| Title |
Effect of rubber wood biochar on nutrition and growth of nursery plants of Hevea brasiliensis established in an Ultisol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-1-84 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Randombage Saman Dharmakeerthi, Jayalath Arachchige Sarath Chandrasiri, Vishani Udayanga Edirimanne |
| Abstract |
Application of biochar alters availability of nutrients and acidic cations in soils which in turn could affect growth of plant to different degrees. Effect of rubber wood biochar amendment on the growth and nutritional status of Hevea nursery plants was determined in this study. Biochar were applied at 1% and 2% (w/w) with and without the recommended rates of N and Mg liquid fertilizers (LF). Two control treatments with 0% biochar but with and without recommended levels of all N, P, K, and Mg LF were also included. Application of biochar alone has a significant positive effect on above ground dry matter accumulation of the rootstock seedling (81% over the 0% biochar + no LF control) while no effect on the scion growth. Growth of plants in LF added treatments were much higher. Combining 2% biochar with N and Mg significantly increased the above ground dry matter accumulation over N-P-K-Mg only treatment in both rootstock seedling (29%) and the scion (61%). Biochar only application did not affect the N and P and decreased K and Ca concentrations in leaves. When combined with N and Mg fertilizers however, biochar significantly increased total N, P, Mg and Ca uptake. Biochar only application (2%) significantly decreased the leaf Mn concentrations in the seedling probably due to decrease in Mn availability as a result of increase in soil pH. The increase in soil pH due to biochar addition decreased with time close to original values in soils that received LF, possibly due to sulfate of ammonia. We concluded that application of rubber wood biochar (upto 2% w/w) could improve the growth of Hevea plants with the use of only N and Mg fertilizers under nursery conditions tested in this experiment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pakistan | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 117 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
| Researcher | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 31 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 54 | 45% |
| Environmental Science | 22 | 18% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 32 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 February 2013.
All research outputs
#13,375,146
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#692
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,027
of 280,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#12
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
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 280,252 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.