Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 688

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 102 of the 102 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The land-to-ocean loops of the global carbon cycle

Open access
Regnier, Pierre, Resplandy, Laure, Najjar, Raymond G., Ciais, Philippe·2022·Nature

Abstract

Carbon storage by the ocean and by the land is usually quantified separately, and does not fully take into account the land-to-ocean transport of carbon through inland waters, estuaries, tidal wetlands and continental shelf waters—the ‘land-to-ocean aquatic continuum’ (LOAC). Here we assess LOAC carbon cycling before the industrial period and perturbed by direct human interventions, including climate change. In our view of the global carbon cycle, the traditional ‘long-range loop’, which carries carbon from terrestrial ecosystems to the open ocean through rivers, is reinforced by two ‘short-range loops’ that carry carbon from terrestrial ecosystems to inland waters and from tidal wetlands to the open ocean. Using a mass-balance approach, we find that the pre-industrial uptake of atmospheric carbon dioxide by terrestrial ecosystems transferred to the ocean and outgassed back to the atmosphere amounts to 0.65 ± 0.30 petagrams of carbon per year (±2 sigma). Humans have accelerated the cycling of carbon between terrestrial ecosystems, inland waters and the atmosphere, and decreased the uptake of atmospheric carbon dioxide from tidal wetlands and submerged vegetation. Ignoring these changing LOAC carbon fluxes results in an overestimation of carbon storage in terrestrial ecosystems by 0.6 ± 0.4 petagrams of carbon per year, and an underestimation of sedimentary and oceanic carbon storage. We identify knowledge gaps that are key to reduce uncertainties in future assessments of LOAC fluxes. An assessment of the land-to-ocean cycling of carbon through inland waters, estuaries, tidal wetlands and continental shelf waters provides a perspective on the global carbon cycle and identifies key knowledge gaps.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41586-021-04339-9

Cites

102 of 102 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 102 references

Cited by

See all 688

Metadata

Authors
Regnier, P., Resplandy, L., Najjar, R. G., & Ciais, P.
Venue
Nature
Published
2022-03-16
Volume
603
Issue
7901
Pages
401-410
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W4220774684
Cited by
688
References
102
FWCI
64.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The land-to-ocean loops of the global carbon cycle. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41586-021-04339-9
The paper
Regnier, P., Resplandy, L., Najjar, R. G., & Ciais, P. (2022). The land-to-ocean loops of the global carbon cycle. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04339-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.