Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37927779›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2023

Trends in soil organic matter and topsoil thickness under regenerative practices at the University of Washington student farm.

Julia E Macray, David R Montgomery

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Julia E MacrayDepartment of Earth & Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
David R MontgomeryDepartment of Earth & Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional methods of agriculture, especially tillage, are often accompanied by soil degradation in the form of erosion and organic matter depletion. Regenerative agricultural methods seek to repair soil ecosystems by building topsoil and soil organic matter (SOM), decreasing reliance on chemical fertilizers and increasing both water retention capacity and the diversity and quantity of soil microbial and fungal communities. The University of Washington (UW) student farm is an organic and regeneratively managed site on the UW Seattle campus. Over the past 20 years the farm gradually expanded so locations on the farm encompass both unimproved topsoil and soils managed regeneratively for periods of 5 to 20 years. This arrangement allows a time-trend analysis of soil development under regenerative methods. Measurements of topsoil thickness (defined as the distance from the ground surface to the base of the soil A horizon) and organic matter content were collected across 14 distinct plots on the farm to quantify trends over time and estimate net change in SOM (and soil organic carbon, or SOC). While SOM content weakly increased by 0.5% per year, topsoil thickness exhibited a significant linear increase of 0.86 cm per year. Over a twenty-year period under the management practices of the UW Farm total organic carbon storage in soils, determined using topsoil thickness, density, and SOC content, increased by between 4 and 14 t ha

Indexed as

EcosystemSoilCarbonEnvironmental MonitoringFarmsHumansCarbonSoilConservation agricultureRegenerative agricultureSoil carbonSoil healthSoil organic matter

Identifiers

PMID37927779
PMCPMC10625358

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.