HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (54) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Guggenberger, G. Articles by Elliott, E. T. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Guggenberger, G. Articles by Elliott, E. T. Agricola Articles by Guggenberger, G. Articles by Elliott, E. T.

Bacterial and Fungal Cell-Wall Residues in Conventional and No-Tillage Agroecosystems

^a Lehrstuhl für Bodenkunde und Bodengeographie, Universität Bayreuth, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany
^b School of Natural Resources, 2021 Coffey Road, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210-1085 USA
^c Natural Resource Ecology Lab., Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523 USA

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1 Ratios of glucosamine to muramic acid for the conventional () and no-tillage soils () at Mandan, ND, Stratton, CO, Bushland, TX, Sidney, NE, Manhattan, KS, and Lexington, KY. Mean values with standard errors are shown, n = 3. Pairs of bars with the same letter signify no sigificant difference at P < 0.05 between the two cropping systems

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2 Scatter plot of the microbial biomass versus the amino sugar content in conventional () and no-tillage (•) soils at Mandan, ND, Stratton, CO, Bushland, TX, Sidney, NE, Manhattan, KS, and Lexington, KY. Mean values with standard errors are shown, n = 3. The solid line represents the functional relation between both sets of parameter with its slope and its intercept

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3 Concentration of SOM present as total amino sugars (A) and glucosamine (B) as related to the TOC content in conventional () and no-tillage soils () at Mandan, ND, Stratton, CO, Bushland, TX, Sidney, NE, Manhattan, KS, and Lexington, KY. Mean values with standard errors are shown, n = 3. Pairs of bars with the same letter signify no sigificant difference at P < 0.05 between the two cropping systems

View larger version (33K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4 Ratios of glucosamine to muramic acid for the aggregate-size classes <53 µm (), 53 to 250 mm (), 250 to 2000 mm (), and 2000 yo 8000 mm () of the conventional (CT) and no-tillage soils (NT) at Sidney, NE and Lexington, KY. Mean values with standard errors are shown, n = 3. Pairs of bars with the same letter signify no sigificant difference at P < 0.05 between the aggregate-size classes. Values of the NT treatment with * are significantly different than corresponding values of the CT plots at P < 0.05

View larger version (42K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5 Concentration of SOM present as total amino sugars (A) and glucosamine (B) as related to the TOC content in the aggregate-size classes <53 µm (), 53 to 250 mm (), 250 to 2000 mm (), and 2000 to 8000 mm () of the conventional (CT) and no-tillage soils (NT) at Sidney, NE and Lexington, KY. Mean values with standard errors are shown, n = 3. Pairs of bars with the same letter signify no sigificant difference at P < 0.05 between the aggregate-size classes. Values of the NT treatment with * are significantly different than corresponding values of the CT plots at P < 0.05