4.7 Article

Chemical and biochemical properties in a silty loam soil under conventional and organic management

期刊

SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH
卷 90, 期 1-2, 页码 162-170

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2005.08.016

关键词

organic farming; conventional farming; soil enzymes; total organic carbon; microbial biomass C; microbial biomass N; metabolic quotient

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To improve soil fertility, efforts need to be made to increase soil organic matter content. Conventional farming practice generally leads to a reduction of soil organic matter. This study compared inorganic and organic fertilisers in a crop rotation system over two cultivation cycles: first crop broad bean (Vicia faba L.) and second crop mixed cropped melon-water melon (Cucumis melo-Citrullus vulgaris) under semi-arid conditions. Total organic carbon (TOC), Kjeldahl-N, available-P, microbial biomass C (Cmic), and N (Nmic), soil respiration and enzymatic activities (protease, urease, and alkaline phosphatase) were determined in soils between the fourth and sixth year of management comparison. The metabolic quotient (qCO(2)), the Cmic/Nmic ratio, and the Crnic/ TOC ratio were also calculated. Organic management resulted in significant increases in TOC and Kjeldahl-N, available-P, soil respiration, microbial biomass, and enzymatic activities compared with those found under conventional management. Crop yield was greater from organic than conventional fertilizer. The qCO(2) showed a progressive increase for both treatments during the study, although qCO(2) was greater with conventional than organic fertilizer. In both treatments, an increase in the Cmic/Nmic ratio from first to second crop cycle was observed, indicating a change in the microbial populations. Biochemical properties were positively correlated (p < 0.01) with TOC and nutrient content. These results indicated that organic management positively affected soil organic matter content, thus improving soil quality and productivity. (c) 2005 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

4.7
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