Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Online
    • Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • Info For
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About JSWC
    • Editorial Board
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • Contact Us

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Online
    • Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • Info For
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About JSWC
    • Editorial Board
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • Contact Us
  • Follow SWCS on Twitter
  • Visit SWCS on Facebook
Research ArticleResearch Section

What does it take to detect a change in soil carbon stock? A regional comparison of minimum detectable difference and experiment duration in the north central United States

M. Necpálová, R.P. Anex, A.N. Kravchenko, L.J. Abendroth, S.J. Del Grosso, W.A. Dick, M.J. Helmers, D. Herzmann, J.G. Lauer, E.D. Nafziger, J.E. Sawyer, P.C. Scharf, J.S. Strock and M.B. Villamil
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation November 2014, 69 (6) 517-531; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.69.6.517
M. Necpálová
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R.P. Anex Jr.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A.N. Kravchenko
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L.J. Abendroth
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S.J. Del Grosso
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W.A. Dick
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M.J. Helmers
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D. Herzmann
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.G. Lauer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E.D. Nafziger
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.E. Sawyer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P.C. Scharf
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.S. Strock
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M.B. Villamil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Variability in soil organic carbon (SOC) results from natural and human processes interacting across time and space, and leads to large variation in the minimum difference in SOC that can be detected with a particular experimental design. Here we report a unique comparison of minimum detectable differences (MDDs) in SOC, and the estimated times required to observe those MDDs across the north central United States, calculated for the two most common SOC experiments: (1) a comparison between two treatments, e.g., moldboard plow (MP) and no-tillage (NT), using a randomized complete block design experiment; and (2) a comparison of changes in SOC over time for a particular treatment, e.g., NT, using a randomized complete block design experiment with time as an additional factor. We estimated the duration of the two experiment types required to achieve MDD through simulation of SOC dynamics. Data for the study came from 13 experimental sites located in Iowa, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, and Minnesota. Soil organic carbon, bulk density, and texture were measured at four soil depths. Minimum detectable differences were calculated with probability of Type I error of 0.05 and probability of Type II error of 0.15.

The MDDs in SOC were highly variable across the region and increased with soil depth. At 0 to 10 cm (0 to 3.9 in) soil depth, MDDs with five replications ranged from 1.04 g C kg−1 (0.017 oz C lb−1; 6%) to 7.15 g C kg−1 (0.114 oz C lb−1; 31%) for comparison of two treatments; and from 0.46 g C kg−1 (0.007 oz C lb−1; 3%) to 3.12 g C kg−1 (0.050 oz C lb−1; 13%) for SOC change over time. Large differences were also predicted in the experiment duration required to detect a difference in SOC between MP and NT (from 8 to >100 years with five replications), or a change in SOC over time under NT management (from 11 to 71 years with five replications). At most locations, the time required to detect a change in SOC under NT was shorter than the time required to detect a difference between MP and NT. Minimum detectable difference and experiment duration decreased with the number of replications and were correlated with SOC variability and soil texture of the experimental sites, i.e., they tended to be lower in fine textured soils. Experiment duration was also reduced by increased crop productivity and the amount of residue left on the soil. The relationships and methods described here enable the design of experiments with high power of detecting differences and changes in SOC and enhance our understanding of how management practices influence SOC storage.

  • © 2014 by the Soil and Water Conservation Society
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation: 69 (6)
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
Vol. 69, Issue 6
November/December 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Soil and Water Conservation.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
What does it take to detect a change in soil carbon stock? A regional comparison of minimum detectable difference and experiment duration in the north central United States
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
What does it take to detect a change in soil carbon stock? A regional comparison of minimum detectable difference and experiment duration in the north central United States
M. Necpálová, R.P. Anex, A.N. Kravchenko, L.J. Abendroth, S.J. Del Grosso, W.A. Dick, M.J. Helmers, D. Herzmann, J.G. Lauer, E.D. Nafziger, J.E. Sawyer, P.C. Scharf, J.S. Strock, M.B. Villamil
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Nov 2014, 69 (6) 517-531; DOI: 10.2489/jswc.69.6.517

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
What does it take to detect a change in soil carbon stock? A regional comparison of minimum detectable difference and experiment duration in the north central United States
M. Necpálová, R.P. Anex, A.N. Kravchenko, L.J. Abendroth, S.J. Del Grosso, W.A. Dick, M.J. Helmers, D. Herzmann, J.G. Lauer, E.D. Nafziger, J.E. Sawyer, P.C. Scharf, J.S. Strock, M.B. Villamil
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Nov 2014, 69 (6) 517-531; DOI: 10.2489/jswc.69.6.517
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Effects of economic and climatic factors on agricultural water use in arid regions
  • Sediment delivery ratios from forest road networks and harvesting operational features by physiographic region in the southeastern United States
  • Gully erosion susceptibility prediction in Mollisols using machine learning models
Show more Research Section

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Early Online
  • Archive
  • Subject Collections

Info For

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers

Customer Service

  • Subscriptions
  • Permissions and Reprints
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy

SWCS

  • Membership
  • Publications
  • Meetings and Events
  • Conservation Career Center

© 2023 Soil and Water Conservation Society