Interactive effects of biochar and the earthworm Pontoscolex corethrurus on plant productivity and soil enzyme activities
- 1.3k Downloads
There is a growing interest in the use of soil enzymes as early indicators of soil quality change under contrasting agricultural management practices. In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the use of biochar to improve soil properties and thus soil quality. In addition, earthworms can also be used to ameliorate soil properties. However, there is no literature available on how biochar and earthworms interact and affect soil enzymes.
The general objective of the present study was to test the suitability of adding biochar and earthworms in two tropical soils with low fertility status in order to improve their characteristics and productivity.
Materials and methods
Biochars were prepared from four different materials [sewage sludge (B1), deinking sewage sludge (B2), Miscanthus (B3) and pine wood (B4)] on two tropical soils (an Acrisol and a Ferralsol) planted with proso millet (Panicum milliaceum L.). In addition, in order to investigate the interaction between earthworms and biochar, earthworm Pontoscolex corethrurus was added to half of the mesocosms, while excluded in the remaining half. The activities of invertase, β-glucosidase, β-glucosaminidase, urease, phosphomonoesterase and arylsulphatase were determined. The geometric mean of the assayed enzymes (GMea) was used as an integrative soil quality index.
Results and discussion
Overall, earthworms and especially biochar had a positive effect on soil quality. GMea showed B1, B2 and B3 performing better than B4; however, results were soil specific. Plant productivity increased under both biochar and earthworm addition. Fruit productivity and plant growth was enhanced by B1 and B2 but not by B3 or B4.
Enhancements of productivity and soil enzymatic activities are possible in the presence of earthworms and the combination of the practices earthworm and biochar addition can be suggested in low fertility tropical soils. However, scientists should proceed carefully in the selection of biochars as the results of this study show a high specificity in the biochar–soil interaction.
KeywordsBiochar Pontoscolex corethrurus Soil enzymes Soil quality Tropical soils
- Acosta-Martínez V, Tabatabai MA (2000) Enzyme activities in a limed agricultural soil. Biol Fertil Soils 31:85–91Google Scholar
- Aira M, Monroy F, Domínguez J (2003) Effects of two species of earthworms (Allolobophora spp.) on soil systems: a microfaunal and biochemical analysis. Pedobiologia 47:877–881Google Scholar
- Bailey VL, Fansler SJ, Smith JL, Bolton H (2011) Reconciling apparent variability in effects of biochar amendment on soil enzyme activities by assay optimization. Soil Biol Biochem 43:296–301Google Scholar
- Bandick AB, Dick RP (1999) Field management effects on soil enzyme activities. Soil Biol Bioche 31:1471–1479Google Scholar
- Brown G, Pashanasi B, Villenave C, Patron JC, Senapati BK, Giri S, Barois I, Lavelle P, Blanchart E, Blakemore RJ, Spain BJ (1999) Effects of earthworms on plant production in the tropics. In: Lavelle P, Brussaard L, Hendrix P (eds) Earthworm management in tropical agroecosystems. CABI, Wallingford, pp 87–147Google Scholar
- Day PR (1965) Particle fractionation and particle-size analysis. In: Black CA, Evans DD, White JL, Ensminger LE, Clark FE (eds) Methods of soil analysis, part 1, physical and mineralogical properties. Including statistics of measurement and sampling. ASASSSA, Madison, pp 545–567Google Scholar
- Doube BM, Brown GG (1998) Life in a complex community: functional interactions between earthworms, organic matter, microorganisms, and plant growth. In: Edwards CA (ed) Earthworm ecology. St. Lucie Press, Boca Raton, pp 179–211Google Scholar
- FAO (2006) World reference base for soils resources. World Soil No. 103. Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
- Lammirato C, Miltner A, Kaestner M (2011) Effects of wood char and activated carbon on the hydrolysis of cellobiose by β-glucosidase from Aspergillus niger. Soil Biol Biochem 43:1936–1942Google Scholar
- Mijangos I, Albizu I, Epelde L, Amezaga I, Mendarte S, Garbisu C (2010) Effects of liming on soil properties and plant performance of temperate mountainous grasslands. J Environ Manag 91:2066–2074Google Scholar
- Nannipieri P, Kandeler E, Ruggiero P (2002) Enzyme activities and microbiological and biochemical processes in soils. In: Burns RG, Dick RP (eds) Enzymes in the Environment: Activity, Ecology and Applications. Marcel Dekker Inc, Nueva York, pp 1–34Google Scholar
- Paz-Ferreiro J, Trasar-Cepeda C, Leirós MC, Seoane S, Gil-Sotres F (2010) Effect of management and climate on biochemical properties of grassland soils from Galicia (NW Spain). Eur J Soil Biol 46:136–143Google Scholar
- Paz-Ferreiro J, Trasar-Cepeda C, Leirós MdC, Seoane S, Gil-Sotres F (2011) Intraannual variation in biochemical properties and the biochemical equilibrium of different grassland soils under contrasting management and climate. Biol Fertil Soils 47:633–645Google Scholar
- Thies JE, Rillig M (2009) Characteristics of biochar: biological properties. In: Lehmann J, Joseph S (eds) Biochar for environmental management: science and technology. Earthscan, London, pp 85–105Google Scholar
- USEPA (1997) Method 3051a: microwave assisted acid dissolution of sediments, sludges, soils, and oils, 2nd edn. U.S. Gov. Print. Office, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- van Zwieten L, Kimber S, Morris S, Chan KY, Downie A, Rust J, Joseph S, Cowie A (2010) Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of papermill waste on agronomic performance and soil fertility. Plant Soil 327:235–246Google Scholar