Interactive effects of biochar and polyacrylamide on decomposition of maize rhizodeposits: implications from 14C labeling and microbial metabolic quotient
- 407 Downloads
The applications of biochar (BC) and polyacrylamide (PAM) may have interactive effects on carbon (C) dynamics and sequestration for improving the soil quality and achieving sustainable agriculture. Relative to BC and PAM, rhizodeposits act as C and energy source for microorganisms and may change the mineralization dynamics of soil organic matter (SOM). No attempt has been made to assess the effects of BC, anionic PAM, or their combination on the decomposition of different aged 14C-labeled rhizodeposits. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of the treatments mentioned above on the decomposition of different aged 14C-labeled maize rhizodeposits.
Materials and methods
biochar (BC) at 10 Mg ha−1 or anionic PAM at 80 kg ha−1 or their combination (BC + PAM) was applied to soils with/without 2-, 4-, 8-, and 16-day-aged 14C-labeled maize rhizodeposits. After that, the soil was incubated at 22 °C for 46 days.
Results and discussion
After 2 days of incubation, the total CO2 efflux rates from the soil with rhizodeposits were 1.4–1.8 times higher than those from the soil without rhizodeposits. The cumulative 14CO2 efflux (32 % of the 14C input) was maximal for the soil containing 2-day-aged 14C-labeled rhizodeposits. Consequently, 2-day-aged rhizodeposits were more easily and rapidly decomposed than the older rhizodeposits. However, no differences in the total respired 14CO2 from rhizodeposits were observed at the end of the incubation. Incorporation of 14C into microbial biomass and 66–85 % of the 14C input remained in the soil after 46 days indicated that neither the age of 14C-labeled rhizodeposits nor BC, PAM, or BC + PAM changed microbial utilization of rhizodeposits.
Applying BC or BC + PAM to soil exerted only minor effects on the decomposition of rhizodeposits. The contribution of rhizodeposits to CO2 efflux from soil and MBC depends on their age as young rhizodeposits contain more labile C, which is easily available for microbial uptake and utilization.
KeywordsBiochar Decomposition of rhizodeposits Soil organic matter Polyacrylamide Responsible editor: Yu Luo
This work was carried out with the support of the “Cooperative Research Program for Agricultural Science and Technology Development (Project No. PJ010182042014),” Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea. This study was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2012R1A1B3001409).
- Farrar JF, Jones DL (2003) The control of carbon acquisition by and growth of roots. In Root ecology, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Chap. 4, pp. 91–124Google Scholar
- Kramer S, Marhan S, Ruess L, Armbruster W, Butenschoen O, Haslwimmer H, Kuzyakov Y, Pausch J, Scheunemann N, Schoene J, Schmalwasser A, Totsche KU, Walker F, Scheu S, Kandeler E (2012) Carbon flow into microbial and fungal biomass as basis for the belowground food web of agroecosystems. Pedobiologia 55:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kumar R, Pandey S, Pandey A (2006) Plant roots and carbon sequestration. Curr Sci 91:885–890Google Scholar
- Kuzyakov Y, Cheng W (2004) Root effects on soil organic matter decomposition. In: Zobel RW, Wright SF (eds) Root and soil management: interactions between roots and the soil, Agronomy Monograph No. 48, pp. 119–143Google Scholar
- Marschner P, Rengel Z (2007) Nutrient cycling in terrestrial ecosystems (Vol. 10). Springer Science & Business MediaGoogle Scholar
- SAS (2004) SAS/STAT user’s guide, Release 9.1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
- Zang H, Yang X, Feng X, Qian X, Hu Y, Ren C, Zeng Z (2015). Rhizodeposition of Nitrogen and Carbon by Mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) and Its Contribution to Intercropped Oats (Avena nuda L.). PLOS ONE 10(3):e0121132. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121132
- Zibilske LM (1994) Carbon mineralization. In: Weaver RW, Angle S, Bottomley P, Bezdicek D, Smith S, Tabatabai A, Wollum A (eds) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Microbiological and Biochemical Properties. Soil Science Society of America Book Series, vol. 5, Soil Sci Soc Am, Inc, Madison, pp 835–864Google Scholar