舟, 等. 天山北坡中段山地草地类型多样性研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2005, 19(5):59-62.
	FENG Ying, XU Peng, AN Shazhou, et al. Study on the diversity of rangeland types in middle zone of northern slope of Tianshan Mountain[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2005, 19(5): 59-62.
[2]	李金花, 李振涛, 任继周. 放牧对草地植物的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2002, 11(1):4-8.
	LI Jinhua, LI Zhentao, REN Jizhou. The effects of grazing on grassland plants[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinaca, 2002, 11(1): 4-8.
[3]	苏清荷. 天山北坡主要草地类型生产力与气候相关性的研究[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆农业大学, 2010.
	SU Qinghe. Study on relationship between NPP and climate of main rangeland types in northern slope of Tianshan Mountain[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2010.
[4]	任继周, 王钦, 牟新待, 等. 草原生产流程及草原季节畜牧业[J]. 中国农业科学, 1978, 11(2):87-92.
	REN Jizhou, WANG Qin, MOU Xindai, et al. Grassland production process and seasonal animal husbandry[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 1978, 11 (2): 97-92.
[5]	吐尔逊娜依·热依木. 牧民定居现状分析与发展对策研究[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆农业大学, 2004.
	Tuerxunnayi Reyimu. Analysis of the situation and study on the development strategy of settlement for herdsmen[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2004.
[6]	张晓玲, 徐田伟, 谭攀柱, 等. 季节放牧对高寒草原植被群落和生物量的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2019, 28(10):1576-1582.
	ZHANG Xiaoling, XU Tianwei, TAN Panzhu, et al. Effect of seasonal grazing on plant community and biomass of alpine steppe[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 2019, 28(10): 1576-1582.
[7]	刘建军, 浦野忠朗, 鞠子茂, 等. 放牧对草原生态系统地下生产力及生物量的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2005, 25(1):88-93.
	LIU Jianjun, URANO Taddaki, MARIKO Shigeru, et al. Influence of grazing pressures on belowground productivity and biomass in Mongolia steppe[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2005, 25(1): 88-93.
[8]	聂秀青, 熊丰, 李长斌, 等. 青藏高原高寒灌丛生态系统草本层生物量分配格局[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(18):6664-6669.
	NIE Xiuqing, XIONG Feng, LI Changbin, et al. Biomass allocation relationships in the grass layer in alpine shrubland ecosystems on the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(18): 6664-6669.
[9]	高丽楠. 放牧对川西北高寒草甸植被生物量及土壤氮素的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018, 46(15):226-231.
	GAO Linan. Effect of grazing on vegetation biomass and soil nitrogen of alpine meadow in Northwest Sichuan[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 46(15): 226-231.
[10]	柴曦, 梁存柱, 梁茂伟, 等. 内蒙古草甸草原与典型草原地下生物量与生产力季节动态及其碳库潜力[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(19):5530-5540.
	CHAI Xi, LIANG Cunzhu, LIANG Maowei, et al. Seasonal dynamics of belowground biomass and productivity and potential of carbon sequestration in meadow steppe and typical steppe, in Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014, 34(19): 5530-5540.
[11]	布仁其其格. 放牧强度对典型草原植物多样性与生产力的影响[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古大学, 2010.
	Burenqiqige. Effect of different grazing systems on diversity and productivity of plant in Stipa krylovii Roshev. typical steppe[D]. Huhhot: Inner Mongolia University, 2010.
[12]	张景慧, 祁瑜, 王艳, 等. 放牧对贝加尔针茅草原植物个体和群落生物量分配的影响[J]. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2012, 48(3):270-275.
	ZHANG Jinghui, QI Yu, WANG Yan, et al. The effects of grazing on individual-level and community-level biomass allocation in the Stipa baicalensisn steppe[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Natural Science Ed.), 2012, 48(3): 270-275.
[13]	高永恒, 陈槐, 罗鹏, 等. 放牧强度对川西北高寒草甸植物生物量及其分配的影响[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2008, 24(3):26-32.
	GAO Yongheng, CHEN Huai, LUO Peng, et al. Effect of grazing intensity on biomass of alpine meadow and its allocation in the northwestern Sichuan[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2008, 24(3): 26-32.
[14]	崔树娟, 布仁巴音, 朱小雪, 等. 不同季节适度放牧对高寒草甸植物群落特征的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2014, 34(2):349-357.
	CUI Shujuan, Burenbayin, ZHU Xiaoxue, et al. Effects of seasonal moderate grazing on plant community of alpine meadow[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2014, 34(2): 349-357.
[15]	沈禹颖, 阎顺国, 朱兴运, 等. 河西走廊几种盐化草地第一性生产力的研究.I.地上生物量与地下生物量季节动态及分配[J]. 草业学报, 1995, 4(2):44-50.
	SHEN Yuying, YAN Shunguo, ZHU Xingyun, et al. The primary productivity of saline pastures in Hexi Corridor. I. The seasonal dynamics of above and underground biomass[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 1995, 4(2): 44-50.
[16]	McNaughton S J. Compensatory plant growth as a response to herbivory[J]. Oikos, 1983, 40(3): 329-336. DOI URL
[17]	WU Gaolin, DU Guozhen, LIU Zhengheng, et al. Effect of fencing and grazing on a Kobresia-dominated meadow in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau[J]. Plant and Soil, 2009, 319(2): 115-126. DOI URL
[18]	姚喜喜. 高寒草甸植物群落和家畜对放牧压力的响应机制研究[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2019.
	YAO Xixi. Studies on response mechanism of plant community and livestock to grazing pressure in an alpine meadow[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2019.
[19]	Diaz S, Lavorel S, McIntyre S, et al. Plant trait responses to grazing — a global synthesis[J]. Global Change Biology, 2007, 13(2): 313-341. DOI URL
[20]	董全民, 赵新全, 马玉寿, 等. 放牧强度对高寒混播人工草地群落特征及地上现存量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2012, 20(1):10-16. DOI
	DONG Quanmin, ZHAO Xinquan, MA Yushou, et al. Effect of grazing intensity on community character and aboveground present biomass of alpine mixed-sown pasture[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2012, 20(1): 10-16.
[21]	孙熙麟, 王明玖, 陈海军, 等. 短花针茅荒漠草原地下生物量对不同强度放牧的响应[J]. 内蒙古农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2010, 31(4):101-104.
	SUN Xilin, WANG Mingjiu, CHEN Haijun, et al. Response of underground biomass of different grazing intensities in the Stipa breviflora desert steppe[J]. Journal of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University (Natural Science Ed.), 2010, 31(4): 101-104.
[22]	李怡, 韩国栋. 放牧强度对内蒙古大针茅典型草原地下生物量及其垂直分布的影响[J]. 内蒙古农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2011, 32(2):89-92.
	LI Yi, HAN Guodong. Effects of different grazing intensities on the underground biomass and its vertical distribution of the typical Stipa grandis steppe[J]. Journal of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University (Natural Science Ed.), 2011, 32(2): 89-92.
[23]	许曼丽, 朱志红, 李英年, 等. 高寒矮嵩草草甸4种主要植物补偿生长变化与耐牧性比较研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2012, 28(20):7-16.
	XU Manli, ZHU Zhihong, LI Yingnian, et al. Compensatory growth and grazing-tolerance of 4 major plant species in alpine Kobresia hunilis meadow[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2012, 28(20): 7-16.
[24]	段敏杰, 高清竹, 万运帆, 等. 放牧对藏北紫花针茅高寒草原植物群落特征的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30(14):3892-3900.
	DUAN Minjie, GAO Qingzhu, WAN Yunfan, et al. Effect of grazing on community characteristics and species diversity of Stipa purpurea alpine grassland in Northern Tibet[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(14): 3892-3900.
[25]	仁青吉, 崔现亮, 赵彬彬. 放牧对高寒草甸植物群落结构及生产力的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2008, 17(6):134-140. DOI
	REN Qingji, CUI Xianliang, ZHAO Binbin. Effect of grazing on community structure and productivity in an alpine meadow[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2008, 17(6):134-140.
[26]	宋磊, 董全民, 李世雄, 等. 放牧对青海湖北岸高寒草原植物群落特征的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2016, 33(8):1625-1632.
	SONG Lei, DONG Quanmin, LI Shixiong, et al. Impact of grazing on the characteristics of alpine grassland plant community on the north shore of Qinghai lake region[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2016, 33(8): 1625-1632.
[27]	Dahlman R C, Kucera C L. Root productivity and turnover in native prairie[J]. Ecology, 1965, 46(1-2): 84-89. DOI URL
[28]	王悦骅, 宋晓辉, 王占文, 等. 短花针茅荒漠草原植物地上地下生物量对载畜率和降水的响应[J]. 西北植物学报, 2018, 38(8):1526-1533.
	WANG Yuehua, SONG Xiaohui, WANG Zhanwen, et al. Responses of plant above and underground productivity of Stipa breviflora desert steppe to stocking rates and precipitation[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2018, 38(8): 1526-1533.
[29]	宇万太, 于永强. 植物地下生物量研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 2001, 12(6):927-932.
	YU Taiwan, YU Yongqiang. Advances in the research of underground biomass[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2001, 12(6): 927-932.
[30]	毛绍娟, 吴启华, 李红琴, 等. 放牧强度对高寒杂草类草甸群落结构及生物量的影响[J]. 冰川冻土, 2015, 37(5):1372-1380.
	MAO Shaojuan, WU Qihua, LI Hongqin, et al. Effects of grazing intensity on species diversity and biomass in alpine-cold forb meadow on the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2015, 37(5): 1372-1380.
[31]	卫智军, 闫瑞瑞, 运向军, 等. 放牧制度下荒漠草原主要植物生物量及能量分配研究[J]. 中国沙漠, 2011, 31(5):1124-1130.
	WEI Zhijun, YAN Ruirui, YUN Xiangjun, et al. Study on biomass and energy allocation of major plant species in desert steppe under different grazing systems[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2011, 31(5): 1124-1130.
[32]	DENG Lei, Sweeney S, SHANGGUAN Zhouping, Grassland responses to grazing disturbance:plant diversity changes with grazing intensity in a desert steppe[J]. Grass and Forage Science, 2014, 69(3): 524-533. DOI URL
[33]	王炜, 梁存柱, 刘钟龄, 等. 草原群落退化与恢复演替中的植物个体行为分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2000, 24(3):268.
	WANG Wei, LIANG Cunzhu, LIU Zhongling, et al. Analysis of plant individual behavior in degradation and restoration succession of grassland communities[J]. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 2000, 24(3): 268.
[34]	安慧. 放牧干扰对荒漠草原优势植物形态可塑性及生物量分配的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2014, 28(11):116-121.
	AN Hui. Effect of grazing on morphological plasticity and biomass allocation of dominant species in desert steppe[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2014, 28(11): 116-121.

项目 Items	游牧 Nomadic grazing	定居 Settled grazing
放牧天数 Grazing days	180 d	60 d
放牧模式 Grazing mode	放牧+补饲	短期放牧+舍饲
放牧家畜 Grazing livestock	细毛羊、哈萨克羊、哈萨克马、新疆褐牛多种家畜混合放牧	细毛羊、哈萨克羊、哈萨克马、新疆褐牛多种家畜混合放牧
家畜数量 Number of livestock	300±20(羊单位)	300±20(羊单位)

项目 Items	游牧 Nomadic grazing	定居 Settled grazing
放牧天数 Grazing days	180 d	60 d
放牧模式 Grazing mode	放牧+补饲	短期放牧+舍饲
放牧家畜 Grazing livestock	细毛羊、哈萨克羊、哈萨克马、新疆褐牛多种家畜混合放牧	细毛羊、哈萨克羊、哈萨克马、新疆褐牛多种家畜混合放牧
家畜数量 Number of livestock	300±20(羊单位)	300±20(羊单位)

放牧方式 Grazing method	放牧强度 Grazing intensity	群落组成 Dominant species	盖度 Coverage (%)	地上现存量 Aboveground present biomass (g/m²)
游牧 Nomadic grazing	CK	野韭菜、细果苔草、溚草	92±3.38	181.28±20.85
	LG	细果苔草、委陵菜、草原糙苏	80±2.51	156.06±16.67
	HG	细果苔草、醉马草、针茅	58±1.29	131.68±10.61
定居放牧 Settled grazing	CK	细果苔草、草原糙苏、委陵菜	95±3.22	188.71±17.65
	LG	细果苔草、针茅、草原糙苏	84±3.03	165.18±15.32
	HG	醉马草、细果苔草、大籽蒿	71±2.06	142.55±13.20

放牧方式 Grazing method	放牧强度 Grazing intensity	群落组成 Dominant species	盖度 Coverage (%)	地上现存量 Aboveground present biomass (g/m²)
游牧 Nomadic grazing	CK	野韭菜、细果苔草、溚草	92±3.38	181.28±20.85
	LG	细果苔草、委陵菜、草原糙苏	80±2.51	156.06±16.67
	HG	细果苔草、醉马草、针茅	58±1.29	131.68±10.61
定居放牧 Settled grazing	CK	细果苔草、草原糙苏、委陵菜	95±3.22	188.71±17.65
	LG	细果苔草、针茅、草原糙苏	84±3.03	165.18±15.32
	HG	醉马草、细果苔草、大籽蒿	71±2.06	142.55±13.20

不同利用方式对天山北坡中段山地草甸草地植物生物量分布的影响

Effects of different utilization methods on the biomass distribution of mountain meadows in the middle of northern slope of Tianshan Mountain

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 34

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	吕齐, 蒋宇, 赵丰云, 雷叶, 于坤, 姚东东, 李旭娇, 沙日叶, 王芳霞. 施加生物炭对盐胁迫下无花果生物量叶绿素荧光参数及离子分配的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(3): 574-581.
[2]	赵欣欣, 刘太杰, 韩迎春, 王国平, 陈焕轩, 熊世武, 雷亚平, 杨北方, 李亚兵, 冯璐. 种植密度对机采麦套棉产量形成及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(9): 2081-2090.
[3]	杨金钰, 孙九胜, 乔小燕, 槐国龙. 不同光质配比对水培牧草大麦生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(8): 1871-1876.
[4]	潘金龙, 唐光木, 徐万里, 马雪琴, 张云舒, 马海刚, 贾宏涛. 棉秆炭对灰漠土活性有机碳氮的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(7): 1615-1624.
[5]	孟阿静, 齐莹莹, 付彦博, 王治国, 王新勇, 冯耀祖. 增温水滴灌对棉花生物量、养分吸收及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(3): 558-566.
[6]	蔡沙, 岳永寰, 靳瑰丽. 水分胁迫对醉马草生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(11): 2714-2723.
[7]	阿不都卡地尔·库尔班, 陈友强, 刘华君, 潘竟海, 李小惠, 林明, 鲁伟丹, 白晓山, 董心久, 李思忠. 深松对叶丛生长期甜菜形态结构特性及生物量积累特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(10): 2421-2430.
[8]	陈昱东, 吕光辉, 张磊, 蒋腊梅, 王恒方. 荒漠植物功能性状和生物量对土壤水盐环境的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(10): 2574-2584.
[9]	吕文钧, 吐尔逊娜依·热依木, 雪热提江·麦提努日, 张青青. 游牧与定居放牧下山地草甸草地植物群落特征分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(1): 231-241.
[10]	王君杰, 李俊, 乔治军. 生物菌肥对谷子长势指标及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(6): 1042-1047.
[11]	赛米拉克孜·台外库力, 靳瑰丽, 安沙舟, 董乙强. 不同生境条件下醉马草芽库的动态变化特征[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(5): 947-954.
[12]	刘春花, 张锐, 谢富, 王阳, 胡凯红, 王健健, 宋岩, 赵振坤, 张建良. 核桃实生幼苗光合特性对高磷胁迫的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(2): 254-264.
[13]	李亚莉, 哈丽哈什·依巴提, 张炎, 李源, 李青军. 氮磷减施与钾锌互作对棉花生物量、产量与养分吸收的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2020, 57(4): 746-753.
[14]	葛春辉, 张云舒, 唐光木, 徐万里, 姚红宇. 生物炭的施入对玉米生物量和磷养分吸收的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2020, 57(3): 442-449.
[15]	宋伞伞, 郑强卿, 姚永生, 陈奇凌, 王晶晶, 王远, 郑森宇, 唐梦, 支金虎. 不同产量水平下枣园土壤微生物量碳、氮与土壤和植株养分的关系[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2020, 57(10): 1878-1891.