4.7 Article

Water-extractable organic matter of different composts: A comparative study of properties and allelochemical effects on horticultural plants

期刊

GEODERMA
卷 156, 期 3-4, 页码 287-292

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.02.028

关键词

Compost; Water-extractable organic matter; Allelochemical effect; Horticultural plants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The water-extractable organic matter (WEOM) was obtained from a green compost (GC WEOM), a mixed compost (MC WEOM) and a coffee compost (CC WEOM) and then characterized by means of chemical and physico-chemical methods, such as pH, electrical conductivity, total organic carbon (TOC), E-4/E-6 ratio, fluorescence and Fourier Transform infrared (FT IR) spectroscopies and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The comparative evaluation of the three WEOM samples highlighted significant differences among them. In particular, the TOC content, the E-4/E-6 ratio, the epsilon(280) value and the humification index followed the same order: CC WEOM>MC WEOM>GC WEOM. The fluorescence analysis of the three WEOM samples showed the presence of a common fluorophore unit possibly associated to simple aromatic units such as phenolic-like, hydroxy-substituted benzoic and cinnamic acid derivatives. The FT IR spectra of all WEOM samples indicated the presence of aromatic phenolic structures, while the HPLC analysis showed the presence of benzoic acid derivatives such as phthalic and salicylic acids. The allelochemical potential of each WEOM sample at two concentrations was tested on tomato and lettuce germination and early growth. In general, for both species, each WEOM sample at the two doses caused a significant increase of shoot length and plant fresh weight. The germination percentage of both plants and root elongation of lettuce resulted unaffected, whereas tomato roots resulted generally shorter in the presence of any WEOM sample, particularly at the higher dose. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据