Defining the Spatial Heterogeneity of Soil Biological...
5
Defining the Spatial Heterogeneity Defining the Spatial Heterogeneity of Soil Biological Activity of Soil Biological Activity Soil Interfaces for Sustainable Development Conference Soil Interfaces for Sustainable Development Conference (Montreal, Quebec, Canada) (Montreal, Quebec, Canada) Viacheslav Adamchuk and Viacheslav Adamchuk and Jasmeen Kaur Bioresource Bioresource Engineering, McGill university Engineering, McGill university Nadiia Nadiia Adamchuk Adamchuk-Chala Chala Ukrainian Research Institute of Microbiology and Virology of Ukrainian Research Institute of Microbiology and Virology of Zabolotnyi Zabolotnyi Joann Whalen and Joann Whalen and Asim Asim Biswas Biswas Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University July 8, 2015 July 8, 2015 Macdonald Campus McGill University Est. 1821 Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences Proximal Soil Sensing Advances in Agronomy 113: 237-283 Proximal Soil Sensing (PSS) is a set of technologies developed to measure the physical, chemical and biological properties of soil when placing the sensor in contact with, or at a proximal distance (less than 2 m) to, the soil being characterized Soil Physical Properties D – direct measurement I – indirect measurement Advances in Agronomy 113: 237-283 Soil Chemical Properties D – direct measurement I – indirect measurement
Transcript of Defining the Spatial Heterogeneity of Soil Biological...
Defining the Spatial HeterogeneityDefining the Spatial Heterogeneityof Soil Biological Activityof Soil Biological Activity
Soil Interfaces for Sustainable Development ConferenceSoil Interfaces for Sustainable Development Conference(Montreal, Quebec, Canada)(Montreal, Quebec, Canada)
Viacheslav Adamchuk and Viacheslav Adamchuk and Jasmeen KaurBioresourceBioresource Engineering, McGill universityEngineering, McGill university
NadiiaNadiia AdamchukAdamchuk--ChalaChalaUkrainian Research Institute of Microbiology and Virology of Ukrainian Research Institute of Microbiology and Virology of ZabolotnyiZabolotnyi
Joann Whalen and Joann Whalen and AsimAsim BiswasBiswasNatural Resource Sciences, McGill UniversityNatural Resource Sciences, McGill University
July 8, 2015July 8, 2015
Macdonald CampusMcGill University
Est. 1821
McGill UniversityEst. 1821
Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental
Sciences
Proximal Soil Sensing
Advances in Agronomy 113: 237-283
Proximal Soil Sensing (PSS) is a set of technologies developed to measure the physical, chemical and biological properties of soil when placing the sensor in contact with, or at a proximal distance (less than 2 m) to, the soil being characterized
Soil Physical Properties
D – direct measurementI – indirect measurement Advances in Agronomy 113: 237-283
Soil Chemical Properties
D – direct measurement
I – indirect measurement
Lab data Topography
Sensor FusionSensor Fusion
Soil ECa
Soil pH
Soil Reflectance
Typical Field MappingTypical Field Mapping
Site-Specific Calibration
5ECcrpHcrECoptpHoptopt HHDDSOF
• S-optimality
• D-optimality (soil pH)
• D-optimality (soil EC)
• H-criteria (soil pH)
• H-criteria (soil EC)
Ex-Situ Measurements
In Situ Measurements
Soil profiling
Temporal monitoring
OnOn--thethe--Spot Analyzer (OSA)Spot Analyzer (OSA)
Guard
US Patent Application No. 14/494,719
Sensor deployment mechanism
Soil preparation mechanism
Standard hitch
Sensor rinsing system
ISE package
Proximal Soil Sensing
Soil Physics Soil Chemistry Soil Biology
Biofilm Approach• 1 x 5 cm polyethylene terephtalate plastic films• 3, 6 and 9 days in soil• Genera of diazotrophic bacteria
– Bacillius– Azotobacter– Enterobacter– Flavobacterium– Pseudomonas– Rhizobium
• Phyla of fungi– Ascomycota– Zygomycota
• Crop Status– Excess Green Index
Experimental Sites
Field 16 Field 22 Field 66
Field 16 Field 22 Field 66
Area, ha 2.8 14.1 4.9 Number of sites 5 11 4
Season Third year forage crop Second year forage crop Cultivar Mix of alfalfa (16.8 kg/ha) and
brome grass (11.2 kg/ha)
planted on 5‐May‐2010
Mix of alfalfa (16.8 kg/ha), brome grass (11.2 kg/ha) and tall fescue (4.5 kg/ha) planted on 12‐
May‐2011 Prior crop Grain corn in 2010 Silage corn in 2009
Relative Elevation
Field 16 Field 22 Field 66
Apparent Electrical Conductivity
Field 16 Field 22 Field 66
Site Examples
Field 16 Field 22 Field 66
Azotobacter
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
0 3 6 9Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2)
Enterobacter
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
0 3 6 9Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2)
Flavobacterium
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
0 3 6 9
Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2) Pseudomonas
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
0 3 6 9
Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2)
Rhizobium
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
0 3 6 9Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2)
Bacillus
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
0 3 6 9Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2)
Ascomycota
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
0 3 6 9Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2)
Zygomycota
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
0 3 6 9
Days
ln(Colony count/cm
‐2)
Genera of diazotrophic bacteria Phyla of fungi
Site characteristic
Ba
cill
ius
Azo
tob
act
er
En
tero
ba
cte
r
Fla
vo
bac
teri
um
Pse
ud
om
on
as
Rh
izo
biu
m
As
com
yco
ta
Zy
go
my
cota
pH 0.36
(0.00)** 0.12
(0.14) 0.06
(0.28) 0.00
(0.86) 0.37
(0.00)** 0.03
(0.43) 0.04
(0.39) 0.08
(0.24)
Buffer pH 0.37
(0.00)** 0.18
(0.06) 0.05
(0.37) 0.01
(0.64) 0.37
(0.00)** 0.07
(0.26) 0.04
(0.40) 0.09
(0.21)
P 0.25
(0.02) 0.00
(0.79) 0.01
(0.70) 0.02
(0.59) 0.00
(0.93) 0.06
(0.29) 0.03
(0.47) 0.05
(0.34)
K 0.00
(0.87) 0.11
(0.15) 0.03
(0.45) 0.03
(0.46) 0.36
(0.01)* 0.02
(0.52) 0.07
(0.27) 0.13
(0.12)
Ca 0.06
(0.28) 0.07
(0.27) 0.05
(0.35) 0.00
(0.85) 0.30
(0.01)* 0.05
(0.34) 0.03
(0.47) 0.01
(0.64)
Mg 0.03
(0.44) 0.01
(0.66) 0.01
(0.65) 0.06
(0.31) 0.30
(0.01)* 0.01
(0.62) 0.02
(0.52) 0.00
(0.79)
Al 0.12
(0.14) 0.18
(0.06) 0.07
(0.27) 0.00
(0.96) 0.43
(0.00)** 0.14
(0.11) 0.01
(0.65) 0.00
(0.87)
NO3 0.04
(0.41) 0.04
(0.40) 0.02
(0.56) 0.08
(0.24) 0.17
(0.07) 0.06
(0.30) 0.00
(0.95) 0.02
(0.54)
NH4 0.00
(0.83) 0.05
(0.36) 0.01
(0.63) 0.02
(0.60) 0.04
(0.43) 0.08
(0.22) 0.06
(0.29) 0.01
(0.71)
Chemical Properties
* p < 0.01** p < 0.001
Physical Properties
Genera of diazotrophic bacteria Phyla of fungi
Site characteristic
Ba
cill
ius
Azo
tob
act
er
En
tero
ba
cte
r
Fla
vo
bac
teri
um
Pse
ud
om
on
as
Rh
izo
biu
m
As
com
yco
ta
Zy
go
my
cota
SOM 0.00
(0.96) 0.04
(0.41) 0.02
(0.52) 0.02
(0.60) 0.15
(0.10) 0.03
(0.46) 0.03
(0.50) 0.00
(0.81)
Moisture 0.01
(0.64) 0.01
(0.69) 0.01
(0.66) 0.08
(0.21) 0.18
(0.06) 0.03
(0.49) 0.00
(0.85) 0.00
(0.96)
Sand 0.02
(0.56) 0.02
(0.53) 0.00
(0.83) 0.03
(0.49) 0.07
(0.24) 0.12
(0.14) 0.16
(0.08) 0.04
(0.38)
Silt 0.02
(0.51) 0.00
(0.95) 0.00
(0.93) 0.09
(0.21) 0.12
(0.14) 0.00
(0.94) 0.23
(0.03) 0.08
(0.24)
Clay 0.00
(0.87) 0.07
(0.25) 0.00
(0.79) 0.00
(0.77) 0.01
(0.73) 0.46
(0.00)** 0.03
(0.47) 0.00
(0.85)
ECa 0.04
(0.40) 0.09
(0.19) 0.06
(0.29) 0.00
(0.85) 0.24
(0.03) 0.18
(0.06) 0.04
(0.42) 0.00
(0.87) Excess Green
Index0.03
(0.44)0.08
(0.22)0.04
(0.40)0.02
(0.58) 0.23
(0.03) 0.12
(0.14) 0.17
(0.07)0.01
(0.64)
* p < 0.01** p < 0.001
Regression Examples
R2 = 0.51
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
6 11 16 21 26 31 36
% Clay
Rh
izo
biu
m g
row
th,
ln(c
ol/
cm^
2)/d
ay
R2 = 0.35
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
Soil pH
Bac
illi
us
gro
wth
, ln
(co
l/cm
^2)
/day
Soil CO2 Sensing
In Situ Soil CO2 Sensing
Organic Soil
Mineral Soil
Substrate-Induced Soil CO2
Emission Sensor System
Kaur et al. (2015) Sensors 15: 4734-4748
Sensing Soil Bioactivity In Situ Soil Microscopy
Summary
• Proximal soil sensing of biological properties is important!?
• “Biofilm” method indicates population at a specific time
• Spatial heterogeneity of soil microbiology is NOT directly related to– Physical soil properties– Chemical soil properties– Cropping history– Past management
• Rapid in situ measurement of biological activity is feasible
http://adamchukpa.mcgill.caE:mail: [email protected]
