1. INTRODUCTION

2. METHODS

3. RESULTS & DISCUSSION

3.2. Biotic SOC Stocks Justified in Further Detail

Terrain consideration is not the only justification to revise SOC/SIC or DOC/DIC totals. Most current estimates are based on superficial soil layers, overlook litter/logs, roots, biota and/or peats and surprisingly undervalue or quite ignore Permafrost.

3.2.1. Biotic Boreal Permafrosts Reconsidered but Not Reconciled

Permafrost is a massive and ancient soil carbon store reaching depths of 1.5 km and extending under the Ocean (out of Land’s domain?). Permafrost soils “officially” contain 1,460–1,600 Gt C in surface 0–3 m including in Yedoma regions or river deltas, plus ~501 Gt C in other deep terrestrial sediments and the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, along with about ~560 Gt C subsea from the Pleistocene (Schuur et al. 2015, 2022: 348). Excluding ~560 Gt in subsea, a total is thus 2,101 Gt that terrain may double to >4,200 Gt SOC. Significantly, these latter authors compare their new totals to “the 2,050 Pg C of organic soil C (from 0- to 3-m depth) contained in all other biomes” that, similarly doubled, is ~4,100 Gt SOC, or about equal to the total terrain Permafrost SOC value, as indeed is presented in the Abstract.

Moreover, due to melting, these authors estimate 67–237 Gt C emissions by 2100, or ∼0.5–2 Gt C/yr loss, stating: “carbon release from [permafrost] soils to the atmosphere could outweigh the potential for carbon gain by plants”. If also doubled, this loss is ~1–4 Gt C/yr.

Raupach & Canadell (2010) earlier estimated Permafrost with 1,700 Gt C of which around 100 Gt C (= ~50 ppm CO₂) was vulnerable to release by thawing over the next century. Predicted warming trends within the circumpolar region could result in release of 30–60 Gt C by the year 2040 according to Deluca & Boisvenue (2012). Trubl et al. (2018) have Permafrost thawing at a rate of ≥1 cm of depth per year also releasing many microbes. Permafrost soils and peats are many millennia old; their carbon may date to >2.6 million years according to a recent Nature paper on 1.6 million year old preserved mammoth DNA (Callaway 2021). With ¹⁴C half-life of 5,568 years (Alves et al. 2018: fig. 2), such aged organic soil has its ¹⁴C decayed by 280–450 half-lives thus its loss to the atmosphere would have similar isotope profile as do fossil fuels. Shi et al. (2020) summarized: “Integrated to a depth of 1 m, global soil carbon has a mean age of 4,830 ± 1,730 yr, with older carbon in deeper layers and permafrost regions. In contrast, vertically resolved land models simulate ∆¹⁴C values that imply younger carbon ages and a more rapid carbon turnover”.

Notwithstanding general terrain considerations, Permafrost SOC tally yet has large uncertainties and is widely underestimated in its neglected hill-slope bases (hill toes) by >200% having new mean values ∼550 and ∼720 Gt SOC “for the linear and sigmoidal profile geometries, respectively, with a maximal uncertainty of >2000 Pg C” (Shelef et al. 2017). Adding to prior boreal Permafrost totals would then possibly represent 1,700 + >2,000 = >3,700 Gt C (to 3 m depth?) or may extrapolate to as much as 1,700 x >200% = >5,100 Gt SOC.

Deluca & Boisvenue (2012) reported: “The expansion of temperate and boreal forest ecosystems back into glaciated landscapes resulted in the net accumulation of 500–1350 Pg of C on the Earth’s surface”; presumably a large part of this added to Permafrost and peat carbon? These large carbon stores are likely both expanding and simultaneously melting as temperatures rise disproportionately rapidly in the far North. It is important to note that global average temperature rises are about twice as high on land as in the oceans and about doubled again in the boreal North with the tangible risk of self-fueling Permafrost melting and/or peat fires causing cascading (snowballing?) climate warming effects.

Recently, in June 2020 in the midst of uncontrollable peat fires, the boreal North experienced record air temperatures of 38°C that were +18°C above their average, and the Arctic has already warmed to more than 2°C above the Preindustrial level with this rapid warming expected to double by midcentury and potentially emit up to about 150 Gt C by 2100 (Natali et al. 2021). Thus, a 1.5°C global rise may be more than twice this on land and higher yet for soil, more so further North. Globally: “mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons” (Lembrechts et al. 2021). Thus, if air temperature is +2°C, soil may go up +5°C. (Summaries are to be found here: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146879/heat-and-fire-scorches-siberia; https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2020/08/31/barrow/; https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/05/25/2022-year-of-the-taiga-barrow-2/).

3.2.2. Missed Peats

Peats contain more carbon than above-ground vegetation, including the World’s forests. In spite of this, peatland ecosystems are still omitted from the main Earth system models that are used for future climate change projections or mitigation schemes according to Loisel et al. (2021). These authors (tabs. S4–5) show peat stocks of 808 + 315 = 1,123 Gt C and predict 100 Gt C could be lost by 2100, although large uncertainties remain (www.exeter.ac.uk/news/research/title_829842_en.html). Sometimes included in carbon inventories, sometimes not, carbon-rich peatlands cover ~2–3% of land area yet contain about 10% of global SOC with degradation from drainage, fires or exploitation of at least 3 Gt CO₂ per year (equivalent to ~0.81 Gt C/yr) or ~10% of the global fossil fuel emissions according to Parish et al. (2008: tab. 9.1). Peat total was recently doubled from 550 Gt to 955–1,060 Gt by an extra ~510 Gt overlooked in northern peatlands (Nichols & Peteet 2019, 2021). So peat loss may now be doubled too to ~1.62 Gt C/yr? Waterlogged peat does not gain as much from terrain, however peat values are seemingly only for a depth of 1 m and Parish et al. say: “The deepest peat/lignite layer in the world is probably the Phillipi peatland in Greece, reputed to be 190 m deep... and dating largely from the Pleistocene”. Thus, values may yet be increased two or more times for depth. Moreover, peats can also be ancient (“peatlands have certainly existed for hundreds of millions of years”), again diminishing isotopic C dilution argument solely from the burning of fossil fuels (e.g., coal, oil, gas).

3.2.3. Essentials of SOC Stocks from Above- and Below-ground Biota

Above-ground vegetation and below-ground biota tallies were stated by Crowther et al. (2019; https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1559650): “Soil is the largest repository of organic matter on land, storing ~1500 Gt carbon, which is at least as much as the vegetation (~560 Gt) and atmosphere (~750 Gt) combined.” Unfortunately all three values were mistaken since soil and vegetation totals were already >10,000 Gt C and >1,000 Gt C, respectively (Blakemore 2018b), and, according to IPCC and ESSD (2019: fig. 2), atmosphere had 860 Gt C then (now 875 Gt C from ESSD 2022: fig. 2). Moreover, Blakemore (2020c: fig. 1 https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/38139/1/Veop-4.pdf) summed Crowther et al. (2019: fig. 2C) soil grid values to 4,595 Gt C, not 1,500 Gt as they stated. (Their SoilGrids data source now totals 5,796.1 Gt SOC, according to Wang et al. 2022). Doubled for terrain, land easily supports ~10,000 Gt SOC. Crowther et al.’s plant and microbial biomass actually added up to ~595 and 23 Gt C, respectively (not ~560 and 7.5 Gt C as claimed); both presumably also doubled for terrain to ~1,191 and 46 Gt C. Although the corresponding author declined to reply nor self-rectify these errors (pers. comms.), corrected information was detailed already (R. Blakemore 2019d Science eLetters commentary DEC. 2, 2019- science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aav0550). Appropriately revised and corrected, values showing interesting geographic distributions are provided below (Figure 7).

Compared to Figure 7, Rodin et al. (1975: tab. 1) had ~1,200 Gt C “phytomass cover” although these authors assumed a pre-cultivated or natural state and possibly included roots. Bar-On et al. (2018: tab. S1) for “Trees” had 450 Gt C, ESSD (2019, 2022) Vegetation values ranged 450–650 Gt C (mean 550), while Wuepper et al. (with T. Crowther) (2021) “above-ground” plant biomass was 601 Gt C, itself above Crowther et al. (2019) value of ~560 Gt C. Such large inconsistencies require convergence. Nevertheless, realistic final above-ground vegetation estimates, doubled for terrain, are likely around ~1,100 Gt C.

3.2.3.1. Roots

Roots spread deep and wide for many plants, for example, prairie grasses or trees with deepest known at 68 m for Boscia albitrunca (Burch.) in Botswana’s central Kalahari desert (Canadell et al. 1996). A summary for roots biomass by Blakemore (2018b) had reported an initial 146 Gt C from a dry biomass of 292 Gt from Jackson et al. (1997: tab. 2) that was allocated about 175 Gt (80%) for forests and about 42 Gt (20%) in other biomes. Jackson et al. found fine roots alone (also ~20% of their total) representing 33% of total annual net primary productivity (NPP). Roots total, as updated by Mokany et al. (2005: 95) to 241 Gt C, is less than an earlier figure of 267 Gt C by Robinson (2004: fig. 2) he said comprised about half of 492 Gt C estimated for the planet’s above-ground vegetation. Robinson’s initial value seems mainly for tree roots rather than for grasses, scrub, tundra, desert, etc. that Mokany et al. and Jackson et al. (1997: tab. 2) show as substantial (~20%).

Robinson (2004) found that true below-ground biomass of tree roots in general are not only underestimated by about 60%, but also that losses as large as 20–40% of root samples can occur after recovery from soil due to subsequent handling, washing and storage; i.e., errors may amount to 100%. Therefore, instead of an initial 160 Gt C as then estimated in (tree?) root systems globally, he said a true amount could be about 267 Gt C. If 20% of this value is added for other than forest biomes (from Jackson et al. 1997: tab. 2), a new total is about (267 + 53 =) 320 Gt C. Alternatively, a new total from Mokany et al.’s (2005) 241 Gt C with 60% added for missed tree roots, plus mean 30% added for Robinson’s sampling errors, is (241 + 217 =) 458 Gt C. Doubled for terrain this then is 916 Gt C, or roughly the same as above-ground plant biomass previously estimated (~1,100 Gt C).

Some support for this is Qi et al. (2019) global synthesis of a root:shoot ratio of 0.90. Often commensurate, ratios for trees are lowest with grasses highest and Reiners (1974: tab. 4) footnoted roots as high as 74% of total phytomass for Calluna heathland in UK.

Dead or decaying roots form an integral part of a litter pool but are rarely included.

3.2.3.2. Litter, Logs and Roots in Above- and Below-ground “Detritus”

Theoretically, all ~220 Gt C/yr shoot and root NPP is eventually converted to litter detritus that is recycled by earthworms/microbes (e.g. Guo et al. 2021). Brovkin et al. (2011) proposed a (flat) global litter amount of 184 Gt C noting it was towards upper ranges of “litter stocks based on observations (68–97 Gt C) or models (47–196 Gt C)”. IPCC (2001: fig. 3.1d) and Houghton (2007: fig. 1) had about 550 Gt C in “Vegetation” and 300 Gt C of “DETRITUS” plus 1,500 Gt C total soil organic matter (cf. just 3 Gt C in their Ocean “Surface biota”) (see vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/07/04/ip-bees/). Their 300 Gt C in soil litter (and logs?) was possibly derived from Matthews (1997) litter report of (160 fine + 150 coarse =) 310 Gt “dm = dry matter” with “rarely included” belowground litter. This value should properly be halved for carbon to 155 but doubled again for terrain to 310 Gt C. Matthews also noted “including standing and fallen dead wood may increase estimates of the fine litter pool by ~40%”. Compare this to Reiners (1973 from Bolin 1970) that has humus, mulch, etc. “detritus” at ~700 Gt C. Yet, if reasonably assuming Houghton’s 300 Gt C value was correct, as also adopted herein, the total may be updated and doubled for terrain to about 600 Gt C as per Blakemore (2020a, 2020c: fig. 3) and as shown in Figs. 5–6.

3.2.3.3. Contributions of Soil Biota (Biodiversity, Biomass & Necromass) to Total SOC

Global biomass data from Bar-On et al. (2018: tab. S1 - rpdata.caltech.edu/publications/Bar-On_2018_SI.pdf) were updated in Blakemore (2018b: fig. 12, tab. 10) and Blakemore (2022). Note that Bar-On et al. (2018: tab. S1) “Trees” at just 450 Gt C, plus soil Bacteria, Fungi, and Protists at 24 Gt C, totaled >474 Gt C on Land (>99%) while Ocean had ~3–6 Gt C ~(1%). Terrain and other correcting adjustments, as detailed herein, up soil biota values to >230 Gt C plus Phytomass (shoots, roots, litter/logs) now total 2,880 Gt C or >99.9%, thereby reducing Ocean share to <0.1%.

Vermeij & Grosberg (2010) estimated between 85% and 95% of all living macroscopic species are found “on land”, while Locey & Lennon (2016: fig. 3) showed Earth with ~10¹² microbial original taxonomic units (OTUs) with just 10¹⁰ or ~1% in global Oceans. When microbes are fully accounted for, soil alone supports >99.9% biodiversity with 2.1 x 10²⁴ species (Blakemore 2022). This is consistent with UNEP (2002: 10) finding that probably over 80% of total plant production soon enters the soil system either through plant roots or as leaf-litter and perhaps 50% of below-ground allocation is released as extra-root carbon exudates, some being ‘traded’ with microbes for Nitrogen fixation or other growth factors. Intricate soil biotic pathways include microbial necromass and products that make up as much as 80% of global SOC according to Gross & Harrison (2019: fig. 1). Bar-On et al. (2018: tab. 1) have 70 Gt C Bacteria, mainly terrestrial, with a 10-fold uncertainty, presumably giving a biomass range of 7–700 Gt C. They claim an above-ground plant biomass (≈320 Gt C) represents ≈60% of global total, with below-ground biomass composed mainly of plant roots (≈130 Gt C) to total 450 Gt C in “Plants”. Total microbes residing in soil or deep subsurface they give as ≈100 Gt C. Terrestrial Arthropods (mainly insects or similar), Annelids and Molluscs they have at just 0.2 Gt C for each while total soil Protists are 4 Gt C (to give total soil organisms just 4.6 Gt C?). (For marine biota they have a generous ≈6 Gt C). All these values (except for those in water) are revised and at least doubled for neglected terrain considerations herein. Figures below summarize progressive biomass and biodiversity reviews (Figs. 9–11).

Figure 10. Biomass and Biodiversity reallocations sourced from Blakemore (2018b: figs. 12 & 15).

Figure 10. Biomass and Biodiversity reallocations sourced from Blakemore (2018b: figs. 12 & 15).

Figure 11. Early estimates with large disparity in global Biomass and Biodiversity allocations for main Realms-of-Life (excluding the atmospheric “Aeolian biota” or Aeliota that likely supports as much life at any time as the Oceans & Aquatics combined, as in Tabs. 1–2). Source: https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/03/29/eco-taxo-bio/; https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/07/04/ip-bees/. Soils support an estimated >83% of biomass (arguably 99.7% if the above-ground biota are included) and >99.9% biodiversity with latest microbial data (Blakemore 2022; https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/08/04/different-f3/).

Figure 11. Early estimates with large disparity in global Biomass and Biodiversity allocations for main Realms-of-Life (excluding the atmospheric “Aeolian biota” or Aeliota that likely supports as much life at any time as the Oceans & Aquatics combined, as in Tabs. 1–2). Source: https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/03/29/eco-taxo-bio/; https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/07/04/ip-bees/. Soils support an estimated >83% of biomass (arguably 99.7% if the above-ground biota are included) and >99.9% biodiversity with latest microbial data (Blakemore 2022; https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/08/04/different-f3/).

3.2.3.4. Microbial Biomass

Zhao et al. (2022) rightly concluded: “soil is the most microbiologically abundant (∼10²⁹) and diverse (∼10¹¹) environment on the Earth” which translates into substantial biomass. To a depth of 1 m total soil microbe biomass in Bar-On et al. (2018 : tab. S1 pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.1711842115/suppl_file/1711842115.sapp.pdf) was ≈20 Gt C comprised of Bacteria and Achaea of ≈8 Gt C and a total soil fungi value of ≈12 Gt C. Their soil microbial error margin was 10-fold (i.e., possible biomass range 2–200 Gt C?).

For soil Protists globally, Bar-On et al. estimated ≈1.5×10²² ciliates, ≈4×10²³ testates, ≈1.5×10²⁴ naked amoebae, ≈3×10²⁵ flagellates; these numbers may be doubled for terrain. Their biomass amounted to ≈1.5 Gt C that, if also doubled for terrain, is about 3 Gt C.

Mainly for bacteria, Blakemore (2022) summarized 10⁸–10¹² microbial cells/g or 10¹⁴–10¹⁸ cells/t (since 10⁶ grams/tonne). While Whitman et al. (1998: tab. 2) had 123 x 10⁶ km² soil with 1.3 t per cubic meter bulk density, perhaps a more modest flat "habitable land" is ~104 × 10⁶ km² (Blakemore 2018b: fig. 4, tab. 5). Doubled for terrain, to 1 m depth is ~208,000 Gt or ~2.1 x 10¹⁴ t global topsoil, leading to a new soil microbe total of 2.1 x 10²⁸–10³² with a median value ~2.1 x 10³⁰ cells (with 2.1 x 10²⁴ spp), as is reported herein.

Soil microbe cell dry biomass Whitman et al. (1998) took as 2 x 10^-13 g/cell with half carbon (and C:N = 1:0.24), thus, 2 x 10^-13 g/cell x 2.1 x 10³⁰ cells is 4 x 10¹⁷ g or 400 Gt (= 200 Gt C : 48 Gt N). (This dry biomass g/cell seems acceptable e.g., Sanz-Jimenez et al. 2022). Bar-On et al. (2018) said: “≈98% of the total microbial biomass is found in the top 1 meter of soil” further validating new microbial estimates to 1 m depth of global soils. Biota is dominated by Bacteria then Archaea with minor contributions (<1–2 %?) from other microbes with a biomass estimate herein coinciding with Bar-On et al’s. upper range of 200 Gt C.

3.2.3.5. Fungi

Earthworms aside, Fungi are probably the next most important soil organisms. From Bar-On et al. (2018: fig. 5) Fungi were 12 Gt C and 10²⁷ cells, mainly in soils and herein at least doubled for terrain to 24 Gt C and 2 x 10²⁷ cells. Contributions of Ectomycorrhizal fungi biomass they estimated as “roughly ≈0.2 Gt C” and for Arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM) “≈2 Gt C”. Rather than 12 Gt C as Bar-On et al. claim, Robinson (2004) found 15 Gt C in mycorrhizal hyphae alone, doubled for terrain gives soil fungi >30 Gt C.

3.2.3.6. Phytomenon and Biocrust

Soil phytomenon, surface biocrust, or autotrophic biofilm and some epiphytes (e.g., bryophytic liverworts, hornworts, epiphytic mosses plus microfungi/yeasts, photosynthetic green algae, lichens, and Cyanobacteria or Cyanophyta) coat the convoluted superficial and interstitial surface rocks, topsoil, or sands, and snow or ice. According to Elbert et al. (2012), these ‘cryptogamic covers’ or biocrust total about 5 Gt C taking up about 4 Gt C per year in NPP, but terrain doubles these values at finer scale to 10–20 Gt C and ~8–16 Gt C/yr (Blakemore 2018b; also - https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2022/08/04/different-f3/). Elbert et al. (2012) further derived a nitrogen uptake by cryptogamic covers of around 49 Tg per year (now >100–200 Tg N/yr), they say suggests that cryptogamic covers account for nearly half of biological nitrogen fixation. At >100 Tg N this is approximately the same as an annual oversupply of synthetic N fertilizer, as is noted below in an agronomic section.

Aside from soil cryptogams, Jassey et al. (2022) report an average 5.5 x 10⁶ photoautotrophic algae per gram of surface soil (cf. autotrophic marine cyanobacteria and Prochlorococcus spp. density of 4 x 10⁴ cells per ml seawater from Whitman et al. 1998), and soil algae alone having NPP of ~3.5 Gt C/yr that, when increased for micro-terrain, is likely also doubled or quadrupled in value. Soil’s phytomenon NPP is thus about the same – or possibly more – than all the Oceans’ phytoplankton NPP (of just ~20 Gt C/yr).

3.2.3.7. Earthworm Abundance, Biodiversity, Biomass & Ecological Activities

Earthworms (Annelida: Oligochaeta: Megadrilacea) are a major component of healthy soils (along with Fungi) due to intimate associations. Earthworms, plants, and soil microbes co-evolved interdependence, their interactions regulate Soil Ecology. Megadrile earthworms comprise 20 families, approximately 600 genera (several unnecessary sub-genera) and ~7,000 described species or sub-species with an expected total of over 35,000 species (Blakemore 2012, 2016a). They represent up to 90% of invertebrate biomass present in soil. Moreover, microbes increase during digestion and after gut passage in their fresh castings by up to x 1,000 (Lee 1985: 27, 206) further enriching soils.

Beneficial earthworm activities of micro-mixing, aeration and drainage stimulate microbial and other soil-faunal activities thereby enhancing plant growth (Figure 12).

His professional life mostly spent studying Earthworm Ecology, Charles Darwin (1881: 158) calculated from Hensen (1877: 360) that there must exist 133,000 living worms in a hectare of productive land (ca. 13.3 /m²) with 3 g per worm (Darwin mistakes this for 1 g) (= 40 g/m²). In previous reports these were multiplied by “flat” habitable land areas of ~10 Gha to give totals of about 1.3 x 10¹⁵ or 1.3 quadrillion, with 4.0 Gt live biomass.

From a wider range of habitats, including alpine, taiga, and dry sclerophyll scrub, an average 273 worms/m² (= 2.73 x 10⁶ ha^-1) and a fresh wt biomass of 63 g/m² (= 0.63 t ha^-1) were derived from Lee (1985: tab. 7) and multiplied by realistic land area (Whitman et al. 1998: tab. 2) including scrub, tundra, alpine, etc., of 12.1 Gha by Blakemore (2000, 2016a, 2018b) to give 32.8 x 10¹⁵ worms and 7.6 Gt live weight – almost double Darwin’s figure (vermecology.wordpress.com/2017/02/12/nature-article-to-commemorate-charles-darwins-birthday-on-12th-feb/). Doubled for terrain these now are 65.6 x 10¹⁵ worms and 15.2 Gt wet mass. At 30% moisture (Lee 1985: 33), dry mass is 4.5 Gt with half carbon at ~2.3 Gt C.

For “Annelida” (Oligochaeta comprising Megadriles + Microdriles with marine Polychaeta explicitly excluded) Bar-On et al. (2018: 31–32) had “300 individual earthworms per m² ”, 5 mg C per worm and 1.5 g C/m² (i.e., 3 g dry, 10 g wet/m²), supporting my abundance numbers of 273 /m² and fresh ~63 g/m². However, their 0.2 Gt C total earthworm biomass is now raised to ~2.3 Gt C (Blakemore 2022). Ratio C:N 1:0.24 gives 0.54 Gt N or 540 Tg N, five times more than synthetic Nitrogen added to farmlands per year(!).

In wet organic soils, microdrile Enchytraeidae may range 10³–10⁵ per m² (Adl 2006) two to three times megadrile 10¹⁵–10¹⁶ totals, so total Oligochaeta range 10¹⁷–10¹⁹ or median 10¹⁸. Bar-On et al. (2018: tab. S1) megadriles + microdriles total of 10¹⁸ is thus feasible.

Enchytraeidae population maxima of 290,000 /m² (~3 x 10⁵ /m² and 53 g/m² live) were in peat at Moor House Nature Reserve in England (Gragg 1963: tab. 2, Springett 1967: fig. 24) while limestone grassland plots had 389 earthworms /m² (110 g/m² live weight).

One of the highest megadrile records is of Pontodrilus litoralis (Grube) that Coupland & McDonald (2008) reported with populations of 750–4,875 /m² under wrack seaweed on arid beaches in WA they calculated consumed 19–31 kg/m²/yr organic material. Highest earthworms in Lee (1985: tab. 7) were in NZ pastures (2,020 /m² with 305 fresh g/m² from McColl & Lautour 1978). Another example, in a 1,000 year-old permanent pasture in the UK where six lumbricid species attained 456 /m² and 153 g/m² (Blakemore 1981, 1994, 2000, 2016a, 2018a). A pasture population in NZ of 716 worms/m² (160 g/m²) extrapolated to a field population of 7.16 million worms ha^-1 and 1.6 t/ha (Blakemore 2011). Such biomass exceeds all other soil fauna, matching above-ground cattle or sheep stocking rates.

Eve Balfour (1943) gave Rothamsted earthworm counts of 123 /m² in unmanured plots (as for N-P-K plots); 680 /m² in FYM plots; 2,125 /m² on grassland (cf. Blakemore 2018a: tabs. 1–7). She also pointed out that “Earthworms render soil permeable to rain thus checking the tendency to erosion by rain and wind. Aeration and nitrification are also stimulated”.

Overall megadrile means in Lee (1985: tab. 7) of 273 /m² and 63 fresh g/m² give an average mass per worm of 63/273 or about 0.23 g/worm. However these figures are low estimates when earthworms in fertile soils, forests, or orchards are more likely in the order of 50–500 /m² and 20–400 g/m² (Blakemore 2016a: tab. 2). Thus, potential ideal maxima are of 500 worms/m² and 400 g/m² that, if in ~10 Gha fertile soils are 50 x 10¹⁵ and 40 Gt (12 Gt dry, 6 Gt C). Doubled for terrain to 24 Gt dry and 12 Gt C is tempered with ~69% earthworm biomass decline under intensive agrichemical regimes (Blakemore 2018a: tab. 11) thereby likely reducing this to just ~3.6 Gt C, as presented in the Abstract.

Conversely, simply conserving earthworms may reduce soil erosion and farm fertility, not least their burrows allowing better drainage and moisture holding capacity; they optimally construct ~9,000 km/ha increasing soil porosity, infiltration, and stimulating plant growth (Gaupp et al. 2015). Pimental & Kounang (1998) quote 220 worm burrows per m² (3–5 mm diameter) which is 2.2 million drainage points per hectare, some that may extend for several metres depth. Worms may process their body weight of soil each day, or possibly ~1,314 Gt dry soil per year. Lee’s (1985) figures show they recycle all organic Ah soil horizon in 4 years (cf. Darwin 1881).

Agrichemical overuse has effectively eliminated earthworms from fields, pastures, or forests; at least three species are extinct many more likely also gone (Blakemore 2018a).

3.2.3.8. Termites and Ants (Termitidae and Formicidae)

Soil terrain consideration (Blakemore 2018b) doubles evenly dispersed earthworm data, but taxa like termites or ants in discrete colonies or nests per unit area not quite so.

Fayle & Klimes (2022) discuss the various estimates of these two taxa (Termitidae and Formicidae) apparently endorsing earlier termite values while accepting most recent ant data by Schultheiss et al. (2022) of 20 × 10¹⁵ ants with biomass of 0.012 Gt C; these ant values were raised for terrain by Blakemore (2022 veop.files.wordpress.com/2022/09/new-addendum-file.pdf) to 40 × 10¹⁵ (40 quadrillion) ants and 0.024 Gt C ant biomass; both much lower than earthworms now at 65 quadrillion worms (65 x 10¹⁵) with biomass >2.25–3.6 Gt C.

For termites, Whitman et al. (1998: tab. 4) had a world population of 2.4 x 10¹⁷ – now raised for terrain to 4.8 x 10¹⁷ – and estimated global termite biomass as 0.445 Gt wet (https://web.archive.org/web/20220828201550/https:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_(ecology)) at (30%) this is ~0.13 Gt dry with a carbon content (50%) of ~0.075 Gt C [reported by Bar-On et al. (2018: 41) as ≈0.07 Gt C or by Tuma et al. (2020) as 0.05 Gt C]. This 0.075 Gt C, doubled for terrain, is herein raised to ~0.15 Gt C for all global termites.

Unlike earthworms or termites that truly inhabit the soil realm, ants are mostly superficial foragers and their alate forms almost resemble soil “tourists”. Tuma et al. (2020: fig. 1) ant biomass of 0.07 Gt C was devalued by Schultheiss et al. (2022) by almost six times to 0.012 Gt C (now doubled), demonstrating our lack of fundamental knowledge of basic soil biotic data including for perhaps the most obvious of all – the ubiquitous ant.

Compared to beneficial soil fauna like earthworms, excess livestock subsidized for meat-eaters now at 0.1 Gt C is certainly detrimental to natural wildlife (Figure 13 and Figure 14).

3.2.3.9. Soil Nematodes

Soil nematodes of 4.4 × 10²⁰ expressed either as density per gram of soil or per unit area on a planimetically flat basis (van den Hoogen et al. 2019) with a total biomass of ~0.3 Gt translates to ~0.03 Gt C (which the authors claim is three times greater than a previous estimate of soil nematode biomass and represents 82% of total human biomass). Herein raised for neglected terrain, now to 8.8 x 10²⁰ nematodes with ~0.06 Gt C biomass.

3.2.3.10. Soil Viruses

Regarding soil viruses especially bacteriophages – aside from questions (as for mitochondria) on whether they are living entities or not – their abundance in soils may be miscalculated by orders of magnitude. In Bar-On et al. (2018: tab. S1), global viruses are 10³¹ with biomass of 0.2 Gt C and 10⁸–10⁹ phages per gram of soil. Yet a summary paper (Trubl et al. 2018) found: “While many soils contain large numbers of viral particles (10⁷ to 10⁹ virus particles per gram of soil.. knowledge of soil viral ecology has come mainly from the fraction that desorbs easily from soils (<10% ..) and the much smaller subset that has been isolated.” If <10% are detectable, a likely range is then >10⁸–10¹⁰/g and, as with soil bacteria, their numbers are massive and a reasonable mean estimate is of 10⁹ viruses/g that, if a similar proportion is isolatable, may be closer to 10¹⁰ (coincidentally this is the same value provided by Kuzyakov & Mason-Jones 2018). Thus, Earth’s ~2.1 x 10²⁰ g soil to 1 m depth may have ~2.1 x 10³⁰ virions and, if to 10 m soil depth, = ~2.1 x 10³¹. So Bar-On et al.’s total 10³¹ at 0.2 Gt C, if doubled in soil alone equates to ~0.4 Gt C. Compare to Bar-On et al.’s (2018: 55): “assuming a mean soil depth of 10 meters (276), we get to an estimate of ~10²⁹-10³⁰ virions in soil” with mean ≈6.2 × 10²⁹ soil viruses (mainly phages) having a 32-fold uncertainty(!). Terrain allowance may double their total to ≈1.24 × 10³⁰, presumably then with one-tenth or ~0.02 Gt C. Mushegian (2020) confirms virome quadrillion-quadrillion (>10³⁰) count, yet, as mentioned, may be out by orders of magnitude and whether this truly adds living organisms to an ever-evolving soil biota tally is up for debate.

Since compilation, new soil virus data is provided (www.soilviral.com/) having: “1 billion viruses g^-1, that if calculated over the whole globe amounts to about 4.9 x 10³¹ soil viruses globally”. Doubled for terrain, this becomes 10 x 10³¹ and 4 Gt C as possible new values.

Of note is whether soil viruses impact SOC, nutrient cycling, emissions or NPP productivity as they do in marine settings where 20–40% of microbial standing stock lyse daily to a dissolved nutrient pool (Kuzyakov & Mason-Jones 2018). Williamson et al. (2017) discuss such issues and, in an cogent Conclusion, remark: “Soils represent the greatest reservoir of biodiversity on the planet; prokaryotic diversity in soils is estimated to be three orders of magnitude greater than in all other ecosystems combined… Soils remain the most poorly understood ecosystems on Earth. At the same time, viruses represent the largest pool of untapped genetic diversity and unexplored sequence space on the planet. In this regard, the soil virome comprises an unknown quantity within an unexplored territory: a vast new frontier, ripe with opportunities for discovery.” Thus the current report is not alone to realize such facts.

4. CONCLUSIONS

References

1. Adl, S.M. 2006. Enchytraeids. In: E.G. Gregorich (ed). Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis Chapter 35. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Pp. 445-453. www.researchgate.net/publication/310828675_Enchytraeids_in_Soil_Sampling_and_Methods_of_Analysis.
2. Alves, E.Q., Macario, K., Ascough, P., Bronk-Ramsey, C. 2018. The worldwide marine radiocarbon reservoir effect: Definitions, mechanisms, and prospects. Reviews of Geophysics, 56, 278–305. [CrossRef]
3. Alexander, P., Brown, C., Arneth, A., Finnigan, J. Moran, D. Rounsevell, M. 2017. Losses, inefficiencies and waste in the global food system. Agricultural Systems. 153: 190-200. [CrossRef]
4. Andreae, M.O. 2019. Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning – an updated assessment. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 19: 8523–8546. [CrossRef]
5. Andreae, M.O., Merlet, P. 2001. Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning, Global Biogeochem. Cy. 15(4): 955–966. [CrossRef]
6. Asner, G.P., Scurlock, J.M.O., Hicke, J.A. 2003. Global synthesis of leaf area index observations: Implications for ecological and remote sensing studies. Global Ecology and Biogeography. 12: 191–205.
7. Bahn, M., et al. 2010. Soil respiration at mean annual temperature predicts annual total across vegetation types and biomes. Biogeoscience. 7 (7): 2147–2157. https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/7/2147/2010/bg-7-2147-2010.pdf.
8. Bahram, M., Hildebrand, F., Forslund, S.K. et al. 2018. Structure and function of the global topsoil microbiome. Nature. 560: 233–237. [CrossRef]
9. Balfour, E.B. 1943. The Living Soil. Faber & Faber, London. Pp. 223.
10. Bar-On, Y.M., Phillips, R., Milo, R. 2018. The biomass distribution on Earth. PNAS. 115(25): 6506-6511. [CrossRef]
11. Bartsev, S., Degermendzhi, A., Ivanova, Y., Shchemel, A., Tchernetsky, M. 2012. Boreal forests contribution to global seasonal dynamic of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Procedia Environ Sci. 13: 194–201. [CrossRef]
12. Basile, S.J., Lin, X., Wieder, W.R., Hartman, M.D., Keppel-Aleks, G. 2020. Leveraging the signature of heterotrophic respiration on atmospheric CO₂ for model benchmarking, Biogeosciences. 17: 1293–1308. [CrossRef]
13. Baveye, P.C. 2020a. Bypass and hyperbole in soil research: Worrisome practices critically reviewed through examples. European Journal of Soil Science: 1–20. [CrossRef]
14. Baveye, P.C. 2020b. Bypass and hyperbole in soil research: A personal view on plausible causes and possible remedies. European Journal of Soil Science: 1–8. [CrossRef]
15. Beste, A. 2022. GREENWASHING & HIGH TECH – Faking it: (un-)sustainable solutions for agriculture. ENSSER, Germany Greens/MEP publication. Online: https://ensser.org/from-our-members/greenwashing-high-tech-faking-it-un-sustainable-solutions-for-agriculture.
16. Blakemore, R.J. 1981. Ecology of Earthworms under Different Fertilizer Regimes in Agriculture. BSc Honours thesis (801/1/22) at PCL/Westminster University, London, UK. Pp. 93.
17. Blakemore, R.J. 1994. Earthworms of South-East Queensland and Their Agronomic Potential in Brigalow Soils. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD, Australia. Pp. 605. https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/data/UQ_366290/THE8652.pdf.
18. Blakemore, R.J. 2000. Ecology of earthworms under the “Haughley Experiment” of organic and conventional management regimes. Biol. Agric. Hortic. 18: 141–159. Available online: http://orgprints.org/30000/.
19. Blakemore, R.J. 2011. Breaking New Ground? Taupo Volcanic Zone Geothermal Earthworm Surveys. PG Certificate in Geothermal Energy Technology Project Report 2011.8, University of Auckland, N.Z. Pp. 1–48. https://ia600107.us.archive.org/21/items/GTEProject/GTE%20Project.pdf.
20. Blakemore, R.J. 2012. Call for a Census of Soil Invertebrates (CoSI). Zool Mid East, 58 (4): 171-176 vermecology.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/blakemore-2012-census-of-soil-invertebrates-cosi.pdf. [CrossRef]
21. Blakemore, R.J. 2016a. Cosmopolitan Earthworms. (6^th Edn.). VermEcology, Yokohama, Japan. Pp. 1,250 + 150 figs.
22. Blakemore, R.J. 2016b. Veni, Vidi, Vermi—I. On the contribution of Darwin’s ‘humble earthworm’ to soil health, pollution-free primary production, organic ‘waste’ management & atmospheric carbon capture for a safe and sustainable global climate. Verm Ecol. Occas. Pap. Veop. 2: 1–34. Available online: https://veop.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/vvv-i.pdf (accessed on 10 May 2018).
23. Blakemore, R.J. 2016c. Veni, Vidi, Vermi—II. Earthworms in organic fields restore SOM & H₂O and fix CO₂. Verm Ecol. Occas. Pap. Veop. 2: 1–26. https://veop.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/vvv-ii.pdf.
24. Blakemore, R.J. 2018a. Critical Decline of Earthworms from Organic Origins under Intensive, Humic SOM-Depleting Agriculture. Soil Syst. 2, 33. [CrossRef]
25. Blakemore, R.J. 2018b. Non-Flat Earth Recalibrated for Terrain and Topsoil. Soil Syst, 2, 64. [CrossRef]
26. Blakemore, R.J. 2019a. https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2019/09/20/soc-upped-after-uninvited-comment-on-soil-syst-2018-2-64/.
27. Blakemore, R.J. 2019b. Humic Carbon to Fix Extinction, Climate and Health. Veop. 3: 1-8. Online: https://veop.wordpress.com/2019/05/30/humic-carbon-to-fix-extinction-climate-and-health/. Pdf: https://veop.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/veop-3-2019.pdf. Preprints – www.preprints.org/manuscript/201904.0109/v1 9th April, 2019. [CrossRef]
28. Blakemore, R.J. 2019c. https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2019/11/11/earthworm-cast-carbon-storage-eccs/.
29. Blakemore, R.J. 2020a. Addendum to “Soil Syst. 2018,2,64” on SOC & NPP. Online: https://vermecology.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/addendum-2020a.pdf.
30. Blakemore, R.J. 2020b. Realms of the Soil (vs. Solar Lunacy). Online: https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2020/05/27/realms-of-the-soil/.
31. Blakemore, R.J. 2020c. Global SOC, Annual NPP & CO2 Turnover Time (τ). Veop. 4: 1–8. Online: https://veop.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/veop-4-5.pdf. https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/38139/1/Veop-4.pdf.
32. Blakemore, R.J. 2022. New Global Species Biodiversity: Soil soars, Ocean flounders. Veop. 5: 1–9. Online: https://veop.wordpress.com/2022/09/10/volume-5/. https://veop.files.wordpress.com/2022/09/new-addendum-file.pdf. [CrossRef]
33. Billen G., et al. 2021. Reshaping the european agro-food system and closing its nitrogen cycle: the potential of combining dietary change, agroecology, and circularity. OneEarth. 4(6): 839–850. [CrossRef]
34. Bolin, B. 1970. The Carbon Cycle. Scientific American. 223(3): 124–135. https://ceiba.org.mx/publicaciones/Centro_Documentacion/Biosphere/1970_Biosphere_ScientificAmerican.pdf.
35. Bolin, B., Fung, I. 1992. The carbon cycle revisited.Modeling the Earth system. NASA Technical Reports. 3: 151–164. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/42786764.pdf.
36. Brovkin, V. et al. 2011. Plant-driven variation in decomposition rates improves projections of global litter stock distribution. Biogeosciences Discuss. 8: 8817–8844. www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/8/8817/2011. [CrossRef]
37. Buringh, P. 1984. Organic Carbon in Soils of the World. The Role of Terrestrial Vegetation in the Global Carbon Cycle: Measurement by Remote Sensing. G.M. Woodwell (Ed.). SCOPE. John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://web.archive.org/web/20220329103348/https://scope.dge.carnegiescience.edu/SCOPE_23/SCOPE_23_3.1_chapter3_91-109.pdf.
38. Buyanovsky, G.A., Wagner, G.H. 1998. Carbon cycling in cultivated land and its global significance. Global. Change Biology. 4: 131–141. [CrossRef]
39. Callaway, E. 2021. Million-year-old mammoth genomes shatter record for oldest ancient DNA. Nature. 590: 537–538. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00436-x. [CrossRef]
40. Campbell, J.E., et al. 2017. Large historical growth in global terrestrial gross primary production. United States: Nature. 544: 84–87. [CrossRef]
41. Canadell, J., Jackson, R.B., Ehleringer, J.B. et al. 1996. Maximum rooting depth of vegetation types at the global scale. Oecologia. 108: 583–595. [CrossRef]
42. Canadell, J.G., et al. 2021. Global Carbon and other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Chapter 5: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Pp. 673–816.https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter05.pdf. [CrossRef]
43. Carson, R. 1962. Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin Company: USA. Pp. 323.
44. Chan Y.K., McCoy, D. 2010. Soil carbon storage potential under perennial pastures in the mid-north coast of New South Wales, Australia. Tropical Grasslands. 44: 184–191.
45. Chapin F.S., Eviner V.T. 2014. Biogeochemical Interactions Governing Terrestrial Net Primary Production. In: Holland H.D., Turekian K.K. (Eds.). Treatise on Geochemistry, 2^nd Edn., Vol. 10: 189-216. Oxford: Elsevier. https://evinerlab.ucdavis.edu/sites/g/files/dgvnsk10626/files/inline-files/Chapin-Eviner-2014Biogeochem-final.pdf.
46. Chen, J.M., Ju, W., Ciais, P. et al. 2019. Vegetation structural change since 1981 significantly enhanced the terrestrial carbon sink. Nat Commun. 10: 4259. [CrossRef]
47. Comis, D. 2002. Glomalin: hiding place for a third of the world's stored soil carbon. Agricultural Research USDA-ARS Sep 2002: 4–7. Available at: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archive/sep02/soil0902.htm.
48. Cotching, W.E. 2018. Organic matter in the agricultural soils of Tasmania, Australia - a review. Geoderma. 312: 170-182. https://www.billcotching.com/Cotching_Geoderma_2017.pdf. [CrossRef]
49. Conant R.T., Cerri C.E.P., Osborne B.B., Paustian K. 2017. Grassland management impacts on soil carbon stocks: a new synthesis. Ecological Applications. 27: 662–668.
50. Corlett, R. 2016. Plant diversity in a changing world. Plant Diversity. 38(1): 10-16. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468265916300300.
51. Coupland, G.T., McDonald, J.I. 2008. Extraordinarily high earthworm abundance in deposits of marine macrodetritus along two semi-arid beaches. Mar. Ecol. Prog. 361: 181–189. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24872547.
52. Cowie, R.H., Bouchet, P., Fontaine, B. 2022. The Sixth Mass Extinction: fact, fiction or speculation?. Biol Rev. 97: 640-663. [CrossRef]
53. Cragg, J.B. 1961. Some Aspects of the Ecology of Moorland Animals. The Journal of Ecology. 49(3): 477. [CrossRef]
54. Crowther T.W., et al. 2019. The global soil community and its influence on biogeochemistry. Science. 365(6455):eaav0550. [CrossRef]
55. Crutzen PJ. 1970. The influence of nitrogen oxides on the atmospheric ozone content. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society. 96: 320–325. [CrossRef]
56. Cui, W.Z., et a. 2022. Adverse effects of microplastics on earthworms: a critical review. Sci. Total Environ. 850: 158041. [CrossRef]
57. Dasgupta, P. 2021. The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. London: HM Treasury. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/final-report-the-economics-of-biodiversity-the-dasgupta-review.
58. D'Elia, A.H., Liles, G.C., Viers, J.H., Smart, D.R. 2017. Deep carbon storage potential of buried floodplain soils. Sci Rep. 7(1): 8181. [CrossRef]
59. Darwin, C.R. 1881. The formation of vegetable mould, through the action of worms, with observations on their habits. London: John Murray. http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=F1357&viewtype=side&pageseq=1.
60. Delang, C.O. 2018. The consequences of soil degradation in China: a review. GeoScape. 12(2): 92–103. [CrossRef]
61. DeLuca, T.H., Boisvenue, C. 2012. Boreal forest soil carbon: distribution, function and modelling. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research. 85(2): 161–184. https://academic.oup.com/forestry/article/85/2/161/527316. [CrossRef]
62. Diamond, M.L. et al. 2015. Exploring the Planetary Boundary for Chemical Pollution. Environ. Int. 78: 8–15, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/56700567.pdf. [CrossRef]
63. Elbert, W. et al. 2012. Contribution of cryptogamic covers to the global cycles of carbon and nitrogen. Nat. Geosci. 5: 459–462. https://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038%2Fngeo1486.
64. Elhacham, E., Ben-Uri, L., Grozovski, J., Bar-On, Y. M., Milo, R. 2020. Global human-made mass exceeds all living biomass. Nature. https://fisherp.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/s41586-020-3010-5.pdf. [CrossRef]
65. Erb, K.H., Fetzel, T., Plutzar, C. et al. 2016. Biomass turnover time in terrestrial ecosystems halved by land use. Nature Geosci. 9: 674–678. [CrossRef]
66. Erb, K.H., Kastner, T., Plutzar, C. et al. 2018. Unexpectedly large impact of forest management and grazing on global vegetation biomass. Nature. 553: 73–76. [CrossRef]
67. ESSD 2019: Friedlingstein, P., et al. Global Carbon Budget 2019, Earth Syst. Sci. Data. 11: 1783–1838. Online. https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/11/1783/2019/. [CrossRef]
68. ESSD 2022: Friedlingstein, P., O'Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Gregor, L., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Alkama, R., Arneth, A., Arora, V. K., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gkritzalis, T., Gloege, L., Grassi, G., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Hefner, M., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Jersild, A., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lindsay, K., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGrath, M. J., Metzl, N., Monacci, N. M., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O'Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pan, N., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rodriguez, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Shutler, J. D., Skjelvan, I., Steinhoff, T., Sun, Q., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Takao, S., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, X., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tsujino, H., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Whitehead, C., Willstrand Wranne, A., Wright, R., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., Zeng, J., Zheng, B. Global Carbon Budget 2022. Earth Syst. Sci. Data. 14: 4811–4900. [CrossRef]
69. Fan, M.S., Zhao, F.J., Fairweather-Tait S.J., et al. 2008. Evidence of decreasing mineral density in wheat grain over the last 160 years. J Trace Elem Med Biol. 22(4):315-24. [CrossRef]
70. Fang, H., Baret, F., Plummer, S., Schaepman, G. 2019. An overview of global leaf area index (LAI): Methods, products, validation, and applications. Reviews of Geophysics. 57(3): 739–799. [CrossRef]
71. FAO/GSP. 2022. Global Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration Potential Map – GSOCseq v.1.1. Technical report. Rome. [CrossRef]
72. Fayle, T.M., Klimes, P. 2022. Improving estimates of global ant biomass and abundance. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 119(42):e2214825119. https://www.scienceopen.com/document_file/00a8c7d7-4948-4efc-bb6d-5c29f280f89c/PubMedCentral/00a8c7d7-4948-4efc-bb6d-5c29f280f89c.pdf. [CrossRef]
73. Fenn, M.E. et al. 2009. Status of soil acidification in North America. Journal of Forest Science. 52: 3-13. https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/24312.
74. Ferrer M., Méndez-García C., Bargiela R., Chow J., Alonso S., García-Moyano A., Bjerga G.E.K., Steen I.H., Schwabe T., Blom C., Vester J., Weckbecker A., Shahgaldian P., de Carvalho CCCR, Meskys R, Zanaroli G, Glöckner FO, Fernández-Guerra A, Thambisetty S, de la Calle F, Golyshina OV, Yakimov MM, Jaeger KE, Yakunin AF, Streit WR, McMeel O, Calewaert JB, Tonné N, Golyshin P.N. 2019. INMARE Consortium. Decoding the ocean's microbiological secrets for marine enzyme biodiscovery. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 366(1): fny285. [CrossRef]
75. Field, C.B., Behrenfeld, M.J., Randerson, J.T., Falkowski, P. 1998. Primary production of the Biosphere: Integrating Terrestrial and Oceanic Components. Science. 281(5374): 237–240. [CrossRef]
76. Fierer, N., Breitbart, M., Nulton, J., Salamon, P., Lozupone, C., Jones, R., et al. 2007. Metagenomic and Small-subunit rRNA Analyses Reveal the Genetic Diversity of Bacteria, Archaea, Fungi, and Viruses in Soil Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 73: 7059–7066. http://aem.asm.org/content/73/21/7059.full.
77. Fierer, N, et al. 2009. Global patterns in belowground communities. Ecol Lett. 12(11): 1238–1249. [CrossRef]
78. Fishman, F.J., Lennon, J.T. 2022. Macroevolutionary constraints on global microbial diversity. bioRxiv. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.06.04.494835v1.full. [CrossRef]
79. Forster, P.M., et al. 2020. Current and future global climate impacts resulting from COVID-19. Nat. Clim. Chang. 10: 913–919. [CrossRef]
80. Gagnone, B. et al. 2016 Soil-surface carbon dioxide emission following nitrogen fertilization in corn. Canadian Journal of Soil Science. 96(2): 219–232. [CrossRef]
81. Gan, Y. et al. 2014. Improving farming practices reduce the carbon footprint of spring wheat production. Nat. Commun. 5: 5012. https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms6012.pdf. [CrossRef]
82. Gao, Y., Yang, T., Wang, Y., Yu, G.. 2017. Fate of river-transported carbon in China: implications for carbon cycling in coastal ecosystems. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability. 3( 3): e01265. [CrossRef]
83. Gasser, T., Crepin, L., Quilcaille, Y., Houghton, R. A., Ciais, P., Obersteiner, M. 2020. Historical CO₂ emissions from land use and land cover change and their uncertainty. Biogeosciences. 17: 4075–4101. [CrossRef]
84. Gaupp-Berghausen, M., Hofer, M., Rewald, B., Zaller, J.G. 2015. Glyphosate-based herbicides reduce the activity and reproduction of earthworms and lead to increased soil nutrient concentrations. Sci. Rep. 5: 12886. [CrossRef]
85. Georgiou, K., Jackson, R.B., Vindušková, O., et al. 2022. Global stocks and capacity of mineral-associated soil organic carbon. Nat Commun. 13: 3797. [CrossRef]
86. Gerke, J. 2022. The Central Role of Soil Organic Matter in Soil Fertility and Carbon Storage. Soil Syst. 6: 33. [CrossRef]
87. Gibbs, H.K., Salmon, J.M. 2015. Mapping the world's degraded lands. Applied Geography. 57: 12–21. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0143622814002793. [CrossRef]
88. Grace, P.R., Oades, J.M., Keith, H., Hancock, T.W. 1995. Trends in Wheat Yields and Soil Organic Carbon in the Permanent Rotation Trial at the Waite Agricultural Research Institute, South Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 35(7): 857-864.
89. Gasser, T., Crepin, L., Quilcaille, Y., Houghton, R. A., Ciais, P., Obersteiner, M. 2020. Historical CO₂ emissions from land use and land cover change and their uncertainty. Biogeosciences. 17: 4075–4101. [CrossRef]
90. Cragg, J.B. 1961. Some Aspects of the Ecology of Moorland Animals. Journal of Ecology. 49(3): 477–506. [CrossRef]
91. Graven, H.D., Keeling, R.F., et al. 2013. Enhanced seasonal exchange of CO₂ by northern ecosystems since 1960. Science. 341: 1085–1089.
92. Grosberg R.K., Vermeij G.J., Wainwright P.C. 2012. Biodiversity in water and on land. Curr Biol. 22(21): R900-3. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
93. Gross, C.D.; Harrison, R.B. 2019. The Case for Digging Deeper: Soil Organic Carbon Storage, Dynamics, and Controls in Our Changing World. Soil Syst. 3: 28. [CrossRef]
94. Guenther, A. et al. 1995. A global model of natural volatile organic compound emissions. Journal of Geophysical Research. 100(D5): 8873-8892. Report #: D5. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1bf6v7zf#main. [CrossRef]
95. Guerra, C.A., Heintz-Buschart, A., Sikorski, J. et al. 2020. Blind spots in global soil biodiversity and ecosystem function research. Nat Commun 11: 3870 (2020). [CrossRef]
96. Guo, L., Gifford R. 2002. Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biology. 8: 345-360. [CrossRef]
97. Guo, L., Deng, M., Yang, S., Liu, W., Wang, X., Wang, J., Liu, L. 2021. The coordination between leaf and fine root litter decomposition and the difference in their controlling factors. Global Ecology and Biogeography. 30: 2286–2296. [CrossRef]
98. Guo, X., et al. 2018. Drivers of spatio-temporal changes in paddy soil pH in Jiangxi Province, China from 1980 to 2010. Sci Rep. 8: 2702. [CrossRef]
99. Hansell, D.A. 2013. Recalcitrant dissolved organic carbon fractions, Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 5: 421–445.
100. Hansis, E., Davis, S.J., Pongratz, J. 2015. Relevance of methodological choices for accounting of land use change carbon fluxes, Global Biogeochem. Cy. 29: 1230–1246. [CrossRef]
101. Harper, R.J., Tibbett, M. 2013. The hidden organic carbon in deep mineral soils. Plant Soil. 368: 641–648. [CrossRef]
102. Harper, R.J., et al. 2012. Reforesting degraded agricultural landscapes with Eucalypts: Effects on carbon storage and soil fertility after 26 years. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 163: 3–13. [CrossRef]
103. Haverd, V., Smith, B., Canadell, J.G., et al. 2020. Higher than expected CO₂ fertilization inferred from leaf to global observations. Glob Change Biol. 26: 2390–2402. [CrossRef]
104. Hashimoto, S., Carvalhais, N., Ito, A., Migliavacca, M., Nishina, K., Reichstein, M. 2015. Global spatiotemporal distribution of soil respiration modeled using a global database, Biogeosciences. 12: 4121–4132 2015. [CrossRef]
105. Hayes, M.H.B, Clapp, C.E. 2001. Humic substances: Considerations of composition, aspects of structure and environmental influences. Soil Sci. 166: 723–737.
106. Hensen, V. 1877.http://www.zobodat.at/pdf/Zeitschrift-fuer-wiss-Zoologie_28_0354-0364.pdf.
107. Hiederer, R., Köchy, M., 2012. Global soil organic carbon estimates and the harmonized world soil database. EU Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability Publications Office. [CrossRef]
108. Hoshino, T. et al. 2020. Global diversity of microbial communities in marine sediment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 117(44): 27587-27597. [CrossRef]
109. Houghton, R.A. 2003. Revised estimates of the annual net flux of carbon to the atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 1850-2000. Tellus B Chem Phys Meterol. 55: 378–390. [CrossRef]
110. Houghton, R.A. 2007. Balancing the Global Carbon Budget. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences. 35: 1, 313-347. [CrossRef]
111. Howard, A. 1940. An Agricultural Testament. UK: Oxford University Press. https://web.archive.org/web/20100702222720/http:/ps-survival.com/PS/Agriculture/An_Agricultural_Testament_1943.pdf; https://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/howardAT/ATtoc.html.
112. Howard, A. 1945. Farming and Gardening for Health or Disease (The Soil and Health). UK: Faber and Faber Limited. https://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/howardSH/SHtoc.html.
113. Huang, J. et al. 2018. The global oxygen budget and its future projection. Science Bulletin. 63(18): 1180-1186. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209592731830375X. [CrossRef]
114. Hursh, A., et al. 2017. The sensitivity of soil respiration to soil temperature, moisture, and carbon supply at the global scale. Global Change Biology. 23(5): 2090–2103. [CrossRef]
115. Hutchinson, G.E. 1954. The Biochemistry of the Terrestrial Atmosphere. In: G. P. Kuiper (Ed.): The Earth as a Planet. Pp. 371–433. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1954eap..book..371H.
116. Isbell, F.,et al. 2022. Expert perspectives on global biodiversity loss and its drivers and impacts on people. Front Ecol Environ. 2022. [CrossRef]
117. IPBES 2018. Chapter 4: Status and trends of land degradation and restoration and associated changes in biodiversity and ecosystem fundtions. In: IPBES assessment report on land degradation and restoration. Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem services, Bonn, Germany. Pp. 317-426. https://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/divers19-02/010075051.pdf.
118. IPBES 2019. Global assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES Secretariat: 1753. https://ipbes.net/global-assessment. [CrossRef]
119. IPCC 2000. https://archive.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/land_use.
120. IPCC 2001. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/WGI_TAR_full_report.pdf.
121. IPCC 2013. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter06_FINAL.pdf.
122. IPCC 2018. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/TAR-03.pdf.
123. IPCC 2019. www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/08/4.-SPM_Approved_Microsite_FINAL.pdf.
124. IPCC 2022. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/4/2022/11/SRCCL_Full_Report.pdf.
125. Jackson, R.B.; Moony, H.A.; Schulze, E.D. 1997. A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents. PNAS. 94: 7362–7366. [CrossRef]
126. Jacquet, F., et al. 2022. Pesticide-free agriculture as a new paradigm for research. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 42: 8. [CrossRef]
127. Jassey, V.E.J., et al. 2022. Contribution of soil algae to the global carbon cycle. New Phytologist. 234(1); 64-76. [CrossRef]
128. Jobbágy, E.G., Jackson, R.B. 2000. The Vertical Distribution of Soil Organic Carbon and Its Relation to Climate and Vegetation. Ecological Applications. 10: 423-436. [CrossRef]
129. Jones, C. 2009. Submission to Victorian Government: Inquiry into Soil Sequestration. https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/enrc/soil_carbon_sequestration/submission/Australian_Soil_Carbon_Accreditation_Scheme_ASCAS.pdf ; https://www.amazingcarbon.com/PDF/JONES-SoilSequestrationInquiry(17Dec09).pdf.
130. Kallmeyer, J, et al. 2012. Global distribution of microbial abundance and biomass in subseafloor sediment. PNAS. 109: 16213–16216.
131. Kaplan, J.O., et al. 2010. Holocene carbon emissions as a result of anthropogenic land cover change. The Holocene. 21(5): 775–791. [CrossRef]
132. Khan, S.A., et al. 2007. The myth of nitrogen fertilization for soil carbon sequestration. J. Environ. Qual. 36: 1821–1832. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8c70/72032538c84201e43d1f78caa61dc49cb698.pdf.
133. Keeling, R.F.,Manning, A.C. 2014. Studies of Recent Changes in Atmospheric O₂ Content. In K. Turekian, & H. Holland (Eds.) Treatise on Geochemistry: 2^nd Edn. Pp. 385-404. https:/. [CrossRef]
134. Keeling, R.F., et al. 2021. Impacts of Changes in Atmospheric O₂ on Human Physiology. Is There a Basis for Concern? Front. Physiol. 12: 571137. www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2021.571137/full. [CrossRef]
135. Keenan, T.F., et al. 2021. RETRACTED ARTICLE: A constraint on historic growth in global photosynthesis due to increasing CO2. Nature. 600:253–258 (2021). https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/92603/2/Keenan%20et%20al%202021.%20Nature.%20Constraints%20on%20historic%20growth.%20Accepted%20manuscript.pdf. [CrossRef]
136. Keynes, R.D. 2001. Charles Darwin's Beagle diary. Cambridge University Press, UK. Pp. 471.
137. Koch, A., Mcbratney, A., Adams, M., Field, D., Hill, R., Crawford, J., Minasny, B., Lal, R., Abbott, L., O'Donnell, A. G., Angers, D., Baldock, J., Barbier, E., Binkley, D., Parton, W., Wall, D. H., Bird, M., Bouma, J., Chenu, C., ... Zimmermann, M. 2013. Soil Security: Solving the Global Soil Crisis. Global Policy. 4(4): 434-441. [CrossRef]
138. Kopittke, P.M., et al. 2019. Soil and the intensification of agriculture for global food security. Environ. Int., 132:105078. [CrossRef]
139. Koren, G., et al. 2019. Global 3-D simulations of the triple oxygen isotope signature Δ¹⁷O in atmospheric CO₂. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. 124. Online: https://edepot.wur.nl/498192. [CrossRef]
140. Krausmann, F. et al. 2013. Global human appropriation of net primary production doubled in the 20th century. PNAS. 110: 10324–10329. [CrossRef]
141. Kuzyakov, Y., Mason-Jones, K. 2018. Viruses in soil: Nano-scale undead drivers of microbial life, biogeochemical turnover and ecosystem functions. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2018, 127: 305–317. https://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~kuzyakov/SBB_2018_Kuzyakov_Viruses-Phages_Review.pdf. [CrossRef]
142. Lal, R. 2001 Soil degradation by erosion. Land Degradation & Development. 12: 519-539. [CrossRef]
143. Lal, R. 2004. Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food Security, Science. 304: 5677.https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4669684/mod_folder/content/0/Soil-carbon-sequestration-impacts-on-global-climate-change-and-food-securityScience.pdf. [CrossRef]
144. Lal, R. 2006. Influence of Soil Erosion on Carbon Dynamics in the Wold. Chapter 3. In: Science in Soil Science SOIL EROSION AND CARBON DYNAMICS Edited by Eric J. Roose, Rattan Lal, Christian Feller, Bernard Barthes, Bobby A. Stewart (2006). Pp 23-35. Online: https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/41645/1/9781135460556.pdf.
145. Lal, R. 2009. Sequestering atmospheric carbon dioxide. Critical Reviews in Plant Science. 28: 90-96.
146. Lal, R. et al. 2011. Recarbonization of the Biosphere. IASS, Potsdam, Springer, Heidleberg. Pp. 558.
147. Lal, R. 2019a. Carbon Cycling in Global Drylands. Curr. Clim. Change Rep. 5: 221.
148. Lal, R. 2019b. Conceptual basis of managing soil carbon: Inspired by nature and driven by science. J. Soil Water Conserv. 74(2): 29A-34A. [CrossRef]
149. Lal, R. 2020. Managing Soils for Resolving the Conflict Between Agriculture and Nature: The Hard Talk. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2020, 71(1): 1–9. [CrossRef]
150. Lal, R. 2020. Soil Erosion and Gaseous Emissions. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10: 2784. [CrossRef]
151. Lal, R. 2022. Fate of Soil Carbon Transported by Erosional Processes. Appl. Sci. 12: 48. [CrossRef]
152. Lal, R., Pimentel, D. 2008. Soil erosion: a carbon sink or source? Science. 319: 1040–1042.
153. Laskar, A.H. et al. 2019. Triple oxygen and clumped isotope compositions of CO₂ in the middle troposphere. Earth & Space Science. 6: 1205–1219. [CrossRef]
154. Larsen, B.B., Miller, E.C., Rhodes, M.K., Wiens, J.J. 2017. Inordinate fondness multiplied and redistributed: The number of species on earth and the new pie of life. Quarterly Review of Biology. 92(3): 229-265. http://wienslab.com/Publications_files/Larsen_et_al_QRB_2017.pdf. [CrossRef]
155. Lee, K.E. 1985. Earthworms their Ecology and Relationships with Soils and Land Use. Academic Press, Sydney.
156. Lembrechts, J.J., et al. 2021. Global maps of soil temperature. Global Change Biology. 28: 3110–3144. [CrossRef]
157. Lennon J.T., Locey K.J. 2020. More support for Earth's massive microbiome. Biol Direct. 15(1): 5. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
158. Li Q., Yu P., Li G., Zhou D., Chen X. 2014. Overlooking Soil Erosion Induces Underestimation of the Soil C Loss in Degraded Land. Quat. Int. 2014, 349: 287–290.
159. Li, P., Peng, C., Wang, M., Li, W., Zhao, P., Wang, K., Yang, Y. and Zhu, Q. 2017. Quantification of the response of global terrestrial net primary production to multifactor global change. Ecological Indicators. 76: 245–255.
160. Li, W., et al. 2018. Gross and net land cover changes in the main plant functional types derived from the annual ESA CCI land cover maps (1992–2015). Earth Syst. Sci. Data. 10: 219–234. [CrossRef]
161. Liang, M.C., Mahata, S., Laskar, A.H. et al. 2017. Oxygen isotope anomaly in tropospheric CO₂ and implications for CO₂ residence time in the atmosphere and gross primary productivity. Sci Rep. 7: 13180 (2017). [CrossRef]
162. Liao, H. et al. 2021. Herbicide Selection Promotes Antibiotic Resistance in Soil Microbiomes, Molecular Biology and Evolution. 38(6): 2337–2350. [CrossRef]
163. Locey, K.J., Lennon, J.T. 2016. Scaling laws predict global microbial diversity. PNAS. 113: 5970–5975. [CrossRef]
164. Loisel, J., et al. 2021. Expert assessment of future vulnerability of the global peatland carbon sink. Nat. Clim. Chang. 11: 70–77 (2021). https://climatehomes.unibe.ch/~joos/papers/loisel20ncc.pdf. [CrossRef]
165. Louca, S., Mazel, F., Doebeli, M., Parfrey, L.W. 2019. A census-based estimate of earth’s bacterial and archaeal diversity. PLoS Biol. 17: e3000106.
166. Lu, M., Zhou, X., Luo Y., Yang, Y., Fang, C., Chen J., Li, B. 2011. Minor stimulation of soil carbon storage by nitrogen addition: a meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 140: 234–244.
167. Luske, B, Van der Kamp, J. 2009. Carbon sequestration potential of reclaimed desert soils in Egypt . Louis Bolk Instituut & Soil & More International. Pp. 35 pages. https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/16438/1/2192.pdf.
168. Magnabosco, C., Lin, L.-H., Dong, H., Bomberg, M., Ghiorse, W., Stan-Lotter, H., … Onstott, T. C. 2018. The biomass and biodiversity of the continental subsurface. Nat. Geosc. 11: 707-717. [CrossRef]
169. Manning, A.C., Keeling, R.F. 2006. Global oceanic and land biotic carbon sinks from the Scripps atmospheric oxygen flask sampling network. Tellus. 58B: 95-116. [CrossRef]
170. Matthews, E. 1997. Global litter production, pools, and turnover times: Estimates from measurement data and regression models, J. Geophys. Res. 102: 18771–18800. [CrossRef]
171. Martinez, D.A., Loening, U.E., Graham, M.C., Gathorne-Hardy, A. 2021. When the Medicine Feeds the Problem; Do Nitrogen Fertilisers and Pesticides Enhance the Nutritional Quality of Crops for Their Pests and Pathogens? Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 5: 701310. [CrossRef]
172. Mayer, A.B., Trenchard, L., Rayns, F. 2022. Historical changes in the mineral content of fruit and vegetables in the UK from 1940 to 2019: a concern for human nutrition and agriculture. Int J Food Sci Nutr.;73(3): 315-326. [CrossRef]
173. McColl, H.P.,de Lautour, M.L. 1978. Earthworms and topsoil mining at Judgeford, New Zealand. Soil news. 27: 148-152.
174. McMahon, S., Parnell, J. 2013. Weighing the deep continental biosphere. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. 87(1): 113–120. [CrossRef]
175. Meng, C. et al 2019. Global soil acidification impacts on belowground processes. Environ. Res. Lett. 14: 074003. [CrossRef]
176. Mohr, C. 2021. When science and politics come together: From depletion to recovery of the stratospheric ozone hole : This article belongs to Ambio's 50th Anniversary Collection. Theme: Ozone Layer. Ambio. 50(1): 31-34. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680069/. [CrossRef]
177. Mokany, K, Raison, R.J., Prokushkin, A. 2005. Critical analysis of root: Shoot ratios in terrestrial biomes. Glob. Chang. Biol. 12: 84–96. http://reddcr.go.cr/sites/default/files/centro-de-documentacion/mokany_et_al._2006_-_critical_analysis_root_to_shoot_ratios.pdf.
178. Mollison, B.C. 1988. Permaculture: A Designers’ Manual. Tagari Publications, Tyalgum. Pp. 576.
179. Monger, H.C. et al. 2015. Sequestration of inorganic carbon in soil and groundwater. Geology. 43 (5): 375–378. [CrossRef]
180. Morris, H.M. 1922. The insect and other invertebrate fauna of arable land at Rothamsted. Ann. Appl. Biol. 9: 282–305.
181. Morris, H.M. 1927. The insect and other invertebrate fauna of arable land at Rothamsted. Part II. Ann. Appl. Biol. 14: 442–464.
182. Mulvaney, R.L., Khan, S.A., Ellsworth, T.R.. 2009. Synthetic nitrogen fertilizers deplete soil nitrogen: a global dilemma for sustainable cereal production. J Environ Qual. 38(6): 2295-314. [CrossRef]
183. Mushegian, A.R. 2020. Are There 10³¹ Virus Particles on Earth, or More, or Fewer? J Bacteriol. 2020. 202(9):e00052-20. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7148134/. [CrossRef]
184. Myers, N. 1993. Gaia: an atlas of planet management. Garden City (NY): Anchor/Doubleday.
185. Myers, J.P., Antoniou, M.N., Blumberg, B. et al. 2016. Concerns over use of glyphosate-based herbicides and risks associated with exposures: a consensus statement. Environ Health. 15: 19 (2016). [CrossRef]
186. Naorem, A., Jayaraman, S., Dalal, R.C., Patra, A., Rao, C.S., Lal, R. 2022. Soil Inorganic Carbon as a Potential Sink in Carbon Storage in Dryland Soils—A Review. Agriculture. 12: 1256. [CrossRef]
187. Natali, S.M. et al. 2021. Permafrost carbon feedbacks threaten global climate goals. PNAS. 118: e2100163188. [CrossRef]
188. Nicolas, V., Oestreicher, N., Vélot, C. 2016. Multiple effects of a commercial Roundup® formulation on the soil filamentous fungus Aspergillus nidulans at low doses: evidence of an unexpected impact on energetic metabolism. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 23: 14393–14404 (2016). [CrossRef]
189. Nichols, J.E., Peteet, D.M. 2019. Rapid expansion of northern peatlands and doubled estimate of carbon storage. Nat. Geosci. 12: 917–921 (2019). [CrossRef]
190. Nichols, J.E., Peteet, D.M. 2021. “J. E. Nichols and D. M. Peteet reply”. Nat. Geosci. 14: 470–472. [CrossRef]
191. Oertel, G., Matschullat, J., Zimmermann, F., Erasmi, S. 2016. Greenhouse gas emissions from soils—A review. Geochemistry. 76: 327–352. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/82396671.pdf.
192. Parish, F., Sirin, A., Charman, D., Joosten, H., Minayeva, T., Silvius, M. and Stringer, L. (Eds.) 2008. Assessment on Peatlands, Biodiversity and Climate Change: Main Report. Global Environment Centre, Kuala Lumpur and Wetlands International, Wageningen. Available at: http://www.imcg.net/media/download_gallery/books/assessment_peatland.pdf.
193. Peace, A.H., et al. 2020. Effect of aerosol radiative forcing uncertainty on projected exceedance year of a 1.5 °C global temperature rise. Environ. Res. Lett. 15: 0940a6. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aba20c/pdf. [CrossRef]
194. Peixoto, F. 2005. Comparative effects of the Roundup and glyphosate on mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. Chemosphere. 61(8): 1115–22.
195. Persson, L., et al. 2022. Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities. Environmental Science & Technology. 56(3): 1510-1521. [CrossRef]
196. Piao, S, et al., 2019. Interannual variation of terrestrial carbon cycle: Issues and perspectives. Global. Change Biology. 26: 300-318. [CrossRef]
197. Piao, S., et al. 2020. Characteristics, drivers and feedbacks of global greening. Nat Rev Earth Environ. 1: 14–27 (2020). [CrossRef]
198. Pimentel, D.; Burgess, M. 2013. Soil erosion threatens food production. Agriculture. 3: 443–463.
199. Pimentel, D., Kounang, N. 1998. Ecology of Soil Erosion in Ecosystems. Ecosystems. 1: 416–426. https://www.doc-developpement-durable.org/file/eau/lutte-contre-erosion_protection-sols/Ecology%20of%20Soil%20Erosion.pdf. [CrossRef]
200. Pimentel, D., et al. 1995. Environmental and economic costs of soil erosion and conservation benefits., Science. 267(5201): 1117–1123. [CrossRef]
201. Prideaux, G.J., Warburton, N.M. 2008. A New Pleistocene Tree-Kangaroo (Diprotodontia: Macropodidae) From The Nullarbor Plain Of South-Central Australia. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 28(2): 463-478. [CrossRef]
202. Prideaux, G.J., Warburton, N.M. 2009. Bohra nullarbora sp. nov., a second tree-kangaroo (Marsupialia: Macropodidae) from the Pleistocene of the Nullarbor Plain, Western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum. 25: 165-179. https://jva.journals.ekb.eg/article_67223_6d30039a619f3d0aafd707f9580b76df.pdf.
203. Pribyl, D.W. 2010. A critical review of the conventional SOC to SOM conversion factor. Geoderma. 156: 75–83.
204. Qi, Y., Wei, W., Chen, C., Chen, L. 2019. Plant root-shoot biomass allocation over diverse biomes: A global synthesis. Global Ecology and Conservation: e00606. [CrossRef]
205. Raich, J.W.et al. 2002. Interannual variability in global soil respiration, 1980-94. Glob Chang Biol. 8:800–812.
206. Raupach, M.R., Canadell, J.G. 2010. Carbon and the Anthropocene. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 2(4): 210-218. https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/global/pdf/Raupach_2010_Carbon%20and%20the%20Anthropocene.COSUST.pdf. [CrossRef]
207. Régnier, C., Achaz, G., Lambert, A., Cowie, R.H., Bouchet, P., Fontaine, B. 2015. Mass extinction in poorly known taxa. PNAS. 112(25): 7761–7766. [CrossRef]
208. Reiners, W.A. 1973. Terrestrial detritus and the carbon cycle. Brookhaven Symp Biol. 30: 303-327. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/18361979_Terrestrial_detritus_and_the_carbon_cycle.
209. Revelle R., Suess, H.E. 1957. Carbon Dioxide Exchange Between Atmosphere and Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO₂ during the Past Decades. Tellus. 9(1): 18-27. [CrossRef]
210. Ricciardi, V., et al. 2018. How much of the world's food do smallholders produce?. Glob. Fd Sec. 17: 64–72. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912417301293.
211. Ricciardi, V., Mehrabi, Z., Wittman, H. et al. 2021. Higher yields and more biodiversity on smaller farms. Nat Sustain. 4: 651–657 (2021). [CrossRef]
212. Riley, G.A. 1944. The carbon metabolism and photosynthetic efficiency of the earth as a whole. American Scientist. 32: 129–34.
213. Robinson, D. 2004. Scaling the depths: Below-ground allocation in plants, forests and biomes. Funct. Ecol. 18: 290–295. [CrossRef]
214. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature. 461: 472–475 (2009). [CrossRef]
215. Rodin L.E., Bazilevich N.I., Rozov N.N. 1975. Productivity of the world’s main ecosystems. In D. E. Reichle, J. F. Franklin, and D. W. Goodall (Eds.): Productivity of World Ecosystems. Pp. 13–26. Washington, D.C.: Natl. Acad. Sci. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/20114/chapter/3.
216. Rossel, R.A.V. et al. 2015. The Australian three-dimensional soil grid: Australia’s contribution to the GlobalSoilMap project. Soil research. 53: 845-864. [CrossRef]
217. Raoult, D. et al. 2021. Role of glyphosate in the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria?, Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 76(7): 1655–1657. [CrossRef]
218. Roxburgh, S., et al. 2019. A revised above-ground maximum biomass layer for the Australian continent. Forest Ecology and Management. 432: 264–275. https://soe.dcceew.gov.au/views/reference/45891.
219. Ruddiman, W., 2003. The Anthropogenic Greenhouse Era began thousands of years ago. Climate Change. 61: 261–293. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023/B:CLIM.0000004577.17928.fa.pdf.
220. Ruddiman, W.F. et al., 2016: Late Holocene climate: Natural or anthropogenic? Reviews of Geophysics, 54(1), 93–118. [CrossRef]
221. Running, S.W. et al. 2004. A Continuous Satellite-Derived Measure of Global Terrestrial Primary Production, BioScience. 54(6): 547–560. [CrossRef]
222. Sanderman, J., Hengl, T., Fiske, G. J. 2017. Soil carbon debt of 12,000 years of human land use. PNAS. 114: 9575-9580 (2017). [CrossRef]
223. Sanderman, J., Hengl, T., Fiske, G.J. 2018. Correction for Sanderman et al., Soil carbon debt of 12,000 years of human land use. PNAS. 115(7): E1700. [CrossRef]
224. Santos, A.; Flores, M. 1995. Effects of glyphosate on nitrogen fixation of free-living heterotrophic bacteria. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 20: 349–352.
225. Sanz-Jiménez, A., Malvar, O., Ruz, J.J. et al. 2022. High-throughput determination of dry mass of single bacterial cells by ultrathin membrane resonators. Commun Biol 5: 1227. [CrossRef]
226. Schnitzer, M., Khan, S.U. 1978. Soil Organic Matter. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
227. Schultheiss, P., et al. 2022. The abundance, biomass, and distribution of ants on Earth. PNAS. 119: e2201550119.
228. Scholes, M., Andreae, M.O. 2000. Biogenic and Pyrogenic Emissions from Africa and Their Impact on the Global Atmosphere. AMBIO. 29(1): 20-23. http://the-eis.com/elibrary/sites/default/files/downloads/literature/Wildland%20fire%20emmissions%20impact%20global%20atmosphere_Scholes.pdf. [CrossRef]
229. Schuur, E.A.G., et al. 2015. Climate change and the permafrost carbon feedback. Nature. 520: 171-179. [CrossRef]
230. Schurr, E.A.G., et al. 2022. Permafrost and Climate Change: Carbon Cycle Feedbacks From the Warming Arctic. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 47: 343-371. Online: https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1899837. [CrossRef]
231. Scurlock, J.M.O., Olson, R.J. 2002. Terrestrial Net Primary Productivity - A brief history and a new worldwide database. Environmental Reviews. 10:91-109. [CrossRef]
232. Scurlock J.M.O., Johnson K., Olson R.J. 2002. Estimating net primary productivity from grassland biomass dynamics measurements. Global Change Biology. 8: 736–753. [CrossRef]
233. Sha, L., et al. 2021. Soil carbon flux research in the asian region: Review and future perspectives. Journal of Agricultural Meteorology. 77(1): 24-51. www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/agrmet/77/1/77_D-20-00013/_pdf/-char/en. [CrossRef]
234. Shelef, E., et al. 2017. Large uncertainty in permafrost carbon stocks due to hillslope soil deposits. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44: 6134–6144. [CrossRef]
235. Shi, Z., et al. 2020. The age distribution of global soil carbon inferred from radiocarbon measurements. Nat. Geosci. 13: 555–559 (2020). [CrossRef]
236. Siegenthaler, U., Sarmiento, J. 1993. Atmospheric carbon dioxide and the ocean. Nature. 365: 119–125 (1993). Online: https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/bibliography/related_files/us9301.pdf. [CrossRef]
237. Singh, S., Kumar, V., Gill, J.P.K., et al. 2020. Herbicide Glyphosate: Toxicity and Microbial Degradation. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 17(20): 7519. [CrossRef]
238. Springett, J.A. 1967. An ecological study of moorland Enchytraeidae, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses. Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/8869/.
239. Springmann, M., Clark, M., Mason-D’Croz, D. et al. 2018. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature. 562: 519–525 (2018). [CrossRef]
240. Standen, V. 1984. Production and diversity of enchytraeids, earthworms and plants in fertilized hay meadow plots. J. Appl. Ecol. 21: 293-312.
241. Stavrakou, T., Müller, J.F., Peeters, J. et al. 2012. Satellite evidence for a large source of formic acid from boreal and tropical forests. Nature Geosci. 5: 26–30 (2012). [CrossRef]
242. Strilbyska OM, et al. 2022. The effects of low-toxic herbicide Roundup and glyphosate on mitochondria. EXCLI J. 21: 183-196. [CrossRef]
243. Strzelecki, P.E. 1845. Physical description of New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land: accompanied by a geological map, sections and diagrams, and figures of the organic remains. Longman, Brown, Green, & Longmans, London. https://archive.org/details/PhysicalDescriptionOfNewSouthWalesAndVanDiemensLand/page/n425.
244. Sun, G.-X., et al. 2020. The co-evolution of life and organics on earth: Expansions of energy harnessing. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology. 51(6): 603–625. [CrossRef]
245. Thomas, D. 2007. The Mineral Depletion of Foods Available to US as A Nation (1940–2002) – A Review of the 6th Edition of McCance and Widdowson. Nutrition and Health. 19(1-2): 21-55. [CrossRef]
246. Tian, D., Niu, S. 2015. A global analysis of soil acidification caused by nitrogen addition. Environ. Res. Lett. 10: 024019. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/2/024019/pdf. [CrossRef]
247. Tibbett, M., Fraser, T.D., Duddigan, S. 2020. Identifying potential threats to soil biodiversity. PeerJ.8:e9271. [CrossRef]
248. Trenberth, K.E., Smith, L., Qian, T., Dai, A., Fasullo, J. 2007. Estimates of the global water budget and its annual cycle using observational and model data. Journal of Hydrometeorology. 8: 758–769. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/hydr/8/4/jhm600_1.xml.
249. Trubl, G., et al. 2018. Soil viruses are underexplored players in ecosystem carbon processing. mSystems. 3: e00076-18. [CrossRef]
250. Tuma, J., Eggleton, P. Fayle, T.M. 2020. Ant-termite interactions: an important but under-explored ecological linkage. Biological Reviews. 95: 555–572. http://tomfayle.com/Papers/Tuma%20et%20al%20(2020).pdf. [CrossRef]
251. UNCCD 2022. UN Convention to Combat Desertification GLO2 Report. Online:- https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/2022-04/UNCCD_GLO2_low-res_2.pdf.
252. UNEP 2002. World Atlas of Biodiversity. Cambridge: UK. https://archive.org/details/worldatlasofbiod02groo/page/10/mode/1up?view=theater.
253. Ussiri, D.A., Lal, R. 2017. The Modern Carbon Cycle. In: Carbon Sequestration for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation. Springer, Cham. [CrossRef]
254. Van Bruggen, A.H.C., He, M.M., Shin, K., Mai, V., Jeong, K.C., Finckh, M.R., Morris, J.G. 2018. Environmental and health effects of the herbicide glyphosate. Science of The Total Environment. 616-617: 255–268. [CrossRef]
255. van Bruggen, A.H.C., Finckh, M.R., He, M., Ritsema, C.J., Harkes, P., Knuth, D., Geissen, V. 2021. Indirect Effects of the Herbicide Glyphosate on Plant, Animal and Human Health Through its Effects on Microbial Communities. Front. Environ. Sci. 9: 763917. [CrossRef]
256. van den Hoogen, J., et al. 2019. Soil nematode abundance and functional group composition at a global scale. Nature. 572: 194–198. [CrossRef]
257. Van Oost K, et al. 2007. The impact of agricultural soil erosion on the global carbon cycle. Science. 318: 626–629. http://geomorphology.sese.asu.edu/Papers/VanOost_2009_Science.pdf.
258. Van Oost, K., et al. 2012. Legacy of human-induced C erosion and burial on soil-atmosphere C exchange. PNAS. 109(47): 19492-7. https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/8/69/2011/bg-8-69-2011.pdf. [CrossRef]
259. Vázquez, M.B. Moreno, M.V. Amodeo M.R. et al. 2021. Effects of glyphosate on soil fungal communities: A field study. Revista Argentina de Microbiología. 53(4): 349-358. [CrossRef]
260. Vermeij, G., Grosberg, R.K. 2010. The Great Divergence: When Did Diversity on Land Exceed That in the Sea? Integrative and Comparative Biology, 50(4): 675–682. [CrossRef]
261. Walling, D.E. 2008. The changing sediment loads of the world’s rivers. Ann. Warsaw Univ. Life Sci. SGGW L. Reclam39: 3–20.
262. Wang, Z., Van Oost, K. 2019. Modeling global anthropogenic erosion in the Holocene. The Holocene. 29(3): 367–379. Online: https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal%3A225291/datastream/PDF_01/view. [CrossRef]
263. Wang, M., Guo, X., Zhang, S. et al. 2022. Global soil profiles indicate depth-dependent soil carbon losses under a warmer climate. Nat Commun. 13: 5514 (2022). [CrossRef]
264. Wang, W., Zhong, Z., Wang, Q. et al. 2017. Glomalin contributed more to carbon, nutrients in deeper soils, and differently associated with climates and soil properties in vertical profiles. Sci Rep. 7: 13003 (2017). [CrossRef]
265. Warner, D.L., Blond-Lamberty, B., et al., 2019. Spatial predictions and associated uncertainty of annual soil respiration at the global scale. Global Biogeochemical Cycles. 33: 1733-1745. [CrossRef]
266. Watson, K. 2015. Home Growing Produces Ten Times the Food of Arable Farms. https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/home-growing-produces-ten-times-the-food-of-arable-farms.
267. Watson, L. 2010. Portugal gives green light to pasture carbon farming as a recognised offset. Australian Farm Journal. January 2010: 44-47.
268. Welp, L., Keeling, R., Meijer, H. et al. 2011. Interannual variability in the oxygen isotopes of atmospheric CO2 driven by El Niño. Nature. 477: 579–582 (2011). [CrossRef]
269. Whitman, W.B., Coleman, D.C., Wiebe, W.J., 1998. Prokaryotes: the unseen majority. PNAS. 95: 6578–6583. [CrossRef]
270. Williamson, K.E., Fuhrmann, J.J., Wommack, K.E., Radosevich, M. 2017. Viruses in Soil Ecosystems: An Unknown Quantity Within an Unexplored Territory. Annu. Rev. Virol. 4: 201–219. [CrossRef]
271. Wilson, E.O. 1992. The diversity of life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
272. Winkler, A.J., et al. 2021a. Slowdown of the greening trend in natural vegetation with further rise in atmospheric CO₂. Biogeosciences. 18:4985–5010. [CrossRef]
273. Winkler, K., Fuchs, R., et al. 2021b. Global land use changes are four times greater than previously estimated. Nat Commun. 12: 2501 (2021). [CrossRef]
274. Woodwell, G.M., Whittake, R.H., Reiners, W.A., Likens, G.E., Delwiche, C.C., Botkin, D.B. 1978. The biota and the world carbon budget. Science. 199(4325): 141-146. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/William-Reiners/publication/6027359_The_Biota_and_the_World_Carbon_Budget/links/5685ffc008ae051f9af1eef5/The-Biota-and-the-World-Carbon-Budget.pdf. [CrossRef]
275. Wuepper, D., Borrelli, P., Panagos, P., Lauber, T., Crowther, T., Thomas, A., Robinson, D.A. 2021. A ‘debt’ based approach to land degradation as an indicator of global change. Global Change Biology. 27: 5407–5410. [CrossRef]
276. Yang, Y., et al. 2015. Long-term changesin soil pH across major forest ecosystems in China. Geophys. Res. Lett. 42: 933–940. [CrossRef]
277. Yeomans, P.A. 1954. The Keyline Plan. Online:https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/21106239.
278. Zamanian, K. et al. 2021. Soil carbonates: the unaccounted, irrecoverable carbon source. Geoderma, 384 (2021): 114817. [CrossRef]
279. Zhan, S., et al. 2019. A global assessment of terrestrial evapotranspiration increase due to surface water area change. Earth's Future. 7: 266–282. [CrossRef]
280. Zhang, D., Shen, J., Zhang, F. et al. 2017. Carbon footprint of grain production in China. Sci Rep. 7: 4126 (2017). [CrossRef]
281. Zhao, J., Jin, L., Wu, D., et al. 2022. Global airborne bacterial community-interactions with Earth's microbiomes and anthropogenic activities. PNAS. 119(42):e2204465119. [CrossRef]
282. Zhao, Z., et al. 2017. Model prediction of biome-specific global soil respiration from 1960 to 2012. Earth's Future. 5(7): 715–729. [CrossRef]
283. Zheng, B. Ciais, P. Chevallier, F. Chuvieco, E. Chen, Y. Yang, H. 2021. Increasing forest fire emissions despite the decline in global burned area. Sci. Adv. 7: eabh2646.
284. Zhu, Z., Piao, S., et al. 2016. Greening of the Earth and its drivers. Nature Clim Change. 6: 791–795 (2016). https://sites.bu.edu/cliveg/files/2016/04/zhu-greening-earth-ncc-2016.pdf. [CrossRef]