极端干旱区荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落多样性特征

doi:10.17520/biods.2025485

生物多样性 ›› 2026, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (4): 25485. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2025485 cstr: 32101.14.biods.2025485

• 研究报告: 微生物多样性 • 上一篇下一篇

极端干旱区荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落多样性特征

尹翔正¹^,²^,³^,⁴^,⁵, 姜海燕¹^,^*(), 张俊²^,³^,⁴^,⁵^,^*(), 罗春生²^,³^,⁴^,⁵^,⁶, 张元明²

¹ 内蒙古农业大学林学院, 呼和浩特 010000
² 中国科学院新疆生态与地理研究所干旱区生态安全与可持续发展全国重点实验室, 乌鲁木齐 830011
³ 新疆精河荒漠生态系统国家定位观测研究站, 乌鲁木齐 830063
⁴ 新疆塔里木河胡杨林生态系统国家定位观测研究站, 乌鲁木齐 830063
⁵ 新疆维吾尔自治区林业科学院治沙研究所新疆林草治沙与沙产业重点实验室, 乌鲁木齐 830063
⁶ 大连民族大学环境与资源学院, 辽宁大连 116600

收稿日期:2025-12-04 接受日期:2026-03-17 出版日期:2026-04-20 发布日期:2026-05-27
通讯作者: 姜海燕,张俊
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区公益性科研院所基本科研业务经费资助项目(KY2025062);新疆维吾尔自治区公益性科研院所基本科研业务经费资助项目(KY2026044);新疆维吾尔自治区重点研发技术项目(2025B03025-3-2);“北京林业大学-新疆维吾尔自治区林业科学院”联合专项项目(KY2024018);“北京林业大学-新疆维吾尔自治区林业科学院”联合专项项目(bl-xjlky-05)

Diversity characteristics of phyllosphere bacterial communities in desert shrubs in hyper-arid regions

Xiangzheng Yin¹^,²^,³^,⁴^,⁵, Haiyan Jiang¹^,^*(), Jun Zhang²^,³^,⁴^,⁵^,^*(), Chunsheng Luo²^,³^,⁴^,⁵^,⁶, Yuanming Zhang²

¹ College of Forestry, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010000, China
² State Key Laboratory of Ecological Safe and Sustainable Development in Arid Lands, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
³ Xinjiang Jinghe Desert Ecosystem National Observation and Research Station, Urumqi 830063, China
⁴ Xinjiang Tarim River Populus euphratica Forest Ecosystem National Observation and Research Station, Urumqi 830063, China
⁵ Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Forest, Grassland, Desertification Mitigation and Desert Land Development, Institute of Sand Control, Xinjiang Academy of Forestry, Urumqi 830063, China
⁶ College of Environment and Resources, Dalian Minzu University, Dalian, Liaoning 116600, China

Received:2025-12-04 Accepted:2026-03-17 Online:2026-04-20 Published:2026-05-27
Contact: Haiyan Jiang, Jun Zhang
Supported by:
Basic Research Operating Funds for Public Welfare Research Institutes of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(KY2025062);Basic Research Operating Funds for Public Welfare Research Institutes of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(KY2026044);the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Key Research and Development Technology Project(2025B03025-3-2);the Joint Special Project of “Beijing Forestry University-Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Academy of Forestry Sciences”(KY2024018);the Joint Special Project of “Beijing Forestry University-Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Academy of Forestry Sciences”(bl-xjlky-05)

1. 附录.pdf(1473KB)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

叶际微生物对宿主植物健康至关重要, 但极端干旱区荒漠灌木叶际内生与附生细菌群落的多样性特征及构建的环境机制尚不清楚。本研究以新疆吐鲁番的6种典型荒漠灌木为对象, 通过16S rRNA基因多样性分析, 并结合主坐标分析、变差分解、结构方程模型及零模型等统计方法, 系统分析了叶际内生与附生细菌群落的多样性特征、影响因素及群落构建机制。结果表明, 6种典型荒漠灌木的叶际附生细菌群落多样性在不同植物物种间存在显著差异(P < 0.05), 而内生细菌群落多样性在不同植物物种间差异不显著(P > 0.05)。此外, 叶际细菌群落的多样性在叶片表面(附生)与内部(内生)之间存在显著差异, 且内生细菌群落的Shannon指数与Pielou均匀度指数均显著高于附生细菌群落(P < 0.05)。变差分解分析结果显示, 叶片生理对叶际内生细菌群落的独立解释度(35.10%)显著高于叶片形态(13.42%)和叶片养分(0.62%), 而叶片形态对叶际附生细菌群落的独立解释度(32.75%)显著高于叶片生理(6.75%)和叶片养分(0.52%)。结构方程模型分析结果显示, 无论是叶片表面还是内部, 叶片生理化学特性不仅直接作用于细菌群落结构, 还通过叶片形态特征间接影响细菌群落结构; 同时, 叶片形态特征也可通过作用于细菌群落的α多样性间接影响其群落结构。零模型分析表明, 随机性过程在叶际附生(66.67%-93.33%)与内生(80.00%-100.00%)细菌群落的构建中占主导地位, 生态漂变是两者构建的驱动力。本研究揭示了极端干旱区荒漠灌木叶际附生细菌群落多样性主要受植物物种身份和叶片形态塑造, 且物种间差异显著; 而内生细菌群落的多样性则主要受叶片生理特性驱动, 物种间差异不显著。此外, 随机性过程(特别是生态漂变)在两类群落的构建中均起主导作用。这些发现为理解全球气候变化背景下脆弱荒漠生态系统的生物多样性维持机制提供了新的理论视角。

关键词: 荒漠灌木, 内生与附生细菌群落多样性, 群落构建, 叶片功能性状, 宿主植物身份, 极端干旱区

Abstract

Aims: Phyllosphere microorganisms are crucial for host plant health; however, the diversity patterns and underlying mechanisms of both phyllosphere endophytic and epiphytic bacterial communities in desert shrubs of arid regions remain poorly understood. This study aimed to systematically investigate the diversity characteristics, influencing factor, and assembly mechanisms of phyllosphere endophytic and epiphytic bacterial communities in six typical desert shrubs.
Methods: The study focused on six typical desert shrub species in Turpan, Xinjiang. Using high-throughput sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene combined with statistical approaches including principal coordinates analysis, variation partitioning, structural equation modeling, and null models, we analyzed the diversity characteristics, influencing factors, and assembly mechanisms of phyllosphere endophytic and epiphytic bacterial communities.
Results: The diversity of epiphytic bacterial communities differed significantly among the six desert shrub species (P<0.05), while no significant interspecific differences were observed in endophytic bacterial community diversity (P>0.05). Significant differences in bacterial community diversity were detected between the leaf surface (epiphytic) and interior (endophytic), with the Shannon index and Pielou’s evenness index being significantly higher in endophytic than in epiphytic communities (P < 0.05). Variation partitioning analysis revealed that leaf physiology independently explained a greater proportion of variation in endophytic bacterial communities (35.10%) than leaf morphology (13.42%) or leaf nutrients (0.62%). In contrast, leaf morphology independently explained more variation in epiphytic bacterial communities (32.75%) compared to leaf physiology (6.75%) and leaf nutrients (0.52%). Structural equation modeling indicated that leaf physiological and chemical traits not only directly affected bacterial community structure on both leaf surfaces and interiors, but also indirectly influenced it through leaf morphological traits. Additionally, leaf morphology indirectly shaped community structure via its effect on bacterial α diversity. Null model analysis demonstrated that stochastic processes dominated the assembly of both epiphytic (66.67%-93.33%) and endophytic (80.00%-100.00%) bacterial communities, with ecological drift being the core influencing factors.
Conclusion: This study reveals that in extremely arid desert shrubs, epiphytic bacterial community diversity is primarily shaped by plant species identity and leaf morphology, with significant interspecific differences, whereas endophytic community diversity is mainly driven by leaf physiology and shows no significant interspecific variation. Moreover, stochastic processes, particularly ecological drift, play a dominant role in the assembly of both community types. These findings provide new theoretical insights into the mechanisms sustaining biodiversity in vulnerable desert ecosystems under global climate change.

Key words: desert shrubs, endophytic and epiphytic bacterial community diversity, community assembly, leaf functional traits, host plant identity, hyper-arid regions

尹翔正, 姜海燕, 张俊, 罗春生, 张元明 (2026) 极端干旱区荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落多样性特征. 生物多样性, 34, 25485. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2025485.

Xiangzheng Yin, Haiyan Jiang, Jun Zhang, Chunsheng Luo, Yuanming Zhang (2026) Diversity characteristics of phyllosphere bacterial communities in desert shrubs in hyper-arid regions. Biodiversity Science, 34, 25485. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2025485.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/10.17520/biods.2025485

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/Y2026/V34/I4/25485

图/表 5

图1 荒漠灌木叶际内生与附生细菌群落α多样性分布特征。Cc: 头状沙拐枣; Cj: 泡果沙拐枣; Ha: 梭梭; Hp: 白梭梭; Th: 刚毛柽柳; Tr: 多枝柽柳。*P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001。箱线右方小写字母表示经最小显著差数法(LSD)多重比较检验结果, 不同字母表示差异显著。

Fig. 1 Alpha diversity distribution characteristics of phyllosphere endophytic and epiphytic bacterial communities in desert shrubs. Cc, Calligonum caput-medusae; Cj, C. junceum; Ha, Haloxylon ammodendron; Hp, H. persicum; Th, Tamarix hispida; Tr, T. ramosissima. * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001. Lowercase letters beside boxplots denote least significant difference (LSD) multiple comparison results, different letters indicate significant differences.

图2 基于Bray-Curtis距离的不同荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落结构主坐标分析(PCoA)。(a)叶片微生境对叶际细菌群落结构的影响; 植物物种身份对叶际内生(b)和附生(c)细菌群落结构的影响; 植物属身份对叶际内生(d)和附生(e)细菌群落结构的影响。图中虚线椭圆表示基于95%置信区间的组内数据分布范围。

Fig. 2 Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of phyllosphere bacterial community structure in desert shrubs based on Bray-Curtis distance. (a) Effect of leaf ecological niche on phyllosphere bacterial community structure; Effect of plant species identity on endophytic (b) and epiphytic (c) bacterial community structure; Effect of plant genus identity on endophytic (d) and epiphytic (e) bacterial community structure. The dashed ellipses in the figure represent the distribution range of within-group data based on a 95% confidence interval.

图3 叶片功能性状对荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落结构的影响。(a)冗余分析显示叶际细菌群落与叶片功能性状的关系; (b)变差分解显示叶片功能性状中叶片养分、叶片生理、叶片形态对叶际细菌群落结构变异的解释比例。小于0的值未显示。BW: 叶片宽度; BL: 叶片长度; SLA: 比叶面积; LMA: 比叶重; LDMC: 叶干物质含量; SS: 可溶性糖; ST: 淀粉; Phe: 总酚; Fla: 总黄酮; TNC: 总非结构性碳水化合物; LTP: 叶片总磷; LTC: 叶片总碳。

Fig. 3 Effects of leaf functional traits on phyllosphere bacterial community structure in desert shrubs. (a) Redundancy analysis showing the relationship between phyllosphere bacterial communities and leaf functional traits. (b) Variance partitioning analysis illustrating the independent and shared contributions of leaf nutrient, physiological, and morphological traits to the variation in phyllosphere bacterial community structure. Values<0 not shown. BW, Blade width; BL, Blade length; SLA, Specific leaf area: LMA, Leaf mass per area; LDMC, Leaf dry matter content; SS, Soluble sugar; ST, Starch; Phe, Total phenols; Fla, Total flavonoids; TNC, Total non-structural carbohydrates ; LTP, Leaf total phosphorus; LTC, Leaf total carbon.

图4 荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落结构变异的主要影响因素。(a)叶际内生细菌群落结构方程模型; (b)叶际附生细菌群落结构方程模型; 箭头旁数值为标准化路径系数, 实线表示显著效应(P<0.05), 虚线表示不显著效应(P>0.05), 红色和蓝色分别表示正效应和负效应, R2为变量解释度, GOF为模型拟合优度。(c)各变量对叶际内生细菌群落结构的标准化效应分解; (d)各变量对叶际附生细菌群落结构的标准化效应分解。*P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001。叶片功能性状对应缩写见图3。

Fig. 4 The key factors influencing the variation of phyllosphere bacterial community structure in desert shrubs. (a) Structural equation model of phyllosphere endophytic bacterial communities; (b) Structural equation model of phyllosphere epiphytic bacterial communities. Values next to arrows are standardized path coefficients. Solid lines indicate significant effects (P < 0.05), while dashed lines indicate non-significant effects (P > 0.05). Red and blue lines represent positive and negative effects, respectively. R2 denotes the explained variance of variables, and GOF denotes the goodness of model fit. (c) Decomposition of standardized effects of each variable on the structure of phyllosphere endophytic bacterial communities; (d) Decomposition of standardized effects of each variable on the structure of phyllosphere epiphytic bacterial communities. * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001. The corresponding abbreviations of leaf functional traits are shown in Fig. 3.

图5 荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落的构建过程。(a)内生、附生细菌群落的β最近分类单元指数(βNTI)值, 虚线为阈值|2| (>|2|表示偏确定性过程,<|2|表示偏随机性过程); (b)基于零模型分析的确定性过程(同质选择和异质选择)与随机性过程(均质化扩散、扩散限制和生态漂变)对细菌群落构建的相对影响。缩写含义见图1。

Fig. 5 Assembly processes of phyllosphere bacterial communities in desert shrubs. (a) β-nearest taxon index (βNTI) distributions of endophytic and epiphytic bacterial communities. The dashed lines indicate the |2| threshold, with values>|2| suggesting deterministic assembly and values<|2| indicating stochastic dominance. (b) Relative contributions of deterministic (homogeneous and heterogeneous selection) versus stochastic (homogenizing dispersal, diffusion limitation, and ecological drift) processes to bacterial community assembly, inferred from a zero-model analysis. The meanings of the abbreviations are shown in Fig. 1.

参考文献 78

[1]	Abdelfattah A, Freilich S, Bartuv R, Zhimo VY, Kumar A, Biasi A, Salim S, Feygenberg O, Burchard E, Dardick C, Liu J, Khan A, Ellouze W, Ali S, Spadaro D, Torres R, Teixido N, Ozkaya O, Buehlmann A, Vero S, Mondino P, Berg G, Wisniewski M, Droby S (2021) Global analysis of the apple fruit microbiome: Are all apples the same? Environmental Microbiology, 23, 6038-6055.
[2]	Alford RA, Wilbur HM (1985) Priority effects in experimental pond communities: Competition between Bufo and Rana. Ecology, 66, 1097-1105.
[3]	Bai L, Wen YZ, Han GD, Tang JL, Xu ZW, Wang ZW, Jiang L, Ren HY (2025) Long-term climate warming and nitrogen deposition increase leaf epiphytic and endophytic bacterial diversity. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 67, 2430-2445.
[4]	Bashir I, War AF, Rafiq I, Reshi ZA, Rashid I, Shouche YS (2022) Phyllosphere microbiome: Diversity and functions. Microbiological Research, 254, 126888.
[5]	Bodenhausen N, Horton MW, Bergelson J (2013) Bacterial communities associated with the leaves and the roots of Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS ONE, 8, e56329.
[6]	Borruso L, Wellstein C, Bani A, Casagrande Bacchiocchi S, Margoni A, Tonin R, Zerbe S, Brusetti L (2018) Temporal shifts in endophyte bacterial community composition of sessile oak (Quercus petraea) are linked to foliar nitrogen, stomatal length, and herbivory. PeerJ, 6, e5769.
[7]	Bulgarelli D, Schlaeppi K, Spaepen S, van Themaat EVL, Schulze-Lefert P (2013) Structure and functions of the bacterial microbiota of plants. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 64, 807-838.
[8]	Canto A, Herrera CM (2012) Micro-organisms behind the pollination scenes: Microbial imprint on floral nectar sugar variation in a tropical plant community. Annals of Botany, 110, 1173-1183.
[9]	Chase JM (2003) Community assembly: When should history matter? Oecologia, 136, 489-498.
[10]	Chaudhry V, Runge P, Sengupta P, Doehlemann G, Parker JE, Kemen E (2021) Shaping the leaf microbiota: Plant-microbe-microbe interactions. Journal of Experimental Botany, 72, 36-56.
[11]	Chen DQ, Yang JJ, Wang SF, Lan SR, Wang YL, Liu ZJ, Qian X (2025) Comparative analysis of community composition and network structure between phyllosphere endophytic and epiphytic fungal communities of Mussaenda pubescens. Microbiology Spectrum, 13, e01019-e01024.
[12]	Chen T, Nomura K, Wang XL, Sohrabi R, Xu J, Yao LY, Paasch BC, Ma L, Kremer J, Cheng YT, Zhang L, Wang N, Wang ET, Xin XF, He SY (2020) A plant genetic network for preventing dysbiosis in the phyllosphere. Nature, 580, 653-657.
[13]	Chen XL, Li LL, He YH (2024) Epiphytic and endophytic bacteria on Camellia oleifera phyllosphere: Exploring region and cultivar effect. BMC Ecology and Evolution, 24, 62.
[14]	Chesson P (2000) Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 31, 343-366.
[15]	Coleman-Derr D, Desgarennes D, Fonseca-García C, Gross S, Clingenpeel S, Woyke T, North G, Visel A, Partida- Martinez LP, Tringe SG (2016) Plant compartment and biogeography affect microbiome composition in cultivated and native Agave species. New Phytologist, 209, 798-811.
[16]	Demarquest G, Lajoie G (2023) Bacterial endophytes of sugar maple leaves vary more idiosyncratically than epiphytes across a large geographic area. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 99, fiad079.
[17]	Dini-Andreote F, Stegen JC, van Elsas JD, Salles JF (2015) Disentangling mechanisms that mediate the balance between stochastic and deterministic processes in microbial succession. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 112, e1326-e1332.
[18]	Fargione J, Brown CS, Tilman D (2003) Community assembly and invasion: An experimental test of neutral versus niche processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 100, 8916-8920.
[19]	Feng YZ, Chen RR, Stegen JC, Guo ZY, Zhang JW, Li ZP, Lin XG (2018) Two key features influencing community assembly processes at regional scale: Initial state and degree of change in environmental conditions. Molecular Ecology, 27, 5238-5251.
[20]	Finkel OM, Burch AY, Elad T, Huse SM, Lindow SE, Post AF, Belkin S (2012) Distance-decay relationships partially determine diversity patterns of phyllosphere bacteria on tamrix trees across the Sonoran Desert. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 78, 6187-6193.
[21]	Fonseca-García C, Coleman-Derr D, Garrido E, Visel A, Tringe SG, Partida-Martínez LP (2016) The Cacti microbiome: Interplay between habitat-filtering and host-specificity. Frontiers in Microbiology, 7, 150.
[22]	Gilbert B, Levine JM (2017) Ecological drift and the distribution of species diversity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 284, 20170507.
[23]	Griffin EA, Carson WP (2015) The ecology and natural history of foliar bacteria with a focus on tropical forests and agroecosystems. The Botanical Review, 81, 105-149.
[24]	Griffin EA, Harrison JG, Kembel SW, Carrell AA, Wright SJ, Carson WP (2019) Plant host identity and soil macronutrients explain little variation in sapling endophyte community composition: Is disturbance an alternative explanation? Journal of Ecology, 107, 1876-1889.
[25]	Hakobyan A, Velte S, Sickel W, Quandt D, Stoll A, Knief C (2023) Tillandsia landbeckii phyllosphere and laimosphere as refugia for bacterial life in a hyperarid desert environment. Microbiome, 11, 246.
[26]	Hubbell SP (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. In: Monographs in Population Biology. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
[27]	Hubbell SP (2005) Neutral theory in community ecology and the hypothesis of functional equivalence. Functional Ecology, 19, 166-172.
[28]	Hunter PJ, Hand P, Pink D, Whipps JM, Bending GD (2010) Both leaf properties and microbe-microbe interactions influence within-species variation in bacterial population diversity and structure in the lettuce (Lactuca species) phyllosphere. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 76, 8117-8125.
[29]	Kembel SW, O’Connor TK, Arnold HK, Hubbell SP, Wright SJ, Green JL (2014) Relationships between phyllosphere bacterial communities and plant functional traits in a neotropical forest. Proceedings of the National Academy, USA, 111, 13715-13720.
[30]	Kim M, Singh D, Lai-Hoe A, Go R, Abdul Rahim R, Ainuddin AN, Chun J, Adams JM (2012) Distinctive phyllosphere bacterial communities in tropical trees. Microbial Ecology, 63, 674-681.
[31]	Knapp DG, Lázár A, Molnár A, Vajna B, Karácsony Z, Váczy KZ, Kovács GM (2021) Above-ground parts of white grapevine Vitis vinifera cv. Furmint share core members of the fungal microbiome. Environmental Microbiology Reports, 13, 509-520.
[32]	Laforest-Lapointe I, Paquette A, Messier C, Kembel SW (2017) Leaf bacterial diversity mediates plant diversity and ecosystem function relationships. Nature, 546, 145-147.
[33]	Lajoie G, Kembel SW (2021) Host neighborhood shapes bacterial community assembly and specialization on tree species across a latitudinal gradient. Ecological Monographs, 91, e01443.
[34]	Leibold MA, Holyoak M, Mouquet N, Amarasekare P, Chase JM, Hoopes MF, Holt RD, Shurin JB, Law R, Tilman D, Loreau M, Gonzalez A (2004) The metacommunity concept: A framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecology Letters, 7, 601-613.
[35]	Li B, Fu MY, Jin GZ, Liu ZL (2025) Rare bacterial subcommunity drives nutrient cycling in phyllosphere habitat of evergreen conifers. Microbiology Spectrum, 13, e00518-e00525.
[36]	Li MJ, Hong L, Ye WH, Wang ZM, Shen H (2022) Phyllosphere bacterial and fungal communities vary with host species identity, plant traits and seasonality in a subtropical forest. Environmental Microbiome, 17, 29.
[37]	Li XM, Zuo YL, Xue ZK, Zhang LL, Zhao LL, He XL (2018) Characteristics of microbial community structure in rhizosphere soil of different desert plants. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38, 2855-2863.(in Chinese with English abstract)
	[李欣玫, 左易灵, 薛子可, 张琳琳, 赵丽莉, 贺学礼 (2018) 不同荒漠植物根际土壤微生物群落结构特征. 生态学报, 38, 2855-2863.]
[38]	Li Y, Pan JX, Zhang RY, Wang JS, Tian DS, Niu SL (2022) Environmental factors, bacterial interactions and plant traits jointly regulate epiphytic bacterial community composition of two alpine grassland species. Science of the Total Environment, 836, 155665.
[39]	Li Y, Wang JS, Pan JX, Zhang RY, Zhou B, Niu SL (2025) Divergent assembly processes of phyllosphere and rhizosphere microbial communities along environmental gradient. Plant, Cell & Environment, 48, 1380-1392.
[40]	Li YS, Jin L, Wu MH, Wang B, Qu N, Zhou HZ, Chen T, Liu GX, Yue M, Zhang GS (2024) Forest management positively reshapes the phyllosphere bacterial community and improves community stability. Environment International, 186, 108611.
[41]	Lindow SE, Brandl MT (2003) Microbiology of the phyllosphere. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 69, 1875-1883.
[42]	Liu D, Howell K (2021) Community succession of the grapevine fungal microbiome in the annual growth cycle. Environmental Microbiology, 23, 1842-1857.
[43]	Liu HW, MacDonald CA, Cook J, Anderson IC, Singh BK (2019) An ecological loop: Host microbiomes across multitrophic interactions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 34, 1118-1130.
[44]	Liu JQ, Sun X, Zuo YL, Hu QN, He XL (2023) Plant species shape the bacterial communities on the phyllosphere in a hyper-arid desert. Microbiological Research, 269, 127314.
[45]	Liu JY, Zhang XL, Jin XY, Wang MT, Zhang YY, Wang XY (2024) Nutrient allocation patterns in different aboveground organs at different reproductive stages of four introduced Calligonum species in a common garden in northwestern China. Frontiers in Plant Science, 15, 1504216.
[46]	Maignien L, DeForce EA, Chafee ME, Eren AM, Simmons SL (2014) Ecological succession and stochastic variation in the assembly of Arabidopsis thaliana phyllosphere communities. mBio, 5, e00682-e00613.
[47]	Melotto M, Underwood W, He SY (2008) Role of stomata in plant innate immunity and foliar bacterial diseases. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 46, 101-122.
[48]	Mercado-Blanco J (2015) Life of microbes inside the plant. In: Principles of Plant-Microbe Interactions (ed. Lugtenberg B), pp. 25-32. Springer International Publishing, Cham.
[49]	Mina D, Pereira JA, Lino-Neto T, Baptista P (2020) Epiphytic and endophytic bacteria on olive tree phyllosphere: Exploring tissue and cultivar effect. Microbial Ecology, 80, 145-157.
[50]	Pan YS, Liu BH, Zhang WY, Zhuang S, Wang HZ, Chen JY, Xiao L, Li YZ, Han DF (2024) Drought-induced assembly of rhizosphere mycobiomes shows beneficial effects on plant growth. mSystems, 9, e00354-e00324.
[51]	Qvit-Raz N, Finkel OM, Al-Deeb TM, Malkawi HI, Hindiyeh MY, Jurkevitch E, Belkin S (2012) Biogeographical diversity of leaf-associated microbial communities from salt-secreting Tamarix trees of the Dead Sea region. Research in Microbiology, 163, 142-150.
[52]	Redford AJ, Fierer N (2009) Bacterial succession on the leaf surface: A novel system for studying successional dynamics. Microbial Ecology, 58, 189-198.
[53]	Rodríguez-Castro L, Sierra AM, Villarreal Aguilar JC, Saltonstall K (2025) Spatial and seasonal analysis of phyllosphere bacterial communities of the epiphytic gymnosperm Zamia pseudoparasitica. Applied Biosciences, 4, 35.
[54]	Sanjenbam P, Agashe D (2024) Divergence and convergence in epiphytic and endophytic phyllosphere bacterial communities of rice landraces. mSphere, 9, e00765-e00724.
[55]	Schimann H, Vacher C, Coste S, Louisanna E, Fort T, Zinger L (2023) Determinants of the vertical distribution of the phyllosphere differ between microbial groups and the epi and endosphere in a tropical forest. Phytobiomes Journal, 7, 312-323.
[56]	Schlechter RO, Miebach M, Remus-Emsermann MNP (2019) Driving factors of epiphytic bacterial communities: A review. Journal of Advanced Research, 19, 57-65.
[57]	Tahtamouni ME, Khresat S, Lucero M, Sigala J, Unc A (2016) Diversity of endophytes across the soil-plant continuum for Atriplex spp. in arid environments. Journal of Arid Land, 8, 241-253.
[58]	Truchado P, Gil MI, Reboleiro P, Rodelas B, Allende A (2017) Impact of solar radiation exposure on phyllosphere bacterial community of red-pigmented baby leaf lettuce. Food Microbiology, 66, 77-85.
[59]	Vacher C, Castagneyrol B, Jousselin E, Schimann H (2021) Trees and insects have microbiomes: Consequences for forest health and management. Current Forestry Reports, 7, 81-96.
[60]	Vacher C, Hampe A, Porté AJ, Sauer U, Compant S, Morris CE (2016) The phyllosphere: Microbial jungle at the plant- climate interface. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 47, 1-24.
[61]	Violle C, Navas ML, Vile D, Kazakou E, Fortunel C, Hummel I, Garnier E (2007) Let the concept of trait be functional! Oikos, 116, 882-892.
[62]	Vorholt JA (2012) Microbial life in the phyllosphere. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 10, 828-840.
[63]	Wallace J, Laforest-Lapointe I, Kembel SW (2018) Variation in the leaf and root microbiome of sugar maple (Acer saccharum) at an elevational range limit. PeerJ, 6, e5293.
[64]	Wang WX, Luo M, Pan CD (2010) Microorganisms and its biological activity in rhizospheric soil around desert plants at the lower reaches of Tarim River, Xinjiang, China. Journal of Desert Research, 30, 571-576.(in Chinese with English abstract)
	[王卫霞, 罗明, 潘存德 (2010) 塔里木河下游几种荒漠植物根际土壤微生物及其活性. 中国沙漠, 30, 571-576.]
[65]	Wang ZH, Jiang Y, Zhang MH, Chu CJ, Chen YF, Fang S, Jin GZ, Jiang MX, Lian JY, Li YP, Liu Y, Ma KP, Mi XC, Qiao XJ, Wang XH, Wang XG, Xu H, Ye WH, Zhu L, Zhu Y, He FL, Kembel SW (2023) Diversity and biogeography of plant phyllosphere bacteria are governed by latitude-dependent mechanisms. New Phytologist, 240, 1534-1547.
[66]	Wei S, Zhao YF, Pan BR, Yin LK, Liu RX (2014) Phenological behaviour of desert plants in response to temperature change: A case study from Turpan Eremophytes Botanical Garden, Northwest China. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 46, 1601-1609.
[67]	Wei YQ, Lan GY, Wu ZX, Chen BQ, Quan F, Li MM, Sun SQ, Du HN (2022) Phyllosphere fungal communities of rubber trees exhibited biogeographical patterns, but not bacteria. Environmental Microbiology, 24, 3777-3790.
[68]	Wu TG, Wang GG, Wu QT, Cheng XR, Yu MK, Wang W, Yu XB (2014) Patterns of leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry among Quercus acutissima provenances across China. Ecological Complexity, 17, 32-39.
[69]	Yadav RKP, Karamanoli K, Vokou D (2005) Bacterial colonization of the phyllosphere of Mediterranean perennial species as influenced by leaf structural and chemical features. Microbial Ecology, 50, 185-196.
[70]	Yan K, Han WH, Zhu QL, Li CR, Dong Z, Wang YP (2022) Leaf surface microtopography shaping the bacterial community in the phyllosphere: Evidence from 11 tree species. Microbiological Research, 254, 126897.
[71]	Yan ZZ, Chen QL, Li CY, Thi Nguyen BA, He JZ, Hu HW (2022) Contrasting ecological processes shape the Eucalyptus phyllosphere bacterial and fungal community assemblies. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Environment, 1, 73-83.
[72]	Yang X, Wang PD, Xiao BW, Xu QN, Guo Q, Li SP, Guo LL, Deng MF, Lu JB, Liu LL, Ma KP, Schmid B, Jiang L (2023) Different assembly mechanisms of leaf epiphytic and endophytic bacterial communities underlie their higher diversity in more diverse forests. Journal of Ecology, 111, 970-981.
[73]	Yao H, Sun X, He C, Li XC, Guo LD (2020) Host identity is more important in structuring bacterial epiphytes than endophytes in a tropical mangrove forest. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 96, fiaa038.
[74]	Yao H, Sun X, He C, Maitra P, Li XC, Guo LD (2019) Phyllosphere epiphytic and endophytic fungal community and network structures differ in a tropical mangrove ecosystem. Microbiome, 7, 57.
[75]	Yue K, Fornara DA, Yang WQ, Peng Y, Li ZJ, Wu FZ, Peng CH (2017) Effects of three global change drivers on terrestrial C:N:P stoichiometry: A global synthesis. Global Change Biology, 23, 2450-2463.
[76]	Zhang J, Zhang YM, Zhang Q (2024) Host plant traits play a crucial role in shaping the composition of epiphytic microbiota in the arid desert, Northwest China. Journal of Arid Land, 16, 699-724.
[77]	Zhang J, Zhou XB, Rong XY, Yin BF, Zhang L, Zhang YM (2026) Host phylogeny and traits shape the composition and network structure of the phyllosphere microbial communities in temperate desert plants. Microbiological Research, 302, 128355.
[78]	Zhang X, Xu Y, Yang YC, Zhao YL, Men ZH, Wang YL (2024) The diversity and assembly mechanism of phyllosphere fungal communities in the relict plant Helianthemum songaricum. Biodiversity Sciencesongaricum, 32, 23384.(in Chinese with English abstract)
	[张旋, 徐颖, 杨颜慈, 赵艳玲, 门中华, 王永龙 (2024) 孑遗植物半日花叶际真菌群落的多样性与构建机制. 生物多样性, 32, 23384.]

极端干旱区荒漠灌木叶际细菌群落多样性特征

Diversity characteristics of phyllosphere bacterial communities in desert shrubs in hyper-arid regions

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

补充材料

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 78

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	罗春生, 张俊, 金华, 尹翔正, 张元明. 古尔班通古特沙漠灌木叶际细菌群落的多样性特征及其驱动因素[J]. 生物多样性, 2025, 33(12): 25340-.
[2]	曲锐, 左振君, 王有鑫, 张良键, 吴志刚, 乔秀娟, 王忠. 基于元素组的生物地球化学生态位及其在不同生态系统中的应用[J]. 生物多样性, 2024, 32(4): 23378-.
[3]	郑梦瑶, 李媛, 王雪蓉, 张越, 贾彤. 芦芽山不同植被类型土壤原生动物群落构建机制[J]. 生物多样性, 2024, 32(4): 23419-.
[4]	徐凯伦, 陈小荣, 张敏华, 于婉婉, 吴素美, 朱志成, 陈定云, 兰荣光, 董舒, 刘宇. 演替和地形共同影响浙江百山祖森林群落的性系统多样性[J]. 生物多样性, 2024, 32(12): 24338-.
[5]	杨胜娴, 杨清, 李晓东, 巢欣, 刘惠秋, 魏蓝若雪, 巴桑. 确定性过程主导高原典型河流浮游植物地理分布格局和群落构建[J]. 生物多样性, 2023, 31(7): 23092-.
[6]	杜芳, 荣晓莹, 徐鹏, 尹本丰, 张元明. 降水对古尔班通古特沙漠细菌群落多样性和构建过程的影响[J]. 生物多样性, 2023, 31(2): 22492-.
[7]	董建宇, 孙昕, 詹启鹏, 张宇洋, 张秀梅. 莱州湾东岸潮下带大型底栖动物群落beta多样性格局及其驱动因素[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(3): 21388-.
[8]	王寅, 王健铭, 曲梦君, 李景文. 干旱内陆河流域植物群落构建过程及其关键驱动因素[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(2): 21419-.
[9]	雍青措姆, 习新强, 牛克昌. 高寒草甸植物物种丧失对草原毛虫的影响[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(11): 22069-.
[10]	米湘成, 王绪高, 沈国春, 刘徐兵, 宋晓阳, 乔秀娟, 冯刚, 杨洁, 毛子昆, 徐学红, 马克平. 中国森林生物多样性监测网络: 二十年群落构建机制探索的回顾与展望[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(10): 22504-.
[11]	高程, 郭良栋. 微生物物种多样性、群落构建与功能性状研究进展[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(10): 22429-.
[12]	王少鹏, 罗明宇, 冯彦皓, 储诚进, 张大勇. 生物多样性理论最新进展[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(10): 22410-.
[13]	康佳鹏, 韩路, 冯春晖, 王海珍. 塔里木荒漠河岸林不同生境群落物种多度分布格局[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(7): 875-886.
[14]	欧阳园丽, 张参参, 林小凡, 田立新, 顾菡娇, 陈伏生, 卜文圣. 中国亚热带不同菌根树种的根叶形态学性状特征与生长差异: 以江西新岗山为例[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(6): 746-758.
[15]	董雷, 王静, 刘永刚, 赵志平, 米湘成, 郭柯. 太行山北段地区荆条灌丛和三裂绣线菊灌丛群落谱系结构[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(1): 21-31.