| Literature DB >> 25090235 |
Rajan Ghimire1, Jay B Norton1, Peter D Stahl1, Urszula Norton2.
Abstract
Changes in soil microbiotic properties such as microbial biomass and community structure in response to alternative management systems are driven by microbial substrate quality and substrate utilization. We evaluated irrigated crop and forage production in two separate four-year experiments for differences in microbial substrate quality, microbial biomass and community structure, and microbial substrate utilization under conventional, organic, and reduced-tillage management systems. The six different management systems were imposed on fields previously under long-term, intensively tilledEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25090235 PMCID: PMC4121199 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103901
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Crop rotations and management practices under different conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop and forage production (see Table S2 for detailed dates and management activities).
| System | year | Crop in rotation | Management practices | |
| Crop | CV | 2009 | Pinto bean | Tillage with moldboard plow and disk (5–7 passes each year), use of chemical fertilizers based on soil test recommendation for each crop, pesticides application as needed, and no livestock grazing. |
| 2010 | Corn | |||
| 2011 | Sugar beet | |||
| 2012 | Corn | |||
| OR | 2009 | Alfalfa | Tillage with moldboard plow and disk (5–7 passes each year) and use of USDA-NOP certified practices for soil fertility (organic manure application) and pest management (e.g., cultivation), and no livestock grazing. | |
| 2010 | Alfalfa | |||
| 2011 | Corn | |||
| 2012 | Pinto bean | |||
| RT | 2009 | Pinto bean | Reduced-tillage (1–2 tillage passes each year that leave >15% crop residue on surface), use of chemical fertilizers based on soil test recommendation, pesticides application as needed, and no livestock grazing. | |
| 2010 | Corn | |||
| 2011 | Sugar beet | |||
| 2012 | Corn | |||
| Forage | CV | 2009 | Alfalfa/grasses | Conventional tillage (5–7 passes in year 1 and 4), use of chemical fertilizers based on soil test recommendation, pesticides application as needed, and grazing with fall weaned calves during winter 2011/12. |
| 2010 | Alfalfa/grasses | |||
| 2011 | Alfalfa/grasses | |||
| 2012 | Corn | |||
| OR | 2009 | Alfalfa/grasses | Conventional tillage and use of USDA certified practices for soil fertility (compost application) and pest management (no pesticides), and grazing with fall weaned calves during winter 2011/12. | |
| 2010 | Alfalfa/grasses | |||
| 2011 | Alfalfa/grasses | |||
| 2012 | Corn | |||
| RT | 2009 | Alfalfa/grasses | Reduced-tillage in the first year and no-tillage after, use of chemical fertilizers based on soil test recommendation, pesticides application as needed, and grazing with fall weaned calves during winter 2011/12. | |
| 2010 | Alfalfa/grasses | |||
| 2011 | Alfalfa/grasses | |||
| 2012 | Corn | |||
Soil properties as influenced by conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop and forage production one and four years after transition from continuous conventional corn.
| System | SOC | STN | DOC | Db | |||||||||
| Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | ||
| g kg−1 soil | g kg−1 soil | mg kg−1 soil | g cm−3 | ||||||||||
| Crop | CV | 6.70aA(1.31) | 5.83bA(0.98) | −13.0 | 0.65(0.08) | 0.73(0.12) | +12.3 | 19.5aB(2.08) | 119cA(4.46) | +510 | 1.46aA(0.02) | 1.43abA(0.02) | −2.05 |
| OR | 6.52aB(0.16) | 8.95aA(0.37) | +37.3 | 0.79(0.05) | 0.90(0.08) | +13.3 | 36.4aB(5.45) | 154aA(4.43) | +323 | 1.48aA(0.02) | 1.40bA(0.02) | −5.41 | |
| RT | 7.31aA(0.86) | 8.00aA(0.52) | +9.44 | 0.72(0.04) | 0.80(0.05) | +11.8 | 20.6aB(3.78) | 137bA(8.49) | +565 | 1.42aA(0.02) | 1.48aA(0.03) | +4.23 | |
| Forage | CV | 8.96aA(1.36) | 7.23bA(0.46) | −19.3 | 0.77(0.09) | 0.81(0.08) | +5.19 | 38.6aB(3.85) | 139aA(13.3) | +360 | 1.47aA(0.03) | 1.44aA(0.02) | −2.04 |
| OR | 9.26aA(0.76) | 8.50abA(0.35) | −8.31 | 0.77(0.02) | 0.89(0.07) | +15.5 | 26.5aB(5.73) | 147aA(7.36) | +455 | 1.47aA(0.02) | 1.42aA(0.03) | −3.40 | |
| RT | 8.13aA(0.70) | 10.2aA(1.04) | +25.5 | 0.86(0.14) | 1.04(0.09) | +20.9 | 27.7aB(3.31) | 152aA(2.67) | +449 | 1.39bA(0.02) | 1.42aA(0.02) | +2.16 | |
Number in parenthesis indicates standard error.
SOC = soil organic carbon, STN = soil total nitrogen, DOC = dissolved organic carbon (g kg−1 soil) and Db = soil bulk density (g cm−3). Different lowercase letters within a column indicate significant difference among management systems within a year and different uppercase letters indicate significant difference among years within a management system in crop as well as forage production (p = 0.05). No letter within a column or row indicates no significant management system×year difference.
Figure 1Total soil microbial biomass as influenced by conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop (a) and forage (b) production in the first and fourth years.
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among management systems within a year and different uppercase letters indicate significant difference among years within a management system (p = 0.05).
Figure 2Fungal-to-Bacterial ratio as influenced by conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop (a) and forage (b) production in the first and fourth years.
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among management systems within a year and different uppercase letters indicate significant difference among years within a management system (p = 0.05).
Figure 3Carbon-to-nitrogen ratio of microbial substrate as influenced by conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop (a) and forage (b) production in the first and fourth years.
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among management systems within a year and different uppercase letters indicate significant difference among years within a management system (p = 0.05).
Figure 4Microbial substrate utilization as influenced by conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop (a) and forage (b) production in the first and fourth years.
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among management systems within a year and different uppercase letters indicate significant difference among years within a management system (p = 0.05).
Figure 5Score plots of the first two principle components (1) and loading of different microbial groups (2) as influenced by conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop (a) and forage (b) production.
Gram+ = gram-positive bacteria, Gram− = gram-negative bacteria, AMF = arbuscular mycorrhizal Fungus, Other Bact. = other bacteria and Other F. = other fungus.
Soil microbial communities as influenced by conventional (CV), organic (OR), and reduced-tillage (RT) management systems for crop and forage production one and four years after transition from continuous conventional corn.
| System | Gram positivebacteria | Gram negativebacteria | Other Bacteria | AMF | Other Fungi | Protozoa | Shannon’s diversity index | ||||||||||||||||
| Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | Y1 | Y4 | Δ% | |||
| nmol kg−1 soil | nmol kg−1 soil | nmol kg−1 soil | nmol kg−1 soil | nmol kg−1 soil | nmol kg−1 soil | ||||||||||||||||||
| Crop | CV | 200aB(53.3) | 414bA(43.7) | +107 | 160bB(33.8) | 391cA(60.4) | +144 | 12.2aB(5.64) | 60.3bA(11.7) | +394 | 28.7aB(6.21) | 76.5bA(7.24) | +167 | 20.0bB(5.01) | 152bA(15.8) | +665 | 3.30(1.81) | 14.4bA(2.70) | +336 | 3.50aB(0.25) | 5.53aA(0.23) | +58.2 | |
| OR | 213aB(51.6) | 555aA(48.8) | +161 | 166bB(34.4) | 559aA(84.4) | +237 | 12.0aB(4.26) | 105aA(18.9) | +775 | 28.8aB(7.00) | 118aA(13.9) | +310 | 29.1aB(6.70) | 230aA(16.1) | +201 | 3.02(1.63) | 28.7aA(2.17) | +850 | 3.55aB(0.29) | 5.89aA(0.20) | +66.0 | ||
| RT | 270aB(60.7) | 467bA(54.1) | +72.9 | 236aB(45.9) | 479bA(78.2) | +106 | 22.4aB(6.97) | 70.9bA(13.5) | +217 | 44.3aB(8.88) | 89.6bA(10.5) | +116 | 31.7aB(7.17) | 173bA(23.0) | +147 | 4.38(2.36) | 21.4abA(3.28) | +754 | 3.80aB(0.27) | 5.71aA(0.27) | +50.2 | ||
| Forage | CV | 124aB(21.5) | 391bA(23.7) | +215 | 117aB(17.5) | 408bA(55.1) | +249 | 2.30aB(1.61) | 51.5aA(10.6) | +2139 | 24.9aB(3.50) | 86.7bA(7.99) | +248 | 18.2aB(3.59) | 176aB(15.8) | +867 | 0.00 | 21.1(2.31) | - | 3.85aB(0.22) | 5.69aA(0.20) | +47.9 | |
| OR | 157aB(22.3) | 474abA(55.3) | +197 | 142aB(18.8) | 490bA(93.0) | +245 | 3.69aB(2.26) | 70.7aA(11.5) | +1575 | 29.5aB(3.64) | 111aA(22.7) | +276 | 23.0aB(3.77) | 177aB(16.1) | +670 | 0.00 | 22.8(3.87) | 4.00aB(0.16) | 5.64aA(0.22) | +41.0 | |||
| RT | 180aB(24.2) | 526aA(41.6) | +192 | 177aB(19.5) | 566aA(72.1) | +219 | 3.11aB(2.19) | 80.4aA(19.4) | +2485 | 36.9aB(4.22) | 116aA(12.3) | +214 | 29.1aB(3.30) | 218aB(23.0) | +649 | 1.13(1.13) | 37.1(2.94) | +3597 | 4.19aB(0.04) | 5.71aA(0.22) | +36.1 | ||
Number in parenthesis indicates standard error.
AMF = Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi. Different lowercase letters within a column indicate significant difference among management systems within a year and different uppercase letters indicate significant difference among years within a management system in crop as well as forage production (p = 0.05). No letter within a column or row indicates no significant management system×year difference.
Significant correlation coefficients (r) between soil microbial substrate properties, microbial community and substrate utilization in crop and forage production systems.
| DOC | C∶N MAS | Microbial biomass | F∶B ratio | PC1 | |
|
| |||||
| Substrate C∶N | 0.69(<0.001) | - | |||
| Microbial biomass | 0.83(<0.001) | 0.86(<0.001) | - | ||
| F∶B ratio | 0.83(<0.001) | 0.81(<0.001) | 0.91(<0.001) | - | |
| PC1 | 0.78(<0.001) | 0.63(0.001) | 0.83(<0.001) | 0.91(<0.001) | - |
| Soil Resp. | −0.64(0.001) | −0.47(0.02) | −0.70(<0.001) | −0.74(<0.001) | −0.84(<0.001) |
|
| |||||
| Substrate C∶N | 0.65(0.001) | - | |||
| Microbial biomass | 0.85(<0.001) | 0.56(0.006) | - | ||
| F∶B ratio | 0.91(<0.001) | 0.64(0.001) | 0.83(<0.001) | - | |
| PC1 | 0.93(<0.001) | 0.67(0.001) | 0.91(<0.001) | 0.97(<0.001) | - |
| Soil Resp. | −0.79(<0.001) | −0.40(<0.001) | −0.87(<0.001) | −0.73(<0.001) | −0.84(<0.001) |
Number in parenthesis indicates Pearson correlation p values.
DOC = dissolved organic carbon, F∶B ratio = fungi to bacteria ratio, PC1 = First principal component and Soil Resp. = potential soil respiration.
PC1 explains shift in soil microbial community structure from the first to the fourth year.
Figure 6Conceptual framework illustrating influence of management system on microbial substrate properties, microbial communities, and SOC sequestration.
Alternative management systems influence (1) microbial substrate availability and quality, (2) soil microbial biomass and community structure, and (3) soil respiration and SOC sequestration. DOC = dissolved organic carbon (microbial substrate).