4.7 Article

Immobilization and mineralization of nitrogen in a saline and alkaline soil during microbial use of sugarcane filter cake amended with glucose

期刊

BIOLOGY AND FERTILITY OF SOILS
卷 45, 期 3, 页码 289-296

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00374-008-0333-z

关键词

Microbial biomass C; Microbial biomass N; Ergosterol; CO2 production; N re-mineralization

资金

  1. Higher Education Commission, Islamabad, Pakistan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A 42-day incubation was conducted to study the effect of glucose and ammonium addition adjusted to a C/N ratio of 12.5 on sugarcane filter cake decomposition and on the release of inorganic N from microbial residues formed initially. The CO2 evolved increased in comparison with the non-amended control from 35% of the added C with pure +5 mg g(-1) soil filter cake amendment to 41% with +5 mg g(-1) soil filter cake +2.5 mg g(-1) soil glucose amendment to 48% with 5 mg g(-1) soil filter cake +5 mg g(-1) soil glucose amendment. The different amendments increased microbial biomass C and microbial biomass N within 6 h and such an increase persisted. The fungal cell-membrane component ergosterol initially showed a disproportionate increase in relation to microbial biomass C, which completely disappeared by the end of the incubation. The cellulase activity showed a 5-fold increase after filter cake addition, which was not further increased by the additional glucose amendment. The cellulase activity showed an exponential decline to values around 4% of the initial value in all treatments. The amount of inorganic N immobilized from day 0 to day 14 increased with increasing amount of C added, in contrast to the control treatment. After day 14, the immobilized N was re-mineralized at rates between 1.3 and 1.5 A mu g N g(-1) soil d(-1) in the treatments being more than twice as high as in the control treatment. This means that the re-mineralization rate is independent of the actual size of the microbial residues pool and also independent of the size of the soil microbial biomass.

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