Effect of biochar on nutrient retention and nectarine tree performance: A three‐year field trial
Abstract
We performed a series of experiments in controlled conditions to assess the potential of hardwood‐derived biochar either as a source or as a removing additive of macronutrients [nitrate‐nitrogen (NO 3‐N), ammonium‐N (NH 4‐N), potassium (K), phosphorus (P), and magnesium (Mg)] in solution. In addition, a 3‐year field trial was carried out in a commercial nectarine orchard to evaluate the effect of increasing soil‐applied biochar rates on tree nutritional status, yield, fruit quality, soil pH, soil NO 3‐N, and NH 4‐N concentration and soil water content. In controlled conditions, the concentrations of K, P, Mg, and NH 4‐N in solution were significantly increased and positively correlated with biochar rates. Biochar was ineffective in removing NO 3‐N, K, P, and Mg from enriched solutions, while at the rate of 40 g L−1 biochar removed almost 52% of the initial NH 4‐N concentration. In a mature, irrigated, fertilized, commercial nectarine orchard (Big Top/GF677) on a sandy‐loam soil in the Italian Po Valley, soil‐applied biochar at the rates of 5, 15, and 30 t ha−1 were effective in reducing the leached amount of NH 4‐N in the top 0.25 m soil layer over 13 months, as estimated by ion exchange resin lysimeters. Nevertheless, independent of the rate, biochar did not affect soil pH, soil N mineral availability, soil moisture, tree nutritional status, yield, and fruit quality. We conclude that, unless an evident constraint is identified, in non‐limiting conditions (e.g., water availability and soil fertility), potential benefits from biochar application in commercial orchards are hidden or negligible.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Anion exchange capacities of biochar and its ability to retain ions and molecules within the pores further contribute to biochar's enhanced nutrient retention capacity.
“Sorrenti et al. (2016) and anion exchange capacities of biochar and its ability to retain ions and molecules within the pores further contribute to biochar's enhanced nutrient retention capacity.”
From Biochar and its importance on nutrient dynamics in soil and plant (2020) · cites this paper as Sorrenti et al. 2016
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 38
- Authors
- Sorrenti, G., Ventura, M., & Toselli, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Bologna (IT)
- Free University of Bozen-Bolzano (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Sorrenti, Giovambattista
- Venue
- Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-03-17
- Volume
- 179
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 336-346
- ISSN
- 1436-8730 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2624
- OpenAlex
- W2299794926
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 5.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science (publishedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion)
- Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Soil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
- Keywords
- biochar, nectarine orchards, nutrient retention, nitrate nitrogen, potassium, phosphorus, magnesium, tree nutritional status, fruit yield, fruit quality, soil pH, soil moisture, sandy loam soil
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review