Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Dec 22;17(12):e0278824. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278824

Bentonite clay with different nitrogen sources can effectively reduce nitrate leaching from sandy soil

Zahid Hussain 1,¤,*, Tang Cheng 1,*, Muhammad Irshad 2, Riaz Ahmed Khattak 3, Chen Yao 4, Di Song 1, Muhammad Mohiuddin 5
Editor: Waqas ud Din Khan6
PMCID: PMC9779043  PMID: 36548269

Abstract

Nitrate (NO3-1) leaching from soils results in the lower soil fertility, reduced crop productivity and increased water pollution. The effects of bentonite clay mixed with various nitrogen (N) fertilizers on NO3-1 leaching from sandy soils haven’t been extensively studied. Therefore, the present lysimetric study determined NO3-1 leaching from bentonite [0, 2 and 4% (m/m)] treated sandy soil under three N sources (calcium nitrate [Ca(NO3)2], ammonium chloride [NH4Cl], and urea [CO(NH2)2] at the rate of 300 kg N ha-1). Results showed that bentonite markedly reduced NO3-1 release in the leachate, while 4% bentonite retained higher NO3 in the soil. The NO3-1 leaching from sandy soil varied with N sources as Ca(NO3)2 > NH4Cl > (CO(NH2)2. At early stages of leaching, higher concentrations of NO3-1 were detected in leachate with both NH4Cl and Ca(NO3)2, but leaching of NO3-1 increased with urea at later leaching stages. The amount of total NO3-1 retained in soil was conversely related to the amount of NO3-1 in the leachate. This study indicated that soil amendment with bentonite could efficiently mitigate NO3-1 leaching from sandy soil and hence prevent N fertilizer losses and groundwater pollution.

1. Introduction

Growing populations and changing diets require an increase in agricultural production which may lead to an increase in the use of fertilizers. As such, food demand and fertilizer use have been forecasted to double or triple by 2050 [1]. Chemical N fertilizers and organic manures are often applied to the soil in higher amounts for higher agriculture production, which may lead to the N losses due to removal from the cropped fields into the water bodies [2] and/or emission into the atmosphere [3, 4]. Of the applied N for crops, only 40–50% is being incorporated into the agricultural products [5] and the remainder N is subjected to the substantial losses [6]. The rainfall intensity and irrigation water influence the NO3-1 loss in the soil profile [7, 8]. The N fertilizers, used either as urea or ammonium form, are biochemically converted to NO3-1 which is susceptible to leaching from soil-plant system and enter groundwater bodies [2]. Therefore, an effective technology is required to prevent NO3-1 losses from sandy soils.

Soil NO3-1 is originated from both organic and inorganic N sources. Leaching and drainage studies found that NO3-1 is the major form of N occurred in the soil water [810]. A number of factors including plant characteristics, seasonal and climatic changes, and soil properties govern NO3-1 leaching from soils [11, 12]. The specific factors include soil texture, soil N concentration, amount of applied N, type of fertilizer, precipitation amount and intensity, soil water holding capacity, types of crops, root length and N demand of next crop [13, 14]. Leaching of NO3-1-N is more common than leaching of NH4-N since both NO3-1-N and soil are negatively charged [15]. Over application or un-timely application of animal manures or commercial N fertilizers result in the nutrient imbalance in soils which lead to the increased N leaching rates, especially of NO3-1, into groundwater [12, 16]. Sandy soils, due to low water holding capacity [17], allow NO3-1 to leach down into the groundwater faster than the soils having fine textures, such as clay loams [13, 15]. Thus, leaching of NO3-1 through soil profile can potentially contaminate surface and groundwater [18]. Sandy soils with low organic matter may facilitate leaching of 10–15 mg L-1 of NO3-1 to groundwater [19]. About 20–25% of this NO3-1 may enter surface water via buffer streams and wetlands causing eutrophication of water bodies [20, 21].

The increasing unsustainable agricultural use of N fertilizers results in NO3-1 leaching into ground waters [22, 23] and runoff into surface water ecosystem producing unfavorable consequences [24], which adversely affect water quality [22, 25]. The increasing potential of contamination of water resources is linked with the inefficient management of N fertilizer when compared with the natural systems [2628]. The concentration of NO3-1 above 10 mg L-1 in drinking water are considered as harmful for human health [29]. Higher NO3-1 consumption has been affiliated with various illnesses, e.g., methemoglobinemia has been proven due to ingestion of over nitrate concentrations in water [30, 31]. The endogenous NO3-1 may chemically be transformed to carcinogenic N compounds leading to adverse effects of colorectal cancer [32] and bladder cancer [33]. Therefore, developing an effective technology to retain nutrients in soils is imperative to prevent NO3-1 leaching from soils. Soil amendments have been considered as management practice to reduce NO3-1 losses from sandy soils [34]. Bentonite, an alumina-siliceous clay material, has not been previously utilized to control NO3-1 leaching.

Bentonite, like other clays, are hydrous aluminosilicates with fine colloids of < 2 mm of soils [35]. Clays are composed of fine-grained clays minerals and crystals such as quartz, carbonates and oxides [35] and are considered to retain contaminants by anion and cation exchange processes and prevent leaching into groundwaters. Due to effective adsorption capacities, bentonite clay has been used for multiple purposes. Bentonite is also used to remove dyes, radioactive waste, purification of viral RNA and wastewater [3638]. Bentonite application as amendment enhanced soil fertility by increased soil carbon and potassium [39], while improved water holding capacity of sandy soils under drought stress [40]. Bentonite application to sandy acidic soil improved soil fertility by increasing availability of macro-nutrient (up to 30%) to plants [41]. Fertilizers, if used in combination with nano-dimensional adsorbents increase nutrient use efficiency and reduce nutrient leaching into groundwaters [42], Clay amended sandy soil significantly reduced N and P leaching by 20% to 60% [43]. Leaching of NH4-N was reduced by 70% from a mixture of biochar, urea and bentonite plus sepiolite clay [44]. However, it is still unclear that how the type of fertilizer and application of bentonite clay to soils can mitigate NO3-1 leaching.

A reduction in the NO3-1 leaching was expected when clay material was applied to the soil. Reports evaluating the interactive effects of bentonite material and N sources on the reduction of NO3-1 leaching from sandy soils are scanty. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to investigate the influence of bentonite on NO3-1 leachability from a sandy soil after application of calcium nitrate [Ca(NO3)2], ammonium chloride [NH4Cl], and urea [CO(NH2)2] as three N sources.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Lysimeter experiment

A leaching experiment was conducted in the Soil Science Laboratory at COMSATS University Islamabad, Abbottabad Campus, Pakistan following the idea of Zhao et al. [45]. For this purpose, PVC columns, with 0.60 m length and 0.15 m diameter, were installed to run the experiment. The bottles used for collecting leachate were installed on the floor. Filter papers were placed on porous bottom of the columns to prevent soil leaching. The columns were connected with bottles using small pipes for the collection of leachate. The connecting pipes were kept airtight to prevent evaporation from the leachate bottles. Locally collected sandy soil samples from agricultural land (0–12 cm depth) were utilized for the experiment. Bentonite material was commercially purchased and then air-dried. Both the soil and bentonite were analyzed for physico-chemical properties before the experiment. After air drying, 46 kg of the soil was added to each column (0.50 m length). The air-dried clay was applied at the rate of 0, 2 and 4% to the sandy soil packed in a PVC column. Three treatments of nitrogen (N) fertilizers namely calcium nitrate [Ca(NO3)2], ammonium chloride [NH4Cl], and urea [CO(NH2)2] were applied to the soil. Based on the bulk density of soil (1.3 g cm-1), each fertilizer was applied at 300 kg N ha-1. Initially, as the soil was dry, the amount of first water application was kept higher so that enough water may drain out to collect the leachate. For later leaching events, the leaching fraction (LF) was calculated by dividing the drained water by applied water. Then, the tap water was applied at leaching fraction of 0.3~0.4. Leachate was collected within 24 h after each water application. A total of five leaching events were covered, that is, 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th and 10th day. The graphical display of the experiment is illustrated in [Fig 1].

Fig 1. Graphical display of lysimeter experiment.

Fig 1

2.2 Laboratory analysis

Chemical analyses of soil, bentonite and tap water were carried out before experiment. Soil samples were air-dried and sieved via 2 mm sieve. The soil and air-dried bentonite material were tested for pH and electrical conductivity (EC) in 1:5 (w/v) soil-water suspensions by a pH meter (Model: HANNA HI 8520) and EC meter (Model: 4320 JENWAY), respectively [46]. The soil was saturated for overnight, weighed and then the water holding capacity (WHC) of the soil was calculated by the difference in the weight of soil [47]. The bulk density of soil was determined using cylindrical cores. The soil sample was weighed and placed in the oven at 105°C for 8 to 12 hours until the weight was constant. Bulk density was then calculated in the same way as described by Grossman and Reinsch [48].

The post-experiment soil was sampled in two layers (0–25 and 25–50 cm) from the PVC columns and was thoroughly mixed. A 10 g soil sample was shaken in 100 mL distilled water for 1 h and then the suspension was filtered. Moisture content in the soil samples was adjusted by oven drying few grams of soil. The leachate collected from 5 events was analyzed for NO3 concentration. The NO3-1 concentration in pre- and post-experiment soil, bentonite and leachate was determined by UV spectrophotometer (Model: LI-UV-7000) at 220 nm [49]. All the reagents/chemicals of Sigma Aldrich, Germany, were utilized during the experiment.

2.3 Statistical analysis

Data were statistically analyzed by OriginLab 2021 for graphical presentation. The three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on Sigmaplot. The three factors were taken as bentonite (0, 2% and 4%), N fertilizer sources ([Ca(NO3)2], [NH4Cl] and [CO(NH2)2]), and leaching events (1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th and 10th day) with three replications. A post hoc Tukey test was also performed to determine the significant difference between the levels of factors.

3. Results

3.1. Pre-experiment chemical analysis

Bentonite clay, soil and water were analyzed for chemical properties before experiment, which are presented in Table 1. Analysis revealed that soil had highest NO3-1 concentrations, compared to bentonite clay. The tap water had low concentrations of NO3-1. The electrical conductivity (EC) of bentonite was highest compared to soil and water samples, but still it fell below the category of non-saline (EC<4 dS m-1). However, the pH of bentonite was lower (pH<7) making it more acidic as compared to soil and water.

Table 1. Nitrate, electrical conductivity (EC) and pH of bentonite clay material, soil and tap water.

Material Nitrate EC (mS m-1) pH
Bentonite 23.5 mg kg-1 126.7 5.7
Soil 34.4 mg kg-1 87.8 7.8
Tap water 7.8 mg L-1 37.5 7.2

3.2. Effect of bentonite and N sources on NO3-1 leaching

Impact of bentonite clay mixed with different N sources on NO3-1 leaching is illustrated in [Fig 2]. Results showed NO3-1 concentration decreased by 12 to 19% in the leachate, irrespective of the source of N with increasing bentonite rates. The significantly highest reduction (20–25%) in NO3-1 leaching was recorded with Ca(NO3)2 with 4% bentonite as compared with CO(NH2)2 and NH4Cl at similar bentonite rates. At early stages of leaching, the leachate showed higher concentrations of NO3-1 in leachate with both NH4Cl and Ca(NO3)2, but leaching of NO3 increased with urea sources at later leaching stages [Fig 3]. Total NO3-1 loads were higher in soil with urea and Ca(NO3)2 treated soil at 4% bentonite as compared to NH4Cl [Fig 4]. The incubation of soil with bentonite (4%) reduced NO3 content by 7%, 20% and 8% with Ca(NO3)2, NH4Cl and CO(NH2)2 treated soil, respectively [Fig 5].

Fig 2. Average amount of leachate nitrate from bentonite treated sandy soil (from day 1 to day 10).

Fig 2

N, A and U indicate Ca(NO3)2, NH4Cl and CO(NH2)2, respectively. Bentonite clay was applied at the rate of 0%, 2% and 4%. *, ** and *** show significant differences at P<0.05, P<0,01 and P<0.001, respectively.

Fig 3. Nitrate leaching in bentonite amended sandy soil using Ca(NO3)2 (a), NH4Cl (b), and CO(NH2)2 (c) with 0%, 2% and 4% bentonite during five leaching events (days). *, ** and *** show significant difference at P<0.05, P<0,01 and P<0.001, respectively.

Fig 3

Fig 4. Residual nitrate loads (g) in soil after leaching events (days) at 0%, 2% and 4% bentonite with Ca(NO3)2 (N), NH4Cl (A), and CO(NH2)2 (U).

Fig 4

*, ** and *** show significant difference at P<0.05, P<0,01 and P<0.001, respectively.

Fig 5. Nitrate concentration in 4% bentonite clay mixed sandy soil after discrete incubation with Ca(NO3)2 (N), NH4Cl (A) and CO(NH2)2 (U), *, ** and *** show significant difference between treatments at P<0.05, P<0,01 and P<0.001, respectively.

Fig 5

3.3. Statistical analysis

A three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on NO3-1 leaching with 3 N sources, 3 levels of bentonite and 5 leaching events [Table 2]. Analysis showed that there was significant difference (P<0.001) within N sources, bentonite levels and leaching events (days). There was statistically significant (P<0.01) interaction among all the factors. The Tukey test revealed significant (P<0.05) difference between 0% and 2%, and 0% and 4% bentonite with all N sources on NO3-1 leaching, but the difference was not significant between 2% and 4% bentonite with all N sources [Table 2].

Table 2. Summary ANOVA on effect of bentonite and N sources on NO3-1 leaching at different leaching events.

Source of Variation DF SS MS F P
N sources (N) 2 2943336.13 1471668 14453 < 0.01
Bentonite levels (B) 2 74157.91 37078 364 < 0.01
Leaching event / day (D) 4 282061.82 70515 692 < 0.01
N x B 4 11270.48 2817 27 < 0.01
N x D 8 589355.42 73669 723 < 0.01
B x D 8 15955 1994 19 < 0.01
N x B x D 16 24125 1507 14 < 0.01
Residual 90 9164 101
Total 134 3949426 29473

4. Discussion

Results showed that irrespective of the source of N, the NO3-1 leaching consistently decreased with increasing bentonite application showing the sequences of fertilizer type as: Ca(NO3) 2 > NH4Cl > CO(NH2)2 [Fig 2]. Form of N leached from the soil columns was closely related to the type of fertilizer applied to the soil [50]. The NO3-1 fertilizers appeared to be more sensitive to the leaching, especially in sandy soils [51] and also to the denitrification [52] as compared to urea or ammonium fertilizers. Also, NO3-1 leaching is substantially higher in free-drained soils [53], such as sandy soil with macropores used in the present study.

Application of bentonite decreased NO3-1 leaching, regardless to the rate of application. The [NO3-1] decreased with increasing bentonite treatments level. Whereby higher NO3-1 concentration was observed in NO3-1 and NH4 containing fertilizers during the initial leaching [Fig 3]. Urea form of N showed consistent increases in NO3-1 concentrations in water collected in later leaching stages [Fig 3]. This could be associated with increased nitrification process in soils under unsaturated conditions [54], which might have resulted in increased NO3-1 leaching at later stages. Accumulation of NO3-1 was more in the soil sampled from the lower layer of the column after a leaching process, showing the sequence as CO(NH2)2 > NH4Cl > Ca(NO3)2.

The amount of total NO3-1 retained in soil was termed as nitrate loads conversely related to the amount of NO3-1 in the leachates [Fig 4]. An enhanced application of bentonite significantly retained NO3-1 in the soil columns. A higher amount of NO3-1 was retained in the soil amended with 4% bentonite. The application of bentonite clay enhanced soil moisture and improved macro-aggregate development [55] which improved soil quality through structural development, by increased exchange of anions and cations [56] and helped in reduced leaching while promoting nutrient retention [57].

Enrichment of sandy soils with bentonite increased the porosity and altered the pore-size distribution [58]. The interactions of bentonite with biochar and urea improved soil properties by diffusing soil moisture which controlled the mobility of nutrients within soils [59], thus with high water retaining capacity, increased exchange capacity, swelling, thermal stability and slow-releasing characteristics, bentonite offers valuable solution to reduced nutrient leaching from loose soils.

Higher quantity of NO3-1 was retained in urea treated soil followed by nitrate and ammonium containing fertilizers [Fig 4]. Such retention could be attributed to the transformation of NO3-1 in urea contained soil after few days of incubation. Across all N sources, the application of bentonite (4%) markedly limited the release of NO3-1. After incubation, bentonite contents reduced the magnitude of NO3-1 among fertilizers as follow: 7% in Ca(NO3)2, 20% in NH4Cl and 8% in urea treated soil [Fig 5]. The soil having negatively charged sites attracts more positively charged NH4 as compared to the negatively charged NO3-1, and therefore the NH4 has been considered to be a less mobile in soils, than NO3-1 [60, 61].

The effect of bentonite on the leachability of NO3-1 varied with different N fertilizers. The NO3-1 leaching consistently decreased with increasing bentonite application showing the sequences of fertilizer type as: Ca(NO3) 2 > NH4Cl > CO(NH2)2 [Fig 2]. Addition of Ca as Ca(NO3)2 increased the adsorptive capacity of bentonite at low pH (5–6), while higher concentration of NO3-1 ion due to the addition of calcium nitrate as N source resulted in increased adsorption of NO3-1 at bentonite clay surfaces [62]. The mechanism can be further explained by Ca hydrolysis, which resulted into the formation of less soluble Ca(OH)2, releasing more H+ ions, thus acidifying the media [Eq 1] [63]. Under low pH, the anion exchange capacity of bentonites in significantly increased which offers more positive sites to attract NO3-1 on its surface [Eq 2], which increased the retention of NO3-1 ions on soil colloids due to adsorption phenomenon [Eq 3]. This ultimately reduced NO3-1 leaching from sandy soil and showed lower NO3-1 concentrations in leachate. The entire process can be explained as follows, where A is dissociated anion and X is the soil colloidal surface

Ca2++H2OCaOH2+2H+ (1)
X+H+X++HA (2)
X++NO3XNO3 (3)

Surface charge of variable charge clays varies with changes in pH of soil solution, therefore, at low pH, the anion exchange capacity exceeds cation exchange capacities which retain more NO3-1 on its surfaces [64], while increasing the mobility of NH4 in such conditions. However, the mobility of both N forms can be maintained by adjusting the rates of Ca(NO3)2 and urea along with bentonite clay under field conditions. The study suggested that bentonite amendment with Ca(NO3)2 as N sources could effectively mitigate NO3-1 leaching from sandy soils.

5. Conclusions

It is concluded that N sources and bentonite application were important factors affecting the NO3-1 leaching from sandy soil. Application of N sources enhanced NO3-1 leaching from the sandy soil. The NO3-1 leaching decreased in the order of Ca(NO3)2 > NH4Cl > urea. Bentonite substantially reduced NO3-1 in the leachate. Urea showed higher NO3-1 at the later leaching events. Higher contents of NO3-1 were retained in the soil with 4% bentonite. Higher NO3-1 contents were accumulated in the lower part of the soil column after a leaching process. This experiment suggests that bentonite clay chemistry with added Ca(NO3)2 provide better understanding of anion exchange capacity to retain higher NO3-1 concentrations in soil, thereby decreasing NO3-1 leaching from sandy soil. Further research is suggested to investigate the effects of different clay types on the dynamics of nitrate under field conditions.

Supporting information

S1 File

(PDF)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

Yunnan Provincial Major Science and Technology Special Plan Projects (202102AE090030) Received by Tang Cheng.

References

  • 1.Elferink M, Schierhorn F (2016) Global demand for food is rising. Can we meet it? Harvard Business Review, Harward Business Publishing, Canada.
  • 2.Bijay-Singh, Craswell E (2021) Fertilizers and nitrate pollution of surface and ground water: an increasing pervasive global problem. SN Applied Science 3: 518. 10.1007/s42452-021-04521-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Shah AN, Iqbal J, Tanveer M et al. (2017) Nitrogen fertilization and conservation tillage: a review on growth, yield, and greenhouse gas emissions in cotton. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 24: 2261–2272. 10.1007/s11356-016-7894-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Mosongo PS, Pelster DE, Li X, Gaudel G, Wang Y, Chen S, et al. (2022) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Response to Fertilizer Application and Soil Moisture in Dry Agricultural Uplands of Central Kenya. Atmosphere 13: 463. 10.3390/atmos13030463 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Houlton BZ, Almaraz M, Aneja V, Austin AT, Bai E, Cassman KG, et al. (2019) A world of cobenefits: Solving the global nitrogen challenge. Earth’s Future 7: 865–872. doi: 10.1029/2019EF001222 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Xu P, Chen A, Houlton BZ, Zeng Z, Wei S, Zhao C, et al. (2020) Spatial Variation of Reactive Nitrogen Emissions from China’s Croplands Codetermined by Regional Urbanization and Its Feedback to Global Climate Change. Geophysical Research Letters 47: e2019GL086551. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Pathak H, Jain N, Bhatia A, Kumar A, Chatterjee D, et al. (2016) Improved nitrogen management: A key to climate change adaptation and mitigation. Indian Journal of Fertilizers 12: 151–162. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Lu J, Bai Z, Velthof GL, Wu Z, Chadwick D, Ma L (2019) Accumulation and leaching of nitrate in soils in wheat-maize production in China. Agricultural Water Management 212: 407–415. 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.08.039 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kladivko EJ, Van Scoyoc GE, Monke EJ, Oates KM, Pask W (1991) Pesticides and nutrient movement into subsurface tile drains on s silt loam soil in Indiana. Journal of Environmental Quality 20: 264–270. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Jacinthe PA, Dick WA, Brown LC (1999) Bioremediation of nitrate-contaminated shallow soils using water table management techniques: Nitrate removal efficiency. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 42: 1251–1259. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Bibi S, Saifullah, Naeem A, Dahlawi S (2016) Environmental Impacts of Nitrogen Use in Agriculture, Nitrate Leaching and Mitigation Strategies. Hakeem et al. (eds.), Soil Science: Agricultural and Environmental Prospectives, Springer International Publishing Switzerland. 10.1007/978-3-319-34451-5_6 [DOI]
  • 12.Tamagno S, Eagle AJ, McLellan E, van Kessel C, Linquist BA, Ladha JK et al. (2022) Quantifying N leaching losses as a function of N balance: A path to sustainable food supply chains. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 324: 107714. 10.1016/j.agee.2021.107714 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Hallaq AHA (2010) The impact of soil texture on nitrates leaching into groundwater in the North Governorate, Gaza Strip. Journal of Social Sciences 38(2): 1–37. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Plošek L, Elbl J, Lošák T, Kužel S, Kintl A, Juřička D et al. (2017) Leaching of mineral nitrogen in the soil influenced by addition of compost and N-mineral fertilizer. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B. Soil and Plant Science 67(7): 607–614. 10.1080/09064710.2017.1322632 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Huddell AM, Galford GL, Tully KL, Crowley C, Palm CA, Neill C et al. (2020) Meta-analysis on the potential for increasing nitrogen losses from intensifying tropical agriculture. Global Change Biology 26: 1668–1680. 10.1111/gcb.14951 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Hatfield JL, Cambardella CA (2001) Nutrient management in cropping systems. In McFarland J and Sanderson M (ed.) Integrated management of land application of animal waste. (In press.). American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.
  • 17.Rasa K, Heikkinen J, Hannula M, Arstila K, Kulju S, Hyvaluoma J (2018) How and why does willow biochar increase a clay soil water retention capacity? Biomass and Bioenergy 119: 346–353. doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2018.10.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Wang H, Gao J-e, Li X-h, Zhang S-l, Wang H-j (2015) Nitrate Accumulation and Leaching in Surface and Ground Water Based on Simulated Rainfall Experiments. PLoS ONE 10(8): e0136274. 10.1371/journal.pone.0136274 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Gatiboni L, Osmond D (2019) Nitrogen Management and Water Quality, Publication No: AG-439-02, NC State Extension Publications, NC State University, USA.
  • 20.Johnson S, Burchell MR, Evans RO, Osmond DL, Gilliam JW (2012) Riparian Buffer Located in an Upland Landscape Position Does Not Enhance Nitrate-nitrogen Removal. Ecological Engineering 52: 252–261. 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2012.11.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.King SE, Osmond DL, Smith J, Dukes M, Evans RO, Knies S et al. (2015) Effects of Riparian Buffer Vegetation and Width: A 12-year Retrospective Study. Journal of Environmental Quality 45(4): 1243–1251. 10.2134/jeq2015.06.0321 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Hansen B, Thorling L, Schullehner J et al. (2017) Groundwater nitrate response to sustainable nitrogen management. Scientific Reports 7: 8566. 10.1038/s41598-017-07147-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ayyub CM, Haidar MW, Zulfiqar F, Abideen ZU, Wright SR (2019) Potato tuber yield and quality in response to different nitrogen fertilizer application rates under two split doses in an irrigated sandy loam soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition 42(15): 1850–1860. 10.1080/01904167.2019.1648669 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Alexander RB, Smith RA, Schwarz GE (1995) The regional transport of point and non-point source of nitrogen to the Gulf of Mexico. In Proc. Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Conf. Kenner LA, 5–6 Dec 1995. USEPA Publication National Center for Environment. Publ. and Inf. Washington, D.C.
  • 25.Zeb S, Waseem A, Malik AH, Mahmood Q (2011) Water quality assessment of Siran River, Pakistan. International Journal of Physical Sciences 6: 7789–7798. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kanwar RS, Stilenberg DER, Pfeiffer DL, Karlen TS, Simpkins WW (1993) Transport of nitrate and pesticides to shallow groundwater systems as affected by tillage and crop rotation practices, 270–273. In Proc. National Conference on Agricultural Research to Protect Water Quality.
  • 27.Randall GW (1997) Nitrate-N in surface waters as influenced by climatic conditions and agricultural practices. In Proc. Agriculture. and Hypoxia in the Mississippi Watershed Conference, St. Louis, MO. 14–15 July 1997. American Farm Bureau Federation, Park Ridge, IL.
  • 28.Cambardella CA, Moorman TB, Jaynes DB, Parkin TB, Karlen DL (1999) Water quality in Walnut Creek watershed: Nitrate nitrogen in soils, subsurface drainage water and shallow groundwater. Journal of Environmental Quality 28: 25–34. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.EPA (2022) National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations#Inorganic (Date of access: 28.08.2022).
  • 30.Kross BC, Hallberg GR, Bruner R, Cherryholmes K, Johnson KJ (1993) The nitrate contamination of private well water in Iowa. American Journal of Public Health 83: 270–272. doi: 10.2105/ajph.83.2.270 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.WHO (2022) Guidelines for drinking-water quality 4th ed., https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240045064 (Date of access: 28.08.2022).
  • 32.Espejo-Herrera N et al. (2016) Colorectal cancer risk and nitrate exposure through drinking water and diet. International Journal of Cancer 139: 334–346. https://doil.org/10.1002/ijc.30083. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Jones RR et al. (2016) Nitrate from Drinking Water and Diet and Bladder Cancer Among Postmenopausal Women in Iowa. Environmental Health Perspectives 124: 1751–1758. 10.1289/EHP191 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Irshad M, Waseem A, Umar M, Sabir MA (2014) Leachability of nitrate from sandy soil using waste amendment. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 45: 680–687. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Sirivastava A, Singh PK (2017) Adsorption of Nitrate from Ground Water using Indian Bentonite: Fixed Bed Column Study. International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology (IJERT) 6(5): 390–394. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Bentahar S, Dnik A, Khomri ME, Messaoudi NE, Mohammad AD, Noureddine E et al. (2018) Removal of a cationic dye from aqueous solution by natural clay. Journal of Groundwater for Sustainable Development 6: 255–262. 10.1016/j.gsd.2018.02.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.De Castro MLFA, Abad MLB, Sumalinog DAG, Abarca RRM, Paoprasert P, de Luna MDG (2018) Adsorption of Methylene Blue dye and Cu(II) ions on EDTA-modified bentonite: Isotherm, kinetic and thermodynamic studies. J. Sustain. Environ. Res. 28, 197–205. 10.1016/j.serj.2018.04.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lopez-Fernandez M, Vilchez-Vargas R, Jroundi F, Boon N, Pieper D, Merroun ML (2018) Microbial community changes induced by uranyl nitrate in bentonite clay microcosms. Applied Clay Science 160: 206–216. 10.1016/j.clay.2017.12.034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Hall DJM, Jones HR, Crabtree WL, Daniels TL (2010) Claying and deep ripping can increase crop yields and profits on water repellent sands with marginal fertility in southern Western Australia. Australian Journal of Soil Research 48: 178–187. 10.1071/SR09078. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Mi J, Gregorich EG, Xu S, McLaughlin NB, Liu J (2020) Effect of bentonite as a soil amendment on field water‑holding capacity, and millet photosynthesis and grain quality. Scientific Reports 10: 18282. 10.1038/s41598-020-75350-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Czaban J, Siebielec G (2013) Effects of Bentonite on Sandy Soil Chemistry in a Long-Term Plot Experiment (II); Effect on pH, CEC, and Macro- and Micronutrients. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 22(6): 1669–1676. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Zulfiqar F, Navarro M, Ashraf M, Akram NA, Munné-Bosch S (2019) Nanofertilizer use for sustainable agriculture: Advantages and limitations. Plant Science 289: 110270. 10.1016/j.plantsci.2019.110270 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Tahir S, Marschner P (2017) Clay Addition to Sandy Soil Reduces Nutrient Leaching—Effect of Clay Concentration and Ped Size. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 48(15): 1813–1821. 10.1080/00103624.2017.1395454. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Shi W, Ju Y, Bian R, Li L, Joseph S, Mitchell RG et al. (2020) Biochar bound urea boosts plant growth and reduces nitrogen leaching. Science of Total Environment 701: 134424. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134424 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Zhao C, Hu C, Huang W, Sun X, Tan Q, Di H (2010) A lysimeter study of nitrate leaching and optimum nitrogen application rates for intensively irrigated vegetable production systems in Central China. Journal of Soils and Sediments 10: 9–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Richard LA (1954) Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils (USDA Handbook 60) Washington, DC: USDA.
  • 47.Basso AS, Miguez FE, Laird DA, Horton R, Westgate M (2013) Assessing potential of biochar for increasing water-holding capacity of sandy soils. GCB-Bioenergy 5(2): 132–142. 10.1111/gcbb.12026 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Grossman RB, Reinsch TG (2002) Bulk density and linear extensibility: core method. In: Dane JH, Topp GC (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods. Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, WI, pp. 208–228. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Norman RJ, Stucki JW (1981) The determination of nitrate and nitrite in soil extracts by ultraviolet spectrophotometry. Soil Science Society of America 45: 347–353. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Zhou JB, Xi JG, Chen ZJ, Li SX (2006) Leaching and transformation of nitrogen fertilizers in soil after application of N with irrigation: A soil column method. Pedosphere 16(2): 245–252. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.De Boer HC, Deru JGC, Hoekstra NJ, Van Eekeren N (2016) Strategic timing of nitrogen fertilization to increase root biomass and nitrogen-use efficiency of Lolium perenne L. Plant and Soil 407: 81–90. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Harty MA, Forrestal PJ, Watson CJ, McGeough KL, Carolan R, Elliot C et al. (2016) Reducing nitrous oxide emissions by changing N fertilizer use from calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN) to urea based formulations. Science of Total Environment 563–564: 576–586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.De Boer HC (2017) Nitrate leaching from liquid cattle manure compared to synthetic fertilizer applied to grassland or silage maize in the Netherlands. Wageningen Livestock Research Wageningen, October.
  • 54.Zhang YM, Chen DL, Zhang JB, Edis R, Hu CS, Zhu AN (2004) Ammonia volatilization and denitrification losses from an irrigated maize-wheat rotation field in the North China Plain. Pedosphere 14(4): 533–540. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Zhang H, Chen W, Zhao B, Phillips LA, Zhou Y, Lapen DR et al. (2020) Sandy soils amended with bentonite induced changes in soil microbiota and fungistasis in maize fields. Applied Soil Ecology 146: 103378. 10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.103378. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Churchman GJ, Noble A, Bailey G, Chittleborough D, Harper R (2014) Clay addition and redistribution to enhance carbon sequestration in soils Soil Carbon. In: Hartemink AE, McSweeney K (eds.) Soil Carbon. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 327–335. 10.1007/978-3-319-04084-4_34. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Satje A, Nelson PN (2009) Bentonite treatments can improve the nutrient and water holding capacity of sugarcane soils in the wet tropics. Proceedings: Australian Society of Sugarcane Technology 31: 166–176. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Suzuki S, Noble AD, Ruaysoongnern S, Chinabut N (2007) Improvement in water-holding capacity and structural stability of a sandy soil in northeast Thailand. Arid Land Research Management 21: 37–49. [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Liu X, Liao J, Song H et al. (2019) A Biochar-Based Route for Environmentally Friendly Controlled Release of Nitrogen: Urea-Loaded Biochar and Bentonite Composite. Scientific Reports 9: 9548. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-46065-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Wang FL, Alva AK (2000) Ammonium adsorption and desorption in sandy soils. Soil Science Society of American Journal 64: 1669–1674. [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Wang Y, Zhang YP (2004) Ammonium adsorption in a Eum-Orthic Anthrosol at different solution / soil ratios and temperature. Pedosphere 14(2): 253–257. [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Ouakouak A, Youcef L, Achour S, Hamdi N (2018) Kinetics and equilibrium studies of nitrates adsorption onto natural Bentonite. Conference paper, Colloque International Sciences & Techniques de l’Eau & Environnement (STEE).
  • 63.Lohinger H (2019) Calcium Hydroxide. Epina ebook Series. UC Davis, University of California, USA
  • 64.Sollins P, Robertson GP, Uehara G (1988) Nutrient Mobility in Variable- and Permanent-Charge Soils. Biogeochemistry 6(3): 181–199. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Waqas ud Din Khan

5 Aug 2022

PONE-D-22-14894Bentonite clay mixed with different N sources significantly reduce nitrate leaching from sandy soilPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zahid Hussain,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

​The title and introduction of this manuscript needs to be revised thoroughly. Similarly, there are some serious concerns existed on English language used in this manuscript. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 02 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Waqas ud Din Khan, Ph. D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

"The authors received no specific funding for this work"

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution. 

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: 

"Authors appreciate the support of Yunnan Provincial Key Laboratory of Pollution Processes and Management in Plateau Lake Watershed (Project No: 202005AG070105) for funding this publication."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: 

"The authors received no specific funding for this work"

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

5. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Reviewed manuscript “Bentonite clay mixed with different N sources significantly reduce1

nitrate leaching from sandy soil” is an original and interesting study. Authors comprehensively evaluated the nitrate leaching in sandy soil that is beneficial for both environment and agriculture. I would suggest minor revision.

Following are some suggestions for further improvements:

From the title, I would suggest you to remove the words “mixed” and “significantly” to make it more catchy.

In abstract results should be extended to few more lines.

Journal format need to be followed regarding citations write up in text.

Introduction and Discussion section needs to further strengthen by latest studies on the subject.

Line 105: Company name and details for used material should incorporate

Line 106: for chemical for physical and chemical properties should be corrected

Line 120: Sentence not correct

Figure legends are too brief.

At some places in the text, there are grammatical mistakes that needs to be corrected by some native English colleague.

To further strengthen introduction, following latest studies etc. are suggested to cite:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2019.110270

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2019.1648669

Reviewer #2: General remarks:

1- The manuscript has an average quality of data. There must be some more experiments which supports different adsorption models to make the quality of this manuscript more better

2- The introduction part has not enough citations which is necessary to support your statements of manuscript.

3- Most of the references are old, there must be recent references from 2018 to onwards.

4- In the whole manuscript please replace NO3 to NO3−1

5- The discussion has been elaborated in a good way but it needs recent references.

6- Format all the references in the reference list according to PLOS ONE journal. https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html

Comment 1: please edit the title from “Bentonite clay mixed with different N sources significantly reduce nitrate leaching from sandy soil” to “Bentonite clay mixed with different nitrogen sources, significantly reduce nitrate leaching from sandy soil.”

Comment 2: line number 44 should be like “may lead to an increase in the use of fertilizers.” Instead of “will/may lead to an increase in the use of fertilizers.”

Comment 3: in the start of line 47 there is no reference cited after the word atmosphere.

Comment 4: from line 50 to 53 “Developing an effective technology to retain nutrients in soils is imperative to prevent NO3 leaching from soils. Soil amendments have been considered as management practice to reduce NO3 losses from sandy soils (Irshad et al., 2014). Bentonite, an alumina-siliceous clay material, has not been previously utilized to control NO3 leaching.”

There is no synchronization with the ongoing paragraph.

Comment 5: from line 47 to line 51 there is no single reference has been observed. Please support your statements with published research work.

Comment 6: in line 59 there must be root length instead of rooting length.

Comment 7: line 77 to 78 there is no supporting reference has been found. Please write a proper reference.

Comment 8: from line 84 to 87, the author discussed about different amendments to control nitrogen leaching. Author must elaborate that how many percent the amendment improved the nitrogen leaching as compare to control treatment.

Comment 9: in the last paragraph of introduction from 92 to 96, there must be proper objectives of the aimed study. Please write it.

Comment 10: in line 97 “Lysimeter experiment” has been described well but there is no supporting reference which describe that from where the author generated the idea.

Comment 11: in Fig.1, author must use subscript letters for representing the chemical formulas e.g [CO(NH2)2] should be written as [CO(NH2)2] please do it for the rest also.

Comment 12: in the line 123, the author discussed about water holding capacity analysis but did not mentioned the reference at the end. Please cite a reference to support the analysis method.

Comment 13: why there are double brackets in line 137 and 138 “((0 fertilizer, [Ca(NO3)2], [NH4Cl] and [CO(NH2)2])).” Please remove them.

Comment 14: from line 242 to 249 there is no supporting reference has been cited.

Comment 15: in the line 258, the NO3 should be written as NO3.

Reviewer #3: I would suggest to authors to address following comments,

How different sources of N applied NO3 leaching from sandy soil? What could be mechanistic explanation of this process.

Line 45-47, should be supported by doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7894-4

Significant amount of references are more than 15-20 years old, they need to be updated. For example, The United States Environmental Protection Agency set the standard for drinking water and health advisory level of 10 mg L-1 nitrate based on the human health risks (Kross et al., 1993), which is a very old figure.

Authors did not develop a link between NO3 leaching and sandy soil, they have provided a generalized overview of NO3 leaching in soil, but did not explain in the context of sandy soil and why authors have used sandy soil in this study?

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Fiza Pir Dad

Reviewer #3: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Review Report.docx

PLoS One. 2022 Dec 22;17(12):e0278824. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278824.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


30 Sep 2022

A detailed "Response to Reviewers" file has been uploaded.

Two reviewers (1 and 2) suggested changes in Title of the manuscript. The title was modified keeping in view of both reviewers. However, it can be further modified if suggested

New references has been added as suggested by all reviewers

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Waqas ud Din Khan

4 Nov 2022

PONE-D-22-14894R1Bentonite clay with different nitrogen sources reduce nitrate leaching from sandy soilPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zhaid Hussain

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 19 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Waqas ud Din Khan, Ph. D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: line no 105: please write here three sources names in objectives.

Line 32: The effects of bentonite clay on NO3 -1leaching from sandy soils are not

extensively studied. Author is sure that he is not using the sandy soil?

Line 55: The N fertilizers, used either as urea or ammonium form, is biochemically converted to NO3-1 which is susceptible to leaching from soil-plant system and enter groundwater bodies.

Please rewrite the line by replacing is with are.

Line 61, 73: NO3 should be replaced with NO3-1.

Reviewer #3: Authors have revised the manuscript and can be accepted in current form for publication. This is a very interested study and have showed the combination of Bentonite clay with different nitrogen sources to reduce N leaching from sandy soils.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: Yes: Fiza Pir Dad

Reviewer #3: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-14894_R1-.pdf

PLoS One. 2022 Dec 22;17(12):e0278824. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278824.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


7 Nov 2022

A separate file "Response to Reviewers" has been uploaded. It includes detailed response to the comments by reviewers.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Waqas ud Din Khan

24 Nov 2022

Bentonite clay with different nitrogen sources can effectively reduce nitrate leaching from sandy soil

PONE-D-22-14894R2

Dear Dr. Zahid Hussain,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Waqas ud Din Khan, Ph. D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: The manuscript is in good from now. Author has successfully addressed all the comments according to my expertise. I recommend this article to publish in Plos One.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: Yes: Fiza Pir Dad

**********

Acceptance letter

Waqas ud Din Khan

9 Dec 2022

PONE-D-22-14894R2

Bentonite clay with different nitrogen sources can effectively reduce nitrate leaching from sandy soil

Dear Dr. Hussain:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Waqas ud Din Khan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Review Report.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-14894_R1-.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES