MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412925470 · doi:10.1071/cp24257

The pros and cons of increasing soil organic matter in dryland cropping systems

2025· article· en· W4412925470 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chelsea K. Janke, John A. Kirkegaard, James Hunt, Louise Barton, Lindsay W. Bell, Senani Karunaratne, Lynne M. Macdonald, Chiara Pasut, Uta Stockmann, Ehsan Tavakkoli, V. V. S. R. Gupta, Anton Wasson, Mark Farrell

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop and Pasture Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationEuropean CommissionMcGill UniversityJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsconsCroppingDryland farmingAgroforestryEnvironmental scienceOrganic matterSoil organic matterAgronomyEarth scienceSoil scienceGeographyGeologySoil waterAgricultureEcologyBiologyComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil organic matter (SOM) in drylands accounts for approximately 33% of global soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks and regulates many processes. Anthropogenic activities and climatic changes have influenced, and continue to significantly influence SOM contents. However, management practices that improve the soil carbon (C) and macronutrient balance can increase or maintain SOM. These include (1) maximising C inputs from grain crops, (2) integrating livestock and pasture phases, (3) using cover crops, (4) intercropping, (5) managing tillage and stubble, and (6) organic amendments. Estimated SOC increases achievable in drylands, ranging from 60 to 114 kg C ha year−1, fall short of the ambitious ‘4 per mille’ target, which is equivalent to a 0.4% annual increase in initial soil C, or at least 240 kg C ha−1 year−1 for drylands (assuming a global mean dryland SOC stock of 60 Mg C ha−1). In dryland systems, we propose a more rational approach, advocating for context-specific optima with a clear understanding of the benefits and costs to evaluate the suitability of management practices for improving SOM. The benefits include amelioration of soil constraints, improving nutrient and water availability, enhancing system resilience and sustainability, and potential participation in C markets. However, costs can be significant and are typically divided into the following two main categories: (1) economic (e.g. financial costs required for implementing management practices), and (2) environmental (e.g. the potential for increased nutrient loss via emissions or leaching as a result of enhanced nutrient cycling). The net benefit or cost is highly context-dependent, with the unique challenges of dryland environments being often overlooked in the literature. This review examines the primary strategies for maintaining or increasing SOM in dryland arable systems, the associated benefits and costs, methods for monitoring SOC stocks, and future challenges and opportunities.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrop and Pasture ScienceSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207