Dear Label_Name,

Greetings! I hope you are well.

I am writing on behalf of an international publishing house, Science and Education Publishing, USA (http://www.sciepub.com).

Science and Education Publishing (SciEP) is a multidisciplinary open access publisher of Journals covering the fields of Science, Technology and Medicine. All SciEP publications are subject to high-quality peer review, editorial and production processes and are freely available online.

Welcome to the April, 2013 edition of SciEP newsletter, providing monthly summaries of articles on science & education related topics of interest to scientist and professionals. The mission of our journals is to provide an open access forum for publishing new findings on issues pertinent to scientific and academic field. We also invite you to submit original research papers, review articles, short reports, or case studies are considered for publication in our Multidisciplinary Journals.

American Journal of Public Health Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajphr-1-1-3

The Implementation of a Tele-Homecare System with Service Oriented Architecture and HL7 Message Transmission Standard
Ching-Sung Wang

American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajmbr-1-1-2

The Influence of Ethanol on Pyruvate Kinases Activity in Vivo, in Vitro, in Silico
Lelevich Sergey Vladimirovich, Khrustalev Vladislav Victorovich, Barkovsky Eugene Victorovich, Shedogubova Tatyana Aleksandrovna

American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
DOI: 10.12691/ajmsm-1-1-1

Clinical and Histological Features in Wegener Granulomatosis
Li Cavoli Gioacchino, Passantino Rita, Bono Luisa, Tortorici Calogera, Ferrantelli Angelo, Giammarresi Carlo, Rotolo Ugo

American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
DOI: 10.12691/ajidm-1-1-2

The Curse of Lymphatic Filariasis: Would the Continual Use of Diethylcarbamazine Eliminate this Scourge in Papua New Guinea?
Anne Lanham, Lillian Mwanri

We have released issues of some journals on February 2013.
American Journal of Public Health Research
American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
American Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
American Journal of Clinical Medicine Research
American Journal of Nursing Research
American Journal of Cancer Prevention
American Journal of Medicine Studies
American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
American Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research
American Journal of Biomedical Research
American Journal of Mechanical Engineering
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Journal of Preventive Medicine
American Journal of Food and Nutrition
American Journal of Hypertension Research
American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment
American Journal of Zoological Research
Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Biomedical Science and Engineering

We are pleased to announce that submissions are now being accepted for peer review for all the journals across all our subject areas in SciEP.

Please submit your manuscript via our online submission system:
http://www.sciepub.com/author/signin

To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please click on the following link: unsubscribe

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

David Rain
Email:join@sciepub.com
Science and Education Publishing (http://www.sciepub.com)

Age Effects of Millet Crops on Phytolith Carbon Sequestration

R. Vidhya, L. Arul Pragasan*

Department of Environmental Sciences, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu - 641 046, India

Abstract: Carbon sequestration within the phytoliths plays an effective long-term carbon sequestration mechanism. This study explores the potential of carbon sequestration among the millet crops such as Pearl millet, Sorghum, Little millet, Finger millet and Foxtail millet at three different growth ages. The crop samples were divided into three growth ages: 30th day, 60th day and 90th day after sowing and divided into aboveground biomass (AGB) and belowground biomass (BGB) for analysis of carbon occluded within phytoliths (phytOC). This study revealed that the maximum accumulation of phytoliths and occlusion of carbon were observed on the 60th day. Among the millet crops, Finger millet showed the highest phytOC yield, flux and production rate. Therefore, cultivating high phytOC crops such as Finger millet could certainly contribute to terrestrial carbon sequestration in mitigation of global warming and climate change.

Keywords: biomass, millets, phytolith occluded carbon, terrestrial carbon sequestration, growth stages

Received November 04, 2022; Revised December 07, 2022; Accepted December 18, 2022

Citation: R. Vidhya, L. Arul Pragasan, Age Effects of Millet Crops on Phytolith Carbon Sequestration. Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 10 (12). 747-753. January 2022. doi:10.12691/aees-10-12-7

1. Introduction

The recent concern has been the rise in carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentration in the atmosphere and this has led to finding ways to increase long-term carbon sequestration [1]. Terrestrial biogeochemical carbon (C) sequestration has been mentioned as a potential stable C sink strategy to reduce atmospheric CO₂. The C stored in the terrestrial biomass decomposes quickly and releases CO₂ into the atmosphere. Biogeochemical C sequestration within phytoliths is one of the most promising, secure, and efficient long-term C sequestration mechanisms identified in recent research on carbon sequestration [2,3,4].

Phytoliths are microscopic silicified structures formed in or between the cells of the plants [5]. Plant dry weight phytolith content varies significantly in the plant kingdom, ranging from 0.1% to 10% [6]. Phytoliths are released into the soil, and other sediments when a plant dies, and they remain stable over a wide pH range (pH 3-9) in various environments and climatic conditions [7,8,9]. During plant growth, phytoliths can occlude the small amount of organic carbon (0.2% to 5.8 %) absorbed from atmospheric CO2 at the time of photosynthesis [1,10]. Hence this carbon occluded within phytoliths has been identified as a significant long term terrestrial carbon sink, capturing around 1.5 billion tonnes of CO₂ each year [1].

Phytoliths are found in all types of plants throughout the plant kingdom. Monocotyledons absorb and deposit more silicon than dicotyledons. Certain monocotyledonous families such as the Restionaceae, Arecaceae, Zingiberaceae, Bromeliaceae, Orchidaceae and Cyperaceae are particularly prone to phytolith deposition. However, Poaceae, the most ecologically evolved and flourishing grass family deposits the heaviest and most distinctive phytoliths [11,12]. The accumulation and production of phytoliths vary from species to species. Similarly, the occlusion of carbon within phytoliths varies within the species, such as in sugarcane, which varies from 3.88% to 19.26% [13,14]. Environmental factors played an essential role in absorbing silica from the soil and depositing it into plant parts [15].

Millets are one of the important crops grown in India. They are cultivated in all seasons since they can withstand high temperature as well as short growing season. India is the largest millet producer in the world (41.04%). The main millets grown in India are Pearl millet, Sorghum, Little millet, Foxtail millet, Finger millet, Kodo millet, Proso millet and Barnyard millet [16].

There is limited research on the impact of age on the accumulation of phytoliths and the occlusion of carbon within phytoliths in grass species. Many research studies have shown phytolith content in different grass species such as bamboo and crops (millets, wheat, maize, sugarcane and rice) [17]. Furthermore, several studies have focused on cellular and molecular studies of phytolith formation to investigate the role of phytoliths in biogeochemical cycling [18]. The objective of this study was to test: (1) to determine phytolith content of selected millets at different ages of the crops, and (2) carbon occlusion in these millet species.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Study Site Selection

Figure 1. Map showing the location of sampling sites in Tamil Nadu, India

The study was conducted in two places of typical millet lands. One study site is located around 36 km west of Thiruvannamalai city, Tamil Nadu, India (Chengam, latitude 12°3068′N and longitude 78°7958′E). This site experiences mean annual temperature of 33.77°C in the daytime and 23.68°C in the night hours. Average annual precipitation is 75.94mm with warmest month is May and coldest month is January. The soil is a mix of red loam and black soil. The dominant vegetation is all varieties of millets. The second site selected was close to a famous South Indian city called Tirunelveli, India (8°4014′N, 77°6174′E). This region experiences mean annual temperature of 30°C in the daytime and 26°C in the night hours. Annual average precipitation is 163.28mm. The warmest month is April and coldest month is January. The soil is a red sandy and soil. Though the dominant vegetation is paddy, the other vegetation such as varieties of millets, banana plantations, and maze can be seen widely (Figure 1).

2.2. Sampling of Crops and Experimental Design

Three replicates of the five millet varieties at different growth ages, i.e., 30th day, 60th day, and 90th day after sowing, were randomly sampled. The samples were collected by digging up each individual plant to a depth of 20 cm below ground level at the sites. The plants were cut into two parts: above ground parts, and below ground parts that is buried below the soil surface. The above ground sample is used to calculate AGB (Above Ground Biomass) and below ground sample is used to calculate BGB (Below ground Biomass). This crop samples were carefully washed with running water and rinsed with distilled water. The cleaned samples were oven-dried at 75°C to a constant weight. The biomass per unit was calculated, and the crop samples were ground and passed to a 0.25 mm sieve before analyzed for Phytolith and PhytOC content.

2.3. Soil Sampling and Characterization

Soil samples were collected from the top layer (0-15 cm) of the soil each time crop samples are collected from the sites for further studies. 1kg of soil samples was sealed in an airtight bag and transferred to the laboratory. Soil samples were thoroughly mixed before sieving through a 2.0 mm mesh screen for further analysis. The soil samples collected from different sites were assessed total organic carbon by Walkley-Black Method and silicon dioxide by Gravimetric method.

2.4. Estimation of Organic Carbon in Crops

One gram of ground samples was taken in pre-weighed crucibles and placed inside the muffle furnace at 550ºC for an hour. The crucibles with ash were weighed after cooling in a desiccator [19]. Organic carbon was calculated as below:

Where,

W1= Weight of empty crucibles,

W2 = Weight of oven-dried grind samples + Crucibles,

W3 = Weight of ash + Crucibles.

(Considering 0.58% carbon in ash-free plant materials)

Where C is the Organic Carbon.

2.5. Extraction of Phytoliths from Crops

The Phytolith was extracted from plant material using a dry ashing and acid extraction method. 1g of dry plant material was placed in a silica crucible and heated to 500°C for 8 hours in a muffle furnace. It was cooled before being transferred to test tubes. 20 ml of 10% HCl was added and kept in the water bath at 70°C for 20 minutes before centrifuging at 3500 rpm for 5 minutes and discarding the supernatant. The remaining material was rinsed with distilled water and centrifuged at 3500 rpm for 5 minutes before discarding the supernatant. After that, 20 ml of 15% H₂O₂ was added, and the mixture was kept in a water bath at 70°C for 20 minutes. The supernatant was discarded after centrifugation at 3500 rpm for 5 minutes. Furthermore, the remaining material was rinsed with distilled water and centrifuged at 3500 rpm for 5 minutes before discarding the supernatant. Finally, 1 mL of 100% ethanol was added and allowed to dry [20].

2.6. Estimation of PhytOC

Dried extracted phytolith samples were treated with one mol/L HF at 55°C for 60 minutes to dissolve Phytolith. After HF treatment, the organic carbon released from phytoliths was dried at 45°C [21] and phytOC was analyzed by TOC Analyzer (SHIMADZU SSM-5000A) [22].

2.7. Data Analysis

The data was analysed using ANOVA, Duncan's Multiple Range Test (p < 0.05), and the means were compared using the LSD test using SPSS (Version 21, SPSS Inc., Wacker Drive, Chicago, USA) to examine the mean difference in phytolith, and phytOC contents in the millet crop samples. Carried out Correlation analysis to examine phytolith content, C concentration, and phytOC in the crop samples. The following are the related formulae [23]:

1. Phytolith concentration (g/Kg) = phytolith weight (g)/dry biomass (Kg)

2. C concentration in phytolith (g/Kg) = C content in phytolith(g)/phytolith weight(Kg)

3. PhytOC concentration (g/Kg) = C content in phytolith(g)/ dry biomass (Kg)

4. PhytOC flux Production (Kg/ha/yr) = PhytOC concentration (g/Kg) × NPP (Kg/ha/yr) × 10-3

5. PhytOC production rate (Kg/yr) = PhytOC production flux (Kg/ha/yr) × area (ha)

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Soil Characteristics

Soil organic carbon is essential in increasing crop yield and sequestering atmospheric carbon [24]. Total organic carbon (TOC) ranged from 0.96% to 1.65% at various growth stages (Figure 2). TOC of soil was analysed for each millet variety growing stage, and there was no significant difference (p>0.05) in Pearl Millet, Foxtail Millet, Finger millet and Little millet. However, in Sorghum, there was significant difference at different growth stages. The variations in soil organic carbon imply no proper soil management in agricultural land. Research has shown that improved agricultural methods and management techniques that might offer carbon input higher than the above necessary level are likely to sustain the soil organic carbon level and preserve good soil health [25].

Figure 2. Total organic carbon of soil at different growth stages of crops grown. 1 = 30th day, 2= 60th day and 3 = 90th day. Based on the least significant difference (LSD) test, various lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the P = 0.05 level; error bars represent standard error (n = 3)

Silicon dioxide (SiO₂) is commonly found in nature in the form of quartz, which is also the most common source of silica used in agriculture. Silicon, a mineral element, is not considered necessary. It is neither macro-elements nor micro-elements in plant mineral nutrition. Scientists regard it as a facilitating element at the agricultural level. Its accumulation in the epidermis provides rigidity and support to crops, protecting them from biotic and abiotic stresses [26]. In this study, SiO₂ in soil ranged from 45.38% to 85.45% and varied significantly (p<0.05) in each millet variety at different ages (Fig 2). The soil in which Little millet was cultivated had the highest SiO₂ among other soil.

3.2. Plant Biomass and Carbon Stored in Millet Varieties at Different Ages

Accumulation of biomass in crops depends on the photosynthesis process, where carbon is either transported to the growth sites or stored [27]. Plant biomass increased from the initial to 90th day after sowing. The biomass accumulation varied among millet crops ranging from 2478.77 Kg/ha to 28611.03 Kg/ha (Figure 3). Little millet showed the highest biomass accumulation among all the millet crops on the 30th day and 60th day. On the 90th day, Pearl millet showed the highest biomass. The variation of plant biomass could be due to the crops grown under different environmental factors such as temperature and precipitation [28].

Figure 3. Plant biomass at different growth stages. 1 = 30th day, 2= 60th day and 3 = 90th day. Based on the least significant difference (LSD) test, various lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the P = 0.05 level; error bars represent standard error (n = 3)

The carbon allocation between aboveground and belowground biomass varies due to environmental factors [29]. There were significant (p<0.05) variations in the organic carbon content among the five millet varieties. The study showed that crops allocated carbon more in AGB. The results indicated that carbon content increased with plant growth from the initial age (30th day) to the final age (90th day). The carbon content of AGB varied from 46.31% to 53.15% and BGB from 10.29% to 52.04% (Table 1). In AGB, a common trend was observed: carbon accumulated highest on the 60th day, except in Sorghum, where carbon was high on the 90th day. On the contrary, carbon in BGB on 60th day showed lesser accumulation except in Finger millet where carbon decreased from 30th to 90th day. The study revealed that Sorghum sequestered carbon high in AGB (52.72%), and Pearl millet high in BGB (52.04%).

Table 1. Carbon Content of Millet Varieties

3.3. Phytolith and PhytOC Content of Different Millet Varieties

The Poaceae family accumulates more phytoliths than other monocots [30]. The production of phytoliths differs in each plant. Our study showed that phytolith content ranged from 0.1515 g/kg to 11.2922 g/Kg (Figure 4). The study revealed that the production of phytoliths significantly varied (p<0.05) among the millet varieties with age. In AGB, the accumulation of phytoliths showed highest on the 60th day, and in BGB, Pearl and Foxtail Millet had highest on the 30th day, whereas Finger, Sorghum and Little millet were high on the 60th day.

Overall, BGB accumulated the highest phytoliths than AGB. Foxtail (5.8770 g/Kg) and Sorghum (11.2922 g/Kg) generally accumulated more phytoliths in AGB and BGB, respectively on the 60th day. The phytolith variation between the species could be due to different locations, fertilizers, temperature, and silicon availability for plants in different soil types [21].

Figure 4. Comparison of Phytolith in AGB and BGB at different growing stages of millet varieties. 1 = 30th day, 2= 60th day and 3 = 90th day. A= AGB, B=BGB. Based on the least significant difference (LSD) test, various lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the P = 0.05 level; error bars represent standard error (n = 3)

In general, AGB had higher phytOC content than BGB. phytOC content varied at different ages. No common trend was observed in both AGB or BGB. In AGB, most phytOC contents were high on the 60th day. However, in BGB, phytOC content decreased from 30th to the 90th day. The phytOC concentration varied from 0.013 g/Kg to 0.09 g/Kg (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Comparison of PhytOC in AGB and BGB at different growing stages of millet varieties. (A) PhytOC in AGB and (B) PhytOC in BGB.1 = 30th day, 2= 60th day and 3 = 90th day. Based on the least significant difference (LSD) test, various lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the P = 0.05 level; error bars represent standard error. (n = 3)

Finger millet showed the highest phytOC in AGB and BGB on 60th and 30th days, respectively. The factors influencing the variations of phytOC in each millet crop variety are unknown. Further study is required to identify the factors influencing the production of phytOC and to accurately estimate phytOC production based on the pattern of phytOC content of millet crops grown under the same environmental conditions.

The correlations between phytolith content, carbon in phytoliths, and phytOC content in each millet variety at total growth were investigated. The findings show no significant (p>0.05) relationship between phytolith content in plants and phytOC in all the millet varieties (Table 2). This pattern agrees with a recent study on eight millet species that showed no correlation between phytolith yield and percentage phytOC content on a dry weight basis (P = 0.071, R² = 0.105) [30]. Similarly, previous work on rice, wheat and bamboo indicated the same results [18,31,32]. These results imply the deposition of phytoliths and the efficiency of carbon trapping within the phytoliths rather than the amount of Phytolith taken up by the plant that determines the relative phytOC yields.

Table 2. Correlation Matrix Between the Phytolith, PhytOC and Carbon Content in Phytolith in Millet Varieties

Furthermore, the study also revealed a significant correlation between phytOC and C content within Phytolith in Foxtail Millet (R² = 0.9778; p<0.01) and Little Millet (R² = 0.7992; p<0.05). The results agree with the previous work on rice, millet and bamboo [33]. Our findings suggest that phytOC concentrations in Foxtail and Little millet are closely related to phytolith content and the efficiency of C deposition during phytolith formation.

The phytOC production flux was observed to be high on the 60th day. The average phytOC production flux contributed by millet varieties ranged from 0.0628 Kg/ha/yr to 1.313 Kg/ha/yr (Figure 6). Moreover, the phytOC production rate ranged from 18.85 Kg/yr to 394.17 Kg/yr (Table 3). Finger millet contributed the highest phytOC production flux and rate.

Figure 6. Estimated PhytOC Production Flux of Millet crop Varieties at different age. 1 = 30th day, 2= 60th day and 3 = 90th day. error bars represent standard error. (n = 3)

Table 3. Estimated PhytOC Production Rate in Millet Varieties

4. Conclusion

The study revealed that the carbon stored from the initial to their full maturity stage varies from species to species in above and belowground biomass. The crop biomass increased from the 30th day to the 60th day. The soil properties of TOC and SiO₂ were high on the Little millet soil. However, it did not yield high Phytoliths and phytOC content. The accumulation of phytoliths was high on the 60th day, and the same was observed in phytOC content, phytOC production flux and rate. The amount of carbon sequestrated within the phytoliths during the growth phase showed that Finger millet had high phytOC yield than other millet varieties. Therefore, the phytOC available in Finger millet contributes to the long-term terrestrial carbon sequestration when released into the soil during the death of the crop. Practices such as managing soil nutrients and regularly adding silicon fertilizers to agricultural lands can improve phytolith production, increase the phytOC accumulation to contribute to terrestrial carbon sequestration, and assist in mitigating climate change.

References

[1]   | Song, A., Ning, D., Fan, F., Li, Z., Provance-Bowley, M. and Liang, Y, “The potential for carbon bio-sequestration in China’s paddy rice (Oryza sativa L.) as impacted by slag-based silicate fertilizer,” Scientific reports, 5(1). 1-12. Dec.2015.
[2]   | Song, Z., Liu, H., Li, B. and Yang, X, “The production of phytolith‐occluded carbon in China's forests: implications to biogeochemical carbon sequestration,” Global change biology, 19(9). 2907-2915. Sep.2013.
[3]   | Anjum, M. and Nagabovanalli, P. B, “Assessing production of phytolith and phytolith occluded carbon in above-ground biomass of intensively cultivated rice ecosystems in India,” Carbon Management, 12(5). 509-519. Sep.2021.
[4]   | Davamani, V., Sangeetha Piriya, R., Rakesh, S. S., Parameswari, E., Paul Sebastian, S., Kalaiselvi, P. ... and Santhi, R, “Phytolith-Occluded Carbon Sequestration Potential of Oil Palm Plantation in Tamil Nadu,” ACS Omega, 7(3). 2809-2820. Jan.2022.
[5]   | Strömberg, C. A., Di Stilio, V. S. and Song, Z, “Functions of phytoliths in vascular plants: an evolutionary perspective,” Functional Ecology, 30(8). 1286-1297. Aug.2016.
[6]   | Yang, X., Song, Z., Liu, H., Van Zwieten, L., Song, A., Li, Z., Hao, Q., Zhang, X. and Wang, H, “Phytolith accumulation in broadleaf and conifer forests of northern China: implications for phytolith carbon sequestration,” Geoderma, 312. 36-44. Feb.2018.
[7]   | Piperno, D. R, Phytoliths: a comprehensive guide for archaeologists and paleoecologists, Rowman Altamira, 2006.
[8]   | Sun, X., Liu, Q., Gu, J., Chen, X. and Zhu, K, “Evaluation of the occluded carbon within husk phytoliths of 35 rice cultivars,” Frontiers of Earth Science,10(4). 683-690. Dec.2016.
[9]   | Rashid, I., Mir, S. H., Zurro, D., Dar, R. A. and Reshi, Z. A, “Phytoliths as proxies of the past,” Earth-Science Reviews, 194. 234-250. Jul.2019.
[10]   | Pan, W., Song, Z., Liu, H., Müeller, K., Yang, X., Zhang, X., Li, Z., Liu, X., Qiu, S., Hao, Q. and Wang, H, “Impact of grassland degradation on soil phytolith carbon sequestration in Inner Mongolian steppe of China”x Geoderma, 308. 86-92. Dec.2017.
[11]   | Shakoor, S. A., Bhat, M. A. and Mir, S. H, “Phytoliths in Plants: A Review,” Research and Reviews: Journal of Botanical Sciences, 3(1), 10-24. Jun.2014.
[12]   | Sharma, R., Kumar, V. and Kumar, R, “Distribution of phytoliths in plants: A review,” Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes, 3(2). 123-148. Apr.2019.
[13]   | Rajendiran, S., Coumar, M. V., Kundu, S., Dotaniya, A. M. and Rao, A. S, “Role of phytolith occluded carbon of crop plants for enhancing soil carbon sequestration in agro-ecosystems” Current Science,103. 911-920. Oct.2012
[14]   | Parr, J., Sullivan, L. and Quirk, R., “Sugarcane phytoliths: encapsulation and sequestration of a long-lived carbon fraction,” Sugar Tech, 11(1). 17-21. Jan.2009.
[15]   | Piperno, D. R., Phytoliths. In Tracking environmental change using lake sediments. Springer, Dordrecht, 2002, 235-251.
[16]   | Malathi, B., Appaji, C., Reddy, G. R., Dattatri, K. and Sudhakar, N, “Growth pattern of millets in India,” Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, 50(4). 382-386. Aug.2016.
[17]   | Parr, J., Sullivan, L., Chen, B., Ye, G. and Zheng, W, “Carbon bio‐sequestration within the phytoliths of economic bamboo species,” Global Change Biology, 16(10). 2661-2667. Oct.2010.
[18]   | Hodson, M. J., Song, Z., Ball, T. B., Elbaum, R. and Struyf, E, “Frontiers in Phytolith Research. Frontiers in Plant Science,” 11, 454. Apr.2020.
[19]   | Allen, S. E., Grimshaw, H. M. and Rowland, A. P, “Chemical analysis. Methods in plant ecology,” BlackWell, 285-344. 1986.
[20]   | Rajendiran, S., Coumar, V., Dotaniya, M. L. and Kumar, A, “Carbon occlusion potential of rice phytoliths: implications for global carbon cycle and climate change mitigation,” Appl Ecol Environ Res, 14(2). 265-281. 2016.
[21]   | Li, Z., Song, Z., Parr, J. F. and Wang, H, “Occluded C in rice phytoliths: implications to biogeochemical carbon sequestration,” Plant and soil, 370(1). 615-623. Sep.2013.
[22]   | Sun, X., Liu, Q., Tang, T., Chen, X. and Luo, X, “Silicon fertilizer application promotes phytolith accumulation in rice plants,” Frontiers in plant science, 1. 425. Apr.2019.
[23]   | Yang, J., Wu, J., Jiang, P., Xu, Q., Zhao, P. and He, S, “A study of phytolith-occluded carbon stock in monopodial bamboo in China,” Scientific Reports, 5(1). 1-8. Aug.2015.
[24]   | Jansson, C., Faiola, C., Wingler, A., Zhu, X. G., Kravchenko, A., De Graaff, M. A., Ogden, A.J., Handakumbura, P.P., Werner, C. and Beckles, D.M, “Crops for carbon farming,” Frontiers in Plant Science, 12. 938. Jun 2021.
[25]   | Nayak, A. K., Shahid, M., Shukla, A. K., Kumar, A., Raja, R., Tripathi, R. and Panda, B. B., Soil organic carbon sequestration in agriculture: Issues and priorities. ICAR-Central Rice Research Institute, Cuttack-753006, Odisha, India, 2012, 17-32.
[26]   | Ouesse, M. E. A., Wade, A. C., Dieye, G., Sall, M. and Diop, D, “Analysis and Characterization of Samples of Agricultural Soils Dominated by SiO 2 in Senegal,” in 2018 IEEE 8th International Conference Nanomaterials: Application & Properties (NAP), IEEE, 1-4.
[27]   | Chen, Z., Tao, X., Khan, A., Tan, D. K. and Luo, H, “Biomass accumulation, photosynthetic traits and root development of cotton as affected by irrigation and nitrogen-fertilization,” Frontiers in Plant Science, 9. 173. Feb.2018.
[28]   | Mathew, I., Shimelis, H., Mutema, M. and Chaplot, V, “What crop type for atmospheric carbon sequestration: Results from a global data analysis,” Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 243. 34-46. Jun.2017.
[29]   | Liu, Y., Xu, M., Li, G., Wang, M., Li, Z. and De Boeck, H. J, “Changes of aboveground and belowground biomass allocation in four dominant grassland species across a precipitation gradient,” Frontiers in Plant Science, 12. 609. Apr.2021.
[30]   | Zuo, X. and Lü, H, “Carbon sequestration within millet phytoliths from dry-farming of crops in China,” Chinese Science Bulletin, 56(32). 3451-3456. Nov.2011.
[31]   | Parr, J. F. and Sullivan, L. A, “Phytolith occluded carbon and silica variability in wheat cultivars,” Plant and Soil, 342(1). 165-171. May.2011.
[32]   | Sun, X., Liu, Q., Zhao, G., Chen, X., Tang, T. and Xiang, Y, “Comparison of phytolith-occluded carbon in 51 main cultivated rice (Oryza sativa) cultivars of China,” RSC advances, 7(86). 54726-54733. 2017.
[33]   | Yang, X., Song, Z., Sullivan, L., Wang, H., Li, Z., Li, Y. and Zhang, F, “Topographic control on phytolith carbon sequestration in moso bamboo (Phyllostachys pubescens) ecosystems,” Carbon Management, 7(1-2). 105-112. Mar.2016.