Soil carbon stocks and bulk density: spatial or cumulative mass coordinates as a basis of expression?
Abstract
Accounting for CO2 fluxes by determining changes in stocks of soil carbon (C) as a result of land use change is an option for complying nations under the Kyoto Protocol. The 1996 IPCC guidelines for C accounting recommend that soil C stocks to a depth of 30 cm be used in such accounting. However, the soil bulk density often changes with land use and the soil C per unit ground area to a fixed depth will also change even without any change in the mass fraction of C in dry soil. This problem will generally arise when soil C accounting is taken to a fixed depth (i.e. uses ‘spatial coordinates’). For accuracy in determining the land use change effects on soil C, soil sampling should be referred to a fixed dry soil mass per unit ground area (i.e. use ‘cumulative mass coordinates’). There has been intermittent literature‐discussion about this issue over several decades. Methods to accomplish C accounting on a mass coordinate basis, none of them accurate or efficient, have been suggested. Here, we propose a simple, accurate methodology for determining soil C stocks using cumulative mass coordinates, which does not involve repeat sampling trips, nominal specification of the location of boundaries between soil horizons, or independent sampling for determining soil bulk densities. Each core is taken a little (say 10 cm) below the nominal mass/depth required and the retrieved core is sliced into two at a point a little above the nominal mass/depth (say 10 cm above). An accurate determina…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Converting all SOC stocks to an equivalent mass basis minimizes any potential difference in SOC stocks due to differences in sampling volume to a fixed depth.
“In order to minimize any potential difference in SOC stocks due to differences in sampling volume to a fixed depth, we converted all SOC stocks to an equivalent mass basis (SOCeq) [51].”
From Impacts of Rotational Grazing on Soil Carbon in Native Grass-Based Pastures in Southern Australia (2015) · cites this paper as [51]
Cites
Calculation of organic matter and nutrients stored in soils under contrasting management regimes
Ellert, B. H., & Bettany, J. R. (1995) · Canadian Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.4141/cjss95-075 · Cited by 1,686 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
DON, A., SCHUMACHER, J., & FREIBAUER, A. (2011) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02336.x · Cited by 1,477 · see citing works
Soil carbon sequestration accelerated by restoration of grassland biodiversity
Yang, Y., Tilman, D., Furey, G., & Lehman, C. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-08636-w · Cited by 557 · see citing works
Environmental costs and benefits of growing<i>Miscanthus</i>for bioenergy in the<scp>UK</scp>
McCalmont, J. P., Hastings, A., McNamara, N. P., Richter, G. M., Robson, P., Donnison, I. S., & Clifton‐Brown, J. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12294 · Cited by 244 · see citing works
Temporal Changes in C and N Stocks of Restored Prairie: Implications for C Sequestration Strategies
Matamala, R., Jastrow, J. D., Miller, R. M., & Garten, C. T. (2008) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/07-1609.1 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Zatta, A., Clifton‐Brown, J., Robson, P., Hastings, A., & Monti, A. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12054 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Xiao, L., Zhou, S., Zhao, R., Greenwood, P., & Kuhn, N. J. (2020) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2020.106982 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Accumulation and Vertical Distribution across a 74‐Year Chronosequence
Knops, J. M. H., & Bradley, K. L. (2009) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj2009.0058 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Impacts of Rotational Grazing on Soil Carbon in Native Grass-Based Pastures in Southern Australia
Sanderman, J., Reseigh, J., Wurst, M., Young, M.-A., & Austin, J. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0136157 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in 28‐Year‐Old Land Uses in Reclaimed Coal Mine Soils of Ohio
Shrestha, R. K., & Lal, R. (2007) · Journal of Environmental Quality · doi:10.2134/jeq2007.0071 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
- Authors
- Gifford, R. M., & Roderick, M. L.
- Affiliations
- Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
- Australian National University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Gifford, Roger M.
- ORCID
- Roderick, Michael L.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-10-09
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1507-1514
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2099534745
- Cited by
- 221
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 3.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Global Change Biology (publishedVersion)
- ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Soil Geostatistics and Mapping
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil erosion and sediment transport
- Keywords
- soil carbon stocks, soil bulk density, spatial coordinates, land use change, carbon accounting, Kyoto Protocol, IPCC guidelines, linear interpolation, soil depth
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