Cited by 92Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsRice Cultivation and Yield ImprovementAgricultural Science and Fertilization

A two years study on the combined effects of biochar and inhibitors on ammonia volatilization in an intensively managed rice field

Open access
He, Tiehu, Liu, Deyan, Yuan, Junji, Ni, Kang, Zaman, Mohammad, Luo, Jiafa, Lindsey, Stuart, Ding, Weixin·2018·Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

Abstract

China is the world’s largest emitter of gaseous ammonia (NH3), a compound that poses severe risks to human and ecosystem health. Adding biochar and inhibitors to soils has been suggested as a method to increase carbon sequestration and reduce nitrous oxide emissions, however, the effects of the amendments on NH3 emissions are poorly understood. We conducted a field experiment to evaluate the effect of applying biochar combined with a urease inhibitor (hydroquinone, HQ) and a nitrification inhibitor (dicyandiamide, DCD) on NH3 emissions, rice yields, and N use efficiency (NUE) during two growth seasons. Four replicates of seven treatments comprising no urea fertilizer (control), urea (N), biochar (B), urea + biochar (NB), NB + urease inhibitor (NBUI), NB + nitrification inhibitor (NBNI), and NB + urease and nitrification inhibitors (double inhibitor) (NBDI), were arranged in a randomized complete block design. Wheat straw biochar was applied once, in June 2014. Biochar in the NB treatment increased NH3 losses by 14.1% in the first rice season (P < 0.05), primarily due to increased pH and concentrations of NH4+-N in the floodwater, and decreased NH3 losses in the second rice growth season by 6.8%, probably due to its high adsorption capacity for NH4+ and increased nitrification. The combined application of biochar and DCD increased NH3 losses by 47.0% and 17.2% in 2014 and 2015, respectively. The application of biochar + double inhibitors was shown to have no effect on NH3 losses in the first rice growth season, but in the second year, NH3 losses were reduced by 19.8% (P < 0.05). The combination of biochar and HQ decreased NH3 losses by 10.5–23.4% during the two growth seasons (P < 0.05) and the addition of biochar either alone (NB), or in combination with HQ (NBUI) or double inhibitors (NBDI), increased rice yield by 7.4–16.5% and NUE from 29.4% in the N treatment (N) to 42.5%. The combined application of biochar and DCD did not have an effect on rice yield and NUE in the first year, but increased yield and NUE in the second year (P < 0.05). Overall, our results suggest that the combination of biochar and HQ or the combined application of urease and nitrification inhibitors to soil enriched with biochar at least one year previously could be an effective practice for reducing NH3 emissions and increasing rice yields.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.agee.2018.05.010

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Biochar application to soil with urea increased NH3 volatilization losses by 14.1% in the first rice season, primarily due to increased pH and concentrations of NH4+-N in the floodwater, and decreased NH3 losses in the second rice growth season by 6.8%, probably due to its high adsorption capacity for NH4+ and increased nitrification.

    “Recently Hea et al. (2018) reported that biochar application to soil with urea increased NH3 volatilization losses by 14.1% in the first rice season, primarily due to increased pH and concentrations of NH4 + -N in the floodwater, and decreased NH3 losses in the second rice growth season by 6.8%, probably due to its high adsorption capacity for NH4 + and increased nitrification.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
He, T., Liu, D., Yuan, J., Ni, K., Zaman, M., Luo, J., Lindsey, S., & Ding, W.
Affiliations
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CN)
  • International Atomic Energy Agency (AT)
  • AgResearch (NZ)
Corresponding author
Ding, Weixin
Venue
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-09
Volume
264
Pages
44-53
ISSN
0167-8809 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2804145558
Cited by
92
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3
FWCI
7.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Special Fund for Forest Scientific Research in Public Welfare (201404210)
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFD0200309)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (41501274, BK20151056)
  • Frontier Project from the Institute of Soil Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences (ISSASIP1607)
  • IAEA
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Rice Cultivation and Yield Improvement
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
Keywords
biochar, ammonia volatilization, urease inhibitors, hydroquinone, nitrification inhibitors, dicyandiamide, rice, nitrogen use efficiency, urea fertilizer, soil amendment, ammonium adsorption, rice yield, nitrogen management, greenhouse gas emissions, wheat straw biochar, flooded paddy soil, soil pH, ammonia nitrogen, carbon sequestration

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