An inter-laboratory comparison of soil organic carbon analysis on a farm with four agricultural management systems

IF 2 3区 农林科学 Q2 AGRONOMY Agronomy Journal Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1002/agj2.70018
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,&nbsp;Bruno Basso,&nbsp;Neville Millar,&nbsp;Kris Covey,&nbsp;Charles Bettigo,&nbsp;Sindhu Jagadamma,&nbsp;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.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Agronomy Journal
Agronomy Journal 农林科学-农艺学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.50%
发文量
265
审稿时长
4.8 months
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.
期刊最新文献
Historical changes and yield in the Ohio corn performance test: A 50-year summary Enhancing population and family selection accuracy with statistical genetics models accounting for epistatic effects for wheat breeding An inter-laboratory comparison of soil organic carbon analysis on a farm with four agricultural management systems Optimizing groundnut sowing for minimizing dry spell risks over Rayalaseema, a rainfed region of India Estimating hard winter wheat yield with historical and novel methods
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1