Cited by 944Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsAgricultural Science and FertilizationMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology

Structure and function of the soil microbial community in a long-term fertilizer experiment

Marschner, P·2003·Soil Biology and Biochemistry

Abstract

The effect of organic and inorganic fertiliser amendments is often studied shortly after addition of a single dose to the soil but less is known about the long-term effects of amendments. We conducted a study to determine the effects of long-term addition of organic and inorganic fertiliser amendments at low rates on soil chemical and biological properties. Surface soil samples were taken from an experimental field site near Cologne, Germany in summer 2000. At this site, five different treatments were established in 1969: mineral fertiliser (NPK), crop residues removed (mineral only); mineral fertiliser with crop residues; manure 5.2 t ha-1 yr-1; sewage sludge 7.6 t ha-1 yr-1 or straw 4.0 t ha-1 yr-1 with 10 kg N as CaCN2 t straw-1. The organic amendments increased the Corg content of the soil but had no significant effect on the dissolved organic C (DOC) content. The C/N ratio was highest in the straw treatment and lowest in the mineral only treatment. Of the enzymes studied, only protease activity was affected by the different amendments. It was highest after sewage amendment and lowest in the mineral only treatment. The ratios of Gram+ to Gram- bacteria and of bacteria to fungi, as determined by signature phospholipid fatty acids, were higher in the organic treatments than in the inorganic treatments. The community structure of bacteria and eukaryotic microorganisms was assessed by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) and redundancy discriminate analyses of the DGGE banding patterns. While the bacterial community structure was affected by the treatments this was not the case for the eukaryotes. Bacterial and eukaryotic community structures were significantly affected by Corg content and C/N ratio.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0038-0717(02)00297-3

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marschner, P.
Affiliations
The University of Adelaide (AU)
Corresponding author
Marschner, P
Venue
Soil Biology and Biochemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-03-01
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
453-461
ISSN
0038-0717 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978874661
Cited by
944
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 70 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 49
FWCI
29.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Soil Biology and Biochemistry (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
Keywords
soil microbial communities, organic fertilizer, mineral fertilizers, manure, sewage sludge, straw, crop residues, soil organic carbon, dissolved organic carbon, C/N ratio, soil enzyme activity, proteolytic activity, phospholipid fatty acids, bacterial community structure, protists, NPK fertilizer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review