Advertisement

Impact of Acephate and Buprofezin on Soil Cellulases

  • Naga Raju Maddela
  • Kadiyala Venkateswarlu
Chapter

Abstract

Cellulases are one of several enzymes produced chiefly by fungi, bacteria and protozoans. These important enzymes degrade cellulose and some related polysaccharides in soil, and are directly involved in the cycling of carbon compounds in soil. These enzymes are highly sensitive to anthropogenic factors such as pesticides thereby the soil fertility is greatly affected. Several insecticides, fungicides and herbicides have been assessed to understand their effects on soil cellulases. In most of these studies, it has been found that soil cellulases were greatly affected by the pesticides. The influence of two selected insecticides, acephate and buprofezin, on soil cellulases is presented in detail in this chapter. Lab experiments were conducted with soil samples treated once, twice or thrice with a single or two insecticides together with N-P-K amendments. Even though cellulase activities were stimulated at lower concentrations (2.5–7.5 μg g−1) of a single application of either acephate or buprofezin, the activities were adversely affected at higher concentrations (10 μg g−1) or after three application of an insecticide. The response of the enzyme activities was similar even in soil samples amended with N-P-K. Interaction of the two selected insecticides, at concentrations above 5 μg g−1 soil of acephate or buprofezin, or in combination at graded concentrations of 0–10 μg g−1 soil, resulted in antagonistic effect towards the enzyme activity. Our findings on single or repeated applications of acephate or buprofezin clearly indicate that cellulases are highly sensitive to soil pollution through insecticide use in agriculture. Also, these observations suggest that indiscriminate use of acephate and buprofezin, at higher rates but not at field applications doses, is deleterious to cellulases in soils.

References

  1. Begum SFM, Rajesh G (2015) Impact of microbial diversity and soil enzymatic activity in dimethoate amended soils series of Tamil Nadu. Int J Environ Sci Technol 4:1089–1097Google Scholar
  2. Endo T, Kuska T, Tan N, Sakai M (1982) Effects of the insecticide Cartap hydrochloride on soil enzyme activities, respiration and nitrification. J Pestic Sci 7:101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gundi VAKB, Viswanath B, Chandra MS, Kumar VN, Reddy BR (2007) Activities of cellulase and amylase in soils as influenced by insecticide interactions. Ecotoxicol Envion Saf 68:278–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Lodhi A, Malik NN, Mahmood T, Azam F (2000) Response of soil microflora, microbial biomass and some soil enzymes to Baythroid (an insecticide). Pak J Biol Sci 3:868–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Nelson N (1944) A photometric adaptation of Somagyi method for determination of glucose. J Biol Chem 153:375–380Google Scholar
  6. Omar SA, Abd-Alla MH (2000) Physiological aspects of fungi isolated from root nodules of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) Microbiol Res 154:339–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Omar SA, Abdel-Sater MA (2001) Microbial populations and enzyme activities in soil treated with pesticides. Water Air Soil Pollut 127:49–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Omar SA, Moharram AM, Abd-Alla MH (1993) Effects of an organophosphorus insecticide on the growth and cellulotytic activity of fungi. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 31:305–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Pancholy SK, Rice EL (1973) Soil enzymes in relation to old field succession: amylase, cellulase, invertase, dehydrogenase and urease. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 37:47–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ross DJ, Speir TW (1985) Changes in biochemical activities of soil incubated with the nematicides and fenamiphos. Soil Biol Biochem 17:123–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ross DJ, Speir TW, Cowling JC, Whale KN (1984) Influence of field applications of oxamyl and fenamiphos on biochemical activities of soil under pasture. NZ J Sci 27:247–254Google Scholar
  12. Sanchez-Hernandez JC, Sandoval M, Pierart A (2017) Short-term response of soil enzyme activities in a chlorpyrifos-treated mesocosm: use of enzyme-based indexes. Ecol Indic 73:525–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shittu OB, Akintokun AK, Akintokun PO, Gbadebo MO (2004) Effect of diazinon application on soil properties and soil microflora. Proceedings of International Conference and National Development, 25–28 October. COLNAS Proceedings, pp 68–74Google Scholar
  14. Srinivasulu M, Rangaswamy V (2006) Activities of invertase and cellulase as influenced by the application of tridemorph and captan to ground nut (Araachis hypogeae) soil. Afr J Biotechnol 5:175–180Google Scholar
  15. Tejada M, Morillo E, Gómez I, Madrid F, Undabeytia T (2017) Effect of controlled release formulations of diuron and alachlorherbicides on the biochemical activity of agricultural soils. J Hazard Mater 322:334–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Naga Raju Maddela
    • 1
  • Kadiyala Venkateswarlu
    • 2
  1. 1.East Campus, School of Environment Science & EngineeringSun Yat-sen UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Sri Krishnadevaraya UniversityAnantapurIndia

Personalised recommendations