Search for: All records

Abstract Microbial carbon (C) use efficiency (CUE) delineates the proportion of organic C used by microorganisms for anabolism and ultimately influences the amount of C sequestered in soils. However, the key factors controlling CUE remain enigmatic, leading to considerable uncertainty in understanding soil C retention and predicting its responses to global change factors. Here, we investigate the global patterns of CUE estimate by stoichiometric modeling in surface soils of natural ecosystems, and examine its associations with temperature, precipitation, plant‐derived C and soil nutrient availability. We found that CUE is determined by the most limiting resource among these four basic environmental resources within specific climate zones (i.e., tropical, temperate, arid, and cold zones). Higher CUE is common in arid and cold zones and corresponds to limitations in temperature, water, and plant‐derived C input, while lower CUE is observed in tropical and temperate zones with widespread limitation of nutrients (e.g., nitrogen or phosphorus) in soil. The contrasting resource limitations among climate zones led to an apparent increase in CUE with increasing latitude. The resource‐specific dependence of CUE implies that soils in high latitudes with arid and cold environments may retain less organic C in the future, as warming and increased precipitation can reduce CUE. In contrast, oligotrophic soils in low latitudes may increase organic C retention, as CUE could be increased with concurrent anthropogenic nutrient inputs. The findings underscore the importance of resource limitations for CUE and suggest asymmetric responses of organic C retention in soils across latitudes to global change factors. 

Agricultural activities contribute almost half of the total anthropogenic nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, but proper assessment of mitigation measures is hampered by large uncertainties during the quantification of cropland N2O emissions and mitigation potentials. This review summarizes the up-to-date datasets and approaches to provide spatially explicit and crop-specific assessment of the global mitigation potentials. Here, we show that global cropland N2O emissions have quadrupled to 1.2 Tg N2O-N year 1 over 1961–2020. The mitigation potential is 0.7 Tg N2O-N without compromising the crop production, with 86% from optimizing nitrogen fertilization, three-quarters (78%) from maize (22%), vegetables, and fruits (16%), other crops (15%), wheat (13%), and rice (12%), and over 80% from South Asia, China, the European Union, other American countries, the United States, and Southeast Asia. More accurate estimation of cropland N2O mitigation potentials requires extending the N2O observation network, improving modeling capacity, quantifying the feasibility of mitigation measures, and seeking additional mitigation measures. 

Agriculture’s global environmental impacts are widely expected to continue expanding, driven by population and economic growth and dietary changes. This Review highlights climate change as an additional amplifier of agriculture’s environmental impacts, by reducing agricultural productivity, reducing the efficacy of agrochemicals, increasing soil erosion, accelerating the growth and expanding the range of crop diseases and pests, and increasing land clearing. We identify multiple pathways through which climate change intensifies agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, creating a potentially powerful climate change–reinforcing feedback loop. The challenges raised by climate change underscore the urgent need to transition to sustainable, climate-resilient agricultural systems. This requires investments that both accelerate adoption of proven solutions that provide multiple benefits, and that discover and scale new beneficial processes and food products. 

Meeting end-of-century global warming targets requires aggressive action on multiple fronts. Recent reports note the futility of addressing mitigation goals without fully engaging the agricultural sector, yet no available assessments combine both nature-based solutions (reforestation, grassland and wetland protection, and agricultural practice change) and cellulosic bioenergy for a single geographic region. Collectively, these solutions might offer a suite of climate, biodiversity, and other benefits greater than either alone. Nature-based solutions are largely constrained by the duration of carbon accrual in soils and forest biomass; each of these carbon pools will eventually saturate. Bioenergy solutions can last indefinitely but carry significant environmental risk if carelessly deployed. We detail a simplified scenario for the U.S. that illustrates the benefits of combining approaches. We assign a portion of non-forested former cropland to bioenergy sufficient to meet projected mid-century transportation needs, with the remainder assigned to nature-based solutions such as reforestation. Bottom-up mitigation potentials for the aggregate contributions of crop, grazing, forest, and bioenergy lands are assessed by including in a Monte Carlo model conservative ranges for cost-effective local mitigation capacities, together with ranges for (a) areal extents that avoid double counting and include realistic adoption rates and (b) the projected duration of different carbon sinks. The projected duration illustrates the net effect of eventually saturating soil carbon pools in the case of most strategies, and additionally saturating biomass carbon pools in the case of reforestation. Results show a conservative end-of-century mitigation capacity of 110 (57 – 178) Gt CO2e for the U.S., ~50% higher than existing estimates that prioritize nature-based or bioenergy solutions separately. Further research is needed to shrink uncertainties but there is sufficient confidence in the general magnitude and direction of a combined approach to plan for deployment now. The dataset is a synthesis of literature values selected based on criteria described in the parent paper’s narrative. The files can be opened in Microsoft Excel or any other spreadsheet that can load Excel-format files. 

The soil carbon (C) stock, comprising soil organic C (SOC) and soil inorganic C (SIC) and being the largest reservoir of the terrestrial biosphere, is a critical part of the global C cycle. Soil has been a source of greenhouse gases (GHGs) since the dawn of settled agriculture about 10 millenia ago. Soils of agricultural ecosystems are depleted of their SOC stocks and the magnitude of depletion is greater in those prone to accelerated erosion by water and wind and other degradation processes. Adoption of judicious land use and science-based management practices can lead to re-carbonization of depleted soils and make them a sink for atmospheric C. Soils in humid climates have potential to increase storage of SOC and those in arid and semiarid climates have potential to store both SOC and SIC. Payments to land managers for sequestration of C in soil, based on credible measurement of changes in soil C stocks at farm or landscape levels, are also important for promoting adoption of recommended land use and management practices. In conjunction with a rapid and aggressive reduction in GHG emissions across all sectors of the economy, sequestration of C in soil (and vegetation) can be an important negative emissions method for limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2°C This article is part of the theme issue ‘The role of soils in delivering Nature's Contributions to People’.