The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of Labile Soil Organic Matter Fractionation Techniques
Abstract
Labile soil organic carbon (SOC L ), soil organic carbon with a relatively short turnover time, is an important source of energy for the belowground portion of ecosystems and is sensitive to land management changes. Many techniques exist to differentiate and quantify labile SOC, but rarely have these been directly compared. Here we compare the results of four common chemical, physical, and biological methods of empirically measuring labile SOC with soils taken from 33 restored grasslands that differ in length of time since cessation of agriculture. Among sites, microbial biomass C, acid‐hydrolyzable C, the amount of C respired after 12 d of a laboratory incubation, and light fraction carbon (LFC) were all positively correlated with one another, although there were large differences in the sizes of the pools estimated with each method. Acid‐hydrolyzable C consistently provided the largest estimate and 12‐d incubations the smallest estimate of labile SOC. The quantity of labile SOC obtained by fitting respiration data from a laboratory incubation with a two‐pool model with separate decay constants for each pool was also positively correlated with the three measures of labile soil C not derived from respiration data, although this technique was sensitive to whether the decay constant of the recalcitrant pool was constrained or not. All methods showed increases in labile SOC pools with increases in total soil organic carbon (SOC T ) pools, although the rate of change varied between techniques. The size of stable aggregates correlated positively with hydrolyzable C and SOC T , supporting the idea that aggregates may physically protect soil C from decomposition, although the degree to which this C is labile is unclear.
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
Biometry. The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research
Fienberg, S. E., Sokal, R. R., Rohlf, F. J., Rohlf, F. J., & Sokal, R. R. (1970) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529087 · Cited by 9,364
Brookes, P. C., Landman, A., Pruden, G., & Jenkinson, D. S. (1985) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0038-0717(85)90144-0 · Cited by 5,828
Analysis of Factors Controlling Soil Organic Matter Levels in Great Plains Grasslands
Parton, W. J., Schimel, D. S., Cole, C. V., & Ojima, D. S. (1987) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1987.03615995005100050015x · Cited by 3,759
Six, J., Elliott, E. T., & Paustian, K. (2000) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/s0038-0717(00)00179-6 · Cited by 3,397
Particulate Soil Organic‐Matter Changes across a Grassland Cultivation Sequence
Cambardella, C. A., & Elliott, E. T. (1992) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1992.03615995005600030017x · Cited by 3,044
Standard Soil Methods for Long-Term Ecological Research
(1999) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195120837.001.0001 · Cited by 1,910
Aggregation and Soil Organic Matter Accumulation in Cultivated and Native Grassland Soils
Six, J., Elliott, E. T., Paustian, K., & Doran, J. W. (1998) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1998.03615995006200050032x · Cited by 1,789
The retention of organic matter in soils
Oades, J. M. (1988) · Biogeochemistry · doi:10.1007/bf02180317 · Cited by 1,184
Smith, P., Smith, J. U., Powlson, D. S., McGill, W. B., Arah, J. R. M., Chertov, O. G., Coleman, K., Franko, U., Frolking, S., Jenkinson, D. S., et al. (1997) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/s0016-7061(97)00087-6 · Cited by 1,150
Powlson, D. S., Prookes, P. C., & Christensen, B. T. (1987) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0038-0717(87)90076-9 · Cited by 1,111
Cited by
SOM fractionation methods: Relevance to functional pools and to stabilization mechanisms
von Lützow, M., Kögel-Knabner, I., Ekschmitt, K., Flessa, H., Guggenberger, G., Matzner, E., & Marschner, B. (2007) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2007.03.007 · Cited by 1,590
Widespread coupling between the rate and temperature sensitivity of organic matter decay
Craine, J. M., Fierer, N., & McLauchlan, K. K. (2010) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/ngeo1009 · Cited by 405
Self-citationBelay-Tedla, A., Zhou, X., Su, B., Wan, S., & Luo, Y. (2009) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.10.003 · Cited by 337
Organic Amendments Influence Soil Organic Carbon Pools and Rice–Wheat Productivity
Majumder, B., Mandal, B., Bandyopadhyay, P. K., Gangopadhyay, A., Mani, P. K., Kundu, A. L., & Mazumdar, D. (2008) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj2006.0378 · Cited by 321
Role of Soil Organic Matter in Maintaining Sustainability of Cropping Systems
Fageria, N. K. (2012) · Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis · doi:10.1080/00103624.2012.697234 · Cited by 320
Metadata
- Authors
- McLauchlan, K. K., & Hobbie, S. E.
- Venue
- Soil Science Society of America Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-09
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1616-1625
- ISSN
- 0361-5995 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0661
- OpenAlex
- W2088089571
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 43
- FWCI
- 16.33
- 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: Comparison of Labile Soil Organic Matter Fractionation Techniques. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2136/sssaj2004.1616
- The paper
- McLauchlan, K. K., & Hobbie, S. E. (2004). Comparison of Labile Soil Organic Matter Fractionation Techniques. Soil Science Society of America Journal. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.1616
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.