Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 105–119 | Cite as

Changes in mineral soil organic carbon stocks in the croplands of European Russia and the Ukraine, 1990–2070; comparison of three models and implications for climate mitigation

  • P. SmithEmail author
  • J. U. Smith
  • U. Franko
  • K. Kuka
  • V. A. Romanenkov
  • L. K. Shevtsova
  • M. Wattenbach
  • P. Gottschalk
  • O. D. Sirotenko
  • D. I. Rukhovich
  • P. V. Koroleva
  • I. A. Romanenko
  • N. V. Lisovoi
Original Article


Three soil carbon models (RothC, CANDY and the Model of Humus Balance) were used to estimate the impacts of climate change on agricultural mineral soil carbon stocks in European Russia and the Ukraine using detailed spatial data on land-use, future land-use, cropping patterns, agricultural management, climate and soil type. Scenarios of climate were derived from the Hadley Centre climate Version 3 (HadCM3) model; future yields were determined using the Soil–Climate–Yield model, and land use was determined from regional agricultural and economic data and a model of agricultural economics. The models suggest that optimal management, which entails the replacement of row crops with other crops, and the use of extra years of grass in the rotation could reduce Soil organic carbon (SOC) loss in the croplands of European Russia and the Ukraine by 30–44% compared to the business-as-usual management. The environmentally sustainable management scenario (SUS), though applied for a limited area within the total region, suggests that much of this optimisation could be realised without damaging profitability for farmers.


Soil carbon Model Sustainability Climate change Impact RothC CANDY Model of humus balance 



Business-as-usual management scenario


Optimal economic management scenario


Environmentally sustainable management scenario


Hadley centre climate model Version 3


Soil organic carbon


United Nations framework convention on climate change


Rothamsted carbon model


Geographical information system


Intergovernmental panel on climate change


Special report on emissions scenarios


Potential evapotranspiration


Regional agricultural production systems


Farm yard manure






Inert organic matter


Bioclimatic potential



This work was funded by INTAS project MASC-FSU (INTAS-2001-0116/F5).


  1. Bellamy PH, Loveland PJ, Bradley RI, Lark RM, Kirk GJD (2005) Carbon losses from all soils across England and Wales 1978–2003. Nature 437:245–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cole CV, Duxbury J, Freney J, et al (1997) Global estimates of potential mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions by agriculture. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 49:221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coleman K, Jenkinson DS (1996) RothC-26.3—a model for the turnover of carbon in soil. In: Powlson DS, Smith P, Smith JU (eds) Evaluation of soil organic matter models using existing, vol 38. Long-term datasets, NATO ASI series I. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, pp 237–246Google Scholar
  4. Coleman K, Jenkinson DS, Crocker GJ, et al (1997) Simulating trends in soil organic carbon in long-term experiments using RothC-26.3. Geoderma 81:29–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dendoncker N, Van Wesemael B, Rounsevell MDA, Roelandt C, Lettens S (2004) Belgium’s CO2 mitigation potential under improved cropland management. Agric Ecosyst Environ 103:101–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Falloon P, Smith P, Coleman K, Marshall S (1998a) Estimating the size of the inert organic matter pool from total soil organic carbon content for use in the Rothamsted carbon model. Soil Biol Biochem 30:1207–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Falloon P, Smith P, Smith JU, Szabó J, Coleman K, Marshall S (1998b) Regional estimates of carbon sequestration potential: linking the Rothamsted carbon model to GIS databases. Biol Fertil Soil 27:236–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Franko U, Oelschlägel B, Schenk S (1995) Simulation of temperature-, water- and nitrogen dynamics using the model CANDY. Ecol Modell 81(S):213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Franko U, Kuka K, Romanenko IA, Romanenkov VA, Shevtsova LK, Koroleva PV (2007) Validation of the CANDY model with Russian long term experiments. Reg Environ Change (this issue)Google Scholar
  10. Ivanov LA (1957) World potential evaporation map. Hydrometeoizdat, Leningrad, pp 1–12 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  11. Izrael YA, Sirotenko OD (2003) Modeling climate change effect on crop productivity in Russian agriculture. Meteorol i gidrologia 6:5–17 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  12. Janssens IA, Freibauer A, Ciais P, et al (2003) Europe’s terrestrial biosphere absorbs 7–12% of European anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Science 300:1538–1542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Janssens IA, Freibauer A, Schlamadinger B, et al (2005) The carbon budget of terrestrial ecosystems at country-scale. A European case study. Biogeosciences 2:15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Janzen HH, Campbell CA, Gregorich EG, Ellert BH (1998) Soil carbon dynamics in Canadian agroecosystems. In: Lal R, Kimble J, Follet R, Stewart BA (eds) Soil processes and the carbon cycle. Advances in soil science. Lewis Publishers, CRC, Boca Raton, Fl, USA, pp 57–80Google Scholar
  15. Jenkinson DS, Adams DE, Wild A (1991) Model estimates of CO2 emissions from soil in response to global warming. Nature 351:304–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kätterer T, Andrén O (1999) Long-term agricultural field experiments in Northern Europe: analysis of the influence of management on soil carbon stocks using the ICBM model. Agric Ecosyst Environ 75:145–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kimble JM, Lal R, Follett RF (eds) (2002) Agricultural practices and policies for carbon sequestration in soil. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  18. Kozlovsky FI (1998) Genesis and geography of the arable soil on the Russian Plain. Izvestia RAN 5:142–154 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  19. Lal R (2004) Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change. Geoderma 123:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lal R, Kimble JM, Follett RF, Cole CV (1998) The potential of US Cropland to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Sleeping Bear Press/Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, MIGoogle Scholar
  21. Larionova AA, Rozanova IN, Yevdokimov IV, Yermolayev AM, Kurganova IN, Blagodatsky SA (2003) Land-use change and management effects on carbon sequestration in soils of Russia’s South Taiga zone. Tellus 55:331–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McGill WB (1996) Review and classification of 10 soil organic matter (SOM) models. In: Powlson DS, Smith P, Smith JU (eds) Evaluation of soil organic matter models using existing, long-term datasets, NATO ASI series I, vol 38. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, pp 111–132Google Scholar
  23. Mitchell TD, Carter TR, Jones PD, Hulme M, New M (2004) A comprehensive set of high-resolution grids of monthly climate for Europe and the globe: the observed record (1901–2000) and 16 scenarios (2001–2100). Working Paper 55, Tyndall centre for climate change research, University of East Anglia, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  24. Nakićenović N, Alcamo J, Davis G, de Vries B, Fenhann J, et al (2000) Pecial report on emissions scenarios: a special report of working group II of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  25. Orlov DS, Biryukova ON, Sukhanova NI (1996) Soil organic matter in Russian federation. Nauka, Moscow, p 256 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  26. Parry M (ed) (2000) Assessment of potential effects and adaptations for climate change in Europe: the Europe ACACIA project. Jackson Environment Institute, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, p 320Google Scholar
  27. Paustian K, Levine E, Post WM, Ryzhova IM (1997) The use of models to integrate information and understanding of soil C at the regional scale. Geoderma 79:227–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Post WM, Emanuel WR, Zinke PJ, Stangenberger AG (1982) Soil carbon pools and world life zones. Nature 298:156–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Puhlmann M, Kuka K, Franko U (2006) Comparison of methods for the estimation of inert carbon suitable for initialisation of the CANDY model. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 74:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rodin AZ, Krylatov AK (ed) (1998) Dynamic of humus balance in cropland of Russian federation. Agroprogress, Moscow, p 60 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  31. Romanenko GA, Tutunnikov AI, Sychev VG (1998) Fertilizers, effect, efficiency of application. Reference book. Central Institute of Agrochemical Service in Agriculture, Moscow, p 375 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  32. Romanenko IA (2005) Evaluation of regional ecosystem reproduction potential in long-term perspective. Int Agric J 1:25–27Google Scholar
  33. Romanenko IA, Romanenkov VA, Smith P, Smith JU, Sirotenko OD, Lisovoi NV, Shevtsova LK, Rukhovich DI, Koroleva PV (2007) Constructing regional scenarios for sustainable agriculture in European Russia and the Ukraine for 2000 to 2070. Reg Environ Change (this issue)Google Scholar
  34. Romanenkov VA, Smith JU, Smith P, Sirotenko OD, Rukhovich DI, Romanenko IA (2007) Changes in soil organic carbon stocks of croplands in European Russia; estimates from the model of humus balance. Reg Environ Change (this issue)Google Scholar
  35. Rukhovich DI, Koroleva PV, Vilchevskaya EV, Rozhkov VA (2007) Constructing spatially-resolved database for modelling soil organic carbon stocks of croplands in European Russia. Reg Environ Change (this issue)Google Scholar
  36. Russian Statistical Agency (2000) Major indicators of RF agro-industrial complex: biannual statistical bulletin, 1990–2000. Main inter-regional center of processing and dissemination of statistical information, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  37. Savin IY, Sirotenko OD, Romanenkov VA, Shevtsova LK (2002) Assessment the role of agricultural management strategies in balance of organic carbon in arable soils of Moscow region. In: Shishov LL, Voitovitch NV (eds) Soils of the Moscow region and their use. Dokuchaev Soil Institute, Moscow, I, pp 324–335 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  38. Shevtsova L, Romanenkov V, Sirotenko O, Smith P, Smith JU, Leech P, Kanzyvaa S, Rodionova V (2003) Effect of natural and agricultural factors on long-term organic matter dynamics in arable soddy-podzolic soils—modeling and observation. Geoderma 116:165–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sirotenko OD, Abashina A, Pavlova V (1995) Sensitivity of the Russian agriculture to changes in climate, atmospheric chemical composition and soil fertility. Meteorol Hydrogeol 4:107–114 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  40. Sleutel S, De Neve S, Hofman G (2003) Estimates of carbon stock changes in Belgian cropland. Soil Use Manag 19:166–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smith JU, Smith P, Wattenbach M, et al (2005) Projected changes in mineral soil carbon of European croplands and grasslands, 1990–2080. Glob Change Biol 11:2141–2152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smith JU, Smith P, Wattenbach M et al (2007a) Projected changes in cropland soil organic carbon stocks in European Russia and the Ukraine, 1990–2070. Glob Change Biol 13:342–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith P (2004a) Carbon sequestration in croplands: the potential in Europe and the global context. Eur J Agron 20:229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smith P (2004b) Monitoring and verification of soil carbon changes under article 3.4 of the Kyoto protocol. Soil Use Manag 20:264–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Smith P (ed) (2004c) Modelling agricultural soil carbon sinks in the European part of the former Soviet Union. Final report of project INTAS-2001-0116/F5. INTAS, Brussels, p 49Google Scholar
  46. Smith P, Powlson DS (2003) Sustainability of soil management practices—a global perspective. In: Abbott LK, Murphy DV (eds) Soil biological fertility—a key to sustainable land use in agriculture. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 241–254Google Scholar
  47. Smith P, Smith JU, Powlson DS, et al (1997b) A comparison of the performance of nine soil organic matter models using seven long-term experimental datasets. Geoderma 81:153–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith P, Powlson DS, Smith JU, Falloon PD, Coleman K (2000) Meeting Europe’s climate change commitments: quantitative estimates of the potential for carbon mitigation by agriculture. Glob Change Biol 6:525–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Smith P, Goulding KW, Smith KA, Powlson DS, Smith JU, Falloon PD, Coleman K (2001a) Enhancing the carbon sink in European agricultural soils: including trace gas fluxes in estimates of carbon mitigation potential. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 60:237–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smith P, Shevtsova LK, Ashman M et al (2001b) Modelling soil organic matter dynamics in the former Soviet Union under decreased inorganic fertilization following perestroika. In: Donatelli M (ed) Proceedings of second ESA symposium on modelling cropping systems, July 2001 ESA, Florence, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  51. Smith P, Smith JU, Wattenbach M, et al (2006) Projected changes in mineral soil carbon of European forests, 1990–2100. Can J Soil Sci 86:159–169Google Scholar
  52. Smith P, Martino D, Cai Z et al (2007b) Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos Trans R Soc B (in press)Google Scholar
  53. Sparling G, Parfitt RL, Hewitt AE, Schipper LA (2003) Three approaches to define desired soil organic matter contents. J Environ Qual 32:760–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stolbovoi V (2002) Carbon in agricultural soils of Russia. In: Proceedings of the OECD expert meeting on soil organic carbon indicators for agricultural land, Ottowa, Canada, 15–18 October 2002. Available at:
  55. Tate KR, Scott NA, Parshotam A, Brown L, Wilde RH, Giltrap DJ, Trustrum NA, Gomez B, Ross DJ (2000) A multi-scale analysis of a terrestrial carbon budget—is New Zealand a source or sink of carbon? Agriculture, Ecosyst Environ 82:229–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wang YP, Polglase PJ (1995) Carbon balance in the tundra, boreal forest and humid tropical forest during climate-change—scaling-up from leaf physiology and soil carbon dynamics. Plant Cell Environ 18:1226–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Smith
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. U. Smith
    • 1
  • U. Franko
    • 2
  • K. Kuka
    • 2
  • V. A. Romanenkov
    • 3
  • L. K. Shevtsova
    • 3
  • M. Wattenbach
    • 1
  • P. Gottschalk
    • 1
  • O. D. Sirotenko
    • 4
  • D. I. Rukhovich
    • 5
  • P. V. Koroleva
    • 5
  • I. A. Romanenko
    • 6
  • N. V. Lisovoi
    • 7
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK
  2. 2.Department of Soil PhysicsHelmholtz Centre for Environmental Research—UFZHalleGermany
  3. 3.Pryanishnikov All-Russian Institute of Agrochemistry (VNIIA)MoscowRussia
  4. 4.All-Russian Institute of Agricultural MeteorologyObninsk, Kaluga RegionRussia
  5. 5.Dokuchaev Soil Science InstituteMoscowRussia
  6. 6.All-Russian Institute of Agricultural Problems and InformaticsMoscowRussia
  7. 7.Institute for Soil Science and Agrochemistry Research named after O.N. SokolovskyKharkiv-24Ukraine

Personalised recommendations