Comparative assessment of soil microbial biomass determined by the methods of direct microscopy and substrate-induced respiration

被引:15
作者
Ananyeva, N. D. [1 ]
Polyanskaya, L. M. [2 ]
Susyan, E. A. [1 ]
Vasenkina, I. V. [2 ]
Wirth, S. [3 ]
Zvyagintsev, D. G. [2 ]
机构
[1] Russian Acad Sci, Inst Physicochem & Biol Problems Soil Sci, Pushchino 142290, Moscow Oblast, Russia
[2] Moscow MV Lomonosov State Univ, Fac Soil Sci, Moscow 119992, Russia
[3] Inst Landscape Matter Dynam, Leibniz Ctr Agr Landscape Res, ZALF, Muncheberg, Germany
基金
俄罗斯基础研究基金会;
关键词
soil; microbial biomass; direct microscopy; substrate-induced respiration;
D O I
10.1134/S0026261708030168
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
The content of microbial biomass (MB) was determined in samples of gray forest, chestnut, and tundra soils with different physicochemical properties (0.4-22.7% C-org; 8.4-26.8% silt particles; pH 4.3-8.4) by the methods of substrate-induced respiration (MBSIR) and direct microscopy (MBM). The samples of two upper soil layers, 0-5 and 5-10 cm (without plant litter), from different ecosystems (forest, forest shelter belt, meadow, fallow, and arable) and elements of relief of interfluvial tundra (block/upper land plateau, depression between blocks) have been analyzed. The content of microbial biomass in the 0-5-cm soil layer was 216-8134 and 348-7513 mu g C/g soil as measured by the methods of substrate-induced respiration and direct microscopy, respectively. The MBSIR and MBM values closely correlated with each other: r = 0.90 and 0.74 for 0-5 and 5 10 cm, respectively. The average MBSIR/MBM ratio was 90 and 60% for 0-5 and 5-10 cm, respectively. The portion of microbial carbon in total organic soil carbon was, on average, 4 and 3% (SIR) and 5 and 7% (direct microscopy) for 0-5 and 5-10 cm, respectively. Possible reasons for the differences between MBSIR and MBM values in the soils under study are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:356 / 364
页数:9
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   PHYSIOLOGICAL METHOD FOR QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT OF MICROBIAL BIOMASS IN SOILS [J].
ANDERSON, JPE ;
DOMSCH, KH .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 1978, 10 (03) :215-221
[2]   An inter-laboratory comparison of ten different ways of measuring soil microbial biomass C [J].
Beck, T ;
Joergensen, RG ;
Kandeler, E ;
Makeschin, F ;
Nuss, E ;
Oberholzer, HR ;
Scheu, S .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 1997, 29 (07) :1023-1032
[3]   SOIL MICROBIAL BIOMASS ESTIMATES IN SOILS CONTAMINATED WITH METALS [J].
BROOKES, PC ;
HEIJNEN, CE ;
MCGRATH, SP ;
VANCE, ED .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 1986, 18 (04) :383-388
[4]   COMPARISON OF METHODS FOR SOIL MICROBIAL-POPULATION AND BIOMASS STUDIES [J].
DOMSCH, KH ;
BECK, T ;
ANDERSON, JPE ;
SODERSTROM, B ;
PARKINSON, D ;
TROLLDENIER, G .
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PFLANZENERNAHRUNG UND BODENKUNDE, 1979, 142 (03) :520-533
[5]  
Evdokimova G. A., 1995, POCHVOVEDENIE, P1487
[6]   SOIL FUNGI - RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN HYPHAL ACTIVITY AND STAINING WITH FLUORESCEIN DIACETATE [J].
INGHAM, ER ;
KLEIN, DA .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 1984, 16 (03) :273-278
[7]   BACTERIAL, FUNGAL AND PROTOZOAN RESPONSES TO CHLOROFORM FUMIGATION IN STORED SOIL [J].
INGHAM, ER ;
HORTON, KA .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 1987, 19 (05) :545-550
[8]   EFFECTS OF BIOCIDAL TREATMENTS ON METABOLISM IN SOIL .3. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOIL BIOVOLUME, MEASURED BY OPTICAL MICROSCOPY, AND FLUSH OF DECOMPOSITION CAUSED BY FUMIGATION [J].
JENKINSON, DS ;
POWLSON, DS ;
WEDDERBURN, RWM .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 1976, 8 (03) :189-202
[9]   EVALUATION OF METHODS TO ESTIMATE THE SOIL MICROBIAL BIOMASS AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH SOIL TEXTURE AND ORGANIC-MATTER [J].
KAISER, EA ;
MUELLER, T ;
JOERGENSEN, RG ;
INSAM, H ;
HEINEMEYER, O .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 1992, 24 (07) :675-683
[10]  
Kozhevin P.A., 1989, MIKROBNYE POPULYATSI