soil physical, microbial enzyme, and molecular characterization of native prairie and agricultural...

1
Soil Physical, Microbial Enzyme, and Molecular Soil Physical, Microbial Enzyme, and Molecular Characterization of Native Prairie and Characterization of Native Prairie and Agricultural Ecosystems Agricultural Ecosystems S.H. Anderson, R.J. Kremer, and N. Mungai S.H. Anderson, R.J. Kremer, and N. Mungai Department of Soil, Environmental & Atmospheric Sciences, University of Missouri Department of Soil, Environmental & Atmospheric Sciences, University of Missouri USDA-ARS Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, Columbia, Missouri USDA-ARS Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, Columbia, Missouri Materials and Methods (cont.) Materials and Methods (cont.) Additional soil samples were taken and Additional soil samples were taken and essayed for essayed for energy transformation energy transformation enzymes (dehyrogenase); enzymes (dehyrogenase); nutrient nutrient mineralization enzymes for C (β- mineralization enzymes for C (β- glucosidase), P (alkaline phosphatases), glucosidase), P (alkaline phosphatases), and N (β- and N (β- glucosamidase); soil glucosamidase); soil microbial diversity by a C microbial diversity by a C substrate substrate utilization utilization assay; and CO assay; and CO 2 2 respiration. respiration. Total soil DNA was extracted, Total soil DNA was extracted, quantified, and quantified, and subjected to subjected to amplification (polymerase chain amplification (polymerase chain reaction, PCR) with known, primer DNA to reaction, PCR) with known, primer DNA to detect detect various bacterial genotypes. various bacterial genotypes. Different DNA Different DNA sequence combinations sequence combinations resulting from PCR were resulting from PCR were separated on a separated on a gel matrix using electrophoresis, gel matrix using electrophoresis, visualized as a series of bands visualized as a series of bands Results Results Soil bulk density was 32% lower for the Soil bulk density was 32% lower for the native prairie native prairie site (TP) compared to site (TP) compared to the sites with a history of the sites with a history of tillage tillage (RC, PF-NP, CRP; Table 2). (RC, PF-NP, CRP; Table 2). Water-stable aggregates were 10 times Water-stable aggregates were 10 times higher for the higher for the TP site compared to TP site compared to the RC site. The CRP and the RC site. The CRP and restored restored prairie sites had values at 72% of the TP prairie sites had values at 72% of the TP site (Table 2). site (Table 2). Saturated hydraulic conductivity values Saturated hydraulic conductivity values were over 35 were over 35 times higher for the times higher for the native prairie (TP) compared to native prairie (TP) compared to the the continuously cropped site (RC), and 2.5 continuously cropped site (RC), and 2.5 times times higher compared to the restored higher compared to the restored sites (PF-NP, PF- sites (PF-NP, PF- SL, CRP; SL, CRP; Table 2). Table 2). This was attributed to the This was attributed to the greater greater number of macropores (> 1 mm in effective number of macropores (> 1 mm in effective diameter) for the native prairie diameter) for the native prairie site. site. Soil enzyme activities were Soil enzyme activities were consistently highest for TP consistently highest for TP and PF-SL and PF-SL sites (Table 3), reflecting the close sites (Table 3), reflecting the close relationship of SOM levels with microbial relationship of SOM levels with microbial activity activity . . Enzyme activity values were generally Enzyme activity values were generally lowest for soil lowest for soil under continuous under continuous cropping (RC) likely due to low cropping (RC) likely due to low SOM and SOM and water-stable aggregates (Table 3). water-stable aggregates (Table 3). PF-NP soils were lower in PF-NP soils were lower in dehydrogenase, dehydrogenase, glucosaminidase, and glucosaminidase, and phosphatase, which may be a phosphatase, which may be a reflection reflection of different microbial communities and of different microbial communities and possible different SOM quality possible different SOM quality. Soil DNA content agreed closely with Soil DNA content agreed closely with other indicators other indicators of soil quality (SOM, of soil quality (SOM, glucosidase) that are associated glucosidase) that are associated with with microbial activity. microbial activity. The site with the highest number of The site with the highest number of bands from bands from molecular analysis of molecular analysis of extracted soil DNA, TP with extracted soil DNA, TP with 20, appears 20, appears to have the greatest bacterial diversity, to have the greatest bacterial diversity, while soil from RC with 10 bands had while soil from RC with 10 bands had the lowest the lowest diversity. Soil from the PF diversity. Soil from the PF and CRP sites had band and CRP sites had band numbers ranging numbers ranging from 12 to 16, suggesting that this from 12 to 16, suggesting that this ‘intermediate’ level of diversity is a ‘intermediate’ level of diversity is a Table 1. Table 1. Characteristics of ecosystems at study Characteristics of ecosystems at study sites. sites. Study Site Study Site Code Code Management System Management System Vegetation Vegetation Tucker Prairie Tucker Prairie TP TP Uncultivated native Uncultivated native Native, Native, warm season warm season prairie. prairie. grasses and grasses and forbs. forbs. Prairie Fork – New Prairie Fork – New PF-NP PF-NP Row crops until 1993, Row crops until 1993, Little bluestem, Little bluestem, Prairie Prairie native grasses and native grasses and side-oats side-oats gramma, gramma, legumes since 1994. legumes since 1994. Indian Indian grass. grass. Prairie Fork – Siricea Prairie Fork – Siricea PF-SL PF-SL Same as PF-NP. Same as PF-NP. Same as Same as PF-NP with PF-NP with Lespedeza Lespedeza infestation of infestation of lespedeza. lespedeza. Centralia-CRP Centralia-CRP CRP CRP Managed as CRP since Managed as CRP since Cool season Cool season grasses grasses 1990, no fertility. 1990, no fertility. and forage and forage legumes. legumes. Centralia-Row Crop Centralia-Row Crop RC RC Rotation since 1990, high Rotation since 1990, high Soybean (2003), Soybean (2003), fertility, fertility, minimum tillage. minimum tillage. corn (2004). corn (2004). Introduction Introduction Evaluation of critical soil Evaluation of critical soil properties is essential in assessing the properties is essential in assessing the restoration of degraded prairies and old restoration of degraded prairies and old cultivated fields to ecosystems that cultivated fields to ecosystems that resemble native prairies. Restoration resemble native prairies. Restoration and maintenance of soil quality is and maintenance of soil quality is highly dependent on organic matter highly dependent on organic matter (SOM), an array of soil organisms and (SOM), an array of soil organisms and biological activity, and improved biological activity, and improved physical characteristics including water physical characteristics including water infiltration, macroporosity, aggregate infiltration, macroporosity, aggregate stability, and bulk density. stability, and bulk density. Soils Soils managed under native ecosystems relative managed under native ecosystems relative to agricultural row crops often have to agricultural row crops often have significant differences in soil physical significant differences in soil physical and microbial properties. Assessment of and microbial properties. Assessment of relationships among these properties may relationships among these properties may provide useful information in how the provide useful information in how the physical environment affects microbial physical environment affects microbial properties. properties. Objective Objective The objective of this research was The objective of this research was Figure 1. Figure 1. Sites used for the study (a) Tucker Sites used for the study (a) Tucker Prairie, (b) Prairie Fork- Prairie, (b) Prairie Fork- new prairie, (c) new prairie, (c) Prairie Fork with sericea lespedeza Prairie Fork with sericea lespedeza infestation, (d) Centralia CRP, and (e) Centralia infestation, (d) Centralia CRP, and (e) Centralia row crop row crop rotation (with corn). rotation (with corn). b c d e a Table 2. Table 2. Soil physical and chemical properties. Soil physical and chemical properties. Bulk Bulk Water-Stable Water-Stable Hydaulic Hydaulic Study Site Study Site SOM SOM Density Density Aggregates Aggregates Conductivity* Conductivity* Porosity Porosity % % g cm g cm -3 -3 % % mm h mm h -1 -1 m m 3 m m -3 -3 TP TP 7.0 7.0 0.83d** 0.83d** 40.8a 40.8a 671a 671a 0.619a 0.619a PF-NP PF-NP 3.4 3.4 1.22ab 1.22ab 29.4b 29.4b 243b 243b 0.485cd 0.485cd PF-SL PF-SL 3.8 3.8 1.12c 1.12c 28.2b 28.2b 222b 222b 0.521b 0.521b CRP CRP 3.0 3.0 1.19b 1.19b 30.6b 30.6b 285b 285b 0.497c 0.497c Table 3. Table 3. Microbial enzyme activities and DNA Microbial enzyme activities and DNA content for the sites. content for the sites. Dehydro- Dehydro- Glucos- Glucos- Soil Soil Study Site Study Site genase genase aminidase aminidase Glucosidase Glucosidase Phosphatase Phosphatase DNA DNA g tpf g g tpf g -1 -1 -------------- -------------- g g -nitrophenol g -nitrophenol g -1 -1 soil soil -------------- -------------- g g g g -1 -1 soil soil TP TP 320 a* 320 a* 160 a 160 a 350 a 350 a 1580 a 1580 a 10.3 10.3 PF-NP PF-NP 190 c 190 c 90 c 90 c 325 ab 325 ab 640 cd 640 cd 8.1 8.1 PF-SL PF-SL 250 b 250 b 150 ab 150 ab 300 bc 300 bc 1180 b 1180 b 7.4 7.4 CRP CRP 260 b 260 b 130 b 130 b 290 c 290 c 710 c 710 c 8.2 8.2 RC RC 120 d 120 d 70 c 70 c 250 c 250 c 400 d 400 d 6.2 6.2 *Means within a column followed by the same letter are not *Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P<0.05. significantly different at P<0.05. Materials and Methods Materials and Methods Land treatments included native, Land treatments included native, uncultivated uncultivated prairie with established prairie with established warm-season grasses and warm-season grasses and forbs; 10-yr- forbs; 10-yr- old restored prairie dominated by little old restored prairie dominated by little bluestem ( bluestem ( Schizachyrium scoparium Schizachyrium scoparium ), ), side- side- oats oats gramma ( gramma ( Bouteloua curtipendula Bouteloua curtipendula ), and ), and Indian grass Indian grass ( ( Sorghastrum nutans Sorghastrum nutans ); ); 10-yr- 10-yr- old restored prairie old restored prairie dominated by dominated by sericea lespedeza ( sericea lespedeza ( Lespedeza cuneata Lespedeza cuneata ); ); a a 14-yr-old conservation reserve program 14-yr-old conservation reserve program site with site with cool-season grasses and low cool-season grasses and low density forage legumes; density forage legumes; and a site and a site under row crop production with the past under row crop production with the past 14 years under a corn ( 14 years under a corn ( Zea mays Zea mays )-soybean )-soybean ( ( Glycine Glycine max max ) rotation cropping system ) rotation cropping system (Fig. 1, Table 1). (Fig. 1, Table 1). Sampling sites were located on Mexico Sampling sites were located on Mexico silt loam (fine, silt loam (fine, smectitic, mesic Aeric smectitic, mesic Aeric Vertic Epiaqualfs). Vertic Epiaqualfs). Relatively undisturbed cores (7.62 cm by Relatively undisturbed cores (7.62 cm by 7.62 cm ) were 7.62 cm ) were sampled from the 0 to sampled from the 0 to 10 cm depth on 12 May 2004; 10 cm depth on 12 May 2004; 3 replicate 3 replicate locations with 5 sub-samples per locations with 5 sub-samples per Summary Summary This research demonstrated that soil This research demonstrated that soil measurements based on soil enzyme measurements based on soil enzyme activity, physiological and molecular activity, physiological and molecular characteristics, and selected physical characteristics, and selected physical traits (water-stable aggregation, traits (water-stable aggregation, saturated hydraulic conductivity) saturated hydraulic conductivity) differentiated soils managed as native differentiated soils managed as native prairie, restored prairie, or cultivated prairie, restored prairie, or cultivated land. Results indicated that sites under land. Results indicated that sites under restoration to prairie vegetation are restoration to prairie vegetation are transitional between native prairie and transitional between native prairie and cultivated soils based on combined cultivated soils based on combined physical and microbiological analyses. physical and microbiological analyses. The use of physiological and molecular The use of physiological and molecular analyses of prairie soils yielded new analyses of prairie soils yielded new insights on the complex functional and insights on the complex functional and structural diversity of their soil structural diversity of their soil

Post on 21-Dec-2015

217 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Soil Physical, Microbial Enzyme, and Molecular Characterization of Native Prairie and Agricultural Ecosystems S.H. Anderson, R.J. Kremer, and N. Mungai

Soil Physical, Microbial Enzyme, and Molecular Characterization of Soil Physical, Microbial Enzyme, and Molecular Characterization of Native Prairie and Agricultural EcosystemsNative Prairie and Agricultural Ecosystems

S.H. Anderson, R.J. Kremer, and N. MungaiS.H. Anderson, R.J. Kremer, and N. MungaiDepartment of Soil, Environmental & Atmospheric Sciences, University of MissouriDepartment of Soil, Environmental & Atmospheric Sciences, University of Missouri

USDA-ARS Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, Columbia, MissouriUSDA-ARS Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, Columbia, Missouri

Soil Physical, Microbial Enzyme, and Molecular Characterization of Soil Physical, Microbial Enzyme, and Molecular Characterization of Native Prairie and Agricultural EcosystemsNative Prairie and Agricultural Ecosystems

S.H. Anderson, R.J. Kremer, and N. MungaiS.H. Anderson, R.J. Kremer, and N. MungaiDepartment of Soil, Environmental & Atmospheric Sciences, University of MissouriDepartment of Soil, Environmental & Atmospheric Sciences, University of Missouri

USDA-ARS Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, Columbia, MissouriUSDA-ARS Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, Columbia, Missouri

Materials and Methods (cont.)Materials and Methods (cont.)Additional soil samples were taken and essayed for Additional soil samples were taken and essayed for energy transformation enzymes (dehyrogenase); energy transformation enzymes (dehyrogenase); nutrient mineralization enzymes for C (β-nutrient mineralization enzymes for C (β- glucosidase), P glucosidase), P (alkaline phosphatases), and N (β-(alkaline phosphatases), and N (β- glucosamidase); soil glucosamidase); soil

microbial diversity by a C microbial diversity by a C substrate utilization substrate utilization assay; and COassay; and CO22 respiration. respiration.

Total soil DNA was extracted, quantified, and Total soil DNA was extracted, quantified, and subjected subjected to amplification (polymerase chain to amplification (polymerase chain reaction, PCR) with reaction, PCR) with known, primer DNA to detect known, primer DNA to detect various bacterial various bacterial genotypes. Different DNA genotypes. Different DNA sequence combinations sequence combinations resulting from PCR were resulting from PCR were separated on a gel matrix using separated on a gel matrix using electrophoresis, electrophoresis, visualized as a series of bands visualized as a series of bands distributed over the distributed over the matrix. The series of bands obtained matrix. The series of bands obtained from from separating the DNA fragments resulted in separating the DNA fragments resulted in genetic genetic profiles that characterized microbial profiles that characterized microbial communities.communities.

ResultsResults Soil bulk density was 32% lower for the native prairie Soil bulk density was 32% lower for the native prairie site (TP) compared to the sites with a history of site (TP) compared to the sites with a history of tillage (RC, PF-NP, CRP; Table 2).tillage (RC, PF-NP, CRP; Table 2).

Water-stable aggregates were 10 times higher for the Water-stable aggregates were 10 times higher for the TP site compared to the RC site. The CRP and TP site compared to the RC site. The CRP and restored prairie sites had values at 72% of the TP restored prairie sites had values at 72% of the TP site site (Table 2).(Table 2).

Saturated hydraulic conductivity values were over 35 Saturated hydraulic conductivity values were over 35 times higher for the native prairie (TP) compared to times higher for the native prairie (TP) compared to the continuously cropped site (RC), and 2.5 times the continuously cropped site (RC), and 2.5 times higher compared to the restored sites (PF-NP, PF-higher compared to the restored sites (PF-NP, PF- SL, SL, CRP; CRP; Table 2). This was attributed to the Table 2). This was attributed to the greater greater number of macropores (> 1 mm in effective number of macropores (> 1 mm in effective diameter) diameter) for the native prairie site.for the native prairie site.

Soil enzyme activities were consistently highest for TP Soil enzyme activities were consistently highest for TP and PF-SL sites (Table 3), reflecting the close and PF-SL sites (Table 3), reflecting the close relationship of SOM levels with microbial activityrelationship of SOM levels with microbial activity..

Enzyme activity values were generally lowest for soil Enzyme activity values were generally lowest for soil under continuous cropping (RC) likely due to low under continuous cropping (RC) likely due to low SOM SOM and water-stable aggregates (Table 3).and water-stable aggregates (Table 3).

PF-NP soils were lower in dehydrogenase, PF-NP soils were lower in dehydrogenase, glucosaminidase, and phosphatase, which may be a glucosaminidase, and phosphatase, which may be a reflection of different microbial communities and reflection of different microbial communities and possible different SOM qualitypossible different SOM quality.

Soil DNA content agreed closely with other indicators Soil DNA content agreed closely with other indicators of soil quality (SOM, glucosidase) that are associated of soil quality (SOM, glucosidase) that are associated with microbial activity.with microbial activity.

The site with the highest number of bands from The site with the highest number of bands from molecular analysis of extracted soil DNA, TP with molecular analysis of extracted soil DNA, TP with 20, 20, appears to have the greatest bacterial diversity, appears to have the greatest bacterial diversity, while while soil from RC with 10 bands had the lowest soil from RC with 10 bands had the lowest diversity. diversity. Soil from the PF and CRP sites had band Soil from the PF and CRP sites had band numbers numbers ranging from 12 to 16, suggesting that this ranging from 12 to 16, suggesting that this ‘intermediate’ level of diversity is a characteristic ‘intermediate’ level of diversity is a characteristic response of soil undergoing restoration to its response of soil undergoing restoration to its original original bacterial community.bacterial community.

The relationship of soil organic matter (SOM) to The relationship of soil organic matter (SOM) to biological activity is illustrated by strong biological activity is illustrated by strong correlations correlations between soil DNA (representing the between soil DNA (representing the bacterial bacterial community) and water stable aggregates community) and water stable aggregates (r(r2 2 = 0.82) and = 0.82) and glucosidase activity (representing glucosidase activity (representing SOM decomposition; SOM decomposition; rr22 = 0.83). = 0.83).

Table 1.Table 1. Characteristics of ecosystems at study sites. Characteristics of ecosystems at study sites.

Study Site Study Site CodeCode Management SystemManagement System VegetationVegetation

Tucker PrairieTucker Prairie TPTP Uncultivated nativeUncultivated native Native, warm seasonNative, warm seasonprairie.prairie. grasses and forbs.grasses and forbs.

Prairie Fork – NewPrairie Fork – New PF-NPPF-NP Row crops until 1993,Row crops until 1993, Little bluestem, Little bluestem,

PrairiePrairie native grasses and native grasses and side-oats side-oats gramma,gramma,

legumes since 1994.legumes since 1994. Indian grass.Indian grass.

Prairie Fork – SiriceaPrairie Fork – Siricea PF-SLPF-SL Same as PF-NP.Same as PF-NP. Same as PF-NP withSame as PF-NP withLespedezaLespedeza infestation ofinfestation of

lespedeza.lespedeza.

Centralia-CRPCentralia-CRP CRPCRP Managed as CRP sinceManaged as CRP since Cool season grassesCool season grasses1990, no fertility.1990, no fertility. and forage legumes. and forage legumes.

Centralia-Row CropCentralia-Row Crop RCRC Rotation since 1990, highRotation since 1990, high Soybean (2003), Soybean (2003), fertility, minimum tillage.fertility, minimum tillage. corn (2004).corn (2004).

IntroductionIntroduction

Evaluation of critical soil properties is essential in Evaluation of critical soil properties is essential in assessing the restoration of degraded prairies and old assessing the restoration of degraded prairies and old cultivated fields to ecosystems that resemble native cultivated fields to ecosystems that resemble native prairies. Restoration and maintenance of soil quality is prairies. Restoration and maintenance of soil quality is highly dependent on organic matter (SOM), an array of highly dependent on organic matter (SOM), an array of soil organisms and biological activity, and improved soil organisms and biological activity, and improved physical characteristics including water infiltration, physical characteristics including water infiltration, macroporosity, aggregate stability, and bulk density.macroporosity, aggregate stability, and bulk density. Soils managed under native ecosystems relative to Soils managed under native ecosystems relative to agricultural row crops often have significant differences agricultural row crops often have significant differences in soil physical and microbial properties. Assessment of in soil physical and microbial properties. Assessment of relationships among these properties may provide useful relationships among these properties may provide useful information in how the physical environment affects information in how the physical environment affects microbial properties.microbial properties.

ObjectiveObjective The objective of this research was to quantify soil The objective of this research was to quantify soil

physical properties and soil enzyme activity, physical properties and soil enzyme activity, physiological and molecular characteristics for native, physiological and molecular characteristics for native, restored, and cultivated prairies. restored, and cultivated prairies.

Figure 1.Figure 1. Sites used for the study (a) Tucker Prairie, (b) Prairie Fork- Sites used for the study (a) Tucker Prairie, (b) Prairie Fork- new prairie, (c) Prairie Fork with sericea lespedeza new prairie, (c) Prairie Fork with sericea lespedeza

infestation, (d) Centralia CRP, and (e) Centralia row crop infestation, (d) Centralia CRP, and (e) Centralia row crop rotation (with corn).rotation (with corn).

b c d ea

Table 2.Table 2. Soil physical and chemical properties. Soil physical and chemical properties.

BulkBulk Water-StableWater-Stable Hydaulic HydaulicStudy SiteStudy Site SOMSOM DensityDensity Aggregates Aggregates Conductivity*Conductivity* PorosityPorosity

%% g cmg cm-3-3 % % mm h mm h-1-1 m m33 m m-3-3

TPTP 7.07.0 0.83d**0.83d** 40.8a 40.8a 671a 671a 0.619a0.619a

PF-NPPF-NP 3.43.4 1.22ab1.22ab 29.4b 29.4b 243b 243b 0.485cd0.485cd

PF-SLPF-SL 3.83.8 1.12c1.12c 28.2b 28.2b 222b 222b 0.521b0.521b

CRPCRP 3.03.0 1.19b1.19b 30.6b 30.6b 285b 285b 0.497c0.497c

RCRC 2.72.7 1.26a1.26a 3.8c 3.8c 17.9c 17.9c 0.473d0.473d

*Geometric means*Geometric means**Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P<0.05.**Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P<0.05.

Table 3.Table 3. Microbial enzyme activities and DNA content for the sites. Microbial enzyme activities and DNA content for the sites.

Dehydro-Dehydro- Glucos-Glucos- SoilSoilStudy SiteStudy Site genase genase aminidase aminidase GlucosidaseGlucosidase PhosphatasePhosphatase DNADNA

g tpf gg tpf g-1-1 -------------- -------------- g g -nitrophenol g-nitrophenol g-1-1 soil -------------- soil -------------- g gg g-1-1 soil soil

TPTP 320 a*320 a* 160 a160 a 350 a 350 a 1580 a 1580 a 10.310.3

PF-NPPF-NP 190 c190 c 90 c 90 c 325 ab 325 ab 640 cd 640 cd 8.1 8.1

PF-SLPF-SL 250 b250 b 150 ab150 ab 300 bc 300 bc 1180 b 1180 b 7.4 7.4

CRPCRP 260 b260 b 130 b130 b 290 c 290 c 710 c 710 c 8.2 8.2

RCRC 120 d120 d 70 c 70 c 250 c 250 c 400 d 400 d 6.2 6.2

*Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P<0.05.*Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P<0.05.

Materials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsLand treatments included native, uncultivated Land treatments included native, uncultivated prairie with established warm-season grasses and prairie with established warm-season grasses and forbs; 10-yr-old restored prairie dominated by little forbs; 10-yr-old restored prairie dominated by little bluestem (bluestem (Schizachyrium scopariumSchizachyrium scoparium),), side-oats side-oats gramma gramma ((Bouteloua curtipendulaBouteloua curtipendula), and Indian grass ), and Indian grass ((Sorghastrum nutansSorghastrum nutans);); 10-yr-old restored prairie 10-yr-old restored prairie dominated by sericea lespedeza (dominated by sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneataLespedeza cuneata); ); a 14-yr-old conservation reserve program site with a 14-yr-old conservation reserve program site with cool-cool-season grasses and low density forage legumes; season grasses and low density forage legumes; and a and a site under row crop production with the past site under row crop production with the past 14 years 14 years under a corn (under a corn (Zea maysZea mays)-soybean ()-soybean (Glycine Glycine maxmax) ) rotation cropping system (Fig. 1, Table 1).rotation cropping system (Fig. 1, Table 1).

Sampling sites were located on Mexico silt loam (fine, Sampling sites were located on Mexico silt loam (fine, smectitic, mesic Aeric Vertic Epiaqualfs).smectitic, mesic Aeric Vertic Epiaqualfs).

Relatively undisturbed cores (7.62 cm by 7.62 cm ) were Relatively undisturbed cores (7.62 cm by 7.62 cm ) were sampled from the 0 to 10 cm depth on 12 May 2004; sampled from the 0 to 10 cm depth on 12 May 2004; 3 3 replicate locations with 5 sub-samples per location.replicate locations with 5 sub-samples per location.

Samples were evaluated for physical properties: bulk Samples were evaluated for physical properties: bulk density, pore-size distributions, saturated hydraulic density, pore-size distributions, saturated hydraulic conductivity and water-stable aggregates.conductivity and water-stable aggregates.

SummarySummary

This research demonstrated that soil measurements This research demonstrated that soil measurements based on soil enzyme activity, physiological and based on soil enzyme activity, physiological and molecular characteristics, and selected physical traits molecular characteristics, and selected physical traits (water-stable aggregation, saturated hydraulic (water-stable aggregation, saturated hydraulic conductivity) differentiated soils managed as native conductivity) differentiated soils managed as native prairie, restored prairie, or cultivated land. Results prairie, restored prairie, or cultivated land. Results indicated that sites under restoration to prairie indicated that sites under restoration to prairie vegetation are transitional between native prairie and vegetation are transitional between native prairie and cultivated soils based on combined physical and cultivated soils based on combined physical and microbiological analyses. The use of physiological and microbiological analyses. The use of physiological and molecular analyses of prairie soils yielded new insights on molecular analyses of prairie soils yielded new insights on the complex functional and structural diversity of their the complex functional and structural diversity of their soil bacterial communities, which contribute to the soil bacterial communities, which contribute to the biological characteristics of these soils.biological characteristics of these soils.