NASA Logo, External Link
Facebook icon, External Link to NASA STI page on Facebook Twitter icon, External Link to NASA STI on Twitter YouTube icon, External Link to NASA STI Channel on YouTube RSS icon, External Link to New NASA STI RSS Feed AddThis share icon
 

Record Details

Record 1 of 5318
Sampling for Soil Carbon Stock Assessment in Rocky Agricultural Soils
External Online Source: doi:10.2136/sssaj2015.11.0405
Author and Affiliation:
Beem-Miller, Jeffrey P.(Cornell Univ., School of Integrative Plant Science, Ithaca, NY, United States)
Kong, Angela Y. Y.(Columbia Univ., Center for Climate Systems Research, New York, NY, United States)
Ogle, Stephen(Colorado State Univ., Natural Resource Ecology Lab., Fort Collins, CO, United States)
Wolfe, David(Cornell Univ., School of Integrative Plant Science, Ithaca, NY, United States)
Abstract: Coring methods commonly employed in soil organic C (SOC) stock assessment may not accurately capture soil rock fragment (RF) content or soil bulk density (rho (sub b)) in rocky agricultural soils, potentially biasing SOC stock estimates. Quantitative pits are considered less biased than coring methods but are invasive and often cost-prohibitive. We compared fixed-depth and mass-based estimates of SOC stocks (0.3-meters depth) for hammer, hydraulic push, and rotary coring methods relative to quantitative pits at four agricultural sites ranging in RF content from less than 0.01 to 0.24 cubic meters per cubic meter. Sampling costs were also compared. Coring methods significantly underestimated RF content at all rocky sites, but significant differences (p is less than 0.05) in SOC stocks between pits and corers were only found with the hammer method using the fixed-depth approach at the less than 0.01 cubic meters per cubic meter RF site (pit, 5.80 kilograms C per square meter; hammer, 4.74 kilograms C per square meter) and at the 0.14 cubic meters per cubic meter RF site (pit, 8.81 kilograms C per square meter; hammer, 6.71 kilograms C per square meter). The hammer corer also underestimated rho (sub b) at all sites as did the hydraulic push corer at the 0.21 cubic meters per cubic meter RF site. No significant differences in mass-based SOC stock estimates were observed between pits and corers. Our results indicate that (i) calculating SOC stocks on a mass basis can overcome biases in RF and rho (sub b) estimates introduced by sampling equipment and (ii) a quantitative pit is the optimal sampling method for establishing reference soil masses, followed by rotary and then hydraulic push corers.
Publication Date: Aug 30, 2016
Document ID:
20160012559
(Acquired Oct 26, 2016)
Subject Category: GEOPHYSICS; LIFE SCIENCES (GENERAL)
Report/Patent Number: GSFC-E-DAA-TN36555
Document Type: Journal Article
Publication Information: Soil Science Society of America Journal (e-ISSN 1435-0661); Volume 80; No. 5; 1411-1423
Publisher Information: Soil Science Society of America
Contract/Grant/Task Num: NNX14AB99A
Financial Sponsor: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Greenbelt, MD United States
Organization Source: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Greenbelt, MD United States
Description: 13p; In English
Distribution Limits: Unclassified; Publicly available; Unlimited
Rights: Copyright
NASA Terms: SOIL SAMPLING; CORE SAMPLING; CORES; PITS (EXCAVATIONS); CARBON; ORGANIC MATERIALS; ROCKS; SOILS; DENSITY (MASS/VOLUME); ESTIMATES; HAMMERS; COSTS; DEPTH; HYDRAULIC SHOCK; FRAGMENTS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; AGRICULTURE; BIAS
Other Descriptors: SOIL MASS; CORING METHODS; HAMMER METHOD
Availability Source: Other Sources
› Back to Top
Find Similar Records
NASA Logo, External Link
NASA Official: Gerald Steeman
Site Curator: STI Program
Last Modified: October 26, 2016
Contact Us