Conocarpus biochar as a soil amendment for reducing heavy metal availability and uptake by maize plants
Open accessAbstract
The objective of this study was to assess the use of Concarpus biochar as a soil amendment for reducing heavy metal accessibility and uptake by maize plants (Zea mays L.). The impacts of biochar rates (0.0, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0% w/w) and two soil moisture levels (75% and 100% of field capacity, FC) on immobilization and availability of Fe, Mn, Zn, Cd, Cu and Pb to maize plants as well as its application effects on soil pH, EC, bulk density, and moisture content were evaluated using heavy metal-contaminated soil collected from mining area. The biochar addition significantly decreased the bulk density and increased moisture content of soil. Applying biochar significantly reduced NH4OAc- or AB-DTPA-extractable heavy metal concentrations of soils, indicating metal immobilization. Conocarpus biochar increased shoot dry biomass of maize plants by 54.5-102% at 75% FC and 133-266% at 100% FC. Moreover, applying biochar significantly reduced shoot heavy metal concentrations in maize plants (except for Fe at 75% FC) in response to increasing application rates, with a highest decrease of 51.3% and 60.5% for Mn, 28% and 21.2% for Zn, 60% and 29.5% for Cu, 53.2% and 47.2% for Cd at soil moisture levels of 75% FC and 100% FC, respectively. The results suggest that biochar may be effectively used as a soil amendment for heavy metal immobilization and in reducing its phytotoxicity.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 addition significantly decreased NH4OAc- or AB-DTPA-extractable heavy metal concentrations of soils, indicating metal immobilization, and increased shoot dry biomass of maize plants by 54.5-102% at 75% FC and 133-266% at 100% FC.
“Biochar addition significantly decreased NH 4 OAc-or AB-DTPAextractable heavy metal concentrations of soils, indicating metal immobilization, increasing shoot dry biomass of maize plants by 54.5À102% at 75% FC and 133À266% at 100% FC.”
From Biochar implications for sustainable agriculture and environment: A review (2019) · cites this paper as Al-Wabel et al., 2015
The effects of biochar applications depend on various factors such as soil and metal types, type of feedstocks used for charring, pyrolysis conditions and amount of biochars applied to soils.
“Specifically, the effects of biochars applications depend on various factors such as soil and metal types, the type of feedstocks used for charring, pyrolysis conditions and the amount of biochars applied to soils (Al-Wabel et al., 2015;Park et al., 2011).”
From Biochar implications for sustainable agriculture and environment: A review (2019) · cites this paper as Al-Wabel et al., 2015
Applying biochar significantly reduced shoot heavy metal concentrations in maize plants, except Fe at 75% FC, in response to increasing application rates, with highest decreases of 51.3% and 60.5% for Mn, 28% and 21.2% for Zn, 60% and 29.5% for Cu, 53.2% and 47.2% for Cd at 75% FC and 100% FC, respectively.
“In addition, applying biochar significantly reduced shoot heavy metal concentrations in maize plants (except for Fe at 75% FC) in response to increasing application rates, with a highest decrease of 51.3% and 60.5% for Mn, 28% and 21.2% for Zn, 60% and 29.5% for Cu, 53.2% and 47.2% for Cd at soil moisture levels of 75% FC and 100% FC, respectively (Al-Wabel et al., 2015).”
From Biochar implications for sustainable agriculture and environment: A review (2019) · cites this paper as Al-Wabel et al., 2015
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 51 · Cited by 276
- Authors
- Al-Wabel, M. I., Usman, A. R. A., El-Naggar, A. H., Aly, A. A., Ibrahim, H. M., Elmaghraby, S., & Al-Omran, A.
- Affiliations
- King Saud University (SA)
- Ain Shams University (EG)
- Suez Canal University (EG)
- Corresponding author
- Al-Wabel, Mohammad I.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-07
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 503-511
- ISSN
- 1319-562X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4486727
- OpenAlex
- W2032496119
- Cited by
- 276
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 5
- FWCI
- 10.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- NSTIP (ENV1592-11-02)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Heavy metals in environment
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
- Keywords
- soil amendment, heavy metal immobilization, heavy metal availability, maize, phytotoxicity, mining-contaminated soil, soil moisture, cadmium, copper, manganese, zinc, lead, iron, soil bulk density, plant biomass
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
