Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36777236›Full record

ReviewAgronomy for sustainable development2023

Current controversies on mechanisms controlling soil carbon storage: implications for interactions with practitioners and policy-makers. A review.

Delphine Derrien, Pierre Barré, Isabelle Basile-Doelsch, Lauric Cécillon, Abad Chabbi, Alexandra Crème, Sébastien Fontaine, Ludovic Henneron, Noémie Janot, Gwenaëlle Lashermes and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Agronomy for sustainable development, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Beyond microbial carbon use efficiency.National science review · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Delphine DerrienINRAE, BEF, F-54000 Nancy, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6482-2316
Pierre BarréLaboratoire de Géologie, École Normale Supérieure, CNRS, PSL University, IPSL, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0822-0556
Isabelle Basile-DoelschAix Marseille University, CNRS, IRD, INRAE, Coll France, CEREGE, Aix-en-Provence, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0587-8141
Lauric CécillonLaboratoire de Géologie, École Normale Supérieure, CNRS, PSL University, IPSL, Paris, France.
Abad ChabbiUMR EcoSys, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France.
Alexandra CrèmeUMR EcoSys, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France.
Sébastien FontaineUniversité Clermont Auvergne, INRAE, VetAgro Sup, UMR Ecosystème Prairial, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1404-0700
Ludovic HenneronUSC ECODIV-Rouen 7603, Normandie Université, UNIROUEN, INRAE, 76000 Rouen, France.
Noémie JanotISPA, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, INRAE, F-33140 Villenave d'Ornon, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9287-2532
Gwenaëlle LashermesUniversité de Reims Champagne Ardenne, INRAE, FARE, UMR A 614, 51097 Reims, France.
Katell QuénéaSorbonne Université, CNRS, EPHE, PSL, UMR METIS, F-75005 Paris, France.
Frédéric ReesUMR EcoSys, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4827-4452
Marie-France DignacINRAE, CNRS, Sorbonne Université, UMR iEES-Paris, 4 place Jussieu, 75005 Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0231-5597

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is currently an intense debate about the potential for additional organic carbon storage in soil, the strategies by which it may be accomplished and what the actual benefits might be for agriculture and the climate. Controversy forms an essential part of the scientific process, but on the topic of soil carbon storage, it may confuse the agricultural community and the general public and may delay actions to fight climate change. In an attempt to shed light on this topic, the originality of this article lies in its intention to provide a balanced description of contradictory scientific opinions on soil carbon storage and to examine how the scientific community can support decision-making despite the controversy. In the first part, we review and attempt to reconcile conflicting views on the mechanisms controlling organic carbon dynamics in soil. We discuss the divergent opinions about chemical recalcitrance, the microbial or plant origin of persistent soil organic matter, the contribution of particulate organic matter to additional organic carbon storage in soil, and the spatial and energetic inaccessibility of soil organic matter to decomposers. In the second part, we examine the advantages and limitations of big data management and modeling, which are essential tools to link the latest scientific theories with the actions taken by stakeholders. Finally, we show how the analysis and discussion of controversies can guide scientists in supporting stakeholders for the design of (i) appropriate trade-offs for biomass use in agriculture and forestry and (ii) climate-smart management practices, keeping in mind their still unresolved effects on soil carbon storage.

Indexed as

Big dataBiomass useCarbon storageChemical recalcitranceInaccessibilityManagement practicesModelsPOM

Identifiers

PMID36777236
PMCPMC9901420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.