Turfgrass Soil Carbon Change Through Time: Raw Data and Code

<p><strong>Data Description</strong> Managed turfgrass is a common component of urban landscapes that is expanding under current land use trends. Previous studies have reported high rates of soil carbon sequestration in turfgrass, but no systematic review has summarized these rates nor evaluated how they change as turfgrass ages. We conducted a meta-analysis of soil carbon sequestration rates from 63 studies. Those data, as well as the code used to analyze them and create figures, are shared here.</p> <p><strong>Dataset Development</strong> We conducted a systematic review from Nov 2020 to Jan 2021 using Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the Michigan Turfgrass Information File Database. The search terms targeted were "soil carbon", "carbon sequestration", "carbon storage", or “carbon stock”, with "turf", "turfgrass", "lawn", "urban ecosystem", or "residential", “Fescue”, “Zoysia”, “Poa”, “Cynodon”, “Bouteloua”, “Lolium”, or “Agrostis”. We included only peer-reviewed studies written in English that measured SOC change over one year or longer, and where grass was managed as turf (mowed or clipped regularly). We included studies that sampled to any soil depth, and included several methodologies: small-plot research conducted over a few years (22 datasets from 4 articles), chronosequences of golf courses or residential lawns (39 datasets from 16 articles), and one study that was a variation on a chronosequence method and compiled long-term soil test data provided by golf courses of various ages (3 datasets from Qian & Follett, 2002). In total, 63 datasets from 21 articles met the search criteria.</p> <p>We excluded 1) duplicate reports of the same data, 2) small plot studies that did not report baseline SOC stocks, and 3) pure modeling studies. We included five papers that only measured changes in SOC concentrations, but not areal stocks (i.e., SOC in Mg ha-1). For these papers, we converted from concentrations to stocks using several approaches. For two papers (Law & Patton, 2017; Y. Qian & Follett, 2002) we used estimated bulk densities provided by the authors. For the chronosequences reported in Selhorst & Lal (2011), we used the average bulk density reported by the author. For the 13 choronosequences reported in Selhorst & Lal (2013), we estimated bulk density from the average relationship between percent C and bulk density reported by Selhorst (2011). For Wang et al. (2014), we used bulk density values from official soil survey descriptions.</p> <p><strong>Data provenance</strong> In most cases we contacted authors of the studies to obtain the original data. If authors did not reply after two inquiries, or no longer had access to the data, we captured data from published figures using WebPlotDigitizer (Rohatgi, 2021). For three manuscripts the data was already available, or partially available, in public data repositories. Data provenance information is provided in the document "Dataset summaries and citations.docx".</p> <p><strong>Recommended Uses</strong> We recommend the following to data users:</p> <ol> <li>Consult and cite the original manuscripts for each dataset, which often provide additional information about turfgrass management, experimental methods, and environmental context. Original citations are provided in the document "Dataset summaries and citations.docx".</li> <li>For datasets that were previously published in public repositories, consult and cite the original datasets, which may provide additional data on turfgrass management practices, soil nitrogen, and natural reference sites. Links to repositories are in the document "Dataset summaries and citations.docx".</li> <li>Consider contacting the dataset authors to notify them of your plans to use the data, and to offer co-authorship as appropriate.</li> </ol>