Plant and Soil

, Volume 378, Issue 1–2, pp 365–381 | Cite as

Anaerobic Soil Disinfestation (ASD) Combined with Soil Solarization as a Methyl Bromide Alternative: Vegetable Crop Performance and Soil Nutrient Dynamics

  • David M. Butler
  • Nancy Kokalis-Burelle
  • Joseph P. Albano
  • T. Greg McCollum
  • Joji Muramoto
  • Carol Shennan
  • Erin N. Rosskopf
Regular Article

Abstract

Background and Aims

Soil treatment by anaerobic soil disinfestation (ASD) combined with soil solarization can effectively control soilborne plant pathogens and plant-parasitic nematodes in specialty crop production systems. At the same time, research is limited on the impact of soil treatment by ASD + solarization on soil fertility, crop performance and plant nutrition. Our objectives were to evaluate the response of 1) soil nutrients and 2) vegetable crop performance to ASD + solarization with differing levels of irrigation, molasses amendment, and partially-composted poultry litter amendment (CPL) compared to an untreated control and a methyl bromide (MeBr) + chloropicrin-fumigated control.

Methods

A 2-year field study was established in 2008 at the USDA-ARS U.S. Horticultural Research Lab in Fort Pierce, Florida, USA to determine the effectiveness of ASD as an alternative to MeBr fumigation for a bell pepper (Capsicum annum L.)-eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) double crop system. A complete factorial combination of treatments in a split-split plot was established to evaluate three levels of initial irrigation [10, 5, or 0 cm], two levels of CPL (amended or unamended), and two levels of molasses (amended or unamended) in combination with solarization. Untreated and MeBr controls were established for comparison to ASD treatments.

Conclusions

Results suggest that ASD treatment using molasses as the carbon source paired with solarization can be an effective strategy to maintain crop yields in the absence of soil fumigants. For both bell pepper and eggplant crops, ASD treatments with molasses as the carbon source had equivalent or greater marketable yields than the MeBr control. The application of organic amendments in ASD treatment (molasses or molasses + CPL) caused differences in soil nutrients and plant nutrition compared to the MeBr control that must be effectively managed in order to implement ASD on a commercial scale as a MeBr replacement.

Keywords

Soil disinfestation Methyl bromide alternatives Molasses Organic amendments Bell pepper Eggplant Solarization Vegetable nutrition 

Abbreviations

ASD

Anaerobic soil disinfestation

CPL

Composted poultry litter

MeBr

Methyl bromide

UTC

Untreated control

References

  1. Acosta-Martínez V, Harmel RD (2006) Soil microbial communities and enzyme activities under various poultry litter application rates. J Environ Qual 35:1309–1318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey KL, Lazarovits G (2003) Suppressing soil-borne diseases with residue management and organic amendments. Soil Till Res 72:169–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett AJ, Bending GD, Chandler D, Hilton S, Mills P (2012) Meeting the demand for crop production: the challenge of yield decline in crops grown in short rotations. Biol Rev 87:52–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blok WJ, Lamers JG, Termorshuizen AJ, Bollen GJ (2000) Control of soilborne plant pathogens by incorporating fresh organic amendments followed by tarping. Phytopath 90:253–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bodelier P, Libochant JA, Blom C, Laanbroek HJ (1996) Dynamics of nitrification and denitrification in root-oxygenated sediments and adaptation of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria to low-oxygen or anoxic habitats. Appl Environ Microbiol 62:4100–4107PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Butler DM, Kokalis-Burelle N, Muramoto J, Shennan C, McCollum TG, Rosskopf EN (2012a) Impact of anaerobic soil disinfestation combined with soil solarization on plant–parasitic nematodes and introduced inoculum of soilborne plant pathogens in raised-bed vegetable production. Crop Protect 39:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Butler DM, Rosskopf EN, Kokalis-Burelle N, Albano J, Muramoto J, Shennan C (2012b) Exploring warm-season cover crops as carbon sources for anaerobic soil disinfestation (ASD). Plant Soil 355:149–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen Y, Katan J (1980) Effect of solar heating of soils by transparent polyethylene mulching on their chemical properties. Soil Sci 130:271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen Y, Gamliel A, Stapleton JJ, Aviad T (1991) Chemical, physical, and microbial changes related to plant growth in disinfested soils. In: Katan J, DeVay JE (eds) Soil solarization. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  10. Evanylo G, Sherony C, Spargo J, Starner D, Brosius M, Haering K (2008) Soil and water environmental effects of fertilizer-, manure-, and compost-based fertility practices in an organic vegetable cropping system. Agric Ecosyst Environ 127:50–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fiedler S, Vepraskas MJ, Richardson JL (2007) Soil redox potential: Importance, field measurements, and observations. Adv Agron 94:1–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gamliel A, Austerweil M, Kritzman G (2000) Non-chemical approach to soilborne pest management–organic amendments. Crop Protect 19:847–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goud JC, Termorshuizen AJ, Blok WJ, van Bruggen AHC (2004) Long-term effect of biological soil disinfestation on Verticillium wilt. Plant Dis 88:688–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hasson AM, Hassaballah T, Hussain R, Abbass L (1987) Effect of solar soil sterilization on nitrification in soil. J Plant Nutr 10:1805–1809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haynes RJ, Naidu R (1998) Influence of lime, fertilizer and manure applications on soil organic matter content and soil physical conditions: A review. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 51:123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kowalchuk GA, Stephen JR (2001) Ammonia-oxidizing bacteria: A model for molecular microbial ecology. Ann Rev Microbiol 55:485–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Maynard DN, Santos BM (2007) Yields of vegetables. In: Olson SM, Simonne E (eds) Vegetable production handbook for Florida. UF/IFAS, Gainesville, pp 95–96Google Scholar
  18. McCarty DG, Ownley BH, Wszelaki AL, Sams CE, Butler DM (2012) Evaluation of anaerobic soil disinfestation (ASD) for warm-season vegetable production in Tennessee. HortSci 47:S330–S331, abstractGoogle Scholar
  19. Mehlich A (1984) Mehlich 3 soil test extractant: A modification of Mehlich 2 extractant. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 15:1409–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Messiha N, van Diepeningen A, Wenneker M, van Beuningen A, Janse J, Coenen T, Termorshuizen A, van Bruggen A, Blok W (2007) Biological soil disinfestation (BSD), a new control method for potato brown rot, caused by Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 biovar 2. Eur J Plant Path 117:403–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Momma N (2008) Biological soil disinfestation (BSD) of soilborne pathogens and its possible mechanisms. Japan Agric Res Quart 42:7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Momma N, Yamamoto K, Simandi P, Shishido M (2006) Role of organic acids in the mechanisms of biological soil disinfestation (BSD). J Gen Plant Path 72:247–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Momma N, Momma M, Kobara Y (2010) Biological soil disinfestation using ethanol: effect on Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici and soil microorganisms. J Gen Plant Pathol 76:336–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Momma N, Kobara Y, Momma M (2011) Fe2+ and Mn2+, potential agents to induce suppression of Fusarium oxysporum for biological soil disinfestation. J Gen Plant Pathol 77:331–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mowlick S, Hirota K, Takehara T, Kaku N, Ueki K, Ueki A (2012a) Development of anaerobic bacterial community consisted of diverse clostridial species during biological soil disinfestation amended with plant biomass. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 58:273–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mowlick S, Hirota K, Takehara T, Kaku N, Ueki K, Ueki A (2012b) Proliferation of diversified clostridial species during biological soil disinfestation incorporated with plant biomass under various conditions. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. doi:10.1007/s00253-012-4532-z PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Olson SM, Simonne EH, Stall WM, Vallad GE, Webb SE, McAvoy EJ, Smith SA (2010) Pepper production in Florida. In: Olson SM, Santos B (eds) Vegetable production handbook for Florida. University of Florida, IFAS Extension, Gainesville, pp 211–226Google Scholar
  28. Pérez-Piqueres A, Edel-Hermann V, Alabouvette C, Steinberg C (2006) Response of soil microbial communities to compost amendments. Soil Biol Biochem 38:460–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rabenhorst MC, Castenson KL (2005) Temperature effects on iron reduction in a hydric soil. Soil Sci 170:734–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ritz C, Merka W (2004) Maximizing poultry manure use through nutrient management planning. Bulletin 1245 Georgia cooperative extension service. College of Agriculture and Environmental Science, University of Georgia, AthensGoogle Scholar
  31. Rovira AD (1976) Studies on soil fumigation—I: Effects on ammonium, nitrate and phosphate in soil and on the growth, nutrition and yield of wheat. Soil Biol Biochem 8:241–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. SAS Institute (2007) SAS/STAT user’s guide: Statistics. SAS Inst, CaryGoogle Scholar
  33. Shennan C, Muramoto J, Koike S, Bolda M, Daugovish O, Mochizuki M, Klonsky K, Rosskopf EN, Kokalis-Burelle N, Butler DM (2011) Anaerobic soil disinfestation for suppressing Verticillium dahliae in strawberry production in California. HortSci 46:S174–S175, abstractGoogle Scholar
  34. Shinmura A (2004) Principle and effect of soil sterilization method by reducing redox potential of soil (in Japanese). The Phytopathological Society of Japan (PSJ) Soilborne Disease Workshop Report 22:2–12Google Scholar
  35. Stapleton JJ, Quick J, Devay JE (1985) Soil solarization: Effects on soil properties, crop fertilization and plant growth. Soil Bio Biochem 17:369–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thaning C, Gerhardson B (2001) Reduced sclerotial soil-longevity by whole-crop amendment and plastic covering. J Plant Dis Protect 108:143–151Google Scholar
  37. USDA-AMS (2005) United States Standards for Grades of Sweet Peppers.Google Scholar
  38. USDA-AMS (2013) United States Standards for Grades of Eggplant.Google Scholar
  39. USEPA (1983a) Methods for chemical analysis of water and waste. Determination of nitrogen as ammonia. Method 350.1, Environmental Monitoring and Support Lab, Office of Research and Development, USEPA, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  40. USEPA (1983b) Methods for chemical analysis of water and waste. Determination of nitrite/nitrate by automated cadmium reduction. Method 353.2, Environmental Monitoring and Support Lab, Office of Research and Development, USEPA, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  41. USEPA (1993) In: O'Dell JW (ed) Determination of total Kjeldahl nitrogen by semi-automated colorimetry. Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  42. USEPA (1997) Test methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical methods: EPA Publ. SW-846. Microwave assisted acid digestion of siliceous and organically based matrices. Method 3052, Office of Solid Waste, USEPA, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  43. Vadas PA, Sims JT (1998) Redox status, poultry litter, and phosphorus solubility in Atlantic coastal plain soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 62:1025–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yossen V, Zumelza G, Gasoni L, Kobayashi K (2008) Effect of soil reductive sterilisation on Fusarium wilt in greenhouse carnation in Córdoba, Argentina. Australas Plant Pathol 37:520–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • David M. Butler
    • 1
  • Nancy Kokalis-Burelle
    • 2
  • Joseph P. Albano
    • 2
  • T. Greg McCollum
    • 2
  • Joji Muramoto
    • 3
  • Carol Shennan
    • 3
  • Erin N. Rosskopf
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Plant SciencesThe University of TennesseeKnoxvilleUSA
  2. 2.U.S. Horticultural Research Laboratory, USDA-ARSFort PierceUSA
  3. 3.Department of Environmental StudiesThe University of CaliforniaSanta CruzUSA

Personalised recommendations