Abstract
The effects of biochar and plant growth promoting (Pseudomonas fluresenc) as biofertilizer on some sandy soil physical, chemical properties and wheat productivity were studied in two successive winter season (2021–2022 and 2022–2023). A field experiment was carried out at the Ismailia Agric.Res.Station, Ismailia Governorate, Egypt (latitude, 30o 35' 41.901" N and longitude, 32o 16' 45.834" E). Two rates of biochar (2.4 and 4.8 Mg ha-1) and two techniques methods of biofertilization (Pseudomonas fluresenc) were applied as coating or soaking. The results showed that biochar rates and biofertilizer (Pseudomonas fluresenc) enhanced soil moisture content, bulk density, and total porosity. During both seasons under study; a significant decrease in (BD) values was observed, while an increase in (TP) and soil moisture content values (FC, WP, and AW) were observed compared to control. Furthermore, the biochar application has a greater impact on soil CEC and organic matter .The significant increase in soil nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium availability obtained with increasing rates of applied biochar combined with biofertilizer. Furthermore, the results showed that the application of a high rate of biochar (4.8 ha-1) in conjunction with coating biofertilizer treatment recorded the highest values of macronutrient content and wheat yield components compared to control and other treatments. Also, there is no significant different detected between coating or soaking was observed.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar and Pseudomonas biofertilizer decreased soil bulk density significantly versus control.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- biochar rates and biofertilizer (Pseudomonas fluresenc)e1
- Interactor
- Pseudomonas fluresence1symbiont
- Outcome
- (BD) valuese0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a significant decrease in (BD) values was observed”
e1“biochar rates and biofertilizer (Pseudomonas fluresenc)”
e2“were observed compared to control”
t0“Wheat Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar and biofertilizer increased soil total porosity and moisture values versus control.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- biochar rates and biofertilizer (Pseudomonas fluresenc)e1
- Interactor
- Pseudomonas fluresence1symbiont
- Outcome
- (TP) and soil moisture content values (FC, WP, and AW)e0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“an increase in (TP) and soil moisture content values (FC, WP, and AW) were observed compared to control”
e1“biochar rates and biofertilizer (Pseudomonas fluresenc)”
t0“Wheat Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar had a greater impact on soil CEC and organic matter.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- biochar applicatione0
- Outcome
- soil CEC and organic mattere0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the biochar application has a greater impact on soil CEC and organic matter”
t0“Wheat Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing biochar rates with biofertilizer significantly increased available soil nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- increasing rates of applied biochar combined with biofertilizere0
- Interactor
- Pseudomonas fluresence1symbiont
- Outcome
- soil nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium availabilitye0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The significant increase in soil nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium availability obtained with increasing rates of applied biochar combined with biofertilizer”
e1“biofertilization (Pseudomonas fluresenc)”
t0“Wheat Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
High-rate biochar with coating biofertilizer gave the highest wheat macronutrient content versus control and other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- high rate of biochar (4.8 ha-1) in conjunction with coating biofertilizer treatmente0
- Interactor
- Pseudomonas fluresence1symbiont
- Outcome
- macronutrient contente0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- control and other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“application of a high rate of biochar (4.8 ha-1) in conjunction with coating biofertilizer treatment recorded the highest values of macronutrient content and wheat yield components compared to control and other treatments”
e1“biofertilization (Pseudomonas fluresenc)”
Claim · model-written summary
High-rate biochar with coating biofertilizer gave the highest wheat yield components versus control and other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- high rate of biochar (4.8 ha-1) in conjunction with coating biofertilizer treatmente0
- Interactor
- Pseudomonas fluresence1symbiont
- Outcome
- wheat yield componentse0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- control and other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“application of a high rate of biochar (4.8 ha-1) in conjunction with coating biofertilizer treatment recorded the highest values of macronutrient content and wheat yield components compared to control and other treatments”
e1“biofertilization (Pseudomonas fluresenc)”
Claim · model-written summary
Coating and soaking biofertilizer treatments did not differ significantly.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- coatinge0
- Interactor
- Pseudomonas fluresence1symbiont
- Outcome
- significant differente0
- Comparator
- soakinge0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there is no significant different detected between coating or soaking was observed”
e1“biofertilization (Pseudomonas fluresenc)”
t0“Wheat Productivity”
The same questions in other papers
biochar · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →storage · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →inoculation · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →storage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →inoculation · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
43 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →biochar · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →biochar · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
110 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
117 papers more in this group
See all 121 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
262 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
273 papers more in this group
See all 277 papers →8 of 10 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.