[Terrapreta] Abstract on Charcoal in soil

[Kevin Chisholm]

Dear Christoph

Christoph Steiner wrote:
> Dear Kevin,
> 
> Terra Preta fertility is the result of increased nutrient availability
> (mainly phosphorus and calcium), lower pH and acidity, and soil biological
> and physical conditions. These were created by soil organic matter
> enrichment (not only charcoal). Therefore we tested different soil organic
> matter sources. Charcoal added very little nutrients but was recalcitrant
> and improved biological and (possibly physical conditions). Chicken manure
> added nutrients but was decomposed during the study period.

Pardon my ignorance, but it seems to me that the Chicken Manure is an 
excellent "soil feeder", in the sense of providing both mineral 
nutrients, and "caloric nutrients" for soil life forms. Straight mineral 
fertilizers provide mineral nutrients only, and do not feed soil life 
forms. My concern was that if the soil was marginal, the benefits of all 
additions would be very significant, and that the benefits of Terra 
Preta could be understated because of other growth mechanisms being more 
limiting.

> The soil base was very reasonable. Most Terra Preta soils were made out of
> Ferralsols or Acrisols, the predominant soils in the Amazon Basin.

Heavily leached soils are a real growing challenge.

> We did not consider all forms of carbon as equal, therefore we studied and
> compared them. If you are interested in the full article, please send me
> an e-mail (christoph.steiner(at)biochar.org).

Thanks very much!! I will very much appreciate a copy of this article.

Best wishes,

Kevin
> 
> Best wishes,
> Christoph
> 
>> Dear Michael
>>
>>
>> I might be missing something, but doesn't this test seem to test the
>> benefits of soil nutrients rather than the benefits of Terra Preta?
>>
>> Wouldn't these tests have been more enlightening if a more reasonable
>> soil base had been chosen?
>>
>> It would appear that all forms of carbon are considered as equal, when
>> this is not necessarily the case. Indeed , it is likely that carbohydrate
>> carbon, cellulostic carbon, and charcoal carbon serve very different
>> functions.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Michael Bailes wrote:
>>
>>> Abstract  Application of organic fertilizers and charcoal increase
>>> nutrient stocks in the rooting zone of crops, reduce nutrient leaching
>>> and thus improve crop production on acid and highly weathered tropical
>>> soils. In a field trial near Manaus (Brazil) 15 different amendment
>>> combinations based on equal amounts of carbon (C) applied through
>>> chicken manure (CM), compost, charcoal, and forest litter were tested
>>> during four cropping cycles with rice (*Oryza sativa* L.) and sorghum
>>> (*Sorghum bicolor* L.) in five
>>> replicates. CM amendments resulted in the highest (*P* < 0.05)
>>> cumulative crop yield (12.4 Mg ha?1) over four seasons. Most
>>> importantly, surface soil pH, phosphorus (P), calcium (Ca), and
>>> magnesium (Mg) were significantly enhanced by CM. A single compost
>>> application produced fourfold more grain yield (*P* < 0.05) than plots
>>> mineral fertilized in split applications. Charcoal significantly
>>> improved plant growth and doubled grain production if fertilized with
>>> NPK in comparison to the NPK-fertilizer without charcoal
>>> (*P* < 0.05). The higher yields caused a significantly greater nutrient
>>> export in charcoal-amended fields, but available nutrients did not
>>> decrease to the same extent as on just mineral fertilized plots.
>>> Exchangeable soil
>>> aluminum (Al) was further reduced if mineral fertilizer was applied with
>>>  charcoal (from 4.7 to 0 mg kg?1). The resilience of soil organic
>>> matter (SOM) in charcoal amended plots (8 and 4% soil C loss, mineral
>>> fertilized or not fertilized, respectively) indicates the refractory
>>> nature of charcoal in comparison to SOM losses over 20 months in CM
>>> (27%), compost amended (27%),
>>> and control plots (25% loss).
>>> http://www.springerlink.com/content/6655755v113437g3/
>>> Feb 2007
>>> Christoph Steiner1 [image: Contact
>>> Information]<http://www.springerlink.com/content/6655755v113437g3/#Conta
>>> ctOfAuthor1>,
>>>
>>> Wenceslau G. Teixeira2, Johannes Lehmann3, Thomas Nehls1,
>>> Jeferson Luis Vasconcelos de Mac?do2, Winfried E. H. Blum4 and Wolfgang
>>> Zech
>>> 1
>>>
>>>
>>> Does this article abstract say that Charcoal kept SOM in the soil for
>>> longer?
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Terrapreta mailing list
>>> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Terrapreta mailing list
>> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
>>
>>
>>
>> End of Terrapreta Digest, Vol 4, Issue 140
>> ******************************************
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
> 
>