Sheep-urine-induced changes in soil microbial community structure

Nunan, Naoise; Singh, Brajesh K.; Reid, Eileen; Ord, B. G.; Papert, Artemis; Squires, Julie; Prosser, James I.; Wheatley, Ron E.; McNicol, Jim; Millard, P.

doi:10.1111/j.1574-6941.2006.00072.x

Cited by 32 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, Ritz et al (2004) found that the impact of urine on the soil microbes was confined largely to phenotypic measures of the community, while the background genetic structure of the community did not appear to be affected. This was subsequently confirmed by Nunan et al (2006), who reported that urine addition only accounted for 10-15% of the variability in community structure across their upland site. The bacterial community associated with bulk soil was more responsive to urine deposition than the rhizophere bacterial community (Singh et al 2009b).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 63%

“…Carbon utilization patterns of soil microbes are altered by treatment with urine, generally leading to an increase in substrate utilisation 2-5 weeks after urine addition Nunan et al 2006). However, Ritz et al (2004) found that the impact of urine on the soil microbes was confined largely to phenotypic measures of the community, while the background genetic structure of the community did not appear to be affected.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does grassland vegetation drive soil microbial diversity?

Millard¹,

Singh²

2009

Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does plant diversity drive soil microbial diversity in temperate, upland grasslands? Plants influence microbial activity around their roots by release of carbon and pot studies have shown an impact of different grass species on soil microbial community structure. Therefore it is tempting to answer yes. However, evidence from field studies is more complex. This evidence is reviewed at three different scales. First, studies from the plant community scale are considered that have compared soil microbial community structure in pastures of different vegetation composition, as a consequence of pasture improvement. These show fungi dominating the biomass in unimproved pastures and bacteria when lime and fertilizers have been applied. Secondly, evidence for interactions between individual grass species and soil microbes is discussed at the level of the rhizosphere, by considering both pot experiments and field studies. These have produced contrasting and inconclusive results, often due to spatial heterogeneity of soil properties and microbial communities. In particular, increased soil pH and fertility in urine patches and other nutrient cycling processes interact to increase the spatially complexity of soil microbial communities. Finally three studies which have measured microbial community structure in the rhizoplane are considered. These show that bacterial diversity is not directly related to plant diversity, although fungal diversity is. In addition, the soil fungal community has been demonstrated to have an effect upon the composition of the bacterial community. We suggest that while current vegetation influences fungal communities (particularly mycorrhizae) and litter inputs fungal saprotrophs, bacterial community structure is influenced more by the quality or composition of soil organic matter, thereby reflecting carbon inputs to the soil over decades.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 63%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does grassland vegetation drive soil microbial diversity?

Millard¹,

Singh²

2009

Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ritz et al (35) found that community structure had a high degree of spatial variability, which they linked to sheep urine patches, while Nunan et al (33) also found that in a field trial, there were changes in microbial community structure but not in composition in response to the application of sheep urine, as shown by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis profiles. From our microcosm study, it is suggested that the response of bacterial communities within a urine patch is dependent upon the grass species present and the concentration of sheep urine added.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Sheep Urine Deposition on the Bacterial Community Structure in an Acidic Upland Grassland Soil

Rooney

Kennedy

Deering

et al. 2006

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of the addition of synthetic sheep urine (SSU) and plant species on the bacterial community composition of upland acidic grasslands was studied using a microcosm approach. Low, medium, and high concentrations of SSU were applied to pots containing plant species typical of both unimproved (Agrostis capillaris) and agriculturally improved (Lolium perenne) grasslands, and harvests were carried out 10 days and 50 days after the addition of SSU. SSU application significantly increased both soil pH (P < 0.005), with pH values ranging from pH 5.4 (zero SSU) to pH 6.4 (high SSU), and microbial activity (P < 0.005), with treatment with medium and high levels of SSU displaying significantly higher microbial activity (triphenylformazan dehydrogenase activity) than treatment of soil with zero or low concentrations of SSU. Microbial biomass, however, was not significantly altered by any of the SSU applications. Plant species alone had no effect on microbial biomass or activity. Bacterial community structure was profiled using bacterial automated ribosomal intergenic spacer analysis. Multidimensional scaling plots indicated that applications of high concentrations of SSU significantly altered the bacterial community composition in the presence of plant species but at different times: 10 days after application of high concentrations of SSU, the bacterial community composition of L. perenne-planted soils differed significantly from those of any other soils, whereas in the case of A. capillaris-planted soils, the bacterial community composition was different 50 days after treatment with high concentrations of SSU. Canonical correspondence analysis also highlighted the importance of interactions between SSU addition, plant species, and time in the bacterial community structure. This study has shown that the response of plants and bacterial communities to sheep urine deposition in grasslands is dependent on both the grass species present and the concentration of SSU applied, which may have important ecological consequences for agricultural grasslands.Intensification of upland pastures has been widespread in northwestern Europe, with formerly rough grazing areas undergoing improvement through fertilization, liming, and increased grazing (5). Intensification leads to shifts in the floristic composition in acidic upland grasslands, resulting in diminished floristic diversity (19). In Ireland and the United Kingdom, the predominant upland grassland formation on acidic soils is a species-rich but low-yielding plant community, with Agrostis capillaris as the predominant grass species and Nardus stricta, Holcus lanatus, Festuca rubra, and Festuca ovina typically at lower abundances (36). These seminatural grasslands can be improved to species-poor but high-yielding types dominated by Lolium perenne through intensive practices such as fertilization, grazing, and/or reseeding. A loss of diversity through intensification has been a cause for some concern (20, 23), particularly since little is known about impacts on belowground bi...

show abstract

“…C: soil organic-C, N: soil-N, Dehy: dehydrogenase, AlP: alkaline phosphatase, AcP: acid phosphatase, Glu: β-glucosidase, Pro: protease, and Mb: microbial biomass-C, respectively. *P b 0.05, **P b 0.01, ***P b 0.001. local N-urine input from animals (Nunan et al, 2006;Patra et al, 2005). Protease activity can also vary independently of microbial activity due to the formation of inorganic and organic colloids in soil (Makoi and Ndakidemi, 2008).…”

Section: Tablementioning

confidence: 98%