Aqueous Leaching of Organic Acids and Dissolved Organic Carbon from Various Biochars Prepared at Different Temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biochar has been used as a soil amendment, as a water treatment material, and for carbon (C) sequestration. Thirty-six biochars, produced from wood, agricultural residue, and manure feedstocks at different temperatures, were evaluated for the aqueous leaching of different forms of soluble C. The release of inorganic C (alkalinity), organic acids (OAs), and total dissolved organic C (DOC) was highly variable and dependent on the feedstock and pyrolysis temperature. The pH and alkalinity increased for the majority of samples. Higher pH values were associated with high-temperature (high-T) (600 and 700°C) biochars. Statistically significant differences in alkalinity were not observed between low-temperature (low-T) (300°C) and high-T biochars, whereas alkalinity released from wood-based biochar was significantly lower than from others. Concentrations of OAs and DOC released from low-T biochars were greater than from high-T biochars. The C in the OAs represented 1 to 60% of the total DOC released, indicating the presence of other DOC forms. The C released as DOC represented up to 3% (majority <0.1%) of the total C in the biochar. Scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy showed the high-T biochars had a greater proportion of micropores. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy showed that hydroxyl, aliphatic, and quinone were the predominant functional groups of all biochars and that the abundance of other functional groups was dependent on the feedstock. The release of DOC, especially bioavailable forms such as OAs, may promote growth of organisms and heavy metal complexation and diminish the potential effectiveness of various biochars for C sequestration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".