Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T16:03:17.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effect of Biochar on Native and Invasive Prairie Plant Species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Melinda M. Adams ,
Tamara J. Benjamin ,
Nancy C. Emery ,
Sylvie J. Brouder  and
Kevin D. Gibson
Melinda M. Adams
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Tamara J. Benjamin
Affiliation:
Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Nancy C. Emery
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology and Department of Biology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Sylvie J. Brouder
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, 915 West State Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Kevin D. Gibson*
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: kgibson@purdue.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Biochar, a carbon-rich product formed by the incomplete combustion of biomass, has been shown to improve soil quality and increase crop growth but has not been evaluated in prairie ecosystems. We assessed the response of a native perennial grass, big bluestem, and an invasive herbaceous perennial, sericea, to biochar amendments in two greenhouse experiments in 2010 and 2011. In the first experiment, big bluestem and sericea were grown in monoculture; the main treatments were soil type (silt, sand), percent biochar (0%, 1%, 2%, and 4%) and nitrogen (0 and 10 g N m−2). Big bluestem growth was increased by the addition of biochar, particularly in the sand soil. In contrast, sericea growth was either not affected or decreased when biochar was added to the soil, particularly at the higher biochar rates. Adding N to the soil appeared to increase sericea growth in the presence of biochar and the silt soil, which suggests that biochar may have reduced N availability. A replacement series was used in the second experiment to evaluate the effect of biochar on competition between the two species. Main treatments were biochar rates (0% and 2%), nitrogen rates (0 and 10 g N m−2) and the following big bluestem to sericea ratios: 6 : 0, 4 : 2, 3 : 3, 2 : 4, and 0 : 6. After 180 d, big bluestem height and biomass were significantly greater in biochar-amended soils than in unamended soils. However, sericea height and biomass were unaffected by biochar amendments and the addition of biochar did not alter competitive outcomes. Competition between big bluestem and sericea was asymmetrical; sericea reduced the growth of big bluestem but big bluestem had relatively little effect on the growth of sericea. Our research suggests that biochar has the potential to increase the growth of big bluestem and may be a useful tool for prairie restoration.

Keywords

Big bluestem, Andropogon gerardii Vitmansericea, Lespedeza cuneata (Dumont) G. DonBlack carboncarbon sequestrationcompetitionprairie restorationreplacement series
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , June 2013 , pp. 197 - 207
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Allred, B. W., Fuhlendorf, S. D., Monaco, T. A., and Will, R. E. 2010. Morphological and physiological traits in the success of the invasive plant Lespedeza cuneata . Biol. Invasions 12:739–49.Google Scholar
Amonette, J. E. and Joseph, S. 2009. Characteristics of biochar: microchemical properties. Pages 33–52 in Lehmann, J. L. and Joseph, S., eds. Biochar for Environmental Management, Science and Technology. London Earthscan.Google Scholar
Atkinson, C. J., Fitzgerald, J. D., and Hipps, N. A. 2010. Potential mechanisms for achieving agricultural benefits from biochar application to temperature soils: a review. Plant Soil 337:1–18.Google Scholar
Averett, J. M., Klips, R. A., Nave, L. E., Frey, S. D., and Curtis, P. S. 2004. Effects of soil carbon amendment on nitrogen availability and plant growth in an experimental tallgrass prairie restoration. Restor. Ecol. 12:568–574.Google Scholar
Barnes, C. W., Kinkle, L. L., and Growth, J. V. 2005. Spatial and temporal dynamics of Puccinia andropogonis on Comandra umbellata and Andropogon gerardii in a native prairie. Can. J. Bot. 83:1159–1173.Google Scholar
Blumenthal, D. M., Jordan, N. R., and Russelle, M. P. 2003. Soil carbon addition controls weeds and facilitates prairie restoration. Ecol. Appl. 13:605–615.Google Scholar
Brandon, A. L., Gibson, D. J., and Middleton, B. A. 2004. Mechanisms for dominance in an early successional old field by the invasive non-native Lespedeza cuneata (Dum. Cours.) G. Don. Biol. Invasions 6:483–493.Google Scholar
Chan, K. Y., Van Zwieten, L., Meszaros, I., Downie, A., and Joseph, S. 2007. Agronomic values of greenwaste biochars as a soil amendments. Australian J. of Soil Res. 45:437–444.Google Scholar
Chan, K. Y., Van Zwieten, L., Meszaros, I., Downie, A., and Joseph, S. Using poultry litter biochars as soil amendments. Australian J. of Soil Res. 2008. 46:437–444.Google Scholar
Chapin, F. S. III. 1980. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Ann. Rev. Ecol. System. 11:233–260.Google Scholar
Corbin, J. D. and D'Antonio, C. M. 2004. Can carbon addition increase competitiveness of native grasses? A case study from California. Restoration Ecol 12:36–43.Google Scholar
Cully, A. C., Cully, J. F. Jr., and Hiebert, R. D. 2003. Invasion of exotic plant species in tallgrass prairie fragments. Cons. Biol. 17:990–998.Google Scholar
Cummings, D. C., Bidwell, T. G., Medlin, C. R., Fuhlendorf, S. D., Elmore, R. D., and Weir, J. R. 2007. Ecology and management of Sericea lespedeza . NREM-2874. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service. 8 p.Google Scholar
Davis, M. A., Grime, J. P., and Thompson, K. 2000. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J. Ecol. 88:528–534.Google Scholar
DeLuca, T. H., MacKenzie, M. D., and Gundale, M. J. 2009. Biochar effects on soil nutrient transformation. Pages 251–280 in Lehmann, J. and Joseph, S., eds. Biochar for Environmental Management, Science and Technology. Earthscan, London.Google Scholar
DeLuca, T. H., MacKenzie, M. D., Gundale, M. J., and Holben, W. E. 2006. Wildlife-produced charcoal directly influences nitrogen cycling in Ponderosa pine forests. Soil Sci. 70:448–453.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, F. A., Wrage, K., Hobbie, S. E., and Reich, P. B. 2006. Tree patches show greater N losses but maintain higher soil N availability than grassland patches in a frequently burned oak savanna. Ecosystems 9:441–452.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Brooks, M. L., and Allen, E. B. 2006. Control of invasive weeds with prescribed burning. Weed Tech. 20:535–548.Google Scholar
Estorninos, L. E., Gealy, D. R. Jr., and Talbert, R. 2002. Growth response of rice (Oryza sativa) and red rice (O. sativa) in a replacement series study. Weed Tech. 16:401–406.Google Scholar
Fechter, R. H. and Jones, R. 2001. Estimated economic impacts of the invasive plant Sericea lespedeza on Kansas grazing lands. J. Ag. Appl. Econ. 33:360.Google Scholar
Fernandes, M. B., Skjemstad, J. O., Johnson, B. B., Wells, J. D., and Brooks, P. 2003. Characterization of carbonaceous combustion residues. I. Morphological elemental and spectroscopic features. Chemosphere 52:785–795.Google Scholar
Foster, B. and Gross, K. 1998. Species richness in a successional grassland: effects of nitrogen enrichment and plant litter. Ecology 79:2593–2602.Google Scholar
Foster, B., Smith, V., Dickson, L., and Hilderbrand, T. 2002. Invasibility and compositional stability in a grassland community: relationships to diversity and extrinsic factors. Oikos 99:300–307.Google Scholar
Gaskin, J. W., Speir, R. A., Harris, K., Das, K. C., Lee, R. D., Morris, L. A., and Fisher, D. S. 2010. Effect of peanut hull and pine chip biochar on soil nutrients, corn nutrient status, and yield. Agron. J. 102:623–633.Google Scholar
Gealy, D. R., Estorninos, L. E., Gbur, E. E., and Chavez, R. S. 2005. Inference interactions of two rice cultivars and their F3 cross with barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) in a replacement series study. Weed Sci. 53:323–330.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. 2007. Prehistorically modified soils of central Amazonia: a model for sustainable agriculture in the twenty-first century. Philos. T. Roy. Soc. B. 362:187–196.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. and Amelung, W. 2003. Pyrogenic carbon in native grassland soils along climosequence in North America. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 17:1064–1072.Google Scholar
Glaser, B., Haumaier, L., Guggenberger, G., and Zech, W. 2001. The Terra Preta phenomenon – a model for sustainable agriculture in the humid tropics. Naturwissenschaften 88:37–41.Google Scholar
Graber, E. R., Harel, Y. M., Kolton, M., Cytryn, E., Silber, A., David, D. R., Tsechansky, L., Botenshtein, M., and Elad, Y. 2010. Biochar impact on development and productivity of pepper and tomato grown in fertigated soilless media. Plant Soil 337:481–496.Google Scholar
Gross, K. and Werner, P. 1982. Colonizing abilities of “biennial” plant species in relation to ground cover: implications for their distributions in a successional sere. Ecology 4:921–931.Google Scholar
Grygiel, C. E., Norland, J. E., and Biondini, M. E. 2010. Can carbon and phosphorus amendments increase native forbs in a restoration process? A case study in the northern tall-grass prairie (U.S.A.). Restor. Ecol. 20:122–130.Google Scholar
Gundale, M. J. and DeLuca, T. H. 2007. Charcoal effects on soil solution chemistry and growth of Koeleria macrantha in Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir ecosystems. Biol. Fert. Soils 43:303–311.Google Scholar
Harper, L. 1977. Substitutive experiments. Pages 255–267 in Population Biology of Plants. London Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hartnett, D. C. and Fay, P. A. 1998. Plant populations: patterns and processes. Pages 81–100 in Knapp, A. K., Briggs, J. M., Hartnett, D. C., and Collins, S. C., eds. Grassland Dynamics: Long-term Ecological Research in Tallgrass Prairie. New York Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Joseph, S. D., Camps-Arbestain, M., Lin, Y., Munroe, P., Chia, C. H., Hook, J., van Zwieten, L., Kimber, S., Cowie, A., Singh, B. P., Lehmann, J., Foidl, N., Smernik, J., and Amonette, J. E. 2010. An investigation into the reactions of biochar in soil. Soil Res. 48:501–515.Google Scholar
Kardol, P., van der Wal, A., Bezemer, T. M., de Boer, W., Duyts, H., Holtkamp, R. and van der Putten, W. H. 2008. Restoration of species rich grasslands on ex-arable land: seed addition outweighs soil fertility reduction. Biol. Cons. 141:2208–2217.Google Scholar
Kakani, V. G. and Reddy, K. R. 2010. Reflectance properties, leaf photosynthesis and growth of nitrogen deficient big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii). J. Agron. Crop Sci. 5:379–390.Google Scholar
Kalburtji, K. and Mosjidis, J. 1992. Effects of Sericea lespedeza residues on warm-season grasses. J. Range Manag. 45:441–444.Google Scholar
Kalburtji, K. L., Mosjidis, J. A., and Mamolos, A. P. 2001. Allelopathic plants. Lespedeza cuneata . Allelopathy J. 8:41–49.Google Scholar
Knapp, A. K. 1985. Effect of fire and drought on the ecophysiology of Andropogon gerardii and Panicum virgatum in a tallgrass prairie. J. Ecol. 4:1309–1320.Google Scholar
Knops, J. and Tilman, D. 2000. Dynamics of soil nitrogen and carbon accumulation for 61 years after agricultural abandonment. Ecology 81:88–98.Google Scholar
Kramer, R. W., Kujawinski, E. B., and Hatcher, P. G. 2004. Identification of black carbon derived structures in a volcanic ash soil humic acid by Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectronomy. Env. Sci. Tech. 38:3387–3395.Google Scholar
Lehmann, J. 2007. Bio-energy in the black. Front. Ecol. Env. 5:381–387.Google Scholar
Lehman, J., Pereira da Silva, J. Jr., Steiner, C., Nehls, T., Zech, W., and Glaser, B. 2003. Nutrient availability and leaching in an archaeological anthrosol and a ferrasol of the central Amazon basin: fertilizer, manure, and charcoal amendments. Plant Soil 249:343–357.Google Scholar
Major, J., Rondon, M., Molina, D., Riha, S. J., and Lehmann, J. 2010. Maize yield and nutrition during 4 years after biochar applications to a Colombian savanna oxisol. Plant Soil 33:117–128.Google Scholar
Major, J., Steiner, C., DiTommaso, A., Falcão, N., and Lehmann, J. 2005. Weed composition and cover after three years of soil fertility management in the central Brazilian Amazon: compost, fertilizer, manure and charcoal applications. Weed Biol. Manag. 5:69–76.Google Scholar
Mangla, S., Sheley, R. L., James, J. J., and Radosevich, S. 2011. Intra and interspecific competition among invasive and native species during early stages of plant growth. Plant Ecol. 212:531–542.Google Scholar
Mangold, J. M. and Sheley, R. L. 2008. Controlling performance of bluebunch wheatgrass and spotted knapweed using nitrogen and sucrose amendments. Western North American Naturalist 68:129–137.Google Scholar
Mann, L. 1986. Changes in soil carbon after cultivation. Soil Sci. 142:279–288.Google Scholar
Masiello, C. A. 2004. New directions in black carbon organic geochemistry. Marine Chem. 92:201–213.Google Scholar
Mays, D. A. and Bengston, J. W. 1985. ‘Interstate’ sericea lespedeza: a long-term nitrogen source for loblolly pine growing on coal mine spoil. Tree Planters' Notes 36:9–12.Google Scholar
Mehlich, A. 1984. Mehlich 3 soil test extractant: a modification of Mehlich 2 extractant. Comm. Soil Sci. Plant Analysis 15:1409–1416.Google Scholar
Mlot, C. 1990. Restoring the prairie. Bioscience 11:804–809.Google Scholar
Morghan, K. J. and Seastedt, T. R. 1999. Effects of soil nitrogen reduction on nonnative plants in restored grasslands. Restor. Ecol. 7:51–55.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. W. and Sommers, L. E. 1982. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. Pages 539–594 in Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., and Keeney, D. R., eds. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2. 2nd edition. Madison, Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Novak, J. M., Busscher, W. J., Laird, D., Ahmeda, M., Watts, D. W., and Niandou, M. A. S. 2009. Impact of biochar amendment on fertility of a Southeastern coastal plain soil. Soil Sci. 174:105–112.Google Scholar
Novoplansky, A. and Goldberg, D. 2001. Effects of water pulsing on individual performance and competitive hierarchies in plants. J. Vegetable. Sci. 12:199–208.Google Scholar
Ojima, D. S., Schimel, D. S., Patron, W. J., and Owensby, C. E. 1994. Long- and short-term effects of fire on nitrogen cycling in tallgrass prairie. Biogeochemistry 24:67–84.Google Scholar
Paschke, M. T., McLendon, T., and Redente, E. 2000. Nitrogen availability and old-filed sucession in a short-grass steppe. Ecosystems 3:144–158.Google Scholar
Perry, L. G., Galatowitsch, S. M., and Rosen, C. J. 2004. Competitive control of invasive vegetation; a native wetland sedge suppresses Phalaris arundinacea in carbon-enriched soil. J. Appl. Ecol. 41:151–162.Google Scholar
Prober, S. M., Thiele, K. R., Lunt, I. D., and Koen, T. B. 2005. Restoring ecological function in temperate grassy woodlands; manipulating soil nutrients, exotic annuals and native perennial grasses through carbon supplements and spring burns. J. Appl. Ecol.42 1073–1085.Google Scholar
Radosevich, S. 1987. Methods to study interaction among crops and weed. Weed Tech. 1:190–198.Google Scholar
Rashid, I. and Reshi, Z. 2010. Does carbon addition to soil counteract disturbance-promoted alien plant invasions? Trop. Ecol. 51:339–345.Google Scholar
Ritchie, M. E. and Tilman, D. 1995. Response of legumes to herbivores and nutrients during succession on a nitrogen-poor soil. Ecology 76:2648–2655.Google Scholar
Samson, F. and Knopf, F. 1994. Prairie conservation in North America. Bioscience 6:418–421.Google Scholar
Sanders, N. J., Weltzin, J. F., Crutsinger, G. M., Fitzpatrick, M. C., Nunez, M. A., Oswalt, C. M., and Lane, K. E. 2007. Insects mediate the effects of propagule supply and resource availability on a plant invasion. Ecology 88:2383–2391.Google Scholar
Schutzenhofer, M. R. and Knight, T. M. 2007. Population-level effects of augmented herbivory on Lespedeza cuneata: implications for biological control. Ecol. Appl. 17:965–971.Google Scholar
Seastedt, T. R., Briggs, J. M., and Gibson, D. J. 1991. Controls of nitrogen limitations in tallgrass prairie. Oecologia 87:72–79.Google Scholar
Silletti, A. M. and Knapp, A. K. 2004. Competition and coexistence in grassland codominants: responses to neighbor removal and resource availability. Can. J. Bot. 82:450–460.Google Scholar
Simpson, M. and Hatcher, P. G. 2004. Overestimates of black carbon in soil sediments. Naturwissenschaften 91:436–440.Google Scholar
Skold, M. D. 1989. Cropland retirement policies and their effects on land-use in the Great Plains. Product. Agric. 2:197–201.Google Scholar
Solaiman, Z. M., Murphy, D. V., and Abbott, L. K. 2011. Biochars influence seed germination and early growth of seedlings. Plant Soil 352:1–15.Google Scholar
Steiner, C., Glaser, B., Teixeira, W., Lehmann, J., Blum, W., and Zech, W. 2008. Nitrogen retention and plant uptake on a highly weathered Central Amazonian ferralsol amended with compost and charcoal. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 6:893–899.Google Scholar
Steiner, C., Teixeira, W., Lehmann, J., Nehls, T., de Macedo, J., Blum, W., and Zech, W. 2007. Long term effects of manure, charcoal, and mineral fertilization on crop production and fertility on a highly weathered Central Amazonian upland soil. Plant Soil 291:275–290.Google Scholar
Streubel, J. D., Collins, H. P., Garica-Perez, M., Granatstein, D., and Kruger, C. E. 2011. Influence of contrasting biochar types on five soils at increasing rates of application. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 75:1402–1413.Google Scholar
Sumner, M. E. and Miller, W. P. 1996. Cation exchange capacity and exchange coefficients. Pages 1201–1229 in Sparks, D. L., ed. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3. Chemical Methods. Madison, WI, SSSA and ASA.Google Scholar
Turner, C., Blair, J., Shartz, R., and Neel, J. 1997. Soil N and plant responses to fire, topography, and supplemental N in tallgrass prairie. Ecology 78:1832–1843.Google Scholar
Van Zwieten, L., Kimber, S., Morris, S., Chan, K. Y., Downie, A., Rust, J., Joseph, S., and Cowie, A. 2010. Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of papermill waste on agronomic performatnce and soil fertility. Plant Soil 27:235–246.Google Scholar
Warnick, D. D., Lehmann, J., Kuyper, T. W., and Rilling, M. C. 2007. Mycorrhizal responses to biochar in soil – concepts and mechanisms. Plant Soil 300:9–20.Google Scholar
Wedin, D. and Tilman, D. 1993. Competition among grasses along a nitrogen gradient; initial conditions and mechanisms of competition. Ecol. Monog. 63:199–229.Google Scholar
Yamato, M., Okimori, Y., Wibowo, I. F., Ashori, S., and Ogawa, M. 2006. Effects of the application of charred bark of Acacia mangium on the yield of maize, cowpea and peanut, and soil chemical properties in South Sumatra, Indonesia. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 52:489–495.Google Scholar