Aggregate Stability in Historical

Charcoal Hearth Soils

Zoey Dodson
Stockton University
Galloway, NJ 08205
The purpose of this paper is to determine if historically produced charcoal in soil affects
aggregate stability.
This paper is for scientists and students interested in the effects of charcoal on soil.

Abstract
Studies have shown that charcoal amendments can improve many soil qualities, including
aggregate stability. In this study, an aggregate stability test and a slake test were performed in
order to determine if charcoal soils have an effect on aggregate stability. Charcoal hearth soils
and a control were sampled from multiple locations in Catoctin Mountain Park, MD and Sterling
State Forest, NY, where charcoal was historically produced in order to fuel iron furnaces. The
results show that there is no significant difference between the charcoal and control soils in terms
of percent water stable aggregates and resistance to slaking. This reveals that charcoal does not
affect the aggregate stability of the soils from the sampled sites.
Introduction
The focus of this study is the aggregate stability of charcoal hearth soils. Charcoal is
produced through pyrolysis, or the heating of wood in oxygen-deprived conditions. It is porous,
has low density, and high carbon (Sun and Lu, 2014). The ironworks at Sterling Lake in Sterling
State Forest were started in 1736 and shutdown in 1891 (Atlas Obscura, 2015). The Catoctin
Furnace was utilized from 1776 until 1873. The charcoal hearth soils of the sites in this study
were developed from people burning piles of wood in order to make charcoal to fuel the iron
furnaces (National Park Service, 2015). The production of charcoal caused charcoal particles to
be incorporated into the soil (Borchard et al., 2014).
Aggregate stability is a measurement of the ability of soil aggregates to withstand
fragmentation when exposed to destructive forces (USDA, 2001). Typically, the amount and
stability of aggregates increases with higher soil organic matter, surface area of clay minerals,
and cation exchange capacity. Increased aggregate stability diminishes losses of soil, carbon,
nitrogen, and phosphorous and enhances macro-aggregates and porosity (Jakk et al., 2015). The
USDAs aggregate stability test applies flowing water as the destructive force and aggregates

that are able to resist it are considered water stable aggregates (WSA). Slaking is when
aggregates break apart as they are quickly submerged in water (USDA, 2001).
The purpose of this research was to determine if charcoal has an effect on aggregate
stability. Soinne et al. (2014) studied the effect of biochar on clay soil aggregate stability. They
produced biochar in a laboratory and manually added it to fine-textured clay soils. Their results
showed biochar increased water stable aggregates, which they attributed to structure stabilization
from cation bridge formation (Soinne et al., 2014). Sun and Lu (2014) also studied clay soils and
found that charcoal amendments improve aggregates resistance to slaking through an enhanced
bond between mineral particles and carbon. In Sun and Lus (2014) research, they took samples
of Vertisols, brought them to a laboratory, and added commercial biochars made of different
organic materials. Research by Kaiser et al. (2014), looked at the effect of charcoal on the
formation of silt-sized aggregates in artificial soil mixtures. They found a positive effect of
charcoal on macroaggregate formation and suggested that charcoal supplies habitat and energy
for soil microorganisms that may produce aggregate forming adhesives (Kaiser et al., 2014). I
found one study where charcoal did not have a positive effect on aggregation. Pronk et al. (2012)
studied the effects of charcoal on aggregation of artificial soils that were incubated. Their results
showed a decrease in macroaggregation after 1 year of incubation and no effect on
microaggregates (Pronk et al., 2012). The charcoal soils in this study are different from Soinne et
al. (2014), Sun and Lu (2014), and Kaiser et al.s (2014) because they were sampled directly
from sites where charcoal was historically produced rather than artificially formulated in a
laboratory.
Aggregate stability and soil slaking were analyzed using the aggregate stability and slake
test from the USDAs Soil Quality Test Kit Guide (USDA, 2001). The tests were performed on

soil aggregates taken from charcoal hearths and from a control site. Based on the majority of
previous studies findings, the aggregates from the charcoal hearths are likely to have more
aggregate stability and more resistance to slaking compared with the control aggregates.
Materials and Methods
Samples for this study were collected from six different sites. The sites were at different
locations at Catoctin Mountain Park (CMP). They include CMP Mfne (mountain flank, NE
hillslope aspect), CMP Mfse (mountain flank, SE hillslope aspect), CMP Mbne (mountain base,
NE hillslope aspect), and CMP Mbse (mountain base, SE hillslope aspect). Locations sampled at
Sterling State Forest (SSF) were SSF 1 (an unsorted till deposit) and SSF 2 (a boulder field
deposit). At each site, samples were taken from a charcoal hearth and a control approximately 20
meters away. All of the soil aggregates were sampled from the A horizon.
The aggregate stability test and the slake test follow the guidelines from the USDAs Soil
Quality Test Kit Guide (USDA, 2001). For the aggregate stability test, soil in a sieve is oscillated
up and down in distilled water. The soil in the sieve is then oscillated periodically in calgon
solution, a dispersant, so that only the sands remain. The percent of WSA can then be calculated:
% water stable aggregates =

mass of water stable aggregates - mass of sand

mass of soil - mass of sand

X 100 (USDA, 2001).

The slake test is a qualitative test. Soil fragments in sieve baskets are immersed in water and
observed for stability. A stability class of 1 through 6 is recorded based on the structural integrity
of the aggregates as they are submerged for a duration of five minutes and the amount of soil
remaining on the sieve baskets after being repeatedly dipped in the water (USDA, 2001). Both
tests were performed on the hearth and control soils.
Results
Figure 1 shows the averages of the percent WSA for both the charcoal hearth and control
soils. A paired t-test on the percent WSA of the hearth and control soil pits resulted in a p-value

of 0.49, meaning the difference between the two groups is not statistically significant (GraphPad
Prism).
The slake test resulted in either a 5.94 or 6 for all of the samples, which means that
neither the hearth nor the control soils showed evidence of slaking. This data was consistent and
showed virtually no variation.
Discussion
A statistical test on the percent WSA of the hearth and control soils shows that there is not
a significant difference of the means between the two groups. This shows that the charcoal did
not affect the aggregate stability. This result is different than what was hypothesized. According
to Kaiser et al. (2014), charcoal has many varying structures and chemical properties that
determines the effects on soil aggregation. These characteristics include pyrolysis temperature,
particle size, feedstock, content of functional groups, and the amount used to enrich the soil.
Another factor that influences the effect of charcoal on aggregation is clay content (Kaiser et al.,
2014). The soil used in the study by Soinne et al. (2014) had 38% and 48% clay contents, Sun
and Lu (2014) had 43.4% clay content, and Kaiser et al. (2014) had samples with 10% clay
content. The soil samples used in this study had clay contents ranging from 5-17%. It is possible
that the reason Soinne et al. (2014) and Sun and Lu (2014) saw improvements in aggregate
stability, whereas the soils from this study did not, is the high clay percentages. Still, this does
not account for the improved aggregate stability seen in Kaiser et al. (2014). The charcoal
particle size they used was at the micrometer scale, which is what the authors say was an
important role in producing positive effects. Pronk et al. (2012) mentions that more strongly
charred black carbon material can have lower biological activity and transformation rates. They
attribute the use of strongly charred charcoal in their study as the reason it produced negative or
no effects on aggregate stability (Pronk et al., 2012).

Another factor worth noting is that the geomorphic positions did not seem to have any
effect on the aggregate stability. The sites that were similar (e.g. CMP Mfne and CMP Mfse)
have completely different percent WSA. There was a lack of replication since only one aggregate
was sampled and tested for each soil pit.
The slake test also showed no difference between the charcoal hearth and control soils.
Both soils had the highest stability rating (5.94 or 6), for all samples. It cannot be inferred that
the charcoal altered the ability of the aggregates to resist slaking. The soils sampled in this study
have stable soil fragments. Factors of strong stability are texture, clay mineralogy, and organic
matter content (USDA, 2001). The clay percentages of the A horizons ranged from 5-17%.
According to Lado et al. (2004), slaking increases with increasing clay content (Lado et al.,
2004). The samples had fairly low clay content, which could be why they had such high
resistance to slaking. It could also be due to organic matter, which could be determined in future
research.
Conclusion
The charcoal hearth soils were not statistically different from the control soils in average
percent WSA. The charcoal did not influence the percent water stable aggregates or the
aggregates ability to withstand slaking. There are many factors that affect the characteristics of
charcoal, which in turn affects aggregate stability differently. Because Pronk et al. (2012)
attributed their negative results to strongly charred charcoal, further research should be done on
the historically produced charcoal of Catoctin Mountain Park and Sterling State Forest to
determine the rates of how much they were charred.
References
Atlas Obscura. 2015. Sterling lake iron works. Accessed 2015 Dec 13.
http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/sterling-lake-iron-works

Borchard, N., B. Ladd, S. Eschemann, D. Hegenberg, B.M. Mseler, and W. Amelung. 2014.
Black carbon and soil properties at historical charcoal production sites in
Germany. Geoderma 232-234:236-242.
GraphPad Prism version 6.00 for Windows. GraphPad software. La Jolla, California USA.
www.graphpad.com.
Jakk, O., R. Kodeov, A. Kubi, I. Stehlkov, O. Drbek, and A. Kapika. 2015. Soil
aggregate stability within morphologically diverse areas. Catena 127:287-299.
Kaiser, M., T.A. Ghezzehei, M. Kleber, D.D. Myrold, and A.A. Berhe. 2014. Influence of
calcium carbonate and charcoal applications on organic matter storage in silt-sized
aggregates formed during a microcosm experiment. Soil Science Society of America
Journal 78:1624-1631.
Lado, M., M. Ben-Hur, and I. Shainberg. 2004. Soil wetting and texture effects on aggregate
stability, seal formation, and erosion. Soil Science Society of America Journal 68:19921999.
National Park Service. 2015. Catoctin iron furnace. U.S. Department of the Interior.
http://www.nps.gov/cato/learn/historyculture/furnace.htm
Pronk, G.J., K. Heister, G. Ding, K. Smalla, and I. Kgel-Knabner. 2012. Development of
biogeochemical interfaces in an artificial soil incubation experiment; aggregation and
formation of organo-mineral associations. Geoderma 189-190:585-594.
Soinne, H., J. Hovi, P. Tammeorg, and E. Turtola. 2014. Effect of biochar on phosphorous
sorption and clay soil aggregate stability. Geoderma 219-220:162-167.
Sun, F., and S. Lu. 2014. Biochars improve aggregate stability, water retention, and pore-space
properties of clayey soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 177:26-33.

USDA. 2001. Soil quality test kit guide. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.

Figure 1. The field site locations of the samples. Catoctin Mountain Park is located in Thurmont,
MD. Sterling State Forest is located in Tuxedo Park, NY.

Figure 2. The averages of the percent water stable aggregates (WSA) with standard deviations as
the error bars. The p-value of the paired t-test is included.