| Title | The response of soil multi-functionality to agricultural management practices can be predicted by key soil abiotic and biotic properties |
| Publication Type | Journal Article |
| Year of Publication | 2021 |
| Authors | Nazaries L., Singh B.P, Sarker J.R, Fang Y.Y, Klein M., Singh B.K |
| Journal | Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment |
| Volume | 307 |
| Pagination | 13 |
| Date Published | Feb |
| Type of Article | Article |
| ISBN Number | 0167-8809 |
| Accession Number | WOS:000595150400007 |
| Keywords | agricultural management practices, Agriculture, biodiversity, carbon, Community structure, crop-rotation, ecosystem, Environmental Sciences & Ecology, extraction method, MICROBIAL, microbial abundance, microbial communities, multi-functionality, multifunctionality, nitrogen, organic-matter, residue management, soil, soil health, Soil nutrients, tillage |
| Abstract | Soil organisms play an essential role in ecosystem functioning, including nutrient cycling and climate regulation. Most of soil functions have a microbial origin and recent findings suggest that various microbial community attributes (e.g. diversity, composition, abundance) are linked to the rate of soil functions in natural ecosystems. However, no such evidence is available from the agronomically managed systems. The types of agronomic practice and mechanisms (biotic vs. abiotic) that could impact microbial regulation of soil functions remain poorly understood. We collected soil samples from three long-term field trials across three geographically distinct regions with multiple management treatments (e.g. tillage, stubble management and fertiliser application) and measured the response of a number soil abiotic (e.g. soil aggregate stability, pH, nutrient status) and biotic (e.g. bacterial and fungal community structure, abundance of various microbial taxa) variables, and soil functions linked to nutrient cycling and nutrient availability. We used information theory and multi-model inference to identify key biotic and abiotic predictors of soil functions, and to model their response to land management through a multi-functionality index. Results indicated that no-till treatment generally impacted microbial community (42% decrease in the average gene copy number of all microbes compared to other management practices) and promoted soil structure (27% increase in the small aggregate fraction) but reduced some process rates, while stubble retention increased nutrient availability in the presence of fertilisation (59% on average). But these responses were site specific. The multi-functionality index associated with nutrient cycling declined under no-till system (47% on average) but increased when no-till was combined with stubble retention (49% on average) and fertiliser application (44%). Our modelling suggested that the best models that explained most of the variation in MF always included both abiotic and biotic variables. Amongst the latter, fungal community structure and beta(beta)-Proteobacteria abundance were of importance as the model's R2 dropped by 12% when biotic attributes were removed providing evidence that the link between microbial community and soil functions was maintained in agricultural soils. This study provides support for the inclusion of microbial data in decision support systems for sustainable farming practices.
|
| Short Title | Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. |
| Alternate Journal | Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. |
stdClass Object
(
[vid] => 628
[uid] => 11
[title] => The response of soil multi-functionality to agricultural management practices can be predicted by key soil abiotic and biotic properties
[log] =>
[status] => 1
[comment] => 0
[promote] => 1
[sticky] => 0
[nid] => 550
[type] => biblio
[language] => und
[created] => 1616411846
[changed] => 1616411846
[tnid] => 0
[translate] => 0
[revision_timestamp] => 1616411846
[revision_uid] => 11
[biblio_type] => 102
[biblio_number] =>
[biblio_other_number] =>
[biblio_sort_title] => response of soil multifunctionality to agricultural management p
[biblio_secondary_title] => Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
[biblio_tertiary_title] =>
[biblio_edition] =>
[biblio_publisher] =>
[biblio_place_published] =>
[biblio_year] => 2021
[biblio_volume] => 307
[biblio_pages] => 13
[biblio_date] => Feb
[biblio_isbn] => 0167-8809
[biblio_lang] => English
[biblio_abst_e] => Soil organisms play an essential role in ecosystem functioning, including nutrient cycling and climate regulation. Most of soil functions have a microbial origin and recent findings suggest that various microbial community attributes (e.g. diversity, composition, abundance) are linked to the rate of soil functions in natural ecosystems. However, no such evidence is available from the agronomically managed systems. The types of agronomic practice and mechanisms (biotic vs. abiotic) that could impact microbial regulation of soil functions remain poorly understood. We collected soil samples from three long-term field trials across three geographically distinct regions with multiple management treatments (e.g. tillage, stubble management and fertiliser application) and measured the response of a number soil abiotic (e.g. soil aggregate stability, pH, nutrient status) and biotic (e.g. bacterial and fungal community structure, abundance of various microbial taxa) variables, and soil functions linked to nutrient cycling and nutrient availability. We used information theory and multi-model inference to identify key biotic and abiotic predictors of soil functions, and to model their response to land management through a multi-functionality index. Results indicated that no-till treatment generally impacted microbial community (42% decrease in the average gene copy number of all microbes compared to other management practices) and promoted soil structure (27% increase in the small aggregate fraction) but reduced some process rates, while stubble retention increased nutrient availability in the presence of fertilisation (59% on average). But these responses were site specific. The multi-functionality index associated with nutrient cycling declined under no-till system (47% on average) but increased when no-till was combined with stubble retention (49% on average) and fertiliser application (44%). Our modelling suggested that the best models that explained most of the variation in MF always included both abiotic and biotic variables. Amongst the latter, fungal community structure and beta(beta)-Proteobacteria abundance were of importance as the model's R2 dropped by 12% when biotic attributes were removed providing evidence that the link between microbial community and soil functions was maintained in agricultural soils. This study provides support for the inclusion of microbial data in decision support systems for sustainable farming practices.
[biblio_abst_f] =>
[biblio_full_text] => 0
[biblio_url] =>
[biblio_issue] =>
[biblio_type_of_work] => Article
[biblio_accession_number] => WOS:000595150400007
[biblio_call_number] =>
[biblio_notes] => ISI Document Delivery No.: OZ8DP
Times Cited: 0
Cited Reference Count: 70
Nazaries, Loic Singh, Bhupinder Pal Sarker, Jharna Rani Fang, Yunying Klein, Marcus Singh, Brajesh K.
Singh, Bhupinder Pal/D-8670-2017
Singh, Bhupinder Pal/0000-0003-1952-9070; Singh, Brajesh/0000-0003-4413-4185
Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC)in AustraliaGrains R&D Corp [DAN00169]; Australian Research councilAustralian Research Council [DP170104634, DP190103714]
This research was supported by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC)in Australia (project number: DAN00169). BKS work in soil microbial community was also supported by the Australian Research council (DP170104634 and DP190103714). The authors would like to acknowledge Satvinder Singh Bawa, Xinhua He, Dougal Pottie, Kamal Hossain, Shidhwaretho Paul, Michael McLean, Mathew Coggan, Donald Browne, and Ian Menz for their assistance in the field and/or laboratory. We also thank the following for allowing access to the trial sites: Central West Farming Systems (Diana Parson, James Mwendwa in Condobolin); Ram Dalal (Hermitage) and Francis Hoyle (Merredin). Finally, we are thankful to Audrey Page for her input on food safety.
47
Elsevier
Amsterdam
1873-2305
[biblio_custom1] =>
[biblio_custom2] =>
[biblio_custom3] =>
[biblio_custom4] =>
[biblio_custom5] =>
[biblio_custom6] =>
[biblio_custom7] => 107206
[biblio_research_notes] =>
[biblio_number_of_volumes] =>
[biblio_short_title] => Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
[biblio_alternate_title] => Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
[biblio_original_publication] =>
[biblio_reprint_edition] =>
[biblio_translated_title] =>
[biblio_section] =>
[biblio_citekey] => 550
[biblio_coins] =>
[biblio_doi] =>
[biblio_issn] =>
[biblio_auth_address] => [Nazaries, Loic; Klein, Marcus; Singh, Brajesh K.] Western Sydney Univ, Hawkesbury Inst Environm, Penrith, NSW 2751, Australia. [Singh, Bhupinder Pal; Sarker, Jharna Rani; Fang, Yunying] Elizabeth Macarthur Agr Inst, NSW Dept Primary Ind, Menangle, NSW 2568, Australia. [Sarker, Jharna Rani] Sher e Bangla Agr Univ, Dept Soil Sci, Dhaka 1207, Bangladesh. [Singh, Brajesh K.] Western Sydney Univ, Global Ctr Land Based Innovat, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW 2751, Australia.
Singh, BK (corresponding author), Western Sydney Univ, Hawkesbury Inst Environm, Penrith, NSW 2751, Australia.
b.singh@westernsydney.edu.au
[biblio_remote_db_name] =>
[biblio_remote_db_provider] =>
[biblio_label] =>
[biblio_access_date] =>
[biblio_refereed] =>
[biblio_md5] => 88f2b89b6f997b853ba702547631fcad
[biblio_formats] => Array
(
[biblio_abst_e] => full_html
[biblio_abst_f] => full_html
[biblio_notes] => full_html
[biblio_research_notes] => full_html
[biblio_custom1] => full_html
[biblio_custom2] => full_html
[biblio_custom3] => full_html
[biblio_custom4] => full_html
[biblio_custom5] => full_html
[biblio_custom6] => full_html
[biblio_custom7] => full_html
[biblio_coins] => full_html
[biblio_auth_address] => full_html
)
[biblio_type_name] => Journal Article
[biblio_contributors] => Array
(
[0] => Array
(
[nid] => 550
[vid] => 628
[cid] => 1381
[auth_type] => 1
[auth_category] => 1
[rank] => 0
[merge_cid] => 0
[aka] => 0
[alt_form] => 0
[drupal_uid] =>
[name] => Nazaries, L.
[lastname] => Nazaries
[firstname] => L.
[prefix] =>
[suffix] =>
[initials] =>
[affiliation] =>
[literal] => 0
[md5] => 49833ef7aced1709915d7c5063ab88e1
)
[1] => Array
(
[nid] => 550
[vid] => 628
[cid] => 807
[auth_type] => 1
[auth_category] => 1
[rank] => 1
[merge_cid] => 0
[aka] => 0
[alt_form] => 0
[drupal_uid] =>
[name] => Singh, B. P.
[lastname] => Singh
[firstname] => B.
[prefix] =>
[suffix] =>
[initials] => P.
[affiliation] =>
[literal] => 0
[md5] => 91217475dacc033f4a7c6ae54b6c1383
)
[2] => Array
(
[nid] => 550
[vid] => 628
[cid] => 1382
[auth_type] => 1
[auth_category] => 1
[rank] => 2
[merge_cid] => 0
[aka] => 0
[alt_form] => 0
[drupal_uid] =>
[name] => Sarker, J. R.
[lastname] => Sarker
[firstname] => J.
[prefix] =>
[suffix] =>
[initials] => R.
[affiliation] =>
[literal] => 0
[md5] => 6ff5985cd7fa68d2e6cc62cfe5db3b59
)
[3] => Array
(
[nid] => 550
[vid] => 628
[cid] => 1383
[auth_type] => 1
[auth_category] => 1
[rank] => 3
[merge_cid] => 0
[aka] => 0
[alt_form] => 0
[drupal_uid] =>
[name] => Fang, Y. Y.
[lastname] => Fang
[firstname] => Y.
[prefix] =>
[suffix] =>
[initials] => Y.
[affiliation] =>
[literal] => 0
[md5] => 205db04c7a777f3620daedf2c5f41ce2
)
[4] => Array
(
[nid] => 550
[vid] => 628
[cid] => 1384
[auth_type] => 1
[auth_category] => 1
[rank] => 4
[merge_cid] => 0
[aka] => 0
[alt_form] => 0
[drupal_uid] =>
[name] => Klein, M.
[lastname] => Klein
[firstname] => M.
[prefix] =>
[suffix] =>
[initials] =>
[affiliation] =>
[literal] => 0
[md5] => 6852f0ba13562e5e60aa2a153964f4a5
)
[5] => Array
(
[nid] => 550
[vid] => 628
[cid] => 167
[auth_type] => 1
[auth_category] => 1
[rank] => 5
[merge_cid] => 0
[aka] => 0
[alt_form] => 0
[drupal_uid] =>
[name] => Singh, B. K.
[lastname] => Singh
[firstname] => B.
[prefix] =>
[suffix] =>
[initials] => K.
[affiliation] =>
[literal] => 0
[md5] => b59c9500754b536a90eabcf3ebaa13ea
)
)
[biblio_keywords] => Array
(
[1767] => agricultural management practices
[421] => Agriculture
[79] => biodiversity
[135] => carbon
[119] => Community structure
[1603] => crop-rotation
[133] => ecosystem
[450] => Environmental Sciences & Ecology
[176] => extraction method
[514] => MICROBIAL
[1768] => microbial abundance
[29] => microbial communities
[1766] => multi-functionality
[1574] => multifunctionality
[68] => nitrogen
[51] => organic-matter
[151] => residue management
[83] => soil
[31] => soil health
[1387] => Soil nutrients
[1145] => tillage
)
[body] => Array
(
)
[rdf_mapping] => Array
(
[rdftype] => Array
(
[0] => sioc:Item
[1] => foaf:Document
)
[title] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => dc:title
)
)
[created] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => dc:date
[1] => dc:created
)
[datatype] => xsd:dateTime
[callback] => date_iso8601
)
[changed] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => dc:modified
)
[datatype] => xsd:dateTime
[callback] => date_iso8601
)
[body] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => content:encoded
)
)
[uid] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => sioc:has_creator
)
[type] => rel
)
[name] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => foaf:name
)
)
[comment_count] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => sioc:num_replies
)
[datatype] => xsd:integer
)
[last_activity] => Array
(
[predicates] => Array
(
[0] => sioc:last_activity_date
)
[datatype] => xsd:dateTime
[callback] => date_iso8601
)
)
[name] => clare.cameron
[picture] => 0
[data] => a:13:{s:16:"ckeditor_default";s:1:"t";s:20:"ckeditor_show_toggle";s:1:"t";s:14:"ckeditor_width";s:4:"100%";s:13:"ckeditor_lang";s:2:"en";s:18:"ckeditor_auto_lang";s:1:"t";s:19:"biblio_show_profile";i:0;s:19:"biblio_my_pubs_menu";i:0;s:21:"biblio_contributor_id";s:1:"0";s:22:"biblio_id_change_count";s:1:"0";s:17:"biblio_user_style";s:6:"system";s:18:"biblio_baseopenurl";s:0:"";s:18:"biblio_openurl_sid";s:0:"";s:19:"biblio_crossref_pid";s:0:"";}
[entity_view_prepared] => 1
)