Paper · 2006 · Soil Research

The impact of crop residue amendments and lime on microbial community structure and nitrogen-fixing bacteria in the wheat rhizosphere

Darryl R. Nelson; Pauline M. Mele

16
claims
31
verbatim quotes
78
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Crop management practices can affect the soil microbial community, but it is not clear whether the effect of these practices is measurable at the wheat root–soil interface, where the plant exerts significant influence through root exudation. In this study, wheat plants were grown in soil amended with milled canola, lucerne, lupin, pea, and wheat residues with and without lime, to determine what changes occur to microbial community structure in the rhizosphere. Rhizosphere soil collected from wheat plants at the 5-leaf stage was assessed for overall microbial functional diversity using BIOLOG analysis and the diversity of the functional gene nifH using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP), and cloning. Plant development was reduced in all residue amendments except lucerne, and a high positive correlation in the non-limited treatments between plant residue nitrogen (N) content and wheat shoot N suggested microbial competition for available N. Results from BIOLOG analysis indicated significant differences in rhizosphere microbial community structure due to lime, and to a lesser extent, residue type. Diversity, measured by the Shannon Diversity Index, was higher in limed rhizosphere soil, in addition to an increase in soils amended with lucerne, lupin, and pea residues compared with amendment with wheat, canola, and control soil. Each residue amendment promoted unique microbial communities determined by multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) and analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) of the BIOLOG data; the strongest effect was produced by addition of canola residues. N-fixing bacteria were also affected by lime, but residue effects were less apparent, especially between limed samples. The factor that correlated best with both BIOLOG and nifH T-RFLP data in non-limed soil was a combination of residue sodium (Na), copper (Cu), and manganese (Mn). In limed soil, phosphorus (P), calcium (Ca), and pH correlated well with BIOLOG data, and N, potassium (K), and iron (Fe) correlated with nifH T-RFLP data. A clone library of nifH sequences from control and limed, pea-amended soils revealed significant diversity amongst nifH sequences, most clustering with α-proteobacteria, and in some instances with Geobacter sulfurreducens. Clone distribution was significantly different for control soil and pea/lime soil, especially amongst the α-proteobacteria. The results suggest that rhizosphere microorganisms can be influenced by soil amendments, and change, depending on the type of residue applied. The addition of lime, however, produced the most significant changes in microbial community structure and nifH-containing rhizobacteria, highlighting the significant functional changes that occur when soil pH is increased.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 16

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant development fell under all residue amendments except lucerne.

Treatment
residue amendmentse0
Outcome
Plant developmente0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
except lucernee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plant development was reduced in all residue amendments except lucerne”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 770–840 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue nitrogen content positively correlated with wheat shoot nitrogen in non-limed treatments.

Compound
plant residue nitrogen (N) contente0
Outcome
wheat shoot Ne0
Direction
positivee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a high positive correlation in the non-limited treatments between plant residue nitrogen (N) content and wheat shoot N suggested microbial competition for available N”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 846–1012 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Lime significantly altered wheat rhizosphere microbial community structure.

Treatment
limee0
Outcome
rhizosphere microbial community structuree0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“significant differences in rhizosphere microbial community structure due to lime”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1053–1133 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue type also affected rhizosphere microbial community structure to a lesser extent.

Treatment
residue typee0
Outcome
rhizosphere microbial community structuree0
Qualifier
to a lesser extente0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“significant differences in rhizosphere microbial community structure due to lime, and to a lesser extent, residue type”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1053–1171 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Microbial functional diversity was higher in limed rhizosphere soil.

Treatment
limede0
Outcome
Diversitye0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Diversity, measured by the Shannon Diversity Index, was higher in limed rhizosphere soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1173–1261 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lucerne, lupin and pea residue increased diversity over wheat, canola and control soil.

Treatment
lucerne, lupin, and pea residuese0
Outcome
Diversitye0
Direction
increasee0
Comparator
wheat, canola, and control soile0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Diversity, measured by the Shannon Diversity Index, was higher in limed rhizosphere soil, in addition to an increase in soils amended with lucerne, lupin, and pea residues compared with amendment with wheat, canola, and control soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1173–1405 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Each residue amendment promoted a distinct microbial community.

Treatment
Each residue amendmente0
Outcome
unique microbial communitiese0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Each residue amendment promoted unique microbial communities”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1407–1467 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Canola residue had the strongest effect on microbial communities.

Treatment
addition of canola residuese0
Outcome
strongest effecte0
Direction
strongest effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the strongest effect was produced by addition of canola residues”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1572–1636 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lime affected nitrogen-fixing bacteria.

Treatment
limee0
Outcome
N-fixing bacteriae0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“N-fixing bacteria were also affected by lime”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1638–1682 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue effects on nitrogen-fixing bacteria were less apparent, especially with lime.

Treatment
residuee0
Outcome
effectse0
Direction
less apparente0
Qualifier
especially between limed samplese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“residue effects were less apparent, especially between limed samples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1688–1756 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue sodium, copper and manganese best correlated with microbiome data in non-limed soil.

Compound
residue sodium (Na), copper (Cu), and manganese (Mn)e0
Outcome
BIOLOG and nifH T-RFLP datae0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The factor that correlated best with both BIOLOG and nifH T-RFLP data in non-limed soil was a combination of residue sodium (Na), copper (Cu), and manganese (Mn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1758–1919 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphorus, calcium and pH correlated with BIOLOG data in limed soil.

Compound
phosphorus (P), calcium (Ca)e0
Outcome
BIOLOG datae0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In limed soil, phosphorus (P), calcium (Ca), and pH correlated well with BIOLOG data”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1921–2005 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen, potassium and iron correlated with nifH data in limed soil.

Compound
N, potassium (K), and iron (Fe)e0
Outcome
nifH T-RFLP datae0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“N, potassium (K), and iron (Fe) correlated with nifH T-RFLP data”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2011–2075 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The nifH clone library showed significant sequence diversity.

Gene
nifHe0
Outcome
diversity amongst nifH sequencese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A clone library of nifH sequences from control and limed, pea-amended soils revealed significant diversity amongst nifH sequences”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2077–2206 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Most nifH sequences clustered with alpha-proteobacteria, and some with Geobacter sulfurreducens.

Outcome
clustering with α-proteobacteria, and in some instances with Geobacter sulfurreducense0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“most clustering with α-proteobacteria, and in some instances with Geobacter sulfurreducens”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2208–2298 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

nifH clone distribution differed significantly between control and pea/lime soil.

Treatment
pea/lime soile0
Outcome
Clone distributione0
Direction
differente0
Comparator
control soile0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Clone distribution was significantly different for control soil and pea/lime soil, especially amongst the α-proteobacteria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2300–2422 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–121 · show in text ↑

other · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

114 papers: 100 positive, 14 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 100 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

110 papers more in this group

See all 114 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.