CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 335Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsAgricultural Science and FertilizationSoil Management and Crop Yield

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 140 of the 144 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biochar reduced nitrate leaching and improved soil moisture content without yield improvements in a four-year field study

Haider, Ghulam, Steffens, Diedrich, Moser, Gerald, Müller, Christoph, Kammann, Claudia I.·2017·Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
DOI 10.1016/j.agee.2016.12.019
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The use of biochar (BC) is discussed as a strategy to sequester carbon in soils, to reduce GHG emissions and improve soil fertility. However, the responses of crop yields to biochar amendments in agricultural ecosystems, specifically under temperate field conditions, are still uncertain. Furthermore, results obtained under field conditions are often differing from laboratory studies. Therefore, the establishment of long-term studies under field conditions is mandatory to provide the base for recommendations. We carried out a two-factorial split-plot field experiment over four years (2012–2015, still in progress) to compare the effects of BC on crop yields, mineral nitrogen (NO3− and NH4+) dynamics, soil moisture and initial soil CO2 efflux. A temperate sandy soil was amended with BC (0, 15 and 30Mgha−1) with the second factor being watering regime (irrigated or rainfed). The soil CO2 efflux was increased only for a short time following BC amendments. Freshly incorporated BC (30Mgha−1) initially induced manganese (Mn) deficiency at the vegetative stage of the first crop maize (Zea maize L.). Biochar amendments significantly reduced NO3− leaching, as indicated by greater NO3− stocks in the topsoil and reduced stocks in the subsoil (0–15, BC amendment zone and 60–90cm respectively). In BC treatments a higher soil moisture and higher NO3− amount was observed, however, this did not translate into higher yields. Rather, grain yields of maize (year I) and summer barley (Hordeum vulgare L., year III, no nitrogen (N) fertilization) were significantly reduced (1–11 and 5–26% respectively) due to N deficiency with BC amendment or (non-alleviated) drought stress. A prolonged drought spell in 2015 (year IV) drastically reduced the grain yield of maize (5 and 0.7Mgha−1) and N uptake (96 and 11kgha−1) in the irrigated and rainfed treatments respectively, without any alleviating effects of biochar amendment. We conclude that application of large amounts of pure, non-nutrient-loaded biochar to temperate sandy soils may provide environmental benefits, such as carbon sequestration and reduction of nitrate leaching, but without an economic incentive for implementing biochar use, at least for the initial few years of application.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.agee.2016.12.019

Cites

140 of 140 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 144 references

4 of the 144 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Ernsting, 2009, Biochar for climate change mitigation: fact or fiction?, Biofuel Watch
  2. Kishimoto, 1985, Charcoal as a soil conditioner: symposium on forest products research, Int. Achieve Future, 5, 12
  3. Rosopulo, 1976, Vergleich verschiedener Veraschungsmethoden für die nasschemische Bestimmung von Mengen- und Spurenelementen in Kulturpflanzen, Landwirtschaftliche Forschung, 29, 199
  4. Widowati, 2014, The use of biochar to reduce nitrogen and potassium leaching from soil cultivated with maize, J. Degrad. Min. Lands Manag., 2, 211

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–335 of 335

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Haider, G., Steffens, D., Moser, G., Müller, C., & Kammann, C. I.
Affiliations
  • Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (DE)
  • University College Dublin (IE)
  • Hochschule Geisenheim University (DE)
Corresponding author
Haider, Ghulam
ORCID
Venue
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
237
Pages
80-94
ISSN
0167-8809 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.agee.2016.12.019
OpenAlex
W2564391281
Cited by
334
References
144
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 11
FWCI
25.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Justus Liebig Universität Gießen
  • Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
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
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
Keywords
biochar, nitrate leaching, soil moisture, crop yield, maize, barley, drought stress, nitrogen deficiency, soil CO2 efflux, manganese deficiency, nitrogen mineralization, sandy soil, carbon sequestration, irrigation, rainfed agriculture, long-term field experiment, nitrogen uptake, temperate climate, soil amendment, nitrogen fertilization, greenhouse gas emissions reduction

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