The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Soil Carbon, Nitrogen, and Bulk Density Comparisons in Two Cropland Tillage Systems after 25 Years and in Virgin Grassland
Abstract
Stubble mulching is advocated as a desirable soil management practice, but no data are available for the northern Great Plains showing the effect of its long‐term use on soil properties. Neither have any comparisons been made of organic carbon (C) levels in cropland and virgin grassland in this region since 1947. Four farm field sites, each of moderately coarse‐, medium‐, and fine‐textured soils under conventional tillage, stubble mulch tillage, and virgin grassland (never cultivated) were sampled at 0 to 7.6, 7.6 to 15.2, 15.2 to 30.5, and 30.5 to 45.7 cm to measure organic C, total nitrogen (N), and bulk density. Average organic C and total N to a depth of 45.7 cm, % by weight, were significantly higher under stubble mulch than conventional tillage management. Organic C concentration in moderately coarse‐ and fine‐textured soils was 44 and 13% higher, respectively, under stubble mulch than conventional management, but it did not differ between the two management systems in medium‐textured soils. The percentage loss of C and N from the 0‐ to 7.6‐ and 7.6‐ to 15.2‐cm soil zones due to cropping as compared to virgin grassland was no greater than the percentage loss found in 1947 at field stations after nearly 40 years of cropping. In another comparison considering only medium‐textured soils on farm fields, percentage loss of organic C after about 70 years of cropping, using 1979 virgin grasslands as a reference, was no greater than loss after about 40 years of cropping, using 1950 virgin grasslands. Continued cultivation of dryland soils, especially with stuhble mulching, has maintained organic C and total N at higher levels than was projected from earlier research. Cropland bulk densities to 30.5 cm ranged from 7 to 20% higher than on grassland but did not differ between conventional and stubble mulch tillage management.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Dynamics of soil nitrogen and carbon accumulation for 61 years after agricultural abandonment
Knops, J. M. H., & Tilman, D. (2000) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[0088:dosnac]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 595
Lal, R. (1997) · Soil and Tillage Research · doi:10.1016/s0167-1987(97)00036-6 · Cited by 580
Carbon distribution and losses: erosion and deposition effects
Gregorich, E. G., Greer, K. J., Anderson, D. W., & Liang, B. C. (1998) · Soil and Tillage Research · doi:10.1016/s0167-1987(98)00117-2 · Cited by 508
Wardle, D. A. (1995) · Advances in Ecological Research · doi:10.1016/s0065-2504(08)60065-3 · Cited by 465
Kucharik, C. J., Brye, K. R., Norman, J. M., Foley, J. A., Gower, S. T., & Bundy, L. G. (2001) · Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s10021-001-0007-2 · Cited by 178
Metadata
- Authors
- Bauer, A., & Black, A. L.
- Venue
- Soil Science Society of America Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1981-11
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1166-1170
- ISSN
- 0361-5995 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0661
- OpenAlex
- W2023139950
- Cited by
- 227
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.54
- 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: Soil Carbon, Nitrogen, and Bulk Density Comparisons in Two Cropland Tillage Systems after 25 Years and in Virgin Grassland. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2136/sssaj1981.03615995004500060032x
- The paper
- Bauer, A., & Black, A. L. (1981). Soil Carbon, Nitrogen, and Bulk Density Comparisons in Two Cropland Tillage Systems after 25 Years and in Virgin Grassland. Soil Science Society of America Journal. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1981.03615995004500060032x
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.