The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring and Understanding Carbon Storage in Afforested Soils by Physical Fractionation
Abstract
Forested ecosystems have been identified as potential C sinks. However, the accuracy of measurement and understanding of the underlying mechanisms for soil organic C (SOC) storage in forested ecosystems needs to be improved. The objective of this study was to use aggregate and soil organic matter (SOM) fractionation techniques to identify SOC pools that preferentially stabilize SOC in the long term and elucidate SOC sequestration mechanisms in forested soils. At two sites (Wildlife area, Ohio and Kemptville, Ontario) representing two different soils (Hapludalf and Hapludoll), we sampled soils under agriculture, afforestation, and forest and separated them into aggregates. Different size classes of intra‐aggregate particulate organic matter (iPOM) fractions were isolated by density flotation, dispersion, and sieving. At both sites, aggregation and whole SOC content were greater in the forested than in the agricultural ecosystems. The greater aggregation in forested ecosystems resulted in greater iPOM C concentrations, especially the iPOM C fractions associated with microaggregates (53–250 μm) and microaggregates occluded within macroaggregates (mM) (250–2000 μm). The sum of C in these fractions (microaggregate protected C) was 468 ± 29, 696 ± 171, 673 ± 70 g C m −2 in the agricultural, afforested, and forested soils at Kemptville, respectively. The difference in the microaggregate protected C between the agricultural and the afforested soils accounted, on average, for 20% of the difference in whole SOC stocks between the soils. We conclude, SOC is stabilized for a relatively longer term within microaggregates formed in afforested and forest systems. Therefore, we suggest a new fractionation scheme to isolate this microaggregate associated SOC for assessing the impact of land use, land management, and climate change on C storage.
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
Cites
Soil carbon sequestration and land‐use change: processes and potential
Post, W. M., & Kwon, K. C. (2000) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00308.x · Cited by 2,602
Observational Contrains on the Global Atmospheric Co 2 Budget
Tans, P. P., Fung, I. Y., & Takahashi, T. (1990) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.247.4949.1431 · Cited by 2,066
Calculation of organic matter and nutrients stored in soils under contrasting management regimes
Ellert, B. H., & Bettany, J. R. (1995) · Canadian Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.4141/cjss95-075 · Cited by 1,686
Cited by
Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change
Davidson, E. A., & Janssens, I. A. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04514 · Cited by 6,919
How strongly can forest management influence soil carbon sequestration?
Jandl, R., Lindner, M., Vesterdal, L., Bauwens, B., Baritz, R., Hagedorn, F., Johnson, D. W., Minkkinen, K., & Byrne, K. A. (2007) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.09.003 · Cited by 1,458
Carbon accumulation in agricultural soils after afforestation: a meta-analysis
LAGANIÈRE, J., ANGERS, D. A., & PARÉ, D. (2010) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01930.x · Cited by 956
Poeplau, C., Don, A., Six, J., Kaiser, M., Benbi, D., Chenu, C., Cotrufo, M. F., Derrien, D., Gioacchini, P., Grand, S., et al. (2018) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.06.025 · Cited by 632
Self-citationLinkages between aggregate formation, porosity and soil chemical properties
Regelink, I. C., Stoof, C. R., Rousseva, S., Weng, L., Lair, G. J., Kram, P., Nikolaidis, N. P., Kercheva, M., Banwart, S., & Comans, R. N. J. (2015) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.01.022 · Cited by 391
Metadata
- Authors
- Six, J., Callewaert, P., Lenders, S., De Gryze, S., Morris, S. J., Gregorich, E. G., Paul, E. A., & Paustian, K.
- Venue
- Soil Science Society of America Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1981-1987
- ISSN
- 0361-5995 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0661
- OpenAlex
- W2155236826
- Cited by
- 680
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 16.16
- 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
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.