Cited by 119Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsBioenergy crop production and managementSoil Management and Crop Yield

Mechanisms of soil carbon accrual and storage in bioenergy cropping systems

Tiemann, Lisa K., Grandy, A. Stuart·2015·GCB Bioenergy

Abstract

Annual row cropping systems converted to perennial bioenergy crops tend to accrue soil C, likely a function of increased root production and decreased frequency of tillage; however, very little is known about the mechanisms governing the accrual and stability of this additional soil C. To address this uncertainty, we assessed the formation and stability of aggregates and soil organic C ( SOC ) pools under switchgrass, giant miscanthus , a native perennial grass mix and continuous corn treatments in Michigan and Wisconsin soils differing in both texture and mineralogy. We isolated different aggregate size fractions, >2 mm, 0.5–2 mm, and 2 mm aggregates, and higher under the perennial grasses compared to corn. Contrastingly, in Wisconsin soils, microbial activities were highest in the <0.5 mm aggregates and evidence for soil C accrual under perennial grasses was observed only in a fast turnover pool in the <0.5 mm aggregate class. Our results help explain cross‐site variability in soil C accrual under perennial bioenergy crops by demonstrating how interactions between belowground productivity, soil type, aggregation processes and microbial communities influence the rates and extent of SOC stabilization. Bioenergy cropping systems have the potential to be low‐C energy sources but first we must understand the complex interactions controlling the formation and stabilization of SOC if we are to maximize soil C accrual.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gcbb.12126

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Typically, perennial energy crop cultivation reduces soil C mineralization by enhancing physical protection derived from aggregation due to no-till systems, root exudates, and a longer growth period.

    “Typically, perennial energy crop cultivation reduces soil C mineralization by enhancing physical protection derived from aggregation due to no- till systems, a large number of root exudates, and a longer growth period (Austin et al.,2017; Sartori et al.,2006; Tiemann &amp; Grandy, 2015).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tiemann, L. K., & Grandy, A. S.
Affiliations
University of New Hampshire (US)
Corresponding author
Tiemann, Lisa K.
Venue
GCB Bioenergy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-03
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
161-174
ISSN
  • 1757-1693 (ISSN-L)
  • 1757-1707
OpenAlex
W2154889095
Cited by
119
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3
FWCI
11.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
GCB Bioenergy (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
Keywords
soil organic carbon, soil carbon stabilization, perennial energy crops, switchgrass, Miscanthus × giganteus, aggregate size fractions, soil aggregate stability, permanganate oxidizable carbon, soil microbial activity, soil respiration, soil enzyme activity, soil type, soil texture, soil mineralogy, continuous corn, root production, reduced tillage

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