Hydrolases Activities of Extracted Humic Substances During Vermicomposting of Damaged Tomatoes Wastes Using a Continuous-Supplying System

  • Manuel J. Fernández-Gómez
  • Esperanza Romero
  • Celia Cifuentes
  • Rogelio Nogales
Part of the Environmental Science and Engineering book series (ESE)


The behaviour of extracelullar hydrolytic enzyme activities in a continuous-supply vermicomposting system has never been studied previously. The aim of this study was to assess under such system the extracellular enzyme activities glucosidase, urease, acid phosphatase, and protease, which were extracted following the pyrophosphate-extraction method at pH 7.1. Vermicomposting was carried out using a medium-sized rectangular vermireactor continually supplied with damaged tomatoes (10 kg week−1) during a 5-month period on a layer of mature sheep manure. The earthworms were then removed, and the vermicomposted organic material was matured over a 2-month period. Total earthworm biomass reached its greatest value after 3 months, coinciding with peak levels for pyrophosphate-extractable carbon content and extracellular urease, acid phosphatase and protease activities. Extracellular β-glucosidase activity peaked in the 4th month, when microbial activity was also at its greatest level. At the end of the vermicomposting period, phosphatase and protease activity decreased to levels similar to those recorded at the beginning of the vermicomposting process. By contrast, β-glucosidase and urease activity values were grater than those recorded at the start of the vermicomposting process. Humic-enzyme complexes generated during the vermicomposting period were unable to resist denaturation, inactivation, and degradation caused by the air-drying during the maturation phase. Although the mature vermicompost obtained showed higher content in humus-enzyme complexes than the initial mature sheep manure, the assayed continuous-supply vermicomposting system was unefficient for enhancing the formation of stabilized humus-enzymes complexes.


  1. Benítez E, Nogales R, Elvira C, Masciandaro G, Ceccanti B (1999) Enzymes activities as indicators of the stabilization of sewage sludges composting by Eisenia andrei. Bioresour Technol 67:297–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benítez E, Nogales R, Masciandaro G, Ceccanti B (2000) Isolation by IEF of humic–urease complexes from earthworms processed sewage sludges. Biol Fertil Soils 31:489–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benítez E, Melgar R, Nogales R (2004) Estimating soil resilience to toxic waste by measuring enzyme activities. Soil Biol Biochem 36:1615–1621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benítez E, Sainz H, Nogales R (2005) Hydrolytic enzyme activities of extracted humic substances during the vermicomposting of a lignocellulosic olive waste. Bioresour Technol 96:785–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burns RG (1982) Enzyme activity in soil: location and a possible role in microbial ecology. Soil Biol Biochem 14:423–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dick RP (1994) Soil enzyme activities as indicators of soil quality. In: Doran JW, Coleman DC, Bezdicek DF, Stewart BA (eds) Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment. American Society of Agronomy-Soil Science Society of America, Special Publication No. 35, Madison,WI, pp 107–124Google Scholar
  7. Edwards CA (1995) Historical overview of vermicomposting. BioCycle 36:56–58Google Scholar
  8. Elvira C, Sampedro L, Benítez E, Nogales R (1998) Vermicomposting of sludges from paper mill and dairy industries with Eisenia andrei: a pilot scale study. Bioresour Technol 6:205–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. García C, Henández T, Costa F, Ceccanti C, Ganni A (1993) Hydrolases in the organic matter fractions of sewage sludge: changes with composting. Bioresour Technol 45:47–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. García C, Hernández T, Costa F (1997) Potencial use of dehydrogenase activity as an index of microbial activity in degraded soils. Commun Soil Sci Plan28:123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kandeler E, Gerber H (1988) Short-term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium. Biol Fertil Soils 6:68–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. MAPA (1986) Métodos Oficiales de Análisis. Vol III Plantas, Productos Orgánicos Fertilizantes, Suelos, Agua, Productos Fitosanitarios y Fertilizantes Inorgánicos. Publicaciones del Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación, Madrid, SpainGoogle Scholar
  13. McCarty GW, Shogren DR, Bremner JM (1992) Regulation of urease production in soil by microbial assimilation of nitrogen. Biol Fertil Soils 12:261–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Melgar R, Benítez E, Nogales R (2009) Bioconversion of wastes from olive oil industries using the epigeic earthworm Eisenia Andrei. J Environ Sci Health–Part B 44:488–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nannipieri P, Ceccanti B, Cervelli S, Matarese E (1980) Extraction of phosphatase, urease, protease, organic carbon and nitrogen from soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44:1011–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nannipieri P, Sequi P, Fusi P (1996) Humus and Enzyme Activity. In: Piccolo A (ed) Humic substances in terrestrial ecosystems. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 293–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nogales R, Cifuentes C, Benítez E (2005) Vermicomposting of winery wastes: A laboratory study. J Environ Sci Health–Part B 49:659–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nogales R, Domínguez J, Mato S (2008) Vermicompostaje. In: Moreno J, Moral R (eds) Compostaje. Editorial Mundi-Prensa, Madrid, Spain pp 187–2008Google Scholar
  19. Parthasarathi K, Ranganathan LS (1999) Longevity of microbial and enzyme activity and their influence on NPK content in pressmud vermicasts. Eur J Soil Biol 35:107–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Parthasarathi K, Ranganathan LS (2000) Aging effect on enzyme activities in pressmud vermicasts of Lampito mauritii (Kinberg) and Eudrilus eugeniae (Kinberg). Biol Fertil Soils 30:347–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pascual JA, Moreno JL, Hernández T, García C (2002) Persistence of immobilised and total urease and phosphatase activities in a soil amended with organic wastes. Bioresour Technol 82:73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Romero E, Benítez E, Nogales R (2005) Suitability of wastes from olive-oil industry for initial reclamation of a Pb/Zn mine tailing. Water Air Soil Pollut 165:153–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sims JR, Haby VA (1971) Simplified colorimetric determination of soil organic matter. Soil Sci 112:137–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tabatabai MA, Bremner JM (1969) Use of p-nitrophenylphosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol Biochem 1:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Xu JM, Tang C, Chen ZL (2006) The role of plant residues in pH change of acid soils differing in initial pH. Soil Biol Biochem 38:709–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel J. Fernández-Gómez
    • 1
  • Esperanza Romero
    • 1
  • Celia Cifuentes
    • 1
  • Rogelio Nogales
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Enviromental ProtectionEstación Experimental del Zaidín, CSICGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations