Scientific Reports of the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine

Carbon sequestration and restoration of soil organic matter under giant miscanthus under different fertilisation systems in the Forest-Steppe conditions of Ukraine

Valerii Nosenko
Download article
Abstract

The aim of the study was to determine the patterns of carbon sequestration by a perennial plantation of giant miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus), cultivar ‘Osinniy Zoretsvit’, in the soil and above-ground biomass under different fertilisation systems and foliar application of potassium humate in the Forest-Steppe conditions of Ukraine. Field experiments were conducted during 2021-2025 on strongly eroded podzolised chernozem with a light loamy texture. The two-factor experiment included three fertilisation systems (control; organic – Leonardite, 100 kg/ha; mineral – N60P16K80) and four foliar potassium humate application regimes. It was established that the cultivation of giant miscanthus ensured a progressive accumulation of soil organic carbon (SOC) from 0.829 to 0.876-0.934% over five years. The greatest increase in SOC (+11.9%) was recorded under the organic fertilisation system combined with double foliar application of potassium humate (A2B4). Carbon stocks in the arable layer (0-30 cm) increased from 2.91 to 3.28 t C/ha. The maximum annual carbon sequestration by above-ground biomass reached 8.25 t C/ha (A3B4), while the cumulative amount over five years ranged from 16.74 to 29.25 t C/ha, equivalent to 61.4-107.3 t CO2/ha in CO2-equivalent terms. The study confirmed the statistically significant effects of fertilisation systems (LSD05 = 0.012%; p < 0.01) and foliar feeding (LSD05 = 0.008%). The organic fertilisation system using Leonardite in combination with double foliar application of potassium humate proved to be the most effective for restoring soil organic matter, whereas the mineral system N60P16K80 ensured the highest carbon sequestration in above-ground biomass. A functional differentiation of agrotechnological effects was established: the organic system optimises the soil carbon pool, while the mineral system enhances the bioenergy carbon pool. The practical significance of the study lies in the scientific substantiation of a differentiated choice of fertilisation systems for miscanthus cultivation, serving as a basis for the implementation of climate-smart agriculture and the certification of carbon credits 

Keywords

soil organic carbon; carbon balance; potassium humate; climate-smart agriculture; bioenergy crops

Suggested citation
Nosenko, V. (2026). Carbon sequestration and restoration of soil organic matter under giant miscanthus under different fertilisation systems in the Forest-Steppe conditions of Ukraine. Scientific Reports of the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, 22(3),71-85. https://doi.org/10.31548/dopovidi/3.2026.71
References
  1. Bertola, C., et al. (2024). Early impacts of marginal land-use transition to Miscanthus on soil quality and soil carbon storage across Europe. GCB Bioenergy, 16(6), article number e13145. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.13145.
  2. Beznosko, I., Gorgan, T., Mosiychuk, I., Havruliuk, L., & Buniak, O. (2022). The quantitative composition of micromycetes under cereal crops in chernozem soils in the Left-Bank Forest Steppe of Ukraine. Biosystems Diversity, 30(2), 1443-149. doi: 10.15421/012214.
  3. Convention on Biological Diversity. (1992, June). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_030#Text.
  4. DSTU 4287:2004. (2005). Soil quality. Sampling. Retrieved from https://online.budstandart.com/ua/catalog/doc-page.html?id_doc=54569.
  5. DSTU ISO 11465:2001. (2003). Soil quality. Determination of dry matter and water content on a mass basis. Gravimetric method. Retrieved from https://online.budstandart.com/ua/catalog/doc-page.html?id_doc=55865.
  6. Elshamly, A.M.S., & Nassar, S.M.A. (2023). Stimulating growth, root quality, and yield of carrots cultivated under full and limited irrigation levels by humic and potassium applications. Scientific Reports, 13, article number 14260. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41488-5.
  7. Gumentyk, M., & Kharytonov, M. (2018). Development and assessment of technologies of miscanthus and switchgrass growing in forest-steppe zone of Ukraine. Agriculture and Forestry, 64(2), 137-146. doi: 10.17707/AgricultForest.64.2.10.
  8. Hayda, Yu., Fuchylo, Ya., Brych, V., Haida, T., Borisyak, O., & Shuvar, A. (2024). Carbon dioxide sequestration and oxygen production on Miscanthus plantations. Economic Analysis, 34 (3), 144-158. doi: 10.35774/econa2024.03.144.
  9. Holder, A., Askew, K., & Robson, P. (2026). Identifying a cell wall ideotype for increased soil carbon contents associated with Miscanthus cultivation. Frontiers in Plant Science, 16, article number 1729614. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2025.1729614.
  10. IPCC. (2019). 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Volume 4 – agriculture, forestry and other land use. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2019rf/vol4.html.
  11. Izquierdo, J., Arriagada, O., García-Pintos, G., Ortiz, R., García-Pintos, M., & García-Pintos, M. (2025). Humic field biostimulation as a sustainable agricultural practice to increase yield of main grains: Evidence from on-farm trials. Frontiers in Plant Science, 16, article number 1709876. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2025.1709876.
  12. Kane, J.L., Schartiger, R.G., Daniels, N.K., Freedman, Z.B., McDonald, L.M., Skousen, J.G., & Morrissey, E.M. (2023). Bioenergy crop Miscanthus × giganteus acts as an ecosystem engineer to increase bacterial diversity and soil organic matter on marginal land. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 186, article number 109178. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2023.109178.
  13. Nakajima, T., Yamada, T., Anzoua, K.G., Kokubo, R., & Noborio, K. (2018). Carbon sequestration and yield performances of Miscanthus × giganteus and Miscanthus sinensis. Carbon Management, 9(4), 415-423. doi: 10.1080/17583004.2018.1518106.
  14. Namoi, N., Jang, C., Behnke, G.D., Lee, J.W., Yang, W., & Lee, D. (2024). Nitrogen fertilization effects on aged Miscanthus × giganteus stands: Exploring biomass yield, yield components, and biomass prediction using in-season morphological traits. GCB Bioenergy, 16(5), article number e13139. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.13139.
  15. Namoi, N., Jang, C., Voigt, T., & Lee, D. (2026). Soil fertility management for sustainable Miscanthus × giganteus production: Increased tiller weight from nitrogen management explains yield gains in aged miscanthus. Biomass and Bioenergy, 204, article number 108394. doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2025.108394.
  16. Pidlisnyuk, V., Stefanovska, T., Janse, L., & Medkov, A. (2025). Bioenergetic, ecological and agronomic value of Miscanthus × giganteus greef et dеu in sustainable land use. Agroecological Journal, 3, 32-40. doi: 10.33730/2077-4893.3.2025.340776.
  17. Pribyl, D.W. (2010). A critical review of the conventional SOC to SOM conversion factor. Geoderma, 156(3-4), 75-83. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.02.003.
  18. Prysiazhniuk, O., Maliarenko, O., Roik, M., Fuchylo, Ya., Lewandowski, I., Makovskis, K., Lazdina, D., & von Cossel, M. (2022). Biomass dry matter yield of willow and Miscanthus in low-input cropping on heavy clay soils in Ukraine. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining, 16(6), 1794-1807. doi: 10.1002/bbb.2432.
  19. Rakhmetov, D. (2011). Theoretical and applied aspects of plant introduction in Ukraine. Kyiv: Agrar Media Group.
  20. Shen, J., Xiao, X., Zhong, D., & Lian, H. (2024). Potassium humate supplementation improves photosynthesis and agronomic and yield traits of foxtail millet. Scientific Reports, 14, article number 9508. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-57354-x.
  21. Siddique, I.A., Grados, D., Chen, J., Lærke, P.E., & Jørgensen, U. (2023). Soil organic carbon stock change following perennialization: A meta-analysis. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 43, article number 58. doi: 10.1007/s13593-023-00912-w.
  22. Terravesta. (n.d.). Carbon life cycle. Retrieved from https://www.terravesta.com/shared-files/3688/?Terravesta-Miscanthus-Carbon-Life-Cycle-Report.pdf.
  23. Teteriuk, R., & Kulyk М. (2024). Analysis of miscanthus varieties for adaptability, yield and energy productivity of biomass in the Left Bank Forest-Steppe of Ukraine. Scientific Progress & Innovations, 27(3), 31-37. doi: 10.31210/spi2024.27.03.05.
  24. Wu, Y., Huang, H., Chen, F., Tan, T., & Xu, Y. (2024). Soil organic carbon sequestration rate and spatiotemporal dynamics under perennial energy crops cultivation: A global meta-analysis. Soil and Tillage Research, 240, article number 106064. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2024.106064.
  25. Yakovenko, V., Gorban, V., Kotovych, O., Didur, O., & Lisovets, O. (2024). Visual evaluation of soil structure in low-intensity land use systems of steppe zone of Ukraine. Soil Use and Management, 40(1), article number e12972. doi: 10.1111/sum.12972.
  26. Yakovenko, V., Gorban, V., Kotovych, O., Didur, O., & Poleva, J. (2025). Humus forms, earthworm bioturbation and soil organic carbon storage in Chernozems of the low-intensity land use of steppe zone of Ukraine. Geoderma Regional, 42, article number e00988. doi: 10.1016/j.geodrs.2025.e00988.