Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 746

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 124 of the 124 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Myth of Nitrogen Fertilization for Soil Carbon Sequestration

Open access
Khan, S. A., Mulvaney, R. L., Ellsworth, T. R., Boast, C. W.·2007·Journal of Environmental Quality

Abstract

Intensive use of N fertilizers in modern agriculture is motivated by the economic value of high grain yields and is generally perceived to sequester soil organic C by increasing the input of crop residues. This perception is at odds with a century of soil organic C data reported herein for the Morrow Plots, the world's oldest experimental site under continuous corn (Zea mays L.). After 40 to 50 yr of synthetic fertilization that exceeded grain N removal by 60 to 190%, a net decline occurred in soil C despite increasingly massive residue C incorporation, the decline being more extensive for a corn–soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) or corn–oats (Avena sativa L.)–hay rotation than for continuous corn and of greater intensity for the profile (0–46 cm) than the surface soil. These findings implicate fertilizer N in promoting the decomposition of crop residues and soil organic matter and are consistent with data from numerous cropping experiments involving synthetic N fertilization in the USA Corn Belt and elsewhere, although not with the interpretation usually provided. There are important implications for soil C sequestration because the yield‐based input of fertilizer N has commonly exceeded grain N removal for corn production on fertile soils since the 1960s. To mitigate the ongoing consequences of soil deterioration, atmospheric CO 2 enrichment, and NO 3− pollution of ground and surface waters, N fertilization should be managed by site‐specific assessment of soil N availability. Current fertilizer N management practices, if combined with corn stover removal for bioenergy production, exacerbate soil C loss.

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 · 10.2134/jeq2007.0099

Cites

124 of 124 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 124 references

Cited by

See all 746

Metadata

Authors
Khan, S. A., Mulvaney, R. L., Ellsworth, T. R., & Boast, C. W.
Venue
Journal of Environmental Quality
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-11
Volume
36
Issue
6
Pages
1821-1832
ISSN
  • 0047-2425 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2537
OpenAlex
W2054897709
Cited by
746
References
124
FWCI
59.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: The Myth of Nitrogen Fertilization for Soil Carbon Sequestration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2134/jeq2007.0099
The paper
Khan, S. A., Mulvaney, R. L., Ellsworth, T. R., & Boast, C. W. (2007). The Myth of Nitrogen Fertilization for Soil Carbon Sequestration. Journal of Environmental Quality. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2007.0099

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.