石油污染土壤的生物修复与土壤酶活性关系

生态学杂志 ›› 2005, Vol. ›› Issue (10): 1226-1229.

石油污染土壤的生物修复与土壤酶活性关系

蔺昕^1,2, 李培军¹, 孙铁珩¹, 台培东¹, 巩宗强¹, 张海荣¹

1. 中国科学院沈阳应用生态研究所, 沈阳, 110016;
2. 中国科学院研究生院, 北京, 100039

收稿日期:2004-11-21 修回日期:2005-06-20 出版日期:2005-10-10
通讯作者: 李培军
基金资助:
“863”计划项目(2004AA649060);国家重点基础研究发展规划项目(2004CB418506);国家自然科学重点基金项目(20337010);中国科学院知识创新工程资助项目(SLYQY0412).

Bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil and its relationship with soil enzyme activities

LIN Xin^1,2, LI Peijun¹, SUN Tieheng¹, TAI Peidong¹, GONG Zongqiang¹, ZHANG Hairong¹

1. Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China;
2. Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100039, China

Received:2004-11-21 Revised:2005-06-20 Online:2005-10-10

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究了不同油浓度污染土壤经过两个为期125 d的生物修复后的土壤中过氧化氢酶、多酚氧化酶和脂肪酶的酶活变化,分析了土壤中3种酶活性的变化特征与规律。结果表明,随着油浓度的增加,土壤中过氧化氢酶和多酚氧化酶的活性下降,脂肪酶活性增加;经过生物修复后,土壤中的过氧化氢酶和多酚氧化酶的活性在第二周期要比第一周期提高,而脂肪酶活性下降;这3种土壤酶活性变化受污染物浓度影响不显著,但不同浓度油污染土壤的修复对过氧化氢酶的影响要大于对多酚氧化酶和脂肪酶的影响。

关键词: 栗瘿蜂, 虫瘿, 发生量, 板栗, 天敌

Abstract: This paper studied the variations of catalase(CAT),polyphenol oxidase(PPO) and lipase in soils contaminated by different concentration oil after bio-remedied for two durations of 125 days.The results showed that the activities of CAT and PPO in the soils were decreased,while that of lipase was increased with increasing oil concentration.After the second duration of remediation,the activities of soil CAT and PPO were higher than those after the first remediation duration,while that of lipase was in inverse.The activities of these three enzymes were not significantly affected by oil concentration,but the bioremediation of soil contaminated by different concentration oil had more significant effect on CAT than on PPO and lipase.

Key words: Dryocosmus kuriphilus, Cecidum, Occurrence quantity, Chestnut, Natural enemy

中图分类号:

X171.5

蔺昕, 李培军, 孙铁珩, 台培东, 巩宗强, 张海荣. 石油污染土壤的生物修复与土壤酶活性关系[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005, (10): 1226-1229.

LIN Xin, LI Peijun, SUN Tieheng, TAI Peidong, GONG Zongqiang, ZHANG Hairong. Bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil and its relationship with soil enzyme activities[J]. cje, 2005, (10): 1226-1229.

参考文献

[1] 勾影波,苏永春.1996.东北高寒地区麦田土壤酶活性的季节变化与环境因素关系的研究[J].生态学杂志,15(4):63～65.
[2] 关松荫.1986.土壤酶及其研究法[M].北京:农业出版社.
[3] 吕桂芬,赵吉,赵利,等.1997.应用土壤酶活性评价草原石油污染的初步研究[J].内蒙古大学学报(自然科学版),28(5):687～691.
[4] 张丽莉,陈利军,刘桂芬,等.2003.污染土壤的酶学修复研究进展[J].应用生态学报,14(12):2342～2346.
[5] 哈兹耶夫,(郑洪元等译).1980.土壤酶活性[M].北京:科学出版社,12～21.
[6] 刘世亮,骆永明,丁克强,等.2003.土壤中有机污染物的植物修复研究进展[J].土壤,35(3):187～192.
[7] 常学秀,文传浩,沈其荣.2001.锌厂Pb污染农田小麦根际与非根际土壤酶活性特征研究[J].生态学杂志,20(4):5～8.
[8] 腾应,黄昌勇,龙健,等.2003.铜尾矿污染区土壤酶活性研究[J].应用生态学报,14(11):1976～1980.
[9] 魏丹.1999.土壤酶对改土培肥和土壤有机污染物的净化作用[J].黑龙江农业科学,(4):48～50.
[10] Baligar VC, Wright RJ, Semedley MD. 1988. Enzyme activities in hill land soil of appalachian region[J]. Soil Sci. Plant Anal,4:367～ 384.
[11] Dhruva KJ, Sharma GD, Mishra RR. 1992. Soil microbial population numbers and enzyme activities in relation to altitude and forest degradation[J]. Soil Biol. Biochem, 8: 761 ～ 767.
[12] Dinesh R, Dubey PR, Shyam GP. 1998. Soil microbial biomass an enzyme activities influenced by organic manure incorporation into soils of a rice-rice system[J]. J. Agron. Crop Sci., 181: 173 ～178.
[13] Margesin R, Walder G, Schinner F. 2000. The impact of hydrocarbon remediation (diesel oil and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) on enzyme activities and microbial properties of soil [J].Acta Biotechnol., 20: 313～ 333.
[14] Rossel D, Tarradellas J, Bitton G, et al. 1997. Use of enzymes in soil ecotoxicology: A case for dehydrogenase and hydrolytic enzymes[A] . In: Tarradellas J, eds. Soil Ecotoxicology [C] . Boca Raton, Florida: CRCLewis Publishers, 179～197.

[1]	李明江, 张泽, 刘予涵, 羊绍武, 尚昊培, 蒋正雄, 李星星, 陈国华, 张晓明. 不同农业生态系统对夏番茄田中烟粉虱及其自然天敌种群动态的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2022, 41(11): 2188-2198.
[2]	郭靖, 章家恩. 福寿螺应对天敌的响应策略与机制研究进展 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2020, 39(8): 2776-2784.
[3]	苏杰,李婷,韩国栋,蒋瑞旭,张建萍*. 古尔班通古特沙漠及交错带白茎绢蒿与沙拐枣节肢动物群落结构动态 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(6): 1606-1613.
[4]	张琴1,舒金平1**,华正媛2,叶碧欢1,吴小双1,刘达富3,金有名2,耿显胜1,王浩杰1. 衢州地区灯下油茶害虫多样性及种群动态 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(8): 2201-2209.
[5]	郭靖1,章家恩1,2,3**. 福寿螺的生物防治现状、问题与对策 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(10): 2943-2950.
[6]	廉凯敏1,吴应建1,张丽2,赵璐璐3,张峰4**. 太宽河自然保护区板栗群落数量分类与排序 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(1): 33-39.
[7]	杜艳丽1,张佳鑫1,杨萌萌1,孙淑玲1,秦岭1,王金宝2,张志勇1**. 栗苞挥发物成分及其在桃蛀螟防治中的潜在应用 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2014, 33(8): 2096-2100.
[8]	李敏1,汪继超1,刘海伟2,史海涛1*. 黄额闭壳龟(Cuora galbinifrons*)巢捕食的模拟 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2014, 33(6): 1629-1633.
[9]	张旭珠,常虹,张鑫,段美春,李骁,宇振荣,刘云慧**. 农业景观步甲多样性时间格局及其与景观结构的关系 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2012, 31(12): 3127-3132.
[10]	秦钟,章家恩,张锦,骆世明. 稻鸭共作系统中主要捕食性天敌的结构及多样性 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(07): 1354-1360.
[11]	秦钟,章家恩,张锦,骆世明. 稻鸭共作系统中稻飞虱及主要捕食性天敌的空间生态位 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(07): 1361-1369.
[12]	黄先才,周子杨,孟玲,李保平. 稻鸭共作有机稻田蜘蛛多样性与飞虱数量的季节动态 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(07): 1342-1346.
[13]	苗进,韩宝瑜. 外源水杨酸甲酯（MeSA）处理茶树对茶园主要害虫及其天敌的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(03): 564-568.
[14]	万年峰,季香云,蒋杰贤,淡家贵. 桃园生草对桃树上主要害虫及天敌生态位的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(01): 30-39.
[15]	桂富荣;李正跃;万方浩. 天敌资源在马缨丹生物防治中的应用 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2009, 28(07): 1388-1393 .