Next Article in Journal
Use of Digital Technologies into Agroforestry Systems: A Review
Previous Article in Journal
The Chemical Defense Response of Two Different Cotton Varieties Against Cotton Aphids in the Kashi Region
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Microalgae-Based Strategies for Soil Health and Crop Productivity: Mechanisms, Challenges, and Pathways to Climate-Resilient Agriculture

by
Wogene Solomon Kabato
1,*,
Niguss Hailegnaw
2,
Tesfatsion Ermias Chaffamo
3,
Asish Samuel
1,
Agampodi Gihan S. D. De Silva
1 and
Zoltán Molnár
1
1
Albert Kázmér Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Széchenyi István University, 9200 Mosonmagyaróvár, Hungary
2
Department of Agronomy, Everglades Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Belle Glade, FL 33430, USA
3
Department of Plant Science, College of Agricultural Science, Wachemo University Durame Campus, Durame P.O. Box 667, Ethiopia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2025, 15(11), 2669; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15112669
Submission received: 18 October 2025 / Revised: 17 November 2025 / Accepted: 19 November 2025 / Published: 20 November 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Plant-Crop Biology and Biochemistry)

Abstract

Microalgae hold significant potential as nature-based solutions in agriculture, offering benefits such as nitrogen fixation, enhanced nutrient cycling, stimulation of beneficial microbes, strengthening soil structure, and carbon sequestration. Yet, despite their potential, the role of microalgae, particularly through their interactions with soil systems, remains largely underexplored. Their ability to generate bioactive substances such as phytohormones, amino acids, and extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) fosters soil aggregation, nutrient availability, water retention, biological soil crust, and soil restoration, which ultimately supports plant growth and productivity. Moreover, the thermochemical conversion of microalgal biomass into biochar offers an effective strategy to improve carbon sequestration while simultaneously enriching soil nutrient content, thereby increasing crop productivity. While microalgae-based products often demonstrate strong efficacy under laboratory and greenhouse conditions, their performance in the field remains constrained by soil physicochemical properties, ecological incompatibility, competition with native microbial communities, and environmental variability, leading to inconsistent outcomes and highlighting the need for soil-specific, field-relevant strategies. Furthermore, the lack of standardized and cost-effective cultivation, formulation, and processing, along with low biomass yield and energy-intensive production, continues to limit their large-scale adoption in agricultural systems. Therefore, this narrative review aimed to discuss the mechanisms of coupling microalgal biomass and biochar to enhance soil health and crop growth, while also addressing field-performance constraints. It provides a balanced view of the potential and challenges of microalgae-based technologies for sustainable soil management and crop productivity. Overall, microalgae possess significant potential to improve soil health, increase crop yields, and contribute to sustainable agriculture that can withstand climate challenges.

1. Introduction

With the challenges of climate change and increasing worldwide food needs, sustainable farming has become more important than ever. Central to this initiative is soil, a frequently ignored but essential resource that sustains ecosystem functions, agricultural productivity, and mitigating climate change. Healthy soil, which serves as the basis of our food system, not only supports the growth of plants but also plays a role in conservation of biodiversity, nutrient cycling, water filtration, and carbon sequestration [1]. However, unsustainable farming management, overuse of chemical fertilizers, and the impact of climate change have led to severe soil degradation, including erosion, contamination, increased salinity, disrupted soil microbial communities, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and nutrient imbalances [2,3].
Addressing these interlinked challenges requires innovative, nature-based, and eco-efficient solutions that restore soil health, improve crop productivity, and mitigate climate impacts. In this regard, microalgae biotechnology has emerged as a promising approach to achieve the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals by offering innovative solutions for sustainable agricultural practices and addressing climate change [4]. Microalgae, including cyanobacteria, consist of varied unicellular photosynthetic organisms that demonstrate remarkable photosynthetic efficiency, rapid growth, and adaptability, making them a sustainable agricultural resource [5]. They enhance soil fertility and resilience by fixing nitrogen, improving nutrient availability, cycling nutrients, sequestering carbon, and promoting beneficial microbes, while also supporting plant growth through bioactive compounds such as phytohormones, polysaccharides, amino acids, vitamins, and antimicrobial agents [6,7,8]. Moreover, they dominate soil crusts in arid and dryland ecosystems, stabilizing soil, enhancing nutrient availability, and supporting soil–plant interactions, which makes them valuable for ecological restoration and sustainable management of degraded lands [9,10,11].
Beyond their in situ ecological functions, they also generate valuable biomass for use as biofertilizers, biostimulants, and biochar. Microalgae-based biofertilizers and biostimulants enhance the biological, chemical, and physical characteristics of soil, while also encouraging plant development and nutrient cycling [12,13]. For instance, EPS secreted by microalgae aids in soil aggregation, increased carbon content, and foster the development of beneficial microbial communities that facilitate nutrient cycling [14]. Moreover, pyrolysis of algal biomass into biochar produces a stable, nutrient-rich material that enhances soil organic matter, nutrient retention, microbial diversity, and serves as a long-term carbon sink [15,16,17], thereby supporting sustainable agriculture and climate change mitigation.
The effectiveness of exogenous microalgae in agricultural soils remains inconsistent due to several key limitations. Their performance is highly context-dependent, influenced by soil physicochemical properties, native microbial communities, climatic conditions, and application methods [18,19]. Introduced microalgae may compete with native soil microorganisms for resources, reducing native populations or altering ecological niches [18,20]. Moreover, nutrient competition between introduced microalgae and resident soil microbes can hinder inoculum establishment and persistence, thereby reducing its effectiveness, especially in nutrient-deficient soils where competition is more intense [21]. This competition is a one of the factors in why inoculants sometimes fail to persist and perform as expected.
Moreover, most strains are selected based on greenhouse and laboratory traits rather than ecological compatibility, limiting their persistence and functionality under diverse field conditions [22]. The ecological adaptation of numerous microalgal species to particular environments and specific physicochemical conditions restricts their ability to thrive and function optimally when placed in terrestrial or agricultural soils, creating a significant challenge in fully utilizing their potential as biofertilizers. A significant amount of microalgae biomass is essential for agricultural applications, particularly as growth enhancers and fertilizers. Their large-scale application still faces challenges, including inconsistent field performance, lower biomass production, high production costs, and limited long-term data, as much of the existing evidence comes from controlled greenhouse and laboratory studies [23,24]. In addition, the lack of standardized cultivation and formulation methods hinders the reproducibility and scalability of microalgae-based agricultural products.
We conducted a literature search of peer-reviewed studies across multiple databases with an emphasis on both controlled and field experiments. The review highlights how microalgae’s biological mechanisms, bioactive compounds, and interactions with soil microbes and plants contribute to soil health and mitigate climate change, while also discussing associated limitations and challenges.

2. Microalgae: An Overview

Algae, the earliest photosynthesizing organisms on Earth, are classified based on size into macroalgae and microalgae. Macroalgae, commonly referred to as seaweed, are large, multicellular organisms that can be found in freshwater and marine environments. While microalgae are microscopic, unicellular eukaryotic organisms with high photosynthetic efficiency, belonging to diverse phyla such as Chlorophyta, Rhodophyta, Euglenophyta, and others. Functionally similar prokaryotic organisms, such as cyanobacteria, also contribute significantly to photosynthetic productivity and soil improvement [25,26]. Microalgae are among the most efficient carbon sinks, converting CO2 into carbon-rich biomass. Microalgae form a diverse group with vast and largely untapped genetic potential, as currently known species account for only 1% of their estimated global diversity [27,28].
Microalgae can naturally thrive in both aquatic and soil environments. They can be cultivated under various systems, including open ponds, photobioreactors, or even efficiently cultivated using domestic or industrial wastewater [29]. Their rapid growth rate and ability to utilize sunlight, carbon dioxide, and inorganic nutrients make them highly efficient biomass producers. Microalgae, known as “living biorefineries,” can capture up to 1.8–2.0 kg of CO2 per kilogram of biomass, making them a powerful tool for mitigating global warming [30,31].
In terrestrial and agricultural environments, microalgae and cyanobacteria in the soil are crucial for sustaining and improving soil fertility [32]. Utilizing native soil cyanobacteria in areas prone to erosion improves soil chemical characteristics such as nitrogen, organic matter, and carbon [33]. Microalgae also produce metabolites like superoxide dismutase, carotenoids, and proline, which help them survive drought stress and improve soil stability by enhancing its structural strength [34]. In dry conditions, microalgal filaments increase their surface area to absorb nutrients and prevent water loss [35].
Microalgae are used in several advanced agricultural applications, such as foliar application, seed coating or priming, and soil amendment. Microalgae, unlike conventional fertilizers, provide organic carbon to the soil, which is crucial for addressing soil organic carbon depletion and improving soil fertility [36,37]. It can be used in different forms in soil and plants: living biomass, dry biomass, and liquid leaf extracting compound [38]. The selection of technique is influenced by the type of crop, growth stage, and intended result, which may include promoting growth, increasing nutrient absorption, or stimulating soil microbial activity. Alongside increasing crop yields and enriching soil health, these products also provision the objectives of climate-smart agriculture by decreasing dependency on chemical inputs, lowering environmental impacts, and promoting the sustainability of farming systems [24,39].
Therefore, the beneficial effects of microalgae on soil functions and plant growth can be significantly improved and leveraged by applying algal biomass in various forms as a biofertilizer, biostimulant, and algal biochar. Biofertilizers are products that contain natural substances or microorganisms that enhance soil properties, restore fertility, and improve crop productivity. Biostimulants are substances or microorganisms that enhance plant nutrition, improving nutrient use efficiency, stress tolerance, crop quality, or nutrient availability [40].

3. Mechanism of Soil Health Improvement by Microalgae

Microalgae and cyanobacteria are emerging as powerful tools for improving soil health and supporting sustainable agriculture. As shown in Figure 1, when applied as biostimulants or biofertilizers, their biomass provides a wide range of benefits, from enhancing nutrient availability to stimulating plant growth and resilience. For the purpose of this review, we categorized the different mechanisms into the following groups: nitrogen fixation, phosphorus solubilization, production of bioactive compounds, stimulation of microorganisms, and formation of biological soil crust. In addition, the decomposition of microalgal biomass contributes to a slow release of macro- and micronutrients [41,42], while biochar derived from microalgae serves as a valuable soil amendment, enhancing carbon sequestration and long-term fertility [43]. Through these interconnected mechanisms, microalgae enhance soil fertility, aggregation and structure, stimulate microbial activity, improve nutrient and water retention, reduce dependence on chemical fertilizers, and thereby contributing significantly to sustainable soil management. In the following section, each mechanism will be described in detail.

3.1. Nitrogen Fixation

Nitrogen constitutes 78% of Earth’s atmosphere yet crops frequently experience nitrogen deficiency because atmospheric nitrogen (N2) is stable and demands substantial energy for conversion into reactive nitrogen [44]. It is a vital nutrient for plant growth, playing a fundamental role in the synthesis of proteins, chlorophyll, and other essential compounds. Despite its importance, nitrogen in soils is often strongly unavailable to plants because much of it is locked in organic forms or lost through leaching, volatilization, and denitrification [45]. To compensate for the limited availability of nitrogen in soils, conventional fertilization strategies primarily rely on synthetic chemicals, which raises concerns about their effects on environmental sustainability, soil health, and human well-being. As a more sustainable alternative, nitrogen fixation through biological means, such as by microalgae and cyanobacteria, can naturally enrich soils while supporting crop growth, ultimately reducing dependence on chemical nitrogen fertilizers [46,47].
Microalgae, including cyanobacteria, are essential to ecosystems by performing biological nitrogen fixation, a process that converts N2, which is unavailable to most organisms, into bioavailable forms such as ammonium (NH4+). This process, catalyzed by the nitrogenase enzyme complex, is energy-intensive and requires both ATP and a supply of electrons to reduce N2 into ammonia (NH3) and ammonium (NH4+) [48,49]. These processes are fundamental to nutrient cycling and primary production, highlighting their ecological and biogeochemical importance. Through this mechanism, microalgae supply essential nitrogen compounds that support their own growth as well as that of surrounding plants and microorganisms.
However, one significant obstacle in nitrogen fixation is the heightened sensitivity of nitrogenase to oxygen, which can restrict its functionality, especially in cyanobacteria where oxygenic photosynthesis produces elevated oxygen concentrations [50]. To overcome this, filamentous cyanobacteria develop heterocysts, which are specialized cells with thick walls that create an oxygen-free environment for nitrogen fixation, allowing them to convert atmospheric nitrogen into ammonium and organic nitrogen compounds [49]. The presence of nitrogenase in these cyanobacterial species gives them a competitive advantage in nitrogen-deficient environments, enhancing soil fertility and ecosystem productivity [51].
Beyond fixation, microalgae biomass contributes to mineralization after decomposition, releasing organic nitrogen in forms such as ammonium that can be assimilated by plants and soil microbes. Microalgae applied to soil act as biofertilizers, which enhance soil organic carbon levels, improving aeration, nutrient availability, structure, moisture retention, and support agricultural activity [12]. Biofertilizers are products that contain natural substances or living microorganisms capable of improving the biological and chemical properties of soil, restoring soil fertility, and crop productivity [52,53]. Applying live or dry microalgae as biofertilizers enhances crop development and increases yield potential [54]. This is achieved through their photosynthetic and nitrogen-fixing activities, which result in the mineralization and mobilization of both inorganic and organic nutrients.
Table 1 highlights the potential impact of microalgae-based biofertilizers on soil fertility and their role as sustainable supplement to synthetic fertilizers. Microalgal extracts enhance the availability of key macronutrients, including calcium, magnesium, potassium, and phosphorus, [41]. Typically, the choice of microalgae as biofertilizers is generally determined by their capacity to fix atmospheric nitrogen and promote plant growth through various beneficial actions. Algae-based fertilizers, including Nostoc sp., Chlorella vulgaris, Anabaena azolla, Scenedesmus dimorphus, and Spirulina platensis, have been effectively utilized to boost crop growth and soil health [36,55]. Further, microalgae treatments such as Scenedesmus quadricauda, C. vulgaris, and Klebsormidium sp., especially when combined with mineral fertilizers, significantly enhanced crop growth, yield, protein content, and soil enzymatic activities, while reducing nitrate leaching, indicating their potential as a sustainable strategy to recover soil fertility and lessen reliance on chemical fertilizers [56,57,58].
While amendments derived from microalgae have been promoted for their ability to improve soil fertility and increase crop yields, there is also evidence indicating situations where unintended adverse outcomes that deserve careful consideration. For instance, in a sandy soil pot experiment the incorporation of C. vulgaris enhanced nutrient availability (notably N, P, and Ca) and reduced nutrient leaching, yet simultaneously increased sulfate (SO42−) concentrations in soil leachates, posing a groundwater pollution risk [68]. In another study, application of C. vulgaris biomass increased soil NH4+ and NO3 in soil pools, but crop uptake was low (0.7% of added N), with 10% retained in the soil after 30 days [69], this show that some nitrogen was lost or unavailable due to immobilization in soil or microbial biomass. Moreover, under conditions of high organic C and low O2 (e.g., coarse-textured soils, limited aeration), decomposition of algal biomass can accelerate denitrification: for instance, one investigation documented a 7 mm reduction in O2 penetration and enhanced NO3/NO2 fluxes in the sediment–water interface [70]. This risks may arise in soils when algal amendments alter C:N dynamics and oxygen availability, thereby intensifying denitrification or transient nitrogen immobilization. These findings highlight the trade-offs inherent in algal amendments, improved nutrient retention on one side, but risks of sulfate mobilization, nitrogen immobilization or gaseous loss on the other.
Shrestha et al. [71] evaluated the effects of applying microalgal biomass (Coelastrella sp.) as fertilizer on wheat grown in a field experiment, compared to conventional urea fertilization. Microalgae application had minimal effect on aboveground biomass but slightly reduced wheat grain nitrogen content. Importantly, soil emissions of nitric oxide (NO) and nitrous oxide (N2O) were substantially lower, with NO reduced 2–5 fold and N2O reduced approximately 2-fold. However, considering the CO2 emissions from algae cultivation, the overall climate impact was similar to or up to 40% higher than urea. These results indicate that microalgae can reduce soil nitrogen losses and greenhouse gas emissions, but the carbon footprint of biomass production must be considered when evaluating its environmental benefits.
Moreover, recent research has explored different forms of algae amendment can alter N cycling and possibly increase losses if conditions favor denitrification. The study by [72] investigated how different microalgae processing methods influence soil nitrogen cycling. The results demonstrated that wet microalgae amendments are more effective in enhancing nitrogen retention by promoting dissimilatory nitrate reduction to ammonium (DNRA), which minimizes nitrogen losses typically associated with denitrification and nitrification. In contrast, drying or dewatering microalgae appears to be less effective for fertilizer production, as wet microalgae exhibit higher potential to boost DNRA activity and retain nitrogen in soils. To maximize the efficiency of microalgae-based fertilizers, future research should explore the optimization of application methods, appropriate concentrations, species selection, and timing.

3.2. Phosphorus Solubilization

Phosphorus (P) is an essential but immobile soil nutrient, often limiting crop productivity due to its low availability to plants. Although the concentrations of plant available phosphorus in soil solutions are typically lower than the amounts needed by plants, the deficiency of phosphorus in agriculture is addressed through significant applications of P fertilizers [73]. However, this practice is inefficient, as crops typically take up less than 20% of the applied phosphorus during the growing season [74]. The remaining phosphorus contributes to environmental degradation, particularly through runoff that contaminates water bodies [75]. Enhancing its availability through the use of phosphate-solubilizing microorganisms (PSMs) offers a sustainable solution to improve soil–plant phosphorus dynamics [76]. PSMs mobilize insoluble phosphorus by using mechanisms such as acidification, chelation, enzymatic cleavage, ion exchange, and the secretion of polymeric substances. These processes not only increase plant-accessible phosphorus but also contribute significantly to biogeochemical phosphorus cycling and nutrient sustainability in agricultural practices [77].
Microalgae and cyanobacteria enhance soil health by boosting phosphorus accessibility for plants, which may decrease the reliance on chemical fertilizers. Cyanobacteria and microalgae, as key PSM, play a vital role in making phosphorus available to plants by mobilizing phosphorus bound to calcium in alkaline soils or to aluminum in acidic soils, depending on the soil pH [24]. Cyanobacteria release bound phosphorus through two mechanisms: either by producing chelating agents that bind to calcium ions or by excreting organic acids that facilitate solubilization [25]. Yandigeri et al. [78] demonstrated that the cyanobacteria Westiellopsis prolifica and A. variabilis can solubilise Ca-bound mineral phosphates by producing aromatic chelating compounds (phthalic acid) rather than classical low-molecular-weight organic acids. Moreover, Afkairin et al. [77] demonstrated that Anabaena sp. markedly enhanced the solubilization of organic phosphorus sources in alkaline soil through elevated phosphatase activity.
Moreover, beyond inorganic P solubilization, microalgae also play a vital role in P mineralization by breaking down organic P compounds, contributing to plant-available P and enhancing soil P cycling. This is achieved through the production of extracellular enzymes like phosphodiesterases, alkaline phosphatases, and phytases, which hydrolyze various organic P forms like phosphoesters, phosphodiesters, and phytic acid [79,80]. For instance, Euglena gracilis [80] and Chlamydomonas reinhardtii [81] have shown phytase activity, enabling them to release inorganic P from phytate in both aquatic and soil environments. Additionally, when microalgal biomass is added to the soil, decomposition of its organic matter releases nutrients, further contributing to the pool of plant-available phosphorus [82]. This dual role, active enzymatic mineralization of organic P and passive release through biomass degradation, makes microalgae promising agents for enhancing phosphorus availability in sustainable agricultural systems.
Most microorganisms, including microalgae, employ various adaptive strategies to cope with phosphorus scarcity, including the ability to store excess phosphorus when it is abundantly available. Microalgae exhibit a luxury P uptake mechanism, where excess P from the environment is stored intracellularly as polyphosphate (polyP) granules for later use under P-deficient conditions [83,84]. PolyP is crucial for providing the necessary components for DNA synthesis throughout the cell division cycle and is also plays a role in nitrogen fixation and the storage of nutrients [85]. This luxury uptake and internal storage of phosphorus is enhanced by membrane lipid remodeling, allowing these organisms to reallocate internal P by replacing phospholipids with non-P-containing lipids such as glycolipids and betaine lipids during P starvation [86]. Such adaptive responses, reported in fast-growing and high P-accumulating species like Nannochloropsis salina [87], Synechocystis sp. [88], and Nannochloropsis gaditana [89], not only support microalgal survival under nutrient stress but also present potential for mobilizing and delivering soluble P to plants in agricultural systems.

3.3. Production of Bioactive Compounds

Microalgae produce a wide array of biologically active compounds, including phytohormones, amino acids, polysaccharides, polypeptides, vitamins, antimicrobial agents, and EPS. These compounds collectively enhance soil quality, stimulate microbial interactions, and support plant growth by improving nutrient availability, soil structure, and water retention [24,30,90].
These microorganisms synthesize a variety of phytohormones such as auxins, cytokinins, gibberellins, and abscisic acid, which regulate plant physiological and biochemical processes, including cell division, elongation, and stress responses [91]. Phytohormones are natural chemical signals that control plant growth and development, enhance nutrient absorption, initiate seed germination, and promote the growth of roots and shoots. They also assist plants in managing stress by increasing antioxidant defenses and enhancing the efficiency of nutrient and water use [92,93]. Further, their positive effects on plant growth are attributed to their ability to improve critical processes like photosynthesis, nucleic acid synthesis, ion absorption, and respiration, ultimately boosting overall plant metabolism [94,95,96].
Phytohormones act as natural biostimulants by encouraging plant development, boosting nutrient absorption, increasing resilience to stress, and stimulating beneficial soil microbial activity [97,98,99]. Biostimulants are characterized by their ability to improve the processes of plant nutrition, independent of their nutrient composition, with the goal of enhancing nutrient utilization efficiency, resilience to stress, crop quality, or the availability of nutrients in the rhizospheres [100]. Their application enhances agricultural yield, optimizes nutrient use efficiency, and strengthens plants’ ability to withstand environmental challenges like drought, salinity, extremes temperature, and heavy metal contamination [101]. The specific constituents of each microalgal biostimulant determines mode of action, as each bioactive compound can trigger unique biological responses in plants [102].
Table 2 highlights the biostimulant properties of phytohormones and other bioactive compounds produced by various microalgae and cyanobacteria species, demonstrating their capacity to enhance plant growth and development. For instance, cyanobacteria like Nostoc and Anabaena are known to produce auxins, which stimulate root development and improve nutrient uptake in plants [103]. Similarly, microalgae-derived cytokinins enhance shoot growth and delay senescence, contributing to increased crop productivity. In addition, these bioactive compounds strengthen plant–microbe interactions, supporting a more robust and healthy soil ecosystem [37]. Moreover, application of S. platensis, either as powder or extract, significantly enhanced sesame growth, antioxidant activity, yield traits, and mineral composition, demonstrating their potential as effective bio-stimulants and sustainable alternatives to chemical fertilizers [104].
Microalgae, rich in amino acids, serve as effective biostimulants in promoting plant growth and improving soil health [96]. These amino acids, such as glutamic acid, aspartic acid, and arginine, act as signaling molecules and precursors for proteins and other growth-regulating compounds. The use of microalgal or macroalgal extracts enriched with specific amino acids as biostimulants has been shown to induce various physicochemical changes in plants, stimulating the production of proteins, pigments, and key growth-regulating compounds that enhance plant growth [93,113]. For instance, root application of Spirulina platensis optimized biomass production in papaya seedlings [113], while foliar applications of A. vaginicola and N. calcicole significantly improved growth parameters in cucumber, tomato, and squash [107]. They enhance nutrient absorption, promote root growth, and increase plants’ resilience to stress, all while encouraging positive microbial activity in the soil [114].
Amino acids derived from microalgae contribute to sustainable farming by reducing dependence on synthetic fertilizers and enhancing overall soil health. Microalgae, unlike conventional fertilizers, provide organic carbon (C) to the soil, which is crucial for addressing soil organic C depletion and improving soil fertility [36,37]. Additionally, they are known for their broad environmental adaptability and hold potential for rehabilitating degraded soils, including desertified and saline-alkali lands [26,115].
EPSs, which are intricate high-molecular-weight polymers generated by microalgae, play a crucial role in supporting their life processes and interactions with the environment while also greatly improving soil structure and promoting microbial activity [116]. Microalgal EPS mainly consist of polysaccharides, proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids [117,118]. EPS is also produced by many microalgae and cyanobacteria, especially under diverse biotic and abiotic stress conditions [119]. These molecules form a protective, moisture-retaining layer around cells that shields them from environmental stress, promotes soil particle aggregation, and aids plants by conserving moisture and trapping essential nutrients [90,120].
EPS function as natural facilitators, improving soil health by fostering soil aggregation, enhancing water retention, and establishing suitable microhabitats for beneficial microorganisms [14,121]. Certain microalgae species exhibit substantial increases in extracellular and intracellular polysaccharides during growth, contributing to higher soil carbon fixation and enhancing both total carbon and dissolved organic carbon levels [122]. Microalgae-derived EPS are recognized for their capability in bioremediation, essentially in the remediation of heavy metals [123]. Studies shows that EPS produced by microalgae under mixotrophic conditions enhance biosorption of environmental contaminants, with modified biochemical composition and functional groups, particularly from C. vulgaris, showing strong potential for Pb(II) removal [124]. This metal-sequestering capacity is particularly valuable for improving soil quality in agricultural areas and for pretreating metal-contaminated wastewater used in irrigation.
By strengthening soil aggregation, EPS supports healthier soil ecosystems, promotes plant growth, and helps alleviate the impacts of environmental challenges like drought and intense rainfall. During cell decomposition, the production of EPSs by microalgae enhances soil organic carbon levels, providing an accessible carbon source that supports the growth of soil microbiota, particularly under climate change conditions [125].

3.4. Stimulation of Soil Microbial Interactions

Microbial communities, such as bacteria, fungi, microalgae, actinomycetes, and viruses, are indispensable to the plant–soil ecosystem, ensuring long-term sustainability. These microorganisms are fundamental to breaking down organic matter, sequestering carbon, and transforming nutrients through mechanism like oxidation, nitrification, and nitrogen fixation [48]. Microalgae stimulate soil microbiota through multiple interlinked mechanisms that enhance soil fertility and ecological resilience.
Through their photosynthetic activity, microalgae produce EPS, organic acids, and bioactive compounds that not only enrich microbial habitats but also create synergistic interactions among bacteria, fungi, and other soil biota [25]. Particularly, interactions within microalgae–bacteria consortia can be either synergistic or competitive, depending on nutrient availability and environmental conditions. Synergistic relationships occur when microalgae releases dissolved organic carbon and release oxygen into their surrounding microenvironment that stimulate bacterial activity, such as nitrogen fixation, nitrification, and organic matter decomposition. In return, associated nitrogen-fixing and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria releases nutrients, including nitrogen, phosphorus, carbon dioxide, and growth promoters that support algal growth and overall soil fertility [126,127,128]. For instance, the combined use of cyanobacteria (N. linckia) and A. lipoferum led to a notable increase in soil fertility, with total nitrogen rising by 20.7% to 40% and nitrate plus nitrite nitrogen increasing by 27.1% to 59.2% relative to uninoculated soils [129]. This indicates that the collaboration between microalgae and bacteria effectively enhances nutrient cycling in the soil, especially concerning nitrogen dynamics, which in turn supports crop growth and promotes soil health. Conversely, competitive interactions can arise in situations where nutrients are limited, especially in soils lacking phosphorus, as both microalgae and bacteria compete for scarce resources, which may lead to decreased nutrient uptake efficiency and microbial stability [130]. These consortia bolster nutrient availability, support biomass production, and have promising biotechnological value [131].
Importantly, by supporting a diverse array of microbial groups, microalgae foster soil biodiversity, an essential measure of soil health and its ability to withstand climate stress [132]. Soil biodiversity enhances functional redundancy, ensuring that critical processes such as nutrient cycling, organic matter decomposition, and disease suppression remain stable even under disturbance [133]. The combination of nutrient complementarity and stimulation of microbes leads to improved nutrient cycling, better interactions between roots and microbes, and a more robust rhizosphere, thereby supporting improved plant growth and soil quality [18]. The diversity within microalgae–microorganism symbiotic systems boost soil health by enhancing ecosystem stability, raising crop resistance to environmental challenges, such as salinity [18,134].
Microalgae-based fertilizers can significantly change the microbial community in the soil by promoting the development of beneficial microbial populations while simultaneously restricting the presence of detrimental ones. In particular, studies have indicated that their use boosts the numbers of helpful bacteria and fungi such as Thermonaerobaculia, Microascaceae, and Sordariomycetes, while decreasing the levels of plant pathogens like Pseudomonas, Togniniaceae, and Phaeoacremonium [135]. This shift may be due to a variety of interacting processes. It is widely recognized that microalgae produce EPS and easily degradable organic carbon during their growth and when they are applied to soils, which increase the soil carbon content and promote the presence of saprophytic and symbiotic microorganisms. Additionally, the synthesis of phytohormones and antimicrobial compounds can boost root growth and inhibit the proliferation of pathogens. These processes work together to enhance the presence of beneficial microbial groups while diminishing pathogens, thus improving soil health, increasing disease resistance, and supporting a more robust and productive agricultural ecosystem. Employing biofertilizers derived from active microalgae can enhance soil microbial ecosystems, nutrient use efficiency, abiotic stress tolerance, and minimize dependence on fertilizers [36,48].

3.5. Microalgae in Biological Soil Crusts: Their Importance in Dryland Ecosystem and Soil Restoration

Dry and semi-dry regions cover 41% of the world’s land surface and sustain over 38% of the entire human population [136] and face significant anthropogenic degradation that leads to the loss of ecosystem integrity and services, as well as the deterioration of social-ecological systems. In the early stages of primary succession in arid and dryland ecosystems, plant cover is sparse, and growth conditions are stressful, allowing poikilohydric cryptogams, particularly autotrophic cyanobacteria and green algae, to act as first colonizers and form biological soil crusts (BSC) [137]. BSCs are essential for dryland ecosystems, enhancing soil stability and fertility by binding soil particles to prevent erosion, improving water retention, and contributing to carbon storage through complex microbial networks [138]. Biocrusts, which are intricate assemblages of algae, fungi, lichens, and bryophytes, play a crucial role in soil stabilization, erosion prevention, and nutrient cycling facilitation [139].
Microalgal and cyanobacteria biocrusts are crucial components of dryland ecosystems, thriving even in harsh desert environments and serving as ecosystem engineers [140]. In many dryland ecosystems, particularly where the coverage of vascular plants is low, biocrusts can account for over 40% of soil surface cover, and in some localized areas, coverage exceeds 70%, particularly in interpatch zones dominated by cyanobacteria and lichens [141,142]. The structure, species composition, and thickness of BSCs, ranging from less than 1 mm in newly established crusts to 1–5 mm in more developed cyanobacterial/green-algae crusts [9], are largely influenced by abiotic factors such as surface wetness duration, and these crusts can later be succeeded by moss and lichen dominated stages in semiarid to humid regions [143].
EPSs produced by microalgae, especially cyanobacteria, are integral to soil stabilization by facilitating the formation of biological soil crusts [144]. By releasing EPS, as well as engaging in photosynthetic carbon–nitrogen fixation, they profoundly change the physicochemical attributes of the soil, which in turn influences hydrological features and improves resistance to erosion [140]. Cyanobacteria act as ecological engineers by improving soil structure and aggregate stability, facilitating ecological processes, and providing habitats for diverse organism [103]. In desert soil crusts, these microorganisms enhance desiccation tolerance by adjusting carbohydrate metabolism, particularly increasing EPS and sucrose production, to mitigate reactive oxygen species accumulation and oxidative damage in arid regions [145]. The extent of EPS promote soil aggregation is influenced by soil structure and texture, microbial community, and root exudation [146]. According to the study, EPS-R1 produced by Paenibacillus tarimensis significantly increased soil aggregation, stability, and permeability in calcareous, silty-clay saline soil. It decreased disintegration, increased permeability by 251%, and produced up to 86.9% macroaggregates (>2 mm), demonstrating its potential as a bio-structuring amendment, especially for arid and degraded soils [147]. However, when EPS build up excessively, it can cause bioclogging, which partially blocks pore spaces and drastically lowers hydraulic conductivity and porosity in the soil matrix [148,149]. Because EPS can more easily obstruct the small pore networks of fine-textured soils like clays, bioclogging is more common in these types of soils and causes a faster decline in hydraulic conductivity [150]. In order to prevent excessively compacted or tight aggregate structures, it is advised to use organic amendments, such as straw, when using EPS, particularly in clay soil. These amendments are known to increase porosity, lower bulk density, and improve structural resilience.
Studies show that inoculating cyanobacterial species, Scytonema javanicum and Phormidium ambiguum, in different soil types led to the formation of biocrusts, with P. ambiguum enhancing exopolysaccharide content and soil resistance, while S. javanicum increased organic C and N content, both improving soil aggregation through their filaments and extracellular secretions [11]. These biological soil crusts provide a variety of ecosystem benefits, including controlling soil erosion, improving the availability of nutrients and water, facilitating soil development, and recycling nitrogen and carbon. In cold climates, their slow degradation rates increase soil organic carbon, thereby contributing to carbon sequestration and positioning these soils as important carbon sinks [151]. Beyond carbon sequestration, the breakdown of EPS releases organic matter into the environment, fueling microbial activity and nutrient cycling [120].
BSCs play critical ecological roles by stabilizing the soil surface, regulating hydrological processes including infiltration, runoff, and evaporation, and supplying carbon and nitrogen to the ecosystem, thereby influencing vegetation patterns and overall soil–plant interactions [140,152,153]. It also plays a crucial role in influencing soil structure and surface morphology, as well as in capturing and retaining organic matter and essential resources, ultimately enhancing soil fertility through their impact on atmospheric carbon and nitrogen fixation [65].

4. Microalgae-Derived Biochar or Hydrochar for Soil Health

The growing algae-based industry addresses concerns over algal waste management by converting residues into functional biochar, mitigating ecological impacts and enhancing commercial sustainability [154]. Biochar, a carbon-rich material produced from plant- or animal-based biomass through thermal conversion under limited oxygen conditions, has obtained considerable attention for its ability to address critical global challenges, like soil degradation, climate change, and environmental pollution [155]. Common thermochemical conversion methods for biochar production include pyrolysis, hydrothermal carbonization (HTC), torrefaction, and gasification [156]. Hydrochar is produced through hydrothermal carbonization (HTC), which converts wet biomass into a stable, carbon-rich material under high heat and pressure in an aqueous environment. The HTC process usually functions at temperatures between 180 and 250 °C and pressures of 2–6 MPa, which makes it especially efficient for handling feedstocks with high moisture content such as food waste, agricultural residues, and algae [157].
Microalgae, with their inherent carbon sequestration potential driven by photosynthesis, can be further valorized by pyrolyzing them into biochar. This transformation not only locks atmospheric carbon into a stable form but also creates a long-lasting soil amendment that improves both fertility and sustainability. The rich composition of carbohydrates, lipids, proteins, nucleic acids, and unsaturated fatty acids in both macroalgae and microalgae contributes to the production of high-quality biochar, with its physical and chemical properties determining its overall quality [158]. Moreover, algae, rich in protein, tend to produce biochars with a greater concentration of nitrogen-rich compounds like amide, amine, phenols, pyrrole, carboxylic acids, pyridine and other compounds, making them ideal for soil enhancement and environmental remediation [159,160,161]. Such nitrogen-enriched biochars can improve soil microbial activity, support crop growth under nutrient-limited conditions, and aid in the immobilization of heavy metals and pollutants.
Microalgal biochar, produced under low temperatures and limited oxygen conditions, resulting in a carbon-rich material with a nutrient-dense profile and strong ion-exchange properties [16,162]. This form of biochar is widely regarded for its role in enhancing soil health and efficiently adsorbing pollutants from air and wastewater. Additionally, low-temperature torrefaction during pyrolysis converts algal biomass into coal-like fuel, demonstrating the versatility of algae-derived biochar across a range of applications. In contrast, high-temperature carbonization of algal biochar produces materials with a graphitic carbon framework, excellent electron conductivity, and a substantial surface area, making them ideal for applications such as supercapacitors, CO2 adsorption, and persulfate activation [154].
The study by [43] investigated the pyrolysis of three microalgae species (C. vulgaris, Nannochloropsis sp., and Spirulina sp.) using thermogravimetric analysis. The results revealed that microalgae-derived biochar contains ten times more nitrogen and phosphorus than plant-based materials like wood or crop residues, along with more oxygen-rich surface groups, highlighting its significant potential for environmental applications. Moreover, the cultivation of C. vulgaris in photobioreactors with varying CO2 concentrations resulted in high biomass productivity, and pyrolysis at 500 °C produced biochar with favorable properties for carbon sequestration and bio-adsorption, highlighting its potential as a sustainable technology for carbon capture and microalgal biorefinery [16]. Moreover, Scenedesmus sp. biochar produced via HTC was repurposed as a biofertilizer. When biochar applied to tomato plants, the biochar increased plant height to 22 cm (compared to 10 cm in controls), chlorophyll content to 24.5 mg/g (versus 10.4 mg/g in controls), and dry weight to 640 mg (versus 285 mg in controls), demonstrating its potential as a sustainable fertilizer [163].
Table 3 shows that microalgae-derived biochar, when used as a soil amendment, enhances crop growth and quality while significantly improving long-term carbon storage and soil fertility. It acts as an eco-friendly substitute for chemical fertilizers, enriching soil nutrients, boosting crop productivity, and improving soil quality by enhancing water retention, increasing soil permeability, and facilitating the gradual release of nutrients [17,164]. Additionally, its stable structure and strong carbon retention capacity make it an efficient agent for carbon sequestration [165]. These properties collectively improve nutrient availability, strengthen water retention, and enrich soil health, resulting in higher agricultural output.

5. Microalgae for Soil Health and Climate Resilient Agriculture

Climate change significantly affects soil health and crop productivity by exacerbating abiotic stresses, including drought, salinity, extreme temperatures, and nutrient deficiencies, while also intensifying biotic pressures from pathogens and pests [175]. These interconnected challenges threaten agricultural sustainability by reducing soil fertility, reduce organic matter, disturb microbial community, impairing plant growth, and diminishing overall crop yields. Conventional farming practices that depend extensively on synthetic fertilizers and unsustainable soil management contribute to the rapid soil degradation, nutrient leaching, and environmental pollution.
The integration of microalgae into agricultural systems establishes a strong synergy between soil health improvement and climate change mitigation. By enhancing soil organic carbon through biomass production and decomposition, microalgae directly contribute to carbon sequestration, reducing atmospheric CO2 levels while simultaneously improving soil structure and fertility [176]. During their decomposition, these microorganisms release EPSs, which serve as an easily accessible carbon source for soil microbiota, thereby supporting microbial growth and activity [125]. Furthermore, microalgae stimulating beneficial microbial communities and promoting nutrient availability, making them a vital component of sustainable agricultural practices and climate-resilient ecosystems [177,178].
Their application as biofertilizers, biostimulants, and biochar not only promotes soil rejuvenation but also aids in addressing climate change by decreasing reliance on fossil fuel-based agrochemicals and enhancing soil carbon retention. Healthy soils, rich in organic matter, sequester atmospheric CO2 through processes like photosynthesis and organic matter decomposition, thereby reducing GHG concentrations [179,180]. The synergies between soil improvement and climate change mitigation are centered on the ability of healthy soils to act as carbon sinks, enhance ecosystem resilience, and support sustainable land management.
Recent evidence demonstrates that microalgae and their associated groups could improve crop resilience when facing abiotic stresses. For instance, applying microalgal extracts to Chenopodium quinoa under salt stress led to a higher accumulation of proline (which acts as an osmoprotectant) and boosted the activities of antioxidant enzymes, resulting in enhanced tolerance to salt stress [181]. Similarly, the combined cultivation of microalgae with plant-growth-promoting bacteria in saline environments greatly reduced yield losses by means of mechanisms such as the production of phytohormones, siderophores, the formation of exopolysaccharides, and the modulation of reactive oxygen species [182]. Furthermore, algal biostimulants increase salt tolerance in common beans, demonstrating that extracts from microalgae such as D. salina and C. vulgaris enhance the plants’ ability to withstand salinity by promoting osmotic adjustment, proline accumulation, and improved nutrient uptake [183].The results offer specific illustrations of how metabolites derived from microalgae, interactions between microalgae and bacteria, and feedback mechanisms among soil microbes and plants can directly enhance resilience against drought, salinity, and extreme temperatures in farming systems.
As photosynthetic organisms, microalgae are highly efficient at capturing atmospheric CO2. This process effectively removes CO2 from the atmosphere or industrial flue gases and stores it in the form of algal biomass [184]. Additionally, microalgae possess specialized CO2 concentrating mechanisms that enhance carbon fixation efficiency, making them a crucial component of sustainable carbon capture solutions [25]. However, microalgae species vary in their tolerance to CO2, which is a key factor in determining their suitability for biomass production. Species with higher CO2 tolerance can efficiently utilize elevated CO2 concentrations, leading to increased growth and carbon fixation. In contrast, species with low CO2 tolerance may experience growth inhibition due to acidification of the culture medium. For instance, Scenedesmus sp. can tolerate 10–20% CO2 despite an optimal concentration of 2% [185].
Microalgae biochar has the potential to fulfill several complementary roles, including soil amendments, enhancing soil carbon stability, reducing GHG emissions, and minimizing dependence on energy-intensive agricultural inputs [6,186]. Its nutrient-rich composition and ion-exchange properties help maintain soil fertility, combat desertification, and reduce GHG emissions, promoting soil health and sustainable agriculture [187,188]. One of the valuable uses of biochar is as an alternative to activated carbon for remediating contaminated soils [189]. Incorporating carbon-rich biochar into soil enhances its nutritional and biological properties, boosts contamination resistance, and helps reduce GHG emissions, such as CO2, CH4, and N2O, contributing to climate change mitigation [190,191]. The biological sequestration of CO2 by microalgae helps mitigate GHG emissions while simultaneously restoring carbon-rich soils, addressing the interconnected challenges of soil degradation and climate change [192,193]. Biochar accomplishes these objectives by altering soil microbial activity, enhancing its physicochemical properties, and providing a medium for the adsorption of GHG [194]. According to [16], microalgae biomass (e.g., C. vulgaris) was cultivated and converted into biochar via slow pyrolysis at temperatures 500 °C. The resulting biochar exhibited a high carbon content (up to 60%) and stable aromatic structures, making it an effective long-term carbon sink. Hence, the application of biochar to soil not only sequesters carbon but also enhances soil fertility by improving nutrient retention and stimulating microbial activity.

6. Limitations to Exogenous Microalgae Efficacy in Agricultural Soils

The effectiveness of exogenous microalgae products in agricultural soils is far from uniform, as their interactions with native soil microbial communities are highly complex and context dependent. These outcomes are affected by a dynamic interplay of factors, including the identity, diversity, and abundance of resident microbes, as well as their ecological traits and functional roles within the soil ecosystem. Beyond microbial interactions, numerous environmental and biological variables, such as soil physicochemical properties, the applied microalgal species, inoculum density, and prevailing climatic conditions, strongly influence efficacy [18,195]. This variability makes it difficult to predict consistent benefits across different soils and cropping systems, underscoring the need for a deeper understanding of the mechanisms driving microalgae–soil–microbiome interactions.
Soil characteristics like pH, texture, organic matter content, moisture, and salinity can significantly affect microalgae colonization, persistence, and functional contributions [19,195,196]. Acidic or alkaline conditions can affect microalgal metabolism, cell membrane stability, and bioactive compound release [195]. Determining the optimal soil pH is vital when selecting species to maximize their functional potential. For instance, the acidophilic microalgae Euglena mutabilis and Chlorella protothecoides var. acidicola grew best at pH 2.5, generating monosaccharides and glycolic acid that aided heterotrophic bacterial activity [197]. This underscores their ecological role in promoting microbial interactions and bioremediation processes in acidic, metal-contaminated environments. In contrast, Spirulina sp. and Microcoleus sp. thrive under alkaline conditions, whereas many eukaryotic microalgae exhibit better growth and activity in neutral soils [198,199]. As a result, strains that perform well under controlled laboratory and greenhouse settings often fail to deliver consistent benefits under field conditions, where environmental fluctuations, microbial competition, and complex soil properties strongly influence outcomes. Under field conditions, the inherent complexity and heterogeneity of soils further contribute to variable results, often leading to inconsistent outcomes and difficulties in evaluating the overall success of microalgae applications [200,201]. These insights suggest that soil variability plays a decisive role in determining the success of microalgae applications, emphasizing the need for soil-specific strategies and adaptive management approaches (Figure 2).
Resident soil microbes, such as bacteria and fungi, often compete with introduced microalgae for key nutrients like phosphorus, nitrogen, and micronutrients. These interactions, ranging from symbiosis to competition or repulsion, can alter the soil micro-ecosystem’s balance and affect vital biogeochemical processes [202,203]. Microalgal polysaccharides and phytohormones can provide carbon sources that stimulate microbial activity and enhance nutrient availability in the soil [176,204]. However, intensive additions of microalgal biomass may amplify competition for nutrients with resident soil microorganisms, potentially reducing the efficacy of the inoculum, particularly in nutrient-limited soils where microbial activity is constrained [205,206]. Overall, the limited understanding of how microalgae compete or cooperate with resident soil microbes remains a key barrier to predicting their consistent efficacy in agricultural soils.
Variations in environmental conditions can significantly impact the effectiveness of microbial inoculants, as these elements affect the survival and functionality of the introduced microbial strains as well as the indigenous microbial communities [207]. Microbial inoculants need to infiltrate, establish, multiply, and possibly disperse, and these processes collectively influence their effect on plant growth in conjunction with native soil microorganisms [208]. In light of this, it is suggested that integrating an ecological framework when assessing and utilizing microbial products may help forecast colonization success and consequently the positive results of inoculants.
According to [22], despite microalgae-based products’ potential to enhance soil health, crop productivity, and reduce chemical inputs, their efficacy remains limited by a lack of ecological consideration during strain selection and development. This is largely due to selection based on laboratory traits rather than ecological compatibility, which limits their survival, activity, and appropriate persistence in diverse soil environments. They also point to the economic and logistical impracticality of designing and testing highly specific inoculants for every unique field condition, especially given the spatial heterogeneity of soils. These challenges highlight the need for a more holistic, field-relevant approach to overcome soil and microbial constraints.

7. Challenges and Research Gap

Despite their significant potential, several challenges hinder the large-scale adoption of microalgae-based applications. A primary obstacle is the difficulty of achieving cost-effective biomass production at a commercial scale. Large scale production faces major challenges, such as high production costs, low biomass concentration, contamination risks, and energy intensive harvesting make it difficult to ensure a reliable and economical supply chain [23,209]. Energy-intensive cultivation, harvesting, and drying procedures, along with the requirement for nutrient supplementation and regulated growth conditions, are the main causes of the high cost of producing microalgae biomass. According to economic analyses, harvesting and dewatering alone can cost as much as 20–30% of the total cost of production, and drying or biomass processing can add 10–20% [210]. Other significant costs include nutrient inputs and mixing energy. Moreover, the relatively low biomass yield and high moisture content of microalgae increase the energy demand for drying and processing before biochar conversion, thereby reducing overall economic viability [211].
Microalgae cultivation is constrained by high energy and capital costs associated with artificial lighting, water demands, and energy-intensive downstream processing, which collectively reduce economic viability and sustainability for large-scale agricultural applications [7,24]. Studies on the production of microalgal biofuel, for instance, have shown that up to about 3000 L of water may be required per liter of product [212]. This suggests a significant water that might outweigh the advantages in semi-arid or drought-prone agricultural areas. These factors imply that utilizing microalgal biomass or products in regions with limited water supplies requires consideration of drought-tolerant strains, wastewater-based cultivation, water-recycling techniques, or low-water cultivation systems in order to reduce the consumptive water of algal biomass for soil amendment. According to Marra et al., [213], about 70% of the microalgae culture medium can be used again with Pseudococcomyxa simplex over three consecutive batch cultivations without affecting the specific growth rate or chlorophyll content. In contrast, under all tested conditions, they found that Chlorella vulgaris growth significantly decreased following the initial cultivation in the repurposed medium. Overall, water reuse offers a practical strategy to reduce both the water footprint and cultivation costs. However, the choice of microalgae species is crucial, though, as different strains exhibit varying capacities for growth and productivity maintenance in wastewater or repurposed media. Thus, in water-scarce areas, selecting species that can withstand medium recycling is crucial to obtaining consistent water-saving benefits.
Global climate change poses a number of stressors, including rising temperatures, changed rainfall patterns, changes in salinity, and pH, which have a substantial impact on microalgal growth, productivity, and ecological balance [214]. Particularly, in open-pond cultivation systems, excessive rainfall dilutes the growth medium and increases the risk of contamination [215], whereas drought conditions increase evaporation, concentrate salts, and impose osmotic stress, which restricts the growth of algae [216]. In order to maintain consistent biomass production under a variety of climatic conditions, it is crucial to choose species with a wide range of temperature tolerance as well as to optimize pond design.
As a more economical alternative, cultivating mixed algal cultures in nutrient-rich wastewater or agro-industrial effluents within open raceway systems is gaining attention to reduce costs [99,217,218]. For instance, wastewater media have reduced the cost of producing biomass from approximately 1.98 EUR/kg to 9.69 EUR/kg [219]. While using wastewater instead of synthetic media can significantly reduce on input use, the effects of energy consumption on the environment are still problematic. However, in open raceway system, maintaining optimal cultivation conditions, such as stable CO2 levels, pH, temperature, and light intensity, is also difficult, as fluctuations can affect growth rates and carbon fixation efficiency [220]. Closed photobioreactors offer controlled environments for monoalgal cultivation. Although their construction and operational costs are high, they can be 3–5 times less cost and energy-efficient than open systems, with harvesting and dewatering contributing 3–15% to total biomass production costs, substantially lower than the corresponding costs in open cultivation [221]. Integrating production with sustainable systems like wastewater treatment or biorefineries can boost scalability and cost-effectiveness [15].
Beyond cultivation challenges, processing methods also play a decisive role in determining the agricultural and environmental effectiveness of microalgae. For instance, dried microalgae treatments increase CO2 respiration by 17% and microbial biomass carbon (MBC) by 38% compared to paste applications, highlighting the need to optimize processing techniques to reduce greenhouse gas emissions [72]. Furthermore, existing literature lacks detailed investigations into algal biochar preparation methods and their correlation with applications in soil improvement and carbon sequestration, highlighting the need for more focused and comprehensive research in this emerging field.
Although microalgae-based systems are effective for nutrient recovery and CO2 sequestration, they can also produce nitrous oxide (N2O), a potent greenhouse gas, through various biochemical pathways. This unintended N2O emission may offset the environmental benefits of microalgae applications in wastewater treatment and reduce their overall greenhouse gas mitigation potential [222]. Moreover, algal residues with high nitrogen content can exacerbate microbial competition for inorganic carbon and promote gaseous losses, undermining the intended climate benefits [68]. Collectively, these studies highlight that while microalgal applications promise agronomic and environmental gains, they may paradoxically contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and nutrient inefficiencies if not carefully managed.
Therefore, several critical research gaps should be addressed to enable the widespread adoption of microalgae-based products for improving soil health and mitigating climate change. Unlike conventional chemical fertilizers, which frequently receive government support, biofertilizers made from microalgae are currently not supported by targeted subsidies or financial incentives for their production and commercialization [223]. The effectiveness of microalgae is influenced by factors such as soil type, cropping practices, and climate, which means that application protocols have yet to be standardized. Additionally, there is limited research on how different preparation methods impact soil carbon storage, nutrient cycling, and microbial activity, and the consequences of processing and formulation techniques, whether utilized as dried biomass, extracts, or biochar, are still not well understood. Moreover, the absence of clear regulations and quality certification standards, along with a lack of awareness among farmers and end users, poses challenges for market acceptance [37]. A thorough cost–benefit analysis of microalgae processing, from cultivation to market integration, is essential to identify economic bottlenecks and optimize resources. Addressing these challenges can enable microalgae to transform sustainable agriculture, carbon sequestration, and climate change mitigation.

8. Future Perspective

Future research on microalgae-based soil amendments should focus on overcoming the current technological, ecological, and economic limitations that hinder their large-scale adoption. One of the main priorities is still developing economical cultivation and processing systems. Integrating microalgae production with wastewater treatment or biorefineries can increase economic viability while encouraging resource recycling and environmental sustainability.
Another key direction is the advancement of microalgal strains that are adapted to soil conditions. The majority of microalgae species thrive in aquatic environments and are not well-suited for terrestrial habitats. Consequently, the identification and cultivation of terrestrial or soil-dwelling species such as Chlorococcum, Nostoc, or Scenedesmus can improve their persistence and functionality in soil ecosystems. Applying adaptive laboratory evolution or genetic engineering could enhance tolerance to desiccation, salinity, and temperature fluctuations, traits vital for soil survival [224]. For example, research on Scenedesmus sp. IITRIND2 revealed that under elevated salinity, the microalga restricted ion channels, secreted EPS, and accumulated osmolytes such as proline and sugars, indicating coordinated metabolic adjustments that maintain cellular homeostasis and identify potential genetic engineering targets for enhancing salt tolerance [225]. Similarly, research by Schroda et al. [226] illustrated that the overexpression of the HSP70B gene in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii led to a substantial improvement in thermotolerance for the green alga by stabilizing photosystem II and safeguarding cellular proteins under elevated temperature conditions. The transgenic lines showed higher photosynthetic efficiency and growth rates compared to the wild type when subjected to heat stress, suggesting that strategically manipulating heat-shock proteins can improve resilience to temperature changes, a crucial attribute for soil endurance and applications geared toward climate resilience.
To strengthen field performance, co-inoculation strategies combining microalgae with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) or mycorrhizal fungi can improve nutrient cycling, water retention, and microbial synergy [127,227,228,229,230]. Co-inoculation led to a reduction in acidity, enhancement of aggregate stability, an increase in soil nutrients, an improvement in the soil quality index, and superior plant growth compared to single inoculations. Moreover, advanced formulation techniques, such as encapsulation, biochar carriers, or hydrogel matrices, can safeguard microalgae from harsh soil conditions and prolong their active duration.
It is crucial to develop standardized application protocols that account for various soil types, climates, and cropping systems in order to assess and enhance the agronomic and environmental advantages of microalgal amendments. Long-term field trials should be prioritized to evaluate persistence, functional stability, and ecological impacts in real-world conditions. Future investigations should concentrate on assessing the ecological compatibility of microalgae through the examination of their interactions with indigenous soil microorganisms, plant roots, and environmental stresses. Understanding these interactions is crucial to ensure that microalgal applications enhance soil health without disrupting existing soil microbial communities or ecosystem balance.
Collectively, advancing microalgae-based applications requires multidisciplinary collaboration among researchers, industry, and policymakers to integrate biological innovation with practical field implementation. Addressing these research gaps will allow microalgae to play a transformative role in sustainable agriculture, soil fertility enhancement, and climate change mitigation.

9. Conclusions

Soil is the foundation of agriculture and climate resilience, and recent advancements in microalgae biotechnology offer new ways to restore and sustain this vital resource. These versatile microorganisms can significantly improve soil health, crop productivity, and environmental sustainability. Microalgae have potential to enhance soil health by promoting nitrogen fixation, P solubilization, nutrient cycling, enriching microbial communities, and producing bioactive compounds and EPSs that improve soil aggregation, soil structure, water retention, and plant growth. With their high efficiency in CO2 capture, biomass production, and carbon sequestration, microalgae present an effective tool for climate change mitigation. Further conversion of microalgae into biochar provides an eco-friendly approach to improving soil fertility, increasing carbon sequestration, and mitigating climate change by stabilizing organic carbon and supporting microbial activity. However, the efficacy of microalgae-based products is affected by a range of environmental and biological factors, such as soil physicochemical properties, microalgal species applied, inoculum density, and prevailing climatic conditions. Further, their commercial adoption is constrained by limited research and the high costs of production. Most studies focus on microalgae’s potential at a laboratory scale, without addressing the practical challenges of integrating it into existing farming systems. To overcome these limitations, future efforts should focus on selecting field-adapted strains, employing mixed-strain inocula, conducting long-term field trials, optimizing formulation and delivery systems, and ensuring ecological compatibility with native soil environments. Further research is needed to develop precise application protocols, defining suitable methods, concentrations, and timings for different soils and crops, to enhance productivity, improve soil properties, and strengthen resilience to environmental stress. The next challenge lies in developing cost-effective cultivation systems, advancing biomass harvesting technologies, converting microalgal biomass into biochar, and optimizing metabolic pathways to enhance productivity and generate novel high-value compounds. Achieving these advances will harness the full potential of microalgae, driving soil health improvement, supporting a circular bioeconomy, and aiding climate change mitigation, ultimately fostering a more resilient and sustainable agricultural future.

Author Contributions

W.S.K.: Conceptualization, Data curation, Analysis, Visualization, Investigation, Writing—original draft, and Writing—review and editing. N.H.: Writing—review and editing, Data curation, Investigation. T.E.C.: Writing—review and editing, Data curation, Investigation. A.S.: Writing—review and editing, Data curation, Investigation. A.G.S.D.D.S.: Writing—review and editing, Data curation, Investigation. Z.M.: Investigation; Data curation, Supervision, Writing—review and editing. All authors approved the final version. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed.

Acknowledgments

During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used ChatGPT-4 solely to improve readability and refine the language. The authors have reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of this publication.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Fausak, L.K.; Bridson, N.; Diaz-Osorio, F.; Jassal, R.S.; Lavkulich, L.M. Soil health—A perspective. Front. Soil Sci. 2024, 4, 1462428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kopittke, P.M.; Menzies, N.W.; Wang, P.; McKenna, B.A.; Lombi, E. Soil and the intensification of agriculture for global food security. Environ. Int. 2019, 132, 105078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Nuruzzaman; Bahar, M.; Naidu, R. Diffuse soil pollution from agriculture: Impacts and remediation. Sci. Total Environ. 2025, 962, 178398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sutherland, D.L.; McCauley, J.; Labeeuw, L.; Ray, P.; Kuzhiumparambil, U.; Hall, C.; Doblin, M.; Nguyen, L.N.; Ralph, P.J. How microalgal biotechnology can assist with the UN Sustainable Development Goals for natural resource management. Curr. Res. Environ. Sustain. 2021, 3, 100050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Naik, B.; Mishra, R.; Kumar, V.; Mishra, S.; Gupta, U.; Rustagi, S.; Gupta, A.K.; Preet, M.S.; Bhatt, S.C.; Rizwanuddin, S. Micro-algae: Revolutionizing food production for a healthy and sustainable future. J. Agric. Food Res. 2024, 15, 100939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ramakrishnan, B.; Maddela, N.R.; Venkateswarlu, K.; Megharaj, M. Potential of microalgae and cyanobacteria to improve soil health and agricultural productivity: A critical view. Environ. Sci. Adv. 2023, 2, 586–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ighalo, J.O.; Dulta, K.; Kurniawan, S.B.; Omoarukhe, F.O.; Ewuzie, U.; Eshiemogie, S.O.; Ojo, A.U.; Abdullah, S.R.S. Progress in Microalgae Application for CO2 Sequestration. Clean. Chem. Eng. 2022, 3, 100044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Nur, M.M.A.; Mahreni; Murni, S.W.; Setyoningrum, T.M.; Hadi, F.; Widayati, T.W.; Jaya, D.; Sulistyawati, R.R.E.; Puspitaningrum, D.A.; Dewi, R.N.; et al. Innovative strategies for utilizing microalgae as dual-purpose biofertilizers and phycoremediators in agroecosystems. Biotechnol. Rep. 2025, 45, e00870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Zaplata, M.K.; Schümberg, S.; Kidron, G.J.; Ramm, J.; Veste, M. Impacts of cyanobacteria-dominated biological soil crusts on seedling emergence and fate: An in situ experiment. Plant Soil 2025, 509, 417–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Muñoz-Rojas, M.; Román, J.R.; Roncero-Ramos, B.; Erickson, T.E.; Merritt, D.J.; Aguila-Carricondo, P.; Cantón, Y. Cyanobacteria inoculation enhances carbon sequestration in soil substrates used in dryland restoration. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 636, 1149–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chamizo, S.; Mugnai, G.; Rossi, F.; Certini, G.; De Philippis, R. Cyanobacteria Inoculation Improves Soil Stability and Fertility on Different Textured Soils: Gaining Insights for Applicability in Soil Restoration. Front. Environ. Sci. 2018, 6, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Osorio-Reyes, J.G.; Valenzuela-Amaro, H.M.; Pizaña-Aranda, J.J.P.; Ramírez-Gamboa, D.; Meléndez-Sánchez, E.R.; López-Arellanes, M.E.; Castañeda-Antonio, M.D.; Coronado-Apodaca, K.G.; Gomes Araújo, R.; Sosa-Hernández, J.E.; et al. Microalgae-Based Biotechnology as Alternative Biofertilizers for Soil Enhancement and Carbon Footprint Reduction: Advantages and Implications. Mar. Drugs 2023, 21, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Win, T.T.; Barone, G.D.; Secundo, F.; Fu, P. Algal Biofertilizers and Plant Growth Stimulants for Sustainable Agriculture. Ind. Biotechnol. 2018, 14, 203–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. De Philippis, R.; Colica, G.; Micheletti, E. Exopolysaccharide-producing cyanobacteria in heavy metal removal from water: Molecular basis and practical applicability of the biosorption process. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 92, 697–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Gurau, S.; Imran, M.; Ray, R.L. Algae: A cutting-edge solution for enhancing soil health and accelerating carbon sequestration—A review. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2025, 37, 103980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Yu, K.L.; Show, P.L.; Ong, H.C.; Ling, T.C.; Chen, W.-H.; Salleh, M.A.M. Biochar production from microalgae cultivation through pyrolysis as a sustainable carbon sequestration and biorefinery approach. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2018, 20, 2047–2055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Karthik, V.; Kumar, P.S.; Vo, D.-V.N.; Sindhu, J.; Sneka, D.; Subhashini, B.; Saravanan, K.; Jeyanthi, J. Hydrothermal production of algal biochar for environmental and fertilizer applications: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2021, 19, 1025–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ren, C.-G.; Kong, C.-C.; Li, S.-M.; Wang, X.-J.; Yu, X.; Wang, Y.-C.; Qin, S.; Cui, H.-L. Symbiotic microalgae and microbes: A new frontier in saline agriculture. Front. Microbiol. 2025, 16, 1540274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kang, E.; Li, Y.; Zhang, X.; Yan, Z.; Wu, H.; Li, M.; Yan, L.; Zhang, K.; Wang, J.; Kang, X. Soil pH and nutrients shape the vertical distribution of microbial communities in an alpine wetland. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 774, 145780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Xie, P.; Wang, Q.-S.; Qu, W.-Y.; Chen, X.; Feng, Y.-J.; Ma, J.; Ren, N.-Q.; Ho, S.-H. Revealing real impact of microalgae on seasonal dynamics of bacterial community in a pilot-scale microalgal-bacterial consortium system. Water Res. 2025, 274, 123145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Yang, X.; Liu, L.; Liu, X.; Xie, S.; Feng, J.; Lv, J. The responding mechanism of indigenous bacteria in municipal wastewater inoculated with different concentrations of exogenous microalgae. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 345, 118547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bell, T.H.; Kaminsky, L.M.; Gugino, B.K.; Carlson, J.E.; Malik, R.J.; Hockett, K.L.; Trexler, R.V. Factoring Ecological, Societal, and Economic Considerations into Inoculant Development. Trends Biotechnol. 2019, 37, 572–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Novoveská, L.; Nielsen, S.L.; Eroldoğan, O.T.; Haznedaroglu, B.Z.; Rinkevich, B.; Fazi, S.; Robbens, J.; Vasquez, M.; Einarsson, H. Overview and Challenges of Large-Scale Cultivation of Photosynthetic Microalgae and Cyanobacteria. Mar. Drugs 2023, 21, 445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Parmar, P.; Kumar, R.; Neha, Y.; Srivatsan, V. Microalgae as next generation plant growth additives: Functions, applications, challenges and circular bioeconomy based solutions. Front Plant Sci 2023, 14, 1073546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Alvarez, A.L.; Weyers, S.L.; Goemann, H.M.; Peyton, B.M.; Gardner, R.D. Microalgae, soil and plants: A critical review of microalgae as renewable resources for agriculture. Algal Res. 2021, 54, 102200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Singh, J.; Saxena, R.C. Chapter 2—An Introduction to Microalgae: Diversity and Significance. In Handbook of Marine Microalgae; Kim, S.-K., Ed.; Academic Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2015; pp. 11–24. [Google Scholar]
  27. Hadi, S.I.I.A.; Santana, H.; Brunale, P.P.M.; Gomes, T.G.; Oliveira, M.D.; Matthiensen, A.; Oliveira, M.E.C.; Silva, F.C.P.; Brasil, B.S.A.F. DNA Barcoding Green Microalgae Isolated from Neotropical Inland Waters. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0149284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Brasil, B.d.S.A.F.; de Siqueira, F.G.; Salum, T.F.C.; Zanette, C.M.; Spier, M.R. Microalgae and cyanobacteria as enzyme biofactories. Algal Res. 2017, 25, 76–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Khan, M.I.; Shin, J.H.; Kim, J.D. The promising future of microalgae: Current status, challenges, and optimization of a sustainable and renewable industry for biofuels, feed, and other products. Microb. Cell Factories 2018, 17, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Dolganyuk, V.; Belova, D.; Babich, O.; Prosekov, A.; Ivanova, S.; Katserov, D.; Patyukov, N.; Sukhikh, S. Microalgae: A Promising Source of Valuable Bioproducts. Biomolecules 2020, 10, 1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ahmad, I.; Yuzir, A.; Mohamad, S.E.; Iwamoto, K.; Abdullah, N. Role of Microalgae in Sustainable Energy and Environment. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 1051, 012059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Joseph, J.; Ray, J.G. A critical analysis of ecology and diversity of Cyanobacteria in long-term chemicalized tropical plantation field soils: Implications for sustainable soil fertility management. J. Environ. Manag. 2025, 392, 126817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kheirfam, H.; Sadeghi, S.H.; Homaee, M.; Zarei Darki, B. Quality improvement of an erosion-prone soil through microbial enrichment. Soil Tillage Res. 2017, 165, 230–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lin, C.-S.; Wu, J.-T. Tolerance of soil algae and cyanobacteria to drought stress. J. Phycol. 2014, 50, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Karsten, U.; Holzinger, A. Light, temperature, and desiccation effects on photosynthetic activity, and drought-induced ultrastructural changes in the green alga Klebsormidium dissectum (Streptophyta) from a high alpine soil crust. Microb. Ecol. 2012, 63, 51–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, Z.; Xu, M.; Fan, Y.; Zhang, L.; Wang, H. Using microalgae to reduce the use of conventional fertilizers in hydroponics and soil-based cultivation. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 912, 169424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Renuka, N.; Guldhe, A.; Prasanna, R.; Singh, P.; Bux, F. Microalgae as multi-functional options in modern agriculture: Current trends, prospects and challenges. Biotechnol. Adv. 2018, 36, 1255–1273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Lu, Q.; Xiao, Y. From manure to high-value fertilizer: The employment of microalgae as a nutrient carrier for sustainable agriculture. Algal Res. 2022, 67, 102855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bello, A.S.; Saadaoui, I.; Ben-Hamadou, R. “Beyond the Source of Bioenergy”: Microalgae in Modern Agriculture as a Biostimulant, Biofertilizer, and Anti-Abiotic Stress. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Miranda, A.M.; Hernandez-Tenorio, F.; Villalta, F.; Vargas, G.J.; Sáez, A.A. Advances in the Development of Biofertilizers and Biostimulants from Microalgae. Biology 2024, 13, 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Suchithra, M.R.; Muniswami, D.M.; Sri, M.S.; Usha, R.; Rasheeq, A.A.; Preethi, B.A.; Dineshkumar, R. Effectiveness of green microalgae as biostimulants and biofertilizer through foliar spray and soil drench method for tomato cultivation. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2022, 146, 740–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Weigand, H.; Velten, H.; Düring, R.A.; Chifflard, P.; Rohnke, M.; Weintraut, T.; Heusch, S.; Theilen, U. Soil fertilization with microalgae biomass from municipal wastewater treatment causes no additional leaching of dissolved macronutrients and trace elements in a column experiment. J. Environ. Qual. 2024, 53, 618–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Binda, G.; Spanu, D.; Bettinetti, R.; Magagnin, L.; Pozzi, A.; Dossi, C. Comprehensive comparison of microalgae-derived biochar from different feedstocks: A prospective study for future environmental applications. Algal Res. 2020, 52, 102103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Martínez-Dalmau, J.; Berbel, J.; Ordóñez-Fernández, R. Nitrogen Fertilization. A Review of the Risks Associated with the Inefficiency of Its Use and Policy Responses. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Govindasamy, P.; Muthusamy, S.K.; Bagavathiannan, M.; Mowrer, J.; Jagannadham, P.T.K.; Maity, A.; Halli, H.M.; Sujayanand, G.K.; Vadivel, R.; Das, T.K.; et al. Nitrogen use efficiency-a key to enhance crop productivity under a changing climate. Front. Plant Sci. 2023, 14, 1121073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ladha, J.K.; Peoples, M.B.; Reddy, P.M.; Biswas, J.C.; Bennett, A.; Jat, M.L.; Krupnik, T.J. Biological nitrogen fixation and prospects for ecological intensification in cereal-based cropping systems. Field Crops Res. 2022, 283, 108541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sanchez, P. Nitrogen. In Properties and Management of Soils in the Tropics, 2nd ed.; Sanchez, P.A., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2019; pp. 326–369. [Google Scholar]
  48. Song, X.; Bo, Y.; Feng, Y.; Tan, Y.; Zhou, C.; Yan, X.; Ruan, R.; Xu, Q.; Cheng, P. Potential applications for multifunctional microalgae in soil improvement. Front. Environ. Sci. 2022, 10, 1035332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Nawaz, T.; Fahad, S.; Saud, S.; Zhou, R.; Abdelsalam, N.R.; Abdelhamid, M.M.A.; Jaremko, M. Sustainable nitrogen solutions: Cyanobacteria-powered plant biotechnology for conservation and metabolite production. Curr. Plant Biol. 2024, 40, 100399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kumar, A.; Paul, S.; Das, D.; Singh, M. Metabolic Pathway Engineering in Cyanobacteria for Biohydrogen Production. In Cyanobacteria Biotechnology: Sustainability of Water-Energy-Environment Nexus; Mehmood, M.A., Malik, S., Musharraf, S.G., Boopathy, R., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; pp. 67–89. [Google Scholar]
  51. Nawaz, T.; Fahad, S.; Gu, L.; Saud, S.; Zhou, R. Cyanobacteria: Role in sustainable biomanufacturing and nitrogen fixation. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefining 2024, 18, 2132–2155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Daniel, A.I.; Fadaka, A.O.; Gokul, A.; Bakare, O.O.; Aina, O.; Fisher, S.; Burt, A.F.; Mavumengwana, V.; Keyster, M.; Klein, A. Biofertilizer: The Future of Food Security and Food Safety. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 1220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mitter, E.K.; Tosi, M.; Obregón, D.; Dunfield, K.E.; Germida, J.J. Rethinking Crop Nutrition in Times of Modern Microbiology: Innovative Biofertilizer Technologies. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 606815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Gonçalves, A.L. The Use of Microalgae and Cyanobacteria in the Improvement of Agricultural Practices: A Review on Their Biofertilising, Biostimulating and Biopesticide Roles. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Baweja, P.; Kumar, S.; Kumar, G. Organic Fertilizer from Algae: A Novel Approach Towards Sustainable Agriculture. In Biofertilizers for Sustainable Agriculture and Environment; Giri, B., Prasad, R., Wu, Q.-S., Varma, A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 353–370. [Google Scholar]
  56. La Bella, E.; Baglieri, A.; Fragalà, F.; Saccone, R.; Salvagno, E.; Terrazzino, S.; Puglisi, I. Influence of Microalgae Biomasses Retrieved from Phycoremediation of Wastewaters on Yield of Lettuce, Soil Health, and Nitrogen Environmental Fate. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2024, 24, 4880–4897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Rupawalla, Z.; Robinson, N.; Schmidt, S.; Li, S.; Carruthers, S.; Buisset, E.; Roles, J.; Hankamer, B.; Wolf, J. Algae biofertilisers promote sustainable food production and a circular nutrient economy—An integrated empirical-modelling study. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 796, 148913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Sigurnjak, I.; Vaneeckhaute, C.; Michels, E.; Ryckaert, B.; Ghekiere, G.; Tack, F.M.G.; Meers, E. Fertilizer performance of liquid fraction of digestate as synthetic nitrogen substitute in silage maize cultivation for three consecutive years. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 599–600, 1885–1894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Shanthakumar, S.; Abinandan, S.; Venkateswarlu, K.; Subashchandrabose, S.R.; Megharaj, M. Algalization of acid soils with acid-tolerant strains: Improvement in pH, carbon content, exopolysaccharides, indole acetic acid and dehydrogenase activity. Land Degrad. Dev. 2021, 32, 3157–3166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Sharma, G.K.; Khan, S.A.; Shrivastava, M.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Sharma, A.; Gupta, D.K.; Kishore, P.; Gupta, N. Circular economy fertilization: Phycoremediated algal biomass as biofertilizers for sustainable crop production. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 287, 112295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Manjunath, M.; Kanchan, A.; Ranjan, K.; Venkatachalam, S.; Prasanna, R.; Ramakrishnan, B.; Hossain, F.; Nain, L.; Shivay, Y.S.; Rai, A.B.; et al. Beneficial cyanobacteria and eubacteria synergistically enhance bioavailability of soil nutrients and yield of okra. Heliyon 2016, 2, e00066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kholssi, R.; Marks, E.A.N.; Miñón, J.; Montero, O.; Debdoubi, A.; Rad, C. Biofertilizing Effect of Chlorella sorokiniana Suspensions on Wheat Growth. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2019, 38, 644–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Dineshkumar, R.; Subramanian, J.; Gopalsamy, J.; Jayasingam, P.; Arumugam, A.; Kannadasan, S.; Sampathkumar, P. The Impact of Using Microalgae as Biofertilizer in Maize (Zea mays L.). Waste Biomass Valorization 2019, 10, 1101–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Swarnalakshmi, K.; Prasanna, R.; Kumar, A.; Pattnaik, S.; Chakravarty, K.; Shivay, Y.S.; Singh, R.; Saxena, A.K. Evaluating the influence of novel cyanobacterial biofilmed biofertilizers on soil fertility and plant nutrition in wheat. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2013, 55, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Yadav, P.; Singh, R.P.; Hashem, A.; Abd Allah, E.F.; Santoyo, G.; Kumar, A.; Gupta, R.K. Enhancing Biocrust Development and Plant Growth through Inoculation of Desiccation-Tolerant Cyanobacteria in Different Textured Soils. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 2507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Dineshkumar, R.; Kumaravel, R.; Gopalsamy, J.; Sikder, M.N.A.; Sampathkumar, P. Microalgae as Bio-fertilizers for Rice Growth and Seed Yield Productivity. Waste Biomass Valorization 2018, 9, 793–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Malam Issa, O.; Défarge, C.; Le Bissonnais, Y.; Marin, B.; Duval, O.; Bruand, A.; D’Acqui, L.P.; Nordenberg, S.; Annerman, M. Effects of the inoculation of cyanobacteria on the microstructure and the structural stability of a tropical soil. Plant Soil 2007, 290, 209–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Garbowski, T. The Effect of Chlorella vulgaris (Chlorellales: Chlorellaceae) on the Fertility of Sandy Soils and on the Composition of Soil Leachates. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2024, 24, 6496–6506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Alobwede, E.; Cotton, A.; Leake, J.R.; Pandhal, J. The Fate and Distribution of Microalgal Nitrogen When Applied as an Agricultural Soil Fertiliser and Its Effect on Soil Microbial Communities. Phycology 2022, 2, 297–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Yao, Y.; Chen, Y.; Han, R.; Chen, D.; Ma, H.; Han, X.; Feng, Y.; Shi, C. Algal Decomposition Accelerates Denitrification as Evidenced by the High-Resolution Distribution of Nitrogen Fractions in the Sediment–Water Interface of Eutrophic Lakes. Water 2024, 16, 341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Shrestha, R.C.; Ghazaryan, L.; Poodiack, B.; Zorin, B.; Gross, A.; Gillor, O.; Khozin-Goldberg, I.; Gelfand, I. The effects of microalgae-based fertilization of wheat on yield, soil microbiome and nitrogen oxides emissions. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 806, 151320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Shayesteh, H.; Jenkins, S.N.; Moheimani, N.R.; Bolan, N.; Bühlmann, C.H.; Gurung, S.K.; Vadiveloo, A.; Bahri, P.A.; Mickan, B.S. Nitrogen dynamics and biological processes in soil amended with microalgae grown in abattoir digestate to recover nutrients. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 344, 118467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Jahan, N.; Mahmud, U.; Khan, M.Z. Sustainable plant-soil phosphorus management in agricultural systems: Challenges, environmental impacts and innovative solutions. Discov. Soil 2025, 2, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Simpson, R.J.; Oberson, A.; Culvenor, R.A.; Ryan, M.H.; Veneklaas, E.J.; Lambers, H.; Lynch, J.P.; Ryan, P.R.; Delhaize, E.; Smith, F.A.; et al. Strategies and agronomic interventions to improve the phosphorus-use efficiency of farming systems. Plant Soil 2011, 349, 89–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Liu, P.; Shi, Q.; Chen, Z.; Wang, M.; Ying, F.; Gu, X.; Wu, Y.; Yao, Z.; Cong, W.-F.; Zhao, Z.; et al. Dynamically managing soil phosphorus could halve phosphorus losses from cropland in lake basins. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2025, 383, 109532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Silva, L.I.d.; Pereira, M.C.; Carvalho, A.M.X.d.; Buttrós, V.H.; Pasqual, M.; Dória, J. Phosphorus-Solubilizing Microorganisms: A Key to Sustainable Agriculture. Agriculture 2023, 13, 462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Afkairin, A.; Ippolito, J.A.; Stromberger, M.; Davis, J.G. Solubilization of organic phosphorus sources by cyanobacteria and a commercially available bacterial consortium. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 162, 103900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Yandigeri, M.S.; Yadav, A.K.; Srinivasan, R.; Kashyap, S.; Pabbi, S. Studies on mineral phosphate solubilization by cyanobacteria Westiellopsis and Anabaena. Microbiology 2011, 80, 558–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Caille, C.; Duhamel, S.; Latifi, A.; Rabouille, S. Adaptive Responses of Cyanobacteria to Phosphate Limitation: A Focus on Marine Diazotrophs. Environ. Microbiol. 2024, 26, e70023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Zhu, J.; Wakisaka, M. Finding of phytase: Understanding growth promotion mechanism of phytic acid to freshwater microalga Euglena gracilis. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 296, 122343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Erpel, F.; Restovic, F.; Arce-Johnson, P. Development of phytase-expressing chlamydomonas reinhardtii for monogastric animal nutrition. BMC Biotechnol. 2016, 16, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Mau, L.; Kant, J.; Walker, R.; Kuchendorf, C.M.; Schrey, S.D.; Roessner, U.; Watt, M. Wheat Can Access Phosphorus From Algal Biomass as Quickly and Continuously as From Mineral Fertilizer. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 631314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Plouviez, M.; Brown, N. Polyphosphate accumulation in microalgae and cyanobacteria: Recent advances and opportunities for phosphorus upcycling. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2024, 90, 103207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Solovchenko, A.; Plouviez, M.; Khozin-Goldberg, I. Getting Grip on Phosphorus: Potential of Microalgae as a Vehicle for Sustainable Usage of This Macronutrient. Plants 2024, 13, 1834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Seki, Y.; Nitta, K.; Kaneko, Y. Observation of polyphosphate bodies and DNA during the cell division cycle of Synechococcus elongatus PCC 7942. Plant Biol. 2014, 16, 258–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Çakirsoy, I.; Miyamoto, T.; Ohtake, N. Physiology of microalgae and their application to sustainable agriculture: A mini-review. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1005991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Sforza, E.; Calvaruso, C.; La Rocca, N.; Bertucco, A. Luxury uptake of phosphorus in Nannochloropsis salina: Effect of P concentration and light on P uptake in batch and continuous cultures. Biochem. Eng. J. 2018, 134, 69–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ryu, H.-b.; Kang, M.-J.; Choi, K.-M.; Yang, I.-K.; Hong, S.-J.; Lee, C.-G. Inhibition of Polyphosphate Degradation in Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 through Inactivation of the phoU Gene. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2024, 34, 407–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Cañavate, J.P.; Armada, I.; Hachero-Cruzado, I. Interspecific variability in phosphorus-induced lipid remodelling among marine eukaryotic phytoplankton. New Phytol. 2017, 213, 700–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Babiak, W.; Krzemińska, I. Extracellular Polymeric Substances (EPS) as Microalgal Bioproducts: A Review of Factors Affecting EPS Synthesis and Application in Flocculation Processes. Energies 2021, 14, 4007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Lu, Y.; Xu, J. Phytohormones in microalgae: A new opportunity for microalgal biotechnology? Trends Plant Sci. 2015, 20, 273–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. EL Sabagh, A.; Islam, M.S.; Hossain, A.; Iqbal, M.A.; Mubeen, M.; Waleed, M.; Reginato, M.; Battaglia, M.; Ahmed, S.; Rehman, A.; et al. Phytohormones as Growth Regulators During Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Plants. Front. Agron. 2022, 4, 765068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Chabili, A.; Minaoui, F.; Hakkoum, Z.; Douma, M.; Meddich, A.; Loudiki, M. A Comprehensive Review of Microalgae and Cyanobacteria-Based Biostimulants for Agriculture Uses. Plants 2024, 13, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Han, X.; Zeng, H.; Bartocci, P.; Fantozzi, F.; Yan, Y. Phytohormones and Effects on Growth and Metabolites of Microalgae: A Review. Fermentation 2018, 4, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Ferreira, A.; Bastos, C.R.V.; Marques-dos-Santos, C.; Acién-Fernandez, F.G.; Gouveia, L. Algaeculture for agriculture: From past to future. Front. Agron. 2023, 5, 1064041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Kapoore, R.V.; Wood, E.E.; Llewellyn, C.A. Algae biostimulants: A critical look at microalgal biostimulants for sustainable agricultural practices. Biotechnol. Adv. 2021, 49, 107754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Álvarez-González, A.; Greque de Morais, E.; Planas-Carbonell, A.; Uggetti, E. Enhancing sustainability through microalgae cultivation in urban wastewater for biostimulant production and nutrient recovery. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 904, 166878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Brito-Lopez, C.; van der Wielen, N.; Barbosa, M.; Karlova, R. Plant growth–promoting microbes and microalgae-based biostimulants: Sustainable strategy for agriculture and abiotic stress resilience. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2025, 380, 20240251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Ördög, V.; Van Staden, J.; Takács, G.; Gergely, I.; Stirk, W.A. Chapter seven—Microalgal and cyanobacterial biostimulants used in wheat and maize production. In Biostimulants for Improving Reproductive Growth and Crop Yield; Gupta, S., Doležal, K., Van Staden, J., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2025; pp. 169–218. [Google Scholar]
  100. Rouphael, Y.; Colla, G. Editorial: Biostimulants in Agriculture. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Colla, G.; Rouphael, Y. Microalgae: New Source of Plant Biostimulants. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Parađiković, N.; Teklić, T.; Zeljković, S.; Lisjak, M.; Špoljarević, M. Biostimulants research in some horticultural plant species—A review. Food Energy Secur. 2019, 8, e00162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Nawaz, T.; Saud, S.; Gu, L.; Khan, I.; Fahad, S.; Zhou, R. Cyanobacteria: Harnessing the power of microorganisms for plant growth promotion, stress alleviation, and phytoremediation in the era of sustainable agriculture. Plant Stress 2024, 11, 100399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. El-Shazoly, R.M.; Yousef, S.; Hifney, A.F.; Abdel-Wahab, D.A. Effectiveness of Algae as a Low-Cost Alternative Input to Stimulate Sesamum indicum L. Growth and Productivity for Sustainable Purposes. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2025, 25, 8006–8025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Shariatmadari, Z.; Riahi, H.; Abdi, M.; Hashtroudi, M.S.; Ghassempour, A.R. Impact of cyanobacterial extracts on the growth and oil content of the medicinal plant Mentha piperita L. J. Appl. Phycol. 2015, 27, 2279–2287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Rupawalla, Z.; Shaw, L.; Ross, I.L.; Schmidt, S.; Hankamer, B.; Wolf, J. Germination screen for microalgae-generated plant growth biostimulants. Algal Res. 2022, 66, 102784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Shariatmadari, Z.; Riahi, H.; Seyed Hashtroudi, M.; Ghassempour, A.; Aghashariatmadary, Z. Plant growth promoting cyanobacteria and their distribution in terrestrial habitats of Iran. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2013, 59, 535–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Gitau, M.M.; Farkas, A.; Ördög, V.; Maróti, G. Evaluation of the biostimulant effects of two Chlorophyta microalgae on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 364, 132689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Moon, J.; Park, Y.J.; Choi, Y.B.; Truong, T.Q.; Huynh, P.K.; Kim, Y.B.; Kim, S.M. Physiological Effects and Mechanisms of Chlorella vulgaris as a Biostimulant on the Growth and Drought Tolerance of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plants 2024, 13, 3012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Plaza, B.M.; Gómez-Serrano, C.; Acién-Fernández, F.G.; Jimenez-Becker, S. Effect of microalgae hydrolysate foliar application (Arthrospira platensis and Scenedesmus sp.) on Petunia x hybrida growth. J. Appl. Phycol. 2018, 30, 2359–2365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Lamb, T.I.; Berghahn, E.; Pita, F.M.; de Oliveira Neves, L.; dos Reis Blasi, É.A.; Hofstetter, J.S.; Dammann, M.; da Silva, L.C.O.; Buffon, G.; Dullius, A.; et al. Isolation and selection of microalgae capable of stimulating rice plant development and seed production. Algal Res. 2023, 74, 103203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Gitau, M.M.; Farkas, A.; Balla, B.; Ördög, V.; Futó, Z.; Maróti, G. Strain-Specific Biostimulant Effects of Chlorella and Chlamydomonas Green Microalgae on Medicago truncatula. Plants 2021, 10, 1060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Guedes, W.A.; Araújo, R.H.C.R.; Rocha, J.L.A.; Lima, J.F.d.; Dias, G.A.; Oliveira, Á.M.F.d.; Lima, R.F.d.; Oliveira, L.M. Production of Papaya Seedlings Using Spirulina platensis as a Biostimulant Applied on Leaf and Root. J. Exp. Agric. Int. 2018, 28, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Bulgari, R.; Franzoni, G.; Ferrante, A. Biostimulants Application in Horticultural Crops under Abiotic Stress Conditions. Agronomy 2019, 9, 306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Barsanti, L.; Gualtieri, P. Is exploitation of microalgae economically and energetically sustainable? Algal Res. 2018, 31, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Zhou, Y.; Cui, X.; Wu, B.; Wang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Ren, T.; Xia, S.; Rittmann, B.E. Microalgal extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) and their roles in cultivation, biomass harvesting, and bioproducts extraction. Bioresour. Technol. 2024, 406, 131054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Wang, M.; Kuo-Dahab, W.C.; Dolan, S.; Park, C. Kinetics of nutrient removal and expression of extracellular polymeric substances of the microalgae, Chlorella sp. and Micractinium sp., in wastewater treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 154, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Xiao, R.; Zheng, Y. Overview of microalgal extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) and their applications. Biotechnol. Adv. 2016, 34, 1225–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Gaignard, C.; Laroche, C.; Pierre, G.; Dubessay, P.; Delattre, C.; Gardarin, C.; Gourvil, P.; Probert, I.; Dubuffet, A.; Michaud, P. Screening of marine microalgae: Investigation of new exopolysaccharide producers. Algal Res. 2019, 44, 101711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Costa, O.Y.A.; Raaijmakers, J.M.; Kuramae, E.E. Microbial Extracellular Polymeric Substances: Ecological Function and Impact on Soil Aggregation. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Luo, Y.; Lopez, J.B.G.; van Veelen, H.P.J.; Kok, D.-J.D.; Postma, R.; Thijssen, D.; Sechi, V.; ter Heijne, A.; Bezemer, T.M.; Buisman, C.J.N. Effects of different soil organic amendments (OAs) on extracellular polymeric substances (EPS). Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2024, 121, 103624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Hu, J.; Guo, H.; Xue, Y.; Gao, M.-t.; Zhang, S.; Tsang, Y.F.; Li, J.; Wang, Y.-n.; Wang, L. Using a mixture of microalgae, biochar, and organic manure to increase the capacity of soil to act as carbon sink. J. Soils Sed. 2019, 19, 3718–3727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Ciempiel, W.; Czemierska, M.; Szymańska-Chargot, M.; Zdunek, A.; Wiącek, D.; Jarosz-Wilkołazka, A.; Krzemińska, I. Soluble Extracellular Polymeric Substances Produced by Parachlorella kessleri and Chlorella vulgaris: Biochemical Characterization and Assessment of Their Cadmium and Lead Sorption Abilities. Molecules 2022, 27, 7153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Ciempiel, W.; Czemierska, M.; Wiącek, D.; Szymańska, M.; Jarosz-Wilkołazka, A.; Krzemińska, I. Lead biosorption and chemical composition of extracellular polymeric substances isolated from mixotrophic microalgal cultures. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 9093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Tiwari, O.N.; Bhunia, B.; Mondal, A.; Gopikrishna, K.; Indrama, T. System metabolic engineering of exopolysaccharide-producing cyanobacteria in soil rehabilitation by inducing the formation of biological soil crusts: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 211, 70–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Yao, S.; Lyu, S.; An, Y.; Lu, J.; Gjermansen, C.; Schramm, A. Microalgae-bacteria symbiosis in microalgal growth and biofuel production: A review. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2019, 126, 359–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Solomon, W.; Mutum, L.; Janda, T.; Molnár, Z. Potential benefit of microalgae and their interaction with bacteria to sustainable crop production. Plant Growth Regul. 2023, 101, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Álvarez, C.; Jiménez-Ríos, L.; Iniesta-Pallarés, M.; Jurado-Flores, A.; Molina-Heredia, F.P.; Ng, C.K.Y.; Mariscal, V. Symbiosis between cyanobacteria and plants: From molecular studies to agronomic applications. J. Exp. Bot. 2023, 74, 6145–6157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Solomon, W.; Mutum, L.; Janda, T.; Molnar, Z. Microalgae–bacteria interaction: A catalyst to improve maize (Zea mays L.) growth and soil fertility. Cereal Res. Commun. 2024, 53, 1037–1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Liu, H.; Zhou, Y.; Xiao, W.; Ji, L.; Cao, X.; Song, C. Shifting nutrient-mediated interactions between algae and bacteria in a microcosm: Evidence from alkaline phosphatase assay. Microbiol. Res. 2012, 167, 292–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Llamas, A.; Leon-Miranda, E.; Tejada-Jimenez, M. Microalgal and Nitrogen-Fixing Bacterial Consortia: From Interaction to Biotechnological Potential. Plants 2023, 12, 2476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Bender, S.F.; Wagg, C.; van der Heijden, M.G.A. An Underground Revolution: Biodiversity and Soil Ecological Engineering for Agricultural Sustainability. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2016, 31, 440–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Delgado-Baquerizo, M.; Eldridge, D.J.; Liu, Y.R.; Liu, Z.W.; Coleine, C.; Trivedi, P. Soil biodiversity and function under global change. PLoS Biol. 2025, 23, e3003093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Carillo, P.; Ciarmiello, L.F.; Woodrow, P.; Corrado, G.; Chiaiese, P.; Rouphael, Y. Enhancing Sustainability by Improving Plant Salt Tolerance through Macro- and Micro-Algal Biostimulants. Biology 2020, 9, 253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Song, X.; Liu, J.; Feng, Y.; Zhou, C.; Li, X.; Yan, X.; Ruan, R.; Cheng, P. Microalgae-based biofertilizers improve fertility and microbial community structures in the soil of potted tomato. Front. Plant Sci. 2024, 15, 1461945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Prăvălie, R. Drylands extent and environmental issues. A global approach. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2016, 161, 259–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Bowker, M.A.; Reed, S.C.; Maestre, F.T.; Eldridge, D.J. Biocrusts: The living skin of the earth. Plant Soil 2018, 429, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Li, X.; Hui, R.; Tan, H.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, R.; Song, N. Biocrust Research in China: Recent Progress and Application in Land Degradation Control. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 751521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Gufwan, L.A.; Peng, L.; Gufwan, N.M.; Lan, S.; Wu, L. Enhancing Soil Health Through Biocrusts: A Microbial Ecosystem Approach for Degradation Control and Restoration. Microb. Ecol. 2025, 88, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Yang, Y.; Deng, Y.; Cai, C.; Wang, F.; Fang, Y.; Duan, X. Biocrusts’ impact on hydrological processes and erosion dynamics: A review. Geoderma 2025, 459, 117383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Rodriguez-Caballero, E.; Belnap, J.; Büdel, B.; Crutzen, P.J.; Andreae, M.O.; Pöschl, U.; Weber, B. Dryland photoautotrophic soil surface communities endangered byglobal change. Nat. Geosci. 2018, 11, 185–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Maestre, F.T.; Escolar, C.; de Guevara, M.L.; Quero, J.L.; Lázaro, R.; Delgado-Baquerizo, M.; Ochoa, V.; Berdugo, M.; Gozalo, B.; Gallardo, A. Changes in biocrust cover drive carbon cycle responses to climate change in drylands. Glob. Change Biol. 2013, 19, 3835–3847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Xiao, B.; Hu, K.; Ren, T.; Li, B. Moss-dominated biological soil crusts significantly influence soil moisture and temperature regimes in semiarid ecosystems. Geoderma 2016, 263, 35–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Vinoth, M.; Sivasankari, S.; Ahamed, A.K.K.; Alsamhary, K.I.; Al-Enazi, N.M.; Abdel-Raouf, N.; Alharbi, R.M.; Govindarajan, R.K.; Ravi, G.; Alarjani, K.M.; et al. Bio-Characterization and Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Exopolysaccharides in Biofilm-Producing Cyanobacteria Isolated from Soil Crust: Exploring the Potential of Microalgal Biomolecules. Biology 2023, 12, 1065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Chen, L.; Yang, Y.; Deng, S.; Xu, Y.; Wang, G.; Liu, Y. The response of carbohydrate metabolism to the fluctuation of relative humidity (RH) in the desert soil cyanobacterium Phormidium tenue. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2012, 48, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Zhang, M.; Wu, Y.; Qu, C.; Huang, Q.; Cai, P. Microbial extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) in soil: From interfacial behaviour to ecological multifunctionality. Geo-Bio Interfaces 2024, 1, e4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Smail, L.; Djemouai, N.; Boukhelata, N.; Baha, N.; Kaci, Y. Effects of Commercial and Paenibacillus tarimensis Exopolysaccharides on Soil Aggregation and Hydraulic Properties of a Saline Clay Loam Soil. Curr. Microbiol. 2025, 82, 527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Abdel Aal, G.Z.; Atekwana, E.A.; Atekwana, E.A. Effect of bioclogging in porous media on complex conductivity signatures. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosciences 2010, 115, G00G07. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Walshire, L.A.; Zhang, H.; Xie, X.; Larson, S.L.; Weiss, C.A.; Nick, Z.H.; Breland, B.R.; Vroman, E.T.; Han, F.X. Exopolysaccharides from Rhizobium Tropici modified the surface characteristics of a Mississippi River Levee soil clay and its bulk soil properties. Soil Adv. 2025, 4, 100075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Kim, Y.-M.; Kwon, T.-H. Entrapment of clay particles enhances durability of bacterial biofilm-associated bioclogging in sand. Acta Geotech. 2022, 17, 119–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Jung, P.; Briegel-Williams, L.; Simon, A.; Thyssen, A.; Büdel, B. Uncovering biological soil crusts: Carbon content and structure of intact Arctic, Antarctic and alpine biological soil crusts. Biogeosciences 2018, 15, 1149–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Elbert, W.; Weber, B.; Burrows, S.; Steinkamp, J.; Büdel, B.; Andreae, M.O.; Pöschl, U. Contribution of cryptogamic covers to the global cycles of carbon and nitrogen. Nat. Geosci. 2012, 5, 459–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Kidron, G.J.; Tal, S.Y. The effect of biocrusts on evaporation from sand dunes in the Negev Desert. Geoderma 2012, 179–180, 104–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Chen, Y.-D.; Liu, F.; Ren, N.-Q.; Ho, S.-H. Revolutions in algal biochar for different applications: State-of-the-art techniques and future scenarios. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2020, 31, 2591–2602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Leong, Y.K.; Chang, J.-S. Microalgae-based biochar production and applications: A comprehensive review. Bioresour. Technol. 2023, 389, 129782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Amalina, F.; Razak, A.S.A.; Krishnan, S.; Zularisam, A.W.; Nasrullah, M. A comprehensive assessment of the method for producing biochar, its characterization, stability, and potential applications in regenerative economic sustainability—A review. Clean. Mater. 2022, 3, 100045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Zhang, Z.; Zhu, Z.; Shen, B.; Liu, L. Insights into biochar and hydrochar production and applications: A review. Energy 2019, 171, 581–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Lee, X.J.; Ong, H.C.; Gan, Y.Y.; Chen, W.-H.; Mahlia, T.M.I. State of art review on conventional and advanced pyrolysis of macroalgae and microalgae for biochar, bio-oil and bio-syngas production. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 210, 112707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Mousavi, M.; Martis, V.; Fini, E.H. Inherently Functionalized Carbon from Algae to Adsorb Precursors of Secondary Organic Aerosols in Noncombustion Sources. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 14375–14384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Wang, K.; Brown, R.C.; Homsy, S.; Martinez, L.; Sidhu, S.S. Fast pyrolysis of microalgae remnants in a fluidized bed reactor for bio-oil and biochar production. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 127, 494–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Leng, L.; Xu, S.; Liu, R.; Yu, T.; Zhuo, X.; Leng, S.; Xiong, Q.; Huang, H. Nitrogen containing functional groups of biochar: An overview. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 298, 122286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Bi, Z.; He, B.B. 26—Biochar from microalgae. In 3rd Generation Biofuels; Jacob-Lopes, E., Zepka, L.Q., Severo, I.A., Maroneze, M.M., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2022; pp. 613–637. [Google Scholar]
  163. Arun, J.; Gopinath, K.P.; Vigneshwar, S.S.; Swetha, A. Sustainable and eco-friendly approach for phosphorus recovery from wastewater by hydrothermally carbonized microalgae: Study on spent bio-char as fertilizer. J. Water Process Eng. 2020, 38, 101567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Wang, C.; Lin, X.; Zhang, X.; Show, P.L. Research advances on production and application of algal biochar in environmental remediation. Environ. Pollut. 2024, 348, 123860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. González Fernández, L.A.; Medellín Castillo, N.A.; Sánchez Polo, M.; Navarro Frómeta, A.E.; Vilasó Cadre, J.E. Algal-Based Carbonaceous Materials for Environmental Remediation: Advances in Wastewater Treatment, Carbon Sequestration, and Biofuel Applications. Processes 2025, 13, 556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Minello, L.V.P.; Kuntzler, S.G.; Lamb, T.I.; Neves, C.O.; Berghahn, E.; da Paschoa, R.P.; Silveira, V.; de Lima, J.C.; Aguzzoli, C.; Sperotto, R.A. Rice plants treated with biochar derived from Spirulina (Arthrospira platensis) optimize resource allocation towards seed production. Front Plant Sci 2024, 15, 1422935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Chu, Q.; Lyu, T.; Xue, L.; Yang, L.; Feng, Y.; Sha, Z.; Yue, B.; Mortimer, R.J.G.; Cooper, M.; Pan, G. Hydrothermal carbonization of microalgae for phosphorus recycling from wastewater to crop-soil systems as slow-release fertilizers. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 283, 124627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Myung, E.; Kim, H.; Choi, N.; Cho, K. The biochar derived from Spirulina platensis for the adsorption of Pb and Zn and enhancing the soil physicochemical properties. Chemosphere 2024, 364, 143203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Bordoloi, N.; Narzari, R.; Sut, D.; Saikia, R.; Chutia, R.S.; Kataki, R. Characterization of bio-oil and its sub-fractions from pyrolysis of Scenedesmus dimorphus. Renew. Energy 2016, 98, 245–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Yao, C.; Wu, P.; Pan, Y.; Lu, H.; Chi, L.; Meng, Y.; Cao, X.; Xue, S.; Yang, X. Evaluation of the integrated hydrothermal carbonization-algal cultivation process for enhanced nitrogen utilization in Arthrospira platensis production. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 216, 381–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Bird, M.I.; Wurster, C.M.; Silva, P.H.D.P.; Paul, N.A.; de Nys, R. Algal biochar: Effects and applications. GCB Bioenergy 2012, 4, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Mona, S.; Saini, N.; Sujata; Kumar, S.; Sharma, A.; Yadav, A.; Yadav, N.; Deepak, B. Characterization and utilization of algal and wheat husk biochar as biofertilizers for sustainable soil amelioration. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2024, 27, 101893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Roberts, D.A.; Cole, A.J.; Paul, N.A.; de Nys, R. Algal biochar enhances the re-vegetation of stockpiled mine soils with native grass. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 161, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Roberts, D.A.; Paul, N.A.; Cole, A.J.; de Nys, R. From waste water treatment to land management: Conversion of aquatic biomass to biochar for soil amelioration and the fortification of crops with essential trace elements. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 157, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Oishy, M.N.; Shemonty, N.A.; Fatema, S.I.; Mahbub, S.; Mim, E.L.; Hasan Raisa, M.B.; Anik, A.H. Unravelling the effects of climate change on the soil-plant-atmosphere interactions: A critical review. Soil Environ. Health 2025, 3, 100130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. De Silva, A.G.S.D.; Hashim, Z.K.; Solomon, W.; Zhao, J.-B.; Kovács, G.; Kulmány, I.M.; Molnár, Z. Unveiling the Role of Edaphic Microalgae in Soil Carbon Sequestration: Potential for Agricultural Inoculants in Climate Change Mitigation. Agriculture 2024, 14, 2065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Tarafdar, A.; Sowmya, G.; Yogeshwari, K.; Rattu, G.; Negi, T.; Awasthi, M.K.; Hoang, A.; Sindhu, R.; Sirohi, R. Environmental pollution mitigation through utilization of carbon dioxide by microalgae. Environ. Pollut. 2023, 328, 121623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Mutum, L.; Janda, T.; Ördög, V.; Molnár, Z. Biologia Futura: Potential of different forms of microalgae for soil improvement. Biol. Futur. 2022, 73, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Lal, R. Soil organic matter and water retention. Agron. J. 2020, 112, 3265–3277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Hou, D. Sustainable soil management and climate change mitigation. Soil Use Manag. 2021, 37, 220–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Fiorentino, S.; Bellani, L.; Santin, M.; Castagna, A.; Echeverria, M.C.; Giorgetti, L. Effects of Microalgae as Biostimulants on Plant Growth, Content of Antioxidant Molecules and Total Antioxidant Capacity in Chenopodium quinoa Exposed to Salt Stress. Plants 2025, 14, 781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  182. Maurya, N.; Sharma, A.; Sundaram, S. The Role of PGPB-Microalgae interaction in Alleviating Salt Stress in Plants. Curr. Microbiol. 2024, 81, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Senousy, H.H.; Hamoud, Y.A.; Abu-Elsaoud, A.M.; Mahmoud Al zoubi, O.; Abdelbaky, N.F.; Zia-ur-Rehman, M.; Usman, M.; Soliman, M.H. Algal Bio-Stimulants Enhance Salt Tolerance in Common Bean: Dissecting Morphological, Physiological, and Genetic Mechanisms for Stress Adaptation. Plants 2023, 12, 3714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Wang, B.; Li, Y.; Wu, N.; Lan, C.Q. CO2 bio-mitigation using microalgae. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2008, 79, 707–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Jiang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Wang, J.; Chen, Y.; Shen, S.; Liu, T. Utilization of simulated flue gas for cultivation of Scenedesmus dimorphus. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 128, 359–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Matthews, H.D.; Zickfeld, K.; Dickau, M.; MacIsaac, A.J.; Mathesius, S.; Nzotungicimpaye, C.-M.; Luers, A. Temporary nature-based carbon removal can lower peak warming in a well-below 2 °C scenario. Commun. Earth Environ. 2022, 3, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Pandian, K.; Vijayakumar, S.; Mustaffa, M.R.A.F.; Subramanian, P.; Chitraputhirapillai, S. Biochar—A sustainable soil conditioner for improving soil health, crop production and environment under changing climate: A review. Front. Soil Sci. 2024, 4, 1376159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Chalivendra, S. Sustainable Biochar Production from Algal Biomass for Soil Enhancement. Int. J. Sci. Res. Sci. Technol. 2024, 11, 602–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Pandey, B.; Suthar, S.; Chand, N. Effect of biochar amendment on metal mobility, phytotoxicity, soil enzymes, and metal-uptakes by wheat (Triticum aestivum) in contaminated soils. Chemosphere 2022, 307, 135889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  190. Jiang, Z.; Lian, F.; Wang, Z.; Xing, B. The role of biochars in sustainable crop production and soil resiliency. J. Exp. Bot. 2019, 71, 520–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Singh, B.P.; Cowie, A.L.; Smernik, R.J. Biochar Carbon Stability in a Clayey Soil As a Function of Feedstock and Pyrolysis Temperature. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 11770–11778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Kheirfam, H. Increasing soil potential for carbon sequestration using microbes from biological soil crusts. J. Arid Environ. 2020, 172, 104022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Rossi, F.; Olguín, E.J.; Diels, L.; De Philippis, R. Microbial fixation of CO2 in water bodies and in drylands to combat climate change, soil loss and desertification. New Biotechnol. 2015, 32, 109–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Kazemi Shariat Panahi, H.; Dehhaghi, M.; Ok, Y.S.; Nizami, A.-S.; Khoshnevisan, B.; Mussatto, S.I.; Aghbashlo, M.; Tabatabaei, M.; Lam, S.S. A comprehensive review of engineered biochar: Production, characteristics, and environmental applications. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 270, 122462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Zhang, L.; Lv, J. Linkages between soil respiration and soil eukaryotic microalgae following vegetation restoration in the Loess Plateau, China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2022, 33, 881–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Bach, E.M.; Baer, S.G.; Meyer, C.K.; Six, J. Soil texture affects soil microbial and structural recovery during grassland restoration. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2010, 42, 2182–2191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Nancucheo, I.; Barrie Johnson, D. Acidophilic algae isolated from mine-impacted environments and their roles in sustaining heterotrophic acidophiles. Front. Microbiol. 2012, 3, 325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Lababpour, A.; Kaviani, M. Isolation and submerged culture biomass production of the arid land cyanobacteria Microcoleus spp., an investigation on its utilization for biological soil crust restoration. Environ. Earth Sci. 2016, 75, 1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Lu, Q.; Xiao, Y.; Lu, Y. Employment of algae-based biological soil crust to control desertification for the sustainable development: A mini-review. Algal Res. 2022, 65, 102747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Hawkes, C.V.; Connor, E.W. Translating phytobiomes from theory to practice: Ecological and evolutionary considerations. Phytobiomes J. 2017, 1, 57–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Kaminsky, L.M.; Trexler, R.V.; Malik, R.J.; Hockett, K.L.; Bell, T.H. The Inherent Conflicts in Developing Soil Microbial Inoculants. Trends Biotechnol. 2019, 37, 140–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Perera, I.; Subashchandrabose, S.R.; Venkateswarlu, K.; Naidu, R.; Megharaj, M. Consortia of cyanobacteria/microalgae and bacteria in desert soils: An underexplored microbiota. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 102, 7351–7363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Ramanan, R.; Kim, B.-H.; Cho, D.-H.; Oh, H.-M.; Kim, H.-S. Algae–bacteria interactions: Evolution, ecology and emerging applications. Biotechnol. Adv. 2016, 34, 14–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Jose, S.; Renuka, N.; Ratha, S.K.; Kumari, S.; Bux, F. Microalgal bioinoculants for sustainable agriculture and their interactions with soil biotic and abiotic components: A review. Pedosphere 2024, 34, 297–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  205. Su, Y.; Ren, Y.; Wang, G.; Li, J.; Zhang, H.; Yang, Y.; Pang, X.; Han, J. Microalgae and microbial inoculant as partial substitutes for chemical fertilizer enhance Polygala tenuifolia yield and quality by improving soil microorganisms. Front. Plant Sci. 2025, 15, 1499966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Wichaphian, A.; Kamngoen, A.; Pathom-aree, W.; Maneechote, W.; Khuendee, T.; Chromkaew, Y.; Cheirsilp, B.; Shyu, D.J.H.; Srinuanpan, S. Integrating Microalgal Chlorella Biomass and Biorefinery Residues into Sustainable Agriculture and Food Production: Insights from Lettuce Cultivation. Foods 2025, 14, 808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  207. Liu, X.; Le Roux, X.; Salles, J.F. The legacy of microbial inoculants in agroecosystems and potential for tackling climate change challenges. iScience 2022, 25, 103821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Li, J.; Wang, J.; Liu, H.; Macdonald, C.A.; Singh, B.K. Microbial inoculants with higher capacity to colonize soils improved wheat drought tolerance. Microb. Biotechnol. 2023, 16, 2131–2144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Fernández, F.G.A.; Reis, A.; Wijffels, R.H.; Barbosa, M.; Verdelho, V.; Llamas, B. The role of microalgae in the bioeconomy. New Biotechnol. 2021, 61, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. McGrath, S.J.; Laamanen, C.A.; Senhorinho, G.N.A.; Scott, J.A. Microalgal harvesting for biofuels—Options and associated operational costs. Algal Res. 2024, 77, 103343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Li, L.; Wang, J.; Sun, W.; Peng, X.; Qi, X. Production of Algae-Derived Biochar and Its Application in Pollutants Adsorption—A Mini Review. Separations 2025, 12, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Farooq, W.; Suh, W.I.; Park, M.S.; Yang, J.W. Water use and its recycling in microalgae cultivation for biofuel application. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 184, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  213. Marra, L.; Aurino, E.; Raganati, F.; Pollio, A.; Marzocchella, A. Improving Microalgae Feasibility Cultivation: Preliminary Results on Exhausted Medium Reuse Strategy. Processes 2024, 12, 1029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Kholssi, R.; Lougraimzi, H.; Moreno-Garrido, I. Effects of global environmental change on microalgal photosynthesis, growth and their distribution. Mar. Environ. Res. 2023, 184, 105877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Qin, S.; Wang, K.; Gao, F.; Ge, B.; Cui, H.; Li, W. Biotechnologies for bulk production of microalgal biomass: From mass cultivation to dried biomass acquisition. Biotechnol. Biofuels Bioprod. 2023, 16, 131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Tafvizi, F.; Hosseini Tafreshi, S.A.; Toluei, Z.; Toghyani, M.A. Stress responses of the green microalga, Dunaliella salina to PEG-induced drought. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK 2020, 100, 1043–1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Zhang, T.-Y.; Hu, H.-Y.; Wu, Y.-H.; Zhuang, L.-L.; Xu, X.-Q.; Wang, X.-X.; Dao, G.-H. Promising solutions to solve the bottlenecks in the large-scale cultivation of microalgae for biomass/bioenergy production. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 60, 1602–1614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Akca, M.O.; Saygin, S.D.; Bilgin, A.; Arslan, S.; Erpul, G. Harnessing Chlorella vulgaris for Mucilage Mitigation and Wheat Growth on Fluvisol: A Study on Wastewater Treatment Efficacy. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2025, 25, 6720–6739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Dias, R.R.; Deprá, M.C.; de Menezes, C.R.; Zepka, L.Q.; Jacob-Lopes, E. Microalgae Cultivation in Wastewater: How Realistic Is This Approach for Value-Added Product Production? Processes 2025, 13, 2052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Thiviyanathan, V.A.; Ker, P.J.; Hoon Tang, S.G.; Amin, E.P.P.; Yee, W.; Hannan, M.A.; Jamaludin, Z.; Nghiem, L.D.; Indra Mahlia, T.M. Microalgae biomass and biomolecule quantification: Optical techniques, challenges and prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2024, 189, 113926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Fasaei, F.; Bitter, J.H.; Slegers, P.M.; van Boxtel, A.J.B. Techno-economic evaluation of microalgae harvesting and dewatering systems. Algal Res. 2018, 31, 347–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Zhang, Y.; Wang, J.-H.; Zhang, J.-T.; Chi, Z.-Y.; Kong, F.-T.; Zhang, Q. The long overlooked microalgal nitrous oxide emission: Characteristics, mechanisms, and influencing factors in microalgae-based wastewater treatment scenarios. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 856, 159153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  223. Ronga, D.; Biazzi, E.; Parati, K.; Carminati, D.; Carminati, E.; Tava, A. Microalgal Biostimulants and Biofertilisers in Crop Productions. Agronomy 2019, 9, 192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Lee, S.; Kim, P. Current Status and Applications of Adaptive Laboratory Evolution in Industrial Microorganisms. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 30, 793–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  225. Arora, N.; Kumari, P.; Kumar, A.; Gangwar, R.; Gulati, K.; Pruthi, P.A.; Prasad, R.; Kumar, D.; Pruthi, V.; Poluri, K.M. Delineating the molecular responses of a halotolerant microalga using integrated omics approach to identify genetic engineering targets for enhanced TAG production. Biotechnol. Biofuels 2019, 12, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  226. Schroda, M.; Hemme, D.; Mühlhaus, T. The Chlamydomonas heat stress response. Plant J. 2015, 82, 466–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  227. Zhou, L.; Liu, W.; Duan, H.; Dong, H.; Li, J.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, J.; Ding, S.; Xu, T.; Guo, B. Improved effects of combined application of nitrogen-fixing bacteria Azotobacter beijerinckii and microalgae Chlorella pyrenoidosa on wheat growth and saline-alkali soil quality. Chemosphere 2023, 313, 137409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Peng, L.; Xie, X.; Chen, M.; Qiao, F.; Liu, X.; Zhao, Y.; Peng, X.; Liu, F. Co-Inoculation Between Bacteria and Algae from Biological Soil Crusts and Their Effects on the Growth of Poa annua and Sandy Soils Quality. Microorganisms 2025, 13, 1778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  229. Prasanna, R.; Joshi, M.; Rana, A.; Shivay, Y.S.; Nain, L. Influence of co-inoculation of bacteria-cyanobacteria on crop yield and C–N sequestration in soil under rice crop. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2012, 28, 1223–1235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  230. Mao, Q.; Xie, X.; Pinzon-Nuñez, D.A.; Xie, Z.; Liu, T.; Irshad, S. Native microalgae and Bacillus XZM remediate arsenic-contaminated soil by forming biological soil crusts. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 345, 118858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the effects of microalgae and cyanobacteria-based products on soil and plants.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the effects of microalgae and cyanobacteria-based products on soil and plants.
Agronomy 15 02669 g001
Figure 2. Flowchart for context-dependent selection of microalgae inoculants in agricultural soils.
Figure 2. Flowchart for context-dependent selection of microalgae inoculants in agricultural soils.
Agronomy 15 02669 g002
Table 1. Effects of microalgae-based biofertilizers on soil fertility and plant growth.
Table 1. Effects of microalgae-based biofertilizers on soil fertility and plant growth.
Microalgae/Cyanobacteria SpeciesBaseline Soil PropertiesExperimental ConditionImpacts on Soil/PlantReferences
Desmodesmus sp. and Heterochlorella sp.Acid soilSoil incubation using Petri dishesSignificantly improved soil health by increasing pH (~1 unit), carbon content (29–57%), exopolysaccharides (>200%), dehydrogenase activity (>500%), and indole acetic acid production (200–500%).[59]
Chlorella minutissimaLow organic carbon Field plots with spinach (S. oleracea) and maize (Z. mays)Reduced soil nitrate leaching and enhanced soil organic carbon, microbial activity, plant growth, and yield.[60]
Anabaena sp.Limited availability of micronutrientsPot experiment under net house conditions with okra (Abelmoschus esculentus)Enhanced soil iron concentration by 2–3 times and boost microbial carbon biomass[61]
Chlorella sorokinianaLow nutrient levelsLaboratory germination assay and pot experiment in a climatic chamber with wheat (Triticum aestivum)Enhanced nutrient excretion and extracellular substances. Aboveground and belowground biomass increased by 22% and 55%, respectively.
[62]
Chlorella vulgaris and Spirulina platensisLow nitrogen and potassiumGreenhouse condition with maize (Z. mays L.)Improved soil fertility, enhanced early-stage growth, and promoted yield-related traits.[63]
Anabaena–Pseudomonas biofilmLow available nitrogen and organic carbonPot experiment under controlled conditions with wheat (Triticum aestivum)Improved nitrogen fixation ability, enhanced P uptake, and increased growth and nutrient absorption[64]
Nostoc calcicola BOT1, Scytonema sp. BOT2Nutrient and water deficient soilLaboratory microcosm experiment in Petri plates with rice (Oryza sativa)Significantly improved soil fertility, promoted biocrust formation, and stimulated plant growth. It supports degraded land rehabilitation and persist in soil after prolonged desiccation.[65]
Chlorella sp. and Scenedesmus sp.Low organic carbon and available nitrogenPot experiments under controlled growth cabinet and greenhouse conditions with spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.)Increased microbial diversity, slowed nitrogen release, improved foliage greenness, and enhanced soil water retention.[57]
Chlorella vulgaris and Spirulina platensisLow phosphorus and organic matter content, with alkaline soil.Field experiment with rice (Oryza sativa)Enhanced soil nitrogen levels, enzyme activity and increased rice yield up to 7–20.9%.[66]
Nostoc sp.Poor soil aggregationSoil inoculationEnhanced soil aggregation[67]
Chlorella vulgarisLow organic matter and carbonPot experiment in a greenhouse with tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)Increased fruit length, diameter, weight, and seed number, enhanced fruit mineral content (P, Ca, K, Mg), and extended fruit shelf life.[41]
Table 2. Effects of the microalgae-based biostimulants on crop growth and development.
Table 2. Effects of the microalgae-based biostimulants on crop growth and development.
Microalgae/Cyanobacteria SpeciesBioactive CompoundsExperimental ConditionImpacts on Crop PerformanceReferences
Nostoc calcicole; Anabaena vaginicolaAuxins (IAA)Pot experiments with wheat (Triticum aestivum) using spraying algal extractsSignificant improvement in plant height, root length, and biomass.[105]
Chlorococcum, Micractinium, Scenedesmus, and ChlorellaCytokinins, gibberellins, auxin (IAA) and abscisic acidGreenhouse with spinach (Spinacia oleracea L) seeds were primedAchieved a 1.7-fold increase in seed germination and up to a 2.1-fold increase in seedling biomass.[106]
Anabaena vaginicola and Nostoc calcicolaAuxins (IAA and Indole-3-butyric acid (IBA))Greenhouse pot experiment with tomato, cucumber, and squash were conducted by spraying algal extractNotable increases in plant height, fresh and dry weight, and root length.[107]
Chlorella sp. and Chlamydomonas reinhardtii cc 124Auxin (IAA)Greenhouse pot experiment with tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) treated by algae extractEnhanced pigment levels were observed, along with increased fruit weight and diameter.[108]
Chlorella vulgarisAuxin (IAA)Arabidopsis thaliana was treated with algae extractRoot and shoot growth, along with drought tolerance, were substantially enhanced.[109]
Scenedesmus sp.Cytokinins, auxins (indoleacetic acid)Greenhouse pot experiment with Petunia x hybrida were conducted by foliar sprayShoot, leaf, and flower growth, along with plant nutrient status, were enhanced.[110]
Chlamydomonas sp., Chlorella sp. and Desmodesmus sp.ExopolysaccharidesControlled chamber and greenhouse with rice (Oryza sativa L.) were conducted by seed inoculation and foliar applicationIncreased root dry weight by 43%, shoot dry weight by 36%, and number of seeds by 11%.[111]
Chlorella sp. and Chlamydomonas reinhardtiiExopolysaccharidesGreenhouse conditions with medicago truncatulaEnhanced biomass, pigment levels (chlorophylls and carotenoids), and flower count.[112]
Table 3. Effects of microalgae-based biochar and hydrochar on agricultural applications.
Table 3. Effects of microalgae-based biochar and hydrochar on agricultural applications.
Microalgae/Cyanobacteria SpeciesProduct and Produced MethodsChemical Properties of the ProductSoil/Plant EvaluationEffects on Soil/PlantReferences
Arthrospira platensisBiochar (produced slow pyrolysis at 300 °CC-51%
N-26%
O-20%
Rice (Oryza sativa)Significantly increased seeds per plant, seed weight, root dry weight, and grain yield.[166]
Chlorella vulgaris and Microcystis sp.Hydrochar (HTC
at 200 °C)
C-60.5%
H-3.3%
N-8.1%
pH-6.1
Wheat (Triticum aestivum L)Increased soil available P, improved plant P use efficiency by 34.4%, and enhanced wheat yield by 21.6%.[167]
Spirulina platensisBiochar (pyrolysis at 400 °C)C-59.68%
N-10.36%
H-3.93%
SoilReduced lead (Pb) and zinc (Zn) contamination in soil.[168]
Spirulina dimorphusBiochar (Pyrolysis at 600 °C)C-53.58%
N-6.5%
H-8.5%
SoilIncreased soil fertility and carbon sequestration.[169]
Arthrospira platensisHydrochar (HTC at 210 °C)C-68.3%
H-8.5%
N-6.7%
-Improved nitrogen use efficiency and biomass yield, while reducing the need for chemical nitrogen fertilizers by 60%.[170]
Cladophora vagabundaBiochar (Pyrolysis at 400 °C)C-29.5%
H-3.53%
N-6.55%
Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)The relatively high nutrient content improved soil amendment value and demonstrated potential for long-term carbon sequestration.[171]
Specific species unknownBiochar (Pyrolysis at 350 °C)C-59.1%
P-7.37 ppm
K-14 ppm
Vigna radiata (Moong) and Pennisetum glaucum (Bajra)Enhanced shoot growth, reaching 25.53 cm in Moong and 16.75 cm in Bajra, while also significantly improving plant yield and soil health.[172]
OedogoniumBiochar (Pyrolysis at 750 °C) C- 30.7%
H- 0.7%
N- 3.0%
pH-9.4
Stockpiled soils (ferrosol and sodosol)Improved the establishment and growth of Kangaroo grass (Themeda australis) across both soil types, contributing to enhanced soil rehabilitation.[173]
OedogoniumBiochar (Pyrolysis at 750 °C)pH-10.03
EC-254 (μS cm−1)
Radishes (Raphanus sativus)Improved radish growth by 35–40%, higher nutrients content of crop (Mo, Mg, Ca, P, K,), and lower metal content, and enhanced soil quality.[174]
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

Kabato, W.S.; Hailegnaw, N.; Chaffamo, T.E.; Samuel, A.; De Silva, A.G.S.D.; Molnár, Z. Microalgae-Based Strategies for Soil Health and Crop Productivity: Mechanisms, Challenges, and Pathways to Climate-Resilient Agriculture. Agronomy 2025, 15, 2669. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15112669

AMA Style

Kabato WS, Hailegnaw N, Chaffamo TE, Samuel A, De Silva AGSD, Molnár Z. Microalgae-Based Strategies for Soil Health and Crop Productivity: Mechanisms, Challenges, and Pathways to Climate-Resilient Agriculture. Agronomy. 2025; 15(11):2669. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15112669

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kabato, Wogene Solomon, Niguss Hailegnaw, Tesfatsion Ermias Chaffamo, Asish Samuel, Agampodi Gihan S. D. De Silva, and Zoltán Molnár. 2025. "Microalgae-Based Strategies for Soil Health and Crop Productivity: Mechanisms, Challenges, and Pathways to Climate-Resilient Agriculture" Agronomy 15, no. 11: 2669. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15112669

APA Style

Kabato, W. S., Hailegnaw, N., Chaffamo, T. E., Samuel, A., De Silva, A. G. S. D., & Molnár, Z. (2025). Microalgae-Based Strategies for Soil Health and Crop Productivity: Mechanisms, Challenges, and Pathways to Climate-Resilient Agriculture. Agronomy, 15(11), 2669. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15112669

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