Cited by 616Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsSoil Management and Crop YieldAgricultural Science and Fertilization

Potential role of biochars in decreasing soil acidification - a critical review

Open access
Dai, Zhongmin, Zhang, Xiaojie, Tang, C., Muhammad, Niaz, Wu, Jianjun, Brookes, Philip C., Xu, Jianming·2017·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

A large number of soils, worldwide, are acid (normally pH<5.5) and suffering from on-going soil acidification. Acid soils or soils undergoing acidification generally have low fertility and low crop productivity. Biochars have been reported to be of potential value in agriculture for improving soil properties and in reducing the hazards caused by soil acidification and in naturally acidic soils. However, the ameliorant effects of biochars on acid soils and the mechanisms involved have not previously been critically reviewed. Here we summarize the phenomena, and mechanisms involved in the improvement of soil acidity by biochars, the alleviation of aluminum toxicity, the enhancement of nutrient availability, and changes in nitrification by collating data in the literature. In addition, the agronomic effectiveness and environmental concerns in the incorporation of biochar and other soil additives (i.e. lime, industrial by-products, organic wastes and plant residues) to acid soils are systemically compared. We conclude that biochar is a potentially effective amendment to reverse or to prevent acidification in acid soils. Finally, perspectives for further research in terms of soil acidification are presented to address some issues that are still poorly understood and/or highly controversial.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.169

Cites

154 of 154 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dai, Z., Zhang, X., Tang, C., Muhammad, N., Wu, J., Brookes, P. C., & Xu, J.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • La Trobe University (AU)
Corresponding author
Xu, Jianming
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-03
Volume
581-582
Pages
601-611
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2570723607
Cited by
616
References
154
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 87 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 10
FWCI
3.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • La Trobe University
Funders
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFD0200302)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (41520104001)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
Keywords
biochar, soil acidification, acid soils, soil amendment, aluminum toxicity, nutrient availability, nitrification, liming, industrial by-products, organic waste, plant residues, soil pH

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