Soil Enzymatic Activities as Influenced by Lead and Nickel Concentrations in a Vertisol of Central India
- 84 Downloads
A pot-culture was conducted in Completely Randomized Design with three replicates to study the effect of Pb and Ni on enzymatic activities in a Vertisols. Results indicated that increasing in the levels of Pb from 0, 100, 150 and 300 mg kg−1 soil significantly reduced the dehydrogenase activity (DHA) 38.9, 32.1, 30.9, 18.1 µg triphenylformazan g−1 soil 24 h−1; acid phosphatase activities 73, 61, 58, 55 µg PNP g−1 soil h−1 and alkaline phosphatase activities 80.7, 69.4, 66.2 and 64.0 µg PNP g−1 soil h−1, respectively. Application of Ni up to 100 mg kg−1 had significantly improved the soil enzymatic activities and thereafter there was no such change up to the highest level (300 mg Ni kg−1). Among soil enzymatic activities, DHA was more sensitive to Pb application. The findings generated through this study can be useful for managing waste water for safe disposal as well as sustainable crop production.
KeywordsCrop growth Heavy metals Lead Nickel Soil enzymatic activities
The authors sincerely thank Dr. Tapan Adhikari, Principal Scientist for his experimental guidance; and Mrs. Seema Sahu, technical staff of Division of Environmental Soil Science, ICAR-IISS, Bhopal for her valuable help during the estimation of soil enzymatic activities.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Abdel-Raouf MS, Abdul-Raheim ARM (2017) Removal of heavy metals from industrial wastewater by biomass-based materials: a review. J Poll Eff Cont 5:180Google Scholar
- Ahmad MS, Ashraf M (2011) Essential roles and hazardous effects of nickel in plants. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 214:125–167Google Scholar
- Dotaniya ML, Meena VD, Das H (2014c) Chromium toxicity on seed germination, root elongation and coleoptile growth of pigeon pea (Cajanuscajan). Legume Res 37(2):225–227Google Scholar
- Kabata-Pendias A, Pendias H (2001) Trace elements in soils and plants. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- Pacha J (1986) Wplywtrojwartosciowegochromunaaktywnoscwybranychenzymow w glebie. Acta Biol Siles 3(20):95Google Scholar
- Ploskonka JM, Niklinska M (2013) Effects of soil moisture and nickel contamination on microbial respiration rates in heavy metal-polluted soils. Pol J Environ Stud 22(5):1411–1418Google Scholar
- Rajendiran S, Dotaniya ML, Coumar MV, Panwar NR, Saha JK (2015) Heavy metal polluted soils in India: status and counter measures. JNKVV Res J 49(3):320–337Google Scholar
- Singh D, Chhonkar PK, Pandey RN (2005) Soil plant water analysis: a methods manual, 1st edn. Westville Publishing House, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
- Singh S, Parihar P, Singh R, Singh VP, Prasad SM (2016) Heavy metal tolerance in plants: role of transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics and lonomics. Front Plant Sci 6:1143Google Scholar
- Tabatabai MA (1994) Soil enzymes. In: Weaver RW, Angle JS, Bottomley PS (eds) Methods of soil analysis, part 2. Microbiological and biochemical properties. SSSA Book Series No. 5. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 775–833Google Scholar
- Wyszkowska J, Kurcharski J, Lajszner W (2006) The effects of copper on soil biochemical properties and its interaction with other heavy metals. Pol J Environ Stud 15:927–934Google Scholar