Worth was proven S the S treatment, was amended with all the digestate containing a high S-SO4 2- concentration (Table 5). five). ARS moderately correlated PHOS (r = 0.58) which a higher S-SO42- concentration (Table ARS moderately correlated toto PHOS (r =0.58) which was statistically the highest in the therapy and lowest inside the BC (Figure 2c). The final was statistically the highest within the S S therapy and lowest inside the BC (Figure 2c). The last determined enzyme was in comparison for the the manage drastically increased in determined enzyme UREURE was in comparison tocontrol substantially increased in sulsulphur amended remedies + S and S (Figure 2d). phur amended remedies BCBC + S and S (Figure 2d).Figure two. Soil activities of – glucosidase–GLU (a), arylsulfatase–ARS (b), phosphatase–PHOS (c),(c), and urease–URE Figure 2. Soil activities of – glucosidase–GLU (a), arylsulfatase–ARS (b), phosphatase–PHOS and urease–URE (d); (d); tested therapies: BC–biochar, S–sulphur, + S–biochar and and sulphur. Mean SD. The diverse letters express tested therapies: BC–biochar, S–sulphur, BC BC + S–biochar sulphur. Imply SD. The distinctive letters express the the results of ANOVA Tukey’s HSD Posthoc Test–the statistical variations at significance level0.05.0.05. final results of ANOVA Tukey’s HSD Posthoc Test–the statistical variations at significance level p pThe values of BR inside the BC and S S remedies were drastically decrease comparedthe The values of BR within the BC and treatment options have been significantly decrease in comparison with towards the manage (Figure 3a), showing that aerobic decomposition is apparently negatively afcontrol (Figure 3a), displaying that aerobic decomposition is apparently negatively affected fected by the amendment respective enriched digestates. The co-enrichment of digestate by the amendment in the in the respective enriched digestates. The co-enrichment of digestate with each the biochar and elemental sulphur mitigates the unfavorable of every on the with both the biochar and elemental sulphur mitigates the unfavorable effect impact of every of your components around the the within the soil. components around the BR in BR soil. As all SIRs correlated extremely or moderately positively with each and every other, the variations all SIRs correlated very or moderately positively with each and every other, the differences in the respiration properties have been related (Figure 3b ). For example, the BC and S treatrespiration properties have been similar (Figure 3b ). By way of example, the BC and S treatments’ values were substantially reduced than the manage. In contrast, the BC + S digestate ments’ values considerably elevated or didn’t adjust all SIRs and we assumed that the combined enrichment of increased digestate by biochar and sulphur mitigated the adverse impact of either BC or elemental Son by biochar and sulphur mitigated the adverse impact of either BC or elemental soil soil aerobes. Moreover, the PCA (Figure A2) showed a positive PX-12 Description relationship amongst Son aerobes. In addition, the PCA biplotbiplot (Figure A2) showed a positive relationship all kinds of soil of soil respiration except for Glc-SIR. amongst all typesrespiration except for Glc-SIR.Agronomy 2021, 11, 2041 Agronomy 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW8 of 14 8 ofFigure three. Basal respiration trehalose SIR–Tre-SIR (b), (b), L-lysine SIR–Lys-SIR (c), L-alanine Figure 3. Basal respiration (a),(a), trehalose SIR–Tre-SIR L-lysine SIR–Lys-SIR (c), L-alanine SIR– SIR–Ala-SIR (d), D-glucose Lanabecestat Epigenetic Reader Domain SIR–Glc-SIR (e) and N-acetyl–D-glucosamine SIR.