Cited by 1,737Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesAgricultural Science and Fertilization

Biochar and its effects on plant productivity and nutrient cycling: A meta-analysis

Biederman, Lori A., Harpole, W. Stanley·2013·GCB Bioenergy

Abstract

Abstract Biochar is a carbon‐rich coproduct resulting from pyrolyzing biomass. When applied to the soil it resists decomposition, effectively sequestering the applied carbon and mitigating anthropogenic CO 2 emissions. Other promoted benefits of biochar application to soil include increased plant productivity and reduced nutrient leaching. However, the effects of biochar are variable and it remains unclear if recent enthusiasm can be justified. We evaluate ecosystem responses to biochar application with a meta‐analysis of 371 independent studies culled from 114 published manuscripts. We find that despite variability introduced by soil and climate, the addition of biochar to soils resulted, on average, in increased aboveground productivity, crop yield, soil microbial biomass, rhizobia nodulation, plant K tissue concentration, soil phosphorus (P), soil potassium (K), total soil nitrogen (N), and total soil carbon (C) compared with control conditions. Soil pH also tended to increase, becoming less acidic, following the addition of biochar. Variables that showed no significant mean response to biochar included belowground productivity, the ratio of aboveground : belowground biomass, mycorrhizal colonization of roots, plant tissue N, and soil P concentration, and soil inorganic N. Additional analyses found no detectable relationship between the amount of biochar added and aboveground productivity. Our results provide the first quantitative review of the effects of biochar on multiple ecosystem functions and the central tendencies suggest that biochar holds promise in being a win‐win‐win solution to energy, carbon storage, and ecosystem function. However, biochar's impacts on a fourth component, the downstream nontarget environments, remain unknown and present a critical research gap.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gcbb.12037

Cites

191 of 191 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

1 of the 192 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Biederman, L. A., & Harpole, W. S.
Affiliations
Iowa State University (US)
Corresponding author
Biederman, Lori A.
Venue
GCB Bioenergy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-12-31
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
202-214
ISSN
  • 1757-1693 (ISSN-L)
  • 1757-1707
OpenAlex
W2129623720
Cited by
1,737
References
192
Citations by year
2026: 146 · 2025: 133 · 2024: 160 · 2023: 157 · 2022: 143 · 2021: 179 · 2020: 155 · 2019: 139 · 2018: 124 · 2017: 131 · 2016: 107 · 2015: 74 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 1
FWCI
78.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
GCB Bioenergy (publishedVersion)
Funders
Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Iowa State University
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
Keywords
biochar, soil amendment, plant productivity, crop yield, nutrient cycling, soil carbon sequestration, soil microbial biomass, rhizobia nodulation, soil pH, soil nitrogen, soil phosphorus, soil potassium, mycorrhizal colonization, nutrient leaching, biomass pyrolysis

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