Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 362

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Calibration of the Rothamsted organic carbon turnover model (RothC ver. 26.3), using measurable soil organic carbon pools

Skjemstad, J. O., Spouncer, L. R., Cowie, B., Swift, R. S.·2004·Australian Journal of Soil Research

Abstract

A fractionation scheme that provided the measurement of a labile pool (particulate organic carbon), a charcoal-carbon pool, and a humic pool by difference was tested as a means of initialising the Rothamsted organic carbon turnover model version 26.3. Equating these 3 fractions with the resistant plant material, inert organic matter, and humic pools of the model, respectively, gave good agreement between measured and modelled data for 2 long-term rotation trials in Australia using a soil depth of 30 cm. At one location, Brigalow Research Station in Queensland, there were 3 distinct soil types, two clays and a duplex soil, in a semi-arid, subtropical climate. At this site, continuous wheat with some sorghum was established after clearing land under brigalow ( Acacia harpophylla ) and continued for 18 years. The second location was near Tarlee, South Australia, and was established on existing agricultural land. One soil type (red brown earth) with 2 rotations (continuous wheat and wheat–fallow) were available over a period of 8 years. The modelled and measured data were in good agreement for both locations but the level of agreement was substantially improved when the resistant plant material decomposition rate was reduced from 0.3 to 0.15/year. No other modifications were required and the resulting values provided excellent agreement between the modelled and measured data not only for the total soil organic carbon but also for the individual pools. Using this fractionation scheme therefore provides an excellent means of initialising and testing the Rothamsted model, not only in Australia, but also in countries with similar soil types and climate. For the first time, the work reported here demonstrates a methodology linking measured soil carbon pools with a conceptual soil carbon turnover model. This approach has the advantage of allowing the model to be initialised at any point in the landscape without the necessity for historical data or for using the model itself to generate an initial equilibrium pool structure. The correct prediction of the changing total soil organic carbon levels, as well as the pool structure over time, acts as an internal verification and gives confidence that the model is performing as intended.

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 · 10.1071/sr03013

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 362

Metadata

Authors
Skjemstad, J. O., Spouncer, L. R., Cowie, B., & Swift, R. S.
Venue
Australian Journal of Soil Research
Published
2004-02-13
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
79-88
ISSN
  • 0004-9573 (ISSN-L)
  • 1446-568X
OpenAlex
W2169539450
Cited by
362
References
0
FWCI
22.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Calibration of the Rothamsted organic carbon turnover model (RothC ver. 26.3), using measurable soil organic carbon pools. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1071/sr03013
The paper
Skjemstad, J. O., Spouncer, L. R., Cowie, B., & Swift, R. S. (2004). Calibration of the Rothamsted organic carbon turnover model (RothC ver. 26.3), using measurable soil organic carbon pools. Australian Journal of Soil Research. https://doi.org/10.1071/sr03013

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.