Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of forest and soil type on microbial biomass carbon and respiration

  • Soil Biology
  • Published:
Eurasian Soil Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of study was to evaluate the variation of soil microbial biomass carbon (Cmic) and microbial respiration (MR) in three types soil (Chromic Cambisols, Chromic Luvisols and Eutric Leptosols) of mixed beech forest (Beech- Hornbeam and Beech- Maple). Soil was randomly sampled from 0–10 cm layer (plant litter removed), 90 soil samples were taken. Cmic determined by the fumigation-extraction method and MR by closed bottle method. Soil Corg, Ntot and pH were measured. There are significant differences between the soil types concerning the Cmic content and MR. These parameters were highest in Chromic Cambisols following Chromic Luvisols, while the lowest were in Eutric Leptosols. A similar trend of Corg and Ntot was observed in studied soils. Two-way ANOVA indicated that soil type and forest type have significantly effect on the most soil characteristics. Chromic Cambisols shows a productive soil due to have the maximum Cmic, MR, Corg and Ntot. In Cambisols under Beech- Maple forest the Cmic value and soil C/N ratio were higher compared to Beech-Hornbeam (19.5 and 4.1 mg C g–1, and 16.3 and 3.3, respectively). This fact might be indicated that Maple litter had more easy decomposable organic compounds than Hornbeam. According to regression analysis, 89 and 68 percentage of Cmic variability could explain by soil Corg and Ntot respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. N. D. Ananyeva, E. A. Susyan, O. V. Chernova, and S. Wirth, “Microbial respiration activities of soils from different climatic regions of European Russia,” Eur. J. Soil Biol. 44, 147–157 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. J. P. E. Anderson, “Soil respiration,” in Methods of Soil Analysis, Ed. by A. L. Page, R. H. Miller, and D. R. Keeney (American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, 1982), pp. 141–154 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  3. T. H. Anderson, and K. H. Domsch, “Ratios of microbial biomass carbon to total organic carbon in arable soil,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 21, 471–479 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. H. Bahramnia, Forestry Plan (Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resource, Gorgan, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. Bauhus, and R. Barthel, “Mechanisms for carbon and nutrient release and retention within beech forest gaps. II. The role of soil microbial biomass,” Plant Soil 168, 585–592 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. J. Bauhus, D. Parea, and L. Coatea, “Effects of tree species stand age and soil type on soil microbial biomass and its activity in a southern boreal forest,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 30 (8–9), 1077–1089 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. T. Beck, P. Capriel, H. Borchert, and R. Brandhuber, “The relationship between microbial biomass with chemical and physical soil properties,” Agribiol. Res. 48, 74–82 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  8. S. A. Blagodatskiy, and E. V. Blagodatskaya, “Dynamics of the microbial biomass and the ratio of eukaryotic and prokaryotic microorganisms in a gray forest soil,” Eurasian Soil Sci. 29, 1384–1389 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. A. Blagodatskii, I. N. Bogomolova, and E. V. Blagodatskaya, “Microbial biomass and growth kinetics of microorganisms in chernozem soils under different land use modes,” Microbiology 77, 99–106 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. S. K. Chapman, J. A. Langley, S. C. Hart, and G. W. Koch, “Plants actively control nitrogen cycling: uncorking the microbial bottleneck,” New Phytol. 169, 27–34 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. J. M. Craine, C. Morrow, and N. Fierer, “Microbial nitrogen limitation increases decomposition,” Ecology 88, 2105–2113 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. H. Habashi, Assessment of Precision of Soil Map District 1 of Bahramnia Forestry Plan (Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Hassink, “Effects of soil texture on the size of the microbial biomass and on the amount of C mineralized per unit of microbial biomass in Dutch grassland soils,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 26, 1573–1581 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. P. Hogberg, A. Nordgren, N. Buchmann, A. F. S. Taylor, A. Ekblad, M. N. Hogberg, G. Nyberg, M. Ottosson-Löfvenius, and D. J. Read, “Large-scale forest girdling experiment shows that current photosynthesis drives soil respiration,” Nature 411, 789–792 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. D. S. Jenkinson, and L. C. Parry, “The nitrogen cycle in the broad balk wheat experiment: A model for the turnover of nitrogen through the soil microbial biomass,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 21, 535–541 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I: Physical and Mineralogical Methods, Ed. by A. Klute, (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1986).

  17. J. Makova, S. Javorekova, J. Medo, and K. Majercikova, “Characteristics of microbial biomass carbon and respiration activities in arable soil and pasture grassland soil,” J. Central Eur. Agric. 12 (4), 752–765 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. D. Myrold, P. A. Matson, and D. L. Peterson, “Relationships between soil microbial properties and aboveground stand characteristics of conifer forests in Oregon,” Biogeochemistry 8, 265–281 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. M. Nael, H. Khademi, and M. A. Hajabbasi, “Response of soil quality indicators and their spatial variability to land degradation in central Iran,” Appl. Soil Ecol. 27, 221–232 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. D. W. Nelson, and L. E. Sommers, “A simple digestion procedure for estimation of total nitrogen in soil and sediments,” J. Environ. Qual. 1, 423–425 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part II: Chemical and Microbiological Methods, Ed. by A. L. Page, R. H. Miller, and M. Keeney (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1992).

  22. N. Puladi, M. A. Delavar, A. Golchin, and A. Mosavikoper, “Effect of alder and poplar plantation on soil quality and carbon sequestration (a case study: Safrabasteh Poplar Experimental Station),” Iran. J. For. Poplar Res. 21 (2), 286–299 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  23. F. Raiesi, and E. Asadi, “Soil microbial activity and litter turnover in native grazed and ungrazed rangelands in a semiarid ecosystem,” Biol. Fertil. Soils 43, 76–82 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. H. Rennenberg, M. Dannenmann, A. Gessler, J. Kreuzwieser, J. Simon, and H. Papen, “Nitrogen balance in forest soils: nutritional limitation of plants under climate change stresses,” Plant Biol. 11, 4–23 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. W. Schlesinger, and J. Andrews, “Soil respiration and the global carbon cycle,” Biogeochemistry 48, 7–20 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. J. L. Smith, and J. W. Doran, “Measurement and use of pH and electrical conductivity for soil quality analysis,” in Methods for Assessing Soil Quality, Ed. by J. W. Doran and A. J. Jones (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1996), pp. 169–185.

    Google Scholar 

  27. E. D. Vance, P. C. Brookes, and D. S. Jenkinson, “An extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 19, 703–707 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ch. Wang, J. V. Yang, and Q. Zhang, “Soil respiration in six temperate forests in China,” Global Change Biol. 12, 2103–2114 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. D. A. Wardle, “A comparative assessment of factors which influence microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen levels in soil,” Biol. Rev. 67, 321–356 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. D. A. Wardle, and A. Ghani, “A critique of the microbial metabolic quotient (qCO2) as a bioindicator of disturbance and ecosystem development,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 27, 1601–1610 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. J. C. Yuste, M. Nagy, A. Janssens, A. Carrera, and R. Ceulemans, “Soil respiration in a mixed temperate forest and its contribution to total ecosystem respiration,” Tree Physiol. 25, 609–619 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Forest Sciences, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, 49189-43646, Iran

    Hashem Habashi

Authors
  1. Hashem Habashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hashem Habashi.

Additional information

The article is published in the original.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Habashi, H. Effect of forest and soil type on microbial biomass carbon and respiration. Eurasian Soil Sc. 49, 1084–1089 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229316090064

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229316090064

Keywords

Search

Navigation