کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
677358 | 1459848 | 2012 | 9 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |

The rapid development of biogas production will result in increased use of biogas residues as organic fertilizers. However, control of microbial activity by organic fertilizers remains a challenge for modern land use, especially with respect to mitigating greenhouse effects and increasing C sequestration in soil. To address this issue, we compared CO2 emissions, microbial growth and extracellular enzyme activities in agricultural soil amended with biogas residues (BGR) versus maize straw (MST). Over a 21 day incubation period, 6.4% of organic C added was mineralised and evolved as CO2 with BGR and 30% with MST. As shown by the substrate-induced growth respiration approach, BGR and MST significantly decreased the specific microbial growth rate (μ) and increased the microbial biomass C in the soil, indicating a clear shift in the microbial community to slower-growing microorganisms. Because of the reduced availability of C associated with the less labile C and more lignin in biogas residues, observed μ values and microbial biomass C were lower after BGR application than after MST application. After 21 days incubation, BGR had no effect on the activity of three extracellular enzymes: β-glucosidase and cellobiohydrolase, both of which are involved in cellulose decomposition; and xylanase, which is involved in hemicellulose decomposition. In contrast, MST significantly increased the activity of these three enzymes. The application of biogas residues in short-term experiment leads to a 34% increase in soil C content and slower C turnover as compared to common maize residues.
► Biogas residues (BGR) applied to soil as organic fertilizers were decomposed 2.5 times slower as compared to maize straw.
► BGR application stimulated mainly slow-growing soil microorganisms.
► In contrast to maize straw the BGR did not increase the activity of cellulose-degrading soil enzymes.
► BGR leads to slower C turnover and a 34% increase in C sequestration versus common maize straw.
Journal: Biomass and Bioenergy - Volume 45, October 2012, Pages 221–229