4.7 Article

The effect of biochar feedstock, pyrolysis temperature, and application rate on the reduction of ammonia volatilisation from biochar-amended soil

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 627, 期 -, 页码 942-950

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.312

关键词

Biochar; Ammonia volatilisation; pH; Pyrolysis temperature; Bacteria; Nitrosomonodaceae

资金

  1. Department of Education and Training, Government of Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ammonia (NH3) volatilisation is one of the most important causes of nitrogen (N) loss in soil-plant systems worldwide. Carbon-based amendments such as biochar have been shown to mitigate NH3 volatilisation in agricultural soils to various degrees. In this study, we investigated the influence of biochar feedstocks (poultry manure, green waste compost, and wheat straw), pyrolysis temperatures (250, 350, 450, 500 and 700 degrees C) and application rates (1 and 2%), on NH3 volatilisation from a calcareous soil. The 15 biochars were chemically characterized, and a laboratory incubation study was conducted to assess NH3 volatilisation from the soil over a period of four weeks. Furthermore, changes to the bacterial and fungal communities were assessed via sequencing of phylogenetic marker genes. The study showed that biochar feedstock sources, pyrolysis temperature, and application rates all affected NH3 volatilisation. Overall, low pyrolysis temperature biochars and higher biochar application rates achieved greater reductions in NH3 volatilisation. A feedstock related effect was also observed, with poultry manure biochar reducing NH3 volatilisation by an average of 53% in comparison to 38% and 35% reductions for biochar from green waste compost and wheat straw respectively. Results indicate that the biogeochemistry underlying biochar-mediated reduction in NH3 volatilisation is complex and caused by changes in soil pH, NH3 sorption and microbial community composition (especially ammonia oxidising guilds). (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据