KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry / 2015 / Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 6

Assessing the impact of azadirachtin application to soil on ureaseactivity and its kinetic parameters

Ridvan KIZILKAYA
İraida SAMOFALOVA
Natalya MUDRYKH
Fariz MİKAİLSOY
İzzet AKÇA
Svetlana SUSHKOVA
Tatiana MINKINA
Sayfa
976–983
Yayın Tarihi
2015-12-04
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Overall, in this study, all azadirachtin application doses were effective in influencing the kinetic behavior of urease in Albic Luvisol.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Abstract: The kinetic parameters of soil urease have attracted considerable attention; however, little information is available on its kinetic parameters and behaviors in response to azadirachtin application to the soil.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:A short (14-day) field experiment was conducted using Albic Luvisol soil (loam texture; pH 6.70; electrical conductivity 0.81 dS m-1; CaCO3 content 0.04%; total organic carbon 0.99%) as the experimental soil in the Perm region of the Russian Federation to investigate the effects of different azadirachtin application doses on soil urease activity and its kinetic behaviors.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Overall, in this study, all azadirachtin application doses were effective in influencing the kinetic behavior of urease in Albic Luvisol.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Azadirachtin · kinetic parameters · pesticide

Özet

Abstract: The kinetic parameters of soil urease have attracted considerable attention; however, little information is available on its kinetic parameters and behaviors in response to azadirachtin application to the soil. A short (14-day) field experiment was conducted using Albic Luvisol soil (loam texture; pH 6.70; electrical conductivity 0.81 dS m-1; CaCO3 content 0.04%; total organic carbon 0.99%) as the experimental soil in the Perm region of the Russian Federation to investigate the effects of different azadirachtin application doses on soil urease activity and its kinetic behaviors. The results showed that the highest urease activity was found under high azadirachtin application doses (0.6 L ha-1) compared to the control (0 L ha-1), recommended (0.3 L ha-1), and low (0.15 L ha-1) azadirachtin application doses at all different incubation times (1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 h). Soil urease enzymes exhibited typical Michaelis-Menten kinetic behaviors; high azadirachtin application doses increased the substrate affinity constant (KM) and decreased the maximum reaction rates (Vmax) of soil urease. As compared to the control azadirachtin application dose, the low azadirachtin application dose increased the Vmax of soil urease; however, with low and recommended application doses, the Vmax of soil urease decreased. Overall, in this study, all azadirachtin application doses were effective in influencing the kinetic behavior of urease in Albic Luvisol.

Abstract

Abstract: The kinetic parameters of soil urease have attracted considerable attention; however, little information is available on its kinetic parameters and behaviors in response to azadirachtin application to the soil. A short (14-day) field experiment was conducted using Albic Luvisol soil (loam texture; pH 6.70; electrical conductivity 0.81 dS m-1; CaCO3 content 0.04%; total organic carbon 0.99%) as the experimental soil in the Perm region of the Russian Federation to investigate the effects of different azadirachtin application doses on soil urease activity and its kinetic behaviors. The results showed that the highest urease activity was found under high azadirachtin application doses (0.6 L ha-1) compared to the control (0 L ha-1), recommended (0.3 L ha-1), and low (0.15 L ha-1) azadirachtin application doses at all different incubation times (1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 h). Soil urease enzymes exhibited typical Michaelis-Menten kinetic behaviors; high azadirachtin application doses increased the substrate affinity constant (KM) and decreased the maximum reaction rates (Vmax) of soil urease. As compared to the control azadirachtin application dose, the low azadirachtin application dose increased the Vmax of soil urease; however, with low and recommended application doses, the Vmax of soil urease decreased. Overall, in this study, all azadirachtin application doses were effective in influencing the kinetic behavior of urease in Albic Luvisol.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KIZILKAYA, R., SAMOFALOVA, İ., MUDRYKH, N., MİKAİLSOY, F., AKÇA, İ., SUSHKOVA, S., MINKINA, T. (2015). Assessing the impact of azadirachtin application to soil on ureaseactivity and its kinetic parameters. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 6, 976–983. https://ajindex.com/articles/179897

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Agyaro K, Kwakye P, Bonsu M, Ose BA, Asare Donkor N, Amanor E (2006). Breakdown of azadirachtin A in a tropical soil amended with neem leaves and animal manures. Pedosphere 16: 230–236.
  2. Akça I, Kutluk Yılmaz ND, Kızılkaya R (2005). Effects of azadirachtin on beet soilborne pomovirus and soil biological properties on sugar beet. J Environ Sci Heal B 40: 285–296.
  3. Akca I, Tuncer C, Guler A, Saryhan, I (2009). Residual toxicity of 8 different insecticides on honey bee (Apis mellifera Hymenoptera: Apidae). J Anim Vet Adv 8: 436–440.
  4. Aliev SA, Haciyev DA, Mikayilov FD (1984). Kinetic and thermodynamic characteristics of enzyme–invertase and urease in Azerbaijan soils. Eur Soil Sci 11: 55–66.
  5. Bremner JM, Mulvaney RL (1978). Urease activity in soils. In: Burns RG, editor. Soil Enzymes. New York, NY, USA: Academic Press, p. 149–196.
  6. Cervelle S, Nanipieri P, Giovanninni G, Perna A (1976). Relationships between substituted urea herbicides and soil urease activity. Weed Res 16: 365–368.
  7. Chowdhury A, Pradhan S, Saha M, Sanyal N (2008). Impact of pesticides on soil microbiological parameters and possible bioremediation strategies. Indian J Microbiol 48: 114–127.
  8. Cornish-Bowden A (1976). Principles of Enzyme Kinetics. London, UK: Butterworth. Dick RP (1997). Soil enzyme activities as integrative indicators of soil health. In: Pankhurst CE, Double BM, Gupta VVSR, editors. Biological Indicators of Soil Health. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, pp. 121–156.
  9. Dick RP, Samdor JA, Eash NS (1994). Soil enzyme activities after 1500 years of agriculture in the Colca Valley, Peru. Agric Ecosys Environ 50: 123–131.
  10. Dick WA, Tabatabai MA (1992). Significance and potential uses of soil enzymes. In: Metting Jr, FB, editor. Soil Microbial Ecology: Applications in Agricultural and Environmental Management. New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker, pp. 95–225.
  11. Ekberli İ, Kızılkaya R, Kars N (2006). Urease enzyme and its kinetic and thermodynamic parameters in clay loam soil. Asian J Chem 18: 3097–3105.
  12. FAO (2006). World Reference Base For Soil Resources. A framework for international classification, correlation and communication. World Soil Resources Report No. 103. Rome: FAO. Gianfreda L, Sannino F, Ortega N, Nanipieri P (1994). Activity of free and immobilized urease in soil: effects of pesticides. Soil Biol Biochem 26: 777–784.
  13. Gianfreda L, Rao MA (2011). The influence of pesticides on soil enzymes. In: Shukla G, Varma A, editors. Soil Enzymology. Soil Biology Series No. 22. Berlin/Heidelber