Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Crop and Environment
journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/crop-and-environmentReviewCarbon sequestration potential, challenges, and strategies towards climate
action in smallholder agricultural systems of South Asia
Mangi L. Jat a,*, Debashis Chakraborty b, Jagdish K. Ladha c, Chhiter M. Parihar b, Ashim Datta d,
Biswapati Mandal e, Hari S. Nayak b, Pragati Maity b, Dharamvir S. Rana a,f,
Suresh K. Chaudhari g, Bruno Gerard h,i
a International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), CG Block, NASC Complex Dev Prakash Shastri Marg, Pusa, New Delhi, 110012, India
b ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, 110012, India
c University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, USA
d ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, 132001, India
e Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, 741252, India
f International Rice Research Institute-India, CG Block, NASC Complex Dev Prakash Shastri Marg, Pusa, New Delhi, 110012, India
g Natural Resource Management Division, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Pusa, New Delhi, 110012, India
h International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), El-Batan, Texcoco, Mexico
i UM6P, Ben Guerir, 43150, MoroccoA R T I C L E I N F O
Keywords:
Balanced fertilization
Carbon sequestration
Carbon stock
Conservation agriculture
Global warming potential* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: M.Jat@cgiar.org (M.L. Jat).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crope.2022.03.005
Received 31 January 2022; Received in revised for
2773-126X/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by El
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncA B S T R A C T
South Asia is a global hotspot for climate change with enormous pressure on land and water resources for feeding
the burgeoning population. The agricultural production systems are highly vulnerable in the region and is pri-
marily dominated by small and marginal farmers with intensive farming practices that had favored the loss of
carbon (C) from soil. This review discusses the potential of soil and crop management practices such as minimum/
reduced/no-tillage, use of organic manure, balanced and integrated plant nutrient application, precision land
levelling, precision water and pest management, residue management, and cropping system optimization to
maintain the C-equilibrium between soil and atmosphere and to enhance the C-sequestration in the long run.
Results of meta-analysis show a potential 36% increase in soil organic C stock in the top 0–15 cm layer in this
region which amounts to ~18Mg C stocks ha
1. Improved management practices across crops and environment
may reduce methane em0ission by 12% resulting in an 8% reduction in global warming potential (GWP), while
non-submerged condition led to a 51% GWP reduction in rice. Conservation agriculture and precision fertilization
also reduced GWP by 11 and 14%, respectively. Although several innovative climate resilient technologies having
significant potential for C-sequestration have been developed, there is an urgent need for their scaling and
accelerated adoption to increase soil C-sequestration. Policies and programs need to be devised for incentivizing
farmers to adopt more C-neutral or C-positive agricultural practices. The national governments and other agencies
should work towards C farming together with global initiatives such as the “4 per 1000” Initiative and Global Soil
Partnership, and regional public-private partnership initiatives on carbon credits for Regenerative Agriculture
such as by Grow Indigo-CIMMYT-ICAR in India, in addition to research and policy changes. This will be vital for
the success of soil C sequestration towards climate action in South Asia.1. Introduction
Globally, the average temperature has increased more than one-
degree Fahrenheit since the late 1800s, and most of this increase has
occurred over just the past few decades. The world's most renowned
climate scientists have warned that only a dozen years remain that globalm 21 February 2022; Accepted 2
sevier Ltd on behalf of Huazhong
-nd/4.0/).warming can be kept at a maximum of 1.5 C, beyond which an increase
of even half a degree will significantly worsen the risk of drought, floods,
extreme heat, and poverty for hundreds of millions of people (The
Guardian, 2018). The increase in temperature has resulted from the ris-
ing levels of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere: carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases (F).2 February 2022
Agricultural University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101These levels have risen by about 40% in the last 150 years, with half of
that rise occurring in the last three decades.
About half of cumulative anthropogenic CO2 emissions between 1750
and 2010 have occurred in the last 40 years (IPCC et al., 2014). From
1750 to 1970, cumulative CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion
were 420 35 Gt CO2, and these had tripled to 1300 110 Gt CO2 by
2010. Between 1750 and 2010, cumulative CO2 emissions from forestry
and other land use changes increased from 490 180 Gt CO2 to
680 300 Gt CO2. Of the total GHG emission in 2014, CO2 accounted for
76%, CH4 for 16%, and N2O for 6% (Table 1). At the end of 2019, annual
CO2 emissions from industrial activities and the burning of fossil fuels
have increased to 36.8 Gt, and total CO2 emissions from all human ac-
tivities, including agriculture and land use, have increased to 43.1 Gt of
CO2 (Harvey and Gronewold, 2019). Today, the agricultural sector has a
significant carbon (C) footprint and accounts for >25% of worldwide
anthropogenic GHG emissions. Besides fossil fuel burning, the decom-
position of soil organic matter (SOM) and crop residue burning are major
sources of CO2 emissions. Methane emission in agriculture occurs from
flooded soils under rice cultivation, enteric fermentation in the digestive
systems of livestock, and the decomposition of manure and crop residues
under wet conditions. Emissions of N2O in agriculture result predomi-
nantly from soils fertilized with nitrogen, manure, and compost that
release inorganic nitrogen into the soil. Among the largest emitters in
agriculture are enteric fermentation (40%), manure left on pasture
(16%), synthetic fertilizer (16%), paddy rice (10%), manure manage-
ment (7%), and burning of savannahs (5%) (FAO STAT, 2014).
Carbon dioxide and other gases emitted from industrial and agricul-
tural sources trap heat in the atmosphere, resulting in an increase in
global average temperatures and thus global climate change (IPCC,
2018). The increase in concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere has a
wide range of effects: rising sea levels; the increasing frequency and in-
tensity of wildfires; more extreme weather events such as changes in the
amount, timing, and distribution of rain, snow, and runoff; deadly heat
waves; severe droughts; and tropical storms; and is a threat to food
production. Therefore, controlling the emission of GHGs into the atmo-
sphere is considered as the greatest environmental challenges of this
century (Amundson and Beaudeu, 2018). Globally, economic and pop-
ulation growth are the most important drivers of increasing GHG emis-
sions and are projected to increase continuously in future. Therefore, any
reduction in GHG emissions is uncertain, and further increase in emis-
sions cannot be ruled out.
Soils constitute the largest C pool both in organic and inorganic
forms. The amount of C in SOM ranges from 40 to 60% by weight.
Although SOM usually constitutes less than 5% of soil weight, it is one of
the most important components of a field ecosystem (Lal, 2015).Table 1
Global greenhouse gas emissions (Source: IPCC et al., 2014).
Gas Source Emission rate Percent of
(Gt CO2-e total GHG
yr
1) emission
Carbon Fossil fuel burning 32.5 65
dioxide Forestry and other land use 5.5 11
(CO2) (deforestation, land clearing for
agriculture, and degradation of
soils)
Methane Agricultural activities, waste 7.8 16
(CH4) management, energy use, and
biomass burning
Nitrous oxide Agricultural activities, such as 3.19 6
(N2O) fertilizer use, are the primary
source. Fossil fuel combustion
also generates N2O
Fluorinated Industrial processes, 1.0 2
(F-gases) refrigeration, and the use of a
variety of consumer products
[include hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs),
and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)]
87Globally, approximately 2300–2500 Gt of C (about 60% organic and 40%
inorganic) is stored in the top 2m (1200–1600 Gt in 1m) of soil, of which
about 70% is stored in the subsoil below 0.2m (Batjes, 1998; Paustian
et al., 2016). The amount of C in soils is more than three times that of C in
terrestrial vegetation, and at least 230 times higher than the 2009 global
CO2 emissions (Sommer and Bossio, 2014). From this amount, approxi-
mately 60 Gt of C is exchanged with the atmosphere annually (Eswaran
et al., 1993; Schlesinger, 1997; Solomon et al. 2007). Because of large C
pool, soils offer the potential for GHGmitigation through C sequestration
in aboveground biomass or soils. Additionally, the management of bio-
physiochemical properties of soil and vegetation mitigates climate
change by reducing emissions. Globally, there has been a strong interest
in capturing C in agricultural soils, not only to mitigate the risk of global
warming, but also to improve the soil quality (Bernoux et al., 2006; FAO
and ITPS, 2015; Lal, 1997; 2011; Minasny et al., 2017; Paustian et al.,
2016; Smith, 2008; World Bank, 2012).
This paper reviews general aspects of soil C sequestration, including
its potential and associated challenges and risks, with a special reference
to South Asia. It presents a detailed account of management practices to
enhance soil C storage and GHG mitigation, and a meta-analysis of
published appraisals in the cropping systems of South Asia.
2. South Asia – a hot spot for soil C loss and GHG emissions
Agriculture in South Asia is predominantly cereal-based, i.e. the
cultivation of about 40 million hectares with multiple cereal crops or a
single cereal crop, followed by a non-cereal crop such as legumes, veg-
etables, or potatoes, in an annual rotation (http://www.fao.org/3/y18
60e/y1860e07.htm). Rapid population growth and climate unpredict-
ability in South Asia will increase the demand for food by at least 40% by
2050 (Bodirsky et al., 2015). Meeting this projected need is doubly
challenging, considering that 94% of the land suitable for farming is
already under production and that 58% of agricultural areas face mul-
tiple hazards such as water shortage and extreme heat stress (Amarnath
et al., 2017). It is anticipated that the current situation will worsen with
climate change, which includes rising temperatures (Muthukumara et al.,
2018). The region is undergoing rapid economic growth, resulting in an
increase in the emission of GHGs into the atmosphere. As of 2017, South
Asia accounted for 7.5% of the world's total CO2 emission from burning
fossil fuels, of which India's share was 6.6% and the remaining less than
1% was shared by seven other countries in the region (Table 2). A large
proportion of the total GHG emission from agriculture in South Asia
comes from CH4 and N2O, representing 17% of the world's total in 2017
with 179% increase since 1990 (Table 3). India accounted for 11.8% and
the other seven countries for the remaining 5.2% of total global CH4 and
N2O emissions. Among the major sources of GHG emissions, rice culti-
vation is responsible for both CH4 and N2O emissions (Table 4). In South
Asia, on a CO2-equivalent (CO2-e) basis, rice cultivation (134697 Gg) and
N fertilization (141935 Gg) are responsible for the largest emissions.
Other sources of CH4 emissions include crop residue burning (3447 GgTable 2
Fossil CO2 emissions by country/region in 2017.
Country Total (Mt Percent Per land Per capita % increase
CO2 yr
1) of world area (t CO2 (t CO2 from 1990
km
2 cap
1
yr
1) yr
1)
World 37077.4 100 73 4.9 63.5
South Asia 2782.5 7.5 654 1.1 561
Afghanistan 11.4 0.03 18 0.3 349
Bangladesh 84.5 0.23 573 0.5 510
Bhutan 1.45 0.00 38 1.8 599
India 2454.7 6.62 747 1.8 305
Maldives 0.96 0.00 3213 2.2 1383
Nepal 8.21 0.02 56 0.3 671
Pakistan 197.3 0.53 224 1.0 198
Sri Lanka 23.98 0.6 365 1.1 473
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101
Table 3
Methane and nitrous oxide emissions (CO2-e) in 2017 and CO2 emission in 2012 from agriculture in south-Asian countries (Source: FAOSTAT).
Country Emission (Mt yr
1) Emission (% of world) Increase from 1990 (%)
CO a
2 CH4 NO2 Total (CH4þN2O) CH4 N2O Total CH4 N2O
World 817.5 2984.19 2426.28 100 100 100 59.7 11.8 26.0
South Asia 165.02 615.13 337.15 17.0 20.6 13.9 178.7 23.7 66.4
Afghanistan 13.82 8.70 5.12 0.3 0.3 0.2 88.4 92.9 81.1
Bangladesh 77.30 50.13 27.16 1.4 1.7 1.1 33.2 18.6 72.4
Bhutan 0.46 0.35 0.11 0.0 0.0 0.0 
17.3 
19.8 
7.5
India 639.42 415.36 224.06 11.8 13.9 9.2 27.2 13.9 62.4
Maldives 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 850.0 0.00
Nepal 22.45 16.57 5.88 0.4 0.6 0.2 42.1 37.2 57.7
Pakistan 163.96 106.65 57.31 3.0 3.6 2.4 112.7 109.8 118.2
Sri Lanka 4.57 3.05 1.53 0.1 0.1 0.1 
26.2 
32.1 
10.4
a Associated with fuel burning and generation of electricity used in agriculture including fisheries estimated in 2012.
Table 4
Major sources of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture in South Asia during
2017 (Source: FAOSTAT).
Emissions of GHG in terms of CO2-e (Gg)
Rice cultivation Synthetic Applied Crop Burning
fertilizer manure residue of crop
residue
CH4 N2O N2O N2O N2O CH4
South Asia 134697 1434 141935 24052 34757 3447
Afghanistan 322 23 909 495 403 59
Bangladesh 23529 148 8007 1830 3935 386
Bhutan 50 1 5 14 13 2
India 97070 1050 109466 15644 26148 2744
Nepal 3414 45 591 708 762 119
Pakistan 8528 156 22249 5273 3318 409
Sri Lanka 1774 11 708 88 178 28CO2-e), and other sources of N2O emissions include the application of
manure (24052 Gg CO2-e) and crop residues (34757Gg CO2-e) to soils.
Meeting the increased demand for food during the Green Revolution
was associated with intensive cropping, soil management, and the use of
agrochemicals, hence, resulted in the gradual loss of SOM (Singh et al.,
2009; Yadvinder-Singh et al., 2004). Although crop productivity has
doubled or tripled during the last decades, negative impacts on the
environment, biodiversity, soil, and air quality are common conse-
quences (Godfray et al., 2014; Tilman et al., 2011). Conventional culti-
vation practices with exhaustive tillage and removal of crop residues by
burning or for other uses in South Asia have not only resulted in nutrient
and C losses but have also created a severe air pollution problem (Lohan
et al., 2018). About 2 million farmers in northwest India burn an esti-
mated 23 million tons of rice residues every year (NAAS, 2017). In some
of the cities of northwest India, particulate air pollution in 2017 exceeded
by more than five times the safe daily threshold limit, causing severe
health problems both in rural and urban areas (Cusworth et al., 2018).
Continuous tillage with the removal or burning of crop residues has also
brought about the loss of SOM, resulting in a lower threshold, and
adversely affecting soil functioning (Lal, 1997).
3. Carbon sequestration
The term “C sequestration” has been defined in many ways (Bernoux
et al., 2005) but broadly it is used to describe both natural and deliberate
processes by which CO2 is either removed from the atmosphere or
diverted from emission sources and stored in the terrestrial environment
(vegetation, soils, and sediments), oceans, and geological formations
(USGS, 2011). It is the process of capture and long-term storage of CO2 in
a stable state. This process can be direct or indirect, and can be biological,
chemical, geological, or physical in nature. When inorganic CO2 is
sequestered directly by plants through photosynthesis or through
chemical reactions in the soil, this process is often called “C fixation”.88Biological processes that occur in soils, wetlands, forests, oceans, and
other ecosystems can store CO2, which is referred as “C sinks”.
Bernoux et al. (2005) argued that since soils are associated with CH4
and N2O as well as with CO2 fluxes, the concept of “soil C sequestration”
should not be limited to considerations of C storage or CO2 balance. All
GHG fluxes must be computed at the plot level, or preferably at the level
of the entire soil-plant pools of agroecosystems in C–CO2 or CO2-e,
incorporating as many emission sources and sinks as possible for the
entire soil-plant system. These fluxes may originate from different
ecosystem pools: solid or dissolved, organic or mineral. Bernoux et al.
(2005) proposed that “soil C sequestration” or better, “soil-plant C
sequestration”, should be considered as the result of the net balance of all
GHGs, expressed in C–CO2 or CO2-e, computing all emission sources and
sinks of a given agroecosystem in comparison to a reference agro-
ecosystem, for a given period.
Beyond its role in climate-change mitigation, SOM is not only a key
component in nutrient cycling, but also influences a wide range of
ecosystem services including water availability and quality and soil
erodibility and is a source of energy for the soil biota that act as biological
control agents for the pests and diseases of plants, livestock and even
humans (Swift et al., 2004). SOM is most beneficial when it decays and
releases energy and nutrients, and therefore its turnover is more impor-
tant than the accrual of non-productive organic matter deposits (Leh-
mann and Kleber, 2015). We propose that a definition of C sequestration
should encompass not only the components of SOM in C storage (or soil C
sequestration) and GHG mitigation, but also the characteristic dynamic
turnover that results in labile pools essential for maintaining soil health.
Therefore, there are two highly related aspects of C sequestration that
aim to attain food security under a changing climate: (1) reducing GHG
emissions for mitigating climate change, and (2) increasing soil C storage
and linked C recycling for improving the efficient use of resources (i.e.
water, energy, and nutrients).
4. Soil C sequestration potential
4.1. Global
Soils act both as a C sink (gain) and a C source (loss). There is a
continual gain and loss of soil C that establishes a dynamic equilibrium.
Eventually, the ability of a soil system to sequester C lies in the balance
between net gains and net losses. Before the dramatic increase in C
emissions during the industrial revolution, the global C cycle, or “C flux”
was maintained at a near balance between uptake of CO2 (sinks) and its
release back into the atmosphere (sources). Therefore, soil organic car-
bon (SOC) can be characterized as a dynamic equilibrium between gains
and losses. Practices that either increase gains (i.e. increase inputs) or
reduce losses can promote soil C sequestration. The soil C gain occurs
largely from photosynthetically captured C (referred to as NPP, net pri-
mary productivity) and from the recycling of a part of the NPP as crop
residues, including root biomass, rhizodepositions or manure/organic
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101
Fig. 1. The ‘4 per 1000’ soil carbon sequestration initiative (Soussana et al.
2019) [Full technical potential of soil C sequestration at 3.7 Gt C y
1 in 2030-40
with enhanced land C sink scenario; Fossil fuel and cement emissions of 10.9 Gt
C y
1 follow Paris agreement for 2030; 0.7 Gt C emission by net land use change
(a reduction of 25% from current estimates); atmospheric growth of CO2 is zero
by halting net deforestation].waste. The loss of soil C occurs largely from respiration by plants and the
microbial decomposition and mineralization of organic residues to CO2
and CH4. In addition, soil erosion (Lal, 2004c) and photodegradation of
surface litter (Austin and Vivanco, 2006) are other important forms of C
loss.
Natural ecosystems are undisturbed and strike a balance of C gains
over C losses, hence maintain greater C storage or C sinks. But the con-
version of stable natural ecosystems to disturbed agricultural systems
promotes soil C loss, converting soil from a net sink to a source of GHGs.
It is interesting to note that globally, about 50% of vegetated land surface
has been converted to agriculture (Zomer et al., 2017). A recent estimate
indicated that since the beginning of agriculture about 10–12 millennia
ago, 456 Gt of C has been lost from the terrestrial biosphere (Lal et al.,
2018). There are two components: (1) from the prehistoric era to about
1750, the loss is estimated as 320 Gt; and (2) from 1750 to the present
era, there has been a further loss of 136 Gt. Another estimate reported the
reduction of soil C by 128 Gt during the 10,000 years of cultivation
(Sanderman et al., 2017). On the other hand, Paustian et al. (2016) re-
ported a soil C loss of 0.5 to >2Mg C per hectare per year following the
conversion of a natural ecosystem to cropland. This would result in the
loss of 30–50% of the total C stock in the top 30 cm layer of topsoil until a
new equilibrium was established.
The large historic losses over a large time frame, and the fact that soil
possesses two to three times more C storage capacity than the atmo-
sphere, have led to a belief that soil has the potential to mitigate GHG
emissions and climate change via sequestering soil C. During the last few
decades, several researchers have published a range of estimates of soil C
sequestration/C storage potential in agriculture. Based on 22 published
studies, Fuss et al. (2018) reported global estimates of technical potential
annual C sequestration rates ranging from 0.51 to 11.37 Gt of CO2
(0.13–3.09 Gt C). A large range of reported estimates represented diverse
agroecologies/systems (croplands, desertified area, and drylands), and
management practices (soil reclamation, zero tillage, agroforestry,
restoration of degraded land, and grazing management). The discrep-
ancies in the areas assumed for extrapolation (e.g. all cropland is
amenable to sequestration as opposed to areas of degraded land that are
not) were reported to be the main reason for the large variation in the
reported rates of SOC sequestration. In addition, variations in soil depths
and the SOC equilibrium durations used for extrapolation cannot be ruled
out. Nevertheless, based on the median values of minimums/maximums
ranges, the best estimate of technical potential was 3.8 (2.3–5.3) Gt CO2
yr
1 or 1.03 (0.62–1.44) Gt C yr
1.
It is encouraging that a strong interest in this area is not limited to the
scientific community only. Recently in the global C agenda for climate-
change mitigation and adaptation, soils have become a part through
the initiation of three high level programmes (Amelung et al., 2020).
Firstly, in 2015, the French government launched the “4 per 1000”
(4p1000) initiative at the 21st Conference of Parties (COP) of the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as part of
the Lima Paris Climate Agreement. The agreement recommended a
voluntary plan of 4p1000 to sequester C in world soils at the rate of 0.4%
or 4‰ (4 per mille) annually (Minasny et al., 2017; Rumpel et al., 2020;
Soussana et al. 2019; UNFCCC, 2017). Secondly, at COP23 in 2018, the
Koronivia workshops on agriculture were launched, giving emphasis on
soils and SOC for climate-change mitigation. And finally in 2019, the
FAO launched a program for the recarbonization of soils, called RECSOIL
(FAO, 2019).
In 4p1000 initiative, the value of 0.43% is based on the ratio of global
anthropogenic C emissions and total SOC stock (3.7 Gt/860 Gt) (Fig. 1).
Annual GHGs emissions from fossil C are estimated at 3.7 Gt per year and
a global estimate of soil C stock of 860 Gt at 40 cm of soil depth. The
value of 3.7 Gt C of emissions per year comes from the range of 2–5 Gt C
estimated by Fuss et al. (2018). For agricultural soils, Smith (2016)
estimated the value of 0.45%, which is based on 1.3 Gt C of emissions per
year and an agricultural SOC stock of 286 Gt C at 0–40 cm depth (Job-
bagy and Jackson, 2000). For a 0–30 cm depth, the same annual89sequestration potential would be equal to 0.53% of emissions and 0.56%
of global and agricultural soil stocks (690 and 23 Gt C, respectively).
Considering the land area of the world as 149 million km2, the average
amount of C is calculated to be 161 tonnes of SOC per hectare, and 0.4%
of this would be 0.6 tonnes of C per hectare per year.
It has been argued that the initiative's target of 4p1000 is highly
ambitious, and important questions have been raised as to whether it is
feasible to increase SOC stocks by 0.4% per year on average around the
world (Baveye et al., 2018; De Vries, 2018; Poulton et al., 2018; Van-
denBygaart, 2017; van Groeningen et al., 2017; White et al., 2018).
Soussana et al. (2019) and Rumpel et al. (2020) mentioned that 4p1000
initiative is indeed an aspirational goal with much uncertainty about
what is achievable but aimed to promote concerted research and devel-
opment programs on good soil management that could help mitigate
climate change. They discussed various specific criticisms of the initiative
in relation to biophysical, agronomic, and socioeconomic issues, and
provided a more realistic scenario of what was possible and not possible.
Subsequently, Amundson and Beaudeu (2018) further elaborated on the
challenges and complexities involved in achieving this goal, and opined
that adaptationmay bemore relevant thanmitigation. They proposed the
concept of “weather proofing soils” which would involve the develop-
ment and promotion of improved soil C management approaches that are
more adaptable. Recently, Amelung et al. (2020) suggested a soil-specific
perspective on feasible C sequestration and some of its trade-offs. They
also highlighted that crop land soils with large yield gap and/or large
historic SOC losses have major potential for carbon sequestration. A
greater need for local, reusable, and diversified knowledge on preser-
vation and restoration of higher SOC stocks has been suggested (Beillouin
et al., 2021). A few promising sustainable management options with
higher SOC sequestration potential were identified for farmers in
America (Cerri et al., 2021).
4.2. South Asia
South Asia accounts for less than 5% of the world's total land area and
supports around 25% of the world's population (FAO STAT, 2017).
Around 50% of the land area is used for agricultural purposes and is
characterized by tropical, dry, and temperate climates along with diverse
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101ecosystems, land uses, and management practices. The region is densely
populated, and per capita land availability in some countries is less than
0.1 ha and is continuously decreasing. The possibility of increasing crop
area is limited. The region is undergoing rapid industrialization
contributing to greater emission of GHGs. In addition, there is rapid
degradation of soil quality with low SOM content due to fertility-mining
practices (removal and burning of residues, unrestrained and excessive
grazing, and imbalanced use of nutrients). Lal (2004a, b, c) reported a C
sequestration potential of 7–10 Tg C yr
1 and 18–35 Tg C yr
1 from
restoration of degraded land in India and South Asia, respectively. With
the adoption of recommended management practices on the cropland of
South Asia, SOC potential was estimated to be 11–22 Tg C yr
1 (Lal,
2004c). The underlying assumptions included were the implementation
of appropriate policies to promote recommended management practices
such as conservation agriculture (CA), mulch farming, cover crops, in-
tegrated nutrient management with manuring and biological nitrogen
fixation, and water conservation and harvesting. Lal (2004a, c) also re-
ported a soil inorganic C sequestration potential of 19–27 Tg C yr
1 of
secondary carbonates and 26–38 Tg C yr
1 of leaching of carbonates in
the arid regions of South Asia. Using International Soil Reference and
Information Centre (ISRIC) Soil Grids 250m and FAO GLC Share Land
Cover database, Zomer et al. (2017) reported a C sequestration potential
of 0.11–0.23 Pg C hr
1 in South Asia. Assuming that C sequestration
continues for 20 years, the current soil C stock of 7.68 Pg is likely to
increase to 9.87 or 12.18 Pg for medium and high sequestration sce-
narios, respectively. Grace et al. (2012), using IPCC methodology
together with local data, calculated a sequestration potential of 44.1Mt C
over 20 years from the implementation of zero tillage practices in
rice-wheat systems of India.
5. Challenges associated with SOC sequestration
SOC sequestration is a dynamic process, and the amount and duration
of C storage depends on the pools (active/labile vs. recalcitrant/passive)
and their cycling (Six et al., 2001), the form of stabilization (chem-
ical/physical), and the physical location (inter/intra-aggregate vs. free)
of the C in the soil (Balesdent et al., 2000; Six et al., 2001). Rates of
turnover of organic matter depend on soil properties such as clay content
and nutrient status. Clay is one of the key carbon-capture materials and
tends to bind organic matter in soil and helps to protect it from microbial
breakdown (Yang et al., 2021). Yang et al. (2021) also showed that the
quasi-irreversible sorption of high molecular-weight sugars within clay
aggregates, inaccessible by the microbes is responsible for clay-C pro-
tection. In addition, temperature plays a crucial role, which is complex
because of variation in the temperature sensitivities of different SOM
fractions (Conant et al., 2011). The impact of temperature becomes more
crucial with a rise in ambient temperature due to climate forcing,
resulting in microbially-driven increases in decomposition. Therefore,
there are limits to C sequestration which are not only biophysical but also
include technical and economic barriers.
5.1. Retention of C in a soil is not unlimited (C saturation)
Over time, SOC reaches a steady-state equilibrium, balancing C gains
and losses. Since organic inputs vary in quality, quantity, and subsequent
interactions with soil constituents and environment, the ability of a soil
to retain C is not unlimited. Carbon saturation is often used to describe
the maximum capacity of a soil to retain C as a stabilized fraction based
on soil properties (Stewart et al., 2007). Sanderman et al. (2009) opined
that while the term ‘soil C saturation’ is conceptually and theoretically
appealing, the results from some of the long-term experiments may not
support it. For example, Blair et al. (2006) found that total C stocks
increased linearly with input levels of up to 200Mg dry weight ha
1 for
15 years, without showing any signs of saturating behavior. However,
Stewart et al. (2008) found some evidence of saturation. Likewise,
Johnston et al. (2009) reported that the annual addition of farmyard90manure (FYM) in the Broadbalk long-term experiment at Rothamsted
increased C over the 160-year period, but the higher increase in early
years was followed by a slower increase in later years, arriving at a new
equilibrium. The time taken for soil to reach a new equilibrium tends to
vary not only between soils within a temperate or tropical environment
but also between the environments. It normally takes a longer time to
reach equilibrium in a temperate soil than in a tropical soil (Jenkinson,
1988; Paustian et al., 1997; Smith et al., 1996). It has been suggested that
SOC saturation depends on clay and silt content and that there is a critical
C concentration below which a soil's function is reduced (Stockmann
et al., 2015). Nevertheless, most current SOC models assume first-order
kinetics for the decomposition of various conceptual pools of organic
matter (McGill, 1996; Paustian, 1994), which means that equilibrium C
stocks are linearly proportional to C inputs (Paustian et al., 1997).
5.2. Carbon storage in soil is not permanent (Non-permanence)
Carbon stored in soils is non-permanent. With changes in land use and
land management, soil loses C, which can only be maintained or
increased with the continuous addition of C input. By changing agricul-
tural management or land use, soil C is lost more rapidly than it accu-
mulates (Smith et al., 1996). Soil clay plays an important role in retaining
C. Agricultural soil with a 50% clay content requires >2.2Mg C ha
1
annually to maintain a given C level, while agricultural soil containing a
30% clay content requires more than 6.5Mg C ha
1 annually. In addition,
the rate of C input must be higher at existing soil C levels to maintain a
level stock of C in the soil (Biala, 2011).
Microbial decomposition and mineralization to CO2 is the major
outcome of organic C. Approximately 1–2% of crop residues are stabi-
lized as humified SOM for a period (Schlesinger, 1990) that are
composed of large complex macromolecules, carbohydrates, proteina-
ceous materials, and lipids. This could be 60–85% of the total SOM
(Haider and Guggenberger, 2005). However, this notion, which was
based on chemical analysis of the extracted materials has been chal-
lenged, and recent understanding suggests that humic substances are
marginally important (Kleber and Johnson, 2010). Based on direct
high-resolution in situ observations with non-destructive techniques, it
has been established that humic substances are rather simple, smaller
biomolecules (Kelleher and Simpson, 2006). Although Hayes and Swift
(2020) however, strongly disagreed with these views. They presented a
detailed account of decomposition processes leading to the formation of a
range of products including soil humic substances with a degree of
resistance to microbial degradation. The new thinking in SOM research
suggests that the molecular structure of plant inputs and organic matter
has a secondary role in determining C residence times over decades to
millennia, and that C stability depends mainly on the biotic and abiotic
environment (Schmidt et al., 2011). The biotic and abiotic factors along
with dynamics of labile C pools are required to evaluate management,
land use, and climate change effects on SOC changes and soil function-
alities (Kopittke et al., 2022). New findings suggest that microbial
decomposition actually facilitates long-term C sequestration by main-
taining C flow through the soil profile (Dynarski et al., 2020; Roth et al.,
2019), and that infrequent tillage may not cause sufficient disruption of
soil aggregates leading to C loss (Cooper et al., 2016). Schmidt et al.
(2011) proposed that a new generation of experiments and soil C models
will be needed to make advances in our understanding of SOM and our
responses to global warming.
5.3. Socio-economic constraints
While many land and crop management practices are known to
enhance SOC sequestration, benefit accrual is constrained by the exis-
tence of numerous adverse forces on the ground. Table 5 provides key
adoption constraints to an effective SOC sequestration strategy, the
existing practice, and their implications. There are major barriers for
farmers to adopt SOC sequestration practices because of the trade-offs
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101
Table 5
Socioeconomic constraints to adoption of potential SOC sequestration practices.
SOC sequestration Practices Adoption constraint Major reasons for mismanagement (trade-offs) Implications or risk of mismanagement
No open grazing Lack of dedicated pastureland for grazing, shortage Excessive uncontrolled grazing, community/social Results in bare fallow and soil surface
of fodder, poor economic conditions of farmers structure, lack of regulations exposure to wind and water erosion and
especially landless livestock farmers loss of SOC
Scientific land use plans and Ineffective policies Good quality soils used for other purposes such as Loss of soil and SOC, virgin/forest soils
sustainable soil brick making, urbanization are put under agricultural use
management
Zero or reduced tillage Lack of knowledge and machinery, conventional Conventional/intensive tillage (CT)-based CT results in loss of SOC and GHG
tillage-based mindset legacy and misconceptions, mindset, lack of incentives for eco-system services emissions
lack of locally adapted packages
Crop residue retention/ Other economic usages of crop residue such as Residue removed or burned Wrong use of crop residue and burning
recycling fodder, fuel and fencing/no cheaper and easy results in loss of C and GHG emissions
options of burning, lack of knowledge and capacity
Application of biochar Technology constraint, economic constraints Biochar application is not a common practice Increase in GHG emissions, risk of
respiratory diseases, toxicity
Balanced use of nutrients Knowledge gap, non-availability, affordability Imbalanced or inadequate and inefficient use of Loss of soil fertility and sub-optimal
including organic nutrients crop yields due to loss of C and GHG
amendment emissions
Crop need based N Knowledge gap, fertilizer subsidy in many Inefficient including either inadequate or excess Low levels of SOC from inadequate N
application developing countries use of N fertilizer use or loss of SOC and increase in N2O
emissions from excess of N
Controlled water application Poor irrigation infrastructure, bad policies such as Inefficient water management SOC loss and increased GHG emission
heavy subsidy on energy and water from frequent soil wetting and drying
Use of crop varieties with No breeding efforts for deep rooting traits Use of varieties with shallow rooting Inadequate root biomass
SOC associated traits such
as deep rooting
Fallow management: cover Poor land management and lack of financial Bare fallow SOC loss and GHG emissions
crop, weedy fallow incentives
Crop rotation optimization Knowledge gap, poor infrastructure, lack of Sub-optimal crop rotation, i.e. rotations with long SOC loss of GHG emissions
incentives fallow or rotations with contrasting edaphic
management requirement (rice-wheat rotation)involved. For example, the removal of crop residues from the field for
other uses such as fodder, fuel, and fencing are traditional practices for
managing residues. Not only is this an economical option for farmers, but
there is also a lack of knowledge and capacity which discourages the
adoption of practices promoting SOC sequestration. Likewise, shifting to
zero- or reduced-tillage requires altering farm implements/equipment
and the substitution of conventional crop and weed-control methods. The
adoption of practices to enhance SOC also involves additional costs and
the risk of getting lower yields in the short term. Much remains unknown
about SOC storage, so it is difficult to estimate total benefits and to know
which soil management practices offer the most potential for a given soil
type, climate, and crop.
6. Risks associated with SOC sequestration
Not only does SOC sequestration involve economic and biological
costs but there can also be environmental cost. When mismanaged, some
management practices that are known to result in C sequestration and
GHG mitigation risk losing SOC and/or enhancing GHG emissions.
Notably, N fertilization, either from organic (manure) or inorganic
(synthetic fertilizer) source, has negative consequences when applied
sub-optimally–used either insufficiently or excessively. On one hand,
when applied in inadequate amounts over time, for example in Africa,
then there is no or negligible soil C build up (Ladha et al., 2020). On the
other hand, when applied in excess, for example in China and India, then
soil C decreases from enhanced decomposition, which increases N2O
emission, NH3 volatilization, and/or NO3 leaching. No-till compared to
conventional tillage is another example of a practice that is reported to
result in higher N2O emissions (Van Kessel et al., 2013). No-till adoption
may also increase the use of herbicides and pesticides, potentially
affecting the environment (Friedrich et al., 2012). Sub-optimal or excess
organic amendment to soil can also have an adverse effect on grain yield
from nutrient immobilization. A growing interest in biofuel, resulting in a
competition for fixed C, could also be a threat to SOC sequestration
(Janzen, 2006), as the use of biofuel involves burning of C which origi-
nated recently from photosynthetic activity.917. Management practices to enhance C sequestration
Lal et al. (2007) proposed six soil C management strategies to increase
SOC: (1) minimum disturbance of soil, (2) maintenance of permanent
ground cover, (3) intensification of nutrient recycling mechanisms, (4)
creation of a positive nutrient balance, (5) enhancement of biodiversity,
and (6) reduction in losses of water and nutrients. These strategies are
generally applicable in South Asia and could be achieved notably through
conversion of degraded land to perennial vegetation, increasing the NPP
of agricultural ecosystems, and converting conventional tillage to no-till
farming (Lal et al., 2007) opined that a C-management strategy should
not only be able to increase SOC content, but also should have some
potential for reducing GHG emissions. Carbon management practices are
aimed at increasing the ecosystem C balance by adding more C into the
soil (e.g. through planting crops), increasing below- and above-ground
biomass (e.g. forests and agroforestry), sequestering SOC (all ecosys-
tems) (Soussana et al. 2019), and also reducing C losses from the soil
(Paustian et al., 2016). In the eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains of India, CA
management practices like zero tillage with partial residue retention in
rice-wheat systems could increase SOC content by 4.7Mg C ha
1 after
seven years of practice (Sapkota et al., 2017). Avoidance of adverse land
use, management strategies, and restoration of degraded land can help in
maintaining SOC stocks in soil (Paustian et al., 2016; Soussana et al.
2019). Table 6 provides details of various management options for
increasing soil SOC stocks and reducing GHG emissions.
7.1. Precision land leveling
Proper land leveling is known to enhance input use efficiency, crop
growth, and yield (Aryal et al., 2015). In South Asia, the majority of
agricultural lands are poorly leveled by traditional land-leveling prac-
tices (Jat et al., 2006; Ladha et al., 2009). Precision land leveling (PLL) is
laser-assisted, and very fine leveling of land is achieved with the desired
grade within 2 cm of its average micro elevation (Jat et al., 2015). PLL
is known to lower GHG emission by improving water and N use efficiency
(Jat et al., 2015). Under Indian conditions, PLL could reduce almost
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101
Table 6
Key management options for SOC benefits.
Practices GHG mitigation Soil C stocks SOC Other value addition
sequestration
net balance
Land leveling Lower GHG emissions from No or negligible change þ Improvements in crop productivity
improved water use through better crop establishment and
efficiency input (i.e. water) use efficiencies
Tillage: zero or reduced tillage with drill/ Lower GHG emissions from Increase in SOC in surface soil layer þ Improvements in soil aggregates, resource
direct-seeding energy saving associated efficiencies and economic returns
with zero tillage
Crop residue management: no burning/ No burning is known to Soil mulch increases soil C stocks þþþ Organic amendment including soil mulch
residue retention as soil mulch reduce GHG emissions. and biochar application stimulate soil
Residue retention will biological activity and slow nutrient
increase CO2 emissions release
Application of biochar Increase in net CO2 removal Increases soil C þþ Biochar enriches soil and stores SOC in a
from atmosphere. stable form and it improves pasture
management and effectively controls soil
erosion
Use of manure with or without inorganic Enhances CO2 emissions Enhances soil C storage þþ Enhances nutrient availability after
fertilizer decomposition. Supports more diverse soil
microbial communities and increases
microbial biomass contributing to
increase in SOM
Water management: controlled water Flooding enhances CH4 Enhances soil C storage through þþ Critical for mineralization and release of
application emissions and alternate plant and microbial growth. nutrients
wetting/drying reduces CH4 Flooding enhances soil C storage.
and increases N2O but Irrigation in dry lands increases C
overall GWP is lower inputs and thereby C storage
Crop variety trait: deep rooting Likely to reduce N2O Deep rooting enhances soil C storage þ Deep rooting may enhance root activity
emission from greater crop hence better nutrient availability
uptake on N
Nutrient management: nitrogen, other Smart N application reduces N and other nutrients enhance plant þþ N stimulates decomposition of SOM and
nutrients N2O emissions and lower growth and soil C storage, but excess thereby nutrient release
GWP N fertilization may also burn SOC
Pest management No or negligible change No or negligible change þ Improvements in crop productivity and
higher biomass return to soil
Fallow management: cover crop, weedy Soil cover with live mulch Soil cover with live mulch of right þþ Soil cover with live mulch of right lignin/
fallow reduces GHG emissions lignin/N enhances C storage N enhances labile C and N pools. Cover
crops can capture nutrients otherwise
prone to losses such as nitrate leaching.
Continuous soil cover of vegetation
reduces vulnerability of soil to C loss
Crop rotation optimization/sustainable CO2 emissions likely to Potential to increase SOC through þþ Higher system productivity, input use
intensification increase but overall GWP greater C inputs efficiency and economic returns
lower
Aerobic rice cultivation under CH4 emission will reduce, Likely to maintain SOC with residue þþ Higher input use efficiency and economic
conservation agriculture may increase N2O but overall mulch with zero tillage returns
GWP will be lower
Rice production practices that minimize Both CH4 and N2O emission Likely to maintain SOC through þ Higher input use efficiency and economic
CH4 emission: growing rice cultivars reduces, GWP will be lower better management, may increase returns, increase in soil C in rhizosphere
that inhibit CH4 production, more through microbiome
effective water and fertilizer
management, microbiome
manipulation to enhance C
sequestration in rhizosphere0.15Mg of CO2-e ha
1 year
1 of GHG emissions due to less time spent for
pumping irrigation water and decreased cultivation time (Gill, 2014).
PLL is critical for efficient water use and for increasing water produc-
tivity, and improves crop productivity through better crop establishment
practices (Aggarwal et al., 2010; Ahmed et al., 2001; Jat et al., 2011).
There has been 6–11% (Sidhu et al., 2007) and 10–25% (Singh et al.,
2007) increases in wheat yields in Punjab, India due to PLL. The asso-
ciated increase in NPP in terms of crop residues and below ground
biomass can be a source of soil C if further managed properly.7.2. Zero or reduced tillage with drill/direct-seeding
Loss of SOC is often attributed to the practice of tilling the soil.
Adoption of zero or reduced tillage will enable SOC sequestration, and is
believed to be one of the key global mitigation strategies of climate
change. Zero tillage has been widely reported as a viable option in
increasing the C storage in soils (Corbeels et al., 2016; Francaviglia et al.,922017; Virto et al., 2012), although few have reported no change (de
Sant-Anna et al., 2017; Dimassi et al., 2014). Most of the cases where zero
tillage showed SOC increase, were mostly sampled to a depth of 30 cm or
less, thereby not-revealing changes down the profile. In limited studies,
where soil sampling was beyond 30 cm, no apparent difference in SOC
between conservation and conventional tillage was recorded (Baker
et al., 2007; VandenBygaart et al., 2003). Soil aggregates are stabilized
under reduced and zero tillage practice, which physically protect C from
mineralization (Kumari et al., 2011; Merante et al., 2017), however, the
effect is realized over the long run (Six et al., 2004). The effect of zero
tillage is dependent on climate, especially on rainfall, and the effect is
more pronounced in drier areas (Chenu et al., 2019). The energy re-
quirements of zero tillage and reduced tillage are less, so GHG emissions
are lower (Aryal et al., 2015a; Grace et al., 2003). GHG emissions were
reduced by 1.5Mg CO2-e ha
1 year
1 in zero tillage-based wheat (Aryal
et al., 2015a) and maize systems (Parihar et al., 2018).
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–1017.3. Crop residue management
Crop residue return (biomass return after harvesting) has positive
impacts on SOC, however, its effectiveness varies with tillage practices
(Zhang et al., 2014; Zhao et al., 2017). Retaining residues on the soil
surface increases the soil C sequestration (Lou et al., 2011; Wang et al.,
2015; Zhao et al., 2020), whereas residue incorporation with inversion
tillage may lead to higher N2O and CH4 emissions (Hu et al., 2016; Koga
and Tajima, 2011). Amount of residue return is positively related to the C
sequestration (Lou et al., 2011). Residue return with optimum fertilizer
input, paddy-upland rotation, improved crop cultivars, and use of le-
gumes in rotation are some of the improved management practices for
enhancing amounts of crop residue return to the soil (Soussana et al.
2019; Wang et al., 2020). Crop retention can reduce the requirement of
fertilizer (Jat et al., 2018; Prade et al., 2017) and therefore, may limit the
GHG emission. The application of biochar (a synthesized product from
crop residues and other organic sources) to soil has the potential to offset
12% of global GHG emissions, as it can stabilize decaying organic matter
and associated CO2 release, and can remain in soil for hundreds or even
thousands of years (Levitan, 2009). The retention over longer period is
due to reduction in mineralization rate by 10–100 times from that of crop
biomass (Lehmann et al., 2015). A meta-analysis reported that biochar
can either increase or decrease soil C depending on the types of bio-
char/soil and duration (Majumder et al., 2019). In addition to its effect
on SOC, biochar application may decrease soil N2O emissions (Paustian
et al., 2019) to an extent of 9–12% (Verhoeven et al., 2017) or even 50%
(Cayuela et al., 2014).
7.4. Water management
Improved water management enhances C sequestration by increasing
NPP and the subsequent addition of biomass to soil (Soussana et al.,
2019; Sykes et al., 2018). It is estimated that improved water manage-
ment could mitigate 1.14 t CO2-e ha
1 year
1 of GHG emissions (Aryal
et al., 2020). In dryland agricultural system, crop productivity and the
above- and below-ground inputs of C to the soil can be improved through
efficient water management practices which enhances the
plant-available water (Plaza-Bonilla et al., 2015). However, drip irriga-
tion with frequent wetting-drying cycles may promote soil CO2 emission
through greater microbial activities (Guo et al., 2017).
Micro-irrigation/fertigation also reduces N losses and hence lower GWP
(Guardia et al., 2017). In rice cultivation, soil flooding is known to emit a
large amount of CH4 (Gebremichael et al., 2017), which can significantly
be reduced from improved water management such as alternate wetting
and drying (AWD), also called intermittent flooding (Chidthaisong et al.,
2018; Mofijul Islam et al., 2020). However, the intermittent flooding may
result in higher N2O emission (Kritee et al., 2018; Lagomarsino et al.,
2016), which necessitates water management to be in synchrony with
inorganic fertilizer and organic matter inputs. Reduced water application
reduces the C footprint of pumping water (Nouri et al., 2019).
7.5. Nutrient management
The application of N fertilizer from the right source, at the right dose,
right time, and in the right place enhances crop yield, N use efficiency,
and SOC storage, and mitigates GHG emissions (Snyder et al., 2009).
Optimum and balanced doses of nutrients maximize crop yields, resulting
in relatively more C inputs from both above- and below-ground plant
biomass to the soil. Nitrogen can be applied effectively by correlating the
leaf greenness with the leaf N content, and this can be done with a
chlorophyll meter, leaf color chart, or optical sensors (e.g. GreenSeeker)
(Ladha et al., 2020). Decision support systems like Nutrient Expert and
Crop Manager are becoming popular for efficient nutrient management
(Pampolino et al., 2012; Parihar et al., 2017). ‘Nutrient Expert’-based
management reduced on average 13% of GHG emissions from rice,
wheat, and maize compared with farmers' fertilizer practices. Studies93conducted by Gaihre et al. (2015) reported that in Bangladesh, the deep
placement of urea in a rice-rice cropping system reduced N loss as N2O
and improved the crop yield. Thus, deep placement of urea can mitigate
global warming and improve SOC by producing more biomass than
traditionally applied urea. Enhanced fertility management can improve
SOC content at the rate of 0.05–0.15Mg ha
1 year
1 (Lal, 2004a). In a
meta-analysis conducted by Ladha et al. (2011), it was reported that N
fertilization promotes SOC storage in agricultural soils throughout the
world.
Benbi and Brar (2009) reported that the application of balanced
fertilization positively impacted the soil C sequestration due to its effects
on crop growth. Balanced fertilization (N120 P30 K30) improved SOC
concentration in rice-wheat and maize-wheat cropping systems because
of the greater C input associated with enhanced primary production and
crop residues returned to the soil (Kukal et al., 2009).
To improve soil health and soil productivity through balanced
fertilization, the Government of India has started a “Soil Health Man-
agement (SHM)” program under the National Mission for Sustainable
Agriculture (NMSA, 2017). In India, the Soil Health Card (SHC) has been
useful in assessing the status of soil health, and when used over time. The
SHM program aims to promote Integrated Nutrient Management (INM)
through the judicious use of chemical fertilizers including secondary- and
micro-nutrients in conjunction with organic manures and bio-fertilizers.
The SHC-based recommendations have shown an 8–10% reduction of
chemical fertilizer use with a 5–6% increase in crop yields (Srinivasarao
et al., 2019).
7.6. Use of manure with or without inorganic fertilizer
In India, the availability of manure as a source of nutrients and C in
agricultural practice reduced from 70% of the total manure produced in
the early 1970s to 30% in the early 1990s (FAO, 2006). Three hundred
and thirty-five Mt of dung is produced per annum in India, out of which
225Mt is available for agricultural use (Pathak et al., 2009). This is only
one third of the FYM requirement of the country that is needed to achieve
the full C sequestration potential (Pathak et al., 2011).
Use of organic manure such as compost can enhance soil C stocks
(Paustian et al., 2016) but may also result in higher CO2 emissions (Ray
et al., 2020). Application of organic manure can improve SOM by sup-
plying enzyme-producing microorganisms with C and N substrates (Zhen
et al., 2014), thus enhancing the structure and diversity of the microbial
community (Hedlund, 2002). However, application of inorganic nutri-
ents (NPK) with FYM sequestered C at the rate of 0.33Mg of C ha
1 yr
1
compared to 0.16Mg of C ha
1 yr
1 in NPK application alone (Pathak
et al., 2011). Even in a hot, semi-arid climate, balanced and integrated
nutrient management along with FYM could increase SOC in soil
(Anantha et al., 2018). Regmi et al. (2002), in a long-term study, reported
the accumulation of soil C in a triple-cereal cropping system (rice-rice--
wheat) with organic (FYM or compost) amendment. In a rice-wheat
cropping system, compared to NPK, the use of organic material
increased SOC ranging from 18 to 62% (Gami et al., 2001). Likewise,
Duxbury (2001) reported SOC accumulation from 0.08 to 0.98Mg C ha
1
yr
1 in rice-wheat cropping systems through addition of FYM in India
and Nepal. Several researchers have reported higher GHG fluxes (CH4
and N2O emissions) in different types of soil when manures were added
(Bhattacharyya et al., 2012; Khalil et al., 2002). In a soybean-wheat
cropping systems with an organic amendment, Lenka et al. (2016) re-
ported increases in SOC stocks and N2O and CO2 emissions but the
annual GWP was lower.
7.7. Crop variety traits
Deep-rooted crops and crop varieties can sequester more CO2 in lower
soil profiles (Kell, 2012). Growing deep-rooted crops also (1) reduces
nitrate leaching to the groundwater and thereby reduces N2O emission
(Abalos et al., 2016; Crews and Rumsey, 2017), (2) improves SOC stocks
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101(Culman et al., 2013; Sykes et al., 2018), and (3) extracts nutrients and
moisture from deeper soil layers (Lorenz and Lal, 2014). Deep-rooted
perennial crops could also significantly decrease the requirement for
tillage (Sykes et al., 2018). Plants with improved root architecture can
improve soil structure (Gregory et al., 2010), hydrology (Macleod et al.,
2007), drought tolerance (Kamoshita et al., 2008; McKenzie et al., 2009),
and N use efficiency (Trachsel et al., 2009). Van de Broek et al. (2020)
compared the amount of assimilated C that was transferred belowground
and potentially stabilized in the soil from old and new wheat varieties.
The authors reported that old wheat cultivars with higher root biomass
transferred more assimilated C down the soil profile over more recent
cultivars. Recently, Dijkstra et al. (2020) proposed a new ‘Rhizo-Engine
framework’ emphasizing a holistic approach for studying plant root ef-
fects on SOC sequestration and the sensitivity of SOC stocks to climate
and land-use changes.
Mycorrhizal association is another important trait that could play a
crucial role in moving C into soil through active participation with plants.
It is reported that plants with mycorrhizal associations can transfer up to
15% more C to soil than their non-mycorrhizal counterparts (https://
www.earthday.org/land-management-and-carbon-sequestration/). The
most common mycorrhizal fungi are marked by thread-like filaments,
hyphae that extend the reach of a plant, increasing its access to nutrients
and water. These hyphae are coated with a sticky substance called glo-
malin which are known to improve soil structure and C storage. Glomalin
helps the organic matter bind with silt, sand, and clay particles, and it
contains 30–40% C and helps in forming soil aggregates (Wright and
Nichols, 2002). Averill et al. (2014) using global data sets, observed 70%
more C per unit N in soil dominated by ectomycorrhizal and ericoid
mycorrhizal-associated plants than arbuscular mycorrhizal-associated
plants. Another recent synthesis by Verbruggen et al. (2021) opined
that the mycorrhizal fungi can increase C sequestration through
“enhanced weathering” of silicate rocks through intense interactions.
7.8. Pest management
The excessive use of pesticides in crop production has amplified to
fight against insect pests and diseases. While the use of pesticides cap-
tures more C from improved crop production, it also increases GHG
emissions from the processes (i.e., manufacturing, transport, and appli-
cation) involved in the use of synthetic pesticides (NPF, 2017). Integrated
pest management (IPM) can reduce pesticide use and increase crop
yields. A study conducted in 24 countries of Asia and Africa has shown
that the use of IPM to control pests can increase crop yields by more than
40%, and can reduce pesticide use by 31% (Pretty and Bharucha, 2015).
Research has shown that any pest management practices that lessen foliar
spraying are able to reduce GHG emissions (Heimpel et al., 2013).
Climate-smart pest management (CSPM) is a cross-sectoral approach to
managing pests. CSPM is proposed by the FAO (2010), and its aim are to
reduce crop losses due to pests, improve ecosystem services, reduce GHG
emissions, and make the agricultural system more resilient (Heeb et al.,
2019).
7.9. Fallow management
A cover crop used to cover the ground surface during the fallow
period (Ruis and Blanco-Canqui, 2017) prevents nutrients leaching from
the soil profile, and provides nutrients to the main crops (Sykes et al.,
2018). Poeplau and Don (2015) reported a reduction in SOC loss by cover
cropping. A significant area in South Asia, where cultivation of a single
crop is the practice, provides an opportunity for cover cropping. Like-
wise, in intensive double-cropping areas, a short-duration cover crop
such as sesbania can be grown to improve soil fertility including soil C
(Kundu, 2014). In a meta-analysis, Poeplau and Don (2015) estimated
that using cover crops in 25% of the world's farmland could offset 8% of
GHG emissions from agriculture. Cover cropping has also been reported
to reduce N2O emissions (Eory et al., 2015; Pellerin et al., 2013). Aryal94et al. (2020) reported that cover crops and fallow rotation in warm and
moist climates can reduce a net loss of 0.98Mg C ha
1 in 7-year period.
Creating borders of permanent vegetation along the edges of the field is
another way to provide continuing live cover for agricultural soils
(Poeplau and Don, 2015). The possible effect of no-till in increasing SOC
is more prominent when cover cropping is included in the system (Chenu
et al., 2019).
Cheng et al. (2014) and Dignac et al. (2017) reported improvement in
SOC stocks through rhizodeposition and root litter addition, which is
greater with perennial crops thanwith annuals. In a policy analysis report
on soil health and C sequestration in US croplands, Biardeau et al. (2016)
reported that agroforestry, in which crop cultivation is intermixed with
growing trees and sometimes with grazing livestock, has the highest
potential to hold C, ranging from 4.3 to 6.3MT CO2-e per ha annually.
7.10. Crop rotation optimization
Inclusion of a dual- or multi-purpose legume (grain, green manure,
and forage) in a rotation is likely to balance the organic and inorganic
fertilizer inputs and its effect on SOC stocks (Bhandari et al., 2002; Regmi
et al., 2002). In South Asia, several researchers have shown similar
benefits at the system level of optimizing crop rotations in CA mode in
rice-wheat and rice-rice rotations (Gathala et al., 2013; Laik et al., 2014).
Legumes with the ability to fix atmospheric N benefit subsequent crops
by increasing biomass production, crop residue inputs, and subsequently
the total SOC in legume-cereal crop rotations (Shah et al. 2003, 2011).
Reducing overgrazing (which decreases NPP and increases CH4 flux and
animal respiration); balancing SOM decomposition through manures,
crop residues and litter; and enhancing the mean annual NPP, are known
to improve SOC in agricultural soils (Jansson et al., 2010). Greater SOC
stocks and more stabilized SOC can be obtained by increasing soil
biodiversity (Chenu et al., 2019; Lange et al., 2015; Steinbeiss et al.,
2008). Havlin et al. (1990) reported that instead of continuous soybean
cultivation, the inclusion of grain sorghum in a rotation increased soil
organic C and N and that growing high residue crops along with reduced
tillage could increase productivity. Ladha et al. (2016) reported that in
different parts of the Indo-Gangetic Plains, the implementation of CA
along with intensive crop diversification (i.e. the inclusion of legumes
and maize crops in rice- and wheat-based cropping systems) resulted in a
54% increase in grain energy yield, with 104% more economic returns, a
35% reduction in total water input, and a 43% lower global warming
potential intensity (GWPi) compared to farmers’ conventional manage-
ment practices.
Improved agronomic practices can lead to SOC changes which are
often higher than the proposed 0.4% (4p1000 initiative). Agricultural
practices that increase SOC also supports higher and sustained food
production, improved soil health, multiple ecosystem services, and
reduced environmental footprints. This can be a win-win solution for
farmers and society as a whole (Foresight Brief, 2019).
8. A meta-analysis of C sequestration estimates under various
management practices
A global meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the potential SOC
sequestration in the soils of South Asia, and the potential for the miti-
gation of GHG emissions under major management (fertilizer and tillage)
options. Inventories of SOC stocks (kg ha
1) at various depths of soil (a
total of 507 paired data from 51 studies) and GHG emissions (250 paired
data from 33 studies) under different management practices were carried
out. The practices were broadly categorized into (1) synthetic fertilizer
inputs, (2) INM, where fertilizer inputs were partially substituted with
organic sources, (3) organic amendment as the source of nutrients, (4)
CA, and (5) AWD (this included non-submergence/flooding conditions in
rice). The CA included practices where at least one crop was under zero-
tillage with or without residue retention. Where varying amounts of
residues or different sources and doses of fertilizers were used, the
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101conventional practice with a similar combination of treatments was taken
as the control (Jat et al., 2020). Four depths of soil (0–15, 15–30, 30–45,
and 45–60 cm) were considered in the analysis of soil C stock over the
period. For the GHG inventory, (1) direct emissions of CH4 and N2O (kg
ha
1 season
1); (2) emission matrices, viz. GWP (kg CO2-e ha
1); and (3)
yield-scaled GWP (yield-GWP, kg CO2-e t
1: ratio of GWP to the yield of a
crop or system) were evaluated. To eliminate large variations reported in
the studies, the CO2-e of CH4 and N2O for the 100-yr period (Fifth
Assessment Report (AR5) of IPCC), Myhre et al., 2013) were used to
compute the total GWP in each study. Only studies where a practice was
continuously followed for at least four years were selected. Data were
grouped into cereal-cereal and cereal-legume rotations for soil C stock
analysis, and into major cereal crops (rice, wheat, and maize) for GHG
emission analysis. Data were also organized into broad soil textural
groups of fine, moderately fine, medium, moderately coarse, and coarse.
The meta-analysis was performed by using ‘metafor’ in R programming
platform (Viechtbauer, 2010).
8.1. Increase in soil C stocks
The meta-analysis, which calculates the change over the control in
respective studies, reveals an overall 36% (confidence interval (CI),
31–42%) increase (p< 0.01, N¼ 161) in SOC stock in the top 0–15 cmFig. 2. Effect (% change over the control) of major management practices i.e. fertiliz
and a combined (pooled) effect (e) on soil organic C sequestration potential in diffe
tillage. Confidence intervals are given as horizontal bars.
95layer, which is larger than at other depths (Fig. 2). This amounts to
~18Mg C ha
1 of SOC stocks in the 0–15 cm soil layer. The results varied
with treatments with the largest increase in INM practice (52% or
19Mg C ha
1). Increases in SOC in other depths remained similar: 19% in
15–30, 20% in 30–45, and 16% in 45–60 cm soil layers. In a global
analysis, Han et al. (2016) reported increases of 5.1, 6.0, and 0.5Mg C
ha
1, respectively, in the upper 0–20 cm layer with balanced chemical
fertilizer, fertilizer with straw, and manure, respectively. Ladha et al.
(2011) reported an 8% increase of SOC (gravimetric) with fertilizer, and
37%with organic amendment in the 0–30 cm soil layer in more than 100
long-term experiments running globally in diverse agroecologies.
Long-term experiments in Rothamsted, U.K. (>150 years) showed
1.8–4.3% SOC increase yr
1 (0–23 cm) in the first 20 yrs; the change
became insignificant after 80–100 years (Poulton et al., 2018). A much
less SOC increase of 0.3–0.8% per year was, however, recorded with low
or irregular rates of application of manure (Poulton et al., 2018).
The meta-analysis carried out in this study revealed that the effect of
CA on soil C stock was visible only in the surface 0–15 cm soil layer with a
20% increase equivalent to a C stock potential of 15Mg C ha
1. Other
meta-analyses have estimated an average of 5.6 (0.7) Mg C ha
1 in-
crease in the upper 10 or 20 cm layers (Aguilera et al., 2013; Angers and
Eriksen-Hamel, 2008; Haddaway et al., 2017; ; Luo et al., 2010; Powlson
et al., 2016; VandenBygaart et al., 2003; Virto et al., 2012; West and Post,ers (a), integrated nutrients (b), organic inputs (c), conservation agriculture (d),
rent soil layers. Control is the no-fertilizer or organic inputs, and conventional
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–1012002). The C sequestration potential of zero tillage (0–30 cm) in the
Indo-Gangetic Plains was estimated at 4–8Mg C ha
1 (Grace et al.,
2012). However, it is argued that the increases in SOC with different
management practices will improve soil quality but impact on climate
change mitigation will likely be limited (Powlson et al., 2014).8.2. Mitigation in GHG emissions
Overall, improved management practices reduced methane emissions
by 12% in rice (N¼ 92), resulting in an 8% reduction in GWP, and almost
the same magnitude of reduction when expressed as yield-scaled changes
(Fig. 3a). However, N2O emissions in upland soils (N¼ 174) remained
unaffected by improved management practices. Conservation agriculture
and fertilization reduced the GWP by 11 and 14%, respectively, while
non-submerged conditions led to a large (51%) reduction in GWP in rice
(Fig. 3b). A meta-analysis from China indicated a reduction in GWP by
25% in rice paddies and 2% in upland soils (Zhao et al., 2016).
Alternate-wetting-drying reduced CH4 emissions in rice cultivation by
39–83% in the USA (Linquist et al., 2018). Estimates from a global study
indicated a 66% reduction in GWP from no-till compared to the con-
ventional tillage system (Sainju, 2016). GWP increased with the organic
amendment, either with (12%) or without (32%) inorganic fertilizer. A
12% increase in N2O emissions was reported with manure treatment
compared to fertilizer treatment globally (Han et al., 2017). Studies re-
ported increases in N2O emissions associated with greater amounts of NFig. 3. Effect of improved management practices on changes in CH4 and N2O
emissions, Global Warming Potential (GWP) and yield-scaled GWP: all inclusive
(a), and under major management options (b and c). All are percent change over
the control; confidence intervals are given as horizontal bars.
96applications through manure (Decock, 2014; Perala et al., 2006). Our
yield-scaled GWP estimation followed similar trends except for INM,
where higher yields compensated the increase in GWP (Fig. 3c).
Reduction in N2O emission was related to reduction in yield under CA
through a global meta-analysis (Zhao et al., 2016). Another global
analysis suggested increase in yield-scaled N2O emissions in zero tillage
with <10 yrs of duration, which decreased after 10 yrs, compared to
conventional tillage (Van Kessel et al., 2013). Soil texture appeared to
have no influence on CH4 emissions in rice, while N2O emissions
increased by 36% in fine-textured soil (Fig. 4). The yield-scaled GWPwas
similar in wheat and maize, but lower in rice by adopting CA (Fig. 5).
This agreed with the findings of Linquist et al. (2012), who reported
greater mitigation opportunities in rice systems, compared to maize and
wheat systems. There was no change in either GWP or yield-scaled GWP
in wheat with improved management practices. In a global study,
yield-scaled reduction in GWP in rice was 21% with optimal N applica-
tions (Pittelkow et al., 2014).
9. Conclusions and recommendations
South Asian agriculture is a global ‘hot spot’ for climate change
vulnerability and rapid population growth. Meeting a projected food
demand of at least 40 percent will be constrained by climate unpredict-
ability including rising temperature. Currently, South Asia accounted for
7.5% of total world's fossils CO2 emissions which is bound to increase
with continuing agriculture expansion along with rapid economic
growth. There is no argument that sequestration of C in soils, plants, and
plant products holds huge potential both to improve soil health and
create C sinks that reduce atmospheric CO2 and combat climate change.
There are several promising agronomic practices to enhance soil C stocksFig. 4. Management-induced changes in CH4 and N2O emissions (percent
change over the control) as affected by soil texture. Confidence intervals are
given as horizontal bars.
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101
Fig. 5. Changes in yield-scaled GWP (percent change over control) through
adoption of improved management options under major cereal crops. Confi-
dence intervals are given as horizontal bars.and mitigate GHG emissions. Notably, CA which is getting increasing
attention in South Asia has proven potential. Our estimates suggest that
existing soil management practices has potential to mitigate around
~18Mg C ha
1 C year 
1 (0–15 cm soil layer) which can compensate up
to 8% reduction in GHG emissions.
There is urgent need for supporting campaigns and efforts to increase
soil C sequestration, both on a policy level and through programs which
incentivizes farmers to adopt more C positive agricultural practices.
Expanding support and working together with global initiatives such as
the 4p1000 Initiative, regional public-private partnership (Grow Indigo-
CIMMYT-ICAR; https://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-
policy/indian-farmers-can-now-trade-in-carbon-credits-to-boost-inco
me-122030300039_1.html) initiatives on C credits for Regenerative
Agriculture as well as research and policy changes, will be important to
the success of soil C sequestration. The current strategies to deliver
knowledge, technologies, and incentives to promote the adoption of
sound technical practices to the farmers are not adequate which need
much support.
Our future research efforts should also be devoted to develop moni-
toring and verification protocols for C sequestration in South Asia which
will assist economists and policy makers to assess economic value of soil
C and formulate right policies. Future studies should focus more on
agroforestry and crop diversification, as there is limited information
available on their potential for C sequestration. Effect of climate variables
on SOC have been least studied. More work is needed to better quantify
benefits of C sequestration on soil quality, productivity, and water and air
quality. Further, the potential impact of climate variability on the sta-
bility of sequestered C in soils and plants should be evaluated. New
generation of long-term studies to assess the potential of new manage-
ment practices in C sequestration and its stabilization on a long-term
basis is needed to advance our knowledge.Declaration of competing interest
The author declares that he/she has no competing interests. Author
Jagdish K. Ladha (Editorial Board member) was not involved in the
journal’s review or decisions related to this manuscript.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), the
Government of India for a Window 3 grant to CIMMYT, the CGIAR
Research Programs on Wheat Agri-Food Systems (CRP WHEAT) and
Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) for funding this
research. CCAFS0 work is supported by CGIAR Fund Donors and through
bilateral funding agreements. For details, please visit https://ccafs.cgia97r.org/donors. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations
expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not neces-
sarily reflect the views of the associated and/or supporting institutions/
funders. The usual disclaimer applies.
References
Abalos, D., Brown, S.E., Vanderzaag, A.C., Gordon, R.J., Dunfield, K.E., Wagner-
Riddle, C., 2016. Micrometeorological measurements over 3 years reveal differences
in N2O emissions between annual and perennial crops. Global Change Biol. 22,
1244–1255.
Aggarwal, R., Kaur, S., Singh, A., 2010. Assessment of saving in water resources through
precision land leveling in Punjab. J. Soil Water Conserv. 9, 182–185.
Aguilera, E., Lassaletta, L., Gattinger, A., Gimeno, B.S., 2013. Managing soil carbon for
climate change mitigation and adaptation in Mediterranean cropping systems: a
meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 168, 25–36.
Ahmed, B., Khokhar, S.B., Badar, H., 2001. Economics of laser land leveling in district
Faisalabad. Pakistan. J. Appl. Sci. 1, 409–412.
Amarnath, G., Alahacoon, N., Smakhtin, V., Aggarwal, P., 2017. Mapping Multiple
Climate-Related Hazards in South Asia. Colombo, Sri Lanka. International Water
Management Institute (IWMI). 41p. (IWMI Research Report 170).
Amelung, W., Bossio, D., de Vries, W., Ko€gel-Knabner, I., Lehmann, J., Amundson, R.,
Bol, R., Collins, C., Lal, R., Leifeld, J., Minasny, B., Pan, G., Paustian, K., Rumpel, C.,
Sanderman, J., van Groenigen, J.W., Mooney, S., van Wesemael, B., Wander, M.,
Chabbi, A., 2020. Towards a global-scale soil climate mitigation strategy. Nat.
Commun. 11, 5427. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18887-7.
Amundson, R., Beaudeu, L., 2018. Soil carbon sequestration is an elusive climate
mitigation tool. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 115, 11652–11656.
Anantha, K.C., Majumder, S.P., Padhan, D., Badole, S., Datta, A., Mandal, B., Gade, K.R.,
2018. Carbon dynamics, potential and cost of carbon sequestration in double rice
cropping system in semi-arid southern India. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 18 (2), 418–434.
Angers, D.A., Eriksen-Hamel, N.S., 2008. Full-inversion tillage and organic carbon
distribution in soil profiles: a meta-analysis. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 72, 1370–1374.
https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2007.0342.
Aryal, J.P., Mehrotra, M.B., Jat, M.L., Sidhu, H.S., 2015. Impacts of laser land leveling in
rice–wheat systems of the north–western Indo-Gangetic plains of India. Food Secur.
7, 725–738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0460-y.
Aryal, J.P., Sapkota, T.B., Jat, M.L., Bishnoi, D.K., 2015a. On-farm economic and
environmental impact of zero-tillage wheat: a case of North-West India. Exp. Agric.
51 (1), 1–16.
Aryal, J.P., Sapkota, T.B., Rahut, D.B., Jat, M.L., 2020. Agricultural Sustainability under
emerging climatic variability: role of climate smart agriculture and relevant policies
in India. Int. J. Innovat. Sustain. Dev. 14 (2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1504/
IJISD.2020.106243.
Austin, A.T., Vivanco, L., 2006. Plant litter decomposition in a semi-arid ecosystem
controlled by photodegradation. Nature 442, 555–558.
Averill, C., Turner, B.L., Finzi, A.C., 2014. Mycorrhiza-mediated competition between
plants and decomposers drives soil carbon storage. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/
nature12901.
Baker, J.M., Ochsner, T.E., Venterea, R.T., Griffis, T.J., 2007. Tillage and soil carbon
sequestration–what do we really know? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 118 (1–4), 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.05.014.
Balesdent, J., Chenub, C., Balabaneb, 2000. Relationship of soil organic matter dynamics
to physical protection and tillage. Soil Tillage Res. 53, 215–230.
Batjes, N.H., 1998. Mitigation of atmospheric CO2 concentrations by increased carbon
sequestration in the soil. Biol. Fertil. Soils 27 (3), 230–235.
Baveye, P.C., Berthelin, J., Tessier, D., Lemaire, G., 2018. The “4 per 1000” initiative: a
credibility issue for the soil science community? Geoderma 309, 118–123. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.05.00.
Beillouin, D., Cardinael, R., Berre, D., Boyer, A., Corbeels, M., Fallot, A., Feder, F.,
Demenois, J., 2021. A global overview of studies about land management, land-use
change, and climate change effects on soil organic carbon. Global Change Biol. 28,
1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15998, 00.
Benbi, D.K., Brar, J.S., 2009. A 25-year record of carbon sequestration and soil properties
in intensive agriculture. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 29, 257–265.
Bernoux, M., Cerri, C.C., Cerri, C.E.P., Neto, M.S., Metay, A., Perrin, A.S., Scopel, E.,
Tantely, R., Blavet, D., Piccolo, M.C.D., Pavei, M., 2006. Cropping systems, carbon
sequestration and erosion in Brazil: a review. Agric. Sustain. Dev. 26, 1–8.
Bernoux, M., Feller, C., Cerri, C.C., Eschenbrenner, V., Cerri, C.E.P., 2005. Soil carbon
sequestration. In: Roose, E., Lal, R., Feller, C., Barthes, B., Stewart, B. (Eds.), Book:
Erosion & Carbon Dynamics. CRC Publisher, USA, pp. 13–22.
Bhandari, A.L., Ladha, J., Pathak, S., Padre, A., Dawe, D., Gupta, R.K., 2002. Yield and soil
nutrient changes in a long-term rice-wheat rotation in India. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 66,
162–170. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2002.0162.
Bhattacharyya, P., Roy, K.S., Neogi, S., Adhya, T.K., Rao, K.S., Manna, M.C., 2012. Effects
of rice straw and nitrogen fertilization on greenhouse gas emissions and carbon
storage in tropical flooded soil planted with rice. Soil Tillage Res. 124, 119–130.
Biala, J., 2011. The Benefits of Using Compost for Mitigating Climate Change. Report
Number: NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Report OEH 2011/0385.
Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW.
Biardeau, L., Crebbin-Coates, R., Keerati, R., Litke, S., Rodriguez, H., 2016. Soil Health
and Carbon Sequestration in US Croplands: A Policy Analysis. NRCS, USDA and
Barkley Food Institute. https://food.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/
GSPPCarbon_03052016_FINAL.pdf.
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101Blair, N., Faulkner, R.D., Till, A.R., Poulton, P.R., 2006. Long-term management impacts
on soil C, N and physical fertility: Part I: Broadbalk experiment. Soil Tillage Res. 91,
30–38.
Bodirsky, B.L., Rolinski, S., Biewald, A., Weindl, I., Popp, A., Lotze-Campen, H., 2015.
Global food demand scenarios for the 21st century. PLoS One 10 (11), e0139201.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139201.
Cayuela, M.L., Zwieten, L.V., Singh, B.P., Jeffery, S., Roig, A., Sanchez-Monedero, M.A.,
2014. Biochar's role in mitigating soil nitrous oxide emissions: a review and meta-
analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 91, 5–16.
Cerri, C.E.P., Cherubin, M.R., Damian, J.M., Mello, F.F.C., Lal, R., 2021. Soil Carbon
Sequestration through Adopting Sustainable Management Practices: Potential and
Opportunity for the American Countries, vol. 60. Inter-American Institute for
Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), ISBN 978-92-9248-958-8.
Cheng, W., Parton, W.J., Gonzalez-Meler, M.A., Phillips, R., Asao, S., McNickle, G.G.,
Brzostek, E., Jastrow, J.D., 2014. Synthesis and modeling perspectives of rhizosphere
priming. New Phytol. 201, 31–44.
Chenu, C., Angers, D.A., Barre, P., Derrien, D., Arrouays, D., Balesdent, J., 2019.
Increasing organic stocks in agricultural soils: knowledge gaps and potential
innovations. Soil Tillage Res. 188, 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.still.2018.04.011.
Chidthaisong, A., Cha-un, N., Rossopa, B., Buddaboon, C., Kunuthai, C., Sriphirom, P.,
Towprayoon, S., Tokida, T., Padre, A.T., 2018. Evaluating the effects of alternate
wetting and drying (AWD) on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from a paddy
field in Thailand. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 64 (1), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00380768.2017.1399044.
Conant, R.T., Ryan, M.G., Agren, G.I., Birge, H.E., Davidson, E.A., Eliasson, P.E.,
Evans, S.E., Frey, S.D., Giardina, C.P., Hopkins, F.M., Hyvo€nen, R., 2011.
Temperature and soil organic matter decomposition rates - synthesis of current
knowledge and a way forward. Global Change Biol. 17, 3392–3404.
Cooper, J., Baranski, M., Stewart, G., Nobel-de Lange, M., Barberi, P., Fließbach, A.,
Peigne, J., Berner, A., Brock, C., Casagrande, M., Crowley, O., 2016. Shallow non-
inversion tillage in organic farming maintains crop yields and increases soil C stocks:
a meta-analysis. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 36 (22). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-016-
0354-1.
Corbeels, M., March~ao, R.L., Neto, M.S., Ferreira, E.G., Madari, B.E., Scopel, E.,
Brito, O.R., 2016. Evidence of limited carbon sequestration in soils under no-till
systems in the Cerrado of Brazil. Sci. Rep. 6, 21450.
Crews, T.E., Rumsey, B.E., 2017. What agriculture can learn from native ecosystems in
building soil organic matter: a review. Sustainability 9, 578.
Culman, S.W., Snapp, S.S., Ollenburger, M., Basso, B., DeHaan, L.R., 2013. Soil and water
quality rapidly responds to the perennial grain Kernza wheatgrass. Agron. J. 105 (3),
735–744.
Cusworth, D.H., Mickley, L.J., Sulprizio, M.P., Liu, T., Marlier, M.E., DeFries, R.S.,
Guttikunda, S.K., Gupta, P., 2018. Quantifying the influence of agricultural fires in
northwest India on urban air pollution in Delhi, India. Environ. Res. Lett. 13 (4),
044018.
de Sant-Anna, S.A., Jantalia, C.P., Sa, J.M., Vilela, L., Marchao, R.L., Alves, B.J.,
Urquiaga, S., Boddey, R.M., 2017. Changes in soil organic carbon during 22 years of
pastures, cropping or integrated crop/livestock systems in the Brazilian Cerrado.
Nutrient Cycl. Agroecosyst 108 (1), 101–120.
Decock, C., 2014. Mitigating nitrous oxide emissions from corn cropping systems in the
midwestern US: potential and data gaps. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 4247–4256.
Dignac, M.F., Derrien, D., Barre, P., Barot, S., Cecillon, L., Chenu, C., Chevallier, T.,
Freschet, G.T., Garnier, P., Guenet, B., Hedde, M., 2017. Increasing soil carbon
storage: mechanisms, effects of agricultural practices and proxies, a review. Agron.
Sustain. Dev. 37, 14.
De Vries, W., 2018. Soil carbon 4 per mille: a good initiative but let's manage not only the
soil but also the expectations. Geoderma 309, 111–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.geoderma.2017.05.023.
Dijkstra, F.A., Zhu, B., Cheng, W., 2020. Root effects on soil organic carbon: a double
edged sword. New Phytol. 230, 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17082.
Dimassi, B., Mary, B., Wylleman, R., Labreuche, J., Couture, D., Piraux, F., Cohan, J.P.,
2014. Long-term effects of contrasted tillage and crop management on soil carbon
dynamics during 41 years. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 188, 134–146.
Duxbury, J.M., 2001. Long-term yield trends in the rice-wheat cropping system: results
from experiments and northwest India. J. Crop Prod. 3, 27–52.
Dynarski, K.A., Bossio, D.A., Scow, K.M., 2020. Dynamic stability of soil carbon:
reassessing the “permanence” of soil carbon sequestration. Front. Environ. Sci. 8,
514701. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.514701.
Eory, V., MacLeod, M., Topp, C.F.E., Rees, R.M., Webb, J., McVittie, A., Dewhurst, R.,
2015. Review and Update the UK Agriculture Marginal Abatement Cost Curve to
Assess the Greenhouse Gas Abatement Potential for the 5th Carbon Budget Period
and to 2050. Final Report Submitted for the Project Contract “Provision of Services to
Review and Update the UK Agriculture MACC and to Assess Abatement Potential for
the 5th Carbon Budget Period and to 2050”. Scotland's Rural College and Ricardo
AEA.
Eswaran, H., Van Den Berg, E., Reich, P., 1993. Organic carbons in soils of the world. Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57, 192–194.
FAO, 2006. Fertilizer use by crop. Food Agric. Organ.
FAO, 2010. Climate-smart pest management. Food and agriculture organization. Practice
Brief climate-smart agriculture. http://www.fao.org/3/BU464EN/bu464en.pdf.
FAO, 2019. Recarbonization of global soils-A dynamic response to offset global emissions.
Food Agric. Organ Unit. Nation. http://www.fao.org/3/i7235en/I7235EN.pdf.
FAO, ITPS, 2015. Status of the World's Soil Resources (SWSR) – Main Report. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Intergovernmental Technical
Panel on Soils, Rome, Italy.98FAO STAT, 2014. Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations, Rome, Italy.
FAO STAT, 2017. In: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome,
Italy.
Foresight Brief, 2019. The Potential of Carbon Sequestration in the Soil. No. 013. UN
Environment. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/28453.
Francaviglia, R., Di Bene, C., Farina, R., Salvati, L., 2017. Soil organic carbon
sequestration and tillage systems in the Mediterranean Basin: a data mining
approach. Nutrient Cycl. Agroecosyst. 107 (1), 125–137.
Friedrich, T., Derpsch, R., Kassam, A., 2012. Overview of the Global Spread of
Conservation Agriculture. Field Actions Science Reports. Special Issue 6. http://journ
als.openedition.org/factsreports/1941.
Fuss, S., Lamb, W.F., Callaghan, M.W., Hilaire, J., Creutzig, F., Amann, T., Beringer, T., de
Oliveira Garcia, W., Hartmann, J., Khanna, T., Luderer, G., 2018. Negative emissions
- Part 2: costs, potentials and side effects. Environ. Res. Lett. 13 (6), 063002, 915
10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9f.
Gaihre, Y.K., Singh, U., Islam, S.M., Huda, A., Islam, M.R., Satter, M.A., Sanabria, J.,
Islam, M.R., Shah, A.L., 2015. Impacts of urea deep placement on nitrous oxide and
nitric oxide emissions from rice fields in Bangladesh. Geoderma 259–260, 370–379.
Gami, S.K., Ladha, J.K., Pathak, H., Shah, M.P., Pasquin, E., Pandey, S., Hobbs, P.,
Joshy, D., Mishra, R., 2001. Long term changes in yield and soil fertility in a twenty-
year rice-wheat experiment in Nepal. Biol. Fertil. Soils 34, 73–78.
Gathala, M., Kumar, V., Sharma, P.C., Saharawat, Y., Jat, H.S., Singh, M., Kumar, A.,
Jat, M.L., Humphreys, E., Sharma, D.K., Sharma, S., Ladha, J.K., 2013. Optimizing
intensive cereal-based cropping systems addressing current and future drivers of
agricultural change in the northwestern Indo-Gangetic Plains of India. Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ. 177, 85–97.
Gebremichael, A.W., Osborne, B., Orr, P., 2017. Flooding-related increases in CO2 and
N2O emissions from a temperate coastal grassland ecosystem. Biogeosciences 14,
2611–2626.
Gill, G., 2014. An Assessment of the Impact of Laser-Assisted Precision Land Leveling
Technology as a Component of Climate-Smart Agriculture in the State of Haryana,
India. CIMMYT-CCAFS. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/65078.
Godfray, H., Charles, J., Garnett, T., 2014. Food security and sustainable intensification.
Phil. Trans. R Soc. B36920120273.
Grace, P.R., Jain, M.C., Harrington, L., Robertson, G.P., 2003. Long-term sustainability of
the tropical and subtropical rice-wheat system: an environmental perspective. In:
Ladha, J.K., Hill, J., Gupta, R.K., Duxbury, J.M., Buresh, R.J. (Eds.), Improving the
Productivity and Sustainability of Rice-Wheat Systems: Issues and Impact, vol. 146.
ASA Special Publications 65, Madison, WI, pp. 1–18.
Grace, P., John, A., Aggarwal, P.K., Stephen, O., Paustian, K., Basso, B., 2012. Soil carbon
sequestration and associated economic costs for farming systems of the Indo-Gangetic
Plain: a meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 146. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.agee.2011.10.019.
Gregory, A.S., Webster, C.P., Watts, C.W., Whalley, W.R., Macleod, C.J.A., Joynes, A.,
Papadopoulos, A., Haygarth, P.M., Binley, A., Humphreys, M.W., Turner, L.B., 2010.
Soil management and grass species effects on the hydraulic properties of shrinking
soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J 74, 753–761.
Guardia, G., Cangani, M.T., Andreu, G., Sanz-Cobena, A., García-Marco, S., Alvarez, J.M.,
Recio-Huetos, J., Vallejo, A., 2017. Effect of inhibitors and fertigation strategies on
GHG emissions, NO fluxes and yield in irrigated maize. Field Crops Res. 204,
135–145.
The Guardian, 2018. We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN. htt
ps://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-
exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report.
Guo, S., Qi, Y., Peng, Q., Dong, Y., He, Y., Yan, Z., Wang, L., 2017. Influences of drip and
flood irrigation on soil carbon dioxide emission and soil carbon sequestration of
maize cropland in the North China Plain. J. Arid Land 9 (2), 222–233.
Haddaway, N.R., Hedlund, K., Jackson, L.E., Katerrer, T., Lugato, E., Thomsen, I.K.,
Jørgensen, H.B., Isberg, P.E., 2017. How does tillage intensity affect soil organic
carbon? A systematic review. Environ. Evid 6, 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-
017-0108-9.
Haider, K.M., Guggenberger, G., 2005. Organic matter. Genesis and formation. In:
Hillel, D. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment. Elsevier Ltd, Oxford,
pp. 93–101.
Han, P., Zhang, W., Wang, G., Sun, W., Huang, Y., 2016. Changes in soil organic carbon in
croplands subjected to fertilizer management: a global meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 6,
27199. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep27199.
Han, Z., Walter, M.T., Drinkwater, L.E., 2017. N2O emissions from grain cropping
systems: a meta-analysis of the impacts of fertilizer-based and ecologically-based
nutrient management strategies. Nutrient Cycl. Agroecosyst. 107, 335–355.
Harvey, C., Gronewold, N., 2019. CO2 Emissions Will Break Another Record in 2019. E&E
News, December 2019. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/co2-emissions-
will-break-another-record-in-2019/.
Havlin, J.L., Kissel, D.E., Maddux, L.D., Claassen, M.M., Long, J.H., 1990. Crop rotation
and tillage effects on soil organic carbon and nitrogen. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54,
448–452.
Hayes, M.H.B., Swift, R.S., 2020. Vindication of humic substances as a key component of
organic matter in soil and water. Adv. Agron. 163, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/
bs.agron.2020.05.001.
Hedlund, K., 2002. Soil microbial community structure in relation to vegetation
management on former agricultural land. Soil Biol. Biochem. 34, 1299–1307.
Heeb, L., Jenner, E., Cock, M.J.W., 2019. Climate-smart pest management: building
resilience of farms and landscapes to changing pest threats. J. Pest. Sci. 92, 951–969.
Heimpel, G.E., Yang, Y., Hill, J.D., Ragsdale, D.W., 2013. Environmental consequences of
invasive species: greenhouse gas emissions of insecticide use and the role of
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101biological control in reducing emissions. PLoS One 8 (8), e72293. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0072293.
Hu, N., Wang, B., Gu, Z., Tao, B., Zhang, Z., Hu, S., Zhu, L., Meng, Y., 2016. Effects of
different straw returning modes on greenhouse gas emissions and crop yields in a
rice-wheat rotation system. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ 223, 115–122.
IPCC, 2014. Contribution of working groups I, II and III. In: Pachauri, R.K., Meyer, L.A.
(Eds.), To the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (Geneva: IPCC) Climate change: synthesis report.
IPCC, 2018. Summary for policymakers of IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5C
approved by governments. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15.
Jansson, C., Wullschleger, S.D., Kalluri, U.C., Tuskan, G.A., 2010. Phytosequestration:
carbon biosequestration by plants and the prospects of genetic engineering.
Bioscience 60, 685–696.
Janzen, H.H., 2006. The soil carbon dilemma: shall we hoard it or use it? Soil Biol.
Biochem. 38, 419–424.
Jat, H.S., Datta, A., Sharma, P.C., Kumar, V., Yadav, A.K., Choudhary, M., Choudhary, V.,
Gathala, M.K., Sharma, D.K., Jat, M.L., Yaduvanshi, N.P.S., Singh, G., McDonald, A.,
2018. Assessing soil properties and nutrient availability under conservation
agriculture practices in a reclaimed sodic soil incereal-based systems of North-West
India. Arch. Agron Soil Sci. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2017.1359415.
Jat, M.L., Chakraborty, D., Ladha, J.K., Rana, D.S., Gathala, M.K., McDonald, A.,
Gerard, B., 2020. Conservation agriculture for sustainable intensification in South
Asia. Nat. Sustain. 3, 336–343.
Jat, M.L., Chandna, P., Gupta, R., Sharma, S.K., Gill, M.A., 2006. Laser Land Leveling: A
Precursor Technology for Resource Conservation. New Delhi: Rice-Wheat Consortium
for the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Rice-Wheat Consortium Technical Bulletin Series 7.
Jat, M.L., Gupta, R., Saharawat, Y., Khosla, R., 2011. Layering precision land leveling and
furrow irrigated raised bed planting: productivity and input use efficiency of irrigated
bread wheat in Indo-Gangetic plains. Am. J. Plant Sci. 2 (4), 578–588.
Jat, M.L., Singh, Y., Gill, G., Sidhu, H., Aryal, J.P., Stirling, C., Gerard, B., 2015. Laser
assisted precision land leveling: impacts in irrigated intensive production systems of
South Asia. In: Lal, Rattan, Stewart, B.A. (Eds.), Soil-specific Farming: Precision
Agriculture. CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group, pp. 323–352.
Jenkinson, D.S., 1988. Soil organic matter and its dynamics. In: Wild, A. (Ed.), Russell's
Soil Conditions and Plant Growth, eleventh ed. Longman, London, pp. 564–607.
Jobbagy, E.G., Jackson, R.B., 2000. The vertical distribution of soil organic carbon and its
relation to climate and vegetation. Ecol. Appl. 10, 423–436.
Johnston, A.E., Poulton, P.R., Coleman, K., 2009. Soil organic matter: its importance in
sustainable agriculture and Carbon dioxide fluxes. Adv. Agron. 101, 1–57.
Kamoshita, A., Babu, R.C., Boopathi, N.M., Fukai, S., 2008. Phenotypic and genotypic
analysis of drought resistance traits for development of rice cultivars adapted to
rainfed environments. Field Crops Res. 109, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.fcr.2008.06.010.
Kell, D.B., 2012. Large-scale sequestration of atmospheric carbon via plant roots in
natural and agricultural ecosystems: why and how. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci.
367 (1595), 1589–1597.
Kelleher, B.P., Simpson, A.J., 2006. Humic substances in soils: are they really chemically
distinct? Environ. Sci. Technol. 40, 4605–4611.
Khalil, M.I., Rosenani, A.B., Van Cleemput, O., Boeckx, P., Shamshuddin, J., Fauziah, C.,
2002. Nitrous oxide production from an ultisol of the humid tropics treated with
different nitrogen sources and moisture regimes. Biol. Fertil. Soils 36, 59–65.
Kleber, M., Johnson, M.G., 2010. Advances in understanding the molecular structure of
soil organic matter: implications for interactions in the environment. Adv. Agron.
106, 77–142.
Koga, N., Tajima, R., 2011. Assessing energy efficiencies and greenhouse gas emissions
under bioethanol-oriented paddy rice production in northern Japan. J. Environ.
Manag. 92 (3), 967–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvm an.2010.11.008.
Kopittke, P.M., Berhe, A.A., Carrillo, Y., Cavagnaro, T.R., Chen, D., Chen, Q.-L.,
Dobarco, M.R., Dijkstra, F.A., Field, D.J., Grundy, M.J., He, J.-Z., Hoyle, F.C., Ko€gel-
Knabner, I., Lam, S.K., Marschner, P., Martinez, C., McBratney, A.B., McDonald-
Madden, E., Menzies, N.W., Mosley, L.M., Mueller, C.W., Murphy, D.V., Nielsen, U.N.,
O'Donnell, A.G., Pendall, E., Pett-Ridge, J., Rumpel, C., Young, I.M., Minasny, B.,
2022. Ensuring planetary survival: the centrality of organic carbon in balancing the
multifunctional nature of soils. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. (in press). https://
doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2021.2024484.
Kritee, K., Nair, D., Zavala-Araiza, D., Proville, J., Rudek, J., Adhya, T.K., Loecke, T.,
Esteves, T., Balireddygari, S., Dava, O., Ram, K., Abhilash, S.R., Madasamy, M.,
Dokka, R.V., Anandaraj, D., Athiyaman, D., Reddy, M., Ahuja, R., Hamburg, S.P.,
2018. High nitrous oxide fluxes from rice indicate the need to manage water for both
long- and short-term climate impacts. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 115 (39),
9720–9725. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1809276115.
Kukal, S.S., Rehana, R., Benbi, D.K., 2009. Soil organic carbon sequestration in relation to
organic and inorganic fertilization in rice-wheat and maize-wheat systems. Soil
Tillage Res. 102, 87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2008.07.017.
Kumari, M., Chakraborty, D., Gathala, M.K., Pathak, H., Dwivedi, B.S., Tomar, R.K., 2011.
Soil aggregation and associated organic carbon fractions as affected by tillage in a
rice–wheat rotation in North India. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 75, 560–567.
Kundu, D., 2014. Sustaining productivity of rice soils under changing climate: issues and
options related to nitrogen fertility. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 62 (Suppl. l), 143–154.
Ladha, J.K., Reddy, C.K., Padre, A.T., Van Kessel, C., 2011. Role of nitrogen fertilization in
sustaining organic matter in cultivated soils. J. Environ. Qual. 40, 1756–1766.
Ladha, J.K., Jat, M.L., Stirling, C.M., Chakraborty, D., Pradhan, P., Krupnik, T.J.,
Sapkota, T.B., Pathak, H., Rana, D.S., Tesfaye, K., Gerard, B., 2020. Achieving the
sustainable development goals in agriculture: the crucial role of nitrogen in cereal-
based systems. Adv. Agron. 163, 39–116.99Ladha, J.K., Rao, A.N., Raman, A.K., Padre, A.T., Dobermann, A., Gathala, M., Kumar, V.,
Saharawat, Y., Sharma, S., Piepho, H.P., Alam, M.M., 2016. Agronomic
improvements can make future cereal systems in South Asia far more productive and
result in a lower environmental footprint. Global Change Biol. 22, 1054–1074.
Ladha, J.K., Kumar, V., Alam, M.M., Sharma, S., Gathala, M.K., Chandna, P.,
Saharawat, Y.S., Balasubrmanian, V., 2009. Integrating crop and resource
management technologies for enhanced productivity, profitability, and sustainability
of the rice-wheat system in South Asia. In: Ladha, J.K., Singh, Y., Erenstein (Eds.),
Integrated Crop and Resource Management in the Rice–Wheat System of South Asia.
International Rice Research Institute, Manila, Philippines, pp. 69–108.
Lagomarsino, A., Agnelli, A.E., Linquist, B., Adviento-Borbe, M.A., Agnelli, A., Gavina, G.,
Ravaglia, S., Ferrara, R.M., 2016. Alternate wetting and drying of rice reduce CH4
emissions but triggered N2O peaks in a clayey soil of Central Italy. Pedosphere 46,
533–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1002-0160(15)60063-7.
Laik, R., Sharma, S., Idris, M., Singh, A.K., Singh, S.S., Bhatt, B.P., Saharawat, Y.S.,
Humphreys, E., Ladha, J.K., 2014. Integration of conservation agriculture with best
management practices for improving system performance of the rice–wheat rotation
in the Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains of India. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 195, 68–82.
Lal, R., 1997. Residue management, conservation tillage and soil restoration for
mitigating greenhouse effect by CO2 enrichment. Soil Res. 43, 81–107.
Lal, R., 2004a. Soil carbon sequestration in India. Climatic Change 65, 277–296.
Lal, R., 2004b. Agricultural activities and the global carbon cycle. Nutrient Cycl.
Agroecosyst. 70 (2), 103–116.
Lal, R., 2004c. The potential of carbon sequestration in soils of South Asia. In:
International Soil Conservation Conference – Brisbane July 2004.
Lal, R., 2011. Sequestering carbon in soils of agro-ecosystems. Food Pol. 36, 33.
Lal, R., 2015. Sequestering carbon and increasing productivity by conservation
agriculture. J. Soil Water Conserv. 70, 55A–62A.
Lal, R., Follett, F., Stewart, B.A., Kimble, J.M., 2007. Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate
climate change and advance food security. Soil Sci. 172, 943–956.
Lal, R., Smith, P., Jungkunst, H.F., Mitsch, W.J., Lehmann, J., Nair, P.R., McBratney, A.B.,
de Moraes Sa, J.C., Schneider, J., Zinn, Y.L., Skorupa, A.L., 2018. The carbon
sequestration potential of terrestrial ecosystems. J. Soil Water Conserv 73 (6),
145A–152A. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.73.6.145A.
Lange, M., Eisenhauer, N., Sierra, C.A., Bessler, H., Engels, C., Griffiths, R.I., Mellado-
Vazquez, P.G., Malik, A.A., Roy, J., Scheu, S., Steinbeiss, S., 2015. Plant diversity
increases soil microbial activity and soil carbon storage. Nat. Commun 6, 6707.
Lehmann, J., Abiven, S., Kleber, M., Pan, G., Singh, B.P., Sohi, S.P., Zimmerman, A.R.,
2015. Persistence of biochar in soil. In: Lehmann, J., Joseph, S. (Eds.), Biochar for
Environmental Management: Science, Technology and Implementation. Taylor and
Francis, pp. 235–282.
Lehmann, J., Kleber, M., 2015. The contentious nature of soil organic matter. Nature 528,
60–68, 2015.
Lenka, S., Lenka, N.K., Singh, A.B., Singh, B., Raghuwanshi, J., 2016. Global warming
potential and greenhouse gas emission under different soil nutrient management
practices in soybean–wheat system of central India. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24,
4603–4612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-8189-5.
Levitan, D., 2009. Refilling the carbon sink: biochar's potential and pitfalls. Yale Environ.
360.
Linquist, B.A., Adviento-Borbe, M.A., Pittelkow, C.M., van Kessel, C., Groenigen, K.J.V.,
2012. Fertilizer management practices and greenhouse gas emissions from rice
systems: a quantitative review and analysis. Field Crops Res. 135, 10–21.
Linquist, B.A., Marcos, M., Adviento-Borbe, M.A., Anders, M., Harrell, D., Linscombe, S.,
Reba, M.L., Runkle, B.R., Tarpley, L., Thomson, A., 2018. Greenhouse gas emissions
and management practices that affect emissions in US rice systems. J. Environ. Qual
47, 395–409.
Lohan, S.K., Jat, H.S., Yadav, A.K., Sindhu, H.S., Jat, M.L., Choudhary, M., Peter, J.K.,
Sharma, P.C., 2018. Burning issues of paddy residue management in north-west states
of India. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 81, 693–706.
Lorenz, K., Lal, R., 2014. Soil organic carbon sequestration in agroforestry systems.
A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 34 (2), 443–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-
014-0212-y.
Lou, Y., Xu, M., Wang, W., Sun, X., Zhao, K., 2011. Return rate of straw residue affects soil
organic C sequestration by chemical fertilization. Soil Tillage Res. 113, 70–73.
Luo, Z., Wang, E., Osbert, J.S., 2010. Can no-tillage stimulate carbon sequestration in
agricultural soils? A meta-analysis of paired experiments. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
139, 224–231.
Macleod, C.J.A., Binley, A., Hawkins, S.L., Humphreys, M.W., Turner, L.B., Whalley, W.R.,
Haygarth, P.M., 2007. Genetically modified hydrographs: what can grass genetics do
for temperate catchment hydrology? Hydrol. Process 21, 2217–2221.
Majumder, S., Neogi, S., Dutta, T., Powel, M.A., Banik, P., 2019. The impact of biochar on
soil carbon sequestration: meta-analytical approach to evaluating environmental and
economic advantages. J. Environ. Manag. 250, 109466. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvman.2019.109466.
McGill, W.B., 1996. Review and classification of ten soil organic matter models. In:
Powlson, D.S., et al. (Eds.), Evaluation of Soil Organic Matter Models, NATO ANSI
Series. Springer Verlag, pp. 112–113.
McKenzie, B.M., Bengough, A.G., Hallett, P.D., Thomas, W.T.B., Forster, B.,
McNicol, J.W., 2009. Deep rooting and drought screening of cereal crops: a novel
field-based method and its application. Field Crops Res. 112, 165–171.
Minasny, B., Malone, B.P., McBratney, A.B., Angers, D.A., Arrouays, D., et al., 2017. Soil
carbon 4 per mile. Geoderma 292, 59–86.
Mofijul Islam, S.M., Gaihre, Y.K., Rafiqul Islam, Md, Akter, M., Al Mahmud, A., Singh, U.,
Sander, B.O., 2020. Effects of water management on greenhouse gas emissions from
farmers' rice fields in Bangladesh. Sci. Total Environ., 139382 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139382.
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101Muthukumara, M., Bandyopadhya, S., Chonabayashi, S., Markandya, A., Mosier, T., 2018.
South Asia's Hotspots: the Impact of Temperature and Precipitation Changes on
Living Standards. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1155-5.
Myhre, G., Shindell, D., Breon, F.M., Collins, W., Fuglestvedt, J., 2013. Anthropogenic and
natural radiative forcing. In: Stocker, T.F., et al. (Eds.), Climate Change 2013: the
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
NAAS, 2017. Innovative Viable Solution to Rice Residue Burning in Rice-Wheat Cropping
System through Concurrent Use of Super Straw Management System-Fitted Combines
and Turbo Happy Seeder. Policy Brief No. 2. National Academy of Agricultural
Sciences, New Delhi, p. 16.
NMSA, 2017. National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture. Integrated Nutrient
Management Division.
Nouri, H., Stokvis, B., Galindo, A., Blatchford, M., Hoekstra, A.Y., 2019. Water scarcity
alleviation through water footprint reduction in agriculture: the effect of soil
mulching and drip irrigation. Sci. Total Environ. 653, 241–252.
NPF, 2017. Next Policy Framework (NPF) Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s (AAFC),
pp. 241–252.
Pampolino, M.F., Witt, C., Pasuquin, J.M., Johnston, A., Fisher, M.J., 2012. Development
approach and evaluation of the Nutrient Expert software for nutrient management in
cereal crops. Comput. Electron. Agric. 88, 103–110.
Parihar, C.M., Jat, S.L., Singh, A.K., Ghosh, A., Rathore, N.S., Kumar, B., Pradhan, S.,
Majumdar, K., Satyanarayana, T., Jat, M.L., Saharawat, Y.S., 2017. Effects of
precision conservation agriculture in a maize-wheat-mung bean rotation on crop
yield, water use and radiation conversion under a semiarid agro-ecosystem. Agric.
Water Manag 192, 306–319.
Parihar, C.M., Parihar, M.D., Sapkota, T.B., Nanwal, R.K., Singh, A.K., Jat, S.L.,
Nayak, H.S., Mahala, D.M., Singh, L.K., Kakraliya, S.K., Stirling, C.M., 2018. Long-
term impact of conservation agriculture and diversified maize rotations on carbon
pools and stocks, mineral nitrogen fractions and nitrous oxide fluxes in Inceptisol of
India. Sci. Total Environ 640, 1382–1392.
Pathak, H., Jain, N., Bhatia, A., Mohanty, S., Gupta, N., 2009. Global warming mitigation
potential of biogas plants in India. Environ. Monit. Assess 157, 407–418.
Pathak, H., Byjesh, K., Chakrabarti, B., Aggarwal, P.K., 2011. Potential and cost of carbon
sequestration in Indian agriculture: estimates from long-term field experiments. Field
Crops Res. 120, 102–111.
Paustian, K., 1994. Modeling soil biology and biogeochemical processes for sustainable
agriculture. In: Paknjurst, C., Doube, B.M., Gupta, V.V.S.R. (Eds.), Management of
Soil Biota in Sustainable Farming Systems. CISRO Publ., Melbourne, pp. 182–196.
Paustian, K., Collins, H.P., Paul, E.A., 1997. Management controls on soil C. In: Paul, E.A.
(Ed.), Soil Organic Matter in Temperate Agroecosystems: Long-Term Experiments in
North America. Lewis Publishers, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 15–49.
Paustian, K., Lehmann, J., Ogle, S., Reay, D., Robertson, G.P., Smith, P., 2016. Climate
smart soils. Nature 532, 49–57.
Paustian, K., Larson, E., Kent, J., Marx, E., Swan, A., 2019. Soil C sequestration as a
biological negative emission strategy. Front Clim. 1, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fclim.2019.00008.
Pellerin, S., Bamiere, L., Angers, D., Beline, F., Benoit, M., Butault, J.P., Chenu, C.,
Colnenne-David, C., de Cara, S., Delame, N., Doreau, M., 2013. How Can French
Agriculture Contribute to Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions? Synopsis of the Study
Report (July). INRA, Paris, France, p. 92.
Perala, P., Kapuinen, P., Esala, M., Tyynela, S., Regina, K., 2006. Influence of slurry and
mineral fertiliser application techniques on N2O andCH4 fluxes from a barley field in
southern Finland. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 117, 71–78.
Pittelkow, C.M., Adviento-Borbe, M.A., Van Kessel, C.S., Hill, J.E., Linquist, B.A., 2014.
Optimizing rice yields while minimizing yield-scaled global warming potential.
Global Change Biol. 20, 1382–1393.
Plaza-Bonilla, D., Arrúe, J.L., Cantero-Martínez, C., Fanlo, R., Iglesias, A., Alvaro-
Fuentes, J., 2015. Carbon management in dryland agricultural systems. A review.
Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35, 1319–1334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-015-0326-x.
Poeplau, C., Don, A., 2015. Carbon sequestration in agricultural soils via cultivation of
cover crops–A meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 200, 33–41.
Poulton, P., Johnston, J., Macdonald, A., White, R., Powlson, D., 2018. Major limitations
to achieving “4 per 1000” increases in soil organic carbon stock in temperate regions:
evidence from long-term experiments at Rothamsted Research, United Kingdom.
Global Change Biol. 24 (6), 2563–2584.
Powlson, D.S., Stirling, C.M., Jat, M.L., Gerard, B.G., Palm, C.A., Sanchez, P.A.,
Cassman, K.G., 2014. Limited potential of no-till agriculture for climate change
mitigation. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 678–683. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2292.
Powlson, D.S., Stirling, C.M., Thierfelder, C., White, R.P., Jat, M.L., 2016. Does
conservation agriculture deliver climate change mitigation through soil carbon
sequestration in tropical agro-ecosystems? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 220, 164–174.
Prade, T., K€atterer, T., Bjo€rnsson, L., 2017. Including a one-year grass ley increases soil
organic carbon and decreases greenhouse gas emissions from cereal-dominated
rotations – a Swedish farm case study. Biosyst. Eng. 164, 200–212.
Pretty, J., Bharucha, Z.P., 2015. Integrated pest management for sustainable
intensification of agriculture in Asia and Africa. Insects 6, 152–182.
Ray, R.L., Griffin, R.W., Fares, A., Elhassan, A., Awal, R., Woldesenbet, S., Risch, E., 2020.
Soil CO2 emission in response to organic amendments, temperature, and rainfall. Sci.
Rep. 10, 5849. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-62267-6.
Regmi, A.P., Ladha, J.K., Pathak, H., Pasuquin, E., Bueno, C., Dawe, D., Hobbs, P.R.,
Joshy, D., Maskey, S.L., Pandey, S.P., 2002. Yield and soil fertility trends in a 20-year
rice-rice-wheat experiment in Nepal. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J 66, 857–867.
Roth, V.N., Lange, M., Simon, C., Hertkorn, N., Bucher, S., Goodall, T., Griffiths, R.I.,
Mellado-Vazquez, P.G., Mommer, L., Oram, N.J., Weigelt, A., 2019. Persistence of100dissolved organic matter explained by molecular changes during its passage through
soil. Nat. Geosci 12, 755–761. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561019-0417-4.
Ruis, S.J., Blanco-Canqui, H., 2017. Cover crops could offset crop residue removal effects
on soil carbon and other properties: a review. Agron. J. 109 (5), 1785–1805.
Rumpel, C., Amiraslani, F., Chenu, C., Cardenas, M.G., Kaonga, M., Koutika, L.S.,
Ladha, J., Madari, B., Shirato, Y., Smith, P., Soudi, B., 2020. Response to "The
"4p1000" initiative: a new name should be adopted" by Baveye and White (2019).
Ambio 49, 363–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01209-7.
Sainju, U.M., 2016. A Global meta-analysis on the impact of management practices on net
global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity from cropland soils. PLoS One
11 (2), e0148527. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148527.
Sanderman, J., Farquharson, R., Baldock, J., 2009. Soil Carbon Sequestration Potential: a
Review for Australian Agriculture CSIRO Land and Water. A report prepared for
Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, p. 90.
Sanderman, J., Hengl, T., Gregory, J.F., 2017. Soil carbon debt of 12,000 years of human
land use. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114 (36), 9575–9580.
Sapkota, T.B., Jat, R.K., Singh, R.G., Jat, M.L., Stirling, C.M., Jat, M.K., Bijarniya, M.K.,
Kumar, M., Saharawat, Y.S., Gupta, R.K., 2017. Soil organic carbon changes after
seven years of conservation agriculture in a rice–wheat system of the eastern Indo-
Gangetic Plains. Soil Use Manag. 33, 81–89.
Schlesinger, W.H., 1990. Evidence from chronosequence studies for a low carbon-storage
potential of soils. Nature 348, 232–234.
Schlesinger, W.H., 1997. Biogeochemistry. An Analysis of Global Change, second ed.
Academic Press, San Diego, London, Boston, New York, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto,
p. 588.
Schmidt, M.W., Torn, M.S., Abiven, S., Dittmar, T., Guggenberger, G., Janssens, I.A.,
Kleber, M., Ko€gel-Knabner, I., Lehmann, J., Manning, D.A., Nannipieri, P., 2011.
Persistence of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property. Nature 478, 49–56.
Shah, Z., Shah, S.H., Peoples, M.B., Schwenke, G.D., Herridge, D.F., 2003. Crop residue
and fertilizer N effects on nitrogen fixation and yields of legume-cereal rotations and
soil organic fertility. Field Crops Res. 83, 1–11.
Shah, Z., Ahmad, S.R., Rahman, H.U., Shah, M.Z., 2011. Sustaining rice-wheat system
through management of legumes II. Effect of green manure legumes and fertilizer on
wheat yield. Pakistan J. Bot. 43, 2093–2097.
Sidhu, H.S., Manpreet, S., Humphreys, E., Yadvinder, S., Balwinder, S., Dhillon, S.S.,
Blackwell, J., Bector, V., Malkeet, S., Sarbjeet, S., 2007. The HS enables direct drilling
of wheat into rice stubble. Aust. J. Exp. Agric 47, 844–854.
Singh, S., Ladha, J.K., Gupta, R.K., Bhushan, L., Rao, A.N., Sivaprasad, B., Singh, P.P.,
2007. Evaluation of mulching, intercropping with Sesbania and herbicide use for
weed management in dry-seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.). Crop Protect 26, 518–524.
Singh, Y., Sidhu, H.S., Singh, M., Dhaliwal, H.S., Blackwell, J., Singh, R.P., Singla, N.,
Lohan, S.K., 2009. Happy Seeder: A Conservation Agriculture Technology for
Managing Rice Residues. Technical Bulletin 1, Department of Soils, PAU, Ludhiana,
India.
Six, J., Carpentier, A., van Kessel, C., Merckx, R., Harris, D., Horwath, W.R., Lüscher, A.,
2001. Impact of elevated CO2 on soil organic matter dynamics as related to changes
in aggregate turnover and residue quality. Plant Soil 234, 27–36.
Six, J., Ogle, S.M., Breidt, F.J., Conant, R.T., Mosiers, A.R., Paustian, K., 2004. The
potential to mitigate global warming with no-tillage management is only realised
when practised in the long term. Global Change Biol. 10 (2), 155–160. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00730.x.
Smith, P., 2008. Land use change and soil organic carbon dynamics. Nutrient Cycl.
Agroecosyst. 81, 169–178.
Smith, P., 2016. Soil carbon sequestration and biochar as negative emission technologies.
Global Change Biol. 22, 1315–1324.
Smith, P., Powlson, D.S., Glendining, M.J., 1996. Establishing a European soil organic
matter network (SOMNET). In: Powlson, D.S., et al. (Eds.), Evaluation of Soil Organic
Matter Models Using Existing Long-Term Datasets, NATOASI Series I Vol 38.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 81–98.
Snyder, C.S., Bruulsema, T.W., Jensen, T.L., Fixen, P.E., 2009. Review of greenhouse gas
emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects. Agric.
Ecosyst. Environ. 133, 247–266.
Solomon, S.D., Manning, Q.M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M., Miller,
H.L., 2007. Climate Change 2007: the Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom
and New York, NY, USA, 996 pp.
Sommer, R., Bossio, D., 2014. Dynamics and climate change mitigation potential of soil
organic carbon sequestration. J. Environ. Manag. 144, 83–87.
Soussana, J.F., Lutfalla, S., Ehrhardt, F., Rosenstock, T., Lamanna, C., Havlík, P.,
Richards, M., Chotte, J.L., Torquebiau, E., Ciais, P., Smith, P., 2019. Matching policy
and science: rationale for the ‘4 per 1000-soils for food security and climate’
initiative. Soil Tillage Res. 188, 3–15.
Srinivasarao, C., Kundu, S., Lakshmi, C.S., Rani, Y.S., Nataraj, K.C., Gangaiah, B.,
Laxmi, M.J., Babu, M.V.S., Rani, U., Nagalakshmi, S., Manasa, R., 2019. Soil Health
Issues for Sustainability of South Asian Agriculture. EC Agriculture 5.6.
Steinbeiss, S., Bessler, H., Engels, C., Temperton, V.M., Buchmann, N., Roscher, C.,
Kreutziger, Y., Baade, J., Habekost, M., Gleixner, G., 2008. Plant diversity positively
affects short-term soil carbon storage in experimental grasslands. Global Change Biol.
14, 2937–2949.
Stewart, C.E., Pausitan, K., Conant, R.T., Plante, A.F., Six, J., 2007. Soil carbon saturation:
concept, evidence and evaluation. Biogeochemistry 86, 19–31.
Stewart, C.E., Plante, A.F., Paustian, K., Conant, R.T., Six, J., 2008. Soil carbon saturation:
linking concept and measurable carbon pools. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 72, 379–392.
M.L. Jat et al. Crop and Environment 1 (2022) 86–101Stockmann, U., Padarian, J., McBratney, A., Minasny, B., de Brogniez, D.,
Montanarella, L., Hong, S.Y., Rawlins, B.G., Field, D.J., 2015. Global soil carbon
assessment. Global Food Secur 6, 9–16.
Swift, M.J., Izac, A.M.N., Noordwijk, M., 2004. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in
agricultural landscapes–are we asking the right questions? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
104 (1), 113–134.
Sykes, A.J., Macleod, M., Eory, V., Rees, R.M., Payen, F., Myrgiotis, V., Williams, M.,
Sohi, S., Hillier, J., Moran, D., Manning, D.A., 2018. Characterising the biophysical,
economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal
technology. Global Change Biol. 26, 1085–1108.
Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Jason, H., Belinda, L.B., 2011. Global food demand and the
sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (50),
20260–20264.
Trachsel, S., Messmer, R., Stamp, P., Hund, A., 2009. Mapping of QTLs for lateral and
axile root growth of tropical maize. Theor. Appl. Genet. 119, 1413–1424.
UNFCCC, 2017. United Nations framework convention on climate change. Informal
documents. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/4-per-1000-initiative.pdf.
USGS, 2011. The Concept of Geologic Carbon Sequestration. U.S. Geological Survey
Energy Resources Program. Fact Sheet 2010–3122. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/
3122/pdf/FS2010-3122.pdf.
Van de Broek, M., Ghiasi, S., Decock, C., Hund, A., Abiven, S., Friedli, C., Werner, R.A.,
Six, J., 2020. The soil organic carbon stabilization potential of old and new wheat
cultivars: a 13CO2-labeling study. Biogeosciences 17, 2971–2986. https://doi.org/
10.5194/bg-17-2971-2020.
VandenBygaart, A.J., 2017. Geoderma 309, 113–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.geoderma.2017.05.024. Comments on "soil carbon 4 per mille" by Minasny, B.,
Malone, B.P., McBratney, A.B., Angers, D.A., Arrouays, D., Chambers, A., Chaplot, V.,
Chen, Z.S., Cheng, K., Das, B.S., Field, D.J., 2017.
VandenBygaart, A.J., Gregorich, E.G., Angers, D.A., 2003. Influence of agricultural
management on soil organic carbon: a compendium and assessment of Canadian
studies. Can. J. Soil Sci. 83, 363–380.
van Groeningen, J.W., van Kessel, C., Hungate, B.A., Oenema, O., Powlson, D.S., van
Groeningen, K.J., 2017. Sequestering soil organic carbon: a nitrogen dilemma.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 4738–4739. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b01427.
Van Kessel, C., Venterea, R., Six, J., Adviento-Borbe, M.A., Linquist, B., van
Groenigen, K.J., 2013. Climate, duration, and N placement determine N2O emissions
in reduced tillage systems: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biol. 19, 33–44.
Verbruggen, E., Struyf, E., Vicca, S., 2021. Can arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi speed up
carbon sequestration by enhanced weathering? Plants, People, Planet 1–9. https://
doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10179, 00.
Zhao, X., Liu, B.Y., Liu, S.L., Qi, J.Y., Wang, X., Pu, C., Li, S.S., Zhang, X.Z., Yang, X.G.,
Lal, R., Chen, F., 2020. Sustaining crop production in China's cropland by crop
residue retention: a meta-analysis. Land Degrad. Dev. 31, 694–709.101Viechtbauer, Wolfgang, 2010. Conducting meta-analyses in R with themetafor package.
J. Stat. Software 36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03.
Virto, I., Barr, P., Burlot, A., Chenu, C., 2012. Carbon input differences as the main factor
explaining the variability in soil organic C storage in no-tilled compared to inversion
tilled agrosystems. Biogeochemistry 108, 17–26.
Wang, X., He, C., Liu, B., Zhao, X., Liu, Y., Wang, Q., 2020. Effects of residue returning on
soil organic carbon storage and sequestration rate in China’s croplands: a meta-
analysis. Agronomy 10, 691. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10050691.
Wang, X., Yang, H., Liu, J., Wu, J., Chen, W., Wu, J., Zhu, L., Bian, X., 2015. Effects of
ditch-buried straw return on soil organic carbon and rice yields in a rice -wheat
rotation system. Catena 127, 56–63.
West, T.O., Post, W.M., 2002. Soil organic carbon sequestration rates by tillage and crop
rotation: a global data analysis. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 66, 1930–1946.
White, R.E., Davidson, B., Lam, S.K., Chen, D., 2018. A critique of the paper ‘Soil carbon 4
per mille' by Minasny et al. (2017). Geoderma 309, 115–117. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.05.02.
World Bank, 2012. Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils. © World Bank,
Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11868
License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.
Wright, S., Nichols, K.A., 2002. Glomalin: Hiding Place for a Third of the World’s Stored
Soil Carbon. https://agresearchmag.ars.usda.gov/2002/sep/soil.
Yadvinder-Singh, B.S., Ladha, J.K., Khind, C.S., Gupta, R.K., Meelu, O.P., Pasuquin, E.,
2004. Long-term effects of integrated management of organic inputs on yield and soil
fertility in the rice-wheat rotation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 68, 845–853.
Yang, J.Q., Zhang, X., Bourg, I.C., Stone, H.A., 2021. 4D imaging reveals mechanisms of
clay-carbon protection and release. Nat. Commun. 12, 622. https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41467-020-20798-6.
Zhang, H.L., Lal, R., Zhao, X., Xue, J.F., Chen, F., 2014. Opportunities and challenges of
soil carbon sequestration by conservation agriculture in China. Adv. Agron. 124,
1–36.
Zhao, X., Liu, S.L., Pu, C., Zhang, X.Q., Xue, J.F., et al., 2016. Methane and nitrous oxide
emissions under no-till farming in China: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biol. 22,
1372–1384.
Zhao, X., Liu, S.L., Pu, C., Zhang, X.Q., Xue, J.F., et al., 2016. Methane and nitrous oxide
emissions under no-till farming in China: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biol. 22,
1372–1384.
Zhao, X., Liu, S.L., Pu, C., Zhang, X.Q., Xue, J.F., Ren, Y.X., Zhao, X.L., Chen, F., Lal, R.,
et al., 2017. Crop yields under no-till farming in China: a meta-analysis. Eur. J. Agron.
84, 67–75.
Verhoeven, E., Pereira, E., Decock, C., Suddick, E., Angst, T., Six, J., 2017. Toward a
better assessment of biochar -nitrous oxide mitigation potential at the field scale. J.
Environ. Qual 46, 237.
Zomer, R.J., Bossio, D.A., Sommer, R., Verchot, L.V., 2017. Global sequestration potential
of increased organic carbon in cropland soils. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–8.