| Title |
Effect of biochar on growth and ion contents of bean plant under saline condition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-018-1446-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Salar Farhangi-Abriz, Shahram Torabian |
| Abstract |
A pot experiment was conducted with three biochar ratios (non-biochar, 5, and 10% total pot mass) and three salinities (control, 6, and 12 dSm-1 sodium chloride) treatments. At the flowering stage, we harvested common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L. cv. Derakhshan) plants and measured growth characteristics and nutrient contents. As an average, salt stress decreased shoot and root dry weight, leaf area, relative water content, chlorophyll fluorescence (Fv/Fm) and leaf chlorophyll content, however, increased root length, sodium (Na) content of root and shoot, Na uptake, and translocation of bean plants, compared to control. On the other hand, the growth and ion contents of bean were affected positively by use of biochar, but Na translocation was not changed. Addition of biochar improved content of chlorophylls a, b, and total, and potassium (K), calcium (Ca), and magnesium (Mg) contents, while, diminished Na content and uptakes. Moreover, in case of measured parameters, 10% biochar was more effective compared to 5%. Overall, biochar enhanced growth of a bean under saline condition, which may have contributed to the reduction of Na uptake and enhance of K, Ca, and Mg contents. |
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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 20 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 9 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 18% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 21 | 42% |
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 12 February 2018.
All research outputs
#19,440,618
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#5,443
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#339,584
of 448,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#110
of 212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 448,711 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 212 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.