Application Method and Biochar Type Affect Petroleum Hydrocarbon Degradation in Northern Landfarms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To integrate biochar as a practical and successful remedial amendment at northern landfarms, components of its formulation and application must be optimized for site‐specific environmental conditions. Different biochar amendments were applied to petroleum hydrocarbon (PHC)‐contaminated soil at two northern field sites (Iqaluit and Whitehorse) and in a laboratory study at −5°C to determine the effects of application method (injection or incorporation) and biochar type (wood, fishmeal, bonemeal, and/or compost) on PHC degradation and associated soil properties. Incorporation decreased F2 (equivalent n C 10 –C 16 ) and F3 (equivalent n C 16 –C 34 ) PHC concentrations in soil after 31 d, whereas injection did not decrease PHC concentrations until Day 334. Bonemeal‐derived biochar selectively stimulated F3‐PHC degradation in frozen soil over 90 d under controlled laboratory conditions. In the field, there was little difference in PHC degradation between biochar types and the fertilizer control. Incorporation also increased NO 3 − availability, and in field trials, all biochars increased NO 3 − availability relative to the fertilizer control, whereas the effects of biochars on NH 4 + and PO 4 3− were variable. Aromatic functional gene abundance was enhanced when treatments were incorporated, compared with when injected. In field trials, 6% Zakus wood plus fertilizer inhibited aliphatic and aromatic gene abundance. Liquid water content increased in incorporated treatments, specifically those amended with fishmeal biochar. Incorporation was the most successful application method for these northern soils, and although biochar amendments are not clearly effective in reducing PHC concentrations, there is evidence to suggest it can beneficially influence soil properties and PHC degradation under specific environmental conditions. Core Ideas Biochar was applied in field trials to assess petroleum hydrocarbon remediation potential. Incorporating soil amendments increased petroleum hydrocarbon degradation in northern soils. Bonemeal biochar enhanced petroleum hydrocarbon degradation under frozen conditions. Nitrate availability was increased in soils with biochar amendments. Liquid water content increased in incorporated treatments, specifically with biochar additions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".