
Leave crop residues on the field
System: Arable crops
Not applicable or effective for: Systems in which crop residues are needed for other use, such as wheat straw for bedding or crop residues for animal feed or fuel production, etc.
Description
Leaving or increasing the returns from crop residues on the ground, instead of removal. The crop residues are the aerial parts of plants that are not harvested and left on the ground in fields or orchards at the time of harvest. The crop residues can be left on the ground or can be incorporated into the soil, either shallow (<15cm) or deep incorporation (>15cm). The quantity and quality of crop residues vary depending on the plant species and growing conditions.
Mechanism of effect
Maintaining or increasing crop residues generally enhances soil organic carbon (SOC) by returning additional carbon to the soil. Residues are decomposed by soil fauna and micro-organisms, with part of the carbon stabilised in more persistent forms (humification) and part released as CO₂ through mineralisation. The net SOC balance depends on the interplay between stabilisation (strongly influenced by residue composition such as C/N ratio, lignin content or other biochemical traits) and mineralisation (affected by soil texture, moisture, temperature, and management practices). Crop yields, species, and soil type also determine the amount of carbon entering the soil. Retaining residues improves soil structure and aggregation, increasing the soil’s ability to store carbon, water, and nutrients.
However, regarding GHG emissions the residues, particularly those with high nitrogen content, can stimulate N₂O emissions during microbial decomposition, especially under anaerobic conditions where denitrification occurs. The overall climate impact ultimately depends on the balance between SOC gains and additional N₂O emissions. In general, the N2O emission risk is low, as currently mostly straw and prunings are removed, and these have high C/N ratios, while most residues that have low C/N ratios (e.g. vegetables) are already left on the field. In systems where SOC accumulation is substantial, the net effect can be positive for climate mitigation.
Reference situation
Usual management of crop residues (crop residue removal for cereals; often no crop residue removal for other crops).
Legend
| ● – Small effect (<5%) | o – No effect | o – no effect |
| ●● – Medium effect (5-20%) | ● – Unfavourable effect | N/A – unknown effect |
| ●●● – Large effect (>20%) | ● – ● – Variable effect (depending on farm characteristics or way/level of implementation) |
Effect on total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (kg CO2-eq)
| per ha | Level of evidence | |||
| Mean | min-max | |||
| Retain crop residues on field | ? | ● – ● | High | |
Effect per emission source
| Soil | Inputs | Energy use | ||||
| N2O | min-max | CO2 | min-max | CO2 | min-max | |
| Retain crop residues on field | ● | ● – ● | ? | ● – ● | ● | ● – ● |
Effect on soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks
| Relative change (%) in SOC%: | ||||
| Mean | (min-max) | Level of evidence | ||
| Leave crop residues on field | ● ● | ● – ●●● | High | |
| Incorporate crop residues in the soil | ● | ●● – ●● | Medium | |
| ● – small increase (<10%) | ● – small decrease (<5%) | o – no effect |
| ●● – medium increase (10-25%) | ●●– large decrease (≥5%) | ? – unknown effect |
| ●●● – large increase (>25%) | ● – ● – Variable effect (depending on farm characteristics or way/level of implementation) |
Explanation of variable effect
Retain crop residues on field, Incorparate residue in the soils
GHG emissions: N₂O emissions from crop residues depend on residue characteristics, environmental conditions, and management practices. Residues with a low C/N ratio (<20–30) and high soluble carbon or nitrogen content decompose rapidly, generally increasing N₂O emissions, while residues with a higher C/N ratio (e.g., cereals, maize straw) tend to emit less. Warm, moist, or poorly aerated soils, especially under anaerobic conditions, enhance denitrification and N₂O production, while acidic soils may limit its reduction to N₂. Management strongly influences emissions. Fertilisation practices, soil tillage intensity, and residue placement (surface vs. incorporation) affect both nitrogen availability and oxygen diffusion. Deep incorporation (>15 cm) generally increases emissions compared to shallow incorporation (Aballo et al., 2022). Mitigation strategies are being explored, such as co-applying residues with high C/N materials (e.g., compost, sawdust) or nitrification inhibitors to slow nitrogen turnover and reduce N₂O fluxes. Regarding fertilization practices, applying synthetic nitrogen to crop residues like straw is sometimes done to prevent nitrogen hunger for the following crop and to speed up decomposition, but it may also increase upstream CO₂ emissions and N₂O emissions. Conversely, nitrogen-rich residues can reduce mineral fertilizer needs for the next crop if their mineralization aligns with crop demand. Overall, these effects remain highly context-dependent and require careful management.
Soil organic carbon (SOC): Effects of crop residue incorporation on SOC stocks can range from negative to positive because it depends on how much carbon enters the soil and how quickly that carbon is decomposed or stabilised. Higher amounts of returned biomass generally increase the potential for SOC gains, but the quality of the residues strongly shapes the outcome. Residues with a high C/N ratio or high lignin content decompose more slowly, favouring humification and longer-term carbon storage, whereas residues rich in nitrogen or soluble compounds mineralise rapidly and release more CO₂, reducing the net sequestration effect. Soil conditions (moisture, temperature), microbial activity, and soil texture further influence whether carbon is stabilised or lost. Because these factors interact differently across systems, residue incorporation can lead to outcomes ranging from SOC loss to significant SOC accumulation, with the strongest increases are typically observed in the upper 0–30 cm under long-term, well-managed residue retention.
| Literature references | |
|---|---|
| Essich et al., 2020 | Is Crop Residue Removal to Reduce N2O Emissions Driven by Quality or Quantity? A Field Study and Meta-Analysis |
| Zhao et al., 2020 | Sustaining crop production in China’s cropland by crop residue retention: A meta-analysis |
| Xu et al., 2021 | Aboveground litter inputs determine carbon storage across soil profiles: a meta-analysis |
| Brohoussou et al., 2022 | Impacts of the components of conservation agriculture on soil organic carbon and total nitrogen storage: A global meta-analysis |
| Yangjin et al., 2021 | A meta-analysis of management practices for simultaneously mitigating N2O and NO emissions from agricultural soils |
| Li et al., 2021 | Return of crop residues to arable land stimulates N2O emission but mitigates NO3− leaching: a meta-analysis |
| Xu et al., 2019 | A global meta-analysis of soil organic carbon response to corn stover removal |
| Hu et al., 2019 | The Responses of Soil N2O Emissions to Residue Returning Systems: A Meta-Analysis |
| Abalos et al., 2022 | Predicting field N2O emissions from crop residues based on their biochemical composition: A meta-analytical approach |
| Abalos et al., 2022 | A review and meta-analysis of mitigation measures for nitrous oxide emissions from crop residues |
| Thiebeau et al. 2021 | Contribution of crop residues to N₂O emissions: impact of their chemical characteristics |
| Xia et al., 2018 | Trade-offs between soil carbon sequestration and reactive nitrogen losses under straw return in global agroecosystems |
| Miao et al., 2019 | Soil extracellular enzyme activities under long-term fertilization management in the croplands of China: a meta-analysis |
| Gross et al., 2021 | Meta-analysis on how manure application changes soil organic carbon storage |
| Wang et al., 2021 | Straw application and soil organic carbon change: A meta-analysis |
| Shang et al., 2021 | Can cropland management practices lower net greenhouse emissions without compromising yield? |