1 / 31

Soils Working Group 2012 Update

Soils Working Group 2012 Update. Jennifer Moore-Kucera, Ph.D. Texas Tech University 13 March 2012. Team Members. Jennifer Moore Kucera (Grad student: Chenhui Li ) Jaehoon Lee (Grad student: Rob Raley ) Marion Brodhagen Debbie Inglis - Mount Vernon NWREC

megara
Télécharger la présentation

Soils Working Group 2012 Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Soils Working Group 2012 Update Jennifer Moore-Kucera, Ph.D. Texas Tech University 13 March 2012

  2. Team Members Jennifer Moore Kucera (Grad student: Chenhui Li) Jaehoon Lee (Grad student: Rob Raley) Marion Brodhagen Debbie Inglis - Mount Vernon NWREC Carol Miles - Mount Vernon NWREC Drew Corbin -Snohomish Co. Extension

  3. 2010-2012 SWG Objectives • Bury weathered BDMs and extract at 6, 12, 18, 24 (?) mo. • Measure % area loss of each BDM • Evaluate changes in soil quality properties

  4. Starch-based Certified compostable Products Tested Control Cellulosic paper-like OMRI Certified Experimental SpunbondPolylactic Acid Material

  5. AFTERfinal harvest(~Oct ‘10): • BDM pieces (~103 cm2) are cut, inserted in nylon mesh bags (161cm2; 250 μm openings) with soil and • Multiple sets are buried (10-15 cm) for up to 2 yrs • A set is extracted ~ every 6 mo. Cutting BDM pieces RIP Nylon mesh bags Burial

  6. Anemometer Light sensor Air Temp RH % Soil Temp

  7. % Area Reduction • Extract bags • Remove BDM pieces • Wash and mat on transparency • Measure area (cm2) • Photograph (‘ground truth’)

  8. Spunbond and WeedGuard 6 Months 12 Months Spunbond 0% (24) WeedGuardTX, WA > 99% (16)TN0% (3); 14 (1OF); 83-95% (2HT,2OF) Spunbond 0% (24) WeedGuardTX, WA 100% (16)TN100%, 83% (7,1HT) 0  6 mo  12 mo 0  6 mo  12 mo BDM % reduction (# of reps)

  9. BioBag and BioTelo • 6 Months • BioBagTX 0% (1HT); 5-18% (7)TN & WA 0% (16) • BioTeloTX 5-29% (8) TN & WA 0% (16) • 12 Months • BioBagTX 100% (2HT); 74-94% (6) TNHT 0% (4**); TNOF 5-32% (4) WA 0% (16) • BioTeloTXHT 100% (1HT,1OF), 52-81% (6)TNHT 6, 0% (1,3); TNOF 32-81% (4) WA 88, 0% (1OF,7) BDM average reduction (# of reps)

  10. Questions for team Why does TX have the most degradation of BioBag and BioTelo products? Does it depend on pre-burial status of mulch? • Need data from 2010 visual field assessments (CWG) • Need data from 2010 materials testing (MWG) Does it depend on soil temp and moisture? • Which data set to use (avg, max, min, daily, monthly, 3-weeks prior to extraction?)

  11. ?? Relationship b/w % elongation at breaking and % area loss Tensile strength data from Karen Leonas

  12. Soil Quality Index Flow Chart

  13. Soil Quality Index Flow Chart

  14. Soil Quality Index Flow Chart

  15. Soil Quality Index Flow Chart

  16. SQI 6-months extraction • No significant effect of BDM treatment in TN or TX • Significant effect of tunnel treatment with higher SQI for inside tunnels vs. open field

  17. WA SQI after 6 months extraction • Tunnel*TRT • WG > all other BDM trts within each tunnel site • SQI in WG and BB higher in open field vs. high-tunnel

  18. SMAF variables **TN and WA please confirm these values!

  19. Other Biological Measurements Soil microbial community composition PLFA profiling (broad taxonomic level info; no phylogenetic info) N-acetyl-β-glucosaminidase Chitin (fungal cell walls)  amino sugars (org N) DNA sequencing (Marion Brodhagen)

  20. Brodhagen lab: ID of microbial BDM degraders Findings so far: Most are Ascomycetes Most of these bacteria and fungi are oligotrophs  live on trace nutrients, like volatiles in air  difficult to prove that they degrade BDMs rather than simply colonizing  still working on this; ideas??  keystone species in BDM degradation?  extreme efforts to remove all C sources other than BDMs: -- only brand new glassware -- separate, new reagents -- airtight, activated charcoal-filtered box to remove volatiles

  21. Method for demonstrating growth on BDMs as sole C source: under optimization for publication 3 1 1 2 2 13: Exclusion of C sources other than BDMs: cut to uniform weights, UV-sterilized, and then placed in liquid or atop solid (agar) medium and inoculated. Agar can be a C source but it’s difficult to grow these in broth aerobically. 4: Box for culturing fungi under activated-charcoal filtered air 4

  22. Conclusions so far • BDM colonizers are mostly Ascomycetes and a few Basidiomycetes (yeasts). • Need longer sequence reads and possibly other genes in addition to 18S rRNA genes for species-level identification. • Do we need species-level identification at this point? • These fungi are metabolically diverse: -- degrade many (unusual) substrates -- make lots of secondary metabolites… including some toxins. • Eladiais known to degrade L-sugars. Conventional wisdom is that at least for PLA, the L-sugars that remain are likely recalcitrant. Hopefully more to come on this?

  23. SWG Summary • All 6 month assessments are complete WG: 20/24 samples degraded > 84% • 12 month assessments still in progress are PLFA profiling and some chemical analyses WG consistently degraded across all 3 ecoregions within 12 months BioBag & BioTelo: TX > TN > WA (0%)

  24. SWG Summary • Minimal changes in SQI due to BDM treatment • SQI higher in HT compared to OF in TX and TN • In WA SQI was higher under WG compared to all other treatments • Potential fungal degraders may pose pathogenic properties…details still coming

  25. Future SWG Goals • Complete 18 mo. analyses (samples arrive next wk!) (?Need for 24 mo assessments?) • Present oral and poster presentations at 2012 ASHS (FL) & SSSA (OH) meetings • Publish 4 papers? • SMAF • % area reduction (with Carol and Karen?) • Marion’s DNA work • Jaehoon and Rob’s Environmental Data Analyses • Others?

  26. Questions/Comments? Thank you!

  27. Soil/Environmental Properties

  28. SAS Programs TX and TN program WA program Proc Sort Data=TX; By Trt Tunnel; title ‘SQI TX 1.1'; Proc Mixed Data=TX; Class BlkTrt Tunnel; Model SQI = Trt Tunnel TRT*Tunnel/ddfm=satterth; RANDOM BLK BLK*TRT; lsmeans TRT Tunnel TRT*Tunnel / PDIFF; run; quit; Proc sort data = WA; By Tunnel BlkTrt; title ‘SQI WA 1.1'; Proc mixed data = WA; Class Blk Tunnel Trt; Model SQI =Tunnel|TRT/ ddfm=satterth; Random BlkBlk*Tunnel Blk*TRT(Tunnel); lsmeansTunnel|TRT/pdiff; run;quit;

  29. Burial & Extraction Times

  30. Ranking Tensile Strength at Burial With % Area Loss at 6 and 12 months Tensile strength data from Karen Leonas

  31. SWG Accomplishments • Lee, J., Inglis, D., Miles, C., Moore-Kucera, J., Wszelaki, A. May 19–21, 2010. Soil quality and thermal properties under biodegradable mulches. Annual Southeastern Regional Soil Physics Meeting. Nashville, Tennessee. • Moore-Kucera. September 27, 2011. ‘Biodegradable mulches:Short-term degradability and impacts on soil health.’ HortScience 46(8). • Moore-Kucera, J. Spring, 2010. Three lectures, one field tour, and one lab class on high tunnel and BDM research delivered to undergraduate soil science students at TTU, Lubbock, TX. • 2011 Fall Issue. Pulling plastic: Texas Tech researchers dig into biodegradable mulch. Kucera-Moore, J. and Wallace, R.W. (TTU/TAMU). Texas Tech Discoveries Magazine. Lubbock, TX. • June 6, 2011. Researchers Dig into Biodegradable Mulch. Kucera Moore, J. and Wallace, R.W. (TTU/TAMU). Texas Tech Today Web Magazine. TTU, Lubbock, TX. • Cowan, J., Miles, C., Inglis, D., Leonas, K., Moore-Kucera, J., Wszelaki, A., Wallace, R., Hayes, D., and Wadsworth, L. 2010. Proceedings paper: Evaluating potential biodegradable mulches for high tunnel and field vegetable production. Agricultural Plastics Congress, July 31–August 1, Palm Desert, California. Slide presentation. • Inglis, D., Miles, C., Belasco, E., Brodhagen, M., Corbin, A., Espinola-Arredondo, A., Hayes, D., Jones, R., Lee, J., Leonas, K., Liu, H., Marsh, T., Moore-Kucera, J., Wadsworth, L., Wallace, R., Walters T., and Wszelaki. A. 2010. Biodegradable Mulches for Specialty Crops Produced Under Protective Covers. • Miles, C., Hayes, D., Moore-Kucera, J., Brodhagen, M., Marsh, T., Corbin, A., Wallace, R., Wszelaki, A., Walters, T. Lee, J., and Inglis, D. 2011. Biodegradable alternatives to plastic mulch. In: Transforming Lives Transforming Landscapes. The Business of Sustainable Water Buffer Management. Steenbergen, F. van, A. Tuinhof and L. Knoop (Eds). Wageningen, The Netherlands: 3R Water Secretariat (book chapter; 1200 books printed). • Chenhui Li*, Marko Davinic, Lisa M. Fultz, Jaehoon Lee, Russel W. Wallace, Jeff Martin, Robert Raley Jr., Carol Miles, Debbie A. Inglis and Jennifer Moore-Kucera. 2011. Biodegradable Mulches: Short-Term Degradability and Impacts On Soil Health. Abstracts, Annual Meeting of the American Society of Agronomy, 16-19 October 2011, San Antonio, TX. • Moore-Kucera, J. , M. Davinic, L. Fultz, J. Lee, C.A. Miles, M. Brodhagen, J. Cowan, R.W. Wallace, A. Wszelaki, J. Martin, J. Roozen, B. Gundersen and D.A. Inglis. 2011. Biodegradable Mulches: Short-term degradability and impacts on soil health. HortScience 46(10):S68. American Society for Horticultural Science, September 2011,Waikoloa, HI.

More Related