CC BY
16ГЕОГРАФИЯ И ГЕНЕЗИС ПОЧВ
UDC: 631.461.1
R. Kizilkaya1' 2, O. Dengiz1, M. Kussainova3 THE EFFECTS OF TOPOSEQUENCES ON SOIL PROPERTIES AND UREASE ACTIVITIES
1Ondokuz Mayis University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 55139, Samsun, Turkey 2Agrobigen R&D Ltd.Co. Samsun Technopark, Ondokuz Mayis University, 55139,
Samsun, Turkey
3 Kazakh Research Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry after U.U. Uspanov, 050060, Almaty, 75 V al-Farabi avenue, Kazakhstan Abstract The main objectives of this study were (i) to determine physico-chemical properties of six different soils (ii) to measure the range and degree of urease activities, (iii) to evaluate the influence of soil physico-chemical properties on urease activities in the both sides of the £ankiri-Acifay River associated with specific landforms and different slope gradient. While right side soils of the Acifay River are formed on quaternary alluvial deposits that find on terrace and floodplain, left side soils formed from quaternary alluvium, alluvial-collivial material and oligo-miocene gypsum and salt strata located on floodplain, terrace and steep lands respectively. Soil properties data of both sides of Acifay River soils indicated significantly differences each other in terms of pedogenic processes which have been shaped by landscape position and parent material. According to soil taxonomy, 6 different soils were determined and classified as Entisol, Inceptisol and Mollisol along transect. In addition, it was found that changes of landscape positions associated with erosion and organic matter content can alter the soil urease activities within the soil profile and along different slope.
Key words: soil genesis, soil landscape, soil enzyme activity.
spatial variability resulting from differ-
INTRODUCTION
The soil is an unconsolidated three-dimensional natural body that mantles the landscape. The characteristics and properties of soils are the result of a complex interaction of physical, chemical and biological reactions (soil forming reactions) [1]. Natural soil bodies are the result of climate and living organisms acting on parent material with topography and with time required for soil forming processes [2, 3]. These soil forming factors determine soil properties by governing the type and intensity of the pedological processes involved. Because the variable of climate, parent material, relief and time also govern geomorphic processes, landscape evaluation is intimately related to soil development [4]. Therefore, the characteristics of soils change from region to region or from place to place [5]. However, this changing is not coincidence in nature.
Several soil studies in arid and semiarid areas indicate that soils show wide
ences in parent material, age of land surface, topography, water distribution, amount and intensity of rainfall and living organisms' heterogeneity [6, 7].
Soil is a complex system wherein chemical, physical and biochemical factors are held in dynamic equilibrium. Studies of enzyme activities provide information on the biochemical processes occurring in soil. There is growing evidence that soil biological parameters may be potential and sensitive indicators of soil ecological stress or restoration [8] and management-induced changes in soil quality [9]. Measurements of several enzymatic activities have been used to establish indices soil biological fertility [10]. The urease (UA) is involved in the hydrolysis of urea to carbondioxide and ammonia, which can be assimilated by microbes and plants. It acts on carbon-nitrogen (C-N) bonds other than the peptide linkage [11].
The study area has specific properties in terms of different topographical positions and parent material that influence distribution of plant patterns on both sides of Acifay River. These cases are the main principal reasons for selection of this are. Therefore, the objectives of this study were (i) to determine physico-chemical properties of six different soils (ii) to measure the range and degree of urease activities, (iii) to evaluate the influence of soil properties on urease activities in the both sides of the £ankiri-Acifay River associated with specific landforms and different slope gradient.
OBJECTS AND METHODS
The study area
The study was carried out transect along both sides of the £ankiri-Acifay River which is a prominent land form, parent material and vegetation. The study area is located approximately between 557733E-4497924N, 557751E-4497889N and situated in vicinity of £ankiri province. It ranges in relief from 740 m to 800 m and four landscape positions (floodplain, terrace, backslope, shoulder), representing changes in geomorphology, topographic gradients and soil characteristics, were selected. The underlying bedrocks within the study area consist of primarily that while right side soils of the Acifay River are formed on quaternary alluvial deposits that find on floodplain and terrace, left side soils are formed on quaternary alluvium, alluvial-collivial material spotted on floodplain and terrace oligomiocene gypsum and rock salt strata located on mid-slope and steep lands. Gypsum were commonly encountered with crystals, foliated (laminae) and mixing (not pure) forms. Vegetation cover varies through transect. Right side lands have been generally used for agriculture crops, while left side lands have covered three major plant community types (herb, shrub-grass, and grass) and upper lands is generally barren due to overgrazing. According to meteorological data, the mean annual temperature and rainfall are 11.10C and 417.7 mm. respec-
tively. In addition, the study site has mesic soil temperature regime and xeric moisture regime [12].
Soil sampling
Based on the hypothesis that topography and parent material and also vegetation cover might be the main controlling factor in soil development. Soils have been studied on along transect (crosswise from East to West direction) with representative six profiles (Figure 1). Morphological properties of these six profiles in the field were identified and sampled by genetic horizons and classified according to Soil Survey Staff (1993 and 1999) [12, 13]. 25 soil samples were taken to investigate for their physical and chemical properties at the laboratory Disturbed soil samples were then air-dried and passed through a 2 mm sieve to prepare for laboratory analysis.
Soil physico-chemical analysis
After soil samples were then air-dried and passed through a 2 mm sieve, particle size distribution was determined by the hydrometer method [14]. Coarse fragments from 2 to 60 mm were separated by passing from 2 mm sieve and mass coarse fraction ration (CFm) was calculated. Organic matter was determined in air-dry samples using the Walkley-Black wet digestion method [15]. pH, electrical conductivity (EC) were determined according to Soil Survey Laboratory [16]. Lime content by Scheibler calsimeter [13]. Total gypsum by precipitation with BaCh [17]. Cation exchange capacities (CEC) was measured using a 1 N NH4OAC (pH 7) method [16].
Urease activities
Urease (EC 3.5.1.5) activity (UA) was measured by the method of Hoffmann and Teicher [18]. 0.25 ml toluene, 0.75 ml citrate buffer (pH, 6.7) and 1 ml of 10 % urea substrate solution were added to the 1 g sample and the samples were incubated for 3 h at 37OC. The formation of ammonium was determined spectrophotometri-cally at 578 nm and results were expressed as mg N g-1 dry sample.
Figure 1 - Different soil formations on various parent materials, slopes and land covers along the transect of both sides of the Aciçay river
Statistical analysis All results are reported as the mean value of three replicate determinations calculated on an oven-dry basis. Moisture was determined by weight loss after drying the soil at 105oC for 48 h. Statistical analyses were performed by using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS 10.0) program. The asterisks, * and ** indicate significance at P<0.05 and P<0.01, respectively.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Physico-chemical properties of soil Field physical characterization data for representative profiles of the soils are presented in Figure land Table 1. Soil physical properties that have been taken into consideration in this study showed variability as a result of dynamic interactions among natural environmental factors such as climate, parent material, land cover-land use and topography. Especially, slope has been regarded as one of the most important abiotic factors that control the pedogenic process on a local scale [19,
20]. Steeper slope contributes to greater runoff, as well as to greater translocation of surface materials down slope through surface erosion and movement of soil mass [21]. In left side soils, clay percentage of surface soils in low slope sides is more than on higher slope except flood-plain top soil that is almost coarse recently alluvial deposits and the sand content for slopes with high gradient is higher than for low slopes. The same conclusion is supported by Rezaei and Gilkes [22] in a study in the Iran. A logical reason of this event is that in low slope (2-4 %) accumulation processes and in upper slope (> 30 %) runoff processes are dominant. This case is similar to the coarse fragment ratio (CFr). While the lowest value (0.44 %) of CFr is for slopes ranging from 0 to 2 %, the highest values of CFr that are steadily increased with increasing slope gradient are 34.52 %. While right side floodplain of Acifay River finer- textured soils, sand and coarser textured soils occupied the opposite bank (Table 1).
Effect of topography on soil thickness has been reported by many researchers [22-25]. Soils along transect of left side of Acifay River display variation in terms of participle distribution and depth in surface horizon. These variables are the obvious effect of eroding forces. Therefore, sur-
face soils were carried and accumulated from uplands to low lands leading to progressively redder, deeper and finer texture soils with decreasing elevation. While the deepest soil formed on low slope class (2-4 %) or terraces, shallow soils cover on steep slope.
Table 1 - Selected physicochemical properties for the six typical soil profiles
Horizon Depth, cm Particle size CFm >2 mm, % pH EC, dS m- 1 O.M, % CaCOs, % Gypsum, % CEC, cmol kg-1
C, % Si, % S, % class
Right side floodplain (PI) Aquic Xerofluvent
Ap 0-14 31 44 25 CL 1.1 7.52 1.90 1.92 12.23 0.18 16.70
C1 14-40 18 46 35 L 23.1 7.53 1.13 0.78 11.53 0.21 15.43
2C2g 40-69 11 9 80 LS 64.6 7.66 1.80 0.33 7.78 0.21 10.75
2C3g 69+ 15 24 61 SL 20.3 7.52 2.92 0.65 8.84 0.25 12.45
R{qhtside old river terrace (PII) Typic Calsixerept
Ap 0-22 41 37 22 C 1.41 7.28 1.79 2.44 10.61 0.10 15.61
A2 22-53 32 44 24 CL 1.05 7.52 1.70 1.21 12.37 0.13 15.74
Bw 53-113 38 38 24 CL 0.96 7.47 2.61 1.11 13.14 0.24 22.08
Bk 113149 43 39 18 SiC 0.54 7.80 3.22 1.05 17.34 0.74 25.08
BC 149185 36 49 15 SiCL 0.13 7.83 3.85 0.98 12.08 0.66 19.45
C1 185229 48 37 15 C 0.21 7.78 4.50 0.72 11.64 0.50 22.74
C2 229+ 45 43 12 C 0.74 7.48 2.80 0.70 12.14 0.34 18.70
Le ft side floodplain (PI) Typic Xerofluvent
A 0-6 5 22 73 LS 0.44 7.53 3.50 0.98 15.73 0.53 9.04
C1 6-15 9 53 38 SiL 1.33 7.77 4.71 0.72 15.19 0.62 9.35
C2z 15-26 9 43 48 L 2.16 7.93 9.32 0.78 14.66 1.33 11.65
C3z 26+ 8 39 54 SL 5.31 7.82 8.71 0.59 14.66 1.44 10.62
Right side old river terrace (PII) Typic Calsixeroll
Ap 0-22 41 37 22 C 1.41 7.28 1.79 2.44 10.61 0.10 15.61
A2 22-53 32 44 24 CL 1.05 7.52 1.70 1.21 12.37 0.13 15.74
Bw 53-113 38 38 24 CL 0.96 7.47 2.61 1.11 13.14 0.24 22.08
Bk 113149 43 39 18 SiC 0.54 7.80 3.22 1.05 17.34 0.74 25.08
BC 149185 36 49 15 SiCL 0.13 7.83 3.85 0.98 12.08 0.66 19.45
C1 185229 48 37 15 C 0.21 7.78 4.50 0.72 11.64 0.50 22.74
C2 229+ 45 43 12 C 0.74 7.48 2.80 0.70 12.14 0.34 18.70
Left side back slope (Pill) Typic Xerorthent
A 0-20 28 39 41 L 26.90 7.45 7.52 0.78 11.31 1.76 18.16
Cy 20-44 26 33 51 SCL 15.30 7.56 5.11 0.52 13.29 13.43 16.11
2Cy 44-120 23 42 36 L 10.25 7.75 16.62 0.33 10.61 21.71 16.30
R 120+ - - - - - - - - - - -
Left side shoulder (PIV) Lithic Xerorthent
A 0-18 14 24 62 SL 34.52 7.42 9.79 0.46 6.36 20.13 18.09
R 18+ - - - - - - - - - - -
Topsoil textural classes that were affected by slope gradient have the following distribution with decreasing elevation: Coarse sandy loam, clay loam, clay. This result to some extent is concurrence with the result of Kreznor et al. [26]. Rezaei and Gilkes [22] in their study showed dependency of particle size on landscape attributes, including slope gradients. However there is an abrupt textural transition from old river terrace soils to floodplain soils that contain loamy sand texture. There are common pebbles and cobbles within profiles of floodplain of both sides. Phillips et al. [27] indicated that the soil on the terrace shows greater soil development and better drainage compared to the soil on the floodplain. The same results were also observed in the study area. This is because of the higher position of this soil on the landscape. Moreover, the effect of parent material on structure and solum depth of the left side soils is more than the effect of landscape position. Soil profile thickness and soil clay content are important parameters for water retention. Benny and Stephens [23] reported that soil profile thickness was considered an effective element in determining soil quality, especially considering storage of plant available water and nutrients. Rezaei and Gilkes [22] also indicate that this case is a very important soil physical property especially for rangelands, which usually receive no artificial fertilizer.
Soil chemical properties on different slope position and parent material were significantly affected by the degree of soil development and leaching processing. In addition, Gerrard [28] also indicated that the movement and distribution of water on slopes is one of the primary reasons for differences of soil properties on landscapes. Soil pH and EC are generally greater at depth than at the soil surface. This case was particularly observed in left side terrace soil that has significantly high pH values (7.80-8.75), whereas pH value of right side terrace soil varies between 7.28-
7.83. It seems that this situation has significantly effect on distribution of land uses and plant pattern of both sides of Acifay River.
Many studies have made correlations between soil properties and landscape positions-slope and parent material. In their study, Brubaker et al. [29] found 13 soil properties that differed with landscape position on four fields in eastern Nebraska. According to their results, sand, silt, pH, EC, calcium carbonate (CaCO3) generally increased down slope. Clay content, OM and CEC generally decreased down slope. On the other hand, in this study it was found that clay content, OM, and CEC generally increased from upper slope to low slope lands. Soil organic matter content depends on the complex interaction of several factors including the quantity and quality of litter fall, climatic factor, soil properties (especially the amount and type of clay), and erosion [30]. Soils of the both sides of Acifay River have consistently low organic matter ranging from 0.46 to 2.61 % (Table 3). For all soils, the organic matter is the highest in the surface horizon and decreases sharply to its lowest level in the subsoil. In the study area, the reasons of the low level organic matter are attributable to rapid decomposition and mineralization of organic matter (especially, due to intensive agricultural activities for right side), to overgrazing and to soil erosion (due to high slope for left side). Cation exchange capacity in the soils ranged from 9.04 to 27.18 cmol kg-1. CEC values generally tended to be more related to the clay content (r = 0.901**), because organic matter content is generally low particularly in subsurface horizons. On the other hand, it was found statistically relation between organic matter and CEC (r = 0.596*). The gypsum content, which is relatively high in the fresh parent material (from 13.43 % to 21.71 %) is low relatively low from 0.10 % to 1.76 % in most surface horizons.
Soil urease activities The urease activities are presented in Figures 2 for each landscape position and profiles. There were significant differences in extracellular urease enzyme activities among landscape positions and soil depth. Close observation suggests that there is a tendency for greater values in urease activities at the old river terrace for both sides of river. Moreover, urease activities on shoulder and backslope position in left side were significantly lower than the old river terrace in footslope position, which was agreement with A^kin and Kizilkaya [31]. This situation may be based on erosion and soil organic carbon deposition in footslope position. Gregorich and Anderson [32] and Fu et. al. [33] reported
Urease activi
0 5 10 0 -
a so J
a ioo
HI
£ 150 200 250
Typic Calsi
0 0 ■ 10 20 I 30 ■S 40 & 50
HI
- 60
" 70 80 90
The same results were found by Bergstrom et al [34]. They suggested that higher proportion of organic matter and enzyme activities such as urease, phospha-tase, arylsulphatase, b-glucosidase and dehydrogenase in A horizon in a Grey Brown Luvisol (Hapludalf) at all landscape
that backslope and shoulder soils were the most affected by erosion and footslope soils showed the higher clay and organic matter content. Because of the high in organic matter contents, it was assumed that organic matter and clay content might be affecting the enzyme activities of soils. For all landscape positions, urease activities showed similar trend in all profiles. In all positions and each sides, urease activities in soils decreased from the surface soil downwards indicating that the major part of the location is existed to the A horizon. On the contrary, the minority of urease activities has generally remained in the C horizon of the all profiles. Additionally, urease enzymes exhibited similar pattern on all profiles (Figure 2).
position. Shukla et al. [35] assumed that higher organic matter and urease activities higher 0-10 deep soil and decreased with soil depth. Enrichment of organic matter and urease activities in surface soil is also reported by Zaman et al., Speir and Ross [36, 37] suggested that the distribution of
Figure 2 - Distribution of urease activity in soil profiles
APA and ASA correspond with the distribution of microorganisms in the profiles. The decrease in enzyme activities with depth can be mainly attributed to the diminution of biological activity down the profile. Inactivation of urease enzymes by clay minerals in the deeper horizons may be partly responsible for the different distribution patterns of the enzymes with depth [37].
The soil organic matter gave the significant correlations with extracellular urease activities (Figure 3), but not significantly correlated with the other soil physico-chemical properties. In both sites, the
microbial community of the highly skeleton has consumed relatively more organic matter than the other soil physico-chemical properties. Similarly, other studies [38-40] showed that soil organic matter content was significantly correlated with the soil urease activities. The organic matter content, related with soil biological activities, is often used as an index of soil biological activity. Indeed, the microorganisms and their synthesized urease enzymes have been shown to be more sensitive than the total carbon concentration for soil management practices [41].
Figure 3 - The relationships between soil organic matter content and urease activities
CONCLUSION Soil chemical and physical properties data of these both sides of Acifay River soils indicated significantly differences each other in terms of pedogenic processes which have been shaped by landscape position and parent material. Another way to view this concept that these factors are keys on soil forming processes especially at the local region. In addition, the results also indicated the enzyme activities along a hillslope and soil profile had the great differences in the soils. The old river terrace in footslope position has greater organic matter contents compared the other
positions, because the higher levels in the fine particles and organic matter content clearly show erosional depositing at the footslope and denudation of shoulder. The main effects of the organic matter on the urease activities may be welded the accumulation or decomposition of organic matter and erosion and deposition. The organic matter strongly correlated with urease activities suggests the number and activity of soil microorganisms depend on mainly of mineralizable substrate and urease enzyme synthesizing. In conclusion, this study demonstrated changes of landscape positions can alter the soil urease activi-
ties within the soil profile. Landscape position associated with erosion resulted in high variability of enzymes. It is, therefore, a special and interesting area for the per-
formance of an integrated analysis of soil enzymes in relation to landscape position and soil profile.
REFERENCES
1 Edward, J.C., William, J.W., Thomas, W.S. Robert, R.D. Distribution and Genesis of Soils of the Northeastern United States // Geomorphology. - 1989. - №2. - P. 285-302.
2 Jenny, H. Factors of Soil Formation-A System of Quantitative Pedology. - New York: McGraw-Hill, 1941. - 281 pp.
3 Jenny, H. The Soil Resource. - New York: Springer-Verlag, 1980. - 377 pp.
4 McFadden,L.D., P.L.K. Knuepfer. Soil Geomorphology: The linkage of Pedology and Superficial Processes. In: Knuepfer, P.L.K., McFadden,L.D. (Eds), Soils and Landscape evaluation // Geomorphology. - 1990. - Vol. 3. - P. 197-205.
5 Birkeland, P.W. Soil and Geomorphology. - New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1999. 430 pp.
6 Wierenga, P.J., Hendrickx, J.M.H., Nash, M.H., Ludwing, J., L.A. Daugherty. Variation of soil and vegetation with distance along transect in the Chihuahuan Desert // Journal of Arid Environments. - 1987. - №13. - P. 53-63.
7 Shmida, A., T.L. Burgess. Plant growth-from strategies and vegetation types in arid environments. In: Werger, M.J.A (Eds), Soil Reclamation Processes: Microbiological Analyses and applications. - New York: Marcel Dekker, 1988. - P. 83-106.
8 Kizilkaya, R., Bayrakli, B. Effects of N-enriched sewage sludge on soil enzyme activities // Applied Soil Ecology. - 2005. - №30. - P. 192-202.
9 Kennedy, A.C., Papendick, R.I. Microbial characteristics of soil quality // Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. - 1995. - №50. - P. 243-428.
10 Dick, W.A., Tabatabai, M.A. Potential uses of soil enzymes. In: Meeting F.B. (Ed.), Soil microbial ecology: applications in agricultural and environmental management. -New York: Marcel dekker, 1992. - P. 95-127.
11 Bremner, J.M., Mulvaney, R.L. Urease activity in soils. In: Burns, R.G. (Ed.), Soil enzymes. - New York: Academic Press, 1978. - P. 149-196.
12 Soil Survey Staff. Soil Survey Manuel: USDA Handbook. No: 18. - Washington D.C. USA, 1993.
13 Soil Survey Staff. Soil Taxonomy. A Basic of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Survey: USDA Handbook No: 436. - Washington D.C. USA, 1999.
14 Bouyoucos, G.J. A recalibration of the hydrometer method for making mechanical analysis of soils // Agronomy Journal. - 1951. - №43. - P. 435-438.
15 Nelson, D.W., L.E. Sommers. Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Page, L.A., Miller, R.H., Keeney, D.R (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Methods (2 nd ed). American Society of Agronomy. - Madison, WI, 1982. - P. 539-579.
16 Soil Survey Staff. Procedures for collecting soil samples and methods of analysis for soil survey. Soil Surv. Invest. - Rep. I. U.S. Gov. Print. Office, Washington D.C. USA, 1992.
17 Porta, J. Methodologies for the analysis and characterization of gypsum in soils: a review // Geoderma. - 1998. - №87. - P. 31-36.
18 Hoffmann, G.G., Teicher, K. Ein Kolorimetrisches Verfahren zur Bestimmung der Urease Aktivitat in Boden, Z. Pflanzenernahr // Bodenk. - 1961. - №91. - P. 55-63.
19 McDaniel, P.A., Bathke, G.R., Boul, S.W., Cassel, D.K., A.L, Falen. Secondary manganese/iron ratios as pedochemical indicators of field-scale through flow water movement // Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. - 1992. - №56. - P. 1211-1217.
20 Boul, S.W., Hole, F.D., McCracken, R.J., R.J. Southard. Soil Genesis and Classification. - Ames: Iowa state Univ. Press, 1997. - Ed. 4.
21 Hall,G.F. Pedology and geomorphology. In: Wilding, L.P., Smeck, N.E., Hall, G.F. (Eds), Pedogenesis and Soil Taxonomy: I. Concepts and Interactions. - NY: Elsevier, 1983. - P. 117-140.
22 Rezaei, S.A. and R.J. Gilkes. The effects of landscape attributes and plant community on soil physical properties in rangelands // Geoderma. - 2005. - №125. - P. 145154.
23 Benny, L.A., P.R. Stephens. The Feasibility of Determining the Influence of Arable Land Management on Topsoil Depth. - Aokautere: Soil Conservation Centre Publication, 1985.
24 McIntosh, P.D., Lynn, I.H., P.D. Johnstone. Creating and Testing a Geometric Soil Landscape Model in Dry Steep lands using a Very Low Sampling Density. Australian Journal of Soil Research. - 2000. - №38. - P. 101-112.
25 Power, J.F., Sandoval, F.M., Ries, R.E., S.D. Merrill. Effects of Topsoil and Subsoil Thickness on Soil Water Content and Crop Production on a Disturbed Soil. Soil Science Society of American Journal. - 1981. - №45. - P. 124-129.
26 Kreznor, W.R., Olson, K.R., Banwart, W.L., D.L Johnson. Soil landscape and erosion relationships in northwest Illinois watershed // Soil Science Society of American Journal. - 1989. - №53. - P. 1763-1771.
27 Phillips, D.H., Foss, J.E., Stiles, C.A., Trettin, C.C., Luxmoore, R.J. Soil Landscape Relationships at the Lower Reaches of a Watershed at Bear Creek near Oak Ridge, Tennessee // Catena. - 2001. - №44. - P. 205-222.
28 Gerrard, A.J. Soils and Landforms. An Integration of Geomorphology and Pedology. Allen and Unwin. - 1981.
29 Brubaker, S. C., A. J. Jones, D. T. Lewis, and K. Frank. Soil properties associated with landscape position // Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. - 1993. - №57. - P. 235-239.
30 Dahlgeren, R.H., Boettinger, J.L., Huntington, G.L., R.G. Amundson. Soil development along an evlevational transect in the western Sierra Nevada, California // Geoderma. - 1997. - №78. - P. 207-236.
31 A^kin, T., Kizilkaya, R. Organic and microbial biomass carbon contents of aggregates in a toposequence of pasture soil // Asian Journal of Chemistry. - 2006. - №18. - P. 1500 - 1508.
32 Gregorich E. G., Anderson, D. W. Effects of cultivation and erosion on soils of four top sequences in Canadian prairies // Geoderma. - 1985. - №36. - P. 343-354.
33 Fu, B.J., Liu, S.L., Chen, L.D., Lu, Y.H., Qiu, J. Soil quality regime in relation to land cover and slope position across a highly modified slope landscape // Ecological Research. - 2004. - №19. - P. 111-118.
34 Bergstrom, D.W., Monreal, C.M., Millette, J.A., King, D.J. Spatial dependence of soil enzyme activities along a slope // Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. - 1998. - №62. - P. 1302-1308.
35 Shukla, A.K. B. K. Tiwari and R. R. Mishra. Temporal and depth wise distribution of microorganisms, enzymes activities and soil respiration in potato field soil under different agricultural systems in north-eastern hill region of India // Reve-d' Ecolodie-etde- Biologie-du-sol. - 1989. - №26. - P. 249-265.
36 Zaman, M., Cameron, K.C., Di, H.J., Inubushi, K. Changes in mineral N, microbial biomass and enzyme activities in different soil depths after surface applications of dairy shed effluent and chemical fertilizer // Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems. - 2002. -№63. - P. 275-290.
37 Speir, T.W., Ross, D.J. Soil phosphatase and sulphatase. In: Burns, R.G. (Ed.), Soil enzymes. - New York: Academic Press, 1978. - P. 198-235.
38 De Luca, T.H. Keeney, D.R. Soluble antrone-reactive carbon in soils: effect of carbon and nitrogen amendments // Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. - 1993. - №57. - P. 1296-1300.
39 Leiros, M.C., C. Trasar-Cepeda, S. Seoane and F. Gil-Sotres. Biochemical properties of acid soils under climax vegetation (Atlantic oakwood) in an area of the European temperate-humid zone (Galicia, NW Spain): general parameters // Soil Biol. Biochem. -2000. - №32. - P. 733-745.
40 Kizilkaya, R., A^kin, T., Bayrakli, F., Saglam, M. Microbiological characteristics of soils contaminated with heavy metals // European Journal of Soil Biology. - 2004. -№40. - P. 95-102.
41 Doran, J.W. Parkin, T.B. Defining and assessing soil quality, in: J.W. Doran, D.C. Coleman, D.F. Bezdicek, B.A. Stewart (Eds.), Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment // Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Special Publication. - Madison, USA, 1994. - №35. - P. 3-21.
ТУШН
Р. Кызылкая 1 2, О. Денгиз1, М.Д. Кусаинова 3
топырак TonoTYCiprniMHiH, топырак касиеттерше жэне уреаза
БЕЛСЕНД1Л1ГШЕ ЭСЕР1
1Ондокуз Майыз Университетi, Ауыл-шаруашылык факультету Топырактану жэне ваджтер коректену бвлiмi, 55139, Самсун, Туркия 2Agrobigen R&D Ltd.Co. «Самсун» технопарку Ондокуз Майыз Университету
55139, Самсун, Туркия 3 9.О. Оспанов атындагы Казак топырактану жэне агрохимия гылыми-зерттеу институты, 050060, Алматы, эл-Фараби дацгылы, 75 В, Казакстан
Зерттеудщ непзп ма;саттары: (i) 6 тYрлi топырактыц физикальщ-химияльщ ;асиеттерш аны;тау; (ii) уреазаныц белсендытнщ мелшерш жэне ау;ымын елшеу; (iii) арнаиы рельефтермен, градиент багытымен ерекшеленетш Чанкыры-Ачисаи езеншщ ею жагындагы топырактыц курамындагы уреаза белсендтгше физикалы; жэне химиялы; ;асиеттершщ эсерш багалау. Ачисаи езеншщ оц жа; беткешнщ топырак;тары терраста жэне су тас;ынында орналас;ан тертiншi аллювиалды шегiндiлерде ;алыптасатын болса, сол жагынан беткi ;абатта орналас;ан топыра;тар тертiншi аллювиалды, аллювиальды; -колливалы; материалдан жэне олигомиоцендж гипстен жэне туз ;абаттарынан турады, олар жазы;ты;та, терраста жэне тж жерлерде орналас;ан.
Ачисаи езендершщ ею жагындагы топыра;тарыныц ;асиеттерi туралы деректер ландшафты; жагдаига жэне бастап;ы материалга сэикес ;алыптас;ан топыра; процестерiне ;атысты бiр-бiрiнiц арасында аитарлы;таи аиырмашылыщтарды керсетедь
Топыра;тыц таксономиясына сэикес, 6 тYрлi топыра; аны;талды жэне кескiн боиынша Entisol, Inceptisol жэне Mollisol ретшде жiктелдi. Будан бас;а, эрозиямен жэне органикалы; заттардыц курамымен баиланысты ландшафт жагдаиындагы езгерiстер топыра; профилшщ шшдеп жэне бас;а беткеи боиынша топыра;тыц уреазасыныц белсендiлiгiне эсер етуi мYмкiн екендiгi аны;талды.
Туйунду свздер: топыра; генезисi, топыра;тыц ландшафты, топыра; ферменттершщ белсендiлiгi.
РЕЗЮМЕ
Р. Кызылкая 1 2, О. Денгиз1, М.Д. Кусаинова 3 ВЛИЯНИЕ ТОПОСЪЕМКИ НА ПОЧВЕННЫЕ СВОЙСТВА И ДЕЯТЕЛЬНОСТЬ АКТИВНОСТИ УРЕАЗЫ
1Университет Ондокуз Майыз, факультет сельского хозяйства, Отдел почвоведения и питания растений, 55139, Самсун, Турция 2Agrobigen R&D Ltd.Co. Технопарк «Самсун», Университет Ондокуз Майыз,
55139, Самсун, Турция 3Казахский научно-исследовательский институт почвоведения и агрохимии
им. У.У. Успанова, 050060, г. Алматы, пр. аль-Фараби, 75 В, Казахстан Основными задачами данного исследования были (i) определение физико-химических свойств шести различных почв (ii) измерение диапазона и степени активности уреазы, (iii) оценка влияния физико-химических своиств почвы на деятельность уре-азы на обеих сторонах реки Чанкыры-Ачисаи в зависимости от рельефа и градиента уклона. В то время как, почвы правобережья реки Ачиджаи образованы на четвертичных аллювиальных отложениях, находящихся на террасе и поиме, почвы левобережья образованы из четвертичного аллювия, аллювиально-коллювиального материала и олигомиоце-новых гипсовых и соляных пластов, расположенных в поиме, террасе и на крутых склонах. Данные о своиствах почв с обеих сторон реки Ачиджаи свидетельствуют о значительных различиях их между собои в соответствии с почвенными процессами, в которых они были сформированы по их ландшафтному положению и исходному материалу. В соответствии с таксономиеи почв были определены 6 различных почв, которые были классифицированы как Entisol, Inceptisol и Mollisol вдоль разреза. Кроме того, было обнаружено, что изменения ландшафта, связанные с эрозиеи и содержанием органических веществ, могут влиять на деятельность почвеннои уреазы как в пределах профиля почвы, так и вдоль различных склонов.
Ключевые слова: почвенньш генезис, почвенньш ландшафт, активность почвенных ферментов.
