Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T22:19:21.958Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The microbiology of four steamed soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

C. D. Oxley  and
E. A. Gray
C. D. Oxley
Affiliation:
National Agricultural Advisory Service, Eastern Province, Anstey Hall, Trumpington, near Cambridge
E. A. Gray
Affiliation:
National Agricultural Advisory Service, Eastern Province, Anstey Hall, Trumpington, near Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Four soils, sterilized by steam at 100° C, with unsteamed controls for three soils, were examined at intervals up to 62 days to study the microbiology in relation to the abundance of ammonia, nitrites and nitrates of all the soils, the C/N ratios of two, and the pH and moisture content of three. After steaming, the soils were flooded with sterilized tap water equivalent in amount to 3 in. of rainfall at intervals varying with the particular soil. The soil of the first trial remained under water until very near the end of the experiment. In all the soils, the production of ammonia up to 14 days after steaming was associated with increased biological activity, generally a multiplication of bacteria associated with multiplication of Protozoa. The production of nitrites and nitrates was associated with a similar biological activity. Those bacteria that survived steaming had simple growth requirements as compared with those of the subsequent microflora. The Protozoa showed a series of ‘pulses’ of maximum and minimum abundance and there was also a succession of species in all the soils. A predilection of Protozoa for certain bacteria was shown by the association of certain species with particular groups of bacteria identified by Gram's staining. In two of the soils, there were ‘pulses’ of maximum and minimum abundance of diatoms, and in one soil diatoms possibly affected soil texture. The investigation showed that despite the contrasting characters of the soils, the major chemical changes were almost wholly attributable to biological activity, and that after steaming the same general reactions occurred in all. The investigation proved the importance of considering the microbiology of steamed soils as a problem in ecology.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , October 1952 , pp. 353 - 361
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1952

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anscombe, F. J. & Singh, B. N. (1948). Nature, Lond., 161, 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calkins, G. N. & Summers, F. M. (1941). Protozoa in Biological Research. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Conn, H. J. & Darrow, M. A. (1935). Soil. Sci. 39, 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dujardin, F. (1841). Histoire Naturelle des Zoophytes. Infusoires. Paris.Google Scholar
Ehrenberg, D. C. G. (1839). Die Infusionthierchen. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Gale, E. G. (1948). Chemical Activities of Bacteria. London: University Tutorial Press.Google Scholar
Gray, E. A. (1951). Stylonichia mytilus and the lunar periods. Nature, Lond., 167, 38.Google Scholar
Gray, E. A. (1952). Ecology of the ciliate fauna of a chalk stream. J. Gen. Microbiol. 6, 108.Google Scholar
Hall, N. M. & Clegg, F. L. (1949). Soc. Appl. Bad. 2, 105.Google Scholar
Harrison, J. (1938). Numbers and types of bacteria in cheese. Abstr. Proc. Soc. Bact. p. 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, L. A. (1917). Amer. Nat. 51, 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrici, A. T. (1939). Biology of Bacteria. New York: Heath & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, T. L. (1916). J. Bact. 1, 423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, P. C. T. & Mollison, J. (1948). J. Gen. Microbiol. 2, 54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lochhead, A. G. & Chase, F. E. (1943). Soil Sci. 55, 185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meiklejohn, J. (1930). Ann. Appl. Biol. 17, 614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, E. J. (1923). The Micro-Organisms of the Soil. London: Longmans, Green and Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salle, A. J. (1943). Fundamental Principles of Bacteriology. New York and London: McGraw.Google Scholar
Singh, B. N. (1941). Ann. Appl. Biol. 28, 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, B. N. (1946). Ann. Appl. Biol. 33, 112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonneborn, T. M. (1932). Biol. Bull. Woods Hole, 63, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, Marjory (1943). Bacterial Metabolism. London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. B. (1938). Soil Sci. 46, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, T. W. & Thompson, B. (1949). J. Hort. Sci. 25, 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodruff, L. (1912). J. Exp. Zool. 12, 206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar