results from other experiments may be similar to or quite different
from classroom findings. Given the variability in biochar and soil
properties, it is likely that classroom findings will differ from findings of other experiments. Results in Figure 10 were taken from
published field, greenhouse, and laboratory experiments to show
variability in responses of plant growth (A and B) and soil respiration (C and D) to biochar addition. These previous experiments
have shown positive, negative, and neutral results of biochar soil
amendment, depending on the soil type and the biochar properties. One reason for this variability is soil pH (Appendix 1).
Differences in pH between biochar and control treatments and
soil types may help explain differences in plant growth and soil
respiration. For example, biochar has a large effect on corn yield
in an acidic soil (Figure 10A), whereas biochar has no measurable
effect on corn yield in a basic soil (Figure 10B). Students can measure soil pH and visualize differences between treatments by
graphing dot charts (Appendix 1).
Comparing classroom experimental designs and results with
previous experiments gives context to the students’ work and
allows for meaningful discussion about the nature of scientific
investigation. For example, our classroom soil respiration experiment was conducted over a 24-hour period, while the laboratory
(Figure 10C) and greenhouse (Figure 10D) soil respiration experiments were conducted over 50 days and 10 weeks, respectively.
Ask your students why the soil respiration results over 10 weeks
differ from those of their 24-hour experiment. In this case, the
classroom experimental design resulted in a CO2 concentration
that reached the maximum detectable limit in the compost treatments (Figure 9), whereas the garden-soil CO2 concentrations
continued to increase, similar to the results in Figure 10. Use
these results as an opportunity for students to objectively critique
the experimental design and suggest ways to improve it, rather
than criticizing themselves for “doing it wrong.” Teachers and students can refer to Figure 10 to discuss variability in experimental
results and show that scientific experiments rarely come to one
“right” answer or conclusion. Using the CER framework, task students to use multiple pieces of experimental evidence from classroom experiments and other experiments to develop a scientific
argument (Appendix 2).
The plant growth and soil respiration experiments align with
NGSS and the CER framework to engage students in an authentic
science experience. Students will develop soil and plant disciplinary knowledge and gain experience with science practices.
Together, students will craft a scientific argument using data generated both by their class and by professional scientists. This integrated approach connects students to ongoing, relevant research
in soil and plant science.
This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture
National Institute of Food and Agriculture Research Initiative–
Coordinated Agricultural Projects Bioenergy Alliance Network of
the Rockies grant no. 2013-68005-21298.
Basso, A.S., Miguez, F.E., Laird, D.A., Horton, R. & Westgate, M. (2013).
Assessing potential of biochar for increasing water‐holding capacity of
sandy soils. GCB Bioenergy, 5, 132–143.
Biederman, L.A. & Harpole, W.S. (2013). Biochar and its effects on plant
productivity and nutrient cycling: a meta-analysis. Global Change
Biology Bioenergy, 5, 202–214.
Bird, M.I., Wurster, C.M., de Paula Silva, P.H., Bass, A.M. & de Nys, R. (2011).
Algal biochar – production and properties. Bioresource Technology, 102,
Dempster, D.N., Gleeson, D.B., Solaiman, Z.M., Jones, D.L. & Murphy, D.V.
(2012). Decreased soil microbial biomass and nitrogen mineralisation
with Eucalyptus biochar addition to a coarse textured soil. Plant and
Soil, 354, 311–324.
Field, J.L., Keske, C.M.H., Birch, G.L., DeFoort, M.W. & Cotrufo, M.F. (2012).
Distributed biochar and bioenergy coproduction: a regionally specific
case study of environmental benefits and economic impacts. GCB
Bioenergy, 5, 177–191.
Fierer, N. & Jackson, R.B. (2006). The diversity and biogeography of soil
bacterial communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences USA, 103, 626.
Foster, E.J., Hansen, N., Wallenstein, M. & Cotrufo, M.F. (2016). Biochar and
manure amendments impact soil nutrients and microbial enzymatic
activities in a semi-arid irrigated maize cropping system. Agriculture
Ecosystems & Environment,
Fuertes, A.B., Arbestain, M.C., Sevilla, M., Maciá-Agulló, J.A., Fiol, S., Lopez,
R., et al. (2010). Chemical and structural properties of carbonaceous
products obtained by pyrolysis and hydrothermal carbonisation of
corn stover. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 48, 618–626.
Glaser, B., Haumaier, L., Guggenberger, G. & Zech, W. (2001). The ‘Terra
Preta’ phenomenon: a model for sustainable agriculture in the humid
tropics. Naturwissenschaften, 88, 37–41.
IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report. Contribution of
Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 1–151).
Jeffery, S., Verheijen, F.G.A., van der Velde, M. & Bastos, A.C. (2011). A
quantitative review of the effects of biochar application to soils on
crop productivity using meta-analysis. Agriculture Ecosystems &
Environment, 144, 175–187.
Lehmann, J. (2007). A handful of carbon. Nature, 447, 143–144.
Lehmann, J. & Joseph, S. (2015). Biochar for Environmental Management:
Science, Technology and Implementation. New York, NY: Routledge.
Liu, S., Zhang, Y., Zong, Y., Hu, Z., Wu, S., Zhou, J., et al. (2016). Response of soil
carbon dioxide fluxes, soil organic carbon and microbial biomass carbon
to biochar amendment: a meta-analysis. GCB Bioenergy, 8, 392–406.
Macías, F. & Arbestain, M.C. (2010). Soil carbon sequestration in a changing
global environment. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global
Change, 15, 511–529.
Major, J., Rondon, M., Molina, D., Riha, S.J. & Lehmann, J. (2010). Maize yield
and nutrition during 4 years after biochar application to a Colombian
savanna oxisol. Plant and Soil, 333, 117–128.
McNeill, K.L. & Krajcik, J. (2008). Inquiry and scientific explanations:
helping students use evidence and reasoning. In J. Luft, R.L. Bell &
J. Gess-Newsome (Eds.), Science as Inquiry in the Secondary Setting
(pp. 121–134). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Paul, E.A. (2014). Soil Microbiology, Ecology and Biochemistry. San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Schimel, J.P. & Bennett, J. (2004). Nitrogen mineralization: challenges of a
changing paradigm. Ecology, 85, 591–602.