MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412049776 · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2025.109845

Conservation tillage enhances both organic and inorganic carbon in dryland: Insights from a 20-year field experiment and meta-analysis

2025· article· en· W4412049776 on OpenAlexaff
Weiting Ding, Liangjie Sun, Zhiming Qi, Shengping Li, Vilim Filipović, Xueping Wu, Hailong He

Bibliographic record

VenueAgriculture Ecosystems & Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersHigh-end Foreign Experts Recruitment Plan of ChinaQingdao Agricultural University
KeywordsTillageEnvironmental scienceField (mathematics)Carbon fibersMeta-analysisSoil carbonAgronomyAgroforestrySoil scienceBiologyMathematicsSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conservation tillage is widely recognized as a promising practice for sequestering soil organic carbon (SOC). However, its impact on soil inorganic carbon (SIC) remains less understood and has seldom been quantified. This study aimed to examine the effects of conservation tillage on soil carbon pools, focusing on SIC, by combining a 20-year field experiment in an arid-calcareous cropland of China with a meta-analysis of 76 pairwise data from 7 studies. The field experiment confirms that conservation tillage significantly increases carbon stock, with reduced tillage (RT) increasing SOC (25.09 %, 0–40 cm) and no-tillage (NT) increasing SIC (10.67 %, 0–20 cm). SOC and SIC exhibit a complementary relationship, whereby an increase in SOC effectively compensates for reduced SIC within RT. Notably, the proliferation of calcifying bacteria (e.g., Bacillus ) and reduced urease activity suggest that microbial-induced carbonate precipitation, a process known to be facilitated by these bacteria, may contribute significantly to SIC formation under NT. Agronomic practices, as well as soil abiotic and biotic factors, collectively influence SIC. The relative importance of these factors varies with soil depth: biotic variables effects weaken with depth, while abiotic variables increase. Furthermore, our meta-analysis reveals that the response of SIC to conservation tillage varies with climatic, edaphic, and agronomic factors. Arid regions benefit the most from NT in enhancing SIC stock (3.27 %). These findings provide valuable insights into how conservation tillage influences soil carbon, particularly SIC, and enhance our understanding of carbon dynamics in arid systems. ● Conservation tillage significantly improves soil properties in arid alkaline cropland. ● Reduced tillage develops soil organic carbon, while no-tillage (NT) increases soil inorganic carbon (SIC). ● NT is associated with an increase in ureolytic microbial abundance, potentially promoting carbonate precipitation. ● SIC is influenced by both biotic and abiotic factors. ● NT is a pivotal strategy for enhancing SIC sequestration in dryland agriculture.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgriculture Ecosystems & EnvironmentSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207