Phosphorus availability in soil amended with biochar from rice rusk and cattle manure and cultivated with common bean

Torres, William Gleidson Alves; Colen, Fernando; Pandey, Sugandha Dogra; Frazão, Leidivan Almeida; Sampaio, Regynaldo Arruda; Fernandes, Luiz Arnaldo

doi:10.1590/1413-7054202044014620

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Agricultural Sciences • Ciênc. agrotec. 44 • 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-7054202044014620 copy

Phosphorus availability in soil amended with biochar from rice rusk and cattle manure and cultivated with common bean

Disponibilidade de fósforo em solos adubados com biochar de casca de arroz e de esterco bovino e cultivado com feijoeiro

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

The soils of the Brazilian Savanna are generally acidic and have low availability of nutrients, so the use of alternative inputs to improve their fertility should be investigated. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the potential of biochars from rice husk (BHR) and from bovine manure (BCM) in increasing phosphorus availability and their effects on soil chemical properties and in common beans plants. The experiments were carried out in a completely randomized design, in a 4x2+3 factorial scheme with four replicates. The treatments were four biochar doses (1, 2, 3 and 4% m/v), two biochars (BRH and BCM) and three additional treatments (C1, no liming and no fertilization; C2, addition of Ca and Mg carbonate and NPK fertilizers and; C3, addition of Ca and Mg silicate and NK fertilizers). In the highest doses of BRH there was an increase of 2.7, 5.3 and 2.5 times in the P content extracted by Mehlich 1 and quantified by colorimentria, by Mehlich 1 and quantified by spectroscopy and by ion exchange resin and quantified by spectroscopy, respectively. For the highest doses of BCM, the increases in P content were 51.3, 289.2 and 88.4 times greater than in C1, respectively, according to the methods described for BRH. The biochars increased soil pH, CEC, nutrient content and the growth of bean plants compared to C1, especially BCM. However, the production of dry matter was significantly lower than that obtained in C2.

Index terms:
Soil fertility; pyrolysis; Phaseolus vulgaris L.; silicon

Editora da Universidade Federal de Lavras Editora da UFLA, Caixa Postal 3037 - 37200-900 - Lavras - MG - Brasil, Telefone: 35 3829-1115 - Lavras - MG - Brazil
E-mail: revista.ca.editora@ufla.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] ^*Corresponding author: luizmcmg@gmail.com

Biochars								Additional treatments*
Biochar from cattle manure				Biochar from rice husk
Doses (% m/v)				Doses (% m/v)
1	2	3	4	1	2	3	4	C1	C2	C3

Attribute	Biochar characterization		Biochar and nutrient and trace elements added to the soil
	BRH	BCM	BRH doses (% m/v)				BCM doses (%m/v)
	BRH	BCM	1	2	3	4	1	2	3	4
pH	7.3	9.8	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Elec. Conduc. (mS cm^-1)	178	411	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Density (g dm^-3)	0.56	0.54	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Ashes (%)	24.5	36.2	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Volatile comp. (%)	65.4	43.5	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Fix carbon (%)	6.2	12.7	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Biochar (g dm^-3)	-	-	10	20	30	40	10	20	30	40
Total C (g dm^-3)	91.84	167.9	1.64	3.28	4.92	6.56	3.11	6.22	9.33	12.44
Total N (g dm^-3)	1.96	6.43	0.04	0.07	0.10	0.14	0.12	0.24	0.36	0.48
P (g dm^-3)	14.17	32.67	0.25	0.51	0.76	1.01	0.61	1.21	1.82	2.42
K (g dm^-3)	1.90	5.40	0.03	0.07	0.10	0.14	0.10	0.20	0.30	0.40
Ca (g dm^-3)	12.10	19.33	0.22	0.43	0.65	0.86	0.36	0.72	1.07	1.43
Mg (g dm^-3)	18.14	23.22	0.32	0.65	0.97	1.30	0.43	0.86	1.29	1.72
Na (g dm^-3)	<0.01	1.08	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01	0.02	0.04	0.06	0.08
S (g dm^-3)	0.32	0.70	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.02	0.01	0.03	0.04	0.05
Fe (mg dm^-3)	7.22	375.3	0.13	0.26	0.39	0.52	6.9	13.9	20.8	27.8
Zn (mg dm^-3)	21.50	100.4	0.38	0.77	1.15	1.54	1.86	3.72	5.58	7.44
Mn (mg dm^-3)	44.91	82.08	0.80	1.60	2.41	3.21	1.52	3.04	4.56	6.08
Cu (mg dm^-3)	9.63	15.28	0.17	0.34	0.52	0.69	0.28	0.57	0.85	1.13
B (mg dm^-3)	2.24	6.64	0.04	0.08	0.12	0.16	0.12	0.25	0.37	0.49
Ni (mg dm^-3)	21.28	0.30	0.38	0.76	1.14	1.52	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.02
Cd (mg dm^-3)	0.15	0.33	<0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.02
Pb (mg dm^-3)	0.16	0.42	<0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.02	0.03

Attribute	C1	C2	C3	Biochar from rice husk					Biochar from cattle manure
				1	2	3	4	Mean	1	2	3	4	Mean
TC g kg^-1	10.32a	10.62b	10.12c	10.20abc	11.91	14.22	17.90	13.57A	11.12	15.11	15.12	17.60	14.74A
				$y = 7.21 + 2.542 * * x R^{2} = 0.97$					$y = 9.99 + 2.021 * * x R^{2} = 0.90$
pH - water	4.90a	5.50b	5.21c	5.00a	5.05a	5.25c	5.55b	5.21B	5.80	6.41	7.03	7.51	6.69A
				$y = 4.75 + 0.185 * * x R^{2} = 0.92$					$y = 5.25 + 0.575 * * x R^{2} = 0.99$
Al cmolc dm^-3	0.47a	0.01b	0.07c	0.22	0.30	0.22	0.20	0.24A	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00B
				$y = 0.24$					$y = 0.0$
P Mehl.C mg dm^-3	0.69a	14.31b	0.53c	0.89	1.10	1.33	1.87	1.30B	10.59	21.11	156.25	177.5	91.36A
				$y = 0.51 + 0.317 * * x R^{2} = 0.94$					$y = - 67.21 + 63.587 * * x R^{2} = 0.87$
P Mehl. E mg dm^-3	0.33	20.92	0.36	0.73	0.92	1.41	1.75	1.20B	15.75	30.52	67.6	98.42	53.07A
				$y = 0.32 + 0.355 * * x R^{2} = 0.98$					$y = - 18.2 + 28.509 * * x R^{2} = 0.98$
P Res. E mg dm^-3	1.60	26.01	3.00	2.4	2.6	3.2	4.1	3.08B	12.08	27.40a	81.44	142.23	65.79A
				$y = 1.65 + 0.57 * * x R^{2} = 0.93$					$y = - 45.34 + 44.449 * * x R^{2} = 0.96$
Si mg dm^-3	1.08	1.02	1.74c	1.42	1.58	1.74c	2.00	1.69A	1.03	1.50	2.13	3.16	1.96A
				$y = 1.21 + 0.19 * * x R^{2} = 0.98$					$y = 0.20 + 0.702 * * x R^{2} = 0.97$

Attribute	C1	C2	C3	Biochar from rice husk					Biochar from cattle manure
Attribute	C1	C2	C3	1	2	3	4	Mean	1	2	3	4	Mean
SDM g/ plant	0.42a	3.13b	2.37c	0.53a	0.57	0.76	1.04	0.73B	0.94	1.13	1.30	2.01	1.35A
SDM g/ plant	0.42a	3.13b	2.37c	$y = 0.38 + 0.282 * * x R^{2} = 0.71$					$y = 0.51 + 0.338 * * x R^{2} = 0.88$
RDM g/plant	0.47a	2.80b	1.91c	0.82	0.86	0.92	1.74	1.09B	1.01	1.35	1.45	2.06	1.47A
RDM g/plant	0.47a	2.80b	1.91c	$y = 0.295 + 0.172 * * x R^{2} = 0.91$					$y = 0.66 + 0.325 * * x R^{2} = 0.93$
SDM / RDM	0.89	1.11	1.24	0.63	0.66	0.83	0.60	0.67	0.93	0.84	0.90	0.98	0.92