Next Article in Journal
Simulation and Experimental Study of a Split High-Speed Precision Seeding System
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of Grazing Sheep and Mowing on Grassland Vegetation Community and Soil Microbial Activity under Different Levels of Nitrogen Deposition
Previous Article in Journal
Responses of Soybean Water Supply and Requirement to Future Climate Conditions in Heilongjiang Province
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Impact of the Renovation of Grassland on the Development of Segetal Weeds in Organic Farming
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 12
Issue 7
10.3390/agriculture12071036
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Grazing Horse Effects on Desert Grassland Soil Gross Nitrification and Denitrification Rates in Northern China

by
Xiaonan Wang
1,
Chengjie Wang
2,
Chengyang Zhou
1,
Shining Zuo
1,
Yixin Ji
1,
Qiezhuo Lamao
1 and
Ding Huang
1,*
1
College of Grassland Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
2
College of Grassland, Resources and Environment, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010011, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2022, 12(7), 1036; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12071036
Submission received: 23 June 2022 / Revised: 14 July 2022 / Accepted: 14 July 2022 / Published: 15 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Restoration of Degraded Grasslands and Sustainable Grazing)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of grazing on soil gross nitrification (GN) and denitrification (DN) rates and soil environmental factors on GN and DN in the desert grassland of northern China. Soil samples were collected from July to November in 2017 and March to June in 2018, with 5-5 soil samples taken from three enclosures (CK) vs. three heavy-grazing (G) randomized treatment blocks. We determined: (1) the soil moisture (SM), pH, bulk density (BD), total nitrogen (TN), soil organic carbon (SOC), and inorganic nitrogen (IN, NH4+-N, and NO3−-N) content, and (2) GN and DN. The relationship between the changes in GN, DN, and the soil environment was analyzed using stepwise multiple-regression analysis. Gross nitrification, DN, pH, BD, C/N, SM, IN, and NO3−-N varied significantly by month. Grazing induced significant increases in SM and NO3− only. GN in the CK treatment was related to NH4+-N and NO3−-N, while GN in the G treatment was related to NH4+-N and SM. DN in the CK treatment was related to NH4+-N, while DN in the G treatment was related to C/N. Additionally, GN and DN had obvious seasonal variations and reached a maximum in July. This highlights the different underlying mechanisms that affect soil GN and DN and the dynamics, particularly in the desert grassland system.

1. Introduction

Nitrogen (N) plays an important role in plant growth [1,2]. Gross nitrification (GN) and denitrification (DN), as two vital processes of soil N cycling, regulate the form of soil inorganic nitrogen (IN, NH4+ and NO3−) available to plants [3,4]. GN is the transition from ammonium nitrogen (NH4+) to nitrate nitrogen (NO3−), while DN is the transition from NO3− to nitrogen gas N2O and N2 [5]. Grasslands cover 26% of global terrestrial surface [6], and grazing is one of the main ways of using grasslands. Animal grazing increases soil compaction through trampling [7] and affects grassland nutrient cycling through feed intake and excreta return [8]. These effects have been shown to influence GN and DN.
Increasingly, studies have been conducted in grasslands assessing GN under different grazing managements [4,9,10,11,12]. While some studies have found that grazing promotes GN [13,14], others have found that grazing inhibits soil GN [15,16]. Numerous studies have been conducted on grassland soil DN under different grazing management conditions [17,18,19,20]. While Du R et al. and Gao [21,22] found that grazing promotes soil DN, Sun et al. and Wang et al. concluded that grazing inhibits soil DN [11,23]. From previous research conducted, no consistent relationships were found between animal grazing effects and soil GN and DN.
Soil GN can be influenced by soil physicochemical properties, such as soil carbon:nitrogen (C:N) ratios and soil moisture [24,25,26]. For example, there is a negative correlation between GN and soil C/N, because micro-organisms change N by using C [27]. Li et al. found that soil organic carbon (SOC) decreases the GN rate [28], whereas Luo et al. found that the GN rate increases as the SOC content increases [29]. As the substrate of GN, the content of NH4+ would directly affect the rate of GN. Generally, the higher the NH4+ content is, the faster the GN rate is [30]; however, another study found that the GN rate does not increase with the increase in NH4+ content [31]. In the upper 100 cm of soil, soil total N is mainly composed of organic N [32]. Organic N provides a substrate for heterotrophic nitrification [33]. Yao et al. found that the higher the organic N content in soil, the greater the GN [34]. Soil pH affects GN mainly by affecting the composition and function of micro-organisms [35,36]. When soil pH > 7.5, the GN rate of adding anhydrous ammonia reached 89%, whereas when the pH < 6, it was 39% [37]. In addition, the rate of GN was increased by increasing the soil pH by adding lime [38]. The soil GN rate was affected by temperature, but there was no consistent relationship. Gao et al. found that the GN rate decreased with the increase in temperature [39], whereas Bork et al. found that the increase in temperature greatly promoted the GN rate [40]. Soil GN is regulated by precipitation through changes in nitrate [41]. Chen et al. found that the higher the soil water content, the faster the rate of GN [42]. However, it was found that the GN rate decreased with the increase in soil moisture content [43].
Soil DN occurs under anaerobic conditions and is affected by soil environmental factors [44,45,46]. For example, NO3−, as the substrate of DN, and SOC, as the electron donor of denitrifying bacteria, affect the DN rate [47,48]. The addition of NO3− and C stimulates the DN rate [49]. The effect of soil pH on DN was not consistent. In general, acidic soil inhibits DN [50], while alkaline soil promotes DN [51]. In addition, there was no significant relationship between pH and DN [52]. DN is also affected by temperature. In general, the DN rate increases as the temperature increases [53]. Conversely, the DN rate would decrease if the temperature was higher or lower than the optimal temperature [54].
Here, we investigated the effects of animal grazing on soil GN and DN from the desert grassland of Inner Mongolia, northern China. Previous studies have covered the impact of animal grazing on plant productivity and community characteristics [55,56] and soil physical and chemical properties [57,58]. However, no information is available on soil GN and DN in desert grasslands in China. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of animal grazing on soil GN and DN over a year (except winter) in desert grassland soil. Specifically, we aimed to determine if animal grazing influences soil GN and DN.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Sites

The experiment was conducted in the Xilamuren desert steppe (41°21′ N, 111°112′ E), near Damao County of Baotou City, Inner Mongolia, China. The climate in this region is mid-temperate semi-arid continental monsoon. The elevation is about 1600 m. The annual precipitation is 280 mm with abundant precipitation in summer, from July to September. The annual evaporation is about 2300 mm. The annual average temperature is 2.5 °C. The soil type is loamy sand texture (using the FAO classification). The experimental grassland was dominated by Stipa krylovii. Other common species include Stipa breviflora, Cleistogenes songorica, and Artemisia frigida.

2.2. Experimental Design

In 2012, an 8.64 ha experimental site was established with relatively homogenous vegetation, which was previously free-grazing land, and the grassland area around the experimental site was about 70,000 ha. The experimental area was divided into two treatments (CK: enclosure, and G: heavy grazing with a stocking rate of 1.05 sheep/ha/year (5 horses)) with three replicates per treatment in a randomized complete block design. For the grazing treatments, adult Mongolian horses with similar body weight and age grazed for the first 5 days of each month, from June to September each year, from 2012 to 2018.

2.3. Soil Sampling

Soil samples were collected from July to November in 2017 and March to June in 2018. Five intact soil cores were randomly collected with a soil corer at a depth of 10–15 cm in each plot (four points at the corners and one point in the center). Soil samples kept in an incubator with ice bags were brought back to the laboratory and immediately transferred to a 4 °C refrigerator for storage. Soil GN and DN rates were determined within 7 days of sampling. In addition, we collected additional soil samples to determine soil pH, bulk density (BD), soil moisture (SM), total nitrogen (TN), NH4+-N, NO3−-N, and IN and SOC. Soil temperature (ST) was automatically monitored by the PC-4 Meteorological environment monitoring recorder (PC-4, Jinzhou Sunshine Meteorological Technology Co., Ltd., Jinzhou, China).

2.4. Soil Characteristic Measurements

The GN and DN rates of the soil were determined using Barometric Process Separation Technology (BaPS, Aozuo Ecological Instrument Co., Ltd., Beijing, China). Five intact soil cores from each plot were placed in the BaPS incubation chamber to determine the rates of GN and DN. Following Conrads et al. to overcome the measurement error of BaPS for alkaline calcareous soil, the respiration quotient was set to 0.9 [59]. The data collection time was over 12 h, and the system automatically recalculated the soil GN rate and DN rate. Soil pH was measured using a pH meter (PHS-3C, Shanghai INESA Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China) with a soil–water mass ratio of 1:2.5. BD was measured using the soil core method at the subsurface depth (10–15 cm) using the BaPS soil core sampler, and SM was measured using the gravimetric method. NH4+-N and NO3−-N were determined by a continuous flow analyzer (AA3, Tianjin Zhongtong Technology Development Co., Ltd., Tianjin, China) after extracting fresh soil with 2 mol/L KCl. SOC and TN were determined by an elemental analyzer after dilution with hydrochloric acid to remove calcium carbonate (Vario MACRO cube, Beijing Zhongke Huaxing Technology trade Co., Ltd., Beijing, China).

2.5. Statistical Analysis

To test the effects of treatment, month, and their interactions on GN, DN, and soil environmental factors, we used a repeated-measures mixed-model analysis of variance with treatment as the fixed effect, and month as a repeated-measures factor. To compare and analyze the differences between CK and G treatments, the response ratio (RR) was used to reflect the response effect of each index to grazing. The specific calculation formula [60,61] is as follows:
R R   =   l n ( X t X c )   =   l n   X t − l n   X c
where Xt represents the average value of the G treatment and Xc represents the average value of the CK treatment. When RR was 0, it indicated that grazing did not cause differences in parameters between the G and CK groups. If RR was less than 0, it meant that the grazing activity had a negative effect on the selected parameter; if RR was greater than 0, it meant that the grazing activity had a positive effect on the selected parameter. The differences in soil GN and DN between the CK and G treatments were tested using a t-test. Pearson’s correlation analysis and linear regression analysis were used to test relationships between the soil environmental factors and GN and DN under different treatments. Stepwise multiple-regression analyses were performed with soil physicochemical properties as independent variables and GN and DN as dependent variables. All statistical analyses were conducted with SPSS 19.0 statistical software package (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA), and figures were plotted with SigmaPlot 12.5 (Systat Software, Inc., San Jose, CA, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Soil Analysis

SM and NO3−-N content showed significant differences between the CK and G treatments (p < 0.05), but no significant difference for the other indices (p > 0.05; Table 1). In contrast, GN, pH, BD, C/N, SM, IN, and NO3−-N showed strong significant differences between months (p < 0.001) and DN showed a slight significant difference between months (p < 0.05; Table 1). There were interactions between treatments and months for pH, NH4+-N, and BD (p < 0.05 or p < 0.01; Table 1). Grazing response on SOC, NO3−-N, IN, SM, C/N, BD, and TN showed an increasing trend, but GN, DN, and NH4+-N had a decreasing trend (Figure 1).

3.2. Soil GN and DN

GN was significantly lower (p < 0.05) in the G than CK treatment in July (140.04 and 173.17 ug kg−1 h−1, respectively, Figure 2a), and varied significantly between months (p < 0.001), but no interaction was observed between grazing treatment and months. DN was significantly lower (p < 0.05) in the G than CK treatment in July (107.00 and 135.98 ug kg−1 h−1, respectively, Figure 2b), and varied significantly between months (p < 0.05), but no interaction was observed between grazing treatment and months.

3.3. Correlations between GN, DN, and Soil Physical and Chemical Properties

GN in the CK treatment showed a significant positive correlation with NH4+-N (R2 = 0.214; p < 0.05) and with SM (R2 = 0.182; p < 0.05) but showed a significant negative correlation with NO3−-N (R2 = 0.274; p < 0.01, Figure 3). DN in the CK treatment showed a significant positive correlation with NH4+-N (R2 = 0.198; p < 0.05). GN in the G treatment showed a significant negative correlation with NH4+-N (R2 = 0.248; p < 0.01) and C/N (R2 = 0.156; p < 0.05), but showed a significant positive correlation with SM (R2 = 0.303; p < 0.01). DN in the G treatment showed a significant negative correlation with C/N (R2 = 0.17; p < 0.05).

3.4. Factors Controlling GN and DN Processes

GN in the CK treatment was positively correlated with NH4+-N, but was negatively correlated with NO3−-N; NH4+-N and NO3−-N as explanatory variables could explain 41.5% of the variance in the dependent variable GN in the CK (p < 0.01; Table 2). DN in the CK treatment was positively correlated with NH4+-N and NH4+-N could explain 19.8% of the variance in the dependent variable DN in the CK (p < 0.05; Table 2). GN in the G treatment was positively correlated with SM, but was negatively correlated with NH4+-N; SM and NH4+-N as explanatory variables could explain 53.3% of the variance in the dependent variable GN in the G (p < 0.001; Table 2). DN in the G treatment was negatively correlated with C/N, and C/N could explain 17% of the variance in the dependent variable DN in the G (p < 0.05; Table 2).

4. Discussion

4.1. Grazing Effects on GN and DN in Desert-Steppe Grassland

Our results showed that GN in the CK treatment was positively correlated with NH4+-N and SM (Figure 3; Table 2), but was negatively correlated with NO3−-N (Figure 3; Table 2). Studies found that SM was the main factor affecting soil GN [2,62]. In this study, we observed positive effects between GN and SM. It was found that the higher the SM, the faster the GN rate [26,42], whereas Vernimmen et al. found that with the increase in SM, the GN rate decreased [43]. Studies have shown that there is critical water content in the GN rate. Below the critical water content, the soil GN rate increases with an increase in soil water content. Above the critical water content, the GN rate decreases with an increase in water content [63,64]. This study area belongs to the driest part of the steppe, with an average annual precipitation of about 280 mm, mainly in the form of rainfall in summer. Therefore, for the majority of the year, the soil is under water deficit. NH4+-N is used as a substrate for GN, and its concentration in soil directly affects the intensity of GN [30,65]. We observed strong positive effects between GN and NH4+-N. It was found that the GN rate increased with the increase in NH4+-N [66,67]. However, this is in contrast with other studies that found GN was not significantly correlated with NH4+-N [2,31,68]. NO3−-N is a product of soil GN, and we found strong negative effects between GN and NO3−-N. A high concentration of product (NO3−-N) mainly inhibits the growth of nitrite bacteria [69], thus hindering the nitrification process. GN in the G treatment was positively correlated with SM (Figure 3; Table 2), but was negatively correlated with NH4+-N, C/N, and pH (Figure 3; Table 2). GN rates increased significantly with the increase in SM in the G treatment (R2 = 0.303, p = 0.003), although the SM after grazing was higher than that in the enclosures (Figure 1), and the SM after grazing was within the lower soil water content range. Soil C:N has an important effect on GN, affecting the abundance of ammonia oxidizing bacteria and archaea [70,71]. In this study, GN and C/N showed a negative correlation (Figure 3). This is consistent with previous research results showing that forest soil C:N is negatively correlated with GN [70,72]. The higher C/N ratio of grassland soil would increase the demand of micro-organisms for N, leading to a reduction in available substrates for GN, thus reducing the GN rate [73]. Soil pH affects the GN rate mainly by affecting the activity of soil-nitrifying bacteria and the GN process [74]. In our study, the pH was 7.57–7.99, with negative effects between GN and pH in the G treatment (Table S2). Conversely, when soil pH is lower than 4.5 or higher than 8.0, GN is inhibited [75]. When the soil pH is between 7.0 and 8.0, the GN process is promoted [76,77]. This discrepancy may be attributed to differences in grazing livestock, stocking rates, and grassland types. In addition, we found strong negative effects between GN and NH4+-N in the G treatment (Figure 3 and Table 2). We speculate that the main reason for these adverse results between enclosure and grazing treatment is the change in microbial activity under grazing pressure [78,79].
NH4+-N has a certain influence on DN. Our results showed that DN in the CK treatment was positively correlated with NH4+-N (Figure 3; Table 2). Mulvaney et al. showed that NH4+-N fertilizer can enhance DN by affecting the content of water-soluble organic C and pH in the soil [80]. In contrast, Wang et al. found that adding a small amount of NH4+-N inhibited the DN rate [81]. This discrepancy may also be attributed to difference in microbial activity.
In addition, DN rates are regulated by soil C and N content [82,83]. Our results showed that DN in the G treatment was negatively correlated with C/N and SOC (Figure 3; Table 2; Table S2). This may be because increasing the water content could increase the SOC and TN content in the G treatment [84,85]. In addition, other experiments in the desert steppe of Inner Mongolia have shown that short-term heavy grazing increased microbial nitrogen retention [86], which in turn reduced DN [87]. Yan et al. showed that heavy grazing can reduce C and N sequestration potential [88]. This discrepancy in findings may be due to differences in climate, soil physicochemical properties, and microbial composition in the study area itself, or due to changes in plant and microbial communities caused by grazing, resulting in different degrees of response.

4.2. Seasonal Dynamics of GN and DN

The monthly soil GN and DN rates showed strong seasonal variations. This agrees with previous studies on the significant seasonal variation of soil GN and DN rates in different geographic regions [14,89]. Soil GN and DN rates are affected by a variety of factors, among which seasonal changes in SM, temperature, and IN can affect N conversion [2,67,90]. During the sampling period, the maximum soil GN and DN rates occurred in July, and soil GN was related to SM, NH4+-N, and NO3−-N. During this period, SM was the second highest in July after November (Figure S1), coupled with suitable NH4+-N, NO3−-N, temperature, and better hydrothermal conditions, which made the microbial activity and growth stronger and promoted GN [91]. Soil GN rates were significantly positively correlated with SM, but soil temperature had no significant effect on the soil GN rate (Tables S1 and S2). Therefore, during the sampling period, temperature was not the main influencing factor restricting soil GN in the grassland. The experimental area is in a semi-arid climate zone, and the SM remains low for extended periods. During our experiments, SM content was below 10% throughout the sampling period, while the soil temperature fluctuated between −1.53 and 24.33 °C (Figure S1). Therefore, although soil temperature conditions in July (24.33 °C) were suitable for soil nitrogen transformation, due to the limiting effect of lower SM, the effect of soil temperature was reduced, the effect of SM on soil GN was significant, and it became a main limiting factor affecting the change of soil GN rate. The soil GN and DN rates in November were the second highest. It may be that the soil underwent freezing and thawing, and the soil water content had reached its highest level (Figure S1). In addition, the content of NH4+-N and NO3−-N was also high, which promoted soil GN, but this may also be due to the soil temperature dropping to below zero (−1.53 °C). Therefore, the GN in November was lower than that in July. Since soil DN was positively correlated with GN (Tables S1 and S2), soil DN showed a consistent seasonal trend, reaching a maximum in July, followed by November.

5. Conclusions

Despite having no effect on GN and DN, there were different pathways affecting GN and DN under grazing pressure compared with CK. The soil GN rate in the CK treatment was regulated by NH4+-N and NO3−-N, while the soil GN rate in the G treatment was affected by NH4+-N and SM. Likewise, the DN rate in the CK treatment was regulated by NH4+-N, while the DN rate in the G treatment was regulated by C/N. Additionally, the soil GN and DN rates in the desert steppe of Inner Mongolia had obvious seasonal variations and reached a maximum in July. This highlights the different underlying mechanisms which affect soil GN and DN and their dynamics, particularly in the desert grassland system. Additionally, since GN and DN in soil are processes involving micro-organisms, it is necessary to study the micro-organisms related to GN and DN. Understanding their underlying effects may be critical to clarify the response mechanism of GN and DN to grazing and lay a foundation for in-depth understanding of soil N cycle in a desert steppe ecosystem.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agriculture12071036/s1, Figure S1: Monthly changes of surface soil temperature and moisture in the experimental site; Table S1: Correlation analysis between gross nitrification (GN), denitrification (DN) and soil physical and chemical properties in the CK treatment; Table S2: Correlation analysis between gross nitrification (GN), denitrification (DN) and soil physical and chemical properties in the G treatment.

Author Contributions

Investigation, X.W., C.Z., S.Z., Y.J. and Q.L.; project administration, C.W., D.H. and X.W.; resources, C.W.; visualization, X.W.; writing—original draft, X.W.; writing—review and editing, D.H.; funding acquisition, D.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Beijing Scientific Committee project of China, grant number Z181100009618031; the Climate-Smart Grassland Ecosystem Management Project, grant number 10006-P166853-2021-PIR-WB-China.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Jones, D.L.; Shannon, D.; Murphy, D.V.; Farrar, J. Role of dissolved organic nitrogen (don) in soil N cycling in grassland soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2004, 36, 749–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Lu, X.Y.; Yan, Y.; Fan, J.H.; Wang, X.D. Gross nitrification and denitrification in alpine grassland ecosystems on the Tibetan Plateau. Arct. Antarct. Alp. Res. 2012, 44, 188–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Nasholm, T.; Kielland, K.; Ganeteg, U. Uptake of organic nitrogen by plants. New Phytol. 2009, 182, 31–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Roux, X.; Bardy, M.; Loiseau, P.; Louault, F. Stimulation of soil nitrification and denitrification by grazing in grasslands: Do changes in plant species composition matter? Oecologia 2003, 137, 417–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zumft, W.G. Cell biology and molecular basis of denitrification. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 1997, 61, 533–616. [Google Scholar]
  6. Andresen, L.C.; Yuan, N.; Seibert, R.; Moser, G.; Kammann, C.I.; Luterbacher, J.; Erbs, M.; Muller, C. Biomass responses in a temperate European grassland through 17 years of elevated CO2. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2018, 24, 3875–3885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, Y.W.; Han, J.G.; Li, Z.Q. A study of the effects of different grazing intensities on soil physical properties. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2002, 10, 74–78. [Google Scholar]
  8. Krzic, M.; Broersma, K.; Thompson, D.J.; Bomke, A.A. Soil properties and species diversity of grazed crested wheatgrass and native rangelands. J. Range Manag. 2000, 53, 353–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Frank, D.A.; Groffman, P.M.; Evans, R.D.; Tracy, B.F. Ungulate stimulation of nitrogen cycling and retention in yellowstone park grasslands. Oecologia 2000, 123, 116–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Liu, T.Z.; Nan, Z.B.; Hou, F.J. Culturable autotrophic ammonia-oxidizing bacteria population and nitrification potential in a sheep grazing intensity gradient in a grassland on the loess plateau of northwest China. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2011, 91, 925–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Sun, G.; Wu, N.; Luo, P. Characteristics of soil nitrogen and carbon of pastures under different management in northwestern Sichuan. Acta Phytoecol. Sin. 2005, 29, 304–310. [Google Scholar]
  12. Gao, X.F.; Han, G.D. Study on effect of grazing on steppe soil nitrogen cycle. Soils 2011, 43, 161–166. [Google Scholar]
  13. Pan, H.; Xie, K.X.; Zhang, Q.C.; Jia, Z.J.; Xu, J.M.; Di, H.J.; Li, Y. Archaea and bacteria respectively dominate nitrification in lightly and heavily grazed soil in a grassland system. Biol. Fertil. Soils. 2018, 54, 41–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. He, Y.Y. Studies on the Plant Nitrogen Reserves and Soil Nitrogen Cycling in Kubqi Desert. Master’s Thesis, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohhot, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  15. Holst, J.; Liu, C.; Brüggemann, N.; Butterbach-Bahl, K.; Zheng, X.; Wang, Y.; Han, S.; Yao, Z.; Yue, J.; Han, X. Microbial N turnover and N-Oxide (N2O/NO/NO2) fluxes in semi-arid grassland of Inner Mongolia. Ecosystems 2007, 10, 623–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wang, C. Study on the Structure and Activity of Soil Nitrifiers in Desert Steppe, Northwestern China. Master’s Thesis, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  17. Luo, J.; Tillman, R.W.; Ball, P.R. Grazing effects on denitrification in a soil under pasture during two contrasting seasons. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1999, 31, 903–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Chroňáková, A.; Radl, V.; Cuhel, J.; Simek, M.; Elhottová, D.; Engel, M.; Schloter, M. Overwintering management on upland pasture causes shifts in an abundance of denitrifying microbial communities, their activity and N2O-reducing ability. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2009, 41, 1132–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wu, H.; Dannenmann, M.; Fanselow, N.; Wolf, B.; Yao, Z.; Xing, W.; Bruggemann, N.; Zheng, X.; Han, X.; Dittert, K. Feedback of grazing on gross rates of N mineralization and inorganic N partitioning in steppe soils of Inner Mongolia. Plant Soil 2011, 340, 127–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chen, Y.L.; Hu, H.W.; Han, H.Y.; Du, Y.; Wan, S.Q.; Xu, Z.W.; Chen, B.D. Abundance and community structure of ammonia-oxidizing archaea and bacteria in response to fertilization and mowing in a temperate steppe in Inner Mongolia. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2014, 89, 67–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Du, R.; Wang, G.C.; Lv, D.R. Effect of grazing on microbiological processes of N2O production in grassland soils. Environ. Sci. 2001, 22, 11–15. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gao, Y.H. Study on Carbon and Nitrogen Distribution Pattern and Cycling Process in an Alpine Meadow Ecosystem under Different Grazing Intensity. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, China, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  23. Wang, X.; Guo, X.L.; Zheng, R.B.; Wang, S.F.; Liu, S.Y.; Tian, W. Effects of grazing on nitrogen transformation in swamp meadow wetland soils in Napahai of northwest Yunnan. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2018, 38, 2308–2314. [Google Scholar]
  24. Barnard, R.; Leadley, P.W.; Hungate, B.A. Global change, nitrification, and denitrification: A review. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 2005, 19, GB1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zaman, M.; Chang, S.X. Substrate type, temperature, and moisture content affect gross and net N mineralization and nitrification rates in agroforestry systems. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2004, 39, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kiese, R.; Hewett, B.; Butterbach-Bahl, K. Seasonal dynamic of gross nitrification and N2O emission at two tropical rainforest sites in Queensland, Australia. Plant Soil 2008, 309, 105–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Cabrera, M.L.; Kissel, D.E.; Vigil, M.F. Nitrogen mineralization from organic residues. J. Environ. Qual. 2005, 34, 75–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Li, P.; Lang, M.; Li, Y.S.; Li, Q.W.; Wu, J.C.; Yang, F.; Bai, X.X. Effects of different fertilization on nitrification and mineralization in black soil. J. Agro-Environ. Sci. 2015, 34, 1326–1332. [Google Scholar]
  29. Luo, Q.P.; Gong, J.R.; Xu, S.; Baoyin, T.G.T.; Wang, Y.H.; Zhai, Z.W.; Pan, Y.; Liu, M.; Yang, L.L. Effects of N and P additions on net nitrogen mineralization in temperate typical grasslands in Inner Mongolia, China. Chin. J. Plant Ecol. 2016, 40, 480–492. [Google Scholar]
  30. Zhao, W.; Cai, Z.C.; Xu, Z.H. Does ammonium-based N addition influence nitrification and acidification in humid subtropical soils of China? Plant Soil 2007, 297, 213–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Flowers, T.H.; O’Callaghan, J.R. Nitrification in soils incubated with pig slurry or ammonium sulphate. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1983, 15, 337–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Batjes, N.H. Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 1996, 47, 151–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Schimel, J.P.; Firestone, M.K.; Killham, K.S. Identification of heterotrophic nitrification in a sierran forest soil. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1984, 48, 802–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Yao, H.Y.; Campbell, C.D.; Qiao, X.R. Soil pH controls nitrification and carbon substrate utilization more than urea or charcoal in some highly acidic soils. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2011, 47, 515–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Cheng, Y.; Wang, J.; Mary, B.; Zhang, J.B.; Cai, Z.C.; Chang, S.X. Soil pH has contrasting effects on gross and net nitrogen mineralizations in adjacent forest and grassland soils in central Alberta, Canada. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2013, 57, 848–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Yang, F.; Wu, J.J.; Zhang, D.D.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, Q.; Cheng, X.L. Soil bacterial community composition and diversity in relation to edaphic properties and plant traits in grasslands of southern China. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2018, 128, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kyveryga, P.M.; Blackmer, A.M.; Ellsworth, J.W.; Isla, R. Soil pH effects on nitrification of fall-applied anhydrous ammonia. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2004, 68, 545–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nugroho, R.A.; Roling, W.F.M.; Laverman, A.M.; Verhoef, H.A. Low nitrification rates in acid scots pine forest soils are due to pH-related factors. Microb. Ecol. 2007, 53, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gao, W.; Yan, D. Warming suppresses microbial biomass but enhances N recycling. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2019, 131, 111–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bork, E.W.; Attaeian, B.; Cahill, J.F.; Chang, S.X. Soil nitrogen and greenhouse gas dynamics in a temperate grassland under experimental warming and defoliation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2019, 83, 780–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Gu, C.H.; Riley, W.J. Combined effects of short-term rainfall patterns and soil texture on soil nitrogen cycling—A modeling analysis. J. Contam. Hydrol. 2010, 112, 141–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Chen, Y.T.; Borken, W.; Stange, C.F.; Matzner, E. Effects of decreasing water potential on gross ammonification and nitrification in an acid coniferous forest soil. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2011, 43, 333–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Vernimmen, R.R.E.; Verhoef, H.A.; Verstraten, J.M.; Bruijnzeel, L.A.; Klomp, N.S.; Zoomer, H.R.; Wartenbergh, P.E. Nitrogen mineralization, nitrification and denitrification potential in contrasting lowland rain forest types in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2007, 39, 2992–3003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Weier, K.L.; Doran, J.W.; Power, J.F.; Walters, D.T. Denitrification and the dinitrogen/nitrous oxide ratio as affected by soil water, available carbon, and nitrate. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1993, 57, 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Van Den Heuvel, R.N.; Van Der Biezen, E.; Jetten, M.S.M.; Hefting, M.M.; Kartal, B. Denitrification at pH 4 by a soil-derived rhodanobacter-dominated community. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 12, 3264–3271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Bakken, L.R.; Bergaust, L.; Liu, B.; Frostegard, A. Regulation of denitrification at the cellular level: A clue to the understanding of N2O emissions from soils. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2012, 367, 1226–1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Senbayram, M.; Budai, A.; Bol, R.; Chadwick, D.; Marton, L.; Gtindogan, R.; Wu, D. Soil NO3 level and O2 availability are key factors in controlling N2O reduction to N2 following long-term liming of an acidic sandy soil. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2019, 132, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Giles, M.; Morley, N.; Baggs, E.M.; Daniell, T.J. Soil nitrate reducing processes-drivers, mechanisms for spatial variation and significance for nitrous oxide production. Front. Microbiol. 2012, 3, 407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Li, X.; McCarty, G.W.; Lang, M.; Ducey, T.; Hunt, P.; Miller, J. Topographic and physicochemical controls on soil denitrification in prior converted croplands located on the Delmarva Peninsula, USA. Geoderma 2018, 309, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sun, P.P.; Zhuge, Y.P.; Zhang, J.B.; Cai, Z.C. Soil pH was the main controlling factor of the denitrification rates and N2/N2O emission ratios in forest and grassland soils along the Northeast China Transect (NECT). Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2012, 58, 517–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cuhel, J.; Simek, M. Proximal and distal control by pH of denitrification rate in a pasture soil. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2011, 141, 230–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Simek, M.; Cooper, J.E.; Picek, T.; Santrickova, H. Denitrification in arable soils in relation to their physicochemical properties and fertilization practice. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2000, 32, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Shan, J.; Yang, P.P.; Shang, X.X.; Rahman, M.M.; Yan, X.Y. Anaerobic ammonium oxidation and denitrification in a paddy soil as affected by temperature, pH, organic carbon, and substrates. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2018, 54, 341–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Hofstra, N.; Bouwman, A.F. Denitrification in agricultural soils: Summarizing published data and estimating global annual rates. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2005, 72, 267–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zhang, P.J.; Huang, J.H.; Mu, L.; Shan, Y.M.; Ye, R.H.; Wen, C.; Chang, H.; Ren, T.T.; Chen, S.P.; Bai, Y.F. Influence of nitrogen and water addition on the primary productivity of Stipa breviflora in a desert steppe under different grazing intensities. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2022, 42, 80–92. [Google Scholar]
  56. Zhang, J.; Liu, J.H.; Wang, Z.W.; Li, Z.G.; Han, G.D.; Qu, Z.Q. The Response of plant community to grazing and precipitation in desert steppe of Inner Mongolia. Chin. J. Grassl. 2020, 42, 67–74. [Google Scholar]
  57. Yu, Z.H.; Lv, G.Y.; Wang, X.Y.; Xu, X.B.; Jia, D.X.; Wang, C.J. Effects of different grazing intensities on soil carbon and nitrogen and their stable isotopes in Inner Mongolian desert grasslands. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2022, 30, 544–552. [Google Scholar]
  58. Dai, Y.J.; Guo, J.Y.; Li, Y.Q.; Dong, Z.; Li, H.L. Soil physical and chemical properties affected by long-term grazing on the desert steppe of Inner Mongolia, China. Catena 2022, 211, 105996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Conrads, H.; Ingwersen, J.; Streck, T. Sterilization-CO2-Injection (SCI) BaPS: Establishment of a new method to measure rates of soil respiration and gross nitrification in calcareous agricultural soils. EGU Gen. Assem. 2013, 15, 2013–10759. [Google Scholar]
  60. Gao, L.; Hou, X.Y.; Wang, Z.; Han, W.J.; Yun, X.J. Effects of heavy grazing on soil nitrogen mineralization and temperature sensitivity along the Eastern Eurasia Steppe Transect. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2019, 9, 5095–5105. [Google Scholar]
  61. Hedges, L.V.; Gurevitch, J.; Curtis, P.S. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 1999, 80, 1150–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gao, Y.H.; Luo, P.; Wu, N.; Chen, H. Seasonal dynamics of nitrification and denitrification in an alpine meadow soil based on the BaPS technique. Ecol. Environ. 2008, 17, 384–387. [Google Scholar]
  63. Liu, Q.H. Using BaPS System to Study Upland Soil Nitrification-Denitrification and Respiration. Master’s Thesis, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  64. Yan, Z.Q.; Qi, Y.C.; Dong, Y.S.; Peng, Q.; Sun, L.J.; Jia, J.Q.; Cao, C.C.; Guo, S.F.; He, Y.L. Nitrogen cycling in grassland ecosystems in response to climate change and human activities. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2014, 23, 279–292. [Google Scholar]
  65. Mendum, T.A.; Sockett, R.E.; Hirsch, P.R. Use of molecular and isotopic techniques to monitor the response of autotrophic ammonia-oxidizing populations of the β subdivision of the class Proteobacteria in arable soils to nitrogen fertilizer. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1999, 65, 4155–4162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  66. Feyissa, A.; Yang, F.; Wu, J.J.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, D.D.; Cheng, X.L. Soil nitrogen dynamics at a regional scale along a precipitation gradient in secondary grassland of China. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 781, 146736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Zou, G.H.; Zhao, F.L.; Shan, Y. Vertical distribution of nitrogen and its influencing factors under different land use patterns in a typical red soil region. J. Ecol. Rural Environ. 2019, 35, 644–650. [Google Scholar]
  68. Verchot, L.V.; Groffman, P.M.; Frank, D.A. Landscape versus ungulate control of gross mineralization and gross nitrification in semi-arid grasslands of Yellowstone National Park. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2002, 34, 1691–1699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Monaghan, R.M.; Barraclough, D. Some chemical and physical factors affecting the rate and dynamics of nitrification in urine-affected soil. Plant Soil 1992, 143, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Baldos, A.P.; Corre, M.D.; Veldkamp, E. Response of N cycling to nutrient inputs in forest soils across a 1000–3000 m elevation gradient in the Ecuadorian Andes. Ecology 2015, 96, 749–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Xiao, R.; Ran, W.; Hu, S.; Guo, H. The response of ammonia oxidizing archaea and bacteria in relation to heterotrophs under different carbon and nitrogen amendments in two agricultural soils. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 158, 103812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wang, C.H.; Wang, N.N.; Zhu, J.X.; Liu, Y.; Xu, X.F.; Niu, S.L.; Yu, G.R.; Han, X.G.; He, N.P. Soil gross N ammonification and nitrification from tropical to temperate forests in eastern China. Funct. Ecol. 2017, 32, 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Chen, Z.M.; Ding, W.X.; Xu, Y.H.; Miller, C.; Rutting, T.; Yu, H.Y.; Fan, J.L.; Zhang, J.B.; Zhu, T.B. Importance of heterotrophic nitrification and dissimilatory nitrate reduction to ammonium in a cropland soil: Evidences from a 15N tracing study to literature synthesis. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2015, 91, 65–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Stevens, R.J.; Laughlin, R.J. Measurement of nitrous oxide and dinitrogen emissions from agricultural soils. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 1998, 52, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Vallis, I.; Harper, L.A.; Catchhpoole, V.R.; Weier, K.L. Volatilization of ammonia from urine patches in a subtropical pasture. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 1982, 33, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Morrill, L.G.; Dawson, J.E. Growth rates of nitrifying chemoautotrophs in soil. J. Bacteriol. 1962, 83, 205–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  77. Morrill, L.G.; Dawson, J.E. Patterns observed for the oxidation of ammonium to nitrate by soil organisms. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 1967, 31, 757–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Anthonisen, A.C.; Loehr, R.C.; Prakasam, T.B.S.; Srinath, E.G. Inhibition of nitrification by ammonia and nitrous acid. J.- Water Pollut. Control Fed. 1976, 48, 835–852. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  79. Du, Z.Y.; Cai, Y.J.; Zhang, B.; Hong, J.T.; Wang, X.D. Research progress on livestock excreta returning on soil nitrogen transformation and nitrous oxide emission in grasslands. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2022, 42, 45–57. [Google Scholar]
  80. Mulvaney, R.L.; Khan, S.A.; Mulvaney, C.S. Nitrogen fertilizers promote denitrification. Biol. Fertil. Soils 1997, 24, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Wang, D.P.; Zheng, L.; Luo, X.H.; Wang, W.B.; Zhang, Y.F.; Xue, X.X.; Wu, X.P. Nitrification and denitrification under different temperature, moisture, carbon and nitrogen sources in Latosols. Chin. J. Soil Sci. 2018, 49, 616–622. [Google Scholar]
  82. Koops, J.G.; Van Beusichem, M.L.; Oenema, O. Nitrogen loss from grassland on peat soils through nitrous oxide production. Plant Soil 1997, 188, 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Xu, Y.Q.; Wan, S.Q.; Cheng, W.X.; Li, L.H. Impacts of grazing intensity on denitrification and N2O production in a semi-arid grassland ecosystem. Biogeochemistry 2008, 88, 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Pei, W.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, L.Z.; Jia, L.Y. Effects of grazing, water and nitrogen on soil aggregates in Inner Mongolia grassland. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2021, 29, 1499–1506. [Google Scholar]
  85. Su, J.S.; Zhao, J.; Jing, G.H.; Wei, L.; Liu, J.; Cheng, J.M.; Zhang, J.E. Root pattern of Stipa plants in semiarid grassland after long-term grazing exclusion. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2017, 37, 6571–6580. [Google Scholar]
  86. Liu, N.; Zhang, Y.J. Effects of grazing on soil organic carbon and total nitrogen in typical steppe. Pratac. Sci. 2010, 27, 11–14. [Google Scholar]
  87. Wang, F.F.; Xu, H.; Li, T.; Wu, X. Effects and mechanisms of grazing on key processes of soil nitrogen cycling in grassland: A review. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 2019, 30, 3277–3284. [Google Scholar]
  88. Yan, R.R.; Xin, X.P.; Wang, X.; Yan, Y.C.; Deng, Y.; Yang, G.X. The change of soil carbon and nitrogen under different grazing gradients in Hulunber meadow steppe. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2014, 34, 1587–1595. [Google Scholar]
  89. Zak, D.R.; Grigal, D.F. Nitrogen mineralization, nitrification and denitrification in upland and wetland ecosystems. Oecologia 1991, 88, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Jiang, Y.Q. Effects of Fertigation on N2O and NO Emissions in Greenhouse Vegetable Fields and the Contribution for Mitigation. Master’s Thesis, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  91. Liu, Q.R.; Qi, L.H.; Hu, X.; Zhang, Y. Effects of nitrogen fertilization on nitrification and denitrification in Phyllostachys edulis forests. J. Nanjing For. Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2017, 41, 82–88. [Google Scholar]
Agriculture 12 01036 g001 550
Figure 1. Gross nitrification (GN), denitrification (DN), and soil physical and chemical properties as responses to grazing.
Figure 1. Gross nitrification (GN), denitrification (DN), and soil physical and chemical properties as responses to grazing.
Agriculture 12 01036 g001
Agriculture 12 01036 g002 550
Figure 2. Monthly gross nitrification (GN) (a) and denitrification (DN) (b) in enclosure (CK) and heavy grazing (G) treatments. Different lowercase letters indicate a significant effect between treatments (p < 0.05).
Figure 2. Monthly gross nitrification (GN) (a) and denitrification (DN) (b) in enclosure (CK) and heavy grazing (G) treatments. Different lowercase letters indicate a significant effect between treatments (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 12 01036 g002
Agriculture 12 01036 g003 550
Figure 3. Relationships between gross nitrification (GN) and NH4+-N (a), NO3−-N (b), SOC/TN (C/N) (c), and soil moisture (SM) (d) in enclosure (CK) and heavy grazing (G) treatments, respectively. Relationships between denitrification (DN) and NH4+-N (e), NO3−-N (f), SOC/TN (C/N) (g), and soil moisture (SM) (h) in enclosure (CK) and heavy grazing (G) treatments, respectively. R2 is the coefficient of determination.
Figure 3. Relationships between gross nitrification (GN) and NH4+-N (a), NO3−-N (b), SOC/TN (C/N) (c), and soil moisture (SM) (d) in enclosure (CK) and heavy grazing (G) treatments, respectively. Relationships between denitrification (DN) and NH4+-N (e), NO3−-N (f), SOC/TN (C/N) (g), and soil moisture (SM) (h) in enclosure (CK) and heavy grazing (G) treatments, respectively. R2 is the coefficient of determination.
Agriculture 12 01036 g003
Table
Table 1. Effects of treatment (T), month (M), and their interaction on gross nitrification (GN), denitrification (DN), and soil physical and chemical properties in a desert steppe, based on a repeated-measures analysis of variance.
Table 1. Effects of treatment (T), month (M), and their interaction on gross nitrification (GN), denitrification (DN), and soil physical and chemical properties in a desert steppe, based on a repeated-measures analysis of variance.
TreatmentMonthT * M
FPFPFP
GN5.670.147.198***0.7360.66
DN2.3160.2673.251*0.2730.966
pH2.8880.23111.156***3.558*
NH4+-N12.8320.072.3190.0724.594**
TN17.3790.0531.2180.3490.6460.729
BD5.5890.1428.839***2.644*
C/N17.7290.05218.633***0.5940.769
SM26.094*87.895***1.9470.122
IN18.60.0510.799***1.6450.189
NO3−-N21*11.567***2.2720.077
SOC16.8070.0551.9040.130.3150.949
Unmarked letters, *, **, *** represent p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001 respectively. GN: gross nitrification; DN: denitrification; TN: total nitrogen; BD: bulk density; C/N: SOC/TN; SM: soil moisture; IN: inorganic nitrogen; SOC: soil organic carbon.
Table
Table 2. Stepwise multiple regression analysis of the soil gross nitrification (GN) and denitrification (DN) rates against the measured soil parameters across the study sites.
Table 2. Stepwise multiple regression analysis of the soil gross nitrification (GN) and denitrification (DN) rates against the measured soil parameters across the study sites.
TreatmentDependent
Variables		Standard Coefficient Regression EquationF ValueR2p Value
CKGNY = −0.455NO3−N + 0.382NH4+-N8.510.4150.002
DNY = 0.445NH4+-N6.1700.1980.02
GGNY = 0.535SM−0.480NH4+-N13.7010.5330
DNY = −0.413C/N5.1300.170.032
CK: enclosure; G: heavy grazing; GN: gross nitrification; DN: denitrification; SM: soil moisture; C/N: soil organic carbon/total nitrogen.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, X.; Wang, C.; Zhou, C.; Zuo, S.; Ji, Y.; Lamao, Q.; Huang, D. Grazing Horse Effects on Desert Grassland Soil Gross Nitrification and Denitrification Rates in Northern China. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12071036

AMA Style

Wang X, Wang C, Zhou C, Zuo S, Ji Y, Lamao Q, Huang D. Grazing Horse Effects on Desert Grassland Soil Gross Nitrification and Denitrification Rates in Northern China. Agriculture. 2022; 12(7):1036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12071036

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Xiaonan, Chengjie Wang, Chengyang Zhou, Shining Zuo, Yixin Ji, Qiezhuo Lamao, and Ding Huang. 2022. "Grazing Horse Effects on Desert Grassland Soil Gross Nitrification and Denitrification Rates in Northern China" Agriculture 12, no. 7: 1036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12071036

APA Style

Wang, X., Wang, C., Zhou, C., Zuo, S., Ji, Y., Lamao, Q., & Huang, D. (2022). Grazing Horse Effects on Desert Grassland Soil Gross Nitrification and Denitrification Rates in Northern China. Agriculture, 12(7), 1036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12071036

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop