Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of Salinity and Alkalinity on Soil Enzyme Activities in Soil Aggregates of Different Sizes

  • SOIL PHYSICS
  • Published:
Eurasian Soil Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The foothill areas of eastern Turkey are an arid and semiarid region with natural salinization, where calcareous alluvial saline soils (Calcaric Fluvisols) are circulated as a result of floods of the Aras River. In this study, the effects of salinity and alkalinity on soil aggregate size distribution and enzyme activities at different aggregate size were investigated. For this purpose, soil samples were collected with three replicates at saline, alkaline, saline-alkaline and non-saline–alkaline areas and passed through into different sieves (2, 1, 0.850, 0.425, 0.106 and 0.02 mm) by dry sieving method for determining aggregate weight distribution in each macro (2–0.45 mm) and micro (0.45–0.02 mm) aggregates. For determining aggregate size distribution, sieves were shaken using a horizontal shaking machine (Retsch, AS 200 basic, Haan, Germany). The soil enzymes were determined in these aggregate sizes (2–1, 1–0.850, 0.850–0.425, 0.425–0.106, 0.106–0.02 mm) for all soil types. All soils belonged to the clay loam with the carbon content in the range of 0.5–0.8%, while the percentage of exchangeable sodium for the non-saline–alkaline and alkaline–saline soils was from 3.5 to 22%, but the pH diapason from 8.3 to 8.9. Results showed that soil salinity and alkalinity decreased the weight of macro aggregates and increased the weight of micro aggregates, besides soil salinity and alkalinity decreased soil enzyme activities. But soil salinity decreased enzyme activity more than alkalinity. Furthermore, the highest urease and catalase activities were in macro aggregates (0.850–0.425 mm aggregate size) for all soil types. The reason may be that macro aggregates contain higher organic matter and organic carbon than micro aggregates. Consequently, the highest enzyme (urease and catalase) activities were detected in macro aggregates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. S. A. Aliev, D. A. Khatsiev, and F. D. Mikhailov, “Kinetic indices of catalase activity in the main soil groups of Azerbaijan,” Pochvovedenie, No. 9, 107–112 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Turkish State Meteorological Service, Ankara, 2018.

  3. A. R. Barzegar, J. M. Oades, P. Rengasamy, and L. Giles, “Effect of alkalinity and salinity on disaggregation and tensile strength of an alfisol under different cropping systems,” Soil Tillage Res. 32 (4), 329–345 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-1987(94)00421-A

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. T. H. Beck, “Die messung der katalaseaktivitaet von Böden,” Z. Pflanzenernaehr. Bodenkd. 130 (1), 68–81 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.19711300108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. L. H. Cammeraat and A. C. Imeson, “Deriving indicators of soil degradation from soil aggregation studies in southeastern Spain and southern France,” Geomorphology 23 (2–4), 307–321 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(98)00012-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. G. Crescimanno, M. Iovino, and G. Provenzano, “Influence of salinity and alkalinity on soil structural and hydraulic characteristics,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 59 (6), 1701–1708 (1995). https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1995.03615995005900060028x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. W. Demisie, Z. Y. Liu, and M. K. Zhang, “Effect of biochar on carbon fractions and enzyme activity of red soil,” Catena 121, 214–221 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.05.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. R. P. Dick, “Soil enzyme activities as indicators of soil quality,” in Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1994), Vol. 35, Ch. 7, pp. 107–124. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaspecpub35.c7

  9. W. A. Dick, L. Cheng, and P. Wang, “Soil acid and alkaline phosphatase activity as pH adjustment indicators,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 1915–1919 (200). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(00)00166-8

  10. G. G. Hoffmann and K. Teicher, “Ein kolorimetrisches Verfahren zur Bestimmung der Ureaseaktivität in Böden,” Z. Pflanzenernaehr., Dueng., Bodenkd. 91 (140), 55–63 (1961). https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.19610950107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. E. D. Hofmann and G. G. Hoffmann, “Die bestimmug der biologischen tatigheit in böden mit enzymethoden,” in Advances in Enzymology and Related Areas of Molecular Biology (Wiley, Chichester, 1966), Vol. 28, pp. 365–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470122730.ch6

  12. M. S. Hossain, “Present scenario of global salt affected soils, its management and importance of salinity research,” Int. Res. J. Biol. Sci. 1, 1–3 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. Huang, L. Liu, G. Zeng, P. Xu, C. Huang, L. Deng, et al., “The effects of rice straw biochar on indigenous microbial community and enzymes activity in heavy metal-contaminated sediment,” Chemosphere 174, 545–553 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.01.130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. V. Kabiri, F. Raiesi, and M. A. Ghazavi, “Six years of different tillage systems affected aggregate-associated SOM in a semi-arid loam soil from Central Iran,” Soil Tillage Res. 154, 114–125 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2015.06.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. J. Kohler, F. Caravaca, and A. Roldán, “An AM fungus and a PGPR intensify the adverse effects of salinity on the stability of rhizosphere soil aggregates of Lactuca sativa,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 42 (3), 429–434 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.11.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. G. J. Levy and J. R: Torrento, “Clay dispersion and macroaggregate stability as affected by exchangeable potassium and sodium,” Soil Sci. 160, 352–358 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. E. O. McLean, “Soil pH and lime requirement,” in Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd ed. (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1982), pp. 199–224. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c12

  18. I. C. Mendes, A. K. Bandick, R. P. Dick, and P. J. Bottomley, “Microbial biomass and activities in soil aggregates affected by winter cover crops,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63 (4), 873–881 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1999.634873x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. J. M. Oades and A. G. Waters, “Aggregate hierarchy in soils,” Austr. J. Soil Res. 29, 815–828 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. A. Oren, “Bioenergetic aspects of halophilism,” Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 63 (2), 334–348 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.63.2.334-348.1999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. C. Pan, C. Liu, H. Zhao, and Y. Wang, “Changes of soil physico-chemical properties and enzyme activities in relation to grassland salinization,” Eur. J. Soil Biol. 55, 13–19 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2012.09.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. H. Pathak and D. L. N. Rao, “Carbon and nitrogen mineralization from added organic matter in saline and alkali soils,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 30 (6), 695–702 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(97)00208-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. K. M. Rath, A. Maheshwari, P. Bengtson, and J. Rousk, “Comparative toxicities of salts on microbial processes in soil,” Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 82, 2012–2020 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. J. D. Rhoades, “Soluble salts,” in Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1982), pp. 167–179.

  25. J. D. Rhoades, “Cation exchange capacity,” in Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1982), pp. 149–157.

  26. J. D. Rhoades, “Exchangeable cations,” in Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties (Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 1982), pp. 159–164.

  27. Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soils, Ed. by L. A. Richards (US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, 1954).

    Google Scholar 

  28. D. N. Rietz and R. J. Haynes, “Effects of irrigation-induced salinity and alkalinity on soil microbial activity,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 35 (6), 845–854 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(03)00125-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Developments in Soil Salinity Assessment and Reclamation: Innovative Thinking and Use of Marginal Soil and Water Resources in Irrigated Agriculture, Ed. by S. A. Shahid, M. A. Abdelfattah, and F. K. Taha (Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  30. E. V. Shein and L. O. Karpachevskii, Theories and Methods of Soil Physics, Ed. by L. O. Karpachevskii, (Grif i K, Tula, 2007) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  31. K. Singh, V. C. Pandey, B. Singh, and R. R. Singh, “Ecological restoration of degraded alkaline lands through afforestation and cropping,” Ecol. Eng. 43, 70–80 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2012.02.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 17.0 (SPSS, Chicago, 2008).

  33. U. Şimşek, E. V. Shein, F. Mikailsoy, A. G. Bolotov, and E. Erdel, “Subsoil compaction: the ıntensity of manifestation in silty clayey calcic pantofluvic fluvisols of the Iğdır region (Eastern Turkey),” Eurasian Soil Sci. 52, 296–299 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229319030104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. S. Temel and U. Şimşek, “Iğdır Ovası toprakların çoraklaşma süreci ve çözüm önerileri,” Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi 21 (2), 53–59 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Risk Assessment Methodologies of Soil Threats in Europe, JRC Scientific and Policy Reports EUR, Ed. by C. L. van Beek and G. Tóth (European Communities, Luxembourg, 2012). https://doi.org/10.2788/47096

  36. A. Walkley and L. A. Black, “An examination of the degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method,” Soil Sci. 37 (1), 29–38 (1934). https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. J. Yang, F. Yang, Y. Yang, G. Xing, C. Deng, Y. Shen, et al., “A proposal of “core enzyme” bioindicator in long-term Pb–Zn ore pollution areas based on topsoil property analysis,” Environ. Pollut. 213, 760–769 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.03.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. H. Yu, P. Fan, J. Hou, Q. Dang, D. Cui, B. Xi, and W. Tan, “Inhibitory effect of microplastics on soil extracellular enzymatic activities by changing soil properties and direct adsorption: an investigation at the aggregate-fraction level,” Environ. Pollut. 267, 115544 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. B. C. Yuan, Z. Z. Li, H. Liu, M. Gao, and Y. Y. Zhang, “Microbial biomass and activity in salt affected soils under arid conditions,” Appl. Soil Ecol. 35, 319–328 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2006.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. H. H. Zahran, “Diversity, adaptation and activity of the bacterial flora in saline environments,” Biol. Fertil. Soils 25 (3), 211–223 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/s003740050306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. L. Zheng, M. Zhang, R. Xiao, J. Chen, and F. Yu, “Impact of salinity and Pb on enzyme activities of a saline soil from the Yellow River delta a microcosm study,” Phys. Chem. Earth, Parts A/B/C 97, 77–87 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2016.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Igdır, 76000, Igdır, Turkey

    E. Erdel

Authors
  1. E. Erdel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. Erdel.

Ethics declarations

The authors have no financial or proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Erdel, E. Effects of Salinity and Alkalinity on Soil Enzyme Activities in Soil Aggregates of Different Sizes. Eurasian Soil Sc. 55, 759–765 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229322060047

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229322060047

Keywords:

Search

Navigation