Arabian Journal of Geosciences

, 11:536 | Cite as

Effect of coal and wood ash on phosphorus immobilization in different textured soils

  • Muhammad Irshad
  • Farhan HafeezEmail author
  • Madiha Naseem
  • Muhammad Rizwan
  • Mohammad I. Al-Wabel
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Implications of Biochar Application to Soil Environment under Arid Conditions


Decreased phosphorus (P) losses and improved environmental quality are crucial to consider while recycling farm wastes and adding various soil amendments. This study investigated the impact of coal and wood ash on the extractability of P from soils (sandy loam and loamy sand) amended with organic and inorganic phosphorus fertilizers. These soils were further amended coal and wood ash, and analyses were carried out to quantify the water-, Olsen-, and Mehlich 1-extractable P. Ratio of the ashes applied to soils were 5% to sandy loam soil while 10% to loamy sand soil. Water-extractable P was observed to be mainly dependent on the ash type as well as the extraction method. Ash amendment reduced the solubilization of P across soils up to 9% and 23% and 7% to 17% upon 5% and 10% ash amendment in loamy sand and sandy loam soils, respectively. However, the water-extractable P was found to be low in wood ash-amended soil as compared to coal ash. Interestingly, this extractability was greater in soils treated with inorganic P. Phosphorus extraction from soil followed the trend as Mehlich 1 > Olsen > water. P leachability was found to be mainly dependent on ash amendment but values were high for the soil treated with inorganic P. The study inferred that using ash materials such as coal ash and wood ash can be a practical measure for moderating P losses from soils important for economic and environmental perspectives.


Coal ash Wood ash Phosphorus Rock phosphate Organic amendment 


Funding information

This study is financially supported by the COMSATS University Islamabad, Abbottabad Campus, Abbottabad, Pakistan.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Ali S, Rizwan M, Qayyum MF, Ok YS, Ibrahim M, Riaz M, Arif MS, Hafeez F, Al-Wabel MI, Shahzad AN (2017) Biochar soil amendment on alleviation of drought and salt stress in plants: a critical review. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:12700–12712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhogal A, Nicholson FA, Young I, Sturrock C, Whitmore AP, Chambers BJ (2011) Effects of recent and accumulated livestock manure carbon additions on soil fertility and quality. Eur J Soil Sci 62:174–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bouraima AK, He B, Tian T (2016) Runoff, nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) losses from purple slope cropland soil under rating fertilization in Three Gorges Region. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:4541–4550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Callahan MP, Kleinman PJA, Sharpley AN, Stout WL (2002) Assessing the efficacy of alternative phosphorus sorbing soil amendments. Soil Sci 167:539–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carpenter SR (2008) Phosphorus control is critical to mitigating eutrophication. PNAS 105(32):11039–11040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carpenter SR, Caraco NF, Correl DL, Howarth RW, Sharpley AN, Smith VH (1998) Nonpoint pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Ecol Appl 8:559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DeLuca HT, MacKenzie MD, Gundale MJ (2009) Biochar effects on soil nutrient transformations. In: Lehmann J, Joseph S (eds) Biochar for environmental management: science and technology. Earthscan, London, pp 251–270Google Scholar
  8. Demeyer A, Nkana JCV, Verloo MG (2001) Characteristics of wood ash and influence on soil properties and nutrient uptake: an overview. Bioresour Technol 77:287–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Faridullah IM, Yamamoto S, Ahmad Z, Endo T, Honna T (2009) Extractability and bioavaiability of phosphorus from soil amended with poultry litter and poultry litter ash. J Food Agric Environ 7(2):292–297Google Scholar
  10. Faridullah NZ, Alam A, Irshad M, Sabir MA (2014) Distribution and evaluating phosphorus, potassium, calcium and magnesium in the fresh and composted poultry litter. Bulg J Agric Sci 20(6):1394–1400Google Scholar
  11. Gee GW, Bauder JW (1986) Particle-size analysis. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods 2nd edition. 9(1). American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 383–411Google Scholar
  12. Gustafsson JP, Mwamila LB, Kergoat K (2012) The pH dependence of phosphate sorption and desorption in Swedish agricultural soils. Geoderma 189:304–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hafeez F, Aziz T, Maqsood MA, Ahmed M, Farooq M (2010) Differences in rice cultivars for growth and phosphorus acquisition from rock phosphate and mono-ammonium phosphate sources. Int J Agric Biol 12:907–910Google Scholar
  14. He J, Su D, Lv S, Diao Z, Bu H, Wo Q (2018) Analysis of factors controlling soil phosphorus loss with surface runoff in Huihe National Nature Reserve by principal component and path analysis methods. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:2320–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hedley M, McLaughlin M (2005) Reactions of phosphate fertilizers and by-products in soil. In: Sims JT, Sharpley AN (eds) Phosphorus: agriculture and the environment. Agron. Monog, vol 46. Madison, WI, pp 181–252Google Scholar
  16. Kahl JS, Fernandez IJ, Rustad LE, Peckenham J (1996) Threshold application rates of wood ash to an acidic forest soil. J Environ Qual 25:220–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kakier U, Summer ME (1996) Boron availability to plant from coal combustion by-products. Water Air Soil Pollut 89:93–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klemedtsson L, Ernfors M, Bjork RG, Weslien P, Rutting T, Crill P, Sikstrom U (2010) Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by wood ash application to a Picea abies (L.) Karst. forest on a drained organic soil. Eur J Soil Sci 61:734–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Knapp BA, Insam H (2011) Recycling of biomass ashes—current technologies and future research needs. In: Insam H, Knapp BA (eds) Recycling of biomass ashes. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  20. Koopmans GF, Van der Zeeuw ME, Chardon WJ, Dolfing J (2001) Selective extractive of labile phosphorus using dialysis membrane tubes filled with hydrous iron hydroxide. Soil Sci 166:475–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee H, Ha HS, Lee CH, Lee YB, Kim PJ (2006) Fly ash effect on improving soil properties and rice productivity in Korean paddy soils. Bioresour Technol 97(13):1490–1497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu Y, Sheng X, Dong Y, Ma Y (2012) Removal of high-concentration phosphate by calcite: effect of sulfate and pH. Desalination 289:66–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu W, Ji H, Kerr P, Wu Y, Fang Y (2015) The application of soil amendments benefits to the reduction of phosphorus depletion and the growth of cabbage and corn. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22:16772–16780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mando A, Ouattara B, Sédogo M, Stroosnijder L, Ouattara K, Brussaard L, Vanlauwe B (2005) Long-term effect of tillage and manure application on soil organic fractions and crop performance under Sudano-Sahelian conditions. Soil Tillage Res 80:95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mandre M (2006) Influence of wood ash on soil chemical composition and biochemical parameters of young Scots pine. Proc Estonian Acad Sci Biol Ecol 55(2):91–107Google Scholar
  26. McDowell RW (2005) The effectiveness of coal fly-ash to decrease phosphorus loss from grassland soils. Soil Res 43:853–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mehlich A (1953) Determination of P, Ca, Mg, K, Na and NH4. North Carolina Soil Test Division (Mimeo 1953). North Carolina Dept. of Agric., RaleighGoogle Scholar
  28. Mooleki SP, Schoenau JJ, Charles JL, Wen G (2004) Effect of rate, frequency and incorporation of feedlot cattle manure on soil nitrogen availability, crop performance and nitrogen use efficiency in east-central Saskatchewan. Can J Soil Sci 84:199–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Muse JK, Mitchell CC (1995) Paper mill boiler ash and lime by-products as soil liming materials. Agron J 87:432–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1982) Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties. ASA, SSSA, Madison, pp 539–580Google Scholar
  31. O’Flynn CJ, Fenton O, Healy MG (2012) Evaluation of amendments to control phosphorus losses in runoff from pig slurry applications to land. Clean Soil Air Water 40(2):164–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ochecova P, Tlustos P, Szakova J (2014) Wheat and soil response to wood fly ash application in contaminated soils. Agron Soils Environ Qual 106(3):995–1002Google Scholar
  33. Olsen SR, Sommers LE (1982) Phosphorus. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2, Agronomy series No. 9, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, pp 403–430Google Scholar
  34. Patterson SJ, Acharya SN, Thomas JE, Bertschi AB, Rothwell RL (2004) Integrated soil and crop management: barley biomass and grain yield and canola seed yield response to land application of wood ash. Agron J 96(4):971–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Penn CJ, Bryant RB, Callahan MP, McGrath JM (2011) Use of industrial by-products to sorb and retain phosphorus. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 42(6):633–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Qayyum MF, Rehman MZ, Ali S, Rizwan M, Naeem A, Maqsood MA, Khalid H, Rinklebe J, Ok YS (2017a) Residual effects of monoammonium phosphate, gypsum and elemental sulfur on cadmium phytoavailability and translocation from soil to wheat in an effluent irrigated field. Chemosphere 174:515–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Qayyum MF, Liaquat F, Rehman RA, Gul M, Zafar ul Hye M, Rizwan M, Rehaman MZ (2017b) Effects of co-composting of farm manure and biochar on plant growth and carbon mineralization in an alkaline soil. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:26060–26068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rahaman MS, Ellis N, Mavinic DS (2008) Effects of various process parameters on struvite precipitation kinetics and subsequent determination of rate constants. Water Sci Technol 57:647–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rehman MZ, Rizwan M, Khalid H, Ali S, Naeem A, Yousaf B, Liu G, Sabir M, Farooq M (2018) Farmyard manure alone and combined with immobilizing amendments reduced cadmium accumulation in wheat and rice grains grown in field irrigated with raw effluents. Chemosphere 199:468–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Saarsalmi A, Malkonen E, Piirainen S (2001) Effects of wood ash fertilization on forest soil chemical properties. Silva Fennica 35(3):355–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sales BC, Chakoumakos BC, Boatner LA, Ramey JO (1992) Structural evolution of the amorphous solids produced by heating crystalline MgHPO4.3H2O. J Mater Res 7:2646–2649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sander ML, Andren O (1997) Ash from cereal and rape straw used for heat production: liming effect and contents of plant nutrients and heavy metals. Water Air Soil Pollut 93:93–108Google Scholar
  43. SAS (1999) StatView reference, third edn. SAS Institute Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
  44. Schiemenz K, Kern J, Paulsen HM, Bachmann S, Lobermann BE (2011) Phosphorus fertilizing effects of biomass ashes. In: Insam H, Knapp BA (eds) Recycling of biomass ashes. Springer-Verlag Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  45. Silveira ML, Miyittah MK, O’Connor GA (2006) Phosphorus release from a manure-impacted spodosol: effects of a water treatment residual. J Environ Qual 35(2):529–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sims JT (2000) The role of soil testing in environment risk assessment for phosphorus. In: Agricultural and phosphorus management. Lewis Pub., Boca Raton, pp 57–81Google Scholar
  47. Sims JT, Pierzynski GM (2005) In: Al-Amoodi L, Dick W (eds) Chemistry of phosphorus in soils. In Chemical processes in soils. Soil Science Society of America, Inc., MadisonGoogle Scholar
  48. Stout WL, Sharpley AN, Weaver SR (2003) Effect of amending high phosphorus soils with flue-gas desulfurization gypsum on plant uptake and soil fractions of phosphorus. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 67:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Uckert GB (2004) Versuche zur landbaulichen Verwertung von Holzaschen unter besonderer Ber€ucksichtigung der Knickholzpotenziale Schleswig-Holsteins. Dissertation, University of KielGoogle Scholar
  50. Ukwattage NL, Ranjith PG, Bouazza M (2013) The use of coal combustion fly ash as a soil amendment in agricultural lands (with comments on its potential to improve food security and sequester carbon). Fuel 109:400–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ulén B, Snäll S (2007) Forms and retention of phosphorus in an illiteclay soil profile with a history of fertilisation with pig manure and mineral fertilizers. Geoderma 137:455–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vance ED, Mitchell CC (2000) Beneficial use of wood ash as an agricultural soil amendment: case studies from the United States forest products industry. In: Power JF, Dick WA (eds) Land application of agricultural, industrial and municipal by-products. SSSA, Madison, pp 567–582Google Scholar
  53. Xiong X, Yanxia L, Wei L, Chunye L, Wei H, Ming Y (2010) Copper content in animal manures and potential risk of soil copper pollution with animal manure use in agriculture. Resour Conserv Recycl 54:985–990CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Irshad
    • 1
    • 2
  • Farhan Hafeez
    • 1
    Email author
  • Madiha Naseem
    • 1
  • Muhammad Rizwan
    • 3
  • Mohammad I. Al-Wabel
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Environmental SciencesCOMSATS University IslamabadAbbottabadPakistan
  2. 2.Arid Land Research CenterTottori UniversityTottori CityJapan
  3. 3.Department of Environmental Sciences and EngineeringGovernment College UniversityFaisalabadPakistan
  4. 4.Soil Sciences Department, College of Food and Agricultural SciencesKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations