SSSAJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Acosta-Martínez, V.
Right arrow Articles by Allen, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Acosta-Martínez, V.
Right arrow Articles by Allen, V.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Acosta-Martínez, V.
Right arrow Articles by Allen, V.
Related Collections
Right arrow Soil Microbiology
Right arrow Water Conservation
Right arrow Soil Biochemistry

Soil Microbial, Chemical and Physical Properties in Continuous Cotton and Integrated Crop–Livestock Systems

V. Acosta-Martíneza,*, T. M. Zobecka and Vivien Allenb

a USDA-ARS, Plant Stress and Water Conservation Lab., 3810 4th Street, Lubbock, TX 79415
b Dep. of Plant and Soil Science, Texas Tech Univ., Lubbock, TX 79409



View larger version (49K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. (A, B) Microbial biomass C and (C, D) N in soils under integrated crop–livestock system and continuous cotton system in November 2002 and July 2003. The bold crop signifies which crop the field is under at the time of the measurements. Similar letter at the same depth indicates no significant treatment differences according to least significant differences (LSD) at P < 0.05.

 


View larger version (38K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. (A, B) ß-glucosidase and (C, D) ß-glucosaminidase activities in soils under integrated crop–livestock system and continuous cotton system in November 2002 and July 2003. The bold crop signifies which crop the field is under at the time of the measurements. Similar letter at the same depth indicates no significant treatment differences according to least significant differences (LSD) at P < 0.05.

 


View larger version (45K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Arylsulfatase activity of chloroform fumigated soil, non-fumigated, and fumigated minus non-fumigated soil of the integrated crop-livestock system and continuous cotton system in November 2002 and July 2003. The bold crop signifies which crop the field is under at the time of the measurements. Similar letter at the same depth indicates no significant treatment differences according to least significant differences (LSD) at P < 0.05.

 


View larger version (14K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Principal component analyses (PCA) of fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) profiles of soils under integrated crop–livestock system and continuous cotton system in November 2002 and July 2003.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Vadose Zone Journal Journal of Plant Registrations
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Journal of
Environmental Quality
Copyright © 2004 by the Soil Science Society of America.