Paper · 2019 · Ciência Rural

Biochar in sugar beet production and nutrition

Katherin Prissila Sevilla Zelaya; Barbara Samartini Queiroz Alves; Fernando Colen; et al.

3
claims
3
verbatim quotes
9
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

ABSTRACT: The biomass pyrolysis process may be an alternative for the agricultural use of sewage sludge. This study aimed to evaluate the use of of biochars from mixture of sewage sludge and sugarcane bagasse (BB, 1:1 relationship sewage sludge and sugarcane bagasse) on sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) production and nutrition. A greenhouse experiment was conducted with five application rates of BB: 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, and 10% (v/v), and two additional treatments, biochar from sewage sludge (BS, application rate 5% (v/v)) and conventional treatment (CV) that received lime and mineral fertilizer. The treated soils were incubated for 45 days, after which, seedlings were cultivated for 55 days. Biochar produce from sewage sludge and sugarcane bagasse is an alternative technology to reduce the potential for contamination of sewage sludge and to incorporate more stable carbon forms in the soil. Although, biochar has increased soil fertility, fine roots and nutrient uptake efficiency by sugar beet plants, total dry matter yield was significantly lower than that obtained in conventional treatment.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biochar increased soil fertility.

Treatment
biochare0
Outcome
soil fertilitye0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
conventional treatmente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Although, biochar has increased soil fertility, fine roots and nutrient uptake efficiency by sugar beet plants, total dry matter yield was significantly lower than that obtained in conventional treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 896–1100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biochar increased fine roots and nutrient uptake efficiency in sugar beet.

Treatment
biochare0
Outcome
fine roots and nutrient uptake efficiencye0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
conventional treatmente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Although, biochar has increased soil fertility, fine roots and nutrient uptake efficiency by sugar beet plants, total dry matter yield was significantly lower than that obtained in conventional treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 896–1100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Biochar produced significantly less sugar beet total dry matter than conventional treatment.

Treatment
biochare0
Outcome
total dry matter yielde0
Direction
lowere0
Comparator
conventional treatmente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Although, biochar has increased soil fertility, fine roots and nutrient uptake efficiency by sugar beet plants, total dry matter yield was significantly lower than that obtained in conventional treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 896–1100 · show in text ↑

biochar · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.