Home Effect of biochar and soil amendment on bacterial community composition in the root soil and fruit of tomato under greenhouse conditions
Article Open Access

Effect of biochar and soil amendment on bacterial community composition in the root soil and fruit of tomato under greenhouse conditions

  • Jian Zhang EMAIL logo , Rui Xia and Pengcheng Wang
Published/Copyright: April 17, 2025
Download Article (PDF)
Open Chemistry
From the journal Open Chemistry Volume 23 Issue 1

Abstract

Tomato root soil quality and microbial community composition are important for improving fruit quality. However, the effect of biochar and soil amendment on tomato fruit quality and root soil characteristics under greenhouse production has been insufficiently explored. In this study, the fruit quality and bacterial communities in tomato root soil and fruit subjected to biochar and soil amendment were analyzed using Illumina sequencing. The results showed that the application of biochar and soil amendment increased the available phosphorous in tomato greenhouse soils, ranging from 49.37 to 52.02 mg kg−1. Biochar greatly affected the fruit quality, such as the lutein content (1.55 μg g−1). The potassium content in the fruits was higher than that of nitrogen and phosphorous, reaching 1.59 g kg−1. The addition of biochar and soil amendment promoted the abundance of Bacteroidota, Actinobacteriota, and Firmicutes at the phylum level in the tomato fruits. However, biochar and soil amendment slightly reduced the number of Proteobacteria in the fruits. This study provides new insights into practical strategies for promoting tomato fruit quality and soil condition.

Graphical abstract

Keywords: bacterial species; carotenoid content; facility agriculture; fruit type; Solanaceae crop

1 Introduction

Tomato is an important economic crop that is widely cultivated worldwide and is rich in various nutrients, such as ascorbic acid, sugar, and lycopene, rendering it a popular fresh fruit [1,2]. In addition, tomato is also an important model plant in botanical research, especially in genetics, fruit development, and stress tolerance [3]. At present, China’s tomato cultivation area and total yield rank first globally [4]. Further research into tomato cultivation techniques can help inform sustainable fruit production.

Tomato fruits are one of the highest-yielding and most-consumed vegetables worldwide, and fruit quality is the key attribute for consumers [5,6]. One example is cherry tomatoes, which are sold as fresh fruits at the market. Tomatoes are also processed into preserved fruits, tomato sauce, juice, and other food products [7,8,9]. With the rapid development of facility agriculture in China, the production of tomatoes under greenhouse conditions has become increasingly prevalent. Greenhouse tomatoes are influenced by various factors such as soil properties, moisture, temperature, and light [10,11]. For example, relative humidity impacts tomato plant growth status and fruit storage [6,12], and excessive relative humidity causes plant diseases such as root rot and inhibits tomato plant growth under greenhouse conditions, which can affect soil quality [13].

Healthy soil, one of the most important factors in greenhouse production, has a good ability to maintain and supply water and nutrients, which can promote crop yield [14]. Compared with open field conditions, greenhouse tomato cultivation offers higher economic benefits and breaks seasonal restrictions [15]. However, owing to the high multiple cropping index in greenhouse cultivation, fertilizer and pesticide use is relatively excessive, which greatly decreases soil quality, resulting in acidification, salinization, and plant diseases [16,17,18]. Soil properties, fertilizers, pesticides, and cultivation methods are vital factors that can affect the composition of soil microbial community structures [17,19]. Therefore, improving the soil quality and microbial community structures of tomato plants under greenhouse conditions can promote fruit quality.

The greenhouse soil quality during cultivation greatly impacts the outcomes of facility agriculture [18]. Various approaches have been used for improving facility soil, which mainly focus on improving the physical and chemical properties of the soil that are not conducive to plant growth and promoting plant growth through biological improvement [10,20]. Biochar is a porous substance made from biomass through high-temperature pyrolysis with limited oxygen. The addition of biochar or soil amendment can improve greenhouse soil conditions [21], such as by improving carbon sequestration and beneficial microbial activity [22]. Although the effects of biochar and soil amendment on soil attributes have been explored, studies on the influence of biochar or soil amendment on greenhouse soils during tomato cultivation are limited. Therefore, the objectives of this work were to explore the effect of biochar and soil amendment on tomato rhizosphere soil properties and bacterial diversity in tomato fruit and soil under greenhouse conditions. The findings of this study are helpful in elucidating the mechanisms by which biochar or soil amendment promotes tomato plant growth and fruit regulation.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Tomato variety and experiment location

The tomato variety HMT was purchased from Shandong Xianrui Seed Industry Co., Ltd (China). This variety was used based on its good fruit quality, flavor, and color. The seed sowing and seedling cultivations were performed, and the experimental site was located at the planting base in Huaiyuan County, Anhui Province, China. The field trial was conducted from January 2021 to March 2023.

2.2 Experimental design

Three treatments were applied: (1) control (CK), which utilized conventional fertilization method with fertilizer nutrients as follows: 153, 60, 156, and 900 kg of nitrogen-, phosphorus-, potassium-, and carbon-based microbial fertilizer, respectively (total nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium ≥5%) (1 hm2); (2) treatment 1 (T1) (1 hm2): 54, 45, 117, and 1,500 kg of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and commercial biochar, respectively; and (3) treatment 2 (T2) (1 hm2): 54, 45, 117, and 1,500 kg of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and “ZBN” soil amendment, respectively (Guozhen Ecological Technology Co., Ltd., China). Chemical fertilizer with a TN, phosphorus, and potassium content of 195 kg (1 hm2) in the soil was applied. Three replicates per treatment were randomly arranged within a 50 m² plot in a randomized block design. Tomato seedlings were planted according to conventional management. All the fruits were collected 45–50 days after flowering.

2.3 Collection of soil and fruit samples

Each experimental treatment was conducted with five sampling points. Ten tomato plants were collected from each point, and the root soils were placed in sterile bags. Fine root samples were transferred to the laboratory in a sterile centrifuge tube containing 20 mL of 10 mmol l−1 phosphate-buffered solution and then oscillated to collect the rhizosphere soil adhering to the roots. The samples were centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 30 s, the supernatant was removed, and the rhizosphere soil samples from all sampling points were mixed to form a composite sample. The rhizosphere soil samples were stored at −80°C for future use. Ten additional tomato fruits in each treatment were collected as a backup. All the samples used for sequencing were stored at −80°C for subsequent experiments. The fruit samples were recorded as GK for CK, G1 for T1, and G2 for T2.

2.4 Nutrient analysis of soils and fruits

The available nitrogen of the soil was measured, and available potassium was determined by ammonium acetate extraction and flame photometry. Nitrate and ammonium nitrogen were measured using an AA3 flow analyzer (auto analyzer3-AA3, seal analytical, Mequon, WI). The total nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in the fruit and available nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in the soil were analyzed as previously described [23].

2.5 High-performance liquid chromatography analysis of the fruit

In brief, 5 g of homogenized fruit was added to 50 mL of ultrapure water, followed by 5 mL of zinc acetate and 5 mL of potassium ferrocyanide solution. The primary filtrate was discarded, and the subsequent filtrate was filtered again with a 0.45 μm filter. Liquid-phase detection was performed, and d-glucose was detected. In addition, α-carotene, β-carotene, lycopene, and lutein were detected. Standard solutions including malic acid, citric acid, shikimic acid, tartaric acid, and oxalic acid were prepared. The high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC; Ultimate 3000, Thermo Fisher, USA) analysis was then employed based on operating conditions from previous studies [24,25].

2.6 Extraction of total DNA from the soil and fruit

A Fast DNA SPIN Kit (MP Bio-product) was used for DNA extraction from the soil in accordance with the instruction manual, as previously described [26]. A NanoDrop 2000 spectrophotometer was used for DNA concentration and quality determination. After the purified DNA was qualified by 2% agarose gel electrophoresis, a NEXT Flex Rapid DNA Seq Kit (Bio Scientific) was used to build the database. The primers used to amplify the 16S rRNA gene in bacteria were f515 (5′-GTGCCAGCMGCCGCGG-3′) and r907 (5′-CCGTCAATTCMTTTRAGTTT-3′). Polymerase chain reactions (PCRs) were performed (50 μl) with the following steps: 94°C for 5 min and 30 cycles of 94°C for 30 s, 55°C for 30 s, and 72°C for 30 s. The PCR products were purified with an extraction kit (Qiagen, Germany). All sequencing steps were accomplished with the Illumina MiSeq platform (Biozeron, Shanghai, China).

2.7 Sequencing data analysis

Fastp (https://github.com/OpenGene/fastp) and FLASH version 1.2.7 (http://www.cbcb.umd.edu/software/flash) were used for quality control and splicing on the original sequencing sequences. The ribosomal database project classifier Bayesian algorithm was employed to classify and annotate operational taxonomic units (OTUs). Uparse software (Uparse v7.0.1001, http://drive5.com/uparse/) was used to cluster the effective sequences obtained from high-throughput sequencing, and the sequences were clustered into OTUs at a 97% sequence similarity threshold. Chimeras were removed (http://rdp.Cme.msu.edu/) to annotate the species classification of each sequence with an alignment threshold of more than 70% [26]. Mathur software was utilized to calculate the α-diversity index of each sample, and Student’s t-test was used to draw dilution curves. The R statistical environment was used to visualize species composition at different classification levels. Quantitative insights into microbial ecology were used to calculate β diversity, construct principal coordinates (PCoA) and Venn analysis graphs, and analyze samples. Differences between species were also analyzed [27].

2.8 Statistical analysis

The data were analyzed using Excel 2010 software (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA). The least significant difference method in a single-factor experimental statistical analysis (P < 0.05) was used for the analysis of variance, with the values represented as mean ± standard error using Data Processing System 18.1.

3 Results

3.1 Analysis of soil and fruit nutrients and quality

In this study, no significant differences in the color and size of the fruits were observed in the three treatments, suggesting that biochar and soil amendment did not affect fruit size. Moreover, cross-sectional images showed that the cavities, internal colors, length, and width of the fruits were similar (Figure 1a). However, the fruit quality differed in terms of organic acid and carotenoid content based on the HPLC analysis. In the three treatments, the content of α-carotene ranged from 0.016 to 0.055 μg g−1 (Figure 1b) and that of β-carotene ranged from 2.38 to 4.53 μg g−1 (Figure 1c). Using the analysis of variance, we observed that the β-carotene content was significantly higher than α-carotene across all treatments (P < 0.05). β-Carotenoids accumulated in high amounts in the tomato fruits, with the highest content detected in the control treatment (GK). The content of lycopene in the fruits ranged from 1.08 to 1.91 μg g−1 (Figure 1d), with the highest content found in the GK treatment. Both biochar and soil amendment treatments showed lower levels of β-carotene and lycopene compared to the control. The content of lutein ranged from 1.28 to 1.55 μg g−1 (Figure 1e), with the highest lutein content found in the G1 treatment. The content of d-glucose ranged from 7.03 to 8.61 mg g−1 (Figure 1f), with the highest content detected in the GK fruit. Compared to the control fruits, the G1 and G2 fruits showed a decrease in glucose content, but the difference was not significant. The findings herein suggest that biochar may influence glucose content accumulation in tomato fruit, which may be attributed to decreased available potassium in the soil (Table 1).

Figure 1 Photos of tomato fruits and cross-sectional view of the fruits (a), GK, G1, and G2 from top to bottom. Contents of α-carotene (b), β-carotene (c), lycopene (d), lutein (e), and d-glucose (f) in tomato fruits. Bar represents 5 cm.
Figure 1

Photos of tomato fruits and cross-sectional view of the fruits (a), GK, G1, and G2 from top to bottom. Contents of α-carotene (b), β-carotene (c), lycopene (d), lutein (e), and d-glucose (f) in tomato fruits. Bar represents 5 cm.

Table 1

Analysis of nutrients in tomato root soil

Treatment AN (mg kg−1) AP (mg kg−1) AK (mg kg−1)
CK 93.72 ± 4.89a 49.37 ± 3.94b 135.86 ± 6.03a
T1 91.68 ± 3.19b 49.98 ± 3.72b 127.98 ± 5.23ab
T2 91.17 ±± 2.13b 52.02 ± 2.67a 112.99 ± 4.01c

AN, available nitrogen; AP, available phosphorous; AK, available potassium. The least significant difference method in a single-factor experimental statistical analysis (P < 0.05) was used. Same letters indicate non-significant differences.

In the present study, the content of available nitrogen in the soil ranged from 91.7 to 93.72 mg kg−1 (Table 1), that of available phosphorus ranged from 49.37 to 52.02 mg kg−1, and that of available potassium ranged from 112.99 to 135.86 mg kg−1. Available potassium decreased under biochar (T1) and soil amendment (T2), suggesting that these two treatments reduced the available potassium in root soils. Interestingly, biochar increased the phosphorus content in the soil, and the highest phosphorus content was observed in the soil of the T2 treatment (Table 1). In addition, the content of potassium in the soil was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than that of nitrogen and phosphorus. With regard to the contents of these three nutrients in the fruits, potassium was the highest, followed by nitrogen and then phosphorus (Table 2). However, the phosphorus content in G1 was slightly higher than that of GK, suggesting that biochar increased the phosphorus content in the tomato fruits. Furthermore, no significant differences in these nutrients were observed among the treatments.

Table 2

Nutrient determination of tomato fruits in three treatments

Treatment N (g kg−1) P (g kg−1) K (g kg−1) Mg2+ (mg kg−1) Fe3+ (mg kg−1) Zn2+ (mg kg−1)
GK 1.32 ± 0.01a 0.21 ± 0.06a 1.58 ± 0.12a 99.03 ± 0.22a 7.64 ± 0.20a 2.18 ± 0.26a
G1 1.35 ± 0.09a 0.22 ± 0.03a 1.59 ± 0.11a 95.12 ± 0.25ab 6.82 ± 0.19ab 1.88 ± 0.31ab
G2 1.26 ± 0.03ab 0.21 ± 0.04a 1.51 ± 0.10ab 100.11 ± 0.13a 5.93 ± 0.15b 1.63 ± 0.21b

N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; K, potassium. The least significant difference method in a single-factor experimental statistical analysis (P < 0.05) was used. Same letters indicate non-significant differences.

Among the three fruit treatments, the iron (Fe3+) content ranged from 5.93 to 7.64 mg kg−1, indicating that the tomato fruit was rich in iron. The content of magnesium (Mg2+) in the fruits ranged from 99 to 100 mg kg−1, which was the highest among the three detected elements. The content of zinc (Zn2+) was between 1.63 and 2.18 mg kg−1, which was lower than that of iron (Table 2). However, the application of biochar and soil amendment reduced the contents of iron and zinc. The present study showed that the highest content of magnesium was in the G2 fruit. The present study demonstrated that biochar and soil amendment have different effects on organic acid accumulation. For instance, the contents of citric acid were 2523.23, 2131.22, and 2397.96 μg g−1 in GK, G1, and G2, respectively (Table 3). The content of malic acid reached 183.29, 185.16, and 208.75 μg g−1 in GK, G1, and G2, respectively. The content of tartaric acid was low in all the treatments. However, the contents of malic acid, tartaric acid, and oxalic acid increased in G1 and G2, whereas the content of citric acid was reduced in G1 and G2. While the shikimic acid content was low across all treatments, its content increased in G1 and decreased in G2 compared with GK.

Table 3

Analysis of organic acids in tomato fruits

Treatment Mal (μg g−1) Cit (μg g−1) Shi (μg g−1) Tar (μg g−1) Oxa (μg g−1)
GK 183.29 ± 30.93b 2523.23 ± 34.81a 28.44 ± 1.17ab 19.90 ± 1.19b 89.61 ± 10.94c
G1 185.16 ± 25.71b 2131.22 ± 26.05b 31.78 ± 1.14a 20.70 ± 2.59b 203.19 ± 12.64a
G2 208.75 ± 27.04a 2397.96 ± 28.49ab 20.53 ± 10.11c 27.72 ± 2.94a 182.27 ± 13.74b

Mal, malic acid; Cit, citric acid, Shi, shikimic acid; Tar, tartaric acid; Oxa, oxalic acid. The fruit samples were recorded as GK for control (CK), G1 for treatment 1 (T1), and G2 for treatment 2 (T2). The least significant difference method in a single-factor experimental statistical analysis (P < 0.05) was used. Same letters indicate non-significant differences.

3.2 Analysis of bacterial communities

The PCoA showed that the distribution of samples was significantly different in the soils (Figure 2a) and fruits (Figure 2b). The OTU analysis indicated a total of 1,873 core OTUs in the soil samples (Figure 2c) and 127 core OTUs in the fruits (Figure 2d). Interestingly, the unique OTUs of T2 were the highest in the soil, and treatment G1 had the highest number of unique core OTUs in the fruit. The bacterial communities in the soil are very different from the fruits.

Figure 2 PCoA analysis of soil (a) and fruit (b) samples, and Venn diagram of soil (c) and fruit (d) samples and core OTU analysis.
Figure 2

PCoA analysis of soil (a) and fruit (b) samples, and Venn diagram of soil (c) and fruit (d) samples and core OTU analysis.

The bacterial community at the phylum level was evaluated by heatmap analysis. The results showed that the community abundance in the soil was greatly higher than that in the fruit, indicating that a greater number of bacteria were present in the soil and that few microbes could colonize the tomato fruits. The communities with high abundance in the soil included Proteobacteria, Acidobacteriota, Bacteroidota, Gemmatimonadota, Planctomycetota, Actinobacteriota, Chloroflexi, Myxococcota, and Methylomirabilota (Figure 3a). The populations with high community abundance in the fruits included Cyanobacteria, Proteobacteria, Bacteroidota, Actinobacteriota, Firmicutes, and Myxococcota. The communities with low abundance were Chloroflexi and Gemmatimonadota (Figure 3b). However, the abundance of Chloroflexi and Planctomycetota increased in the soil samples. The main bacterial communities of CK, T1, and T2 in the soil included Proteobacteria, Acidobacteriota, Chloroflexi, Actinobacteriota, Planctomycetota, Gemmatimonadota, Bacteroidota, and Methylomirabilota (Figure 4a). The main bacterial communities at the phylum level in the three fruit treatments included Cyanobacteria, Proteobacteria, and Bacteroidota (Figure 4b). However, biochar and soil amendment slightly reduced the number of Proteobacteria in the fruits. Based on the number of bacteria at the phylum level, the top dominant species in the soils included Acidobacteriota, Actinobacteriota, and Chloroflexi (Figure 5a). By contrast, the top dominant species in the fruits included Cyanobacteria and Proteobacteria (Figure 5b).

Figure 3 Heatmap analysis of bacterial structures at the phylum level in the soil (a) and fruit (b) samples.
Figure 3

Heatmap analysis of bacterial structures at the phylum level in the soil (a) and fruit (b) samples.

Figure 4 Column chart of community structure at the phylum level in the soil (a) and fruit (b) samples.
Figure 4

Column chart of community structure at the phylum level in the soil (a) and fruit (b) samples.

Figure 5 Top 30 taxonomy genera at the phylum level in the tomato soil (a) and fruit (b) samples.
Figure 5

Top 30 taxonomy genera at the phylum level in the tomato soil (a) and fruit (b) samples.

4 Discussion

Healthy soil is an important prerequisite for high-quality tomato fruit. In this study, the nutrients, organic acids, and microbial community structures of tomato fruits under biochar and soil amendment were analyzed. The results support that biochar and soil amendment can be used to improve soil quality, which is in accordance with previous findings [28,29,30]. Moreover, biochar not only regulated the bacterial structures in the soil but also impacted the tomato fruit quality in terms of carotenoids and sugars.

In this study, no significant differences in the color and size of the fruits were observed in the three treatments. Moreover, cross-sectional images showed that the cavities, internal colors, length, and width of the fruits were similar, suggesting that tomato fruit shape was consistent across the three treatments. However, the fruit quality differed in terms of organic acid and carotenoid content based on the HPLC analysis. The test results showed that the content of β-carotenoid was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than that of α-carotene across all treatments. This finding indicated that β-carotenoids accumulated in high amounts in the tomato fruits, with the highest content detected in the control treatment (GK), suggesting that this treatment encouraged the accumulation of β-carotenoids in the fruit. The observations suggest that both biochar and soil amendment may not promote β-carotenoid accumulation. Recent studies have found biochar to be an alternative option for improving fruit quality in acidic soils or under drought stress [29,31]. In contrast to these findings, the data in this study indicated that biochar or soil amendment affected the different types of carotenoid contents in the tomato fruit. The highest lutein content was found in the G1 treatment, suggesting that biochar promoted lutein accumulation. Compared with the GK fruit, the G1 and G2 fruits showed a decrease in glucose content, suggesting that biochar and soil amendment may influence sugar accumulation. To date, few studies have evaluated the effect of biochar on tomato fruit quality. The findings herein suggest that biochar may influence glucose content accumulation in tomato fruit, which may be attributed to decreased available potassium in the soil.

It has been found that biochar influences soil quality by increasing plant nutrient uptake and crop production [32,33]. In the present study, available potassium decreased under biochar (T1) and soil amendment (T2), suggesting that these two treatments reduced the available potassium in root soils. Interestingly, biochar increased the phosphorus content in the soil, and the results differ from earlier findings in this report whereby the highest phosphorus content was observed in the soil of the T2 treatment (Table 1). This observation suggests that soil amendment had a greater ability to promote phosphorus in the soil than biochar. In addition, the content of potassium in the soil was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than that of nitrogen and phosphorus. The results showed that the application of biochar and soil amendment increased the available phosphorous in tomato greenhouse soils. This conclusion is in accordance with a previous finding whereby biochar addition not only increased the concentration of soil organic carbon but also promoted available phosphorous [34]. This outcome implies that the application of biochar to soils helps enlarge soil phosphorus pools and thus increase soil phosphorus availability [35]. With regard to the contents of these three nutrients in the fruits, potassium was the highest, followed by nitrogen and then phosphorus (Table 2). However, the phosphorus content in G1 was slightly higher than that of GK, suggesting that biochar increased the phosphorus content in the tomato fruits. Furthermore, biochar and soil amendment did not greatly influence the three nutrients in the fruits when compared with the control (GK).

The content of magnesium was the highest among the three detected elements. The content of zinc was lower than that of iron (Table 2). However, the application of biochar and soil amendment reduced the contents of iron and zinc in this work. Many studies have demonstrated that biochar influences the iron content of plants and soil [36,37,38]. The present study showed that the highest content of magnesium was in the G2 fruit, suggesting that soil amendment helps adsorb magnesium in soils. This study illustrated that biochar and soil amendment had different effects on element accumulation in tomato fruits.

Given that biochar has a positive effect on soil properties [29,32], few studies have directly reported whether biochar can influence the organic acid content in tomato fruits. The present study demonstrated that biochar and soil amendment have different effects on organic acid accumulation. For instance, the citric acid was the main component in the fruits. The content of tartaric acid was low in all the treatments. However, the contents of malic acid, tartaric acid, and oxalic acid increased in G1 and G2, whereas the content of citric acid was reduced in G1 and G2. While the shikimic acid content was low across all treatments, its content increased in G1 and decreased in G2 compared with GK, suggesting that biochar promotes shikimic acid accumulation in tomato fruit. However, soil amendment was beneficial for malic acid, tartaric acid, and oxalic acid formation. Although it has been reported that biochar enhances fruit yield and quality [39], the regulation of specific organic acids has seldom been reported. Overall, these findings suggest that malic acid, tartaric acid, and oxalic acid accumulate in the fruits and are the main indicators of tomato fruit quality. These findings help evaluate tomato fruit quality under biochar application.

Soil quality is vital for tomato plant growth, and it has been confirmed that soil microbes play an important role in maintaining soil nutrient cycling [40,41]. In this study, the microbial distribution in the soil and fruit samples from the control group differed greatly from that in the biochar and soil amendment treatment group. Interestingly, the unique OTUs of T2 were the highest in the soil, and treatment G1 had the highest number of unique core OTUs in the fruit, which suggests that biochar or soil amendment influenced the numbers of soil bacteria when compared with the control (CK).

The bacterial community at the phylum level was evaluated by heatmap analysis. The results showed that the community abundance in the soil was considerably higher than that in the fruit, indicating that a greater number of bacteria were present in the soil and that few microbes could colonize the tomato fruits. The data suggested that these bacterial species are dominant in the soils under biochar and soil amendment. This finding implies that biochar provides suitable habitation for bacterial growth, as reported in another study that biochar can improve the diversity and species of microbial communities in plant soil [32,42]. The populations with high community abundance in the fruits included Cyanobacteria, Proteobacteria, Bacteroidota, and Actinobacteriota. However, the communities with low abundance were Chloroflexi and Gemmatimonadota. The data suggested that the application of biochar and soil amendment promoted the abundance of Bacteroidota, Actinobacteriota, and Firmicutes in tomato fruits. The main bacterial communities in the soil included Proteobacteria, Acidobacteriota, Chloroflexi, Actinobacteriota, Bacteroidota, and Methylomirabilota (Figure 4a). It has been reported that Actinobacteriota, Firmicutes, and Bacteroidota are the most important phyla in the microbiota communities in lead-contaminated soils with biochar application [43]. The present result differed from the previous findings that the main communities at the phylum level in the three treatments included Cyanobacteria, Proteobacteria, and Bacteroidota (Figure 4b). However, biochar and soil amendment had an impact on the bacterial structures in the tomato fruits. The top three dominant species in the soils included Acidobacteriota, Actinobacteriota, and Chloroflexi (Figure 5a). By contrast, the top dominant species in the fruits included Cyanobacteria, and Proteobacteria at the phylum level (Figure 5b). In summary, this study reveals that biochar or soil amendment can improve the nutrient uptake of tomato plants and influence the bacterial composition in the root soil and fruit.

5 Conclusion

The current study revealed that the application of biochar and soil amendment increased the available phosphorous in the root soil. Biochar affected the tomato fruit quality, specifically the organic acid and carotenoid contents (including lutein). The dominant communities in the fruit included Cyanobacteria and Proteobacteria. However, biochar slightly reduced the number of Proteobacteria in the fruit. The addition of biochar effectively improved the soil properties and fruit quality and influenced the bacterial community structures in tomatoes under greenhouse conditions. These results provide a promising starting point for the use of biochar as a sustainable management strategy to improve tomato fruit quality.

tel: +86-551-62639032; fax: +86-551-65148169

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the people in the experimental basement.

  1. Funding information: This work was supported by the Anhui Provincial Natural Science Foundation (2408085MC052), the Fund from Anhui Major Science and Technology Project (202103b06020010), and the Youth Development Fund (second level) from Anhui Academy of Agricultural Sciences.

  2. Author contributions: J.Z.: conceptualization, methodology, investigation, formal analysis, and writing – review and editing; R.X.: investigation and data curation; P.C.W.: investigation and formal analysis.

  3. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

  5. Data availability statement: The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

[1] Dere S, Kusvuran S, Dasgan HY. Does drought increase the antioxidant nutrient capacity of tomatoes? Int J Food Sci Technol. 2022;57:6633–45.10.1111/ijfs.16008Search in Google Scholar

[2] Huang D, Yun F, Zhang Y, Man X, Wang C, Liao W. D-cysteine desulfhydrase silence influences the level of sugar, organic acid, carotenoids, and polyphenols in tomato fruit. Sci Hortic. 2023;321:112356.10.1016/j.scienta.2023.112356Search in Google Scholar

[3] Guo M, Wang XS, Guo HD, Bai SY, Khan A, Wang XM, et al. Tomato salt tolerance mechanisms and their potential applications for fighting salinity: A review. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:949541.10.3389/fpls.2022.949541Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[4] Wu LH, Zhou C, Long GY, Yang XB, Wei ZY, Liao YJ, et al. Fitness of fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda to three solanaceous vegetables. J Integr Agr. 2021;20:755–63.10.1016/S2095-3119(20)63476-1Search in Google Scholar

[5] Gong T, Brecht JK, Hutton SF, Koch KE, Zhao X. Tomato fruit quality is more strongly affected by scion type and planting season than by rootstock type. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:948556.10.3389/fpls.2022.948556Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[6] Cabrera-Díaz E, Castillo A, Martínez-Chávez L, Beltrán-Huerta J, Gutiérrez-González P, Orozco-García AG, et al. Attachment and survival of Salmonella enterica and Listeria monocytogenes on tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum) as affected by relative humidity, temperature, and storage time. J Food Prot. 2022;85:1044–52.10.4315/JFP-21-370Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[7] Rocha MdC, Deliza R, Corrêa FM, Carmo MGFd, Abboud ACS. A study to guide breeding of new cultivars of organic cherry tomato following a consumer-driven approach. Food Res Int. 2013;51:265–73.10.1016/j.foodres.2012.12.019Search in Google Scholar

[8] Causse M, Buret M, Robini K, Verschave P. Inheritance of nutritional and sensory quality traits in fresh market tomato and relation to consumer preferences. J Food Sci. 2003;68:2342–50.10.1111/j.1365-2621.2003.tb05770.xSearch in Google Scholar

[9] Soleimanian Y, Ratti C, Karim A, Rodrigue D, Khalloufi S. Simultaneous valorization of discarded tomato and whey through osmotic dehydration: Development of high value-added products, rheological characterizations, and mass transfer modeling. J Food Engine. 2023;359:111713.10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2023.111713Search in Google Scholar

[10] Yang F, Wu P, Zhang L, Wang Z, Zhou W, Liu X. Subsurface irrigation with ceramic emitters improves greenhouse tomato yield and resource utilization efficiency by stabilizing soil hydrothermal status. Sci Hortic. 2024;323:112532.10.1016/j.scienta.2023.112532Search in Google Scholar

[11] Lu L, Han Y, Wang J, Xu J, Li Y, Sun M, et al. PBAT/PLA humic acid biodegradable film applied on solar greenhouse tomato plants increased lycopene and decreased total acid contents. Sci Total Env. 2023;871:162077.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162077Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[12] Zheng Y, Yang Z, Xu C, Wang L, Huang H, Yang S. The interactive effects of daytime high temperature and humidity on growth and endogenous hormone concentration of tomato seedlings. HortSci. 2020;55:1575–83.10.21273/HORTSCI15145-20Search in Google Scholar

[13] Sanoubar R, Barbanti L. Fungal diseases on tomato plant under greenhouse condition. Eur J Biol Res. 2017;7:299–308.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Lal R. Soil health and carbon management. Food Energy Secur. 2016;5:212–22.10.1002/fes3.96Search in Google Scholar

[15] D Amico A, De Boni A, Ottomano Palmisano G, Acciani C, Roma R. Environmental analysis of soilless tomato production in a high-tech greenhouse. Clean Env Syst. 2023;11:100137.10.1016/j.cesys.2023.100137Search in Google Scholar

[16] Yu Q, Wang M, Tian Y, Shi X, Li X, Xu L, et al. Effects of porous clay ceramic rates on aeration porosity characteristics in a structurally degraded soil under greenhouse vegetable production. Pedosphere. 2021;31:606–14.10.1016/S1002-0160(21)60006-1Search in Google Scholar

[17] Sun J, Pan L, Li Z, Zeng Q, Wang L, Zhu L. Comparison of greenhouse and open field cultivations across China: soil characteristics, contamination and microbial diversity. Env Pollut. 2018;243:1509–16.10.1016/j.envpol.2018.09.112Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[18] Hu W, Zhang Y, Huang B, Teng Y. Soil environmental quality in greenhouse vegetable production systems in eastern China: Current status and management strategies. Chemosphere. 2017;170:183–95.10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.12.047Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[19] Naz M, Dai Z, Hussain S, Tariq M, Danish S, Khan IU, et al. The soil pH and heavy metals revealed their impact on soil microbial community. J Env Manage. 2022;321:115770.10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115770Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[20] Wang Y, Gu J, Ni J. Influence of biochar on soil air permeability and greenhouse gas emissions in vegetated soil: A review. Biogeotechnics. 2023;1:100040.10.1016/j.bgtech.2023.100040Search in Google Scholar

[21] Zhou Y, Zhao H, Lu Z, Ren X, Zhang Z, Wang Q. Synergistic effects of biochar derived from different sources on greenhouse gas emissions and microplastics mitigation during sewage sludge composting. Bioresour Technol. 2023;387:129556.10.1016/j.biortech.2023.129556Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[22] Sharma AK, Ghodke PK, Goyal N, Bobde P, Kwon EE, Lin KYA, et al. A critical review on biochar production from pine wastes, upgradation techniques, environmental sustainability, and challenges. Bioresour Technol. 2023;387:129632.10.1016/j.biortech.2023.129632Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[23] Zhang J, Guo T, Tao Z, Wang P, Tian H. Transcriptome profiling of genes involved in nutrient uptake regulated by phosphate-solubilizing bacteria in pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Plant Physiol Biochem. 2020;156:611–26.10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.10.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[24] Ma L, Zhao L, Wang J, Pan C, Liu C, Wang Y, et al. Determination of 12 carbamate insecticides in typical vegetables and fruits by rapid multi-plug filtration cleanup and ultra-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry detection. J Chromatogr Sci. 2020;58:109–16.10.1093/chromsci/bmz081Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[25] Singh J, Jayaprakasha GK, Patil BS. Improved sample preparation and optimized solvent extraction for quantitation of carotenoids. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 2021;76:60–7.10.1007/s11130-020-00862-8Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[26] Zhang J, Wang P, Tian H, Xiao Q, Jiang H. Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil microbial community structure and analysis of soil properties with vegetable planted at different years under greenhouse conditions. Soil Res. 2019;187:1–10.10.1016/j.still.2018.11.008Search in Google Scholar

[27] Zhang J, Tian H, Wang P, Xiao Q, Zhu S, Jiang H. Variations in pH significantly affect cadmium uptake in grafted muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.) plants and drive the diversity of bacterial communities in a seedling substrate. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2019;139:132–40.10.1016/j.plaphy.2019.03.013Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[28] Adhikari S, Timms W, Mahmud MAP. Optimising water holding capacity and hydrophobicity of biochar for soil amendment – A review. Sci Total Env. 2022;851:158043.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158043Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[29] Wu S, Zhang Y, Tan Q, Sun X, Wei W, Hu C. Biochar is superior to lime in improving acidic soil properties and fruit quality of Satsuma mandarin. Sci Total Env. 2020;714:136722.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136722Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[30] Zhang M, Zhang L, Riaz M, Xia H, Jiang C. Biochar amendment improved fruit quality and soil properties and microbial communities at different depths in citrus production. J Clean Product. 2021;292:126062.10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126062Search in Google Scholar

[31] Usman M, Ahmad N, Raza W, Zhao Z, Abubakar M, Rehman SU, et al. Impact of biochar on the yield and nutritional quality of tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum) under drought stress. J Sci Food Agr. 2023;103:3479–88.10.1002/jsfa.12517Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[32] Ren H, Guo H, Shafiqul Islam M, Zaki HEM, Wang Z, Wang H, et al. Improvement effect of biochar on soil microbial community structure and metabolites of decline disease bayberry. Front Microbiol. 2023;14:1154886.10.3389/fmicb.2023.1154886Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[33] She D, Sun X, Gamareldawla AHD, Nazar EA, Hu W, Edith K, et al. Benefits of soil biochar amendments to tomato growth under saline water irrigation. Sci Rep. 2018;8:14743.10.1038/s41598-018-33040-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[34] Liu X, Liu C, Gao W, Xue C, Guo Z, Jiang L, et al. Impact of biochar amendment on the abundance and structure of diazotrophic community in an alkaline soil. Sci Total Env. 2019;688:944–51.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.293Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[35] Wei T, van Treuren R, Liu X, Zhang Z, Chen J, Liu Y, et al. Whole-genome resequencing of 445 Lactuca accessions reveals the domestication history of cultivated lettuce. Nat Gen. 2021;53:752–60.10.1038/s41588-021-00831-0Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[36] Ramzani PMA, Khalid M, Naveed M, Ahmad R, Shahid M. Iron biofortification of wheat grains through integrated use of organic and chemical fertilizers in pH affected calcareous soil. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2016;104:284–93.10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.04.053Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[37] Batool S, Shah AA, Abu Bakar AF, Maah MJ, Abu Bakar NK. Removal of organochlorine pesticides using zerovalent iron supported on biochar nanocomposite from Nephelium lappaceum (Rambutan) fruit peel waste. Chemosphere. 2022;289:133011.10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.133011Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[38] Jin W, Wang Z, Sun Y, Wang Y, Bi C, Zhou L, et al. Impacts of biochar and silicate fertilizer on arsenic accumulation in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Ecotoxicol Env Safe. 2020;189:109928.10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.109928Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[39] Akhtar SS, Li G, Andersen MN, Liu F. Biochar enhances yield and quality of tomato under reduced irrigation. Agr Water Manage. 2014;138:37–44.10.1016/j.agwat.2014.02.016Search in Google Scholar

[40] Hao J, Feng Y, Wang X, Yu Q, Zhang F, Yang G, et al. Soil microbial nitrogen-cycling gene abundances in response to crop diversification: A meta-analysis. Sci Total Env. 2022;838:156621.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156621Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[41] Shen M, Song B, Zhou C, Almatrafi E, Hu T, Zeng G, et al. Recent advances in impacts of microplastics on nitrogen cycling in the environment: A review. Sci Total Env. 2022;815:152740.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152740Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[42] Zhao Y, Zhang M, Yang W, Di HJ, Ma L, Liu W, et al. Effects of microbial inoculants on phosphorus and potassium availability, bacterial community composition, and chili pepper growth in a calcareous soil: a greenhouse study. J Soils Sediment. 2019;19:3597–607.10.1007/s11368-019-02319-1Search in Google Scholar

[43] Sun F, Chen J, Chen F, Wang X, Liu K, Yang Y, et al. Influence of biochar remediation on Eisenia fetida in Pb-contaminated soils. Chemosphere. 2022;295:133954.10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.133954Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2024-03-10
Revised: 2025-02-12
Accepted: 2025-03-21
Published Online: 2025-04-17

© 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Research Articles
  2. Phytochemical investigation and evaluation of antioxidant and antidiabetic activities in aqueous extracts of Cedrus atlantica
  3. Influence of B4C addition on the tribological properties of bronze matrix brake pad materials
  4. Discovery of the bacterial HslV protease activators as lead molecules with novel mode of action
  5. Characterization of volatile flavor compounds of cigar with different aging conditions by headspace–gas chromatography–ion mobility spectrometry
  6. Effective remediation of organic pollutant using Musa acuminata peel extract-assisted iron oxide nanoparticles
  7. Analysis and health risk assessment of toxic elements in traditional herbal tea infusions
  8. Cadmium exposure in marine crabs from Jiaxing City, China: Insights into health risk assessment
  9. Green-synthesized silver nanoparticles of Cinnamomum zeylanicum and their biological activities
  10. Tetraclinis articulata (Vahl) Mast., Mentha pulegium L., and Thymus zygis L. essential oils: Chemical composition, antioxidant and antifungal properties against postharvest fungal diseases of apple, and in vitro, in vivo, and in silico investigation
  11. Exploration of plant alkaloids as potential inhibitors of HIV–CD4 binding: Insight into comprehensive in silico approaches
  12. Recovery of phenylethyl alcohol from aqueous solution by batch adsorption
  13. Electrochemical approach for monitoring the catalytic action of immobilized catalase
  14. Green synthesis of ZIF-8 for selective adsorption of dyes in water purification
  15. Optimization of the conditions for the preparation of povidone iodine using the response surface methodology
  16. A case study on the influence of soil amendment on ginger oil’s physicochemical properties, mineral contents, microbial load, and HPLC determination of its vitamin level
  17. Removal of antiviral favipiravir from wastewater using biochar produced from hazelnut shells
  18. Effect of biochar and soil amendment on bacterial community composition in the root soil and fruit of tomato under greenhouse conditions
  19. Bioremediation of malachite green dye using Sargassum wightii seaweed and its biological and physicochemical characterization
  20. Evaluation of natural compounds as folate biosynthesis inhibitors in Mycobacterium leprae using docking, ADMET analysis, and molecular dynamics simulation
  21. Novel insecticidal properties of bioactive zoochemicals extracted from sea urchin Salmacis virgulata
  22. Elevational gradients shape total phenolic content and bioactive potential of sweet marjoram (Origanum majorana L.): A comparative study across altitudinal zones
  23. Study on the CO2 absorption performance of deep eutectic solvents formed by superbase DBN and weak acid diethylene glycol
  24. Preparation and wastewater treatment performance of zeolite-modified ecological concrete
  25. Multifunctional chitosan nanoparticles: Zn2+ adsorption, antimicrobial activity, and promotion of aquatic health
  26. Comparative analysis of nutritional composition and bioactive properties of Chlorella vulgaris and Arthrospira platensis: Implications for functional foods and dietary supplements
  27. Growth kinetics and mechanical characterization of boride layers formed on Ti6Al4V
  28. Enhancement of water absorption properties of potassium polyacrylate-based hydrogels in CaCl2-rich soils using potassium di- and tri-carboxylate salts
  29. Electrochemical and microbiological effects of dumpsite leachates on soil and air quality
  30. Modeling benzene physicochemical properties using Zagreb upsilon indices
  31. Characterization and ecological risk assessment of toxic metals in mangrove sediments near Langen Village in Tieshan Bay of Beibu Gulf, China
  32. Protective effect of Helicteres isora, an efficient candidate on hepatorenal toxicity and management of diabetes in animal models
  33. Valorization of Juglans regia L. (Walnut) green husk from Jordan: Analysis of fatty acids, phenolics, antioxidant, and cytotoxic activities
  34. Molecular docking and dynamics simulations of bioactive terpenes from Catharanthus roseus essential oil targeting breast cancer
  35. Selection of a dam site by using AHP and VIKOR: The Sakarya Basin
  36. Characterization and modeling of kidney bean shell biochar as adsorbent for caffeine removal from aquatic environments
  37. The effects of short-term and long-term 2100 MHz radiofrequency radiation on adult rat auditory brainstem response
  38. Biochemical insights into the anthelmintic and anti-inflammatory potential of sea cucumber extract: In vitro and in silico approaches
  39. Resveratrol-derived MDM2 inhibitors: Synthesis, characterization, and biological evaluation against MDM2 and HCT-116 cells
  40. Phytochemical constituents, in vitro antibacterial activity, and computational studies of Sudanese Musa acuminate Colla fruit peel hydro-ethanol extract
  41. Chemical composition of essential oils reviewed from the height of Cajuput (Melaleuca leucadendron) plantations in Buru Island and Seram Island, Maluku, Indonesia
  42. Phytochemical analysis and antioxidant activity of Azadirachta indica A. Juss from the Republic of Chad: in vitro and in silico studies
  43. Stability studies of titanium–carboxylate complexes: A multi-method computational approach
  44. Efficient adsorption performance of an alginate-based dental material for uranium(vi) removal
  45. Synthesis and characterization of the Co(ii), Ni(ii), and Cu(ii) complexes with a 1,2,4-triazine derivative ligand
  46. Evaluation of the impact of music on antioxidant mechanisms and survival in salt-stressed goldfish
  47. Optimization and validation of UPLC method for dapagliflozin and candesartan cilexetil in an on-demand formulation: Analytical quality by design approach
  48. Biomass-based cellulose hydroxyapatite nanocomposites for the efficient sequestration of dyes: Kinetics, response surface methodology optimization, and reusability
  49. Multifunctional nitrogen and boron co-doped carbon dots: A fluorescent probe for Hg2+ and biothiol detection with bioimaging and antifungal applications
  50. Separation of sulphonamides on a C12-diol mixed-mode HPLC column and investigation of their retention mechanism
  51. Characterization and antioxidant activity of pectin from lemon peels
  52. Fast PFAS determination in honey by direct probe electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry: A health risk assessment insight
  53. Correlation study between GC–MS analysis of cigarette aroma compounds and sensory evaluation
  54. Synthesis, biological evaluation, and molecular docking studies of substituted chromone-2-carboxamide derivatives as anti-breast cancer agents
  55. The influence of feed space velocity and pressure on the cold flow properties of diesel fuel
  56. Acid etching behavior and mechanism in acid solution of iron components in basalt fibers
  57. Protective effect of green synthesized nanoceria on retinal oxidative stress and inflammation in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rat
  58. Evaluation of the antianxiety activity of green zinc nanoparticles mediated by Boswellia thurifera in albino mice by following the plus maze and light and dark exploration tests
  59. Yeast as an efficient and eco-friendly bifunctional porogen for biomass-derived nitrogen-doped carbon catalysts in the oxygen reduction reaction
  60. Novel descriptors for the prediction of molecular properties
  61. Special Issue on Advancing Sustainable Chemistry for a Greener Future
  62. One-pot fabrication of highly porous morphology of ferric oxide-ferric oxychloride/poly-O-chloroaniline nanocomposite seeded on poly-1H pyrrole: Photocathode for green hydrogen generation from natural and artificial seawater
  63. High-efficiency photocathode for green hydrogen generation from sanitation water using bismuthyl chloride/poly-o-chlorobenzeneamine nanocomposite
  64. Special Issue on Phytochemicals, Biological and Toxicological Analysis of Plants
  65. Comparative analysis of fruit quality parameters and volatile compounds in commercially grown citrus cultivars
  66. Total phenolic, flavonoid, flavonol, and tannin contents as well as antioxidant and antiparasitic activities of aqueous methanol extract of Alhagi graecorum plant used in traditional medicine: Collected in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  67. Study on the pharmacological effects and active compounds of Apocynum venetum L.
  68. Chemical profile of Senna italica and Senna velutina seed and their pharmacological properties
  69. Essential oils from Brazilian plants: A literature analysis of anti-inflammatory and antimalarial properties and in silico validation
  70. Toxicological effects of green tea catechin extract on rat liver: Delineating safe and harmful doses
https://doi.org/10.1515/chem-2025-0147
Keywords for this article
bacterial species; carotenoid content; facility agriculture; fruit type; Solanaceae crop
Creative Commons
BY 4.0

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Research Articles
  2. Phytochemical investigation and evaluation of antioxidant and antidiabetic activities in aqueous extracts of Cedrus atlantica
  3. Influence of B4C addition on the tribological properties of bronze matrix brake pad materials
  4. Discovery of the bacterial HslV protease activators as lead molecules with novel mode of action
  5. Characterization of volatile flavor compounds of cigar with different aging conditions by headspace–gas chromatography–ion mobility spectrometry
  6. Effective remediation of organic pollutant using Musa acuminata peel extract-assisted iron oxide nanoparticles
  7. Analysis and health risk assessment of toxic elements in traditional herbal tea infusions
  8. Cadmium exposure in marine crabs from Jiaxing City, China: Insights into health risk assessment
  9. Green-synthesized silver nanoparticles of Cinnamomum zeylanicum and their biological activities
  10. Tetraclinis articulata (Vahl) Mast., Mentha pulegium L., and Thymus zygis L. essential oils: Chemical composition, antioxidant and antifungal properties against postharvest fungal diseases of apple, and in vitro, in vivo, and in silico investigation
  11. Exploration of plant alkaloids as potential inhibitors of HIV–CD4 binding: Insight into comprehensive in silico approaches
  12. Recovery of phenylethyl alcohol from aqueous solution by batch adsorption
  13. Electrochemical approach for monitoring the catalytic action of immobilized catalase
  14. Green synthesis of ZIF-8 for selective adsorption of dyes in water purification
  15. Optimization of the conditions for the preparation of povidone iodine using the response surface methodology
  16. A case study on the influence of soil amendment on ginger oil’s physicochemical properties, mineral contents, microbial load, and HPLC determination of its vitamin level
  17. Removal of antiviral favipiravir from wastewater using biochar produced from hazelnut shells
  18. Effect of biochar and soil amendment on bacterial community composition in the root soil and fruit of tomato under greenhouse conditions
  19. Bioremediation of malachite green dye using Sargassum wightii seaweed and its biological and physicochemical characterization
  20. Evaluation of natural compounds as folate biosynthesis inhibitors in Mycobacterium leprae using docking, ADMET analysis, and molecular dynamics simulation
  21. Novel insecticidal properties of bioactive zoochemicals extracted from sea urchin Salmacis virgulata
  22. Elevational gradients shape total phenolic content and bioactive potential of sweet marjoram (Origanum majorana L.): A comparative study across altitudinal zones
  23. Study on the CO2 absorption performance of deep eutectic solvents formed by superbase DBN and weak acid diethylene glycol
  24. Preparation and wastewater treatment performance of zeolite-modified ecological concrete
  25. Multifunctional chitosan nanoparticles: Zn2+ adsorption, antimicrobial activity, and promotion of aquatic health
  26. Comparative analysis of nutritional composition and bioactive properties of Chlorella vulgaris and Arthrospira platensis: Implications for functional foods and dietary supplements
  27. Growth kinetics and mechanical characterization of boride layers formed on Ti6Al4V
  28. Enhancement of water absorption properties of potassium polyacrylate-based hydrogels in CaCl2-rich soils using potassium di- and tri-carboxylate salts
  29. Electrochemical and microbiological effects of dumpsite leachates on soil and air quality
  30. Modeling benzene physicochemical properties using Zagreb upsilon indices
  31. Characterization and ecological risk assessment of toxic metals in mangrove sediments near Langen Village in Tieshan Bay of Beibu Gulf, China
  32. Protective effect of Helicteres isora, an efficient candidate on hepatorenal toxicity and management of diabetes in animal models
  33. Valorization of Juglans regia L. (Walnut) green husk from Jordan: Analysis of fatty acids, phenolics, antioxidant, and cytotoxic activities
  34. Molecular docking and dynamics simulations of bioactive terpenes from Catharanthus roseus essential oil targeting breast cancer
  35. Selection of a dam site by using AHP and VIKOR: The Sakarya Basin
  36. Characterization and modeling of kidney bean shell biochar as adsorbent for caffeine removal from aquatic environments
  37. The effects of short-term and long-term 2100 MHz radiofrequency radiation on adult rat auditory brainstem response
  38. Biochemical insights into the anthelmintic and anti-inflammatory potential of sea cucumber extract: In vitro and in silico approaches
  39. Resveratrol-derived MDM2 inhibitors: Synthesis, characterization, and biological evaluation against MDM2 and HCT-116 cells
  40. Phytochemical constituents, in vitro antibacterial activity, and computational studies of Sudanese Musa acuminate Colla fruit peel hydro-ethanol extract
  41. Chemical composition of essential oils reviewed from the height of Cajuput (Melaleuca leucadendron) plantations in Buru Island and Seram Island, Maluku, Indonesia
  42. Phytochemical analysis and antioxidant activity of Azadirachta indica A. Juss from the Republic of Chad: in vitro and in silico studies
  43. Stability studies of titanium–carboxylate complexes: A multi-method computational approach
  44. Efficient adsorption performance of an alginate-based dental material for uranium(vi) removal
  45. Synthesis and characterization of the Co(ii), Ni(ii), and Cu(ii) complexes with a 1,2,4-triazine derivative ligand
  46. Evaluation of the impact of music on antioxidant mechanisms and survival in salt-stressed goldfish
  47. Optimization and validation of UPLC method for dapagliflozin and candesartan cilexetil in an on-demand formulation: Analytical quality by design approach
  48. Biomass-based cellulose hydroxyapatite nanocomposites for the efficient sequestration of dyes: Kinetics, response surface methodology optimization, and reusability
  49. Multifunctional nitrogen and boron co-doped carbon dots: A fluorescent probe for Hg2+ and biothiol detection with bioimaging and antifungal applications
  50. Separation of sulphonamides on a C12-diol mixed-mode HPLC column and investigation of their retention mechanism
  51. Characterization and antioxidant activity of pectin from lemon peels
  52. Fast PFAS determination in honey by direct probe electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry: A health risk assessment insight
  53. Correlation study between GC–MS analysis of cigarette aroma compounds and sensory evaluation
  54. Synthesis, biological evaluation, and molecular docking studies of substituted chromone-2-carboxamide derivatives as anti-breast cancer agents
  55. The influence of feed space velocity and pressure on the cold flow properties of diesel fuel
  56. Acid etching behavior and mechanism in acid solution of iron components in basalt fibers
  57. Protective effect of green synthesized nanoceria on retinal oxidative stress and inflammation in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rat
  58. Evaluation of the antianxiety activity of green zinc nanoparticles mediated by Boswellia thurifera in albino mice by following the plus maze and light and dark exploration tests
  59. Yeast as an efficient and eco-friendly bifunctional porogen for biomass-derived nitrogen-doped carbon catalysts in the oxygen reduction reaction
  60. Novel descriptors for the prediction of molecular properties
  61. Special Issue on Advancing Sustainable Chemistry for a Greener Future
  62. One-pot fabrication of highly porous morphology of ferric oxide-ferric oxychloride/poly-O-chloroaniline nanocomposite seeded on poly-1H pyrrole: Photocathode for green hydrogen generation from natural and artificial seawater
  63. High-efficiency photocathode for green hydrogen generation from sanitation water using bismuthyl chloride/poly-o-chlorobenzeneamine nanocomposite
  64. Special Issue on Phytochemicals, Biological and Toxicological Analysis of Plants
  65. Comparative analysis of fruit quality parameters and volatile compounds in commercially grown citrus cultivars
  66. Total phenolic, flavonoid, flavonol, and tannin contents as well as antioxidant and antiparasitic activities of aqueous methanol extract of Alhagi graecorum plant used in traditional medicine: Collected in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  67. Study on the pharmacological effects and active compounds of Apocynum venetum L.
  68. Chemical profile of Senna italica and Senna velutina seed and their pharmacological properties
  69. Essential oils from Brazilian plants: A literature analysis of anti-inflammatory and antimalarial properties and in silico validation
  70. Toxicological effects of green tea catechin extract on rat liver: Delineating safe and harmful doses
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 26.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/chem-2025-0147/html
Scroll to top button