Abstract
Converting raw straw into biochar is considered an effective strategy for soil carbon sequestration. However, it remains uncertain whether biochar is more environmentally friendly for achieving higher crop yield in comparison to raw straw in drought-prone regions. Here, a 5-year experiment with three treatments (no incorporation(CK), raw straw incorporation(SI) and straw-derived biochar incorporation(BI)) was conducted to examine the effects of SI and BI on soil physicochemical properties, grain yield (GY), and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Results indicated both SI and BI increased soil water content (SWC), soil temperature (ST), soil porosity, field capacity, pH, total nitrogen and soil organic carbon (SOC) compared with CK. On average, seasonal soil CO2 emission increased significantly by 42.3% in SI and 16.8% in BI, respectively; seasonal N2O emission increased by 26.9% in SI, while decreased by 17.5% in BI. Particularly, the 5-year average GY was as high as 9.4 t ha-1 in BI, significantly higher than that of SI and CK. The 5-year average global warming potential (GWP) increased by 57.9% and 24.6% under SI and BI, respectively, compared with CK. As a result, the average GHG emission intensity (GHGI) increased by 32.0% in SI, whereas it declined by 8.9% in BI. Attribution analysis showed that the CO2 emission primary driven GHGI change under SI, contributing up to 76.4% to GHGI increase. Conversely, the GY increase primary driven GHGI change under BI, contributing to 55.0% GHGI decrease. Therefore, converting raw straw into biochar incorporation acts as an environment-friendly strategy for higher yield harvest.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Raw straw incorporation increased soil water content, temperature, porosity, field capacity, pH, total nitrogen and organic carbon relative to no incorporation.
- Treatment
- SIe0
- Outcome
- soil water content (SWC), soil temperature (ST), soil porosity, field capacity, pH, total nitrogen and soil organic carbon (SOC)e0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- CKe0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Results indicated both SI and BI increased soil water content (SWC), soil temperature (ST), soil porosity, field capacity, pH, total nitrogen and soil organic carbon (SOC) compared with CK.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar incorporation increased the listed soil properties relative to no incorporation.
- Treatment
- BIe0
- Outcome
- soil water content (SWC), soil temperature (ST), soil porosity, field capacity, pH, total nitrogen and soil organic carbon (SOC)e0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- CKe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Results indicated both SI and BI increased soil water content (SWC), soil temperature (ST), soil porosity, field capacity, pH, total nitrogen and soil organic carbon (SOC) compared with CK.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI increased seasonal soil CO2 emission by 42.3%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seasonal soil CO2 emission increased significantly by 42.3% in SI and 16.8% in BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BI increased seasonal soil CO2 emission by 16.8%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seasonal soil CO2 emission increased significantly by 42.3% in SI and 16.8% in BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI increased seasonal N2O emission by 26.9%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seasonal N2O emission increased by 26.9% in SI, while decreased by 17.5% in BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BI decreased seasonal N2O emission by 17.5%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seasonal N2O emission increased by 26.9% in SI, while decreased by 17.5% in BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BI grain yield averaged 9.4 t ha-1 and exceeded SI and CK.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the 5-year average GY was as high as 9.4 t ha-1 in BI, significantly higher than that of SI and CK”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI increased average global warming potential by 57.9% relative to CK.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the 5-year average global warming potential (GWP) increased by 57.9% and 24.6% under SI and BI, respectively, compared with CK”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BI increased average global warming potential by 24.6% relative to CK.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the 5-year average global warming potential (GWP) increased by 57.9% and 24.6% under SI and BI, respectively, compared with CK”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI increased greenhouse gas emission intensity by 32.0%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average GHG emission intensity (GHGI) increased by 32.0% in SI, whereas it declined by 8.9% in BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BI reduced greenhouse gas emission intensity by 8.9%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average GHG emission intensity (GHGI) increased by 32.0% in SI, whereas it declined by 8.9% in BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 emission contributed 76.4% to GHGI increase under SI.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the CO2 emission primary driven GHGI change under SI, contributing up to 76.4% to GHGI increase”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
GY increase contributed 55.0% to GHGI decrease under BI.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the GY increase primary driven GHGI change under BI, contributing to 55.0% GHGI decrease”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors recommend biochar incorporation for higher yield.
- Outcome
- converting raw straw into biochar incorporatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“converting raw straw into biochar incorporation acts as an environment-friendly strategy for higher yield harvest”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
biochar · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →organic · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
36 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
33 papers more in this group
See all 37 papers →organic · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →biochar · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
174 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
189 papers more in this group
See all 193 papers →biochar · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
11 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 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.