Production of rice husk biochar and its effects on lentil and wheat biomass

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Authors

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Biochar application as a strategy for long term carbon sequestration has recieved worldwide attention. In addition to long term carbon sequestration and global warming mitigation, biochar application in soil can result in improvement of soil properties, enhancement of plant growth and sustainable management of agricultural, garden and industrial biomass wastes and residues . Most of reports about positive effects of biochar have been done in acidic soils and there is little information about biochar effects in non-acidic soils. Therefore this research was conducted to investigate the effects of production condition of two type of rice husk biochar on their properties and accessing these biochar effects on plant biomass production in a two plant (lentil-wheat) cycle in an alkaline soil in greenhouse condition.

Materials and methods: Biochar 1 and 2 were produced of rice husk at temperature range of 250-300 and 450-500 C, respectively and they were compared with each other. 0.4, 1.6 and 3.3 weight percent (B0.4, B1.6 and B3.3) of biochar 1 and 2 were added to pots. At first, lentil was seeded and then wheat was seeded after lentil harvest. Effects of type and application rate of biochar on biomass production were compared with each other and control (without biochar) treatment.
Results: Molar hydrogen to carbon ratio and infrared spectrum of biochars showed more aromaticity in biochar produced at higher temperature. Increase of temperature led to smaller particle size, increase of electrical conductivity, pH, nitogen, potassium, calcium and phosphorus content of biochar. Two biochar effects on dry above and below ground biomass of lentil and wheat were not significantly different. But dry above ground biomass of wheat and dry below ground biomass of lentil and wheat in biochar 1 and 2 treatments were significantly higher in compared to control treatment. Effect of biochar application rates on dry above ground biomass of lentil were not significantly different with each other and control treatment. But dry below ground biomass of lentil in B3.3 was significantly more than other biochar application rates (B0.4 and B1.6) and control treatment. Dry above ground biomass of wheat in B1.6 and B3.3 was significantly more than B0.4 and control treatments. Dry below ground biomass of wheat in B1.6 was significantly more than B0.4, however it was not significantly different in comparison with B3.3. Shoot to root ratio of lentil in B1.6 and B3.3 was significantly less than control treatment. Shoot to root ratio of wheat was significantly less than control in all biochar application rates, however biochar application rates did not have significant difference with each other.
Conclusion: More aromaticity of biochar 2 (produced at temperature of 500-450 C˚) in comparison with biochar 1 (produced at temperature of 500-450 C˚) means more long term carbon sequestration potential. Biochar application had positive effects on biomass especially below ground biomass. Biochar effects were not only limited to first growth cycle (lentil) but also exist in second growth cycle (wheat). Generally it can be concluded that biochar production of rice husk can improve plant growth even in alkaline soils.

Keywords


1.Al-Wabel, M.I., Al-Omran, A., El-Naggar, A.H., Nadeem, M., and Usman, A.R. 2013.
Pyrolysis temprature induced changes in characteristics and chemical composition of biochar
produced of conocarpus wastes. Bioresource Technology. 131: 374-379.
2.Amonette, J.E., and Joseph, S. 2009. Characteristics of biochar: Microchemical properties.
P 33-52, In: J. Lehmann and S. Joseph (Eds.), Biochar for environmental management:
Science and Technology. Eds Earthscan, London, Sterling, VA.
3.ASTM. 2007. ASTM book of Standards Volume 15.01: Refractories, Activated Carbon:
Advanced Ceramics, American Society for Testing Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
1090p.
4.Atkinson, C., Fitzgerald, J., and Hipps, N. 2010. Potential mechanisms for achieving
agricultural benefits from biochar application in soils: a review. Plant and Soil. 337: 1-18.
5.Barrow, C.J. 2012. Biochar potential for countering land degradation and for improving
agriculture. Applied Geography. 34: 21-28.
6.Blackwell, P., Riethmuller, G., and Collins, M. 2009. Biochar application for soil. P 207-222,
In: J. Lehman and S. Joseph (Eds.), Biochar for Environmental Management, Science and
Technology. Eds Earthscan, London, Sterling, VA.
7.Bremner, J.M., and Mulvaney, C.S. 1982. Nitrogen total. P 595-624, In: A.L. Page, R.H.
Miller and D.R. Keeny (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and
Microbiological Properties. 2nd Ed. Madison, Soil Science Society of America.
8.Carter, S., Shackley, S., Sohi, S., Suy, T.B., and Haefele, S. 2013. The impact of biochar
application on soil properties and plant growth of pot grown lettuce (Lactuca sativa) and
cabbage (Brassica chinensis). Agronomy. 3: 404-418.
9.Chan, K.Y., Van Zwieten, L., Meszaros, I., Downie, A., and Joseph, S. 2007. Agronomic
values of greenwaste biochar as a soil amendment. Austr. J. Soil Res. 45: 629-634.
10.Chan, K.Y., Van Zwieten, L., Meszaros, I., Downie, A., and Joseph, S. 2008. Using poultry
litter biochars as soil amendments. Austr. J. Soil Res. 46: 437-444.
11.Chapman, H.D. 1965. Cation exchange capacity. P 891-901, In: C.A. Black (Ed.), Methods
of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Madison, American Society of Agronomy.
12.Denyes, M.J., Rutter, A., and Zeeb, B.A. 2013. In situ application of activated carbon and
biochar to PCB-contaminated soil and the effects of mixing regime. Environmental
Pollution. 182: 201-208.
13.Dane, J.H., and Topp, G.C. 2002. Methods of Soil Analysis. Physical Methods. SSSA Press,
Madison, WI, USA, 1663p.
14.Downie, A., Crosky, A., and Munroe, P. 2009. Physical properties of biochar. P 13-32,
In: J. Lehmann and S. Joseph (Eds.), Biochar for environmental management: Science and
Technology. Eds Earthscan, London, Sterling, VA.
15.Enders, A., and Lehmann, J. 2012. Comparison of wet-digestion and dry-ashing methods for
total elemental analysis of biochar. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis.
43: 1042-1052.
16.FAO. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. available online on:
htpp:// www.fao.org/statistics/en/.
17.Glaser, B., Lehmann, J., and Zech, W. 2002. Ameliorating physical and chemical properties
of highly weathered soils in the tropics with charcoal a review. Biology and Fertility of Soils.
35: 219-230.
18.Knudsen, D., Peterson, G.A., and Pratt, P.F. 1982. Lithium, sodium, potassium. P 225-246,
In: A.L. Page, R.H. Miller and D.R. Keeney (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2:
Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 2nd Ed. Madison, Soil Science Society of America.
19.Kuhlbusch, T.A.J., and Crutzen, P.J. 1996. Black carbon, the global carbon cycle and
atmospheric carbon dioxide. P 160-169, In: J.S. Levine (Ed.), Biomass Burning and Global
Change, MIT Press, Cambridge, UK.
20.Krull, E.S., Baldock, J.A., Skjemstad, J.O., and Smernik, R.J. 2009. Characteristics of
biochar: organo-chemical properties. P 53-66, In: J. Lehmann and S. Joseph (Eds.), Biochar
for Environmental Management. Eds Earthscan, London, Sterling, VA.
21.Lehmann, J., Da Silva Jr., J.P., Steiner, C., Nehls, T., Zech, W., and Glaser, B. 2003. Nutrient
availability and leaching in an archaeological Anthrosol and a Ferralsol of the Central Amazon
basin: fertilizer, manure and charcoal amendments. Plant and Soil. 249: 343-357.
22.Lehman, J., Rillig, M.C., Thies, J., Masiello, C.A., Hockaday, W.C., and Crowley, D. 2011.
Biochar effects on soil biota: a review. Soil Biology & Biochemistry. 43: 1812-1836.
23.Lehmann, J., and Rondon, M.A. 2005. Bio-char soil management on highly weathered soil in
the humid tropics. P 160-169, In: N. Uphoff (Ed.), Biological approaches to sustainable soil
systems. CRC, Boca Raton.
24.Nelson, D.W., and Sommers, L.E. 1982. Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter.
P 539-577, In: A.L. Page, R.H. Miller and D.R. Keeny (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2:
Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 2nd Ed. Madison, Soil Science Society of America.
25.Olsen, S.R., and Sommers, L.E. 1982. Phosphorus. P 403-427, In: A.L. Page, L.H. Miller
and D.R. Keeny (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological
Properties. 2nd Ed. Madison, Soil Science Society of America.
26.Pavia, D.L., Lampman, G.M., Kriz, G.S., and Vyvyan, J.A. 2009. Introduction to
Spectroscopy, 4th Edition, Cengage Learning, USA, 752p.
27.Rajkovich, S., Enders, A., Hanley, K., Hyland, C., Zimmerman, A.R., and Lehmann, J. 2012.
Corn growth and nitrogen nutrition after addition of biochars with varying properties to a
temperate soil, Biology and Fertility of Soils. 48: 271-284.
28.Rondon, M., Lehmann, J., Ramírez, J., and Hurtado, M. 2007. Biological nitrogen fixation
by common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) increases with bio-char additions. Biology and
Fertility of Soils. 43: 699-708.
29.SAS Institue Inc. 2001. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. SAS Institue, Cary, NC, USA.
30.Saarnio, S., Heimonen, K., and Kettunen, R. 2013. Biochar addition indirectly affects N2O
emissions via soil moisture and plant N uptake. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 58: 99-106.
31.Schmidt, M.W.I., and Noack, A.G. 2000. Black carbon in soils and sediments: Analysis,
distribution, implications and current challenges, Global Biogeochemical Cycles. 14: 777-793.
32.Van Zwieten, L., Kimber, S., Morris, S., Chan, K.Y., Downie, A., Joseph, S., and Cowie, A.
2010. Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of papermill waste on agronomic performance
and soil fertility. Plant and Soil. 327: 235-246.
33.Verheijen, F.G.A., Jeffery, S., Bastos, A.C., Van der Velde, M., and Diafas, I. 2009. Biochar
Application to Soils - A Critical Scientific Review of Effects on Soil Properties, Processes
and Functions. EUR 24099 EN, Office for the Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg, 149p.
34.Wardle, D.A., Zackrisson, O., and Nilsson, M.C. 1998. The charcoal effect in boreal forests:
mechanisms and ecological consequences. Oecologia. 115: 419-426.
35.Yamato, M., Okimori, Y., Wibowo, I.F., Anshori, S., and Ogawa, M. 2006. Effects of the
application of charred bark in Acacia mangium on the yield of maize, cowpea, peanut and soil
chemical properties in south Sumatra, Indonesia. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 52: 489-495.
36.Zhang, A., Liu, Y., Pan, G., Hussain, Q., Li, L., Zheng, J., and Zhang, X. 2012. Effect of
biochar amendment on maize yield and greenhouse gas emissions from a soil organic carbon
poor calcareous loamy soil from Central China Plain. Plant and Soils. 351: 263-275.