| Literature DB >> 26974549 |
Fengge Zhang1,2, Xiaohui Meng1, Chenglong Feng1, Wei Ran1,3, Guanghui Yu1,3, Yingjun Zhang2, Qirong Shen1,3.
Abstract
Opportunity costs seriously limit the large-scale production of bio-organic fertilizers (BOFs) both in China and internationally. This study addresses the utilization of amino acids resulting from the acidic hydrolysis of pig corpses as organic nitrogen sources to increase the density of TrichodermaharzianumT-E5 (a typical plant growth-promoting fungi, PGPF). This results in a novel, economical, highly efficient and environmentally friendly BOF product. Fluorescence excitation-emission matrix (EEM) spectroscopy combined with fluorescence regional integration (FRI) was employed to monitor compost maturity levels, while pot experiments were utilized to test the effects of this novel BOF on plant growth. An optimization experiment, based on response surface methodologies (RSMs), showed that a maximum T-E5 population (3.72 × 108 ITS copies g-1) was obtained from a mixture of 65.17% cattle manure compost (W/W), 19.33% maggot manure (W/W), 15.50% (V/W)hydrolytic amino acid solution and 4.69% (V/W) inoculum at 28.7°C after a 14 day secondary solid fermentation. Spectroscopy analysis revealed that the compost transformation process involved the degradation of protein-like substances and the formation of fulvic-like and humic-like substances. FRI parameters (PI, n, PII, n, PIII, n and PV, n) were used to characterize the degree of compost maturity. The BOF resulted in significantly higher increased chlorophyll content, shoot length, and shoot and root dry weights of three vegetables (cucumber, tomato and pepper) by 9.9%~22.4%, 22.9%~58.5%, 31.0%~84.9%, and 24.2%~34.1%, respectively. In summary, this study presents an operational means of increasing PGPF T-E5 populations in BOF to promote plant growth with a concomitant reduction in production cost. In addition, a BOF compost maturity assessment using fluorescence EEM spectroscopy and FRI ensured its safe field application.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26974549 PMCID: PMC4790899 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149447
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Plackket-Burman design matrix and the results of the six variables (coded and actual levels) with T-E5 population levels as a response.
| Run order | Experimental factors | Response | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coded level | Actual level | T-E5 population(log10T-E5 ITS copies g-1) | ||||||||||||
| χ1 | χ2 | χ3 | χ4 | χ5 | χ6 | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | Actual | Predicted | |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 25 | 20 | 5 | 20 | 2 | 1 | 6.62 | 6.64 |
| 2 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 10 | 20 | 5 | 40 | 2 | 1 | 4.95 | 4.96 |
| 3 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 10 | 10 | 1 | 20 | 2 | 1 | 5.89 | 5.90 |
| 4 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 10 | 10 | 1 | 40 | 2 | 3 | 4.72 | 4.72 |
| 5 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 25 | 10 | 1 | 20 | 10 | 1 | 6.46 | 6.45 |
| 6 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 20 | 10 | 3 | 5.92 | 5.94 |
| 7 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 20 | 5 | 20 | 10 | 3 | 6.18 | 6.16 |
| 8 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 10 | 20 | 1 | 40 | 10 | 1 | 5.02 | 5.00 |
| 9 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 20 | 1 | 40 | 10 | 3 | 5.46 | 5.50 |
| 10 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 25 | 10 | 5 | 40 | 10 | 1 | 5.28 | 5.27 |
| 11 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 20 | 10 | 5 | 40 | 2 | 3 | 5.24 | 5.22 |
| 12 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 25 | 20 | 1 | 20 | 2 | 3 | 6.65 | 6.63 |
Note: X1, maggot manure (%); X2, hydrolytic amino acid (%); X3, rice straw (%); X4, composting temperature (°C); X5, inoculum content (%); X6, daily agitation frequency.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the response surface quadratic model of the T-E5 population based on the Plackett-Burman design (PBD).
| Source | T-E5 population(log10T-E5 ITS copies g-1) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sum of squares (SS) | Degrees of freedom (DF) | Mean square (MS) | F Values | P-value Prob>F | |
| Model | 5.07 | 6 | 0.84 | 1203.99 | <0.0001 |
| X1 | 0.77 | 1 | 0.77 | 1090.37 | <0.0001 |
| X2 | 0.16 | 1 | 0.16 | 222.91 | <0.0001 |
| X3 | 8.333E-006 | 1 | 8.333E-006 | 0.012 | 0.9175 |
| X4 | 4.14 | 1 | 4.14 | 5902.91 | <0.0001 |
| X5 | 5.208E-003 | 1 | 5.208E-003 | 7.42 | 0.0416 |
| X6 | 2.083E-004 | 1 | 2.083E-004 | 0.30 | 0.6092 |
| Residual | 3.508E-003 | 5 | 7.017E-004 | ||
| Cor Total | 5.07 | 11 | |||
Note: C.V. % = 0.46; R2 = 0.99923; Adj R2 = 0.9985; Pred R2 = 0.9960; Adeq Precision ratio = 94.655. X1, maggot manure (%); X2, hydrolytic amino acid (%); X3, rice straw (%); X4, composting temperature (°C); X5, inoculum content (%); X6, daily agitation frequency.
*Correlation is significant at p < 0.05
**Correlation is highly significant at p < 0.001.
Box-Behnken design (BBD) matrix of variables (coded and actual levels) for T-E5 population optimization.
| Run order | Experimental factors | Response | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coded level | Actual level | T-E5 population (log10T-E5 ITS copies g-1) | ||||||||
| χ1 | χ2 | χ3 | χ4 | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | Actual | Predicted | |
| 1 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 | 30 | 6 | 7.89 | 7.65 |
| 2 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 15 | 30 | 10 | 7.99 | 8.03 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 25 | 15 | 20 | 6 | 6.90 | 6.89 |
| 4 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 17.5 | 10 | 30 | 10 | 8.09 | 8.11 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17.5 | 15 | 30 | 6 | 8.64 | 8.52 |
| 6 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 6 | 7.94 | 7.88 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17.5 | 15 | 30 | 6 | 8.29 | 8.52 |
| 8 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 17.5 | 20 | 30 | 10 | 8.15 | 8.25 |
| 9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 25 | 15 | 40 | 6 | 5.89 | 5.84 |
| 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 17.5 | 15 | 40 | 2 | 6.13 | 6.02 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 17.5 | 15 | 40 | 10 | 6.15 | 6.07 |
| 12 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 6 | 6.34 | 6.50 |
| 13 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 17.5 | 20 | 40 | 6 | 5.74 | 5.72 |
| 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17.5 | 15 | 30 | 6 | 8.57 | 8.52 |
| 15 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 17.5 | 15 | 20 | 10 | 7.11 | 6.98 |
| 16 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 17.5 | 10 | 20 | 6 | 6.42 | 6.57 |
| 17 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 25 | 15 | 30 | 10 | 8.27 | 8.33 |
| 18 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 17.5 | 10 | 40 | 6 | 5.61 | 5.74 |
| 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17.5 | 15 | 30 | 6 | 8.47 | 8.52 |
| 20 | -1 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 10 | 15 | 30 | 2 | 7.96 | 8.03 |
| 21 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 20 | 30 | 6 | 8.09 | 8.08 |
| 22 | 0 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 17.5 | 20 | 30 | 2 | 8.14 | 8.24 |
| 23 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 40 | 6 | 5.49 | 5.62 |
| 24 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 17.5 | 20 | 20 | 6 | 6.84 | 6.83 |
| 25 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 10 | 30 | 6 | 8.05 | 7.97 |
| 26 | 0 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 17.5 | 15 | 20 | 2 | 7.21 | 7.05 |
| 27 | 1 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 25 | 15 | 30 | 2 | 8.25 | 8.34 |
| 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17.5 | 15 | 30 | 6 | 8.62 | 8.52 |
| 29 | 0 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 17.5 | 10 | 30 | 2 | 8.12 | 8.14 |
Note: X1, maggot manure (%); X2, hydrolytic amino acid (%); X3, composting temperature (°C); X4, inoculum content (%).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the response surface quadratic model of the T-E5 population based on the Box-Behnken design (BBD).
| Source | T-E5 population(log10T-E5 ITS copies g-1) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sum of squares (SS) | Degrees of freedom (DF) | Mean square (MS) | F Values | P-value Prob>F | |
| Model | 29.46 | 14 | 2.10 | 82.19 | <0.0001 |
| X1 | 0.28 | 1 | 0.28 | 11.02 | 0.0051 |
| X2 | 0.043 | 1 | 0.043 | 1.69 | 0.2150 |
| X3 | 2.81 | 1 | 2.81 | 109.87 | <0.0001 |
| X4 | 2.083E-004 | 1 | 2.083E-004 | 8.137E-003 | 0.9294 |
| X1X2 | 2.500E-005 | 1 | 2.500E-005 | 9.764E-004 | 0.9755 |
| X1X3 | 6.400E-003 | 1 | 6.400E-003 | 0.25 | 0.6249 |
| X1X4 | 2.500E-005 | 1 | 2.500E-005 | 9.764E-004 | 0.9755 |
| X2X3 | 0.021 | 1 | 0.021 | 0.82 | 0.3802 |
| X2X4 | 4.000E-004 | 1 | 4.000E-004 | 0.016 | 0.9023 |
| X3X4 | 3.600E-003 | 1 | 3.600E-003 | 0.14 | 0.7133 |
| X12 | 0.69 | 1 | 0.69 | 26.80 | 0.0001 |
| X22 | 0.68 | 1 | 0.68 | 26.39 | 0.0002 |
| X32 | 25.40 | 1 | 25.40 | 992.19 | <0.0001 |
| X42 | 8.578E-004 | 1 | 8.578E-004 | 0.034 | 0.8574 |
| Residual | 0.36 | 14 | 0.026 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 0.28 | 10 | 0.028 | 1.34 | 0.4169 |
| Pure Error | 0.082 | 4 | 0.021 | ||
| Cor Total | 29.82 | 28 | |||
Note: C.V. % = 2.15; R2 = 0.9880; Adj R2 = 0.9760; Pred R2 = 0.9423; Adeq Precision ratio = 25.215. X1, maggot manure (%); X2, hydrolytic amino acid (%); X3, composting temperature (°C); X4, inoculum content (%).
*Correlation is significant at p < 0.05
**Correlation is highly significant at p < 0.001.
Fig 1Three-dimensional response surface plot for T-E5 population as a function of maggot manure, hydrolytic amino acids, composting temperature and inoculum contents (a) maggot manure and hydrolytic amino acids; (b) maggot manure and composting temperature; (c) maggot manure and inoculum contents; (d) hydrolytic amino acids and composting temperature; (e) hydrolytic amino acids and inoculum contents; (f) composting temperature and inoculum contents.
Fig 2Dynamic changes of physicochemical parameters and T-E5 population during composting process in the optimized condition (a) Temperature and T-E5 population; (b) C/N;(c)NH4+-N/NO3--N; (d) pH and EC. Note: Error bars represent standard deviation of triplicates for temperature, C/N, pH, EC, NH4+-N/NO3—N and T-E5 population.
Fig 3Fluorescence EEM contours of WEOM from composts during composting process in the optimized condition.
Peak A, peak B and peak C represent protein-like, fulvic-like and humic-like substances, respectively. (a) 0 d; (b) 3 d; (c) 6 d; (d) 8 d; (e) 11 d; (f) 14 d.
Fig 4Dynamic changes of Pi, n in the five regions during composting process in the optimized condition.
Pearson correlation between physicochemical and FRI parameters.
| Parameters | PI, n | PII, n | PIII, n | PIV, n | PV, n | PV, n /PIII, n |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| temperature | 0.260 | 0.216 | -0.158 | 0.686 | 0.130 | 0.483 |
| C/N | 0.727 | 0.904 | -0.802 | 0.291 | -0.882 | 0.580 |
| NH4+-N/NO3--N | 0.716 | 0.940 | -0.803 | 0.234 | -0.906 | 0.552 |
| pH | -0.789 | -0.960 | 0.893 | -0.431 | 0.918 | -0.720 |
| Ec | -0.942 | -0.965 | 0.981 | -0.565 | 0.976 | -0.834 |
Note
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).
The effects of different treatments on the biomasses of cucumber, tomato and pepper plants on the harvest day (30 d after transplantation) during the pot experiment.
| Treatments | Chlorophyll content (SPAD) | Shoot length (cm) | Dry weight (g/plant) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shoot | Root | |||
| CKc | 30.4±1.2c | 84.6±5.0c | 3.82±0.12c | 0.41±0.03c |
| OFc | 34.3±1.5b | 97.2±7.0b | 4.53±0.15b | 0.47±0.02b |
| BOFc | 37.2±1.2a | 134.1±16.5a | 5.75±0.19a | 0.55±0.03a |
| CKt | 41.5±0.9b | 38.4±0.6c | 4.22±0.30c | 0.48±0.04b |
| OFt | 42.4±0.7b | 42.1±2.5b | 4.96±0.21b | 0.51±0.04b |
| BOFt | 45.6±1.0a | 47.2±1.4a | 5.53±0.09a | 0.63±0.05a |
| CKp | 44.0±1.6b | 33.3±2.1c | 2.05±0.13c | 0.33±0.03b |
| OFp | 45.8±1.3b | 37.5±0.5b | 2.95±0.12b | 0.35±0.02b |
| BOFp | 49.4±1.4a | 41.6±1.6a | 3.79±0.13a | 0.41±0.03a |
Notes: Control, the pot soil was supplemented with 2% (w/w DW) of cattle manure compost and was planted with cucumber (CKc), tomato (CKt) and pepper (CKp) plants; treatment 1, the pot soil was supplemented with 2% (w/w DW) of OF and was planted with cucumber (OFc), tomato (OFt) and pepper (OFp) plants; treatment 2, the pot soil was supplemented with 2% (w/w DW) of BOF and was planted with cucumber (BOFc), tomato (BOFt) and pepper (BOFp) plants. The data were analyzed using Duncan’s ANOVA test. All values are the means of the three replicates. Values with a different letter shown in the same column are significantly different at P≤0.05. Numbers followed by “±” are the standard errors (SEs).