Estimating soil carbon change using the web-based Nutrient Tracking Tool (NTT) with APEX

被引:0
|
作者
Menefee, D. [1 ]
Saleh, A. [1 ]
Gallego, O. [1 ]
机构
[1] Tarleton State Univ, Texas Inst Appl Environm Res, Stephenville, TX 76401 USA
关键词
agricultural modeling-climate-smart agriculture-soil carbon; climate-smart agriculture; soil carbon; NITROGEN-FERTILIZER USE; ORGANIC-CARBON; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; CLIMATE-CHANGE; CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE; CROP RESIDUE; MANAGEMENT; CORN; YIELD; MODEL;
D O I
10.2489/jSWC.2024.00042
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Understanding soil carbon (C) balance within agroecosystems is an important piece of reducing agriculture-related climate impacts and improving soil quality. The web-based Nutrient Tracking Tool (NTT) has been widely applied for estimating nutrient fate and transport, erosion potential, and crop yield using the Agricultural Policy Environmental eXtender (APEX) model. NTT simulates a variety of agricultural systems and is in the process of being improved to provide a more holistic understanding of the impact of management practices on agricultural sustainability as it is adopted in various parts of the United States. One improvement in NTT is the incorporation of APEX's soil organic C (SOC) estimation into NTT to allow decision-makers the ability to estimate how management practices impact C balance on a free and user-friendly platform. In order to test this additional outcome, NTT was used to estimate SOC in a series of simulations using recorded SOC change from a literature review. Nine studies with SOC measurements at least five years apart that took place in the contiguous United States and had sufficient management data to reliably run NTT were selected. The selected studies consisted of 131 paired SOC measurements (initial and final) across a wide range of cropping systems, including no-till, conventional tillage, cover crops, nutrient management systems, and crop rotations. Details from each study location were input into NTT (location, slope, planting date, tillage practice, fertilization rate, and soil properties-texture and initial SOC) and run using modified NTT/APEX 806. Measured SOC and SOC change were then compared with those of predicted values. Overall, the correlation between measured and predicted final SOC was r 2 = 0.57. The average deviation between simulated and measured soil C change was -0.39 +/- 0.03 Mg ha -1 (12.5% difference). This corresponds to an average percentage change of 0.27% with the simulation and -0.68% with measured values across all sites; the percentage change is relatively low because of averaging sites with opposing change directions. Sites were also grouped by management practice to determine how NTT functions in varying management practices; the practices with the lowest deviation were continuous corn (0.12 Mg ha -1 error; 39.55% difference) and intensive tillage (-0.16 Mg ha -1 error; -35.33% difference) and the practices with the highest deviation were zero fertilizer systems (3.75 Mg ha -1 error; 146.27% difference). Considering the fact all weather information was obtained from NTT databases (PRISM database) and few parameters were modified in APEX, the results obtained from this comparison study are promising. One major limitation with this study is that most of the measured values for verification came from the Midwest and north central United States with few from the southern or western states. Nevertheless, this initial look is a good first step toward a robust C decision-making tool. In future work we plan to verify C results from a wider variety of locations in the United States and a wider variety of agricultural land uses.
引用
收藏
页码:180 / 190
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Web-Based Tracking Tool Through a Multidisciplinary Massive Transfusion Taskforce
    Townsend, J.
    Geurkink, C.
    Gulczynski, B.
    Day, B.
    Posa-Kearney, K.
    Pool, M.
    TRANSFUSION, 2024, 64 : 284A - 285A
  • [22] Tracking clinical trial accrual strategies and barriers via a Web-based screening tool
    Grubbs, S. S.
    Gonzalez, M.
    Krasna, M.
    Siegel, R.
    Bryant, D.
    Tschetter, L.
    Hayenga, L.
    Duggan, B.
    St. Germaine, D.
    Denicoff, A.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2009, 27 (15)
  • [23] Climate change-related vulnerabilities and local environmental public health tracking through GEMSS: A web-based visualization tool
    Houghton, Adele
    Prudent, Natasha
    Scott, James E., III
    Wade, Richard
    Luber, George
    APPLIED GEOGRAPHY, 2012, 33 (01) : 36 - 44
  • [24] Student perceptions of using a web-based course management tool (Courseinfo)
    Wood, SL
    Lynn, S
    RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT, 2002, 73 (01) : A84 - A85
  • [25] Prophet, a web-based tool for class prediction using microarray data
    Medina, Ignacio
    Montaner, David
    Tarraga, Joaquin
    Dopazo, Joaquin
    BIOINFORMATICS, 2007, 23 (03) : 390 - 391
  • [26] A Web-Based Tool to Interpolate Nitrogen Loading Using a Genetic Algorithm
    Park, Youn Shik
    Engel, Bernie A.
    WATER, 2014, 6 (09) : 2770 - 2781
  • [27] Commuter choice benefits calculator: Web-based tool for estimating costs and benefits of commuter programs
    Herzog, Erik
    Grant, Michael
    Transportation Research Record, 2002, (1781) : 32 - 39
  • [28] Using web-based distance learning methods to teach nutrient management planners
    Lea-Cox, JD
    Varley, EN
    Ross, DS
    Teffeau, KM
    HORTTECHNOLOGY, 2002, 12 (04) : 736 - 740
  • [29] Assessment of Costs in Harvesting Systems Using WoodChainManager Web-based Tool
    Triplat, Matevz
    Krajnc, Nike
    CROATIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST ENGINEERING, 2020, 41 (01) : 49 - 57
  • [30] Waste Prevention Scenarios Using a Web-Based Tool for Local Authorities
    Lasaridi, Katia
    Hatzi, Ourania
    Batistatos, George
    Abeliotis, Konstadinos
    Chroni, Christina
    Kalogeropoulos, Nick
    Chatzieleftheriou, Costas
    Gargoulas, Nick
    Mavropoulos, Antonis
    Zorpas, Antonis
    Nikolaidou, Maria
    Anagnostopoulos, Dimosthenis
    WASTE AND BIOMASS VALORIZATION, 2015, 6 (05) : 625 - 636