Cited by 2,602Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsSoil erosion and sediment transportSoil Geostatistics and Mapping

Soil carbon sequestration and land‐use change: processes and potential

Open access
Post, W. M., Kwon, K. C.·2000·Global Change Biology

Abstract

Summary: When agricultural land is no longer used for cultivation and allowed to revert to natural vegetation or replanted to perennial vegetation, soil organic carbon can accumulate. This accumulation process essentially reverses some of the effects responsible for soil organic carbon losses from when the land was converted from perennial vegetation. We discuss the essential elements of what is known about soil organic matter dynamics that may result in enhanced soil carbon sequestration with changes in land‐use and soil management. We review literature that reports changes in soil organic carbon after changes in land‐use that favour carbon accumulation. This data summary provides a guide to approximate rates of SOC sequestration that are possible with management, and indicates the relative importance of some factors that influence the rates of organic carbon sequestration in soil. There is a large variation in the length of time for and the rate at which carbon may accumulate in soil, related to the productivity of the recovering vegetation, physical and biological conditions in the soil, and the past history of soil organic carbon inputs and physical disturbance. Maximum rates of C accumulation during the early aggrading stage of perennial vegetation growth, while substantial, are usually much less than 100 g C m −2 y −1. Average rates of accumulation are similar for forest or grassland establishment: 33.8 g C m −2 y −1 and 33.2 g C m −2 y −1 , respectively. These observed rates of soil organic C accumulation, when combined with the small amount of land area involved, are insufficient to account for a significant fraction of the missing C in the global carbon cycle as accumulating in the soils of formerly agricultural land.

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 · 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00308.x

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

  • Compared to annual crops, Miscanthus has the potential to sequester C due to reduced soil disturbance, the translocation of C from above-ground biomass to roots and rhizomes, and the provision of soil C inputs from leaf litter.

    “Compared to annual crops, Miscanthus has the potential to sequester C due to reduced soil disturbance (tillage is only required as part of the initial cultivation; Post & Kwon, 2000), the translocation of C from above‐ground biomass to roots and rhizomes (Kuzyakov & Domanski, 2000), and the provision of soil C inputs from leaf litter (Amougou, Bertrand, Machet, & Recous, 2011).”

    From Measured and modelled effect of land‐use change from temperate grassland to <i>Miscanthus</i> on soil carbon stocks after 12 years (2019) · cites this paper as Post & Kwon, 2000

    Post and Kwon’s ‘Soil potential for carbon accumulation’ section explains that tillage contributes to soil-carbon losses, while the ‘Permanent grassland establishment’ section reports potential gains when cropland becomes grassland. These passages support reduced disturbance as a potential reason for carbon sequestration, but do not establish that Miscanthus requires tillage only during initial cultivation. The root-and-rhizome and leaf-litter mechanisms are attributed to other citations in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Potential default carbon sequestration rates for arable crops, grassland and forests have been estimated to be 0.3, 0.5-0.7 and 0.1-0.2 Mg C ha−1 year−1, respectively; others found 0.33 Mg C ha−1 year−1 for both grassland and forest systems.

    “Potential, default C sequestration rates for arable crops, grassland and forests have been estimated to be 0.3, 0.5–0.7 and 0.1–0.2 Mg C ha−1 year−1, respectively [132]; others found 0.33 Mg C ha−1 year−1 for both grassland and forest systems [133].”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. S O I L C A R B O N S E Q U E S T R A T I O N A N D L A N D -U S E C H A N G E 325 # 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Global Change Biology, 6, 317±327 13652486, 2000, 3, · DOI
  2. Hamburg SP (1984) Effects of forest growth on soil nitrogen and organic matter pools following release from subsistence agriculture. In: Forest Soils and Treatment Impacts (ed. Stone EL), Proceedings of the Sixth North American Forest Soils Conference, pp. 145±158. University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
  3. Jenkinson DS (1971) The accumulation of organic matter in soil left uncultivated. Report Rothamsted Experimental Station for 1970, Part 2, pp. 113±137.
  4. Sanchez PA, Palm CA, Davey CB, Szott LT, Russell CE (1985) Tree crops as soil improvers in the humid tropics?. In: Trees as Crop Plants (eds Cannell MGR, Jackson JE), pp. 327±358. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Natural Environment Research Council, Edinburgh, UK.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Post, W. M., & Kwon, K. C.
Affiliations
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory (US)
  • Tuskegee University (US)
Corresponding author
Post, W. M.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-03
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
317-327
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2159758382
Cited by
2,602
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 71 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 98 · 2023: 128 · 2022: 143 · 2021: 122 · 2020: 137 · 2019: 160 · 2018: 141 · 2017: 148 · 2016: 136 · 2015: 136 · 2014: 146 · 2013: 137 · 2012: 151
FWCI
67.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Global Change Biology (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE-AC05?)
  • Lockheed Martin
  • Biological and Environmental Research
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
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Soil Geostatistics and Mapping
Keywords
soil carbon sequestration, land use change, soil organic carbon, perennial vegetation, forest establishment, grassland establishment, soil organic matter dynamics, carbon accumulation rates, soil management, carbon cycle

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