...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>European Journal of Soil Biology >Earthworm collection from agricultural fields: comparisons of selected expellants in presence/absence of hand-sorting.
【24h】

Earthworm collection from agricultural fields: comparisons of selected expellants in presence/absence of hand-sorting.

机译：从农业领域收集worm：比较是否存在人工分类的选定驱除剂。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The role earthworms play in soil fertility is under increasing scientific scrutiny, especially in light of the fact that farmers are seeking to reduce soil tillage. However, there are many discrepancies in earthworm sampling methods. The aim of this study is to compare the efficiency of three chemical expellants (formaldehyde, commercial 'hot' mustard and allyl isothiocyanate, abbreviated AITC), with two sampling methods: (i) a simple method that consisted in spreading an expellant solution on the soil and retrieving earthworms that emerged at the soil surface, and (ii) a combined method that consisted in applying a chemical to expel earthworms and then hand-sorting the remaining earthworms from the block of soil. Sampling efficiency was measured in terms of earthworm density and biomass, for endogeic and anecic earthworms. With the simple method, a higher density of earthworms was sampled using formaldehyde and AITC than with mustard. Formaldehyde, AITC and mustard expelled not significantly different biomasses of 47.7, 31.9 and 20.5 g m-2, respectively, on average over the three plots. The combined method did not yield a significantly different density or biomass with the different chemicals. Formaldehyde is toxic and commercial 'hot' mustard is difficult to standardise and inefficient when used without hand-sorting. Accounting for the accuracy of the sampling methods as well as the toxicity of the chemicals to users and soil organisms, AITC appears to be a reliable and promising chemical expellant whether or not in combination with hand-sorting. Its use would be a step towards standardizing earthworm sampling methods.
机译：increasing在土壤肥力中的作用正在受到越来越严格的科学审查，特别是考虑到农民正在寻求减少土壤耕作的事实。但是，worm采样方法存在许多差异。这项研究的目的是比较三种化学驱除剂（甲醛，商业“热”芥末和异硫氰酸烯丙酯，缩写为AITC）的效率，并采用两种采样方法：（i）一种简单的方法，将驱除剂溶液散布在土壤和在土壤表面出现的earth;以及（ii）一种组合方法，包括将化学物质喷出earth，然后从土壤块中手工分选剩余的worm。对于内生和ec生的efficiency，以efficiency密度和生物量衡量取样效率。通过简单的方法，使用甲醛和AITC采集的than比使用芥末的密度更高。在三个样地中，甲醛，AITC和芥菜的生物量平均分别没有明显差异，分别为47.7、31.9和20.5 g m -2 。组合方法使用不同的化学药品不会产生明显不同的密度或生物量。甲醛是有毒的，如果不进行手工分拣，则商用“热”芥末难以标准化且效率低下。考虑到采样方法的准确性以及该化学品对使用者和土壤生物的毒性，无论是否与人工分拣相结合，AITC似乎都是一种可靠且很有前途的化学品。它的使用将朝着标准化sampling采样方法迈出一步。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号