Advertisement

Arabian Journal of Geosciences

, 12:563 | Cite as

Comparative effect of mesquite biochar, farmyard manure, and chemical fertilizers on soil fertility and growth of onion (Allium cepa L.)

  • Mumtaz Khan
  • Kaneez Fatima
  • Rehan Ahmad
  • Rafia Younas
  • Muhammad Rizwan
  • Muhammad Azam
  • Zain ul Abadin
  • Shafaqat AliEmail author
S. I. BIOCHAR
  • 13 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Implications of Biochar Application to Soil Environment under Arid Conditions

Abstract

Mesquite (Prosopis juliflora L.), a noxious weed, needs control and effective utilization for agronomical purposes. A field experiment was conducted to compare the effects of mesquite biochar (MB, 10 tons ha−1), farmyard manure (FYM, 10 tons ha−1), and NPK fertilizers (120:80:80 kg ha−1) on physicochemical attributes of soil and onion traits. Characterization analysis revealed that MB has greater pH (8.6) and EC (0.45 dS/m−1) than FYM (8.1 and 0.24 dS/m−1). Further, pyrolysis produced irregularly shaped mesquite biochar particles embedded with micropores of variant sizes. Soil analysis showed that MB had greater EC (1.47 dS/m−1) than FYM (1.42 dS/m−1) and NPK fertilizers (1.41 dS/m−1). Similarly, MB significantly improved water holding capacity of the soil and contributed more organic matter (0.58%) and NO3–N (2.02 mg kg−1) than other treatments. However, no significant effect of MB treatment was observed on soil Olsen-P. Further, maximum bulb weight (6.13 kg plot−1), leaf length (32.38 cm), total onion yield (268.55 kg ha−1), and total N and K contents in onion bulb were also observed in the plots treated with MB as compared with FYM and NPK fertilizers. In conclusion, MB is a suitable organic amendment to improve soil fertility and plant growth, and may be included in fertilization programs to improve crops yield.

Keywords

Soil fertility Organic amendment Crop yield Fertilizers 

Notes

Funding information

This study was funded by Higher Education Commission of Pakistan.

References

  1. Abdissa Y, Tekalign T, Pant L (2011) Growth, bulb yield and quality of onion (Allium cepa L.) as influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization on vertisol I. growth attributes, biomass production and bulb yield. Afr Journal Agr Res 6:3252–3258Google Scholar
  2. Adekayode F, Olojugba M (2010) The utilization of wood ash as manure to reduce the use of mineral fertilizer for improved performance of maize (Zea mays L.) as measured in the chlorophyll content and grain yield. J Soil Sci Environ Manage 1:40–45Google Scholar
  3. Aldrich RJ (1987) Predicting crop yield reductions from weeds. Weed Technol 1:199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amonette JE, Joseph S (2009) Characteristics of biochar: microchemical properties. In: Lehmann and Joseph (Ed) Biochar for environmental management: science and technology, 1st edn. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 33–53Google Scholar
  5. Barnes RT, Gallagher ME, Masiello CA, Liu Z, Dugan B (2014) Biochar-induced changes in soil hydraulic conductivity and dissolved nutrient fluxes constrained by laboratory experiments. PLoS One 9:e108340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernardino CAR, Mahler CF, Veloso MCC, Romeiro GA (2017) Preparation of biochar from sugarcane by-product filter mud by slow pyrolysis and its use like adsorbent waste and biomass. Valorization 8:2511–2521.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-016-9728-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Briat JF, Fobis-Loisy I, Grignon N, Lobréaux S, Pascal N, Savino G, Thoiron S, Wirén N, Wuytswinkel O (1995) Cellular and molecular aspects of iron metabolism in plants. Biol Cell 84:69–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chan KY, Xu Z (2009) Biochar: nutrient properties and their enhancement. In: Lehman and Joseph (ed) Biochar for environmental management: science and technology, 1st edn. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 67–84Google Scholar
  9. Chan KY, Van Zwieten L, Meszaros I, Downie A, Joseph S (2008) Agronomic values of greenwaste biochar as a soil amendment. Soil Research 45:629–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ding Y, Liu Y-X, Wu W-X, Shi D-Z, Yang M, Zhong Z-K (2010) Evaluation of biochar effects on nitrogen retention and leaching in multi-layered soil columns. Water Air Soil Pollut 213:47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Downie A, Crosky A, Munroe P (2009) Physical properties of biochar, biochar for environment management science and technology. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Elad Y, Cytryn E, Harel YM, Lew B, Graber ER (2011) The biochar effect: plant resistance to biotic stresses. Phytopathol Mediterr 50:335–349Google Scholar
  13. Estefan G, Sommer R, Ryan J (2013) Methods of soil, plant, and water analysis: a manual for the West Asia and North Africa region: 3rd Edn. ICARDA, Beirut, pp 170–176Google Scholar
  14. Freeman G, Mossadeghi N (1970) Effect of sulphate nutrition on flavour components of onion (Allium cepa). J Sci Food Agric 21:610–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gartler J, Robinson B, Burton K, Clucas L (2013) Carbonaceous soil amendments to biofortify crop plants with zinc. Sci Total Environ 465:308–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaskin JW, Speir RA, Harris K, Das K, Lee RD, Morris LA, Fisher DS (2010) Effect of peanut hull and pine chip biochar on soil nutrients, corn nutrient status, and yield. Agron J 102:623–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Glaser B, Lehmann J, Steiner C, Nehls T, Yousaf M, Zech W (2002) Potential of pyrolyzed organic matter in soil amelioration. In: 12th ISCO Conference’. Beijing, pp. 421–427Google Scholar
  18. Gondim RS, Muniz CR, Lima CEP, Santos C (2018) Explaining the water-holding capacity of biochar by scanning electron microscope images. Revista Caatinga 31:972–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Horwitz W (2010) Official methods of analysis of AOAC International. Volume I, agricultural chemicals, contaminants, drugs/edited by William Horwitz. Gaithersburg (Maryland): AOAC International, 1997.,Google Scholar
  20. Jones D, Rousk J, Edwards-Jones G, DeLuca T, Murphy D (2012) Biochar-mediated changes in soil quality and plant growth in a three year field trial. Soil Biol Biochem 45:113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Karhu K, Mattila T, Bergström I, Regina K (2011) Biochar addition to agricultural soil increased CH4 uptake and water holding capacity–results from a short-term pilot field study. Agric Ecosyst Environ 140:309–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kookana RS, Sarmah AK, Van Zwieten L, Krull E, Singh B (2011) Biochar application to soil: agronomic and environmental benefits and unintended consequences. In: Advances in agronomy, vol 112. Elsevier, pp. 103-143Google Scholar
  23. Ladygina N, Rineau F (2013) Biochar and soil biota. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lehmann J, da Silva JP, Steiner C, Nehls T, Zech W, 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 Soil 249:343–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liu XH, Zhang XC (2012) Effect of biochar on pH of alkaline soils in the loess plateau: results from incubation experiments. Int J Agric Biol 5:65–70Google Scholar
  26. Masulili A, Utomo WH, Syechfani M (2010) Rice husk biochar for rice based cropping system in acid soil 1. The characteristics of rice husk biochar and its influence on the properties of acid sulfate soils and rice growth in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. J Agric Sci 2:39Google Scholar
  27. Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS, Dean LA (1998) Estimation of available phosphorous in soil by extraction with sodium bicarbonate: US depertment of agriculture, Washington DC, pp 18–19Google Scholar
  28. Pandian K, Subramaniayan P, Gnasekaran P, Chitraputhirapillai S (2016) Effect of biochar amendment on soil physical, chemical and biological properties and groundnut yield in rainfed Alfisol of semi-arid tropics. Arch Agron Soil Sci 62:1293–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Parab N, Sinha S, Mishra S (2015) Coal fly ash amendment in acidic field: Effect on soil microbial activity and onion yield. Applied Soil Ecology 96:211–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Randle WM (2000) Increasing nitrogen concentration in hydroponic solutions affects onion flavor and bulb quality. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 125:254–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ronsse F, Van Hecke S, Dickinson D, Prins W (2013) Production and characterization of slow pyrolysis biochar: influence of feedstock type and pyrolysis conditions. Gcb Bioenergy 5:104–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schulz H, Glaser B (2012) Effects of biochar compared to organic and inorganic fertilizers on soil quality and plant growth in a greenhouse experiment. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 175:410–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sims JR, Jackson GD (1971) Rapid analysis of soil nitrate with chromotropic acid1. Soil Sci Soc Am J 35:603–606.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1971.03615995003500040035x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Slattery WJ, Ridley AM, Windsor S (1991) Ash alkalinity of animal and plant products. Aust J Exp Agric 31:321–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Soltanpour P, Workman S (1979) Modification of the NH4 HCO3-DTPA soil test to omit carbon black. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 10:1411–1420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Srivastava PK, Gupta M, Upadhyay RK, Sharma S, Singh N, Tewari SK, Singh B (2012) Effects of combined application of vermicompost and mineral fertilizer on the growth of Allium cepa L. and soil fertility. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 175:101–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steel RGD, Torrie JH, Discky A (1997) Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach, 3rd edn. McGraw Hill Book Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Steiner C, Teixeira WG, Lehmann J, Nehls T, de Macêdo JLV, Blum WE, Zech W (2007) Long term effects of manure, charcoal and mineral fertilization on crop production and fertility on a highly weathered Central Amazonian upland soil. Plant and soil 291:275–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Walkley A (1947) A critical examination of a rapid method for determining organic carbon in soils-effect of variations in digestion conditions and of inorganic soil constituents. Soil Sci 63:251–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang Y, Pan F, Wang G, Zhang G, Wang Y, Chen X, Mao Z (2014) Effects of biochar on photosynthesis and antioxidative system of Malus hupehensis Rehd. seedlings under replant conditions. Sci Hortic 175:9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Willium K, Qureshi RA (2015) Evaluation of biochar as fertilizer for the growth of some seasonal vegetables. Journal of Bioresource Management 2:1.  https://doi.org/10.35691/JBM.5102.0011
  42. Xu C-Y, Hosseini-Bai S, Hao Y, Rachaputi RC, Wang H, Xu Z, Wallace H (2015) Effect of biochar amendment on yield and photosynthesis of peanut on two types of soils. Environ Sci Pollu Res 22:6112–6125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang H, Chen C, Gray EM, Boyd SE, Yang H, Zhang D (2016) Roles of biochar in improving phosphorus availability in soils: a phosphate adsorbent and a source of available phosphorus. Geoderma 276:1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.04.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhao L, Cao X, Mašek O, Zimmerman A (2013) Heterogeneity of biochar properties as a function of feedstock sources and production temperatures. Journal Hazard Mater 256:1–9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mumtaz Khan
    • 1
  • Kaneez Fatima
    • 2
  • Rehan Ahmad
    • 1
  • Rafia Younas
    • 1
  • Muhammad Rizwan
    • 3
  • Muhammad Azam
    • 4
  • Zain ul Abadin
    • 5
  • Shafaqat Ali
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Environmental ScienceGomal UniversityDera Ismail KhanPakistan
  2. 2.Department of Soil ScienceGomal UniversityDera Ismail KhanPakistan
  3. 3.Department of Environmental Sciences and EngineeringGovernment College UniversityFaisalabadPakistan
  4. 4.Institute of Horticultural SciencesUniversity of AgricultureFaisalabadPakistan
  5. 5.Department of HorticultureGomal UniversityDera Ismail KhanPakistan

Personalised recommendations