inter-laboratory comparison of multi-enzyme and multiple substrate-induced respiration assays to assess method consistency in soil monitoring
The use of indicators in soil monitoring schemes to detect changes in soil quality is receiving increased attention, particularly the application of soil biological methods. However, to date, the ability to compare information from different laboratories applying soil microbiological techniques in b...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Biology and fertility of soils 2009-07, Vol.45 (6), p.623-633 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 633 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 623 |
| container_title | Biology and fertility of soils |
| container_volume | 45 |
| creator | Creamer, Rachel E Bellamy, Pat Black, Helaina I. J Cameron, Clare M Campbell, Colin D Chamberlain, Paul Harris, Jim Parekh, Nisha Pawlett, Mark Poskitt, Jan Stone, Dote Ritz, Karl |
| description | The use of indicators in soil monitoring schemes to detect changes in soil quality is receiving increased attention, particularly the application of soil biological methods. However, to date, the ability to compare information from different laboratories applying soil microbiological techniques in broad-scale monitoring has rarely been taken into account. This study aimed to assess the consistency and repeatability of two techniques that are being evaluated for use as microbiological indicators of soil quality: multi-enzyme activity assay and multiple substrate-induced respiration (MSIR). Data were tested for intrinsic (within-assay plate) variation, inter-laboratory repeatability (geometric mean regression and correlation coefficient) and land-use discrimination (principal components analysis). Intrinsic variation was large for both assays suggesting that high replicate numbers are required. Inter-laboratory repeatability showed diverging patterns for the enzyme assay and MSIR. Discrimination of soils was significant for both techniques with relatively consistent patterns; however, combined laboratory discrimination analyses for each technique showed inconsistent correspondence between the laboratories. These issues could be addressed through the adoption of reliable analytical standards for biological methods along with adequate replication. However, until the former is addressed, dispersed analyses are not currently advisable for monitoring schemes. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00374-009-0374-y |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_slubar_slu_se_43631</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>21285423</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-f8d302f71e3e3a6a17b1ce2a5d28acac265a97fb3cbd8b21f4baab1ccff7dbc43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU2L1zAQxoso-Hf1A3gyePAWzUvbtEdZfIMFD7rnME0na5Y2qZkWqd_B72z-20XBg6d5GH7PzCRPVT2X4rUUwrwhIbSpuRA9vxP7g-oka624MF3_sDoJaTquTKseV0-IboWQTSf7U_UrxBUzn2BIGdaUd-bSvEAOlCJLns3btAaO8ec-I4M4Ho1lQkbbQGvxIA9x3ByOLCMtoXRCsQIR7MTWdFZIxGZcv6WxTI8UaMXodhYioxQmNqcYyuoQb55WjzxMhM_u60V1_f7d18uP_Orzh0-Xb6-4qxu5ct-NWihvJGrU0II0g3SooBlVBw6cahvojR-0G8ZuUNLXA0BBnPdmHFytLyp-zKUfuGyDXXKYIe82QbA0bQPkc7GEttatloV_dfBLTt83pNXOgRxOE0RMG1klVdfUShfw5T_gbdpyLG-xSou-73XXFkgekMuJKKP_s18Ke07THmnakqa9E3vxqPuLl_NHYf47-H-mF4fJQ7JwU0K111-UkFrItpHCtPo3nH2y8A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>230999386</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>inter-laboratory comparison of multi-enzyme and multiple substrate-induced respiration assays to assess method consistency in soil monitoring</title><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Creamer, Rachel E ; Bellamy, Pat ; Black, Helaina I. J ; Cameron, Clare M ; Campbell, Colin D ; Chamberlain, Paul ; Harris, Jim ; Parekh, Nisha ; Pawlett, Mark ; Poskitt, Jan ; Stone, Dote ; Ritz, Karl</creator><creatorcontrib>Creamer, Rachel E ; Bellamy, Pat ; Black, Helaina I. J ; Cameron, Clare M ; Campbell, Colin D ; Chamberlain, Paul ; Harris, Jim ; Parekh, Nisha ; Pawlett, Mark ; Poskitt, Jan ; Stone, Dote ; Ritz, Karl ; Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><description>The use of indicators in soil monitoring schemes to detect changes in soil quality is receiving increased attention, particularly the application of soil biological methods. However, to date, the ability to compare information from different laboratories applying soil microbiological techniques in broad-scale monitoring has rarely been taken into account. This study aimed to assess the consistency and repeatability of two techniques that are being evaluated for use as microbiological indicators of soil quality: multi-enzyme activity assay and multiple substrate-induced respiration (MSIR). Data were tested for intrinsic (within-assay plate) variation, inter-laboratory repeatability (geometric mean regression and correlation coefficient) and land-use discrimination (principal components analysis). Intrinsic variation was large for both assays suggesting that high replicate numbers are required. Inter-laboratory repeatability showed diverging patterns for the enzyme assay and MSIR. Discrimination of soils was significant for both techniques with relatively consistent patterns; however, combined laboratory discrimination analyses for each technique showed inconsistent correspondence between the laboratories. These issues could be addressed through the adoption of reliable analytical standards for biological methods along with adequate replication. However, until the former is addressed, dispersed analyses are not currently advisable for monitoring schemes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0178-2762</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1432-0789</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-0789</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00374-009-0374-y</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Berlin/Heidelberg : Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Agriculture ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Correlation coefficient ; Environmental monitoring ; Enzymatic activity ; Enzymes ; Land use ; Life Sciences ; Markvetenskap ; Original Paper ; Principal components analysis ; Respiration ; Soil quality ; Soil Science ; Soil Science & Conservation ; Soil sciences ; Soils ; Substrates</subject><ispartof>Biology and fertility of soils, 2009-07, Vol.45 (6), p.623-633</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-f8d302f71e3e3a6a17b1ce2a5d28acac265a97fb3cbd8b21f4baab1ccff7dbc43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-f8d302f71e3e3a6a17b1ce2a5d28acac265a97fb3cbd8b21f4baab1ccff7dbc43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00374-009-0374-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00374-009-0374-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://res.slu.se/id/publ/43631$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Creamer, Rachel E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellamy, Pat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Black, Helaina I. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cameron, Clare M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Colin D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chamberlain, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harris, Jim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parekh, Nisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pawlett, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Poskitt, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Dote</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ritz, Karl</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><title>inter-laboratory comparison of multi-enzyme and multiple substrate-induced respiration assays to assess method consistency in soil monitoring</title><title>Biology and fertility of soils</title><addtitle>Biol Fertil Soils</addtitle><description>The use of indicators in soil monitoring schemes to detect changes in soil quality is receiving increased attention, particularly the application of soil biological methods. However, to date, the ability to compare information from different laboratories applying soil microbiological techniques in broad-scale monitoring has rarely been taken into account. This study aimed to assess the consistency and repeatability of two techniques that are being evaluated for use as microbiological indicators of soil quality: multi-enzyme activity assay and multiple substrate-induced respiration (MSIR). Data were tested for intrinsic (within-assay plate) variation, inter-laboratory repeatability (geometric mean regression and correlation coefficient) and land-use discrimination (principal components analysis). Intrinsic variation was large for both assays suggesting that high replicate numbers are required. Inter-laboratory repeatability showed diverging patterns for the enzyme assay and MSIR. Discrimination of soils was significant for both techniques with relatively consistent patterns; however, combined laboratory discrimination analyses for each technique showed inconsistent correspondence between the laboratories. These issues could be addressed through the adoption of reliable analytical standards for biological methods along with adequate replication. However, until the former is addressed, dispersed analyses are not currently advisable for monitoring schemes.</description><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Correlation coefficient</subject><subject>Environmental monitoring</subject><subject>Enzymatic activity</subject><subject>Enzymes</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Markvetenskap</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Principal components analysis</subject><subject>Respiration</subject><subject>Soil quality</subject><subject>Soil Science</subject><subject>Soil Science & Conservation</subject><subject>Soil sciences</subject><subject>Soils</subject><subject>Substrates</subject><issn>0178-2762</issn><issn>1432-0789</issn><issn>1432-0789</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU2L1zAQxoso-Hf1A3gyePAWzUvbtEdZfIMFD7rnME0na5Y2qZkWqd_B72z-20XBg6d5GH7PzCRPVT2X4rUUwrwhIbSpuRA9vxP7g-oka624MF3_sDoJaTquTKseV0-IboWQTSf7U_UrxBUzn2BIGdaUd-bSvEAOlCJLns3btAaO8ec-I4M4Ho1lQkbbQGvxIA9x3ByOLCMtoXRCsQIR7MTWdFZIxGZcv6WxTI8UaMXodhYioxQmNqcYyuoQb55WjzxMhM_u60V1_f7d18uP_Orzh0-Xb6-4qxu5ct-NWihvJGrU0II0g3SooBlVBw6cahvojR-0G8ZuUNLXA0BBnPdmHFytLyp-zKUfuGyDXXKYIe82QbA0bQPkc7GEttatloV_dfBLTt83pNXOgRxOE0RMG1klVdfUShfw5T_gbdpyLG-xSou-73XXFkgekMuJKKP_s18Ke07THmnakqa9E3vxqPuLl_NHYf47-H-mF4fJQ7JwU0K111-UkFrItpHCtPo3nH2y8A</recordid><startdate>20090701</startdate><enddate>20090701</enddate><creator>Creamer, Rachel E</creator><creator>Bellamy, Pat</creator><creator>Black, Helaina I. J</creator><creator>Cameron, Clare M</creator><creator>Campbell, Colin D</creator><creator>Chamberlain, Paul</creator><creator>Harris, Jim</creator><creator>Parekh, Nisha</creator><creator>Pawlett, Mark</creator><creator>Poskitt, Jan</creator><creator>Stone, Dote</creator><creator>Ritz, Karl</creator><general>Berlin/Heidelberg : Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090701</creationdate><title>inter-laboratory comparison of multi-enzyme and multiple substrate-induced respiration assays to assess method consistency in soil monitoring</title><author>Creamer, Rachel E ; Bellamy, Pat ; Black, Helaina I. J ; Cameron, Clare M ; Campbell, Colin D ; Chamberlain, Paul ; Harris, Jim ; Parekh, Nisha ; Pawlett, Mark ; Poskitt, Jan ; Stone, Dote ; Ritz, Karl</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-f8d302f71e3e3a6a17b1ce2a5d28acac265a97fb3cbd8b21f4baab1ccff7dbc43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Correlation coefficient</topic><topic>Environmental monitoring</topic><topic>Enzymatic activity</topic><topic>Enzymes</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Markvetenskap</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Principal components analysis</topic><topic>Respiration</topic><topic>Soil quality</topic><topic>Soil Science</topic><topic>Soil Science & Conservation</topic><topic>Soil sciences</topic><topic>Soils</topic><topic>Substrates</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Creamer, Rachel E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellamy, Pat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Black, Helaina I. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cameron, Clare M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Colin D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chamberlain, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harris, Jim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parekh, Nisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pawlett, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Poskitt, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Dote</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ritz, Karl</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><jtitle>Biology and fertility of soils</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Creamer, Rachel E</au><au>Bellamy, Pat</au><au>Black, Helaina I. J</au><au>Cameron, Clare M</au><au>Campbell, Colin D</au><au>Chamberlain, Paul</au><au>Harris, Jim</au><au>Parekh, Nisha</au><au>Pawlett, Mark</au><au>Poskitt, Jan</au><au>Stone, Dote</au><au>Ritz, Karl</au><aucorp>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>inter-laboratory comparison of multi-enzyme and multiple substrate-induced respiration assays to assess method consistency in soil monitoring</atitle><jtitle>Biology and fertility of soils</jtitle><stitle>Biol Fertil Soils</stitle><date>2009-07-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>623</spage><epage>633</epage><pages>623-633</pages><issn>0178-2762</issn><issn>1432-0789</issn><eissn>1432-0789</eissn><abstract>The use of indicators in soil monitoring schemes to detect changes in soil quality is receiving increased attention, particularly the application of soil biological methods. However, to date, the ability to compare information from different laboratories applying soil microbiological techniques in broad-scale monitoring has rarely been taken into account. This study aimed to assess the consistency and repeatability of two techniques that are being evaluated for use as microbiological indicators of soil quality: multi-enzyme activity assay and multiple substrate-induced respiration (MSIR). Data were tested for intrinsic (within-assay plate) variation, inter-laboratory repeatability (geometric mean regression and correlation coefficient) and land-use discrimination (principal components analysis). Intrinsic variation was large for both assays suggesting that high replicate numbers are required. Inter-laboratory repeatability showed diverging patterns for the enzyme assay and MSIR. Discrimination of soils was significant for both techniques with relatively consistent patterns; however, combined laboratory discrimination analyses for each technique showed inconsistent correspondence between the laboratories. These issues could be addressed through the adoption of reliable analytical standards for biological methods along with adequate replication. However, until the former is addressed, dispersed analyses are not currently advisable for monitoring schemes.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Berlin/Heidelberg : Springer-Verlag</pub><doi>10.1007/s00374-009-0374-y</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0178-2762 |
| ispartof | Biology and fertility of soils, 2009-07, Vol.45 (6), p.623-633 |
| issn | 0178-2762 1432-0789 1432-0789 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_swepub_primary_oai_slubar_slu_se_43631 |
| source | SpringerNature Journals |
| subjects | Agriculture Biomedical and Life Sciences Correlation coefficient Environmental monitoring Enzymatic activity Enzymes Land use Life Sciences Markvetenskap Original Paper Principal components analysis Respiration Soil quality Soil Science Soil Science & Conservation Soil sciences Soils Substrates |
| title | inter-laboratory comparison of multi-enzyme and multiple substrate-induced respiration assays to assess method consistency in soil monitoring |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T11%3A24%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=inter-laboratory%20comparison%20of%20multi-enzyme%20and%20multiple%20substrate-induced%20respiration%20assays%20to%20assess%20method%20consistency%20in%20soil%20monitoring&rft.jtitle=Biology%20and%20fertility%20of%20soils&rft.au=Creamer,%20Rachel%20E&rft.aucorp=Sveriges%20lantbruksuniversitet&rft.date=2009-07-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=623&rft.epage=633&rft.pages=623-633&rft.issn=0178-2762&rft.eissn=1432-0789&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00374-009-0374-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_swepu%3E21285423%3C/proquest_swepu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=230999386&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |