Biochar but not humic acid product amendment affected maize yields via improving plant-soil moisture relations
- 1.5k Downloads
Biochar (BC) and humic acid product (HAP) soil amendments may improve plant performance under water-limited conditions. Our aim was to investigate if BC and HAP amendments, alone or in combination, will have positive and synergistic effects.
A three-factorial fully randomized study was carried out in the greenhouse for 66 days, including the factors ‘BC’, ‘HAP’ and ‘water regime’. Maize (Zea mays var. ‘Amadeo’ DKC-3399) was grown in pots (6 kg sandy soil pot−1) amended with/without BC (0, 1.5 and 3 %; w/w) and with/without HAP (0 or an equivalent of 8 kg ha−1). Two water regimes, limited and frequent (H2O limit , H2O frequ ), were applied after day 28 following seedling establishment at 60 % water holding capacity (WHC). In the H2O limit treatment, the soil water content was allowed to drop until wilting symptoms became visible (25–30 % WHC) while in H2O frequ the WHC was brought to 60 % of the maximum on a daily basis
BC but not HAP, added alone or in combination with BC, significantly increased the biomass yield and the water and N use efficiency of plants at both water regimes. The BC-mediated relative increase in the yield was equal with both watering regimes, refuting initial hypotheses. BC had generally a stimulating effect on water relations and photosynthesis, it increased the relative water content and the leaf osmotic potential, decreased the stomatal resistance and stimulated the leaf gas exchange (transpiration). Both, BC and pure HAP addition, stimulated photosynthesis by increasing the electron transport rate (ETR) of photosystem II (PSII) and of the ratio between effective photochemical quantum yield to non-photochemical quenching (Y(II)/Y(NPQ), revealing reduced heat dissipation.
Biochar use in poor sandy soils can improve plant growth by improving soil-plant water relations and photosynthesis under both H2O frequ and H2O limit conditions. HAP loading, however, did not improve the effect of biochar or vice versa.
KeywordsBiochar Eco-physiology Photosynthesis Humic acid products Maize Sandy soil Water holding capacity Water stress Osmotic potential
We thank the technical staff at the Department of Plant Ecology for assistance during the experimental analysis. This work was supported by the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan with an administrative collaboration with DAAD (The German Academic Exchange Service). C. Kammann gratefully acknowledges the financial support of DFG grant KA- 3442/1-1.
- Bot A, Benites J (2005) The importance of soil organic matter: key to drought-resistant soil and sustained food production. FAO Soils Bull 80:94Google Scholar
- Brecht N (2012) Wasserverfugbarkeit fur Pflanzen in Boden mit und ohne Biochar. Thesis, Justus-Liebig Univesity Giessen, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- Cornic G (1994) Drought stress and high light effects on leaf photosynthesis. In: Baker NR, Bowyer JR (eds) Photoinhibition of photosynthesis from molecular mechanisms to the field. Bios Scientific Publishers, Oxford, pp 297–311Google Scholar
- Drozd J, Gonet SS, Senesi N, Weber J (1997) The Role of humus substances in ecosystems and environment protection. PTSH-Polish Society of Humic Substances, Polish Chapter of the International Humic Substances Society, WroclawGoogle Scholar
- FAO (2008) Climate change. In: Water and food security. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
- Flexas J, Ribas-Carbó M, Bota J, Galmés J, Henkle M, Martínez-Cañellas S, Medrano H (2006) Decreased Rubisco activity during water stress is not induced by decreased relative water content but related to conditions of low stomatal conductance and chloroplast CO2 concentration. New Phytol 172:73–82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Keeney DR, Nelson DW (1982) Nitrogen inorganic forms. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties. SSSA, Madison, pp 643–693Google Scholar
- Lawlor DW (1995) Effects of water deficit on photosynthesis. In: Smirnoff N (ed) Environment and plant metabolism. Bios Scientific Publishers Ltd., Oxford, pp 129–160Google Scholar
- 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 1–12Google Scholar
- Major J, Steiner C, Downie A, Lehmann J (2009) Biochar effects on nutrient leaching. In: Lehmann J, Joseph S (eds) Biochar for environmental management. Earthscan, London, pp 271–287Google Scholar
- Novak JM, Lima I, Gaskin JW et al (2009) Characterization of designer biochar produced at different temperatures and their effects on a loamy sand. Ann Environ Sci 3:195–206Google Scholar
- Pfundel E (2007) Operations of junior PAM In: Heinz Walz Gmbh (ed) Junior-PAM chlorophyll Fluorometer operator’s guide. pp 17–42Google Scholar
- Prendergast-Miller MT, Duvall M, Sohi SP (2011) Localisation of nitrate in the rhizosphere of biochar-amended soils. Soil Biol Biochem 43:2243–2246Google Scholar
- Schnitzer M (2000) A lifetime perspective on the chemistry of soil organic matter. Adv Agron 68:3–58Google Scholar
- Schreiber U, Bilger W, Neubauer C (1994) Chlorophyll fluorescence as a nonintrusive indicator for rapid assessment of in vivo photosynthesis. In: Schulze ED, Caldwell MM (eds) Ecophysiology of photosynthesis. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 49–70Google Scholar
- Smernik RJ (2009) Biochar and sorption of organic compounds. In: Lehmann J, Joseph S (eds) Biochar for environmental management: science and technology. Earthscan, London, p 289Google Scholar
- Spokas KA, Reicosky DC (2009) Impact of sixteen different biochars on soil greenhouse gas production. Ann Environ Sci 3:179–193Google Scholar
- Sukartono UWH, Kusuma Z, 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. J Trop Agric 49:47–52Google Scholar
- Utomo RN (2013) Der Einfluss unterschiedlicher Biokohle-Produkte auf die Porengrößenverteilung eines sandigen Bodens. Bach. Thesis, Technical University of Central Hesse, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- Uzoma KC, Inoue M, Andry H, Zahoor A, Nishihara E (2011b) Influence of biochar application on sandy soil hydraulic properties and nutrient retention. J Food Agric Environ 9:1137–1143Google Scholar
- Zhang X, Ervin EH, Evanylo G, Sherony C, Peot C (2005) Biosolids impact on tall fescue drought resistance. J Residuals Sci Technol 2:173–180Google Scholar