Cited by 206Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsSoil Management and Crop YieldSoil erosion and sediment transport

Implications for Soil Properties of Removing Cereal Straw: Results from Long‐Term Studies1

Powlson, David S., Glendining, Margaret J., Coleman, Kevin, Whitmore, Andrew P.·2011·Agronomy Journal

Abstract

Bioenergy developments could lead to large‐scale removal of cereal straw from fields, with consequences for soil organic carbon (SOC) and related properties. In 25 experiments of 6 to 56 yr duration there was a trend for SOC and total soil N content to increase where straw was incorporated annually. However the increases were only significant in six experiments and were <10% in the majority of cases. Increases in microbial biomass C or N were always proportionately greater than for SOC or N. In simulations of annual straw incorporation using the RothC model, 90% of the microbial biomass C increase in 100 yr was reached within 20 yr as biomass C moves toward a new equilibrium value more rapidly than total SOC. Simulations also showed that if straw was removed in 50% of years, SOC and biomass C increases were about 50% of those with annual straw incorporation. There is considerable evidence that small changes in total SOC have disproportionately large impacts on soil physical properties such as aggregate stability, water infiltration rate, and plow draft and that microbial activity is crucial in the formation of stable aggregates. We conclude that, although changes in SOC resulting from addition or removal of straw are small, it would be unwise to remove straw every year as this is likely to lead to deterioration in soil physical properties. Local assessments are required to determine the frequency of straw removal that is acceptable for soil functioning; this will influence the capacity of bioenergy installations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2134/agronj2010.0146s

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • Authors have modified and coupled RothC by adding and calibrating new specific soil and residue C pools, accounting for tree and crop residues.

    “Authors have modified and coupled RothC by adding and calibrating new specific soil and residue C pools, accounting for tree [164] and crop [165] residues.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Powlson, D. S., Glendining, M. J., Coleman, K., & Whitmore, A. P.
Affiliations
Rothamsted Research (GB)
Corresponding author
Powlson, David S.
Venue
Agronomy Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-01
Volume
103
Issue
1
Pages
279-287
ISSN
  • 0002-1962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-0645
OpenAlex
W1999499080
Cited by
206
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 7
FWCI
22.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Agronomy Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Rothamsted Repository (Rothamsted Repository) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil erosion and sediment transport
Keywords
straw incorporation, soil organic carbon, soil nitrogen, microbial biomass carbon, RothC model, soil aggregate stability, water infiltration, energy crops, long-term field experiment, soil physical properties

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