ArticlePloS one2026
Land use change reshaped soil carbon dynamics in Northern China.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Northern China has experienced some of the most intensive land use changes globally, yet the consequent impacts on soil carbon dynamics and regional source-sink patterns, particularly the divergent responses of soil organic carbon (SOC) and soil inorganic carbon (SIC), remain poorly quantified. This study examined how land use change reshapes SOC and SIC pools and modulates their sensitivity to environmental drivers. Using nationwide soil survey data from the 1980s and 2010s, we applied random forest models and partial least squares structural equation modeling to disentangle the responces SOC and SIC pools for land use and environmental change. Results revealed that Northern China functioned as a net soil carbon source over the 30-year interval, losing approximately 0.56 Gt of SOC and 0.56 Gt of SIC. Land use type emerged as the dominant control on carbon source-sink patterns. Grassland transitioned into strong carbon sources driven primarily by SIC losses of 1.51 Gt, whereas unutilized land exhibited estimated net carbon gains with apparent SIC accumulation of 2.06 Gt. Beyond altering carbon stocks, land use change reversed regional source-sink patterns and markedly heightened the sensitivity of soil carbon dynamics to environmental changes with explanatory strength increment of 0.11 for SOC and 0.09 for SIC, respectively. Specifically, SOC responded primarily to biotic drivers such as vegetation productivity, while SIC exhibited tighter coupling with increasing atmospheric CO2 fluctuations. The main contribution of this study is revealing how SOC and SIC respond differently to environmental drivers following land use change. Practically, these results indicate that regional carbon management strategies must fully consider land use change effects and explicitly include soil inorganic carbon in carbon neutrality accounting frameworks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.