| Literature DB >> 35050041 |
Lili Syahani Rusli1,2, Rosazlin Abdullah1,3, Jamilah Syafawati Yaacob1,3, Normaniza Osman1.
Abstract
Amelioration of soil acidity can boost soil fertility, hence increasing nutrient uptake, secondary metabolite, and its antioxidant potential. In the present study, the effectiveness of food waste compost and palm kernel biochar was assessed as soil amendments for Melastoma malabathricum L. grown in acidic soil conditions. A six-month greenhouse study was conducted using completely randomized design (CRD) with three treatment groups, including control plants (T1), plants amended with palm kernel biochar (T2), and plants amended with food waste compost (T3). Data analysis revealed that Melastoma malabathricum L. amended with T3 recorded the highest total chlorophyll content (433.678 ± 13.224 µg g-1 DW), followed by T2 and T1. The increase in chlorophyll content was contributed by the increase in soil pH. This was shown by the positive significant correlations between soil pH and chlorophyll a (r2 = 0.96; p ≤ 0.01) and chlorophyll b (r2 = 0.778; p ≤ 0.01). In addition, the same treatment exhibited the highest total anthocyanin content (leaves; 36.1 × 10-2 ± 0.034 mg/g DW and root extract; 8.9 × 10-2 ± 0.020 mg/g DW), total phenolic content (stem extract; 4930.956 ± 16.025 mg GAE/g DE), and total flavonoid content (stem extract; 209.984 ± 0.572 mg QE/g DE). Moreover, this study also found that the highest antioxidant potential against 2,2-Diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and 2,2-Azinobis (3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid (ABTS) radicals was exhibited by samples supplemented with food waste compost (T3), followed by palm kernel biochar (T2). This indicates that the soil amendments have the capacity to enhance the secondary metabolites that protect plants, therefore ameliorating Melastoma malabathricum L.'s response towards acidic stress, and resulting in better antioxidant properties. Furthermore, this study also recorded better nutrient uptake in T3. With the significantly higher levels of macronutrient in the soil, the food waste compost could enhance the nutrient properties, secondary metabolites, and antioxidant capacity of Melastoma malabathricum L. grown in acidic soil conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Melastoma malabathricum L.; food waste compost; palm kernel biochar; plant phytochemical; soil fertility
Year: 2022 PMID: 35050041 PMCID: PMC8778759 DOI: 10.3390/plants11020153
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Effects of different amendments on soil pH (n = 3). Vertical bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05) amongst treatments in the final planting period.
Figure 2Relationship between soil pH and plant macronutrients with (a) N: nitrogen, (b) P: phosphorus, and (c) K: potassium (data are means of treatments).
The effects of different treatments on the chemical properties of soil.
| Treatments | Total N | Available P | Exchangeable Cation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K | Ca | Mg | Na | |||
| % | mg/kg | meq/100g | ||||
|
| 3.33 × 10−2 ± 0.003 b | 2.500 ± 0.500 c | 15.3 × 10−2 ± 0.013 c | 1.287 ± 0.090 b | 28.7 × 10−2 ± 0.027 a | 3.03 × 10−2 ± 0.000 a |
|
| 11.5 × 10−2 ± 0.005 a | 79.500 ± 0.500 b | 107 × 10−2 ± 0.130 b | 1.370 ± 0.100 b | 21.3 × 10−2 ± 0.015 a | 3.5 × 10−2 ± 0.005 a |
|
| 12.3 × 10−2 ± 0.009 a | 190.500 ± 1.500 a | 170 × 10−2 ± 0.151 a | 2.280 ± 0.142 a | 27.7 × 10−2 ± 0.020 a | 4.0 × 10−2 ± 0.006 a |
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
|
| 2.653 ± 0.018 a | 191.270 ± 5.047 a | 2.653 ± 0.034 a | 31.090 ± 0.517 a | 79.3 × 10−2 ± 0.054 a | 2.1 × 10−2 ± 0.001 a |
|
| 1.927 ± 0.070 c | 77.227 ± 1.998 c | 1.783 ± 0.107 c | 4.273 ± 0.069 b | 72.3 × 10−2 ± 0.049 a | 2.0 × 10−2 ± 0.000 a |
|
| 2.140 ± 0.047 b | 133.747 ± 2.139 b | 2.340 ± 0.050 b | 4.613 ± 0.178 b | 67.0 × 10−2 ± 0.072 a | 1.9 × 10−2 ± 0.000 a |
Note: T1: control; T2: plant supplemented with palm kernel biochar; T3: plant; ppm: part per million; meq: milliequivalent. The values (mean ± SE) followed by dissimilar letters in each column are significantly different at p ≤ 0.05.
Phytochemical screening of extracts from various parts of M. malabathricum L.
| Phytochemical Screening | Leaves | Stem | Roots | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T1 | T2 | T3 | T1 | T2 | T3 | |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| + | + | + | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| ++ | ++ | ++ | + | + | + | + | ++ | ++ |
| +++ | +++ | +++ | + | + | ++ | + | ++ | ++ | |
|
| ++ | ++ | ++ | + | + | + | + | + | + |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| ++ | ++ | ++ | - | - | - | + | + | + |
Notes: (+++) indicates appreciable amount of phytochemical; (++) indicate moderate amount of phytochemical; (+) indicate trace amount of phytochemical and (-) indicates the absence of the phytochemical.
Comparison of chlorophylls and carotenoid contents from methanolic extract of M. malabathricum L. leaves.
| C | C | C | C | C | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 182.623 ± 14.475 b | 90.628 ± 5.298 b | 273.252 ± 19.720 c | 2.010 ± 0.049 b | 149.212 ± 12.748 b | 1.836 ±0.028 a |
|
| 261.837 ± 6.519 a | 95.008 ± 2.069 b | 356.845 ± 8.576 b | 2.756 ± 0.011 a | 224.698 ± 5.66 a | 1.588 ± 0.006 b |
|
| 289.441 ± 8.881 a | 144.237 ± 4.585 a | 433.678 ± 13.224 a | 2.007 ± 0.025 b | 237.733 ± 7.224 a | 1.824 ± 0.014 a |
Note: T1: control; T2: plant supplemented with palm kernel biochar; T3: plant supplemented with food waste compost; Ca: chlorophyll a; Cb: chlorophyll b; Ca + Cb: total chlorophyll content; Ca/Cb ratio: Chlorophyll a and b ratio; C(x+c): carotenoid content; DW: dry weigh. The values (mean ± SE) followed by dissimilar letters in each column are significantly different at p ≤ 0.05.
Effects of different treatments on total anthocyanin content, total flavonoid content, and total phenolic content in various parts of M. malabathricum L. methanolic extracts.
| TAC (mg/g DW) | TPC (mg GAE/g DE) | TFC (mg QE/g DE) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaves | Stem | Roots | Leaves | Stem | Roots | Leaves | Stem | Roots | |
|
| 10.2 × 10−2 ± 0.036 b | 1.5 × 10−2 ± 0.005 a | 2.0 × 10−2 ± 0.006 a | 9505.160 ± 182.057 a | 2174.517 ± 27.789 b | 3606.996 ± 9.396 b | 1088.224 ± 31.536 b | 183.353 ± 1.264 b | 175.845 ± 4.395 c |
|
| 26.5 × 10−2 ± 0.038 a | 6.1 × 10−2 ± 0.024 a | 6.5 × 10−2 ± 0.034 a | 9933.322 ± 30.217 a | 2267.808 ± 58.939 b | 5419.291 ± 36.121 a | 1524.796 ± 38.125 a | 183.572 ± 0.922 b | 643.268 ± 5.946 a |
|
| 36.1 × 10−2 ± 0.034 a | 3.7 × 10−2 ± 0.015 a | 8.9 × 10−2 ± 0.020 a | 9857.329 ± 49.172 a | 4930.956 ± 16.025 a | 5396.671 ± 8.200 a | 1464.902 ± 16.032 a | 209.984 ± 0.572 a | 232.944 ± 2.511 b |
Note: T1: control; T2: plant supplemented with palm kernel biochar; T3: plant supplemented with food waste compost; TAC: total anthocyanin content; TPC: total phenolic content; TFC: total flavonoid content; DW: dry weight; GAE: gallic acid equivalent; QE: quercetin equivalent; DE: dry extract. The values (mean ± SE) followed by dissimilar letters in each column are significantly different at p ≤ 0.05.
The effects of different treatments on the antioxidant activities of the various parts of M. malabathricum L. methanolic extracts.
| ABTS | DPPH | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IC50 (mg/mL) | IC50 (mg/mL) | |||||
| Leaves | Stem | Roots | Leaves | Stem | Roots | |
|
| 46.4 × 10−2 ± 0.057 a | 450.7 × 10−2 ± 0.733 a | 133.5 × 10−2 ± 0.036 a | 22.3 × 10−2 ± 0.008 a | 376.9 × 10−2 ± 0.014 a | 299.9 × 10−2 ± 0.008 a |
|
| 29.3 × 10−2 ± 0.027 b | 16.5 × 10−2 ± 0.002 b | 102.3 × 10−2 ± 0.061 b | 16.3 × 10−2 ± 0.002 b | 73.4 × 10−2 ± 0.039 c | 76.3 × 10−2 ± 0.035 b |
|
| 27.9 × 10−2 ± 0.020 b | 19.7 × 10−2 ± 0.003 b | 14.8 × 10−2 ± 0.000 c | 13.1 × 10−2 ± 0.001 c | 276.6 × 10−2 ± 0.182 b | 49.1 × 10−2 ± 0.032 c |
Note: T1: control; T2: plant supplemented with palm kernel biochar; T3: plant supplemented with food waste compost; The values (mean ± SE) followed by dissimilar letters in each column are significantly different at p ≤ 0.05.
Significant Pearson’s Correlation between Parameters.
| pH | N | P | K | Ca | Mg | Na | Zn | Fe | Mn | Cu | Cd | C | C | C | Car | TAC | TPC | TFC | DPPH | ABTS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| N | 0.929 ** | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||
| P | 0.938 ** | 0.887 * | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| K | 0.944 ** | 0.953 ** | 0.950 * | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
| Ca | 0.787 * | 0.802 * | 0.943 * | 0.903 ** | 1 | ||||||||||||||||
| Mg | −0.253 | −0.40 | 0.115 | −0.176 | 0.307 | 1 | |||||||||||||||
| Na | 0.530 | 0.675 | 0.516 | 0.762 * | 0.434 | −0.249 | 1 | ||||||||||||||
| Zn | −0.802 ** | −0.862 ** | −0.628 | −0.707 * | −0.459 | 0.490 | −0.297 | 1 | |||||||||||||
| Fe | −0.666 | −0.814 * | −0.405 | −0.614 | −0.177 | 0.731 * | −0.353 | 0.939 ** | 1 | ||||||||||||
| Mn | −0.515 | −0.655 | −0.233 | −0.427 | −0.115 | 0.575 | −0.144 | 0.914 ** | 0.935 ** | 1 | |||||||||||
| Cu | −0.940 ** | −0.975 ** | −0.805 | −0.907 ** | −0.619 | 0.446 | −0.549 | 0.938 ** | 0.868 ** | 0.751 * | 1 | ||||||||||
| Cd | −0.547 | −0.489 | −0.952 ** | −0.490 | −0.351 | 0.415 | −0.335 | 0.326 | 0.322 | 0.197 | 0.460 | 1 | |||||||||
| C | 0.960 ** | 0.902 ** | 0.891 * | 0.899 ** | 0.771 * | −0.343 | 0.494 | −0.794 * | −0.691 * | −0.556 | −0.912 ** | −0.643 | 1 | ||||||||
| C | 0.778 * | 0.649 | 0.905 * | 0.805 * | 0.935 ** | 0.167 | 0.460 | −0.290 | −0.084 | 0.072 | −0.533 | −0.577 | 0.763 * | 1 | |||||||
| C | 0.950 ** | 0.851 ** | 0.968 ** | 0.904 ** | 0.862 ** | −0.177 | 0.502 | −0.657 | −0.510 | −0.360 | −0.827 ** | −0.657 | 0.972 ** | 0.894 ** | 1 | ||||||
| Car | 0.945 ** | 0.914 ** | 0.829 * | 0.883 ** | 0.720 * | −0.412 | 0.486 | −0.843 ** | −0.762 * | −0.639 | −0.934 ** | −0.622 | 0.994 ** | 0.687 * | 0.940 ** | 1 | |||||
| TAC | 0.869 ** | 0.879 ** | 0.912 * | 0.903 ** | 0.798 * | −0.107 | 0.548 | −0.717 * | −0.573 | −0.424 | −0.843 ** | −0.215 | 0.803 ** | 0.669 * | 0.801 ** | 0.792 * | 1 | ||||
| TPC | 0.675 * | 0.767 * | 0.548 | 0.616 | 0.340 | −0.60 | 0.350 | −0.748 * | −0.733 * | −0.670 * | −0.739 * | −0.490 | 0.702 * | 0.360 | 0.618 | 0.727 * | 0.442 | 1 | |||
| TFC | 0.883 ** | 0.939 ** | 0.657 | 0.848 ** | 0.576 | −0.524 | 0.514 | −0.936 ** | −0.902 ** | −0.816 ** | −0.967 ** | −0.533 | 0.921 ** | 0.469 | 0.810 ** | 0.956 ** | 0.739 * | 0.749 * | 1 | ||
| DPPH | −0.979 ** | −0.948 ** | −0.943 ** | −0.970 ** | −0.817 * | 0.240 | −0.622 | 0.759 * | 0.628 | 0.486 | 0.915 ** | 0.562 | −0.954 ** | −0.802 ** | −0.954 ** | −0.935 ** | −0.840 ** | −0.734 * | −0.867 ** | 1 | |
| ABTS | −0.822 ** | −0.785 * | −0.583 | −0.779 * | −0.628 | 0.398 | −0.464 | 0.745 * | 0.713 * | 0.585 | 0.836 ** | 0.582 | −0.909 ** | −0.575 | −0.840 ** | −0.925 ** | −0.743 * | −0.460 | −0.896 ** | 0.780 * | 1 |
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Physico-chemical properties of soil and organic fertilizers used in the study.
| Properties | Soil | PK Biochar | FW Compost |
|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 3.90 | 8.61 | 6.60 |
| EC (dS/M) | 0.10 | 3.67 | 2.84 |
| Texture | Sandy loam | - | - |
| Total OC (%) | 3.97 | 43.41 | 14.34 |
| N (%) | 0.06 | 0.5 | 2.39 |
| Available P (mg/kg) | 0.29 | 0.15 | 2.82 |
| K (meq/100 g) | 0.11 | 0.74 | 0.21 |
| Ca (meq/100 g) | 1.20 | 2.27 | 0.76 |
| Mg (meq/100 g) | 0.26 | 0.25 | 0.36 |
Note: EC: electrical conductivity; OC: organic carbon N: nitrogen; P: phosphorus; K: potassium; Ca: calcium; Mg: magnesium.
Figure 3A schematic flow chart of methodology used in this study.