Bangladesh Agron. J. 2021, 24(2): 63-72 

  

ENHANCEMENT THE PRODUCTIVITY OF PROCESSING 

CATEGORY POTATO BY BIOCHAR 

T. S. Roy1, B. R. Das1, N. Sultana1, R. Chakraborty1 and M. S. Rahman2 

1Department of Agronomy, 2Department of Bio Chemistry, 4 Department of Agricultural  Chemistry, 

Faculty of Agriculture, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Bangladesh 

Corresponding Author: tuhinsuvraroy@sau.edu.bd 

(Received: 19 August 2021, Accepted: 30 October 2021) 

Keywords: Tuber yield, French fry, biomass inoculation, potato 

 

Abstract 

The application of biochar may enhance the yield of potato for different processing 

categories. A field experiment was conducted at Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, 

Dhaka-1207, during the period from November, 2020 to April, 2021 to find out the 

response of biochar on yield of potato for different processing categories. The experiment 

comprised of Potato varieties (3): V1: BARI Alu-29 (Courage), V2: BARI Alu-28 (Lady 

Rosetta) and V3: BARI Alu-25 (Asterix) and Biochar level (5): B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.50 t ha-1, 

B2: 5.00 t ha-1 and B3: 7.50 t ha-1 and B4: 10 t ha-1. The study was laid out in a randomized 

complete block design with 3 replications. The results showed that biochar amendment 

could enhance the yield of processing category potato. The total yield and marketable 

yield of potato gradually increased with increasing biochar level. The results also revealed 

that the processing category potato viz., canned, chips and French fry potato yield 

progressively increased with advancing biochar level irrespective of varieties except 

dehydrated category. In case of marketable yield, BARI Alu-25 and BARI Alu-29 with 

biochar level 5 to 10 t ha-1performed superior than other combinations and produced 

19.50 to 21.30 t ha-1which are 18.54 to 36.45% higher than without biochar. The 

combination of V2B4 produced maximum canned (8.10 t ha-1) and dehydrated potato 

(10.09t ha-1) but V3B4 made significantly highest chips (9.03 t ha-1) and French fry (5.70 t 

ha-1) potato, whereas, BARI Alu-29 and BARI Alu-28 did not produce any 

French fry category potato. However, the level of biochar of 5 to 10 t ha-1 could 

enhance processing category potato production. It may be concluded that potato growers 

may apply biochar along with recommended rate of other fertilizers for producing 

maximum processing category potato.  
 

Introduction  

Among the world top ten potato producing countries, Bangladesh ranked the 8 th position (FAOSTAT, 

2019). Beside of area and production of potato in Bangladesh, the yield has also been increasing but, 

the quality of potato are very low in compared to those of the other leading potato growing countries 

like Belgium, France, USA, Denmark, the Netherlands, UK (FAOSTAT, 2019). 

The addition of soil amendment is necessary to restore the fertility of the soil. Biochar is one of the soil 

amendments that can improve soil fertility (Ding et al., 2016; Hunt et al., 2010). Biochar is produced 

by pyrolysis of biomass under low or anaerobic conditions (Nair et al., 2014). It is a mixture of char 

and ash, but it is mainly (70- 95%) carbon rich material. Biochar have good effects on some soil 

physical properties such as reducing soil bulk density (Mukherjee and Lal, 2013 and Mankasingh et al., 

2011), increases the water retention capacity (Karhu et al., 2011 and Vaccari et al., 2011) and increases 

soil pH, EC, CEC of acidity soil (Abewa et al., 2014) and reduces the necessity of inorganic fertilizers. 

Biochar also can be a direct source of nutrients for plants which contains N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S and 

micronutrient. Mollick et al. (2020) reported that, the yield and processing quality of potato have been 



64   Roy et al. 

 

significantly influenced by the application of 7 t ha-1 of biochar in potato field. So, considering 

beneficial effect of biochar, the present investigation was undertaken to observe the performance of 

potato varieties for processing purposes under biochar treatments. 

 

Materials and Methods 

The experiment was conducted at the Agronomy Research Field, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural 

University, Dhaka-1207 situated at 23°771116 min. North latitude and 90°375884 min. East 

longitude at an altitude of 8.6 meter above the sea level (Anon., 2004) during the period from 

November, 2020 to April, 2021.Top soil was silty clay in texture, soil pH was 5.6 and has organic 

carbon of 0.45%. The experiment was consisted of two factors, i.e., factor A:Potato varieties (3): V1: 

BARI Alu-29 (Courage), V2: BARI Alu-28 (Lady Rosetta) and V3: BARI Alu-25 (Asterix); factor B: 

Biochar level (5): B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.50 t ha-1, B2: 5.00 t ha-1 and B3: 7.50 t ha-1 and B4: 10 t ha-1. 

Experiment was laid out in a Factorial Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with 3 

replications. Certified grade sprouted potato tubers were used as planting material. The experimental 

plot was fertilized by recommended doses of Urea 325kg ha-1, Triple Super Phosphate (TSP) 200kg ha-

1, gypsum 100 kg ha-1, zinc sulphate 8 kg ha-1Mondal et al. (2011).The total amount of biochar was 

applied at 7 days before planting as per treatment. Seed tubers (50-60 g) were planted at 4-5cm depth 

in soil on November 11, 2020. All other intercultural operations and plant protection measures were 

taken as per when needed. Harvesting of potato was done on February 19, 2021 at 7 days after haulm 

cutting. The potatoes of each plot were separately harvested, bagged and tagged and brought to the 

laboratory. All yield and quality contributing parameters were recorded as per treatments. On the basis 

of weight, the tubers have been graded into marketable tuber (>20g) and non-marketable tuber (<20g). 

Marketable tubers were again separated into canned potato (20-35 mm) dehydrated potato (35-45 mm), 

chips potato (45-75 mm) and French fries potato (>75 mm) as per processing category (Marwaha et al., 

2010).The data obtained for different characters were statistically analyzed following the analysis of 

variance techniques by using MSTAT-C computer package program. The significant differences 

among the treatment means were compared by Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 5% level of 

probability (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). 

 

Results and Discussion 

Potato yield: Potato yield was significantly (p≤0.05) influenced by varietal variation and/or biochar 

level (Figures 1, 2 & Table 1). Results of Figure 1 showed that, the V3 produced maximum yield 

followed by V1 and V2 produced the minimum one. BARI ALu-25 produced 20.79 % higher yield 

more potato than BARI ALu-28. This might be due to genetic potentiality of potato cultivars. The 

results of our findings were also in line with the findings of Youseef et al. (2017) and Vakis (1990) 

who found that potato yield varied with varietal variation. The yield of potato progressively increased 

with increasing biochar levels (Figure 2). The 32.06 % higher yield was obtained from B4 than B0. The 

higher yield might be attributed to vigorous plant growth, more tubers hill-1 and large sized tuber. 

Biochar as a soil conditioner it may have increased soil fertility, reduced nutrient leaching, increased 

microbial activity in soil, improved water holding capacity, and cation exchange capacity in both sandy 

and clay soils which facilitated better photosynthetic activities, partitioning of photosynthates to the 

sink (storage organ potato tuber) consequently increased yield and quality of crops. This may also be 

because biochar serves as a carrier substrate for nitrogen (N) and other mineral nutrients which increase 

the effectiveness of biochar by retaining and preventing the leaching of N beyond the reach of plants 

The results of our findings were accordance with those of Youseef et al. (2017), Ding et al. (2016), 

Yang et al. (2015), who reported that biochar application enhanced the yield of potato. Potato yield was 

also significantly influenced by the interaction effect of variety and biochar level (Table 1). The highest 

potato yield (27.33 t ha-1) was obtained from the V3B4 which was statistically similar to V3B3, V3B2 and 



Enhancement the Productivity of Processing Category Potato  65 

 

V1B4 and the lowest (17.78 t ha-1) was obtained from the V2B0. Treatment combination V3B4 produced 

53.71% higher yield than V2B0. 

 

  
V1: BARI Alu-29, V2: BARI Alu-28 and  

V3: BARI Alu-25 

Fig. 1. Effect of variety on the potato yield 

          (LSD 0.05=1.46) 

B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.5 t ha-1, B2: 5.0 t ha-1, 

B3: 7.5 t ha-11 and B4: 8.0 t ha-1 

Fig. 2. Effect of biochar on the potato yield  

          (LSD 0.05=1.89) 

 

Marketable potato yield: Marketable potato yield (>20 g) was significantly (p≤0.05) differed by 

different potato varieties (Figure 3). Results revealed that, the treatment V3 produced the maximum 

marketable potato followed by V1 and V2whereas   minimum. V3 produced 11.79 % higher marketable 

potato than V2. Biochar level had significant influenced on the marketable potato yield (Figure 3).  

  
V1: BARI Alu-29, V2: BARI Alu-28 and 

V3: BARI Alu-25 

Fig. 3. Effect of variety on the marketable potato   

yield (LSD 0.05=0.98) 

B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.5 t ha-1, B2: 5.0 t ha-1, 

B3: 7.5 t ha-11 and B4: 10.0 t ha-1 

Fig. 4. Effect of biochar on the marketable potato 

yield (LSD 0.05=1.27) 

Results revealed that, marketable potato yield gradually increased with increasing biochar levels and B4 

produced maximum marketable potato which was statistically at par with B3 and B2 and 21.58 % 

higher marketable potato yield was obtained from the plot treated with 10 t ha-1 biochar (B4) than 

without biochar (B0).Gautam et al. (2017), reported that higher levels of the biochar amended soils 

could be due to improved availability of phosphorous as a result of biochar addition which also could 

be the reason for better production of marketable potato. Collins et al. (2013) also reported that 

increased biochar application had increased quality potato tuber. Youseef et al. (2017) reported that 

marketable yield was significantly increased with increasing biochar application rates up to 5 m3fed-1. 

Marketable potato yield was significantly differed by the interaction effect of variety and biochar level 

(Table 1). The maximum  marketable potato yield (21.30 t ha-1) was obtained from the V3B4 which was 

0

6

12

18

24

30

V1 V2 V3

P
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-1

)

Variety

0

6

12

18

24

30

B0 B1 B2 B3 B4

P
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-1

)

Different levels of biochar

16

17

18

19

20

V1 V2 V3

M
a
rk

e
ta

b
le

 p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld

(t
 h

a
-1

)

Varieties

0

5

10

15

20

25

B0 B1 B2 B3 B4

M
a
rk

e
ta

b
le

 p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld

(t
 h

a
-1

)

Different levels of biochar



66   Roy et al. 

 

statistically at par with V3B3, V3B2, V1B2, V1B3 and V1B4 and the lowest marketable potato yield (15.61 

t ha-1)  from the V2B0  treatment combination which was statistically at par with V1B0, V1B1, V2B1, 

V2B2 and V3B0. Treatment combination V3B4 produced 36.45 % more marketable potato than treatment 

combination V2B0. These results agree with those reported by Nair et al. (2014) who found that 

marketable potato yield increased with increasing biochar. 

 

Table 1. Interaction effect of variety and biochar on the yield characters of potato 

Treatment combinations Potato yield (t ha-1) Marketable potato yield (t ha-1) 

V1B0 19.15  g-i 16.45  de 

V1B1 20.04  f-i 17.50  c-e 

V1B2 22.83  c-f 19.52  a-c 

V1B3 23.59  b-e 19.97  ab 

V1B4 25.70  a-c 20.24  ab 

V2B0 17.78  i 15.61  e 

V2B1 18.41  hi 16.52  de 

V2B2 20.41  e-i 17.75  c-e 

V2B3 21.75  d-g 18.52  b-d 

V2B4 23.84  b-d 18.97  bc 

V3B0 21.28  d-h 17.69  c-e 

V3B1 23.49  b-e 18.55  b-d 

V3B2 25.05  a-c 19.50  a-c 

V3B3 26.29  ab 20.58  ab 

V3B4 27.33  a 21.30  a 

LSD (0.05) 3.27 2.19 

CV (%) 8.71 7.05 

V1: BARI Alu-29 (Courage), V2: BARI Alu-28 (Lady Rosetta) and V3: BARI Alu-25 (Asterix); B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.50 t ha-

1, B2: 5.00 t ha-1, B3: 7.50 t ha-1 and B4: 10 t ha-1. 

In a column the mean having the same letter(s) don’t differ significantly at 5% level of [probability 

 

Canned potato yield: Potato variety showed significant difference on canned potato yield (Figure 5). 

The highest canned potato (6.74 t ha-1) was produced by the V2and the lowest canned potato (3.09 t by 

the V3. Biochar levels exerted significant difference on canned potato yield (Figure 6). The highest 

canned potato (6.04 t ha-1) was produced by the B4 and the lowest canned potato (3.96 t ha-1) by the 

treatment B0. Interaction effect of variety and different biochar levels exerted significant difference on 

canned potato yield (Table 2). The highest canned potato (8.10 t ha-1) was produced by the treatment 

combination V2B4 and the lowest canned potato (2.46 t ha-1) was produced by the treatment 

combination V3B0 which was statistically similar with V3B1. 

  
V1: BARI Alu-29, V2: BARI Alu-28  and V3: BARI Alu-25 

 

Fig. 5. Effect of variety on the canned potato yield 

B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.5 t ha-1, B2: 5.0 t ha-1, B3: 7.5 t ha-11 and B4: 

10.0 t ha-1 

Fig. 6. Effect of biochar on the canned potato 

0

2

4

6

8

V1 V2 V3

C
a
n

n
e
d

 p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-1

)

Varieties

0

2

4

6

8

B0 B1 B2 B3 B4

C
a
n

n
e
d

 p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-1

)

Different levels of biochar



Enhancement the Productivity of Processing Category Potato  67 

 

(LSD 0.05=0.34) yield (LSD 0.05=0.44) 

 

Dehydrated potato yield: Dehydrated potato yield was significantly (p≤0.05) differed by the varietal 

difference (Figure 7). The highest dehydrated potato yield (6.39 t ha-1) was recorded from the V2 

followed by V1 (6.35 t ha-1) whereas the lowest one (4.67 t ha-1) was recorded from V3. Dehydrated 

potato yield was significantly differed by the different biochar levels (Figure 8). The highest 

dehydrated potato yield (6.94 t ha-1) was recorded from the B4 whereas the lowest one (4.74 t ha-1) was 

recorded from B2.  

  
V1: BARI Alu-29, V2: BARI Alu-28 and 

V3: BARI Alu-25 

Fig. 7. Effect of variety on the dehydrated potato 

yield (LSD 0.05=0.49) 

B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.5 t ha-1, B2: 5.0 t ha-1, B3: 7.5 t ha-11 and 

B4: 10.0 t ha-1 

Fig. 8. Effect of biochar on the dehydrated potato 

yield (LSD 0.05=0.63) 

 

Dehydrated potato yield was significantly differed by the interaction effect of variety and biochar levels 

(Table 2). The highest dehydrated potato yield (10.09 t ha-1) was recorded from the treatment 

combination V2B4 whereas the lowest one (4.04 t ha-1) was recorded from V3B2 which was statistically 

similar with V3B4, V3B3, V3B1 and V2B2. 

Chips potato yield: Potato variety exerted significant influence on chips potato yield (Figure 9). The 

highest chips potato (7.19 t ha-1) was produced by the V3 and the lowest chips potato (3.61 t ha-1) was 

produced by the V2.Biochar levels employed significant influence on chips potato yield (Figure 10). 

The chips potato yield gradually increased with increasing biochar level.The highest chips potato (6.82 

t ha-1) was produced by the B4 and the lowest (3.94 t ha-1) by the treatment B0. Interaction effect of 

variety and different biochar levels exerted significant influence on chips potato yield (Table 2). The 

highest chips potato (9.03 t ha-1) was produced by the treatment combination V3B4and the lowest chips 

potato (2.08 t ha-1) was produced by the treatment combination V2B0.Increases chips potato yield has 

been attributed to better water holding capacity, higher cation exchange capacity, increased aeration, 

increased nutrient retention and the ability of biochar to reduce bulk-density. Nair et al. (2014) stated 

similar comments regarding chips potato yield. 

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

V1 V2 V3

D
e
h

y
d

ra
te

d
 p

o
ta

to
 

y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-1

)

Varieties

0

2

4

6

8

B0 B1 B2 B3 B4D
e
h

y
d

ra
te

d
 p

o
ta

to
 y

ie
ld

 (
t 

h
a
-1

)

Different levels of biochar



68   Roy et al. 

 

  
V1: BARI Alu-29, V2: BARI Alu-28 and 

V3: BARI Alu-25 

Fig. 9. Effect of variety on the chips potato  yield 

(LSD 0.05=0.38) 

B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.5 t ha-1, B2: 5.0 t ha-1, B3: 7.5 t ha-11 and 

B4: 10.0 t ha-1 

Fig. 10. Effect of biochar on the chips potato yield 

(LSD 0.05=0.50) 

 

French-fry potato yield: French-fry potato yield was significantly influenced by the potato variety 

(Figure 23). The highest french-fry potato yield (4.32 t ha-1) was recorded from the V3 and both the 

variety V1 and V2 did not produce any french-fry potato. French-fry potato yield was significantly 

influenced by the different biochar levels (Figure 24). The results also revealed that french-fry potato 

yield increased with increasing biochar level. The highest french-fry potato yield (1.90 t ha-1) was 

recorded from the B4treatment whereas the lowest (0.99 t ha-1) from B0 treatment. The increase in yield 

of potato for French fry production with the application of biochar could be attributed to corresponding 

increase in leaf area, which was responsible for synthesizing photosynthesis and increase in tuber 

weight (Youseef et al., 2017). 

  
V1: BARI Alu-29, V2: BARI Alu-28 and 

V3: BARI Alu-25 

Fig. 11. Effect of variety on yield of potato for 

French fry production 

            (LSD 0.05=0.24) 

B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.5 t ha-1, B2: 5.0 t ha-1, B3: 7.5 t ha-11 and 

B4: 10.0 t ha-1 

Fig. 12. Effect of biocharon yield of potato for 

French fry production 

             (LSD 0.05=0.30) 

French-fry potato yield was significantly influence by the interaction effect of variety and different 

biochar levels (Table 2). The highest french-fry potato yield (5.70 t ha-1) was recorded from the 

treatment combination V3B4whereas V1 and V2 in combination with all the biochar levels did not 

produce any french-fry potato. 

 

Table 2. Interaction effect of variety and biochar on yield of potato for different processing purpose 

Treatment 

combinations 

Yield for canned  

potato production 

(t ha-1) 

Yield for Dehydrated 

potato   production 

yield (t ha-1) 

Yield of potato for 

chips  production 

(t ha-1) 

Yield of potato 

for French fry 

production 

0

2

4

6

8

V1 V2 V3C
h

ip
s 

p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-1

)

Varieties

0

2

4

6

8

B0 B1 B2 B3 B4

C
h

ip
s 

p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-1

)

Different levels of biochar

0

1

2

3

4

5

V1 V2 V3

F
re

n
ch

 f
ry

 p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 

(t
 h

a
-1

)

Varieties

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

B0 B1 B2 B3 B4

F
re

n
ch

 f
ry

 p
o

ta
to

 y
ie

ld
 (

t 
h

a
-

1
)

Different levels of biochar



Enhancement the Productivity of Processing Category Potato  69 

 
(t ha-1) 

V1B0 3.87  fg 5.64  cd 4.43  f-h NF 

V1B1 4.43  ef 7.22  b 5.09  ef NF 

V1B2 4.70  e 5.62  cd 5.52  e NF 

V1B3 5.82  cd 6.75  b 5.73  de NF 

V1B4 6.48  c 6.49  bc 6.55  cd NF 

V2B0 5.55  d 5.47  cd 2.08  j NF 

V2B1 6.38  c 6.44  bc 3.15  i NF 

V2B2 6.40  c 4.56  d-f 3.71  hi NF 

V2B3 7.26  b 5.41  cd 4.23  gh NF 

V2B4 8.10  a 10.09  a 4.88  e-g NF 

V3B0 2.46  h 5.21  de 5.30  e 2.98  c 

V3B1 2.57  h 5.05  d-f 6.47  cd 4.06  b 

V3B2 3.42  g 4.04  f 7.19  bc 4.29  b 

V3B3 3.44  g 4.82  d-f 7.95  b 4.55  b 

V3B4 3.54  g 4.23  ef 9.03  a 5.70  a 

LSD (0.05) 0.76 1.09 0.86 0.53 

CV (%) 9.18 11.19 9.46 21.87 

In a column the mean having the same letter(s) don’t differ significantly at 5% level of probabilityV1: BARI Alu-29 

(Courage), V2: BARI Alu-28 (Lady Rosetta) and V3: BARI Alu-25 (Asterix); B0: 0 t ha-1, B1: 2.50 t ha-1, B2: 5.00 t ha-1, 

B3: 7.50 t ha-1 and B4: 10 t ha-1. NF means not found. 

 

Conclusion 

From the above findings, it may be concluded that biochar had significant positive role on potato 

production. The marketable yield, canned, chips and French fry category potato yield sharply 

increased with increasing biochar level. Among the treatment combinations, BARI Alu-25 and 

BARI Alu-29 with biochar level from 5 to 10 t ha-1 produced significantly higher yield (19.50 to 21.30 

t ha-1) than other combinations which are 18.54 to 36.45% higher than without biochar. The 

combination of V2B4 produced maximum canned (8.10 t ha-1) and dehydrated potato (10.09t ha-1) but 

V3B4 made significantly maximum chips (9.03 t ha-1) and French fry (5.70 t ha-1) category potato, 

whereas, no French fry category potato was found from BARI Alu-29 and BARI Alu-28 It may be 

concluded that potato growers could apply biochar along with recommended rate of other fertilizers for 

producing maximum processing category potato.  

Acknowledgements 

This study was supported by the Grant of Advanced Research in Education  (GARE), Bangladesh 

Bureau of Educational Information and Statistic (BANBEIS), Ministry of Education, Government of 

the People`s Republic of Bangladesh. 

References 

Abewa, A., B. Yitaferu, Y.G. Selassie and T. Amare. 2014. The role of biochar on acid soil reclamation and 

yield of Teff (Eragrostistef [Zucc] Trotter) in Northwestern Ethiopia. J. Agric. Sci.6(1): 1-12.  

Anonymous. 2004. Effect of seedling throwing on the grain yield of wart land rice compared to other 

planting methods.Crop Soil Water Management Program Agronomy Division, BRRI, Gazipur- 

1710. p.56.  

Chan, K., L. Van Zwieten, I. Meszaros, A. Downie and S. Joseph. 2008. Agronomic values of green waste 

biochar as a soil amendment. Soil Res. 45: 629-634. 

Collins, H.P., J. Streubel, A. Alva, L. Porter and B. Chaves. 2013. Phosphorus uptake by potato from biochar 

amended with anaerobic digested dairy manure effluent. Agron. J. 105(4):  989-998. 



70   Roy et al. 

 
Cornelissen, G., V. Martinsen, V. Shitumbanuma, V. Alling, G.D. Breedveld, D.W. Rutherford, M. 

Sparrevik, S.E. Hale, A. Obia, J. Mulder, P.O. Boxand W.R. Division. 2013. Biochar Effect on 

Maize Yield and Soil Characteristics in Five Conservation Farming Sites in Zambia. pp.256-274.  

Ding, Y., Y. Liu, S. Liu, Z. Li, X. Tan, X. Huang, G. Zeng, L. Zhou and B. Zheng. 2016. Biochar to improve 

soil fertility. A Review. Agron. Sust. Dev. 36(2): 1-18. 

Dou, L., M Komatsuzaki, and M. Nakagawa. 2012. Effects of biochar, mokusakueki and bokashi application 

on soil nutrients, yields and qualities of sweet potato. Int. Res. J. Agril. Sci. Soil Sci.2(8): 318-327. 

FAOSTAT.2019. Statistical Database. Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations, Rome, Italy. 

Food Agric. 80: 810-820. 

Gautam, D.K., R.M, Bajracharya and B.K. Sitaula. 2017. Biochar amendment of soil and its effect on crop 

production of small holder farms in Rasuwa district of Nepal. Int. J. Agric. Environ. Biores. 2(2): 

120-135. 

Gomez, K.A. andA.A. Gomez. 1984. Statistical procedure for agricultural research. Second Edn. Intl. Rice 

Res. Inst., John Wiley and Sons. New York. pp.1-340. 

Hunt, J., M. DuPonte, D. Sato and A. Kawabata. 2010. The basics of biochar: A natural soil amendment. 

Soil Crop Manag. 30(7): 1-6. 

Kang, S.W., J.W. Park, D.C. Seo, Y.S. Ok, K.D. Park, I.W. Choi and J.S. Cho. 2016. Effect of biochar 

application on rice yield and greenhouse gas emission under different nutrient conditions from 

paddy soil. J. Environ. Eng. 142: 1-7.  

Karhu, K., T. Mattila, I. Bergström and K. Regina. 2011. Biochar addition to agricultural soil increased CH4 

uptake and water holding capacity-Results from a short-term pilot field study. Agric. Ecosyst. 

Environ. 140(1-2): 309-313. 

Mankasingh, U., P. Choi and V. Ragnarsdottir. 2011. Biochar application in a tropical, agricultural region: A 

plot scale study in. Appl. Geochem. 26: 218-221.  

Marwaha, R.S., S.K. Pandey, D.  Kumar, S.V. Singh and P. Kumar. 2010. Potato processing scenario in 

India: industrial constraints, future projections, challenges ahead and remedies-a review. J. Food 

Sci. Technol. 47(2): 137-156. 

Mollick, M.O.A., A.K. Paul, I. Alamand M.M. Sumon. 2020. Effect of biochar on yield and quality of potato 

(Solanum tuberosum L.) tuber. Intl. J. Bio. Stress Manag. 11(5): 445-450. 

Mondal, M.R.I., M.S. Islam, M.A.B. Jalil, M.M. Rahman, M.S. Alam and M.H.H. Rahman. 

2011.KrishiProjuktiHatboi (Handbook of Agro-technology), 5th edition. Bangladesh Agricultural 

Research Institute, Gazipur-1701, Bangladesh. p.307. 

Mukherjee, A. and R. Lal. 2013. Biochar impacts on soil physical properties and greenhouse gas emissions. 

pp.313-339.  

Mukherjee, A. and A.R. Zimmerman. 2013. Organic carbon and nutrient release from a range of laboratory-

produced biochars and biochar–soil mixtures. Geoderma.193: 122-130.  

Nair, A., R.A.J.L. Kruse, Tillman and V. Lawson. 2014.Biochar application in potato production. Iowa State 

Res. Farm Prog. Rep. 2027. pp.17-21.  

Novak, J.M., I., Lima, B. Xing, J.W. Gaskin, C. Steiner, K. Das, M. Ahmedna, D. Rehrah, D.W. Watts and 

W.J. Busscher. 2009. Characterization of designer biochar produced at different temperatures and 

their effects on a loamy sand. Ann. Environ. Sci. 3: 195-206. 

Vaccari, F.P. 2015. Biochar stimulates plant growth but not fruit yield of processing tomato in a fertile soil. 

Agric.  Ecosyst. Environ. 207: 163-170. 

Vakis, N.J. 1990. Evaluation of potato varieties and clones. Miscellaneous Rep. 38, Agric. Res. Inst., 

Ministry of Agric. And Nat. Resources, Nicosia, Cyprus. 

Yang, Y., S. Ma, Y. Zhao, M. Jing, Y. Xu and J. Chen. 2015. A field experiment on enhancement of crop 

yield by rice straw and corn stalk-derived biochar in Northern China. Sustainability. 7: 13713-

13725. 



Enhancement the Productivity of Processing Category Potato  71 

 
Yilangai, R.M., S.A. Manu, W. Pineau, S.S. Mailumo and K.I. Okekeagulu. 2014. The effect of biochar and 

crop veil on growth and yield of tomato (Lycopersicum esculentus Mill) in Jos, North central 

Nigeria. Curr. Agric. Res. 2(1): 37-42. 

Yooyen, J., S. Wijitkosum and T. Sriburi. 2015. Increasing yield of soybean by adding biochar. J. Environ. 

Res. Develop. 9(4): 1066-1074. 

Youseef, M.E.A., I.A.S. Al-Easily and D.A.S. Nawar. 2017. Impact of biochar addition on productivity and 

tubers quality of some potato cultivars under sandy soil conditions. Egypt J. Hort. 44(2): 199 -217. 

Zheng, H., Z.Y. Wang, X. Deng, S. Herbert and B. Xing. 2013. Impacts of adding biochar on nitrogen 

retention and bioavailability in agricultural soil. Geoderma. 206:32-39 

 

 

 

 


	Enhancement the productivity of processing category potato by biochar
	Gomez, K.A. andA.A. Gomez. 1984. Statistical procedure for agricultural research. Second Edn. Intl. Rice Res. Inst., John Wiley and Sons. New York. pp.1-340.