Cited by 64Bioenergy crop production and managementSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems

Land conversion from annual to perennial crops: A win-win strategy for biomass yield and soil organic carbon and total nitrogen sequestration

Open access
Chen, Ji, Lærke, Poul Erik, Jørgensen, Uffe·2022·Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

Abstract

How much can we increase biomass yield by promoting land conversion from annual to perennial crops? Will increased biomass extraction for biorefineries reduce soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) stock? Which cropping system is more stable for biomass production over time? To our knowledge, no study has concurrently investigated the effects of land conversion from annual to perennial crops on biomass yield, yield stability, and changes in SOC and TN stock, which limits the understanding and application of sustainable agroecosystems producing biomass for biorefineries. Based on five-year continuous observations in central Jutland Denmark, our results showed that perennial crops significantly increased biomass yield by 19% and yield stability by 88% compared to annual crops. Perennial crops significantly increased SOC content by 4% and SOC stock by 11% at 0–100 cm depth across the five years. The opposite responses of SOC content and stock under annual and perennial crops led to even more significant differences between the crop types. Perennial crops had no effect on soil TN content and increased soil TN stock to one meter depth by 22%, whereas continuous annual crops had no effect on it. Neither annual nor perennial crops had effects on SOC and TN stock when estimated based on equivalent soil mass because the soil density increased under perennial crops. Our results showed that changes in SOC and TN stock between annual and perennial crops varied with the specific calculating methods (fixed depth/equivalent mass), thus the selected methods should be clearly defined in the future research. Increases in SOC content at one meter depth were positively correlated with biomass yield and yield stability, suggesting a win-win strategy for climate mitigation and food security. Altogether, our results highlight the potential to redesign the current cropping system for sustainable intensification by selecting proper perennial crops for green biorefineries.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.agee.2022.107907

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Arable land conversion to perennial energy crops has been shown to increase soil C stocks on both regional and global scales.

    “Arable land conversion to perennial energy crops has been shown to increase soil C stocks on both regional and global scales (Chen, Lærke, & Jørgensen,2022; Chen, Manevski, et al., 2022; Ledo et al., 2020).”

    From Marginal land conversion to perennial energy crops with biomass removal enhances soil carbon sequestration (2022) · cites this paper as Chen, Lærke, & Jørgensen,2022

    The Results (page unavailable) report an 11% increase in soil organic carbon stock under perennial crops at the study site when calculated at a fixed depth. They also report no significant increase using equivalent soil mass. The Study site section identifies a single experimental location, so this paper does not establish an increase on regional or global scales. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 33 · Cited by 64

Authors
Chen, J., Lærke, P. E., & Jørgensen, U.
Affiliations
Aarhus University (DK)
Corresponding author
Chen, Ji
Venue
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-06
Volume
330
Pages
107907
ISSN
0167-8809 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4211230792
Cited by
64
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 11
FWCI
13.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Aarhus University
  • Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond
  • Horizon 2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Keywords
land conversion, perennial crops, annual crops, biomass yield, yield stability, soil organic carbon, soil nitrogen, carbon sequestration, nitrogen sequestration, soil density, green biorefinery, sustainable intensification, agroecosystems

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review