<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">SOIL</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>SOIL</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">SOIL</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">SOIL</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2199-398X</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/soil-5-223-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Evaluating the carbon sequestration potential of volcanic soils in southern Iceland after birch afforestation</article-title><alt-title>Evaluating the carbon sequestration potential of volcanic soils</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Evaluating the carbon sequestration potential of volcanic soils}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{M. Hunziker et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Hunziker</surname><given-names>Matthias</given-names></name>
          <email>matthew_hunziker@gmx.ch</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Arnalds</surname><given-names>Olafur</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Kuhn</surname><given-names>Nikolaus J.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Environmental Sciences, Physical Geography and Environmental Change,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Klingelbergstrasse 27, 4056 Basel, Switzerland</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Agricultural University of Iceland, Hvanneyri, Iceland</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Matthias Hunziker (matthew_hunziker@gmx.ch)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>6</day><month>August</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>5</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>223</fpage><lpage>238</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>13</day><month>July</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>6</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>2</day><month>June</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>7</day><month>June</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2019 Matthias Hunziker et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2019</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019.html">This article is available from https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e106">Afforestation is a strategy to sequester atmospheric
carbon in the terrestrial system and to enhance ecosystem services.
Iceland's large areas of formerly vegetated and now degraded ecosystems
therefore have a high potential to act as carbon sinks. Consequently, the
ecological restoration of these landscape systems is part of climate
mitigation programmes supported by the Icelandic government. The aim of this
study was to explore the change in the soil organic carbon (SOC) pools and
to estimate the SOC sequestration potential during the re-establishment of
birch forest on severely degraded land. Differently aged afforested mountain
birch sites (15, 20, 25 and 50 years) were compared to sites of severely
degraded land, naturally growing remnants of mountain birch woodland and
grasslands which were re-vegetated using fertilizer and grass seeds 50 years
ago. The soil was sampled to estimate the SOC stocks and for physical
fractionation to characterize the quality of the SOC. The results of our
study show that the severely degraded soils can potentially sequester an
additional 20 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (0–30 cm) to reach the SOC stock of naturally
growing birch woodlands. After 50 years of birch growth, the SOC stock is
significantly lower than that of a naturally growing birch woodland,
suggesting that afforested stands could sequester additional SOC beyond 50
years of growth. The SOC fractionation revealed that at all the tested sites
most of the carbon was stored in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fraction.
However, after 50 years of birch growth on severely degraded soils the
particulate organic matter (POM) fraction was significantly enriched most
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> t POM-C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the top 30 cm. The study also found a doubling
of the dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentration after 50 years of birch
growth. Therefore and due to the absence of any increase in the tested
mineral-associated SOC fractions, we assume that the afforestation process
evokes a carbon deposition in the labile SOC pools. Consequently, parts of
this plant-derived, labile SOC may be partly released into the atmosphere
during the process of stabilization with the mineral soil phases in the
future. Our results are limited in their scope since the selected sites do
not fully reflect the heterogeneity of landscape evolution and the range of
soil degradation conditions. As an alternative, we suggest using repeated
plot measurements instead of space-for-time substitution approaches for
testing C changes in severely degraded volcanic soils. Our findings clearly
show that detailed measurements on the SOC quality are needed to estimate
the SOC sequestration potential of restoration activities on severely
degraded volcanic soils, rather than only measuring SOC concentration and
SOC stocks.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<?pagebreak page224?><sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S1.SS1">
  <label>1.1</label><title>Iceland's soil carbon sequestration potential by land restoration</title>
      <p id="d1e177">The Icelandic government approved activities including revegetation and
afforestation in the 1990s to increase the terrestrial carbon sequestration
from the atmosphere (Sigurdsson and Snorrason, 2000;
Aradottir and Arnalds, 2001; Ministry for the Environment, 2007). In effect,
land reclamation has been carried out for over 100 years in order to halt
land degradation and soil erosion events (Crofts, 2011) caused by
human activities since the island's settlement about 1100 years ago
(Aradottir and Arnalds, 2001), as well as natural stress
factors such as volcanic eruptions or the harsh climate.</p>
      <p id="d1e180">Woodlands and species-rich heathlands form the undisturbed ecosystem type
on drylands at lower elevation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">400</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m a.s.l.)
(Aradòttir et al., 1992). Fertile Brown Andosol is the
typical soil type of these ecosystems and it is found across 13 360 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Óskarsson et al., 2004). Andosols have a tendency to
accumulate higher quantities of SOC than other soil types, due to the cover
of soil organic carbon (SOC) enriched surface horizons by volcanic ejecta
and the andic properties resulting from the formation of organo-mineral
complexes (Dahlgren
et al., 2004; McDaniel et al., 2012; Delmelle et al., 2015; Arnalds, 2015a).
Hence,  the average SOC stock of the
Brown Andosols is estimated at 227 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Óskarsson et al., 2004). During the last centuries,
about 43 000 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of Iceland (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) has been affected
by severe extreme soil erosion (Arnalds et
al., 2016). Consequently, about 120–500 Mt of SOC has been lost in the past (Óskarsson et al., 2004). Presently, approximately 45 000 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) of the land area is covered by sparsely
vegetated areas which range to barren deserts, in addition to disturbed
areas with reduced carbon levels (Arnalds, 2015b). These
landscapes are characterized by limited vegetation cover on vitric soil
types (Arnalds et al., 2013) with low
biomass production and low SOC stocks (Óskarsson et al.,
2004). Vitrisols (Vitric Andosols and Leptosols), which are the typical soil
types of the deserts, contain less than 45 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on average
(Óskarsson et al., 2004).</p>
      <p id="d1e265">Based on these differences, the potential of the severely degraded soils to
sequester high amounts of carbon has been demonstrated (Arnalds et al.,
2000; Ágústsdóttir, 2004). An important aspect of reclaiming
degraded land is the recovery of ecosystem services including rehabilitation
of farm land, protection against soil erosion or public recreation
(Aradóttir et al., 2013). For example, the large-scale
project called <italic>Hekluskógar</italic> was established in southern Iceland in 2007 with the aim of
restoring resilient birch woodlands on about 900 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the vicinity of
Mount Hekla in order to reduce the effect of volcanic hazards
(Aradóttir, 2007).</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S1.SS2">
  <label>1.2</label><title>Assessment of SOC change in Iceland</title>
      <p id="d1e289">The Icelandic carbon stocks have been reported in a national inventory for
the UNFCCC (Hellsing et al., 2016). The Icelandic National
Inventory Report uses a country-specific soil carbon sequestration factor of
0.51 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for soils during the conversion of severely
degraded land (“Other Land”) to forest land or grassland
(Hellsing et al., 2016). This is based on Icelandic field studies
which found an increase in the SOC stock and therefore assigned a positive
soil carbon sequestration effect to the reclamation (Aradóttir
et al., 2000; Snorrason et al., 2002; Ritter, 2007; Bjarnadottir, 2009;
Kolka-Jónsson, 2011; Arnalds et al., 2013). In addition, the Icelandic
Soil Conservation Service continuously reviews this value by ongoing C
sequestration monitoring (Hellsing et al., 2016). The
establishment of a vegetation community passes through different development
stages; consequently, the sequestration rate, as a function of SOC change
over time, is not linear until the new SOC stock equilibrium is reached
(Smith et al., 1997; Six et al., 2002; Stewart et al., 2007). Hence, the development of the SOC stock
and the SOC sequestration rates need to be recorded with a high temporal
resolution instead of using the data of only two inventories (e.g. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or initial and developed vegetation type).</p>
      <p id="d1e338">Monitoring the total C stock is not sufficient to characterize the overall
potential for removal of atmospheric C by afforestation since soil organic
matter (SOM) consists of a heterogeneous mixture with respect its physical
protection and chemical structure (Schmidt et al., 2011).
This leads to dynamic patterns of SOC stocks, composition of SOC,
decomposability and turnover rates of SOC during land-use changes (von
Lützow et al., 2008; Poeplau and Don, 2013). Recent studies show that
the labile SOC pool, which is composed mainly of particulate organic matter
(POM), increases simultaneously with the total SOC in the mineral soil
during the establishment of vegetation systems with a higher net primary
production rate (Guidi
et al., 2014; Gabarrón-Galeote et al., 2015; Trigalet et al., 2016;
Hunziker et al., 2017). To date, however, soil studies in Iceland have not
focused on such changes in SOC fractions during the establishment of woody
vegetation systems.</p>
      <p id="d1e341">In Iceland, the conversion of vegetation cover is currently driven by
revegetation of severely degraded land (Aradóttir et al., 2000;
Arnalds et al., 2013), natural succession following glacier retreat
(Vilmundardóttir et al.,
2015) and afforestation of different types of tree species on heathland
(Ritter, 2007), as well as on grazed land
(Snorrason et al., 2002). However, there is limited
information concerning carbon sequestration in soils associated with the
afforestation of severely degraded landscapes by the only native forest tree
species, <italic>Betula pubescens</italic> Ehrh. ssp. <italic>czerepanovii</italic>.</p>
      <p id="d1e350">The present study was part of the <italic>CarbBirch</italic> project (Halldórsson
et al., 2011) which was launched in 2008 and involved two of the five
<italic>CarbBirch</italic> study areas. The main<?pagebreak page225?> goal of <italic>CarbBirch</italic> was to study the ecological impact of the
restoration activities in <italic>Hekluskógar</italic>. The present study aims at characterizing the
long-term carbon sequestration potential of afforestation efforts with
mountain birch on severely degraded soils. For this, we compared the SOC
patterns in mountain birch stands of different ages to those of severely
degraded and barren areas, reclaimed grasslands and natural old growth birch
woodlands. The article first introduces the commonly used SOC parameters, SOC
concentration and the SOC stocks (0–30 cm), and then discusses the vertical
distribution of SOC, SOC quality and the interaction between the SOC and the
volcanic clay minerals.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Material and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Study approach</title>
      <p id="d1e381">The study area is in the vicinity of the Mount Hekla volcano
(Fig. 1a). Due to the unsustainable land use
and volcanic activity, most of this area has been affected by erosion. The
resulting landscape is characterized by sandy deserts
(Arnalds et al., 2016), which often leads to
the formation of important sandstorms
(Crofts, 2011; Arnalds et al., 2016), and,
in consequence, reclamation activities have been carried out over the last
decades (Halldórsson et al., 2011). The soil parent
material generally consists of lava field material, glacial till, aeolian
deposits or buried soil materials (Dugmore et al., 2009; Thorarinsdottir
and Arnalds, 2012).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e386">The topological map (equidistance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 100 m) showing the study
area between the Ytri-Rangá River, Mount Burfell, Mount Hekla and
Gunnarsholt (crossed cycle) in the south of Iceland <bold>(a)</bold>. The locations of
the naturally growing birch woodland (<bold>b</bold>; asterisks) and the afforested (<bold>c</bold>;
B15: circles; B20: triangles; B25: pentagons; B50: diamonds) and degraded
(crosses) as well as revegetated (stars) test sites <bold>(d)</bold> are shown in more
detail. The sampling scheme illustrates the age and vegetation
characteristics of the different study sites and the applied soil sampling
setup <bold>(e)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e418">The afforested woodland area “<italic>Gunnlaugsskógur</italic>” is located approximately 1 km north of the
Icelandic Soil Conservation Service Headquarters at Gunnarsholt
(Fig. 1c). In 1926, the eroded area was
excluded from sheep grazing by fencing. After the stabilization of the
ground surface and the fertilization of the soil, birch was seeded on small
plots in 1939 and 1945. In 1945, birch seedlings resulting from the activity
in 1939 were transplanted on a nearby lava field, although most of the
present birch area at <italic>Gunnlaugsskógur</italic> has naturally regenerated through seed production of
the previously planted birches  (Aradóttir, 1991;
Aradottir and Arnalds, 2001). The age of the afforested birch sites was
determined by dendrochronology as part of the <italic>CarbBirch</italic> project. The mean ages of the
sampled afforested birch plots were 15, 20, 25, and 50 years (Birch15,
Birch20, Birch25, and Birch50), respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e431">In addition to the birch plots, soil samples were taken from three severely
degraded sites with barren surfaces and from three revegetated sites with
grass vegetation north of <italic>Gunnlaugsskógur</italic> (Fig. 1d). In the
present study, the severely degraded and eroded sites (Barren Land)
represent the stage before any restoration activity has begun. The Barren
Land sites were selected at 4 km distance from <italic>Gunnlaugsskógur</italic>, as barren areas were not
available near the afforested birch sites, and it was assumed that the
geologic and pedologic characteristics were comparable to those at the birch
sites. The grassland sites (Grass50) were located next to the severely
degraded sites; these were protected against sheep grazing by fencing and
then revegetated by using fertilizers and grass seeds about 50 years ago and
at present are not used for hay production. The topsoil at these sites has
been found to be degraded, while horizons buried by wind deposits may
contain some carbon (Arnalds, 2010;
Arnalds et al., 2013). This has to be considered when assessing carbon
sequestration by actual restoration programmes because parts of the found SOC
may result from earlier vegetation. Due to the same age of Birch50 and
Grass50, the two different reclamation types can be compared directly.</p>
      <p id="d1e440">The differently aged birch sites were further compared to a naturally
growing birch woodland located at Hraunteigur (Fig. 1b). This area was protected against sand encroachment by two streams, but was
subjected to deposition of large amounts of dust and periodic tephra
fallout. Thus, it represents the original mountain birch woodlands
(Birchnat) which covered large areas in the vicinity of Mount Hekla in the
past (Árnason, 1958). As the vegetation cover is subject to
large-scale sediment deposition, the area has accumulated soils with depths
of more than 2 m (Kolka-Jónsson, 2011).</p>
      <p id="d1e443">Field sampling was carried out in summer 2011. Each of the tested categories
(e.g. Barren Land, Birch15, Birchnat) described above was represented by
three test sites (three replicates) (Fig. 1e).
After removing the litter layer, the top 30 cm of the mineral soil was
sampled. This sampling depth interval represents the common depth for SOC
stock inventories (Aalde et al., 2006;
Snorrason, 2010), and in addition, the top 30 cm of the mineral soil
contains most of the belowground living root biomass at grassland and birch
sites (Snorrason
et al., 2002; Bjarnadottir et al., 2007; Hunziker et al., 2014). Thus, the
dominant belowground organic carbon source deriving from plant growth is
located between 0 and 30 cm soil depth.</p>
      <p id="d1e446">At each site, five soil pits were randomly placed. At the woody sites,
sampling occurred within one-half of the crown diameter of a dominant
mountain birch (<italic>Betula pubescens</italic> Ehrh. ssp. <italic>czerepanovii</italic>) tree. The soil was sampled with a cylindric metal
core (Eijkelkamp Soil &amp; Water, Giesbeek) of 100 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> volume and 5 cm
in diameter at given soil intervals (0–5, 5–10, 10–20 and 20–30 cm). The
five sub-samples per depth interval were immediately mixed in order to form
one composite sample. Thus, each depth interval per category was represented
by 3 composite samples (3 replicates per depth interval)
(Fig. 1), resulting in a dataset of a total of 84
composite samples.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Laboratory soil treatments</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>2.2.1</label><title>Determining common properties for volcanic soils</title>
      <?pagebreak page226?><p id="d1e479">All 84 composite soil samples were dried at 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C until a
constant weight was reached. The weight (g), the volume (cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the
bulk density (g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) of the fine earth (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) were
determined by dry sieving and water displacement of the coarse material
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm). Soil reaction (pH value, <?xmltex \hack{\mbox\bgroup}?>(–))<?xmltex \hack{\egroup}?> was determined in water
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and potassium chloride (1 : 2.5 0.01 M KCl) to determine the protons
in the actual and potential liquid soil phase (FAL, 1996). Acid
ammonium oxalate extractable Al, Fe and Si and pyrophosphate extractable Al
and Fe were measured with an ICP device following the method of Blakemore et al. (1987). The concentrations of the volcanic clay minerals
allophane and ferrihydrite were estimated by multiplying the Si<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration by 6 and the Fe<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration by 1.7, respectively (Parfitt and Childs, 1988;
Parfitt, 1990). The allophane and ferrihydrite contents were then summed up
to determine the clay content (%) deriving from the oxalate extraction
which is a typical measure for texture analysis in volcanic soils
(Arnalds, 2015a).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>2.2.2</label><title>Soil and soil organic carbon fractionation</title>
      <p id="d1e575">A commonly used method for SOC fractionation is the one developed by
Zimmermann et al. (2007) which produces four different functional
carbon groups due to the expected reactivity of the SOC within the groups.
We slightly modified the separation procedure, limiting the analysis to
disaggregation, the particle size separation and the density fractionation
to separate the SOC. The applied physical fractionation technique is suited
to investigating the responses of SOC stability to land-use changes
(Cambardella
and Elliott, 1992; Six et al., 1998; Poeplau and Don, 2013; Hunziker et al.,
2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e578">The fractionation procedure determined the fine soil fraction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) of the 84 composite samples. Initially, the samples were dispersed by
an ultrasound treatment (22 J mL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) in 150 mL deionized water to
retrieve only primary organo-mineral complexes (Christensen,
2001). The samples were subsequently wet-sieved to 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m to separate
the stable sand-sized aggregates and the unprotected particulate organic
matter from the material <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m. The particulate organic
material (POM) was separated from the denser organic material in the
mineral-associated sand and aggregate fraction (heavy fraction; HF) by
density fractionation (1.8 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, sodium polytungstate from Sometu) on
the soil material (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m). After separation, both
fractions were washed with deionized water until the electrical conductivity
of the rinse water reached <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>S
(Wagai et al., 2008).</p>
      <p id="d1e678">In some cases, the pumice material around Mount Hekla has a density of about
1 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Arnalds, 2000), and some POM samples
were contaminated with pumice material. We solved this problem by using a
charged glass surface to separate the POM material from the pumice material
(Kaiser et al., 2009). The electrostatically charged glass
plate was set 2 to 5 cm above the stone plate on which the contaminated POM
fraction was distributed and was slowly moved over the sample. The distance
between the charged glass surface and soil particle surface was manually set
due to the different sizes of POM and pumice material. The organic particles
electrostatically attracted to the glass plate were visually checked for
possible “contamination” by pumice material. In these cases, the pumice
material was manually removed. The pumice material (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) was transferred to the HF fraction.</p>
      <?pagebreak page227?><p id="d1e715">The material which is smaller than 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m represents the SOC pool of the
silt and clay size fraction which can also contain aggregates consisting of
volcanic clay minerals. Further, after settling time, a sample of the
suspension (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) was taken, filtered with a 0.45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
filter and analysed for its dissolved organic carbon content (DOC). The
value of the DOC concentration was used as an indicator of the ability of
the sampled soils to leach dissolved organic carbon. Compared to Zimmermann
et al. (2007), the present study did not conduct oxidation with
sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) to determine the resistant SOC pool. Hence, the
present study did not measure the SOC in the NaOCl-resistant fraction
(rSOC).</p>
      <p id="d1e753">All samples of the bulk soil (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) and the POM, HF and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fractions were ball-milled and analysed for organic carbon
content (%) by dry combustion (Leco CN 628 Elemental Determinator). The
DOC content (mg L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) was measured using a combustion analytic oxidation
method (TOC-5000A, Shimadzu).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>SOC stock estimation</title>
      <p id="d1e805">The amount of soil organic carbon that is stored in a given soil profile is
defined as the SOC stock and is given in tons per hectare. According to
Ellert et al. (2008) and Rodeghiero et al. (2009), the SOC stock (SOC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">stock</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>; t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is a
function of the soil's carbon content (SOC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">conc</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>; mg g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), the
bulk density (BD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>; g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) of the fine soil fraction
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) and the investigated soil depth (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; cm). The conversion
factor between the units is 100. The study calculated the amount of soil
organic carbon which was stored in the fine soil fraction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm)
within the top 30 cm according to the given formula:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.Ex1"><mml:math id="M59" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SOC</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">stock</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SOC</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">conc</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          SOC stocks stored in the SOC fractions were calculated after Poeplau and Don (2013) and Guidi et al. (2014).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Physical, chemical and morphological characteristics of the sampled soil intervals</title>
      <p id="d1e964">The soil material sampled at all depth intervals was andic (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) and therefore classified as
Andosols (Table 2) (IUSS Working Group WRB,
2014). According to the Icelandic soil classification (Arnalds,
2008), freely drained soils under vegetation are termed Andosols and
desert soils are classified as Vitrisols. The results of the present study
confirmed that the sampled soils of the birch and grass stands are
classified as Brown Andosols (1 %–12 % C and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % allophane)
(Tables 1, 2). The
calculated bulk densities of the fine earth material fractions were within
the range of 0.3 to 0.8 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of typical Icelandic Andosols
(Arnalds, 2008). The severely degraded and unvegetated soils of
Barren Land were classified as Vitrisols (Arnalds, 2015c) due
to the relatively high pH values (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The pH values
of the top 20 cm of these soils were significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) higher
compared to those of the other tested categories. However, the soils of
Barren Land contained more organic carbon and clay minerals than usually
found in Vitrisols of Icelandic deserts (Table 1)
(Óskarsson et al., 2004). At Barren Land, we found the
highest concentrations of allophane and ferrihydrite clay minerals
(Table 2). These high concentrations stand in
contrast to the typically low concentration (2 %–5 %) found in desert
Vitrisols (Arnalds, 2015d). Lilienfein et al. (2003) found an
increase in allophane and ferrihydrite concentrations with increasing age of
mudflow soils at Mt Shasta. Based on these findings, our results indicate
that the soils at Barren Land are pedogenetically developed and the high
carbon and clay contents found on Barren Land are more representative of
severely degraded soils than Icelandic desert soils.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1058">Values characterizing the vegetation types studied and sampled soil
intervals for common soil properties. The median, minimum and maximum values
(in parentheses) are given.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="8">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Type</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Volume</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Bulk</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">C content</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">pH (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">pH (KCl)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(cm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">gravel</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">density</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(–)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(–)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(–)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> 100 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Barren Land</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11.8 (1.3; 14.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.76 (0.64; 0.82)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.7 (0.9; 2.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.7 (9.9; 13.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.0 (6.7; 7.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.7 (5.4; 5.7)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.0 (0.5; 11.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.65 (0.60; 0.82)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.1 (0.9; 3.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.3 (10.1; 14.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.2 (7.0; 7.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.8 (5.6; 5.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (0.3; 9.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.54 (0.49; 0.79)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.7 (1.1; 2.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.1 (10.6; 13.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.2 (7.0; 7.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.8 (5.7; 5.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.8 (0.5; 3.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.48 (0.48; 0.56)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.7 (2.2; 2.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.5 (11.1; 14.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.3 (6.8; 7.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.9 (5.5; 5.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.8 (1.0; 8.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.75 (0.66; 0.85)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.1 (1.4; 2.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.2 (14.4; 17.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.1 (6.0; 6.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.9 (4.8; 5.0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.5 (1.3; 5.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.87 (0.80; 0.89)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.9 (0.9; 1.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.5 (11.5; 12.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.6 (6.3; 6.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.2 (5.0; 5.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.0 (1.0; 4.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.89 (0.69; 0.91)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (0.6; 2.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.7 (10.5; 12.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.8 (6.7; 6.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.3 (5.2; 5.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.0 (0.0; 8.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.76 (0.56; 0.90)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (0.4; 2.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.1 (10.0; 11.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.9 (6.8; 6.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 (5.4; 5.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.5 (0.8; 4.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.55 (0.47; 0.69)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.9 (2.1; 5.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.6 (15.6; 17.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.1 (6.0; 6.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.9 (4.9; 5.0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0 (0.5; 3.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.79 (0.66; 0.89)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.5 (0.8; 2.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.0 (10.1; 13.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.5 (6.4; 6.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.1 (5.1; 5.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0 (0.5; 3.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.82 (0.69; 0.89)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (0.7; 1.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.1 (10.1; 12.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.7 (6.6; 6.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.3 (5.2; 5.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.3 (0.3; 5.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.91 (0.66; 0.95)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (0.8; 1.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.2 (10.6; 14.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.8 (6.8; 7.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.3 (5.3; 5.6)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.3 (1.0; 8.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.59 (0.44; 0.76)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.4 (2.1; 5.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.9 (14.1; 17.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.1 (6.0; 6.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.0 (5.0; 5.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (0.4; 2.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.77 (0.75; 0.89)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.8 (1.0; 2.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.2 (11.5; 13.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.5 (6.5; 6.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.2 (5.2; 5.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.0 (0.3; 3.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.82 (0.80; 0.89)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (1.0; 1.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.1 (10.9; 11.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.7 (6.7; 6.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.3 (5.2; 5.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (0.1; 1.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.79 (0.74; 0.90)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.4 (1.0; 1.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.0 (10.4; 11.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.7 (6.7; 6.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.3 (5.3; 5.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0 (1.0; 1.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.44 (0.40; 0.49)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.1 (5.5; 9.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">18.6 (16.9; 20.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.8 (5.8; 6.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.8 (4.8; 4.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.8 (0.5; 2.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.75 (0.68; 0.78)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.9 (1.7; 2.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.7 (12.5; 13.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.3 (6.3; 6.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.0 (5.0; 5.0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.0 (1.3; 4.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.78 (0.72; 0.84)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.5 (1.1; 1.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.8 (10.9; 12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.5 (6.1; 6.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.1 (5.1; 5.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.3 (0.1; 1.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.88 (0.85; 0.90)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (0.9; 1.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.7 (10.6; 11.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.6 (6.6; 6.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.2 (5.1; 5.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Grass50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.3 (6.3; 8.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.72 (0.68; 0.73)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.5 (2.5; 2.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.6 (12.5; 13.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.4 (6.3; 6.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.1 (5.0; 5.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.5 (5.0; 7.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.85 (0.71; 0.86)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.0 (1.2; 2.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.2 (10.7; 11.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.7 (6.7; 6.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.4 (5.2; 5.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.5 (3.8; 13.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.63 (0.63; 0.75)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.6 (1.8; 3.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.9 (10.5; 11.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.8 (6.8; 6.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 (5.5; 5.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.5 (0.2; 7.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.63 (0.61; 0.76)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.4 (2.0; 3.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.2 (12.1; 12.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.0 (6.9; 7.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.6 (5.5; 5.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birchnat</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (0.5; 0.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.51 (0.46; 0.52)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">6.3 (6.3; 6.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">19.2 (19.0; 19.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.0 (6.0; 6.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.0 (5.0; 5.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.3 (0.1; 0.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.68 (0.64; 0.68)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4.0 (3.3; 5.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">16.3 (16.1; 17.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.3 (6.3; 6.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.1 (5.0; 5.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1 (0.0; 0.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.67 (0.64; 0.67)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.4 (2.1; 3.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.7 (13.2; 15.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.5 (6.2; 6.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.2 (5.0; 5.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1 (0.0; 0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.72 (0.70; 0.76)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.9 (1.8; 2.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.6 (11.8; 12.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.7 (6.7; 6.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.3 (5.2; 5.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2032">SOC concentrations varied between 0.6 % and 9.8 % within the whole dataset
of the 84 samples (Table 1). Surprisingly, the
lowest C contents were not found at the Barren Land sites as was expected;
this is most likely due to the absent vegetation cover at the time of
sampling. This finding supports the hypothesis that organic carbon was
sequestered in the soil before the onset of soil erosion. Further, at the
Barren Land, Grass50 and Birch15 sites, the SOC concentrations were higher
in the deeper sampling intervals (5–30 cm) than at the shallow depths of 0–5 cm (Table 1). At the Barren Land, Grass50 and
afforested Birch sites, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratios of the soil mostly varied between 10
and 14 (–). However, the ratio was considerably higher in the top 5 cm at
Grass50 and significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) higher at all tested birch categories compared to the soil at Barren Land. In deeper soil
layers the differences were only significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) between Barren
Land and Birchnat in sampling layer “5–10 cm”
(Table 1). Hence, the soils at Birchnat also showed
the highest <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratios with a maximum value of 19.2
(Table 1). These findings can be attributed to the
presence of freshly deposited and less decomposed organic matter close to
the surface ground at the vegetated sites. In contrast, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio was
slightly higher at deeper sampling intervals at Barren Land, which gives
evidence that the carbon originates from past vegetation cover.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2099">Volcanic soil properties of the studied vegetation types and
sampled depth intervals. The median value and the minimum and maximum values
(in parentheses) are given as above.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.86}[.86]?><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Type</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Allophane</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Allophane <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(cm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">ratio (10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, –)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">ratio (10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, –)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Ferrhydrite clay</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(%)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Barren</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.20 (0.14; 0.27)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.82 (0.72; 1.07)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.17 (0.13; 0.23)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.42 (0.39; 0.48)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.50 (2.65; 6.65)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">13.9 (8.2; 20.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">20.8 (12.7; 30.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Land</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.26 (0.13; 0.27)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.63 (0.60; 0.90)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.22 (0.13; 0.24)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.36 (0.34; 0.47)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.46 (2.81; 7.71)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">22.7 (9.3; 23.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">33.9 (13.9; 34.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.16 (0.14; 0.17)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.79 (0.54; 0.85)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.18 (0.14; 0.19)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.47 (0.35; 0.50)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.90 (3.17; 5.85)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12.4 (10.4; 18.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">18.6 (15.6; 27.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.24 (0.15; 0.28)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.57 (0.44; 1.01)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.23 (0.21; 0.29)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.37 (0.35; 0.65)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.51 (5.03; 7.31)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">21.7 (15.2; 23.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">31.8 (22.9; 33.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.26 (0.20; 0.26)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.76 (1.55; 1.90)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.21 (0.15; 0.21)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.69 (0.55; 0.71)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.82 (2.60; 3.01)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">8.6 (8.2; 9.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">13.6 (12.7; 14.6)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.17 (0.17; 0.19)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.23 (1.13; 1.24)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.14 (0.13; 0.15)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.47 (0.41; 0.50)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.96 (2.95; 3.05)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">9.5 (9.4; 9.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">14.8 (14.6; 14.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.19 (0.13; 0.27)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.00 (0.95; 1.11)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.17 (0.11; 0.25)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.49 (0.36; 0.50)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.37 (2.73; 5.35)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">10.8 (9.5; 17.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.5 (14.5; 25.7)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.18 (0.09; 0.31)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.8 (0.75; 1.08)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.15 (0.09; 0.36)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.49 (0.34; 0.52)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.26 (2.51; 7.59)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">10.5 (8.8; 24.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">15.9 (13.5; 36.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.33 (0.26; 0.36)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.67 (1.44; 2.21)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.28 (0.24; 0.41)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.77 (0.64; 1.37)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.15 (3.13; 4.49)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">9.5 (8.9; 13.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">14.9 (14.0; 20.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.21 (0.16; 0.26)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.09 (0.95; 1.19)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.18 (0.13; 0.25)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.51 (0.44; 0.53)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.52 (2.93; 5.09)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">11.4 (9.5; 16.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">17.3 (14.6; 24.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.17 (0.16; 0.20)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.97 (0.85; 1.00)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.16 (0.15; 0.21)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.47 (0.46; 0.52)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.56 (3.16; 4.44)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12.0 (11.1; 14.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">17.9 (16.5; 21.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.19 (0.14; 0.19)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.92 (0.69; 0.96)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.19 (0.15; 0.23)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.48 (0.47; 0.49)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.99 (3.14; 5.11)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">13.6 (11.0; 17.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">20.3 (16.4; 25.6)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.32 (0.26; 0.38)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.70 (1.64; 2.23)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.32 (0.24; 0.42)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.91 (0.73; 1.26)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.37 (3.18; 3.65)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">10.1 (10.0; 10.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">15.6 (15.6; 17.0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.23 (0.18; 0.25)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.22 (1.09; 1.23)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.20 (0.16; 0.22)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.55 (0.48; 0.57)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.76 (3.34; 3.94)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">11.9 (11.3; 12.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">18.1 (17.0; 19.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.18 (0.17; 0.22)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.01 (0.92; 1.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.16 (0.15; 0.19)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.47 (0.41; 0.50)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.81 (3.36; 3.98)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12.7 (11.6; 12.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">19.0 (17.4; 19.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.22 (0.16; 0.24)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.12 (0.89; 1.12)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.20 (0.15; 0.22)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.52 (0.42; 0.53)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.92 (3.52; 4.23)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12.8 (11.8; 14.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">19.3 (17.8; 21.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.52 (0.45; 0.58)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.83 (2.81; 3.12)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.65 (0.58; 0.72)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.92 (1.86; 2.01)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.57 (3.13; 3.65)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">9.2 (8.4; 10.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">15.1 (13.6; 16.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.30 (0.26; 0.34)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.54 (1.26; 1.72)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.28 (0.22; 0.31)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.76 (0.55; 0.82)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.89 (3.79; 4.08)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">11.7 (11.5; 12.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">18.0 (17.9; 19.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.24 (0.20; 0.25)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.13 (1.13; 1.14)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.21 (0.18; 0.22)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.53 (0.50; 0.58)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.08 (3.44; 4.20)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12.4 (11.5; 13.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">18.6 (17.3; 20.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.19 (0.14; 0.19)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.00 (0.86; 1.02)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.18 (0.14; 0.18)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.48 (0.43; 0.54)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.55 (3.25; 3.74)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">11.2 (11.0; 12.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.8 (16.5; 18.6)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Grass50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.29 (0.28; 0.29)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.44 (1.33; 1.65)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.24 (0.24; 0.26)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.71 (0.66; 0.80)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.62 (3.38; 4.03)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">10.4 (10.0; 11.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.2 (15.5; 18.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.24 (0.19; 0.25)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.12 (1.09; 1.15)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.20 (0.18; 0.25)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.55 (0.53; 0.62)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.10 (3.27; 4.30)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12.0 (10.3; 12.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">18.5 (15.7; 19.6)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.31 (0.25; 0.34)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.23 (1.23; 1.29)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.25 (0.24; 0.32)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.65 (0.58; 0.73)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.67 (3.93; 4.82)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">13.1 (12.0; 13.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">20.3 (18.3; 21.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.26 (0.26; 0.32)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.03 (1.00; 1.09)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.30 (0.26; 0.33)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.61 (0.58; 0.74)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.77 (4.75; 5.41)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">15.6 (13.5; 15.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">23.1 (21.0; 24.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birchnat</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.33 (0.30; 0.37)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.81 (2.54; 2.93)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.44 (0.42; 0.49)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.18 (1.93; 2.21)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.27 (2.14; 2.45)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.9 (5.6; 6.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">9.6 (9.0; 10.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5–10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.33 (0.32; 0.39)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.34 (2.15; 2.66)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.40 (0.39; 0.52)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.68 (1.47; 2.05)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.76 (2.52; 2.87)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">7.4 (6.9; 7.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">11.8 (10.9; 12.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.27 (0.24; 0.29)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.49 (1.27; 1.51)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.28 (0.25; 0.32)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.88 (0.79; 1.06)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.47 (3.33; 3.54)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">10.2 (9.4; 10.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">15.6 (14.6; 15.7)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20–30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.25 (0.24; 0.27)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.20 (1.20; 1.34)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.25 (0.24; 0.27)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.74 (0.70; 0.83)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.67 (3.63; 3.81)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">10.9 (10.8; 11.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.6 (16.4; 17.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e3166">Based on the analysis of the C concentrations of the soil samples, the study
showed that the unvegetated, severely degraded volcanic soils contained
appreciable amounts of SOC. And further, afforestation with mountain birch
increased the soil C concentration during the first 50 years of shrub
establishment, predominantly in the top 10 cm. Further, the values of bulk
density and SOC concentration are inversely proportional. Consequently, to
further discuss the SOC sequestration potential of the soils studied,
further detailed information on SOC stocks and SOC quality are needed, in
addition to measurements of SOC concentration. Lastly, the unknown influence
of the sampling depth also needs to be accounted for.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page228?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Afforestation seems to increase the SOC stock in the top 30\,cm}?><title>Afforestation seems to increase the SOC stock in the top 30 cm</title>
      <p id="d1e3178">In the present study, the initial state before afforestation starts is
represented by the sites of Barren Land. The SOC stock (0–30 cm) at Barren
Land (median value: 39 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is higher (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) than
the SOC stocks at Birch15, Birch20 and Birch25. The present study found a
continuous increase in the median SOC stock (0–30 cm) with birch stand age
(Birch15: 31; Birch20: 33; Birch25: 36; Birch50: 46 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
(Fig. 2). After 50 years of birch growth the SOC
stock (0–30 cm) of Birch50 is significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) higher than the SOC
stocks of younger birch stands (Birch15, Birch20) or severely degraded soil
(Barren Land) (Fig. 2). The given results of the
SOC stocks (0–30 cm) might lead to the assumption that the soil acts as a C
source during the first 25 years of the establishment of birch and that
there is a carbon sink between after 25 years until 50 years of birch
growth. This would be in accordance with Hunziker et al. (2017), who found a decline in the SOC stock (0–30 cm) during
the first 40 years of green alder encroachment on former subalpine pastures.
Another finding of the present study is that after 50 years of birch growth,
the SOC stock was still significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) lower than that of the
old-growth woodlands of Birchnat (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> t ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
(Fig. 2). This means that the soils at Birch50
can sequester additional organic carbon during the succession towards mature
woodlands which reflects the equilibrium state. Overall, the results
indicate that afforestation by mountain birch, and the establishment of
birch woodlands, can significantly increase the SOC stock (0–30 cm)
(Birch15–Birch50), which is in accordance with Icelandic studies given in
the literature.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e3266">Median soil organic carbon stocks (t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the mineral
soil of the studied eroded (Barren Land), reclaimed (Grass50, Birch15,
Birch20, Birch25 and Birch50) and old-growth (Birchnat) sites. The range of
the error bars shows the minimum and maximum values. The different
shadings indicate the four sampling depths (0–5 cm: diagonal lines; 5–10 cm:
rectangular squares; 10–20 cm: b, w squares; 20–30 cm: vertical lines). Within
a sampling depth, significant differences (Mann–Whitney <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the age classes are indicated by different letters. Further,
significant differences (Mann–Whitney <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the
total studied soil depth (0–30 cm) are shown above the stacked columns.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page229?><p id="d1e3325">During the period between Birch15 and Birch50 (35 years), the sequestration
rate is 0.42 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> a<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on average, without taking the SOC stock
of Barren Land (as the status before afforestation begins) as a reference for
calculation. The reason for this is given in the assumption that Barren Land
contains a lot of SOC which does not originate from the revegetation process.
The rate is lower than the given removal factor of 0.51 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> a<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for afforestation activities (Hellsing et al., 2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e3377">A literature review revealed that the succession of already vegetated
heathland to birch woodland in eastern Iceland shows no change in C stocks
(Ritter, 2007). The SOC stocks were about 40 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (0–20 cm) for 26-
and 97-year old birch stands. Snorrason et al. (2002) found a
higher SOC stock (0–30 cm) in a 54-year old birch stand (65 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
compared to that of grassland (54 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) at Gunnarsholt, which leads
to the assumption that the effect of afforestation is more effective than
that of revegetation concerning SOC sequestration. However, Snorrason et al. (2002) and Ritter (2007) did not report the initial SOC stock before the
ecosystem change began. Soil development and natural vegetation succession
on moraine till after glacial retreat are other typical processes of land-cover change in Iceland. Vilmundardóttir et al. (2015) found a SOC accumulation
within the top 20 cm from 0.9 (initial status) and 13.5 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at
sites with a maximum age of 120 years, thereby demonstrating that the
process of vegetation succession on moraine till leads to an increase in
soil carbon stock. Our results indicate that the change in SOC stocks during
afforestation with mountain birch on severely degraded soils (Fig. 2) is
comparable with those given for shrub encroachment in the cited literature.</p>
      <p id="d1e3428">Restoration by revegetation is another process of land-cover change in
Iceland  (Aradóttir et al.,
2000; Arnalds et al., 2013). The present study compared the effects of
afforestation and revegetation. Within 50 years, the revegetated sites
(Grass50), which were restored by fertilizer and grass seeds, showed a
median SOC stock 9 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> higher compared to the soils of Birch50.
This leads to the assumption that revegetation of severely degraded soils
enhances the SOC stock (0–30 cm) more effectively than afforestation
(Fig. 2). Aradóttir et al. (2000)
and Snorrason et al. (2002) also studied revegetated grassland
sites near Gunnarsholt showing a site history comparable to the grassland
sites of the present study. Accordingly, Snorrason et al. (2002) reported a SOC stock (0–30 cm) of 54 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
which is comparable with the SOC stocks of the present study. However,
Aradóttir et al. (2000) found 28 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (0–20 cm) for
a 46-year old grassland site, compared to the median value of 34 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (0–20 cm) for the present grassland sites.</p>
      <p id="d1e3479">The results of the SOC stocks within the commonly used soil depths of 30 cm
of the tested categories indicate that the SOC pool decreases between Barren
Land and 15-year old birch stands. It then increases during<?pagebreak page230?> birch
establishment to reach the level of naturally grown birch woodlands
(Fig. 2). This pattern is comparable with other
field studies (e.g. Goulden et al., 2011; Hunziker et al., 2017). However,
the analysis of mineral SOC dynamics in such a temporally dynamic landscape,
which results in unequal SOC and volcanic clay concentration patterns
across the tested categories, calls for more detailed and alternative
methods (Tables 1, 2). Thus, the present study further focused on the vertical distribution of
the SOC and its quality to verify whether afforestation results in the soil
becoming a C source and whether more C is sequestered during revegetation
than afforestation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>SOC fractionation enhances our understanding of afforestation processes</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1">
  <label>3.3.1</label><title>Vertical resolution of SOC stocks</title>
      <p id="d1e3497">The vertical distribution of SOC concentrations
(Table 1) and SOC stock at Grass50 with the sampled
soil intervals showed clearly that the highest SOC stock (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is located between 10 and 30 cm
(Fig. 2). The same patterns were found at Barren
Land, which shows the unexpected but high importance of the SOC stock in
deeper sampling intervals such as “10–20” and “20–30 cm”. Hence, two-thirds of the calculated SOC stock was found to be deeper than 10 cm at Grass50.
This is not in accordance with the commonly observed vertical decrease in
the SOC concentration (Jobbágy and Jackson, 2000). However,
this is a typical pattern of volcanic soils which are also characterized by
biologically active soil layers buried by ash from volcanic eruptions.
Arnalds and Kimble (2001) observed similar patterns for soils
with lag-gravel surfaces, which developed through intense frost heave of
coarse material and aeolian deposition. Strachan et al. (1998), Snorrason et al. (2002) and
Kolka-Jónsson (2011) confirm this inverse vertical SOC
pattern in disturbed and undisturbed soil pedons in the same region as the
present study. Therefore, this inversion of the SOC stock with depth seems
to be a common feature of sandy soils in southern Iceland, and is the result
of high volcanic activity, geomorphic processes and anthropogenic
disturbances  (Dugmore et al., 2009;
Kolka-Jónsson, 2011; Arnalds, 2015e). Hence, Andosols generally consist
of chronologically layered soil horizons with various amounts of organic
carbon as well as different densities of gravel and fine earth material
which substantially influence the vertical patterns of the SOC stock.
Restoration activities and carbon accumulation derived from plant growth can
start on such soil pedons in Iceland.</p>
      <p id="d1e3522">Icelandic desert soils and severely degraded soils generally contain a SOC
stock ranging from 1 to 45 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> before the application of any
restoration activities (Óskarsson et al., 2004;
Arnalds et al., 2013). The present study calculated a median SOC stock of 40 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 2) for severely degraded
soils, which is comparable with the higher SOC stock values given in the
cited literature. This implies that the soils of Barren Land contain a
certain amount of SOC due to earlier soil formation processes prior to
disturbance and SOC accumulation, and which occurred before the soil profile
was truncated by soil erosion processes. Nonetheless, the SOC stocks (0–30 cm) of Barren Land are significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) lower than in soils under
well-established and non-degraded ecosystems (Birchnat)
(Fig. 2). The subdivision of the studied soil
columns of 30 cm into four sampling intervals explains the higher SOC stocks
at Barren Land and Grass50. This is due to the higher values in the
intervals “10–20 cm” and “20–30 cm” compared to the afforested birch
sites (Birch15–Birch50), which constitute older buried soils
(Table 1, Fig. 2). The
subdivision further characterizes the patterns found of SOC stock (0–30 cm)
(Sect. 3.2), with the high SOC stocks (0–30 cm) at Barren Land and Grass50
being caused by the carbon pool located deeper than 10 cm soil depth. Under
the given site conditions, it is questionable to apply the commonly used
soil depth of 30 cm for SOC stock monitoring (Aalde et al., 2006) to sample
SOC that originates from buried soils, as it distorts the effects of
restoration activities in the results of SOC concentration and SOC stock.
Based on this understanding, the SOC stocks (0–30 cm) do<?pagebreak page231?> not reveal that
afforestation caused a C loss during the first 25 years of mountain birch
establishment at such severely degraded sites and that the effects of
revegetation are more effective than those of afforestation by mountain birch
within the first 50 years.</p>
      <p id="d1e3561">The analysis of C vertical distribution shows further that C concentration
continuously increases in the top 10 cm during the establishment of birch
woodland (Table 1) (Birch15–Birch50). Hence, the
SOC stock increases by 10 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and 3.5 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
in the sampling intervals “0–5 cm” and “5–10 cm” during the same time
interval, respectively (Fig. 2). Thus,
afforestation by mountain birch on severely degraded volcanic soils is most
distinct in the top 10 cm, which is comparable with the findings of
Bárcena et al. (2014). However, the SOC stock (0–10 cm) of
50-year old birch woodlands is still lower (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; 16 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) than the stocks identified at the Birchnat sites.
The SOC stocks (5–30 cm) of Birch50 significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) differ from
the SOC stocks of Birchnat (Fig. 2). This
indicates that afforested stands can additionally accumulate SOC between 5
and 30 cm soil depth during their development to mature mountain birch
stands after 50 years of birch growth. Major SOC sources are the
incorporation of aboveground litter material into the soil phases and the
root system of establishing and old-growth birch trees which is mostly
situated in the top 30 cm (Hunziker et al., 2014).</p>
      <p id="d1e3647">The results indicate that spatial variability must be taken into account
when analysing SOC of volcanic soils, especially when deeper than 10 cm,
between the sampled sites and the tested categories (barren, birch,
etc.). This is even more relevant in landscapes with past or recent erosion
processes as soil-forming processes. Thus, the equality or comparability of
the sites, except for the studied variable, is not ensured for
space-for-time substitution sampling approaches under such circumstances as
performed in the present study (Walker et al., 2010). Hence, it
is misleading to use the selected Barren Land sites, which were selected at
4 km distance from the afforested sites (Birch15, Birch20, Birch25 and
Birch50) and 15 km from Birchnat, as the initial status (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for discussing
the effect of afforestation and calculating any SOC sequestration rates.
Accordingly, the authors suggest using permanent plots and the application
of long-term monitoring (Arnalds
et al., 2013; Thorsson, 2019) or cumulative coordinate approaches
(Rovira et al.,
2015), which seem more appropriate for assessing changes in SOC characteristics
on severely degraded soils.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS2">
  <label>3.3.2</label><title>Analysis of soil organic carbon quality</title>
      <p id="d1e3669">The net primary production (NPP) of a landscape is increased during
afforestation. Hence, the supply of organic material to the soil is higher
at shrubby sites compared to barren areas (e.g. Bjarnadottir et al., 2007).
The mass of POM material can be taken as an indicator for this supply. In
the present study, the change in the material supply leads to a significant
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) increase in the median mass of POM material (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the top 30 cm of the soil, which
was measured at Barren Land: 5; Birch15: 43; Birch20: 53; Birch25: 51;
Birch50: 174 mg POM per gram soil. The sites at Birchnat contained 95 mg POM g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> soil. The lower value at Birchnat (95 mg POM g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> soil)
compared to Birch50 (174 mg POM g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> soil) can be explained by the lower
productivity of Birchnat due to the already undergone self-thinning process
during the forest development at Birchnat. Further, the revegetation to
grassland (Grass50) showed distinctly lower median POM mass (24 mg g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
soil) than Birch50. Significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) differences between the POM
masses of Birch50 and Grass50 were found in the top three sampling layers.
According to these results, it is hypothesized firstly that afforestation is
a more effective restoration process than revegetation with grasses in
terms of supplying organic material and hence carbon to the soil phases, and
secondly, this supply increases exponentially during the establishment of
afforested birch woodlands. However, this observation is inconsistent with
the results of the unfractionated SOC stocks (0–30 cm) comparison (Sect. 3.2), which suggests that the conversion of eroded land into grassland is a
more effective restoration approach. Thus, further explanations are needed
to explain the characteristics of these high SOC pools.</p>
      <p id="d1e3785">Physical fractionation of the SOC further revealed that the SOC stocks at
Grass50 consist mostly of carbon found in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”
(73 %) and HF (16 %) fractions, respectively
(Table 3). Only a minor part of the SOC stock
originated from the POM fraction (3 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). Our findings are
confirmed by the results of Sollins et al. (1983), who studied C dynamics at
four mudflow chronosequences at Mt Shasta in California and hence stated
that the heavy fraction is an important C sink (37 %–72 % of the total C). The
vertical resolution showed further that the amount of carbon stored in the
“<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” fraction became more dominant at deeper sampling
intervals at Grass 50. Hence, the SOC stocks in the 10–20 and 20–30 cm
layers were fed by SOC found in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” fraction
(Figs. 2, 3);
results of Barren Land showed the same pattern. At these sites, the SOC
stock (Fig. 2) consisted mostly of carbon which
was stored in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” (65 %) and HF (28 %)
fractions, respectively (Table 3), which is in
accordance with Sollins et al. (1983). This more detailed analysis of the
depth-resolution SOC quality indicates that at Barren Land and Grass50 the
SOC measured in deeper sampling intervals was sequestered in horizons during
soil development historically. Later, these C-rich horizons of the
palaeosoils were buried by aeolian transported material and then again
exposed by soil erosion. This assumption of sampling material of palaeosoils
is underlined by the highest allophane and ferrihydrite contents at Barren
Land and Grass50 (Table 2) as a result of the
weathering of soil minerals.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e3876">The SOC stocks (t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) at the 0–30 cm interval, explained
by SOC fractions. The median value and the minimum and maximum values (in
parentheses) are given.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Type</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col5" align="center">SOC stock </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">POM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">HF</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">DOC</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Barren Land</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.7 (0.2; 1.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11.5 (9.1; 13.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">26.4 (14.2; 33.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.0 (1.2; 2.7)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.9 (3.5; 7.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.3 (5.5; 11.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">17.4 (5.9; 25.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (0.6; 1.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.8 (3.6; 9.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.9 (7.6; 11.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">16.5 (12.3; 20.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 (0.8; 2.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.3 (3.2; 9.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.7 (7.1; 9.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19.9 (16.3; 26.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.4 (1.1; 2.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birch50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">13.2 (7.1; 17.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.0 (8.2; 9.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">23.5 (18.3; 25.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.5 (1.7; 3.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Grass50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.1 (1.7; 4.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.1 (8.0; 10.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">41.5 (25.8; 53.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.8 (1.7; 3.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birchnat</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11.5 (9.5; 16.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12.8 (10.3; 19.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">32.4 (29.5; 36.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.7 (3.1; 5.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e4160">SOC concentration (mg g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) of the fraction POM <bold>(a, e, i, m)</bold>,
HF <bold>(b, f, j, n)</bold>, “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” <bold>(c, g, k, o)</bold> and DOC <bold>(d, h, l, p)</bold>
divided into the sampled soil depths (0–5, 5–10, 10–20 and 20–30 cm) for the
reclaimed (Birch15, Birch20, Birch25, Birch50 and Grass50), eroded (Barren
Land) and old-growth (Birchnat) sites. The boxes show the minimum,
median and maximum values. Note the variable scale of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019-f03.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?pagebreak page233?><p id="d1e4219">The combination of a vertically divided soil sampling technique and the
physical SOC fractionation showed that most of the SOC at Barren Land
originated in soil material which was smaller than 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m at a soil
depth deeper than 10 cm. Hence, the SOC which is found at severely degraded
soils (Óskarsson et al.,
2004; Arnalds et al., 2013) seems to be “old” buried SOC, or sedimented
small-sized SOC, instead of deriving from the ongoing revegetation or
succession process. This underlines the evidence that the SOC stocks
measured deeper than 10 cm soil depth distort the SOC accumulation during
restoration activities (previous section). Sites with such SOC patterns can
therefore hardly be used as reference sites to explore the effect of
restoration on SOC dynamics. The same assumption can be made for the SOC
patterns at Grass50, which showed low values of POM mass and POM-C
concentrations but high C concentrations in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”
fraction. Thus, it is questionable whether the SOC by itself and the
difference of 17 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> between Barren Land and Grass50 are the
result of the revegetation process. The physical fractionation revealed that
the SOC found at Grass50 has rather originated from buried soil material
than from revegetation. Based on this and the given results in the previous
sections, it seems that afforestation is the more effective restoration
process than revegetation, primarily due to the higher amount of POM
material and POM-C found in the soils covered by mountain birch shrubs.</p>
      <p id="d1e4260">Turning eroded land into birch woodland led to a continuous increase in the
SOC stock (0–30 cm) (Fig. 2). During
afforestation, the increases between the median C stocks of the POM and
“<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” fractions were 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">163</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and 6
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> between Birch15 and Birch50. These increases are
explained by the increases in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”-C and POM-C
concentrations during the afforested time span
(Figs. 3, 4).
During the same time span, the DOC concentration doubles. This is in
accordance with Hunziker et al. (2017), who also found a
doubling of the DOC concentration during the encroachment of subalpine
pastures by green alder bushes. The SOC stock of the HF fraction seemed to
stagnate at about 9 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> during the same observation time
(Table 3).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e4358">Cumulated carbon concentrations (mg g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) (0–30 cm) within the
analysed SOC fractions for the reclaimed (Birch15, Birch20, Birch25, Birch50
and Grass50), eroded (Barren Land) and old-growth (Birchnat) sites. The
boxes show the minimum, median and maximum values. Note the variable scale
of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=142.26378pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019-f04.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e4386">According to the results of the present study
(Fig. 2, Table 3,
Fig. 4), afforestation by mountain birch on
severely degraded soils increases the SOC stock, especially in the top 10 cm. However, this increase is accompanied by a higher SOC lability, which is
indicated by the significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) increase in the POM concentration
and the POM C stock as well as the increase in DOC concentration and the
DOC stock (Table 3, Fig. 4) between Birch15 and Birch50. Our study also
found a significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) increase in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”-SOC
stock of 6 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> between Birch15 and Birch50. This result can be
attributed to a stabilization of the SOC due to its binding with the colloid
fraction, which contains clay-sized minerals and organo-mineral complexes.
However, the extraction of the material of the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”
fraction was only conducted by the physical separation technique of Zimmermann et al. (2007) due to the mineralogy of the samples. Hence, the chosen
method in this study does not give information about the location of the
organic matter in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” fraction and, consequently, the
degree of the SOC stabilization.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>SOC stabilization by volcanic clay minerals</title>
      <?pagebreak page234?><p id="d1e4489">Clay minerals found in volcanic soils, such as those found in Iceland, may
play a key role in stabilizing soil organic carbon due to their amorphism,
high degree of hydration, extensive specific surface area (200–1500 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and pH-dependent charge and the high reactivity (Torn
et al., 1997; Basile-Doelsch et al., 2007; McDaniel et al., 2012; Arnalds,
2015a). The major stabilization mechanisms are either the formation of
allophane– or ferrihydrite–humus complexes, which is favoured at pH
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, or the building of metal–humus complexes which are more
effective at pH values lower than 5.0 (Arnalds, 2015a). The
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratios
(Table 1) are used as an indicator of the
occurrence of metal–humus complexes. The higher the ratio, the more clay
minerals are bound to organic compounds, which suggests an increase in the
SOC stabilization. In order to discuss stabilization processes of SOC found
in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” fraction' with mineral clays (Sect. 3.3), we
therefore considered the SOC concentration of the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”
fraction in Fig. 5.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e4598">Relationship between common properties of volcanic soils. The
charts show the allophane concentration (%) as a function of pH value
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (–) <bold>(a)</bold>, unfractionated SOC concentration (%) <bold>(b)</bold> and
“<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” SOC concentration (%) <bold>(c)</bold>, as well as the amount
of Al and Fe, in the form of organo-mineral complexes
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molar ratio (–)), as a
function of pH value (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (–) <bold>(d)</bold>, unfractionated SOC concentration
(%) <bold>(e)</bold> and “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” SOC concentration (%) <bold>(f)</bold>. The
observations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are labelled based on the vegetation types: Barren
Land (<?xmltex \hack{\protect}?><?xmltex \igopts{width=5.690551pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019-g01.png"/>), Birch15 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">▴</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), Birch20 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">•</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>), Birch25 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">⧫</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), Birch50 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">▪</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), Grass50 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" lspace="0mm">+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>)
and Birchnat (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" lspace="0mm">×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>). The dotted circles
show all samples of Birchnat (0–5, 5–10 cm), all samples of Birch50 (0–5 cm) and one sample of Birch25 (0–5 cm).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://soil.copernicus.org/articles/5/223/2019/soil-5-223-2019-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4792">In general, the results showed a decline of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratios with soil depth for all tested categories
(Table 2). Further, Birchnat and Birch50 showed the
highest <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratios, while at
Barren Land and Grass50, the lowest ratios were found
(Table 2). The present study found a strong
positive (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.68</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.001) correlation between the
allophane concentration and the pH value and a strong negative (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.77</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.001) correlation between the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio and the pH value,
respectively (Fig. 5a, b). These findings are
in accordance with Arnalds (2015c). The allophane concentrations are highest
in the soils which were unvegetated (Barren Land). On the other hand, the
concentrations of Al and Fe bound to metal–humus complexes were highest in
the top sampling intervals of sites with the longest vegetation covers
(Birchnat, Birch50 and Birch25; dotted circle). Both correlations indicate a
possible influence of the different stages of vegetation cover on the
amounts of allophane and the ratio
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. This can be
explained by the increase in protons resulting from vegetation processes in
the soil, which leads to acidification and simultaneously a lowering of the
pH value. Hence, the establishment of vegetation favours the formation of
metal–humus complexes (Arnalds, 2008, 2015c).</p>
      <p id="d1e5008">The scatterplots comparing the allophane concentrations with the
unfractionated SOC concentrations, as well as the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” SOC
concentrations, show no clear trends as most of the samples contained
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % of unfractionated SOC or “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” SOC. The
highest SOC concentrations were found in the upper sampling intervals at
Birch25, Birch50 and Birchnat (dotted circles). However, the allophane
content is lowest in these cases (dotted circle), which may be attributed to
the fact that soil weathering and the formation of clay minerals takes
longer than the allocation of soil organic carbon during birch growth.
Regarding SOC sequestration during the reclamation of severely degraded land
and soils, soil material of eroded and capped soil profiles most likely
already passed through weathering processes and therefore contained a high
amount of clay minerals. The fresh SOC originating from reclamation
activities can be stabilized by the already existing clay minerals like
allophane (Table 2, Fig. 5) and the carbon sequestration potential of these eroded soils may be
relatively high (Arnalds et al., 2000; Ágústsdóttir, 2004).</p>
      <p id="d1e5057">The stabilization of the SOC in the form of metal–humus complexes seems to
be hampered due to the relatively high measured pH values
(Table 1), which were higher than the upper
threshold value of 5.0 for the building of metal–humus complexes given in
the literature (Fig. 5d, f). The pattern that
the uppermost sampling intervals of the vegetated sites (dotted circle) are
decoupled from the nested scatters was also observed in the relationship
between the selected SOC pools (SOC concentration, “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”
SOC concentration) and the organo-mineral complexes
(Fig. 5d, f). The decoupled nested scatter
shows an almost strong positive relationship (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” SOC concentration and
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molar ratio
(Fig. 5f). This observation of relatively high
“<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” SOC concentrations as well as relatively high
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pyr</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fe</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Al</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ox</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molar ratio values
indicates that the SOC in the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” fraction might be
sequestered as organo-mineral complexes in the upper sampling intervals at
Birch25, Birch50 and Birchnat. In such cases, the formation of metal–humus
complexes might comprise a reasonable stabilization process of the SOC in
the “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” fraction (Fig. 5f).
The regression analysis between the SOC and volcanic minerals indicates that
during afforestation, the organic carbon is preferably stabilized in
metal–humus complexes. It implies that this process starts to be an
effective stabilization process for total SOC and “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m” SOC after 20 years of birch growth and can occur in deeper sampling
intervals in older birch stands.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <?pagebreak page236?><p id="d1e5302">This study aimed to evaluate the SOC sequestration potential of
afforestation on severely degraded soils in southern Iceland due to the
forecasted high potential of these soils. Afforestation with mountain birch
leads to an increase in the SOC stock (0–30 cm) between the ages of 15 and 50
years. Since the 50-year birch stands still contained lower SOC stock than
naturally old growth birch woodlands, it appears that the SOC stock
equilibrium has not been reached yet. Consequently, afforestation with the native
mountain birch species is a successful strategy to sequester atmospheric
carbon severely degraded volcanic soils by about 20 t C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. However,
stored C is likely relatively labile with a disproportional rise in the POM
fraction SOC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) compared
to mineral-associated OC stored in the HF and “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m”
fractions, especially in the top 10 cm. Indeed, the proportion of the latter
SOC fraction declined to just more than half of the SOC stock (0–30 cm) in
the afforested plots as opposed to over 90 % in unvegetated soils, which
resulted in remarkable SOC stocks. Consequently, much of the newly stored C
may not be sequestrated at all but is probably prone to loss again in the
event of future change in OM inputs. Our approach thus reveals that detailed
measurements on the SOC quality are equally needed to appreciate the SOC
sequestration potential of restoration activities on severely degraded
volcanic soils, rather than only measuring SOC stocks. Lastly, we found that
severely degraded volcanic soils are surprisingly variable in their SOC
stocks, with often inverse SOC profiles resulting from an interplay between
soil erosion and burial by ash from volcanic eruptions. This highly local
occurrence of specific SOC depth profiles, even more so than normal,
necessitates a depth-differentiated and SOC-fractionated approach to deduce
SOC storage resulting from land-use changes.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e5381">The data that support the findings of this study are available by request
from the corresponding author (Matthias Hunziker).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e5387">MH designed the sampling setup, did the soil sampling and led
the lab analysis procedure. MH also did the statistics,
prepared the manuscript with valuable contributions of the two co-authors
OA and NJK and undertook the revisions during the
review process. NJK provided the lab facilities and supervised
MH during his PhD studies. OA was the project
leader of the CarbBirch research project.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e5393">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e5399">This work contributes to the CarbBirch project funded by Orkuveita
Reykjavikur and the work within the Nordic Centre of Advanced Research on
Environmental Services (CAR-ES) and the Forest Soil C-sink Nordic Network
(FSC-Sink). We want to thank our lab technician and friend Marianne Caroni,
who sadly left us much too early, for her help and inspired discussions. We
would also like to extend our gratitude to Ruth Strunk and Judith Kobler for
their help in the laboratory during carbon and volcanic clay measurements.
Nina Carle and Mathias Würsch helped during data gathering in the field
and in the laboratory. Our sincerest thanks go to Gudmundur Halldorsson and
the people of the Soil Conservation Service at Gunnersholt for their help
and hospitality. Further, the authors gratefully acknowledge Vladimir Wingate for improving the grammar. The comments provided by Lorenzo Menichetti, Robert Qualls and Steven Sleutel are much appreciated.</p></ack><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5404">This paper was edited by Steven Sleutel and reviewed by Lorenzo Menichetti and Robert Qualls.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Aalde, H., Gonzalez, P., Gytarsky, M., Krug, T., Kurz, W. A., Ogle, S.,
Raison, J., Schoene, D., Ravandranath, N. H., Eggleston, H. S., Buendia, L.,
Miwa, K., Ngara, T., and Tanabe, K.: Forest Land, in: IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Volume 4 Agriculture, Forestry and Other
Land Use, IGES, Hayama, Kanagawa, Japan, 1–83, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ágústsdóttir, A. M.: Revegetation of eroded land and
possibilities of carbon sequestration in Iceland, Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys.,
70, 241–247, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Aradóttir, Á., Svavarsdóttir, K., Jonsson, T. H., and Gudbergsson,
G.: Carbon accumulation in vegetation and soils by reclamation of degraded
areas, Iceland Agr. Sci. 13, 99–113, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Aradóttir, Á. L.: Population biology and stand development of birch
(Betula pubescens Ehrh.) on disturbed sites in Iceland, PhD Dissertation,
Texas A&amp;M University, Texas, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Aradóttir, Á. L.: Restoration of birch and willow woodland on eroded
areas, in:  Effects
of Afforestation on Ecosystems, edited by: Halldorsson, G., Oddsdottir, E. S., and Eggertsson, O., Landscape and Rural Development, 67–74, TemaNord 2207:508 (c) Nordic Council of Ministers
Copenhagen,
2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Aradottir, A. L. and Arnalds, O.: Ecosystem degradation and restoration of birch
woodlands in Iceland, in:  Nordic Mountain Birch
Ecosystem, edited by:  Wielgolaski, F. E., Man and the Biosphere Series, 293–308, UNESCO,
Paris, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Aradòttir, À. L., Arnalds, O., and Archer, S. R.: Degradation of
vegetation and soils (Hnignun grodurs og jardvegs), in: Græðum
Island, Soil Conservation Service Yearbook 1991–1992, 73–82, Landgrædsla Ríkisins Reykjavik, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Aradóttir, Á. L., Petursdottir, T., Halldorsson, G., Svavarsdottir,
K., and Arnalds, O.: Drivers of Ecological Restoration: Lessons from a Century
of Restoration in Iceland, Ecol. Soc., 18, 33, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05946-180433" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5751/ES-05946-180433</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: The Icelandic “rofabard” soil erosion features, Earth Surf.
Proc. Land. 25, 17–28, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Soils of Iceland, JÖKULL-Icel. J. Earth Sci. 58, 409–421,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Dust sources and deposition of aeolian materials in Iceland,
Iceland Agr. Sci. 23, 3–21, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Andosols – Soils of Volcanic Regions (Chapter 5), in: The Soils
of Iceland, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,  47–54, 2015a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Classification and the Main Soil Types (Chapter 6), in: The
Soils of Iceland, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,  55–70, 2015b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Chemical Characteristics (Chapter 8), in: The Soils of Iceland,
Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,  91–105, 2015c.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Genesis and Mineralogical Characteristics (Chapter 9), in: The
Soils of Iceland, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,   107–117, 2015d.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: The Soils of Iceland, World Soils Book Series, Springer
Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2015e.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O. and Kimble, J.: Andisols of deserts in Iceland, 65, 1778–1786, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O., Gudbergsson, G., and Gudmundsson, J.: Carbon Sequestration and
Reclamation of Severely Degraded Soils in Iceland, Iceland Agr. Sci., 13,
87–97, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O., Orradottir, B., Aradottir, A. L.: Carbon accumulation in
Icelandic desert Andosols during early stages of restoration, Geoderma,
193–194, 172–179, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O., Dagsson-Waldhauserova, P., and Olafsson, H.: The Icelandic volcanic
aeolian environment: Processes and impacts – A review, Aeolian Res., 20,
176–195, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Árnason, G.: Uppblástur og eyðing býla í Landsveit
[Erosion and degradation of farmland in Landsveit], in:
Sandgræðslan, edite<?pagebreak page237?>d by: Sigurjónsson, A., Búnaðarfélag Íslands og
Sandgræðsla ríkisins, 88–92, 1958.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bárcena, T. G., Gundersen, P., and Vesterdal, L.: Afforestation effects on
SOC in former cropland: oak and spruce chronosequences resampled after 13
years, Glob. Change Biol., 20, 2938–2952, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Basile-Doelsch, I., Amundson, R., Stone, W. E. E., Borschneck, D., Bottero,
J. Y., Moustier, S., Masin, F., and Colin, F.: Mineral control of carbon pools in
a volcanic soil horizon, Geoderma, 137, 477–489, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bjarnadottir, B.: Carbon stocks and fluxes in a young Siberian larch
(Larix sibirica) plantation in Iceland, PhD Dissertation, Lund University, Lund, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bjarnadottir, B., Sigurdsson, B. D., and Lindroth, A.: Estimate of annual carbon
balance of a young Siberian larch (Larix sibirica) plantation in Iceland,
Tellus B, 59, 891–899, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Blakemore, L. C., Searle, P. L., and Daly, B. K.: Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Soils, No. 80, Scientific Report, New Zealand Soil Bureau, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Cambardella, C. A. and Elliott, E. T.: Particulate Soil Organic-Matter Changes
across a Grassland Cultivation Sequence, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 56, 777–783,
1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Christensen, B. T.: Physical fractionation of soil and structural and
functional complexity in organic matter turnover, Eur. J. Soil Sci., 52,
345–353, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Crofts, R.: Healing the Land: The story of land reclamation and soil
conservation in Iceland, The Soil Conservation Service of Iceland,
Gunnarsholt, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dahlgren, R. A., Saigusa, M., and Ugolini, F. C.: The Nature, Properties and
Management of Volcanic Soils, Advances in Agronomy, Vol. 82, 113–182, Academic
Press, New York, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Delmelle, P., Opfergelt, S., Cornelis, J.-T., and Ping, C.-L.: Volcanic Soils,
in: The Encyclopedia of Volcanoes, 1253–1264, Elsevier,  San Diego, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dugmore, A. J., Gisladóttir, G., Simpson, I. A., and Newton, A.: Conceptual
Models of 1200 Years of Icelandic Soil Erosion Reconstructed Using
Tephrochronology, J. N. Atl., 2, 1–18, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ellert, B. H., Janzen, H. H., VandenBygaart, A. J., and Bremer, E.: Measuring
Change in Soil Organic Carbon Storage, in: Carter, M. R. and Gregorich, E. G.,
Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
FAL: Schweizerische Referenzmethoden der Eidg. landwirtschaftlichen
Forschungsanstalten. Band 2: Bodenuntersuchungen zur
Standort-Charakterisierung, Eidg. Forschungsanstalten FAL, RAC, FAW,
Zürich-Reckenholz, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gabarrón-Galeote, M. A., Trigalet, S., and van Wesemael, B.: Effect of land
abandonment on soil organic carbon fractions along a Mediterranean
precipitation gradient, Geoderma, 249–250, 69–78, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Goulden, M. L., McMillan, A. M. S., Winston, G. C., Rocha, A. V., Manies, K. L.,
Harden, J. W., and Bond-Lamberty, B. P.: Patterns of NPP, GPP, respiration, and
NEP during boreal forest succession, Glob. Change Biol., 17, 855–871, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Guidi, C., Magid, J., Rodeghiero, M., Gianelle, D., and Vesterdal, L.: Effects
of forest expansion on mountain grassland: changes within soil organic
carbon fractions, Plant Soil, 385, 373–387, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Halldórsson, G., Aradóttir, Á. L., Sigurðsson, B. D.,
Oddsdóttir, E. S., Hunziker, M., and Arnalds, O.: Kolbjörk – endurheimt
birkivistkerfa og kolefnisbinding [CarbBirch – Ecosystem restoration and
carbon sequestration], in:
Vistheimt Á Íslandi, edited by:   Aradóttir, A. L. and Halldórsson, G.,
Landbúnaðarháskóli Íslands
og Landgræðsla ríkisins, 133–136, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hellsing, V., Ragnarsdottir, A., Jonsson, K., Andresson, K., Johannsson, T.,
Guðmundsson, J., Snorrason, A., Thorsson, J., and Einarsson, S.: National
Inventory Report 2016; submitted under the United Nations framework
convention on climate change, emissions of greenhouse gases in Iceland from
1990 to 2014, Environmental Agency of Iceland, Reykjavik, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hunziker, M., Caviezel, C., and Kuhn, N. J.: Shrub encroachment by green alder on
subalpine pastures: Changes in mineral soil organic carbon characteristics,
Catena, 157, 35–46, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hunziker, M., Sigurdsson, B. D., Halldorsson, G., Schwanghart, W., and Kuhn, N.:
Biomass allometries and coarse root biomass distribution of mountain birch
in southern Iceland, Iceland Agr. Sci., 27,  111–125, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
IUSS Working Group WRB: World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014 (World
Soil Resources Reports No. 106), FAO, Rome, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jobbágy, E. G. and Jackson, R. B.: The vertical distribution of soil organic
carbon and its relation to climate and vegetation, Ecol. Appl., 10, 423–436,
2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kaiser, M., Ellerbrock, R. H., and Sommer, M.: Separation of Coarse Organic
Particles from Bulk Surface Soil Samples by Electrostatic Attraction, Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J., 73, 2118–2130,  2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kolka-Jónsson, P.: Carbon sequestration and soil development under
mountain birch (Betula pubescens) in rehabilitated areas in southern Iceland, MSc thesis, Ohio State University, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lilienfein, J., Qualls, R. G., Uselman, S. M., and Bridgham, S. D.: Soil formation
and organic matter accretion in a young andestic chronosequence at Mt.
Shasta, California, Geoderma, 116, 249–264, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
McDaniel, P. A., Lowe, D. J., Arnalds, O., and Ping, C.-L.: Andisols, in:   Handbook of Soil Sciences, edited by: Huang,
P. M., Li, Y., and Sumner, M. E.,  2nd Edn.,
CRC Press (Taylor &amp; Francis), Boca Raton, FL,   33.29–33.48, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ministry for the Environment: Iceland's climate change strategy, Reykjavik, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Óskarsson, H., Arnalds, Ó., Gudmundsson, J., and Gudbergsson, G.:
Organic carbon in Icelandic Andosols: geographical variation and impact of
erosion, Catena, 56, 225–238, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Parfitt, R.: Allophane in New Zealand – a review, Aust. J. Soil Res., 28,
343–360, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Parfitt, R. and Childs, C.: Estimation of forms of Fe and Al – a review, and
analysis of contrasting soils by dissolution and Mossbauer methods, Soil
Res., 26, 121–144, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Poeplau, C. and Don, A.: Sensitivity of soil organic carbon stocks and
fractions to different land-use changes across Europe, Geoderma, 192,
189–201, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ritter, E.: Carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in volcanic soils following
afforestation with native birch (Betula pubescens) and introduced larch
(Larix sibirica) in Iceland, Plant Soil, 295, 239–251, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page238?><ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Rodeghiero, M., Heinemeyer, A., Schrumpf, M., and Bellamy, P.: Determination of
changes in soil carbon stocks, in:
Soil Carbon Dynamics: An Integrated Methodology, edited by:  Kutsch, W. L., Bahn, M., and Heinemeyer,  A., Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 49–75, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Rovira, P., Sauras, T., Salgado, J., and Merino, A.: Towards sound comparisons
of soil carbon stocks: A proposal based on the cumulative coordinates
approach, Catena, 133, 420–431, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schmidt, M. W. I., Torn, M. S., Abiven, S., Dittmar, T., Guggenberger, G.,
Janssens, I. A., Kleber, M., Kögel-Knabner, I., Lehmann, J., Manning,
D. A. C., Nannipieri, P., Rasse, D. P., Weiner, S., and Trumbore, S. E.: Persistence
of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property, Nature, 478, 49–56, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sigurdsson, B. D. and Snorrason, A.: Carbon sequestration by afforestation and
revegetation as a means of limiting net-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in Iceland,
Biotechnol. Agron. Soc., 4, 303–307, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Six, J., Elliott, E. T., Paustian, K., and Doran, J. W.: Aggregation and Soil
Organic Matter Accumulation in Cultivated and Native Grassland Soils, Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J., 62, 1367–1377, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1998.03615995006200050032x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2136/sssaj1998.03615995006200050032x</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Six, J., Conant, R. T., Paul, E. A., and Paustian, K.: Stabilization mechanisms of
soil organic matter: Implications for C-saturation of soils, Plant Soil, 241,
155–176, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Smith, D. M., Larson, B. C., Kelty, M. J., and Ashton, P. M. S.: The practice of silviculture: applied forest ecology, 9th Edn., Wiley, New York, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Snorrason, A.: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010, Country Report
Iceland, FAO, Rome, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Snorrason, A., Sigurdsson, B. D., Gudbergsson, G., Svavarsdottir, K.,
and Jonsson, T. H.: Carbon sequestration in forest plantations in Iceland, Iceland
Agr. Sci., 15, 81–93, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sollins, P., Spycher, G., and Topik, C.: Processes of soil organic matter
accretion at a mudflow chronosequence, Mt Shasta, California, Ecology, 64,
1273–1282, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stewart, C. E., Paustian, K., Conant, R. T., Plante, A. F., and Six, J.: Soil
carbon saturation: concept, evidence and evaluation, Biogeochemistry, 86,
19–31, 2007.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Strachan, I. B., Arnalds, Ó., Pálmason, F., Thorgeirsson, H.,
Sigurdsson, B. D., Sigurdardóttir, H., and Novoselac, G.: Soils of the
Gunnarsholt experimental plantation, Iceland Agr. Sci., 12, 15–26, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Thorarinsdottir, E. F. and Arnalds, O.: Wind erosion of volcanic materials in
the Hekla area, South Iceland, Aeolian Res., 4, 39–50, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Thorsson, J.: Carbon sequestration rates in Icelandic
land-reclamation sites, in preparation, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Torn, M. S., Trumbore, S. E., Chadwick, O. A., Vitousek, P. M., and Hendricks, D. M.:
Mineral control of soil organic carbon storage and turnover, Nature, 389,
170–173, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trigalet, S., Gabarrón-Galeote, M. A., Van Oost, K., and van Wesemael, B.:
Changes in soil organic carbon pools along a chronosequence of land
abandonment in southern Spain, Geoderma, 268, 14–21, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Vilmundardóttir, O. K., Gísladóttir, G., and Lal, R.: Soil carbon
accretion along an age chronosequence formed by the retreat of the
Skaftafellsjökull glacier, SE-Iceland, Geomorphology, 228, 124–133,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
von Lützow, M., Kögel-Knabner, I., Ludwig, B., Matzner, E., Flessa,
H., Ekschmitt, K., Guggenberger, G., Marschner, B., and Kalbitz, K.:
Stabilization mechanisms of organic matter in four temperate soils:
Development and application of a conceptual model, J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sc.,
171, 111–124, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wagai, R., Mayer, L. M., Kitayama, K., and Knicker, H.: Climate and parent
material controls on organic matter storage in surface soils: A three-pool,
density-separation approach, Geoderma 147, 23–33, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Walker, L. R., Wardle, D. A., Bardgett, R. D., and Clarkson, B. D.: The use of
chronosequences in studies of ecological succession and soil development, J.
Ecol., 98, 725–736, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zimmermann, M., Leifeld, J., and Fuhrer, J.: Quantifying soil organic carbon
fractions by infrared-spectroscopy, Soil Biol. Biochem., 39, 224–231, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Evaluating the carbon sequestration potential of volcanic soils in southern Iceland after birch afforestation</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Afforestation is a strategy to sequester atmospheric
carbon in the terrestrial system and to enhance ecosystem services.
Iceland's large areas of formerly vegetated and now degraded ecosystems
therefore have a high potential to act as carbon sinks. Consequently, the
ecological restoration of these landscape systems is part of climate
mitigation programmes supported by the Icelandic government. The aim of this
study was to explore the change in the soil organic carbon (SOC) pools and
to estimate the SOC sequestration potential during the re-establishment of
birch forest on severely degraded land. Differently aged afforested mountain
birch sites (15, 20, 25 and 50 years) were compared to sites of severely
degraded land, naturally growing remnants of mountain birch woodland and
grasslands which were re-vegetated using fertilizer and grass seeds 50 years
ago. The soil was sampled to estimate the SOC stocks and for physical
fractionation to characterize the quality of the SOC. The results of our
study show that the severely degraded soils can potentially sequester an
additional 20&thinsp;t&thinsp;C&thinsp;ha<sup>−1</sup> (0–30&thinsp;cm) to reach the SOC stock of naturally
growing birch woodlands. After 50 years of birch growth, the SOC stock is
significantly lower than that of a naturally growing birch woodland,
suggesting that afforested stands could sequester additional SOC beyond 50
years of growth. The SOC fractionation revealed that at all the tested sites
most of the carbon was stored in the  &lt; 63&thinsp;µm fraction.
However, after 50 years of birch growth on severely degraded soils the
particulate organic matter (POM) fraction was significantly enriched most
(+12&thinsp;t&thinsp;POM-C&thinsp;ha<sup>−1</sup>) in the top 30&thinsp;cm. The study also found a doubling
of the dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentration after 50 years of birch
growth. Therefore and due to the absence of any increase in the tested
mineral-associated SOC fractions, we assume that the afforestation process
evokes a carbon deposition in the labile SOC pools. Consequently, parts of
this plant-derived, labile SOC may be partly released into the atmosphere
during the process of stabilization with the mineral soil phases in the
future. Our results are limited in their scope since the selected sites do
not fully reflect the heterogeneity of landscape evolution and the range of
soil degradation conditions. As an alternative, we suggest using repeated
plot measurements instead of space-for-time substitution approaches for
testing C changes in severely degraded volcanic soils. Our findings clearly
show that detailed measurements on the SOC quality are needed to estimate
the SOC sequestration potential of restoration activities on severely
degraded volcanic soils, rather than only measuring SOC concentration and
SOC stocks.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Aalde, H., Gonzalez, P., Gytarsky, M., Krug, T., Kurz, W. A., Ogle, S.,
Raison, J., Schoene, D., Ravandranath, N. H., Eggleston, H. S., Buendia, L.,
Miwa, K., Ngara, T., and Tanabe, K.: Forest Land, in: IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Volume 4 Agriculture, Forestry and Other
Land Use, IGES, Hayama, Kanagawa, Japan, 1–83, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Ágústsdóttir, A. M.: Revegetation of eroded land and
possibilities of carbon sequestration in Iceland, Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys.,
70, 241–247, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Aradóttir, Á., Svavarsdóttir, K., Jonsson, T. H., and Gudbergsson,
G.: Carbon accumulation in vegetation and soils by reclamation of degraded
areas, Iceland Agr. Sci. 13, 99–113, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Aradóttir, Á. L.: Population biology and stand development of birch
(Betula pubescens Ehrh.) on disturbed sites in Iceland, PhD Dissertation,
Texas A&amp;M University, Texas, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Aradóttir, Á. L.: Restoration of birch and willow woodland on eroded
areas, in:  Effects
of Afforestation on Ecosystems, edited by: Halldorsson, G., Oddsdottir, E. S., and Eggertsson, O., Landscape and Rural Development, 67–74, TemaNord 2207:508 (c) Nordic Council of Ministers
Copenhagen,
2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Aradottir, A. L. and Arnalds, O.: Ecosystem degradation and restoration of birch
woodlands in Iceland, in:  Nordic Mountain Birch
Ecosystem, edited by:  Wielgolaski, F. E., Man and the Biosphere Series, 293–308, UNESCO,
Paris, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Aradòttir, À. L., Arnalds, O., and Archer, S. R.: Degradation of
vegetation and soils (Hnignun grodurs og jardvegs), in: Græðum
Island, Soil Conservation Service Yearbook 1991–1992, 73–82, Landgrædsla Ríkisins Reykjavik, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Aradóttir, Á. L., Petursdottir, T., Halldorsson, G., Svavarsdottir,
K., and Arnalds, O.: Drivers of Ecological Restoration: Lessons from a Century
of Restoration in Iceland, Ecol. Soc., 18, 33, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05946-180433" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05946-180433</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: The Icelandic “rofabard” soil erosion features, Earth Surf.
Proc. Land. 25, 17–28, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Soils of Iceland, JÖKULL-Icel. J. Earth Sci. 58, 409–421,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Dust sources and deposition of aeolian materials in Iceland,
Iceland Agr. Sci. 23, 3–21, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Andosols – Soils of Volcanic Regions (Chapter 5), in: The Soils
of Iceland, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,  47–54, 2015a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Classification and the Main Soil Types (Chapter 6), in: The
Soils of Iceland, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,  55–70, 2015b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Chemical Characteristics (Chapter 8), in: The Soils of Iceland,
Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,  91–105, 2015c.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: Genesis and Mineralogical Characteristics (Chapter 9), in: The
Soils of Iceland, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,   107–117, 2015d.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O.: The Soils of Iceland, World Soils Book Series, Springer
Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2015e.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O. and Kimble, J.: Andisols of deserts in Iceland, 65, 1778–1786, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O., Gudbergsson, G., and Gudmundsson, J.: Carbon Sequestration and
Reclamation of Severely Degraded Soils in Iceland, Iceland Agr. Sci., 13,
87–97, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O., Orradottir, B., Aradottir, A. L.: Carbon accumulation in
Icelandic desert Andosols during early stages of restoration, Geoderma,
193–194, 172–179, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Arnalds, O., Dagsson-Waldhauserova, P., and Olafsson, H.: The Icelandic volcanic
aeolian environment: Processes and impacts – A review, Aeolian Res., 20,
176–195, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Árnason, G.: Uppblástur og eyðing býla í Landsveit
[Erosion and degradation of farmland in Landsveit], in:
Sandgræðslan, edited by: Sigurjónsson, A., Búnaðarfélag Íslands og
Sandgræðsla ríkisins, 88–92, 1958.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Bárcena, T. G., Gundersen, P., and Vesterdal, L.: Afforestation effects on
SOC in former cropland: oak and spruce chronosequences resampled after 13
years, Glob. Change Biol., 20, 2938–2952, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Basile-Doelsch, I., Amundson, R., Stone, W. E. E., Borschneck, D., Bottero,
J. Y., Moustier, S., Masin, F., and Colin, F.: Mineral control of carbon pools in
a volcanic soil horizon, Geoderma, 137, 477–489, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Bjarnadottir, B.: Carbon stocks and fluxes in a young Siberian larch
(Larix sibirica) plantation in Iceland, PhD Dissertation, Lund University, Lund, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Bjarnadottir, B., Sigurdsson, B. D., and Lindroth, A.: Estimate of annual carbon
balance of a young Siberian larch (Larix sibirica) plantation in Iceland,
Tellus B, 59, 891–899, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Blakemore, L. C., Searle, P. L., and Daly, B. K.: Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Soils, No. 80, Scientific Report, New Zealand Soil Bureau, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Cambardella, C. A. and Elliott, E. T.: Particulate Soil Organic-Matter Changes
across a Grassland Cultivation Sequence, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 56, 777–783,
1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Christensen, B. T.: Physical fractionation of soil and structural and
functional complexity in organic matter turnover, Eur. J. Soil Sci., 52,
345–353, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Crofts, R.: Healing the Land: The story of land reclamation and soil
conservation in Iceland, The Soil Conservation Service of Iceland,
Gunnarsholt, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Dahlgren, R. A., Saigusa, M., and Ugolini, F. C.: The Nature, Properties and
Management of Volcanic Soils, Advances in Agronomy, Vol. 82, 113–182, Academic
Press, New York, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Delmelle, P., Opfergelt, S., Cornelis, J.-T., and Ping, C.-L.: Volcanic Soils,
in: The Encyclopedia of Volcanoes, 1253–1264, Elsevier,  San Diego, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Dugmore, A. J., Gisladóttir, G., Simpson, I. A., and Newton, A.: Conceptual
Models of 1200 Years of Icelandic Soil Erosion Reconstructed Using
Tephrochronology, J. N. Atl., 2, 1–18, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Ellert, B. H., Janzen, H. H., VandenBygaart, A. J., and Bremer, E.: Measuring
Change in Soil Organic Carbon Storage, in: Carter, M. R. and Gregorich, E. G.,
Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
FAL: Schweizerische Referenzmethoden der Eidg. landwirtschaftlichen
Forschungsanstalten. Band 2: Bodenuntersuchungen zur
Standort-Charakterisierung, Eidg. Forschungsanstalten FAL, RAC, FAW,
Zürich-Reckenholz, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Gabarrón-Galeote, M. A., Trigalet, S., and van Wesemael, B.: Effect of land
abandonment on soil organic carbon fractions along a Mediterranean
precipitation gradient, Geoderma, 249–250, 69–78, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Goulden, M. L., McMillan, A. M. S., Winston, G. C., Rocha, A. V., Manies, K. L.,
Harden, J. W., and Bond-Lamberty, B. P.: Patterns of NPP, GPP, respiration, and
NEP during boreal forest succession, Glob. Change Biol., 17, 855–871, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Guidi, C., Magid, J., Rodeghiero, M., Gianelle, D., and Vesterdal, L.: Effects
of forest expansion on mountain grassland: changes within soil organic
carbon fractions, Plant Soil, 385, 373–387, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Halldórsson, G., Aradóttir, Á. L., Sigurðsson, B. D.,
Oddsdóttir, E. S., Hunziker, M., and Arnalds, O.: Kolbjörk – endurheimt
birkivistkerfa og kolefnisbinding [CarbBirch – Ecosystem restoration and
carbon sequestration], in:
Vistheimt Á Íslandi, edited by:   Aradóttir, A. L. and Halldórsson, G.,
Landbúnaðarháskóli Íslands
og Landgræðsla ríkisins, 133–136, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Hellsing, V., Ragnarsdottir, A., Jonsson, K., Andresson, K., Johannsson, T.,
Guðmundsson, J., Snorrason, A., Thorsson, J., and Einarsson, S.: National
Inventory Report 2016; submitted under the United Nations framework
convention on climate change, emissions of greenhouse gases in Iceland from
1990 to 2014, Environmental Agency of Iceland, Reykjavik, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Hunziker, M., Caviezel, C., and Kuhn, N. J.: Shrub encroachment by green alder on
subalpine pastures: Changes in mineral soil organic carbon characteristics,
Catena, 157, 35–46, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Hunziker, M., Sigurdsson, B. D., Halldorsson, G., Schwanghart, W., and Kuhn, N.:
Biomass allometries and coarse root biomass distribution of mountain birch
in southern Iceland, Iceland Agr. Sci., 27,  111–125, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
IUSS Working Group WRB: World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014 (World
Soil Resources Reports No. 106), FAO, Rome, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Jobbágy, E. G. and Jackson, R. B.: The vertical distribution of soil organic
carbon and its relation to climate and vegetation, Ecol. Appl., 10, 423–436,
2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Kaiser, M., Ellerbrock, R. H., and Sommer, M.: Separation of Coarse Organic
Particles from Bulk Surface Soil Samples by Electrostatic Attraction, Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J., 73, 2118–2130,  2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Kolka-Jónsson, P.: Carbon sequestration and soil development under
mountain birch (Betula pubescens) in rehabilitated areas in southern Iceland, MSc thesis, Ohio State University, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Lilienfein, J., Qualls, R. G., Uselman, S. M., and Bridgham, S. D.: Soil formation
and organic matter accretion in a young andestic chronosequence at Mt.
Shasta, California, Geoderma, 116, 249–264, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
McDaniel, P. A., Lowe, D. J., Arnalds, O., and Ping, C.-L.: Andisols, in:   Handbook of Soil Sciences, edited by: Huang,
P. M., Li, Y., and Sumner, M. E.,  2nd Edn.,
CRC Press (Taylor &amp; Francis), Boca Raton, FL,   33.29–33.48, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Ministry for the Environment: Iceland's climate change strategy, Reykjavik, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Óskarsson, H., Arnalds, Ó., Gudmundsson, J., and Gudbergsson, G.:
Organic carbon in Icelandic Andosols: geographical variation and impact of
erosion, Catena, 56, 225–238, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Parfitt, R.: Allophane in New Zealand – a review, Aust. J. Soil Res., 28,
343–360, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Parfitt, R. and Childs, C.: Estimation of forms of Fe and Al – a review, and
analysis of contrasting soils by dissolution and Mossbauer methods, Soil
Res., 26, 121–144, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Poeplau, C. and Don, A.: Sensitivity of soil organic carbon stocks and
fractions to different land-use changes across Europe, Geoderma, 192,
189–201, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Ritter, E.: Carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in volcanic soils following
afforestation with native birch (Betula pubescens) and introduced larch
(Larix sibirica) in Iceland, Plant Soil, 295, 239–251, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Rodeghiero, M., Heinemeyer, A., Schrumpf, M., and Bellamy, P.: Determination of
changes in soil carbon stocks, in:
Soil Carbon Dynamics: An Integrated Methodology, edited by:  Kutsch, W. L., Bahn, M., and Heinemeyer,  A., Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 49–75, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Rovira, P., Sauras, T., Salgado, J., and Merino, A.: Towards sound comparisons
of soil carbon stocks: A proposal based on the cumulative coordinates
approach, Catena, 133, 420–431, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Schmidt, M. W. I., Torn, M. S., Abiven, S., Dittmar, T., Guggenberger, G.,
Janssens, I. A., Kleber, M., Kögel-Knabner, I., Lehmann, J., Manning,
D. A. C., Nannipieri, P., Rasse, D. P., Weiner, S., and Trumbore, S. E.: Persistence
of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property, Nature, 478, 49–56, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Sigurdsson, B. D. and Snorrason, A.: Carbon sequestration by afforestation and
revegetation as a means of limiting net-CO<sub>2</sub> emissions in Iceland,
Biotechnol. Agron. Soc., 4, 303–307, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Six, J., Elliott, E. T., Paustian, K., and Doran, J. W.: Aggregation and Soil
Organic Matter Accumulation in Cultivated and Native Grassland Soils, Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J., 62, 1367–1377, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1998.03615995006200050032x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1998.03615995006200050032x</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Six, J., Conant, R. T., Paul, E. A., and Paustian, K.: Stabilization mechanisms of
soil organic matter: Implications for C-saturation of soils, Plant Soil, 241,
155–176, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Smith, D. M., Larson, B. C., Kelty, M. J., and Ashton, P. M. S.: The practice of silviculture: applied forest ecology, 9th Edn., Wiley, New York, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Snorrason, A.: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010, Country Report
Iceland, FAO, Rome, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Snorrason, A., Sigurdsson, B. D., Gudbergsson, G., Svavarsdottir, K.,
and Jonsson, T. H.: Carbon sequestration in forest plantations in Iceland, Iceland
Agr. Sci., 15, 81–93, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Sollins, P., Spycher, G., and Topik, C.: Processes of soil organic matter
accretion at a mudflow chronosequence, Mt Shasta, California, Ecology, 64,
1273–1282, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Stewart, C. E., Paustian, K., Conant, R. T., Plante, A. F., and Six, J.: Soil
carbon saturation: concept, evidence and evaluation, Biogeochemistry, 86,
19–31, 2007.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Strachan, I. B., Arnalds, Ó., Pálmason, F., Thorgeirsson, H.,
Sigurdsson, B. D., Sigurdardóttir, H., and Novoselac, G.: Soils of the
Gunnarsholt experimental plantation, Iceland Agr. Sci., 12, 15–26, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Thorarinsdottir, E. F. and Arnalds, O.: Wind erosion of volcanic materials in
the Hekla area, South Iceland, Aeolian Res., 4, 39–50, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Thorsson, J.: Carbon sequestration rates in Icelandic
land-reclamation sites, in preparation, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Torn, M. S., Trumbore, S. E., Chadwick, O. A., Vitousek, P. M., and Hendricks, D. M.:
Mineral control of soil organic carbon storage and turnover, Nature, 389,
170–173, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Trigalet, S., Gabarrón-Galeote, M. A., Van Oost, K., and van Wesemael, B.:
Changes in soil organic carbon pools along a chronosequence of land
abandonment in southern Spain, Geoderma, 268, 14–21, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Vilmundardóttir, O. K., Gísladóttir, G., and Lal, R.: Soil carbon
accretion along an age chronosequence formed by the retreat of the
Skaftafellsjökull glacier, SE-Iceland, Geomorphology, 228, 124–133,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
von Lützow, M., Kögel-Knabner, I., Ludwig, B., Matzner, E., Flessa,
H., Ekschmitt, K., Guggenberger, G., Marschner, B., and Kalbitz, K.:
Stabilization mechanisms of organic matter in four temperate soils:
Development and application of a conceptual model, J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sc.,
171, 111–124, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Wagai, R., Mayer, L. M., Kitayama, K., and Knicker, H.: Climate and parent
material controls on organic matter storage in surface soils: A three-pool,
density-separation approach, Geoderma 147, 23–33, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Walker, L. R., Wardle, D. A., Bardgett, R. D., and Clarkson, B. D.: The use of
chronosequences in studies of ecological succession and soil development, J.
Ecol., 98, 725–736, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Zimmermann, M., Leifeld, J., and Fuhrer, J.: Quantifying soil organic carbon
fractions by infrared-spectroscopy, Soil Biol. Biochem., 39, 224–231, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
