Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 177–190 | Cite as

Acidity, water retention, and mechanical physical quality of a strongly acidic Ultisol amended with biochars derived from different feedstocks

  • Yutong Zong
  • Qing Xiao
  • Shenggao Lu
Soils, Sec 3 • Remediation and Management of Contaminated or Degraded Lands • Research Article



Strongly acidic Ultisols in tropical and subtropical regions of China present one of the most important degraded soils. The improvement of soil quality for these soils is a key goal for sustainable agriculture. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the beneficial effects of biochar amendments on the soil acidity, plant available nutrient contents, and physical properties of a strongly acidic Ultisol.

Materials and methods

A Typic Plinthudult with low soil fertility and poor physical properties was amended by three biochars made from straw (SB), woodchips (WCB), and wastewater sludge (WSB) at the rate of 0, 2, 4, and 6 % biochar, respectively. After 180 days of incubation, the chemical, nutrient contents, water retention, consistency, tensile strength, and shear strength of biochar-amended soils were determined.

Results and discussion

Experimental results indicate that biochars significantly (p < 0.05) increase the pH of the soil and decrease the contents of exchangeable H+ and Al3+. The WCB treatment results in higher pH values than the SB and WSB treatments. The biochars significantly increase total C, available P, K, and exchangeable K, Ca, and Mg contents. Biochar applications significantly enhance water-holding capacity of soil, while not increasing the available water content (AWC) of the soil. Biochar application significantly (p < 0.05) increases the liquid limit (LL) and plastic index (PI) of the soil. The effectiveness of biochar on LL and PL is more pronounced in the SB-amended soils. With application of biochar, the tensile strength (TS) of Ultisol decreases from original 466 kPa to 233, 164, and 175 kPa for 6 % WCB-, SB-, and WSB-amended soils, respectively. Direct shear tests indicate WCB significantly reduces the cohesion (c) of the soils, while biochars do not alter the internal friction angle (φ) of soil. Analyses of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) coupled with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) reveal that soil mineral particles are inserted inside the pores of biochar and attached on the surface of biochar, indicating that biochar greatly changes the microstructure and pore system of soil.


It is suggested that biochar amendment generally improves the quality of degraded Ultisols with strong acidity, low fertility, and poor physical properties. The physical dilution effect and microstructure change caused by the porous and less dense biochar are identified to be the main mechanism for the biochar to improve the physical properties of strongly acidic Ultisols.


Acidity Biochar Mechanical strength Soil consistency Ultisol Water retention capacity 



This work was supported by the National Key Basic Research Support Foundation of China (973) (2011CB100502) and Science and Technology Department of Zhejiang Province (2014C32037).


  1. Abel S, Peters A, Trinks S, Schonsky H, Facklam M, Wessolek G (2013) Impact of biochar and hydrochar addition on water retention and water repellency of sandy soil. Geoderma 202–203:183–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asai H, Samson BK, Stephan HM, Songyikhangsuthor K, Inoue Y, Shiraiwa T, Horie T (2009) Biochar amendment techniques for upland rice production in Northern Laos: soil physical properties, leaf SPAD and grain yield. Field Crops Res 111:81–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson CJ, Fitzgerald JD, Hipps NA (2010) Potential mechanisms for achieving agricultural benefits from biochar application to temperate soils: a review. Plant Soil 337:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Briggs C, Breiner J, Graham R (2012) Physical and chemical properties of Pinus ponderosa charcoal: implications for soil modification. Soil Sci 177:263–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Busscher WJ, Novak JM, Evans DE, Watts DW, Niandou MAS, Ahmedna M (2010) Influence of pecan biochar on physical properties of a Norfolk loamy sand. Soil Sci 175:10–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gee GW, Bauder JW (1986) Particle-size analysis. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis, vol 9, Agronomy Monograph. ASA and SSSA, Madison, USA, pp 383–411Google Scholar
  7. Glaser B, Lehmann J, Zech W (2002) Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of highly weathered soils in the tropics with charcoal—a review. Biol Fert Soils 35:219–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. He YQ, Sun B (2008) Evolution and regulation of red soil quality (in Chinese). Science Press, Beijing, p 375Google Scholar
  9. Herath HMSK, Camps-Arbestain M, Hedley M (2013) Effect of biochar on soil physical properties in two contrasting soils: an Alfisol and an Andisol. Geoderma 209–210:188–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hseu ZY, Jien SH, Chien WH, Liou RC (2014) Impacts of biochar on physical properties and erosion potential of a mudstone slopeland soil. The Scientific World Journal ID 602197, 10.1155/2014/602197
  11. Imhoff S, da Silva AP, Dexter A (2002) Factors contributing to the tensile strength and friability of Oxisols. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:1656–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jien SH, Wang CS (2013) Effects of biochar on soil properties and erosion potential in a highly weathered soil. Catena 110:225–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Laird DA, Fleming P, Davis DD, Horton R, Wang B, Karlen DL (2010) Impact of biochar amendments on the quality of a typical Midwestern agricultural soil. Geoderma 158:443–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lal R, Shukla MR (2004) Principles of soil physics. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Lehmann J, da Silva JP, Steiner C, Nehls T, Zech W, Glaser B (2003) Nutrient availability and leaching in an archaeological Anthrosol and a Ferralsol of the Central Amazon basin: fertilizer, manure and charcoal amendments. Plant Soil 249:343–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lei O, Zhang R (2013) Effects of biochars derived from different feedstocks and pyrolysis temperatures on soil physical and hydraulic properties. J Soils Sediments 13:1561–1572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lu SG, Sun FF, Zong YT (2014) Effect of rice husk biochar and coal fly ash on some physical properties of expansive clayey soil (Vertisol). Catena 114:37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Manyà JJ (2012) Pyrolysis for biochar purposes: a review to establish current knowledge gaps and research needs. Environ Sci Technol 46:7939–7954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mukome FN, Zhang X, Silva LC, Six J, Parikh SJ (2013) Use of chemical and physical characteristics to investigate trends in biochar feedstocks. J Agri Food Chem 61:2196–2204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Munkholm LJ, Schjønning P, Kay BD (2002) Tensile strength of soil cores in relation to aggregate strength, soil fragmentation and pore characteristics. Soil Till Res 64:125–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1982) Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In: Page AL, Klute A (eds) Methods of soil analysis: part 2. Chemical and microbiological methods, agronomy monograph, vol 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison, pp pp. 539–pp. 579Google Scholar
  22. Novak JM, Busscher WJ, Laird DL, Ahmedna M, Watts DW, Niandou MAS (2009) Impact of biochar amendment on fertility of a southeastern coastal plain soil. Soil Sci 174:105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Novak JM, Busscher WJ, Watts DW, Amonette JE, Ippolito JA, Lima IM, Gaskin J, Das KC, Steiner C, Ahmedna M, Rehrah D, Schomberg H (2012) Biochars impact on soil-moisture storage in an Ultisol and two Aridisols. Soil Sci 177:310–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Soil Survey Staff (2010) Keys to soil taxonomy (11th ed.). USDA-NRCS, Washington, DC, p 336Google Scholar
  25. State Standard of the People’s Republic of China (SSPRC) (1999) Standard for Soil Test Method (GB/T50123-1999) (in Chinese). People’s Republic of China Ministry of Construction, pp 41–46, 107–114Google Scholar
  26. Steiner C, Teixeira WG, Lehmann J, Nehls T, Vasconcelos de Macêdo JL, Blum WEH, 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 291:275–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Steiner C, Glaser B, Teixeira WG, Lehmann J, Blum WEH, Zech W (2008) Nitrogen retention and plant uptake on a highly weathered central Amazonian Ferraisol amended with compost and charcoal. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 171:893–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Streubel JD, Collins HP, Garcia-Perez M, Tarara J, Granatstein D, Kruger CE (2011) Influence of contrasting biochar types on five soils at increasing rates of application. Soil Sci Soc Am J 75:1402–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Thomas GW (1982) Exchangeable cation. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis: part 2. Chemical and microbiological methods, vol 9, Agronomy Monograph. ASA and SSSA, Madison, pp 159–165Google Scholar
  30. Uzoma KC, 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 Manage 27:205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Xu RK, Zhao AZ, Yuan JH, Jiang J (2012) pH buffering capacity of acid soils from tropical and subtropical regions of China as influenced by incorporation of crop straw biochars. J Soils Sediments 12:494–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yuan JH, Xu RK (2011) The amelioration effects of low temperature biochar generated from nine crop residues on an acidic Ultisol. Soil Use Manage 27:110–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yuan JH, Xu RK, Qian W, Wang RH (2011) Comparison of the ameliorating effects on an acidic Ultisol between four crop straws and their biochars. J Soils Sediments 11:741–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang GL, Gong ZT (2012) Soil survey laboratory methods (in Chinese). Science Press, Beijing, pp 58–60Google Scholar
  35. Zhejiang Province Soil Survey Office (1994) Soils of Zhejiang Province (in Chinese). Zhejiang Science & Technology Press, Hangzhou, pp 103–128Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Environmental and Resource ScienceZhejiang UniversityHangzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations