Page 64 - Read online
P. 64

Page 20 of 23                                            Diaz-Vallejo et al. Carbon Footprints 2026, 5, 12





               Copyright
               © The Author(s) 2026.


               Supplementary Materials
               Supplementary Materials


               REFERENCES
               1.  Lal, R. Soil health and carbon management. Food. Energy. Secur. 2016, 5, 212-22. DOI
               2.  Kleber, M.; Bourg, I. C.; Coward, E. K.; Hansel, C. M.; Myneni, S. C. B.; Nunan, N. Dynamic interactions at the mineral-organic matter
                  interface. Nat. Rev. Earth. Environ. 2021, 2, 402-21. DOI
               3.  Henneron, L.; Balesdent, J.; Alvarez, G.; et al. Bioenergetic control of soil carbon dynamics across depth. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 7676.
                  DOI PubMed PMC
               4.  Liptzin, D.; Norris, C. E.; Cappellazzi, S. B.; et al. An evaluation of carbon indicators of soil health in long-term agricultural
                  experiments. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 2022, 172, 108708. DOI
               5.  Koorneef, G. J.; Pulleman, M. M.; Comans, R. N.; et al. Assessing soil functioning: what is the added value of soil organic carbon
                  quality measurements alongside total organic carbon content? Soil. Biol. Biochem. 2024, 196, 109507. DOI
               6.  Rasmussen, C.; Heckman, K.; Wieder, W. R.; et al. Beyond clay: towards an improved set of variables for predicting soil organic matter
                  content. Biogeochemistry 2018, 137, 297-306. DOI
               7.  Vaughan, E.; Matos, M.; Ríos, S.; Santiago, C.; Marín-spiotta, E. Clay and climate are poor predictors of regional-scale soil carbon
                  storage in the US Caribbean. Geoderma 2019, 354, 113841. DOI
               8.  Luo, Y.; Ahlström, A.; Allison, S. D.; et al. Toward more realistic projections of soil carbon dynamics by Earth system models. Global.
                  Biogeochem. Cycles. 2016, 30, 40-56. DOI
               9.  Zhao, Y.; Xu, Y.; Cha, X.; et al. A global meta-analysis of land use change on soil mineral-associated and particulate organic carbon.
                  Glob. Chang. Biol. 2025, 31, e70111. DOI
               10.  Ma, Y.; Xie, T.; Li, X. Spatial variation of soil organic carbon in the Qinghai Lake watershed, northeast Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. CATENA
                  2022, 213, 106187. DOI
               11.  Powers, J. S.; Corre, M. D.; Twine, T. E.; Veldkamp, E. Geographic bias of field observations of soil carbon stocks with tropical
                  land-use changes precludes spatial extrapolation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2011, 108, 6318-22. DOI PubMed PMC
               12.  Veldkamp, E.; Schmidt, M.; Powers, J. S.; Corre, M. D. Deforestation and reforestation impacts on soils in the tropics. Nat. Rev. Earth.
                  Environ. 2020, 1, 590-605. DOI
               13.  Smith, P.; Soussana, J. F.; Angers, D.; et al. How to measure, report and verify soil carbon change to realize the potential of soil carbon
                  sequestration for atmospheric greenhouse gas removal. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2020, 26, 219-41. DOI PubMed PMC
               14.  Poeplau, C.; Don, A. Sensitivity of soil organic carbon stocks and fractions to different land-use changes across Europe. Geoderma 2013,
                  192, 189-201. DOI
               15.  Janzen, H. H.; Janzen, D. W.; Gregorich, E. G. The ‘soil health’ metaphor: Illuminating or illusory? Soil. Biol. Biochem. 2021, 159,
                  108167. DOI
               16.  Maharjan, B.; Das, S.; Acharya, B. S. Soil health gap: a concept to establish a benchmark for soil health management. Glob. Ecol.
                  Conserv. 2020, 23, e01116. DOI
               17.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Status of the world’s soil resources (summary report). Rome (IT):
                  FAO; 2015. h​t​t​p​s​:​/​/​w​w​w​.​f​a​o​.​o​r​g​/​f​i​l​e​a​d​m​i​n​/​u​s​e​r​_​u​p​l​o​a​d​/​n​e​w​s​r​o​o​m​/​d​o​c​s​/​F​A​O​-​w​o​r​l​d​-​s​o​i​l​s​-​r​e​p​o​r​t​-​S​U​M​M​A​R​Y​.​p​d​f​ (accessed
                  2026-03-12).
               18.  Poorter, L.; Craven, D.; Jakovac, C. C.; et al. Multidimensional tropical forest recovery. Science 2021, 374, 1370-6. DOI
               19.  Keller, N.; Anthony, M. A.; van der Voort, T. S.; et al. Soil carbon as a blind spot in tropical rainforest restoration. Curr. Biol. 2025, 35,
                  R765-81. DOI PubMed
               20.  Robinson, N.; Drever, C. R.; Gibbs, D. A.; et al. Protect young secondary forests for optimum carbon removal. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2025,
                  15, 793-800. DOI
               21.  Marín‐spiotta, E.; Sharma, S. Carbon storage in successional and plantation forest soils: a tropical analysis. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2012,
                  22, 105-17. DOI
               22.  Idowu, O.; Van Es, H.; Abawi, G.; et al. Use of an integrative soil health test for evaluation of soil management impacts. Renew. Agric.
                  Food. Syst. 2009, 24, 214-24. DOI
               23.  Andrews, S. S.; Karlen, D. L.; Cambardella, C. A. The soil management assessment framework: a quantitative soil quality evaluation
                  method. Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2004, 68, 1945-62. DOI
   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69