You are viewing /report/second-state-carbon-cycle-report-soccr2-sustained-assessment-report/chapter/agriculture/finding/key-message-5-3 in Turtle
Alternatives : HTML JSON YAML text N-Triples JSON Triples RDF+XML RDF+JSON Graphviz SVG
Raw
@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix gcis: <http://data.globalchange.gov/gcis.owl#> .
@prefix cito: <http://purl.org/spar/cito/> .
@prefix biro: <http://purl.org/spar/biro/> .

<https://data.globalchange.gov/report/second-state-carbon-cycle-report-soccr2-sustained-assessment-report/chapter/agriculture/finding/key-message-5-3>
   dcterms:identifier "key-message-5-3";
   gcis:findingNumber "5.3"^^xsd:string;
   gcis:findingStatement "Most cropland carbon stocks are in the soil, and cropland management practices can increase or decrease soil carbon stocks. Integration of practices that can increase soil carbon stocks include maintaining land cover with vegetation (especially deep-rooted perennials and cover crops), protecting the soil from erosion (using reduced or no tillage), and improving nutrient management. The magnitude and longevity of management-related carbon stock changes have strong environmental and regional differences, and they are subject to subsequent changes in management practices (<em>high confidence, likely</em>)."^^xsd:string;
   gcis:isFindingOf <https://data.globalchange.gov/report/second-state-carbon-cycle-report-soccr2-sustained-assessment-report/chapter/agriculture>;
   gcis:isFindingOf <https://data.globalchange.gov/report/second-state-carbon-cycle-report-soccr2-sustained-assessment-report>;

## Properties of the finding:
   
   gcis:descriptionOfEvidenceBase "Most of this carbon pool exists within soils, with less than 5% residing in cropland vegetation, a finding consistent with previous reports such as the <em>First State of the Carbon Cycle Report</em> (CCSP 2007) and USDA (2016). The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service has established 15 standard soil health conservation practices, which have the potential to increase soil carbon and coincidently reduce atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> (Chambers et al., 2016). Evidence indicates that adoption of no tillage may increase carbon storage, especially in the soil surface, compared to conventional tillage (Chambers et al., 2016; Paustian et al., 2016; Sperow 2016), although soil heterogeneity and slow rates of change make the conclusive measurement of short-term changes difficult. It may not be appropriate to assume that adopting no tillage will sequester carbon over the long term or mitigate GHG emissions (e.g., Baker et al., 2007; Luo et al., 2010; Powlson et al., 2014; Ugarte et al., 2014). Practices that convert lands from perennial systems, such as converting retired lands or other lands to row crops, will release stored carbon back to the atmosphere (Gelfand et al., 2011; Huang et al., 2002). Conversely, management practices with the potential to release stored carbon are the inadequate return of crop residues (Blanco-Canqui and Lal 2009) and aggressive tillage (Conant et al., 2007). Conservation practices improve soil aeration, aggregate stability, and nutrient reserves, while modulating temperature and water and increasing microbial activity and diversity. As a result, soil is more resilient to climate variability and more productive (Lal 2015; Lehman et al., 2015)."^^xsd:string;
   
   gcis:assessmentOfConfidenceBasedOnEvidence "Confidence that conservation practices have the potential to increase soil carbon stocks is high."^^xsd:string;
   
   gcis:newInformationAndRemainingUncertainties "Major uncertainties are related to individual practices such as no-tillage management, in particular the magnitude and longevity of changes to soil carbon stocks. Meta-analyses by Luo et al. (2010) and Ugarte et al. (2014) suggest that other factors contributing to variability in soil organic carbon sequestration include climatic and soil properties interacting with management factors (e.g., cropping frequency, crop rotation diversity, nitrogen, and drainage), along with impacts on rooting depth and above- and belowground biomass. Future shifts in management can reverse gains."^^xsd:string;

   a gcis:Finding .

## This finding cites the following entities:



<https://data.globalchange.gov/report/second-state-carbon-cycle-report-soccr2-sustained-assessment-report/chapter/agriculture/finding/key-message-5-3>
   prov:wasDerivedFrom <https://data.globalchange.gov/report/second-state-carbon-cycle-report-soccr2-sustained-assessment-report/chapter/preface/figure/figurep-4>.