Grassland management impacts on soil carbon stocks: a new synthesis
Open accessAbstract
Grassland ecosystems cover a large portion of Earths’ surface and contain substantial amounts of soil organic carbon. Previous work has established that these soil carbon stocks are sensitive to management and land use changes: grazing, species composition, and mineral nutrient availability can lead to losses or gains of soil carbon. Because of the large annual carbon fluxes into and out of grassland systems, there has been growing interest in how changes in management might shift the net balance of these flows, stemming losses from degrading grasslands or managing systems to increase soil carbon stocks (i.e., carbon sequestration). A synthesis published in 2001 assembled data from hundreds of studies to document soil carbon responses to changes in management. Here we present a new synthesis that has integrated data from the hundreds of studies published after our previous work. These new data largely confirm our earlier conclusions: improved grazing management, fertilization, sowing legumes and improved grass species, irrigation, and conversion from cultivation all tend to lead to increased soil C, at rates ranging from 0.105 to more than 1 Mg C·ha −1 ·yr −1 . The new data include assessment of three new management practices: fire, silvopastoralism, and reclamation, although these studies are limited in number. The main area in which the new data are contrary to our previous synthesis is in conversion from native vegetation to grassland, where we find that across the studies the average rate of soil carbon stock change is low and not significant. The data in this synthesis confirm that improving grassland management practices and conversion from cropland to grassland improve soil carbon stocks.
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?
The current SOC stock in those grasslands is highly uncertain and is sensitive to methodological choices such as definition and extent of grassland, depth of soil, and year of study.
“For instance, the current SOC stock in those grasslands is highly uncertain and is sensitive to methodological choices (e.g., definition and extent of grassland, depth of soil, year of study)35,51.”
From Risk to rely on soil carbon sequestration to offset global ruminant emissions (2023) · cites this paper as [51]
The Introduction (page unavailable) estimates grazing-land soil carbon by combining grassland area with carbon stocks measured to a specified depth, so the paper supports the relevance of area and depth to a stock estimate. It calls estimates of *sequestration potential* highly uncertain, but does not say that the current stock is highly uncertain or identify grassland definitions and year of study as sources of that uncertainty. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn general, soil C stock can be increased by increasing C inputs to the soil or by reducing the relative rate of loss as CO2 via decomposition or stabilization.
“In general, soil C stock can be increased by (a) increasing C inputs to the soil or (b) reducing the relative rate of loss (as CO 2 ) via decomposition or stabilization, which reduces emissions to the atmosphere that would otherwise occur (Conant et al., 2017).”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Conant et al., 2017
The Discussion reports that improved grassland management can increase soil C stocks and sequester atmospheric carbon. It does not explain those increases as increased C inputs or reduced CO2 loss through decomposition or stabilization, so the specific mechanisms attributed to it are not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe average SOC accrual rate was 0.52 Mg C ha-1 yr-1, which is ~1.5-2× greater than commonly cited mean accrual rates for improved grazing management (0.28 Mg C ha-1 yr-1; Conant et al., 2017; 0.32 Mg C ha-1 yr-1; Dondini et al., 2023).
“This resulted in an average SOC accrual rate of 0.52 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 , which is ~1.5-2× greater than commonly cited mean accrual rates for improved grazing management (0.28 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 ; Conant et al., 2017; 0.32 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 ; Dondini et al., 2023).”
From Impact of 10 years of adaptive multi-paddock grazing on soil carbon and beef's greenhouse gas footprint in the US Upper Midwest (2026) · cites this paper as Conant et al., 2017
Grazing lands contain more than 30% of total global soil organic carbon.
“Grazing lands are one of the most significant reservoirs of soil organic carbon (SOC) (Conant et al., 2017), containing more than 30% of total global SOC (Follett et al., 2000;Lal, 2002;Schuman et al., 2002;Derner and Schuman, 2007).”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Conant et al., 2017
These practices explain the higher relative sequestration rates compared to some others.
“These practices explain the higher relative sequestration rates compared to some others (Wang et al., 2015;Conant et al., 2017).”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Conant et al., 2017
Our estimated soil C sequestration rate lies toward the higher end of reported values, both above and below some other literature values.
“Compared to other literature, our estimated soil C sequestration rate lies toward the higher end-both above (Wang et al., 2015;Conant et al., 2017) and below (Stanley et al., 2018) reported values from others.”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Conant et al., 2017
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
Farming the planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in the year 2000
Ramankutty, N., Evan, A. T., Monfreda, C., & Foley, J. A. (2008) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/2007gb002952 · Cited by 1,942 · see citing works
GRASSLAND MANAGEMENT AND CONVERSION INTO GRASSLAND: EFFECTS ON SOIL CARBON
Conant, R. T., Paustian, K., & Elliott, E. T. (2001) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0343:gmacig]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 1,365 · see citing works
Self-citationFull accounting of the greenhouse gas (CO2, N2O, CH4) budget of nine European grassland sites
Soussana, J. F., Allard, V., Pilegaard, K., Ambus, P., Amman, C., Campbell, C., Ceschia, E., Clifton-Brown, J., Czobel, S., Domingues, R., et al. (2007) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.022 · Cited by 505 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…the practices evaluated in these studies affect forage productivity, which could have implications for CH4 emissions if changes in forage productivity lead to changes in livestock management and subsequent ruminant and manure emissions (Jones et al. 2005, Soussana et al. 2007, Gleason et al. 2009).”
BackgroundExploring the biophysical option space for feeding the world without deforestation
Erb, K.-H., Lauk, C., Kastner, T., Mayer, A., Theurl, M. C., & Haberl, H. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms11382 · Cited by 352 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Asner, G. P., A. J. Elmore, L. P. Olander, R. E. Martin, and A. T. Harris. 2004. Grazing systems, ecosystem responses, and global change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 29:261-299.
- Briske, D. D., J. D. Derner, D. G. Milchunas, and K. W. Tate. 2011a. An evidence-based assessment of prescribed grazing practices. Pages 21-74 in D. D. Briske, editor. Conservation benefits of rangeland practices: assessment, recommend ations, and knowledge gaps. USDA-NRCS, Washington, DC.
- Brown, G. M. C., and C. D. Grant. 2000. Nutrient status of pasture ecosystems established on rehabilitated overburden and topsoil sites in the Hunter Valley, New South Wales. Australian Journal of Soil Research 38:479-491.
- Conant, R. T. 2011. Sequestration through forestry and agricul- ture. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2: 238-254.
- Conant, R. T. 2012. Grassland soil organic carbon stocks: sta- tus, opportunities, vulnerability. Pages 275-302 in R. Lal, K. Lorenz, R. F. Hüttl, B. U. Schneider, and J. von Braun, editors. Recarbonization of the biosphere. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
- Follett, R. F., J. M. Kimble, and R. Lal. 2001. The potential of US grazing lands to sequester carbon and mitigate the green- house effect. CRC Press, Chelsea, Michigan, USA.
- Gonzalez-Ramirez, J., C. L. Kling, and A. Valcu. 2013. An overview of carbon offsets from agriculture. Annual review of resource economics. 2: 145-184, Volume 4. Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, California, USA.
- Matthews, E. 1983. Global vegetation and land use: new high- resolution data bases for climate studies. Journal of Climatology and Applied Meteorology 22:474-487.
- McSherry, M. E., and M. E. Ritchie. 2013. Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: a global review. Global Change Biology 19:1347-1357.
- Nelson, D. W., and L. E. Sommers. 1996. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. Pages 961-1010 in D. L. Sparks, editor. Methods of soil analysis. Part 3: Chemical methods. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
- Paustian, K., H. P. Collins, and E. A. Paul. 1997. Management controls on soil carbon. Pages 15-49 in E. A. Paul, K. Paustian, E. T. Elliot, and C. V. Cole, editors. Soil organic matter in temperate agroecosystems. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
- Smith, P., et al. 2007. Agriculture. Pages 499-540 in B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave, and L. A. Meyer, editors. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
- Smith, P., et al. 2008. Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 363: 789-813.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Global stocks and capacity of mineral-associated soil organic carbon
Georgiou, K., Jackson, R. B., Vindušková, O., Abramoff, R. Z., Ahlström, A., Feng, W., Harden, J. W., Pellegrini, A. F. A., Polley, H. W., Soong, J. L., et al. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-31540-9 · Cited by 979 · see citing works
Soussana, J.-F., Lutfalla, S., Ehrhardt, F., Rosenstock, T., Lamanna, C., Havlík, P., Richards, M., Wollenberg, E. (., Chotte, J.-L., Torquebiau, E., et al. (2019) · Soil and Tillage Research · doi:10.1016/j.still.2017.12.002 · Cited by 369 · see citing works
Restoring Abandoned Farmland to Mitigate Climate Change on a Full Earth
Yang, Y., Hobbie, S. E., Hernandez, R. R., Fargione, J., Grodsky, S. M., Tilman, D., Zhu, Y.-G., Luo, Y., Smith, T. M., Jungers, J. M., et al. (2020) · One Earth · doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2020.07.019 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System
Rowntree, J. E., Stanley, P. L., Maciel, I. C. F., Thorbecke, M., Rosenzweig, S. T., Hancock, D. W., Guzman, A., & Raven, M. R. (2020) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2020.544984 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
“While it has limitations, without baseline SOC data for each field, the chronosequence approach is the best alternative for measuring temporal SOC changes with differingmanagement when compared within soil types and has been used widely throughout the ecological sciences (Walker et al., 2010).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialBrewer, K. M., & Gaudin, A. C. M. (2020) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107936 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Soil carbon sequestration in grazing systems: managing expectations
Godde, C. M., de Boer, I. J. M., Ermgassen, E. Z., Herrero, M., van Middelaar, C. E., Muller, A., Röös, E., Schader, C., Smith, P., van Zanten, H. H. E., et al. (2020) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-020-02673-x · Cited by 63 · see citing works
The potential of agricultural land management to contribute to lower global surface temperatures
Mayer, A., Hausfather, Z., Jones, A. D., & Silver, W. L. (2018) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaq0932 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Apfelbaum, S. I., Thompson, R., Wang, F., Mosier, S., Teague, R., & Byck, P. (2022) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114576 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Risk to rely on soil carbon sequestration to offset global ruminant emissions
Wang, Y., de Boer, I. J. M., Persson, U. M., Ripoll-Bosch, R., Cederberg, C., Gerber, P. J., Smith, P., & van Middelaar, C. E. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-43452-3 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Greenhouse gas mitigation co-benefits across the global agricultural development programs
Khatri-Chhetri, A., Costa Junior, C., & Wollenberg, E. (2022) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102586 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Carbon opportunity cost increases carbon footprint advantage of grain-finished beef
Blaustein-Rejto, D., Soltis, N., & Blomqvist, L. (2023) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0295035 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Stanley, P., Roche, L., & Bowles, T. (2025) · International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability · doi:10.1080/14735903.2025.2461826 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Garcia, L., Stanley, P. L., Sacramento, J. P., Dillon, J. A., Thorbecke, M., Thompson, L. R., Ambike, V., Sharma, P., Xu, S., Chiavegato, M. B., et al. (2026) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2026.104879 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Conant, R. T., Cerri, C. E. P., Osborne, B. B., & Paustian, K.
- Affiliations
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- Unversidade de São Paulo Piracicaba Brazil
- Colorado State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Conant, Richard T.
- Venue
- Ecological Applications
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-03
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 662-668
- ISSN
- 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-5582
- OpenAlex
- W2556643920
- Cited by
- 738
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 100 · 2025: 112 · 2024: 97 · 2023: 108 · 2022: 97 · 2021: 88 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 11
- FWCI
- 2.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Ecological Applications (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA‐OAR‐CCD‐09‐07)
- National Science Foundation (0842315)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil erosion and sediment transport
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Pasture and Agricultural Systems
- Keywords
- grassland management, soil organic carbon, carbon sequestration, grazing management, fertilization, irrigation, fire, silvopastoral systems, land reclamation, carbon flux
- MeSH terms
- Carbon, Conservation of Natural Resources, Soil, Grassland
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
