Enzymatic Activities of Bok Choy (<i>Brassica rapa</i> subsp. <i>Chinensis</i>) Grown Soil with the Amendment of Sandwich Compost

Phooi, Chooi Lin; Azman, Elisa Azura; Ismail, Roslan

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7311957

International Journal of Agronomy

On this page

Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion Data Availability Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 7311957 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7311957

Enzymatic Activities of Bok Choy (Brassica rapa subsp. Chinensis) Grown Soil with the Amendment of Sandwich Compost

Chooi Lin Phooi,¹Elisa Azura Azman,¹and Roslan Ismail^2,3

Academic Editor: Addi Mohamed

Received06 Apr 2022

Revised07 Aug 2022

Accepted17 Aug 2022

Published12 Sept 2022

Abstract

Soil enzymes ensure our food security, yet they are vulnerable to abiotic stresses. Solving the global issues of food waste by amending the Sandwich compost can be a great solution to ensure food security. Food waste Sandwich compost substrate (as soil amendment) and leachate (as seed priming solution and liquid fertilizer) were used to grow Bok Choy for 4 growing cycles, where soil pH, cation exchangeable capacity, moisture content, aggregate stability, and enzyme activity were determined. The Sandwich compost substrate amendment increased soil pH close to neutral and CEC up to 1.5-fold. Anaerobic Sandwich compost substrate-amended soil reduced soil catalase activity. Still, it steadily increased during the growing cycle. The Sandwich compost substrate amendment soil sustained the aggregate stability for 4 growing cycles. On the flip side, aggregate stability without the Sandwich compost substrate amended soil declined from the growing cycle to the next growing cycle. All variables were positively correlated except catalase activity. Henceforward, Sandwich compost substrate is recommended to improve soil quality in the aspects of pH, CEC urease activity, and dehydrogenase activity.

1. Introduction

Soil enzymes are the vital drivers for food security. Starved of soil enzymes, the nutrient cycle will be interrupted due to the failure of the plant nutrients uptake. Soil enzyme activity is valuable to the environment, especially pollution and aeration, in which they work. Soil enzyme activity is closely correlated to the amount of soil organic matter, plant, soil, root, and microbial biomass [1]. Besides, soil enzyme activity is affected by abiotic factors such as pH, temperature, moisture content, and soil cultural management, which is largely affected by anthropogenic pollutants (such as zinc) and commercial fertilizer [2].

Catalase is a hydrogen peroxide oxidoreductase and is deemed an intracellular enzyme [3]. It is typically found in aerobic bacteria and most facultative anaerobes; however, it is absent in obligate anaerobes. The role of catalase is to defend the cells from oxidative damage [4]. Soil catalase activity is a soil pollution indicator. Hence, the studied soil is considered low in pollutants if the range lies between 0.23–0.36 mL and 0.1 mol L⁻¹ KMnO₄ g⁻¹ [5]; Tang et al [6]. Besides, catalase had a significant correlation to organic carbon and reduced soil depth [5, 7]. Catalase activity in subsoil (50–60 cm) has lowered by 21–43% than surface layer soil. Catalase activity is reduced by both Cr(III) and Cr(VI), however, Cr(III) has stronger inhibition of enzymatic activity than Cr(VI) [8, 18]. Lower catalase activity in urban soil indicates lower tolerance to oxidative stress and lower soil fertility for plant growth.

Since microorganisms hydrolyze urea enzymatically, and ureases can be found in enormous quantities in biologically active soil. Being an extracellular enzyme, urease is responsible for the nitrogen (N) and carbon (C) cycles [9]. It is also vital for ammonification in the N cycle. Urease catalyzes the hydrolysis of urea to ammonia (NH₃) and carbon dioxide (CO₂). The substrates for ammonification are uric acid, urea, and organic N [9, 10]. High ammonium content is stated to be as high urease content. Urease activity is also affected by soil clay content and is persistent in dry soil and low temperature [11]. Urease activity is contributed by the excretion of microbes, root residues, and organic matter [12]. Urease activity is found to be positively correlated with total N [13, 14]. The low total N stored in Beijing urban soil was shown by the low urease activity [15]. Urease activity also reduced with the increased depth from ground level.

Brassica crops like Bok Choy provide a variety of phytonutrients, vitamins, minerals, and fiber to people [16]. Leafy vegetables have short growing cycles (3 to 4 weeks from plantation to harvest) and are demanded by people. Brassica sp. contains health-promoting compounds such as polyphenols, carotenoids, and glucosinolates (a group of sulfur and N-containing secondary plant metabolites [17, 18]. They play an important role in plant defense against herbivorous insects and microbial pathogens [19–21]. In Malaysia, Brassica sp. production was 0.15 Mt in 2019, making it 15% of the total vegetable production [22]. With the high demand and nutrients of Bok Choy, it was selected as the test crop.

Anaerobic Sandwich compost is produced with a wide range of beneficial microbes in a short period of time which is in the range of 7–21 days [23]. Sandwich compost enhanced soil urease activity in coffee production [24, 25]. Furthermore, organic matter enhanced soil aggregate stability and eventually brought about the improvement of microbial agents (W. [26]. Soil aggregate stability is affected by moisture content [27]. Therefore, the objective of this study is to determine the effect and relationship between soil pH, cation exchangeable capacity, moisture content, aggregate stability, and enzyme activity, through Sandwich compost amendment on Bok Choy.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Site

The study was carried out in a net house, Field 10, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) (2°59′31.4″N 101°42′52.1″E), Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. The soil was collected from the study site under the following conditions (Table 1).

2.2. Treatments

The experimental set-up was conducted, where nine (9) treatments with three (3) replications were each carried out for four (4) growing cycles, which is the same as the previous study [28]. Thus, a total of 108 experimental units were involved. The experiment was conducted as destructive sampling. The treatments evaluated are listed in Table 2.

Sandwich compost was prepared with cooked and uncooked food waste [25, 28, 29]. The Sandwich compost consist of substrate and leachate (Table 3). The 280 dwarf types of Bok Choy seed were from the green eagle [30]. One of seed was primed in 500 mL of overnight tap water (Table 3) with the addition of 1 mL of Sandwich compost leachate (0.2%) for 3 hours [31, 32] before being sown in peat moss. The mixed urban soil with Sandwich compost substrate (1 : 1 ratio) was filled with a weight of 1.3 kg per polybag in a 10 × 10 cm polybag, covered with 0.7 kg urban soil, and covered with a layer of plastic gunny bag. Sandwich compost substrate amended soil was incubated for 45 days. The seedlings were transplanted into the soil after seven (7) days of emerging. A 0.2% of Sandwich compost leachate [33] was applied at every five-day interval beginning from 8 days after transplanting (DAT).

The oven-dried Sandwich compost sample was ground with an electrical stainless-steel coffee grinder and deposited in a well-packed plastic bag for further analysis. The sample (0.25 g) was digested using a 1 : 1 ratio of H₂SO₄ and H₂O₂ at 350°C until the content turns colorless. After cooling the contents, the volume is made up of the distilled water and filtered through No. 1 filter paper for further analysis including N, P, K, Mg, Ca, Fe, and Al. The concentration was determined by using ICP except N. Nitrogen was determined by distillation and titration. A 10 mL sample and 10 mL 30% NaOH were added to the distillation apparatus. An indicator solution, 10 mL of boric acid mixed indicator, was added to an Erlenmeyer flask. The distillation process had changed the color of the 2% boric acid mixed indicator from purple color to green color. About 50 mL of green solution was ready for the next step. The green color solution will be titrated with 0.01 N HCl to give purple color and the used HCl will be recorded.

2.3. Soil Physiochemical Analysis

The soil moisture content was determined gravimetrically [34]. A 20 g of fresh soil was oven-dried in a crucible at 105°C for 24–36 hours, cooled in a desiccator, and weighed. The data were expressed as %. The remaining soil sample was air-dried and crushed using a mortar and pestle in an anticlockwise orientation. The sample was sieved gently with a 2 mm sieve for further analysis.

Soil pH was determined using a 1 : 2.5 (w/v) soil-water extract [34] with a glass electrode HI2211 pH/ORP meter. A 100 mL plastic vial with a cap was filled with 10 g of soil and 25 mL of distilled water and shaken using an orbital shaker for 30 minutes at 180 rpm. To set down the soil, it stood for 1–24 hour(s) and the PH was tested with a pH meter.

Aggregate stability (%) was analyzed with the wet sieving method [35]. A 5 g sample of 1 to 2 mm air-dried soil was weighed and placed in the wet sieving sieve. The sample was premoisturized with a water sprayer. The can was then filled with three-quarters of distilled water. The sample was wet sieved for 10 minutes. The sample remaining on the sieve was transferred to a dish with slow and continuous flow of tap water. The sample was oven-dried at 105°C for 24 hours and the dry aggregate was weighed (W). The sample was washed under tap water on the 0.25 nm sieve until the color turned clear. The sample remaining on the sieve was oven-dried at 105°C for 24 hours and weighed (S). The calculation is as follows:

Cation exchange capacity was determined by using the leaching method [36]. The leaching tube was layered with glass wool, filter paper, 10 g of air-dried soil, and filter paper. A 100 mL of pH 7 1 N ammonium acetate was leached for 10 ± 3 seconds per drop to a 100 mL volumetric flask. The extractant was made up of pH 7 1 N ammonium acetate. After that, 100 mL of 95% ethanol leached for 10 ± 3 seconds per drop. To deform the cation exchange capacity, 100 mL of 0.05 M K₂SO₄ was leached with speed. The extractant was then determined using a distillation method. A 10 mL of 30% NaOH and 10 mL of extractant were distilled with 10 mL of boric acid with an indicator mixture. The purple color of boric acid with the indicator mixture was then turned green and collected after distilling up to 50 mL. The green color solution was then titrated with 0.01 N HCl. The used HCl was recorded. The calculation is as follows:

2.4. Soil Enzyme Activity Analysis

Back-titrating residual H₂O₂ measured catalase activity with KmnO₄ [12], p. 323; [5, 37]. A 2 g of soil sample was added to 40 mL of distilled water with 5 mL of 0.3% H₂O₂ solution, shaken for 20 min (180 rpm), and then 5 mL of 1.5 mol/L of H₂SO₄ was added. The solution was filtered and titrated using 0.02 mol L⁻¹ of KmnO₄. The reacted amount of 0.02 mol L⁻¹ of KMnO₄, calculated per gram of dry soil, was used to express catalase activity.

Dehydrogenase activity was measured using the classical triphenyl tetrazolium chloride method [38]. A 5 g of sieved soil, 0.4 g of CaCO₃, 1 mL of 1.5% 2,3,5-triphenyl tetrazolium chloride (TTC), and 2.5 mL of pure water were added and mixed well in a test tube. The tubes were sealed tightly and incubated for 24 h at 37°C in the dark. The product 1,3,5-triphenyl formazan (TPF), from the reduction of TTC, was extracted by using methanol, and additional methanol was added to make the sample volume of 50 mL. The TPF concentration was measured by the spectrophotometric method at 485 nm, and methanol was used in the reference cell. The DHA activity was expressed as TPF g⁻¹ h⁻¹.

Urease activity was determined using urea as the substrate [12], p. 296; [39]. The soil mixture, including 5 g of soil, 1 mL of toluene, 10 mL of 10% urea solution, and 20 mL of citrate buffer pH 6 was incubated at 37°C for 24 h. A 4 mL of sodium phenolate (20 mL of phenolate solution, 62.5 mL of liquefied phenol, 2 mL of methanol, 187.5 mL of acetone and made up with ethanol to 100 mL), 20 mL of 27% NaOH made up with H₂O in a 100 mL volumetric flask, 3 mL of 0.9% sodium hypochlorite, and 20 mL H₂O were added to the 3 mL filtrate, the mixture is left to stand for 20 min until a blue color appeared. Ammonium sulfate was used as a calibration curve. A 0.4717 g of ammonium sulfate in 1000 mL contained 0.1 mg of N mL⁻¹. The released NH₃–N was measured spectrophotometrically at 578 nm within an hour. The urease release rate was expressed as mg NH₃–N.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The recorded data were analyzed with a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) using package “agricolae” under R studio, version 4.2.1 [40]. When F was significant at the level, treatment means were compared and separated using Duncan Multiple Range Test (DMRT). Pearson’s correlation was analyzed by the package “corrplot” [41]. The results were expressed as a mean ± standard error of measurement.

3. Results

3.1. Soil Physicochemical Properties

Soil pH had significant interaction between the growing cycle and Sandwich compost amendment (Figure 1). Soil pH of Sandwich compost substrate amended soil significantly increased and was maintained along with the four growing cycles of growing.

Cation exchange capacity (CEC) has no significant interaction between the growing cycle and the Sandwich compost amendment (Figure 2). CEC has significantly decreased in the fourth growing cycle (Figure 2(a)). CEC of Sandwich compost amended soil was significantly higher than unamended soil (Figure 2(b)).

(a)

(b)

Soil moisture content has no significant difference between the growing cycle and Sandwich compost amendment. The second and fourth growing cycles showed significantly higher soil moisture content (Figure 3(a)). Sandwich compost amended soil showed significantly higher soil moisture content (Figure 3(b)) as well.

(a)

(b)

Soil aggregate stability had significant interaction between the growing cycle and the Sandwich compost amendment. Aggregate stability of unamended soil significantly decreased along with the growing cycle period (Figure 4). Soil aggregate stability of T000 has significantly decreased during the growing period, especially during cycle 4. Soil aggregate stability in commercial fertilized soil (T009) also decreased along the growing cycle. Sandwich compost amended soil (T100, T101, T110, and T111) has significantly stronger aggregate stability along the 4 growing cycles.

3.2. Soil Enzyme Activity

Soil enzyme activity such as catalase, dehydrogenase, and urease activities were affected by both Sandwich compost amendment and growing cycles. Catalase activity was significantly stable in the soil without Sandwich compost substrate amendment along with the growing cycles (Figure 5). Sandwich compost substrate amended soil has significantly lower catalase activity compared to unamended soil along with the four growing cycles. Soil catalase activity of Sandwich compost substrate amended soil has significantly increased along with the growing cycles.

Urease activity and dehydrogenase activity have significantly increased with the Sandwich compost substrate amendment. Nevertheless, urease activity decreased during the fourth growing cycle (Figure 6). The application of Sandwich compost leachate has not significantly affected soil urease activity. Dehydrogenase activity of Sandwich compost substrate unamended soil significantly decreased compared to preamended soil (Figure 7).

3.3. Correlation of Soil pH, Moisture Content, Aggregate Stability, CEC, and Enzyme Activity

All variables were positively correlated to one another except for catalase activity (Figure 8). Catalase activity was significantly negatively correlated to all variables except aggregate stability and soil moisture content. Aggregate stability was significantly positively correlated to pH, CEC, dehydrogenase activity, and urease activity.

4. Discussion

The significant shifting of soil pH between 6.0 and 7.0 makes most of the nutrient available to plants [42, 43]. The preamended soil pH (4.0) was not suitable for most plants to grow (Table 1). However, organic matter has the potential to replace liming in the effort of lowering Al toxicity. Therefore, its amendment of the Sandwich compost substrate can be an alternative to liming activity. Soil pH with Sandwich compost substrate amended soil exhibited an optimum plant growth pH range and they sustained four growing cycles [44–46]. Moreover, another soil amendment such as biochar was also able to stabilize the soil pH under drought conditions [47].

Neutralization of pH in Sandwich compost substrate amended soil has improved the efficiency uptake of Fe and Mn in plants [45]. The pH neutralization also reduced the toxicity of the soil. Besides, earthworm survival percentage can be affected by the low pH (pH_KCl 3.4) and the high concentration of Al₂(SO₄)₃ [48]. Thus, the neutralization of pH in the soil will positively impact the survival of earthworms. Besides, soil pH has a positive correlation with microbial biomass [49]. Hence, the shifting of soil pH in Sandwich compost substrate amended soil would increase microbial biomass.

CEC significantly reduced at the fourth growing cycle may be due to soil organic matter (Sandwich compost substrate) content which has reduced after three growing cycles. Sandwich compost substrate is being fully degraded by microbes. In contrast, the longer the composting, the higher the CEC value (51.7–59.8 meq 100 g⁻¹) [50]. Moreover, CEC decreases with soil depth [51].

CEC of Sandwich compost substrate amended soil showed significantly greater than Sandwichcompost substrate unamended ones [52]. CEC was largely affected by the amount of organic matter [53–55] including Sandwich compost substrate. Therefore, large percentages of organic matter contribute to more negative sites (e.g., lignin derivatives including humic-like substances) and thus, a high CEC value [56]. Furthermore, the humification of the Sandwich compost substrate contributed to the phenolic and carboxylic groups and thus increased the CEC [50, 57].

Sandwich compost substrate possibly consisted of high urea for urease to work on it. Nevertheless, the Sandwich compost substrate amendment may be needed to sustain the high urease activity [58, 59]. Organic matter content and microbial biomass improved urease activity [60]. Urease is generally found in intercellular living cells and on extracellular clay organic matter (Sandwich compost substrate) surfaces [61].

Landfill leachate toxicity was negatively correlated to enzyme activity, including urease activity [62]. Yet, Sandwich compost leachate was not significantly affected by urease activity. Therefore, Sandwich compost leachate is believed to be nontoxic to soil enzyme activity. However, high urease activity in the topsoil was immobilized by the microbial biomass due to a surplus of hydrolyzed urea-N [11]. Therefore, the plant root morphology and plant nutrient content were significantly lower than the preamended Sandwich compost substrate.

Dehydrogenase activity was strongly suppressed under soil 1.5–4.5 [63]. Low soil pH of Sandwich compost substrate unamended soil suppressed the potential enzyme activity [64] by damaging ion and hydrogen bonds in the enzyme center [65].

Soil pH was significantly positively correlated to CEC (Figure 8) [66, 67]. Sandwich compost substrate amended soil has high CEC and, thus, it has a high H⁺ buffering capacity. Additionally, urease activity and CEC were positively correlated, which is supported by the previous findings [68, 69]. This would be reduced by the ammonia volatilization from urea [70]. However, these findings were contradictory to wetland urease activity [71].

Soil urease activity and pH were significantly positively correlated (Figure 8). Soil pH that is close to neutral demonstrated significantly high urease activity [2, 72]. Increasing soil pH by liming significantly increased soil urease activity and the growth of urease-producing microbes [73]. In older studies, urease activity and pH were not significantly correlated [71]. Soil urease activity was significantly negatively correlated to catalase activity (Figure 7), which is contrary to the findings of the previous study [2]. This may be due to the anaerobes that were predominant in the Sandwich compost substrate amended soil.

Soil moisture plays a vital role in the hydrological cycle during land surface processes. High soil moisture content promotes plant growth. Hence, soil moisture stress deteriorated the plant physiology parameters [74]. On the other hand, the application of plant growth regulators reversed the plant physiology measurement [74]. Therefore, Sandwich compost substrate was the key to improving soil moisture content.

Soil moisture content can directly reflect the soil water holding capacity and indirectly reflect the field capacity [75]. The selected soil type was clay. Clay theoretically holds large amounts of water. Nonetheless, the presence of Sandwich compost substrate in high amounts will shift the key player of water retention. The amount of soil clay content and organic matter (Sandwich compost) is the major control of water retention. For instance, large amounts of clay content with low amounts of organic matter significantly affected the soil water retention and vice versa [76–78]. Sandwich compost substrate as a soil amendment may be able to increase water retention under high soil degradation [76].

Soil aggregate stability provides water storage and filtering, nutrient storage and recycling, as well as physical support and stability [79]. Continuous harvesting affects the soil aggregate. In general, field production soil has significantly lower aggregate stability compared to forest soil [80]. Sandwich compost substrate amended soil showed stronger aggregate stability because of the increased soil organic matter storage by the development of soil aggregate [79, 81]. Amendment of organic matter and plant root length density enhanced soil aggregate stability [82, 83]. However, the low root length of Bok Choy in Sandwich compost substrate amended soil has significant aggregate stability.

Low catalase activity may be due to the production of Sandwich compost substrate in anaerobic conditions. Thus, the anaerobes were predominant in the soil. Moreover, the amendment of organic matter in low doses will not improve soil catalase activity [84]. One-third of the Sandwich compost substrate may be deemed a low dose for improving catalase activity. However, catalase activity was increased with organic matter [60]. The aeration of compost production will affect the catalase activity.

High soil catalase activity of Sandwich compost substrate amended soil during the growing cycles may be due to the soil air increasing along with the growing cycles. High air-filled porosity, oxygen diffusion rate and redox potential, and low water amount and Fe²⁺ content resulted in high soil catalase activity [85, 86]. Moreover, soil water-filled pore space and soil pore size distribution indirectly affect the soil enzyme activity because they affect the fungal and bacterial biomass [87].

Catalase activity was significantly negatively correlated to pH (Figure 8) [88]. Nevertheless, catalase activity was significantly negatively correlated to CEC, which contrasts with the aforementioned findings [88] because catalase may be predominantly present in aerobic organisms [89]. Soil aggregate stability was positively correlated to soil enzyme activity [90].

There were some limitations in this study. Firstly, the soil incubation environment was aerobic without any disturbance, such as tillage, before growing Bok Choy. Thus, the catalase activity was low under the Sandwich compost substrate amendment. Second, the soil texture was limited to clay soil. Third, the tested crop (Bok Choy) was a short-term crop that is demanded by people.

5. Conclusion

The crucial player in soil quality was the Sandwich compost substrate amendment. Aggregate stability was positively correlated to pH, CEC, dehydrogenase activity, urease activity, and soil moisture content. Nevertheless, catalase activity was negatively correlated to aggregate stability, pH, CEC, dehydrogenase activity, urease activity, and soil moisture content. Aggregate stability was reduced with the growing cycle since continuous harvesting disturbs the soil structure significantly. Soil urease activity, dehydrogenase activity, pH, and CEC were significantly improved with the Sandwich compost substrate amendment. Hence, Sandwich compost substrate is proposed to improve soil quality.

Data Availability

The figure data used to support the findings of this study have been deposited in the figshare repository (10.6084/m9.figshare.20493879).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

W. Zhou, X. Sun, S. Li, T. Du, Y. Zheng, and Z. Fan, “Effects of organic mulching on soil aggregate stability and aggregate binding agents in an urban forest in Beijing, China,” Journal of Forestry Research, vol. 33, no. 3, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. S. Olkova and E. Tovstik, “Comparison of natural abiotic factors and pollution influence on the soil enzymative activity,” Ecological Engineering and Environmental Technology, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 42–48, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Santos, R. Vieira, A. Luzio, and L. Félix, “Zebrafish early life stages for toxicological screening: insights from molecular and biochemical markers,” Advances in Molecular Toxicology, vol. 12, pp. 151–179, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Choudhury, D. Moulick, D. Ghosh et al., “Drought-induced oxidative stress in pearl millet (cenchrus americanus L) at seedling stage: survival mechanisms through alteration of morphophysiological and antioxidants activity,” The Life, vol. 12, no. 8, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Stpniewska, A. Wolińska, and J. Ziomek, “Response of soil catalase activity to chromium contamination,” Journal of Environmental Sciences, vol. 21, no. 8, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Tang, H. Xu, F. Song, H. Ge, and S. Yue, “Effects of heavy metals on microorganisms and enzymes in soils of lead-zinc tailing ponds,” Environmental Research, vol. 207, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Shu, A. Ming, J. Zhang et al., “Effects of close-to-nature transformation on soil enzyme activities and organic carbon fractions in cuninghamia lanceolata and pinus massoniana plantations,” Forests, vol. 13, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Ao, X. Chen, T. Deng et al., “Chromium biogeochemical behaviour in soil-plant systems and remediation strategies: a critical review,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 424, Article ID 127233, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Neemisha and S. Sharma, “Soil enzymes and their role in nutrient cycling,” Structure and Functions of Pedosphere, vol. 173, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. S. Strock, “Ammonification,” 2008, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080454054002561?via%3Dihub.
View at: Google Scholar
R. G. Burns, A. H. Pukite, and A. D. McLaren, “Concerning the location and persistence of soil urease,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 308–311, 1972.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Y. Guan, “Soil Enzymes and their research methods,” 1986, https://www.scirp.org/(S(i43dyn45teexjx455qlt3d2q))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=113922.
View at: Google Scholar
W. T. Frankenberger and W. A. Dick, “Relationships between enzyme activities and microbial growth and activity indices in soil,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 945–951, 1983.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. C. Siman, F. V. Andrade, R. R. Passos, M. Littig, and F. d. O. Machado, “Nitrogen fertilizers and volatilization of ammonia, carbonic gas emissions and urease activity,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 426–438, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Li, L. Meng, U. Herman, Z. Lu, and J. Crittenden, “A survey of soil enzyme activities along major roads in Beijing: the implications for traffic corridor green space management,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 12, no. 10, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Li, W. Pang, and Z. Piao, “Omics meets phytonutrients in vegetable brassicas: for nutritional quality breeding,” Horticultural Plant Journal, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 247–254, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. del Carmen Martínez-Ballesta, D. A. Moreno, and M. Carvajal, “The physiological importance of glucosinolates on plant response to abiotic stress in Brassica,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 14, no. 6, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Praveen, A. Pandey, and M. Gupta, “Nitric oxide alters nitrogen metabolism and PIN gene expressions by playing protective role in arsenic challenged Brassica juncea L,” Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, vol. 176, pp. 95–107, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Augustine and N. C. Bisht, “Biotic elicitors and mechanical damage modulate Glucosinolate accumulation by co-ordinated interplay of glucosinolate biosynthesis regulators in polyploid Brassica juncea,” Phytochemistry, vol. 117, no. 1, pp. 43–50, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. A. Halkier and J. Gershenzon, “Biology and biochemistry of glucosinolates,” Annual Review of Plant Biology, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 303–333, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. J. Touw, A. Verdecia Mogena, A. Maedicke, R. Sontowski, N. M. van Dam, and T. Tsunoda, “Both biosynthesis and transport are involved in glucosinolate accumulation during root-herbivory in Brassica rapa,” Frontiers of Plant Science, vol. 10, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Jabatan Pertanian Malaysia, “Statistik tanaman sayur-sayuran dan tanaman ladang,” 2019, https://cupdf.com/document/statistik-tanaman-sayur-sayuran-dan-tanaman-ladang-.html?page=1.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Quiroz and C. Céspedes, “Bokashi as an amendment and source of nitrogen in sustainable agricultural systems: a review,” Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 237–248, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. A. Gómez-Velasco, J. D. Álvarez-Solís, V. M. Ruiz-Valdiviezo et al., “Enzymatic activities in soil cultivated with coffee (Coffea arabica L. cv. ‘Bourbon’) and amended with organic material,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 45, no. 19, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. L. Phooi, E. A. Azman, and R. Ismail, “Urban soil enzyme activity restoration with Sandwich compost,” IOCAG, vol. 10, no. 1, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Zhou, S. t. Xu, C. M. Monreal et al., “Bentonite-humic acid improves soil organic carbon, microbial biomass, enzyme activities and grain quality in a sandy soil cropped to maize (Zea mays L.) in a semi-arid region,” Journal of Integrative Agriculture, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 208–221, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. J. Sithole, L. S. Magwaza, and G. R. Thibaud, “Long-term impact of no-till conservation agriculture and N-fertilizer on soil aggregate stability, infiltration and distribution of C in different size fractions,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 190, pp. 147–156, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. L. Phooi, E. A. Azman, and R. Ismail, “Effect of EM Sandwich compost on the enzymatic activities of the soil planted with Bok Choy (Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis),” IOCAG, vol. 10, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. L. Phooi, E. AzmanAzura, R. Ismail, and S. Shahruddin, “Effect of Sandwich compost leachate on allium tuberosum seed germination,” Pertanika Journal of Tropical Agricultural Science, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 481–490, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Green Eagle Seeds, “Pak choy,” 2022, https://greeneagle.com.my/.
View at: Google Scholar
N. S. B. Alias, L. Billa, A. Muhammad, and A. Singh, “Priming and temperature effects on germination and early seedling growth of some Brassica spp,” Acta Horticulturae, vol. 1225, pp. 407–414, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. J. O’hare, L. S. Wong, L. E. Force, and D. E. Irving, “Glucosinolate composition and anti-cancer potential of seed-sprouts from horticultural members of the brassicaceae,” Acta Horticulturae, vol. 744, pp. 181–188, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Olle and I. H. Williams, “Effective microorganisms and their influence on vegetable production—a review,” The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 380–386, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Xu, T. Zhang, S. Wang, and Z. Wang, “Soil pH and C/N ratio determines spatial variations in soil microbial communities and enzymatic activities of the agricultural ecosystems in Northeast China: jilin Province case,” Applied Soil Ecology, vol. 155, Article ID 103629, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. B. S. Teh and J. Talib, “Soil physics analyses,” 2006, https://www.academia.edu/24416434/Soil_Physics_Analyses_Vol_I.
View at: Google Scholar
D. S. Ross and Q. Ketterings, “Recommended methods for determining soil cation exchange capacity,” 2018, https://www.udel.edu/content/dam/udelImages/canr/pdfs/extension/factsheets/soiltest-recs/CHAP9-2009-2018.pdf.
View at: Google Scholar
J. L. Johnson and K. L. Temple, “Some variables affecting the measurement of “catalase activity” in soil,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 207–209, 1964.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. K. Friedel, K. M�lter, and W. R. Fischer, “Comparison and improvement of methods for determining soil dehydrogenase activity by using triphenyltetrazolium chloride and iodonitrotetrazolium chloride,” Biology and Fertility of Soils, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 291–296, 1994.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. D. Van Slyke and R. M. Archibald, “Manometric, titrimetric, and colorimetric methods for measurement of urease activity,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 154, no. 3, pp. 623–642, 1944.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. de Mendiburu and M. Yaseen, “Agricolae statistical procedures for agricultural research,” 2020, https://rdrr.io/cran/agricolae/.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Wei, V. Simko, M. Levy, Y. Xie, Y. Jin, and J. Zemla, “R package “corrplot”: visualization of a correlation matrix,” Statistician, vol. 56, pp. 316–324, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
R. D. Horrocks and J. F. Vallentine, Harvested Forages Soil Fertility and Forage Production, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site
B. Singh, S. R. Cattle, and D. J. Field, “Edaphic soil science introduction to,” 2014, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323738992_Edaphic_Soil_Science_Introduction_to.
View at: Google Scholar
D. M. Christel, “The use of bokashi as a soil fertility amendment in organic spinach cultivation,” 2017, https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/678.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Prayogo and M. Ihsan, “Utilization of LCC (Legume Cover Crop) and bokashi fertilizer for the efficiency of Fe and Mn uptake of former coal mine land,” Journal of Degraded and Mining Lands Management, vol. 06, no. 01, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
U. S. Setyastika and R. Suntari, “Pengaruh aplikasi Bokashi terhadap dinamika ketersediaan N, P, dan S pada Inceptisol Karangploso, Malang,” Jurnal Tanah Dan Sumberdaya Lahan, vol. 6, no. 2, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Mansoor, N. Kour, S. Manhas et al., “Biochar as a tool for effective management of drought and heavy metal toxicity,” Chemosphere, vol. 271, Article ID 129458, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. A. M. van Gestel and G. Hoogerwerf, “Influence of soil pH on the toxicity of aluminium for Eisenia andrei (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae) in an artificial soil substrate,” Pedobiologia, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 385–395, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Zhalnina, R. Dias, P. D. de Quadros et al., “Soil pH determines microbial diversity and composition in the park grass experiment,” Microbial Ecology, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 395–406, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Fornes, D. Mendoza-Hernández, R. García-de-la-Fuente, M. Abad, and R. M. Belda, “Composting versus vermicomposting a comparative study of organic matter evolution through straight and combined processes,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 118, pp. 296–305, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. G. Soracco, R. Villarreal, L. A. Lozano, S. Vittori, E. M. Melani, and D. J. G. Marino, “Glyphosate dynamics in a soil under conventional and no-till systems during a soybean growing season,” Geoderma, vol. 323, pp. 13–21, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Xiaohou, T. Min, J. Ping, and C. Weiling, “Effect of EM Bokashi application on control of secondary soil salinization,” Water Science and Engineering, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 99–106, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Kweon, E. Lund, and C. Maxton, “Soil organic matter and cation-exchange capacity sensing with on-the-go electrical conductivity and optical sensors,” Geoderma, vol. 199, pp. 80–89, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. L. Parfitt, D. J. Giltrap, and J. S. Whitton, “Contribution of organic matter and clay minerals to the cation exchange capacity of soils,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 26, no. 9-10, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. R. Rahmani, J. P. Ackerson, D. Schulze, K. Adhikari, and Z. Libohova, “Digital mapping of soil organic matter and cation exchange capacity in a low relief landscape using LiDAR data,” Agronomy, vol. 12, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Lyu, T. Watanabe, S. Sugimoto, M. Kilasara, and S. Funakawa, “Control of climate on soil charge characteristics through organic matter and clay mineral distributions in volcanic soils of Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania,” Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 288–300, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Benito, A. Masaguer, A. Moliner, C. Hontoria, and J. Almorox, “Dynamics of pruning waste and spent horse litter co-composting as determined by chemical parameters,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 497–500, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Wang, Y. A. Xu, D. Li et al., “Vermicompost and biochar as bio-conditioners to immobilize heavy metal and improve soil fertility on cadmium contaminated soil under acid rain stress,” The Science of the Total Environment, vol. 621, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Zaman, K. C. Cameron, H. J. Di, and K. Inubushi, “Changes in mineral N, microbial biomass and enzyme activities in different soil depths after surface applications of dairy shed effluent and chemical fertilizer,” Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, vol. 63, no. 2–3, pp. 275–290, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Guangming, Z. Xuechen, W. Xiuping, S. Hongbo, Y. Jingsong, and W. Xiangping, “Soil enzymes as indicators of saline soil fertility under various soil amendments,” Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, vol. 237, pp. 274–279, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Krajewska, “Ureases I. Functional, catalytic and kinetic properties a review,” Journal of Molecular Catalysis B: Enzymatic, vol. 59, no. 1–3, pp. 9–21, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Yang, Z. Chen, T. Liu et al., “Ecological effects of cow manure compost on soils contaminated by landfill leachate,” Ecological Indicators, vol. 32, pp. 14–18, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Levyk, O. Maryskevych, M. Brzezińska, and T. Włodarczyk, “Dehydrogenase activity of technogenic soils of former sulphur mines (Yavoriv and Nemyriv, Ukraine),” International Agrophysics, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 255–260, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Fernández-Calviño and E. Bååth, “Growth response of the bacterial community to pH in soils differing in pH,” FEMS Microbiology Ecology, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 149–156, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. T. Frankenberger and J. B. Johanson, “Effect of pH on enzyme stability in soils,” Soil Biology and Biochemistry, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 433–437, 1982.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. S. Helling, G. Chesters, and R. B. Corey, “Contribution of organic matter and clay to soil cation-exchange capacity as affected by the pH of the saturating solution,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 517–520, 1964.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Silber, I. Levkovitch, and E. R. Graber, “pH-dependent mineral release and surface properties of cornstraw biochar: agronomic implications,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 44, no. 24, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. M. Reynolds and D. C. Wolf, “Influence of urease activity and soil properties on ammonia volatilization from urea,” Soil Science, vol. 143, no. 6, pp. 418–425, 1987.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. I. Zantua, L. C. Dumenil, and J. M. Bremner, “Relationships between soil urease activity and other soil properties,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 350–352, 1977.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. A. Lasisi, O. O. Akinremi, and D. Kumaragamage, “Efficacy of a new N -(n -butyl) thiophosphoric triamide formulation in reducing ammonia volatilization from urea-based fertilizers,” Canadian Journal of Soil Science, vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 395–405, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. L. Sahrawat, “Relationships between soil urease activity and other properties of some tropical wetland rice soils,” Fertilizer Research, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 145–150, 1983.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Wei, Z. Jin, M. Zhang et al., “Impact of spent mushroom substrate on Cd immobilization and soil property,” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 27, no. 3, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. A. Fisher, S. A. Yarwood, and B. R. James, “Soil urease activity and bacterial ureC gene copy numbers: effect of pH,” Geoderma, vol. 285, pp. 1–8, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Khan, A. M. D. Bano, and A. Babar, “Impacts of plant growth promoters and plant growth regulators on rainfed agriculture,” PLoS One, vol. 15, no. 4, Article ID e0231426, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Pan, S. Hou, S. Wu et al., “Variation of soil hydraulic properties with alpine grassland degradation in the eastern Tibetan Plateau,” Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, vol. 21, no. 4, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Dai, X. Guo, X. Ke, Y. Du, F. Zhang, and G. Cao, “The variation in soil water retention of alpine shrub meadow under different degrees of degradation on northeastern Qinghai-Tibetan plateau,” Plant and Soil, vol. 458, no. 1–2, pp. 231–244, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. E. Saxton and W. J. Rawls, “Soil water characteristic estimates by texture and organic matter for hydrologic solutions,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 70, no. 5, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Yang, G. L. Zhang, J. L. Yang et al., “Organic matter controls of soil water retention in an alpine grassland and its significance for hydrological processes,” Journal of Hydrology, vol. 519, no. PD, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Rabot, M. Wiesmeier, S. Schlüter, and H. J. Vogel, “Soil structure as an indicator of soil functions: a review,” Geoderma, vol. 314, pp. 122–137, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Fokom, S. Adamou, M. C. Teugwa et al., “Glomalin related soil protein, carbon, nitrogen and soil aggregate stability as affected by land use variation in the humid forest zone of south Cameroon,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 120, pp. 69–75, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Yu, Y. Zheng, J. Zhang et al., “Importance of soil interparticle forces and organic matter for aggregate stability in a temperate soil and a subtropical soil,” Geoderma, vol. 362, Article ID 114088, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. N. Daynes, D. J. Field, J. A. Saleeba, M. A. Cole, and P. A. McGee, “Development and stabilisation of soil structure via interactions between organic matter, arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and plant roots,” Soil Biology and Biochemistry, vol. 57, pp. 683–694, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. A. Materechera, A. R. Dexter, and A. M. Alston, “Formation of aggregates by plant roots in homogenised soils,” Plant and Soil, vol. 142, no. 1, pp. 69–79, 1992.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. A. Pascual, T. Hernandez, C. Garcia, and M. Ayuso, “Enzymatic activities in an arid soil amended with urban organic wastes: laboratory experiment,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 131–138, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Glinski, Z. Stepniewska, and M. Brzezinska, “Characterization of the dehydrogenase and catalase activity of the soils of two natural sites with respect to the soil oxygenation status,” Polish Journal of Soil Science, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 47–52, 1986.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Glinski, W. Stepniewski, Z. Stepniewska, T. Włdarczyk, and M. Brzezińska, “Characteristics of aeration properties of selected soil profiles from Central Europe,” International Agrophysics, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 17–31, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
Q. Xia, N. Zheng, J. L. Heitman, and W. Shi, “Soil pore size distribution shaped not only compositions but also networks of the soil microbial community,” Applied Soil Ecology, vol. 170, Article ID 104273, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Qiu, X. Zhang, L. Li, and J. Gao, “Changes in soil properties with vegetation types in highland grassland of the Loess Plateau, China,” African Journal of Biotechnology, vol. 10, no. 71, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Sharma and P. Ahmad, “Catalase: a versatile antioxidant in plants,” 2014, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780127999630000046.
View at: Google Scholar
R. P. Udawatta, R. J. Kremer, B. W. Adamson, and S. H. Anderson, “Variations in soil aggregate stability and enzyme activities in a temperate agroforestry practice,” Applied Soil Ecology, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 153–160, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Chooi Lin Phooi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

539

Downloads

616

Citations