Investigation of post‐amendment biochar impact on low clay soil moisture provides agriculture professionals with much needed data. While laboratory testing is available, we propose inexpensive containers, tools and measuring devices to enable agriculture professionals to directly assess biochar impact on gravimetric water content, shrinkage, and release at point of soil rupture. Sandy loam, silty loam and loamy sand soils are amended (10% ) with lignocellulosic (oak) and hemicellulosic (cardboard) biochars in cup, plug and roll experiments. Cups with oak and cardboard biochar addition produced 76.32% and 75.72% H2O retention respectively, compared to 67.75% (67.75 g H2O 100 g−1 H2O) for controls. Cardboard and oak biochar limited diametric shrinkage to 2.95% (1.29 mm) and 3.75% (1.65 mm) respectively; controls shrunk 6.96% (3.06 mm). Oak and cardboard biochar limited depth shrinkage to 2.95% (0.38 mm) and 2.99% (0.38 mm) respectively; control depth shrinkage is 3.64% (0.47 mm). In roll tests, cardboard and oak biochar treatment yielded 28.07% (1.37 g H2O), and 26.69% (1.3 g H2O) moisture at rupture, respectively, compared with 11.98% (0.58 g) for controls. Significant (p ≤ 0.001) differences in moisture retention, shrinkage and available moisture at rupture confirm biochar contributions to improved moisture performance. Physico‐chemical analyses complemented experimental findings. We find study methods suit the needs of agricultural professionals to measure moisture while working with biochar to amend soils.
Climate change and land management are altering forest fire frequency and intensity worldwide. In some Northeast U.S. forests, pitch pine (Pinus rigida Miller) is not suffering from presence but rather a lack of wildfire events. In their absence, prescribed fire is being used to diminish fuel loads, open canopies and reduce competition. Pyrogenic carbon (PyC) produced by the fires may also improve soil moisture retention and plant physiological processes. Where the application of prescribed fire is not feasible due to nearby human populations, we reason prescribed fire PyC could be replaced by anthropogenic PyC product to provide similar soil benefits. We tested this hypothesis with pitch pine seedlings at a site absent overstory planted in submerged tree pots with control and PyC-imbued soils. Investigators found anthropogenic and forest PyC fostered similar growth, soil moisture retention and photosynthetic intrinsic water use efficiency, both significantly higher than unamended soils. We conclude anthropogenic subsurface PyC soil amendment provides a conservation management tool for enhancing benefits in ecosystems where prescribed fire is not a viable option in northerly forests in the U.S.
Indigenous species in coastal barren communities are subject to anthropogenic and environmental pressures; some species are in decline, and there is uncertainty about their long-term survival. The authors added supplemental soil carbon in the form of red oak biochar to calcined clay (1:9) to determine the effect of this treatment on survival of legume (Lupinus perennis and Baptisia tinctoria) and non-legume (Vaccinium angustifolium and Quercus ilicifolia) species during a period spanning two and a half seasons of unirrigated pot tests. Red oak biochar used in the experiment was produced from pyrolysis, the thermochemical devolitization and carbonization of the starting biomass. Biochar significantly affected the survival rates of all species (P=<.03). Biochartreated non-legumes had higher survival rates (P=<.10) than similarly treated legumes. Future investigations of biochars, particularly those evolved from recycled lignocellulosic wastes, associated with survival, should focus on reversal of habitat loss.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.