See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/226839181

Mineralization of organic matter and the carbon sequestration capacity of zonal

soils

Article in Eurasian Soil Science · January 2008

DOI: 10.1134/S1064229308070065

CITATIONS READS
44 264

5 authors, including:

Vyacheslav M. Semenov T. V. Kuznetsova

Russian Academy of Sciences 30 PUBLICATIONS 304 CITATIONS
90 PUBLICATIONS 973 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Vyacheslav M. Semenov on 21 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSN 1064-2293, Eurasian Soil Science, 2008, Vol. 41, No. 7, pp. 717–730. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2008.
Original Russian Text © V.M. Semenov, L.A. Ivannikova, T.V. Kuznetsova, N.A. Semenova, A.S. Tulina, 2008, published in Pochvovedenie, 2008, No. 7, pp. 819–832.

SOIL
CHEMISTRY

Mineralization of Organic Matter and the Carbon Sequestration

Capacity of Zonal Soils
V. M. Semenov, L. A. Ivannikova, T. V. Kuznetsova, N. A. Semenova, and A. S. Tulina
Institute of Physicochemical and Biological Problems of Soil Science, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Institutskaya ul. 2, Pushchino, Moscow oblast, 142290 Russia
E-mail: semenov@ibbp.psn.ru
Received November 10, 2006

Abstract—The susceptibility of soil organic matter (SOM) to mineralization decreases in the following
sequence of zonal soils: tundra soil > soddy-podzolic soil > gray forest soil > chestnut soil > dark chestnut soil >
chernozem. The content of potentially mineralizable organic matter in the plowed soils is 1.9–3.9 times lower
than that in their virgin analogues. The highest soil carbon sequestration capacity (SCSC) is typical of the
leached chernozems, and the lowest SCSC is typical of the tundra soil. Taking into account the real soil tem-
peratures and the duration of the warm season, the SCSC values decrease in the following sequence: leached
chernozem > dark chestnut soil > chestnut soil ≥ tundra soil > gray forest soil > soddy-podzolic soil. Arable
soils are characterized by higher SCSC values in comparison with their virgin analogues.
DOI: 10.1134/S1064229308070065

INTRODUCTION constitute 20 and 2% of the corresponding global pools

The inventory of sources and sinks of carbon and the
quantitative assessment of major carbon pools and
fluxes in the biosphere are necessary for the develop-
ment of a strategy aimed at mitigation of climate
changes. The global budget of carbon dioxide in the air
is dictated by the CO2 emission from natural and
anthropogenic sources and the CO2 sink in various
pools. In contrast to the anthropogenic sources that can
be controlled, it is difficult to regulate the CO2 emission
from soils because of the great number of factors affect-
ing the CO2 generation in soils and its diffusion into the
atmosphere. Moreover, the artificial limitation of the
organic matter mineralization (to reduce the CO2 emis-
sion) may lead to a deficit of nutrients and, thus,
decrease the biomass production by plants. As a result,
the photosynthetic binding of CO2 may decrease [36].
Therefore, a strategy aimed at increasing the stable pool
of soil organic carbon seems to be more appropriate
than a strategy aimed at limiting the CO2 emission from
soils [48]. The fixation of atmospheric carbon in the
organic matter of terrestrial ecosystems and its long-
term preservation in the SOM with a minimal risk of
immediate emission is referred to as soil carbon seques-
tration. The mean residence time (MRT) of carbon in
the atmosphere is five years; in plant biomass, 10 years;
and in the SOM, 35 years [40]. The global pool of soil
organic carbon is four times greater than the biotic pool
and three times greater than the atmospheric pool [3, 6,
40, 48]. Soils of natural ecosystems and the surface lay-
ers of peat deposits in Russia contain 296 Pg of organic
carbon; the organic carbon pool in arable soils of Rus-
sian is estimated at 19.0–27.3 Pg [8, 58]. These values
of soil organic carbon, respectively.
The enhancement of soil carbon sequestration and
the reduction of carbon emissions are the main strate-
gies aimed to control the concentration of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere. It is important that the strategy
of carbon sequestration in soils is an environmentally
beneficial strategy; its positive economic, agronomic,
ecological, and technological effects are beyond doubt.
Moreover, this strategy is cost-efficient in comparison
with the measures necessary to enhance the geological
sequestration of carbon or its sequestration in the
ocean. Also, this strategy is harmless with respect to
water ecosystems. The carbon sequestered in the SOM
may be properly estimated and become the object of
trade operations on carbon sequestration or emission
quotas. This is a profitable business for all the coun-
tries, including those that have not signed the Kyoto
protocol [34]. It is supposed that the organic carbon
sequestration in agricultural soils of the European
Union may exceed the volumes of CO2 emission from
burning of fossil fuels in these countries in the nearest
future.
It is known that SOM performs numerous transpor-
tation, regulatory, protective, physiological, and other
agroecological functions realized via diverse biological
and physicochemical processes [1, 10–12, 15, 16, 18,
19]. Therefore, favorable changes in the quantity and
quality of SOM under the impact of the enhanced car-
bon sequestration should improve the soil quality and
fertility and its tolerance toward various disturbances;
they should also activate various mechanisms of the soil
self-rehabilitation.

717
718 SEMENOV et al.
The sequestration of organic carbon in soils is a rel-
atively new aspect of studies of the biogeochemical car-
bon cycle within the framework of the problems of glo-
bal climate change and the response of terrestrial eco-
systems to it. Studies of the processes of mineralization
and stabilization of SOM and their alterations under the
impact of different factors have come to the forefront of
modern soil science [32, 35, 43, 49, 52, 54–56, 59]. The
quantitative assessment of carbon sequestration in soils
is based on calculations of the carbon sequestration
potential in soils (ecosystems) and the determination of
the carbon sequestration capacity of soils. The seques-
tration potential of ecosystems characterizes the inten-
sity of the input (return) of organic carbon into the soil
with plant residues and organic fertilizers. The soil car-
bon sequestration capacity reflects the soil capacity to
stabilize and retain carbon in the SOM. Usually, the soil
carbon sequestration is calculated as the SOM budget;
changes in the total Corg content in the soil or changes
in the Corg pool in the 1-m-thick soil layer during some
period are calculated. The existing estimates of the soil
carbon sequestration potential in the United States,
India, the European Union, and other countries and
regions are based on this approach [30, 39, 46, 57].
However, as the carbon of plant residues is susceptible
to mineralization, a considerable part of this carbon
pool may be readily emitted into the atmosphere.
Therefore, estimates of the soil carbon sequestration
based on the budget of plant residues seem to be too
optimistic. In fact, estimates based on changes in the
bulk content of soil organic carbon also cannot be con-
sidered sufficiently accurate, because the variability of
data on the Corg content obtained by various analytical
methods often exceeds the statistically significant dif-
ferences. Other methods such as the determination of
the carbon content in the clay fraction, in soil microag-
gregates (<250 µm), in the particulate organic matter,
or in the fungal biomass [21, 33, 38, 41, 44, 50, 52, 60]
characterize the particular mechanisms of carbon
sequestration in soils rather than the total soil carbon
sequestration capacity.
From the theoretical and practical viewpoints, sev-
eral important problems related to soil carbon seques-
tration can be formulated. What are the differences in
the soil carbon sequestration capacity between different
ecoregions and ecosystems? What criteria can be used
to identify these differences? What are the most signif-
icant processes responsible for the soil carbon seques-
tration? What are the residence times of carbon in dif-
ferent soil pools? What are the relationships between
the organic matter mineralization and carbon stabiliza-
tion in the soil? What are the most feasible, reliable,
sensitive, and simple methods that make it possible to
judge changes in the soil organic carbon pool after
some external impacts on the soil? What are the factors
controlling the existing differences in soil organic car-
bon pools between soils of northern and southern
regions? Are these differences specified by the climatic
conditions or by the protection of SOM from decompo-
sition ensured by the local soil conditions? What can be
the effect of global warming on the state of SOM and
on the reserves of organic carbon in different soils?
From our point of view, the biokinetic analysis of
SOM can be a reliable method to determine both the
mineralization capacity of SOM and the soil carbon
sequestration capacity. This method makes it possible
to determine the quantitative characteristics of the
SOM that can be used to assess the carbon sequestra-
tion capacity of soils of Russia.
OBJECTS AND METHODS
The zonal sequence of soils in the European part of
Russia was studied (Table 1). The soil samples were
taken from the layers of 0–5 and 5–10 cm; forest litters,
mossy horizons, and stubble remains were not sampled.
The soil samples were sieved through a 6-mm screen
and air dried. Weight portions (100 g) of air-dried soil
mass were placed into special incubation chambers.
The construction of these chambers made it possible to
determine the CO2 emission (with the use of a 0.2 N
NaOH solution) upon the continuous natural gas
exchange processes between the soil and the atmo-
sphere in the course of incubation [4]. Before the incu-
bation, the soil samples were subdivided into two par-
allel groups. Samples of the first group were moistened
to 60% of the field moisture capacity and kept in the
moist state for 10 days to initiate the microbial activity.
Samples of the second group were dried at 65°C for
24 h and then moistened to 60% of the field moisture
capacity immediately before incubation. Then, the
samples were placed into incubation chambers con-
nected with the vessels containing NaOH. At the begin-
ning of the incubation, the C-CO2 emitted from the soil
was measured every day; then, the frequency of measure-
ments was reduced to one measurement per 3–5 days. The
amount of C-CO2 absorbed by the alkali was measured
by means of titration with 0.2 N HCl. The soil samples
were incubated for 150 days. The experiment was per-
formed in two replicates. The incubation temperature
was 22 ± 1°ë. The rate of CO2 production in the course
of incubation and the cumulative amount of C-CO2
emitted from the soils in the course of incubation were
calculated. The soil basal respiration, the content of
microbial biomass, and the metabolic quotient qCO2
were determined after 14 days of incubation of the pre-
liminarily moistened and dried samples [12]. The value
of the basal respiration (mg C-CO2/100 g of soil per h)
corresponded to the mean intensity of the C-CO2 emis-
sion from the preliminarily moistened soil. The carbon
of the microbial biomass (Cmb) was calculated from the
data on the total amount of C-CO2 emitted from the pre-
liminarily dried soil in 14 days according to Eq. (1).
Cumulative curves showing the production of C-CO2
during the entire period of incubation were approxi-
mated by exponential regression equations (eqs. 2–4).
The contents of the potentially mineralizable carbon
(C0) and of the fractions of easily (k1 > 0.1 day–1), mod-
EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008
 MINERALIZATION OF ORGANIC MATTER 719

Table 1. Major chemical properties of the studied sequence of zonal soils

Soil, region, ecosystem Corg, % Ntot, mg/100 g C:N pHKCl

Tundra soil, Vorkuta:

hummocky terrain 29.26 1475 19.8 3.75

Soddy-podzolic soil, Tver oblast:

coniferous forest 1.97 208 9.5 4.10

cropland 1.01 116 8.7 5.05

Gray forest soil, Moscow oblast:

mixed forest 2.04 217 9.4 5.00

cropland 0.95 111 8.6 5.55

Leached chernozem, Penza oblast:

virgin plot 7.01 668 10.5 6.20

cropland 3.96 397 10.0 5.60

Dark chestnut soil, Volgograd oblast:

shelterbelt 1.51 153 9.9 6.75

cropland 1.00 123 8.3 6.45

Chestnut soil, Volgograd oblast:

fallow plot 1.37 141 9.7 7.70

cropland 0.94 118 8.0 6.75

Note: The collection of soil samples was prepared and kindly submitted to us by researchers from the Institute of Physicochemical and
Biological Problems of Soil Science of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Dr. Biol. Sci. N.D. Anan’eva, Cand. Biol. Sci.
E.A. Sus’yan, and Cand. Techn. Sci. V.O. Lopes de Gerenu.

erately (k2 > 0.01 day–1), and difficultly (k3 > 0.001 day–1)
mineralizable SOM were calculated. The suggested
equations are as follows:
ët = 0.45Cmb (1 – exp(–kt) + Bt,
ët = C0 (1 – exp(–kt),
ët = C1(1 – exp(–k1t) + C2(1 – exp(–k2t),
ët = C1(1 – exp(–k1t) + C2(1 – exp(–k2t)
+ C3(1 – exp(–k3t),
where Ct is the total amount of C-CO2 (mg/100 g of
soil) released from the soil during the time t (days); C0
is the carbon content (mg/100 g) of the potentially min-
eralizable pool of the SOM; C1 to C3 are the contents of
the easily, moderately, and hardly mineralizable frac-
tions of the active pool of SOM (mg/100 g); Cmb is the
carbon of the microbial biomass (mg/100 g); 0.45 is the
portion of organic carbon mineralized by the microor-
ganisms; and B is the constant characterizing the equi-
(1) librium between the decay and growth of the biomass
in the course of incubation.
(2)
The content of C0 gives us a general notion about the
(3) mineralization potential of the SOM, and the contents
(4) of fractions C1, C2, and C3 inform us about the intensi-
ties of the carbon turnover in different components of
the SOM.
The soil carbon sequestration capacity (SCSC) can
be quantitatively characterized by the ratio between the
organic carbon resistant to mineralization and the
potentially mineralizable organic carbon (Eq. 5):
SCSC = (Corg – ë0)/(C0), (5)

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

720 SEMENOV et al.

Table 2. Structure of the pool of active organic matter in the studied sequence of zonal soils

Easily mineralizable Moderately mineralizable Hardly mineralizable

Soil, ecosystem
C1, k1, C2, k2, C3, k3,
mg/100 g day–1 mg/100 g day–1 mg/100 g day–1

Tundra soil:

hummocky terrain 205 ± 36 0.676 ± 0.104 Absent 8889 ± 155 0.007 ± 0.000

Soddy-podzolic soil:

forest 37 ± 1 0.392 ± 0.016 88 ± 10 0.054 ± 0.004 183 ± 0 0.007 ± 0.001

cropland 24 ± 1 0.170 ± 0.004 Absent 82 ± 4 0.005 ± 0.000

Gray forest soil,

forest 37 ± 3 0.355 ± 0.036 51 ± 4 0.071 ± 0.009 176 ± 3 0.008 ± 0.000

cropland 19 ± 1 0.239 ± 0.020 Absent 54 ± 1 0.007 ± 0.000

Leached chernozem:,

virgin plot 60 ± 1 0.404 ± 0.008 94 ± 0 0.071 ± 0.001 337 ± 4 0.005 ± 0.000

cropland 35 ± 2 0.243 ± 0.009 Absent 91 ± 0 0.009 ± 0.000

Dark chestnut soil:

shelterbelt 21 ± 2 0.262 ± 0.012 " 67 ± 1 0.009 ± 0.000

cropland 12 ± 1 0.259 ± 0.081 " 38 ± 1 0.008 ± 0.000

Chestnut soil:

fallow plot 21 ± 1 0.230 ± 0.016 " 91 ± 6 0.005 ± 0.000

cropland 12 ± 1 0.220 ± 0.012 " 40 ± 2 0.005 ± 0.001

Note: The values of C1, C2, and C3 and k1, k2, and k3 were calculated according to eqs. (3) or (4).

where Corg is the total content of organic carbon
(mg/100 g), and C0 is the content of potentially miner-
alizable organic carbon (mg/100 g).
In order to determine the potential mineralization of
the SOM under field conditions (at the temperature
equal to the average soil temperature during the warm
season typical of the given zonal soil [2]), the data
obtained were recalculated using the correction coeffi-
cient Q10 according to Eq. (6); then, the content of the
potentially mineralizable carbon (C0) was calculated
according to Eq. (2). Equation (6) has the following
form:
V2 = V1 · Q(T2 – T1)/10,
where V2 is the extrapolated value of the parameter, V1
is the experimental value, Q (Q10) is the coefficient
equal to 2.1, T2 is the average soil temperature under
the field conditions, and T1 is the soil temperature dur-
ing the incubation.
The organic carbon content in the samples was
determined by the wet combustion method (oxidation
of organic matter by a mixture of H2SO4 and K2Cr2O7
with titration using Mohr’s salt), and the total nitrogen
content was determined by the colorimetric method [5].
The statistical treatment of the data was performed
with the use of Excel 2000 and Statistica 6.0 software.
The coefficients of the regression equations with the
significance level P > 0.05 were discarded.
(6) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The total content of Corg and the C : N ratio in the
SOM reflect the genetic specificity of the biogenic
humus-accumulative processes in different soil zones

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

 MINERALIZATION OF ORGANIC MATTER 721

Tundra soil Soddy-podzolic soil

250
7000
6000 200

5000
150
4000

3000 100
2000
50
1000

0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

Gray forest soil Leached chernozem
350
250
300
200 250
C-CO2, mg/100 g

150 200

150
100
100
50 50

0 50 100 150
0 50 100 150
Dark chestnut soil Chestnut soil
80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

Days
1 1' 2 2'

The dynamics of the cumulative production of C-CO2 by soils of (1) natural ecosystems and (2) agroecosystems at the incubation
temperature of 22°C and at the temperature equal to the average soil temperature during the warm season in the corresponding soil
zone (1' and 2', respectively).

and their dependence on the input and removal of plant bution, the mineralogical composition, the nature and
organic matter, the soil aeration conditions, the soil frequency of external impacts on the soil system, and
water and temperature regimes, the particle-size distri- other internal and external factors (Table 1).

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

722 SEMENOV et al.

Table 3. The carbon of the microbial biomass (Cmb), the basal respiration, and the metabolic quotient of microbes in the stud-
ied sequence of zonal soils

Cmb Basal respiration,

qCO2, mg C-CO2
Soil, ecosystem mg C-CO2/100 g
per h/g Cmb
mg/100 g % of Corg of soil per h

Tundra soil:
hummocky terrain 638 ± 43 2.2 2.89 ± 0.44 4.54 ± 0.31
Soddy-podzolic soil:
forest 131 ± 2 6.6 0.25 ± 0.11 1.89 ± 0.03
cropland 31 ± 1 3.1 0.06 ± 0.04 2.01 ± 0.04
Gray forest soil:
forest 116 ± 3 5.7 0.21 ± 0.12 1.84 ± 0.05
cropland 25 ± 0 2.6 0.06 ± 0.04 2.29 ± 0.00
Leached chernozem:
virgin plot 183 ± 2 2.6 0.35 ± 0.20 1.93 ± 0.02
cropland 49 ± 6 1.2 0.14 ± 0.09 2.84 ± 0.34
Dark chestnut soil:
shelterbelt 36 ± 4 2.4 0.07 ± 0.05 1.92 ± 0.19
cropland 18 ± 6 1.8 0.04 ± 0.02 2.47 ± 0.85
Chestnut soil:
fallow plot 28 ± 2 2.1 0.07 ± 0.04 2.34 ± 0.16
cropland 19 ± 1 2.0 0.05 ± 0.04 2.58 ± 0.07
Note: The Cmb content was calculated according to Eq. (1).

The sampled tundra soil contained an extremely
high amount of organic carbon; the SOM was repre-
sented by moderately decomposed plant residues
weakly bound with the mineral matrix. The soils of the
southern taiga, forest-steppe, and steppe ecosystems
contained normal amounts of organic matter. The Corg
content in the arable soils was 1.4 to 2.1 times lower
than the Corg content in the corresponding virgin soils.
This is in agreement with published data [8, 11, 51]. A
detailed analysis of the chemical properties of SOM in
the European part of Russia can be found in the works
by I.V. Tyurin, M.M. Kononova, L.N. Aleksandrova,
V.V. Ponomareva, T.A. Plotnikova, D.S. Orlov,
S.N. Chukov, and other researchers. They demon-
strated that the group and fractional composition of the
SOM depends on the soil genesis and its position in the
system of bioclimatic zones. It was found that humifi-
cation processes are most vividly manifested in the
zone of chernozemic soils; the mineralization of
organic matter is a dominant process in arid soils,
whereas the conservation of incompletely humified
organic matter is typical of the northern humid regions.
The curves of the cumulative emission of C-CO2 by
zonal soils in the course of the incubation experiment
are shown in the figure. These curves were approxi-
mated by two- or three-order exponential regression
equations (eqs. 3 and 4). As a result, zonal regularities
of the distribution of the easily (k1 > 0.1 day–1), moder-
ately (k2 > 0.01 day–1), and difficultly (k3 > 0.001 day–1)
mineralizable carbon fractions in the total pool of the
potentially mineralizable (active) organic matter were
established for natural ecosystems and agroecosystems
(Table 2). In the soddy-podzolic, gray forest, and cher-
nozemic soils, all three fractions of the active SOM
were present. In the tundra soil, as well as in the dark
chestnut and chestnut soils, only the fractions of easily
and hardly mineralizable organic matter were present.
The portion of hardly mineralizable carbon in the active
pool of the SOM in natural ecosystems varied from
59 to 98%; its distribution in the zonal soil sequence
was as follows: soddy-podzolic soil < gray forest soil <

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

 MINERALIZATION OF ORGANIC MATTER 723

Table 4. The potential mineralization capacity of the organic matter in the studied sequence of zonal soils under similar con-
ditions of incubation in the laboratory

Potentially mineralizable carbon (C0)

Constant of mineralization
Soil, ecosystem
rate (k, day–1 )
mg/100 g % of Corg

Tundra soil, hummocky terrain 8861 ± 1070 30.3 0.008 ± 0.001

Soddy-podzolic soil:
forest 219 ± 19 11.1 0.032 ± 0.005
cropland 63 ± 2 6.2 0.024 ± 0.007
Gray forest soil:
forest 181 ± 17 8.9 0.031 ± 0.005
cropland 46 ± 2 4.8 0.031 ± 0.006
Leached chernozem:
virgin plot 279 ± 30 4.0 0.034 ± 0.005
cropland 92 ± 8 2.3 0.035 ± 0.001
Dark chestnut soil:
shelterbelt 65 ± 5 4.3 0.027 ± 0.005
cropland 34 ± 2 3.4 0.028 ± 0.005
Chestnut soil:
fallow plot 66 ± 1 4.8 0.023 ± 0.005
cropland 30 ± 0 3.2 0.030 ± 0.003
Note: The soils were incubated at constant moisture (60% of the field capacity) and temperature (22°C) conditions for 150 days. The values
of C0 and k were calculated according to Eq. (2).

leached chernozem < dark chestnut soil < chestnut soil
< tundra soil. The constants of the mineralization of the
easily mineralizable organic matter in the soils of natural
ecosystems varied from 0.230 to 0.676 day–1; the con-
stants of mineralization of hardly mineralizable organic
matter in these soils varied from 0.005 to 0.009 day–1.
The pools of active organic matter in the agricultural
soils were 1.8–3.9 times lower than those in the corre-
sponding soils of natural ecosystems at the expense of
a decrease in the contents of the easily and hardly min-
eralizable fractions and the complete disappearance of
the moderately mineralizable fraction.
The content of microbial biomass and the metabolic
quotient calculated as the ratio of the basal respiration
to the Cmb are sensitive indicators of the biological
quality of the SOM and the ecophysiological status of
the soil microorganisms [20]. The degree of accumula-
tion of the SOM as a result of the accumulation and
decomposition of the biomass and metabolites depends
on the efficiency of the utilization of the SOM by the
microbial community, the formation of microbial
metabolites, the degree of protection of the microbial
biomass from decomposition, and the rate of utilization
of microbial metabolites by other microorganisms [54].
The lower the growth rate of the microorganisms and
the less protected the microbial biomass, the higher the
portion of soil organic carbon expended for respiration
processes. The rate of dying off of the unprotected
microbial biomass is estimated at about 70% per day,
whereas the dying off of the protected microbial biom-
ass is only about 0.5% per day. The highest content of
the carbon of the microbial biomass (Cmb) upon the lab-
oratory incubation experiment was determined in the
tundra soil; this soil was also characterized by a high
content of easily mineralizable organic matter (Tables 2
and 3). However, the portion of the microbial biomass
in the total pool of organic matter in the tundra soil was
only 2.2%. The metabolic quotient qCO2 determined
for the tundra soil was higher than that in the other
soils. This points to the stress state of the soil microbial
community during the incubation at the temperature
that was considerably higher than the normal tempera-
ture of tundra soils under natural conditions. In other
soils, the Cmb content varied from 2.1 to 6.6% of the

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

724 SEMENOV et al.
Corg. The highest values of Cmb were typical of the
soddy-podzolic soil; they decreased in the southward
direction and were the lowest in the chestnut soil. How-
ever, with respect to the absolute content of Cmb, the soil
sequence was somewhat different: leached chernozem >
soddy-podzolic soil > gray forest soil > dark chestnut
soil > chestnut soil. The same sequence was found for
the arable soils, though the values of Cmb in them
(1.2−3.1% of Corg) were 1.5–4.5 times lower than those
in the virgin soils. The data obtained suggest that the
most considerable depletion of the microbial biomass
upon the soil cultivation takes place in the soddy-pod-
zolic and gray forest soils. The increased values of the
metabolic quotient in arable soils in comparison with
their natural analogues attest to the predominant utili-
zation of easily available carbon by microorganisms for
their respiration activity. This may be due to the deficit
of moderately mineralizable organic matter.
The pool of potentially mineralizable SOM includes
all the substances available for microorganisms inde-
pendently of their origin, chemical composition, struc-
ture, and properties. At the same time, it can be sup-
posed that the contribution of easily soluble, low-
molecular, and particulate organic substances to this
pool is more significant than the contribution of insolu-
ble, complex, and high-molecular compounds bound
with the mineral soil matrix. The pool of mineralizable
organic matter depends on the amount and quality of
the organic matter entering the soil, the degree of pro-
tection of the particular components of the SOM from
decomposition, and the factors controlling the soil
microbial activity. Under the controlled conditions of
the experiment and the absence of the input of organic
substrates into the soil, the degree of mineralization of
the SOM is largely dictated by the protection of the lat-
ter from mineralization processes. The organic matter
of the tundra soil represented by the weakly trans-
formed plant residues displayed the maximum mineral-
ization capacity (Table 4). The content of potentially
mineralizable carbon (C0) in the other soils of natural
ecosystems was lower than that in the tundra soil by
32–136 times. The content of C0 in the leached cher-
nozem exceeded the contents of C0 in the soddy-pod-
zolic, gray forest, and chestnut soils by 1.3, 1.5, and
4.3 times, respectively. The mineralization capacity of
the SOM calculated as the percent of C0 in the Corg
decreased in the following order: tundra soil > soddy-
podzolic soil > gray forest soil > chestnut soil > dark
chestnut soil > leached chernozem. As seen from
Table 4, the content of C0 in the arable soils was 1.9 to
3.9 times lower than that in the corresponding soils of
natural ecosystems. The most significant depletion of
the pool of C0 took place in the arable gray forest and
soddy-podzolic soils. In the chestnut and dark chestnut
soils, the difference between the C0 contents in the ara-
ble and nonarable variants was less significant. This
may be explained by the low additional input of plant
residues into the nonarable soils sampled within a shel-
terbelt and on a fallow plot; in addition, these residues
are subjected to intense mineralization. It should be
noted that the relative depletion of C0 in the arable soils
in comparison with the nonarable soils was much more
significant than the depletion of the total organic carbon
(Tables 1 and 4). The main reason for this is the pre-
dominant expenditure of easily soluble organic matter
fractions for the microbial respiration. The difference
between the soil respiration quotients in natural and
agricultural ecosystems supports this conclusion. How-
ever, soil cultivation can also enhance the stability of
organic substances and their resistance to mineraliza-
tion. Several mechanisms of the SOM stabilization are
known: (1) the formation of high-molecular humic sub-
stances; (2) the quick sorption of hydrophilic compo-
nents of fresh organic matter by hydrophobic centers of
humic substances and the sorption of amino acids by
polyphenols; (3) the formation of soil microaggregates
and organomineral complexes; (4) the accumulation of
dissolved organic matter in the pores whose diameter is
less than the size of bacteria; (5) the predominance of
fungal biomass, which is more resistant to decomposi-
tion than the microbial biomass; (6) the excretion of
microbial metabolites that are toxic for other species;
and (7) the loss (deactivation) of enzymes participating
in the microbial decomposition of the substrate [27, 42,
43, 50, 52, 54–56].
The amount of stabilized carbon in the composition
of the SOM characterizes the soil carbon sequestration
capacity. The higher the stability of the SOM, the lower
the production of carbon dioxide. Therefore, the carbon
sequestration capacity of the SOM is inversely propor-
tional to the mineralization capacity of the SOM. The
main source of the C-CO2 emission from soils is related
to a relatively small (1–10% of the Corg in the layer of
0–20 cm) pool of active SOM with the mean residence
time (MRT) of the carbon varying from several days to
several months [12–14, 16–17, 23, 29, 45, 47]. The por-
tion of the moderately mineralizable pool (MRT = 10–
80 years) constitutes 45–55% of Corg, and the portion of
the stable (passive) pool with the MRT varying from
several hundred to thousands of years reaches 39–52%
[47]. It was shown that the contribution of SOM to the
total CO2 production under the forest soil reaches 41%
[31]. Up to 80% of this amount of C-CO2 is produced
due to the decomposition of plant residues with the
MRT of less than 2–10 years, and about 20% is gener-
ated due to the mineralization of humic substances with
the MRT of more than several decades. Other estimates
[9] suggest that the contribution of mineralizable humic
substances to the total CO2 emission from soils does not
exceed 0.2–4.2%. Hence, humus as the most stable part
of the SOM represents the main pool of sequestered
carbon.
Soil types differ from one another in their textural
and mineralogical characteristics, aggregate-size distri-
bution, structure, and other physical and physicochem-
ical properties that affect the proportion between the
mineralizable and resistant fractions of the SOM [22,
32, 35, 50, 55]. Therefore, the SCSC depends not only
EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008
 MINERALIZATION OF ORGANIC MATTER
on the return of organic matter into the soil but also on
the soil capacity to accumulate Corg, which has certain
limits. In some cases, the long-term application of high
rates of organic fertilizers is accompanied by a contin-
uous rise in the soil Corg content. In other cases, the soil
saturation with organic carbon takes place relatively
quickly, so that the additional inputs of organic matter
are subjected to rapid mineralization [52]. A continuous
sequestration of carbon may only take place in soils
with a high capacity for stabilization of the SOM.
We suppose that the content of potentially mineral-
izable SOM may be a reliable quantitative indicator of
the soil capacity to produce C-CO2 and sequester
organic carbon. On the one hand, the content of poten-
tially mineralizable organic matter is less dependent on
the daily and seasonal fluctuations of environmental
factors in comparison with the real C-CO2 emission in
the field. Thus, the interannual variability of the annual
emission fluxes of CO2 from soils of various ecosys-
tems in Moscow oblast averages 33% [7]. The soil tem-
perature fluctuations explain 80% of the seasonal vari-
ability of the CO2 emission from soils [25]. The effect
of soil temperature on the C-CO2 emission under natu-
ral conditions can be more or less accurately predicted
from the experimental data with the use of the correc-
tion factor (Q10). It is much more difficult to estimate
the combined effect of soil moisture and temperature
conditions. On the other hand, the content of potentially
mineralizable organic matter (C0) is indicative of the
SCSC, because the C0 value depends both on the
amount and quality of organic matter entering the soil
and on the physiochemical and biological soil proper-
ties controlling the protection of the SOM from decom-
position and mineralization. The more carbon is fixed
in the soil per unit of the potentially mineralizable
organic matter, the higher the SCSC (Eq. (5)). In con-
trast to the currently used approaches to estimate the
carbon sequestration potential of soils on the basis of
data on the carbon content of certain fractions of the
SOM separated by chemical methods or by densigran-
ulometric fractionation, the index suggested by us (the
SCSC value) characterizes the carbon sequestration
potential in the entire pool of the SOM. The values of
this index do not depend on the method of the SOM
fractionation, and they make it possible to compare the
results obtained for different natural and arable soils.
Upon the soil temperature and moisture content
favorable for the organic matter mineralization in the
incubation experiment, the minimum SCSC value was
found for the tundra soil, and the chernozem was char-
acterized by the maximum SCSC value (Table 5). The
SCSC in the nonarable dark chestnut and chestnut soils
was two times higher than that in the soddy-podzolic
and gray forest soils, though the total content of Corg
was higher in the latter two soils. The SCSC values in
the arable zonal soils were 1.3 to 1.9 times higher than
those in the soils of natural ecosystems. In the arable
soils, the SCSC values followed the following
sequence: leached chernozem > chestnut soil ≥ dark
EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008
725
Table 5. Carbon sequestration capacity in the studied se-
quence of zonal soils
Index of the soil carbon sequestra-
tion capacity
Soil, ecosystem
1 2 3
Tundra soil:
hummocky terrain 2.4 ± 0.4 9.0 ± 1.2 19.7 ± 1.5
Soddy-podzolic soil:
forest 8.1 ± 0.8 14.8 ± 1.5 15.8 ± 1.7
cropland 15.1 ± 0.6 27.1 ± 1.0 30.5 ± 1.7
Gray forest soil:
forest 10.3 ± 1.1 17.4 ± 1.8 18.4 ± 2.0
cropland 19.9 ± 1.2 32.8 ± 1.9 35.4 ± 2.2
Leached chernozem:
virgin plot 24.3 ± 2.8 37.1 ± 4.3 38.7 ± 4.7
cropland 42.3 ± 3.8 66.0 ± 4.1 68.7 ± 4.3
Dark chestnut soil:
shelterbelt 22.4 ± 1.4 24.2 ± 1.5 24.2 ± 1.5
cropland 28.5 ± 1.6 30.7 ± 1.7 30.7 ± 1.7
Chestnut soil:
fallow plot 19.8 ± 0.3 19.1 ± 0.3 18.6 ± 0.3
cropland 30.3 ± 0.3 29.2 ± 0.3 28.4 ± 0.3
Note: (1) The SCSC value calculated from the results of experimen-
tal incubation under similar conditions (22°C, 60% of the
FWC, 150 days), (2) the SCSC value calculated with a correc-
tion for the real soil temperature in the corresponding zone
(for the period of 150 days), and (3) the SCSC value calcu-
lated with a correction for the real soil temperature and the
duration of the warm season in the corresponding zone. The
values of the SCSC were calculated according to Eq. (5).
chestnut soils > gray forest soil > soddy-podzolic soil
(Table 5). It has been found that the carbon sequestra-
tion potential decreases within the following sequence
of ecosystems: degraded ecosystems > agroecosystems
(cultivated lands) > pastures > forests and perennial
crops [40]. It is seen from this sequence that the carbon
sequestration potential increases in the ecosystems for
726 SEMENOV et al.

which the rapid growth of plant productivity is possible organic matter Q10 within the range of temperatures from
under favorable conditions. As shown above, soils of 5 to 35°C averages 2.11 ± 0.08 [37].
agroecosystems have an increased carbon sequestration
Our data suggest that the mineralization of organic
capacity, and their productivity is sensitive to soil man-
matter in the tundra soil under natural conditions (tak-
agement options. Therefore, it is recommended that tra-
ing into account the real soil temperature and the dura-
ditional farming systems should include measures
tion of the warm period equal to 60 days) is six times
aimed at increasing the SOM content and the thickness
lower than that under laboratory conditions (at a tem-
of the humus horizon, as well as erosion control mea-
perature of 22°C for 150 days). The corresponding dif-
sures to prevent carbon loss with eroded soil and other
ferences for the soddy-podzolic, gray forest, and cher-
measures aimed at the SOM stabilization (its protection
nozemic soils were much lower; the predicted produc-
from the mineralization action of soil microorganisms)
tion of C-CO2 by these soils under natural conditions
[26, 40]. Carbon sequestration in soils of agroecosys-
should be lower than that in the incubation experiment
tems can be enhanced by a number of measures:
by 1.9, 1.7, and 1.6 times, respectively. No significant
(1) increased rates of application of organic fertilizers
differences between the C-CO2 production in the exper-
and widening of their assortment; (2) incorporation of
iment and in the field were found for the dark chestnut
fresh organic materials into the deep soil horizons
and chestnut soils. Thus, if we recalculate the real
(below the plow layer); (3) the transfer of low-produc-
amount (under field conditions) of potentially mineral-
tive croplands into meadows, rangelands, and forested
izable organic matter in percent of the total organic
lands; (4) erosion control measures; (5) minimization
matter, the studied soils should be arranged into the fol-
of tillage operations and the replacement of moldboard
lowing sequence: soddy-podzolic > gray forest > chest-
plowing by surface tillage and zero tillage techniques;
nut > tundra > dark chestnut > leached chernozem. The
(6) the exclusion of black fallow from crop rotations;
real SCSC is higher than the experimentally obtained
(7) the inclusion of cover crops with high density into
SCSC for all the soils, except for the dark chestnut and
crop rotations; (8) the growing of crops with an
chestnut soils. The real SCSC values decrease in the
increased content of lignin and polyphenols; (9) an
following soil sequence: leached chernozem > dark
obligatory return of all the byproducts into the soil (soil
chestnut soil > chestnut soil ≥ tundra soil > gray forest
mulching); (10) the optimization of the nutrient regime
soil > soddy-podzolic soil (Table 5). In the group of vir-
of soils via application of a system of organic and min-
gin (noncultivated) soils, the SCSC value of the leached
eral fertilizers; and (11) the elimination of the factors
chernozem is 1.6 to 2.4 times higher than the SCSC val-
that limit crop growth.
ues of the other virgin soils. The SCSC value of the ara-
It is known that one of the major factors limiting the ble leached chernozem is even more significant:
SOM mineralization is the soil temperature. Soils of 68 units of stable carbon per unit of the potentially min-
humid and cold northern regions markedly differ from eralizable carbon.
soils of dry and warm areas in the proportion between
It is important that the SCSC index has its own
the biologically active and inactive (stable) pools of
value; it does not correlate with the Corg and C0 con-
SOM; the content of the active fraction is more sensi-
tents, though it is calculated from these parameters. At
tive to changes in the soil temperature than to changes
the same time, the Corg and C0 contents are mutually
in the soil moisture [28]. Other researchers indicate that
correlated. For the experimental values, the correlation
the inactive (stable) fraction of the SOM in the north of
coefficient r is 0.980 (n = 11); for the corrected (field)
the boreal zone is also characterized by high sensitivity
values, the correlation coefficient is 0.989 (n = 11). The
to temperature conditions [24]. Indeed, at room temper-
main difficulty of the quantitative diagnostics of the
ature of the incubation used in our experiment, the main
SCSC by the suggested method consists of the need to
source of the ë-ëé2 emission from the tundra soil was
obtain sufficiently accurate data on the pool of the
related to the hardly mineralizable fraction with the miner-
potentially mineralizable organic carbon, which
alization constant k varying from 0.001 to 0.01 day–1
requires long-term incubation of soil samples. At the
(Tables 2 and 4). As the average soil temperature during
same time, a huge set of experimental data suggests that
the warm period and the duration of the latter consider-
the amount of C-CO2 released in three days of incuba-
ably differ in the zonal soil sequence [2], the real
tion of the preliminarily dried soil samples gives an
amounts of organic matter mineralized under field con-
adequate estimate of the potential mineralization of the
ditions may differ from those established in a labora-
SOM [28, 29]. In our experiment, the total emission of
tory. In this case, the values of the SCSC should also
C-CO2 during the first 2.9 days of the incubation was
change. To avoid this ambiguity, we corrected the
well correlated with the content of potentially mineral-
obtained values of the cumulated ë-ëé2 emission for
izable organic carbon determined for the entire period
the real field conditions using the correction factor
of the incubation. The relationship between these
(Q10) that reflects the effect of the soil temperature on
parameters had a linear form (Table 7).
the rates of the organic matter mineralization. The corre-
sponding curves are also shown in the figure. The value of Thus, the major zonal soil types on the European
Q10 was taken equal to 2.1. According to literature data, territory of Russia differ from one another in their
the temperature coefficient of the rate of decomposition of capacity to stabilize and sequester carbon in the SOM.

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

 MINERALIZATION OF ORGANIC MATTER 727

Table 6. Mineralization capacity of organic matter in different zonal soils with due account for the real soil temperature and
duration of the warm season

Potentially mineralizable carbon (C0)

Constant of mineraliza-
Soil, ecosystem
tion (k), day–1
mg/100 g % of Corg

Tundra soil; the average soil temperature during the

warm season (60 days) is 7.5°C:

2953 ± 365 10.1 0.008 ± 0.001

hummocky terrain --------------------------- ---------- ---------------------------------
1416 ± 101 4.8 0.019 ± 0.002

Soddy-podzolic soil; the average soil temperature

during the warm season (121 days) is 14.5°C:

125 ± 11 6.3 0.032 ± 0.005

forest --------------------- ------- ---------------------------------
118 ± 11 6.0 0.037 ± 0.005

36 ± 1 3.6 0.024 ± 0.007

cropland --------------- ------- ---------------------------------
32 ± 2 3.2 0.032 ± 0.009

Gray forest soil; the average soil temperature dur-

ing the warm season (128 days) is 15.5°C:

112 ± 11 5.5 0.031 ± 0.005

forest --------------------- ------- ---------------------------------
106 ± 11 5.2 0.036 ± 0.006

28 ± 10 2.9 0.031 ± 0.006

cropland ------------------ ------- ---------------------------------
26 ± 2 2.7 0.038 ± 0.008

Leached chernozem; the average soil temperature

during the warm season (136 days) is 16.5°C:

186 ± 20 2.6 0.034 ± 0.005

virgin plot --------------------- ------- ---------------------------------
178 ± 20 2.5 0.038 ± 0.006

59 ± 4 1.5 0.035 ± 0.002

cropland --------------- ------- ---------------------------------
57 ± 3 1.4 0.039 ± 0.002

Dark chestnut soil; the average soil temperature

during the warm season (150 days) is 21°C:

60 ± 4 4.0 0.027 ± 0.005

shelterbelt --------------- ------- ---------------------------------
60 ± 4 4.0 0.027 ± 0.005

32 ± 2 6.2 0.028 ± 0.005

cropland --------------- ------- ---------------------------------
32 ± 2 6.2 0.028 ± 0.005

Chestnut soil; the average soil temperature during

the warm season (160 days) is 22.5°C:

68 ± 1 5.0 0.023 ± 0.005

fallow plot --------------- ------- ---------------------------------
70 ± 1 5.1 0.021 ± 0.004

31 ± 0 3.3 0.030 ± 0.003

cropland --------------- ------- ---------------------------------
32 ± 0 3.4 0.028 ± 0.002

Note: Data calculated with due account for the soil temperature are given above the line, and data calculated with due account for both the soil
temperature and the duration of the warm season are given under the line. The values of C0 and k were calculated according to Eq. (2).

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

728 SEMENOV et al.

Table 7. The dependence between the content of potentially tion of fresh organic matter is retarded by the lower soil
mineralizable organic carbon (y, mg/100 g) and the C-CO2 temperatures and the shorter warm period. The SCSC
emission (x, mg/100 g) during the first 2.9 days of the incu- values of these soils are sensitive to interannual or sea-
bation experiment sonal variations in the weather conditions. In the case of
a rise in the soil temperature, the SCSC values in these
Soil region, Regression Correlation soils should decrease. Regular tillage operations favor
ecosystem equation coefficient* the warming and additional aeration of plowed soils;
they enhance the mechanical destruction, translocation,
Tundra soil, Vorkuta and mixing of plant residues. As a result, their mineral-
ization and stabilization in the plowed soils should be
hummocky terrain y = 10.0x + 5628.2 0.978 more pronounced than in virgin soils. Thus, arable soils
are characterized by higher SCSC values in comparison
Soddy-podzolic soil, with those of the analogous soils of natural ecosystems.
Tver oblast

coniferous forest y = 1.96x + 145.8 0.997 CONCLUSIONS

cropland y = 1.03x + 52.3 0.985 (1) The organic mater of the upper horizons of soddy-
podzolic and gray forest soils and leached chernozems of
Gray forest soil, natural ecosystems is characterized by the presence of
Moscow oblast pools of easily (k1 > 0.1 day–1), moderately (k2 > 0.01 day–
1), and difficultly (k > 0.001 day–1) mineralizable frac-
3
mixed forest y = 2.00x + 114.0 0.998 tions; in the tundra soil, as well as in the dark chestnut
and chestnut soils, only easily and hardly mineralizable
cropland y = 1.14x + 34.9 0.991 fractions of the SOM are present. Agricultural use of
soils leads to a decrease in the contents of the easily and
Leached chernozem, hardly mineralizable fractions in all the soils and to the
Penza oblast disappearance of the moderately mineralizable fraction
from the SOM of cultivated soddy-podzolic, gray for-
virgin plot y = 2.09x + 159.6 0.999 est, and chernozemic soils.
cropland y = 3.37x + 28.0 0.992 (2) The relative content of microbial biomass in the
soils of natural ecosystems varies from 2.1 to 6.6% of
Dark chestnut soil, the total content of Corg; it decreases in the following
Volgograd oblast order: tundra soil > leached chernozem > soddy-pod-
zolic soil > gray forest soil > dark chestnut soil > chest-
shelterbelt y = 1.38x + 48.7 0.976 nut soil. The content of microbial biomass in the arable
soils decreases by 1.5–4.6 times in comparison with the
cropland y = 0.97x + 28.1 0.977 analogous soils of natural ecosystems and varies from
1.2 to 3.1% of Corg.
Chestnut soil, Vol- (3) The amount of potentially mineralizable carbon
gograd oblast of organic matter in the studied tundra soil exceeds that
in the other zonal soils by 32–136 times. In the leached
fallow plot y = 0.22x + 63.6 0.981
chernozem, its amount is higher than in the soddy-pod-
cropland y = 2.71x + 12.8 0.988
zolic, gray forest, and chestnut soils by 1.3, 1.5, and 4.3
times, respectively. The high portion of potentially
mineralizable carbon in the total organic matter is typi-
* The significance level is P < 0.05.
cal of the tundra, soddy-podzolic, and gray forest soils.
The content of potentially mineralizable carbon in the
plowed soils is substantially lower than that in the soils
This capacity can be quantitatively estimated by the of natural ecosystems. The greatest depletion of poten-
SCSC index calculated as the ratio between the stable tially mineralizable carbon upon the soil cultivation is
(resistant toward mineralization) carbon and the poten- typical of the gray forest and soddy-podzolic soils.
tially mineralizable carbon. The highest SCSC values (4) Under stable soil temperature and moisture con-
are typical of the leached chernozem and dark chestnut ditions favoring the organic matter mineralization, the
and chestnut soils. This is conditioned by the complete minimum carbon sequestration capacity is typical of
transformation of fresh organic matter incorporated the tundra soil, and the maximum carbon sequestration
into the soil with rapid stabilization of the newly capacity is identified in the leached chernozem. Taking
formed humic substances. In the gray forest; soddy- into account the real soil temperatures during the warm
podzolic; and, especially, tundra soils, the transforma- period and the duration of the latter, the carbon seques-

EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008

 MINERALIZATION OF ORGANIC MATTER
tration potential in the zonal soil sequence decreases in
the following order: leached chernozem > dark chestnut
soil > chestnut soil ≥ tundra soil > gray forest soil >
soddy-podzolic soil. The indices of the carbon seques-
tration capacity in the soils of the agroecosystems are
1.3 to 1.9 times higher than those in the soils of the nat-
ural ecosystems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was supported by the Russian Foundation
for Basic Research (project nos. 04-04-48670 and 07-04-
00529) and by State Contract no. 02.445.11.7398 NSh-
3096.2006.4.
REFERENCES
1. N. F. Ganzhara, “A Conceptual Model of Humification,”
Pochvovedenie, No. 9, 1075–1080 (1997) [Eur. Soil Sci.
30 (9), 957–962 (1997)].
2. V. N. Dimo, Temperature Regime of Soils of the USSR
(Kolos, Moscow, 1972) [in Russian].
3. G. A. Zavarzin and V. N. Kudeyarov, “Soil as the Main
Source of Carbon Dioxide and an Organic Carbon Sink
in the Territory of Russia,” Vestn. Ross. Akad. Nauk 76
(1), 14–29 (2006).
4. L. A. Ivannikova, “A Method for Determining the Min-
eralization of Soil Organic Matter from the Amount of
the Produced CO2,” in Methods of Studying Soil Organic
Matter (Rossel’khozakademiya, Moscow, 2005),
pp. 376–385 [in Russian].
5. V. N. Kudeyarov, “A Procedure for Determining the
Total Carbon Pools in Soils and Plants,” Agrokhimiya,
No. 11, 125–128 (1972).
6. V. N. Kudeyarov, “The Role of Soils in the Carbon
Cycle,” Pochvovedenie, No. 8, 915–923 (2005) [Eur.
Soil Sci. 38 (8), 808–815 (2005)].
7. V. N. Kudeyarov and I. N. Kurganova, “Respiration of
Russian Soils: Database Analysis, Long-Term Monitor-
ing, and General Estimates,” Pochvovedenie, No. 9,
1112–1121 (2005) [Eur. Soil Sci. 38 (9), 983–992
(2005)].
8. D. S. Orlov and O. N. Biryukova, “Organic Carbon
Pools in Soils of the Russian Federation,” Pochvovede-
nie, No. 1, 21–32 (1995).
9. D. S. Orlov and O. N. Biryukova, “The Stability of Soil
Organic Compounds and the Emission of Greenhouse
Gases into the Atmosphere,” Pochvovedenie, No. 7,
783–793 (1998) [Eur. Soil Sci. 31 (7), 711–720 (1998)].
10. D. S. Orlov, O. N. Biryukova, and M. S. Rozanova,
“Revised System of the Humus Status Parameters of
Soils and Their Genetic Horizons,” Pochvovedenie,
No. 8, 918–926 (2004) [Eur. Soil Sci. 37 (8), 798–805
(2004)].
11. D. S. Orlov, O. N. Biryukova, and M. S. Rozanova, “Real
and Apparent Losses of Organic Matter by the Soils of
the Russian Federation,” Pochvovedenie, No. 2, 197–
207 (1996) [Eur. Soil Sci. 29 (2), 174–183 (1996)].
12. V. M. Semenov, L. A. Ivannikova, and T. V. Kuznetsova,
“Laboratory Diagnostics of the Biological Quality of
Soil Organic Matter,” in Methods of Studying Soil
EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008
729
Organic Matter (Rossel’khozakademiya, Moscow,
2005), pp. 214–230 [in Russian].
13. V. M. Semenov, L. A. Ivannikova, T. V. Kuznetsova, and
N. A. Semenova, “The Role of Plant Biomass in the For-
mation of the Active Pool of Soil Organic Matter,” Poch-
vovedenie, No. 11, 1350–1359 (2004) [Eur. Soil Sci. 37
(11), 1196–1204 (2004)].
14. V. M. Semenov, I. K. Kravchenko, L. A. Ivannikova,
et al., “Experimental Determination of the Active
Organic Matter Content in Some Soils of Natural and
Agricultural Ecosystems,” Pochvovedenie, No. 3, 282–
292 (2006) [Eur. Soil Sci. 39 (3), 251–260 (2006)].
15. V. M. Semenov and A. K. Khodzhaeva, “Agroecological
Functions of Plant Residues in the Soil,” Agrokhimiya,
No. 7, 63–81 (2006).
16. A. V. Smagin, N. B. Sadovnikova, M. V. Smagina, et al.,
Simulation of Soil Organic Matter Dynamics (Mosk.
Gos. Univ., Moscow, 2001) [in Russian].
17. S. Ya. Trofimov, “On the Dynamics of Organic Matter in
Soils,” Pochvovedenie, No. 9, 1081–1086 (1997) [Eur.
Soil Sci. 30 (9), 963–968 (1997)].
18. A. D. Fokin and V. V. Idei, “Dokuchaev’s Ideas and the
Problems of Organic Matter,” Pochvovedenie, No. 2,
187–196 (1996) [Eur. Soil Sci. 29 (2), 165–173 (1996)].
19. A. D. Fokin, “The Role of Soil Organic Matter in the
Functioning of Natural and Agricultural Ecosystems,”
Pochvovedenie, No. 4, 40–45 (1994).
20. T.-H. Anderson and K. H. Domsch, “The Metabolic
Quotient for CO2 (qCO2) as a Specific Activity Parame-
ter to Assess the Effect of Environmental Conditions,
Such as pH, on the Microbial Biomass of Forest Soils,”
Soil Biol. Biochem. 25, 393–395 (1993).
21. V. L. Bailey, J. L. Smith, and H. Bolton, Jr., “Fungal-to-
Bacterial Ratios in Soils for Enhanced C Sequestration,”
Soil Biol. Biochem. 34, 997–1007 (2002).
22. C. J. Bronick and R. Lal, “Soil Structure and Manage-
ment: a Review,” Geoderma 124, 3–22 (2005).
23. H. P. Collins, E. T. Elliott, K. Paustian, et al., “Soil Car-
bon Pools and Fluxes in Long-Term Corn Belt Agroeco-
systems,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 157–168 (2000).
24. M-M. Couteaux, P. Bottner, J. M. Anderson, et al.,
“Decomposition of 13C-Labelled Standard Plant Mate-
rial in a Latitudinal Transect of European Coniferous
Forests: Differential Impact of Climate on the Decompo-
sition of Soil Organic Matter Compartments,” Bio-
geochemistry 54, 147–170 (2001).
25. E. A. Davidson, E. Belk, and R. D. Boone, “Soil Water
Content and Temperature as Independent or Confounded
Factors Controlling Soil Respiration in a Temperate
Mixed Forest,” Global Change Biol. 4, 217–227 (1998).
26. R. L. Desjardins, W. Smith, B. Grant, et al., “Manage-
ment Strategies to Sequester Carbon in Agricultural
Soils and to Mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions,” Clim.
Change 70, 283–297 (2005).
27. K. Ekschmitt, M. Liu, S. Vetter, et al., “Strategies Used
by Soil Biota to Overcome Soil Organic Matter Stability
- Why Is Dead Organic Matter Left over in the Soil?”
Geoderma 128, 167–176 (2005).
28. A. J. Franzluebbers, R. L. Haney, C. W. Honeycutt, et al.,
“Climatic Influences on Active Fractions of Soil Organic
Matter,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 33, 1103–1111 (2001).
730 SEMENOV et al.
29. A. J. Franzluebbers, R. L. Haney, C. W. Honeycutt, et al.,
“Flush of Carbon Dioxide Following Rewetting of Dried
Soils Relates to Active Organic Pools,” Soil Sci. Soc.
Am. J. 64, 613–623 (2000).
30. A. Freibauer, M. D. A. Rounsevell, P. Smith, and J. Ver-
hagen, “Carbon Sequestration in the Agricultural Soils
of Europe,” Geoderma 122, 1–23 (2004).
31. J. B. Gaudinski, S. E. Trumbore, E. A. Davidson, and
Sh. Zheng, “Soil Carbon Cycling in a Temperate Forest:
Radiocarbon-Based Estimates of Residence Times,
Sequestration Rates and Partitioning of Fluxes,” Bio-
geochemistry 51, 33–69 (2000).
32. J. M. Gonzalez and D. A. Laird, “Carbon Sequestration
in Clay Mineral Fractions from 14C-Labeled Plant Resi-
dues,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 67, 1715–1720 (2003).
33. J. Hassink, “Density Fractions of Macroorganic Matter
and Microbial Biomass as Predictors of C and N Miner-
alization,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 27, 1099–1108 (1995).
34. I. Hannam, “International and National Aspects of a
Legislative Framework to Manage Soil Carbon Seques-
tration,” Clim. Change 65, 365–387 (2004).
35. J. Hassink, “The Capacity of Soils to Preserve Organic C
and N by Their Association with Clay and Silt Particles,”
Plant Soil 191, 77–87 (1997).
36. H. H. Janzen, “The Soil Carbon Dilemma: Shall We
Hoard It or Use It?” Soil Biol. Biochem. 38, 419–424
(2006).
37. T. Katterer, M. Reichstein, O. Andren, and A. Lomander,
“Temperature Dependence of Organic Matter Decompo-
sition: a Critical Review Using Literature Data Analyzed
with Different Models,” Biol. Fertil. Soils 27, 258–262
(1998).
38. A. Y. Y. Kong, J. Six, D. C. Bryant, et al., “The Relation-
ship between Carbon Input, Aggregation, and Soil
Organic Carbon Stabilization in Sustainable Cropping
Systems,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 69, 1078–1085 (2005).
39. R. Lal, “Soil Carbon Sequestration in India,” Clim.
Change 65, 277–296 (2004).
40. R. Lal, “Soil Carbon Sequestration to Mitigate Climate
Change,” Geoderma 123, 1–22 (2004).
41. J. Leifeld and I. Kogel-Knabner, “Soil Organic Matter
Fractions as Early Indicators for Carbon Stock Changes
under Different Land-Use?” Geoderma 124, 143–155
(2005).
42. E. J. Lundquist, L. E. Jackson, K. M. Scow, and C. Hsu,
“Changes in Microbial Biomass and Community Com-
position, and Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Pools after
Incorporation of Rye into Three California Agricultural
Soils,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 31, 221–236 (1999).
43. D. A. Martens, “Plant Residue Biochemistry Regulates
Soil Carbon Cycling and Carbon Sequestration,” Soil
Biol. Biochem. 32, 361–369 (2000).
44. T. Muller and H. Hoper, “Soil Organic Matter Turnover
as a Function of the Soil Clay Content: Consequences
for Model Applications,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 36, 877–
888 (2004).
45. B. Nicolardot, J. A. E. Molina, and M. R. Allard, “C and
N Fluxes between Pools of Soil Organic Matter: Model
Calibration with Long-Term Incubation Data,” Soil Biol.
Biochem. 26, 235–243 (1994).
View publication stats
46. X. Niu and S. W. Duiker, “Carbon Sequestration Poten-
tial by Afforestation of Marginal Agricultural Land in the
Midwestern U.S,” For. Ecol. Manage. 223, 415–427
(2006).
47. E. A. Paul, S. J. Morris, R. T. Conant, and A. F. Plante,
“Does the Acid Hydrolysis–Incubation Method Measure
Meaningful Soil Organic Carbon Pools?,” Soil Sci. Soc.
Am. J. 70, 1023–1035 (2006).
48. K. Paustian, J. Six, E. T. Elliott, and H. W. Hunt, “Man-
agement Options for Reducing CO2 Emissions from
Agricultural Soils,” Biogeochemistry 48, 147–163
(2000).
49. A. Piccolo, R. Spaccini, R. Nieder, and J. Richter,
“Sequestration of a Biologically Labile Organic Carbon
in Soils by Humified Organic Matter,” Clim. Change 67,
329–343 (2004).
50. H. R. Schulten and P. Leinweber, “New Insight into
Organic-Mineral Particles: Composition, Properties, and
Models of Molecular Structure,” Biol. Fertil. Soils 30,
399–432 (2000).
51. M. Schnitzer, D. F. E. McArthur, H.-R. Schulten, et al.,
“Long-Term Cultivation Effects on the Quantity and
Quality of Organic Matter in Selected Canadian Prairie
Soils,” Geoderma 130, 141–156 (2006).
52. J. Six, R. T. Conant, E. A. Paul, and K. Paustian, “Stabi-
lization Mechanisms of Soil Organic Matter: Implica-
tions for C-Saturation of Soils,” Plant Soil 241, 155–176
(2002).
53. J. Six, E. T. Elliott, K. Paustian, and J. W. Doran, “Aggre-
gation and Soil Organic Matter Accumulation in Culti-
vated and Nature Grassland Soils,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.
62, 1367–1377 (1998).
54. J. Six, S. D. Frey, R. K. Thiet, and K. M. Batten, “Bacte-
rial and Fungal Contributions to Carbon Sequestration in
Agroecosystems,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 70, 555–569
(2006).
55. P. Sollins, P. Homann, and B. A. Caldwell, “Stabilization
and Destabilization of Soil Organic Matter: Mechanisms
and Controls,” Geoderma 74, 65–105 (1996).
56. R. Spaccini, A. Piccolo, P. Conte, et al., “Increased Soil
Organic Carbon Sequestration through Hydrophobic
Protection by Humic Substances,” Soil Biol. Biochem.
34, 1839–1851 (2002).
57. M. Sperow, M. Eve, and K. Paustian, “Potential Soil C
Sequestration on U.S. Agricultural Soils,” Clim. Change
57, 319–339 (2003).
58. V. Stolbovoi, “Carbon in Russian Soils,” Clim. Change
55, 131–156 (2002).
59. R. S. Swift, “Sequestration of Carbon by Soil,” Soil Sci.
166, 858–871 (2001).
60. J. K. Whalen, P. J. Bottomley, and D. D. Myrold, “Car-
bon and Nitrogen Mineralization from Light- and
Heavy-Fraction Additions to Soil,” Soil Biol. Biochem.
32, 1345–1352 (2000).
EURASIAN SOIL SCIENCE Vol. 41 No. 7 2008