The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The global carbon dioxide flux in soil respiration and its relationship to vegetation and climate
Open accessAbstract
We review measured rates of soil respiration from terrestrial and wetland ecosystems to define the annual global CO2 flux from soils, to identify uncertainties in the global flux estimate, and to investigate the influences of temperature, precipitation, and vegetation on soil respiration rates. The annual global CO2 flux from soils is estimated to average (± S.D.) 68 ± 4 PgC/yr, based on extrapolations from biome land areas. Relatively few measurements of soil respiration exist from arid, semi-arid, and tropical regions; these regions should be priorities for additional research. On a global scale, soil respiration rates are positively correlated with mean annual air temperatures and mean annual precipitation. There is a close correlation between mean annual net primary productivity (NPP) of different vegetation biomes and their mean annual soil respiration rates, with soil respiration averaging 24% higher than mean annual NPP. This difference represents a minimum estimate of the contribution of root respiration to the total soil CO2 efflux. Estimates of soil C turnover rates range from 500 years in tundra and peaty wetlands to 10 years in tropical savannas. We also evaluate the potential impacts of human activities on soil respiration rates, with particular focus on land use changes, soil fertilization, irrigation and drainage, and climate changes. The impacts of human activities on soil respiration rates are poorly documented, and vary among sites. Of particular importance are potential changes in temperatures and precipitation. Based on a review of in situ measurements, the Q10 value for total soil respiration has a median value of 2.4. Increased soil respiration with global warming is likely to provide a positive feedback to the greenhouse effect.
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
Plumbing the Global Carbon Cycle: Integrating Inland Waters into the Terrestrial Carbon Budget
Cole, J. J., Prairie, Y. T., Caraco, N. F., McDowell, W. H., Tranvik, L. J., Striegl, R. G., Duarte, C. M., Kortelainen, P., Downing, J. A., Middelburg, J. J., et al. (2007) · Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s10021-006-9013-8 · Cited by 3,941
Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3800.1 · Cited by 2,902
Effect of climate change on air quality
Jacob, D. J., & Winner, D. A. (2009) · Atmospheric Environment · doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.051 · Cited by 1,979
Aerts, R. (1997) · Oikos · doi:10.2307/3546886 · Cited by 1,786
Temperature-associated increases in the global soil respiration record
Bond-Lamberty, B., & Thomson, A. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08930 · Cited by 1,618
Metadata
- Authors
- RAICH, J. W., & SCHLESINGER, W. H.
- Venue
- Tellus B
- Publisher
- Stockholm University Press
- Published
- 1992-04
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 81-99
- ISSN
- 0280-6509 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0889
- OpenAlex
- W2045078541
- Cited by
- 3,486
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 50.14
- 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 global carbon dioxide flux in soil respiration and its relationship to vegetation and climate. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1034/j.1600-0889.1992.t01-1-00001.x
- The paper
- RAICH, J. W., & SCHLESINGER, W. H. (1992). The global carbon dioxide flux in soil respiration and its relationship to vegetation and climate. Tellus B. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.1992.t01-1-00001.x
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.