Next Article in Journal
Exploring the Nexus between Conspiracy Beliefs and Creativity, Attitudes toward People, and Psychological Wellbeing: Insights from the 10th European Social Survey
Previous Article in Journal
Expert-Based Assessment of the Potential of Agroforestry Systems in Plain Regions across Bihor County, Western Romania
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 22
10.3390/su152215725
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Minimizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions with Clinoptilolite Zeolite in Moris Pineapple Cultivation on Drained Sapric Soils

by
Liza Nuriati Lim Kim Choo
1,*,
Osumanu Haruna Ahmed
2,
Shamsiah Sekot
1 and
Syahirah Shahlehi
2
1
Soil Science, Water and Fertilizer Research Centre, Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute, MARDI Saratok, P.O. Box 59, Saratok 95407, Sarawak, Malaysia
2
Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Islam Sultan Sharif Ali, Kampus Sinaut, KM 33 Jalan Tutong, Kampong Sinaut, Tutong TB1741, Brunei
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(22), 15725; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215725
Submission received: 17 September 2023 / Revised: 26 October 2023 / Accepted: 31 October 2023 / Published: 8 November 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Drained tropical peat soils for agriculture emit more carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere from their stored carbon compared with their pristine state. Field and laboratory experiments were conducted to assess whether the natural zeolite of the clinoptilolite (ZeoC) species could be included in the pineapple fertilization program to decrease the CO2 emissions from tropical sapric soils. The static closed-chamber and laboratory incubation methods were used to determine the effects of ZeoC on the CO2 emitted from a drained sapric soil planted with Moris pineapple. The treatments assessed were as follows: (a) suggested ratio of ZeoC (5 g, 10 g, 14 g, and 20 g of ZeoC) and 20 g compound NPK 30:1:32 fertilizer, enumerated based on the pineapple plant requirement; (b) 20 g of compound NPK 30:1:32 fertilizer only; and (c) unfertilized sapric soils. The drained sapric soils amended with ZeoC (rate of 5 g to 20 g/plant) minimized the CO2 emissions compared with those without the ZeoC, because of the physical and chemical sorption of organic compounds and polar CO2 onto the lattices of ZeoC, which inhibited organic matter decomposition. ZeoC fertilization reduces sapric soil acidity and improves Moris pineapple fruit quality attributes and yield. Monthly pineapple fertilization with ZeoC at the vegetative and flowering phases is an alternative agronomic strategy to reduce CO2 emissions. This approach does not reduce pineapple yield on drained tropical sapric soils.

1. Introduction

Approximately 60% to 70% of tropical peatlands exist in Southeast Asia [1,2]. This occurrence accounts for 6% of global peatland [3]. These organic soils are commonly planted with pineapple, sago, rubber, oil palm, and mixed orchards. Although advances in agronomic and crop production technologies have enabled cash crops to be grown successfully on tropical peat soils, the potential effects of the cultivated peat soils on global climate change via greenhouse gas emissions remains as the persistent problem in managing peatlands’ sustainably for agriculture.
In aerobic conditions, CO2 is emitted from tropical peat soils when organic peat materials are decomposed by microorganisms [3]. Drainage and the lowering of the water table of peat soils accelerates peat oxidation [4], and this results in significant emissions of CO2 because of the high organic carbon content of peat soils. Tropical peatlands store approximately 15% to 19% of global peat carbon [5,6]. CO2 is emitted from peat soils via aerobic and anaerobic microbial respiration, organic carbon decomposition, root respiration, and peat fires. The temperature, water table depth, land use, and crop type influence CO2 emission from peat soils [7,8,9]. Soil CO2 emissions from cultivated peat soil vary with crop type, but their emissions are influenced by fertilization, root exudates, and nutrient availability. These factors are regulated by the soil microbial community, particularly at the rhizosphere [6,10,11,12]. Generally, fertilizers influence CO2 emissions by regulating the soil microbial activity [13,14]. However, the CO2 emitted from organic soils is reported to be low with the use of nitrogen-based fertilizers, due to increased acidity and a reduction in the degradation of organic matter [15].
In Malaysia, pineapples are primarily planted (90%) on drained peat soils (14,702 ha) rather than mineral soils [16]. This cash crop is an important premium fruit for international trade that consistently contributes to Malaysia’s gross domestic product. The annual export value for this premium fruit is approximately USD 6.08 million [17], with an estimated fresh pineapple fruit yield of 325,038 mt in 2021 [16]. Pineapple requires significant amounts of nitrogen (N) and potassium (K) fertilizers for a good yield and fruit quality [18]. Therefore, an efficient fertilization program is needed, not only to ensure the optimum uptake of nutrients by pineapple plants, but also to minimize the polluting effects of greenhouse gas emission. Although attempts have been made to monitor the greenhouse gas emissions from oil palm plantations on peatlands, there is less monitoring of the CO2 emissions for pineapples grown on peat soils. Pineapples grown on drained peatlands in Malaysia emit 179.6 t CO2 ha−1 annually [19].
ZeoC is a volcanogenic sedimentary rock that is extensively utilized in agriculture for increasing soil and crop quality on marginal soils (acidic, clayey, and sandy soils) [20,21,22,23]. ZeoC is isomorphous and is composed of aluminosilicate tetrahedral units as the primary building blocks, with a silicon or aluminum atom at the center linked by four oxygen atoms via covalent bonds [24,25,26,27]. These tetrahedrons are arranged in a three-dimensional lattice [27]. The zeolites’ lattice contains open cavities, which are occupied by water molecules and an extra framework of exchangeable cations [26]. The open cavities are interconnected, forming long and wide channels of various sizes, resembling a honeycomb structure [22,24]. These open cavities enable the mobilization, adsorption, and exchange of ions and nutrients within the ZeoC framework. Moreover, the size of the ZeoC framework regulates the types of cations and molecules that it absorbs within its channels, such that ZeoC functions as a molecular sieve [20,27,28]. These important properties of ZeoC enable it to be a nutrient carrier or soil amendment for improving the nutrient availability and crop productivity of marginal soils. However, ZeoC’s nutrient adsorption capacity is influenced by its silica-to-alumina ratio, pore size, total number of cations within its lattices, size, and the polarity of the adsorbed molecules and ions [27,29]. Besides enhancing soil fertility and crop quality, zeolites are able to reduce the nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from agricultural soils [30,31,32]. The high cation exchange capacity (CEC) of the zeolites facilitates the adsorption of ammonium ions within their lattices via ion exchange [21,22]. This process inhibits microbial nitrification, leading to low soil N2O emissions. At present, there are insufficient details on the application of ZeoC as a soil amendment to decrease the CO2 emitted from drained organic soils.
To date, how ZeoC affects the CO2 emitted from cultivated sapric soils is not clearly elucidated. It is possible that ZeoC could increase CO2 emissions through increasing the soil pH and organic matter degradation because of its alkalinity [21]. On the contrary, ZeoC might reduce CO2 emissions by adsorbing organic matter onto its lattices in order to inhibit organic matter decomposition [30,33]. Based on the preceding arguments, the aim of this current study was to assess the use of ZeoC in the fertilization program for reducing soil CO2 emission from a sapric soil planted with pineapple. To this end, we hypothesized that ZeoC will decrease CO2 emission. This assumption is due to the fact that ZeoC’s uniform molecular-sized framework, porousness, and ion exchange attributes will allow the sorption of polar CO2 molecules and anionic organic compounds onto the lattices of ZeoC, thereby decreasing the soil organic matter decomposition and CO2 emission. To test the afore-stated assumption, the static closed-chamber method was used to evaluate the impact of ZeoC on the CO2 emitted from a sapric soil planted with Moris pineapple, whereas a laboratory incubation study under controlled conditions was performed to validate the results derived from the field experiment. This current study is expected to provide details on possible mitigation measures to minimize CO2 emission for the more sustainable production of pineapples on organic soils.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Physiography and Attributes of the Tropical Sapric Soils at Saratok, Malaysia

The field trial was executed on a drained sapric peatland located at Saratok, Malaysia, and the geographic coordinates of the study area are 1°55′30.9″ N 111°14′15.1″ E (Figure 1). The annual rainfall of the study area is approximately 3923 mm. The trial area has a mean annual temperature of 27.7 °C and an annual average relative humidity of between 55% and 60%. The peat area receives dry weather in July, with a mean rainfall of about 172 mm, while the wet monsoon season occurs between November and January, with a mean rainfall of about 450 to 514 mm.
The organic soil used in the field and laboratory experiments of this study is categorized as highly degraded sapric soil with a scarcely identifiable plant structure (H7 to H9 of the Von Post Scale) sitting on up to 3.0 m of thick peat. This sapric peat irregularly overlies sulphatic clayey substratum. The topsoil layer is made up of undecomposed leaf litters and live root centered in the upper 30 cm. At a lower depth, the peat soil is more hemic, with a fiber content greater than 17%. The ash content is generally less than 10%, indicating predominantly pure organic material with little or no mineral deposition in the peat top horizon (75 cm). The sapric soil of the study area (at depth of 0 to 20 cm) is acidic (Ph 3.9), indicating the need for liming prior to cultivation, not saline, with an electrical conductivity value of about 177.4 Μs cm−1, and is high in CEC, with a mean value of approximately 143.2 cmol(+) kg−1. The CEC of the sapric soil in the study area is Ph-dependent, due to the amount of exchangeable hydrogen attached to the organic colloids and humic substances of the peat soil; however, they do not exhibit exchange properties because the exchangeable hydrogen is tightly fixed with the functional groups of the organic acids in peat soils [34]. The sapric peat soil is high in total organic carbon, with a mean value of about 41.8%, which is common for tropical peatlands. This is because tropical peat soils are formed through biochemical process on woody plant materials that originated from rainforest trees by microorganisms under waterlogged conditions. Although the amount of total nitrogen in the sapric soil is high (1.39%), most of the nitrogen in the peat soils at the study area is inaccessible to plants because this macronutrient exists predominantly as organic nitrogen. Therefore, a significant amount of nitrogen fertilizers is needed for crop uptake, because the nitrogen mineralization process occurs slowly in peat soil under acidic conditions. The study area was previously planted with Ananas comosus L. Merr cv. Moris and ginger cv. Bentong (Zingiber offinale Roscoe) from 2012 to 2015 before the establishment of the field experiment in December 2016. For this sapric area, the water table fluctuated between 20 cm and 38 cm.

2.2. Chemical and Morphological Characteristics of the ZeoC Mineral

The ZeoC mineral in powder form was utilized in the field and laboratory experiments due to its nutrient sorption and ion exchange attributes. The ZeoC is gray-white, inexpensive, commercially available, and it was imported from Indonesia. The ZeoC was not treated with any chemicals before being used in the laboratory and field experiments. The ZeoC is alkaline, with a mean Ph of 8.77, and this mineral has a CEC of approximately 103.8 cmol(+) kg−1. The CEC of the ZeoC was measured utilizing the cesium chloride procedure [35]. The cesium chloride was used as the displacement solution to prevent the underestimation of the CEC of the ZeoC, because cesium chloride minimizes the entrapment of ammonium ions in the cavities of the ZeoC framework. The alkaline nature of the ZeoC demonstrates the mineral’s potential to resist changes in Ph and improve soil Ph. The ZeoC’s high CEC emphasizes its ability to retain and release nutrients via the ion exchange mechanism, subject to the mineral’s preferred ion selectivity and affinity, exchange kinetics, and total number of cations attached to ZeoC’s lattices and surface frameworks [36]. The major composition of the ZeoC mineral is as follows: silica (Si–78.08%), iron (Fe–10.70%), and aluminum (Al–7.03%) oxides, whereas their minor elements are composed of sodium (Na–0.53%), magnesium (Mg–1.10%), calcium (Ca–1.27%), and K (1.29%) oxides. The surface area of the ZeoC mineral utilized in this study is low (23.19 m2 g−1), and this value is common for natural zeolites from Indonesia [37,38]. The ZeoC surface morphology shown in Figure 2 demonstrates that the ZeoC mineral is crystalline with unevenly structured particles. The crystalline phase of the ZeoC is composed of quartz as its major phase, whereas the ZeoC’s minor crystalline phase is made up of mordenite, potassium aluminum silicate, and albite (Figure 3). These results are based on the ZeoC crystal identification using an X-ray diffractometer (Rigaku Smartlab SE, Rigaku Analytical Devices Inc., Wilmington, MA, USA). The ZeoC mineral has a high Si:Al oxide ratio of about 11.1.

2.3. Experimental Design and Fertilization Treatments for Moris Pineapples Cultivated on a Drained Sapric Peat Soil

The monitoring of soil CO2 emissions from a pineapple-cultivated sapric soil was conducted in a factorial experiment with three blocks comprising the following: (a) six fertilizer ratios (Z1 to Z6: combination of ZeoC and compound NPK fertilizers); (b) four soil CO2 flux monitoring periods (at days 1, 7, 15, and 30 following pineapple fertilization); and (c) five gas flux sampling periods (6 a.m., 12 p.m., 6 p.m., 12 a.m., and 6 a.m. the following day). The fertilizer treatments (Z1 to Z6) were organized in a randomized complete block design (RCBD).
For this trial, Moris pineapple was selected as the experimental crop, because this cultivar is widely cultivated for domestic consumption in Malaysia. Also, the Moris pineapple has a higher resistance to stress and diseases compared with other pineapple cultivars. In this study, Moris suckers were grown on planting beds to prevent inundation throughout heavy rainfalls, particularly in the wet season (November to January). For this, planting beds were erected in December 2016 at the experimental site (18 beds). The dimensions of the planting beds were 40 cm (height) × 100 cm (width) × 350 cm (length). The planting beds were built approximately 50 cm apart. For each bed, pineapple suckers were planted in two rows. Nine pineapple suckers were planted in each row, and the spacing between the plants was 30 cm, whereas the spacing between the rows was 60 cm. To avert inter-plot fertilizer residual contamination, narrow trenches, measuring 30 cm (width) × 50 cm (depth), were built between the blocks. These trenches also functioned to drain excess water during rainstorms. The Moris pineapples were strictly maintained following the pineapple agronomic guidelines for tropical peatlands [39].
The details of the ZeoC treatments assessed in this present study are listed in Table 1. The recommended ratios of the ZeoC used in the field trial (25% of ZeoC: 5 g; 50% of ZeoC: 10 g; 70% of ZeoC: 14 g; and 100% of ZeoC: 20 g) were enumerated based on the nutrient needs of the pineapple plants planted in sapric soils, particularly at the vegetative (3 and 6 months of plant growth) and flowering (9 months of plant growth) phases [39]. The compound N:P2O5:K2O fertilizer utilized for the Moris pineapple cultivation is composed of ammonium sulfate, Christmas Island rock phosphate, and muriate of potash, in ratios of 30:1:32, respectively. The fertilizers were applied at the vegetative (three and six months of growth) and flowering (nine months old) phases, respectively, in March, June, and September 2017. Before fertilization, the treatments (Z1 to Z4) containing NPK fertilizers and ZeoC minerals were vigorously blended, after which they were applied to the pineapple plants, according to the recommended ratios, as outlined in Table 1. The fertilizer treatments (Z1 to Z5) were applied annularly to the sapric soil at about 5 cm from the ground surface of the pineapple stems. For each pineapple plant, 20 g of compound NPK fertilizer was applied (treatments Z1 to Z5). The effects of the ZeoC treatments (Z1 to Z5) on soil pH were also determined [40] in the field experiment. For this, soil samples were obtained at 30 cm, 60 cm, and 90 cm from the top horizon of the sapric soil. The soil sampling was carried out at days 7, 15, and 30 following fertilization at the vegetative and flowering phases (three, six, and nine months of plant growth). The Moris pineapple fruits (50% ripe) were picked at 14 months of plant growth in February 2018.

2.4. Soil Carbon Dioxide Measurements in Pineapple Cultivation

The peat soil CO2 emissions in pineapple cultivation were trapped using the static closed-chamber method [41,42]. For this, eighteen acrylic square-shaped static chambers were fabricated and inserted between rows of Moris plants. The dimensions of the closed chambers were 0.2 m in height, 0.2 m in width, and 0.2 m in length. The base of the static closed chamber was void and razor-edged. Each closed chamber was equipped with a fan to acquire a balance gas pressure state inside of the closed chamber throughout gas sampling. Thermometers and polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE)–silicone (12 mm) septas were installed at the top section of the static closed chambers, respectively, to monitor the chamber temperatures and to collect gas samples. Before gas sampling, square-shaped soil collars fitted with a foam gasket were placed into the sapric soil about 6 cm from the soil surface, because organic matter decomposition occurs predominantly at the peat top horizon [3]. Thereafter, each of the static closed chambers were placed onto the soil collar. Once equilibrium was achieved (approximately 30 min), gas samples from the chamber were collected using a syringe and placed in 20 mL vacuum chromatography vials. An Agilent 7890A gas chromatography model (Agilent Technologies Inc., Wilmington, DE, USA) was used to analyze the CO2 from the gas samples obtained in the field experiment. The gas chromatography had thermal conductivity and flame ionization detectors, and the system used a stainless steel chromatographic packed column. The gas chromatography was operated on a 15 mL min−1 gas flow rate, with temperatures of 250 °C for thermal conductivity and flame ionization detectors. The gas chromatography was equipped with a gas clean filter system (oxygen and moisture) to prevent oxidation and hydrolyzation damage to the chromatographic column. The operating conditions of the gas chromatography used in this study are summarized in Table A1. Gas mixtures containing methane (CH4) (1 ppm), CO2 (400 ppm), oxygen (O2) (5 ppm), and nitrogen (N2) (5 ppm) were used as the calibration standards and prepared on a gravimetric basis 10 L aluminum cylinders (Linde Gas Singapore Pte. Ltd., Jurong, Singapore) at approximately 5 bars. Single-point calibration was performed, and a calibration curve was generated by plotting the known concentrations of the standard gas and detector responses (peak area), after which a linear regression line was fitted to the data points to obtain the calibration curve equation. A series of replicates of the standard concentrations were performed to validate the calibration curve. Confirmation through the spiking technique (known concentration of CO2) was also carried out to compare and identify CO2 and its separation from the other compounds. An example of the chromatogram for CO2 is presented in Figure A1.
Soil CO2 emission was monitored for 24 h at 6 a.m. (morning), 12 p.m. (noon), 6 p.m. (evening), 12 a.m. (midnight), and 6 a.m. (the following morning). The soil CO2 emission was measured following fertilization at the vegetative (three and six months of growth: March and June 2017) and flowering (nine months of growth: September 2017) phases. Gas samples were collected on days 1, 7, 15, and 30 following fertilization. The soil CO2 from the static closed chamber was computed according to the accumulation of CO2 flux in the closed chamber over time, the volume of the closed chamber, and the expanse of the soil enveloped by the static closed chamber, using the methods of IAEA [41] and Widén and Lindroth [42]. The peat soil CO2 flux was determined using linear regression analysis (relationship between CO2 flux and time), after which the flux values were expressed in kg ha−1 yr−1 [41,42].
Throughout the soil CO2 monitoring at the experimental site, soil temperature and meteorological data (humidity, rainfall, and temperature) were collected, respectively, using a temperature sensor (Eijkelkamp IP68, Giesbeek, The Netherlands) and a portable weather station (WatchDog 2900ET, Spectrum Technologies Inc., Plainfield, IL, USA).

2.5. Laboratory Soil Carbon Dioxide Experiment

The effects of the recommended fertilization rates (Table 1) for pineapple cultivation (co-application of ZeoC and NPK fertilizers) utilized in the field experiment on peat soil CO2 emissions were also assessed under controlled laboratory conditions using the incubation method [15,43]. However, the fertilizer application rates were scaled down at a ratio of 1:5 ZeoC to compound NPK 30:1:32 fertilizer from the standard fertilizer recommendation. The laboratory experiments were conducted in triplicate using the completely randomized design (CRD) method at room temperature (26 °C). For the laboratory trial, the soil samples were obtained at the top horizon (0 cm to 10 cm) from the field site at Saratok, Sarawak, after which the soil samples (120 g) were placed into conical flasks (1 L). Afterwards, the peat soil samples in the conical flasks were aerobically incubated at 26 °C for four days to encourage microorganism activity [15,43]. Before starting the laboratory incubation study, the treatments (combination of ZeoC mineral and NPK fertilizers), as listed in Table 1, were placed into each of the conical flasks, after which the mixtures (treatments and peat soils) were meticulously manually mixed. Thereafter, the conical flasks containing the treatments were covered with silicone rubber lids, which were fitted with thermometers and PTFE–silicone septas for gas collection. The treatments were incubated at 80% soil field capacity for one month (30 days) at room temperature (26 °C). Gas samples (20 mL) from the conical flasks were collected daily using a syringe for 30 days prior to the sealing of the conical flask and after a four-hour-long interval [15], after which CO2 fluxes were measured using gas chromatography. The operating conditions for the gas chromatography used to analyze the CO2 emissions under field conditions, as described in Section 2.4, were also used for the laboratory incubation experiment. Therefrom, laboratory soil CO2 emissions, expressed in units of μg g−1 soil h−1, were computed according to the variation between the CO2 emitted before and after the sealing of the conical flask (four-hour-long interval). The peat soils in the conical flasks were sampled at 7, 15, and 30 days after incubation and, thereafter, the samples were analyzed for pH [40].

2.6. Data Analysis

The statistical data analysis for this study was executed utilizing the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) Version 9.1. The significant effects of the ZeoC treatments on soil CO2 emission, peat soil properties, and pineapple yield were assessed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), whereas Tukey’s new multiple-range test procedure at p ≤ 0.05 was utilized to obtain the treatment means deviating from the control treatments. Repeated-measures ANOVA, utilizing the linear mixed-effects model procedure, was performed considering the sampling time and CO2 flux monitoring as random effects and doses of the ZeoC fertilizers as fixed effects on peat soil CO2 emission. The relationship between peat soil CO2 emission and soil temperature was evaluated using Pearson correlation analysis with the Proc CORR procedure.

3. Results

3.1. Soil Carbon Dioxide Emitted from Moris Cultivated Sapric Soils

The ZeoC application significantly influenced the soil CO2 emission of the drained cultivated peat soils. However, the CO2 emission varied, depending on the ZeoC application rates and the Moris pineapple growth phases (Figure 4a). At three months of Moris pineapple growth (March 2017), the ZeoC-treated soils (Z1 and Z2) showed lower CO2 emissions compared with the rest of the treatments, including the controls (NPK fertilization without ZeoC: Z5) and the peat soil alone (Z6), but the CO2 emitted from Z3 was higher. Conversely, all of the treatments with ZeoC (Z1 to Z4) effectively reduced the CO2 emission compared with the NPK fertilization (Z5) at six months of pineapple growth (June 2017). However, the CO2 emissions from the peat soils that were treated with ZeoC (Z1 to Z4) were similar regardless of the amount of ZeoC applied. At nine months of the Moris pineapple growth (flower initiation stage in September 2017), the rest of the ZeoC treatments (Z1 to Z4) displayed significantly minimized CO2 emission compared with the controls (Z5 and Z6). Similarly, relative to the NPK fertilization without ZeoC (Z5) and the untreated peat soils (Z6), the mean CO2 emissions were lower in all of the treatments with ZeoC (Z1 to Z4) (Figure 4b) throughout the pineapple planting cycle. The mean soil CO2 emissions (inclusive of all of the ZeoC treatments and the controls: Z1 to Z6) were higher at three months of pineapple growth, after which the peat CO2 emission decreased until nine months of pineapple growth (Figure 4c).
Throughout the Moris pineapple planting cycle, there was no specific soil CO2 emission trend with the time of gas flux measurement (Figure 5) and fertilization (Figure 6). However, the CO2 emitted from the NPK-fertilized peat soil (Z5) remained higher on days one and seven following fertilization, relative to the other treatments, except at nine months of pineapple growth (Figure 6c). This observation occurred throughout the pineapple growth phases (Figure 6a,b). At three months after planting, the mean CO2 emission (inclusive of all of the ZeoC treatments and controls: Z1 to Z6) remained high on day one following pineapple fertilization but decreased on day seven (Figure 7a). Conversely, the average CO2 emissions were similar, irrespective of the fertilization period, at six months of pineapple growth (Figure 7a). At the flowering phase (nine months of growth), the mean CO2 emission remained high on days seven and fifteen following pineapple fertilization but decreased on days one and thirty (Figure 7a). Throughout the pineapple planting cycle, the average CO2 emission (inclusive of all of the ZeoC treatments and controls: Z1 to Z6) remained high on days one and fifteen following pineapple fertilization but decreased on days seven and thirty (Figure 8a).
Relative to the time of gas flux measurement, the mean CO2 emitted was lower at noon but higher in the morning (Figure 7b) at three months of pineapple growth (March 2017). Likewise, at six months of pineapple growth (Figure 7b), the mean CO2 emission decreased from noon until the following morning but remained high in the previous morning. At nine months of plant growth (Figure 7b), the average CO2 emitted was higher at noon but lower in the ensuing morning. During the Moris planting cycle in 2017 (Figure 8b), the mean CO2 emission (inclusive of all of the ZeoC treatments and controls: Z1 to Z6) peaked in the morning but was lower throughout the rest of the day (noon, evening, midnight, and the ensuing morning).
Throughout the Moris planting cycle in 2017, no significant relationship was observed between the soil temperature and the peat soil CO2 emission (Table 2), although the average soil temperature did differ with the time of gas flux measurement. Throughout the pineapple planting cycle, the ZeoC-amended sapric soils (Z1 to Z4) showed a decreased soil acidity relative to the NPK fertilization without ZeoC (Z5) and the untreated peat soils (Z6) (Figure 9a).

3.2. Laboratory Soil Carbon Dioxide Experiment

Under controlled laboratory conditions, the mean CO2 emissions from the ZeoC-amended peat soils (Z2, Z3, and Z4) were significantly lower relative to the controls (NPK fertilization without ZeoC and untreated soils: Z5 and Z6, respectively), except for Z1 (Figure 10a). Contrarily, the CO2 emissions from the controls (Z5 and Z6) were higher throughout the incubation study. It is worth noting that the peat soils that were amended with higher rates of ZeoC (Z3 and Z4) were most effective at decreasing CO2 emissions compared to that of the other treatments, including the NPK fertilization without ZeoC and the untreated peat soils (Z5 and Z6). Compared with the time of incubation, with the exception of the non-treated peat soils (Z6), the average CO2 emissions from the ZeoC-amended soils (Z1 to Z4) and the NPK fertilization (Z5) were higher on day 1 following pineapple fertilization, after which the CO2 emission gradually decreased until day 30 (Figure 10b). Throughout the laboratory incubation experiment, the ZeoC-amended peat soils (Z1 to Z4) demonstrated higher soil pH values relative to the controls (Z5 and Z6), which remained acidic (Figure 9b).

4. Discussion

4.1. Effect of ZeoC Application on Soil Carbon Dioxide Emitted from Moris Cultivated Sapric Soils

Throughout the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (three, six, and nine months of pineapple growth), the effectiveness of the ZeoC treatment in reducing peat CO2 emission following compound NPK fertilization demonstrated the capacity of the zeolite mineral to adsorb peat organic substances and polar CO2 via physical and chemical adsorption mechanisms [28,30,33]. The adsorption of organic material onto the crystal lattices and surface frameworks of the ZeoC suppressed the peat organic material degradation, thus causing low CO2 emission [30,33]. ZeoC is able to adsorb CO2 within the cavities of its internal surface, due to the small size of the CO2 molecule, which is approximately 0.33 nm [28,33]. However, the adsorption of polar CO2 by the ZeoC-treated peat soils depends on the number of exchangeable cations in its channels [44], because the exchangeable cations in the ZeoC are able to interact and adsorb CO2 via chemisorption. This observation is consistent with the composition of the ZeoC, such as the existence of exchangeable cations, particularly Fe, K, Ca, Mg, and Na. These cations were identified using energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy (Section 2.2). Nevertheless, the competing interactions between the positively charged and exchangeable nutrients, namely ammonium, Na, K, Fe, Ca, and Mg, indirectly restrict the CO2 adsorption, since the unoccupied exchange sites of the ZeoC are inadequate to retain both cations and CO2 molecules onto ZeoC’s charged lattices and structured framework simultaneously. This might explain the ineffectiveness of Z3 (14 g of ZeoC) in decreasing the CO2 emission at three months of pineapple growth in March 2017. This also explains the insignificant differences in the CO2 emissions between the ZeoC-treated peat soils, regardless of the amount of ZeoC used (Z1 to Z4: 5 g to 20 g of ZeoC), throughout the pineapple growth phases and at six months after planting. In addition, the ZeoC’s high Si:Al oxide ratio might have restricted the CO2 adsorption because of the limited number of charged structured frameworks of the ZeoC mineral induced by the exchange of Si4+ by Al3+. Also, the production of carbonates, which are able to bond with the oxygen-linked Si/Al via chemisorption, caused the rupture of the Al–O bond, thus resulting in the restriction of CO2 sorption on the surface of the CZ [29].
Throughout the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (three, six, and nine months of pineapple growth), the differences in the CO2 emission following pineapple fertilization across time relate to the diversity of the peat microbial community [12] and the heterotrophic activities at the top horizon of the sapric soil (0 cm to 10 cm), where the organic matter degradation predominantly occurs [3]. At three months of pineapple growth, in March 2017, the peat CO2 emission peaked at day one following pineapple fertilization, because of the easily accessible nutrients of the NPK fertilizers for microbial metabolism. This process increases the peat soil degradation. On the contrary, the lower CO2 emitted on days one and seven after fertilization, at nine and three months of pineapple growth, respectivley, was unexpected. However, it is possible that the CO2 emission was influenced by the availability of nutrients in the sapric soils that were treated with ZeoC, which affected the activity of the microbial metabolism.
The sapric soil CO2 emission was influenced by the time of the gas flux measurement; however, these findings (Table 2) were inconsistent with the insignificant correlation between the soil temperature and the CO2 emission. This demonstrates that, although the peat soil temperature controls the CO2 emission, changes in the flux CO2 emission across time somewhat depend on a moderate soil temperature fluctuation in Southeast Asia’s monsoon seasons during the flux measurement.
The early growth of the pineapple root structure explains the higher soil CO2 emission at three months of pineapple growth in March 2017. Conversely, the reduction in the CO2 emitted from the peat soil at nine months of pineapple growth can be ascribed to the growth development of the Moris, which was less active at the flower initiation stage. Nevertheless, it is possible that the microbial degradation of the root exudates, particularly at the rhizosphere, influenced the peat soil CO2 emission throughout the pineapple planting cycle [10,12]. Root exudates are organic compounds that are of low molecular weight and are easily degraded and labile. This product serves as another source of energy for the peat soil microorganisms, with a corresponding release of CO2 as a by-product of the microbial metabolism [12,45,46,47].
Throughout the pineapple planting cycle, the higher CO2 emission from the compound NPK-30:1:32-fertilized peat soils is expected, because chemical fertilizers do not only provide nutrients for the plants and soil microorganisms, but they also affect the peat soil pH and the microbial activities [13,14,48]. This process accelerates the peat decomposition, accompanied by CO2 emission as a consequence of the soil microbial activity [12]. By comparison, the CO2 emission from the non-treated peat soils occurs when the peat organic matter is decomposed by microorganisms under aerobic conditions [3,49,50]. However, their CO2 emissions are regulated by heterotrophic activities, particularly at the sapric top horizon, which is influenced by water table fluctuation [3,7,12].
The ability of the ZeoC mineral to resist changes in pH by decreasing soil acidity throughout the pineapple planting cycle relates to the slow accretion of the ZeoC at the sapric top horizon, because the ZeoC does not weather and disintegrate rapidly [51]. This suggests that ZeoC could be used as an alternative liming material by pineapple growers to not only reduce liming using materials such as hydrated lime or dolomite on cultivated peatlands, but also to manage pineapple cultivation sustainably by minimizing the CO2 emissions via the combined utilization of ZeoC and compound NPK fertilizers at the vegetative and flowering phases. This practice offers a viable agronomic management option for pineapple growers, because liming applications using common liming materials might induce soil CO2 emission through more heterotrophic and autotrophic respirations [14].
The average fruit weight of a Moris pineapple ranges between 1.5 and 1.8 kg/fruit [34,52]. Both ammonium and K are essential for ensuring optimum pineapple plant growth, as well as increasing the yield and improving the pineapple fruit quality [34,53]. In this present study, the ZeoC-amended sapric soils (5 g to 20 g of ZeoC) had a higher fresh pineapple fruit weight (approximately 2.03 kg to 2.17 kg fruit−1), with improved pineapple sweetness (ranging between 13.32 °Brix), compared with compound the NPK 30:1:32 fertilization (Figure A2). The affinity of the ZeoC mineral for K and ammonium ions [24,54], coupled with the capacity of the ZeoC mineral to resist changes in pH by reducing the sapric soil acidity, increases the availability of macronutrients, particularly ammonium and K, for absorption by the Moris pineapple plants. This finding concurs with the high sapric soil pH values (Figure 9a) and the increase in the N and K uptake of the Moris pineapple plants (Figure A3) whose soils were amended with ZeoC throughout the pineapple planting cycle in 2017. These findings concur with preceding reports that have also substantiated the ability of ZeoC to adsorb and regulate the macronutrients for plant uptake in order to ensure a good yield and fruit quality [55,56].
Based on the preceding discussion, the results of the field experiments suggest that amending sapric soils with NPK 30:1:32 (application rate of 20 g/plant), in conjunction with the ZeoC mineral (application rate of 5 g to 20 g), following pineapple fertilization at the vegetative and flower initiation stages is effective in minimizing the CO2 emissions of pineapple cultivation on drained sapric soils without reducing Moris pineapple productivity, including the fresh fruit weight and fruit taste. The results of the field experiments concur with the postulated hypothesis of this study. It is worth emphasizing that the slow build-up of the ZeoC mineral at the sapric top horizon played an essential role in decreasing CO2 emission, because ZeoC does not rapidly weather and disintegrate. The findings from this study suggest that including ZeoC in the pineapple fertilization regime offers an alternative restorative agricultural practice for pineapple growers to manage drained peat soils sustainably, as well as reducing the production cost (via liming) and increasing the revenue for pineapple plantations.

4.2. The Effect of ZeoC on Soil Carbon Dioxide Emission from Peat Soils—A Laboratory Incubation Study

For the laboratory incubation experiment, the ability of the ZeoC mineral (treatments Z2 to Z4) to minimize the CO2 emissions after NPK fertilization concurs with the findings of the field study. This finding buttresses the ability of the ZeoC mineral to adsorb peat organic matter and polar CO2 onto its lattices and structured framework. However, the ineffectiveness of Z1 (the treatment with the lowest amount of ZeoC: 5 g) in decreasing the CO2 emission was unforeseen. Nonetheless, it is possible that the competing interactions between exchangeable nutrients, organic matter, other nutrients, and N2O for sorption onto the ZeoC indirectly restrict the CO2 adsorption, because the unoccupied exchange sites of the ZeoC mineral are inadequate to retain both the CO2 molecules and the organic matter onto ZeoC’s charged lattices and structured framework at the same time. Moreover, it is also possible that the lower amount of ZeoC used in Z1 (5 g) limited the number of exchange sites for the CO2, organic matter, cations, and anions, such as phosphate and nitrate, for simultaneous sorption onto the ZeoC. Conversely, the higher amounts of ZeoC in treatments Z3 (14 g) and Z4 (20 g) increased the number of exchange sites and surfaces of this zeolite mineral [57] for the adsorption of organic matter and polar CO2 via physical and chemical sorption mechanisms in order to inhibit organic matter decomposition. This elucidates the ability of the ZeoC mineral in Z3 and Z4 to reduce CO2 emission relative to the other ZeoC treatments, including the controls comprising the standard NPK fertilization for pineapple and the untreated sapric soils under the controlled laboratory experiment. In comparison with the field experiment, all of the ZeoC treatments (Z1 to Z4) were applied every three months during the pineapple vegetative and flowering stages during fertilization. This process led to the slow accumulation of the ZeoC mineral at the top horizon of the sapric soil, thereby enabling the adsorption of CO2 and organic material onto ZeoC’s lattices and structured framework. This relatively explains the effectiveness of all of the ZeoC treatments (ZeoC application rates of 5 g to 20 g) in minimizing the CO2 emission of pineapple cultivation compared with the laboratory study. Moreover, the CO2 emission peaked on day one of the incubation because of the easily accessible nutrients of the NPK fertilizers for microbial metabolism. This process increases peat soil oxidation. Furthermore, it is possible that the gradual release of nutrients with the ZeoC treatments influenced the microbial metabolism activity, resulting in low CO2 emission subsequently throughout the incubation period. Although the soils that were treated with the standard NPK fertilizers and the untreated sapric soils remained acidic throughout the incubation period, the higher soil pH with ZeoC (Z1 to Z4) (pH range: 6.15 to 6.79) (Figure 9b) illustrates the capacity of this natural zeolite to buffer peat soil pH. These findings concur with the results obtained in this field experiment.

5. Conclusions

The co-application of ZeoC with a compound NPK fertilizer minimizes CO2 emissions and improves the soil pH in pineapple-cultivated sapric soils. The effectiveness of the natural zeolite of the ZeoC species in minimizing soil CO2 emissions is associated with the adsorption of peat organic matter and polar CO2 onto the lattices of the ZeoC through physical and chemical adsorption. There was no significant variation in peat CO2 emission reduction with the amount of ZeoC used (with application rates of 5 g to 20 g of ZeoC). This suggests that monthly fertilization with the co-application of ZeoC (Z1: 5 g) and an NPK fertilizer (20 g) should be cost effective for reducing CO2 emission without compromising the peat soil and pineapple productivity. However, comprehensive studies on refining the formulation rates of ZeoC as a potential soil amendment are crucial, not only to minimize CO2 emission, but also to manage pineapple farming sustainably in organic soils. Additionally, the effects of ZeoC application in conjunction with and without standard compound NPK fertilizer need to be assessed, because peat soils’ CO2 emission is affected by the soil microbial activities. Also, the long-term monitoring of soil CO2 emissions from pineapple plantations is required in order to corroborate the findings of this current study, since abiotic factors such as rainfall distribution, the water table, temperature, peat type and its degree of decomposition, and soil microbial biota may affect the outcome of the study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.N.L.K.C.; methodology, L.N.L.K.C. and O.H.A.; validation, L.N.L.K.C. and O.H.A.; formal analysis, L.N.L.K.C., O.H.A. and S.S. (Shamsiah Sekot); investigation, L.N.L.K.C. and O.H.A.; resources, L.N.L.K.C. and O.H.A.; data curation, L.N.L.K.C. and O.H.A.; writing—original draft preparation, L.N.L.K.C.; writing—review and editing, L.N.L.K.C., O.H.A. and S.S. (Syahirah Shahlehi); visualization, L.N.L.K.C.; supervision, L.N.L.K.C. and O.H.A.; project administration, L.N.L.K.C.; funding acquisition, L.N.L.K.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Government of Malaysia under the 12th Malaysia Plan Development Project and Fundamental Research Grant Scheme through the Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute, grant numbers P-RP515 and FRGS/1/2015/WAB01/MOA/02/2.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to extend their special thanks and appreciation to Universiti Putra Malaysia Bintulu Campus Sarawak, Malaysia, for their collaborative research. The facilities provided by MARDI Saratok and Universiti Putra Malaysia Bintulu Campus for this study are appreciated.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Supplementary data for soil CO2 emission analysis using gas chromatography, fruit quality attributes, and plant nutrient uptake for pineapple cv. Moris, cultivated on sapric soils.
Table A1. Operating conditions for the gas chromatography system (Agilent 7890A).
Table A1. Operating conditions for the gas chromatography system (Agilent 7890A).
ParametersValues
OvenTemperature: 100 °C
Maximum temperature: 275 °C
ColumnStainless steel packed column
Diameter: 0.125 inches
Dimension: 28 cm × 31 cm × 16 cm
Length: 20 ft
Flow rate: 15 mL min−1
Pressure: 32.6 psi
Flame ionization detectorTemperature: 250 °C
Hydrogen flow: 400 mL min−1
Air flow: 400 mL min−1
Make-up flow (helium): 25 mL min−1
Thermal conductivity detectorTemperature: 250 °C
Reference flow: 20 mL min−1
Make-up flow (helium): 3 mL min−1
Sustainability 15 15725 g0a1
Figure A1. An example of a chromatogram for gas samples analyzed using Agilent 7890A.
Figure A1. An example of a chromatogram for gas samples analyzed using Agilent 7890A.
Sustainability 15 15725 g0a1
Sustainability 15 15725 g0a2
Figure A2. (a) Fruit sweetness (°Brix) and (b) fruit weight of Moris pineapple at harvest amended with different rates of ZeoC and NPK 30:1:32 fertilizer. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with a different letter are significantly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05.
Figure A2. (a) Fruit sweetness (°Brix) and (b) fruit weight of Moris pineapple at harvest amended with different rates of ZeoC and NPK 30:1:32 fertilizer. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with a different letter are significantly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05.
Sustainability 15 15725 g0a2
Sustainability 15 15725 g0a3
Figure A3. Total (a) nitrogen and (b) potassium uptake (leaves, stems, and roots) of Moris pineapple at harvest amended with different rates of ZeoC and NPK fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with a different letter are significantly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05.
Figure A3. Total (a) nitrogen and (b) potassium uptake (leaves, stems, and roots) of Moris pineapple at harvest amended with different rates of ZeoC and NPK fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with a different letter are significantly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05.
Sustainability 15 15725 g0a3

References

  1. Veloo, R.; Paramananthan, S.; Van Ranst, E. Classification of tropical lowland peats revisited: The case of Sarawak. Catena 2014, 118, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Adon, R.; Bakar, I.; Wijeyesekera, D.C.; Zainorabidin, A. Overview of the sustainable uses of peat soil in Malaysia with some relevant geotechnical assessments. Int. J. Integr. Eng. 2012, 4, 38–46. [Google Scholar]
  3. Jauhiainen, J.; Silvennoinen, H.; Hämäläinen, R.; Limin, S.; Raison, R.J.; Vasander, H. Nitrous oxide fluxes from tropical peat with different disturbance history and management. Biogeosciences 2012, 9, 1337–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Warren, M.; Frolking, S.; Dai, Z.; Kurnianto, S. Impacts of land use, restoration, and climate change on tropical peat carbon stocks in the twenty-first century: Implications for climate mitigation. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2017, 22, 1041–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dhandapani, S.; Ritz, K.; Evers, S.; Yule, C.M.; Sjögersten, S. Are secondary forest second-rate? Comparing peatland greenhouse gas emissions, chemical and microbial community properties between primary and secondary forests in Peninsula Malaysia. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 655, 220–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Girkin, N.T.; Lopes dos Santos, R.A.; Vane, C.H.; Ostle, N.; Turner, B.L.; Sjögersten, S. Peat properties, dominant vegetation type and microbial community structure in a tropical peatland. Wetlands 2020, 40, 1367–1377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kechavarzi, C.; Dawson, Q.; Bartlett, M.; Leeds-Harrison, P.B. The role of soil moisture, temperature and nutrient amendment on CO2 efflux from agricultural peat soil microcosms. Geoderma 2010, 154, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jauhiainen, J.; Kerojoki, O.; Silvennoinen, H.; Limin, S.; Vasander, H. Heterotrophic respiration in drained tropical peat is greatly affected by temperature—A passive ecosystem cooling experiment. Environ. Res. Lett. 2014, 9, 105013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hatala, J.A.; Detto, M.; Sonnentag, O.; Deverel, S.J.; Verfaille, J.; Baldocchi, D.D. Greenhouse gas (CO2, CH4, H2O) fluxes from drained and flooded agricultural peatlands in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2012, 150, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chaddy, A.; Melling, L.; Ishikura, K.; Goh, K.J.; Toma, Y.; Hatano, R. Effects of long-term nitrogen fertilization and ground water level changes on soil CO2 fluxes from oil palm plantation on tropical peatland. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hoyos-Santillan, J.; Craignon, J.; Lomax, B.H.; Lopez, O.R.; Turner, B.L.; Sjögersten, S. Root oxygen loss from Raphia taedigera palms mediates greenhouse emissions in lowland neotropical peatlands. Plant Soil 2016, 404, 47–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kuzyakov, Y. Sources of CO2 efflux from soil and review of partitioning methods. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2006, 38, 425–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rastogi, M.; Singh, S.; Pathak, H. Emission of carbon dioxide from soil. Curr. Sci. 2002, 82, 510–517. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zhang, H.-M.; Liang, Z.; Li, Y.; Chen, Z.-X.; Zhnag, J.-B.; Cai, Z.-C.; Elsgaard, L.; Cheng, Y.; van Groenigen, K.J.; Abalos, D. Liming modifies greenhouse gas fluxes from soils: A meta-analysis of biological drivers. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2022, 340, 108182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Aerts, R.; Toet, S. Nutritional controls on carbon dioxide and methane emission from carex-dominated peat soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1997, 29, 1683–1690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. DOA. Crop Statistics Booklet (Food Crop Sub-Sector); Department of Agriculture Malaysia: Putrajaya, Malaysia, 2021; p. 108.
  17. FAOSTAT. Pineapple World Production 2020, Crops and Livestock Products Statistics; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2021; Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat (accessed on 30 September 2021).
  18. Darnaudery, M.; Fournier, P.; Lechaudel, M. Low-input pineapple crops with high quality fruit: Promising impacts of locally integrated and organic fertilization compared to chemical fertilisers. Exp. Agric. 2018, 54, 286–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Choo, L.N.L.K.; Ahmed, O.H. Partitioning carbon dioxide emission and assessing dissolved organic carbon leaching of a drained peatland cultivated with pineapple at Saratok, Malaysia. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 906021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ramesh, K.; Reddy, D.D. Chapter 4—Zeolites and their potential uses in agriculture. In Advances in Agronomy; Sparks, D.L., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2011; Volume 113, pp. 219–241. [Google Scholar]
  21. Jakkula, V.S.; Wani, S.P. Zeolites: Potential soil amendments for improving nutrient and water use efficiency and agriculture productivity. Sci. Rev. Chem. Commun. 2018, 8, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  22. Sangeetha, C.; Baskar, P. Zeolites and its potential uses in agriculture: A critical review. Agric. Rev. 2016, 37, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zwingmann, N.; Mackinnon, I.D.R.; Gilkes, R.J. Use of zeolite synthesized from alkali treated kaolin as K fertilizer: Glasshouse experiments on leaching and uptake of K by wheat plants in sandy soil. Appl. Clay Sci. 2011, 53, 684–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Belviso, C. Zeolite for potential toxic metal uptake from contaminated soil: A brief review. Processes 2020, 8, 820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Derbe, T.; Temesgen, S.; Bitew, M. A short review on synthesis, characterization, and applications of zeolites. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 2021, 6637898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kurniawan, T.; Nuryoto, N.; Firdaus, M.A. Zeolite for agriculture intensification and catalyst in agroindustry. World Chem. Eng. 2019, 3, 14–23. [Google Scholar]
  27. Mansouri, N.; Rikhtegar, N.; Panahi, H.A.; Atabi, F.; Shahraki, B.K. Porosity, characterization and structural properties of natural zeolite—Clinoptilolite—As a sorbent. Environ. Prot. Eng. 2013, 39, 141–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Wahono, S.K.; Stalin, J.; Addai-Mensah, J.; Skinner, W.; Vinu, A.; Vasilev, K. Physico-chemical modification of natural modernite-clinoptilolite zeolites and their enhanced CO2 adsorption capacity. Micropor. Mesopor. Mat. 2020, 294, 109871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bonenfant, D.; Kharoune, M.; Niquette, P.; Mimeault, M.; Hausler, R. Advances in principal factors influencing carbon dioxide adsorption on zeolites. Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 2008, 9, 013007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Natpinit, P.; Chantrawongphaisal, B.; Anuwattana, R.; Ditkaew, T.; Kongsomboon, C.; Thapnui, P.; Hongcharoensri, P. Reduction of greenhouse emissions using zeolite 4A under different fertilizer usages in rice cultivation. Appl. Environ. Res. 2019, 4, 70–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Jumadi, O.; Pagoga, S.; Rachmawaty; Hala, Y.; Hiola, S.F.; Karim, H.; Kaseng, E.S.; Inubushi, K. Production of N2O, CO2 gases and microbe responses in the soil amended with urea granulated zeolite. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1313, 012095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zaman, M.; Nguyen, M.L. Effect of lime or zeolite on N2O and N2 emissions from a pastoral soil treated with urine or nitrate-N fertilizer under field conditions. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2010, 136, 254–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hernández-Espinosa, M.A.; Quiroz-Estrada, K.; Petranovskii, V.; Rojas, F.; Portillo, R.; Salgado, M.A.; Marcelo, M.; Efraín, R.; Felipe, C. Adsorption of N2, N2O and CO2 on epistilbite natural zeolite from Jalisco, Mexico after acid-treatment. Mineral 2018, 8, 196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ahmed, O.H.; Ahmad Husni, M.H.; Rahim, A.A.; Mohd Hanafi, M. Sustainable Production of Pineapples on Tropical Peat Soils; Universiti Putra Malaysia Press: Serdang, Malaysia, 2013; pp. 1–141. [Google Scholar]
  35. Ming, D.W.; Dixon, J.B. Clinoptilolite in South Texas soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1986, 50, 1618–1622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Montalvo, S.; Guerrero, L.; Borja, R.; Sánchez, E.; Milán, Z.; Cortés, I.; de la la Rubia, M.A. Application of natural zeolites in anaerobic digestion process: A review. Appl. Clay Sci. 2012, 58, 125–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Wahono, S.K.; Prasetyo, D.J.; Jatmiko, T.H.; Suwanto, A.; Pratiwi, D.; Hernawan; Vasilev, K. Transformation of modernite-clinoptilolite natural zeolite at different calcination temperatures. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 251, 012009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hernawan; Wahono, S.K.; Maryana, R.; Pratiwi, D. Modification of Gunungkidul natural zeolite as bioethanol dehydrating agents. Energy Procedia 2015, 65, 116–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mohammed Selamat, M.; Abdul Rahman, H. Amalan kultur. In Penanaman Nanas—Nanas Makan Segar dan Nanas Kaleng; Mohammed Selamat, M., Ed.; MARDI: Serdang, Malaysia, 1996; pp. 22–34. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ismail, A.B.; Asing, J.; Zulkefli, M. Residual impact of various land clearing techniques on peat chemical characteristics. In A Case Study at MARDI Peat Research Station, Sessang, Sarawak, Malaysia; Ismail, A.B., Ong, H.K., Mohamad Hanif, M.J., Umi Kalsom, M.S., Eds.; MARDI: Serdang, Malaysia, 2007; pp. 33–61. [Google Scholar]
  41. IAEA. Methane and nitrous oxide flux measurements form soil and plant systems. In Manual on Measurement of Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agriculture; IAEA-TECDOC-674; IAEA: Vienna, Austria, 1992; pp. 45–79. [Google Scholar]
  42. Widén, B.; Lindroth, A. A calibration system for soil carbon dioxide—Efflux measurement chambers. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2003, 67, 327–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Sim, A.K.F.; Ishak, C.F.; Hanif, A.H.M.; Melling, L. Effect of N fertilization on N2O emission from a tropical peat soil: A laboratory incubation study. In Proceedings of the 14th International Peat Congress: Peatlands in Balance, Stockholm, Sweden, 3–8 June 2012. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ferretti, G.; Keiblinger, K.M.; Zimmermann, M.; Giuseppe, D.D.; Faccini, B.; Colombani, N.; Mentler, A.; Zechmeister-Boltenstren, S.; Coltorti, M.; Mastrocicco, M. High resolution short-term investigation of soil CO2, N2O, NOx, and NH3 emissions after different chabazite zeolite amendments. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2017, 119, 138–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Xiong, Q.; Hu, J.; Wei, H.; Zhang, H.; Zhu, J. Relationship between plant roots, rhizosphere microorganisms, and nitrogen, and its special focus on rice. Agriculture 2021, 11, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Dotaniya, M.L.; Meena, V.D. Rhizosphere effect on nutrient availability in soil and its uptake by plants: A review. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India Sect. B Biol. Sci. 2015, 85, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. McNear, D.H., Jr. The rhizosphere—Roots, soil, and everything in between. Nat. Educ. Know. 2013, 4, 1. [Google Scholar]
  48. Oktarita, S.; Hergoualc’h, K.; Anwar, S.; Verchot, V. Substantial N2O emissions from peat decomposition and N fertilization in an oil palm plantation exacerbated by hotspots. Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 104007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hoojier, A.; Page, S.; Canadell, J.G.; Silvius, M.; Kwadijk, J.; Wösten, H.; Jauhiainen, J. Current and future CO2 emissions from drained peatlands in Southeast Asia. Biogeosciences 2010, 7, 1505–1514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kløve, B.; Sveistrup, T.E.; Hauge, A. Leaching of nutrients and emission of greenhouse gases from peatland cultivation at Bodin, Northern Norway. Geoderma 2010, 154, 219–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Nur Aainaa, H.; Haruna Ahmed, O.; Ab Majid, N.M. Effects of clinoptilolite zeolite on phosphorus dynamics and yield of Zea Mays L. cultivated on an acid soil. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0204401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Mohammed Selamat, M. Biologi tanaman dan keperluan persekitaran. In Penanaman Nanas—Nanas Makan Segar Dan Nanas Kaleng; Mohammed Selamat, M., Ed.; MARDI: Serdang, Malaysia, 1996; pp. 7–16. [Google Scholar]
  53. Malézieux, E.; Bartholomew, D.P. Plant nutrition. In The Pineapple: Botany, Production and Uses; Bartholomew, D.P., Paull, R.E., Rohrbach, K.G., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2003; pp. 143–165. [Google Scholar]
  54. Mumpton, F. La roca magica: Uses of natural zeolites in agriculture and industry. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1999, 96, 33463–33470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Palanivell, P.; Ahmed, O.H.; Ab Majid, N.M. Minimizing ammonia volatilization from urea, improving lowland rice (cv. MR219) seed germination, plant growth variables, nutrient uptake, and nutrient recovery using clinoptilolite zeolite. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2016, 62, 708–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Omar, L.; Ahmed, O.H.; Jalloh, M.B.; Muhamad, A.M.N. Soil nitrogen fractions, nitrogen use efficiency and yield of Zea mays L. grown on a tropical acid soil treated with composts and clinoptilolite zeolite. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Murkani, M.; Nasrollahi, M.; Ravanbakhsh, M.; Bahrami, P.; Jaafarzadeh, N.; Fard, H. Evaluation of natural zeolite clinoptilolite efficiency for the removal of ammonium and nitrate from aquatic solutions. Environ. Health Eng. Manag. 2015, 2, 17–22. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 15 15725 g001
Figure 1. Site map of the experimental zone situated along Jalan Roban-Kabong at Saratok, Sarawak, Malaysia, (Source: Google Earth Map).
Figure 1. Site map of the experimental zone situated along Jalan Roban-Kabong at Saratok, Sarawak, Malaysia, (Source: Google Earth Map).
Sustainability 15 15725 g001
Sustainability 15 15725 g002
Figure 2. Surface morphology of the ZeoC mineral at selected magnifications: (a) 50 μm; (b) 10 μm; and (c) 5 μm.
Figure 2. Surface morphology of the ZeoC mineral at selected magnifications: (a) 50 μm; (b) 10 μm; and (c) 5 μm.
Sustainability 15 15725 g002
Sustainability 15 15725 g003
Figure 3. X-ray diffraction diffractogram of the ZeoC mineral.
Figure 3. X-ray diffraction diffractogram of the ZeoC mineral.
Sustainability 15 15725 g003
Sustainability 15 15725 g004
Figure 4. (a) Soil CO2 emissions in pineapple cultivation treated with different rates of ZeoC and NPK fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) at different pineapple vegetative stages; (b) mean CO2 emissions from treatments during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017; and (c) mean CO2 emissions (inclusive of all ZeoC treatments and controls: Z1 to Z6) from sapric soils during the Moris planting cycle in 2017. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with asterisks denote six months of pineapple growth and primes denote nine months of pineapple growth.
Figure 4. (a) Soil CO2 emissions in pineapple cultivation treated with different rates of ZeoC and NPK fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) at different pineapple vegetative stages; (b) mean CO2 emissions from treatments during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017; and (c) mean CO2 emissions (inclusive of all ZeoC treatments and controls: Z1 to Z6) from sapric soils during the Moris planting cycle in 2017. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with asterisks denote six months of pineapple growth and primes denote nine months of pineapple growth.
Sustainability 15 15725 g004
Sustainability 15 15725 g005
Figure 5. Soil CO2 emissions in pineapple cultivation administered with differing rates of ZeoC and compound fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) at differing times during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (vegetative and flowering phases). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with an asterisk, single primes, double primes, and carets represent gas measurement at noon, evening, midnight, and the ensuing morning, respectively.
Figure 5. Soil CO2 emissions in pineapple cultivation administered with differing rates of ZeoC and compound fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) at differing times during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (vegetative and flowering phases). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with an asterisk, single primes, double primes, and carets represent gas measurement at noon, evening, midnight, and the ensuing morning, respectively.
Sustainability 15 15725 g005
Sustainability 15 15725 g006
Figure 6. Soil CO2 emissions after fertilization in pineapple cultivation (administered with differing ratios of ZeoC and compound fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) on drained peat soils during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (vegetative and flowering phases). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with asterisks, single primes, and double primes denote days seven, fifteen, and thirty following fertilizations, respectively.
Figure 6. Soil CO2 emissions after fertilization in pineapple cultivation (administered with differing ratios of ZeoC and compound fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) on drained peat soils during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (vegetative and flowering phases). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with asterisks, single primes, and double primes denote days seven, fifteen, and thirty following fertilizations, respectively.
Sustainability 15 15725 g006
Sustainability 15 15725 g007
Figure 7. Mean soil CO2 emissions (a) after fertilization and (b) at differing times during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (vegetative and flowering phases). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with single primes and double primes denote the pineapple growth phases at six and nine months of growth, respectively.
Figure 7. Mean soil CO2 emissions (a) after fertilization and (b) at differing times during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017 (vegetative and flowering phases). The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080). Letters with single primes and double primes denote the pineapple growth phases at six and nine months of growth, respectively.
Sustainability 15 15725 g007
Sustainability 15 15725 g008
Figure 8. Averaged soil CO2 emissions (a) after fertilization and (b) at differing times, inclusive of all of the ZeoC treatments and controls (Z1 to Z6) during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080).
Figure 8. Averaged soil CO2 emissions (a) after fertilization and (b) at differing times, inclusive of all of the ZeoC treatments and controls (Z1 to Z6) during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080).
Sustainability 15 15725 g008
Sustainability 15 15725 g009
Figure 9. (a) Mean soil pH (inclusive of aerobic and saturated sapric horizons: 30 cm, 60 cm, and 90 cm) at different pineapple vegetative stages and (b) mean soil pH after thirty days of incubation in the laboratory, amended with differing ratios of ZeoC and NPK 30:1:32. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05. Letters with asterisks and primes denote six and nine months of Moris growth, respectively.
Figure 9. (a) Mean soil pH (inclusive of aerobic and saturated sapric horizons: 30 cm, 60 cm, and 90 cm) at different pineapple vegetative stages and (b) mean soil pH after thirty days of incubation in the laboratory, amended with differing ratios of ZeoC and NPK 30:1:32. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05. Letters with asterisks and primes denote six and nine months of Moris growth, respectively.
Sustainability 15 15725 g009
Sustainability 15 15725 g010
Figure 10. Mean soil (a) CO2 emitted from sapric soils administered with differing ratios of ZeoC and compound fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) under controlled laboratory conditions for 30 days and (b) CO2 emissions according to treatments (Z1 to Z6) in the laboratory incubation experiment. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 10. Mean soil (a) CO2 emitted from sapric soils administered with differing ratios of ZeoC and compound fertilizers (NPK ratio of 30:1:32) under controlled laboratory conditions for 30 days and (b) CO2 emissions according to treatments (Z1 to Z6) in the laboratory incubation experiment. The error bars denote the standard error of the mean. Means with differing letters are distinctly different by Tukey’s test at p ≤ 0.05.
Sustainability 15 15725 g010
Table 1. Selected fertilizer application ratios (mixture of ZeoC mineral and compound fertilizers) for Moris pineapple planted in sapric soils.
Table 1. Selected fertilizer application ratios (mixture of ZeoC mineral and compound fertilizers) for Moris pineapple planted in sapric soils.
Fertilizer TreatmentsAdministration Ratio
Z15 g ZeoC and 20 g compound fertilizer (NPK ratio—30:1:32)
Z210 g ZeoC and 20 g compound fertilizer (NPK ratio—30:1:32)
Z314 g ZeoC and 20 g compound fertilizer (NPK ratio—30:1:32)
Z420 g ZeoC and 20 g compound fertilizer (NPK ratio—30:1:32)
Z5Positive control: 20 g compound fertilizer (NPK ratio—30:1:32)
Z6Negative control: non-fertilized peat soil
Note: ZeoC—Natural zeolite of the clinoptilolite species.
Table 2. Correlation between soil temperature and CO2 emission from peat soils during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017.
Table 2. Correlation between soil temperature and CO2 emission from peat soils during the pineapple planting cycle in 2017.
VariablePlant Growth Phases (Soil Temperature)
3 Months of Plant Growth6 Months of Plant Growth9 Months of Plant Growth
Soil CO2 fluxR = −0.10972R = −0.09812R = −0.03134
p = 0.0552p = 0.0778p = 0.3290
TimeMean Soil Temperature (°C)
6.00 a.m.26.7 d27.3 b25.8 d
12.00 p.m.28.9 b29.7 a29.7 a
6.00 p.m.30.1 a30.3 a29.7 a
12.00 a.m.27.8 c27.8 b27.3 b
6 a.m. (ensuing morning)26.4 d26.9 b26.4 c
R values denote Pearson’s correlation coefficient, whereas p values denote the probability level at 0.05. Different letters in the same column indicate significant differences between means using Tukey’s test with p ≤ 0.05 (n = 1080).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Choo, L.N.L.K.; Ahmed, O.H.; Sekot, S.; Shahlehi, S. Minimizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions with Clinoptilolite Zeolite in Moris Pineapple Cultivation on Drained Sapric Soils. Sustainability 2023, 15, 15725. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215725

AMA Style

Choo LNLK, Ahmed OH, Sekot S, Shahlehi S. Minimizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions with Clinoptilolite Zeolite in Moris Pineapple Cultivation on Drained Sapric Soils. Sustainability. 2023; 15(22):15725. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215725

Chicago/Turabian Style

Choo, Liza Nuriati Lim Kim, Osumanu Haruna Ahmed, Shamsiah Sekot, and Syahirah Shahlehi. 2023. "Minimizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions with Clinoptilolite Zeolite in Moris Pineapple Cultivation on Drained Sapric Soils" Sustainability 15, no. 22: 15725. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215725

APA Style

Choo, L. N. L. K., Ahmed, O. H., Sekot, S., & Shahlehi, S. (2023). Minimizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions with Clinoptilolite Zeolite in Moris Pineapple Cultivation on Drained Sapric Soils. Sustainability, 15(22), 15725. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215725

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop