QUALIDADE BIOLÓGICA DO SOLO DE SISTEMAS DE CULTIVO EM POMARES DE CITRUS DELICIOSA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X9355Abstract
The citrus production is grown in Rio Grande do Sul under different croppingsystems, and their impact on soil quality is unknown. The aim of thisstudy was to evaluate some measures of environmental quality between differentmanagement systems of Citrus from Vale do Caí, RS with emphasison the production of tangerines ‘Montenegrina’ (Citrus deliciosa Tenore) bychemical and biological characterization of soils. The samples were collectedfrom five areas cultivated under different cropping types: organic cropping(PO), organic cropping in transition to biodynamic (POT), agroforestry cropping(PAF), conventional cropping (PC) and native forestry (MN) as a controltreatment in the Montenegro city, Rio Grande do Sul, at 0-10 cm of depth. Wedetermined the microbial biomass carbon (CBM), basal respiration (RB), theactivities of urease, acid phosphatase (FA) and the hydrolysis of fluoresceindiacetate (FDA). For all evaluations, the results were significantly higher inthe control area (MN). In CBM evaluations, the control obtained values of175.2 mg C Kg-1 of dry soil and the lowest value was found in CP at 34 mg CKg-1 of dry soil. The values of RB to system PAF (334.4 mg C-CO2 kg-1 of dry soil), PO (333.3 mg C-CO2 kg-1 of dry soil) and LPO (257.7 mg C-CO2 kg-1 soildried) were significantly lower against the control (728.7 mg C-CO2 kg-1 drysoil). In the urease evaluation, the systems POT and PO were significantlylower with values of 77.7 and 68.5 µg N-NH4 g-1 of dry soil 2 h-1 respectively,compared with the control (128 µg N-NH4 g-1 of dry soil 2 h-1). For cropping systems of PC and PAF, FA values obtained were almost three folds lower(541 and 427 µg p-nitrofenol g-1 dry soil h-1 respectively) when compared withthe control area. So the cropping systems, even the less intensive, were notable to maintain the same quality of soil microbiology that areas of the nativeforestry. This shows that soil quality indicators such as RB, the FA and ureasecan be important indicators in assessing the environmental quality of differentcropping systems of Citrus deliciosa.Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
