Soil Microbial Composition and Soil Health of Reverse-Osmosis-Concentrate and Brackish-Groundwater Irrigated Soils in Southern New Mexico

IF 2.9 Q2 SOIL SCIENCE Soil Systems Pub Date : 2023-04-17 DOI:10.3390/soilsystems7020037
Akram R. Ben Ali, F. Holguin, M. Shukla
{"title":"Soil Microbial Composition and Soil Health of Reverse-Osmosis-Concentrate and Brackish-Groundwater Irrigated Soils in Southern New Mexico","authors":"Akram R. Ben Ali, F. Holguin, M. Shukla","doi":"10.3390/soilsystems7020037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The phospholipid fatty acid method was used to determine the shifts in microbial biomass due to irrigation with reverse-osmosis (RO) concentrate (or highly saline reject water) and brackish groundwater (BGW). In this greenhouse study, RO concentrate and BGW were applied to irrigate pecan trees for 8 months for two consecutive seasons. The objectives of the study were to (i) evaluate how irrigation with RO concentrate and BGW impacts soil microbial composition in pecan rhizospheres using microbial phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) biomarkers as indicators, and (ii) evaluate its implications on soil health. Three treatments of RO concentrate (EC = 8.0 dS/m), BGW (EC = 4.0 dS/m), and the city of Las Cruces’s water (EC = 0.8 dS/m) as a control were used to irrigate pecan trees. EC, pH, and organic matter (OM%) content of the soil samples were measured, and PLFA biomarkers for the microbial community were determined. Na-, Cl-, and K-ion concentrations were 26.16, 32.54, and 5.93 meq/L in 2017 and 25.44, 24.26, and 5.49 meq/L in 2018, respectively, in RO irrigation pots. For two seasons, gram-positive bacteria were dominant, while gram-negative bacteria were not detected in the second season. PLFA biomarkers of fungi were found among all three treatments in the first season; however, they appeared only with BGW in the second season. Actinomycetes were recorded in the first season while they were not seen in the second season. Increases in soil salinity and microbial shifts could have important implications for soil health. Irrigating with RO and BGW shifted the soil microbial composition; therefore, long-term irrigation with BGW and RO concentrate would be deleterious for pecan production and soil health.","PeriodicalId":21908,"journal":{"name":"Soil Systems","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soil Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems7020037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The phospholipid fatty acid method was used to determine the shifts in microbial biomass due to irrigation with reverse-osmosis (RO) concentrate (or highly saline reject water) and brackish groundwater (BGW). In this greenhouse study, RO concentrate and BGW were applied to irrigate pecan trees for 8 months for two consecutive seasons. The objectives of the study were to (i) evaluate how irrigation with RO concentrate and BGW impacts soil microbial composition in pecan rhizospheres using microbial phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) biomarkers as indicators, and (ii) evaluate its implications on soil health. Three treatments of RO concentrate (EC = 8.0 dS/m), BGW (EC = 4.0 dS/m), and the city of Las Cruces’s water (EC = 0.8 dS/m) as a control were used to irrigate pecan trees. EC, pH, and organic matter (OM%) content of the soil samples were measured, and PLFA biomarkers for the microbial community were determined. Na-, Cl-, and K-ion concentrations were 26.16, 32.54, and 5.93 meq/L in 2017 and 25.44, 24.26, and 5.49 meq/L in 2018, respectively, in RO irrigation pots. For two seasons, gram-positive bacteria were dominant, while gram-negative bacteria were not detected in the second season. PLFA biomarkers of fungi were found among all three treatments in the first season; however, they appeared only with BGW in the second season. Actinomycetes were recorded in the first season while they were not seen in the second season. Increases in soil salinity and microbial shifts could have important implications for soil health. Irrigating with RO and BGW shifted the soil microbial composition; therefore, long-term irrigation with BGW and RO concentrate would be deleterious for pecan production and soil health.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新墨西哥州南部反渗透浓缩和微咸地下水灌溉土壤微生物组成与土壤健康
磷脂脂肪酸法用于测定反渗透(RO)浓缩液(或高含盐废水)和微咸水(BGW)灌溉引起的微生物生物量的变化。在本温室研究中,采用RO浓缩液和BGW连续两季灌溉山核桃树8个月。该研究的目的是(i)使用微生物磷脂脂肪酸(PLFA)生物标志物作为指标,评估RO浓缩液和BGW灌溉对山核桃根际土壤微生物组成的影响,以及(ii)评估其对土壤健康的影响。采用RO浓缩液(EC=8.0 dS/m)、BGW(EC=4.0 dS/m)和拉斯克鲁塞斯市水(EC=0.8 dS/m)三种处理作为对照来灌溉山核桃树。测量了土壤样品的EC、pH和有机质(OM%)含量,并测定了微生物群落的PLFA生物标志物。2017年,反渗透灌溉池中的Na-、Cl-和K-离子浓度分别为26.16、32.54和5.93meq/L,2018年分别为25.44、24.26和5.49meq/L。在两个季节中,革兰氏阳性菌占优势,而在第二个季节中没有检测到革兰氏阴性菌。在第一季的所有三个处理中都发现了真菌的PLFA生物标志物;然而,他们只在第二季中与BGW一起出现。放线菌在第一季有记录,而在第二季没有发现。土壤盐度的增加和微生物的变化可能对土壤健康产生重要影响。反渗透和BGW灌溉改变了土壤微生物组成;因此,长期使用BGW和RO浓缩液灌溉对山核桃生产和土壤健康有害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Soil Systems
Soil Systems Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth-Surface Processes
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
80
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Structural Shifts in the Soil Prokaryotic Communities Marking the Podzol-Forming Process on Sand Dumps Soil Phytomining: Recent Developments—A Review Selenium and Heavy Metals in Soil–Plant System in a Hydrogeochemical Province with High Selenium Content in Groundwater: A Case Study of the Lower Dniester Valley Tillage and Cover Crop Systems Alter Soil Particle Size Distribution in Raised-Bed-and-Furrow Row-Crop Agroecosystems Shifts in Soil Bacterial Communities under Three-Year Fertilization Management and Multiple Cropping Systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1