Carbon footprints from plants, soil, and the environment are needed to evaluate C balance of an agroecosystem, which indicates if a system is a C source or sink for mitigating climate change. There is scarce information about C footprint and C balance in dryland agroecosystems. We measured C storage of above‐ and belowground crop biomass, CO 2 fluxes, soil C sequestration rates, and C balances of three long‐term (34‐year‐old) dryland cropping sequences from 2016 to 2018 in the US northern Great Plains. Cropping sequences were no‐till continuous spring wheat (NTCW; Triticum aestivum L.), no‐till spring wheat–pea (NTWP; Pisum sativum L.), and conventional till spring wheat–fallow (CTWF). Carbon storage in grain, straw, root, and rhizodeposit were 29%–61% greater for NTCW and NTWP than CTWF. The CO 2 flux peaked immediately after tillage, planting, fertilization, and intense precipitation (>10 mm) for 3 months in 2016–2017. Cumulative annual CO 2 flux was 8%–37% greater for NTCW than NTWP and CTWF in 2016–2017, but was not different among cropping sequences in 2017–2018. Soil C sequestration rate at 0–10 cm measured from 2012 to 2019 was in the order: NTCW (0.27 Mg C ha −1 year −1 ) > NTWP > CTWF (−0.23 Mg C ha −1 year −1 ). Carbon balance remained negative and was not significantly different among cropping sequences but varied by year. Carbon loss increased with increased precipitation, regardless of cropping systems. Although a C source, the legume–nonlegume rotation can reduce C loss due to greater grain C output than other cropping sequences in the semiarid region of the northern Great Plains.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sainju et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: