ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Microbiol.
Sec. Microbe and Virus Interactions with Plants
This article is part of the Research TopicHarnessing Genomics to Revolutionize Plant Disease Management and Preservation of Soil BiodiversityView all 4 articles
Effects of Different Rice Straw Returning Methods in Karst Paddy Fields on Soil Bacterial Community Structure and Rice Yield: A Mechanistic Analysis Based on 16S rRNA Sequencing
Provisionally accepted
- Guizhou Chuyang Ecological Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd, Guiyang, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
The effective utilization of crop straw can contribute to sustainable agricultural development. However, how different straw return methods regulate soil fertility and rice yield via bacterial communities in karst paddy fields remains elusive. This field study investigated five straw return treatments (deep plowing, PD; rotary tillage with incorporation, RTM; field rapid composting, FRC; no-till mulching, NT; bioreactor, BR) and a blank control CK (no straw return, fertilizer only) on soil physicochemical properties, bacterial community structure, and rice yield, combined with 16S rRNA sequencing technology. Results indicate: 1) All straw incorporation treatments significantly increased soil organic matter (SOM) and nutrient content (P<0.05), NT and BR treatments increased soil organic matter (SOM) by 38.2% and 36.4%, respectively, compared to CK, while total nitrogen increased by 42.1% and 48.4% with NT; 2) Although RTM treatment did not achieve the highest SOM accumulation, it yielded the highest rice yield of 30.37 kg/plot (a significant increase of 13.2% compared to CK), revealing that yield is jointly regulated by soil physicochemical properties and bacterial communities; 3) Straw return treatments did not significantly affect bacterial α-diversity (intergroup differences in Shannon index and Chao 1 index, P>0.05), but significantly influenced β-diversity, symbiotic network structure, and community assembly processes: BR treatment formed a complex and stable microbial network structure, while NT exhibited a highly modular community structure ( Modularity=0.66); 4) Bacterial community assembly under straw return was dominated by deterministic processes, with homogenous selection accounting for 45% and 42% in NT and BR treatments, respectively, significantly higher than CK (28%, P<0.05); 5) Pathwise Linear Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) confirmed that TN (path coefficient 0.97, P<0.001) and bacterial β-diversity (path coefficient 0.83, P<0.001) were the most critical factors influencing rice yield. This study elucidates the mechanisms by which different straw return methods drive soil functions through reshaping bacterial community assembly and interaction networks. It provides theoretical support for optimizing straw return technologies in karst paddy fields, such as applying RTM for "yield-priority" scenarios and NT for "Rapid fertilizationLong-term soil enrichment" scenarios.
Keywords: Straw return to fields, Karst paddy fields, Bacterial communities, 16S rRNA sequencing, rice yield, community assembly
Received: 13 Oct 2025; Accepted: 26 Nov 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Tang, He, Zhou and Wang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Hu Wang
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.