Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 117, Issue 1, pp 17–29 | Cite as

Counting viableAzotobacter chroococcum in vertisols

II. Comparison of media
  • J. P. Thompson
Article

Abstract

Counts of Azotobacter on Brown's medium containing 0.5% glucose sterilized separately from phosphates were greater than on some 20 other published media and modifications. Brown's medium gave considerably greater counts than Rovira's combined carbon medium, but pigmentation ofA. chroococcum allowing ready identification was more developed on the latter. Addition of components of Rovira's medium to improve pigmentation in Brown's medium was only partly successful. With Ca acetate+Na citrate as C sources, percentage pigmented colonies was increased from 0 to 85% but colony counts were lower than with glucose. Sucrose as carbon source resulted in larger colonies but lower counts.

In an experiment with nine published media plus eleven modifications comprising carbon sources of glucose, sucrose, arabinose, dextrin, mannitol, acetate, citrate, and benzoate in various mineral bases, Brown's medium gave greatest counts. Counts on other media were increased to comparable levels by substituting separately sterilized 0.5% glucose for original carbon sources. Other media like Rovira's, Parker's and Aleem's had greater percentages of pigmented colonies with Aleem's benzoate medium having the most intensely pigmented colonies. Mineral composition had little effect on colony counts. Density of oligonitrophilic bacteria on the various media had little effect on counts of Azotobacter. Multiple regression analyses were used to relate Azotobacter colony counts and characteristics to 22 organic and inorganic constituents of media. Counts were positively related to glucose sterilized separately and negatively related to sucrose. Colony diameter was positively related to sucrose. Percentage of pigmented colonies was positively related to Ca, glucose and benzoate and negatively related to Ca/Na ratio and S. Non-pigmented Azotobacter colonies on Brown's medium became pigmented when replica-plated to other media indicating all wereA. chroococcum. Brown's medium is recommended for counting Azotobacter in vertisols with replica plating to a chromogenic medium,e.g., Rovira's, for identification ofA. chroococcum if required.

Key words

Azotobacter chroococcum counting cracking clays enumeration media vertisols 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahrens E 1966 Zur Frage der C-Quelle für den quantitativen Nachweis von Azotobacter. Soil Biol. Int. News Bull. NS. 5, 22.Google Scholar
  2. Ahrens E 1969 Zur Frage der Ausnutzung von Na-Benzoat und Stärke. Soil Biol. Int. News Bull. NS. 10, 14–16.Google Scholar
  3. Aleem M I H 1953 Counting of Azotobacter in soils. Plant and Soil 4, 248–251.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson G R and Jordan J V 1953 Some factors affecting pigmentation ofAzotobacter chroococcum. J. Ag. Food Chem. 1, 523–526.Google Scholar
  5. Brown M E, Burlingham S K and Jackson R M 1962 Studies onAzotobacter species in soil. I. Comparison of media and techniques for counting Azotobacter in soil. Plant and Soil 17, 309–319.Google Scholar
  6. Gerretsen F C 1953 The influence of boron on the growth ofAzotobacter chroococcum. Sixth International Congress of Microbiology 3, 120–121.Google Scholar
  7. Frayer W E, Wilson R W and Furnival G M 1971 FSCREEN (fast screen). A computer program for screening all combinations of independent variables in univariate multiple regressions. Department of Forest and Wood Sciences, Colorado State University. Fort Collins.Google Scholar
  8. James N 1958 Soil extract in soil microbiology. Can. J. Microbiol. 4, 363–370.Google Scholar
  9. Jensen H L 1940 Contributions to the nitrogen economy of Australian wheat soils with particular reference to New South Wales. Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S. Wales. 65, 1–122.Google Scholar
  10. Jensen H L 1951 Notes on the biology of Azotobacter. Proc. Soc. Appl. Bact. 14, 89.Google Scholar
  11. Jensen V 1955 The Azotobacter-flora of some Danish water-courses. Bot. Tiddskr. (Copenhagen) 52, 143–157.Google Scholar
  12. Knowles R 1982 Free-living dinitrogen-fixing bacteria.In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Ed. A L Page. pp 1071–1092. American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  13. Lederberg J and Lederberg E 1952 Replica plating and indirect selection of bacterial mutants. J. Bact. 63, 399–406.Google Scholar
  14. McKnight T 1949 Non-symbiotic nitrogen-fixing organisms in Queensland soils. Q. J. Agric. Sci. 6, 177–195.Google Scholar
  15. Martin W P 1940 Distribution and activity of Azotobacter in the range and cultivated soils of Arizona. Ariz. Agric. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. No. 83.Google Scholar
  16. Meiklejohn J 1965 Counting Beijerinckia in soils. Soil Biol. Int. News Bull. N.S. 3, 10.Google Scholar
  17. Mulder E G 1953 The essentiality of trace elements for microorganisms and the microbiological determination of trace elements. 6th Int. Congr. Microbiol. 3, 141–142.Google Scholar
  18. Norris D O 1959 The isolation and identification of azotobacters. Lab. Pract. 8, 239–243.Google Scholar
  19. Parker C A 1955 Non-symbiotic nitrogen-fixing bacteria in soil II. Studies on Azotobacter. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 6, 388–397.Google Scholar
  20. Ridge E H 1970a Inoculation and survival ofAzotobacter chroococcum on stored wheat seed. J. Appl. Bact. 33, 262–269.Google Scholar
  21. Ridge E H 1970b Effects of some diluents upon viable counts ofAzotobacter chroococcum. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol. 16, 189–192.Google Scholar
  22. Swaby R J 1939 The occurrence and activities of Azotobacter andClostridium butyricum in Victorian soils Aust. J. Exp. Biol. 17, 401–423.Google Scholar
  23. Thompson J P 1989 Counting viable Azotobacter in vertisols. I. Methods for preparation of soil suspensions. Plant and Soil 117, 1–8.Google Scholar
  24. Thompson J P and Skerman V B D 1979 Azotobacteraceae: The Taxonomy and Ecology of the Aerobic Nitrogen-fixing Bacteria. 417 p. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  25. Wang T L 1951 Nouvelle methode de dosage des éléments mineraux fertilisants du sol par les Azotobacter. Plant and Soil 3, 41–46.Google Scholar
  26. Winogradsky S 1935 The method in soil microbiology as illustrated by studies on Azotobacter and nitrifying organisms. Soil Science 40, 59–76.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. P. Thompson
    • 1
  1. 1.Queensland Wheat Research InstituteToowoombaAustralia

Personalised recommendations