POTENTIAL of ENZYMATIC METHODS and BIOLOG ECOPLATE ANALYSIS for INVESTIGATION of MICROBIAL FUNCTIONALITY in AGRICULTURAL SOILS

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 047, 218 - 234, 31.12.2021

Nilgün Poyraz , Suat Sezen , Mehmet Burçin Mutlu

Öz

Agricultural systems and applications affects the soil ecological conditions and microbial structure.
However, it is important that the interventions do not disturb the balance and quality of the microbial
content of the soil. For this reason, enzymatic methods and Biolog Ecoplate method were applied to
research and evaluate the status of functional microbial diversity in four different agricultural soil
samples (A, B, C, D).
The results indicated that the pH, electrical conductivity, amounts of total nitrogen (N) and humidity
were generally similar but calcium carbonate rates were higher in A and B agricultural soils. Soil
enzymatic activity results showed some differences among the four different agricultural soils. The
activity measurements of urease, phosphatase and dehydrogenase were high and results showed the
differanties. Enzymatic activities and microbial populations correlated with each others and content of
organic carbon.
Evaluation of substrate utilization profiles and the diversity indices concluded that microbial
community structure and composition were different related to various conditions. The average well
color development (AWCD) which was calculated in the Biolog EcoPlate analysis showed some
variations in the catabolic ability of four different agricultural soil samples’ microbial communities.
Compared to other samples, C and D agricultural soil samples had a higher overall AWCD value.
AWCD of C soil was significantly higher than in the others. Lowest used substrates were α-
Cyclodextrin, α-Ketobutyric acid, β-Methyl-D-glucoside, α-D-Lactose and 2- hydroxybutyric acid.
The most extensively used substrates were aminoacids and carbohydrate groups. These results
indicates the degradation potential. With the Biolog EcoPlate and enzymatic measurements, changes
in the microbial community in agricultural soils can be detected, and also agricultural management
and application methods for tillage can be evaluated.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dehydrogenase, urease, phosphatase, AWCD, Biolog Ecoplate, microbial activity

Kaynakça

• [1] Schimel, J. , & Schaeffer, S. M. (2012). Microbial control over carbon cycling in soil. Frontiers in microbiology, 3, 348.
• [2] Delgado‐Baquerizo, M. , Grinyer, J., Reich, P. B., & Singh, B. K. (2016). Relative importance of soil properties and microbial community for soil functionality: insights from a microbial swap experiment. Functional Ecology, 30(11), 1862-1873.
• [3] Anderson, S. A. , Sissons, C. H., Coleman, M. J., & Wong, L. (2002). Application of carbon source utilization patterns to measure the metabolic similarity of complex dental plaque biofilm microcosms. Applied and environmental microbiology, 68(11), 5779-5783.
• [4] Giacometti C., Demyan M.S., Cavani L., Marzadori C., Ciavatta C., Kandeler E. (2013). Chemical and microbiological soil quality indicators and their potential to differentiate fertilization regimes in temperate agroecosystems. Applied Soil Ecology, 64, 32–48.
• [5] Lopez-Lozano, N. E., Carcaño-Montiel, M. G., & Bashan, Y. (2016). Using native trees and cacti to improve soil potential nitrogen fixation during long-term restoration of arid lands. Plant and Soil, 403(1-2), 317-329.
• [6] Insam, H. (2001). Developments in soil microbiology since the mid 1960s. Geoderma, 100(3-4), 389-402.
• [7] Wakelin, S. A., Barratt, B. I., Gerard, E., Gregg, A. L., Brodie, E. L., Andersen, G. L., ... & O'Callaghan, M. (2013). Shifts in the phylogenetic structure and functional capacity of soil microbial communities follow alteration of native tussock grassland ecosystems. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 57, 675-682.
• [8] Järvan M., Edesi L., Adamson A., Võsa T. (2014): Soil microbial communities and dehydrogenase activity depending on farming systems. Plant, Soil and Environment, 60, 459–463.
• [9] Fließbach, A., Oberholzer, H. R., Gunst, L., & Mäder, P. (2007). Soil organic matter and biological soil quality indicators after 21 years of organic and conventional farming. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 118(1-4), 273-284.
• [10] Marschner, P., Kandeler, E., & Marschner, B. (2003). Structure and function of the soil microbial community in a long-term fertilizer experiment. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 35(3), 453-461.
• [11] Chang, E. H., Chung, R. S., & Tsai, Y. H. (2007). Effect of different application rates of organic fertilizer on soil enzyme activity and microbial population. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 53(2), 132-140.
• [12] Chu, H., Lin, X., Fujii, T., Morimoto, S., Yagi, K., Hu, J., & Zhang, J. (2007). Soil microbial biomass, dehydrogenase activity, bacterial community structure in response to long-term fertilizer management. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 39(11), 2971-2976.
• [13] Govaerts, B., Mezzalama, M., Unno, Y., Sayre, K. D., Luna-Guido, M., Vanherck, K., ... & Deckers, J. (2007). Influence of tillage, residue management, and crop rotation on soil microbial biomass and catabolic diversity. Applied soil ecology, 37(1-2), 18-30.
• [14] Ngosong, C., Jarosch, M., Raupp, J., Neumann, E., & Ruess, L. (2010). The impact of farming practice on soil microorganisms and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi: Crop type versus long-term mineral and organic fertilization. Applied Soil Ecology, 46(1), 134-142.
• [15] Acosta-Martinez, V., Mikha, M. M., Sistani, K. R., Stahlman, P. W., Benjamin, J. G., Vigil, M. F., & Erickson, R. (2011). Multi-location study of soil enzyme activities as affected by types and rates of manure application and tillage practices. Agriculture, 1(1), 4-21.
• [16] Dumontet, S., Cavoski, I., Ricciuti, P., Mondelli, D., Jarrar, M., Pasquale, V., & Crecchio, C. (2017). Metabolic and genetic patterns of soil microbial communities in response to different amendments under organic farming system. Geoderma, 296, 79-85.
• [17] Garland, J. L., & Mills, A. L. (1991). Classification and characterization of heterotrophic microbial communities on the basis of patterns of community-level sole-carbon-source utilization. Applied and environmental microbiology, 57(8), 2351-2359.
• [18] Huang, N., Wang, W., Yao, Y., Zhu, F., Wang, W., & Chang, X. (2017). The influence of different concentrations of bio-organic fertilizer on cucumber Fusarium wilt and soil microflora alterations. PLoS One, 12(2), e0171490.
• [19] Feigl, V., Ujaczki, É., Vaszita, E., & Molnár, M. (2017). Influence of red mud on soil microbial communities: Application and comprehensive evaluation of the Biolog EcoPlate approach as a tool in soil microbiological studies. Science of the Total Environment, 595, 903-911.
• [20] Zhang, C., Zhou, T., Zhu, L., Du, Z., Li, B., Wang, J., ... & Sun, Y. (2019). Using enzyme activities and soil microbial diversity to understand the effects of fluoxastrobin on microorganisms in fluvo-aquic soil. Science of The Total Environment, 666, 89-93.
• [21] Guo, P., Zhu, L., Wang, J., Wang, J., Xie, H., & Lv, D. (2015). Enzymatic activities and microbial biomass in black soil as affected by azoxystrobin. Environmental Earth Sciences, 74(2), 1353-1361.
• [22] Sun, X., Zhu, L., Wang, J., Wang, J., Su, B., Liu, T., ... & Shao, Y. (2017). Toxic effects of ionic liquid 1-octyl-3-methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate on soil enzyme activity and soil microbial community diversity. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 135, 201-208.
• [23] Zhang, Q., Zhu, L., Wang, J., Xie, H., Wang, J., Wang, F., & Sun, F. (2014). Effects of fomesafen on soil enzyme activity, microbial population, and bacterial community composition. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 186(5), 2801-2812.
• [24] Kalra YP (1995) Determination of pH of soils by different methods: collaborative study. Journal of AOAC International 78, 310–324.
• [25] Loeppert, R. H., & Suarez, D. L. (1996). Carbonate and gypsum. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 3 Chemical Methods, 5, 437-474.
• [26] Nielsen, J.P. (2003). Evaluation of malting barley quality using exploratory data analysis. II. The use of kernel hardness and image analysis as screening methods. Journal of Cereal Science, 38, 247-255.
• [27] Tabatabaı, M.A.(1994). Soil enzymes. In: Weaver, R.W., Angel, S., Bottomley, P., Bezdicek,D.,Smith,S.,Tabatabai, A. and Wollum, A. (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2 – Microbiological and Biochemical Properties. SSSA Book Series No. 5. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, pp. 775–833,
• [28] Keeney, D. R., & Nelson, D. W. (1982). Nitrogen-Inorganic Forms. In A. L. Page (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Agronomy Monograph 9, Part 2 (2nd ed., pp. 643-698). Madison, WI: ASA, SSSA.
• [29] Xu, W., Ge, Z., & Poudel, D. R. (2015). Application and optimization of biolog ecoplates in functional diversity studies of soil microbial communities. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 22, p. 04015). EDP Sciences.
• [30] Classen, A. T., Boyle, S. I., Haskins, K. E., Overby, S. T., & Hart, S. C. (2003). Community-level physiological profiles of bacteria and fungi: plate type and incubation temperature influences on contrasting soils. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 44(3), 319-328.
• [31] Garland, J. L., Mills, A. L., & Young, J. S. (2001). Relative effectiveness of kinetic analysis vs single point readings for classifying environmental samples based on community-level physiological profiles (CLPP). Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 33(7-8), 1059-1066.
• [32] Gomez, E., Garland, J., & Conti, M. (2004). Reproducibility in the response of soil bacterialcommunity-level physiological profiles from a land use intensification gradient. Applied Soil Ecology, 26(1), 21-30.
• [33] Jałowiecki, Ł., Chojniak, J. M., Dorgeloh, E., Hegedusova, B., Ejhed, H., Magnér, J., & Płaza, G. A. (2016). Microbial community profiles in wastewaters from onsite wastewater treatment systems technology. PloS one, 11(1), e0147725.
• [34] Zak, J. C., Willig, M. R., Moorhead, D. L., & Wildman, H. G. (1994). Functional diversity of microbial communities: a quantitative approach. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 26(9), 1101-1108.
• [35] Rapport, D. J. (1995). Ecosystem health: More than a metaphor?.Environmental values, 4(4), 287-309.
• [36] Bowles, T. M., Acosta-Martínez, V., Calderón, F., & Jackson, L. E. (2014). Soil enzyme activities, microbial communities, and carbon and nitrogen availability in organic agroecosystems across an intensively-managed agricultural landscape. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 68, 252-262.
• [37] Spedding, T. A., Hamel, C., Mehuys, G. R., & Madramootoo, C. A. (2004). Soil microbial dynamics in maize-growing soil under different tillage and residue management systems. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 36(3), 499-512.
• [38] Yegül, U., Eminoğlu, M. B., & Türker, U. (2019). Buğdayın Verim ve Kalite Parametrelerinin Toprağın Elektriksel İletkenliği ile İlişkisinin Belirlenmesi. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(3), 270-283.
• [39] Deveci, H., Konukcu, F., & Altürk, B. (2019). Effect of climate change on wheat grown soil moisture profile in Thrace district. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 16(2), 202-218.
• [40] Burns, R. G., DeForest, J. L., Marxsen, J., Sinsabaugh, R. L., Stromberger, M. E., Wallenstein, M. D., ... & Zoppini, A. (2013). Soil enzymes in a changing environment: current knowledge and future directions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 58, 216-234.
• [41] Byrnes, B. H., & Amberger, A. (1988). Fate of broadcast urea in a flooded soil when treated with N-(n-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide, a urease inhibitor. Fertilizer research, 18(3), 221-231.
• [42] Anna, G., Karolina, G., Jarosław, G., Magdalena, F., & Jerzy, K. (2017). Microbial community diversity and the interaction of soil under maize growth in different cultivation techniques. Plant, Soil and Environment, 63(6), 264-270.
• [43] Tejada, M., Benítez, C., Gómez, I., & Parrado, J. (2011). Use of biostimulants on soil restoration: Effects on soil biochemical properties and microbial community. Applied Soil Ecology, 49, 11-17.
• [44] Maestre, F. T., Puche, M. D., Guerrero, C., & Escudero, A. (2011). Shrub encroachment does not reduce the activity of some soil enzymes in Mediterranean semiarid grasslands. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 43(8), 1746-1749.
• [45] Kapanen, A., Vikman, M., Rajasärkkä, J., Virta, M., & Itävaara, M. (2013). Biotests for environmental quality assessment of composted sewage sludge. Waste Management, 33(6), 1451-1460.
• [46] Gryta, A., Frąc, M., & Oszust, K. (2014). The application of the Biolog EcoPlate approach in ecotoxicological evaluation of dairy sewage sludge. Applied biochemistry and biotechnology, 174(4), 1434-1443.
• [47] Ghimire, R., Norton, J. B., Stahl, P. D., & Norton, U. (2014). Soil microbial substrate properties and microbial community responses under irrigated organic and reduced-tillage crop and forage production systems. PloS one, 9(8), e103901.