William Brinton, Bruno Basso, Neville Millar, Kris Covey, Charles Bettigo, Sindhu Jagadamma, Frank Loeffler
{"title":"An inter-laboratory comparison of soil organic carbon analysis on a farm with four agricultural management systems","authors":"William Brinton, Bruno Basso, Neville Millar, Kris Covey, Charles Bettigo, Sindhu Jagadamma, Frank Loeffler","doi":"10.1002/agj2.70018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Soil organic carbon (SOC) as a key soil health indicator is integral to the soil's capacity to function as a vital living ecosystem that sustains plants, animals, and humans. Accurate SOC estimation is essential to decision-making for an increasing number of stakeholders, such as farmers, industry professionals, and policymakers, to determine the environmental benefit of agricultural practices, and more recently, allocate financial rewards through carbon market initiatives. Our study examined SOC variability in soils from four different regenerative management systems on a single farm using stratification and sample compositing, and analyzed by four different laboratories using dry combustion, the recommended analytical method, but one which varied according to laboratory standard operating procedures (SOP). Results showed significant variation in SOC levels for the same soil samples at different laboratories (1.6 ± 0.2 g kg<sup>−1</sup>), variation comparable to that between the distinct management systems (1.5 ± 0.4 g kg<sup>−1</sup>). Our findings show that analytical variability within and between laboratories must be considered, that use of the same laboratory, and to the extent possible the same SOP for successive SOC measurements at the same location is necessary, and that rigorous stratification alongside minimal sample consolidation should be conducted to generate analytical sample numbers that cater to logistics, economics, and scientific rigor.</p>","PeriodicalId":7522,"journal":{"name":"Agronomy Journal","volume":"117 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/agj2.70018","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agronomy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/agj2.70018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Soil organic carbon (SOC) as a key soil health indicator is integral to the soil's capacity to function as a vital living ecosystem that sustains plants, animals, and humans. Accurate SOC estimation is essential to decision-making for an increasing number of stakeholders, such as farmers, industry professionals, and policymakers, to determine the environmental benefit of agricultural practices, and more recently, allocate financial rewards through carbon market initiatives. Our study examined SOC variability in soils from four different regenerative management systems on a single farm using stratification and sample compositing, and analyzed by four different laboratories using dry combustion, the recommended analytical method, but one which varied according to laboratory standard operating procedures (SOP). Results showed significant variation in SOC levels for the same soil samples at different laboratories (1.6 ± 0.2 g kg−1), variation comparable to that between the distinct management systems (1.5 ± 0.4 g kg−1). Our findings show that analytical variability within and between laboratories must be considered, that use of the same laboratory, and to the extent possible the same SOP for successive SOC measurements at the same location is necessary, and that rigorous stratification alongside minimal sample consolidation should be conducted to generate analytical sample numbers that cater to logistics, economics, and scientific rigor.
土壤有机碳(SOC)作为一项关键的土壤健康指标,是土壤作为维持植物、动物和人类生存的重要生态系统功能的组成部分。准确的SOC估算对于越来越多的利益相关者(如农民、行业专业人士和政策制定者)的决策至关重要,以确定农业实践的环境效益,以及最近通过碳市场倡议分配经济奖励。本研究采用分层和样品合成的方法,对单个农场4种不同再生管理系统土壤的有机碳变化进行了研究,并在4个不同的实验室使用干燃烧分析方法进行了分析,干燃烧是推荐的分析方法,但根据实验室标准操作程序(SOP)进行了不同的分析。结果表明,同一土壤样品在不同实验室的有机碳含量差异显著(1.6±0.2 g kg - 1),与不同管理制度之间的差异相当(1.5±0.4 g kg - 1)。我们的研究结果表明,必须考虑实验室内部和实验室之间的分析可变性,必须使用同一实验室,并尽可能在同一地点对连续的SOC测量使用相同的SOP,并且应该进行严格的分层和最小的样品合并,以产生符合物流,经济和科学严谨性的分析样品数量。
期刊介绍:
After critical review and approval by the editorial board, AJ publishes articles reporting research findings in soil–plant relationships; crop science; soil science; biometry; crop, soil, pasture, and range management; crop, forage, and pasture production and utilization; turfgrass; agroclimatology; agronomic models; integrated pest management; integrated agricultural systems; and various aspects of entomology, weed science, animal science, plant pathology, and agricultural economics as applied to production agriculture.
Notes are published about apparatus, observations, and experimental techniques. Observations usually are limited to studies and reports of unrepeatable phenomena or other unique circumstances. Review and interpretation papers are also published, subject to standard review. Contributions to the Forum section deal with current agronomic issues and questions in brief, thought-provoking form. Such papers are reviewed by the editor in consultation with the editorial board.