广西师范大学学报（自然科学版） ›› 2026, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (4): 195-209.doi: 10.16088/j.issn.1001-6600.2025070805

• 农业科学 • 上一篇    下一篇

桂北地区石灰性土壤和红壤中微生物群落结构及功能的差异性研究

王汝儒1,2,3, 颜湘婷1,2,3, 刘宗保2,4,5, 陈荣枢1,2,3*, 朱婧1,2,3   

  1. 1.广西生态脆弱区环境过程与修复重点实验室(广西师范大学), 广西 桂林 541006;
    2.珍稀濒危动植物生态与环境保护教育部重点实验室(广西师范大学), 广西 桂林 541006;
    3.广西师范大学 环境与资源学院, 广西 桂林 541006;
    4.广西漓江流域资源保护与可持续利用重点实验室(广西师范大学), 广西 桂林 541006;
    5.广西师范大学 生命科学学院, 广西 桂林 541006
  • 收稿日期:2025-07-08 修回日期:2025-10-20 出版日期:2026-07-05 发布日期:2026-07-01
  • 通讯作者: 陈荣枢(1995—),男,广西北海人,广西师范大学讲师。E-mail: rongshuc522@gxnu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    广西自然科学基金(2020GXNSFBA159029);广西生态脆弱区环境过程与修复重点实验室基金(EPRZR2024-05)

Differences in microbial community structure and function between limestone soils and red soils in Northern Guangxi, China

Wang Ruru1,2,3, Yan Xiangting1,2,3, Liu Zongbao2,4,5, Chen Rongshu1,2,3*, Zhu Jing1,2,3   

  1. 1. Guangxi Key Laboratory of Environmental Processes and Remediation in Ecologically Fragile Regions (Guangxi Normal University), Guilin Guangxi 541006, China;
    2. Key Laboratory of Ecology of Rare and Endangered Species and Environmental Protection (Guangxi Normal University), Ministry of Education, Guilin Guangxi 541006, China;
    3. College of Environment and Resources, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin Guangxi 541006, China;
    4. Guangxi Key Laboratory of Landscape Resources Conservation and Sustainable Utilization in Lijiang River Basin (Guangxi Normal University), Guilin Guangxi 541006, China;
    5. College of Life Sciences, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin Guangxi 541006, China
  • Received:2025-07-08 Revised:2025-10-20 Online:2026-07-05 Published:2026-07-01

PDF (PC)

2

摘要： 为揭示亚热带季风区不同类型森林土壤的微生物多样性特征,本研究以广西北部森林植被下石灰性土壤(LS)和红壤(RS)的O/A(0~10 cm)和AB(10~30 cm)土壤为对象,采用16S rRNA扩增子测序技术,结合土壤理化性质分析,探讨不同土壤类型及土层中微生物群落结构、功能及共现网络的差异。结果表明:1)石灰性土壤和红壤均以变形菌门Proteobacteria、放线菌门Actinobacteria和酸杆菌门Acidobacteria为优势菌门;相比石灰性土壤,红壤中酸杆菌门丰度更高;古菌中奇古菌门Thaumarchaeota在2类土壤中均占主导地位(>76%)。2)与酸性红壤相比,石灰性土壤细菌的丰富度指数更高,而酸性红壤古菌的丰富度指数则高于石灰性土壤;但总体来看,2种土壤细菌和古菌的α多样性并无显著差异;O/A层相比AB层有更高的细菌丰富度和多样性,但古菌反之,在AB层丰富度更高。3)石灰性土壤的细菌和古菌网络模块化程度更高,信息传递效率更优;红壤网络节点复杂度与鲁棒性更强,反映其对酸性环境的适应机制。4)土壤pH和土壤有机碳(SOC)、总氮(TN)和有效磷(AP)等养分通过调节资源可利用性间接影响微生物功能分化。5)石灰性土壤细菌在碳氮代谢(如硝化、芳香化合物降解)中功能更强,红壤细菌则表现出更强的固氮能力。古菌功能预测显示,石灰性土壤中好氧氨氧化活性显著,2类土壤AB层土壤产甲烷潜力更高。

关键词: 石灰性土壤, 红壤, 微生物群落结构, 功能预测, 共现网络, 生态位分化, 桂北地区

Abstract: To elucidate the characteristics of microbial diversity in different forest soil types within the subtropical monsoon region, this study investigated O/A (0~10 cm) and AB (10~30 cm) horizons of limestone soils (LS) and red soils (RS) under forest vegetation in Northern Guangxi. Combining 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing with soil physicochemical property analysis differences in microbial community structure, functional potential, and co-occurrence networks between soil types and horizons are explored. The results showed that: 1) Both soil types were dominated by Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Acidobacteria. Compared with limestone soils, RS exhibited higher relative abundance of Acidobacteria. Archaeal communities were predominantly Thaumarchaeota (>76%) in both soils. 2) Bacterial and archaeal richness indices were higher in limestone soils and red soils, respectively, though overall alpha diversity showed no significant difference. The O/A horizon displayed higher bacterial richness and diversity than the AB horizon, whereas archaeal richness was greater in the AB horizon. 3) Limestone soils bacterial and archaeal networks exhibited higher modularity and information transfer efficiency, while red soils networks demonstrated enhanced node complexity and robustness, reflecting adaptive mechanisms to acidic environments. 4) Soil pH, organic carbon (SOC), total nitrogen (TN), and available phosphorus (AP) indirectly regulated microbial functional divergence by modulating resource availability. 5) Limestone soils bacteria showed stronger carbon-nitrogen metabolic functions (e.g., nitrification, aromatic compound degradation), whereas red soils bacteria exhibited enhanced nitrogen fixation capacity. Archaeal functional prediction revealed significantly higher aerobic ammonia oxidation activity in limestone soils and greater methanogenic potential in AB horizons of both soils.

Key words: limestone soil, red soil, microbial community structure, functional prediction, co-occurrence networks, niche differentiation, Northern Guangxi, China

中图分类号:  S154.36

[1] Saccá M L, Barra Caracciolo A, Di Lenola M, et al. Ecosystem services provided by soil microorganisms[M]//Soil Biological Communities and Ecosystem Resilience. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017: 9-24. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-63336-7_2.
[2] Delgado-Baquerizo M, Oliverio A M, Brewer T E, et al. A global atlas of the dominant bacteria found in soil[J]. Science, 2018, 359(6373): 320-325. DOI: 10.1126/science.aap9516.
[3] Philippot L, Chenu C, Kappler A, et al. The interplay between microbial communities and soil properties[J]. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 2024, 22(4): 226-239. DOI: 10.1038/s41579-023-00980-5.
[4] Karimi B, Terrat S, Dequiedt S, et al. Biogeography of soil bacteria and archaea across France[J]. Science Advances, 2018, 4(7): eaat1808. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat1808.
[5] Griffiths R I, Thomson B C, Plassart P, et al. Mapping and validating predictions of soil bacterial biodiversity using European and national scale datasets[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2016, 97: 61-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.06.018.
[6] Kemmitt S, Wright D, Goulding K, et al. pH regulation of carbon and nitrogen dynamics in two agricultural soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2006, 38(5): 898-911. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.08.006.
[7] Zhang J, Wang P C, Tian H M, et al. Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil microbial community structure and analysis of soil properties with vegetable planted at different years under greenhouse conditions[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2019, 187: 1-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2018.11.008.
[8] Griffiths R I, Thomson B C, James P, et al. The bacterial biogeography of British soils[J]. Environmental Microbiology, 2011, 13(6): 1642-1654. DOI: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2011.02480.x.
[9] Zhou X, Tahvanainen T, Malard L, et al. Global analysis of soil bacterial genera and diversity in response to pH[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2024, 198: 109552. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2024.109552.
[10] Fierer N, Bradford M A, Jackson R B. Toward an ecological classification of soil bacteria[J]. Ecology, 2007, 88(6): 1354-1364. DOI: 10.1890/05-1839.
[11] De Menezes A B, Prendergast-Miller M T, Poonpatana P, et al. C/N ratio drives soil actinobacterial cellobiohydrolase gene diversity[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2015, 81(9): 3016-3028. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.00067-15.
[12] Baker B J, De Anda V, Seitz K W, et al. Diversity, ecology and evolution of archaea[J]. Nature Microbiology, 2020, 5(7): 887-900. DOI: 10.1038/s41564-020-0715-z.
[13] Rampelotto P H. Extremophiles and extreme environments[J]. Life, 2013, 3(3): 482-485. DOI: 10.3390/life3030482.
[14] Zou D Y, Qi Y L, Zhou J J, et al. Unveiling the life of archaea in sediments: diversity, metabolic potentials, and ecological roles[J]. iMetaOmics, 2025, 2(1): e56. DOI: 10.1002/imo2.56.
[15] Kemnitz D, Kolb S, Conrad R. High abundance of Crenarchaeota in a temperate acidic forest soil[J]. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 2007, 60(3): 442-448. DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2007.00310.x.
[16] Pesaro M, Widmer F. Identification of novel Crenarchaeota and Euryarchaeota clusters associated with different depth layers of a forest soil[J]. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 2002, 42(1): 89-98. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-6496(02)00302-1.
[17] Bahram M, Hildebrand F, Forslund S K, et al. Structure and function of the global topsoil microbiome[J]. Nature, 2018, 560(7717): 233-237. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0386-6.
[18] Wei G S, Li M C, Shi W C, et al. Similar drivers but different effects lead to distinct ecological patterns of soil bacterial and archaeal communities[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2020, 144: 107759. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107759.
[19] Ma B, Dai Z M, Wang H Z, et al. Distinct biogeographic patterns for archaea, bacteria, and fungi along the vegetation gradient at the continental scale in Eastern China[J]. mSystems, 2017, 2(1): e00174-e00116. DOI: 10.1128/mSystems.00174-16.
[20] Guseva K, Darcy S, Simon E, et al. From diversity to complexity: microbial networks in soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2022, 169: 108604. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108604.
[21] Li K, Xing X Y, Wang S B, et al. Organic fertilisation enhances network complexity among bacteria, fungi, and protists by improving organic matter and phosphorus in acidic agricultural soils[J]. European Journal of Soil Biology, 2024, 122: 103649. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2024.103649.
[22] Shi J W, Yang L, Liao Y, et al. Soil labile organic carbon fractions mediate microbial community assembly processes during long-term vegetation succession in a semiarid region[J]. iMeta, 2023, 2(4): e142. DOI: 10.1002/imt2.142.
[23] Fan K K, Weisenhorn P, Gilbert J A, et al. Soil pH correlates with the co-occurrence and assemblage process of diazotrophic communities in rhizosphere and bulk soils of wheat fields[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018, 121: 185-192. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.03.017.
[24] Duan Y L, Zhang J B, Petropoulos E, et al. Soil acidification destabilizes terrestrial ecosystems via decoupling soil microbiome[J]. Global Change Biology, 2025, 31(4): e70174. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.70174.
[25] 宋同清, 彭晚霞, 杜虎, 等. 中国西南喀斯特石漠化时空演变特征、发生机制与调控对策[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(18): 5328-5341. DOI: 10.5846/stxb201405090929.
[26] 王智慧, 蒋先军. 紫色土中微生物群落结构及功能特征对土壤pH的差异响应[J]. 环境科学, 2022, 43(7): 3876-3883. DOI: 10.13227/j.hjkx.202111055.
[27] Ma X M, Zhou Z, Chen J, et al. Long-term nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization reveals that phosphorus limitation shapes the microbial community composition and functions in tropical montane forest soil[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2023, 854: 158709. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158709.
[28] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[29] 鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2000.
[30] 吴雨纯, 秦明森, 肖海钰, 等. 嘉陵江干流微塑料附着微生物的群落构建机制[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2025, 31(1): 1-11. DOI: 10.19675/j.cnki.1006-687x.2024.06006.
[31] Louca S, Parfrey L W, Doebeli M. Decoupling function and taxonomy in the global ocean microbiome[J]. Science, 2016, 353(6305): 1272-1277. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf4507.
[32] 刘瑛涵, 任伟征, 赵璐峰, 等. 稻鱼共生系统土壤微生物群落组成和功能特征[J]. 华南农业大学学报, 2024, 45(6): 865-877. DOI: 10.7671/j.issn.1001-411X.202406032.
[33] Li H, Yang S, Semenov M V, et al. Temperature sensitivity of SOM decomposition is linked with a K-selected microbial community[J]. Global Change Biology, 2021, 27(12): 2763-2779. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.15593.
[34] Chen Y J, Neilson J W, Kushwaha P, et al. Life-history strategies of soil microbial communities in an arid ecosystem[J]. The ISME Journal, 2021, 15(3): 649-657. DOI: 10.1038/s41396-020-00803-y.
[35] Shao P S, Lynch L, Xie H T, et al. Tradeoffs among microbial life history strategies influence the fate of microbial residues in subtropical forest soils[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2021, 153: 108112. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.108112.
[36] 刘开朗, 王加启, 卜登攀, 等. 环境微生物群落结构与功能多样性研究方法[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30(4): 1074-1080. DOI: 10.20103/j.stxb.2010.04.029.
[37] Li X, Zhang Y, Song S M, et al. Bacterial diversity patterns differ in different patch types of mixed forests in the upstream area of the Yangtze River Basin[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2021, 161: 103868. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2020.103868.
[38] 马姣娇, 高常军, 易小青, 等. 广东海丰湿地生态恢复进程中不同生境的土壤微生物特征分析[J]. 环境科学, 2023, 44(5): 2908-2917. DOI: 10.13227/j.hjkx.202205179.
[39] 李敏, 郝伟. 大兴安岭4个树种根围土壤细菌群落结构[J]. 生态学杂志, 2021, 40(7): 2057-2066. DOI: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202107.008.
[40] Yuan Y L, Si G C, Wang J, et al. Bacterial community in alpine grasslands along an altitudinal gradient on the Tibetan Plateau[J]. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 2014, 87(1): 121-132. DOI: 10.1111/1574-6941.12197.
[41] 郭城. 石漠化地区不同植被恢复模式下土壤微生物群落结构研究[D]. 贵阳: 贵州师范大学, 2021.
[42] 段昌海, 张翠景, 孙艺华, 等. 新型产甲烷古菌研究进展[J]. 微生物学报, 2019, 59(6): 981-995. DOI: 10.13343/j.cnki.wsxb.20180435.
[43] Wang Y Q, Shahbaz M, Zhran M, et al. Microbial resource limitation in aggregates in karst and non-karst soils[J]. Agronomy, 2021, 11(8): 1591. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy11081591.
[44] Xu Z W, Yu G R, Zhang X Y, et al. Biogeographical patterns of soil microbial community as influenced by soil characteristics and climate across Chinese forest biomes[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2018, 124: 298-305. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.11.019.
[45] Jeanbille M, BuÉE M, Bach C, et al. Soil parameters drive the structure, diversity and metabolic potentials of the bacterial communities across temperate beech forest soil sequences[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2016, 71(2): 482-493. DOI: 10.1007/s00248-015-0669-5.
[46] Zumsteg A, Luster J, Göransson H, et al. Bacterial, archaeal and fungal succession in the forefield of a receding glacier[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2012, 63(3): 552-564. DOI: 10.1007/s00248-011-9991-8.
[47] Liang Y T, Xiao X, Nuccio E E, et al. Differentiation strategies of soil rare and abundant microbial taxa in response to changing climatic regimes[J]. Environmental Microbiology, 2020, 22(4): 1327-1340. DOI: 10.1111/1462-2920.14945.
[48] Lei M T, Li Y, Zhang W L, et al. Identifying ecological processes driving vertical and horizontal archaeal community assemblages in a contaminated urban river[J]. Chemosphere, 2020, 245: 125615. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125615.
[49] Chaban B, Ng S Y M, Jarrell K F. Archaeal habitats: from the extreme to the ordinary[J]. Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 2006, 52(2): 73-116. DOI: 10.1139/w05-147.
[50] Ma B, Wang H Z, Dsouza M, et al. Geographic patterns of co-occurrence network topological features for soil microbiota at continental scale in Eastern China[J]. The ISME Journal, 2016, 10(8): 1891-1901. DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2015.261.
[51] Mallick S, Das S. Acid-tolerant bacteria and prospects in industrial and environmental applications[J]. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2023, 107(11): 3355-3374. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-023-12529-w.
[52] Li W T, Liu Q H, Xie L L, et al. Interspecific plant-plant interactions increase the soil microbial network stability, shift keystone microbial taxa, and enhance their functions in mixed stands[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2023, 533: 120851. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2023.120851.
[53] Creamer R E, Hannula S E, Van Leeuwen J P, et al. Ecological network analysis reveals the inter-connection between soil biodiversity and ecosystem function as affected by land use across Europe[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2016, 97: 112-124. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.08.006.
[54] Zarafshar M, Vincent G, Korboulewsky N, et al. The impact of stand composition and tree density on topsoil characteristics and soil microbial activities[J]. Catena, 2024, 234: 107541. DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2023.107541.
[55] 刘红梅, 李睿颖, 高晶晶, 等. 保护性耕作对土壤团聚体及微生物学特性的影响研究进展[J]. 生态环境学报, 2020, 29(6): 1277-1284. DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2020.06.025.
[56] Han S, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Luo X S, et al. Soil aggregate size-dependent relationships between microbial functional diversity and multifunctionality[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2021, 154: 108143. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108143.
[57] Kitano H. Biological robustness[J]. Nature Reviews Genetics, 2004, 5(11): 826-837. DOI: 10.1038/nrg1471.
[58] Li W, Luo M M, Shi R, et al. Variations in bacterial and archaeal community structure and diversity along the soil profiles of a peatland in Southwest China[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2022, 29(2): 2276-2286. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-15774-6.
[59] Cheng X Y, Yun Y, Wang H M, et al. Contrasting bacterial communities and their assembly processes in karst soils under different land use[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 751: 142263. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142263.
[60] Fazi S, Amalfitano S, Pernthaler J, et al. Bacterial communities associated with benthic organic matter in headwater stream microhabitats[J]. Environmental Microbiology, 2005, 7(10): 1633-1640. DOI: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00857.x.
[61] Cheng Y, Zhang H M, Chen Z X, et al. Contrasting effects of different pH-raising materials on N2O emissions in acidic upland soils[J]. European Journal of Soil Science, 2021, 72(1): 432-445. DOI: 10.1111/ejss.12964.
[62] Rondon M A, Lehmann J, RamÍRez J, et al. Biological nitrogen fixation by common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) increases with bio-char additions[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2007, 43(6): 699-708. DOI: 10.1007/s00374-006-0152-z.
[63] Di H J, Cameron K C, Shen J P, et al. Nitrification driven by bacteria and not archaea in nitrogen-rich grassland soils[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2009, 2(9): 621-624. DOI: 10.1038/ngeo613.
[64] Prosser J I, Nicol G W. Archaeal and bacterial ammonia-oxidisers in soil: the quest for niche specialisation and differentiation[J]. Trends in Microbiology, 2012, 20(11): 523-531. DOI: 10.1016/j.tim.2012.08.001.
[65] Nicol G W, Leininger S, Schleper C, et al. The influence of soil pH on the diversity, abundance and transcriptional activity of ammonia oxidizing Archaea and bacteria[J]. Environmental Microbiology, 2008, 10(11): 2966-2978. DOI: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01701.x.
[66] 李煜珊, 李耀明, 欧阳志云. 产甲烷微生物研究概况[J]. 环境科学, 2014, 35(5): 2025-2030. DOI: 10.13227/j.hjkx.2014.05.056.
[67] Xiao Y M, Wang J, Wang B, et al. Soil microbial network complexity predicts soil multifunctionality better than soil microbial diversity during grassland-farmland-shrubland conversion on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2025, 379: 109356. DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2024.109356.
[68] 刘坤和, 薛玉琴, 竹兰萍, 等. 嘉陵江滨岸带不同土地利用类型对土壤细菌群落多样性的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2022, 43(3): 1620-1629. DOI: 10.13227/j.hjkx.202106174.
[69] Langille M G I, Zaneveld J, Caporaso J G, et al. Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences[J]. Nature Biotechnology, 2013, 31(9): 814-821. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2676.
[70] Sansupa C, Wahdan S F M, Hossen S, et al. Can we use functional annotation of prokaryotic taxa (FAPROTAX) to assign the ecological functions of soil bacteria?[J]. Applied Sciences, 2021, 11(2): 688. DOI: 10.3390/app11020688.
[1] 庞丽珍, 杜丽娜, 王波. 漓江3种淡水螺类肠道微生物研究[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2025, 43(5): 207-217.
[2] 彭素琴, 刘郁林, 毛瑢, 刘苑秋, 樊乙萱, 周玉姗, 杨琪. 马尾松补植木荷对土壤微生物生物量碳氮的动态影响[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2025, 43(1): 150-160.
[3] 李友邦, 农娟丽, 杨婉琳, 赵佳佳, 朱琪琪. 弄岗同域分布赤腹松鼠和红颊长吻松鼠活动节律研究[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2021, 39(1): 71-78.
[4] 李燕林, 黄松. 桂北地区地质遗迹与民族文化资源的空间关系研究[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2016, 34(1): 197-209.
[5] 吴超, 钟一文. 蛋白质功能预测的蚁群优化算法[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2011, 29(3): 136-141.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 田晟, 赵凯龙, 苗佳霖. 基于改进YOLO11n模型的自动驾驶道路交通检测算法研究[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(1): 1 -9 .
[2] 唐程华, 易见兵, 吴欣, 熊文武, 王敬永. 跨域少样本图像语义分割方法综述[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 1 -27 .
[3] 田晟, 谢华林, 陈东. 基于改进深度强化学习的燃料电池汽车能量管理策略[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 28 -45 .
[4] 张旭, 刘迪迪. 基于TD3算法的电动汽车智能充/放电调度策略[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 46 -55 .
[5] 闫远洋, 谢丽蓉, 张龙军, 任娟, 黄晨晨, 胡超. 基于多目标优化的超短期风电功率预测模型[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 56 -70 .
[6] 陶振卓, 韦笃取. 参数未知永磁同步电机的自适应混沌同步控制[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 71 -78 .
[7] 王成龙, 宋强, 李文峰, 张仕民. PAM-DETR: 基于改进RT-DETR的医用手套小目标缺陷检测算法[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 79 -95 .
[8] 韦吴杰, 陈庆锋. 基于视图解耦与反事实增强的公平图学习[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 96 -106 .
[9] 曹锋, 吴澍康, 朱伟臻, 易见兵. 基于多属性决策的矛盾体分离式评估方法[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 107 -120 .
[10] 罗珵, 黄文韬, 何东平, 张越. 一类具有十参数的复三次多项式微分系统的弱持续中心问题[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2026, 44(4): 121 -129 .
版权所有 © 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）编辑部
地址：广西桂林市三里店育才路15号　邮编：541004
电话：0773-5857325　E-mail: gxsdzkb@mailbox.gxnu.edu.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发