Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Soil organic carbon stocks in southeast Germany (Bavaria) as affected by land use, soil type and sampling depth

Open access
Wiesmeier, Martin, Spörlein, Peter, Geuß, Uwe, Hangen, Edzard, Haug, Stephan, Reischl, Arthur, Schilling, Bernd, von Lützow, Margit, Kögel‐Knabner, Ingrid·2012·Global Change Biology

Abstract

Precise estimations of soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks are of decided importance for the detection of C sequestration or emission potential induced by land use changes. For Germany, a comprehensive, land use–specific SOC data set has not yet been compiled. We evaluated a unique data set of 1460 soil profiles in southeast Germany in order to calculate representative SOC stocks to a depth of 1 m for the main land use types. The results showed that grassland soils stored the highest amount of SOC, with a median value of 11.8 kg m−2, whereas considerably lower stocks of 9.8 and 9.0 kg m−2 were found for forest and cropland soils, respectively. However, the differences between extensively used land (grassland, forest) and cropland were much lower compared with results from other studies in central European countries. The depth distribution of SOC showed that despite low SOC concentrations in A horizons of cropland soils, their stocks were not considerably lower compared with other land uses. This was due to a deepening of the topsoil compared with grassland soils. Higher grassland SOC stocks were caused by an accumulation of SOC in the B horizon which was attributable to a high proportion of C‐rich Gleysols within grassland soils. This demonstrates the relevance of pedogenetic SOC inventories instead of solely land use–based approaches. Our study indicated that cultivation‐induced SOC depletion was probably often overestimated since most studies use fixed depth increments. Moreover, the application of modelled parameters in SOC inventories is questioned because a calculation of SOC stocks using different pedotransfer functions revealed considerably biased results. We recommend SOC stocks be determined by horizon for the entire soil profile in order to estimate the impact of land use changes precisely and to evaluate C sequestration potentials more accurately.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02699.x

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 55 references

Cited by

See all 344

Metadata

Authors
Wiesmeier, M., Spörlein, P., Geuß, U., Hangen, E., Haug, S., Reischl, A., Schilling, B., von Lützow, M., & Kögel‐Knabner, I.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-04-24
Volume
18
Issue
7
Pages
2233-2245
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2113953899
Cited by
344
References
55
FWCI
27.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Soil organic carbon stocks in southeast Germany (Bavaria) as affected by land use, soil type and sampling depth. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02699.x
The paper
Wiesmeier, M., Spörlein, P., Geuß, U., Hangen, E., Haug, S., Reischl, A., Schilling, B., von Lützow, M., & Kögel‐Knabner, I. (2012). Soil organic carbon stocks in southeast Germany (Bavaria) as affected by land use, soil type and sampling depth. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02699.x

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.