https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4339-9165
Figures
Abstract
The use of biochar as a soil ameliorant has recently gained momentum. However, its application has been reported to have some adverse effects soon after the pyrolysis process. This study aimed to determine the effect of different biochar ageing methods and fertiliser applications on selected soil properties, growth, and yield of red radish (Raphanus sativus L.). A 2 x 3 factorial arrangement was used in a complete randomised design (CRD) with three replications. The factors were (1) biochar ageing at three levels, i.e., naturally aged biochar (NB), artificially aged biochar (AB), and fresh biochar (FB), and (2) fertiliser at two levels viz fertilised (F) and non-fertilised (NF). A control treatment (without biochar) was also included. Irrespective of the ageing method used, biochar application significantly increased soil pH, while fertiliser application significantly reduced soil pH throughout the experiment. Similarly, biochar application significantly increased soil hydraulic conductivity compared to the control. However, after ten weeks, significantly higher soil hydraulic conductivity was reported in treatments with AB biochar compared to both NB and FB. The application of fertiliser in biochar-amended soils improves the soil’s hydraulic properties and increases radish growth. The study concludes that AB biochar + fertiliser application improves soil properties and growth of radish.
Citation: Nyambo P, Motsi H, Chiduza C, Malobane ME (2023) Biochar ageing improves soil properties, growth and yield of red radish (Raphanus sativus) in a Haplic Cambisol. PLoS ONE 18(7): e0288709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288709
Editor: Paulo H. Pagliari, University of Minnesota, UNITED STATES
Received: March 26, 2022; Accepted: July 3, 2023; Published: July 19, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Nyambo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This work is based on the research supported wholly by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa and the Dutch Research Council (de Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek - NWO) Project UID 129352 and the Govan Mbeki Research and Development Centre of the University of Fort Hare (GMRDC). The NRF, NOW and GMRDC are thanked for their financial contribution. Any opinion, finding, conclusion, or recommenda-tion expressed in this material is that of the author(s), and the NRF and NWO do not accept any liability in this regard.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
The unsustainable farming practices used by most smallholder farmers deplete the already low soil organic carbon (SOC) in South African soils [1,2]. As a result, the soils are highly degraded hence low agricultural productivity. To attain a sustainable agricultural system, researchers have, among other strategies, advocated for the use of biochar as a soil ameliorant [3]. The use of biochar as a soil ameliorant has recently gained momentum in South Africa [4]. Numerous studies have shown the potential benefits of biochar in improving soil’s physical [5,6], chemical [7,8], and biological properties [5,9]. However, its application soon after the pyrolysis process, herein referred to as fresh biochar, has been reported to have detrimental effects. For example, high hydrophobicity, which limits biochar interaction with nutrients, water, soil organic matter (SOM) [10], and localisation of nutrients, which becomes unavailable for plant uptake [11]. Therefore, there is a need for its optimisation to increase its effectiveness as a soil ameliorant. One strategy is to take the biochar through an accelerated ageing process.
Biochar ageing alters its physical, biological, and chemical properties, which in turn can significantly influence its interaction with the soil and organic matter [12,13]. During the ageing process, the decomposition of hydrophobic compounds introduces oxygen-containing functional groups with a high density of π electrons on the biochar surface [13,14]. These functional groups (mostly carboxylic, phenolic, and lactonic groups) are naturally acidic and result in a high surface charge density and cation exchange capacity in aged biochar [15]. As a result, nutrient retention, bioavailability, and mobility will be significantly improved [16], thus, increasing crop growth and yield [10]. Biochar can be aged naturally or artificially through oxidation, hydration, leaching, hydrolysis, freeze-thaw, wetting and drying cycles, mineralisation, and adsorption of dissolved organic matter onto biochar surfaces [16]. Natural ageing usually happens in the field over several years, decades or centuries, while artificial ageing is done in the laboratory using chemicals like hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), sulphuric acid (H2SO4), and HNO3 [16,17].
The different ageing techniques may result in inconsistent observations on the effectiveness of aged biochar as a soil ameliorant. For instance, Paetsch et al. [13] reported that water holding capacity effects were more pronounced in aged than fresh biochar, while Aller et al. [10] reported increased water content in fresh compared to artificially aged biochar. In a study by Hale et al. [18], fresh biochar increased soil pH while aged biochar reduced pH; similarly, Dempster et al. [19] reported an increase in pH on fresh compared to naturally aged biochar. On the contrary, Zhelezova et al. [14] reported that naturally aged biochar increased pH more than fresh. Fresh biochar increased the final maize biomass weight in the sandy loam and silt loam soils, whereas aged biochar only increased biomass weight in silt loam soils [10]. According to Thers et al. [20], there were no significant differences between naturally aged and artificially aged biochar application on oil grain, oil, and straw yield of seed rape biomass. In addition, the responses of biochar are specific to the site (soil and climate), feedstock, preparation method, conditions, and method of ageing; therefore, it is essential to evaluate the effects of biochar ageing under South African conditions for informed eco-specific recommendations.
Radish (Raphanus sativus L.) is a dicotyledon from the family of Brassica which is grown for human consumption and animal consumption and is used as a cover crop in multiple cropping systems and conservation agriculture [21,22]. In South Africa, it is mainly grown in the KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape provinces [22]. Radish is a short-cycle, highly nutrient-demanding crop sensitive to poor hydraulic conditions [23]. Therefore, supplementing nutrients using fertilisers significantly improves root morphology, improving its capacity to hold soil and penetration to nutrient-deficit zones [24]. However, the rapid loss of fertiliser may compromise its growth and development, necessitating the need to include the co-application of fertilisers with organic amendments like biochar.
Besides biochar ageing, the application of blended biochar and inorganic fertiliser is becoming another dimension to manage the high hydrophobicity and localisation of nutrient challenges of biochar soon after application. The dynamics associated with such a combination is that inorganic fertiliser provides already available nutrients for immediate plant uptake. At the same time, biochar, through its high SOC and other properties, manipulates soil conditions to limit nutrient losses, improving nutrient use efficiency. However, there are still limited studies in this regard. One of the available studies indicated that biochar alone yielded 3.6–4 t ha-1, while biochar co-applied with fertiliser yielded 4.1–5.5 t ha-1 over a four-year maize trial [25]. Still, soil chemical properties (pH, and ammonium-N, available P and exchangeable K) did not differ between the co-application and biochar alone, except on NO3-N where the biochar and mineral fertiliser combination was higher than biochar alone [25]. Thus, there is still a need to explore how this co-application influences soil properties and crop yields, especially on a short cycle of crops such as radish. This study aimed to investigate the effect of differently aged biochar and fertiliser addition on amended soil’s chemical and hydraulic properties and the growth and yield of radish under a greenhouse.
Methods and materials
Soil preparation
The study’s soil was collected from the Fort Hare University Research Farm (32°47’43.3 "S 26°50’54.1"E) in Alice, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. The IUSS Working Group WRB [26] classified the soil as a Haplic Cambisol. The mean annual temperature and average annual rainfall within the research farm are 18.1°C and 575 mm, respectively [2]. The field has been under continuous maize production for more than six years. The field is ploughed using a tractor before planting. The soil was transported to the University of Fort Hare glasshouse, where it was air-dried before being sieved through a 2 mm sieve size. The selected soil properties are shown in Table 1.
Experimental design and treatments
A 2 x 3 factorial arrangement was used in a complete randomised design (CRD) with three replications. The two factors were (1) fertiliser at two levels viz fertilised (F) and non-fertilised (NF), and (2) biochar ageing at three levels, i.e., naturally aged biochar (NB), artificially aged biochar (AB), and fresh biochar (FB). A treatment without biochar was included as a control, thus, giving 21 pots. The pots were spaced 1 m apart.
Biochar preparation and biochar ageing
Pyrolysis. The biochar feedstock used was derived from dairy-cattle dung which was sourced from the University of Fort Hare Dairy Trust grazing paddocks. The fresh cattle manure was air-dried before pyrolysis. Pyrolysis was done using a muffle furnace following Githinji [27] procedure.Briefly, the dried cattle manure was pyrolysed for 30 minutes in a 5 litre container at 500°C in a muffle furnace and then allowed to cool down in the absence of oxygen in a desiccator. Thereafter biochar was sieved using a 2 mm sieve to obtain uniformity. A biochar sample was taken to the laboratory for characterisation (Table 1).
Ageing process. Biochar was aged naturally and artificially. Artificial ageing was done using the hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) method following Liu et al. [28]. Briefly, 54.17 g of biochar was mixed with one litre of H2O2 (5%) in 1.5 litre glass jars. The glass jars were put in an oven at 80°C with regular agitation (two to three times a day) until all water evaporated and dried. The biochar was then further dried at 105°C for 12 hours and allowed to cool. Natural ageing was done following Ren et al. [29]. Briefly, soil and biochar were mixed at a rate of 5% weight of biochar per weight of soil (w/w). Soil and biochar were thoroughly mixed by shaking in 5 kg plastic bags before being taken to the incubator. Deionised water was added to the biochar-soil mixture, and the moisture content was adjusted to 40% water-holding capacity. Constant moisture in all the pots was maintained by regularly taking measurements using an HH2 moisture meter (Delta-T Devices Ltd, Cambridge, England). All the pots were incubated at 28 C for 30 days while stirring with a glass bar every two days while ageing. After ageing, the mixture was freeze-dried for one day and then removed to reach room temperature.
Planting and crop growth in the greenhouse
The pot experiment was conducted for a total of 70 days. Seven kilograms of plastic pots were filled with 5 kg soil-biochar mixtures, while control pots were filled with soil only. Before planting, all pots were watered and left to freely drain to achieve field capacity. Five seeds of radish (Raphanus sativus) were planted in each pot and later thinned to one seedling per pot soon after germination. A pressure-plate apparatus was used to determine the field capacity of the soil [5]; thereafter moisture measurements were done using the HH2 soil moisture meter (Delta T-UK) to determine the amount of water needed to keep the soil at field capacity. Basal fertiliser and top-dressing fertiliser were applied only in pots receiving the fertiliser treatment. Single super phosphate and muriate of potash were applied at planting as basal fertiliser at rates of 110 kg/ha and 65 kg/ha, respectively, following a recommendation by Imthiyas and Seran [30]. Lime-ammonium (LAN) (28% N) was applied as a topdressing fertiliser, five weeks after planting at 90 kg/ha.
Data collection and measurement
Crop growth and yield parameters. After planting, the pots were checked every day to determine the number of days to emerge. Percentage germination was calculated based on hypocotyls that appeared above the soil’s surface and were calculated following Eq 1.
(1)
During the crop growth period, leaf area was determined following Eq 2 as suggested by Silva et al. [31]. The length and width of the youngest fully developed leaf was measured using a 30 cm ruler. Leaf width was taken at the widest part of the leaf.
(2)
Where LA = leaf area, in cm2; C = length, in cm; L = width, in cm; and f = correction factor for radish (0.57).
A digital vernal calliper was used to measure bulb diameter. After harvesting, the tape root and bulb length were also measured using a 30 cm ruler. Each plant was separated into shoots, bulbs, and roots, put in a labelled sampling bag, and weighed to determine fresh mass. Dry mass was determined after drying the soil samples at 65°C for 72 hours.
Soil chemical parameters. Soil samples were collected fortnightly for the determination of selected soil chemical properties. The samples were air-dried before being taken to the laboratory for analysis. Both pH and electrical conductivity (EC) were determined using a glass electrode pH meter (Crison Instruments, Spain) at a ratio of 1:2.5 (soil/water) [32].
Soil hydraulic parameters.
The cumulative infiltration (I) and saturated hydraulic conductivity (k) were determined using a minidisk infiltrometer (Meter Group Inc., Washington, USA) following Zhang [33]. Subsequently, I and k were calculated following Eqs 3 and 4, respectively.
(3)
where C1 (m/s) and C2 (m/s½) are curve fitting parameters; C1 is related to hydraulic conductivity, and C2 is related to soil sorptivity. The hydraulic conductivity of the soil (k) is then computed by using the following equation:
(4)
Where C1 is the slope of the curve of the cumulative infiltration versus the square root of time, and A is a value relating the van Genuchten parameters for a given soil type to the suction rate and radius of the infiltrometer disk.
Results
Soil properties
pH and electrical conductivity. The two-way interaction of time x fertiliser was significant with respect to pH (P<0.001) and electrical conductivity (P<0.05), while two-way interactions of biochar ageing x fertiliser and biochar ageing x time were only significant (P<0.01) with respect to soil pH.
On day 0, soil pH was significantly higher in soils amended with fresh biochar (7.37) compared to the control (6.89) and naturally aged biochar (6.51) (Fig 1A). From week 2 until week 10, the control treatment had a significantly lower soil pH than soils that were amended with biochar. Fertiliser application significantly reduced soil pH throughout the experiment except on week 4 (Fig 1B).
Interactive effect of (a) time x biochar ageing and (b) time x fertilisation on pH of a Haplic Cambisol soil. Error bars indicate standard deviation error.
Fertiliser application significantly decreased soil pH (P< 0.001) by 11% compared to no fertilisers in the control treatment, while the interaction of fertiliser application and the various biochar-ageing treatments were not significant (Fig 2A). Electrical conductivity was significantly higher in fertilised than unfertilised treatments in weeks 4 and 8 by 61.8% and 26.7%, respectively (Fig 2B).
Interactive effects of (a) biochar ageing x fertilisation on soil pH and (b) time x fertilisation on the electrical conductivity of a Haplic Cambisol. Error bars indicate standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences among the treatments.
Soil hydraulic properties. Only the two-way interaction of biochar ageing x time was significant with respect to both infiltration rate (P<0.001) and saturated hydraulic conductivity (P>0.05).
Generally, the infiltration rate increased from week 5 to week 10 in all the treatments (Fig 3A). On week 5, infiltration was significantly higher by 42.4% in treatments with fresh biochar compared to the control treatment. At week 10, soils amended with naturally aged biochar had 37.1% and 18.8% higher infiltration rates compared to treatments with control and artificially aged biochar. Similar to the infiltration rate, hydraulic conductivity increased with time in all the treatments (Fig 3B). The control treatment had significantly lower saturated hydraulic conductivity compared to all the other treatments throughout the experiment.
Interaction of time x biochar ageing on (a) infiltration rate and (b) saturated hydraulic conductivity of a Haplic Cambisol soil. Error bars indicate standard error.
Plant growth
The various types of biochar ageing were not significantly different with respect to germination percentage and taproot length; however, they were all significantly (P>0.001) higher compared to the control (Fig 4A and 4B).
Effect of biochar ageing on (a) germination percentage and (b) taproot length of red radish in a Haplic Cambisol.
Addition of fertiliser in treatments that had artificially aged biochar increased the bulb diameter of red radish by 51.6% compared to no fertilisation within the same biochar treatment (Fig 5A). The highest bulb length values were recorded in pots that were fertilised (53 cm) compared to the unfertilised pots (3.25 cm) (Fig 5B).
Interaction of (a) fertilisation x biochar ageing on bulb diameter and (b) effects of fertilisation on bulb length of red radish in a Haplic Cambisol.
Leaf area was significantly higher by 61.2% in fertilised pots compared to unfertilised pots under artificially aged biochar (Fig 6). Similarly, fertiliser application in artificially aged biochar treatment increased leaf area of red radish by 63.8% and 54.8% compared to unfertilised pots with the control and fresh biochar, respectively.
Different letters indicate a significant difference.
Fertiliser application significantly increased total biomass, root mass, bulb mass, and shoot mass irrespective of type biochar ageing (Table 2). The highest total biomass was recorded in treatments with fertiliser and artificially aged biochar, while the lowest was in treatments with the combination of artificially aged biochar and no fertiliser. Similarly, the treatment of artificially aged biochar and fertilisation significantly increased fresh and dry shoot biomass by 77% and 72.4%, respectively.
Different letters indicate significance difference.
Discussion
The application of biochar enhances soil properties [34,35], and the ageing process affects the extent to which the soil properties are enhanced. Soil pH is a vital soil parameter that mediates nutrient availability, biological and chemical activities in the soil, and crop growth [36]. Applying all biochar types increased soil pH compared to the control without biochar. The finding is in line with many previous studies, which reported soil pH increases after applying biochar [5,37–39]. In this study, it is essential to note that both FB and NB amended soil had similar pH at the end of the study. This suggests that the applied natural ageing process in this study may have less influence on pH of biochar.
On the other hand, the difference in pH in soils amended with NB and AB confirms the reports by Ren et al. [29] and Tan et al. [40], who reported that biochar ageing processes affect biochar properties differently. The difference in pH between AB and NB treatment may also be because the artificial ageing process reduces biochar pH more than natural ageing [40]. Generally, the application of fresh biochar had higher pH throughout the study than aged biochar (Fig 1). This may be because, during the ageing process, carboxyl and hydroxyl functional groups increase on the biochar surface, which tends to reduce biochar pH [41,42].
The addition of fertiliser showed a decrease in pH and an increase in EC throughout the study compared to unfertilised (Fig 1). Fertiliser is known for increasing acidification and salts, which are some of its environmental shortcomings [43,44]. The application of biochar and fertiliser mixture had higher pH than the fertiliser application. This shows that biochar can buffer low soil pH [45]. The fact that applying biochar had no effect on EC does not correspond with previous studies that found biochar application to increase soil EC [37]. On the other hand, the results support the finding by Nyambo et al. [5], who also found no significant effect of biochar application on soil EC. This may suggest that its effect on EC is biochar specific.
This study found the lowest infiltration rate and hydraulic conductivity on the control throughout the study. This was also observed by Novak et al. [46], who reported an increase in infiltration rate after biochar application compared to treatments without biochar. The dynamics of how biochar improves infiltration rate and hydraulic conductivity arise from its properties such as hydrophilic nature, high internal porosity, high surface area, and relatively polar surface chemistry [17], which is due to the formation of oxygen-containing functional groups [47]. Thus, when biochar is incorporated into the soil, it positively influences soil properties, especially soil porosity which may allow smooth infiltration of water avoiding runoff and poor drainage. Qian and Chen [48] and Cao et al. [49] reported that biochar ageing increases the concentration of oxygen-containing functional groups on biochar surfaces that adsorb metal cations while making biochar surfaces more hydrophilic and hence less able to adsorb hydrophobic organic compounds. These properties are expected to improve [17]. For this reason, AB had a greater infiltration rate and hydraulic conductivity than fresh FB. This shows that AB was able to change the surface chemistry of biochar more than NB with ageing. According to Tan et al. [40], the artificial ageing process increases the specific surface area more than the natural ageing process. This may be why the infiltration rate and hydraulic conductivity were found to be higher under AB than in both NB and FB. Nevertheless, it is important to note that studies on how biochar ageing affects soil hydraulic properties are still scarce in the literature; thus, more research is still required.
Applying all the biochar types enhanced seed germination, which is in line with a study by Ke et al. [50] and Van Zwieten et al. [21], who also reported that radish germination increased with biochar application. The increase in seed germination after applying biochar may be due to the fact that biochar contains a variety of nutrients, such as nitrogen, potassium, sodium, calcium, and magnesium, that can influence seed germination [51,52]. In this study, aged biochar and fresh biochar did not show any significant difference, which shows that all the biochar created similar conditions required for radish germination.
Ke et al. [50] reported similar results as in this study by observing no difference in radish bulb length and width on biochar-amended soils compared to the control. On the contrary, Adekiya et al. [53] reported a significant increase in radish bulb length and width in biochar-amended soil compared to no biochar control. Thus, this warrants more research to fully understand the effect of biochar on radish bulb length and width. However, it is important to note that even though biochar had no statistical influence on radish bulb size in this study, the bulbs were generally bigger under biochar treatments than the control. Bulb length and width are affected by physicochemical properties (e.g., water holding capacity, bulk density, and porosity), fertilisation, and organic matter [52]. For instance, Adekiya et al. [24] reported a positive correlation between radish bulb length and porosity. Therefore, applying biochar could have improved the nutrient’s availability which may explain the bigger bulbs compared to the control treatment. This also possibly explains why fertilised pots had bigger bulbs than unfertilised pots.
Leaf area is important for the harvesting of light during photosynthesis. With a larger leaf area, more light can be captured and manufacture food for the plant. Silva et al. [31] supported this study’s findings and reported an increase in leaf area in radish after applying 2.8 g nitrogen per pot. Nitrogen is an essential nutrient for leaf development; therefore, adding nitrogen fertiliser provides the required nutrients for leaf growth. The application of biochar plus fertiliser treatments had a bigger leaf area than fertiliser only which is in line with the findings by Minhas et al. [53]. This can show that NB, AB, and FB treatments can supplement or enhance nutrient availability.
The high tap roots on fertilised compared to unfertilised treatments are in line with the study by Baloch et al. [52], who reported that radish taproot was high on fertilised compared to unfertilised treatments. This is because the addition of fertiliser supplied phosphorus which is responsible for the root growth. The difference between the control and all biochar plus fertiliser amended treatments could be due to the improvements in nutrient availability with the application of biochar. Aged and fresh biochar did not show any significant difference, meaning that the characteristics of aged and fresh biochar required for root development were similar.
The biomass yield increase after the application of biochar plus fertiliser is mainly attributed to the plants’ increase in nutrient availability and efficient use, especially nitrogen, which is of primary importance in biomass partitioning [54]. The increase in nutrient availability leads to an increase in more growth and development of plants, thus, increasing their biomass. The result in this study supports Baloch et al. [52] and Zafar-ul-Hye et al. [55], who reported an increase in dry and fresh weight after applying biochar plus fertiliser compared to the control (fertiliser only). Van Zwieten et al. [21] also reported a significant increase in biomass under biochar plus fertiliser blend compared to fertiliser only. AB plus fertiliser performed better than the other treatment combinations in this study. This shows that better yields can be attained by blending artificially aged biochar and fertiliser.
Conclusions
This study aimed to investigate how biochar ageing and fertilisation affect selected soil chemical and hydraulic properties and the growth and yield of radish. The addition of fertiliser increased and decreased EC and pH, respectively. Fertiliser application did not affect the germination percentage of radish seeds, while biochar application significantly increased germination compared to the control. On the yield parameters, fertiliser-affected treatments have the highest numbers. Aged biochar (AB and NB) and fertiliser are effective for improving soil chemical and hydraulic properties and growth and yield of radish and can be recommended. However, further studies need to be done on how biochar ageing influences other soil properties and crops, which were not part of this study.
References
- 1. Mandiringana OT, Mnkeni PN, Mkile Z, Van Averbeke W, Van Ranst E, Verplancke H. Mineralogy and fertility status of selected soils of the Eastern Cape province, South Africa. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 2005 Oct 1; 36(17–18):2431–46.
- 2. Nyambo P, Chiduza C, Araya T. Carbon input and maize productivity as influenced by tillage, crop rotation, residue management and biochar in a semiarid region in South Africa. Agronomy. 2020a May; 10(5):705.
- 3. Mukherjee A, Lal R, Zimmerman AR. Impacts of 1.5-year field aging on biochar, humic acid, and water treatment residual amended soil. Soil Science. 2014 Jul 1; 179(7):333–9.
- 4. Nyambo P, Cornelius C, Araya T. Carbon dioxide fluxes and carbon stocks under conservation agricultural practices in South Africa. Agriculture. 2020b Aug 25; 10(9):374.
- 5. Nyambo P, Taeni T, Chiduza C, Araya T. Effects of maize residue biochar amendments on soil properties and soil loss on acidic Hutton soil. Agronomy. 2018 Nov 10; 8(11):256.
- 6. Nyambo P, Chiduza C, Araya T. Effect of conservation agriculture on selected soil physical properties on a haplic cambisol in Alice, Eastern Cape, South Africa. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science. 2022 Jan 28; 68(2):195–208.
- 7. Sika MP, Hardie AG. Effect of pine wood biochar on ammonium nitrate leaching and availability in a South African sandy soil. European Journal of Soil Science. 2014 Jan; 65(1):113–9.
- 8. Dzvene AR, Chiduza C, Mnkeni PN, Peter PC. Characterisation of livestock biochars and their effect on selected soil properties and maize early growth stage in soils of Eastern Cape province, South Africa. South African Journal of Plant and Soil. 2019 Jun 1; 36(3):199–209.
- 9. Mamera M, van Tol JJ, Aghoghovwia MP, Nhantumbo AB, Chabala LM, Cambule A, Chalwe H, Mufume JC, Rafael R. Potential use of biochar in pit latrines as a faecal sludge management strategy to reduce water resource contaminations: a review. Applied Sciences. 2021 Jan; 11(24):11772.
- 10. Aller D, Rathke S, Laird D, Cruse R, Hatfield J. Impacts of fresh and aged biochars on plant available water and water use efficiency. Geoderma. 2017; 307:114–121.
- 11. Gonzalez V, Kang J. Effects of biochar and compost ageing on soil fertility and radish germination. Journal of Environment and Bio Research. 2017; 1(1).
- 12. Dong X, Li G, Lin Q, Zhao X. Quantity and quality changes of biochar aged for 5 years in soil under field conditions. Catena. 2017; 159:136–143.
- 13. Paetsch L, Mueller CW, Kögel-Knabner I, Von Lützow M, Girardin C, Rumpel C. Effect of in-situ aged and fresh biochar on soil hydraulic conditions and microbial C use under drought conditions. Scientific Reports. 2018 May 1; 8(1):1–1.
- 14. Zhelezova A, Cederlund H, Stenström J. Effect of biochar amendment and ageing on adsorption and degradation of two herbicides. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution. 2017 Jun; 228(6):1–3. pmid:28603318
- 15. Yadav M, Paritosh K, Pareek N, Vivekanand V. Coupled treatment of lignocellulosic agricultural residues for augmented biomethanation. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019 Mar 10; 213:75–88.
- 16. Mia S, Dijkstra FA, Singh B. Long-term aging of biochar: a molecular understanding with agricultural and environmental implications. Advances in Agronomy. 2017 Jan 1; 141:1–51.
- 17. Aller DM. Scaling understanding of biochar ageing impacts on soil water and crop yields, (Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University), 2017.
- 18. Hale S, Hanley K, Lehmann J, Zimmerman A, Cornelissen G. Effects of chemical, biological, and physical ageing as well as soil addition on the sorption of pyrene to activated carbon and biochar. Environmental Science & Technology. 2011; 45(24):10445–10453.
- 19. Dempster DN, Jones DL, Murphy DV. Organic nitrogen mineralisation in two contrasting agro-ecosystems is unchanged by biochar addition. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2012; 48:47–50.
- 20. Thers H, Abalos D, Dörsch P, Elsgaard L. Nitrous oxide emissions from oilseed rape cultivation were unaffected by flash pyrolysis biochar of different type, rate and field ageing. Science of The Total Environment. 2020 Jul 1; 724:138140. pmid:32251883
- 21. Van Zwieten L, Kimber S, Morris S, Chan KY, Downie A, Rust J, Joseph S, Cowie A. Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of papermill waste on agronomic performance and soil fertility. Plant and Soil. 2010 Feb; 327(1):235–46.
- 22. Ammann S, Goodenough D, Nash D. Fodder facts: production. The Dairy Mail. 2016; 23(3):90–95.
- 23. Politud ER. Growth and yield performance of radish (Raphanus sativus L.)‘cv’‘SNOW WHITE’ in response to varying levels of vermicast applications. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications. 2016; 6(5):53–7.
- 24. Adekiya AO, Agbede TM, Aboyeji CM, Dunsin O, Simeon VT. Effects of biochar and poultry manure on soil characteristics and the yield of radish. Scientia Horticulturae. 2019; 243:457–463.
- 25. Kamau S, Karanja NK, Ayuke FO, Lehmann J. Short-term influence of biochar and fertilizer-biochar blends on soil nutrients, fauna and maize growth. Biology and Fertility of Soils. 2019 Oct; 55(7):661–73.
- 26.
WRB IW. World reference book for soil resources. World soil resources report. FAO, Rome. 2006.
- 27. Githinji L. Effect of biochar application rate on soil physical and hydraulic properties of a sandy loam. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science. 2014; 60(4):457–470.
- 28. Liu Z, Zhu M, Wang J, Liu X, Guo W, Zheng J, Bian R, Wang G, Zhang X, Cheng K, Liu X. The responses of soil organic carbon mineralisation and microbial communities to fresh and aged biochar soil amendments. GCB Bioenergy. 2019; 11(12):1408–1420.
- 29. Ren X, Sun H, Wang F, Zhang P, Zhu H. Effect of aging in field soil on biochar’s properties and its sorption capacity. Environmental Pollution. 2018 Nov 1; 242:1880–6. pmid:30061080
- 30. Imthiyas MS, Seran TH. Marketable tuber yield of radish (Raphanus sativus L.) as influenced by compost and NPK fertilizers. Research Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences ISSN. 2017; 2320:6063.
- 31. Silva PF, Matos RM, Ediclecia V, Alencar AE, Dantas Neto J. Growth and plant mass of radish fertirrigated with different doses nitrogen. Revista Ceres. 2016 Mar; 63:122–8.
- 32.
Agri Laboratory Association of Southern Africa (AgriLASA) Soil Handbook. Pretoria (South Africa): Agri Laboratory Association of Southern Africa. 2004; Pretoria, South Africa.
- 33. Zhang R. Determination of soil sorptivity and hydraulic conductivity from the disk infiltrometer. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 1997 Jul; 61(4):1024–30.
- 34. Hussain M, Farooq M, Nawaz A, Al-Sadi AM, Solaiman ZM, Alghamdi SS, Ammara U, Ok YS, Siddique KH. Biochar for crop production: potential benefits and risks. Journal of Soils and Sediments. 2017 Mar; 17(3):685–716.
- 35. Ijaz M, Tahir M, Shahid M, Ul-Allah S, Sattar A, Sher A, Mahmood K, Hussain M. Combined application of biochar and PGPR consortia for sustainable production of wheat under semiarid conditions with a reduced dose of synthetic fertilizer. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology. 2019 Apr; 50(2):449–58. pmid:30671922
- 36. Zhang YY, Wu W, Liu H. Factors affecting variations of soil pH in different horizons in hilly regions. PLoS One. 2019 Jun 19; 14(6): e0218563. pmid:31216328
- 37. He L, Shan J, Zhao X, Wang S, Yan X. Variable responses of nitrification and denitrification in a paddy soil to long-term biochar amendment and short-term biochar addition. Chemosphere. 2019; 234:558–567. pmid:31229717
- 38. Kizito S, Luo H, Lu J, Bah H, Dong R, Wu S. Role of nutrient-enriched biochar as a soil amendment during maize growth: Exploring practical alternatives to recycle agricultural residuals and to reduce chemical fertilizer demand. Sustainability. 2019; 11(11):3211.
- 39. Wu Z, Zhang Q, Zhang X, Duan P, Yan X, Xiong Z. Biochar-enriched soil mitigated N2O and NO emissions similarly as fresh biochar for wheat production. Science of the Total Environment. 2020 Jan 20; 701:134943. pmid:31731203
- 40. Tan L, Ma Z, Yang K, Cui Q, Wang K, Wang T, Wu GL, Zheng J. Effect of three artificial aging techniques on physicochemical properties and Pb adsorption capacities of different biochars. Science of the Total Environment. 2020 Jan 10; 699:134223. pmid:31522055
- 41. de la Rosa JM, Rosado M, Paneque M, Miller AZ, Knicker H. Effects of aging under field conditions on biochar structure and composition: Implications for biochar stability in soils. Science of the Total Environment. 2018 Feb 1; 613:969–76. pmid:28946384
- 42. Huang Z, Hu L, Dai J. Effects of ageing on the surface characteristics and Cu (ii) adsorption behaviour of rice husk biochar in soil. Open Chemistry. 2020 Jan 1; 18(1):1421–32.
- 43. Ge S, Zhu Z, Jiang Y. Long-term impact of fertilisation on soil pH and fertility in an apple production system. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 2018; 18(1):282–293.
- 44. Mathew EE, Wafula WN, Korir NK, Gweyi-Onyango JP. Effect of phosphorus levels on soil properties and plant tissues of two Nerica varieties. Asian Soil Research Journal. 2018; 1(3):1–9.
- 45. Shi RY, Li JY, Ni NI, Xu RK. Understanding the biochar’s role in ameliorating soil acidity. Journal of Integrative Agriculture. 2019 Jul 1; 18(7):1508–17.
- 46. Novak J, Sigua G, Watts D, Cantrell K, Shumaker P, Szogi A, Johnson MG, Spokas K. Biochars impact on water infiltration and water quality through a compacted subsoil layer. Chemosphere. 2016 Jan 1; 142:160–7. pmid:26138710
- 47. Alotaibi KD, Schoenau JJ. Addition of biochar to a sandy desert soil: effect on crop growth, water retention and selected properties. Agronomy. 2019; 9(6):327.
- 48. Qian L, Chen B. Interactions of aluminum with biochars and oxidized biochars: implications for the biochar aging process. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry. 2014 Jan 15;62(2):373–80. pmid:24364719
- 49. Cao T, Chen W, Yang T, He T, Liu Z, Meng J. Surface characterization of aged biochar incubated in different types of soil. BioResources. 2017 Jul 18;12(3):6366–77.
- 50. Ke H, Zhang Q, Liu G. Effects of wood biochar addition on growth of cherry radish (Raphanus sativus L. var. radculus pers). InIOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2018 Mar 1; 128(1):012182. IOP Publishing.
- 51. Novak JM, Busscher WJ, Laird DL, Ahmedna M, Watts DW, Niandou MA. Impact of biochar amendment on fertility of a southeastern coastal plain soil. Soil Science. 2009 Feb 1; 174(2):105–12.
- 52. Baloch PA, Uddin R, Nizamani F, Solangi A, Siddiqui A. Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium fertilisers on growth and yield characteristics of radish (Raphinus sativus L.). Am. Eurasian. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2014; 14(6):565–569.
- 53. Minhas WA, Hussain M, Mehboob N, Nawaz A, UL-Allah S, Rizwan MS, Hassan Z. Synergetic use of biochar and synthetic nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers to improves maize productivity and nutrient retention in loamy soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2020 May 27; 43(9):1356–68.52.
- 54. Shibabaw A, Alemayehu G, Adgo E, Germer J, Asch F, Freyer B. Growth and biomass yield response of clover (Trifolium decorum) to preceding crop and organic treatment in the highlands of Awi Administrative Zone, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Science and Technology. 2017; 10(3):151–64.
- 55. Zafar-ul-Hye M, Wasim MM, Munir TM, Aon M, Shaaban M, Abbas M, Hussain M, Ahmad M. Co-application of sugarcane bagasse biochar, farmyard manure and mineral nitrogen improved growth indices of corn grown in alkaline calcareous soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2020 May 27; 43(9):1293–305.