↓ Skip to main content

Radiocarbon constraints imply reduced carbon uptake by soils during the 21st century

Overview of attention for article published in Science, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
16 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
twitter
93 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
164 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
350 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Radiocarbon constraints imply reduced carbon uptake by soils during the 21st century
Published in
Science, September 2016
DOI 10.1126/science.aad4273
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yujie He, Susan E Trumbore, Margaret S Torn, Jennifer W Harden, Lydia J S Vaughn, Steven D Allison, James T Randerson

Abstract

Soil is the largest terrestrial carbon reservoir and may influence the sign and magnitude of carbon cycle-climate feedbacks. Many Earth system models (ESMs) estimate a significant soil carbon sink by 2100, yet the underlying carbon dynamics determining this response have not been systematically tested against observations. We used (14)C data from 157 globally distributed soil profiles sampled to 1-meter depth to show that ESMs underestimated the mean age of soil carbon by a factor of more than six (430 ± 50 years versus 3100 ± 1800 years). Consequently, ESMs overestimated the carbon sequestration potential of soils by a factor of nearly two (40 ± 27%). These inconsistencies suggest that ESMs must better represent carbon stabilization processes and the turnover time of slow and passive reservoirs when simulating future atmospheric carbon dioxide dynamics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 93 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 350 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
France 3 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 337 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 95 27%
Researcher 83 24%
Student > Master 35 10%
Student > Bachelor 23 7%
Other 20 6%
Other 50 14%
Unknown 44 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 98 28%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 79 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 61 17%
Engineering 9 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 1%
Other 25 7%
Unknown 73 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 210. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2024.
All research outputs
#188,141
of 25,709,917 outputs
Outputs from Science
#5,486
of 83,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,662
of 329,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#95
of 1,111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,709,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,252 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 65.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,740 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.