4.6 Article

Soil extracellular enzyme activities are sensitive indicators of detrital inputs and carbon availability

期刊

APPLIED SOIL ECOLOGY
卷 92, 期 -, 页码 18-23

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.03.006

关键词

Detritus; Decomposition; DIRT; Extracellular enzymes; Litter manipulation; beta-Glucosidase; Polyphenol oxidase

资金

  1. NSF [1257032]
  2. European Union
  3. State of Hungary
  4. European Social Fund [TAMOP 4.2.4.A/2-11-1-2012-0001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In a litter manipulation experiment in a temperate deciduous oak forest in Central Europe, we examined soil carbon contents and density fractions, as well as beta-glucosidase and polyphenol oxidase enzyme activities, which play central roles in the degradation of litter and soil organic matter. Our measurements were taken in the DIRT (detritus input and removal treatments) plots, where manipulations include doubling of leaf litter or woody debris inputs, as well as removal of litter, trenching to prevent root inputs, and removal of all litter inputs. After 10 years of manipulation, soil C content did not vary predictably among plots, although the amount of light fraction material was greater in control and litter addition plots compared to litter removal plots. Even after 10 years of litter addition, there were no significant differences in activities of either enzyme in double litter plots compared to control plots, a result consistent with other observed measures of microbial activity. However, removal of roots and litter caused significant decreases in beta-glucosidase activities very quickly, and these differences increased over time. However, polyphenol oxidase activities were not significant different among treatments. Enzyme activities were not correlated with total soil carbon contents, but activities of both enzymes were significantly and positively related to the amount of light fraction carbon, suggesting that enzymes respond to increases in labile carbon availability. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据