Growing Dedicated Energy Crops on Marginal Lands and Ecosystem Services
Open accessAbstract
Core Ideas: Dedicated bioenergy crops can enhance ecosystem services in marginal lands. Ecosystem services vary with the type of marginal land. More field data are needed about the performance of energy crops on marginal lands. Marginal lands are candidates for growing dedicated energy crops such as perennial warm‐season grasses (WSGs) and short‐rotation woody crops (SRWCs), but actual field data on ecosystem services have not been widely discussed. This review (i) discusses potential marginal lands studied for energy crop production, (ii) considers the impacts of energy crops on ecosystem services, and (iii) underlines research needs. Some marginal or degraded lands studied for energy crops include highly erodible, flood‐prone, compacted, saline, acid, contaminated, or sandy soils, reclaimed minesoils, urban marginal sites, and abandoned or degraded croplands. Field data are few but indicate that ecosystem services vary with the type of marginal land, management (i.e., fertilizer or amendment rates), and perennial species. Biomass yields can vary between 1 and 14 Mg ha −1 yr −1 under WSGs and between 0.5 and 9.5 Mg ha −1 yr −1 under SRWCs. Growing energy crops on marginal lands can reduce water and wind erosion, sequester soil C between 0.25 and 4 Mg C ha −1 yr −1 , restore contaminated or compacted soils, and improve biodiversity. Fertilization or addition of organic amendments increases biomass yield and C sequestration on marginal lands. Future research on energy crops on marginal lands should evaluate (i) all ecosystem services, (ii) site‐specific management strategies, (iii) species tolerant to adverse climatic, soil, and environmental conditions, and (vi) economic viability, among others. Overall, dedicated bioenergy crops can provide biofuel feedstocks and other ecosystem services, but more experimental data are needed to reduce the uncertainty regarding the performance of energy crops under different types of marginal or degraded lands.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
Marginal lands provide an attractive option for bioproduct crop production because they do not compete with land normally used for food production and can support high bioproduct crop yields.
“Marginal lands, that is, land with soils that have physical, chemical, and biological properties that make them less suitable for intensive agricultural production, provide an attractive option for bioproduct crop production as they do not compete with land normally used for food production and can support high bioproduct crop yields (Blanco-Canqui, 2016; Li et al., 2022; Mehmood et al., 2017).”
From Early production of switchgrass ( <i>Panicum virgatum</i> L.) and willow ( <i>Salix</i> spp.) indicates carbon accumulation potential in Appalachian reclaimed mine and agriculture soil (2024) · cites this paper as Blanco-Canqui, 2016
The Abandoned or Degraded Croplands section proposes growing energy crops in marginal patches while reserving highly productive areas for food crops, supporting the land-use rationale. The Biomass yield section says marginal lands can produce substantial biomass, but yields vary and generally exceed 5 Mg ha−1 only with fertilizers or amendments. The claim omits those conditions and presents high yields and lack of competition with food production as general properties. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredHighly disturbed soils can sequester carbon at higher rates compared to less disturbed soils due to lower initial organic C concentrations.
“Despite these challenges, highly disturbed soils can sequester carbon (C) at higher rates compared to less disturbed soils due to lower initial organic C concentrations (Blanco-Canqui, 2016; Lal, 2015; Paustien et al., 2019).”
From Early production of switchgrass ( <i>Panicum virgatum</i> L.) and willow ( <i>Salix</i> spp.) indicates carbon accumulation potential in Appalachian reclaimed mine and agriculture soil (2024) · cites this paper as Blanco-Canqui, 2016
It is likely that longer term bioproduct crop production can result in C sequestration with higher potential in mine soils.
“It is likely that longer term bioproduct crop production can result in C sequestration (Blanco-Canqui, 2016; Ma et al., 2000; Rytter et al., 2015) with higher potential in mine soils.”
From Early production of switchgrass ( <i>Panicum virgatum</i> L.) and willow ( <i>Salix</i> spp.) indicates carbon accumulation potential in Appalachian reclaimed mine and agriculture soil (2024) · cites this paper as Blanco-Canqui, 2016
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Stabilization mechanisms of soil organic matter: Implications for C-saturation of soils
Six, J., Conant, R. T., Paul, E. A., & Paustian, K. (2002) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1023/a:1016125726789 · Cited by 4,633 · see citing works
Mapping the world's degraded lands
Gibbs, H. K., & Salmon, J. M. (2015) · Applied Geography · doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.11.024 · Cited by 753 · see citing works
Perennial grasslands enhance biodiversity and multiple ecosystem services in bioenergy landscapes
Werling, B. P., Dickson, T. L., Isaacs, R., Gaines, H., Gratton, C., Gross, K. L., Liere, H., Malmstrom, C. M., Meehan, T. D., Ruan, L., et al. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1309492111 · Cited by 460 · see citing works
Nsanganwimana, F., Pourrut, B., Mench, M., & Douay, F. (2014) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.04.027 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Lee, D. K., Owens, V. N., & Doolittle, J. J. (2007) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj2006.0152 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
A novel framework to classify marginal land for sustainable biomass feedstock production
Gopalakrishnan, G., Cristina Negri, M., & Snyder, S. W. (2011) · Journal of Environmental Quality · doi:10.2134/jeq2010.0539 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Hartman, J. C., Nippert, J. B., Orozco, R. A., & Springer, C. J. (2011) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.04.055 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Soil hydraulic properties influenced by stiff-stemmed grass hedge systems
Rachman, A., Anderson, S. H., Gantzer, C. J., & Alberts, E. E. (2004) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj2004.1386 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Lord, R. A. (2015) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.04.015 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Hydrologic and water quality impacts and biomass production potential on marginal land
Feng, Q., Chaubey, I., Her, Y. G., Cibin, R., Engel, B., Volenec, J., & Wang, X. (2015) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.07.004 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Switchgrass Yield on Reclaimed Surface Mines for Bioenergy Production
Marra, M., Keene, T., Skousen, J., & Griggs, T. (2013) · Journal of Environmental Quality · doi:10.2134/jeq2012.0453 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Matos, E. S., Freese, D., Böhm, C., Quinkenstein, A., & Hüttl, R. F. (2012) · Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis · doi:10.1080/00103624.2012.648354 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 52
- DiTomaso. 2009. Tolerance of switchgrass to extreme soil moisture stress: Ecological implications. Plant Sci. 177:724-732. doi:10.1016/j. plantsci.2009.09.003 · DOI
- Bennett, A.B., T.D. Meehan, C. Gratton, and R. Isaacs. 2014. Modeling pollinator community response to contrasting bioenergy scenarios. PLoS One 9(11):e110676. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0110676. · DOI
- Berdahl, J.D., A.B. Frank, J.M. Krupinsky, P.M. Carr, J.D. Hanson, and H.A. Johnson. 2005. Biomass yield, phenology, and survival of diverse switchgrass cultivars and experimental strains in western North Dakota. Agron. J. 97:549-555. doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0549 · DOI
- Blanco-Canqui, H., C.J. Gantzer, S.H. Anderson, and E.E. Alberts. 2004. Grass barriers for reduced concentrated flow induced soil and nutrient loss. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 68:1963-1972. doi:10.2136/sssaj2004.1963 · DOI
- Blanco-Canqui, H., J. Gilley, D. Eisenhauer, and A. Boldt. 2014. Soil carbon accumulation under switchgrass barriers. Agron. J. 106:2185-2192. doi:10.2134/agronj14.0227 · DOI
- Blanco-Canqui, H., and R. Lal. 2004. Mechanisms of carbon sequestration in soil aggregates. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 23:481-504. doi:10.1080/07352680490886842 · DOI
- Boyer, C.N., R.K. Roberts, B.C. English, D.D. Tyler, J.A. Larson, and D.F. Mooney. 2013. Effects of soil type and landscape on yield and profit maximizing nitrogen rates for switchgrass production. Biomass Bioenergy 48:33-42. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.11.004 · DOI
- Brandes, E., G.S. McNunn, L.A. Schulte, I.J. Bonner, D.J. Muth, B.A. Babcock, et al. 2016. Subfield profitability analysis reveals an economic case for cropland diversification. Environ. Res. Lett. 11:014009 doi:10.1088/1748- 9326/11/1/014009. · DOI
- Chauvat, M., G. Perez, M. Hedde, and I. Lamy. 2014. Establishment of bioenergy crops on metal contaminated soils stimulates belowground fauna. Biomass Bioenergy 62:207-211. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.01.042 · DOI
- Chen, L.M., R. Stehouwer, M.L. Wu, D. Kost, X.L. Guo, J.M. Bigham, et al. 2013. Minesoil response to reclamation by using a flue gas desulfurization product. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 77:1744-1754. doi:10.2136/sssaj2013.02.0054 · DOI
- Clark, L.J., W.R. Whalley, and P.B. Barraclough. 2003. How do roots penetrate strong soil? Plant Soil 255:93-104. doi:10.1023/A:1026140122848 · DOI
- Clark, R.B., E.E. Alberts, R.W. Zobel, T.R. Sinclair, M.S. Miller, W.D. Kemper, and C.D. Foy. 1998. Eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides) root penetration into and chemical properties of claypan soils. Plant Soil 200:33-45. doi:10.1023/A:1004256100631 · DOI
- Cox, W.A., L.L. Wolfenbarger, L.L.I. Berkeley, S.E. Engberg, W.M. Janousek, P.E. Klug, et al. 2014. Grassland bird communities on conservation and marginal grasslands in an agricultural landscape. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 193:53-59. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2014.04.026 · DOI
- Davis, S.C., W.J. Parton, F.G. Dohleman, N.R. Gottel, C.M. Smith, S.J. Del Grosso, et al. 2010. Comparative biogeochemical cycles of bioenergy crops reveal nitrogen-fixation and low greenhouse gas emissions in a Miscanthus ´ giganteus agro-ecosystem. Ecosystems 13:144-156. doi:10.1007/ s10021-009-9306-9 · DOI · Paper page
- Denef, K., J. Six, R. Merckx, and K. Paustian. 2004. Carbon sequestration in microaggregates of no-tillage soils with different clay mineralogy. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 68:1935-1944. doi:10.2136/sssaj2004.1935 · DOI
- Di Nasso, N.N.O., M.V. Lasorella, N. Roncucci, and E. Bonari. 2015. Soil texture and crop management affect switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) productivity in the Mediterranean. Ind. Crops Prod. 65:21-26. doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.11.017 · DOI
- Entry, J.A., L.S. Watrud, and M. Reeves. 1999. Mycorrhizal fungi. Environ. Pollut. 104:449-457. doi:10.1016/S0269-7491(98)00163-8 · DOI
- Evanylo, G.K., A.O. Abaye, C. Dundas, C.E. Zipper, R. Lemus, B. Sukkariyah, and J. Rockett. 2005. Herbaceous vegetation productivity, persistence, and metals uptake on a biosolids-amended mine soil. J. Environ. Qual. 34:1811-1819. doi:10.2134/jeq2004.0329 · DOI
- Evers, B.J., H. Blanco-Canqui, S.A. Staggenborg, and J. Tatarko. 2013. Dedicated bioenergy crop impacts on soil wind erodibility and organic carbon in Kansas. Agron. J. 105:1271-1276. doi:10.2134/agronj2013.0072 · DOI
- Evers, E.W., and M.J. Parsons. 2003. Soil type and moisture level influence on Alamo switchgrass emergence and seedling growth. Crop Sci. 43:288-294. doi:10.2135/cropsci2003.0288 · DOI
- Follett, R.F. 2001. Soil management concepts and carbon sequestration in cropland soils. Soil Tillage Res. 61:77-92. doi:10.1016/S0167- 1987(01)00180-5 · DOI
- Gelfand, I., T. Zenone, P. Jasrotia, J.Q. Chen, S.K. Hamilton, and G.P. Robertson. 2011. Carbon debt of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) grasslands converted to bioenergy production. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108:13864- 13869. doi:10.1073/pnas.1017277108 · DOI
- Grünewald, H., C. Böhm, A. Quinkenstein, P. Grundmann, J. Eberts, and G. von Wühlisch. 2009. Robinia pseudoacacia L.: A lesser known tree species for biomass production. Bioenergy Res. 2:123-133. doi:10.1007/s12155- 009-9038-x · DOI
- Hopkins, A.A., and C.M. Taliaferro. 1997. Genetic variation within switchgrass populations for acid soil tolerance. Crop Sci. 37:1719-1722. doi:10.2135/ cropsci1997.0011183X003700060007x · DOI
- Krizek, D.T., J.C. Ritchie, A.M. Sadeghi, C.D. Foy, E.G. Rhoden, J.R. Davis, and M.J. Camp. 2003. A four-year study of biomass production of eastern gamagrass grown on an acid compact soil. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 34:457-480. doi:10.1081/CSS-120017832 · DOI
- Lee, D.K., V.N. Owens, A. Boe, and B.C. Koo. 2009. Biomass and seed yields of big bluestem, switchgrass, and intermediate wheatgrass in response to manure and harvest timing at two topographic positions. GCB Bioenergy 1:171-179. doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2009.01008.x · DOI · Paper page
- Lee, J., G. Pedroso, B.A. Linquist, D. Putnam, C. Kessel, and J. Six. 2012. Simulating switchgrass biomass production across ecoregions using the DAYCENT model. GCB Bioenergy 4:521-533. doi:10.1111/j.1757- 1707.2011.01140.x · DOI
- Lemus, R., and R. Lal. 2005. Bioenergy crops and carbon sequestration. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 24:1-21. doi:10.1080/07352680590910393 · DOI · Paper page
- Levy, D.B., E.F. Redente, and G.D. Uphoff. 1999. Evaluating the phytotoxicity of Pb-Zn tailings to big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman) and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.). Soil Sci. 164:363-375. doi:10.1097/00010694-199906000-00001 · DOI
- Manning, P., G. Taylor, and E.M. Hanley. 2015. Bioenergy, food production and biodiversity: An unlikely alliance? GCB Bioenergy 7:570-576. doi:10.1111/gcbb.12173 · DOI · Paper page
- Mi, J., W. Liu, W.H. Yang, J. Yan, J.Q. Li, and T. Sang. 2014. Carbon sequestration by Miscanthus energy crops plantations in a broad range semi-arid marginal land in China. Sci. Total Environ. 496:373-380. doi:10.1016/j. scitotenv.2014.07.047 · DOI · Paper page
- Mooney, D.F., R.K. Roberts, B.C. English, D.D. Tyler, and J.A. Larson. 2009. Yield and breakeven price of 'Alamo' switchgrass for biofuels in Tennessee. Agron. J. 101:1234-1242. doi:10.2134/agronj2009.0090 · DOI
- Mulkey, V.R., V.N. Owens, and D.K. Lee. 2006. Management of switchgrass- dominated Conservation Reserve Program lands for biomass production in South Dakota. Crop Sci. 46:712-720. doi:10.2135/cropsci2005.04-0007 · DOI · Paper page
- Pidlisnyuk, V., L. Erickson, S. Kharchenko, and T. Stefanovska. 2014. Sustainable land management: Growing miscanthus in soils contaminated with heavy metals. J. Environ. Prot. 5:723-730. doi:10.4236/jep.2014.58073 · DOI
- Qin, Z., J.B. Dunn, H. Kwon, S. Mueller, and M.M. Wander. 2016. Soil carbon sequestration and land use change associated with biofuel production: Empirical evidence. GCB Bioenergy 8:66-80. doi:10.1111/gcbb.12237 · DOI · Paper page
- Qin, Z., Q. Zhuang, and X. Cai. 2015. Bioenergy crop productivity and potential climate change mitigation from marginal lands in the United States: An ecosystem modeling perspective. GCB Bioenergy 7:1211-1221. doi:10.1111/gcbb.12212 · DOI
- Robertson, B.A., P.J. Doran, E.R. Loomis, J.R. Robertson, and D.W. Schemske. 2011. Perennial biomass crops enhance avian biodiversity. GCB Bioenergy 3:235-246. doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2010.01080.x · DOI
- Sadeghpour, A., M. Hashemi, E. Jahanzad, and S.J. Herbert. 2015. Switchgrass stand density and yield as influenced by seedbed preparation methods in a sandy loam soil. Bioenergy Res. 8:1840-1846. doi:10.1007/s12155-015-9638-6 · DOI
- Saha, M., and M.J. Eckelman. 2015. Geospatial assessment of potential bioenergy crop production on urban marginal land. Appl. Energy 159:540-547. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.09.021 · DOI
- Schmer, M.R., Q. Xue, and J.R. Hendrickson. 2012. Salinity effects on perennial, warm-season (C 4 ) grass germination adapted to the northern Great Plains. Can. J. Plant Sci. 92:873-881. doi:10.4141/cjps2012-001 · DOI
- Shield, I.F., T.J.P. Barraclough, A.B. Riche, and N.E. Yates. 2012. The yield response of the energy crops switchgrass and reed canary grass to fertilizer applications when grown on a low productivity sandy soil. Biomass Bioenergy 42:86-96. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.03.017 · DOI · Paper page
- Skinner, R.H. 2008. High biomass removal limits carbon sequestration potential of mature temperate pastures. J. Environ. Qual. 37:1319-1326. doi:10.2134/jeq2007.0263 · DOI
- Smith, S.L., K.D. Thelen, and S. MacDonald. 2013. Yield and quality analyses of bioenergy crops grown on a regulatory brownfield. Biomass Bioenergy 49:123-130. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.12.017 · DOI · Paper page
- Stroup, J.A., M.A. Sanderson, J.P. Muir, M.J. McFarland, and R.L. Reed. 2003. Comparison of growth and performance in upland and lowland switchgrass types to water and nitrogen stress. Bioresour. Technol. 86:65- 72. doi:10.1016/S0960-8524(02)00102-5 · DOI
- Ussiri, D.A.N., and R. Lal. 2005. Carbon sequestration in reclaimed soils. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 24:151-165. doi:10.1080/07352680591002147 · DOI
- Vamvuka, D., V. Topouzi, and S. Sfakiotakis. 2010. Evaluation of production yield and thermal processing of switchgrass as a bio-energy crop for the Mediterranean region. Fuel Process. Technol. 91:988-996. doi:10.1016/j. fuproc.2010.02.018 · DOI
- Venuto, B.C., and J.A. Daniel. 2010. Biomass feedstock harvest from Conservation Reserve Program land in northwestern Oklahoma. Crop Sci. 50:737-743. doi:10.2135/cropsci2008.11.0641 · DOI
- Wilson, H.M., R.M. Cruse, and C.L. Burras. 2011. Perennial grass management impacts on runoff and sediment export from vegetated channels in pulse flow runoff events. Biomass Bioenergy 35:429-436. doi:10.1016/j. biombioe.2010.08.059 · DOI
- Xie, F.L., C.N. Stewart, F.A. Taki, Q.L. He, H.W. Liu, and B.H. Zhang. 2014. High-throughput deep sequencing shows that microRNAs play important roles in switchgrass responses to drought and salinity stress. Plant Biotechnol. J. 12:354-366. doi:10.1111/pbi.12142 · DOI
- Zamora, D.S., K.G. Apostol, and G.J. Wyatt. 2014. Biomass production and potential ethanol yields of shrub willow hybrids and native willow accessions after a single 3-year harvest cycle on marginal lands in central Minnesota, USA. Agrofor. Syst. 88:593-606. doi:10.1007/s10457-014-9693-6 · DOI
- Zhao, X., J.D. Monnell, B. Niblick, C.D. Rovensky, and A.E. Landis. 2014. The viability of biofuel production on urban marginal land: An analysis of metal contaminants and energy balance for Pittsburgh's Sunflower Gardens. Landsc. Urban Plann. 124:22-33. doi:10.1016/j. landurbplan.2013.12.015 · DOI
- Zhuo, Y., Y.F. Zhang, G.H. Xie, and S.J. Xiong. 2015. Effects of salt stress on biomass and ash composition of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum). Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B 65:300-309. doi:10.1080/09064710.2015.1006670 14350661, 2016, 4, Downloaded from https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2136/sssaj2016.03.0080, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2026]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ghodake, G. S., Shinde, S. K., Kadam, A. A., Saratale, R. G., Saratale, G. D., Kumar, M., Palem, R. R., AL-Shwaiman, H. A., Elgorban, A. M., Syed, A., et al. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126645 · Cited by 414 · see citing works
Panoutsou, C., Germer, S., Karka, P., Papadokostantakis, S., Kroyan, Y., Wojcieszyk, M., Maniatis, K., Marchand, P., & Landalv, I. (2021) · Energy Strategy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.esr.2021.100633 · Cited by 233 · see citing works
Cadmium and mercury phytostabilization from soil using Miscanthus × giganteus
Zgorelec, Z., Bilandzija, N., Knez, K., Galic, M., & Zuzul, S. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-63488-5 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Grover, S., Anderson, H. M., Fleck, J., Kelly, C. N., Schuler, J., Ruark, M. D., & Freedman, Z. B. (2024) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.1002/saj2.20647 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Osei, A. K., Thevathasan, N. V., & Oelbermann, M. (2025) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.70025 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“…Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. requirements makes them excellent candidates for continued and long-term soil C storage (Blanco-Canqui 2016; Lemus and Lal 2005; Marsal et al. 2016).”
- Authors
- Blanco-Canqui, H.
- Affiliations
- Dep. of Agronomy and Horticulture Univ. of Nebraska‐Lincoln 261 Plant Science Hall Lincoln NE 68583
- Venue
- Soil Science Society of America Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-07
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 845-858
- ISSN
- 0361-5995 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0661
- OpenAlex
- W2502805945
- Cited by
- 169
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3
- FWCI
- 23.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Soil Science Society of America Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
- Keywords
- dedicated energy crops, marginal land, ecosystem services, short rotation woody crops, soil carbon sequestration, erosion control, soil remediation, reclaimed mine soils, biomass yield, organic amendments, biofuel feedstock, biodiversity
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
