Carbon-rich products such as biochar and coal char have emerged as promising soil amendments to improve soil properties and support plant growth in semiarid climates. Coal char is produced from the pyrolysis of coal, while biochar is a biomass-derived product from pyrolysis. A two-year field study was conducted to evaluate the comparative impacts of coal char, biochar, inorganic fertilizer, and manure amendments on soil properties, plant growth indices, and soil and plant nutrient dynamics in a semiarid, sandy clay loam soil in Wyoming, USA. The study demonstrates the value of multivariate approaches for capturing the complex, interactive effects of amendments and plant covariates on crop performance. Results show that, while char and amendment treatments did not significantly alter soil pH, EC, or CEC, both char type and fertilizer amendments significantly affected soil nutrient availability and plant tissue nutrient concentrations. Multivariate multiple linear regression (MMLR) showed coal char at 22–44 Mg ha⁻¹ increased yield by up to 4.4 t ha⁻¹, with higher Normalized Difference Red Edge (NDRE) and leaf sulfur (S) concentrations associated with reduced sugar loss to molasses. Our results suggest that coal char has potential as a sustainable amendment for improving sugar beet productivity in semiarid, sandy clay loam soils, especially when integrated with inorganic fertilizer and manure. Further research is needed to assess the variability of coal char and biochar and their cumulative impacts on soil health and productivity across different cropping systems.

Grassland ecosystems, which cover over one-third of the Earth’s land area, store 10-30% of global soil carbon (C). However, these ecosystems face substantial impacts from human activities, including mining. This study investigates the spatial distribution of soil C and related environmental factors in reclaimed grasslands on former uranium mine sites in Wyoming. We hypothesized that grazing duration and environmental factors would influence soil C levels. Interactions between topography, vegetation diversity, soil properties, and soil C in the context of grazing management in both natural and reclaimed grasslands from of a wide range of periods from 1 year to 100 years were analyzed using Geographically Weighted Regression models. Data collected from 2022-23 showed that total carbon was consistently higher in natural grasslands (1.2-4.9%) than in reclaimed grasslands (0.8-1.3%). Additionally, soil C was significantly higher in natural grasslands grazed for 1 year compared to those grazed for 100 years. In contrast, reclaimed grasslands had lower soil C in areas grazed for 1 year compared to those grazed for 7 or 14 years. The absolute values of coefficients from environmental covariates indicated that areas grazed for a shorter duration (~1 year) were more influenced by biotic and abiotic factors than areas grazed for longer periods (>7 years). Our findings show moderate grazing increases the resiliency of grassland ecosystem when grazed 7 years or longer and acknowledge the roles of topographic, soil, and vegetative factors in enhancing soil C concentration and developing sustainable land management practice in rangeland conditions.

Though on‐farm research is crucial for addressing agricultural needs, it presents challenges that can derail projects if not addressed. Unlike small plot or greenhouse studies, on‐farm research evaluates tradeoffs in real‐world systems, offers access to diverse environments, and relies on farmer–researcher collaboration. The resilience and productivity of our agricultural systems depend on continual experimentation and innovation, and successful on‐farm projects empower farmers to evaluate and adopt practices that support social, financial, and ecological well‐being. However, implementing research on working farms and coordinating among diverse viewpoints comes with significant complexities. In this paper, we identify four main challenges in on‐farm research: (1) Meeting the different needs and goals of farmers and researchers, (2) coordinating and accounting for time and resource needs, (3) maintaining clean data and experimental design, and (4) managing risks related to reputation, data sovereignty, power imbalances, biases, and accountability. We detail how these challenges can be addressed through thoughtful planning before, during, and after an on‐farm project and offer examples from our own work. For instance, farmers and researchers should make decisions collaboratively, include outcomes relevant to both parties, maintain flexibility, and set clear, reasonable expectations. Researchers should simplify experimental designs where possible, educate themselves on transdisciplinary research ethics, and hold regular meetings to address issues. This paper offers practical recommendations to help researchers avoid common pitfalls in order to promote successful farmer–researcher partnerships that advance agricultural adaptation for a resilient future.