Glomalin-related soil protein: Assessment of current detection and quantification tools

Despite the widely acknowledged importance of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) in soil ecology, quantifying their biomass and presence in field soils is hindered by tedious techniques. Hence biochemical markers may be useful, among which glomalin-related soil protein (GRSP) could show a particular promise. Presently GRSP is operationally defined, its identification resting solely on the methods used to extract it from soil (citric acid buffer and autoclaving) and the assays (Bradford/enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with a monoclonal antibody) utilized to detect it. The current assumption is that most non-heat stable soil proteins except glomalin are destroyed during the harsh extraction procedure. However, this critical assumption has not been tested. The purpose of this research was to challenge the GRSP extraction process to determine the accuracy of the Bradford method as a measure of glomalin; and to provide some assessment of the specificity of the ELISA monoclonal antibody. In two studies we spiked soil samples either with known quantities of a glycoprotein (BSA: bovine serum albumin) or with leaf litter from specific sources. After extraction 41-84% of the added BSA was detected with the Bradford method. This suggests that the currently used extraction procedure does not eliminate all non-glomalin proteins. Also, ELISA cross-reactivity against BSA was limited, ranging from 3% to 14%. Additions of leaf litter also significantly influenced GRSP extraction and quantification suggesting that plant-derived proteins, as would occur in the field, had a similar effect as BSA. Litter additions decreased the immunoreactive protein values, suggesting interference with antibody recognition. We conclude that the use of GRSP, especially Bradford-based detection, in the assessment of AMF-derived substances within field soils is problematic, it may be inappropriate in situations of significant organic matter additions. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.