HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (15) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Conant, R. T. Articles by Paustian, K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Conant, R. T. Articles by Paustian, K. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Conant, R. T. Articles by Paustian, K. Related Collections Soil Organic Matter Experiment Design Soil Analysis Spatial Distribution

Spatial Variability of Soil Carbon in Forested and Cultivated Sites

Implications for Change Detection

^a Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523-1499
^b Environmental Resources Trust, 209 NW 58th Street, Seattle, WA 98107-2030

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Diagram illustrating design and orientation of all microplots used for collection of soil samples. Initial (gray) and resampling (black) cores are distinguished.

View larger version (33K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Soil C content (0–0.3 m, ±1 SD confidence interval) by depth increment for two sampling times at (a) cultivated and forested sites in Tennessee (TN), and (b) old-growth and second-growth sites in Washington (WA). The first term in the microplots is the sampling time (i.e., 1 = initial and 2 = resampling), and the second term represents the microplot number (i.e., 1–3).

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Relationship illustrating the magnitude of soil C change (0–0.3 m) that can be detected (minimum detectable difference; MDD) with 90% confidence by collecting a certain number of samples from (a) cultivated or (b) forested sites in Tennessee (TN).

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Relationship illustrating the magnitude of soil C change (0–0.3 m) that can be detected (minimum detectable difference; MDD) with 90% confidence by collecting a certain number of samples from (a) old-growth and (b) second-growth sites in Washington (WA).

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Diagram illustrating the relationship between magnitude of soil C change (percent) and the portion of simulated soil C changes in which the critical t value was exceeded for three confidence levels ( = 0.05, 0.10, and 0.25) using paired (P) and unpaired (NP) analyses. Soil C changes from 5 to 100% and were generated based on methods described in the text.