Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

13
Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar and Urea Only to Improve Nutrients Use Efficiency and Yield of Oryza sativa L. Cultivation on a Tropical Acid Soil Ali Maru, 1 Osumanu Ahmed Haruna, 1,2,3 and Walter Charles Primus 4 1 Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Bintulu Campus, 97008 Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia 2 Agriculture and Environment, Borneo Eco-Science Research Center, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Bintulu Sarawak Campus, 97008 Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia 3 Institute of Tropical Forestry and Forest Products (INTROP), Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia 4 Department of Basic Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Bintulu Campus, 97008 Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia Correspondence should be addressed to Osumanu Ahmed Haruna; [email protected] Received 1 March 2015; Revised 18 June 2015; Accepted 25 June 2015 Academic Editor: Zhenli He Copyright © 2015 Ali Maru et al. is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. e excessive use of nitrogen (N) fertilizers in sustaining high rice yields due to N dynamics in tropical acid soils not only is economically unsustainable but also causes environmental pollution. e objective of this study was to coapply biochar and urea to improve soil chemical properties and productivity of rice. Biochar (5 t ha −1 ) and different rates of urea (100%, 75%, 50%, 25%, and 0% of recommended N application) were evaluated in both pot and field trials. Selected soil chemical properties, rice plants growth variables, nutrient use efficiency, and yield were determined using standard procedures. Coapplication of biochar with 100% and 75% urea recommendation rates significantly increased nutrients availability (especially P and K) and their use efficiency in both pot and field trials. ese treatments also significantly increased rice growth variables and grain yield. Coapplication of biochar and urea application at 75% of the recommended rate can be used to improve soil chemical properties and productivity and reduce urea use by 25%. 1. Introduction Nitrogen fertilizers use is expected to increase in a stabilized way up to 21.3 million tonnes in 2015 and 23.6 million tonnes by 2030 [1], suggesting that N is an important nutrient in rice cultivation as it plays an essential role in sustaining high yield of crops [2, 3]. is is probably one of the reasons why 70% of the chemical fertilizers used in rice cultivation are N fertilizer. Nitrogen is generally applied to soils in a large quantity [4–6] due to demand of N by high yielding rice cultivars to achieve a desirable yield [7]. Furthermore, there is no residual effect of N in paddy fields [8] because some of the N is immobilized by microbes into soil organic fraction, and some is fixed by the clay minerals such as illite, vermiculite, and smectite whereas the rest are lost through denitrification, ammonia volatilization, and leaching. However, N use can be efficiently managed through the use of biochar to improve N and other important nutrients uptake in rice cultivation [8]. Nutrient uptake by rice plants is not different from monocot crops such as wheat and maize but the amount of nutrients absorbed varies with rice growth stage. Nitrogen absorption is low at seedling stage and peaks before heading stage [9, 10]. e stage of highest P uptake is young panicle developmental stage followed by the tillering stage [9, 10]. e period of highest K uptake is before heading stage and little is absorbed aſter heading [11–14]. Nutrient absorption differs with rice cultivar, fertilizer type, fertilization technology, soil type, and environmental factors [15–18]. e soil (Typic Paleudults) used in this study is less cultivated with rice compared to Alfisols, Vertisols, Mollisols, and Inceptisols due to its poor Hindawi Publishing Corporation e Scientific World Journal Volume 2015, Article ID 943853, 12 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/943853

Transcript of Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

Page 1: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

Research ArticleCoapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar and Urea Only toImprove Nutrients Use Efficiency and Yield of Oryza sativa LCultivation on a Tropical Acid Soil

Ali Maru1 Osumanu Ahmed Haruna123 and Walter Charles Primus4

1Department of Crop Science Faculty of Agriculture and Food Sciences Universiti Putra Malaysia Bintulu Campus97008 Bintulu Sarawak Malaysia2Agriculture and Environment Borneo Eco-Science Research Center Faculty of Agriculture and Food SciencesUniversiti Putra Malaysia Bintulu Sarawak Campus 97008 Bintulu Sarawak Malaysia3Institute of Tropical Forestry and Forest Products (INTROP) Universiti Putra Malaysia 43400 Serdang Selangor Malaysia4Department of Basic Science and Engineering Faculty of Agriculture and Food Sciences Universiti Putra Malaysia Bintulu Campus97008 Bintulu Sarawak Malaysia

Correspondence should be addressed to Osumanu Ahmed Haruna osman60hotmailcom

Received 1 March 2015 Revised 18 June 2015 Accepted 25 June 2015

Academic Editor Zhenli He

Copyright copy 2015 Ali Maru et alThis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License whichpermits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited

The excessive use of nitrogen (N) fertilizers in sustaining high rice yields due to N dynamics in tropical acid soils not only iseconomically unsustainable but also causes environmental pollutionThe objective of this study was to coapply biochar and urea toimprove soil chemical properties and productivity of rice Biochar (5 t haminus1) and different rates of urea (100 75 50 25 and0 of recommended N application) were evaluated in both pot and field trials Selected soil chemical properties rice plants growthvariables nutrient use efficiency and yield were determined using standard procedures Coapplication of biochar with 100 and75 urea recommendation rates significantly increased nutrients availability (especially P and K) and their use efficiency in bothpot and field trials These treatments also significantly increased rice growth variables and grain yield Coapplication of biocharand urea application at 75 of the recommended rate can be used to improve soil chemical properties and productivity and reduceurea use by 25

1 Introduction

Nitrogen fertilizers use is expected to increase in a stabilizedway up to 213 million tonnes in 2015 and 236 million tonnesby 2030 [1] suggesting that N is an important nutrient inrice cultivation as it plays an essential role in sustaining highyield of crops [2 3] This is probably one of the reasons why70 of the chemical fertilizers used in rice cultivation areN fertilizer Nitrogen is generally applied to soils in a largequantity [4ndash6] due to demand of N by high yielding ricecultivars to achieve a desirable yield [7] Furthermore there isno residual effect of N in paddy fields [8] because some of theN is immobilized by microbes into soil organic fraction andsome is fixed by the clay minerals such as illite vermiculiteand smectite whereas the rest are lost through denitrification

ammonia volatilization and leaching However N use can beefficiently managed through the use of biochar to improve Nand other important nutrients uptake in rice cultivation [8]Nutrient uptake by rice plants is not different from monocotcrops such as wheat and maize but the amount of nutrientsabsorbed varies with rice growth stage Nitrogen absorptionis low at seedling stage and peaks before heading stage [9 10]The stage of highest P uptake is young panicle developmentalstage followed by the tillering stage [9 10] The period ofhighest K uptake is before heading stage and little is absorbedafter heading [11ndash14] Nutrient absorption differs with ricecultivar fertilizer type fertilization technology soil type andenvironmental factors [15ndash18] The soil (Typic Paleudults)used in this study is less cultivated with rice compared toAlfisols Vertisols Mollisols and Inceptisols due to its poor

Hindawi Publishing Corporatione Scientific World JournalVolume 2015 Article ID 943853 12 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552015943853

2 The Scientific World Journal

physical and chemical properties [19] However Ultisols arethe most common agricultural soils in the tropics Biocharcan be used to improve the physicochemical properties ofUltisols to boast rice yield on these soils

Biochar is pyrolysis biomass under limited or no supply ofoxygen [20] Biochar has an impact on nutrient addition andnutrient retention in soils Biochar consists mainly of mineralelements such asCa FeMgNaK P Si andAl [21]withmin-imum amount of N During pyrolysis significant proportionsof biomass N are lost by volatilization [22] The N remainingin the biochar and the fraction of N inside aromatic C struc-tures of biochar tend to be poorly available for plants uptake[22 23] Biochar has a low density and high porosity thatmakes it possible to inhabit soil microorganisms and holdmoisture up to three times its own weight [24] thereby pre-venting nutrient leaching and volatilization Surface waterinfiltration is improved in a biochar amended soil [25ndash27]Biochar consists largely of amorphous graphene sheets whichgive rise to large amounts of reactive surfaces where a widevariety of organic (both polar and nonpolar) molecules andinorganic ions are absorbed [28] andmade available for plantsabsorption High pH of biochar increased acidic soil pH[29] An increase in pH provides a wide range of benefits interms of soil quality notably by improving the availability ofnutrients to plants and in some cases it reduces the availabi-lity of detrimental elements such as Al and Fe [29]The objec-tives of this study were to (i) increase rice yield through theuse of biochar andN fertilizer only and (ii) reduceN fertilizerapplication rate by improving nutrients use efficiency Theseobjectives were based on the assumptions that chicken litterbiochar used in this study will provide all essential nutrientsrecommended for rice production except N and it will alsorelease and enhance efficient use of P and K in the soil forrice plant growth

2 Materials and Methods

Typic Paleudults (Nyalau Series) soil was sampled at the 0 to25 cm depth in an uncultivated secondary forest of UniversitiPutraMalaysia Bintulu Campus Sarawak Malaysia (latitude3∘ 121015840 14510158401015840 N and longitude 113∘ 41015840 16010158401015840 E) The soil wasair-dried after which it was ground to pass a 5mm sieve forpot trial and further sieved to pass a 2mm sieve for analysisof selected chemical and physical properties of the soilbefore and after the pot and field experiments Soil pH wasdetermined in 1 25 (soil distilled water) using a digital pHmeter [30] Soil organic matter was determined using loss ofweight on ignition after which the total carbonwas calculatedas 58 of the organic matter [31] Total N was determinedusing Kjeldahl method [32] and inorganic N (NO3

minus-N andNH4+-N) was determined using the method described by

Keeney andNelson [33]whereas total Pwas determinedusingUV-Vis Spectrophotometer (Perkin Elmer Lambda 25 USA)after blue color was developed according to the Blue method[34] Exchangeable cations were extracted with 1MNH

4

OAcpH 70 using the leachingmethod [35] and determined usingAtomic Absorption Spectrometer (AAnalyst 800 PERKINElmer Instruments Norwalk CT) The soil cation exchange

Table 1 Some selected chemical properties of Black Earth chickenlitter biochar

(a)

MacronutrientspH 85

Total carbon 637Fixed carbon 612Nitrogen 28Phosphate 26Potassium 39Calcium 59Sulphur 059Ash content 237

(b)

MicronutrientsAv particle size 05ndash2mm

mgkgminus1

Silicon 23Aluminium 15Potassium oxide 163Boron 62Copper 167Manganese 1130Zinc 856Magnesium oxide 67Arsenic 21Cadmium 07Chromium 96Mercury 006Nickel 14Lead 12Source Black Earth Company in north of Bendigo Victoria Australia

capacity (CEC) was determined with a leaching method [35]followed by steam distillation [36]

21 Chemical Composition of Biochar The Black Earth Prod-ucts chicken litter biochar used in this study was importedfrom Australia The chemical properties (Table 1) of the bio-char were up to standard whereas the arsenic cadmiumchromium copper lead mercury nickel and zinc levels areall below the set guidelines for maximum levels of heavymetals (20 5 250 375 150 4 125 and 700mgKgminus1 resp)based onAustralia CertifiedOrganic Standard 2010 (Table 1)

22 Pot Study In the greenhouse study pots (86433 cm3)were filled with 1 kg of air-dried soil (based on the bulk den-sity of the soil that is 1157 g cmminus3) that was mixed thoroughlywith 20 g of the chicken litter biochar The four replicates ofeach treatment were arranged in a basin and the basins were

The Scientific World Journal 3

Table 2 Fertilization schedule recommended by Muda Agricultural Development Authority 2013 and the equivalent rates used in the pottrial

Local rice variety MR219 105 to 111 days to maturityPlant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays aftertransplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Fertilizer type Mixture fertilizers(Government aid)

Urea(Government aid)

Additional substance of fertilizer1212172MgO + TE

Additional substance of fertilizer1212172MgO + TE

Application rates(kg haminus1) 360 kg haminus1 100 kg haminus1

(1 bag alcoveminus1) 175 kg haminus1 175 kg haminus1

Themixture fertilizers (Government aid) = 175N 155P2O5 10K2O

Table 3 Biochar rates and fertilization schedule of the pot study

Plant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays after transplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Treatments Biochar rates g hillminus1

T1 0 0 0 0 0T2 0 Mix A1 04 Mix B1 Mix B1T3 20 Mix A1 04 Mix B1 Mix B1T4 20 055 urea only 12 018 urea only 018 urea onlyT5 20 041 urea only 09 014 urea only 014 urea onlyT6 20 028 urea only 06 009 urea only 009 urea onlyT7 20 014 urea only 03 005 urea only 005 urea onlyT8 20 0 0 0 0Mix A1 = (055 g urea + 050 g TSP + 024 g MOP)Mix B1 = (018 g urea + 019 g TSP + 020 g MOP + 0014MgO)

arranged in a rain shelter atUniversiti PutraMalaysia BintuluSarawak Campus in a Complete RandomizedDesign (CRD)15-day nursed rice seeds of MR219 variety in a plastic-wareprior to transplanting were planted at a planting density of 3seedlings per pot

Treatments evaluated are as follows

(i) soil only (T1)(ii) soil + normal fertilization (T2)(iii) soil + biochar + normal fertilization (T3)(iv) soil + biochar + 100 N fertilization only (T4)(v) soil + biochar + 75 N fertilization only (T5)(vi) soil + biochar + 50 N fertilization only (T6)(vii) soil + biochar + 25 N fertilization only (T7)(viii) soil + biochar only (no fertilization) (T8)

The fertilizers used for the MR219 variety are the recom-mended fertilizer rates for rice by Muda Agricultural Devel-opment Authority (MADA) Malaysia [37] (Table 2)

The recommended rates (Table 2) by MADA [37] werescaled down based on the requirement of plant hill and thevarious percentages of N used for pot study (Table 3)

The water level in the basins was maintained at 25 cmabove the soil in the pot tomimic waterlogged conditionThefertilizers were applied on the soil surface in each pot at thegrowth stages recommended by MADA [38] (Table 3) How-ever all plants under N fertilization only show K deficiency

at 35 days after transplanting and to correct this deficiency024 g hillminus1MOP was applied The plants were managed andharvested at panicle heading stage (70th day after trans-planting) which is a major determinant of rice yield [39]Plant height number of tillers and number of leaves weremeasured at 70 days after transplanting before harvesting theabove biomass for dry matter yield and chemical analysisThe soil in the pots was air-dried and ground to pass a 2mmsieve for analysis The soil samples were analyzed using thestandard procedures stated previously The rice plant rootswere thoroughly washed with tap water followed by distilledwater after which they were oven-dried for dry weight andchemical analysis The roots and the above biomass sampleswere digested using the Single Dry Ashing Method [35] afterwhich K Ca Mg Mn Zn Fe and Cu were determinedusingAtomicAbsorption Spectrometry (AAS)whereas Pwasdetermined using the Blue method [36] Total N was deter-mined using Kjedahl method [32] Crude silica was also det-ermined using the method described by Shouichi et al [38]The nutrient concentrations were multiplied by their drymatter yield to represent nutrient uptakeThe agronomic andcrop recovery efficiency of applied N was determined usingthe formula below

AEN =119884N minus 1198840119865N

REN =119880N minus 1198800119865N

(1)

4 The Scientific World Journal

Table 4 Biochar rate and fertilization schedule of the field study

Plant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays after transplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Treatments Biochar rates g plotminus1

T1 0 0 0 0 0T2 0 Mix A2 40 Mix B1 Mix B1T4 2000 55 urea only 40 18 urea only 18 urea onlyT5 2000 403 urea only 30 14 urea only 14 urea onlyT6 2000 275 urea only 20 9 urea only 9 urea onlyT7 2000 138 urea only 10 5 urea only 5 urea onlyT8 2000 0 0 0 0Mix A2 = (55 g urea + 50 g TSP + 24 g MOP)Mix B2 = (183 g urea + 187 g TSP + 198 g MOP + 14MgO)

where 119865N is amount of (fertilizer) N applied (kg haminus1) 119884N iscrop yield with applied N (kg haminus1) 119884

0

is crop yield (kg haminus1)in a control treatment with no N 119880N is total plant N uptakein aboveground biomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot thatreceived N and 119880

0

is the total N uptake in abovegroundbiomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot that received no N[40]

23 Field Study A field study was conducted after the pottrial at the Long Term Research Grant Scheme (LRGS) riceplot at Universiti PutraMalaysia Bintulu campus on the sametype of soil (Typic Paleudults) used in the pot experimentTheexperimental area has an annual precipitation of 2200mmand a maximum and minimum mean temperature of 32 and24∘C respectivelyThe study area also has a relative humidityof 70 and 90 The experimental design used was random-ized complete block design with four replications (blocks)The total experimental area was 24m (length) times 23m(breadth) Each plot size was 2m (length) times 2m (breadth)The distance between plots was 1m and that between blockswas 3mThe soil pH P K Cu Zn Ca Fe andMg and total NNO3minus and NH4

+ of the experimental plots were determinedbefore and after the study using the procedures describedpreviously in the pot trial The treatments evaluated in thisfield study were the same as those in the pot study except T3(soil + biochar + normal fertilization)whichwas excluded T3was excluded in this field trial because its effect on dry matterproduction in the pot trial was not statistically different fromthose of T4 and T5 (Table 7) The biochar and the fertilizerrates used in the pot study (Table 3) were scaled up in thefield experiment (Table 4)

The biochar was spread on the soil surface of the exper-imental plots and thoroughly mixed a day before trans-planting 15-day nursed rice seeds of MR219 variety in aplastic-ware prior to transplanting were planted at a plantingdensity of 100 hills per experimental plot and 3 seedlingsper hill with a planting distance of 02m between rowsand 02m within The water level in the experimental plotwas maintained about 4 cm above the soil surface to mimicwaterlogged condition The rice plants were managed andharvested at different maturity day due to treatments effecton grain ripening Plant height number of tillers number of

leaves culm height and number of panicles were measuredat maturity (a day before harvesting the above biomass) fordry matter yield and chemical analysis Ten panicles werecollected from each experimental plot for grain filling andyield determinationThe soils were collected from the experi-mental plots air-dried and ground to pass a 2mm sieveThe soil and above biomass samples were analyzed using thestandard procedures stated in the pot study

24 Statistical Analysis Analysis of variance (ANOVA) wasused to test treatment effects whereas treatments means werecompared using Tukeyrsquos test [41] Simple linear regressionand Pearson correlation were used to establish relationshipbetween variables The Statistical Analysis Software version93 was used for the statistical analysis

3 Results and Discussion

31 Effects of Biochar and N Rates on Soil Chemical PropertiesThepHof the soil with coapplication of biochar and urea only(T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8) of the pot trial were significantlyhigher than that in the normal fertilization (T2) and soil only(T1) (Table 5) The exchangeable acidity and Al3+ of the soilwith coapplication of biochar and urea only (T3 T4 T5 T6T7 and T8) in the pot trial were statistically lower than in T2and T1 whereas H+ in T5 T6 T7 and T8 were lower thanin T2 (Table 5) These differences were due to application ofbiochar as biochar has high affinity for these ions In the fieldtrial Al3+ in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were significantly lower thanin T2 and T1 However the pH exchangeable acidity andH+ of the soil due to T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 in the fieldtrial were not statistically different from those of T2 and T1(Table 6) because of the large volume of soil in the field (interms of ratio to the amount of biochar used) hence reducingthe effect of biochar compared to the specific amount of soilused in the pot trial It might also be due to high acidiccations such asH+ in the fieldwhichmight have caused bufferchanges in active acidity Although the pH exchangeableacidity and H+ of the soil with biochar (T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) in the field trial were not remarkably reduced thereduction of Al3+ can be considered as the reduction of thesoil acidity as Kong et al [6] proposed that reduction of

The Scientific World Journal 5

Table5Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthep

otstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T3T4

T5T6

T7T8

pHw

53bplusmn010

52bplusmn007

56aplusmn006

58aplusmn007

58aplusmn006

59aplusmn008

58aplusmn001

57aplusmn009

Organicmatter

980cplusmn048

170bplusmn14

7205

abplusmn10

4200

abplusmn10

0195

abplusmn029

220

aplusmn10

8188

abplusmn10

3193

abplusmn10

3To

talcarbo

n113cplusmn006

197bplusmn017

238

abplusmn012

232

abplusmn012

226

abplusmn003

255

aplusmn013

218

abplusmn012

223

abplusmn012

TotalN

0077aplusmn0007

0056aplusmn000

40063aplusmn0007

0084aplusmn000

60070aplusmn0008

0070aplusmn0008

0084aplusmn0016

0077aplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3minus

105cplusmn020

193a

bcplusmn034

210

abcplusmn029

245

aplusmn045

210

abcplusmn029

228

abplusmn018

175a

bcplusmn020

123b

cplusmn018

ExchangeableNH4

+

175cplusmn020

876

aplusmn045

981aplusmn070

1033

aplusmn044

1005aplusmn044

1051aplusmn040

1016

aplusmn035

455

bplusmn045

ExchangeableP

375

cplusmn024

721cplusmn077

196

abplusmn092

1856a

bplusmn096

1707

bplusmn401

1823a

bplusmn077

1759

abplusmn053

2126aplusmn14

0To

talP

7008dplusmn065

11665

cplusmn878

22545

aplusmn1634

187bplusmn573

1876

5bplusmn419

20244

abplusmn575

21434

bplusmn2905

18315

bplusmn1942

cmolkgminus1

CEC

660

abplusmn015

635

bplusmn007

790aplusmn030

745a

bplusmn044

695

abplusmn026

618

bplusmn011

733a

bplusmn030

713a

bplusmn44

ExchangeableAc

idity

068

aplusmn0027

068

aplusmn000

6037

bplusmn0014

035

bcplusmn0016

034

bcplusmn0005

032

bcplusmn0008

031

bcplusmn0020

029

cplusmn0011

ExchangeableAl3+

053

aplusmn0013

053

aplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

6024

bplusmn0015

024

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn0010

020

bplusmn0008

ExchangeableH

+015

abplusmn0023

018

aplusmn0013

015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn0020

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0014

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0015

TotalK

+206

aplusmn032

145aplusmn014

157aplusmn026

138aplusmn012

158aplusmn014

161aplusmn033

128aplusmn025

134aplusmn012

ExchangeableK+

030

abplusmn003

018

bplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

028

abplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

037

aplusmn005

021

bplusmn003

027

abplusmn003

ExchangeableCu

2+0050fplusmn00016

006

0eplusmn00028

0082cplusmn00018

0089cplusmn0007

0097bplusmn00023

0103a

bplusmn00012

0110

aplusmn00013

0072aplusmn00026

ExchangeableMn2

+015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn000

4017

abplusmn0002

013

abplusmn0027

013

abplusmn0036

008

abplusmn0031

015

abplusmn0019

018

aplusmn0003

ExchangeableFe

2+038

abplusmn010

053

aplusmn004

037

abplusmn003

030

abplusmn008

030

bplusmn008

018

bplusmn003

026

bplusmn004

035

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+000

6abplusmn000

030005a

bplusmn000

030008a

bplusmn000

090007a

bplusmn000

06000

6abplusmn00010

0007a

bplusmn00010

000

9aplusmn00017

000

4bplusmn000

06Ex

changeableNa+

628

aplusmn207

342

aplusmn090

646

aplusmn097

564

aplusmn335

260

aplusmn010

691

aplusmn210

688

aplusmn19

8464

aplusmn19

8Ex

changeableCa

2+1759

bplusmn227

2035bplusmn14

93274

aplusmn13

82916

abplusmn14

32669a

bplusmn313

2516

abplusmn402

2889a

bplusmn291

2703a

bplusmn12

5Ex

changeableMg2

+667

aplusmn086

408

bplusmn024

675

aplusmn044

545

abplusmn021

405

bplusmn052

397

bplusmn028

329

bplusmn051

757aplusmn059

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

6 The Scientific World Journal

Table6Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthefi

eldstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T4T5

T6T7

T8Be

fore

pHw

46aplusmn016

46aplusmn020

49aplusmn020

49aplusmn019

50aplusmn014

47aplusmn017

45aplusmn011

49aplusmn004

Organicmatter

75cplusmn065

83cplusmn13

8153

aplusmn15

5130

aplusmn095

143

abplusmn091

133

aplusmn025

145

aplusmn095

108

bcplusmn085

Totalcarbo

n087

cplusmn007

096

cplusmn016

177aplusmn018

151aplusmn011

165bplusmn011

154aplusmn003

168aplusmn011

125b

cplusmn010

TotalN

004

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0007

007

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3

minus

088

aplusmn018

105aplusmn020

210

aplusmn029

175aplusmn020

175aplusmn020

193aplusmn034

140aplusmn029

105aplusmn035

ExchangeableNH4

+

193dplusmn018

333

dplusmn034

368

cdplusmn018

280

aplusmn008

298

bcplusmn015

298

abcplusmn018

228

abplusmn022

158a

bcplusmn018

AvailableP

114aplusmn018

264

aplusmn021

360

aplusmn054

488

aplusmn082

403

aplusmn074

264

aplusmn049

334

aplusmn208

284

aplusmn064

TotalP

6803aplusmn1299

7735

aplusmn639

7706aplusmn79

78622aplusmn808

7402aplusmn563

8305aplusmn831

7694aplusmn229

6480aplusmn464

cmolkgminus1

TotalK

289

aplusmn056

228

aplusmn017

176aplusmn028

222

aplusmn081

192aplusmn014

287

aplusmn112

265

aplusmn080

330

aplusmn114

AvailableK

040

dplusmn005

107a

bplusmn005

071

bcplusmn005

075

bcplusmn003

099

abplusmn018

066

cdplusmn006

037

dplusmn006

101abplusmn012

CEC

288

cplusmn018

275

cplusmn036

665

abplusmn068

593

abplusmn022

555

abplusmn054

725aplusmn048

650

abplusmn059

458

bcplusmn010

ExchangeableAc

idity

110a

bplusmn004

106a

bcplusmn013

073

cdplusmn005

074

cdplusmn005

055

dplusmn004

079

bcdplusmn009

068

dplusmn006

132aplusmn007

ExchangeableAl3+

091

aplusmn006

071

bplusmn007

043

dplusmn004

040

dplusmn001

036

dplusmn003

052

dplusmn004

049

bcplusmn003

124c

dplusmn005

ExchangeableH

+019

aplusmn007

035

aplusmn006

030

aplusmn008

034

aplusmn006

019

aplusmn003

027

aplusmn005

019

aplusmn007

008

aplusmn002

ExchangeableCu

2+00076

aplusmn000

04000

69bplusmn000

02000

69bplusmn000

09000

60abplusmn000

0500052

abplusmn00010

00032

abplusmn000

01000

67bplusmn000

0200119

abplusmn000

06Ex

changeableMn2

+044

aplusmn006

039

aplusmn007

037

aplusmn005

037

aplusmn006

040

aplusmn004

056

aplusmn005

033

aplusmn007

027

aplusmn007

ExchangeableFe

2+18

8bplusmn008

182aplusmn007

015

bplusmn010

004

bplusmn001

006

bplusmn001

005

bplusmn002

008

aplusmn001

016

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+00017

aplusmn000

0400018

bplusmn000

0900011

abplusmn000

03000

09bplusmn000

0200023

bplusmn00011

00018

abplusmn00012

00037

bplusmn00019

000

68bplusmn000

08Ex

changeableNa+

521

aplusmn034

477

aplusmn021

449

aplusmn009

443

aplusmn008

468

aplusmn018

432

aplusmn015

487

aplusmn063

525

aplusmn039

ExchangeableCa

2+1770

aplusmn13

71812

bplusmn12

31941bplusmn117

1982a

bplusmn070

1896a

bplusmn19

31990a

bplusmn047

1689bplusmn18

52639

abplusmn276

ExchangeableMg2

+1479bplusmn028

1222aplusmn201

1123

aplusmn13

01142a

bplusmn056

1214

abplusmn14

81555aplusmn13

11323aplusmn225

527

aplusmn093

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

The Scientific World Journal 7

Table 7 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 7620d plusmn 117 8648c plusmn 048 9838a plusmn 113 9808a plusmn 079 9480ab plusmn 076 9315b plusmn 046 8805c plusmn 102 8005d plusmn 107

hillminus1

Number of tillers 60e plusmn 010 12c plusmn 029 15a plusmn 025 16a plusmn 029 13b plusmn 048 13bc plusmn 041 12c plusmn 029 10d plusmn 025Number of leaves 8f plusmn 144 66c plusmn 129 81a plusmn 085 78ab plusmn 065 73ab plusmn 125 75b plusmn 065 57c plusmn 138 38e plusmn 065

g hillminus1

Root dry weight 311d plusmn 026 1063bc plusmn 057 1455a plusmn 040 1158b plusmn 008 1174b plusmn 007 1094b plusmn 004 928c plusmn 022 924c plusmn 060Dry matter yield 586c plusmn 051 2315c plusmn 084 3381a plusmn 032 3355a plusmn 050 3157a plusmn 075 2737b plusmn 106 2354c plusmn 021 1631d plusmn 038Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 8 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 725c plusmn 277 930ab plusmn 142 1018a plusmn 081 1005ab plusmn 083 952ab plusmn 143 907b plusmn 134 730c plusmn 384Culm height (cm) 589c plusmn 234 758b plusmn 103 808a plusmn 077 812a plusmn 167 794a plusmn 151 737a plusmn 059 580a plusmn 446Number of tillers per 004m2 8b plusmn 030 12ab plusmn 049 16a plusmn 073 15a plusmn 029 12ab plusmn 040 12ab plusmn 034 10b plusmn 056Number of leaves per 004m2 8f plusmn 025 66c plusmn 078 81a plusmn 274 78ab plusmn 050 73ab plusmn 064 75b plusmn 073 38e plusmn 106Number of panicles per 004m2 7d plusmn 014 11b plusmn 018 13a plusmn 041 13a plusmn 045 10bc plusmn 052 9c plusmn 074 6d plusmn 016Dry matter yield (g per 004m2) 56e plusmn 060 170bc plusmn 198 277a plusmn 224 232ab plusmn 109 197b plusmn 099 131cd plusmn 134 75de plusmn 151Total grain per panicle 110bc plusmn 1164 104c plusmn 219 136abc plusmn 221 160a plusmn 957 133abc plusmn 643 151ab plusmn 1708 143abc plusmn 1528 total grain filling per panicle 6592a plusmn 181 6330a plusmn 201 6691a plusmn 102 6146a plusmn 193 6699a plusmn 236 6756a plusmn 134 6851a plusmn 126Yield (t haminus1) 2612d plusmn 027 4206cd plusmn 019 6794ab plusmn 025 7559a plusmn 043 5233bc plusmn 048 5184bc plusmn 066 3429d plusmn 042Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

aluminum toxicity in tropical soils leads to reduction of soilacidity and this process improves plant productivity In thepot trial the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 and T8 on OMTC Mn2+ Fe2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+ NO3

minus NH4+ total

N CEC and K+ were similar However Cu2+ total P andavailable P were significantly higher in T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8 than in T2 (Table 5) In the field trial CEC OMand TC in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were statistically higher thanin T2 and T1 but NH4

+ was significantly higher in T5 T6and T7 than in T2 and T1 (Table 6) The soil NH4

+ OMand TC in the field were increased due to biochar application[29] Additionally total N and available P of the plots whichreceived T5 and T6 in the field trial were significantly higherthan in T2 and T1 However the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5T6 T7 and T8 on soil Cu2+ Mn2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+NO3minus total P total K+ and exchangeable K+ were similar

(Table 6) Although Nyalau Series is not productive and alsoprone to nutrient leaching under flooded condition [42] thechicken litter biochar used in this study generally improvedthe chemical properties of this soil [43] The differences insome of the chemical elements among the soils amendedwithbiochar were due to substitution between different nutrientelements in the rice plants [44] Furthermore the nitrogenrates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6 T7 andT8 stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K (Tables 5 and 6)

32 Aboveground Variables In the pot study plant heightnumber of leaves number of tillers and dry matter yield(DMY)due toT3 T4 andT5were significantly higher than in

T2 and T1 However plant height number of leaves and drymatter yield (DMY) among T3 T4 and T5 were not signifi-cantly different but the number of tillers was not significantlydifferent between T3 and T4 (Table 7) In the field studynumber of tillers and plant height due to T2 and T1 were notsignificantly different from those of T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8)However culm height due to T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 wassignificantly lower than in T2 and T1 The number of leavesin T4 T5 T6 and T7 was significantly higher than in T2 andT1 (Table 8)The number of panicles in T4 and T5 was higherand significantly different from those of T2 and T1 (Table 8)The differences in nutrients availability in the soil (Tables 5and 6) due to coapplication of biochar and urea only mighthave caused the differences in the aforementioned growthvariables confirming the findings of Brady andWeil [29] thatbiochar improves soil productivity and N plays an importantrole in sustaining high yield of rice [2 3] The percentageof total grain filling was not statistically different in all thetreatments however the total grain and dry matter yield inT2 was statistically lower than in T4 and T5 (Table 8) Thegrain yield in T5 and T4 was significantly higher than in T2and T1 (Table 8)The differences in number of panicles due tothe effect of biochar on nutrient availability and nutrient useefficiency of N fertilization might have caused the differencesin the grain yield total grain and dry matter yield (Tables 7and 8) The grain yields of T4 and T5 were not significantlydifferent although T4 had 100 N fertilization that is 25more than in T5 (Table 8) This indicates that biochar canbe used to reduce N application rate in paddy cultivation ontropical acid soils The yield of T5 (7556 t haminus1) was 4436

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 2: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

2 The Scientific World Journal

physical and chemical properties [19] However Ultisols arethe most common agricultural soils in the tropics Biocharcan be used to improve the physicochemical properties ofUltisols to boast rice yield on these soils

Biochar is pyrolysis biomass under limited or no supply ofoxygen [20] Biochar has an impact on nutrient addition andnutrient retention in soils Biochar consists mainly of mineralelements such asCa FeMgNaK P Si andAl [21]withmin-imum amount of N During pyrolysis significant proportionsof biomass N are lost by volatilization [22] The N remainingin the biochar and the fraction of N inside aromatic C struc-tures of biochar tend to be poorly available for plants uptake[22 23] Biochar has a low density and high porosity thatmakes it possible to inhabit soil microorganisms and holdmoisture up to three times its own weight [24] thereby pre-venting nutrient leaching and volatilization Surface waterinfiltration is improved in a biochar amended soil [25ndash27]Biochar consists largely of amorphous graphene sheets whichgive rise to large amounts of reactive surfaces where a widevariety of organic (both polar and nonpolar) molecules andinorganic ions are absorbed [28] andmade available for plantsabsorption High pH of biochar increased acidic soil pH[29] An increase in pH provides a wide range of benefits interms of soil quality notably by improving the availability ofnutrients to plants and in some cases it reduces the availabi-lity of detrimental elements such as Al and Fe [29]The objec-tives of this study were to (i) increase rice yield through theuse of biochar andN fertilizer only and (ii) reduceN fertilizerapplication rate by improving nutrients use efficiency Theseobjectives were based on the assumptions that chicken litterbiochar used in this study will provide all essential nutrientsrecommended for rice production except N and it will alsorelease and enhance efficient use of P and K in the soil forrice plant growth

2 Materials and Methods

Typic Paleudults (Nyalau Series) soil was sampled at the 0 to25 cm depth in an uncultivated secondary forest of UniversitiPutraMalaysia Bintulu Campus Sarawak Malaysia (latitude3∘ 121015840 14510158401015840 N and longitude 113∘ 41015840 16010158401015840 E) The soil wasair-dried after which it was ground to pass a 5mm sieve forpot trial and further sieved to pass a 2mm sieve for analysisof selected chemical and physical properties of the soilbefore and after the pot and field experiments Soil pH wasdetermined in 1 25 (soil distilled water) using a digital pHmeter [30] Soil organic matter was determined using loss ofweight on ignition after which the total carbonwas calculatedas 58 of the organic matter [31] Total N was determinedusing Kjeldahl method [32] and inorganic N (NO3

minus-N andNH4+-N) was determined using the method described by

Keeney andNelson [33]whereas total Pwas determinedusingUV-Vis Spectrophotometer (Perkin Elmer Lambda 25 USA)after blue color was developed according to the Blue method[34] Exchangeable cations were extracted with 1MNH

4

OAcpH 70 using the leachingmethod [35] and determined usingAtomic Absorption Spectrometer (AAnalyst 800 PERKINElmer Instruments Norwalk CT) The soil cation exchange

Table 1 Some selected chemical properties of Black Earth chickenlitter biochar

(a)

MacronutrientspH 85

Total carbon 637Fixed carbon 612Nitrogen 28Phosphate 26Potassium 39Calcium 59Sulphur 059Ash content 237

(b)

MicronutrientsAv particle size 05ndash2mm

mgkgminus1

Silicon 23Aluminium 15Potassium oxide 163Boron 62Copper 167Manganese 1130Zinc 856Magnesium oxide 67Arsenic 21Cadmium 07Chromium 96Mercury 006Nickel 14Lead 12Source Black Earth Company in north of Bendigo Victoria Australia

capacity (CEC) was determined with a leaching method [35]followed by steam distillation [36]

21 Chemical Composition of Biochar The Black Earth Prod-ucts chicken litter biochar used in this study was importedfrom Australia The chemical properties (Table 1) of the bio-char were up to standard whereas the arsenic cadmiumchromium copper lead mercury nickel and zinc levels areall below the set guidelines for maximum levels of heavymetals (20 5 250 375 150 4 125 and 700mgKgminus1 resp)based onAustralia CertifiedOrganic Standard 2010 (Table 1)

22 Pot Study In the greenhouse study pots (86433 cm3)were filled with 1 kg of air-dried soil (based on the bulk den-sity of the soil that is 1157 g cmminus3) that was mixed thoroughlywith 20 g of the chicken litter biochar The four replicates ofeach treatment were arranged in a basin and the basins were

The Scientific World Journal 3

Table 2 Fertilization schedule recommended by Muda Agricultural Development Authority 2013 and the equivalent rates used in the pottrial

Local rice variety MR219 105 to 111 days to maturityPlant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays aftertransplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Fertilizer type Mixture fertilizers(Government aid)

Urea(Government aid)

Additional substance of fertilizer1212172MgO + TE

Additional substance of fertilizer1212172MgO + TE

Application rates(kg haminus1) 360 kg haminus1 100 kg haminus1

(1 bag alcoveminus1) 175 kg haminus1 175 kg haminus1

Themixture fertilizers (Government aid) = 175N 155P2O5 10K2O

Table 3 Biochar rates and fertilization schedule of the pot study

Plant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays after transplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Treatments Biochar rates g hillminus1

T1 0 0 0 0 0T2 0 Mix A1 04 Mix B1 Mix B1T3 20 Mix A1 04 Mix B1 Mix B1T4 20 055 urea only 12 018 urea only 018 urea onlyT5 20 041 urea only 09 014 urea only 014 urea onlyT6 20 028 urea only 06 009 urea only 009 urea onlyT7 20 014 urea only 03 005 urea only 005 urea onlyT8 20 0 0 0 0Mix A1 = (055 g urea + 050 g TSP + 024 g MOP)Mix B1 = (018 g urea + 019 g TSP + 020 g MOP + 0014MgO)

arranged in a rain shelter atUniversiti PutraMalaysia BintuluSarawak Campus in a Complete RandomizedDesign (CRD)15-day nursed rice seeds of MR219 variety in a plastic-wareprior to transplanting were planted at a planting density of 3seedlings per pot

Treatments evaluated are as follows

(i) soil only (T1)(ii) soil + normal fertilization (T2)(iii) soil + biochar + normal fertilization (T3)(iv) soil + biochar + 100 N fertilization only (T4)(v) soil + biochar + 75 N fertilization only (T5)(vi) soil + biochar + 50 N fertilization only (T6)(vii) soil + biochar + 25 N fertilization only (T7)(viii) soil + biochar only (no fertilization) (T8)

The fertilizers used for the MR219 variety are the recom-mended fertilizer rates for rice by Muda Agricultural Devel-opment Authority (MADA) Malaysia [37] (Table 2)

The recommended rates (Table 2) by MADA [37] werescaled down based on the requirement of plant hill and thevarious percentages of N used for pot study (Table 3)

The water level in the basins was maintained at 25 cmabove the soil in the pot tomimic waterlogged conditionThefertilizers were applied on the soil surface in each pot at thegrowth stages recommended by MADA [38] (Table 3) How-ever all plants under N fertilization only show K deficiency

at 35 days after transplanting and to correct this deficiency024 g hillminus1MOP was applied The plants were managed andharvested at panicle heading stage (70th day after trans-planting) which is a major determinant of rice yield [39]Plant height number of tillers and number of leaves weremeasured at 70 days after transplanting before harvesting theabove biomass for dry matter yield and chemical analysisThe soil in the pots was air-dried and ground to pass a 2mmsieve for analysis The soil samples were analyzed using thestandard procedures stated previously The rice plant rootswere thoroughly washed with tap water followed by distilledwater after which they were oven-dried for dry weight andchemical analysis The roots and the above biomass sampleswere digested using the Single Dry Ashing Method [35] afterwhich K Ca Mg Mn Zn Fe and Cu were determinedusingAtomicAbsorption Spectrometry (AAS)whereas Pwasdetermined using the Blue method [36] Total N was deter-mined using Kjedahl method [32] Crude silica was also det-ermined using the method described by Shouichi et al [38]The nutrient concentrations were multiplied by their drymatter yield to represent nutrient uptakeThe agronomic andcrop recovery efficiency of applied N was determined usingthe formula below

AEN =119884N minus 1198840119865N

REN =119880N minus 1198800119865N

(1)

4 The Scientific World Journal

Table 4 Biochar rate and fertilization schedule of the field study

Plant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays after transplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Treatments Biochar rates g plotminus1

T1 0 0 0 0 0T2 0 Mix A2 40 Mix B1 Mix B1T4 2000 55 urea only 40 18 urea only 18 urea onlyT5 2000 403 urea only 30 14 urea only 14 urea onlyT6 2000 275 urea only 20 9 urea only 9 urea onlyT7 2000 138 urea only 10 5 urea only 5 urea onlyT8 2000 0 0 0 0Mix A2 = (55 g urea + 50 g TSP + 24 g MOP)Mix B2 = (183 g urea + 187 g TSP + 198 g MOP + 14MgO)

where 119865N is amount of (fertilizer) N applied (kg haminus1) 119884N iscrop yield with applied N (kg haminus1) 119884

0

is crop yield (kg haminus1)in a control treatment with no N 119880N is total plant N uptakein aboveground biomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot thatreceived N and 119880

0

is the total N uptake in abovegroundbiomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot that received no N[40]

23 Field Study A field study was conducted after the pottrial at the Long Term Research Grant Scheme (LRGS) riceplot at Universiti PutraMalaysia Bintulu campus on the sametype of soil (Typic Paleudults) used in the pot experimentTheexperimental area has an annual precipitation of 2200mmand a maximum and minimum mean temperature of 32 and24∘C respectivelyThe study area also has a relative humidityof 70 and 90 The experimental design used was random-ized complete block design with four replications (blocks)The total experimental area was 24m (length) times 23m(breadth) Each plot size was 2m (length) times 2m (breadth)The distance between plots was 1m and that between blockswas 3mThe soil pH P K Cu Zn Ca Fe andMg and total NNO3minus and NH4

+ of the experimental plots were determinedbefore and after the study using the procedures describedpreviously in the pot trial The treatments evaluated in thisfield study were the same as those in the pot study except T3(soil + biochar + normal fertilization)whichwas excluded T3was excluded in this field trial because its effect on dry matterproduction in the pot trial was not statistically different fromthose of T4 and T5 (Table 7) The biochar and the fertilizerrates used in the pot study (Table 3) were scaled up in thefield experiment (Table 4)

The biochar was spread on the soil surface of the exper-imental plots and thoroughly mixed a day before trans-planting 15-day nursed rice seeds of MR219 variety in aplastic-ware prior to transplanting were planted at a plantingdensity of 100 hills per experimental plot and 3 seedlingsper hill with a planting distance of 02m between rowsand 02m within The water level in the experimental plotwas maintained about 4 cm above the soil surface to mimicwaterlogged condition The rice plants were managed andharvested at different maturity day due to treatments effecton grain ripening Plant height number of tillers number of

leaves culm height and number of panicles were measuredat maturity (a day before harvesting the above biomass) fordry matter yield and chemical analysis Ten panicles werecollected from each experimental plot for grain filling andyield determinationThe soils were collected from the experi-mental plots air-dried and ground to pass a 2mm sieveThe soil and above biomass samples were analyzed using thestandard procedures stated in the pot study

24 Statistical Analysis Analysis of variance (ANOVA) wasused to test treatment effects whereas treatments means werecompared using Tukeyrsquos test [41] Simple linear regressionand Pearson correlation were used to establish relationshipbetween variables The Statistical Analysis Software version93 was used for the statistical analysis

3 Results and Discussion

31 Effects of Biochar and N Rates on Soil Chemical PropertiesThepHof the soil with coapplication of biochar and urea only(T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8) of the pot trial were significantlyhigher than that in the normal fertilization (T2) and soil only(T1) (Table 5) The exchangeable acidity and Al3+ of the soilwith coapplication of biochar and urea only (T3 T4 T5 T6T7 and T8) in the pot trial were statistically lower than in T2and T1 whereas H+ in T5 T6 T7 and T8 were lower thanin T2 (Table 5) These differences were due to application ofbiochar as biochar has high affinity for these ions In the fieldtrial Al3+ in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were significantly lower thanin T2 and T1 However the pH exchangeable acidity andH+ of the soil due to T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 in the fieldtrial were not statistically different from those of T2 and T1(Table 6) because of the large volume of soil in the field (interms of ratio to the amount of biochar used) hence reducingthe effect of biochar compared to the specific amount of soilused in the pot trial It might also be due to high acidiccations such asH+ in the fieldwhichmight have caused bufferchanges in active acidity Although the pH exchangeableacidity and H+ of the soil with biochar (T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) in the field trial were not remarkably reduced thereduction of Al3+ can be considered as the reduction of thesoil acidity as Kong et al [6] proposed that reduction of

The Scientific World Journal 5

Table5Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthep

otstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T3T4

T5T6

T7T8

pHw

53bplusmn010

52bplusmn007

56aplusmn006

58aplusmn007

58aplusmn006

59aplusmn008

58aplusmn001

57aplusmn009

Organicmatter

980cplusmn048

170bplusmn14

7205

abplusmn10

4200

abplusmn10

0195

abplusmn029

220

aplusmn10

8188

abplusmn10

3193

abplusmn10

3To

talcarbo

n113cplusmn006

197bplusmn017

238

abplusmn012

232

abplusmn012

226

abplusmn003

255

aplusmn013

218

abplusmn012

223

abplusmn012

TotalN

0077aplusmn0007

0056aplusmn000

40063aplusmn0007

0084aplusmn000

60070aplusmn0008

0070aplusmn0008

0084aplusmn0016

0077aplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3minus

105cplusmn020

193a

bcplusmn034

210

abcplusmn029

245

aplusmn045

210

abcplusmn029

228

abplusmn018

175a

bcplusmn020

123b

cplusmn018

ExchangeableNH4

+

175cplusmn020

876

aplusmn045

981aplusmn070

1033

aplusmn044

1005aplusmn044

1051aplusmn040

1016

aplusmn035

455

bplusmn045

ExchangeableP

375

cplusmn024

721cplusmn077

196

abplusmn092

1856a

bplusmn096

1707

bplusmn401

1823a

bplusmn077

1759

abplusmn053

2126aplusmn14

0To

talP

7008dplusmn065

11665

cplusmn878

22545

aplusmn1634

187bplusmn573

1876

5bplusmn419

20244

abplusmn575

21434

bplusmn2905

18315

bplusmn1942

cmolkgminus1

CEC

660

abplusmn015

635

bplusmn007

790aplusmn030

745a

bplusmn044

695

abplusmn026

618

bplusmn011

733a

bplusmn030

713a

bplusmn44

ExchangeableAc

idity

068

aplusmn0027

068

aplusmn000

6037

bplusmn0014

035

bcplusmn0016

034

bcplusmn0005

032

bcplusmn0008

031

bcplusmn0020

029

cplusmn0011

ExchangeableAl3+

053

aplusmn0013

053

aplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

6024

bplusmn0015

024

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn0010

020

bplusmn0008

ExchangeableH

+015

abplusmn0023

018

aplusmn0013

015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn0020

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0014

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0015

TotalK

+206

aplusmn032

145aplusmn014

157aplusmn026

138aplusmn012

158aplusmn014

161aplusmn033

128aplusmn025

134aplusmn012

ExchangeableK+

030

abplusmn003

018

bplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

028

abplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

037

aplusmn005

021

bplusmn003

027

abplusmn003

ExchangeableCu

2+0050fplusmn00016

006

0eplusmn00028

0082cplusmn00018

0089cplusmn0007

0097bplusmn00023

0103a

bplusmn00012

0110

aplusmn00013

0072aplusmn00026

ExchangeableMn2

+015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn000

4017

abplusmn0002

013

abplusmn0027

013

abplusmn0036

008

abplusmn0031

015

abplusmn0019

018

aplusmn0003

ExchangeableFe

2+038

abplusmn010

053

aplusmn004

037

abplusmn003

030

abplusmn008

030

bplusmn008

018

bplusmn003

026

bplusmn004

035

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+000

6abplusmn000

030005a

bplusmn000

030008a

bplusmn000

090007a

bplusmn000

06000

6abplusmn00010

0007a

bplusmn00010

000

9aplusmn00017

000

4bplusmn000

06Ex

changeableNa+

628

aplusmn207

342

aplusmn090

646

aplusmn097

564

aplusmn335

260

aplusmn010

691

aplusmn210

688

aplusmn19

8464

aplusmn19

8Ex

changeableCa

2+1759

bplusmn227

2035bplusmn14

93274

aplusmn13

82916

abplusmn14

32669a

bplusmn313

2516

abplusmn402

2889a

bplusmn291

2703a

bplusmn12

5Ex

changeableMg2

+667

aplusmn086

408

bplusmn024

675

aplusmn044

545

abplusmn021

405

bplusmn052

397

bplusmn028

329

bplusmn051

757aplusmn059

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

6 The Scientific World Journal

Table6Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthefi

eldstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T4T5

T6T7

T8Be

fore

pHw

46aplusmn016

46aplusmn020

49aplusmn020

49aplusmn019

50aplusmn014

47aplusmn017

45aplusmn011

49aplusmn004

Organicmatter

75cplusmn065

83cplusmn13

8153

aplusmn15

5130

aplusmn095

143

abplusmn091

133

aplusmn025

145

aplusmn095

108

bcplusmn085

Totalcarbo

n087

cplusmn007

096

cplusmn016

177aplusmn018

151aplusmn011

165bplusmn011

154aplusmn003

168aplusmn011

125b

cplusmn010

TotalN

004

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0007

007

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3

minus

088

aplusmn018

105aplusmn020

210

aplusmn029

175aplusmn020

175aplusmn020

193aplusmn034

140aplusmn029

105aplusmn035

ExchangeableNH4

+

193dplusmn018

333

dplusmn034

368

cdplusmn018

280

aplusmn008

298

bcplusmn015

298

abcplusmn018

228

abplusmn022

158a

bcplusmn018

AvailableP

114aplusmn018

264

aplusmn021

360

aplusmn054

488

aplusmn082

403

aplusmn074

264

aplusmn049

334

aplusmn208

284

aplusmn064

TotalP

6803aplusmn1299

7735

aplusmn639

7706aplusmn79

78622aplusmn808

7402aplusmn563

8305aplusmn831

7694aplusmn229

6480aplusmn464

cmolkgminus1

TotalK

289

aplusmn056

228

aplusmn017

176aplusmn028

222

aplusmn081

192aplusmn014

287

aplusmn112

265

aplusmn080

330

aplusmn114

AvailableK

040

dplusmn005

107a

bplusmn005

071

bcplusmn005

075

bcplusmn003

099

abplusmn018

066

cdplusmn006

037

dplusmn006

101abplusmn012

CEC

288

cplusmn018

275

cplusmn036

665

abplusmn068

593

abplusmn022

555

abplusmn054

725aplusmn048

650

abplusmn059

458

bcplusmn010

ExchangeableAc

idity

110a

bplusmn004

106a

bcplusmn013

073

cdplusmn005

074

cdplusmn005

055

dplusmn004

079

bcdplusmn009

068

dplusmn006

132aplusmn007

ExchangeableAl3+

091

aplusmn006

071

bplusmn007

043

dplusmn004

040

dplusmn001

036

dplusmn003

052

dplusmn004

049

bcplusmn003

124c

dplusmn005

ExchangeableH

+019

aplusmn007

035

aplusmn006

030

aplusmn008

034

aplusmn006

019

aplusmn003

027

aplusmn005

019

aplusmn007

008

aplusmn002

ExchangeableCu

2+00076

aplusmn000

04000

69bplusmn000

02000

69bplusmn000

09000

60abplusmn000

0500052

abplusmn00010

00032

abplusmn000

01000

67bplusmn000

0200119

abplusmn000

06Ex

changeableMn2

+044

aplusmn006

039

aplusmn007

037

aplusmn005

037

aplusmn006

040

aplusmn004

056

aplusmn005

033

aplusmn007

027

aplusmn007

ExchangeableFe

2+18

8bplusmn008

182aplusmn007

015

bplusmn010

004

bplusmn001

006

bplusmn001

005

bplusmn002

008

aplusmn001

016

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+00017

aplusmn000

0400018

bplusmn000

0900011

abplusmn000

03000

09bplusmn000

0200023

bplusmn00011

00018

abplusmn00012

00037

bplusmn00019

000

68bplusmn000

08Ex

changeableNa+

521

aplusmn034

477

aplusmn021

449

aplusmn009

443

aplusmn008

468

aplusmn018

432

aplusmn015

487

aplusmn063

525

aplusmn039

ExchangeableCa

2+1770

aplusmn13

71812

bplusmn12

31941bplusmn117

1982a

bplusmn070

1896a

bplusmn19

31990a

bplusmn047

1689bplusmn18

52639

abplusmn276

ExchangeableMg2

+1479bplusmn028

1222aplusmn201

1123

aplusmn13

01142a

bplusmn056

1214

abplusmn14

81555aplusmn13

11323aplusmn225

527

aplusmn093

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

The Scientific World Journal 7

Table 7 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 7620d plusmn 117 8648c plusmn 048 9838a plusmn 113 9808a plusmn 079 9480ab plusmn 076 9315b plusmn 046 8805c plusmn 102 8005d plusmn 107

hillminus1

Number of tillers 60e plusmn 010 12c plusmn 029 15a plusmn 025 16a plusmn 029 13b plusmn 048 13bc plusmn 041 12c plusmn 029 10d plusmn 025Number of leaves 8f plusmn 144 66c plusmn 129 81a plusmn 085 78ab plusmn 065 73ab plusmn 125 75b plusmn 065 57c plusmn 138 38e plusmn 065

g hillminus1

Root dry weight 311d plusmn 026 1063bc plusmn 057 1455a plusmn 040 1158b plusmn 008 1174b plusmn 007 1094b plusmn 004 928c plusmn 022 924c plusmn 060Dry matter yield 586c plusmn 051 2315c plusmn 084 3381a plusmn 032 3355a plusmn 050 3157a plusmn 075 2737b plusmn 106 2354c plusmn 021 1631d plusmn 038Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 8 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 725c plusmn 277 930ab plusmn 142 1018a plusmn 081 1005ab plusmn 083 952ab plusmn 143 907b plusmn 134 730c plusmn 384Culm height (cm) 589c plusmn 234 758b plusmn 103 808a plusmn 077 812a plusmn 167 794a plusmn 151 737a plusmn 059 580a plusmn 446Number of tillers per 004m2 8b plusmn 030 12ab plusmn 049 16a plusmn 073 15a plusmn 029 12ab plusmn 040 12ab plusmn 034 10b plusmn 056Number of leaves per 004m2 8f plusmn 025 66c plusmn 078 81a plusmn 274 78ab plusmn 050 73ab plusmn 064 75b plusmn 073 38e plusmn 106Number of panicles per 004m2 7d plusmn 014 11b plusmn 018 13a plusmn 041 13a plusmn 045 10bc plusmn 052 9c plusmn 074 6d plusmn 016Dry matter yield (g per 004m2) 56e plusmn 060 170bc plusmn 198 277a plusmn 224 232ab plusmn 109 197b plusmn 099 131cd plusmn 134 75de plusmn 151Total grain per panicle 110bc plusmn 1164 104c plusmn 219 136abc plusmn 221 160a plusmn 957 133abc plusmn 643 151ab plusmn 1708 143abc plusmn 1528 total grain filling per panicle 6592a plusmn 181 6330a plusmn 201 6691a plusmn 102 6146a plusmn 193 6699a plusmn 236 6756a plusmn 134 6851a plusmn 126Yield (t haminus1) 2612d plusmn 027 4206cd plusmn 019 6794ab plusmn 025 7559a plusmn 043 5233bc plusmn 048 5184bc plusmn 066 3429d plusmn 042Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

aluminum toxicity in tropical soils leads to reduction of soilacidity and this process improves plant productivity In thepot trial the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 and T8 on OMTC Mn2+ Fe2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+ NO3

minus NH4+ total

N CEC and K+ were similar However Cu2+ total P andavailable P were significantly higher in T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8 than in T2 (Table 5) In the field trial CEC OMand TC in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were statistically higher thanin T2 and T1 but NH4

+ was significantly higher in T5 T6and T7 than in T2 and T1 (Table 6) The soil NH4

+ OMand TC in the field were increased due to biochar application[29] Additionally total N and available P of the plots whichreceived T5 and T6 in the field trial were significantly higherthan in T2 and T1 However the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5T6 T7 and T8 on soil Cu2+ Mn2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+NO3minus total P total K+ and exchangeable K+ were similar

(Table 6) Although Nyalau Series is not productive and alsoprone to nutrient leaching under flooded condition [42] thechicken litter biochar used in this study generally improvedthe chemical properties of this soil [43] The differences insome of the chemical elements among the soils amendedwithbiochar were due to substitution between different nutrientelements in the rice plants [44] Furthermore the nitrogenrates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6 T7 andT8 stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K (Tables 5 and 6)

32 Aboveground Variables In the pot study plant heightnumber of leaves number of tillers and dry matter yield(DMY)due toT3 T4 andT5were significantly higher than in

T2 and T1 However plant height number of leaves and drymatter yield (DMY) among T3 T4 and T5 were not signifi-cantly different but the number of tillers was not significantlydifferent between T3 and T4 (Table 7) In the field studynumber of tillers and plant height due to T2 and T1 were notsignificantly different from those of T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8)However culm height due to T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 wassignificantly lower than in T2 and T1 The number of leavesin T4 T5 T6 and T7 was significantly higher than in T2 andT1 (Table 8)The number of panicles in T4 and T5 was higherand significantly different from those of T2 and T1 (Table 8)The differences in nutrients availability in the soil (Tables 5and 6) due to coapplication of biochar and urea only mighthave caused the differences in the aforementioned growthvariables confirming the findings of Brady andWeil [29] thatbiochar improves soil productivity and N plays an importantrole in sustaining high yield of rice [2 3] The percentageof total grain filling was not statistically different in all thetreatments however the total grain and dry matter yield inT2 was statistically lower than in T4 and T5 (Table 8) Thegrain yield in T5 and T4 was significantly higher than in T2and T1 (Table 8)The differences in number of panicles due tothe effect of biochar on nutrient availability and nutrient useefficiency of N fertilization might have caused the differencesin the grain yield total grain and dry matter yield (Tables 7and 8) The grain yields of T4 and T5 were not significantlydifferent although T4 had 100 N fertilization that is 25more than in T5 (Table 8) This indicates that biochar canbe used to reduce N application rate in paddy cultivation ontropical acid soils The yield of T5 (7556 t haminus1) was 4436

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 3: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

The Scientific World Journal 3

Table 2 Fertilization schedule recommended by Muda Agricultural Development Authority 2013 and the equivalent rates used in the pottrial

Local rice variety MR219 105 to 111 days to maturityPlant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays aftertransplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Fertilizer type Mixture fertilizers(Government aid)

Urea(Government aid)

Additional substance of fertilizer1212172MgO + TE

Additional substance of fertilizer1212172MgO + TE

Application rates(kg haminus1) 360 kg haminus1 100 kg haminus1

(1 bag alcoveminus1) 175 kg haminus1 175 kg haminus1

Themixture fertilizers (Government aid) = 175N 155P2O5 10K2O

Table 3 Biochar rates and fertilization schedule of the pot study

Plant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays after transplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Treatments Biochar rates g hillminus1

T1 0 0 0 0 0T2 0 Mix A1 04 Mix B1 Mix B1T3 20 Mix A1 04 Mix B1 Mix B1T4 20 055 urea only 12 018 urea only 018 urea onlyT5 20 041 urea only 09 014 urea only 014 urea onlyT6 20 028 urea only 06 009 urea only 009 urea onlyT7 20 014 urea only 03 005 urea only 005 urea onlyT8 20 0 0 0 0Mix A1 = (055 g urea + 050 g TSP + 024 g MOP)Mix B1 = (018 g urea + 019 g TSP + 020 g MOP + 0014MgO)

arranged in a rain shelter atUniversiti PutraMalaysia BintuluSarawak Campus in a Complete RandomizedDesign (CRD)15-day nursed rice seeds of MR219 variety in a plastic-wareprior to transplanting were planted at a planting density of 3seedlings per pot

Treatments evaluated are as follows

(i) soil only (T1)(ii) soil + normal fertilization (T2)(iii) soil + biochar + normal fertilization (T3)(iv) soil + biochar + 100 N fertilization only (T4)(v) soil + biochar + 75 N fertilization only (T5)(vi) soil + biochar + 50 N fertilization only (T6)(vii) soil + biochar + 25 N fertilization only (T7)(viii) soil + biochar only (no fertilization) (T8)

The fertilizers used for the MR219 variety are the recom-mended fertilizer rates for rice by Muda Agricultural Devel-opment Authority (MADA) Malaysia [37] (Table 2)

The recommended rates (Table 2) by MADA [37] werescaled down based on the requirement of plant hill and thevarious percentages of N used for pot study (Table 3)

The water level in the basins was maintained at 25 cmabove the soil in the pot tomimic waterlogged conditionThefertilizers were applied on the soil surface in each pot at thegrowth stages recommended by MADA [38] (Table 3) How-ever all plants under N fertilization only show K deficiency

at 35 days after transplanting and to correct this deficiency024 g hillminus1MOP was applied The plants were managed andharvested at panicle heading stage (70th day after trans-planting) which is a major determinant of rice yield [39]Plant height number of tillers and number of leaves weremeasured at 70 days after transplanting before harvesting theabove biomass for dry matter yield and chemical analysisThe soil in the pots was air-dried and ground to pass a 2mmsieve for analysis The soil samples were analyzed using thestandard procedures stated previously The rice plant rootswere thoroughly washed with tap water followed by distilledwater after which they were oven-dried for dry weight andchemical analysis The roots and the above biomass sampleswere digested using the Single Dry Ashing Method [35] afterwhich K Ca Mg Mn Zn Fe and Cu were determinedusingAtomicAbsorption Spectrometry (AAS)whereas Pwasdetermined using the Blue method [36] Total N was deter-mined using Kjedahl method [32] Crude silica was also det-ermined using the method described by Shouichi et al [38]The nutrient concentrations were multiplied by their drymatter yield to represent nutrient uptakeThe agronomic andcrop recovery efficiency of applied N was determined usingthe formula below

AEN =119884N minus 1198840119865N

REN =119880N minus 1198800119865N

(1)

4 The Scientific World Journal

Table 4 Biochar rate and fertilization schedule of the field study

Plant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays after transplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Treatments Biochar rates g plotminus1

T1 0 0 0 0 0T2 0 Mix A2 40 Mix B1 Mix B1T4 2000 55 urea only 40 18 urea only 18 urea onlyT5 2000 403 urea only 30 14 urea only 14 urea onlyT6 2000 275 urea only 20 9 urea only 9 urea onlyT7 2000 138 urea only 10 5 urea only 5 urea onlyT8 2000 0 0 0 0Mix A2 = (55 g urea + 50 g TSP + 24 g MOP)Mix B2 = (183 g urea + 187 g TSP + 198 g MOP + 14MgO)

where 119865N is amount of (fertilizer) N applied (kg haminus1) 119884N iscrop yield with applied N (kg haminus1) 119884

0

is crop yield (kg haminus1)in a control treatment with no N 119880N is total plant N uptakein aboveground biomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot thatreceived N and 119880

0

is the total N uptake in abovegroundbiomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot that received no N[40]

23 Field Study A field study was conducted after the pottrial at the Long Term Research Grant Scheme (LRGS) riceplot at Universiti PutraMalaysia Bintulu campus on the sametype of soil (Typic Paleudults) used in the pot experimentTheexperimental area has an annual precipitation of 2200mmand a maximum and minimum mean temperature of 32 and24∘C respectivelyThe study area also has a relative humidityof 70 and 90 The experimental design used was random-ized complete block design with four replications (blocks)The total experimental area was 24m (length) times 23m(breadth) Each plot size was 2m (length) times 2m (breadth)The distance between plots was 1m and that between blockswas 3mThe soil pH P K Cu Zn Ca Fe andMg and total NNO3minus and NH4

+ of the experimental plots were determinedbefore and after the study using the procedures describedpreviously in the pot trial The treatments evaluated in thisfield study were the same as those in the pot study except T3(soil + biochar + normal fertilization)whichwas excluded T3was excluded in this field trial because its effect on dry matterproduction in the pot trial was not statistically different fromthose of T4 and T5 (Table 7) The biochar and the fertilizerrates used in the pot study (Table 3) were scaled up in thefield experiment (Table 4)

The biochar was spread on the soil surface of the exper-imental plots and thoroughly mixed a day before trans-planting 15-day nursed rice seeds of MR219 variety in aplastic-ware prior to transplanting were planted at a plantingdensity of 100 hills per experimental plot and 3 seedlingsper hill with a planting distance of 02m between rowsand 02m within The water level in the experimental plotwas maintained about 4 cm above the soil surface to mimicwaterlogged condition The rice plants were managed andharvested at different maturity day due to treatments effecton grain ripening Plant height number of tillers number of

leaves culm height and number of panicles were measuredat maturity (a day before harvesting the above biomass) fordry matter yield and chemical analysis Ten panicles werecollected from each experimental plot for grain filling andyield determinationThe soils were collected from the experi-mental plots air-dried and ground to pass a 2mm sieveThe soil and above biomass samples were analyzed using thestandard procedures stated in the pot study

24 Statistical Analysis Analysis of variance (ANOVA) wasused to test treatment effects whereas treatments means werecompared using Tukeyrsquos test [41] Simple linear regressionand Pearson correlation were used to establish relationshipbetween variables The Statistical Analysis Software version93 was used for the statistical analysis

3 Results and Discussion

31 Effects of Biochar and N Rates on Soil Chemical PropertiesThepHof the soil with coapplication of biochar and urea only(T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8) of the pot trial were significantlyhigher than that in the normal fertilization (T2) and soil only(T1) (Table 5) The exchangeable acidity and Al3+ of the soilwith coapplication of biochar and urea only (T3 T4 T5 T6T7 and T8) in the pot trial were statistically lower than in T2and T1 whereas H+ in T5 T6 T7 and T8 were lower thanin T2 (Table 5) These differences were due to application ofbiochar as biochar has high affinity for these ions In the fieldtrial Al3+ in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were significantly lower thanin T2 and T1 However the pH exchangeable acidity andH+ of the soil due to T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 in the fieldtrial were not statistically different from those of T2 and T1(Table 6) because of the large volume of soil in the field (interms of ratio to the amount of biochar used) hence reducingthe effect of biochar compared to the specific amount of soilused in the pot trial It might also be due to high acidiccations such asH+ in the fieldwhichmight have caused bufferchanges in active acidity Although the pH exchangeableacidity and H+ of the soil with biochar (T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) in the field trial were not remarkably reduced thereduction of Al3+ can be considered as the reduction of thesoil acidity as Kong et al [6] proposed that reduction of

The Scientific World Journal 5

Table5Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthep

otstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T3T4

T5T6

T7T8

pHw

53bplusmn010

52bplusmn007

56aplusmn006

58aplusmn007

58aplusmn006

59aplusmn008

58aplusmn001

57aplusmn009

Organicmatter

980cplusmn048

170bplusmn14

7205

abplusmn10

4200

abplusmn10

0195

abplusmn029

220

aplusmn10

8188

abplusmn10

3193

abplusmn10

3To

talcarbo

n113cplusmn006

197bplusmn017

238

abplusmn012

232

abplusmn012

226

abplusmn003

255

aplusmn013

218

abplusmn012

223

abplusmn012

TotalN

0077aplusmn0007

0056aplusmn000

40063aplusmn0007

0084aplusmn000

60070aplusmn0008

0070aplusmn0008

0084aplusmn0016

0077aplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3minus

105cplusmn020

193a

bcplusmn034

210

abcplusmn029

245

aplusmn045

210

abcplusmn029

228

abplusmn018

175a

bcplusmn020

123b

cplusmn018

ExchangeableNH4

+

175cplusmn020

876

aplusmn045

981aplusmn070

1033

aplusmn044

1005aplusmn044

1051aplusmn040

1016

aplusmn035

455

bplusmn045

ExchangeableP

375

cplusmn024

721cplusmn077

196

abplusmn092

1856a

bplusmn096

1707

bplusmn401

1823a

bplusmn077

1759

abplusmn053

2126aplusmn14

0To

talP

7008dplusmn065

11665

cplusmn878

22545

aplusmn1634

187bplusmn573

1876

5bplusmn419

20244

abplusmn575

21434

bplusmn2905

18315

bplusmn1942

cmolkgminus1

CEC

660

abplusmn015

635

bplusmn007

790aplusmn030

745a

bplusmn044

695

abplusmn026

618

bplusmn011

733a

bplusmn030

713a

bplusmn44

ExchangeableAc

idity

068

aplusmn0027

068

aplusmn000

6037

bplusmn0014

035

bcplusmn0016

034

bcplusmn0005

032

bcplusmn0008

031

bcplusmn0020

029

cplusmn0011

ExchangeableAl3+

053

aplusmn0013

053

aplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

6024

bplusmn0015

024

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn0010

020

bplusmn0008

ExchangeableH

+015

abplusmn0023

018

aplusmn0013

015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn0020

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0014

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0015

TotalK

+206

aplusmn032

145aplusmn014

157aplusmn026

138aplusmn012

158aplusmn014

161aplusmn033

128aplusmn025

134aplusmn012

ExchangeableK+

030

abplusmn003

018

bplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

028

abplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

037

aplusmn005

021

bplusmn003

027

abplusmn003

ExchangeableCu

2+0050fplusmn00016

006

0eplusmn00028

0082cplusmn00018

0089cplusmn0007

0097bplusmn00023

0103a

bplusmn00012

0110

aplusmn00013

0072aplusmn00026

ExchangeableMn2

+015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn000

4017

abplusmn0002

013

abplusmn0027

013

abplusmn0036

008

abplusmn0031

015

abplusmn0019

018

aplusmn0003

ExchangeableFe

2+038

abplusmn010

053

aplusmn004

037

abplusmn003

030

abplusmn008

030

bplusmn008

018

bplusmn003

026

bplusmn004

035

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+000

6abplusmn000

030005a

bplusmn000

030008a

bplusmn000

090007a

bplusmn000

06000

6abplusmn00010

0007a

bplusmn00010

000

9aplusmn00017

000

4bplusmn000

06Ex

changeableNa+

628

aplusmn207

342

aplusmn090

646

aplusmn097

564

aplusmn335

260

aplusmn010

691

aplusmn210

688

aplusmn19

8464

aplusmn19

8Ex

changeableCa

2+1759

bplusmn227

2035bplusmn14

93274

aplusmn13

82916

abplusmn14

32669a

bplusmn313

2516

abplusmn402

2889a

bplusmn291

2703a

bplusmn12

5Ex

changeableMg2

+667

aplusmn086

408

bplusmn024

675

aplusmn044

545

abplusmn021

405

bplusmn052

397

bplusmn028

329

bplusmn051

757aplusmn059

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

6 The Scientific World Journal

Table6Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthefi

eldstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T4T5

T6T7

T8Be

fore

pHw

46aplusmn016

46aplusmn020

49aplusmn020

49aplusmn019

50aplusmn014

47aplusmn017

45aplusmn011

49aplusmn004

Organicmatter

75cplusmn065

83cplusmn13

8153

aplusmn15

5130

aplusmn095

143

abplusmn091

133

aplusmn025

145

aplusmn095

108

bcplusmn085

Totalcarbo

n087

cplusmn007

096

cplusmn016

177aplusmn018

151aplusmn011

165bplusmn011

154aplusmn003

168aplusmn011

125b

cplusmn010

TotalN

004

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0007

007

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3

minus

088

aplusmn018

105aplusmn020

210

aplusmn029

175aplusmn020

175aplusmn020

193aplusmn034

140aplusmn029

105aplusmn035

ExchangeableNH4

+

193dplusmn018

333

dplusmn034

368

cdplusmn018

280

aplusmn008

298

bcplusmn015

298

abcplusmn018

228

abplusmn022

158a

bcplusmn018

AvailableP

114aplusmn018

264

aplusmn021

360

aplusmn054

488

aplusmn082

403

aplusmn074

264

aplusmn049

334

aplusmn208

284

aplusmn064

TotalP

6803aplusmn1299

7735

aplusmn639

7706aplusmn79

78622aplusmn808

7402aplusmn563

8305aplusmn831

7694aplusmn229

6480aplusmn464

cmolkgminus1

TotalK

289

aplusmn056

228

aplusmn017

176aplusmn028

222

aplusmn081

192aplusmn014

287

aplusmn112

265

aplusmn080

330

aplusmn114

AvailableK

040

dplusmn005

107a

bplusmn005

071

bcplusmn005

075

bcplusmn003

099

abplusmn018

066

cdplusmn006

037

dplusmn006

101abplusmn012

CEC

288

cplusmn018

275

cplusmn036

665

abplusmn068

593

abplusmn022

555

abplusmn054

725aplusmn048

650

abplusmn059

458

bcplusmn010

ExchangeableAc

idity

110a

bplusmn004

106a

bcplusmn013

073

cdplusmn005

074

cdplusmn005

055

dplusmn004

079

bcdplusmn009

068

dplusmn006

132aplusmn007

ExchangeableAl3+

091

aplusmn006

071

bplusmn007

043

dplusmn004

040

dplusmn001

036

dplusmn003

052

dplusmn004

049

bcplusmn003

124c

dplusmn005

ExchangeableH

+019

aplusmn007

035

aplusmn006

030

aplusmn008

034

aplusmn006

019

aplusmn003

027

aplusmn005

019

aplusmn007

008

aplusmn002

ExchangeableCu

2+00076

aplusmn000

04000

69bplusmn000

02000

69bplusmn000

09000

60abplusmn000

0500052

abplusmn00010

00032

abplusmn000

01000

67bplusmn000

0200119

abplusmn000

06Ex

changeableMn2

+044

aplusmn006

039

aplusmn007

037

aplusmn005

037

aplusmn006

040

aplusmn004

056

aplusmn005

033

aplusmn007

027

aplusmn007

ExchangeableFe

2+18

8bplusmn008

182aplusmn007

015

bplusmn010

004

bplusmn001

006

bplusmn001

005

bplusmn002

008

aplusmn001

016

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+00017

aplusmn000

0400018

bplusmn000

0900011

abplusmn000

03000

09bplusmn000

0200023

bplusmn00011

00018

abplusmn00012

00037

bplusmn00019

000

68bplusmn000

08Ex

changeableNa+

521

aplusmn034

477

aplusmn021

449

aplusmn009

443

aplusmn008

468

aplusmn018

432

aplusmn015

487

aplusmn063

525

aplusmn039

ExchangeableCa

2+1770

aplusmn13

71812

bplusmn12

31941bplusmn117

1982a

bplusmn070

1896a

bplusmn19

31990a

bplusmn047

1689bplusmn18

52639

abplusmn276

ExchangeableMg2

+1479bplusmn028

1222aplusmn201

1123

aplusmn13

01142a

bplusmn056

1214

abplusmn14

81555aplusmn13

11323aplusmn225

527

aplusmn093

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

The Scientific World Journal 7

Table 7 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 7620d plusmn 117 8648c plusmn 048 9838a plusmn 113 9808a plusmn 079 9480ab plusmn 076 9315b plusmn 046 8805c plusmn 102 8005d plusmn 107

hillminus1

Number of tillers 60e plusmn 010 12c plusmn 029 15a plusmn 025 16a plusmn 029 13b plusmn 048 13bc plusmn 041 12c plusmn 029 10d plusmn 025Number of leaves 8f plusmn 144 66c plusmn 129 81a plusmn 085 78ab plusmn 065 73ab plusmn 125 75b plusmn 065 57c plusmn 138 38e plusmn 065

g hillminus1

Root dry weight 311d plusmn 026 1063bc plusmn 057 1455a plusmn 040 1158b plusmn 008 1174b plusmn 007 1094b plusmn 004 928c plusmn 022 924c plusmn 060Dry matter yield 586c plusmn 051 2315c plusmn 084 3381a plusmn 032 3355a plusmn 050 3157a plusmn 075 2737b plusmn 106 2354c plusmn 021 1631d plusmn 038Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 8 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 725c plusmn 277 930ab plusmn 142 1018a plusmn 081 1005ab plusmn 083 952ab plusmn 143 907b plusmn 134 730c plusmn 384Culm height (cm) 589c plusmn 234 758b plusmn 103 808a plusmn 077 812a plusmn 167 794a plusmn 151 737a plusmn 059 580a plusmn 446Number of tillers per 004m2 8b plusmn 030 12ab plusmn 049 16a plusmn 073 15a plusmn 029 12ab plusmn 040 12ab plusmn 034 10b plusmn 056Number of leaves per 004m2 8f plusmn 025 66c plusmn 078 81a plusmn 274 78ab plusmn 050 73ab plusmn 064 75b plusmn 073 38e plusmn 106Number of panicles per 004m2 7d plusmn 014 11b plusmn 018 13a plusmn 041 13a plusmn 045 10bc plusmn 052 9c plusmn 074 6d plusmn 016Dry matter yield (g per 004m2) 56e plusmn 060 170bc plusmn 198 277a plusmn 224 232ab plusmn 109 197b plusmn 099 131cd plusmn 134 75de plusmn 151Total grain per panicle 110bc plusmn 1164 104c plusmn 219 136abc plusmn 221 160a plusmn 957 133abc plusmn 643 151ab plusmn 1708 143abc plusmn 1528 total grain filling per panicle 6592a plusmn 181 6330a plusmn 201 6691a plusmn 102 6146a plusmn 193 6699a plusmn 236 6756a plusmn 134 6851a plusmn 126Yield (t haminus1) 2612d plusmn 027 4206cd plusmn 019 6794ab plusmn 025 7559a plusmn 043 5233bc plusmn 048 5184bc plusmn 066 3429d plusmn 042Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

aluminum toxicity in tropical soils leads to reduction of soilacidity and this process improves plant productivity In thepot trial the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 and T8 on OMTC Mn2+ Fe2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+ NO3

minus NH4+ total

N CEC and K+ were similar However Cu2+ total P andavailable P were significantly higher in T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8 than in T2 (Table 5) In the field trial CEC OMand TC in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were statistically higher thanin T2 and T1 but NH4

+ was significantly higher in T5 T6and T7 than in T2 and T1 (Table 6) The soil NH4

+ OMand TC in the field were increased due to biochar application[29] Additionally total N and available P of the plots whichreceived T5 and T6 in the field trial were significantly higherthan in T2 and T1 However the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5T6 T7 and T8 on soil Cu2+ Mn2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+NO3minus total P total K+ and exchangeable K+ were similar

(Table 6) Although Nyalau Series is not productive and alsoprone to nutrient leaching under flooded condition [42] thechicken litter biochar used in this study generally improvedthe chemical properties of this soil [43] The differences insome of the chemical elements among the soils amendedwithbiochar were due to substitution between different nutrientelements in the rice plants [44] Furthermore the nitrogenrates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6 T7 andT8 stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K (Tables 5 and 6)

32 Aboveground Variables In the pot study plant heightnumber of leaves number of tillers and dry matter yield(DMY)due toT3 T4 andT5were significantly higher than in

T2 and T1 However plant height number of leaves and drymatter yield (DMY) among T3 T4 and T5 were not signifi-cantly different but the number of tillers was not significantlydifferent between T3 and T4 (Table 7) In the field studynumber of tillers and plant height due to T2 and T1 were notsignificantly different from those of T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8)However culm height due to T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 wassignificantly lower than in T2 and T1 The number of leavesin T4 T5 T6 and T7 was significantly higher than in T2 andT1 (Table 8)The number of panicles in T4 and T5 was higherand significantly different from those of T2 and T1 (Table 8)The differences in nutrients availability in the soil (Tables 5and 6) due to coapplication of biochar and urea only mighthave caused the differences in the aforementioned growthvariables confirming the findings of Brady andWeil [29] thatbiochar improves soil productivity and N plays an importantrole in sustaining high yield of rice [2 3] The percentageof total grain filling was not statistically different in all thetreatments however the total grain and dry matter yield inT2 was statistically lower than in T4 and T5 (Table 8) Thegrain yield in T5 and T4 was significantly higher than in T2and T1 (Table 8)The differences in number of panicles due tothe effect of biochar on nutrient availability and nutrient useefficiency of N fertilization might have caused the differencesin the grain yield total grain and dry matter yield (Tables 7and 8) The grain yields of T4 and T5 were not significantlydifferent although T4 had 100 N fertilization that is 25more than in T5 (Table 8) This indicates that biochar canbe used to reduce N application rate in paddy cultivation ontropical acid soils The yield of T5 (7556 t haminus1) was 4436

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 4: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

4 The Scientific World Journal

Table 4 Biochar rate and fertilization schedule of the field study

Plant growth stages Early tillering growth Active growth Formation of stalk Grain fillingDays after transplanting 15 to 20 35 to 40 50 to 55 70 to 75

Treatments Biochar rates g plotminus1

T1 0 0 0 0 0T2 0 Mix A2 40 Mix B1 Mix B1T4 2000 55 urea only 40 18 urea only 18 urea onlyT5 2000 403 urea only 30 14 urea only 14 urea onlyT6 2000 275 urea only 20 9 urea only 9 urea onlyT7 2000 138 urea only 10 5 urea only 5 urea onlyT8 2000 0 0 0 0Mix A2 = (55 g urea + 50 g TSP + 24 g MOP)Mix B2 = (183 g urea + 187 g TSP + 198 g MOP + 14MgO)

where 119865N is amount of (fertilizer) N applied (kg haminus1) 119884N iscrop yield with applied N (kg haminus1) 119884

0

is crop yield (kg haminus1)in a control treatment with no N 119880N is total plant N uptakein aboveground biomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot thatreceived N and 119880

0

is the total N uptake in abovegroundbiomass at maturity (kg haminus1) in a plot that received no N[40]

23 Field Study A field study was conducted after the pottrial at the Long Term Research Grant Scheme (LRGS) riceplot at Universiti PutraMalaysia Bintulu campus on the sametype of soil (Typic Paleudults) used in the pot experimentTheexperimental area has an annual precipitation of 2200mmand a maximum and minimum mean temperature of 32 and24∘C respectivelyThe study area also has a relative humidityof 70 and 90 The experimental design used was random-ized complete block design with four replications (blocks)The total experimental area was 24m (length) times 23m(breadth) Each plot size was 2m (length) times 2m (breadth)The distance between plots was 1m and that between blockswas 3mThe soil pH P K Cu Zn Ca Fe andMg and total NNO3minus and NH4

+ of the experimental plots were determinedbefore and after the study using the procedures describedpreviously in the pot trial The treatments evaluated in thisfield study were the same as those in the pot study except T3(soil + biochar + normal fertilization)whichwas excluded T3was excluded in this field trial because its effect on dry matterproduction in the pot trial was not statistically different fromthose of T4 and T5 (Table 7) The biochar and the fertilizerrates used in the pot study (Table 3) were scaled up in thefield experiment (Table 4)

The biochar was spread on the soil surface of the exper-imental plots and thoroughly mixed a day before trans-planting 15-day nursed rice seeds of MR219 variety in aplastic-ware prior to transplanting were planted at a plantingdensity of 100 hills per experimental plot and 3 seedlingsper hill with a planting distance of 02m between rowsand 02m within The water level in the experimental plotwas maintained about 4 cm above the soil surface to mimicwaterlogged condition The rice plants were managed andharvested at different maturity day due to treatments effecton grain ripening Plant height number of tillers number of

leaves culm height and number of panicles were measuredat maturity (a day before harvesting the above biomass) fordry matter yield and chemical analysis Ten panicles werecollected from each experimental plot for grain filling andyield determinationThe soils were collected from the experi-mental plots air-dried and ground to pass a 2mm sieveThe soil and above biomass samples were analyzed using thestandard procedures stated in the pot study

24 Statistical Analysis Analysis of variance (ANOVA) wasused to test treatment effects whereas treatments means werecompared using Tukeyrsquos test [41] Simple linear regressionand Pearson correlation were used to establish relationshipbetween variables The Statistical Analysis Software version93 was used for the statistical analysis

3 Results and Discussion

31 Effects of Biochar and N Rates on Soil Chemical PropertiesThepHof the soil with coapplication of biochar and urea only(T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8) of the pot trial were significantlyhigher than that in the normal fertilization (T2) and soil only(T1) (Table 5) The exchangeable acidity and Al3+ of the soilwith coapplication of biochar and urea only (T3 T4 T5 T6T7 and T8) in the pot trial were statistically lower than in T2and T1 whereas H+ in T5 T6 T7 and T8 were lower thanin T2 (Table 5) These differences were due to application ofbiochar as biochar has high affinity for these ions In the fieldtrial Al3+ in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were significantly lower thanin T2 and T1 However the pH exchangeable acidity andH+ of the soil due to T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 in the fieldtrial were not statistically different from those of T2 and T1(Table 6) because of the large volume of soil in the field (interms of ratio to the amount of biochar used) hence reducingthe effect of biochar compared to the specific amount of soilused in the pot trial It might also be due to high acidiccations such asH+ in the fieldwhichmight have caused bufferchanges in active acidity Although the pH exchangeableacidity and H+ of the soil with biochar (T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) in the field trial were not remarkably reduced thereduction of Al3+ can be considered as the reduction of thesoil acidity as Kong et al [6] proposed that reduction of

The Scientific World Journal 5

Table5Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthep

otstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T3T4

T5T6

T7T8

pHw

53bplusmn010

52bplusmn007

56aplusmn006

58aplusmn007

58aplusmn006

59aplusmn008

58aplusmn001

57aplusmn009

Organicmatter

980cplusmn048

170bplusmn14

7205

abplusmn10

4200

abplusmn10

0195

abplusmn029

220

aplusmn10

8188

abplusmn10

3193

abplusmn10

3To

talcarbo

n113cplusmn006

197bplusmn017

238

abplusmn012

232

abplusmn012

226

abplusmn003

255

aplusmn013

218

abplusmn012

223

abplusmn012

TotalN

0077aplusmn0007

0056aplusmn000

40063aplusmn0007

0084aplusmn000

60070aplusmn0008

0070aplusmn0008

0084aplusmn0016

0077aplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3minus

105cplusmn020

193a

bcplusmn034

210

abcplusmn029

245

aplusmn045

210

abcplusmn029

228

abplusmn018

175a

bcplusmn020

123b

cplusmn018

ExchangeableNH4

+

175cplusmn020

876

aplusmn045

981aplusmn070

1033

aplusmn044

1005aplusmn044

1051aplusmn040

1016

aplusmn035

455

bplusmn045

ExchangeableP

375

cplusmn024

721cplusmn077

196

abplusmn092

1856a

bplusmn096

1707

bplusmn401

1823a

bplusmn077

1759

abplusmn053

2126aplusmn14

0To

talP

7008dplusmn065

11665

cplusmn878

22545

aplusmn1634

187bplusmn573

1876

5bplusmn419

20244

abplusmn575

21434

bplusmn2905

18315

bplusmn1942

cmolkgminus1

CEC

660

abplusmn015

635

bplusmn007

790aplusmn030

745a

bplusmn044

695

abplusmn026

618

bplusmn011

733a

bplusmn030

713a

bplusmn44

ExchangeableAc

idity

068

aplusmn0027

068

aplusmn000

6037

bplusmn0014

035

bcplusmn0016

034

bcplusmn0005

032

bcplusmn0008

031

bcplusmn0020

029

cplusmn0011

ExchangeableAl3+

053

aplusmn0013

053

aplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

6024

bplusmn0015

024

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn0010

020

bplusmn0008

ExchangeableH

+015

abplusmn0023

018

aplusmn0013

015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn0020

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0014

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0015

TotalK

+206

aplusmn032

145aplusmn014

157aplusmn026

138aplusmn012

158aplusmn014

161aplusmn033

128aplusmn025

134aplusmn012

ExchangeableK+

030

abplusmn003

018

bplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

028

abplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

037

aplusmn005

021

bplusmn003

027

abplusmn003

ExchangeableCu

2+0050fplusmn00016

006

0eplusmn00028

0082cplusmn00018

0089cplusmn0007

0097bplusmn00023

0103a

bplusmn00012

0110

aplusmn00013

0072aplusmn00026

ExchangeableMn2

+015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn000

4017

abplusmn0002

013

abplusmn0027

013

abplusmn0036

008

abplusmn0031

015

abplusmn0019

018

aplusmn0003

ExchangeableFe

2+038

abplusmn010

053

aplusmn004

037

abplusmn003

030

abplusmn008

030

bplusmn008

018

bplusmn003

026

bplusmn004

035

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+000

6abplusmn000

030005a

bplusmn000

030008a

bplusmn000

090007a

bplusmn000

06000

6abplusmn00010

0007a

bplusmn00010

000

9aplusmn00017

000

4bplusmn000

06Ex

changeableNa+

628

aplusmn207

342

aplusmn090

646

aplusmn097

564

aplusmn335

260

aplusmn010

691

aplusmn210

688

aplusmn19

8464

aplusmn19

8Ex

changeableCa

2+1759

bplusmn227

2035bplusmn14

93274

aplusmn13

82916

abplusmn14

32669a

bplusmn313

2516

abplusmn402

2889a

bplusmn291

2703a

bplusmn12

5Ex

changeableMg2

+667

aplusmn086

408

bplusmn024

675

aplusmn044

545

abplusmn021

405

bplusmn052

397

bplusmn028

329

bplusmn051

757aplusmn059

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

6 The Scientific World Journal

Table6Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthefi

eldstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T4T5

T6T7

T8Be

fore

pHw

46aplusmn016

46aplusmn020

49aplusmn020

49aplusmn019

50aplusmn014

47aplusmn017

45aplusmn011

49aplusmn004

Organicmatter

75cplusmn065

83cplusmn13

8153

aplusmn15

5130

aplusmn095

143

abplusmn091

133

aplusmn025

145

aplusmn095

108

bcplusmn085

Totalcarbo

n087

cplusmn007

096

cplusmn016

177aplusmn018

151aplusmn011

165bplusmn011

154aplusmn003

168aplusmn011

125b

cplusmn010

TotalN

004

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0007

007

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3

minus

088

aplusmn018

105aplusmn020

210

aplusmn029

175aplusmn020

175aplusmn020

193aplusmn034

140aplusmn029

105aplusmn035

ExchangeableNH4

+

193dplusmn018

333

dplusmn034

368

cdplusmn018

280

aplusmn008

298

bcplusmn015

298

abcplusmn018

228

abplusmn022

158a

bcplusmn018

AvailableP

114aplusmn018

264

aplusmn021

360

aplusmn054

488

aplusmn082

403

aplusmn074

264

aplusmn049

334

aplusmn208

284

aplusmn064

TotalP

6803aplusmn1299

7735

aplusmn639

7706aplusmn79

78622aplusmn808

7402aplusmn563

8305aplusmn831

7694aplusmn229

6480aplusmn464

cmolkgminus1

TotalK

289

aplusmn056

228

aplusmn017

176aplusmn028

222

aplusmn081

192aplusmn014

287

aplusmn112

265

aplusmn080

330

aplusmn114

AvailableK

040

dplusmn005

107a

bplusmn005

071

bcplusmn005

075

bcplusmn003

099

abplusmn018

066

cdplusmn006

037

dplusmn006

101abplusmn012

CEC

288

cplusmn018

275

cplusmn036

665

abplusmn068

593

abplusmn022

555

abplusmn054

725aplusmn048

650

abplusmn059

458

bcplusmn010

ExchangeableAc

idity

110a

bplusmn004

106a

bcplusmn013

073

cdplusmn005

074

cdplusmn005

055

dplusmn004

079

bcdplusmn009

068

dplusmn006

132aplusmn007

ExchangeableAl3+

091

aplusmn006

071

bplusmn007

043

dplusmn004

040

dplusmn001

036

dplusmn003

052

dplusmn004

049

bcplusmn003

124c

dplusmn005

ExchangeableH

+019

aplusmn007

035

aplusmn006

030

aplusmn008

034

aplusmn006

019

aplusmn003

027

aplusmn005

019

aplusmn007

008

aplusmn002

ExchangeableCu

2+00076

aplusmn000

04000

69bplusmn000

02000

69bplusmn000

09000

60abplusmn000

0500052

abplusmn00010

00032

abplusmn000

01000

67bplusmn000

0200119

abplusmn000

06Ex

changeableMn2

+044

aplusmn006

039

aplusmn007

037

aplusmn005

037

aplusmn006

040

aplusmn004

056

aplusmn005

033

aplusmn007

027

aplusmn007

ExchangeableFe

2+18

8bplusmn008

182aplusmn007

015

bplusmn010

004

bplusmn001

006

bplusmn001

005

bplusmn002

008

aplusmn001

016

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+00017

aplusmn000

0400018

bplusmn000

0900011

abplusmn000

03000

09bplusmn000

0200023

bplusmn00011

00018

abplusmn00012

00037

bplusmn00019

000

68bplusmn000

08Ex

changeableNa+

521

aplusmn034

477

aplusmn021

449

aplusmn009

443

aplusmn008

468

aplusmn018

432

aplusmn015

487

aplusmn063

525

aplusmn039

ExchangeableCa

2+1770

aplusmn13

71812

bplusmn12

31941bplusmn117

1982a

bplusmn070

1896a

bplusmn19

31990a

bplusmn047

1689bplusmn18

52639

abplusmn276

ExchangeableMg2

+1479bplusmn028

1222aplusmn201

1123

aplusmn13

01142a

bplusmn056

1214

abplusmn14

81555aplusmn13

11323aplusmn225

527

aplusmn093

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

The Scientific World Journal 7

Table 7 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 7620d plusmn 117 8648c plusmn 048 9838a plusmn 113 9808a plusmn 079 9480ab plusmn 076 9315b plusmn 046 8805c plusmn 102 8005d plusmn 107

hillminus1

Number of tillers 60e plusmn 010 12c plusmn 029 15a plusmn 025 16a plusmn 029 13b plusmn 048 13bc plusmn 041 12c plusmn 029 10d plusmn 025Number of leaves 8f plusmn 144 66c plusmn 129 81a plusmn 085 78ab plusmn 065 73ab plusmn 125 75b plusmn 065 57c plusmn 138 38e plusmn 065

g hillminus1

Root dry weight 311d plusmn 026 1063bc plusmn 057 1455a plusmn 040 1158b plusmn 008 1174b plusmn 007 1094b plusmn 004 928c plusmn 022 924c plusmn 060Dry matter yield 586c plusmn 051 2315c plusmn 084 3381a plusmn 032 3355a plusmn 050 3157a plusmn 075 2737b plusmn 106 2354c plusmn 021 1631d plusmn 038Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 8 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 725c plusmn 277 930ab plusmn 142 1018a plusmn 081 1005ab plusmn 083 952ab plusmn 143 907b plusmn 134 730c plusmn 384Culm height (cm) 589c plusmn 234 758b plusmn 103 808a plusmn 077 812a plusmn 167 794a plusmn 151 737a plusmn 059 580a plusmn 446Number of tillers per 004m2 8b plusmn 030 12ab plusmn 049 16a plusmn 073 15a plusmn 029 12ab plusmn 040 12ab plusmn 034 10b plusmn 056Number of leaves per 004m2 8f plusmn 025 66c plusmn 078 81a plusmn 274 78ab plusmn 050 73ab plusmn 064 75b plusmn 073 38e plusmn 106Number of panicles per 004m2 7d plusmn 014 11b plusmn 018 13a plusmn 041 13a plusmn 045 10bc plusmn 052 9c plusmn 074 6d plusmn 016Dry matter yield (g per 004m2) 56e plusmn 060 170bc plusmn 198 277a plusmn 224 232ab plusmn 109 197b plusmn 099 131cd plusmn 134 75de plusmn 151Total grain per panicle 110bc plusmn 1164 104c plusmn 219 136abc plusmn 221 160a plusmn 957 133abc plusmn 643 151ab plusmn 1708 143abc plusmn 1528 total grain filling per panicle 6592a plusmn 181 6330a plusmn 201 6691a plusmn 102 6146a plusmn 193 6699a plusmn 236 6756a plusmn 134 6851a plusmn 126Yield (t haminus1) 2612d plusmn 027 4206cd plusmn 019 6794ab plusmn 025 7559a plusmn 043 5233bc plusmn 048 5184bc plusmn 066 3429d plusmn 042Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

aluminum toxicity in tropical soils leads to reduction of soilacidity and this process improves plant productivity In thepot trial the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 and T8 on OMTC Mn2+ Fe2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+ NO3

minus NH4+ total

N CEC and K+ were similar However Cu2+ total P andavailable P were significantly higher in T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8 than in T2 (Table 5) In the field trial CEC OMand TC in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were statistically higher thanin T2 and T1 but NH4

+ was significantly higher in T5 T6and T7 than in T2 and T1 (Table 6) The soil NH4

+ OMand TC in the field were increased due to biochar application[29] Additionally total N and available P of the plots whichreceived T5 and T6 in the field trial were significantly higherthan in T2 and T1 However the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5T6 T7 and T8 on soil Cu2+ Mn2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+NO3minus total P total K+ and exchangeable K+ were similar

(Table 6) Although Nyalau Series is not productive and alsoprone to nutrient leaching under flooded condition [42] thechicken litter biochar used in this study generally improvedthe chemical properties of this soil [43] The differences insome of the chemical elements among the soils amendedwithbiochar were due to substitution between different nutrientelements in the rice plants [44] Furthermore the nitrogenrates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6 T7 andT8 stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K (Tables 5 and 6)

32 Aboveground Variables In the pot study plant heightnumber of leaves number of tillers and dry matter yield(DMY)due toT3 T4 andT5were significantly higher than in

T2 and T1 However plant height number of leaves and drymatter yield (DMY) among T3 T4 and T5 were not signifi-cantly different but the number of tillers was not significantlydifferent between T3 and T4 (Table 7) In the field studynumber of tillers and plant height due to T2 and T1 were notsignificantly different from those of T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8)However culm height due to T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 wassignificantly lower than in T2 and T1 The number of leavesin T4 T5 T6 and T7 was significantly higher than in T2 andT1 (Table 8)The number of panicles in T4 and T5 was higherand significantly different from those of T2 and T1 (Table 8)The differences in nutrients availability in the soil (Tables 5and 6) due to coapplication of biochar and urea only mighthave caused the differences in the aforementioned growthvariables confirming the findings of Brady andWeil [29] thatbiochar improves soil productivity and N plays an importantrole in sustaining high yield of rice [2 3] The percentageof total grain filling was not statistically different in all thetreatments however the total grain and dry matter yield inT2 was statistically lower than in T4 and T5 (Table 8) Thegrain yield in T5 and T4 was significantly higher than in T2and T1 (Table 8)The differences in number of panicles due tothe effect of biochar on nutrient availability and nutrient useefficiency of N fertilization might have caused the differencesin the grain yield total grain and dry matter yield (Tables 7and 8) The grain yields of T4 and T5 were not significantlydifferent although T4 had 100 N fertilization that is 25more than in T5 (Table 8) This indicates that biochar canbe used to reduce N application rate in paddy cultivation ontropical acid soils The yield of T5 (7556 t haminus1) was 4436

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 5: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

The Scientific World Journal 5

Table5Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthep

otstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T3T4

T5T6

T7T8

pHw

53bplusmn010

52bplusmn007

56aplusmn006

58aplusmn007

58aplusmn006

59aplusmn008

58aplusmn001

57aplusmn009

Organicmatter

980cplusmn048

170bplusmn14

7205

abplusmn10

4200

abplusmn10

0195

abplusmn029

220

aplusmn10

8188

abplusmn10

3193

abplusmn10

3To

talcarbo

n113cplusmn006

197bplusmn017

238

abplusmn012

232

abplusmn012

226

abplusmn003

255

aplusmn013

218

abplusmn012

223

abplusmn012

TotalN

0077aplusmn0007

0056aplusmn000

40063aplusmn0007

0084aplusmn000

60070aplusmn0008

0070aplusmn0008

0084aplusmn0016

0077aplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3minus

105cplusmn020

193a

bcplusmn034

210

abcplusmn029

245

aplusmn045

210

abcplusmn029

228

abplusmn018

175a

bcplusmn020

123b

cplusmn018

ExchangeableNH4

+

175cplusmn020

876

aplusmn045

981aplusmn070

1033

aplusmn044

1005aplusmn044

1051aplusmn040

1016

aplusmn035

455

bplusmn045

ExchangeableP

375

cplusmn024

721cplusmn077

196

abplusmn092

1856a

bplusmn096

1707

bplusmn401

1823a

bplusmn077

1759

abplusmn053

2126aplusmn14

0To

talP

7008dplusmn065

11665

cplusmn878

22545

aplusmn1634

187bplusmn573

1876

5bplusmn419

20244

abplusmn575

21434

bplusmn2905

18315

bplusmn1942

cmolkgminus1

CEC

660

abplusmn015

635

bplusmn007

790aplusmn030

745a

bplusmn044

695

abplusmn026

618

bplusmn011

733a

bplusmn030

713a

bplusmn44

ExchangeableAc

idity

068

aplusmn0027

068

aplusmn000

6037

bplusmn0014

035

bcplusmn0016

034

bcplusmn0005

032

bcplusmn0008

031

bcplusmn0020

029

cplusmn0011

ExchangeableAl3+

053

aplusmn0013

053

aplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn000

6024

bplusmn0015

024

bplusmn000

9022

bplusmn0010

020

bplusmn0008

ExchangeableH

+015

abplusmn0023

018

aplusmn0013

015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn0020

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0014

009

bplusmn0012

009

bplusmn0015

TotalK

+206

aplusmn032

145aplusmn014

157aplusmn026

138aplusmn012

158aplusmn014

161aplusmn033

128aplusmn025

134aplusmn012

ExchangeableK+

030

abplusmn003

018

bplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

028

abplusmn005

031

abplusmn002

037

aplusmn005

021

bplusmn003

027

abplusmn003

ExchangeableCu

2+0050fplusmn00016

006

0eplusmn00028

0082cplusmn00018

0089cplusmn0007

0097bplusmn00023

0103a

bplusmn00012

0110

aplusmn00013

0072aplusmn00026

ExchangeableMn2

+015

abplusmn0014

013

abplusmn000

4017

abplusmn0002

013

abplusmn0027

013

abplusmn0036

008

abplusmn0031

015

abplusmn0019

018

aplusmn0003

ExchangeableFe

2+038

abplusmn010

053

aplusmn004

037

abplusmn003

030

abplusmn008

030

bplusmn008

018

bplusmn003

026

bplusmn004

035

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+000

6abplusmn000

030005a

bplusmn000

030008a

bplusmn000

090007a

bplusmn000

06000

6abplusmn00010

0007a

bplusmn00010

000

9aplusmn00017

000

4bplusmn000

06Ex

changeableNa+

628

aplusmn207

342

aplusmn090

646

aplusmn097

564

aplusmn335

260

aplusmn010

691

aplusmn210

688

aplusmn19

8464

aplusmn19

8Ex

changeableCa

2+1759

bplusmn227

2035bplusmn14

93274

aplusmn13

82916

abplusmn14

32669a

bplusmn313

2516

abplusmn402

2889a

bplusmn291

2703a

bplusmn12

5Ex

changeableMg2

+667

aplusmn086

408

bplusmn024

675

aplusmn044

545

abplusmn021

405

bplusmn052

397

bplusmn028

329

bplusmn051

757aplusmn059

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

6 The Scientific World Journal

Table6Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthefi

eldstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T4T5

T6T7

T8Be

fore

pHw

46aplusmn016

46aplusmn020

49aplusmn020

49aplusmn019

50aplusmn014

47aplusmn017

45aplusmn011

49aplusmn004

Organicmatter

75cplusmn065

83cplusmn13

8153

aplusmn15

5130

aplusmn095

143

abplusmn091

133

aplusmn025

145

aplusmn095

108

bcplusmn085

Totalcarbo

n087

cplusmn007

096

cplusmn016

177aplusmn018

151aplusmn011

165bplusmn011

154aplusmn003

168aplusmn011

125b

cplusmn010

TotalN

004

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0007

007

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3

minus

088

aplusmn018

105aplusmn020

210

aplusmn029

175aplusmn020

175aplusmn020

193aplusmn034

140aplusmn029

105aplusmn035

ExchangeableNH4

+

193dplusmn018

333

dplusmn034

368

cdplusmn018

280

aplusmn008

298

bcplusmn015

298

abcplusmn018

228

abplusmn022

158a

bcplusmn018

AvailableP

114aplusmn018

264

aplusmn021

360

aplusmn054

488

aplusmn082

403

aplusmn074

264

aplusmn049

334

aplusmn208

284

aplusmn064

TotalP

6803aplusmn1299

7735

aplusmn639

7706aplusmn79

78622aplusmn808

7402aplusmn563

8305aplusmn831

7694aplusmn229

6480aplusmn464

cmolkgminus1

TotalK

289

aplusmn056

228

aplusmn017

176aplusmn028

222

aplusmn081

192aplusmn014

287

aplusmn112

265

aplusmn080

330

aplusmn114

AvailableK

040

dplusmn005

107a

bplusmn005

071

bcplusmn005

075

bcplusmn003

099

abplusmn018

066

cdplusmn006

037

dplusmn006

101abplusmn012

CEC

288

cplusmn018

275

cplusmn036

665

abplusmn068

593

abplusmn022

555

abplusmn054

725aplusmn048

650

abplusmn059

458

bcplusmn010

ExchangeableAc

idity

110a

bplusmn004

106a

bcplusmn013

073

cdplusmn005

074

cdplusmn005

055

dplusmn004

079

bcdplusmn009

068

dplusmn006

132aplusmn007

ExchangeableAl3+

091

aplusmn006

071

bplusmn007

043

dplusmn004

040

dplusmn001

036

dplusmn003

052

dplusmn004

049

bcplusmn003

124c

dplusmn005

ExchangeableH

+019

aplusmn007

035

aplusmn006

030

aplusmn008

034

aplusmn006

019

aplusmn003

027

aplusmn005

019

aplusmn007

008

aplusmn002

ExchangeableCu

2+00076

aplusmn000

04000

69bplusmn000

02000

69bplusmn000

09000

60abplusmn000

0500052

abplusmn00010

00032

abplusmn000

01000

67bplusmn000

0200119

abplusmn000

06Ex

changeableMn2

+044

aplusmn006

039

aplusmn007

037

aplusmn005

037

aplusmn006

040

aplusmn004

056

aplusmn005

033

aplusmn007

027

aplusmn007

ExchangeableFe

2+18

8bplusmn008

182aplusmn007

015

bplusmn010

004

bplusmn001

006

bplusmn001

005

bplusmn002

008

aplusmn001

016

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+00017

aplusmn000

0400018

bplusmn000

0900011

abplusmn000

03000

09bplusmn000

0200023

bplusmn00011

00018

abplusmn00012

00037

bplusmn00019

000

68bplusmn000

08Ex

changeableNa+

521

aplusmn034

477

aplusmn021

449

aplusmn009

443

aplusmn008

468

aplusmn018

432

aplusmn015

487

aplusmn063

525

aplusmn039

ExchangeableCa

2+1770

aplusmn13

71812

bplusmn12

31941bplusmn117

1982a

bplusmn070

1896a

bplusmn19

31990a

bplusmn047

1689bplusmn18

52639

abplusmn276

ExchangeableMg2

+1479bplusmn028

1222aplusmn201

1123

aplusmn13

01142a

bplusmn056

1214

abplusmn14

81555aplusmn13

11323aplusmn225

527

aplusmn093

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

The Scientific World Journal 7

Table 7 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 7620d plusmn 117 8648c plusmn 048 9838a plusmn 113 9808a plusmn 079 9480ab plusmn 076 9315b plusmn 046 8805c plusmn 102 8005d plusmn 107

hillminus1

Number of tillers 60e plusmn 010 12c plusmn 029 15a plusmn 025 16a plusmn 029 13b plusmn 048 13bc plusmn 041 12c plusmn 029 10d plusmn 025Number of leaves 8f plusmn 144 66c plusmn 129 81a plusmn 085 78ab plusmn 065 73ab plusmn 125 75b plusmn 065 57c plusmn 138 38e plusmn 065

g hillminus1

Root dry weight 311d plusmn 026 1063bc plusmn 057 1455a plusmn 040 1158b plusmn 008 1174b plusmn 007 1094b plusmn 004 928c plusmn 022 924c plusmn 060Dry matter yield 586c plusmn 051 2315c plusmn 084 3381a plusmn 032 3355a plusmn 050 3157a plusmn 075 2737b plusmn 106 2354c plusmn 021 1631d plusmn 038Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 8 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 725c plusmn 277 930ab plusmn 142 1018a plusmn 081 1005ab plusmn 083 952ab plusmn 143 907b plusmn 134 730c plusmn 384Culm height (cm) 589c plusmn 234 758b plusmn 103 808a plusmn 077 812a plusmn 167 794a plusmn 151 737a plusmn 059 580a plusmn 446Number of tillers per 004m2 8b plusmn 030 12ab plusmn 049 16a plusmn 073 15a plusmn 029 12ab plusmn 040 12ab plusmn 034 10b plusmn 056Number of leaves per 004m2 8f plusmn 025 66c plusmn 078 81a plusmn 274 78ab plusmn 050 73ab plusmn 064 75b plusmn 073 38e plusmn 106Number of panicles per 004m2 7d plusmn 014 11b plusmn 018 13a plusmn 041 13a plusmn 045 10bc plusmn 052 9c plusmn 074 6d plusmn 016Dry matter yield (g per 004m2) 56e plusmn 060 170bc plusmn 198 277a plusmn 224 232ab plusmn 109 197b plusmn 099 131cd plusmn 134 75de plusmn 151Total grain per panicle 110bc plusmn 1164 104c plusmn 219 136abc plusmn 221 160a plusmn 957 133abc plusmn 643 151ab plusmn 1708 143abc plusmn 1528 total grain filling per panicle 6592a plusmn 181 6330a plusmn 201 6691a plusmn 102 6146a plusmn 193 6699a plusmn 236 6756a plusmn 134 6851a plusmn 126Yield (t haminus1) 2612d plusmn 027 4206cd plusmn 019 6794ab plusmn 025 7559a plusmn 043 5233bc plusmn 048 5184bc plusmn 066 3429d plusmn 042Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

aluminum toxicity in tropical soils leads to reduction of soilacidity and this process improves plant productivity In thepot trial the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 and T8 on OMTC Mn2+ Fe2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+ NO3

minus NH4+ total

N CEC and K+ were similar However Cu2+ total P andavailable P were significantly higher in T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8 than in T2 (Table 5) In the field trial CEC OMand TC in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were statistically higher thanin T2 and T1 but NH4

+ was significantly higher in T5 T6and T7 than in T2 and T1 (Table 6) The soil NH4

+ OMand TC in the field were increased due to biochar application[29] Additionally total N and available P of the plots whichreceived T5 and T6 in the field trial were significantly higherthan in T2 and T1 However the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5T6 T7 and T8 on soil Cu2+ Mn2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+NO3minus total P total K+ and exchangeable K+ were similar

(Table 6) Although Nyalau Series is not productive and alsoprone to nutrient leaching under flooded condition [42] thechicken litter biochar used in this study generally improvedthe chemical properties of this soil [43] The differences insome of the chemical elements among the soils amendedwithbiochar were due to substitution between different nutrientelements in the rice plants [44] Furthermore the nitrogenrates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6 T7 andT8 stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K (Tables 5 and 6)

32 Aboveground Variables In the pot study plant heightnumber of leaves number of tillers and dry matter yield(DMY)due toT3 T4 andT5were significantly higher than in

T2 and T1 However plant height number of leaves and drymatter yield (DMY) among T3 T4 and T5 were not signifi-cantly different but the number of tillers was not significantlydifferent between T3 and T4 (Table 7) In the field studynumber of tillers and plant height due to T2 and T1 were notsignificantly different from those of T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8)However culm height due to T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 wassignificantly lower than in T2 and T1 The number of leavesin T4 T5 T6 and T7 was significantly higher than in T2 andT1 (Table 8)The number of panicles in T4 and T5 was higherand significantly different from those of T2 and T1 (Table 8)The differences in nutrients availability in the soil (Tables 5and 6) due to coapplication of biochar and urea only mighthave caused the differences in the aforementioned growthvariables confirming the findings of Brady andWeil [29] thatbiochar improves soil productivity and N plays an importantrole in sustaining high yield of rice [2 3] The percentageof total grain filling was not statistically different in all thetreatments however the total grain and dry matter yield inT2 was statistically lower than in T4 and T5 (Table 8) Thegrain yield in T5 and T4 was significantly higher than in T2and T1 (Table 8)The differences in number of panicles due tothe effect of biochar on nutrient availability and nutrient useefficiency of N fertilization might have caused the differencesin the grain yield total grain and dry matter yield (Tables 7and 8) The grain yields of T4 and T5 were not significantlydifferent although T4 had 100 N fertilization that is 25more than in T5 (Table 8) This indicates that biochar canbe used to reduce N application rate in paddy cultivation ontropical acid soils The yield of T5 (7556 t haminus1) was 4436

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 6: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

6 The Scientific World Journal

Table6Eff

ectsof

biochara

ndnitro

genfertilizatio

non

soilchem

icalprop

ertie

sinthefi

eldstu

dy

Treatm

ent

T1T2

T4T5

T6T7

T8Be

fore

pHw

46aplusmn016

46aplusmn020

49aplusmn020

49aplusmn019

50aplusmn014

47aplusmn017

45aplusmn011

49aplusmn004

Organicmatter

75cplusmn065

83cplusmn13

8153

aplusmn15

5130

aplusmn095

143

abplusmn091

133

aplusmn025

145

aplusmn095

108

bcplusmn085

Totalcarbo

n087

cplusmn007

096

cplusmn016

177aplusmn018

151aplusmn011

165bplusmn011

154aplusmn003

168aplusmn011

125b

cplusmn010

TotalN

004

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

011

aplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0013

009

abplusmn0007

007

bplusmn0008

005

bplusmn0007

mgk

gminus1

AvailableN

O3

minus

088

aplusmn018

105aplusmn020

210

aplusmn029

175aplusmn020

175aplusmn020

193aplusmn034

140aplusmn029

105aplusmn035

ExchangeableNH4

+

193dplusmn018

333

dplusmn034

368

cdplusmn018

280

aplusmn008

298

bcplusmn015

298

abcplusmn018

228

abplusmn022

158a

bcplusmn018

AvailableP

114aplusmn018

264

aplusmn021

360

aplusmn054

488

aplusmn082

403

aplusmn074

264

aplusmn049

334

aplusmn208

284

aplusmn064

TotalP

6803aplusmn1299

7735

aplusmn639

7706aplusmn79

78622aplusmn808

7402aplusmn563

8305aplusmn831

7694aplusmn229

6480aplusmn464

cmolkgminus1

TotalK

289

aplusmn056

228

aplusmn017

176aplusmn028

222

aplusmn081

192aplusmn014

287

aplusmn112

265

aplusmn080

330

aplusmn114

AvailableK

040

dplusmn005

107a

bplusmn005

071

bcplusmn005

075

bcplusmn003

099

abplusmn018

066

cdplusmn006

037

dplusmn006

101abplusmn012

CEC

288

cplusmn018

275

cplusmn036

665

abplusmn068

593

abplusmn022

555

abplusmn054

725aplusmn048

650

abplusmn059

458

bcplusmn010

ExchangeableAc

idity

110a

bplusmn004

106a

bcplusmn013

073

cdplusmn005

074

cdplusmn005

055

dplusmn004

079

bcdplusmn009

068

dplusmn006

132aplusmn007

ExchangeableAl3+

091

aplusmn006

071

bplusmn007

043

dplusmn004

040

dplusmn001

036

dplusmn003

052

dplusmn004

049

bcplusmn003

124c

dplusmn005

ExchangeableH

+019

aplusmn007

035

aplusmn006

030

aplusmn008

034

aplusmn006

019

aplusmn003

027

aplusmn005

019

aplusmn007

008

aplusmn002

ExchangeableCu

2+00076

aplusmn000

04000

69bplusmn000

02000

69bplusmn000

09000

60abplusmn000

0500052

abplusmn00010

00032

abplusmn000

01000

67bplusmn000

0200119

abplusmn000

06Ex

changeableMn2

+044

aplusmn006

039

aplusmn007

037

aplusmn005

037

aplusmn006

040

aplusmn004

056

aplusmn005

033

aplusmn007

027

aplusmn007

ExchangeableFe

2+18

8bplusmn008

182aplusmn007

015

bplusmn010

004

bplusmn001

006

bplusmn001

005

bplusmn002

008

aplusmn001

016

bplusmn001

ExchangeableZn

2+00017

aplusmn000

0400018

bplusmn000

0900011

abplusmn000

03000

09bplusmn000

0200023

bplusmn00011

00018

abplusmn00012

00037

bplusmn00019

000

68bplusmn000

08Ex

changeableNa+

521

aplusmn034

477

aplusmn021

449

aplusmn009

443

aplusmn008

468

aplusmn018

432

aplusmn015

487

aplusmn063

525

aplusmn039

ExchangeableCa

2+1770

aplusmn13

71812

bplusmn12

31941bplusmn117

1982a

bplusmn070

1896a

bplusmn19

31990a

bplusmn047

1689bplusmn18

52639

abplusmn276

ExchangeableMg2

+1479bplusmn028

1222aplusmn201

1123

aplusmn13

01142a

bplusmn056

1214

abplusmn14

81555aplusmn13

11323aplusmn225

527

aplusmn093

Differentletterswith

inar

owindicatesig

nificantd

ifference

betweenmeans

offour

replicatesplusmnsta

ndarderroru

singTu

keyrsquos

testat119875le005

The Scientific World Journal 7

Table 7 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 7620d plusmn 117 8648c plusmn 048 9838a plusmn 113 9808a plusmn 079 9480ab plusmn 076 9315b plusmn 046 8805c plusmn 102 8005d plusmn 107

hillminus1

Number of tillers 60e plusmn 010 12c plusmn 029 15a plusmn 025 16a plusmn 029 13b plusmn 048 13bc plusmn 041 12c plusmn 029 10d plusmn 025Number of leaves 8f plusmn 144 66c plusmn 129 81a plusmn 085 78ab plusmn 065 73ab plusmn 125 75b plusmn 065 57c plusmn 138 38e plusmn 065

g hillminus1

Root dry weight 311d plusmn 026 1063bc plusmn 057 1455a plusmn 040 1158b plusmn 008 1174b plusmn 007 1094b plusmn 004 928c plusmn 022 924c plusmn 060Dry matter yield 586c plusmn 051 2315c plusmn 084 3381a plusmn 032 3355a plusmn 050 3157a plusmn 075 2737b plusmn 106 2354c plusmn 021 1631d plusmn 038Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 8 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 725c plusmn 277 930ab plusmn 142 1018a plusmn 081 1005ab plusmn 083 952ab plusmn 143 907b plusmn 134 730c plusmn 384Culm height (cm) 589c plusmn 234 758b plusmn 103 808a plusmn 077 812a plusmn 167 794a plusmn 151 737a plusmn 059 580a plusmn 446Number of tillers per 004m2 8b plusmn 030 12ab plusmn 049 16a plusmn 073 15a plusmn 029 12ab plusmn 040 12ab plusmn 034 10b plusmn 056Number of leaves per 004m2 8f plusmn 025 66c plusmn 078 81a plusmn 274 78ab plusmn 050 73ab plusmn 064 75b plusmn 073 38e plusmn 106Number of panicles per 004m2 7d plusmn 014 11b plusmn 018 13a plusmn 041 13a plusmn 045 10bc plusmn 052 9c plusmn 074 6d plusmn 016Dry matter yield (g per 004m2) 56e plusmn 060 170bc plusmn 198 277a plusmn 224 232ab plusmn 109 197b plusmn 099 131cd plusmn 134 75de plusmn 151Total grain per panicle 110bc plusmn 1164 104c plusmn 219 136abc plusmn 221 160a plusmn 957 133abc plusmn 643 151ab plusmn 1708 143abc plusmn 1528 total grain filling per panicle 6592a plusmn 181 6330a plusmn 201 6691a plusmn 102 6146a plusmn 193 6699a plusmn 236 6756a plusmn 134 6851a plusmn 126Yield (t haminus1) 2612d plusmn 027 4206cd plusmn 019 6794ab plusmn 025 7559a plusmn 043 5233bc plusmn 048 5184bc plusmn 066 3429d plusmn 042Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

aluminum toxicity in tropical soils leads to reduction of soilacidity and this process improves plant productivity In thepot trial the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 and T8 on OMTC Mn2+ Fe2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+ NO3

minus NH4+ total

N CEC and K+ were similar However Cu2+ total P andavailable P were significantly higher in T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8 than in T2 (Table 5) In the field trial CEC OMand TC in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were statistically higher thanin T2 and T1 but NH4

+ was significantly higher in T5 T6and T7 than in T2 and T1 (Table 6) The soil NH4

+ OMand TC in the field were increased due to biochar application[29] Additionally total N and available P of the plots whichreceived T5 and T6 in the field trial were significantly higherthan in T2 and T1 However the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5T6 T7 and T8 on soil Cu2+ Mn2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+NO3minus total P total K+ and exchangeable K+ were similar

(Table 6) Although Nyalau Series is not productive and alsoprone to nutrient leaching under flooded condition [42] thechicken litter biochar used in this study generally improvedthe chemical properties of this soil [43] The differences insome of the chemical elements among the soils amendedwithbiochar were due to substitution between different nutrientelements in the rice plants [44] Furthermore the nitrogenrates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6 T7 andT8 stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K (Tables 5 and 6)

32 Aboveground Variables In the pot study plant heightnumber of leaves number of tillers and dry matter yield(DMY)due toT3 T4 andT5were significantly higher than in

T2 and T1 However plant height number of leaves and drymatter yield (DMY) among T3 T4 and T5 were not signifi-cantly different but the number of tillers was not significantlydifferent between T3 and T4 (Table 7) In the field studynumber of tillers and plant height due to T2 and T1 were notsignificantly different from those of T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8)However culm height due to T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 wassignificantly lower than in T2 and T1 The number of leavesin T4 T5 T6 and T7 was significantly higher than in T2 andT1 (Table 8)The number of panicles in T4 and T5 was higherand significantly different from those of T2 and T1 (Table 8)The differences in nutrients availability in the soil (Tables 5and 6) due to coapplication of biochar and urea only mighthave caused the differences in the aforementioned growthvariables confirming the findings of Brady andWeil [29] thatbiochar improves soil productivity and N plays an importantrole in sustaining high yield of rice [2 3] The percentageof total grain filling was not statistically different in all thetreatments however the total grain and dry matter yield inT2 was statistically lower than in T4 and T5 (Table 8) Thegrain yield in T5 and T4 was significantly higher than in T2and T1 (Table 8)The differences in number of panicles due tothe effect of biochar on nutrient availability and nutrient useefficiency of N fertilization might have caused the differencesin the grain yield total grain and dry matter yield (Tables 7and 8) The grain yields of T4 and T5 were not significantlydifferent although T4 had 100 N fertilization that is 25more than in T5 (Table 8) This indicates that biochar canbe used to reduce N application rate in paddy cultivation ontropical acid soils The yield of T5 (7556 t haminus1) was 4436

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 7: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

The Scientific World Journal 7

Table 7 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 7620d plusmn 117 8648c plusmn 048 9838a plusmn 113 9808a plusmn 079 9480ab plusmn 076 9315b plusmn 046 8805c plusmn 102 8005d plusmn 107

hillminus1

Number of tillers 60e plusmn 010 12c plusmn 029 15a plusmn 025 16a plusmn 029 13b plusmn 048 13bc plusmn 041 12c plusmn 029 10d plusmn 025Number of leaves 8f plusmn 144 66c plusmn 129 81a plusmn 085 78ab plusmn 065 73ab plusmn 125 75b plusmn 065 57c plusmn 138 38e plusmn 065

g hillminus1

Root dry weight 311d plusmn 026 1063bc plusmn 057 1455a plusmn 040 1158b plusmn 008 1174b plusmn 007 1094b plusmn 004 928c plusmn 022 924c plusmn 060Dry matter yield 586c plusmn 051 2315c plusmn 084 3381a plusmn 032 3355a plusmn 050 3157a plusmn 075 2737b plusmn 106 2354c plusmn 021 1631d plusmn 038Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 8 Effects of biochar and nitrogen fertilization on measured variables of rice plants in the field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8Plant height (cm) 725c plusmn 277 930ab plusmn 142 1018a plusmn 081 1005ab plusmn 083 952ab plusmn 143 907b plusmn 134 730c plusmn 384Culm height (cm) 589c plusmn 234 758b plusmn 103 808a plusmn 077 812a plusmn 167 794a plusmn 151 737a plusmn 059 580a plusmn 446Number of tillers per 004m2 8b plusmn 030 12ab plusmn 049 16a plusmn 073 15a plusmn 029 12ab plusmn 040 12ab plusmn 034 10b plusmn 056Number of leaves per 004m2 8f plusmn 025 66c plusmn 078 81a plusmn 274 78ab plusmn 050 73ab plusmn 064 75b plusmn 073 38e plusmn 106Number of panicles per 004m2 7d plusmn 014 11b plusmn 018 13a plusmn 041 13a plusmn 045 10bc plusmn 052 9c plusmn 074 6d plusmn 016Dry matter yield (g per 004m2) 56e plusmn 060 170bc plusmn 198 277a plusmn 224 232ab plusmn 109 197b plusmn 099 131cd plusmn 134 75de plusmn 151Total grain per panicle 110bc plusmn 1164 104c plusmn 219 136abc plusmn 221 160a plusmn 957 133abc plusmn 643 151ab plusmn 1708 143abc plusmn 1528 total grain filling per panicle 6592a plusmn 181 6330a plusmn 201 6691a plusmn 102 6146a plusmn 193 6699a plusmn 236 6756a plusmn 134 6851a plusmn 126Yield (t haminus1) 2612d plusmn 027 4206cd plusmn 019 6794ab plusmn 025 7559a plusmn 043 5233bc plusmn 048 5184bc plusmn 066 3429d plusmn 042Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means of four replicates plusmn standard error using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

aluminum toxicity in tropical soils leads to reduction of soilacidity and this process improves plant productivity In thepot trial the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 and T8 on OMTC Mn2+ Fe2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+ NO3

minus NH4+ total

N CEC and K+ were similar However Cu2+ total P andavailable P were significantly higher in T3 T4 T5 T6 T7and T8 than in T2 (Table 5) In the field trial CEC OMand TC in T4 T5 T6 and T7 were statistically higher thanin T2 and T1 but NH4

+ was significantly higher in T5 T6and T7 than in T2 and T1 (Table 6) The soil NH4

+ OMand TC in the field were increased due to biochar application[29] Additionally total N and available P of the plots whichreceived T5 and T6 in the field trial were significantly higherthan in T2 and T1 However the effects of T2 T3 T4 T5T6 T7 and T8 on soil Cu2+ Mn2+ Zn2+ Na+ Ca2+ Mg2+NO3minus total P total K+ and exchangeable K+ were similar

(Table 6) Although Nyalau Series is not productive and alsoprone to nutrient leaching under flooded condition [42] thechicken litter biochar used in this study generally improvedthe chemical properties of this soil [43] The differences insome of the chemical elements among the soils amendedwithbiochar were due to substitution between different nutrientelements in the rice plants [44] Furthermore the nitrogenrates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6 T7 andT8 stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K (Tables 5 and 6)

32 Aboveground Variables In the pot study plant heightnumber of leaves number of tillers and dry matter yield(DMY)due toT3 T4 andT5were significantly higher than in

T2 and T1 However plant height number of leaves and drymatter yield (DMY) among T3 T4 and T5 were not signifi-cantly different but the number of tillers was not significantlydifferent between T3 and T4 (Table 7) In the field studynumber of tillers and plant height due to T2 and T1 were notsignificantly different from those of T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8)However culm height due to T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8 wassignificantly lower than in T2 and T1 The number of leavesin T4 T5 T6 and T7 was significantly higher than in T2 andT1 (Table 8)The number of panicles in T4 and T5 was higherand significantly different from those of T2 and T1 (Table 8)The differences in nutrients availability in the soil (Tables 5and 6) due to coapplication of biochar and urea only mighthave caused the differences in the aforementioned growthvariables confirming the findings of Brady andWeil [29] thatbiochar improves soil productivity and N plays an importantrole in sustaining high yield of rice [2 3] The percentageof total grain filling was not statistically different in all thetreatments however the total grain and dry matter yield inT2 was statistically lower than in T4 and T5 (Table 8) Thegrain yield in T5 and T4 was significantly higher than in T2and T1 (Table 8)The differences in number of panicles due tothe effect of biochar on nutrient availability and nutrient useefficiency of N fertilization might have caused the differencesin the grain yield total grain and dry matter yield (Tables 7and 8) The grain yields of T4 and T5 were not significantlydifferent although T4 had 100 N fertilization that is 25more than in T5 (Table 8) This indicates that biochar canbe used to reduce N application rate in paddy cultivation ontropical acid soils The yield of T5 (7556 t haminus1) was 4436

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 8: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

8 The Scientific World Journal

Table 9 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a pot study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg hillminus1

Total N 112e plusmn 107 390ab plusmn 233 437a plusmn 272 437a plusmn 124 344bc plusmn 102 291cd plusmn 171 219d plusmn 054Si 208c plusmn 510 1106abc plusmn 905 2197a plusmn 2143 1667ab plusmn 4577 1438abc plusmn 4035 1501abc plusmn 3499 1000abc plusmn 562

mg hillminus1

Total P 33d plusmn 053 307b plusmn 262 523a plusmn 138 302b plusmn 318 256bc plusmn 081 220bc plusmn 202 197c plusmn 118K+ 463e plusmn 820 2384d plusmn 1101 5060a plusmn 5228 3473bc plusmn 1657 4218ab plusmn 1396 3830b plusmn 1597 3618bc plusmn 656Ca2+ 197d plusmn 203 846bc plusmn 1030 1478a plusmn 1107 1373a plusmn 773 1420a plusmn 813 1263a plusmn 429 1194ab plusmn 835Mg2+ 112d plusmn 242 402c plusmn 225 803a plusmn 754 652ab plusmn 401 836a plusmn 1091 672ab plusmn 359 557bc plusmn 154Na2+ 120e plusmn 198 303bcd plusmn 496 435ab plusmn 537 354abc plusmn 184 487a plusmn 176 383abc plusmn 233 254cde plusmn 184Fe2+ 37cd plusmn 059 167a plusmn 071 62b plusmn 058 44bcd plusmn 032 49bc plusmn 061 36cd plusmn 051 25d plusmn 022Cu2+ 005d plusmn 0005 025c plusmn 0019 045ab plusmn 0013 048a plusmn 0017 048a plusmn 0016 047ab plusmn 0023 038b plusmn 0017Zn2+ 09b plusmn 028 46ab plusmn 065 65ab plusmn 288 84a plusmn 091 67ab plusmn 174 65ab plusmn 171 68ab plusmn 058Mn2+ 096e plusmn 008 343c plusmn 016 543a plusmn 018 471ab plusmn 009 512a plusmn 026 396bc plusmn 030 374c plusmn 009Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

Table 10 Effects of coapplication of biochar and urea on nutrients uptake in a field study

Treatment T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8mg004m2

Total N 190d plusmn 005 1161cd plusmn 260 3163a plusmn 733 2750ab plusmn 155 1718bc plusmn 230 727cd plusmn 090 331cd plusmn 064Si 414b plusmn 228 584ab plusmn 452 958a plusmn 1214 528ab plusmn 812 632ab plusmn 1347 322ab plusmn 262 446b plusmn 1226

mg004m2

Total P 273e plusmn 010 914de plusmn 123 3832a plusmn 234 3144ab plusmn 392 2558bc plusmn 281 1691cd plusmn 253 831de plusmn 171K+ 1190d plusmn 1119 3065c plusmn 3696 4391ab plusmn 2639 4456a plusmn 3115 4249abc plusmn 1426 3076bc plusmn 3312 1592d plusmn 2723Ca2+ 364bc plusmn 212 486bc plusmn 527 1179a plusmn 839 1299a plusmn 1219 850ab plusmn 635 493bc plusmn 425 257c plusmn 606Mg2+ 119c plusmn 169 360c plusmn 476 995a plusmn 953 937ab plusmn 531 711b plusmn 800 364c plusmn 400 194c plusmn 490Na2+ 1162ab plusmn 1474 1446ab plusmn 3521 2563ab plusmn 8648 2270a plusmn 3403 415ab plusmn 775 986b plusmn 3037 916ab plusmn 3185Fe2+ 129c plusmn 016 464bc plusmn 080 980a plusmn 152 786ab plusmn 122 527bc plusmn 063 310c plusmn 058 139c plusmn 024Cu2+ 0012a plusmn 0004 0018a plusmn 0005 0023a plusmn 0011 0034a plusmn 0007 0018a plusmn 0007 0008a plusmn 0005 0013a plusmn 0007Zn2+ 029c plusmn 006 094ab plusmn 020 135a plusmn 012 136a plusmn 019 118a plusmn 005 087abc plusmn 010 042bc plusmn 010Mn2+ 0011a plusmn 0002 0039a plusmn 0005 0071a plusmn 0026 0092a plusmn 0024 0124a plusmn 0048 0056a plusmn 0017 0047a plusmn 0014Different letters within a row indicate significant difference between means using Tukeyrsquos test at 119875 le 005

higher than that of T2 (4206 t haminus1) (Table 8) Leaching ofsoil nutrients due to coarse particles in the soil of this presentstudymight have reduced the number of tillers bearing grainsof the plants under T2 and hence the lower yield This con-firms the findings of McLaughlin et al [24] that biocharreduces leaching of nutrients The rice yields of T5 and T4were lower than the potential yield of about 10 t haminus1 due tolimitation of some nutrients especially P and K Although T4and T5 had limited P and K their yields are higher than theaverage rice yield of 4 to 5 t haminus1 in Malaysia (Table 8)

33 Nutrient Uptake The effects of biochar and N fertiliza-tion on nutrient uptake of the rice plants in both pot and fieldtrials were determined (Tables 9 and 10) The pot trial showsthat Ca2+ K+ Mg2+ Cu2+ andMn2+ uptake were statisticallylower in T2 than in T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 9) HoweverZn2+ total N and crude silica due to T2were not significantlydifferent from those of T3 T4 T5 and T6 (Table 8) Theuptake of Fe2+ was significantly higher in T2 than in T3 T4

T5 T6 T7 and T8 whereas total P of T3 and Na+ of T5uptake were higher and statistically different from those ofT2 (Table 9) In the field trial Mg2+ and total P uptake in T4T5 and T6 were significantly higher than in T2 but Ca2+ K+and total N uptake in T2 were significantly lower than in T4and T5 (Table 10) The uptake of Fe2+ in T4 was significantlyhigher than in T2 (Table 10) The difference in Fe2+ is dueto the higher dry matter yield in T4 as compared to that ofT2 The uptake of Na+ Cu2+ Mn2+ and crude silica in T4T5 T6 T7 and T8 was not statistically different from thatof T2 (Table 10) suggesting that the biochar improved bothnutrient availability and uptake AlthoughNuptake in the potstudy was higher than the field trial this difference is becausethe plants in the pot trial were harvested at panicle initiationstage a stage where N was not translocated into the sinkorgans for grain formation compared to the field trial whereat maturity N was translocated to the sink organs for grainformation Additionally some of the urea-Nmight have beenlost through leaching and volatilization in the field trial

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 9: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

The Scientific World Journal 9

compared to the pot study Coapplication of biochar andurea stimulated the availability of other nutrients especiallyavailable P and K Potassium availability was increased by thebiochar and urea application due to K+ displacement fromsoil exchangeable complex by theNH4

+ (from urea) confirm-ing the findings of Patrick et al [45] Additionally soluble K+believed to remain at a constant level under flooded condition[45] could not be ascertained because in this study thedemand forKby the rice plants exceeded the suppliedK in thesoil solution at 35 days after transplanting or the soluble K+could not remain at a constant level under flooded conditionduring the growing period However K fertilization wasreduced by 625 of the recommended K fertilizer byMADA[37]

34 Relationship between Level of Nitrogen Applied on a SoilAmended with Biochar and Grain Yield The relationshipbetween coapplication of biochar and urea (T4 T5 T6 T7and T8) and rice grain yield was linear (Figure 1) suggestingthat grain yield increased with increasing rate of urea

35 Correlation amongNFertilizationN P andKUptake andGrain Yield Although the relationship between N fertiliza-tion and grain yieldwas linear (Figure 1) itmust be noted thatthe linear relationship in Figure 1 was based onN fertilizationonly in soils amended with biochar (T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield whereas the data in Table 11 were obtainedbased on correlation among N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5T6 T7 andT8) N P andKuptake and grain yieldThe linearrelationship between urea applied on the soils amended withbiochar and grain yield was compared to the correlationbetween urea applied in all treatments of the study and grainyield The correlation between N P and K uptake and ricegrain yield was similar to those of the regression analysisresults in Figure 1 However there was no significant correla-tion between N fertilization (T1 T2 T4 T5 T6 T7 and T8)and grain yield (Table 11) This contradicted the regressionresults in Figure 1 where there was significant and positivelinear relationshipThese results suggest that the biochar inc-reased utilization of urea which resulted in improved grainyield It is also essential to look at the relationship betweennutrient uptake and grain yield instead of focusing only onfertilization and grain yield because the relationship betweenfertilization and grain yield is influenced by the type of soilon which fertilizers are applied

36 Relationship between Internal Nutrient Use Efficiency andYield The internal nutrient efficiency of the major nutrientsuptake in response to yieldwas determinedThe abovegroundplant N P and K uptake in T1 (soil only) were 48 kgNhaminus1068 kg P haminus1 and 297 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an aver-age estimated grain yield of 261 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and4) whereas aboveground plant N P and K uptake in T2(normal fertilization) were 29 kgNhaminus1 229 kg P haminus1 and766 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimated grainyield of 52 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) However the above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended

Table 11 Correlation among nitrogen fertilization N P and Kuptake and grain yield

N applied N uptake P uptake K uptakeN applied

N uptake 0796lowast0032

P uptake 06350126

0949lowast0001

K uptake 0771lowast0042

0900lowast0006

0913lowast0004

Yield 06710099

0919lowast0003

0936lowast0002

0919lowast0003

lowastSignificant correlation at 119875 le 005

T4T5

T7T6

T8

00

12345678

50 100 150 200 250 300 350G

rain

yie

ld (t

haminus

1)

N = 5

Rates of urea (kg haminus1) on the biochar amended soil

R2= 081

Yield = 0011 Napp + 382

Figure 1 Linear relationship between levels of nitrogen applied ona soil amended with biochar and grain yield

T1

T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00556 Nup + 30069

Plant N uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 2 Relationship between N uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Nup = nitrogen uptake

with biochar and 75 urea) were 68 kgNhaminus1 786 kg P haminus1and 1115 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 756 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) whereas above-ground plant N P and K uptake in T5 (soils amended withbiochar and 100 urea) were 791 kgNhaminus1 958 kg P haminus1and 1098 kgK+ haminus1 respectively with an average estimatedgrain yield of 679 t haminus1 (Figures 2 3 and 4) Generally thereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake

37 Crop Recovery and Agronomic Efficiency of Applied Nitro-gen The crop recovery and agronomic efficiency of the app-lied N in both pot and field trials were determined (Tables 12and 13) The results showed that the crop recovery of applied

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 10: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

10 The Scientific World Journal

Table 12 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under pot trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Dry matteryield (DMY)

Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN)

g hillminus1

T1 0 008 586 mdash mdashT2 28250 020 2315 00004 006T3 28250 022 3381 00005 010T4 28250 020 3355 00004 010T5 21180 019 3157 00005 012T6 14130 016 2737 00006 015T7 7065 013 2354 00007 025T8 0 008 1631 mdash mdash

Table 13 Effects of nitrogen application on crop recovery and agronomic efficiency under field trial

Treatment Total N applied Plants N uptake Yield Crop recovery efficiencyof applied N (REN)

Agronomic efficiency ofapplied N (AEN )

g004m2

T1 0 002 105 mdash mdashT2 3275 012 168 000031 00020T4 3275 032 272 000092 00051T5 24563 028 302 000106 00081T6 16375 017 209 000092 00064T7 8188 007 207 000061 00126T8 0 003 137 mdash mdash

T1

T2

T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 088

Yield = 04987 Pup + 26435

Plant P uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 3 Relationship between P uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Pup = phosphorus uptake

N (REN) in the pot trial was higher with the soils amendedwith biochar than in the normal practice Additionally theREN increased with decreasing N fertilizer rate (Table 12)This indicates that biochar in the treatments with N fertilizerenhanced N availability more than the rice plant requirementas compared to the plants under the normal N fertilizationThis might be due to limitation in the amount of N theplants can absorb within a given period besides the factthat the chicken litter biochar had some amount of N Croprecovery of applied N (REN) of the field trial was indifferentfrom REN in the pot trial except for T6 and T7 where RENdeclined (Table 13) Additionally the agronomic efficiency ofthe appliedN (AEN) was not different fromREN in both trials

T1T2T8

T4T5

T6T7

012345678

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gra

in y

ield

(t h

aminus1)

N = 7

R2= 085

Yield = 00485 Kup + 11913

Plant K uptake (kg haminus1)

Figure 4 Relationship between K+ uptake and grain yield underdifferent treatments where Kup = potassium uptake

However the AEN did not decline as compared to REN of thefield trial (Table 13)

4 Conclusions

Coapplication of chicken litter biochar and urea can increasesoil nutrient availability nutrient use efficiency dry matteryield crop recovery and agronomic efficiency in rice culti-vation Urea and K application was also reduced by 25 and625 respectively whereas Egypt rock phosphate magne-sium oxide and chelated ZnCoBor were 100 reduced inboth pot and field studiesThe grain yield in T5 was increasedto 7556 t haminus1 which is 4436 higher and significantlydifferent from yield of T2 (4206 t haminus1) Additionally biochar

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 11: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

The Scientific World Journal 11

and the N rates (100 75 50 25 and 0) in T4 T5 T6T7 and T8 respectively stimulated the availability of othernutrients especially P andK in the pot andfield studiesThereis a significant relationship between internal nutrient useefficiency and grain yield Additionally grain yield increasedwith increasing nutrient uptake Finally it is essential to lookat the relationship between nutrient uptake and grain yield ofrice instead of concentrating on only fertilization and grainyield as demonstrated in this study

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Education (MOE)Malaysia for Long Term Research Grant Scheme LRGS(Food Security-Enhancing Sustainable Rice Production) andUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for funding this researchproject through the Putra Research Grant of UPM

References

[1] FAO ldquoFertilizer requirement in 2015 and 2030rdquo An FAOPerspective FAO Rome Italy 2000

[2] S B Peng J L Huang X H Zhong et al ldquoResearch strategy inimproving fertilizer-nitrogen 17 use efficiency of irrigated ricein Chinardquo Scientia Agricultura Sinica vol 35 no 9 pp 1095ndash1103 2002

[3] S N Yang Q G Yu J Ye et al ldquoEffects of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and nitrogen use efficiency of hybrid ricerdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 16 no 5 pp 1120ndash1125 2010

[4] M M Alam J K Ladha Z Rahman S R Khan A HKhan and R J Buresh ldquoNutrient management for increasedproductivity of rice-wheat cropping system in BangladeshrdquoField Crops Research vol 96 no 2-3 pp 374ndash386 2006

[5] S Singh N Ghoshal and K P Singh ldquoSynchronizing nitrogenavailability through application of organic inputs of varyingresource quality in a tropical dryland agroecosystemrdquo AppliedSoil Ecology vol 36 no 2-3 pp 164ndash175 2007

[6] W D Kong Y G Zhu B J Fu X Z Han L Zhang and J ZHe ldquoEffect of long-term application of chemical fertilizers onmicrobial biomass and functional diversity of a black soilrdquoPedosphere vol 18 no 6 pp 801ndash808 2008

[7] Z L Zhu and D L Chen ldquoNitrogen fertilizer use in Chinamdashcontributions to food production impacts on the environmentand best management strategiesrdquo Nutrient Cycling in Agroe-cosystems vol 63 no 2-3 pp 117ndash127 2002

[8] R H Moll E J Kamprath and W A Jackson ldquoAnalysisand interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency ofnitrogen utilizationrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 74 no 3 pp 562ndash564 1982

[9] DGuindo B RWells andR JNorman ldquoCultivar andnitrogenrate influence on nitrogen uptake and partitioning in ricerdquo SoilScience Society of America Journal vol 58 no 3 pp 840ndash8451994

[10] L J Liu W Xu C F Wu and J C Yang ldquoCharacteristics ofgrowth development and nutrient uptake in rice under site-specific nitrogen managementrdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Sciencevol 21 no 2 pp 167ndash173 2007

[11] M M Wopereis-Pura H Watanabe J Moreira and M C SWopereis ldquoEffect of late nitrogen application on rice yield grainquality and profitability in the Senegal River valleyrdquo EuropeanJournal of Agronomy vol 17 no 3 pp 191ndash198 2002

[12] J M Zeng K H Cui J L Huang F He and S B PengldquoResponses of physio-biochemical properties to N-fertilizerapplication and its relationship with nitrogen use efficiency inrice (Oryza sativa L)rdquoActa Agronomica Sinica vol 33 no 7 pp116ndash117 2007

[13] W NWang J W Lu Y Q He X K Li and H Li ldquoEffects of NP K fertilizer application on grain yield quality nutrient uptakeand utilization of ricerdquo Chinese Journal of Rice Science vol 25no 6 pp 645ndash653 2011

[14] C Y Wu X Tang Y Chen S M Yang and S H Ye ldquoEffectof fertilization systems on yield and nutrients absorption injaponica rice varietyrdquo Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis vol 23no 1 pp 132ndash137 2011

[15] F M Li X L Fan and W D Chen ldquoEffects of controlledrelease fertilizer on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiencyrdquo PlantNutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 11 no 4 pp 494ndash500 2005

[16] L J Liu W Xu C Tang Z Q Wang and J C Yang ldquoEffectof indigenous nitrogen supply of soil on the grain yield andfertilizer-N use efficiency in ricerdquo Chinese Journal of RiceScience vol 19 no 4 pp 343ndash349 2005

[17] Y H Zhang Y L Zhang QWHuang Y C Xu andQ R ShenldquoEffects of different nitrogen application rates on grain yieldsand nitrogen uptake and utilization by different rice cultivarsrdquoPlant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science vol 12 no 5 pp 616ndash6212006

[18] J Huang F He K H Cui et al ldquoDetermination of optimalnitrogen rate for rice varieties using a chlorophyll meterrdquo FieldCrops Research vol 105 no 1-2 pp 70ndash80 2008

[19] K W Flach and D F Slusher ldquoSoil used for rice culture inthe United Statesrdquo in Soil and Rice International Rice ResearchInstitute Manila The Philippines 1978

[20] S Joseph C Peacock J Lehmann and P Munroe ldquoDevelopinga biochar classification and test methodsrdquo in Biochar for Envi-ronmental Management Science and Technology J Lehmannand S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[21] J Amonette and S Joseph ldquoCharacteristics of biocharmdashmicro-chemical propertiesrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Manage-ment Science and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Edschapter 3 p 33 Earthscan London UK 2009

[22] K Y Chan and Z Xu ldquoBiochar nutrient properties and theirenhancementrdquo in Biochar for Environmental Management Sci-ence and Technology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan2009

[23] J W Gaskin R A Speir K Harris et al ldquoEffect of peanut hulland pine chip biochar on soil nutrients corn nutrient status andyieldrdquo Agronomy Journal vol 102 no 2 pp 623ndash633 2010

[24] HMcLaughlin P S Anderson F E Shields and T B Reed ldquoAllbiochar are not created equal and how to tell them apartrdquo inProceedings of the North American Biochar Conference BoulderColo USA August 2009

[25] H Asai B K Samson H M Stephan et al ldquoBiochar amend-ment techniques for upland rice production inNorthern Laos 1Soil physical properties leaf SPAD and grain yieldrdquo Field CropsResearch vol 111 no 1-2 pp 81ndash84 2009

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 12: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

12 The Scientific World Journal

[26] JMajorBiochar Application to a Colombia SavannaOxisol Fateand Effect on Soil Fertility Crop Production Nutrient Lechingand Soil Hydrology Department of Crop and Soil SiencesCornell University Ithaca NY USA 2009

[27] B Husk and J Major ldquoCommercial scale agricultural biocharfield trial in Quebec Canada over two years effects of biocharon soil fertility biology crop productivity and qualityrdquo Dispo-nible en ligne 2010 httpwwwresearchgatenetpublication237079745

[28] J E Levine US-Focused Biochar Report Assessment of BiocharrsquosBenefit for the United States of America USBImdashUS BiocharInitiative Boulder Colo USA 2009

[29] N C Brady and R R Weil The Nature and Properties of SoilsPearson Prentice Hall 14th edition 2008

[30] HM Peech ldquoHydrogen-ion activityrdquo inMethod of Soil AnalysisPart 2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White FE Clark and R C Dinauer Eds vol 2 pp 914ndash926 AmericanSociety of Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[31] B Chefetz P G Hatcher Y Hadar and Y Chen ldquoChemical andbiological characterization of organic matter during compost-ing of municipal solid wasterdquo Journal of Environmental Qualityvol 25 no 4 pp 776ndash785 1996

[32] K H Tan Soil Sampling Preparation and Analysis CRC PressTaylor amp Francis Group Boca Raton Fla USA 2nd edition2005

[33] D R Keeney and D W Nelson ldquoNitrogenmdashinorganic formsrdquoin Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 A L Page D R KeeneyD E Baker R H Miller Jr R Ellis and D J Rhoades EdsAgronomy Monograph ASA SSSA Madison Wis USA 2ndedition 1982

[34] J Murphy and J P Riley ldquoA modified single solution methodfor the determination of phosphate in natural watersrdquoAnalyticaChimica Acta vol 27 pp 31ndash36 1962

[35] A Cottenie ldquoSoil testing and plant testing as a basis for fertilizerrecommendationrdquo FAO Soils Bulletin vol 38 pp 70ndash73 1980

[36] J M Bremner ldquoTotal nitrogenrdquo inMethod of Soil Analysis Part2 C A Black D D Evan L E Ensminger J L White F EClark and R D Dinauer Eds pp 1149ndash1178 American Societyof Agronomy Madison Wis USA 1965

[37] Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) ldquoPaddyfertilizationrdquo 1970httpwwwmadagovmysemakan-tanaman-padi

[38] Y Shouichi A F Douglas H C James and A G KwanchaiLaboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice he Interna-tional Rice Research Institute Los Banos The Philippines 3rdedition 1976

[39] Y F Sun J M Liang J Ye andW Y Zhu ldquoCultivation of super-high yielding rice plantsrdquo China Rice vol 5 pp 38ndash39 1999

[40] A R Dobermann ldquoNitrogen use efficiencymdashstate of the artrdquoPaper 316 AgronomymdashFaculty Publications 2005 httpdigi-talcommonsunleduagronomyfacpub316

[41] SAS SASSTAT Software SAS Institute Cary NC USA 2001[42] S Paramanathan Soils of Malaysia Their Characteristics and

Identification vol 1 Academy of Sciences Malaysia KualaLumpur Malaysia 2000

[43] A Downie A Crosky and P Munroe ldquoPhysical properties ofbiocharrdquo inBiochar for EnvironmentalManagement Science andTechnology J Lehmann and S Joseph Eds Earthscan 2009

[44] EMA Smaling andOOenema ldquoEstimating nutrient balancesin agro-ecosystems at different spatial scalesrdquo in Methods forAssessment of Soil Degradation R Lal W E H Blum C

Valentin and B A Stewart Eds Advances in Soil Science pp229ndash252 CRC press 1997

[45] W H Patrick D S Mikkelsen and B R Wells ldquoPlant nutrientbehavior in flooded soilsrdquo in Fertilizer Technology and Use OP Engelstad Ed pp 197ndash228 Soil Science Society of AmericaMadison Wis USA 3rd edition 1985

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Page 13: Research Article Coapplication of Chicken Litter Biochar ...

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Biotechnology Research International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Veterinary Medicine International

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Cell BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


Feasibility and technology study: Chicken litter gasification in Belarus (2012)

Feasibility and technology study: Chicken litter gasification in Belarus (2012)

ars.els-cdn.com  · Web viewSteiner, C., Das, K.C.C., Melear, N., Lakly, D., 2010. Reducing nitrogen loss during poultry litter composting using biochar. J. Environ. Qual. 39, 1236–1242.

ars.els-cdn.com  · Web viewSteiner, C., Das, K.C.C., Melear, N., Lakly, D., 2010. Reducing nitrogen loss during poultry litter composting using biochar. J. Environ. Qual. 39, 1236–1242.

SMART-FARMS: Transforming chicken litter into a reliable ...uest.ntua.gr/athens2017/proceedings/pdfs/Athens2017_Fuentes_Pap… · SMART-FARMS: Transforming chicken litter into a reliable

SMART-FARMS: Transforming chicken litter into a reliable ...uest.ntua.gr/athens2017/proceedings/pdfs/Athens2017_Fuentes_Pap… · SMART-FARMS: Transforming chicken litter into a reliable

Fermented Biochar

Fermented Biochar

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL BIOCHAR INITIATIVE BIOCHAR FOR ... · PDF fileAN INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL BIOCHAR INITIATIVE & BIOCHAR FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Thayer

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL BIOCHAR INITIATIVE BIOCHAR FOR ... · PDF fileAN INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL BIOCHAR INITIATIVE & BIOCHAR FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Thayer

Converting Shelterbelt Biomass to Biochar Shelterbelt Biomass to Biochar, Wilson Biochar Associates, February 2017 1 Converting Shelterbelt Biomass to Biochar A feasibility analysis

Converting Shelterbelt Biomass to Biochar Shelterbelt Biomass to Biochar, Wilson Biochar Associates, February 2017 1 Converting Shelterbelt Biomass to Biochar A feasibility analysis

Biochar for Environmental Management in California · Biochar for Environmental Management in California. Uses of Biochar As a Soil Amendment ... biochar, biochar quality is determined

Biochar for Environmental Management in California · Biochar for Environmental Management in California. Uses of Biochar As a Soil Amendment ... biochar, biochar quality is determined

Report Biochar Stability Test Method Final · Biochar Carbon Stability Test Method : An assessment of methods to determine biochar carbon stability. International Biochar Initiative.

Report Biochar Stability Test Method Final · Biochar Carbon Stability Test Method : An assessment of methods to determine biochar carbon stability. International Biochar Initiative.

Biochar slideshow

Biochar slideshow

a_To Litter Or Not To Litter

a_To Litter Or Not To Litter

To Litter Or Not to Litter

To Litter Or Not to Litter

Eco. Litter! Litter Pickers Litter picker and high-visibility vest Pick up litter Stay in your own playground.

Eco. Litter! Litter Pickers Litter picker and high-visibility vest Pick up litter Stay in your own playground.

Biochar What and Why? Tom Miles, NW Biochar Working Group ...

Biochar What and Why? Tom Miles, NW Biochar Working Group ...

WORKING WITH EPA COOPERATIVE …itepsrv1.itep.nau.edu/itep_course_downloads/TWRAP/17_tlefSuperfund/...WORKING WITH EPA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS: A TRIBAL PERSPECTIVE ... Chicken Litter,

WORKING WITH EPA COOPERATIVE …itepsrv1.itep.nau.edu/itep_course_downloads/TWRAP/17_tlefSuperfund/...WORKING WITH EPA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS: A TRIBAL PERSPECTIVE ... Chicken Litter,

Biochar Paper

Biochar Paper

1st Asia Pacific Biochar ConferenceAP BioChar Conference-May09

1st Asia Pacific Biochar ConferenceAP BioChar Conference-May09

Chicken Litter as Fertiliser for Broadacre Grain Crops a user

Chicken Litter as Fertiliser for Broadacre Grain Crops a user

Effect of Litter Type on Productive Performance of Growing ... · R 18 Effect of Litter Type on Productive Performance of Growing and Laying Dandarawi Chicken M. El-Sagheer, H.Y.

Effect of Litter Type on Productive Performance of Growing ... · R 18 Effect of Litter Type on Productive Performance of Growing and Laying Dandarawi Chicken M. El-Sagheer, H.Y.

An Evaluation of Chicken Litter Ash, Wood Ash and …research-repository.uwa.edu.au/files/3231623/Yusiharni...An Evaluation of Chicken Litter Ash, Wood Ash and Slag for Use as Lime

An Evaluation of Chicken Litter Ash, Wood Ash and …research-repository.uwa.edu.au/files/3231623/Yusiharni...An Evaluation of Chicken Litter Ash, Wood Ash and Slag for Use as Lime

Litter management and Litter born Diseases

Litter management and Litter born Diseases