Published November, 2002

DIVISION S-6—SOIL & WATER MANAGEMENT

& CONSERVATION

Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration Rates by Tillage and Crop Rotation:

A Global Data Analysis
Tristram O. West* and Wilfred M. Post

ABSTRACT tices include, but are not limited to, reducing tillage
Changes in agricultural management can potentially increase the intensity, decreasing or ceasing the fallow period, using
accumulation rate of soil organic C (SOC), thereby sequestering CO2 a winter cover crop, changing from monoculture to rota-
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 long- cultivation thereby increasing SOC to a new equilibrium
term agricultural experiments, consisting of 276 paired treatments.
Results indicate, on average, that a change from conventional tillage
(Johnson et al. 1995).
(CT) to no-till (NT) can sequester 57 ⫾ 14 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1, excluding
A global analysis of soil C loss following cultivation
wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)-fallow systems which may not result in of forests or grasslands indicated a 20% reduction of
SOC accumulation with a change from CT to NT. Enhancing rotation the initial SOC, or approximately 1500 g m⫺2 in the top
complexity can sequester an average 20 ⫾ 12 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1, excluding a 30 cm of soil (Mann, 1986). A similar analysis by David-
change from continuous corn (Zea mays L.) to corn-soybean (Glycine son and Ackerman (1993) estimated a 30% SOC loss
max L.) which may not result in a significant accumulation of SOC. from the entire soil column within 20 yr following culti-
Carbon sequestration rates, with a change from CT to NT, can be ex- vation, with the majority of this loss occurring within
pected to peak in 5 to 10 yr with SOC reaching a new equilibrium the first 5 yr.
in 15 to 20 yr. Following initiation of an enhancement in rotation Loss of SOC can be reversed by ceasing cultivation
complexity, SOC may reach a new equilibrium in approximately 40 to
and returning to the original land cover or other peren-
60 yr. Carbon sequestration rates, estimated for a number of individual
crops and crop rotations in this study, can be used in spatial modeling
nial vegetation. Average global C sequestration rates,
analyses to more accurately predict regional, national, and global C when changing land use from agriculture to forest or
sequestration potentials. grassland, were estimated to be 33.8 or 33.2 g C m⫺2
yr⫺1, respectively (Post and Kwon, 2000). Silver et al.
(2000) estimated that reforestation of abandoned tropi-
cal agricultural land and pasture sequesters C in the soil
O rganic C in agricultural soils contributes positively
to soil fertility, soil tilth, crop production, and over-
all soil sustainability (Bauer and Black, 1994; Lal et al.,
at a rate of 130 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1 for the first 20 yr, and then
at an average rate of 41 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1 for the following
1997; Reeves, 1997). Changes in agricultural manage- 80 yr.
ment can increase or decrease SOC. Optimizing agricul- Loss of SOC can also be reversed by using less inten-
tural management for accumulation of SOC can result in sive cultivation practices or by changing from monocul-
the sequestration of atmospheric CO2, thereby partially ture to rotation cropping. In an analysis of 17 experi-
mitigating the current increase in atmospheric CO2 ments (n ⫽ 38), Kern and Johnson (1993) concluded
(Sampson and Scholes, 2000). In addition to the environ- that a change from CT to NT sequesters the greatest
mental benefits of soil C sequestration, consideration amount of C in the top 8 cm of soil, a lesser amount in
has also been given to the implementation of a C credit the 8- to 15-cm depth, and no significant amount below
trading system which may provide economic incentives 15 cm. They also concluded that, unlike NT, no signifi-
for C sequestration initiatives (Marland et al., 2001a; cant change in SOC was realized in response to reduced
2001b). tillage (RT). Kern and Johnson (1993) assumed the du-
Changes in agricultural practices for the purpose of ration of C sequestration to be between 10 and 20 yr.
increasing SOC must either increase organic matter in- Paustian et al. (1997) compared 39 paired tillage experi-
puts to the soil, decrease decomposition of soil organic ments, ranging in duration from 5 to 20 yr, and estimated
matter (SOM) and oxidation of SOC, or a combination that NT resulted in an average soil C increase of 285 g
thereof (Follett, 2001; Paustian et al., 2000). These prac- m⫺2 with respect to CT. Using an average experiment
duration of 13 yr implies an approximate C sequestra-
T.O. West and W.M. Post, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak tion rate of 22 g m⫺2 yr⫺1.
Ridge National Lab., P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6335.
Received 16 Oct. 2001. *Corresponding author (westto@[Link]). Abbreviations: CT, conventional tillage; IPCC, Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change; NT, no-till; RT, reduced tillage; SOC, soil
Published in Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 66:1930–1946 (2002). organic C; SOM, soil organic matter.

1930
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES 1931

In an analysis of 17 European tillage experiments, change in SOC was found to occur between 20 and 30 cm;
Smith et al. (1998) found that the average increase of hence, extrapolating SOC measurements from higher in the
SOC, with a change from CT to NT, was 0.73 ⫾ 0.39% soil profile to represent SOC changes in the lower profile
yr⫺1, and that SOC may reach a new equilibrium in would incorrectly inflate C sequestration estimates. Therefore,
when experimental results indicated SOC measurements, for
approximately 50 to 100 yr. Analysis of some long-term example, to a depth of 15 cm, it was assumed that changes in
experiments in Canada (Dumanski et al., 1998) indi- SOC below 15 cm were negligible. Values reported for SOM
cated that SOC can be sequestered for 25 to 30 yr at a were converted to SOC through division by 1.72 (Soil Survey
rate of 50 to 75 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1, depending on soil type, in Division Staff, 1993).
well fertilized Chernozemic and Luvisolic soils cropped Data that were presented in terms of SOC percentage were
continuously to cereals and hay. Analysis of these Cana- converted to mass per unit area by multiplying the fraction
dian experiments focused on crop rotations, as opposed of SOC by respective measurements of soil bulk density
to tillage, and is unique in that it considered rates of C (g cm⫺3) and depth of soil sampled (cm). In experiments where
sequestration with regard to soil type. SOC concentration was provided without data on soil bulk
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change density, bulk density was calculated according to equations
provided by Chen et al. (1998). Chen et al. (1998) provide
(IPCC) has developed guidelines for accounting of green- regression equations for estimating soil bulk density with re-
house gases, including C sinks in forest and agricultural spect to tillage practice and soil depth, based on clay- and
ecosystems (Houghton et al., 1997). The IPCC suggests sand-particle fractions and the percentage of SOM.
using a multiplication factor of 1.1 for a change from A more direct approach for estimating soil bulk density
CT to NT (Houghton et al., 1997; Land-use change & (Adams, 1973) has been used by Post and Kwon (2000) in an
forestry section), essentially corresponding to a 10% analysis of C accumulation in forest and grassland ecosystems.
increase in SOC. Moving from CT to RT, factors of A separate analysis was performed on the data compiled for
1.05 and 1.0 are recommended for agricultural lands in use in this study, between SOC under CT and SOC under
temperate and tropical climate regimes, respectively. NT, using soil bulk density estimates based on both Chen et
al. (1998) and Adams (1973). Analyses included soil samples
The IPCC suggests these factors be applied to a depth at varying depths from experiments only where soil bulk den-
of 30 cm and over a period of 20 yr. Additional factors sity was measured (n ⫽ 202), thus allowing a comparison
are provided for residue management, soil inputs (e.g., between changes in SOC with both measured and estimated
mulching and manure), and fallow frequency. The IPCC bulk density values. A linear regression analysis (Fig. 1) indi-
approach has recently been applied in a national inven- cated that calculated changes in SOC based on equations from
tory of C in agricultural soils (Eve et al., 2001). Chen et al. (1998) had a slightly higher correlation (r 2 ⫽ 0.87)
In an effort to integrate data from previous regional with changes in SOC using actual soil bulk density measure-
analyses and improve estimates of agricultural C seques- ments than did estimates based on Adams (1973) (r 2 ⫽ 0.81).
tration rates, we developed a global data set based on
a review of long-term experiments in the published liter- Analysis of Experimental Data
ature that recorded the response of SOC to changes in
agricultural management. Soil organic C measurements Rates of Carbon Sequestration
and auxiliary data were specifically compiled to (i) quan- Carbon sequestration rates were calculated for (i) a de-
titatively estimate the response of SOC to changes in crease in tillage intensity, and (ii) an enhancement of rotation
tillage intensity and crop rotation, (ii) quantitatively complexity. A decrease in tillage intensity refers to a change
estimate the duration of C sequestration rates, and (iii) in tillage practice that reduces soil disturbance and generally
provide confidence intervals for estimates of C seques- results in increased surface residue. In this analysis, CT in-
tration rates that could be used in policy and C cycle cluded the use of a moldboard plow, RT consisted of practices
that used tillage operations other than plowing (e.g., disking),
modeling analyses. This analysis was intended to pro- and NT included practices that did not till the soil. Crop
vide increased accuracy over past estimates of potential systems (e.g., continuous corn, corn–soybean, and wheat–
C sequestration by increasing the number of experi- fallow) were grouped separately in the tillage analysis to deter-
ments (sample size) and stratifying the analysis by crop- mine whether a statistically significant amount of C was se-
ping practice (e.g., continuous corn, soybean-sorghum questered within each group in response to a reduction in
[Sorghum spp.] rotation, etc.). tillage intensity.
Enhancement of rotation complexity refers to (i) a change
from monoculture to continuous rotation cropping, (ii) a change
MATERIALS AND METHODS from crop–fallow systems to continuous monoculture or rota-
tion cropping, and (iii) an increase in the number of crops
Database Compilation and Organization
used in a rotation cropping system. In this analysis, continuous
Experiments from the published literature that recorded cropping is a cropping system without a fallow season, mono-
the response of SOC to changes in tillage or crop rotation, culture is a system with only one crop grown, and rotation
and that were greater than 5 yr in duration, were used in this cropping indicates two or more crops rotated over time on
study. A total of 67 global, long-term agricultural experiment the same unit of land. Most of the monoculture and rotation
sites, consisting of 276 paired treatments, were compiled (Ta- systems in this analysis are cropped continuously, with the
ble 1). exception of wheat–fallow systems.
Measurements for SOC were recorded as mass per unit Carbon sequestration rates were estimated by calculating
area (e.g., g m⫺2 30-cm depth⫺1). Reported estimates that did the mean difference between the initial and alternative prac-
not include SOC measurements to a 30-cm depth were not tices, using soil sample data from the latest year available
normalized to a depth of 30 cm. In many cases, little or no (e.g., comparing C measurements for NT and CT in Year 20,
 Table 1. Agricultural experiments used in this study. 1932
Location Crop or Tillage† Prior history Duration Treatment‡ Depth ⌬SOC§ References
yr cm g m⫺2
Ås, Norway N/A (low N) N/A 31 3 yr cereal-3 yr row crop vs. 20 ⫺199 Uhlen (1991)
cereal
Ås, Norway N/A (low N) N/A 31 2 yr ley-4 yr row crop vs. 20 199 Uhlen (1991)
3 yr cereal-3 yr row crop
Ås, Norway N/A (low N) N/A 31 4 yr ley-2 yr row crop vs. 20 881 Uhlen (1991)
3 yr cereal-3 yr row crop
Ås, Norway N/A (medium N) N/A 31 3 yr cereal-3 yr row crop vs. 20 ⫺171 Uhlen (1991)
cereal
Ås, Norway N/A (medium N) N/A 31 2 yr ley-4 yr row crop vs. 20 711 Uhlen (1991)
3 yr cereal-3 yr row crop
Ås, Norway NA (medium N) N/A 31 4 yr ley-2 yr row crop vs. 20 597 Uhlen (1991)
3 yr cereal-3 yr row crop
Athens, GA Summer grain-winter rye Old field, 10 yr 16 NT vs. CT 20 158 Hendrix (1997)
Auburn, AL CT N/A 100 Cn-C vs. Cn 10 37 Entry et al. (1996), Mitchell et al.
(1996, 2000)
Auburn, AL CT N/A 100 Cn-C-S vs. Cn 10 701 Entry et al. (1996), Mitchell et al.
(1996, 2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (no fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 S-Sf vs. S 17 798 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (no fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-S vs. S 17 1393 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (no fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 C-Sf vs. C 17 ⫺45 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (no fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 C-S vs. C 17 ⫺663 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (no fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-C vs. C 17 101 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 S-Sf vs. S 17 1404 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 S-C vs. S 17 1921 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 C-Sf vs. C 17 ⫺101 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-C vs. C 17 112 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 C-S vs. C 17 ⫺393 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (no fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-S (avg. seq.) vs. W 17 112 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (no fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-Sf (avg. seq) vs. W 17 595 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-S (avg. seq.) vs. W 17 168 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-Sf (avg. seq.) vs. W 17 483 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Balcarce, Argentina CT (N fert.) Pasture, 4 yr 11 W-C (avg. seq.) vs. W 17 651 Studdert and Echeverrı́a (2000)
Buenos Aires, Argentina N/A (no fert.) N/A 15 W-G vs. W 21 310 Miglierina et al. (2000)
Buenos Aires, Argentina N/A (fert.) N/A 15 W-G vs. W 21 180 Miglierina et al. (2000)
Buenos Aires, Argentina N/A (no fert.) N/A 15 W-G/legume vs. W 21 390 Miglierina et al. (2000)
Buenos Aires, Argentina N/A (fert.) N/A 15 W-G/legume vs. W 21 760 Miglierina et al. (2000)
Bushland, TX RT CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 Sm vs. W-Sm-F 20 100 Potter et al. (1997)
Bushland, TX RT CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 W vs. W-Sm-F 20 20 Potter et al. (1997)
Bushland, TX RT CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 W vs. W-F 20 100 Potter et al. (1997)
SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

Bushland, TX NT CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 Sm vs. W-Sm-F 20 80 Potter et al. (1997)

Bushland, TX NT CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 W vs. W-Sm-F 20 280 Potter et al. (1997)
Bushland, TX NT CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 W vs. W-F 20 420 Potter et al. (1997)
Bushland, TX Sm CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 280 Potter et al. (1997)
Bushland, TX W CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 560 Potter et al. (1997)
Bushland, TX W-Sm-F (avg. seq.) CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 300 Potter et al. (1997)
Bushland, TX W-F (avg. seq.) CT, W or W-F, 苲30 yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 240 Potter et al. (1997)
Canterbury, New Zealand W-B-peas W-B-peas, ⬎10 yr 9 NT vs. CT 15 2607 Hermawan and Cameron (1993)
Canterbury, New Zealand W-peas-B-white clover Ryegrass-white clover, 苲5 yr 10 NT vs. CT 15 640 Francis and Knight (1993)
Cantuar, SK, Canada W Cereal-fallow, 70–80 yr 15 NT vs. CT 15 192 Campbell et al. (1996b)
Cantuar, SK, Canada W-F Cereal-fallow, 70–80 yr 15 NT vs. RT 15 59 Campbell et al. (1996b)
Cantuar, SK, Canada NT Cereal-fallow, 70–80 yr 15 W vs. W-F 15 ⫺6 Campbell et al. (1996b)
Columbia, MO C Grassland 100 NT vs. CT 20 853 Buyanovsky and Wagner (1998), Balesdent
et al. (1988), Buyanovsky et al. (1997)
Columbia, MO CT (fert.) Grassland 100 C-W-Cl vs. C 20 1112 Buyanovsky and Wagner (1998), Balesdent
et al. (1988), Buyanovsky et al. (1997)
Continued next page.

14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 Table 1. Continued.
Location Crop or Tillage† Prior history Duration Treatment‡ Depth ⌬SOC§ References
yr cm g m⫺2
Columbia, MO CT (0 fert.) Grassland 100 C-W-Cl vs. C 20 1655 Buyanovsky and Wagner (1998), Balesdent
et al. (1988), Buyanovsky et al. (1997)
Columbia, MO CT (fert.) Grassland 100 C-W-Cl vs. W 20 1112 Buyanovsky and Wagner (1998), Balesdent
et al. (1988), Buyanovsky et al. (1997).
Columbia, MO CT (0 fert.) Grassland 100 C-W-Cl vs. W 20 1520 Buyanovsky and Wagner (1998), Balesdent
et al. (1988), Buyanovsky et al. (1997)
Condobolin, Australia W Cultivated, ⬎50 yr 14 NT vs. RT 10 227 Fettell and Gill (1995)
Cordoba, Argentina S Crop-meadow rotation 15 NT vs. CT 15 834 Chagas et al. (1995)
Cordoba, Argentina S Crop-meadow rotation 15 NT vs. RT 15 675 Chagas et al. (1995)
Cordoba, Argentina S Crop-meadow rotation 15 RT vs. CT 15 159 Chagas et al. (1995)
Corpus Christi, TX 4 yr [C]-4 yr Cn CT, many yr 12 NT vs. CT 20 560 Potter et al. (1998)
Corpus Christi, TX 4 yr [C]-4 yr Cn CT, many yr 12 NT vs. RT 20 200 Potter et al. (1998)
Corpus Christi, TX 4 yr [C]-4 yr Cn CT, many yr 12 RT vs. CT 20 360 Potter et al. (1998)
Corpus Christi, TX 4 yr C-4 yr [Cn] CT, many yr 12 NT vs. CT 20 340 Potter et al. (1998)
Corpus Christi, TX 4 yr C-4 yr [Cn] CT, many yr 12 NT vs. CT 20 340 Potter et al. (1998)
Corpus Christi, TX 4 yr C-4 yr [Cn] CT, many yr 12 RT vs. CT 20 110 Potter et al. (1998)
Crossville, AL S CT, row crop, ⬎50 yr 10 NT vs. CT 20 1006 Edwards et al. (1992), Wood and
Edwards (1992)
Crossville, AL C CT, row crop, ⬎50 yr 10 NT vs. CT 20 1603 Edwards et al. (1992), Wood and
Edwards (1992)
Crossville, AL C-S CT, row crop, ⬎50 yr 10 NT vs. CT 20 1191 Edwards et al. (1992), Wood and
Edwards (1992)
Crossville, AL CT CT, row crop, ⬎50 yr 10 C-S vs. S 20 ⫺122 Edwards et al. (1992), Wood and
Edwards (1992)
Crossville, AL NT CT, row crop, ⬎50 yr 10 C-S vs. S 20 64 Edwards et al. (1992), Wood and
Edwards (1992)
Crossville, AL CT CT, row crop, ⬎50 yr 10 C-S vs. C 20 ⫺259 Edwards et al. (1992), Wood and
Edwards (1992)
Crossville, AL NT CT, row crop, ⬎50 yr 10 C-S vs. C 20 ⫺671 Edwards et al. (1992), Wood and
Edwards (1992)
Culbertson, MT W Cropped, 4 yr 9 NT vs. CT 15 55 Aase and Pikul (1995), Pikul and
Aase (1995), J.L. Pikul, personal
communication, 2001.
Culbertson, MT W Cropped, 4 yr 9 NT vs. RT 15 ⫺248 Aase and Pikul (1995), Pikul and
Aase (1995), J.L. Pikul, personal
communication, 2001.
Culbertson, MT W Cropped, 4 yr 9 RT vs. CT 15 303 Aase and Pikul (1995), Pikul and
Aase (1995), J.L. Pikul, personal
communication, 2001.
Culbertson, MT CT Cropped, 4 yr 9 W-B vs. W 15 33 Aase and Pikul (1995), Pikul and
Aase (1995), J.L. Pikul, personal
communication, 2001.
Dawson Creek, BC, Canada B N/A 10 NT vs. CT 7.5 901 Arshad et al. (1990)
Edinburgh, Scotland B N/A 24 NT vs. CT 30 2898 Soane and Ball (1998), Ball et al. (1997)
Edinburgh, Scotland B N/A 24 NT vs. CT 30 2735 Soane and Ball (1998)
Eldorado do Sul, Brazil O-C CT, 15 yr 9 NT vs. CT 30 460 Bayer et al. (2000)
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES

Eldorado do Sul, Brazil O/V-C/Cp CT, 15 yr 9 NT vs. CT 30 640 Bayer et al. (2000)
Eldorado do Sul, Brazil CT CT, 15 yr 9 O/V-C/Cp vs. O-C 30 560 Bayer et al. (2000)
Eldorado do Sul, Brazil NT CT, 15 yr 9 O/V-C/Cp vs. O-C 30 740 Bayer et al. (2000)
El Reno, OK W-F CT, W, 9 yr 11 NT vs. CT 20 1270 Dao (1998)
Elwood, IL C-S N/A 6 NT vs. CT 30 592 Mielke et al. (1986)
Essone, France C CT, W, 苲10 yr 15 NT vs. CT 30 721 Balesdent et al. (1990)
Fargo, ND S-B-Sf-B N/A 10 NT vs. CT 30 2285 Deibert and Utter (1989)
Fargo, ND S-B-Sf-B N/A 10 NT vs. RT 30 2107 Deibert and Utter (1989)
Fargo, ND S-B-Sf-B N/A 10 RT vs. CT 30 179 Deibert and Utter (1989)
Florence, SC C N/A 7 NT vs. RT 15 452 Karlen et al. (1989)
1933

Continued next page.

14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 Table 1. Continued. 1934
Location Crop or Tillage† Prior history Duration Treatment‡ Depth ⌬SOC§ References
yr cm g m⫺2
Giessen, Germany C-C-beet N/A 17 NT vs. CT 25 107 Tebrügge and Düring (1999)
Hoytville, OH C CT, C-O, 6 yr 18 NT vs. CT 30 2397 Dick et al. (1997), Dick (1983), W.A. Dick,
personal communication, 2000.
Hoytville, OH C-S CT, C-O, 6 yr 18 NT vs. CT 30 1538 Dick et al. (1997), Dick (1983), W.A. Dick,
personal communication, 2000.
Hoytville, OH C-O-G CT, C-O, 6 yr 18 NT vs. CT 30 2187 Dick et al. (1997), Dick (1983), W.A. Dick,
personal communication, 2000.
Hoytville, OH NT CT, C-O, 6 yr 19 C-S vs. C 30 ⫺1722 Dick et al. (1997), Dick (1983), W.A. Dick,
personal communication, 2000.
Hoytville, OH CT CT, C-O, 6 yr 19 C-S vs. C 30 ⫺863 Dick et al. (1997), Dick (1983), W.A. Dick,
personal communication, 2000.
Hoytville, OH NT CT, C-O, 6 yr 19 C-O-G vs. C 30 ⫺14 Dick et al. (1997), Dick (1983), W.A. Dick,
personal communication, 2000.
Hoytville, OH CT CT, C-O, 6 yr 19 C-O-G vs. C 30 224 Dick et al. (1997), Dick (1983), W.A. Dick,
personal communication, 2000.
Indiana, USA C N/A 7 NT vs. CT 10 307 Kladivko et al. (1986)
Indiana, USA C-S N/A 7 NT vs. CT 7.5 653 Kladivko et al. (1986)
Indian Head, SK, Canada CT (0 fert.) CT, F-W 15 W vs. W-F 40 ⫺111 Campbell et al. (1991a, 1997), Campbell
(2001a)
Indian Head, SK, Canada CT (fert.) CT, F-W 15 W vs. W-F 40 162 Campbell et al. (1991a, 1997), Campbell
(2001a)
Indian Head, SK, Canada CT (0 fert.) CT, F-W 15 W vs. W-W-F 40 368 Campbell et al. (1991a, 1997), Campbell
(2001a)
Indian Head, SK, Canada CT (fert.) CT, F-W 15 W vs. W-W-F 40 ⫺106 Campbell et al. (1991a, 1997), Campbell
(2001a)
Kanawha, IA CT N/A 36 C-S vs. C 15 ⫺234 Robinson et al. (1996)
Kanawha, IA CT N/A 36 C-C-O-G vs. C 15 527 Robinson et al. (1996)
Kanawha, IA CT N/A 36 C-A-G-G vs. C 15 566 Robinson et al. (1996)
Lethbridge, AB, Canada N/A Cultivated for 苲3 yr 78 W vs. W-F 15 230 Monreal and Janzen (1993), Janzen et al.
(1997)
Lethbridge, AB, Canada N/A Cultivated for 苲3 yr 78 W vs. W-W-F 15 147 Monreal and Janzen (1993), Janzen et al.
(1997)
Lethbridge, AB, Canada N/A Cultivated for 苲44 yr 41 W vs. W-F 30 112 Janzen (1987), Janzen et al. (1997)
Lethbridge, AB, Canada N/A Cultivated for 苲44 yr 41 W vs. W-W-F 30 244 Janzen (1987), Janzen et al. (1997)
Lethbridge, AB, Canada Fert. with manure Cultivated for 苲44 yr 41 W vs. W-W-F 30 ⫺255 Janzen (1987), Janzen et al. (1997)
Lethbridge, AB, Canada N/A Cultivated for 苲44 yr 41 W vs. F-W-W-H-H-H 30 ⫺360 Janzen (1987), Janzen et al. (1997)
Lethbridge, AB, Canada W-F Cultivated for 苲61 yr 24 NT vs. CT 20 ⫺320 Miller et al. (1999)
Lexington, KY C (0 N) Bluegrass, 50 yr 20 NT vs. CT 30 788 Blevens et al. (1983a), Ismail et al.
(1994)
SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

Lexington, KY C (84 N) Bluegrass, 50 yr 20 NT vs. CT 30 383 Blevens et al. (1983a), Ismail et al.
(1994)
Lexington, KY C (168 N) Bluegrass, 50 yr 20 NT vs. CT 30 392 Blevens et al. (1983a), Ismail et al.
(1994)
Lexington, KY C (336 N) Bluegrass, 50 yr 20 NT vs. CT 30 696 Blevens et al. (1983a), Ismail et al.
(1994)
Lincoln, NE Sm-S N/A 10 NT vs. CT 8 ⫺160 Dickey et al. (1994)
Lincoln, NE Sm-S N/A 10 RT vs. CT 8 633 Dickey et al. (1994)
Lincoln, NE Sm-S N/A 10 NT vs. RT 8 ⫺793 Dickey et al. (1994)
Lincoln, NE Sm-S N/A 10 NT vs. CT 8 301 Dickey et al. (1994)
Lincoln, NE Sm-S N/A 10 RT vs. CT 8 688 Dickey et al. (1994)
Lincoln, NE Sm-S N/A 10 NT vs. RT 8 ⫺388 Dickey et al. (1994)
Mandan, ND W-F (0 N) N/A 7 NT vs. CT 30 ⫺109 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-F (0 N) N/A 7 NT vs. RT 30 419 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-F (0 N) N/A 7 RT vs. CT 30 ⫺528 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-F (20 N) N/A 7 NT vs. CT 30 ⫺634 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Continued next page.

14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 Table 1. Continued.
Location Crop or Tillage† Prior history Duration Treatment‡ Depth ⌬SOC§ References
yr cm g m⫺2
Mandan, ND W-F (20 N) N/A 7 NT vs. RT 30 ⫺423 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-F (20 N) N/A 7 RT vs. CT 30 ⫺211 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-F (40 N) N/A 7 NT vs. CT 30 ⫺1074 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-F (40 N) N/A 7 NT vs. RT 30 ⫺332 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-F (40 N) N/A 7 RT vs. CT 30 ⫺741 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (34 N) N/A 7 NT vs. CT 30 892 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (34 N) N/A 7 NT vs. RT 30 890 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (34 N) N/A 7 RT vs. CT 30 2 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (67 N) N/A 7 NT vs. CT 30 1246 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (67 N) N/A 7 NT vs. RT 30 55 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (67 N) N/A 7 RT vs. CT 30 1191 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (101 N) N/A 7 NT vs. CT 30 1690 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (101 N) N/A 7 NT vs. RT 30 914 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND W-W-Sf (101 N) N/A 7 RT vs. CT 30 777 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND CT (low N) N/A 7 W-W-Sf vs. W-F 30 562 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND CT (medium N) N/A 7 W-W-Sf vs. W-F 30 ⫺234 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND CT (high N) N/A 7 W-W-Sf vs. W-F 30 ⫺425 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND NT (low N) N/A 7 W-W-Sf vs. W-F 30 1563 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND NT (medium N) N/A 7 W-W-Sf vs. W-F 30 1646 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Mandan, ND NT (high N) N/A 7 W-W-Sf vs. W-F 30 2339 Black and Tanaka (1997)
Manhatten, KS S N/A 11 NT vs. CT 30 307 Havlin et al. (1990), Havlin and Kissel
(1997)
Manhatten, KS Sm-S N/A 11 NT vs. CT 30 399 Havlin et al. (1990), Havlin and Kissel
(1997)
Manhatten, KS Sm N/A 11 NT vs. CT 30 54 Havlin et al. (1990), Havlin and Kissel
(1997)
Manhatten, KS S N/A 12 NT vs. CT 30 ⫺57 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS Sm-S N/A 12 NT vs. CT 30 468 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS Sm N/A 12 NT vs. CT 30 578 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS CT N/A 11 S-Sm vs. S 30 344 Havlin et al. (1990), Havlin and Kissel
(1997)
Manhatten, KS NT N/A 11 S-Sm vs. S 30 436 Havlin et al. (1990), Havlin and Kissel
(1997)
Manhatten, KS CT N/A 11 Sm-S vs. Sm 30 ⫺384 Havlin et al. (1990), Havlin and Kissel
(1997)
Manhatten, KS NT N/A 11 Sm-S vs. Sm 30 ⫺39 Havlin et al. (1990), Havlin and Kissel
(1997)
Manhatten, KS CT N/A 12 S-Sm vs. S 30 ⫺933 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS NT N/A 12 S-Sm vs. S 30 ⫺408 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS CT N/A 12 Sm-S vs. Sm 30 ⫺1050 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS NT N/A 12 Sm-S vs. Sm 30 ⫺1159 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS CT (0 N) N/A 8 C-S vs. S 30 69 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS CT (252 N) N/A 8 C-S vs. S 30 293 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS CT (0 N) N/A 8 C-S vs. C 30 ⫺263 Havlin et al. (1990)
Manhatten, KS CT (252 N) N/A 8 C-S vs. C 30 ⫺266 Havlin et al. (1990)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-S vs. C 30 248 Varvel (1994)
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES

Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 Sm-S vs. S 30 ⫺553 Varvel (1994)

Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-S vs. S 30 ⫺160 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 Sm-S vs. Sm 30 ⫺428 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. C 30 645 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. S 30 237 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. Sm 30 362 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. C 30 92 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. S 30 ⫺316 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (0 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. Sm 30 ⫺191 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (90 N) N/A 10 C-S vs. C 30 209 Varvel (1994)
Continued next page.
1935

14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 1936

Table 1. Continued.
Location Crop or Tillage† Prior history Duration Treatment‡ Depth ⌬SOC§ References
yr cm g m⫺2
Mead, NE CT (34 N) N/A 10 C-S vs. S 30 ⫺208 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (34 N) N/A 10 Sm-S vs. S 30 ⫺606 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (34 N) N/A 10 Sm-S vs. Sm 30 ⫺429 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (90 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. C 30 479 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (34 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. S 30 62 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (34 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. Sm 30 240 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (90 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. C 30 142 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (34 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. S 30 ⫺275 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (34 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. Sm 30 ⫺97 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (180 N) N/A 10 C-S vs. C 30 ⫺2 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (68 N) N/A 10 C-S vs. S 30 ⫺271 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (68 N) N/A 10 Sm-S vs. S 30 ⫺476 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (68 N) N/A 10 Sm-S vs. Sm 30 ⫺322 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (180 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. C 30 443 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (68 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. S 30 174 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (68 N) N/A 10 C-O-Sm-S vs. Sm 30 328 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (180 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. C 30 73 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (68 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. S 30 ⫺176 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE CT (68 N) N/A 10 C-S-Sm-O vs. Sm 30 ⫺22 Varvel (1994)
Mead, NE RT (fert., herbicide) N/A 16 C-S-C-O/Cl vs. C 15 276 Lesoing and Doran (1997)
Melfort, SK, Canada CT (0 fert.) CT, F-W 30 W vs. W-F 15 390 Campbell et al. (1991b, 1997)
Melfort, SK, Canada CT (fert.) CT, F-W 30 W vs. W-F 15 420 Campbell et al. (1991b, 1997)
Melfort, SK, Canada CT (0 fert.) CT, F-W 30 W vs. F-W-W-H-H-W 15 3 Campbell et al. (1991b, 1997)
Melfort, SK, Canada CT (fert.) CT, F-W 30 W vs. F-W-W-H-H-W 15 183 Campbell et al. (1991b, 1997)
Nashua, IA CT N/A 12 C-S vs. C 15 164 Robinson et al. (1996)
Nashua, IA CT N/A 12 C-C-O-G vs. C 15 614 Robinson et al. (1996)
North Yorkshire, England B N/A 9 NT vs. CT 20 330 Chaney et al. (1985)
Palmerston North, New Zealand C-O N/A 10 NT vs. CT 20 549 Horne et al. (1992)
Palmerston North, New Zealand C-O N/A 10 RT vs. CT 20 584 Horne et al. (1992)
Palmerston North, New Zealand C-O N/A 10 NT vs. RT 20 ⫺35 Horne et al. (1992)
Pendleton, OR W-F (0 N) N/A 44 RT vs. CT 30 324 Rasmussen and Smiley (1997), Rasmussen
and Rohde (1988)
Pendleton, OR W-F (90 N) N/A 44 RT vs. CT 30 434 Rasmussen and Smiley (1997), Rasmussen
and Rohde (1988)
Pendleton, OR W-F (135 N) N/A 44 RT vs. CT 30 579 Rasmussen and Smiley (1997), Rasmussen
and Rohde (1988)
SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

Pendleton, OR W-F (180 N) N/A 44 RT vs. CT 30 548 Rasmussen and Smiley (1997), Rasmussen
and Rohde (1988)
Quebec, Canada C Grass meadow, ⬎20 yr 11 NT vs. CT 24 216 Angers et al. (1993)
Quebec, Canada C Grass meadow, ⬎20 yr 11 NT vs. RT 24 208 Angers et al. (1993)
Quebec, Canada C Grass meadow, ⬎20 yr 11 RT vs. CT 24 8 Angers et al. (1993)
Rycroft, AB, Canada Canola-W-B-F N/A 6 NT vs. CT 20 190 Franzluebbers and Arshad (1996)
Rycroft, AB, Canada Canola-W-B-F N/A 6 NT vs. RT 20 13 Franzluebbers and Arshad (1996)
Rycroft, AB, Canada Canola-W-B-F N/A 6 RT vs. CT 20 177 Franzluebbers and Arshad (1996)
Senatobia, MS C Pasture 8 NT vs. CT 15.2 354 Rhoton (2000)
Senatobia, MS CnS Pasture 8 NT vs. CT 15.2 268 Rhoton (2000)
Senatobia, MS S Pasture 8 NT vs. CT 15.2 488 Rhoton (2000)
Sidney, NE W Native grassland 22 NT vs. CT 20 673 Lyon et al. (1997)
Sidney, NE W Native grassland 22 NT vs. RT 20 234 Lyon et al. (1997)
Continued next page.

14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 Table 1. Continued.
Location Crop or Tillage† Prior history Duration Treatment‡ Depth ⌬SOC§ References
yr cm g m⫺2
Sidney, NE W Native grassland 22 RT vs. CT 20 439 Lyon et al. (1997)
Sidney, NE W Native grassland 22 NT vs. CT 20 350 Lyon et al. (1997)
Sidney, NE W Native grassland 22 NT vs. RT 20 385 Lyon et al. (1997)
Sidney, NE W Native grassland 22 RT vs. CT 20 ⫺35 Lyon et al. (1997)
Sidney, NE W-F Cultivated for 苲47 yr 11 NT vs. CT 30 10 Doran et al. (1998)
Sidney, NE W-F Cultivated for 苲47 yr 11 RT vs. CT 30 ⫺80 Doran et al. (1998)
Sidney, NE W-F Cultivated for 苲47 yr 11 NT vs. RT 30 90 Doran et al. (1998)
South Charleston, OH C CT, C-S 18 NT vs. CT 30 2392 Karlen et al. (1989), Hunt et al. (1996)
South Charleston, OH C CT, C-S 18 NT vs. RT 30 2623 Karlen et al. (1989), Hunt et al. (1996)
South Charleston, OH C CT, C-S 18 RT vs. CT 30 ⫺231 Karlen et al. (1989), Hunt et al. (1996)
Stewart Valley, SK, Canada W N/A 15 NT vs. CT 15 192 Campbell et al. (1996a)
Stewart Valley, SK, Canada W-F N/A 16 NT vs. RT 16 404 Campbell et al. (1996a)
Stewart Valley, SK, Canada NT N/A 15 W vs. W-F 15 92 Campbell et al. (1996a)
Sutherland, IA CT (200 N) Cultivated for 苲36 yr 34 C-S vs. C 15 95 Robinson et al. (1996)
Sutherland, IA CT (135 N) Cultivated for 苲36 yr 34 C-C-O-G vs. C 15 760 Robinson et al. (1996)
Sutherland, IA CT (135 N) Cultivated for 苲36 yr 34 C-A-G-G vs. C 15 892 Robinson et al. (1996)
Swift Current, SK, Canada RT (no N) CT, F-W, 苲60 yr 23 W vs. W-W-F 15 130 Biederbeck et al. (1984), Campbell and
Zentner (1997)
Swift Current, SK, Canada RT (N) CT, F-W, 苲60 yr 23 W vs. W-W-F 15 ⫺120 Biederbeck et al. (1984), Campbell and
Zentner (1997)
Swift Current, SK, Canada NT CT, F-W, 苲70 yr 14 W vs. W-F 15 154 Campbell et al. (1995)
Swift Current, SK, Canada CT CT, F-W, 苲70 yr 14 W vs. W-F 15 ⫺29 Campbell et al. (1995)
Swift Current, SK, Canada W-F CT, F-W, 苲70 yr 14 NT vs. CT 15 109 Campbell et al. (1995)
Swift Current, SK, Canada W CT, F-W, 苲70 yr 14 NT vs. CT 15 292 Campbell et al. (1995)
Temple, TX [W]-Sm-C (28 N) CT many yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 140 Potter et al. (1998)
Temple, TX [W]-Sm-C (112 N) CT, many yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 ⫺110 Potter et al. (1998)
Temple, TX W-Sm-[C] (28 N) CT, many yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 300 Potter et al. (1998)
Temple, TX W-Sm-[C] (112 N) CT, many yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 290 Potter et al. (1998)
Tune, Norway B-O Cultivated 苲14 yr 13 RT vs. CT 20 191 Børresen and Njøs (1993)
Urbana, IL C-S N/A 9 RT vs. CT 30 65 Yang and Wander (1999)
Urbana, IL C-S N/A 9 NT vs. RT 30 ⫺312 Yang and Wander (1999)
Urbana, IL C-S N/A 9 RT vs. CT 30 377 Yang and Wander (1999)
Urbana, IL CT (0 N) N/A 69 C-O-S vs. C 15 733 Darmondy and Peck (1997), Odell et al.
(1984)
Urbana, IL CT (M, L, P) N/A 69 C-O-S vs. C 15 534 Darmondy and Peck (1997), Odell et al.
(1984)
Urbana, IL CT (0 N) N/A 69 C-O-H vs. C 15 1267 Darmondy and Peck (1997), Odell et al.
(1984)
Urbana, IL CT (M, L, P) N/A 69 C-O-H vs. C 15 1959 Darmondy and Peck (1997), Odell et al.
(1984)
Vienna, IL C-S Tall fescue, ⬎10 yr 7 NT vs. CT 15 617 Kitur et al. (1994), Hussain et al. (1998),
Hussain et al. (1999)
Vienna, IL C-S Tall fescue, ⬎ 10 yr 7 RT vs. CT 15 ⫺253 Kitur et al. (1994), Hussain et al. (1998),
Hussain et al. (1999)
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES

Vienna, IL C-S Tall fescue, ⬎10 yr 7 NT vs. RT 15 870 Kitur et al. (1994), Hussain et al. (1998),
Hussain et al. (1999)
Wagga Wagga, Australia W-lupin Pasture, 2 yr 10 NT vs. CT 20 569 Chan et al. (1992)
Wagga Wagga, Australia W-lupin Pasture, 2 yr 10 RT vs. CT 20 ⫺62 Chan et al. (1992)
Wagga Wagga, Australia W-lupin Pasture, 2 yr 10 NT vs. RT 20 631 Chan et al. (1992)
Warra, Australia W (0 N) Cultivated, cereal, 50 yr 10 NT vs. CT 10 97 Dalal et al. (1995), Hossain et al. (1996)
Warra, Australia W (25 N) Cultivated, cereal, 50 yr 10 NT vs. CT 10 190 Dalal et al. (1995), Hossain et al. (1996)
Warra, Australia W (75 N) Cultivated, cereal, 50 yr 10 NT vs. CT 10 262 Dalal et al. (1995), Hossain et al. (1996)
Continued next page.
1937

14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 1938

Table 1. Continued.
Location Crop or Tillage† Prior history Duration Treatment‡ Depth ⌬SOC§ References
yr cm g m⫺2
Warra, Australia CT, W (0 N) Cultivated, cereal, 50 yr 10 W-Legume vs. W 10 138 Dalal et al. (1995), Hossain et al. (1996)
Warra, Australia CT, W (0 N) Cultivated, cereal, 50 yr 10 W-G/legume vs. W 10 234 Dalal et al. (1995), Hossain et al. (1996)
Warwick, Australia W-B CT, 13 yr 20 NT vs. CT 10 413 Dalal (1989), Dalal et al. (1991)
Warwick, Australia W-B CT, 13 yr 20 NT vs. CT 10 433 Dalal (1989), Dalal et al. (1991)
Warwick, Australia W-B CT, 13 yr 20 NT vs. CT 10 374 Dalal (1989), Dalal et al. (1991)
Waseca, MN C-A N/A 11 NT vs. CT 15 650 Mielke et al. (1986)
Waseca, MN C N/A 6 NT vs. CT 30 ⫺2 Mielke et al. (1986)
Woodslee, ON, Canada CT (No N) Maize, alfalfa, and red 35 C-O-A-A vs. C 70 1390 Gregorich et al. (2001)
clover, ⬎15 yr
Woodslee, ON, Canada CT (N) Maize, alfalfa, and red 35 C-O-A-A vs. C 70 2450 Gregorich et al. (2001)
clover, ⬎15 yr
Wooster, OH C Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 NT vs. CT 30 1236 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000
Wooster, OH C-S Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 NT vs. CT 30 1568 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000
Wooster, OH C-S Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 NT vs. RT 30 1317 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000
Wooster, OH C-S Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 RT vs. CT 30 251 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000.
Wooster, OH C-O-G Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 NT vs. CT 30 1603 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000.
Wooster, OH NT Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 C-S vs. C 30 366 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000.
Wooster, OH CT Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 C-S vs. C 30 33 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000.
Wooster, OH NT Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 C-O-G vs. C 30 ⫺45 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal

communication, 2000.
Wooster, OH CT Grass meadow, 6 yr 19 C-O-G vs. C 30 ⫺412 Dick et al. (1997), Mahboubi et al. (1993),
Lal et al. (1994), W.A. Dick, personal
communication, 2000.
† Values in parentheses represent N application rate in kg ha⫺1 yr⫺1. Brackets represent the crop during or after which the soil samples were taken. CT, RT, and NT refer to conventional tillage, reduced
tillage, and no-till, respectively. Treatments with varying fertilizer application rates or crop sequences were averaged prior to analysis. Abbreviations: A, alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.); B, barley (Hordeum
vulgare L.); C, corn or maize; Cl, clover (Trifolium sp.); Cn, cotton; Cp, cowpea (Vigna unguicalata L.); F, fallow; Fert., unspecified fertilizer rate; G, grass; H, hay; L, lime; M, manure; O, oats (Avena
spp.); Ps, pasture, P, phosphorus; S, soybean; Sf, sunflower; Sm, sorghum; V, vetch (Vicia sativa L.); W, wheat. N/A is not available.
‡ Treatments are arranged as the management intended to sequester soil organic C versus the conventional management (e.g., NT vs. CT; soybean–sunflower vs. continuous soybean).
§ Calculated using soil organic matter (SOM) to SOC conversion factor of 0.58 and estimates of soil bulk density where necessary (see text for further explanation).

14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES 1939

Fig. 1. Comparison between changes in soil organic C (SOC) based on measured soil bulk densities and soil bulk densities estimated using
equations from Adams (1973) and Chen et al. (1998). Dashed line indicates 1:1 relationship.

as opposed to comparing NT in Year 20 to CT in Year 1). the mean duration of C sequestration rates would be to calcu-
This method of analysis was intended to reduce the variability late the change in SOC, following a new management practice,
in C sequestration estimates caused by deviations in annual from those experiments that have a documented land-use his-
precipitation and temperature from the average annual mean, tory that coincides with the baseline condition or treatment
which has been shown to cause significant gain or loss of SOC control (e.g., land-use history is CT, as opposed to NT). Most
in any particular year (Campbell et al., 2001b). For example, experiments, however, fail to meet this criteria. Instead, we
if changes in mean annual weather conditions cause changes used all experiments that had three or more sampling times
in productivity and C input to the soil, these changes will be documented throughout the experiment duration (n ⫽ 42)
observed in both the CT and NT treatments in any given year and estimated the percentage change in the annual rate
and will counterbalance each other when the difference be- of SOC sequestration (⌬SOCR% yr⫺1) using the following
tween the two treatments is calculated. In using this method, equation:
it is possible that a calculated change in SOC could be caused,
not only by an increase in SOC under the new management, ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 ⫽ 兩[(NT2 ⫺ CT2) ⫺ (NT1 ⫺ CT1)]/
but by a decrease in SOC over time under the initial manage- (NT1 ⫺ CT1)/(t2 ⫺ t1)兩 ⫻ 100 [1]
ment regime. However, for this study we are primarily inter-
where NT1 and 2 and CT1 and 2 is SOC under NT and CT during
ested in the overall benefit of changing from conventional
the first and second years in which SOC was measured, respec-
management to the new mode of operation, and this method
tively; SOCR is the estimated annual rate of soil C sequestra-
satisfies that purpose.
tion; and t1 and t2 are the number of years following initiation
A paired T-test, using Minitab v. 12.23 (Minitab, 1999), was
used on all groups of paired treatments to determine whether of the experiment in which SOC was measured. Equation [1]
the new management scenario was significantly different than was repeated for consecutive years in each experiment and
the baseline scenario (e.g., NT vs. CT; corn–soybean–cotton results were plotted against respective experiment durations.
[Gossypium hirsutum L.] rotation vs. continuous cotton). A As the percentage annual difference in SOC decreased with
95% confidence interval of the mean was determined for all time, it was inferred that SOC was approaching a new equilib-
estimates of C sequestration, regardless of whether the mean rium and C sequestration had either decreased significantly
difference in SOC between treatments was statistically signifi- or ceased.
cant. Treatments that were replicated using different fertilizer As noted by Huston (2001), the biological response (e.g.,
change in SOC) to a specific environmental condition (e.g.,
application rates or different crop sequence orders were aver-
aged prior to statistical analyses, so multiple replications from NT) can be difficult to detect because of the many additional
one experiment would not overly influence the results or mask conditions or confounding variables that also affect the biolog-
the results of other experiments. The effects of regional cli- ical response. In this study, it is possible that deficiencies in
mate (i.e., annual temperature and precipitation) on C seques- soil macro and micronutrients, fluctuations in mean annual
temperature and precipitation, and other common agronomic
tration rates are not presented here, because preliminary anal-
ysis using all treatments indicated no significant correlation variables act as limiting factors to C sequestration. This phe-
between climate variables and C sequestration rates. nomenon is supported by experiments with different wheat
rotations in Canada that indicate little or no C sequestration
with a change to NT when crops were not adequately fertilized
Duration of Carbon Sequestration Rates
(Campbell et al., 2001a).
Soil organic C is expected to reach a new equilibrium at In an effort to reduce the effects of confounding variables,
some period following adoption of a new management practice and thereby reduce the variability in estimates of C sequestra-
(Johnson et al., 1995). The most accurate method to quantify tion rates, a quantile regression procedure (Koenker and Bas-
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1940 SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

sett, 1978) was used. Quantile regression algorithms have Influence of Tillage Intensity
previously been used to estimate the effect of limiting factors on Carbon Sequestration
within ecological experiments (Cade et al., 1999). In the case
of C sequestration rates, a nonlinear quantile regression algo- A comparison of the amount of C sequestered was
rithm will usually be most representative of the nonlinear conducted between CT, RT, and NT to determine
nature of SOC dynamics over time. While such an algorithm whether the three treatments resulted in significantly
has been developed (Koenker and Park, 1996), it is not yet different amounts of SOC. Only experiments that in-
available in common statistical packages. In following the the- cluded measurements for all three tillage treatments
ory of nonlinear quantile regression analysis, we calculated were included in the analysis (n ⫽ 29). Soil organic C
the 75% quantile of mean annual changes in sequestration rates, levels under NT were significantly different from SOC
and subsequently applied a nonlinear regression algorithm.
Algorithms that provided the best fit (highest correlation)
levels under CT (P ⱕ 0.002, ␣ ⫽ 0.05) and RT (P ⱕ
with the data were identified using Sigma Plot v. 4 (SPSS, 0.016, ␣ ⫽ 0.05), while SOC levels under CT and RT
1997). Both the nonlinear quantile regression equations and were not significantly different from each other (P ⱕ
the traditional nonlinear regression equations are presented 0.142, ␣ ⫽ 0.05). Therefore, CT and RT treatments were
for comparison. grouped together and referred to collectively as CT in
all analyses hereinafter.
A comparison between all CT and NT paired treat-
RESULTS ments (n ⫽ 93) indicated that, on average, a move from
Vertical Distribution of Sequestered Carbon CT to NT can sequester 48 ⫾ 13 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1 (Table 2).
Moving to NT in wheat–fallow rotations showed no
Vertical distribution of C sequestered in the soil pro- significant increase in SOC and therefore may not be a
file was analyzed based on a change from CT to NT recommended practice for sequestering SOC. Excluding
(Fig. 2). Measurements of SOC best fit into four catego- wheat–fallow treatments from the analysis resulted in
ries of sampling depth: 0 to 7, 7 to 15, 15 to 25, and 25 an average potential C sequestration rate of 57 ⫾ 14 g
to 35 cm. A significant increase in SOC of 482 ⫾ 87 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1, when changing from CT to NT (Fig. 3).
m⫺2 (P ⱕ 0.000, ␣ ⫽ 0.05, n ⫽ 59) and 73 ⫾ 57 g m⫺2 Mean C sequestration rates, with a change to NT,
(P ⱕ 0.013, ␣ ⫽ 0.05, n ⫽ 55) was found for the 0- to for rotation cropping systems were significantly greater
7- and 7- to 15-cm depths, respectively. The 15- to 25-cm than for continuous monocultures (P ⱕ 0.087, ␣ ⫽ 0.1)
(n ⫽ 41) and the 25- to 35-cm depths (n ⫽ 19) did not (Table 2). Corn–soybean rotations, with a change from
show a significant increase in SOC when changing from CT to NT, resulted in the highest C sequestration (90 ⫾
CT to NT. Therefore, it is estimated that approximately 59 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1 ) of all monoculture and rotation crop-
85% of the C sequestered in soil, with a change from ping systems. Since corn–soybean rotations make up
CT to NT, occurs in the top 7 cm. Regression equations the majority of the rotation corn and rotation soybean
for the 0- to 7-cm depth (Eq. [2]) and 7- to 15-cm depth categories, analyses of rotation corn and rotation soy-
(Eq. [3]) are: bean data were also completed with the exclusion of
SOCNT ⫽ 1.20(SOCCT) ⫹ 255.12 r 2 ⫽ 0.85 [2] corn–soybean treatments (Table 2).

SOCNT ⫽ 0.93(SOCCT) ⫹ 181.36 r 2 ⫽ 0.93 [3] Influence of Enhanced Rotation Complexity

on Carbon Sequestration
where SOCNT and SOCCT is SOC in grams per square
meter under NT and CT, respectively. Enhancing rotation complexity (i.e., changing from
monoculture to continuous rotation cropping, changing

Fig. 3. Comparison of soil organic C (SOC) between conventional

Fig. 2. Soil organic C (SOC) at different soil depths as a result of tillage and no-till. This analysis includes all tillage experiments
changing from conventional tillage to no-till. Dashed line indicates except those involving wheat-fallow rotation systems (see text for
1:1 relationship. explanation). Dashed line indicates 1:1 relationship.
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES 1941

Table 2. Soil organic C (SOC) sequestered in response to changing from conventional tillage to no-till.
Number Linear regression
of paired Average Average duration between CT
Crop systems treatments soil depth of experiments Mean increase in SOC and NT‡ Mean C sequestration rate§
cm yr g m ⫺2 g kg C⫺1† g m⫺2 yr⫺1 g kg C⫺1 yr⫺1†
All crop systems 93 22 15 624 ⫾ 157* 147 ⫾ 31 y ⫽ 1.10x ⫹ 158.35 48 ⫾ 13 12 ⫾ 3
All crop systems
(no wheat–fallow)¶ 79 22 14 710 ⫾ 175* 163 ⫾ 35 y ⫽ 1.11x ⫹ 202.73 57 ⫾ 14 14 ⫾ 3
All continuous monocultures 39 21 16 704 ⫾ 274* 169 ⫾ 49 y ⫽ 1.13x ⫹ 145.31 44 ⫾ 14 13 ⫾ 4
All rotations
(no wheat–fallow) 40 22 13 716 ⫾ 233* 156 ⫾ 51 y ⫽ 1.07x ⫹ 357.89 69 ⫾ 25 15 ⫾ 5
All corn systems 35 23 18 812 ⫾ 271* 188 ⫾ 51 y ⫽ 1.01x ⫹ 744.27 55 ⫾ 21 14 ⫾ 5
Continuous corn 14 25 23 932 ⫾ 559* 211 ⫾ 119 y ⫽ 0.97x ⫹ 1090.65 44 ⫾ 27 12 ⫾ 9
Rotation corn 21 23 15 731 ⫾ 300* 173 ⫾ 65 y ⫽ 1.07x ⫹ 426.84 62 ⫾ 32 15 ⫾ 7
Rotation corn
(no corn–soybean)# 10 22 16 603 ⫾ 521* 142 ⫾ 103 y ⫽ 1.14x ⫹ 0.70 32 ⫾ 19 8 ⫾ 4
Corn–soybean rotation 11 23 14 847 ⫾ 402* 200 ⫾ 97 y ⫽ 0.82x ⫹ 1676.70 90 ⫾ 59 21 ⫾ 13
All wheat systems 36 19 14 347 ⫾ 181* 108 ⫾ 47 y ⫽ 1.00x ⫹ 340.22 32 ⫾ 21 9 ⫾ 5
Continuous wheat 10 15 12 293 ⫾ 287* 121 ⫾ 72 y ⫽ 1.15x ⫺ 90.83 25 ⫾ 26 11 ⫾ 7
Rotation wheat
(no wheat–fallow) 12 20 10 630 ⫾ 451* 154 ⫾ 126 y ⫽ 0.95x ⫹ 911.43 74 ⫾ 52 16 ⫾ 13
Wheat–fallow 14 23 19 142 ⫾ 192 59 ⫾ 51 y ⫽ 0.88x ⫹ 600.02 2 ⫾ 19 3 ⫾ 4
All soybean systems 22 22 12 760 ⫾ 325* 173 ⫾ 68 y ⫽ 1.08x ⫹ 384.06 78 ⫾ 38 18 ⫾ 8
Continuous soybean 6 21 10 542 ⫾ 402* 195 ⫾ 144 y ⫽ 0.88x ⫹ 1023.75 61 ⫾ 46 22 ⫾ 16
Rotation soybean 16 22 13 842 ⫾ 439* 165 ⫾ 87 y ⫽ 1.19x ⫺ 143.67 84 ⫾ 52 17 ⫾ 10
Rotation soybean
(no corn–soybean) 6 23 11 790 ⫾ 1210 94 ⫾ 181 y ⫽ 1.4x ⫺ 1467.98 77 ⫾ 121 9 ⫾ 18
* Indicates significant difference between SOC under conventional till (CT) and no-till (NT) at the P ⫽ 0.05 level.
† Represents an increase in SOC per kg SOC, as opposed to SOC per kg soil.
‡ CT and NT are denoted in the regression equations as x and y, respectively.
§ Sequestration rate was calculated as an average of sequestration rates from each experiment, not by division of the mean increase in SOC with the
average duration of experiments.
¶ Wheat–fallow rotations were not shown to sequester a significant amount of C, with a change from CT to NT, and were therefore excluded from
some analyses.
# Since corn–soybean rotations constituted a large part of the rotation corn and rotation soybean categories, these categories were also analyzed with the
exclusion of corn–soybean rotations.

crop–fallow to continuous monoculture or rotation (15 ⫾ 11 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1) on average as did a change
cropping, or increasing the number of crops in a rotation to NT (Table 3). Changing from continuous corn to
system), did not result in sequestering as much SOC a corn–soybean rotation did not result in increased C
Table 3. Soil organic carbon sequestered in response to enhancing crop rotation.†
Number Linear regression
of paired Average Average duration between initial system Mean C
Enhanced crop rotation treatments soil depth of experiments Mean increase in SOC and enhanced rotation§ sequestration rate¶
cm yr g m ⫺2 g kg C⫺1‡ g m⫺2 yr⫺1 g kg C⫺1 yr⫺1‡
All rotations 97 22 25 218 ⫾ 118* 56 ⫾ 24 y ⫽ 0.98x ⫹ 320.12 15 ⫾ 11 4⫾2
All rotations
(no c to c-s)# 85 21 26 293 ⫾ 118* 70 ⫾ 25 y ⫽ 1.00x ⫹ 286.29 20 ⫾ 12 5⫾2
All CT rotations
(no c to c-s) 48 21 28 280 ⫾ 167* 75 ⫾ 40 y ⫽ 0.95x ⫹ 527.84 16 ⫾ 14 4⫾3
All NT rotations
(no c to c-s) 14 25 15 171 ⫾ 377 47 ⫾ 56 y ⫽ 0.93x ⫹ 524.14 26 ⫾ 56 6⫾8
All rotations with grass,
hay, or pasture 18 33 20 538 ⫾ 243* 108 ⫾ 64 y ⫽ 1.02x ⫹ 382.69 19 ⫾ 8 5⫾4
All corn rotations 35 23 30 163 ⫾ 212 58 ⫾ 44 y ⫽ 0.84x ⫹ 1021.40 6 ⫾ 11 2⫾2
All corn rotations
(no c to c-s) 23 22 34 412 ⫾ 209* 97 ⫾ 53 y ⫽ 0.89x ⫹ 966.94 19 ⫾ 11 4⫾2
Continuous corn to
corn-soybean 12 24 21 ⫺311 ⫾ 367 ⫺46 ⫾ 51 y ⫽ 0.77x ⫹ 904.24 ⫺19 ⫾ 19 ⫺3 ⫾ 4
All wheat rotations 32 19 24 271 ⫾ 139* 64 ⫾ 28 y ⫽ 1.10x ⫺ 142.5 27 ⫾ 22 6⫾4
All wheat rotations
(no w-f to cont. w)†† 15 20 20 446 ⫾ 274* 97 ⫾ 50 y ⫽ 1.09x ⫺ 13.83 51 ⫾ 47 11 ⫾ 8
Wheat–fallow to
continuous wheat 11 17 25 104 ⫾ 100* 33 ⫾ 38 y ⫽ 1.02x ⫹ 54.73 6⫾8 2⫾3
All soybean rotations 13 25 11 253 ⫾ 473 57 ⫾ 82 y ⫽ 0.85x ⫹ 1081.52 26 ⫾ 46 6⫾8
* Indicates significant difference between soil organic carbon (SOC) under baseline condition and rotation enhancement at the P ⫽ 0.05 level.
† Consists of changing from monoculture to continuous rotation cropping, crop-fallow to continuous monoculture or rotation cropping, and increasing
the number of crops in a rotation system.
‡ Represents an increase in SOC per kg SOC, as opposed to SOC per kg soil.
§ Initial and enhanced rotation systems are denoted in regression equations by x and y, respectively.
¶ Sequestration rate was calculated as an average of sequestration rates from each experiment, not by division of the mean increase in SOC with the
average duration of experiments.
# A change from continuous corn (c) to corn–soybean (c-s) rotation was not shown to sequester a significant amount of C, and was therefore excluded
from some analyses.
†† A change from wheat–fallow (w-f) to continuous wheat (w) was not shown to sequester a significant amount of C, and was therefore excluded from
some analyses. Treatments with a change from wheat–fallow to non-fallow, wheat rotations were included.
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1942 SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

Fig. 6. The percentage change in annual soil organic C (SOC) seques-

Fig. 4. Comparison of soil organic C (SOC) between initial and en- tration rates under enhanced rotation, relative to monoculture
hanced rotation cropping systems, which include comparisons be- or rotation with a lesser number of crops (see text for further
tween (i) monoculture and continuous rotation, (ii) wheat–fallow explanation). Solid line represents data (solid circles) using a hyper-
and continuous monoculture or rotation cropping, and (iii) rotation bolic decay regression equation (see Eq. [6] in text). Dashed line
with two crops and rotation with three or more crops. This analysis represents the 75% quantile of mean values (open squares) using
includes all rotation enhancement experiments except those involv- a hyperbolic decay regression equation (see Eq. [7] in text).
ing a change from continuous corn to corn–soybean rotation (see
text for explanation). Dashed line indicates 1:1 relationship.
steady-state level than that of CT, and therefore stands
sequestration. Continuous corn generally produces to gain less SOC under a rotation enhancement. This
more residue and C input than a corn–soybean rotation explanation is supported by the observation that SOC
system. The decrease in residue C input may be the accumulation in response to changes in agricultural
cause of lower C sequestration rates or possible SOC management is likely to be greatest on lands with a
loss, as indicated by correlations found between SOC history of intensive cultivation, because soils that have
and soil residue inputs (Clapp et al., 2000; Duiker and lost the most C stand to gain the greatest (see Johnson
Lal, 1999; Rasmussen et al., 1980). An analysis of all et al. 1995).
rotation enhancements, not including a change from Many of the wheat experiments consisted of decreas-
continuous corn to corn–soybean rotations (Fig. 4), re- ing the fallow period (e.g., changing from a wheat–
sulted in a mean C sequestration rate of 20 ⫾ 12 g C fallow rotation to a wheat–wheat–fallow rotation) or
m⫺2 yr⫺1 (Table 3). rotating wheat with one or more different crops (e.g.,
Enhancing rotation complexity, while already using wheat–sunflower [Helianthus annuus L.] or wheat–
NT, did not result in a significant increase in SOC. It legume rotations). These practices appeared to be more
is possible that SOC under NT is closer to a maximum successful in sequestering C (51 ⫾ 47 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1)
than moving from a wheat–fallow rotation to continuous
wheat (6 ⫾ 8 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1). Therefore, while moving
from wheat–fallow to continuous wheat may increase
C residue inputs, it does not appear to increase SOC as
effectively as a continuous cropping system that either
rotates wheat with other crops or reduces the fallow
period.

Duration of Carbon Sequestration

An analysis of the annual rate of change in SOC in
response to a change to NT, reveals that the majority of
SOC change occurs within the first 10- to 15-yr following
implementation of NT (Fig. 5). The highest correlation
(r 2 ⫽ 0.12) between ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and time, using a
traditional nonlinear regression analysis, was obtained
using the following nonlinear regression equation:
192.39
Fig. 5. The percentage change in annual soil organic C (SOC) seques- y⫽ r 2 ⫽ 0.12 [4]
冢
x ⫺ 7.36 2
冣
tration rates under NT, relative to CT. Solid line represents data
(solid circles) using a nonlinear regression equation (see Eq. [4] 1⫹
in text). Dashed line represents the 75% quantile of mean values 1.95
(open squares) using a nonlinear regression equation (see Eq. [5]
in text). A data point at Year 8 and 1236% has been excluded where y is ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and x is the number of years
from the graph, for easier visual interpretation, but was included the land has been in NT. Applying quantile regression
in the analysis. techniques resulted in a higher correlation between
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES 1943

⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and time (r 2 ⫽ 0.92), using the following ment in rotation management. The IPCC provides a
nonlinear regression equation on the 75% quantile of multiplication factor of 1.10, corresponding to a 10%
mean values: increase in SOC, to be used in calculations of C seques-
tration with a change to NT (Houghton et al., 1997).
冤 冢x ⫺1.137.02冣 冥
2
y ⫽ 52.85 ⫹ 313.54 ⫻ exp ⫺0.5 Results from this study indicate that a factor of 1.16
and 1.07 may be more appropriate for a change to NT
r 2 ⫽ 0.92 [5] and an enhancement in rotation complexity, respec-
tively.
where y is ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and x is the number of years Soil C sequestration rates, with a change to NT prac-
the land has been in NT. tices, can be expected to have a delayed response, reach
The correlation between ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and time in peak sequestration rates in 5 to 10 yr, and decline to
response to enhancing rotation complexity (Fig. 6) was near zero in 15 to 20 yr, based on regression analyses
less explicit than that for a reduction in tillage intensity (Fig. 5). This agrees with a review by Lal et al. (1998),
(Fig. 5). This was expected since the average C seques- based on results from Franzluebbers and Arshad (1996),
tration rates for rotation improvements were lower than that there may be little to no increase in SOC in the
those for a reduction in tillage intensity (Tables 2 and 3). first 2 to 5 yr after a change in management practice,
The data for rotation enhancements were more variable but will be followed by a large increase in the next 5 to
than those for a reduction in tillage intensity, and there 10 yr. Campbell et al. (2001b) concluded that wheat
was no indication of a delayed response to sequestering rotation systems in Canada will reach an equilibrium,
SOC. In terms of nonquantile regression analysis, the following a change to NT, after 15 to 20 yr, provided
following hyperbolic decay equation best fit the data that average weather conditions remain constant. Lal
(r 2 ⫽ 0.02): et al. (1998) estimate that rates of C sequestration may
109.82 continue over a period of 25 to 50 yr. While this estimate
y ⫽ 13.07 ⫹ r 2 ⫽ 0.02 [6] does not coincide with our estimates of sequestration
3.07 ⫹ x
duration with a change to NT, the extended C sequestra-
where y is ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and x is the number of years tion projected by Lal et al. (1998) may be consistent
in which an enhanced rotation system has been in use. with projected sequestration rates for an enhancement
The quantile regression technique again resulted in a in rotation complexity (Fig. 6).
higher correlation between ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and time While estimated changes in SOC are due to either an
(r 2 ⫽ 0.30), using the following hyperbolic decay equa- increase in C inputs or a decrease in CO2 efflux from
tion on the 75% quantile of mean changes in C seques- the soil, it is not possible from this study, nor is it the
tration rates: intention, to determine which factor is responsible for
the change in SOC. The position taken here is that all
861.38
y⫽ r 2 ⫽ 0.30 [7] flows of C to and from the soil are inherently accounted
5.92 ⫹ x for by the change in SOC (West and Marland, 2002).
where y is ⌬SOCR% yr⫺1 and x is the number of years in However, it is noted that SOC can be transported by
which an enhanced rotation system has been in use. erosional forces and deposited elsewhere in the water-
With a relatively low correlation coefficient, little can shed. Ignoring displacement and redistribution of SOC
be concluded regarding the duration of C sequestration by erosion may lead to smaller estimates of C sequestra-
rates for improvements in rotation management. How- tion than actually exist.
ever, it can be speculated that while C sequestration Data used in this analysis was stratified separately
rates are lower for an enhancement in rotation complex- with regard to a change in tillage or a change in crop
ity, as compared with a decrease in tillage intensity, the rotation. In practice, these changes could occur simulta-
rate of sequestration may continue for a longer period neously. It can be inferred from our results that if a
of time (苲40–60 yr). decrease in tillage and an enhancement in rotation com-
plexity occur simultaneously, the short-term (苲15–20 yr)
increase in SOC will primarily be caused by the change
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS in tillage and subsequent decrease in the rate of SOC
The results presented here indicate that a change from decomposition, while the long-term (苲40–60 yr) increase
CT to NT can sequester an average 57 ⫾ 14 g C m⫺2 in SOC will be primarily caused by the rotation enhance-
yr⫺1, excluding a change to NT in wheat–fallow systems. ment and subsequent change in residue input and com-
This average value is higher than previous estimates of position.
24 to 40 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1 (Lal et al., 1999) and 10 to 50 g When assessing the potential for C sequestration in
C m⫺2 yr⫺1 (Lal et al., 1998), and is within the higher agricultural soils, it is particularly important to consider
range of values (approximately 10–60 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1) cited the crop rotation being used, in addition to tillage opera-
in a recent review by Follett (2001). An enhancement in tions and inputs to production. Soil C sequestration rates
rotation complexity, with the exception of a change from estimated from this analysis provide increased resolu-
continuous corn to corn–soybean, can sequester an aver- tion over previous analyses because of the disaggrega-
age 20 ⫾ 12 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1. This value is similar to that tion of data by crop type, estimates of sequestration
of 10–30 g C m⫺2 yr⫺1, with an average of 20 g C m⫺2 duration, and the inclusion of confidence intervals. Esti-
yr⫺1, estimated by Lal et al. (1998, 1999) for an improve- mates of C sequestration rates and the delineation of
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1944 SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

rates between cropping systems presented here may Cade, B.S., J.W. Terrell, and R.L. Schroeder. 1999. Estimating effects
of limiting factors with regression quantiles. Ecology 80:311–323.
have a substantial impact on estimates of potential C
Campbell, C.A., V.O. Biederbeck, R.P. Zentner, and G.P. Lafond.
storage at regional and global scales. 1991a. Effect of crop rotations and cultural practices on soil organic
matter, microbial biomass and respiration in a thin Black Cherno-
zem. Can. J. Soil Sci. 71:363–376.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Campbell, C.A., K.E. Bowren, M. Schnitzer, R.P. Zentner, and L.
We thank Con A. Campbell, Warren A. Dick, and Joseph Townley-Smith. 1991b. Effect of crop rotations and fertilization
L. Pikul for sharing unpublished results for use in this analysis; on soil organic matter and some biochemical properties of a thick
Michael Huston and T.J. Blasing for discussions regarding Black Chernozem. Can. J. Soil Sci. 71:377–387.
Campbell, C.A., G.P. Lafond, A.P. Moulin, L. Townley-Smith, and
data analysis; Jesse Miller for initial literature review and data
R.P. Zentner. 1997. Crop production and soil organic matter in
compilation; and three anonymous reviewers. Research per- long-term crop rotations in the sub-humid northern Great Plains
formed as part of the Consortium for Research on Enhancing of Canada. p. 297–315. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic matter
Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Ecosystems, and spon- in temperate agroecosystems—Long-term experiments in North
sored by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science, America. CRC Press, New York.
Biological, and Environmental Research. Oak Ridge National Campbell, C.A., B.G. McConkey, R.P. Zenter, F.B. Dyck, F. Selles,
Laboratory is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the U.S. and D. Curtin. 1995. Carbon sequestration in a Brown Chernozem
Dept. of Energy under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725. as affected by tillage and rotation. Can. J. Soil Sci. 75:449–458.
Campbell, C.A., B.G. McConkey, R.P. Zentner, F. Selles, and D.
Curtin. 1996a. Long-term effects of tillage and crop rotations on
REFERENCES soil organic C and total N in a clay soil in southwestern Saskatche-
Aase, J.K., and J.L. Pikul, Jr. 1995. Crop and soil response to long-term wan. Can. J. Soil Sci. 76:395–401.
tillage practices in the Northern Great Plains. Agron. J. 87:652–656. Campbell, C.A., B.G. McConkey, R.P. Zentner, F. Selles, and D.
Adams, W.A. 1973. The effect of organic matter on the bulk and true Curtin. 1996b. Tillage and crop rotation effects on soil organic C
densities of some uncultivated Podzolic soils. J. Soil Sci. 24:10–17. and N in a coarse-textured Typic Haploboroll in southwestern
Angers, D.A., A. N’dayegamiye, and D. Côté. 1993. Tillage-induced Saskatchewan. Soil Tillage Res. 37:3–14.
differences in organic matter of particle-size fractions and microbial Campbell, C.A., F. Selles, G.P. Lafond, and R.P. Zenter. 2001a. Adopt-
biomass. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57:512–516. ing zero tillage management: impact on soil C and N under long-
Arshad, M.A., M. Schnitzer, D.A. Angers, and J.A. Ripmeester. 1990. term crop rotations in a thin Black Chernozem. Can. J. Soil Sci.
Effects of till vs no-till on the quality of soil organic matter. Soil 81:139–148.
Biol. Biochem. 22:595–599. Campbell, C.A., and R.P. Zentner. 1997. Crop production and soil
Balesdent, J., A. Mariotti, and D. Boisgontier. 1990. Effect of tillage organic matter in long-term crop rotations in the semi-arid North-
on soil organic carbon mineralization estimated from 13C abundance ern Great Plains of Canada. p. 317–334. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.)
in maize fields. J. Soil Sci. 41:587–596. Soil organic matter in temperate agroecosystems—Long-term ex-
Balesdent, J., G.H. Wagner, and A. Mariotti. 1988. Soil organic matter periments in North America. CRC Press, New York.
turnover in long-term field experiments as revealed by carbon-13 Campbell, C.A., R.P. Zentner, F. Selles, B.C. Liang, and B. Blomert.
natural abundance. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52:118–124. 2001b. Evaluation of a simple model to describe carbon accumula-
Ball, B.C., D.J. Campbell, J.T. Douglas, J.K. Henshall, and M.F. O’Sul- tion in a Brown Chernozem under varying fallow frequency. Can.
livan. 1997. Soil structural quality, compaction and land manage- J. Soil Sci. 81:383–394.
ment. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 48:593–601. Chagas, C.I., O.J. Santanatoglia, M.G. Castiglioni, and H.J. Marelli.
Bauer, A., and A.L. Black. 1994. Quantification of the effect of soil 1995. Tillage and cropping effects on selected properties of an
organic matter content on soil productivity. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. argiudoll in Argentina. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 26:643–655.
58:185–193. Chan, K.Y., W.P. Roberts, and D.P. Heenan. 1992. Organic carbon
Bayer, C., J. Mielniczuk, T.J.C. Amado, L. Martin-Neto, and S.V. and associated soil properties of a red earth after 10 years of
Fernandes. 2000. Organic matter storage in a sandy clay loam rotation under different stubble and tillage practices. Aust. J. Soil
Acrisol affected by tillage and cropping systems in southern Brazil. Res. 30:71–83.
Soil Tillage Res. 54:101–109. Chaney, K., D.R. Hodgson, and M.A. Braim. 1985. The effects of
Biederbeck, V.O., C.A. Campbell, and R.P. Zentner. 1984. Effect of direct drilling, shallow cultivation and ploughing on some soil physi-
crop rotation and fertilization on some biological properties of a cal properties in a long-term experiment on spring barley. J. Agric.
loam in southwestern Saskatchewan. Can. J. Soil Sci. 64:355–367. Sci. 194:125–133.
Black, A.L., and D.L. Tanaka. 1997. A conservation tillage-cropping Chen, Y., S. Tessier, and J. Rouffignat. 1998. Soil bulk density esti-
systems study in the Northern Great Plains of the United States. mation for tillage systems and soil textures. Trans. ASAE 41:
p. 335–342. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic matter in temperate 1601–1610.
agroecosystems—Long-term experiments in North America. CRC Clapp, C.E., R.R. Allmaras, M.F. Layese, D.R. Linden, and R.H.
Press, New York. Dowdy. 2000. Soil organic carbon and C-13 abundance as related
Blevins, R.L., M.S. Smith, G.W. Thomas, and W.W. Frye. 1983a. to tillage, crop residue, and nitrogen fertilization under continuous
Influence of conservation tillage on soil properties. J. Soil Water corn management in Minnesota. Soil Tillage Res. 55:127–142.
Conserv. 38:301–305. Dalal, R.C. 1989. Long-term effects of no-tillage, crop residue, and
Blevins, R.L., G.W. Thomas, M.S. Smith, W.W. Frye, and P.L. Corne- nitrogen application on properties of a Vertisol. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
lius. 1983b. Changes in soil properties after 10 years continu- J. 53:1511–1515.
ous non-tilled and conventionally tilled corn. Soil Tillage Res. 3: Dalal, R.C., P.A. Henderson, and J.M. Glasby. 1991. Organic matter
135–146. and microbial biomass in a Vertisol after 20 yr of zero-tillage. Soil
Børreson, T., and A. Njøs. 1993. Ploughing and rotary cultivation Biol. Biochem 23:435–441.
for cereal production in a long-term experiment on a clay soil in Dalal, R.C., W.M. Strong, E.J. Weston, J.E. Cooper, K.J. Lehane,
southeastern Norway: 1. Soil properties. Soil Tillage Res. 28:97–108. A.J. King, and C.J. Chicken. 1995. Sustaining productivity of a
Buyanovsky, G.A., J.R. Brown, and G.H. Wagner. 1997. Sanborn Vertisol at Warra, Queensland, with fertilizers, no-tillage, or le-
Field: Effects of 100 years of cropping on soil parameters influenc- gumes: 1. Organic matter status. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 35:903–913.
ing productivity. p. 205–225. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic Dao, T.H. 1998. Tillage and crop residue effects on carbon dioxide
matter in temperate agroecosystems—Long-term experiments in evolution and carbon storage in a Paleustoll. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
North America. CRC Press, New York. J. 62:250–256.
Buyanovsky, G.A., and G.H. Wagner. 1998. Carbon cycling in cul- Darmondy, R.G., and T.R. Peck. 1997. Soil organic carbon changes
tivated land and its global significance. Global Change Biol. 4: through time at the University of Illinois Morrow plots. p. 161–169.
131–141. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic matter in temperate agroeco-
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
WEST & POST: GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON SEQUESTRATION RATES 1945

systems—Long-term experiments in North America. CRC Press, Zealand: 1. A comparison of some soil properties. Soil Tillage
New York. Res. 22:131–143.
Davidson, E.A., and I.L. Ackerman. 1993. Changes in soil carbon Hossain, S.A., R.C. Dalal, S.A. Waring, W.M. Strong, and E.J. Weston.
inventories following cultivation of previously untilled soils. Bio- 1996. Comparison of legume-based cropping systems at Warra,
geochemistry 20:161–193. Queensland: I. Soil nitrogen and organic carbon accretion and
Deibert, E.J., and R.A. Utter. 1989. Growth and NPK uptake by potentially mineralisable nitrogen. Aust. J. Soil Res. 34:273–287.
soybean cultivars in northern U.S.A. under reduced tillage systems. Houghton, J.T., L.G. Meira Filho, B. Lim, K. Tréanton, I. Mamaty,
Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:1101–1111. Y. Bonduki, D.J. Griggs, and B.A. Callander (ed.). 1997. Revised
Dick, W.A. 1983. Organic carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus concen- 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventor-
trations and pH in soil profiles as affected by tillage intensity. Soil ies. Volumes 1–3. Hadley Centre Meteorological Office, United
Sci. Soc. Am. J. 47:102–107. Kingdom.
Dick, W.A., W.M. Edwards, and E.L. McCoy. 1997. Continuous appli- Hunt, P.G., D.L. Karlen, T.A. Matheny, and V.L. Quisenberry. 1996.
cation of no-tillage to Ohio soils: Changes in crop yields and organic Changes in carbon content of a Norfolk loamy sand after 14 years
matter-related soil properties. p. 171–182. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) of conservation or conventional tillage. J. Soil Water Conserv.
Soil organic matter in temperate agroecosystems—Long-term ex- 51:255–258.
periments in North America. CRC Press, New York. Hussain, I., K.R. Olson, and S.A. Ebelhar. 1999. Long-term tillage
Dickey, E.C., P.J. Jasa, and R.D. Grisso. 1994. Long term tillage effects on soil chemical properties and organic matter fractions.
effects on grain yield and soil properties in a soybean/grain sorghum Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63:1335–1341.
rotation. J. Prod. Agric. 7:465–470. Hussain, I., K.R. Olson, and J.C. Siemens. 1998. Long-term tillage
Doran, J.W., E.T. Elliott, and K. Paustian. 1998. Soil microbial activity, effects on physical properties of eroded soils. Soil Sci. 163:970–981.
nitrogen cycling, and long-term changes in organic pools as related Huston, M.A. 2001. Critical issues for improving predictions. p. 7–21.
to fallow tillage management. Soil Tillage Res. 49:3–18. In J.M. Scott et al. (ed.) Predicting species occurrences: Issues of
Duiker, S.W., and R. Lal. 1999. Crop residue and tillage effects on accuracy and scale. Island Press, Covelo, CA.
carbon sequestration in a Luvisol in central Ohio. Soil Tillage Ismail, I., R.L. Blevins, and W.W. Frye. 1994. Long-term no-tillage
Res. 52:73–81. effects on soil properties and continuous corn yields. Soil Sci. Soc.
Dumanski, J., R.L. Desjardins, C. Tarnocai, D. Monreal, E.G. Gre- Am. J. 58:193–198.
gorich, V. Kirkwood, and C.A. Campbell. 1998. Possibilities for Janzen, H.H. 1987. Soil organic matter characteristics after long-term
future carbon sequestration in Canadian agriculture in relation to cropping to various spring wheat rotations. Can. J. Soil Sci. 67:
845–856.
land use changes. Clim. Change 40:81–103.
Janzen, H.H., A.M. Johnston, J.M. Carefoot, and C.W. Lindwall. 1997.
Edwards, J.H., C.W. Wood, D.L. Thrulow, and M.E. Ruf. 1992. Tillage
Soil organic matter dynamics in long-term experiments in Southern
and crop rotation effects on fertility status of a Hapludult soil. Soil
Alberta. p. 283–296. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic matter
Sci. Soc. Am. J. 56:1577–1582.
in temperate agroecosystems—Long-term experiments in North
Entry, J.A., C.C. Mitchell, and C.B. Backman. 1996. Influence of
America. CRC Press, New York.
management practices on soil organic matter, microbial biomass
Johnson, M.G., E.R. Levine, and J.S. Kern. 1995. Soil organic matter:
and cotton yield in Alabama’s “Old Rotation”. Biol. Fertil. Soils
Distribution, genesis, and management to reduce greenhouse gas
23:353–358.
emissions. Water Air Soil Pollut. 82:593–615.
Eve, M.D., K. Paustian, R. Follett, and E.T. Elliott. 2001. A national
Karlen, D.L., W.R. Berti, P.G. Hunt, and T.A. Matheny. 1989. Soil-
inventory of changes in soil carbon from national resources inven-
test values after eight years of tillage research on a Norfolk sandy
tory data. p. 593–610. In R. Lal, J.M. Kimble, R.F. Follett, and loam. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 20:1413–1426.
B.A. Stewart (ed.) Assessment methods for soil carbon. Lewis Kern, J.S., and M.G. Johnson. 1993. Conservation tillage impacts on
Publishers, New York. national soil and atmospheric carbon levels. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
Fettell, N.A., and H.S. Gill. 1995. Long-term effects of tillage, stubble, J. 57:200–210.
and nitrogen management on properties of a red-brown earth. Kitur, B.K., S.R. Phillips, K.R. Olson, and S.A. Ebelhar. 1994. Tillage
Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 35:923–928. effects on selected chemical properties of Grantsburg silt loam.
Follett, R.F. 2001. Soil management concepts and carbon sequestra- Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 25:225–246.
tion in cropland soils. Soil Tillage Res. 61:77–92. Kladivko, E.J., D.R. Griffith, and J.V. Mannering. 1986. Conservation
Francis, G.S., and T.L. Knight. 1993. Long-term effects of conventional tillage effects on soil properties and yield of corn and soya beans
and no-tillage on selected soil properties and crop yields in Canter- in Indiana. Soil Tillage Res. 8:277–287.
bury, New Zealand. Soil Tillage Res. 26:193–210. Koenker, R., and G.W. Bassett. 1978. Regression quantiles. Econo-
Franzluebbers, A.J., and M.A. Arshad. 1996. Soil organic matter pools metrica 46:33–50.
during early adoption of conservation tillage in northwestern Can- Koenker, R., and B.J. Park. 1996. An interior point algorithm for
ada. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 60:1422–1427. nonlinear quantile regression. J. Econometrics 71:265–283.
Gregorich, E.G., C.F. Drury, and J.A. Baldock. 2001. Changes in soil Lal, R., R.F., Follett, J. Kimble, and C.V. Cole. 1999. Managing U.S.
carbon under long-term maize in monoculture and legume-based cropland to sequester carbon in soil. J. Soil Water Conserv. 54:
rotation. Can. J. Soil Sci. 81:21–31. 374–381.
Havlin, J.L., and D.E. Kissel. 1997. Management effects on soil organic Lal, R., J. Kimble, and R. Follett. 1997. Soil quality management for
carbon and nitrogen in the east-central Great Plains of Kansas. p. carbon sequestration. p. 1–8. In R. Lal et al. (ed.) Soil properties
381–386. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic matter in temperate and their management for carbon sequestration. United States
agroecosystems—Long-term experiments in North America. CRC Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Ser-
Press, New York. vices, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE.
Havlin, J.L., D.E. Kissel, L.D. Maddux, M.M. Claassen, and J.H. Lal, R., J.M. Kimble, R.F. Follett, and C.V. Cole. 1998. The potential
Long. 1990. Crop rotation and tillage effects on soil organic carbon of U.S. cropland to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse
and nitrogen. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54:448–452. effect. Sleeping Bear Press, Chelsea, MI.
Hendrix, P.F. 1997. Long-term patterns of plant production and soil Lal, R., A.A. Mahboubi, and N.R. Fausey. 1994. Long-term tillage
carbon dynamics in a Georgia Piedmont Agoecosystem. p. 235–245. and rotation effects on properties of a central Ohio soil. Soil Sci.
In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic matter in temperate agroeco- Soc. Am. J. 58:517–522.
systems—Long-term experiments in North America. CRC Press, Lesoing, G.W. and J.W. Doran. 1997. Crop rotation, manure, and
New York. agricultural chemical effects on dryland crop yield and SOM over
Hermawan, B., and K.C. Cameron. 1993. Structural changes in a silt 16 years in Eastern Nebraska. p. 197–204. In E.A. Paul et al.
loam under long-term conventional or minimum tillage. Soil Tillage (ed.) Soil organic matter in temperate agroecosystems—Long-term
Res. 26:139–150. experiments in North America. CRC Press, New York.
Horne, D.J., C.W. Ross, and K.A. Hughes. 1992. Ten years of a maize/ Lyon, D.J., C.A. Monz, R.E. Brown, and A.K. Metherell. 1997. Soil
oats rotation under three tillage systems on a silt loam in New organic matter changes over two decades of winter wheat-fallow
 14350661, 2002, 6, Downloaded from [Link] by Universidade Estadual Paulista, Wiley Online Library on [24/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1946 SOIL SCI. SOC. AM. J., VOL. 66, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

cropping in Western Nebraska. p. 343–351. In E.A. Paul et al. C in long-term management systems in Texas. Soil Tillage Res.
(ed.) Soil organic matter in temperate agroecosystems—Long-term 47:309–321.
experiments in North America. CRC Press, New York. Rasmussen, P.E., R.R. Allmaras, C.R. Rohde, and N.C. Roager. 1980.
Mahboubi, A.A., R. Lal, and N.R. Faussey. 1993. Twenty-eight years Crop residue influences on soil carbon and nitrogen in a wheat-
of tillage effects on two soils in Ohio. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57: fallow system. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44:596–600.
506–512. Rasmussen, P.E., and C.R. Rohde. 1988. Long-term tillage and nitro-
Mann, L.K. 1986. Changes in soil carbon storage after cultivation. gen fertilization effects on organic nitrogen and carbon in a semiarid
Soil Sci. 142:279–288. soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52:1114–1117.
Marland, G., K. Fruit, and R. Sedjo. 2001a. Accounting for seques- Rasmussen, P.E., and R.W. Smiley. 1997. Soil carbon and nitrogen
tered carbon: The question of permanence. Environ. Sci. Policy change in long-term agricultural experiments at Pendleton, Oregon.
4:259–268. p. 353–360. In E.A. Paul et al. (ed.) Soil organic matter in temperate
agroecosystems—Long-term experiments in North America. CRC
Marland, G., B.A. McCarl, and U. Schneider. 2001b. Soil carbon:
Press, New York.
Policy and economics. Clim. Change 51:101–117. Reeves, D.W. 1997. The role of soil organic matter in maintaining
Mielke, L.N., J.W. Doran, and K.A. Richards. 1986. Physical environ- soil quality in continuous cropping systems. Soil Tillage Res. 43:
ment near the surface of plowed and no-tilled soils. Soil Tillage 131–167.
Res. 7:355–366. Rhoton, F.E. 2000. Influence of time on soil response to no-till prac-
Miglierina, A.M., J.O. Iglesias, M.R. Landriscini, J.A. Galantini, and tices. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 64:700–709.
R.A. Rosell. 2000. The effects of crop rotation and fertilization on Robinson, C.A., R.M. Cruse, and M. Ghaffarzadeh. 1996. Cropping
wheat productivity in the Pampean semiarid region of Argentina: 1. system and nitrogen effects on Mollisol organic carbon. Soil Sci.
Soil physical and chemical properties. Soil Tillage Res. 53:129–135. Soc. Am. J. 60:264–269.
Miller, J.J., F.J. Larney, and C.W. Lindwall. 1999. Physical properties Sampson, R.N., and R.J. Scholes. 2000. Additional human-induced
of a Chernozemic clay loam soil under long-term conventional activities Article 3.4. p. 181–281. In R.T. Watson et al. (ed.) Land
tillage and no-till. Can. J. Soil Sci. 79:325–331. use, land-use change, and forestry: A special report of the Intergov-
Minitab. 1999. Minitab user’s guide 2: Data analysis and quality tests. ernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press,
Minitab, State College, PA. New York.
Mitchell, C.C., F.J. Arriaga, J.A. Entry, J.L. Novak, W.R. Goodman, Silver, W.L., R. Osterlag, and A.E. Lugo. 2000. The potential for
D.W. Reeves, M.W. Runge, and G.J. Traxler. 1996. The Old Rota- carbon sequestration through reforestation of abandoned tropical
tion, 1896–1996 100 Years of Sustainable Cropping Research. Ala- agricultural and pasture lands. Restor. Ecol. 8:394–407.
bama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, AL. Smith, P., D.S. Powlson, M.J. Glendining, and J.U. Smith. 1998. Pre-
Mitchell, C.C., W. Reeves, and M.D. Hubbs. 2000. The Old Rotation liminary estimates of the potential for carbon mitigation in Euro-
1996–1999. Agronomy and Soils Departmental Series Number 228. pean soils through no-till farming. Global Change Biol. 4:679–685.
Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, AL. Soane, B.D., and B.C. Ball. 1998. Review of management and conduct
of long-term tillage studies with special reference to a 25-yr experi-
Monreal, C.M., and H.H. Janzen. 1993. Soil organic-carbon dynamics
ment on barley in Scotland. Soil Tillage Res. 45:17–37.
after 80 years of cropping a Dark Brown Chernozem. Can. J. Soil
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil Survey Manual. United States
Sci. 73:133–136. Department of Agriculture, Handbook no. 18. U.S. Gov. Print.
Odell, R.T., S.W. Melsted, and W.M. Walker. 1984. Changes in organic Off., Washington, DC.
carbon and nitrogen of Morrow plow soils under different treat- SPSS. 1997. Sigma Plot for windows, version 4.00. SPSS, Chicago, IL.
ments, 1904–1973. Soil Sci. 137:160–171. Studdert, G.A., and H.E. Echeverrı́a. 2000. Crop rotations and nitro-
Paustian, K., O. Andrén, H.H. Janzen, R. Lal, P. Smith, G. Tian, H. gen fertilization to manage soil organic carbon dynamics. Soil Sci.
Tiessen, M. Van Noordwijk, and P.L. Woomer. 1997. Agricultural Soc. Am. J. 64:1496–1503.
soils as a sink to mitigate CO2 emissions. Soil Use Manage. 13: Tebrügge, F., and R.-A. Düring. 1999. Reducing tillage intensity—A
230–244. review of results from a long-term study in Germany. Soil Tillage
Paustian, K., J. Six, E.T. Elliott, and H.W. Hunt. 2000. Management Res. 53:15–28.
options for reducing CO2 emissions from agricultural soils. Bio- Uhlen, G. 1991. Long-term effects of fertilizers, manure, straw and
geochemistry 48:147–163. crop rotation on total-N and total-C in soil. Acta Agric. Scand.
Pikul, J.L. Jr., and J.K. Aase. 1995. Infiltration and soil properties as 41:119–127.
affected by annual cropping in the Northern Great Plains. Agron. Varvel, G.E. 1994. Rotation and nitrogen fertilization effects on
J. 87:656–662. changes in soil carbon and nitrogen. Agron. J. 86:319–325.
West, T.O., and G. Marland. 2002. Net carbon flux from agricultural
Post, W.M., and K.C. Kwon. 2000. Soil carbon sequestration and
ecosystems: Methodology for full carbon cycle analyses. Environ.
land-use change: Processes and potential. Global Change Biol. 6: Pollut. 116:437–442.
317–327. Wood, C.W., and J.H. Edwards. 1992. Agroecosystem management
Potter, K.N., O.R. Jones, H.A. Torbert, and P.W. Unger. 1997. Crop effects on soil carbon and nitrogen. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 39:
rotation and tillage effects on organic carbon sequestration in the 123–138.
semiarid southern great plains. Soil Sci. 162:140–146. Yang, X.M., and M.M. Wander. 1999. Tillage effects on soil organic
Potter, K.N., H.A. Torbert, O.R. Jones, J.E. Matocha, J.E. Morrison, carbon distribution and storage in a silt loam soil in Illinois. Soil
Jr., and P.W. Unger. 1998. Distribution and amount of soil organic Tillage Res. 52:1–9.