No abstract

Summary When agricultural land is no longer used for cultivation and allowed to revert to natural vegetation or replanted to perennial vegetation, soil organic carbon can accumulate. This accumulation process essentially reverses some of the effects responsible for soil organic carbon losses from when the land was converted from perennial vegetation. We discuss the essential elements of what is known about soil organic matter dynamics that may result in enhanced soil carbon sequestration with changes in land‐use and soil management. We review literature that reports changes in soil organic carbon after changes in land‐use that favour carbon accumulation. This data summary provides a guide to approximate rates of SOC sequestration that are possible with management, and indicates the relative importance of some factors that influence the rates of organic carbon sequestration in soil. There is a large variation in the length of time for and the rate at which carbon may accumulate in soil, related to the productivity of the recovering vegetation, physical and biological conditions in the soil, and the past history of soil organic carbon inputs and physical disturbance. Maximum rates of C accumulation during the early aggrading stage of perennial vegetation growth, while substantial, are usually much less than 100 g C m−2 y−1. Average rates of accumulation are similar for forest or grassland establishment: 33.8 g C m−2 y−1 and 33.2 g C m−2 y−1, respectively. These observed rates of soil organic C accumulation, when combined with the small amount of land area involved, are insufficient to account for a significant fraction of the missing C in the global carbon cycle as accumulating in the soils of formerly agricultural land.

Stocks of soil organic carbon represent a large component of the carbon cycle that may participate in climate change feedbacks, particularly on decadal and centennial timescales. For Earth system models (ESMs), the ability to accurately represent the global distribution of existing soil carbon stocks is a prerequisite for accurately predicting future carbon–climate feedbacks. We compared soil carbon simulations from 11 model centers to empirical data from the Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD) and the Northern Circumpolar Soil Carbon Database (NCSCD). Model estimates of global soil carbon stocks ranged from 510 to 3040 Pg C, compared to an estimate of 1260 Pg C (with a 95% confidence interval of 890–1660 Pg C) from the HWSD. Model simulations for the high northern latitudes fell between 60 and 820 Pg C, compared to 500 Pg C (with a 95% confidence interval of 380–620 Pg C) for the NCSCD and 290 Pg C for the HWSD. Global soil carbon varied 5.9 fold across models in response to a 2.6-fold variation in global net primary productivity (NPP) and a 3.6-fold variation in global soil carbon turnover times. Model–data agreement was moderate at the biome level (R² values ranged from 0.38 to 0.97 with a mean of 0.75); however, the spatial distribution of soil carbon simulated by the ESMs at the 1° scale was not well correlated with the HWSD (Pearson correlation coefficients less than 0.4 and root mean square errors from 9.4 to 20.8 kg C m⁻²). In northern latitudes where the two data sets overlapped, agreement between the HWSD and the NCSCD was poor (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.33), indicating uncertainty in empirical estimates of soil carbon. We found that a reduced complexity model dependent on NPP and soil temperature explained much of the 1° spatial variation in soil carbon within most ESMs (R² values between 0.62 and 0.93 for 9 of 11 model centers). However, the same reduced complexity model only explained 10% of the spatial variation in HWSD soil carbon when driven by observations of NPP and temperature, implying that other drivers or processes may be more important in explaining observed soil carbon distributions. The reduced complexity model also showed that differences in simulated soil carbon across ESMs were driven by differences in simulated NPP and the parameterization of soil heterotrophic respiration (inter-model R² = 0.93), not by structural differences between the models. Overall, our results suggest that despite fair global-scale agreement with observational data and moderate agreement at the biome scale, most ESMs cannot reproduce grid-scale variation in soil carbon and may be missing key processes. Future work should focus on improving the simulation of driving variables for soil carbon stocks and modifying model structures to include additional processes

Aim To estimate the concentrations, stoichiometry and storage of soil microbial biomass carbon (C), nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) at biome and global scales. Location Global. Method We collected 3422 data points to summarize the concentrations and stoichiometry of C, N and P in soils, soil microbial biomass at global and biome levels, and to estimate the global storage of soil microbial biomass C and N. Results The results show that concentrations of C, N and P in soils and soil microbial biomass vary substantially across biomes; the fractions of soil elements C, N and P in soil microbial biomass are 1.2, 2.6 and 8.0%, respectively. The best estimates of C:N:P stoichiometry for soil elements and soil microbial biomass are 287:17:1 and 42:6:1, respectively, at global scale, and they vary in a wide range among biomes. The vertical distribution of soil microbial biomass follows the distribution of roots up to 1 m depth. Main conclusions The global storage of soil microbial biomass C and N were estimated to be 16.7 Pg C and 2.6 Pg N in the 0–30 cm soil profiles, and 23.2 Pg C and 3.7 Pg N in the 0–100 cm soil profiles. We did not estimate P in soil microbial biomass due to insufficient data and insignificant correlation between soil total P and climate variables used for spatial extrapolation. The spatial patterns of soil microbial biomass C and N were consistent with those of soil organic C and total N, i.e. high density in northern high latitude, and low density in low latitudes and the Southern Hemisphere.

tices include, but are not limited to, reducing tillage intensity, decreasing or ceasing the fallow period, using Changes in agricultural management can potentially increase the a winter cover crop, changing from monoculture to rotaaccumulation rate of soil organic C (SOC), thereby sequestering CO 2 from the atmosphere. This study was conducted to quantify potential tion cropping, or altering soil inputs to increase primary soil C sequestration rates for different crops in response to decreasing production (e.g., fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation). tillage intensity or enhancing rotation complexity, and to estimate the Implementing practices that sequester C can reverse the duration of time over which sequestration may occur. Analyses of C loss of SOC that may have occurred under intensive sequestration rates were completed using a global database of 67 longcultivation thereby increasing SOC to a new equilibrium term agricultural experiments, consisting of 276 paired treatments.