Search
2026 Volume 2
Article Contents
ORIGINAL RESEARCH   Open Access    

Biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions in acidic upland and flooded paddy soils

  • # Authors contributed equally: Cheng Chu, Ahmed S. Elrys
    Full list of author information is available at the end of the article.

  • Received: 28 October 2025
    Revised: 02 December 2025
    Accepted: 18 December 2025
    Published online: 22 January 2026
    Nitrogen Cycling  2 Article number: e009 (2026)  |  Cite this article
  • Biochar addition reduced N2O emissions compared to CaO in acidic upland soil.

    Biochar addition in acidic upland soil markedly decreased N2O emissions through bacterial and fungal denitrification pathways.

    Biochar addition stimulated multiple N2O emission pathways in flooded paddy soil.

  • Although it is well documented that biochar (BC) application reduces nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions in certain soils, a deeper understanding of the inconsistent results, and the underlying microbial mechanisms across different land-use types remains a significant challenge. In this study, biochar (BC-1%, 3%, and 5%), and quicklime (CaO-0.02%, 0.05%, and 0.08%) were applied to acidic upland and flooded paddy soils. N2O emissions were then determined and partitioned into nitrification, nitrifier denitrification, bacterial and fungal denitrification sources using natural abundance isotopic analyses (δ15Nbulk, δ15NSP, and δ18O), alongside complementary microbial molecular assessments. The results revealed contrasting effects of BC on N2O emissions in different soils. In acidic upland soil, BC achieved greater mitigation of N2O emissions than CaO. This mitigation was probably driven by suppressed bacterial and fungal denitrification, linked to lower abundance of Chaetomium—a high N2O-producing fungal genus—and enhanced expression of the nosZII gene, which encodes N2O reductase. Together, these changes curtailed N2O production from both microbial pathways. In flooded paddy soil, however, BC stimulated N2O emissions compared to the control or CaO treatment. Multiple pathways equally contributed to N2O emissions, with each showing a significant enhancement after BC addition to paddy soils. The present study demonstrated that comprehensive insight into the N2O pathway and microbial mechanisms is crucial, given the contrasting responses in upland and flooded paddy soils. Such mechanistic insight, through precise pathway attribution, highlights a critical need for and should precede future studies under more complex and realistic conditions before large-scale implications can be drawn.
    Graphical Abstract
  • 加载中
  • The supplementary files can be downloaded from here.
  • [1] Ravishankara AR, Daniel JS, Portmann RW. 2009. Nitrous oxide (N2O): the dominant ozone-depleting substance emitted in the 21st century. Science 326:123−125 doi: 10.1126/science.1176985

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [2] Ciais P, Sabine C, Bala G, Bopp L, Brovkin V, et al. 2014. Carbon and other biogeochemical cycles. In Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 465−570 www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1
    [3] Tian H, Yang J, Xu R, Lu C, Canadell JG, et al. 2019. Global soil nitrous oxide emissions since the preindustrial era estimated by an ensemble of terrestrial biosphere models: magnitude, attribution, and uncertainty. Global Change Biology 25:640−659 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14514

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [4] Wang Y, Guo J, Vogt RD, Mulder J, Wang J, et al. 2018. Soil pH as the chief modifier for regional nitrous oxide emissions: new evidence and implications for global estimates and mitigation. Global Change Biology 24:e617−e626 doi: 10.1111/gcb.13966

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [5] Cui X, Zhou F, Ciais P, Davidson EA, Tubiello FN, et al. 2021. Global mapping of crop-specific emission factors highlights hotspots of nitrous oxide mitigation. Nature Food 2:886−893 doi: 10.1038/s43016-021-00384-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [6] Shi RY, Li JY, Jiang J, Kamran MA, Xu RK, et al. 2018. Incorporation of corn straw biochar inhibited the re-acidification of four acidic soils derived from different parent materials. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 25:9662−9672 doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-1289-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [7] Yuan JH, Xu RK. 2011. The amelioration effects of low temperature biochar generated from nine crop residues on an acidic Ultisol. Soil Use and Management 27:110−115 doi: 10.1111/j.1475-2743.2010.00317.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8] Liu X, Shi Y, Zhang Q, Li G. 2021. Effects of biochar on nitrification and denitrification-mediated N2O emissions and the associated microbial community in an agricultural soil. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 28:6649−6663 doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-10928-4

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [9] Wu Z, Zhang X, Dong Y, Li B, Xiong Z. 2019. Biochar amendment reduced greenhouse gas intensities in the rice-wheat rotation system: six-year field observation and meta-analysis. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 278:107625 doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107625

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [10] He L, Zhao X, Wang S, Xing G. 2016. The effects of rice-straw biochar addition on nitrification activity and nitrous oxide emissions in two Oxisols. Soil and Tillage Research 164:52−62 doi: 10.1016/j.still.2016.05.006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11] Čuhel J, Šimek M, Laughlin RJ, Bru D, Chèneby D, et al. 2010. Insights into the effect of soil pH on N2O and N2 emissions and denitrifier community size and activity. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 76(6):1870−1878 doi: 10.1128/AEM.02484-09

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [12] Qiu Y, Zhang Y, Zhang K, Xu X, Zhao Y, et al. 2024. Intermediate soil acidification induces highest nitrous oxide emissions. Nature Communications 15:2695 doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-46931-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [13] Cayuela ML, van Zwieten L, Singh BP, Jeffery S, Roig A, et al. 2014. Biochar's role in mitigating soil nitrous oxide emissions: a review and meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 191:5−16 doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2013.10.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14] Borchard N, Schirrmann M, Cayuela ML, Kammann C, Wrage-Mönnig N, et al. 2019. Biochar, soil and land-use interactions that reduce nitrate leaching and N2O emissions: a meta-analysis. Science of The Total Environment 651:2354−2364 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.060

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [15] Liu Q, Liu B, Zhang Y, Hu T, Lin Z, et al. 2019. Biochar application as a tool to decrease soil nitrogen losses (NH3 volatilization, N2O emissions, and N leaching) from croplands: options and mitigation strength in a global perspective. Global Change Biology 25:2077−2093 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14613

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16] Cayuela ML, Sánchez-Monedero MA, Roig A, Hanley K, Enders A, et al. 2013. Biochar and denitrification in soils: when, how much and why does biochar reduce N2O emissions? Scientific Reports 3:1732 doi: 10.1038/srep01732

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [17] Toyoda S, Yoshida N, Koba K. 2017. Isotopocule analysis of biologically produced nitrous oxide in various environments. Mass Spectrometry Reviews 36:135−160 doi: 10.1002/mas.21459

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [18] Butterbach-Bahl K, Baggs EM, Dannenmann M, Kiese R, Zechmeister-Boltenstern S. 2013. Nitrous oxide emissions from soils: how well do we understand the processes and their controls? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 368(1621):20130122 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0122

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [19] Müller C, Laughlin RJ, Spott O, Rütting T. 2014. Quantification of N2O emission pathways via a 15N tracing model. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 72:44−54 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.01.013

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20] Zhang Y, Zhao W, Cai Z, Müller C, Zhang J. 2018. Heterotrophic nitrification is responsible for large rates of N2O emission from subtropical acid forest soil in China. European Journal of Soil Science 69:646−654 doi: 10.1111/ejss.12557

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21] Hu HW, Chen D, He JZ. 2015. Microbial regulation of terrestrial nitrous oxide formation: understanding the biological pathways for prediction of emission rates. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 39:729−749 doi: 10.1093/femsre/fuv021

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22] Harter J, Guzman-Bustamante I, Kuehfuss S, Ruser R, Well R, et al. 2016. Gas entrapment and microbial N2O reduction reduce N2O emissions from a biochar-amended sandy clay loam soil. Scientific Reports 6:39574 doi: 10.1038/srep39574

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23] Yu L, Harris E, Lewicka-Szczebak D, Barthel M, Blomberg MRA, et al. 2020. What can we learn from N2O isotope data? – Analytics, processes and modelling. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry 34:e8858 doi: 10.1002/rcm.8858

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [24] Lewicka-Szczebak D, Lewicki MP, Well R. 2020. N2O isotope approaches for source partitioning of N2O production and estimation of N2O reduction–validation with the 15N gas-flux method in laboratory and field studies. Biogeosciences 17:5513−5537 doi: 10.5194/bg-17-5513-2020

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25] Chu C, Dai S, Meng L, Cai Z, Zhang J, et al. 2023. Biochar application can mitigate NH3 volatilization in acidic forest and upland soils but stimulates gaseous N losses in flooded acidic paddy soil. Science of The Total Environment 864:161099 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.161099

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26] Buchen C, Lewicka-Szczebak D, Flessa H, Well R. 2018. Estimating N2O processes during grassland renewal and grassland conversion to maize cropping using N2O isotopocules. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry 32:1053−1067 doi: 10.1002/rcm.8132

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [27] Zhang P, Wen T, Hu Y, Zhang J, Cai Z. 2021. Can N fertilizer addition affect N2O isotopocule signatures for soil N2O source partitioning? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(9):5024 doi: 10.3390/ijerph18095024

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [28] Wang X, Han C, Zhang J, Huang Q, Deng H, et al. 2015. Long-term fertilization effects on active ammonia oxidizers in an acidic upland soil in China. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 84:28−37 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.02.013

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29] Zheng B, Zhu Y, Sardans J, Peñuelas J, Su J. 2018. QMEC: a tool for high-throughput quantitative assessment of microbial functional potential in C, N, P, and S biogeochemical cycling. Science China Life Sciences 61:1451−1462 doi: 10.1007/s11427-018-9364-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30] Zhao Y, Su JQ, Ye J, Rensing C, Tardif S, et al. 2019. AsChip: a high-throughput qPCR chip for comprehensive profiling of genes linked to microbial cycling of arsenic. Environmental Science & Technology 53(2):798−807 doi: 10.1021/acs.est.8b03798

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [31] Edgar RC. 2013. UPARSE: highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nature Methods 10:996−998 doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2604

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [32] Nilsson RH, Larsson KH, Taylor AFS, Bengtsson-Palme J, Jeppesen TS, et al. 2019. The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi: handling dark taxa and parallel taxonomic classifications. Nucleic Acids Research 47:D259−d264 doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1022

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [33] Mothapo N, Chen H, Cubeta MA, Grossman JM, Fuller F, et al. 2015. Phylogenetic, taxonomic and functional diversity of fungal denitrifiers and associated N2O production efficacy. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 83:160−175 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.02.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [34] Yang Y, Zhang J, Cai Z. 2016. Nitrification activities and N mineralization in paddy soils are insensitive to oxygen concentration. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B — Soil & Plant Science 66(3):272−281 doi: 10.1080/09064710.2015.1093653

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [35] Lin Y, Ding W, Liu D, He T, Yoo G, et al. 2017. Wheat straw-derived biochar amendment stimulated N2O emissions from rice paddy soils by regulating the amoA genes of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 113:89−98 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2017.06.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [36] Shen QR, Ran W, Cao ZH. 2003. Mechanisms of nitrite accumulation occurring in soil nitrification. Chemosphere 50:747−753 doi: 10.1016/S0045-6535(02)00215-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [37] Zhang A, Cui L, Pan G, Li L, Hussain Q, et al. 2010. Effect of biochar amendment on yield and methane and nitrous oxide emissions from a rice paddy from Tai Lake plain, China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 139(4):469−475 doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2010.09.003

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38] Xiao X, Chen B, Chen Z, Zhu L, Schnoor JL. 2018. Insight into multiple and multilevel structures of biochars and their potential environmental applications: a critical review. Environmental Science & Technology 52:5027−5047 doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b06487

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [39] Yang HI, Lou K, Rajapaksha AU, Ok YS, Anyia AO, et al. 2018. Adsorption of ammonium in aqueous solutions by pine sawdust and wheat straw biochars. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 25:25638−25647 doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-8551-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40] Yang F, Cao X, Gao B, Zhao L, Li F. 2015. Short-term effects of rice straw biochar on sorption, emission, and transformation of soil NH4+-N. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 22:9184−9192 doi: 10.1007/s11356-014-4067-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [41] Philippot L, Andert J, Jones CM, Bru D, Hallin S. 2011. Importance of denitrifiers lacking the genes encoding the nitrous oxide reductase for N2O emissions from soil. Global Change Biology 17:1497−1504 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02334.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [42] Chen H, Mothapo NV, Shi W. 2015. Soil moisture and pH control relative contributions of fungi and bacteria to N2O production. Microbial Ecology 69:180−191 doi: 10.1007/s00248-014-0488-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [43] Zhang Y, Zhao W, Zhang J, Cai Z. 2017. N2O production pathways relate to land use type in acidic soils in subtropical China. Journal of Soils and Sediments 17:306−314 doi: 10.1007/s11368-016-1554-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [44] Huang Y, Xiao X, Long X. 2017. Fungal denitrification contributes significantly to N2O production in a highly acidic tea soil. Journal of Soils and Sediments 17:1599−1606 doi: 10.1007/s11368-017-1655-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [45] Ji C, Han Z, Zheng F, Wu S, Wang J, et al. 2022. Biochar reduced soil nitrous oxide emissions through suppressing fungal denitrification and affecting fungal community assembly in a subtropical tea plantation. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 326:107784 doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2021.107784

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46] Shoun H, Kim DH, Uchiyama H, Sugiyama J. 1992. Denitrification by fungi. FEMS Microbiology Letters 94:277−281 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1992.tb05331.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [47] Wei Z, Well R, Ma X, Lewicka-Szczebak D, Rohe L, et al. 2024. Organic fertilizer amendment decreased N2O/(N2O+N2) ratio by enhancing the mutualism between bacterial and fungal denitrifiers in high nitrogen loading arable soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 198:109550 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2024.109550

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [48] Harter J, Krause HM, Schuettler S, Ruser R, Fromme M, et al. 2014. Linking N2O emissions from biochar-amended soil to the structure and function of the N-cycling microbial community. The ISME Journal 8:660−674 doi: 10.1038/ismej.2013.160

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [49] Duan P, Zhang X, Zhang Q, Wu Z, Xiong Z. 2018. Field-aged biochar stimulated N2O production from greenhouse vegetable production soils by nitrification and denitrification. Science of The Total Environment 642:1303−1310 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.166

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [50] Liao J, Hu A, Zhao Z, Liu X, Jiang C, et al. 2021. Biochar with large specific surface area recruits N2O-reducing microbes and mitigate N2O emission. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 156:108212 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108212

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [51] Zhang Y, Zhang Z, Chen Y. 2021. Biochar mitigates N2O emission of microbial denitrification through modulating carbon metabolism and allocation of reducing power. Environmental Science & Technology 55:8068−8078 doi: 10.1021/acs.est.1c01976

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [52] Jones CM, Spor A, Brennan FP, Breuil MC, Bru D, et al. 2014. Recently identified microbial guild mediates soil N2O sink capacity. Nature Climate Change 4:801−805 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2301

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [53] Shan J, Sanford RA, Chee-Sanford J, Ooi SK, Löffler FE, et al. 2021. Beyond denitrification: the role of microbial diversity in controlling nitrous oxide reduction and soil nitrous oxide emissions. Global Change Biology 27:2669−2683 doi: 10.1111/gcb.15545

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [54] Obia A, Cornelissen G, Mulder J, Dörsch P. 2015. Effect of soil pH increase by biochar on NO, N2O and N2 production during denitrification in acid soils. PLoS One 10:e0138781 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138781

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [55] He L, Shan J, Zhao X, Wang S, Yan X. 2019. Variable responses of nitrification and denitrification in a paddy soil to long-term biochar amendment and short-term biochar addition. Chemosphere 234:558−567 doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.06.038

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [56] Yanai Y, Toyota K, Okazaki M. 2007. Effects of charcoal addition on N2O emissions from soil resulting from rewetting air-dried soil in short-term laboratory experiments. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 53:181−188 doi: 10.1111/j.1747-0765.2007.00123.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [57] Andersson S, Nilsson SI, Saetre P. 2000. Leaching of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) in mor humus as affected by temperature and pH. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32:1−10 doi: 10.1016/S0038-0717(99)00103-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [58] Bååth E, Anderson TH. 2003. Comparison of soil fungal/bacterial ratios in a pH gradient using physiological and PLFA-based techniques. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 35:955−963 doi: 10.1016/S0038-0717(03)00154-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [59] Wei Z, Shan J, Well R, Yan X, Senbayram M. 2022. Land use conversion and soil moisture affect the magnitude and pattern of soil-borne N2, NO, and N2O emissions. Geoderma 407:115568 doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115568

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [60] Šimek M, Cooper JE. 2002. The influence of soil pH on denitrification: progress towards the understanding of this interaction over the last 50 years. European Journal of Soil Science 53:345−354 doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2389.2002.00461.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [61] Liu B, Mørkved PT, Frostegård Å, Bakken LR. 2010. Denitrification gene pools, transcription and kinetics of NO, N2O and N2 production as affected by soil pH. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 72:407−417 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.00856.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [62] Vor T, Dyckmans J, Loftfield N, Beese F, Flessa H. 2003. Aeration effects on CO2, N2O, and CH4 emission and leachate composition of a forest soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 166:39−45 doi: 10.1002/jpln.200390010

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [63] Saggar S, Jha N, Deslippe J, Bolan NS, Luo J, et al. 2013. Denitrification and N2O: N2 production in temperate grasslands: processes, measurements, modelling and mitigating negative impacts. Science of The Total Environment 465:173−195 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.11.050

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [64] Anderson CR, Hamonts K, Clough TJ, Condron LM. 2014. Biochar does not affect soil N-transformations or microbial community structure under ruminant urine patches but does alter relative proportions of nitrogen cycling bacteria. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 191:63−72 doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2014.02.021

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [65] Zhang K, Chen L, Li Y, Brookes PC, Xu J, et al. 2017. The effects of combinations of biochar, lime, and organic fertilizer on nitrification and nitrifiers. Biology and Fertility of Soils 53:77−87 doi: 10.1007/s00374-016-1154-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [66] Li M, Liu M, Li ZP, Jiang CY, Wu M. 2016. Soil N transformation and microbial community structure as affected by adding biochar to a paddy soil of subtropical China. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 15:209−219 doi: 10.1016/s2095-3119(15)61136-4

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [67] Venterea RT, Clough TJ, Coulter JA, Breuillin-Sessoms F, Wang P, et al. 2015. Ammonium sorption and ammonia inhibition of nitrite-oxidizing bacteria explain contrasting soil N2O production. Scientific Reports 5:12153 doi: 10.1038/srep12153

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [68] Aleem MIH, Alexander M. 1960. Nutrition and physiology of Nitrobacter agilis. Applied Microbiology 8:80−84 doi: 10.1128/am.8.2.80-84.1960

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [69] Zhang J, Cai Z, Zhu T. 2011. N2O production pathways in the subtropical acid forest soils in China. Environmental Research 111:643−649 doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2011.04.005

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Chu C, Elrys AS, Dai S, Wen T, Xu J, et al. 2026. Biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions in acidic upland and flooded paddy soils. Nitrogen Cycling 2: e009 doi: 10.48130/nc-0025-0021
    Chu C, Elrys AS, Dai S, Wen T, Xu J, et al. 2026. Biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions in acidic upland and flooded paddy soils. Nitrogen Cycling 2: e009 doi: 10.48130/nc-0025-0021

Figures(4)  /  Tables(1)

Article Metrics

Article views(363) PDF downloads(163)

Original Research   Open Access    

Biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions in acidic upland and flooded paddy soils

Nitrogen Cycling  2 Article number: e009  (2026)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Although it is well documented that biochar (BC) application reduces nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions in certain soils, a deeper understanding of the inconsistent results, and the underlying microbial mechanisms across different land-use types remains a significant challenge. In this study, biochar (BC-1%, 3%, and 5%), and quicklime (CaO-0.02%, 0.05%, and 0.08%) were applied to acidic upland and flooded paddy soils. N2O emissions were then determined and partitioned into nitrification, nitrifier denitrification, bacterial and fungal denitrification sources using natural abundance isotopic analyses (δ15Nbulk, δ15NSP, and δ18O), alongside complementary microbial molecular assessments. The results revealed contrasting effects of BC on N2O emissions in different soils. In acidic upland soil, BC achieved greater mitigation of N2O emissions than CaO. This mitigation was probably driven by suppressed bacterial and fungal denitrification, linked to lower abundance of Chaetomium—a high N2O-producing fungal genus—and enhanced expression of the nosZII gene, which encodes N2O reductase. Together, these changes curtailed N2O production from both microbial pathways. In flooded paddy soil, however, BC stimulated N2O emissions compared to the control or CaO treatment. Multiple pathways equally contributed to N2O emissions, with each showing a significant enhancement after BC addition to paddy soils. The present study demonstrated that comprehensive insight into the N2O pathway and microbial mechanisms is crucial, given the contrasting responses in upland and flooded paddy soils. Such mechanistic insight, through precise pathway attribution, highlights a critical need for and should precede future studies under more complex and realistic conditions before large-scale implications can be drawn.

    • Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a potent greenhouse gas with a 100-year Global Warming Potential (GWP100), 265 times that of carbon dioxide with a long atmospheric lifetime of 121 years. It is also the most significant ozone-depleting substance in the stratosphere[1]. Nitrogen fertilization was the dominant driver of N2O emission in agriculture[2,3], with acidic soils showing heightened sensitivity[4]. Globally, about two-thirds of the mitigation potential for soil N2O emissions (30% of direct soil emissions) could be realized in humid subtropical areas, particularly in gleysols and acrisols[5]. It suggests that acidic agricultural soils in humid subtropical regions represent significant potential for N2O mitigation.

      Recently, biochar (BC) was reported to counteract soil acidity[6,7] and mitigate soil N2O[8,9]. The increase in soil pH due to BC application, accelerated soil nitrification and denitrification, which generally favored N2O production[10]. But the N2O/(N2O + N2) ratio decreased as soil pH increased due to changes in denitrification activity[11]. Soil pH showed a unimodal relationship with soil denitrifiers and N2O emission factors, with the highest values in moderately acidic (pH = 5.6–6.0) soils[12]. BC application was not, or only slightly, effective in mitigating N2O emissions[13,14] or altered N2O flux at a greater variation[15] in strongly acidic soils (pH < 5), compared to slightly acidic and neutral soils. The acid-buffering capacity of BC was an important aspect of N2O mitigation, which was not primarily due to a pH shift but to the 'electron shuttle' function that promotes N2O to N2[16]. Therefore, such contrasts complicate the BC impact on N2O emissions, and the liming effect requires separate assessment, especially in strongly acidic soils.

      About 90% of N2O was produced by microbial processes in terrestrial and aquatic systems[2,17,18]. Almost all microbes involved in biogeochemical nitrogen cycling have the potential to catalyze N2O production[1821]. Stable isotope labeling technologies could provide more information on N2O mediated by nitrification or denitrification in BC-amended soils. A reduction in the N2O/(N2 + N2O) ratio demonstrated that BC facilitated the final step of denitrification by using the15N gas-flux method[16,22]. However, the values of δ18O and δ15Nbulk of N2O will be affected by the isotopic composition of reactants like NO3 and NH4+. Recently, isotopic approaches using N2O signatures (δ15N, δ15NSP, and δ18O) have become available to identify N2O pathways without being affected by N2O precursors or the addition of substrates[17,23]. As a further development of the mapping approach, a new three-dimensional model integrated three N2O isotopic signatures in a Bayesian framework, and identified the nearest solution for $r_{\rm N_2O} $ (N2O residual fraction, the unreduced N2O mole fraction of total gross N2O production), and mixing proportions[24]. Advantages of the new model over the mapping approach included: (1) allowing for inputting uncertainties and assessing the confidence intervals for the results; (2) allowing for separating the four most relevant N2O production pathways (nitrification, nitrifier denitrification, bacterial- and fungal-denitrification), within which other isotopic methods cannot distinguish fungal-denitrification; (3) allowing for quantifying the extent of N2O reduction. The decisive step forward in the methods provided an opportunity to understand the changes in N2O production pathways following BC application, which will help to elucidate subsequent soil N2O emissions.

      In this study, an incubation experiment was set up to measure soil-borne N2O fluxes and partition their sources. Afterwards, N2O-related microbial information was analyzed. It is hypothesized that: (1) the increase in soil pH achieved by adding BC to acidic soils cannot fully account for its effect on N2O emissions; and (2) the impact of BC on N2O emissions may vary across farmland with different land-use types.

    • Two acidic soils in proximity, namely upland soil (US), and paddy soil (PS), were collected from Liujiazhan in Yingtan City, Jiangxi Province, China (28°15' N, 116°55' E). The mean annual temperature was 18.4 °C, and the mean annual precipitation was 1,785 mm. The soils were classified as Orthic Acrisol according to the FAO soil classification, with Quaternary red clay parent material. The two soils from adjacent plots had different land-use types. Peanut was planted in upland soil, and rice was cultivated in paddy land, with an annual fertilization rate of 200–300 kg N ha−1. Surface soils (0–20 cm) were collected from four randomly selected plots (4 m × 4 m) without an O horizon. Roots and litter were removed, and the remaining soil was sieved (< 2 mm). The physicochemical properties of the two soils are listed in Table 1. The applied BC was produced from maize straw under an oxygen-limited condition at 450–500 °C (Qinfeng Zhongcheng Biochar New Material Ltd, Nanjing, China). The BC was ground to a particle size of 1 mm before incubation. The pH of the BC was 9.96; total C and N content were 643.1 and 8.1 g kg−1, respectively. The calcium oxide (CaO) used in the experiment was a normal laboratory reagent (CAS 1305-78-8).

      Table 1.  Soil properties of two studied soils after Biochar (BC), and CaO (Quicklime) amendment

      Soil Treatment pH SOC (g C kg−1) TN (g N kg−1) DOC (mg C kg−1) C/N ratio
      US Control 4.87 ± 0.00 Cd 8.61 ± 0.80 Da 0.99 ± 0.00 Da 78.52 ± 2.44 Cb 8.72 ± 0.81 Da
      BC-1% 4.97 ± 0.04 C 13.07 ± 0.69 C 1.10 ± 0.01 C 48.80 ± 0.18 D 11.86 ± 0.49 C
      BC-3% 5.06 ± 0.06 B 21.52 ± 0.47 B 1.22 ± 0.03 B 91.77 ± 1.91 B 17.64 ± 0.92 B
      BC-5% 5.22 ± 0.01 A 31.07 ± 0.63 A 1.43 ± 0.02 A 103.15 ± 2.33 A 21.78 ± 0.58 A
      CaO-0.02% 5.04 ± 0.01 c 8.10 ± 0.75 a 0.97 ± 0.02 ab 92.75 ± 1.79 a 8.34 ± 1.00 a
      CaO-0.05% 5.29 ± 0.01 b 8.37 ± 0.54 a 0.94 ± 0.04 b 93.68 ± 0.58 a 8.88 ± 0.40 a
      CaO-0.08% 5.54 ± 0.04 a 7.99 ± 0.99 a 0.97 ± 0.01 ab 63.58 ± 0.60 c 8.21 ± 1.02 a
      PS Control 4.78 ± 0.02 Dc 13.40 ± 0.98 Da 1.53 ± 0.02 Ca 201.63 ± 3.67 Aa 8.77 ± 0.74 Da
      BC-1% 4.85 ± 0.02 C 17.62 ± 1.10 C 1.56 ± 0.02 C 164.60 ± 0.75 B 11.3 ± 0.68 C
      BC-3% 5.11 ± 0.02 B 25.38 ± 0.16 B 1.80 ± 0.02 B 142.83 ± 0.35 C 14.13 ± 0.21 B
      BC-5% 5.27 ± 0.04 A 35.29 ± 0.80 A 1.97 ± 0.04 A 163.10 ± 1.83 B 17.91 ± 0.39 A
      CaO-0.02% 4.87 ± 0.07 bc 12.94 ± 0.46 b 1.56 ± 0.02 a 171.47 ± 2.06 c 8.31 ± 0.28 a
      CaO-0.05% 4.97 ± 0.06 b 12.56 ± 0.24 c 1.48 ± 0.01 b 183.07 ± 1.36 b 8.46 ± 0.20 a
      CaO-0.08% 5.19 ± 0.05 a 11.34 ± 0.46 d 1.41 ± 0.03 c 161.73 ± 1.66 c 8.06 ± 0.50 a
      Data are expressed as the means ± SE (n = 3). Different capital letters indicate significant differences between BC treatments in the same soil (p < 0.05); different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between CaO treatments in the same soil (p < 0.05). SOC, soil organic carbon; TN, total nitrogen; DOC, dissolved organic carbon, C/N ratio, ratio of SOC to TN; US, upland soil; PS, paddy land soil; FS, forest land soil.

      A short-term incubation study (4 d) was designed to investigate the response of N2O emission to BC addition. To isolate the pH effect of BC on soil N2O emissions, different CaO addition gradients were applied simultaneously. The gradient addition rate of BC or CaO with three replicates was set to obtain a pH series at the end of the pre-incubation (40% water-holding capacity, 25 °C, 7 d), listed as the control (no BC or CaO, Control), BC-1%, BC-3%, BC-5%, CaO-0.02%, CaO-0.05%, and CaO-0.08%.

      Briefly, 20 g (oven-dry weight basis) of US or PS was placed into a 250 mL Erlenmeyer flask to measure soil N2O fluxes. Soils were uniformly supplemented with urea (natural abundance) at 100 mg N kg−1 soil, followed by additional water supply (60% water-holding capacity for US; water-to-soil ratio of 1:1 for PS). Details of gas sampling and flux measurement are presented in Chu et al.[25]. Then, the source partition of the associated N2O experiment was conducted to calculate the relative proportions of N2O produced by each pathway. For the 500 mL flask, 100 g of US soil, or 50 g of PS soil were used to ensure the accuracy of stable isotope analysis (the N2O concentration needs to reach 385 ppb[26]). Then, flasks were sealed after daily vacuuming and ventilation with synthetic air (80% N2 + 20% O2), and incubated (25 °C, 4 d) between gas sampling events (0, 24, 48, and 96 h). Headspace gas samples for N2O production pathway analysis were collected at 48 h (US) and 24 h (PS) after urea application, based on the requirement that N2O concentration exceed 385 ppb for isotope analysis[26]. After resealing for 24 h, 80 mL of gas was extracted into a pre-evacuated serum bottle. In parallel, three additional soil microcosms were prepared for destructive sampling at the end of the incubation period.

    • The isotopic signatures of N2O, δ15Nbulk, δ15NSP, and δ18O were analyzed by Delta V plus IRMS (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA), fitted with five cups to analyze m/z 44, 45, and 46 of N2O molecules as well as m/z 30 and 31 of NO+ fragments. The analytical precision of δ15Nbulk, δ15NSP, and δ18O in the current IRMS was 0.3‰, 0.6‰, and 0.9‰, respectively. Further details on the isotopic analysis and N2O calculations were provided by Zhang et al.[27]. The N2O isotopic signatures, δ15Nα, δ15Nbulk, and δ15NSP, were calculated using Eqs (1) and (2).

      $ {\delta }^{15}{N}^{bulk}=({\delta }^{15}{N}^{\alpha }+{\delta }^{15}{N}^{\beta })/2 $ (1)
      $ {\delta }^{15}{N}^{sp}={\delta }^{15}{N}^{\alpha }-{\delta }^{15}{N}^{\beta } $ (2)

      The novel Fractionation and Mixing Evaluation Model (FRAME, https://malewick.github.io/frame/) was used to partition N2O sources, and estimate the extent of N2O reduction to N2 using Bayesian statistics. The probability distributions of proportional contributions were determined, allowing the simultaneous integration of multiple N2O isotopic signatures into a single model to find the nearest solution for the N2O mixing proportions and the residual fraction ($r_{\rm N_2O} $, N2O/[N2O + N2]). Briefly, input data of measured δ15Nbulk, δ15NSP, and δ18O from five sources (i.e., bacterial denitrification (bD), fungal denitrification (fD), nitrifier denitrification (nD), nitrification (Ni), and heterotrophic nitrification hN)) were assumed to be normally distributed. Three replicates constituted a single sample, on which the Monte Carlo integration was performed. The FRAME model overcame restrictions on source numbers in a single run of the traditional linear mixing model (Isotope Mapping Approach method), and allowed for feeding uncertainties in input data into the model and for assessing the confidence intervals of output data[24]. Multiple N2O production pathways, including the important pathway of heterotrophic nitrification, were separated by the FRAME. According to the technical results based on pure cultures of four heterotrophic fungal species (Aspergillus flavus ATCC 26214, Aspergillus flavus, Trichoderma harzianum, and Fusarium oxysporum), δ15NSP remained constant at 23.5‰ to 30.1‰ (averaged 26.2‰), while δ15Nbulk and δ18O values showed wide ranges (data not published). Characteristic isotopic endmembers of other N2O production pathways and N2O reduction fractionation factors are adopted from Yu et al.[23]. The endmember isotopic signatures of each pathway were corrected based on the actual measured substrate values determined in this study before being input into the model (Supplementary Table S1).

    • Soil pH was analyzed at a 2.5:1 (deionized water : dry soil, v : w) ratio using a pH meter (Quark Ltd, Nanjing, China). Soil organic carbon (SOC) concentration was measured by the wet digestion method with H2SO4-K2Cr2O7. Total nitrogen (TN) content was determined by the semi-micro Kjeldahl method using Se, CuSO4, and K2SO4 as catalysts. Dissolved organic C (DOC) was extracted with deionized water at a 5:1 water-to-dry soil ratio (v : w), and its content was measured using the Analyzer Multi N/C (Analytik Jena, Jena, Germany).

    • Soil total DNA was extracted using the FastDNA Spin Kit for Soil (MP Biomedicals, Santa Ana, USA) following the manufacturer's instructions. DNA quality was assessed by ultraviolet absorbance (NanoDrop ND2000, Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA), and concentration was determined using the QuantiFluor dsDNA kit (Promega, USA).

      The bacterial 16S rRNA and fungal ITS genes were amplified by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR, CFX96 Real-Time System, Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., Hercules, CA, USA) using primer pairs of 515F/926R and ITS1F/ITS2R, respectively (further details are provided in Supplementary Table S2). Negative controls (sterile water instead of soil DNA template), and melting curve analysis were performed in triplicate synchronously in each batch of qPCR assays to confirm specific amplification. A serial dilution of the soil DNA solutions was used to assess whether the PCR assay was inhibited during the amplification[28].

      Various key functional genes that mediate soil nitrogen cycling processes were quantified using high-throughput quantitative PCR assays, including ammonia-oxidizing archaea (AOA) amoA, ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) amoA, nirS, nirK, nosZI, and nosZII with extended phylogenies such as nirK2, nirK3, nirS2, and nirS3[29,30]. High-throughput quantitative PCR assays were run on the SmartChip Real-time PCR system (WaferGen Biosystems, Fremont, USA), further details are provided in Supplementary Table S3, and chip reaction systems are as described by Zheng et al.[29].

    • The Illumina HiSeq 2500 high-throughput sequencing platform was used for amplicon sequencing analysis of the V4−V5 region of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene, and the fungal ITS gene with primers of 515F/926R and ITS1F/ITS2R, respectively (Supplementary Table S2). PCR amplification was performed using primers with barcodes and PremixTaq (TaKaRa, Japan), and PCR products were recovered using a Gel Extraction Kit (E.Z.N.A.®, Omega, USA), and mixed to the same concentration. High-throughput sequencing library builds were performed according to the NEBNext® Ultra™ DNA Library PrepKit for Illumina following standard procedures. Results of Raw Reads were stored in the FASTQ file format. Amplicon sequencing was entrusted to Magigene Technology Co. (Guangdong, China). The high-throughput sequencing generated 16S rRNA and ITS gene sequences, which were deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive database under Accession No. PRJNA673937.

    • The relevant calculations of N2O flux, cumulative N2O, N2 production rate, and the residual fraction of N2OD in products were provided in Supplementary Text S1. The raw data were quality-controlled using Fastp software (v0.23.2, https://github.com/OpenGene/fastp), with a window size set to 4 and mean base mass set to 20, to reject over-short sequences (length ≤ 200 bp) and to eliminate low-quality sequences (-q 15, -u 40). Primers were removed using Cutadapt (https://github.com/marcelm/cutadapt/) to obtain paired-end Clean Reads. The sequence was spliced on Usearch software (v11, www.drive5.com/usearch). OTU (Operational Taxonomic Units) clustering analysis was conducted in Uparse, where sequences with ≥ 97% similarity were assigned to the same OTU, and the most frequent sequence was selected as the representative sequence for each OTU[31]. Silva (v132, for bacterial 16S rRNA genes, www.arb-silva.de) and Unite (v8.0, for fungal ITS genes) databases were used to annotate species taxonomic information with confidence thresholds of 0.8[31,32].

      All statistical analyses were conducted on SPSS 26 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA), and Origin 2019 (OriginLab, Northampton, USA). Significant differences in soil properties, N2O flux, and cumulative N2O emissions among treatments within each soil type were evaluated using one-way ANOVA followed by least significant differences (LSD) at the 5% significance level. Correlations between microbial characteristics and N2O emissions from pathways were analyzed by linear regression models at a 5% significance level. Redundancy analyses (RDA) between the N2O production pathway and soil physicochemical properties were conducted on Canoco software (v5.0, Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY, USA).

    • The soil physicochemical properties of two different land-use types following treatment with BC and CaO are presented in Table 1. The initial pH of upland (US) and paddy (PS) soils was 4.87 and 4.78, respectively. The concentrations of SOC and TN in the US were significantly lower than those in PS. There was no significant difference in the C/N ratio between the two soils. Compared with Control, soil pH increased dramatically after BC or CaO addition. The highest pH was 5.22 and 5.54 in BC-5% and CaO-0.08% in US, and was 5.27 and 5.19 in BC-5% and CaO-0.08% in PS, respectively. The concentrations of SOC and TN and the C/N ratio significantly increased following BC addition in both US and PS, whereas little change was observed after CaO addition. DOC value for CaO-0.08% treatment showed an abrupt decrease compared with the control.

      The abundances of N transformation-relevant genes in US soils were generally lower than those in PS soils (Fig. 1). In US soil, both BC and CaO treatments generally reduced gene abundance of amoA, nxrA, narG, napA, nirS, nirK, and ureC in N transformation, most significantly in aerobic nitrification, denitrification, and mineralization. But the BC amendment enlarged the relative quantitative advantage of nosZII (expressed as nosZII/(amoA + nxrA + narG + napA + nirS + nirK) ratio) from 0.49 ± 0.02 in the control to 0.71 ± 0.10 with the BC addition rate, implying a more favorable N2O reduction to N2. The nosZII/(amoA + nxrA + narG + napA + nirS + nirK) ratio slightly decreased from 0.48 ± 0.01 to 0.42 ± 0.07 in PS. Based on reported fungi capable of producing N2O[33], the community abundance of these fungi was calculated across different treatments (Supplementary Table S4). Following the BC addition, the relative abundance of Chaetomium, a genus known for its strong N2O-producing capacity of 99.9–206.9 nmol N2O mL−1 media day−1, significantly decreased in the US, whereas it increased in PS. The effects of CaO on microbial properties were significantly weaker than those observed with BC addition.

      Figure 1. 

      Soil nitrogen cycling related functional gene abundance after biochar or CaO addition in two studied soils; the color of the block represents the functional gene abundance in nitrogen transformation. * Indicate the statistical significance with significance levels of p < 0.05. BC, Biochar; CaO, lime; US, upland soil; PS, paddy soil.

    • Urea addition induced notably different N2O emission patterns in US and PS (Fig. 2a). In US, the N2O emission rate peaked at 48-h, showing a significantly lower value in BC-5% (6.15 μg N kg−1 d−1, p < 0.05) and a considerably higher value in CaO-0.02% (10.1 μg N kg−1 d−1, p < 0.05) compared with the control (7.77 μg N kg−1 d−1). In PS, N2O emissions increased gradually during the first 72 h, and then rose sharply thereafter. At 96 h, emissions were significantly higher in BC-3% (199 μg N kg−1 d−1), and BC-5% (470 μg N kg−1 d−1, p < 0.05), as well as in CaO-0.05% (104 μg N kg−1 d−1), and CaO-0.08% (125 μg N kg−1 d−1, p < 0.05), compared with the control (39.7 μg N kg−1 d−1). The cumulative N2O emission was 20.3 μg N kg−1 in the control of the US over 96 h of incubation (Fig. 2b). The cumulative N2O emission was significantly reduced to 16.6 μg N kg−1 in BC-5%, but increased dramatically to 23.3 μg N kg−1 in CaO-0.05%. The cumulative N2O emission was 37.1 μg N kg−1 in the PS control. The addition of 3% and 5% BC significantly increased cumulative N2O emissions by 5.25- and 14.4-fold, respectively, compared with the control. The addition of 0.05% and 0.08% CaO also significantly increased cumulative N2O emissions by 2.25- and 1.94-fold, respectively, compared with the control.

      Figure 2. 

      Dynamics of (a) soil N2O production rate, and (b) cumulative soil N2O emission, and (c) inorganic nitrogen concentrations after biochar or CaO addition in two studied soils. Error bars indicate the standard deviations of the means (n = 3). Different capital letters indicate significant differences between BC treatments in the same soil (p < 0.05); different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between CaO treatments in the same soil (p < 0.05). * Indicate statistical significance at p < 0.05. BC, Biochar; CaO, lime; US, upland soil; PS, paddy soil.

      Soil exchangeable NO3-N concentration increased over time (Fig. 2c), from initial 8.24–10.73 to 21.86–29.36 mg N kg−1 in US soil, and from initial 4.62–11.00 to 15.85–26.75 mg N kg−1 in PS soil. BC amendment significantly reduced NO3-N concentration throughout the incubation period, by 1.22%–20.05% in US soil and more evident by 10.50%–56.59% in PS soil. In contrast, CaO treatments sporadically increased NO3-N concentration. Soil exchangeable NH4+-N concentration sharply peaked during the first 48 h and tapered off thereafter. NH4+-N concentration in all treatments was significantly lower than in the control in both soils at the end of incubation.

    • The FRAME model was used to partition sources of N2O, with probability distribution of the results, correlations between the modeled fractions, and the corresponding R coefficients presented in matrix plots (Supplementary Figs S1 & S2). Isotopic signature of soil N2O (δ15Nbulk, δ18O and δ15Nsp) was measured (Supplementary Fig. S3). The reliability of the modeled results was demonstrated by the low correlation between the output fractions. The correlation between fD and Ni ranged from −0.53 to −0.74 in the US and from −0.45 to −0.60 in PS. Similarly, the correlation between bD and nD ranged from −0.39 to −0.55 in the US and from −0.36 to −0.61 in PS. The observed correlation between these fractions likely resulted from the close isotopic endmember values between fD and Ni, as well as between bD and nD (Supplementary Table S1). The residual fraction $r_{\rm N_2O} $ showed a stronger correlation with bD in US (ranging from−0.34 to −0.62) than in PS (ranging from −0.34 to −0.40), indicating that $r_{\rm N_2O} $ estimation in US covered a much wider range.

      The dominant N2O production pathways in the control of US were bD and fD, accounting for 30% ± 19% and 25% ± 16% of the total N2O production, respectively, followed by Ni, nD and hN (Fig. 3c). In US, the addition of BC reduced the contribution of fD to total N2O emissions by 4%–13%, and that of bD by 4%–9%, relative to the control, whereas CaO addition led to smaller reductions of 0%–5% for fD, and 3%–6% for bD. For PS, N2O production occurred via bD, fD, nD, Ni, and hN, with each pathway contributing approximately equally (16%–26%) under all addition treatments (Fig. 3d). The contribution of each pathway showed slight changes within 7% after BC or CaO addition. N2O from pathways was dramatically reinforced to the same level after BC or CaO addition, which induced slight variation in contributions.

      Figure 3. 

      (a), (b) N2O production from soil N2O pathways, (c), (d) their percentage contribution to total N2O emission, and (e), (f) N2O/N2 production rate (column) and the proportion of N2O after biochar or CaO addition in two studied soils. bD, bacterial denitrification; fD, fungal denitrification; nD, nitrifier denitrification; Ni, nitrification; hN, heterotrophic nitrification. * Indicate the statistical significance with significance levels of p < 0.05. BC, Biochar; CaO, lime; US, upland soil; PS, paddy soil.

      In US soil, the BC addition reduced $r_{\rm N_2O} $ to 0.32–0.36 from 0.54 in the control which was 0.49–0.53 in the CaO treatment (Fig. 3e). The BC treatment also reduced $r_{\rm N_2O\_D} $, the ratio of N2ObD + nD in N2ObD + nD + N2 that describes the residual degree of N2O to 0.15–0.18 from 0.32 in control. This value was 0.26–0.28 in the CaO treatment. The denitrifying product N2O + N2 flux, calculated from the N2O emission rate and $r_{\rm N_2O} $, was 14.43 μg N kg−1 d−1 in the control, of which N2 was accounted for 6.67 μg N kg−1 d−1. Compared with the control, the BC treatment increased the N2O + N2 emission rate by 28%–62%, and N2 by 85%–122%. The CaO treatment promoted N2 by 19%–38% compared with the control. The greater increase in N2 led to a lower proportion of N2O in denitrification products under BC treatment. It implied the BC treatment contributed significantly to N2O reduction to N2. In PS soil, N2O + N2 emission was 7.75 μg N kg−1 d−1 in the control, of which N2 accounted for 5.77 μg N kg−1 d−1 (Fig. 3f). The BC treatment at a high addition rate significantly enhanced N2O + N2 and N2 emission by 23–26 times. This value was greater than 1–9 times that of the CaO treatment, and the slight variation in $r_{\rm N_2O} $ indicated that treatment with BC or CaO resulted in close promotion of both N2O production and reduction.

    • The RDA analysis revealed a correlation between soil properties and N2O characteristics (Fig. 4). The first two ordination axes accounted for more than 90% of the total variance. In US soil, biochar treatments are clustered in the positive direction of Axis 1, indicating a close relationship with SOC, TN, and C/N ratio. The total N2O emission, that from bD and fD, and the $r_{\rm N_2O} $ ratio were positively correlated with soil NO3 concentrations, and negatively correlated with soil TN, SOC content, and C/N ratio. It indicated that BC addition potentially reduced N2O production via these denitrification pathways by increasing the C/N ratio, TN, and SOC. But CaO amendments are closely linked to elevated levels of NO3, indicating the dominance of substrate availability. In the PS, pH played a prominent role, a major driver along Axis 1. The biochar treatments were strongly associated with pH and NH4+ as well as SOC and TN. The promotion of pathway-based N2O emission is committed to the total N2O emission. With the help of SOC and TN, this promotion effect was far greater than the pH enhancement provided by CaO. The $r_{\rm N_2O} $ ratio was negatively related to soil pH, indicating that higher pH led to greater N2 emission than N2O.

      Figure 4. 

      Redundancy analyses (RDA) of the N2O production rate in each pathway and soil physicochemical properties. bD, bacterial denitrification; fD, fungal denitrification; nD, nitrifier denitrification; Ni, nitrification; hN, heterotrophic nitrification; BC, Biochar; CaO, lime; US, upland soil; PS, paddy soil.

      The correlation between the abundance of nitrogen transformation-related genes and N2O production from the pathway explained some potential microbial effects. The bD-N2O was significantly, negatively correlated with the ratio of nosZII to (amoA + nxrA + narG + napA + nirS + nirK) in US (p <0.05, Supplementary Fig. S4a). The fD-N2O was positively correlated with the relative abundance of Chaetomium and Oidiodendron in the US fungi communities (Supplementary Fig. S4c), and with the total relative abundance of Chaetomium, Mortierella, Oidiodendron, and Pseudallescheria communities in PS (Supplementary Fig. S4d). Higher N2O emissions from nD and Ni were possibly related to the greater relative abundance of amoA-AOA in the US, but in PS, they were associated with amoA-AOB (Supplementary Fig. S5). The hN-N2O was significantly, positively correlated with SOC, TN contents, and C/N ratio (Supplementary Table S5). Besides, the significantly negative correlation between the relative abundance of the nosZII gene and $r_{\rm N_2O} $ in the US (Supplementary Fig. S6a and S6b) suggested that N2O mitigation was attributed to the prominent role of the nosZII gene. However, $r_{\rm N_2O} $ in PS increased with the nitrifying genes in PS (Supplementary Fig. S6c), mirroring the increased N2O emissions resulting from nitrification-driven N2O production in PS.

    • The present results showed that both peak N2O fluxes and cumulative N2O emissions were much lower in upland soils (US) than in paddy soils (PS), regardless of treatment (Fig. 2). This total difference between US and PS soils indicated that the water regime and soil TOC content may play a decisive role in regulating N2O emissions from the soil N cycle. The extremely high N2O emission from paddy soil could be related to the thin overlying water layer, which creates a slightly anaerobic environment in the soil. It allowed nitrification to occur producing sufficient substrate NO3. Nitrification activities in the same paddy soils as this study were insensitive to oxygen concentration, which decreased from 20% to 2%[34]. Contrary to the previous findings that N2O emissions were negligible due to the complete reduction of NO3 to N2 in flooded soils, the thin water layer couldn't guarantee the complete denitrification of N2O to N2, resulting in the accumulation of N2O.

      Similar results were reported that BC addition reduced N2O emissions in two upland soils (pH 5.05 and 4.90) under 65% WHC[10]. Significant increase in N2O emissions of 291% and 256% after BC amendment were reported in paddy soils at a soil : water ratio of 1:2[35], consistent with the field paddy experiment, which showed increased N2O emissions[36]. In the clay upland soil used for the test, BC addition might suppress N2O emissions by improving soil aeration, thereby depressing denitrifier activity, as bulk density decreased with BC amendment[37], likely due to the good structure and porous network of BC[38]. The BC amendment reduced the NO3 substrate concentration during most of the incubation period (Fig. 2). The negatively charged surface of BC, as well as chemical bonding, shows a strong affinity for NH4+[39], which affects abiotic NH4+ sorption and biotic NH4+ transformation in soils[40]. It is inferred that inorganic N substrate concentration in dryland soils is an important limiting factor. The 'electron shuttle' function of BC also facilitated the transfer of electrons to soil denitrifying microorganisms, thereby promoting the reduction of N2O to N2[16].

    • Denitrification was the primary source of N2O in both upland and flooded soils. It was because most fungi and approximately one-third of denitrifying bacteria[41] lacked the genetic potential for N2O reduction. Both fungi and bacteria can generate N2O across a wide range of WFPS (60%–90%) in farming systems[42]. They could play an important role in upland agricultural, tea plantation, and bamboo plantation soils[43], and in acidic soils[42,44,45]. The BC addition had a high potential for fD-N2O reduction of 2%–55% for absolute emissions and 4%–13% for its contribution in the US (Fig. 3), which was lower than the previously reported range of 28%–52%[45]. Previous studies reported that classes of Penicillium and Sordariomycetes, and genera of Botrytis, Cladosporium, Mortierella, and Verticillium with N2O-producing capability shifted significantly due to BC amendment in acidic tea soils[44,45]. The N2O emission from fD was positively correlated with the relative abundance of specific fungal genera with high N2O capacity, such as Chaetomium, Oidiodendron, Mortierella, and Pseudallescheria (Supplementary Fig. S4). The key genus, Chaetomium, showed relatively high N2O activity of 99.9–206.9 nmol mL−1 d−1[46]. The importance was also found to explain the contribution of fungal denitrification to N2O emissions in the Manure treatments within the co-occurrence networks of bacterial and fungal denitrifiers[47]. Moreover, its relative community abundance in PS is 100 times that in the US, which could better explain the higher N2O emission through fD in PS. More efforts from pure-culture experiments are needed to understand how BC affects Chaetomium growth.

      In this study, the bD-N2O was negatively correlated with the ratio of nosZII to (amoA + nxrA + narG + napA + nirS + nirK). Many studies also linked soil N2O reduction to nosZ gene abundance after BC addition[4850], and to optimizing electron distribution among denitrifying enzymes at the cellular level[51]. Clade II N2O reducers or nosZII gene abundance and community could play an important, previously unrecognized role in controlling N2O emissions[52,53]. Carbon availability (DOC) introduced by BC (Table 1) substantially increased relative nosZII gene abundance, leading to a net reduction in N2O emissions[54,55]. This explanation also accounted for the previous results that pH increase alone does not induce large N2O reductions within a few days[54,56]. The decreased DOC content in CaO-0.08% suggested that without additional DOC supplementation, CaO treatment enhanced microbial activity by raising pH, particularly among bacteria that utilized DOC, thereby accelerating DOC decomposition and mineralization[57,58].

      Similar higher abundances of these genes were reported in the paddy soil than in orchard or vegetable soils[59]. The BC treatment vigorously promoted these functional genes related to N2O production compared with nosZII, resulting in a significant increase in N2O production over N2. The nosZ gene was more easily suppressed by BC than the nirS or nirK genes in flooded acidic soil[35]. It is likely due to the nosZ gene's high sensitivity to low pH[60,61] that were not elevated after BC amendment in the strongly acidic soil, or due to the greater inhibition by high O2 concentration[62,63], that might exist in the porous BC and thin layer of water, or due to the slow growth rate relative to nirS or nirK genes[64]. It was inferred that the N2O reduction in bD was achieved by increasing the relative nosZII gene abundance in the US, while the N2O increase was achieved by increasing the gene abundance related to N2O production in PS.

    • It is widely accepted that autotrophic nitrification could be stimulated following BC addition, as increased nitrification activity and nitrifier gene abundance were observed, likely due to improved nutrient availability and soil pH in acidic cropland soils[10,65,66]. However, in the present study, BC addition caused a smaller change in N2O emissions from autotrophic nitrification (Ni-N2O) than other production pathways, and a similar pattern was observed with CaO addition. While BC addition was observed to elevate N2O emissions via heterotrophic nitrification (hN-N2O) in the present study, this increase was substantially offset by reductions in bacterial and fungal denitrification pathways, where microorganisms related to bD and fD are more capable of producing N2O. BC addition also resulted in a remarkable increase of Ni-N2O in flooded PS, likely linked to elevated amoA-AOB abundance. During nitrification, the intermediate products NH2OH and NO2 serve as substrates for N2O production[67]. Rapid urea hydrolysis in humid or flooded soil produces ammonia (NH3), as evidenced by the observed increase in ureC genes in this study. This NH3 is more toxic to Nitrobacter than to ammonium oxidizers, thereby leading to excessive accumulation of NO2, which in turn contributes to N2O production[36,68]. In addition, heterotrophic nitrification has been reported to explain N2O emissions in acidic soils in recent studies[43,69]. It was found that both BC and CaO consistently enhanced hN-N2O, especially in the BC-3% and BC-5% treatments. The hN-N2O was positively correlated with increasing SOC, TN content, and the C/N ratio. The same finding was reported, with the contribution of heterotrophic nitrification to N2O production significantly correlated with SOC content and soil C/N ratio, because SOC, rather than the oxidation of reduced nitrogen compounds, is the main energy source for heterotrophic microorganisms[20]. Thus, this stimulation may stem from amendments altering microbial activity, particularly favoring heterotrophic nitrification under elevated SOC and imbalanced C/N conditions. In summary, the results aligned with the hypothesis given in the introduction. A conceptual map of the biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions in two soils was depicted based on the 'Hole-in-the-Pipe' model. BC addition potentially reduced N2O production via denitrification pathways by increasing the C/N ratio, TN, and SOC, which (compared with CaO amendment that increased pH only) strongly affected key microorganisms in the fD and bD processes, thereby interfering with total N2O emissions through fD and bD. Other processes, such as nitrification, exhibit weaker responses than bD and fD. In the PS, which has a high SOC and TN content, the increase in pH induced by BC addition enhanced N2O production from SOC and TN, thereby promoting the activity of microorganisms involved in various pathways and leading to a surge in total N2O emissions.

    • This study reveals divergent effects of BC and CaO on soil N2O emissions across land use types. While BC demonstrated superior N2O mitigation efficacy in acidic upland soils compared to CaO, it paradoxically induced higher emissions in flooded paddy soil. Mechanistic investigations could focus on bacterial and fungal denitrification pathways as the principal drivers of N2O reduction in acidic upland soil following BC addition. In contrast, multiple production pathways contributed equally to N2O accumulation in flooded paddy soil, with each pathway showing a significant enhancement after BC addition. Biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions may involve uncertain offsetting or synergistic effects of pH factors and of synchronously added carbon and nitrogen on soil N2O emissions. This finding emphasizes the need for precise N2O pathway partitioning in future studies to disentangle these competing mechanisms. Advancing the understanding of microbial-mediated N2O production at the pathway level will be instrumental in developing land-use-specific mitigation strategies, ultimately optimizing agricultural practices for sustainable soil management.

      • We acknowledge the support of the Hainan Seed Industry Laboratory for this study.

      • The authors confirm their contributions to the paper as follows: Cheng Chu: performing experiments and writing the first draft of the manuscript; Ahmed S. Elrys: writing the first draft of the manuscript and providing comments on earlier versions of the manuscript; Shenyan Dai: performing experiment; Teng Wen: performing isotope analysis; Jin Xu: performing isotope analysis; Zucong Cai: proposing study conception and designing study; Jinbo Zhang: proposing study conception and designing study; Anne B. Jansen-Willems: providing comments on earlier versions of the manuscript; Kristina Kleineidam: providing comments on earlier versions of the manuscript; Christoph Müller: providing comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

      • The datasets used or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable requests.

      • This work was supported by the Hainan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 425CXTD606), the National Natural Science Foundation for Excellent Youth Science Foundation of China (Grant No. RZ2400002277), and College initial funding (Grant No. 1677772342Y).

      • The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

      • Biochar addition reduced N2O emissions compared to CaO in acidic upland soil.

        Biochar addition in acidic upland soil markedly decreased N2O emissions through bacterial and fungal denitrification pathways.

        Biochar addition stimulated multiple N2O emission pathways in flooded paddy soil.

      • # Authors contributed equally: Cheng Chu, Ahmed S. Elrys
        Full list of author information is available at the end of the article.

      • Copyright: © 2026 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press, Fayetteville, GA. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (4)  Table (1) References (69)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Chu C, Elrys AS, Dai S, Wen T, Xu J, et al. 2026. Biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions in acidic upland and flooded paddy soils. Nitrogen Cycling 2: e009 doi: 10.48130/nc-0025-0021
    Chu C, Elrys AS, Dai S, Wen T, Xu J, et al. 2026. Biochar's contrasting effects on N2O emissions in acidic upland and flooded paddy soils. Nitrogen Cycling 2: e009 doi: 10.48130/nc-0025-0021

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return