Skip to main content
Book cover

Soil Carbon pp 219–227Cite as

Is Percent ‘Projected Natural Vegetation Soil Carbon’ a Useful Indicator of Soil Condition?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Progress in Soil Science ((PROSOIL))

Abstract

The concentration of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) is often used as an indicator of soil condition and soil health. To be useful as an indicator, SOC must be considered in context, with soil type, climatic region, local rainfall, slope, and land use history influencing measured amounts of SOC. The concept of Percent Projected Natural Vegetation Soil Carbon (PNVSC) implicitly incorporates these context variables. Percent PNVSC is defined as a simple percentage comparing the contemporary measured soil carbon against a hypothetical amount of soil carbon that would be observed in the local landscape today, if the areas under managed agroecosystems remained under natural vegetation (which in this study is dry sclerophyll forest). The term ‘natural’ used in the PNVSC concept approximates with the natural system prior to agrarian settlement. Percent PNVSC was calculated for a 22,000 ha sub-catchment of the Hunter Valley, Australia and it showed a spatially weighted average of 73, indicating substantial soil carbon loss as a result of cumulative land use change over more than 100 years. The Percent PNVSC map highlights changes in soil carbon distribution across the landscape with mid-slope positions lower in the catchment showing the greatest loss of soil carbon. Viticulture has resulted in half of the original SOC being lost, compared to a 75 % PNVSC for unimproved pasture and an 83 % PNVSC for improved pasture. Average soil carbon loss due to mixed land-use change in this sub-catchment is 13,331 kg C/ha.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bandaranayake W, Qian YL, Parton WJ, Ojima DS, Follett RF (2003) Estimation of soil organic carbon changes in Turfgrass systems using the CENTURY model. Agron J 95:558–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batjes NH (1996) Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world. Eur J Soil Sci 47(2):151–163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman K, Jenkinson DS (1999) The Rothamsted carbon model webpage. http://www.rothamsted.ac.uk/ssgs/RothC/RothC.php. Accessed May 2013

  • Grace PR, Jeffrey N, Ladd JF, Robertson GP, Gage SH (2006) SOCRATES—a simple model for predicting long-term changes in soil organic carbon in terrestrial ecosystems. Soil Biol Biochem 38:1172–1176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Isbell RF, McDonald WS, Ashton LJ (1997) Concepts and rationale of the Australian soil classification. ACLEP, CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • IUSS Working Group WRB (2007) World reference base for soil resources 2006. First update 2007. World Soil Resources Report No. 103. FAO, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins A (2006) Northern rivers Soil Health Card: a monitoring tool for farmers developed by farmers. In: Proceedings of the APEN international conference, Practice change for sustainable communities: exploring footprints, pathways and possibilities, 6–8 March 2006, Beechworth, Australia. http://www.regional.org.au/au/apen/2006/refereed/1/3157_jenkinsa.htm. Accessed May 2013

  • McKenzie N, Coughlan K, Cresswell H (eds) (2002) Soil physical measurement and determination for land evaluation. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood

    Google Scholar 

  • Odgers NP, McBratney AB, Minasny B (2011) Bottom-up digital soil mapping. II. Soil series classes. Geoderma 163(1–2):30–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parton WJ, Stewart JWB, Cole CV (1987) Dynamics of C, N, S, and P in grassland soils: a model. Biogeochemistry 5:109–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stabile M (2011) Deconstructing the complexity of land use and cover classification and land change modelling. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Department of Agriculture (2002) Interpreting the soil conditioning index: a tool for measuring soil organic matter trends, Soil quality – Agronomy Technical Note No. 16. Soil Quality Institute, National Soil Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Auburn

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Department of Agriculture (2012) Soil quality – Improving how your soil works. National Resources and Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Last update October 2012. http://www.soils.usda.gov/sqi/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Waring .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Waring, C., Stockmann, U., Malone, B.P., Whelan, B., McBratney, A.B. (2014). Is Percent ‘Projected Natural Vegetation Soil Carbon’ a Useful Indicator of Soil Condition?. In: Hartemink, A., McSweeney, K. (eds) Soil Carbon. Progress in Soil Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04084-4_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics