Next Article in Journal
Absorption, Translocation, and Metabolism of Glyphosate and Imazethapyr in Smooth Pigweed with Multiple Resistance
Next Article in Special Issue
Response of Rice Grain Yield and Soil Fertility to Fertilization Management under Three Rice-Based Cropping Systems in Reclaimed Soil
Previous Article in Journal
Differences in the Physiological Indicators of Seed Germination and Seedling Establishment of Durum Wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) Cultivars Subjected to Salinity Stress
Previous Article in Special Issue
Morphological and Physiological Response of Tomato to Sole and Combined Application of Vermicompost and Chemical Fertilizers
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 13
Issue 7
10.3390/agronomy13071719
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Impact of Chemically Diverse Organic Residue Amendment on Soil Enzymatic Activities in a Sandy Loam Soil

by
Sandeep Sharma
1,
Neha Sharma
1,2,
Nihar Gupta
1,
Padma Angmo
1,
Manzer H. Siddiqui
3,* and
Md Atikur Rahman
4
1
Department of Soil Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141004, India
2
Department of Microbiology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141004, India
3
Department of Botany and Microbiology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
4
Grassland and Forage Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration, Cheonan 31000, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2023, 13(7), 1719; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071719
Submission received: 15 May 2023 / Revised: 20 June 2023 / Accepted: 24 June 2023 / Published: 27 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Applied Research and Extension in Agronomic Soil Fertility Series II)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
To monitor soil biological quality, it is of paramount importance to assess how chemically diverse organic residue amendments reciprocate to organic matter. The present incubation study aimed to evaluate the effect of organic residue amendments varying widely in their biochemical composition on the dynamics of soil enzymatic activity. The changes in the pattern of soil enzymatic activity have been monitored over a period of 63 days using a total of eleven different crop residues. The enzyme activity (dehydrogenase, fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis, acid phosphatase, alkaline phosphatase and phytase) in soils amended with chemically diverse organic residues were significantly higher as compared to the control. It was further observed that the enzymatic activities in Azadirachta indica, Avena sativa and Lens culinaris continued to be higher up to 28 days after their incorporation (DAI). Our study showed that plant residues varying in different cellulose and hemicellulose contents influenced the enzymatic activities as well as functional diversity of soil microbial communities.

1. Introduction

The ability of organic amendments to boost soil health and increase crop productivity makes their use in agriculture a common practise. In fact, organic amendments of various origins and compositions can provide the soil with essential nutrients and increase the amount of organic matter in the soil, both of which have positive effects on the soil’s overall health [1]. Soil and crop management practices, such as residue management, tillage, crop rotation, is considered to be important global issues for enhancing soil quality and in attaining sustainability in agricultural production [2,3]. To work out residue decomposition response in soils, physical factors of soil or residue and biological components serve as the most suitable tools or functional traits [4,5]. The incorporation of organic materials in soil played a vital role in the maintenance of soil quality; most of the soil processes are driven through soil microorganisms, thereby releasing important plant nutrients through solubilization, the mineralization of organic and inorganic pools in soil and the stabilization of soil aggregates, and thus, it is beneficial for soil conservation and crop production [6,7]. In recent years, biological properties of soil have been considered the sensitive indicators for a quick response to alteration in the management systems [8]. Among the biological activities, enzymatic activities are considered the best indicators of specific biochemical reactions derived primarily from soil microbes as they participate in nutrient cycling and scale up the decomposition of organic amendments [9,10,11].
The microbial community and its functions are detected by changes in soil enzymatic activity [12]. They indicate modifications in soil biochemical processes and SOM dynamics ascribed to human-induced variation in abiotic and biotic components in soil [13,14]. The quantification of soil enzymatic activity in important nutrient cycling (C, N and P), and oxidation–reduction processes have been utilized extensively as a possible indicator for evaluating the impact of land use changes and management practices on soil health [15,16,17]. The amount of each soil enzyme varies primarily depending on different soil types containing different contents of the organic matter and intensity of the biological activities of soil [18]. Amongst various enzymes, the important soil enzymes include acid and alkaline phosphatases, amylases, arylsulphatases, β-glucosidases, cellulases, chitinases, soil dehydrogenases, proteases and ureases released from plants [19], animals [20], organic compounds and microorganisms [21] and soil [22,23]. Soil enzymes may also be utilised as an essential indicator of the soil quality as they are significantly correlated with soil properties [24].
Organic amendments, such as crop residues, green manure and livestock manure, have been identified as one of the most cost-efficient and successful sustainable agricultural practises for increasing SOM content [25]. Nutrient release and rate of decomposition of organic amendments is variably influenced by the C/N ratio and their biochemical composition [26]. For example, various organic residues differ in total N, C/N ratio, cellulose, hemicelluloses, lignin, polyphenol content resulting in differences in enzymatic activities and changes in functional quality of soil [27]. Organic residues having a low C/N (<20) show greater N mineralization compared to the residues having wide C/N ratios which cause N immobilization [28]. Additionally, some researchers have reported that chemically resistant residues, such as those high in lignin, degrade more slowly than residues with low lignin and high N concentrations, increasing soil organic matter and enhancing soil C stabilisation [29]. Wang et al. [30], in a study, observed that overall, diverse crop residue quality generated distinct expressions of the structure and function of the soil microbial community. Similarly, Domínguez et al. [31] reported that diversifying crop residues as an energy source for microbes will enhance enzymatic activities in the soil carried out by earthworms and finally augment the decomposition of organic matter. In addition to the quality and composition of crop residues, the organic matter decomposition is influenced by intrinsic soil conditions [32,33]. According to Mathew et al. [32], carbon-rich clayey soils in tropical humid regions had a better biomass production capacity than sandy soils, which resulted in increased plant C stocks and C transfer to soils. In addition, because of their tendency to aggregate, capacity to offer physical protection and capacity for mineral adsorption of C constituents, clayey soils also support substantial C stocks [32,34]. Furthermore, fine textured soils typically take longer to mineralize SOC and crop residues than coarse textured soils due to the fact that clay can physically shield soil’s organic C and may restrict microbial access to it [35,36].
Presently, limited information is available in the literature on the role of crop residue heterogeneity on the dynamics of different enzymatic activities in soil. However, studies have investigated the effects of organic residue amendments on soil enzymatic activities, but most of these studies have focused on specific residue types or narrowly defined chemical compositions [37,38]. To fully comprehend the influence of organic residues on soil enzymatic activities, it is crucial to consider the diverse range of residues commonly available in agricultural systems. These residues exhibit variations in chemical composition, including cellulose, lignin and nitrogen content. Therefore, keeping in view the abovesaid, emphasis of the present study was undertaken to evaluate the changes in various soil enzymatic activities in soils amended with different types of plant residues having different biochemical composition. We hypothesized that crop residues differing widely in biochemical composition would have a differential effect on the enzymatic activity.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Site

A laboratory study has been conducted using sandy loam soil (Typic Ustochrept, USDA classification) collected from the experimental field of the PAU, Ludhiana located in the Indo-Gangetic plains of north-western India. Soil samples (0–15 cm depth) were randomly collected from eight different locations within the field, mixed thoroughly to make a composite sample of approximately 50 kg. The sample was then partially air-dried, cleaned, sieved (<2 mm), brought to field capacity and stored in the bag. The soil under study was normal in reaction and electrical conductivity (pH 8.0 and electrical conductivity 0.4 dSm−1), medium in organic carbon 4.1 g kg−1 [39], KMnO4-oxidizable N of 9.7 mg kg−1 [40] and low in available P 3.1 mg kg−1 [41] and available K 31 mg kg−1 [42].

2.2. Experimental Details

A total of eleven different amendments with their respective crop description having different C/N ratio were selected, to study their effect on soil enzymes and are given in Table 1. The experiment was laid down in a complete randomized design (CRD) with three replications of each treatment. The crop residues were collected, washed, dried, ground and stored for the proximate analysis. On dry weight basis, 500 g soil was taken in the polypropylene pots od f one litre capacity, and moistened to its field capacity. Crop residues were added at the rate of 1% to these pots and were mixed thoroughly with the soil. During the course of incubation period, moist air was continuously circulated in the chamber at 30 °C. The soil sampling from each treatment were done at the time intervals of 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, 28, 42, 63rd days after incubation (DAI) and stored at 4 °C immediately for the subsequent analysis of enzymatic activities {(dehydrogenase (DHA), fluorescein diacetate (FDA), acid phosphatase (ACP), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), phytase (PA)} to avoid minimum losses after collection.

2.3. Proximate Analysis of Organic Residues

The total organic carbon (C) and total nitrogen (N) content of the crop residues were estimated by dry combustion method using Vario EL CHN elemental analyser (Heraeus Elementor EL, Hanau, Germany). The proximate analysis was done to estimate the cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin fractions of the residues [43]. Neutral digestion was performed with 1 g of plant residues and 100 mL of neutral detergent solution. The acid digestion was performed using 100 mL of detergent solution acid per gram of the residues at 150 °C in the digester block for 1 h. The samples were then vacuum filtered using crucibles with the repeated washings of hot distilled water and acetone (10–20 mL) and allowed to be dried for 12 h at 105 °C. The hemicellulose content was evaluated from the difference between the percentage of total neutral fiber and the percentage of acid detergent fiber. The cellulose content of the acid fiber was obtained after digestion with 12 M H2SO4 for 3 h and the left-over material remained after cellulose quantification was burned in a muffle furnace at 500 °C for 3 h for the determination of lignin content. The anthrone colorimetric method was used to measure total soluble sugar (TSS) content as described by [44] and the starch (ST) content was measured using a method with 3,5-dinitrosalicylic acid (DNS) method as described by [45].

2.4. Enzymatic Activity in the Soil

Dehydrogenase (DHA) was quantified from 1 g of soil sample using 0.2 mL of 3% triphenyltetrazolium chloride (TTC) and 0.5 mL of glucose solution (1%) and incubated at 30 °C for 24 h. Then, triphenyl foramazan (TPF) was extracted with 10 mL ethanol and determined spectrophotometrically after 2 h refrigeration at 485 nm. Each value of DHA activity was the mean of three replicates and was expressed as μg TPF formed/g/h [46]. The activity of acid (ACP) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) was determined on the release of p-nitrophenol (PNP) after the cleavage of p-nitrophenyl phosphate (PNPP) by acid and alkaline phosphomonoesterase. Briefly, ACP and ALP activity was measured in the 1.0 g air-dried soil sample incubated in the 0.2 mL toluene, 4 mL Modified Universal Buffer (MUB) of pH = 4, 11 (for ACP and ALP respectively) and 1 mL of 0.05 M PNP solution at 37 °C for 1 h. The addition of 1 mL of 0.5 M CaCl2 and 4 mL of 0.5 M NaOH led to a stop in the reaction. Finally, the soil suspension was filtered, and filtrate was analysed for the estimation of p-nitrophenol content on a spectrophotometer at 420 nm [47]. The activity of acid and alkaline phosphomonoesterase was expressed as μg PNP released/g/h. Phytase activity was estimated by [48] method. To determine phytase activity, 1 g of the soil was transferred in which 4 mL NaOAc buffer solution (pH 4.5) and 1 mL 1μM sodium phytate solution were added to the tubes. After incubation at 37 °C for 1 h, the reaction was terminated with the addition of 0.5 mL of 10% trichloroacetic acid, and the hydrolysed product was measured using Olsen method. Phytase activity was expressed as µg Pi released/g soil/h. The activity of fluorescein diacetate (FDA) hydrolysis was measured using 2 g of soil treated with 60 mM potassium phosphate buffer (pH 7.6) and 0.2 mL solution of FDA (1000 mg mL−1). The samples were incubated for 20 min in the incubator at 30 °C. After incubation, the reaction was stopped by the addition of 15 mL of chloroform: methanol in 2:1 ratio immediately to terminate the reaction. The supernatant was filtered after centrifugation at 2000 rpm for 10 min, and the colour intensity of fluorescein present in the filtrate was measured at 490 nm on a spectrophotometer [49].

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The least significance difference (LSD) among the treatment means was calculated at 5% level of probability by using Analysis of variance (ANOVA), carried out using IRRISTAT version 5.0.

3. Results

The chemical composition of all the organic residues used in the study are given in the Table 2. The carbon content of different residues varied from 27.3% to 44.6% and the N content ranged from 0.39% to 4.82% with C/N ratio ranging from 9 to 106. The cellulose (CEL) content of the residues ranged from 17.6% to 45.4%, hemicellulose (HEM) content ranged from 7.80% to 23.5% and Lignin (LIG) contents ranged from 9.50% to 30.6% (Table 2).

Effect of Organic Residues on Enzymatic Activity

Plant residues significantly increased the activities of DHA, FDA, APA, APP and PA at all the sampling dates. DHA ranged from 15.7 to 19.1, 9.13 to 18.9 and 21.7 to 57.4 µg TPF g−1 h−1 for tree residues, cereals and others, respectively. T1, T4 and T9 showed maximum DHA activity. There was a significant increase in DHA of up to 28 DAI, and it decreased thereafter (Figure 1). Among tree species, Azadirachita sp. showed significantly higher activities at the 28th DAI, followed by Populus alba and Melia azedarach. Among cereal residues, Avena sativa showed significantly higher DHA followed by Zea mays. Among other plant residues species, Lens culinaris showed significantly higher DHA at the 28th DAI.
Fluorescein diacetate (FDA) activity ranged from 0.356 to 0.436, 0.254 to 0.306 and 0.308 to 0.380 μg fluorescein released/g dry soil/20 min for the residues of trees, cereals and the other plant species, respectively. Among plant residues, Populus alba, Triticum aestivum and Saccharum officinarum residues showed maximum activity (Figure 2). Among tree residues, Melia azedarach showed significantly higher FDA activities at the 7th DAI than the other residues species. In the case of cereal residues, Triticum aestivum showed significantly higher FDA activity, which was closely followed by Avena sativa and was least in the case of Zea mays. The Saccharum officinarum residue showed significantly higher FDA activity on the 7th DAI compared to other residues species.
The activity of APA and APP varied significantly among the various treatments and showed highest phosphatase activity up to the 14th and 21st DAI in Azadirachita indica, Avena sativa and Lens culinaris, respectively; thereafter, a marked decrease was observed (Figure 3 and Figure 4). Among the tree species, Azadirachita indica showed maximum APA and APP enzymatic activity followed by Melia azedarach and Populus alba. Among the cereals, Avena sativa showed significantly higher APA and APP activity than the others. Among other plant residue species, Lens culinaris showing a significantly higher increase in the phosphatase activities than the others.
The values of phytase activity (PA) ranged from 11.2 to 12.5, 10.8 to 13.5 and 10.3 to 11.7 µg P hydrolysed/g/h in the soils amended with the residues of trees, cereals and the others, respectively. Initially, a slow increase in PA activity was noticed up to the 14th DAI, which increased markedly at the 28th DAI (Figure 5). Among the tree species, Melia azedarach showed significantly higher activity than other species. The significantly higher PA was observed in Avena sativa followed by Zea mays. Among the residues of other plant species, a significantly higher increase in PA activity at the 28th DAI was observed in Lens culinaris followed by Saccharum officinarum.

4. Discussion

Crop residues differed widely with regard to the chemical composition of their tissues, and these residues contribute differently to soil C inputs [50,51]. Liu et al. [51] concluded in an experiment that differences in chemical composition between various plant residues, and soil texture is the sole reason for the enhancement of residue degradation and SOC accumulation. The plant residues, compared with the unamended control, yielded a significant increase in the activities of different enzymes measured in this study. FDA and DHA activities in the soil amended with different plant residues showed higher activities on the 7th and 28th DAI compared to the control, respectively. It might be due to higher microbial activity during the mineralization of crop residues. The level of DHA in the soil can be used as an index of the total microbial activity. The additions of organic inputs to soil stimulate DHA activity because the added material may contain intracellular and extracellular enzymes [52]. Sekaran et al. [53] reported that applying various crop residues to the soil improved the dehydrogenase enzymatic activity in the soil. Dehydrogenases have a significant impact on a number of oxidative processes that dehydrate organic molecules [54]. In addition, a significant positive correlation between the SOC and DHA has also been studied [55]. Averaged over all the sampling dates, the maximum DHA was observed for Avena sativa amended plots followed by Azadirachita indica. The nature of plant residues (e.g., easily decomposable C fraction, cellulose, hemicelluloses, lignin) is reported to affect the enzymatic activity differently [56]. This is likely due to the increase in microbial activities that directly depend on labile C pools and stimulates autochthonous microbial activity in organic amended soils [57]. The rate of soil microbial population, growth and extracellular enzyme production of different crop residues having different chemical compounds change because of their different degradation rates [58]. Consistent with our study, other researchers [59,60] have also reported a decrease in DHA with time.
Unlike DHA, FDA hydrolysis peaked at the 7th DAI when the FDA production rate ranged between 0.211–0.784 μg fluorescein released/g dry soil/20 min. The increase in the FDA hydrolysis activity indicated an increase in C, and the nutrients release the soil from the added plant residues [11] since FDA is considered a comprehensive C cycling enzyme assay [61]. The hydrolysis of fluorescein diacetate (FDA), which affects the activity of various hydrolytic enzymes, is a gauge of the soil’s overall microbial activity [62]. The FDA activity declined sharply thereafter, which may be due to the depletion of the easily available substrate. Averaged of all the sampling dates, residues of tree species exhibited the maximum FDA activity followed by other residues and was least in cereals. Zhao et al. [63] reported that FDA has been utilized to estimate the potential microbial activity of soil amended with a wide range of organic amendments. FDA has also been used to determine amounts of active fungi and bacteria and to locate acetyl esterases in living protist cells [64]. Cellulose is readily degraded by both fungi and bacteria. However, lignin is more recalcitrant, and its complete degradation is restricted to a selected group of fungi that produce the extracellular lignin peroxidases [65]. In addition, from different studies it is recognized that lignin depolymerization and the mineralization of subsequent diverse aromatics present in crop residues are the two steps in the biodegradation of lignin in nature [66]. Due to the above reasons, FDA activity was higher in those plant residues (e.g., Populus alba, Triticum aestivum, Saccharum officinarum), which have high cellulose and lignin content. These results can be attributed to the presence of higher cellulose and hemicellulose contents as well as low N content [67].
A significant increase in APA and APP activities were observed with the addition of different plant residues, which peaked at the 14th and 21st DAI, and thereafter, the enzymatic activities decreased markedly. Stegarescu et al. [68] in a similar study reported that the maximum increase in APA was between 7 to 10 days after the incorporation of plant residues, which was attributed by the increase in microbial respiration. Carlson et al. [69] reported in an experiment using organic amendments a significant decrease in the overall phosphatase activity over different time intervals, which suggest that the activity of enzymes is stimulated by organic amendments as phosphatase producing microbial community is lost over time. In addition, the addition of organic amendments may stimulate microbial production of enzymes, such as dehydrogenase and phosphatase, to enhance organic matter decomposition and organic P mineralization [70]. The significant increase in phosphatase activity after the addition of different plant residues may be due to inherent high microbial activities [71]. Like phosphatase activities, PA is also related to the transformation and mineralization of organic P to inorganic P in soils. PA plays a crucial role in P cycling by catalysing the hydrolysis of the organic form of P in soil (i.e., phytate). In addition, P availability for plants and microbial uptake in soil is highly influenced by PA [72]. Sharma and Dhaliwal [73] reported a significant increase in phytase enzymes upon the application of organic amendment, such as rice straw compost. Similarly, Saikia et al. and Bera et al. [22,62] reported an increase in phytase activity in soils at days of vigorous growth by using green manures and crop residue as an organic amendment.

Enzymatic Activity Correlates Their Biochemical Composition of Plant Residues

The C/N ratio is usually considered a key factor in controlling decomposition and nutrient release and is considered to be a good indicator of litter decomposition rate in many ecosystems [74,75] as mineralization rates decrease with increasing C/N ratio [75]. Our incubation study showed that the lower C/N ratio and higher enzymatic activity influenced the mineralization process. The structural components and their proportions (soluble carbohydrates, cellulose, hemicelluloses, lignin, etc.) differ among plant residues and likewise break down at different rates, influencing microbial community structure [76]. High CEL and HEM is linked to rapid decomposition and high LIG content, high C/N ratio, and low total N are associated with a slower breakdown [77]. The present study also showed the slow enzymatic activity during the first week of incubation, which could possibly be due to the presence of recalcitrant forms of C, such as lignin [78,79].

5. Conclusions

The results from this study suggest that the increase in enzymatic activities with the addition of crop residues are strongly influenced by their biochemical composition (cellulose, hemicelluloses, lignin content) and their C/N ratio. The lower the C/N ratio, the more labile C pools will result in their high degradation and enzymatic activity. The quality of crop residues, and particularly their cellulose and hemicellulose content, will highly influence the soil enzymatic activities. Holocellulose (hemicelluloses + celluloses) was the responsible factor for explaining the variability of C mineralization and enzymatic activities in soil amended with different types of plant residues.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.S., N.S. and N.G.; methodology, S.S. and N.S.; software, N.S. and N.G.; validation, S.S., N.S. and N.G.; formal analysis, N.S., P.A., M.H.S. and N.G.; investigation, S.S. and N.S.; resources, S.S. and M.H.S.; data curation, S.S., M.H.S., N.S. and N.G.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S., M.H.S., M.A.R., N.S. and N.G.; writing—review and editing, S.S., P.A., M.H.S. and M.A.R.; visualization, S.S.; supervision, S.S.; project administration, S.S.; funding acquisition, S.S. and M.H.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2023R347), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2023R347), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Urra, J.; Alkorta, I.; Garbisu, C. Potential benefits and risks for soil health derived from the use of organic amendments in agriculture. Agronomy 2019, 9, 542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Davis, A.G.; Huggins, D.R.; Reganold, J.P. Linking soil health and ecological resilience to achieve agricultural sustainability. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2023, 21, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kumar, N.; Chaudhary, A.; Ahlawat, O.P.; Naorem, A.; Upadhyay, G.; Chhokar, R.S.; Gill, S.C.; Khippal, A.; Tripathi, S.C.; Singh, G.P. Crop residue management challenges, opportunities and way forward for sustainable food-energy security in India: A review. Soil Tillage Res. 2023, 228, 105641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Gura, I.; Mnkeni, P.N.S.; Preez, D.C.C.; Barnard, J.H. Short-term effects of conservation agriculture strategies on the soil quality of a Haplic Plinthosol in Eastern Cape, South Africa. Soil Tillage Res. 2022, 220, 105378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Cotrufo, F.M.; Haddix, M.L.; Kroeger, M.E.; Stewart, C.E. The role of plant input physical-chemical properties, and microbial and soil chemical diversity on the formation of particulate and mineral-associated organic matter. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2022, 168, 108648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Leogrande, R.; Vitti, C. Use of organic amendments to reclaim saline and sodic soils: A review. Arid Land Res. Manag. 2018, 33, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bhattacharyya, S.S.; Ros, G.H.; Furtak, K.; Iqbal, H.M.N.; Parra-Saldivar, R. Soil carbon sequestration—An interplay between soil microbial community and soil organic matter dynamics. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 815, 152928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Montanez, A.; Rigamonti, N.; Vico, S.; Silva, C.; Nunez, L.; Zerbino, S. Influence of aerobic treated manure application on the chemical and microbiological properties of soil. Span J. Agric. Res. 2019, 17, e1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sharma, S.; Singh, P.; Chauhan, S.; Chaudhary, O.P. Landscape position and slope aspects impacts on soil organic carbon pool and biological indicators of a fragile ecosystem in high-altitude cold arid region. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2022, 22, 2612–2632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sharma, S.; Singh, P.; Sodhi, G.P.S. Soil organic carbon and biological indicators of uncultivated vis-à-vis intensively cultivated soils under rice–wheat and cotton–wheat cropping systems in South-Western Punjab. Carbon Manag. 2020, 11, 681–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Galindo, F.S.; Strock, J.S.; Pagliari, P.H. Impacts of corn stover management and fertilizer application on soil nutrient availability and enzymatic activity. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 1985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bogati, K.; Walczak, M. The impact of drought stress on soil microbial community, enzyme activities and plants. Agronomy 2022, 12, 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kabiri, V.; Raiesi, F.; Ghazavi, M.A. Tillage effects on soil microbial biomass, SOM mineralization and enzyme activity in a semi-arid Calcixerepts. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2016, 232, 73–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Trasar-Capeda, C.; Leiro’s, M.C.; Gil-Sotres, F. Hydrolytic enzyme activities in agricultural and forest soils. Some implications for their use as indicators of soil quality. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2008, 40, 2146–2155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Pandey, D.; Agarwal, M.; Bohra, J.S. Effects of conventional tillage and no tillage permutations on extracellular soil enzyme activities and microbial biomass under rice cultivation. Soil Tillage Res. 2014, 136, 51–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. De Medeiros, E.V.; De Alcantara Notaro, K.; De Barros, J.A.; Da Silva Moraes, W.; Silva, A.O.; Moreira, K.A. Absolute and specific enzymatic activities of sandy entisol from tropical dry forest, monoculture and intercropping areas. Soil Tillage Res. 2015, 145, 208–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Meena, A.; Rao, K.S. Assessment of soil microbial and enzyme activity in the rhizosphere zone under different land use/cover of a semi-arid ecosystem, India. Ecol. Process. 2021, 10, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Farooq, T.H.; Kumar, U.; Mo, J.; Shakoor, A.; Wang, J.; Rashid, M.H.U.; Tufall, M.A.; Chen, X.; Yen, W. Intercropping of Peanut–Tea enhances soil enzymatic activity and soil nutrient status at different soil profiles in subtropical southern China. Plants 2021, 10, 881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pankaj; Sharma, S.; Singh, V.; Angmo, P. Changes in soil biological and chemical environment during wheat growth stages under nitrogen and straw management practices in rice-wheat system. J. Plant Nutr. 2023, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liang, Y.; Xu, L.; Bao, J.; Firmin, K.A.; Zong, W. Attapulgite enhances methane production from anaerobic digestion of pig slurry by changing enzyme activities and microbial community. Renew. Energy 2019, 145, 222–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Langa, A. Characterisation of Recombinant Beta-Glucosidases from Thermomyces Lanuginosus SSBP and Investigation of Their Synergistic Potential in Cellulose Hydrolysis. Ph.D. Thesis, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  22. Bera, T.; Sharma, S.; Thind, H.S.; Yadvinder-Singh; Sidhu, H.S.; Jat, M.L. Soil biochemical changes at different wheat growth stages in response to conservation agriculture practices in a rice-wheat system of north-western India. Soil Res. 2017, 56, 91–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Datta, A.; Gujre, N.; Gupta, D.; Agnihotri, R.; Mitra, S. Application of enzymes as a diagnostic tool for soils as affected by municipal solid wastes. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 286, 112169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bhaduri, D.; Saha, A.; Desai, D.; Meena, H.N. Restoration of carbon and microbial activity in salt-induced soil by application of peanut shell biochar during short-term incubation study. Chemosphere 2016, 148, 86–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, J.; Hu, K.; Li, K.; Zheng, C.; Li, B. Simulating the effects of long-term discontinuous and continuous fertilization with straw return on crop yields and soil organic carbon dynamics using the DNDC model. Soil Tillage Res. 2017, 165, 302–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kumar, K.A.; Swain, D.K.; Bhadoria, P.B.S. Split application of organic nutrient improved productivity, nutritional quality and economics of rice-chickpea cropping system in lateritic soil. Field Crop. Res. 2018, 223, 125–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Margida, M.G.; Lashermes, G.; Moorhead, D.L. Estimating relative cellulolytic and ligninolytic enzyme activities as functions of lignin and cellulose content in decomposing plant litter. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2020, 141, 107689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lazicki, P.; Geisseler, D.; Lloyd, M. Nitrogen mineralization from organic amendments is variable but predictable. J. Environ. Qual. 2020, 49, 483–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Berg, B.; McClaugherty, C. Decomposition as a process. In Plant Litter: Decomposition, Humus Formation, Carbon Sequestration; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 11–33. [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang, Y.; Liu, L.; Yang, J.; Duan, Y.; Luo, Y.; Taherzadeh, M.J.; Li, Y.; Li, H.; Awasthi, M.K.; Zhao, Z. The diversity of microbial community and function varied in response to different agricultural residues composting. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 715, 136983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Domínguez, A.; Gabbarini, L.A.; Rodriguez, M.P.; Escudero, H.J.; Wall, L.G.; Bedano, J.C. Crop residues used as food drive enzyme activation and enzymatic stoichiometry in casts of the earthworm Aporrectodea caliginosa (Savigny, 1826). Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 166, 104000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mathew, I.; Shimelis, H.; Mutema, M.; Chaplot, V. What crop type for atmospheric carbon sequestration: Results from a global data analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2017, 243, 34–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Stewart, C.E.; Moturi, P.; Follett, R.F.; Halvorson, A.D. Lignin biochemistry and soil N determine crop residue decomposition and soil priming. Biogeochemistry 2015, 124, 335–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Martens, D.A. Plant residue biochemistry regulates soil carbon cycling and carbon sequestration. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2000, 32, 361–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Sarkar, J.R.; Singh, B.P.; Cowie, A.L.; Fang, Y.; Collins, D.; Doughtery, W.J.; Singh, B.K. Carbon and nutrient mineralisation dynamics in aggregate-size classes from different tillage systems after input of canola and wheat residues. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2018, 116, 22–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Xu, X.; Shi, Z.; Li, D.; Rey, A.; Ruan, H.; Craine, J.M.; Liang, J.; Zhou, J.; Luo, Y. Soil properties control decomposition of soil organic carbon: Results from data-assimilation analysis. Geoderma 2016, 262, 235–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Dutta, A.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Jiménez-Ballesta, R.; Dey, A.; Saha, N.D.; Kumar, S.; Nath, C.P.; Prakash, V.; Jatav, S.S.; Patra, A. Conventional and zero tillage with residue management in rice–wheat system in the Indo-Gangetic plains: Impact on thermal sensitivity of soil organic carbon respiration and enzyme activity. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Sharma, S.; Saikia, R.; Thind, S.S.; Singh, Y.; Jat, M.L. Tillage, green manure and residue management accelerate soil carbon pools and hydrolytic enzymatic activities for conservation agriculture based rice-wheat systems. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2021, 52, 470–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Walkley, A.; Black, I.A. An examination of the degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934, 37, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Subbiah, B.V.; Asija, G.L. A rapid procedure for estimation of available nitrogen in soils. Curr. Sci. 1956, 25, 259–260. [Google Scholar]
  41. Olsen, S.R.; Cole, C.V.; Watanabe, F.S.; Dean, I.A. Estimation of Available Phosphorus in Soils by Extraction with Sodium Bicarbonate; U.S. Department of Agriculture Circle: Washington, DC, USA, 1954; Volume 939, pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  42. Black, C.A. Mrthods of soil analsis. In Chemical and Minerological Properties; Part-II; American Society of Agronomy: Madison, WI, USA, 1965. [Google Scholar]
  43. Van Soest, P.J. Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds I: Preparation of fiber residues of low nitrogen content. J. AOAC Int. 1963, 46, 825–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Zhang, X. Research Method in Crop Physiology; High Education Press: Bejing, China, 2000; pp. 193–197. [Google Scholar]
  45. Zhaofan, H. Analysis Techniques for Grain Quality of Cereals and Oils; Chinese Agric, Press: Bejing, China, 1985; pp. 151–152. [Google Scholar]
  46. Camina, F.; Trasar, A.C.C.; Sotres, G.F.; Leiros, C. Measurement of dehydrogenase activity in acid soil rich in organic matter. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1998, 33, 1005–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tabatabai, M.A.; Bremner, J.M. Use of p-Nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1969, 1, 301–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ames, B.N. Assay of inorganic phosphate, total phosphate and phosphatases. Meth. Enzymol. 1966, 8, 115–118. [Google Scholar]
  49. Adam, G.; Duncan, H. Development of a sensitive and rapid method for the measurement of total microbial activity using fluorescein diacetate (FDA) in a range of soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2001, 33, 943–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Kong, A.Y.Y.; Six, J. Tracing cover crop root versus residue carbon into soils from conventional, low-input, and organic cropping systems. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2010, 74, 1201–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Liu, S.; Li, J.; Liang, A.; Duan, Y.; Chen, H.; Yu, Z.; Fan, R.; Liu, H.; Pan, H. Chemical compositions of plant residues regulate soil organic carbon turnover in typical soils with contrasting textures in northeast China plain. Agronomy 2022, 12, 747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Onet, A.; Dincă, L.C.; Grenni, P.; Laslo, V.; Teusdea, A.C.; Vasile, D.L.; Enescu, R.E.; Crisan, V.E. Biological indicators for evaluating soil quality improvement in a soil degraded by erosion processes. J. Soils Sediments 2019, 19, 2393–2404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sekaran, U.; Kumar, S.; Hernandez, J.L.G. Integration of crop and livestock enhanced soil biochemical properties and microbial community structure. Geoderma 2021, 381, 114686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Behesti, M.; Etesami, H.; Alikhani, H.A. Effect of different biochars amendment on soil biological indicators in a calcareous soil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 14752–14761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Choudhary, M.; Meena, V.S.; Pandey, S.C.; Mondal, T.; Yadav, R.P.; Mishra, P.K.; Bisht, J.K.; Pattanayak, A. Long-term effects of organic manure and inorganic fertilization on biological soil quality indicators of soybean-wheat rotation in the Indian mid-Himalaya. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 157, 103754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Almagro, M.; Ruiz-Navarro, A.; Diaz-Pereira, E.; Albaladejo, J.; Martinez-Mana, M. Plant residue chemical quality modulates the soil microbial response related to decomposition and soil organic carbon and nitrogen stabilization in a rainfed Mediterranean agroecosystem. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2021, 156, 108198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Srinivas, D.; Bharatha Lakshmi, M.; Bhattacharyya, P. Carbon pools and associated soil enzymatic activities as influenced by long-term application of fertilizers and manure in lowland rice soil. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 2015, 63, 310–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Curtright, A.J.; Tiemann, L.K. Intercropping increases soil extracellular enzyme activity: A meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2021, 321, 107489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wiatrowska, K.; Komisarek, J.; Olejnik, J. Variations in organic carbon content and dehydrogenases activity in post-agriculture forest soils: A case study in south-western Pomerania. Forests 2021, 12, 459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Herrero-Hernández, E.; Andrades, M.S.; Eguren, G.B.; Sánchez-Martín, M.J.; Rodríguez-Cruz, M.S.; Marín-Benito, J.M. Organic amendment for the recovery of vineyard soils: Effects of a single application on soil properties over two years. Processes 2022, 10, 317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Parihar, C.M.; Yadav, M.R.; Jat, S.L.; Singh, A.K.; Kumar, B.; Pradhan, S.; Chakraborty, D.; Jat, M.L.; Jat, R.K.; Saharawat, Y.S.; et al. Long term effect of conservation agriculture in maize rotations on total organic carbon, physical and biological properties of a sandy loam soil in north-western Indo-Gangetic Plains. Soil Till. Res. 2016, 161, 116–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Saikia, R.; Sharma, S.; Thind, H.S.; Sidhu, H.S.; Yadvinder-Singh. Temporal changes in biochemical indicators of soil quality in response to tillage, crop residue and green manure management in a rice-wheat system. Ecol. Indic. 2019, 103, 383–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhao, J.; Liu, S.; Zhou, X.; Xia, Q.; Liu, X.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, J.; Cai, Z.; Huang, X. Reductive soil disinfestation incorporated with organic residue combination significantly improves soil microbial activity and functional diversity than sole residue incorporation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 104, 7573–7588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Lundgren, B. Fluorescein diacetate as a stain of metabolically active bacteria in soil. Oikas 1981, 36, 17–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Saini, A.; Aggarwal, N.; Sharma, A.; Yadav, A. Actinomycetes: A source of lignocellulolytic enzymes. Enzyme Res. 2015, 2015, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Kamimura, N.; Takahashi, K.; Mori, K.; Araki, T.; Fujita, M.; Higuchi, Y.; Masai, E. Bacterial catabolism of lignin-derived aromatics: New findings in a recent decade: Update on bacterial lignin catabolism. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 9, 679–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Sharma, S.; Kaur, J.; Thind, H.S.; Singh, Y.; Sharma, N.; Kirandip. A framework for refining soil microbial indices as bioindicators during decomposition of various organic residues in a sandy loam soil. J. Appl. Nat. Sci. 2015, 7, 700–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Stegarescu, G.; Reintam, E.; Tontutare, T. Cover crop residues effect on soil structural stability and phosphatase activity. Acta Agric. Scand. B. Soil Plant Sci. 2021, 71, 992–1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Carlson, J.; Saxena, J.; Basta, N.; Hundal, L.; Busalachi, D.; Dick, R.P. Application of organic amendments to restore degraded soil: Effects on soil microbial properties. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015, 187, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Wang, J.; Xiong, Z.; Kuzyakov, Y. Biochar stability in soil: Meta-analysis of decomposition and priming effects. Glob. Chang. Biol. Bioenergy 2016, 8, 512–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Jindo, K.; Audette, Y.; Olivares, F.L.; Canellas, L.P.; Smith, D.S.; Vorony, R.P. Biotic and abiotic effects of soil organic matter on the phytoavailable phosphorus in soils: A review. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 2023, 10, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Liu, X.; Han, R.; Cao, Y.; Turner, B.L.; Ma, L.Q. Enhancing phytate availability in soils and phytate-P acquisition by plants: A review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 9196–9219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Sharma, S.; Dhaliwal, S.S. Effect of sewage sludge and rice straw compost on yield, micronutrient availability and soil quality under rice–wheat system. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2019, 50, 1943–1954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zeng, D.H.; Mao, R.; Chang, S.X. Carbon mineralization of tree leaf litter and crop residues from poplar-based agroforestry systems in Northeast China: A laboratory study. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2010, 44, 133–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Wu, J.; Zhang, H.; Cheng, X.; Liu, G. Nitrogen addition stimulates litter decomposition rate: From the perspective of the combined effect of soil environment and litter quality. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2023, 179, 108992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Hadas, A.; Kautsky, L.; Goek, M.; Kara, E.E. Rates of decomposition of plant residues and available nitrogen in soil, related to residue composition through simulation of carbon and nitrogen turnover. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2004, 36, 255–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Wagner, G.H.; Wolf, D.C. Carbon Transformations and Soil Organic Matter Formation. In Principles and Applications of Soil Microbiology; Sylvia, D.M., Fuhrman, J.J., Hartel, R.G., Zuberer, D.A., Eds.; Prentice-Hall: New York, NY, USA, 1998; pp. 218–258. [Google Scholar]
  78. Kalbitz, K.; Kaiser, K.; Bargholz, J.; Dardenne, P. Lignin degradation controls the production of dissolved organic matter in decomposing folia litter. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2006, 57, 504–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Pastorelli, R.; Costagil, V.; Forte, C.; Viti, C.; Rompato, B.; Nannini, G.; Certini, G. Litter decomposition: Little evidence of the “home-field advantage” in a mountain forest in Italy. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2021, 159, 108300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 13 01719 g001a 550Agronomy 13 01719 g001b 550
Figure 1. Changes in dehydrogenase activity (µg TPF g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop (c) residues. Error bars denote standard deviation.
Figure 1. Changes in dehydrogenase activity (µg TPF g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop (c) residues. Error bars denote standard deviation.
Agronomy 13 01719 g001aAgronomy 13 01719 g001b
Agronomy 13 01719 g002 550
Figure 2. Changes in FDA activity (µg flourescein g−1 20 min−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Figure 2. Changes in FDA activity (µg flourescein g−1 20 min−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Agronomy 13 01719 g002
Agronomy 13 01719 g003a 550Agronomy 13 01719 g003b 550
Figure 3. Changes in acid phosphatase activity(µg PNP g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Figure 3. Changes in acid phosphatase activity(µg PNP g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Agronomy 13 01719 g003aAgronomy 13 01719 g003b
Agronomy 13 01719 g004a 550Agronomy 13 01719 g004b 550
Figure 4. Changes in alkaline phosphatase activity (µg PNP g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Figure 4. Changes in alkaline phosphatase activity (µg PNP g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Agronomy 13 01719 g004aAgronomy 13 01719 g004b
Agronomy 13 01719 g005a 550Agronomy 13 01719 g005b 550
Figure 5. Changes in phytase activity (µg P hydrolyzed g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Figure 5. Changes in phytase activity (µg P hydrolyzed g−1 h−1) as influenced by tree litters (a), cereals (b), other crop residues (c). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Agronomy 13 01719 g005aAgronomy 13 01719 g005b
Table
Table 1. List of the treatments used for the study and respective crop residue description.
Table 1. List of the treatments used for the study and respective crop residue description.
TreatmentsLatin NameEnglish NameFamily
T0-Control-
T1Melia azedarachDekMeliaceae
T2Azadirachta indicaNeemMeliaceae
T3Populus albaPoplarSalicaceae
T4Avena sativaOatPoaceae
T5Zea maysMaizePoaceae
T6Triticum aestivumWheat strawPoaceae
T7Oryza sativaRice strawPoaceae
T8Hordeum vulgareBarleyPoaceae
T9Lens culinarisMasarFabaceae
T10Saccharum officinarumSugarcane TrashPoaceae
T11Brassica junceaMustardBrassicaceae
Table
Table 2. Biochemical analysis of different crop residues.
Table 2. Biochemical analysis of different crop residues.
Crop ResiduesCEL (%)HEM
(%)		LIG
(%)		TSS
(mg/L)		ST
(mg/L)		C
(%)		N
(%)		C/N
Tree residues
Melia azedarach17.67.809.500.580.1744.64.829
Azadirachta indica39.616.523.90.550.1439.82.1918
Populus alba45.410.830.30.460.1127.30.91230
Cereals
Avena sativa27.121.314.80.840.1642.01.3232
Zea mays39.522.518.90.780.1238.20.6262
Triticum aestivum38.520.715.00.790.1038.30.8148
Oryza sativa35.123.518.20.670.1742.00.39106
Hordeum vulgare33.720.130.60.700.0835.60.7150
Other crop residues
Lens culinaris18.422.311.10.660.1834.11.7120
Saccharum officinarum23.920.320.00.620.1137.30.91441
Brassica juncea21.415.619.50.600.1040.51.1834
CEL—Cellulose; HEM—Hemicelluloses; LIG—Lignin; TSS—Total Soluble Solids; ST—Starch; C—Total Carbon; N—Total Nitrogen.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sharma, S.; Sharma, N.; Gupta, N.; Angmo, P.; Siddiqui, M.H.; Rahman, M.A. Impact of Chemically Diverse Organic Residue Amendment on Soil Enzymatic Activities in a Sandy Loam Soil. Agronomy 2023, 13, 1719. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071719

AMA Style

Sharma S, Sharma N, Gupta N, Angmo P, Siddiqui MH, Rahman MA. Impact of Chemically Diverse Organic Residue Amendment on Soil Enzymatic Activities in a Sandy Loam Soil. Agronomy. 2023; 13(7):1719. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071719

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sharma, Sandeep, Neha Sharma, Nihar Gupta, Padma Angmo, Manzer H. Siddiqui, and Md Atikur Rahman. 2023. "Impact of Chemically Diverse Organic Residue Amendment on Soil Enzymatic Activities in a Sandy Loam Soil" Agronomy 13, no. 7: 1719. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071719

APA Style

Sharma, S., Sharma, N., Gupta, N., Angmo, P., Siddiqui, M. H., & Rahman, M. A. (2023). Impact of Chemically Diverse Organic Residue Amendment on Soil Enzymatic Activities in a Sandy Loam Soil. Agronomy, 13(7), 1719. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071719

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop