4.6 Article

The susceptibility of soil enzymes to inhibition by leaf litter tannins is dependent on the tannin chemistry, enzyme class and vegetation history

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 196, 期 4, 页码 1122-1132

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04346.x

关键词

antioxidant potential; enzyme inhibition; enzyme isoforms; hydrolase; oxidoreductase; soil enzymes; tannin

资金

  1. NSF [DEB-1145993]
  2. USDA [2009-35320-05042]
  3. Division Of Environmental Biology
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences [1145993] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By inhibiting soil enzymes, tannins play an important role in soil carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) mineralization. The role of tannin chemistry in this inhibitory process, in conjunction with enzyme classes and isoforms, is less well understood. Here, we compared the inhibition efficiencies of mixed tannins (MTs, mostly limited to angiosperms) and condensed tannins (CTs, produced mostly by gymnosperms) against the potential activity of beta-glucosidase (BG), N-acetyl-glucosaminidase (NAG), and peroxidase in two soils that differed in their vegetation histories. Compared with CTs, MTs exhibited 50% more inhibition of almond (Prunus dulcis) BG activity and greater inhibition of the potential NAG activity in the gymnosperm-acclimatized soils. CTs exhibited lower BG inhibition in the angiosperm-acclimated soils, whereas both types of tannins exhibited higher peroxidase inhibition in the angiosperm soils than in gymnosperm soils. At all of the tested tannin concentrations, irrespective of the tannin type and site history, the potential peroxidase activity was inhibited two-fold more than the hydrolase activity and was positively associated with the redox-buffering efficiency of tannins. Our finding that the inhibitory activities and mechanisms of MTs and CTs are dependent on the vegetative history and enzyme class is novel and furthers our understanding of the role of tannins and soil isoenzymes in decomposition.

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