Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • CiteScore value: 7.57 CiteScore 7.57
  • SNIP value: 2.708 SNIP 2.708
  • SJR value: 2.150 SJR 2.150
  • IPP value: 7.02 IPP 7.02
  • Scimago H index value: 17 Scimago H index 17
Volume 4, issue 2 | Copyright
SOIL, 4, 169-171, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-4-169-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Original research article 07 Jun 2018

Original research article | 07 Jun 2018

Comment on "Soil organic stocks are systematically overestimated by misuse of the parameters bulk density and rock fragment content" by Poeplau et al. (2017)

Eleanor Ursula Hobley1, Brian Murphy2, and Aaron Simmons3 Eleanor Ursula Hobley et al.
  • 1Soil Science, Technical University of Munich, Weihenstephan, Germany
  • 2NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, Swan Hill, Australia
  • 3NSW Dept. Primary Industries, Orange, Australia
Download & links
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
This research evaluates equations to calculate soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks. Although various equations exist for SOC stock calculations, we recommend using the simplest equation with THE lowest associated errors. Adjusting SOC stock calculations for rock content is essential. Using the mass proportion of rocks to do so minimizes error.
This research evaluates equations to calculate soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks. Although...
Citation
Share