Cited by 74Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsSoil Management and Crop YieldSoil erosion and sediment transport

What Are the Effects of Agricultural Management on Soil Organic Carbon in Boreo-Temperate Systems?

Open access
Haddaway, Neal R., Hedlund, Katarina, Jackson, Louise E., Kätterer, Thomas, Lugato, Emanuele, Thomsen, Ingrid K., Jørgensen, Helene Bracht, Söderström, Bo·2015·Environmental Evidence

Abstract

Abstract Background Soils contain the largest stock of organic carbon (C) in terrestrial ecosystems and changes in soil C stocks may significantly affect atmospheric CO2. A significant part of soil C is present in cultivated soils that occupy about 35 % of the global land surface. Agricultural intensification has led to practices that may decrease soil organic carbon (SOC), and agricultural management has the potential to be a powerful tool for climate change mitigation and increased soil fertility through SOC sequestration. Here, we systematically map evidence relating to the impacts of agricultural management on SOC in arable systems of the warm temperate and snow climate zones (subset of temperate and continental climates: Köppen–Geiger Classification). Methods Seventeen academic citation databases, 3 search engines and 25 organisational websites were searched for literature (academic and grey) using search strings translated into a range of languages relevant to the included geographical scope of the topic. Stakeholders were also contacted with requests for evidence. Bibliographic checking of 127 relevant reviews was undertaken to check for missing articles. Screening for relevance against predefined inclusion criteria was undertaken at title, abstract and full text levels according to a published protocol. All relevant studies were coded in a meta-database describing the citation, study settings, methods and quantitative data available (without extraction of the study findings). A basic critical appraisal of included studies was also performed. A geographical information system (GIS) presenting the map database on a physical, online map was also produced. Results A total of 735 studies from 553 articles was included in the systematic map database. Studies investigated one or more of five broad categories of interventions: amendments (286 studies), crop rotations (238), fertilisers (307), tillage (306), and multiple interventions (55). Studies were identified from across the includible climate zones, with the notable underrepresentation from Russia. The majority of studies employed only point sampling of SOC, low levels of true spatial replication and moderate study periods (i.e. 10–20 years). Missing key methodological information was found in 28 % of studies. Conclusions Long-term study sites identified in this map provide a useful addition to existing databases of long-term experiments (LTEs). The identification of knowledge gaps, such as studies from Russia, also identify a need for improved cataloguing or reporting of existing and on-going research. This systematic map database represents a useful resource for decision-makers wishing to identify knowledge gaps warranting further primary research, knowledge gluts warranting further secondary research, and deficiencies and best practice in research methodology. In addition to the systematic map database, we have also produced two further resources: (1) a database of LTE sites investigating agricultural management and SOC, and (2) a database of reviews and meta-analyses. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review or map that utilises a GIS for presentation of an evidence base, which we believe substantially increases the utility of the map outputs.

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 · 10.1186/s13750-015-0049-0

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

  • The impact of a specific agricultural practice on soil health may take decades to become evident after transitioning from one practice to another.

    “For example, the impact of a specific agricultural practice on soil health may take decades to become evident after transitioning from one practice to another [30].”

    From Grassland-Based Farming Systems Targeting Agroecology: Which Indicators Should Be Used for On-Farm Assessment? (2025) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Background (page unavailable) says soil organic carbon responds slowly to changes in agricultural management and that changes can take many years to detect. The Discussion (page unavailable) describes long-term studies, but does not establish that effects take decades to become evident. The source addresses soil organic carbon, not soil health broadly. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 77 · Cited by 74

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. Guidelines for Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 4.2: Collaboration for Environmental Evidence: http://www.environmen- talevidence.org/Documents/Guidelines/Guidelines4.2.pdf; 2013.
  2. Paul EA, Paustian KH, Elliott E, Cole CV. Soil organic matter in Temperate Agroecosystems: Long Term Experiments in North America: CRC Press; 1997.

Authors
Haddaway, N. R., Hedlund, K., Jackson, L. E., Kätterer, T., Lugato, E., Thomsen, I. K., Jørgensen, H. B., & Söderström, B.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
  • European Commission (BE)
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (SE)
Corresponding author
Haddaway, Neal R.
Venue
Environmental Evidence
Published
2015-12-10
Volume
4
Issue
1
ISSN
2047-2382 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2196218856
Cited by
74
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2012: 1
FWCI
10.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Evidence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • Joint Research Centre (European Commission) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Stiftelsen för Miljöstrategisk Forskning
  • Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
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
soil organic carbon, agricultural management, arable soils, soil carbon sequestration, crop rotation, fertilizers, tillage, soil amendment, long-term experiment, climate change mitigation, knowledge gaps, reporting quality, temperate climate, research funding allocation, research prioritization, soil fertility

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