JOURNAL of Soil Biology and Ecology 

Soil biological health as influenced by microbial inoculation of coffee plants with and without organic manures and inorganic fertilizers

Authors: M. RAGHAVENDRAKUMAR, N.G. KUMAR, GURUMURTHY, H. AND A.N. BALAKRISHNA

Abstract:

The experiment was conducted in Karnataka part of the Western Ghats region in coffee plantations of five years old. The coffee plants were inoculated with a microbial consortium (MIC) of seven indigenous V.A. mycorrhizal fungi, Azotobacter chroococcum and P-solubilizing Pseudomonas sp. and mesofauna consortium (MFC) with and without the application of organic manure in the form of farmyard manure (FYM) and recommended fertilizers (RDF). The samples were drawn at bi-monthly intervals for ten months. The soil biological activities were assessed by measuring dehydrogenase activity, acid and alkaline phosphatase activity and soil microbial activities regarding soil microbial biomass-C, N and P. It was observed that most of the activities of these enzymes had significantly increased most of the time when FYM was applied and at times when inorganic fertilizers were applied, but the activity further increased when both FYM and RDF were applied. The enzyme activities followed a similar pattern following the inoculation of MIC and MFC. The enzyme activities were highest in the treatment MIC+MFC+FYM+RDF. The soil microbial biomass- C, N and P of the indigenous population, as well as of inoculated MIC, increased either with the application of farmyard manure alone or recommended dose of fertilizers alone and the activity further increased when both farmyard manure and inorganic fertilizers were applied and further when inoculated with MIC and MFC. The highest microbial biomass-C, N and P, were in treatment MIC+MFC+FYM+RDF. All the treatments with or without MIC and MFC and with or without organic and inorganic fertilizers have recorded significantly higher coffee yields than control and are on par with each other. However, inoculation of MIC with RDF has resulted in higher bean yield (13.28 q ha-1) compared to only RDF alone (13.02 q ha-1) and with FYM (13.54 q ha-1). This suggests that the soil microbial activities significantly influenced soil biological health indicators, and thus soil biological health can be assessed using the above parameters.

References:

Aalkorta Itziar, Aizpurua Ana, Riga Patrick, lbizu Isabel, Amezaga Ibone and Garbisu Carlos, 2003. Soil enzyme activities as biological indicators of soil health. Reviews on environmental health, 18: 65-73.

Abawi, G.S., Widmer, T.L., 2000. Impact of soil health management practices on soil-borne pathogens, nematodes and root diseases of vegetable crops. Applied Soil Ecology 15, 37–47.

Andrews, S. S., Karlen, D. L. and Gambardella, C. A., 2004. The soil management assessment framework: A quantitative soil quality evaluation method. Soil Sci.Soc. Am. J. 68, 1945-1962.

Bennett, LT., Mele, P.M., Annett, S. and Kasel, S, 2010. Examining links between soil management, soil health, and public benefits in agricultural landscapes: an Australian perspective. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 139:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2010.06.017.

Bezdicek and B. A. Stewart, eds. Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment; Proceedings of a symposium, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 4-5 November 1992. Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, WI. 

Bloem, J, 2018. Applying soil health indicators to encourage sustainable soil use: the transition from scientific study to practical application. Sustainability, 10(9):3021.

Doran, J. W., and Parkin, T. B. 1994. Defining and assessing soil quality. Pages 3-21 in J.W. Doran et al., (eds.) Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment. Soil Science Society of America Special Publication no. 35, Madison, WI.

Fusaro, S., Gavinelli, F., Lazzarini, F. and Paoletti, M.G., (2018) Soil biological quality index based on earthworms (QBS-e). A new way to use earthworms as bioindicators in agroecosystems. EcolIndic, 93:1276-1292.

Karlen, D. L. and Stott, D. E. 1994. Framework for evaluating physical and chemical indicators of soil quality. Pages 53-72 in J. W. Doran, D. C. Leman, D. F. Lumarie Perez-Guzman, Lori A. Phillips, Miguel A. Acevedo and Veronica Acosta-Martinez, 2020. Comparing biological methods for soil health assessments: EL-FAME, enzyme activities, and qPCR. https://doi.org/10.1002/saj2.20211.

Papendick, R.I. and Parr, J., 1992. Soil quality- the key to sustainable agriculture. Am. J. Altern. Agric., 7, 2–3.

Romig, D.E., Garlynd, M.J., Harris, R.F. and McSweeney, K., 1995. How farmers assess soil, health and quality. J. Soil and Water Conservation, 50, 229–236.