Enzyme induced cementation of biochar-intercalated soil: fabrication and characterization

  • A. AlmajedEmail author
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Implications of Biochar Application to Soil Environment under Arid Conditions


This paper presents the effect of adding biochar on the sand treated by a bio-inspired technique known as enzyme-induced carbonate precipitation (EICP). In EICP, free urease enzyme is used to accelerate the reaction between calcium chloride and urea to induce calcium carbonate precipitation in soil pores. A laboratory study was conducted to investigate the efficiency of three different biochars produced at different temperatures (300, 500, and 700 °C) and applied at 1% to the soil. The precipitation is expected to change the mechanical properties of the treated soil through binding particles and reducing the impact of the ammonia chloride. The outcome of this study illustrated that adding biochar will decrease the cementation bonding between particles, strength, due surface structure, and functional groups of biochar. Furthermore, lower pH was recorded at a lower pyrolysis temperature compared to a high pyrolysis temperature. However, the high pyrolysis temperature indicated that higher porosity would decrease the efficiency of precipitation. Unconfined compressive strength, scan electron microscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and X-ray diffractometer were illustrated, and the type of precipitation and crystal that form through this study was discussed.


CaCO3 EICP Cemented sand Biochar 



The authors acknowledge the College of Engineering Research Center and Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for their financial support for the research work reported in this article.


  1. Ahmad M, Lee SS, Dou X, Mohan D, Sung JK, Yang JE, Ok YS (2012) Effects of pyrolysis temperature on soybean stover- and peanut shell-derived biochar properties and TCE adsorption in water. Bioresour Technol 118:536–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmad M, Ahmad M, Usman AR, Al-Faraj AS, Abduljabbar AS, Al-Wabel MI (2018) Biochar composites with nano zerovalent iron and eggshell powder for nitrate removal from aqueous solution with coexisting chloride ions. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(26):25757–25771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Almajed AA (2017) Enzyme induced carbonate precipitation (EICP) for soil improvement. (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University)Google Scholar
  4. Almajed A, Khodadadi Tirkolaei H, Kavazanjian E Jr (2018) Baseline investigation on enzyme-induced calcium carbonate precipitation. J Geotech Geoenviron 144(11):04018081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Almajed A, Tirkolaei HK, Kavazanjian E, Hamdan N (2019) Enzyme induced biocementated sand with high strength at low carbonate content. Sci Rep 9(1):1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Al-Wabel MI, Al-Omran A, El-Naggar AH, Nadeem M, Usman AR (2013) Pyrolysis temperature induced changes in characteristics and chemical composition of biochar produced from conocarpus wastes. Bioresour Technol 131:374–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Al-Wabel MI, Usman AR, El-Naggar AH, Aly AA, Ibrahim HM, Elmaghraby S, Al-Omran A (2015) Conocarpus biochar as a soil amendment for reducing heavy metal availability and uptake by maize plants. Saudi journal of biological sciences 22(4):503–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cataldo DA, Maroon M, Schrader LE, Youngs VL (1975) Rapid colorimetric determination of nitrate in plant tissue by nitration of salicylic acid. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 6(1):71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen B, Zhou D, Zhu L (2008) Transitional adsorption and partition of nonpolar and polar aromaric contaminants by biochars of pine needles with different pyrolytic temperatures. Environ Sci Technol 42:5137–5143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Das N, Kayastha AM, Srivastava PK (2002) Purification and haracterization of urease from dehuskedpigeonpea (Cajanuscajan L.) seeds. Phytochemistry 61(5)Google Scholar
  11. Demirbas A (2004) Effects of temperature and particle size on biochar yield from pyrolysis of agricultural residues. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 72(2):243–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dilrukshi RAN, Kawasaki S (2016) Effective use of plant-derived urease in the field of geoenvironmental. Geotechnical Engineering. J Civil Environ Eng (207)2Google Scholar
  13. El-Naggar A, Lee SS, Awad YM, Yang X, Ryu C, Rizwan M et al (2018) Influence of soil properties and feedstocks on biochar potential for carbon mineralization and improvement of infertile soils. Geoderma 332:100–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Enders A, Hanley K, Whitman T, Joseph S, Lehmann J (2012) Characterization of biochars to evaluate recalcitrance and agronomic performance. Bioresour Technol 114:644–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gai X, Wang H, Liu J, Zhai L, Liu S, Ren T, Liu H (2014) Effects of feedstock and pyrolysis temperature on biochar adsorption of ammonium and nitrate. PLoS One 9(12):e113888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grossman JM, O’Neill BE, Tsai SM, Liang B, Neves E, Lehmann J, Thies JE (2010) Amazonian anthrosols support similar microbial communities that differ distinctly from those extant in adjacent, unmodified soils of the same mineralogy. Microb Ecol 60:192e205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hamdan N Kavazanjian E (2016) Enzyme-induced carbonate mineral precipitation for fugitive dust control. Géotechnique 66(7):546–555Google Scholar
  18. Hamdan N, Kavazanjian E, O’Donnell S (2013) Carbonate cementation via plant derived urease. 18th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  19. Inyang M, Gao B, Yao Y, Xue Y, Zimmerman AR, Pullammanappallil P, Cao X (2012) Removal of heavy metals from aqueous solution by biochars derived from anaerobically digested biomass. Bioresour Technol 110:50–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Karol RH (2003) Chemical grouting and soil stabilization. Dekker, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kavazanjian E, Almajed A, Hamdan N (2017) Bio-inspired soil improvement using EICP soil columns and soil nails. Geotechnical Special Publication (288 GSP):13–22Google Scholar
  22. Kayastha AM, Das N (1999) A simple laboratory experiment for teaching enzyme immobilization with urease and its application in blood urea estimation. Biochemical Education 27(2):114–117Google Scholar
  23. Kim J-S, Sparovek S, Longo RM, De Melo WJ, Crowley D (2007) Bacterial diversity of terra preta and pristine forest soil from the Western Amazon. Soil Biol Biochem 39:648e690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lehmann J, Rillig MC, Thies J, Masiello CA, Hockaday WC, Crowley D (2011) Biochar effects on soil biota—a review. Soil Biol Biochem 43(9):1812–1836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liang B, Lehmann J, Solomon D, Kinyangi J, Grossman J, O'Neill B, Skjemstad JO, Thies J, Luizao FJ, Petersen J, Neves EG (2006) Black carbon increases cation exchange capacity in soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:1719–1730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Malik Z, Yutong Z, ShengGao L, Abassi GH, Ali S, Kamran M et al (2018) Effect of biochar and quicklime on growth of wheat and physicochemical properties of Ultisols. Arab J Geosci 11(17):496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Manikandan A, Subramanian KS (2013) Urea intercalated biochar—a slow release fertilizer production and characterisation. Indian J Sci Technol 6(12):5579–5584Google Scholar
  28. Mohamed EM, El-Naggar AH, Usman AR, Al-Wabel M (2015) Dynamics of CO2 emission and biochemical properties of a sandy calcareous soil amended with Conocarpus waste and biochar. Pedosphere 25(1):46–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Neupane D, Yasuhara H, Kinoshita N, Ando Y (2015a) Distribution of mineralized carbonate and its quantification method in enzyme mediated calcite precipitation technique. Soils and Foundations 55(2):447–457Google Scholar
  30. Neupane D, Yasuhara H, Kinoshita N, Putra H (2015b) Distribution of grout material within 1-m sand column in insitu calcite precipitation technique. Soils and Foundations 55(6):1512–1518Google Scholar
  31. O’Neill B, Grossman J, Tsai MT, Gomes JE, Lehmann J, Peterson J, Neves E, Thies JE (2009) Bacterial community composition in Brazilian Anthrosols and adjacent soils characterized using culturing and molecular identification. Microb Ecol 58:23e35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pietikäinen J, Kiikkilä O, Fritze H (2000) Charcoal as a habitat for microbes and its effects on the microbial community of the underlying humus. Oikos 89:231e242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Putra H, Yasuhara H, Kinoshita N, Neupane D, Lu C (2016) Effect of magnesium as substitute material in enzyme-mediated calcite precipitation for soil-improvement technique. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 4Google Scholar
  34. Quilliam RS, Marsden KA, Gertler C, Rousk J, DeLuca TH, Jones DL (2012) Nutrient dynamics, microbial growth and weed emergence in biochar amended soil are influenced by time since application and reapplication rate. Agric Ecosyst Environ 158:192–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rehrah D, Bansode RR, Hassan O, Ahmedna M (2016) Physico-chemical characterization of biochars from solid municipal waste for use in soil amendment. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 118:42–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sasongko A (2018) Ammonia determination in bottled water using spectrophotometer: comparison between Nessler and Berthelot methods. JST (Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi) 7(1):126–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tan X, Liu Y, Zeng G, Wang X, Hu X, Gu Y, Yang Z (2015) Application of biochar for the removal of pollutants from aqueous solutions. Chemosphere 125:70–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Usman AR, Abduljabbar A, Vithanage M, Ok YS, Ahmad M, Ahmad M et al (2015) Biochar production from date palm waste: charring temperature induced changes in composition and surface chemistry. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 115:392–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yasuhara H, Hayashi K, Okamura M (2011) Evolution in mechanical and hydraulic properties of calcite-cemented sand mediated by biocatalyst. Geo-Frontiers 2011: Advances in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 3984–3992Google Scholar
  40. Yasuhara H, Neupane D, Hayashi K, Okamura M (2012) Experiments and predictions of physical properties of sand cemented by enzymatically-induced carbonate precipitation. Soils and Foundations 52(3):539–549Google Scholar
  41. Yin B, Crowley D, Sparovek G, De Melo WJ, Borneman J (2000) Bacterial functional redundancy along a soil reclamation gradient. Appl Environ Microbiol 66:4361e4365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yuan JH, Xu RK, Zhang H (2011) The forms of alkalis in the biochar produced from crop residues at different temperatures. Bioresour Technol 102(3):3488–3497CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringKing Saud University (KSU)RiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations