Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:04:28.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of biochar on the physical properties of bare soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2013

Francesca Ventura ,
Fiorenzo Salvatorelli ,
Stefano Piana ,
Linda Pieri  and
Paola Rossi Pisa
Francesca Ventura
Affiliation:
DipSA, Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, University of Bologna, viale Fanin 44, 40127 Bologna, Italy. Email: [email protected]
Fiorenzo Salvatorelli
Affiliation:
DipSA, Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, University of Bologna, viale Fanin 44, 40127 Bologna, Italy. Email: [email protected]
Stefano Piana
Affiliation:
DipSA, Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, University of Bologna, viale Fanin 44, 40127 Bologna, Italy. Email: [email protected]
Linda Pieri
Affiliation:
DipSA, Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, University of Bologna, viale Fanin 44, 40127 Bologna, Italy. Email: [email protected]
Paola Rossi Pisa
Affiliation:
DipSA, Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, University of Bologna, viale Fanin 44, 40127 Bologna, Italy. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The pyrolysis conversion of vegetable residues into energy and biochar, and its incorporation in agricultural soil, reduces CO2 emission and provides a longterm soil carbon sequestration. Moreover, biochar application in soil seems to increase nutrient stocks in the rooting layer, improving crop yield. Compared with the numerous studies assessing the positive effect of biochar on yield, however, little research has been published elucidating the mechanisms responsible for the reported benefits. Few studies cited soil moisture as the key factor, attributing the increased yield to the higher soil water availability.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of biochar on the physical and hydraulic properties of a bare Padana Plain (Cadriano, Bologna) agricultural soil. A preliminary plot experiment in 2009 explored the influence of 10 and 30 kg ha–1 of biochar on soil moisture, without effects from plants. Results of the first experiment suggested using higher biochar rates in a similar experimental scheme. During the second experiment, 30 and 60 t ha–1 doses were investigated. Soil water content, bulk density, electrical conductivity and soil water retention were measured. The comparison between treated soils and the control indicates that the biochar rate is directly correlated to electrical conductibility and inversely correlated with bulk density. The effect on the density of soil can be very positive in case of heavy soils. The dark colour of the char increased the surface temperature with respect to the control, while no differences were detected at 7·5 cm depth. No influences were found on other soil characteristics, including soil pH, moisture and water retention.

Keywords

soil carbon sequestrationsoil temperaturesoil water contentsoil water retention
Type
Biochar
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 103 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 5 - 11
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Society of Edinburgh 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

5. References

Baronti, S., Alberti, G., Delle Vedove, G., Di Gennaro, F., Fellet, G., Genesio, L., Miglietta, F., Peressotti, A. & Vaccai, F. P. 2010. The biochar option to improve plant yields: first results from some field and pot experiments in Italy. Italian Journal of Agronomy 5, 3–11.Google Scholar
Blake, G. R. & Hartge, K. H. 1986. Bulk Density. In Klute, A. (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I. Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Agronomy Monograph 9 (2nd ed.), 363–75. Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy/Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Chan, K. Y., Van Zwieten, L., Meszaros, I., Downie, A. & Joseph, S. 2007. Agronomic values of greenwaste biochar as a soil amendment. Australian Journal of Soil Research 45, 629–34.Google Scholar
Cresswell, H. P., Green, T. W. & McKenzie, N. J. 2008. The adequacy of pressure plate apparatus for determining soil water retention. Soil Science Society of America Journal 72, 41–49.Google Scholar
Dane, J. H. & Hopmans, J. W. 2002. Soil Water Retention and Storage – Introduction. In Dane, J. H. & Topp, G. C. (eds) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods. Soil Science Society of America Book Series 5, 671–74. Madison, Wisconsin: Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Glaser, B., Lehmann, J. & Zech, W. 2002. Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of highly weathered soils in the tropics with charcoal: a review. Biology and Fertility of Soils 35, 219–30.Google Scholar
Iswaran, V., Jauhri, K. S. & Sen, A. 1980. Effect of charcoal, coal and peat on the yield of moong, soybean and pea. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 15, 191–92.Google Scholar
Jha, P., Biswas, A. K., Lakaria, B. L. & Subba, R. A. 2010. Biochar in agriculture – prospects and related implications (review). Current Science 99(9), 1218–25.Google Scholar
Laird, D. A., Fleming, P., Davis, D. D., Horton, R., Wang, B. & Karlen, D. L. 2010. Impact of biochar amendments on the quality of a typical Midwestern agricultural soil. Geoderma 158, 443–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, J. 2007. Bio-energy in the black. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 5, 381–87.Google Scholar
Lehmann, J., Da Silva, J. P. Jr., Steiner, C., Nehls, T., Zech, W. & Claser, B. 2003. Nutrient availability and leaching in an archeological anthrosol and ferralsol of the Central Amazon basin: fertilizer, manure and charcoal amendments. Plant Soil 249, 343–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, J. & Rondon, M. 2006. Bio-Char Soil Management on Highly Weathered Soils in the Humid Tropics. In Uphoff, N., Ball, A. S., Fernandes, E., Herren, H., Husson, O., Laing, M., Palm, C., Pretty, J., Sanchez, P., Sanginga, N. & Thies, J. (eds) Biological Approaches to Sustainable Soil System. Boca Raton, London, New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Lima, A., Farrington, J. & Reddy, C. 2005. Combustion-derived polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the environment – a review. Environmental Forensics 6, 109–31.Google Scholar
Matzneller, P., Ventura, F., Gaspari, N. & Rossi Pisa, P. 2010. Analysis of trends in a long term agrometeorological data set in Bologna (Italy). Climatic Change 100(3–4), 717–31.Google Scholar
McHenry, M. P. 2009 Agricultural biochar production, renewable energy generation and farm carbon sequestration in Western Australia: Certainty, uncertainty and risk. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 129, 1–7.Google Scholar
Novak, J. M., Busscher, W. J., Watts, D. W., Amonette, J. E., Ippolito, J. A., Lima, I. M., Gaskin, J., Das, K. C., Steiner, C., Ahmedna, M., Rehrah, D. & Schomberg, H. 2012. Biochar's Impact on Soil-Moisture Storage in an Ultisol and Two Aridisols. Soil Science 177(5), 310–20.Google Scholar
Pratt, K. & Moran, D. 2010. Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of global biochar mitigation potential. Biomass and Bioenergy 34, 1149–58.Google Scholar
Rondon, M. A., Lehmann, J., Ramìrez, J. & Hurtado, M. 2007. Biological nitrogen fixation by common (Phaseoulus vulgaris L.) increases with bio-char. Biology and Fertility of Soils 43, 699–708.Google Scholar
Sohi, S. P., Krull, E., Lopez-Capel, E. & Bol, R. 2010. A Review of Biochar and Its Use and Function in Soil. Advances in Agronomy 105, 48–76.Google Scholar
Van Zwieten, L., Kimber, S., Sinclair, K., Chan, K. Y. & Downie, A. 2008. Biochar: potential for climate change mitigation, improved yield and soil health. In Boschma, S. P., Serafin, L. M. & Ayres, J. F. (eds) Pastures at the cutting edge. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Grassland Society of NSW, 30–33. Orange, NSW: Grassland Society of NSW Inc.152 pp.Google Scholar
Ventura, F., Facini, O., Piana, S. & Rossi Pisa, P. 2010. Soil moisture measurements: a comparison of instrumentations performances. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering 136(2), 81–89.Google Scholar
Whittig, L. D. & Allardice, W. C. 1986. X-ray diffraction techniques. In Klute, A (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 331–62. Madison, Wisconsin: Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Yamato, M., Okimori, Y., Wibowo, I. F., Anshori, S. & Ogawa, M. 2006. Effects of the application of charred bark of Acacia mangium on the yield of maize, cowpea and peanut, and soil chemical properties in South Sumatra, Indonesia. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 52, 489–95.Google Scholar