BioEnergy Research

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 559–567 | Cite as

The Impact of Corn Residue Removal on Soil Aggregates and Particulate Organic Matter

  • Shannon L. OsborneEmail author
  • Jane M. F. Johnson
  • Virginia L. Jin
  • Amber L. Hammerbeck
  • Gary E. Varvel
  • Tom E. Schumacher


Removal of corn (Zea mays L.) stover as a biofuel feedstock is being considered. It is important to understand the implications of this practice when establishing removal guidelines to ensure the long-term sustainability of both the biofuel industry and soil health. Aboveground and belowground plant residues are the soil’s main sources of organic materials that bind soil particles together into aggregates and increase soil carbon (C) storage. Serving to stabilize soil particles, soil organic matter (SOM) assists in supplying plant available nutrients, increases water holding capacity, and helps reduce soil erosion. Data obtained from three Corn Stover Regional Partnership sites (Brookings, SD; Morris, MN; and Ithaca, NE) were utilized to evaluate the impact of removing corn stover on soil physical properties, including dry aggregate size distribution (DASD), erodible fraction (EF), and SOM components. Each site consisted of a combination of three residue removal rates (low—removal of grain only, intermediate—approximately 50 % residue removal, and high—maximum amount of residue removal). Results showed that the distribution of soil aggregates was less favorable for all three locations when residue was removed without the addition of other sources of organic matter such as cover crops. Additionally, we found that when residue was removed and the soil surface was less protected, there was an increase in the EF at all three research sites. There was a reduction in the EF for both the Brookings, SD, and Ithaca, NE sites when cover crops were incorporated or additional nitrogen (N) was added to the system. Amounts of SOM, fine particulate organic matter (fPOM), and total particulate organic matter (tPOM) consistently decreased as greater amounts of residue were removed from the soil surface. Across these three locations, the removal of crop residue from the soil surface had a negative impact on measured soil physical properties. The addition of a cover crop or additional N helped reduce this impact as measured through aggregate size distribution and EF and SOM components.


Bioenergy Second generation feedstock Sustainable Renewable energy Soil health 



Project funding was provided by the United States Department of Agriculture—Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), as part of the USDA—ARS—Resilient Economic Agricultural Practices (REAP)/formally Renewable Energy Assessment Project. Additional funding was from the North Central Regional Sun Grant Center at South Dakota State University through a grant provided by the United States Department of Energy—Office of Biomass Programs under award number DE-FC36-05GO85041. Technical assistance in the field and/or lab is acknowledged from Kurt Dagel, Chris Nelson, Ann Qualm, Gary Amundson, Nancy Barbour, Chad Rollofson, Stephan Swanson, Susan Siragusa, David Walla, Tyler Goeschel, Molly Hoffbauer, and Carla Ahlschwede.


  1. 1.
    USDA-National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) (2010) Data and Statistics. Washington, D.C. Accessed 15 March 2011
  2. 2.
    Wilhelm WW, Johnson JMF, Karlen DL, Lightle DT (2007) Corn stover to sustain soil organic carbon further constrains biomass supply. Agron J 99:1665–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Johnson JMF, Papiernik SK, Mikha MM, Spokas KA, Tomer MD, Weyers SL (2010) Soil processes and residue harvest management. In: Lal R, Stewart BA (eds) Carbon management, fuels, and soil quality. Taylor & Francis, New York, pp 1–44Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jastrow JD, Miller RM (1997) Soil aggregate stabilization and carbon sequestration: feedbacks through organomineral associations. In: Lal R, Kimble JM, Follet RF, Stewart BA (eds) Soil processes and the carbon cycle. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 207–223Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cambardella CA, Gajda AM, Doran JW, Wienhold BJ, Kettler TA (2001) Estimation of particulate and total organic matter by weight loss-on-ignition. In: Lal R, Kimball JM, Follet RF, Stewart BA (eds) Assessment methods for soil carbon. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, pp 349–359Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Soil Science Society of America (2008) Glossary of soil science terms. SSSA, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gale WJ, Cambardella CA, Bailey TB (2000) Root-derived carbon and the formation and stabilization of aggregates. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Golchin A, Oades JM, Skjemstad JO, Clarke P (1994) Soil structure and carbon cycling. Aust J Soil Res 32:1043–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Golchin A, Oades JM, Skjemstad JO, Clarke P (1995) Structural and dynamic properties of soil organic matter as reflected by 13C natural abundance, pyrolysis mass spectrometry and solid-state 13C NMR spectroscopy in density fractions of an Oxisol under forest and pasture. Aust J Soil Res 33:59–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Six J, Elliott ET, Paustian K, Doran JW (1998) Aggregation and soil organic matter accumulation in cultivated and native grassland soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 62:1367–1377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blanco-Canqui H, Lal R, Post WM, Izaurralde RC, Owens LB (2006) Rapid changes in soil carbon and structural properties due to stover removal from no-till corn plots. Soil Sci 171:468–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blanco-Canqui H, Lal R (2009) Corn stover removal for expanded uses reduces soil fertility and structural stability. Soil Sci Soc Am J 73:418–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clapp CE, Allmaras RR, Layese MF, Linden DR, Dowdy RH (2000) Soil organic carbon and C-13 abundances as related to tillage, crop residue, and nitrogen fertilization under continuous corn management in Minnesota. Soil Till Res 55:127–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hooker BA, Morris TF, Peters R, Cardon ZG (2005) Long-term effects of tillage and corn stalk return on soil carbon dynamics. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:188–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johnson JMF, Acosta-Martinez V, Cambardella CA, Barbour NW (2013) Crop and soil responses to using corn stover as a bioenergy feedstock: observations from the northern US Corn Belt. Agriculture 3:71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pikul JL Jr, Osborne S, Ellsbury M, Riedell W (2007) Particulate organic matter and water-stable aggregation of soil under contrasting management. Soil Sci Soc Am J 71:766–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singh B, Malhi SS (2006) Response of soil physical properties to tillage and residue management on two soils in a cool temperate environment. Soil Till Res 85:143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karlen DL (2010) Corn stover feedstock trials to support predictive modeling. Glob Change Biol Bioenerg 2:235–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karlen DL, Varvel GE, Johnson JMF, Baker J, Osborne SL, Novak JM et al (2011) Monitoring soil quality to assess the sustainability of harvesting corn stover. Agron J 103:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Karlen DL, Birrell SJ, Johnson JMF, Osborne SL, Schumacher TE, Varvel GE et al. (2012) Corn grain, stover yield and nutrient removal validations regional partnership sites. In: Proceeding of the 2012 National Conference: Science for Biomass Feedstock Production and Utilization, New Orleans, LA, 2012Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hammerbeck AL, Stetson SJ, Osborne SL, Schumacher TE, Pikul JL Jr (2012) Corn residue removal impact on soil aggregates in a no-till corn/soybean rotation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76:1390–1398. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2011.0421 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chepil WS (1962) A compact rotary sieve and the importance of dry sieving in physical soil analysis. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 26:4–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pikul JL, Chilom G, Rice J, Eynard A, Schumacher TE, Nichols K, Johnson JMF, Wright S, Caesar T, Ellsbury M (2009) Organic matter and water stability of field aggregates affected by tillage in South Dakota. Soil Sci Soc Am J 73:197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Varvel GE, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB, Follett R, Kimble J (2008) Comparison of corn and switchgrass on marginal soils for bioenergy. Biomass Bioenerg 32:18–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Follett RF, Vogel KP, Varvel GE, Mitchell RB, Kimble J (2012) Soil carbon sequestration by switchgrass and no-till maize grown for bioenergy. Bioenerg Res 5:866–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wienhold BJ, Varvel GE, Johnson JMF, Wilhelm WW (2013) Carbon source quality and placement effects on soil organic carbon status. Bioenerg Res 6:786–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cambardella CA, Elliott ET (1992) Particulate soil organic-matter changes across a grassland cultivation sequence. Soil Sci Soc Am J 56:777–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Griffin TS, Porter GA (2004) Altering soil carbon and nitrogen stocks in intensively tilled two-year rotations. Biol Fert Soils 39:366–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liebig MA, Tanaka DL, Wienhold BJ (2004) Tillage and cropping effects on soil quality indicators in the northern Great Plains. Soil Till Res 78:131–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Magdoff F, Weil RR (2004) Soil organic matter in sustainable agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FLCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York (outside the USA) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shannon L. Osborne
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jane M. F. Johnson
    • 2
  • Virginia L. Jin
    • 3
  • Amber L. Hammerbeck
    • 4
  • Gary E. Varvel
    • 3
  • Tom E. Schumacher
    • 4
  1. 1.USDA—Agricultural Research Service—North Central Agricultural Research LaboratoryBrookingsUSA
  2. 2.USDA—Agricultural Research Service—North Central Soil Conservation Research LaboratoryMorrisUSA
  3. 3.USDA—Agricultural Research Service—Agroecosystems Management Research UnitLincolnUSA
  4. 4.Plant Science DepartmentSouth Dakota State UniversityBrookingsUSA

Personalised recommendations