当前世界环境

Introduction

Indian power generation is in majority dependent on coal-based thermal power station. The coal combustion products produced every year is around 112MT (million tons) in India and it exceeds 225 MT by 2017[Singh, 2012]. Impact assessment of fly ash on environmental are very complex and detailed research is important and analysis of the side-effects on plants and soil is need of the hour. Sustainable agriculture needs careful use of any organic amendments to improve the fertility of soil while minimizing any harmful effect on the environment [Ram and Masto, 2014]. The fly ash application on agricultural land has been widely evaluated, it affects the soil environment, contains many non-essential as well as essential elements but characteristically poor in nitrogen and phosphorus. The studies on the influence of fly ash amendment in different combinations on soil biological properties is very minimal [Schutteret al.,2001]. Therefore, management of fly ash would remain a great concern today. Due to its high cost of environmental management and disposal, utilization of fly ash in forestry, horticulture, floriculture and agriculture sectors could be a viable option.

Fly ash is generally alkaline due to the low content of sulphur and the presence of hydroxides of magnesium carbonate and calcium carbonates [Vimlesh and Giri, 2011]. Though fly ash utilization in agriculture is rare because of its high pH, low N and P including minmal soil microbial activity [Wong and Wong, 1989]. Fly ash helps in improving the soil nutrient [Rautarayet al.,2003]. Some reports mentioned apllication of fly ash as a soil ameliorant to improve soil physical properties [Shenet al.,2008], alkaline pH of fly ash also helps to enhance organic mineralization and promotes nutrient supply to the plants [Mittraet al.,2005]。它构成了各种元素,比如如果Na, Ca, Mg, K, Cd, Pb, Cu, Co, Fe, Mn, Mo, Ni, B, Zn, and Al, lack of nitrogen and phosphorus. Various heavy metals namely Cu, Ni, Fe, Pb, Cr, Cd etc that may exhibit metal toxicity in plants. Fly ash utilization in soil systems has been tested so far forBrassica juncea,Helianthus annus[Pandeyet al.,1994],Cassia siamea[Tripathiet al.,2005],Triticum aestivum[Kumaret al.,2010], rice [Bisoiet al.,2017]. The presence of nutrients allows the use of fly ash for agricultural purposes to fortify crops with nutrients, such as Se, Fe, and Zn. It is reported that leguminous crops can tolerate too many heavy metals. Chickpea is an important source of amino acids and protein. In the semi-arid region of India, it is cultivated on a large scale [Pandeyet al.,2010].

Soil of Bundelkhand region in India fall into two categories the Red soil and Black soil. The red soil locally known as rakar, exhibits very low retention of water and large permeability [Biswaset al.,2012]. They are poorly rich in organic matter, nitrogen and phosphorus. It is hypothesized that the addition of organics could be beneficial in improving the soil Physico-chemical characteristics and sustain productivity [Biswaset al.,2012]. In this study Chickpea is used as test crop because it is an important leguminous food grain in India. In Uttar Pradesh, Jhansi district is one of the major producers of chickpea fall under the Bundelkhand region. The main objective of this study was to assess the effect of different doses of fly ash on the Bundelkhand soil which is semiarid region and suffers from water stress and exposed to increasingly variable and extreme conditions of weather. The field experiment was conducted during winter ,different treatment were made such as control with no amendment of fly ash (T1), amendment of fly ash at the rate of 10tha^-1(T2), 20tha^-1(T3), 30tha^-1(T4), 40tha^-1(T5),50tha^-1(T6) in combination with vermicompost (2tha^-1in soil) and Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium (20kg N + 50 kgP₂O₅/ha + 20kg k₂O/ ha in soil) with three replications.

Methodology

Experimental Site and Climate

In the present experiment fly ash was collected from Parichha TPP, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India. Jhansi district is situated 24⁰11’N to 25⁰57’N latitude and 78⁰10’E to 79⁰23' E longitude in the semi-arid region of the country. The field experiment was conducted at the agricultural field of Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, India during November 2018-March 2019.

Experimental Set –up

In the present experiment Chickpea plant (CicerarietinumL.) of variety, Awrodhi was used. The fly ash samples were taken from the Parichha thermal power plant, Jhansi. The experimental plots (each 2x2m size) were arranged in a completely RBD manner in triplicates. The various treatment were vermicompost + NPK(T1) (control), fly ash (10 tha^-1)+ NPK + vermicompost (T2), fly ash (20 tha^-1) + NPK + vermicompost (T3), fly ash (30tha^-1) + NPK + vermicompost (T4), fly ash (40 tha^-1) + NPK + vermicompost (T5), fly ash (50 tha^-1) + NPK + vermicompost (T6). Divide each experimental plot to minimize the possibility of nutrient and microbial exchange among the treatments. In each of treatment fly ash, NPK and vermicompost combination were given. The vermicompost and NPK were added at a fixed rate. The common dose of NPK was applied 20kg N ha^-1+ 50 kgP₂O₅ha^-1+ 20kg k2O ha^-1and 2 t ha^-1vermicompost was applied.

Soil Analysis

Composite soil samples were taken from the 10-20cm horizon near the root of the plants growing under different treatments and immediately transferred in the laboratory.

The pH of fly ash and soil samples were measured in the 1:5(w/v) suspension of with the help of pH meter. EC was measured by conductivity meters [Piper CS, 1966], moisture content was measured by gravimetric method, porosity [Brgowskiet al.,2014], water holding capacity (WHC) and bulk density (BD) by Black method [Black GR, 1965], Organic carbon (OC) determined by Walkey and Black’s rapid titration method [Allison FA, 1973], total nitrogen (N) was determined by Kjeldhal’s method, phosphorus determined by Olsen and Sommers [Olsen and Sommer, 1982]. Potassium measured by Flame photometer method [Jackson ML, 1967], Sulphur was determined by turbidimetric method [Tandon HLS, 1995], Zinc, Boron, Iron, Mangenese, Cadmium, Molybdenum, Arsenic and Copper in control, fly ash and amended soil were measured from 1g dried sample in 20 ml of tri acid mixtures (HNO₃:H₂SO₄:HClO4:5:1:1) at 80⁰C for 8 h [Allenet al.,1986]. Then, the samples were filtered and used of heavy metal analysis using AAS.

Plant sampling and analysis

鹰嘴豆种子浸泡在0.01%汞chloride to sterilized surface. Each line was sown in 6 rows with 30 cm inter-row spacing at 3cm deep furrow. The plant height, number of branches per plant, the dry matter weight, number of root nodules were measured by randomly selected sample of ten plants from each plot at 30days, 45 days, 60 days, 75days and at harvest days after sowing (DAS). The number of pod/plant, number of seed/pod recorded from random plants samples at the time of harvest. Seed Index (g), seed yield/plant, seed yield from the net plot was recorded after drying under the standard moisture conditions. The seed yield of crop/plot were then changed in to yield/ hectare (Kg/ha).

Estimation of microbial population

For estimation of microbial population the soil were isolated from rhizosphere of control and fly ash amended soil treatment by serial dilution and spread plate technique. For isolation ofphosphate solubilizing bacteriaand N₂fixing bacteria,Rhizobium leguminosarum, 0.5ml of aliquot of appropriate dilutions were plated in sterilized Petri plates containing Pikovskaya^’s Medium and Yeast extract Mannitol Agar plates respectively. Three replicates were taken for each sample. After incubation at 30-32⁰C upto 48-72 hours colony count was recorded. Microbial density were expressed in the form of CFU /g of soil.

Results

Physico chemical characterization of Soil, Fly ash and fly ash amended soil.

The Physico chemical properties of unamended soil and fly ash amended soil are summarized in table 1 and characterization of fly ash is presented in table 2. The value of pH, Electricity conductivity (EC), porosity, Moisture content and water holding capacity (WHC) of soil were increased significantly with increases doses of fly ash. pH was 7.6 recorded in unamended soil (T1, control) whereas fly ash amended soil become more alkaline with 8.3 in T6 treatment. EC, porosity, Moisture content and water holding capacity were recorded 1.66 dsm^-1, 33.26%, 4.4, 56.81% respectively higher in T6 plot as compared to unamended soil. Value of Bulk density and total nitrogen were 1.24g/cm³, 205kg/ha respectively found in T6 treatment lower than unamended soil, as the dose of fly ash increases they decrease continuously. Total phosphorus, Organic carbon, potassium, sulphur were recorded higher in T6 treatment 12.21kg/ha, 1.85%, 124kg/ha, 12.14mg/kg respectively as compared to the experimental plot (T1) as given in table. Fly ash used was little alkaline with pH 7.4 and EC was 0.32dsm^-1recorded. Total nitrogen, total phosphorus, total potassium were recorded 0.30%, 0.20%, 0.57% respectively.

Table 1: Physico- chemical properties of unamended soil and Fly ash treated soil (Mean±SD)

Parameter	T1(control)	T2(10tha-1fly ash)	T3(20tha-1fly ash)	T4(30tha-1fly ash)	T5(40tha-1fly ash)	T6(50tha-1fly ash)
pH	7.6±0.05	7.8±0.11	7.9±0.05	7.10±0.30	8.1±0.05	8.3±0.05
Electricity conductivity(dsm-1)	0.77±0.11	0.79± 0.05	1.24±0.24	1.34±0.06	1.40±0.08	1.66±0.28
Porosity (%)	30.06±0.03	30.37±0.05	30.78±0.01	31.11±0.05	31.90±0.04	33.26±0.06
Moisture content	2.3±0.11	2.7±0.05	3.8±0.05	3.9±0.11	4.2±0.05	4.4±0.17
Bulk density(g/cm3)	1.29±0.11	1.27±0.05	1.28±0.11	1.26±0.01	1.25±0.01	1.24±0.01
Water holding capacity (%)	37.11±0.61	38.12±0.57	39.89±0.21	39.96±0.014	40.11±0.52	56.81±0.46
Total phosphorus (kg/ha)	9.87±0.02	10.10±0.46	10.14±0.01	10.51±0.02	11.06±0.55	12.21±0.02
Total nitrogen (kg/ha)	247±0.57	245±0.57	239±0.57	220±0.57	215±0.57	205±0.57
Total organic carbon (%)	0.67±0.03	0.69±0.07	0.81±0	0.96±0.13	1.23±0.07	1.85±0.08
Total potassium (kg/ha)	121±0.57	122.11±0.66	123±0.80	123.20±0.61	123.52±0.90	124±0.57
Total sulphur (mg/kg)	9.36±0.72	10.14±0.023	10.60±0.09	11.05±0.11	11.84±0.07	12.14±0.08

Table 2: Characterization of Fly ash ((Mean±SD)

Parameter	Fly ash
pH(1:2)	7.4±0.02
ECH2O (1:2) (dS/m )	0.32±0.78(dS/m )
Bulk density(g/cc)	0.97±0.48(g/cc)
Water holding capacity(%)	56.75±0.23(%)
Porosity (%)	48±0.34(%)
Organic carbon (%)	0.80±0.12(%)
Texture	Silt loam
Total N (%)	0.30±0.11(%)
Total P (%)	0.20±0.19(%)
Total K (%)	0.57±0.03(%)

Growth/ Yield attributes

All yield/growth attributes was recorded at different time interval of 30DAS, 45DAS, 60DAS, 75DAS and at harvest. The number of branches, plant height, root nodules/ plant, dry matter weight, number of pod/ plant, number of seed/ pod, seed yield/ plant and seed index increased up to T3 later reduced significantly at higher dose of fly ash amended soil as compared to control (T1) as given in Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. All the growth parameter of chickpea crop was higher at 20tha^-1fly ash amended soil along with fertilizer and vermicompost whereas at higher dose of fly ash i.e. 30tha^-1, 40tha^-1and 50tha^-1recorded significantly lower yield.

Figure 1: Impact of Treatments on Root Nodule and Dry matter of selected plant (Chick Pea) on different time interval Click here to view Figure

Figure 2: Impact of Treatments on Branches Numbers and Plant Height of selected plant (Chick Pea) on different time interval Click here to view Figure

Effect of fly ash on soil Microbial density

The rhizospheric zone contains huge microorganism which helps the plant to survive in stress condition, the population ofPhosphate solubilizing bacteriaandN₂fixing bacteriawas recorded maximum at 20 tha^-1fly ash (T3) application beyond this population completely ceased as given in table 3. The pH of the soil in this study is around neutral and fly ash amendment makes the soil more alkaline which cause negative effects to microorganism. A significant reduction in the microbial population was observed in fly ash 50 t ha^-1(T6).

Table 3: Microbial population in unamended soil and coal fly ash amended soil grow under chickpea crop (x 10²CFU) (Mean±SD)

Treatment	Phosphate solublizing bacteria (x104)	N2fixing bacteria(x104)
T1(No amendement, control)	36±0.16	38±0.08
T2 (FA10tha-1+NPK+vermicompost)	70±0.58	66±0.27
T3(FA20tha-1+NPK+vermicompost)	76±0.44	75±0.27
T4(FA40tha-1+NPK+vermicompost)	66±0.23	67±0.61
T5(FA50tha-1+NPK+vermicompost)	64±0.78	60±0.63
T6 (FA60tha-1+NPK+vermicompost)	51±0.90	48±0.20

Heavy metal contents in fly ash and fly ash amended soil

The result of heavy metal analysis of fly ash and fly ash added soil increased as compared to control shown in table 4. Upto 20tha^-1fly ash no significant increment in the concentration of Co, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Cu, Pb, Zn and As were recorded. However, beyond 30tha^-1fly ash there was an increase in concentration of all the metals. Cd was recorded nil in both fly ash and fly ash applied soil. The fly ash was found alkaline hence at higher dose of fly ash application heavy metal increased due to their inherent concentration in fly ash.

Table 4: Concentration of heavy metal (mg/ kg) in unamended soil, fly ash amended soil and coal fly ash (Mean±SD)

Heavy metals	T1	T2	T3	T4	T5	T6	Fly ash
Cd	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL
Co	0.07±0.02	1.07±0.03	1.49±0.08	2.01±0.08	2.14±0.05	4.12±0.04	5.06±0.05
Cr	3.32±0.05	4.03±0.64	6.01±0.29	7.92±0.08	10±0.03	16±0.06	18.39±0.04
Cu	6.34±0.04	6.39±0.34	7.01±0.12	9.12±0.30	10.68±0.04	11.01±0.03	12.49±0.05
Fe	11201±1.12	11204±1.13	11207±1.15	11208±1.09	11208±1.78	11209±1.67	489± 0.03
Mn	9.27±0.48	20.33±0.23	28.45±0.02	32.01±0.05	41±0.03	50.83±0.07	87±0.40
Ni	0.03±0.02	1.78±0.07	2.47±0.04	3.30±0.03	4.67±0.02	5.34±0.02	12±0.03
Pb	0.40±0.03	0.57±0.02	0.63±0.03	0.92±0.07	1.12±0.08	2.01±0.05	4.04±0.02
Zn	0.80±0.15	1.28±0.08	2.12±0.04	2.61±0.04	3.12±0.02	3.29±0.03	5.19±0.4
As	0.02	0.03	0.03	0.04	0.05	0.05	0.09

Discussion

在这个实验中,各种参数是水资源terized such as Physico-chemical, biological with different concentration of fly ash along with NPK and vermicompost. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the use of fly ash aided in low nutrient content soil in Bundelkhand where drought is a common problem. To reach this objective different concentration of fly ash was used to evaluate the suitable level of fly ash for the growth of crop and microbial response. After setting up an experimental field, it appears that fly ash amended soil had a different effect on soil than that of control soil. Indeed, all the plots in this experiment showed different values for Physico-chemical parameters, as the concentration of fly ash increased the value of pH, EC, porosity, moisture content, WHC, P, N, OC, K, S, B, Fe, Mn, and Co also increased as given in table 1. Same has been observed by Tejasvi and Kumar [Tejasvi and Kumar, 2012], according to them the fly ash changed the soil texture, increased water holding capacity, soil porosity, pH, electrical conductivity and organic carbon , decreased bulk density values, N. The nitrogen content decreased as fly ash level increased the same [Dash et al., 2015]. According to Sharma and Singh, 2016 in chickpea leaves the nitrogen content was decreased as the level of fly ash increases. Gradual reduction of nitrogen in chickpea leaf with an increasing proportion of fly ash can be correlated to the nitrogen in fly ash [Mishra and Shukla, 1986]. All concerned growth and yield parameters were suffered due to poor availability of nitrogen in the soil amendments with fly ash. Fly ash amendment at higher doses caused high deficiency of nitrogen in the soil, which caused suppressed growth and crop yield. The decline in growth of plant and yield from 50 to 100% fly ash amended soil was possibly due high levels of chloride, sulphate, carbonate, and bicarbonate salts leading to increase in salinity in fly ash amended soil [Singh and Siddiqui,2003].

The lower bulk density was observed in T2, T3, T4, and T5 as compared to T1 (control), the bulk density decreased due to the presence of ashes [Dransart et al., 2019]. Fly ash was found an excellent amendment for soil which reduces soil bulk density causing dispersed aggregate fine particles, increase water holding capacity and reduce saturated hydraulic conductivity.

它改变了环境pH值等因素,有机食品carbon, total nitrogen determine and influence the soil microbial population distribution [Mazinani et al., 2012]. Surridge AKJ, 2009 have reported that the addition of fly neutralizes the pH which leads to increased ion mobility causing increase in bacterial species richness. Our results indicated that the addition of fly ash to soil would influence microbial activity in the soil the result could be explained by the application of different concentration of fly ash to soil. In terms of microbial population, this suggests that at higher application rate results in to the insufficient substrate C, N and high levels of heavy metals content [Nayaket al.,2014]. A similar observation was found by some authors that the most limiting factors for microbial activity are usually due a insufficient substrate C and N supply [Klubeket al.,1992]. However, fly ash contains high toxic heavy metals which can ultimately hinder the normal metabolic process of soil inhabitant microorganisms [Jala and Goyal, 2006].

In fly ash amended soil rhizosphere creates an aerobic environment in the soil that enhances the microbial activity which stimulates oxidation of organic matter [James et al., 2016]. The optimum growth of the bacterial population was observed in T3 therefore, significant reduction in microbial population was observed beyond T3 as given in table 6. Similar result reported by Kohli and Goyal, 2010 that fly ash application at the 10t ha^-1was good for population of bacteria, dehydrogenase enzyme activity and microbial biomass. According to Nayaket al.,2014, the population of both actinomycetes and fungi decreased in fly ash amended the and beyond fly ash at 20 tha^-1the actinomycetes growth completely ceased. There was a slight decrease in NO₂oxidizer microbes in fly ash amended soil whereas denitrifiers showed an increase up to fly ash at 40 tha^-1. Pichtel and Hayes, 1990 reported that with 20% fly ash, the population of bacteria, fungi, and actinomycetes reduced by 57%, 86% and 80%, respectively.

Fly ash contains Ca, Mg, Fe, Cu, Mn, S, B, P and Zn which are beneficial for the growth of the plant, as well as it contains some metals such as Pb, Hg, Ba, Cr, and As [Pandaet al.,2015]. The presence of Iron, Zinc, Copper in T6 plot is higher which decreases the growth of chickpea crop decreases may be due to accumulation of higher concentration of heavy metals Fly Ash containing 10 % ash which had a positive effect on soil microorganism in term of N and P cycling, enzyme activity and reducing the availability of heavy metals [Jameset al.,2016].

在现在的年代tudy, the application of fly ash up to 20 tha^-1increased the growth parameters of crop such as plant height, dry matter weight, root nodules and a number of branches, beyond 20 tha^-1the growth was found to be ceased. Previous studies have depicted that fly ash affects the crop yield [Singhet al.,2011]. According to Pandaet al.,2015, application of fly ash in soil improved the rice and maize growth up to certain treatments and after that, fly ash caused deleterious effects on the growth of the plant. Similarly, [Dransartet al.,2019] found that 40% of fly ash was found most suitable for growth and yield of test crop.

Conclusion

This study suggests that application of fly ash, fertilizer and vermicompost had a significant impact on soil properties, microbial population, and growth of the crop. The result indicates the higher dose of fly ash contain heavy metal may increase toxicity which leads to decrease microbial population. The alteration in soil properties after the amendment of different doses of fly ash which in turn affect the nutrient status of soil and crop yield. The short term experiment indicates an ample scope of fly ash utilization in combination with fertilizer and organic manure to improve the fertility of the soil, microbial population and crop productivity in dry Bundelkhand region.

Acknowledgments

The author is extremely thankful to the Department of Microbiology, Bundelkhand university, Jhansi for providing all the necessary laboratory facilities.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of Interest

The authors do not have any conflict of interest.

Reference

1. Allen SE, Grimshaw HM, Rowland AP. Chemical analysis. In: Moore, P.D., Chapman, S.E. (Eds.), Methods in plant ecology. Blackwell scientific publication, oxford London 1986;285-344.
2. Allison FA. Soil organic matter and its role in crop production. Elsevier, Amsterdam 1973.
3. Bisoi SS, Mishra SS, Barik J, Panda D. Effect of different treatments of fly ash and mining soil on growth and antioxidant protection of Indian wild rice. Int. J. of phytoremdiation 2017;19:446-452.
4. Biswas H, Narayan D, Lakaria BL. Effect of integrated nutrient management on soil properties and performance of anola (Emblica officinalis Gaertn) based agri- horti system in Bundelkhand region. Indian Journal of soil Conservation 2012;40:141-146.
5. Black GR.. Bulk density. In: Method of soil analysis, part I. In: Black, C.A., Evans, D.D., White, J.L., Ensminger, L.E., Clark, F.E. (Eds.), Agronomy, vol. 9. American Society of Agronomy Monogr., Madison 1965;374–377.
6. Blackwell KJ, Singleton I, Tobin JM. Metal cation uptake by yeast: A review. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol 1995;43:571-584.
7. Brgowski Z, Kwasowski W, Madyniak R. Calculating particle density, bulk density and total porosity of soil based on its texture. Soil science annual. 2014;139-149.
8. Dash AK, Pradan A, Das S, Mohanty SS. Fly ash as a potential source of soil amendment in agriculture and a component of integrated plant nutrient supply system. Jr. of Industrial Pollution Control 2015;31:251-259.
9. Dhadse S, Kumari P, Bhagia LJ.. Fly ash characterization, utilization and government initiatives in India-a review. J Sci Ind Res 2008;67:11-18.
10. Dransart JL, Demuynck S, Bidar G, Douay F, Grumiaux F, Louvel B, Pernin C, Lepretre A. Does adding fly ash to metal- contaminated soils play a role in soil functionality regarding metal availability, litter quality, microbial activity and the community structure of Diptera larvae? Applied soil ecology 2019.
11. Jackson ML. Soil chemical analysis prentice hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi1967;205.
12. Jala S, Goyal D. Fly ash as a soil ameliorant for improving crop production – a review. Bioresour. Technol 2006;97:1136-1147.
13. James A, Nath S, Rana AS, Singh A. Effect of fly ash and sewage sludge on growth and yield of raddish (Raphanus sarivus). Asian journal of env. Sci 2016;11:40-44.
14. Klubek B, Carlson CL, Oliver J, Adriano DC. Characterization of microbial abundance and activity from 3 coal ash basins. Soil Biol. Biochem 1992;24:1119-1125.
15. Kohli SJ, Goyal D. Effect of fly ash application on some soil physical properties and microbial activities. Acta Agrophys 2010;16:327-335.
16. Kumar V, Chandra A, Singh G. Efficacy of fly ash based bio-fertilizer vs perfected chemical fertilizer in wheat (Triticum aestivum) International Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology 2010;2:31-35.
17. Mazinani Z, Aminafshar M, Asgharzadeh A, Chamani M. Effect ofAzotobacterpopulation on physic-chemical characteristics of some soil samples in Iran. Ann.Biol.Res 2012;3:3120-3125.
18. Mishra LC, KN Shukla. Effects of fly ash deposition on growth metabolism and dry matter production of maize and soyabean. Environ. Pollution 1986;42:1-13.
19. Nayak, A.K., Raja, R., Rao, K.S., Shukla, A.K., Mohanty, S., Mohammad, S., Tripathi, R., Panda, B.B., Bhattacharyya, P., Kumar, A., Lal, B., Sethi, S. K., Puri, C., Nayak, D., Swain, C.K., 2014. Effect of fly ash application on soil microbial response and heavy metal accumulation in soil and rice plant. Ecotoxicology and Environmental safety. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2014.03.033.
20. Olsen SR, Sommers LE. Phosphorus. In:Page, A.L., Miller, R.H., Keeney, D.R. (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis part2- chemical and microbiological properties 2nd ed American society of agronomy, soil science of America, madison, WI 1982;403-430.
21. Panda SS, Mishra LP, Muduli SD, Nayak BD, Dhal NK. Effect of fly ash on vegetative growth and photosynthetic pigment concentration of rice and maize. Biologija 2015;61:94-100.
22. Pandey V, Mishra J, Singh SN, Singh N, Yunus M, Ahmad KJ. Growth response ofHelianthus annusL. growth on fly ash amended soil. Environ. Biol 1994;15:117-125.
23. Pandey VC, Singh JS, Kumar A, Tewari DD. Accumulation of heavy metals by chickpea grown in fly ash treated soil: effects on antioxidants. Clean- soil, Air water 2010;38:111-1123.
24. Pichtel JR, Hayes JM. Influence of fly ash on soil microbial activity and populations. J.Environ. Qual 1990;19:593-597.
25. Piper CS. Soil and plant analysis, University of Adelaide, Australia, Hans publishers, Bombay India 1966;233-237.
26. Rautaray SK, Ghosh BC, Mittra BN. Effect of fly ash, organic wastes and chemical fertilizer on yield, nutrient uptake, heavy metal content and residual fertility in a rice-mustard cropping sequence under acid lateritic soils. Bioresource Technology 2003; 90:275-283.
27. Schutter ME, Fuhramann JJ. Soil microbial community response to fly ash amendment as revealed by analyses of whole soil and bacterial isolates. Soil Biol. Biochem 2001;33:1947-1958.
28. Sharma N, Singh DK. Growth and yield patterns in Chickpea cv.391 growth under fly ash stress in root- knot nematode and root nodule bacteria presence. Annals of natural sciences 2016;2:24-29.
29. Shen JF, Zhou XW, Sun DS, Fang JG, Liu ZJ, Li Z. Soil improvement with coal ash and sewage sludge: a field experiment. Environ. Geol 2008;53: 1777-1785.
30. Singh LP, Siddiqui ZA. Effects of fly ash andHelminthosporium oeyzaeon growth and yield of three cultivars of rice, Bioresour. Technol 2003;86:73-78.
31. Surridge AKJ, Merwe克鲁格r .初步微bial studies on the impact of plants and South African fly ash on amelioration of crude oil polluted soils. In proceeding of the world of coal ash 2009; 4-7.
32. Tandon HLS. Method of analysis of soils, plants, water and fertilizers. Fertilizers development and consultation organization, New Delhi 1995.
33. Tejasvi A, Kumar S. Impact of fly ash on soil properties. Natl.Acad. Sci. Lett 2012;35:13-16.
34. Tripathi RD, Ram RC, Sinha LC, Jha AK, Srivastava SK. Bulk use of pond ash for reclamation of waste/alkaline land for agriculture purpose. Use of ash in agriculture, NTPC, report 2005.
35. Wong MH, Wong JWC. Germination and seedlings growth of vegetable crops in fly ash amended soils. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ 1989;26: 23-35.
36. Mittra BN, Karmakar S, Swain DK, Ghosh BC. Fly ash – A potential source of soil amendment and a component of integrated plant nutrient supply system, fuel 2005; 84, 1447-1451.
37. Singh JS. Coal fly ash in agriculture-beneficial or Risky? Sci.Rep.6 (49) 2012;43-45.
38. Ram LC, Masto RE. Fly ash for soil amelioration: A review on the influence of ash blending with inorganic and organic amendments. Earth Science Reviews, 2014. 52-74.
39. Vimlesh K and Giri AK. Characterization of Fly ash generated from Parichha thermal power station in Jhansi, India. E-Journal of Chemistry 2011, 8(1), 400-404.