| Title |
Effects of biochar and alkaline amendments on cadmium immobilization, selected nutrient and cadmium concentrations of lettuce (Lactuca sativa) in two contrasting soils
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-2019-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Desta Woldetsadik, Pay Drechsel, Bernard Keraita, Bernd Marschner, Fisseha Itanna, Heluf Gebrekidan |
| Abstract |
To assess the efficiency of seven treatments including biochars produced from dried faecal matter and manures as stabilizing agents of cadmium (Cd)-spiked soils, lettuce was grown in glasshouse on two contrasting soils. The soils used were moderately fertile silty loam and less fertile sandy loam and the applied treatments were 7 % w/w. The reduction of bioavailable Cd (ammonium nitrate extractable) and its phytoavailability for lettuce were used as assessment criteria in the evaluation of stabilization performance of each treatment. Moreover, the agronomic values of the treatments were also investigated. Ammonium nitrate extraction results indicated that faecal matter biochar, cow manure biochar and lime significantly reduced bioavailable Cd by 84-87, 65-68 and 82-91 %, respectively, as compared to the spiked controls. Unpredictably, coffee husk biochar induced significant increment of Cd in NH4NO3 extracts. The immobilization potential of faecal matter biochar and lime were superior than the other treatments. However, lime and egg shell promoted statistically lower yield and P, K and Zn concentrations response of lettuce plants compared to the biochar treatments. The lowest Cd and highest P tissue concentrations of lettuce plants were induced by faecal matter and cow manure biochar treatments in both soils. Additionally, the greatest Cd phytoavailability reduction for lettuce was induced by poultry litter and cow manure biochars in the silty loam soil. Our results indicate that faecal matter and animal manure biochars have shown great potential to promote Cd immobilization and lettuce growth response in heavily contaminated agricultural fields. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 107 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 15% |
| Researcher | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 34 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 24% |
| Environmental Science | 16 | 15% |
| Engineering | 8 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 5% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 42 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 November 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,031
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,461
of 1,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,127
of 301,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#147
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,046 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.