IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i23p12862-d696288.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Different Agricultural Farming Practices on Microbial Biomass and Enzyme Activities of Celery Growing Field Soil

Author

Listed:
  • Lin Wang

    (Henan Key Laboratory of Earth System Observation and Modeling, College of Geography and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
    Department of Environmental Sciences, Miami College, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China)

  • Mandeep Kaur

    (Henan Key Laboratory of Earth System Observation and Modeling, College of Geography and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China)

  • Ping Zhang

    (Henan Key Laboratory of Earth System Observation and Modeling, College of Geography and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China)

  • Ji Li

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Ming Xu

    (Henan Key Laboratory of Earth System Observation and Modeling, College of Geography and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China)

Abstract

Soil quality is directly affected by alterations in its microbiological, biological, biochemical, physical, and chemical aspects. The microbiological activities of soil can affect soil fertility and plant growth because it can speed up the cycling of nutrients, enzymes, and hormones that are needed by plants for proper growth and development. The use of different agricultural management practices can influence microbial biomass and enzyme activities by altering soil microclimate, soil microorganism habitat, and nutrient cycling. Based on this, the present work planned to evaluate the impact of conventional, low-input, and organic farming systems in a vegetable field growing celery on microbial biomass and different soil enzyme activities. The present study showed a comparison of the effect of different practices on biological soil quality indicators during two sampling times, i.e., one month after colonization and one month before harvesting. It was observed that the soil microbial biomass in the organic farming system was significantly higher than that found in conventional and low-input practices. Under an organic farming system, the soil microbial biomass in December was significantly higher than that in October. The soil microbial biomass carbon in the 0–20 cm soil layer showed higher variation compared to that in the 20–40 cm layer for all the three of the farming management practices that were used in the study. Additionally, the soil total carbon and total organic carbon were recorded as being higher in the December samples than they were in the October samples. Under all the three of the management practices that were applied, the soil catalase activity was higher in the October samples than it was in the December soil samples that were collected the from 20–40 cm soil layer compared to those that were taken from the 0–20 cm layer. The application of organic fertilizer (chicken and cowmanure compost) resulted inincreases in the soil urease and in the protease activity. The protease activity of the soil samples that were extracted from the 0–20 cm and 20–40 cm soil layers in October was higher in the samples that were taken from farms using conventional practices than it was in the samples that were taken from farms using organic and low-input practices, while the samples that were collected during December from both of the soil layers showed higher protease activity when organic methods had been used. No significant variation in the soil urease activity was observed between the two soil layer samples. Urease activity was the highest when organic management practices were being used, followed by the low-input and the conventional modes. For the conventional and low-input practices, the soil urease activity showed an obvious trend of change that was related to thetime of sampling, i.e., activity in December was significantly higher than activity in October. The novelty of this study was to determine the microbial biomass carbon and enzymatic activity in a six-field crop rotation (tomato, cucumber, celery, fennel, cauliflower, and eggplant) using three management practices: low-input, conventional, and organic systems. The present study showed that the long-term application of organic fertilizers plays a large role in maintaining excellent microbial and enzyme activitythat result in improved soil quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Lin Wang & Mandeep Kaur & Ping Zhang & Ji Li & Ming Xu, 2021. "Effect of Different Agricultural Farming Practices on Microbial Biomass and Enzyme Activities of Celery Growing Field Soil," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12862-:d:696288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12862/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12862/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cezary A. Kwiatkowski & Elżbieta Harasim & Beata Feledyn-Szewczyk & Jacek Antonkiewicz, 2020. "Enzymatic Activity of Loess Soil in Organic and Conventional Farming Systems," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Martina Lori & Sarah Symnaczik & Paul Mäder & Gerlinde De Deyn & Andreas Gattinger, 2017. "Organic farming enhances soil microbial abundance and activity—A meta-analysis and meta-regression," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Atanu Mukherjee & Emmanuel C. Omondi & Paul R. Hepperly & Rita Seidel & Wade P. Heller, 2020. "Impacts of Organic and Conventional Management on the Nutritional Level of Vegetables," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Nesar Ahmed & Shirley Thompson & Giovanni M. Turchini, 2020. "Organic aquaculture productivity, environmental sustainability, and food security: insights from organic agriculture," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1253-1267, December.
    3. Ariana Macieira & Joana Barbosa & Paula Teixeira, 2021. "Food Safety in Local Farming of Fruits and Vegetables," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-15, September.
    4. de la Cruz, Vera Ysabel V. & Tantriani, & Cheng, Weiguo & Tawaraya, Keitaro, 2023. "Yield gap between organic and conventional farming systems across climate types and sub-types: A meta-analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    5. Maria Wanic & Magdalena Jastrzębska & Marta K. Kostrzewska & Mariola Parzonka, 2024. "Spelt in Diversified and Spelt-Based Crop Rotations: Grain Yield and Technological and Nutritional Quality," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Shangyi Lou & Jin He & Hongwen Li & Qingjie Wang & Caiyun Lu & Wenzheng Liu & Peng Liu & Zhenguo Zhang & Hui Li, 2021. "Current Knowledge and Future Directions for Improving Subsoiling Quality and Reducing Energy Consumption in Conservation Fields," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Marioara Nicoleta Filimon & Diana Larisa Roman & Ion Valeriu Caraba & Adriana Isvoran, 2021. "Assessment of the Effect of Application of the Herbicide S-Metolachlor on the Activity of Some Enzymes Found in Soil," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, May.
    8. Nontobeko Gloria Maphuhla & Francis Bayo Lewu & Opeoluwa Oyehan Oyedeji, 2020. "The Effects of Physicochemical Parameters on Analysed Soil Enzyme Activity from Alice Landfill Site," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15, December.
    9. Peisang Luo & Zedong Long & Mei Sun & Qiufen Feng & Xibai Zeng & Hua Wang & Zunchang Luo & Geng Sun, 2023. "Long-Term Application of Pig Manure to Ameliorate Soil Acidity in Red Upland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, September.
    10. Castillo-Eguskitza, Nekane & Hoyos, David & Onaindia, Miren & Czajkowski, Mikolaj, 2019. "Unraveling local preferences and willingness to pay for different management scenarios: A choice experiment to biosphere reserve management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Xue Yang & Yuzheng Li & Chunying Li & Qianqian Li & Bin Qiao & Sen Shi & Chunjian Zhao, 2021. "Enhancement of Interplanting of Ficus carica L. with Taxus cuspidata Sieb. et Zucc. on Growth of Two Plants," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Laura Mariana Cismaș & Emilia Mary Bălan & Cristina Georgiana Zeldea & Marioara Iordan & Cristian Mihai Cismaș, 2023. "Agriculture and the Bioeconomy: A Socioeconomic Analysis of Central and Eastern European Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Camila Fritzen Cidón & Paola Schmitt Figueiró & Dusan Schreiber, 2021. "Benefits of Organic Agriculture under the Perspective of the Bioeconomy: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Filip Hampl, 2020. "A statistical analysis of the financial performance of organic and conventional farms in the Czech Republic with respect to their size," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 66(1), pages 1-9.
    15. Valeria Borsellino & Emanuele Schimmenti & Hamid El Bilali, 2020. "Agri-Food Markets towards Sustainable Patterns," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-35, March.
    16. Lagerquist, Elsa & Vogeler, Iris & Kumar, Uttam & Bergkvist, Göran & Lana, Marcos & Watson, Christine A. & Parsons, David, 2024. "Assessing the effect of intercropped leguminous service crops on main crops and soil processes using APSIM NG," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    17. Katarzyna Pużyńska & Agnieszka Synowiec & Stanisław Pużyński & Jan Bocianowski & Kazimierz Klima & Andrzej Lepiarczyk, 2021. "The Performance of Oat-Vetch Mixtures in Organic and Conventional Farming Systems," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, April.
    18. Maria Giordano & Spyridon A. Petropoulos & Youssef Rouphael, 2021. "The Fate of Nitrogen from Soil to Plants: Influence of Agricultural Practices in Modern Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-22, September.
    19. Sylwia Wesołowska & Barbara Futa & Magdalena Myszura & Agata Kobyłka, 2022. "Residual Effects of Different Cropping Systems on Physicochemical Properties and the Activity of Phosphatases of Soil," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    20. Beatrice Farda & Rihab Djebaili & Matteo Bernardi & Loretta Pace & Maddalena Del Gallo & Marika Pellegrini, 2022. "Bacterial Microbiota and Soil Fertility of Crocus sativus L. Rhizosphere in the Presence and Absence of Fusarium spp," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-13, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12862-:d:696288. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.