Abstract
Abstract Intensive agricultural practices have accelerated soil organic carbon mineralization, compromising soil health and function. This study evaluated the efficacy of microgranular biochar (MicroCHAR) and powdered biochar as soil additives enhancing soil function, and pea, maize and wheat growth and yield. We carried out a series of experiments with degraded drought‐prone soils in greenhouse and field conditions, combining biochar addition with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). The combination of amendments variously impacted soil nutrient status; availability of extractable potassium (K) increased in all cases, whilst that of calcium (Ca) was reduced when AMF inoculation was applied alone but not in combination with biochar. MicroCHAR positively affected root biomass and pea P content compared with the control, but biochar did not enhance N or K. Crop yield was not significantly increased by MicroCHAR amendment. MicroCHAR enhanced the mycorrhization rate of crop roots by 260%, an effect seen in the greenhouse and field conditions. This study suggests that credible benefits in some crops can be gained by the application of MicroCHAR to some soils. Observed effects may be soil and crop specific; future study of optimal nutrient and microorganism coatings on microgranular biochar opens exciting avenues for the improvement of crop yields in degraded agricultural soils.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar amendments increased extractable soil potassium availability in all cases.
- Taxon
- pea
Lathyrus oleraceuse1 - Treatment
- amendmentse0
- Outcome
- availability of extractable potassium (K)e0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of amendments variously impacted soil nutrient status; availability of extractable potassium (K) increased in all cases, whilst that of calcium (Ca) was reduced when AMF inoculation was applied alone but not in combination with biochar.”
e1“pea, maize and wheat growth and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
AMF inoculation alone reduced extractable soil calcium availability.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse1
- Treatment
- AMF inoculatione0
- Interactor
- AMFe0symbiont
- Outcome
- calcium (Ca)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- combination with biochare0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“availability of extractable potassium (K) increased in all cases, whilst that of calcium (Ca) was reduced when AMF inoculation was applied alone but not in combination with biochar.”
e1“pea, maize and wheat growth and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
MicroCHAR increased root biomass relative to the control.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Treatment
- MicroCHARe0
- Outcome
- root biomasse0
- Direction
- positively affectede0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“MicroCHAR positively affected root biomass and pea P content compared with the control, but biochar did not enhance N or K.”
Claim · model-written summary
MicroCHAR increased pea phosphorus content relative to the control.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Treatment
- MicroCHARe0
- Outcome
- pea P contente0
- Direction
- positively affectede0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“MicroCHAR positively affected root biomass and pea P content compared with the control, but biochar did not enhance N or K.”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar did not enhance nitrogen or potassium content.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Treatment
- biochare0
- Outcome
- N or Ke0
- Direction
- did not enhancee0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“MicroCHAR positively affected root biomass and pea P content compared with the control, but biochar did not enhance N or K.”
Claim · model-written summary
MicroCHAR did not significantly increase crop yield.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Crop yield was not significantly increased by MicroCHAR amendment.”
Claim · model-written summary
MicroCHAR increased crop root mycorrhization by 260% in greenhouse and field conditions.
- Taxon
- crope0
- Treatment
- MicroCHARe0
- Outcome
- mycorrhization rate of crop rootse0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Value
- 260%e0
- Setting
- greenhouse and field conditionse0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“MicroCHAR enhanced the mycorrhization rate of crop roots by 260%, an effect seen in the greenhouse and field conditions.”
The same questions in other papers
biochar · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →biochar · nutrient: content · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →biochar · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →mycorrhiza · nutrient: content · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →other · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 37 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
36 papers more in this group
See all 40 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.