## 2 Materials and Methods
### Effects of Different Amounts of Chicken Litter Biochar and Phosphorus on Plant Nutrient Uptake

Table 5: Effects of co-applied biochar on nitrogen uptake of leaves, stems, and roots uptake of maize at tasseling stage. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Leaves** & **Stems** & **Roots** & **Total Ca Uptake** \\ \hline \hline T1 & \(4.15\)f \(\pm\) 0.05 & \(4.11\)h \(\pm\) 0.03 & \(8.79\)d \(\pm\) 0.11 & \(17.06\)f \(\pm\) 0.12 \\ T2 & \(27.98\)e \(\pm\) 1.16 & \(64.85\)g \(\pm\) 1.63 & \(26.06\)c \(\pm\) 3.76 & \(118.90\)e \(\pm\) 2.18 \\ T3 & \(24.51\)e \(\pm\) 0.28 & \(98.50\)def \(\pm\) 0.02 & \(39.46\)b \(\pm\) 0.78 & \(162.48\)d \(\pm\) 1.60 \\ T4 & \(32.84\)d \(\pm\) 0.72 & \(133.72\)ab \(\pm\) 3.61 & \(43.25\)ab \(\pm\) 0.97 & \(209.83\)ab \(\pm\) 4.68 \\ T5 & \(35.51\)d \(\pm\) 1.17 & \(108.08\)cde \(\pm\) 1.59 & \(41.21\)b \(\pm\) 0.27 & \(184.81\)c \(\pm\) 0.28 \\ T6 & \(24.35\)e \(\pm\) 1.17 & \(116.36\)bcd \(\pm\) 2.29 & \(44.38\)ab \(\pm\) 1.49 & \(185.09\)c \(\pm\) 3.48 \\ T7 & \(52.12\)b \(\pm\) 1.35 & \(124.63\)abc \(\pm\) 4.19 & \(40.03\)b \(\pm\) 4.41 & \(216.79\)a \(\pm\) 1.46 \\ T8 & \(44.83\)c \(\pm\) 0.79 & \(136.09\)a \(\pm\) 4.61 & \(39.12\)b \(\pm\) 0.92 & \(202.05\)a \(\pm\) 4.70 \\ T9 & \(45.56\)c \(\pm\) 0.91 & \(85.63\)f \(\pm\) 0.70 & \(19.38\)c \(\pm\) 0.99 & \(150.58\)d \(\pm\) 5.63 \\ T10 & \(48.18\)bc \(\pm\) 1.76 & \(133.55\)ab \(\pm\) 6.13 & \(37.54\)b \(\pm\) 5.64 & \(219.29\)a \(\pm\) 5.34 \\ T11 & \(45.61\)c \(\pm\) 1.04 & \(112.15\)cde \(\pm\) 2.71 & \(40.58\)b \(\pm\) 2.92 & \(198.35\)bc \(\pm\) 2.92 \\ T12 & \(56.58\)a \(\pm\) 1.77 & \(96.31\)ef \(\pm\) 6.99 & \(51.27\)a \(\pm\) 1.16 & \(204.17\)ab \(\pm\) 5.96 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: Different letters within a column indicate significant difference between means of three replicates \(\pm\) standard error using Tukey’s test at \(p\leq 0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 7: Effects of treatments on calcium uptake of leaves, stems, and roots, and total calcium uptake of maize at tasseling stage. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Leaves** & **Stems** & **Roots** & **Total Na Uptake** \\ \hline \hline T1 & \(12.76\)e \(\pm\) 0.28 & \(0.38\)e \(\pm\) 0.06 & \(0.72\)h \(\pm\) 0.007 & \(13.87\)g \(\pm\) 0.28 \\ T2 & \(97.44\)d \(\pm\) 2.05 & \(7.34\)d \(\pm\) 0.15 & \(3.53\)f \(\pm\) 0.27 & \(108.31\)ef \(\pm\) 2.09 \\ T3 & \(108.65\)cd \(\pm\) 9.36 & \(22.49\)a \(\pm\) 0.65 & \(5.96\)a \(\pm\) 0.05 & \(137.10\)de \(\pm\) 9.07 \\ T4 & \(142.23\)b \(\pm\) 4.59 & \(13.57\)c \(\pm\) 0.35 & \(4.41\)cd \(\pm\) 0.06 & \(160.22\)bcd \(\pm\) 4.67 \\ T5 & \(140.50\)b \(\pm\) 8.84 & \(6.61\)d \(\pm\) 0.11 & \(2.57\)g \(\pm\) 0.05 & \(149.69\)cd \(\pm\) 8.72 \\ T6 & \(90.24\)d \(\pm\) 0.72 & \(7.35\)d \(\pm\) 1.65 & \(4.68\)cd \(\pm\) 0.11 & \(102.28\)f \(\pm\) 1.89 \\ T7 & \(166.89\)ab \(\pm\) 5.94 & \(16.61\)b \(\pm\) 866.5 & \(5.50\)ab \(\pm\) 0.15 & \(189.01\)ab \(\pm\) 6.62 \\ T8 & \(136.86\)bc \(\pm\) 5.70 & \(6.694\)b \(\pm\) 0.005 & \(4.29\)de \(\pm\) 0.09 & \(147.854\) \(\pm\) 5.76 \\ T9 & \(182.84\)a \(\pm\) 5.37 & \(7.08\)d \(\pm\) 0.10 & \(3.36\)f \(\pm\) 0.08 & \(192.94\)a \(\pm\) 5.31 \\ T10 & \(175.98\)a \(\pm\) 3.63 & \(6.40\)d \(\pm\) 0.08 & \(4.95\)bc \(\pm\) 0.04 & \(187.34\)b \(\pm\) 3.71 \\ T11 & \(174.25\)a \(\pm\) 7.06 & \(8.97\)d \(\pm\) 0.05 & \(3.72\)ef \(\pm\) 0.03 & \(186.95\)ab \(\pm\) 7.07 \\ T12 & \(166.19\)ab \(\pm\) 8.30 & \(8.80\)d \(\pm\) 0.66 & \(4.64\)cd \(\pm\)0.11 & \(179.64\)abc \(\pm\) 7.71 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: Different letters within a column indicate significant difference between means of three replicates \(\pm\) standard error using Tukey’s test at \(p\leq 0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 8: Effects of treatments on sodium uptake of leaves, stems, and roots, and total sodium uptake of maize at tasseling stage.