PL EN
 
PL EN
Bieżące wydanie
O czasopiśmie
Zespół Redakcyjny
Redakcja i Wydawca
Opłaty za publikacje
Open Access
vol. 17, 2, 2016
Statystyki
Pobierz cytowanie
NUMBER AND ACTIVITY OF MICROORGANISMS IN SOIL INOCULATED WITH THE RHIZOCELL C BIOPREPARATION IN STRAWBERRY CULTIVATION (FRAGARIA × ANANASA DUCH.)
Małgorzata Hawrot-Paw 1
,
 
Grzegorz Mikiciuk 2
,
 
Małgorzata Mikiciuk 3
,
 
Monika Izwikow 4
,
 
Joanna Kiniorska 4
 
 
 
Więcej
Ukryj
1
Department of Agrotechnical Systems Engineering, West Pomeranian University of Szczecin, Papieża Pawła VI 1, 71-459 Szczecin, Poland
 
2
Department of Horticulture, West Pomeranian University of Szczecin, Słowackiego 17, 71-434 Szczecin, Poland
 
3
Department of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, West Pomeranian University of Szczecin, Słowackiego 17, 71-434 Szczecin, Poland
 
4
Department of Agrotechnical Systems Engineering, West Pomeranian University of Szczecin, Słowackiego 17, 71-434 Szczecin, Poland
 
 
Data publikacji: 01-04-2016
 
 
J. Ecol. Eng. 2016; 17(2):135–140
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/62307
 
 
Artykuł (PDF)
Referencje (30)
 
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
biopreparation
microorganisms
biological activity
soil
Rhizocell C
 
STRESZCZENIE
An experiment involving vegetation pots was conducted to assess the effect of inoculating the soil with the Rhizocell C biopreparation, which includes bacteria from the genus Bacillus amyloliquefaciens IT45, on the number and activity of selected groups of soil microorganisms. The biopreparation was applied in strawberries (Fragaria × ananasa Duch.) in a dose recommended by the manufacturer. Microbiological analyses were conducted four times during the vegetation of plants. The obtained results led to a conclusion that the use of biopreparation affects biological activity of soil, and a majority of the observed changes were beneficial. The mean number of the most microorganisms after Rhizocell C biopreparation was higher than in the control object. Soil inoculation had an influence on the activity of microorganisms determined based on biomass content, but the differences were not significant.
 
REFERENCJE (30)
1.
Anderson J.P.E., Domsch K.H. 1978. A physiological method for the quantitative measurement of microbial biomass in soils. Soil. Biol. Biochem., 10, 215.
Google Scholar
 
 
2.
Anerek B., Górska E.B., Russel S. 2006. Charakterystyka celulolitycznego szczepu Micromonospora rubra wyizolowanego z gleby. Acta Agr. Silv., Agraria, 49, 5–11.
Google Scholar
 
 
3.
Barea J.M., Azcon R., Azcon-Aguilar C. 2002. Mycorrhizosphere interactions to improve plant fitness and soil quality. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek., 81(1-4), 343–351.
Google Scholar
 
 
4.
Breza-Boruta B. 2002. Wybrane właściwości enzymatyczne promieniowców z rodzaju Streptomyces wyizolowanych spod uprawy ziemniaka. Acta Sci. Pol., Agricultura, 1(1), 27–36.
Google Scholar
 
 
5.
Bunt J.S., Rovira A.D. 1955. Microbiological studies of some subantarctic soil. J. Soil Sci., 6 (1), 119–128.
Google Scholar
 
 
6.
Burbianka M., Pliszka A. 1977. Mikrobiologia żywności. PZWL, Warszawa.
Google Scholar
 
 
7.
Cavigelli M.A., Robertson G.P. 2000. The functional significance of denitrifier community composition in a terrestrial ecosystem. Ecology, 81, 1404–1414.
Google Scholar
 
 
8.
Cooney D.G., Emerson R. 1964. Termofilic fungi. Freeman, London.
Google Scholar
 
 
9.
Derkowska E., Sas Paszt L., Harbuzov A., Sumorok B. 2015. Rooth growth, mycorrhizal frequency and soil microorganisms in strawberry as affected by biopreparations. Adv. Microbiol., 5, 65–73.
Google Scholar
 
 
10.
Fenglerowa W. 1965. Simple method for counting Azotobacter in soil samples. Acta Microbiol. Pol., 14, 203.
Google Scholar
 
 
11.
Jarecki W., Bobrecka-Jamro D. 2012. Reaction of white lupine (Lupinus albus L.) to seed inoculation with nitragina. Acta. Sci. Pol, Agricultura, 11(2), 19–26.
Google Scholar
 
 
12.
Kaczmarek Z., Wolna-Maruwka A., Jakubus M. 2008. Zmiany liczebności wybranych grup drobnoustrojów glebowych oraz aktywności enzymatycznej w glebie inokulowanej Efektywnymi Mikroorganizmami (EM). J. Res. Appl. Agric. Eng., 53(3), 122–127. [in Polish.].
Google Scholar
 
 
13.
Kędzia W., Konar H. 1974. Diagnostyka mikrobiologiczna. PZWL, Warszawa.
Google Scholar
 
 
14.
Kowalska J., Sosnowska D., Remlein-Starosta D., Drożdżyński D., Wojciechowska R., Łopatka L. 2012. Efektywne Mikroorganizmy w rolnictwie ekologicznym. Ministerstwo rolnictwa i rozwoju wsi, Warszawa, Falenty.
Google Scholar
 
 
15.
Küster E. 1971. Biologia gleby. PWRiL, Warszawa.
Google Scholar
 
 
16.
Maliszewska W. 1954. Proponowana szczegółowa metodyka analiz mikrobiologicznych gleby. IUNG, Puławy.
Google Scholar
 
 
17.
Martin J.P. 1950. Use of acid rose bengales and streptomycin in the plate method for estimating soil fungi. Soil Sci., 69, 215–233.
Google Scholar
 
 
18.
Martyniuk S. 2011. Skuteczne i nieskuteczne preparaty mikrobiologiczne stosowane w ochronie i uprawie roślin oraz rzetelne i nierzetelne metody ich oceny. Post. Mikrobiol., 50(4), 321–328.
Google Scholar
 
 
19.
Martyniuk S. 2012. Czy rozwój integrowanej ochrony roślin I rolnictwa ekologicznego zwiększy wykorzystanie biopestycydów w praktyce rolniczej? J. Res. Appl. Agric. Eng., 57(4), 35–37.
Google Scholar
 
 
20.
Schimel J.P., Gulledge J. 1998. Microbial community structure and global trace gases. Global Change Biol., 4, 745–758.
Google Scholar
 
 
21.
Vessey J.K. 2003. Plant growth promoting Rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant and Soil, 255, 571–586.
Google Scholar
 
 
22.
Watanabe K. 2002. Linking genetics, physiology and ecology: an interdisciplinary approach for advancing bioremediation. J. Biosci. Bioeng., 94 (6), 557–565.
Google Scholar
 
 
23.
Wielgosz E., Dziamba S., Dziamba J. 2010. Effect of application of EM spraying on the populations and activity of soil microorganisms occurring in the root zone of spring barley. Pol. J. Soil Sci., 43, 65–72.
Google Scholar
 
 
24.
Wierzba S., Nabrdalik M. 2005. Biocomposite for organic waste degradation. Physicochem. Probl. Miner. Process., 39, 249–256.
Google Scholar
 
 
25.
Winding A., Hund-Rinke K., Rutgers M. 2005. The use of microorganisms in ecological soil classification and assessment concept. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 62, 230–248.
Google Scholar
 
 
26.
Wolna-Maruwka A., Schroeter-Zakrzewska A., Borowiak K. 2010. Wpływ preparatu EM na stan mikrobiologiczny podłoża przeznaczonego do uprawy pelargonii (Pelargonium × hortorum). Nauka Przyr. Technol., 4(6), #98.
Google Scholar
 
 
27.
Wolna-Maruwka A., Schroeter-Zakrzewska A., Borowiak K., Niewiadomska A. 2012. Impact of microbiological inoculum on numbers and activity f microorganisms in peat substrate and on growth and flowering of Scarlet sage. Pol. J. Environ. Stud., 21(6), 1881–1891.
Google Scholar
 
 
28.
Wyszkowska J., Kucharski J., Borowik A. 2013. Biological effects of L-tryptophan and the vaccine Azotobakteryna in soil. J. Res. Appl. Agric. Eng., 58(4), 238–241.
Google Scholar
 
 
29.
Wyszkowska J., Kucharski M., Kucharski J. 2008. Microbiological and biochemical properties of soil depending on adenine and Azotobacterin applied. J. Elem., 13, 127–137.
Google Scholar
 
 
30.
http://agriculture-de-conserva..., dostęp z dnia 22.06.2015.
Google Scholar
 
 
Udostępnij
Wyślij mailem
ARTYKUŁ POWIĄZANY
Analysis of Soil Salinization as an Environmental Issue in Latin America
Impact of Organic Cultivation Technology of Fiber Hemp (Cannabis Sativa L) on Soil Agrochemical and Bioecological Properties
Efficiency of the Use of Lawn Grasses for Biology and Soil Conservation of Agricultural Systems under the Conditions of the Ukraine’s Podillia
Effect of Coal Mining Waste and Its Mixtures with Sewage Sludge and Mineral Wool on Selected Properties of Degraded Anthropogenic Soil
Accumulation of Lead and Cadmium by Vegetables at Different Levels of Gray Forest Soil Moistening in the Conditions of the Right Bank Forest Steppe of Ukraine
© 2006-2023 Journal hosting platform by Bentus