Shantel King- Proposal Abstract1
-
Upload
andrae-genus -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of Shantel King- Proposal Abstract1
-
7/30/2019 Shantel King- Proposal Abstract1
1/1
Microbial Diversity and Enzyme Activity in
Organic Farming vs. Conventional Farming
Shantel L. King
Major Advisor: Dr. Ramble O. Ankumah
Over the last twenty years organic farming acreages have increased as an alternative solution to
the traditional or modern agriculture which practice is heavily dependent on inorganic fertilizersand other agricultural chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides). These
practices have been associated with loss of soil fertility, soil erosion, and ground water pollution
which in turn can affect the ability of soils to process nutrients and waste, and can also affect
ecosystem processes. Understanding the effects of organic farming on soil functions as compared
to conventional agriculture is important in protecting soils from degradation and improving
ecosystem processes in soils. These land uses have also been reported to impact soil microbial
and biochemical properties. Soil enzyme activity and microbial community assessment have been
suggested as possible measures of the soil ecosystems function. Among soil enzyme activity
measurements reported to correlate with soil biological activity are dehydrogenase, alkaline
phosphatase, arylsulfatase, and phosphodiesterase. For example alkaline phosphatase activity has
been correlated with microbial respiration, biomass, and soil organic matter, and
phosphodiesterase activity has been associated with breakdown of nucleic acid. Recent reports
have also indicated that measurement of microbial community composition and shifts in response
to disturbances in the soil may offer insight and opportunities in quantifying the effect of land use
and environmental influences on a soils ability to function properly. This in turn may help in the
search for general indicators, which could be used to assess soil quality. This study seeks to
examine the impact of organic farming and conventional farming systems on soil quality using
soil enzyme quality and microbial diversity as measures of soil quality. The specific objectivesare: to evaluate the effects of organic and conventional farming on microbial diversity (ii) soil
enzyme activity and iii) compare these with soil chemical and physical parameters (organic
matter, pH and bulk density). Soil samples will be collected from two long term organic and non-
organic farming plots located in Roanoke, PA. Microbial diversity will be determined by whole
DNA extraction followed by DGGE. Soil enzyme activity will be measured using the
phosphomoesterases and phosphodiesterase as a measure of enzyme activity. In addition to these
measurements, soil organic carbon, pH and bulk density will be measured. Results from
community measurements will be compared with organic matter content, and soil enzyme
activities. A relationship of how these parameters are influenced by the two farming systems will
then be evaluated. It is hypothesized that the organic farming plots will have higher organic
matter, microbial diversity and soil enzyme activity compared to the conventional tillage plots.
. References:
1. Esperschutz J., Gattinger, A., Mader, P., Schloter, M. and FleiBach, A. (2007)Response of soil
microbial biomass and community structures to conventional and organic farming systems under identical
crop rotations. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. 61 26-37.
2. Anna K. Bandick and Richard P. Dick. 1999. Field management effects on soil enzyme activities. SoilBiology and Biochemistry.31:1471-1479.
3. Bo, L., Cong, T., Shuijin, H., Gumpertz, M., Ristaino, J.B. 2007. Effect of organic, sustainable, and
conventional management strategies in grower fields on soil physical, chemical, and biologicalfactors and the incidence of Southern blight. Applied Soil Ecology. 37:202-214.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00380717http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00380717http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00380717http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%235163%231999%23999689988%23114774%23FLA%23&_cdi=5163&_pubType=J&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=0fb8bac478d1fdf0e11a2e2bb7319dcchttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%235163%231999%23999689988%23114774%23FLA%23&_cdi=5163&_pubType=J&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=0fb8bac478d1fdf0e11a2e2bb7319dcchttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%235163%231999%23999689988%23114774%23FLA%23&_cdi=5163&_pubType=J&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=0fb8bac478d1fdf0e11a2e2bb7319dcchttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%235163%231999%23999689988%23114774%23FLA%23&_cdi=5163&_pubType=J&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=0fb8bac478d1fdf0e11a2e2bb7319dcchttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00380717http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00380717http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%235163%231999%23999689988%23114774%23FLA%23&_cdi=5163&_pubType=J&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=0fb8bac478d1fdf0e11a2e2bb7319dcc