半干旱草原大中型土壤动物在畜粪分解中的作用

程建伟, 王亚东, 王桠楠, 李莹, 郭颖, 白正, 刘新民, 李永宏

Effects of soil macro- and meso-fauna on the decomposition of cattle and horse dung pats in a semi-arid steppe

Jianwei Cheng, Yadong Wang, Yanan Wang, Ying Li, Ying Guo, Zheng Bai, Xinmin Liu, Frank Yonghong Li

图5 在畜粪分解第30 d土壤动物对土壤特性的影响。CK, 仅土壤, 无粪; T0, 粪添加+0.425 mm隔离网(排除了粪金龟(粪居型和掘洞型粪金龟)和中型土壤动物); T1, 粪添加+1 mm隔离网(排除了粪金龟); T2, 粪添加+2 mm隔离网(排除了掘洞型粪金龟); T3, 仅粪添加(不排除土壤动物)。采用Duncan检验进行事后比较, 不同的小写字母表示不同处理间差异显著(P < 0.05)。采用独立样本t检验进行事后比较, 不同的大写字母代表牛粪和马粪之间在P < 0.05水平上存在显著差异。

Fig. 5 Effects of soil fauna on soil properties at day 30 of the experimental period. CK, Soil only, no dung nor soil fauna; T0, dung pat covered with a wire-mesh-cage of 0.425 mm holes (excluding dung beetles and soil meso-fauna); T1, dung pat covered with a wire-mesh-cage of 1 mm holes (excluding dung beetles); T2, dung pat covered with a wire-mesh-cage of 2 mm holes (excluding tunneler dung beetle); T3, exposed dung (with no exclusion of soil fauna). The significant differences between treatments at P < 0.05 are denoted using different lower letters (one-way ANOVA with Duncan’s multiple-range tests for post hoc comparisons). Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference between cattle dung and horse dung at P < 0.05, after using independent sample t test for post hoc comparisons.