Effect of different tillage systems on the biological and enzymatic activity of soil

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Authors

1 Ph.D. student of Soil Science Gorgan university of agricultural science and natural resources. Iran,Golestan

2 Associate Professor and Faculty Member of Soil Science Department, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources

3 Associate Professor and Academic Member of the Technical and Engineering Department of Golestan Province Soil and Water Research Institute

4 Professor and Faculty Member of Agriculture Science, Department of Plant Production, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources

5 Assistant Professor and Faculty Member of Soil Science Department, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources

Abstract

Abstract

Background and objectives: In recent years, the use of conservation tillage methods in the world has been widely considered and the use of conventional tillage methods has become obsolete in some parts of the world. Soil conservation tillage systems in arid and semi-arid usually runs. In semi-arid areas, the key to increasing the production of crops is to maximize the penetration of superficial waters. In addition, techniques that lead to a decrease in evaporation from the soil and increase the amount of water available to plants when drought occurs, they are very important. Conventional tillage methods, by increasing energy costs, lead to processes of degradation and reduction of water and soil resources, and long-term effects on soil properties produce undesirable effects and cause the formation of hard layers. The metabolic share and microbial contribution are among the ecophysiological indices that are evaluated to determine the microbial status of the soil.
Materials and methods: This research was conducted in 2015 to investigate the effect of different tillage systems on soil biological activity in Golestan province. In this study, in the first stage, three regions were selected from Golestan province in the Gorganroud basin and in the cities of Gonbad, Kordkuy and Bandargaz. From each of these managements, 30 samples were taken at depths of 0-30 cm. Then biological soil properties such as soil microbial respiration, microbial biomass, urease, alkaline phosphatase, acid phosphatase, dehydrogenase and cellulase activity Measured. The experiment was conducted as a completely randomized block with three replications.
Results :The results showed that the effect of tillage treatment in three areas of Gonbad, Kordkuy and Bandargaz on microbial respiration traits, alkaline phosphatase, acid phosphatase, urease, cellulase and dehydrogenase was significant, but there was no significant effect on microbial biomass in Gonbad region. The results of the comparison of mean values indicated that soil biological activity was affected by different tillage systems in the three studied areas. In all three studied areas, the rate of respiration in conventional tillage systems was higher than that of no-till and conservation tillage systems. While in the no-till system, due to reduced organic matter decomposition, the amount of microbial biomass was higher than the other two systems. Considering the differences in enzymatic activity in different regions in different systems, the results showed that alkaline and acid phosphatase enzymes activity, urease and cellulase activity in the Gonbad region in the conservation tillage system was higher than of two other systems While in the Kurdkuy region the activity of these enzymes in the conservation tillage system was less than the other two systems. In the Kurdkuy and Bandargaz regions, the activity of the dehydrogenase enzyme in the conservation tillage system was more than the other two systems, while in the Gonbad region the activity of this enzyme in the no-till system was more than the other two systems.
Conclusion: Different tillage systems affect the level of biological and enzymatic activity of the soil, which was also dependent on the area, so that the microbial biomass of the soil decreased with decreasing moisture content and soil organic matter.
Also, according to the results of this study, it was determined that the conventional tillage s system in terms of biological and enzymatic activities in all three areas, especially the Gonbad area, had less efficiency and more efficient no-till and conservation tillage systems, although in areas the different situations were different.
Key words: tillage, enzymatic activity, conservation tillage and organic matter

Keywords

References

1.Alef, K., and Nannipieri, P. 1995. Methods in Applied Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry. Academic Press.
New York. USA, 608p.
2.AliAsgharzadeh, N. 2010. Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry. Second Edition, Tabriz University Press. (In Persian)
3.AliAsgharzadeh, N. 2011. Laboratory methods in soil biology. Second Edition, Tabriz University Press. (In Persian)
4.Amador, J.A., Gluch Sman, A.M., Lyons, J.B., and Gorres, J.H. 1997. Spatial distribution of soil phosphatase activity within a riparian forest. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. USA. 162: 11. 808-824.
5.Amini, A., Rajai, M., and Farsi Nejad, K. 2014. Effect of different tillage methods and plant residue management on yield and yield components of wheat. J. Plant Ecophysiol. 6: 16. 27-3. (In Persian)
6.Bear, M.H., Henderix, P.F., and Colman, D.C. 1994. Water stable aggregates and organic matter fraction in conventional and no-tillage. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. USA. 58: 777-786.
7.Bossatta, E., and Agren, I.G. 1999.Soil organic matter quality interpreted thermodynamically. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 31: 1889-1891.
8.Brainard, D.C., Peachey, E., Haramoto, E., Luna, J., and Rangarajan, A. 2013. Weed ecology and management under strip-tillage: implications for Northern U.S. vegetable cropping systems. Weed Technology. 27: 218-230.
9.Buerkert, A., Bationo, A., and Dossa,K. 2000. Mechanisms of residue mulch-induced cereal growth increases in west Africa. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. USA. 64: 347-354.
10.Burns, R.G. 1978. Soil enzymes. Academic Press, New York, Pp: 149-196.
11.Castellini, M., and Ventrella, D. 2012. Impact of conventional and minimum tillage on soil hydraulic conductivity in typical cropping system in Southern Italy. Soil and Tillage Research.124: 47-56.
 12.Chander, K., Goya, S., and Kapoor, K. 2006. Microbial biomass dynamics during the decomposition of leaf litter of Poplar and eucalyptus in a sandy loam. Appl. Soil Ecol. J. 35: 10-23.
13.Corstanje, R., Schulin, R., and Lark, R.M. 2007. Scale-dependent relationships between soil organic carbon and urease activity. Europ. J. Soil Sci.58: 1087-1095.
14.Courtney, R.G., and Mullen, G.J. 2008. Soil quality and barley growth as influenced by the laud application
of two compost types. Bioresource Technology. 99: 2913-2918.
15.Dick, R.P., Breakwell, D.P., and Turco, R.F. 1996. Soil enzyme activities and biodiversity measurements as integrative microbiological indicators. P 247-271. In: J.W. Doran and Jones A.J. (eds), Methods for assessing soil quality. Special Publication Number 49, Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. USA., Madison, WI.
16.Dick, R.P. 1994. Soil enzyme activities as indicators of soil quality. Pp: 107-124.
17.Dick, W.A. 1984. Influence of long-term tillage and crop rotation combinations on soil enzyme activities. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. USA. 48: 569-574.
18.Eivazi, F., and Tabatabai, M.A. 1977. Phosphatases in soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 9: 167-172.
19.Gianfreda, L., and Bollage, J.M. 1996. Influence of natural and anthropogenic factors on enzyme activity in soil.
P 123-194. In: G. Stotzky and J.M. Bollag. (eds.), Soil Biochemistry,Vol. 9, Marcel Dekker, New York.
20.Githinji, H.K., Okalebo, C.O., Othieno, A., Bationo, J., Kihara, J., and Waswa, B.S. 2011. Effects of Conservation Tillage, Fertilizer Inputs and Cropping Systems on Soil Properties and Crop Yield in Western Kenya. P 151-189.
In:A. Bationo, A. (ed), Innovations as Key to the Green Revolution in Africa. Springer + Business Media B.V.
21.Guo, P., Wang, C., Jia, Q., Wang, Q., Han, G., and Tian, X. 2011. Response of soil microbial biomass and enzymatic activities to fertilizations of mixed inorganic and organic nitrogen at a subtropical forest in East China. Plant and Soil. 338: 355-366.
22.Hu, C., and Cao, Z. 2007. Size and activity of the soil microbial biomass and soil enzyme activity in long-term field experiments. World J. Agric. Sci. 1: 63-70.
23.Huang, S., Zeng, J., Wu, Q., Shi, Q., and Pan, X. 2013. Effect of crop residue retention on rice yield in China: A
meta-analysis. Field Crops Research. 154: 188-194.
24.Isermeyer, H. 1952. A simple method for determining soil formation and carbonates in soil. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 56: 26-38. (In German)
25.Jarecki, M.K., and Lal, R. 2003.Crop management for soil carbon sequestration. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences. 22: 471-502.
26.Jenkinson, D.S., and Ladd, J.N.1981. Microbial Biomass in Soil: Measurement and Turnover. P 455-471. In: E.A. Paul and J.N. Ladd. (eds.), Soil Biochemistry. New York.
27.Kazemi, N., and Zakeri, H. 2006.Tillage for Sustainable Cropping. Ilam University Press. (In Persian)
28.Khademi, H., Mohammadi, J., and Nael, M. 2006. Comparison of selected soil quality indicators in different land use management systems in Boroojen, Chaharmahal Bakhtiari province. Sci. J. Agric. 29: 111-124. (In Persian)
29.Kramer, S., and Green, D.M. 2000. Acid and alkaline phosphatase dynamics and their relationship to soil microclimate in a semi-arid woodland. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 32: 2. 179-188.
30.Li, X., and Sarah, P. 2003. Enzyme activities along a climatic transect in the Judean Desert. Catena. 53: 4. 349-363.
31.Liang, Y., Nikolic, M., Peng, Y., and Chen, W. 2005. Organic manure simulates biological activity and barley growth in soil subject to secondary salinization. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 37: 1185-1195.
32.Malhi, S.S., and Lemke, R. 2007. Tillage, crop residue and N fertilizer effects on crop yield, nutrient uptake, soil quality and nitrous oxide gas emissions in a second 4-yr rotation cycle. Soil and Tillage Research.96: 269-283.
 33.Martinez-Salgado, M.M., Gutiérrez-Romero, V., Jannsens, M., and Ortega-Blu, R. 2010. Biological soil quality indicators: a review. P 319-328. In:
A. Mendez-Vilas, (ed.), Current Research, Technology and Education Topics in Applied Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology. Formatex Research Center, Spain.
34.Mathew, R., Feng, Y., Githinji, L., Ankumah, R., and Balkcom, K. 2012. Impact of no-tillage and conventional tillage systems on soil microbial communities. J. Appl. Environ. Soil Science. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/ 548620.
35.Meriles, J.M., Vargas, G., Conforto, C., Figoni, G., Lovera, E., Mach, G.J., and Guzman, C.A. 2009. Soil microbial communities under diļ¬€erent soybean cropping sysems: characterization of microbial population dynamics, soil microbial activity, microbial biomass, and fatty acid profles. Soil and Tillage Research. 103: 271-281.
36.Nannipieri, P., Grego, S., and Caccanti, B. 1990. Ecological significance of the biological activity in soil. P 293-355.
In: S.J.M. Bollag and G. Stotzky (eds). Soil Biochemistry. Marcel Dekker,New York.
37.Raiesi, F. 2007. The conversion of overgrazed pastures to almond orchards and alfalfa cropping systems may
favor microbial indicators of soil quality in Central Iran. Agriculture, Ecosyst. Environ. J. 121: 309-318.
38.Rajai, F., and Raeisi, F. 2010. Superabsorbate role of Superab A200 in modulating soil moisture stresses and its effect on nitrogen dynamics and enzymatic activity of alkaline phosphatase and Urease in soil. Iran. Water Res. J. 4: 7. 13-24. (In 
39.Ross, M., Hernandez, M.T., and Garcia, C. 2003. Soil microbial activity after restoration of a semiarid soil by organic amendments. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 35: 463-469.
40.Safahani Langroudi, A.R., Dadgar, T., Pasandi, R., and Alavian, M. 2016. Long-term effects of crop residue management, tillage and nitrogen fertilizer on corn yield and soil properties. Iran. J. Crop Sci. 18: 1. 34-48. (In Persian)
41.Sall, S.N., and Chotte, J.L. 2002. Phosphatase and urease activities in a tropical sandy soil as affected by soil water- holding capacity and assay conditions. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 33: 19-20. 3745-3755.
42.Sardans, J., and Peûuelas, J. 2005. Drought decreases soil enzyme activity in a Mediterranean Quercus ilex L. forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 37: 3. 455-461.
43.Smith, M.K., Smith, J.P., and Stirling, G.R. 2011. Integration of minimum tillage, crop rotation and organic amendments into a ginger farming system: Impacts on yield and soil borne diseases. Soil and Tillage Research.114: 108-116.
44.Tabatabai, M.A. 1994. Soil enzymes.P 775-833. In: R.W. Weaver, J.S. Angle, and P.S. Bottomley, (eds.), Methods
of Soil Analysis: Microbiological and Biochemical Properties. Part 2. Book Ser. 5. Soil Science Society of America, USA., Madison, WI.
45.Tabatabai, M.A., and Bremner, J.M. 1972. Assay of urease activity in soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry.4: 479-487.
46.Thalmann, A. 1968. On the methodology for the determination of dehydrogenase activity in soil using   triphenyltetrazolium chloride (TTC). Agricultural Research. 21: 249-258.
47.Trasar-Cepeda, C., Leiros, M.C., and Gil-Sotres, F. 2000. Biochemical properties of acid soils under climax vegetation (Atlantic oak wood) in an area of the European temperatehumid zone (Galicia, N.W. Spain): specific parameters. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 32: 747-755.
48.Treseder, K.K. 2008. Nitrogen additions and microbial biomass: a meta analysis of ecosysem sudies. Ecology Letters.
11: 1111-20.
49.Verhulst, N., Govaerts, E., Verachtert, F., Kienle, A., Limon-Ortega, J., Deckers, D., and Sayre, K.D. 2009. The importance of crop residue management in maintaining soil quality in zero tillage systems; a comparison between long-term trials in rainfed and irrigated wheat systems. 4th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture-February 4-7. New Delhi, India.
50.Watts, C.W., Eich, S., and Dexter, A.R. 2000. Effects of mechanical energy inputs on soil respiration at the aggregates and field scales. Soil and Tillage Research. 53: 231-243.
51.Wyszkowska, J., Kucharski, J., and Lajszner, W. 2005. Enzymatic activities in different soils contaminated with copper. Polish J. Environ. Stud.14: 659-664.
52.Zarea, M.J., Ghalavand, A., Mohammadi Goltapeh, E., and Rejali, F. 2009. Interactions between AM fungus (Glomus mosseae) - earthworms and their effects on bacterial communities’composition, Nitrogenase activities and Nuptake. Agric. Technol. J. 5: 2. 337-347.
Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production
Volume 9, Issue 2
July 2019
Pages 151-164

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics