Biology and Fertility of Soils

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 164–170

Activity, origins and location of cellulases in a silt loam soil

  • C. F. A. Hope
  • R. G. Burns


“Cellulase” activity in a silt loam soil was assayed and characterised using a microcrystalline cellulose substrate (Avicel). Activity was maximal between pH 5.3 and pH 6.0. A 64% loss in activity was observed on air-drying the soil. However, the residual activity was stable to storage at 40°C for 7 days and was resistant to the action of added protease. The component endoglucanase and β-D-glucosidase activities in field-moist and air-dried soil were also assayed. The proportion of the soil microbial population able to utilise cellulose was investigated and the persistence of two free (soluble) cellulase preparations of microbial origin was determined following their addition to soil. A rapid decline in the endoglucanase activity of a Streptomyces sp. cellulase preparation was observed while 30% of the original activity of a Trichoderma viride cellulase preparation could still be detected after 20 days. From the data obtained in this study it appears that the major portion of the β-D-glucosidase activity is bound to and protected by the soil colloids. By contrast, the major portion of the exo- and endoglucanase activity appears to be “free” in the soil solution, attached to the outer surfaces of cellulolytic microorganisms or associated in enzyme substrate complexes. The low residual activity measured in air-dried soil may owe its stability to an association with soil colloids or with recalcitrant cellulosic material present in soil.

Key words

Soil cellulase Enzyme characterisation β-D-Glucosidase Trichoderma viride Endoglucanase 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Benefield CB (1971) A rapid method for measuring cellulase activity in soils. Soil Biol Biochem 3:325–329Google Scholar
  2. Berg B, v. Hofsten B, Pettersson G (1972a) Growth and cellulase formation by Cellvibrio fulvus. J Appl Bacteriol 35:201–214Google Scholar
  3. Berg B, v. Hofsten B, Pettersson G (1972b) Electronmicroscopic observations on the degredation of cellulose fibres by Cellvibrio fulvus and Sporocytopha myxococcoides. J Appl Bacteriol 35:215–219Google Scholar
  4. Brink RH Jr, Dubach P, Lynch DL (1960) Measurements of carbohydrates in soil hydrolyzates with anthrone. Soil Sci 89:157–166Google Scholar
  5. Burns RG (1982a) Carbon mineralization by mixed cultures. In: Bull AT, Slater JH (eds) Microbial interactions and communities. Academic Press, London, pp 475–543Google Scholar
  6. Burns RG (1982b) Enzyme activity in soil: location and a possible role in microbial ecology. Soil Biol Biochem 14:423–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burns RG, El-Sayed MH, McLaren AD (1972) Extraction of an urease-active organo-complex from soil. Soil Biol Biochem 4:107–108Google Scholar
  8. Crawford DL, Sutherland JB (1979) The role of actinomycetes in the decomposition of lignocellulose. Develop Ind Microbial 20:143–151Google Scholar
  9. Drozdowicz A (1971) The behavior of cellulase in soil. Rev Microbiol 2:17–23Google Scholar
  10. Enari T-M, Markkanen P (1977) Production of cellulolytic enzymes by fungi. Adv Biochem Eng 5:3–22Google Scholar
  11. Goksoyr J, Eidsa G, Eriksen J, Osmundsvag K (1975) A comparison of cellulases form different microorganisms. In: Bailey M, Enari T-M, Linko M (eds) Symposium on the enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose. Sitra, Helsinki, pp 217–230Google Scholar
  12. Hagerdal B, Ferchak JD, Pye EK (1980) Saccharification of cellulose by the cellulolytic enzyme system of Thermonospora sp. I. Stability of cellulolytic activities with respect to time, temperature and pH. Biotechnol Bioeng 22:1515–1526Google Scholar
  13. Hayano K (1986) Cellulase complex in a tomato field soil: induction, localization and some properties. Soil Biol Biochem 18:215–219Google Scholar
  14. Hope CFA, Burns RG (1985) The barrier-ring plate technique for studying extracellular enzyme diffusion and microbial growth in model soil environments. J Gen Microbiol 131:1237–1243Google Scholar
  15. Ibister JD, Shippen RS, Caplan J (1980) A new method for measuring cellulose and starch degradation in soils. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 24:570–574Google Scholar
  16. Ishaque M, Kluepfel D (1980) Cellulase complex of a mesophilic Streptomyces strain. Can J Microbiol 26:183–189Google Scholar
  17. Latter PM, Howson G (1977) The use of cotton strips to indicate cellulose decomposition in the field. Pedobiologia 17:145–155Google Scholar
  18. Lee Y-H, Fan LT (1980) Properties and mode of action of cellulase. Adv Biochem Eng 17:101–129Google Scholar
  19. Lethbridge G, Bull AT, Burns RG (1978) Assay and properties of 1,3-β-glucanase in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 10:389–391Google Scholar
  20. Lethbridge G, Burns RG (1976) Inhibition of soil urease by organophosphorus insecticides. Soil Biol Biochem 8:99–102Google Scholar
  21. McLaren AD, Skujins J (1968) The physical environment of microorganisms in soil. In: Gray TRG, Parkinson D (eds) The ecology of soil bacteria. Liverpool University Press, Liverpool, pp 3–24Google Scholar
  22. Miller GL, Blum R, Glennon WE, Burton AL (1960) Measurement of carboxymethylcellulase activity. Anal Biochem 1:127–132Google Scholar
  23. Montenecourt BS, Eveleigh DE (1977) Semiquantitative plate assay for determination of cellulase production by Trichoderma viride. Appl Environ Microbiol 33:178–183Google Scholar
  24. Nannipieri P, Ceccanti B, Conti C, Bianchi D (1982) Hydrolases extracted from soil: their properties and activities. Soil Biol Biochem 14:257–263Google Scholar
  25. Pancholy SK, Rice EL (1973) Soil enzymes in relation to oldfield succession: amylase, cellulase, invertase, dehydrogenase and urease. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 37:47–50Google Scholar
  26. Pettit NM, Gregory LJ, Freedman RB, Burns RG (1977) Differential stabilities of soil enzymes: assay and properties of phosphatase and arylsulphatase. Biochim Biophys Acta 485:357–366Google Scholar
  27. Pycraft CJH, Howarth P (1980) A method for measuring enzymic degradation of cellulose fibres. Pap Technol Ind 21:283–285Google Scholar
  28. Ramasamy K, Verachtert H (1980) Localization of cellulase components in Pseudomonas sp isolated from activated sludge. J Gen Microbiol 117:181–191Google Scholar
  29. Reese ET (1963) Advances in the enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose and related materials. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. Ross DJ (1974) Glucose oxidase activity in soil and its possible interference in assays of cellulase activity. Soil Biol Biochem 6:303–306Google Scholar
  31. Ross DJ, Speir TW (1979) Studies on a climosequence of soils in tussock grasslands 23. Cellulases and hemicellulase activies of topsoils and tussock plant materials. NZ J Sci 22:25–33Google Scholar
  32. Rowland SP (1975) Selected aspects of the structure and accessibility of cellulose as they relate to hydrolysis. Biotechnol Bioeng Symp 5:183–191Google Scholar
  33. Sarkar JM (1986) Formation of [14C] cellulase-humic complexes and their stability in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 18:251–254Google Scholar
  34. Sato K (1981) Relations between soil microflora and CO2 evolution upon decomposition of cellulose. Plant Soil 61:251–258Google Scholar
  35. Speir TW, Ross DJ (1981) A comparison of the effects of air-drying and acetone dehydration on soil enzyme activities. Soil Biol Biochem 13:225–229Google Scholar
  36. Spiro RG (1966) Analysis of sugars found in glycoproteins. In: Neufeld EF, Ginsberg V (eds) Methods in enzymology, vol 8. Academic Press, London, pp 3–26Google Scholar
  37. Sternberg D (1976) Production of cellulase by Trichoderma. Biotechnol Bioeng Symp 6:35–53Google Scholar
  38. Williams ST, Robinson CS (1981) The role of streptomycetes in decomposition of chitin in acidic soils. J Gen Microbiol 127:55–63Google Scholar
  39. Wood TM, McCrae SI, MacFarlane CC (1980) The isolation, purification and properties of the cellobiohydrolase component of Penicillium funiculosum cellulase. Biochem J 189:51–65Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. F. A. Hope
    • 1
  • R. G. Burns
    • 1
  1. 1.Biological LaboratoryUniversity of KentCanterburyUK
  2. 2.Department of MicrobiologyUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK

Personalised recommendations