Advertisement

Wetlands

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 416–421 | Cite as

Phenol oxidase activity in peatlands in New York State: Response to summer drought and peat type

  • Christopher J. Williams
  • Erica A. Shingara
  • Joseph B. Yavitt
Article

Abstract

We studied phenol oxidase (PO) activity in two Sphagnum-dominated peatlands and a Carex-dominated freshwater marsh during a strong summer drought in Central New York, USA to determine whether PO activity might respond to expected climatic changes. Peat was sampled at different depths and within distinct vegetation types within the marsh. Carex-derived peat supported substantially higher PO activity (average=0.030, range=0.011–0.051 μMOL diqc min−1 mg dry peat−1, at soil pH 5.5) than Sphagnum peat (average=0.006, range=0.001–0.015 μMOL diqc min−1 mg dry peat−1, at soil pH 3.8). In both peat types, PO activity showed a strong exponential increase with increased solution pH. Phenol oxidase activity in Sphagnum peat did not vary significantly during the drought, suggesting that PO activity may be constrained by low pH and enzyme inhibitors. Conversely, PO activity in the marsh peat varied with peat type and sample date but not as a consistent function of water-table depth. As a result, PO activity in Sphagnum peat appears to be regulated less by aeration and more by pH and possibly enzyme inhibitors. When pH is favorable, PO activity depends more on wetland vegetation type and botanical composition of the peat than climatic factors.

Key Words

Carex L-dopa peat soil soil enzyme Sphagnum 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Banerjee, R. D. and S. P. Sen. 1979. Antibiotic activity of bryophytes. Bryologist 82:141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borga, P., M. Nilsson, and A. Tunlid. 1994. Bacterial communities in peat in relation to botanical composition as revealed by phospholipid fatty acid analysis. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 26:841–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Box, J. D. 1983. Investigation of the Folin-Ciocalteau Phenol reagent for the determination of polyphenolic substances in natural waters. Water Research 17:249–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duxbury J. M. and R. L. Tate. 1981. The effect of soil depth and crop cover on enzymatic activities in Pahokee muck. Soil Science Society of America Journal 45:322–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fasman, G. D. 1975. Handbook of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. CRC Press, Cleveland, OH, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Freeman C., G. Liska, N. J. Ostle, S. E. Jones, and M. A. Lock. 1995. The use of fluorogenic substrates for measuring enzyme activity in peatlands. Plant and Soil 175:147–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Freeman C., G. Liska, N. J. Ostle, M. A. Lock, B. Renyolds, and J. Hudson. 1996. Microbial, activity and enyzmatic decomposition processes following peatland water table drawdown. Plant and Soil 180:121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gorham, E. 1991. Northern peatlands: role in the carbon cycle and probable responses to climatic warming. Ecological Applications 1:182–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jonassen, S., J. P. Bryant, F. S. II Chapin, and M. Andersson. 1986. Plant phenols and nutrients in relation to variations in climate and rodent grazing. American Naturalist 128:394–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kuprevich, V. F. and T. A. Shcherbakova. 1971. Comparative enzymatic activity in diverse types of soil. p. 167–201. In A. D. McLaren and J. Skujin (eds.). Soil Biochemistry. Marcel Dekker. New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  11. Ladd, J. N. 1978. Origin and range of enzymes in soil. p. 51–96. In R. G. Burns (ed.) Soil Enzymes. Academic Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
  12. Lähdesmäki, P. and R. Piispanen. 1988. Degradation products and the hydrolytic enzyme activities in the soil humification process. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 20:287–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leake, J. R. 1987. Metabolism of phyto- and fungitoxic phenolic acids by the ericoid mycorrhizal fungus. p. 332–333. In D. M. Sylvia, L. L. Hung, and J. H. Graham (eds.). Proceedings of the Seventh North American Mycorrhiza Conference. University of Florida Press, Gainsville, FL, USA.Google Scholar
  14. Mitchell, J. F. B., T. C. Johns, J. M. Gregory, and S. F. B. Tett. 1996. Climate response to increasing levels of greenhouse gases and sulphate aerosols. Nature 376:501–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Münster, U. 1991. Extracellular enzyme activity in eutrophic and polyhumic lakes. p. 96–122. In R. J. Chróst (ed.). Microbial Enzymes in Aquatic Environments. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY USA.Google Scholar
  16. Nichols-Orians, C. 1991. Differential effects of condensed and hydrolyzable tannin on polyphenol oxidase activity of attine symbiotic fungus. Journal of Chemical Ecology 17:1811–1819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Painter, T. J. 1991. Lindow Man, Tollund, Man and other peat-bog bodies: The preservative and antimicrobial action of sphagnan, a reactive glycuronoglycan with tanning and sequestering properties. Carbohydrate Polymers 15:123–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Peters G. T. and F. S. Colwell. 1989. Effects of stream order and season on mineralization of [14C]-phenol in streams. Hydrobiologia 174:79–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pind, A., C. Freeman, and M. A. Lock. 1994. Enzymatic degradation of phenolic materials in peatlands-measurement of phenol oxidase activity. Plant and Soil 159:227–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rasmussen, S., C. Wolff, and H. Rudolph. 1995. Compartmentalization of phenolic constituents in Sphagnum. Phytochemistry 38:35–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Read, D. J. 1992. The mycorrhizal Fungal community with special reference to nutrient mobilization. p. 631–652. In G. C. Carroll and D. T. Wicklow (eds.) The Fungal Community. Marcel Dekker. New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  22. Sherman, T. D., K. C. Vaughn, and S. O. Duke, 1991. A limited survey of the phylogenetic distribution of polyphenol oxidase. Phytochemistry 30:2499–2506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sinsabaugh, R. L. and A. E. Linkins. 1990. Enzymatic and chemical analysis of particulate organic matter from a boreal river. Freshwater Biology 23:301–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tate, R. L. III. 1980. Microbial oxidation of organic matter in histosols. p. 169–201. In M. Alexander (ed.) Advances in Microbial Ecology. Plenum Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  25. van Breemen, N. 1995. How Sphagnum bogs down other plants. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10:270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Verhoeven, J. T. A. and W. M. Liefveld. 1997. The ecological significance of organochemical compounds in Sphagnum. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 46:117–130.Google Scholar
  27. Verhoeven, J. T. A. and E. Toth. 1995. Decomposition of Carex and Sphagnum litter in fends: effect of litter quality and inhibition by living tissue homogenates. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 27:271–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wetzel, R. G. 1991. Extracellular enzymatic interactions: Storage. redistribution, and interspecific communication. p. 6–28. In R. J. Chróst (ed.) Microbial Enzymes in Aquatic Environments Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  29. Wilson, M. A., J. Sawyer, P. G. Hatcher, and H. E. III. Lerch. 1989. 1-3-5 Hydroxybenzene structures in mosses. Phytochemistry 28: 1395–1400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher J. Williams
    • 2
  • Erica A. Shingara
    • 1
  • Joseph B. Yavitt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Natural Resources Fernow HallCornell UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Department of Earth, and Environmental ScienceUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations