Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31427607›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Biochar amendment improves degraded pasturelands in Brazil: environmental and cost-benefit analysis.

Agnieszka E Latawiec, Bernardo B N Strassburg, André B Junqueira, Ednaldo Araujo, Luiz Fernando D de Moraes, Helena A N Pinto, Ana Castro, Marcio Rangel, Gustavo A Malaguti, Aline F Rodrigues and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Agnieszka E LatawiecDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. a.latawiec@iis-rio.org.
Bernardo B N StrassburgDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8598-3020
André B JunqueiraDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3681-1705
Ednaldo AraujoBrazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Embrapa Agrobiology, Rodovia BR 465, Km 7, 23891-000, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro Brazil Embrapa Agrobiology, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luiz Fernando D de MoraesBrazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Embrapa Agrobiology, Rodovia BR 465, Km 7, 23891-000, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro Brazil Embrapa Agrobiology, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Helena A N PintoDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Ana CastroDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Marcio RangelInternational Institute for Sustainability, Estrada Dona Castorina 124, 22460-320, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Gustavo A MalagutiDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Aline F RodriguesDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luis Gustavo BarioniBrazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Embrapa Agricultural Informatics, Av. Dr. André Tosello, 209 - Cidade Universitária, 13083-886, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Etelvino H NovotnyBrazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Embrapa Soils, R. Jardim Botânico, 1024 - Jardim Botânico, 22460-000, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Gerard CornelissenDepartment of Environmental Engineering, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, P.O. Box 3930, Ullevål Stadion, N-0806, Oslo, Norway.
Maiara MendesDepartment of Geography and the Environment, Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, 22453900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Nilcileny BatistaFederal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ), Rodovia BR 465, Km 07, 23890-000, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Jose Guilherme GuerraBrazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Embrapa Agrobiology, Rodovia BR 465, Km 7, 23891-000, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro Brazil Embrapa Agrobiology, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Everaldo ZontaFederal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ), Rodovia BR 465, Km 07, 23890-000, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Catarina JakovacInternational Institute for Sustainability, Estrada Dona Castorina 124, 22460-320, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Sarah E HaleDepartment of Environmental Engineering, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, P.O. Box 3930, Ullevål Stadion, N-0806, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most deforested lands in Brazil are occupied by low-productivity cattle ranching. Brazil is the second biggest meat producer worldwide and is projected to increase its agricultural output more than any other country. Biochar has been shown to improve soil properties and agricultural productivity when added to degraded soils, but these effects are context-dependent. The impact of biochar, fertilizer and inoculant on the productivity of forage grasses in Brazil (Brachiaria spp. and Panicum spp.) was investigated from environmental and socio-economic perspectives. We showed a 27% average increase in Brachiaria production over two years but no significant effects of amendment on Panicum yield. Biochar addition also increased the contents of macronutrients, soil pH and CEC. Each hectare amended with biochar saved 91 tonnes of CO

Indexed as

CharcoalEnvironmentAgricultureAlgorithmsBiomassBrazilCarbon CycleCost-Benefit AnalysisEcosystemForestsModels, TheoreticalSoilbiocharCharcoalSoil

Identifiers

PMID31427607
PMCPMC6700309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.