Cited by 214Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityAgricultural Science and Fertilization

Biochars and the plant-soil interface

Open access
Lehmann, Johannes, Kuzyakov, Yakov, Pan, Genxing, Ok, Yong Sik·2015·Plant and Soil

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This editorial argues that biochar effects on crop growth remain unpredictable because biochar and soil properties vary widely and mechanistic understanding of the biochar-soil-plant interface is limited. It introduces a special issue showing that roots and microorganisms respond to biochar particles and pore-scale environments, with pH and mycorrhizal interactions as key examples.

Key findings

  • Biochar effects on crop yield remain inconsistent, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing yield, due to widely varying biochar properties, variable soil properties, and differing environmental plant requirements.
  • The paper emphasizes three-way biochar-soil-root interactions and spatial heterogeneity: biochar particles may have pH 9.2, surrounding soil pH 4.2, and a 2 % w/w biochar mixture pH 5.9, so the average pH may not reflect the microenvironment roots actually experience.
  • Special-issue findings include significantly increased maize root systems after 4 Mg ha⁻¹ maize-cob biochar on deeply weathered Zambian soils, with increased root-shoot ratio; decreased Arabidopsis root hair abundance with alkaline biochar extracts regardless of inorganic P addition; and greater mycorrhizal abundance within biochar than in surrounding soil, with biochar-induced mycorrhizae increasing P uptake from soil rather than from biochar.
  • Responses were often non-linear: plant-water relations or disease suppression improved at intermediate biochar rates of 0.5–1.5 % w/w and decreased beyond that; pH correction was important for increasing biological N fixation and influencing heavy metal uptake by plants.

Methods

  • This is an editorial/special-issue introduction that synthesizes and discusses included studies rather than presenting primary experimental research.
  • No primary data collection, sample, or statistical analysis is described; reported examples and numbers are drawn from cited special-issue papers and prior literature.
  • The paper calls for spatially explicit investigation of the biochar-soil-plant interface at scales relevant to root and microbial interactions.

Limitations

  • Stated in the paper: there is a distinct lack of mechanistic insight into how properties shared by many biochars affect plant growth, and causal relationships are particularly difficult to discern.
  • Stated in the paper: quantitative evidence on whether more or fewer roots and microorganisms grow in biochar particles is virtually non-existent, and reasons for preferential growth near or in biochar pores remain unclear.
  • Evident from the text: as an editorial/special-issue introduction, it does not present new primary data or a systematic review methodology, so its conclusions rely on selected cited studies and conceptual synthesis.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11104-015-2658-3

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 27 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Premisecitation

    The unpredictability of biochar effects on crop growth is largely due to widely varying biochar properties and variable soil properties and environmental plant requirements.

    “To a large extent, this is a result of widely varying biochar properties (Enders et al. 2012;Schimmelpfennig and Glaser 2012) as well as of variable soil properties and environmental plant requirements.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Enders et al. 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Schimmelpfennig and Glaser 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Interpretationreasoning

    Biochars may affect growth of roots or mycorrhizae and thereby the extent of plant water or nutrient uptake from soil surrounding biochar particles not directly influenced by biochar.

    “For example, biochars may affect growth of roots or mycorrhizae in the soil and thereby the extent to which the plant takes up water or nutrients from the soil surrounding the biochar particles that is not directly influenced by the added biochar.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Interpretationreasoning

    Roots, root hairs, and mycorrhizal hyphae growing in pores or on surfaces of biochar particles may be exposed to a chemical, physical, and biological environment very different from surrounding soil.

    “Further, the roots, root hairs, and mycorrhizal hyphae that grow in the pores or on the surfaces of biochar particles may be exposed to a chemical and physical and biological environment that is very different from the soil environment surrounding it.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Roots can explore biochar pores directly.
    • Rests on an assumption: Biochars are particulate in nature.
  • Premisecitation

    Quantitative evidence of whether there are more or less roots and microorganisms growing in biochar particles is virtually non-existent.

    “Even though roots and microorganisms growing on and in biochar particles have been visualized for some time (Ogawa 1994), quantitative evidence of whether there are more or less roots and microorganisms growing in biochar particles is virtually non-existent (Lehmann et al. 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lehmann et al. 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Premisecitation

    The effects of biochars on crop growth appear unpredictable, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing yield responses.

    “Even though our knowledge has considerably advanced, the effects of biochars on crop growth still appear unpredictable, with in some instances increasing while in others decreasing yield responses (Liu et al. 2013;Jeffery et al. 2015a).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Liu et al. 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jeffery et al. 2015a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 8
  • May combine two claims. 13
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Alkaline biochars can increase pH of acid soil, which may enhance photosynthesis and alter the way plants explore biochar pores.

    “This interaction may also occur in reverse when alkaline biochars increase the pH of an acid soil; this may in turn enhance photosynthesis and could alter the way plants explore the pores of biochar particles.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The spatial arrangement of the biochar-soil-plant interface warrants recognition.

    “However, because roots can explore biochar pores directly and the biochars are particulate in nature, the spatial arrangement of the biochar-soil-plant interface warrants recognition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Roots can explore biochar pores directly.
    • Rests on an assumption: Biochars are particulate in nature.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    In most conceptual models and experiments, the plant is thought to interact with a mixture of biochar and soil, but in fact there could be important three-way interactions between biochar particles, soil, and plant roots.

    “In most conceptual models (and most experiments), the plant is thought to interact with a mixture of biochar and soil (Fig. 1a), when in fact there could in many instances be important three-way interactions between biochar particles, soil, and plant roots (Fig. 1b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Some biochars increase crop yield while others decrease yield, for reasons explainable by known crop responses to altered pH or salt contents and short-term N limitation in N deficient soil.

    “Some biochars may increase crop yield, whereas others may decrease yield for reasons that are readily explainable using known responses of crops to for example altered pH or salt contents (Van Zwieten et al. 2010;Rajkovich et al. 2012) and short-term N limitation in N deficient soil (Clough et al. 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Van Zwieten et al. 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Rajkovich et al. 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Clough et al. 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Average pH does not reflect the pH environment roots are exposed to, which could be higher or lower than composite pH depending on proximity to biochar particles.

    “However, this average pH does not reflect the pH environment the roots are actually exposed to, which could be higher or lower than the composite pH and depend on the proximity to the biochar particles (Fig. 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The pH of biochar particles (9.2) may be much higher than surrounding soil (4.2), and a 2% w/w biochar mixture may show an intermediate pH (5.9).

    “For example, the pH of the biochar particles (9.2) may be much higher than that of the surrounding soil (4.2) and the mixture of 2 % w/w biochar may show an intermediate pH (5.9) (Fig. 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Van Zwieten et al. 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The need for recognizing the wide variety of biochars with often diametrically opposing physical and chemical properties has been amply stated.

    “The need for recognizing the wide variety of biochars with often diametrically opposing characteristics in terms of physical and chemical properties has been amply stated (Novak et al. 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Novak et al. 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Plant-water relations or disease suppression improved at intermediate biochar application rates of 0.5-1.5% w/w and decreased beyond that.

    “Rather, plant-water relations (Haider et al. 2015) or disease suppression (Jaiswal et al. 2015) improved by what these studies considered to be intermediate biochar application rates of 0.5-1.5 % w/w and decreased beyond that.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Haider et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jaiswal et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Abiven et al. 2015, root architecture was markedly influenced by biochar additions and root-shoot ratio increased.

    “The authors were not only able to show that the root architecture was markedly influenced by the biochar additions but also that the root-shoot ratio increased.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Abiven et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    pH correction is often observed to be important in overall effects of biochars on plant performance, and was important for increasing biological N fixation in a field setting.

    “The importance of pH correction in overall effects of biochars on plant performance is often observed and was also important for increasing biological N fixation in a field setting (Van Zwieten et al. 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Van Zwieten et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In Vanek and Lehmann 2015, pH was excluded as an explanation for preference of microorganisms or roots to grow near biochar particles.

    “The reasons for such a preference of microorganisms or roots to grow near biochar particles or even in their pores remain unclear: are these related to nutrients, water or pH (which was excluded as an explanation in the paper by Vanek and Lehmann 2015), and if not, what other reasons may exist?”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Vanek and Lehmann 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Wang et al. 2015, bacterial community structure was not affected by biochar in presence of plants, and without plants only minimally influenced.

    “In the study by Wang et al. (2015), the bacterial community structure was not affected by additions of biochar in the presence of plants (that on their own showed a major imprint on community structure), and even without plants was only minimally influenced by additions of biochar.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wang et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Soil minerals interacting with biochar particles may create a different interface than exposed biochar surfaces.

    “Soil minerals interacting with biochar particles may create a different interface than exposed biochar surfaces and may warrant separate consideration.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Greater mycorrhizal abundance within biochar than in surrounding soil was observed (Vanek and Lehmann 2015), confirming earlier visual analyses.

    “The spatial distribution of microorganisms may be especially revealing, as with the observed greater mycorrhizal abundance within the biochar than in the surrounding soil (Vanek and Lehmann 2015) that confirms earlier visual analyses (Lehmann et al. 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Vanek and Lehmann 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Lehmann et al. 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The argument for including appropriate experimental controls beyond a no-biochar treatment has been made, but appropriate experimental designs are only slowly implemented.

    “The argument for including appropriate experimental controls in research on biochars that go beyond a no-biochar treatment has also been made (Jeffery et al. 2015b) but appropriate experimental designs are only slowly implemented.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jeffery et al. 2015b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Investigating the plant-soil interface in a spatially-explicit manner brings critical mechanisms into focus.

    “Conversely, investigating the plant-soil interface in a spatially-explicit manner by observing the contribution that areas within and around biochars make brings critical mechanisms into focus.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Emergent evidence shows that processes occur on surfaces of biochar particles and in their pore spaces that are relevant to plant growth.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    In most cases, significant methodological hurdles will be faced to examine pH around and in biochar pores experienced by root hairs or mycorrhizal hyphae.

    “In most cases, we will face significant methodological hurdles to examine for instance the pH around and in those pores of biochars that root hairs or mycorrhizal hyphae experience.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is equally possible (and more likely) that cause and effect are not always discernible, with negative effects emerging at high application rates.

    “It is tempting to interpret such results with an optimum response to the target effect, but it is equally possible (and given the multitude of effects of different biochars on plant-soil interactions even more likely) that cause and effect are not always discernable, with negative effects emerging at high application rates.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Root growth may be influenced independent of large changes in nutrient availability, possibly by plant perception of its environment.

    “This finding shows that root growth may be influenced independent of large changes in nutrient availability (without any observed changes in aeration, pH, moisture), possibly by plant perception of its environment.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
19 of 19
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is a distinct lack of mechanistic insight into how properties shared by many biochars affect plant growth.

    “However, we also observe a distinct lack of mechanistic insight into how properties that are shared by many biochars affect plant growth.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Biochars are known to alter many soil properties (pH, bulk density, soil aggregation, water holding capacity, nutrient availability, organic carbon availability).

    “Biochars are known to alter in many instances a wide variety of soil properties, such as pH, bulk density, soil aggregation, water holding capacity, nutrient availability and organic carbon availability.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Roots can explore biochar pores directly.

    “because roots can explore biochar pores directly”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Biochars are particulate in nature.

    “the biochars are particulate in nature”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The distribution of biochar particles and thereby its influence on soil properties is not homogeneous on a fine scale.

    “In addition, the distribution of biochar particles and thereby its influence on soil properties, is not homogeneous on a fine scale.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Even less is known about the reasons why roots or microorganisms would prefer the biochar spaces, beyond well-known effects of nutrients, water or metabolizable carbon as energy sources.

    “Even less is known about the reasons why roots or microorganisms would prefer the biochar spaces, beyond well-known effects of nutrients, water or metabolizable carbon as energy sources.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Emergent evidence shows that processes occur on surfaces of biochar particles and in their pore spaces that are relevant to plant growth.

    “Even less recognized is the topic of this special issue: the emergent evidence shows that processes occur on surfaces of biochar particles and in their pore spaces that are relevant to plant growth.”
7 of 7

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?

  • The application of biochar to soils has been shown to achieve net carbon gain in soils while also serving for increased plant biomass production by enhancing the nutrient supply to plants and increasing nutrient and water use efficiencies (NUE and WUE) by plants.

    “In this connection, the application of biochar to soils has been shown to achieve the net carbon gain in soils while also serving for increased plant biomass production by enhancing the nutrient supply to plants and increasing nutrient and water use efficiencies (NUE and WUE) by plants (Kookana et al., 2011; Lehmann et al., 2015; Minasny et al., 2017).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lehmann, J., Kuzyakov, Y., Pan, G., & Ok, Y. S.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • University of Göttingen (DE)
  • Nanjing Agricultural University (CN)
  • Kangwon National University (KR)
Corresponding author
Lehmann, Johannes
Venue
Plant and Soil
Published
2015-09-08
Volume
395
Issue
1-2
Pages
1-5
ISSN
  • 0032-079X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-5036
OpenAlex
W2128207984
Cited by
214
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 1
FWCI
20.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Plant and Soil (publishedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
Keywords
biochar, soil-plant interface, rhizosphere interactions, crop yield, biochar properties, soil amendment, nitrogen limitation, soil pH, salt stress, plant growth mechanisms

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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