实验室土壤处理影响二氧化碳呼吸,氨基氮和水稳定团聚体的结果

Brinton Wf
{"title":"实验室土壤处理影响二氧化碳呼吸,氨基氮和水稳定团聚体的结果","authors":"Brinton Wf","doi":"10.19080/artoaj.2020.24.556262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Laboratory analysis of soil traits associated with soil quality or soil health has gained popularity very recently reflecting a trend begun over a half-century ago scrutinizing farming systems for potentially deleterious soil effects. This renewed focus has brought into the forefront concerns about how laboratory soil handling may influence the observed traits. We find evidence in the literature that many but not all these concerns were addressed decades ago before the topic became of widespread interest but also before the soil testing industry modernized to high-throughput methods of soil homogenization not designed for soil quality investigations. Consequently, we find it necessary to retrace some steps in order to better characterize artifacts that may hamper objective evaluation of soil responses associated with soil health before conclusions of management effects of farming systems are drawn. Our study examined soils processed by a soil proficiency program by creating two size groups representing intensive and light soil disturbance and discerned differential effects of sieve sizes and moistening properties depending on which soil quality tests were used. The largest effects were due to wetting and not to sieving when comparing CO2 respiration, whereas sieving significantly influenced extractable amino-N and water stable aggregates. We found no evidence that a colorimetric thin-layer gel method (Solvita) for CO2 capture would lead to different conclusions when compared to an IRGA-infrared respirometer. It is recommended that future work continue to examine soil handling factors commonly employed for nutrient analyses which may be inconsistent with the goals of soil quality evaluation.","PeriodicalId":360573,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Research & Technology: Open Access Journal","volume":"70 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laboratory Soil Handling Affects CO2 Respiration, Amino-N and Water Stable Aggregate Results\",\"authors\":\"Brinton Wf\",\"doi\":\"10.19080/artoaj.2020.24.556262\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Laboratory analysis of soil traits associated with soil quality or soil health has gained popularity very recently reflecting a trend begun over a half-century ago scrutinizing farming systems for potentially deleterious soil effects. This renewed focus has brought into the forefront concerns about how laboratory soil handling may influence the observed traits. We find evidence in the literature that many but not all these concerns were addressed decades ago before the topic became of widespread interest but also before the soil testing industry modernized to high-throughput methods of soil homogenization not designed for soil quality investigations. Consequently, we find it necessary to retrace some steps in order to better characterize artifacts that may hamper objective evaluation of soil responses associated with soil health before conclusions of management effects of farming systems are drawn. Our study examined soils processed by a soil proficiency program by creating two size groups representing intensive and light soil disturbance and discerned differential effects of sieve sizes and moistening properties depending on which soil quality tests were used. The largest effects were due to wetting and not to sieving when comparing CO2 respiration, whereas sieving significantly influenced extractable amino-N and water stable aggregates. We found no evidence that a colorimetric thin-layer gel method (Solvita) for CO2 capture would lead to different conclusions when compared to an IRGA-infrared respirometer. It is recommended that future work continue to examine soil handling factors commonly employed for nutrient analyses which may be inconsistent with the goals of soil quality evaluation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":360573,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Research & Technology: Open Access Journal\",\"volume\":\"70 4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Research & Technology: Open Access Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19080/artoaj.2020.24.556262\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Research & Technology: Open Access Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19080/artoaj.2020.24.556262","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

与土壤质量或土壤健康相关的土壤性状的实验室分析最近开始流行,反映了半个多世纪前开始的一种趋势,即仔细检查农业系统是否有潜在的有害土壤影响。这一重新关注的焦点带来了最前沿的关注,即实验室土壤处理如何影响观察到的性状。我们在文献中发现证据,许多但不是所有这些问题在几十年前就已经解决了,在这个话题成为广泛关注之前,也是在土壤测试行业现代化之前,土壤均质化的高通量方法不是为土壤质量调查设计的。因此,我们发现有必要追溯一些步骤,以便在得出耕作系统管理效果的结论之前,更好地表征可能妨碍客观评估与土壤健康相关的土壤响应的人工因素。我们的研究检查了土壤熟练度程序处理过的土壤,通过创建两个大小组来表示强烈和轻微的土壤扰动,并根据使用的土壤质量测试识别筛子尺寸和润湿特性的差异影响。当比较二氧化碳呼吸时,最大的影响是由于湿润而不是筛分,而筛分显著影响可提取的氨基氮和水稳定团聚体。我们没有发现比色薄层凝胶法(Solvita)与irga -红外呼吸计相比会产生不同结论的证据。建议今后的工作继续检查通常用于养分分析的土壤处理因素,这些因素可能与土壤质量评价的目标不一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Laboratory Soil Handling Affects CO2 Respiration, Amino-N and Water Stable Aggregate Results
Laboratory analysis of soil traits associated with soil quality or soil health has gained popularity very recently reflecting a trend begun over a half-century ago scrutinizing farming systems for potentially deleterious soil effects. This renewed focus has brought into the forefront concerns about how laboratory soil handling may influence the observed traits. We find evidence in the literature that many but not all these concerns were addressed decades ago before the topic became of widespread interest but also before the soil testing industry modernized to high-throughput methods of soil homogenization not designed for soil quality investigations. Consequently, we find it necessary to retrace some steps in order to better characterize artifacts that may hamper objective evaluation of soil responses associated with soil health before conclusions of management effects of farming systems are drawn. Our study examined soils processed by a soil proficiency program by creating two size groups representing intensive and light soil disturbance and discerned differential effects of sieve sizes and moistening properties depending on which soil quality tests were used. The largest effects were due to wetting and not to sieving when comparing CO2 respiration, whereas sieving significantly influenced extractable amino-N and water stable aggregates. We found no evidence that a colorimetric thin-layer gel method (Solvita) for CO2 capture would lead to different conclusions when compared to an IRGA-infrared respirometer. It is recommended that future work continue to examine soil handling factors commonly employed for nutrient analyses which may be inconsistent with the goals of soil quality evaluation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信