Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Field Crops Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fcr

Biochar improves phosphorus use efficiency of organic-inorganic fertilizers, MARK

maize-wheat productivity and soil quality in a low fertility alkaline soil
⁎
Muhammad Arifa, Muhammad Ilyasa, Muhammad Riazb, , Kawsar Alic, Kamran Shahd,
Izhar Ul Haqd, Shah Fahade,f
a
Department of Agronomy, The University of Agriculture Peshawar, Pakistan
b
Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Government College University Faisalabad, Allama Iqbal Road, Faisalabad, Pakistan
c
Department of Agriculture, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Pakistan
d
Institute of Mechatronics Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar, Pakistan
e
College of Plant Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, China
f
Department of Agriculture, University of Swabi, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Low and declining soil organic matter contents pose a significant threat to soil fertility, crop productivity and
Biochar economic returns in arid and semi-arid agroecosystems. Holistic approaches are required to build and sustain soil
P sources organic matter in such soils to enhance nutrient use efficiencies and meet food security. Biochar is emerging as
Maize an attractive option for multiple benefits to soil-plant systems and carbon sequestration, especially in low fer-
Wheat
tility soils. We conducted a two-year maize-wheat rotation field experiments during 2015 and 2016 to test the
Phosphorus use efficiency
effects of biochar on crop productivity, soil properties and phosphorous use efficiency (PUE) when applied with
organic P sources as either farmyard manure (FYM) or poultry manure (PM) and diammonium phosphate (DAP)
chemical fertilizer. Biochar was applied at two rates (0 and 10 t ha−1) whereas percentage of organic-inorganic
P sources were 0, 25, 50 and 100% respectively. Biochar and manures were incorporated only once at the start of
the field experiments whereas chemical fertilizers were applied during each crop cycle. Analysis of the two-year
data revealed that biochar and P sources significantly and positively changed crop and soil quality attributes.
Application of biochar significantly increased biological and grain yields of maize and wheat, soil organic carbon
(SOC), and available nitrogen (N) and P contents without any negative effects on soil pH and electrical con-
ductivity (EC). Addition of 50% P each from organic (FYM or PM) and chemical fertilizer increased biological
and grain yields of maize, however, wheat biological and grain yields were higher with 100% PM or FYM in the
presence of biochar. SOC and P contents were the highest when biochar was integrated with 100% P from FYM
under maize crop. Biochar enhanced PUE from organic P sources more than the chemical fertilizer for both
crops. Grain and biological yields of both crops correlated positively with SOC, soil N and soil P contents. We
also found strong correlations between SOC, PUE and harvest index (HI) suggesting the benefits of increasing
SOC contents under biochar-related integrated nutrient management practices. Overall results from these field
experiments indicate potential of biochar to enhance plant nutrition, crop productivity and soil quality in nu-
trient poor alkaline calcareous soil under maize-wheat cropping system. Long-term farmers’ participatory field
experiments, however, are required to extrapolate the potential of biochar integrations into current cereal-based
cropping systems of Pakistan.

1. Introduction
Cereal crops are cultivated under vast areas for their role as stable
food and energy source on global scale, especially in developing
countries (Cassman, 1999; Farhad et al., 2009). However, the agri-
culture productivity is consistently on decline due to reduction in soil
quality and poor nutrient use efficiencies in developing countries
(Vagen et al., 2005; Jones et al., 2013). Combating poverty and hunger
of an exponentially growing population is a major challenge of agri-
cultural sector in Pakistan (Ali et al., 2015). There is a need of revising
the current agricultural management practices with a view of im-
proving nutrient supply, demand and recycling for better farmer in-
come and soil quality (Delate and Camberdella, 2004; Lal, 2013).
Recycling of nutrients from organic sources into the soil is a

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mr548@ymail.com (M. Riaz).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.08.018
Received 17 June 2017; Received in revised form 22 August 2017; Accepted 27 August 2017
0378-4290/ © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
M. Arif et al.
sustainable approach for improving soil physical, chemical and biolo-
gical properties (Girmay et al., 2008). Such practices are, in particular,
very important to enhance soil fertility and crop productivity in soils
with intrinsically low soil fertility (Shah and Khan, 2003; Anjum et al.,
2011). Biochar, a charcoal like material, is produced from pyrolysis of
biomass under limited or no-supply of oxygen and have high surface
area and highly porous structure (Lehmann and Rondón, 2006;
Atkinson et al., 2010). Use of biochar is gaining considerable global
interest for its potential of improving soil nutrient retention, water
holding capacity and sequestering carbon (C) in largely recalcitrant
form (Downie et al., 2009). High porosity of biochar is generally linked
with enhanced water retention in soils (Singh et al., 2010). Biochar acts
as a soil conditioner, enhances plant growth by supplying nutrients
efficiently and increases crop yields (Lehmann et al., 2003; Steiner
et al., 2007; Laird et al., 2009; Verheijen et al., 2009; Spokas et al.,
2012). Biochar application has been shown to have positive effects on
soil C stability, especially in soil with low native organic matter con-
tents (Ketterings et al., 2000; Sohi et al., 2009; Riaz et al., 2017). A
comprehensive literature review has also shown higher soil water
holding capacity, increasing crop yields and subsequently decrease in
number of irrigations in biochar amended soils (Sohi et al., 2009). A
meta-analysis by Jeffery et al. (2011) has shown 10% mean increase,
over the control, in crop yield after application of biochar. However,
Lehman et al. (2006) reported a range of 20–120% increase in crop
productivity after biochar treatment.
Considering the wide variety of soil types, cropping patterns and
farmers’ resources, several management practices are adopted to reduce
the magnitude of soil fertility degradation. Regardless of soil types and
crop seasons, organic amendments are generally more effective to in-
crease soil C and organic matter status as compared to mineral fertili-
zers (Su et al., 2006). Developing sustainable fertilizer management
practices by integrating them with a large number of organic nutrient
sources can improve soil fertility and quality (Lampkin, 2002;
Manqiang et al., 2009; Arif et al., 2015). Organic amendments for such
purpose are available in huge quantities and originate from diverse
resources including crop residues, green manures, industrial wastes,
animal wastes and household waste (Quilty and Cattle, 2011; Ali et al.,
2015). Application of organic amendments has been advocated to sus-
tain soil organic matter, improve soil biological functioning, aeration
and moisture retention, reduce compaction, pollutant attenuation and
enhance soil nutrient supply (Girmay et al., 2008). However, these
numerous benefits associated with soil application of organic amend-
ments depend strongly on the quantity and nature of organic wastes
(Jones and Healey, 2010).
Biochar is emerging as an attractive option to improve fertilizer use
efficiency (Gaunt and Cowie, 2009; Zhang et al., 2010). For example,
Blackwell et al. (2010) have shown that banded application of wood-
based biochar increased wheat yield and fertilizer efficiency in dryland
south-western Australia. Increase in nitrogenous fertilizer use effi-
ciencies mean their reduced losses to environment via leaching and
greenhouse gas emissions (Chan et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2010; Wang
et al., 2011). A few recent field-based studies have found increased
fertilizer use efficiencies of chemical (Agegenhu et al., 2016) and che-
mical-organic (Arif et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2016) fertilizers in biochar
amended low fertility soils.
Low P availability to plants is a global problem limiting crop pro-
duction, especially in arid and semi-arid regions of the world
(Richardson and Simpson, 2011; Syers et al., 2011). As a result, a
number of agronomic practices have been proposed to enhance P
availability and use by crops under diverse climatic conditions (Shenoy
and Kalagudi, 2005; Simpson et al., 2011). However, very limited
number of studies have focussed on the use of biochar to increase P
utilization from organic and inorganic P fertilizers (e.g. Shen et al.,
2016; Yeboah et al., 2016). Very recently, Gul and Whalen (2016) also
indicated about lack of research on P use efficiency despite of avail-
ability of data regarding P uptake by various crops under biochar
26
Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37
amendments.
Considering the above discussion and lack of understanding on the
potential of biochar to enhance P nutrition of crops in low fertility soils
such as those exist in arid and semi-arid agroecosystems of Pakistan, we
conducted wheat and maize experiments under field conditions for two
growth seasons during 2015 and 2016 with following objectives of:
• investigating effects of biochar on growth and yield of wheat and
maize, and soil chemical properties;
• studying if biochar improves P nutrition from combined application
of inorganic and organic P sources of poultry manure (PM) and
farmyard manure (FYM); and
• testing the hypothesis if the increased P use efficiency (PUE) is
correlated to higher soil organic carbon (SOC) contents after the
addition of biochar.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Description of experimental site
The field experiments were conducted at Agronomy Research Farm
of the University of Agriculture Peshawar (31°1′21″N, 71°28′5″E)
during growing seasons of 2015 and 2016. The experimental site has
subtropical climate with an average annual rainfall of 350 mm, most of
which falls during August to December. The average temperature in
summer is 40 °C and winter is 18 °C. The soil is silty clay loam, alkaline
in reaction with low in organic matter contents and low in plant
available nutrients. Physico-chemical properties of the soil are shown in
Table 1.
2.2. Production and characterization of biochar and organic amendments
FYM and PM were collected from the dairy and poultry farms of The
University of Agriculture Peshawar, respectively. The manures were
dried and kept under cover before they were used in the field experi-
ments. For biochar production, prunings of the Acacia tree were used.
The biochar was prepared using a stainless-steel kiln fabricated locally
at the Institute of Mechatronics Engineering, University of
Engineering & Technology, Peshawar. The kiln consisted of two cham-
bers i.e. internal and external with provision of complete auto-ignition
system. The internal chamber had an inlet hole of 8 inch diameter
through which the biomass was fed into the chamber. The internal
chamber had numerous holes of 0.3 inch diameter near the bottom of
the chamber on each side in three rows for the air flow to proceed the
process of combustion as well as for air circulation. A movable plate
was attached at the bottom to slide the output product and its motion
was controlled through a 12 V window motor. Temperature sensor had
a temperature range up to 1000 °C. During biochar preparation, max-
imum temperature of 680 °C was attained after 20 min of ignition with
an average temperature of about 450 °C throughout the process. pH and
electrical conductivity (EC) of biochar, FYM and PM were measured on
1:10 ratio (w/v) suspension using digital pH (InoLab, WTW Series,
Germany) and EC (Jenway, UK) meters following methods described by
Rhoades (1996). Total organic C contents were measured with Walkely-
Table 1
Physico-chemical properties of soil at the field experiment site.
Property Values
pH1:5 8.24
EC1:5 (dS m−1) 0.16
Textural class Silty clay loam
Total organic C (g kg−1) 12.71
Available N (mg kg−1) 18.94
Available P (mg kg−1) 2.48
Available K (mg kg−1) 80.63
M. Arif et al. Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37

Table 2 get a total of 100 kg P ha−1. Urea was used to apply N to treatment
Properties of the biochar, FYM and PM used in the field experiment. plots at the rate of 150 kg ha−1. Half of the recommended dose of N
was applied as urea at sowing time and remaining half dose of N was
Property Biochar FYM PM
applied at V5 stage of the maize crop. Urea was applied manually be-
pH1:10 7.35 8.13 7.81 tween the rows of wheat crop in two splits at the time of sowing and
EC1:10 (dS m−1) 1.25 1.37 1.32 tillering stage. Chemical fertilizers were applied during each crop cul-
Total organic C (g kg−1) 568 473 683
tivation cycle. However, FYM, PM and biochar were applied only once
Total P (g kg−1) 10.89 34.32 54.81
Total N (g kg−1) 9.52 14.87 25.73 before the sowing of maize crop in this two-year maize-wheat rotation
experiment.

Black method (Nelson and Sommers, 1996). Total N was determined by
the method of Bremner and Tabatabai (1972) following Kjeldahl’s di-
gestion and distillation procedure. Total soil phosphorus (P) was esti-
mated using method described by Soltanpour and Schwab (1977). Soil
available potassium (K) was measured following flame photometer
method. The properties of the biochar and manures used in the ex-
periment are given in Table 2.
2.3. Experimental design and treatments
The field experiments were designed to test the effects of biochar
and P sources added as combination of organic (FYM, PM) and chemical
fertilizer. The experiment was arranged following a randomized com-
plete block design (RCBD) with three replicates per treatment. Biochar
was applied at 0 and 10 t ha−1 whereas organic and inorganic P sources
were added as FYM, PM and diammonium phosphate (DAP). The bio-
char was sieved through a 2-mm mesh before being broadcasted uni-
formly in treatment plots and mixed in the soil to a depth of 15 cm with
rotavator. FYM and PM were applied a week before sowing and DAP
and biochar were applied at the time of seedbed preparation. Fractions
of organic to inorganic P sources were 100, 75, 50, 0% respectively (see
Table S1 for more information on treatments). For each of these P
combinations, organic and inorganic P nutrient sources were applied to
2.4. Field experiments agronomic practices
For this two-year maize-wheat rotation experiment, plots were es-
tablished into 5 × 4.2 m2 dimensions with 0.5 m wide buffering strip
around each plot to avoid dispersal of biochar and organic manures
among the plots. Summary of the agronomic practices carried out for
both crops is shown in Table S2. Briefly, the field was ploughed with a
disc harrow and cultivator followed by planking to achieve uniform soil
tilth for both crops. The maize cultivar ‘Azam’ was sown at seed rate of
30 kg ha−1 and thinning was done after one week of emergence and
uniform plant population of 65,000 ha−1 was maintained. Weeding was
done twice in the growth season (i.e. 20 and 40 days after emergence)
with help of hoe for maize crop. Chloropyrephos insecticide was
sprayed in 0.006% concentration to control stem borer in maize. Wheat
variety ‘Atta Habib’ was sown at seed rate of 120 kg ha−1. Broad
spectrum herbicide ‘Atlantus’ was used to control weeds in wheat crop.
Crops were irrigated considering crop requirements under prevailing
weather conditions using canal water. All these agronomic practices
were kept uniform for all plots. At maturity, four central rows were
harvested, sun dried, weighed for recording data on biological yield of
maize and wheat crops. The ears of maize were shelled and weighed to
record grain yield. Similarly, dried bundles of wheat crop were threshed
to record grain yield data.

Fig. 1. Effects of P source and biochar on plant height (cm), LAI and biological yield (kg ha−1) of maize and wheat. P and B indicate P source and biochar factors respectively. Bars are
means of six replicates from two cultivation cycles for each crop and contain ± standard error of means. * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001, ns = non-significant.

27
M. Arif et al. Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37

2.5. Soil sampling and analysis

38.35***

16.11***
10.75**

13.98**
Two-way analysis of variance test to study the effects of biochar, P sources and biochar*P source on biological yield and grain yield parameters, soil properties and PUE over the two cultivation cycles for each crop during 2015 and 2016.

2.09ns

0.85ns
PUE
After each crop harvest, surface soil samples were taken with a
stainless-steel auger from each plot at 15 cm depth. The sample were air

17.63***
33.38***
dried, hand sorted to remove any vegetation remains, ground to pass

5.57***

1.13ns

0.91ns
Soil P

3.68*
through 2 mm sieve and stored in clean plastic bags until used for
analyses. Soil pH and EC were measured on 1:5 (w/v) ratio in water
using above mentioned protocol. SOC contents were determined using
3.68**
Soil N

0.73ns

0.61ns
1.34*

2.22*
2.95*
Walkely Black method (Nelson and Sommers, 1996). Soil available N
was measured by the method of Subbiah and Asija (1956). Soil avail-
able P was estimated using the protocol of Olsen et al. (1954).
15.14***
23.79***

10.21**
9.40***

1.15ns
2.77*

2.6. Calculations of P use efficiencies (PUE)

SOC

Grain samples were dried to constant weight at 75 °C and 0.5 g

9.81***

portion of the dried samples were milled into fine powder and subse-
1.82ns

0.43ns
0.01ns
0.64ns
2.89*
Soil properties

EC

quently digested with 5 mL of conc. H2SO4 and H2O2 (Wolf, 1982).

Total P concentrations in grain samples were determined following
1.13ns
2.00ns
1.10ns

1.77ns
4.23ns
1.61ns

method of Allen et al. (1986).

pH

Grain P uptake was calculated using following formula:

Grain P uptake (kg ha −1)

Harvest index

Grain P content (g kg−1) × Grain yield (kg ha −1)

49.16***
56.00***

=
7.02***

3.07**

1000 (1)
0.79ns
0.49ns

Phosphorus use efficiency (PUE) was, then, calculated using fol-

lowing formula described by Fageria et al. (1997):
Grain yield

117.83***
188.51***
62.56***
52.33***

6.20***

P uptake in fertilized plot (kg ha −1)

3.40*

− P uptake in control plot (kg ha−1)

PUE (%) = × 100
Total P applied (kg ha −1) (2)
1000-grain weight

2.7. Statistical analysis

13.53***
26.43***

20.89***
8.44***
0.03ns

0.56ns

Data were tested for normality and homogeneity of distribution and,

if required, were log transformed before the analysis of variance test.
We pooled the data from two-cropping cycles and analysed the data
Grains per ear/spike

using two-way analysis of variance test using biochar (B) and P source
(P) as fixed experimental factors. Effects of B, P and B × P interactions
on wheat and maize yield components and soil chemical properties
Grain yield

10.39***

were calculated separately. Bivariate scatter plots followed by linear

10.63**
7.14***

8.06**
2.28ns

0.78ns

regression were developed to explore the relationships between various

parameters. Data in figures and tables are means of six replicates from
two cultivation cycles unless otherwise stated. All statistical analyses
Biological yield

were performed with SPSS for windows software v. 21.

34.24***
6.99***

* = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001, ns = non-significant.

4.95**
9.44**
0.95ns

3. Results
2.74*

3.1. Biological yield components

17.16***
38.76***
4.89**
0.48ns
1.51ns

1.31ns

Biochar and P source had significant effects on plant height, leaf

LAI

area index (LAI) and biological yield of both maize and wheat (Fig. 1;
Biological yield

Table 3). The combined application of organic and inorganic P sources

Plant height

generally performed better compared to their sole applications in either

17.40***

66.55***
F-values

organic or inorganic forms. PM apparently showed more positive effects

3.78**

5.73**
0.56ns

0.54ns

on plant height of both crops than FYM in increasing wheat and maize
plant height (Fig. 1a, d). For the maize crop, higher plant height was
measured in plots treated with biochar in combination with 100%-PM
P source*Biochar

P source*Biochar

as P source while in maize higher plant height was measured in plots

treated with 50% PM and biochar in combination as P sources. The
P source

P source
Biochar

Biochar

response of maize LAI to biochar was different to that of wheat LAI

Factors

(Fig. 1b, e) and more increase in wheat LAI was measured than maize
LAI where the effects of biochar on LAI were not significant. Effects of
biochar on increasing biological yield of maize were evident when
Wheat
Maize
Table 3

Crop

applied with 100% chemical fertilizer (Fig. 1c), however, similar results
were observed for wheat but with application of 100% FYM (Fig. 1f).

28
M. Arif et al.
Fig. 2. Effects of P source and biochar on grains per ear/spike, 1000-grain weight (g), grain yield (kg ha−1) and harvest index (%). P and B indicate P source and biochar factors
respectively. Bars are means of six replicates from two cultivation cycles for each crop and contain ± standard error of means. * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001,
ns = non-significant.
Interactions between biochar and P sources were generally non-sig-
nificant for biological yield components of maize and wheat except for
the biological yield of maize (Fig. 1c).
3.2. Grain yield components
Effects of biochar and P source on grains per ear/spike, 1000-grain
weight, grain yield and HI of maize and wheat are shown in Fig. 2.
Addition of P sources significantly increased grain yield and yield
components for both crops (Table 3). However, biochar marginally but
significantly increased number of grains per ear/spike, 1000-grain
weight and grain yield of maize and wheat (Fig. 1a–c, e–g). The highest
1000-grain weight of maize was recorded in treatment consisting of
biochar and 50%-PM (Fig. 2b) while, for wheat, addition of biochar
with 100%-PM produced the highest 1000-grain weight (Fig. 2f).
Highest grain yield in maize was recorded in plots treated with 50%-
FYM and 50%-PM in the presence of biochar (Fig. 2e). Similar ob-
servations were noted for wheat grain yield but at 100%-FYM and
100%-PM (Fig. 2g). The HI, however, showed non-consistent but sig-
nificant changes under the effects of biochar and P sources (Fig. 2d). In
contrast to HI of maize, biochar always resulted in higher HI for all P
sources in wheat crop (Fig. 2h). Interactions between biochar and P
sources were significant for grain yield of both maize and wheat crops.
Biochar and P sources had significant effects on PUE of maize and
wheat (Fig. 3; Table 3). Highest PUE in maize was found under 50%-
FYM and 50%-PM treatments with biochar (Fig. 3a). However, con-
trasting PUE effects were observed for wheat crop as the highest PUE
values were noticed for 100%-FYM and 100%-PM with biochar
(Fig. 3b).
3.3. Effects on soil pH and EC
Changes in soil pH and EC under maize and wheat crops over the
two growing seasons are shown in Table 4. Neither P sources nor
29
Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37
biochar had significant effects on soil pH under maize and wheat cul-
tivation (Table 3). However, in some instances, biochar did increase soil
pH slightly both under maize and wheat crops. Biochar had non-sig-
nificant effects on soil EC under maize and wheat crops. P sources
produced significantly changes in soil EC only under maize crop. Al-
though non-significant, biochar effects on soil pH and EC were more
noticeable under wheat crop. pH and EC values were also higher in soil
under wheat cultivation.
3.4. Changes in SOC, available N and P contents
Changes in SOC and soil available N and P contents after the harvest
of both crops are shown in Table 5. Both biochar and P sources had
significant effects on SOC contents under maize and wheat crops. Ap-
plication of FYM and PM generally increased SOC contents which were
further enhanced under the influence of biochar. SOC contents after the
harvest of maize and wheat were crop specific. Interactions biochar and
P source for SOC were significant for maize crop only. Biochar and P
source significantly altered soil available N for both maize and wheat
crops (Table 5). For both crops, biochar enhanced soil available N
contents. Highest soil available N contents were always found when
manures were integrated with chemical fertilizer. Soil under maize and
wheat cultivation also showed considerable variations in soil available
N contents. Changes in soil available P contents followed trends similar
to soil available N content for maize and wheat crops (Table 5).
Treatments consisting of FYM and PM with biochar always exhibited
higher soil available P contents whereas soil available P were higher
after the wheat crop than the maize crop.
3.5. Relationships of biological and grain yields with SOC, soil N and P
We explored the relationships of crop biological and grain yields
with SOC, soil available N and soil available P contents using bivariate
scatterplots, and fitting linear regression curves to the plots (Figs. 4 and
M. Arif et al. Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37

Fig. 3. Effects of P source and biochar on PUE (%) of a) maize and b) wheat. P and B indicate P source and biochar factors respectively. Bars are means of six replicates from two
cultivation cycles for each crop and contain ± standard error of means. * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001, ns = non-significant.

Table 4
Effects of P source and biochar on soil pH and EC (dS m−1) in maize and wheat crops over the two cultivation cycles for each crop during 2015–2016.

pH1:5 EC1:5 (dS m−1)

P source Maize (Pns, Bns, P × Bns) Wheat (Pns, Bns, P × Bns) Maize (P***, Bns, P × B*) Wheat (Pns, Bns, P × Bns)

Without biochar With biochar Without biochar With biochar Without biochar With biochar Without biochar With biochar

Control 7.49 (0.05) 7.63 (0.03) 7.62 (0.17) 7.83 (0.12) 0.33 (0.00) 0.33 (0.00) 0.41 (0.03) 0.41 (0.03)
100%-FYM 7.44 (0.01) 7.53 (0.03) 8.01 (0.11) 8.15 (0.02) 0.33 (0.00) 0.33 (0.00) 0.44 (0.05) 0.51 (0.05)
75%-FYM 7.46 (0.00) 7.51 (0.03) 7.65 (0.13) 8.08 (0.03) 0.34 (0.00) 0.33 (0.00) 0.50 (0.05) 0.51 (0.08)
50%-FYM 7.50 (0.02) 7.47 (0.06) 8.01 (0.10) 8.03 (0.07) 0.34 (0.00) 0.34 (0.00) 0.50 (0.08) 0.44 (.08)
100%-PM 7.49 (0.03) 7.53 (0.01) 7.90 (0.16) 8.00 (0.06) 0.33 (0.00) 0.33 (0.00) 0.51 (0.05) 0.42 (0.04)
75%-PM 7.47 (0.01) 7.45 (0.03) 7.92 (0.12) 8.01 (0.10) 0.34 (0.00) 0.33 (0.00) 0.48 (0.07) 0.49 (0.08)
50%-PM 7.48 (0.01) 7.50 (0.02) 8.09 (0.02) 7.97 (0.16) 0.33 (0.00) 0.34 (0.00) 0.44 (0.02) 0.53 (0.03)
100%-CF 7.53 (0.03) 7.52 (0.04) 8.11 (0.02) 8.16 (0.01) 0.33 (0.00) 0.34 (0.00) 0.44 (0.06) 0.40 (0.03)

All values are average of six replicates from two cultivation cycles of each crop followed by standard error of means in parenthesis. P and B indicate P source and biochar factors
respectively. * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001, ns = non- significant,

5). Biological yield of maize showed non-significant relationship with
SOC but significant correlations with soil N and P contents (Fig. 4a–c).
Similar relationships were found for grain yield with SOC, soil N and P
contents (Fig. 4d–f). However, for the wheat crop, we found significant
relationships of biological yield with SOC, soil N and P contents
(Fig. 5a–c). Grain yield of wheat also correlated significantly and po-
sitively with SOC, soil N and P contents (Fig. 5d–f).
relationship with SOC (Fig. 6a), however, PUE correlated weakly but
significantly negatively with SOC (Fig. 6b). Similar relationships of HI
and PUE with SOC were significant and positive for wheat crop (Fig. 6c,
d). However, correlations between PUE and HI for both crops were
significant and positive (Fig. 7). This observation was more convincing
and strong for the wheat crop though (Fig. 7b).

4. Discussion
3.6. Correlations between PUE, HI and SOC
4.1. Effects on biological and grain yields
Relationships of HI and PUE with SOC for both maize and wheat
crops are shown in Fig. 6. HI of maize showed non-significant Biological yield components (leaf area, plant height and total plant

30
M. Arif et al. Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37

P and B indicate P source and biochar factors respectively. All values are average of six replicates from two cultivation cycles of each crop followed by standard error of means in parenthesis. P and B indicate P source and biochar factors
biomass) are important growth parameters that mainly contribute to

With biochar

12.21 (0.16)
4.93 (0.29)

9.76 (0.99)
9.13 (0.47)
9.87 (0.33)
7.04 (0.83)
7.11 (0.42)
7.15 (0.76)
the photosynthetic abilities of crop and economic yield. Incorporation
Wheat (P***, B***, P × Bns)
of biochar increased grain yield of maize and wheat by 24% and 18%
compared to the similar plots without biochar respectively. Nutrient
Without biochar contained within biochar amendments could be responsible for such
short-term increase in crop yields (Lehmann et al., 2003). However,
(0.30)
long-term effects of biochar on nutrient availability are due to an in-
(0.51)
(0.67)
(0.84)
(0.62)
(0.26)
(0.21)
(0.42)
crease in surface oxidation and cation exchange capacity (CEC) which
intensifies over time and can lead to greater nutrient retention in soil
4.53
9.12
7.60
6.99
9.17
6.01
5.10
5.53
(Cheng et al., 2006; Liang et al., 2006). Other possible explanations for
increase in wheat and maize grain yield in biochar amended plots in-
With biochar

(0.21)
(0.18)
(0.39)
(0.53)
(0.63)
(0.44)
(0.31)
(0.43)
clude the effects of biochar on soil physio-chemical properties such as
enhanced water holding capacity, increased CEC and providing a
Soil available P (mg kg−1)

Maize (P***, B*, P × Bns)

2.80
5.71
5.37
4.15
5.72
4.43
4.10
4.87

medium for absorption of plant nutrients by improving conditions for

soil microbial activities (Chan et al., 2007; Sohi et al., 2009).
Biochar increases crop productivity by improving soil fertility and
Without biochar

fertilizer use efficiency, especially of nitrogenous fertilizer (Day et al.,

(0.03)
(0.36)
(0.34)
(0.70)
(0.31)
(0.15)
(0.34)
(0.31)

2005; Arif et al., 2012). Biochar may reduce the activity of nitrifying
bacteria or reduce the concentration of phenolic compounds in the soil
2.33
5.22
5.37
4.59
5.15
3.87
3.88
3.30

solution that could augment the immobilization of inorganic N with

possible negative effects on crop growth (Park et al., 2005). Uzoma
With biochar

et al. (2011) reported similar findings and reported that biochar in-
corporation at 20 and 30 t ha−1 rates increased maize grain yields by
Effects of P source and biochar on SOC (g kg−1), soil available N (mg kg−1) and soil P (mg kg−1) in soil under maize and wheat cultivation during 2015–2016.

(24)
(61)
(24)
(54)
(32)
(41)
(16)
(46)

98% and 150% respectively as compared to control. Higher grain yield

Wheat (P**, B*, P × Bns)

427
642
494
558
518
559
493
458

in biochar applied plots might be due to the positive effects on crop N

uptake through improved N fertilizer use efficiency especially in soils
Without biochar

highly susceptible to N losses (Hossain et al., 2010; Uzoma et al., 2011).

Integrated use of organic and inorganic P sources had more pro-
(42)
(84)
(83)

(50)
(32)
(27)
(52)
(8)

nounced effects on biological and grain yields of maize and wheat as

320
553
560
493
486
463
447
407

compared to their application alone. These additive effects of combined

application of organic and inorganic P are due to the slow release and
availability of N and P from organic sources which were less prone to
With biochar

losses as compared to mineral N and P fertilizers. Wheat produced more

(29)
(37)
(24)
(15)

(43)
(33)
(58)
(0)
Soil available N (mg kg−1)

tillers when it was planted in high FYM incorporated plots. This in-
Maize (P**, B*, P × Bns)

547
727
767
777
800
743
767
800

crease can be the result of beneficial effects of nutrients released from

the decomposition of FYM especially N and P (Ali et al., 2015, 2017).
Without biochar

4.2. Changes in soil properties and PUE

(56)
(33)
(45)
(29)
(49)
(18)
(33)
(33)

Soil organic matter and SOC plays key role in soil fertility and soil
450
667
690
753
710
773
767
767

quality management (Selvakumari et al., 2000; Ali et al., 2015). We

observed higher SOC contents in soils under biochar treatment which
With biochar

14.33 (0.96)
10.53 (0.41)

11.65 (0.70)

10.98 (1.05)
6.27 (0.27)

9.09 (0.34)

9.29 (0.22)
9.41 (1.59)

corresponded positively to the rate of biochar addition (Pattanayak

et al., 2001; Sarwar et al., 2003). Soil P contents were significantly
Wheat (P***, B**, P × Bns)

increased by the combined application of biochar and FYM. Soil ap-

plication of biochar can improve soil nutrient retention and availability
to plants due to high CEC and similar mechanism could be responsible
Without biochar

for increase in soil P contents and crop productivity (Krull et al., 2003;
12.04 (0.33)

10.16 (0.50)
5.00 (0.58)

9.47 (0.25)
9.14 (0.33)

9.22 (0.50)
8.75 (0.19)
8.37 (0.51)

Major et al., 2009). Soil application of high C:N ratio organic amend-
ments generally promotes fungal feeding populations, consequently, a
fungal-dominated organic matter decomposition prevails. Therefore, an
improved P availability under biochar treatment could be the result of
With biochar

16.16 (1.28)
10.17 (1.91)

13.30 (1.15)

michorizal-fungal associations (Matsubara et al., 2002; Solaiman et al.,

6.40 (0.17)

8.47 (0.79)

9.70 (0.25)
8.47 (0.41)
7.93 (0.30)

2010). Mycorrhizal fungi play significant role in P availability by using

Maize (P***, B***, P × B*)

biochar as a habitat (Warnock et al., 2007). The finer parts of the

mycelium, generally the absorptive hyphae, are more vulnerable to
fungal grazers and it is primarily these architectural elements that could
Without biochar

be effectively protected within biochar particles and enhanced soil P

SOC (g kg−1)

10.30 (0.56)

10.46 (0.30)
4.95 (0.33)

8.73 (0.23)
7.97 (0.29)

7.79 (0.42)
7.63 (0.18)
6.97 (0.59)

contents (Klironomos and Kendrick, 1996). In addition to chemical

signals, biochar may also adsorb compounds toxic to mycorrhizal fungi.
For example, Wallstedt et al. (2002) found lower concentrations of
water-soluble phenols after biochar application and attributed this to
100%-FYM

enhanced fungal capacity for soil available P. As a result of aforemen-

100%-DAP

respectively.
75%-FYM
50%-FYM
100%-PM
P source

75%-PM
50%-PM
Control

tioned phenomenon, the incorporation of biochar caused an increase in

Table 5

PUE under both wheat and maize crops, and a concomitant increase in
crop yields compared to the unamended soil. This increase in PUE with

31
M. Arif et al.
Fig. 4. Correlations of biological yield (kg ha−1) and gain yield (kg ha−1) of maize with SOC (g kg soil−1), Soil N (mg kg soil−1) and soil P (mg kg soil−1).
biochar addition could also be the result of the additional nutrients
made available by biochar. Our estimates showed that 18% of addi-
tional P was taken up by the plants in biochar-amended plots which is
similar to the observations of Wang et al. (2012). Despite of general
prediction that N use efficiency is greater if biochar is applied with
inorganic and organic nutrient sources (e.g. Steiner et al., 2008; Schulz
and Glaser, 2012; Doan et al., 2015), little data is available on effects of
biochar on PUE under fertilized conditions (Gul and Whalen, 2016).
4.3. Effects on soil N contents
In the current study, biochar enhanced soil N contents variedly
when applied with organic and chemical N sources. Supply of N from
mineralization of soil organic matter is a major process of plant N nu-
trition. According to estimates of Cui et al. (2008), soil N contents were
significantly controlled by soil organic matter as they increased by 5.37
and 3.68 kg ha−1 for maize and wheat respectively with each g kg−1
increase in soil organic matter contents. However, it must be noticed
that application of biochar alone could cause N immobilization and lead
to N deficiency in plants due to high C:N ratios (Lehmann and Joseph,
2009; Riaz et al., 2017). Application of organic matter with C:N ratios
higher than 20 are known to cause microbial N immobilization (Fisher
and Binkley, 2000). As biochar has high C:N ratio (up to 400), it is
likely that increased mineralization of a exchangeable C fractions could
contribute to a reduction in soil total N, and potentially reduce plant
available N. However, when biochar was integrated with chemical or
32
Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37
organic N fertilizer, the process of mineralization could exceed im-
mobilization and as a result soil N contents were increased. However,
total C and N content in biochar does not reflect the actual availability
of these elements for microbes to cause immobilization. The re-
calcitrant nature of biochar suggests that few structural constituents
within biochar would contribute to nutrient immobilization, however,
biochar may also absorbs organic molecules that have high C:N ratio
from soil solution and increase mineralization (Gundale and DeLuca,
2007).
4.4. Factors for improved crop yields and soil fertility
There is little literature available on the effects of biochar on field
crops in calcareous soils under semi-arid conditions. This study re-
vealed positive effects of biochar applied in combination of organic
(FYM and PM) and inorganic (DAP) P sources on maize and wheat
yields and soil chemical properties. Biochar increased maize yield by 10
and 35% as compared the no biochar applied and control plots, re-
spectively. This enhanced crop productivity was associated with im-
proved soil nutrients as biochar significantly improved SOC, soil P and
N contents. Increase in soil pH in alkaline soil is hypothesized to have
negative effects on soil nutrients, however, we observed that slight
increase in soil pH after biochar application had no negative effects on
nutrient availability to plants. We also did not find any adverse effects
of biochar-induced changes in soil pH on grain yield of both crops.
Biochar increasing SOC and P contents after wheat harvest strongly
M. Arif et al.
Fig. 5. Relationships of biological yield (kg ha−1) and gain yield (kg ha−1) of maize with SOC (g kg soil−1), Soil N (mg kg soil−1) and soil P (mg kg soil−1).
suggest that biochar improves soil organic matter contents and retain or
release macronutrients such as N and P efficiently (Johnston et al.,
2009). This was evident from higher biological and grain yields of both
maize and wheat crops in biochar amended plots. These observations
also indicate the potential role of biochar to reduce nutrient loss from
leaching (Laird et al., 2010a,b), and also provision of sustained supply
of P through the slow release of these nutrients to crops (Glaser et al.,
2002; Mukherjee and Zimmerman, 2013).
Our results further suggest that combined application of chemical
and organic P sources resulted in higher biological and grains yields of
maize crop. Obtaining 50% P from organic sources either FYM or PM
and 50% from chemical fertilizer resulted in higher biological and grain
yields. For examples, these treatments produced more than 80% higher
grain yield and 48% higher biological yield compared to the un-
amended control treatment. However, higher biological yield of wheat
crop was obtained from plots amended with 100% PM and 100% FYM
but they were very similar to the biological yield obtained from treat-
ments consisting of 50%-PM + 50%-DAP and 100%-DAP in the pre-
sence of biochar. Our study indicates that chemical fertilizer could meet
the immediate P requirements of the crops whereas manures keep on
supplying nutrients in soluble form for longer time by minimizing their
fixation and precipitation from organic nutrient resources (Murphy,
2015). Under such scenarios, the plant roots are able to absorb nutrients
more efficiently in higher quantities resulting in enhanced biological
and grain yields (Mohandas et al., 2008).
Similar positive effects of integrating organic and inorganic
33
Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37
fertilizers on crop yields have been shown elsewhere. For example,
Zafar et al. (2013) reported that combined application of PM with
chemical P fertilizer resulted in higher grain yield of 19 and 41% over
the inorganic P and PM alone, respectively. Ayoola and Adeniyan
(2006) found that application of NPK fertilizers in combination with PM
proved better than sole application of either NPK or PM in increasing
grain yield of maize. Improved mungbean yield and yield components
were also observed under integrated application of nutrients (Aslam
et al., 2010). A few studies have reported that addition of biochar
provided beneficial effects on NPK both from organic and inorganic
nutrient sources in nutrient poor soils (e.g. Widowati and Asnah, 2014;
Ali et al., 2015, 2016).
Increase in SOC is the fundamental benefit of integrating organic
and inorganic nutrient sources (Rasool et al., 2008). Our study also
indicates that addition of manures increased SOC and P contents. Goyal
et al. (1999) found that SOC contents increased many-fold after appli-
cation of chemical fertilizer with farmyard manure, wheat straw or
Sesbania bispinosa green manure. Dhillon and Brar (2006) demonstrated
additive effects of FYM incorporated with optimum P levels on P
availability in soil. Similarly, Hoover et al. (2015) argued that in-
tegrating PM with chemical fertilizer significantly increased P avail-
ability in topsoil at 0–30 cm depth in calcareous soils under corn-soy-
bean rotation. However, Opala et al. (2010) reported lower maize yield
under FYM application but, at the same time, enhanced labile inorganic
P pools in soil.
M. Arif et al. Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37

Fig. 6. Relationships of HI (%) and PUE (%) with SOC (g kg soil−1) in maize and wheat production.

Fig. 7. Relationships between HI (%) and PUE (%) in

maize and wheat crops.

34
M. Arif et al.
4.5. Effects of increasing SOC on PUE and HI
Soils with higher organic matter contents generally have high in-
herent soil productivity and agricultural practices aiming to enhance
soil organic matter contents are considered an effective strategy to
improve native soil productivity. Therefore, enhancing and sustaining
SOC is pre-requisite to enhance nutrient use efficiencies, crop growth
and yield, and soil quality (Zhao et al., 2016). In this study, above-
ground crop responses in terms of enhanced biological and grain yields
were correlated positively with below-ground improvements in SOC
and plant available N and P after integrating biochar in maize-wheat
cropping system. We also found strong relationships between SOC, PUE
and HI for both wheat and maize crops over the two cultivation cycles.
These observations strongly suggest that increase in SOC from biochar
is the fundamental mechanism for increase in crop yields, nutrient use
efficiencies and positive changes in soil physical and biochemical
properties. A number of studies have demonstrated positive effects of
increasing SOC on crop yields and soil quality, particularly in soils in-
herently poor in nutrients (e.g. Bauer and Black, 1994; Kanchikerimath
and Singh, 2001; Lal, 2006). Pan et al. (2009) summarised province-
level data in China to find positive correlations between SOC and crop
biological yields but no conclusive evidence of SOC relationship with
crop yields. Therefore, significant correlations of crop productivity and
yields with SOC in this study should also be interpreted cautiously,
although an increase in SOC leads to higher plant available nutrients
(Oelofse et al., 2015; Zhao et al., 2016). A meta-analysis by Biederman
and Harpole (2013) found strong effects of biochar on SOC which was
also the case in our study, however, direct evidence of this increase in
SOC on PUE and HI, as reported in this study, is scarce in the literature.
Benefits of biochar application depends on its interactions with
native and added organic matter such as manures, crop residues and
composts. Biochar may reduce decomposition of native and added SOC
by sorbing organic compounds (Smernik, 2009; Lu et al., 2014; Riaz
et al., 2017). However, a number of studies have demonstrated an
undesirable “positive priming effect” after application of biochar to soil
under laboratory conditions (e.g. Hamer et al., 2004; Wardle et al.,
2008; Kuzyakov, 2010; Cross and Sohi, 2011; Woolf and Lehmann,
2012). However, it is not very clear how biochar interacts with organic
matter under field conditions. Significantly higher SOC contents in soil
after two-year maize-wheat cultivation in our study indicated that
biochar could stabilize SOC from manure in low organic matter content
soil.
5. Conclusions, limitations and further research
The results from this 2-year maize-wheat cropping system con-
cluded that the integration of biochar with organic and inorganic P
sources could improve crop productivity and soil quality under field
conditions. Primary factor for improved crop yields and soil fertility is
the increase in SOC under biochar application since biochar augments
native and fresh organic matter added as FYM and PM. Positive re-
lationships between SOC, PUE and HI suggest that biochar improves
plant P uptake and soil N contents which often limits crop production in
arid and semi-arid soils of Pakistan natively poor in plant available
nutrients. Our results also indicate the potential of biochar to increase
cost-effectiveness of chemical fertilizers for sustainable nutrient man-
agement by small landholding farmer communities in Pakistan.
However, selection of suitable feedstock for biochar production is
crucial as much of the crop residues are generally in-use for multiple
purposes. Nevertheless, plenty of feedstock options still exists in the
form of various on-farm organic wastes and urban green wastes which
could be included in the farm management practices.
Both the availability and cost of chemical fertilizers often hinder
crop production in nutrient poor and resource-limited farming com-
munities; therefore, under such compelling scenarios, strategies to in-
crease the fertilizer use efficiency is always desirable. Our results
35
Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37
advocate the synergy between biochar and organic amendments to
optimize PUE which, generally, is a limiting factor for crop production
in low fertility alkaline calcareous soils. Therefore, in addition to in-
creasing soil organic matter contents, biochar improves nutrient use
efficiency and, consequently, reduce nutrient loss to environment.
Time-scale for benefits of biochar under field conditions is a critical
factor needs to be taken into consideration before recommendation of
biochar for soil management at farm levels. Lack of biochar-based long-
term field experiments warrants a cautious approach to test the biochar
efficacy for soil fertility management. For example, in a recent study
conducted for 3 years, Feng et al. (2014) found non-significant effects of
biochar on annual yields of summer maize and winter wheat on sea-
sonal basis over the first 4 growing seasons, however, the effects on
cumulative yields were significant. Similar to our study, majority of
field-based biochar studies are 1–2 years long in duration reporting
mixed effects of biochar on crop yields and soil fertility e.g. Spokas
et al. (2012) reviewed 44 studies involving field applications of biochar
and reported that only 50% of them found positive effects of biochar
whereas the others had no or negative effects on crop yields. Our two-
year field-based study also reflects the promising potential of biochar in
integrative nutrient management for productivity of cereal-based
cropping systems in Pakistan. However, we stress on careful and critical
assessment of biochar integration into current farm management
practices using long-term farmers’ participatory field experiments to
evaluate biochar usefulness as sustainable nutrient management
strategy in arid and semi-arid agroecosystems.
Acknowledgement
The authors acknowledge the financial support of Higher Education
Commission of Pakistan for this project under NRPU program.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the
online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.08.018.
References
Agegenhu, G., Bass, A.M., Nelson, P.N., Bird, M.I., 2016. Benefits of biochar, compost and
biochar-compost for soil quality, maize yield and greenhouse gas emissions in a
tropical agricultural soil. Sci. Total Environ. 543, 295–306.
Ali, K., Arif, M., Jan, M.T., Khan, M.J., Jones, D.L., 2015. Integrated use of biochar: a tool
for improving soil and wheat quality of degraded soil under wheat-maize cropping
pattern. Pak. J. Bot. 47, 233–240.
Ali, K., Arif, M., Shah, F., Shehzad, A., Munsif, F., Mian, I.A., Mian, A.A., 2017.
Improvement in maize (Zea mays L) growth and quality through integrated use of
biochar. Pak. J. Bot. 49, 85–94.
Allen, S.E., Grimshaw, H.M., Rowland, P., 1986. Chemical analysis. In: Moore, P.D.,
Chapman, S.B. (Eds.), Methods in Plant Ecology. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, pp.
303–316.
Anjum, S., Xie, X.Y., Wang, L.C., Saleem, M.F., Man, C., Wang, L., 2011. Morphological,
physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress. Afr. J. Agric. Res.
6, 2026–2032.
Arif, M., Ali, A., Umair, M., Munsif, F., Ali, K., Inamullah, M. Saleem, Ayub, G., 2012.
Effect of biochar FYM and mineral nitrogen alone and in combination on yield and
yield components of maize. Sarhad J. Agric. 28, 191–195.
Arif, M., Jalal, F., Jan, M.T., Muhammad, D., Quilliam, R.S., 2015. Incorporation of
biochar and legumes into the summer gap: improving productivity of cereal-based
cropping systems in Pakistan. Agroecol. Sust. Food 39, 391–398.
Arif, M., Ali, K., Jan, M.T., Shah, Z., Jones, D.L., Quilliam, R.S., 2016. Integration of
biochar with animal manure and nitrogen for improving maize yields and soil
properties in calcareous semi-arid agroecosystems. Field Crops Res. 195, 28–35.
Aslam, M., Hussain, N., Zubair, M., Hussain, S.B., Baloch, M.S., 2010. Integration of or-
ganic and inorganic sources of phosphorus for increased productivity of mungbean
(Vigna radiata). Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 47, 111–114.
Atkinson, C.J., Fitzgerald, J.D., Hipps, N.A., 2010. Potential mechanisms for achieving
agricultural benefits from biochar application to temperate soils: a review. Plant Soil
337, 1–18.
Ayoola, O.T., Adeniyan, O.N., 2006. Influence of poultry manure and NPK fertilizer on
yield and yield components of crops under different cropping systems in south west
Nigeria. Afr. J. Biotechol. 5, 1386–1392.
Bauer, A., Black, A.L., 1994. Quantification of the effect of soil organic matter content on
soil productivity. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58, 185–193.
M. Arif et al.
Biederman, L.A., Harpole, W.S., 2013. Biochar and its effects on plant productivity and
nutrient cycling: a meta-analysis. GCB Bioenergy 5, 202–2014.
Blackwell, P., Krull, E., Butler, G., Herbert, A., Solaiman, Z., 2010. Effect of banded
biochar on dryland wheat production and fertiliser use in south-western Australia: an
agronomic and economic perspective. Aust. J. Soil Res. 48, 531–545.
Bremner, J.M., Tabatabai, M.A., 1972. Use of an ammonia electrode for determination of
ammonium in Kjeldahl analysis of soils. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 3, 71–80.
Cassman, K.G., 1999. Ecological intensification of cereal production systems: yield po-
tential, soil quality, and precision agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 96, 5952–5959.
Chan, K.Y., Zwieten, L.V., Meszaros, I., Downie, A., Joseph, S., 2007. Agronomic values of
green waste biochar as a soil amendment. Aust. J. Soil Res. 45, 629–634.
Cheng, C.-H., Lehmann, J., Thies, J.E., Burton, S.D., Engelhard, M.H., 2006. Oxidation of
black carbon by biotic and abiotic processes. Org. Geochem. 37, 1477–1488.
Cross, A., Sohi, S.P., 2011. The priming potential of biochar products in relation to labile
carbon contents and soil organic matter status. Soil Biol. Biochem. 43, 2127–2134.
Cui, Z.L., Zhang, F.S., Chen, X.P., Miao, Y.X., Li, J.L., Shi, L.W., Xu, J.F., Ye, Y.L., Liu, C.S.,
Yang, Z.P., 2008. On-farm estimation of indigenous nitrogen supply for site-specific
nitrogen management in the North China plain. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 81, 37–47.
Day, D., Evans, R.J., Lee, J.W., Reicosky, D., 2005. Economical CO2, SOx, and NOx capture
from fossil-fuel utilization with combined renewable hydrogen production and large-
scale carbon sequestration. Energy 30, 2558–2579.
Delate, K., Camberdella, C.A., 2004. Agro-ecosystem performance during transition to
certified organic grain production. Agron. J. 96, 1288–1298.
Dhillon, N.S., Brar, B.S., 2006. Influence of long-term use of fertilizers and farmyard
manure on the adsorption–desorption behavior and bioavailability of phosphorus in
soils. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 75, 67–78.
Doan, T.T., Henry-des-Tureaux, T., Rumpel, C., Janeau, J.-L., Jouquet, P., 2015. Impact of
compost, vermicompost and biochar on soil fertility, maize yield and soil erosion in
northern Vietnam: a three-year mesocosm experiment. Sci. Total Environ. 514,
147–154.
Downie, A., Crosky, A., Munroe, P., 2009. Physical properties of biochar. In: Lehmann, J.,
Joseph, S. (Eds.), Biochar for Environmental Management: Science and Technology.
Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 13–32.
Fageria, N.K., Baliger, V.C., Jones, C.A., 1997. Growth and Mineral Nutrition of Field
Crops, 2nd ed. Marcel Dekker, Inc., NY, USA.
Farhad, W., Saleem, M.F., Cheema, M.A., Hammad, H.M., 2009. Effect of poultry manure
levels on the productivity of spring maize (Zea mays L.). J. Anim. Plant Sci. 19,
122–125.
Feng, L., Gui-tong, L., Qi-mei, L., Xiao-rong, Z., 2014. Crop yield and soil properties in the
first 3 years after biochar application to a calcareous soil. J. Integr. Agric. 13,
525–532.
Fisher, R.F., Binkley, D., 2000. Ecology and Management of Forest Soils. John Wiley and
Sons, New York, USA pp. 489.
Gaunt, J., Cowie, A., 2009. Biochar, greenhouse gas accounting and emission trading. In:
Lehman, J., Joseph, S. (Eds.), Biochar for Environmental Management: Science and
Technology. Earthscan, Sterling, UK.
Girmay, G., Singh, B.R., Mitiku, H., Borresen, T., Lal, R., 2008. Carbon stocks in Ethiopian
soils in relation to land use and soil management. Land Degrad. Dev. 19, 351–367.
Glaser, B., Lehmann, J., Zech, W., 2002. Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of
highly weathered soils in the tropics with charcoal-a review. Biol. Fertil. Soils 35,
219–230.
Goyal, S., Chander, K., Mundra, M.C., Kapoor, K.K., 1999. Influence of inorganic fertili-
zers and organic amendments on soil organic matter and soil microbial properties
under tropical conditions. Biol. Fertil. Soils 29, 196–200.
Gul, S., Whalen, J.K., 2016. Biochemical cycling of nitrogen and phosphorus in biochar-
amended soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 103, 1–15.
Gundale, M.J., DeLuca, T.H., 2007. Charcoal and litter extracts alter soil solution
chemistry and growth of Koeleria macrantha in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir eco-
system. Biol. Fertil. Soils 43, 303–311.
Hamer, U., Marschner, B., Brodowski, S., Amelung, W., 2004. Interactive priming of black
carbon and glucose mineralisation. Org. Geochem. 35, 823–830.
Hoover, N.L., Kanwar, R., Soupir, M.L., Pederson, C., 2015. Effects of poultry manure
application on phosphorus in soil and tile drain water under a corn-soybean rotation.
Water Air Soil Pollut. 226, 1–12.
Hossain, M.K., Strezov, V., Chan, K.Y., Nelson, P.F., 2010. Agronomic properties of
wastewater sludge biochar and bioavailability of metals in production of cherry to-
mato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Chemosphere 78, 1167–1171.
Jeffery, S., Verheijen, F.G.A., van der Velde, M., Bastos, A.C.A., 2011. A quantitative
review of the effects of biochar application to soils on crop productivity using meta-
analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 144, 175–187.
Johnston, A.E., Poulton, P.R., Coleman, K., 2009. Soil organic matter: its importance in
sustainable agriculture and carbon dioxide fluxes. Adv. Agron. 101, 1–57.
Jones, D.L., Healey, J.R., 2010. Organic amendments for remediation: putting waste to
good use. Elements 6, 369–374.
Jones, D.L., Cross, P., Withers, P.J., DeLuca, T.H., Robinson, D.A., Quilliam, R.S., Harris,
I., Chadwick, D.R., Edwards-Jones, G., 2013. Nutrient stripping: the global disparity
between food security and soil nutrient stocks. J. Appl. Ecol. 50, 851–862.
Ketterings, Q.M., Bigham, J.M., Laperche, V., 2000. Changes in soil mineralogy and
texture caused by slash-and-burn fires in Sumatra, Indonesia. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 64,
1108–1117.
Klironomos, J.N., Kendrick, W.B., 1996. Palatability of microfungi to soil arthropods in
relation to the functioning of arbuscular mycorrhizae. Biol. Fertil. Soils 21, 43–52.
Krull, E.S., Skjemstad, J.O., Graetz, D., Grice, K., Cook, W., Parr, J.F., 2003. 13C-depleted
charcoal from C4 grasses and the role of occluded carbon in phytoliths. Org. Chem.
34, 1337–1352.
Kuzyakov, Y., 2010. Priming effects: interactions between living and dead organic matter.
36
Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37
Soil Biol. Biochem. 42, 1363–1371.
Laird, D.A., Brown, R.C., Amonette, J.E., Lehmann, J., 2009. Review of the pyrolysis
platform for co-producing bio-oil and biochar. Biofuel Bioprod. Biorefin. 3, 547–562.
Laird, D., Fleming, P., Wang, B., Horton, R., Karlen, D., 2010a. Biochar impact on nutrient
leaching from a Midwestern agricultural soil. Geoderma 158, 436–442.
Laird, D.A., Fleming, P., Davis, D.D., Horton, R., Wang, B., Karlen, D.L., 2010b. Impact of
biochar amendments on the quality of a typical midwestern agricultural soil.
Geoderma 158, 443–449.
Lal, R., 2006. Enhancing crop yields in the developing countries through restoration of
the soil organic carbon pool in agricultural lands. Land Degrad. Dev. 17, 197–209.
Lal, R., 2013. Food security in a changing climate. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. 13, 8–21.
Lampkin, N., 2002. Organic Farming. Old Pond, Ipswich.
Lehman, J., Guant, J., Rondon, M., 2006. Bio-char sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems-
a review. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 11, 403–427.
Lehmann, J., Joseph, S., 2009. Biochar for environmental management: an introduction.
In: Lehmann, J., Joseph, S. (Eds.), Biochar for Environmental Management: Science
and Technology. Earthscan, London, pp. 1–12.
Lehmann, J., Rondón, M.A., 2006. Bio-char soil management on highly weathered soils in
the humid tropics. In: Uphoff, N., Ball, A.S., Fernandes, E., Herren, H., Husson, O.,
Laing, M., Palm, C., Pretty, J., Sánchez, P., Sanginga, N., Thies, J. (Eds.), Biological
Approaches to Sustainable Soil Systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, pp.
517–530.
Lehmann, J., da Silva, J.P., 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: fertiliser, manure and charcoal amendments. Plant Soil 249, 343–357.
Liang, B., Lehmann, J., Solomon, D., Kinyangi, J., Grossman, J., O’neill, B., Skjemstad,
J.O., Thies, J., Luizao, F.J., Petersen, J., Neves, E.G., 2006. Black carbon increases
cation exchange capacity in soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 70, 1719–1730.
Lu, W., Ding, W., Zhang, J., Li, Y., Luo, J., Bolan, N., Xie, Z., 2014. Biochar suppressed the
decomposition of organic carbon in a cultivated sandy loam soil: a negative priming
effect. Soil Biol. Biochem. 76, 12–21.
Major, J., Steiner, C., Downie, A., Lehmann, J., 2009. Biochar effects on nutrient leaching.
In: Lehmann, J., Joseph, S. (Eds.), Biochar for Environmental Management: Science
and Technology. Earthscan, London; Sterling, VA, pp. 271–287.
Manqiang, L., Feng, H., Xiaoyun, C., Qianru, H., Jiaguo, J., Bin, Z., Huixin, L., 2009.
Organic amendments with reduced chemical fertilizer promote soil microbial de-
velopment and nutrient availability in a subtropical paddy field. The influence of
quantity, type and application time of organic amendments. Appl. Soil Ecol. 42,
166–175.
Matsubara, Y.I., Hasegawa, N., Fukui, H., 2002. Incidence of Fusarium root rot in as-
paragus seedlings infected with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus as affected by several
soil amendments. J. Jpn. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 71, 370–374.
Mohandas, S., Paramasivam, V., Sakthivel, N., 2008. Phosphorus and Zinc enriched or-
ganics for enhancing the yield of transplanted rice in New Cauvery Delta, Tamil
Nadu. J. Ecobiol. 23, 73–76.
Mukherjee, A., Zimmerman, A.R., 2013. Organic carbon and nutrient release from a range
of laboratory-produced biochars and biochar-soil mixtures. Geoderma 193, 122–130.
Murphy, B.W., 2015. Impact of soil organic matter on soil properties-a review with em-
phasis on Australian soils. Soil Res. 53, 605–635.
Nelson, D.W., Sommers, L.E., et al., 1996. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic
matter. In: 2nd ed. In: Page, A.L. (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, vol. 9. American
Society of Agronomy Inc., Madison, WI, USA, pp. 961–1010 Part 2.
Oelofse, M., Markussen, B., Knudsen, L., Schelde, K., Olesen, J., Jensen, L., Bruun, S.,
2015. Do soil organic carbon levels affect potential yields and nitrogen use effi-
ciency? An analysis of winter wheat and spring barley field trials. Eur. J. Agron. 66,
62–73.
Olsen, S.R., Cole, C.V., Watanabe, F.S., Dean, L.A., 1954. Estimation of Available
Phosphorus in Soils by Extraction with Sodium Bicarbonate. USDA. Circular/United
States Department of Agriculture, Washington no. 939.
Opala, P.A., Okalebo, J.R., Othieno, C.O., Kisinyo, P., 2010. Effect of organic and in-
organic phosphorus sources on maize yields in an acid soil in western Kenya. Nutr.
Cycl. Agroecosyst. 86, 317–329.
Pan, G., Smith, P., Pan, W., 2009. The role of soil organic matter in maintaining the
productivity and yield stability of cereals in China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 129,
344–348.
Park, B.B., Yanai, R.D., Sahm, J.M., Lee, D.K., Abrahamson, L.P., 2005. Wood ash effects
on plant and soil in a willow bioenergy plantation. Biomass Bioenergy 28, 355–365.
Pattanayak, S.K., Mishra, K.N., Jena, M.K., Nayak, R.K., 2001. Evaluation of green
manure crops fertilized with various phosphorus sources and their effect on sub-
sequent rice crop. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 49, 285–291.
Quilty, J., Cattle, S., 2011. Use and understanding of organic amendments in Australian
agriculture: a review. Soil Res. 49, 1–26.
Rasool, R., Kukal, S.S., Hira, G.S., 2008. Soil organic carbon and physical properties as
affected by long-term application of FYM and inorganic fertilizers in maize–wheat
system. Soil Tillage Res. 101, 31–36.
Rhoades, J.D., 1996. Salinity: electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids. In: Sparks,
D.L. (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3. Chemical Methods, 3rd ed. American
Society of Agronomy Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, pp.
417–435.
Riaz, M., Roohi, M., Arif, M.S., Hussain, Q., Yasmeen, T., Shahzad, T., Shahzad, S.M.,
Muhammad, H.F., Arif, M., Khalid, M., 2017. Corncob-derived biochar decelerates
mineralization of native and added organic matter (AOM) in organic matter depleted
alkaline soil. Geoderma 294, 19–28.
Richardson, A.E., Simpson, R.J., 2011. Soil microorganisms mediating phosphorus
availability. Plant Physiol. 156, 989–996.
Sarwar, G., Hussain, N., Mujeeb, F., Schmeisky, H., Hassan, G., 2003. Biocompost
M. Arif et al.
application for the improvement of soil characteristics and dry matter yield of Lolium
perenne (Grass). Asian J. Plant Sci. 2, 237–241.
Schulz, H., Glaser, B., 2012. Effects of biochar compared to organic and inorganic ferti-
lizers on soil quality and plant growth in a greenhouse experiment. J. Soil Sci. Plant
Nutr. 175, 410–422.
Selvakumari, G., Baskar, M., Jayanthi, D., Mathan, K.K., 2000. Effect of integration of fly
ash with fertilizers and organic manures on nutrient availability, yield and nutrient
uptake of rice in alfisols. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 48, 268–278.
Shah, Z., Khan, A.A., 2003. Evaluation of crop residues for potentially available nitrogen
in soils. Sarhad J. Agric. 19, 81–92.
Shen, Q., Hedley, M., Arbestain, M.C., Kirschbaum, M.U.F., 2016. Can biochar increase
the bioavailability of phosphorus? J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 16, 268–286.
Shenoy, V.V., Kalagudi, G.M., 2005. Enhancing plant phosphorus use efficiency for sus-
tainable cropping. Biotechnol. Adv. 23, 501–513.
Simpson, R.J., Oberson, A., Culvenor, R.A., Ryan, M.H., Veneklaas, E.J., Lambers, H.,
Lynch, J.P., Ryan, P.R., Delhaize, E., Smith, F., Smith, S.E., Harvey, P.R., Richardson,
A.E., 2011. Strategies and agronomic interventions to improve the phosphorus-use
efficiency of farming systems. Plant Soil 349, 89–120.
Singh, B., Singh, B.P., Cowie, A.L., 2010. Characterisation and evaluation of biochars for
their application as a soil amendment. Soil Res. 48, 516–525.
Smernik, R., 2009. Biochar and sorption of organic compounds. In: Lehmann, J., Joseph,
S. (Eds.), Biochar for Environmental Management: Science and Technology.
Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 289–296.
Sohi, S., Lopez-Capel, E., Krull, E., Bol, R., 2009. Biochar, climate change and soil: a
review to guide future research. CSIRO Land and Water Science Report 5. pp. 17–31.
Solaiman, Z.M., Blackwell, P., Abbott, L.K., Storer, P., 2010. Direct and residual effect of
biochar application on mycorrhizal root colonization: growth and nutrition of wheat.
Soil Res. 48, 546–554.
Soltanpour, P.N., Schwab, A.P., 1977. A new soil test for simultaneous extraction of
macro- and micro-nutrients in alkaline soils. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 8,
195–207.
Spokas, K.A., Cantrell, K.B., Novak, J.M., Archer, D.W., Ippolito, J.A., Collins, H.P.,
Boateng, A.A., Lima, I.M., Lamb, M.C., McAloon, A.J., Lentz, R.D., 2012. Biochar: a
synthesis of its agronomic impact beyond carbon sequestration. J. Environ. Qual. 41,
973–989.
Steiner, C., Teixeira, W.G., Lehmann, J., Nehls, T., de Macedo, J.L.V., Blum, W.E.H., 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
Soil 291, 275–290.
Steiner, C., Glaser, B., Geraldes Teixeira, W., Lehmann, J., Blum, W.E., Zech, W., 2008.
Nitrogen retention and plant uptake on a highly weathered central Amazonian fer-
ralsol amended with compost and charcoal. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 171, 893–899.
Su, Y.-Z., Wang, F., Suo, D.-R., Zhang, Z.-H., Du, M.-W., 2006. Long-term effect of ferti-
lizer and manure application on soil-carbon sequestration and soil fertility under the
wheat–wheat–maize cropping system in northwest China. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst.
37
Field Crops Research 214 (2017) 25–37
75, 285–295.
Subbiah, B.V., Asija, G.L., 1956. A rapid procedure for the determination of available
nitrogen in soils. Curr. Sci. 31 196–196.
Syers, K., Bekunda, M., Cordell, D., Corman, J., Johnston, J., Rosemarin, A., Salecedo, I.,
2011. UNEP Year Book. P and Food Production. Available at http://www.unep.org/
yearbook/2011/pdfs/P_and_food_productioin.pdf. (Accessed 21 March 2017).
Uzoma, K.C., Inoue, M., Andry, H., Fujimaki, H., Zahoor, A., Nishihara, E., 2011. Effect of
cow manure biochar on maize productivity under sandy soil condition. Soil Use
Manag. 27, 205–212.
Vagen, T.-G., Lal, R., Singh, B.R., 2005. Soil carbon sequestration in sub-Saharan Africa: a
review. Land Degrad. Dev. 16, 53–71.
Verheijen, F.G.A., Jeffery, S., Bastos, A.C., van der Velde, M., 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.
Wallstedt, A., Coughlan, A., Munson, A.D., Nilsson, M.C., Margolis, H.A., 2002.
Mechanisms of interaction between Kalmia angustifolia cover and Picea mariana
seedlings. Can. J. For. Res. 32, 2022–2031.
Wang, J., Zhang, M., Xiong, Z., Liu, P., Pan, G., 2011. Effects of biochar addition on N2O
and CO2 emissions from two paddy soils. Biol. Fertil. Soils 47, 887–896.
Wang, T., Camps Arbestain, M., Hedley, M., Bishop, P., 2012. Predicting phosphorus
bioavailability from high-ash biochars. Plant Soil 357, 173–187.
Wardle, D.A., Nilsson, M.C., Zackrisson, O., 2008. Fire-derived charcoal causes loss of
forest humus. Science 320, 629.
Warnock, D.D., Lehmann, J., Kuyper, T.W., Rillig, M.C., 2007. Mycorrhizal responses to
biochar in soil - concepts and mechanisms. Plant Soil 300, 9–20.
Widowati, W., Asnah, A., 2014. Biochar effect on potassium fertilizer and leaching po-
tassium dosage for two corn planting seasons. Agrivita 36, 65–71.
Wolf, B., 1982. A comprehensive systems of leaf analysis and its use for diagnosing crop
nutrients status. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 13, 1035–1059.
Woolf, D., Lehmann, J., 2012. Modelling the long-term response to positive and negative
priming of soil organic carbon by black carbon. Biogeochemistry 111, 83–95.
Yeboah, E., Asamoah, G., Kofi, B., Abunyewa, A.A., 2016. Effect of biochar type and rate
of application on maize yield indices and water use efficiency on an Ultisol in Ghana.
Energy Procedia 93, 14–18.
Zafar, M., Abbasi, M.K., Khaliq, A., 2013. Effect of different phosphorus sources on the
growth, yield, energy content and phosphorus utilization efficiency in maize at
Rawalakot Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Pak. J. Plant Nutr. 36, 1915–1934.
Zhang, A., Cui, L., Pan, G., Li, L., Hussain, Q., Zhang, X., Zhen, J., Crowley, D., 2010.
Effects of biochar amendment on yield and methane and nitrous oxide emissions from
a rice paddy from Tai Lake plain, China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 139, 469–475.
Zhang, D., Pan, G., Wu, G., Kibue, G.W., Li, L., Zhang, X., Zheng, J., Cheng, K., Joseph, S.,
Liu, X., 2016. Biochar helps enhance maize productivity and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions under balanced fertilization in a rainfed low fertility inceptisol.
Chemosphere 142, 106–113.