Helen M. Hughes , Shelby C. McClelland , Meagan E. Schipanski , Jonathan Hillier
{"title":"温带地区覆盖作物对土壤C影响的模拟","authors":"Helen M. Hughes , Shelby C. McClelland , Meagan E. Schipanski , Jonathan Hillier","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103663","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><p>Agricultural land management decisions are based on numerous considerations. Belowground carbon (C) storage for both ecosystem health and greenhouse gas (GHG) management is a growing motivation. Observed heterogeneity in soil C storage in croplands may be driven by various environmental, climatic and management factors. Farm system models can indicate which practices will drive C storage, provided the practice is well parameterised and the land manager can provide necessary input data.</p></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><p>We aimed to predict soil C impacts of temperate cover cropping using simple models suitable for broad farmer use and decision support.</p></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><p>The dataset used was initially compiled for a meta-analysis (<span>McClelland et al., 2021</span>) to quantify soil C response to cover crop treatments relative to a non-cover cropped system. It contains 181 data points from 40 existing studies in temperate climates. Environmental, climatic and management indicators were regressed pairwise to predict annual soil C stock change under cover cropping relative to no cover cropping. We also included the IPCC tier 1 methodology and meta-analysis response ratios in our model comparison.</p><p>The ease of reliable measurement and monitoring across the modelled indicators was also considered because the best-correlated relationships are squandered if data constraints risk decision-makers being unable to use the model.</p></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><p>Using an extended test dataset to consider priorities for model users, several regression models outperformed the IPCC tier 1 methodology. In particular, two regression models reliably predicted negative changes in soil C, which IPCC and meta-analysis factor approaches could not. A single variable regression model based on cover crop biomass (dry matter) production was the best combination of statistical power, biological relevance and parsimony. In temperate climates, we predicted an increase in soil C stocks as long as cover crop biomass production exceeded 1.3 Mg ha<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup>.</p></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><p>Our final model can be applied with estimated user input data, and avoids the need for baseline soil C as an input; this makes it relatively accessible for farmers. Parsimonious models for soil C change under land management practices can be effective and are an opportunity to increase access to soil C management information for farmers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"209 ","pages":"Article 103663"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modelling the soil C impacts of cover crops in temperate regions\",\"authors\":\"Helen M. Hughes , Shelby C. McClelland , Meagan E. Schipanski , Jonathan Hillier\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103663\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><p>Agricultural land management decisions are based on numerous considerations. Belowground carbon (C) storage for both ecosystem health and greenhouse gas (GHG) management is a growing motivation. Observed heterogeneity in soil C storage in croplands may be driven by various environmental, climatic and management factors. Farm system models can indicate which practices will drive C storage, provided the practice is well parameterised and the land manager can provide necessary input data.</p></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><p>We aimed to predict soil C impacts of temperate cover cropping using simple models suitable for broad farmer use and decision support.</p></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><p>The dataset used was initially compiled for a meta-analysis (<span>McClelland et al., 2021</span>) to quantify soil C response to cover crop treatments relative to a non-cover cropped system. It contains 181 data points from 40 existing studies in temperate climates. Environmental, climatic and management indicators were regressed pairwise to predict annual soil C stock change under cover cropping relative to no cover cropping. We also included the IPCC tier 1 methodology and meta-analysis response ratios in our model comparison.</p><p>The ease of reliable measurement and monitoring across the modelled indicators was also considered because the best-correlated relationships are squandered if data constraints risk decision-makers being unable to use the model.</p></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><p>Using an extended test dataset to consider priorities for model users, several regression models outperformed the IPCC tier 1 methodology. In particular, two regression models reliably predicted negative changes in soil C, which IPCC and meta-analysis factor approaches could not. A single variable regression model based on cover crop biomass (dry matter) production was the best combination of statistical power, biological relevance and parsimony. In temperate climates, we predicted an increase in soil C stocks as long as cover crop biomass production exceeded 1.3 Mg ha<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup>.</p></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><p>Our final model can be applied with estimated user input data, and avoids the need for baseline soil C as an input; this makes it relatively accessible for farmers. Parsimonious models for soil C change under land management practices can be effective and are an opportunity to increase access to soil C management information for farmers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7730,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Systems\",\"volume\":\"209 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103663\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X23000689\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Systems","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X23000689","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Modelling the soil C impacts of cover crops in temperate regions
CONTEXT
Agricultural land management decisions are based on numerous considerations. Belowground carbon (C) storage for both ecosystem health and greenhouse gas (GHG) management is a growing motivation. Observed heterogeneity in soil C storage in croplands may be driven by various environmental, climatic and management factors. Farm system models can indicate which practices will drive C storage, provided the practice is well parameterised and the land manager can provide necessary input data.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to predict soil C impacts of temperate cover cropping using simple models suitable for broad farmer use and decision support.
METHODS
The dataset used was initially compiled for a meta-analysis (McClelland et al., 2021) to quantify soil C response to cover crop treatments relative to a non-cover cropped system. It contains 181 data points from 40 existing studies in temperate climates. Environmental, climatic and management indicators were regressed pairwise to predict annual soil C stock change under cover cropping relative to no cover cropping. We also included the IPCC tier 1 methodology and meta-analysis response ratios in our model comparison.
The ease of reliable measurement and monitoring across the modelled indicators was also considered because the best-correlated relationships are squandered if data constraints risk decision-makers being unable to use the model.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Using an extended test dataset to consider priorities for model users, several regression models outperformed the IPCC tier 1 methodology. In particular, two regression models reliably predicted negative changes in soil C, which IPCC and meta-analysis factor approaches could not. A single variable regression model based on cover crop biomass (dry matter) production was the best combination of statistical power, biological relevance and parsimony. In temperate climates, we predicted an increase in soil C stocks as long as cover crop biomass production exceeded 1.3 Mg ha−1 yr−1.
SIGNIFICANCE
Our final model can be applied with estimated user input data, and avoids the need for baseline soil C as an input; this makes it relatively accessible for farmers. Parsimonious models for soil C change under land management practices can be effective and are an opportunity to increase access to soil C management information for farmers.
期刊介绍:
Agricultural Systems is an international journal that deals with interactions - among the components of agricultural systems, among hierarchical levels of agricultural systems, between agricultural and other land use systems, and between agricultural systems and their natural, social and economic environments.
The scope includes the development and application of systems analysis methodologies in the following areas:
Systems approaches in the sustainable intensification of agriculture; pathways for sustainable intensification; crop-livestock integration; farm-level resource allocation; quantification of benefits and trade-offs at farm to landscape levels; integrative, participatory and dynamic modelling approaches for qualitative and quantitative assessments of agricultural systems and decision making;
The interactions between agricultural and non-agricultural landscapes; the multiple services of agricultural systems; food security and the environment;
Global change and adaptation science; transformational adaptations as driven by changes in climate, policy, values and attitudes influencing the design of farming systems;
Development and application of farming systems design tools and methods for impact, scenario and case study analysis; managing the complexities of dynamic agricultural systems; innovation systems and multi stakeholder arrangements that support or promote change and (or) inform policy decisions.