The Potential of U.S. Grazing Lands to Sequester Carbon and Mitigate the Greenhouse Effect 2000
DOI: 10.1201/9781420032468.ch2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Broad- Scale Perspective on the Extent, Distribution, and Characteristics of U. S. Grazing Lands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If N availability increases, for instance due to increased grazing, belowground C inputs could be reduced even further despite an increase in biomass as heterotrophic organisms will favor root‐derived organic matter over native SOM as their primary energy source. Our results support modeling studies showing that conversions of native rangeland communities including pinyon‐juniper woodlands, sagebrush scrublands, and bunchgrasslands to cheatgrass as occurs in the western United States will result in C losses (Sobecki et al , 2001) since large C stocks accumulated over long time periods are replaced by a small pool of regrowth, while C inputs into stable SOM pools are reduced (Schulze et al , 2000).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…If N availability increases, for instance due to increased grazing, belowground C inputs could be reduced even further despite an increase in biomass as heterotrophic organisms will favor root‐derived organic matter over native SOM as their primary energy source. Our results support modeling studies showing that conversions of native rangeland communities including pinyon‐juniper woodlands, sagebrush scrublands, and bunchgrasslands to cheatgrass as occurs in the western United States will result in C losses (Sobecki et al , 2001) since large C stocks accumulated over long time periods are replaced by a small pool of regrowth, while C inputs into stable SOM pools are reduced (Schulze et al , 2000).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Though substantial areas of the Northern Great Plains are used for crop production, significant parts of this province remain unploughed and are used as rangelands. Quantification of the parameters for carbon cycle in Northern Plains grasslands is an essential part of the general task to evaluate the carbon budget of North America (Sobecki et al ., 2001; Wofsy & Harriss, 2002). Many of the early methods for studying carbon budgets of grazing lands can be traced back to the International Biological Program (Coupland, 1979; Breymeyer & Van Dyne, 1981) with its emphasis on both net primary production and field photosynthesis based on measurements from towers and chambers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7 This lack of attention stems, no doubt, from the relatively low carbon storage capacity per unit area, the extreme heterogeneity of rangeland soils and the fact that signifi cant gains in carbon storage capacity would likely require major changes in existing rangeland management. 8 Estimating the potential gains in carbon storage on rangeland soils is complicated and the synthesis of multiple studies rarely provides unambiguous fi ndings with respect to land management impacts on carbon storage. However, with respect to two common range management activities, grazing generally causes total biomass and carbon to decline on rangelands, while vegetation burning over the long-term results in little change in carbon although the above-vs. below-ground allocations may be altered.…”
Section: Carbon Offsetsmentioning
confidence: 99%