Next Article in Journal
The Machine Learning-Based Task Automation Framework for Human Resource Management in MNC Companies
Previous Article in Journal
Heat Transfer Enhancement in a Tube Heat Exchanger Using Discrete Triangular-Prism Roughness Elements
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

Effects of Vermicompost Application on Plant Growth Stimulation in Technogenic Soils †

Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Mining and Geology, VŠB–Technical University of Ostrava, 17. Listopadu 2172/15, 708 00 Ostrava, Czech Republic
Presented at the 4th International Conference on Advances in Environmental Engineering, Ostrava, Czech Republic, 20–22 November 2023.
Eng. Proc. 2023, 57(1), 42; https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023057042
Published: 18 December 2023

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to support the use of waste materials formed from a mixture of technogenic soils for growing plants through adding vermicompost leachates. The effect on the growth of underground and above-ground biomass was evaluated on plants of the bush variety of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Three different types of biodegradable waste (apple pomace, matolin, and horse manure) were used in the experiments, from which individual vermicomposts were subsequently produced. The effect of the addition of vermicompost leachates to the soil was manifested in all the statistically evaluated parameters of the bush tomato plants. It was found that the highest values were achieved for the root weight (+2.91 g; p < 0.01) and for the stem (+1.92 g, p < 0.01). The lowest values were observed in the control plants without application of the vermicompost leachates.

1. Introduction

Nowadays, there is increasing pressure to recycle waste materials due to the efforts of maintaining the ecosystem and the use of energy and nutrients. Soils burdened with industrial activity, the so-called technosoils, are known for their reduced proportion of organic matter. A recently published meta-analysis [1] stated the average value of their organic carbon content is approximately 4.3%. In addition, these technogenic soils are also known for the content of toxic substances that cause changes in their biological activity, which are often manifested as the diversity of soil microorganisms [2,3,4,5], and also in their structure down to the level of soil microstructures [6,7,8,9,10,11]. All the above-mentioned changes reduce the functions of these technogenic soils and make their regeneration impossible. The enrichment of technosoils with vermicompost can contribute to their agricultural use.
Vermicomposting is a sustainable approach to waste management and it represents the process of the decomposition of organic waste through the cooperation of earthworms (genus Eisenia) and microorganisms [12]. It includes physical processes such as the fragmentation, aeration, and overturning of wastes, as well as biochemical processes such as enzymatic digestion, the transformation of waste materials, and their enrichment. Earthworms modify the physico-chemical and biological state of organic matter, reduce the C/N ratio, increase the surface area, expose more sites for microbial action and improve the decomposition process [13].
However, more generally, vermicompost can be described as, most often, a dark, weakly sticky mass of a solid state resembling humus or peat [14]. Factors affecting vermicompost quality include, for example, aeration, moisture [15], temperature [16], pH value [17,18], and the content of chemical substances, or elements, respectively [19]. A very important feature is the ability to supply crops with growth hormones such as auxin, gibberellin, or cytokinin, and the presence of fulvic acids and humic acids acting as plant growth regulators [20]. Aeration, mechanical mixing, additional nutrients (additives), extraction time, water quality, and temperature affect mainly the efficiency of the extraction of the substances mentioned above [21].
The aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of the application of vermicompost leachates extracts on the growth stimulation of tomato plants (Solanum lycopersicum L.) in a mixture with a technogenic soils.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Preparation of Vermicomposts and Their Aqueous Solutions

Three different types of biodegradable waste (apple pomace, matolin, and horse manure) were used in experiments, from which individual vermicomposts were subsequently produced.
A specially designed glass laboratory extractor with a volume of 10 L was used for the preparation of aqueous extracts from vermicomposts. This extractor was equipped with a magnetic stirrer (850 rpm), an aeration device, and four probes (pH, EC, dissolved oxygen and temperature). During the production of aqueous extracts, a constant temperature of 30 °C and an air flow of 10 L/min were maintained. For leaching, one kilogram of fresh vermicompost was placed in a perforated basket (volume 1250 mL) and placed in a glass container containing 9 liters of demineralized water.
The ratio of vermicompost to water was 1:9. A dressing was then prepared from the leachates after 48 h of aeration, in a ratio of 1:10 with demineralized water. The dressing was applied in two variants, by spraying the leaf and dressing the substrate. One dose represented 100 mL of solution or demineralized water for control purposes. Pre-grown determinant varieties of Solanum lycopersicum plants were used as test plants.

2.2. Experimental Plants

The plants of Solanum lycopersicum were grown in special boxes (Figure 1) equipped with aluminum foil preventing temperature changes and the influence of results by external sources of heat or cold in the laboratory (radiators and windows). The temperature in boxes was 24 °C (day) and 18 °C (night) throughout the growing season. Sodium lamps of a power of approx. 10,500 Lx were used as a source of light and partly heat. Each plant was planted in 5L containers. Fertilizer was applied 5 times in total during the vegetation period, at intervals, in the 2nd, 6th, 8th, and 10th week. In the cases where irrigation with fertilizer was not applied, control demineralized water was used instead. The time interval since planting the plants to their harvest was, in total, 13 weeks for above-ground biomass and 14 weeks for underground biomass root. Fruits were harvested in a total of 4 phases, namely, in the 9th, 10th, and 13th week.

2.3. Method of Plants Growth Assessment

At harvest, the plants were divided into fruits, other above-ground biomass (stem and leaf), and underground biomass. In the case of underground biomass, rough manual separation of the root system was performed after the substrate had dried (harvesting 1 week longer). The biomass collected in this way was then washed out 3 times in demineralized water and thereby freed of from the maximum of possible soil contamination. Each variant was performed in six repetitions. Fresh biomass weights and fruit weight and number were recorded during harvest.

2.4. Statistical Evaluation

The SAS 9.3 program was used for the plant yield evaluation. The MEANS and UNIVARIATE procedure was used to determine basic statistics. Correlations and regressions between the assessed variables were calculated using the CORR and REGG procedures. Subsequently, a detailed evaluation was performed using the GLM procedure, two-factor analysis of variance. The evaluated parameters were root weight (g), stem weight (g), fruit weight (g) and number of fruits (pcs). Several variants of the model were tested. Based on the Akaike information criterion [22], a model containing the effects of application form and dose was selected. The interaction effect was not statistically significant, so it was excluded from further evaluation. The Tukey–Kramer test [23] and statistical significance levels p < 0.05 were used to determine the significance between individual effect levels; p < 0.01; p < 0.001.

3. Results

3.1. Basic Statistics of the Evaluated Data Set

Table 1 shows the basic statistics of the evaluated data set. The average weight of the root system was 42.47 g, with a standard deviation of 6.04 g. The weight of the stem was in the range of 46.88–81.66 g. At harvest, an average of 22.27 pieces of fruit with an average weight of 6.49 g were obtained. The weight of the fruits of the bush varieties of tomatoes ranged from 4.41 g to 8.21 g with a standard deviation of 0.77 g.
As part of the statistical analysis of the obtained data, a correlation analysis was also performed. Very strong and statistically significant correlations were observed mainly between the root weight and stem weight (g) (r = 0.705; p < 0.01) and the fruit weight (g) (r = 0.621; p < 0.01), respectively. A similarly strong relationship was found between the stem weight (g) and fruit weight (g) (r = 0.624; p < 0.01). Moderately strong correlations were also found between the root weight (g) and fruit number (pc) (r = 0.384; p < 0.001), stem weight (g) and fruit number (pc) (r = 0.341; p < 0.01), and between the fruit number and weight (g) (r = 0.369; p < 0.01), respectively.

3.2. Impact of Vermicompost Leachates on Plant Growth

The model equation for evaluating the effect of the application of vermicompost leachates on the amount of biomass of the bush tomato was statistically significant (p < 0.01) for all the monitored parameters and explained the variability of the evaluated biomass parameters from 19.4% to 82% (Table 2). The effect of the form of vermicompost application was statistically significant (p < 0.01) only for the root and stem weight. The interaction between the monitored effects was not statistically significant (p > 0.05) for any of the monitored parameters and was therefore not included in the evaluation.
The root weights reached statistically significantly higher values when vermicompost leachates were applied to the soil (+2.91 g; p < 0.01). Similar tendencies were also found for higher stem weights (g), which were also achieved when vermicompost leachates were applied to the soil (+1.92 g, p < 0.01). However, statistically significant application differences were not observed for fruit weights and fruit numbers.

4. Discussion

As is the evidence of previous research, the quality of vermicomposts varies depending on the input raw materials and production procedures [24,25]. A whole range of studies around the world looked at and confirmed the positive effect not only of vermicomposts, but also of their leachates, for example, on the growth of fruit [26] and vegetables [27]. Atiyeh et al. [28] confirm in their work, similar to my work, the increase in the biomass of bush tomatoes when using vermicompost based on food waste. Zeller [29] observed a greater increase in the root mass of bush tomatoes of about 10 g when vermicomposts were applied, which is also confirmed by the results presented by me. Moreover, the obtained results are consistent with the work of Edwards et al. [20]. Bachman and Metzger [30] observed a positive effect of vermicompost based on pig manure on the growth of the root systems, stems, and leaves of tomatoes. My results also align with the study by Joshi et al. [31], which describes the positive effect of vermicompost as an organic fertilizer and bioagent on plant growth. Furthermore, Pillai and Aswathy [32] observed, for example, an 18% higher yield of edible tomato berries when vermicomposts were applied to the leaf. Similarly, the positive effect of vermicompost application or vermicompost leachate was also observed in other field crops, such as (sown flax) in study [33]. Similarly to my study, Fritz [34] also evaluated the effect of leachates from vermicomposts on the yield of selected vegetable species (Raphanus sativus, Rucola selvatica, and Pisum sativum). In his work, this author, in contrast to my results, did not confirm the positive effect of the application of these extracts on the yield of the observed vegetable species. Contrary to the study by Fritz (2012), an even higher yield can be achieved by adding additives such as brewer’s yeast.
In the case of this study, the specific kind of leachate was used as a result of the assumption that leachates prepared this way will improve the microflora in the rhizosphere and phyllosphere of technogenic soils, thereby increasing the biomass growth and plant yield.

5. Conclusions

This study shows the use of vermicompost for enriching the properties of technosoil suitable for the growth of cultural (agricultural) plants. Based upon the results achieved, in the case of Solanum lycopersicum plants, it can be inferred that the application of vermicompost in the form of leachates improves the overall health of soils and their productivity due to the improved intake of nutrients, the presence of humic substances and phytohormones, and that it also supports microbial activity. The effect of the addition of vermicompost leachates to the soil was manifested in all the statistically evaluated parameters of the bush tomato plants. The highest values were achieved for the root weight (+2.91 g; p < 0.01) and for the stem (+1.92 g, p < 0.01). The lowest values were observed in the control plants without the application of vermicompost leachate.

Funding

This research was funded by The Project for Specific University Research (SGS) No. SP2023/4 by the Faculty of Mining and Geology of VŠB—Technical University of Ostrava.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Allory, V.; Séré, G.; Ouvrard, S. A meta-analysis of carbon content and stocks in Technosoils and identification of the main governing factors. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2021, 73, e13141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nosalj, S.; Šimonovičová, A.; Vojtková, H. Enzyme production by soilborne fungal strains of Aspergillus niger isolated from different localities affected by mining. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 900, 012027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Šimonovičová, A.; Ferianc, P.; Vojtková, H.; Pangallo, D.; Hanajík, P.; Kraková, L.; Feketeová, Z.; Čerňanský, S.; Okenicová, L.; Žemberyová, M.; et al. Alkaline Technosol contaminated by former mining activity and its culturable autochthonous microbiota. Chemosphere 2017, 171, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Šimonovičová, A.; Vojtková, H.; Nosalj, S.; Piecková, E.; Švehláková, H.; Kraková, L.; Drahovská, H.; Stalmachová, B.; Kučová, K.; Pangallo, D. Aspergillus niger environmental isolates and their specific diversity through metabolite profiling. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 658010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Vojtková, H. New strains of copper-resistant pseudomonas bacteria isolated from anthropogenically polluted soils. In Proceedings of the International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM 2014, Albena, Bulgaria, 17–26 June 2014; Volume 1, pp. 451–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Urík, M.; Polák, F.; Bujdoš, M.; Miglierini, M.B.; Milová-Žiaková, B.; Farkas, B.; Goneková, Z.; Vojtková, H.; Matúš, P. Antimony leaching from antimony-bearing ferric oxyhydroxides by filamentous fungi and biotransformation of ferric substrate. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 664, 683–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Farkas, B.; Vojtková, H.; Bujdoš, M.; Kolenčík, M.; Šebesta, M.; Matulová, M.; Duborská, E.; Danko, M.; Kim, H.; Kučová, K.; et al. Fungal mobilization of selenium in the presence of hausmannite and ferric oxyhydroxides. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Matulová, M.; Bujdoš, M.; Miglierini, M.B.; Cesnek, M.; Duborská, E.; Mosnáčková, K.; Vojtková, H.; Kmječ, T.; Dekan, J.; Matúš, P.; et al. The effect of high selenite and selenate concentrations on ferric oxyhydroxides transformation under alkaline conditions. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 9955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Balíková, K.; Vojtková, H.; Duborská, E.; Kim, H.; Matúš, P.; Urík, M. Role of Exopolysaccharides of Pseudomonas in heavy metal removal and other remediation strategies. Polymers 2022, 14, 4253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Šebesta, M.; Vojtková, H.; Cyprichová, V.; Ingle, A.P.; Urík, M.; Kolenčík, M. Mycosynthesis of metal-containing nanoparticles—Fungal metal resistance and mechanisms of synthesis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 14084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Šebesta, M.; Vojtková, H.; Cyprichová, V.; Ingle, A.P.; Urík, M.; Kolenčík, M. Mycosynthesis of metal-containing nanoparticles—Synthesis by Ascomycetes and Basidiomycetes and their application. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Singh, R.P.; Sing, P.; Araujo, A.S.F.; Ibrahim, M.H.; Sulaiman, O. Management of urban solid waste: Vermicomposting a sustainable option. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 719–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Datta, S.; Singh, J.; Singh, S.; Singh, J. Earthworms, pesticides and sustainable agriculture: A review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 8227–8243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hanč, A.; Plíva, P. Vermikompostování—Perspektivní způsob nakládání s bioodpady. Odpad. Forum 2010, 11, 32. [Google Scholar]
  15. Garg, V.K.; Gupta, R. Effect of temperature variations on vermicomposting of household solid waste and fecundity of Eisenia fetida. Bioremediat. J. 2011, 15, 165–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Nagavallemma, K.P.; Wani, S.P.; Lacroix, S.; Padmaja, V.V.; Vineela, C.; Babu Rao, M.; Sahrawat, K.L. Vermicomposting: Recycling wastes into valuable organic fertilizer. Glob. Theme Agrecosyst. Rep. 2004, 8, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  17. Shak, K.P.Y.; Wu, T.Y.; Lim, S.L.; Lee, C.A. Sustainable reuse of rice residues as feedstocks in vermicomposting for organic fertilizer production. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2014, 21, 1349–1359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Garg, V.K.; Gupta, R. Vermicomposting of agro-industrial processing waste. In Biotechnology for Agro-Industrial Residues Utilisation; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 431–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pommeresche, R. Žížaly a Jejich Význam pro Zlepšování Kvality Půdy; Bioinstitut: Olomouc, Czech Republic, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  20. Edwards, C.A.; Arancon, N.Q.; Sherman, R.L. Vermiculture Technology: Earthworms, Organic Wastes, and Environmental Management; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Salter, C.E.; Edwards, C.A. The production of vermicompost aqueous solutions or teas. In Vermiculture Technology; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2010; pp. 153–163. [Google Scholar]
  22. Akaike, H. Fitting autoregressive models for prediction. Ann. Inst. Stat. Math. 1969, 21, 243–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tukey, J.W. Comparing individual means in the analysis of variance. Biometrics 1949, 5, 99–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Pant, A.P.; Radovich, T.J.K.; Hue, N.V.; Paull, R.E. Biochemical properties of compost tea associated with compost quality and effects on pak choi growth. Sci. Hortic. 2012, 148, 138–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hanč, A.; Bouček, J.; Švehla, P.; Drešlová, M.; Tlustoš, P. Properties of vermicompost aqueous extracts prepared under different conditions. Environ. Technol. 2017, 38, 1428–1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Singh, R.; Gupta, R.K.; Patil, R.T.; Sharma, R.R.; Asrey, R.; Kumar, A.; Jangra, K.K. Sequential foliar application of vermicompost leachates improves marketable fruit yield and quality of strawberry (Fragaria x ananassa Duch.). Sci. Hortic. 2010, 124, 34–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ievinsh, G. Vermicompost treatment differentially affects seed germination, seedling growth and physiological status of vegetable crop species. Plant Growth Regul. 2011, 65, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Atiyeh, R.M.; Subler, S.; Edwards, C.A.; Bachman, G.; Metzger, J.D.; Shuster, W. Effects of vermicomposts and composts on plant growth in horticultural container media and soil. Pedobiologia 2000, 44, 579–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zaller, J.G. Foliar spraying of vermicornpost extracts: Effects on fruit quality and indications of late-blight suppression of field-grown tomatoes. Biol. Agric. Hortic. 2006, 24, 165–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bachman, G.R.; Metzger, J.D. Growth of bedding plants in commercial potting substrate amended with vermicompost. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 3155–3161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Joshi, R.; Singh, J.; Vig, A.P. Vermicompost as an effective organic fertilizer and biocontrol agent: Effect on growth, yield and quality of plants. Rev. Environ. Sci. Bio/Technol. 2015, 14, 137–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Pillai, A.V.; Aswathy, K.K.; Preethy, T.T.; Renisha, M. Effect of organic liquid manures on crop growth and productivity. Int. J. Curr. Res. 2016, 8, 29023–29029. [Google Scholar]
  33. Makkar, C.; Singh, J.; Parkash, C. Vermicompost and vermiwash as supplement to improve seedling, plant growth and yield in Linum usitassimum L. for organic agriculture. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 2017, 6, 203–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Fritz, J.I.; Franke-Whittle, I.H.; Haindl, S.; Insam, H.; Braun, R. Microbiological community analysis of vermicompost tea and its influence on the growth of vegetables and cereals. Can. J. Microbiol. 2012, 58, 836–847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The growth of Solanum lycopersicum plants in boxes (author’s photo).
Figure 1. The growth of Solanum lycopersicum plants in boxes (author’s photo).
Engproc 57 00042 g001
Table 1. Basic statistics of the evaluated data set.
Table 1. Basic statistics of the evaluated data set.
Variablen x ¯ smin.max.s.e.V (%)
root (g)19142.476.0429.8758.040.4414.23
stem (g)19266.606.3146.8881.660.469.47
fruits (g)1926.490.774.418.210.0611.82
fruits (pcs)19222.273.6110290.2616.22
Notes: (n) number of measurements; ( x ¯ ) arithmetic mean; (s) standard deviation; (min) minimum value; (max) maximum value; (s.e.) the mean error of the arithmetic mean; (V) coefficient of variance (%).
Table 2. Basic statistics from the ANOVA procedure.
Table 2. Basic statistics from the ANOVA procedure.
Rated
Properties
ModelFormDose
r2pF-ValuepF-Valuep
root (g)0.820<0.00159.66<0.001156.42<0.001
stem (g)0.51<0.0018.760.00436.73<0.001
fruits (g)0.692<0.0011.040.30882.79<0.001
fruits (pcs)0.194<0.0010.020.8788.91<0.001
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Dreslova, M. Effects of Vermicompost Application on Plant Growth Stimulation in Technogenic Soils. Eng. Proc. 2023, 57, 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023057042

AMA Style

Dreslova M. Effects of Vermicompost Application on Plant Growth Stimulation in Technogenic Soils. Engineering Proceedings. 2023; 57(1):42. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023057042

Chicago/Turabian Style

Dreslova, Marketa. 2023. "Effects of Vermicompost Application on Plant Growth Stimulation in Technogenic Soils" Engineering Proceedings 57, no. 1: 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023057042

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop