Carbon input differences as the main factor explaining the variability in soil organic C storage in no-tilled compared to inversion tilled agrosystems
- 1.2k Downloads
Conversion to no-till (NT) is usually associated to increased soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks in comparison to inversion tillage (IT). However, an important and unexplained variability in the changes in SOC with NT adoption exists, which impedes accurate prediction of its potential for C sequestration. We performed a meta-analysis with pedo-climatic and crop factors observed to influence SOC storage under NT at local and regional scales, in order to determine those better explaining this variability at a global scale. We studied SOC stocks (0–30 cm) in an equivalent soil mass, climatic and soil characteristics in 92 NT–IT paired cases. A sub-base with the 35 pairs providing C inputs was used to test their effect. Greater SOC stocks were observed with NT, with a smaller difference than often described (6.7%, i.e. 3.4 Mg C ha−1). Crop C inputs differences was the only factor significantly and positively related to SOC stock differences between NT and IT, explaining 30% of their variability. The variability in SOC storage induced by NT conversion seems largely related to the variability of the crop production response. Changes at the agro-ecosystem level, not only in soil, should be considered when assessing the potential of NT for C sequestration.
KeywordsNo-tillage C sequestration Crop primary production Soil C C sinks
The authors thank May Balabane (Unité Pessac, INRA Versailles, France) for her fruitful collaboration in this paper, and Naoise Nunan (Unité Mixte de Recherche BIOEMCO, CNRS-AgroParisTech, Thiverval-Grignon, France) for his help and contribution to the statistical treatment of data presented in this work. Iñigo Virto’s salary was paid by the Basque Government (Eusko Jaurlaritza, Spain). Pierre Barré’s salary was paid by the GIS “Climat-Environnement-Société” (Carbosoil project, France). W.A. Dick and J. Castellanos are thanked for providing data to complete the information found in their studies.
- Arrouays D, Balesdent J, Germon GC, Jayet PA, Soussana JF, Stengel P (2002) Contribution à la lutte contre l’effet de serre. Stocker du carbone dans les sols agricoles de France? Expertise Scientifique Collective, Synthèse du rapport. INRA, ParisGoogle Scholar
- Black AL, Tanaka DL (1997) A conservation tillage-cropping systems study in the Northern Great Plains of the United States. In: Paul EA, Elliott ET, Paustian K, Cole CV (eds) Soil organic matter in temperate agroecosystems. Long-term experiments in North America. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 335–342Google Scholar
- Carter MR (1994) Strategies to overcome impediments to adoption of conservation tillage. In: Carter MR (ed) Conservation tillage in temperate agroecosystems. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, pp 3–19Google Scholar
- DeFelice MS, Carter PR, Mitchell SB (2006) Influence of tillage on corn and soybean yield in the United States and Canada. Crop Manag. doi: 10.1094/CM-2006-0626-01-RS
- Franzluebbers AJ, Steiner JL (2002) Climatic influences on soil organic carbon storage with no tillage. In: Kimble JM, Lal R, Follett RF (eds) Agricultural practices and policies for carbon sequestration in soil. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp 71–86Google Scholar
- Riley H, Borresen T, Ekeberg E, Rydgberg T (1994) Trends in reduced tillage research and practice in Scandinavia. In: Carter MR (ed) Conservation tillage in temperate agroecosystems. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, pp 23–45Google Scholar
- Sisti CPJ, dos Santos HP, Kohhann R, Alves BJR, Urquiaga S, Boddey RM (2004) Change in carbon and nitrogen stocks in soil under 13 years of conventional or zero tillage in southern Brazil. Soil Till Res 76:39–58.Google Scholar