Cited by 73Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsSugarcane Cultivation and ProcessingSoil Management and Crop Yield

Soil carbon changes resulting from sugarcane trash management at two locations in Queensland, Australia, and in North-East Brazil

Blair, Graeme J., Chapman, Les, Whitbread, A. M., Ball-Coelho, B., Larsen, P., Tiessen, H.·1998·Australian Journal of Soil Research

Abstract

Sugarcane cropping produces a large amount of crop residues, which offers considerable scope for residue management. Soil samples, collected from 2 long-term experiments in Australia and an experiment in Pernambuco State, Brazil, were analysed for total carbon (CT) and for labile carbon (CL) by oxidation with 333 mM KMnO4. At the 2 locations in Australia, CT and CL concentrations were lower in the surface layer (0-1 cm) of the cropped soil compared with a nearby uncropped reference soil. Burning resulted in a greater loss in CT and CL at a depth of 0-1 cm than green cane trash management. At one of the sites, sugarcane cropping resulted in a decline in CT relative to the reference in the green trash management treatment but an increase in CL. In Brazil, trash management from one cane crop did not change CT over a 12-month period but green cane trash return increased CL. Sustainable sugarcane cropping systems must include crop residue return without burning in order to maintain an active C cycle in the system to drive nutrient cycles.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/s98021

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • In sugarcane, fields burned before harvest have lower SOC than unburned fields where harvest residue is retained.

    “In the case of sugarcane, fields burned before harvest have lower SOC than unburned fields where the harvest residue is retained on the fields (Blair et al., 1998;Graham et al., 2002), and our models likewise revealed that retention of harvest residue resulted in faster SOC accumulation (Tables B1 and B2).”

    From Changes in soil organic carbon under biofuel crops (2009) · cites this paper as Blair et al., 1998

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blair, G. J., Chapman, L., Whitbread, A. M., Ball-Coelho, B., Larsen, P., & Tiessen, H.
Venue
Australian Journal of Soil Research
Published
1998-11-12
Volume
36
Issue
6
Pages
873-882
ISSN
  • 0004-9573 (ISSN-L)
  • 1446-568X
OpenAlex
W2014551651
Cited by
73
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4
FWCI
3.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Soil Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Sugarcane Cultivation and Processing
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
Keywords
soil carbon, labile carbon, crop residue burning, soil oxidation, Queensland, Pernambuco

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