Carbon farming practices for European cropland: A review on the effect on soil organic carbon

IF 6.1 1区 农林科学 Q1 SOIL SCIENCE
Tashina Petersson , Gabriele Antoniella , Lucia Perugini , Maria Vincenza Chiriacò , Tommaso Chiti
{"title":"Carbon farming practices for European cropland: A review on the effect on soil organic carbon","authors":"Tashina Petersson ,&nbsp;Gabriele Antoniella ,&nbsp;Lucia Perugini ,&nbsp;Maria Vincenza Chiriacò ,&nbsp;Tommaso Chiti","doi":"10.1016/j.still.2024.106353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Carbon farming has been recently proposed as an effective measure for climate change mitigation through carbon (C) sequestration or C emissions reduction. In order to identify and estimate the climate change mitigation potential of carbon farming practices on European croplands we conduct a systematic review on both relative and absolute annual soil organic carbon (SOC) stock change (ΔSOC<sub>REL;</sub> ΔSOC<sub>ABS</sub>) related to single and combined agroecological practices tested on mineral soils at a minimum of 0–30 cm and up to 150 cm soil depth whenever data were available. We used the term ΔSOC<sub>REL</sub> for SOC stock changes determined by the paired comparison method and the term ΔSOC<sub>ABS</sub> for those calculated using the SOC stock difference method. We compiled a dataset with more than 700 records on SOC change rates representing 12 carbon farming practices. Mean ΔSOC<sub>REL</sub> in Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup> at 0–30 cm soil depth were collected for cover crops (0.40 ± 0.32), organic amendments (0.52 ± 0.47 and 0.38 ± 0.37 when the control is respectively unfertilized or liquid organic amendment), crop residue maintenance (0.14 ± 0.06), improved rotations (0.21 ± 0.16), reduced soil disturbance (0.24 ± 0.34), silvoarable systems (0.21 ± 0.08), organic (0.9 Mg ± 0.25) and conservation management (0.78 ± 0.62), set-aside (0.75 ± 0.68 and −0.39 ± 0.50 when the control is respectively cropland or pasture/grassland), cropland conversion into permanent grassland (0.79 ± 0.47), poplar plantations (0.25 ± 0.68 and −0.85 ± 0.53 when established on cropland or pasture/grassland). SOC sequestration was detected only for organic amendments, cover crops, poplar plantations, conservation management, organic management, and combined carbon farming practices for which we estimated a median ΔSOC<sub>ABS</sub> ranging between 0.32 and 0.96 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup> at 0–30 cm. The ΔSOC<sub>ABS</sub> observed at 0–30 cm soil depth from cropland conversion into short rotation forestry resulted in an increase of C, while negative values were observed when the control was grassland. Cropland conversion into permanent grassland or pasture showed positive ΔSOC<sub>REL</sub> at 0–30 and 0–90 and 0–100 cm soil depth. Reduced soil disturbance full soil profile assessment at 0–50 cm soil depth completely counterweighted any SOC stock increase found in topsoil at 0–30 and 0–40 cm soil depth, therefore resulting in no net climate benefit. Conservation management, organic management, and combining cover crops with organic amendments are the most effective strategies shifting arable land from C source to net sink, with median ΔSOC<sub>ABS</sub> at 0–30 cm soil depth of 0.63, 0.91 and 0.96 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup>, respectively. Permanent grasslands and pastures were negatively affected by any type of land-use change, at least in topsoil. Natural ecological successions after cropland abandonment (20-year set-aside), or arable land conversion into poplar plantations and grassland promote relative SOC stock annual increase by 1.08, 0.77 and 0.33 at 0–30 cm respectively, while the net climate benefit remains unclear when subsoils are assessed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49503,"journal":{"name":"Soil & Tillage Research","volume":"247 ","pages":"Article 106353"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soil & Tillage Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198724003544","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Carbon farming has been recently proposed as an effective measure for climate change mitigation through carbon (C) sequestration or C emissions reduction. In order to identify and estimate the climate change mitigation potential of carbon farming practices on European croplands we conduct a systematic review on both relative and absolute annual soil organic carbon (SOC) stock change (ΔSOCREL; ΔSOCABS) related to single and combined agroecological practices tested on mineral soils at a minimum of 0–30 cm and up to 150 cm soil depth whenever data were available. We used the term ΔSOCREL for SOC stock changes determined by the paired comparison method and the term ΔSOCABS for those calculated using the SOC stock difference method. We compiled a dataset with more than 700 records on SOC change rates representing 12 carbon farming practices. Mean ΔSOCREL in Mg C ha−1 yr−1 at 0–30 cm soil depth were collected for cover crops (0.40 ± 0.32), organic amendments (0.52 ± 0.47 and 0.38 ± 0.37 when the control is respectively unfertilized or liquid organic amendment), crop residue maintenance (0.14 ± 0.06), improved rotations (0.21 ± 0.16), reduced soil disturbance (0.24 ± 0.34), silvoarable systems (0.21 ± 0.08), organic (0.9 Mg ± 0.25) and conservation management (0.78 ± 0.62), set-aside (0.75 ± 0.68 and −0.39 ± 0.50 when the control is respectively cropland or pasture/grassland), cropland conversion into permanent grassland (0.79 ± 0.47), poplar plantations (0.25 ± 0.68 and −0.85 ± 0.53 when established on cropland or pasture/grassland). SOC sequestration was detected only for organic amendments, cover crops, poplar plantations, conservation management, organic management, and combined carbon farming practices for which we estimated a median ΔSOCABS ranging between 0.32 and 0.96 Mg C ha−1 yr−1 at 0–30 cm. The ΔSOCABS observed at 0–30 cm soil depth from cropland conversion into short rotation forestry resulted in an increase of C, while negative values were observed when the control was grassland. Cropland conversion into permanent grassland or pasture showed positive ΔSOCREL at 0–30 and 0–90 and 0–100 cm soil depth. Reduced soil disturbance full soil profile assessment at 0–50 cm soil depth completely counterweighted any SOC stock increase found in topsoil at 0–30 and 0–40 cm soil depth, therefore resulting in no net climate benefit. Conservation management, organic management, and combining cover crops with organic amendments are the most effective strategies shifting arable land from C source to net sink, with median ΔSOCABS at 0–30 cm soil depth of 0.63, 0.91 and 0.96 Mg C ha−1 yr−1, respectively. Permanent grasslands and pastures were negatively affected by any type of land-use change, at least in topsoil. Natural ecological successions after cropland abandonment (20-year set-aside), or arable land conversion into poplar plantations and grassland promote relative SOC stock annual increase by 1.08, 0.77 and 0.33 at 0–30 cm respectively, while the net climate benefit remains unclear when subsoils are assessed.
欧洲耕地碳耕作法:回顾对土壤有机碳的影响
最近,碳耕法被认为是通过固碳或减少碳排放来减缓气候变化的有效措施。为了确定和估算欧洲耕地碳汇耕作法的气候变化减缓潜力,我们对在矿质土壤上测试的单一和组合农业生态学实践的相对和绝对年度土壤有机碳(SOC)储量变化(ΔSOCREL;ΔSOCABS)进行了系统性回顾,只要有数据可用,最小测试深度为 0-30 厘米,最大测试深度为 150 厘米。我们用 ΔSOCREL 表示通过配对比较法确定的 SOC 储量变化,用 ΔSOCABS 表示通过 SOC 储量差异法计算的 SOC 储量变化。我们编制了一个包含 700 多条 SOC 变化率记录的数据集,代表了 12 种碳耕作法。以 Mg C ha-1 yr-1 为单位收集了 0-30 厘米土壤深度的平均 ΔSOCREL 值,分别为覆盖作物(0.40 ± 0.32)、有机添加剂(0.52 ± 0.47 和 0.38 ± 0.37,对照分别为未施肥或液体有机添加剂)、作物残茬维护(0.14 ± 0.06)、改良轮作(0.21 ± 0.16)、减少土壤扰动(0.24 ± 0.34)、可青贮系统(0.21 ± 0.08)、有机管理(0.9 兆克 ± 0.25)和保护管理(0.78 ± 0.62)、退耕(0.75 ± 0.68 和 -0.39 ± 0.50,当对照分别为耕地或牧场/草地时)、耕地转化为永久草地(0.79 ± 0.47)、杨树种植园(0.25 ± 0.68 和 -0.85 ± 0.53,当建立在耕地或牧场/草地上时)。只有在有机改良剂、覆盖作物、杨树种植、保护性管理、有机管理和综合碳耕作法中检测到 SOC 固碳,我们估计这些方法在 0-30 厘米处的ΔSOCABS 中值介于 0.32 和 0.96 兆克 C ha-1 yr-1 之间。在 0-30 厘米土壤深度观测到的ΔSOCABS 值中,耕地转化为短轮伐林的结果是碳增加,而对照为草地时则为负值。耕地转化为永久草地或牧场后,0-30、0-90 和 0-100 厘米土壤深度的 ΔSOCREL 均为正值。在 0-50 厘米土层深度,土壤扰动的减少完全抵消了 0-30 厘米和 0-40 厘米土层深度表土中 SOC 储量的增加,因此没有产生净气候效益。保护性管理、有机管理以及将覆盖作物与有机添加剂相结合是将耕地从碳源转变为净汇的最有效策略,0-30 厘米土壤深度的ΔSOCABS 中值分别为 0.63、0.91 和 0.96 兆克碳/公顷/年。任何类型的土地利用变化都会对永久草地和牧场产生不利影响,至少在表土层是如此。耕地废弃后的自然生态演替(20 年预留),或耕地转化为杨树种植园和草地后,0-30 厘米处的相对 SOC 储量年增长率分别为 1.08、0.77 和 0.33,而在评估底土时,气候净效益仍不明确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Soil & Tillage Research
Soil & Tillage Research 农林科学-土壤科学
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
266
审稿时长
5 months
期刊介绍: Soil & Tillage Research examines the physical, chemical and biological changes in the soil caused by tillage and field traffic. Manuscripts will be considered on aspects of soil science, physics, technology, mechanization and applied engineering for a sustainable balance among productivity, environmental quality and profitability. The following are examples of suitable topics within the scope of the journal of Soil and Tillage Research: The agricultural and biosystems engineering associated with tillage (including no-tillage, reduced-tillage and direct drilling), irrigation and drainage, crops and crop rotations, fertilization, rehabilitation of mine spoils and processes used to modify soils. Soil change effects on establishment and yield of crops, growth of plants and roots, structure and erosion of soil, cycling of carbon and nutrients, greenhouse gas emissions, leaching, runoff and other processes that affect environmental quality. Characterization or modeling of tillage and field traffic responses, soil, climate, or topographic effects, soil deformation processes, tillage tools, traction devices, energy requirements, economics, surface and subsurface water quality effects, tillage effects on weed, pest and disease control, and their interactions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信