International Journal of Plant & Soil Science

Volume 35, Issue 18, Page 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

ISSN: 2320-7035

Biochar Implementation in Rice Paddies

for Addressing Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Nutrient Loss: A Review
D. R. K. Saikanth a, Bal Veer Singh b++*, Avinash Kumar Rai c#,
Udayagiri Siva Kumar d, Surender e, Babita Yadav f†
and Omkar Singh g‡
a Department
of Agricultural Extension, CoA, PJTSAU, Rajendranaagar, Hyderabad, India.
b Department of Agronomy, CSA University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur, U.P-208002, India.
c Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Ghazipur, UP, Directorate of Extension, Aacharya Narendra Dev University of

Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Ayodhya, UP, India.

d Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India.
e Choudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University Hisar, India.
f Department of Botany, Nehru College, Chhibramau, Kannauj, India.
g Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel University of Agriculture and Technology, Meerut, U.P -250110, India.

Authors’ contributions
This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. All authors read and approved the final
manuscript.

Article Information
DOI: 10.9734/IJPSS/2023/v35i183326

Open Peer Review History:

This journal follows the Advanced Open Peer Review policy. Identity of the Reviewers, Editor(s) and additional Reviewers,
peer review comments, different versions of the manuscript, comments of the editors, etc are available here:
https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/102138

Received: 30/04/2023
Review Article Accepted: 05/07/2023
Published: 21/07/2023

ABSTRACT
Eco-challenges like greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and nutrient depletion are key threats to the
health of rice field ecosystems. Biochars (BCs) - porous, carbon-dense materials with substantial
surface areas and an abundance of surface functional groups - are emerging as a viable solution
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
++
Ph.D Scholar;
#
Scientist (SMS);
†
Associate Professor;
‡
Senior Research Fellow;
*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected];

Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

for these issues, offering a way to increase rice production and address environmental concerns.
Despite this potential, there is still a need for a comprehensive understanding of BCs' performance
characteristics and their environmental interactions with rice paddy soils. The beneficial outcomes
of using BCs, including enhanced rice growth and yield, decreased nutrient loss, and reduced GHG
emissions. Factors like biomass type, pyrolysis temperature, and modification process significantly
influence BCs' performance. The use of BCs can boost rice production while mitigating emissions
of CO2, N2O, and CH4. They do this by improving soil properties, encouraging microbial diversity,
supplying nutrients, and minimizing nutrient losses. However, the potential ecological hazards
related to the use of BCs in rice paddies. These hazards include inconsistent research outcomes
and the possibility of secondary pollution. Future research must address these challenges to
ensure the sustainable application of BCs.

Keywords: Biochar implementation; greenhouse gas; maize yield; nitrogen cycle.

1. INTRODUCTION can enhance nutrient retention in the soil by

attracting and holding onto nutrient ions, thereby
Biochar, a carbon-rich material produced from reducing nutrient leaching and enhancing soil
the pyrolysis of biomass, holds significant fertility [9]. In the context of rice paddies, biochar
potential for addressing pressing environmental application might prove particularly beneficial
concerns in the agricultural sector [1]. Biochar’s given the sector's high GHG emissions and
unique properties, such as its high porosity, nutrient loss concerns [10]. Despite the potential
stability, and nutrient-retention capacity, make it of BCs as a cost-effective soil amendment, a
an attractive amendment for soil remediation and comprehensive review of their performance
greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation strategies [1]. characteristics and environmental behavior in
Greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide paddy soils is still lacking. Different methods of
(CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), preparing biochar and their application strategies
are major contributors to global warming and can yield varying results in addressing specific
climate change [2]. In agriculture, these gases challenges in rice paddies. Furthermore, there is
are primarily emitted during the decomposition of limited information on the potential secondary
organic materials and the use of synthetic risks associated with biochar application in rice
fertilizers [2]. Rice paddies, in particular, are fields. Therefore, there is a need to
significant emitters of CH4 due to the anaerobic systematically summarize the effects of BCs with
conditions that prevail during the flooded periods different performance characteristics on
of the rice cultivation cycle [3]. Nutrient loss, improving environmental issues in paddy fields,
another critical concern in agriculture, occurs increasing rice yield, and assessing potential
when essential nutrients, such as nitrogen (N), ecological risks.
phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), are lost from
the soil, reducing soil fertility and crop The (Table 1) provides insightful data regarding
productivity [4]. The mechanisms for nutrient loss the characteristics of various biochars produced
include leaching, runoff, volatilization, and from different feedstocks at varying pyrolysis
erosion, and they are often exacerbated by temperatures. Biochar properties including pH,
inappropriate fertilizer application and other poor specific surface area (SSA), ash content,
management practices [4]. In rice paddies, recalcitrant index (R50), atomic ratios (H/C, O/C),
nutrient loss can result in substantial yield content of mineral elements (P, K, Ca, Mg) and
reductions, negatively impacting food security cation exchange capacity (CEC) are reported,
and farmers' livelihoods [5]. The advent of which are key indicators for biochar's potential
biochar offers an innovative approach to applications especially in soil amendment and
addressing these challenges. Theoretically, carbon sequestration. Pine sawdust biochar
biochar’s porous structure can capture and store produced at increasing pyrolysis temperatures
GHGs, particularly CO2, thus reducing their (350°C to 650°C) displayed an increase in pH,
emissions into the atmosphere [6]. SSA and ash content with a corresponding
decrease in the recalcitrant index and atomic
Biochar is gaining significant attention due to its ratio H/C [1]. The increasing ash content with
potential for carbon (C) sequestration, pyrolysis temperature could be attributed to the
improvement of soil health, fertility enhancement, increased mineral concentration at high
and crop productivity and quality [7,8]. Biochar temperatures, as organic constituents are largely

611
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

Table 1. Influence of feedstock type, pyrolysis temperature and on the characteristics of Biochars (BCs)

Feedstocks Temperature pH Specific Ash Recalcitrant Atomic Ratio Content of Mineral Cation
(°C) Surface Area (%) Index (R50) (H/C, O/C) Elements (P, K, Ca, Exchange
(SSA) (m2 g-1) Mg) (a: g/kg; b: Capacity
water-soluble g/kg) (CEC)
(cmol kg-1)
Pine sawdust 350 5.75 3.39 12.30 1.19 (0.44, 0.07) a 56.13
450 6.31 179.77 15.60 0.87 (0.32, 0.08) a 52.43
550 6.66 431.91 11.90 0.80 (0.26, 0.10) a 47.43
650 6.84 443.79 21.70 0.66 (0.14, 0.10) a 39.22
Vine pruning 250 7.35 5.00 1.22 0.55 (0.06, 0.07) b (0.03) b 60.95
350 10.26 8.30 0.75 0.25 (0.07, 0.04) b (0.02) b 47.38
600 11.31 11.50 0.41 0.13 (0.11, 0.01) b (0.01) b 32.23
Orange pomace 250 7.29 6.70 1.29 0.44 (0.03, 0.11) b (0.03) b 52.57
350 9.88 11.30 0.84 0.19 (0.06, 0.02) b (0.01) b 35.23
600 10.45 16.30 0.42 0.11 (0.10, 0.01) b 0b 25.59
Conocarpus waste 200 7.37 4.53 0.06 0.41 (0.84, 0.38) a (43.4) a 3.43
400 9.67 5.27 0.04 0.18 (0.88, 0.54) a (51.8) a 3.98
600 12.21 8.56 0.02 0.08 (1.11, 0.90) a (64.7) a 4.79
800 12.38 8.64 0.01 0.06 (1.34, 1.15) a (67.5) a 7.81
Algal biomass 250 8.72 22.90 1.21 0.71 (3.24, 0.75) b (0.07) b 81.23
350 12.98 33.40 0.86 0.33 (4.12, 0.22) b (0.08) b 62.80
600 13.66 42.70 0.38 0.15 (5.49, 0.16) b (0.08) b 49.80
Tire 300 6.95 13.10 0.01 b 0.13 (0.63, 0.04) b 5.53
500 8.94 10.30 0.03 b 0.49 (2.72, 0.10) b 51.90
700 10.2 10.90 0.01 b 0.58 (3.15, 0.17) b 10.90
Sewage sludge 500 8.81 25.42 74.21 0.48 (0.45, 18.19) a (8.52, 59.29, 14.74) a 76.76
700 11.11 32.17 81.53 0.15 (0.30, 20.35) a (9.94, 64.37, 16.37) a 50.34
900 12.15 67.60 100.09 0.09 (0.12, 20.34) a (9.68, 69.56, 17.52) a 247.51
Palm tree rachis 600 10.23 164.73 38.68 0.62 0.53 0.2 39.86
(leaves)
Silica impregnated 600 9.02 140.37 71.39 0.75 1.48 0.11 33.20
Zeolite impregnated 600 9.09 153.28 68.37 0.57 1.94 0.46 76.27
Rice straw 350 - 166.90 18.00 0.51 0.94 0.22 -

612
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

Feedstocks Temperature pH Specific Ash Recalcitrant Atomic Ratio Content of Mineral Cation
(°C) Surface Area (%) Index (R50) (H/C, O/C) Elements (P, K, Ca, Exchange
(SSA) (m2 g-1) Mg) (a: g/kg; b: Capacity
water-soluble g/kg) (CEC)
(cmol kg-1)
600 - 391.00 27.10 0.60 0.42 0.04 -
Rice straw 350 - 206.20 21.10 0.42 0.92 0.27 -
(FeCl3 modified) 600 - 363.00 28.90 0.56 0.43 0.07 -
Swine manure 350 - 123.50 30.80 0.50 1.03 0.24 -
600 - 325.80 45.00 0.61 0.45 0.06 -
Swine manure 350 - 164.40 28.60 0.45 1.02 0.30 -
(FeCl3 modified) 600 - 267.60 43.30 0.57 0.56 0.17 -
Rice straw 450 - 3.40 - 0.61 0.30 0.10 -
(FeCl3 modified)
Rice straw 450 - 3.10 - 0.53 0.90 0.20 -
(AlCl3 modified)
Poultry litter 450 - 10.40 - 0.60 0.30 0.10 -
Poultry litter 450 - 1.80 - 0.61 0.50 0.10 -
(FeCl3 modified)
Poultry litter 450 - 4.70 - 0.45 0.80 0.20 -
(AlCl3 modified)
Corn straw 450 - 12.60 - 0.53 0.80 0.30 -
Corn straw 450 - 11.00 - 0.48 0.60 0.30 -
(FeCl3 modified)
Corn straw 450 - 11.40 - 0.53 0.90 0.40 -
(AlCl3 modified)

613
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

vaporized [11]. The influence of pyrolysis application of BCs to improve and remediate
temperature on biochar characteristics is also paddy soils. A total of 1,729 papers were initially
demonstrated with vine pruning, orange pomace, obtained using the keywords "BCs and paddy."
Conocarpus waste, and algal biomass. An Based on a review of titles and abstracts, we
increasing trend in pH and 7 decreasing trend in selected more than 200 papers that closely
H/C ratio, recalcitrant index (R50) and cation aligned with the subject matter of this review.
exchange capacity (CEC) are observed with
increasing pyrolysis temperature [12]. Biochars 2.2 Selection Criteria
produced from sewage sludge at 500°C, 700°C
and 900°C display high ash content which could We established rigorous selection criteria to
be associated with the inorganic fraction in the ensure the inclusion of only the most relevant
original feedstock. Furthermore, the SSA and and high-quality studies in the review. The
CEC both increased with the increase in inclusion criteria were as follows:
temperature, indicating the enhancement of
biochar's surface reactivity and nutrient retention 1. The study had to be a primary research
capability [13]. Biochar produced from modified article that reported on empirical findings.
feedstocks such as FeCl3 and AlCl3 modified rice 2. The study had to be written in English.
straw, and poultry litter also showed distinct 3. The study had to focus on the application
characteristics. The modifications in feedstock of biochar in rice paddies and its impact on
might alter the biochar's properties, enhancing greenhouse gas emissions and/or nutrient
their specific functionalities. For instance, FeCl3 loss.
modification tends to improve the specific surface
area and nutrient retention capacity of biochars
Studies that did not meet these criteria were
[14]. It is worth noting that these properties will
excluded from the review. Also, review articles,
affect biochar's behavior in the environment, and
conference proceedings, dissertations, theses,
its effectiveness in specific applications. For
book chapters, and reports were excluded due to
example, high pH biochars might be better
their varying quality standards and reporting
applied in acidic soils, high SSA biochars
formats. However, key information from such
might provide more sites for nutrient adsorption
sources was used to guide the review process.
and hence more beneficial for nutrient-poor
soils, while high ash content biochars might
be more resilient to degradation, making 2.3 Data Extraction and Analysis
them more suitable for carbon sequestration [15].
Data extraction involved the collection of key
2. METHODOLOGY information from the selected studies. For each
included study, we extracted data on the study
To conduct this review, we adopted a design, location, sample size, type and quantity
comprehensive approach that encompassed a of biochar used, application method,
systematic literature search, rigorous selection measurements of greenhouse gas emissions and
criteria, and thorough data extraction and nutrient loss, key findings, and limitations. This
analysis procedures. This methodological data was tabulated to facilitate comparison and
framework ensured the inclusion of relevant and synthesis.
high-quality studies that would facilitate a
comprehensive understanding of the potential of The analysis involved a narrative synthesis of the
biochar for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions extracted data, focusing on the impacts of
and nutrient loss in rice paddies. biochar application on greenhouse gas
emissions and nutrient loss in rice paddies. We
2.1 Search Strategy also identified patterns and trends across the
studies, noted areas of agreement and
Our search strategy involved a broad search of disagreement, and highlighted gaps in the
academic databases, including PubMed, Web of current research. Our goal was to produce a
Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, as well as comprehensive, evidence-based overview of the
a hand-search of reference lists in relevant potential of biochar for mitigating greenhouse
articles to identify additional sources. To address gas emissions and nutrient loss in rice paddies,
this gap, we conducted a literature search using identifying areas where further research is
the mainstream academic database Web of needed and providing recommendations for
Science to identify relevant papers on the future work in this field.

614
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

3. BIOCHAR: PRODUCTION AND 3. Nutrient Retention Capacity: Biochar can

CHARACTERISTICS retain and slowly release essential
nutrients, improving soil fertility and crop
Biochar, a carbon-rich product derived from the productivity, and minimizing nutrient
pyrolysis of organic biomass, has increasingly leaching [9].
gained recognition for its potential in mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing soil 4. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM
fertility, and improving environmental RICE PADDIES
sustainability. Understanding the production and
inherent properties of biochar is fundamental to In agriculture, rice paddies significantly contribute
tapping into its potential. Biochar production to greenhouse gas emissions, particularly
primarily involves the process of pyrolysis, which methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). It delver
is the thermochemical decomposition of organic deeper into these contributions and their
material in the absence of oxygen or under environmental implications. Methane emissions
significantly reduced oxygen concentrations [1]. from rice paddies stem from the anaerobic
This process usually occurs at high temperatures decomposition of organic matter in flooded fields.
ranging between 300 and 1000°C. Pyrolysis The microbes involved in this process, known as
results in three main products: biochar, syngas (a methanogens, thrive in the oxygen-deprived
mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide), and conditions of flooded rice fields and produce
bio-oil. The biochar yield, along with the methane as a by-product of their metabolism
proportions of the other two by-products, [17]. Furthermore, CH4 emissions from rice
depends on the processing conditions, paddies are significantly influenced by
particularly temperature, heating rate, and management practices. For instance, continuous
residence time, as well as the type of biomass flooding of rice fields tends to increase methane
feedstock used. emissions compared to intermittent flooding [18].
Nitrous oxide emissions from rice paddies mainly
A diverse array of biomass materials can serve occur through the microbial processes of
as feedstock for biochar production. These nitrification and denitrification. Nitrification
include wood, crop residues such as straw and involves the conversion of ammonia to nitrate by
husks, animal manures, green waste, and other aerobic bacteria, while denitrification involves the
organic materials [16]. The choice of feedstock conversion of nitrate to dinitrogen by anaerobic
significantly influences the properties of the bacteria. These processes are influenced by
resulting biochar and, consequently, its factors such as soil pH, temperature, moisture
performance and suitability for specific content, and the availability of organic carbon
applications. For instance, biochars produced and nitrogen [19]. Additionally, the application of
from woody feedstocks typically exhibit nitrogen fertilizers can boost N2O emissions, as
higher carbon content and stability compared to surplus nitrogen provides substrates for nitrifying
those derived from grasses or manures. Biochar and denitrifying bacteria [20]. Several studies
is recognized for its unique physical and have endeavored to quantify greenhouse gas
chemical properties, which contribute to its emissions from rice paddies. A study by Sass et
functionality when applied to soil. Key properties al. [3] reported that rice paddies account for
include: approximately 5-20% of total anthropogenic
methane emissions. Similarly, Cai et al. [20]
1. High Porosity and Surface Area: found that N2O emissions from rice paddies
Biochar is characterized by a porous account for about 3-5% of total anthropogenic
structure with a large surface area, N2O emissions. These emissions have significant
which enhances its capacity for water environmental implications. Methane and nitrous
retention, provides habitat for beneficial oxide are potent greenhouse gases, with 28 and
soil microbes, and facilitates the 265 times the global warming potential of carbon
adsorption of nutrients and pollutants dioxide over a 100-year period, respectively [21].
[9]. Therefore, their emissions contribute significantly
2. High Carbon Content and Stability: The to global warming and subsequent climate
high carbon content and stability of biochar change impacts, such as rising global
mean that it can persist in soil for centuries temperatures, sea-level rise, and increased
or even millennia, thereby sequestering frequency and intensity of extreme weather
carbon and mitigating greenhouse gas events [2]. Furthermore, the increased N2O
emissions [1]. emissions can contribute to ozone layer

615
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

depletion, further exacerbating environmental temperature, application rate, duration, and soil
concerns [22]. type. Biochar application led to various outcomes
like increased biodiversity, improved soil
5. NUTRIENT LOSS IN RICE PADDIES aeration, pH adjustments, nutrient availability,
decreased nutrient leaching, and enhanced
Understanding nutrient loss in rice paddies
microbial activity, contributing to yield increments
involves evaluating the causes, the impact on
[27]. Biochar derived from rice straw, for
crop yield and soil health, and its overall
instance, increased the yield from +2.82% to
environmental implications. This section aims to
+24.56% [28]. Rice straw biochar, applied at 5,
provide a comprehensive overview of these
10, 20 t/ha over four years, led to improved
aspects. Leaching is one of the primary causes
biodiversity, soil aeration, and pH, increasing the
of nutrient loss in rice paddies. This process
yield from +2.82% to 7.47% [29]. In another
involves the downward movement of dissolved
study, rice straw biochar was applied at 22.5 t/ha
nutrients through the soil profile beyond the root
for three years, leading to an increase in soil pH,
zone due to excessive rainfall or irrigation.
total carbon (TC), and total nitrogen (TN),
Consequently, essential nutrients such as
resulting in a +9.2% to +16.4% yield increase
nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium are lost
[30]. Biochar derived from wheat straw at 500°C,
from the soil, reducing their availability to the rice
applied at 0.5–3% w/w for two years, resulted in
plants [23]. Erosion, which entails the removal of
increased soil pH and nitrogen availability,
topsoil by wind and water, is another significant
improving the yield by +1.8% to +7.3% [31].
cause of nutrient loss. The process often sweeps
Wheat straw biochar produced at 350–450°C
away nutrient-rich soil particles, contributing to
and applied at 20 t/ha increased soil organic
reduced soil fertility and, consequently,
carbon (SOC), TN, and nutrient availability,
diminished crop yields [24]. Volatilization refers
resulting in a significant yield improvement of
to the conversion of solid or liquid substances
+28.4% [6]. Rice husk biochar yielded some of
into gas. In rice paddies, this often involves the
the highest yield improvements. When applied to
transformation of applied nitrogen fertilizers into
acid sulfate soil, it improved soil pH, nutrient
ammonia gas, leading to nitrogen loss from the
availability, and total bacterial population,
soil [25]. The rate of volatilization is influenced by
resulting in a dramatic yield increase of +41.87%
factors such as pH, temperature, and the type of
[32]. When rice husk biochar was applied at 2%
fertilizer used. The impact of nutrient loss from
w/w to sandy loam soil, it increased soil nutrient
rice paddies is multifaceted, affecting crop yields,
availability, leading to an impressive yield
soil health, and overall environmental
improvement ranging from +18.58% to +35.1%
sustainability. Firstly, nutrient loss can lead to
[33]. Biochar produced from other feedstocks
significant reductions in crop yields. According to
such as bamboo chips, cassava straw, chicken
Wang et al. [26], nutrient deficiencies associated
litter, and sewage sludge also showed promising
with nutrient loss can limit rice growth, reduce
results. For instance, chicken litter biochar
grain size and number, and hence decrease
application resulted in a massive +86.44% yield
overall yield. Moreover, nutrient loss can
increase [34] and sewage sludge biochar yielded
detrimentally affect soil health. The removal of
the largest yield increase ranging from +148.8%
nutrients through leaching, erosion, and
to +175.1% [35]. Although biochar effects were
volatilization can diminish soil fertility, reduce
generally positive, results varied depending on
organic matter content, and impair soil structure,
factors such as application rate, pyrolysis
affecting its capacity to support plant growth and
temperature, feedstock type, and soil properties.
maintain productivity over time [24]. Given these
Understanding these interactions and optimizing
implications, managing nutrient loss from rice
biochar application methods is crucial to fully
paddies is of paramount importance. It not only
utilize its potential in enhancing rice yield. It's
enhances agricultural productivity but also
also important to further investigate the long-term
contributes to soil conservation and
impacts of biochar application on soil health and
environmental sustainability. In the context of
crop yield stability [36].
such strategies, the potential role of biochar is
worth investigating.
6. ROLE OF BIOCHAR IN MITIGATING
The application of biochar (BC) has been shown GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND
to positively impact rice yield, largely through NUTRIENT LOSS
improving soil characteristics, as demonstrated in
(Table 2). The data provided shows variability Biochar holds great promise in addressing the
due to differences in feedstocks, pyrolysis challenges of greenhouse gas emissions and

616
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

nutrient loss in rice paddies. It involves roles of methane emissions from rice paddies following
biochar in mitigating these issues and evaluates biochar application, attributed to improved soil
empirical evidence supporting these theories. aeration and increased methanotroph activity.
Biochar's potential to reduce greenhouse gas Similarly, Cayuela et al. [38] observed reduced
emissions is associated with its unique N2O emissions following biochar application to a
physicochemical properties. Its porous structure tropical soil, correlating with changes in soil pH
and high surface area can provide habitats for and moisture content. For nutrient loss, a study
methanotrophs-microbes that consume methane- by Lehmann et al. [29] found that biochar
thereby reducing CH4 emissions [37]. Moreover, application reduced leaching of nitrate and
biochar can enhance soil aeration, disrupting the phosphate in sandy soils [42-44].
anaerobic conditions that favor methane
production [27]. For N2O emissions, biochar can 7. POTENTIAL ECOLOGICAL RISKS
indirectly reduce its production by influencing soil
pH and moisture content. Biochar has been While biochars (BCs) have demonstrated
found to increase soil pH, which can inhibit immense promise in tackling environmental
nitrification and denitrification processes issues within rice fields and boosting rice yields,
responsible for N2O emissions [38]. Additionally, there are potential challenges associated with
improved soil structure and water-holding their use. Factors such as the origin of the
capacity due to biochar application can decrease feedstock, conditions of pyrolysis, and
soil water saturation, further reducing conditions modification techniques of BCs can lead to
favoring N2O production [39]. Biochar is also significantly diverse performance characteristics,
thought to minimize nutrient loss through several introducing a degree of unpredictability. This
mechanisms. Firstly, it can enhance soil retention could potentially undermine the advantages of
of nutrients due to its high cation exchange using BCs for enhancing and rehabilitating rice
capacity (CEC), reducing nutrient leaching [29]. fields, and might even precipitate detrimental
Secondly, the porous structure of biochar can consequences. For example, harmful substances
help to mitigate soil erosion by improving soil might be released, greenhouse gas emissions
aggregate stability [40]. Additionally, biochar can might escalate, pollutants might be secondarily
reduce nitrogen loss through volatilization. emitted, and the biodegradation of pesticides
Biochar's alkaline pH can help to retain might be obstructed. Moreover, the growth and
ammonia, a form of nitrogen lost through development of both rice plants and
volatilization, thus preserving soil nitrogen [41]. microorganisms might be hindered.
Several empirical studies have examined the Consequently, the potential ecological risks
efficacy of biochar in mitigating greenhouse gas stemming from the employment of BCs in paddy
emissions and nutrient loss. For instance, Zhang cultivation systems remain a pressing concern in
et al. [27] reported a significant decrease in current discussions.

Fig. 1. Inhibition (a) and promotion (b) of greenhouse gas emissions by BCs in rice fields

617
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

Table 2. Effect of BC application on the improvement of rice yield

Feedstocks Pyrolysis Application rate Time Soil type/texture Main impact factors Yield increase (%)
temperature (°C) (years)
Rice Straw 350–500 5, 10, 20 t/ha 4 Sandy loam Increased biodiversity, soil +2.82% - 7.47%
aeration, soil pH
Rice Straw 500 22.5 t/ha 3 - Increased soil pH, TC, TN +9.2% - +16.4%
Rice Straw 550 10.5 t/ha 2 Gley paddy Increased soil pH, SOC, +8.5% - +10.7%
available P and K
Wheat Straw 500 0.5–3% w/w 2 - Increased soil pH, soil N +1.8% - +7.3%
availability
Bamboo Chips and 600 22.5 t/ha 2 Clay loam Increased NO3−-N content of +19.8% - +21.6%
Rice Straw rhizosphere soil
Cassava Straw 300–500 20, 30 t/ha - Ultisols Improved soil pH, SOC, TN, +10.46% - +10.56%
soil microbial C and N
Wheat Straw 350–450 20 t/ha - Anthrosol Increased SOC, TN, nutrient +28.4%
availability
Rice Husk 500 4 t/ha - Acid sulfate soil Improved soil pH, nutrients (K, +41.87%
P, Ca, Mg), total bacterial
population
Wheat Straw 550–600 5, 20, 40 t/ha - Silty loam Decreased N and P leaching +4.42% - +16.89%
loss, increased N use
efficiency
Rice Straw 450–500 1.8, 3.6 mg/ha - Saline–alkaline soil Increased P availability and +3.66% - +8.54%
retention, increased CEC
Rice Straw 600 15, 30, 60 t/ha - Clay and sand Improved soil pH, SOC, +10.13% - +24.56%
nutrient availability, N use
efficiency
Rice Husk 300, 500, 600 2% w/w - Sandy loam Increased soil nutrient +18.58% - +35.1%
availability
Rice Straw - 20, 40 t/ha - Dark-yellow Reduced N loss and improved +1.67% - +5.54%
N use efficiency
Wheat/Rice/Maize 550 2% w/w - - Enhanced soil invertase, +51.05% - +102.03%
Straw phosphatase, urease for C, N,
and P mineralization

618
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

Feedstocks Pyrolysis Application rate Time Soil type/texture Main impact factors Yield increase (%)
temperature (°C) (years)
Rice Husk 500 10, 20 t/ha - Clay Increased pH, CEC, OC, N, P, +52.2% - +65.4%
and K availability
Rice Husk 600 1% w/w - Slightly acidic Increased essential elements +11% - +19%
and water usage efficiency
Chicken Litter - 5 t/ha - Sandy loam Increased soil pH, TC, TP, TN, +86.44%
available P and exchangeable
N
Sewage Sludge 550 5, 10% w/w - Sandy loam Increased soil pH, TN, SOC, +148.8% - +175.1%
available nutrients
Cassava Straw - 30 t/ha - Ultisol N uptake was associated with -
enhanced activities of N
metabolism enzymes
Wheat Straw 500 24, 48 t/ha 3-4 Granite red soil Mortierella and Westerdykella -
promoted TOC degradation
Wheat Straw 350–550 20, 40 t/ha - Sandy loam Increased dehydrogenase and -
alkaline phosphatases,
decreased β-glucosidase
Rice Straw 500 24 t/ha - Stagnic anthrosol Stimulated microbial use of N- -
rich substances, such as amino
acids
Rice Husk - 1, 2, 5, 10% w/w - Riparian soil Enhanced P mineralization and -
reduced N leaching

619
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

Fig. 2. Potential risks of BC application in paddy fields

8. CONCLUSION ecological risks associated with BCs in rice fields

warrant further exploration.
Biochars (BCs) have demonstrated considerable
potential in mitigating global environmental COMPETING INTERESTS
challenges within rice cultivation environments,
while simultaneously enhancing rice yields. Thus, Authors have declared that no competing
the utilization of BCs is increasingly viewed as an interests exist.
eco-friendly, cost-effective, and sustainable
strategy for the enhancement and restoration of REFERENCES
paddy fields. Factors such as the type of
biomass used, the pyrolysis temperature, and the 1. Lehmann J, Joseph S. Biochar for
method of modification play crucial roles in environmental management: Science,
shaping the performance attributes of BCs. The technology and implementation.
application of BCs, or their modified counterparts Routledge; 2015.
with varying performance characteristics, can
2. IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of
foster rice yield increases and reduce
Climate Change. Contribution of Working
greenhouse gas emissions (for instance, CO2,
Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of
N2O, and CH4). This is achieved by improving
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
soil physical and chemical properties, nurturing
Change; 2014.
microbial communities, providing nutrient
sources, and curbing nutrient losses. Even 3. Sass RL, Fisher FM, Wang YB, Turner FT,
though BCs are finding more use as Jund MF. Methane emission from rice
amendments for paddy remediation, potential fields: The effect of floodwater

620
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

management. Global Biogeochemical soil and water: a review. Chemosphere.

Cycles. 1992;6(3):249-262. 2014;99:19-33.
4. Galloway JN, Townsend AR, Erisman JW, 14. Song W, Guo M. Quality variations of
Bekunda M, Cai Z, Freney JR, et al. poultry litter biochar generated at different
Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: pyrolysis temperatures. Journal of
Recent trends, questions, and potential Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis.
solutions. Science. 2008;320(5878):889- 2012;94:138-145.
892. 15. Chen B, Zhou D, Zhu L. Transitional
5. Dobermann A, Witt C, Dawe D, adsorption and partition of nonpolar and
Abdulrachman S, Gines HC, Nagarajan polar aromatic contaminants by biochars of
R, et al. Site-specific nutrient management pine needles with different pyrolytic
for intensive rice cropping systems in temperatures. Environmental Science &
Asia. Field Crops Research. 2004;74(1): Technology. 2008;42(14):5137-5143.
37-66. 16. Novak JM, Busscher WJ. Selection and
6. Woolf D, Amonette JE, Street-Perrott FA, use of designer biochars to improve
Lehmann J, Joseph S. Sustainable biochar characteristics of southeastern USA
to mitigate global climate change. Nature coastal plain degraded soils. In Advances
Communications. 2010;1(1):1-9. in Agronomy. Academic Press.
7. Alkharabsheh HM, Seleiman MF, Battaglia 2013;118:1-40.
ML, Shami A, Jalal RS, Alhammad BA, 17. Wassmann R, Lantin RS, Neue HU,
Almutairi KF, Al-Saif AM. Biochar and its Buendia LV, Corton TM, Lu Y.
broad impacts in soil quality and fertility, Characterization of methane emissions
nutrient leaching and crop productivity: A from rice fields in Asia. III. Mitigation
review. Agronomy. 2021;11(5):993. options and future research needs.
8. Siedt M, Schäffer A, Smith KE, Nabel M, Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems. 2000;
Roß-Nickoll M, van Dongen JT. Comparing 58(1):23-36.
straw, compost, and biochar regarding 18. Yan X, Akiyama H, Yagi K, Akimoto H.
their suitability as agricultural soil Global estimations of the inventory
amendments to affect soil structure, and mitigation potential of methane
nutrient leaching, microbial communities, emissions from rice cultivation conducted
and the fate of pesticides. Science of the using the 2006 Intergovernmental
Total Environment. 2021;751:141607. Panel on Climate Change Guidelines.
9. Lehmann J, Gaunt J, Rondon M. Bio-char Global Biogeochemical Cycles. 2005;
sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems–a 23(2).
review. Mitigation and Adaptation 19. Shang Q, Yang X, Gao C, Wu P, Liu J, Xu
Strategies for Global Change. Y, Shen Q, Zou J, Guo S. Net annual
2006;11(2):403-427. global warming potential and greenhouse
10. Haefele SM, Konboon Y, Wongboon W, gas intensity in Chinese double rice-
Amarante S, Maarifat AA, Pfeiffer EM, cropping systems: A 3-year field
Knoblauch C. Effects and fate of biochar measurement in long-term fertilizer
from rice residues in rice-based systems. experiments. Global Change Biology.
Field Crops Research. 2011;121(3): 2011;17(6):2196-2210.
430-440. 20. Cai Z, Xing G, Yan X, Xu H, Tsuruta H,
11. Zimmerman AR. Abiotic and microbial Yagi K, Minami K. Methane and nitrous
oxidation of laboratory-produced black oxide emissions from rice paddy fields as
carbon (biochar). Environmental Science affected by nitrogen fertilisers and water
and Technology. 2010;44(4):1295-1301. management. Plant and Soil.
12. Novak JM, Busscher WJ. Selection and 1997;196(1):7-14.
use of designer biochars to improve 21. Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon FM, Collins W,
characteristics of southeastern USA Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, et al.
coastal plain degraded soils. In Biochar Anthropogenic and natural radiative
and Soil Biota. CRC Press. 2012:69-96. forcing. In Climate change 2013 the
13. Ahmad M, Rajapaksha AU, Lim JE, Zhang physical science basis: Working Group I
M, Bolan N, Mohan D, et al. Biochar as a contribution to the Fifth assessment report
sorbent for contaminant management in of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

621
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

Change. Cambridge University Press. 33. Jones DL, Murphy DV, Khalid M, Ahmad
2013:659-740. W, Edwards‐Jones G, DeLuca TH. Short-
22. Ravishankara AR, Daniel JS, Portmann term biochar-induced increase in soil CO2
RW. Nitrous oxide (N2O): The dominant release is both biotically and abiotically
ozone-depleting substance emitted in the mediated. Soil Biology and Biochemistry.
21st century. Science. 2009;326(5949): 2011;43(8):1723-1731.
123-125. 34. Agegnehu G, Bass AM, Nelson PN,
23. Zhang X, Davidson EA, Mauzerall DL, Bird MI. Benefits of biochar, compost
Searchinger TD, Dumas P, Shen Y. and biochar–compost for soil quality,
Managing nitrogen for sustainable maize yield and greenhouse gas
development. Nature. 2015;528(7580):51- emissions in a tropical agricultural soil.
59. Science of the Total Environment. 2016;
24. Lal R. Soil degradation by erosion. Land 543:295-306.
Degradation & Development. 35. Jin H. Characterization of microbial life
2001;12(6):519-539. colonizing biochar and biochar-amended
25. Savci S. Investigation of effect of chemical soils. Ph.D. thesis. Cornell University;
fertilizers on environment. APCBEE 2010.
Procedia. 2012;1:287-292. 36. Jeffery S, Verheijen FG, van der Velde M,
26. Wang M, Zheng Q, Shen Q, Guo S. The Bastos AC. A quantitative review of the
critical role of potassium in plant stress effects of biochar application to soils on
response. International Journal of crop productivity using meta-analysis.
Molecular Sciences. 2013;14(4):7370- Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment.
7390. 2011;144(1):175-187.
27. Zhang A, Cui L, Pan G, Li L, Hussain Q, et 37. Liu S, Zhang Y, Zong Y, Hu Z, Wu S, Zhou
al. Effect of biochar amendment on yield J, Jin Y, Zou J. Response of soil carbon
and methane and nitrous oxide emissions dioxide fluxes, soil organic carbon and
from a rice paddy from Tai Lake plain, microbial biomass carbon to biochar
China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & amendment: A meta‐analysis. GCB
Environment. 2010;139(4):469-475. Bioenergy. 2016;8(2):392-406.
28. Liu X, Zhang A, Ji C, Joseph S, Bian R, Li 38. Cayuela ML, Sánchez-Monedero MA, Roig
L, et al. Biochar's effect on crop A, Hanley K, Enders A, Lehmann J.
productivity and the dependence on Biochar and denitrification in soils: when,
experimental conditions-a meta-analysis of how much and why does biochar reduce
literature data. Plant and Soil. 2013;373(1- N2O emissions? Scientific Reports.
2):583-594. 2013;3:1732.
29. Lehmann J, Rillig MC, Thies J, Masiello 39. Singh BP, Hatton BJ, Singh B, Cowie AL,
CA, Hockaday WC, Crowley D. Biochar Kathuria A. Influence of biochars on
effects on soil biota – A review. Soil nitrous oxide emission and nitrogen
Biology and Biochemistry. leaching from two contrasting soils.
2011;43(9):1812-1836. Journal of Environmental Quality.
2010;39(4):1224-1235.
30. Glaser B, Lehmann J, Zech W.
Ameliorating physical and chemical 40. Liu X, Zhang A. Effect of biochar
properties of highly weathered soils in the amendment on yield and methane and
tropics with charcoal -a review. Biology nitrous oxide emissions from a rice paddy
and Fertility of Soils. 2002;35(4):219-230. from Tai Lake plain, China. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment. 2012;
31. Baronti S, Alberti G, Delle Vedove G, Di
148:348-358.
Gennaro F, Fellet G, Genesio L, et al. The
biochar option to improve plant yields: First 41. Spokas KA, Koskinen WC, Baker JM,
results from some field and pot Reicosky DC. Impacts of woodchip biochar
experiments in Italy. Italian Journal of additions on greenhouse gas production
Agronomy. 2010;5(1):3. and sorption/degradation of two herbicides
in a Minnesota soil. Chemosphere.
32. Biederman LA, Harpole WS. Biochar and
2009;77(4):574-581.
its effects on plant productivity and nutrient
cycling: A meta‐analysis. GCB Bioenergy. 42. Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews:
2013;5(2):202-214. An analysis of 14 review types and

622
 Saikanth et al.; Int. J. Plant Soil Sci., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 610-623, 2023; Article no.IJPSS.102138

associated methodologies. Health interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration;

Information & Libraries Journal. 2009; 2011.
26(2):91-108. 44. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic
43. Higgins JP, Green S. (Eds.). Cochrane reviews in the social sciences: A practical
handbook for systematic reviews of guide. Blackwell Publishing; 2006.
_________________________________________________________________________________
© 2023 Saikanth et al.; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/102138

623