Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Effects of Biochar on Proctor Compaction Test Parameters of Different Textured Soils

Year 2026, Volume: 16 Issue: 1, 375 - 385, 01.03.2026
https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1705004
https://izlik.org/JA48AZ67LJ

Abstract

Soil compaction is a critical factor limiting soil productivity, commonly caused by volumetric changes, natural events, and mechanical forces. The degradation of soil physical properties adversely affects essential factors such as water availability, air exchange, temperature regulation, and seed germination, ultimately restricting root development and shoot emergence, which leads to reduced plant growth and yield. One of the most effective strategies to mitigate soil compaction is the application of organic-based soil amendments. This study investigated the effects of biochar (BC) applied at different rates (0%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%, and 4%) to soils with varying textures (clay, loam, and sandy loam) on key soil quality indicators: soil organic carbon (OC), aggregate stability (AS), and Proctor compaction parameters including optimum moisture content (OMC) and maximum bulk density (MBD). The results demonstrated that biochar significantly improved OC and AS across all soil types (p < 0.001). The OC increased from 0.73% in the control to 1.40% with 4% BC, while AS improved from 26.98% to 46.03%. Biochar also enhanced OMC from 20.56% to 31.15% (a 51.51% increase) and reduced MBD from 1.71 g /cm³ to 1.54 g /cm³ (a 9.94% decrease). Correlation analysis indicated strong positive relationships between BC and OC, AS, and OMC, and significant negative correlations between MBD and BC, OC, and AS. These findings suggest that biochar application enhances soil structure and resilience against compaction, supporting improved soil health, agricultural productivity, and environmental sustainability. Therefore, biochar represents a promising amendment for sustainable land management.

References

  • Abbott, L. K., & Murphy, D. V. (2007). What is soil biological fertility? In D. V. Murphy & L. K. Abbott (Eds.), Soil biological fertility: A key to sustainable land use in agriculture (pp. 1–15). Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Abiven, S., Menasseri, S., & Chenu, C. (2009). The effects of organic inputs over time on soil aggregate stability–A literature analysis. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 41(1), 1-12.
  • Akgül, M. (1992). Daphan Ovası Topraklarının Sınıflandırılması ve Haritalanması. Atatürk Üni. Fen Bilimleri Enst. Doktora Tezi.
  • Aksakal, E. L. (2004). Toprak sıkışması ve tarımsal açıdan önemi. Research in Agricultural Sciences, 35(3-4).
  • ASTM. (1992). Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials. Ball, B. C. (2013). Soil structure and greenhouse gas emissions: A synthesis of 20 years of experimentation. European Journal of Soil Science, 64(3), 357-373.
  • Batey, T. (2009). Soil compaction and soil management–A review. Soil Use and Management, 25(4), 335-345.
  • Blanco-Canqui, H. (2021). Does biochar application alleviate soil compaction? Review and data synthesis. Geoderma, 404, 115317.
  • Flint, A. L., & Flint, L. E. (2002). 2.2 Particle density. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 Physical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 229–240). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Frene, J. P., Pandey, B. K., & Castrillo, G. (2024). Under pressure: Elucidating soil compaction and its effect on soil functions. Plant and Soil, 502(1), 267–278.
  • Gao, J., & O’Neill, B. C. (2020). Mapping global urban land for the 21st century with data-driven simulations and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Nature Communications, 11(1), 2302.
  • Gee, G. W., & Or, D. (2002). Particle-size analysis. In J. H. Dane & G. C. Topp (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 Physical methods (pp. 255–293). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Greenberg, I., Kaiser, M., Polifka, S., Wiedner, K., Glaser, B., & Ludwig, B. (2019). The effect of biochar with biogas digestate or mineral fertilizer on fertility, aggregation and organic carbon content of sandy soil: Results of a temperate field experiment. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci., 182, 824-835.
  • Hailegnaw, N. S., Mercl, F., Pracke, K., Szakova, J., & Tlustos, P. (2019). High temperature-produced biochar can be efficient in nitrate loss prevention and carbon sequestration. Geoderma, 338, 48-55.
  • IBM. (2011). IBM Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corporation.
  • Lehmann, J., Rillig, M. C., Thies, J., Masiello, C. A., Hockaday, W. C., & Crowley, D. (2020). Biochar effects on soil biota–A review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 43(9), 1812–1836.
  • Li, L., Zhang, Y. J., Novak, A., Yang, Y., & Wang, J. (2021). Role of biochar in improving sandy soil water retention and resilience to drought. Water, 13(4), 407.
  • Liu, C., Yang, L., Li, Y., & Sun, Z. (2023). Biochar effects on soil structure and hydraulic properties: A review. Environmental Research, 216, 114456.
  • Loeppert, R. H., & Suarez, D. L. (1996). Carbonate and gypsum. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 437–474). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Madari, B. E., Silva, M. A., Carvalho, M. T., Maia, A. H., Petter, F. A., Santos, J. L., ... & Zeviani, W. M. (2017). Properties of a sandy clay loam Haplic Ferralsol and soybean grain yield in a five-year field trial as affected by biochar amendment. Geoderma, 305, 100–112.
  • Nelson, D. W., & Sommers, L. E. (1996). Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 961–1010). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Nimmo, J. R., & Perkins, K. S. (2002). 2.6 Aggregate stability and size distribution. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 Physical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 317–328). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Omondi, M. O., Xia, X., Nahayo, A., Liu, X., Korai, P. K., & Pan, G. (2016). Quantification of biochar effects on soil hydrological properties using meta-analysis of data. Geoderma, 274, 28–34.
  • Özcan, A., & Tuncer, A. (2024). Tarımda biyokömür: Toprak iyileştirmesi ve ürün verimliliği için sürdürülebilir bir yaklaşım. Journal of Agriculture, Food and Ecology, 1(1), 7–13.
  • Özdemir, N., & Canbolat, M. (1997). Toprak strüktürünün oluşum süreçleri ve yönetimi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(3).
  • Özgül, M. (2003). Erzurum Yöresinde Yaygın Olarak Bulunan Büyük Toprak Gruplarının Sınıflandırılması ve Haritalanması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Toprak Anabilimdalı Doktora Tezi.
  • Rhoades, J. D. (1996). Salinity: Electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 417–435). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Sari, S., Aksakal, E. L., & Angin, I. (2017). Influence of vermicompost application on soil consistency limits and soil compatibility. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 41(5), 357–371.
  • Seifu Woldeyohannis, Y. (2024). Negative effect of soil compaction and investigation of its relation with soil physiochemical properties in mechanization farming system. Applied and Environmental Soil Science, 2024(1), 5654283.
  • Servadio, P., Marsili, A., Vignozzi, N., Pellegrini, S., & Pagliai, M. (2005). Effects on some soil qualities in central Italy following the passage of four wheel drive tractor fitted with single and dual tires. Soil and Tillage Research, 84(1), 87-100.
  • Sumner, M. E., & Miller, W. P. (1996). Cation exchange capacity and exchange coefficients. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 1201–1229). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Thomas, G. W. (1996). Soil pH and soil acidity. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 475–490). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Turgut, B., & Öztaş, T. (2012). Penetrasyon direncini etkileyen bazı toprak özelliklerinin yersel değişiminin belirlenmesi. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi–Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 18(2), 115–120.
  • Yang, Y., Meng, Z., Li, H., Gao, Y., Li, T., & Qin, L. (2025). Soil porosity as a key factor of soil aggregate stability: Insights from restricted grazing. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1535193.
  • Zhang, X., Wang, H., He, L., Lu, K., Sarmah, A., Li, J., ... & Huang, H. (2013). Using biochar for remediation of soils contaminated with heavy metals and organic pollutants. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 20, 8472–8483.
  • Zheng, X., Dong, J., Zhang, W., Xiang, J., Yin, X., & Han, L. (2021). Biogas residue biochar shifted bacterial community, mineralization, and molecular structure of organic carbon in a sandy loam Alfisol. GCB Bioenergy, 13(5), 838–848.

Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri

Year 2026, Volume: 16 Issue: 1, 375 - 385, 01.03.2026
https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1705004
https://izlik.org/JA48AZ67LJ

Abstract

Toprak sıkışması, toprağın üretkenliğini etkileyen önemli bir faktör olup, topraklardaki hacimsel değişimler, doğal olaylar ve mekaniksel dış kuvvetler nedeniyle meydana gelir. Toprak fiziksel koşullarının bozulması, su, hava, sıcaklık ve çimlenme gibi faktörlere olumsuz etki yaparak kök gelişimini ve sürgün çıkışını engeller, bitkisel üretimin düşmesine neden olur. Söz konusu olumsuzlukları minimize etmenin en etkili yöntemlerinde biri organik kaynaklı toprak düzenleyicilerin toprağa uygulanmasıdır. Bu çalışmada, farklı tekstürlerdeki topraklara (kil, tın, kumlu tın) farklı dozlarda biyokömür (BC) uygulamasının (%0, %0,5, %1, %2, %4) toprağın organik karbon (OC), agregat stabilitesi (AS) ve Proctor sıkışma testi parametreleri olan optimum nem içeriği (OMC) ile maksimum hacim ağırlığı (MBD) üzerine etkileri incelenmiştir. Biyokömür uygulaması araştırma topraklarının organik karbon (OC) içeriğini ve agregat stabilitesi (AS) değerlerini istatistiksel olarak önemli düzeyde (p<0.001) artırmıştır. Daha yüksek dozlarda uygulanan biyokömür dozları daha belirgin iyileştirmelere yol açmış, genel ortalamalar incelendiğinde kontrol grubunda %0.73 olan OC değeri %4 biyokömür uygulamasında %1.4 olarak belirlenmiştir. AS ise kontrolde %26.98 iken %4 biyokömür uygulamasında %46.03 olarak belirlenmiştir. Optimum nem içeriği (OMC) biyokömür uygulamasıyla genel ortalamada %20.56’dan %31.15’e yükselmiş ve oransal olarak %51.51 oranında bir artış gösterirken, maksimum hacim ağırlık (MBD) 1.71 g/cm3’den 1.54 g/cm3’e düşmüş ve oransal olarak %9.94 oranında bir azalış göstermiştir. Korelasyon analizi, BC ile OC, AS ve OMC arasında güçlü pozitif ilişkiler olduğunu gösterirken; MBD ile BC, OC ve AS arasında önemli negatif korelasyon olduğunu göstermiştir. Bulgularımız, biyokömür uygulamasının toprakların özelliklerini iyileştirerek sıkışmaya karşı direncini artırdığını ve sıkışmayı azalttığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu iyileştirmeler daha iyi toprak sağlığına, artan tarımsal üretkenliğe ve artan çevresel dayanıklılığa katkıda bulunarak biyokömürü sürdürülebilir arazi yönetimi için toprak iyileştiricisi olarak kullanılabileceğini göstermektedir.

References

  • Abbott, L. K., & Murphy, D. V. (2007). What is soil biological fertility? In D. V. Murphy & L. K. Abbott (Eds.), Soil biological fertility: A key to sustainable land use in agriculture (pp. 1–15). Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Abiven, S., Menasseri, S., & Chenu, C. (2009). The effects of organic inputs over time on soil aggregate stability–A literature analysis. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 41(1), 1-12.
  • Akgül, M. (1992). Daphan Ovası Topraklarının Sınıflandırılması ve Haritalanması. Atatürk Üni. Fen Bilimleri Enst. Doktora Tezi.
  • Aksakal, E. L. (2004). Toprak sıkışması ve tarımsal açıdan önemi. Research in Agricultural Sciences, 35(3-4).
  • ASTM. (1992). Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials. Ball, B. C. (2013). Soil structure and greenhouse gas emissions: A synthesis of 20 years of experimentation. European Journal of Soil Science, 64(3), 357-373.
  • Batey, T. (2009). Soil compaction and soil management–A review. Soil Use and Management, 25(4), 335-345.
  • Blanco-Canqui, H. (2021). Does biochar application alleviate soil compaction? Review and data synthesis. Geoderma, 404, 115317.
  • Flint, A. L., & Flint, L. E. (2002). 2.2 Particle density. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 Physical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 229–240). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Frene, J. P., Pandey, B. K., & Castrillo, G. (2024). Under pressure: Elucidating soil compaction and its effect on soil functions. Plant and Soil, 502(1), 267–278.
  • Gao, J., & O’Neill, B. C. (2020). Mapping global urban land for the 21st century with data-driven simulations and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Nature Communications, 11(1), 2302.
  • Gee, G. W., & Or, D. (2002). Particle-size analysis. In J. H. Dane & G. C. Topp (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 Physical methods (pp. 255–293). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Greenberg, I., Kaiser, M., Polifka, S., Wiedner, K., Glaser, B., & Ludwig, B. (2019). The effect of biochar with biogas digestate or mineral fertilizer on fertility, aggregation and organic carbon content of sandy soil: Results of a temperate field experiment. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci., 182, 824-835.
  • Hailegnaw, N. S., Mercl, F., Pracke, K., Szakova, J., & Tlustos, P. (2019). High temperature-produced biochar can be efficient in nitrate loss prevention and carbon sequestration. Geoderma, 338, 48-55.
  • IBM. (2011). IBM Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corporation.
  • Lehmann, J., Rillig, M. C., Thies, J., Masiello, C. A., Hockaday, W. C., & Crowley, D. (2020). Biochar effects on soil biota–A review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 43(9), 1812–1836.
  • Li, L., Zhang, Y. J., Novak, A., Yang, Y., & Wang, J. (2021). Role of biochar in improving sandy soil water retention and resilience to drought. Water, 13(4), 407.
  • Liu, C., Yang, L., Li, Y., & Sun, Z. (2023). Biochar effects on soil structure and hydraulic properties: A review. Environmental Research, 216, 114456.
  • Loeppert, R. H., & Suarez, D. L. (1996). Carbonate and gypsum. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 437–474). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Madari, B. E., Silva, M. A., Carvalho, M. T., Maia, A. H., Petter, F. A., Santos, J. L., ... & Zeviani, W. M. (2017). Properties of a sandy clay loam Haplic Ferralsol and soybean grain yield in a five-year field trial as affected by biochar amendment. Geoderma, 305, 100–112.
  • Nelson, D. W., & Sommers, L. E. (1996). Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 961–1010). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Nimmo, J. R., & Perkins, K. S. (2002). 2.6 Aggregate stability and size distribution. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 Physical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 317–328). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Omondi, M. O., Xia, X., Nahayo, A., Liu, X., Korai, P. K., & Pan, G. (2016). Quantification of biochar effects on soil hydrological properties using meta-analysis of data. Geoderma, 274, 28–34.
  • Özcan, A., & Tuncer, A. (2024). Tarımda biyokömür: Toprak iyileştirmesi ve ürün verimliliği için sürdürülebilir bir yaklaşım. Journal of Agriculture, Food and Ecology, 1(1), 7–13.
  • Özdemir, N., & Canbolat, M. (1997). Toprak strüktürünün oluşum süreçleri ve yönetimi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(3).
  • Özgül, M. (2003). Erzurum Yöresinde Yaygın Olarak Bulunan Büyük Toprak Gruplarının Sınıflandırılması ve Haritalanması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Toprak Anabilimdalı Doktora Tezi.
  • Rhoades, J. D. (1996). Salinity: Electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 417–435). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Sari, S., Aksakal, E. L., & Angin, I. (2017). Influence of vermicompost application on soil consistency limits and soil compatibility. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 41(5), 357–371.
  • Seifu Woldeyohannis, Y. (2024). Negative effect of soil compaction and investigation of its relation with soil physiochemical properties in mechanization farming system. Applied and Environmental Soil Science, 2024(1), 5654283.
  • Servadio, P., Marsili, A., Vignozzi, N., Pellegrini, S., & Pagliai, M. (2005). Effects on some soil qualities in central Italy following the passage of four wheel drive tractor fitted with single and dual tires. Soil and Tillage Research, 84(1), 87-100.
  • Sumner, M. E., & Miller, W. P. (1996). Cation exchange capacity and exchange coefficients. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 1201–1229). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Thomas, G. W. (1996). Soil pH and soil acidity. In Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical methods (Vol. 5, pp. 475–490). Soil Science Society of America.
  • Turgut, B., & Öztaş, T. (2012). Penetrasyon direncini etkileyen bazı toprak özelliklerinin yersel değişiminin belirlenmesi. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi–Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 18(2), 115–120.
  • Yang, Y., Meng, Z., Li, H., Gao, Y., Li, T., & Qin, L. (2025). Soil porosity as a key factor of soil aggregate stability: Insights from restricted grazing. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1535193.
  • Zhang, X., Wang, H., He, L., Lu, K., Sarmah, A., Li, J., ... & Huang, H. (2013). Using biochar for remediation of soils contaminated with heavy metals and organic pollutants. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 20, 8472–8483.
  • Zheng, X., Dong, J., Zhang, W., Xiang, J., Yin, X., & Han, L. (2021). Biogas residue biochar shifted bacterial community, mineralization, and molecular structure of organic carbon in a sandy loam Alfisol. GCB Bioenergy, 13(5), 838–848.
There are 35 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Soil Physics, Soil Mechanics
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Abdullah Bakan 0009-0007-8059-4038

Ekrem Lütfi Aksakal 0000-0002-8910-3190

Submission Date May 23, 2025
Acceptance Date July 8, 2025
Publication Date March 1, 2026
DOI https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1705004
IZ https://izlik.org/JA48AZ67LJ
Published in Issue Year 2026 Volume: 16 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Bakan, A., & Aksakal, E. L. (2026). Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 16(1), 375-385. https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1705004
AMA 1.Bakan A, Aksakal EL. Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri. J. Inst. Sci. and Tech. 2026;16(1):375-385. doi:10.21597/jist.1705004
Chicago Bakan, Abdullah, and Ekrem Lütfi Aksakal. 2026. “Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri”. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 16 (1): 375-85. https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1705004.
EndNote Bakan A, Aksakal EL (March 1, 2026) Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 16 1 375–385.
IEEE [1]A. Bakan and E. L. Aksakal, “Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri”, J. Inst. Sci. and Tech., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 375–385, Mar. 2026, doi: 10.21597/jist.1705004.
ISNAD Bakan, Abdullah - Aksakal, Ekrem Lütfi. “Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri”. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 16/1 (March 1, 2026): 375-385. https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1705004.
JAMA 1.Bakan A, Aksakal EL. Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri. J. Inst. Sci. and Tech. 2026;16:375–385.
MLA Bakan, Abdullah, and Ekrem Lütfi Aksakal. “Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri”. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, vol. 16, no. 1, Mar. 2026, pp. 375-8, doi:10.21597/jist.1705004.
Vancouver 1.Abdullah Bakan, Ekrem Lütfi Aksakal. Biyokömürün Farklı Tekstürdeki Toprakların Proctor Sıkıştırma Testi Parametreleri Üzerine Etkileri. J. Inst. Sci. and Tech. 2026 Mar. 1;16(1):375-8. doi:10.21597/jist.1705004