Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:20:19.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving soil carbon pool, soil fertility and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) in low-fertile tropical Alfisols by combining fertilizers with slow-decomposing organic amendments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2019

J. A. S. Chathurika ,
D. Kumaragamage ,
S. P. Indraratne  and
W. S. Dandeniya
J. A. S. Chathurika
Affiliation:
Postgraduate Institute of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka
D. Kumaragamage*
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Studies and Sciences, The University of Winnipeg, 515 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, MB R3B 2E9, Canada
S. P. Indraratne
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Studies and Sciences, The University of Winnipeg, 515 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, MB R3B 2E9, Canada
W. S. Dandeniya
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka
*
Author for correspondence: D. Kumaragamage, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Amendment of recalcitrant organic materials with high carbon/nitrogen (C/N)-ratio may improve and maintain soil labile C for a longer period, thus enhancing the productivity of soils with low fertility; however, immobilization of N may affect the plant growth negatively. To reduce the negative impacts, recalcitrant organic materials can be pre-incubated with N-rich sources or applied in combination with fertilizers. The current study evaluated sawdust biochar (BC) and pre-incubated cattle manure–sawdust mixture (CS) amendments with synthetic fertilizers in improving soil carbon pool, soil fertility and maize (Zea mays L.) yield on a tropical Alfisol. Four treatments: control, site-specific fertilizer (SSF), site-specific fertilizer with sawdust biochar (BC + SSF) or pre-incubated cattle manure-sawdust mixture (CS + SSF), were evaluated for two seasons with maize. The residual effect was evaluated in the third season. During the year of active C application, lability index, C management index and potentially mineralizable N were significantly greater in CS + SSF than BC + SSF treatment. However, the same indices measured in the third season with no further application of amendments were significantly greater in BC + SSF than in CS + SSF treatment, indicating an increase in more recalcitrant C pool with BC amendment. Application of organic amendments improved soil fertility parameters compared with the application of fertilizer alone. Maize yield was significantly increased by fertilizer, with or without organic amendments; with significantly greater yield in BC + SSF than other treatments. Results suggest that soil amendment with BC had greater potential to improve the soil carbon pool and maintain labile carbon for a longer period than a pre-incubated CS.

Keywords

Biocharcattle manure–sawdust mixturemaize yieldresidual effectsoil carbontropical soils
Type
Crops and Soils Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 157 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 45 - 54
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Backer, RGM, Schwinghamer, TD, Whalen, JK, Seguin, P and Smith, DL (2016) Crop yield and SOC responses to biochar application were dependent on soil texture and crop type in southern Quebec, Canada. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 179, 399–408.Google Scholar
Bauer, A and Black, AL (1994) Quantification of the effect of soil organic matter content on soil productivity. Soil Science Society of America Journal 58, 185–193.Google Scholar
Bedada, W, Karltun, E, Lemenih, M and Tolera, M (2014) Long-term addition of compost and NP fertilizer increases crop yield and improves soil quality in experiments on smallholder farms. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 195, 193–201.Google Scholar
Blair, GJ, Lefroy, RDB and Lisle, L (1995) Soil carbon fractions based on their degree of oxidation, and the development of a carbon management index for agricultural systems. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 46, 1459–1466.Google Scholar
Bolan, NS, Kunhikrishnan, A, Choppala, GK, Thangarajan, R and Chung, JW (2012) Stabilization of carbon in composts and biochars in relation to carbon sequestration and soil fertility. Science of the Total Environment 424, 264–270.Google Scholar
Cahn, MD, Bouldin, DR, Cravo, MS and Bowen, WT (1993) Cation and nitrate leaching in an oxisol of the Brazilian Amazon. Agronomy Journal 85, 334–340.Google Scholar
Chae, YM and Tabatabai, MA (1986) Mineralization of nitrogen in soils amended with organic wastes. Journal of Environmental Quality 15, 193–198.Google Scholar
Chan, KY, Van Zwieten, L, Meszaros, I, Downie, A and Joseph, S (2008) Using poultry litter biochars as soil amendments. Australian Journal of Soil Research 46, 437–444.Google Scholar
Chathurika, JAS, Indraratne, SP and Dandeniya, WS (2014) Site specific fertilizer recommendations for maize (Zea mays) grown in Reddish Brown Earth and Reddish Brown Latasolic soils. Tropical Agricultural Research 25, 287–297.Google Scholar
Chathurika, JAS, Indraratne, SP, Dandeniya, WS and Kumaragamage, D (2016 a) Beneficial management practices on growth and yield parameters of maize (Zea mays) and soil fertility improvement. Tropical Agricultural Research 27, 59–74.Google Scholar
Chathurika, JAS, Kumaragamage, D, Zvomuya, F, Akinremi, OO, Flaten, DN, Indraratne, SP and Dandeniya, WS (2016 b) Woodchip biochar with or without synthetic fertilizers affects soil properties and available phosphorus in two alkaline, Chernozemic soils. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 96, 472–484.Google Scholar
Clark, GJ, Dodgshun, N, Sale, PWG and Tang, C (2007) Changes in chemical and biological properties of a sodic clay subsoil with addition of organic amendments. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 39, 2806–2817.Google Scholar
De Costa, WA and Sangakkara, UR (2006) Agronomic regeneration of soil fertility in tropical Asian smallholder uplands for sustainable food production. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 144, 111–133.Google Scholar
Demisie, W, Liu, Z and Zhang, M (2014) Effect of biochar on carbon fractions and enzyme activity of red soil. Catena 121, 214–221.Google Scholar
De Silva, GGR, Dassanayake, AR and Mapa, RB (2005) Soils of the mid country intermediate zone. In Mapa, RB, Dassanayaka, AR and Nayakekorala, HB (eds), Soils of the Intermediate Zone of Sri Lanka: Morphology, Characterization and Classification. Special Publication no. 4. Peradeniya, Sri Lanka: Soil Science Society of Sri Lanka, pp. 118–148.Google Scholar
Dharmakeerthi, RS, Chandrasiri, JAS and Edirimanne, VU (2012) Effect of rubber wood biochar on nutrition and growth of nursery plants of Hevea brasiliensis established in an Ultisol. SpringerPlus 1, Article no. 84, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-1-84Google Scholar
Diacono, M and Montemurro, F (2010) Long-term effects of organic amendments on soil fertility. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 30, 401–422.Google Scholar
DOA – Department of Agriculture (2013) Cyber Extension: Fertilizer Recommendation for Maize. Peradeniya, Sri Lanka: Department of Agriculture. https://www.doa.gov.lk/FCRDI/index.php/en/crop/43-maize-e. Accessed 20 March 2013.Google Scholar
Eiland, F, Klamer, M, Lind, AM, Leth, M and Bååth, E (2001) Influence of initial C/N ratio on chemical and microbial composition during long term composting of straw. Microbial Ecology 41, 272–280.Google Scholar
El Halim, AA and El Baroudy, AA (2014) Influence addition of fine sawdust on the physical properties of expansive soil in the Middle Nile Delta, Egypt. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 14, 483–490.Google Scholar
Gee, GW and Or, D (2002) Particle size analysis. In Dane, JH and Topp, CG (eds), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 4, Physical Methods. Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy, pp. 255–278.Google Scholar
Ghosh, BN, Meena, VS, Singh, RJ, Alam, NM, Patra, S, Bhattacharyya, R, Sharma, NK, Dadhwal, KS and Mishra, PK (2018) Effects of fertilization on soil aggregation, carbon distribution and carbon management index of maize-wheat rotation in the north-western Indian Himalayas. Ecological Indicators 265, in press. Corrected proof available online from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X18301353 (Accessed 22 February 2019).Google Scholar
Glaser, B, Balashov, E, Haumaier, L, Guggenberger, G and Zech, W (2000) Black carbon in density fractions of anthropogenic soils of the Brazilian Amazon region. Organic Geochemistry 31, 669–678.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Guimarães, DV, Gonzaga, MIS and Melo Neto, JDO (2014) Management of soil organic matter and carbon storage in tropical fruit crops. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícolae Ambiental 18, 301–306.Google Scholar
Jeffery, S, Verheijen, FGA, van der Velde, M and Bastos, AC (2011) A quantitative review of the effects of biochar application to soils on crop productivity using meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 144, 175–187.Google Scholar
Jeffery, S, Abalos, D, Prodana, M, Bastos, AC, van Groenigen, JW, Hungate, BA and Verheijen, F (2017) Biochar boosts tropical but not temperate crop yields. Environmental Research Letters 12, article no. 053001, 1–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa67bdGoogle Scholar
Jin, VL, Johnson, MV, Haney, RL and Arnold, JG (2011) Potential carbon and nitrogen mineralization in soils from a perennial forage production system amended with class B biosolids. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 141, 461–465.Google Scholar
Keeney, DR (1982) Nitrogen management for maximum and minimum pollution. In Stevenson, FJ (ed.), Nitrogen in Agricultural Soils. Agronomy Monograph 22. Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy, pp. 605–649.Google Scholar
Kemper, WD and Rosenau, RC (1996) Aggregate stability and size distribution. In Klute, A (ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1, Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Madison, WI, USA: ASA and SSSA, pp. 425–442.Google Scholar
Kimetu, JM, Lehmann, J, Ngoze, SN, Mugendi, DN, Kinyangi, JM, Riha, S, Verchot, L, Recha, WJ and Pell, AN (2008) Reversibility of soil productivity decline with organic matter of differing quality along a degradation gradient. Ecosystems 11, 726–739.Google Scholar
Kumaragamage, D and Indraratne, SP (2011) Systematic approach to diagnosing fertility problems in soils of Sri Lanka. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 42, 2699–2715.Google Scholar
Kumaragamage, D and Kendaragama, KMA (2010) Risk and limitations of dry zone soils. In Mapa, RB, Somasiri, S and Dassananyaka, AR (eds), Soils of the Dry Zone of Sri Lanka: Morphology, Characterization and Classification. Special Publication no. 7. Sri Lanka: Sarvodaya Vishva Lekha. Soil Science Society of Sri Lanka, pp. 239–258.Google Scholar
Laird, DA, Fleming, P, Davis, DD, Horton, R, Wang, B and Karlen, DL (2010) Impact of biochar amendments on the quality of a typical Midwestern agricultural soil. Geoderma 158, 443–449.Google Scholar
Lal, R (2004) Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and food security. Science 304, 1623–1627.Google Scholar
Lehmann, J (2007) Bio-energy in the black. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 5, 381–387.Google Scholar
Lehmann, J, Da Silva, JP Jr., 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.Google Scholar
Major, J (2010) Guidelines on Practical Aspects of Biochar Application to Field Soil in Various Soil Management Systems. Canandaigua, NY, USA: International Biochar Initiatives. Available online from: https://www.biochar-international.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/IBI_Biochar_Application.pdf (Accessed 22 February 2019).Google Scholar
Major, J, Rondon, M, Molina, D, Riha, SJ and Lehmann, J (2010) Maize yield and nutrition during 4 years after biochar application to a Colombian savanna oxisol. Plant and Soil 333, 117–128.Google Scholar
Mariaselvam, AA, Dandeniya, WS, Indraratne, SP and Dharmakeerthi, RS (2014) High C/N materials mixed with cattle manure as organic amendments to improve soil productivity and nutrient availability. Tropical Agricultural Research 25, 201–213.Google Scholar
Markus, DK, McKinnon, JP and Buccafuri, AF (1985) Automated analysis of nitrate, nitrite and ammonium nitrogen in soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 49, 1208–1215.Google Scholar
Nelson, DW and Sommers, LE (1996) Total organic carbon and organic matter. In Sparks, DL (ed.), Method of Soil Analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods. Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy, pp. 961–1010.Google Scholar
Novak, JM, Busscher, WJ, Laird, DL, Ahmedna, M, Watts, DW and Niandou, MAS (2009) Impact of biochar amendment on fertility of a southeastern coastal plain soil. Soil Science 174, 105–112.Google Scholar
Olayinka, A and Adebayo, A (1984) Effect of incubation temperatures and different sources of N and P on decomposition of sawdust in soil. Agricultural Wastes 11, 293–306.Google Scholar
Olayinka, A and Adebayo, A (1989) Effect of pre-incubated sawdust-based cowdung on growth and nutrient uptake of Zea mays (L.) and on soil chemical properties. Biology and Fertility of Soils 7, 176–179.Google Scholar
Ouyang, L, Wang, F, Tang, J, Yu, L and Zhang, R (2013) Effects of biochar amendment on soil aggregates and hydraulic properties. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 13, 991–1002.Google Scholar
Portch, S and Hunter, A (2002) A Systematic Approach to Soil Fertility Evaluation and Improvement. Special publication No. 5. Hong Kong, China: Canpotex Limited.Google Scholar
Renck, A and Lehmann, J (2004) Rapid water flow and transport of inorganic and organic nitrogen in a highly aggregated tropical soil. Soil Science 169, 330–341.Google Scholar
Rondon, MA, 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.Google Scholar
Schmidt, MWI, Skjemstad, JO, Gehrt, E and Kögel-Knabner, I (1999) Charred organic carbon in German chernozemic soils. European Journal of Soil Science 50, 351–365.Google Scholar
Six, J, Conant, RT, Paul, EA and Paustian, K (2002) Stabilization mechanisms of soil organic matter: implications for C-saturation of soils. Plant and Soil 241, 155–176.Google Scholar
Soinne, H, Hovi, J, Tammeorg, P and Turtola, E (2014) Effect of biochar on phosphorus sorption and clay soil aggregate stability. Geoderma 219–220, 162–167.Google Scholar
Sommerfeldt, TG and Mackay, DC (1987) Utilization of cattle manure containing wood shavings: effect on soil and crop. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 67, 309–316.Google Scholar
Steiner, C, Teixeira, WG, Lehmannm, J, Nehls, T, de Macêdo, JLV, Blum, WEH and 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, 275–290.Google Scholar
Sukartono, Utomo WH, Kusuma, Z and Nugroho, WH (2011) Soil fertility status, nutrient uptake, and maize (Zea mays L.) yield following biochar and cattle manure application on sandy soils of Lombok, Indonesia. Journal of Tropical Agriculture 49, 47–52.Google Scholar
Sumner, ME and Miller, WP (1996) Cation exchange capacity and exchange coefficient. In Sparks, DL (ed.), Method of Soil Analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods. Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy, pp. 1201–1229.Google Scholar
Tiessen, H, Cuevas, E and Chacon, P (1994) The role of soil organic matter in sustaining soil fertility. Nature 371, 783–785.Google Scholar
Van Zwieten, L, Kimber, S, Morris, S, Chan, KY, Downie, A, Rust, J, Joseph, S and Cowie, A (2010) Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of paper mill waste on agronomic performance and soil fertility. Plant and Soil 327, 235–246.Google Scholar
Wei, W, Yan, Y, Cao, J, Christie, P, Zhang, F and Fan, M (2016) Effects of combined application of organic amendments and fertilizers on crop yield and soil organic matter: an integrated analysis of long-term experiments. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 225, 86–92.Google Scholar
Weil, RR, Islam, KR, Stine, MA, Gruver, JB and Samson-Liebig, SE (2003) Estimating active carbon for soil quality assessment: a simplified method for laboratory and field use. American Journal of Alternate Agriculture 18, 3–17.Google Scholar
Zhang, M, Cheng, G, Feng, H, Sun, B, Zhao, Y, Chen, H, Chen, J, Dyck, M, Wang, X, Zhang, J and Zhang, A (2017) Effects of straw and biochar amendments on aggregate stability, soil organic carbon, and enzyme activities in the Loess Plateau, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 24, 10108–10120.Google Scholar