Please wait a minute...
Journal of Arid Land  2025, Vol. 17 Issue (9): 1282-1296    DOI: 10.1007/s40333-025-0028-4     CSTR: 32276.14.JAL.02500284
Research article     
Rhizosphere bacterial communities of Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq. during different developmental stages
ZHANG Shengnan1,2,3, GAO Haiyan1,2,3, YANG Shanshan4, ZHANG Lei1,2,*(), YAN Deren1, HUANG Haiguang1,2, YANG Zhiguo1,2, LI Junwen1,2,3, TANG Yuekun5, XU Hongbin1,2
1Inner Mongolia Academy of Forestry, Hohhot 010010, China
2Inner Mongolia Duolun Hunshandake Sandland Ecosystem Observation and Research Station, Xilingol 027300, China
3Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration for Sandy Land Biological Resources Conservation and Cultivation, Hohhot 010010, China
4College of Life Science, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China
5Tongliao Forest Park Management and Protection Center, Tongliao 028000, China
Download: HTML     PDF(1476KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Abstract  

The rhizosphere bacteria play crucial roles in plant health and growth as they are involved in assimilating nutrients and resisting adverse conditions such as nutrient stress, drought, and wind erosion. Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq. is a pioneer plant used in sand fixation due to its strong resistance to drought and wind erosion. However, the bacterial community characteristics and ecological function in the rhizosphere of A. squarrosum are poorly understood. In this study, soil samples were collected from different developmental stages (seedling stage, vegetative stage, reproductive stage, and withering stage) of A. squarrosum. Illumina Miseq sequencing was used to detect differences in soil bacterial abundance. The Phylogenetic Investigation of Communities by Reconstruction of Unobserved States (PICRUSt) program was used to predict bacterial functions, and the relationships among bacteria, functional populations, and soil nutrients were examined using a heatmap analysis. The results showed that the Shannon and Sobs indices of rhizosphere bacteria were significantly higher during the reproductive stage than during the other stages. Pantoea sp. (7.03%) was the dominant genus during the seedling stage; Arthrobacter sp. was the dominant genus during the vegetative (13.94%), reproductive (7.57%), and withering (12.30%) stages. The relative abundances of Chloroflexi, Acidobacteria, and Gemmatimonadetes were significantly high during the reproductive stage. According to the PICRUSt analysis, membrane transport, signal transduction, and environmental adaptation of the bacterial functional population occurred during the seedling stage. Carbohydrate metabolism increased during the vegetative stage, while energy metabolism, lipid metabolism, and biosynthesis of other secondary metabolites of the bacterial functional population significantly increased during the reproductive stage. The abundances of bacterial communities, functional genes, and soil nutrients were synergistically altered during various developmental stages. Our findings suggest that the developmental stages of A. squarrosum play a significant role in defining the composition and structure of bacterial communities in the rhizosphere. The results will provide a basis for better prediction and understanding of soil bacterial metabolic potential and functions of A. squarrosum rhizosphere in sandy areas.



Key wordsbacterial diversity      developmental stage      drought      functional prediction      soil nutrient      wind erosion     
Received: 02 April 2025      Published: 30 September 2025
Corresponding Authors: *ZHANG Lei (E-mail: lkyzhanglei@126.com)
Cite this article:

ZHANG Shengnan, GAO Haiyan, YANG Shanshan, ZHANG Lei, YAN Deren, HUANG Haiguang, YANG Zhiguo, LI Junwen, TANG Yuekun, XU Hongbin. Rhizosphere bacterial communities of Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq. during different developmental stages. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(9): 1282-1296.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1007/s40333-025-0028-4     OR     http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2025/V17/I9/1282

Fig. 1 Morphology of Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq. during different developmental stages. (a), seedling stage; (b), vegetative stage; (c), reproductive stage; (d), withering stage.
Soil nutrient and enzyme activity Developmental stage
Seedling stage Vegetative stage Reproductive stage Withering stage
Soil organic matter (g/kg) 1.86±0.13ab 2.09±0.18a 1.62±0.14b 1.68±0.04b
Available nitrogen (mg/kg) 11.33±0.98b 13.17±0.39a 7.21±0.54d 10.11±0.04c
Available phosphorus (mg/kg) 35.77±2.21c 48.48±2.79b 33.33±0.47c 65.65±5.16a
Available potassium (mg/kg) 162.36±5.60b 155.55±0.14b 85.28±8.20c 238.13±3.95a
Sucrase (mg/(g•24h)) 1.52±0.06a 1.01±0.07b 0.81±0.09c 1.08±0.07b
Urease (μg/(g•24h)) 156.54±1.17a 161.95±7.02a 105.84±2.34c 139.30±2.55b
Neutral protease (μg/(g•24h)) 16.75±4.72b 38.33±2.92a 17.80±0.90b 2.97±0.45c
Neutral phosphatase (mg/(g•24h)) 223.54±18.23ab 236.01±28.78a 172.69±1.92c 187.08±0.96bc
Catalase (mg/(g•24h)) 28.90±1.30a 29.80±0.44a 26.59±0.21b 30.56±1.31a
Table 1 Nutrient contents and enzyme activities of the rhizosphere soil during different developmental stages
Fig. 2 Diversity indices (a1-a4) and principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) (b) of rhizosphere bacterial communities. S, seedling stage; V, vegetative stage; R, reproductive stage; W, withering stage; PC, principal coordinate. Boxes in Figure 2a1-a4 indicate the IQR (interquartile range, 75th to 25th of the data). The median value is shown as a line within the box. Outlier is shown as black circle. Whiskers extend to the most extreme value within 1.5×IQR. Lowercase letters within the same diversity index indicate significant differences among different developmental stages at P<0.050 level.
Fig. 3 Relative abundance of bacterial taxa in the rhizosphere soil at the phylum (a) and genus (b) levels
Fig. 4 Spearman correlations between rhizosphere bacteria at the genus level and soil nutrient and enzyme factors. SOM, soil organic matter; AN, available nitrogen; AP, available phosphorus; AK, available potassium; Su, sucrase; Ur, urease; Pr, neutral protease; Ph, neutral phosphatase; Ca, catalase. *, P<0.050 level; **, P<0.010 level.
Fig. 5 Principal component analysis (PCA) of rhizosphere bacteria functional components. PC, principal component.
Level 1 function Developmental stage
Seedling stage Vegetative stage Reproductive stage Withering stage
(%)
Metabolism 50.96±1.07b 52.23±0.50a 52.60±0.22a 52.20±0.33a
Environmental information processing 16.00±0.89a 15.34±0.40ab 14.93±0.13c 15.19±0.24b
Genetic information processing 14.69±0.24b 14.90±0.11a 14.95±0.10a 14.94±0.07a
Cellular processes 3.59±0.22a 3.22±0.13b 3.34±0.10b 3.31±0.21b
Human diseases 1.05±0.06a 0.94±0.03b 0.91±0.02c 0.97±0.05b
Organismal systems 0.82±0.05b 0.83±0.01b 0.87±0.01a 0.83±0.01b
Table 2 Relative proportions of primary functional genes of rhizosphere bacteria
Level 1 function Level 2 function Developmental stage
Seedling stage Vegetative stage Reproductive stage Withering stage
(%)
Metabolism Global and overview maps
(global and overall pictures of metabolism)
38.96±0.37b 39.77±0.29a 39.77±0.29a 39.76±0.21a
Carbohydrate metabolism 9.07±0.11c 9.39±0.14a 9.28±0.07b 9.33±0.14ab
Amino acid metabolism 7.94±0.26b 8.26±0.08a 8.30±0.04a 8.26±0.07a
Energy metabolism 4.09±0.04b 4.10±0.03b 4.17±0.02a 4.11±0.04b
Metabolism of cofactors and vitamins 3.97±0.02c 4.00±0.02a 3.99±0.02ab 3.98±0.02bc
Lipid metabolism 2.26±0.08c 2.33±0.03b 2.39±0.02a 2.36±0.03b
Xenobiotics biodegradation and metabolism 2.35±0.12a 2.30±0.04ab 2.31±0.04ab 2.29±0.04b
Nucleotide metabolism 2.28±0.04ab 2.28±0.02a 2.26±0.02b 2.26±0.02b
Metabolism of other amino acids 1.70±0.02a 1.66±0.02b 1.66±0.01b 1.67±0.01b
Biosynthesis of other secondary metabolites 1.46±0.05c 1.47±0.03c 1.56±0.01a 1.53±0.03b
Metabolism of terpenoids and polyketides 1.07±0.04d 1.12±0.04c 1.18±0.02a 1.15±0.03b
Glycan biosynthesis and metabolism 1.08±0.04a 1.04±0.01b 1.10±0.02a 1.09±0.03a
Environmental information processing Membrane transport 3.82±0.41a 3.36±0.23b 3.24±0.06b 3.27±0.13b
Signal transduction 2.92±0.24a 2.62±0.16b 2.53±0.03b 2.56±0.05b
Cellular process Cellular community-prokaryotes 2.70±0.19a 2.52±0.13b 2.45±0.03b 2.45±0.04b
Genetic information processing Translation 2.23±0.09b 2.35±0.07a 2.39±0.04a 2.37±0.04a
Replication and repair 2.19±0.07b 2.29±0.04a 2.30±0.02a 2.29±0.03a
Folding, sorting, and degradation 1.16±0.02b 1.21±0.02a 1.21±0.01a 1.22±0.01a
Table 3 Relative proportions of secondary functional genes of rhizosphere bacteria
Fig. 6 Relationships between rhizosphere bacterial community and secondary functional genes. GM, global and overview maps; CM, carbohydrate metabolism; AM, amino acid metabolism; EM, energy metabolism; CVM, metabolism of cofactors and vitamins; MT, membrane transport; ST, signal transduction; CCP, cellular community-prokaryotes; Tr, translation; LM, lipid metabolism; XBM, xenobiotics biodegradation and metabolism; NM, nucleotide metabolism; RR, replication and repair; OAM, metabolism of other amino acids; SMB, biosynthesis of other secondary metabolites; FSD, folding, sorting, and degradation; TPM, metabolism of terpenoids and polyketides; GBM, glycan biosynthesis and metabolism. *, P<0.050 level; **, P<0.010 level.
[1]   Agarwal P, Vibhandik R, Agrahari R, et al. 2024. Role of root exudates on the soil microbial diversity and biogeochemistry of heavy metals. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 196(5): 2673-2693.
[2]   Ahmed W, Ashraf M N, Sanaullah M, et al. 2024. Soil organic carbon and nitrogen mineralization potential of manures regulated by soil microbial activities in contrasting soil textures. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 24(2): 3056-3067.
[3]   Bao S D. 2008. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis (3rd ed.). Beijing: China Agriculture Press. (in Chinese)
[4]   Bataeva Y V, Grigoryan L N. 2024. Ecological features and adaptive capabilities of cyanobacteria in desert ecosystems: A review. Eurasian Soil Science, 57(3): 430-445.
[5]   Chaparro J M, Badri D V, Vivanco J M. 2014. Rhizosphere microbiome assemblage is affected by plant development. The ISME Journal, 8(4): 790-803.
[6]   Chen J L, Luo Y Q, Zhao X Y, et al. 2024a. Effect of drought and rehydration on physiological characteristics of Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq. in different habitats. Plants, 13(18): 2601, doi: 10.3390/plants13182601.
[7]   Chen C Y, Zuo X A, Zhao X. 2024b. The effect of ecological characteristics on the domestication of sand rice (Agriophyllum squarrosum). PeerJ, 12: e18320, doi: 10.7717/peerj.18320.
[8]   Chiquito-Contreras C J, Meza-Menchaca T, Guzmán-López O, et al. 2024. Molecular insights into plant-microbe interactions: A comprehensive review of key mechanisms. Frontiers in Bioscience-Elite, 16(1): 9, doi: 10.31083/j.fbe1601009.
[9]   Gunina A, Kuzyakov Y. 2015. Sugars in soil and sweets for microorganisms: Review of origin, content, composition and fate. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 90: 87-100.
[10]   Jiang S X, Zhao P. 2023. Morphological structure and biomass allocation of Agriophyllum squarrosum in different habitats of east section of Hexi Corridor. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 41(3): 248-256. (in Chinese)
[11]   Kandeler E, Gerber H. 1988. Short-term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 6: 68-72.
[12]   Khan N, Bano A. 2019. Exopolysaccharide producing rhizobacteria and their impact on growth and drought tolerance of wheat grown under rainfed conditions. PLoS ONE, 14(9): e0222302, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222302.
[13]   Khoso M A, Wagan S, Alam I, et al. 2024. Impact of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on plant nutrition and root characteristics: Current perspective. Plant Stress, 11: 100341, doi: 10.1016/j.stress.2023.100341.
[14]   Kumar A, Dubey A. 2020. Rhizosphere microbiome: Engineering bacterial competitiveness for enhancing crop production. Journal of Advanced Research, 24: 337-352.
doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2020.04.014 pmid: 32461810
[15]   Ladd J N, Brisbane P G, Butler J H A, et al. 1976. Studies on soil fumigation-III: Effects on enzyme-activities, bacterial numbers and extractable ninhydrin reactive compounds. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 8(4): 255-260.
[16]   Li J, Qu H, Zhao H L, et al. 2015. Growth and physiological responses of Agriophyllum squarrosum to sand burial stress. Journal of Arid Land, 7(1): 94-100.
[17]   Li Q, Xiong Z, Xiang P, et al. 2024. Effects of uranium mining on soil bacterial communities and functions in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Chemosphere, 347: 140715, doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.140715.
[18]   Liu M L, Zhu R Q, Xie H C. 2022. Responses of germination strategy of Agriophyllum squarrosum to rainfall pattern in the Tengger Desert. PeerJ, 10: e14395, doi: 10.7717/peerj.14395.
[19]   Liu M L, Li X R, Xie H C, et al. 2023. Responses of life history strategies of pioneering desert plant Agriophyllum squarrosum to precipitation patterns. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 42(4): 820-827. (in Chinese)
[20]   Liu Z M, Yan Q L, Baskin C, et al. 2006. Burial of canopy-stored seeds in the annual psammophyte Agriophyllum squarrosum Moq. (Chenopodiaceae) and its ecological significance. Plant and Soil, 288(1): 71-80.
[21]   Ma Y W, Wang H Q, Kang Y L, et al. 2025. Small molecule metabolites drive plant rhizosphere microbial community assembly patterns. Frontiers in Microbiology, 16: 1503537, doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2025.1503537.
[22]   Ma Z, Yi Z H, Bayar K, et al. 2021. Community dynamics in rhizosphere microorganisms at different development stages of wheat growing in confined isolation environments. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 105(9): 3843-3857.
[23]   Maphosa S, Steyn M, Lebre P H, et al. 2025. Rhizosphere bacterial communities of Namib Desert plant species: Evidence of specialised plant-microbe associations. Microbiological Research, 293: 128076, doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2025.128076.
[24]   Matera A, Warchoł M, Simlat M. 2025. Effect of the Pantoea vagans strain SRS89 on carrot (Daucus carota subsp. sativus L.) seed germination and plant growth under saline conditions. South African Journal of Botany, 180: 415-427.
[25]   Niu Q H, Huang X W, Zhang L, et al. 2006. A neutral protease from Bacillus nematocida, another potential virulence factor in the infection against nematodes. Archives of Microbiology, 185(6): 439-448.
[26]   Pii Y, Mimmo T, Tomasi N, et al. 2015. Microbial interactions in the rhizosphere: Beneficial influences of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on nutrient acquisition process. A review. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 51: 403-415.
[27]   Ping X X, Khan R A A, Chen S M, et al. 2024. Deciphering the role of rhizosphere microbiota in modulating disease resistance in cabbage varieties. Microbiome, 12(1): 160, doi: 10.1186/s40168-024-01883-0.
[28]   Qian C J, Yin H X, Shi Y, et al. 2016. Population dynamics of Agriophyllum squarrosum, a pioneer annual plant endemic to mobile sand dunes, in response to global climate change. Scientific Reports, 6: 26613, doi: 10.1038/srep26613.
[29]   Rajguru B, Shri M, Bhatt V D. 2024. Exploring microbial diversity in the rhizosphere: A comprehensive review of metagenomic approaches and their applications. 3 Biotech, 14(10): 224, doi: 10.1007/s13205-024-04065-9.
[30]   Saad M M, Eida A A, Hirt H. 2020. Tailoring plant-associated microbial inoculants in agriculture: A roadmap for successful application. Journal of Experimental Botany, 71(13): 3878-3901.
doi: 10.1093/jxb/eraa111 pmid: 32157287
[31]   Santoyo G. 2022. How plants recruit their microbiome? New insights into beneficial interactions. Journal of Advanced Research, 40: 45-58.
doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2021.11.020 pmid: 36100333
[32]   Shahid A, Khan F, Ahmad N, et al. 2020. Microalgal carbohydrates and proteins:Synthesis, extraction, applications, and challenges. In: Alam M A, Xu J L, Wang Z L. Microalgae Biotechnology for Food, Health and High Value Products. Singapore: Springer, 27-79.
[33]   Shahri W, Ahmad S S, Tahir I. 2014. Sugar signaling in plant growth and development. In: Hakeem K, Rehman R, Tahir I. Plant Signaling: Understanding the Molecular Crosstalk. New Delhi: Springer, 93-116.
[34]   Sharma P, Gayen D. 2021. Plant protease as regulator and signaling molecule for enhancing environmental stress-tolerance. Plant Cell Reports, 40(11): 2081-2095.
[35]   Sprovieri P, Martino G. 2018. The role of the carbohydrates in plasmatic membrane. Physiological Research, 67(1): 1-11.
pmid: 29137479
[36]   Staszel-Szlachta K, Lasota J, Szlachta A, et al. 2024. The impact of root systems and their exudates in different tree species on soil properties and microorganisms in a temperate forest ecosystem. BMC Plant Biology, 24(1): 45, doi: 10.1186/s12870-024-04724-2.
[37]   Sun L, Yang Y B, Wang R, et al. 2020. Effects of exopolysaccharide derived from Pantoea alhagi NX-11 on drought resistance of rice and its efficient fermentation preparation. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 162: 946-955.
[38]   Ulbrich T C, Rivas-Ubach A, Tiemann L K, et al. 2022. Plant root exudates and rhizosphere bacterial communities shift with neighbor context. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 172: 108753, doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108753.
[39]   Vives-Peris V, de Ollas C, Gómez-Cadenas A, et al. 2020. Root exudates: From plant to rhizosphere and beyond. Plant Cell Reports, 39: 3-17.
doi: 10.1007/s00299-019-02447-5 pmid: 31346716
[40]   Vu B, Chen M, Crawford R J, et al. 2009. Bacterial extracellular polysaccharides involved in biofilm formation. Molecules, 14(7): 2535-2554.
doi: 10.3390/molecules14072535 pmid: 19633622
[41]   Walitang D I, Kim C G, Kim K, et al. 2018. The influence of host genotype and salt stress on the seed endophytic community of salt-sensitive and salt-tolerant rice cultivars. BMC Plant Biology, 18: 51, doi: 10.1186/s12870-018-1261-1.
pmid: 29587643
[42]   Wang X J, Chen Y, Wang Z Y, et al. 2024. Examining the diversity of rhizosphere soil bacterial communities and screening of growth-promoting bacteria from the rhizosphere soil of Haloxylon ammodendron in Xinjiang. Microbiology Research, 15(3): 1346-1358.
[43]   Wang Y D, Wang Z L, Zhang Q Z, et al. 2018. Long-term effects of nitrogen fertilization on aggregation and localization of carbon, nitrogen and microbial activities in soil. Science of the Total Environment, 624: 1131-1139.
[44]   Wen T, Zhao M L, Yuan J, et al. 2021. Root exudates mediate plant defense against foliar pathogens by recruiting beneficial microbes. Soil Ecology Letters, 3: 42-51.
doi: 10.1007/s42832-020-0057-z
[45]   Xiong C, Singh B K, Zhu Y G, et al. 2024. Microbial species pool-mediated diazotrophic community assembly in crop microbiomes during plant development. Msystems, 9(4): e01055-23, doi: 10.1128/msystems.01055-23.
[46]   Yang L J, Li T L, Li F S, et al. 2008. Fertilization regulates soil enzymatic activity and fertility dynamics in a cucumber field. Scientia Horticulturae, 116(1): 21-26.
[47]   Ye S H, Ma Z Y, Liu Z F, et al. 2014. Effects of carbohydrate sources on biosorption properties of the novel exopolysaccharides produced by Arthrobacter ps-5. Carbohydrate Polymers, 112(4): 615-621.
[48]   Yu P, He X M, Bear M, et al. 2021. Plant flavones enrich rhizosphere Oxalobacteraceae to improve maize performance under nitrogen deprivation. Nature Plants, 7(4): 481-499.
doi: 10.1038/s41477-021-00897-y pmid: 33833418
[49]   Yuan H Z, Zhu Z K, Liu S L, et al. 2016. Microbial utilization of rice root exudates: 13C labeling and PLFA composition. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 52: 615-627.
[50]   Zhang J, Zhang C W, Yang J, et al. 2019. Insights into endophytic bacterial community structures of seeds among various Oryza sativa L. rice genotypes. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 38(1): 93-102.
doi: 10.1007/s00344-018-9812-0
[51]   Zhang X X, Ma Y N, Wang X, et al. 2022. Dynamics of rice microbiomes reveal core vertically transmitted seed endophytes. Microbiome, 10(1): 216, doi: 10.1186/s40168-022-01422-9.
[52]   Zhao S, Chen X, Deng S P, et al. 2016. The effects of fungicide, soil fumigant, bio-organic fertilizer and their combined application on Chrysanthemum Fusarium wilt controlling, soil enzyme activities and microbial properties. Molecules, 21(4): 526, doi: 10.3390/molecules21040526.
[53]   Zheng Y R, Gao Y, An P, et al. 2004. Germination characteristics of Agriophyllum squarrosum. Canadian Journal of Botany, 82(11): 1662-1670.
[1] HUANG Peng, GUO Xi, YUE Yaojie. Mechanisms of meteorological drought propagation to hydrological drought in the upper Shiyang River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(8): 1027-1047.
[2] HUANG Cheng, HOU Shengtong, WANG Bao, SONG Yuchuan, Aikeremu ABULATIJIANG, MIN Jiuzhou, SHENG Jiandong, JIANG Ping'an, WANG Ze, CHENG Junhui. Effects of a combination of biochar and cow manure on soil nutrients and cotton yield in salinized fields[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(7): 1014-1026.
[3] Suellen Teixeira Nobre GONÇALVES, Francisco das Chagas VASCONCELOS JÚNIOR, Cleiton da Silva SILVEIRA, José Micael Ferreira da COSTA, Antonio Duarte MARCOS JUNIOR. Occurrence of flash drought in reservoirs in the semi-arid area of the Ceará State, Brazil[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(7): 865-887.
[4] JING Haimeng, ZHOU Nan, TANTAI Yu, ZHAO Yunge. Artificial cyanobacteria crusts can improve soil fertility and plant growth in a semi-arid area, northern China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(6): 808-822.
[5] Mashael MAASHI, Nada ALZABEN, Noha NEGM, Venkatesan VEERAMANI, Sabarunisha Sheik BEGUM, Geetha PALANIAPPAN. Forecasting land use changes in crop classification and drought using remote sensing[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(5): 575-589.
[6] BAI Junhong, WANG Jianglin, CHEN Jie, WANG Xuejia. Spatiotemporal variations and driving mechanisms of flash droughts during 1981-2020 in the Qilian Mountains, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(4): 481-499.
[7] ZHAO Pengshu, YAN Xia, QIAN Chaoju, MA Guorong, FANG Tingzhou, YIN Xiaoyue, ZHOU Shanshan, LIAO Yuqiu, SHI Liang, FAN Xingke, Awuku IBRAHIM, MA Xiaofei. Diversification of flavonoid accumulation among ecotypes of Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq. in response to drought stress[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(4): 538-559.
[8] YANG Qianqian, WU Xue, Bota BAHETHAN, TIAN Cuiping, YANG Xianyao, WANG Xiantao. Variations of soil bacterial community structure and function under different habitats of Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb. in the upper reaches of the Tarim River, Northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(4): 560-574.
[9] CHE Cunwei, ZHANG Mingjun, XIAO Shengchun, YANG Wanmin, WANG Shengjie, WANG Zhilan, SUN Meiling. Radial growth of Platycladus orientalis Linn. and its growth resilience after extreme droughts along a precipitation gradient[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(3): 381-393.
[10] YANG Jianhua, LI Yaqian, ZHOU Lei, ZHANG Zhenqing, ZHOU Hongkui, WU Jianjun. Effects of temperature and precipitation on drought trends in Xinjiang, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(8): 1098-1117.
[11] Seyed Morteza MOUSAVI, Hossein BABAZADEH, Mahdi SARAI-TABRIZI, Amir KHOSROJERDI. Assessment of rehabilitation strategies for lakes affected by anthropogenic and climatic changes: A case study of the Urmia Lake, Iran[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(6): 752-767.
[12] CAO Wenyu, BAI Jianjun, YU Leshan. Grassland-type ecosystem stability in China differs under the influence of drought and wet events[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(5): 615-631.
[13] TANG Xiaoyan, FENG Yongjiu, LEI Zhenkun, CHEN Shurui, WANG Jiafeng, WANG Rong, TANG Panli, WANG Mian, JIN Yanmin, TONG Xiaohua. Urban growth scenario projection using heuristic cellular automata in arid areas considering the drought impact[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(4): 580-601.
[14] BAI Jizhou, LI Jing, RAN Hui, ZHOU Zixiang, DANG Hui, ZHANG Cheng, YU Yuyang. Influence of varied drought types on soil conservation service within the framework of climate change: insights from the Jinghe River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(2): 220-245.
[15] QU Zhicheng, YAO Shunyu, LIU Dongwei. Response of drought to climate extremes in a semi-arid inland river basin in China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(11): 1505-1521.