| Literature DB >> 35385517 |
Muhammad Talha Bin Yousaf1, Muhammad Farrakh Nawaz1, Ghulam Yasin2,3, Hefa Cheng4, Irfan Ahmed1, Sadaf Gul5, Muhammad Rizwan6, Abdur Rehim7, Qi Xuebin8, Shafeeq Ur Rahman4,9.
Abstract
Salinity is a global problem, and almost more than 20% of the total cultivated area of the world is affected by salt stress. Phytoremediation is one of the most suitable practices to combat salinity and recently biochar has showed the tremendous potential to alleviate salt-affected soils and enhance vegetation. Trees improve the soil characteristics by facilitating the leaching of salts and releasing organic acids in soil. Moreover, in the presence of trees, higher transpiration rates and lower evaporation rates are also helpful in ameliorating salt affected soils. This study was designed to check the effect of different levels of biochar on the morph-physiological characteristics of three important agroforestry tree species: Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Vachellia nilotica, and Dalbergia sissoo, in saline soils. Farmyard manure biochar was applied at the rate of 3% (w/w), 6% (w/w), and 9% (w/w) to find appropriate levels of biochar for promoting the early-stage trees growth under saline conditions. Results of the current study revealed that maximum shoot length (104.77 cm), shoot dry weight (23.72 g), leaves dry weight (28.23 g), plant diameter (12.32 mm), root length (20.89 cm), root dry weight (18.90 g), photosynthetic rate (25.33 μ moles CO2 m-2s-1) and stomatal conductance (0.12 mol H2O m-2 s-1) were discovered in the plants of Eucalyptus camaldulensis at the rate of 6% (w/w). All tree species showed better results for growth and physiological characteristics when biochar was applied at the rate of 6% (w/w). In comparison, a decreasing trend in growth parameters was found in the excessive amount of biochar when the application rate was increased from 6% (w/w) to 9% (w/w) for all three species. So, applying an appropriate level of biochar is important for boosting plant growth in saline soils. Among different tree species, Vachellia nilotica and Eucalyptus camaldulensis both showed very promising results to remediate salt affected soils with Vachellia nilotica showing maximum potential to absorb sodium ions.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35385517 PMCID: PMC8985979 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Climatic conditions data during the year 2017.
| Month | Average Max. Temp. (°C) | Average Min. Temp. (°C) | Precipitation (mm) | Sunshine Duration (Hours) | ET₀(mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 17.6 | 08.2 | 11.5 | 03.6 | 00.9 |
|
| 23.3 | 10.2 | 4.1 | 06.6 | 01.9 |
|
| 27.3 | 14.2 | 16.2 | 07.2 | 02.7 |
|
| 37.7 | 20.9 | 28.3 | 09.2 | 05.2 |
|
| 41.1 | 26.0 | 10.1 | 10.4 | 05.7 |
|
| 39.8 | 27.3 | 41.6 | 09.38 | 05.3 |
|
| 38.5 | 28.9 | 117.2 | 07.0 | 04.0 |
|
| 38.1 | 28.6 | 66 | 07.9 | 03.8 |
Physicochemical characteristics of the soil before the initiation of the experiment.
| Textural class | Sandy Loam |
|---|---|
| Sand (%) | 60 ± 1 |
| Silt (%) | 25 ± 0.5 |
| Clay (%) | 15 ± 0.3 |
| Saturation (%) | 28 ± 1 |
| pH | 8.5 ± 0.3 |
| EC (dS/m) | 20.5 ± 9 |
| TSS (mmol/L) | 205 ± 20 |
| CO32- (mmol/L) | 10 ± 2 |
| HCO3- (mmol/L) | 30 ± 4 |
| Cl- (mmol/L) | 140 ± 19 |
| Ca2+ + Mg2+ (mmol/L) | 12 ± 4.5 |
| Na+ (mmol/L) | 160 ± 15.2 |
| K+ (mmol/L) | 47 ± 7 |
| OM (%) | 0.64 ± 0.03 |
Physicochemical characteristics of Farmyard Manure Biochar.
| pH | 7.0 |
|---|---|
| EC (dS/m) | 2.08 |
| TSS (mg/kg) | 20.8 |
| CO32-(mg/kg) | (-) |
| HCO3-(mg/kg) | 8 |
| Cl- (mg/kg) | 4 |
| Ca2+ + Mg2+ (mg/kg) | 13.2 |
| Na+ (mg/kg) | 3.4 |
| K+(mg/kg) | 7.2 |
| OM (%) | 95.4 |
| TOC (%) | 70.2 |
Characteristics of tap water of nursery.
| pH | 7.29 |
|---|---|
| EC (dS/m) | 0.669 |
| TSS (mg/L) | 6.699 |
| Carbonates | (-) |
| Bi Carbonates (mg/L) | 4.8 |
| Ca + Mg (mg/L) | 3 |
| Chlorides (mg/L) | 2.5 |
| RSC | 1.8 |
| Sodium (mg/L) | 0.69 |
Fig 1Growth parameters of plants against three different levels of Farmyard Manure Biochar.
These values are three replicates, and for each replication, there were three plants (n = 9). The difference between lower case letters indicates that values are significantly (p < 0.05) different from each other.
Fig 2Physiological attributes of plants against three different levels of Farmyard Manure Biochar.
These values are the means of three replicates, and for each replication, there were three plants (n = 9). The difference between lower case letters indicates that values are significantly (p < 0.05) different from each other.
Fig 3Ionic contents of plants against three different levels of Farmyard Manure Biochar.
These values are means of three replicates, and for each replication, there were three plants (n = 9). The difference between lower case letters indicates that values are significantly (p < 0.05) different from each other.
Effect of different levels of biochar and selected agroforestry trees species on post-harvest soil characteristics.
| Control | FYMB 3% | FYMB 6% | FYMB 9% | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sp. 1 | Sp. 2 | Sp. 3 | Sp. 1 | Sp. 2 | Sp. 3 | Sp. 1 | Sp. 2 | Sp. 3 | Sp. 1 | Sp. 2 | Sp. 3 | |
|
| 7.73a ± 0.08 | 7.77a ± 0.08 | 7.77a ± 0.08 | 8.07abc ± 0.08 | 8.20a ± 0.08 | 8.20a ± 0.08 | 7.93abc ± 0.08 | 7.93abc ± 0.08 | 8.00abc ± 0.08 | 7.97abc ± 0.08 | 8.10ab ± 0.08 | 8.10ab ± 0.08 |
|
| 8.29b ± 0.28 | 8.71b ± 0.28 | 12.41a ± 0.28 | 3.77ef ± 0.28 | 4.41de ± 0.28 | 6.71c ± 0.28 | 3.22f ± 0.28 | 3.22f ± 0.28 | 5.19d ± 0.28 | 4.65de ± 0.28 | 5.23d ± 0.28 | 6.98c ± 0.28 |
|
| 82.90b ± 2.82 | 87.10b ± 2.82 | 124.10a ± 2.82 | 37.70ef ± 2.82 | 44.10de ± 2.82 | 67.07c ± 2.82 | 32.17f ± 2.82 | 32.17f ± 2.82 | 51.93d ± 2.82 | 46.47de ± 2.82 | 52.27d ± 2.82 | 69.80c ± 2.82 |
| CO32-(mmol/L) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) | (-) |
| HCO3-(mmol/L) | 3.20cd ± 0.22 | 4.44ab ± 0.22 | 4.51a ± 0.22 | 5.44c ± 0.22 | 5.97bc ± 0.22 | 6.18abc ± 0.22 | 3.65e ± 0.22 | 3.65e ± 0.22 | 3.83de ± 0.22 | 4.11de ± 0.22 | 4.22de ± 0.22 | 4.53d ± 0.22 |
| Cl- (mmol /L) | 40.00c ± 1.1 | 51.00b ± 1.1 | 60.00a ± 1.1 | 18.00g ± 1.1 | 20.00g ± 1.1 | 25.00ef ± 1.1 | 14.00h ± 1.1 | 14.00h ± 1.1 | 26.67ef ± 1.1 | 25.00ef ± 1.1 | 28.00de ± 1.1 | 30.63d ± 1.1 |
| Ca2++Mg2+ (mmol/L) | 3.73b ± 0.7 | 3.73b ± 0.7 | 3.83b ± 0.7 | 6.77ab ± 0.7 | 7.20a ± 0.7 | 7.20a ± 0.7 | 7.93a ± 0.7 | 7.93a ± 0.7 | 7.87a ± 0.7 | 8.47a ± 0.7 | 9.20a ± 0.7 | 9.14a ± 0.7 |
| Na+ (mmol/L) | 48.00b ± 1.23 | 51.00b ± 1.23 | 62.33a ± 1.23 | 21.33def ± 1.23 | 23.00de ± 1.23 | 30.00c ± 1.23 | 17.00f ± 1.23 | 17.00f ± 1.23 | 23.33de ± 1.23 | 19.67ef ± 1.23 | 21.33def ± 1.23 | 25.67cd ± 1.23 |
|
| 35.23b ± 1.69 | 37.41b ± 1.69 | 45.50a ± 1.69 | 11.78bc ± 1.69 | 12.20bc ± 1.69 | 15.89b ± 1.69 | 8.57c ± 1.69 | 8.57c ± 1.69 | 11.77bc ± 1.69 | 9.28c ± 1.69 | 9.82bc ± 1.69 | 11.72bc ± 1.69 |
| K+ | 6.60b ± 0.67 | 6.53b ± 0.67 | 6.03b ± 0.67 | 10.97d ± 0.67 | 11.27cd ± 0.67 | 11.40bcd ± 0.67 | 12.97abcd ± 0.67 | 12.97abcd ± 0.67 | 13.40abcd ± 0.67 | 13.47abc ± 0.67 | 13.77abc ± 0.67 | 13.90a ± 0.67 |
|
| 0.51d ± 0.01 | 0.51d ± 0.01 | 0.50d ± 0.01 | 0.80c ± 0.01 | 0.79c ± 0.01 | 0.78c ± 0.01 | 0.85b ± 0.01 | 0.85b ± 0.01 | 0.83b ± 0.01 | 0.90a ± 0.01 | 0.89a ± 0.01 | 0.88a ± 0.01 |
|
| 0.30d ± 0.01 | 0.29d ± 0.01 | 0.29d ± 0.01 | 0.46c ± 0.01 | 0.46c ± 0.01 | 0.46c ± 0.01 | 0.49b ± 0.01 | 0.49b ± 0.01 | 0.48b ± 0.01 | 0.52a ± 0.01 | 0.52a ± 0.01 | 0.51a ± 0.01 |
|
| 34.19c ± 0.25 | 0.028d ± 0.25 | 34.53c ± 0.25 | 37.06e ± 0.25 | 36.67e ± 0.25 | 36.37e ± 0.25 | 43.32bcd ± 0.25 | 43.32bcd ± 0.25 | 42.69d ± 0.25 | 44.32a ± 0.25 | 43.88ab ± 0.25 | 43.69abc ± 0.25 |
*Mean value (n = 3) ± Standard error
Different alphabetical letters showed significant (P ≤ 0.05) difference among treatments and vice versa
Sp. 1 = Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Sp. 2 = Vachellia nilotica, Sp. 3 = Dalbergia sissoo