Abstract
Biochar has shown beneficial effects in agricultural production, yet the combined effects of biochar and reduced irrigation on crop growth and water-use efficiency (WUE) in diverse soil types have not been fully explored. A split-root pot experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of addition of 2% softwood (SWB) and wheat straw biochar (WSB) on growth, physiology, WUE and nutrients uptake of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants grown in a Ferrosol and an Anthrosol, respectively, under three irrigation treatments. The plants were either irrigated daily to 90% of water-holding capacity (FI), or irrigated with 70% volume of water used for FI to the whole root-zone (DI) or alternately to half root-zone (PRD). The results showed that plants grown in Anthrosol possessed greater leaf gas exchange rates, dry biomass and WUE while lower nutrients content compared to those grown in Ferrosol. Despite a negative effect on plant N content and WUE, WSB addition increased water-holding capacity, consequently improved leaf gas exchange, water uptake, biomass and K content resulting in an improved in the leaf quality of tobacco as exemplified by an increased leaf K content and a more appropriate N to K stoichiometric ratio. However, these effects were not evident upon SWB addition. Moreover, these responses to biochar addition were stronger in Ferrosol than in Anthrosol might be associated with its lower pH. Compared to FI, PRD slightly reduced photosynthetic rate but significantly decreased stomatal conductance, transpiration rate and leaf area, leading to a significant increase in intrinsic, instantaneous and plant WUE. Additionally, PRD was superior over DI in improving yield, WUE, N uptake under a same irrigation volume. It was concluded that WSB combined with PRD could be a promising practice to synergistically improve tobacco yield, quality and WUE by improving soil hydro-physical properties and nutrients bioavailability.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Tobacco in Anthrosol had greater leaf gas exchange, biomass and water use efficiency than in Ferrosol.
- Taxon
- tobacco
Nicotiana tabacume1 - Outcome
- leaf gas exchange rates, dry biomass and WUEe0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- Ferrosole0
- Setting
- Anthrosole0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plants grown in Anthrosol possessed greater leaf gas exchange rates, dry biomass and WUE while lower nutrients content compared to those grown in Ferrosol”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Tobacco in Anthrosol had lower nutrient content than in Ferrosol.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Outcome
- nutrients contente0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- Ferrosole0
- Setting
- Anthrosole0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plants grown in Anthrosol possessed greater leaf gas exchange rates, dry biomass and WUE while lower nutrients content compared to those grown in Ferrosol”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat straw biochar lowered tobacco plant N content and WUE.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- WSB additione0
- Outcome
- plant N content and WUEe0
- Direction
- negative effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a negative effect on plant N content and WUE, WSB addition”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat straw biochar increased soil water holding capacity.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- WSB additione0
- Outcome
- water-holding capacitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WSB addition increased water-holding capacity”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat straw biochar improved tobacco leaf gas exchange, water uptake and biomass.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- WSB additione0
- Outcome
- leaf gas exchange, water uptake, biomasse0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WSB addition increased water-holding capacity, consequently improved leaf gas exchange, water uptake, biomass and K content”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat straw biochar improved tobacco K content.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume2
- Treatment
- WSB additione1
- Outcome
- K contente0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improved leaf gas exchange, water uptake, biomass and K content”
e1“WSB addition increased water-holding capacity”
e2“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat straw biochar improved tobacco leaf quality, including the N to K ratio.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume0
- Treatment
- WSB additione1
- Outcome
- leaf quality of tobaccoe0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Qualifier
- a more appropriate N to K stoichiometric ratioe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“an improved in the leaf quality of tobacco as exemplified by an increased leaf K content and a more appropriate N to K stoichiometric ratio”
e1“WSB addition increased water-holding capacity”
Claim · model-written summary
Softwood biochar did not show the reported wheat straw biochar benefits.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- SWB additione0
- Outcome
- these effectse0
- Direction
- not evidente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“these effects were not evident upon SWB addition”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar responses were stronger in Ferrosol than Anthrosol, possibly associated with pH.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- biochar additione0
- Outcome
- these responsese0
- Direction
- strongere0
- Qualifier
- might be associated with its lower pHe0
- Comparator
- Anthrosole0
- Setting
- Ferrosole0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“these responses to biochar addition were stronger in Ferrosol than in Anthrosol might be associated with its lower pH”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Partial root zone drying slightly reduced tobacco photosynthetic rate versus full irrigation.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic ratee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- slightlye0
- Comparator
- FIe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to FI, PRD slightly reduced photosynthetic rate”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Partial root zone drying significantly decreased stomatal conductance, transpiration and leaf area versus full irrigation.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- stomatal conductance, transpiration rate and leaf areae0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Comparator
- FIe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to FI, PRD slightly reduced photosynthetic rate but significantly decreased stomatal conductance, transpiration rate and leaf area”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Partial root zone drying significantly increased intrinsic, instantaneous and plant WUE versus full irrigation.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume3
- Treatment
- PRDe2
- Outcome
- intrinsic, instantaneous and plant WUEe1
- Direction
- increasee1
- Comparator
- FIe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PRD was superior over DI”
e1“leading to a significant increase in intrinsic, instantaneous and plant WUE”
e2“Compared to FI, PRD slightly reduced photosynthetic rate”
e3“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Partial root zone drying surpassed deficit irrigation for tobacco yield at equal irrigation volume.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Qualifier
- under a same irrigation volumee0
- Comparator
- DIe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PRD was superior over DI in improving yield, WUE, N uptake under a same irrigation volume”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Partial root zone drying surpassed deficit irrigation for tobacco WUE at equal irrigation volume.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Qualifier
- under a same irrigation volumee0
- Comparator
- DIe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PRD was superior over DI in improving yield, WUE, N uptake under a same irrigation volume”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Partial root zone drying surpassed deficit irrigation for tobacco N uptake at equal irrigation volume.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume1
- Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- N uptakee0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Qualifier
- under a same irrigation volumee0
- Comparator
- DIe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PRD was superior over DI in improving yield, WUE, N uptake under a same irrigation volume”
e1“tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend wheat straw biochar with partial root zone drying to improve tobacco yield, quality and WUE.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume0
- Treatment
- WSB combined with PRDe0
- Outcome
- improve tobacco yield, quality and WUEe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WSB combined with PRD could be a promising practice to synergistically improve tobacco yield, quality and WUE by improving soil hydro-physical properties and nutrients bioavailability”
The same questions in other papers
Triticum aestivum · soil: physics · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Triticum aestivum · nutrient: content · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Triticum aestivum · quality: general · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
biochar · physiology: water · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
irrigation · physiology: gas exchange · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- negative
irrigation · physiology: photosynthesis · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →irrigation · nutrient: content · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →8 of 13 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.