Assessment of four soil nematode communities in Hawaii by different methods

dc.contributor.author Quintero, Tonia G. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-07-22T00:15:41Z
dc.date.available 2011-07-22T00:15:41Z
dc.date.issued 2008 en_US
dc.description Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2008. en_US
dc.description Nematode communities are potentially excellent indicators of soil health. Assessing these nematodes communities using molecular and morphological techniques may seem straight forward. However, many challenges exist in implementing molecular techniques. First, molecular techniques employed to study nematode communities generally involve DNA extraction, PCR, cloning and molecular sequencing. Each of these steps can introduce bias into the analysis of a nematode community. Using morphology to identify and assess nematode soil health is cumbersome as well. Systematic knowledge of the nematode fauna is essential in order to assign nematodes to their appropriate classification. In new environments permanent slides and collaboration with laboratories that extensively work on nematode taxonomy for adequate identification of nematodes is essential. As a result, attempting to assess the health of soil should require multiple nematode faunal analyses over time which includes (1) comparison of two methods, (2) Gap analyses and (3) extraction methods. It is believed that these experiments have provided pertinent information to help in the quest of measuring and monitoring soil health. However, there is not adequate information to confidently determine if the Manoa Falls Trail sites were "healthier" in comparison to the Whitmore site. en_US
dc.description Includes bibliographical references (leaves 151-152). en_US
dc.description Also available by subscription via World Wide Web en_US
dc.description 153 leaves, bound 29 cm en_US
dc.description.abstract Nematode communities are potentially excellent indicators of soil health. Assessing these nematodes communities using molecular and morphological techniques may seem straight forward. However, many challenges exist in implementing molecular techniques. First, molecular techniques employed to study nematode communities generally involve DNA extraction, PCR, cloning and molecular sequencing. Each of these steps can introduce bias into the analysis of a nematode community. Using morphology to identify and assess nematode soil health is cumbersome as well. Systematic knowledge of the nematode fauna is essential in order to assign nematodes to their appropriate classification. In new environments permanent slides and collaboration with laboratories that extensively work on nematode taxonomy for adequate identification of nematodes is essential. As a result, attempting to assess the health of soil should require multiple nematode faunal analyses over time which includes I) comparison of two methods, 2) Gap analyses and 3) extraction methods. It is believed that these experiments have provided pertinent information to help in the quest of measuring and monitoring soil health. However, there is not adequate information to confidently determine if the Manoa Falls Trail sites were "healthier" in comparison to the Whitmore site. en_US
dc.identifier.isbn 9780549596226 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10125/20923
dc.language.iso en-US en_US
dc.relation Theses for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (University of Hawaii at Manoa). Tropical Plant Pathology; no. 5069 en_US
dc.rights All UHM dissertations and theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission from the copyright owner. en_US
dc.title Assessment of four soil nematode communities in Hawaii by different methods en_US
dc.type Thesis en_US
dc.type.dcmi Text en_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
PHD_ACH.H3_5069_uh.pdf
Size:
4.91 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Version for UH users
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
PHD_ACH.H3_5069_r.pdf
Size:
4.92 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Version for non-UH users. Copying/Printing is not permitted