The conversion of the corn/soybean ecosystem to no‐till agriculture may result in a carbon sink
Abstract
Mitigating or slowing an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration ([CO 2]) has been the focus of international efforts, most apparent with the development of the Kyoto Protocol. Sequestration of carbon (C) in agricultural soils is being advocated as a method to assist in meeting the demands of an international C credit system. The conversion of conventionally tilled agricultural lands to no till is widely accepted as having a large‐scale sequestration potential. In this study, C flux measurements over a no‐till corn/soybean agricultural ecosystem over 6 years were coupled with estimates of C release associated with agricultural practices to assess the net biome productivity (NBP) of this no‐till ecosystem. Estimates of NBP were also calculated for the conventionally tilled corn/soybean ecosystem assuming net ecosystem exchange is C neutral. These measurements were scaled to the US as a whole to determine the sequestration potential of corn/soybean ecosystems, under current practices where 10% of agricultural land devoted to this ecosystem is no‐tilled and under a hypothetical scenario where 100% of the land is not tilled. The estimates of this analysis show that current corn/soybean agriculture in the US releases ∼7.2 Tg C annually, with no‐till sequestering ∼2.2 Tg and conventional‐till releasing ∼9.4 Tg. The complete conversion of land area to no till might result in 21.7 Tg C sequestered annually, representing a net C flux difference of ∼29 Tg C. These results demonstrate that large‐scale conversion to no‐till practices, at least for the corn/soybean ecosystem, could potentially offset ca. 2% of annual US carbon emissions.
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?
Reduced tillage results in soil C sequestration.
“Conversely, reduced tillage results in soil C sequestration (e.g., West & Post, 2002;Bernacchi et al., 2005;Grandy & Robertson, 2007), and SOC accumulation under perennial grasses grown on former cropland may be partially attributable to the cessation of tillage.”
From Changes in soil organic carbon under biofuel crops (2009) · cites this paper as Bernacchi et al., 2005
Cites
Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration Rates by Tillage and Crop Rotation: A Global Data Analysis
West, T. O., & Post, W. M. (2002) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj2002.1930 · Cited by 2,215 · cited 5× · see citing works
“Predicted increases in soil C sequestration associated with a switch from conventional-till practices to no-till practices is mostly linked with periodic measurements or models of soil organic carbon (SOC) (West & Post, 2002; West & Marland, 2002a, 2003; Del Galdo et al., 2003; Freibauer et al., 2004; Lal, 2004b, c Sm…”
BackgroundInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kell, D. B. (2011) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mcr175 · Cited by 439 · see citing works
Changes in soil organic carbon under biofuel crops
ANDERSON‐TEIXEIRA, K. J., DAVIS, S. C., MASTERS, M. D., & DELUCIA, E. H. (2009) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2008.01001.x · Cited by 391 · see citing works
Altered Belowground Carbon Cycling Following Land-Use Change to Perennial Bioenergy Crops
Anderson-Teixeira, K. J., Masters, M. D., Black, C. K., Zeri, M., Hussain, M. Z., Bernacchi, C. J., & DeLucia, E. H. (2013) · Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s10021-012-9628-x · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Self-citationTemporal 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
- Authors
- Bernacchi, C. J., Hollinger, S. E., & Meyers, T.
- Affiliations
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bernacchi, Carl J.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-10-13
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1867-1872
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W4230997883
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 7.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Global Change Biology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Energy
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil erosion and sediment transport
- Keywords
- no-tillage, carbon sequestration, net biome production, carbon flux measurement, conventional tillage, agricultural carbon emissions, carbon credits, soil carbon
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